Washblog

Gregoire's plan includes:

-Cleaning up more than 60 sites contaminated by toxic substances within a half-mile of Puget Sound. Cleanup and prevention of toxics make up $54.7 million of the $220 million budget.

-Restoring salmon habitats and shorelines to more natural conditions by removing creosote logs and abandoned vessels. Price tag: $37.4 million.

-Ensuring cities and counties reduce the amount of toxic stormwater runoff, including improving old stormwater systems, at a cost of $25.3 million.

-Cleaning up septic pollution, by helping homeowners upgrade failing septic systems and helping local governments improve septic system programs. This is expected to be the most expensive part of the initial project, costing $56.3 million.

What the AP article glosses over is found deeper in the Puget Sound Partnership's report. The major problem of stormwater overload can be directly contributed from overdevelopment and a lack of enforcement of land-use laws. What does the report say?

A variety of actions must be used for habitat protection including timely and effective enforcement of habitat protection requirements, and there is broad support to improve compliance with existing laws. Additional strategies -- including education to encourage individual stewardship, land use policies that direct growth toward urban areas, and maintaining rural areas for farming and forestry -- will help protect and sustain upland and marine habitats.

The report mentions that laws on the books are sufficient for habitat protection and smart land-use policy, but the problem isn't so much the laws, but enforcement of them. More from the report:

Sudden increases in stream flow that occur during high rainfall can be greatly exacerbated by urbanization that replaces natural vegetation with pavement or rooftops. This water surge can damage habitat in streams and wetlands. Managing stormwater runoff is essential for clean water, as well as protecting habitat and our supply of water. Stormwater runoff from new and existing roads and developed areas must be managed to maximize the amount of water that soaks into the ground. Many of the region's cities and urban areas were built before stormwater was controlled or treated, and extensive retrofitting and treatment of water running off city streets will be needed, especially in priority areas. New development will need to be located and built to minimize impacts and comply with existing laws.

These findings are well documented in their real-world effect by Noemie's post on Joesph Schuler's farm and the results of a lassis-faire policy on land-use taken by the City of Auburn and Washington Department of Ecology. Another question that should be raised, how does such development alter Puget Sound? Like the intro says, what we do upstream has a profound effect downstream, and ultimately the entire sound region:

Puget Sound is a vast and beautiful estuary -- one of the largest in the United States. Waters rush down from the mountains through fertile valleys and mix with shifting tides and currents in the sparkling saltwater basin. Puget Sound is also a complex living ecosystem -- the collective body of plants and animals that interact with each other and their surroundings.

Thank god I-933 failed, things would be much worse had it passed. Nevertheless, the foundation for cleaning up Puget Sound needs to be done now, with the political capitol available to move legislation. If anyone has been to Hood Canal recently, you know how bad it is for fishing, alge blooms, etc.