Swinomish Channel will fill in by 2015 without funds for dredging
Nov 29 2010 in Environment by Deborah Bach

The Swinomish Channel is due to be dredged in 2011, but funding for the project is uncertain. Photo by Joe Mabel
The Swinomish Channel, used by thousands of boaters each year, will silt in and become impassable by 2015 unless it is dredged — but funding for that work is more uncertain than ever.
In recent years dredging has been paid for through congressional earmarks, but with Republicans vowing to ban earmarks when the new Congress takes power in January, it’s uncertain whether the work will be funded. If not, that poses serious implications for boaters and marine-related businesses along the channel.
“It’s very critical,” said La Conner Marina Harbormaster Paul Mattos. “If they didn’t keep this dredged there would be no marina here after a while. This whole town would suffer, because a lot of business comes from the water.”
The 11-mile artificial channel, which connects Skagit Bay in the north to Padilla Bay in the south, was approved by Congress in 1892 and completed in 1937. It is authorized to a depth of minus 12 feet below mean lower low water, but silts in quickly and must be dredged at least every three years to prevent it from filling in.
The channel was last dredged in 2008 and is due for another sweep next year, which will cost an estimated $850,000. The work was previously included in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers budget. But the Corps is now funding only projects with more than 10 million tons of waterborne commerce a year, and the channel falls short of that requirement.
A study commissioned by the Port of Skagit County and released in February found that the channel depth would reach minus 2 feet by 2015 in Padilla Bay, and by 2019 in Skagit Bay. Thousands of boaters use the channel every year to and from the San Juan and Gulf Islands and points beyond to avoid crossing the more hazardous Strait of Juan de Fuca.
There are about 35,000 boats visiting British Columbia annually, 7,500 guest boats at Cap Sante Boat Haven in Anacortes and about 17,000 overnight boats staying at the Port of Friday Harbor Marina, according to the study, with the majority of them using the channel.
“Lack of dredging will significantly impact these boats and vessels,” notes the study by Kenmore-based BST Associates.
“It could lead to a reduced number of trips and/or place boaters in danger as they are forced to travel via other more dangerous routes.”
Dredging is also critical for fire protection in La Conner, the study notes: many of the buildings along the waterfront are built on creosote pilings, and water access is necessary if a fire broke out.
And for the 25 marine businesses in the area, which range from boatyards to boat manufacturers and at least six marinas, not dredging would be disastrous. More than 500 workers at those companies depend on the channel for employment, the study found, and marina businesses and boaters generated about $92.6 million in business last year.
Jim Dunlap is the owner of Dunlap Towing Company, which has a log-handling facility in La Conner. The company tows logs through the channel almost every day, Dunlap said, and even the intermittent dredging isn’t enough to prevent its tugboats from occasionally hitting the bottom of the channel.
“We just have to wait and plan around those sorts of things, which is inconvenient and costly in the long run,” he said. “Time is money.”
The port has been working with Washington lawmakers in an effort to secure funds for the dredging. Port of Skagit Executive Director Patsy Martin traveled to Washington, D.C. earlier this year to meet with staffers for U.S. Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell and Rep. Rick Larsen, who represents the 2nd Congressional District, which includes the Swinomish Channel.
“We’re trying to find a long-term solution that can work,” Martin said. “I think our congressional delegation understands that this is a vital infrastructure and commerce issue for the region.”
The Port of Anacortes plans to dredge the north end of the channel and use the sand to fill in an old paper mill site. The Senate approved $600,000 for the remainder of the dredging, while the House approved just $62,000. If the funding is allocated, it would likely be for an amount in the mid-point of the two numbers.
That would be enough to address some areas most in need of dredging, said Hiram Arden, the project manager for the Corps of Engineers. The dredging planned by Anacortes would allow the Corps to focus on the south end of the site, Arden said, which is the most critical area. If the funding isn’t approved, he said, there will likely be more vessel groundings and delays throughout the channel.
“Conditions are likely to be worse,” he said. “Depending on draft and how much shoaling there is, there could be other problem areas besides the south end.”
Congress has until Dec. 3 to either pass its appropriations bills, approve an omnibus spending bill or pass a continuing resolution, which would freeze federal funding at 2010 levels and punt funding decisions to the next Congress.
The nonprofit Pacific Northwest Waterways Association has been working with the Port of Skagit County to lobby for the funding. Kristin Meira, the association’s government relations director, said while a continuing resolution seems likely, it’s impossible to know what will happen after Dec. 3.
“We’re in a waiting game right now,” she said. “It’s a big unknown.”
The Republican’s “kneejerk reaction” to earmarks, Meira said, is frustrating.
“The Swinomish Channel provides more economic benefits than it costs,” she said. “This is a very important project to people who live in the area. It’s difficult for us to see earmarks painted with a broad negative brush.”








Richard Hunter said on September 7, 2011
Nearly a year after this article was written not much has changed, except that funding status has moved from “uncertain” to “non-existent”. The federal government is broke. Earmarks and government bailouts are no longer a reliable source of funds. The time has come for us as private citizens to step up and take responsibility for our own destiny. There is time, but not much, to solve this problem, and the answer is PRIVATE FUNDING. A fund is being established to get this done. Stay tuned…..
tom said on December 6, 2010
The elimination of ear marks will not cause this project to lose funding. It will only cause congress to vote on each item that requires funding , as they should. Funny that I read this today AFTER reading that that north end of the channel above the bridge is starting dredging today.
Bill Haimes said on November 30, 2010
I keep my boat in La Conner and would not mind an add-on fee to fund a dredging account. With appropriate safeguards it could grow rapidly and with work, there could be a match from somewhere as well.
Bill Haimes said on November 29, 2010
There is another problem shoal too at the South end of the channel near the Hole in the Wall turn. On the city side the West side of the channel is severely silted in. I have run aground on customers boats there and seen others join us waiting for high tide. The problem with the Corps’ policy is that the commercial tonnage goes down when the channels silt up. Less traffic, less money, more silt, etc. When will we get the picture that an Federally authorized depth in a Federal waterway is an obligation on the Federal Government. There was formerly a lot of commercial traffic on this channel but it has gone away due to this stupid method of allocation of funds. The cash should flow on the “Worst first” principle.
Deborah Bach said on November 30, 2010
Hi Bill,
I hear you. The Corps now funds only projects with more than 10 million tons of waterborne commerce, and the Swinomish Channel only gets about 200,000 tons. It’s the same issue at the locks, where about 80 percent of the traffic is recreational vessels – so it’s a big challenge to get funding for projects there as well.
monkeyloops said on November 29, 2010
So if every boat listed above paid $5 for their visit for three years to use the water way there would be money left over after the dredging to pay for advertising to bring even more boats in and pay for the next dredging.
They want toll bridges, toll parks and toll trails, then toll the marina also. Is a $5 mooring fee really going to affect someone that can afford to tool around in a boat?
Shuksan Tahoma said on November 29, 2010
I’m sure the private sector will be happy to step forward and pay for this.
I mean, since government is the problem and can’t do anything right, they’d probably end up filling it in by mistake, right?
Far better to give a shovel and snorkel to everybody who owns a boat and tell them to start digging.
Herb Stark said on November 23, 2010
Maybe the state of Washington could be convinced to “earmark” a very small percentage of its “Unfair Vessel Excise Tax” on boats for this and other worthy projects.