A group of environmentalists is working to enact "Rights of Nature" laws for Washington rivers across the state.
Olympia-based Rights of Nature Initiative (RONI) Coalition is pushing for an ordinance that recognizes the rights of the Deschutes River.
RONI is in its early stages and started its outreach last week when it pitched its vision to the Local Good Governance Coalition. They also held a webinar this week and talked to interested residents about the concept of the rights of nature.
During the webinar, Thomas Linzey, a legal counsel from a partner organization working with RONI Coalition, said that rights for the natural environment often confuse people as rights are often reserved for humans. Laws often treat nature as property subject to the rights of an owner who may choose to exploit or even destroy it.
Linzey said that the purpose of having rights for nature elevates the level of protection afforded to nature by grounding such protections to the level of rights.
According to rights of nature laws that have been implemented in various parts of the world, rights of nature include the right for an environment to thrive, regenerate, evolve, and perform natural ecosystem functions.
Lizney said that a rights of nature law typically includes four things. First, of course, is the recognition that an environment has legal rights. A rights of nature law should also provide for enforcement as well as remedies to restore damaged ecosystems. Local laws would also have to be amended to reflect the new law.
Ecuador was the first country to enshrine the rights of nature in its national constitution in 2008. In the US, the concept of the rights of nature can be traced to indigenous beliefs.
Linzey said that as of 2023, over three dozen municipal and tribal governments have adopted rights of nature laws, including Orange County in Florida, which the organization sees as an inspiration. Eighty-nine percent of voters in the county approved a ballot measure in 2020 recognizing the rights of rivers and streams in the area despite the county having a population of 1.4 million people.
Abi Ludwig, RONI co-founder, said that the achievements of local communities in Florida were made possible through citizen-led initiatives, which they would like to replicate in Washington State.
An initiative in Olympia and Tumwater would require a number of signatures equivalent to 15% of the total registered votes on the day of the last general election.
Ludwig said that their organization is educational in nature and that RONI is looking for community partners to push for these initiatives. “We are here to provide legal advice and to do everything we can to see those legal initiatives as they are drafted, that they get on the ballot, and that they get passed. That is our mission,” she said at a meeting.
Ludwig said that they are hoping to help launch these initiatives by 2024. For this year, the organization wants to focus on outreach efforts and coalition building.
She acknowledged that there would be certain challenges to the initiative process, such as a 2016 Washington Supreme Court decision that makes it difficult for rights of nature initiatives to prosper at the local level. The decision rejected a ballot initiative in Spokane that would have provided rights for the Spokane River. The Supreme Court found that the initiative was outside the scope of the city’s authority as it would have been in conflict with state laws.
Despite this legal blockade, Ludwig said that they remain positive about the process. She said that they are working with their partners to develop legal language that would preempt the issue.
Beyond Deschutes River, the organization is also looking to help other communities secure rights for other Washington rivers. Interested communities may connect with the organization through its website.
14 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
Bobwubbena
One more thing to lay on our community without a practical discussion about how the growing population in Thurston County will be impacted. Always someone else's at fault or to pay the bill. Yes 100 years ago decisions were made that impacted our community today. This is what our governmental process is designed to "collectively address". The author of this article first must explain what their message means to those in Thurston County now needing a home and a way to live within the community ---paying their own bills. All other ideas need to wait for their suggestions and way to address life today. Otherwise, please hold your "utopia" thoughts for the next generation.
In a recent article, we had the City of Olympia suggesting that they wanted to "escape their responsibilities related to the Growth Management Act via not annexing the area to the SE. Too expensive. Who is responsible for what. Now we want the Deschutes River to be an entity unto itself. Please map out the governance for this concept and who will pay for it.
Friday, June 23, 2023 Report this
olyhiker
What does this mean exactly? It would be nice to know exactly how this impacts us.
Saturday, June 24, 2023 Report this
Southsoundguy
This is an absolutely dumb idea. Might as well give rights to a potato. The government already exercises too much power over waterways and this would make it nearly absolute.
Saturday, June 24, 2023 Report this
Farmerjoe
Clear violation of US Constitutional rights in 5th Amendment and the State Constitutions 4th Amendment where private property cannot be taken without payment of just compensation. Giving the property itself rights over the property owners rights is a taking. How, and how much, will these groups pay the private property owners along the rivers? Will these groups be sued under the US and State Constitutions?
Saturday, June 24, 2023 Report this
bonaro
This sounds like it comes from those who want to prevent their neighbors from the free use of their property.
It will be an infringement of State and Federal property Rights.
Hard no from me.
Saturday, June 24, 2023 Report this
MartyKenney
I’m happy this is being discussed and I can understand the fear of some people around this topic. As previous commenters mention, there’s a potential violation of personal property rights, which would make a particular demographic very unhappy. However, I don’t think that demographic is the most insightful towards the protection of Mother Earth. I believe in our collective obligation to protect the water and natural environment and I believe the younger generations would appreciate the work we can do now to make a healthier Deschutes River. If we don’t do something now, when will it ever be done? I’d love to see a follow up article addressing these folks questions.
Sunday, June 25, 2023 Report this
Madeline_Bishop
Glad to see this topic discussed. Should wealthy landowners get to control nature? Should they be free to let their septic tanks flow into rivers and lakes?
Sunday, June 25, 2023 Report this
Southsoundguy
Please don’t deify nature and pretend it has rights, we simply cannot organize reasonably around a concept so deluded.
Sunday, June 25, 2023 Report this
JJmama
Looks like a cadre of Property Rights advocates decided to flood the comments section.
We've been doing it their way for the past 250 years. Based on the condition of our earth at this point and what we are NOT protecting for future generations, it's time for a new paradigm.
I would absolutely support this, and we would spend our time figuring out how to best honor and integrate those who 'own' property, but without giving them the broad rights to the earth they don't deserve nor have earned any more than most of the rest of us. (And yes, I 'own' properties too, but prefer to see it as stewarding...)
It would be great if these (old and middle-aged) white men could start understanding that the planet is not just about them, but that this is a place we must all 8 billion of us (and counting quickly), live together on. And that we have REAL responsibilities to steward it into the next few thousand years...not some vision of an apocalyptic end-time, so nothing matters.
This is where we're going, because we have no choice in the matter.
The way people have been, and want to keep selfishly and greedily owning, polluting, clearcutting, dominating...this is where we're at now.
It's precisely this kind of thinking which has brought us to this precipice.
We'll need a lot more than just a Rights of Nature designation, to save this place.
Sunday, June 25, 2023 Report this
WayTooOld
Well said, JJmama!
Monday, June 26, 2023 Report this
Southsoundguy
How will 8 billion PEOPLE live together if we start doing insane things like giving rights to water? Get real, you people have no business telling others how the world should run.
Monday, June 26, 2023 Report this
Southsoundguy
I mean seriously, how can we steward something that now has rights!? Total delusion.
Monday, June 26, 2023 Report this
Southsoundguy
I do agree that it is time for a new paradigm. Unfortunately, this idea of giving rights to water is really more of the same liberal nonsense. If you want something fresh, stop thinking about more ways to create “rights” because it just leads to MORE destruction of the earth but government and its aligned/crony forces. Bleet all you want about bogeymen like property owners and white men, but the guilt lies at the feet of liberalism, the current structure of government control over land, and it’s perverse incentive structures.
Monday, June 26, 2023 Report this
TonyW33
I like that this mirrors the perspective of the indigenous peoples of the Americas and Canada. They mostly had it right about respecting the earth. Of course it cannot work here locally or even statewide as others more conservative than me have mentioned. Rivers are federally controlled if it is possible to navigate them at all, at least for now. Also since the state Supreme Court has weighed in on the Spokane River, I doubt this will pass muster there.
Further, I am originally from Florida and am stunned that the proponents of this plan are touting any part of that state's beleaguered environment as an example of winning. Lake Okeechobee, the St Johns River, Tampa Bay, all the Atlantic Ocean inlets and most of the Everglades are so damaged and polluted that they will likely not recover while humans still occupy that area.
The inescapable reality, the actual bottom line, is that we humans have overpopulated the planet and are destroying it. We are incredible breeders and we have no predators to speak of. Each time that "nature" comes up with a means to limit our presence or to thin our herd, we overcome that new obstacle and just continue to consume everything in our sight. Sadly, any effort to protect the planet from this wholesale destruction must include a dramatic decrease in the number of our kind feeding on it. I am not hopeful that it's going to happen yet. If we had the will to do something to help the earth we would have already have done so.
Wednesday, June 28, 2023 Report this