Public Hearings February 19, 1:30 and 3:30 - Pesticides in Washington Oysters: See it live or on TV

Washington Legislature to the 

Department of Ecology:

"You will authorize the use 

of pesticides on oyster beds

in Washington State."

At 1:30 and 3:30 the Washington State legislature will hold 2 hearings on Senate and House bills which will force the Department of Ecology to authorize the use of the neurotoxic pesticide Imidacloprid on Washington oyster beds. 

After DOE denied a permit application. 

After the European Union banned the use of Imidacloprid. 

After France banned the entire class of pesticides Imidacloprid is one of (neonicotinoids). 

After the East Coast Shellfish Growers pointedly said they "...use no feeds, fertilizers, pesticides or antibiotics."

All of Washington's oysters which will be perceived as poisoned.

Washington's oyster industry is about to be tainted in its entirety because a few growers in Willapa Bay are unwilling to change their growing methods. And because a few large growers won't tell them and their lobbyists to drop the idea. Washington's oyster industry and the legislature needs to wake up.

Get Involved
Public Hearings Tuesday, February 19, 1:30 and 3:30
SB5626: "By May 15, 2019, the department [of ecology] shall authorize the use of imidacloprid" in Willapa Bay.
Senate Agriculture, Water, Natural Resources & Parks, 1:30
Live on TVW here: https://www.tvw.org/watch/?eventID=2019021318
Comment here: https://app.leg.wa.gov/pbc/bill//5626

HB1611: "Directs the Department of Ecology (Ecology), by May 15, 2019, to authorize the use of imidacloprid" in Willapa Bay.
Environment and Energy Committee, 3:30
Live TV here: https://www.tvw.org/watch/?eventID=2019021324
Comment here: https://app.leg.wa.gov/pbc/bill//1611

Oyster Industry, Politics and Pesticides

Read it and weep.

This is not a good idea.

(Purchase "Toxic Pearl" at Orca Books)

Who needs science when you can spend the money on politicians instead?
The Seattle Times writes on the current push by politicians who feel the oyster industry should be free to spray pesticides on oyster beds and the marine waters of WA so they won't have to spend money on improved growing techniques. Or on science which shows this ill thought idea is somehow in the statewide interest.
Read the article here: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/politics-has-science-on-the-run-and-not-just-in-the-other-washington/

Like a bad oyster,

this just makes you sick.

Ad nauseam: It makes you feel worse than a bad oyster because it just keeps coming and coming.  
Unlike what the recent lawsuits filed against Pierce County by Taylor Shellfish and the Foss family claim, ad nauseam, the Shoreline Management Act is not in place to "plan for, foster, and give preference to aquaculture." It is in place to protect the critical marine ecosystems from industries who have become blinded by profits and feel their developments and actions within this ecosystem should be allowed to grow, unfettered, free from oversight.
Read Taylor lawsuit against Pierce County's Shoreline Master Program here:
 https://app.box.com/s/mjxvavgay49rqcs3fwvvw09utjjegu28
Read the Foss family's companion lawsuit here:
https://app.box.com/s/aaiclnj3ovyq9h5n5ix4mhi90wcdpgsa

"Shazam! I've created something from nothing!"

It doesn't matter how many times you say it. It's not there.
Nowhere in the Shoreline Management Act does it say aquaculture is supposed to be fostered and given preference over everything else as these suits, and the Department of Ecology seems to believe. The priority of the SMA is to protect this unique and fragile ecosystem from fragmentation.

The Shoreline Management Act is not subservient to NOAA policies created to do nothing more than promote aquaculture, many times based on dubious - at best - "science".

The Departement of Ecology's "handbook" on aquaculture painfully tries to outline the "legal" framework for why aquaculture should be placed on a pedestal, tripping over NOAA and national policies. The reality is the Shoreline Management Act was passed before NOAA's Coastal Zone Management Act. It was passed before the National Shellfish Initiative was created. It was passed before Washington's shellfish initiative was created. The SMA was voted on, and approved, by the citizens of WA.  Most importantly, both the National and State initiatives are nothing more than marketing documents created by lobbyists for the industry and politicians beholden to those lobbyists. They were not voted on - and overwhelmingly approved - by citizens.

Get involved. There are 3 bills politicians are trying to pass which would allow the application of Imidacloprid, a non-discriminate neurotoxic pesciticide (it doesn't care if you're a shrimp or a crab or any other crustacean) on oyster beds and Washington's marine waters. Tell your representative(s) and Governor Inslee the Shoreline Management Act is not meant to allow a wave of the wand to allow pesticides in Washington's marine waters. 

House Bills 1611 and 1037
https://app.leg.wa.gov/pbc/bill//1611
https://app.leg.wa.gov/pbc/bill//1037

Senate Bill 5626
https://app.leg.wa.gov/pbc/bill//5626

Governor Inslee:
https://www.governor.wa.gov/contact/contact/send-gov-inslee-e-message

2019 Brings Publication of a Book on Pesticides and the Shellfish Industry

In Toxic Pearl, the author reveals the secrets and politics that enabled the destruction of our Washington State native aquatic life, and inspires others to stand up and speak out against this continuing industrial conversion of our marine ecosystem.

- Laura Hendricks, Coalition to Protect Puget Sound

Toxic Pearl, Pacific NW Shellfish Companies' Addiction to Pesticides, by M. Perle, is “The toxic legacy of the WA Shellfish industry", writes Amy van Saun, Staff Attorney for Center for Food Safety.  People should want to know where their oysters come from and “the destructive relationship we can have with the environment that sustains us, and our own health."

A reader should take a broader view while reading this history and consider the link between the Columbia River salmon struggles through their migration to the Pacific Coast, then through their coastal feeding grounds in the toxic shellfish sites described in this book, then onward to the Strait of Juan de Fuca to feed the dwindling population of the Southern Resident ORCAs. It seems all related.

Again, the reader may want to take a more wholistic view of the loss of feeding grounds for migrating birds, such as the eelgrass-dependent Brant. A reader may consider the connection between the USFWS Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge eelgrass resting-feeding grounds for Brants, which could be facing habitat loss there from a proposed shellfish farm, to their stopover at Willapa Bay on the Pacific Coast. It, now, is more like a “grab-and-go” feeding site of whatever may be left by shellfish farmers, hopefully sustaining the birds until their next stopover site. Point being, what is left for these birds?  Where can they find resting sites and where can they find food without pesticides?  

Laura Hendricks of the Coalition to Protect Puget Sound writes, this book should “inspire others to stand up and speak out against this continuing industrial conversion of our marine ecosystems.”  As van Saun says, this doesn’t need to be the future.  

Website: www.toxicpearl.com provides additional information.

Available for sale here: https://www.orcabooks.com/book/9780578401621