Minutes
April 23, 1998
Latah County Courthouse
Room 2B, Moscow, Idaho
Craig
Benjamin (WSU), Steve Busch (Moscow), Steve Gill (Executive Secretary), Don
Huskey (UI), Larry Kirkland, Vice Chair. (UI), Loreca J. Stauber (Latah County).
Jay
Becker (WSU), Sue Hinz (Pullman), Phil Merrell (Whitman County), Gary Presol
(Moscow), Tom Townsend, Chair. (Latah County), Les Wigen (Whitman County), Mark
Workman (Pullman-represented by Ron Cooper).
Bob
Hassoldt (self), Gerard Billington (Latah County), Mark Bordson (Whitman County
Planning), Ron Cooper (Pullman), Tom
Lamar (Palouse Clearwater Environmental Institute), Maynard Miller (UI), John
Olson (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-EPA), Derek Pohle (Whitman County
Engineer), Duane Priest (Latah County Surveyor), Adam Thornbrough (Palouse
Clearwater Environmental Institute), Kathleen Warnick (Latah County Planning
Commission).
The
meeting was called to order by PMWRC Vice Chair L. Kirkland at 9:05 A.M.
Approval
of minutes from February 19, 1998 meeting will be delayed until the May 1998
PMWRC meeting.
“Tribal, State and Local Wetland Development Grant Program ” Presentation by John Olson, U.S. EPA Boise, Idaho. S. Gill introduced John Olson, Wetlands Specialist, from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Idaho Operations Office, 1435 North Orchard St. Boise, Idaho 83706.
Mr. Olson informed the committee that the EPA has made changes to the “Wetland Protection-State/Tribal/Local Governments Wetlands Development Grants” which will allow local governments funding for wetlands protection. Mr. Olson then presented a brief overview of the program.
The purpose of the EPA’s Wetlands Grant Program is to assist state, tribal and local government agencies in wetlands protection efforts. Grant funds can be used to develop new wetland protection programs or refine existing wetland protection programs. The project must demonstrate a direct link to improving a local government’s ability to protect the wetlands resource. The EPA shall direct its priorities in the distribution of grant funding in the following areas:
1. Develop Local Governments Wetland Conservation Plans;
2. Wetland/Watershed Protection Approach Demonstration Projects;
3. River Corridor and Wetland Restoration;
4. Assessing and Monitoring the Ecological Integrity of Wetlands;
5. Streamline State/Local Government Regulatory Programs;
6. Development of Wetland Assessment Models and;
7. Training to Build Local Government Wetland Delineation/Protection Capabilities.
The funding may be used in conjunction with other EPA financial assistance including; Nonpoint Source Control, Section 319 Grants, Community Based Environmental Protection funding, Ground water protection, pollution Prevention grants, TMDL funding, Special Project funding including Watershed Protection Programs. Grant recipients must cost share a minimum of 25% of each award’s total project costs. The match may be cash or in-kind contributions. The grant funds are only available to state and tribal agencies and local governmental agencies and not universities or non-profit organizations.
Mr. Olson stressed that one advantage of the Wetland Grants is their flexibility to integrate many water protection programs under one grant. Public involvement is a key component in watershed projects because of the input the public can provide in identifying problems and implementing solutions. The EPA is very receptive to those grant applications that incorporate interdisciplinary, multijurisdictional, cooperative proposals.
Mr. Olson then entertained questions from those participating.
Adam Thornbrough, PCEI, noted that in the Moscow-Pullman area most wetlands have been drained and tiled. He asked if there was money available to restore these wetlands with the cooperation of property owners? Mr. Olson replied no money would be available at this time for the restoration of drained and tiled wetlands; however, money is available to scope these wetlands and identify potential wetland restoration areas.
L. Stauber stated that Latah County is currently surveying county-wide to compile a data base on the location of wetlands, streams, creeks, ground water recharge areas, wells, etc., which will then be transferred into a Geographic Information System (GIS) and she wondered if money would be available for this type of program. Mr. Olson stated that the Wetlands Grant program was specifically setup for these type of local government projects.
L. Kirkland explained that Paradise Creek is a non-point problem for Pullman, WA. because of flooding. He questioned Mr. Olson about the possibility of using the Wetlands Grant monies to restore and/or rebuild upstream retention basins to alleviate the flooding. Mr. Olson responded that the EPA has some trepidation to the incorporation of flood control structures into wetlands. He suggested seeking grant monies from the Army Corps Restoration grant Program for that type of project, which could be used in conjunction with the EPA Wetlands Grant.
Tom Lamar, PCEI, noted that last year PCEI, through Whitman County, requested funding to develop a regional guidebook on how to restore native wetland plant communities in the Palouse region. The grant was not funded; however, he wondered what does it mean to local property owners if they accept the EPA? Will it open the door to further regulations on property owners? Mr. Lamar noted that the EPA must make the point that the funding of wetlands projects does not constitute a “takings” but a beneficial program for the communities and property owners. Mr. Olson responded that this is where additional EPA funding programs such as the Community Based Environmental Protection (CBEP) are of benefit.
Mark Bordson, Whitman County, explained that the Palouse Conservation District along with the Latah Soil Conservation District has recently formed the Paradise Creek Management Committee. The committee is a cross-state effort whose mission is to seek funding for restoration of the Paradise Creek watershed of Latah County, Idaho and Whitman County, Washington. He noted that the Washington Department of Ecology has recently made available funding for Watershed Management Planning; however, they have set-up specific Watershed Resource Inventory Areas (WRIA) that stop at the state borders. Mr. Bordson noted that the single most pressing issue that area property owners feel must be addressed is that of the “ six agency personnel supervising a single farmer as he restores waterways/wetlands on his own property.” Mr. Olson sympathized with this, all to common, problem facing property owners.
Mr. Olson mentioned that the “Clean Water Action Plan” President Clinton proposed in February of 1998 increases available funding for all water projects. [PMWRC has a copy in the library of this 102-page document]. He continued that the key to securing funding by the EPA in the future is the incorporation of the “Total System Approach” that includes watershed/wetlands/groundwater and interdisciplinary, multijurisdictional cooperative grantees.
L. Stauber thanked Mr. Olson and asked that those parties in attendance at today’s meeting (and any other non-attending parties) interested in pursing a cooperative grant plan to meet again in May.
New 5-year Plan: L. Kirkland presented the University of Idaho’s new five year plan for the new PMWRC Ground Water Management Plan, copies were distributed to the remaining entities. S. Gill reminded the other entities that they should be finalizing their individual five-year plans before the next meeting.
Maynard Miller updated the PMWRC on water issues that may be of concern for the next year’s Idaho Legislative session.
§ “Artificial Recharge Proposal” to Idaho Department of Water Resources-Dr. Dale Ralston This proposal, for a preliminary study in the Palouse area on the feasibility of using shallow ground water to recharge a deeper aquifer, was a scaled down version of a larger proposal submitted in March 1997. The amount requested from IDWR was $50,000. Maynard feels that if we have him pre-file this proposal in December 1998, in addition to pre-filing a change in wording of Idaho’s artificial recharge legislation, there is a very good chance we could be funded. He recommends using a total systems approach and incorporating portions of southern Idaho in which this research could benefit.
§ “Idaho Water Atlas”-this bill was vetoed by the governor; however, Maynard is going to scale back the funding, $225,000 down from $ 250,000, and pre-file this in December. He noted that chances are good for funding on this statewide project.
The
meeting was adjourned at approximately 11:15 A.M.
Thursday May 21, 1998 at 9:30 am
Calvin C. Warnick Hydrogeological Library McClure Hall #304-University of Idaho
Moscow, ID.
Respectfully Submitted,
Steve W. Gill
PMWRC Executive Secretary