Boater aims to raise funds for critical Swinomish dredging
Oct 27 2011 in Currents by Deborah Bach
The Swinomish Channel is due to be dredged this year, but no federal funding has yet been allocated for the work. Photo by Joe Mabel
The Swinomish Channel is expected to silt in and become impassable by 2015 without dredging, but with no government funding yet committed for that work, a local boater is taking matters into his own hands.
Ferndale resident Richard Hunter, who moors his boat at the Port of La Conner Marina on the channel, recently formed the nonprofit Swinomish Channel Fund and hopes to raise $1.5 million by next June to cover the costs of dredging the channel.
“There’s zero prospect for getting any funding for this from Congress, which is why I’m doing what I’m doing,” Hunter said.
“I’m convinced that Congress, if they do get around to acting, it’s not going to be in time to get any dredging done this year or next.”
The channel was last dredged in 2008 and is due for another sweep this year. The work has previously been funded through congressional earmarks, which House Republicans banned last year.
Additionally, the federal government slashed funding almost in half for projects on waterways carrying less than 10 million tons of waterborne commerce a year. And the Swinomish Channel, while heavily used by recreational boaters and marine businesses along the waterway, falls short of that amount.
Without dredging, the channel will fill in to a depth of minus 2 feet by 2015 in Padilla Bay, and to the same depth in Skagit Bay by 2019, according to a study released last year that was commissioned by the Port of Skagit and conducted by Kenmore-based BST Associates.
Thousands of boaters use the channel annual to get to and from the San Juan and Gulf Islands as an alternative to the more hazardous Strait of Juan de Fuca. The waterway is also a critical conduit for the 25 marine businesses in the area, including boatyards and at least six marinas. More than 500 workers at those companies depend on the channel for employment, the study found, and marine businesses and boaters generated about $92.6 million in business in 2009.
Hunter thinks businesses in the area, and possibly also recreational boaters, will contribute to help pay for the dredging. He’s set up a website and plans to funnel donations through the Port of Skagit to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which is responsible for maintaining the channel.
Hunter acknowledges that some may balk at paying for work that the government is responsible for, but said, “My response to that would be that the government has decided for whatever reason that they’re not going to fund this thing, so what are we going to do about it?”
John Hicks, chief of navigation for the Army Corps in Seattle, said while the Swinomish is considered a “low-use” waterway in terms of commercial traffic, it is essential to the area.
“We understand the importance of Swinomish Channel and we’re very empathetic of the needs of the people around it,” he said. “While it doesn’t have millions of tons of commerce going through the channel, it is an essential connection between north and south Puget Sound. It really is an important area.”
The Swinomish is not alone in its challenges. The ban on earmarks means that other waterways, harbors and even large ports are not being funded for needed work next year, Hicks said.
“As far as the Seattle district, (the Swinomish) is way up there on our list of priorities,” he said. “If we had funding, we would be able to do it. But unfortunately, the project has traditionally not competed well with other projects in the district, and more importantly, nationally.”
But while the Swinomish dredging was not included in the president’s 2012 budget, there’s still a chance that the work could be funded through additional operations and maintenance funding allocated in separate House and Senate bills to pay for projects like the Swinomish Channel dredging.
The federal government is currently being funded by a continuing resolution that expires Nov 18, after which Congress will have to decide what to do about its unfinished appropriations bills. The bills could be passed or rolled into a larger omnibus spending bill, or Congress could pass another continuing resolution that would freeze federal funding at 2011 levels.
Kristin Meira is executive director of the nonprofit Pacific Northwest Waterways Association, which has been working with the Port of Skagit on funding for the Swinomish dredging. Meira said she remains optimistic that the project will be funded.
“From where I sit, all is far from lost,” she said. “I would argue that this project had a very good track record of funding until the last few years, when national Corps funding was largely frozen, with little opportunity for our Congressional delegation to provide relief. We will continue to advocate for this project to receive federal funding through the Corps for 2012.”
Mary Clem said on January 14, 2012
I wouldn’t define a federal contribution as simply “the entitlement mentality.” All US taxpayers represent the largest economy of scale you can produce. A contribution from everyone can fund many more “entitlements” than having everyone shoulder the (more expensive) burden of whatever needs funds. It’s simply more efficient, and I don’t think it’s necessarily more expensive to each of us, to fund some things collectively. Granted, I personally would like to take my boat to LaConner without grounding it, and I don’t think I’ve attempted it since 2009.
Brian said on October 27, 2011
It’s hard to see why taxpayers in 45 states east of Washington should help fund dredging of an artificial waterway that primarily benefits Washington boaters. Those House Republicans!
Michael Purser said on October 27, 2011
Of course it’s a good thing! How do people think the federal budget, not to mention the state budget, got so gynormous? The Swinomish Channel is an artificial waterway and must be constantly dredged. How does that make fiscal sense? Boaters are welcome to use Deception Pass and the west shore of Fidalgo, which has a very nice state park (more public funding for our benefit). You can have federally subsidized life everywhere or you can have fiscally responsible government, but you cannot have both.
Richard6218 said on November 14, 2011
You are forgetting that the entire economy of La Conner not to mention the Swinomish Tribe is (guessing) 80% dependent on the Channel. Recreational boaters are not the only users. There is a huge logging operation that employs Swinomish members as well as providing jobs and revenue to Dunlap Towing, who haul the logs to mills out of the area. The marine industry consisting of La Conner Maritime, the local fuel dock, the La Conner Marina and many smaller marine businesses all account for employment directly dependent on the Channel. So allowing the Channel to fall into total disrepair is not an option.
steve said on October 27, 2011
I guess this is just more of the ‘pay to play’ which is hitting us left, right, and center. I remember free boat launches, bridge, highways, campgrounds, and on and on. I think this is the new paradigm for life as we know it…….if you want it, pay for it,directly, now,out of your pocket.
maybe that’s a good thing?
Richard6218 said on November 14, 2011
What ever happened to the old paradigm of personal responsibility? This entitlement mentality is simply not the American way. The federal government doesn’t have ANY money of its own: only what it takes from the taxpayers, or prints out of thin air (thank you, Mr. Bernanke). So if you get some “freebie” from the feds, who do you think pays for it? That’s right — your neighbor. The federal government is broke. So if we want something done it’s time to pony up and take responsibility for our own destiny. There is no free lunch.