October 20, 1PM PCT/4PM ECT the Center for Food Safety will present a webinar on protecting the public's marine ecosystem from industrial scale aquaculture. While focused on Washington State, the significant and adverse impacts are a current and growing worldwide problem. Make a difference in life today which continues  into the future.

To register, click on this link: 

https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/join/6168/webinar-the-fight-to-save-our-oceans-the-faces-behind-the-cases

Zangle Cove and Army Corps Lawsuits: Like a geoduck's growth, the process of law moves slowly.

Why do lawsuits have to be filed to prevent this

from happening to Puget Sound's tidelands?

Zangle Cove: Like a fungus, PVC and netting

begin to spread over the tidelands of Zangle Cove,

adding to that spread throughout Puget Sound.

"Plastic free July" is over. Back to planting 

PVC tubing in Puget Sound's tidelands.

 

Puget Sound's entire food web

is being impacted by this.

1: Zangle Cove/Wild Fish Conservancy/Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat vs Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and Pacific Northwest Aquaculture 

Geoduck are grown for nothing more than satisfying a Chinese superstition with what Washingtonians consider a "junk clam". This tideland owner claims he "wants to feed the world". In fact, the "world" he refers to is little more than the elite in China who are able to afford a $100/pound clam and a few curious tourists. After clearing the tidelands of what is believed to be the oldest living species, up to 168 years old, the operator returned and populated the tidelands with PVC piping and netting, transforming these tidelands forever.

Zangle Cove Lawsuit Papers - Why Hydraulic Permits should be required.

Opening Brief

Protect Zangle Cove, The Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat and the Wild Fish Conservancy have filed a suit against Washington's Department of Fish and Wildlife demanding hydraulic permits be required for these activities. Unlike a dock or bulkhead, these structures being placed within Puget Sound's waters and tidelands avoid any oversight by WDFW, the result of nothing more than a flawed interpretation of a flawed Attorney General opinion. 

As detailed in the petitioners opening brief, filed by Lane Powell's Claire Loebs and Richard Lintermans, WDFW not requiring HPA's for impacts to aquatic habitat from aquaculture's actions was not a legislative action but a misreading of an AG opinion. In that opinion, they accurately state:

"..no mention is made of aquaculture’s other potential harmful effects to wild fish that the Hydraulic Code might prevent, such as the destruction of habitat, removal of food sources, and release of pollutants." (p.12)

Response to Motion for Judgement - "a distraction and a waste of judicial resources"
In addition to the owner's waste of Puget Sound's natural resources in the quest for extracting revenue from Washington's most valuable marine ecosystem - the intertidal area over which waters ebb and flow daily - papers filed by the operator and owner were described this way:

"PNA’s [Pacific Northwest Aquaculture] Motion for Judgment is untimely, will waste the resources of the Court, and in the end, would have little impact on the practical resolution of any matter before the Court. The Court should decline to consider the Motion for Judgment separate from the hearing on the merits"

2: Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat/Center for Food Safety vs US Army Corps - Cumulative impacts matter and they are real. 

The things you discover in discovery.

In a separate but related lawsuit the Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat and the Center for Food Safety have filed suit against the US Army Corps claiming they did not adequately consider cumulative impacts in their approving of permits for aquaculture. During the period of discovery, in which information is presented by various parties to be used in their case, a draft of a cumulative impact analysis by the Corps was found. The Coalition found within that draft the following:

“The proposed action is likely to adversely affect designated critical habitat for several species listed under the ESA including Puget Sound Chinook salmon, Hood Canal summer run chum salmon, and Puget Sound steelhead.” p. 101

“Given the magnitude of the impacts in acreage, the importance of eelgrass to the marine ecosystem, and the scale of the aquaculture impacts relative to other stressors, the impacts are considered significant.” p. 103

“The action does threaten a violation of State requirements under the Shoreline Management Act to achieve no net loss of eelgrass and Federal requirements to protect eelgrass imposed under the ESA for aquaculture activities. The proposed action is not consistent with either of these requirements.” p. 101

 “The conclusion therefore is that significant cumulative effects to surf smelt and sand lance spawning habitat would occur due to the proposed action.” p. 112

“The proposed action is inconsistent with State requirements under the SMA to protect forage fish spawning habitat.” p. 111

 Additional comments in papers filed in response to those filed by the Corps and Taylor Shellfish are found in the PLAINTIFF COALTION’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, and PLAINTIFF COALITION’S MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. In that filing, attorney Karl G Anuta  notes:

"... the Corps and Taylor (hereafter collectively referred to as “Defendants”) present a range of factual arguments that appear to be little more than an attempt to confuse the issues at hand. Defendants also ask the court to ignore the documents and actual facts present in the Record..."

"... the Corps failed to take all the steps required by NEPA, and the CWA. The Corps ignored the analysis of their own staff about the significant impacts that NWP 48 was having and was likely to have in the future."

 "The arguments presented by Defendants to try to justify what the Corps did are both factually and legally invalid. Defendants neither make compelling arguments that support the agency position, nor successfully challenge the arguments brought by CPPSH. The positions taken by counsel for the Defendants are, for the most part, little more than post hoc rationalization efforts that are not consistent with the Decision Documents in the actual Record."

Get involved. Donations are tax deductible.
Puget Sound's marine ecosystem supports a wide diversity of species which are being impacted by industrial aquaculture. It is not benign and impacts are cumulative. You can help with donations to the Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat; Wild Fish Conservancy; and Center for Food Safety.

PCC Markets Writes on Southern Resident Orca With Ecosystem Wide View

Get involved:  Tell your grandchildren

you helped preserve 

Southern Resident Orca

not

watched them go extinct.

A young orca and Chinook salmon near San Juan Island. 

Image: National Marine Fisheries Service permit #19091.

PCC Markets provides a piece penned by Anne Mosness on ecosystem wide impacts resulting in the endangered Southern Resident Orca population threatened with extinction in our lifetime. Impacts from development range from impassable culverts, dams and industrial level aquaculture activities threatening habitat for both forage fish and Chinook salmon, the former a food source for the salmon, the latter the food source for the Orca. The article ends with suggestions on actions to take, copied below.

WHAT WE CAN DO

• Dispose of unused drugs in garbage. Do not flush down the toilet.
• Don’t wash your car in the driveway or on the street. Wash your car on the lawn to filter oily chemicalrunoff — or take it to a car wash where suds and chemicals are diverted to a water treatment plant, away from storm drains that empty into Puget Sound. It is illegal to let detergents and contaminated waste enter storm drains in King and Snohomish counties. If you do, you could be fined.
• Switch to an electric car.
• Stencil “No Dumping — Drains to Sound” at your neighborhood storm drains. Contact public works or storm water maintenance in your city, or the following, for stencils, paint and guidance.

Seattle – carlton.stinson@seattle.gov or 206-684-7624

Bothell – christi.cox@bothellwa.gov or 425-806-6790

Burien – marye@burienwa.gov or 206-248-5511

Edmonds – steve.fisher@edmondswa.gov or 425-275-4801

Kirkland – wayers@kirklandwa.gov or 425-587-3859

Redmond – jcapis@redmond.gov or 425-556-2865

• Consider commenting to our U.S. senators and Gov. Inslee about the four lower Snake River dams. See wildsalmon.org.
• Join Sierra Club’s Water/Salmon Committee and learn more here.

Coalition Submits Comment to Ecology on Net Pen Salmon Farming

Net pen salmon farming in Puget Sound 

is not a good idea.

The Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat has submitted comments to the Department of Ecology on their proposed "Managing Sustainable Commercial Net-Pen Aquaculture in Washington Straits and Estuaries". In those comments the Coalition presents evidence on the significant adverse impacts to the marine habitat and native salmon which net-pen aquaculture in other parts of the world have created.

Feed lots of concentrated animals create vectors 

for parasites and disease to take hold.

Pesticides in marine ecosystems do not remain in one place.
Included in the comments is the recently published paper showing pesticides used to treat salmon infested with sea lice spread throughout the marine eco-system and impact species far beyond those the industry seeks to treat. That paper on farms in Scotland noted, "...between 2006 and 2016 levels of anti-sea lice pesticides found in sediment 100 metres away from salmon cages exceeded environmental quality standards in 45 sea lochs and inshore waters." Anyone consuming shellfish filtering waters where these net pens are proposed should take note, as should shellfish growers. (See paper here: https://theferret.scot/45-lochs-polluted-fish-farm-pesticides/)

From waters near Olympia the sea lice 

have no problem living.

Puget Sound is not so different that sea lice won't be a problem.
In the comments the Coalition has also challenged Ecology to produce peer reviewed papers showing that the salinity of Puget Sound is so different from British Columbia and other parts of the world that sea lice will not be a problem. Anyone catching cutthroat in south Puget Sound has experienced the sight of these unwanted parasites clinging to these fish. Anyone looking at the Department of Health water monitoring reports can see the salinity levels are more than adequate to support sea lice populations, as they exist now and the dramatic increase which will occur with these vectors which net pens create.

Lesions are not pretty on any fish, nor healthy.

One thing leads to another.
Parasitic sea lice are not the only problem these concentrated feel lot operations create. A recent study published in the scientific journal Plos One on net pen salmon "...showed evidence of HSMI histopathological lesions over an 11-month timespan, with the prevalence of lesions peaking at 80– 100% in sampled fish." The cause of the lesions were traced to three sources: Piscine orthoreovirus (PRV), and parasites Paranucleospora theridion and Kudoa thyrsites. But the paper notes, importantly, that the virus "... PRV alone was statistically correlated with the occurrence and severity of histopathological lesions in the heart."

Land based salmon farming in Norway

to produce 20,000 tons.

Ecology should not be beholden to the industry

who claim it is more expensive.

Alternatives cost more to operate - but what are the native species in Puget Sound worth?
When sea lice create stress on the salmon it creates an opportunity for the virus to overwhelm the immune system of the salmon, resulting in lesions, poor health, and death. Of more importance, it will not be limited to net pen salmon. The marine ecosystem is fluid and dynamic. Hoping to be able to contain the disease is a false hope. The true alternative to net pen farming are land based operations where the populations are isolated from native species. As the Coalition comments note, Ecology did not appear to consider this alternative, discussed in depth at a 2014 summit held in Canada. There, attendees heard clear and concise methods presented on land based operations.

Get involved. Aquaculture is receiving your tax dollars to promote industry's expansion at the expense of Puget Sound's ecosystem and its native species.
NOAA is proposing millions of dollars be spent in order to overcome "...major constraints, barriers, or hurdles limiting United States aquaculture production." As noted:

NOAA Sea Grant expects to have available a total of $10,000,000-$12,000,000 across fiscal years 2017, 2018, and 2019 for a national initiative to increase aquaculture production in the short-term (2-4 years). 

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

Call:
Sen. Patty Murray: (202) 224-2621
Sen. Maria Cantwell: (202) 224-3441