A lot of people in our community are talking about the plan for improving the levels of dissolved oxygen by reducing the phosphorus that goes into the Spokane River. What’s all the buzz about?

Simply put, it is a disagreement among scientists on the computer-simulation modeling. Is that a big deal? Well, yes and no.

It is a big deal because we base our decisions on sound scientific principles, and that is what we have done with this water-quality improvement plan.

It’s also NOT a big deal because scientists almost always disagree and argue over details. These exchanges are important and valuable.

Confidence in the water-quality improvement plan doesn’t depend on getting all scientists to agree. It does depend on the community’s commitment to applying the best technology possible on the four wastewater treatment plants and to searching out the sources of phosphorus that don’t come from the end of a pipe.

The plan is aggressive and very progressive. It calls for periodic check-ins to monitor progress because scientists are not 100 percent certain that we’ll hit the bull’s eye. That said, we have a great deal of confidence that we’ll clean up 95 percent of the phosphorus in the river and in Lake Spokane.

An informational meeting held Wednesday by the state Department of Ecology opened a 45-day public comment period on the river-cleanup plan as well as four draft water-quality permits for wastewater dischargers along the Spokane River.

In the beginning, we had three choices.

“We could have decided to require that the dischargers remove all of their treated wastewater from the river and pipe it elsewhere at astronomical expense, borne by all of us.

“We could have chosen to “give up,” i.e., let the river remain polluted. The river is our crown jewel. It’s what we brag about and a big part of what attracts people and business to the area. Not only that, but the Spokane River is also a heavily used family recreational area that must be clean.

“The third option – the one we chose – was to do the best we could, working with many community leaders, to come up with a plan that everyone could live with and that gets us to a point where we are not violating water-quality standards. But that doesn’t mean it’s a “soft” plan.

Preparing for and installing new technology is a huge financial burden. Working to minimize pollution that does NOT come from the end of a pipe also requires a gigantic commitment from all of us.

This collaborative group of officials met for two years to develop solutions to the river’s and lake’s problems. The group consisted of companies and cities that discharge wastewater into the river; federal, tribal, state and local governments; and environmental organizations, including the Sierra Club. That community work is the foundation of this water-quality improvement plan.

We all agreed that a healthy environment and healthy economy go hand in hand. Letting the river deteriorate is not an option. Together, we are committed to making the investments necessary for a healthy, prosperous community.

The river and Lake Spokane contain too much phosphorus and other nutrients that act like fertilizers. They promote the growth of algae and other aquatic weeds that use up the oxygen in the water when they decompose.

Without adequate oxygen, fish struggle to survive. In addition, too many nutrients can cause unsightly algae blooms that can become toxic and cause nuisance odors or skin irritations.

The water-quality improvement plan allows the dischargers to release a limited amount of phosphorus without violating the water-quality standards. This limit goes hand-in-hand with a longer-term agreement reached during the collaborative process.

That agreement includes the modernization of treatment facilities at industries and cities along the Spokane River, various strategies for reducing polluted runoff and a heavy emphasis on reusing highly treated wastewater where appropriate.

Uncertainties exist that require flexibility in the future and some ability to adapt to changing populations, emerging wastewater technologies and changing conditions in the river and lake.

We at Ecology welcome your comments and ideas and will make sure anyone who has a question gets that question answered.