Protection Island & Dungeness Spit – enviros vs enviros

Posted on October 29, 2026 by Al Bergstein

When I was a boy, my grandfather and I would walk the hills of the Appalachian Mountains behind their home. These hills were where anthracite coal was first mined, and the environmental destruction was enormous. By the time I was a kid, the mines were played out and the town was desperately trying to survive. As we walked, grandfather would point out various birds. There was one in particular, the Blue jay that we would hear squawking, “Hear that bird?” he asked one day, “Sure” I answered.

“What is that Jay screaming?”

“I don’t know.”

“It’s screaming ‘Jew, Jew, Jew Jew”. And yes, it did sound like that to my young ears.

This was my grandfather attempting to show me that sometimes, the world was going to be screaming bad things and I would have to just assume it was as crazy as that Blue jay.

Recently, a friend told me that noted birder Steve Hampton was publicly claiming I am a racist because I don’t support his position on the proposed transfer of Protection Island and Dungeness Spit Wildlife Refuges to the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe. He has posted this charge on the bird watching listserv called Tweeters. I had no idea Tweeters even was a thing, so I joined up and sure enough, Steve was on there making his case that I am a racist. Why? Because other birders of note were agreeing with my position. It must have shook Steve.

The idea that I’m a racist is bizarre and ridiculous. I moved to the Pacific Northwest in 1978. As a photo journalist in 1975 I was the only white person allowed inside the Menominee Warrior Society takeover of an Abby. I was covering the story for an international news outlet. I remained inside for 30 days until they surrendered to the National Guard.

Since 2007 I have been running this blog to help people understand the environmental issues on the Peninsula. Since Mr. Hampton is a recent transplant from California, with a limited knowledge of our area, he must be unfamiliar with my credentials. You can make your own decision.


I worked for the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe for about five or six years in the 2010s, producing two films for them under the guidance of a tribal elder, the late Marlin Holden, a good friend.

I went before the Tribal Council on numerous times to get funding and renew funding for the project and update the Tribal Council on the projects. My film, “ Treaty Resources “ documented many of the Tribes activities around fishing, hunting geoduck sales, etc.

During that filming I became acquainted with Tribal Chair Allen, the entire Tribal Council, many tribal elders and leaders and the late Kurt Grinnell. I sat in on a variety of tribal meetings and activities. I interviewed Ron Allen for the introduction to the film. I was honored to have been told I was the only white filmmaker ever to be allowed to film the annual tribal meeting.

Also, I was a member of the Jefferson County Marine Resources Committee for eight years including chairing it for two. In that role, I worked closely with the Jamestown Tribe to promote Olympia Oysters being restored to Dungeness Bay.

I worked as a volunteer photographer with Hazel Wolff, Helen Engle, Seattle, Audubon, Lorna Campion, who is now known as Lorna Smith and a noted environmental activist, and the late Eleanor Stopps documenting Protection Island and helping get it passed back in the 1980s. I did one of the last interviews with Eleanor before her death. It was because of Eleanor and the work of thousands of others that Protection Island became a National Wildlife Refuge.

I have documented what the tribe has done and said on this blog for over twenty years. You can search Protection Island and Dungeness Bay and see the vast variety of factual reporting that I have done on the various things that have happened there over those years. I have been an ardent supporter of much of what the Tribe has done over that time. I think that Ron Allen is an exceptional leader and the Tribe is successful because of his leadership.

It is sad that I and others find ourselves opposed to this land transfer that Ron Allen has asked for. No one else other than the Tribe has asked for this. Everyone is satisfied with the Tribe’s co-management of our national wildlife refuges. But make no mistake, the tribe is an economic juggernaut, with many successful businesses including aquaculture.

It is a fact that the Tribe, once they helped cleaned up Dungeness Bay, have filed to put an oyster farm inside the Bay, essentially abutting the Wildlife Refuge in the shallows that many birds, some rare, feed in. The original farm they took over was a small affair. But the tribe publicly stated they were going to expand it and put over 110,000 bags of oysters on the benthic layer. Eventually they reduced that number to 80,000. They attempted to do this in conjunction with the USFW. The Tribe did not receive a permit to operate from the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) responsible for the Refuge, nor did this agency agree to follow its law to write a compatibility determination (CD) determining whether the oyster operation would harm the Refuge. Protect the Peninsula’s Future; Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat and Beyond Pesticides (Plaintiffs) sued the wildlife agency. That lawsuit is still pending. The Tribe is not happy that they are being blocked legally from proceeding with this oyster farm. They have downplayed the danger to the birds from both the Bay and Protection Island that feed there. .


There is no provision made for any public input into future Tribal decisions on the use of the island or its shores. It will be up to the Tribe, in concert with the State Department of Natural Resources, to decide if they want to use the island’s shoreline for commercial aquaculture. DNR has been promiscuous in its granting of aquaculture permits. Can we trust that this commercially driven Tribe will make the right decisions on behalf of our refuge when we will have no voice in decisions moving forward?

As to the Land Transfer in question of Dungeness Spit and Protection Island.

I have never accused the Tribe of the issues that Mr. Hampton is saying that I said on my blog. I have no idea why he seems to think this is related to the Makah and their battle to hunt whales, which has nothing to do with Protection Island. The Whales were under Federal Protection, once the land transfer happens, that is no longer true of the island and the spit.

But, to be clear, I am very concerned about this land transfer. Why?

  1. It was done in secret for months before becoming public. It has been documented that the discussions started in 2025 and were not made public until April of 2026. That is a fact. U.S. Representative Emily Randall worked in secret with the Tribe without any public input until it was leaked.
  2. No one but Tribal Chair Ron Allen wanted this. It was his request, understandably because it would be a great legacy as he nears retirement. I don’t blame him for attempting this. If I were in his shoes, it makes sense while the world is terrified of the Trump Administration and their Project 2025 statements that they want to get the federal government out of management of all our National Wildlife Refuges as well as our Parks. But this was not a proposal of USFW nor any of the environmental groups involved in Protection Island birding.
  3. The Tribe will be responsible for many of the federal laws as he states. I never stated they would not. This is Mr. Hamptons interpretation of what I said. He never reached out to me to ask for clarification. However, once transferred to the Reservation status, the two refuges will no longer be refuges. I have researched this and all my research says this is accurate. I would like Mr. Hampton to provide proof that this is not true.
  4. The Tribe runs a multimillion dollar business in aquaculture. I discussed this at length with the late Tribal Resources head Kurt Grinnell during my interviews with him. That is a fact, not a guess. They sell their geoduck to China. It is a daily business shipping the geoducks through SeaTac. They sell oysters to numerous outlets throughout the Northwest. I have no issue with either of these facts. Never have. My issue is that they appear to be willing to trade off bird protection for tribal profit. I get it. I oppose this one proposal. As far as I am concerned, as only one person, I’m fine with their Sequim Bay oyster farms and other efforts.
  5. If the Tribe gets Dungeness Spit and Protection Island they will be in control of it’s fate, as it relates to the fact that the reservation is a sovereign nation. The Tribe will have no legal reason to take any input other than their own into their decision making processes for the two refuges. To validate this, all Mr. Hampton needed to do was look it up. It’s all online about sovereign nation status.
  6. This status means that it is nation to nation treaty negotiations, and as such no longer is accountable to county or state laws governing the two refuges. This should be concerning to all birders.
  7. Tribal Chairwoman Loni Greninger-Grinnell was quoted in the Port Townsend Leader on May 6, 2026: “We can take our own resources more freely, invest it, keep the public access open and maintained. It’s just about widening what we are able to do now versus being tied to another government that has its own rules and its own opinions on how we do things.”
    1. Public access is not the issue. The issue is protection of the birds. How can we not worry about the meaning of that statement? She is saying that the Tribe does not want to be “tied” to the U.S. rules and can do what it feels is best? What does that really mean given their proposed oyster farm?
  8. There are many more questions I raise on my blog about this proposal. Nothing I have heard from the Tribe in public statements makes me change my concern for their desire to take control of these two refuges and possibly turn them or the waters next to them, into monoculture aquaculture farms. Mr. Hampton simply takes their word for their good intentions. I don’t trust anyone’s good intentions. I like to see things in writing. Even then, once in the reservation, the lands would be extremely hard to have any influence over the Tribe. Anyone working with the tribes and tribal law understands this.

As I asked in a public opinion piece in the Port Townsend Leader earlier this year:

Ron Allen is a great tribal leader. But Ron has been very clear to the public on his position. Here’s what he said at a meeting of the Jefferson County Commissioners earlier this year. Do you agree with this?

“So to go to your first question, that you raised Greg: [Greg Brotherton, County Commissioner] What initiated this to start with? So, we have an oyster farm inside of the Refuge……We ran into a buzzsaw with [U.S.] Fish and Wildlife on recertifying [non-native Pacific oyster commercial operations inside the tidelands of Dungeness Refuge] and getting all the permits because we were out of compliance. They raised issues with us which were really not legitimate issues, [ such as seabird impacts](his words not mine! – editor)….Basically we were clashing with Fish and Wildlife over that particular project, and so we got frustrated with them.” And later, “Over the years the Tribe has become really strong conservationists, you know for many different reasons…we’re developers too, so don’t confuse yourself that we’re just conservation-minded.” Could you imagine if this was anyone other than Ron Allen saying this?

So, in fact, it WAS the issue of disagreement between USFW and JST over the Tribe’s plan to expand Pacific oyster aquaculture in Dungeness Bay, inside Refuge boundaries,and the Tribes frustration over failure to get approval for that expansion which set this whole idea in motion.

And later in the transcript Allen says this about Protection Island: “But we decided that why not just take two of them? [Dungeness and Protection Island] … makes it simpler and easier for us? We do have a nexus with Protection Island. Our people would go over there to harvest shellfish. Shellfish was always a big deal for us historically—they would go different places to harvest different vegetation and different purposes that was important to us…So we just felt put the 2 together. It makes more sense for us because we basically wanted to remove [U.S.] Fish and Wildlife and that we can control and manage it –what we think is much more respectful”

And finally, “No, [our frustration is] just U.S. Fish and Wildlife. Yeah, they were coming up with reasons why we can’t establish an oyster farm, which has nothing to do with the Refuge itself. They didn’t want to see it happen, We did farm oysters and clams [traditionally] that is something we did do, just today in the 21st Century, just bigger. And its not just for subsistence anymore, its just for commercial purposes.”

So how much more clarity do you need? The protection of the birds is secondary to commercial aquaculture. Just change the name, what if Taylor Shellfish wanted to do this? Would you still support this?

There are so many unanswered questions. We have not heard publicly that other Tribes support this transfer as they would be affected by this since they also have “usual and accustomed” rights to these waters. Ron Allen also stated that other tribes like the Makah and Lummi are waiting on the outcome of this to see if they can take over all the other federal refuges in the Salish Sea. Do we really want to give away all these federally protected ecosystems?

Facts are facts. But this is what I believe:

These public lands belong to all Americans including the Jamestown S’Klallam. They were created after hard fought legislative battles by thousands of people including Audubon members. We can leave the situation as it is with the Tribe being paid to manage it and not risk the tribe making a profit over protection.

Let me go on record (again) stating that I am in support of Land Back projects around the country. None of these raised the type of issues that are being raised with this proposal. If Jefferson or Clallam counties wanted to give other non refuge properties to the tribe, maybe the more valuable land in downtown Sequim or Port Townsend, I would be in full support. But I am not in favor of giving away our National Wildlife Refuges after what the Tribe themselves have said that they expect to do with them. How much clearer do you want this put to you dear reader?

I believe that Steve Hampton loves Protection Island, Dungeness Spit and the birds that live there. I think that he is blinding himself to the actual words and deeds that the Tribe is saying and doing that I described above. He has his own reasons for that blindness.

If Mr. Hampton wants to ingratiate himself with the Tribe, why should we care? I have no problem with him having a position on this. But when he starts throwing around “racism” to try and denigrate the legitimate opposition to this highly sensitive environmental proposal, I can’t help but remembering that Blue jay screaming his call in the trees to my grandfather and me.

Al Bergstein
Editor/ Publisher

Filed under: Clallam County, Dungeness Spit, Environmental Activism, Jefferson County, Protection Island | Tagged: , , , | 7 Comments »

Court denies Jamestown appeal of oyster farm lawsuit

Posted on October 27, 2026 by OlyOpen

The ongoing battle for the ability of the Jamestown S’Klallam tribe to put thousands of bags of oysters on the bottom of the shallow Dungeness Bay continues. Protect the Peninsula’s Future sued the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for not following it’s own rules in not writing a compatibility determination (CD) regarding the impact the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe’s industrial oyster farm could have on the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge in Sequim.  While the U.S. District Court in Tacoma was finalizing its ruling, the Tribe asked to intervene.  Twice the judge denied intervention.  The case is whether the USFWS must write the CD, which it resists doing.  The Tacoma judge advised the Tribe it could appeal his decision after he made his final ruling. The Tribe did not take that advice and instead appealed its inability to intervene, prior to a final ruling, to the U.S. 9th District Appellate Court in San Francisco.  However the Appellate court found:

APPEAL DISMISSED; PETITION DENIED. 

The Court stated:

“Appellate review requires finality—a decision that “ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment.”

“In addition to our jurisprudence concerning non-final orders, we have held that … determination is not immediately appealable, because it can be reviewed after a final judgment.”

“…we lack jurisdiction to hear S’Klallam’s appeal of the non-final district court orders.”Hopefully the Tacoma Judge will not take long to finish his ruling that the USFWS must write a compatibility determination.

This does not end the case, nor the Tribe’s determination to both seek the ability to farm the inside of Dungeness Spit, but is probably part of the reasoning that the Tribe has moved to take over both the Spit and Protection Island. Once that land transfer happens, if it does, it will allow the Tribe to avoid any Federal and State laws as it relates to environmental regulations over the two Federal Wildlife Refuges. A Tribal Council member has actually stated to the Port Townsend Leader that was a goal of the land transfers.

So the ruling on whether the U.S.F&W will have to follow their own laws and write a compatibility determination will need to await the judge’s final ruling. No understanding on when that ruling will come down.

If you want to help fund the legal battle, you can send checks to Protect the Peninsula’s Future at the following address:


Protect the Peninsula’s Future

PO Box 421
Sequim WA  98382

Filed under: Clallam County, Dungeness Spit, Environmental Activism, Environmental Law, Olympic Peninsula, Washington State | Tagged: , | 2 Comments »

Event: Salmon Advocates to Rally in Sequim

Posted on October 21, 2026 by OlyOpen

On Thursday, October 22, the Let Our Salmon Come Home campaign will hold a rally and press conference, followed by a procession of voices for change ahead of the public comment period during the Pacific Salmon Commission’s 2026 Fall Meeting.

The Pacific Salmon Treaty, a harvest agreement between the United States and Canada, is currently being renegotiated, and decisions made now will determine the fate of our salmon, Southern Resident killer whales, and coastal communities for the next decade or more. The public has its most consequential opportunity in a generation to call on decision-makers to reform unsustainable ocean fisheries and Let Our Salmon Come Home to the rivers, ecosystems, and coastal communities that depend on them.

SCHEDULE
11:30 AM | Rally | Gardiner Community Center (view map)
The day of action kicks off with a morning rally where salmon advocates from across the region will gather for music, food, and solidarity.

1:00 PM | Press Conference | Gardiner Community Center (view map)
The press and members of the public are invited to hear speakers from across the coast share what’s at stake for our salmon, Southern Resident killer whales, and coastal communities. Speakers include Adrian Tuohy, Let Our Salmon Come Home campaign; Riley Starks, commercial fisher; Dylan Tomine, Washington recreational fisher; Paul Engelmeyer, Oregon conservationist; and others to be announced.

2:00 PM | Procession and Demonstration | 7 Cedars Casino (view map)
Participants will walk from the parking lot to a site adjacent to the casino, where the Pacific Salmon Commission meeting is being held, to raise their voices and amplify the coastwide call to Let Our Salmon Come Home. Backbone Campaign is producing a large-scale visual display, providing strong photo and video opportunities.

3:30–5:00 PM | Public Comment Period | 7 Cedars Casino (view map)
Per the Pacific Salmon Commission’s guidelines, media may attend open sessions under the same registration and conduct rules as the public, but recording, photography, and livestreaming of proceedings are not permitted. Learn more on the Pacific Salmon Commission’s website.

Let Our Salmon Come Home is an international grassroots movement and advocacy campaign led by individuals, organizations, and businesses from California to Alaska, united by a shared commitment to reform unsustainable ocean fisheries and bring our salmon home. Learn more at www.letoursalmoncomehome.org.

Filed under: Clallam County, Environmental Activism, environmental education, Environmental Protection, legislation, Salmon | 2 Comments »

Audubon Holds State Meeting in Bellingham

Posted on October 12, 2026 by Al Bergstein

Time to read

4–6 minutes

I just returned from Bellingham where I participated in the state Audubon society that held their annual meeting with chapter leaders and other interested members.

The agenda was to review the successes that Audubon had achieved in 2026 and the policy goals for 2027. Aububon is a powerhouse environmental organization, both nationally and in the state. Given that one of Washington Audubon’s major achievements in the late 1970s and early 1980s was the work to create the Protection Island National Wildlfe Refuge, I was wondering whether there would be any mention of the brewing controversy over the request by the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe to transfer the refuge to the Tribe. But there was no mention made of it at all.

The primary goal of Audubon nationally is working to reverse the destructive downward trend of wild bird populations . Audubon themselves, though working as best they could, has seen a decline of an estimated 3 Billion birds lost since 1970. Their goal is to reverse this as quickly as possible.

Programs for 2027

Audubon has two main focuses for the state in 2027.

Lights Out Washington Program

A success in 2026 was the adoption of the Lights Out Washington resolution. This program is a state wide effort to educate the public on the issue of mitigating the effects of lights in the night on migratory birds. Huge amounts of light pollution lighten the night sky, whether from cities, harbors, street lights and other general light sources. Anyone walking outside in the middle of the night can likely see stray light sources lighting up the sky. The long term goal is to convince both homeowners, businesses and municipalities to take actions to reduce or eliminate light sources that are not needed. One example discussed was terminal port activities that keep a huge amount of light on all night regardless of whether it is needed or not.

The organization trained the audience to help them prepare for Audubon Lobby Day 2027 to promote additional bills of support for Lights Out Washington and other environmental bills.

Migratory Bird Day

The celebration of World Migratory Bird Day educates the public on challenges of bird migration. Audubon has been promoting an online tool called, “The Migratory Bird Explorer” an amazing compilation of data from scientists and amateur birders across the continent and hemisphere.

Migratory Bird Explorer

Helen Engle Volunteer of the Year presentation

Helen Engle was the president of Seattle Audubon and also Washington State Audubon in the seminal growth period of 1970- 1980s. From Wikipedia: She co-founded various environmental organisations, including the Tahoma Audubon Society, the Washington Environmental council, Washington Wilderness Coalition, The Arboretum Foundation, Nisqually Land Trust, and Citizens for a Healthy Bay in Tacoma. She was a board member of National Audubon Society. The award honors her legacy of environmental activism, a trait sorely missing in so many environmental groups today. I had the honor to meet and travel with Helen to a state convention around 1980. She was a formidable environmental leader.

The Helen Engle Award was given to Alan McCoy from Spokane Audubon. As chapter president he has headed an incredible team of volunteers to expand the chapter and it’s protections for birds in the Spokane area.

Protection Island & Dungeness Spit Land Transfer

I spent a few minutes talking to Csenka Favorini-Csorba, who is the policy director for Washington State Audubon. I asked her about the issue of Protection Island and at first she stated that there is no bill for them to take issue with or support yet so she was not going to comment on it. However as we talked further about the issue, she said that other land transfers, in her opinion, had been very successful. She saw no reason to worry about whether or not the land transfer would be beneficial or not for the birds and the tribes were good stewards of the lands that have been transferred . I reminded her that Jamestown has a significant aquaculture business and that they have already been proposing putting 80,000 bags of oysters on the bottom of Dungeness Bay, right next to the refuge, where diving birds fed .She did not seem to be aware of that or the lawsuit by another environmental organization against the tribe that had stopped this proposal for the time being. Her point of view seemed to be very supportive of tribal land transfers in general saying that the land had been “stolen” (her words) from them long ago and it would be appropriate in some cases to be giving it back to them. (historically it would be more accurate to state that the 1855 treaty that the Jamestown signed along with other tribes ceded land in exchange for the right to hunt and fish in perpetuity. That Treaty and that specific language was the reason for the successful outcome of the Boldt decision in the 1970s for the northwest tribes). I asked her if Audubon Washington might support simply keep things as they were with the tribe co-managing the property so all Americans including the tribe could be able to weigh in on issues of management through the United States Fish and Wildlife. She said that it would be better to wait until the bill came out. It would appear from our conversation that Audubon Washington has little interest in either getting involved in the land transfer when it happens or opposing it in any way shape or form. In her defense, Audubon has to work with many other tribes in the state in order to achieve their goals, and I can understand why they would not be willing to make any statements pro or con until the bill is actually out. I left wondering whether or not Audubon members throughout the state would feel the same way about giving away a refuge that former Audubon leaders including Helen Engle, Hazel Wolf, Lorna Smith (nee Campion in the 1970s), the Nature Conservancy along with thousands of members and the public had spent a huge amount of time putting in the federal reserve system in the first place. That obviously will be a question to be answered next year.

Filed under: Environmental Activism, environmental education, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Environmental Science, Olympic Peninsula, Protection Island | Tagged: | 2 Comments »

WA public lands commissioner scales back order protecting older forests

Posted on September 26, 2026 by Al Bergstein

The Seattle Times reported on the 24th about the change in rules for older forests, due to the extreme budget problems Olympia is facing. The head of DNR is caught between the legal requirements of his job as currently legislated and the demands of environmental activists wanting to protect remaining older growth forests. The money from this logging helps cities like Port Angeles meet their budgets for critical local services. It will be up to the legislature to fix this problem starting in January. If you care about this, you should write your state Senator and Representatives now.

“Without the (legislative) tools Upthegrove is pursuing, the roughly 55,000 acres could be included in timber sales after 2030. Staff estimates based on similar forests suggest that with no change to state policies, managing these 55,000 acres in ways other than traditional harvest would result in tens of millions of dollars lost.“

Read the whole story in the Seattle Times. Support local journalism. Subscribe to the Times.

WA-Public-Lands-Commissioner-Story

Filed under: Clallam County, Environmental Activism, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Jefferson County, legislation, Olympic Peninsula | Tagged: , , , | Comments Off on WA public lands commissioner scales back order protecting older forests

A word from Eleanor Stopps’ Granddaughter about Protection Island

Posted on September 21, 2026 by Al Bergstein
Eleanor Stopps. Named Citizen of the 20th Century in Jefferson County and creator of the Protection Island Wildlife Refuge

Donna Armstrong, Eleanor Stopps granddaughter sent this to me for publication.

Protection Island is more than a place on a map. It is an island in the Strait of Juan de Fuca that provides nesting habitat for tufted puffins, rhinoceros auklets, pigeon guillemots, and many other species. After failed farming and development attempts, parcels were purchased for the purpose of creating a public wildlife refuge. In 1974, Eleanor Stopps (my grandmother) and Fayette Krause of The Nature Conservancy helped create the 48-acre Zella Schultz Washington Seabird Sanctuary.

Over the next decade, Eleanor, Lorna Smith, and many individuals and organizations volunteered to acquire private lots. One example was the “Adopt a Seabird” campaign, which raised $50,000 to purchase 23 lots. I was eight years old when I adopted a seabird.

Now, U.S House of Representative Emily Randall will be sponsoring the Jamestown S’Klallam Land Transfer Act of 2026, which proposes transferring ownership of Protection Island and Dungeness Spit National Wildlife Refuges into trust through the Bureau of Indian Affairs for the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe.

Eleanor, Lorna, and many others worked tirelessly for years with elected officials and public agencies. In 1982, Congress established Protection Island National Wildlife Refuge, with conservation purposes that included protecting wildlife, scientific research, education, and interpretation.

Since then, Protection Island has been stewarded through collaboration among the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, conservation organizations, scientists, and the public. In August 2024, the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe joined this framework through a co-stewardship agreement, creating opportunities to include Tribal knowledge and perspectives. When environmental challenges arise, this model brings Tribal partners, public agencies, scientists, and managers together for solutions.

Representative Randall’s proposal would repeal the 1982 law and remove Protection Island from national refuge status and the protection that provides. I am firmly against taking this action and I am sure my granddmother would have been also. Protection Island exists today because Eleanor, Fayette, Lorna, and many others gave their time, resources, and determination to establish it from private land. That history is part of public trust, future generations can believe in a democracy that can still work for them.

To learn more, visit the protect refuges website https://protectrefuges.org and People for Protection Island & Dungeness NWR on Facebook People For Protection Island & Dungeness NWR | Facebook

Editor’s Note: Eleanor Stopps was named Citizen of the Century by Jefferson County for her efforts.

Zella Schultz & Eleanor Stopps

Filed under: Environmental Activism, environmental education, Environmental Protection, Jefferson County, Protection Island, Straits of Juan de Fuca | 1 Comment »

Event: Stream Stewards – Salmon Biology & Restoration

Posted on August 23, 2026 by Al Bergstein

Here’s a great volunteer opportunity to get you outside and into the stream of things! Watching salmon counting in the stream was a fun morning. Plus you’ll see places you rarely get to see without being part of one of these trainings. Check it out

The Stream Stewards Program, originally developed by Washington State University’s Jefferson County Extension and now hosted by the Salmon Coalition, provides Jefferson and Clallam County residents with the opportunity to turn environmental knowledge into action. Through this 5-week course, participants learn about connections between our lands and waters by diving into topics such as stream ecology and restoration, salmon biology and habitats, managing urban watersheds, riparian forests, tribal roles in restoration, and fisheries management. You will connect with local natural resource experts in classroom sessions and field experiences and learn about opportunities to get involved in local efforts to steward and restore our local watersheds.

Upon completion, volunteers are asked to commit to 20 volunteer hours to an organization of their choice over the following year. Volunteer hours can be applied to a wide range of opportunities that work toward the larger goal of improving local ecosystem health. From getting involved in a citizen science project to engaging in public outreach, volunteers can connect with opportunities that fit their skills and interests. Through this program, we hope to connect you to many of these organizations that host volunteer opportunities.

Throughout the training, organizations will provide participants with information about local projects and offer exciting opportunities to plug in and make a difference on the Olympic Peninsula.

The 5-week course fee will be $100 and classes will take place every Wednesday in September from 9am – 2pm at various locations in Jefferson and Clallam Counties.

Want to just take one or two of the classes? We have now opened up single session registration. You can register for one or multiple sessions individually. Each single session is $25.

Filed under: Clallam County, education, Environmental Activism, environmental education, Environmental Science, Events, Jefferson County, Salmon | Tagged: | Comments Off on Event: Stream Stewards – Salmon Biology & Restoration

Big battery farms encounter resistance across western Washington

Posted on June 19, 2026 by Al Bergstein
Reprinted with permission from the Washington state standard.

Editor: it would seem that the environmentally conscious Washington public does not want to support the industrial needs of putting their “non polluting “ technologies together here. I would think that with the proper legal framework that it would be possible to do these industrial set ups here in the right location. If we’re going to build out the infrastructure to carry us into a carbon free future we’ve got to be willing to find the right locations in our country to do this type of technology.  We cannot be dumping this on the Third World we’ve done it long enough.

by Tom Banse, Washington State Standard
June 18, 2026

Community opposition to big battery farms is spreading across western Washington just as the technology takes on growing importance for the state’s clean energy transition and to stabilize the electric grid.

A multiplying number of cities and counties have enacted moratoriums on permitting for new utility-scale battery storage systems over the past year. Over a similar timeframe, project developers withdrew around a dozen early-stage battery storage proposals from the interconnection queue of Puget Sound Energy, Washington’s largest utility.

Now, green energy groups, electrical trade unions and project developers are redoubling efforts to persuade the public that the big battery arrays are needed to keep the lights on as rising amounts of renewable electricity come onto the grid.

A battery farm basically operates like a giant rechargeable battery. The owner charges the batteries at off-peak times or on sunny, windy days when renewable energy is abundant. Then, when the sun sets, the wind calms, or electricity demand spikes, the operator can send the juice back onto the grid.

“If what the community is really communicating is: We want to pump the brakes a little bit. We want to understand these technologies. We want to understand their safety, their placement in our community… That’s a condition that I think we need to adapt to,” said Scott Bolton, BrightNight Power senior vice president of external affairs.

“If these moratoriums are communicating, we just don’t want these solutions, that’s very troubling at the end of the day because, you know, if not this, then what?” Bolton added.

Opponents of battery farms perceive a threat to their neighborhood safety, their children’s schools and local farmland. A chief concern is that the rechargeable banks of lithium-ion batteries could catch fire and send plumes of toxic smoke drifting overhead and fish-killing runoff into streams. 

The energy industry has a hard sell ahead, judging from the unrest that spread from King County to Skagit, Pierce, Kitsap, Klickitat and Thurston counties — all places where independent developers have proposed commercial battery energy storage systems, or BESS in industry shorthand.

“There’s a dawning awareness of the awful effects of BESS installations such as thermal runaway fires and toxic smoke, and the horrible noise from cooling fans,” wrote Anacortes resident Elke Siller Macartney in a public comment to the Skagit County Commission that she also posted on social media in early June. “It’s the height of arrogance for these companies to pretend to install these things for the supposed good of all.”

Developers of battery farms consistently use the term “rare” to describe the frequency of battery fires and blame first-generation systems that they say have since been improved. 

Critics note that rare is not the same as never. In online forums, they share articles and pictures of batteries of various sorts, or battery manufacturing plants, catching fire on a near-weekly basis somewhere around the world. Large-scale battery fires are notoriously difficult to extinguish.

Insurance underwriter Michael Carrington has studied battery safety closely for his firm Tokio Marine GX, a renewables insurance specialist. He said commercial energy storage systems have reached “a high level of maturity,” giving him confidence to issue coverage with large sums of money at stake.

“The likelihood of any kind of fire is very low,” Carrington said in an interview from London. “How the technology has improved and the regulations have improved is really fantastic.”

Carrington specifically mentioned two safety features that are now industry standards — off-gas sensors and battery spacing. He said off-gas sensors detect early if battery cells are overheating and can automatically trigger a shutdown. Spacing battery modules meters apart outside prevents fire from spreading between adjacent modules.The first large-scale battery energy storage facility in Puget Sound Energy territory is under construction in Sumner, Washington. Developers BrightNight and Cordelio Power expect their Greenwater BESS project (inside the orange fencing) to become operational by the end of 2026. (Photo courtesy of BrightNight Power)

Why do Northwest utilities want battery storage?

Some of the largest utilities in the Northwest, including Puget Sound Energy, Avista and Portland General Electric, publicly solicited battery energy storage proposals in the last couple years.

The first utility-scale battery storage systems in the region were co-located with solar and wind farms east of the Cascade Range. Those sites tend to be less controversial, but expose the utilities to long-distance transmission bottlenecks. Hence, the push for standalone battery farms nearer to cities, which lessens the need to build more cross-state power lines. 

Bellevue, Washington-based PSE has a goal to add 1,500 megawatts of energy storage by 2030. An initial 200 megawatts toward that goal should come from a battery storage project now under construction in Sumner by BrightNight and Cordelio Power. Roughly eight other proposed projects are in various stages of permitting in PSE territory, with the majority facing serious pushback from neighbors, such as near Snoqualmie.

“Battery energy storage systems (BESS) are an important part of PSE’s plans to provide the reliable power our customers expect while delivering more of the clean energy required by Washington’s aggressive clean energy requirements,” utility CEO Mary Kipp wrote in a letter last month to Snoqualmie’s mayor and council.

The Snohomish County Public Utility District is on track to bring the first utility-scale battery energy storage system in western Washington online this fall. The 25-megawatt project near Arlington Municipal Airport is owned by a company named Ameresco.Draft rendering of what a proposed 130 MW battery energy storage system near the city of Snoqualmie could look like. This Jupiter Power project will provide a test of King County’s new battery storage siting standards. (Photo courtesy of Jupiter Power)

A Seattle nonprofit that advocates for decarbonization, Clean & Prosperous, argues that blocking battery storage facilities will eventually hamstring wind and solar farm expansion and prolong dependence on fossil fuel generation.

“This is not infrastructure that is just nice to have. It’s critical infrastructure. We need to develop, particularly batteries in western Washington, to make up for our lack of transmission capacity across the Cascades,” said Isaac Kastama, the group’s government relations director. “We are facing increasing risks of brownouts and blackouts.”

Moratoriums and permit reform

Urged on by skeptical residents, a growing number of city and county councils in Washington are passing six-month or one-year moratoriums on applications for new utility-scale battery storage facilities. This does not affect residential-scale battery installations, often tied to rooftop solar.

“There is tremendous, valley-wide concern related to battery energy storage systems,” Snoqualmie Councilmember Dan Murphy said at a May 26 council meeting. “The moratorium gives cities the time to better study the issue, press pause and look into all of these matters.” 

Snoqualmie was one of at least six jurisdictions where the council voted within the past month to impose or extend a commercial battery storage moratorium. The list also includes Carnation, North Bend, Puyallup, Duvall and Kitsap County. These preemptive and temporary moratoriums aren’t blocking any known battery storage projects.

The recent council actions come on top of earlier votes in the same vein by Bonney Lake, Black Diamond, Covington, Enumclaw, Maple Valley, Mount Vernon, Renton (now expired), Auburn (expired) and Klickitat and Skagit (expired) counties. All of these places wanted to buy time to draft local siting criteria and specific regulations covering such matters as screening, setbacks and fire response.

In Oregon, Marion County passed an outright ban on commercial battery energy storage facilities last year, covering the unincorporated terrain around Salem.

Against this backdrop, Clean & Prosperous organized a study mission to Texas last month for Washington state legislators, utility executives and green energy advocates. The objective was to learn how the Lone Star State got to No. 1 in battery storage, solar and wind power. Washington ranks dead last in clean energy growth, according to an analysis by ProPublica and Oregon Public Broadcasting.

One of the tour stops was a large-scale battery energy storage system in Houston. Project developer Jupiter Power said the Callisto battery farm took 18 months from conception to operation, including about six months in permitting.

“When Jupiter Power gave that stat to our delegation at the BESS facility when we were being briefed, everybody let out like a group-wide, jealous laugh,” said Clean & Prosperous Communications Director Kelsey Nyland, who was there.

“Twelve months later, it was saving taxpayer dollars and doing it with renewable energy,” added tour participant Beth Doglio, a Democratic state representative from Olympia, in an interview with KNKX Radio upon her return. “That is not possible in the state of Washington at this time, and we need to figure out how to make it possible.” 

Besides Doglio, who chairs the House Environment and Energy Committee, Democratic state Reps. Adam Bernbaum, Jake Fey and Republican Andrew Barkis joined the Texas trip with an eye on permitting reform. 

The first big standalone battery storage facility that Puget Sound Energy will bring online — BrightNight’s project in Sumner — will have taken about four years from conception to operation when it enters service at the end of this year.

Washington State Standard is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Washington State Standard maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Bill Lucia for questions: info@washingtonstatestandard.com.

Filed under: Alternative energy., Eastern Washington, Environmental Activism | Tagged: | Comments Off on Big battery farms encounter resistance across western Washington

Meeting held to discuss Protection Island

Posted on June 16, 2026 by Al Bergstein

A large crowd of people gathered at Cape George on Sunday to hear Lorna and Darrell Smith discuss both the history of Protection Island and why they are concerned about the proposed Jamestown S’Klallam Land Transfer that the tribe recently has made public.

In the 1970s and early 1980s Lorna Smith was a key person in the work done to make Protection Island a national wildlife refuge. She acted as the liaison between the Seattle Audubon Society and the two women from Jefferson County that led the battle to get the island designated as a refuge, Zella Schultz and Eleanor Stopps, The thousands of letters of support from both native and non native Americans convinced even normally reticent politicians such as Senator Slade Gorton to help push the legislation through Congress and convince President Ronald Reagan to sign it. It was supported by all members of the Washington delegation and the Republican governor, John Spellman.

Also in attendance on Sunday were two granddaughters of Eleanor Stopps who share Lorna’s concerns. This reporter, who also worked with Audubon photographing the spit in the late 70s, also was in attendance.

The Smiths spent the first hour discussing the rich bird heritage of the island and the Spit, before pivoting to the proposed land transfer and the many questions that need to be answered about this proposal.

The Tribe currently is paid approximately $800,000 a year by the federal government to co-manage the Spit and the island. A month ago the Federal Government authorized over $76 million to support the refuges of the country. Money is there. There is no imminent threat of the government cutting off funds. That would have to be authorized by Congress.

The tribe has already begun requesting the ability to lay 80,000 bags of oysters on the bottom of Dungeness Spit’s inner bay, much to the dismay of bird supporters, who worry that this may cause continued loss of fish and other animals the birds feed upon. Currently, there is a lawsuit moving through the courts to stop this from happening.

In March, tribal Vice Chair Loni Greninger testified in Congress that the co-management has been very successful from both the point of view of the Tribe and the government. So if the working arrangement for co-management is successful, why should the Tribe give up $800k and why should Americans give up one of their 570 national wildlife refuges to the Tribe to become owned by them? How much is the Spit and the island worth to the Tribe and why? The answer might be found in the tribe’s lucrative aquaculture industry, wholly owned by them. While the tribe in their proposal denies having any plans for anything other than the vague term, “conservation” the actual answer to this question might have come from Vice Chair Greninger’s comment to the Port Townsend Leader on April 22nd edition. In it she stated:

“If we’re able to have that fuller ownership instead of co-management, then I don’t have to rely on any other government and their rules and regulations,” she said.

This is exactly what is feared by those who fought so hard to protect this island and Spit. With the tribe in full ownership, we will have no say as to what happens to it, nor if future tribal leaders decide to utilize these environmental treasures for economic gain. While it is understandable that the Tribe once used to forage for seafood there, the differences between subsistence shellfish harvest and modern mechanized aquaculture, with the ability to liquify the bottom with air compressors to get to geoduck, or spread thousands of bags of oysters across hundreds of acres at a time is a far cry from how it once was done.

There is every reason to continue to have the tribe manage the refuges. There is little incentive for Americans to simply hand them over to satisfy a demand. Why is Representative Emily Randall and Senator Maria Cantwell so hellbent on getting this done?

The birds are currently protected, as is the unique ecosystem they rely upon. Why should Americans relinquish this to a tribe that is engaged in the business of oyster, geoduck, crabbing, fish farming and fishing when they themselves are admitting that they want to set their own rules for the use of Protection Island? If the Tribe does get it, will we be on the outside looking in and have no input into protecting birds that live there? Many of us are waiting for more answers.

Filed under: Aquaculture, Around the Salish Sea, Around the Sound, Clallam County, Endangered Species, Environmental Activism, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, First Nations, Jefferson County, legislation, Washington State | Tagged: , , , , | 3 Comments »

Ocean Harvests of Puget Sound Chinook Were Significantly Underestimated for Decades

Posted on June 11, 2026 by Al Bergstein

The Wild Fish Conservancy is highlighting the latest outrage by the very people who were put in charge of protecting wild salmon in Canada. We were hopeful during the last few decades that science based fish monitoring would help produce the right amount of catch to allow the Chinook to recover. Instead, it was all just a ruse to allow the open ocean fishing to continue in larger numbers than were being reported. Many of us following this issue had worries that Canadian Commissioners were in a very cozy relationship with the sports fishing and open ocean industries in Canada. We knew that these commissions were often filled with the very people that were supposed to be managed. As usual, the fox was put in charge of the henhouse. But I’m going to let the press release from Wild Fish Conservancy speak for itself.

While Orcas and Salmon Declined, Ocean Harvests of Puget Sound Chinook Were Significantly Underestimated for Decades


Revised Pacific Salmon Commission data reveal substantially more Puget Sound Chinook were intercepted in ocean fisheries over a twenty-year period, harming local communities and undermining decades of salmon and orca recovery efforts.

For Immediate Release
June 10, 2026

PUGET SOUND, WA—Newly revised data released by Canada at the Pacific Salmon Commission shows that for more than two decades ocean fisheries have killed thousands more Endangered Species Act-listed Puget Sound Chinook salmon each year than previously understood. The corrected estimates reveal far higher harvest mortality in British Columbia’s ocean recreational fisheries, with cascading consequences: lost opportunities to recover Puget Sound Chinook, less prey for endangered Southern Resident orcas, and tighter constraints on local fishing communities.

The scope of the oversight raises hard questions for the fishing families, Tribal Nations, and communities who spent decades accepting closed or curtailed fishing seasons, funding recovery efforts, and backing major conservation measures under the assumption that substantially more Chinook were surviving ocean harvest. It also raises concerns about transparency and accountability, as revisions with major implications for salmon recovery and fishing opportunity were incorporated into technical management processes with little to no public explanation.

For two decades, fisheries managers set salmon recovery targets, determined harvest limits, and assessed prey availability for endangered Southern Resident killer whales while relying on inaccurate data that failed to reflect the true scale of ocean interceptions. In some Central and North Puget Sound watersheds, including the Nooksack, Skagit, and Stillaguamish rivers, revised estimates show that Alaska and British Columbia interception rates exceeded a stunning 60% of returning adult Chinook before those fish reached Puget Sound waters. During this same period, many of these rivers repeatedly failed to meet recovery goals and Southern Resident killer whales continued to decline.

Interception fisheries are an unfortunate product of outdated management frameworks enshrined in the Pacific Salmon Treaty. Even before the revised estimates, distant ocean fisheries were already intercepting far more Chinook from Puget Sound watersheds than fisheries closer to home. According to Pacific Salmon Commission data, ocean fisheries in British Columbia and Alaska harvest roughly four to six times more Chinook from the Nooksack, Skagit, Stillaguamish, and Snohomish watersheds than all local Puget Sound tribal, commercial, and recreational fisheries combined. Meanwhile, many local fisheries in Puget Sound have lost most opportunities to harvest returning Chinook from their own watersheds. For example, in 2025, the Stillaguamish Tribe was limited to a ceremonial harvest of only 26 Chinook salmon. 

The revised estimates followed an update to the accounting method used by fisheries managers in British Columbia. The previous method, in place for two decades, had significantly understated Chinook harvest and mortality in ‘mixed-stock ocean fisheries’, where weak and recovering salmon populations from rivers coastwide are indiscriminately harvested alongside healthier stocks across vast marine areas.

“We already knew Puget Sound Chinook and Southern Resident killer whales were in crisis,” said Dr. Nick Gayeski, Senior Ecologist with Wild Fish Conservancy. “Canada’s underestimate of recreational Chinook harvest show that ocean interceptions were substantially higher than previously understood during a critical period for Chinook and killer whale recovery. These findings expose the profound uncertainty and risk inherent in attempting to manage salmon populations from rivers coastwide in large mixed-stock ocean fisheries.”

More than 25 years after Puget Sound Chinook salmon were listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), many of the populations that make up the listed stock remain far below recovery goals and are now identified as “in crisis” by Washington’s Governor’s Salmon Recovery Office. Southern Resident killer whales were listed as endangered under the ESA in 2005 and have declined approximately 20% over the last two decades to just 76 whales today. Reduced prey availability, particularly large and abundant Chinook, has been identified by killer whale experts and NOAA Fisheries as the leading cause of the whales’ decline. Recent research suggests that reducing ocean interceptions of Chinook salmon before they reach critical Southern Resident killer whale feeding areas could substantially increase prey availability, including modeled increases of up to 25% in Chinook abundance within whale critical habitat.

Importantly, the revised data are not an isolated anomaly or merely a technical correction. They reveal a broader structural problem in attempting to manage salmon populations in mixed-stock ocean fisheries. Despite increasingly sophisticated monitoring and modeling, uncertainty remains high and populations continue to be overharvested under this system.

The new data underscore that uncertainty and raise an important question: if one correction can dramatically change estimates of Chinook mortality, what other sources of uncertainty and risk remain within the management system?

“For decades, fisheries management has prioritized maximizing extraction in mixed-stock ocean fisheries rather than maximizing salmon recovery,” said Emma Helverson, Executive Director for Wild Fish Conservancy. “That approach is failing Chinook salmon, Southern Resident killer whales, tribal treaty fisheries, and fishing communities alike. Ironically, maximizing short-term ocean harvest is reducing long-term fishing opportunities across the coast. Recovering salmon will require transformational changes in where, when, and how fishing occurs to ensure more fish survive to return home.”

This new understanding comes at a consequential time when the U.S. and Canada prepare to renegotiate the Pacific Salmon Treaty, the international agreement that governs coastwide salmon harvest and many of the mixed-stock ocean fisheries now facing renewed scrutiny. Across the Pacific Coast, communities are increasingly calling for major fisheries reforms to reduce interceptions and transition harvest closer to rivers and estuaries, where salmon can be more selectively and sustainably managed as they return home. 

“The Pacific Salmon Treaty renegotiation is happening right now and offers a once-in-a-decade opportunity to redirect salmon management toward a more sustainable and equitable path,” said Helverson. “We do not have another decade to wait. Chinook salmon, Southern Resident killer whales, and coastal communities are already paying the price for a management system that is failing to rebuild abundance. This is the moment for transformational change.”

Updated Chinook mortality distribution tables and stock-specific harvest data are publicly available through the Pacific Salmon Commission Chinook Technical Committee data portal and data application.

Pacific Salmon Commission Chinook Technical Committee. Annual Report of Catch and Escapement for 2024. Appendix C: Comparison of Historic and Updated Canadian Recreational Catch and Release Estimates is available here for download: Pacific Salmon Commission Appendix C Data Tables

###

Wild Fish Conservancy is a nonprofit conservation organization headquartered in Washington State and working from California to Alaska to preserve, protect and restore the northwest’s wild fish and the ecosystems they depend on, through science, education, and advocacy. wildfishconservancy.org 

I highly recommend that you support the efforts of the Wild Fish Conservancy.

Filed under: Environmental Activism, Environmental Science, fisheries, Salmon | Tagged: , | Comments Off on Ocean Harvests of Puget Sound Chinook Were Significantly Underestimated for Decades

Port Townsend Paper Mill – Thoughts on Safety

Posted on June 5, 2026 by Al Bergstein

In the wake of the terrible tank explosion and deaths in Longview, I have read the call from David Ginsberg for a variety of recommendations on the local mill safety and pollution. Additionally, I have read the letter from the mill management, which, according to the Port Townsend Leader was published by the mill on June 1st but is not on the mill’s web site despite a newer post, unrelated to the explosion, is there.

I worked at the mill during COVID in their IT department, helping get remote access available for everyone to work from “home” and also I was in charge of upgrading hundreds of their computers. In my job, I met a lot of the workers, as I had to go to their workstations, both in the offices and the dozens of production environments to remove and install new computers. I often ate lunch with them, and a number of them became friends. Many drive long distances to work here, because our housing situation is not good for the middle class workers that would likely love to live closer to the mill. Some of them would have agreed with David’s call for actions, and some would likely not. It’s a mixed bag of people and perspectives, just like the U.S. today.

The mill is inherently a dangerous place to work. Mill management does take safety seriously from what I encountered. I had to take training, wear steel toed boots, eye and ear protection when I went into the main plant. There are extremely high speed paper making machines that sometimes break down. When they do, it can be a roll of the dice if anyone happens to be near the break down, and it could be deadly if someone was in the vicinity. The mill has been very lucky up to now. But other non-lethal injuries are fairly common and the mill closely tracks them. There are also forklifts roaming around, moving huge rolls of paper. The mill is a very old industrial site, but it has continued to be upgraded for various technical improvements over the decades. Nevertheless, anyone walking around there needs to be very vigilant.

Chemical tanks at Port Townsend Paper Mill. Unclear which of these may be holding the same kind of chemicals that exploded at Longview. Parking lot in upper center. Walkway to work passes by the top circled tanks. Image courtesy of Google Earth.

Every day when I came to work, I am pretty sure that I and the other workers, walked right by three large tanks, that seem to be the same tanks that were involved in the Longview explosion. The tanks are nondescript large tanks that had no discernible markings or safety warnings on them (that may have changed). I assume this because of the photos I’ve seen of the tank that exploded. The pulp “cookers” here at the mill are next to the tanks. None of us likely understood the risk, because I know that if I would be working there today, I would walk the long way around from the parking lot to get to work. However, that way is not the “safe” way, protecting people from the constant truck and forklift traffic. The walkway from the parking lot to the main offices and mill itself goes right by these tanks. Is it really the best idea to have workers constantly walking past them? Could a simple mistake cause a catastrophic explosion? Or are these not the tanks in question?

The mill management is different from the mill ownership. Management is local. Ownership is by Atlas Holdings, from Greenwich Connecticut, apparently some kind of holding company that invests in paper mills. This blog published a short overview when they took over the mill. Profit margins on paper mills are slim, according to CSIMarket https://csimarket.com/Industry/industry_Profitability_Ratios.php?ind=111 Their industry profit margins appear to be 3 to 4%. About as much as Safeway or QFC likely makes. Can Atlas guarantee that they have done everything that could be done for worker safety?

The mill operates under a variety of safety and EPA laws, many federal, some state created, but I don’t know if any are locally created. A variety of environmental laws have been relaxed or eliminated under the two Trump administrations. I’m unclear if any specifically were related to mill safety, but I have read that there is no state nor federal inspection requirements for the tanks that hold these dangerous chemicals. I would love to understand what laws are applicable. If there are none, there should be.

The mill memo mentions that they have carried out inspections and are working on “scheduling further non-destructive testing to reassess tank conditions in 2026.” The county emergency management department also said they are working with the mill and preparing for a July meeting. Given all that has happened, the mill should be very open and forthcoming with their plans and the results. Unfortunately, there is no apparent legal requirement for them to do so. Additionally, all of us should be demanding the State take a much more active role in tank inspections.

In Mr. Ginsberg’s letter, there was a laundry list of other issues dating back a long time. While I agree with his general assessment that there are other issues that need addressing, now is the best time to focus on tank safety. It is in the public eye, and the state will likely be working on improving this one issue in the months ahead. Let’s focus on this and not try to “boil the ocean” of other issues that Ginsberg raises.

It’s a great time for anyone concerned about safety, whether the mill workers themselves or the community at large, to come forward and make your voice heard. Write emails, letters or go to city or county council meetings. The way the news cycle works, the State and Atlas Holdings will be counting on this to fade as an issue quickly. This chance may not come back again until another disaster strikes. We are all hoping it doesn’t happen here.

Filed under: Environmental Activism, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Jefferson County | Tagged: , , | 2 Comments »

Future of Protection Island deserves more public scrutiny before transfer – Port Townsend Leader

Posted on May 15, 2026 by Al Bergstein

This week I wrote an Op-Ed piece that was published in the Port Townsend Leader. In case you don’t have access to the Leader I have included what I wrote below with minor updates. Unfortunately, the Leader only allowed a 700 word limit on the editorial. Obviously, there are many more words to be said about this proposed transfer. A few of them would be: if you agree that more needs to be clarified, and that the process ought to be slowed down, please contact our city, county, state and federal representatives and make your point of view known.

Your comments might be to oppose or simply slow the process to make sure that the island is never to be used for any commercial activity. That is currently not a part of this discussion between the Tribe and the State and Federal Government.

I want to clarify that I do not support efforts I’m hearing about in Clallam County from a group who oppose this and appear to be anti-Tribal in nature. I am not anti-Tribe.

You might ask: Why should I have any credibility to discuss this issue at all?

I have worked for the Tribe, creating two films over 5 years. I worked closely with the late Tribal Elder, Marlin Holden, a close friend, for “Treaty Resources: Legacy of Our Ancestors” that is viewable at the Tribe’s library. I have interviewed the late Kurt Grinnell and Ron Allen. I have presented in front of the Tribal Council a number of times. I was trusted by the Tribe to video tape tribal meetings, something I was told had never been allowed by anyone outside the Tribe. As a member and chair of the Jefferson County Marine Resources Committee I supported efforts led by the Tribe and other aquaculture companies to reestablish Olympia Oysters in Discovery Bay. The Tribe has done an outstanding job under Ron Allen and Kurt Grinnell’s leadership to forge new economic engines for the Tribe and Clallam County’s benefit, including an active aquaculture industry that sells geoduck to China along with oysters and clams regionally.

Promotional poster for Legacy of Our Ancestors

I produced a second film, paid for by the Tribe about the Dungeness River Management team on the restoration of the Dungeness River, called “Working for the River”.

Promotional poster for “Working for the River”

But I also was there at the efforts to create a wildlife refuge at Protection Island. In late 1970s, I was a professional photographer who volunteered for Seattle Audubon, the organization leading national efforts organized by Jefferson County locals Zella Schultz and Eleanor Stopps over a 20 year period. I traveled to John Wayne Marina where Fish and Wildlife staff took me to the island to photograph. The island had been under threat of having 800 lots developed, with no protection for the rare bird habitat that did and does exist there. Through all the efforts by Zella, Eleanor, Lorna Smith, Hazel Wolf and thousands of others, Congress finally established the Refuge, especially with the help of Republican Slade Gordon and Governor John Spellman, Democratic Senators Scoop Jackson and Warren Magnuson & Governor Dixie Lee Ray, along with the entire Washington State delegation who convinced the Reagan administration to sign the bill, the only such refuge established during his eight year presidency.

I have read a lot of what the Tribe wants to do with Protection Island. On the surface, with little detail, it seems benign. I have read a draft of a possible Congressional Bill that would establish the handover. But I am very troubled by the possible use of this island refuge for commercial aquaculture. Destroying the nearshore for commercial purposes would impact the habitat that these birds need to feed and survive. My concern is that we are rushing into an irreversible action with very little forethought and this legal business decision is not clearly defined at the moment. Now is the time to do the right thing and ensure that Protection Island is protected for *all time and all people* of the United States. That is what currently exists.

To hear more on this issue, I will be on KPTZ (91.9 locally on the Olympic Peninsula and kptz.org online) at 9PM Sunday May 17th on Phil Andrus’ “Cats in our Laps” show for one hour to discuss this in even more detail and answer questions from Phil. The show will be podcast later.

With that background, here is the 700 words that were published today in the Port Townsend Leader. I have expanded on this original letter today slightly to include a few issues that I was forced to edit out due to space constraints.

If I told you that a prized National Wildlife Refuge was going to be handed over to an aquaculture company, what would be your reaction? If I told you it was going to be handed over to The Jamestown S’Kallam Tribe, would your reaction be different? Would it be different if you knew that the Tribe runs an expanding aquaculture company?

What if I told you that in a few years, you will not have any say in what the aquaculture company does with the Refuge? That is exactly what is happening.

Protection Island National Wildlife Refuge is being considered for transfer to the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe to add to their reservation. Protection Island is currently owned by all of the citizens of the United States. Why does the Tribe want it for their exclusive use? And what is the importance of Protection Island?

The U.S. Department of the Fish and Wildlife has this to say about Protection Island:

Protection Island National Wildlife Refuge provides some of the last remaining undeveloped habitat for many burrow-nesting seabirds in the Salish Sea, but is of particular importance to the rhinoceros auklet. Scarred by over a hundred years of farming and grazing, and carved up for a summer home subdivision in the late 1960’s, it was finally recognized in 1982 with a National Wildlife Refuge designation before irreversible damage occurred. 

It supports thriving wildlife populations, including what is thought to be the third largest rhinoceros auklet colony in North America, one of the last two breeding sites for tufted puffins in the Salish Sea, and the largest glaucous-winged gull colony in Washington state.

Over the last year, the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe have been working in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife and U.S. Representative Emily Randall to transfer the title of the island, with its nesting habitat, to the Tribe. At this time, the proposal does not specify the aquatic lands, which remain with the State, but mentions a path to the state relinquishing them to the Tribe in the future.

There is a draft bill that will soon be introduced to make the transfer happen. This work has been done by the Tribal attorneys without any public input. It oddly goes along with the Trump administrations goals of getting the United States of out management of Federal Lands. Project 2025, specifically the “Mandate for Leadership” document, proposes restructuring federal land management by prioritizing energy production, expanding logging, and increasing state or private control over public lands. (highlight is mine). Key proposals include Chapter 13 (Interior Department) for dismantling conservation agendas…

We have already transferred the Dungeness Spit Wildlife Refuge to the Tribe with an understanding that the Tribes aquaculture business was going to drop 80,000 bags of oyster spat on the bottom of the bay. This transfer was opposed by the wildlife biologist that worked at the Spit at the time that the transfer was proposed.  There is currently a lawsuit in progress to challenge the process that was used to do this transfer.

Question: “Is the proposed transfer of Protection Island really the best thing for us to do?” 

Protection Island refuge was established after a national campaign led by two local women, Eleanor Stopps & Zella Schultz, and the work of the Seattle Audubon Society led by Helen Engle and  Hazel Wolf  one of the legendary environmental leaders in our state. It was a work that took tens of thousands of volunteer hours with help from National Audubon Society and The Nature Conservancy. (You can listen to an interview I conducted with Eleanor Stopps in 2010 for my film “Voices of the Strait” at the following link.)

https://on.soundcloud.com/uV2PCxSpOmPDvmMeVX

Transferring the Island to the Tribe means that it becomes part of it’s reservation and sovereign territory of the Tribe, no longer forced to follow the rules and regulations of the US Wildlife Refuge Acts of 1966 and 1997 There is no provision made for any public input into future tribal decisions on the use of the island, or it’s shores. There are vague references to the tribe continuing “conservation efforts” without specifying what they are. It will be up to the Tribe in concert with the State Department of Natural Resources to decide if they want to use the island’s shoreline for commercial aquaculture. DNR has been promiscuous in its granting of aquaculture permits. Can we trust that this commercially driven Tribe will make the right decisions on behalf of our Refuge when we will have no voice in decisions moving forward?

Also, the great work that the Tribe has done in restoring environmental places like Jimmy Come Lately Creek, the Dungeness River and other locations was done with Federal and State grants or funds. If the Federal Government is attempting to rid itself of Federal lands like this, who is going to pay for the ongoing management the Tribe claims they will do?

There are many who trust Ron Allen. What about future Tribal leaders after him? 

What protection do we have if the Tribe’s plans dramatically shift towards commerce than protection? Can we effectively veto or alter the Tribes’ activities on the island? How? The act of moving this crown jewell of wildlife will place it beyond the jurisdiction of local or state officials forever. In fact, it makes enforcement by the Federal government a nation to nation affair that leaves our voices out of the regulation process.

I suggest we start by stopping. There is no need for speed in this process. If Republicans want to get rid of Wildlfe Sanctuaries and Democrats want to support whatever the Tribes want, none of that will change with another year or two of public input. Pause this transfer while we figure out how all of us and not just one Tribe, will have a voice in the future of Protection Island if we relinquish control over it to the Tribe.

Listen to me Sunday night on KTPZ.ORG at 9PM Pacific

Original Leader article

https://ptleader.com/articles/columns/future-of-protection-island-deserves-more-public-scrutiny-before-transfer/

Filed under: Clallam County, Endangered Species, Environmental Activism, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, First Nations, Government, Jefferson County, Olympic Peninsula, Straits of Juan de Fuca, Washington State | Tagged: , , , , , | Comments Off on Future of Protection Island deserves more public scrutiny before transfer – Port Townsend Leader

WA Fish and Wildlife panel confronts high tensions and harsh testimony – Washington Standard

Posted on April 21, 2026 by Al Bergstein

The never ending drama of the State Wildlife Commission continued with an open session allowing comments from both sides in the controversy. We urge the Governor to take steps to remove Director Kelly Susewind. The Governor never had any need to follow the lead of the hunters associations as they hated him from the beginning and never would have voted for him in the past or the future. These attacks on Commissioners nominated for their environmental protection stance and the ability to follow science rather than the hunting communities perceived needs to kill bears. This continues attacks across the country on environmental protection under this radical regime in Washington D.C. that fuels this behavior.

Commissioner Smith is a local environmental activist from Jefferson County. I’ve known her and worked with her and her husband Darrell for decades. She was part of the team that lobbied congress to get Protection Island turned into a National Wildlife Refuge in 1982. She has fought for wolf and cougar protection along with protecting bears from slaughter. This hunting often leaves orphaned cubs in its wake. There is no one more qualified to fight to protect the issues of the environment than her. If the Governor abandons her, it will be a stain on his supposed environmental credentials for the rest of his term.

From the Washington Standard:

Surly public comments are a staple of Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission meetings, revealing the deeply personal stakes of those fighting over how far the state should go in protecting various species or allowing for hunting or fishing.

But last week’s session carried a slightly harsher tone, fueled by an investigation into whether commissioners violated open meetings and public records statutes ahead of a decision in 2022 to ban spring bear hunts, and a federal civil rights lawsuit filed against the agency’s director by a commissioner targeted by the probe.

The meeting took place Thursday to Saturday in Olympia. Speakers vented grievances with decisions of the citizen panel, actions of individual members and leaders of the Department of Fish and Wildlife, which the commission oversees. Some called for commissioners to resign, others for agency Director Kelly Susewind to be fired.

Read more at

Washington Standard Article

And support local journalism by donating to it if you can.

Filed under: Eastern Washington, Endangered Species, Environmental Activism, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Government, Politics | Tagged: , | Comments Off on WA Fish and Wildlife panel confronts high tensions and harsh testimony – Washington Standard

DNR Commissioner Upthegrove Stalls on Opportunity to Save Sadie Creek Legacy Forests

Posted on April 18, 2026 by Al Bergstein

From Press Release by Elwha Legacy Forests’ by Eleana Pawl 

“Doc Holliday” timber sale is the name the DNR gave to a parcel of quiet, fern-filled, moss-strewn, biodiverse, legacy forest which is located next to Sadie Creek Campground, off of scenic highway 112 on the Olympic Peninsula. It is a joy for hikers to explore and where from time immemorial, Tribal members have gone to gather traditional foods and medicines. There is also a salmon nesting area. This is about to change, unless Commissioner Upthegrove and DNR come to their senses.

Almost everyone seems to agree that it doesn’t make sense to log legacy forests around the beloved Sadie Creek campground and right about the creek itself. Last year, former Republican gubernatorial candidate, Bill Bryant who visited the forest, wrote an op-ed called “This Puget Sound Forest Should be Saved, there are better ways to log.” Hundreds signed a tribal citizen led letter asking Upthegrove to halt the timber sale.

What makes the situation even more unique is that the logging company is willing to accept an offer that would allow it to forgo logging while paying the same amount of money to DNR that DNR would have gotten had the forest been logged. This means that there’s no loss of money to beneficiaries like schools, libraries, and fire districts. Clallam County Commissioner Randy Johnson, a former timber company executive who also sits on the WA Board of Natural Resources – the body that makes decisions about timber sales – also supports the idea of finding a solution to save these few important acres.

The price tag to keep Sadie Creek campground an enjoyable place to visit is just $32,000.

Commissioner Upthegrove ran on the promise to protect legacy forests. So far, he’s continued business as usual while we lose hundreds of acres of legacy forests each month. Advancing this collaborative partnership is one way to turn the ship around.

For a 1 minute video tour of “Doc Holliday” go to Instagram on mobile: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DGDubjtpQPt/

for a longer overview. Try this by John Gussman

Filed under: Clallam County, Environmental Activism, Environmental Protection | Tagged: , , , , | 7 Comments »

WA Fish and Wildlife commissioner accuses agency director of retaliation – Washington Standard

Posted on April 5, 2026 by Al Bergstein

In a lawsuit, the commissioner and a wildlife group leader say department leaders manufactured allegations against them because they questioned their decisions.

The ongoing passion play attacking the environmental “wing” of the Washington State Fish and Wildlife Commission continues. This battle between the environmental wing and the hunters wing has gone from bad behavior to truly ugly.

To understand this issue, other than reading the good article on the Standard, found here: Washington State Standard Article you have to understand that this stems from a debate over whether hunters should continue to be allowed to kill bears in our state.

The commission, which is nominated by the Governor, has been a lightning rod for hunting groups nationwide. The current Commissioner, Lorna Smith, who lives in Jefferson County and has been employed by an NGO that is anti-bear and cougar hunting, is under attack by these hunting forces and oddly enough, the head of WFW department, Kelly Susewind and Deputy Director Amy Windrope. The Commission is in charge of overseeing Susewind’s department!

To add to all this, Governor Ferguson, who ran on an environmental ticket, in an early move to apparently throw an olive branch to the hunting community, fired former commissioner Tim Ragen. That act enraged environmentalists who said that Ferguson was reneging on pledges to help the very people who got him elected.

There is so much more to this soap opera. It wouldn’t be so pathetic if the killing of bears weren’t at stake. Do we really need to hunt this animals for money anymore?

Please read the Standard’s piece for a more detailed overview.

Filed under: Environmental Activism, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Government | Tagged: , , , , , | 4 Comments »

Plastics An exposé of the plastic industry – Fresh Air

Posted on April 1, 2026 by Al Bergstein

I’ve written about the “end of environmentalism”over the past two years. Here’s another reason why I haven’t changed my mind. If you don’t understand how the oil industry is poisoning us and lying to us, you need to hear this podcast by NPR’s Fresh Air. It’s “Big Tobacco” all over again. It’s worse than you think. Get angry, demand change. Buy at the Co-op where they use less plastic on produce. But you can’t avoid it and the industry banks on it. Literally.

In award-winning journalist Beth Gardiner’s new book, ‘Plastic Inc.,’ she traces how plastic went from a wartime miracle to the survival strategy of the fossil fuel industry. What Gardiner found after years of reporting is that while millions of us were recycling and using less fuel, the companies that make plastic are producing more to make up for it. She spoke with Tonya Mosley about recycling, microplastics in the human body, and the environmental impact.   

https://www.npr.org/2026/04/01/nx-s1-5770396/an-expose-of-the-plastic-industry

Filed under: Environmental Activism, environmental education, Environmental Protection | 4 Comments »

Northwest just finished warmest fall on record, scientists report and NCAR Research shutdown

Posted on December 18, 2025 by Al Bergstein

The Washington State Standard is reporting that not only did we finish the year with the warmest year on record but our recent rain will not do much to help the ongoing drought in central and eastern Washington. Why? Because it’s falling as rain and not as snow.

This record warm spell includes all temperature data going back to 1880. These floods, this warming, is exactly what scientists have been predicting for decades. Now we reap what we have sown in fossil fuel use. So what is the government doing? It’s shutting down research on the atmosphere.

The Trump Administration has announced the closing of the greatest atmospheric research lab in the world, at National Science Foundation’s National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), the largest federal climate research lab outside Boulder in Colorado. This cynical ploy to rob of us global climate data is directly linked to the fossil fuel industry that underpins this administrations every action. Every drop of gas one buys is funding this destruction of our most valuable commodity, the scientific research to understand the processes of our planet. The announcement was made by OMB chair Russell Voight, the author of Project 2025. His statement said, “This facility is one of the largest sources of climate alarmism in the country…” without providing any evidence except his own opinion.

The Governor of Colorado stated, “Climate change is real, but the work of NCAR goes far beyond climate science,” Polis said. “NCAR delivers data around severe weather events like fires and floods that help our country save lives and property, and prevent devastation for families. If these cuts move forward we will lose our competitive advantage against foreign powers and adversaries in the pursuit of scientific discovery.”

If you supported Trump and the politicians who make up his sycophant society you are helping support these disastrous decisions that continue to destroy our country and turn us into something resembling the Soviet Union or worse. Clearly our Senators and House members do not support this shut down of NCAR Colorado. Is this the kind of country you want to leave to your children and grandchildren?

This is not Making America Great Again, it’s an attempt to create a totalitarian government based on the beliefs of the fossil fuel industry. Better rethink your support of this maniac and act now to stop him before it’s too late. Send your donations to the ACLU and other organizations fighting for out rights. Contact friends in Red states to make sure they have heard this news and tell them to contact their Federal representatives to overturn this insane dictate.

You can support a green economy now by buying or leasing electric vehicles, walking and biking whenever possible, donating to the national organizations fighting the administration in court and supporting local farmers who strengthen our resilience to the effects of climate change .

Our hope is when this administration is finally out of office, that we can rebuild better the destroyed institutions that they have worked to eliminate in the name of the gas station of yours down the street. But that will take more than words on a blog. It takes every one of us doing something to change the direction of this out of control ship of state.

https://www.nbcnews.com/science/climate-change/trump-administration-break-climate-research-center-ncar-rcna249668

Filed under: Climate Change, Environmental Activism, Environmental Law, Environmental Science, Global Warming, Government, Olympic Peninsula, Politics | Tagged: , , | Comments Off on Northwest just finished warmest fall on record, scientists report and NCAR Research shutdown

EVENTS, GRANTS ETC

Posted on December 14, 2025 by Al Bergstein

From Angela at the Puget Sound Partnership’s Strait Ecosystem Recovery Network (ERN)

Here’s the good news in a very soggy week: In less than two weeks, the days will start to get longer! I tell myself this every morning when I open the blinds to darkness. 

In this newsletter, you will find news about funding, volunteer opportunities, events, training and conferences, jobs, and more! As always, we welcome your events and successes for our website and future newsletters:

  • Submit events for the newsletter and our calendar of events HERE
  • Submit your successes so we can celebrate them on our website HERE 

   Funding   

The Puget Sound Partnership (Partnership) gathers public and private funding opportunities in the Recovery Acceleration Funding Tool (RAFT). The National Wildlife Federation hosts a database for Nature-Based Solutions Funding. If you see an opportunity that feels too big to do alone, contact us! Strait ERN can help coordinate and write regional grant applications. The Partnership also has grant-writing assistance available.

Estuary and Salmon Restoration Program Grants – RFPs RELEASED NOV 19th

This grant program, administered by the Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) provides grants and technical assistance for projects that restore and conserve near-shore areas in Puget Sound. Match requirements have been eliminated for 2026 grants! There are multiple grant areas and application dates vary. Learn more and see RFPs as they are released HERE.

Temper of Times Foundation

Small grants can fund production of advertising or materials and distribution that will lead to measurable outcomes for wildland ecosystem conservation and restoration. Learn more HERE. 

Date: Proposals due December 15th

MJ Murdock Charitable Trust Strategic Grant Program

The Trust funds conservation, environmental education, natural resource protection, and wildlife preservation projects. The grants can fund capital projects, equipment and technology, or staff. Learn more and apply HERE.

Date: Applications are due December 26th

National Fish Passage Program

This program aims to improve habitat for federal trust species and support infrastructure improvement for communities nationwide. Eligible projects provide benefits to aquatic habitats and infrastructure resiliency. Expected to fund $10M in awards. Learn more HERE.

Date: Proposals due December 31st

Western WA Fish and Wildlife: National Fish Passage Program

This funds projects outside of the Columbia River Basin. Project Summary Forms are due by January 16th. Learn more and apply HERE.

Date: Project Summary Forms due January 16th

Floodplains by Design

Floodplains by Design grants are targeted at reducing flood risks and restoring river functions along Washington’s rivers. The pre-application period for the new grant round opens November 1st and closes January 23rd, 2026. Learn more about the grants HERE.

Date: Pre-applications due January 23rd

Brian Abbott Fish Barrier Removal Board Grants

This grant program supports work to identify and remove barriers for salmon and steelhead migration. Learn more about this program HERE.

Date: Applications due January 26th

ESRP Pre-Design (Learning) Program

Regional Pre-Design (Learning) Proposals support restoration of complex ecosystems or improve effectiveness/efficiency of restoration projects. Learn more about this opportunity and apply HERE.

Date: Proposals due February 9th

Streamflow Restoration Competitive Grants

The application period for these grants will be January 15th to March 17th, 2026. Learn more about the grant program and register for a January informational workshop for applicants HERE.

Date: Applications due March 17th

National Sea Grant Law Center

Letters of Interest for small projects that address legal questions related to ocean or coastal laws. Learn more and apply HERE.

Date: LOIs accepted on a rolling basis through August 1st, 2026

   Volunteer Opportunities   

PSEMP CalendarDo you collect data about the Puget Sound? The Puget Sound Ecosystem Monitoring Program (PSEMP) provides a forum for consolidating data-gathering efforts and conversation. Check out their calendar HERE to see their committee schedules. All are welcome at their meetings!

Stormwater Work Group SurveyThe Stormwater Work Group and PSEMP are collecting information on successes and needs for stormwater monitoring. Fill out the 10-15 minute survey HERE.Date: Survey closes December 17th

Volunteer Your Expertise!

The Habitat Strategic Initiative Lead (HSIL) is seeking input for the updates to the Land Development and Cover Implementation Strategy and the Floodplains and Estuaries Implementation Strategy. You can provide feedback via Google Form: Land Development  |  Floodplains and Estuaries.

Date: Land Development Form closes December 19th

Date: Floodplains and Estuaries Form closes January 9th

Provide Feedback to the Jefferson Land Trust

The Jefferson Land Trust is working on a new five-year Strategic Plan and is seeking community input. Take a 10-minute survey HERE to share your priorities.

   Community Events & Learning Opportunities   

Sequim-Dungeness Christmas Bird CountJoin Olympic Peninsula Audubon Society for their 50th annual Sequim-Dungeness Christmas Bird Count! Track the birds in our neighborhoods. Learn more HERE.Date: December 15th

Wednesday Morning Bird WalksEvery Wednesday, join a band of birders on a 3/4-mile bird survey along the Olympic Discovery Trail. Bring your binoculars and meet in the Dungeness River Nature Center’s parking lot.

Date: December 17th and every WednesdayTime: 8:30 amPlace: Dungeness River Nature Center, Sequim

Native Plant Sale

The Clallam County Conservation District’s Native Plant Sale is currently open for plant orders. See the selection and place your order HERE.

Date: Pre-orders end January 20th

Shoreline Management Act Open House(s)The Department of Ecology is hosting one more virtual Open House to discuss changes to the Shoreline Management Act. Translation services available. Learn more and register HERE.

Date: December 16thTime: 6:00 to 7:00 pmPlace: Virtual; register for link

North Olympic Land Trust’s Open HouseCelebrate NOLS’s 35th Anniversary at their Annual Open House! Enjoy a celebratory slice of cake and swap stories of 35 years of land conservation. Learn more HERE.Date: December 30thTime: 2:00 to 5:00 pmPlace: NOLS Office, Port Angeles

Winter Birding and IllustrationLearn more about the birds of the Salish Sea with the Port Townsend Marine Science Center. Practice scientific illustration, then head outside to look for birds. Learn more and RSVP HERE.Date: January 10thTime: 10:00 am to 12:00 noonPlace: PTMSC Aquarium classroom, Fort Worden

Floodplains and Estuaries LIO/LE Coffee ChatThe Habitat SIL is hosting a coffee chat to talk about the Floodplains and Estuaries Implementation Strategies. This virtual chat is open to members of LIOs and LEs. Register HERE.Date: January 13thTime: 9:00 am to 12:00 noonPlace: Virtual; register for link

Land Development and Cover LIO/LE Coffee ChatThe Habitat SIL is hosting a coffee chat to talk about the Land Development and Cover Implementation Strategies. This virtual chat is open to members of LIOs and LEs. Register HERE.Date: January 15thTime: 1:00 to 4:00 pmPlace: Virtual; register for link

Alternatives to BulkheadsThis self-paced online course is part of Ecology’s Coastal Training Program. Learn about shorelines and stabilization in this 101 offering. Register HERE.Date: January 13 to February 25Place: Virtual

Blueprints for Community-Led Blue CarbonThe focus for this Blue Carbon Collaborative meeting is small-scale blue carbon restoration projects focused on key single-species efforts. Learn more and register HERE. Date: February 5thTime: 10:00 amPlace: Virtual; register for link

   Training and Conferences   

Forestry 101 Workshop

Come learn about forest stewardship and health with the Jefferson County Conservation District. Learn more and register HERE.

Date: December 13th

Time: 2:30 to 4:00 pm

Place: Jefferson County Library, Port Hadlock

Roads and Resilience: Integrating State Transportation, Hazards, and Nature-Based Solutions

Join the Shoreline and Coastal Planners Group for a webinar on natural hazard impacts to state roads. Learn more and register HERE.

Date: December 16th

Time: 10:00 am to 12:00 noon

Place: Virtual

NW Land Camp

NW Land Camp brings together land trust leaders and conservation partners for networking and training. In June 2026, Land Camp will be in beautiful Florence, OR. Mark your calendars and watch for more information!

   Jobs   

Natural Resources Program AssistantThe Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe is hiring an administrative program assistant for their Natural Resources Department. Learn more HERE.

LIO Program ManagerThe Puget Sound Partnership is hiring a Local Integrating Organization Program Manager to lead the Partnership’s LIO Program. The position is largely remote, with some on-site work required. Learn more HERE.   News   2025 State of the Sound ReleasedThe Puget Sound Partnership has released the 2025 State of the Sound report. This is an assessment of the results of all our work around the Puget Sound towards ecosystem protection, restoration, and recovery. There is, of course, both celebration of success and the sobering reality of how much more still needs to be done. Read the report HERE.

2024 Puget Sound Marine Waters OverviewThe PSEMP Marine Waters Workgroup has released it’s 14th annual Marine Waters Overview, collecting data from across the greater Puget Sound. Read about and download the report HERE.

Filed under: Environmental Activism, Events, Government, Olympic Peninsula | Comments Off on EVENTS, GRANTS ETC

The future of inner urban and suburban delivery emerges

Posted on December 6, 2025 by Al Bergstein

While it is easy to get depressed by the current fossil fuel funded federal government and presidential positions on transport, the future is arriving, as it usually does, without any help from the powers that be. The rise of the cargo bike portends a future city with far less gas powered delivery vehicles, less air pollution, and a reduction in vehicles on the roads, which likely will make even car drivers happy!

Tern’s NYC delivery e-bike fleet crosses 1 million miles, with some bikes rolling past 30k

Filed under: Alternative Transportation, Bicycles, Environmental Activism | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Goodbye to Bob Lynette

Posted on October 7, 2025 by Al Bergstein

I knew Bob as a dedicated environmentalist who fought to protect rather than just restore. There are so few like him anymore. So many environmentalists have just gone to being restoration specialists and seem to refuse to actually fight to protect the environment. Many have teamed up with the very industries that are continuing to exploit the environment for profit.

From the Washington Wild obit of Bob.

IN MEMORIAM: Bob Lynette, Olympic Peninsula Activist and 2016 WA Wild Karen M. Fant Award Winner

Filed under: Environmental Activism | 3 Comments »

Next Page »