Minutes
February 19, 1998
Calvin C. Warnick Hydrogeological Library
304 McClure Hall, University of Idaho
Steve
Gill (Executive Secretary), Sue Hinz (Pullman), Don Huskey (UI), Larry
Kirkland, Vice Chair. (UI), Phil Merrell (Whitman County), Gary Presol
(Moscow), Loreca J. Stauber (Latah County), Tom Townsend, Chair. (Latah
County).
Jay
Becker (WSU, represented by Dave Dittmer), Craig Benjamin (WSU), Steve Busch
(Moscow), Les Wigen (Whitman County), Mark Workman (Pullman).
Kevin
Brackney (UI), Rob Buchert (Palouse Conservation District), Dave Dittmer (WSU
for J. Becker), Bob Haynes (Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR).
The
meeting was called to order by PMWRC Chair T. Townsend at 9:45 A.M.
L.
Kirkland noted that he did not attend the January 15, 1998 meeting; minutes
from the January 15, 1998 meeting were then unanimously approved (D. Huskey
motioned, L. Kirkland seconded).
Learning to be Water Wise and Energy Efficient
Program: S. Gill noted that he is
piloting the Learning to be Water Wise
and Energy Efficient Program (W2E2) to nearly seventy
students in four classes here on the Palouse.
Pilot classrooms included: Marg Strong and Janice Johnson’s 4th grade
classes at Russell Elementary, Malena Johnson’s 6th grade at St. Mary’s, and
Monte Sam’s 6th grade in Genesee.
Classroom time was generously donated by the Growing Green project currently underway as a cooperative venture
between Latah Sanitation, Inc. (LSI) and Palouse-Clearwater Environmental
Institute (PCEI). Initial feedback indicates there is wide spread support for
this program.
While the W2E2 program is an exciting program that involves students, parents and teachers, no program is without shortcomings. The standardized W2E2 package lacked local water resource information. To amend this shortcoming a curriculum specific for the Palouse area was developed by Maureen Toomey at the Idaho Water Resource Research Institute (IWRRI). The curriculum includes Palouse-based teaching aids developed by PMWRC.
The purpose of piloting the Learning to be Water Wise and Energy Efficient Program is to encourage efficient water use through the education of our children. The general objective is to inform students, parents, and teachers of the benefits efficient water use will have on the long-term sustainability of communities in the Palouse through the use of the innovative, informative, water education program, Learning to be Water Wise and Energy Efficient Program.
Specific objectives include: 1) educating students on local water distribution, 2) familiarizing students on the hydrogeology of the Palouse, 3) designing activities that localize the W2E2 program including fieldtrips and games, 4) introducing the Palouse-based water education material, 5) distributing the W2E2 activities and kits to students, and 6) evaluating the overall progress and acceptance of the program by students, parents and teachers. Specific tasks included:
§ Meeting with Dr. Leland L. Mink, Idaho Water Resource Research Institute (IWRRI) on the likelihood of the PMWRC piloting W2E2 on the Palouse (see attached letter)
§ Gathering information on W2E2 through conference calls with Christen Scheder, W2E2 Director of Marketing and Dave Munk, W2E2 Program Manager
§ Introducing W2E2 to local school officials
§ Establishing relationship with area teachers to pilot W2E2
§ Expanding relationship with PCEI & LSI staff by cooperatively integrating the W2E2 program into the existing Growing Green curriculum (see support letters)
§ Developing a Palouse-based water education curriculum with Maureen Toomey, IWRRI, that includes the following Palouse-based water education materials developed for PMWRC (see enclosure): 1) Efficient Water Use on the Palouse brochure 2) Teaching Water Conservation on the Palouse curriculum 3) Water Conservation Opportunities for the Palouse handbook
§ Securing PMWRC approval to pilot program
§ Ordering 70 #WW-1- W2E2 kits for pilot classrooms
§ Individualizing the W2E2 kits by utilizing Palouse-based education materials
§ Introducing W2E2 curriculum to classrooms in December
§ Launching W2E2 water activities to classrooms in January
§ Distributing W2E2 water efficient kits to students in February
Future plans include: surveying participating students, parents, and teachers to evaluate their expectations and thoughts concerning the W2E2 program, obtaining local school district approval to include the W2E2 program into local 4th through 8th grade curriculums, seeking an additional partner (i.e. local electrical utility) for long-term integration of the W2E2 program into Moscow and Genesee school districts, piloting the W2E2 program in Pullman and surrounding Washington communities during the fall of 1998, and promoting the educational benefits of the W2E2 program throughout communities in the State of Idaho.
Changes in
1997 Annual Palouse Water Use Report: S. Gill reported that the EPA has proposed regulations requiring
water suppliers nationwide to provide annual reports on what’s in their
drinking water and whether it meets federal standards. The regulation is currently undergoing a
45-day comment period; however, it approval will most likely occur. The regulation would then be finalized
before the end of the year with most water suppliers reporting sometime in
1999. Included in the annual report
would be:
1.
What
lakes, underground aquifers or rivers the water came from.
2.
What
contaminants were in the water and whether the amounts exceeded EPA health standards.
3.
What
health risks were posed by the contamination when federal standards were
exceeded.
4.
What
violations and enforcement actions had been taken against the water supplier
during the year.
5.
Provide
customers information on how they could obtain state reports on how vulnerable
their water system might be to contaminants.
S. Gill recommended that the PMWRC should include
the EPA requirements in the 1997 Annual Palouse Water Use Report. Currently,
the Annual Report includes four of the five requirements. The format will slightly differ from past
years but water suppliers on the Palouse can assure their customers that our
drinking water exceeds EPA requirements.
S. Gill noted that since it is once again time for the individual
entities to submit their 1997 goals and 1998 action plans for the Annual
Palouse Water Use Report, that the cities and universities should include the
EPA requirements. He recommended that individual
entities would need to have their 1997 goals and 1998 action plans for the Annual
Palouse Water Use Report ready by the next PMWRC meeting in April.
The purpose of Mr. Buchert’s presentation was to state that the PCD is seeking cooperation from local citizens, agencies, civic groups, and organizations (i.e. PMWRC) for the purpose of developing a watershed plan. Specifically, he invited the PMWRC to participate in PCD’s watershed plan for the South Fork of the Palouse River (SFPR). The SFPR is consistently listed on Washington Department of Ecology’s (Ecology) 303(d) state list as Water Quality Limited. The Water Quality Index analysis used by Ecology indicated the SFPR has the worst water quality score in the state. Ecology identifies the primary parameters contributing to poor water quality as: fecal coliform, bacteria, nutrients (phosphorous and organic nitrogen), turbidity, and suspended solids. Temperature, pH, and ammonia concentration also violate water quality standards. The above water quality violations have generated considerable interest from state and federal regulatory agencies. Mr. Buchert stated that to maintain local leadership in our land use planning, the PCD must act quickly in drafting an operative watershed plan for the SFPR.
Mr.
Buchert noted that PCD realizes that much of the needed information is readily
available. He asked the PMWRC to
provide ground water information relevant to the watershed planning process. Specifically: an assessment of potential ground
water recharge areas the SFPR watershed boundaries including, possible areas
susceptible to ground water contamination, ground water recharge rates, and
information regarding declining ground water levels throughout the SFPR
watershed boundaries. S. Gill stated
that the Whitman County Critical
Recharge Areas
report he prepared in January 1997 would cover most of the PCD’s request. He would forward a copy to PCD.
Discussion
then began concerning watershed management on the SFPR. Mr. Buchert noted that
the two primary concerns of the PCD are stopping erosion and stopping flooding.
T. Townsend noted the Paradise Creek TMDL has been approved and that the next
stage, mitigation, is beginning. G.
Presol explained that mitigation would include bank stabilization to reduce
erosion and planting of trees to provide shading resulting in lowering of water
temperature. G. Presol asked Mr.
Buchert if future maintenance of the SFPR might include the dredging of the
SFPR or diking of potential flood areas.
Mr. Buchert replied that Ecology might soon consider regulating
non-point sources; therefore, dredging, diking, or similar practices may not be
feasible. He stated that the fact
remains that certain land uses are in place, people are living there; so what
are we to do?
P. Merrell noted that a new committee, known as the Creek Dredging Committee (CDC), was formed last week in Spokane, WA. The CDC is comprised of members from the various agencies that have interests and agendas in waterway dredging. These agencies include: Washington Department of Ecology, Fish and Wildlife, Army Corps of Engineers, and various conservation districts. The committee’s mission is to reform the existing legislative language concerning creek dredging. Specifically, to implement a program similar in scope to the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) riparian and waterway restoration procedures; however, the new program would implement long-term, permanent solutions to waterway restoration by purchasing property from landowners adjacent to impaired waterways. This conceptual plan could be accomplished by pooling agency funds and purchasing landowners property out right, resulting in the reestablishment of native vegetation and mitigating current nonsustainable practices of agriculture along waterways.
Kevin Brackney presented a proposal for funding to the PMWRC. Mr. Brackney stated that the development of water resources in the Pullman-Moscow basin by pumping has lowered ground water levels. This pumping resulted in changing the dynamics of ground water flow and is believed to have caused a decrease in ground water baseflow into streams near the western edge of Moscow Mountain. This reduction in ground water baseflow subsequently increased the rate of the ground water recharge. At the same time, the ground water recharge rates were being reduced because of current agriculture practices and the draining of wetlands by agriculture and urbanization.
The purpose of Mr. Brackney’s proposal is to investigate the local hydrogeologic conditions in these headwater reaches and document the extent of the ground water recharge zones. The general objective is to conduct a limited artificial ground water recharge injection experiment to access the potential for artificial ground water recharge of the upper Wanapum Basalt aquifer. Specific Objectives include:
§ Develop a hydrogeological model of preferential recharge zones through interpretation of drillers logs.
§ Characterize the hydrostratigraphy of the study area by drilling core samples and identifying sand layers and fractured granite suitable for artificial recharge.
§ Identify recharge zones by installing a series of wells in the permeable layers.
§ Determine rates of recharge in these layers to identify sands that may be capable of accepting more recharge than is currently occurring.
§ Conduct a limited ground water artificial recharge experiment using potable water to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a large-scale artificial recharge program.
The research could result in utilizing water collected from the forested areas of Moscow Mountain [believed to be of high quality and require minimal pretreatment prior to injection into aquifers] and directing this water into a series of detention basins built over the inferred ground water recharge zones, increasing the rate of ground water recharge and reducing the magnitude of spring flood events. Mr. Brackney’s request was for total of $60,824. The PMWRC denied funding for Mr. Brackney at this time.
G. Presol stated that the City of
Moscow opposes any proposal that would introduce surface waters into our
aquifers. He noted that the high
quality of our ground water would most likely be impacted by the introduction
of surface water resulting in contamination and much higher water treatment
costs. L. Kirkland noted that Mr.
Brackney might want to consider changing the focus of his research away from
artificial ground water recharge and concentrate on defining areas where more
rapid recharge is occurring along the eastern margin of the Pullman-Moscow
Basin.
The
meeting was adjourned at approximately 12:35 P.M.
The next
meeting will be held on:
NOTE: Special Time, Special Place
NOTE: Special Guest Speaker
John
Olson-Boise EPA
Office
Wetland Protection-State
Development Grants
Thursday April 23, 1998 at 9:00 am
Latah County Courthouse Room 2B
Moscow, ID.
Respectfully Submitted,
Steve W. Gill
PMWRC Executive Secretary