Bainbridge Island: Welcome to South Puget Sound Aquaculture

Plasticizing Puget Sound's tideland habitat for China.

 

Coming to Bainbridge Island: A "preferred use".

PVC tubes for geoduck, exported to China.

 

Inside Bainbridge has posted an article by Sarah Lane (click here) on what south Puget Sound has been fighting against for years and which can now be expected on Bainbridge Island now that its Shoreline Master Plan has been accepted by the Department of Ecology. The same agency who required this paragraph on aquaculture to be removed:

Prohibit aquaculture where it would result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions; adversely affect the quality or extent of habitat for native species including eelgrass, kelp, and other macroalgae; adversely impact City and state critical habitat areas and other habitat conservation areas.

It's not your grandfather's oyster farm,

nor what aquaculture was when the

Shoreline Management Act was passed in 1971

and ratified by voters in 1972.

"It's habitat," until it's ripped up.

When DOE was asked by Ms Lane why the paragraph had to be deleted from the SMP, they responded:

“We can’t prohibit it. It is a water-dependent preferred use according to the Shoreline Management Act.”

Not explained by DOE is why they consider the methods used today by shellfish farmers a "preferred use". Were 40,000 PVC tubes per acre a method used when the Shoreline Management Act was passed?

 

Trust us, we know what's good for you.

We paid for it.

Governor Inslee and Taylor Shellfish

employee Bill Dewey. Standing on the best

science money can buy.



Governor Inslee, having made the choice to use the shellfish industry as a primary fund raising vehicle for both his upcoming election and for those running in the Senate, was naturally supportive of DOE's removal of the paragraph. Not clear was how removing what Bainbridge Island wanted to have included meshed with their additional comment:

 “Each shoreline program is tailored to a town, city, or county’s needs. The governor supports an approach that takes into account those individual needs and differences.”

"It's just a storm." Chelsea Farms

on harvesting impacts to the tidelands. 

Except this also occurs underwater

when divers perform harvest activities.

Make a difference for the future and tell Governor Inslee the shellfish industry's methods are no longer a "preferred use" of Puget Sound's tidelands. He may be contacted by phone at 360-902-4111 or mail at PO Box 40002, Olympia, WA 98504-0002. His shellfish coordinator is Julie Horowitz whose email address is Julie.horowitz@gov.wa.gov

 

Taylor Shellfish Mussel Farm Permit Denied, As Taylor Requested?

The Thurston County Hearing Examiner has denied Taylor Shellfish's shoreline substantial development permit for a 58 raft mussel farm in Totten Inlet. In the initial decision it was stated that cumulative impacts were not adequately considered. [click here for denial]
[click here for initial determination]

When given the opportunity to provide evidence showing cumulative impacts were not significant Taylor Shellfish's attorneys advised them to ask the Hearing Examiner to deny the permit. Perhaps a first, where an applicant applies then says "please deny me."

Look a little deeper and you may find

something they don't want you to see.

Why would Taylor Shellfish ask for a denial? It's certainly not the expense incurred in an appeal of a denial. The shellfish corporations are generating immense profits from geoduck farming with little in the way of expenses and virtually nothing in the form of taxes to the State and Counties. For example, on the 1.8 acres of State owned tidelands Taylor Shellfish was found to be trespassing on an estimated net profit (after expenses) of over $1.5 million will be generated. In an appeal, the legal expenses, fees paid to scientists to create favorable studies, and the expense of hiring public relations firms to create favorable public perceptions all help to reduce Federal taxable income. Property taxes paid for geoduck acreage is virtually non-existent (e.g., in Mason County, 15 acres owned by Taylor Shellfish in Hammersley Inlet from which tens of thousands of pounds of geoduck are harvested from, is charged $16 in property tax) and as most are exported, there is no sales tax revenue generated.

Representation without Taxation

Given the immense profits Taylor Shellfish is generating and the deductible nature of the expenses to appeal, it is more likely that Taylor Shellfish is simply playing a poker game. They are telling citizens and counties who are concerned about the expansion of corporate shellfish farming, "I can afford to appeal this forever. Can you?"

Alternatively, it may very well be they are simply stalling the process. Why? Most likely is they are simply waiting for their political influence to work its way through the updating of county shoreline master plans, a process both Mason County and Thurston County are currently involved in.

Specific to this proposal, Totten Inlet is not all regulated by Thurston County. It is split, with the western half controlled by Mason County. Currently, Mason County is in the process of updating their Shoreline Master Program which Taylor Shellfish has been directly involved in. Seattle Shellfish's Steve Bloomfield is a Mason County Commissioner as is longtime shellfish farm owner Commissioner Tim Sheldon. At a recent presentation, Mason County stated that the conditional use permit for mussel rafts is being "streamlined."

Corporate shellfish farmers are directly involved in shaping the regulations impacting the future of Puget Sound. As Jim Gibbons with Seattle Shellfish extolled to state legislators, Spain is growing 600 million pounds of mussels each year in an area the size of south Puget Sound (south of the Tacoma Narrows). This is equivalent to 24,000 mussel rafts in south Puget Sound. This is his "vision" and the vision of corporate shellfish companies for the future of Puget Sound. Should cumulative impacts be considered? Taylor Shellfish thinks not, for obvious reasons. You should.