[Vision2020] IDWR distribution of funds to water projects

[Mark Solomon]

Following is the letter to the editor I submitted 
yesterday upon reading Kirsten's "article":

Another take

Daily News reporter E. Kirsten Peters could have 
written her article on the proposed groundwater 
ordinance (Daily News 7/20) with journalistic 
integrity. Instead, she chose to editorialize. 
Having attended the meeting myself, Peters' slant 
that "property rights got a black eye" could just 
as easily have been "property rights defended" 
but that is not apparently where her personal 
beliefs lie.

As was clearly stated in the proposed ordinance 
and by members of the public in their testimony, 
property rights are not just about how someone 
can develop new uses on their land but also how 
existing uses and landowners are protected from 
harm by new development. The proposed ordinance, 
I believe, does an excellent job of balancing 
those sometimes conflicting demands in regards to 
our most precious local natural resource - our 
groundwater.

Editorials belong on the opinion page, not in the news.

Mark Solomon

At 5:40 AM -0700 7/21/05, Tom Hansen wrote:
>However, the July 20, 2005 edition of the Moscow-Pullman Daily News is
>reporting (with a special thanks to Kirsten Peters, Daily News Staff
>Writer):
>
>------------------------------------------------------
>
>Property rights take hit in water debate; Naylor Farms stands to lose
>ongoing battle
>
>By E. Kirsten Peters, Daily News Staff Writer
>
>Property rights in Latah County were at the heart of conflict Tuesday in an
>ongoing battle over Moscow's water supply. In the end, it was property
>rights that got the black eye.
>
>At an evening meeting of the county's planning commission, a set of new
>regulations on land use attracted public comment before a crowd of 65 people
>packed into a basement room of the county courthouse. The meeting closed
>with the unanimous acceptance of the proposed regulations by the planning
>commission
>
>The proposal now moves to the county commissioners for consideration.
>
>At issue is land use around the city of Moscow in an area called the
>sub-basin, which is bounded to the north by Moscow Mountain, to the south by
>Paradise Ridge, to the east near Joel and to the west by the state line.
>
>The proposed regulations prohibit outright the use of land for: refining or
>processing mineral resources; processing or storing toxic materials;
>sanitary or industrial landfills, and industrial wastewater treatment.
>
>The proposed regulations would impact the Naylor Farms Inc. property north
>of Moscow. The company has proposed in recent years the use of groundwater
>for irrigated farming and for clay-mineral mining and processing. Naylor
>Farms' petition for water rights has been opposed by water activists in
>Moscow who fear depletion of groundwater resources for the city.
>
>Geologic evidence suggests that groundwater at Naylor Farms cannot flow
>toward Moscow, and the proposed ordinance is highly arbitrary in several
>other respects, Brent Thomson of Naylor Farms said.
>
>"How were the boundaries of the (sub-basin area) established and why don't
>they encompass all the recharge areas?" Thomson asked the commission.
>
>He said the proposed ordinance is a transparent attempt to prevent Naylor
>Farms from pursuing what has until now been legal uses of its property.
>
>Thomson was not alone in his defense of property rights.
>
>"As a property owner I have concerns (about the proposed regulations) and
>...the frittering away of our freedoms," said county resident Murray
>Stanton. "I am not entirely against these ideas but ...we all know how
>difficult it is to reverse regulations once we have them."
>
>Other speakers testified that since local geologists cannot agree even about
>groundwater flow direction, land use should not be restricted in the
>sub-basin because that area may or may not affect recharge of aquifers
>significant to the city of Moscow.
>
>The prohibition against mining in the proposed regulations would apply not
>only to Naylor Farms but to potential new gravel pits within the sub-basin
>area.
>
>"One of our members on the task force (that developed the draft regulations)
>researched the gravel pit question and we believe there aren't any viable
>places in the affected area to acquire good gravel," county planning and
>building director Michelle Fuson said.
>
>The proposed regulations are meant to address the fact that the city of
>Moscow relies for its water on two aquifers under the town. Above the
>aquifers in central Latah County is a bed of loose material under the soil
>called the Latah Formation.
>
>According to the draft county ordinance, rainfall and snowmelt percolate
>into the aquifers in large measure through the Latah Formation throughout
>the "sub-basin" area. Because of this theory of recharge, the county is
>interested in restricting the ways in which land in the sub-basin can be
>used. The goal is the protection of the aquifers from contamination through
>the Latah Formation sediments.
>
>The regulations being considered by the county would not affect land in the
>city of Moscow or in the "area of impact" buffer zone immediately around
>Moscow.
>
>"The city will make its own decisions about water issues that will govern
>the land in town and the city and county have to negotiate an agreement
>about how to handle the area of impact land," Fuson said.
>
>The proposed regulations would mean conditional use permits would be
>required for all new instances of:
>
>residential wastewater treatment;
>
>commercial nurseries;
>
>ag supply and service centers;
>
>car washes;
>
>"concentrated or confined animal feeding operations" of 10 to 100 "animal
>units" as defined by the county code. (see sidebar)
>
>Members of the local ad hoc group known as Protect Our Water testified in
>general agreement with the proposed ordinance, although some acknowledged
>that restricting the number of animals, particularly horses, might be seen
>as severe to some landowners.
>
>Members of the task force that developed the proposed regulations
>acknowledged that no scientific studies were used to determine the rules
>about "animal units."
>
>Making note of that testimony, the planning commission amended the proposed
>ordinance to read that land owners with 60 to 100 "animal units," rather
>than 10 to 100, would have to seek conditional use permits.
>
>Livestock operations that confine more than 100 animal units are prohibited
>in the sub-basin land by the proposed regulations.
>
>Violators could be fined $300 or jailed for 30 days for each day they are
>not in compliance with the new restrictions.
>
>The regulations will now be considered by the board of county commissioners,
>which will determine if the proposed ordinance becomes law.
>
>"Assuming the commissioners want to go forward, they will set a public
>hearing, likely in August," Fuson said.
>
>QuickRead
>
>What happened
>
>Public comment was given to Latah County Planning Commission, which then
>voted unanimously in favor of new county regulations of land use.
>
>What it means
>
>The county is moving toward restrictions on property use in the area from
>Moscow Mountain to Paradise Ridge.
>
>What happens next
>
>The county commissioners will decide whether to accept the proposed
>regulations and give them the force of law.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Unlike what some people may mislead you to believe, water IS NOT an infinite
>source.
>
>Take care, Moscow.
>
>Tom Hansen
>Moscow, Idaho
>
>"law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice, and when they
>fail in this purpose, they become the dangerously structured dams that block
>the flow of social progress."
>
>- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>
>From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
>On Behalf Of Phil Nisbet
>Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 7:24 PM
>To: vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: [Vision2020] IDWR distribution of funds to water projects
>
>Just got back to the shack from the IDWR information meeting.
>
>Distribution of funds from the Idaho Legislature's appropriation for
>hydrological studies in the Moscow Basin have been handed down.
>
>PBAC has been alloted $284,000 to put in a monitering well program in the
>area west of town.  IDWR will do the contracting for drilling services at a
>cost of $15,000.
>
>The Latah County Proposal, drafted by Mark Solomon and John Bush, to study
>the location of recharge points for the Sediment of Bovill and for the
>Wanapum aquifers was also accepted and has been funded to the tune of
>$151,000.  Serious congratulations are due both John and Mark for
>marshalling through a plan that will greatly enhence our understanding of
>how the groundwater system works in the area between Moscow Mountain and
>Moscow.  Further thanks are owed to the area Legislators who made the funds
>happen and to the Commisioners for seeing that the proposal got a good
>hearing before IDWR.
>
>Great Job by all concerned.  It will be good to have the additional data for
>
>future planning efforts.
>
>Phil Nisbet
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee®
>Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
>
>_____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.  
>                http://www.fsr.net                      
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20050721/2659d105/attachment.htm