Opinion

Leaders should help with tough decisions

I think you could subtitle your opinion piece (Aug. 31 editorial);


"Are They Mutually Exclusive?" I have


only been here 18 months, but I have seen many articles on how the


Snoqualmie Valley area is sitting on huge aquifers that will be critical to the growth


of the Eastside.


In spite of the importance of this resource, there seems to be little


activity to determine the sizes and locations of the aquifers, and, more


importantly (as you point out), the accumulated projected usage. We seem


to be content to say there is a lot of water down there, and we can use it for


this project and that project and there will always be more. Doesn't


common sense cry out for a study and a plan?


The entire scenario seems akin to a teen-ager with his/her first bank


account and no training or experience in handling money. Given an


unknown sum by the parents, no stated balance in the account and no budget for


income or outgo, the teen-ager is left to his/her own devices to do with


the money what he/she will.


So what happens? Well, the immediate needs are satisfied without


a long-range plan being put into effect. The money goes for clothes,


dates, CDs, etc., until suddenly the bank says there is no more money in the


account. Then the teen-ager asks, "Where do I get more?"


This is what we are doing with water. We have said the Eastside


aquifers will be needed in the future to fuel growth. How many aquifers are


there? Where are they located? How big are they? How much can we use them


and still have them replenished by rainfall? What is our annual water budget?


Currently the Department of Ecology is not processing any well


permits, and yet King County is considering two projects that seem ludicrous


in light of their potential impact. First and foremost is the North Bend


gravel project proposed by Cadman. By Cadman's own conservative


estimates, this will consume 48 million gallons of water annually. Where will they


get this water? They will drill a well into an aquifer! They will also grade


the lower project site down to a level dangerously close to the top of the


aquifer, even though no one knows just where the top of the aquifer


is. Cadman's record in Monroe makes that a worrisome proposition at best.


The second project is Glacier Northwest's proposal to start


blasting without any real knowledge of what the impact will be on the aquifer.


With consistent, long-term blasting in a localized area, in close proximity


to known aquifers, isn't it logical to expect that this could cause some


settling that might damage the capacity of the aquifer? (Editor's note:


Glacier Northwest disputes this claim.) What are we going to do, wait until a


catastrophe happens and then regret we didn't think about it sooner?


As you say at the end of your editorial, tough questions and


even tougher solutions lie ahead. Why are you the only one asking about


this? Where are our community leaders in this? Are they demanding further


studies and better answers, or are they quiet, waiting to hear what


King County, Cadman, Glacier Northwest and the big political contributors


have to say? Are they leaders, or are they pawns?


Tough questions and tough solutions demand intelligent, forceful


leaders with common sense, leaders who will do what is right, rather than


what is politically expedient.



Ken Hall


North Bend

We encourage an open exchange of ideas on this story's topic, but we ask you to follow our guidelines for respecting community standards. Personal attacks, inappropriate language, and off-topic comments may be removed, and comment privileges revoked, per our Terms of Use. Please see our FAQ if you have questions or concerns about using Facebook to comment.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Read the Nov 19
Green Edition

Browse the print edition page by page, including stories and ads.

Browse the archives.