| Previous :: Next Topic |
| Author |
Message |
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 11276 | TRs | Pics
Location: Don't move here |
|
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
|
 Wed Dec 07, 2016 10:58 am |
|
|
Perhaps people should look nearby for ways to improve habitat. I'll start with this.
https://geo.nwifc.org/SOW/SOW2016_Report/PugetSound.pdf
What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
|
| Back to top |
  
|
|
Chico
Member
Joined: 30 Nov 2012
Posts: 2500 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lacey |
|
Chico
Member
|
Mon Dec 12, 2016 4:47 pm |
|
|
The way I see it is that we'll continue the unabated growth until Puget Sound turns into a cesspool. Only then will the population decrease.
Far too many people moving in. Far too much housing being thrown up. Far too much land being paved over.
And cities don't care because it is all money in their coffers.
Black Diamond (city, not the residents) wants a development that dwarfs the original town and population as just one example.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JPH
Member
Joined: 14 Feb 2008
Posts: 808 | TRs | Pics
|
|
JPH
Member
|
Mon Dec 12, 2016 7:06 pm |
|
|
The problem isn't new development - these are required to meet stringent environmental regulations. The problem is the old developments that pump pollutants into stormwater without treatment and dump raw sewage into open water bodies. But hey, it's way easier to point a finger at the new construction and scream about how they are destroying the environment.
And yes, everyone agrees that a virgin forest is better environmentally than any development.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WANative
Member
Joined: 09 May 2016
Posts: 277 | TRs | Pics
|
|
WANative
Member
|
Mon Dec 12, 2016 7:42 pm |
|
|
| JPH wrote: | | The problem isn't new development - these are required to meet stringent environmental regulations. The problem is the old developments that pump pollutants into stormwater without treatment and dump raw sewage into open water bodies. But hey, it's way easier to point a finger at the new construction and scream about how they are destroying the environment.
. |
What do you mean?
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Humptulips
Member
Joined: 08 Nov 2012
Posts: 234 | TRs | Pics
|
I'm not sure there is a good answer. Just to many people any way you slice it.
Try to control that or even make development too difficult with growth regulations you just push the problem out into other areas.
Maybe more scary earthquake and volcano videos are the answer. Show them to everyone applying for a WA drivers license.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Schroder
Member
Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 6720 | TRs | Pics
Location: on the beach |
|
Schroder
Member
|
Tue Dec 13, 2016 8:02 am |
|
|
I can point to at least one error in the article-
The photo: "340 acres of forest were removed within the 100-year floodplain of the Skykomish River between 2009 and 2011."
This was a hybrid poplar tree farm that was planted in the 90's along the Snohomish River west of Highway 9. There were no trees there in the major floods of 1975 and 1990.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JPH
Member
Joined: 14 Feb 2008
Posts: 808 | TRs | Pics
|
|
JPH
Member
|
Tue Dec 13, 2016 10:21 am |
|
|
| WANative wrote: | | What do you mean? |
You can download the latest stormwater manual from Ecology's website if you want to see the requirements for new development. There are requirements for water quality, flow control and construction stormwater control.
Old developments (especially pre-1992 DOE manual) simply routed the (now increased) runoff to the nearest creek, river or lake and dumped it in along with any pollutants picked up along the way. Add to that the "combined sewer system" that dumps raw sewage straight to surface water with heavy rain and you have a serious mess.
It's not just Washington contributing to the sound's health issues - Victoria dumps over 20 million gallons of raw sewage in to the sound on a daily basis.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Schroder
Member
Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 6720 | TRs | Pics
Location: on the beach |
|
Schroder
Member
|
Tue Dec 13, 2016 10:48 am |
|
|
| JPH wrote: | | Add to that the "combined sewer system" that dumps raw sewage straight to surface water with heavy rain and you have a serious mess. |
I'm not sure what you mean here. You're saying that there are sanitary sewers connected to stormwater drains and going out untreated? Not anywhere that I know of since the 1960's.
The City of Snohomish built a wastewater treatment system to handle future population but it was too large for the low flow of the sanitary sewers so they connected their stormwater system to it to get adequate volume. The cleaner water diluted the sewage so much that the treatment system couldn't perform properly. They've corrected that problem. I never heard of anywhere that has untreated raw sewage discharged to receiving waters other than failing individual septic systems.
I live on a beach on Whidbey and have a 1980 vintage septic system that's currently working fine (inspected last May). I'm trying to get a permit to remodel and the County is requiring me first to install secondary treatment (activated sludge and ultrafiltration) so the water coming out is drinking water quality. I think it's going overboard considering the overall picture and it's going to cost me a small fortune.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JPH
Member
Joined: 14 Feb 2008
Posts: 808 | TRs | Pics
|
|
JPH
Member
|
Tue Dec 13, 2016 11:53 am |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Schroder
Member
Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 6720 | TRs | Pics
Location: on the beach |
|
Schroder
Member
|
Tue Dec 13, 2016 1:19 pm |
|
|
I understand now. These are during significant storm events, not as a regular occurrence.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
