It’s become overwhelming what humans have done to our earth and resources that are certain to burden many future generations. One has only to look at what this generation will spend to clean up the spoils of our past to realize what our forefathers had in mind when they wrote our great constitution.

From billions of dollars required to repair contaminated waterways and neglected forest roads to the federal Superfund cleanup sites, to loss of forest habitat that has accelerated species extinction rates and depleted fish stocks – we have contracted massive debts.

There are impacts from stormwater runoff from highways and impervious surfaces from previous development, shoreline hardening and disruption of littoral habitat which continue to contaminate stormwater drainage systems, fresh water streams and marine shorelines. Dispersed sources of ‘nonpoint’ source pollution threaten water quality, including litter, illegal dumping, solvents, petroleum products and wastes that are transported and deposited on roads and highways.

A vast flood of fertilizer, feed-lot run-off, pesticides and industrial pollutants course down virtually every waterway. Most of the population and the major cities in our state are on coastlines, where biologically disruptive substances flow directly into the Puget Sound.

In May 2001, the Washington State Legislature passed Engrossed Senate Bill 6188 - the Environmental Permit Streamlining Act (RCW 47.06) to coordinate streamlining the environmental permitting process for transportation projects. The bill creates an interagency Transportation Permit Efficiency and Accountability Committee (TPEAC), which is responsible for creating a sustained focus on achieving both the transportation and environmental goals of the state.

As one of four legislators serving on the TPEAC, a bill he helped to draft, House Representative Phil Rockefeller will soon be working on legislation related to Transportation Permitting. “While TPEAC doesn’t directly focus on Puget Sound issues, it will apply environmental standards to transportation infrastructure investments and the securing of necessary federal, state and local approvals on projects of statewide significance. This addresses a variety of issues: programmatic permits; consolidated permitting processes; the design of integrated document files of information that will allow the various permitting agencies to work as a team with WSDOT; developing ways for WSDOT to draft proposed permits, and interact with the permitting agencies. The draft will go to the agency with the authority to approve, disapprove, or modify. Another key area is improved watershed-based mitigation practices and decisions, and the development of a comprehensive, multi-layered data base to facilitate better, faster decisions.”

In 1987, the Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan established a watershed management process to protect Puget Sound and its resources from the effects of nonpoint source pollution. The Plan directed the 12 counties bordering Puget Sound to identify and rank by priority their watersheds for nonpoint source pollution control, and to develop and implement action plans that would protect these watersheds from nonpoint source pollution. Closely coordinated with the programs of other state and federal agencies, the watershed management process represents the first fully-integrated approach to nonpoint source pollution control in the Northwest. The Action Group also developed a regulation, the Nonpoint Rule (WAC Chapter 400-12) to govern the watershed planning program.

As Vice Chair of the House Committee on Natural Resources, and one of four legislators who sit on the State’s Puget Sound Council, Rockefeller can speak to efforts that will bring long-term environmental benefits to the Puget Sound habitat. “We need to realize that sustainable development and protection of our natural resources will attract and retain good business. The economy and a healthy ecosystem are inextricably linked, a pre-condition to the quality of life that attracts people and business here in the first place. We can no longer shift costs of development onto the environment.”

“The recently adopted two-year work plan of the Puget Sound Action Team calls for initiatives to improve water quality, reduce and eliminate contamination from non-point sources, and restore once-productive tributaries, estuaries, shellfish beds, and shorelines. I’ve advocated for adopting measurable goals, quantifiable and timeliness performance standards, for cleanup — something they have not done in the past, but this year’s plan begins to do that.”

On the Puget Sound Council, Rockefeller advises the PSWQAT and its government, tribal, and stakeholder partners as to the quality of the plan. “Despite a lot of efforts over the years, we still see deterioration of indicator species of fish, shellfish, and marine mammals. We have not yet found a basis for stopping the deterioration — let alone ensure long-term recovery and protection of the resource — despite some limited successes and recoveries,” he critiqued.

“The first strategic goal at the state level is to rehabilitate and protect the functionality of habitat and water resources using watershed-based planning. With the failure to pass Ref. 51 and the challenges of dealing with fragmented funding, we need to drive dollars to priorities against that framework. The watershed-based model will offer the best return on our investments,” he said, as he addressed Gov. Gary Locke, state lawmakers, Department of Ecology officials and others involved in watershed planning at a conference Nov. 19, entitled “Washington’s Water Future: Implementing Watershed Solutions.”

Rockefeller seems to have a knack for consensus building and negotiating differences in approach among the Council while devising proposed courses of action that can work for all sides. One of the first regional meetings held in Bremerton presented opportunities for local groups, project managers and advocates to present their work and goals. Particularly, to explain what they do with state funding. He applied this extensively in the writing of the TPEAC legislation.

Statewide, there are 62 Watershed Resource and Inventory Areas (WRIAs) that serve as the basis for coordinated federal, tribal, state, and local recovery efforts in cooperation with citizen and volunteer actions. It is also our State’s goal to integrate the use of available data, planning, and project resources to “buy” the best possible recovery results in our on-going watershed recovery efforts.

Specifically, the legislature intends to combine data related to stream attributes, habitat characteristics, fish distribution and population, passage barriers, and other limiting factors, in a comprehensive, consistent data set built upon a common “hydro layer” foundation. The State Department of Ecology has been invited to contribute additional data planes related to water quality and data cells to this comprehensive data system. Open access to the full range of data by all stakeholders will lead to improved limiting factor analysis and diagnosis of ecosystem recovery needs, and thus to an agreed list of priorities for future action, whatever the particular funding source.

“The Sinclair–Gorst Estuary Restoration Project, with its on-the-ground and in-the-water improvements, implements an integrated plan-and-act model using best available data and science in a sub-basin of “WRIA 15.” This restoration project supports a third state goal, that is to promote and respect the team efforts of the stakeholders and co-managers of the habitat: federal resource agencies, state natural resource and permitting agencies, the WSDOT, and local units of government with land ownership and regulatory roles. Doing it here will give hope and inspiration to tackle similar tasks elsewhere in Puget Sound, just as it should inspire recovery in other WRIAs statewide. If the physical landscape can be returned to functionality here, it can probably be done anywhere,” said Rockefeller.

The opportunity to showcase benefits of ‘sustainable growth’ presented by combined need, interest and significance for the health of both natural resources and people in the community create conditions for successful watershed-based restoration and economic revitalization… hand in hand.