|
Top down governance and
pseudo science by Sue Forde for Citizen Review Online Clallam County, WA - 5/5/01 - A new Clean Water District will be discussed at the workshop on Monday at 10 a.m., and one public hearing on Tuesday, May 8 at 10 a.m. at the County Commissioner's meeting before the commissioner plan to vote it in. The vote will probably take place at that same time. The Clean Water District (CWD) is a metamorphosis of a Shellfish Protection District which has been "mandated" by the State Department of Ecology. The local "watershed council" - the Dungeness River Management Team (DRMT) proposed a renaming of the district to make it more palatable to the people of the area in order that the "entire watershed" could be encompassed on the District - in order to collect more money in the future taxes it will raise and provide more power to oversee the property owners in the District. County Commissioner Steve Tharinger, who will be voting on this issue, is also the chair of the DRMT. Several citizens have questioned whether this might be a conflict of interest on his part. History: Portions of Dungeness Bay have been closed down to shellfishing by the Department of Health due to the "high fecal coliform" found in the water which "might possibly" affect the shellfish. The original shut down occurred in 1997, giving plenty of time to take a shellfish district to the voters. The county commissioners, however, have waited until it's now a "crisis", and will be voting on the issue themselves. According to the 2000 Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan, "Oysters, clams and mussels are "filter feeders" meaning they take in and strain their food from the surrounding water. During the process of filter feeding, shellfish can accumulate contaminants that are present in the environment, including disease-causing organisms associated with human and animal feces." The method used to determine that shellfish may be contaminated is to test the water for bacteria. Further, the standards used are the highest issued by the EPA - based on commercial shellfish. What they don't mention is that the bacteria die off naturally within 24 -72 hours, so there's really no way of knowing if the shellfish are actually contaminated. One method to be assured that shellfish are not contaminated is to rinse them in fresh water for 72 hours prior to selling them. Near the Bay live myriads of ducks (in a protected area owned by Ducks Unlimited), and sea otters and sea lions. No scientific investigation has been made as to whether that could be the source of the pollution found in the shellfish. According to a small booklet entitled Protecting Water Quality in Dungeness Bay: It's In Your Hands (5/99, produced by the Clallam County Department of Community Development (DCD) and others), Fecal coliform bacteria "may not cause disease themselves, but they are indicators of the possible presence of other bacteria or viruses that are disease causing. It goes on to list all the man-made "possible" sources of fecal coliform, ie: "improperly treated sewage from failing septic systems, runoff from farms, runoff from yards (pet wastes) and others. There are many "maybe's" , "possibly's" , "may's", and "could indicate's" - all of which are sheer suppositions, and none of which are backed by valid scientific studies. It's a fear tactic to create a new taxing district that will "oversee" and "monitor" and "enforce" more regulations on people! Nonpoint Source Pollution This It's In Your Hands booklet was accomplished with funding and administration by the Puget Sound Water Quality Action Team (PSWQAT). In their "2000 Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan" (p55), the statement is made that nonpoint source pollution originates from human land uses. They go on to say "The state's salmon recovery plan identified nonpoint pollution sources as one of the primary causes of impaired salmon habitat." The solution to these "water quality" problems, according to the Plan, lies in the state's Growth Management Act, under which "all local governments in the Puget Sound basin address clean water and water quantity goals in local land-use plans and development regulations....they [cities and counties] control land use on about 65 percent of the land in Washington State. They call for measures such as comprehensive plans and critical areas codes [land use restriction programs] to "protect" the waters from the effects or potential effects of nonpoint source pollution. Regulatory measures are one of the methods advocated, with "adequate enforcement" to be provided. How it will be funded According to a report issued by the Clallam County Department of Community Development (DCD) in November 2000, Dungeness Watershed Management: Ten Years of Progress under "Management: Consolidate & Cooperate - To Do List:
The report was funded by grants by state and federal agencies (taxpayer's dollars at work). The report states that DCD has "no stable source of revenue to pay for most programs and activities." Where will the money come from? The Clean Water District is a taxing district. Funding would come from the taxpayers in the District, as its boundaries are designated - and probably beyond, as the proposed ordinance call for the entire "unincorporated Clallam County" to be under the "programs to remedy nonpoint surface pollution". The DRMT proposed, in October 2000 that the boundaries of the District encompass the "entire watershed". Monitoring the Streams One of the primary groups charged with "monitoring" the creeks and streams are the Streamkeepers, a "volunteer stewardship program." (See "Streamkeepers: 'Watching Over' the Watershed") In the DCD report, under "Information: Collect, Analyze, Share, & Use It - To Do List" - the stewardship program requires "stable funding for necessary water quality and water resource studies." The monitoring programs are to be expanded to include "better water quality and quantity data from wells". There will also be "incentives" to "consolidate water systems." Regarding recreation, the plan is to "devise a recreation management plan for the lower Dungeness River" and "continue efforts to increase public access to the Dungeness and other area streams." Metering the Wells? First the taxpayers are to pay for the new regulations and enforcement that will come from the Clean Water District. One wonders how the DCD (who is always placed in charge of "writing, administering and enforcing" these Codes once they are passed by the County Commissioners) plans on gathering "quantity data" from wells. There has been some discussion by the DRMT about metering wells. Metering wells costs the taxpayer in both installation for the metering devices on their well, and then the probably cost-per-water-usage that will follow. In a discussion with Cynthia Nelson of the state Department of Ecology, this reporter learned that Ecology does indeed intend to monitor how much water is being used (and the way to accomplish this is with metering). She assured me, however, that the 80% of water monitoring they're required to do will probably only affect irrigation ditches and the city of Sequim - and will not (probably) affect private landowners. (Yet.) This in addition to the already heavy cost of installing the well in the first place! She cited a Thurston County court decision as the reason why Ecology "must" take this action across the entire state. (In another court action in Yakima where the courts ruled against Ecology, however, the DOE is taking that to mean only in that one county.) They take action where it suits them to accomplish the goals of more land and water control over the people. It's a step-by-step process of having government control every aspect of our water. In reading the Governor's Draft Statewide Strategy to Recover Salmon: Extinction is Not An Option (1/99), Section III, Pg. 32 states: "Certain requirements, intended to apply in all Watersheds with ESA Listings or Potential Listings, will be implemented first in the highest priority watersheds. The Requirements Include:
Looks like metering WILL BE COMING to every resident with a well in the State. Watch for more on this one. New Boundaries: Thinking "Across the Lines of Traditional Jurisdictions" To date, our boundaries have been marked by county lines. Watershed planning groups would like to change that. According to PSWQAT, "the boundaries of land use and resource management programs have traditionally been established based on pollution sources, resources at risk, jurisdiction or land ownership." Now, they think it's time to change all that. "Watersheds are planning units that people can understand and work with," their report states. "However, planning at the watershed scale provides unique challenges. Characterizing watershed health takes time and money and agreement from diverse interests on the data and methods." "Working with such diverse clusters of governments and interest groups requires a high level of skill and different approaches from when one government only is in charge." As a result, the WA State Department of Ecology- an unelected, unaccountable bureaucracy - is deemed the "expert" agency to pull it all together and oversee the various phases required to accomplish their pre-determined outcomes - regardless of the lack of scientific evidence that such action is even necessary. Following the Trail Upward The State Department of Ecology has signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and another one with the Forest Service. Both these federal entities are members of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (United Nations). In the MOA between the USDA Forest Service and Ecology, it states "Ecology will review these TMDLs and submit to EPA for review and approval." Could this prove that the EPA is actually the lead agency on all of the water problems we are having? Related Stories: Proposed Clean Water District meets citizen resistance - Sue Forde Copy of the Proposed Ordinance (missing Exhibit "B") Proposed ordinance for Clean Water District Do you have a story from your area regarding the Growth Management Act or Critical Areas Code? Email me. sforde@tenforward.com |