Letters to the Editor

More questions to be answered

The Sequim Gazette’s article on wastewater treatment for the Carlsborg UGA adequately covers the topic (“Carlsborg wastewater: Sequim bound?”, May 21, page A-1).

The article also covers water availability in the UGA and does not address serious questions about: 1. whether aquifer recharge will actually boost groundwater levels; 2. whether adequate water can be delivered to the UGA using additional wells but without having serious effects to existing wells and streams; 3. whether increased pumping will affect coastal wells and cause salt water incursion in light of projected sea level rise; 4. whether stream remediation efforts will meet tribal and DFW criteria; 5. whether reclaimed water can be cleansed of heavy metals, estrogens and other undesirable compounds before being infiltrated into groundwater and streams.

PGG’s thumbnail mitigation water budget does not address the above questions and does not scientifically verify the amount of deliverable water present in the aquifers now, in 2050, or beyond. It does not take into account glacial recession rates and decreased snow melt inputs or changes to groundwater levels caused by variations in climate patterns.

Long-term planning should be undertaken with better science in this instance. Future businesses and residents investing in Carlsborg will require a sustainable and cost effective water supply.

Richard Mazzota



We encourage an open exchange of ideas on this story's topic, but we ask you to follow our guidelines for respecting community standards. Personal attacks, inappropriate language, and off-topic comments may be removed, and comment privileges revoked, per our Terms of Use. Please see our FAQ if you have questions or concerns about using Facebook to comment.

Read the Oct 26
Green Edition

Browse the print edition page by page, including stories and ads.

Browse the archives.

Friends to Follow

View All Updates