Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Resources October 19 20041 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Whatcom County Council Special Water Resources Work Session October 19, 2004 Council Chair Dan McShane called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. in the Whatcom County Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. Present: Barbara Brenner Laurie Caskey- Schreiber Sam Crawford Seth Fleetwood Sharon Roy Absent: L. Ward Nelson WATER RESOURCES WORK SESSION (AB2004 -025) 1. LAKE WHATCOM Lake Whatcom Management Plan Bruce Roll, Assistant Director, presented the agenda for the October 20 Lake Whatcom Joint Councils and Commissioners Meeting (on file). They need to decide which topics the County Council wants to speak about at the meeting tomorrow night. He's looking for guidance and input from the Council. Staff will also gather and consider input from the public. Staff will compile legislative and public input as it rewrites the plan. Councilmember McShane requested there be an update on the State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) landscape plan during the joint meeting. Roy stated this was discussed in the Natural Resources Committee last week. The three issues that came up were pesticides and herbicides, what to do next with Sudden Valley's density reduction program, and cost of stormwater. Roll stated Sudden Valley Community Association General Manager Steve Grieser would attend the meeting tomorrow night. Craig MacConnell, Cooperative Extension, submitted information (on file) on pesticide use in Whatcom County. Herbicides are considered pesticides. He discussed the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) that defines pesticides. Pesticides have been found in some Whatcom County watersheds. Protection against a compound doesn't mean there is a risk to humans. The risk is in the dose. They can find things at very small quantities. Studies have been done on the Puget Sound region. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) found 23 pesticides in urban streams right after rainstorms. They Water Resources Work Session, 10/19/2004, Page 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. find more pesticides in urban streams than in agricultural streams. The USGS doesn't equate "urban" with household use of pesticides. There are other sources in urban regions, such as commercial uses and parks. Certain herbicides were estimated to be in the watersheds, but were actually not found. The surveyors found metabolites that they assume came from these insecticide but have broken down into other, smaller compounds. In other instances, the surveyors found metabolites and assumed the source as certain insecticides, however those insecticides were never used in the U.S.. Some insecticides, such as diazinon, have been banned. In fish tissue samples, they find the old pesticides that have been banned for many years. Those pesticides stick around for quite a while. The Cooperative Extension website tracks the number of visits to the website by people who are looking for information on pests. Crane fly is the number one pest people are interested in. Since 2001, master gardeners surveyed 200 lawns in the Lake Whatcom watershed. They have not yet found one lawn that needed to be treated for crane fly. A healthy lawn can tolerate up to 25 of the larvae in the spring. Roy asked why watershed residents perceive crane fly as a problem. MacConnell stated the residents haven't looked to see if they really do have a significant problem that needs to be treated. Homeowners get information from different sources. Roy asked what the crane fly does. MacConnell stated they eat the grass roots. When crane flies came to this area, there was a real problem, but the ecosystem has since balanced out. Caskey- Schreiber asked about the crane fly education program. MacConnell stated they are doing many things that are getting the message out about crane flies. They inform the media every spring. Herbicides are mostly from runoff. There are potential ways to reduce that runoff, such as a herbicide ban. The federal government regulates pesticides. It offers some pesticide management to the states. There is a question about whether any other government below the state has any statutory authority. There are good reasons to use pesticides in certain circumstances. If there is a ban, remember there are times when they want to use pesticides, such as to treat West Nile virus or head lice. Structural pests, such as carpenter ants, are a problem in certain isolated locations. Some pesticides are certified for organic use. Some pesticides are biological. Some chemicals are used for typical house cleaning. The issue is not black and white. The City of Montreal has banned the use of pesticides in certain circumstances, such as high risk locations, but also offers permits to use those pesticides when there is a legitimate overriding interest. Water Resources Work Session, 10/19/2004, Page 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. The larger cities in the Northwest enacted policy decisions about their own governmental actions as a first step. In 2001, there was a workgroup of local governmental land managers. From that group came a model for public policy. The model is on his website. The Public Works Department follows it to some degree. Education is another method to reduce pesticide runoff. Change people's attitudes and practices. Those people will tell their neighbors and friends about the correct practices. The Water Resources Division has a grant to do more work on public education. They are also working on a certification program for commercial vendors of pest management practices in the sensitive watersheds. In concert with the commercial vendors, he will develop best management practices (BMP's). There will be education for the vendors and subscription to those BMP's. Then he will certify the vendors as lake- friendly, and advertise those vendors. Roy asked if the sensitive watersheds include marine areas. MacConnell stated he looks to see what areas the County has established as sensitive watersheds, and targets his programs accordingly. They haven't gotten to the point where they have delineated the certification program. McShane asked if fertilizer use is a bigger threat to the lake than the pesticides. MacConnell stated it is, specifically phosphorus. That's why Washington State University (WSU) endorses a product that has no phosphorus. The intent was for that to be the beginning of a product line, the Lake Whatcom Blend, specifically designed to give people a choice of products that have less impact on water resources. The use of that fertilizer has grown. There needs to be more growth. McShane stated he hoped to prioritize alternative fertilizers over pesticide education. He asked the level of concern about dieldren and the threat posed by residential development expanding into farmland. MacConnell stated it doesn't pose a threat. The dose isn't large enough. It's there, but not at a dose that is not large enough to be a threat. Everyone is trying to change attitudes and practices. Be very focused, or the messages will be diffused and confusing. Prioritize the threats to Lake Whatcom. Make the messages as simple as possible, and stay on the message. McShane asked if the change in attitude about the perceived crane fly problem influences gardeners regarding other pesticides. MacConnell stated they haven't measured it. They train 45 master gardeners per year who are his front line of defense. Roy stated the reason she wanted to discuss this at the joint meeting was not because she would support a ban, but because the community and Council have Water Resources Work Session, 10/19/2004, Page 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. been talking about it a lot. She wanted to get good information, which she now has. Caskey- Schreiber stated the biggest advocate for a ban in the watershed is Councilmember Brenner. She should be here to hear this information. She hoped that they can try to address the use of fertilizer in the watershed. Direct education toward the phosphorus -free fertilizer instead of an outright ban. It's good fertilizer. It's not that expensive. Roll stated he received the results of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) site investigation on the Y Road landfill site. There is no evidence that pollutants have migrated off -site. The County doesn't need to follow up with any further action. The issue is closed. There are some elevated levels of lead and a pesticide at the site. Staff will follow up on that. Those levels may be reflective of the sampling methods, not a spike in the material. Don Vesper, Environmental Health Manager, stated nothing surprising was in the EPA report. The contaminants found were on -site, and had not migrated to Carpenter Creek. The County has a sampling and analysis plan for this year. The Health Department thinks that's sufficient. They may want to consider whether additional controls are necessary to further prevent any migration. He thanked Mr. MacConnell for his pesticide presentation. The science of toxicology continues to change. It's difficult to say there is absolutely no risk for something. Right now, he is comfortable saying things are safe. Now, toxicologists are debating dose response at very low levels. The mantra that "the dose makes the poison" is now being questioned, particularly with low doses in susceptible populations. Now, the scientific community is talking about higher levels of response at lower doses. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.) Vesper continued to state they do use standards to determine safety levels. In the future, things may change in that regard for specific chemicals. He doesn't support a pesticide ban in the Lake Whatcom watershed, but do everything they can to limit the use of pesticides to protect the watershed and the public. Roll stated he wanted to talk about stormwater. In the next year, information will come forward from the total maximum daily load (TMDL) study for phosphorus. Lake loading and response models are being developed, identifying opportunities for stormwater retrofit in the Geneva area. All of these actions are coming together in 2005. To date, they have systematically identified what they can accomplish, the amount of pollutant loads they can reduce, and high priority areas influencing drinking water quality. Now, they need to allow some of these to run their course before having some substantive discussions. He needs more discussion with the Council before proposing a set funding source. Water Resources Work Session, 10/19/2004, Page 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Roy stated Councilmember Fleetwood, who has left the meeting, is concerned that they take a comprehensive look at this, specifically with expensive retrofit activity. She asked if they are gathering the pieces for this now, and if it's too soon to look at the big picture because they will be gathering more information in 2005. Councilmember Fleetwood's concern is that they need to look at the big picture of the stormwater issue. Because retrofits are so expensive, they should not become opportunistic about retrofitting just because they are doing a particular project. All of the issues, especially the retrofits, need to have a funding discussion while having the other discussions. She asked if that is premature, and they're still gathering information. Roll stated they are gathering information. A stormwater phase two permit is supposed to be available to the County. Staff doesn't know what that means to the County financially. The phase two permit is another overlay where they will need to be careful about applying resources. Brenner stated they are waiting for the permit, and they've discussed retrofits for years. She is concerned they will continue to wait for something until the costs are prohibitive. Roll stated they are moving forward in the Geneva /Cable Street area regarding the range of retrofit options. It is on the annual road project list. Caskey- Schreiber stated a lot of the retrofit will depend on the total maximum daily load study results. It's prudent to figure out where the target areas will be. That will provide the comprehensive retrofitting approach they need. They need to figure out who is liable for the expense. It's not something the County can afford to do alone. Roll stated one work plan task for next year is taking that information and prioritizing all the drainages in Lake Whatcom to identify priority areas. McShane asked if there are specific tasks in the work plan they can say they are emphasizing at this point in time. For instance, they can say they are working on the TMDL in task 2.1, use pollutant loading information models to identify priority areas in the watershed. Roll stated they can. Stay the course on priority pollutants, particularly phosphorus. They have to engage in the TMDL loading issues. McShane stated a struggle for the Council has been able to comprehend the stormwater threat to Lake Whatcom. There are still people in the public talking about benzene coming from cars. Phosphorus is what they have to deal with. Lay out the tasks, and reflect the priority problems. That's where the TMDL will come in. It will be a focus area. Roll stated everyone agreed that the water resource inventory area (WRIA) effort would produce a more defined lake loading model, and the TMDL would produce a more defined lake response model. They will look at both models to understand what's really going on. They have to link the two models. They are two different modeling approaches. Water Resources Work Session, 10/19/2004, Page 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. McShane asked if the WRIA modeling in the Lake Whatcom watershed is on given drainages and basins, and if that wouldn't be the case for the TMDL on its own. Roll stated he doesn't know the intricacies of the loading model. He knows they emphasized the lake response model. The model they're using is complex. The relative sensitivity and accuracy will depend on how well they are calibrated. They are just getting to the point where they have sufficient data sets for calibration. McShane asked about interim actions. Roll stated communities have enacted phosphorus ordinances. Some of those ordinances look like what Whatcom County is already doing in terms of land disturbances. A phosphorus ordinance is something the Council may want to consider. McShane stated there are urban growth areas (UGA's) in the watershed. He asked if any locations have lower densities for environmental reasons. Hal Hart, Planning and Development Services Director, stated there are. The land should tell the planners what its carrying capacity is. If there is a limitation, such as the concerns of a sensitive lake body, the County can reduce density even in an urban area and still be consistent with growth management. Define a balance. Use science to determine the appropriate strategies for urban design. McShane asked if that has been discussed with the City of Bellingham. Hart stated it has been discussed a little bit. Everyone is watching the Thornton Creek watershed in the Seattle- Lynnwood area. Whether salmon can recover there is being hotly debated. They are struggling with whether or not to preserve areas or develop the densities. McShane stated there should be a link between stormwater retrofits and design in urban areas and the appropriate density. He asked if staff is discussing it. Hart stated it is part of the dialog in the UGA discussions. They will also discuss it as they overlay the need to protect the lake, Whatcom Creek, and other creeks. Also, he raised the issue at various community forums at the north end of town. Roy stated she liked the idea of including the word 'phosphorus." Not a lot of people understood the point of land clearing. Start inserting the term so people begin to make the connections about the real issue. Roll stated he's heard two topics to talk about more at the meeting tomorrow. One topic is confirmation of priority for stormwater work and priority pollutants. Identify additional tasks for stormwater work. The second topic is density reduction in Sudden Valley. That would be a very good discussion in the context of land preservation and reducing or dealing with densities in critical areas and watersheds. McShane stated they should have that discussion with the other councils, including the City Council, because this has implications for their whole urban Water Resources Work Session, 10/19/2004, Page 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. planning. They maybe should not be thinking of these areas as potential future city areas. Or, they should commit to a lower density in those watershed areas, which will have an effect on the revenue streams of the water district and Sudden Valley. He would like to know how much of that they can tolerate. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 10:12 a.m. Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription The Council approved these minutes on November 23, 2004. ATTEST: Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Dan McShane, Council Chair Water Resources Work Session, 10/19/2004, Page 7