ENFORCEMENT FIRST, EVIDENCE LATER? Washington seeks access to King Ranch ponds years after penalties

After fining the King family $267,540, terminating grazing leases, and opening a criminal investigation, officials are now asking to inspect ponds at center of the case.

Wade King on his ranch in Central Washington. Photo: Dan Wheat/Capital Press

Years after fining the King ranching family $267,540, terminating their grazing leases, and launching a criminal investigation, Washington officials are asking for permission to inspect the sites they claim were damaged.

The request suggests the state moved to punish the Kings without seeing damage or confirming whether the sites are legally protected wetlands. The Kings have maintained they are man-made stock watering ponds.

New DOE email requests permission to access King Ranch ponds

In a January 5, 2026 email obtained by UNWON from a third party—not the Kings or their attorneys—the Washington Department of Ecology (DOE) requests access to the ponds to determine whether they are, in fact, natural wetlands.

“The status of each site as a natural wetland is the central issue in the case—central to both Ecology’s enforcement effort and the arguments the Kings have asserted against that effort,” the email states. “Gathering this additional information is thus also central to the case and may be key to any future settlement potential.”

When asked for comment, the family’s attorney Toni Meacham said to her knowledge the state has physically inspected only four of 32 sites, and those inspections occurred after the state accused the family of wrongdoing in 2021.

“The state is trying to force the Kings to let them go across their private property,” Meacham says. “The heart of this case is protecting private property rights and water rights as well as protecting ranching and agriculture from government overreach.”

DOE calls request normal part of discovery process

DOE disputes that framing.

Andrew Wineke, the department’s deputy communications director, says the request is routine legal discovery essential to addressing the Kings’ appeal.

“The Jan. 5, 2026, email requesting access is part of the Department of Ecology’s legal discovery for the Kings’ appeal,” says Wineke. “The email notes that Ecology staff did conduct in-person visits to inspect several of these sites. However, the Kings have not consented to provide access to inspect sites on their property, or to access sites on leased lands that require crossing their property.”

According to Wineke, damage observed at the four inspected sites was consistent with photographic evidence in the case.

“In 2022 and in 2025, staff from Ecology and the Washington Department of Natural Resources visited sites on leased lands that could be reached without the Kings providing access,” he says. “The conditions and physical disturbances found during those in-person visits matched what can be seen in aerial and satellite images at the other sites.”

Meacham says Washington law protects ranchers’ right to maintain stock ponds without permits, citing RCW 90.44.050 and RCW 90.48.422.

Accusations of damaging protected alkali wetlands based on aerial photographs

The case began just two days before Christmas 2021, when the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) notified the King family that they were in default on their grazing lease.

The letter cited information provided by DOE.

“The State was notified by the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) that 14 Alkali Ponds have been disturbed on your lease, prior to February 2021,” the letter from DNR stated. “Alkali Ponds are categorized as rare critical type I wetland habitat. These ponds are also located within an area where cultural resource (sic) are known to exist.”

The state appears to have based their accusations on an aerial image pulled from Google Earth.

Trump admin threatens to withhold federal funding over “targeting” of ranch family

The Kings’ case has drawn national attention, with ranching and policy groups viewing it as a potential precedent for agriculture and property rights.

The Trump administration cited the Kings’ situation as an example of what it describes as “lawfare” against farmers and ranchers.

In December, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins threatened to pull federal funding from Washington state over what she called “targeted lawfare” and “weaponization of government agencies” against the family.

“Targeting a ranch for actively maintaining a man-made farm pond is not only wrong but impermissible under state and federal law,” Rollins wrote. “The Trump Administration will not sit idly by in the face of this injustice.”

Ranch and policy groups see case as bellwether

Groups like the America First Policy Institute (AFPI) say the outcome of the Kings’ appeal could have broad implications.

“For far too long, contributions to society and the ecosystem at large coming uniquely from American producers have been taken for granted,” says T.J. Wilson, deputy director of rural policy at AFPI. “Selective enforcement of disjointed and onerous state regulations on families like the Kings make it even more challenging for our producers to feed their fellow Americans and steward critical natural resources. Putting America first means putting the viability of farming in America, and American family farms like the Kings’ first. Government agencies don’t get a pass on having to follow the law. The constitutional rights of American producers should be honored before, rather than after agencies take costly enforcement action.”

Ranch groups describe the case as an example of the “improper state government action” to which producers are too often subjected.

“We appreciate USDA’s action and look forward to working closely with Secretary Rollins to help resolve this case and confront the overreach and abuse of power that threaten ranch families across the West,” said R-CALF USA Property Rights Chair Shad Sullivan. “Protecting private property rights is absolutely essential to stopping the broader war on beef and preserving the future of America’s cattle industry.”