Boats On!

Max Legg and Betsy Brinson are longtime Bellingham/Whatcom County residents who also serve as co-chairpersons of the Lake Whatcom Stewardship Association.

The proposed boat ban on Lake Whatcom has stirred up much emotion on both sides. It’s one of those issues that could create divisions and distrust among the various groups in our community. Sadly, it appears that is the intention of at least some of the organizers of the initiative. One of the proponents was quoted in The Bellingham Herald as saying, “We’re talking about a few people who, in order to maintain their lifestyle, require motorboats on the water…It’s time to be mature and put their toys away now.”

This “haves vs. have-nots” approach is divisive and ignores the fact that a very large percentage of the almost 9,000 boat owners in Whatcom County would be surprised to hear that, because they own a boat, they are wealthy. They simply want the opportunity to take their families to the lake, go fishing or waterskiing, and enjoy one of the great benefits of living in this wonderful community.

The Healthy Community Campaign (http://www.healthycommunitycampaign. com) believes instead of dividing this community, there is a unique opportunity to unite different groups and individuals in this community around common goals. We believe those common goals are having clean water and the opportunity to enjoy the abundant recreation opportunities this area has to offer. There are some who say that we cannot have both—particularly when it comes to boating on Lake Whatcom. They say that recreational boating is incompatible with clean water. We believe the evidence will show they are wrong.

Another common goal that most of us who live here in Whatcom County share is the desire for rational and reasonable public policy. When the facts are learned about the water in Lake Whatcom, we believe conservatives and liberals, environmental activists and pro-growth activists can come together to express concern about the often senseless and even harmful decisions our city government is making.

Almost everyone would agree that public health and safety are higher priorities than the rights of citizens to enjoy recreation or their “toys.” The fact is, many of those involved in the Healthy Community Campaign live on the lake and draw untreated water directly from the lake. They have a very great concern about the water quality they drink. It may surprise some to find out that Lake Whatcom provides very clean water.

There are those who have tried to create a crisis around Lake Whatcom and who wish to see a fence around it with no one allowed in the watershed. But studies such as the May 2002 Entranco, Inc. report have clearly demonstrated that we enjoy a remarkably clean source of water when compared to other communities, even those who have reservoirs with protected watersheds.

Proponents of the Boats Off! Initiative have stated publicly that benzene is at a level in the lake that’s approaching a danger zone and the public is at risk from benzene. This is simply not true and is an example of extreme exaggeration that destroys credibility. The EPA Maximum Contamination Level for benzene is five parts per billion.

For most of the year, benzene in drinking water cannot be detected even with today’s sensitive instruments. When it has been detected, the highest amount is .04 parts per billion. That is .00000000004. This is a tiny fraction of the EPA safety level. What is interesting about this benzene figure is that it has been declining in recent years while boating activity has not. Benzene comes from many sources including atmospheric sources, wood fires and tobacco smoke. There is essentially no benzene in the lake, and what is there cannot reliably be linked to boats.

This does not make sense to a lot of people because boat motors—particularly older two-stroke engines—do emit some of their unburned fuel into the water. Why does it not show up in contamination in the water? The simple reason is that it evaporates. Should gasoline spill into water, the recommended treatment is to allow it to evaporate.

If people are concerned about the health effects of benzene, they should look to the air not the water. The air in Bellingham, among the cleanest in the nation, contains 20 to 100 times the amount of benzene in our drinking water. And because benzene in the air has a greater impact on health than in the water because of repeated exposure through breathing, this amount equates to 80 to 400 times the exposure from drinking our water.

It is very clear that banning boats would do nothing to protect public health. But, would it harm public safety? Nearly everyone who lives on the lake has either seen or participated in rescues. Sailors, kayakers, swimmers or other boaters frequently get in trouble on the often-rough water and it is the power boater who comes to their rescue. That is one reason why Whatcom Search and Rescue team members are so concerned about losing boats on the lake. Unless everyone is banned from the lake, banning boats will most likely cost lives while doing nothing to protect health.

As those involved in the Healthy Community Campaign have become more involved and educated on lake water issues, we are increasingly concerned about the policies of our city and county governments. It is beginning to become clear that important and costly decisions related to the lake are done on the basis of political grandstanding rather than sound science. We believe this is a basis for all people in this community truly concerned about the lake to come together and work for more rational, science-based policies that truly protect our clean water and our recreational opportunities.

On March 29, 2004, Professor Robin Matthews of Western Washington University made a presentation to City Council members. Dr. Matthews has studied the lake for over 20 years and has been the primary expert relied upon by the city regarding drinking water policy, despite the fact that other experts have criticized her conclusions (not her data) for being too extreme and too activist.

Dr. Matthews said, “Lake Whatcom is an unproductive lake. It’s the cleanest dirty water I’ve ever studied.” By unproductive she meant it is oligotrophic—not biologically active. But what did she mean when she said it was “dirty?” While most of the trend lines on elements tested remain relatively constant over the years, phosphorous and plankton showed marked increase in the last few years.

While even this data is somewhat contradictory if you refer to the data presented on the study Web site, Dr. Matthews drew the relatively strong conclusion that the lake is moving toward a more trophic state—more biologically active. This is natural for a lake over a long period of time and development near a lake can increase the speed of biological activity such as algae blooms. But even the development around Lake Whatcom cannot explain the relatively steady state of the lake and then the recent increase biological activity.

One City Council member asked Dr. Matthews if this trend in increasing “dirtiness” had anything to do with the decrease in flow through the lake following the shutdown of Georgia-Pacific (G-P). Let us quote Dr. Matthews’ answer: “If you look at the changes in the lake they line up almost exactly with the change in diversion (from the Nooksack). You can find they almost exactly match. In fact, when I was looking at the trend analysis, I started by dividing the data into pre- and post-change in G-P diversion and you get very definite changes—especially in site [Basin] 2, which is where the intake is—where we draw our water.”

The fact is that the city of Bellingham drew 1,025 million gallons per month from the Nooksack in 1992 and as of 2001 that diversion was down to 200 million gallons per month, nearly an 80 percent reduction in lake flushing. The city’s own expert has made it clear that the “dirty” water that has her worried is directly related to this change in diversion. As she said, “It’s an interesting coincidence and I don’t believe in that kind of coincidence.”

When asked why the city has reduced its diversion by 80 percent, the mayor responded that for most of the year, the city didn’t need to divert water in order to keep the level up. Maybe not. But it’s pretty clear that Lake Whatcom needs that water flowing through it to keep the algae blooms from happening and to protect the lake from increased biological activity.

If this is the primary problem that the city’s water expert focuses on and it has primarily to do with the city’s control over the Nooksack spigot, we would like to know why the city is not addressing this. We also would like to know why the city has used $8 million of taxpayer money to purchase land around the watershed when there is no evidence that this will have any impact on water quality. Those dollars bought 877 acres. There are 29,000 acres in the watershed. Buying our way to protection looks pretty expensive compared to turning the spigot back on.

The City and County Councils made clear in their March 17 joint meeting that the number one concern is stormwater runoff. Yet, the city is diverting money from stormwater fees to help pay for the new Farmers Market. We would like to know why.

Rational, reasonable people throughout Whatcom County need to become more informed about what is really happening with Lake Whatcom. We have clean water and it is a precious resource worth protecting. Citizens concerned about water quality need to work together to make certain our elected officials are focusing on the right issues and spending public money in ways that will actually do us good. We invite you to join us in that effort. §