New research on wild vs hatchery steelhead

A new study has just come out that helps better understand how to rear hatchery steelhead salmon without impacting genetic diversity, which has been a key concern of wild salmon advocates for years. The findings show that if wild salmon are allowed to spawn naturally, and then the eggs are collected for rearing in a hatchery, that the genetic risks were lessened. This is good news for both sides of the debate, as it shows that hatchery rearing of wild collected eggs may not be a threat to genetic diversity, or at least that’s the way I read it. The authors do state that “…While the longer-term genetic effects were not assessed in this study, other programs have realized reduced genetic diversity during similar timeframes.”


ABSTRACT

Declining salmonid populations often prompt the use of captive-reared fish to supplement wild stocks, but such programs risk negative genetic and ecological impacts. We evaluated six steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) populations in the Hood Canal watershed, Puget Sound, Washington, including three supplemented and three unsupplemented control populations, over the span of 17 years to assess the effects of supplementation on several population genetics metrics. This program uniquely allowed natural spawning to occur before removing eyed eggs from redds for captive rearing, and later release as smolts or adults. Key genetic metrics—expected heterozygosity, allelic richness, and effective population size—remained stable from before to after supplementation in both the supplemented and non-supplemented populations. Parentage analyses confirmed successful reproduction by captively reared adults after they were released into the wild. These findings suggest that natural spawning prior to captive rearing, among other aspects of the program, lessened the genetic risks typically associated with artificial propagation such as loss of genetic diversity, or a reduction in effective population size. Our results highlight the potential for carefully designed supplementation programs to conserve genetic diversity and maintain effective population sizes in threatened steelhead populations.

Introduction

Supplementation programs, where captive-reared fish are introduced into wild populations to enhance natural production and increase abundance, have been widely implemented as a conservation strategy for declining salmonid populations. However, previous studies have highlighted several potential drawbacks of supplementation efforts, including genetic and ecological risks that may outweigh the intended benefits [17]. Understanding these risks is critical because the long-term success of supplementation programs depends not only on their ability to increase population sizes but also on their capacity to maintain the genetic health of these populations. Careful genetic monitoring is therefore essential to assess the effectiveness of these efforts and prevent unintended harm.

You can read the whole article here:

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0339458

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

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

New concerns over PFAS in drinking water

Wired magazine has just run a major exposé on ground water contamination with PFAS on military bases and its likely connection to a significant rise in Parkinson’s Disease. This is a story I would highly recommend reading and subscribing to Wired to support their journalism efforts.

New ideas about chronic illness could revolutionize treatment, if we take the research seriously.

https://www.wired.com/story/scientists-thought-parkinsons-was-in-our-genes-it-might-be-in-the-water

Back in 2016, we carried an article about the contamination of groundwater at the Navy base on Whidbey Island.

The Navy did publish the work on testing wells in the areas around the bases.

From the information copied from the links below, it is clear that the Navy was trying to find the level of exposure to PFAS in drinking wells, but it’s important to note that they were not looking for Parkinson’s Disease, only three kinds of cancers: testicular, kidney and prostate.. They do list a comprehensive list of bases where they were testing here: https://media.defense.gov/2020/Mar/17/2002265607/-1/-1/1/SPREADSHEET_OF_INSTALLATIONS_WHERE_DOD_PERFORMING_ASSESSMENT_OF_PFAS_USE_OR_POTENTIAL_RELEASE.PDF

Follow the story:

From the web: https://www.hillandponton.com/toxic-exposure/naval-air-station-whidbey-island/

Whidbey Island Water Contamination 

Naval Air Station Whidbey Island has been identified as a significant source of PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) contamination in the surrounding communities. These “forever chemicals,” which have been used in industry and consumer products since the 1940s due to their resistance to grease, oil, water, and heat, were present in the Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) used for firefighting and training purposes at the base. 

Beyond PFAS contamination, Whidbey Island’s groundwater faces other threats including potential saltwater intrusion and nitrate runoff from fertilizers, animal waste, and septic systems, prompting increased focus on testing the island’s wells. 

PFAS Contamination

In early 2017, testing by the U.S. Navy near NAS Whidbey Island revealed PFAS levels above the EPA’s lifetime health advisory level of 70 parts per trillion (ppt) PFOA/PFOS. One well showed contamination as high as 2,516 ppt, more than 35 times the advisory level. A more recent Navy sample taken in 2022 showed a certain cancer-causing particulate in drinking water at levels 30,000 times higher than what the EPA considered safe. 

The Navy is currently conducting investigations at multiple locations including the Area 6 Landfill, Ault Field, OLF Coupeville, and Seaplane Base.

291 wells have already been tested near Ault Field, Area 6, and Coupeville. The Navy reported 18 contaminated wells, though it’s unclear how many homes these wells served and there may be many other drinking water sources likely to be contaminated. 

To-date, the Navy has sampled over 360 private drinking water wells near NAS Whidbey Island Area 6 Landfill, Ault Field, and OLF Coupeville. Of these, certain PFAS have been detected at or above the DoD PFAS interim action levels for PFAS in private drinking water wells in over thirty drinking water wells. 

PFAS exposure has been linked to various types of cancers and serious health issues, raising significant public health concerns for residents in the affected areas. If you developed a medical condition after living or working at or near NAS Whidbey Island, you may be eligible for compensation. Get a free case evaluation here to explore your legal options. 


Wired story documents the first major study that showed that bases without PFAS in their water supply had dramatically lower case’s of Parkinson’s than those that did.


Camp Pendleton, in Southern California, is the Marine Corps’ West Coast equivalent to Lejeune. Thousands of young, healthy Marines shuffle through its barbed-wired gates each year. But Pendleton has one thing Lejeune does not: uncontaminated drinking water.

When Goldman compared both populations, the results were shocking: Marines exposed to TCE at Lejeune were 70 percent more likely to have Parkinson’s than those stationed at Pendleton. And in a follow-up study last year, he showed that disease progression in Lejeune vets with the highest exposure to TCE was faster than those with low or no exposure, too. In the world of Parkinson’s research, Goldman’s study was a blockbuster.

The military has been downplaying and lying to us for decades about health issues. Was it that they knew how harmful above ground nuclear testing was, or agent orange, or the burning of toxic wastes in the field in both Gulf Wars, and now PFAS that could be the root cause of a massive increase in Parkinson’s especially among members of the military who lived on some bases.

We may never know how widespread the plume on Whidbey was, nor how many people who lived near the base or in the Oak Harbor area and were exposed to PFAS and developed Parkinson’s Disease. Read the article in Wired to learn the whole story.

If you subscribe to Apple News you can read it as part of your subscription. Also your local library probably has an issue. Or you can buy it on a newsstand, like at airports.

https://pacific.navfac.navy.mil/Facilities-Engineering-Commands/NAVFAC-Northwest/Our-Services/Environmental-Stewardship/Environmental-Restoration/PFAS-Groundwater-and-Drinking-Water-Investigation/Naval-Air-Station-Whidbey-Island

ToxicDocs database of industry documents

From the Press release of Collaborative for Health and Environment.


Greetings CHE Community,

I hope you’re all doing well on this 10th annual Children’s Environmental Health Day! This national observance offers opportunities to raise awareness, celebrate successes, and share new initiatives protecting children’s health.

To mark the day we’re sharing a new collection of articles from leading experts in the latest issue of the SF/Marin Medical Society Journal. See commentary from Dr. Bruce Lanphear,Dr. Anne-Louise Ponsonby, Nse Obot Witherspoon, and others in a special children’s environmental health section of the journal, available now in the CHE Resource Library. See the full list of articles and authors below.

For those in Northern California — there’s still time to get your tickets for our in-person fundraising event on Sunday, October 26 to support our Zero Breast Cancer program! You’ll hear UCSF’s Dr. Kimberly Badal and CHE advisory team member Dr. Ted Schettler discuss cutting edge research on chemical mixtures and breast cancer risk, and enjoy a gorgeous seaside walk along the Bolinas bluffs. If you’re not in California — or can’t make it but would like to contribute — please make your donation here. Many thanks to those who’ve already purchased tickets! 

We hope you can join us for these upcoming webinars:

On Tuesday, October 14 at 11am PT/2pm ET we will host ToxicDocs: A database of once-secret chemical industry documents. The ToxicDocs website contains millions of pages 

dusty pile of paper documents

of industry documents about lead, asbestos, silica, PCBs, and other toxic substances. This collection includes internal memoranda, emails, slides, board minutes, unpublished scientific studies, and other documents that became publicly available through toxic tort litigation. The resource has been tapped by researchers, journalists, and others exploring environmental health risks. In this webinar one of ToxicDocs’ founders, Dr. Merlin Chowkwanyun, will give an overview of this growing dataset, introducing the interface, explaining the technology behind it, and offering a tour of the searchable content. RSVP here.

Science Panel to discuss the Research and Monitoring Topic in the draft 2026-2030 Action Agenda

From the Puget Sound Partnership

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 6, 2025

MEDIA CONTACT: Ian McCabe, 564.669.4628, ian.mccabe@psp.wa.gov 

The Puget Sound Partnership Science Panel will meet online and at Hotel Leo, Leo Lounge, 1224 Cornwall Ave, Bellingham, WA 98225 and online on Wednesday, October 8, from 9:30 a.m. to 3:15 p.m. and Thursday, October 9, from 9:00 a.m. to 2:30 p.m.

We will be providing an all-virtual livestream of this meeting, through TVW. 

TVW web link for October 8: https://tvw.org/video/puget-sound-partnership-science-panel-2025101017/?eventID=2025101017  

TVW web link for October 9: https://tvw.org/video/puget-sound-partnership-science-panel-2025101018/?eventID=2025101018  

The full Science Panel agenda and meeting materials are available through our board meetings page at: https://psp.wa.gov/board_meetings.php.

Meeting highlights include:

  • A presentation and discussion about the status of priority federal policies and appropriations related to Puget Sound recovery. Presentation by Ahren Stroming, special assistant for federal affairs at the Puget Sound Partnership. Read more.  
  • A presentation summarizing a 2023-2025 Puget Sound Research project: Remote Sensing-Based Evaluation of Dungeness River Restoration. Presentation by Scott Redman, science director at the Puget Sound Partnership, and Phil Roni, vice president of Cramer Fish Sciences. Read more.
  • A presentation about the Research and Monitoring Topic in the 2026-2030 Action Agenda. The presentation will include an overview of multiple issues raised during the partner review period for the Science Panel to discuss. Presentation by Scott Redman, science director at the Puget Sound Partnership. Read more
  • A presentation on Washington Sea Grants Fellowship programs and an introduction to current fellows. Presentation by Scott Redman, science director at the Puget Sound Partnership about the. Read more.
  • A presentation and discussion about recommendations from the Puget Sound Ecosystem Monitoring Program (PSEMP) Human Health Scoping and Inventory Project. Presentation by Katrina Radach, PSEMP manager at the Puget Sound Partnership, and Marguerite Pappaioanou, Science Panel member. Read more.
  • A presentation and discussion about the Whidbey Basin Cumulative Effects Evaluation. Presentation by Raquel Gilliland, monitoring program effectiveness analyst at the Puget Sound Partnership, and Mike LeMoine, director of Skagit River System Cooperative. Read more.
  • A presentation and discussion about science to support the Implementation Strategies. Presentation by Scott Redman, science & evaluation director at the Puget Sound Partnership, and Joel Baker, director at Puget Sound Institute, and Andy James, senior research scientist at Puget Sound Institute, and Angela Adams, environmental protection specialist at the Environmental Protection Agency. Read more.
  • A discussion about values on the Science Panel and how these values shape Science Panel’s work and discussions. Discussion led by Chair Kelly Biedenweg, chair of the Puget Sound Partnership Science Panel.

The full Science Panel agenda and meeting materials are available through our board meetings page at: https://psp.wa.gov/board_meetings.php.

If you need special accommodations to participate in this meeting, please notify Boards Program Coordinator, Amber Raney, at 564.999.0527.


About the Science Panel

The Science Panel’s expertise and advice are critical to the Puget Sound Partnership’s efforts to develop a comprehensive, science-based plan to restore Puget Sound. The members, appointed by the Leadership Council, are chosen from the top scientists in Washington state.

About the Puget Sound Partnership

The Puget Sound Partnership is the state agency formed to lead the region’s collective effort to restore and protect Puget Sound. Working with hundreds of government agencies, Tribes, scientists, businesses, and nonprofits, the Partnership mobilizes partner action around a common agenda, advances Sound investments, and tracks progress to optimize recovery.

For more information, go to www.psp.wa.gov.

The pathogen killing starfish is found

From The Tyee this morning. Article authored by Kristen de Jager for the Tyee.ca

Sea star wasting disease has devastated marine ecosystems for over a decade. Scientists in British Columbia have identified Vibrio pectenicida FHCF-3, an infectious bacterium, as the cause of the disease.

Read the whole story and donate to the work of Tyee.ca

https://thetyee.ca/News/2025/08/04/We-Finally-Know-What-Killing-Starfish/?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=040825

Clallam County MRC Letter re: 3 Crabs road flooding

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.

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

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.

A look inside Puget Sound’s declining bull kelp beds – Seattle Times

The Seattle Times has a good overview of the collapse of Bull Kelp, a fundamental plant to the health of Puget Sound. The article, found here, (behind the Times paywall) discusses the issues of the falling numbers of acres of Bull Kelp and its meaning to the Sound. Kelp is another indicator species, since kelp beds are nurseries for many fish and crab. We should be extremely concerned about what vanishing kelp beds mean to the entire web of life in Puget Sound. Locally, in the North Sound and Strait, the Marine Resources Committees (MRC) have been actively involved in monitoring the kelp beds. If you want to get involved, contact your county MRC.

Kelp has vanished from about 80% of the shorelines around which it once grew in Puget Sound, according to a 2023 report from Washington’s Kelp Forest Monitoring Alliance. South of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, the bull kelp beds are down some 90%. Around Bainbridge Island, they’ve all but disappeared entirely.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/climate-lab/a-look-inside-puget-sounds-declining-bull-kelp-beds

Risk Specific Farm Salmon Pathogens (new)

Just in from Alexandra Morton, the leading net pen researcher in the world. Now the science gets even clearer as follows:

Just published! In-depth review of the risk specific farm salmon pathogens causes BC salmon populations. It’s no coincidence the 1st generation of chum that went to sea after salmon farms were removed from the Discovery Islands are returning in larger numbers than we have seen in a long time. We explain why some DFO fish farm science cannot be relied on if you want wild salmon. Huge thanks to my incredible co-authors! This entire edition of Science Advances examines the real cost of salmon farming… https://www.science.org/toc/sciadv/10/42..

Contents | Science Advances 10, 42

Our local representative from Taylor Shellfish has long trashed her in public and is always given a free podium at local Marine Resources Committee meetings to promote his opinions which have never been based in science, but what appears to many as simple character assassination (he has stated numerous times she is not a “real” scientist). The next time you buy shellfish, remember that Taylor Shellfish has been at the forefront of working to discredit her work. Because of the work of businesses attacking her like that, it took years longer to deal with the problems our salmon are facing.

Dabob Bay conservation area expands by nearly 4,000 acres

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.

Glyphosate: more bad news for Roundup™️?

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.

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

Washington tribes seek to pause offshore wind development – Axios Seattle

Axios Seattle is reporting that Washington Tribes under The Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission have asked for a pause in the planning for the offshore wind farms along the Washington coast while the tribes concerns are addressed. The Tribes are not asking for a total ban on the farms but have environmental concerns they say have not been addressed.

Worth noting is that the farms are in the very early stages of permitting by the Federal Government.

As Axios notes:

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management has received two unsolicited lease proposals for offshore wind farms along Washington’s coast.

  • One, from Trident Winds, would cover an area of about 315 square miles about 45 miles off the coast of Grays Harbor and Pacific counties.
  • The other, from Hecate Energy, seeks to lease 403 square miles in a nearby area about 17 miles off the coast.

Both these farms are planning on wind turbines with virtually no impact on the visual look of the coast, but the concerns are more about their impacts on fishing and whales.

As stated in an earlier blog post, this blog along with the stated goals of the tribes in the article is to support wind energy projects, but “not on the backs of the tribes”. The assumption is that the wind energy companies can provide reasonable scientific backing for their proposals. The east coast has implemented wind energy farms much closer in than the proposed Washington coast project, with no signficant impacts. Some of the background on those efforts are found here:

BOEM Completes Environmental Analysis for Proposed Wind Project Offshore Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New York | Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

Comparison of Environmental Effects from Different Offshore Wind Turbine Foundations (boem.gov)

The Institute for Energy Research does have this conclusion to the New England wind farms. It appears that high interest rates, which are impacting the sales of electric cars, are also impacting the implementation of wind energy. Note the concerns in bold:

While a few offshore wind projects have gotten off the ground and have started producing electricity, others have been canceled, often with developers occurring fines. Developers have canceled several projects along the East Coast, saying they were no longer financially feasible. Offshore wind projects have struggled to surmount rising construction and material costs, as well as serious manufacturing problems. In recent months, rising materials costs, high interest rates, and supply chain delays have prompted project developers to cancel or try to renegotiate power contracts for commercial-scale offshore wind facilities in the United States with operating start dates between 2025 and 2028. Offshore wind facilities are among the most expensive utility scale power projects under construction in the United States and would not have gotten off the ground without massive support from state and federal governments and pre-approved power purchase agreements. With the cancellations that have occurred, President Biden’s goal of 30 gigawatts of offshore wind capacity by 2030 is expected to be half that amount.

New England Is Moving Ahead with Offshore Wind Facilities, Despite Their Cost – IER (instituteforenergyresearch.org)

The wind farm built by Avingrid has started producing 68 Megawatts of power to Massachusetts since then.

A good scientific reearch paper on the subject was produced by Nature:

Reviewing the ecological impacts of offshore wind farms | npj Ocean Sustainability (nature.com)

Microsoft’s CoPilot produces this summary of it’s search on the topic:

Wind farms in New England, particularly offshore wind projects, have both positive and negative environmental impacts.

On the positive side, the development of the New England Wind lease area is projected to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by nearly 4 million US tons annually, which is equivalent to taking approximately 700,000 cars off the road each year during the lifespan of the project1. The New England Wind project is expected to generate up to 2,600 megawatts of electricity, sufficient to power more than 900,000 homes with clean renewable energy23.

On the other hand, there are potential negative impacts associated with the construction and operation of wind farms. These can include disruption to marine life during the construction phase, potential collision risks for birds and bats, and changes to the seascape that can impact tourism and fishing2. Research is being conducted to prevent environmental damage4.

It’s important to note that the specific impacts can vary depending on the location and design of the wind farm, and measures are often put in place to mitigate potential negative effects. For example, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) completed an environmental review of the proposed New England Wind project offshore Massachusetts3. This review process is designed to carefully analyze the environmental impact of the proposed project3.

In conclusion, while wind farms can have some environmental impacts, they also play a crucial role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and providing a source of renewable energy. It’s a balance between managing these impacts and transitioning to cleaner energy sources to combat climate change.”

Sign up for Axios to support independent journalism in the Pacific Northwest.

Washington tribes seek to halt offshore wind farms – Axios Seattle

Aquaculture Continues Its Global Rise

A recent article in Sherwood titled, “Aquaculture is Making History” (subtitled “We now farm more fish than we catch”) spoke to the amazing growth of aquaculture worldwide. While the good news is that Americans, the most morbidly obese country on earth, are eating 5 lbs. more seafood per year than they had in the 1990s, the downside to all this is that farmed fish are perhaps the most destructive farming imaginable. Along with land-based farming’s effect on the planet, including the destruction of rain forests, the oceans have witnessed an across-the-board destruction in wild places needed to support wild fish and other wild seafood we eat.

Note: Total aquaculture production, which includes algae and aquatic plants like seaweed, overtook wild fishing efforts more than a decade ago (the more recent milestone excludes sea plants).

From the destruction of mangrove forests along the coasts of tropical waters, where the shrimp farms destroy miles of fish nurseries for the bland shrimp we eat, to the conversion of hundreds of miles of virgin shoreline for the monoculture of various bivalves like geoduck, from the fish farms off the coast of South America to the net pens in Sweden, Norway and Canada creating vectors for disease, we are in the process of radically altering our seas. Eating wild fish is the best thing you can do to stem this trend. Avoiding farmed shrimp and salmon makes an economic statement to those engaged in it.

Salmon in particular is a huge problem. While the global community outside of Alaska have decimated salmon runs, salmon net pens continue to provide a growing number of fish to the American market. Salmon has now met the demand of shrimp in our diets.

This rise in farmed salmon, while good for our diets, poses the huge threats to wild salmon, who of course swim past the nets to get a free lunch and then contract whatever disease is happening to the confined fish inside the nets. Think this is just supposition? When net pens were recently banned and removed in specific Canadian waters, the next years that fish that had migrated past since the removal of the pens the runs were huge and healthy, showing virtually no signs of sea lice or disease. Sea lice were huge problems for the net pen industry and attached themselves to wild fish swimming nearby.

What is to be done? Even the Nature Conservancy recently hired an ex-aquaculture industry person who unequivocally supports fish farming globally. Are you really going to fund such an organization?

It is worth noting that the rise in aquaculture also supports seaweed and other plant-based farming. With a push by NOAA (who officially sees the Puget Sound as worthy of turning into an aquaculture farm) to open seaweed farms here, the possibility of even more waters being turned off limits to all of us so floating farms and shorelines can continue to be converted to industrial use is very real.

In 1999 & 2000 the Governor of Washington State and the shellfish industry opened the floodgates to industrial geoduck farming, given that the Chinese market was exploding with a crazy belief in the aphrodisiac properties of eating geoduck. What was never discussed in that law was “how much is enough? When do we say we have converted enough shoreline to aquaculture?” The industry influences our rural politicians by contributing to their campaigns and seeds their people into environmental organizations both by sitting on their councils, and donating to their “recovery” efforts, as long as it does not impact their ability to make money. In discussions with environmental organizations about this very issue, all but one of them would consider talking up against aquaculture, because they all rely on grants from the industry to support their non-profit work.

Tribes have shifted into commercial aquaculture, some doing good work in raising relatively benign fish such as sablefish (aka black cod) but have also taken on extremely controversial acts such as pressing to put a large-scale aquaculture farm inside the federally protected Dungeness Spit. While scientists from the Spit were threatened with their jobs by national managers (during the Trump presidency), local leaders and environmentalists were unwilling to criticize the tribes for any reason whatsoever.

All this means that while some environmental organizations may be crowing about the growth of aquaculture to feed a hungry planet, the increasing threats to our seas and wild fish continue unabated.

Read the whole article on Sherwood and sign up for their newsletter.

Sherwood News

Note: Some of you regular readers may note that The News has not been publishing as much lately. While I have made an effort to keep up, bad news has been in much greater volume than good news, and I strive to find positive environmental stories to share with you, along with efforts by concerned citizens to protect our fragile and decreasing natural resources. So, my feelings are “less is more”. I’ll continue to bring you the News as it matters. Today’s article I felt was more educational in nature, helping put in perspective the larger forces that are affecting our region. Have a great 4th of July. Our democracy means we have voices that can dissent against this wholesale destruction and not find ourselves in a “re-education” camp, or worse. This November, vote for candidates who actually deliver and not just talk. There are too many of the talk, not deliver on both sides. We will be posting our picks for true environmental candidates in an upcoming post. Thanks again for reading.

What’s better: Electric Cars or Combustion Cars?

Interesting podcast by Living Planet out of Germany. An in-depth look at the environmental costs of both kinds of autos, and the answers might surprise you.

On the road to a carbon-free future, a lot of drivers are facing a tough dilemma: Is it worth switching to an electric car if the gas-powered car I have can still run a few more years? Is the environmental footprint of an EV really that much better? We spoke to several experts about the upside and downside of e-mobility from range anxiety to charging infrastructure and more. Click here to listen.

The URL is

https://www.dw.com/en/whats-better-electric-cars-vs-combustion-cars/audio-69160469

Bird flu is decimating seal colonies. Scientists don’t know how to stop it. (AP)

First we had mass bird and sealife dieoffs due to warm water off the Pacific Coast in the last decade. Followed by ocean acidification. Then Starfish Wasting Disease. Now this. “You know somethings happening but you don’t know what it is, do you, Mr. Jones?” (Bob Dylan)

Avian influenza is killing tens of thousands of seals and sea lions in different corners of the world, disrupting ecosystems and flummoxing scientists who don’t see a clear way to slow the devastating virus. Patrick Whittle reports. (Associated Press)

Culvert Replacement projects: Good Seattle Times overview

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.

Ocean Warming: Losing the battle

While the global “leaders” flew their private Lear jets into Davos and other locations around the world (remember these jaunts are tax deductible in most countries!) they have done nothing to move the needle as we spiral out of control towards a much different planet (see Dune 2 for ideas on where we are headed). This chart was brought to you by my subscription to Chartr. They do amazing work with new ways of seeing data every week.

Job opening @ PT Marine Science Center

The Port Townsend Marine Science Center is seeking a curious, hard-working and enthusiastic team member to join our Aquarium Services department on a full-time, hourly basis. Qualified applicants will be passionate about animal care and conservation, excel in serving a diverse public in an educational setting, and be organized and efficient.

Primary duties for the role involve providing animal care and husbandry for our aquarium collection, providing support and training for aquarium volunteers and docents, and educating the public on marine conservation and ocean species through programs in the aquarium.

Qualified applicants should have experience with animal care and show a demonstrated passion for conservation. Previous education in aquarium or life sciences is strongly preferred, and experience in a customer-driven environment is a plus. This is a 40+ hour full-time position, which includes weekend rotations and some holidays. Occasional overtime may be needed, paid at the rate of 1.5 times the regular hourly rate.

This is an hourly position, paid at a rate of $18.00 to $20.00 per hour based on qualifications and professional experiences. Benefits include generous paid time off, including Paid Sick Leave at the rate of 1 hour sick leave for every 10 hours worked, health and dental insurance, and optional participation in our 403b retirement plan.

At PTMSC we value collaboration generated by a positive, friendly environment. A good sense of humor is a must! In addition to departmental responsibilities, team members have opportunities to participate in special projects, represent the science center at events, and advance their professional development.

How to Apply:

Find the full description for the Aquarium Specialist position on our website PTMSC Work for Us.

This position is open until filled.  Only electronic submissions will be accepted. Please email a copy of your resume and cover letter to jobs@ptmsc.org, with the subject “Aquarium Specialist Position.” Please address your cover letter to Ali Redman, Aquarium Curator.

PTMSC will provide equal opportunity to all applicants regardless of race, color, religion, age, sex, national origin, ancestry, disability, pregnancy, military status, marital status, order of protection status, genetic information, sexual orientation, transgender status, or any other category protected by law, in accordance with all applicable law.

Water reserves low in Olympics – Sequim Gazette

Our snow pack is not in great shape to provide us fresh water this year.

Support local journalism. Subscribe to the Sequim Gazette.

Washington SNOTEL Snow/Precipitation Update Report (usda.gov)