The Washington State legislature adopted the Growth Management Act in 1990. The Act aims to include compact urban growth and reduce urban sprawl. It was (and still is) unique for a state to consider future needs for open spaces for residents to enjoy and recreate. 34 years later, we can now ask whether Washington was wise to take a county-based implementation approach.
I was a University of Washington College of Forest Resources student. In 1995, I typed a future article anticipating what Washington State might look like in 2025. The landscape has changed, and in my opinion, not for the better. The intentions behind the Act were, far too often, thwarted by the undue influence of local or outside money at the county level.
"The Pacific Northwest was remote until the Klondike gold rush in the Yukon territory took off in the late 1890s.
Seattle was the jumping-off place for prospectors and anyone who followed the money. However, the Pacific Northwest region was also established due to its abundant land and water. Before World War II, specific industries thrived, including agriculture, timber harvesting, fishing, and mineral extraction. At the onset of WWII, natural resource exploitation boomed—mainly metals used to build and finance the war effort. Large-to-scale factories ballooned. Employment possibilities jumped with opportunities. People came to gain employment, and in the last twenty years, the trend has continued due to the highest state-based minimum wages.
The Pacific Northwest seems endowed with destruction—the destruction of natural resources. The regional advances aren't all bad, but real progress toward quality of life declines without balance. One way to visualize it for the outdoorsy type is if you climb the face of the mountain and only climb halfway because there are no footholds above; the climber must descend. We all want to reach the summit but it takes choosing the correct or best path which determines how far we can go. It takes vision to see the best path. Growth management is a necessary vision to keep the path open and to create sustainability and resiliency. Proper planning creates buffers against the tendency of unfettered utility and greed.
The Pacific Northwest had large evergreen trees because of the rain and fog common to the region (see picture above and a relatively small diameter tree compared to historic tree size). This is not the case now, as the area is experiencing more drought—or drought-like conditions. We can see the future by only looking back. Yesterday now has the potential to form tomorrow as the only means to ensure the safe passage of people in time. It is impossible to create a reality not conceived as possible today. Many let go too soon or never latch on because they don't feel in control over a dream or vision. However, there is a changing reality.
The region grew large quickly due to the bountiful goodness of Grandmother Moon and Mother Earth. The resources were exploited for the war, and then came the "Boeing Era." The Northwest was always on an economic roller coaster of boom or bust—the hallmark of any extraction industry. This made the region dependent on outside forces at the financial level. I believe this will continue until 2025. (Since I initially wrote my article, in recent years, Governor Inslee and the Democratic majority in the state's legislature have worked hard to create a more local/regional economy where more benefits remain local and are more inclusive.)
Businesses heavily influence the Pacific Northwest as a seaport. Like many regions, local economies have been reduced to food, shopping malls, and espresso carts. Outside money is exploitative. The population will continue to rise but the focus will not be on the cities, as had been in the past. As the overall world profile rises with tension (in-fighting over natural resources ironically), people will seek the areas remaining of the original inhabitants (true native America). It is a struggle against urban encroachment into more wild places. Many from the city bring with them the city mentality. It is a rush to see who will get the last few drops within the bucket, or so they think.
Growth management was designed to address pressing problems. Habitat conversion caused the death of ancient salmon spawning runs, and now climate change is warming the rivers and creeks exposed by the reduction of foliage and trees. Complete forests aren't equivalent to Weyerhauser tree farms and shouldn't be converted to tree farms. Business-caused or thoughtless private conduct causing water pollution should be abated and be required to pay to clean up their messes. People have saved the population of Bald eagles from DDT but then intentionally kill Spotted Owls. They cut down the grandfather trees for DOLLAR signs but then try to claim natural resources are valueless in their eyes.
To lessen the pain of guilt, the words "managed resources" are used to ride the fence. If one thing is saved to destroy another, then no real progress can be made. Balance is not in the degree of destruction but in how much we preserve. To decide which species will live and which will die because of "business as usual" is not for humans to determine.
In conclusion, I see drastic changes in natural land continuing in the future. At the current rate of destruction, by the year 2025, the Pacific Northwest will not resemble much of what it was in 1995. Overpopulation and poor management will scar the region forever. People should focus less on the physical world for their sense of well-being (exploitative resources) and more on the spiritual part that goes ignored. An inner self-respect for all things might be the only way for a better future in the Pacific Northwest and worldwide."
Comments