Compromise best for river, economy

Since the first civilization sprang up in the Tigris-Euphrates Valley, human beings have been partial to river basins as places to build their communities. Flowing water, readily accessible, quenches the thirst and irrigates crops. It provides power, whether as a water wheel on a mill or a turbine in a hydroelectric dam. It’s a source of fish, a means of transportation, a recreational arena.

But the relationship between cities, such as Spokane, and their rivers exacts a toll — on the rivers. Water is taken out and much of it comes back tainted, some not at all. Or the river becomes a convenient repository for waste to be washed downstream.

All of which leads to exasperating dilemmas such as the one that’s on the agenda for a meeting this afternoon at the Ramada Inn.

Officials from the state Department of Ecology will get together with representatives of industries and local governments whose ability to discharge treated wastewater back into the river is endangered by DOE’s present interpretation of federal law. The state and the local entities are in a dispute — not over whether to clean up the river but how much. A critical deadline is at hand.

It’s a complicated situation, calling for more time, which can be provided only if DOE is receptive to a compromise being offered by the local dischargers this afternoon.

DOE is poised to impose a water-quality standard for the Spokane River so strict that the dischargers say it would force them to stop putting any treated wastewater back in the river and turn instead to prohibitively expensive alternative disposal methods. The community would suffer severe economic consequences, all based on an illusive water-quality standard that may not have existed since before human civilization moved into the area. In the meantime, less water in the river spells trouble for power generation and fish life.

And even then, DOE still couldn’t meet its goal, because 44 percent of the phosphates that contribute to the river’s problems doesn’t come from treated wastewater but from so-called non-point sources — contaminants that wash into the river or the aquifer from fertilized golf courses, crop lands and lawns, not to mention waste from farm animals and wildlife.

The dischargers say water quality can be improved to a level necessary to support the actual uses which the river is asked to meet, including sustaining fish. They applied to DOE to begin a rule-making process along those lines. The agency has until next Friday to approve or reject the application; it’s not likely to approve.

Now the local dischargers are offering to withdraw their application — relieving the deadline pressure — if DOE will explore a nine-point plan that includes using the best available treatment technology while identifying ways to get at non-point sources, through land-use planning strategies, and developing water-conservation policies. They’re confident their approach can improve water quality to realistic levels while avoiding devastating economic impacts.

Spokane can’t afford to destroy either its river or its economy, so it’s imperative that whatever decision is made be the result of thorough scientific study and thoughtful deliberation. The state can preserve that opportunity by agreeing to the proposal it will receive this afternoon.