Wash. Rev. Code » Title 90 · Chapter 90.22
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 90.22.010 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The department of ecology may establish minimum water flows or levels for streams, lakes or other public waters for the purposes of protecting fish, game, birds or other wildlife resources, or recreational or aesthetic values of said public waters whenever it appears to be in the public interest to establish the same. In addition, the department of ecology shall, when requested by the department of fish and wildlife to protect fish, game or other wildlife resources under the jurisdiction of the requesting state agency, or if the department of ecology finds it necessary to preserve water quality, establish such minimum flows or levels as are required to protect the resource or preserve the water quality described in the request or determination. Any request submitted by the department of fish and wildlife shall include a statement setting forth the need for establishing a minimum flow or level. When the department acts to preserve water quality, it shall include a similar statement with the proposed rule filed with the code reviser. This section shall not apply to waters artificially stored in reservoirs, provided that in the granting of storage permits by the department of ecology in the future, full recognition shall be given to downstream minimum flows, if any there may be, which have theretofore been established hereunder.
[ 1997 c 32 s 4; 1994 c 264 s 86; 1988 c 47 s 6. Prior: 1987 c 506 s 96; 1987 c 109 s 103; 1969 ex.s. c 284 s 3.]

Notes:

Application—1988 c 47: See note following RCW 90.54.030.
Legislative findings and intent—1987 c 506: See note following RCW 77.04.020.
Purpose—Short title—Construction—Rules—Severability—Captions—1987 c 109: See notes following RCW 43.21B.001.
Severability—1969 ex.s. c 284: See note following RCW 90.48.290.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 22 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1997–2025 · leading case: Swinomish Indian Tribal Cmty. v. Dep't of Ecology, 311 P.3d 6 (Wash. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Swinomish Indian Tribal Cmty. v. Dep't of Ecology, 311 P.3d 6 (Wash. 2013). · cites it 7× “RCW 90.22.010 provides in part: The department of ecology may establish minimum water flows or levels for streams, lakes or other public waters for the purposes of protecting fish, game, birds or other wildlife resources, or recreational or aesthetic values of said public waters…”
Whatcom Cnty. v. W. Washington Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 381 P.3d 1 (Wash. 2016). · cites it 2× “” RCW 90.22.010. Once established, minimum flows are like any other appropriative water right in that they are subject to the rule of “first in time is the first in right.”
Pub. Util. DIST. v. State, Dept. of Ecology, 51 P.3d 744 (Wash. 2002). “22 RCW which authorized Ecology to "establish minimum water flows [to] protect[] fish, game, birds or other wildlife resources, or recreational or aesthetic values," RCW 90.22.010, indicating its recognition that volume is distinct from quality.”
Pub. Util. Dist. No. 1 v. Dep't of Ecology, 146 Wash. 2d 778 (Wash. 2002). “22 RCW which authorized Ecology to “establish minimum water flows [to] protectQ fish, game, birds or other wildlife resources, or recreational or aesthetic values,” RCW 90.22.010, indicating its recognition that volume is distinct from quality.”
Postema v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 11 P.3d 726 (Wash. 2000). “RCW 90.22.010 and .020, enacted in 1969, Laws of 1969, 1st Ex.”
Postema v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 142 Wash. 2d 68 (Wash. 2000). “RCW 90.22.010 and .020, enacted in 1969, Laws of 1969, 1st Ex.”
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe v. Dep't of Ecology, 112 Wash. App. 712 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “[ 4 ] Ecology’s agreement with the City may be characterized as an implementation of RCW 90.22.010 and chapter 90.03 RCW, which authorize Ecology to establish minimum water flows in public waters to protect fish, game, birds or other wildlife resources, and to appropriate water…”
Richard A. Fox & Marnie B. Fox, Apps. v. Skagit Cnty., Res., 372 P.3d 784 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “RCW 90.22.010 empowers the Department to “establish minimum water flows or levels for streams, lakes or other public waters .”
Wells Fargo Bank, NA v. Dep't of Revenue, 271 P.3d 268 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “In this case, the agency decision concerns the exercise of regulatory power to set instream flows by rule under RCW 90.22.010 and RCW 90.54.040, or to initiate an adjudication among water right holders under RCW 90.”
Hubbard v. Dep't of Ecology, 936 P.2d 27 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “Second, the minimum flows established by rule pursuant to RCW 90.22.010 and RCW 90.54.040 are treated as appropriations with priority dates as of the ef *125 fective dates of their establishment.”
Whatcom Cnty. v. W. Washington Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 344 P.3d 1256 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “247; RCW 90.22.010. WAC 173-500-040. Clerk’s Papers (Case No.”
Magdalena T. Bassett v. Washington State Dep't Of Ecology, 438 P.3d 563 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “” RCW 90.22.010. MIFs adopted under this statute “shall be provided for through the adoption of rules.”
Show all 22 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.