Inspiration from the Field

By Jason Paulsen

Last Friday, I had the opportunity to join Methow Conservancy Monitoring Coordinator Dawn Woodruff in conducting an annual grazing utilization survey on one of the conservation easements we’ve helped to create on a beautiful piece of shrub-steppe property near Davis Lake where short-term grazing is permitted each year. 

Kneeling on the steep hillside among the lupine while tediously removing the individual pieces of dead vegetation from bunches of bunch grass in accordance with the official grazing utilization protocol, I had plenty of time to contemplate all that goes into the stewardship of the lands the Methow Conservancy has partnered with private landowners to conserve. 

Who would ever guess that someone would be up on this hillside carefully balancing a small bundle of bunch grass on his index-finger – or that this procedure is completed each spring has part of ensuring the health of this working landscape!

Dawn carefully measuring the length of the
grass as part of the monitoring protocol.

As luck would have it, I found myself back out on the landscape with Dawn on Monday morning walking two forested easement properties in the Upper Rendezvous with their landowner.  Here the results of over ten years of carefully planned forest stewardship have transformed extensive areas of “dog hair” fir into a beautiful and healthy pine dominated-forest complete with abundant Arrowleaf Balsamroot and native grasses – not to mention wildlife at every turn.  It was inspiring to see first-hand the tangible results of a decade of hard work and dedication to a goal of restoring health to this forest, and to share it with the landowner who has made it all possible. 

I’ll be the first to admit that historically my “conservation adrenaline rush” has come at the time a new conservation project is conceived, and again when that project is completed.  With more time spent on the land, getting to know the landowners we work with and the knowledge and stories they have to share about their properties, I can feel a shift taking place.  

I find myself increasingly energized by the opportunity to inspire care for the landscape of our valley in such a way that the Methow Valley is forever known not only for the number of acres that have been protected here, but for the quality of the habitat, productive soils, and scenic views they represent, and for a community that has challenged itself to set a new standard for caring for it all.

                                                                                                - Jason

What have you accomplished on your property this spring, OR what do you hope to accomplish this year?  What would you like to learn more about or have the opportunity to see on-the- ground? 

Please share your thoughts by posting a comment below and thank you for helping to care for the land of the Methow Valley!

Jason Paulsen serves as Executive Director at the Methow Conservancy and inbetween these trips to the field accomplished his spring goal of climbing and skiing Silver Star.

BIG Thanks for GiveBIG

“GiveBIG” the Seattle Foundation said, and wow did those who love the Methow Valley respond!  It was so energizing to get emails throughout the day yesterday showing new donations coming in from across Washington State.  

Sarah Brooks, Heide Andersen, Jason Paulsen, John Sunderland, and Dawn Woodruff
on our office deck energized by GiveBIG!

All told, 90 donations came in to the Methow Conservancy yesterday, raising more than $27,000 for conservation in the Methow Valley.  Though we don’t keep detailed records of this, I can assure you this is far and away a one-day donation record in terms of numbers of donations.  It may take us a day or two to get all those thank you letters out!  Amazing!  (We’re still waiting to hear on our “stretch” amount – the bonus gift from the Seattle Foundation-- but it should be great!). 

According to the Seattle Foundations website, GiveBIG brought in more 37,000 gifts totaling more than $7.4 million in just one day – easily doubling the results from last year.  Our 90 donors were a part of a huge day of giving and as a donor myself, I got caught up in the rush of being a part of something big.

It was a good reminder that giving can and should be fun.  It should feel good.  It should remind us about what we value and it should provide a way for us to express those values.  The day was a tangible sign that groups of people can band together to change the world, as the the incredible giving from yesterday will spur more than 1000 nonprofits to do good in the year to come.

Thanks to all who helped spread the word, who gave yesterday, and who support us any time of the year.  Your trust in us to make your dreams for the Methow Valley come true makes us all very proud.  I’m looking forward to sharing many more stories on this blog of “proof” of how we are putting your conservation investments to work on the ground in the Methow.

I’m reminded of a quote I heard recently at a conference from a fundraising colleague, Peter Drury, in Seattle:  “Philanthropy is born not of wealth, but of generosity.”  We sure do live in a generous state. 

-- Sarah Brooks is the Associate Director at the Methow Conservancy.  She's hoping to run 26.2 miles this weekend in the Vancouver marathon in honor of the more than $26,000 raised yesterday! 

Spring Chinook Acclimation on Methow Conservancy Conservation Property

Methow Conservancy staff members Mary Kiesau, Julie Grialou and I, together with MC Board President Kevin van Bueren and his son Jackson, had the fortune of participating in a morning of education and observation related to spring Chinook on one of our conservation easement properties.  The Yakama Nation, the Methow Conservancy and local landowners have been partners this spring on the first active salmon acclimation project to occur on one of our organization’s conservation properties.  The activities that took place last Monday were the final measurements of certain metrics before the release of the spring Chinook smolts into their new future in the wild.

The goal of the program is to relocate hatchery born spring Chinook fries to a location determined to include the best possible habitat characteristics for acclimation.  In such a location, they will hopefully “imprint” on their surroundings in the approximately one month that they have to live in their new home.  They are contained by a special net that does not impede the movement of other species through the natural ponds and fed twice a day, in addition to the rich natural feed that they find on their own. 

Once they reach an optimal size for survival beyond their sheltered environment and begin to smolt, the young spring Chinook are released from the nets and allowed to find their way in the world. 

Optimally, this means that they will find their way to the ocean and come back to spawn in or near their acclimation site.  These fish are tagged in such a way that arrays, set up in several locations within the side channel below their acclimation site and throughout the Methow mainstem, will document their movement throughout their lifetime in this area.  It will be years before the success of this effort can be evaluated, but in the meantime, it is fun to watch the research in action in such a beautiful setting.  If I were one of those young Chinook, I would most certainly want to return to such a place for my last rites. 

The photos show Yakama Nation biologists Rick Alford, Kraig Mott and Jason Hickman, netting fish, sedating them, taking weight and length measurements, reviving them and ultimately returning them to the pond.  We also observed heron, bear scat and wood ducks on this gorgeous property so full of life.  Another tough day at the office …

By Heide Andersen, Stewardship Director - Heide loves to ride bikes and horses and used to race belt sanders.
 

Inspiring Conservation Through Education

by Mary Kiesau

We take seriously the concept of being a community-based land trust, and education is a unique part of our mission. In addition to directly protecting and stewarding land through conservation easements, we also strive to provide the information and resources community members want and need to learn about the natural history of the Methow, and practice land conservation and stewardship on their own. Just like the people of the Methow, we care deeply about both community and land, and it's through our Education program that we attempt to integrate the two. We've found that educational resources are not only helpful and powerful tools; they are also invaluable ways for us to connect with and learn about our members and community.  

The crowd at our Dec. 2011 First Tuesday & Holiday Social, photo by John Scurlock.

One of our most popular education programs is our First Tuesday Lecture Series. On the First Tuesday of each month we host a free community presentation on a natural history, Methow history, ecological or conservation-focused topic. The sessions are well-attended and create lots of discussion.  For a listing of upcoming First Tuesday lectures, see our Events Page.  Our First Tuesday programs were started in 1997.  For a complete list of our past presentations, click here.

Monthly, we share news about our work as well as relevant natural history and conservation information in our online E-Newsletter.  See and sign-up for our E-News here.  We also post regularly on our Blog, where we are able to share more detailed information about numerous topics (good for you for reading it now!).  A paper newsletter is mailed to members twice a year.

We also share conservation information through our Good Neighbor Handbook and our Restoring Shrub-Steppe in the Methow Valley Handbook.  Originally published in 2000, then revised and reprinted in 2005, the Good Neighbor Handbook offers helpful ecological and practical information for landowners to consider before building or living in the Methow.  The 40-page “restoration handbook” is for anyone who lives on and cares for shrub-steppe lands.  It provides guidance on protecting and restoring this habitat on a small scale, strategies for weed control, and ways to rehabilitate disturbances.  Both handbooks are free at our office or via mail.  They are also downloadable at the links above.

In 2005, we initiated an annual "Methow Conservation Course" for people who wanted a more in-depth study of Methow Valley natural history.  The six-week Methow Conservation Course, held every winter, is designed for both the novice and the experienced naturalist (and for everyone in between).  The course topic changes each year, but goals are always to inspire more observation of, interest in and connections with the natural world so that people can help encourage conservation of the Methow Valley.

In 2011, we created both a Methow Valley Field Guide and a Young Naturalist Activity Booklet.  The field guide is a laminated “pocket” booklet that features 124 plant and animal species.  It is available for $6 at the Methow Conservancy office and vendors around the Valley.  The activity booklet features a variety of nature-related games, quizzes, and activities for kids 6 and up.  It is available as a free download on our website or hard copies are $3 at our office or stores around the Valley.

Grass ID Class

In addition to these educational tools, we also offer an ever-changing variety of field-trips, workshops and classes; host a weed and native plant education table at the Twisp Farmer's Market in late spring (we'll be there May 19th & 26th and June 2nd & 9th this year); and have a conservation resource library with books, videos, and scientific reports anyone can check out.

Much of our educational work is guided by an all-volunteer Education Committee comprised of interested community members and Methow Conservancy Board members.  We are committed to providing the most current and accurate information we can about some of the most pressing conservation issues in the Valley.  Please feel free to contact us with questions or suggestions anytime.

Mary Kiesau is the Methow Conservancy's Educational Programs Director and she's passionate about conservation, natural history and education.  When not in the office, you might find her in the field photographing flowers, birds, wildlife or field-trip participants!

Understanding Place -- Class #6 of "The Ecological History of the Methow Valley" Conservation Course

The 8th annual Methow Conservation Course on the “Ecological History of the Methow Valley” began Monday, January 31st.  Here are highlights from the sixth and last class held on March 12th.  Notes from the first five classes are below this post.  Mary Kiesau prepared this summary.

The Methow Valley by Denny O'Callaghan

Overview:

This class focused on how socio-economics changed the Methow Valley and how people create a conservation culture.  With the creation of the North Cascades National Park in the 1968, and the opening of Highway 20 in 1972, a social and economic shift began to happen in the rural, remote and, then, economically depressed Methow Valley.  The proposal for a downhill ski area in the upper Valley evolved over many years, polarizing the ever-growing community and eventually leading to land-use planning and a land conservation ethic.  John Sunderland provided the history of how the “ski wars” led to progressive land-use planning, trail development and open space preservation, and the creation of the Methow Conservancy.  Dr. Julie Tate-Libby then talked about “amenity migration” in the Methow Valley over the past 20 years and how this cultural and economic development contributed to an environmental and sustainability-focused ethic among residents of the Methow Valley.  Framed within the larger processes of rural restructuring, counter urbanization, and lifestyle migration, Julie discussed what has often been termed the "cultural turn" in the American West and how this relates to amenity-rich areas like the Methow Valley.  We finished the class and the entire course with a group discussion of the current state of the Methow (economic, ecological and otherwise) and what we all thought this might mean for the future of conservation in the Methow. 

John gave us an abbreviated chronology of the history of the Early Winters ski area and development.  It’s very interesting but it’s far too much to list here, so if you’d like to see this in a Word document, email Mary and she’ll send it to you.

A conservation easement in Mazama where residential and commercial development for a ski resort could have been.

John said that the Early Winters “battle” helped drive a conservation agenda in the Methow that is still with us today even though the ski resort and associated development never happened.  Most significantly, issues of water quantity and quality; land-use planning; the development of a trail system; and the creation of the Methow Conservancy were the products of the decades-long upper Valley fight that both divided community members and pulled diverse people together. 

All of these results directly or indirectly came out of the Early Winters EIS (Environmental Impact Statement), and John laid out the primary impacts one by one as follows:

1.  Air Quality:  the County passed an Air Quality Ordinance that set wood stove standards (then WA State adopted standards that all counties had to use).

2.  Water Quality:  Sewage was a big concern because the rocky soils of the Upper Valley were not great for onsite septic systems.  The County adopted a Comprehensive Sewer Plan (known as the Beck Study) in 1983.  Had the ski area been developed a pretty major waste water collection and tertiary treatment facility would have been required.  Water quantity was not initially a big part of the EIS, but the threat of development highlighted it and by the 1990s it was clear that there were water quantity issues and pressure built for a revision to the Methow Basin Plan.  See Greg Knott’s class summary for details on water quantity issues.

3.  Wildlife:  The EIS said that Mule Deer winter range and habitat for Spotted Owl would be reduced.  The result was that Washington Dept. of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) land acquisitions have focused on corridors and winter range for Mule Deer.  The County’s Critical Area Ordinance also focuses on wildlife habitat.  The creation of 20 acre zoning in the Methow Review District (see land-use planning and zoning below) was also meant to protect deer and other wildlife habitat.

4.  Land-use:  This is the most significant impact or outcome of the Early Winters ski hill proposal.  John noted that the entire county had 1-acre zoning before the development fight and that everywhere in the county except the Methow Valley above Gold Creek still does have 1-acre zoning today.  In order to comply with the EIS, as well as satisfy the Aspen Corporation (early on) and the Forest Service, the county passed the Methow Valley Addendum in 1976, creating the Methow Review District (the Methow Valley north of Gold Creek) as well as a “sub-unit A” for Mazama.  A zoning ordinance for the MRD passed in 1979 created 5 and 20 acre zoning on the valley floor and in the uplands, respectively.  Over the years, updates and changes have been made in the MRD, mostly making things stricter and clearer.  The 1990 zoning code revision gave density bonuses to planned developments if they created open space, provided public-use benefits, such as trails, or prohibited woodstoves (i.e. 75% contiguous open space allows a 50% increase in residential housing density).  The “sub-unit A” (Mazama) has always been the most detailed and strict.  John could have given a multi-hour class on the history of zoning changes in the Methow and what’s going on today, but we didn’t have time for that!

The Methow Community Trail (on a conservation easement)

5.  Recreation/Methow Trail System:  A Nordic trail movement began to coalesce well before the downhill ski debate was settled, and proponents for it gave the community an alternative to the downhill ski resort, including the fact that it would create a winter-time economy.  Trail-friendly provisions were written into the Land-Use code.  The early trails began bringing people to the Valley, both as visiting Nordic skiers but also as part-time residents, and this fact may have been one of many reasons that the Early Winters ski hill died. 

6.  Methow Conservancy:  It’s a bit of a long story how the Methow Conservancy was formed, but in brief, here it is….In 1992, RD Merrill & Co acquired all of the Early Winters property and “inherited” the ski hill and associated development issues when Harry Hosey defaulted on his loan for the project.  Merrill had been guarantors on the loan.  In 1993, Merrill signed an agreement with the Methow Valley Citizens Council and the Friends of the Methow that eliminated the proposal for downhill skiing on Sandy Butte in return for the groups’ assurances that they would not file suit against the rest of the Early Winters project.  In the agreement, Merrill agreed to: 1) give MVCC and FOM a “right of opportunity” to purchase property if Merrill pulls out, 2) drop the Early Winters land exchange, 3) drop the concept of a Mazama Sewer District, and 4) support a Methow Valley Environment Center.  The Early Winters EIS Record of Decision also stated that a foundation should be established to address community needs and goals.  This was fairly broad so it could have encompassed many different types of organizations, but Merrill called for the formation of an Environmental Education Center.  A board formed, the RD Merrill Co. gave the group start-up money, and the new nonprofit organization began to take shape.  Right around the same time (the early-mid 1990s), a group of community members formed the Methow Valley Land Trust, an all-volunteer nonprofit organization focused on protecting land in the Valley through conservation easements.  The land trust began to take shape as well.  Very soon, however, both organizations realized that they should merge, and the Methow Conservancy was formally established in 1996. 

John noted that there was a shifting social and economic debate throughout the course of the decades-long ski hill and development proposal.  He said that while the ski area issue was incredibly divisive, the public comments for the EIS were nearly two to one against building something and were in favor of no action (not developing the area).  Ironically, the battle helped form friendships between some new Valley members and old-timers.  With the opening of the North Cascades Highway, the re-making of Winthrop for tourism, the budding Nordic trail system and a growth of wealth elsewhere in the state, there was an in-migration of seasonal and permanent residents.  The Valley was changing.

It was these changes, and others that were happening around the West that attracted Julie Tate-Libby to social anthropology.  Julie continued the discussion, focusing on quality-of-life “migration” and what it has meant for the Methow.

First, Julie said there were three types of “Rural America”

• Amenity Rich: baby boomer retirees, ‘footloose professionals’
• Declining Resource-Dependent: struggling blue collar, middle class
• Chronically Poor: decades of resource extraction & underinvestment, poverty, low education & broken civic institutions.

Then, she pointed out the major differences between plain migration and “amenity migration.”  Amenity Migration is migration for quality of life; it’s a choice that is heavily based on the aesthetics, community, recreational opportunities and lifestyle of a given place.  Julie said that Amenity Migration typically comes in three phases.  Phase 1 is the place is an emerging tourist destination.  Phase 2 is that the place grows because the tourism needs outstrip the available accommodations, attractions and labor.  Phase 3 sees an increased housing market because tourists become amenity migrants (as 2^nd home owners or full-time residents).  Studies show that people tend to retire in places they have visited as tourists, and that they tend to form like-minded communities within towns. 

Julie points out that access to the Methow Valley was always an issue for economic and population growth.  A railroad was never built into the Valley and there’s no major airport.  It was the opening of the North Cascades Scenic Highway in 1972 that started to attract tourists.  Winthrop responded with re-making the town, and a counter-culture “back to the land” movement found cheap land and a good climate for growing food.  It wasn’t until the mid 1990s that the second-home industry really began to grow and become a major employer of local laborers. 

Are communities that have lots of tourists no longer what they were before?  Do they become transformed into something else?  We could probably generally say “yes” to those questions, but that is neither a good or bad thing because it is the relationship between human activity in a place and the place itself that defines a place.  It’s the type of people who move or visit a place, not the sheer fact that people are moving or visiting, that affect a place. 

We asked ourselves in the class, “Why do we live here?”  The answer was community and land – those things give us a sense of place and belonging. 

Then we asked, “Does the Methow shape us or do we shape the Methow?” 

Julie noted that a long-time part-timer told her once, “Most of us who have moved here were just one step ahead of the wrecking ball.”  The point being that the Methow could have been dramatically changed at any one time had it not been for the people, some having just arrived, who were committed to maintaining some core sense of what the Methow was to them.  That’s definitely a hard thing to do and most tourist destinations that become amenity migration destinations have not been able to do that. 

And, things could still change further.  The most recent property data for the Methow Valley School District (Lost River to Gold Creek) says there are about 8100 properties.  Just over 47% of them are full-time residences.  Of the rest, 4122 have owners with primary residences somewhere else in Washington and 490 live out of state.  (One person may own many properties, so don’t try to do the math).  What would happen if more or less people choose to live here?

It’s also not insignificant to remember that the Methow Valley is a part of Okanogan County, the largest county in the State by land-base, but with a population of just 40,000.  Julie encouraged us to think about what our role is and/or could be with the respect to the rest of the county.  Earlier, John had reminded us that the bulk of the county was operating under a comprehensive plan that is nearly 50 years old, whereas the Methow had far more progressive planning codes.  From an earlier class, Greg Knott pointed out that citizen groups have been trying to address basinwide water quantity issues for years, and that a major proposal would soon draw lots of comments.  Julie focused on social issues -- 19.6% of the county’s population lives below the federal poverty level; the county was #1 in Washington State for the number of drug and alcohol related deaths in 2007; in the Brewster and Bridgeport schools, over 90% of the students are Latino whereas 70% of the county population is non-Hispanic white. 

Julie left us with, “What makes us local?”

Why does sense of place matter?  How will we continue to define it in an ever-evolving Methow?

Historical Perspectives: An Evening of Story-Telling. Class #5 of "The Ecological History of the Methow Valley" Conservation Course

The 8th annual Methow Conservation Course on the “Ecological History of the Methow Valley” began Monday, January 31st.  Here are highlights from the fifth class held on March 5th.  Notes from the first four classes are below this post.  Mary Kiesau prepared this summary.

In the fifth class in our 2012 Methow Conservation Course, “The Ecological History of the Methow Valley,”

Karen West, co-author of Bound for the Methow, used photographs from the Shafer Museum to show the old-time, land-based ways of life in the valley, including early mining, logging, farming and ranching and raising sheep and cattle. She then introduced several long-time valley residents who each shared their stories about growing up and working here, which meant chores and hard work and whatever else it took to maintain a family and live off the land in our remote rural valley long before the North Cascades Highway opened.  The local historians who spoke were Bob Tonseth, Frankie Waller, Lloyd Remsberg, Vic Stokes, and Carl & Claude Miller.
 

All photos are courtesy of the Shafer Museum for one-time use only and cannot be reproduced without permission from the museum.

Karen started the evening out showing historical images.... 

Up to 100,000 sheep were once driven through the Methow.

Horses brought heavy loads of homesteading people to the Valley over rough and rocky trails

Ice was cut from the rivers in winter to keep milk and food cool in the spring and summer

What we know of as the Gunn Ranch area was once called Land 5 and it grew acres upon acres of corn, potatoes, grains and orchard fruit, all without irrigation, in the early 1900s.

a herd of cows passes by the old Winthrop high school, where Winthrop Fitness is now

It was hard to exist without horses.  They did everything, including haul large timber like in these two photos.

A large sawmill used to be on the south end of Patterson Lake (Bristlecone Pond in Pine Forest was once part of the mill's operation)

The Alder Mine just outside of Twisp.

Bob Tonseth spoke about the early days of mining in the Valley.  As early as the 1860s, people were traveling through the Okanogan region looking for gold.  The "Glory Hole" or Eureka lode that Alex Barron found in 1895 in the Harts Pass area set off a local mining craze that lasted for some mines well into the 1940s and 1950s, and involved mining for gold, silver, zinc, tungsten and many other metals.  Alder Mine, for instance, was discovered in 1896 but its hey day of activity was from 1939-1953.  But mostly, mining was a very fast boom and bust period for the Methow and the Cascades with some "towns" like Ruby and Barron being abandoned so fast that bars were still stocked with liquor and ore was left in buckets.  Bob noted that one reason people came and left so quickly was that people found gold here without digging very far - it was right on the surface.  In most other places, like Colorado, gold was deeper down, so when folks saw it on the surface they figured there would be a lot more further down and so they came here in droves, but they quickly realized there was not more gold the further they dug.

Frankie Waller spoke next about growing up here with a sheep ranching family.  Like today, their sheep were sheared in March and April, but unlike today, they had thousands of sheep.  The family's job was to find food for the sheep, so they had to constantly be moved all over the region, including as far as Entiat, Orondo and Wenatchee where they were herded (herding sheep is also called driving) up and down the Columbia River.  In the Methow, Frankie said they would move the sheep on a circuit throughout the Pasayten.  Around the 4th of July, the family would load all the sheep into big trucks and take them to Robinson Creek.  From there they would "drive" (herd) them into the mountains.  There were other "sheepmen" there but everyone had unspoken territories.  Some folks would go up the Twisp River drainage too.  In the fall, lambs were sold and sent to Chicago by train.  Ewes were sent to a winter range in southern WA.  Frankie said her Dad sold all his sheep when Grand Coulee Dam was opened because the government wouldn't lease land anymore.

Sacks of potatoes in a shed

Lloyd Remsberg moved to Carlton in 1939 and spoke about being a potato farmer.  Lloyd was also a logger for many years.  Lloyd said potatoes grew well here, but even better they kept for a long time because they weren't sitting in hot, dry soil here as long as they were in other parts of WA (they didn't cook in the soil).  So, lots of people started growing taters here.  Lloyd particularly liked "Netted Gem" potatoes.  Early on, with horses, it would take him weeks to cultivate his fields, but once he got a tractor he could do it in 2 weeks.  He would start harvesting them after frost, usually in the second week of October, at 22 tons at a time.  It would take 2-3 weeks to collect them all!  He would store them (and carry them by hand) in 100 lb sacks (because 50 lbs sacks took too long), then put what didn't sell right away in underground cellars.  He had a cellar in Twin Lakes that held 500 tons! 
 

Vic Stokes was born and raised in the Methow, same as his father.  He is a 4th generation cattleman in the Valley, still living on family land on Beaver Creek.  Vic said that early homesteaders crossed cattle for dual purposes - milk and meat.  They would milk shorthorns!  This was common in those days (and is actually coming back into practice for some small family farms across the country).  Vic noted that everyone had forest grazing permits, even people with just 10 or 15 head of cattle, and that the allotments were real close to were people lived.  People began switching more and more to beef cattle (Vic didn't say why but others have said that an increasing lack of rain/moisture made it hard to raise milk cows.  There was a lot of water in the hills for the first 30 years or so that white people lived in the Methow but by 1915 a drought had hit and stayed with the Valley for many years; and then there was more moisture again, and then there was less again.)  If you raised cattle, you raised horses, and hay, and you usually had as many or more horses than cattle up until WWI.  Most families had sheep, hogs, chickens and large gardens too.  People raised or bartered for all the food that they needed.

Horses had to haul their own hay of course!

A good, reliable horse was as good as gold.

Brothers Claude & Carl Miller, from a homesteading family who over the years owned and worked large parcels of land all over various parts of the Valley, spoke last.  Claude owns the largest herd of saddle horses in the State of Washington, saying "thank god for horse crazy girls - they've kept me in business all my life!"  (Claude supplies horses to girl scout camps around the west as well as packers and other businesses).  Claude was a packer himself for 35 years, and he helped build the Pacific Crest Trail for many years.  Claude said horses here used to be small.  They've progressively gotten bigger over the years.  The winter of 1915-1916 was particularly hard and people were feeding their horses willows to survive.  Claude also said that horse racing and rodeos used to be really common in the Valley - there were several different rodeo grounds spread throughout the Methow.

A young orchard in the early 1900s

Wheat as tall as a horses head, grown without irrigation water!

Carl Miller talked about agriculture and how it changed with the changing climate.  There was a wet spring with a big flood in 1894 and for nearly 20 years after that there was a lot of water in the hills.  Homesteaders thought they would be able to "dryland farm" (grow crops without irrigation), and they did for many years, including Carl and Claude's grandparents who built "the Rose Miller Place" in the Rendezvous.  Guy Waring, the founding father of Winthrop, thought he could grow apples in the Gunn Ranch area (Land 5) without irrigation, but he went broke trying as the 19teens became drier and drier.  Still, many ranches and orchards hung on - some got irrigation and some did not - and by the mid 1900s there were some big wet winters and some spring floods (the flood of 1948 is the one everyone still talks about) that put water into the underground reservoirs again.  Apples made big money when they did well.  For many years, people again grew alfalfa and wheat in the uplands, like Balky Hill, without irrigation.  Carl said there's no way we could do that now.  "You need to get at least 12-15 inches of rain to grow grain.  Some years, we got as little as seven inches."

The Rose Miller Place in the Rendezvous was Carl & Claude Miller's grandparents house.

 Thanks for following along with our 2012 Conservation Course on the Ecological History of the Methow Valley! 

How Water has Influenced, Nurtured, Limited and Changed the Valley - Class #4 of "The Ecological History of the Methow Valley" Conservation Course

The 8th annual Methow Conservation Course on the “Ecological History of the Methow Valley” began Monday, January 31st.  Here are notes from the fourth class held on Feb. 27.  Notes from the first three classes are below this post.  Mary Kiesau prepared this summary.

The fourth class in our 2012 Methow Conservation Course, “The Ecological History of the Methow Valley” focused on how the availability of water has shaped human activity from pre-European times to the present and how it will possibly shape our future.  Greg Knott was our speaker. 

Greg was raised in eastern Washington and has lived in the Methow Valley since 1974.  He worked for the Forest Service in the Methow from that time until 2002 when he transferred to the US Bureau of Reclamation and managed their Methow Subbasin fish habitat restoration program until he retired in 2008.  He is presently the owner of VanHees Environmental, a local consulting firm specializing in salmon restoration and irrigation efficiency projects.  He became involved in water and irrigation issues as a Federal official during the “Methow Salmon Wars” of the late 1990’s.  He joined the local watershed planning effort in 2000 and is currently the chair of the MethowWatershed Council, the organization which has evolved from the watershed planning process. 

After showing us four maps from 1960, 1970, 1980 and 1990 with the number of permit exempt wells (generally speaking, residential drinking water wells) dramatically increasing with each decade, Greg started the program with one clear fact:  water is never created or destroyed.  It only moves from one place to another, and potentially changes form.

Greg drew a general hydrograph (a graph showing the rate of water flow versus time on a river) for our Methow rivers, showing that our rivers peak in May or June, which is indicative of a “snow-driven” system.  In comparison, rivers on the west side of the state usually peak in the fall due to heavy rains.

 Greg noted that the timing of our peak flow could change with climate change.  Models that the USGS has made for the Methow show that there’s potential for our peak to happen earlier and for the length of time rivers stay high to shorten, meaning there’d be less water for us to use in the latter part of the irrigation season.

In the early days, when white people started moving into the Valley in 1886 the first thing they looked for was flat land next to a good water source.  Native Americans in the Methow had long known how important being near streams and rivers were, both for salmon and for clean water in the drier months.  As early as 1887, people started creating their own ditches and diversions to take water from rivers and creeks for their homesteads.  Water right claims were being made by the late 1880’s with the first water rights granted around the turn of the century.  Fifty different diversions existed at one point, some just for single families and some for ranches, with few rules or permits through 1915 or so.  The valley is literally covered with old ditches and canals, most constructed by hand and horse teams dragging “Fresno” log scrapers to excavate the canal.  It wasn’t long before people started consolidating ditches and forming ditch companies (and suing each other too of course).  Two of the earliest companies were the Chewuch Canal Company, formed in 1910, and the Methow Valley Irrigation District (MVID), formed in 1919 although these systems or portions of them were in use before these districts were incorporated.  The Washington State Hydraulic Code was adopted in 1917 and the process of appropriating water became more formal.

Wheel-lines are still in use today.

Irrigation in the Valley was done by flooding fields for decades.  There was no electricity on most ranches and farms until the 1940s, so gravity delivery and flooding was the only real way to irrigate.  It was inefficient (3 to 4 times the amount of water was taken then than now), and it was a lot of work, but it didn’t require much infrastructure.  After WWII, the mass production of aluminum and steel made it easy to make “hand line” pipes, and once people started to get electricity many folks switched to hand-lines, and a little later on, wheel-lines.  Hand-lines, which require a person to move them, and wheel lines, which are moved by a motor, are both still widely used in the Valley, but generally on small scales.  They are about 70% efficient.  In the late 1990s and early 2000s, after several fish species were listed under the Endangered Species Act, irrigators were forced to become even more efficient.  High-efficiency pivot systems were put in place on many ranches with assistance from government grants.  These are 85-90% efficient, leaving more water available for all the users, including fish.

Forests comprise most of the Methow’s over one million acre watershed.  Roughly 85% of the watershed is federal public land, and for a time some folks thought that if we logged more timber we’d have more water because there’d be less “users” drinking from the pond, so to speak.  Greg Knott showed us through a series of slides how only about 70,000 acres of the federal land is really available for timber “management.”  Ok, that’s still a fair bit of land – could we increase the amount of water available for valley users if trees were cut on Forest Service land?  The answer is an easy “no” because (1) only about 2% of the total basin precipitation could be affected by logging (there is no bang for the buck), and (2) without some way to collect and store water from snow melt and rain, the lack of trees would only increase runoff, making floods higher and droughts drier. 

Greg talked briefly about our glacial past and how it influences water today.  Glaciers filled the Valley 8,000 feet tall until about 11,500 years ago.  Only the jagged peaks in the North Cascades were above the glaciers.  When they retreated, huge layers of rock and dirt and mud were left.  Much of that is underground today (look at the sides of road cuts or high river banks).  Also left underground are big pools, small lakes and underground rivers; underground aquifers, reservoirs and holes.  There is such a big “hole” under Lost River and parts of the upper Methow River that much of the water in those reaches is underground.  Water is flowing underground year-round, and it is only in the spring and summer when increased water levels cause the above-ground rivers to fill again.

Water Law and how it affects the Methow consumed the rest of the class time.  Western water law initially came out of the California mining districts because they were using immense amounts of water.  The Mining Act and the Water Law were created at the same time and are very similar.  The basic principles of Water Law are:

·        First in time, first in right – meaning the date of permit claims are very important.

·        Use it or lose it – You must use your entire right (quantity) for an entire season at least once every five years.  There is a lot of talk these days about revising this policy because it doesn’t encourage water conservation, but it was originally a very important anti-hoarding rule.

·        Beneficial use – means you have to use the water for a beneficial, reasonable purpose.

·        No impairment – means you can’t take someone else’s water accidentally or intentionally if they have a claim to the water that is older than your claim.  (If your well is causing your neighbor’s well to go dry and they were there before you, you’re in trouble).

Greg reminded us of an important point – the water belongs to the public regardless of “water rights”.  A water right is only a right to use the water, not to own it. 

Water sustains all of us in the Methow - farms, fish, wildlife and people.

The Washington Hydraulic Code (what many folks think of as the early form of the Department of Ecology) was adopted in 1917.  They established a formal process for requesting and recording a “water right.”  Water Codes were adopted in 1917 for surface water and in 1945 for groundwater.  After 1917 (surface water) and 1945 (ground water) water rights had to be permitted by the State.  Before those dates, water rights are known as “claims” since they have not technically been permitted.  Both claims and rights are tied to the land, to exact parcels, and can’t be moved or spread out over contiguous or nearby acres.  Many early claims and rights were convoluted, at odds and/or much too large to be used without dewatering the streams.  The “adjudication” of water rights became necessary because of feuds over water in certain streams.  Adjudicated water rights are rights that have been legally confirmed by a superior court judge.  In an adjudication, various water rights claimants are required to present evidence that they are meeting the basic requirements of the applicable waters rules and regulations, and based on this testimony and a hydrologic evaluation of the amount of water actually available in the affected watershed, the court apportions out the water to each of the claimants who have established a valid existing water right.   

Until an area is adjudicated, the water right claim or the permitted water right is the document that represents the water right, and most of the water used in the Methow Valley has not been adjudicated.  In the Methow basin, there have been seven adjudications, beginning in 1921 with Beaver and Libby creeks. Gold and Black Canyon creeks were adjudicated in 1929 and Bear Creek and Davis Lake in 1930.  Wolf Creek was the last adjudication in the Methow, completed in 1984.    

It is very common with old (often generous) water rights in a given watershed to add up to more water than is actually available, especially during an extended drought, and that’s certainly true in the Methow Valley.  If you take all the “water right claims” and “water rights,” they add up to 10 to 11 times more than what the Methow basin has.  Resolving this issue of “paper water rights” vs. real water is a tough question facing the Department of Ecology.

Washington State passed the Water Resources Act in 1971 to protect and manage the state's water resources.  Prior to the act, applications for larger amounts of water for irrigation and other purposes caused escalating conflict among farmers and other users.  The legislature adopted WAC 173-548 in 1976 as another attempt to head off water conflicts in the Methow Valley.  The law, commonly known as the Methow Rule, set mandatory minimum instream flows for the Methow River and its tributaries in order to protect aquatic species.  The Methow Rule said in part:

·        There are seven “reaches” in the Methow Basin.

·        There is no “new” water, meaning the basin has what is has for farming, fish, and development; and new water right applications will be subject to regulation depending on the water levels in the reaches..

·        Domestic wells can be drilled (these are called permit exempt wells) and up to 5,000 gallons per day can be taken from each well and used on up to a ½ acre for in-home use, lawns, stockwatering and gardens.

·        If you want to irrigate more than ½ acre, you can not use a domestic well – you need to get a water right if your property doesn’t already have one, and you can still file an application for one but the line is very long.  Any new water rights are subject to the minimum instream flows established in the Methow Rule for that reach, meaning the instream flows have a primary water right (a right that is senior or prioritized) and any water right established after 1976 can be interrupted (paused) if the instream flow for that reach goes below the established minimum flow.

·        Each of the seven reaches can only take 2 cubic feet per second (cfs) for residential domestic wells and stock water established after 1976.  Two cfs equates to roughly 15 gallons per second, or 900 gallons per minute.

The seven "reaches" of the Methow watershed, as created by the Methow Rule, are outlined here.

 The last partial revision of the Methow Rule was proposed in 1999, and it was at that time that the Methow Watershed Council was formed.  Since that time, the Council, with a diverse mix of members, created the Methow Watershed Plan.  The Okanogan County Commissioners approved the plan in 2005 and a detailed Implementation Plan in 2009.  Part of the Implementation Plan includes revising portions of the Methow Rule to better fit the needs of the Methow Valley Basin.  Only the DOE can revise the Methow Rule, but the Methow Watershed Council is tasked with developing the additional information  and making suggestions for any revisions to the rule.

Greg, who has been with the Methow Watershed Council (and its precursor the Methow Basin Planning Unit) since it was developed, said one initial goal was to decide how to account for uses against the 2cfs reserve.  He said that if we all used 5,000 gallons/day, we would already have exceeded the 2 cfs reserve in most of the 7 reaches.  Strictly interpreting the Methow Rule, this would mean that no more domestic wells would be allowed in most of the Methow starting today.  However, the Watershed Council found after examining available information that the average “family” more likely uses around 710 gallons per days (more in summer due to outside watering and less in the winter).  Greg said that if the Methow Rule was revised to specifically allow 710 gals/household/day rather than 5000 gals/household/day to be counted against the 2 cfs reserve then landowners would still be able to drill domestic wells and instream flows would still be protected.  This is because we would be accounting for “real” water use rather than the theoretical maximum.  Even using 710 gals/day the 2 cfs reserve will eventually be used up. Right now, the Lower Valley reach is already “over-allocated” (its 2 cfs allowance is exceeded using the 710 gallon allotment), if every currently existing parcel were to drill a well.  Because of the lower valley’s 1 acre zoning, that area of the valley could be over-allocated by 20,000 lots if a well were to be drilled on every developable parcel. 

Greg acknowledged that our true “consumptive use,” which would include septic return flow is not figured into the 710 gallon per day average.  The MWC is working on proposing a figure for septic return flows per reach which would be subtracted from the 710 gals/day. 

Greg said the point of revising the Methow Rule to reflect more accurate numbers is an attempt to both not have more conflicts over water, and to “solve the Methow’s water issues locally instead of having the State agencies do it for us.”

Coho Salmon appear to be making a comeback in the Methow.

For more details on the current work of the Methow Watershed Council and the upcoming rule-revision proposal see this MethowGrist article. 

For a detailed look at how the Methow Valley News articulated the Water Wars” of 1999 and 2000, including a good list of terminology, see this special report by Lee Hicks from April 2000.

Lastly, this short video (12min.) entitled "The Power of Partnership" will give you a glimpse into what is known as the "Methow Valley Salmon Wars."  The video was created by the Upper Columbia Salmon Recovery Board last year.  Much of what Greg talked about in our class, including the requirement to protect "instream flows" and the creation of the 2cfs/reach minimum was established well before the salmon wars, but the water issues involving federally endangered fish are a big part of the last 12+ years here in the Valley.