Ranchers, DOE officials meet over livestock stream pollution letters

Farmers and livestock producers packed the Public Service Building auditorium Dec. 12 to listen and respond to state Department of Ecology assessment letters on the potential of livestock to pollute watersheds.

DOE officials were invited to the meeting by the Whitman Conservation District.

Ray Ledgerwood, program coordinator for the state Conservation Commission, began the meeting saying that the discussion was about the watershed assessments done earlier this year and laid the ground rules for the afternoon.

“Yes, there’s some issues to be talked about, but there will be no personal attacks,” he said.

Four DOE officials who attended the meeting were Chad Atkins, Mike Kuttel, Ben Rowe from Lacey and Jim Belatti, head of the agency’s eastern region at Spokane.

“We have tremendous respect for the agriculture industry, but we have a job to do,” Atkins said. “We have a goal of clean water.”

Atkins also said the agency is a strong believer in the Whitman Conservation District model and emphasized that there’s a lot of financial and technical assistance available.

“We’re constantly trying to improve our process,” Atkins said. “We want to hear ideas and thoughts.”

The DOE presentation began shortly after 3 p.m. and lasted for close to 45 minutes, leaving about an hour for public comment.

In Eastern Washington, the DOE has worked in Asotin, Adams, Columbia, Garfield, Lincoln and Whitman counties and worked with more than 100 producers.

Rowe said the agency addresses signs of ongoing pollution sources. He also said that the continued emphasis is on working with conservation districts.

Kuttel said they worked within 11 watersheds and eight conservation districts which all have streams that have water pollution issues.

He said they identified 270 sites with 111 of them in Whitman County. That included 56 in the Whitman Conservation District.

“We never entered private property (when doing assessments),” Kuttel said.

They reported they sent 52 letters about the assessments and noncompliance.

“Compliance with state water law is now voluntary, but we will issue fines and penalties when it no longer becomes a voluntary matter,” he said.

“We want to work collaboratively,” Atkins said. “We look at this as a dialogue.”

Conservation district board member Jan Turney told the DOE officials she is frustrated.

“We were notified only three days before letters went out,” she said. “There was no collaboration and there wasn’t any work with the CDs. The process sounded great, but that’s not what really happened.”

“We had trouble connecting with Nancy (Hoobler of Whitman Conservation District) and I apologize for that,” said Atkins.

Board member David Lange also voiced his frustration.

“You didn’t meet with the conservation district board,” he said. “The letters went out Aug. 1. From the first of August to mid-September, farmers are in combines all that time. You don’t realize how upsetting those letters were.”

“The assessments were in the spring,” said Walt Riley, conservation district board president. “Producers have more time in March and April.”

“That sounds like a fair criticism,” said Belatti, who then asked Atkins to address the issue.

“One of our goals is to respond in a more timely manner,” Atkins said.

One producer spoke up and said he had received two letters from DOE this year. He said he’d fenced off stream water and received assistance from the conservation district.

“It’s upsetting,” he said. “I’ve spent a lot of money and time for the last couple of years.”

Producers questioned assessment recommendations of certain types of trees along creeks that run through the desert areas in the southern end of the conservation district.

“I know what it should look like, what vegetation is or is not there,” Kuttel said.

Letters were precipitated by DOE photos and visual indicators, he said.

Denise Culbertson wanted to know if DOE was taking other contaminants into consideration.

“What about deer and coyote poop?” she asked. “What are you doing about lakes and streams and people peeing in them?”

Atkins said scientists can’t tell the difference between human waste and critter waste.

“We have no data on critters,” he said. “We address human causes of pollution.”

Local cattle producer Tom Kammerzell asked the DOE officials if there is another state that is so restrictive.

“I’m not an expert in other states, but a lot of work is going on in California,” Atkins said.

Several present mentioned using common sense as DOE recommends rebuilding native plants. Of the 52 sites assessed in the district, 51 mention having woody riparian growth along the streams.

“Big Alkali Creek goes underground and pops up at the neighbors,” said Dennis Moore of Hay.

Atkins said he hopes DOE can evaluate conditions once or twice a year. He also encouraged producers to do their own tests and take their own photos to share with DOE.

DOE officials tentatively agreed to hold another meeting with the conservation district, possibly in February.