House Bill 1037/Imidacloprid - Pesticides/Politics/Oyster Lobbyists in Washington State

An Exercise in the Political Process In WA:

Polluting Washington's Marine Waters.

House Bill 1037

If at first you don't succeed: How to get approval to apply pesticides directly onto oyster beds and marine waters in Puget Sound, Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay: 

1. Give a Bill a sweet sounding name: "The Aquaculture Fairness Act" (House Bill 1037)

2. Claim that because others are polluting Washington's marine waters then you should be allowed to as well. Section 2(2) of HB1037: 

"...runoff from the yards pours into storm drains in urban areas and is carried out to the sea"

3. Never give up: After being told by the Department of Ecology they would not approve a permit to apply Imidacloprid to oyster beds and marine waters in Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor, the oyster industry did not give up. They appealed the denial.
4. Continue to be involved in the Department of Ecology's Clean Water Committee:  When the process fails, continue pressing within the political process and stay involved in Committees. Try to mend fences with other industries you've upset and turn a blind eye to what's being proposed by others within your industry.

From DOE on the shellfish industry being involved in a Clean Water Committee: Polluted runoff from our streets, forested lands and farms can carry nutrients, bacteria and other pollution into our lakes, streams and rivers. Preventing this type of pollution is our greatest challenge to restoring the health of Washington’s waters – a public resource.

5. Approve the draft of a Bill which supports your position that because runoff from the land is polluting Washington's marine waters then it should be okay for you to apply a pesticide directly onto Washington's oyster beds and in its marine waters (HB1037).

[Special Note: In the proposed Bill and any language used to promote the new narrative, be sure that you don't mention other industries as the source of runoff you're concerned with. It's only "...runoff from the yards...". Not dairy, cattle, agriculture or forestry the shellfish industry has so loudly complained about in the past.]

To read more on the history of the shellfish industry's involvement in transforming the tidelands and marine habitat, read M. Pearle's "Toxic Pearl" (read a review of the book here).

Available for purchase: at Amazon or Orca Books. 

Willapa Bay: Shellfish Growers Claim they had Only "Paused" Imidacloprid Permit, Not Withdrawn It

Monster from the Deep

The native shrimp, or the hand holding it?

`

screen shot from KOMO News broadcast

 

Bad timing.

Two days following the EPA agreeing imidacloprid has played a role in honey bee die-offs, and despite recent studies suggesting "...neonic [imidacloprid] pesticides may also harm birds, butterflies, and water-borne invertebrates", the hand of Willapa Bay shellfish growers has risen from the sediments again with claims of "family farms" being unable to survive without being able to use the neurotoxin on shellfish beds. (see article on EPA press release in Mother Jones) This, despite Willapa Bay shellfish grower Taylor Shellfish (a "5th generation family farm") being opposed to the use of the neurotoxin.

 



From Mother Jones, January 7

 

KOMO's story
KOMO News has released a story on how shellfish growers in Willapa Bay now claim they did not "withdraw" or cancel the permit to apply the neurotoxin imidacloprid to shellfish beds, only "paused" it. They have now asked to redefine "withdrawn" and use the word "paused" instead and have the permit approved again.

What attorneys get paid to ask:

What is the definition of is? Or in this case, "withdrawn."

(screen shot from KOMO News)

 

The "heritage of Washington" is not polluting its waters with neurotoxins. It is preventing them from being used in its waters.

The attorney representing shellfish growers in Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor claims use of this neurotoxin is about "family farms" and the "heritage of Washington". Not application of a neurotoxin shown to have devastating effects on bee colonies, and more importantly, native aquatic species.

 

Shellfish attorney Doug Steding, paid to

redefine what's asked.



(screen shot from KOMO News)

 

The Department of Ecology needs to look beyond what is spoon fed to them by the shellfish growers and their attorneys.

The Department of Ecology now says "...we just don't know" what studies will show. It may be the current studies are correct, which show that imidacloprid and "...neonicotinoids represent a significant risk to surface waters and the diverse aquatic and terrestrial fauna that these ecosystems support." (from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25454246)

 



Department of Ecology: "We just don't know."

Paid to explain why the permit was

 approved in the first place and what

a re-issuance may mean.

(screen shot from KOMO News)

 

Everybody smile - the camera's on.

PR photos are nice, but they really don't show the reality of what the shellfish growers are doing to the intertidal areas. Every business wants to make a profit, but sometimes it turns out the way that profit is made is not in the state-wide interest nor the long-term benefit to aquatic ecosystems. Shellfish growers need to adapt to the reality of what their consumers want: shellfish grown in pristine waters, not a chemical soup which has lessens the diversification of species so they may make more money.

 



Shellfish growers out for a walk,

looking for somewhere to step and sink.

(screen shot from KOMO News)

Let loose the PR

 

Get involved. January 15, from 2 to 4 PM, Governor Inslee will meet with shellfish growers and others to discuss Washington's "Shellfish Initiate" at National Fish and Oyster, 5028 Meridian Rd NE, Olympia, WA. You can also contact him and legislators here to tell them how you feel about pesticides in Washington's tidelands:

Governor Inslee: https://fortress.wa.gov/es/governor/
Legislative and Congressional contacts:
http://app.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/