In an effort to create more wetland environments here, there is a plan to install floating man-made wetlands in Green Lake (Image: Friends of Green Lake)

(Image: City of Seattle)

I don’t know about you, but I like a good wetland. A real low-lying mucky kinda place that you know would pull your boots right off if you tried to walk across it. The kinda place that, according to a recent ruling by the Supreme Court, no longer deserves protection under the Clean Water Act.

On May 25th, 2023 the Court issued its decision in the case of Sackett vs. the EPA, siding with Idaho couple Michael and Chantell Sackett. The case itself has been moving through the court systems since 2008, when the Sacketts were first told to halt filling a lot they were developing near Priest Lake, Idaho. The EPA said they could tell the Sacketts to do this because of the Clean Water Act, and when the couple sued, the local court agreed with the EPA. But finally, court by court, the Sackett’s got what they wanted from the final say in our judicial system.

You would be justified in thinking that this doesn’t sound like something related to natural history on Capitol Hill.  And really, despite my soap box opinions about how we all relate to the more than human world, I don’t delve into environmental policy on Pikes/Pines because it’s not my area of expertise. But this one hurts. And it upends 50 years of protections that are vital to human and environmental health.

The entire case hinged on a definition of “Waters of the US,” and the semantics of what is water and what isn’t as well as that sloppy middle ground — wetlands.

What the ruling determined is that for wetlands to be protected, they have to be 1) adjacent to a river, stream, or other relatively permanent body of water connected to a traditional interstate navigable water, and 2) have a continuous surface connection with that adjacent water.

With a little bit of critical thinking, it should be obvious that this new “test” to see if something is protected by the Clean Water Act isn’t rooted in science. If you pour oil into a wetland adjacent but not directly connected to a lake, you are certain to end up with a polluted lake.

Wetlands are the lifeblood of our planet — they filter water, reduce flooding, prevent coastal erosion, hold more carbon than forests, and are vibrant multispecies communities. Up to 40% of all known species on the planet rely on wetlands in some part of their lives, humans included. Counter to this apparent value is the fact that the world lost approximately 35% of its wetlands between 1970 and 2015, a trend that has continued into present day. With the final ruling of the supreme court, many wetlands, especially those in states where there are relaxed environmental regulations are in even more dire straits.

Thanks for trying, beavers (Image: City of Seattle)

Capitol Hill, of course, isn’t known for its low, wet places but we have water all around us.

Lake Washington, Portage Bay, Lake Union all pass the test and are technically protected (though you won’t catch me drinking from them). There is also no future in which the University of Washington decides to lease the arboretum’s low wet places to a petrochemical plant. And really, we have less to worry about because Seattle, King County, and Washington State have relatively robust environmental regulations (despite the fact that the former two were recently fined by the EPA and the Department of Ecology for overflow from the overworked and antiquated combined stormwater and sewage system).

But the mentality of “we’re fine over here” doesn’t work because water flows. We are all connected.

Polluted, altered groundwater is bad for everyone even if you can’t navigate your megayacht between a wetland and a nearby lake. What happens when salmon traveling across state borders (say along the Snake River into Idaho) discover the scant ephemeral streams they relied on are now a housing development? What happens when a corporation decides it wants to fill in a wetland for a new facility in a community that can’t stand up and fight because they are too busy just surviving (or when their elected officials ignore the public’s wishes like in the case of Cop CIty in Atlanta)?. The Clean Water Act might not have been perfect, but it brought the US back from a time when rivers could literally catch on fire. Some experts suggest that at least half of all the wetlands that were once protected no longer have the federal government behind them.

I have a hard time not thinking about water right now because May was the 10th driest on record in Seattle. A scant .92 inches fell, about half of the average. These types of conditions are hard on our wild neighbors right when many of them are trying to raise young. It feels cruel that at the same time people who want green lawns have already started irrigating with precious clean water

Sackett vs. the EPA didn’t get a lot of press coverage, which felt both criminal and purposeful. (With national debt to worry about, who cares about clean water, right?) And frankly it does just feel like one more straw. I wouldn’t blame you for feeling that this all feels a bit esoteric – wetlands might not be a place you consciously visit or appreciate. But none of this means we should let greedy, selfish people shape the world, or rather continue to.

Constantly approaching environmental subjects from the perspective of ecosystem services, or more transparently, what the natural world can do for people is tiresome. But it doesn’t change the reality that we do need clean water to live and that wetlands do help humans live better lives. Personally I find it difficult to not be overwhelmed with joy when I visit a wetland and that’s enough for me to want to protect them.

I don’t exactly have an answer for what to do about all this. Try keeping up with politics, supporting orgs and politicians that fight for clean water, and counting down the days of peak capitalism. I tried screaming at the radio, it didn’t work.

But a simple thing that I recommend as a solution to just about any environmental quandary is to pay attention to and visit with the thing at stake. Take your family, your friends, your doubting uncle with you. Observe how these places teem with life: beavers, eagles, willows, cottonwoods, dragonflies, and so much more. Try to appreciate them simply because they exist and mean so much to so many, outside of your needs. Even with SR 520 running over the top of it, the wetlands around Foster Island and the Arboretum most certainly hold the most biodiversity within spitting distance of the Hill. Just appreciate that for what it is and hold it dear.

$5 A MONTH TO HELP KEEP CHS PAYWALL-FREE
🌈🐣🌼🌷🌱🌳🌾🍀🍃🦔🐇🐝🐑🌞🌻 
Subscribe to CHS to help us hire writers and photographers to cover the neighborhood. CHS is a pay what you can community news site with no required sign-in or paywall. To stay that way, we need you.

Become a subscriber to help us cover the neighborhood for $5 a month -- or choose your level of support 👍