How Many Ecology Employees Does It Take ...

Recent public records requests show the flurry of activity at Ecology when the Charles Dalton video surfaced. Ecology prepared a powerpoint presentation. They blogged about about the video. At one point, they had as many as 11 staff at all levels involved with developing a response. Eleven people! And what did Ecology's response say?  Well, in part, it said that Ecology had no authority in the matter at hand.

"We don’t have regulatory authority in local critical areas ordinance issues. We don’t make rulings or issue enforcement actions under local critical areas ordinances. Those tasks are on local government turf" (Gordon White, Eco-Connect Blog, Feburary 14, 2012.)

All that PR effort for a situation where they claim to have no authority?  The email below is just one example of the many emails related to this matter.  You can see there are eight people, including senior managers, involved in just one email.

The real question is why Ecology cares about their image in the first place. They're regulators, not movie stars. Yet, they have a blog, a Facebook page, and they seem to have a surfeit of "communications" staff.  Are they communications staff or publicists?

From: Anderson, Paul S. (ECY)
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 2:02 PM
To: Skipper, Katie (ECY)
Cc: Altose, Larry (ECY); Hart, Curt (ECY); Tallent, Geoff (ECY); Stockdale, Erik (ECY); Summerhays, Jeannie (ECY); White, Gordon (ECY)
Subject: RE: PLEASE REVIEW BLOG RESPONSE TO SJC YOUTUBE VIDEO

Katie:

Once again, thanks for your time with this.  I think it looks good.  I would suggest a couple of changes to the PowerPoint:

Slide 4, Bullet 1,  Wetland scientists educated and trained in wetland vegetation, soils and hydrology  [link to SWS-PWS Website?]

Slide 5, Bullet 1,  County asks for technical assistance

Paul

Paul S. Anderson, PWS Wetland Specialist Washington State Department of Ecology 3190 - 160th Ave. SE Bellevue, WA 98008 Phone: (425) 649-7148 Fax: (425) 649-7098 Email: paan461@ecy.wa.gov  

From: Skipper, Katie (ECY)
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 1:19 PM
To: Anderson, Paul S. (ECY); Tallent, Geoff (ECY); Stockdale, Erik (ECY); Summerhays, Jeannie (ECY); White, Gordon (ECY)
Cc: Altose, Larry (ECY); Hart, Curt (ECY)
Subject: PLEASE REVIEW BLOG RESPONSE TO SJC YOUTUBE VIDEO
Importance: High

Hi, all. Attached is a draft blog item and PowerPoint in response to the YouTube video about Charles Dalton’s property on Orcas. Below is our proposed strategy.

Forgive me for sending to all of you, but I’m not sure who to ask for approval, and it’s important that we post our reply promptly. The YouTube video now has 1,857 views. The Freedom Foundation has it posted on their website, too, http://www.myfreedomfoundation.com/index.php/site/view/friends_of_the_san_juans_offer_justification_for_harassing_local_islander, and the Island Guardian has a short item about it http://www.islandguardian.com/archives/00004240.html .

Strategy:

·         Post the blog on our blog site, link to YouTube.

·         Post a short response on the ChangeWA page referencing our video response.

·         Post PowerPoint with voiceover as a video response. The blog will be the basis for the script.

·         Link to on our FaceBook page with reference to the Friends of the San Juans response: http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10150544103742087&id=106592947086

Katie J. Skipper

Communications Manager

Bellingham Field Office

Washington Department of Ecology

Office: 360-715-5205

Cell: 360-510-0682

From Buffers to Bulldozers - As the BAS Turns

The BAS, as we are told by some, is the singular feature of our CAO process that will make our new ordinances "smart" unlike our existing "dumb" sensitive areas ordinance that we've been living relatively happily with for years. Okay, let's follow the bouncing BAS and see how smart it is.

The following emails show the evolution of the word "drainageway" which is a new term introduced into our latest draft wetlands code.  What is a drainageway?  Well, it depends when you ask the question apparently.  In the first email below from Dr. Adamus (August 20, 2010), a "drainageway" is worthy of protection by a buffer if we "are truly using a BAS approach" as he puts it.

In December 2011, Paul Anderson of Ecology appears to liken a "drainageway" to a stream or a watercourse. Again, that's a concept worthy of protection via buffers, since the state Hydraulic Code has all sorts of requirements if you care to do work in the bed of a stream.

However, by January 17, 2012, Ecology seems to have had a change of heart about "drainageways."  By then, the Ecology folk (Anderson, Hruby, McMillan, and Stockdale) are advocating that "drainageways" be removed from a site by site-recontouring because they short-circuit a buffer.

What?!?  Ecology is recommending we bulldoze them? Yes, they are, and our latest wetlands draft CAO includes that notion of a drainageway despite the fact that back in 2010 Adamus said that "if we were truly using a BAS approach" then "drainageways" should have buffers.

I know.  I don't follow it either.

And I know I'm a broken record, but the emails below once again show the level of continuous involvement by Ecology in our County and with the CAOs, despite their claim:

"We don’t have regulatory authority in local critical areas ordinance issues. We don’t make rulings or issue enforcement actions under local critical areas ordinances. Those tasks are on local government turf" (Gordon White, Eco-Connect Blog, Feburary 14, 2012.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Paul Adamus [mailto:adamus7@comcast.net]
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 5:31 PM
To: Shireene Hale
Subject: my next visit; meet w. DOE; deadlines

Hi Shireene,

My next visit will be the week of September 20.  I will be doing a final check on Mindy and Ted, and would also like to see if, on one of those days, Paul Anderson or Erik Stockdale from DOE would be willing to meet with us (you, me, Colin, Janice, maybe Fralick, Pete) to discuss some aspects of the CAO.  Could you try and set up a meeting?  Specifically, before we get too far along I want to gage their reaction to the no-extra-cost innovations I mentioned to you last time, which I believe are necessary in order for us to say we are truly using a BAS approach: (a) putting wider buffers around drainageways that feed wetlands seasonally rather than uniformly around the perimeter of each wetland, (b) modifying the habitat portion of the DOE Rating System so all the Habitat scores are generated using my GIS analysis of LiDAR data and other sources, which would allow us to rate all wetlands regardless of whether they are on private inaccessible parcels, and would improve the accuracy of the assessments that Mindy and Ted have already done.  A third idea, which I will first describe to you early that week or before, concerns the types of wetland landscape settings in SJC that I have determined from my BAS review should result in higher ratings and wider buffers.

As regards the overall schedule, I am progressing well with reading reports and papers for the BAS and extracting key points that I will use in the BAS report.  At this point it looks like the only thing that's threatening the timely attainment of the deadlines is the fact that Pete hasn't been able to get to preparing the Task Order for me to subcontract the necessary GIS work, which he gave a verbal OK to. 

Paul

________________________________________________________________________

From: "Anderson, Paul S. - NWRO SEA (ECY)" <paan461@ECY.WA.GOV>

Date: December 9, 2011 9:03:38 AM PST

To: Shireene Hale <shireeneh@sanjuanco.com>

Cc: "adamus7@comcast.net" <adamus7@comcast.net>, "dnickel@watershedco.com" <dnickel@watershedco.com>, Janice Biletnikoff <janiceb@sanjuanco.com>, Rachel Dietzman <racheld@sjcpublicworks.org>, Scott Rozenbaum <rozewood@rockisland.com>, "Stockdale, Erik (ECY)" <ESTO461@ECY.WA.GOV>, "ed.kilduff@me.com" <ed.kilduff@me.com>, Steve Belluomini <sbelluomini@yahoo.com>, Janet Alderton <jmalderton@yahoo.com>

Subject: RE: Alternative Wetland Buffer Procedure

Shireene:

Thank you for passing along the revised alternative buffer proposal and accompanying documents. 

My only comment at this time is that I recommend keeping the existing “Drainageway” definition.  I think this definition is easier to understand than the proposed alternative (the alternative definition would require a definition for “stream”) and is more consistent with the “watercourse” definition in the state Hydraulic Code (WAC 220-110-020(105)).

Paul

Paul S. Anderson, PWS Wetland Specialist Washington State Department of Ecology 3190 - 160th Ave. SE Bellevue, WA 98008 Phone: (425) 649-7148 Fax: (425) 649-7098 Email: paan461@ecy.wa.gov  

_________________________________________________________________________

From: "Stockdale, Erik (ECY)" <ESTO461@ECY.WA.GOV>

Date: January 17, 2012 4:11:10 PM PST

To: "adamus@comcast.net" <adamus@comcast.net>

Cc: Janet Alderton <jmalderton@yahoo.com>, Scott Rozenbaum <rozewood@rockisland.com>, Janice Biletnikoff <janiceb@sanjuanco.com>, Rachel Dietzman <racheld@sjcpublicworks.org>, "Anderson, Paul S. - NWRO SEA (ECY)" <paan461@ECY.WA.GOV>, Steve Belluomini <sbelluomini@yahoo.com>, Ed Kilduff <ed.kilduff@me.com>, "Hruby, Tom (ECY)" <thru461@ECY.WA.GOV>, "McMillan, Andy (ECY)" <anmc461@ECY.WA.GOV>

Subject: Ecoogy comments on January 16th SJC Buffer Calculator

Hi Paul:

Per your request, below are consolidated comments from Paul Anderson, Tom Hruby, Andy McMillan and me. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or would like clarification.

          (middle section omitted by ECK for brevity)

Drainageways. Thank you for adjusting the weight for the drainageways that will potentially short-circuit a buffer. We recommend the CAO include measures to remedy such situations by requiring that a site be re-contoured to promote sheet flow across the buffer.

Thank you for adding the drop down menus for questions 1 and 2.

Thanks to all for the continued conversation.

Erik

Erik Stockdale, PWS |Wetlands/401 Unit Supervisor|Department of Ecology| 425-649-7061| erik.stockdale@ecy.wa.gov

Our Independent Expert Doesn't Appear to be Either

Dr. Adamus was hired as the County's independent wetlands expert, and yet he apparently needs to ask the Department of Ecology about basic matters of wetland regulation.  From the email below, Dr. Adamus does not even seem to know that wetlands are subject to provisions of the Clean Water Act (anti-degradation policy).

This single email is representative of many more, obtained through Public Records Act requests, showing an open and direct line of communication between Dr. Adamus and the Department of Ecology regarding Dr. Adamus' work with San Juan County.  When Dr. Adamus came on board we also got, from the Department of Ecology, Erik Stockdale, Paul Anderson, and Tom Hruby as a "bonus".

Begging the question of whether it is even proper for the Department of Ecology to have a blog in the first place, Ecology's own Eco-Connect blog says, "We don’t have regulatory authority in local critical areas ordinance issues. We don’t make rulings or issue enforcement actions under local critical areas ordinances. Those tasks are on local government turf."

Then why are they involved, and why does our independent expert rely on them so heavily?

From: Paul Adamus [mailto:adamus7@comcast.net] 
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 1:35 PM
To: Stockdale, Erik (ECY); Hruby, Tom (ECY)
Subject: BAS-related questions

Erik and Tom,

My questions are as follows:

1. Wetlands and Antidegradation (section 401 CWA).  Must all wetlands in WA be protected from degradation?  How do you explain to the public it's OK for wetlands to be used passively as filters for pollution, yet antidegradation applies?  Can Antidegradation be applied to physical changes to a wetland as well, such as ditching or vegetation removal in the wetland buffer -- which can indirectly affect water temperature?  But then, there are no adopted water quality standards for wetlands, correct?  Have any been adopted in WA for seasonal (Type Ns) streams?

2. Wetlands and stormwater.  Are all wetlands off-limits for intentional routing of stormwater, or only Category I?  Any explicit limits on passive incidental stormwater, other than as described in #1?

3.  Do you know of any WA jurisdictions (other than King Co.) that explicitly allow wetland or stream buffer narrowing if LID practices are used?  How much narrowing, maximum?

4.  For jurisdictions that are considering land use intensity as a factor in tailoring buffer widths, are they all using the land use types or activity types in the WDOE documents to define the intensity levels, or are there some like Island County that use the percent of a parcel's vegetation proposed for removal (and its location) as the primary factor that defines intensity level and thus (partly) the buffer width?

5.  Do any jurisdictions allow an "adaptive management" approach wherein property owners may opt for smaller buffers if they agree to and pay for onsite monitoring of contamination and/or resource harm? I have problems with that approach site-specifically, for the many reasons I mentioned in the BAS.

Thanks,

Paul