As we learn more about the horrific mudslide in Washington state that has claimed the lives of at least 24, as of Monday’s official count—with many others still missing, and much land and property destroyed—one particularly chilling bit of information is that it may have been able to be prevented.
The Seattle Times reported March 30 that the state Department of Natural Resources (DNR) used antiquated boundaries to restrict logging above the slope that collapsed, neglecting to incorporate newer research that would have protected land later clear-cut.
In 1997, a report prepared by geologist Daniel J. Miller and hydrologist Joan Sias mapped the plateau atop the unstable hill outside Oso, Wash.; the report indicated places where groundwater could feed into the slope and increase the risks of landslide through erosion. Miller later wrote in a 1999 report that the mountain was constantly shifting and experiencing landslides and would one day suffer “a catastrophic failure.”
When DNR issued logging restrictions in 1997, it cited the Miller-Sias report and stated that any future study should emulate its methods, which used “newly developed computational tools” and was considered state of the art. But instead of using Miller’s map, DNR repurposed boundaries that had been drawn up in 1988, which eventually led to clear-cutting land—priming the area for erosion from groundwater and thus landslides—that would have been off-limits if the most updated report had been used.
If indeed this could have been prevented, not heeding the Miller-Sias report was a grave mistake that led to a tragedy—but perhaps this horrifying event will ensure that future restrictions and regulations in all industries take into account the possible human toll if estimates are wrong or information is outdated.
