Committee approves memorial urging faster permits and asking federal partners to consider transfer of Camas National Wildlife Refuge management

The House Resources and Conservation Committee on Wednesday voted to advance Senate Joint Memorial 104, a measure asking federal partners to expedite a permit to clear the Camas Creek channel through Camas National Wildlife Refuge and to consider transferring management of the refuge to the Idaho Department of Fish and Game.

Sponsor Senator Van Burtonshaw, R.-Dist. 31, told the committee the cleaning would allow more water to pass through the refuge and reduce the need for groundwater pumping to fill Mud Lake for irrigation. "This bill does two things. Number 1, it asks our federal partners to expedite that permit to make that happen. Number 2 ... is that the federal government turn that property over to the state to manage," Burtonshaw said.

The memorial grew out of complaints from Mud Lake area water users who, Burtonshaw said, have for years pumped groundwater to make up for surface water that does not reach Mud Lake. He gave multi-year figures during his presentation, saying Mud Lake water users put about 172,577 acre-feet into the refuge over nine years while only netting about 28,390 acre-feet out, and characterizing the shortfall as a significant cost to local irrigators. Using per-acre-foot price estimates he cited, Burtonshaw said making up the shortfall could cost between roughly $8.6 million and $14.4 million over nine years depending on water prices.

Committee members and outside witnesses split on the proposal. Representative Church questioned whether the memorial would in effect elevate junior downstream users over senior water rights held by the refuge. "We want the Camas Refuge to have their water, but we need to have our water as well," Burtonshaw responded, saying the refuge would remain first in priority under his proposal.

Conservation groups and biologists told the committee they opposed the land-transfer portion of the memorial. Rob Mason, Idaho state director for The Wilderness Society, warned that transfer to state ownership "is not a benign change," noting the state would not be legally required to guarantee public access, tribal treaty rights or to manage the land in perpetuity for wildlife. Jonathan Oppenheimer, government relations director for the Idaho Conservation League, testified the state acquisition could be costly and that many legal constraints would remain: "Regardless of whether this was private property, state property or federal property you would still need to get a 404 permit ... so if the challenge is some of the permitting, that really wouldn't change," he said, referring to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit process under the Clean Water Act.

Lucian Davis, a wildlife biologist who has worked on Camas National Wildlife Refuge, urged the committee to oppose the memorial. "Removing willows is not cleaning the refuge. It's destroying critical habitat for breeding waterfowl and migratory songbirds," Davis said, and added that refuge staff and the refuge complex are currently working on management despite a recent vacancy in the manager position.

Supporters emphasized the operational problems they say hamper timely federal permitting and refuge management. Representative Gerald Raymond (R., Dist. 31), who spoke in support, said he viewed the tribes' written concerns as "relatively soft" and urged continued consultation; he moved that the memorial be sent to the full House. Representative Nelson made the motion to pass SJM 104; the committee advanced the memorial by voice vote. The committee recorded two nay votes; the committee did not record a total yes tally in the available transcript.

The memorial asks federal partners to consider expedited permitting to allow channel cleaning and to contemplate transferring refuge management to Idaho Fish and Game, and it explicitly requests federal attention rather than directing state action. The memorial does not itself change land title or water rights; it is a legislative request sent to federal authorities.

The measure now goes to the House floor for further action.