Saturday Summary 1-24-09

This is a weekly roundup of some of ICIE’s activities in and around the Idaho Legislature. Staffing limits mean we can’t cover every meeting. If there’s an item of interest to you at an upcoming meeting of one of the environment or agriculture committees, let us know and we’ll try to cover it. Agendas are available at www.state.id.us. Click on “Legislative” and click on “Calendars and agendas.”

Senate Resources & Enviornment Committee, 1-19-09: Committee heard a presentation on the issue of grazing rights in the Payette National Forest by permit holder Ron Shirts and attorney Alan Schroeder. The Payette is revising its forest plan to eliminate all grazing of domestic sheep in order to protect wild big horn sheep. This revision would cancel a 1997 agreement between Idaho, Oregon, Washington, the Forest Service and the ranchers to allow grazing of domestic sheep. Under the agreement, the states’ fish & wildlife agencies took responsibility for any contact between the big horn sheep and the domestic sheep grazing in the area. There are currently no big horn sheep in the Hells Canyon area, but they were there historically. The Payette Forest wants to reintroduce the big horn sheep in the area in a revised forest plan.

Until 2005, everyone was conforming to the agreement that was part of the forest plan. The Chief of the Forest Service asked the Payette Forest reconsider this agreement and to eliminate all grazing of domestic sheep. There is no documented evidence of transmission of disease from domestic sheep to wild big horn sheep. There are some common pathogens but both wild and domestic sheep have them. The big horn sheep that would be reintroduced would come from Canada and other states and would not be free of pathogens.According to Idaho Department of Fish & Game, big horn sheep already have pathogens and can get pathogens from many sources including birds. There is no data for the area in question showing that big horn sheep have contact with domestic sheep. The Forest Service claims that the forest plan can override the agreement signed in 1997. The Forest Service is supposed to do a risk assessment and an EIS before modifying the permits; however, it has modified the permits before the risk assessment and EIS are done.

House Environment, Energy & Technology Committee, 1-20-09: Paul Kjellander, Administrator of the Office of Energy Resources presented a bill for print to create priority transmission status for projects in Idaho.Companies planning transmission projects would follow a protocol for priority transmission status which would be followed by an executive order by the Governor to grant the project priority status. A developer would apply for status through the Public Utilities Commission (PUC). The PUC would hold public meetings in order to initiate a ruling for priority status. Using the PUC to approve priority status would streamline the process so that an application does not have to be reviewed by several agencies. In answer to questions, Kjellander pointed out that this is not a siting bill. This bill would allow priority status to be established but the PUC does not determine siting. The PUC looks at what is in the record to determine the impact on the public interest, such as with rates, for example. Siting of transmission projects would remain under local county control except for those projects that are in the national interest and in an area that has been designated as a national transmission corridor by the federal government.

Joint Meeting of the Senate & House Transportation Committees, 1-20-09: On Tuesday, the Idaho Senate & House Transportation Committees gathered to hear a report on a performance audit of the Transportation Department. As the governor mandated, the audit focused on the ITD Highways program. Unsurprisingly, the conclusion was that the current ITD funding is insufficient to maintain and preserve the current highway system, and Idaho is behind its peer group in keeping its roads up to a serviceable level. The audit evaluated the ITD from an organizational standpoint, as well as from the financial planning, scheduling and budgeting standpoints.
Other findings included:
- Road construction costs are increasing faster than the general rate of inflation
- Comprehensive statewide strategy is lacking
- Business and financial planning process is missing
- Departmental programs are generally reactive, lacking a long-term infrastructure management plan
- Capital projects could be improved by establishing uniform project selection criteria and better integration of the planning process
- ITD management is district-centered and decentralized
- Program outcomes are measured against a select but limited set of performance measures
- ITD does not use currently available technology for management of complex maintenance needs
- ITD does not use consistent project management and consultant management practices agency-wide
- GARVEE performance could be improved through a more flexible project finance strategy and institutionalizing generally accepted project management practices.

The audit report went on to make a series of recommendations in each area, with the recommendation that Idaho adopt explicit policies to promote maintenance, preservation and restoration as highest priorities for transportation funding, and that new highway projects should be evaluated for cost effectiveness, and project plans should include long-term maintenance costs for these new roadways.In closing, auditors stressed that the current situation facing Idaho’s highway system is untenable and that the state is falling further and further behind in its ability to maintain and preserve its highway and bridge infrastructure. A full report can be found on the Idaho State Legislature’s website at: http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/ope/publications/reports/r0903.html

Senate Resources & Environment Committee, 1-21-09: On Wednesday, the Idaho Water Resources Board reported on the status of the organization since the Governor’s request to hold back $12 million of a $20 million appropriation. Currently the organization is working on water modeling for the Treasure Valley and Rathdrum/Prairie aquifers as its top priority. Of the original appropriation, there is enough left to complete this task, but there will be not enough to move on to other priorities.The group discussed the status of the CAMP process with the committee in response to a query from Senator Cameron. CAMP refers to the Comprehensive Aquifer Management Planning for the Snake River Plain Aquifer. Senator Cameron commended the group on their ability to bring together all those interested in using the water and recharging the aquifer. In some cases, these people represent either side at the litigation table.In response to a question from Senator Werk, the board chair outlined the basic responsibilities and duties of the board. The board does hold water rights and is working with the state to determine what can be done with those resources not used by water rights holders. They also give regular legislative updates.Senator Werk asked about the planning horizon – considering global warming and the projected early season snow melt. The Department is in charge of water management of resources used by water rights holders. The board would be the organization to look at planning issues related to water storage. The objective is to make the water last as long as possible, for the benefit of the state rather than for that of individual water holders. Currently the board is looking at water years and estimating for the next 50 years.A member of the board explained some basic tenants of water law for the benefit of the newer members of the committee. In order for the board to made these 50-year projections, it has to consider requests according to “beneficial usage” and address ground water and those resources not already spoken for under previous water rights. Water law as determined by the Idaho Constitution which stipulates a “first in time, first in right,” doctrine. Then there is a hierarchy of water use. If there is water available at this point, the usage has to conform to the beneficial use criteria.