Proposed Clean Water District meets citizen resistance

a report by Sue Forde, for the Citizen Review Online

Sequim, WA - May 3, 2001 - Approximately 75 citizens and agency employees gathered at the Carrie Blake Center in Sequim to learn more about the proposed "Clean Water District" scheduled to face a vote by Clallam County commissioners on May 8th. Most of the participants were state or county employees, with about 25 individual citizens attending. The citizens who raised questions or made comments expressed, for the most part, opposition to the idea of the new taxing district.

The public information meeting began at 6 p.m. with poster viewing, informal discussion and refreshments.  Ground rules were laid before the formal presentation began, which admonished listeners to "be polite and try to dwell on the positive - try not to dwell on the negative, but it's okay to ask for clarification.  "Don't be too judgmental," suggested Andy Brastad of Clallam County Natural Resources Division.

County Commissioner Steve Tharinger gave the opening remarks, stating that the closing of Dungeness Bay due to shellfish contamination is the "single most cataclysmic event" the Peninsula has seen.  The Dungeness Bay has had several areas closed by the State Department of Health; several have been reopened.

Washington State has required that a Shellfish Protection District be formed once an area has been "downgraded".  The Dungeness River Management Team (DRMT), however, put forth the idea that the Shellfish Protection District be renamed the Clean Water District, with boundaries expanded to cover a large area of the Sequim-Dungeness Valley instead of limiting the area to the Bay itself.  The DRMT also suggested that the "water quality" issue be included with the District.  A Clean Water District would be a new taxing district, although Commissioner Tharinger stated in a recent local newspaper article that taxes would not be charged.  It was learned at this meeting, however, that taxes may not be assessed so long as grants are available from the state to cover the cost of the District.

The forum, Tharinger stated, is so folks can inform themselves, and that the  "basic issue is clean water for the Dungeness Valley."  He explained that "no-point pollution is not knowing what the problems is" that is causing "high fecal coliform."  He said that birds have been around for a millennium, but "suddenly, there's a problem here."  He said that they have received State Department of Ecology (DOE) and Centennial Water grants for septic systems, and the Clallam Conservation District is developing "good management practices" for small farms around the area.  The DOE has "visited" farms in the community to see about compliance.  He said that "staff" has "helped us take a broader view of what it means to have quality of water in our valley."  He added, "This is a process", and hasn't been decided, but we are under state law.  "We were required to have some kind of district put in place by October of last year," he said. "We need to have some sort of district; we're leaning toward a Clean Water District," he added.

Andy Brastad talked about shellfish protection districts, and why the legislature has "imposed" them on counties that have undergone downgrades.  He said that RCW 90.72 required that a Shellfish Protection District (SPD) be formed within 180 days of commercial shellfish growing area downgrades and closures.  The largest area downgrade occurred in April 2000, he said.  The "county is liable" if we don't create an SPD, he stated. "Someone could bring a lawsuit against the county for not creating a district."  The district is a focus area for water quality and shellfish resource protection programs, he commented.  He said the county will "use existing advisory groups for making decisions, etc."  The county decides on the boundaries for the District, and there is "lots of latitude," he stated.  It can be a small focus area, countywide or there can be multiple focus districts, he said.  The county staff has consulted with other watershed planning groups in counties with similar problems.  They have attended workshops with other counties to learn "how they do it."

The DRMT says we should be "pro-active" in our Clean Water District, Brastad continued.  They want to cover a full range of water quality problems, and have set the District boundaries to coincide with the DRMT watershed boundaries, from Bagley Creek all the way to Sequim Bay.  

Brastad said that funding for the District could come from special fees and assessments, from county general funds, or from grants and loans.  He said they will be "seeking grants and loans and not talking about taxes and fees."

The main focus here, Brastad stated, is a "long term commitment to environmental stewardship."

Valerie Wilson, also with the Clallam County Natural Resources Division, said her background was in biology and environmental science.  "People always say it's the water.  It really isn't.  It's about the land, too....It's funny little government things that makes not a lot of sense," she said.  She talked about nonpoint pollution, which is also called "runoff" pollution. She asked, "How do we know whether we have good water or not - we need indicators." She believes it's caused by small inputs of pollution from many difference sources, scattered around the watershed.  "Land Use Counts!", she said.  "The rain connects the earth and water," she added.

She said that nitrates are an "indicator" of water quality problems.  Although not harmful to adults, they may be "bad for small children," she affirmed. "When they eat shellfish that's undercooked, they get sick with shellfish if nitrates are there - there could be - maybe as well", Wilson said.

"We're talking about a changing landscape," Wilson stated.  There are "...more rooftops, more driveways...we're 'hardening' our landscape.  We're changing the way our water moves," she said.  The problem, according to Wilson, is an "increasing population."  There has been an 20% increase in Sequim and a 15% in the unincorporated Clallam County area, according to Wilson.  (Sequim's population is approximately 4,200.) More land use changes are a problem, she added.

Although "fecal coliform is a growing problem," according to Wilson, parts of the Dungeness Bay which were previously closed have now been reopened.  One cause of increased fecal coliform in an increase of water temperature.  Although fecal coliform itself is not a problem, it's an "indicator" of a potential problem, according to Wilson.

Wilson said the DRMT recommended the name change and geographical area, to be a full "watershed approach."  We are not creating a whole new management area, she said, but coordinating with the DRMT.  We're "not creating another bureaucracy, just using the bureaucracy already existing," she affirmed.  It's a "holistic approach," she added.

Actions underway include the Clallam Conservation District teaching "best management practices"; the Clallam County Environmental Health Department's "educational program", and developing a "strategy for particular areas...they will 'inspect' those areas," Wilson said.  There is a Clean Water Advisory Committee already in place for the new District, comprised of local, state and federal agencies from the DRMT.

The "most important ingredient" according to Wilson, is "community involvement and support."  She said, "Watershed residents are the ones that will really solve the problem." 

Debby Sargeant from the WA Department of Ecology (DOE) spoke next about fecal coliform in the watershed.  "We looked for a single source to make the problem go away," she said.  She showed maps and talked about various areas that had been tested, trying to find where the fecal coliform is coming from.  DOE has done a year-long study looking for sources in the areas.  They're trying to find the "human impacts" on the water quality.  Four out of 17 waterways (from streams to rivers to creeks) met the "clean water" standards set by the EPA, she said.  (See article about EPA and the Clean Water Standards.)

Don Melvin, from the Washington State Department of Health - Department of Food, Safety & Shellfish, said that he's probably the one that started this "problem."  "I guess we're the folks who started this whole mess," he said. He added they've been finding this "problem" throughout Western Washington.

Dr. Jack Rensel of Rensel & Associates, introduced himself as an "aquatic scientist and consultant", and informed the audience of "modeling" procedures.  This is one of the main ways that a "problem" is discovered; they start with a "conceptual model", and as the model goes along, they "must refine assumptions and recognize limitations," he said. 

Dr. Rensel said that "water fecal coliforms are probably mixed...We need to know more about what fecal coliform does, too!"

At 8 p.m., the presentation was opened up to questions and answers; and there were many questions and comments from the citizens present.

Don Melvin responded to one query about how long this whole process would take, with "2-10 years is a time range to look at in getting it turned around," but did not want to commit to that time limitation.

One citizen commented that fecal coliform came into the Dungeness Bay shortly after they stopped dredging the boat channel, and wondered if they had looked into it.

Walt Schubert, city councilman for the City of Sequim, stated that the City had entered into a memorandum of understanding about the Clean Water District agreeing to its implementation provided there would be no taxation without the people voting on it.  There are no guarantees about that, was the response.  It would be up to the county commissioners to decide.

Schubert wanted to know how people could vote on this issue when no one knows where the pollutants are coming from.  Sargeant responded that they have done 18 surveys - "we have several sites on one landowner's property".

Bob Caldwell commented that the livestock numbers have gone down dramatically, and that the larger herds are fenced out of the stream areas, yet the problem seems to have increased. Debby  Sargeant of DOE responded that the problem could be "more development in rural areas, more hobby farms, more houses with onsite systems, people who have one or two animals close to irrigation ditches, it could be onsite sewage treatment, there's a lot of development, stormwater runoff because of that."

Sequim Mayor Bill Thomas made remarks that the Clean Water District should be promoted.

Milton Griffing offered evidence from a scientist to debunk the theory that there is a need for a shellfish district.  "If you cleaned up the river to zero percent fecal coliform, there will still be pollution in Dungeness Bay," he said.  "There are enough regulations and rules on the books now.  "We don't need another bureaucratic district imposed on a rural district," he stated.

"This here has got me worried," said Cecil Dawley, one local landowner.

One gentlemen asked if any studies had been done on bi-valves, which eat bacteria.  No answer was given, and the subject was changed, as Rensel attacked Milton Griffing's presentation.  This reporter raised the question again, and the response was made that "no, no study had been done."  Someone said, "I thought that shellfish being contaminated was the problem, and you haven't studied the bi-valves?  The response was that there is a "high probability" of shellfish being contaminated.

One person stated that harbor seals have doubled, and that there are approximately 800 today.

Another wanted to know what would happen if the grant funding doesn't come through?  "Can't answer those right now," was the response.

Will this new District restrict land development? another citizen wanted to know.  Steve Tharinger responded that they need to "manage the human impact on water quality."  We need to "manage" those buffers and streams, he said.  "We are a thinking animal," Tharinger affirmed.

This reporter asked whether there will be water metering in the valley, or if any discussion has been made about it.  Tharinger responded "At no point have I heard about that point."  The reporter asked him to verify that he is the chair of the DRMT; he said, yes, he is.  This reporter stated that water metering was a topic of discussion according to the DRMT notes at a meeting where he was present.  At that point, an unidentified woman intercepted his response, and said "I think I can answer that question" and proceeded to say that she didn't remember that metering had been discussed.  The meeting was closed shortly thereafter.  

When asked to identify herself, the unidentified woman came over to this reporter after the meeting to discuss the metering issue - she identified herself as Cynthia Nelson, Department of Ecology.  She said that metering would probably begin with the Dungeness River as a method of determining how much water is being used, but the irrigation districts and city of Sequim would be first.  Private citizens wouldn't have to have meters, she said.  This reporter added, "yet".  She said it was required by way of a lawsuit in Thurston County, the Committee of Environment Law & Policy vs. Department of Ecology.  More will be reported on this issue at a later date.