My water, your water, our water

The challenges of providing water to one and all will again be front and center at the Spokane River Forum Conference this November. And this is as it should be.

Flowing, abundant water is the mother’s milk of the Spokane- Coeur d’Alene region. Figuring out how to preserve that natural bounty, ecological function and golden goose of community development for another generation isn’t easy. In fact, it’s also the mother’s milk of friction and hope.

“The irony,” said Guy Gregory with the Department of Ecology, “is that we all want the same thing: green grass, beautiful lakes, cheap, abundant water supplies, and a clean, flowing river. What we’re fiercely debating is how to get there.”

Part of that debate is driven by perceptions of stakeholders in Idaho and Washington about water claims and the best way to distribute them. At the conference, you’ll hear about progress the State of Idaho is making to adjudicate water rights, inclusive of tribal claims, in northern Idaho. Some see this as a means to protect Idaho users from Washington eventually filing a federal claim for more water, others say it’s simply good water resource management.

Meanwhile, the State of Washington is working its way through a proposed instream flow rule for the Spokane River, which is a way is to protect and preserve water to meet the needs of fish, wildlife, recreational uses, wastewater management, and hydropower. Some see this as Washington positioning itself to make the water claim Idahoans fear, others say it’s simply good water resource management.

“And there are fault lines within fault lines,” said Andy Dunau, the Forum’s Executive Director. “Washington has its own debates that partly stem from some folks holding plenty of water rights to meet their future needs, and others not holding enough. Share and share alike is easier said than done.”

So is the conference like going to a sporting event to find out which interests are holding the stronger hand? “Far too simple,” said Dunau. “Washington State University will take us through some exercises which will show us where our values lay, and some modeling that will show the effects of alternative water management choices.”

And within the white noise lays the other, quieter part of the story. Stakeholders across both states are collaborating on research and trying to come up with solutions to some vexing circumstances. “It’s easy,” said Gregory “to say we’re destined to walk up the court house steps and ask judges to tell us who gets what. But its way better to agree on what we want and then ask judges to approve our plan. That keeps destiny in local hands.”

There are signs that Gregory isn’t just talking pie in the sky. Since the 2007 bi-state aquifer study, both states have funded and conducted additional investigations and planning in their respective areas. In 2011, the Idaho Water Resources Board (IWRB) adopted the Rathdrum Prairie Comprehensive Aquifer Management Plan (CAMP), which came from a northern Idaho stakeholder advisory group. What was one key goal they adopted? “Develop strategies to avoid conflicts over water resources.”

And is Idaho acting on it? Yes. IWRB has funded two studies, one assessing ground water pumping along the Spokane River and one assessing future municipal water demands in Kootenai County that will be featured at the conference. Said Neely Miller with the Idaho Water Resources Department, “Solid science and knowledge is power. If both sides are learning from each other’s work, we can work toward a future that meets all our needs.”

At the same time, the last couple of years saw the formation of the Idaho Washington Aquifer Collaborative (IWAC). Said its current chair, Mike Galante, “IWAC is about purveyors from both sides of the border getting together to find common ground and solutions. Whether you’re a purveyor in Washington or Idaho, each of us is tasked with getting water to those who need it. And each of us is constrained and governed by our respective regulators. By working together, we’re sharing best practices and advocating for things our customers want.”

Alan Miller, who like Galante manages an Idaho water district and is part of both CAMP and IWAC, agrees. “We learned a lot from the Spokane County water demand study and it’s made a difference in what we want to look at on our side of the border. Now we’re sharing information on conservation, both best practices and how to measure the effects of our collective efforts.”

“So,” said Dunau “is the region working together because it’s in our best interests or are we positioning for some bitter, litigious struggles? When you come to the conference you can learn, engage with experts, and make your own judgment about that.”

Alan Miller agrees. “The Spokane River Forum Conference has earned its reputation as the place where people from both sides of the border come together, speak their peace, and leave smarter than when they came. If it’s like previous conferences, some good ideas are going to come up that folks decide they want to work on, together. And, yes, I’ll hear some things I’ll politely disagree with. Nothing wrong with that.”