
Water Resources Home >
Water Rights > Stockwater Exemption under the Groundwater Code
Stockwater Exemption under the Groundwater Code
Washington State Supreme Court Appeal - Five Corners Family Farmers, et al., v. State of Washington, et al.
No.84632-44
On December 22, 2011, in a 6-3 decision, the Washington State Supreme Court
issued a ruling that the stockwater permit exemption is not subject to a
quantity limit. The Court held that the 5,000 gallon per day language in
the statute did not apply to stock watering, but that stock watering is subject
to all other water rights requirements.
The majority opinion (signed by 6 justices) closely followed the briefing
that the Department of Ecology (Ecology) submitted to the Court. The Court
held that the “plain language” of RCW 90.44.050 is unambiguous and subject to
one reasonable interpretation. Under this interpretation, RCW 90.44.050
expressly provides four separate exemptions from permitting:
- stock watering (with no quantity limit);
- watering of a lawn or of a non-commercial garden not exceeding one-half
acre in area;
- single or group domestic use not exceeding 5,000 gallons per day; and
- industrial use not exceeding 5,000 gallons per day.
As such, when the law was passed in 1945, the legislature chose not to impose
any quantity limit for stock watering. And, if a different policy is
warranted in light of changes in dairy and stock-raising practices since that
time, it is the legislature’s prerogative on whether to change the law.
In a key footnote, the majority emphasizes that while the groundwater permit
exemption for stock watering is not quantity-limited, such use is subject to
other water law limitations, such as the prohibition against impairment of
senior water rights (including those based on minimum instream flows or stream
closures established by rule).
The majority and dissenting opinions can be accessed below:
Five Corners Family Farmers v.
State No.84632-4 December 22, 2011 OWENS, J. "By
statute, the legislature requires a permit to withdraw public groundwater or
to construct a well to do so. RCW 90.44.050. The statute also provides
exemptions from the permit requirement for certain uses. This case concerns
the scope of one of those exemptions. We conclude that, under the plain
language of the statute, withdrawals of groundwater for stock-watering
purposes are not limited to any particular quantity by RCW 90.44.050. Accordingly, we affirm the superior court’s grant of summary judgment to the
respondents. We also affirm the superior court’s refusal to grant summary
judgment against the appellants on the basis of standing and its
determination that Easterday Ranches Inc. (Easterday) is not entitled to
attorney fees as a result of the change of venue."
Five Corners Family Farmers
v. State No.84632-4 December 22, 2011 WIGGINS, J. (dissenting)
"I agree with the majority that appellants Five Corners Family Farmers et
al. have standing and that Easterday Ranches Inc. is not entitled to
attorney fees. I dissent because I believe the stock-watering permit
exemption in RCW90.44.050is ambiguous, and the legislature intended to limit
the exemption to 5,000gallons of water per day."
Stock Water Working Group
The 2009 Legislature directed Ecology to convene a stockwater working group
to include legislators, four members representing agricultural interests, three
members representing environmental interests, the attorney general or designee,
the director of the Ecology or designee, the director of the Department of
Agriculture or designee, and affected federally recognized tribes.
The working group met five times in 2009-2010, reviewed issues surrounding
the use of permit-exempt groundwater wells for stock-watering purposes,
developed recommendations for legislative action, and submitted a legislative
report of its activities and recommendations to the governor and the appropriate
legislative committees.
The Stock Water Working Group Report at Page 8 provided:
"Conclusions: The Working Group
believes that the discussions concerning the issues surrounding the use of
permit-exempt wells for stock-watering purposes have been fruitful. However,
there is some concern from some Working Group members that it is premature to
weigh in on this issue as there is litigation currently pending in Franklin
County. Moreover, challenges to the Municipal Water Law of 2003 are
currently before the Washington State Supreme Court on, among other things, a
challenge that the law is unconstitutional because it has a retroactive effect
as opposed to being curative legislation. Some members would prefer to wait on
proposing legislation addressing the stock water exemption until direction is
received from the Supreme Court on when water legislation is considered
retroactive as opposed to curative. Nonetheless, the Working Group would
like to continue discussions."
Case Background
Washington State Supreme Court Appeal - Five Corners Family Farmers, et al., v. State of Washington, et al.
No.84632-44
- Respondents State of
Washington's and Department of Ecology's Answer to Briefs of Amici
Interested Indian Tribes and Aqua Permanente - June 6, 2011
- Respondent/Cross
Appellant Easterday's Response to Amicus Brief of Aqua Permanente - June
2, 2011
- Respondent/Cross
Appellant Easterday's Response to Amicus Brief of Interested Indian Tribes
- May 31, 2011
- Agricultural
Association's Reply to Brief of Amicus Curiae Aqua Permanente - June 6,
2011
-
Amicus Brief of Interested Indian Tribes - May 10, 2011
-
Motion of Aqua Permanente for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief -
May 20, 2011
-
Brief of Amicus Curiae Aqua Permanente - May 20, 2011
- Oral Argument date set for June
16, 2011 for Supreme Court No. 84632-4 March 8, 2011
- Five Corners Family
Farmers et.al., Opening Brief of Appellants - August 9, 2010
- State of
Washington's and Department of Ecology's Response Brief -
September 8, 2010
- Respondent/Cross
Appellant Easterday's Opening Brief - September 7, 2010
- Agricultural
Associations' Response to Opening Brief of Appellants - September 8,
2010
- Brief of
Intervenor-Respondent Washington Cattlemen's Association - September 7,
2010
- Appellants’
Reply and Response to Cross-Appeal - October 7, 2010
- Easterday
Ranches, Inc.’s Notice of Cross Appeal
- June 7,
2010
- Notice of Appeal to
Washington Supreme Court - May 27, 2010 - filed by Scott Collin, Five
Corners Family Farmers, The Center for Environmental Law and Policy, and
Sierra Club
Franklin County Superior Court Case:
Five Corners Family Farmers, et al. v. State of Washington, et al. Case
No. 09-2-51185-6
Summary Judgment Motions and Amicus Briefs
-
Easterday Ranches, Inc.
Reply Memorandum
- March
29, 2010
-
Declaration of Janette K. Brimmer - March 16, 2010
-
Declaration of Rachael P. Osborn - March 16, 2010
-
Plaintiffs' Combined Reply Memorandum in Support and in Opposition to
Motions for Summary Judgment and/or Dismiss - March 16, 2010
-
Certificate of
Service - March 16, 2010
-
Joint Tribal Motion for Leave to Participate as Amicus Curiae and related
documents - February 26, 2010
-
Easterday Ranches Inc., Motion for Summary Judgment - February 18, 2010
-
Easterday Ranches Inc., Motion to Strike Declarations - February 18,
2010
-
Easterday Ranches Inc., Note for Motion - February 18, 2010
-
Easterday Ranches Inc., Summary Judgment (Proposed Declaratory Relief) -
February 18, 2010
-
Easterday Ranches Inc., Summary Judgment (Proposed Dismissal) - February
18, 2010
-
Easterday Ranches Inc., Memorandum in support of Easterday's Motion for
Summary Judgment and in response to Five Corners Motion for Summary Judgment
- February 18, 2010
-
State Defendants' (Proposed) Order on Cross Motion for Summary Judgment
- February 18, 2010
- Declaration of Maia Bellon - February 18, 2010
-
Certificate of Service - February 18, 2010
- Washington Cattlemen's Association Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs'
Motion for Summary Judgment and Declaration of John William Field -
February 18, 2010
-
Agricultural Association Intervenors' Note for Motion Docket
Cross-motion for Summary Judgment- February 18, 2010
-
Agricultural Association Intervenors' Cross-motion for Summary Judgment
- February 18, 2010
-
Agricultural Association Intervenors' Memorandum of Law In Support of
Agricultural Associations' Cross-motion for Summary Judgment and in Response
to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment - February 18, 2010
-
Declaration of Jim Werkhoven - February 18, 2010
- Declaration of Don Floren - February 18, 2010
- Declaration of Ron Mauel - February 18, 2010
- Declaration (second) of Jay Gordon - February 18, 2010
-
Declaration of Gloria Edwards - February 18, 2010
-
Declaration of Jeff Slothower in support of Filing Electronically
Transmitted Signatures - February 18, 2010
-
Declaration of Jeff Slothower in support of Agricultural Associations' Cross
Motion for Summary Judgment and Response to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary
Judgment - February 18, 2010
-
Declaration of Art Swannack - February 18, 2010
-
Declaration of Gene Jenkins - February 18, 2010
-
Declaration of Art Groeneweg - February 18, 2010
-
Declaration of Chris Cheney - February 18, 2010
-
Declaration of Darryll Olsen, PH.D in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion
for Summary Judgment and in Support of Easterday Ranches' Cross-Motion for
Summary Judgment - February 10, 2010
-
Intervenor the Columbia Snake River Irrigators Association's Memorandum
in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment and in Support of
Easterday Ranches' Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment and Renewed Motion to
Strike - February 10, 2010
Preliminary Filings and Motions
-
Answer to Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief - August
3, 2009 Defendants State of Washington and Washington State Department
of Ecology
-
Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief - June 30, 2009
Plaintiffs Five Corners Family Farmers, Scott Collin, The Center for
Environmental Law and Policy, and Sierra Club
-
Ecology's response letter to the Center for Environmental Law and Policy
-
01/09/2009 Response to the petition for a declaratory order on various
issues relating to stockwatering using the permit exemption in RCW 90.44.050
-
The Center for Environmental Law and Policy - Petition for Declaratory
Order
-
Reliance on the groundwater exemption for large stock operations
- December 4, 2008 Jay Manning letter of response
-
Murphy and Buchal,
LLP - November 17, 2008
-
The Center for Environmental Law and Policy - November 25, 2008
-
Joint Policy Memorandum - November 20, 2008
-
Washington Farm Bureau and Franklin County Farm Bureau - November 26,
2008
-
Washington Cattlemen's Association - November 21, 2008
-
Washington State Dairy Federation
- November 21, 2008
In the news
Stockwater Exemption
State Water Use Laws: The Ground Water Permit Exemption RCW 90.44.050
The groundwater permit exemption allows certain types of groundwater uses
without requirement to apply for a water right permit from Ecology.
Copyright © Washington State Department of Ecology. See http://www.ecy.wa.gov/copyright.html.