EVICTED!

Miller and Kirsi have officially been evicted from their pasture where they have resided for thirteen years. The Department of Ecology has achieved success in removing these two "environmental hazards" from their home. Years of paperwork, court battles, and countless taxpayer dollars spent have finally culminated in the forced removal and relocation of these two teenaged pet horses, Kirsi and Miller. Why would the DOE care about two older pet horses living in an eight acre pasture over a mile from the Palouse River?

Read on for a summary of the Department of Ecology abuse and harassment our family has quietly endured since 2015. Then, stay tuned to this page as we begin the process of uploading files, documents, photos, research, water test results, references and more, in the hopes of helping other people fight against the DOE's blatant abuse of power, taxpayer money, and government resources.

We may not have the unlimited time, financial, judicial, and manpower resources the DOE enjoys, but we do have years of information to share, and hope that our story reveals just who is responsible for the most dangerous horse manure.

Hint: it isn't the horses.

At the center of the entire story is a basalt bottomed field drainage ditch that runs the length of our horse pasture. Our pasture is approximately 8.15 acres and is located 1.1 miles from the Palouse River. It runs along the southeastern side of State Route 272, and is therefore highly visible to highway passersby. The pasture is quite narrow, but long enough that the horses enjoy more than enough grass and space to keep them happy. They also have ample shelter via a barn and several large trees. For the past 6 years there have been two horses occupying the pasture, the infamous Miller and Kirsi.

In 2014 we experienced an unusually wet and early spring that resulted in flooding of our horse pasture. The field drainage ditch running the length of the pasture couldn't keep up, and after the flood the area around our barn was a muddy mess. During this time Wheat Life Magazine published a very unflattering photo of our flooded pasture in one of their issues. That was when our DOE woes began, even though we didn't know it at the time.

Before we were even aware we were on the DOE radar, we proactively contacted the Palouse Conservation District for advice on how to deal with the aftermath of the flood, and how we could prevent a muddy mess if it flooded again in the future. PCD gave us several suggestions, the majority of which we were able to implement right away. We were able to move a foster animal out of the pasture to her new home, and we euthanized an elderly pony.

Imagine our surprise in 2017 when Steve Hummell contacted us with no warning and told us we were "non-compliant" with the DOE, and would be required to immediately either remove the horses form the pasture or put a buffer fence around the drainage ditch. This would require placing a fence on either side of the drainage ditch, each 35 feet away from the ditch edge. Due to the narrow shape of our pasture, this would effectively reduce the spacious 8.15 acres available for the horses to a meager 3.38 acres, most of which would be a narrow channel ripe for entanglement, entrapment, and injury to Miller and Kirsi. This would also cause severe turf damage as they would be forced to walk in the same narrow paths to get from one end of the pasture to the other.

Steve Hummel, along with Chad Atkins came to visit us in person in June of 2017, again informing us that we were "non-compliant." He told us that the Palouse Conservation District's recommendations that we had sought and implemented 2 years earlier were null and void because the PCD has "no right and no power" to make such recommendations. It was at this time the DOE first offered us money for "technical assistance." Even if taxpayer money did pay to fence the drainage ditch, it would still leave us with the choice of either keeping the horses in a cruel and unsafe living situation, or having to find them a completely new home. When a family member asked Steve Hummell if he was making an example of us, he told us that yes, he was, because we are visible from the highway and made a good example for the DOE.

At this time we began to press back on the DOE. We asked for scientific proof that our two horses, over a mile away from the river, separated by that full mile of riparian foliage, trees, a highway ditch, a gravel pit, and a wooded valley, had any notable impact on the Palouse River. They told us that they don't have to provide such proof, and that they can determine what it means to have "substantial potential to pollute." They have no legal responsibility to define "substantial" or provide any reasoning beyond "because we say so."

This had become a pissing match for the DOE, and they were going to win.

What followed was years of harassment, blatant lies, court appointments, accusations, name calling, and significant liberties taken with science on the part of the DOE. In an effort to prove that our horses do not have "substantial potential to pollute" we hired Anatek Lab to run water quality testing on samples taken from just before water enters our pasture, just after it leaves the pasture, and just before it enters the Palouse River 1.1 miles away. The results were extraordinary. We found that the water entered our pasture from the neighboring wheat field at a fecal coliform level of 8 MPN/100mL. At the pasture exit it rose slightly to 14, which was not unexpected given not only the presence of the horses, but ducks, geese, pigeons, deer, moose, coyote, raccoon, rabbit, and field mice that share the pasture. The water entering the Palouse River 1.1 miles from the pasture had a level of 94 MPN/100mL. In our 0.43 mile long pasture, the water picked up a mere 6 MPN/100 mL, but over the course of 1.1 miles of woodland, unoccupied by livestock or other homes or pets, it picked up an additional 80 MPN/100 mL. It seems our horse pasture is doing a far better job of water protection than 1.1 miles of "ideal riparian landscape."

Note that our pasture water exits at 14 MPN/100 mL, but the Elliott West Wet Weather Treatment Station in King County was allowed to operate with an average of 79.5 MPN/100mL during the same time frame that the DOE was attacking us over our horses. Also note that according to the DOE publication Palouse River Fecal Coliform Bacteria Total Maximum Daily Load Water Quality Improvement Report and Implementation Plan December 2010 Publication No. 10-10-067, the document clearly states that "Primary Contact use is intended for waters 'where a person would have direct contact with water to the point of complete submergence including, but not limited to, skin diving, swimming, and waterskiing.'" It goes on to state that in waters used for primary contact, fecal coliform organism levels must not exceed 100 MPN/100 mL. This level was set using children as the most susceptible users of primary contact water. So according to the DOE itself, our horse pasture water is legally alright for small children to play in, but yet it has "substantial potential to pollute."

Interesting. It appears that the DOE did have an agenda, and were making an example out of us after all.

Unfortunately for us, after years of fighting the DOE with science and logic, despite having an amazing lawyer they managed to steamroll us anyway. It turns out that the DOE is judge and jury in these cases. We never even stood a chance.

It is our goal that our story gets out there for people to see and understand. It is not just our family that has been bullied by the DOE. In our quest to prove our horses could safely stay in their pasture, we met and spoke to many people who had also had run ins with the DOE. Many of these people were vocal and wanted to share their stories, but even more people, especially those involved with city water facilities, told us in no uncertain terms that they did not want to mess with the DOE.

Is this how we want our taxpayer dollars spent? Harassing and intimidating people over ridiculous cases in a public display of power? To crush families and cause hardship for animals? Is this what head of the Washington State DOE, Laura Watson, means when she says she "is well situated to understand all sides, and to know where and when compromise is possible?" Apparently so.

In the next few weeks we will be frantically building a new home for Kirsi and Miller, away from the highway, away from the prying eyes and bullying attitude of the DOE. We hope they are very happy with their win, and enjoy knowing that they successfully spent who knows how many thousands of taxpayer dollars, man hours, and government resources all the way up to the attorney general level in order to protect a drainage ditch from two pet horses.

Well played, DOE. Hopefully the information we provide here can help level the playing field for others in the future.