Watershed group report from The Morning News interesting

The interesting part is that few or none of the people who attended the first meeting are listed among those who are voting on which policy choice to make.
Why? Because many apparently were culled despite their knowledge in favor of people in positions of power who might slow the process of creating a plan to protect the watershed.
If this isn't true, maybe someone will provide a more accurate assessment of the situation.
If the whole process isn't a greenwash in favor of the "develop at any (environmental) cost" group, what is it?
A truly progressive group of cities and counties would enforce the strongest possible regulations for their own good. Otherwise, they might as well remove the dam and let the White River flow. When Beaver Dam was built, its existence implied a responsibility to protect what it provides, because building the dam sacrificed a truly magnificent river for growth in Northwest Arkansas. Treat it with respect or lose it. Keep the rainwater where it falls and the topsoil where the creator put it.
If a person will benefit from anything less than the strongest possible protection of the watershed, he should not be on a small list of people who can decide how to protect the watershed. Let everyone decide: The ratepayers who must buy the water in four counties rapidly having their wells and springs polluted should count for more than those who may profit from minimal regulation.

The Morning News
Local News for Northwest Arkansas

Watershed Group To Consider Three Management Plans
By Caleb Fort
THE MORNING NEWS
http://www.nwaonline.net/articles/2008/12/10/news121108rzwatershed.txt
Watershed group considers options for Beaver Lake

An advisory group agreed Wednesday to look into three possible ways to manage the Beaver Lake Watershed.
The first option would be based on voluntary measures, including education about environmentally friendly development and pasture management.
The second option would be full implementation and enforcement of water requirements set forth by the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality, including an ordinance that would require low-impact development techniques.
The third option would be the same as the second, plus additional requirements, including erosion control at construction sites and stricter requirements for wastewater treatment within 600 feet of Beaver Lake.
All three options would include measures to preserve natural habitat near streams, control erosion of pastureland and upgrades to the West Fork and Huntsville wastewater treatment plants.
The Beaver Lake Watershed Policy Advisory Group, created by the Northwest Arkansas Council, is trying to create a management plan to preserve the watershed and the lake. Environmental consulting firm Tetra Tech is helping to guide the process.
"We're at a threshold," said Kimberly Brewer, associate director of Tetra Tech. "If we do something now, (the lake) will be good for years to come."
It has had four meetings, the first three of which were focused on identifying which issues a plan would have to address and how to measure success.
Now the group has to focus on drafting a plan to address those issues, said Mike Malone, executive director of the council. The group is supposed to have a completed strategy in June.
Juliet Richey, a member of the advisory group representing the Washington County Planning Board, raised questions about requiring or encouraging low-impact development techniques without further research.
Those techniques, such as improved drainage systems, are a way to minimize the effect development has on pollution.
Richey said she was concerned those techniques were not developed with Northwest Arkansas' geography and geology in mind.