A win for saving Dungeness Spit

Posted on May 22, 2025 by Al Bergstein

                                                                                                    

The battle over keeping industrial aquaculture out of our National Wildlife Refuges, is still being played out in the courts. Recently three environmental organizations have successfully sued to get the US Fish & Wildlife Service to complete a “compatibility determination (CD)” for the industrial operation. The court has ruled that a CD must be performed. It is not clear whether the company must now stop any work in the refuge.

Here is the press release from the plaintiffs. Please consider donating to any of them to help offset the costs of the lawsuit. It’s *our* wildlife refuge at stake.

In 2023, Protect the Peninsula’s Future, Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat, and Beyond Pesticides sued the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for its failure to conduct a compatibility determination (CD) for a proposed industrial shellfish operation at the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge (DNWR). The case is being reviewed by the U.S. Federal District Court in Tacoma. 

USFWS regulations state that for any project on or near one of its refuges, a CD must be written.  These cases are not unusual, and the Dungeness case is especially important because if the case is lost, industrial shellfish operations might be free to open at other Refuges. 

Last year the Court ruled the case should proceed because it is clear the USFWS must write a CD.  

The industrial shellfish operator – the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe (JST) – sought to moot the plaintiffs’ case due to potential financial impact to the JST.  The JST received various agency permits to plant 80,000 non-native oyster spat (larvae) in large plastic bags to be anchored to the substrate in the refuge area on 34 acres. The then manager of the DNWR had determined the shellfish operation was incompatible with the mission of the refuge, but higher ups in the agency overruled her and refused to write a CD. In the meantime, the JST started planting oyster spat. 

The federal court allowed the JST to present arguments against the plaintiffs’ suit.   

On 15 May 2025, the court responded in our favor.  The case will not be mooted; the USFWS must follow its regulations.   

From the Court documents:

“Compliance with the statutory procedures in the Refuge Act is undoubtably a  public right that safeguards environmental protection. 

Only the public right to administrative compliance with the Refuge Act procedural requirement to complete a compatibility determination and/or require a special permit are ripe for adjudication. 

Drawing all reasonable inferences in favor of plaintiffs, Jamestown appears to have planted seeds after it was aware that it was probable the Service would conduct a compatibility determination. 

Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED that Jamestown’s motion to dismiss, Dkt  44, is DENIED. “

The plaintiffs now wait for the Court’s final ruling against the USFWS, ordering it to write a CD. 

Filed under: Aquaculture, Clallam County, Environmental Activism, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Olympic Peninsula, Straits of Juan de Fuca | Tagged: | 1 Comment »

Posted on May 5, 2025 by Al Bergstein

This just in from the Puget Sound Partnership’s Strait Ecosystem Recovery Network (ERN). Want to create a rain garden? Or other neighborhood storm water program? Get together with your town or county peeps and apply!

The RFP for the Neighborhood Stormwater Education and Assistance grants will open on May 7th and there are informational webinars on the horizon. These funds can support projects including:

  • Developing tools, resources, or programs to educate landowners and influencers (real estate agents, Homeowners Associations (HOAs), land use consultants, contractors, and others) about stormwater practices; 
  • Providing technical assistance such as pre-application and compliance support and incentives for landowners, developers, and residents to implement and maintain green stormwater infrastructure; 
  • Community outreach events, such as restoration plantings or Low Impact Design (LID)/Green Stormwater Infrastructure (GSI) educational seminars and trainings; 
  • Developing long-term plans, agreements, and funding mechanisms for developing and maintaining stormwater infrastructure within local individual catchments (including systems owned by HOAs); or 
  • GSI training and/or certification programs aligned with community affordable housing, workforce development, and environmental justice goals
Neighborhood Stormwater RFP Opening Soon

Filed under: Clallam County, Environmental Protection, Jefferson County, Olympic Peninsula | Tagged: , , , | Comments Off on

Legislative Roundup

Posted on April 28, 2025 by Al Bergstein

2025 Session Recap

From the Puget Sound Partnership: The 2025 Session of the Washington State Legislature has adjourned Sine Die on April 27. A robust budget deficit and debates about state spending and revenue dictated the session’s flow and outcomes, especially in the final weeks. Due to concerns about implementation costs, many bills aligned with Puget Sound recovery failed to pass and many more were trimmed back to reduce the associated workload. And the final budget included a series of budget cuts that will slow the work of Puget Sound recovery. At the same time, several new policies and budget items survived the legislative process and will provide benefits to Puget Sound recovery, including:

  • Ongoing funding to various state natural resource agencies to support interagency cooperation on environmental permitting of habitat restoration projects.
  • A new round of capital investments in habitat restoration and clean water infrastructure through programs like Puget Sound Acquisition and Restoration, Floodplains by Design, Salmon Recovery Funding Board, Estuary and Salmon Restoration Program, Stormwater Financial Assistance, Centennial Clean Water, and Remedial Action Grants.
  • Closure of a loophole in the Growth Management Act (GMA) to ensure local government plans are consistent with recent amendments to the GMA.
  • New investments in state capacity to monitor toxic chemicals from stormwater and implement measures to reduce those toxics.
  • Extension of the riparian task force and investments in voluntary riparian restoration efforts.

This online newsletter contains subpages for each of the Action Agenda topic areas listed at the top of the page. Each page includes a narrative description of themes and an interactive bill watchlist. The final budget page also includes a full breakdown of budget details.

Read the whole thing at

https://legislativenewsletter-wa-psp.hub.arcgis.com

A point of view from the Washington Policy Center (a conservative group), but worth noting for it’s summary, which seems pretty balanced in it’s analysis…(would welcome a critique of their POV)

Climate and Environmental Spending: Ambitious but Costly

The budget allocates $1 billion in spending to climate and environmental programs, and does not change significantly from the previous budget. The Climate Commitment Act (CCA), which imposes a tax on CO2 emissions, is projected to generate approximately $1.6 billion in revenue according to the department of Ecology. The additional tax is passed onto consumers through higher fuel and energy prices.

Washington Policy Center’s research estimates that the tax on CO2 emissions adds 40 cents per gallon to gasoline prices, disproportionately affecting low- and middle-income households. While the budget funds rebates for low-income families, these are insufficient to offset the regressive nature of the tax. Furthermore, the effectiveness of these investments in reducing emissions is poor, according to the Department of Ecology’s own research. Policymakers should prioritize effectiveness and consider redirecting funds to more immediate priorities, such as infrastructure or tax relief.

Fiscal Sustainability and Taxpayer Impact

The budget’s 6.5% spending increase outpaces the state’s economic growth rate (projected at 4.5% annually). This trajectory risks depleting overall reserves, projected to drop from $3.2 billion to $2.2 billion by 2027, but does add money to the state’s rainy-day fund. The four-year budget outlook shows a potential multi-billion shortfall unless revenues grow unexpectedly, or spending is curtailed. This raises the specter of future tax increases, particularly given Washington’s already high sales, property, and business taxes.

The budget’s reliance on one-time revenues, such as federal grants and the revenue from CCA auctions, masks structural imbalances. When these funds dry up, taxpayers may face pressure to backfill programs rather than cancel them. Washington Policy Center recommends adopting a sustainable growth model, such as tying spending increases to inflation plus population growth, which would cap biennial increases at 5-6%. This approach would preserve reserves and reduce the need for future tax hikes.

Conclusion: A Missed Opportunity for Reform

The 2025-27 conference budget reflects prioritizes spending over fiscal discipline. While investments in education, health care, and climate programs address pressing issues, their scale and structure raise concerns about affordability, efficiency, and long-term consequences. Taxpayers, already grappling with high costs of living, deserve a budget that maximizes value through competition, innovation, and accountability.

Despite record revenues, the budget proposal offers little in the way of tax relief for Washington families and businesses. The state’s tax burden has risen steadily in recent years, driven by increases in property taxes, sales taxes, and a controversial new capital gains tax. With billions in increased in spending over the next four years, lawmakers could easily afford to return some of that money to taxpayers-or at least pause new tax hikes.

Read their analysis of the whole budget items (more categories they analyze) at

https://www.washingtonpolicy.org/publications/detail/the-washington-state-2025-27-budget-proposal-is-out-and-legislators-are-still-spending-money-the-state-doesnt-have

Filed under: Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Government, legislation | Comments Off on Legislative Roundup

Clallam County MRC Letter re: 3 Crabs road flooding

Posted on April 20, 2025 by Al Bergstein

The Clallam County MRC has sent this letter to the Clallam County Board of Commissioners (BOCC) and the Clallam County Department of Community Development (DCD).RE: Shoreline management at Three Crabs Road.

At its recent monthly meeting, the MRC agreed to invoke its advisory responsibitity to the BOCC and communicate our concern about shoreline armoring (permitted and unpermitted) on Three Crabs Road, which recently came to our attention.

What we are seeing

Despite Comprehensive Plan policies for protecting marine shorelines and no-net-loss goats of the Shoreline Management Program, bulkheads have been and continue to be permitted – most often under emergency provisions following erosion from extreme storm surges, which are almost becoming an annual occurrence. ln addition, NASA has recently concluded that the pace of sea leveI rise is faster than previously thought, due to the thermal expansion of the ocean’s mass.

Summary of concerns

The MRC is concerned that intensifying weather conditions wit[ continue to cause erosion and that emergency bulkheads will continue to be requested and built, one property at a time, resulting insignificant impacts on shoretine functions and ecology. We urge the BOCC and DCD to develop a strategy that comprehensively addresses property and shoreline protection on Three Crabs Road.

The strategy shoutd include continued education and outreach to planners, contractors, property owners and county residents overall, and should also:

> clarify that avoidance of ecologicaI impacts is the top priority (but if avoidance is impossibte then

Ecology’s sequence of mitigation actions for shorelines should be followed and

> consider adjacent impacts and cumutative effects of any action; and

> identify mitigative approaches if avoidance is impossibte; and

> provide how no net loss witt be achieved through compensatory mitigation.

Filed under: Clallam County, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Environmental Science, Olympic Peninsula, Straits of Juan de Fuca | 3 Comments »

Ralph Munro walks on

Posted on March 21, 2025 by Al Bergstein

The master of bi-partisan politics and perhaps the greatest politician this state ever had the honor to call one of its own, Ralph Munro, passed yesterday at the age of 81.

I had the good fortune to interview Ralph and spend a few hours with him a decade ago. He was a gentle, always upbeat and positive person. But his accomplishments are one of the greatest list of public service achievements we have ever seen.

Ralph was Secretary of State for five terms. During that time, he instituted vote by mail and voter registration (Motor Voter) when getting a drivers license or renewal.

But Ralph was also the person that Governor Dan Evans called on to go down to California and see about the Vietnamese refugees after Democratic governor Jerry Brown did not want them relocated there. Munro helped to bring them here to resettle in Washington State.

He was a champion of developmentally disabled children and helped get the first law in the country passed to support their needs, called the “Education for All” act. He befriended a 7 year old with developmental disabilities, eventually becoming his legal guardian.

He was a champion of environmental causes. He personally was responsible for ending the Orca hunt and capture in Puget Sound.

He was well respected by Puget Sound tribes. He allowed the tribes to do archeological digs on his property and was honored by them.

And on a personal note, he was the only Republican that I have ever voted for.

My sincere condolences to his family and friends. We will miss him. I doubt, given the current political system that we will ever see anyone like him again in Washington politics.

https://www.kuow.org/stories/remembering-ralph-munro-5-term-washington-secretary-of-state-and-statesman

Filed under: Environmental Activism, Environmental Protection, Government, Politics | 1 Comment »

How to Find Climate Data and Science the Trump Administration Doesn’t Want You to See

Posted on February 15, 2025 by Al Bergstein

Eric Nost, University of Guelph, and Alejandro Paz, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

Information on the internet might seem like it’s there forever, but it’s only as permanent as people choose to make it. This is clear as the second Trump administration has taken steps to dismantle science agencies and remove data and websites they use to communicate with the public, especially regarding climate science.

We are researchers in a network called the Public Environmental Data Partners, a coalition of nonprofits, archivists, and researchers working to ensure that data remains available to the public.

In the first few weeks of Trump’s second term, at least a dozen climate and environmental justice tools were removed. Government websites also scrubbed terms like “climate change” and “resilience.”

Why government websites and data matter

The internet and access to data are crucial for innovation, research, and daily life. Climate scientists use NASA satellite data and NOAA weather records to understand changes in the Earth system and how to protect economies reliant on specific climates. Other researchers use census data alongside climate data to identify who is most affected by climate change. Every day, people visit government websites to understand how to protect themselves from hazards and to learn about climate change policies.

When data and tools are removed, the work of scientists, civil society organizations, and government officials can grind to a halt. Data generated by government scientists is vital, especially for state governments that rely on federal data to run environmental protection programs.

Removing data from websites also makes it harder for the public to participate in key democratic processes, such as commenting on regulatory changes. It also breeds mistrust in the government and science. Federal agencies have been providing climate data to the public for years, and removing this data deprives everyone of essential information.

Bye-bye data?

The first Trump administration removed discussions of climate change and climate policies from government websites. However, in research with the Environmental Data and Governance Initiative, we didn’t find evidence that datasets were permanently deleted. The second Trump administration seems more aggressive, with more rapid removal of information.

In response, Public Environmental Data Partners have been archiving climate datasets, uploading copies to public repositories, and cataloging them to ensure they’re accessible if removed from government websites.

Maintaining tools for understanding climate change

The administration has targeted tools like dashboards that help visualize the social dimensions of climate change. For example, the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool, which mapped marginalized communities expected to experience severe climate impacts, was taken offline after Trump’s first executive orders. The original data behind the tool is still available, but it’s harder to find and access. Because the tool was an open-source project, it’s being recreated by archivists.

Preserving websites for the future

Some webpages have gone offline, such as the 25-year-old Climate Change Center at the Department of Transportation. Other pages, like those on the EPA website, have had their “climate change” links removed, making it harder to find relevant information.

Thankfully, the End of Term Web Archive has captured snapshots of government websites, making them accessible through the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine. This initiative has been ongoing since 2008, capturing millions of government webpages for preservation.

If you’re concerned about missing climate change discussions on government websites, you can use the Wayback Machine to check past versions of pages.

What you can do

You can find archived climate and environmental justice datasets and tools on the Public Environmental Data Partners website. Other groups are archiving datasets linked to Data.gov and making them accessible in other locations.

Researchers are also uploading datasets to searchable repositories like OSF (Center for Open Science). If you’re worried that certain data might disappear, the MIT Libraries’ checklist provides steps on how you can help safeguard federal data.

Narrowing the knowledge sphere

It’s unclear how far the administration will push to remove or hide climate data, but it’s already clear that such actions are narrowing the public’s understanding of climate change, leaving communities and economies vulnerable. While data archiving can help preserve some of this information, there is no replacement for government research infrastructures that produce and share climate data.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license.

Filed under: Environmental Protection, Environmental Science, Olympic Peninsula | Tagged: , , | Comments Off on How to Find Climate Data and Science the Trump Administration Doesn’t Want You to See

Event: PT Paper (PTPC) Draft NPDES Renewal Permit & Meeting

Posted on October 30, 2024 by Al Bergstein

The Washington Department of Ecology (WSDOE) is reviewing for renewal the PT Paper Mill’s (PTPC) Draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Wastewater discharges from the mill, which have been going on for over 100 years, are regulated by the WDOE. Ecology is proposing a draft NPDES permit renewal for PTPC.

PTPC produces pulp by both chemical kraft process and from the repulping of old corrugated cardboard. All of the cardboard recycled in Jefferson County and other areas goes to the mill for repulping. The pulp is sold or used to make paper products, such as liner board for cardboard boxes.

The mill is seeking to discharge about 7% more effluent and 2% greater suspended solids. The permit includes new water-quality based limits for benzo(a)anthracene, chlordane and pentachlorophenol.

The permit includes some new studies of pollutants in Port Townsend Bay, requirements to minimize spills of certain chemicals to the wastewater treatment plant, an odor minimization study and other items.

You can send written comments to the Dept of Ecology HQ in Lacey (see document below for more specific info) and a public meeting and hearing will take place on December 4th, at 5:30 PM at the USO building (Bldg 326) Fort Worden. Interpretation services are available.

Filed under: Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Events | Tagged: , , , , , | Comments Off on Event: PT Paper (PTPC) Draft NPDES Renewal Permit & Meeting

Dabob Bay conservation area expands by nearly 4,000 acres

Posted on October 6, 2024 by Al Bergstein

Peter Bahls and his organization the NW Watershed Institute, have pulled off another successful land transfer that they’ve been working on for years in the waning days of public lands commissioner Hilary Franz’ administration. But the agreement may also find itself strapped for funds if the Climate Commitment Act (CCA) is reversed in the next election or a Republican takes office to replace Franz. Your vote is important to passing this . Our website is supporting King County Commissioner and former State Representative Dave Upthegrove as the next land commissioner because of issues such as this.

QUILCENE — The Dabob Bay Natural Resources Conservation Area has been expanded by 3,943 acres to include more than 11,000 acres around the bay.

Hillary Franz, the state Commissioner of Public Lands, signed an order on Sept. 23.

“Dabob Bay is a unique and special landscape, and I am incredibly happy to protect and preserve public lands there so that future generations get to enjoy its beauty and ecological importance,” Franz said. “This further expansion is a testament to years of hard work from stakeholders and staff to find a solution that protects these rare ecosystems while still supporting local services in east Jefferson County.”

To read the whole story, go to:

https://www.peninsuladailynews.com/news/dabob-bay-conservation-area-expands-by-nearly-4000-acres/

support local journalism subscribe to the Peninsula Daily News.

Filed under: Climate Change, Endangered Species, Environmental Activism, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Forestry, Government, Jefferson County, Olympic Peninsula | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Dabob Bay conservation area expands by nearly 4,000 acres

Glyphosate: more bad news for Roundup™️?

Posted on August 14, 2024 by Al Bergstein

Glyphosate is the chemical agent in RoundUp, perhaps the most widely used pesticide in the world. It is now found in a huge percentage of Americans that have beentested for it, and its possible implication in degenerative nerve diseases and lymphomas is a subject of debate. Today in the New York Times, a very disturbing story of a cluster of rare cancers and neurological illnesses in New Brunswick may be leading back to the chemical.

The story, found here with a subscription (or at your local library), opens with “Doctors in Canada have identified dozens of patients with similar, unexplained symptoms — a scientific puzzle that has now become a political maelstrom.”

The symptoms that showed up in people in a small area of New Brunswick, included an incredible wide range of patients with no common thread except living in a small geographic location, a classic medical cluster. While it was not specific as a cancer cluster, it can be considered a medical cluster. Scientists have a specific definition of a cancer cluster. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI) define a cancer cluster as a greater-than-expected number of cancer cases that occurs within a group of people in a defined geographic area over a specific period of time. These type of clusters were found in areas like the Love Canal back in the 70s.

This is not a small cluster. According to the Times article, “The number of undiagnosable patients currently under his care has risen to more than 430, 111 of whom are under age 45. Thirty-nine have died. ” The doctor who first identified this also noticed that, “… had noticed a pattern of new referrals peaking in the late summer and early fall, when pesticide use is at its highest, and wondered if there could be a connection.”

After having incredibly frustrating stop and start support from the Canadian government, and a number of years attempting to get to a root cause, the doctor who originally identified the cluster managed to get independent testing of many of the people suffering from it. What he found were extremely high levels of glyphosate in many of his patients.

Ninety percent of Marrero’s patients came back with elevated amounts of glyphosate in their blood, in one case as high as 15,000 times the test’s lowest detectable concentration.

This area of New Brunswick sees widespread use of Glyphosate in forestry.

The conclusion of this incredible story is that the government of Canada, after at first taking this cluster and the findings very seriously, mysteriously backed off and has done little to nothing, handing the investigation back to the province. They are now claiming that the cluster is not a cluster. Many people suspect that some kind of industry led lobbying may have stymied the investigation. The doctor who first discovered this cluster of patients is continuing to attempt to find a cause, while wondering why the federal government has given up any pursuit of a root cause to this group of his patients.

The point here is that all of us alive today in the Pacific Northwest likely have glyphosate in our bodies. Given the increasing amount of evidence, both direct and circumstantial about possible effects of glyphosate, it is worth reducing our intake of this potentially cancer causing chemical.

According to ConsumerNotice.org

Key takeaways:

  • 81% of Americans have had recent exposure to glyphosate.
  • The volume of glyphosate applied to crops has increased 100-fold since the late 1970s.
  • The introduction of glyphosate-resistant crops in 1996 added to the exposure.
  • Roundup is the most widely used herbicide in the world.
  • Bayer was supposed to stop selling Roundup in 2023, citing risks to farmworkers and consumers. It has not.
  • One study found glyphosate in more than 95% of the oat-based food samples.

A national health survey released in June 2022 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention observed detectable levels of glyphosate in 80% of urine samples tested.

https://wwwn.cdc.gov/Nchs/Nhanes/2013-2014/SSGLYP_H.htm

NBC News.

According to Microsoft CoPilot: Bayer Corporation has not stopped producing Roundup (though it has been banned in some specific states, counties or towns). They continue to manufacture it while managing ongoing litigation related to its safety. Bayer has implemented a five-point plan to address and mitigate the risks associated with Roundup litigation12. This includes new formulations for the U.S. Lawn & Garden market and ongoing legal strategies to handle current and future cases1.

It is worth educating yourself on what to possibly avoid to minimize ongoing Glyphosate in your diet. Eating organic is a good start, but even some supposedly organic products have been found to have glyphosate in them. The ConsumerNotice.org article is a good start. https://www.consumernotice.org/environmental/pesticides/glyphosate-in-food/

A good overview of Glyphosate was done by NBC. https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/toxic-herbicides-map-showing-high-use-state-rcna50052

Filed under: environmental education, Environmental Protection, Environmental Science | 1 Comment »

Dungeness Spit Aquaculture: Court rules in favor of environmentalists

Posted on August 9, 2024 by Al Bergstein

The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington State concludes that the Federal Refuge Act requires the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS/Service) to complete a compatibility determination, that the Court has jurisdiction and that plaintiffs’ case has merit and should be heard. 

In a major ruling for environmentalists fighting to stop the conversion of the Dungeness Spit wildlife refuge into an industrial aquaculture farm, a federal judge has ruled that the USFWS must complete a “compatibility determination” on potential impacts to these federal lands.  A 50-acre industrial shellfish operation has been allowed to operate abutting the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge in Sequim WA without the agency having written a compatibility determination or permitted the shellfish operation. This Refuge hosts 240 species of birds, 29 species of mammals, 8 species of reptiles and amphibians, and 26 species of fish.  

Protect the Peninsula’s Future (PPF), a WA State non-profit was joined by another WA State non-profit, Coalition To Protect Puget Sound Habitat and the national non-profit, Beyond Pesticides challenging the USFWS in US Western District Court, pleading that the USFWS must write a compatibility determination stating the shellfish operation’s harm to this refuge.  The USFWS/Department of Interior asked the court to dismiss our case, denying their own authority. On July 17, 2024, the federal district court denied dismissal of the case.

The NGOs also pled that should the operation be allowed, it needed a permit. The federal judge left open the opportunity to strengthen this argument.

In his review of the USFWS attempt to dismiss the plaintiffs’ case, Judge Benjamin H. Settle underscored that the Refuge Act mandates that the Service “shall not initiate or permit a new use of a refuge or expand, renew, or extend an existing use of a refuge, unless the [Service] has determined that the use is a compatible use and that the use is not inconsistent with public safety.”  The federal judge continued, “To conclude otherwise would lead to absurd results. It would require the Court to ignore the clear instructions in the Refuge Act and its regulations that deputize the Service to regulate activity within the Refuge. Indulging the Service’s position would also require ignoring the points in the Refuge Act that carefully instruct the Service on how to navigate conflicting or concurrent authority within a refuge.”

“It bears repeating that the Service already acknowledged that it ‘cannot allow the proposed activity unless the entirety of the commercial oyster farming operation within the Refuge boundary is found Compatible with the Refuge purposes.’”

This blog has repeatedly reported on the move to create an industrial aquaculture operation inside Dungeness Spit. In previous articles, we saw key members of the wildlife reserve send reports saying that the proposal was bad for birds and other creatures in the waters inside the Spit. Regardless of the concerns DNR head Hilary Franz signed an approval of leasing the tidelands to the company. Yesterday, Franz lost her bid to move to the U.S. Congress, and she might be replaced by one of two Republicans, but the votes are still being tallied, and Democrat and environmental champion Dave UptheGrove is still in second place as of this writing.

You can help this legal case by sending donations to: PPF   PO Box 421   Sequim WA  98382

or make online through PayPal:  https://www.protectpeninsulasfuture.org/donate/

Filed under: Clallam County, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Olympic Peninsula, Straits of Juan de Fuca | 3 Comments »

Net Pens, Dead? Don’t count on it. Thank Hilary Franz

Posted on June 3, 2024 by Al Bergstein

From coastalwatershedinstitute.org: There’s been a bit of buzz about the status of steelhead net pens in the US/Washington state Salish Sea over the last three months or so. Most recently, Cooke Aquaculture withdrew their appeal of the recent decision upholding Washington state DNR’s ban of net pens on state aquatic lands. This has been touted as, quote, ‘the end of the fight’ against net pens in Washington waters (DNR March 2024).

Except? It absolutely *isn’t* the end of the fight. While Hillary Franz, the current Washington state Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Public Lands Commissioner, made the decision to ban net pens over a year ago, the DNR hasn’t taken any action to codify this rule into agency law (DNRa). Codifying the decision is a three-step process (DNR b). And while other DNR rules have sailed thru this codifying process over the same time period, the net pen decision? Hasn’t budged.

Hillary Franz is not running for re-election. She will no longer be DNR Lands Commissioner after the November elections.

In it’s current state, the net pen ban can be rescinded with a literal stroke of a pen by the next Lands Commissioner. Industry is laying plans for just this. At least one Commissioner candidate has made very clear statements supporting net pens. And Cooke Aquaculture and the Jamestown Tribe, collaborators on a steelhead net pen plan for the central Strait of Juan de Fuca/ Port Angeles Harbor, are now giving ‘informal’ presentations to local groups to try and garner support of future in water net pen projects-including Port Angeles harbor. This isn’t a ‘proposal’. It’s a *plan*. And they’re not asking-they are *telling* folks what is going to happen. They’re doing so quietly now-but will be full throttle after the Washington State DNR Commissioner election is over, and the new Commissioner is in place.

What can you do?

1. PUSH Washington DNR to codify the current net pen ban rule immediately;

2. Confirm early and repeatedly the position of prospective future incoming Washington State Lands Commissioner on in-water net pens, and make sure they also have your input and a clear position on net pens, and;

3. Make sure to let local aquaculture leaders and resource agency managers and officials know that upland contained is the only farmed salmon alternative for our country and state (one very successful operation is already in full swing in BC-link to their information is below).

For those that are new to the topic, here is an excellent link summarizing truth about open net pens https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4fVPt1V3sw .

More information, links, and key citations are here:

DNR a. netpen rulemaking https://www.dnr.wa.gov/publications/em_rule_netpen_cr101.pdf

DNR b.https://www.dnr.wa.gov/rule-making….

DNR 2024. https://www.dnr.wa.gov/…/commissioner-franz-fight…

Mapes 2022. https://www.seattletimes.com/…/state-supreme-court-oks…/

Blue Star Foods model farm module designed to grow 100 Tonnes of Steelhead Salmon per year: https://bluestarfoods.com/little-cedar-falls/

Upland Net Pens get fish into tanks out of the sea.

https://olyopen.com/2018/02/01/norwegian-company-to-build-large-land-based-salmon-farm-in-belfast-maine-republican-journal/?amp=1

Filed under: Aquaculture, Clallam County, Environmental Activism, Environmental Protection, fishing | Tagged: , | 4 Comments »

NOAA agrees hearing on Endangered Alaskan Chinook

Posted on May 25, 2024 by Al Bergstein

In January, The Wild Fish Conservancy petitioned NOAA for a listing urging protection for Alaskan Chinook under the Endangered Species Act. 

Last week, NOAA announced a positive 90-day finding on that petition, agreeing the information included was substantial and warrants further review. This decision triggers an in depth scientific review that will determine if a threatened or endangered listing is warranted.

The decision will likely come as a surprise to many, as Alaska is perceived as having widely abundant salmon runs and all Alaskan salmon fisheries were just recertified by Marine Stewardship Council (though that decision is being challenged). This week, the Copper River run has come in to Seattle markets, trading at around $100 a pound. However, the data shows Alaskan Chinook populations are facing a similar crisis as rivers coastwide, and in some cases are in even worse condition.

Endangered Species Process

We’ll look forward to tracking this process as it progresses.

Filed under: Endangered Species, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, fisheries | 2 Comments »

State Continues Quest to Eradicate Invasive Spartina – MorningAg

Posted on May 14, 2024 by Al Bergstein

The controversial efforts to eliminate Spartina continue.

Survey and eradication efforts for Spartina, led by the Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA), will take place in multiple areas, including Grays Harbor, Hood Canal, Willapa Bay, Puget Sound, the north and west sides of the Olympic Peninsula, and near the mouth of the Columbia River.

https://www.morningagclips.com/state-continues-quest-to-eradicate-invasive-spartina-2

Filed under: Environmental Protection, invasive species | Tagged: | Comments Off on State Continues Quest to Eradicate Invasive Spartina – MorningAg

Black Point Update: Statesman Group may not get water for project

Posted on March 18, 2024 by Al Bergstein

The never ending project at Black Point by the Statesman Group (aka Pleasant Harbor Development) appears to have run into another snag. The Pleasant Tides Property Owners Association (PTPOA) originally was asked by Statesman to provide supplemental water through their water district. However, according to their latest newsletter, the PTPOA lawyers cannot find a legal way to provide that without jeopardizing their non-profit status and federal IRS status as a Home Owners Association (HOA).

The Statesman group is apparently attempting to find other, legal ways for them to accomplish this, but it increasingly looks like Statesman is going to come up short on their plans for providing relatively low cost water, or any supplemental water, to their project.

As many know, this project has been challenged by a number of residents and groups in our county since the very beginning, and despite that, our County Commissioners (Democrats at that too), went along with the highly controversial project plan. None of those former commissioners say they would do it again. And yet, here we are, almost 20 years down the road, with many unanswered questions about how this project will ever successfully come to completion.

In February, the Hood Canal Enviromental Council requested a denial of the project by Jefferson County. They stated, in a letter to the Board of County Commissioners and James Kennedy (prosecuting attorney) that: The plan for 216 single-family residential lots, without the required MPR project features, is inconsistent with the 2019 Development Agreement amendments. That is still a developing story.

Filed under: Environmental Activism, Environmental Protection, Jefferson County, Projects | Tagged: , , | Comments Off on Black Point Update: Statesman Group may not get water for project

Culvert Replacement projects: Good Seattle Times overview

Posted on March 10, 2024 by Al Bergstein

The Seattle Times today has a good article on the ongoing work of culvert replacement. Titled “Removing WA salmon barriers surges to $1M a day, but results are murky” it investigates the results of the hundreds of millions being spent. (Be aware it’s behind a paywall). You likely have been impacted by the work to replace these culverts to save the remaining salmon stocks as you drive 101 from here to Port Angeles.

The Times article focuses on whether the enormous expenditure of almost $7.8 billion over a decade is going to actually help the salmon returning to spawn and save our greatest natural resource. As someone who has watched and studied this project since before the Tribes were successful in federal court, getting the mandate to force the state to spend the money, I have to say that I too, find myself concerned about the efficacy of this project overall.

As the Times points out, many streams are only going to recovered at the point where the streams cross state and federal highways. The projects often don’t seem to make sense, recovering a stream at one point but not upstream of the blockage, essentially simply moving the point that the salmon are blocked.

We have seen successful recovery efforts over streams such as Jimmy Come Lately creek on the land owned by the Jamestown S’Kallam. I have seen many fish there, as a fish ladder is used by the Tribe to count the fish going upstream. It appears to be a very successful recovery effort and the bridge over the creek is a small thing but wide enough to provide the necessary water and slope to help the fish on the journey.

The Times reports “A Seattle Times analysis of available project design reports found that for every barrier WSDOT fixes, nine others upstream and two downstream partially or fully block fish migration. The state or other owners may fix some of them, but most are not scheduled for removal.” This is not a recipe for success.

It’s clear that to the Tribes, this is all part of the “seven generations” approach that has been so successful in reversing many environmental issues on the Peninsula, including recovery of the Dungeness River flood plain, Jimmy Come Lately Creek, Sequim Bay shellfish, and many other projects that the Tribe has provided grant management, project management and leadership to complete. Unfortunately, Washington tax payers do not think in terms of seven generations. They often think about today’s paycheck. It is clear that with our underfunding of schools, hospitals, mental health, child care, foster care and other critical services, there are many who would just rather fund those immediate needs and let the chips fall where they may for salmon. The unfortunate situation we find ourselves in is that for the majority of Washington residents, they no longer have a memory of the enormous salmon runs that our predecessors took for granted. We once had an almost unimaginable source of high quality free food in the salmon runs, all for the cost of a fishing rod, a fishing license and maybe a small boat. It sustained many people on the verge of starvation as late as the 1950s in this state. I’ve interviewed them in my video, “Voices of the Strait” in 2010. Now, almost everyone who eats salmon pays a high price and it comes primarily from Alaska, where they have done a better job of managing the stocks, and their rivers and habitats have been less destroyed. As the article states, the WSDOT knew as early as 1949 that the culverts were a problem, and yet did nothing to change the practices.

Another frustrating truth that the article points out is “The state doesn’t really know if fish are even getting through its new stream crossings, nor is it required to by the court order. It could try, by studying salmon returning to those streams, but it rarely even counts them.”

Governor Inslee recognizes the problem of the federal government forcing this on the State: “There is a federal judicial decision … which has ordered the state ..to do this work on a designated number of culverts,” Inslee said in an interview. “If you want to criticize the prioritization of these investments, you need to focus your criticism on the federal judicial system — not the state.”

The article also points out that the remaining need for $4 Billion dollars would be the equivalent of buying an entirely new electric ferry fleet. As a citizen of a peninsula needing ferries for our basic commerce, and having seen the cancelations that impact that commerce, this seems like an incredibly problematic decision and one that would likely not be approved if put to a vote of the people.

Reading this incredibly detailed article by the Times investigative team, it is clear that huge errors in judgement and project choice have been made with virtually no payback in terms of salmon recovery in any rational timeframe. It seems that seeking a lawsuit to force the judge and Tribes to extend the period of culvert replacement and focus on projects that have the highest possibility of successful salmon recovery and creating a lower priority for those that won’t, would help actually recover salmon, and show some solid results to the taxpayers funding this.

We all want to see salmon recovery, but we want it done in a way that does not waste it on low chances of success.

Filed under: Around the Salish Sea, Around the Sound, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Environmental Science, Olympic Peninsula | Tagged: , | 8 Comments »

They started building a bulkhead for a new home on Hood Canal. Then the feds found out  – Seattle Times

Posted on February 12, 2024 by Al Bergstein

The takeaway here is that a homeowner appears to have ignored multiple cease and desist orders, and knowingly went ahead with construction of a bulkhead when the state and federal laws were clear that he needed permission first. The continued creation and rebuilding of bulkheads on the waters edge (see photo in the article), is an ongoing destruction of shoreline habitat that used to be used by the variety of species using the shore, many of whom are on the brink of extinction. Hard choices *have* to be made to stop this destruction and that sometimes means saying no to people.

It seems clear that it is ridiculous to say, as their attorney stated, that the bulkhead was not, “in the water” as the photo clearly shows water line markings from a high tide at some point in time, likely recently. Is the bulkhead submerged when at high tide?

The article also includes a good graphic showing the ways bulkheads destroy the beach environment.

A judge ruled the structure was built in Hood Canal without a proper permit, and now the homeowner faces a $250,000 fine. Lynda Mapes reports. (Seattle Times)

Filed under: Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Mason County | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Hood Canal Environmental Council Requests Denial of Black Point Project

Posted on February 8, 2024 by Al Bergstein

The Hood Canal Environmental Council (HCEC) has requested that Jefferson County deny the current subdivision proposal by the Statesman for Pleasant Harbor Development. They also request that the County prevents any further sales of properties until all terms are met.

This project, which has been contested for almost 20 years, has seemed to be an ever changing situation. Lawsuits by the developer, counter suits, years of negotiation over payment for services by the county, then the county settling for far less than their billed services. One would have to ask when the citizens of this county will ever see the promised outcomes that Statesman put forward back in the mid 2000s. Certainly if the opponents to it have there way, never, but even if Statesman gets their way, when are we expected to see anything more than a clearcut in this location?

Let’s remember that two full cycles of County Commissioners have moved this forward, against the wishes of many in this county. Is it time for them to admit that this is never going to happen and kill it? One way or another all of us in Jefferson County are paying for the lawsuits that this has incurred on us. Pretending that it’s a zero sum game is just not reality. Anyway, read it and make up your own mind. If you have strong feelings, one way or the other, now seems a good time to throw your thoughts into the disucussion at the County Commissioners meeting.

Here is the letter from the HCEC.

Cristina Haworth, AICP
Jefferson County Board of Commissioners
Josh D. Peters, AICP
Jefferson County Community Development Director
James Kennedy -Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney

RE: Master Planned Resort at Black Point

Greetings:

For more than 50 years the Hood Canal Environmental Council (HCEC) has been active in protecting Hood Canal. As part of this legacy, we have offered input on Jefferson County plans for a Master Planned Resort (MPR) at Black Point. We share the concerns of the Brinnon Group expressed in the February 2, 2024, letter from attorney Richard Aramburu to you (attached).

We hope that Jefferson County intends to follow statutory law, court decisions and its own agreements in matters dealing with land use and protecting Hood Canal. Recent plans submitted to the county to develop the Black Point MPR do not comply with the 2018 Kitsap Superior Court decision or the 2019 Amended Development Agreement.

HCEC endorses the recommendations in the recent letter from attorney Aramburu, that Jefferson County should take the following actions:

1.                  Decline to review the current subdivision proposal submitted by Statesman for Pleasant Harbor development. The plan for 216 single-family residential lots, without the required MPR project features, is inconsistent with the 2019 Development Agreement amendments because it approves residential development without any permits, plans or showing of financial ability to fund or deliver the fanciful amenities, such as a “tea house in the trees” and a full-size NHL hockey rink.

2.                  Return any proposed subdivision plans to the applicant and decline further review until the submittal of plans is consistent with the Amended Development Agreement and Jefferson County codes.

3.                  Determine the subdivision application is not complete because it does not contain all required features and documentation.

4.                  Prevent sales or advertisement for sales of properties within the Pleasant Harbor MPR, through the Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney, until all terms of the Development Agreement and Jefferson County platting ordinances are met.

HCEC welcomes dialogue with you over these concerns.

Sincerely, Phil Best – President
Hood Canal Environmental Council

Filed under: Environmental Activism, Environmental Protection, Jefferson County, Land Development | Tagged: , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Open Letter to the Jefferson County Commissioners regarding Shoreline Master Program

Posted on January 19, 2024 by Al Bergstein

Commissioners:
Having spent eight years in the Jefferson County Marine Resources Committee including a number of years as it’s chairman, along with volunteering hundreds of hours in helping write the existing SMP, I am urging you to require standard conditional use permits for future geoduck applications.

There is currently no real permitting nor oversight on geoduck operations in the county, with the county relying on the State and Federal Government to do whatever it feels necessary to manage and control these operations. We have no idea how much shoreline is being handed over to commercial operations, what damage is being done, nor do we as tax payers of this county have the opportunity to speak in favor or not of new operations that will lock up our shorelines for generations to come. It’s really an outrageous situation.

I join the residents of Squamish Harbor and Discovery Bay in calling for a fair process for evaluating future geoduck proposals. We urge the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) to require, in its update of Jefferson County’s SMP, a standard Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process for all future applications for geoduck cultivation, whether for “new,” “expanded,” or “converted” tideland.

I personally, along with others in this county have seen many consequences of geoduck operations, including: illegal harvesting (documented and admitted); unauthorized expansions; hundreds of loose tubes strewn in shallow water and on beaches; hazards to recreation; underwater loose tubes of unknowable quantity; marine life trapped in nets; harvest operations in native eelgrass; vanishing eelgrass and sand dollar populations; beaching a boat in and trampling a fish stream; and many more practices of environmental concern.

The late Michael Adams, who chaired the MRC for years and was a small time commercial oyster farmer, documented numerous illegal intrusions onto his beaches. Often these were done at night and he told me he had been threatened by the people engaged in it.

Previous legal cases have gone against the industry time and time again.

For over two decades, citizens have been ignored by Washington State Agencies and most Counties as shellfish aquaculture lobbying paved the way for the unlimited proliferation of this industrial conversion of our shorelines. Citizens have had to go to court to get their voices heard. Many of the cases against Taylor, for example were won by the plaintiffs.

A case in 2019 brought against the Army Corp of Engineers was very instructive on this issue. The Corps lost the case. Federal Judge Lasnik stated in his findings that the Army Corps of Engineers in our Corp district, “The Court finds that the Corps has failed to adequately consider the impacts of commercial shellfish aquaculture activities authorized by NWP 48, that its conclusory findings of minimal individual and cumulative impacts are not supported by substantial evidence in the record, and that its EA does not satisfy the requirements of NEPA and the governing regulations.”

While citizens have been pointing out the limited scientific findings that the Corps and the shellfish industry have used to gain permitting, the Judge noted: “There is no discussion of the impacts on other types of aquatic vegetation, on the benthic community, on fish, on birds, on water quality/chemistry/structures, or on substrate characteristics. There is no discussion of the subtidal zone. There is no discussion regarding the impacts of plastic use in shellfish aquaculture and only a passing reference to a possible side effect of pesticide use.”

So a Federal Judge has found that the ’science’ being presented to you the county representatives, is apparently a fraud. Internal records surfaced during this court case actually showed that the Corps had purposely removed key findings supporting the plaintiff’s case from their documents before sending them to the court in discovery.

This is a map of existing shellfish farms in other counties to the south of us. The number, I understand, is over 700. Is this what we want Jefferson County to look like?

Why A Standard CUP is Important

The three most important features of a standard CUP are: 

• The decision is made by a neutral hearing examiner;

• The decision is made only after a public hearing before the hearing examiner; and

• The decision is made based only on the record, both written and testimonial.


These features ensure that all parties are treated fairly and that all parties can see and contest the information presented. A standard CUP avoids the suspicion that decisions are influenced by private conversations and unsupported assertions.


For more than two years, the requirement for a standard CUP for all future geoduck applications was in the Planning Commission’s draft, which was preliminarily approved by the state Department of Ecology (ECY). The same CUP requirement is in Kitsap and Clallam county SMPs, as approved in final form by ECY. Jefferson lies in close shoreline-proximity to these counties, sharing Hood Canal, Discovery Bay, and other waters of the Salish Sea. Notably, all of Hood Canal, including its tidelands and shoreline, and most of Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca are Shorelines of Statewide Significance, under the state Shoreline Management Act. By adopting the standard CUP process, Jefferson County will harmonize with Kitsap and Clallam counties in how they review commercial geoduck operations in our common waters.

Why the Planning Commission Recommendation is Misguided

In late October 2023, a new recommendation was proposed, which, after an initial stalemate, was adopted by the Planning Commission in November (by a 5-4 vote). It requires a standard CUP only for “new” geoduck operations. It prescribes a “discretionary” CUP for “expansions” and “conversions” of existing shellfish tidelands. A discretionary CUP allows county staff to make the decision, after public comment but with no public hearing. Alternatively, staff, in its sole discretion, may (but need not, for any reason) refer the case to the hearing-examiner process.


This scheme is arbitrary and discriminatory. It favors existing shellfish farmers over newcomers and over the citizenry, even though the environmental effects are identical. It is subject to evasion, for example by first farming oysters on a new plot and then converting to geoducks. Also, of great concern: all (or possibly nearly all) existing shellfish farmers in Jefferson County are operating with no county shoreline permit whatsoever, so there is no baseline. The County simply doesn’t know how many acres might be converted or expanded under a discretionary CUP.


Advocates for the Planning Commission recommendation like to argue that the industry is already subject to federal, state, and local oversight, so the need for county regulation is lessened. I and others have first-hand experience with federal oversight, and it is entirely lacking. A citizen can’t even get basic information about a shellfish farm without filing a FOIA request, which can take a year for a response. It took more than two years to find out what happened to very well documented harvesting violations. (Answer: the violations were admitted but there was no consequence.) Other state and other local regulations relate to different subjects.

As County Commissioners, you need not decide whether commercial geoduck farms are “good” or “bad.” Rather, it’s the job of the BOCC to adopt a fair process for making such a decision on a particular application for a particular site. That process is the standard CUP process, and we urge you to require it for all future applications for geoduck cultivation.

Al Bergstein
Former Chair of the Jefferson County Marine Resources Committee and former member of the SMP citizens advisory committee for Jefferson County
Port Townsend

Filed under: Aquaculture, Environmental Activism, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Government, Jefferson County, Olympic Peninsula, Shellfish | 6 Comments »

Jefferson County shorelines needs your help now

Posted on January 12, 2024 by Al Bergstein

Jefferson County is updating its Shoreline Master Plan and is being heavily lobbied by the shellfish industry to allow for the approval of additional geoduck farms in our tidelands without public input.  Neighboring counties–Kitsap and Clallam–allow for public input but Jefferson hasn’t yet committed to this.  Find out what’s at stake as this multimillion dollar export business looks to expand here.   Local environmental activists will talk about their work and how you can get involved.

With a growing multimillion dollar marked in Asia, the shellfish industry is eyeing Jefferson County’s tidelands for increased geoduck cultivation. Geoduck cultivation involves the intense use of plastics—some seven miles and eleven tons of tubing per acre.  Each tube fosters a wholly unnatural density of the large clams that are then “harvested” using hydraulic hoses to liquify the tidelands down to three feet.  Then the whole process starts over again.  Geoduck cultivation raises many environmental concerns, among them: competition for marine nutrients, displacement of tideland marine life, and plastics pollution.  Sierra Club is asking the Jefferson County Commissioners to require a thorough review and public input before issuing any permits to farm geoducks.  A standard “Conditional Use Permit”, as is required in neighboring Kitsap and Clallum counties, should be the norm.  

 When:  Thursday January 18, 7PM on Zoom

https://act.sierraclub.org/events/details?formcampaignid=7013q000002Hy4YAAS

Filed under: Admiralty Inlet, Aquaculture, Environmental Activism, Environmental Protection, Events, Jefferson County | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 3 Comments »

Neah Bay Dredging will improve Strait of Juan de Fuca, Salish Sea oil spill response

Posted on December 14, 2023 by Al Bergstein

Some of the most significant oil spills in Washington State’s history happened in the Strait of Juan de Fuca and Salish Sea. Rescue tugs were stationed around 1999 during winter only months to protect the Strait. During the late 2000s, environmental activists led by People For Puget Sound pushed for a permanent rescue tug to be stationed at Neah Bay (and also at the East end of the Strait). With the support of then Representative Keven Van de Wege the State finally approved the tug at Neah Bay. The East end of the Strait still remains extremely vulnerable.

 Neah Bay Emergency Response Towing Vessel – Photo: Saltchuk Marine Shared Services

The Port of Neah Bay plays a pivotal role as a harbor for Emergency Response Towing Vessels (ERCivTVs) responding to distressed or disabled vessels, and as a designated harbor of refuge. The heavily trafficked Strait of Juan de Fuca sees various types of vessels passing through: cargo, passenger cruise, oil tankers, vehicle, fishing, and privately owned.

Neah Bay Marina

From 1999 to 2016, the stationed Neah Bay rescue tugs responded to 57 disabled vessels or those with reduced maneuvering ability. These incidents could have resulted in accidents or groundings leading to oil spills. The rescue tug is important to preventing spills, which would be extremely damaging to the area’s environment, economy and cultural resources, according to the Washington Department of Ecology.

This (ERTV) stands ready 24/7 on the northwestern Olympic Peninsula point in the Port of Neah Bay to quickly respond. However, challenging tides affect its readiness and the ability of this deep-draft vessel to navigate the channel.

Map courtesy of Army Corps of Engineers

That’s about to change with a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers project to make navigation improvements by deepening the harbor entrance channel. A hydraulic pipeline dredge will deepen the 4,500-foot entrance channel to -21 feet from its current depth, allowing unrestricted access for ocean-going tugs, barges, and larger ships transiting Neah Bay during low tide.

The Corps of Engineers is expected to remove up to 30,000 cubic yards of never-before-dredged sediment material from the channel that’s expected to take two months to complete, pending weather conditions.

“This project will help to ensure that the rescue tug based at Neah Bay is ready to respond to marine emergencies on Washington’s coast,” said Rich Doenges, Southwest Region director for the Washington Department of Ecology. “We think the channel deepening represents a necessary step to prevent impacts to our state’s sensitive coastal environment and preserve our Pacific shorelines.”

The project falls under the Corps of Engineer’s civil works mission’s Continuing Authority Program (CAP) Section 107. It authorizes the Corps of Engineers to make navigation improvements for the non-federal sponsor, in this case the Makah Tribe. The $3.3 million project is mostly federally funded due to a cost-share waiver for Native American Tribes.

Seattle District Project Manager and biologist Juliana Houghton emphasized how the dredged material is perfect for reuse and will help fortify a nearby beach.

“We’ll place the beneficial use dredged material in an area along the shoreline that needs rehabilitation because of a lack of naturally occurring stream sediment,” she said. “The goal is to restore intertidal habitat by depositing the dredged material as beach nourishment.”

A Duwamish Services, LLC dredging crew connects a dredge pipe in Neah Bay, Dec. 8, 2023.
(Photo courtesy of Duwamish Services, LLC)

Deepening the Neah Bay entrance channel will reduce the emergency response tugs operating costs by minimizing the need for vessels to remain outside the bay in deeper waters during low tide. This will save an estimated $81,000 annually in fuel by reducing transit time during tidal changes.

The project first gained traction in the early 2010’s when the non-federal sponsor Makah Tribe contacted the Corps of Engineers Seattle District requesting a study to determine if navigation improvements for the Port of Neah Bay entrance channel were feasible.

“This project has been a long collaborative partnership with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and we’re thrilled to see these improvements enhance the protection of the valuable Neah Bay ecosystem and improve safety for larger commercial and fishing vessels entering the port,” said Makah Tribe Chairman Timothy Greene, Sr.

Throughout the planning process Corps of Engineers officials coordinated, consulted and worked with federal, tribal and state agencies, including Environmental Protection Agency, National Marine Fisheries Services, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Makah Tribe, Washington’s State Department of Ecology, State Historic Preservation Office and Clallam County.

For more information about the US Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District, visit the district’s website at https://www.nws.usace.army.mil/ and follow on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/USACENWS/ and on X (previously Twitter) at https://twitter.com/SeattleDistrict.

Thanks to Louis.R.Velasco@usace.army.mil for the Press Release on this topic. Feel free to reach out to him for additional information as needed.

Filed under: Around the Salish Sea, Environmental Protection, Government, Olympic Peninsula, Straits of Juan de Fuca | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

« Previous Page — Next Page »