The issue of how to deal with Eagle Harbor’s live-aboard community is not, nor ever was, a 15-year problem involving thousands of hours of meetings and testimony from countless public and private citizens and costing millions of dollars in studies and legal fees countering lawsuits.

At its core, the only valid question we face is how to regulate the use of our harbor in a way that reflects our American values of equal opportunity and justice under the law without discrimination, without regard to economic or social class.

We must recognize, first, that the people who use their boats and moor in our harbor reflect as wide an economic and social spectrum as those who live and recreate on land. And we should ask ourselves: Do people with more money and property pollute less because they spend less total time on their boat? No.

Do people who spend most all of their time on board pollute more? No. Should we rule and legislate a liveaboard lifestyle out of existence because it’s viewed as an eyesore or a potential inconvenience by some of those with the most money and power on our island? No. Should everyone, regardless of economic or social status, have the same rights and responsibilities when using and mooring in Eagle Harbor? Yes.

Puget Sound, specifically Eagle Harbor, is a treasured resource deserving the best stewardship and management possible; much of that responsibility currently rests in the hands of the Department of Natural Resources.

I believe DNR can address the controversy surrounding our liveaboard community in a simple and just way: All who use public lands/open water be required — via our already in-place boat registration system — to adhere to all current land/open water, environmental/stewardship regulations.

That includes charging all boaters who anchor or moor in open waters $25 a year – regardless of whether the moorage is for two days, two weeks, two months or 12 months – for that privilege.

All boaters pay in principle and practice. No one with impunity violates good management practices.

No one gets to freeload, and DNR gives nothing away. Boaters who violate environmental/stewardship regulations/laws or who fail to pay the $25 annual moorage/anchor-out fee, would be subject to eviction. Pure and simple.

In principle, this is an honorable solution with all the necessary limitations, restrictions and respect for functional and valid state laws.

It is a state-wide concept concerning all DNR jurisdiction, creating a rational, easily understood set of regulations, uniform in concept and practice, encouraging the safe and effective use of a public treasure.

No longer would we have bickering bureaucrats, endless wasteful meetings and destructive lawsuits.

Ed Cannard

Bainbridge Island