Capital Press

SPOKANE — Agriculture reps and Washington Department of Ecology officials are examining how the agency responds to anonymous complaints against landowners.

From agriculture’s perspective, someone could easily take advantage of the department’s current process, said Aaron Golladay, first vice president of the Washington State Farm Bureau and co-chairman of Ecology’s agriculture and water quality advisory committee.

He gave an example of a community “selectively using” the complaint process to call in “frivolous” complaints against producers. The department has to investigate and the producer has to explain the situation, which is time-consuming if a producer is not at fault, Golladay said.

Ecology director Maia Bellon said the department will provide more information to committee members about responding to complaints, whether they are anonymous or not. She also hopes to determine the percentage of anonymous complaints.

“Our staff are very thoughtful when they see that they’re getting complaints that appear to be of a nature that are not showing us there is a water quality problem,” she said. “I don’t want people taking advantage of the complaint process, I want us to spend our time trying to help out and finding solutions to the big issues that we see.”

Bellon is worried about the possible chilling effect that could come from cracking down on anonymous complaints. Washington Senate Bill 6551 was introduced in January to require Ecology to provide the name of a third party providing notice of a violation. The bill did not pass out of the Senate.

“I don’t think that’s good public policy,” Bellon said, “especially when we do have a lot of smaller communities where people know each other, and it might be awkward if someone identifies a problem in their neighborhood and they don’t want to be treated poorly for raising that issue.”

“I think you should be able to face your accusers,” said committee member Scott Nielsen, Cattle Producers of Washington vice president. “I think (anonymous complaints) are less troubling if you trust the agency. To me, it’s how that anonymous complaint is handled.”

During the meeting, committee members talked about educating the public about proper water quality and farming techniques.

That’s fine, Nielsen said, as long the message says it’s OK for cows to have access to water.

“I think some people look at that and think, ‘Oh my god, there’s a cow down there at the creek — call the cops!’” he said. “I think some (complaints) are vindictive. The ones I’m thinking of had very little to do with water quality and had to do with wolf management.”

Nielsen wants to make sure Ecology officials investigating complaints are objective.

Department special assistant to the director Kelly Susewind will outline the process to the committee, Golladay said. Golladay said the committee has also recommended the department notify landowners when the problem has been resolved.

“Ag’s not out here to destroy the universe, regardless of what a lot of people think,” he said. “My goal is to have a fair and transparent complaint process. We have guilty parties, we know we do, we want them caught and taken care of. We don’t want the good guys getting beat up in the process.”