Homework 7 pt. 2 - Evaluating Elements of theYakima River Basin .docx

Homework 7 pt. 2 -
Evaluating Elements of theYakima River Basin Integrated Water
Resource Management Plan
Priest Rapids Dam
Figure 1. From Kent, C (2004). Water Resource Planning in the
Yakima River Basin: Development vs. Sustainability.
irrigation
Figure 2. From
http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2006/5205/figure25.html
Seasonal Irrigation Demand in the Columbia Basin – Historical
and Projected
Figure 3. Normandeau Associates (2014). Technical Review:
Yakima River Basin Study Proposed Integrated Water Resource
Management Plan.
Yakima River Basin Agriculture Stats
· Produces more than $1.8 billion/yr in crops.
· $1.4 billion/yr in food processing sales.
· Supports more than 5,700 jobs.
· Most crops are irrigated.
· Demand for irrigation water by existing users significantly
exceeds supply in dry and drought years.
· Water rights in the basin are fully appropriated.
· In a typical year, five reservoirs and stream runoff provide
agriculture with 2.7 million acre-feet of water.
· In a typical year at mid-21st century, the amount is forecast to
fall an average of 20 to 40 percent.
· The expected losses to agriculture along in the Yakima Valley
over the next several decades will be “between $92 million at 2°
C warming and $163 million a year at 4° C,” or up to nearly a
quarter of total current crop value. (http://ybsa.org/climate-

change/ )
YRBIWRMP Role Play Part 1 - Stakeholder Groups Conference
· What are the primary concerns of your stakeholder group with
regard to upcoming water resource changes and challenges? (5
min)
· What worries you?
· What will constrain the possibilities for what you hold dear?
· What are the primary interests/goals of your stakeholder
group? (5 min)
· What do you want to fight for?
· What are your primary values?
YRBIWRMP Role Play Part 2 – Gauging Support for Specific
Plan Proposals
We’ll take them on one by one. Follow the steps below as you
work through each decision:
· Articulate your stakeholder perspective on each plan to your
group. Be persuasive and give everyone a chance to speak their
piece. The Government Representative should serve as the
moderator to keep everyone on task and ensure that all
stakeholders provide input. (10min)
· Respond to the prompts on the submission sheet (page 5).
Everyone will turn in their own submission sheet, so fill out the
blanks as you go. (10min)
· If your group is done wrestling with the decision/plan on the
table, consider the difficulties in coming to consensus. If your
group came to a decision to support or not support, but there
were dissenters to that decision, why did their perspective not
win out? Can you think of some alternative to the plan that
could get all stakeholders on board?
1. Bumping Lake Reservoir Enlargement
· Current storage capacity is 33,700 acre-feet (13% of basin’s
supply)
· The new dam would expand it to 190,000 acre-feet and
inundate 2,700 acres of land
2. Black Rock Reservoir Diversion Project

· The Bureau of Reclamation could divert water from out of the
reservoir behind Priest Rapids dam on the Columbia River and
pump it several miles uphill (1400 foot elevation gain).
· The Black Rock Reservoir would contain 1.3 million acre-feet
of water (423 billion gallons).
· Cost estimates for Black Rock’s pump-pipeline-dam-reservoir-
canal construction > $4 billion
3. Targeted Watershed Protection
· Program to acquire and protect sensitive lands.
· Initially, $10,500,000 from the State of Washington would be
used to secure an agreement for purchase of 46,000 acres in the
Teanaway drainage and ~10,000 acres in the Naches watershed.
· Need up to $135 million altogether.
· This land otherwise is likely to be subdivided and developed
4. Market Reallocation
· Water Rights could be bought, sold, or leased.
· Would allow water transfer between districts.
· Substantial change to existing water law required.
· Currently all or part of a water right is subject to
relinquishment if it is unused.
· The proposed plan would allow one to retain a right without
using the water so that the right can be used by someone else

Evaluating Elements of theYakima River Basin Integrated Water
Resource Management Plan
Submission SheetName _____________________ Stakeholder
Group_________________
1) The primary concerns of my stakeholder group are:
________________________________
_____________________________________________________
________________________
2) The primary interests/goals of my stakeholder group are:
___________________________
_____________________________________________________
_______________________________
Bumping Lake Reservoir Enlargement Proposal
3) My stakeholder perspective on this alternative is:
________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_______________________________
4) The consensus decision of my group was: Support Don’t
Support Couldn’t Come to Consensus
5) Which of the key forms of natural, social, and economic
capital are at risk if the project does go forward?
_____________________________________________________
___________

6) Which of the key forms of natural, social, and economic
capital have the potential to be better sustained if the project
does go forward? ___________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_________________________
7)With regards to questions 5 and 6, what is most important to
your stakeholder? _________
_____________________________________________________
_________________________
8)Are your stakeholder values at odds with your own? If so, in
what ways? _______________
_____________________________________________________
_________________________
Black Rock Reservoir Proposal
________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_______________________________
Targeted Watershed Protection Proposal – Teanaway Purchase
________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_______________________________
3
Homework 7 - Preparation for the Role Play* on Wednesday,
May 29
* Evaluating Elements of the Yakima River Basin Integrated
Water Resource Management Plan
To prepare to take part in the class activity, you need to learn
about the water challenges of the Yakima River Basin and the

Yakima River Basin Integrated Water Resource Management
Plan. To do this, you will have several readings. Some will be
shared by everyone so we have some common understanding,
some will be specific to your stakeholder role.
In any serious effort to promote more sustainable water resource
management, one must engage in a long, interdisciplinary, and
hopefully inclusive process – one that blends science, policy,
politics, values, traditions, etc. The people in the Yakima River
Basin and the Washington State government have long been
aware of the water challenges in the basin and have been
struggling to come to some compromises to preserve water
resources and ecosystems while also accommodating cultural
needs, agricultural productivity, and development potential.
Learning about the Yakima River Basin Integrated Water
Resource Management Plan will provide a window into the kind
of controversies and decisions that must be grappled with in any
region coping with insufficient water to meet demands.
For this assignment, work through the following steps…
Step 1 – Work through the common readings
Step 2 – Do the readings specific to your stakeholder role
Take good notes throughout steps 2 and 3 to help you keep in
mind the most significant water-related challenges in the
Yakima River Basin, potential solutions to them, and your
stakeholder perspectives related to them. To learn more, you
can peruse the articles listed in Other Resources, or dive into
the readings for other stakeholders.
The Common Readings
1) Inslee, J (2013). Yakima River Basin: Water, Jobs and Fish.
2013 Policy Brief. The Office of the Governor, The State of
Washington. http://www.governor.wa.gov/node/9266 or
http://www.usbr.gov/pn/programs/yrbwep/2011integratedplan/2
013meetings/2013-03-13/3policy.pdf. [A nicely concise
overview of the challenges and the proposed actions of the
Plan.]

2) Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project (2010).
Yakima Basin
Solution
s Now and for the Future.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0q5JEGgv-F0 or
http://www.usbr.gov/pn/programs/yrbwep/2010workgroup/index
.html [A 10 minute video that provides an overview of the
water problems in the Yakima River Basin and the Yakima
River Basin Water Enhancement Project (YRBWEP), with the
personal touch. As it was produced by the YRBWEP, it
naturally puts their plan and process to develop it in the best
possible light. Not everyone is such a fan.]
3) Bureau of Reclamation (2012). Executive Summary, in Final
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement on the Yakima
River Basin Integrated Water Resource Management Plan.
http://www.usbr.gov/pn/programs/yrbwep/reports/FPEIS/summa
ry.pdf or pdf in the 5/22 module of the course Canvas site. [The
big graphic just before the table of contents, then pages i-vii]
Stakeholder Specific Readings (citations lacking links are in
Canvas in the Readings for 5/21 Module)
1. Senior Water Rights Holders (Anthony Arutyunov, Katie
Boyd, Michael Case, Danielle Hufana, Binit Khadka, Bob
Lewis, Lauren Mamaghani, Angelica Mendoza, Emily Person)

a) Center for Environmental Law & Policy (n.d.). Kittitas
County: Water Scarcity and Exempt Wells.
http://www.celp.org/archive/kittitas/petition/overview.html
b) Bacon, T (2015). State Buying Up Water Rights in Yakima
River Basin. Spokane Public Radio.
http://spokanepublicradio.org/post/state-buying-water-rights-
yakima-river-basin
c) Washington State Department of Ecology (2013). Water
Rights in Washington.
https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/publications/961804swr
.pdf [As much of the controversy in water allocation in the
Yakima Basin (and elsewhere) revolves around water rights,
this is a FAQ that can help you get a sense of how water rights
are established.]
2. Junior Water Rights Holders (Nora Abdi, Abdullah Alsubhi,
Eugene Joo, Alexa Luna, Duha Mohamed, Michael Ngo, Mevin
Santhosh, Shawn Smith, Clarissa Teodoro)
a) Morrison, S (2013). Letter to the Yakima River Basin Water
Enhancement Project Workgroup on behalf of the Yakima Basin
Storage Alliance.
013meetings/2013-03-13/11ybsa.pdf
b) Columbia Institute for Water Policy (2007). History of Over-
Appropriation in the Yakima River Basin.http://columbia-

institute.org/blackrock/backrock/Overappropriation.html
c) Columbia Institute for Water Policy (2007). The Black Rock
Dam Proposal. http://columbia-
institute.org/blackrock/backrock/Proposed_dam.html
3. Government Representatives (Gerardo Apin, Kayla
Chamberlain, Highland Edelman, Keegan O’Neill, Juan Pena,
Marvin Puna, Melissa Radecke, Anna Strigenz)
a) Malloch, S and Garrity, M (2015). Yakima River Basin
Integrated Plan: Implementing Basin-Scale Water Management
& Climate Adaptation. The Water Report. Pages 1-
8.http://swwrc.wsu.edu/documents/2015/05/thewaterreport135.p
df
b) There are several comment letters from government agencies
in the following report starting on page 522 of the pdf reader
(CR-30): U.S. Department of Interior (2012). Yakima River
Basin Integrated Water Resource Plan Final Programmatic
Environmental Impact Statement
http://www.usbr.gov/pn/programs/yrbwep/reports/FPEIS/fpeis.p
df
c) Benitz, M (2009). Re: Yakima Supplemental Draft. Comment
letter to Derek Sandison, Washington State Department of
Ecology. First letter in pdf. [See Readings for 6/2 Module in the
Canvas site]

4. Environmental Groups (Roni Bass, Kylie Cope, Gloria
Gonzalez-Zapata, Emma Hattori, Stephanie Mai, Angelina
Monary, Jake Salvador, Ranim Shayko, Audrey Tinnin)
Read the first article by Martin, then at least three of the others
taking issue with aspects of the plan:
a) Martin, J (2007). Big Growth, Big Fight Over Water. The
Seattle Times. http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/big-
growth-big-fight-over-water/
b) Cantrell, S (2009, 2012, 2013). 3 Letters regarding the
Bumping Lake enlargement proposal from the Seattle Audubon
Society.
013meetings/2013-03-13/14audubon.pdf
c) Evans, B (2009). Re: Comments of the Endangered Species
Coalition on Work Group Draft Integrated Plan. Letter to the
Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Working Group. [pdf
available in Readings for 5/22 Module in the Canvas site.]
d) Forsgaard, K (2013). Yakima Plan Blunders On. The Wild
Cascades.
013meetings/2013-03-13/12cmaykut.pdf [A pretty scathing
assessment of the plan.]
e) McGuire, R, Bates, M, Suckling, K, Skinner, S, Bekker, G,
Evans, B, Zuber, J, Maykut, C, Pica, E, Adams, C, Town M,
Konigsmark, K, and Baldi, G (2012). Re: Proposed National

Recreation Areas. Letter to the Yakima River Basin Water
Enhancement Workgroup on behalf of several environmental
groups. [pdf available in Readings for 5/22 Module in the
Canvas site.]
f) O’Keefe, T (2011). Re: Integrated Water Resource
Management Plan, Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement
Project. Comment letter representing views of American
Whitewater in U.S. Department of Interior (2011). Scoping
Summary Report – Yakima River Basin Integrated Water
Resource Management Plan.
http://www.usbr.gov/pn/programs/yrbwep/2011integratedplan/fi
nal-scopsum-red.pdf [See the docx of just the letter in Readings
for 5/22 Module in the Canvas site]
g) Platt, E (2009). Letter to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
regarding the Bumping Lake Storage Expansion Proposal on
behalf of the Gifford Pinchot Task Force. [pdf available in
Readings for 5/22 Module in the Canvas site.]
h) Ransel, K, Carter, N, Del Giudice, P, Ellis, S, Baldi, J, Wahl,
L, Masonis, R, Leaumont, R, Arthur, B, Curtis, J and Beardslee,
K (2003). Letter to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation about the
Black Rock Storage Proposal from 10 environmental groups.
Water Planet. http://www.waterplanet.ws/pdf/wpbr20061210.pdf
5. The Tribal Nations (Benny Lee, Hank Kilmer, Daniel McCoy,
Maritza Ortega, David Perales, Elena Pham, Elizabeth Roe,

Angelo Tadrous, Xiting Wang, Xuefing Xia, Luxin Zhang)
a) Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation (2012).
Re: Joint Yakama Nation, Roza Irrigation District Comments on
Yakima Basin Storage Study. Letter to Derek Sandison,
Washington State Department of Ecology and David
Kaumheimer, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. [See Readings for
5/22 Module in the Canvas site]
b) Normandeau Associates (2014). Water Rights/Tribal Treaty
Rights,in Technical Review: Yakima River Basin Study
Proposed Integrated Water Resource Management Plan.
Prepared for the Yakima Basin Storage Alliance. Pages 27-32.
http://ybsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/YBSA-IP-
Technical-Review-Revised-Final-Report-7-29-14.pdf
c) There are several other comment letters from tribal nations in
the following report starting on page 509 of the pdf reader (CR-
17): U.S. Department of Interior (2012). Yakima River Basin
Integrated Water Resource Plan Final Programmatic
df
Other Resources
Cook, J and Rabotyagov, S (2015). Water Markets: Do
Agricultural Sellers Only Care About the Offered Price per

Acre-Foot? Evans School of Business. University of
Washington.
http://evans.uw.edu/sites/default/files/public/EvansWorkingPap
er-2011-06.pdf
Kent, C (2004). Water Resource Planning in the Yakima River
Basin: Development vs. Sustainability. Yearbook of the
Association of Pacific Coast Geographers 66: 27-60.
https://muse.jhu.edu/journals/yearbook_of_the_association_of_p
acific_coast_geographers/v066/66.1kent.html#fig01
Martin, J (2007). Big Growth, Big Fight Over Water. The
Seattle Times. http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/big-
growth-big-fight-over-water/
Ulep, AJ. (2013). Water They Doing Right in Yakima? A
Qualitative Study in Collaborative Watershed Planning of the
Plan. Thesis, Goldman Honors Program in Environmental
Science, Technology, and Policy, Stanford Woods Institute for
the Environment, Stanford University.
http://www.academia.edu/10665427/Water_they_doing_right_in
_Yakima_A_Qualitative_Study_in_Collaborative_Watershed_Pl
anning_of_the_Yakima_River_Basin_Integrated_Water_Resourc
e_Management_Plan

U.S. Department of Interior (2011). Scoping Summary Report –
Plan.
http://www.usbr.gov/pn/programs/yrbwep/2011integratedplan/fi
nal-scopsum-red.pdf
U.S. Department of Interior (2012). Yakima River Basin
Integrated Water Resource Plan Final Programmatic
df
Washington State Department of Ecology - Yakima Basin
Integrated Water Resource Management Plan (YBIP)
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wr/cwp/YBIP.html [A web
page with links to many documents]
Wilkins-Wells, K (2011). Water Rights Markets – Again.
Wisdom in Water, Please…
http://nwksgmd4.blogspot.com/2011/07/water-rights-markets-
again.html
Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project Columbia-
Cascades Area Office -
http://www.usbr.gov/pn/programs/yrbwep/ [A web page with
links to many documents]
Yakima Basin Storage Alliance - http://ybsa.org/ [A web page
with links to many documents. This alliance promotes the

formation of more and bigger reservoirs.]
Yakima Basin Storage Alliance (2012). Why YBSA believes
more water is required for the Integrated Plan.
http://ybsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Why-YBSA-
belives-more-water-is-required-for-the-IP-final1.pdf
1

Homework 7 pt. 2 - Evaluating Elements of theYakima River Basin .docx

More Related Content

Similar to Homework 7 pt. 2 - Evaluating Elements of theYakima River Basin .docx (20)

More from pooleavelina (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Homework 7 pt. 2 - Evaluating Elements of theYakima River Basin .docx