The Whatcom Excavator
  • Home
    • About Us
    • Who's Planning Our Lives?
    • Diminishing Property Rights
    • NGO's & Public-Private Partners
    • Agenda 21
    • Buzzwords
    • Deep Thought
    • Best Available Science
    • Best Available Humor >
      • Humor Archive
  • The DREDGE
    • Gotta See This
    • How To Dredge
  • Bulldozed
    • Eco-Activism and County Policy
    • CELDF - "Democracy"
    • ALERT: Community Energy Challenge
  • Pig Trough
    • ReSources
    • Sustainable Connections
    • BALLE
    • ICLEI
    • Whatcom County Community Network
    • Big Wheels Award
  • Contact Us

Comparing Dirty and Clear Flows Into Lake Whatcom

8/2/2012

3 Comments

 
BaldGuy has posted more video just today to help folks understand just how dirty the water flowing into Lake Whatcom has been.   These two videos were taken in the same place, but on two different days:

  Turbid...

Clear...

July 17    ("Dirty Water" by Blackeyed Susans)

"Turbid water flows into Lake Whatcom from Mirror Creek, the outlet into Lake Whatcom from the City of Bellingham’s diversion from the Nooksack River....  Does this sediment contain phosphorous?  Sediment is claimed to be the cause of introducing phosphorous into the lake and degrading water quality."

Aug 1    ("Clear Water" by Toshinori Kondo)

"A view of the same area right at the mouth of Anderson Creek as it flows into Lake Whatcom.   The Bellingham-operated diversion has now been shut off.   Look at how the clarity has changed.   The area around the entrance as well as the water flowing from Anderson Creek appear far different from the turbid cloudy flow that streamed into the lake while Bellingham flowed the diversion water." 

This official diagram helps a person visualize how this system works:
Picture
A lot of reasonable people are wondering:

(a) Are the agencies doing the pumping and flushing performing the measurements and tests that their permits require?

(b)  How does this flushing and turbid water affect the "lake science" data?   If the lake data doesn't note this, are land use and stormwater management conclusions correct?

(c)  Are watershed and lakefront property owners bearing the brunt of the burden for water quality in the lake?   Do these practices impact the lake as much or more than customary land use does?

Those are pretty good questions. 

It would be unjust for the general population to have to "restore," "mitigate," "enhance," and suffer crippling moratoriums for harm not actually related to their own actions (to make up for the actions of others).   There's a critical principle about damage that requires a direct connection (link or tie) to be proven between action, damage and remedy.   A remedy must be proportionate to be fair.  In the case of Lake Whatcom, is all the damage done by homeowners ("development")?

Just yesterday the Washington Department of Ecology announced new state LID (low impact development) regulations that will require people to install rain gardens, severely limit impervious surfaces, obtain off-site mitigation, and a long list of other actions, even though a recent cost-benefit study prepared for the City of Bellingham revealed that many "best management practices" (BMP's) for handling stormwater to reduce phosphorous appear to be so outrageously expensive that they probably shouldn't be recommended.  WE understand those BMP's are still being enthusiastically pushed by outfits like ReSources and their "Baykeeper" people.

Customary land use, including the advanced forestry practices that have been in place on DNR land in the watershed since the "Landscape Plan" was adopted, may have substantially less impact on the condition of Lake Whatcom's water than what we've been led to believe.

WE look forward to learning more about what's going on, and if the "remedies" being imposed in the Lake Whatcom watershed are proportionate.   Stay tuned.   Readers - feel free to comment.
3 Comments
Dave Onkels
8/6/2012 10:57:49 am

John Lesow commented to the Planning commission:
"john lesow
4:04 PM (1 hour ago)

to PDS_Planning_C., Rod, Mary, Ben, Ken, Michelle, David, Gary, Jeff, council, Jack
Thanks for the video

The turbidity from Mirror Lake was referenced by Perry Estridge of the Whatcom County Realtors at the last Council meeting on the Rural Element. Apparently it has been making the rounds. This is the first I'd seen it.

Inevitably, these alarmist communications coincide on the eve of decisions on County policy, in this case the County Comp Plan, scheduled for a final hearing and vote tomorrow.

Maybe the good folks at The Whatcom Excavator can provide some answers to the questions posed in the attached. I won't hold my breath.

Even better, how about the County Council and/or the County Executive answering the same questions posed in this post, namely:

(a) are the agencies doing the pumping and flushing performing the measurements and tests that their permits require ?

(b) How does this flushing and turbid water affect the "lake science data"? If the lake data doesn't note this, are land use and stormwater management conclusions correct?

(c) Are the watershed and lakefront property owners bearing the brunt of the burden for water quality in the lake? Do these practices impact the lake as much or more than customary land use does?

These questions are copied verbatim from the post.

Maybe county government can provide answers. They have the resources to do so.

(a) should be easy.

(b) may require some research, but if the answer to (a) is "yes, and the results are negligible", then the video is a red herring, nothing more.

(c) No one likes to be blamed for the mess of another, but there is no evidence to show that property owners are unduly burdened. To the question, "Do these practices impact the lake as much or more than customary land use does"? My non-scientific reaction is that the flushing of Mirror Lake does not. And you would have to define what "customary land use" is. Logging? Homebuilding? Seaplanes? Small lot lakefront properties with pet dogs? Geese?

Until these questions are answered, the post has little value.

John Lesow
Whatcom County Planning Commissioner
District 3

Reply
Karl Uppiano link
8/6/2012 05:17:08 pm

According to the time stamp, this article was posed 08/02/12, which wasn't on the eve of anything that I'm aware of.

Mr. Lesow, customary land use is whatever use a landowner would use his legally obtained property for, which might be any of the things that you list, above. However, logging and home building have been traditional land uses in the area, along with dogs and geese (although the geese fly in and out of their own accord, and don't seem to be under much landowner control). It appears to me, that the point of this valueless post was to point out that many factors affect Lake Whatcom water quality. The questions legitimately ask if government is being fair in their "taking" of citizens' property rights.

Reply
WE Editors
8/6/2012 11:28:21 pm

WE respond, "Who's the conspiracy theorist?” And, “Who's jumping to conclusions in the absence of data or science?"

These videos are real, valid, observations. The questions are sincere. And yes they should be answered. How much can the public trust the agencies involved to give straight answers?

This material wasn't released on the "eve" of anything specific. There’s a constant onslaught of new policies.

WE received this material and posted it as quickly as it could be vetted, formatted and loaded.

WE made no references to the comp plan update. But now that you mention it, WE wonder if there's some connection to the Rural Element that we missed if these videos somehow triggered your reaction to this item.

WE do expect that those with a) preconceived notions, and b) a stake in the lake management game will bend over backwards to discredit both truth and criticism. That has been the (frankly, hypocritical) modus operandi in these parts for years.

We would ask of Mr. Lesow, and the City, and the "eco-warriors" -- how much do you honestly care about science and practical solutions when the sole (and highly unimaginative) idea you ever seem to forward is “Deny private citizens the use of their land to the greatest extent possible.” Oh, unless land use means a vast increase in biking, hiking, a ballooning parks empire, and any other venture that will line the pockets of cronies and (speaking of murky water) the Land Trust.

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    WE Dredge!
    Picture
    Posting Rules:
    This forum is moderated.  Please make an effort to substantiate claims that support opinion.  Gratuitous profanity and ad-hominem attacks will not be accepted.  You can create a "nickname" if you'd like, and you don't have to reveal your e-mail address.   Feel free to share information and your honest thoughts.

    Categories

    All
    Agenda 21
    Best Available Science
    Big Government
    Eco Activism
    Ethics
    Freedom
    Planning
    Property Rights
    Science
    Small Business
    Social Engineering
    Taxes
    Welcome

    Archives

    January 2022
    September 2020
    August 2020
    April 2020
    November 2019
    August 2019
    September 2018
    July 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    September 2017
    July 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    June 2015
    March 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011


    Automatic Updates

    Do you want to be notified when new content is added to this newsfeed? Most browsers allow you to subscribe to our Really Simple Syndication (RSS) feed. Click on the RSS link below, and follow the instructions.

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.