Drops
Of
Water
Issue 24 November 1998
The first people to find errors in spelling or word structure receive a free map of the Chehalis watershed. Send us an e-mail note telling us about the error.
|
|
Welcome
to the
|
Issue 24 November 1998 |
This newsletter appears monthly in 45,000 households throughout the watershed. Printing is done by The Chronicle, and distribution is by the Chronicle, the Olympia Daily Olympian, the Tenino Independent, the Rochester Sun News and the Aberdeen Daily World. This is an early edition available only to WWW users. Please send us your feedback.
The first people to find errors in spelling or word structure receive a free map of the Chehalis watershed. Send us an e-mail note telling us about the error. |
Click on a topic to read it!
Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New
A land trust is a local, independent nonprofit organization of citizens dedicated to protecting significant natural areas. These open spaces are important to the quality of life and environmental health of the community. Over 1200 land trusts operate in all 50 states conserving millions of acres of farms and forests, wetlands and wildlife habitat, seashores and harbor areas, trails, scenery and recreational sites.
Land trusts conserve land through the acceptance of a donations, outright purchase or the establishment of a conservation easement. The latter is a legally binding agreement between the landowner and a land trust that permanently limits the uses of land in order to protect its conservation values.
DONATION: A landowner, desiring to protect his/her land beyond a lifetime, may donate all or a portion of the land to a land trust while alive or bequeath it in a will. A donation during the living years may confer both substantial income and estate tax benefits to the grantor. A donation by will reduces the value of the estate and thus the estate taxes. If donated for its conservation values, the land will be managed to protect those values in perpetuity.Another type of donation, called a "remainder interest" is possible. In this arrangement the landowner donates the land but retains a "reserved life estate," that is, the right to live on and use the property during his/her lifetime. At death, the entire ownership is released to the land trust. In these cases, both income and estate tax benefits can be realized. Thus the landowner may enjoy the land, receive an income tax donation for a charitable contribution, and be assured of the land's protection far beyond life.
SALE: A landowner, needing some immediate income from land but still desiring to limit its future uses, may opt for a "bargain sale" agreement with a land trust. Under this arrangement the owner sells the land at less than the fair market value. The seller receives needed cash, earns a charitable income tax deduction based on the difference between the sale price and the fair market value and the acquisition becomes more affordable for the land trust.A Conservation Easement leaves protected lands in private ownership and can result in lowered income and property taxes during life and reduced estate taxes after death. The landowner and land trust work together to develop an easement that reflects the owner's wishes and the conservation goals of the land trust. For example, subdivision and development of the land may be restricted or eliminated, certain natural features such as older forests or wetlands may be protected from degradation.
For income tax purposes, the value of the donated easement is the land's value without the easement minus its value with the easement. The easement must provide public benefit by protecting important conservation resources. However, it need not cover all the property nor allow public access.
The land trust, in accepting the responsibility of protecting lands and easements in perpetuity, certainly incurs expenses. Funds are needed to keep the land trust operating, to manage purchased lands and to enforce easements. Problems can arise. Habitat restoration may be needed. Future heirs may contest an easement. Boundary disputes may occur. Subsequent owners may not wish to abide by the easement. Land trusts are legally bound to uphold the terms of the agreements.
Customarily, land trusts request funds for a management account for each property. These moneys may come directly from the grantor, from a fund-raising effort or from service or equipment contributions from the grantor, the public or land trust members.
There are lots of ways to help protect our valuable natural lands in the Chehalis Basin and nearby Puget Sound. Join your local land trust. Each new membership not only adds a bit to the treasury but also gives the organization a little more clout in obtaining grants and other financial assistance.
Many different talents are needed to keep a land trust afloat. You probably have a special skill and/or knowledge of a certain geographical area that would greatly help in the land trust's work. You also know people. Generally, land trusts influence is spread through friends talking to friends. If you are a member of your local land trust, you may help in keeping your own neighborhood sustain its natural beauty. Your neighbor with the fine stream corridor or the wetland full of birds or the shady forest rail might become convinced to protect that treasure for future generations. You have an important role to play.
The Chehalis River Basin Land Trust was born in 1995 to "conserve ecologically significant" lands throughout the Chehalis basin including Grays Harbor. The drainages of all rivers and streams leading to either the Chehalis River or the Harbor fall into this category. Currently the land trust manages four conservation easements. Several other projects are underway in partnership with other conservation groups.
Other land trusts in the area include the Capitol Land Trust, operating throughout Thurston County, and the South of the Sound Farm Trust, a group that specializes in promoting sustainable agriculture.
Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New
With our multitude of lakes, streams and rivers, Washington State seems to have an abundance of water. However, the demand for water has steadily increased each year, while the available water supply has stayed the same, or in some cases, appears to have declined. This increased demand for limited water resources has resulted in the water rights allocation process becoming very complex and controversial.
Last month we covered:
This month we conclude with:
A water right is a legal document which authorizes the use of public water for a specified purpose. A water right is required for any surface water use. Ground-water use in excess of 5,000 gallons per day or irrigation of more than one half acre, also requires a water right. Water rights are issued on a 'first in time, first in "right" basis. Thus, during periods of water shortage, junior rights may be restricted to protect senior rights.
The intent of water resource management and the water rights process is to ensure that Washington's water resources are appropriately allocated and managed to protect water quantity and quality. Regulating how and when water is used is the principal way competing needs for water are managed to protect senior rights and instream resources.
Water-use conflicts occur when available water supply is insufficient to maintain minimum base flows and fulfill existing water rights and claims at the same time. Conflicts also arise when proposed uses may impair minimum base flows or existing water rights.
In order to make wise management decisions about water use, the following factors must be considered
Reduced water quality can severely damage habitat. Low stream flow can block fish migration.
In the Upper Chehalis watershed the combined allocation for surface water and ground water rights and claims totals 1,202 cfs per year. Applications are on file with Ecology for an additional 46 cfs. In winter when flows are high, additional water is available for allocation. However, in summer months, rights and claims exceed natural stream flow in many instances. For example, during an average August at the Porter gage located at the base of the watershed, upstream rights and claims exceed natural flow by 275 percent (nearly three times).
Accordingly, minimum base flows are often not met, and water quality and fisheries habitat problems are compounded.
Irrigated agriculture accounts for the largest use of water in the watershed. This use occurs during summer months when water is least available and most necessary for maintaining minimum base flows.
Population growth is expected to increase steadily, requiring development of new water supplies. Sufficient water must be maintained in streams to adequately dilute permitted wastewater discharges.
The environmental problems of water quality degradation and depletion of fish stocks, and the over-allocation of water rights have been identified in the Upper Chehalis watershed. A number of management - /permitting options are available as described below:
Deny applications for new Water Rights unless acceptable mitigation is proposed.
Pro:-Decisions on applications could be made if no further degradation of water quality or impacts of fish stocks occur.
Con: - "Acceptable mitigation" is difficult to achieve and potentially very expensive for the applicant.
Encourage conservation and efficient use of existing water rights.
Pro:-Could lead to a reduced demand for new sources of supply. May have less impact on water resources.
Con: -May only be applicable to large water users. May be an expensive option.
Consider transfers of existing rights
Pro:-May be new development with little or no impact to system.
Con:-May only be available in limited areas of the watershed.
Enforce against unauthorized use
Pro:-Unauthorized water use would be stopped. Additional water may be available for authorized water right holders.
Con:-Time consuming, expensive, and controversial. -Water savings resulting from enforcement may be minimal or less substantial than projected.
Develop off stream storage
Pro:-May allow some additional development.
Con:-Engineering and Construction costs are very high. Potential water quality and habitat impacts could result.
Republished from: WaDOE publication 95-150
Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New
source: Enviornmental Defense Fund
Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New
At the September 25 meeting of the Chehalis Basin Partnership (CBP), Lewis County Commissioner Richard Graham reported that when Pacific Corp. puts the mine and steam plant up for sale, they will reserve the dam from the sale and work with Lewis County to transfer ownership of the dam to Lewis County or some entity formed by Lewis county.
Graham also reported that an Executive Committee of five elected officials, five staffers, and PIE representatives has been appointed to oversee the project.
According to a September 15 Chronicle article, the Lewis County Commissioners approved a supplemental agreement to the county's $1.1 million contract with Pacific International Engineering to "use a watershed approach toward the Chehalis River Basin flood damage reduction project." They also approved another $12,000 for PIE to lobby federal agency officials and elected officials in Washington, D.C., for more money to study potential flood control solutions. This brings to $19,500 the total lobbying funds.
At the CBP meeting, Graham indicated that although trips of Washington D.C. have been made, "they are still working on funding at this time."
Also on funding of the PIE project, Jerry Alb, director of environmental services for the WA Department of Transportation (DOT), mentioned that the legislature has funneled $600,000 through the DOT to Lewis County for the PIE flood study. Alb has additional DOT advance mitigation funds that could be used for Chehalis Basin restoration projects. Two basin projects already being planned include wetlands banks for future mitigation of the 1-5 DOT project, and $300,000 for streambank restoration in partnership with the Chehalis Tribe.
'Thurston County commissioner Dick Nichols said he wanted an update on the Flood Control Project at each CBP meeting, since it affects the whole watershed. "I don't want people in this room to think that the whole flood proposal is a done deal," he said.
Also reported at the CBP meeting, the "scoping" subcommittee is recommending contributing $8,000 over two years to Drops of Water for public education as part of the HB 2514 grant.
Editor's Note: Stories on flood control and other related projects were reported in the September 30, 1998 edition of the North Beach News and the October 1, 1998 edition of The Chronicle. These newspapers are available from their publishers or your local library.
Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New
Late in September a major announcement was made on the draft salmon recovery strategy for Washington state.
OLYMPIA - The Joint Natural Resources Cabinet has produced its first working draft of a statewide salmon recovery strategy, "Extinction is Not an Option." The working draft represents a dynamic, evolving document that the Joint Natural Resources Cabinet will continue to build upon and improve. It is inviting review and feedback.
"This draft truly is a work in progress. It is far from being complete or final, but it does represent our effort to initiate a collaborative process," said Curt Smitch, special assistant to Gov. Gary Locke. The governor appointed Smitch last year as his salmon advisor.
"These are our collective thoughts to date. As we continue building this strategy, we will improve upon it. We want feedback - What are the most important elements of a statewide strategy? What have we missed? With limited state financial resources, what are the highest priority areas for funding?" Smitch said.
The working draft strategy is being shared in sessions with tribes, counties, cities, ports, business leaders, environmental groups, and others. The draft strategy will be posted Oct. 2 on the Internet on the Governor's Salmon Recovery Office website. The Joint Cabinet plans initial evaluation of feedback mid-October.
"A recovery strategy is needed with or without Endangered Species Act listings. Our goal is to restore wild salmon to healthy, harvestable populations and improve their habitat," said Smitch. "We want to reach our recovery goal with input from business, environmental groups, tribes and local governments."
The Joint Natural Resources Cabinet is developing the State Salmon Recovery Strategy around these fundamental principles:
The Joint Cabinet produced a strategy framework document last January. The current working draft builds upon that and is organized by the "four H's" related to salmon recovery - harvest, hatcheries, habitat and hydropower. The core elements of the draft strategy are in varying stages of development.
Because salmon need plenty of clean, cold water, they are directly affected by how the state manages land and water. Habitat, or what fish need to live, has been the primary focus of the Joint Cabinet.
The core elements of the habitat section include:
*Changes in agricultural practices to improve fish habitat *Forests and fish: Timber, Fish and Wildlife (TFW) *Linking land use decisions and salmon recovery *Managing urban stormwater to protect streams *Clean water for fish: integrating key tools *Fish passage barriers: providing access to habitat
Two other "H's" - harvest and hatcheries - are addressed through fish management by the Department of Fish and Wildlife and tribes. The fourth "H" is hydropower, which partially is under the jurisdiction of the Northwest Power Planning Council.
The draft salmon recovery strategy will be further developed through this year. It will guide the development of more specific regional recovery plans. The National Marine Fisheries Service is expecting a detailed salmon recovery strategy next summer.
The Joint Natural Resources Cabinet includes 10 state agency directors, Public Lands Commissioner Jennifer Belcher and Washington state representation from the Northwest Power Planning Council.
Editor's Note: In addition to other sources, a copy of this report is available for review at the CRC Resource Library. Please call ahead (360/273-6137). to see this report.
Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New
Next month kicks off the 3rd year of our publication. In the last 2 years we've produced 24 issues and covered a range of topics. Among them were: Facts about Estuaries, Glossaries of Water Words and Habitat Terms, Spotted Frogs, Backyard Wildlife Sanctuary Program, Broodstocking Report, Flood Checklists, Chehalis Basin Fisheries Task Force Programs, Coastal Estuary Resources at Risk, DNR Trust Lands Little Known Facts, Do's and Don'ts Around the Home, Habitat Problems and What They Mean to the Fish, Keeping Clean With Fish, Landscaping with Salmon, Lighting the Way For Salmon, Managing Nonpoint Source Pollution (from all sources), Oakville's Project Green, Ocosta Students Monitoring, Other Fish of the Chehalis, Ripples, Riffles & Riparian Runs, River Erosion, Safe Harbors for Salmon, Seasons of the Chehalis, Showering with Salmon, Taking Your Lake's Pulse, Washington's Environmental Health, Waterborne Disease, Wild Salmon, and Zebra Mussels.
Now we'd like some help from you!
Is this publication worthwhile? What would you do to improve it? What do you like best? What do you like least? What would you do differently? What would you like to see? Please take a few minutes and give us your thoughts. You can use this or a piece of plain paper. You don't have to sign it, but if you give us your name and address you will get a response.
Please mail your response to CRC, P.O. Box 586, Oakville, WA 98568
Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New
Teresa Sligar, Tulalip Tribes - from an exhibit at the Burke Museum
In January, WEC helped field a public opinion poll on environmental and growth management related issues. There was overwhelming public support for the development of a state-led salmon recovery plan where the public wanted the state of Washington to take the responsibility for the recovery (see Spring 1998 Voices). Different reasons may motivate this desire for recovery to avoid a federal listing, to help improve water quality, simply because salmon taste good. The fact is, wild salmon populations are declining and we need to act and act fast. In the wake of weak enforcement of our current environmental laws, insufficient funding, and plans that never get implemented, efforts aimed at restoring wild salmon have not proved to be effective. We need tough enforcement of existing laws, updates to some laws and policies, and funding of programs that will directly benefit salmon.
Therefore, the Washington Environmental Council has teamed up with 10 other Washington environmental groups "1000 Friends of Washington, Friends of the Earth, National Audubon Society, Northwest Ecosystem Alliance, Pacific Rivers, People for Puget Sound, Save Our Wild Salmon, Sierra Club, Washington Environmental Alliance for Voter Education, and Wash PIRG" in a combined effort, Campaign for the Northwest. Implicit in the title is that wild salmon protection is more then just saving an amazing fish, it's about protecting what makes Washington a great place to live. Salmon are dying from the same things that impact people:: industrial pollution and runoff that get in our water, runaway growth and sprawl that kills our waterways, timber clearcutting that ruins our streams, and dams that create deadly river conditions for migrating salmon.
Campaign for the Northwest unofficially started in the Fall 1997 as a group of Washington environmental organizations began discussing anticipated ESA listings of the salmon. In response to the salmon problem, Governor Locke had convened a Joint Cabinet on Natural Resources to create a recovery plan.
However, the direction of the plan was unclear. To ensure that this plan contains the things that are needed for salmon recovery, The Campaign for the Northwest created its own People's Pledge for Wild Salmon, which contains detailed recommendations for salmon recovery, to measure how effective any state plan might be.
A brief summary of the ten-page People's Pledge for Wild Salmon:
In the late spring, the eleven groups listed above decided to formalize the campaign and begin public education and activation on the issue thus Campaign for the Northwest. Since then, we have hired a campaign coordinator, developed and run a set of radio ads in Spokane, Bellingham, Everett and Seattle to educate the public and push for immediate action, and begun a grassroots campaign for a strong state recovery plan.
Rare is it that an entire state is emersed in the habitat of an endangered species. This sort of recovery is going to require a coordinated effort among many parties to ensure that salmon can once again thrive in this great state.
Their fate depends on it - so does ours.
To get involved in The Campaign for the Northwest, call (206) 447-3329 or E-mail: campaignnw@aol.com
Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New
Editors note: This month the focus is on the Wynoochee River. Each month we will publish a watershed description from the 1992 Chehalis River Basin Action Plan. We are looking for a volunteer interested in updating this, and other watershed, description.
The Wynoochee River originates in the steep southern flanks of the Olympic Mountains. It drains a 218 square mile area. Much of its drainage has been logged, and severe erosion has taken place in the mountainous headwaters located within the Olympic National Forest. Erosion and mass wastage within this district are some of the most severe in the Chehalis watershed, and corrective measures will have to take into account the steepness of slope, high snow and rainfall (187+ inches per year above the Wynoochee Dam), and the damage already done by road construction and logging.
As the Wynoochee descends from its many mountain feeder streams and begins to form a valley, the Wynoochee Dam, at 51.8 miles above the confluence with the Chehalis, has been constructed by the US Army Corps of Engineers for the multiple purposes of flood control, water supply, and recreation. The watershed drainage area above the Wynoochee Dam covers almost 41 square miles. Its reservoir, Wynoochee Lake, at full pool level covers 1122 acres and contains approximately 70,000 acre-feet of water.
This winding, gravelly river is constantly changing its course. In the winters of 1989 and 1990-91, record flooding caused dramatic course changes in several tributaries of the Chehalis, including the Wynoochee, Emergency erosion control measures have been taken to protect the Wynoochee bridge on the Donovan-Corkery-Wishkah road. The average flow is 1276 cfs. The maximum recorded flow was 24500 cfs in January 1968, and the minimum was 3.0 cfs in August 1967.
The Wynoochee conjoins the Chehalis at tide water near Montesano. Near the confluence a new wastewater treatment plant for the town of Montesano is being constructed.
The City of Aberdeen has a certificated water right for 110 cfs from the Wynoochee River and diversion facility capacity of 125 cfs. The City also has water right permits for an additional 190 cfs.
Aberdeen, which has owned a significant share of the Wynoochee Dam since its inception in 1967, is at this time enacting an agreement, along with Tacoma City Light, to take over complete ownership and operation of the Corps-constructed facility and retrofit it for hydroelectric generation. This agreement, reportedly the first federal-to-municipal dam transfer in the U.S., will call upon the municipal owners to engage in new levels of watershed-level responsibilities. Special concern must be given to anadromous fish sustainability and enhancement, since the Wynoochee is an important salmon spawning and sport fishing stream. The City of Aberdeen also operates an industrial water supply system intake at mile 8.1 on the Wynoochee River, where it can divert 70-82 million gallons per day. This diversion is connected to the industrial water system at Lake Aberdeen, whence it is delivered by pipeline to pulp and paper mills at Grays Harbor. Gravel mining has been extensive on three rivers in the lower Chehalis watershed. The Humptulips, Satsop and Wynoochee have all been mined for gravel since early in this century. The Chehalis has also experienced some mining but to a lesser extent.
Upstream migration of anadromous and other fish is prevented by a concrete barrier dam located 2.2 miles downstream from the Wynoochee Dam. Here are located facilities for attracting, trapping, sorting, and transferring the fish by truck approximately 7.5 miles upstream, where they are released into the river above the reservoir.
Water impounded in Lake Wynoochee is released under controlled conditions to minimize downstream flooding and to augment low natural river flows for the benefit of downstream water users and fisheries during periods of low runoff.
A total of 2,140 acres have irrigation water rights, and approximately one-third of these are used.
Approximately half of the drainage have been managed under the 100-year Shelton Cooperative Sustained Yield Agreement between USDA Forest Service and Simpson Timber Company. The intent of this agreement was to sustain the local economy of Shelton through an even flow of timber. The agreement between 1947 to 1976 established about 75% of the harvest to come from national forest lands as Simpson's stands were not ready for harvest.
The Olympic National Forest administers approximately 60 square miles of the Wynoochee River drainage. Forty-one square miles drain into the Wynoochee Dam Reservoir and 19 square miles drains below the dam.
This drainage has been intensively managed for wood products. The terrain is very steep and dissected with 60% of the area having high mass wasting hazard. Past management practices have left a legacy of subbasins with high road densities and several subbasins in young stands not yet at a stage of hydrologic recovery. Today, road densities range from 2.4 to 4.0 miles and 25-54% of the subbasin areas are in stand ages less than 35 years of age. Older roads and landings may be located on unstable mid-slopes and are constructed using sidecast waste designs. These past management legacies have caused mass failures or exhibit tension creeks showing high potential of failure. These failures cause serious impact to watershed condition.
Below the Wynoochee Dam, the river begins to describe a broad meandering valley with gravelly glacial alluvium underlying it. Here active agriculture is found, with beef production and dairying being the principal pursuits. Row crop production of sweet and field corn and peas are established agriculture endeavors. Some specialty crop production is also being done.
The Wynoochee River drainage was one of five major drainages rated in a high sensitivity condition class by the Olympic National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan FEIS - 1990. A high rating requires special watershed enhancement of mitigation considerations from management activities. A watershed improvement needs inventory has identified hundreds of sites in need of erosion control or potential sedimentation sources through mass wasting. Funding has been a limitation in addressing this watershed improvement need in total.
In a 1986 report on gravel harvest in Grays Harbor, Brian Collins and Thomas Dunne studied the Humptulips, Wynoochee and Satsop Rivers. Of historical factors affecting the characteristics of the rivers they found:
The earliest white settlers to the Grays Harbor area would have seen the area's rivers in a form vastly different from today. Major drift jams of 100-1500 meters blocked portions of the channels of the channels of the lower Satsop and Humptulips Rivers (Sedel and Luchesa, 1981); while apparently undocumented, the same may have also been true of the Wynoochee River. The floodplain of the rivers was characterized by wide, marshy areas with numerous sloughs and branches. According to the archival research of Sedell and Luchesa (1981), timber companies and the Corps of Engineers undertook extensive projects, beginning in the 1880's, to enhance navigation and to facilitate log driving, including the removal of debris jams. This effort and the establishment of agriculture brought about the ditching and draining of the floodplain, and blocking of side channels.
Together this increased sinuosity and decreased width between the mid-19th century and early 20th century are suggestive of a transition from a gravel-choked, braided river to a more meandering river with less gravel. Such a transition is the logical result of the land use modifications which occurred during this era: elimination of side channels, removal of debris jams and downed trees, and log drives all could have brought about the scouring of gravel from the river bed.
Collins and Dunne found that this scouring action in the three rivers combined with harvest activities had actually lowered the river bed and exceeded the natural replenishment rate.
Because of the rate of harvest exceeded by more than ten times the annual bedload transport rate over the last two to three decades, Collins and Dunne concluded that the actual channel beds of the rivers were lowered by approximately 0.1 feet per year.
The most obvious effect of this gravel removal is the loss of spawning habitat for salmon. It can also "eliminate vital features of river habitat, such as less aeration, pools, side-channels, and eddies.
"In a report to the Department of Ecology in 1987, Collins and Dunne identified some potential side-effects of gravel potential problems included:
While instream gravel from Grays Harbor rivers has not been removed for decades, mining of the gravel bars on the banks of the rivers was common until a few years ago. Grays Harbor County began phasing out permits for commercial river bar mining operations due to concern over the loss of fish habitat. Operations have shifted to mining further away from the river beds without apparent hardship to contractors.
Editor's note. Wynooochee and Wynooche are competing ways of spelling the name. In the original Chehalis River Basin Action Plan the name appeared as shown. We are looking for serious volunteers who can assist the Chehalis River Council bring this section of the report up to date. Please contact us if you are interested.
Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New
Computer secrecy, code breaking, and hacking are topics used a lot in the news. This month some of the sentences from this issue have been altered by a code. Only the vowels A, E, I and O have been altered. You challenge is to find out what the original sentence said.
Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New
The key we used is:
In order to solve this one has to work backwards, solving for O, then I, then E and finally A.
Back to top or
Back to Whats New Index Page
Back to CRC Index Page
Back to Newletter Index Page