FEBRUARY 2007: FEATURE
Water works
Washington state’s success on its Columbia River plan
spurs several Oregon efforts to seek expanded water
rights and reservoir funding.
By Robin Doussard
No water, no life.
So intones the glossy DVD that introduces the Oregon Oasis
Project. It doesn’t rely on subtleties to get across its
point: It pulls out agricultural biggie Bob Hale, Echo farmer
Kent Madison and OSU plant researcher Phil Hamm to speak
directly to the camera, run soil through their fingers, and
state resolutely that Eastern Oregon needs more water from the
Columbia River to give the region any chance at growing its
economy.
It’s not a new pitch, in Oregon or across the West. The
desire to use the Columbia River Basin’s water is long,
historic and controversial. The basin, which encompasses
260,000 miles, is a crucial salmon habitat and a crucial people
habitat with thirsty cities and fields. The debate over how to
best serve fish and human has raged for decades, as salmon runs
have faltered and the region’s population continues to
grow.
Washington state last year leaped forward on the issue after
getting water users and conservationists to agree on a plan
that will store more water taken during high-flow winter
months; two-thirds of the water will go to irrigators and
municipalities, and one-third will go back to the river for
fish during July and August. The plan also calls for
conservation projects that would offset increased water usage
elsewhere. The key to the success of Washington’s
Columbia River Management Plan, which went into effect in July,
was that state’s governor putting $200 million toward new
storage and conservation projects. “We’ve broken
the gridlock from the past 20 years, and now we have some hope
for the future,” says Keith Phillips, Gov. Chris
Gregoire’s environmental policy adviser.
THAT INTENSE AND RIGOROUS FIVE-YEAR EFFORT, lauded in the
Seattle press as good for both the environment and economic
development, has spurred several in Oregon — the
Oregon Oasis Project, the state Water Resources Department, and
Republican Sen. David Nelson from Pendleton, whose district
covers Morrow, Umatilla, Union and Wallowa counties — to
take another run at the Columbia River’s water.
The Oasis Project started as a loose coalition of Eastern
Oregon irrigators, businesspeople and community leaders that
incorporated as a nonprofit in November, according to Cindy
Finlayson, the director of economic development for the
Umatilla Electric Cooperative who also works on the Oasis
Project. She says the cooperative provided $100,000 to fund the
project and probably will give another $100,000. Those involved
include electric cooperative CEO Steve Eldridge, Hermiston
engineer Fred Ziari, American Onion’s Bob Hale and farmer
Chet Prior.
The Oasis Project is drafting a bill for this legislative
session that would allow an additional 500,000 acre-feet of
water per year to be pulled from the Columbia River year-round.
Of that, 300,000 acre-feet would go toward irrigating 100,000
new acres that “would provide jobs, economic development
and new taxes for local government.” A two-page summary
of the project states these new irrigated acres would be used
for “high-market value vegetables and fruits, and the
processing of these crops would create over 10,000 new jobs and
$452 million per year in added revenue.”
“The governor and the state could do one simple thing to
create tremendous economic growth in Eastern Oregon,”
says Bob Hale. “Let us use more water.”
Another 195,000 acre-feet would be used to replace
“critical groundwater” now irrigating 65,000 acres.
And 5,000 acre-feet would go to local municipalities so they
would be less dependent upon well water. The plan also calls
for a $10 per acre-foot charge on new water permits to fund
conservation projects. As of early January, legislative
sponsors had not yet been identified, according to
Finlayson.
“If you pull water out year-round, you don’t have
to fund the big infrastructure costs,” says John
Dilorenzo, a lawyer representing the Oasis Project.
“There is no science to suggest that the amount we would
take during low-flow months would have an impact on fish. Our
bill provides immediate relief and doesn’t have a $200
million price tag.” Others would disagree with Dilorenzo;
the debate over what fish need has been ongoing for years since
the federal opinion on the biological state of the Columbia
River system was issued.
Finlayson says the Oasis Project is not a long-term solution;
it would sunset in 25 years. “We believe the timing is
good” for this to be considered, she says. “This
idea has been kicking around for a while. We need to catch up
to Washington.”
Finlayson says she has not seen Nelson’s bills, and
Nelson says he has not coordinated with the Oasis Project,
although both are generally aware of each other’s
efforts. Nelson plans to introduce three water-related bills
this session, one in concert with a request by the state Water
Resources Department (WRD).
NELSON THINKS THE OASIS PROJECT has a big political hurdle in
front of it in seeking to draw additional water during low-flow
months. He agrees that the Oasis Project is a short-term fix,
saying his bills present a long-term solution.
Nelson’s first bill seeks funding for a comprehensive
study of the state’s water supply, to be conducted by the
WRD, which also has separately requested the $890,000 needed
for the study. Debbie Colbert, WRD senior policy coordinator,
says her department’s request has been included in the
governor’s recommended budget.
“Of the 18 Western states, Oregon is one of only two
that are not doing long-term water supply planning,” she
says. “This proposal is our first step. We’ve been
trying to get our initiative funded for several years now.
It’s a milestone that it is in the governor’s
recommended budget. Sen. Nelson’s bill supports our plan.
The twin effort gives us more opportunities to talk about
Oregon’s water needs.” The study would assess
existing and future water needs, inventory potential storage
sites, assess conservation opportunities, and determine the
amount of runoff from the basin each year.
Nelson says his other two bills seek to mirror
Washington’s plan, asking for $200 million to fund
storage projects. It would start with a pilot project that
would store about 50,000 acre-feet of water, to be pulled only
during the high-flow winter months, in a reservoir in Juniper
Canyon. The bills also seek to allow additonal water to be
drawn from the Columbia in more months.
In Washington, Phillips says, “We hired the best
science, and got an independent economic review, and used them
as the cornerstones. The science surprised us.” That
research helped lead to the agreement that more water could be
taken out during periods previously restricted.
Since 1994, after salmon were listed as endangered, water
users in Oregon have been required to provide mitigation
(essentially, replace the water taken) in order to get new
water rights from the Columbia above the Bonneville Dam from
April 15 to Sept. 30. There is no moratorium on new Columbia
rights, says Colbert, ”but there are public interest
standards that apply during that critical fish period.”
But the net effect of this has meant very few new water rights
have been issued since then.
Colbert says the state has never barred winter water from
being pulled, adding, “we just don’t have the
infrastructure to store it.” For example, she notes that
Pendleton currently is taking high winter flows from the
Umatilla River and putting it into its municipal wells.
Despite the debates that are certain to surround these newly
launched water efforts, there is one truth held by all sides:
No water, no life. For fish or human.
Have an opinion? E-mail
feedback@oregonbusiness.com
