August 26, 2004

August 26, 2004

WRIA 56

Hangman (Latah) Creek Watershed

Planning Unit Meeting

Spokane County Conservation District

August 26, 2004

Chair: Walt Edelen, Spokane County Conservation District (SCCD)

Present: Jamie Short, Department of Ecology

Gerald Green, Coeur d’Alene Tribe

Gary Ostheller

Reanette Boese, Spokane County

Bill Rickard, City of Spokane, Environmental Programs

Bruce Carmack

Rick Noll, SCCD

The meeting was called to order at 1:30 p.m. and began with introductions. A meeting agenda with copies of the August 26, 2004 meeting minutes distributed for review. Walt asked for any comments or corrections. Bill Rickard clarified his statement regarding the project budget surplus and the funds that were not yet committed—his intention was to say that we should not turn the money back to Ecology immediately and to hold it as long as we could and determine that we no longer had any use for it.

Minutes were approved with changes noted.

Minutes

Multipurpose Storage Scope

The Planning Unit received an e-mail from Chris Pitre of Golder Associates on August 24 that compiled the information received from the Planning Unit members from the August 17, 2004 meeting. This information assigned a level of effort for a range of options that Golder should focus on for the second step of the Storage Assessment.

The e-mail listed the recalculated level of effort per task:

Pump & Dump - 32%
Wetland Restoration - 29%
Off-Channel Catchments - 20%
New Dams - 10%
Diversion near Spangle - 7%
Snow Fences - 2%
Water Conservation - 1%
No-Till - 0%

Walt stated that at the last TMDL meeting on August 19, 2004, Rick did a presentation summarizing the options that Golder presented in the mid-project report. The question was asked why reforestation wasn’t looked at as one of the options. Walt asked Golder and it was decided that no one thought about it. Chris Pitre also said because the area was predominately an agriculture basin there might be some resistance to reforestation.

Walt asked Bruce Carmack to share with the Planning Unit what he and Bill Rickard talked about the treated water in Spokane County and where do we go with it. They talked briefly about the possibility of bringing that water south into the Hangman Creek watershed and using it in an irrigation project/wetland construction, etc.

The Planning Unit discussed the possibility of this being added to the Multipurpose Storage Study as a full augmentation element. There was some concern about adding more for Golder to do at this time.

Rick Noll – expressed concern about Golder spending 1/3 of the time they have on the Pump and Dump option. He feels that this is a waste of time and the results would not be useful.

Walt stated that he received some information back on the Shoreline Inventory & Assessment Project work the SCCD has been working on. SCCD met with Fish & Wildlife to determine the different reaches as to things that are important within those reaches. The report gives information on the fisheries but he hasn’t had time to see what priorities Fish & Wildlife has placed a high priority on.

Bill Rickard – said to leave the Pump and Dump at the 32% as long as Golder sticks to the itemized elements listed in the memo dated August 12, 2004 and isn’t devoting too much attention to the artesian well option.

Gary Ostheller – Leave as is

Gerry Green – The Tribe doesn’t believe that this will provided a long-term solution.

Reannette Boese – Keep it as it is

Walt asked if the Planning Unit wanted to deal with the other items, such as reforestation and treated water as recommended studies. Reannette Boese said to remind her that, at this point, the County would look at the treated water issue if it should become necessary. It was decided that Golder should go ahead with the current scope of work and the Planning Unit would look for other mechanisms for funding.

Instream Flow Report Comments

The Planning Unit was reminded that the deadline for comments to the report that is being turned in to the Department of Ecology is tomorrow, August 27. Walt asked if there were any comments from the Planning Unit at this time they wanted to add.

Jamie Short, from Department of Ecology, commented that at the end of the last meeting the Planning Unit did not seem to be sure with the strategy on how they wanted to set aside a reserve for municipal & domestic exempt wells. She asked if that was still up in the air or if it was going to be firmed up before the Instream Flow report was sent to Ecology. Walt said that he couldn’t answer this until the Planning Unit discussed this today when the discussion begins on the Implementation Strategies.

Gary Ostheller commented that the Instream Flow Report, as stated, is if nothing is done to the watershed. The idea of storage, which Golder is working on, is that you would save some of the water at run off to use later. To show that storage is viable and if there were ways found that would increase the instream flow that there should be restrictions so that it would stay in the stream. Walt said that we can’t add the elements of storage and augmentation to the Instream Flow report now when we don’t have all of the information yet. The information available now will be touched on in the report.

Hangman Country Newsletter

Walt asked the Planning Unit for subject material for articles that they wanted to see in the next issue of the newsletter that would be going out by the end of September 2004.

Walt suggested the following articles:

· Instream Flow – where we are and where it has gone

· Water Quality Work – tie this in with the TMDL work

· Multipurpose Storage Project

· PFC Inventory Work and Summary

New Website Status

Walt gave current status of the new website and apologized for it taking so long. It is almost completed. If anyone needs documents, etc. please let Walt know and he can send them out by e-mail or hard copy.

At this point the website will have the working DRAFT Hangman (Latah) Creek Instream Flow Assessment and Recommendation Development document available, plus links to all the reports in PDF format It will also have all of the Watershed Planning, Instream Flow information, Water Quality Progress to date, Multipurpose Storage mid project report, and links to all of the relevant Department of Ecology reports. The meeting agendas and minutes will be on the website too. All of the meeting minutes from the beginning of the project will be posted.

If you have questions or problems navigating through it, let Walt know.

Coeur d’Alene Tribe Update

Gerry Green gave a report on what he has been working on in the past few months. The Tribe is in the process of purchasing about 475 acres that is owned by tribal members and who want to sell their land. This is surrounded by a 910 acre farm that includes about 250 acres of flat agriculture drained and tiled field. The reason this spot was chosen is the Red Band Trout population is in the mouth and surrounding area. The total acquisition totals around 1500 acres.

Implementation Strategies

Water Quantity

A. Projected Future Growth

2. What are the impacts of projected growth over the next 20to 50 years?

Recommendations(s):

(c) A reserve should be established for domestic exempt wells (based on future need). A reserve of 500 acre-feet per year should be established for domestic exempt wells. (Revised & approved 5/27/04).

Strategy:

§ Recommendation for instream flow rule with Department of Ecology

§ County would limit water use by domestic exempt wells so that a water right is not 5,000 gallons a day

NOTE: Reanette asked that this be tabled so that she can talk with the County Planners before any further discussion on this subject.

The Planning Unit agreed that there does need to be a population projection of the Hangman as a whole. It needs to come from an official government agency that is responsible for our population projections.

B. Priorities of Future Water Allocation

     Further discussion is required after report on Spokane’s
     Comprehensive Plan, water system plans (Whitman and Benewah
     County too).

1. What does the PU foresee as a priority for future allocations?
(industrial, agricultural, commercial, residential, other).

            Strategies for increasing water supplies in the management area, which
           may include, but are not limited to, increasing water supplies through
           water conservation, water reuse, the use of reclaimed water, voluntary
           water transfers, aquifer recharge and recovery, additional water
           allocations, or additional water storage and water storage
           enhancements. The objective of these strategies is to supply water in
           sufficient quantities to satisfy the minimum instream flows for fish and to
           provide water for future out-of-stream uses for water identified in
           subsection (1)(e) and (g) of this section and to ensure that adequate
           water supplies are available for agriculture, energy production, and
            population and economic growth under the requirements of the state’s
           growth management act, chapter 36.70A RCW. These strategies, in
           and of themselves, shall not be construed to confer new water rights.
           The watershed plan must address the strategies required under this
           subsection.

Recommendation(s):

(a)Future allocations of water rights will be apportioned by the
following allocations with a reserve established for the first
three: (revised and approved 6/18/04)

1. Municipal – 224 acre feet per year

2. Domestic (group, domestic exempt) – 500 acre feet per year

3. Stock water (less than 5,000 gallons per day for ranging cattle)

4. Light Industrial

5. Commercial (retail, commercial livestock)

6. Stock water greater than 5,000 gallons per day

7. Agriculture (irrigated)

8. Heavy Industrial

(b) Initiate a watershed based negotiation to achieve a cooperative agreement to address cross state line availability of water (both surface and groundwater). (revised and approved 6/8/04)

Strategy:

§ Continuing body/Planning Unit

C. Water conservation, Reclamation, and Re-use

       The Planning Unit recognizes that the watershed may be fully allocated.
     Significant water savings may occur from implementing water conservation
      measures. Communities may want to consider instituting a plan to

prevent shortages in the future. (revised and approved 6/08/04)

Recommendation(s):

(a) Work with water purveyors to implement conservation
provisions of HB1338. (revised and

approved 6/08/04).

Strategy:

§ County coordinate/facilitate

§ Department of Health

(i) Identify funding sources for small town infrastructure upgrades (i.e. leak diction, repair, storage, metering). (revised and approved 6/08/04)

Strategy:

§ Continuing body/Planning Unit

§ Department of Health

(b) Recommend new legislation to prevent water saved by improved irrigation efficiency or

conservation from being subject to relinquishment. Request the legislature make funds available to purchase or lease this saved water. (revised and approved 6/08/04)

Strategy:

· Continuing body/Planning Unit to draft
recommendation

                        (i) Establish an Ecology administrated trust and/or non-profit
                            foundation to hold water rights in trust for Hangman
                            Watershed. (revised and approved 6/08/04)

(ii) Request the legislature make funds available to purchase or

lease this saved water.

(iii) Find out if Conservation Futures Reserves funds can be
spent on purchasing water rights.

Strategy:

· Continuing body/Planning Unit

broader regional effort. (approved 6/08/04)

Strategy:

· Continuing body/Planning Unit

(i) Provide an education/information program. (approved 6/08/04)

Strategy:

· Continuing body/Planning Unit

                        (ii) Encourage the use of water conserving programs, actions,
                             and technology (i.e. xeriscaping, low flow toilets and shower
                             heads) for domestic (group, domestic exempt), light
                              industrial, heavy industrial, commercial, agriculture, irrigation,
                              and municipal uses. (revised and approved 6/08/04)

Strategy:

· Continuing body/Planning Unit

(iii) Develop a watershed drought management plan. (approved
6/08/04)

Strategy:

· Continuing body/Planning Unit

There was a discussion regarding the structure of the “Continuing body/Planning Unit” referred to in the “strategies” section of the Recommendations. The Planning Unit agreed that there should be a continuing body/Planning Unit such as we have now but the structure is not known yet.

Jamie Short, DOE, will check on someone having a valid water right with conservation measures for 15 cfs and are only using 10 cfs, the remaining 5cfs can be leased or sold to a water trust, etc. Jamie will bring this information back to the next meeting.

Implementation Strategies continued…..

D. Groundwater/Surface Water Interactions

       Dr. John Buchanan has stated that groundwater withdrawals from the deep
       basalt aquifer system in the upper basin will not have an immediate, direct
       impact on stream flows in the upper basin. However, groundwater
       withdrawal in the upper basin may indeed have an impact on surface water
      flows in the lower basin, but it may be delayed by many years or decades.
       Furthermore, the impact may be so small that it would not be measurable in
       the lower basin.

Recommendation(s):

(a) Recommend that studies be conducted on the long-term ground water resource issues and the impact on surface water. (revised and approved 6/08/04)

(i) Define connections of subbasins (revised and approved 6/08/04)

Strategy:

§ Continuing body/Planning Unit

(ii) Determine potential of long-term aquifer mining
issues (revised and approved 6/08/04)

Strategy:

§ Continuing body/Planning Unit

(iii) A study should be undertaken to evaluate whether groundwater from adjoining watersheds is

being utilized by municipalities on the edge of watershed (Tekoa, Cheney, Spangle). The addition of a dedicated monitoring station (well) should be established.

Strategy:

§ Continuing body/Planning Unit

(c) For the benefit of determining water interchange rates and public information, establish a new permanent gaging station between the upper elevation and lower elevation of the watershed. (approved as is 6/08/04)

Strategy:

§ Recommend USGS establish and maintain

§ Seek Funding strategy

(d) Encourage the establishment of a new permanent gaging station near the stateline. (revised and approved 6/08/04)

Strategy:

§ Needs to be implemented through a joint negotiated agreement between entities on both sides of the stateline.

E. Actual Water Use/Allocation in the Basin

The total certificated water rights in the basin are approximately 48 cfs. However the actual use in the basin is not know.

Recommendation(s):

(a) The Washington State Department of Ecology should devote resources to enforce water rights compliance and curtail illegal water use. (revised and approved 7/08/04)

Strategy:

§ Department of Ecology

(b) Determine the need and support for adjudication in the watershed. (revised and approved 7/08/04)

Strategy:

§ Continuing body/Planning Unit

(i) Prioritize appropriate subbasins for adjudication with water rights in the basin. (revised and

approved 7/08/04)

Strategy:

§ Continuing body/Planning Unit

(ii) If appropriate, a petition should be filed with the State of Washington for general adjudication

of water rights in the basin (revised and approved 7/08/04)

Strategy:

§ Continuing body/Planning Unit

F. Potential Augmentation and Storage Strategies

The Hangman Creek Watershed is routinely impacted by low flows during the critical summer months of July through September. Improvements in storage and augmentation may prove to be beneficial to communities and stream flow levels.

Recommendation(s):

(a) Apply for optional element funding to further study potential storage and flow augmentation in the basin. (revised and approved 7/08/04)

Strategy:

§ Continuing body/Planning Unit

(j) Evaluate the benefits of various storage, flow augmentation and aquifer recharge strategies. (revised and approved 7/08/04)

Strategy:

(ii) Encourage change of source for water rights from surface to ground water where feasible

(added and approved 7/08/04) Note: Additional incentives may help involvement

Strategy:

§ Continuing body/Planning Unit

(revised and approved 7/08/04)

Strategy:

§ Continuing body/Planning Unit

Next Meeting

The meeting scheduled for September will be September 7, 2004 and September 21, 2004, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. at the SCCD offices.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:30 p.m.

Click Here to PRINT PAGE