Washington DNR Moves Forward to Remove Access to Public Tidelands Adjacent to Stretch Point State Park

How much is too much?

Some of the few remaining tidelands accessible to the public in South Puget Sound.
DNR has issued a SEPA mitigated determination of non-significance for a lease of public tidelands on Stretch Island. These tidelands form an extension of Stretch Point State Park, one of the few marine state parks accessible by boat. These state owned tidelands provided some of the few areas the public was still able to boat to and enjoy clamming at low tides in south Puget Sound.
(See full details of SEPA determination here, under "Stretch Island Geoduck Farm Lease #20-079918": https://www.dnr.wa.gov/current-aquatic-resources

Some will say these tidelands are only accessible by boat so what does it matter? If that is the case, then why have Stretch Point State Park, one of the most unique State Parks in South Puget Sound, also only accessible by boat. A large number of people own boats and a large number of people enjoy accessing the few remaining tidelands there are in South Puget Sound.

When did this become beneficial to the public?

Is this really in the public's interest? How many more tidelands is DNR intending to lease out to an industry placing more plastic and PVC in Puget Sound than any other? When is enough too much?

Sept 26 Public Hearing: Geoduck Operation Expansion in Thurston County

Good for whose economy?

Impacting residential area how?

What: Hearing for the expansion of Geoduck Unlimited (owned by Greg Reub) on a tideland parcel owned by Deborah and Greg Dibble at 10221 Steamboat Island Rd., NW, Olympia, WA.
When: September 26, 10AM
(Note: Hearing on geoduck farm will be preceded by a separate hearing for a bulkhead.)
Where: Thurston County Courthouse Building No.1, Room 152 Olympia, Washington 985023
Why: To determine whether a shoreline permit should be issued for an industrial level operation within an established residential area.
Agenda here: Agenda
Staff report here: Staff report
Those in opposition here: Opposition emails (Note: There are many opposed, so this is a large file.)

PVC tubes for everyone.

(It's only for a few years.)

Profits for me, taxes for you, and your property impaired.
On September 26 Thurston County will hear reasons why Greg Reub should be issued a shoreline permit to expand his current geoduck operation (on a tideland parcel he paid for $85,000 for) onto the Dibble family's tideland parcel (tidelands which currently, without a shellfish operation, Thurston County appraises at $2,400).  If permitted, the estimated profits to Mr. Reub for geoduck shipped to China would be in the range of $500,000. The Dibble family, creating a "license to use real estate" would be responsible for various taxes to the Washington Department of Revenue, income tax, and based on what Mr. Reub paid for his tideland parcel, a likely significant increase in their property tax. Explaining to financial institutions that the long term lease allowing the ongoing operation impairing the property would be up to the Dibble family. Explaining to Thurston County how that somehow helps the "local economy" would be up to Mr. Reub.

[Note: In what appears to be a financially deft move, Mr. Reub moved his tideland parcel into a self-directed IRA. Doing so likely allowed Mr. Reub to harvest geoduck and shield the income from taxes, until the future, when retirement withdrawals begin. Likely doing so, Mr. Reub then moved title of the tidelands out of the IRA and into his name, perhaps so he could deduct the property tax (as minimal as it is) from his other income earned as an environmental consultant with Eco Analysts.]

Get involved.
Attend the September 26 hearing and listen to why scientists such as Mr. Reub who own and operate geoduck farms believe their science is good enough to justify the plasticizing of Puget Sound's intertidal tidelands in residential areas. Listen to Thurston County explain how aware they are of current and planned commercial operations on both shorelines of Totten Inlet and throughout the county. And perhaps explain why it is okay to ban plastic shopping bags but then allow thousands of PVC tubes to be placed into Puget Sound.

 

January 17: Zangle Cove Appeal and Permit Hearing Rescheduled/Sohn Separates Tidelands

Zangle Cove Hearing Continued to Tuesday, January 17, 2017 at 10 a.m.

Thurston County Courthouse 

Building One, Room 152

Click here for Agenda and map

Better bring lunch and dinner. 

The appeal of Thurston County's "Mitigated Determinatin of Non-significance" (MDNS) for a geoduck operation in the ecologically sensitive and enjoyed Zangle Cove and associated Shoreline Substantial Development Permit continues January 17. Based on an email from the Hearing Examiner, it may be a marathon, stretching into the night, noting parties should "... arrange to be available into the evening as late as necessary."

What are those tidelands really worth?

"I want to be a farmer." Be careful what you wish for, because your tidelands may now be taxed as "geoduck farmland" instead of open space. Unless lobbyists can prevent it.

As the hearing has progressed, Mr. Sohn has stated he wanted to be a farmer on his tideland parcel. Apparently to that end, or for some other reason, he has decided to separate his tidelands from his upland parcel. So doing creates the ability to now tax his tidelands at what their true value is, as tidelands created for a geoduck operation, instead of "open space" as they and others in Zangle Cove have been for decades in the past, affording an extremely low tax rate. For reference, Taylor Shellfish purchased 10 acres of tidelands, many used for growing geoduck, from Manke Timber in Mason County. Those 10 acres of tidelands are currently appraised at $872,000 (dropping slightly from $899,000 in 2013). If appraisers used "like sales" as they are supposed to, Mr. Sohn's 1.6 acres of tidelands, if used for a geoduck operation, would be appraised as high as $139,000.

British Columbia: Massive Chinese shellfish hatchery near completion on Sunshine Coast

Guess they're just not into you that much anymore.

Licensed to grow seed for geoduck, 

Pacific oyster, scallop and urchin.

Risk to investors and banks is a relative thing.

Apparently becoming aware that being beholden to a few shellfish operators in the United States was not an economically sustainable model, the Chinese are nearing completion of Phase 1 of what ultimately will be among the largest (if not the largest) shellfish hatchery and farming operations in North America. It will compete directly with current shellfish operators such as Taylor Shellfish and Coast Seafoods, who to date have had little real competition to disrupt pricing and distribution models which have existed for decades. How investors and those financing expansion will react to what appears to be a disruptive event is not known, but risk to returns is certainly elevated.

Comparison of Taylor Shellfish to Hummingbird Cove

Investors rule of thumb: Invest in an industry where anyone can make money. 

Yesterday, the Times Colonist wrote that Phase 1 of a Chinese owned shellfish hatchery facility in British Columbia is nearing completion and will cover over 34,000 square meters (365,000 square feet). By comparison, the Nisbet (Goose Point) hatchery facility moved from Willapa Bay to Hawaii is 20,000 square feet. Another perspective is seen in the image above, showing Taylor Shellfish's Quilcene Dabob Bay hatchery facility. Overlying the Taylor Shellfish facility in red is the estimated size of Phase 1. The Vancouver Sun has reported that Phase 2 is expected to result in a facility able to grow and export mature shellfish by the year 2020. Last year, Hatchery International reported that Hummingbird facility was approved to expand within a 27 hectare (~66 acre) area, outlined in blue and orange, an area dwarfing current facilities.

This Christmas, be careful what you ask for. You may just get it.

The shellfish industry for years has been lobbying at the federal, state and local levels to minimize regulatory oversight. Their success has been seen in many areas, ranging from minimizing eelgrass protection to convincing Mason County that tidelands sold under the "Bush Act" should be considered as existing shellfish farms. All aimed at allowing for an increased expansion of operations, then supply, and hoped for profits. That the Chinese business leaders were not born yesterday and can see a market controlled by only a few, for the benefit of those few, has resulted in a multi-million dollar investment by one company in Canada. Others will follow. Those shellfish grown will not be for Canada, but exported. When combined with expansion efforts in the US, a deflating commodity balloon may be what comes for Christmas.

Court of Appeals Upholds Denial of Permit for Chelsea/Detienne Geoduck Farm

"Permitted shoreline uses must be 

designed and conducted in a manner 

that minimizes 

damage to the ecology, 

damage to the environment, 

and interference with the public's use of Washington's water"

Court of Appeals Decision Affirming Shorelines Hearings Board

Decision to Deny a Permit for a Geoduck Operation

[read decision here]

Date: November 14, 2016

Contact: Coalition To Protect Puget Sound Habitat

Laura Hendricks, Director

(253) 509-4987

Thane Tienson, Attorney for Superior Court and Court of Appeals

(503) 810-8303

The Washington State Court of Appeals, Division 1 attached decision affirmed both the Superior Court and Shorelines Hearings Board (SHB) decisions to deny the 5 acre geoduck aquaculture permit in Henderson Bay/Pierce County.  The Court of Appeals stated: 

1.  "We conclude the SHB did not err in concluding the Coalition met its burden of proving the permit buffers did not adequately protect eelgrass from adverse impacts in violation of the SMA (Shoreline Management Act) and Pierce County SMP (Shoreline Master Program).".. The Coalition relied on the FSEIS buffer to argue the buffers approved by the Hearing Examiner were inadequate. The FSEIS identifies the need for a "2-foot vertical buffer or a minimum of 180-foot horizontal buffer" between eelgrass and subtidal geoduck harvest areas to protect eelgrass."

"The SHB found that while Meaders (industry expert) "is knowledgeable of the geoduck industry and science underlying aspects of industry practices," she was not "a credible expert in all aspects of study related to the nearshore environment to which she claimed expertise."

2. "Evidence presented at the hearing showed there are potential adverse impacts to critical habitat."

3.  "Because the consideration of a cumulative impact analysis prior to approval of the permit is consistent with the purpose of the SMA and clearly furthers the goal of the SMA to prevent "uncoordinated and piecemeal development,"the SHB did not err in concluding consideration should be given to preparing a cumulative impacts analysis."

4.  "De Tienne contends the SHB decision is not timely..... Because de Tienne stipulated to consolidation of the petition he filed on June 28, 2013 and there is no dispute the SHB extended the time period for good cause for an additional 30 days, the SHB complied with the time limits of the statute."

Our Coalition members, who have been fighting to protect our Washington aquatic life, are relieved that the Court of Appeals recognized the record of harm of industrial aquaculture and the need to protect eelgrass, herring and critical habitat said Hendricks. We are thankful to Dan Penttila, Wayne Daley and Dr. Gary Ritchie, the scientists who testified and have spoken out about the adverse effects of shellfish aquaculture. Tahoma Audubon and Center for Food Safety have pointed out the harm as well. We are also grateful to Brad and Sandy Newell who were responsible for over $20,000 of legal bills for this appeal. The Court of Appeals did award legal fees to the Coalition.

For more information on the Coalition To Protect Puget Sound Habitat, please see our website:

http://coalitiontoprotectpugetsoundhabitat.org/

Friends of Burley Lagoon Featured on KING5 TV

Friends of Burley Lagoon has released a statement noting Alison Morrow, with KING5 TV, will have information tonight on issues surrounding proposed geoduck farming in this area of Pierce County and south Puget Sound. FOBL believes information will be presented in the 5PM to 6PM news slot. If you have time, you can thank Alison and KING5 for their time and focus here: http://static.king5.com/contact-us/
[corrected spelling of Ms. Morrow's name at 5:09PM ] 

Seattle Shellfish to Mason County - Oops, guess we didn't quite know what we were doing.

Who is managing who?

Mason County Taken for a Ride

Public Loses Access to Tidelands

These are the experts in geoduck farming? 2 years later, "we don't know yet".

In August of 2013, Seattle Shellfish began formally working on acquiring tidelands between McMicken Island State Park and Harstine Island from Mason County, with the intention of growing geoduck. When Mason County decided a land swap was not workable, work on arranging a lease for those tidelands began which culminated in an April 1, 2014 lease. The county would receive 15% of the revenues. Projections of $3 million to the county now appear greatly overstated with the analysis of the tidelands being greatly understated. As of July 14, 2015, all Seattle Shellfish is able to tell Mason County is they don't know how many tidelands are suitable to grow geoduck. The Mason County Journal reported July 16 it was less than half. Who is managing who?

No, you can't dig here anymore.

Thank you Mason County.

December 2013: Tim Sheldon explaining

to fellow commissioners how ex-Commissioner

Steve Bloomfield's Seattle Shellfish will make the

County $3 million growing geoduck with

the public losing access to those acres.

Screenshot from MasonWebTV, December 11, 2013

[see at - https://youtu.be/dl5-j7Zona0]

The public's use of these tidelands is of no value. Ex-Commissioner Bloomfield with Seattle Shellfish says you'll get $3 million. 

In December of 2013 Mason County Commissioners approved a resolution to lease 19 acres of prime public tidelands between McMicken Island State Park and Harstine Island. Long used by the public for digging shellfish and enjoying the intertidal experience of Puget Sound, ex-County Commissioner Steve Bloomfield with Seattle Shellfish laid out a revenue stream which the county would receive, quoting figures of $3 million dollars from revenues and $1,000 in annual acres leased. What could go wrong? 

This isn't quite what I thought it would be.

April 1, 2014: "So there's an estimate of $3 million." 

More or less. Commissioner Jeffreys to an attendee

of the Commissioner meeting.

Screenshot from MasonWebTV, April 2, 2014

[see at - https://youtu.be/zDK0m0IrZAM]

Entering into a lease on April Fools Day should have been warning enough.

Acting on the resolution passed in December, the county entered into a lease agreement with Seattle Shellfish April 1, 2014. At that meeting, Commissioner Jeffreys begins to back shuffle on the firmness of that $3 million in revenues. The illusion created by waving her hands belied just how weak that reality was and drove home why you should not enter into lease agreements on April Fools Day.

April 1, 2014: "It is an agricultural thing and 

in agriculture you never know what tomorrow

is going to bring." Seattle Shellfish's Steve Bloomfield

Screenshot from Mason WebTV, April 2, 2014

[see at - https://youtu.be/-mSGmnym1Js]

Seattle Shellfish is supposed to be an expert in this geoduck farming "agricultural thing". At least that's what they tell their investors and those they lease tidelands from.

At that same meeting, ex-Commisioner Steve Bloomfield with Seattle Shellfish began to explain why there may be cracks in the promises made. Pounding his fists together, Mr. Bloomfield explained to an attendee that some of the tidelands were "hardpan, like this floor." Mr. Bloomfield continued on to explain that Seattle Shellfish really didn't know how many acres could actually grow geoduck. Did the Commissioners then wonder just what it was they had entered into on April 1? Apparently not.

April 14, 2015: "Maybe a little bit of income

for the County over the years."

Ex-commissioner Steve Bloomfield w/Seattle Shellfish

Screenshot from Mason WebTV, April 15, 2015

[see at - https://youtu.be/23tjxtyHC18]

Yes, we've completely evaluated the sediments and habitat area and we know exactly where we are going to plant geoduck. At least on paper.

Despite the now apparent lack of awareness in just what tidelands were usable for geoduck, Seattle Shellfish forged ahead with permits. In those permit applications Seattle Shellfish was clear in stating they would be developing a geoduck farm on 19 acres. [corrected 7/19 - SS did note they were unsure of sediment types and what could be planted. Why approval was granted remains a question.]. Based on drawings submitted June of 2014, and information provided on the sediments and habitat by Seattle Shellfish, the Corps asked for an opinion from the US Fish and Wildlife and National Marine Fisheries Services. Based on that apparently flawed data, they approved a permit for the proposed 19 acre geoduck farm in December of 2014. As recently as April 14, 2015, Mr. Bloomfield was still assuring the county they were forging ahead and the county would be receiving a "little bit of income". Someday. How much that would be was no longer being stated as $3 million. 

The dog days of summer slow thinking down. 

July 14, 2015, ex-Commissioner Bloomfield stood before two Mason County Commissioners and explained Seattle Shellfish was wrong in estimating how much of the tidelands would be usable for geoduck. They were apparently unaware that the center of the lagoon area was a "catch basin" for aquatic vegetation which created anaerobic conditions in the sediments, which for an unexplained reason, were not compatible with geoduck aquaculture. Commissioner Sheldon, who originally extolled the benefits of the lease arrangement, was absent from the meeting. Ms. Jeffreys, instead of asking why it had taken Seattle Shellfish so long to determine their estimates were so wrong, thanked Mr. Bloomfield for keeping her aware. You may listen to ex-Commissioner Bloomfield explain the situation and the commissioners inability to question why things were now so understated by downloading this zip file, beginning at 5:55. Or simply shake your head and wonder who is managing who.

Get involved. The shellfish industry is.

DNR Tideland Leases: Who is managing who?

Arcadia Point Seafood: 2006 - Our offer is equal to 20%.
Arcadia Point Seafood: 2013 -We'll offer you 15% for a
far more convenient parcel, near home and existing farms.

DNR: 2015 - How about 10.25%?
Okay.

~1 acre of state owned tidelands

planted with geoduck and no lease.

Settlement in 2010: $192,000

Harvest value in 2014: ~$1,300,000

(click to enlarge)

I never promised you a shellfish garden, but thanks for the roses.
A recent document request has provided Arcadia Point Seafood's lease proposal from DNR for tidelands in Mason County it and Seattle Shellfish were found to have been trespassing on in 2009. According to statements in applications, it may have been going on since 1988 but because of how statutes in Washington are written, all the state could collect on was activity which had occurred in the prior three years. Growers kept revenues from perhaps as many 3 harvest cycles. For encroachment on 1.2 acres, Arcadia Point Seafood and Seattle Shellfish settled with the state for $192,000 (be patient - DNR's servers are slow). They were allowed to retain possession of their geoduck planted on a bit more than 1 acre, which with geoduck at or above $14/pound, resulted in an estimated $1,300,000 at harvest (see below for how APS estimates their harvest amounts from tidelands). A complete survey of the area having been trespassed on may be found here.

Tidelands Arcadia Point Seafood

was responsive to. 

Will you respond to my offer?

In 2006, prior to the discovery of trespassing on state tidelands, Arcadia Point Seafood participated in "requests for offers to lease" tidelands for growing geoduck from DNR. Responses to those requests included Taylor Shellfish with Kent Kingman, Discovery Bay Shellfish, Seattle Shellfish, and Arcadia Point Seafood, among others. In 2007 a second request was made by DNR. (The 2006 maps may be found here and the 2007 maps here.) Arcadia Point Seafood was the successful "responder" to the proposal on Dickenson Point. 

Thurston County: You almost made it. Mason County: Don't worry about it.

In 2008 APS began seeking out other leases in the Dickenson Point area, being successful with the Thiesens and McClures, the former being adjacent to the north line of the state tidelands. It was a long process with many objecting to the industrial operations, some believing they did not fit in with the residential character of the area. But APS and Taylor Shellfish had money, motivation, and knew how to spend it in the right places. Those permits, while granted, resulted in the Shorelines Hearings Board noting "...it was a very close call.." on requiring a cumulative impacts analysis and Thurston County's  commissioners noting: "The Board shares many of the Coalition's concerns...about the impacts of geoduck aquaculture on the shorelines of Thurston County". It is far different than in Mason County where geoduck farming needs no permit at all. In fact, they have recently leased almost 20 acres of tidelands to Seattle Shellfish, being told they will receive an estimated $3 million from the lease. Maybe.

DNR - "You've won."

Arcadia - "Never mind. I have a better idea."
(and guess which county it's in)

Remind me of what I said in 2006 again?

In the successful response of APS they were seemingly more than generous, and made a point to show how much so. In their "Cost Proposal" they estimated the state would be receiving an estimated 20% of the "gross wholesale revenue" (see above image for their calculations). APS estimated from 40,000 square feet they would be harvesting 90,000 pounds (1.5 geoduck per square foot *40,000 * 1.5 pounds each). (The full response from APS may be found here.)

Seasons change and so did I, you need not wonder why. 
In 2013, seven  years later, after their harvest under the lucrative settlement with the state was complete, APS was contacted by DNR. Along with the other successful "responders" they were asked how they felt about executing on their proposal. APS, realizing the opportunity presented by locking up the contiguous state tidelands with those they already had under lease from private tideland owners, less than 300' from the owner's home, in Mason County where no permit would be needed, had a different response than the others. From notes taken by DNR their change in heart is explained, as well as their offer:

Arcadia Seafood requests the Dickenson Point site be put on hold due to local controversy, and ongoing work of the County Shoreline Hearings Board.  Arcadia point does want to lease this site "in a year or so," but feel "now is not the time."   They would consider to lease an alternate site at Arcadia Point.  The Arcadia site is part of an ownership dispute between Arcadia Point Seafood and DNR that was resolved by settlement agreement.  The site is located at Arcadia Point and fronts the proponents upland property.  Arcadia has indicated, if DNR decides it will only lease one site or the other Arcadia Point Seafood would prefer to farm the Dickenson Point site.  Regarding the lease term, Arcadia is concerned the 10 year lease will only supports a single crop cycle.  For the Dickenson Point site, the proponent proposes rent be amended from 12% of gross and $1,200 per/ac/yr. base rent to 10% and $1,000/ac/yr.  For their private leases, Arcadia pays 15% for multi cycle leases and 10% for single cycle leases; cost of managing single cycle leases is more and there for the royalty to the landowner is less.  Also, in Thurston County, cost and scope of permitting is more difficult than Mason County.  Arcadia proposes a 15% rate at the Arcadia Point site.  Also, Arcadia Point Seafood wishes to review DNR's current BMP's before agreeing to a lease.

DNR: We know you offered 15% but will you take 10.25%?

APS: You drive a hard bargain, and my wife won't be happy, but okay.

In 2015, DNR has suggested a different rate. A lower rate. On May 15 they sent their proposal to APS which included the new, lower rate. (The complete proposal sent to APS may be found here.)

SECTION 4 RENT

4.1 Annual Minimum Base Rent. Tenant shall pay to State the annual minimum base rent in the amount of One Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty Three Dollars ($1,223.00). The annual minimum base rent shall be due and payable in full on or before the Commencement Date and on or before the same date of each year thereafter. In addition to the annual minimum base rent, Tenant shall also pay a production based rent as detailed in Section 4.2, below.

4.2 Geoduck Rent Adjustment.(a) Production Based Rent. When the Tenant commences harvest of cultured geoduck, Tenant shall pay to State, in addition to the annual minimum base rent, a quarterly Production Based Rent. The Production Based Rent shall be computed as follows: the total quarterly volume of geoduck harvested in pounds multiplied by the current average wholesale price per pound, multiplied by the royalty rate of Ten point twenty five percent (10.25%) percent.(b) Quarterly Reports and payment of Production Based Rent. At the same time Tenant submits its quarterly aquaculture production report to the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, Tenant shall submit a copy of the same report to State along with the Production Based Rent as calculated in Section 4.2(a). The quarterly aquaculture production report must include the poundage or other unit of measure and price received for geoduck harvested and sold. If Tenant makes no sales in any quarter, Tenant shall so report.

Commissioner Goldmark did not promise the shellfish industry a shellfish garden. 

Peter Goldmark was elected as the Commissioner of Public Lands in 2008 due, in part, to perceived pressures from the shellfish industry to turn over the few remaining public tidelands there are for them to grow geoduck on. In 2015, as election time ramps up, once again the shellfish industry is pressing the Commissioner directly, and indirectly through politicians, to do what people did not want in 2008 - turn those tidelands into geoduck farms, locking the public out. Commissioner Goldmark never promised the shellfish industry a shellfish garden. Especially one the state only receives 10.25% from.

We're the shellfish industry. We don't have to care.

Non-permitted geoduck farm placed in

Kitsap County's tidelands. Mr. Kimmel says

he "didn't know" he needed a permit in 2013.

 

Almost 6 months after Mr. Kimmel agreed

to remove all gear he has left as a statement

to neighbors and agencies his thoughts.

Including over 9,000 geoduck he will be able

to harvest in another 2-3 years, pocketing the profits.

No doubt he now wishes he had planted more.

Shorelines Hearings Board Affirms Permit for Taylor/Seattle Shellfish Geoduck Farm

Diagram of proposed geoduck farm

on tidelands owned by Taylor/Seattle Shellfish

and the Haley family.

Appeal by the Coalition is denied.
The Shorelines Hearings Board has affirmed the shoreline permit granted by Pierce County for Taylor/Seattle Shellfish to operate an 11 acre geoduck farm. In a decision dated May 15, the SHB determined the neighbors and Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat had not presented sufficient evidence to overcome that which was presented by the shellfish companies.

It may be my dog leaving things

on your lawn, but I'll pick it up.

Every week or so. What's the problem?

Looking in the woods for PVC does not mean it's not escaping from farms.
Numerous concerns were presented to the Board, including neighbors' concerns that the escapement of plastic PVC tubes was still not being controlled by the shellfish industry. The Board listened to testimony from the shellfish industry who stated their "beach cleanups" - held during times which all geoduck farms and most other farms are covered by water - do not find tubes or much other shellfish gear (is that a surprise?). The shellfish companies stated any tubes which escaped would be picked up by workers during their weekly "patrols" on private tidelands up to 1.5 miles away. It is the equivalent of saying a neighborhood dog who leaves droppings on other's yards can be dealt with by weekly visits to pick up what's there.

I have to count what?? When??

 

How high can you count?

While the SHB did affirm the permit approval, there was a condition it added. The shellfish companies will now be required to inventory all aquaculture gear, including tubes and netting used at the Haley farm. They will also be required to inventory that same gear when it is removed, and have added to it the amount retrieved during the "patrols". It will be a start to determining how much PVC and netting is not retrieved but instead remains in Puget Sound.

 

This bag is not connected to the others

so there is no cumulative impact.

No strings attached so no cumulative impacts.
Finally, the Board disagreed with the shellfish companies who believe cumulative impacts need only be considered if the project is "antecedent" to others. The companies logic is the equivalent of saying because one bag of PVC pipes is separate from the others the cumulative impact of all need not be considered. However, the Board also believes the County did do a "cumulative impacts analysis" when it considered existing and future farms, that there were no pending permits for farms to the north or south (either ignoring or not being aware of Taylor's pending permit to the south on Mr. Kingman's tidelands and others pending in Thurston County and proposals in Clallam County), and they reviewed the Biological Evaluation from Environ (whose principal, Mr. Reub, owns a geoduck farm).

Make a difference.
Get involved and stay involved. A small number of shellfish companies are transforming Puget Sound's tidelands to grow geoduck for the Asian market. Those who benefit disperse the money to well paid contract scientists, lobbyists, and attorneys to support their actions taking place. You can help by donating to the Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat.

 



 





It's Taylor Shellfish's Turn: Tell Us Why a 30 Acre Geoduck Farm is Good for the Dungeness Bay

Special Note: Meeting location is changed to Guy Cole Convention Center, 202 N. Blake Ave., Feb 11 at 2 p.m. in order to accommodate the expected crowd. (read article in Sequim Gazette here)

 

The river's restored, wetlands are functioning,

the outflow of fresh water is clean. Hear why PVC pipes

in the tidelands are a good idea.

 

 

Now it's Taylor's turn

On February 11 Taylor Shellfish has their opportunity to explain why a 30 acre geoduck farm in Dungeness Bay is a good idea. This follows a standing room only presentation earlier by citizens and scientists who feel it is not a good idea. (read article about earlier meeting here - note that the meeting location mentioned was changed to the above)

 

Good for the economy, good for jobs, good for Taylor.

Good for Dungeness Bay?

 

 

A million dollars spent for a million PVC tubes

Topics they will try to discuss include why it's a good idea to spend multiple millions of dollars to restore the habitat of lower Dungeness River, and then fill the tidelands with >40,000 PVC pipes/acre on the proposed 30 acre farm.

 

$7 million to restore wetlands and floodplains

so tidelands may be populated with PVC pipes.

(click here to read article on "funding boost")

 

"Impacts are local and short term" - unless you have a farm with sections in "rotation" such that harvesting may occur all the time.

Why it's a good idea to place a geoduck farm next to tidelands acquired by WDFW, considered to be part of a "...significant habitat area for a wide diversity of wildlife, fish populations, including marine mammals, seabirds, migratory shorebirds, migratory and breeding waterfowl, neotropical migrants, salmon, shellfish and Dungeness crab." (From WDFW 'SOUTH PUGET SOUND & NORTH OLYMPIC WILDLIFE AREAS 2014 MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE' page 3)

 

WDFW recently acquired tidelands

adjacent to Taylor's proposed farm.

 

Comment on this one.

Hear why it's a good idea for the Army Corps to spend tax payer dollars on re-establishing old river channels and flood plains in order to help establish habitat critical for salmon, only to have the salmon's transition zone where fresh and salt water mix be clouded with sediments during harvest.

 

Army Corps' preferred alternative.

(click here to comment on restoration plan)

 

Is any of that habitat supporting wildlife Taylor Shellfish considers a pest?

Hear whether Taylor Shellfish will consider any of the wildlife supported by the habitat being restored or which now exists are on their list of "pests." (Some ask what native wildlife in Puget Sound don't they consider a pest.) The Dungeness crab noted in the WDFW document above, and almost everything else noted, are on the list. [Note: To read the shellfish industry's guide to what it considers pests and a hindrance to their profits, click here.]

 

Are these restored areas supporting any pests

Taylor Shellfish doesn't like?

 

 

Hear the best paid experts talk about why aquaculture is a preferred use, which logically means any way to grow shellfish is ok.

The public is invited and is encouraged to attend. Presentations by Taylor Shellfish and their "experts" are always well orchestrated and meaningful. It may even be possible Taylor Shellfish will be offering free oysters to those in attendance. Be early to guarantee a seat and bring your cameras to record the event.

 

 



 

 

Reminder: January 10, Sequim, forum on Taylor Shellfish's proposed 30 acre geoduck farm

What's wrong with this picture?

Nothing if you're Taylor Shellfish.

Everything if you care about

Puget Sound's critical marine habitat.

An informational meeting will be held at the Dungeness Schoolhouse, 2781 Towne Road, Sequim, from 2-4 p.m. Saturday, Jan. 10, to discuss implications of Shelton-based Taylor Shellfish Farms’ 30-acre geoduck operation proposal. Read more in the Sequim Gazette.

Should "improved water quality" mean 

this is what can happen in the marine sediments?

Taylor Shellfish thinks so.

(from the Sequim Gazette)

Taylor Shellfish Continues Rolling Over Estuarine Ecosystems to Grow Geoduck for China

Thurston County

Fishtrap Loop's Dickenson Cove

Another estuarine marine habitat transformed for geoduck?

 

Comments due December 16 (Demand the comment period be extended to January 16)

email: Scott McCormick: mccorms@co.Thurston.wa.us

reference Case 2014103991

See here for Notice of Taylor Shellfish application:

https://app.box.com/s/rp19v2ndyzz3tlf5dtg1



 

Taylor Shellfish: Greenfield Creek and Dickenson Cove -

A Marine Habitat - Perfect for PVC, Netting and Sandbags?

Tideland parcels within which 

geoduck farms are proposed.

 

Importance of freshwater outflows to Puget Sound's marine habitat

One of the most critical parts of Puget Sound's larger marine ecosystem are the freshwater outflows - streams, creeks, seeps and rivers - which exist throughout the shoreline areas of Puget Sound. These outflow areas mix fresh and salt water, and carry food and nutrients used by a number of species, many unique to Puget Sound. The importance of them cannot be understated.

 

Fudge Point State Park, Harstine Island

Taylor Shellfish geoduck farm.

In the middle, a wetland outflow.

 

Important for what, and who?

But these unique marine habitat areas also carry with them a different type of importance: economic gain from planting geoduck. In the case of the proposal by Taylor Shellfish, they view the delta area created by the outflow of Greenfield Creek as prime tidelands to grow geoduck. As with all delta areas in Puget Sound, they are flat and expansive, with sandy sediments. This combination creates an area in which PVC pipes are easy to place with nets being easy to lay down. That a stream channel exists in the middle of the proposal is simply unimportant to them and is, in fact, a risk to the survival of the densely planted geoduck.

 

Don't like that outflow? Sandbag it.

Wilson Point, Harstine Island

 

Freshwater and outwash do not mix with geoduck farms. Do sandbags mix with habitat?

One of the primary concerns to geoduck growers about these freshwater stream outflows is that fresh water will kill geoduck, especially young newly planted geoduck. In addition, during storm events, the outwash of sediments, whether from the upland area or those picked up along the upper tidal areas, will bury nets and tubes. It will kill newly planted geoduck and bury netting, making the removal of tubes and nets "very difficult", if not impossible. In a recent biological evaluation for another farm, it was worded this way:

"...sandbags will be used...to prevent a "blowout" coinciding with a heavy rainfall event which would bury tubes and area nets, thus smothering and killing the geoduck seed and making removal of nets and tubes very difficult." Biological Evaluation for Trident Marine Systems

Sandbags on Pickering Passage

placed to divert wetland outflow

away from geoduck farm. 

Maybe it just shouldn't be there.

 

Shoreline Management Act: Part 2 - Protection from the shellfish industry.
The primary reason behind why the original Shoreline Management Act was created was also for a freshwater outflow delta area: the Nisqually Delta. In the late 1960's a proposal was put forth to transform the last large delta area in Puget Sound to a deepwater sea port. As with geoduck farming, this delta too possessed qualities which were needed for a deepwater sea port: flat and expansive, with a deep drop off into deeper waters. It was this one large project which drove the creation of the SMA, created to protect what was then, and still is today, considered the "most valuable and fragile of its natural resources and that there is great concern throughout the state relating to their utilization, protection, restoration, and preservation." How ironic that now it is the shellfish industry who is posing the greatest threat to the marine ecosystem, not through one large project, but with many incremental and cumulatively significant projects.

Get involved. The shellfish industry is and they are not what they were when the Shoreline Management Act was created. A permit process as important as this should not occur during the Christmas planning period. Request Thurston County extend the comment period to January 16 and they deny this permit.

Burley Lagoon: Taylor Shellfish Proposes 25+ Acre Geoduck Farm

[Note: SEPA environmental decision is separate.]

 

Comments Due July 3, 4:30 P.M.

Must include permit number SD/CP15-14 and Applicant, Taylor Shellfish – Western Oyster

Properties LLC aka Burley Lagoon

Attn: Ty Booth, Senior Planner

tbooth@co.pierce.wa.us 253-798-3727

 

or in writing to:

Planning and Land Services,

Attn: Current Planning, Ste. 175,

2401 South 35th Street

Tacoma, WA 98409.

 

25+ Acre Conversion of Burley Lagoon

Pierce County has notified the public that Taylor Shellfish has submitted an application to create a 25+ acre geoduck farm in Burley Lagoon. As described:

Proposed Action: The Applicant is proposing to convert existing shellfish beds from the cultivation (planting, growing, and harvesting) of Pacific oysters, Manila clams, and scatter-planted Geoduck clams to Geoduck clams planted in tubes.

Detail of action area

 

Do starfish celebrate like the Mariners?

Taylor Shellfish states it is only transforming an area from one type of shellfish cultivation to another and little harm will result. Whether the native habitat and species of Burley Lagoon agree will remain to be seen. It's doubtful the starfish seen below agree.

 

Did we win something?

From Burley Lagoon

 

They typically do not "pig pile" in  celebration like the Mariners did in 1995 after beating the Yankees in the 11th inning of the ALDS . Scientists contacted generally agree these were intentionally moved and piled together. More worrisome to some, by concentrating a population such as this the current "starfish wasting" disease which is impacting starfish in Puget Sound will likely spread, further devastating a native species. However, it is less worrisome to the shellfish industry who see them as little more than a "pest." (See industry's complete list of "pests" in their "Pests of Bivalve Aquaculture" document.)



1995 Game 5 ALDS, 11th Inning

Go home Yankees

Feels better than the starfish.

Things linger in low flush toilets
Pierce County once noted that Burley Lagoon is a low flushing lagoon. The result is sediments which are suspended are not simply carried away by the tide but instead linger within the body of water.  Whether Pierce County will permit one of the largest proposed geoduck farm in an enclosed body of water will remain to be seen.

Image created from dive harvesting

pictures of Spencer Cove, Harstine Island.

[Updated 12/11] Mason County Shellfish Expansion: 18 Exemptions Issued for New Geoduck Farms/Shelton's Public Hearing on Boathouse Conversions

[Update 12/11: Shoreline Permit exemptions have been approved for Steve Wilson. County online records do not show those for Seattle Shellfish, Taylor Shellfish, or Matt Smith's Trident Marine Services have yet been issued or approved, only received. As seen in the 12/12 post, Taylor's Fudge Point geoduck farms were installed in May of this year.]

Shellfish Industry's Ongoing Expansion Into

Puget Sound's Mason County

Geoduck farms exempt from shoreline permits
Mason County has issued 18 exemptions for new geoduck farms this year. Four have been issued to Steve Wilson, one to Seattle Shellfish, six to Matt Smith, and seven to Taylor Shellfish. In addition to the exemptions, the Corps of Engineers and Department of Ecology must also issue authorizations which, in some cases, have been issued. In some cases unauthorized actions were taken requiring removal of structures from the tidelands.

 

Unauthorized placement of sandbags

by Matt Smith's Trident Marine Services.

The Corps required them to be removed.



Boathouse conversion to shellfish "FLUPSY's" to growout shellfish
Permit Hearing: December 16, 10AM
City of Shelton Civic Center
525 West Cota Street, Shelton, WA
Contact: Jason Dose, 360-432-5102, : jasond@ci.shelton.wa.us

"Lizzie Nelson [Capital Aquaculture Consulting] said she would operate out of all boathouses but knows that might not be fair." Presentation to Port of Shelton, June 4, 2013 )
"...doesn't think the Port should convert the marina into this but instead expand to allow the commercial operations." Citizen comment
"Suggested contacting Simpson to see if their tidelots could be used for FLUPSY operations." Citizen comment

In addition to the exempted geoduck farms the shellfish industry has now proposed to expand further its conversion of boathouses in the Oakland Bay marina to shellfish grow-out facilities. Through the use of "FLUPSY's" (floating upweller system) the boathouses would be converted to facilities used to growout shellfish to a larger size before planting. John Lentz had commented on an earlier permit proposal that so doing could increase hatchery efficiency 10 fold, increasing hatchery "output" from "70 million to 700" million shellfish (February 8, 2013). Citizens have already expressed concerns that the conversion to commercial use of the already limited space in the marina should be dealt with by either expanding the marina into a separate commercial section or using adjacent tideland areas already being used.

Chelsea Farm's Earlier Proposed Conversion

 

Existing FLUPSY's north of marina.

How to Help Ensure Puget Sound's Nearshore Environment is Protected

In Puget Sound there are currently two groups on different legal levels who intend to hold the shellfish industry to the same standards as upland property owners are. Case Inlet Shoreline Association (a member of the Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat) and APHETI (the Association for the Protection of Hammersley, Eld and Totten Inlets) are both appealing various permit approvals. CISA is focused on geoduck farms and has appealed permits to the Shoreline Hearings Board. APHETI is focused on a 58 raft mussel farm at the mouth of Totten Inlet and is now at the Superior Court in partnership with Thurston County, appealing a reversal by the Shoreline Hearings Board of the County's denial of Taylor Shellfish's permit application. All are in south Puget Sound, south of the Tacoma Narrows.

Geoduck Farm

~40,000 PVC pipes/acre

Is this really benign?

South Puget Sound is perhaps the most intensely developed areas in all of Puget Sound. While in the early 1970's shellfish aquaculture was, perhaps, a relatively benign operation run by small families, like all industries it has grown and evolved. It is now controlled by a few large companies who are generating immense profits from geoduck farming. These profits are being poured into local governments to craft the updated Shoreline Master Plans such that "industrial" levels of aquaculture are considered a "preferred use." Lobbyists and public relations firms have been hired. It is an industry.

You can help ensure that the future of Puget Sound's shoreline will include the protection of the nearshore environment below the high tide line, into the intertidal and subtidal areas. This habitat supports species which have evolved over thousands of years to be able to take advantage of a shoreline area which is continually exposed and covered, twice each day. It is unlike anything anywhere else and is one of the primary areas which the Shoreline Management Act was intended to protect. It is an area being transformed forever by the shellfish industry and if allowed to continue will never be the same.

Donations to CISA or APHETI will have long term returns which our children, and theirs, will enjoy. Get involved and make a difference.

Friends of Burley Lagoon Comments for Pierce County Shoreline Master Program Update



Correction: Email to tfairba@co.pierce.wa.us

 



Shouldn't this structure have required a permit?

What: Pierce County Shoreline Master Program update study session
When: September 18
Action: Email individual comments or support for comments below to the Pierce County Planning Commission, c/o Toni Fairbanks - tfairba@co.pierce.wa.us

*NOTE: EMAIL SHOULD BE SENT BY TUESDAY AFTERNOON, THE 17TH
**BE SURE TO REQUEST AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THAT YOUR EMAIL HAS BEEN RECEIVED

Friends of Burley Lagoon Request

Friends of Burley Lagoon's President Heather McFarlane has prepared the following comments on Pierce County's Shoreline Master Program Update. They reflect concerns of many in Pierce County and other Puget Sound counties that the protection of Puget Sound's shorelines should not stop at the high tide line. A passive shellfish industry in 1972 being considered a "preferred use" by the Shoreline Management Act when it was passed should not now give that industry carte blanche to develop the tidelands as it sees fit. (See Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat for general information.)

The Friends of Burley Lagoon have asked people to consider becoming involved in the Pierce County update process by sending in their own comments to the "study session" by September 17, or email the following message to:
Pierce County Planning Commission c/o Clerk, Toni Fairbanks

tfairba@co.Pierce.wa.us

"Ms. McFarlane's comments of 9/16/13 to the Planning Commission re the SMP,  represent my views as well and I wish my name noted in the record. I would also appreciate an email acknowledgment."   

Comments follow:

(click on image to enlarge)

 

 (click to enlarge)

 (click to enlarge)

 

 (click to enlarge)