12 CapitalPress.com
March 27, 2015
Lawmaker: If set free, the Eastside would be economically strong
SIDES from Page 1
It’s not surprising, or new.
The issues change, but the
division between Eastern and
Western Washington — some-
times called the Cascade Cur-
tain — predates statehood. As
the pioneers debated how best
to divvy up the Oregon Ter-
ritory into states, they argued
about East versus West.
More than 125 years lat-
er, some Eastside lawmakers
want a re-do.
Kennewick Rep. Brad
Klippert and Spokane Valley
Rep. Matt Shea both intro-
duced bills this year to study
carving out a 51st state on the
Eastside.
Shea said he was taking
up the challenge of liberal
pundits who opine the poorer
Eastside holds back the West-
side’s progressive agenda.
If set free, the Eastside,
with its orchards, farms,
ranches and minerals, would
be economically strong, Shea
said.
“Give us a chance to prove
the naysayers wrong,” he ar-
gues.
Klippert complains the
Westside has imposed such
issues as gay marriage, rec-
reational marijuana and gun
control on the Eastside. For
him, the last straw was the
Seattle City Council dropping
Columbus Day in favor of In-
digenous Peoples Day.
“I have nothing against in-
digenous people, but that’s a
rewriting of the history book,”
he said.
“We constantly have to
live by their principles and
values, and I’m tired of it, and
so are a lot of people,” Klip-
pert said.
Neither Shea’s bill nor
Klippert’s bill got a hearing.
Klippert said he won’t give
up. “I’ll stand by this plan as
long as I’m an elected offi-
cial.”
Capital clout
The Eastside has clout in
Olympia. Senate Majority
Leader Mark Schoesler is a
Ritzville farmer. But many
state policies are determined
by the governor and other
statewide officeholders, elect-
ed Supreme Court justices or
statewide ballot measures and
initiatives promoted by West-
side interests.
Adams County rancher
Branden Spencer said East-
side legislators do well on
issues particular to the region.
“But when it’s one of those
issues that involves both sides
of the state, it’s a lost cause
for this side of the state,” he
said.
For example, the ban on
using hounds to hunt cougars
was passed by initiative in
1996. Since then, lawmakers
have eased the ban, but only
Central Washington beekeeper Tim Hiatt stands March 5 on the
Capitol Campus in Olympia for Honeybee Awareness Day. Even
beekeepers view issues differently depending on which side of the
mountains they’re on, he says.
Don Jenkins/Capital Press
Kennewick Republican Brad Klippert speaks March 3 on the Washington state House. He says he’ll
stand for splitting the state as long as he’s in office.
for limited times in a few
places.
Klickitat County Rancher
Neil Kayser said the hound
ban is an example of a West-
side policy “trickling over the
hill (and) we have to deal with
it.”
“People on the Eastside are
good stewards of the land, but
we have to use the land,” he
said. “If we were poor stew-
ards … we wouldn’t be in
business.”
Kayser said he’d be for
splitting the state.
“Don’t get me wrong,
there are good people on the
Westside,” he said. “We just
have a different lifestyle and
view on things.”
Howls of protest
Democratic Gov. Chris
Gregoire, who didn’t carry a
single Eastside county in the
historically close 2004 elec-
tion, adopted the state-uniting
slogan, “One Washington.”
“What happened to that
concept — One Washington
— on the wolf issue?” asks
Stevens County Commission-
er Wes McCart. Ranchers in
that northeastern Washington
county have for years been
dealing with wolf packs that
attack their livestock.
McCart has pressed law-
makers to recognize that
when it comes to wolves not
all “stakeholders” have as
much at stake.
“I think we have two cate-
gories of stakeholders: Those
who want wolves and those
who are living with wolves,”
he told a House committee in
February.
In an interview, McCart
said he wished people on the
Westside would “take the time
to put themselves in the shoes
of other folks.”
“I’d like for them to real-
ize there’s the desire and fan-
tasy (about wolves) and then
there’s the reality. They’re
living the desire and fantasy,
and we’re living the reality,”
he said.
McCart has spoken in fa-
vor of taking a look at split-
ting the state. “It’s unfortunate
we would ever have to have
that conversation,” he said.
In 2005, a Senate commit-
tee held the last legislative
hearing on dividing the state.
The committee’s chairman, a
Puyallup Democrat, said he
wouldn’t move the bill along,
but he wanted to give East-
side county commissioners a
chance to air their grievances.
“We may entertain this bill
every year,” said the chair-
man, Jim Kastama.
That didn’t satisfy Spo-
kane Republican Bob Mc-
Caslin. He said Eastside res-
idents wanted a new state, not
an annual hearing.
“We’re about as serious as
we can get about this bill,” he
said.
‘Huge divide’
For Honeybee Awareness
Day at the Capitol this month,
Grant County beekeeper Tim
Hiatt wore a tie, befitting
someone on a business trip.
Hiatt is not a backyard
beekeeper. He has 12,000
hives that pollinate Califor-
nia almonds in late winter
before returning to Wash-
ington to pollinate tree fruit.
His customers and neighbors
are farmers. He’s not joining
the push to ban pesticides to
save bees, a position that has
support among some Westside
beekeepers who don’t provide
pollinating services.
“For beekeepers, there’s a
huge divide between east and
west,” Hiatt said.
“I get frustrated with folks
like the Sierra Club who want
to clamp down on pesticide
use,” Hiatt said. “I guess it’s a
constant source of frustration.
Those who want to restrict ag-
riculture like to eat.”
Branden Spencer, the Ad-
ams County rancher, said he
felt the east-west divide in
January at a meeting in Tum-
water of the State Parks Com-
mission.
The commission voted to
charge agricultural producers
to drive on state recreational
trails that bisect their farms
and ranches. Spencer has
miles of trails crossing his
land. Permits will come with
conditions to prevent produc-
ers from getting in the way of
hikers, cyclists and equestri-
ans.
Spencer said parks com-
missioners didn’t “grasp how
desolate the area we live in is.”
“It might as well be
Egypt,” he said.
Historic splits
Before there was an east-
west divide, there was a
north-south divide, which was
decisive in setting the Wash-
ington-Oregon border.
In 1851 and 1852, Oregon
Territory residents north of
the Columbia River held con-
ventions to draw up a petition
to ask Congress for their own
territory. At the time the Or-
egon Territory included what
would become the states of
Washington, Oregon, Idaho
and parts of Montana and Wy-
oming.
“The entire Legislative
power is South of the Colum-
bia River ... the South has no
interest in common whatever
with the North,” the petition
stated. “The Inhabitants North
of the Columbia River receive
no benefit or convenience
whatever from the Territorial
Government as now adminis-
tered.”
Northerners complained
that reaching a judge took
longer than traveling from
Missouri to Massachusetts.
“There is now about three
thousand souls North of the
Columbia,” according to the
petition. “They have raised
a large amount of produce,
wheat, oats, potatoes, on-
ions, etc. for exportation, but
with the many abuses of their
rights and neglected condition
in their civil immunities as
Citizens, it is impossible for
them to prosper in commerce
or advance one step in the im-
provement of Roads & High-
ways.”
Congress granted the peti-
tion and in 1853 broke up the
Oregon Territory and formed
the Washington Territory
from the northern half. That
settled the north-south divide.
The east-west divide became
an issue as Oregon sought to
become a state.
A delegate to Oregon’s
constitutional convention in
1857, Charles Megis of Was-
co County, proposed setting
the boundary at the Cascades,
freeing up the east to form
its own state, according to a
history posted on the Oregon
Secretary of State’s website.
Megis argued that it’s a
“fixed fact in political science,
the great natural boundaries
are to be observed.” Invoking
the image of a mythological
demon, Megis said domina-
tion by the more populous
Westside would be “hanging
over us like an incubus.”
Megis said it would be
tough, but the east could stand
on its own. “Our country...
is bordering upon Indians;
danger hangs over us, but we
shall try to take care of our-
selves.”
The west wouldn’t have it.
A Western Oregon delegate
and future U.S. senator, Dela-
zon Smith, responded: “If we
are hemmed in between these
ranges of mountains here,
with every acre of available
lands appropriated what avail
it, sir? Nothing! We are left to
struggle as best we may.”
Stately ideas
Klippert’s idea is to com-
bine the western halves of
Washington and Oregon into
one state and the eastern
halves into another state.
His legislation would have
established a bi-state task
force to study the economic
and governmental implica-
tions of redrawing boundaries
to unite regions that are de-
scribed in the bill as “remark-
ably conspicuous.”
Shea proposed appointing
a task force to look at cutting
Washington in two, leaving
Oregon out of it.
His
bill’s
preamble
was reminiscent of the
settlers’ 1852 appeal to
Congress:
“Since statehood, the life-
styles, culture and econom-
ics of Eastern and Western
Washington have been very
distinct. The urbanization and
rapid growth in the western
portions of Washington state
have progressively height-
ened this divergence of cultur-
al and economic values from
that of the eastern portions of
the state.”
Population growth played
a defining role in Washing-
ton’s history even before
statehood.
By the time Washington
became the 42nd state in 1889,
the transcontinental railroad
had bypassed Walla Walla,
shutting down its growth. By
a vote of the people, Olympia
was picked as the state capital
over Yakima and Ellensburg.
So it was to Olympia that
ranchers went in February to
talk about cougars.
The bill eventually died in
the Senate, lost in the crush of
other legislation.
Kayser’s cousin, Keith
Kreps, also a Klickitat Coun-
ty rancher, said he was sorely
disappointed.
“They don’t understand
the wildlife issues we have,”
Kreps said. “They don’t un-
derstand the economic loss.
... They wonder why we’re
squawking.”
Kreps was quick to ac-
knowledge that three West-
side Democrats on the natural
resources committee voted to
recommend the Senate pass
the bill. “My hat’s off to them.
They actually understand the
economics we were talking
about,” he said.
Still, he made the drive
over the Cascade Range for
nothing.
His thoughts on splitting
the state: “I’m all for it.”
Bureau of Reclamation’s forecast scheduled to be updated April 6
WATER from Page 1
DOE officials could
not say exactly how much
worse the drought needs
to be. The U.S. Bureau
of Reclamation in early
March forecast that hold-
ers of junior water rights
in the Yakima Basin will
receive 73 percent of their
full supply during the irri-
gation season. Senior wa-
ter rights holders will have
full supplies.
The bureau is sched-
uled to update the forecast
April 6. A DOE water sup-
ply committee that makes
recommendations to agency
directors will meet the next
day.
Don Jenkins/Capital Press
Sen. Jim Honeyford, R-Sunnyside, asks a question Tuesday during
a work session on drought preparations. Honeyford, the Senate’s
capital budget chairman, says $9 million for drought relief will be in
the budget.
Gov. Jay Inslee declared
a drought emergency March
13 in the Yakima Basin, the
Olympic Peninsula and Wal-
la Walla region, the state’s
first drought declaration
since 2005, when then-Gov.
Chris Gregoire declared a
statewide drought.
Drought relief funding
will be in the budget, said
Sunnyside Sen. Jim Hon-
eyford, the Senate’s capital
budget chairman.
As a first response to
this year’s drought, DOE is
seeking water rights to lease
to increase flows in tributary
streams above the conflu-
ence of the Yakima and Na-
ches rivers.
Melting snow usually
feeds the streams, but with
snowpacks a fraction of nor-
mal levels, some streams may
go dry, according to DOE.
So far, the drought emer-
gency applies to 11 of the
state’s 62 watersheds. The
governor could extend the
declaration to other areas
after the DOE water supply
committee reassesses condi-
tions.
Meanwhile, state agen-
cies are gearing up to trans-
fer water rights and, as a last
resort, permit emergency
drought wells.
Marti said officials are
contacting major water us-
ers and irrigation districts to
find water users willing to
lease their rights.
“We will be working to
facilitate transfers of water
rights from senior users with
low-value crops to junior us-
ers with high-value crops,” he
said.
Most of Washington has
received near or above nor-
mal rainfall since last fall.
Unseasonably high tempera-
tures, however, have pre-
vented snow from piling up
in the mountains.
Early spring rains have
soaked Western Washington,
but weekend temperatures
were expected to rise well
above freezing in mountain
passes.
“Any snow we get (Tues-
day) or tomorrow I’m guess-
ing would be short-lived,”
Marti said.
Farmers who hope to use drones commercially can apply for a ‘Section 333’ exemption
DRONES from Page 1
Even if the rules take
another two years, aspiring
operators can use that time
to figure out which aircraft
and equipment best fit their
plans, he said.
The FAA isn’t regulat-
ing drones used for recre-
ation, but the agency takes
a dim view of hobbyists
venturing into territory that
it considers to be commer-
cial, said Wendie Kelling-
ton, an attorney special-
izing in unmanned aerial
vehicles.
At this point, the FAA
is taking a narrow view of
“hobby.”
For example, the agency
said flying a drone to check
if crops need irrigation is
only considered recreation-
al if they’re “grown for per-
sonal enjoyment” and not if
they’re part of a “commer-
cial farming operation.”
Farmers and others who
hope to legally use drones
commercially before the
FAA’s
regulations
are
complete can apply for a
“Section 333” exemption,
which allows them to fly
unmanned aircraft without
a pilot’s license, Kellington
said.
Applicants should be
ready to wait, however. Of
the 640 applications re-
ceived by FAA, fewer than
50 have been granted in the
past six months, she said.
Drone operators who ob-
tain an exemption must still
fly the drone within the “vi-
sual line of sight,” and the
same requirement is pro-
posed in the FAA’s planned
regulations,
Kellington
said.
The agency decided the
technology isn’t mature
enough to allow drones to
be flown beyond the line
of sight, but those proposed
regulations are still up for
comment, she said.
Kellington said the FAA
should at least have “place-
holder” regulations autho-
rizing such drone use, since
the technology is likely to
progress rapidly before the
rules are final.
In reality, the FAA isn’t
in the “enforcement busi-
ness” of ensuring that farm-
ers and other follow its rules
for drones, but the agency
would likely take action if
an accident or other incident
was brought to its attention,
said Gretchen West, vice
president of business devel-
opment and government re-
lations with DroneDeploy,
which specializes in drone
operations.
“We know there are peo-
ple flying commercially ev-
ery single day and the FAA
is not going after them,” she
said.
Even in remote rural ar-
eas, drone operators must be
careful not to interfere with
aerial spray applicators,
said John Stevens, manager
of the Pendleton Unmanned
Aerial System Range, where
drones are tested.
“Within the industry, we
have the responsibility to
make sure we’re doing it
right,” he said.
As drones become more
advanced, safety parameters
will be incorporated into
their operational systems
and the issue will likely be-
come less of a concern, said
McCollough.
For example, McCol-
lough’s cell phones relies on
radio waves but that doesn’t
mean he must get a ham ra-
dio operator’s license to use
it.
“The rules are going to,
in large part, be built into
the technology,” he said.