Water Rights Mitigation: Who Benefits? Steve Boessow Water Rights Biologist April, 2017 Habitat Program, Science Division, Water Team: Dr. Kiza Gates, Jonathan Kohr, Steve Boessow, Robert Granger, Cole Provence
I Thought Ecology Issued Water Rights? RCW 77.57.020 RCW 77.57.020 Review of permit applications to divert or store water Water flow policy. It is the policy of this state that a flow of water sufficient to support game fish and food fish populations be maintained at all times in the streams of this state. The director of ecology shall give the director notice of each application for a permit to divert or store water. The director has thirty days after receiving the notice to state his or her objections to the application. The permit shall not be issued until the thirty-day period has elapsed. The director of ecology may refuse to issue a permit if, in the opinion of the director of ecology, issuing the permit might result in lowering the flow of water in a stream below the flow necessary to adequately support food fish and game fish populations in the stream. The provisions of this section shall in no way affect existing water rights.
WDFW Represents Fish & Aquatic Habitat
Fish & Aquatic Habitat Are Valuable Resources
What Is WDFW s Role? Advisory Recommend Approval- Does Not Oppose Recommend Denial Recommend Conditions or Caution
What Are We Mitigating For? Loss of Flow Change in Timing of Flow Landscape Disruption Human Density Growth!
Loss of Flow
Changes in Timing of Flow
Landscape Disruption
Growth
What Works? Replacement Water in Time & Place Restoration and Protection of Critical Habitat
Restoration Riparian Planting Large Woody Debris Meanders Flow Flow
What Might Work? Flow Augmentation Pump & Dump or Robbing Peter to Pay Paul Reclaimed Water
What Doesn t Work? Transferring Water Rights in Open Basins or Junior to Instream Flows Abandoning Questionable Water Rights Transferring Water Rights Without Property Restrictions Temporary Mitigation Measures
It s More Than Just Stream Flow Mitigation that Replaces Water May Not Address Other Impacts New Projects Require New Services (road crossings, storm water) Increasing Human Density May Disconnect the Flood Plain and High Flow Channels Protection of Private Property Often Trumps Fish Concerns Reclaimed Water May Be a Wise Use of Water, but May Also Promote Growth
More Road Crossings
Disconnected Flood Plain
Flood Protection
Reclaimed Water Frees up Potable Water for Growth
Mitigation Examples Keystone Fruit Company Initial Request For Upstream Moves Denied Moving Non-Interruptible Water Rights Initial Proposed Mitigation Not Substantial No Binding Projects or Timelines Final Attempt at Mitigation Accepted, Project Died
Mitigation Examples Buckhorn Mountain/Kinross Gold Exchanged Over-Mitigation of Some Streams for Modelled Depletion of Others Mitigation Included In-Kind and Out-of-Kind Projects Mitigation to Continue Decades After Mining Has Ceased Non-Governmental Partners Act as Watchdogs and Project Proponents, Relieving Agencies of Some of the Work
Mitigation Examples Kennewick General Hospital Cash in Lieu of Mitigation KGH to Pay Annual Fee Over 40 Years to Fund 13 Projects Mostly Out-of-Kind, Out-of-Place Mitigation Requires Long-Term Commitment From Agencies Appealed- Settlement Favorable to WDFW and Environment
Mitigation Examples Lacey/Olympia/Yelm Exchanged Over-Mitigation of Some Streams for Modelled Depletion of Others Mitigation Included In-Kind and Out-of-Kind Projects Three Cities, Three State Agencies, & Two Tribes Agreed on Wide Ranging Mitigation Package for Municipal Water Yelm Water Right Appealed and Lost at State Supreme Court
Contact Steve Boessow, Water Rights Biologist Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (360) 902-2410 steven.boessow@dfw.wa.gov Habitat Program, Science Division, Water Team: Dr. Kiza Gates, Jonathan Kohr. Steve Boessow, Robert Granger, Cole Provence http://wdfw.wa.gov