Clallam County | Olympic Peninsula Environmental News

Environmental Voter Guide

Posted on July 14, 2026 by Al Bergstein

The Voters’ Pamphlets are out and soon you will get your ballot. Here are my recommendations for environmental focused voters. There are some surprises.

Federal Representative – Macy Jones – No Party Affiliation.

Representative Emily Randall has shown that she does not represent environmental interests in our two counties. She is the main backer of the giveaway of our federal lands, The Dungeness Spit and Protection Island, to the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe. No one other than the tribe has asked for this and Randall is acting on behalf of the Tribe and not the other voters of these counties, including the grandchildren of the woman who saved Protection Island, Eleanor Stopps and the other woman who was instrumental in this, Lorna Smith. This reporter also was there at the beginning of the efforts and does not accept the idea that the Tribal Corporation will do a better job than they are doing now, as co-manager of the tribe. If you want to send a message to Ms. Randall, vote for the woman who does not represent a political party, Macy Jones. She is in support of many of the same things the Democrats are in favor, she is against foreign wars, she supports fully funding schools, more infrastructure, more spent on healthcare, senior care, environmental protection, food security and strong local economies. She is currently a Grange member (as my late wife was), specializes in elder care, and is enrolled in Peninsula College. Read her information in the Voter Guide.

Representative Emily Randall was one of two Democrat votes that missed a key vote that would have saved PBS and billions in foreign aid in June 2025. She has never explained her absence from that vote, despite numerous local Democrats asking why she missed this vote. To be clear, the PBS and foreign aid vote would have LOST if she had been there to vote against it. That is why I am not supporting a Democrat in this role because I believe we need to send someone back to Washington D.C. who will represent our needs and not the specialized interests of the current Democratic Party. It is worth shaking things up to actually accomplish the goals we seek. Rep Randall is not that person. I am willing to take a chance on Macy Jones. I hope you will too.

Legislative District 2 – Adam Bernbaum – Democrat

Adam has done a good job in his first term. I have worked with him on a few issues and he has been very open and willing to discuss issues he is not familiar. He is vice-chairman of the Transportation Committee in the House, and has done significant community service. He has supported expanded access to childcare, rural housing, and infrastructure upgrades. He is endorsed by Planned Parenthood, Firefighters, Nurses and Educators. He is a Democrat worth sending back to Olympia.

Legislative District 24 – Marcia Kelbon – Independent

I spent an hour interviewing Mrs. Kelbon. She is a former business woman, patent attorney, and US Navy Civil Engineer. She comes out of the Republican Party but is no longer supporting the policies of Donald Trump. She has a long local history of being on the Hood Canal Salmon Enhancement Group, North Hood Canal Chamber of Commerce, Habitat for Humanity and a Girl Scout leader among other groups. She has been a foster parent and supports the foster community and knows its needs. She is a well respected member of the South Jefferson County community. She rides a Harley. She is willing to wait on deciding about the issue of giving away Protection Island and Dungeness Spit and is inclined not to support this land transfer at this time. She is wanting to promote business (which is needed to generate more jobs here!) and she emphasized to me that she would love to find a solution to homelessness. She is supportive of all people’s personal persuasions, and does not want government involved in peoples personal lives. I was very impressed with Mrs. Kelbon and for the first time since voting for Secretary of State Ralph Munro in the last century, I’m willing to support an ex-Republican over a Democrat. That should say all you need to know. Can she win the general election? I don’t know, but I am fed up with seeing cuts in Foster Care and youth mental health by a Govenor who told me to my face two years ago it was a priority of his. Also, our public schools continue to rank near the bottom of all states, despite decades of Democratic dominance. Mrs. Kelbon will bring an ability to consider both Parties positions, which may be worth debate, rather than dominance.

If you really can’t stomach voting for a former Republican, shame on you. I hear so many people in Washington state always raving about former governor Dan Evans and Ralph Munro. You would think that people would be willing to entertain a moderate Republican. But if you need another candidate to vote for, choose Mark Hodgson. He seemed in the debates to be the most likely to not follow party line of the Democrats, which is what is needed. He was on the Port Angeles City Council, was raised in Port Angeles and has been endorsed by former Senator Kevin Van De Wege, and former Representative Mike Cooper.

UnOpposed candidates. – No recommendation.

Jefferson County Commissioners District 3 – Anji Scalf

Anji has deep roots in the community. Her family has been here serving the county honorably for decades. She has been an ED for a chapter of the Chamber of Commerce, has a degree in environmental science and early childhood education and public administration. She has been a volunteer for the Fairgrounds Association, and 4-H. She has a long list of endorsements including from former County Commissioner Kathleen Kler, and John Austin.

Judicial Non Partisan Offices

State Supreme Court – Position 1 – Colleen Melody

Former Civil Rights lawyer, pro bono lawyer for immigrants and veterans. Former UW teacher. Graduated from UW with high honors.

State Supreme Court – Position 3 – Mike Diaz

Experienced jurist whom Governor Inslee twice appointed to bench, first in Superior Court and then the Court of Appeals. Has over 200 opinions, and on the superior court oversaw 45 trials. Has helped volunteer with the legal clinic of El Centro de la Raza.

State Supreme Court – Position 5 – Theo Angelis

Appointed by Governor Ferguson. Distinguished jurist. Strong human rights record.

State Supreme Court – Position 7 – Deborah Stevens – Current Chief Justice.

Re-elect her. She is doing a great job.

Filed under: Clallam County, Environmental Law, Government, Jefferson County, Olympic Peninsula | Tagged: election | 3 Comments »

Tribes seek ownership of National Wildlife Refuges in the Salish Sea

Posted on June 23, 2026 by Al Bergstein

Exclusive to the Olympic Peninsula Environmental News

Protection Island National Wildlife Refuge

In a surprising statement Monday in a meeting of the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners, Jamestown S’Klallam Chairman and CEO Ron Allen stated that a number of tribes in the Salish Sea and coastal waters seek to transfer ownership of National Wildlife Refuges (NWR) and incorporate them into their tribal reservations.

This proposed transfer of numerous public lands to private entities like the tribes, is unusual and raises questions about the process of transfer of public lands out of public hands.

Chairman Allen came to the meeting to discuss the proposed “Land Transfer of Dungeness Spit and Protection Island”, and was commenting on this transfer to the three County Commissioners (and public in attendance) when he mentioned that this land transfer is only part of a larger effort by all the tribes to take back public lands that are National Wildlife Refuges. He said that the Makah tribe was seeking land transfers of three properties off the coast, the Nisqually were looking to transfer one adjacent to theirs, and the Lummi Nation or Swinomish (he wasn’t sure which) were looking to transfer the San Juan Islands Wildlife Refuge.

“…Because we know (the) Makah’s going to go after the three (refuges) on the coast. And we’re pretty certain that (the) Lummi or “Swin” (Swinomish) will go after the San Juan (reserve)… We know that that once we get this done they’re gonna go after the other three or four.” Allen said.

He went on about the Nisqually Tribe: “…There’s other tribes doing exactly the same thing just like this…. They’re (The Nisqually Tribe) are always pursuing the refuge in their area in Nisqually Valley area.” It is likely that what Chairman Allen was referring to was the current Nisqually Clear Creek Land Transfer Act of 2026 which is sponsored by Representative Marilyn Strickland and Senators Cantwell and Murray. The tribe is in the process of having U.S. Fish and Wildlife transfer buildings at the hatchery which sits on tribal land to the tribe. It is not seeking to transfer the Billie Frank National Wildlife Refuge to them at this point, but Allen’s comments raise questions about the future of the refuge.

There are six maritime National Wildlife Refuges in Washington State managed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. They are considered the Washington Maritime National Wildlife Refuge Complex:

They include:

Flattery Rocks National Wildlife Refuge
Quillayute Needles National Wildlife Refuge
Copalis National Wildlife Refuge
Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge
Protection Island National Wildlife Refuge
San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuge

The Jamestown S’Klallam currently have been in a co-management agreement with Fish and Wildlife, being paid approximately $800,000 for their work on Protection Island and Dungeness Spit. It is unclear if the Trump administration would be in favor of granting these annual funds if the properties were no longer owned by the Federal Government. It is agreed by all parties that they have been doing exemplary work for the government, and their ability is not being questioned. There have been no calls from the Trump Administration, the Federal government nor the State government to transfer these two particular lands. The request has come only from the Tribe and not from the public. Many public comments ask that nothing change in the relationship.

Washington U.S. Representative Emily Randall (D) has been in talks with the tribe for months if not years, and has openly acknowledged her support of the goal of a land transfer of Dungeness Spit and Protection Island to the Tribe. At a recent public meeting Representative Randall seemed taken aback at the level of public concern over the transfer. The public has only been aware of this land transfer since April. The Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners, City of Sequim and Clallam County Commissioners meetings have been the only local way for the public to comment in person despite this being a federal issue. The Clallam County County Commissioners meetings have been very contentious. The lack of federal sponsored meetings from Randall on the subject is unusual, given the outpouring of negative comments at both counties meetings.

The Trump Administration has been giving up public lands like these refuges as part of their announced Project 2025, which calls for government to get out of the vaguely worded business of “conservation”. In Texas, the administration is in the process of giving away part of the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge in south Texas to SpaceX in exchange for other properties by SpaceX. A lawsuit has been filed on June 10th to stop this transfer.

Chairman Allen said that they took a big ad in the Peninsula Daily News and Port Townsend Leader because they wanted to be as transparent as they possibly could be …but he added, “Congresswoman Randall asked us to kind of back off on it and we said, okay, that’s fine.” (emphasis mine) This raises the question of whether Congresswoman Randall asked the Tribe to not advertise their intentions to the public.

Washington Senator Maria Cantwell has also been in discussion with the Tribe but has not yet fully committed to the transfer and would like to see more public input, according to a person who discussed it with her staff. However she has not held any public meetings on this. There has been no mention of the Governor being involved in the discussions at this time, but it could be deduced that this kind of large scale planning would have been mentioned at some point to him.

This reporter has seen the draft bill that has been written by tribal lawyers that is assumed to be entered into the U.S. Congress at some near future date. The draft bill does not contain any legally binding language that would protect the island, spit, nor the nearshore waters that are owned by DNR from the tribe using it for commercial aquaculture. The concern by the environmental community is that the rare protected species on the island feed off the marine flora and fauna of the waters and beaches around the island. Creating a monoculture “farm” could impact the amount of food available for the birds. The current tribal council and Chairman Allen claim they have no plans. But it is easy to petition the Washington State Department of Natural Resources to open privately held shoreline to commercial use. DNR have a long history of supporting aquaculture and the State of Washington legally views aquaculture as a desired commercial priority. Once it becomes part of tribal lands, it would also be exempt from state or federal oversight as negotiations would be nation to nation based on treaty law.

The Protection Island National Wildlife Reserve was created in 1982 after almost 20 years of work by bird lovers Zella Schultz, Eleanor Stopps and the coordination with Seattle Audubon. It is the breeding ground of most of Puget Sound’s glaucous wing gulls as well as rare Tufted Puffins and Rhinoceros auklets. It’s creation was supported by virtually all the Washington State federal and state senators and representatives, including Senators Warren Magnuson, Henry Jackson and Slade Gorton along with Republican governor John Spellman.

The tribe has admitted that they look forward to writing their own rules for use of the island. In an interview in the local Port Townsend Leader Tribal Vice Chair Loni Greninger stated, “If we’re able to have that fuller ownership instead of co-management, then I don’t have to rely on any other government and their rules and regulations. I can take my deeper regulations from an ancestral standpoint and be able to infuse that and implement it.”

Our stories may be republished online or in print under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. We ask that you edit only for style or to shorten, provide proper attribution and link to our website.

Filed under: Clallam County, Government, Jefferson County, Olympic Peninsula, Straits of Juan de Fuca, Washington State | Tagged: dungeness spit, land transfer, protection island | 12 Comments »

Meeting held to discuss Protection Island

Posted on June 16, 2026 by Al Bergstein

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Filed under: Aquaculture, Around the Salish Sea, Around the Sound, Clallam County, Endangered Species, Environmental Activism, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, First Nations, Jefferson County, legislation, Washington State | Tagged: jamestown s'klallam tribe, Loni Greninger, protection island, Representative Emily Randall, Senator Maria Cantwell | 3 Comments »

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

Posted on May 15, 2026 by Al Bergstein

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

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

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

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

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

Promotional poster for Legacy of Our Ancestors

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

Promotional poster for “Working for the River”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

https://on.soundcloud.com/uV2PCxSpOmPDvmMeVX

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

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

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

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

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

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

Original Leader article

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

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

A Quote worth noting on Refuge Management

Posted on April 27, 2026 by Al Bergstein

As the controversy over the possible transfer of management and ownership of the Dungeness Wildlife Refuge and Protection Island to the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe continues, I was sent this quote which sums up the issue of approving this transfer. At the moment, the Refuge decision making process is theoretically one for the protection of its wildlife for all of American citizens. Yes, that’s not always what happens. But in this case, for 100+ years, I think it has been done well. It is worth remembering that the Tribe is attempting to engage in commercial aquaculture (for their financial benefit) at the very edge of the Refuge, with criticism coming from some key biologists as to the effects of this on the very species that the refuge is supposed to protect. To be clear, in 2024 the US Fish & Wildlife Service signed over management of the Dungeness Spit and Protection Island to the Jamestown Tribe in a deal with virtually no public input that will pay the Tribe at least $500,000 annually and allow them to commercially harvest non-native oysters in a 50-acre parcel within the Refuge. Now a bill has been drafted and will be presented in Congress that would give the Tribe total ownership as part of their reservation allowing them to determine all rule making and audiences for those rule making processes. This makes this quote all the more important in the decision making process of granting this request.

Jean Pratschner wrote Sequim City Council:

My husband Greg Pratschner (deceased) was a regional administrator of USF&W, all over the country. He often worked with tribal groups, very familiar with their agendas, programs, and abilities, often brought them into the Federal programs and helped with scholarships, training, grants, projects. He was awarded many honors for his inclusionary concepts in co-management. We had many Native friends. But, he often felt the goals and perspectives were not on the same page when it came to fisheries and refuges. He could never go against or find a legal way or option to alter a bad aspect of their programs, and always felt there was no argument or decision that he could use to make them comply with a negatively contrived agenda about an issue. His hands were always tied, by ultimately BIA power, that had no concern for non -Native viewpoint, only one opinion or goal would be followed. Native opinion. He always had to bend. Always. Sometimes it turned out less than good for all parties.

Filed under: Clallam County, Endangered Species, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection | Tagged: Dungeness Wildlife Refuge, protection island | 4 Comments »

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

Posted on April 18, 2026 by Al Bergstein

From Press Release by Elwha Legacy Forests’ by Eleana Pawl

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

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

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

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

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

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

for a longer overview. Try this by John Gussman

Filed under: Clallam County, Environmental Activism, Environmental Protection | Tagged: DNR, Doc Holliday, forest, Olympic Peninsula, Sadie Creek | 7 Comments »

Good news! E-Bike Rebates continue!

Posted on March 25, 2026 by Al Bergstein

Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) are relaunching WE-bike on March 30. This e-bike rebate program makes e-bikes and certain cycling accessories more affordable for people in Washington state.

People living in Washington ages 16 and up can apply for rebates between March 30, 2026, and March 29, 2027. The program will randomly select applicants monthly starting April 13. Applicants only need to submit one application to be considered for the monthly selections.

Rebates alone will likely not fully cover e-bike purchases. Recipients can reduce the overall cost of e-bike purchases at participating bike shops by $300 or $1,200, depending on income eligibility. They can put rebates toward qualifying models of all three classes of e-bike.

To apply for a $300 rebate, you need to live in Washington state, be at least 16 years old, and have a working email address.

To apply for a $1,200 rebate, you also need to have an income at or below 80 percent of the median for your county. In Jefferson County the Median income is $74,048. 80% of that is $59,238. So many younger people likely could apply for this rebate here in the county.

Qualifying e-bike types

The rebate can be used for qualifying e-bikes, e-cargo bikes, and adaptive e-bikes.

E-bikes have batteries, working pedals and a motor. E-cargo bikes are for carrying cargo or multiple people. Adaptive e-bikes provide extra support or stability.

WE-Bike helped nearly 3,000 Washingtonians purchase e-bikes and related safety accessories in our 2025 pilot program.

University of Washington researchers learned rebates motivated people to buy e-bikes they couldn’t or wouldn’t have otherwise, especially people in lower-income households. Nearly half of rebate recipients surveyed said they used e-bikes to travel to new destinations. In all, we offered rebates to 6,861 out of 37,751 applicants from all 39 Washington counties.

Program funding

This grant program is entirely funded through Climate Commitment Act revenues. The CCA supports Washington’s climate action efforts by putting cap-and-invest dollars to work reducing climate pollution, creating jobs and improving public health.

Other ways to try e-bikes

E-bike lending library pilot program

While many people are interested in e-bikes, not everyone will be able to receive a rebate through the WE-Bike program. People also may not be ready or able to purchase e-bikes for various reasons.

Programs like e-bike lending libraries can help more people try out e-bikes.

Eligible organizations and businesses in Washington state may apply for funding to create lending library programs for employees or communities.

Here’s the website:

E-bike rebate program

Filed under: Alternative energy., Alternative Transportation, Bicycles, Clallam County, Jefferson County, legislation, Mason County, Washington State | Tagged: adaptive e-bikes, e-bicycles, E-bikes, e-cargo bikes | Comments Off on Good news! E-Bike Rebates continue!

Sportsmen Fight Trump Plan To Log Roadless Headwaters on Olympic Peninsula Public Lands

Posted on September 8, 2025 by OlyOpen

Another day, another threat from the Trump administration to open public lands, revoke roadless areas to open them to cutting on Federal forests. This press release is from the Sportsmen for Wild Olympics.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE September 8th, 2025

QUILCENE, WA—September 8th, 2025: Today, Sportsmen for Wild Olympics released a new map with photos illustrating the devastating impacts that developing key roadless backcountry public lands on Olympic National Forest could have on critical headwaters of prime trophy fishing rivers and public access on the Olympic Peninsula. The group is calling on Congress to pass the Wild Olympics Act as a proactive solution to permanently protect these lands.

“This map tells Congress and the Administration: protect the Olympic Peninsula’s public lands—don’t privatize or develop them,” said Ashley Nichole Lewis, a Quinault Indian Nation fishing guide and spokesperson for Sportsmen for Wild Olympics. “It gives our fellow sportsmen and women something to fight for, not just against—a lasting solution to threats we are confronting right now.”

The urgency comes as the Trump Administration announced a shortened comment period ending September 19th on their plans to rescind the Roadless Rule in order to log & develop sensitive spawning habitat on public lands, a key federal safeguard for undeveloped backcountry areas across national forests, including Olympic National Forest. The new map with photos highlights & names the critical ancient forest roadless headwaters & salmon streams on Olympic National Forest that are now threatened by the Trump Administration’s plan to lift protections for these backcountry public lands prized by Olympic Peninsula sportsmen for the clean water, critical habitat & access they provide.

What is the Roadless Rule?

The Roadless Rule, established in 2001, protects undeveloped areas of national forests from new road construction and logging. These “roadless” areas are often rugged backcountry landscapes that provide crucial habitat for fish and wildlife, protect water quality, and offer remote hunting and angling opportunities. Removing these protections opens the door to industrial development in some of the last remaining intact, healthy forest lands in the country.

“Rescinding the Roadless Rule is yet another attempt to hand over our essential public resources to special interests—at the expense of salmon, clean water, and future generations,” Lewis said.

The coalition—comprising thousands of local and regional hunters and anglers, and over 30 leading sportsmen organizations—has already punched well above their weight earlier this year playing an outsized role in the national backlash opposing the unprecedented threats to public lands coming from both Congress and the Administration. Lewis says these threats highlight exactly why the group supports the Wild Olympics Wilderness & Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, recently reintroduced by Senator Patty Murray and Representative Emily Randall.

“The different public land sale efforts in Congress and the new plan to strip protections from 59 million acres of core forest headwaters nationwide—including lands on the Peninsula—show that they will use any tactic to privatize or exploit our public lands,” Lewis said. “This map shows what that would actually look like. Congress & the White House must reverse course and pass Wild Olympics to permanently protect these critical salmon streams instead.”

The Wild Olympics Act, developed with years of local input, would enhance hunting and fishing access while permanently protecting some of the last, best intact salmon-spawning habitat left in the Lower 48. Importantly, it would not close existing roads or cost timber jobs. It has broad local support with over 800 local endorsements.

The new map & photos show how the Wild Olympics proposal would protect key areas such as South Quinault Ridge, Moonlight Dome, and other core ancient forest headwaters & rivers vital for hunting & fishing on the Peninsula —areas the Administration now plans to open for logging by rescinding the Roadless Rule.

(The steep forested slopes of the Moonlight Dome Roadless Area forms the critical headwaters for both the East and West Forks of the Humptulips River (seen ok the left), one of the top ten Trophy Fishing Rivers in Washington State).

The map also reveals that 300,000 acres of Olympic National Forest have been identified as eligible for sale under different plans by the Administration and some members of Congress during earlier drafts of the budget bill passed earlier this year. While the land sale provision was struck from the budget, proponents continue to push this idea forward.

The unprecedented threats to public lands recently sparked Senator Murray to throw down the gauntlet in the Senate, announcing she will block any public lands legislative package that comes out of Utah Senator Mike Lee’s Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee unless it includes her Wild Olympics bill, a move that galvanized local supporters to pull out all the stops to get it done this Congress.

Lewis hopes the map inspires more hunters and anglers to join the thousands who have already signed their petition.

“The outdoor community is powerful. Our fishing and hunting guides are pillars of this community. The same places we work the hardest are the ones we return to after the day is done—because we love them. Let’s use that collective power to ensure a single pen stroke can never take our public lands away. Let’s pass the Wild Olympics Act.”

###

HOW TO FIGHT BACK.

1) Sign the WildOlympics.org/wild-olympics-petition/ telling Congress ancient temperate rainforests of the #WildOlympics aren’t for sale & to permanently protect Olympic Peninsula #publiclands & rivers against travesties like this in the future.

2) Those who can afford it PLEASE WildOlympics.org/DONATE to fuel our fight. We helped defeat this four years ago. Help us defeat it again & pass the Wild Olympics Wilderness & Wild & Scenic Rivers Act to permanently protect ancient forests & salmon streams once & for all.

3) SUBMIT A COMMENT AT PORTAL LINK Comment Period Ends Sept 19th. Tell USDA to uphold the Roadless Rue to protect Olympic Peninsula Ancient Forests & critical salmon nurseries that were already centuries-old when our nation was born.

For more information, including a rolling list of articles from sportsmen outlets covering the threats to public lands, visit: SportsmenForWildOlympics.org/threats

Sportsmen For Wild Olympics Members Include:

Waters West Guide Service (Montesano)

Bad Ash Outdoors (Tahola)

Northwest Sportfishing Industry Association

Northwest Guides & Anglers Association

The Washington Wildlife Federation,

Izaak Walton League (Gr. Seattle Chapter) Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, (Washington Chapter)

Association of Northwest Steelheaders,

The Gray Wolf Fly Fishing Club (Sequim)

SAGE Fly Rods

Doug Rose Fly Fishing (at request of family)

Bad Ash Fishing (Tahola)

Washington Council of Trout Unlimited

Little Stone Fly Fisher (Port Townsend)

Johnson Guide Service (Sequim)

Olympic Peninsula Skagit Tactics (Forks)

Able Guide Service (Seiku)

Mike Z’s Guide Service (Forks)

Brazda’s Fly Fishing

Angler’s Obsession (Forks)

Sea Run Pursuits

Peninsula Sportsman Guide & Outfitting Service (Port Townsend)

Waters West Fly Fishing Outfitters (Port Angeles)

The Wild Steelhead Coalition

Piscatorial Pursuits (Forks)

Able Guide Service (Sekiu)

LimbSaver

Oly Women On The Fly

WA Council of Fly Fishers International

Puget Sound Fly Fishers

Coastal Cutthroat Coalition

Filed under: Clallam County, Environmental Protection, Government, Jefferson County, legislation, Olympic Peninsula | Tagged: Era of Trump, Roadless Rule, Trump Administration, Wild Olympics Act | 3 Comments »

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: jamestown s'klallam tribe | 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: epa, grant, rain garden, storm water program | Comments Off on

Cold Water Connection Campaign Reopens Rivers for Olympic Peninsula Salmon and Steelhead

Posted on April 29, 2025 by Al Bergstein

From a NOAA Press Release:

With $19 million in NOAA funds, nonprofit and tribal partners plan to remove 17 barriers blocking fish passage on critical spawning rivers originating in Olympic National Park, Washington.

The cold water rivers of Western Washington descend from the glaciers and snow-capped mountains of Olympic National Park. They hold some of the last, best freshwater habitat for salmon and steelhead in the lower 48 states. Despite a warming climate, their high-elevation headwaters are predicted to remain cool enough for salmon and steelhead for at least the next 50 years.

However, the region’s roads—some a legacy of the logging industry—crisscross the watersheds. They often force streams to flow underneath them through small, poorly designed tunnels called culverts that block fish passage. There are more than 4,000 culvert barriers on the Olympic Peninsula. Salmon and steelhead are often unable to reach the historical habitat they need to spawn and produce the next generation.

In response to declining fish populations on the Olympic Peninsula, NOAA’s Office of Habitat Conservation is supporting the Cold Water Connection Campaign. This partnership will reopen 125 miles of critical spawning and rearing habitat over the next 10 years. With $19 million in funds through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction Act, project partners plan to:

Remove 12 high-priority barriers in the Hoh, Quillayute, and Quinault watersheds
Finalize designs for 5 additional culvert replacements
Expand the ability of tribes to perform restoration work
Inject money into the regional economy by hiring local and tribally owned contracting companies
Mitigate flood damage risks by installing culverts built to handle high flows from the region’s increasingly heavy rain storms

“We are running out of time to recover and protect these salmon and steelhead populations,” says Luke Kelly, Western Washington Program Director for Trout Unlimited. “We need to pull out all the stops now, so it’s been great to see all of our government, tribal, nonprofit partners, and private landowners coming together to get this done.”

Cold Water Connection Campaign partners include:

The campaign has support from local, state, and federal agencies including NOAA. In past years(PDF, 8 pages) project partners have also repaired instream and riparian habitat damaged by road building and destructive logging practices.

Also;a new short video looking at the Cold Water Connection Campaign on the Olympic Peninsula . It really celebrates the extensive work the partners have done to make sure they are prioritizing the most impactful barriers for removal, and the benefits this work provides to local communities above and beyond the important benefits to fish and coastal watersheds.

You can watch it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YhmFosupPM

Read the whole press release here before the Trump administration pulls it down:

https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/feature-story/cold-water-connection-campaign-reopens-rivers-olympic-peninsula-salmon-and-steelhead

Filed under: Clallam County, Endangered Species, First Nations, fisheries, Jefferson County | Tagged: COLD WATER CAMPAIGN, Fish barriers, NOAA | Comments Off on Cold Water Connection Campaign Reopens Rivers for Olympic Peninsula Salmon and Steelhead

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 »

Tribe poised to co-manage Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge

Posted on August 10, 2024 by Al Bergstein

In a move that comes as environmentalists sue the Department of Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) for not doing a “compatibility determination” on potential impacts to allowing an industrial aquaculture farm (run for profit by the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe), FWS appears ready to ink an agreement to co-manage the Wildlife Refuge with the tribe.

Does it make sense for an entity that seeks to financially profit from the use of a federal resource, to be given co-management powers of that resource?

While this blog recognizes the importance of the work that the Jamestown have done for environmental restoration projects on the north Olympic Peninsula, there has been sustained concern from environmental watchdogs about the idea of turning the waters of the refuge into an industrial site, with subsequent conversion of the benthic layer and the waters above it into essentially a shellfish farm. Once this is done, there is no returning it to the way it is, as the profit motive will make it virtually impossible to end the work, as we have seen across the south Sound as shellfish aquaculture has turned numerous virgin bays into net covered shores with diesel engines dredging the geoduck farms at all hours of the night (low tides usually are late at night in the winter when harvesting would be easiest).

It is worth noting that the Refuge was established with the following goals, delineated on the front page of its web site:

Recognizing the importance of the fertile habitats, President Woodrow Wilson established the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge on January 20, 1915, as a refuge, preserve, and breeding ground for native birds. Many of these birds feed by diving into the shallows for fish. Today the graceful arc of Dungeness Spit continues to protect nutrient-rich tide flats for migrating shorebirds in spring and fall; a quiet bay with calm waters for wintering waterfowl; an isolated beach for harbor seals and their pups; and abundant eelgrass beds for young salmon and steelhead nurseries.
Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge | Visit Us – Activities | U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (fws.gov)

It is hard to understand how commercial shellfish aquaculture could coexist into preserving native birds who dive into these same waters to feed. Currently the FWS bans even frisbees or kites on the spit as it apparently is not good for the birds. There is a long list of banned behavior that seems innocuous elsewhere.

In 2018, this blog reported on the concerns that were being raised by the staff of the refuge itself, in it, we reported that the applicants have asked for permission to place approx. 150,000 of “on bottom” oyster bags on the central west side of the bay, in approximately 34 acres of the tide flats 1141 acres of the inner spit. While I understand that current numbers of this amount are not at these levels, the long-term goal of this number likely has not changed. This is not the small scale subsistence aquaculture that currently exists in Sequim Bay by tribal members. This will require machinery, boats and staff to harvest these amounts. This could be viewed as the proverbial “camel nose in the tent” which likely will be expanded over time with very little discussion. The applicants propose to raise non-native oysters. To be clear, a significant number of cultivated oysters in the Salish Sea are non-native, so this was not a surprise, nor is it an issue of great concern.

Also noted in that earlier blog entry, as stated by the Department of Interior letter, “The shores and tidelands in this area provide some of the most important wildlife habitat and supports the highest density of waterfowl and shorebirds within the refuge….These shorelines also support one of the largest Brandt haul out sites in the state of Washington….Shorebird densities are highest within the action area and the adjacent lagoon on Graveyard Spit.”

“Human-caused wildlife disturbance and habitat loss are two of the most pervasive threats to shorebird and waterfowl use of the Salish Sea…. very little information is available on entrapment resulting from aquaculture structures.”

The letter also referenced that, “In 2016, a die-off of approximately 1000 Rhinoceros Auklets on Protection Island coincided with a significant reduction in the abundance of sand lance in the Strait of Juan de Fuca.”

Herring also spawn at the west end of Dungeness Harbor and the Department of Interior raised questions about protecting Strait of Juan de Fuca herring, which have been designated “critical” (as in critically low). Sand Lance and Surf Smelt spawning grounds are also found in the area of the application. These species have been identified as “Washington Species of Greatest Conservation Need within the State Wildlife Action Plan (WDFW 2015).” A worry related to this is that these spawning fish will be competing with the oysters for plankton. A failure to find enough food could lead to a significant reduction in the survival rates. There is no known mitigation for this, other than limiting the size and scope of the project.

Additionally, Interior pointed out that a 1996 scientific study found that some shorebirds significantly avoided areas used for aquaculture in a California bay.

This shoreline has also been designated “Natural” in the Critical Areas Ordinance, as far back as 1976. That designation limits activities to those that preserve the national features unchanged. One would assume that the tidelands are also part of that designation. But of course, the waters of the Wildlife Reserve are apparently not part of the county shoreline ordinance.

It is important to note that the applicants themselves have noted in a 2003 report that “wild birds are the second most important source of FC on a year-round basis. It is especially important in winter, when their load approaches 1/2 of the measured marine water input.” It would seem to the average person that putting aquaculture into a bird reserve is by its very nature going to create a tension between the animals that are present and creating the problem and the desire to harvest shellfish for profit.

It is certainly reasonable for the applicants to want to return to aquaculture in the Bay, however the scale is being significantly increased. And now the applicants themselves are being given co-management of the very location that they intend to make a commercial farm. If it wasn’t the Tribe but some standard for-profit company, I’m sure that every environmental organization in the country would be joining in to stop this, but since it is the Tribe, only a couple of environmental organizations have been bold enough to challenge the FWS in court. And they appear to be winning. Years ago, I had a drink with the head of the Western Region of NOAA. I asked him why they kept doing things that required environmental groups to sue them, and why they just didn’t do the right thing to begin with. He laughed and told me that NOAA was a big government organization and had many different perspectives inside it. He welcomed lawsuits that forced them to do the right thing as he couldn’t possibly hope that all his employees were in line with its goals.

The FWS has a problematic role with regards to the Refuge. According to a 2022 article written by Kevin Washburn and N. William Hines, Dean and Professor of Law at the University of Iowa College of Law:

“The congressional direction in the Fish and Wildlife Act is to ensure “the fish, shellfish, and wildlife
resources of the Nation make a material contribution to our national economy and food supply . . . [and] the health, recreation, and well-being of our citizens.”

Congress recognized “that such resources are a living, renewable form of national wealth that is capable of being maintained and greatly increased with proper management, but equally capable of destruction if neglected or unwisely exploited.” (emphasis mine)

As a practical matter, however, one of the most significant challenges for FWS is meeting the
significant demands of the Endangered Species Act.”

The co-management of the reserve can only legally include the following:

“…Endangered Species Programs, Education Programs, Environmental Contaminants Programs, Wetland and Habitat Conservation Restoration, Fish Hatchery Operations, and National Wildlife Refuge Operation and Maintenance. See List of Programs Eligible for Inclusion in Funding Agreements Negotiated with Self-governance Tribes by Interior Bureaus Other than the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Fiscal
Year 2016. Microsoft Word – [14] Washburn – Camera-Ready (case.edu)

The rather ill defined “Northwest Wildlife refuge operations…” in the above paragraph is a concern. The document referenced above goes into considerable detail on the issues raised in co-management of FWS and other agencies. It is beyond the scope of this blog to identify all of them.

Science has learned a lot about the environment since the time when the State originally allowed the use in this location. In many other locations we have decided that the tradeoff of commercial activity is outweighed by a newer appreciation of the value of the natural landscape for a variety of species. It is up to all of us to question our elected officials and bureaucrats, not the applicants, as to why they believe that this is in all our best interests, when we so clearly have set this aside this location for wildlife protection and enhancement. The applicants have every right to apply. It is up to our elected and bureaucratic staffs to make the call for the lands and species we all enjoy and want to protect.

This blog has long supported the work of the JamesTown S’Kallam as they have led environmental protection on the Olympic Peninsula for many decades. We have supported their right to industrial geoduck operations, small scale oyster farming, their rights to their share of the salmon of the state. In this one instance we are questioning whether putting this farm inside a tiny refuge that has decades of protection, as we all struggle to save our seabirds, is the right call. It is not about their rights, it is about the location. Can the State not find and trade suitable other locations for the Tribe to establish, especially since the tribe itself has raised concerns about the viability of the location for aquaculture on the scale they are planning? Then the issue of co-management is a non issue. Then they would be imminently qualified to co-manage the refuge.

Filed under: Aquaculture, Clallam County, Environmental Activism, Environmental Law, Olympic Peninsula, Straits of Juan de Fuca | Tagged: dungeness spit, Fish & Wildlife, FWS, jamestown s'klallam tribe, oysters | 10 Comments »

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 »

Washington tribes seek to pause offshore wind development – Axios Seattle

Posted on July 30, 2024 by Al Bergstein

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 project ¹. 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 energy ² ³.

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 fishing ². Research is being conducted to prevent environmental damage ⁴.

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 Massachusetts ³. This review process is designed to carefully analyze the environmental impact of the proposed project ³.

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.”

Washington tribes seek to halt offshore wind farms – Axios Seattle

Filed under: Alternative energy., Clallam County, Climate Change, Environmental Science, First Nations, fisheries, Olympic Peninsula | Tagged: Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, Quinault, Wind Farm | 4 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: Olympic Peninsula, Port Angeles | 4 Comments »

Water reserves low in Olympics – Sequim Gazette

Posted on February 9, 2024 by Al Bergstein

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

Water reserves low in Olympics

Support local journalism. Subscribe to the Sequim Gazette.

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

Filed under: Clallam County, Climate Change, Environmental Science, Jefferson County, Jefferson County, Olympic Peninsula, Port Townsend | Comments Off on Water reserves low in Olympics – Sequim Gazette

ACTION item: Stopping the industrialization of the Dungeness Wildlife Refuge

Posted on September 11, 2023 by Al Bergstein

Time after time, citizens have had to sue the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for failing to protect the animals and their habitat as required by law, in areas that the nation has recognized as critical to preserve as habitat and for public recreation. Now USFWS is willing to allow, for private profit, the industrialization of refuge lands for shellfish operations.

>>Tell the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Secretary of Interior Deb Haaland that the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge lease for industrial aquaculture must be rescinded.

In spite of demonstrated harm to birds, salmon, forage fish, and shellfish, and a recommendation by the National Marine Fisheries Service that “an alternative site be identified in a location that results in less potential impacts to wildlife that is more appropriate for aquaculture and meets the goals of the tribe,” USFWS approved a lease for an industrial oyster farm inside the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge. This decision, which is in violation of the Clean Water Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, must be reversed.

In the words written of an October 2022 USFWS internal memorandum, “Forgoing a compatibility determination in order to facilitate incompatible commercial activities by any entity would be a subversion of the fundamental requirements in the [USFWS] Improvement Act.”

We are targeting the most recent case of the USFWS’s permissiveness in one of the country’s most pristine nature lands, the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge in the small rural town of Sequim Washington, just below the Olympic National Park. In this case, the shellfish corporation raises shellfish on other sites. They do not need to operate in a national refuge and deny wildlife their feeding and breeding grounds.

The Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge was created by Executive Order in 1915 by Woodrow Wilson, directing the area to be set aside as a “refuge, preserve and breeding ground for native birds and prohibits any disturbance of the birds within the reserve.” The front page of the Refuge website states: “Pets, bicycles, kite flying, Frisbees, ball-playing, camping, and fires are not permitted on the Refuge as they are a disturbance for the many migrating birds and other wildlife taking solitude on the Refuge.” With this level of concern, it is counterintuitive to allow destructive industrial aquaculture.

Industrial shellfish aquaculture is known to reduce or eliminate eelgrass with the use of pesticides. Shellfish aquaculture also involves large-scale use of plastics—PVC tubes and plastic netting—that are hazardous to marine organisms and can trap and entangle wildlife. Commercial shellfish aquaculture is a major industry in Washington state that has significant impacts on the nearshore marine environments, which provide essential habitat for many species, including invertebrates, fish (including herring and salmon), and birds (migratory and shorebirds).

Among the negative impacts of this project are: 50% reduction in bird primary feeding grounds; plastic oyster bags that exclude the probing shorebird flocks from feeding deeply into the substrate, entrap fish and birds, add macro- and micro-plastic bits to the sediment throughout the refuge, and shift the benthic community composition; diminishing of the ecological benefits provided by eelgrass to threatened fish and birds, such as nourishment and cover from predators; and increased algal blooms that will leave a graveyard of dead oysters. These detrimental effects to the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge are NOT minimal. Decisionmakers should not place financial benefits to the corporation above the long-term and cumulative impacts to the refuge. Half of the world’s 10,000-odd bird species are in decline. One in eight faces the threat of extinction. 2.9 billion breeding adult birds have been lost from the United States and Canada in only 50 years.

Let’s raise our national voice and try and stop this refuge destruction with public persuasion. This is a public space we pay to protect. For more information, check out the Daily News post from last August, “Groups Sue U.S. Interior Department to Protect the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge from Industrial Aquaculture.”

This action follows a lawsuit filed by three environmental organizations against the U.S. Department of Interior for failing to protect the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge from industrial aquaculture. The groups, including Protect the Peninsula’s Future, Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat, and Beyond Pesticides, filed their complaint in the U.S. Western District Court of Washington State. The complaint states that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), U.S. Department of Interior, must “take action that is required by the Refuge Improvement Act and conduct a compatibility determination and require a special use permit for a proposed industrial aquaculture use” that will abut and impact the Refuge. The plaintiffs are represented by the Seattle, WA law firm of Bricklin and Newman LLP.

>>Tell the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Secretary of Interior Deb Haaland that the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge lease for industrial aquaculture must be rescinded.

We are focusing this Action against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Secretary of State.

Thank you for your active participation and engagement!

Please take this ACTION and circulate it to your family, friends and colleagues.

https://secure.everyaction.com/WMJxQmNjDUqarx4FmLzUrA2

also, to support the lawsuit, you can send checks to:

Send a check to: PPF, POBox 421, Sequim WA 98382 or through PayPal: https://www.protectpeninsulasfuture.org/donate/

PPF is a federal recognized 501c3 non-profit.

Filed under: Aquaculture, Clallam County, Endangered Species, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Environmental Science, Olympic Peninsula, Sea Life, Shellfish, Straits of Juan de Fuca | Tagged: aquaculture, Dungeness Bay | Comments Off on ACTION item: Stopping the industrialization of the Dungeness Wildlife Refuge

Pat Neal again denounces fish restoration projects.

Posted on September 2, 2023 by Al Bergstein

The Peninsula Daily News mentions that the Kiwana’s of Port Angeles invited fishing guide, columnist and long time “salmon restoration industry” critic Pat Neal to speak at their recent meeting. We have long documented Neal’s rants against any and all efforts to restore the rivers he claims to love.

Neal blames virtually all parties, the Federal government, State government, and Local Governments for spending millions of dollars and having nothing (in his mind) to show for it. The article says that he ended by saying the Tribes should be running fish restoration, as if they haven’t been for decades. He clearly has been out of touch with what has been happening all around him.

Having done volunteer environmental work on the Peninsula for 20 years, along with producing films for the Jamestown S’Klallam and my film “Voices of the Strait” in 2010 for the Puget Sound Partnership, which was a documentary on the “old timers” that grew up fishing and hunting here, I can state that what Neal conveniently leaves out, is as important as what he says.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Clallam-Bay-Roads-1920s-734x1024.jpg — 1930s roads in Clallam Bay

First off, Neal does not seem to understand that the efforts of restoration will take far longer and far more than the little we have already done. Why? Because we are dealing with 150 years of rampant exploitation of the Peninsula and it’s environment by a variety of people and companies operating with a worldview of “unlimited resources.” They were people of a very different time, legal framework and perspective.

Logging companies commercially cut over 95% of the old growth timber here. While doing that, they destroyed the 12,000 year old forest floors right down to the streambeds. A recovery from this destruction will take over another 100 years, if ever. This ecosystem was where the salmon (and numerous other unique species) thrived. They couldn’t and can’t live without it. There is no “blame” here, these people did not have a scientific understanding of how the ecosystem worked. They simply thought there was so much abundance, it could never end. The last “one log” truck went out on this peninsula as late as the early 1970s, while the Congress allowed raw logs to go out to Japan without using our sawmills. I watched as the ships were loaded with giant cedar and fir. Who profited from those decisions? Yet many still want to blame the Spotted Owl or the Boldt Decision for the end of the logging era and the almost simultaneous collapse of the salmon runs. The Spotted Owl fiasco was an outcome, not a cause. The Boldt Decision simply recognized that our neighbors indeed had “Treaty Rights” and they were going to be asked to help manage a fishery they had historically successfully managed for centuries.

One Log Truck c1960s. Photographer unknown.

Additionally, well meaning farmers gutted the rivers for irrigation, especially in the Sequim/Dungeness basin. One long time fisherman named Vince Cameron I interviewed for “Voices of the Strait”, told me that as a young boy, growing up on the Dungeness, he witnessed a tractor come into the river and cut a channel to create an irrigation ditch, during the middle of a salmon run, stranding thousands of fish as they moved upstream to spawn. He also discussed that channelizing the river, to end the flooding of the valley, created a high pressure hose effect, essentially scouring the banks where the salmon spawned.

Vince Cameron on the Dungeness River. Photo by Al Bergstein

The reversal of this entire mess has taken hundreds of millions of dollars, decades of the efforts of the Jamestown S’Klallam and the collaborative work of the Dungeness River Management Team, which included the Tribes, fishermen, hunters and farmers. It has been a successful effort. But it will likely take many more decades before we see significant numbers of salmon, especially the runs of Chinook. Neal would apparently rather sit on the sidelines and complain than take part in these efforts.

Another old timer told me that once the Hood Canal Floating Bridge came in, he noticed that the fishing in Hood Canal seemed to collapse. Since that comment to me, we have scientifically found out he was right, that the bridge is contributing to deaths of millions of fry on their way out to sea. Efforts to understand how we can keep the bridge and yet make it safe for salmon fry are ongoing.

Alexandra Morton in Canada scientifically proved that net pens were contributing to sea lice that were killing and weakening salmon as they passed by on their way to the sea. I witnessed the PR people employed by major aquaculture companies we all love here in Puget Sound, denounce her and her work over and over again. She was finally, after decades of work, successful in getting the Canadian Government to remove these farms. The runs this year, the first year that returns came back having not passed the farms, were spectacular. The people who denounced her have continued to be members of influential committees here on the Peninsula and continue to denounce efforts to reign in their ongoing takeover of our beaches.

We also have witnessed extensive construction of homes and businesses along the banks of salmon streams, destroying the natural habitat for a mixture of concrete and lawns. The reversal of that is taking decades as homes are bought out, removed and flood plains put back in place. Flood plains are the “lungs” of the river, and our destruction of them was incredibly bad news for salmon. Now we are on a path to restoration with best available science helping guide decisions being made by large groups of representatives from our cities, counties and environmental organizations.

I interviewed men who ran sports fishing boats out of Sekiu and other places. Herb Balch told me how he and other sports fishing fleet owners begged the Department of Fisheries to put limits on the salmon fishing during the 50s and 60s because they felt it was wasting the resource. He mentioned to me he would take out a boat of Boeing executives who would want to fish the “limit” and would come back with a boat of 30 to 50 fish. The customers might take one or two leaving him needing to gut and give away the rest. He could never find high school kids to be ready to do the work and in disgust, would dump the remaining fish over the side. This went on, day in and day out during fishing season.

Dick Goin, the late long time fisherman who was the spark for removing the Elwha dam, also documented the dramatic decline in salmon from the 1930s, when he arrived, to when he ended his fishing career. I have a copy of his legendary document, “Roll Call of the Lost” if anyone would like to see it.

Ray Hunter, who grew up in Dungeness Bay, recalled the day that the boats came in and swept across the bay, dragging nets that destroyed the bottom and brought an end to many of the fisheries that he experienced growing up in the 40s and 50s.

Peter Becker told me of being on fishing boats in the late 70s with the latest fish finders and him and the crews wondering who would catch “the last salmon”.

None of these men were environmental radical activists. They were simple fishermen, paper mill workers, truck drivers and businessmen that were appalled by the destruction they watched. They watched the ‘baseline’ as it’s called in science, move, and understood what was happening. From a baseline of virgin forests to a pillaged clear cut, from dozens of dead salmon floating away in the Strait, it was clear to them what was happening. Dick worked hard to reverse it, and the removal of the Elwha Dam and the return of the chinook and other fish to the upper reaches is now being seen. It’s not yet to a place where river guides can make a living, but we are headed that way. Unfortunately, it is not likely to be done in Pat Neal’s lifetime. It just isn’t that simple.

You can watch my film, “Voices of the Strait” on YouTube. Unfortunately, I was requested at the time to keep the running time short, and had to cut many interviews. I’m hoping to return to the film someday and make the running time long enough to include much of what was left “on the cutting room floor”.

You can watch my film, “Working for the River” about the Dungeness recovery efforts, on Vimeo.

Filed under: Clallam County, environmental education, Environmental Protection, fisheries, Jefferson County, Olympic Peninsula, Salmon | 5 Comments »

Groups Sue USFWS for Failure to Protect Dungeness Spit

Posted on August 21, 2023 by Al Bergstein

DUNGENESS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE UPDATE (DNWR): Groups Sue USFWS For Failure to Protect the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge

On August 17, Protect the Peninsula’s Future (PPF) was joined by The Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat and the WA D.C. national organization Beyond Pesticides in a legal action to hold the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) accountable to follow its regulations and protect the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge. They were represented by the Seattle WA law firm Bricklin and Newman

Beyond Pesticides Press Release

The August 17 federal complaint, submitted to the United States District Court For The Western District of Washington, states that the USFWS must “take action that is required by the Refuge Improvement Act and conduct a compatibility determination and require a special use permit for a proposed industrial aquaculture use” that will abut and impact the Refuge.

Plainly, the compatibility determination would decide whether this industrial- shellfish operation is compatible with the mission of the Refuge.The Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge was created in 1915 by President Woodrow Wilson. The Refuge provides habitat, a preserve, and breeding grounds for more than 250 species of birds and 41 species of land animals. The shellfish operation lease is for 50 acres of Washington State bottomlands. 34 acres would be covered with up to 80.000 plastic grow-out bags of non-native shellfish spat, staked into the bottomlands and potentially killing all marine life underneath and snaring wildlife in the netting. These plastic bags will cover the primary feeding grounds for the birds, essentially starving them as they peck through the plastic trying to reach nutrients. This operation would shift the natural year-round-sediment drift, moving the sediment into and covering the eelgrass beds – beds protected for rearing salmon for whales and nourishment for particular migratory ducks. To protect the birds, the area is closed to the public during the migratory bird season. However the USFWS will allow the shellfish operation in to the area all year long to the detriment of the birds.

Please see this publication for further detail. https://www.ehn.org/dungeness-national-wildlife-refuge-oyster-2660613389.html

Filed under: Clallam County, Endangered Species, Environmental Activism, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection | Comments Off on Groups Sue USFWS for Failure to Protect Dungeness Spit

Email Subscription

Help Us Expand!

Educational Sites

Governmental Sites

News Sites

Non Governmental Organizations

Weather

Meta

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Qualifying e-bike types

Program funding

Other ways to try e-bikes

E-bike lending library pilot program

Share this:

Like this:

What is the Roadless Rule?

Sportsmen For Wild Olympics Members Include:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Publishing since 2007

HOTLINES FOR REPORTING SPILLS

Local Events

Recent Posts

Recent Comments:

Tags

Categories

Blogger’s Rights

Credits