Bills unfavorable to farmers have no chance of passage, legislator says
The Capital Press , 02/19/99
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) When farmer Tom Flint hears the politicians talk about rewriting Washington's water law to protect wild salmon, he figures they might as well talk about stopping his heart.
"Water is the lifeblood of Washington," Flint says in a telephone interview from Ephrata. 'If we don't have water, we go away." 'When you have a government and an establishment that wants to take away existing rights that have been out there for a long time, and all of a sudden now wants to change everything, we have a serious problem," says Flint, who grows wheat, alfalfa and "anything that's irrigated." Out in farm country, he is far from alone in his fear and anger.
Gov. Gary Locke's proposal to put more water into Washington rivers and streams a central piece of his plan to restore wild salmon runs is meeting fierce resistance not only from farmers, but the lawmakers who represent them.
And as the 1999 Legislature nears its halfway point, it appears the resistance is having its effect.
Key lawmakers in both chambers say Locke's complicated proposal to make major changes in 110 years of water law including how water rights are granted and transferred, and how water is used has virtually n chance of passage this session.
"I think it's safe to say that thing that affects farmers is dead on arrival at the Legislature," says House Republican Whip Mark Schoesler, a prosperous canola farmer from Ritzville.
Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Marilyn Rasmussen, D Eatonville, a dairy farmer, is more diplomatic in her assessment but says fellow Democrat Lock has bitten off far more than law makers can chew this session.
"Water is everything to farmers. It isn't some little thing that you can just come in and fiddle in one session," she says.
Locke and his top aides are giving it their best shot. They're appearing at hearing after hearing to earnestly make the point that more water has to be freed up to ensure the survival of salmon runs many of them about to be or already listed for protection under the federal Endangered Species Act.
'We have failed to deal with water issues forever," says Curt Smitch, Locke's top aide on the matter. "We had these same proposals on the table 12 years ago. Since then, we've added 1.2 million people. " Locke warns foes that at best they're buying time.
If the state doesn't move to protect wild salmon, the National Marine Fisheries Service, environmentalists and federal judges will, perhaps in ways even less palatable to farmers.
But farmers and their supporters contend Locke's approach penalizes them and amounts to a grab of a basic property right.
'Water rights are a property right as important as land or anything else," says House Agriculture and Ecology Chairman Gary Chandler, R. Moses Lake.
'That should be the starting point of any discussion about changes in water law.' If the government wants farmers' water, then the government should pay for it.
'I don't see that in this bill, and I don't find that acceptable," said Chandler, a hay farmer and apple grower.
Neither does fourth generation farmer Jim Willard, whose family has about 600 acres of apples, wine grapes and a little asparagus near Prosser.
"This will take water away the private citizens, take water away from the landowners an mainly take water away from agriculture," Willard says.
"Just taking a look at the governor's proposal, I think it's a real power grab.
They're taking over complete control, and they want to rewrite water law." Willard believes water management is an important issue, but one that should be dealt with at the local level. Six years ago, he and some of his neighbors formed the Yakima River Watershed Council to try to do something about water shortages.
He says people who live along and depend on the river are the ones best qualified to decide how to manage it, not those sitting in offices in Olympia.
"My livelihood depends upon it, my neighbors' livelihoods depend upon it people who are close to it, depend upon it, are the people who are going to make the best decisions."
Willard and Flint contend the governor's plan focuses too much on stream flows and not enough on other forces affecting salmon recovery.
"I've invested a lot of money trying to clean up the water that leaves my place and do better stewardship of land," Willard says.
"But I think it's only one of the factors. Look at the harvest, look at the gillnets in the Columbia River, look at the global weather patterns that has a lot of effect on what gets back and where the salmon go."
Timber and commercial fishing industry practices also are considered factors in the decline of the region's salmon runs.
And finally, Willard says, look at what the populous Puget Sound region has done to salmon habitat.
"I've heard people talk about removing the Snake River dams, but I have yet to hear anyone talk about removing the, Ballard locks," he says.
This page created and maintained by Chehalis River Council
Send comments or questions to the: Chehalis River Council