Highest Astronomical Tide Line? Pacific County Shoreline Master Program Update Questioned

60 days to appeal Pacific County's SMP update, starting from January 17.

HATs off to the County Commissioners
January 17 Pacific County's SMP update was accepted. Some are now wondering how it was that one area of Pacific County's shoreline is defined as being at the "Highest Astronomical Tide" (HAT) line, and other areas are the Ordinary High Water, typically defined as the average of the highest of the high tides. Two Districts, those represented by Commissioners Ayers and Rogers, do not have that definition (HAT) adapted.

Shifting lines in the sand, shifting times.
The difference can, in some cases, be very significant, impacting where buffer lines are set and developments occur. Using the Department of Ecology's definition, the line is towards the water, in essence providing upland owners a larger parcel and buffers beginning further towards the water. In the case of the HAT, that line is where the highest tide of the year (or perhaps decade, or maybe within the National Tidal Datum Epoch period - an 18 year period of time) is. How one determines that is a surveyor's dream, as they will have to spend hours researching the topography of the land and the cycles of the moon/sun to determine just where that line is. Or wait all year for the highest tide (assuming it is an annual event they are talking about).

Making waves in a storm.
To compound the problem, there is an issue over whether the line being pushed even higher by waves needs to be considered. If one is able to determine the HAT line, what happens if there is a storm which shows the water is actually rising higher? And what if there happens to be a low pressure event offshore which coincides with the HAT, in turn, pushing that line even higher?

Get involved. The seemingly arbitrary adoption of shorelines in two districts being defined as the Highest Astronomical Tide is going to cause Pacific County and property owners challenges as they move forward.

(SMP change from Dan Driscoll, Oysterville Seafarms at 360-244-0736)

Willapa Bay: Oysterville Sea Farms Court Decision May be Appealed by Pacific County

Intensification or Expansion?

What guidance will Pacific County's commissioners give the prosecutor? What guidance will Pacific County residents give the commissioners?

The Chinook Observer writes on the recent court decision in Pacific County over whether Dan Driscoll and his Oysterville Sea Farms operation are in violation of county regulations. These violations were reportedly driven from family tensions between Mr. Driscoll and his estranged uncle Dick Sheldon and son Brian (proponents of spraying imidacloprid neurotoxins and the herbicide imazamox on Willapa Bay shellfish beds), using their political influence to "motivate" Pacific County to begin an action against Mr. Driscoll. As reported by OPB in 2013:

In April 2012, for example, Barnett Kalikow, an Olympia-based attorney who represents Sheldon, pressured County Prosecutor David Burke and commissioners to take action against Driscoll, hinting that if they didn’t, their own careers could be at risk. “If the prosecutor fails in his duty, we have a number of options, ranging from extraordinary writs to recall petitions or both … . Any interference, abetting, advising, or pressuring the prosecutor to ignore or violate this statute may subject the commissioner himself to criminal sanction,” Kalikow wrote.

The OPB article continues, noting:

In June 2011, Sheldon filed a complaint with the county, pointing out that Driscoll was violating his agreement with the county by selling items such as jam and pasta sauce that went beyond the limited inventory the county had approved.

Get involved - elections are coming and commissioners, or those choosing to run against them, should hear (emails below)
Currently, Pacific County's prosecutor is seeking guidance from the commissioners on whether to appeal the decision. In the 2013 OPB article, Faith Taylor-Edred is quoted as saying:

Taylor-Eldred said, “Get involved in the process. When there’s a public hearing, they have to show up and voice their opinions.”

Good advice then, better advice now. Terms for Commissioner Frank Wolf (fwolfe@co.pacific.wa.us)  and Steve Rogers (srogers@co.pacific.wa.us) end in 2016. Lisa Ayers' (layers@co.pacific.wa.us) term runs through 2018.

Is Japanese Eelgrass now a Noxious Weed in ALL of Willapa Bay?

Why would the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board (WSNWCB) consider such a proposal? The Environmental Impact Statement addressing the application of Imazamox on commercial farms in Willapa Bay has not even gone through the scoping process  nor has a General Permit for its application been approved. [click here for Imazamox EIS Scoping and Discharge Permit information]

PUBLIC NOTICE: A hearing will be held in Yakima on November 6 from 1 to 3 PM to consider expanding the definition of Japanese eelgrass as a Class C noxious weed beyond commercial shellfish farms in Willapa Bay. Comments will be accepted by email to noxiousweeds@agr.wa.gov by 5PM November 5; mail to WSNWCB, PO Box 42560, Olympia, WA 98504-2560; or, in person.

 

The Pacific County Noxious Weed Board (PCNWB) is not satisfied with a measured and balanced approach on how to deal with Japanese eelgrass. It has told WSNWCB they now want Japanese eelgrass in all of Willapa Bay to be declared a noxious weed. This is another step to the eradication of Japanese eelgrass through the application of the herbicide Imazamox in all of Willapa Bay and elsewhere. The process should be stopped here and the EIS initiated by the Depatment of Ecology completed before any further actions are taken by WSNWCB. [click here for DOE EIS information]

 

"Therefore we do not at this time support development of a NPDES and State Waste Discharge General Permit addressing the application of imazamox on commercial shellfish beds." US Fish and Wildlife letter to the Department of Ecology, March 7, 2012 [click here for copy of letter]

 

"We encourage the DOE to adopt a precautionary approach to aquatic herbicide application to control Japanese eelgrass..." WDFW letter to DOE, March 7, 2012 [click here for copy of letter]

 

"...DNR does not support issuance of a NPDES permit to allow imazamox to be broadly used to control Zostera japonica [Japanese eelgrass] on aquaculture farms at this time." DNR letter to DOE, March 9, 2012  [click here for copy of letter]

 

Look a little deeper and you'll what

they don't want you to see.

"...the seagrass system has not only scientific value, but an enormous economic value as well. This aspect appears not to be well understood by the general public..." The Ecology of Eelgrass Meadows in the Pacific Northwest: A Community Profile, US Fish and Wildlife Service, 1984 ("USFWS Community Profile")

 

Pacific County Noxious Weed Board and the shellfish industry believe the only economic values to consider are shellfish related. Any other species dependent on Japanese eelgrass are of secondary importance. They see no risk from "collateral damage."
 

Willapa Bay Wildlife Refuge

Migratory Birds

(photo by "wildbio")

"...Zostera japonica [Japanese eelgrass], [is] a favorite foodplant of black brant [geese] and other waterfowl" USFWS Community Profile

"Conflicting uses of the eelgrass habitat, such as oyster culture, ...need suitable management." USFWS Community Profile

"There are, at present, no known undesirable effects of eelgrass in the Pacific Northwest region" USFWS Community Profile

 

Importance of eelgrass

(including Japanese eelgrass)

in the food web.

(click to enlarge)

 

Eelgrass' location is in the lower right-hand corner.

 

"There was some discussion at the November 2 [2011] WSNWCB meeting, including over the value of adding a species to the Class C noxious weed list when there were no county weed boards intending to mandate control at that time." Concise Explanatory Statement, Noxious Weed Board December 2, 2011 [Detailing why the decision to lists Japanese eelgrass was made, including comments for and against the proposal.]



Why did the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board open the door for Imazamox to be applied on such an expansive area of Willapa Bay (all commercial shellfish farms)?

Shellfish corporations/lobbyists are implementing a strategy which consisted of first having Japanese eelgrass removed from Fish and Wildlife's Priority Habitat Species list; then declared a noxious weed by the WSNWCB; followed by getting the Department of Ecology to approve application of the herbicide Imazamox.  In support, they provided a "White Paper" written by Jeff Fisher (formally with Environ, now a Branch Chief with NOAA's National Marine Fisheries covering Mason and Pacific Counties), who is also a shellfish farmer.

Because of citizen involvement the proposal to apply Imazamox was scaled back from all of Washington's marine waters to its application only on commercial shellfish farms in Willapa Bay. Corporate shellfish farmers will continue to press agencies for what they need to increase profits. If you care, get involved.

(email exchanges with WDFW and Bill Dewey, Taylor Shellfish)