Urban Runoff Killing Salmon in Washington

SEATTLE, Washington, February 7, 2003 (ENS) - Every time it rains in Seattle, the storm water sweeps a wide array of urban pollutants into the city's creeks. Faced with mounting evidence that this runoff is killing endangered salmon at alarming rates, state and city officials are wrestling with the economic and environmental consequences of new plans to further protect the city's creeks.

A new report from the National Marine Fisheries Service, cited at this week's Shared Strategy for Puget Sound Conference, includes a comparison by scientists of a West Seattle creek, which has undergone extensive rehabilitation efforts, with a rural creek outside the city.

Hundreds of coho salmon are dying in streams that absorb contaminated runoff from cities, researchers have found. (Photo courtesy U.S. Environmental Protection Agency)

The scientists have not yet reached a final conclusion, but water quality is the primary suspect. The researchers plan to examine samples from the dead fish for evidence of exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, compounds found in automobile exhaust and other air pollution which eventually make their way into the water.

"Our daily lives - yours and mine driving in and out of this conference in Tacoma today - affects the landscape," noted Washington Department of Ecology director Tom Fitzsimmons, addressing the Shared Strategy conference.

Washington Department of Ecology director Tom Fitzsimmons says more action may be needed to clean waterways and protect salmon. (Photo courtesy Department of Ecology)

What is frustrating many Seattle residents is that the city has spent some $26 million since 1999 to protect its creeks from pollution and degradation. For example, Longfellow creek, the urban stream selected for the study, is considered a model for stream rehabilitation projects, featuring carefully replanted banks and manmade gravel beds for spawning salmon.

A range of local activists, including the community group Yes for Seattle, and the local chapter of Sierra Club, are now calling for more extensive efforts through a plan called Initiative 80, which many have dubbed Save Seattle Creeks.

The plan would require the city to develop a long term creek restoration plan, with developers assisting with creek restoration. It calls for tighter storm water regulations and a ban on pesticide use on public lands adjacent to creeks. The initiative also requires the city to "daylight" some creeks that have been directed into underground pipes.

The final dollar amount of the plan is unclear, but Yes for Seattle officials say expenditures for the initiative are capped at some $5 per household, or some $1.3 million per year. The total funding would be determined by the city council.

But Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels says the plan could cost the city far more than its advocates suggest, and the city can not afford it.

"I fully support the goals of creek restoration," he said. "I am proposing a more balanced approach that moves us toward those goals more quickly by listing some early action projects, identifying a funding source and providing for better citizen oversight."

Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels says the city does not have enough money to pay for all the restoration efforts that salmon advocates want. (Photo courtesy Office of the Mayor)

This plan would add $2.4 million in annual spending for salmon protection, funded by a one percent water, drainage and wastewater utility tax.

Critics argue the measure fails to reign in private development and relies far too much on voluntary efforts.

The city government is not alone in its struggle to further protect and rehabilitate salmon populations. Washington Governor Gary Locke told conference attendees that he is committed to statewide salmon recovery, but the state simply cannot afford to continue past spending levels.

State funds for salmon protection will be cut, Locke said, but not as much as many other state programs. Locke has proposed $43 million for salmon projects, some $8 million less than his last budget request. Oregon faces a budget deficit of some $2.4 billion.

The survival of salmon has economic consequences for the state, Locke added, and are critical to Washington's quality of life, history and culture.

Washington Governor Gary Locke (Photo courtesy Office of the Governor)

Seven species of Washington salmon and steelhead are listed as threatened or endangered, and conservationists estimate only one percent of the historic wild salmon population still exists.

Locke warned that the state cannot afford the costs of lawsuits that could be triggered under the Endangered Species Act if restoration and protection efforts fall short.

"If we don't take care of our salmon, the law will," he said, adding that it is vital to find solutions that involve partnerships and collaborative goals between all interested parties.

"The most important ingredient in salmon recovery efforts is partnerships," Locke said. "Locally based citizen efforts are critical, if we are to succeed."

Many coho are dying before they have a chance to spawn and produce young fish like this one. (Photo courtesy Earthjustice)

Over the next two years, Locke wants to foster a closer working relationship with federal agencies and to submit as many credible draft fish recovery plans to NMFS as possible.

But federal money for salmon restoration efforts face cuts of some $20 million under the Bush administration's budget plan, released on Monday. The spending plan asks for $90 million for the Pacific Salmon Recovery Fund, compared to the $110 million appropriated in 2002.

The proposed cuts came despite campaign promises by the president to support a fund many believe is critical to restoring salmon habitat up and down the West Coast.