EPA's proposed TMDL rules represent yet another example of a federal agency having good intentions, but having little sensitivity to the potentially bad effects its actions may ultimately cause. The goal of identifying polluted waters across the nation and making them cleaner is one we all share. No one here today disagrees with that idea. That is a particularly important objective in my own state of Washington, where citizens are now struggling to keep Pacific Northwest salmon from going extinct in streams, lakes, and rivers throughout the Puget Sound.
My primary concern is that if these rules were enacted as written, EPA, despite its good intentions, would undermine sincere efforts by Washington property owners, tribes, states, and local governments to comply with the Endangered Species Act and would slow down local efforts to successfully restore endangered and threatened salmon runs. Specifically, these rules would interfere with the Washington Forests and Fish Agreement-a plan that took two years to negotiate, was agreed to by federal, state, local, tribal entities and small forest landowners, had the full support of Governor Gary Locke, the Washington Department of Ecology and was approved with bipartisan support in the Washington State legislature. This plan was adopted to ensure that eight million acres of non-federal lands would be in compliance with both the Endangered Species Act and Clean Water Act requirements.
Unfortunately, the proposed TMDL changes could jeopardize the Forests and Fish Agreement by suggesting that EPA regulators be given authority to treat silviculture as a "point source." This would reverse policies affecting the forestry industry that have been in place for 27 years. It would further shift regulation of forest management activities from the state level to the federal level, and require federal clean water permits for a wide variety of forest management practices that would already by adequately regulated under the Forests and Fish Agreement.
I am also very concerned that individual property owners who have worked hard to negotiate smaller-scale habitat conservation plans and candidate conservation agreements with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service would nevertheless be required to obtain a permit from EPA under the NPDES rule change. This would create an unduly burdensome process for small private property owners and small communities. Federal agencies should be working together to ensure that Endangered Species Act and Clean Water Act processes don't make it more difficult for local efforts to protect salmon.
Finally, I share the concern of the Washington Department of Ecology and others that these proposed TMDL regulations would add more responsibilities than EPA is capable of managing. The Director of the Washington Department of Ecology correctly pointed out in his comments to the rules that the clear Congressional intent in implementing the Clean Water Act was to provide for a much more streamlined approval process. If enacted, these rules would delay many activities simply because EPA is not capable of managing the approval process.
The Administration should ensure that the heads of the federal agencies that propose these new rules and regulations should first talk with one another, and talk with the states before they move ahead with implementing them. Like me, the citizens of Washington believe that better coordination amongst the federal agencies as well as better coordination between the federal and state agencies would ensure that the goals we all share-cleaner water and preserving endangered salmon-are achieved in the most efficient and expeditious manner.