1.1 Background
Beginning in 1998 and continuing over the next few years, decisions will be made and plans developed and implemented regarding the water resources of the Nooksack River watershed and certain adjacent streams (Water Resources Inventory Area 1 or WRIA 1). These decisions and plans will coordinate with the land use/resource management planning under the Growth Management Act, the Shorelines Management Act, and other similar Acts, along with planning/projects in response to the Endangered Species Act (ESA) listing for Chinook salmon and bull trout, and will largely determine the landscape, the environmental health, and the economic future of Whatcom County residents. Agencies of federal, tribal, state, and local governments are authorized to make these decisions. The state legislature, with agreements from federal agencies, provided an opportunity for watershed management decisions to be made locally.
In 1998 the State legislature passed Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2514, codified as RCW 90.82, known as the Watershed Management Act. The Act provides a framework to better understand the nature and extent of water resources issues and to locally plan and implement a variety of solutions to address those issues. More specifically, the Act requires the development and implementation of a Watershed Management Plan that: ·
Participation in the process is voluntary. In May 1998, Whatcom County, the City of Bellingham, and the Public Utility District No. 1 of Whatcom County decided to engage in the process with the County acting as lead agency. Pursuant to RCW 90.82, these three local governments invited the Lummi Nation and the Nooksack Tribe to join the process. The Nooksack Tribe described their involvement in the project through a July 1998 letter. After a MOA was signed by the three local governments and the Lummi Nation in October 1998, both of the tribal governments had joined the process. The MOA further defines the project objectives, participants, and the decision-making process. Since May 1998, funding (grant and other) has been obtained, resources have been allocated, and actions are underway based on requirements of the law, subsequently signed contracts and agreements, and input from the local community. Together, the five Governments initiated public involvement, water quantity, and instream flow work tasks, in parallel with the Planning Unit formation work task. In May 1999 Planning Unit Caucuses were formed. In June 1999 the first Planning Unit meeting was held.
The decision to engage in the Watershed Management Process was made because of the increasing number of water problems the community is facing. Competing demands for the finite water resources in WRIA 1 pose a host of interconnected, serious challenges that threaten to have a variety of negative impacts to our environment and our economy. While these challenges have been recognized for years, the need to address them has now become imperative.
The demands for water include the needs of fish for sufficient water in streams (known as instream flow) to enable migration and propagation. Since some local fish populations have been listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, we must find a means to ensure that there is sufficient water available for fish, or face federal sanctions. In addition, tribal treaty rights include the right to harvest fish at all usual and accustomed grounds and stations throughout WRIA1. Meanwhile, a growing human population means growing demands for water for farming, homes, businesses, and industries -- demands that are largely going unmet, which in turn is limiting economic development.
The quality of our water is also a problem. Human activities affect both surface and ground water quality and have lowered water quality below that necessary for people and for fish in some areas.
The immediate challenge is to collect or generate sufficient information upon which to base rational water resource management decisions. We need to know how much water naturally occurs throughout the year, how much water is represented by both state and federal (including tribes) water rights and claims, how much water is already allocated, or how much additional water, if any, is available for other uses. In addition, the extent to which ground and surface are interconnected varies throughout the watershed and represents both a water resource management challenge and opportunity.
Because all elements of the watershed management project -- quantity, quality, habitat, and instream flow -- are physically, chemically, and biologically interconnected throughout WRIA 1, any successful management plan needs to address all of these components.
Because water resource issues and policies are both complex and contentious, a collaborative decision making model appears to hold the greatest promise for developing a water resource management plan that will be successful over time. This collaborative effort will be conducted in a manner that does not violate the government-to- government principles of the Indian Nation and Indian Tribe in WRIA 1.
In March 1999, a preliminary draft scope of work was developed by the Initiating Governments. This initial draft identified a number of actions required by law that could be acted on while obtaining further input from the general public, Planning Unit, and others. The initial draft was presented to the public and Planning Unit when they began meeting in June. The Planning Unit recommended a number of modifications of the initial draft. This revised draft is much less detailed than the initial scope of work and is intended to provide a broader framework for the WRIA 1 Watershed Management Project. This revised scope of work incorporates those recommendations, adopted agreements and contracts, requirements of the Watershed Planning Act, and suggestions from the "Guide to Watershed Planning and Management." These documents are referenced throughout this draft and listed by a number as reference documents in the Table of Contents.
1.2 Scope of the Watershed Planning Project
1.2.1 Geographic
The geographic scope of project is Water Resource Inventory Area 1 (figure to be added) and certain parts of Canada that drain to WRIA1. This area includes the drainage area of the Nooksack River and its tributaries, including portions of Skagit County which are drained by the South Fork of the Nooksack River. The area also includes the U.S. portions of the Abbotsford-Sumas Aquifer and the Sumas River drainage that extend into British Columbia. In addition, the study area includes several coastal drainages that drain water into marine waters along the coastline of Whatcom County. The study area includes the Lake Whatcom drainage.
1.2.2 Issues
The scope of issues to be addressed under the Act must include water quantity, but may also include water quality, instream flows, and habitat. The Initiating Governments have chosen to address all four issues/components in the WRIA 1 Watershed Management Project as they are inseparable. If, during the course of their work, technical teams encounter new information which in their opinion, warrants a modification of the Scope of Work to ensure their new information is adequately addressed, the technical team shall propose an amendment to the Scope of Work for approval by the Planning Unit and the Initiating Governments.
1.2.3 Time Frame
Under the Watershed Planning Act, a proposed plan that has been approved by the Planning Unit must be submitted to the County within four years of the date that the Planning Unit first received funding. For WRIA 1, the Watershed Plan must be submitted by June 30, 2002. Implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of the Plan will continue indefinitely into the future.
1.2.4 Affected Parties
It is understood that all federal, tribal, state, and local governments with jurisdiction, as well as all types of private water resource interests and their customers, clients, and members within WRIA1 and hydrologically connected areas are affected parties. It has been determined, however, that it is in the best interest of all affected parties that the membership of the WRIA 1 Planning Unit, as defined by the Act, shall consist of the Initiating Governments (Whatcom County, City of Bellingham, PUD1, Lummi Nation, and Nooksack Tribe), other governments (state agencies, federal agencies, small cities, diking/drainage districts, and water districts), and Water Resource Interests caucuses (fishers, agriculture, non-municipal water systems, forestry, environmental, land development, and private well owners). It is extremely important that early on, and throughout this process, there is a clear understanding of the extent to which the issues and interests of the governments and water resource interests are addressed. Although the scope of work and goals/purposes have been written in a manner that attempts to recognize those needs, each government and water interest will be responsible for ensuring that as the Project progresses its interests are being addressed.
1.3 Implementation Strategy for Scope of Work
The purpose of this scope of work is to outline the general process, strategy, and actions necessary to address water resource issues in WRIA 1, including the actions taken to date. It provides the framework from which more detailed work plans will be developed and implemented. These work plans will include goals/objectives, specific tasks, budgets, who will implement, work products, and schedules. Specific tasks should be clearly linked to the requirements specified in the RCW, MOAs, contracts, or other agreed upon documents (5). A distinction should be made if proposed actions exceed the minimum requirements (5). Where appropriate, work plans will include design parameters such as time step, probable error, and expected contribution to satisfying specific information needs (5). Some of this may not be known until the work plans are implemented. The standard established in the MOA is "best available science," defined as objective and repeatable analysis based on adequate empirical data collected with appropriate quality assurance/ quality control procedures in place.
In many cases, Technical Teams will facilitate the development and implementation of specific work plans. Technical Teams will generally be composed of representatives from the Initiating Governments and Planning Unit or their designees, and other technical experts. Formation of the Technical Teams must be approved by the PU and IGs. Representation on the Teams is determined by each caucus/interest. The Technical Teams will report to and receive direction from the Initiating Governments and Planning Unit. The Technical Teams may choose to develop and implement specific work plans themselves or they may recommend that community members, private consultants and/or government agencies assist. Once work plans are approved, consistent with the March 1999 "Administrative Decision-Makers and the Staff Team Roles and Operating Procedures," updates will be provided to both groups and the Planning Unit on a regular basis.
In some cases, actions and strategies may be developed without the use of Technical Teams. In those situations, a similar review process will be followed with review and input provided by both the Initiating Governments and the Planning Unit.
1.4 Planning Unit
Under the Watershed Planning Act, the Initiating Governments are charged with, among other things, defining the composition of the Planning Unit. In March 1999, the Planning Unit composition was defined in the administratively adopted "Structure and Function" document. Since that time the Planning Unit has formed with water resource interests and other participants identified.
Implementation Strategy/Status
The Planning Unit has been meeting on a regular basis since June 1999. Through these meetings and other discussions it has become apparent that clarity is needed regarding the role of the Planning Unit. More specifically, the Structure and Function document contains a organization diagram that describes the composition and roles/functions of the various players in the process. These descriptions have generated some confusion regarding the role of the Planning Unit. Clarification to the organization diagrams needed to reflect the combined understanding of the Initiating Governments and Planning Unit.
The Initiating Governments are developing a new organization diagram that will clarify the role of the Planning Unit. The organization diagram will be brought to the Planning Unit for input after the revised version is completed.
Table
of Contents | Executive Summary
| Initiation | Organization
of Watershed Planning Project | Technical Assessment
Develop/Revise Watershed Plan | Approval
| Implementation of Watershed Plan | Early
Action Projects and Activities