Washington Court of Appeals Agrees to Publish Decision Supporting Permit Denial of Geoduck Operation

The Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat has released a statement about the Washington Court of Appeals agreeing to publish their decision which affirmed a Shorelines Hearings Board permit denial for a geoduck operation in Pierce County. Despite immense sums of money having been spent by the shellfish industry for attorneys, expert witnesses, and even political donations in support of a Pierce County attorney running for mayor of Gig Harbor, and a final attempt by the industry to claim the decision had little in the way of public interest, the panel of judges agreed to publish their ruling.
Read decision in support of denying permit here:
https://app.box.com/s/rgjvffsgdrklchytus6uwy7chmtljv56
Read decision agreeing to publish here:
https://app.box.com/s/ww0vd3g2r648hjugljqg3v8xk7mgsc50

Dear Interested Parties,

The Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat is pleased to announce that the Washington State Court of Appeals has granted our motion to publish the Detienne Shoreline Hearings Board win that will serve to protect our marine critical habitat, eelgrass, forage fish, the public's right for safe recreation/windsurfing and the need for cumulative impacts analysis..

The Washington State Court of Appeals, Division 1 decision affirmed the Shorelines Hearings Board (SHB) decision 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 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."

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us.

Sincerely,

Laura Hendricks

Director, Coalition To Protect Puget Sound/Habitat

(253) 509-4987

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/

Superior Court will Decide the Detienne/Chelsea Subtidal Geoduck Farm Permit Tomorrow

[Update 4/3: The Superior Court has ruled in favor of the Shorelines Hearings Board decision to deny the permit. Details will be provided when available.]

What: Superior Court will decide whether the Shorelines Hearings Board decision to deny the permit for the Detienne/Chelsea subtidal geoduck farm will stand or be reversed.
When: 1:30
Where: Thurston County Superior Court  

2000 Lakeridge Drive 

Building 2 

Olympia 98502  

Why it's important: The Shorelines Hearings Board reversed Pierce County's approval of this permit saying its uniqueness should have resulted in Pierce County having denied the permit. It is the first subtidal geoduck farm in Puget Sound, within one of the only remaining eelgrass beds in south Puget Sound. 

SHB Decision: "the Permit is therefore DENIED." You may read the SHB decision here.

 

Permit denied by the SHB,

reversing Pierce County's decision.

 

 

To recap (from Friends of Burley Lagoon):   Pierce County originally  granted a Permit, with conditions,  for the geoduck farm in Wauna.  Citizens there, with the Coalition, appealed the County's decision to the Shoreline Hearings Board.   After a six- day hearing, the SHB denied the permit.   Pierce County (via Deputy Prosector advisor Jill Guernsey) appealed the SHB decision initially on a procedural matter, DeTienne/Chelsea Farms cited other issues.   The issues were heard by a single Judge of Thurston County Superior Court.  The Judge denied Pierce County's procedural portion;  the other issues will be decided at tomorrow's hearing before the same Judge.

(read the SHB denial here)

 

Politics Pays: Jill Guernsey, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney 

gets some money from Plauche and Carr - after she appeals.

 

Ms. Guernsey runs for Mayor of Gig Harbor - unopposed - and wins

Entwined within the story is another of shellfish politics. In February of 2013, Pierce County, through their attorney Jill Guernsey, decided to appeal the SHB reversal of their granting the permit (see Ms Guernsey/Pierce County Petition for Review here, which was denied). In March of 2013, a $500 donation to Ms. Gurensey's campaign  from the law firm representing Chelsea and Detienne, Plauche and Carr, was recorded as having been made (see Plauche Carr Petition for Review here). In April of 2013, Ms. Guernsey formally kicked off her Gig Harbor mayoral campaign. She

 

Does a job depend on political donations?

Dennis Hamberg, Director of Pierce County

Planning and Land Services helps out too.

 

 

Burley Lagoon Meeting: Why aren't new structures in Burley Lagoon being permitted?

November 1: A meeting between Taylor Shellfish, Pierce County's Jill Guernsey (Gig Harbor Mayoral candidate and recipient of Taylor attorney's campaign donation) and Ty Booth, the Department of Ecology and Department of Fish and Wildlife will take place to discuss permitting of aquaculture in Burley Lagoon. The public is not invited to attend.

 

Burley Lagoon

Transformation of a passive activity to an industrial operation
After Taylor Shellfish leased the tidelands of Burley Lagoon from the Yamashita family a transformation of this once passively managed area has occurred. Citizens throughout the area have asked Pierce County, the Department of Ecology, the Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Taylor Shellfish why none has required any permits. The response, "It's just a continuation of what was there before."

It's not aquaculture, it's the structures
The issue lost on the agencies responsible for protecting the shorelines of Puget Sound is not whether aquaculture has existed in Burley Lagoon. It is how modern aquaculture is now being practiced. Mr Yamashita is no longer placing oyster shells with spat on the tidelands and waiting for clutch to form. Wide swaths of tidelands are being covered in netting. Structures - in fact hazards to navigation - are appearing throughout Burley Lagoon. Industrial pumps pressurize hoses to spray shell from barges at 2AM in the morning. And, of interest to those concerned about removing structures in Drakes Estero, the old wooden structures seen in the picture below were allowed to be removed without concern to adverse impacts. Some, however, were replaced with new structures.

Old raft structures, most now removed

without any permitting required - or

environmental harm.

(Take note Drakes Bay Oyster.)

 

New structures which replaced the old.

No permits.

New navigational hazards on the tidelands.

No permits.

 

Expansive netting on the tidelands.

No permits.

 

Netting and metal structure

creating a navigational hazard.

No permits.

 

Good morning Burley Lagoon (day time picture

of what occurred at 2AM in Burley Lagoon).

No permit.

 

Proposed - PVC pipes and netting

for 30 acre geoduck farm.

Permits? Stay tuned.

 



The Future of Gig Harbor - Who will be the Mayor?
In the middle of all this is Jill Guernsey, currently the attorney for Pierce County. She is also a  candidate for the position of Mayor of Gig Harbor whose urban growth boundaries are beginning to encroach into lands near Burley Lagoon. She has gladly accepted financial contributions from Taylor Shellfish's legal firm Plauche and Carr. No doubt Taylor Shellfish has been pleased no permitting has been required for any of their activities currently transforming Burley Lagoon. How voters will feel about it remains to be seen.