The Island Guardian
Locally Owned & Operated
- islandguardian.com -
(360) 378-8243 - 305 Blair Avenue, Friday Harbor, WA 98250
The Island Guardian is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists
xx Home | News | Business | Environment | Lifestyles | Entertainment | Columnists | Archives | Classifieds | Nag
News
Current news
Government News
Political News
Service Organizations
Editorials
Obituaries
Guest Editorials
Business
Business
Real Estate
Environment
Environment
Weekly Nag
Weekly Nag
Letters to Editor
Letters to Editor
To Contact the Editor

Friday, September 30th

Pimping Wildlife for Economic Development?



ig_Birgit_Kriete-1 (12k image) (Orca Relief photo)

By Dr. Birgit Kriete

This week, Friday Harbor hosted the 2005 Watchable Wildlife Conference, sponsored by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington State Tourism, Washington State Dept. of Transportation and NOAA.

As an environmentalist and animal advocate, I hoped for a balance of presentations regarding watchable wildlife in Washington State, if not for speakers to urge protective ways of watching one of Washington's greatest resources to preserve it for future generations.

Instead, I experienced a cookbook recipe for enticing more visitors to come to the islands, how to extend the tourism season and how to ensure that we have plenty of activities, sufficient accommodation and good infrastructure in place, and the desire to increase the Washington tourism income from $11.7 to $15 billion during the next few years.

Today, Washington State income from watching wildlife is around $1 billion on an annual basis. Watching wildlife is a major advertising point in attracting visitors to the San Juan Islands. But, at what cost to our wildlife is all of this happening?

Here in the San Juan Islands, and probably in Washington State, killer whales are the superstars of wildlife. Millions are spent every year advertising this resource; millions are spent by visitors seeing this wildlife. Orcas may soon be listed on the endangered species list, an even more enticing reason for tourists to see them. But at what, and whose, costs?

What is our community willing to share, and what are we not willing to share? To answer this, we must decide how we want to see our islands in five, ten and 50 years.

Do we go all the way to entice tourism or do we step back and re-assess the future of our environment and community? Just before the end of the conference, someone asked an excellent question, "Are we pimping wildlife for economic development?"

We have been encouraging visitors to come here to receive a profit off of a magnificent resource – our benefit, but with no return for wildlife. In our current way of thinking, we believe we have the ‘right' to travel, to see what we consider interesting. Tourism has taken over in many places around the world, edging out wildlife and civic life.

We need to have a visionary plan to protect our environment, how to save our wildlife from being ‘loved to death' and how to save our identity as islanders.



(Dr. Birgit Kriete is the Executive Director of the Orca Relief Citizens' Alliance. She may be contacted at Birgit@orcarelief.org.com )





[more..]


Monday, September 26th

One Freeholder's Minority Report



ig_LUDWIG-1 (15k image)Firstly, as a Freeholder myself, I apologize for not sounding the alarm sooner. From December to July, the charter-writing process seemed to be going OK. Then, quite suddenly, a majority group solidified; and a wholly inadequate Charter resulted.

San Juan County desperately needs a good Home Rule Charter. Our present governmental structure is a horrible anachronism that simply doesn't provide the basic fundamentals required of any modern government structure: the rule of law, representation, protection from urbanization, from corruption, and abuse of power. Unfortunately, the new charter doesn't provide these things either.

It's not all bad. It does have an administrative-legislative split which should help reduce the workload of Commissioners. The "alternate" charter has a six-member council which can act as a deliberative body (a three-person council can't). The alternate also meets the requirements of the U. S. Constitution for equal representation and does away with the curse of at-large elections. But this is not nearly enough.
A charter county has far more power to tax, spend and regulate than a code county (which we are now). It can permit anything that is not specifically prohibited by the State and prohibit anything that is not permitted. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but any charter should have strong checks in place to insure strict compliance with the intent of all applicable laws, codes procedures, etc. If SJC had had this all along, it would now be a far happier, safer and fiscally healthy place. Society can tolerate illegal activity by individuals or even by organizations, but when governments ignore the intent of the law, everything important is put at risk: our rights, freedoms, and even our property.

Direct democracy is best, but failing that, a charter needs to restrict elected representatives to discovering and obeying the will of the majority. Without this, we have merely created another privileged aristocracy that reduces citizens to the level of subjects.

The new charter also creates whole new areas of conflict within County government. How will the County Administrator manage when the Auditor, Assessor, Clerk, Treasurer and Sheriff are separately elected and therefore essentially independent of the Administrator's authority?

History and daily life supply us with many examples of why electing representatives does not give people sufficient control over government. We also need the right of initiative and referendum. Sadly, the charter makes it almost impossible to get either initiatives or referenda on the ballot. . San Juan County is a difficult place to gather signatures with its sparse population, its lack of political involvement and where almost everyone moves about in motor vehicles. Political activity is actually banned in most of the best places to get signatures.

Other basic protections for ordinary citizens that a good charter should have are a code of conduct for elected and appointed officials, campaign finance reform, restrictions on the ways the County incurs indebtedness and a swift, efficient transition--all this is fundamental, badly needed in SJC and absent.

Again, SJC needs a good charter; that means fixing the one written by the Freeholders or starting over again. Getting and maintaining political freedom, as a rule, needs steady and long-term effort. Quick fixes, revolutions, riots, demonstrations, etc. don't work. Whether this Charter passes or fails at the polls, we all have much more work to do.

If you decide to vote yes, at least vote for the six-council member "alternate." That requires a yes vote on both the "basic charter" and on the "alternate." It might be easier in the long run to vote no and start the process over again and do it right. It only takes the signatures of 10% of the number of voters in the last general election to restart the freeholder process. To fix the charter requires 15% of the number of voters in the governor/presidential election, a much larger number - and we will need to collect all those signatures for every change!

Steve Ludwig
Lopez

(Mr. Ludwig is a former Freeholder, and is currently running on the Green Party ticket for County Commissioner, District 3)





[more..]


Lifestyles
Lifetstyles
Entertainment
Entertainment
Columnists
John Evans
Mary Kalbert
Ron Keeshan
Gordy Petersen
Piet Visser
Stephen Robins
Bill Weissinger
Amy Wynn
Terra Tamai
Classifieds
Classifieds
Helpful Links
Helpful Links
RSS Feed

Let the newspaper come to you with Real Simple Syndication

RSS Version


Web design by
The Computer Place

© 2008 The Island Guardian, Inc
All Rights Reserved.


Powered By Greymatter

To learn about this newspaper
or
how to place a free ad
or
to become contributor
click below:
About
The Island Guardian

or email:
publisher@
islandguardian.com