Our Sponsors:

Read more »

Trending Stories

Our Members

Many thanks to Bradley & Sally Bagshaw and Maribeth Chadwell some of our many supporters.


Most Commented


    Setting sail for the Salish Sea

    Forget cleaning up Puget Sound: we have bigger waters to take care of. A new name for the Pacific Northwest's inland sea challenges us to rethink the region and its identity.
    All of the inland waters of Washington and British Columbia comprise the Salish Sea.

    All of the inland waters of Washington and British Columbia comprise the Salish Sea. Washington Department of Ecology

    There's no such thing as a blank slate. Our studies of history, ecology, anthropology, geology, evolution, etc. all teach us that there is a there everywhere that precedes us. But in places like the West, and still more so in the last frontier regions of the Pacific Northwest that were settled so late, very little seems fixed. Despite 10,000 plus years of human habitation, pioneers tried to wipe the slate clean of indigenous peoples and old-growth forests to build the New Jerusalem, and cities like Seattle and Portland and Vancouver emerged.

    But still, there is restlessness, a sense our regional identity is not fixed, that the borders and boundaries so lately settled may have been based on old paradigms.

    Once we were the Oregon Territory and stretched to Wyoming and Montana. States were carved out, British colonies and provinces too. Lines were drawn. Oregon celebrates its sesquicentennial of statehood this month, a venerable age for a region that became synonymous with the promise of the frontier. The age of empires — British, American, Russian, Spanish — competing for supremacy has largely passed, though it is being replayed in the melting Arctic, which could have trickle down effects on the Northwest in terms of economic opportunities opened by resource and territorial claims. Those Russians Alaska governor Sarah Palin can see from her porch in Wasilla? They planted a flag on the sea bottom at the North Pole in 2007, setting off a new round of jockeying in a warmer world. After 400 years, the Northwest Passage is still in play.

    The border between Washington and British Columbia was finally fixed by the sweep of Kaiser Wilhelm I of Germany's pen in 1872, but it did not resolve issues that are fluid, or were unknown at the time. His stroke may have made political or strategic sense, but does it make sense in terms of economics in a globalized, or even localized, world? Does it have anything to do with managing a bio-region? Did it take into account the sensibilities and traditions of the indigenous inhabitants? As the sweep and power of empires has shifted, the old blueprints are being reconsidered.

    In this and upcoming stories, I will be exploring aspects of regional identity and concepts that are currently in play in Northwest culture and politics, including notions ranging from Ecotopia and Cascadia to Pugetopolis and the Salish Sea. These ideas sprout from attempts to consider new regional iterations and they form a yeasty part of Northwest debate and discussion, touching on economic development, sustainability, the centralization of power, the role of ecosystems, and the limits of culture and identity. All suggest that while we're not a blank slate, the people of the Northwest aren't yet finished with conceiving it, that that regionalism is dynamic and ongoing.

    One manifestation of restlessness and rethinking is the quiet movement to rename of inland salt waters of the Pacific Northwest. While the people of the Puget Sound region are stewing over how to "save" the Sound and its life forms from massive and ongoing pollution, the terms of the conceptual game may be about to change.

    While Puget Sound has a fairly fixed identity — the deep salt water cul de sac is something you can easily point to on a map — it is connected to a larger ecosystem. The issues of Puget Sound are not limited to it, in other words. The Sound lies within the boundaries of Washington state, but it cannot be saved without understanding its connection to a greater system.

    Retired Western Washington University professor Bert Webber, a marine ecologist, has long been arguing that the inland sea of which Puget Sound is a part needs to be recognized with its own name. In May 2009, the Washington State Board of Geographic Names will take up whether or not to formally consider Webber's proposal to name this inland waterway the Salish Sea. It's Webber's idea, but not exactly new: he first proposed the name to the board in the 1980s, but they declined for various reasons to consider it at that time, among them that there were no "solid reasons" to do so. Webber was the only one pushing for it.

    Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!


    Posted Fri, Jan 23, 8:56 a.m. Inappropriate

    Maybe I missed it in reading the article, but I didn't see a mention of what, if anything, the Salish themselves called this immense body if water. If these inland seas do form one well-defined ecosystem, it makes sense to have a name for the whole entity, even if that name will only be used by scientists (and, of course, the latte and granola set who love to deprecate western culture). And while we're drawing up the map, it would be a perfect opportunity to return the original name to Mount Tahoma.


    Posted Fri, Jan 23, 9:48 a.m. Inappropriate

    Hello Knute,
    Great piece. Important topic. Even for Canadians worried about being integrated into the U.S.A.
    Some of us media commentators in British Columbia have also been musing this month on changing the name "British Columbia" since it's so anachronistic. My latest Vancouver Sun column on the topic is at www.vancouversun.com/thesearch
    Just as The Oregonian is celebrating the state's 150th anniversary by having a flag redesign contest, I think The Vancouver Sun should sponsor a re-name-the-province contest. It is a divisive issue, however.
    Looking forward to your series.
    Douglas Todd, Vancouver Sun


    Posted Fri, Jan 23, 11:24 a.m. Inappropriate

    dbreneman: Good question re: the Coast Salish. From what I understand, WWU professor Bert Webber coined it. But the Coast Salish are on board.
    re: Mt. Tahoma. Great idea. After all, we now have a Denali in Alaska.
    I'm not nitpicking here, just clarifying: The Coast Salish are the ones who live in the Puget Sound region. The Salish are located in the interior. Confusing. But Coast Salish Sea sounds kinda silly, I guess.
    I like this idea. For one, Coast Salish culture is largely overlooked. When most of us think about NW Coast art, for one, we picture Haida totem poles. But the Coast Salish, the people that live in and around Puget Sound, Victoria, Vancouver - the population center of the region - have a different style altogether. You can see an example of a Coast Salish welcoming figure outside the UBC Museum of Anthropology.
    I know more about native relations between the Coast Salish and the BC govt. And that is not exactly a bed of roses - with enduring conflicts over rights and title. Maybe we could prod Washington state to get the ball rolling. We have the Puget Sound Initiative. And the state officially apologized to the Stolo in BC for the lynching of a boy on the US side of the border a century ago: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002838357_lynching02m.html
    I'm going to send my positive input to Olympia, for a start.

    Posted Fri, Jan 23, 12:52 p.m. Inappropriate

    The Coast Salish naming conventions were different from ours. Puget Sound-area tribes referred to the water as "Whulj" or "Whulge" when whites asked them what it was called. As mentioned in the story, it translated as "salt water." Northern Coast Salish peoples referred to parts of Georgia Strait as "Sqelateses," according to Webber.

    In the budding debate over renaming British Columbia, it's interesting to note that Washington was originally going to be named Columbia, thus British Columbia would help distinguish between the two (like Honduras and British Honduras). The name was changed at the last minute because it was thought that Columbia would confuse people with the District of Columbia, though that happened anyway when the U.S. capital became commonly known as Washington, DC. Washingtonia was a rejected alternative name for the state.

    Posted Sat, Jan 24, 8 p.m. Inappropriate

    The Coast Salish name ("Whulj", "salt water") may just be evidence of a kind of provincialism. Some early Europeans called the Atlantic Ocean the "Ocean Sea". You know...it's that really BIG sea out west! When a culture only possesses one example of a particular class of geographic entity, it doesn't need its own distinctive name. You can just call it "the moon" or whatever.

    But we need a distinctive name, and Salish Sea is already gaining traction. This year's Puget Sound Georgia Basin Ecosystem Conference (http://www.psgbconference.org/) is subtitled "The future of the Salish Sea...A call to action!"

    Anyway, thanks for bringing this to our attention, Knute. Puget Sound Maritime has weighed in with our vote: http://www.pugetsoundmaritime.com/2009/01/salish-sea-name-may-become-official/

    Tim Flanagan
    Publisher, PugetSoundMaritime.com

    Posted Mon, Jan 26, 7:40 a.m. Inappropriate

    In Lushootseed, the Coast Salish dialect/language that Chief Si?a? spoke, the "correct" spelling/pronunciation of the word "whulj" is x???l?. (The first caret goes over the x, and the schwa should bear an acute accent, but HTML has its limitations. :-) )


    Posted Mon, Jan 26, 1:37 p.m. Inappropriate

    Ah, I can't resist an article on toponyms, especially Pacific Northwest toponyms. "Salish Sea" is delightfully alliterative and works for me, as long as it's overlaid on the current names and doesn't replace them (much like a new area code!). I was originally going to ask if it made sense to include the Strait of Juan de Fuca, but a look at the map really does make it look like Puget Sound is the odd body out. I don't have a problem with "Whulj," either: sure, it means "salt water," and one could claim that means it's not a real name, but "Avon" means "river," so there you go.

    As for renaming British Columbia, I can't say I support that, on monetary grounds alone: is this really the time to be spending who knows how much on renaming an entire province? But also: yes, it may be "anachronistic," but so are New Hampshire, New England, New Jersey, New York, etc. Surely British Columbia is no worse than New England? It's heritage, folks!

    It would be different, I think, if Canada were like South Africa. Changing Orange Free State to Free State made sense to me. At any rate, if BC must change, I vote for simply "Columbia." I do not want to wake up one day to find that Washington now shares a border with "Ecotopia," "East-West," or "Canasia."

    I guess it's time for me to post at the Sun and write the state BGN! The American Name Society might like to hear about this, too.

    Posted Mon, Jan 26, 5:07 p.m. Inappropriate

    Oh, and as far as Rainier/Tahoma goes: I don't mind, as long as the McKinley/Denali formula is followed: leave the mountain alone, change the name of the national park.

    Posted Thu, Jan 29, 5:31 p.m. Inappropriate

    Renaming prominent features in our region is a good idea, long over due, and fun too.

    Last summer I traveled from Kitsap Co. up to Hoona, Alaska on a forty foot salmon trawler, and then flew back, my first venture that far north.

    Both legs of my journey made it abundantly clear to me for the first time that S.E. Alaska down to Puget Sound is a single eco-region.

    That single eco-system is artificially divided by the petty interests of narrow minded, self-serving 18th. and 19th. century invading colonial powers. Half the wars of the past 150 years all over the world were a direct result of the artificial boundaries drawn by the brain dead British Empire.

    But in more recent times we have been gradually working our way toward a wider, and deeper consciousness of our world, and our effect on it.

    The Salish Sea renaming idea has the potential to overcome the petty artificial boundaries and divisions of the past and maybe bring about a new level of cooperation between B.C. and Washington State that will be good for the waters, and good for people on both sides of the border.

    I think it is a grand idea.


    Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.

    Join Crosscut now!
    Subscribe to our Newsletter

    Follow Us »