[Vision2020] Water issue

Wed, 10 Dec 2003 17:56:52 -0800

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0055_01C3BF46.FE304CA0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Visionaries:

It's been two weeks since a Coalition of local organizations filed a =
petition with the Director of the Idaho Department of Water Resources =
(IDWR) to declare the deep Grand Ronde aquifer a critical groundwater =
area (CGA) and the shallower Wanapum aquifer a groundwater management =
area (GWMA). During that time, the local bureaucrats have started to =
implement a propaganda campaign aimed at maintaining the status quo.

The city of Moscow and Latah county have scheduled a public meeting on =
the potential designation for 12/15, and have been advertising the =
meeting on cable TV (channel 13) and the Daily News. While I applaud the =
effort to get the word out about this meeting, I take issue with the =
ad's statement, "Designation of the area could impact future water use =
within the region and development in the city of Moscow and Latah =
county." A more accurate statement might have read:

Declining water levels in the area's aquifers could impact the future =
availability                          of water in the region, as well as =
development in the city of Moscow and Latah county.   Designation of the =
area would be intended to develop long-term solutions                    =
   to the water supply problem.

It appears that our local governments want to portray state intervention =
as the problem, when the REAL problems are declining groundwater and =
ineffective (or nonexistent) local solutions.

Last week, exiting councilman Jon Kimberling submitted a droll piece to =
this network wanting to know how many members the Coalition groups have, =
who those members are, and "Was consideration given to the economic =
impact on our community if we shut down new development and essentially =
froze our tax base." Well, here's some answers:

  a.. It only takes one person to file a petition with IDWR. Once the =
petition is filed, the director will make his decision based on the =
relevant facts and on testimony taken at a public hearing.=20
  b.. Designation of a CGA or GWMA is not an issue of popularity. It's =
an issue of necessity, when local governments prove incapable of dealing =
with a declining water supply.
  c.. The Coalition which wrote and submitted the petition is composed =
of private, non-profit groups. As such, member information is not =
public.
  d.. The petition to IDWR requested protection of our groundwater. I =
don't believe that the Director of IDWR has the authority to "shut down =
new development" or "freeze our tax base."
  e.. Kimberling's letter is a first step toward rousing a =
pitchfork-wielding mob to round up and dispose of those who would ruin =
the economy of the area by trying to force reasonable, sustainable water =
use on its residents.
Kimberling shows his ignorance of the issue and his distrust of public =
process by the nature of the questions he asks. I have tremendous faith =
that our new city council will deal with this issue much more =
effectively.

Also last week, Larry Kirkland, former UI representative and now =
Executive Secretary of the Palouse Basin Aquifer Committee (PBAC), met =
with the Latah County Commissioners. The purpose of the meeting was =
apparently to provide information and answer whatever questions the =
commissioners had regarding possible CGA or GWMA designations. Some good =
information was exchanged and the commissioners asked some very good =
questions. But Kirkland repeatedly referred to the idea of state =
intervention as "an extra level of bureaucracy" which would "slow down =
the whole process" of providing for the area's water needs. This coming =
from the main figure in a government committee which was charged with =
finding solutions, but has done little beyond research during the last =
twelve years. Kirkland also discussed a variety of artificial aquifer =
recharge projects (like pumping treated sewage into the deep aquifer) as =
though they were simple solutions, without going into the costs and =
potential pitfalls of such projects. The obvious intent of Kirkland's =
testimony before the commissioners was to defend PBAC (the status quo) =
and attempt to derail any support the commissioners might express toward =
state intervention. Kirkland has also met with the Director of IDWR to =
discuss ways to keep PBAC as the primary local group making decisions =
about water use and development.

The decline in local groundwater has been studied for decades. And while =
much has been learned about our groundwater resource, very little has =
been done to conserve or safeguard it. Those who want to pretend that =
the problem isn't urgent enough to warrant significant action by current =
residents are like the ostrich - except I'm not sure the sand is what =
they've got their heads stuck into. Among these feathered fools, I'm =
afraid, are most of Moscow's city government and most members of PBAC. =
That's why state intervention is so necessary.=20

Bill French

------=_NextPart_000_0055_01C3BF46.FE304CA0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1226" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>
Visionaries:
It=92s been two weeks since a =
Coalition of=20
local organizations filed a petition with the Director of the Idaho =
Department=20
of Water Resources (IDWR) to declare the deep Grand Ronde aquifer a =
critical=20
groundwater area (CGA) and the shallower Wanapum aquifer a groundwater=20
management area (GWMA). During that time, the local bureaucrats have =
started to=20
implement a propaganda campaign aimed at maintaining the status =
quo.
The city of Moscow and Latah =
county have=20
scheduled a public meeting on the potential designation for 12/15, and =
have been=20
advertising the meeting on cable TV (channel 13) and the Daily =
News.=20
While I applaud the effort to get the word out about this meeting, I =
take issue=20
with the ad=92s statement, "Designation of the area could impact future =
water use=20
within the region and development in the city of Moscow and Latah =
county." A=20
more accurate statement might have read:
<DIR>
<DIR>
Declining water levels in the =
area=92s=20
aquifers could impact the future=20
availability&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&=
nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&n=
bsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
of water&nbsp;in the region, as well as development in the city of =
Moscow and=20
Latah county.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Designation of the area would be intended =
to=20
develop long-term=20
solutions&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
to the water supply problem.</DIR></DIR>
It appears that our local =
governments want=20
to portray state intervention as the problem, when the REAL =
problems are=20
declining groundwater and ineffective (or nonexistent) local=20
solutions.
Last week, exiting councilman =
Jon=20
Kimberling submitted a droll piece to this network wanting to know how =
many=20
members the Coalition groups have, who those members are, and "Was =
consideration=20
given to the economic impact on our community if we shut down new =
development=20
and essentially froze our tax base." Well, here=92s some =
answers:
<UL>
 <LI>It only takes one =
person to file=20
 a petition with IDWR. Once the petition is filed, the director will =
make his=20
 decision based on the relevant facts and on testimony taken at a =
public=20
 hearing. </LI>
 <LI>Designation of a CGA or GWMA =
is not=20
 an issue of popularity. It=92s an issue of necessity, when local =
governments=20
 prove incapable of dealing with a declining water supply.</LI>
 <LI>The Coalition which wrote =
and submitted=20
 the petition is composed of private, non-profit groups. As such, =
member=20
 information is not public.</LI>
 <LI>The petition to IDWR =
requested=20
 protection of our groundwater. I don=92t believe that the Director of =
IDWR has=20
 the authority to "shut down new development" or "freeze our tax=20
 base."</LI>
 <LI>Kimberling=92s letter is a =
first step=20
 toward rousing a pitchfork-wielding mob to round up and dispose of =
those who=20
 would ruin the economy of the area by trying to force reasonable, =
sustainable=20
 water use on its residents.</LI></UL>
Kimberling shows his ignorance =
of the issue=20
and his distrust of public process by the nature of the questions he =
asks. I=20
have tremendous faith that our new city council will deal with this =
issue much=20
more effectively.
Also last week, Larry Kirkland, =
former UI=20
representative and now Executive Secretary of the Palouse Basin Aquifer=20
Committee (PBAC), met with the Latah County Commissioners. The purpose =
of the=20
meeting was apparently to provide information and answer whatever =
questions the=20
commissioners had regarding possible CGA or GWMA designations. Some good =

information was exchanged and the commissioners asked some very good =
questions.=20
But Kirkland repeatedly referred to the idea of state intervention as =
"an extra=20
level of bureaucracy" which would "slow down the whole process" of =
providing for=20
the area=92s water needs. This coming from the main figure in a =
government=20
committee which was charged with finding solutions, but has done little =
beyond=20
research during the last twelve years. Kirkland also discussed a variety =
of=20
artificial aquifer recharge projects (like pumping treated sewage into =
the deep=20
aquifer) as though they were simple solutions, without going into the =
costs and=20
potential pitfalls of such projects. The obvious intent of Kirkland=92s =
testimony=20
before the commissioners was to defend PBAC (the status quo) and attempt =
to=20
derail any support the commissioners might express toward state =
intervention.=20
Kirkland has also met with the Director of IDWR to discuss ways to keep =
PBAC as=20
the primary local group making decisions about water use and=20
development.
The decline in local =
groundwater has been=20
studied for decades. And while much has been learned about our =
groundwater=20
resource, very little has been done to conserve or safeguard it. Those =
who want=20
to pretend that the problem isn=92t urgent enough to warrant significant =
action by=20
current residents are like the ostrich =96 except I=92m not sure the =
sand is what=20
they=92ve got their heads stuck into. Among these feathered fools, I=92m =
afraid, are=20
most of Moscow=92s city government and most members of PBAC. That=92s =
why state=20
intervention is so necessary. 
Bill =
French</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0055_01C3BF46.FE304CA0--