Our mission is to protect the habitat of Puget Sound tidelands from the underregulated expansion of new and intensive shellfish aquaculture methods. These methods were never anticipated when the Shoreline Management Act was passed. They are transforming the natural tideland ecosystems in Puget Sound and are resulting in a fractured shoreline habitat. In South Puget Sound much of this has been done with few if any meaningful shoreline permits, limited public input, and with minimal peer-reviewed science. It is exactly what the Shoreline Management Act was intended to prevent.

Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/protectourshore
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ProtectOurShoreline
Older News: from 2006 to 8/20/10
(This blog evolved from: http://protectourshoreline.org/)



Monday, June 17, 2013

Shellfish Industry: Welcome to the Neighborhood

A recent night in Burley Lagoon was treated to what Case Inlet has been experiencing for years now. June 13th, at 11PM in Burley Lagoon, wildlife and residents were awoken by motors and lights from Taylor Shellfish. In Case Inlet they know too well what Burley Lagoon has to look forward to.
 
Sunday May 5, 2013
Case Inlet 4:07AM
It's not a rooster that woke you up.
 
Over the past year the avian wildlife, shoreline species, and residents in Burley Lagoon have noticed a new neighbor plying the grounds in the dead of night. Where at one time peaceful sleep and calm waters greeted species who have used Burley Lagoon as a resting place, now oyster barge engines, waves, metal racks being loaded and unloaded, and flood lights reflecting off the waters prevent what all species need but none get enough of: sleep.
 
Is there enough light for you?
Good morning Case Inlet.
 
May 5 of this year, at 4AM in the morning, the shoreline of Case Inlet was treated once more with a gift from the shellfish industry: daytime at night, accompanied by the noise of racks and crates being loaded. While "Best Management Practices" of the industry may ask that their workers use low level lights pointed down and away from the shoreline to help minimize the environmental impacts to an area, they seem to have forgotten that flood lights on their barges and "skiffs" may also have an impact. Agencies seem to also not grasp the fact that not all shellfish companies, or their workers, care about "Best Management Practices" nor do they understand that unless made a specific legal requirement there is little anyone can do about it.
 
At the Detienne permit hearing it was clearly noted by industry that geoduck related activities do not need to occur during the low tides. If a subtidal farm can be created underwater, why should any geoduck related activities be allowed to occur at 4AM in the morning?
 
 


Sunday, June 16, 2013

June 23: Lowest Tide of 2013 (-4) Will Occur at Noon (Olympia Time)

June Tide Chart (Olympia Times)
Sunday, June 23, South Puget Sound (that area south of the Tacoma Narrows) will see the lowest tide of 2013, just after noon (12:16, Olympia). At that point the tidal elevation will be at a -4 level, after which the next 7.5 hours will see enough water flow through the Narrows to cause the entire body of water in south Puget Sound to rise 19.5 feet. Monday will see an even greater rise, from -4 (1:03PM) to +16 (8:11PM). Mid-afternoon of the 23rd, currents through the Tacoma Narrows climb to over 7 knots.

Current Direction/Speed at 4:30PM, June 23


These low tides and the extreme flows of water come only a few times of the year. Make a point of getting out to see a world found only in Puget Sound. You may also be able to find out what it is Taylor Shellfish has been doing in Burley Lagoon during the night hours, disturbing many resident's sleep.

Why were all these removed from
Burley Lagoon's tidelands?




Thursday, June 13, 2013

Drakes Estero Wilderness: A Contract is not a Scientific Study

A Contract is Not Made of Straw
The Point Reyes Light newspaper, owned by Marin Media Institute which Dr. Corey Goodman co-founded, has published another Op-Ed piece which he authored. In that piece he attempts, once again, to breath life into his straw man  concerns over "perfect science" and claims Representative Huffman's reasons for not supporting a poorly written resolution passed by the Sonoma City Council are "mistakes." In Dr. Goodman's attempt to bait Representative Huffman into engaging him over something which is a side show he has created and tries to breath life into over and over, he wades further into the swamp where integrity is easily lost.
 
At issue with the Drakes Bay Oyster Company is not whether the science is perfect or not. It is a black and white contract which Drakes Bay Oyster Company entered into. They believed they could overcome the Wilderness Act and continue their commercial operation in Drakes Estero, thereby preventing the completion of the only shoreline wilderness on the West Coast. It was a false belief and a gamble which they lost. It was a contract they signed and need to honor.
 
Dr. Goodman, as Chairman of Labrys Biologics, Second Genome, Oligasis, Ossianix, Limerick BioPharma, Executive Chairman of Solstice Biologics, and Partner in VenBio, along with his past experience knows anyone's "science" can be easily pulled apart. No doubt many of his studies did not stand up to the scrutiny of peer review. You do the best with what you have. 
 
But in his various roles of the companies listed, Dr. Goodman also knows the value of a contract. After it is written and agreed to, signed and dated, it is not something which is as gooey as a conclusion based on imprecise data. It is sacrosanct and is one of the primary foundations for successful businesses, such as those Dr. Goodman has started and which he seeks capital for.
 
Dr. Goodman no doubt believes the conclusions drawn should be questioned. What nobody has justification in believing is that an agreement created 40 years ago is something which should simply be cast aside. It is time for Drakes Bay Oyster Company to realize the steps taken are creating a template for the dismantling of the Wilderness Act. As Dr. Goodman knows from past business failures, sometimes a business needs to close so you can move on to more successful things.

Thurston County Withdraws/Re-issues SEPA Determination for NW Shellfish/Staley Geoduck Farm

Comments due June 25, appeal date is July 2.
Email comments to Scott McCormick at mccorms@co.thurston.wa.us.
Reference project 2012103227

Thurston County has withdrawn and re-issued its SEPA determination of "Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance" (MDNS) on the proposed geoduck farm located on the William and Marie Staley tideland parcel, operated by Northwest Shellfish. The changes did not benefit the near shore environmental impact, individually or cumulatively, nor did they address the lack of information provided.

Picture submitted with application which
cuts off the tideland area where existing
shellfish operations are located.
2009 satellite view from the same
Thurston County Geodata web site.
(click to enlarge)
 
Location of existing farms to the north.

 
It appears the changes are the result of operator/owner comments wanting to weaken the conditions, not any concerns over the continued expansion of geoduck farming and cumulative impacts. As noted in an earlier piece on this site the proposal neglected to mention shellfish operations on adjacent parcels and larger operations to the north. Could Thurston County truly consider whether this met the requirements of SEPA which require accurate information to be submitted? Will it meet the requirements of the Shoreline Management Act and their own Shoreline Master Program requirements when the development permit is applied for?
 
Rather than addressing the lack of accurate information having been provided, instead, the following changes were made:
 
Condition 3, which required a recorded document which would allow access to the site for research was changed to simply allowing the owner/applicant to "consider" requests and to grant such requests if they do not disrupt farming activities.

Condition 8, which required all tubes and netting to be removed from the site within 2 years, was extended to allow for them to remain for 2.5 years.

The shellfish industry is actively involved in continuing to weaken the regulatory oversight of their activities and expansion. The Shoreline Management Act continues to be weakened by their political involvement in the local creation of county Shoreline Master Programs and in the SEPA process. Most recently the Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association has become involved in weakening the Wilderness Act's ability to protect wilderness areas from commercial development through preventing Drakes Estero from becoming wilderness. Are they really the canary in the coal mine or have they have become the strip miners of Puget Sound's tidelands?

Monday, June 10, 2013

Source of Elevated Dioxin Levels in Oakland Bay (WA) Still Unknown


60% of Manila clams produced in the
United States come from Oakland Bay, WA
 
The Department of Ecology has released its most recent report on the elevated levels of Dioxins discovered in 2008 testing of sediments of Oakland Bay (Shelton, WA). At that time questions of what levels of contaminants may exist below 12 inches resulted in testing and a final report, briefly summarized here. The entire text of the report on what the deeper sediment testing revealed may be found in Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3  (5mb, 5mb, 2mb respectively). In short, elevated levels of Dioxins lead to further testing and additional reports.

Harvesting clams in Oakland Bay
(sediment runoff from harvest area)

(click to enlarge)

In Oakland Bay (WA) over 60% of Manila clams in the United States are produced. Within Oakland Bay, Chapman Cove produces Kumamoto oysters described by Taylor Shellfish as having a "distinctive green tinge." In shellfish tissue samples taken for the DOH health analysis, performed after the elevated levels were discovered, the Kumamoto's were found to have the highest "ppt" (parts per trillion) of all shellfish tested. In the report, DOH felt the shellfish were safe for consumers, although they did recommend in their sediment evaluation consumers do such things as wash clams, hands, faces, brush under nails, and clean pets before allowing them inside (p. 17 and 18).

Dioxin levels in shellfish
from Oakland Bay.
 
 
According to the summary of the most recent report on possible sources, sediment samples taken from creeks feeding into the Bay indicate "these surface water inputs do not currently appear to be the source of the bay-wide dioxin levels."



Dioxin levels in Oakland Bay, Shelton Harbor,
and the "ash mound" near Shelton Creek.
(Note: The proposed Puget Sound
benchmark is 4ng/Kg.)
Within the more detailed report (10mb) it was noted that an old ash mound near Shelton Creek was found to have levels of Dioxins which, while elevated, are still below those found in the sediments of Shelton Harbor where Oakland Bay Marina is located. (Note: The City of Shelton recently amended its updated Shoreline Master Program to allow for up to 10 shellfish nurseries within existing boathouses.)

Shellfish nurseries existing and
proposed at the mouth of Shelton Creek
in Shelton Harbor.


Levels of Dioxins in the sediments of Oakland Bay, Shelton Harbor, and the Ash Mounds range from 4 times times to 8 times the statewide soil background levels of 5 ng/Kg (p. 20). The levels found near the mouth of Shelton Creek were just over 8 ng/Kg. Those in Oakland Bay were over 30 ng/Kg; Shelton Harbor 42 ng/Kg; with the two Ash Mound levels being 21 and 40 ng/Kg. The proposed benchmark for Puget Sound is 4 ng/Kg.

Just because you can't see it
doesn't mean it's not there.
Long life chemical pollutants do not
go away just because they are buried.

 
The long life of chemicals in sediments of Puget Sound, and elsewhere, is an ongoing problem for many areas. In the extreme are sediments near the ASARCO plant in Tacoma where mercury, lead, arsenic and other harmful chemicals exist within the deeper levels of sediments. 
 
In the current case, Oakland Bay was once thought to have sediments which were of little concern until sediments from deeper levels were analyzed. In that study (see opening paragraph above) it was shown that while sedimentation may slowly bury those chemicals from past historical activity, they do not go away.  More importantly, testing only the upper surficial levels does not reveal the complete picture. 
 
Geoducks harvested from depths of 3'
bring with them whatever is
contained in those sediments.
Whether "dry" harvesting (above) 
or "dive" harvesting (below).
 

Activities which expose those buried levels of sediments and cause them to re-enter the water column where they enter the food chain should be a concern for all. There, shellfish filter them out of the water column. Higher level species such as salmon consume lower level species which have absorbed them, in turn entering the food chain. These chemicals are like an Uncle who just keeps coming back and overstays his welcome.
 
Burley Lagoon, near Purdy in
south Puget Sound.
 
 
Currently Burley Lagoon is one of those areas where past industrial activity may have left remnants within deeper sediments. A letter to the Department of Ecology from the Department of Health noted elevated levels of polycholorinated byphenyl (PCB) were found in shellfish tissue samples.
"Shellfish samples exceeded screening level and will be evaluated further."

 
The likely source was the Stradley-Manning Super Fund site where transformers were stored and from which PCB's contaminated the area for years. The site was eventually cleaned and declared "safe" by EPA, but those PCB's which flowed downstream into Burley Lagoon to settle into the sediments to slowly be buried remain there, undetected and currently undisturbed.
 
In the letter to DOE, DOH performed an analysis which determined the shellfish with elevated levels of PCB were not a health risk. Not determined in that letter were whether elevated levels of PCB still exist in the deeper sediments, and if so, whether harvesting from current geoduck or future geoduck will re-introduce them into the water column. Should Taylor decide to move ahead with plans to develop its 30 + acre geoduck farm it may be wise to suggest DOE and DOH require deeper sediment testing.
 
DOE might also consider adding as a "recommendation" in its most recent report on the elevated levels of Dioxins within Oakland Bay that future sites where geoduck harvesting is occurring require sediment testing. It seems the Uncle may still be there, sleeping on the couch.


Thursday, June 6, 2013

Taylor Shellfish/Haley Geoduck Farm: Pierce County Expresses Concerns Over Size of Operation, Helping Reinforce the Need for an EIS/Cumlative Impacts Analysis

"The Haley project is much larger than the previous two farms and I’m not sure whether the conclusions of the various studies and pieces of literature referenced in the BE can be applied without some additional discussion." Pierce County Memo Dated 5/15/13

"Evidence is increasing that the most devastating environmental effects may result not from the direct effects of a particular action, but from the combination of individually minor effects of multiple actions over time." (Chapter 1, Introduction to Cumulative Effects Analysis, Council on Environmental Quality)

Pierce County Expresses Concerns on Taylor Shellfish/Haley Geoduck Farm
Pierce County has expressed concerns over the size of the Taylor Shellfish/Haley Geoduck farm, questioning whether literature referenced in Environ's* Biological Evaluation is applicable to a farm of this size. They have asked for additional information to be submitted.
(*Environ Principal Greg Reub and past Principal Jeff Fisher, now with NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service, are registered owners of companies involved in geoduck farming.)

Haley/Seattle Shellfish/Taylor Shellfish
Parcels on Case Inlet

Overview of area
(Spencer Cove is directly below
the arrow, west of the Haley Farm)
 
As noted in comments submitted on many permit applications there should be a focus on the number and size of expanding operations as well as the infrastructure supporting that expansion. While generally focused on geoduck farming, the proposed expansion of other shellfish operations with non-native/genetically modified Pacific oysters, invasive Manila clams and rafts of non-native Gallow mussels adds to the problem. The time for an Environmental Impact Statement where a complete Cumulative Impacts Analysis addresses the growing impacts from aquaculture in Puget Sound is now, not after the fact. The Shoreline Management Act's defining Puget Sound's habitat as "among the most valuable and fragile of its natural resources" clearly supports this position (RCW 90.58.020).

Cumulative Impacts Analysis
The need for a cumulative impacts analysis is found in Consideration of Cumulative Impacts in EPA Review of NEPA Documents. It begins with: "The combined, incremental effects of human activity, referred to as cumulative impacts, pose a serious threat to the environment." The combination of activities which are occurring in size, time, and location which are associated with the "Haley Farm" helps to establish why it is needed.

In the EPA document, it notes:
CEQ's [Council on Environmental Quality] regulations (CEQ, 1987) explicitly state that cumulative impacts must be evaluated along with the direct effects and indirect effects of each alternative. By mandating the consideration of cumulative impacts, the regulations ensure that the range of actions that is considered in NEPA documents includes not only the project proposal but also all actions that could contribute to cumulative impacts.
In the case of the "Haley Farm" multiple levels of expanding activities are found. At the farm level, as Pierce County notes, it is larger than any previously proposed, and contrary to statements from the shellfish industry that there are only a few tidelands where geoduck may be planted, there are still vast areas of flat and sandy beaches which have never been developed in south Puget Sound.

Subtidal Nearshore Farm is Permitted

Detienne Farm, the first subtidal farm
to receive a permit for planting and harvesting.

Adding to the growing intertidal developments are the nearshore subtidal regions which have only recently been proposed as areas to plant. Recently the "Detienne Farm" permit was approved by the Pierce County Hearing Examiner which included over 4 acres of subtidal area, with one of the few native eelgrass beds in south Puget Sound splitting the proposed intertidal and subtidal operation (see Detienne Farm post for an overview). On Harstine Island, across from the "Haley Farm" is a vast subtidal area, a large portion owned by Seattle Shellfish, which has not yet been commercially planted. Pierce County's permitting of the Detienne Farm establishes a precedent for others to follow.

Spencer Cove's privately owned
subtidal area, directly west of
the "Haley Farm"


Expanding Shellfish Hatchery and Nursery on Spencer Cove
In addition to the exponential increase in acres which the Detienne Farm's approval has now added to impacting Puget Sound's "most valuable and fragile" area is the infrastructure necessary for this to occur. In the case of the Haley Farm, one of its parcels is jointly owned by the Taylor Shellfish family and Seattle Shellfish, tying the two more tightly together. Seattle Shellfish has a large geoduck and nursery operation in Spencer Cove, directly west of the proposed Haley Farm. Uplands adjacent to the state owned lagoon seen in the picture below are under consideration for an industrial  hatchery. PVC pipe is currently "bagged" and loaded onto barges from the site.




In February Seattle Shellfish met with Mason County to discuss placing an upland shellfish nursery to support its growing operation, a follow-up on a 2010 meeting. Recently installed were "nursery rafts" in which geoduck seed from hatcheries elsewhere are grown out to a larger size which allows for a higher survival rate in the upper intertidal areas, further expanding tidelands impacted. The proposed hatchery facility will provide additional seed, currently a constraint to expansion onto undeveloped tidelands, both intertidal and subtidal. Impacts to county infrastructure include heavy truck use of what has been described by a County Commissioner as a "failing bridge" which is the only access to Harstine Island, as well as its roads. The hatchery facility will add to the impact and county maintenance expense.

Expanding Shellfish Nurseries in Marinas
In addition to the facilities owned by Seattle Shellfish and expanding developments on currently undeveloped tidelands is the recent permit application by Chelsea Farms, operator of the subtidal Detienne farm, for a commercial nursery at the only public marina in Oakland Bay. In their permit application it was noted how allowing for the commercial expansion of nurseries could potentially increase seed availability 10 fold. Following the permit request the City of Shelton submitted an amendment to the already drafted Shoreline Master Program to allow up to 10 of the boathouses to be converted from public use to commercial shellfish nurseries. Other conversions are proposed throughout Puget Sound. The loss of slips to moor boats provides minimal public benefit.

Conversion of a public marina
to commercial shellfish nurseries.

Funding for Expanding Shellfish Operations
With the expansion of shellfish operations also comes expenditures of state revenues, county revenues, and private landowners to help support the industry. In order for shellfish to grow there is a need for clean water. Water quality testing throughout Puget Sound is paid for by the Department of Health. County personnel inspect suspected upland areas where problems may exist. Farms pay for fencing to keep cattle out of streams and private land owners in Thurston County are required to pay an annual fee if they own a septic system. While all help to ensure state waters are kept clean, the financial benefactor is the shellfish industry who pays minimal taxes, property or otherwise, and whose jobs created are filled for the most part by underpaid migrant workers.

Small Studies Cannot be used to determine Large Impacts
Pierce County is correct in having a concern of using isolated studies of small farm activities to determine whether new applications for larger farms should be approved or not. While one cottage on a shoreline may have minimal impact, it does not mean a 5 story condominium will have minimal impact nor that a 100 room hotel will have a minimal impact. Each level brings with it a set of incrementally larger actions with both direct and indirect impacts. That is the stage where the shellfish industry is now, whose incremental impacts have not, as a whole, been considered.

Pacific Seafood Processing 
Facility in Warrenton Burns Down

Coast Seafood was recently acquired
by Pacific Seafood which includes a
50% ownership of Penn Cove Shellfish.

Industrial Level of Activity Requires an EIS
The shellfish industry is no longer a group of small families operating on discrete tideland parcels. The industry is becoming controlled by a few large corporations. As seen in the Coast acquisition, consolidation of operations and ownership is occurring, creating a level of industrial activity which small studies of family owned farms cannot replicate.

Let your political representatives know it is time to ensure the state's "most valuable and fragile" natural resource is protected through requiring an Environmental Impact Statement which has an inclusive Cumulative Impacts Analysis.

Governor Inslee: https://fortress.wa.gov/es/governor/
State Legislator: http://app.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/
Senators: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?State=WA
Representatives: http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/#listrep

Read more on Cumulative Impacts Analysis:
EPA's Consideration of Cumulative Impacts in EPA Review of NEPA Documents
Council on Environmental Quality's Considering Cumulative EffectsUnder the National Environmental Policy Act
"Evidence is increasing that the most devastating environmental effects may result not from the direct effects of a particular action, but from the combination of individually minor effects of multiple actions over time." (Chapter 1, Introduction to Cumulative Effects Analysis)

Tuesday, June 4, 2013

Drakes Bay Oyster Company is in Crisis Management Mode


Sam Singer: "The Fixer"
Founder and CEO of 
 
Drakes Bay Oyster Company is in crisis control mode, enlisting Singer Associates to help put a new frame around an old picture. DBOC's "free" legal advice from Cause of Action ended when COA demanded Public Broadcast Service's NewsHour turn over all video tapes used in their article on DBOC. It resulted in a public relations nightmare which shattered the relationship between DBOC and COA like a shotgun blast hitting a skeet. Drakes Bay Oyster Company has begun to understand that nothing is free and there are multiple agendas at play, many of which see DBOC as a simple pawn in a larger game, upon which the tar of right wing conservatism has been spread and it doesn't know how to get it off.

PCSGA Attorney
Newly hired California 
attorney at Plauche & Carr
(created through representing
the needs and wants
of the shellfish industry)


In the shifting tides of aliances for DBOC the Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association has also distanced themselves from DBOC. In their latest "Complaint about Information Quality" (signed by newly hired California attorney Robert Smith, previously with Jenkins and Hogin) they claim their new complaint is not "moot" as their 2007 "Complaint" was found to be, and as was Cause of Action's most recent "Complaint."

In PCSGA's new "Complaint" they acknowledge the "Secretary of the Interior decided to not renew DBOC's lease as a matter of discretion" and that "...the Secretary did not rely on the EIS in making his decision..." Instead of "jobs" or the "Lunny family" PCSGA's concern is the shellfish industry's actions have been found to have adverse impacts which outweigh benefits. Their concern is the environmental impacts will "be cited in review of other shellfish proposals throughout the country, thereby harming the PCSGA and its members."
 
        Bag of Clams
       in dirty water.                                          Clean water.
                      
"Proof" that a bag of clams                       "Proof" water is clean 
in an aquarium filters water                       if you don't pollute it.
which pollutants were added to.

They should be concerned. Constant repetition of "filter feeders" and "nitrogen removal" will not make an insignificant role any more significant. There is no problem with Drakes Estero's waters, nor will there be if DBOC oysters are removed. Even if there were some problem it is not something which will be managed by shellfish. As seen in virtually every healthy body of fresh water throughout the world, oysters have nothing to do with it. Controlling what enters the waters is what matters. As Dr. Land with the University of Texas, Austin, noted so clearly, "Pollution must be stopped. Sopping up never works."

Singer in Action
Today's online Wall Street Journal brackets a public relations "creation" on Drakes Bay Oyster Company with this line at the top and the bottom:
The Wall Street Journal news department was not involved in the creation of this content.
At the bottom, just above the second disclaimer of the "...not involved in the creation of this content" is the contact information: Sam Singer, 415-336-4949 (Cell) In short, what is passed on as "news" is nothing more than an office press release from Singer and Associates, picked up through nothing more than "chummy relations" (see below).

Reuters pr creation on the same topic from Singer and Associates was more to the point: "Reuters is not responsible for the content in this press release." Is this really news reporting or "chummy relations", similar to Dr. Goodman's Marin Media Institute's ownership of Point Reyes Light?


Terrorists attack Foie Gras, Treasure Island Becomes Developed (maybe), and Americas Cup is "Foiled"
Mr. Singer's efforts have included  developing a communication plan to "battle a terrorist attack on producers of foie gras", to have been on the communication team for "some of the largest real estate and transportation development projects in California, including the redevelopment of Treasure Island", and trying to explain why the America's Cup is looming as a financial disaster. Can he make this open oyster on the shelf of a grocery store edible? Not likely.

"I've got friends in high places."
Part of his attraction to those "...who apparently don't feel capable of dealing with the media themselves" is "because of the chummy relations he has cultivated with reporters and columnists at the city's major news outlets" (SFGate, January 7, 2008).  This apparently includes the Wall Street Journal, owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation which also owns Fox News.

Rupert Murdoch
Owner of News Corp.


Mr. Singer has a lot to "fix" with Drakes Bay Oyster Company. The shattered shards of skeet spread on the tidelands of Drakes Estero through the shotgun approach of past decisions speaks for itself. The conservative tar which has been spread on DBOC in its attempt to usurp the Congressional declaration that Drakes Estero will become a wilderness when DBOC ceases operation will not wash off. Mr. Singer's best plan of action is to try and get those shards stuck onto DBOC's layer of tar, put it out to pasture, and let PCSGA attorneys discover - once again - its complaint is a moot point.

Monday, June 3, 2013

June 3, 6PM: City of Shelton to Repeal Old SMP and Adopt New SMP

June 3 at 6PM the City of Shelton will repeal its old Shoreline Master Program (SMP) and adopt the new SMP. Included will be an amendment allowing for conversion of up to 10 boathouses in the Oakland Bay Marina to shellfish nurseries where shellfish (oysters, clams) will be grown out to a larger size before being spread throughout Puget Sound.

The meeting will be held at the Shelton Civic Center, 525 West Cota Street, Shelton.

Friday, May 31, 2013

Drakes Bay Oyster: A New Paint Job Doesn't Change What's Underneath

Nothing is Free
and
New Paint Changes Nothing
"From the Pacific Legal Foundation"

With Drakes Bay Oyster's severing ties with Cause of Action has come a renewed effort to dismiss the contractual agreement which DBOC entered into when it purchased the Johnson Oyster Company. That agreement, signed and dated by the current owners of DBOC, was that the only commercial operation preventing the completion of the shoreline wilderness area which Congress created would cease in 2012. The current process in place, if allowed, will result in a political template being created which will be used to allow commercial operations - of all types - in wilderness areas created under the Wilderness Act. This is a fact.

One of the articles on this split reflects the operator's belief that with this separation will come an unveiling of a new picture, an image of naivety over what Cause of Action was and what a relationship with them would bring.
Although Mr. Lunny said he is sad to lose what he described as Cause of Action’s “fantastic legal assistance,” he acknowledged that the group has motives that he does not share. “They have goals that they’re trying to achieve that are bigger and more broad. That kind of became clear in their letter to PBS,” he said.
Dr. Goodman said he hopes the conversation about Drakes Bay shifts from a “narrative of conspiracies” and political agendas to the issues at hand. “It certainly is going to take one of their big narratives away,” he said of environmentalists. Point Reyes Light, 5/30/2013 (owned by Marin Media Institute,co-founded by Dr. Goodman)  

A new paint job does not change what is underneath the paint. The Pacific Legal Foundation stepping into the newly painted Trojan Horse will not help change the image - or reality - of what is at play any more than a new paint job will change the fact that this commercial operation is far more expansive than a simple hot dog stand. Further, it does not change the fact that this commercial operation is all that is standing in the way of completing the creation of the wilderness area Congress intended for everyone to enjoy and the current owners agreed to that fact when they purchased it.

Wednesday, May 29, 2013

Drakes Bay Oyster Company: Changing Tides Changing Attorneys

Updated 5/30:
Link to May 17 COA letter to PBS added. 
Link to Steven Maglivio's piece on COA being dropped, which ends with this succinctly written paragraph:
But it's too little, too late for the oyster corporation, which produces just 3 percent of the oysters on the west coast. The move to cozy up to the right-wing clearly has hurt the company's efforts to portray itself as the little guy vs. big government. And that's something -- like the agreement the Lunny family made to shut down -- it simply just can't walk away from and pretend didn't happen.
 
And so castles made of sand ...

Drakes Bay Oyster Company (DBOC) has severed its relationship with the conservative group Cause of Action (COA) over the latter's request to PBS for video tapes of interviews used for a recent report on PBS Newshour. (Note: COA has removed their post on the FOIA request. Their May 17 letter to PBS may be viewed here: May 17 COA Letter to PBS.)

As written about earlier, Cause of Action felt it had been portrayed unfairly when executive director Dan Epstein was described by PBS as being “an attorney who once worked for a foundation run by one of the conservative activist Koch brothers" and those opposed to the continued commercial operation were not labeled as COA felt they should be (e.g.,  Amy Trainer is only "described as the head of an environmental group.").

Cause of Action also felt it had been somehow portrayed inaccurately to Phyllis Faber, participant in a lawsuit against the California Coastal Commission's action on DBOC's inaction of violations, noting, "Environmental activist Phyllis Faber is described as 'not happy to be on the same side as Cause of Action.'  In the May 1, 2013 NewsHour broadcast, Ms. Faber is quoted as stating, 'I am very disturbed by that and I don't agree with it at all.'" (Note: The California Coastal Commission has asked the court to dismiss Ms. Faber's lawsuit and for it to fine DBOC for its “'intentional and knowing' violation of state law and the agency’s orders.")

Beware of pro-bono legal representation

DBOC chose to allow Cause of Action and conservative friends into its house with offers of free legal support. The reasons for and consequences of that action could be seen by anyone with an objective eye. Now DBOC has tied itself directly to those who see this as the opportunity to break the Wilderness Act and extract the minimal resources which exist in those few areas Congress intended be set aside for all citizens, not just an exclusive few. How would Marin County feel if they looked in their rear view mirror and saw Cause of Action - or the Pacific Legal Foundation - representing developers from San Francisco pointing to millionaires developing parcels set aside as farm easements and saying "The Marin Agricultural Land Trust (MALT) should be dismantled so we may put up condominiums."

Instead of smoothly winding down a commercial operation DBOC knew was destined to cease in 2012, they instead chose to gamble in hopes they could prevent the completion of the wilderness Congress intended for all citizens to enjoy. Instead of helping their employees start a new operation in Tomales Bay or elsewhere they bussed them from location to location for photo-ops to be used for the benefit of conservative groups. Instead of suggesting to those caught up in the "gift" of the Trojan Horse from COA that they help fund employee training and/or relocation, attorneys from San Francisco and Washington DC are instead made more wealthy.

Stepping back and rethinking what to do in order to avoid another train wreck is something which a group such as Gallatin Public Affairs makes fortunes off of. Whether they, or someone similar is brought into the picture, a broader perspective and solution which is inclusive of all citizens, and not for an exclusive few, needs to be presented.