100% Wild

With the recent acquisition of Forest Service and private lands within the Cedar River Watershed, the city of Seattle now owns the entire 90,500 acre watershed. Commercial logging took place in the watershed for nearly a century with serious side effects. Only 17% of the original forest lands remain, and restoration efforts are needed in the rest. Logging has left the watershed with more miles of roads than streams.

Recognizing the need to address these problems, the city, in conjunction with five state and federal agencies, is preparing a $70 million, 50-year Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) which would offer opportunities for restoration and protection of habitat and water quality in the watershed. It also would allow commercial logging and additional road building to take place in 36% of the watershed, ostensibly to fund the environmental restoration portion of the HCP. Over the next decade the city plans to log twice the acreage it logged during the previous decade.

Now that the press has declared Mayor Paul Schell aligned with Earth First! (see The Stranger, Feb. 12-18), the watershed is saved from the chainsaws, right? Well, not quite. Not as long as City Council President Sue Donaldson, Joni Balter of the Seattle Times, and others keep insisting that council member Margaret Pageler's proposal is the best option available--after all, Margaret has been looking at this issue for a long time now. Guess that makes her an "expert" and she, like all experts, knows what is best for us. (Now we're in real trouble.)

It's a shame that Pageler's ego is getting in the way of the city council taking a sound position on the logging issue. Thanks to Protect Our Watershed Alliance (POWA), a 100% preservation alternative will be included in the forthcoming Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). If this alternative is adopted, it will mean an immediate end to logging in the watershed--not in 10 years as proposed by Charlie Raines of the Sierra Club (why the hell wait 10 years?).

Pageler's plan could allow the logging of all but four live trees per acre in 36% of the watershed. (Fortunately, they can't log the other 64% due to a deal with the Federal government.) Pageler says emphatically that this is not a clearcut; but, we here at Stump Talk have seen the damage that such logging can do: erosion of topsoil, pollution and siltration of streams, loss of wildlife habitat, etc. We consider it a clearcut, both aesthetically and with respect to the environmental degradation it will cause.

POWA's stance is simple: no more commercial logging in the Cedar River Watershed--make the entire watershed an ecological reserve (i.e., the "100% preserve" option). Paying for this without logging the watershed would be easy. A slight increase in water rates--only about $3 per year per customer would cover the costs. Alternatively, the city could change its water rate structure. During the winter months, residential customers pay $7.20 per 500 cubic feet (cf) of water and commercial customers pay only $2.90 per 500 cf of water. During the summer months residential customers pay $11.35 per 500 cf ($7.20 for the first 500 cf) and commercial customers pay $8.20 per 500 cf of water. Why should residential customers, especially low-income and fixed-income, have to pay almost two and a half times more than commercial users? And shouldn't water be more expensive the more you use, especially for commercial users? Eliminating the rate disparity would provide enough money to support the watershed and partially fund future upgrades to Seattle's water and waste-water systems. The principle is simple: if you use more of our public resources, you should expect to pay more. What better way to force businesses to conserve water than to hit them in the pocketbook?

The Environmental Impact Statement will be issued April 17, followed by a 60-day time period for public comments (until June 17). For further information, contact Protect Our Watershed Alliance (POWA) at 206-632-1656, Seattle EF! at 206-632-2954, or Pacific Crest Biodiversity Project at 206-545-3734.

You can also urge the city council to adopt the 100% preserve idea now, not 10 years from now. It will take a majority vote by five city council members to carry a decision. Right now POWA has three council members on the fence and six (including Margaret Pageler) saying that Pageler knows best. Do we want to defer to the so-called "experts?" Stump Talk will let you know in a future column how and where to get a copy of the EIS for comments. Help make Seattle the first city in the nation to have a watershed preserved for clean drinking water now and for the future.

Stump Talk is put out every other week by a few ecofreaks. If you want to help or if you have comments leave a message for NW Forest Action Group at 206-215-1156 or email can@scn.org.