The Naming of the Salish Sea

Turn Point Light House - right on the border

When I first heard that the Puget Sound and inner coastal waters of Vancouver Island in B.C. were being given a new name - the Salish Sea - I was excited. The United States Board on Geographic Names and the Geographic Names of Canada made the designation in 2009. I immediately embraced the Salish Sea as a wonderful way to describe this rich bio-region. I liked the idea of the United States and Canadian government coming together and identifying these waters as a unique sea that spans the border between our two countries. I remember hoping that perhaps with a common body of water, both the U.S and Canada would begin to identify mutually beneficial practices and regulations that promoted a healthy thriving ecosystem.

A little history:
Marine biologist Bert Webber is credited with coming up with the term Salish Sea in 1988. He didn't want to replace the existing names of the various bodies of water - he wanted a term that complemented them AND encompassed them as a whole. His intention in adopting the term was to promote awareness of the overall ecosystem, how to take care of it, how to talk about it. The process took twenty years - but it succeeded much on the merits of research that continually put forth the uniqueness of this particular region.

I have to say, its to the British Columbia side of the Salish Sea that I look for more drastic changes. With raw sewage still being pumped into the waterways and lax enforcement of regulations with the fish farming and whale watching industry - the impact of these practices is certainly felt mere miles away in U.S. waters. On both sides of the border, decisions on oil pipelines, oil tankers traversing the inner water ways, boat regulations, watershed protection impact not only our human livelihood but the multitude of species we co-exist with. It makes sense to me that we approach the dilemmas facing our industry needs in an ecosystem that is becoming increasingly fragile and vulnerable. We need to address these environmental and economic concerns with all the players at the table.

But what makes sense to me doesn't necessarily mean it makes sense to someone else.

In conversation, I refer to the waters of this area as the Salish Sea. On more occasions than not, I hear push back on the name change from what it was - the Puget Sound - here on the Washington side of the sea. Young and old, people want to cling to the old for reasons of comfort and a strange solidarity. "That's what I grew up calling it, I'm not changing now."...or ... "Salish sea - just more political correctness!"

I haven't quite figured out the resistance. Is it because "Salish" is a First Nations designation and honors the indigenous Coast Salish people who lived on and along side these waters long before Europeans started searching for a Northwest passage? Are folks remiss to give up the name Puget? The Puget Sound was named after Peter Puget, a naval officer and companion of George Vancouver in 1792 - and was originally designating the waters south of the Tacoma narrows.

There is a sense of lost identity by renaming anything. And, I suspect, renaming a body of water with an indigenous honor and getting rid of the colonizing western term can bring up the ways in which we culturally privilege and marginalize a certain power deferential. To name this sea "Salish" is to privilege that which our cultures have historically marginalized for centuries. Allowing "Puget" to fade away is to acknowledge the fading power of western white colonialism. It forces us to acknowledge that colonialism was forged on exploiting resources and meeting/creating the voracious needs of the dominant culture. Money and power. That's what colonialism comes down to - and its what brought so many white settlers - my ancestors included - to the northwest in the first place.

Is part of this vanishing Puget Sound identity a sense of lost power and entitlement? What does someone give up by changing the designation of these waters? What has to shift for them to let go of an insular image and explore a larger vision?

The renaming of Puget Sound to the Salish Sea marks a paradigm shift - so of course there is resistance. To embrace "Salish Sea" is to open oneself up to rethinking a belief - a story about territory and power and - yes - interconnection. To say "Salish Sea" is to understand that your actions on either side of the international border matter to the other side - that your actions have impact on the wildlife, the land, and the health of the region. We need this paradigm shift - not just for decisions regarding whether or not pleasure boats should be allowed to empty their holding tanks anywhere - but for catastrophic situations like oil spills. Washington state has well developed response plans for oil spills. B.C does not. Well, they are trying with new legislation - but many say that lack of resources will make the new rules hard to enforce ( New Rules Coming). Considering what could happen to the waters south of the border makes Canada's lack of thorough planning a catastrophic disaster in the making. When we acknowledge that there is no proverbial fence between our waterways - that the actions or lack of action by our neighbor will absolutely impact our home - then we can start to develop collaborative plans to mutually aid and support each other.

Look, Humans like to name things. We like to name something and then claim it. We have been doing this to land probably since the first time we gathered around a fire. A name means nothing to an island or a whale or a lake. But name them we do and always in the spirit of the time and place and at the whimsy of whomever is there with enough power to get the name to stick.

In this time and place, I want this new officially designated Salish Sea naming to stick hard. I want conferences like the Salish Sea Ecosystem Conference to become powerful incubators for collaborative and generative dialogue promoting sustainable ecosystem health - which includes humans as well. I want to see more international dialogue like what the Oil Spill Task Force is doing but on a bigger scale (They work on small spill education). I'd like to see Canadian and U.S. regulations regarding whales and salmon and fish farms work towards similar goals. We can start stepping towards those types of difficult discussions when we all acknowledge that we are talking about the same ecosystem and leave the arbitrary boundaries behind.

I'd love more insight into the mindset of resistance. I'd really like to hear what that stance believes. I want to know what the fear is, the loss, the problem with a new name. If we don't listen the differences into conversation, we'll never find each other in the middle.