      |
 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
NATURAL RESOURCESWaterWater is an essential ingredient for healthy communities. People need clean water for drinking, cooking and bathing. Water is critical to families, farmers, fish, and industry, as well as for power generation, tourism and recreation. In the Pacific Northwest, there usually is not enough water when and where it is needed; often there is too much water where it is not wanted.Counties have a unique perspective on water resources due to their broad authority and responsibilities in land use, health and sanitation, transportation and parks and recreation. One or another of the 39 counties is engaged in nearly every aspect of water resource management, with the key exception of water rights issuance. Counties have responsibility or authority for flood control, storm water and wastewater management, drinking water supply, groundwater management, and many other water-related needs. Even in the water rights arena, however, county decisions on public health, land use and economic development are greatly affected by the decisions of state regulators and water users. Local watershed planning may be an appropriate framework to coordinate these various local efforts, but has yet to demonstrate it will be effective in achieving intended results. WSAC Policy: Counties support changes in state law and budgeting for efficient water rights administration, consistent with collaborative, locally based watershed planning. Water law and administration must be flexible enough to recognize regional differences in water sources, whether they are aquifers or surface water, and in water uses and demands; a “one-size fits all” approach is not appropriate. The Legislature must act to ensure that water supply decisions are made. Whether made through a regional planning process or by the state, these decisions must be timely, consistent and supportive of growth management planning and of efforts underway with state and tribal partners that promote sustainability for people, fisheries and other resources. Legislative solutions must address both urban and rural water needs by providing adequate resources, establishing priorities, and resolving conflicting roles and responsibilities. Rural areas need to continue to have the right to use wells for their water supply. Careful adjustments to water policy through fiscal incentives and policy directives are needed to increase water availability using conservation, storage, water reuse and other water management tools to provide for population growth, economic growth, power generation and adequate instream flows for fish, wildlife and recreation. Water storage – whether surface impoundment or aquifer storage – is key to meeting future water supply needs. Counties believe it is critical to maintain and enhance water storage for human, industrial, and agricultural needs. Stable and predictable water rights are essential for future growth. Water law also must be flexible enough to deal with the changing nature of economic and climatic conditions – and a wide range of methods to utilize water resources, such as temporary transfers. Relinquishment and abandonment provisions should be examined to determine whether to allow longer time periods for nonuse due to planning, economic development, and other circumstances. Disincentives to conservation should be eliminated so that conserved water can be used in other ways. Water right holders should be provided incentives or compensation to allow their water rights to be used to meet objectives of locally developed plans. New state funding needs to be provided for the many water resource and water quality responsibilities of counties. In particular, new state funding to support county responsibilities for safe drinking water supply, stormwater management and flood damage reduction plans and implementation programs should be identified. Though salmon recovery has been an important focus, these core county responsibilities should not be overlooked given their direct connection to salmon recovery efforts. State funding priorities and policies should encourage the need for coordination in these two areas. In addition, funding should be provided on a reimbursement basis to complete and implement watershed plans. Forest ResourcesAt least 31 counties receive revenue from timber receipts generated on state or federal lands. All counties, however, have an interest in the management of those lands in terms of how management practices impact listings of threatened and endangered species. Policies developed by the federal and state governments on multiple uses of these lands have an important effect on counties. Counties have been at the table in recent years to aid in shaping these policies, participating in the Timber, Fish and Wildlife process and the Eastside Ecosystem Coalition of Counties; through their participation in the Board of Natural Resources and the Forest Practices Board; and by holding annual meetings with the Department of Natural Resources on the management of county trust lands.WSAC Policy: Counties must continue to be given a voice in management decisions on federal and state lands, particularly when those decisions impact county revenues and socio-economic conditions. Counties also will advocate for changes in state and federal law that provide for sustainable management of forest resources while maximizing benefits to the state and local economy. Salmon RecoveryUnder the federal Endangered Species Act, sixteen species of salmon, steelhead and bull trout, which spawn in our state, have been listed as threatened or endangered species affecting nearly every county in the state. Many county governments are committed to work collaboratively with cities, tribal governments, state and federal agencies and private citizens to protect and, where possible, restore salmon runs and in time accomplish the de-listing of these threatened and endangered species. Many counties already have committed substantial staff and financial resources to protecting, restoring, and acquiring habitat, operating programs and initiating projects critical to salmon recovery, spending hundreds of millions of dollars in local funds in recent years.The state salmon recovery strategy places much of the burden for habitat protection and restoration on counties and cities. It requires adoption and implementation of storm water management programs for public and private projects and anticipates revision of critical area designations and regulations using “best available science.” The strategy also directs counties, along with other government entities, to inventory and prioritize culvert replacement and stream bank restoration and embark on other projects to improve fish passage and ensure clean and usable habitat. It also commits the State to a number of actions without which achieving salmon recovery will become more difficult, and the burden on local governments heavier. WSAC Policy: While many counties believe in recovering fish species, it is necessary to maintain a strong economy to be able to afford recovery. It is also essential to have clear and consistent guidance and support from state and federal agencies. A successful salmon recovery strategy must be based upon partnership among the state, counties, cities, tribal governments and the federal government. The strategy must be based on achievable goals and include adequate funding for habitat protection and enhancement, an equal role for local government in shaping policy and funding priorities, and flexibility in addressing priorities consistent with resources. It also must recognize the political and constitutional limitations of regulatory approaches to salmon recovery and must encourage more efficient use of our existing resources. Finally, the salmon recovery strategy must address all limiting factors, not only habitat. The strategy must minimize impacts on maintaining and developing healthy agricultural and forest economies, preserve our hydropower resources, prevent excessive harvest of fish and allow for accommodation of projected population growth. To accomplish these goals there must be a new, statewide revenue source for salmon recovery, water quality and water supply projects, including new storage capacity. Counties also will need funding for additional staff for monitoring and enforcement of plans and regulations on salmon recovery. Finally, the state and the federal governments must meet their commitments as true and full partners in salmon recovery, and use their authority and resources to support local and regional efforts. Public LandsOf the state’s 43.3 million upland acres, 40 percent is owned by federal, state or local government and another 6 percent is owned by Native Americans. State and federal forestland and state and federal parkland provide many benefits both to local communities and to the people of the state as a whole. Land ownership by public agencies is not evenly distributed across the state; in many rural counties, there is only a small amount of land available for private use and development. In many areas already dominated by public ownership, there is growing controversy over land purchase by state agencies for wildlife habitat and related purposes. In addition, some agencies fail to adequately maintain public land, resulting in impacts on neighbors from noxious weeds, fire and other public safety problems.WSAC Policy: Counties with large amounts of public land ownership are concerned about land purchases by state agencies for habitat purposes. Counties with substantial population growth are also concerned that the state is not providing adequate recreational and open space opportunities for urban residents. Before acquiring new lands, especially for the purposes of habitat protection, the state should engage in a comprehensive analysis of all existing public lands and align its existing policies through capital facilities planning and proper land management. The legislature also should provide adequate funding to state agencies for long-term maintenance and proper management of state land for control of noxious weeds, fire and public safety.
|
||||||||||||
|
|
