Since I heard of this opportunity to talk with you I have looked forward to it with great excitement and anticipation.
Improving Ecology's relationship with those of you that work in the agriculture industry is one of the Department of Ecology's top priorities.
And what a viable industry it is: More than one-third all land use in Washington is devoted to crop land and livestock production (15.7 million acres). Some $ 5.8 billion in products annually make it Washington's #1 industry.
There are approximately 35,000 farms in Washington. Those farms produce more than 250 different food, feed, and seed crops.
As of last week I have been in this job for a year. Through tours and visits with lots of folks in the agriculture community I have come to appreciate the diversity, the technology, and the economic significance of the industry.
Therefore I'm really glad to spend time with you today to talk about issues that are very near and dear to all of us: how we relate to one another and how we act as stewards of our natural resources especially water.
This morning I'd like to focus on two topics and then leave some time for questions.
First: watershed management.
At Ecology we view watershed management as an important strategy to effectively manage water quality, quantity, and habitat. So I want to share a bit of our thinking about this idea.
Second: I would like to talk briefly about Ecology's efforts to deal with the water quality problems of our state.
As I address these topics I will weave in a bit about Ecology's efforts to develop and improve our relationship with the agricultural industry.
Our hope is that through these efforts together we can move toward improved environmental protection and sustainability.
Let me start by giving you a little perspective on watershed planning.
The legislature, Ecology, all of you, me we'd like to think we're pretty bright and on the cutting edge. After all, we are two years away from the millennium.
But contrary to popular belief, the idea of watershed-based resource management is not new. It actually dates back more than 100 years ago to 1889.
John Wesley Powell suggested organizing the new state of Montana into counties whose boundaries would be established based on hydrographic basins. Powell noted that within each drainage basin, timber, grazing, and agriculture were all tied together by the controlling element of water and he proposed having water rights established by locally elected officials within each basin.
Now over 100 years later we want to steal Powell's idea to more effectively manage water quality, quantity, and habitat on a watershed basis.
Since the end of the 1997 legislative session, I've been working with key legislators in both the House and the Senate, both Democrats and Republicans, on a new shape and direction for environmental management and stewardship in our state. Our efforts have led to House Bill 2514.
The goal of House Bill 2514 is to develop a plan to provide sufficient water for people, fish, and farms in every watershed in Washington for today and far into tomorrow.
The key to making watershed planning successful is to help local communities determine how to protect fish and wildlife, while also providing enough water for future populations and economic growth.
There is tremendous pressure to address water quantity issues now. Quite simply, we are running out of water.
No matter how much it rained last winter, and no matter how much rain El Nino brings to us this winter, we do not have enough water . . . distributed in the right places at the right time . . . to satisfy all the demands that exist in our state.
For some time now, development has been slowed . . . or even stopped altogether . . . because a sufficient supply of cool, clean water cannot be guaranteed.
In fact, the very health of the ecosystems upon which our communities depend are threatened because of a lack of cool, clean water.
We are days away from the National Marine Fisheries Service listing Lower Columbia River steelhead as threatened to be extinct. Also this month, we expect the fisheries service to list Puget Sound chinook as threatened and Columbia river stocks are already list as endangered.
Who could have imagined that various steelhead and salmon runs in Washington would be endangered with extinction in our very lifetime. But it is a fact and we should take careful note because they are the best indicator of water quality that we have in the Northwest.
Salmon, more than any other creatures, monitor water quality as they traverse our rivers, lakes, streams and marine waters.
They are telling us that we have to make constructive, immediate progress to improve the health of our waters. They are also telling us through the ESA that if we don't the federal government may take charge of land-use and water-use decisions in our state.
But the threat of federal intervention is not the only reason to take swift action. We need to do it because resolving our water problems and restoring salmon is good for our economy, good for our life quality, and good for our spirits.
If we loose them we loose the ecological balance of the Pacific Northwest.
To save salmon, to maintain a strong economy, and to adequately provide for the many people who are moving into this wonderful state of Washington, we have to find enough water enough clean water to meet our present and future needs.
Water quality studies conducted by federal, state, and local governments, as well as scientists and technicians in private industry, point to nonpoint pollution as the major source of Washington state's water pollution problems.
Nonpoint pollution comes from many, diffuse sources stormwater runoff, agricultural and forestry practices, urban and suburban land development, and failing septic tanks.
Fecal coliform bacteria are the primary pollution problems harming streams and marine waters and the primary sources of fecal coliform bacteria are failing septic systems, dairy cattle, and stormwater runoff, which often includes pet waste.
Excessive nutrients are the primary problem in our state's lakes. These come from gardening and agricultural practices. Fertilizers contribute to the level of nutrients in lakes, which promote the growth of algae. Algae removes dissolved oxygen from lakes, which is critical for the survival of fish and other aquatic life.
Pollution from agricultural practices accounts for 33 percent of overall water pollution problems in Washington. In streams that are polluted, pollution from agricultural practice accounts for 57 percent of the problem.
Agricultural practices can and do contribute to water pollution. Not only do we have problems with fecal coliform bacteria and pesticides in our lakes, rivers, and streams, but we have very large nitrate problems in ground water in several areas of our state.
Water in portions of Adams, Benton, Clark, Franklin, Grant, King, Thurston, and Whatcom counties violates the federal drinking-water standards for nitrates. Unlike other federal drinking water standards, the nitrate standard has little or no margin of safety for infants.
Agricultural activities, such as the use of fertilizers, can be a major source of nitrates in ground water. Other sources include faulty septic systems and land application of wastewater. Elevated nitrate levels developed over decades, and it will take time to reduce them.
To address ground water problems, several counties have formed Ground Water Management Areas to develop and implement strategic steps toward improving and protecting ground water. Most recently, Grant, Franklin and Adams counties formed a Ground Water Management Area. The key to the success of these efforts is a local commitment a commitment to putting new farming practices in place that will reduce polluted runoff, and decrease nitrate levels. Heather had asked me to talk specifically about agricultural practices contributing to water pollution. Probably the best example of ag practices contributing to polluted surface waters is the lower Yakima River.
In the early 1990s, Ecology conducted a study of the river and agricultural return drains. The study showed that sediments returning to the river from irrigated lands were the number one water-pollution problem in the Yakima. The sediments in the lower Yakima are laden with pesticides such as DDT and dieldrin used in past and current agricultural practices.
The Yakima River does not currently meet water quality standards for about 18 pollution parameters temperature, pH, fecal coliform, turbidity, instream flow, and various pesticides. Many of the tributary irrigation return drains and creeks are also polluted and cannot support beneficial uses of waters, like fish habitat and migration, recreation, and agricultural and domestic uses.
I want to be clear that as I talk about these problems, this is not about assigning blame. It is about Ecology and the ag community working together to solve problems.
This year, Ecology is launching three pilot projects to work with farmers: Working with hobby farmers in the Snohomish River Basin; Reducing pollution from non-dairy livestock operations in the upper Chehalis River basin; and Improving management of agricultural runoff in the Yakima River Basin.
I couldn't be more pleased with the response we've been getting from the agricultural community in the Yakima River basin.
Jim Trull, who manages the Sunnyside Valley Irrigation District, and Ron Van Gundy, who manages the Roza Irrigation District, have agreed to work with us in solving pollution problems in the three biggest tributaries or drainages of the Yakima River Moxee, Sulpher, and Granger Drains.
The Sunnyside Valley Irrigation District and the Roza Irrigation District created the Board of Joint Control a couple of years ago to work on issues and projects of common interest.
The areas within the Board of Joint Control include thousands of irrigators responsible for growing crops on about 200,000 acres.
The board recently adopted a policy that all irrigators must be below a specific turbidity level, as directed by Ecology's pollution loading report for the lower Yakima River.
The board policy also provides a permit system for irrigators with discharges into project waterways. The permit will require the irrigator to maintain the piped inlet to ensure erosion does not occur.
The policy provides for termination of a discharge permit and the irrigators right to discharge if he or she does not comply with the permit.
If an irrigator violates water quality levels, the landowner will need to develop a plan to correct the problem, and implement the plan at the start of the 1999 irrigation season. The irrigation districts will contact Ecology to provide education and assistance to irrigators who have agreed with the board's policy to implement a plan to correct their erosion or water quality problem.
We have two people that will be dedicated to providing education and technical assistance to farmers to help them reduce runoff from their irrigated lands and conserve water. Demonstration projects using straw mulch to prevent erosion. . .drip and sprinkler irrigation systems as opposed to rill or furrow. . . have shown large savings in water use, huge reductions in irrigation tail water and suspended sediment and pesticide discharges back to the return drains.
Farmers that have gone to such measures have truly experienced a cost savings, both in dollars and the environment.
We hope the farmers we will be working with in the next two years will also recognize the potential and seize the opportunity.
To conclude, I'd like to give you just one more example of how a producer can make changes that will help both his bottom line and the environment.
About ten years ago, Gene Gamache, a producer in the Moxee area, set out to reduce the amount of fertilizer and pesticides that were running off of his nearly 700 acres of irrigated crops. For the past two years, Mr. Gamache has been using drip irrigation to successfully irrigate his nearly 700 acres.
This has saved Mr. Gamache in fertilizer and pesticide costs, and he's reduced his water use. He has also essentially eliminated his runoff of sediments and associated pesticides into the Moxee Drain and Yakima River.
This is just one example of the farmer and the environment working in harmony. I look forward to working with Friends of Farms & Forrest in the coming years to create many more.
I'd like to stress again, that I need your help in preserving Washington's quality of life. It is a tangible, economic asset and simply part of what makes life worthwhile.
Back to Watershed Management Index Page
Back to Whats New Index Page
Back to Chehalis River Council Index Page