A recent article highlighted the lackluster job Tacoma “Public” Utilities has done with offering residents promised recreational opportunities at Riffe Lake. It was a promise to offset the cost of hosting a for-profit “government” agency’s cash crop. 

The power generated is sent out of the county at the expense of our community and environment. The utility is also limiting opportunities for public access not just at the infamous boat launch, but also at other area around the lake based on their desire to do wildlife restoration at some locations, likely offering themselves mitigation credits as well.

In fact, one priority restoration location has been historically recreated on and is surrounded by campgrounds, while not restoring property on the lakefront that has little human presence and would benefit wildlife. 

All of this is just a mechanism for restricting access and targeting residents and landowners they don’t like, unfairly.

The utility regulates themselves, permits themselves and picks winners and losers along the shoreline, arbitrarily deciding which residents get permits and which residents get harassed. For example, there is evidence of false reporting of cut trees (claiming trees were cut, yet the stumps were old and black and other trees were growing in the supposed recent cuts). They decided who gets investigated and who doesn’t using what I consider illegal means to procure evidence. When the case was thrown out of court, they employed dubious GIS metrics to intimidate the landowner who called them out for their dishonesty, which increased the utilities’ land via pseudo-imminent domain (not a real government agency) to take property in act of revenge for the botched court case.

Lastly, the truly absurd, their reasoning for the low water and increased temps in the lake, is the fear of an earthquake and the potential that catastrophic flooding might occur. Really? This should have been addressed in an environmental impact statement and the public should have had the opportunity to comment on this and then decide if the tradeoff was worthwhile. 

The fact is that was not a part of the original deal. 

They are hurting downstream ecology by releasing ever warmer bodies of water downstream to impact flow, with little regard to temperature. Ever-increasing temperatures mean less fish in the river and the lake. It’s a sign the river is drying up, and profits will no doubt be the main reasoning for every action the “public” utility makes.

If Lewis County residents are exposed to catastrophic flooding, have no or little access, no meaningful wildlife restoration, no natural river or ecology that should be there, no electricity and do not share in the profits, why exactly have we allowed this company to work out of reach of county planning and permitting? So how bad would a flood be if water was lower? Just serious? We need transparency in how this group deals with local landowners, and we need actionable and serious plans that will justify the dam and the utilities existence in Lewis County.

Brian Stewart 

Onalaska