WSU representatives will convene at Whitman County Superior Court in June against a group of water conservationists in the continuation of a multi-year case challenging the university’s claim to more groundwater than the university has ever used.

The court will hear an appeal of the water conservationists’ lawsuit, which was prompted by increased aquifer pumping to irrigate the greens of the expanded WSU Palouse Ridge Golf Club. The hearing is set for 1:30 p.m. on June 6 in Colfax.

The Grande Ronde Aquifer has been declining at a rate of about one to 1.5 feet per year, said Rachael Paschal Osborn, attorney for the conservationists and executive director of the Center for Environmental Law and Policy. The aquifer has declined about 100 feet total since 1935.

“They have increased their use of water in order to irrigate the new golf course,” she said. “From my clients’ perspective, that is an example of wasteful and unnecessary water use that shows that WSU shouldn’t be using it. If we have ground levels dropping, then increased pumping is likely to make matters worse.”

One of the conservationists’ biggest concerns is that no one knows exactly how much water is stored in Grande Ronde, so it is uncertain when the water will ultimately run out, she said.

Osborn represents Pullman resident Scott Cornelius, the Palouse Water Conservation Network and the Palouse Group of the Sierra Club. In addition to WSU, the Washington Department of Ecology (DOE), which approved the university’s water rights, is a defendant in the appeal.

Frank Hruban, assistant attorney general for WSU, said the expansion of the golf course is not an issue in the case.

Hruban said the case is actually about whether WSU is legally entitled to consolidate its water rights in order to efficiently pump the same amount of water that has always been pumped. The only issue is the cost associated with re-drilling wells and installing new well pumps, he said.

Hruban said the golf course was designed with a state-of-the-art efficient irrigation system, so the expansion did not increase the amount of water WSU uses on a yearly basis.

“WSU has continued to demonstrate a reduced amount of water use,” he said, “even with the expansion of the golf club. WSU has an ongoing program of finding ways to be more efficient with water.”

Osborn refuted Hruban’s explanation of the case. She said though WSU does plan to consolidate its water rights, the case is about what the DOE should have done when the university initially applied for consolidation and whether or not that decision was constitutional.

“WSU is attempting to minimize the issues in the case,” she said. “What they are proposing to do is … not in the interest to the community and frankly it should be somewhat of an embarrassment to the university. They don’t like the bad publicity of this case, so their response is that this case isn’t about anything. This case is about something important. It’s about the community water supply.”

Cornelius said the aquifer receives limited recharge, if any. He said the water is also incredibly precious because it has been measured to be between 10,000 and 20,000 years old, whereas most water in the world now is recycled.

“This water predates any man’s presence on this continent, so it’s really pure,” he said. “It has no nitrates or man-made chemicals of any kind. We should preserve this water.”

Osborn said in addition to WSU, the University of Idaho, the city of Pullman and the city of Moscow all have water rights to the Grande Ronde Aquifer. It is their combined pumping that is causing the drop in water levels. Grande Ronde is the main source of drinking water for the residents of both cities.

“The city of Moscow is already looking at building new reservoirs or looking at new sources of water,” she said. “I don’t think WSU is doing any planning. No, they’re just pumping.”

The case has been going on since 2005.

In 2003, the Washington State Legislature enacted a law stating that municipal water suppliers can hang on to their paper water rights and in doing so converted WSU into a water supplier. In the past, the DOE would have eliminated the paper water rights not being used by WSU. However, when the university applied to consolidate its rights, the DOE did not eliminate them because of the new law.

Kevin Brown, an ecology inspector at the DOE, said WSU won the case when it was taken to the Pollution Control Hearing Board (PCHB) in 2010. The conservationists then appealed that decision, which has been taken to Whitman County Superior Court. This lawsuit raises an issue regarding the constitutionality of the original municipal law decision. He said Osborn and her clients are asking the court to overturn the previous PCHB decision.

Brown said the DOE must comply with the law, which currently maintains that WSU is in good standing to keep all of its water rights. Using the water to irrigate the golf course does not go against the allowed uses portion of that law.

“There are some sections in the new municipal law that establishes municipal uses can be a wide range of uses,” he said. “What they use that for, under the definition in the statute, is pretty wide open. If the law says they can do it, we allow it.”

Brown said the new municipal law allows people to keep unused water rights for the future. Unless WSU says the university has no need for the extra water, the law establishes that they can keep it for future growth and projects.

“(WSU is) using a lot less water than they did (in the past), but they don’t want to give up anything knowing that if the school were to expand in the future, they would have enough water for future growth,” he said. “It allows them to continue to grow into that without fear of losing their water rights.”

Osborn said the main issue is whether or not the DOE is fulfilling their requirement to adequately manage water as a precious resource. The DOE has an obligation to manage the water supply in order to prevent the overdraft that is occurring now with the WSU case, yet they say they do not have to, she said.

“The big question of this case is whether that was a proper application of the water law,” Osborn said.
Cornelius said while the conservationists are not trying to change the law, they are trying to limit WSU’s potential use of groundwater by taking away the paper rights to more water than the university currently needs. He said the case could set a precedent for water use supplied by municipalities around the state.

“We hope to establish that there are limitations on water use,” he said. “We could establish the Department of Ecology would have to acknowledge the potential harm by municipal excessive water use. They have been very accepting of WSU’s water use.”