Contaminated stormwater has been identified as the greatest
threat to Puget Sound water quality, and state and federal
governments are addressing the stormwater problem in numerous
ways.
The animated videos on this page are part of an educational
program established as part of the “Puget Sound Starts Here”
outreach. This past summer, these videos were posted on YouTube as
part of a school curriculum called “Drain Rangers.”
I spotted the videos this past week while working on a blog post
about how well local governments in the Puget Sound region are
embracing stormwater regulations mandated by state and federal
permits. See
“Stormwater Report …,” Water Ways, Dec. 15.
The first video on this page is a general introduction to the
stormwater problem, based on the idea that it takes 15 minutes for
pollution to reach a river. Two videos in the series are similar,
although one includes more solutions. I’ve chosen the longer one,
called “Video Two.” The third video discusses some basic solutions,
while the last goes into more advanced treatments. Others can be
found on the Drain
Rangers Channel on YouTube.
“Polluted stormwater runoff is one of many environmental
problems our students will face,” the paper states. “By equipping
our students at a young age with the problem-solving tools of the
engineer and the verbal and written skills of an effective
communicator, we are preparing these students to solve the
difficult and challenging environmental issues that affect our
present and our future.”
The lessons are designed to meet state requirements for science,
literacy and other educational standards. The curriculum addresses
the problem of pollution as well as solutions.
“This curriculum introduces students to a problem-solving model
where they think like an engineer and explore ways to solve the
problem of polluted stormwater runoff,” according to the
final report (PDF 965 kb) on the project funded by the
Washington Department of Ecology.
According to the report, the grant project produced 15 teacher
trainings, pilot projects in nine schools, four videos, six
illustrations, 13 facts sheets and five posters. At least 34
schools signed up to implement the curriculum during the current
school year, with about 70 schools expected to participate in
2018-19.
In Kitsap County, stormwater has been a major issue — and the
subject of ongoing newspaper stories — for a very long time.
As a local reporter working for the Kitsap Sun, I followed the
prolonged struggle among engineers, developers, planners and
environmentalists to approve new rules for reducing toxic runoff
washing into Puget Sound. After the legal battles were over, local
governments were called on to update their stormwater codes, and
many key provisions went into effect last year.
Click for a PDF (1.7 mb)
version of “Nature’s Scorecard.”
It was with some surprise that I read a new report called
“Nature’s Scorecard,”
which reveals that more than half of the 81 cities and counties
around Puget Sound have failed to follow through in a meaningful
way to encourage low-impact development, which is required by state
rules. Low-impact development, or LID, involves techniques that
filter rainwater into the ground as close to the source as
possible.
According to the report, 15 percent of the local governments
failed to update their codes, and an additional 38 percent made
only minor changes. Out of 81 local governments, 20 were forced to
file a “notice of noncompliance” admitting they had not met the new
standards.
The scorecard is a joint effort by two environmental groups
involved in water quality, Washington Environmental Council and
Puget Soundkeeper Alliance. It was nice to know that the authors of
the report contacted local officials in advance where deficiencies
were noted. Some officials offered explanations, and others moved
quickly to fix the deficiencies, according to Mindy Roberts of
WEC.
Mindy told me that she hopes the scorecard and discussions with
local officials will result in LID improvements without going to
court.
The scorecard also calls out municipalities that have done
exceptionally well on the LID front. Named as “green star leaders”
for going beyond the minimal standards are Kitsap County and the
cities of Lacey, Oak Harbor, Olympia, Port Orchard, Renton, Seattle
and Tacoma. See the news release on
WEC’s website.
The softer approach also paid off in Fife, where stormwater
officials apparently were not aware of the state requirement to
make LID the primary method of stormwater management, Mindy said.
After city officials were contacted, they jumped into action and
now have a code that will reduce stormwater pollution.
Stormwater officials in Mountlake Terrace were on schedule to
meet the state mandate, Mindy said. But the City Council, under
pressure from developers, failed to pass the code language when it
was presented to them. Now city officials are again working to come
into compliance, she noted.
The website for “Nature’s Scorecard” includes
information about the impacts of stormwater, the need for LID
regulations and the status of various cities and counties. Scores
in the report come from compliance with five key LID strategies:
reducing impervious surfaces, protecting native vegetation and
soils, supporting pervious pavement, planting native vegetation,
and protecting natural buffers along streams, wetlands and
shorelines.
Puget Sound residents are encouraged to review the report’s
findings and support their elected officials in the implementation
of LID to protect Puget Sound. Contact information for
city and county stormwater officials is provided for each listed
municipality.
One of the reasons that Kitsap County is a leader in stormwater
management is the support from residents of unincorporated areas.
Each property owner pays an annual fee to monitor water quality,
assess pollution problems, develop appropriate solutions and
construct regional stormwater systems in already-developed areas.
Anyone can review the current five-year
stormwater capital plan (PDF 1 mb).
The Kitsap County commissioners recently approved new stormwater
fees for the coming years. It was interesting to hear the testimony
of supporters at the meeting. Check out the video (above),
beginning at 25:09 minutes. A
fact sheet on the fees (PDF 1.6 mb) can be found on the
county’s website.
Like Kitsap County, the city of Auburn has fully embraced
stormwater management to address flooding and reduce pollution.
Information, including an in-depth comprehensive storm drainage
plan, can be found on the city’s Storm
Drainage website.
At the national level, Kitsap County and Auburn received awards
last year from the Water Environment Federation Stormwater
Institute, which promotes innovative stormwater solutions. They
were among six award winners nationwide for both large and small
municipalities that go beyond regulations. Auburn was recognized
for its stormwater innovation, while Kitsap was recognized for its
management. See the news
release from WEF.
Other related information:
“What
makes stormwater toxic?”: The dangers of road runoff and
possible solutions are examined in an in-depth story by reporter
Eric Wagner. The piece was published Dec. 4 in the Encyclopedia of
Puget Sound.
U.S.
Government Accountability Office (PDF 4.7 mb): In a survey of
31 municipalities, the GAO found that green infrastructure —
another term for LID — was more challenging than traditional pipes
and ponds. GAO learned that collaboration among nearby governments
is important and should be supported through documented
agreements.
Kitsap County’s news release on Nature’s Scorecard: “A
low-impact development approach allows us to work with the rain,
rather than against it,” said Kitsap County Commissioner Charlotte
Garrido. “This approach protects, restores, conserves, and reclaims
our water — and this scorecard helps us know exactly where we stand
in our region.”
Building
Industry Association of Washington: BIAW offers information on
specific LID techniques, manuals and guidelines, technical articles
and reports, and links to government requirements.
Citing pollution problems in Puget Sound, an environmental group
is asking the Environmental Protection Agency to revoke Washington
state’s authority to enforce the federal Clean Water Act.
Northwest
Environmental Advocates, based in Portland, says a review of
103 discharge permits issued by the Washington Department of
Ecology shows a failure to control nitrogen pollution. Excess
nitrogen reduces oxygen levels in the water and triggers algae
blooms, resulting in serious problems in Puget Sound, according to
a
petition submitted to the EPA.
“Ecology determined that over 80 percent of the human sources of
nitrogen in Puget Sound comes from cities and towns, but it
continues to issue discharge permits as if it were completely
ignorant of these facts,” Nina Bell, the group’s executive
director, said in a
news release.
“It’s just flat out illegal to issue permits that contribute to
harmful pollution levels,” she added. “These permits are the
walking dead, existing merely to create the impression that the
state is doing its job to control water pollution when it is
not.”
As far as I know, nobody has come up with a good name for the
type of pollution that gets picked up by rainwater that flows
across the ground, carrying contaminants into ditches, streams and
eventually large waterways, such as Puget Sound.
Cleaning out storm drains is
the last line of defense before pollution from the roads gets into
public waterways. // Kitsap Sun photo
“Stormwater pollution” is a term I have frequently used. But
Sheida Sahandy, executive director of Puget Sound Partnership, made
a good point when I interviewed her last summer about the perils of
stormwater.
“I don’t really like calling it ‘stormwater,’” Sheida told me.
“It doesn’t have much to do with storms. It has to do with people.
We’re talking about our dirt, our detritus, our filth. Everyone has
it, and we all dump it into the sound to one degree or
another.”
Stormwater is relatively pure when it falls from the sky as
rain. It only gets dirty because the runoff picks up dirt, toxic
chemicals, bacteria and other wastes, mostly left behind by
people.
“Stormwater has gotten a bad wrap,” Sheida said. “It’s really
what we’ve done to the poor thing that makes it evil.”
Officially, the Environmental Protection Agency and Washington
Department of Ecology tend to call it “nonpoint source pollution.”
It’s a term that tells us what this kind of pollution is not.
Specifically, it is not pollution coming from a point source, such
as a pipe. But “nonpoint” does not describe what it really is.
Technically, nonpoint pollution is more than stormwater. It
includes waterborne sources such as marinas and atmospheric
deposition from air pollution. Taken together, this form of
pollution remains the most serious threat facing those who would
clean up and protect Puget Sound.
We need a new term like “mess-left-behind pollution,” because it
generally results from someone leaving some kind of contamination
on the ground — such as animal waste or leaking motor oil — or
failing to anticipate future problems — such as those caused by
toxic flame retardants in furniture or mercury from a multitude of
coal-fired power plants.
Agriculture, including livestock wastes;
fertilizers and pesticides; and erosion from grazing practices and
over-cultivation of fields.
Atmospheric deposition, including emissions
from automobile, industrial and agricultural sources and backyard
burning of trash.
Forest practices, including turbidity from
erosion caused by loss of vegetation and road-building, as well as
pesticides and fertilizers from forest applications.
Habitat alteration/hydromodification,
including increased temperature from loss of vegetation or water
impoundment; turbidity from erosion caused by shoreline alteration;
and increased bacteria and chemical concentrations from loss of
streamside vegetation.
Recreation, including sewage, paint and
solvents from boats.
Urban/suburban areas, including bacteria from
failing septic systems, pet wastes and urban wildlife; erosion from
construction and landscaping; lawn chemicals; road runoff; chemical
spills; and increased stream temperature from loss of
vegetation.
The plan lists a variety of
objectives and strategies for reducing the impacts of nonpoint
pollution. Among them are these ideas:
Complete 265 watershed cleanup plans by 2020, focusing on at
least eight priority watersheds each year.
Respond to all complaints about water quality by confirming or
resolving problems.
Provide grants and loans for projects designed to bring a
waterway into compliance with state and federal water-quality
standards.
Support local pollution identification and correction programs
to track down pollution sources and eliminate the problems. (Kitsap
County was identified as a model program.)
Support water-quality trading programs that allow water cleanup
efforts in lieu of meeting increased requirements for industrial
and sewage discharges.
Increase education efforts to help people understand how to
reduce nonpoint pollution.
Coordinate with organized groups and government agencies,
including tribes.
Continue existing monitoring programs and increase monitoring
to measure the effectiveness of water-quality-improvement
projects.
Develop a statewide tracking program for cleanup efforts with
an annual goal of reducing nitrogen by 40,000 pounds, phosphorus by
14,000 pounds and sediment by 8,000 pounds.
I’ve completed the seventh story package in a 10-part series
examining the Puget Sound ecosystem, with a special focus on
indicators of ecological health. We’re calling the project “Taking
the Pulse of Puget Sound.”
Jenifer McIntyre of the
Washington Stormwater Center studies the effects of stormwater
after it passes through filters made of compost and soil materials,
such as what is used in rain gardens. The filters are working, even
though the most dangerous pollutants remain unidentified. /
Kitsap Sun photo by Meegan M. Reid
The latest stories, which ran Sunday and Monday, addressed
freshwater quality. The opening piece looked at the huge amounts of
pollution coming into our streams via stormwater — one of the
highest priorities for cleanup, yet one of the most difficult to
deal with.
As the Puget Sound Partnership’s executive director Sheida
Sahandy told me, industrial discharges are still a concern, but
they are no longer the biggest problem.
“Now we’re dealing with stormwater, which is trickling in here
and trickling in there, and everybody has a finger in it,” she
said.
Solutions are many, and the goal should be to shut off pollution
at the source, beginning with removing dangerous chemicals from
everyday products. Since the sources of pollution are numerous,
everyone needs to play a part — from cleaning up pet wastes to
properly using of household chemicals to reducing the use of lawn
and garden pesticides. (Those who don’t subscribe to the Kitsap Sun
may still find value in the graphics on the
Freshwater Quality page.)
I led off the first story by showing the increased efforts by
city and county governments to better manage their stormwater
systems, such as pumping out their catch basins, sweeping their
streets and converting outdated stormwater ponds into filtration
systems, commonly known as “rain gardens.”
I also introduced readers to the Washington Stormwater
Center, a research facility in Puyallup where scientists are
testing the effectiveness of rain gardens and pervious pavement.
Jenifer McIntyre, a Washington State University researcher, has
demonstrated that stormwater from highway runoff is 100 percent
effective at killing adult coho salmon. Yet that same stormwater
filtered through soil — such as in a rain garden — is cleaned up
enough that fish can survive, apparently unaffected.
Monday’s story addressed the increasing use of benthic
invertebrates — water bugs — to measure the health of streams. The
bugs are doing double duty, since they are both a measurement of
stream quality and a critical part of the food web for the
freshwater ecosystem.
Some 27 local governments and organizations are involved in
collecting data on benthic invertebrates from about 850 stream
locations throughout Puget Sound. For results, check out Puget Sound Stream
Benthos.
When I began this project on freshwater quality several weeks
ago, I thought it was going to be easier than some of the other
story packages I have done, such as on fish, birds and marine
mammals. If anything, this issue is more complex. I’ll admit that
I’ve neglected this blog while pursuing these issues, and soon I
will be moving into the issue of freshwater quantity.
Overall, I must say that I’ve been impressed by the many people
dedicated to finding answers to the mysterious problems brought on
by pollution and by those finding solutions even before the
questions are fully identified.
