Dick

Thanks for this email.

There is a clear legal case on this matter. I would hope that if, as you
suggest, the State does not move to honest and fair testing - that they should
be sued - now there is a resolution that even the Grange would not likely pass.

Regards..Ken

On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 10:21 AM,
Dick Bergeron:

Ken,

One major problem
with fecal chloroform screening is that samples taken from the same location
just a few minutes apart may yield substantially different results. That's
one reason why the state health department uses an average of thirty samples
around commercial shellfish beds.

After the state
reports elevated results, the county might test the waters and find nothing,
or get a completely different set of results.

The Chimacum Grange has recommended, as one of ten, a
legislative resolution to the state convention that would address this issue:

Whereas the quality of
water is important to people and wildlife, and

Whereas the
measurement of fecal chloroform is an inexpensive test used by many
government entities as a marker of water quality, and

Whereas many
government and non-governmental entities hold forth that elevated fecal chloroform
levels are human-caused,

Therefore be it
resolved that:

When any state or
federal agency holds forth that fecal chloroform sampling results indicate a
risk to human or environmental health, that the agency must first test the
fecal chloroform to determine the likely sources before mandating local
action to reduce such risk.

Testing is
expensive, but state mandates to rectify something that may not be a problem
could most effectively be headed off by using the same sample that causes a
mandate.

Of course, having
the Grange adopt this as a resolution is one thing. Getting it into a
common-sense legislative bill will be something else, yet something I will be
doing my best to make happen later this year.

Dick

--- On Wed, 6/11/08, ken shock <[email-masked]> wrote:

From: ken shock <[email-masked]>

Subject: RE: Jefferson officials to mull septics
program

To: "Norman MacLeod" <[email-masked]>

Cc: "Judi Stewart" <[email-masked]>, "George Sickel"
<[email-masked]>,
"Bud Schindler" <[email-masked]>, "jim hagen" <[email-masked]>,
"Kenn Brooks" <[email-masked]>,
"ron ewart"
<[email-masked]>,
"Jack Venrick" <[email-masked]>, "Scott" <[email-masked]>,
"Mountain Coalition" <[email-masked]>,
"jim kennedy"
<[email-masked]>,
"Jim and Donna Buck" <[email-masked]>, "Pat Rodgers" <[email-masked]>,
"Mike Martin" <[email-masked]>

Date: Wednesday, June 11, 2008, 2:29 AM

Norm

We are not back to Brinnon until end of June, and
will miss these meetings on CAO and Septic (and warming).

Aside from the issue of household chemicals and pharmas
entering the waters of our area via urban systems - and its is demonstrable
that widely dispersed rural septic systems do a far better job of breaking
these chemicals down - we have the issue if determining the source of any
bacterial and viral contamination. You have seen my missives to the WRIA 16
crowd, demanding tha DNA testing be done to
determine if the seals are the source (or are humans), in South County. I do
not know how expensive such tests would be, but it sure as hell is allot cheaper that retrofitting septic redesigns and
annual surveillance. (or is 'smart growth' the
actual real objective?)

Personally, I believe that rural residents should demand that the County
PROVE that the any contamination they cite is from humans. It's sort of like
the global warming' crowd asserting that humans cause climate change, without
the slightest definite proof. So that is my suggestion, that we demand DNA
testing or we will see them in court......!

Now I have no doubt that such DNA testing up by Belfair would show human
impact, but I very seriously doubt this would be so in Jefferson - at least
not outside of the UGA !  Therefore, Port
Townsend bay should be the priority and be DNA tested first {:^0}~

Also I think water sample should be taken on a rising tide, by the mouth of
the Hood Canal (the bridge would be a good spot) to determine if bacterial or
viral contamination is entering Eastern Jefferson waters from Puget Sound and
the Straits - and if it is human sourced. It is likely still the case, for
example, that Victoria sewage is pumped untreated into 'deep water' - well
where does that water end up?

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=3f397511-1cec-4df8-91c5-f8e75b7810e1&k=26549

(300,000 people in Victoria)