Bumping Lake central to water talks
Group representing all water interests sees potential with possible reservoir expansionYakima Herald-Republic
More 'Local'
- Avalanche control impedes traffic
- Right Pro Hardware closing after 15 years
- Wapato homicide is county's 20th this year
- Woman's family sues for medical negligence
- Recount for Selah CIty Council race is Dec. 7
- Shortfall may force budget cuts in Wapato
- Local job growth gets a financial lift
YAKIMA, Wash. -- An expanded Bumping Lake northwest of Yakima -- often studied and always rejected for decades -- is one of the key elements of a developing plan to meet future water needs for fish, farmers and communities.
A conceptual proposal that includes increasing the basin's smallest storage reservoir to 200,000 acre-feet of capacity appeared to pass its first test Thursday.
A roundtable group of water interests, called together by state and federal officials, generally supported a larger Bumping Lake and other elements of an initial phase of a plan projected to take up to 40 years to complete.
Making the first piece happen over a 10-year time frame will be ambitious and expensive. Rough estimates place the cost at up to
$4 billion and, possibly, several billion dollars more for the overall plan.
Funding could be sought from Congress and the Washington Legislature as early as 2011.
The first phase would include construction of a 162,000 acre-foot Wymer reservoir in the Yakima River Canyon, north of Yakima; a slight increase in capacity at Lake Cle Elum; fish ladders at Bumping, Cle Elum and Clear Lake dams; more irrigation conservation; water banking, and municipal aquifer storage and recovery.
Those improvements, according to rough estimates developed by consultants to the study group, would add up to 335,000 acre-feet of water to the basin water supply and would reduce the potential water rationing that junior water-right holders would experience in a drought year like 2005.
That year, the junior users received 38 percent of a full supply. A fully implemented plan could see rationing at 63 percent of a full supply.
The group that met Thursday, representing farmers, fish agencies, the Yakama Nation, state and federal agencies, and an environmental group, has been meeting since June at the request of the federal Bureau of Reclamation and the Washington state Department of Ecology, to hammer out a basin water plan on which all basin interests can agree.
The group is scheduled to complete its work in December.
The agencies called the group together after the Bureau of Reclamation ended a five-year, $18 million study and rejected three proposed storage projects reviewed in the study.
The centerpiece of that planning effort was the huge Black Rock reservoir, east of Yakima, that carried an overall price tag of more than $7 billion, including nearly $5 billion for construction.
Coming up with a long-term water plan has always been elusive in the Yakima River Basin.
Derek Sandison, director of the state Department of Ecology's Office of the Columbia River, said the planning group is taking an approach not previously attempted. This effort involves all interest groups and seeks a solution that satisfies a variety of needs.
"The objective here is consensus on a package that addresses all water supply and aquatic needs," he said.
Expanding Bumping Lake, however, has been among the most contentious of possible water solutions. Previous proposals sought to expand Bumping to 436,000 acre-feet of water.
The late U.S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, who owned a home at Goose Prairie near the 33,000 acre-foot lake off State Route 410, always posed a roadblock.
And environmental groups have uniformly opposed new storage, including Bumping, without first wringing every drop of conservation from the century-old Yakima Irrigation Project.
But one environmental group now appears willing to consider support for a larger Bumping as long as the need is documented and is part of an overall plan that provides benefits to fish.
"If it is the way to meet demand and provide benefits for fish, we would go with it," said Michael Garrity of Seattle, the Washington conservation chair for American Rivers.
Garrity also said the planning group should consider land-use issues to address the proliferation of rural homes tapping into groundwater with exempt wells -- a practice that's kicked up a big political fight in Kittitas County.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service also would support expanding Bumping Lake as long as the habitat losses to bull trout and spotted owl can be offset, said Jeff Thomas, a Yakima-based biologist for the federal agency.
Both species are listed under the Endangered Species Act.
Irrigation representatives said they are generally comfortable with the elements in the first phase and the time allotted to implement them.
But backers of the failed Black Rock reservoir expressed concern the first phase wouldn't go far enough to meet everyone's water needs, especially with climate change expected to reduce winter snowpack by more than 40 percent within 30 years.
Charlie de la Chapelle, a Lower Valley farmer and member of the grassroots group that supported Black Rock, said the plan doesn't provide enough water and takes too long.
Some fishery represen-tatives said they would prefer to see fish ladders at Rimrock Lake and Kachess dams -- currently proposed to be delayed for more than 25 years -- completed within the first 10 years.
*David Lester can be reached at 509-577-7674 or dlester@yakimaherald.com.
This idea makes the most sense of any, and has been around for years. I simply can't understand why it hasn't been pursued, instead of the hyper-expensive Black Rock, so touted by Roza District farmers.
Report ViolationI don't want to tell the folks at the Herald how to do their jobs, but why show a map of the area and include the Norse Peak wilderness but not the William O. Douglas wilderness that actually surrounds the Bumping Lake area? The article lists former Supreme Court Justice Douglas as a former resident of the area and a past roadblock to the expansion but makes no mention of the designated Wilderness Area that bears his name and borders a good portion of the lake. Relavent, maybe?
Here is a link to a map showing the wilderness area boundary: www.wilderness.net/index.cfm?fuse=NWPS&latitude=46.7965675693&longitude=-121.305323578&zoom=10
um, yeah, I was wondering the same thing as baileyflyfish. There is wilderness area surrounding that area, although I'm guessing to some people that doesn't really mean much.
Here is more info:
http://www.usbr.gov/pn/programs/yrbwep/meetings/2009-07-15/ppt-storagereservoirs.pdf
http://www.waterplanet.ws/bumping/lake/dam.html
And what is so "unwilderness" about a larger lake? Doesn't that benefit a lot of different animals, along with humans, or don't we really belong on this earth?
I would think that the equalizing effects it would afford, relative to early snow run-off that would otherwise flood and drag more silt downstream as well as cause more potential property damage, would be beneficial to all.
Sometimes the greenie-weenies amaze me in their short-sighted self-righteousness.
I went to Johnny's website suggestion and found that the first sentence says that the proposed Bumping Lake expansion "is ADJACENT TO the William O. Douglas Wilderness - not part of it. So what's the big deal then?
Report ViolationJohnny99, thanks for the links.
Nick, there's no need for name calling just yet. I suppose there is no point delaying the inevitable, though. I'm not necessarily against the expansion itself if it is truly needed and the impacts can be mitigated. I just found it odd that the map posted with the article shows the Norse Peak wilderness that is across HWY 410 to the north and has nothing to do with the story but the wilderness area that completely surrounds the reservoir is somehow left off the map and left out of the discussion in the text. I suspect that the permitting and construction of the expansion may be impacted (both logistically and financially) just a tad by the presence of the Douglas wilderness area which the Herald felt wasn't worth mentioning.
You obviously noticed that the proposed outline of the expanced reservoir falls immediately adjacent to the existing wilderness area boundary. What you may not have noticed is that within the expansion area are facilities, including roads, campgrounds, the marina, and a number of private cabins. These can't simply be relocated up the hill because up the hill is in the wilderness area. The proposed area of the expansion would eliminate most of the developed recreation areas and roads surrounding the reservoir and it isn't obvious that there would be non-wilderness space remaining to allow them to be replaced. It would be interesting to hear what the plan is regarding this issue to ensure that those who camp, boat, or own cabins on land within the proposed expansion aren't screwed for the sake of marginally increased storage capacity.
Also, regarding your suggestion of the benefit to the animals; I don't really know if a slightly larger lake would benefit many animals, but I would bet that the swallowing up of stream beds, including the upper Bumping River, Deep Creek, etc. and eliminating spawning habitat would be considered a negative impact.
Posting Guidelines - Updated Aug. 21 2009
Readers are encouraged to use these forums to discuss issues affecting the
Yakima Valley. Debate the ideas presented in stories and other comments, but
refrain from personal attacks and offensive remarks aimed at others; e.g.,
you may call an idea idiotic, but don't say the person is an idiot. The
Herald-Republic reserves the right to remove any comment for any reason.
Examples include material that is obscene, encourages illegal activity or
stereotypes based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs and
other factors. Continued violation of these guidelines can lead to
suspension or revocation of your ability to post comments. If you believe a
comment is inappropriate, you can bring it to our attention by clicking the
"report violation" link by each comment. Guidelines revised Aug. 21, 2009.
Registered User?

RSS
E-mail
Print
Comments