By
MITCH LIES
Capital Press
May 06, 2010
From concerns over the state misusing time and money
to worries over the loss of water rights, complaints are surfacing over
Oregon's integrated water resources strategy.
Some critics even question whether a need exists to
create a long-term plan for addressing Oregon's future water needs.
"We have existing strategy contained within Oregon's
1909 Water Code," Curtis Martin, chairman of the Oregon Cattlemen's
Association's water resources committee, wrote in a letter to the state.
Martin said the association "is very concerned with
Oregon Water Resources Department's project."
In a letter to the editor of the Capital Press, Martin
also said the process is politically motivated and not the result of a
"problem needing correction."
He said the process is distracting the department from
a backlog of water-use permit applications.
Brenda Bateman, senior policy coordinator with the
OWRD, said the state is "very sensitive" to most of Martin's concerns.
But, she said, Martin is incorrect to label the strategy a political
process.
"The department and the governor's office for a long
time now have been working to get in place the funding, resources and
support for long-term planning of an integrated water resources
strategy," Bateman said.
Bateman said the Legislature provided the department
with funding for two full-time positions to work on the strategy. The
department is not shifting duties away from permitting, she said.
Also, Bateman said, officials hope the strategy will
better equip the department to process permits in a more timely fashion.
Other water users are also leery of a strategy.
"There are potential benefits for agriculture in the
strategy through an interest in water-storage development, but there
also are potential pitfalls for agriculture," said Katie Fast,
government affairs director for the Oregon Farm Bureau.
Helen Moore of Water For Life said the water-user
group is concerned on several levels.
"We believe that the department is going beyond what
the legislation required," she said.
She also questions whether the ecological flow
technical advisory committee is balanced.
"There is representation from an environmental
organization, but no scientist from any water-user group," she said.
The committee includes a hydrologist from the Nature
Conservancy. The committee was formed to define "peak and ecological
flows," a phrase lawmakers included in a 2009 bill that allocated grant
funds for water-storage project studies. Under the bill, grant
applicants are required to address a project's impact on peak and
ecological flows.
"Our concern is as they expand the use of those
definitions, there will never be increased storage of water for
out-of-stream uses," Moore said. "And there are a number of industries
in this state that depend on the ability to use water."
Bateman countered that the committee's work will be
peer-reviewed before it is adopted. And, she said, the state intends for
the peak and ecological flow requirement to be considered only in regard
to water-storage grant applicants.
"I can tell you from the multiple agencies involved
and the governor's office that it is not the intent at all to remove or
jeopardize water rights," Bateman said.
Ultimately, Fast said, "There is always potential when
you're doing planning that it could have an impact on how water is
managed.
"But hopefully, by staying involved, we can steer it
in the right direction," Fast said.
Open houses set
The Oregon Water Resources Department is hosting six
open houses in coming weeks on its Integrated Water Resources Strategy,
beginning with three next week. Up next week are the following:
* May 11: Medford Library, 205 S. Central Ave.,
Medford.
* May 12: Oregon Institute of Technology, 3201 Campus
Drive, Klamath Falls.
* May 13: Redmond Fire and Rescue, 341 NW Dogwood
Ave., Redmond.
All meetings begin at 4 p.m.