May 8, 2015
CapitalPress.com
7
Washington ranchers wary of grouse agreement
By MATTHEW WEAVER
Capital Press
CRESTON, Wash. — Four
Eastern Washington ranchers
say they’re concerned they
will lose their private property
rights if they sign a voluntary
agreement designed to protect
them from legal repercussions
if something happens to a
sage grouse on their property.
The U.S. Fish and Wild-
life Service is fi nalizing a
Washington state candidate
conservation agreement with
assurances — called a CCAA
— for ranchers to take mea-
sures to protect sage grouse
on their property. Consulta-
tion and conservation plan-
ning division manager Brid-
get Moran said the agency is
negotiating with the state De-
partment of Fish and Wildlife
and Washington Cattlemen’s
Association to fi nalize the
agreement for publication and
public comment.
Creston, Wash., rancher
Dawn Nelson says she would
have to reduce her herd of
more than 120 cattle by rough-
ly half if she were to sign up
because of a rotational grazing
requirement in the CCAA.
“They say it’s voluntary to
sign up, but if you don’t sign
up and you happen to have
a bird die on your place or
an accidental take, they can
Matthew Weaver/Capital Press
Creston, Wash., rancher Dawn Nelson and neighboring rancher Loren Brougher look to one another
April 30 while standing on what is normally a lake on Nelson’s property, but is dried out months earlier
than normal due to drought conditions. Nelson and Brougher are leery of signing a candidate conser-
vation agreement with assurances to protect the sage grouse because they say its requirements don’t
factor in situations like drought, among other concerns.
come back and sue you,” Nel-
son said.
Other sticking points in the
draft agreement for Nelson
and her neighbors include:
• Avoiding vehicular ac-
tivity unless essential within
4 miles of occupied “leks,”
an area where birds gather
during the breeding season to
attract mates, between Febru-
ary and July.
• Avoiding harvest within
4 miles of active leks between
April and August.
• Limiting activity two
hours before sunset and two
hours after sunrise within 1.5
miles of an active lek.
• Allowing the department
to access the farmer’s land
with prior notifi cation.
Nelson said the agreement
may work for some ranchers,
but she and several neighbors
are not inclined to sign up.
“That’s a great idea, but I
don’t know how they can en-
force that on private landown-
ers,” she said. “I would rather
be the owner of my land and
not a permittee. Within seven
pages of this draft, you be-
come a permittee on your own
private ground.”
Moran said the plan uses
an example found to be suc-
cessful in Oregon. The agen-
cy has made adjustments to its
drafts based on feedback from
ranchers, she said.
“Many from the ranching
community in other parts of
the range have found them
to be something they can in-
corporate into their business
practices without tremendous
diffi culty,” she said. “We’re
hoping we’re able to do that
here as well.”
Washington Cattlemen’s
Association executive vice
president Jack Field said the
latest draft is an improvement
over original drafts and focuses
more on landowner concerns.
Field said the agreements
have to provide enough pro-
tection and assurance to jus-
tify the expense for ranchers.
“We want to make sure we
can create the best possible
tool to provide the greatest
level of protection not only
to landowners but also to the
bird,” he said.
Incidental take is a concern
if the sage grouse are eventu-
ally protected under the En-
dangered Species Act, Field
said.
“‘Take’ doesn’t have to
mean a dead bird, take could
simply mean adverse modifi -
cation of habitat,” he said.
Nelson wonders who
makes the determination over
whether a farmer’s activity
within range of a lek is need-
ed.
“They call it ‘unnecessary,’
but who decides what’s un-
necessary?” Nelson said.
“What farmer does any-
thing unnecessary?” asked
Dennis Jessup, one of Nel-
son’s neighbors in the Wil-
bur-Creston area. Jessup
runs 200 cows, but said he’s
not sure how much he’d
have to cut until he knows
for sure what the agreement
seeks.
“Everybody wants the
sage grouse to be around,”
neighboring rancher Mi-
chele Rosman said. “I think
what we know works and
what they think works is two
completely different things,
and we’re not going to bend
over for that. If we thought
they could manage theirs,
that’d be different. But they
can’t manage theirs, so what
makes them think they can
manage ours?”
“I don’t think the cattle
is the problem here,” Nelson
said, noting there are coy-
otes, wolves, hawks, owls and
eagles all around. “They’re
going to have to be able to
control the predators and keep
these grouse alive. You can’t
put this on the cow, because
I have never seen a cow eat a
sage grouse. Ever.”
Irrigator group sues Bureau of Reclamation
CSRIA: Water service contract delay blocks privately funded project
Capital Press
SPOKANE, Wash. — The
Columbia-Snake River Ir-
rigators Association fi led
a lawsuit April 30 against
the U.S. Bureau of Rec-
lamation,
claiming
the
agency is holding up con-
struction of an expanded ir-
rigation system by delaying
issuance of a water service
contract.
The association filed
the lawsuit against the
bureau; its commissioner,
Estevan Lopez; and Pa-
cific Northwest regional
director Lorri Lee in U.S.
District Court for the East-
ern District of Washing-
ton.
“It’s really too early
for us to make any kind
of comment, and any com-
ments would be dependent
on the advice of our coun-
sel,” agency public affairs
officer Venetia Gempler
said.
The association alleges
in the lawsuit that the
agency “arbitrarily de-
layed and blocked” a new
water service contract for
a privately funded $42
million pipeline to deliver
surface water east from
the East Low Canal to
roughly 14,000 acres of
farmland north of Inter-
state 90 in the Odessa
Subarea.
The association has
completed pre-construc-
tion engineering.
The pipeline is the first
step in CSRIA’s overall
project to bring surface
water irrigation from the
Columbia River to roughly
70,000 acres of farmland
in the Odessa Subarea.
The bureau has said that
CSRIA’s project interferes
with its plans with the
Odessa Ground Water
Management Subarea
174
17
2
Approximate
site of proposed
irrigation project
LINCOLN
GRANT
28
Crab
Moses
Lake
C r e e k
ADAMS
90
Ca na l
26
C o
b ia Rive
u m
S n
l
Richland
diately review and issue
the water service contract
said.
The bureau will review
the complaint and deter-
mine its next steps, Gempler
said.
BUYING 6” and UP
Alder, Maple, Cottonwood
Saw Logs, Standing Timber
www.cascadehardwood.com
Kennewick, Washington – Odessa Subarea Irrigators and the Columbia-Snake River Irrigators Association (CSRIA) have
filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) in the Eastern District of Washington (U.S. District Court),
stressing that BOR has arbitrarily delayed and blocked the approval of a new water service contract, for the irrigators’
Privately Funded Project to bring Surface Water from the BOR’s East Low Canal. System 1 would be the first major step to
bringing surface water irrigation to about 70,000 acres (or more) of farmland in the Odessa Subarea, both north and south
of I-90. The initial developments (Systems 1-4) would reach as far south of I-90 to Lind Coulee. The Private Sector
Finance/development approach has received widespread public support (with endorsements from many newspapers and
decision-makers) as a viable, cost-effective and realistic option to begin immediately replacing the use of groundwater from
the declining Odessa Aquifer in eastern Washington. It offers a practical and reasonable solution that can be completed in
a short time frame, attempting to bring some relief to the Odessa Aquifer depletion issue.
The surprising and arbitrary denial by the BOR follows nearly three years of meetings and communications that CSRIA and
Odessa Irrigators in the System 1 area (and other areas) have had with BOR and East Columbia Irrigation Basin District
(ECBID). In particular, the BOR capriciously denied approving or executing a Water Service Contract that CSRIA
submitted in May 2014, to the BOR and the ECBID for System 1, a Privately Funded/Financed Project. The Contract
would allow for the construction of a Privately Funded pipeline (System 1) to deliver surface water east, from the East Low
Canal, to about 14,000 acres of farmland north of I-90 in the Odessa Subarea, initially as early as 2016. CSRIA had
completed the System 1 Project pre-construction engineering, and the participants have secured financing with several
major banks/accounting firms. The initial financing amounts to $42 million, with up to $100 million available for multiple
projects. The BOR’s failure to issue the water service contract ignores the irrigator’s direct financing, and has delayed the
System 1 project by at least a year.
The lawsuit further highlights that BOR is requiring that water be delivered from the East Low Canal to System 1
Participants at an excessive and wasteful rate of use (acre-feet/acre), instead of allowing the water to be used more
efficiently over a greater number of acres. This sort of antiquated and wasteful water use requirement threatens the
interests of the System 1 Participants, the CSRIA members, and the overall financial viability of the new Odessa Subarea
projects.
395
Othello
N
state Department of Ecolo-
gy and three irrigation dis-
tricts in the area.
Farms in the Odessa
Subarea rely on rapidly
diminishing well water for
irrigation.
Darryll Olsen, board
representative for CSRIA,
said he hopes the court will
order the bureau to imme-
ing totally secured, and
we’ve lost a year of con-
struction because of the
delay in the bureau issu-
ing the contract,” Olsen
ROP-18-5-1/#24
By MATTHEW WEAVER
within 60 days. CSRIA has
commitments from several
agricultural lenders, Olsen
said.
“We have that financ-
FRANKLIN
e River
a k
Area in
WALLA
detail
WALLA
The BOR has taken a position that rejects 21st Century water resources management, where direct private sector funding
should be leverage to build the distribution pumps and lines, and the “on the ground” water application should embrace the
most efficient and sustainable practices for new surface water irrigation.
The litigation filing is available at CSRIA.org (Odessa Subarea Review).
Wash.
82
Alan Kenaga/Capital Press
19-2/#6