Olympia’s Fight for a Deep-Water Harbor

The proposition to establish for Olympia a harbor that would ultimately meet the commercial necessities of the city was presented to the harbor line commissioners this morning in a practical argument by John F. Gowey, Hazzard Stevens, and A. H. Chambers, the committee appointed by the citizens' mass meeting and by the board of trade. The argument set forth the views of the citizens of Olympia that harbor lines should be located in the city, and not merely a waterway, and that the harbor defined by such lines should extend at least as far south as Third Street and should have a width of not less than 3,300 feet opposite Priest's Point, 2,000 feet opposite the end of the long wharf, and 1,000 feet opposite Third Street.

The committee argued that the whole of Budd's Inlet is 'navigable waters.' Whether deep water as at Brown's wharf, or flats bare at low tide, the whole area of Budd's Inlet to the falls of the Deschutes is, in the eye of the law, as much 'navigable waters' as any part of Puget Sound. Under the state constitution, they said, the board had no alternative but to locate and establish harbor lines in the navigable waters of Budd's Inlet within and in front of the corporate limits of Olympia.

A waterway alone, however broad, through the flats in front of the city instead of harbor lines would be a plain infraction of the constitution, the committee said, because the flats bordering the waterway must be sold to private parties. The board had no power to reserve upon waterways the harbor strip for wharves and docks to be forever owned and controlled by the state in the interest of the people, as provided in establishing harbor lines. All wharf and dock facilities upon such a waterway would at once fall into private hands—the very thing the constitution forbids and seeks to prevent.

The committee named commercial needs and the practicability and cost of the work as the two prime factors determining harbor lines. It looked forward to Olympia as a city of 50,000, handling the products of the Tenino quarries, the coal fields, the lumber mills, and the farms of the region. 'Not how small, but how large can the harbor be made should be the end sought,' the committee wrote. 'Every yard of harbor area attainable should be secured, for it will all be needed.'

Improved dredgers, the committee argued, had made harbor excavation far cheaper. The flats could not remain in their natural condition; with the growth of the city every foot would be used, either dredged to make harbor or filled to make land. At least half the area of the tide flats should be included within the harbor, plus every yard not absolutely required to hold the dredged material. Dredging the remaining area could be deferred until needed, and the material dredged from the harbor would make land on the sides. The owners of adjacent flats would pay for filling and thus contribute to paying for the improvement. A waterway 400 feet wide and a mile and three-quarters long, from the southern extremity of the harbor to the lower falls of the Deschutes, was earnestly recommended. It would provide sites for manufacturing establishments and help flush out impurities. The citizens were well represented before the board, and the meeting was generally satisfactory; the desires of the people were clearly stated.