Editorial views from across the state

It's important that environmental protections be put in place around the Birch Bay watershed as the population in the area continues to grow.

The time to take precautions is now, before growth fills up the land around the bay with homes and businesses. Just look to Bellingham Bay if you want to see how expensive it is to clean up the environment after development occurs. So the proposed Birch Bay watershed taxing district, which could raise funds for property purchases or environmental projects, may be a good idea.

But Whatcom County is right to pull the project back and make sure all residents of the area understand what they may be part of. No one should start paying taxes to a new entity about which they weren't clearly educated.

The hold-up apparently comes from people confusing the suburban community of Birch Bay with the idea of the Birch Bay watershed. So some people who live on the outskirts of Ferndale who received notification of the watershed taxing district probably thought, "I live in Ferndale, not Birch Bay. This isn't for me."

Wrong. Watersheds don't know anything about human political boundaries. The watershed is defined by the largest body of water to which all other water flows. Thus the Lake Whatcom watershed includes part of Bellingham, suburban communities like Geneva and Sudden Valley, and a lot of rural or forested land in Whatcom County.

Watershed distinctions are important. For example, Bellingham's northward growth is pushing the city into the Nooksack River watershed for the first time. Protecting the already stressed river, home to salmon species threatened with extinction, will become an issue for city residents if the city continues its northward push.

In the case of Birch Bay, the health of the streams and ponds that are on the outskirts of Ferndale but in the Birch Bay watershed has a direct effect on the health of Birch Bay.

But usually people don't know what watershed they live in. So it's smart for county officials to step back and take the time to educate everyone in the Birch Bay watershed about what that means, and how it might increase their taxes.

— The Bellingham Herald, July 12

Shrinking world? Well, not really

The whole wide world isn't quite as wide as we thought.

It turns out that Earth scientists, using instruments akin to Hanford's Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory, have determined our planet is almost two-tenths of an inch smaller in diameter than the last most recent measurement (in 2000) indicated.

Think it doesn't matter?

Think again.

Positioning satellites in space requires a precision that goes well beyond the business world's concept of "spitballing it."

According to LiveScience.com, "Earth is generally agreed to have a diameter of about 7,900 miles and a circumference of about 24,900 miles. The new findings, detailed in the latest issue of the Journal of Geodesy, suggest our planet is some millimeters smaller than previously thought."

LiveScience.com says the new measurement combined data obtained via three different techniques, one of which is known as Very Long Baseline Interferometry.

More than 70 radio telescopes worldwide are set to receive radio waves emitted by quasars, and because the stations are so far apart, signals are received at slightly different times.

It's not at all unlike the bouncing lasers at LIGO, which are checking for gravitational waves.

The conclusion is that the world may not be shrinking, but our estimation of its dimensions may be.

— Tri-City Herald, July 16