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 and with limited public input. It is exactly what the Shoreline Management Act was intended to prevent.

Get involved and contact your elected officials to let them you do not support aquaculture's industrial transformation of Puget Sound's tidelands.

Governor Inslee:

Wednesday, November 18, 2015

WDFW Maps Show Declining Densities and Negative Recovery of State Geoduck Tracts Adjacent to Commercial Farms

“If you cut down a forest, it takes a very long time 
to come back. So you need to be very careful with the harvest rate.”
Bob Sizemore, WDFW

WDFW Map showing plots sampled which have
declining densities and negative recovery
adjacent to commercial intertidal farms.

In "The Poaching of Puget Sound" from OPB's KCTS 9, Robert Sizemore with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife notes concerns over declining densities of wild geoduck in subtidal, publicly owned tracts, previously harvested. Provided by WDFW is a map showing the few plots sampled and those which have "declining densities" and "negative recovery" (tracts in red above). On Harstine Island, where some of the most intensive intertidal geoduck farming is occurring on private tidelands, those wild, subtidal state owned tracts co-managed by WDFW and DNR immediately adjacent to the commercial farms are not recovering as expected. In fact, they are declining in density.

Spencer Cove, Northeast Harstine Island
Intertidal farms/dive harvesting
are circled in red. The inset shows where
Washington's subtidal tract is located.

Wilson Point, Southeast Harstine Island
Private intertidal farms are circled in red. The
inset map shows DNR's subtidal geoduck tract
which is declining in density.

If all those geoduck are spawning why are they declining?
WDFW and DNR should both be concerned over how they are managing these public assets. Is it simple coincidence that some of the largest private farms are immediately adjacent to the tracts not recovering? Unlikely. Adding to why WDFW - and DNR - should be concerned is a recent study published shows the farmed geoduck in these commercial farms reach maturity and begin to spawn at 2 to 3 years of age. Why, if the high density geoduck on intertidal farms (40,000+ per acre) are spawning for a period of 3 to 5 years are subtidal tracts adjacent to them not recovering faster than normal? (see here for study: https://app.box.com/s/8glqtmh1v3vmbynwnzaga8spw7cn0ymc)

Is there a fox in the hen house?
Is poaching by those operating the farms adjacent to the state owned tracts occurring? Or is the commercial farming on private tidelands causing die-offs on subtidal tracts from sediment disruption or plastic pollution or a genetic problem? The answer needs to be found before the wild geoduck reach the same fate as the native Olympia oyster, now near extinction from overzealous shellfish farmers who simply sought a profit at the public's expense.

There's more to managing wild geoduck than
just counting how many are harvested.
As Mr. Sizemore with WDFW is quoted as saying, “If you cut down a forest, it takes a very long time to come back. So you need to be very careful with the harvest rate.” It's why DNR requires replanting of forestland after harvesting. As Commissioner Goldmark begins his campaigning on how he is managing state resources he may want to consider why DNR does not manage its subtidal tidelands like it does its forest land and require replanting of state owned subtidal tracts after geoduck ahve been harvested.

Tuesday, November 17, 2015

UW's Climate Impacts Group Releases "State of Knowledge: Climate Change in Puget Sound"

The University of Washington's Climate Impacts Group (CGI) has released their "State of Knowledge: Climate Change in Puget Sound." (29 mb file)

In the report CGI details current projections of how climate change and increasing levels of CO2 may impact Puget Sound. Topics range from how changes to freshwater inflows may impact the circulation of Puget Sound's waters (e.g., salinity, dissolved oxygen) to warming temperatures increasing the risks to human health (e.g., increasing toxicity of diatoms such as Pseudo-nitzschia and increasing harmful algae blooms) to overall ecosystem changes increasing the risks to native species (e.g., introduced non-native species being able to adapt to changes more quickly and displacing the native species).

It is lengthy (over 280 pages) but contains a great deal of information on what changes may be anticipated in the near and distant future.


Thursday, November 12, 2015

Ecology Calls for Comments on Herbicide Application in Washington Waters

I just think this timing table leaves too much wiggle room
 from someone in WDFW to mess with the permit.
Kim Patten, WSU Extension Office, Pacific County
Commenting in 2011 on herbicide application.
(supporter of neurotoxins on shellfish beds)
What's in your shellfish?

Concerned about CO2 and ocean acidification? Not in Willapa Bay.
The Department of Ecology has called for comments on a General Permit covering the application of herbicides in Washington's waters. Included is imazamox, currently being sprayed in Willapa Bay on shellfish beds to kill Japanese eelgrass by shellfish farmers. The same type of aquatic vegetation which was recently found to be "...among the Earth's most efficient and long-term carbon sinks, but coastal development [especially shellfish farming] threatens this capacity." (see "Losses and recovery of organic carbon from a seagrass ecosystem following disturbance" October 21, 2015, in Proceedings of the Royal Society)

See the Draft Permit here
See WDFW timing restrictions here
(Pacific County - Large mouth bass only. Migratory birds? Apparently not important.)
See DOE General Permit site here
See 2011 DOE Response to Comments here (including Mr. Patten's concerns)

Get involved. Unless you don't care about what's in that oyster you're eating.