Something To Consider...

Discussion in 'Conservation' started by Klickrolf, Nov 8, 2016.

Tags:
  1. SilverFly

    SilverFly Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,142
    Likes Received:
    2,638
    Location:
    Camas, WA
    Look Bub, if I wanted your opinion I'd ask... and discuss it properly over a quality beer. ;)

    Seriously though, that’s both encouraging, and disappointing to hear. Encouraging to hear what the root problems really are, and disappointing knowing they will be next to impossible to correct - at least to anything resembling the original state.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2016
  2. Klickrolf

    Klickrolf Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,809
    Likes Received:
    958
    Location:
    Klickitat, Washington
    Why should they be next to impossible to correct? Federal flood insurance is a huge part of the problem and it's time for it to be eliminated. Very little, if any, development in flood plains would occur if the costs of flood insurance were not subsidized. Recovery from logging and logging roads should be quick, easy and mostly natural.

    Specifying carrying capacity as the limiter sounds like we've accepted things as they are, I don't get it and I don't believe we have to be stuck there. We've designed our land development around taxpayer funding and false assumptions. That's the freshwater problem and it is not impossible to correct.
     
    SilverFly likes this.
  3. SilverFly

    SilverFly Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,142
    Likes Received:
    2,638
    Location:
    Camas, WA
    Maybe, maybe not. I dunno, that’s all stuff above my pay grade. Even so, the thought has occurred to me that repeated flood events, or an anomalously large one, could effectively restore some floodplain areas to something resembling their original natural state.

    Of course, it all comes down to economics. If as you suggest, federal flood insurance is not fiscally sustainable, then perhaps a window of opportunity might arise at some point for meaningful habitat restoration. With that in mind, it might be a good idea for people with the appropriate expertise to work out some comparative economic valuations of floodplain area in terms of carrying capacity. Essentially, defining what is an acre of floodplain worth in real dollars when it’s producing anadromous fish at CC, vs being used for housing, used car lots, grazing dairy cows, etc…

    My guess is that an acre of prime floodplain watershed producing fish naturally at or near CC would outweigh any other use when all factors were considered. Some real numbers demonstrating this could be instrumental in making it a reality.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2016
    Klickrolf likes this.
  4. SilverFly

    SilverFly Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,142
    Likes Received:
    2,638
    Location:
    Camas, WA
    Kelp grows so fast (in the right conditions) I doubt there's much anyone could do to essentially eradicate it. Does seem strange that so much kelp has disappeared from PS. Maybe someone at UW has some answers?
     
  5. Alex MacDonald

    Alex MacDonald that's His Lordship, to you.....

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    5,806
    Likes Received:
    3,291
    Location:
    Haus Alpenrosa, Lederhosenland
    Kelp fastens onto rocky bottoms, so i wonder if there's sand or silt coming in?
     
    SilverFly likes this.
  6. SilverFly

    SilverFly Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,142
    Likes Received:
    2,638
    Location:
    Camas, WA
    Well, I gots all curious and did some googlin'. Some interesting projects and information can be found here:

    http://www.restorationfund.org/projects/kelp

    http://www.pugetsoundnearshore.org/technical_papers/kelp.pdf

    Based on the above white paper, you would be at least partially correct that sedimentation is a major hitter affecting kelp (and eel grass) abundance and distribution.
     
    Matt B likes this.