State Agency Roles in

Idaho Water Quality Policy

Executive Summary

by

Allen C. Turner

and

Jay O'Laughlin

Table of Contents

List of Tables

List of Figures

SUMMARY OVERVIEW

In 1990 the Idaho Legislature asked the Idaho Forest, Wildlife and Range Policy Analysis Group to analyze the roles of state agencies in water quality programs. The results of the study are presented in three separately bound documents: (1) State Agency Roles in Water Quality Policy; (2) Agency Self-Studies, the information base designed and furnished by the agencies; and (3) this Executive Summary, consisting of chapter summaries and some figures and tables from volume (1), referred to hereafter as the report. This two-page Summary Overview describes the contents and findings of the report.

During the course of the study (which took place between June and December of 1990), Allen Turner interviewed many water quality program personnel, both in their offices and in the field. He participated in many water quality meetings, both indoors and out, and observed several multiple-agency task groups in action. A digest of his field observations and a list of meetings attended is included as Appendix A in the report. We are grateful for the cooperation of the agencies.

Emphasis in the report is on surface water nonpoint source pollution program design. Other important concerns, such as public health, groundwater protection, and hazardous waste management are at least as important, but receive less attention. Furthermore, emphasis is on why agencies do what they do (program design and statutory law) rather than on how they go about doing it (program implementation and agency rules and regulations).

Agency self-studies, interviews, and responses of reviewers indicated that 529 personnel employed by the state (in seven agencies, the health districts, and the Idaho Cooperative Extension Service) spend at least some portion of their time on water quality. This represents at least 196 full-time equivalent personnel (FTEs). Agency general roles are presented in Chapter 2 of the report.

In addition to the main task of sorting out agency responsibilities in water quality programs, five focus questions guided the study and are the organizational framework of the report. The five questions and general responses follow:

(1). Does Idaho have a coherent water quality policy? Idaho's water quality policy is complex. It is a combination of state interests in protecting water resources for beneficial use and federal interests in clean water. As explained in Chapter 3 of the report, the state's policy protects water as a resource or commodity while seeking to prevent contamination or pollution and to protect public health.

(2). Does policy address water quality issues adequately? Whether the programs are adequately addressing water policy issues is ultimately a political question. Some may feel that programs are too numerous or intrusive; others, that programs are not manned or enforced at levels sufficient to protect water quality. Adequate processes, legal authorities, and agency organizations seem to be in place, and if adequate resources are provided, Idaho's water quality can be protected. There do not seem to be any major duplications of effort. A list of several dozen unresolved water quality issues is included herein and in Chapter 4 of the report.

(3). Are there gaps and overlaps in water quality programs? Gaps and overlaps are a matter of consistency in legislation and agency coordination. For the most part, the legislature has made assignments that do not overlap. State programs seem well coordinated, particularly at the watershed level where agency personnel cooperate. At the administrative level, agency roles are defined in interagency agreements to reduce duplications of effort. As many as 20 agencies -- federal and state -- may be involved in managing a particular watershed. For example, interagency coordination on a large scale is facilitated in the Coeur d'Alene Basin under the direction of the Clean Lakes Coordinating Council. Water quality is a complex arena, requiring many different specialists. Any particular water quality concern -- such as the development of best management practices for forestry, agriculture, or mining -- generally requires a variety of expertise. The number of water quality problems leads to what may be termed effectiveness, enforcement, and expectations gaps, as explained in Chapter 5 in the report and summarized herein.

(4). Are Idaho water quality programs effective? As indicated in Chapter 6 in the report, replies to this question will be forthcoming only after a long-term data base has been established. Trends will then reveal which programs are effective in protecting water quality. Nonetheless, there have been notable improvements in the quality of many of the state's waters, but 17% of Idaho's streams sampled by the Idaho Water Quality Bureau do not support one or more of the several beneficial uses protected by the State Water Quality Standards. Significant controversies exist regarding the level of protection that may be obtainable from the current set of programs and resource allocations.

(5). Are water quality and quantity programs integrated? Programs are integrated in the law and not integrated in the agencies, but attempts to avoid duplication, gaps, and overlaps are facilitated by formal interagency agreements and coordinating committees (see Chapter 7 in the report). The Idaho Legislature has assigned water quality-related duties to several agencies, generally according to the agencies' traditional missions and expertise (see Chapter 8 in the report). Although primary administrative responsibility for water quality and quantity programs are respectively divided between the Department of Health and Welfare and the Department of Water Resources, they are coordinated in the law. For example, the Department of Water Resources may not grant a water right for a use that would violate the State Water Quality Standards or otherwise impair the local public interest in the qualities of the waters of the state.

In sum, water quality programs in Idaho are wide-ranging, complex, and changing in response to federal requirements (see Chapter 9 in the report), increasing public concerns about water quality, the growing competition among different water users, and the cumulative effects of multiple water uses and users. Other states face the same water quality problems as Idaho, and some have chosen different administrative approaches than Idaho's (see Chapter 7 in the report). The way things are progressing in Idaho will work because agencies are cooperating and involving citizen concerns in the process.