While I'm reluctant to open up another can of political worms here on the BB I'm curious about what you fellow fishermen and women think of I-745 here in Washington. It's the latest idea from Eyman that says 90% of all transportation spending should go towards building new roads. Guess who the biggest backer$ of this initiative are? The asphalt pavers association.

I got to thinking about it as I took the scenic route home to Seattle from the Skykomish on Sunday. I couldn't help thinking what a shame it would be to see the road from Monroe to Fall City turned into a four-lane mess.

With all our talk about habitat degredation and loss of watersheds this seemed like a good issue to bring up. So let's hear it.

B. Gray

Mr. Eyman thinks that directing more dollars to roads will help solve our traffic problems. Doesn't he have any idea how many years new roads will be tied up while studies are done to try to determine what impacts those roads will have on wetlands, salmon recovery etc? There are no simple solutions anymore. I can't think of any road that has more than a couple miles length to it that wouldn't go through a wetland. His "solution" is no solution at all.

Kevin

Being in the asphalt business,It doesn't sound all that bad to me.Hopefully any new improvment's won't affect salmon and steelhead recovery effort's.Goodluck,
STRIKE ZONE

If it pass' maybe they'll fix the roads we already have.If they make new roads with the money that means more dwellings and what do you get with more roads and houses,more run off and more people and more cars.

How's about campaigning for family planning and birth control thereby getting a lid on our population explosion.

Man, humans are stupid! We just don't seem to learn from our mistakes.

Well I don't like to get into any political stuff but now I am. This is sapose to put 90% of the money from GAS tax into roads. what is wrong with putting the money where is is sapose to be. not into some lazy dudes pocket so he can sit home an colect welfare while I work and pay taxes. this has nothing to do with fishing its about putting the money that is sapose to be for roads where is belongs. I don't understand the argument of it being a bad thing. think of the jobs it could make by allowing more road work to be done. I say the money is from a tax that is only on cars, like the tab fee it should only be used for roads. how much more simple can it be. don't tax the gas and spend it on the ball park or what ever they want. they can't handle the money so we need to draw pictures and show them simple stuff. I also like the idea of taken the Lotto money and useing it for schools. although I don't think money will solve any problems there. but that is another argument.

my 2 bits
dcrzfitter

Vote NO !!!!!
this bill was sponsered by the Asphalt industry and will hurt public transportaion and other areas of transportation just like the licese plate thing last year it saved a few bucks in the short term but long term it hurts all of us...my .02

------------------
Row Quietly and fish a Cataraft }<<(('>----<'))>>{
Release all Wild Fish

[This message has been edited by Osprey (edited 10-26-2000).]

EricW,

Count me in for the population control bill! Everyone is always complaining about traffic, growth problems, too many people...but you never hear word one about maybe not having so many kids! I wonder how many people who complain about living density have large families? Hello! We have a finite amount of environment yet we keep putting more people into that finite space. Is it possible that limiting population numbers might help?

It would be a tough road to hoe (I.E. impossible) though because I think most people feel that popping out 10 kids is their God-given right.

Kevin

Read your voters guide and then decide. Kevin no time to get this one up for a vote but maybe next cycle,ballot title, Birth control initiative RU-486.Explanatory statement not needed.

While I agree with population control, I think the problem in the Puget Sound area has more to do with economics than people having too many kids. Eveyone wants to come here to get thier part of a booming economy. The latest info I have read is that developed countrys have leveled off their population growth, it's the third world countrys that are breeding themselfs to death.
One thing I have notice about building new or larger roads to solve traffic problems is that they ruduce the targeted traffic jam for a while, then developers come in and find every square inch of buildable property in the area and make an easy commute a selling point. Within a short time the traffic is back to gridlock and there is another push to build more lanes. On the other hand I don't see people giving up the conveniance of a personal vehicle and using mass transit. I don't know what the answer to this problem is. Maybe more rain and snow.

Build a 12-lane freeway, with the idiots on the roads out here, and you know what you'll get? A 12-lane traffic jam, most likely filled with 15,000 ten-seat SUV's all carrying ONE passenger.

I think gas taxes should go to TRANSPORTATION costs, not just building more lanes. More lanes would be great, but there's more to transportation than just building roads.

Fish on........

Well said, Dan. There's a hell of a lot more to transportaion than building roads. Gas taxes are already earmarked for transportation, including roads, buses, ferries, snow removal, etc. Why should we let some rich guy who makes his living selling cheap watches to frat boys tell the DOT how to do their job? Look at southern California and tell me that laying more pavement eases congention. I'm not knocking people who make a living building and maintaining roads (Strike Zone). I'm sure there are plenty of Microsofties browsing the board, even good Democrats, having a hard time voting for Gore and Cantwell considering the alternatives would likely be better for their interests in court. But that's another story.

Anyway, I have to hope people won't be sucked into simple short-term solutions to complex problems.

Back to fishing...

Though I am not form the "Wet-Side" anymore (moved out here 5 years ago) I can provide my insight into the effects of I-745. Simple fact is, you can make all the lanes you want to and you will not curb the traffic problems. "Pave it and they will come" is more like it. The puget sound region is going to have to move towards mass transit that actually works sooner or later (just like many other major cities). It is not a matter of if, but when.

Since the vile topic of politics has been brought up, be sure you vote no on the trapping ban. Someone should put a initiative on the ballot to end wildlife management by referendum. The only change I would have liked to see was I-696, and it lost. Trapping is almost exclusively used to control disease in wild populations. I never used to believe it, but I think you can bet if this one passes, next year it'll be some form of hunting. I certainly hope not.

The easy solution -

No more immigration.

Off shore reef made out of the high seas drift net fleet and the local net fleet.

Dozens more fish and game cops.

Kidding......sorta.

WOW!!!!!!!??????population control???? I thought reproduction was, in fact, one of the few God given rights......Spending 90% of the money where 90% of the traffic is, is a too simple solution for a too complex problem????? You all have lost me this time.

[This message has been edited by wit45cal (edited 10-26-2000).]

Asphalt Companies sponsering a Bill?Come on do you really believe that?lester

wit,

There are diminishing marginal returns on money spent to build additional lanes. Sooner or later, you get no results, even though you are spending more. Hence, my earlier comment.

Fish on.......

Wit,

Yes, reproduction is a right and I don't think anybody on this board would ever seriously think that it could be challenged (although we've all certainly met people who have "sterilization" written all over them). The point was that people express shock and dismay that there is so much urban growth and traffic problems yet we continue to have more development and increased population. Don't you see a correlation? We aren't a farm-based society anymore so I'm not sure that 10 kids is a good idea because families don't need 10 free field workers anymore.
And yes, spending 90% of the money where 90% of the traffic is, is too simple of a solution. We can never keep up with the expansion either budget-wise or logistics-wise with all the hoops that need to be jumped through. There is much more to building more roads than just laying down some concrete. Telecommuting, mass transit etc. are a start... Simple solutions to concrete problems don't always work. Remember that we once thought that just putting in a bunch of hatcheries would solve all our "simple" salmon problems.

Kevin

How do you all get to work? How about your neighbors, friends and relatives. The fact is that no where in the US does mass transit carry more than five percent of the commute. Not even New York. And building more lanes works. There is a reason that LA is now better than Seattle for traffic, MORE LANES!!!!!!!! A massive road building project begun in the seventies. Dan, you're from Lacey...What exactly was the reason for the DOT spending ten years on the 101 - I5 interchange??????? I think they added more lanes to ease congestion did they not.

So far on this thread I have seen support (tacit or otherwise) for population control and vehicle choice restrictions. You lefties never cease to amaze me. It is exactly the individual freedoms here in america that make it so desirable to the rest of the world. That includes your freedom to drive all alone in a lexus school bus if you wish. I never hear of any lefties volunteering more money on april 15 than the IRS says they owe but every Nov. 7 or 8 you all tell me that I don't pay enough. You gotta have pretty low self-esteem to think you can't be trusted with you own money.

wit,

Yes I live in Lacey. Yes, they did build additional lanes and a maasive interchange to ease congestion, both at the Hwy. 101/I-5 interchange, and the Hwy 101/Black Lake Blvd. interchange. And as far as I can remember, it takes longer to get through either area now, than it ever did. It's a simple function of the volume of traffic outpacing the roadbuilding process. If you wanted the highways under construction on a full-time basis, you might be able to build lanes fast enough to handle the increased volume. But I remember when the I-5/101 construction was taking place and the massive traffic delays that occurred. I don't think that improving alternative transportation options is a waste of time and money. I think that to say it is a waste is shortsighted.

Fish on.........

Yes pouring billions of dollars into a mass transit system that does'nt work is a waste of money!!! I see no problem with asking for accountability for any agency using tax dollars and if they cant produce then they should'nt expect continued funding. There are plenty of systems in this country that work and the reason they work is because they have made it convenient for people to use. Simple as that!!!

I'm not saying we don't need more roads or at least some massive improvment,but read the BILL !!!
BTW: Lester lets see 90% goes to road constuction and you don't think the Asphalt industry bought into this....where do you live (oh never mind)and what are you're roads made out of???
when it says that 90% of all funds generated will go to building roads what about all the other programs that reley on this funding

so what does living in Lacey have to do with a Damn thing we all drive I personally put over 30,000 a year on my company truck from Blaine to Eugene .
We need to spend wisely....
BTW :Wit I only cast Left handed I use both hands to VOTE and a lot of research
take you're blinders off

------------------
Row Quietly and fish a Cataraft }<<(('>----<'))>>{
Release all Wild Fish

[This message has been edited by Osprey (edited 10-30-2000).]

Jeeze, I take off for Vegas for a weekend and things finally pipe up about this issue. Here's the top five contributors to I-745 according to the state public disclosure commission:

FOR I-745:
WA CIT FOR CONGESTION RELIEF 743,426.50
APAW (370,000 IN LOANS) 420,000.00
DEATLEY AL (LOAN) 150,000.00
LAKESIDE INDUSTRIES 50,000.00
SUPERIOR ASPHALT 50,000.00

Check it out for yourself here .

Sirs-
Ferries and WSP are both part of the budget that will receive 90% of the funds. I find it interesting that no one is able to make an argument against the initiative based on fact but rather resort to blaming the contributors. How is your mileage at 30 mph? I have done the calculations and my truck would use just over half as much fuel if I were traveling at 55 or better. That alone would keep me from burning over 500 gallons of fuel each year. To me that spells less polution and its associated problems. If one were to extrapolate that into the 500,000 commuters (in cars) each day in the greater puget sound area it soon adds up to 250,000,000 gallons of fuel each year wasted. (did the math in my head but I think thats the number) If you really want to do something for the earth, make a vote in favor of I-745. If you must try to use emotion to sway voters please at least make an effort to avoid the class envy schtick. It's getting to be a very tired message. Perhaps you would prefer to see all of those construction workers in the soup lines. Gov't projects also pay prevailing wages (a $5 to $10 per hour bonus for some) and those working stiffs at the asphalt company just don't deserve that because of a maximum 5% of the commuters??????? Really going to bat for the working man there. Oh the hypocrisy!!!! If mass transit is such a perfect model and there is such a huge demand why aren't there hundreds of fat cat republican businessmen begging for the chance to build and run a system. I'll tell you why, because no one wants it and no one will use it. The right NEVER misses a chance to make a buck, correct? So where are they now???? The fact is that the only person to ever run a private mass transit system at a profit in the US was Walt Disney and the left has continually balked at the idea of private business expanding and running a mag-lev monorail in the greater seattle area. The one time someone tried to ease traffic on his own dime and the lefties crushed him. The politicos don't gain any power if someone does it on their own. I don't see too many of you on the left tossing out the contributors names on your man Gores list either. Perhaps you folks just enjoy being stuck in traffic for an hour before and after work but I would think that time could be better spent tying leaders or flies.

Wit,

Building more roads just isn't the answer and there are many good reasons. If you page through the previous responses, you'll see that "blaming the contributors" isn't the only argument against I-745. It's obvious that you only see what you want to see and you aren't open minded enough to consider any solution that doesn't involve more roads (when we can't even maintain the ones we have now). The only message that is "getting tired" is yours which you keep regurgitating.
Your habit of just grouping everyone who would prefer better solutions as "lefties" shows a need to "classify" those who don't agree with you into one big bad group. It's not a party issue...just an issue.
I carpool to work every day and would LOVE to use a bus if there was a route that covered my area. I much prefer mass transit to driving alone in my car every day in gridlock, wasting the gas that you think your idea of more roads would save. Heck, let's just pave the whole state and then we can all drive anywhere we want whenever we want - are you going to back that initiative too?
Construction workers in the soup lines? Come on....using an image of unemployed workers waiting for food is a little dramatic don't you think? "Vote for I-745 or asphalt workers will all be living out of cardboard boxes." Give us a break.
You are also saying that we should vote for this initiative because government jobs pay well? Should we just re-enact the New Deal and put us all to work building roads and bridges? Huh?
Keep up your rants...your making our argument for us better than we could ever dream of.

K

TV Hosts, Exactly correc.... sounds great
even from the.....
left side


------------------
Row Quietly and fish a Cataraft }<<(('>----<'))>>{
Release all Wild Fish

Class envy schitck? Lost me on that one. I thought the question for this forum is whether or not building more roads is good for our rivers, lakes, creeks and wetlands? Your take on gridlock and commuting aside, I think the answer to that question is obvious. Save the earth by paving more of it. That's a hoot!

So where are your better solutions? Telecommuting(already here and won't ever work for mfg. etc)
Mass transit(already here and only carry 5% best case)
Population control(strangely the only idea to get more than one mention)

Your better solution have not worked anywhere they have been tried(I will concede that telecommuting has a long way to go and should be encouraged when possible). Mine have always worked everywhere they have been tried.

The reason I group you together is because you are expousing leftist ideas that have been tried and proven to be failures over and over throughout history. And yes, if we can avoid using 250 million gallons of fuel in the puget sound each year it will do more for fish and wildlife than any other single solution proposed when acid rain and petroleum waste are considered in conjunction with noxious emissions. Just the resultant absence of tankers in the sound bodes well for fish considering the record of tankers. And doing that would not require paving the entire state just key thoroughfares in the sound area.

Also, I didn't say I agreed with the prevailing wage (davis-bacon) laws, just that they existed. And if road and housing construction were to stop in the puget sound people would, in fact, be out of work. I was merely pointing to the hypocrisy of your side for not fighting for all of the working families of this state. Or does that term only apply to left approved work.

In order to solve a problem one must only present it to private industry along with a profit motive and things will change. Case in point the timber industry. When faced with extinction in the NW they quickly changed their ways of doing things and are now profitable and arguably the most knowledgable people regarding forestry and wildlife habitat. If you would prefer to ride the bus then move closer to a bus stop. You won't do that because those on the left prefer to change the way others live through legislation as opposed to setting an example for others to emulate. Yet another reason you have been fairly categorized by me. Why can't those on the left be proud to be there??? You rarely hear us "right wingers" denying our bent but by the same token you rarely hear those on the left admit it (words like moderate and open-minded are often used). In conjunction with being open minded one must also be discerning. I have looked at all of the options and simply prefer the one proven to work. I learned long ago that good intentions never fixed anything. If you truly think your way is better you would proclaim your ideology in every forum as I do. I doubt that will ever happen either as the vast majority of lefties know they're wrong but their position feels better than reality and that is all that seems to matter. Someday I hope you all will have the courage to recognize and face the truth. Until then...good day.

Let me say that I don't believe in personal attacks but.... Wit you need to think before you type. You have already told anyone who would read your post that you are on the far right. You have a vested political interest in keeping Slade Gorton in office because of your family's land holding in the wheat lands above the Snake River. You have failed to mention that they (your family) are some of the biggest receptionist of welfare. Welfare in the form of free use of the locks on those same Snake River dams to transport their wheat, not to mention the water that they siphon off at the taxpayer expense. Slade Gorton would be in favor of the initiative because he could stand to get even more political donations from the Asphalt pavers as a group by bringing even more federal monies to the state for road construction. Face it our political system is for sale to the highest bidder and money talks and bull$h!t walks. One thing that I have to say for Cantwell is she won't be beholding to any special interest group, not to say that I agree with her on every point but at least she will be her own person not owned by a few large farmers in eastern Washington. Small minded people are unable to think beyond their own personal interest and
instead once in a while think of the greater good of all the people not to mention the fish, deer, elk etc.... Wit I am sure that you are a good person at heart but at least open your mind and think. Don't believe all the political dogma that the right wing spews. The Germans had the same problem in the 30's. see ya!


[This message has been edited by stever in everett (edited 10-31-2000).]

Last time I checked, we wont be voting on alternatives to I-745. It's not a multiple choice or essay question. It's a yes or no vote. Again, is I-745 good for our rivers and streams? I still haven't heard anything in all this strange ranting that convinces me it would be good for the fish, which is my narrow point of interest.

Man Bruce ,
this thing has gotten way off base,
I hate being labeled....Leftist, Rightest.....Hell I thought I was a pedestrian

------------------
Row Quietly and fish a Cataraft }<<(('>----<'))>>{
Release all Wild Fish

Some Facts:
There are really two trains of thought regarding the construction of additional freeway lanes to ease congestion in the Seattle/Metro area. One is that congestion will get so bad that people will be forced to use the mass-transit system. The other is that we construct more lanes, ease congestion, and then face the same problems X years from now. There are intricacies to both strategies, but those are the basics.

With the average automobile operating at it's highest efficiency at around 45 mph, one could argue that the addition of more lanes would help reduce pollutant loading to recieving waters adjacent to roadways. Plus, productivity would go up because as products and goods would be much more easily transported to and fro. The addition of these extra lanes, though, would cause further fragmentation of what remaining habitats and wetlands are left, and increase the amount of impervious surface area that is already causing a major problem in the Puget Sound Basin. Traffic and the impervious surfaces associated with it being the single, greatest contributor to residential stormwater contamination.

So, we can mitigate for the loss of habitats and wetlands, right? Yes, we can, but the verdict is still out on whether man-made wetlands are as effective at detaining and removing pollutants from stormwater, and the verdict is leaning towards "no". And, with recent Federal regulations calling for "no net loss of wetlands", mitigation is becoming less and less of an option.

So, traffic becomes unbearable, road rage runs rampant, and people are forced to use a combination light rail/bus system to get to work, drop the kids off at the pool, run chores, tow their driftboat, etc. People will get sick of sitting in traffic and use the system, right? This sounds great and in theory should work, but in most cases it doesn't, and is in fact a massive tax burden. As of 1994, only two commuter rail systems in the entire United States operated in the "black" (Chicago and St. Louis). For an example of a MASSIVE tax burden, one must only look at the BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) system in the Bay area. Has traffic eased in the Bay area? Not in the slightest. Much like the communities sorrounding the Seattle area, the Bay area is fragmented by water, making transportation planning a veritable nightmare. A cost/benefit analysis can only touch on this conundrum.

So, how does impervious surface contribute to stormwater contamination? Vehicles discharge fine particulates ranging from dust and sediment attached to underbodies and fragments from tire and brake wear, to by-products of incomplete combustion and catalytic muffler residues. Exposed moving parts shed metal fragments and fuel and other lubricants often leak from vehicles.

A model was derived for this loading in 1982 and concluded that approximately 6.4 pounds of Total Suspended Solid Load (stuff in water) could be counted for every 1000 vehicles per mile of curbed roadway, per rain event. If your neighborhood street is .5 miles long and has approximately 5400 cars per day, and there's 141 measurable storms in a year, there would be more than a ton of TSSL deposited in it's recieving waters. YIKES!

You can count some of this out due to increases in vehicle efficiency over the last 18 years, but we still have a major problem. With even the most efficient treatment system only able to remove approximately 80% of this material, it's still a problem. What's attached to this sediment? Zinc, Copper, Magnesium, Benzene, Toluene, Xylene, and on, and on, and on. Bad, carcinogenic stuff.

Hard to say how an initiative such as I-745 will actually help gridlock, since more than 50% of construction money will actually go to design/build of stormwater systems associated with any new construction. Oh, yeah, I forgot to mention the fact that new stormwater regulations have gone "retroactive", meaning if you want to construct/reconstruct something you have to fix prior screw-ups.

Time for Robbo to move to the wilderness and hole up in a cabin.







[This message has been edited by robbo (edited 10-31-2000).]

Robbo in all of that you said basicly what everyone else has said "traffic congestion is here to stay so learn to live with it".On the surface runoff you said the best system would only get 80% of the noxious material which would be nice since there's virtualy no systems anywhere in the state.I believe Bellvue was building one but don't know if it's done yet.Personaly I believe pollution is the biggest hurdle in fish recovery,if you were a fish it would be like sitting in your garage with the car running and the garage door closed. That cabin livin would be nice but I don't think the wife would go for it.

exactly. we've painted ourselves into a corner.

Steve-It bears repeating, I am not far right, just plain right. You say that I don't think yet I put together cogent thoughtful responses to every one of the personal attacks brought against me and as you will see below, enjoy people with an argument. Yes I do proudly proclaim my political persuasion. Anyone with an opinion should be prepared to do the same. If you cannot be proud of what you think you probably haven't begun thinking. I have no vested interest in Slade outside of the fact that he more closely replicates my thinking than does Cantwell. After some divorces I have been placed firmly out of the inheritance loop on all farmland so I think my interest there is limited at best. As to the welfare, that family has farmed that land since the mid 1800's, long before any dams. Many lost lives and lots of lost land since the dams probably equals any perceived benefits. If they were allowed to farm without the gov't intervention on crop rotation and fallow seasons I am sure they would gladly give up the gov't sponsored price fixing and locks use. As you may or may not know, when dealing with thousands of acres (I think they have about 100,000 now) one does not water the crop and thus the well behind the house takes care of all water needs. Pumping the water 15 miles uphill from the river would be prohibitive anyway. As an aside, 100,000 acres is nearly a rounding error for some of the farmers on the dry side of the state.

As to your comments regarding the german people...(I can't believe I am even dignifying this) you've got your political spectrum reversed. Was I being compared to the people who voted for him or Hitler himself???

Robbo- you obviously have some experience here. Prepared an SWPPP or two? While I generally agree with your premise I believe some things jump out immediatly.
The number of rain events should have little effect on total TSSL accumulation but rather higher ppm counts in spot samples during dryer weather and vise-versa. Rain in and of itself should not create TSSL. If the rain did have an effect it would indicate that the rain is carrying airborne solids into the equation that may or may not be attributable to vehicles. I suppose it could be suspended solids from tailpipe emissions but could just as easily be dirt stirred up from the travel or winds. Much of the TSSL count could also be attributed to ambient or atmospheric generation could it not. (much like dust accumulates in our homes)
While copper does have health risks I am not aware of any associated with magnesium and Zinc is harmless unless you get hit with a large chunk of it. As I am sure you know, homeowners with miracle grow are a much larger contributor of copper to the environment than all industry combined. No felony charges for feeding your petunias. I am not aware of the use of toluene, xylene or benzene in the auto industry outside of non-street legal racing gasoline and some fuel additives (aftermarket) I have not however looked at gas formulations lately. There are LOTS of filtering systems that will remove contaminants from stormwater to much better than 99.99 percent purity and RO or nanofiltration can also remove the disolved metals well beyond motca levels. Ro and nano are slow now but the technology is moving quickly. I am currently involved with an oil absorbent firm that is far and away the best I've ever seen. Oil on water is absolutely no trouble. It floats without aid and makes a pretty good hog fuel. Currently testing on some military bases and certain private industries. The only sorbent that will actually meet and exceed ALL astm requirements. The best part, 100% post consumer recycled content. We get paid to haul it away.

B.Gray- I am sorry to say that either way it goes will probably have about the same effect on fish (in my opinion) and that is not much. I tend to agree with many on this board that harvest plays a large part in the current state of fish runs. All species are quite adaptable including fish and if harvest of any kind was outlawed I think the rivers would be overflowing in short order. My advice would be to go with your gut here. If you think that more roads would negatively impact fish runs more than they would positively impact the general welfare of the populace then vote no. I will be voting yes.

Interesting quote by Charles Marion Russell, the cowboy artist, "In my book a pioneer is a man who comes to virgin country, traps off all the fur, kills off all the meat, cuts down all the trees, grazes off all the grass, plows the roots up and strings ten million miles of wire. A pioneer destroys things and calls it civilization." Today, we call such a person a "developer". Their landscape destroying activity requires new and bigger highways. Pavement is progress. The next time you're sitting in a traffic jam, you can thank a developer. A vote "NO" on I-745 probably won't help you move any better through traffic, but it might lead to moratoriums on developing rural environs, where adequate roads don't exist. That should benefit streams and fish.

I think Eyman on to something here All we have to do is build more lanes or highways. All the new lanes are for those who are non Washington State Natives, if you were not born here you have to wait until your lanes are done. The rest of us "locals" can have our roads back, yea thats the ticket. I drive the I5 corrador everyday as part of my work. I work on boats and if I did not end up in quiet marinas after those commutes I sware I would take my or someone's life. It is totally stupid out there. How do you guys do it and end up indoors with a suit and a tie on that is too tight. I have to say I admire you for being able to do that and not getting brought up on murder one charges. I745 is dumb,not just dumb,it is stupid. If you started today building a new freeway system we would all be flying to work in our personal vertical take-off and landing vehicals before it was finished. By the time it is done it'd be packed and gridlocked too So let us invest in one way roads out of the state. Remember just keep stressing that it always rains here and the slugs are carnivorous. Mass transit is one answer and the other is if you do a job at a computer then pass a law that all employers are reguired to set you up to work at home. Anyone want to buy a highrise in Belleview cheap. Q: Do you know what brings tears to a native Washintonian's eyes? A: An Oregonian leaving the state with a Californian under each arm!Keep Washington wet, real wet!

Robbo- you obviously have some experience here. Prepared an SWPPP or two?
While I generally agree with your premise I believe some things jump out immediatly.
The number of rain events should have little effect on total TSSL accumulation but rather higher ppm counts in spot samples during dryer weather and vise-versa.

-I should have added the "on average" portion of the study, my bad. Your absolutely right, though, in that there will be higher/lower counts per storm event. But, in the end, you have X lbs of product.

Rain in and of itself should not create TSSL. If the rain did have an effect it would indicate that the rain is carrying airborne solids into the equation that may or may not be attributable to vehicles. I suppose it could be suspended solids from tailpipe emissions but could just as easily be dirt stirred up from the travel or winds.

-These particles accumulate on the roadway and are subsequently washed into the storm system during a rain event. This study was done on the Westside where dust storms seldom occur and airborned particulates would have little effect on it. I don't believe I ever mentioned that the fact that rain in and of itself creates TSSL, it merely acts as a medium for it.

Much of the TSSL count could also be attributed to ambient or atmospheric generation could it not. (much like dust accumulates in our homes)
While copper does have health risks I am not aware of any associated with magnesium and Zinc is harmless unless you get hit with a large chunk of it.

-The MOTCA standard for Zinc is 5 ppm, and yes, it is toxic. Most of it comes from the oxidation process that occurs from UV rays hitting the tires of our vehicles. Seems inocuous, but it isn't.

As I am sure you know, homeowners with miracle grow are a much larger contributor of copper to the environment than all industry combined. No felony charges for feeding your petunias. I am not aware of the use of toluene, xylene or benzene in the auto industry outside of non-street legal racing gasoline and some fuel additives (aftermarket) I have not however looked at gas formulations lately.

-Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylene (BTEX) are still widely used in the petroleum industry, especially in gasoline. BTEX sampling is one of the main tracking methods for meeting MOTCA cleanup standards in petroleum product spills.

There are LOTS of filtering systems that will remove contaminants from stormwater to much better than 99.99 percent purity and RO or nanofiltration can also remove the disolved metals well beyond motca levels.

-Show me a STORMWATER treatment system that can effectively do this at a reasonable cost, and I will show you a costomer willing to buy it, maybe more.

Ro and nano are slow now but the technology is moving quickly. I am currently involved with an oil absorbent firm that is far and away the best I've ever seen. Oil on water is absolutely no trouble. It floats without aid and makes a pretty good hog fuel. Currently testing on some military bases and certain private industries. The only sorbent that will actually meet and exceed ALL astm requirements. The best part, 100% post consumer recycled content. We get paid to haul it away.

-What is the name of your firm?

Essential Absorbents in Spanaway WA.
253-227-1336
working on a bilge filter for small watercraft. Filter, pump and hoses. Nice unit.

Wit, I did not mean to imply either, I was mearly stating that by blindly following the dogma of any organization with out think freely for ones self led to the situation in Germany in the '30s. Many who didn't agree kept silent and we all know the results.
I can't wait until the elections are over and the discussions can go back to fishing. As for wether I-745 is good for fish i would have to agree that more roads and more traffic can't be good for any living thing, wether it flies, floats, swims or walks.

I hate political threads, but this not about weather or not we need more roads it's about 90% of the money going to road construction and the fact that all the others dependent on these funds will suffer,I realize some of us don't use public transportation but should WE be the ones to decided weather or not to eliminate granny who doesn't drive bus route because we took the funds away to build more roads we muse realize that their are reactions to all of our actions
Think before you vote
I'm not left or right ...it takes both hands to row my Cataraft

------------------
Row Quietly and fish a Cataraft }<<(('>----<'))>>{
Release all Wild Fish