[Senate Hearing 109-96]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 109-96
OREGON RESOURCE CONSERVATION ACT; LITTLE BUTTE/BEAR CREEK SUBBASINS IN
OREGON; NEWLANDS PROJECT HEADQUARTERS; LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY; AND
GLENDO UNIT OF THE MISSOURI RIVER
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER AND POWER
of the
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
on
S. 166 S. 251
S. 310 S. 519
S. 592
__________
APRIL 19, 2005
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
22-931 WASHINGTON : 2005
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico, Chairman
LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico
CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska RON WYDEN, Oregon
RICHARD M. BURR, North Carolina, TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota
MEL MARTINEZ, Florida MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana
JAMES M. TALENT, Missouri DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
CONRAD BURNS, Montana MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia JON S. CORZINE, New Jersey
GORDON SMITH, Oregon KEN SALAZAR, Colorado
JIM BUNNING, Kentucky
Alex Flint, Staff Director
Judith K. Pensabene, Chief Counsel
Robert M. Simon, Democratic Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Democratic Chief Counsel
------
Subcommittee on Water and Power
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Chairman
GORDON SMITH, Oregon, Vice Chairman
LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota
RICHARD M. BURR, North Carolina BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
MEL MARTINEZ, Florida RON WYDEN, Oregon
CONRAD BURNS, Montana DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
JIM BUNNING, Kentucky MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
JAMES M. TALENT, Missouri JON S. CORZINE, New Jersey
KEN SALAZAR, Colorado
Pete V. Domenici and Jeff Bingaman are Ex Officio Members of the
Subcommittee
Kellie Donnelly, Counsel
Patty Beneke, Democratic Senior Counsel
Mike Connor, Democratic Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
STATEMENTS
Page
Ensign, Hon. John, U.S. Senator From Nevada...................... 4
Halbert, Wayne, General Manager, Harlingen Irrigation District,
Harlingen, TX, on behalf of the Texas Irrigation Council....... 11
Heisler, Tod, Executive Director, Deschutes River Conservancy,
Bend, OR....................................................... 23
Hill, James, City of Medford Water Reclamation Division
Administrator, Medford, OR, on behalf of the Water for
Irrigation, Streams and Economy (WISE) Project Advisory
Committee...................................................... 17
Rinne, William, Deputy Commissioner of Reclamation, U.S.
Department of the Interior..................................... 5
Schank, Ernest C., President of the Board of Directors, Truckee-
Carson Irrigation District, Fallon, NV......................... 14
Smith, Hon. Gordon, U.S. Senator From Oregon..................... 1
APPENDIX
Responses to additional questions................................ 29
OREGON RESOURCE CONSERVATION ACT; LITTLE BUTTE/BEAR CREEK SUBBASINS IN
OREGON; NEWLANDS PROJECT HEADQUARTERS; LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY; AND
GLENDO UNIT OF THE MISSOURI RIVER
----------
TUESDAY, APRIL 19, 2005
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Water and Power,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:12 p.m., in
room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Gordon Smith
presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GORDON SMITH,
U.S. SENATOR FROM OREGON
Senator Smith. Ladies and gentlemen, we have convened this
hearing of the Subcommittee on Water and Power. I have been
asked to sit in for Chairman Murkowski, because of her
commitment to another hearing in the Foreign Relations
Committee that requires her presence.
I want to welcome Deputy Commissioner William Rinne. He is
here today to provide the Bureau of Reclamation's testimony on
these bills. And I would also like to welcome those witnesses
on the second panel, many of whom have traveled to be here
today.
I want to extend a special welcome to two Oregonians, Tod
Heisler, executive director of the Deschutes River Conservancy;
and Jim Hill with the city of Medford. I look forward to
hearing from all of today's witnesses.
As a sponsor of S. 166 and S. 251, which are co-sponsored
jointly with my colleague, Senator Wyden, I want to reiterate
my strong commitment to both these bills and the watershed
enhancement efforts they represent.
S. 166 will re-authorize the participation of the bureau in
the Deschutes River Conservancy. The Deschutes Basin, in which
there are several reclamation facilities, is truly one of
Oregon's greatest natural resources. It drains Oregon's high
desert along the eastern front of the Cascades, eventually
flowing in the Columbia River. It is among the state's most
intensively used recreational rivers. It provides water to both
irrigators and also to municipalities.
The Deschutes Basin also contains hundreds of thousands of
acres of productive forests and range lands. It serves the
treaty fishing and water rights of the confederated tribes of
the Warm Springs Indian. And it has Oregon's largest non-
Federal hydroelectric project.
The potential for water conflicts in this--in that
population is obviously very great. However, the DRC has been
extremely successful in watershed restoration. It has helped
the basin avoid many of the water conflicts that have been so
destructive to local communities in other areas of Oregon.
For the last 8 years, the DRC has helped restore stream
flow, and improved the habitat, and water quality along a
hundred miles of the Deschutes River and its tributaries.
Even with these successes, the Deschutes River continues to
face stream flow and water quality challenges. These challenges
if unaddressed, could impact a Federal reclamation project and
projects in the basin. That is one of the reasons why I have
sponsored S. 166 and will push for its enactment.
The other legislation before us today, that I sponsored, is
S. 251. It would authorize the Bureau of Reclamation to conduct
a water resources feasibility study for the Little Butte-Big
Creek sub-basins in Oregon.
This project is known as the Water for Streams, Irrigation
and Economy Project, or WISE. And like DRC, the WISE project
has brought together diverse agricultural, municipal, and
environmental organizations dedicated to meeting the water
challenges facing these sub-basins, which are tributaries of
the Rogue River.
The Bureau of Reclamation has a long history in this area.
Since Reclamation's talent at division became operational in
1958, there has been significant change in southern Oregon, as
highlighted in Jim Hill's testimony, the Little Butte Creek and
Bear Creek watershed space challenges, particularly in dry
years like this; including unreliable irrigation supplies,
degraded water quality for salmon, adverse recreational
impacts.
Population growth has increased the demand for domestic
water supplies and has generated additional wastewater that
must be managed by Medford Regional Water Reclamation Facility.
The city of Medford is to be commended for its leadership in
developing this consensus-based approach to resolving water
supply and water quality issues for both irrigators and the
city; and to improving in-stream flows and water quality for
salmon.
On July 2, 2004, Reclamation and the city of Medford
entered into a memorandum of agreement which outlines
responsibilities for a feasibility study/environmental impact
statement for the WISE project.
Under the MOA, the city of Medford is responsible for
securing the funds necessary to hire the consultant to conduct
the study. Medford officials estimate the city's costs at $2.8
million.
By contrast, S. 251 authorizes a half a million dollars for
Reclamations to act as lead Federal agency and to provide the
necessary technical oversight. Again, I will work with my
colleagues from Oregon for the timely enactment of S. 251 and
look forward to hearing from all of today's witnesses.
I am joined by my colleague from Wyoming, Senator Craig
Thomas. And, Senator, if you have an opening statement.
[The prepared statements of Senators Smith and Ensign
follow:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Gordon Smith, U.S. Senator From Oregon
I appreciate Chairman Murkowski's willingness to convene this
hearing today to receive testimony on several site-specific water bills
that are very important to local communities. Those bills are: S. 166,
to amend the Oregon Resource Conservation Act of 1996 to reauthorize
the participation of the Bureau of Reclamation in the Deschutes River
Conservancy; S. 251, to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to
conduct a water resource feasibility study for the Little Butte/Bear
Creek Subbasins in Oregon; S. 310, to direct the Secretary of the
Interior to convey the Newlands Project Headquarters and Maintenance
Yard Facility to the Truckee-Carson Irrigation District in the State of
Nevada; S. 519, to amend the Lower Rio Grande Valley Water Resources
Conservation and Improvement Act of 2000 to authorize additional
projects and activities under that Act,; and S. 592, to extend the
contract for the Glendo Unit of the Missouri River Basin Project in the
State of Wyoming.
I want to welcome Deputy Commissioner William Rinne here today to
provide the Bureau of Reclamation's testimony on these bills. I'd also
like to welcome those witnesses on the second panel, many of whom have
traveled to be here today. I want to extend a special welcome to two
Oregonians, Tod Heisler, the Executive Director of the Deschutes River
Conservancy and Jim Hill with the City of Medford. I look forward to
hearing from all the witnesses today.
As the sponsor of S. 166 and S. 251, which are cosponsored by my
colleague Senator Wyden, I want to reiterate my strong commitment to
both these bills and the watershed enhancement efforts they represent.
S. 166 will reauthorize the participation of the Bureau of Reclamation
in the Deschutes River Conservancy (DRC). The Deschutes Basin, in which
there are several reclamation facilities, is truly one of Oregon's
greatest resources. It drains Oregon's high desert along the eastern
front of the Cascades, eventually flowing in the Columbia River. It is
among the state's most intensively used recreational rivers. It
provides water to both irrigation projects and to rapidly growing
municipal areas. The Deschutes Basin also contains hundreds of
thousands of acres of productive forest and rangelands, serves the
treaty fishing and water rights of the Confederated Tribes of Warm
Springs, and has Oregon's largest non-federal hydroelectric project.
The potential for water conflicts in this basin is great. However,
the DRC has been an extremely successful watershed restoration
organization that has helped the basin avoid many of the water
conflicts that have been so destructive to local communities in other
areas of Oregon. Participation by the Bureau of Reclamation was first
authorized in 1996, and reauthorized in 2000. The current authorization
of $2 million annually expires at the end of fiscal year 2006.
The Deschutes River Conservancy has brought together diverse
interests, including environmentalists, tribes, irrigators and power
producers, to find cooperative, market-based solutions to the water
supply and water quality challenges we are facing in the Deschutes
Basin. As Tod Heisler's testimony points out, the DRC has obtained
$3.60 in matching support for each federal dollar provided through the
Bureau of Reclamation. These funds have been used effectively over the
last eight years to help restore streamflow and improve the habitat and
water quality along 100 miles of the Deschutes River and its
tributaries.
Even with these successes, the Deschutes River continues to face
streamflow and water quality challenges. These challenges, if
unaddressed, could impact the federal Reclamation projects in the
basin. That's just one of the reasons why I sponsored S. 166, and will
press for its enactment.
The other legislation before us today that I sponsored, S. 251,
would authorize the Bureau of Reclamation to conduct a water resources
feasibility study for the Little Butte/Bear Creek Subbasins in Oregon.
This project is known as the Water for Streams, Irrigation and the
Economy (WISE) Project. Like the DRC, the WISE Project has brought
together nineteen diverse agricultural, municipal and environmental
organizations dedicated to meeting the water challenges facing these
subbasins, which are tributaries of the Rogue River.
The Bureau of Reclamation has a long history in this area. The
Talent Division of the Rogue River Basin Project was authorized by
Congress in 1954 for irrigation, flood control, hydroelectric power and
other beneficial purposes. The Talent Division provides water to three
irrigation districts and electricity from the Green Springs powerplant.
Since the Talent Division became operational in 1958, there has
been significant change in southern Oregon. As highlighted in Jim
Hill's testimony, the Little Butte Creek and Bear Creek watersheds face
challenges--particularly in dry years--including unreliable irrigation
supplies, degraded water quality for salmon, and adverse recreational
impacts. Population growth has increased the demand for domestic water
supplies and has generated additional wastewater that must be managed
by the Medford Regional Water Reclamation Facility.
The City of Medford is to be commended for its leadership in
developing this consensus-based approach to resolving water supply and
water quality issues for both irrigators and the city, and to improving
instream flows and water quality for salmon. On July 2, 2004,
Reclamation and the City of Medford entered into a Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA), which outlines responsibilities for feasibility study/
environmental impact statement for the WISE Project.
Under the MOA, the City of Medford is responsible for securing the
funds necessary to hire the consultant to conduct the study. Medford
officials estimate the city's costs at $2.8 million. By contrast, S.
251 authorizes $500,000 for Reclamation's to act as lead federal agency
and to provide the necessary technical oversight.
Again, I will work with my colleagues from Oregon for the timely
enactment of S. 251. I look forward to hearing from all the witnesses
here today.
__________
Prepared Statement of Hon. John Ensign, U.S. Senator From Nevada,
on S. 310
Madam Chairwoman, Senator Johnson, thank you very much for holding
a hearing today on S. 310, the Newlands Project Headquarters and
Maintenance Yard Facility Transfer Act. I am grateful for your
including this important bill on your busy hearing calendar.
S. 310 would require the Secretary of the Interior to convey the
Newlands Project Headquarters and Maintenance Yard Facility to the
Truckee-Carson Irrigation District (TCID). I introduced S. 310, along
with Senator Reid and Congressman Gibbons, because this title transfer
is necessary if the TCID is to continue maintaining and operating the
Newlands Project.
Over 100 years ago, in 1903, the subject of this transfer proposal,
a 40 acre parcel which is the site of the current office and
maintenance yard for the TCID, was withdrawn for Reclamation purposes
as part of the Newlands Project. Twenty-three years later in 1926, the
TCID entered into a repayment contract with the United States
Government to take over operation and maintenance of the Newlands
Project. At that time, the TCID moved into an office and maintenance
yard on property, near the 40 acre parcel, that the Government had
purchased for the United States Reclamation Service.
By 1975, the TCID had outgrown these original facilities and moved
to the 40 acre parcel that is the subject of this transfer proposal.
The land was available because it was not suitable for growing crops
and therefore was never homesteaded or patented as were other irrigable
acres. The U.S. Government did not contribute to any of the
improvements to this property--all the improvements have been made by
the TCID. However, in the early 1990's, the Bureau of Reclamation
installed a field office on the property, tying into the improvements
already made by the TCID in 1975. It occupies approximately 5 of the 40
acres and would remain with the U.S. Government.
In 1996, the TCID entered into an operation and maintenance
contract with the Department of the Interior. Because of new mandates
regarding water measurement and water control, the TCID needs to expand
its facilities. This transfer is necessary so that the TCID can obtain
financing for the necessary improvements--the first of which will be a
new office building. The water users of the Newlands Project paid for
an office and maintenance yard once and should not have to pay again.
The TCID is a not-for-profit governmental agency organized under
the laws of the State of Nevada. It services the public by maintaining
and operating the Newlands Project and delivering water in accordance
with existing contracts at a minimal cost to the U.S. Government. It is
important to emphasize that this withdrawn land will continue to be
used for public purposes, specifically the operation and maintenance of
a federal water project.
Early in February of 2004, after working with the Bureau of
Reclamation and both sides of the isle on the House Resources
Committee, H.R. 2831 was approved under suspension in the House with no
opposition. S. 310 is almost identical to H.R. 2831, which had been re-
introduced as H.R. 540 in the current session.
S. 310 has the support of our Congressional delegation, as well as
from the Governor of Nevada and other elected officials in Nevada. I
urge the Committee to support this legislation in order to ensure the
efficient operation and maintenance of the Newlands Project.
Thank you, Ms. Chairwoman and Senator Johnson, for holding this
hearing today. I look forward to working with you and your staff to
address any concerns you might have.
Senator Thomas. Thank you. I really do not. I am
particularly interested, of course, in the renewal of the
Glendo contracts on the Missouri River, Platte River, so that
is basically why I am here. Thank you.
Senator Smith. Thank you, Senator.
So, Bill, the mike is yours. We look forward to your
testimony.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM RINNE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF RECLAMATION,
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. Rinne. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am Bill Rinne, Deputy
Commissioner of Reclamation. Thank you for the opportunity to
share the Department of the Interior's views on the five bills
today.
We have submitted written testimonies on each of these
bills and I would ask that they would be included for the
record.
Senator Smith. We will include them in the record without
objection.
Mr. Rinne. I will begin with the two Oregon bills, S. 166,
that authorizes Reclamation's participation in the Deschutes
River Conservancy, a locally created organization dedicated to
the restoring of stream flow and water quality in the Deschutes
Basin in Oregon.
Already, the DRC has leased over 73 cubic feet a second of
water during the 2004 irrigation season, restored nearly 100
miles of stream corridor, and planted 100,000 native plants.
The DRC has also acquired senior water rights that will
remain in-stream during low flow periods, benefiting bull trout
and summer steelhead.
While Reclamation certainly does not oppose S. 166, we
cannot predict the future funding requests by the
administration to carry out the legislation. Regardless, we
look forward to working with you, Senator, as these efforts in
the Deschutes Basin progress.
The second Oregon bill, S. 251, would authorize a
feasibility study of the Little Butte and Bear Creek sub-basins
of the Rogue River. And the primary goals of the bill's
proponents are to increase stream flows for coho salmon;
improve irrigation efficiency, and solve the effluent problems
in the city of Medford.
Considering our history of cooperating with this local
collaborative effort, we wish we could support S. 251 at this
time. However, the proposed legislation does not require the 50
percent non-Federal cost sharing for the feasibility study. And
the grants from the other Federal agencies do not qualify as
cost-sharing.
The Department on S. 592, the Department supports Senator
Thomas's bill to extend contracts to the Glendo Unit of the
Missouri River Basin project.
We do have a couple of technical suggestions, Senator, for
the legislation; which are set out in our prepared testimony.
But we clearly see the need extend these contracts so that all
parties will have the time needed to develop a long-term
cooperative agreement.
As you probably know, we are required to have a contract in
effect in order to deliver water; so, this contract extension
is important to Reclamation also.
We are grateful to you, Senator Thomas, for your leadership
on this.
Turning to S. 310, Mr. Chairman, we would like to transfer
title to the Newlands Project Headquarters and Maintenance
property to the Truckee-Carson Irrigation District. However,
the bill as introduced, would treat proceeds received by the
United States as sale and lease of Fallon Freight Yard, which
are acquired lands, as full payment for the 37 acres this bill
would transfer, which were withdrawn land.
From our point of view, this would mean that the Water
District would not be required to pay anything for the
property. We are concerned that this departure from normal
Reclamation law and policy could set a precedent for others to
follow.
And finally, Mr. Chairman, S. 519 would amend the Lower Rio
Grande Valley Water Resources Conservation and Improvement Act
of 2000; to authorize an additional 19 projects, focused mostly
on water conservation.
Unfortunately, we cannot support adding these 19 new
proposed projects to our long list of already authorized
projects awaiting funding.
Additionally, the bill pre-authorizes projects without
benefit of involvement by Reclamation in the planning and
development stages.
These and other concerns prevent us from supporting S. 519,
despite the worthwhile aim of the bill's proponents conserving
water in the lower Rio Grande.
That concludes my testimony. I will be happy to answer any
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Rinne follows:]
Prepared Statement of William Rinne, Deputy Commissioner of
Reclamation, U.S. Department of the Interior
on s. 166
Madam Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am William Rinne,
Deputy Commissioner of Reclamation. Thank you for the opportunity to
testify on S. 166.
This legislation would amend the Oregon Resource Conservation Act
of 1996 to reauthorize the participation of the Bureau of Reclamation
in the Deschutes River Conservancy (DRC). The Bureau does not oppose S.
166. However, in these lean budget times the Bureau must focus its
scarce resources on its core mission of delivering water and generating
power, and on aging infrastructure and O&M for existing Reclamation
projects, therefore is not likely that the Conservancy will be a high
priority for funding. Regardless of the level of federal financial
support, we believe the Conservancy's goals of improving stream flow
and water quality will certainly benefit the basin.
The DRC was originally authorized by Congress in 1996 to implement
water conservation measures in the Deschutes River basin. The DRC is a
locally created private, nonprofit organization established to restore
stream flow and water quality in the Deschutes Basin of Central Oregon.
The DRC was founded by local irrigation districts, the Confederated
Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation, environmental conservation
groups, and other local stakeholders, in an effort to focus on
practical, incentive-based solutions to the basin's water management
challenges. The DRC leased over 73 cubic feet per second of water in
the basin's streams and rivers during the 2004 irrigation season and
has restored nearly 100 miles of stream corridor using livestock
management techniques, restored channel floodplain connectivity, and
planted over 100,000 native plants in the riparian zone.
The DRC has permanently acquired about 7,259 acre-feet of senior
water rights in the Deschutes basin that will remain instream during
critical low flow periods, benefiting fish species such as ESA listed
bull trout and summer steelhead.
The Administration does not understand the rationale for the
provision that would define a quorum as only 8 people, less than half
of the 19 people appointed to the Conservancy.
This concludes my statement. I will be glad to answer any
questions.
__________
on s. 251
Madam Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am William Rinne,
Deputy Commissioner of Reclamation. Thank you for the opportunity to
testify on S. 251.
This legislation would authorize the Bureau of Reclamation to
conduct a water resource feasibility study in the Bear Creek/Little
Butte Creek sub-basins of the Rogue River in southwestern Oregon, and
to prepare an environmental impact statement provided for in the Act.
The study would investigate opportunities to implement water
conservation measures within the three irrigation districts (Talent,
Rogue River and Medford IDs) served by Reclamation's Rogue River
Project, and to increase water supplies, including use of reclaimed
water from the City of Medford and modifications to existing storage
facilities. Because alternatives being studied would impact the
facilities and operations of the Rogue River Project, Reclamation must
be involved in the effort.
It is Reclamation's understanding that a broad range of
stakeholders has come together to achieve consensus on project goals
and gain community support. The primary goals are to: 1) solve the
sewage and storm water discharge problems of the City of Medford; 2)
increase instream flows in Little Butte Creek and Bear Creek for
threatened coho salmon; and 3) improve irrigation efficiency within the
three irrigation districts. The project would improve the long-term
viability of the three irrigation districts. The Bureau of Reclamation
has cooperated with this local collaborative effort to proactively
address water resource issues that could become contentious in the
future.
Partial funding for this study has been obtained by the City of
Medford via a grant administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. The grant is being used to fund a contractor to initiate
technical studies. The local study partners believe they will be able
to obtain additional funding to complete the technical studies required
to meet Reclamation's standards for water resources planning.
Appropriated funds would be needed to cover Reclamation staff costs to
review and revise as necessary the contractor's technical work,
undertake Endangered Species Act consultations with other Federal
agencies, and publish the notices and documents required under the
National Environmental Policy Act.
The administration cannot support S. 251 at this time. The
legislation does not require at least 50% non-federal cost share for
the feasibility study, as is required by Reclamation policy. Federal
funds obtained by Medford through other agencies would not qualify for
the cost-share requirement.
This concludes my statement. I will be glad to answer any
questions.
__________
on s. 310
Madam Chairman, and members of the Committee, I am William Rinne,
Deputy Commissioner of Reclamation. I am pleased to appear before this
Subcommittee to provide the Administration's views on S. 310.
S. 310 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to convey the
Newlands Project Headquarters and maintenance yard facility to the
Truckee-Carson Irrigation District. The facilities cover about 37 acres
of Reclamation withdrawn property in Fallon, Nevada.
Mr. Chairman, over the past couple years, we have been working very
closely with the District to resolve each of the issues on the title
transfer of the headquarters property. In June 2003, Reclamation and
the President of the District's Board of Director's signed an extensive
Memorandum of Agreement governing the proposed title transfer.
Reclamation actively supports transferring title to state and local
entities when in the mutual interest of affected parties. Based on this
coordination, the Administration supports the concept of transferring
the title for the property to the Truckee-Carson Irrigation District.
However, we are concerned that S. 310 directs that the proceeds
received by the United States for the lease and sale of Fallon Freight
Yard, the transfer of which was authorized in P.L. 107-339, be treated
as full payment for the 37 acres. Under this language, the District
will not be required to pay anything for the property. Under
Reclamation law and policy, the proceeds from the sale of acquired
lands and lease revenues such as those from Fallon Freight yard are to
be treated as a tail-end credit to the applicable project. In this
case, the Newlands Project, not the District, our Contractor who
operates and maintains the Project on behalf of the United States,
should receive the credit. The lands associated with the headquarters
property that is proposed to be transferred under S. 310 are withdrawn
lands and thus the District has not repaid their value. If enacted as
is, we are concerned the bill could set a precedent that would allow
the District and other irrigation districts to make additional claims
on lease or eventual sale revenues from Reclamation acquired lands.
In conclusion, I would like to take this opportunity to compliment
District Board President Ernest Schank and the District's Board of
Directors for their diligence and commitment in working with us on the
issues surrounding this transfer. I also commend Senator Ensign for his
leadership.
That concludes my statement. I would be happy to answer any
questions.
__________
on s. 519
Madam Chairman, I am William Rinne, Deputy Commissioner of
Reclamation, and I am pleased to present the Administration's views on
S. 519, Senator Hutchison's bill to amend the Lower Rio Grande Valley
Water Resources Conservation and Improvement Act of 2000 (Act) to
authorize additional projects and activities.
The bill authorizes an additional 19 water conservation projects,
which include the replacement of canals and laterals with pipelines,
the lining of canals and laterals, the installation of water
measurement and telemetry systems, the renovation and replacement of
pumping plants, and other activities that will result in the
conservation of water. The legislation would enable the Secretary to
participate in the funding of these projects, up to 50 percent of the
total project cost, once they had met the review criteria and project
requirements set forth in the Act. S. 519 aims to provide water saving
measures to areas in Texas that have recently suffered drought.
The Department lauds local and state efforts to improve and
encourage water efficiency and to responsibly manage water quantity in
the border region. The Department testified in general support (with
some suggested revisions) of the original legislation that became P.L.
106-576 and of the subsequent amendment (P.L. 107-351). Together, these
laws authorized 19 projects with a cost ceiling of $47,000,000. The
amendments offered in S. 519 appear to maintain the intent of the
existing law while authorizing an additional 19 projects with a cost
ceiling of $42,356,145. However, Reclamation must continue to direct
limited resources toward constructing ongoing projects, and toward
operation, and maintenance, and rehabilitation of existing projects.
Therefore we cannot support adding these additional projects to the
long list of already authorized projects awaiting Federal funding.
Reclamation has several additional concerns with the legislation, which
we will mention later in this testimony.
Since late December 2000, when P.L. 106-576 was enacted,
Reclamation has been working with local entities in the Lower Rio
Grande Valley, the Texas Water Development Board, and the Texas
Agricultural Extension Service of Texas A&M University. The first
requirement of the public law was issuance of criteria by which
Reclamation would administer the law and determine project eligibility
for federal funding. These criteria were prepared, shared with state,
local and other federal entities and issued in late June 2001, within
the six month timeframe required by the law.
Next, the irrigation districts involved with the 19 currently
authorized projects and the Texas Water Development Board have worked
with Reclamation to begin planning, designing and construction of
authorized projects. To date, Reclamation has approved 15 Project
Reports and 11 of the projects have initiated construction, five of
which are substantially complete and under operation. The 19 presently
authorized projects, if constructed, could save a projected 79,000
acre-feet of water, 6.1 million kilowatt hours of energy, and $742,000
of operation and maintenance expense annually.
Reclamation is administering this program on a reimbursable basis,
with each District submitting quarterly requests for payment. To date,
Congress has appropriated $7,625,000 for implementation of this program
($1.5 million in FY 2003, $4.5 million in FY 2004 and $1.625 million in
FY 2005). Of this amount, Reclamation has obligated a total of
$6,438,000 to reimburse Districts for project costs, which represents
all available funding appropriated to date. As of the end of March
2005, Reclamation has received reimbursement requests for completed
work that exceeds our available funds by approximately $2.94 million.
The emphasis placed by the Act on the initial 19 authorized
projects is primarily on a project's scope, not upon its costs. For
example, the scope of each authorized project is defined by the
language in the Act itself and in the cited engineering report. In some
cases, the specificity of this language has limited the authorization
of (and therefore Reclamation's participation in) a project to only a
portion of what an irrigation district has proposed to construct. The
total project costs of each of these projects are not, however,
specified in the legislation or in the cited engineering reports, but
are determined once the authorized components are sufficiently
developed in the Project Report and a project budget developed. In
accordance with Section 4(b) of the Act, the Federal share of each
project is then determined to be 50 percent of this total project cost.
In contrast, the emphasis that would be placed by S. 519 on the
second 19 projects considered for authorization would be on the
project's cost, not upon its scope. Without changing the conditions for
implementation of the first 19 projects, S. 519 imposes different
conditions for implementation on the proposed 19 projects. For example,
unlike the previous two bills, Section 2(b) of S. 519 would amend the
Act to authorize virtually any project component that would result in
the conservation of water or an improved supply of water, whether or
not this component lies within the scope of the cited engineering
report for that project. Also unlike the Act, S. 519 would identify a
maximum total cost for each project, half of the sum of which equals
the identified ceiling. Furthermore, Section 3 of S. 519 maintains
separate ceilings for each of the groups of projects; namely,
$47,000,000 (2001 dollars) for projects 1 through 19, and $42,356,145
(2004 dollars) for projects 20 through 38.
These differences, while not affecting the requirements for project
qualification, would require somewhat different treatment of projects
with regard to determining scope and cost, depending upon specific
project authorizations.
Another concern is that the proposed legislation pre-authorizes
projects that have had limited, if any, involvement from the Bureau of
Reclamation in the project planning and development process, and which
have not undergone Administration review. Although the Administration
supports the efforts of local project beneficiaries to address their
local water needs, we cannot support either authorization or funds for
projects that have not undergone rigorous Administration review.
Madam Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I am pleased to answer
any questions.
__________
on s. 592
Madam Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am William Rinne,
Deputy Commissioner of Reclamation. Thank you for the opportunity to
testify on S. 592. The Department supports the goals of S. 592.
On July 1, 1997, the State of Wyoming, Nebraska, and Colorado and
the United States Department of the Interior entered into a cooperative
agreement for Platte River research and other efforts relating to
endangered species habitats along the Central Platte River in Nebraska.
The purpose of the cooperative agreement is to jointly undertake a
basin-wide effort to improve the habitat of four threatened and
endangered species along the Platte River. The cooperative study is
designed to help develop a basin-wide program to be the reasonable and
prudent alternative to minimize the effects of existing and new water
related activities in the Platte River Basin.
Glendo Dam and Reservoir is one of several Bureau of Reclamation
dams and reservoirs on the North Platte River that operate as an
integrated system. The Bureau of Reclamation is required to consult
under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) on the operations of the entire
reservoir system.
Successful consultation completion will be dependent upon achieving
a Recovery Implementation Program (Program) that will serve as a
reasonable and prudent alternative for the ESA consultation. A final
programmatic environmental impact statement which leads to a Program is
scheduled to be completed in the fall of 2005, with a record of
decision to follow in December 2005. We anticipate the Governors of the
States of Colorado, Nebraska, and Wyoming and Secretary of the Interior
will enter into such a Program in April 2006. S. 592 will allow
Reclamation to renew the Glendo contracts when the Program is in place.
The intent of S. 592 is to amend the Irrigation Project Contract
Extension Act of 1998 to require the Secretary of the Interior to
extend each of the water service or repayment contracts for the Glendo
Unit of the Missouri River Basin Project for a period of 2 years until
December 31, 2007, or for the term of the cooperative agreement entered
into by the State of Wyoming, Nebraska, Colorado and the Secretary of
the Interior.
To ensure that the intent of this bill to amend the Irrigation
Project Contract Extension Act of 1998 is clearly identified, the
Department recommends the long title of the bill read as follows: ``To
amend the Irrigation Project Contract Extension Act of 1998 to extend
certain contracts between the Bureau of Reclamation and certain
irrigation water contractors in the States of Wyoming and Nebraska.''
With this clarification, the Department supports S. 592. Thank you
for the opportunity to appear before you today.
Senator Smith. As I understand your opposition to S. 166,
it sounds like you are not opposed to the policy the DRC is
advocating but it really comes down to a money thing. Is that
about it?
Mr. Rinne. Correct.
Senator Smith. And the same with S. 251?
Mr. Rinne. S. 251 is, Senator, on the 50/50 cost-share is
probably our major opposition to it.
Senator Smith. So, again, it is more of a money issue
than--or just the policy that it has got to be 50/50?
Mr. Rinne. The policy of the 50/50 and using--and not using
other Federal funds to qualify for 50/50.
Senator Smith. So, if we put in cautionary language, will
the administration support enactment of the bill?
Mr. Rinne. Yes, we would.
Senator Smith. Okay. And does not the DRC advocate exactly
the types of solution that Reclamation is advancing through the
Water 25 program?
Mr. Rinne. Yes.
Senator Smith. I guess we have got to find some money
around here. Thank you.
Senator?
Senator Thomas. That is a brand new idea.
As I understand it, you would like to have this title
changed to this little short title, to amend the Irrigation
Project Contract Extension Act of 1998 to extend certain
contracts between the Bureau of Reclamation and certain
irrigation and water contractors in the State of Wyoming and
Nebraska.
Mr. Rinne. Yes, it is--I would agree.
Senator Thomas. Okay. Sounds good. Thank you.
Mr. Rinne. You are welcome.
Senator Smith. On S. 310, the Newlands project, as
consideration for this title transfer, S. 310 allows the use of
any amounts previously received by the Federal Government for a
lease or sale of land associated with the Fallon Freight Yard,
a proposition not supported by the administration.
Is it correct that the land at issue here, where the
project headquarters and maintenance yard are located, and the
Fallon Freight Yard are two separate tracts of land?
Mr. Rinne. Yes, that is correct, Senator.
Senator Smith. And what is the proper consideration for the
property to be conveyed? Namely, the land associated with the
Newlands Project headquarters and maintenance yard facilities?
Mr. Rinne. We would request a new appraisal to do that.
There was an earlier appraisal that we have not seen, a Fish
and Wildlife Service appraisal, so we feel we need a new
appraisal.
Senator Smith. Would the administration support S. 310 if
the consideration section was modified and the TCID had
compensated the Federal Government for the land at issue?
Mr. Rinne. Absolutely.
Senator Smith. I think that is it, Bill. Thank you very
much.
Oh, I am sorry. We can take time, Senator.
Senator Johnson. No, we do not have to----
Senator Smith. Okay. Senator Johnson has joined us and has
no questions for the Bureau.
Senator Johnson. Thank you very much.
Senator Smith. You are welcome, Senator.
On panel two, we have Wayne Halbert, general manager of the
Harlingen Irrigation District from Harlingen, Texas. We have
Tod Heisler, executive director, Deschutes River Conservancy of
Bend, Oregon; Jim Hill, city of Medford Water Reclamation
Division administrator, and he is the chair of the WISE Project
Advisory Committee; and Early--excuse me, Ernie Schank,
president, Board of Directors of TCID of Fallon, Nevada.
Gentlemen, we welcome you all. We thank you for your
traveling so far to be here, to be part of the Senate record,
and the leadership you are providing on these issues is noted
and again, appreciated.
Why do we not start over here with Wayne? The mike is
yours.
STATEMENT OF WAYNE HALBERT, GENERAL MANAGER, HARLINGEN
IRRIGATION DISTRICT, HARLINGEN, TX, ON BEHALF OF THE TEXAS
IRRIGATION COUNCIL
Mr. Halbert. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, committee members and staff, we thank you for
the opportunity to testify before you today on behalf of the
communities and water districts along the Texas border.
I am Wayne Halbert, general manager of the Harlingen
Irrigation District and represent irrigation districts that
supply irrigation water to over a million acres of farmland and
raw water to municipalities for over 1.5 million people.
Our testimony is in support of S. 519, which amends the
Lower Rio Grande Valley Resources Conservation Improvement Act
of 2000, to authorize additional projects under that act, and
for other purposes.
Our written testimony has been submitted for the record.
But in the interest of time and respect to the committee, I
would like to summarize my comments here today.
First of all, I want to express our gratitude to the
committee for passing previous legislation that has resulted in
a great deal of conservation work along the Rio Grande.
Mexico continues to use more and more water the United
States used to have available. And the rapid urbanization on
both sides of the border increases the demands on the water
resource.
These factors force us to step up our water conservation
work, to keep a reasonable balance to the users of the
resource. With agriculture the major user of the Rio Grande
water, agriculture water conservation projects are the best
source of savings possible.
In your packet are two reports of the success of projects
funded as a result of previous legislation passed by this
committee. These projects are among the first to be completed.
The first report is a project by Cameron County Irrigation
District No. 2, which shows a savings of water by this portion
of their project equal to the municipal standard the district
delivers every year.
The second report is from Hidalgo County Irrigation
District No. 2. And this report was compiled by Texas A&M,
which did testing before and after their project. Their result
show an 81 percent savings of water in the area of the
project.*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The report has been retained in subcommittee files.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are approximately $30 million worth of projects in
the same--in some stage of activity, each of which when
completed, would show equivalent savings of water. All of this
has been, and will continue to be, a tremendous positive impact
to the entire border region.
Two things that authorization of this--this new
authorization does for us: No. 1, it encourages our board of
directors. All of our districts are formed by boards of
directors, who are the landowners. It encourages them to seek
ways to fund the cost-share, the 50 percent of the projects
from the district's perspective. And No. 2, NAD Bank funds,
North American Development Bank funds, have been authorized for
many of the projects that are listed in this legislation. The
NAD Bank funds put a great deal of weight on the authorization
of projects for the awarding of NAD Bank dollars. So, it is
important that these projects be authorized for us to be able
to have access to those funds.
We owe a great deal of thanks to Senator Hutchison and this
committee for their support on these projects and for their
continued support on the projects of S. 519.
Thank you for your time and interest and we are available
for--to answer any questions.
Senator Smith. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Halbert follows:]
Prepared Statement of Wayne Halbert, General Manager of the Harlingen
Irrigation District, Harlingen, TX, on behalf of the Texas Irrigation
Council
Mr. Chairman, Committee Members and staff, thank you for the
opportunity to testify before you today on behalf of the communities
and water districts along the Texas Border. I am Wayne Halbert, General
Manager of the Harlingen Irrigation District and represent irrigation
districts that supply irrigation water to over a million acres of
farmland and raw water to municipalities for over 1.5 million people.
Our testimony is in support of S. 519, which amends the Lower Rio
Grande Valley Resources Conservation and Improvement Act of 2000, to
authorize additional projects under that Act, and for other purposes.
For the past several years the Border Region has been deeply
involved in Integrated Resource Management studies to determine a
direction for our communities to take in water resource management. The
State of Texas gave direction to these studies in 1997 with legislation
that required even more comprehensive determinations of water resource
status. These studies have given us some stark revelations as to
unprecedented predictions in population growth and needs for water
resources over the next few years. The Rio Grande Valley Irrigation
Districts have partnered with the Bureau of Reclamation on projects
since the early 1950's. Most of the Districts have utilized BOR loan
programs to do conservation projects. Many developed projects remain
undone due to a lack of funding available to meet the needs. Districts
have systematically chipped away at these projects within their budget
restraints.
Today water supplies are in better shape than they have been since
1992, however the twelve years of drought or near drought conditions
taught us the frailty of our situation. The slow progress of completing
water conservation projects as local funds are available has become
obviously unacceptable and has placed the agricultural and municipal
supply needs in peril. We saw exhausted water supplies that caused
thousands of acres of land to become unproductive and unable to sustain
the industry that depends on that production. Explosive developments in
Mexico, which share the waters of the Rio Grande, have deprived the
United States of a greater amount of the water resource, accelerating
the crisis. Admittedly a part of the Mexico issue is drought related
but a greater part is a change in Mexico's operations of their system
that has deprived the U.S. users of much of the water supply we
traditionally have received. Recent flood waters and negotiations with
Mexico have reportedly settled the debt issue and Mexico's violation of
the terms of the 1944 Water Treaty but no long term solutions, thus
insuring that this will occur again.
The population explosion in the Rio Grande Valley area continues to
be a real concern in dealing with our water resource issues and
balancing the resource between our urban growth needs and our
continuing farm needs. As if our population problems are not enough,
Mexico's along the border are many times worse and they draw from the
same resource.
All of these pressures turn up the heat on the water resources for
the Rip Grande. There are many valid concerns and frustrations over
various issues that we desperately need congressional help with, but we
also want to offer you a blue print for at least some of the solutions.
In the comprehensive water resource studies of which copies of
these reports have been provided to this committee, an emphasis was
made to seek solutions that would provide balance to the fragile
economy and environment of the border region. The committees and
consultants were charged with the responsibility of finding ways to
provide an adequate water supply for the least amount of impact, both
financial and physical. Our goal was to find enough firm yield water to
provide for the municipal, industrial, environmental and agricultural
needs of the region and to dovetail that plan into the expected growth
needs of the Valley.
The studies looked at desalination, reverse osmosis, runoff reuse,
groundwater recovery, new dam sites, long distance pipelines and any
other opportunity that presented any semblance of credible water
supply. After several years of study it has become apparent that
because agriculture uses 85% of the water available, agriculture must
be the target for the major water conservation projects.
S. 519 amends original authorization for the Bureau of Reclamation
to implement the programs and projects that surfaced as the most cost
effective way to provide for the water resource needs of the Texas
Border region. Most of the irrigation systems were built in the early
1900's and many of the delivery systems that are the lifeblood of the
municipalities as well as agriculture must be renovated. Improvements
to these canals would provide annually one half of a years current
municipal needs in saved water. Other conservation projects that
include volumetric accounting of the water and new technologies in
water delivery could save another 75% of the municipal current annual
needs. All of these projects can be accomplished for construction costs
of from $0.02 to $3.07 per 1000 gallons which projects on a debt
service basis from a fraction of a cent to $0.23 per 1000 gallons of
water saved. The projects outlined in this legislation would once again
increase dramatically the water available for municipal and industrial
use without collapsing the agricultural economy.
The agricultural economy is extremely important to our region as a
large portion of the workforce is dependent on the agriculture
industry. The Border aspects of the region only increases this problem
and agricultural layoffs create immediate social problems far beyond
the normal expectations. We have testified twice before this committee
on the forerunner of this legislation that an undependable water supply
could do irreparable damage and would push our local unemployment
figures out of sight. We have previously presented a report from Texas
A&M that estimates as many as 30,000 jobs have were lost during the
1990's and up to a billion dollars in lost revenues directly related to
the water shortage on the Mexico shortfall alone.
Today we are bringing examples of the fruits of legislation you
passed a few years back. We have included in our testimony two reports
from district projects that have recently been completed. One shows a
savings of water equal to all the water the cities they serve use in a
year. The other project shows reduction in canal water losses at 81%
for the project area involved. The dollars your previous legislation
has authorized and appropriated have reaped huge benefits to the Rio
Grande Valley.
The additional projects requested in this amendment are of utmost
importance as authorized projects encourage the local districts by
freeing up funds from the North American Development Bank, state and
local sources to begin the projects. We recognize that we may have to
live and grow on less water than we have been accustomed to. We have
lost farms and businesses that have been a part of the Rio Grande
Valley heritage for over a hundred years, mostly because water resource
demands during the recent drought period have been inadequate. The
greatest impacts of these losses today are to our agricultural
community; however, the associated impacts have taken their toll on the
Border Region as a whole. The cost of water to the general public is on
the rise and will continue to do so as the scarcity of the resource
manifests itself. Water shortages to the general populace have been
held to a minimum but if we do not act we could experience a crisis in
this arena also.
This legislation allows us to turn these tragic losses around and
provide new life and new hope to the whole Rio Grande Border Region.
The infrastructure that is needed to solve these problems is apparent.
Districts have planned these needed projects for years and anticipated
accomplishing them over the next twenty or so years. Testimony today
has shown you that we do not have that luxury. Every few acre feet of
water not conserved is another family farm gone, another few jobs lost,
another business who had to close their doors. Our future is in your
hands.
We appreciate your support for S. 519. Thank you for your
attention.
Senator Smith. Ernie Schank.
STATEMENT OF ERNEST C. SCHANK, PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF
DIRECTORS, TRUCKEE-CARSON IRRIGATION DISTRICT, FALLON, NV
Mr. Schank. Mr. Chairman and Mr. Johnson, I am glad to see
you, because I had an airplane that I had to catch tonight and
I really did not want to have to stay again overnight.
I am Ernest C. Schank, president of the Board of Directors
of the Truckee-Carson Irrigation District, also known as TCID,
located in Fallon, Nevada. We are the home of one of the first
five authorized projects and the first one to start
construction. We boast U.S. Bureau of Reclamation specification
0001, which was the Derby Dam facility. I am here to testify
today in support of S. 310.
The legislation would require the Secretary of the Interior
to convey the Newlands Project Headquarters and Maintenance
Yard Facility to the TCID. I would like to thank Senators Reid
and Ensign and Congressman Gibbons for introducing this
legislation, Commissioner Keys and the Bureau of Reclamation
people for working cooperatively with us on this proposal.
I did submit written testimony, and I will make a few
comments that I think are of interest, but would ask that my
written testimony be included in the record.
Senator Smith. Without objection.
Mr. Schank. In 1903, over 100 years ago, the 40-acre
parcel, which is the subject of this transfer proposal and is
the site of the current office and maintenance yard for TCID,
was withdrawn for Reclamation purposes, as a part of the
Newlands Project.
This title transfer proposal is narrowly tailored to
include approximately 35 acres of the 40-acre parcel and should
not be viewed as a project title transfer.
In 1926, the TCID entered into a repayment contract with
the U.S. Government, to take over operations and maintenance of
the Newlands Project. At that time, the TCID moved into an
office and maintenance yard on property that the Government had
purchased from the U.S. Reclamation Service. The cost of this
land was included as a project cost that has since been repaid
by the TCID. The Fallon Freight Yard and the Post Office
currently occupy these properties.
By 1975, the TCID had outgrown those original facilities,
and moved to the 40-acre parcel that is the subject of this
title transfer proposal. The land was available because it was
not suited for growing crops and was therefore never
homesteaded or patented, as were acres that were irrigable.
All of the improvements to this property have been made by
the TCID, the U.S. Government has not contributed to these
improvements. In the early 1990's, the Bureau installed a field
office on the property, tying into our improvements. It
occupies approximately five of the 40 acres and would remain
with the U.S. Government.
By 1996, the TCID had repaid the original construction
charges designated for repayment. Thus the Newlands Project is
considered to be a paid-out project under Reclamation law.
In 1996, the TCID entered into an operation and maintenance
contract with Interior. Because of new mandates regarding water
measurement and water control, the TCID needs to expand our
facilities.
The transfer is necessary so that TCID can obtain
financing, and I might mention private financing, for the
necessary improvements, the first of which will be a new
building, office building.
Consideration for the property will be all of the accrued
moneys received from the lease of our old maintenance yard, now
known as the Fallon Rail Freight Yard, which are currently held
in a reclamation fund in the name of the Newlands Project. And
any future lease payments and sales proceeds when provisions of
Public Law 107-339 are completed and the property transfers to
the city of Fallon.
The water users of the Newlands Project paid for an office
and maintenance yard once and should not have to pay again.
Early in February 2004, after working with the Bureau of
Reclamation and both sides of the aisle on the Republican
Resource--House Resources Committee, H.R. 2831 was approved
under suspension in the House with no opposition.
S. 318 is almost identical to H.R. 2831, which has been
reintroduced by Congressman Gibbons as H.R. 540 in this current
session.
TCID is a not-for-profit governmental agency, organized
under the laws of the State of Nevada. TCID provides a service
for the public by maintaining and operating the Newlands
Project and has since 1926, and delivers water in accordance
with existing contracts at minimal cost to U.S. Government.
It is important to emphasize that this withdrawn land will
continue to be used for a particular public purpose, that is
the operation and maintenance of a Federal water project.
TCID is a local job provider with 55 to 60 employees and
contributes, thereby, to the regional economy.
The Governor, and the State, and other elected officials in
our State support this transfer title.
I am not aware of any opposition, from any interested
entities within the State of Nevada, to this transfer. I would
like to request that the subcommittee include the letters from
the Governor and several other elected officials in the record
of this hearing; and I will provide those at the conclusion of
my testimony.
I thank you for allowing me to appear today and will be
glad to answer any questions.
Senator Smith. Thank you, Ernie. We will include those
letters in the record.*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The letters have been retained in subcommittee files.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[The prepared statement of Mr. Schank follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ernest C. Schank, President of the Board of
Directors, Truckee-Carson Irrigation District
Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, I am Ernest C. Schank,
President of the Board of Directors of the Truckee-Carson Irrigation
District (TCID) in Fallon, Nevada. I am here to testify in support of
S. 310.
This legislation would require the Secretary of the Interior to
convey the Newlands Project Headquarters and Maintenance Yard Facility
to the TCID. This title transfer is narrowly tailored to only transfer
ownership of federal land currently being used by the TCID for an
office and maintenance yard facility.
We would like to thank Senator John Ensign R-NV and Senator Harry
Reid D-NV for introducing this legislation in the Senate and
Congressman Jim Gibbons R-NV for introducing companion legislation in
the House, (H.R. 540), to make this title transfer possible. We also
would like to thank Commissioner John Keys and the Bureau of
Reclamation (BOR) for working cooperatively with us on this proposal.
The Newlands Project, one of the first five Reclamation projects,
was authorized on March 14, 1903 and provides for irrigation and other
purposes in the lower Carson River Basin near Fallon, in western
Nevada. Construction began in 1903 on the first project works, the
Derby Diversion Dam and the Truckee Canal. The TCID was created under
the laws of the State of Nevada in 1918 as a non-profit governmental
agency to undertake the building of a drainage system and begin
operating and maintaining the project works beginning in 1926 under
contract with the United States.
In 1926, the TCID entered into a repayment contract with the United
States Government. The TCID moved into the office and maintenance yard
previously occupied by the United States Reclamation Service (USRS).
These properties were held in fee title, and the costs of those assets
were repaid by the water rights owners of the TCID although a title was
never transferred from the U.S.
By 1975, the TCID had outgrown those original facilities, so we
moved to a 40-acre parcel of land withdrawn for Reclamation purposes in
1903. The TCID built a new office and maintenance shop facility on this
withdrawn land. As withdrawn land, this parcel previously to this time
was available for homesteading, proving up, and patient. The land
remained unimproved as it was not irrigable because of the high clay
and alkaline content of the soil. It was, however, suitable for an
office and maintenance yard at one location whereas the previous
facilities were at two separate locations.
The original lot where the office had been was eventually
transferred by the Department of the Interior (DOI) to the United
States Postal Service. The mechanism to dispose of the original
maintenance yard was passed in the 107th session in legislation titled
``Fallon Rail Freight Loading Facility Transfer Act'' (P.L. 107-339).
Provisions were approved by Congress for the transfer of title to the
City of Fallon. The pending transfer has not yet taken place.
Today the parcel which we are seeking to transfer and the attendant
improvements make up the hub of operation and maintenance of the
Newlands Reclamation Project. The TCID has rented the 40 acres for a
nominal fee from the BOR since 1972. The value of the land was
increased significantly by the improvements all made by the TCID. No
federal monies have been used for improvements
In 1996, the TCID entered into an operation and maintenance
contract with the DOI. A part of that contract requires an aggressive
water measurement program. This modernization in water measurement at
each turnout and the increased automation of water control in the many
canals and laterals require more employees, more computer and
electronics space, and more storage space for records.
In 1996, the BOR certified that the TCID had repaid the U.S.
Government the original construction charges designated for repayment.
At this time, the Newlands Project is considered to be a ``paid out
project'' under Reclamation law. Although the original construction
charges and other costs to the U.S. have been repaid, no title to any
of the Newlands Project facilities have been transferred to the TCID.
Although the U.S. Government has leased the land to the TCID for a
nominal value, the lease will eventually expire and the TCID would like
to own the land to make permanent improvements to existing facilities
that have become outdated. The transfer of approximately 35 acres of a
40-acre parcel of federal land is to allow the TCID to make permanent
improvements on the land for continued operation and maintenance of the
Newlands Project. The remaining approximately five acres will be
reserved for a local Bureau of Reclamation field office.
The TCID has out grown its office and shop and needs to expand. The
transfer is necessary so that financing can be obtained for the
improvements--the first of which will be a new office building. The
TCID has made all previous improvements to this land. In order to
secure the necessary financing to make the improvements we need to own
the ground upon which the improvements will stand.
The legislation would direct the transfer pursuant to a memorandum
of agreement we have entered into with the Bureau. The conveyance would
not occur until the National Environmental Policy Act has been fully
complied with. Moreover, any necessary environmental site assessments,
remediation or removal would have to be completed.
Consideration for the property will be all the accrued monies
received from the lease of our old maintenance yard, now known as the
``Fallon Rail Freight Yard'' which are currently held in a reclamation
fund in the name of the Newlands Project and any future lease payments
and sales proceeds when provisions of 107-339 are completed and
property transfers to the City of Fallon.
The Governor of Nevada supports this title transfer. I would like
to ask that the subcommittee include the attached letter from Governor
Guinn, dated July 11, 2002, in the record of this hearing.
On October 15, 2003, during the 108th Congress, I appeared before
the House Subcommittee on Water Power and Resources, and testified in
behalf of H.R. 2831 sponsored by Congressman Jim Gibbons R-NV. Early in
February of 2004 after working with the Bureau of Reclamation and both
sides of the isle on the House Resources Committee, the Bill was
approved under suspension in the House with no opposition. S. 310 is
almost identical to H.R. 2831 from the 108th Session and H.R. 540
introduced in this 109th Session, except a section of definitions has
been added.
In closing, I want to emphasize that the TCID provides a service
to, the public by maintaining and operating the Newlands Reclamation
Project and delivering water in accordance with contracts previously
entered into between the United States and the water rights owners of
the Project. We provide jobs and those employed thus provide assistance
to the Counties, the State of Nevada and the U.S. government as
taxpayers.
I am not aware of any opposition from any interested entity within
the State of Nevada to this title transfer. Nevertheless, we will
commit to addressing any issues that are raised as this legislation
moves forward.
This concludes my remarks. Thank you for allowing me to appear
before your committee today. I would be pleased to answer any questions
you might have.
Senator Smith. What time is your flight?
Mr. Schank. I leave from Baltimore-Washington at 8:15, so I
will have time now.
Senator Smith. Okay. We do not want to----
Mr. Schank. But I was worried.
Senator Smith. All right. Well, we do not want you to miss
your flight.
Jim Hill, a constituent, welcome.
STATEMENT OF JIM HILL, CITY OF MEDFORD WATER RECLAMATION
DIVISION ADMINISTRATOR, MEDFORD, OR, ON BEHALF OF THE WATER FOR
IRRIGATION, STREAMS AND ECONOMY (WISE) PROJECT ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
Mr. Hill. Thank you. My name is Jim Hill. I am the water
reclamation division administrator for the city of Medford, and
also the chair of the WISE Advisory Committee.
Chairman Smith, I want to thank you for the opportunity to
provide testimony in support of S. 251, which would authorize
the Bureau of Reclamation to conduct a water resource
feasibility study for the Little Butte-Bear Creek sub-basins in
Oregon, also known as the WISE Project.
I have submitted written testimony that I request be put
into record.
Senator Smith. Without objection.
Mr. Hill. Thank you.
Today's testimony is presented on behalf of the 19
agricultural, municipal, environmental, and water resource
agencies and groups that comprise the WISE Project Advisory
Committee; and will address the need for the WISE Project, as
well as the need for Reclamation authorization as lead agency
for the project.
At this time I would like to thank both you and Senator
Wyden for introducing and supporting this legislation. It is
great to have two Senators that work so well together and put
the interest of the citizens first.
Reclamation is the architect of the Talent Project, which
has provided irrigation water for the growers in the Bear Creek
Valley since 1958; and utilizes flows from Bear Creek and
Little Butte Creek, the reservoir system connected to the two
streams, and over 200 miles of canals to irrigate over 34,000
acres of prime agricultural land.
The Talent Project also provides flood control, and power
generation, and the reservoir system is heavily used for
fishing, and water sports.
Both Little Butte Creek and Bear Creek are tributaries to
the Rogue River, a world class salmon and steelhead river.
Little Butte Creek is prime Coho spawning habitat and its
health is a key component of the continued economic success of
the Rogue River fisheries, which extend over 130 miles
downstream to the ocean.
Since the initial construction of the Talent Project,
considerable growth has taken place in southern Oregon, as you
have mentioned previously. And we are now suffering from
unreliable and inefficient irrigation water supplies, degraded
water quantity and quality affecting both the fish and the
recreation values of our reservoirs, streams, and rivers.
Even the municipal water supply for the Medford Water
Commission is impacted by Little Butte Creek's reduced water
quality.
About 5 years ago, local interests started planning efforts
to address the above-mentioned water resources issues for the
next 50 years. At the same time, Reclamation was completing its
Bear Creek-Little Butte Creek Water Management Study Appraisal
Report, a lot, which analyzed water conservation measures to
improve irrigation deliveries, enhance streams flows, and
improve water quality and fish habitat in Bear Creek and Little
Butte Creek, including the use of reclaimed effluent from the
Regional Water Reclamation Facility as an additional valuable
source of irrigation water. It ends up that these two groups
were doing the same things, so we put it together and called it
the WISE Project, and that is what we are here to talk about
today.
On June 2, 2004, Reclamation and the city of Medford
entered into a Memorandum of Agreement, which defines the roles
and responsibilities of each agency in the development and
preparation of a WISE environmental study. Reclamation's role
will be to provide technical review of the NEPA process and
assure that NEPA compliance is achieved.
Medford, with Reclamation input on the selection process,
is responsible for hiring a consultant to prepare the study
with Reclamation oversight and technical review.
It is estimated that the cost for the WISE study will be
$2.8 million. That is for the feasibility consultant, and it is
Medford's responsibility to secure. S. 251 would authorize the
appropriation of $500,000 for Reclamation to act as lead agency
and provide the necessary technical oversight.
Medford has retained a consultant for the first phase of
the study. And the preliminary scoping work has been done, and
we are now at a point where your committee's approval of S.
251, authorizing Reclamation to act as lead agency for the WISE
study and appropriating $500,000, is critical, so we can start
the next process, which is the formal scoping process and
filing of the Notice of Intent.
And just in one quick response, I first testified before
the House, introducing this legislation, back in October 2003;
and I just wanted to note that this is the first time that the
Bureau has brought up the issue of a 50/50 cost share. We were
never aware of that and it has been like 2 years.
It has kind of caught--it has caught me by surprise. We
will go back and we will have to investigate that; because if
that is the only thing and truly is the only thing we can see
what we can do about resolving that issue regarding getting
passage of this legislation.
And once again, I want to thank you for the opportunity to
submit this testimony, and this is really important for Little
Butte Creek and Bear Creek and the entire Rogue Valley and the
people around there, because they depend heavily upon the water
resources in that area.
Thank you very much.
Senator Smith. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hill follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jim Hill, City of Medford Water Reclamation
Division Administrator, on behalf of the Water for Irrigation, Streams
and Economy (WISE) Project Advisory Committee, on S. 251
Chairman Domenici, thank you for the opportunity to provide
testimony in support of S. 251, which would authorize the Secretary of
the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation),
to conduct a water resource feasibility study for the Little Butte/Bear
Creek Subbasins in Oregon. This project has become known as the Water
for Streams, Irrigation and the Economy (WISE) Project.
Today's testimony is presented on behalf of the nineteen
agricultural, municipal, environmental and water resource agencies and
groups that comprise the WISE Project Advisory Committee, and will
address the need for the WISE Project, as well as the need for
Reclamation authorization as lead agency to provide project review and
oversight for the Feasibility Study and Environmental Impact Statement
(FS/EIS).
At this time I would like to thank our Senators Smith and Wyden for
introducing this legislation. It is cooperative and proactive projects
such as this that help to avoid the water resource management
controversies that often plague western states. It's great to have two
Senators that work so well together, and put the interest of the
citizens first.
background
Reclamation was the architect for the Talent Project, which has
provided irrigation water for the growers in the Bear Creek Valley
since 1958, utilizing flows from Bear Creek and Little Butte Creek, the
reservoir system connected to the two streams, and over 200 miles of
irrigation canals. The Bear Creek Valley is famous for its pears, and
the Bear Creek Corporation, which grows, processes and distributes the
pears, is the largest employer in the valley. In total there are over
34,000 acres of agricultural land in the Bear Creek Valley.
The Talent Project has also provided flood control, power
generation and recreational benefits. The several reservoirs that are
part of the irrigation system also provide fishing and water sports for
the citizens of Jackson County.
The Rogue River is a world class salmon and steelhead river,
visited by anglers from around the world. Both Little Butte Creek and
Bear Creek are tributaries to the Rogue, and serve as spawning areas
for the Chinook and Coho salmon. Little Butte Creek has been designated
as prime Coho spawning habitat, and its health is a key component of
the continued economic success of the Rogue River fisheries, which
extend over 130 miles downstream to the ocean.
Since the initial construction of the Talent Project, considerable
growth has taken place in southern Oregon. The Little Butte Creek and
Bear Creek watersheds now suffer from unreliable irrigation water
supplies during drought years and degraded water quantity and quality
for native anadromous salmonids and other uses during low flow periods.
The aging and increasingly inefficient water delivery infrastructure
results in high water losses to irrigation districts and water users.
Full appropriation, if not over-appropriation, of water in Bear Creek
and Little Butte Creek threatens the reliability of irrigation water
supply. Degraded water quality and low flows are detrimental to
anadromous salmonids and other species. Increasing stream and river
withdrawals and decreasing reservoir levels adversely affect aesthetic
recreation values of reservoirs, streams, and rivers.
In addition to the agricultural and environmental issues, growth in
the Bear Creek Valley has increased the demand for additional drinking
water, and has generated larger quantities of wastewater, which is
currently treated and discharged into the Rogue River. Degrading water
quality in Little Butte Creek directly affects the Medford Water
Commission (MWC) municipal raw water supply, which is located
downstream of the confluence of Little Butte Creek with the Rogue
River. Increasingly stringent regulatory discharge requirements also
dictate that the Medford Regional Water Reclamation Facility (RWRF),
which treats wastewater from approximately 120,000 customers in the
Bear Creek Valley, seek alternative means of treated effluent disposal
during critical summer flow periods.
In September of 2000 the MWC prepared a scoping report for what was
then called the Irrigation Point of Diversion (IPOD) project. The MWC
withdraws water from the Rogue River just downstream from the
confluence of Little Butte Creek. The intent of the IPOD project was to
move the irrigation points of diversion from Little Butte Creek to the
Rogue River downstream of the MWC treatment plant, thereby improving
the water quality and quantity in Little Butte Creek for the salmon,
while at the same time improving the water quality at the MWC treatment
plant intake.
At the same time, Reclamation was completing its Bear Creek/Little
Butte Creek Water Management Study Appraisal Report, which came out in
February of 2001. The purpose of the study was to analyze water
conservation measures that would reduce losses in the irrigation
delivery systems in the Bear Creek subbasin. The saved water would then
be redistributed to (1) improve irrigation deliveries, and (2) enhance
streams flows and improve water quality and fish habitat in Bear Creek
and Little Butte Creek. One of the recommended options involved piping
the Hopkins Canal, which serves the Rogue River Valley Irrigation
District (RRVID), and pumping reclaimed effluent from the RWRF into the
pipeline as an additional valuable source of irrigation water.
The IPOD Steering Committee which had expanded to include the RWRF,
irrigation districts, environmental groups, and any other concerned
interests, recognized that additional outside funding assistance would
be required for the project to go ahead. The Committee asked
Reclamation, because of its history with the Talent Project, to provide
funding support for the IPOD Project as a key component of its February
2001 appraisal report. Reclamation pointed out that a Feasibility Study
and Environmental Impact Statement (FS/EIS) would be required before it
could participate. At this time the IPOD Steering Committee joined
forces with Reclamation to develop the WISE Project, and to seek
Congressional authorization for Reclamation to act as lead agency for
the WISE FS/EIS.
what is the wise project?
The WISE Project is a proposed water management project to improve
the Bear Creek and Little Butte Creek watersheds within Jackson County
in southern Oregon. The WISE Project aims to use water wisely to
benefit agriculture, irrigation, municipalities, the environment,
recreation, and fisheries interests. The defined study area includes
the Bear Creek and Little Butte Creek watersheds and their associated
tributaries and reservoirs. The purpose of the WISE project is to:
Improve efficiency of water deliveries to the Medford, Rogue
River Valley, and Talent irrigation districts.
Improve irrigation water supply reliability for the Medford,
Rogue River Valley, and Talent irrigation districts.
Improve water conservation through both system-wide and on-
farm irrigation improvements.
Improve water quantity, water quality, and water reliability
for native anadromous salmonids.
Improve aesthetics and recreation values of reservoirs,
streams, and rivers.
Improve water quality at the MWC Water Treatment Facility
intake by improving water quality in Little Butte Creek.
local collaboration
The WISE project is a collaboration of virtually all parties in the
Bear Creek and Little Butte subbasins with an interest in water
resources management. As a follow up to the IPOD Congressional letter
of support, a Memorandum of Support was circulated for signature. Over
25 agencies and groups signed on in support of the WISE project. These
groups include the Farm Bureau, cities throughout the valley, the
irrigation districts, Oregon Water Trust, Headwaters, and the Sierra
Club, to name a few. Irrigators, environmentalists and municipalities
all stand to benefit from the WISE project, and are active
participants. The IPOD Steering Committee members also signed a
Memorandum of Understanding and formed the WISE Project Advisory
Committee (PAC). Even with this local support, though, there is a need
for Reclamation authorization to oversee the project. The following are
the WISE PAC members: City of Medford; Medford Water Commission; Talent
Irrigation District; Medford Irrigation District; Rogue River Valley
Irrigation District Jackson County Farm Bureau; Jackson Soil & Water
Conservation District Bear Creek Watershed Council; Little Butte Creek
Watershed Council Bear Creek Corporation; Oregon Water Trust;
WaterWatch; Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board; Oregon Water Resources
Department; Rogue Basin Coordinating Council; Rogue Valley Council of
Governments; Bureau of Reclamation; Rogue Valley Sewer Services;
Jackson County.
reclamation/medford moa
To address impending water supply and regulatory issues, the WISE
project proposes to modify and supplement the Talent Project system to
improve stream flows and water quality, improve irrigation system
efficiencies, and utilize reclaimed effluent from the RWRF as an
additional irrigation water source. Due to the complexity of the
project and history of Reclamation involvement in the Talent Project,
Reclamation needs to be authorized to act as lead agency at the very
beginning of the WISE project, during preparation of the FS/EIS.
On July 2, 2004, Reclamation and the City of Medford entered into a
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), which defined the roles and
responsibilities of each agency in the development and preparation of
the FS/EIS for the WISE Project. Reclamation's role will be to provide
technical review of the FS/EIS process, and assure that NEPA compliance
is achieved. Medford, with Reclamation input on the selection process,
is responsible for hiring a consultant to prepare the FS/EIS in
accordance with Reclamation oversight and technical review.
funding for wise fs/eis
It is estimated that the cost for the City of Medford to hire a
consultant to prepare the WISE FS/EIS will be $2.8 million. Reclamation
has estimated that the cost to act as lead agency and provide technical
oversight will not exceed $500,000. Per the MOA, Medford is responsible
for securing the funds necessary to hire the FS/EIS consultant. S. 251
includes a provision authorizing the appropriation of $500,000 for
Reclamation to act as lead agency and provide the necessary technical
oversight.
Medford has already secured funding to hire a consultant for the
first phase of the FS/EIS. The preliminary scoping work has been done,
and we are now at a point where your committee's approval of S. 251
authorizing Reclamation to act as lead agency for the WISE FS/EIS and
appropriating $500,000 to fund Reclamation's participation is critical,
so that we can file the Notice of Intent and start the technical
alternatives analyses.
Thank you once again for the opportunity to submit testimony on
this matter that is so important to the citizens of the Little Butte
Creek and Bear Creek Basins of Oregon, and to those around us that may
well be positively impacted by the efforts of the WISE Project. We are
available at any time if you, your staff or committee members would
like further information.
Senator Johnson. Mr. Chairman?
Senator Smith. Yes.
Senator Johnson. I regret that I am going to have to excuse
myself. I do, however, have a series of questions that, with
your consent, I would submit into the record to be directed
toward the panel members of the two panels that were here
today.
Senator Smith. Thank you. We will certainly include those
in the record. And thank you, Senator, for being here.
We are also joined by Senator Salazar of Colorado. Welcome.
Senator Salazar. Thank you, Senator Smith.
Senator Smith. Do you have an opening statement or anything
you want to say at this time?
Senator Salazar. I do, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would
only say that I am very interested in general in the water
issues that you are working on, and the legislation that you
are discussing today. And I recognize, like my colleagues on
this committee, the great importance of water, especially in
the western states; and so I very much look forward to working
with you.
And I wanted to stop by, Mr. Chairman, because this was our
first meeting of this subcommittee.
Senator Smith. Thank you very much, Senator. Colorado is
not unlike a lot of places in eastern Oregon, same sorts of
water issues, so on.
Senator Salazar. Did you hear about that pipeline we are
trying to build from Oregon to Colorado?
Senator Smith. Yes, I heard about that. I heard about that.
No, just kidding.
[Laughter.]
Senator Smith. It is interesting. What is the cubic feet of
the water in the Colorado? A good year is 75 million, 100
million; and I think the Columbia River is 300 million, so it
is--we have got water up there but it needs to stay there.
Senator Salazar. You have got a lot more water in Oregon
than we do in the Colorado River Basin. That is for sure.
Senator Smith. Tod, are you related to the Heislers of
Hepner?
Mr. Heisler. No.
Senator Smith. Okay. All right. Well, we are glad to have
you here anyway.
Mr. Heisler. Thank you very much.
[Laughter.]
Senator Smith. Annie Heisler was on the Pendleton Round-Up
court with my daughter.
Mr. Heisler. Yes.
Senator Smith. And it is a great family in that part of the
world.
Mr. Heisler. I have a sister named Annie, but it is not the
same one.
Senator Smith. She was not on the Roundup Court, then.
Mr. Heisler. No, she was not.
Senator Smith. Tod, the mike is yours.
STATEMENT OF TOD HEISLER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, DESCHUTES RIVER
CONSERVANCY, BEND, OR
Mr. Heisler. All right. Well, thank you very much, Senator
Smith. I appreciate your support and Senator Wyden's support
for S. 166 and for giving me the opportunity to testify about
the critical need to re-authorize the Deschutes River
Conservancy.
There are only two changes from the 2000 authorization that
we are seeking. The new bill extends for 10 years but does not
increase the $10 million of Federal funding and modifies the
quorum requirement.
The Deschutes River Conservancy uses a balanced approach
and seeks to satisfy all of the critical needs for water in the
basin, whether they are farmers, for tribes, growing cities, or
the streams.
The DRC is pioneering a proactive, collaborative approach
intended to avoid conflict and litigation and increase water
supply in the most cost-effective manner possible. So, the
Deschutes River Conservancy, we believe, is a clear alternative
to the Klamath Basin-style conflicts south of us.
The Federal investment from all agencies in the Klamath
Basin will exceed $100 million in this fiscal year. By the time
it is over, the Klamath could consume over $1 billion of
Federal funding.
The Deschutes is one basin to the north of the Klamath and
we know that all of the conditions that created conflict in the
Klamath are also present in the Deschutes. Those conditions are
over-appropriated streams, causing long stretches of them to
run nearly dry in the summer, poor water quality, a number of
stretches listed in the 303(d) list under the Clean Water Act.
We have an endangered species, the bull trout. And with the re-
licensing of the Round Butte Complex, the hydroelectric complex
in the middle of the basin, we are going to see some more
listed species up in the upper basin for the first time in 50
years; that would be Chinook salmon and steelhead.
So of course, we also have farmers who are trying to make a
living on the land and struggling doing that in central Oregon
these days. And we have the fastest growing cities in Oregon;
and I have been told some of the fastest growing cities in the
nation.
So, these are all the ingredients for conflict in a big
way. So we think that the question is not whether an adjustment
will be needed in the Deschutes but rather when it will be made
and how much it will cost. And so the more delay, the more
there is potential for conflict. And when conflict and
litigation emerge, we all know the price to fix the problem
skyrockets.
So, a relatively modest investment now cannot meet the need
for a much larger investment in the future. So, how does the
DRC avoid conflict and produce cost-effective solutions?
Well, it starts with its basic structure. We were created
as a 501(c)(3) organization to bring all of the competing
interests for water together in one body. We represent private
interests and public interests; ranching, timber, tourism,
development, environment, Federal, State, and local agencies.
We also focus on the win-win solutions. We made steady
progress--is being made. And we have restored over 100 cfs of
stream flow, while firming up water supplies to farmers.
One of the primary ways to do that is through conservation
projects. Those irrigation canals on average lose 50 percent
transmission loss due to seepage. So, you put the water in a
pipe and you have 100 percent gain. You double the water supply
available for all of these competing uses. We have transferred
permanently, in stream, 20 cubic feet per second from--of
conserved water from those kinds of projects already.
We also focus not just on water infrastructure but on water
marketing. We have an annual water leasing program that has put
80 cubic feet per second in the Deschutes River while
protecting farmers' water rights from forfeiture.
We have financed these projects from a great diversity of
sources. We are not too reliant on the funding that we receive
from Reclamation. For every dollar of Reclamation investment,
the DRC has obtained three dollars of matching support.
We have been in business now for about 9 years and we are
really poised to scale this up to a level at which it can
really make a difference and have the impact that is needed in
order to avoid the Klamath.
We have got a project in design right now with Morris Unit
Irrigation District. That single project will return 20 cfs to
the stream. It would improve water reliability to that
irrigation district. And it would save them over $200,000 a
year in power.
So, we want to scale up with the conservation, the water
banking, and marketing. We believe this is the way to solve the
problem.
So, Secretary Norton came to town, to Bend, just 8 months
ago to tout our successful effort. And I would like to conclude
with a quote from her article in that summer on the drought
water in the West.
She said, ``The DRC has leveraged Federal funds with other
cost-share dollars to complete a number of important ecosystem
restoration projects and set up the Deschutes water bank.''
She concludes by saying, ``In the final analysis, long-
lasting solutions to chronic water shortages will come from the
people who are most effected. The difficult work of preventing
conflict must be addressed by local communities in long-range
collaborative efforts that focus Federal, State, and local
resources on conservation and alternative water supplies; and
by assuring that the projects are locally driven practical
solutions.''
The Secretary's words describe precisely what the Deschutes
River Conservancy is. Our collaborative approach will be more
cost-effective than an adversarial approach. We have the
ability to match Reclamation investment three-to-one. Our role
in the basin is fundamental. We have catalyst, convener,
facilitator of the diverse stakeholders. Our leadership and
technical expertise is critical to the success at the local
level.
So, we strongly urge you to re-authorize and find
appropriations for the Deschutes River Conservancy and to keep
water management in the Deschutes Basin on a positive track for
years to come. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Heisler follows:]
Prepared Statement of Tod Heisler, Executive Director,
Deschutes River Conservancy
summary
Reauthorization of the Deschutes River Conservancy (DRC) is
critical to the development of fair and rational water allocation to
tribes, cities, farmers, and the streams in the Deschutes River Basin.
The DRC's proactive, collaborative approach to water management will
assure that the pervasive conflicts experienced in the Klamath Basin
can be avoided in the Deschutes Basin. This year, the federal
government will spend $100 million in an effort to resolve conflicts
over water in the Klamath Basin. The DRC requests reauthorization for
$2 million per year on a matching basis through 2016. This modest
investment will be matched by at least four-to-one from non-federal
sources, and will assure that cooperative, market-based approaches can
guide sustainable water management in the Deschutes Basin for years to
come.
the drc success story
The Deschutes River Conservancy (DRC), is a non-profit, private
corporation established in Oregon in 1996. In September 1996, Congress
enacted and the President signed Public Law 104-208, which included
S.1662, the Oregon Resources Conservation Act establishing the DRC
(then known as the Deschutes Basin Working Group under Section 301(h)
(Division B, Title III)). In 2000 Congress reauthorized the DRC through
P.L. 106-270, the Deschutes Resources Conservancy Reauthorization Act
of 2000 which authorized $2.0 million per year on a matching basis
through FY06.
The DRC was created to bring together all of the key stakeholders--
farmers, tribes, irrigation districts, cities, private business, public
agencies and environmental organizations--to proactively devise
solutions that work for the river and for all parties. The DRC's
mission is to restore streamflow and improve water quality in the
Deschutes River Basin. Rather than relying on regulation, the DRC has
successfully employed voluntary, market-based programs to restore over
90 cfs of streamflow in the Deschutes Basin. Furthermore, by planting
more than 100,000 trees, installing 40 miles of riparian fencing,
removing berms and reconstructing stream beds, and many other
restoration activities, the DRC has improved the habitat and water
quality along 100 miles of the Deschutes River and its tributaries. In
eight short years an enormous amount has been accomplished, but there
is much more to do.
the challenge
Long stretches of the Deschutes River and its tributaries still
suffer from poor streamflow and water quality. Much of the river fails
to meet water quality standards set by the Clean Water Act and Oregon's
Department of Environmental Quality. These conditions present
significant threats to the fish and wildlife and are the potential
basis for legal challenges under the Clean Water Act and Endangered
Species Act. These potential legal challenges are imminent due to the
recent relicensing of the Pelton Round Butte Hydroelectric Project that
will provide for fish passage of listed species (steelhead and Chinook
salmon) to the Upper Deschutes Basin for the first time in over fifty
years.
The Deschutes is urgently trying to avoid becoming another area of
Klamath-like conflict, but that possibility still exists. In the
Klamath River Basin, intense conflict over water has financially
crippled many farmers and killed tens of thousands of fish. The DRC is
facilitating win-win solutions among irrigators, cities, and tribes to
resolve conflict while it is still possible to do so.
the drc's pivotal role
The DRC has played a critical catalytic role in galvanizing the
many and diverse constituencies in the basin around the view that
restoration of the Deschutes River Basin serves everyone's interests.
The current political, social and economic conditions create superb
opportunities to achieve lasting results for the Deschutes Basin.
In August 2004, Secretary of Interior, Gail Norton, visited Bend to
tout Interior's new program, Water 2025--Preventing Crisis and Conflict
in the West, and to highlight the innovative nature of a recent grant
to the Deschutes Water Alliance. This alliance between the DRC, five
Central Oregon cities, seven irrigation districts, and the Confederated
Tribes of Warm Springs holds great promise to design and implement a
water bank and conduct conservation projects that can more efficiently
allocate water to all competing uses--the streams, the cities,
recreation, and irrigated agriculture.
Reauthorization for the DRC is critical. The DRC has built the
staff expertise and experience in water conservation and marketing that
is essential for the success of the water bank and the Deschutes Water
Alliance. Reauthorization will allow the DRC and its partners to
capitalize on the current set of opportunities while the conditions are
ripe. Without the DRC's leadership and technical expertise the Alliance
would be significantly handicapped. Beyond its technical expertise in
water rights, transfers and conserved water, the DRC has the knowledge
and experience to raise significant non-federal capital from a variety
of sources to finance its water initiatives.
Over six years the DRC obtained $3.60 of matching support for every
$1.00 of BOR federal funds invested
water conservation and water banking initiatives
The importance of the DRC reauthorization lies in the huge ground
breaking opportunities for major water conservation and water banking
initiatives in the Deschutes Basin. These are the precise opportunities
that the DRC was created to develop. The current funding to the
Deschutes Water Affiance from Interior's Water 2025 program finances
significant data gathering and analysis. The studies are assessing
water allocation optimization alternatives using water conservation,
water banking and water storage. The studies and the pilot water bank
will enable the Deschutes Water Alliance to develop a cost effective,
politically palatable water management master plan that addresses all
of the significant needs for water in the Deschutes Basin.
Subsequently, the DRC and its partners will pursue major water
conservation and water banking projects.
drc reauthorization legislation needs
1. Term: 10 years
2. Amount: $2 million
3. Modify quorum to be eight directors for conducting all business
4. Schedule: The DRC needs to be reauthorized no later than
September 30, 2005.
Only two changes are requested from the 2000 authorization of the
DRC: 1) term increases from five to ten years and 2) quorum is fixed at
eight directors for all kinds of business. The DRC is deeply involved
and has played an important catalytic role in a long term effort that
that is likely to fail without the DRC. The problems are resolvable in
ten to twenty years and another ten years of federal authorization is
critical to success.
Senator Smith. Tod, I guess given the Secretary's words,
you would probably say the DRC is helping to solve the issues
Reclamation is charged with solving?
Mr. Heisler. Correct.
Senator Smith. So, I would probably recommend we find some
money.
Mr. Heisler. Thank you.
Senator Smith. Jim Hill, under the current MOA, which is
referenced in S. 251, what percentage of the feasibility study
costs will be borne by the city of Medford?
Mr. Hill. The city is going to be--is responsible for
seeking funds. We will be searching for a variety of sources of
funds to pay for that $2.8 million.
Right now, we have gotten a $900,000 EPA grant that is
funding the first phase of it. And we will be working with
Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board and with local funding
through the city and other agencies, as well as looking for
more Federal funds to support that; the remainder of the cost
of the feasibility study.
Senator Smith. Wayne, your projects, what kind of bearing
do they have on treaties with Mexico, and do they help us
comply with those treaties?
Mr. Halbert. The problem with the treaties in Mexico is
Mexico has a treaty to deliver so much water to the Rio Grande
on an annual basis. But Mexico has developed a need for that
water that far extends their ability to meet the terms of the
treaty. So, they are not abiding by the treaty and have not for
the last 10 or 15 years, except accidental. And by accidental,
I mean when nature--when Mother Nature gives them enough water
that they cannot capture it all, then we get some of that water
and that water is water that goes in favor of Mexico for the
treaty issue.
The problem that this has created for us in the United
States is that we were dependent on about--a little over
400,000 acre- feet of water a year from Mexico that we are
not--we are no longer getting. And so, these water conservation
projects are important for us to make up that difference.
We are having--in other words, we are having to come from
behind to find ways to satisfy the needs the needs of our
agricultural interests along the Rio Grande, as well as our
municipal and urban needs, also. And the only way we can do it
is--since agriculture is--uses 85 percent of the water, the
only way we can do it is through agricultural water
conservation projects.
Senator Smith. The administration has testified that,
unlike the previous authorization for the lower Rio Grande
Valley, S. 519 shifts the focus from the project's scope to the
project's cost. And do you agree with the Bureau of
Reclamation's characterization of that? And if so, do you think
such a shift in costs is appropriate?
Mr. Halbert. Well, a part of the problem that we were
trying to solve there was that the--when the projects would
occur, when we would actually do the projects--I will try to
explain it by giving you an example of what happened in our
district. We were putting in several miles of pipeline within
our district, putting canals underground in a pipeline. It did
not seem to make any difference to the Bureau that we put in--
if we had two miles of pipeline to construct, it did not make
any difference to the Bureau if that cost us a million dollars
more than it was supposed to cost us. We just could not go two
miles and two feet.
And yet when we got out there in doing the project, we
might could go two miles and another quarter of a mile for less
money but that was not satisfactory with the Bureau. And so, it
was creating all kinds of problems with us being able to comply
with what the Bureau was wanting to do.
There was also some other issues with that, in that we
wanted to spread the amount of money that might be appropriated
over several of the districts so that the districts could do
some of their projects and all of the money not go to one
project. And that was a part of the other issue.
Those two issues were--we tried to address in this
legislation, in the changes in this legislation.
Senator Smith. Would it not have, in effect, then be a
preauthorization of projects if this legislation passes?
Mr. Halbert. I am not sure that I understand the question.
Senator Smith. Well, by this cost shift, the question is if
you are going to start at all, you are going to essentially
pre-approve the entire project and not just components of it?
Mr. Halbert. Right. Well, the studies to do the projects
are still required and complete. It is just that when you
actually do the projects, sometimes even under the best of
study conditions, it is--it does not actually happen on the
field exactly like it does on paper.
Senator Smith. Okay. Ernie, you are off the hook. I do not
have any questions for you.
Mr. Schank. Okay.
Senator Smith. So thank you all again, and we appreciate
your willingness to come this far to participate in this public
record. And we look forward to moving on all of these bills.
With that, we are adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:52 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIX
Responses to Additional Questions
----------
Deschutes River Conservancy,
Bend, OR, May 9, 2005.
Hon. Lisa Murkowski,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Water and Power, Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Ms. Murkowski: Thank you for giving me the opportunity to
testify before your Subcommittee on April 19th in support of S. 166--
The Deschutes River Conservancy Reauthorization Act.
Enclosed, please find responses to the questions you posed in your
April 27th letter.
If you have any further questions, I would be happy to submit
responses to them as well.
Sincerely,
Tod Heisler,
Executive Director.
[Enclosures.]
Questions From Senators Murkowski and Johnson
Question 1. Please describe the DRC's Water Conservation and Water
Banking Initiative.
Answer.
the water acquisition program
Water acquisitions undertaken by the DRC since 1998 total 100 cfs
of restored streamflow in the Deschutes Basin. The DRC acquires water
for instream flow restoration in three ways:
1. Agricultural Water Conservation projects.
2. Water Banking: Leasing natural flow, storage and conserved water
from water rightholders.
3. Transfers: Acquiring water rights or undertaking source switches
(i.e. substituting groundwater for surface water rights).
The DRC's water banking activities also include the State-chartered
Groundwater Mitigation Bank that the DRC runs as part of its leasing
program.
conservation
Irrigation canals in the upper Deschutes Basin have, in most cases,
been excavated into permeable lava flows which dominate the high plains
geology of Central Oregon. Unlined canals and laterals leak large
quantities of water into the ground, requiring large diversions from
the Deschutes River to deliver irrigation water to the places of use.
While the percentages vary from district to district, the overall range
of losses falls within 40-55%. Piping and lining of canals and
laterals, as well as on-farm water use efficiency projects save water
that otherwise seeps into the ground. Oregon's Conserved Water Program
allows this saved water to be protected instream or certificated as new
water rights for use on land. Instream water rights from saved water
can be protected in the 30 mile reach between Bend and Lake Billy
Chinook, making an important contribution to restoration of depleted
flows in the Middle Deschutes River.
Conservation Projects
Conservation projects are typically implemented as a cost-share
between an irrigation district and restoration funders like the DRC.
The DRC uses its federal, state, and hydro power mitigation funds to
finance the capital costs of conservation projects (pipe and
materials), and the irrigation districts usually fund installation and
contractors. The resulting saved water is allocated based on the
proportionate shares of financing by the district and the DRC. The
restoration share of the water is protected permanently instream
through a new instream water right. The district's water is `banked' by
leasing it instream until such time as it is either placed on land
(within the district or in another
district) purchased for permanent instream protection, or provided
for municipal uses through the state's Groundwater Mitigation Program.
In districts that are water short (in particular Tumalo and Three
Sisters Irrigation Districts) the district uses its portion of the
saved water to firm up delivery to its existing patrons (rather than
banking the water and providing water to new uses).
Accomplishments
The DRC has contributed $1.4 million of federal funds to 7
conservation projects with a total investment of $6.8 million (as shown
below). Water conserved for instream use from these projects is 24 cfs
(8,400 AF). The DRC is currently working with irrigation districts on
second generation projects which will include both an annual revolving
conservation fund for piping laterals and carrying out on-farm
projects, as well as developing large piping and lining projects for
district main canals.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Length Total Total Conserved
Piped Water Water Other
Project Irrigation District ----------- Saved ---------------------- Total Cost Sponsor DRC Cost Restoration
----------- Cost Cost
(miles) (ac-ft) (cfs) (ac-ft)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NUID 51-4.......................... North Unit............ 4.89 1,022 1.51 421 425,400 223,900 89,500 112,000
Alfalfa............................ Central Oregon........ 1.91 1,003 3.09 1,003 121,287 62,363 58,924 --
Thompson Ditch..................... Three Sisters......... 1.03 887 2.09 887 131,578 45,978 59,800 25,800
Bend Feed Canal.................... Tumalo................ 1.40 7,251 13.62 4,447 4,842,594 2,811,471 821,123 1,210,000
Cloverdale......................... Three Sisters......... 3.09 1,189 2.00 849 660,000 400,000 160,000 100,000
Lost & Boulder..................... Lost & Boulder........ 10.44 327 0.40 170 106,696 47,111 49,085 10,500
Fryrear............................ Three Sisters......... 3.40 1,273 1.50 637 541,983 271,000 125,000 145,983
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL.................................................. 16.17 12,951 24.21 8,413 6,829,538 3,861,823 1,363,432 1,604,283
====================================================================================================================
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
water banking
Broadly defined, water banking is the temporary exchange of
surface, groundwater, and storage water rights from one use to another
by an intermediary.
Leasing
The DRC's leasing program is a voluntary, market-based program that
temporarily restores streamflow to the Deschutes River and its
tributaries while meeting the needs of local irrigators. Oregon water
law requires that farmers maintain the validity of their water right by
using it `beneficially' once every five years and leasing water
instream constitutes beneficial use under Oregon State law. The leasing
program also educates landowners on options for their water and
provides an introduction to permanent instream transfers. Leasing is
also beneficial to local cities and other groundwater users because the
surface water right can be exchanged for the right to use groundwater.
Formally established in 1998, the program has grown from a small
donation based campaign to an eight-district, paid program comprising
the largest portion of protected water in the Deschutes River. In 2004,
the program was responsible for more than doubling the average summer
flow in the Middle Deschutes, contributing 50 cubic feet per second
(cfs) instream. In addition, the program contributed 5.30 cfs of
protected water to Squaw Creek, 6.60 cfs to Tumalo Creek and 11.4 cfs
in the Crooked River. In total, more than 24,000 acre-feet have been
leased through the program in 2004 (Fig 1).*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* All figures have been retained in subcommittee records.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Approximately 174 landowners are currently participating in the
program, up from 108 in 2003. The increase in water leased was
accompanied by an increase in landowner participation from nearly all
districts.
In the early years of the program all leases were donated. However,
in 2001 the DRC established its current fixed price of $7/acre-foot and
nearly twice the acre-feet were leased (Fig 1). The DRC has also tested
a reverse auction methodology to increase participation in the Ochoco
Irrigation District in 2003 and 2004. Landowners submitted sealed bids
for amounts of water they were willing to lease at a given price.
Ultimately the DRC accepted bids up to its reserve price, ultimately
leasing 196.9 acres instream in 2003 and 642 acres instream in 2004.
Alliance Water Bank
The DRC is a partner in the Deschutes Water Alliance's Water Bank,
which will serve as a parking place for surplus agricultural water.
This water will be held by various accountholders including irrigation
districts, cities, tribes and conservation groups like the DRC. Water
will be deposited in the bank through a variety of mechanisms,
including conserved water projects, piping, and urbanizing acreage.
Through reverse price auctions, fixed price agreements and bilateral
negotiations the water will be traded between the designated
accountholders. Trading opportunities will be subject to reserve
requirements set by the Bank in conjunction with accountholders, in
order to ensure that adequate water right supplies are maintained for
current uses before permanent transactions take place.
The program is process-based and ensures that irrigation
districts--the primary suppliers of water--will move at a rate that is
comfortable with their members and board. For example, to `bank' water,
the DRC quitclaims the water, acquiring ownership. Depending on the
district, the DRC might lease the water instream for one or more years,
and then later negotiate the exit price for the water. Once the exit
fee is paid, the water rights are moved into the transfer process. In
2004, the DRC completed its first cycle of quitclaim, lease and
transfer by moving 31 acres of district water, its first `banked'
water, into the transfer process. The Alliance partnership is likely to
ensure an orderly and planned process for future banking transactions.
transfers
The Transfers Program is focused on permanent transfers of water
rights to create new, senior instream water right certificates or by
moving diversions downstream. In the Deschutes, transfers can also be
used to create new groundwater rights through the State's Groundwater
Mitigation Program. These projects can be donations (the DRC is a
501(c)3 non profit) or based on market prices for water. With rapid
urbanization, demographic and land use change ongoing in the basin,
there are many opportunities to acquire surplus agricultural rights.
There is a limited track record of these transactions in the basin as
they face many issues and hurdles. The DRC has participated in the
first instream transfers of rights in the Squaw Creek, Middle Deschutes
and Lower Crooked reaches, in a number of cases as an agent for clients
involved in groundwater mitigation transactions.
Question 2. How was the DRC able to bring together and work
collaboratively with so many diverse interests?
Answer. The origins of the DRC derive from the process of water
rights adjudication undertaken by the Confederated Tribes of Warm
Springs in the 1980s. At that time, the Tribes recognized that by
exercising the full water rights entitled to them by treaty, they would
cause enormous conflict and do more harm than good to themselves. They
also realized that the issues they cared about most--water quality and
fisheries--were larger than the reservation and could only be
effectively managed at a basin-wide scale. Thus, in cooperation with
Environmental Defense and Central Oregon Irrigation District they
established the Deschutes Basin Working Group, an informal body
convened to discuss cooperative ways to improve water quality, and
restore streamflows and fisheries in the Deschutes.
This cooperative approach of the Deschutes Basin Working Group
evolved over the next decade, and in 1996 the organization became a
501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation and received Federal authorization
under the Oregon Resource Conservation Act. Thus, the original values
instilled in the Deschutes River Conservancy were those of proactive
collaboration.
In addition to original values, the DRC has been able to bring
together and work collaboratively with so many diverse interests
because of the presence of strong incentives to work together toward
common aims. These incentives are as follows:
Common Purpose: All constituencies whether they be farmers,
developers, sportsmen, environmentalists or government agencies share
fundamental values about the importance of protecting Oregon's natural
heritage. They may differ on the means to protect it but they all share
this fundamental value. This enabled the DRC to formulate and reach
consensus on a mission to restore streamflow and improve water quality.
Regulation: The existence of the Endangered Species Act and the
Clean Water Act create strong incentives for diverse groups to work
together. They become powerfully motivated to avoid the regulatory
hammer. When the DRC began ten years ago, there were no listed species
in the basin. The farmers and ranchers knew that species would likely
be listed in the future and that they had time to be proactive to avoid
regulation. Today one species, bull trout is listed and two other
listed species, steelhead and Chinook salmon will be reintroduced above
the Pelton dams in the near future. This has created new urgency to
accelerate the collaboration.
Win-win solutions: The key to holding this diverse group together
has been the DRC's ability to craft win-win solutions and this is the
strongest incentive of all. When people know that to solve one problem
they don't have to create a problem for someone else they are motivated
to advance that solution. The DRC has developed a number of powerful
win-win solutions.
Irrigation canal lining and piping. With transmission losses
of around 50%, piping canals can double the water supply,
firming up supplies to farmers and restoring streamflow at the
same time.
Water rights leasing. By leasing their water rights
instream, farmers can restore streamflow and protect their
water rights from forfeiture.
Water rights transfers. By employing the DRC method of
transferring water rights instream, the stream benefits, the
landowner is compensated, and the irrigation district is able
to maintain financial solvency.
In summary, the keys to achieving effective collaboration among
diverse groups are 1) to unify them around a common purpose (Oregon
natural heritage), 2) galvanize action by creating urgency (impending
regulatory or legal action) and 3) give the group solid opportunities
to solve the problem in a manner that does not harm others (win-win
solutions).
Question 3. Would the DRC be able to continue without the Bureau of
Reclamation's participation?
Answer. The simple answer to this question is no. Managing water
resources for growing cities, the needs of fish and wildlife, and
farmers can not be accomplished without the participation of the Bureau
of Reclamation.
In Central Oregon, two major Reclamation projects serve the needs
of North Unit and Ochoco Irrigation Districts. North Unit and Ochoco
Irrigation Districts divert water from the Crooked River which, as a
result, suffers from low streamflow and poor water quality. Before the
Pelton Round Butte Hydroelectric project was built in the 1960s, the
Crooked River and its major tributaries were significant spawning
grounds and habitat for steelhead and salmon. With the imminent
relicensing of the dams at Pelton Round Butte, these listed species
will be present in the Crooked River once again. Significant
improvements to streamflow and water quality will be necessary to avoid
legal conflict under the Endangered Species Act and Clean Water Act.
In addition, the city of Prineville is on a trajectory for high
population growth. Its neighbor, Redmond, is the fastest growing city
in Oregon. As urban growth occurs a new demand for water will come with
it. This sets up a potential three-way competition for water between
the irrigators, the city, and the endangered species.
It is not possible to resolve this situation without the full
participation of the Bureau of Reclamation and Congress. Successful
outcomes cannot be achieved without Reclamation's technical and
financial support. The management of Prineville and Wickiup reservoirs
must be optimized and releases from them should serve the needs of
cities and streams as well as irrigators. In addition, the water
conveyance infrastructure should be lined or piped to achieve enormous
water savings. Numerous legal, technical and financial hurdles still
prevent progress from being made in these critical areas and the Bureau
of Reclamation must be a part of the solution.
No one expects, however, that the Federal government should foot
the entire bill. The Deschutes River Conservancy, Central Oregon cities
and irrigation districts and the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs
are working together to secure a diverse array of financial resources
including State funding, Hydroelectric mitigation funding, investment
by cities, and private investment by individuals and foundations. We
expect that Federal investment including both Reclamation and USDA
needs to amount to approximately 23%-33% of the total investment if we
are to have any chance to achieve the proactive collaborative solution.
Question 4. Explain the rationale for a quorum of eight directors?
Answer. Currently, the Deschutes River Conservancy board operates
under a two-quorum system--a quorum of eight directors for all business
except for approving projects and a majority quorum (50% plus one) to
approve projects.
When the organization was founded, the majority quorum requirement
seemed to make sense in order to build trust among the diverse
stakeholders on the board. Now, the organization has a long track
record of excellent collaboration among its directors and the majority
quorum is more of a hindrance than a help.
The DRC board is comprised of top civic and business leaders in
Central Oregon including the Forest Supervisor of the Deschutes
National Forest, the mayor of Madras, the Chairman of Brooks Resources
(largest real estate development company in Central Oregon), the
President of Ochoco Lumber, and two prominent ranchers. These prominent
individuals lead very busy lives, making it difficult for them to
attend all of the DRC's board meetings. From a nineteen member board,
we usually get eight or nine directors to attend meeting, but often
find it difficult to secure the tenth director for project votes.
We do not believe that it would benefit the organization to reduce
the stature of the board's membership simply to have directors that are
more readily available. We think it is critical to maintain prominent
individuals on the board and think that reducing the quorum requirement
is a reasonable course of action after nine years of successful
collaboration.
By reducing the quorum to eight, we can more easily conduct
business and make the quorum requirement uniform for all decision-
making, thereby eliminating the awkward two-quorum system under which
we currently operate.