Finding common ground for clean water and healthy farms

Bill Dewey new co-chair of our Ag/Water Quality committee 

Livestock producers, crop growers, shellfish farmers, environmental groups and Ecology are sitting at the table – together – finding common ground on protecting clean water and supporting a healthy agricultural industry.


Bill Dewey, committee co-chair, on his clam farm on Samish Bay.

Most recently, the Agriculture and Water Quality Advisory Committee came together on October 3 in Union Gap to discuss a number of statewide and local issues, as well as welcome Bill Dewey of Taylor Shellfish as the new co-chair. Dewey has served on the advisory committee since it began in 2014 and brings more than 35 years of shellfish farming experience.

“I believe the best approach to our complex challenges is to work in partnership,” says Bellon. “I’m grateful that the agricultural community is willing to continue our work together to make meaningful strides toward identifying lasting solutions that keep working lands productive in an environmentally friendly way.”

Ecology Director Maia Bellon first created the advisory committee to improve our working relationships with the agricultural community. The group provides a forum for open dialogue about complex issues that affect the industry and how they intersect with efforts to prevent water pollution.

 “Our state is making huge strides through collaboration, which allows us to reduce conflict and have open dialogue on difficult issues. Bringing people together leads to solutions that stick,” said Dewey at the October meeting. As a shellfish farmer, Dewey brings a unique perspective to the group as part of an industry that is directly affected by pollution flowing downstream but who also understands the daily challenges of farming.

Clam farms need tractors, too.
Dewey's boat, The Clamdango, is used to bring a tractor back to land.

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.

Bellon relies on the committee to connect with real farmers and ranchers who provide valuable feedback on our work.
Since the group’s inception, they’ve discussed many topics, including:

• Developing voluntary clean water guidance
• Updating and implementing the Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation general permit
• How to evaluate risks to water quality on agricultural lands
• An innovative agreement with Pacific Northwest Direct Seed Association

The meeting is also an opportunity to talk about priorities for future years and share local success stories. Committee members don’t always agree, yet the group remains committed to exploring innovative ways to ensure clean water for farms, clean water for communities, and a healthy agricultural industry.


Views of another type of Washington farming:
on top of Steptoe Butte looking at farm hills in the Palouse region.

 “One of the most important aspects of this committee is the opportunity for face-to-face interactions. Personally engaging with those directly affected pays tremendous dividends to all of us. I recognize and value that it’s not enough to simply talk about what needs to be done. The how can be just as important. I believe we’ve made real progress,” Bellon said.

For more information on the committee and the meeting schedule visit our Agriculture and Water Quality Advisory Committee webpage.

Colleen Keltz, Communications Manager, Water Quality

Marine spatial plan adopted to protect our coastal resources

Ruby Beach on Washington's Pacific coast.

Did you know that only four Washington counties – Clallam, Grays Harbor, Jefferson and Pacific – have marine shorelines on the Pacific Ocean?

Together, these four jurisdictions account for 331,000 acres of marine waters and have 157 miles of open ocean coastline. Our coastal communities and coastal Indian tribes have a rich history and maintain a unique relationship to our coastal resources.

Yet, there are increasing demands on these resources – including new projects and uses that can potentially create conflicts with uses or damage our marine resources.

State develops, adopts marine spatial plan

To ensure Washington maintains a resilient, healthy coastal marine ecosystem, we worked closely with our partners at the Washington departments of Fish and Wildlife and Natural Resources (DNR) to adopt a new tool – called a “marine spatial plan” – to help make coordinated, science based decisions about proposed new ocean projects and uses.

The guidance establishes processes for coordinating among local and tribal governments and state and federal agencies and for ensuring interest groups and the public have opportunities to weigh in on future projects.

Since the plan contains new policies to protect sensitive ecological areas and fisheries, the plan also puts the state in a strong position to review and shape new ocean activities in areas of state and federal waters in the plan's study area.

The state worked closely with local and tribal governments, other state agencies, the Washington Coastal Marine Advisory Council, environmental and planning groups, the private sector and the public to develop the plan.

Plan will help evaluate new ocean projects, uses

The new guidance will help us evaluate new proposals seeking to be located between Cape Flattery and Cape Disappointment. The plan covers a patch of the Pacific nearly 6,000 square nautical miles in size.

Right now, most of ocean uses in Washington center on recreation, maritime shipping, coastal fishing and shellfish aquaculture. But we know we have to be ready to effectively assess proposals for new uses and activities such as:

• Renewable energy
• Mining
• Dredged material disposal
• Marine product harvesting
• Offshore aquaculture operations

Our marine spatial plan builds on a 2010 law passed by the state legislature. Six years in the making, the new plan outlines the data and information that are needed to evaluate new proposals – especially the potential effects new ocean uses could have on people, our local communities and the environment.

It also integrates existing state policies and standards that projects must satisfy such as demonstrating that projects have no likely, long-term significant adverse impacts to resources or uses.

Competition for small fraction of ocean ecosystem

Michele Culver, Intergovernmental Ocean Policy Manager for state Fish and Wildlife said “while the ocean is a vast ecosystem, there is competition to use a small fraction of it.”

The plan, Culver said, provides a way for the state to carefully consider the placement of proposed new uses and the effects on other important activities, such as fishing, that occur in the same area.

  

While the plan establishes protections for fisheries and ecologically sensitive areas in state waters, it doesn’t change current management or permit processes for existing marine activities such as fisheries management plans or shellfish aquaculture.

Before we adopted the guidance, the state sought and received comments on the draft plan and a related environmental impact statement which helped us evaluate anticipated impacts that could arise from adopting the plan.

We carefully assessed all the comments we received and they helped us refine the plan. We will submit the marine spatial plan as part of Washington’s federally-approved Coastal Zone Management Program.

Get involved and stay current on marine spatial planning
  

The new state marine spatial plan creates an inclusive decision-making process that carefully considers economic, social, ecological, and cultural interests and gives all users an avenue for having input on the most appropriate strategies to guide and evaluate future uses of our Pacific Ocean waters.

Everyone can keep tabs and get involved in with marine spatial planning in Washington.

Help chart the future of our Pacific coast

Makah Bay on Washington's northwest Pacific Ocean coast.

Are you interested in helping shape the future of Washington’s Pacific Coast?

Ecology is still taking public comment on the state’s proposed Marine Spatial Plan and draft Environmental Impact Statement until Tuesday, Dec. 12.

The science-based guidance would establish a process for reviewing and making decisions about future ocean uses that might be proposed on the state’s Pacific coast.

Marine spatial plan forward looking

There are no new projects currently proposed for our ocean coast. The Marine Spatial Plan, however, is designed to be forward looking by establishing procedures to make sure that local and tribal governments and state and federal agencies coordinate with one another on planning and permitting decisions for any future proposals.

The plan also would help ensure that the public and interest groups have ample opportunity to weigh in on any future proposals.

While most current coastal activities center on recreation, maritime shipping, aquaculture and coastal fishing, Washington could receive requests to locate new types of projects and activities in the ocean such as:

• Dredge disposal
• Offshore aquaculture operations
• Renewable energy

The Marine Spatial Plan would help ensure any future projects avoid causing long-term significant adverse impacts to our environment, fisheries, and other resources.

Identifying conditions, trends and potential effects

The proposed plan provides data on current ocean conditions and future trends. It also outlines the data and information needed to evaluate new proposed ocean projects, including the potential effects a project could have on people, local communities, and the environment.

While the plan establishes protections for fisheries and ecologically-sensitive areas in state waters, it does not change current management or permit processes for existing marine activities such as fisheries management plans or shellfish aquaculture.
 
Multi-party effort

Ecology developed the draft plan in partnership with the Washington departments of Fish and Wildlife and Natural Resources, Washington Sea Grant, and other agencies.

The state also worked closely with local and tribal governments, other state agencies, the Washington Coastal Marine Advisory Council, environmental and planning groups, the private sector and the public to develop the plan.

Submit comments online or by mail

The Dec. 12 deadline for submitting comments is rapidly approaching. You can submit comments online or by mail to: Jennifer Hennessey, Department of Ecology, PO Box 47600, Olympia, WA 98504-7600.

Finding a balanced approach for aquatic plant management

Yellow flag iris has made this drainage ditch unusable.

We are now accepting comments on our environmental review of chemicals used to manage aquatic plants and algae covered by two of our general water quality permits. These chemicals are used to manage noxious weeds, nuisance plants, and algae in and around water.

Our draft environmental study reviews eight new chemicals, five alternatives for management, and updates information on other chemicals currently covered under the permits. We're seeking your feedback now through June 6.

Click here to review the environmental study and submit your comments.

Environmental management:
the balancing act

Sometimes, protecting the environment requires us to choose between two imperfect options. Just as you might turn to cold medicine to treat your body when you’re sick, we permit the use of some chemicals to help maintain the health of our waterways.

Noxious weeds are non-native plants that are highly destructive, competitive, or difficult to control. Nuisance plants are native, but they are growing in an area – or density – that causes damage the surrounding environment. These plants choke irrigation ditches, cover our lakes in green slime, and can be a risk to public health. While we work hard to keep chemicals out of Washington waters, we allow them under very specific circumstances to help manage these plants and algae.

Caring for the environment is a delicate balancing act. Our permits require people to use management solutions that have the least environmental impact among reasonably available options. Over the years, we’ve found chemicals sometimes can be the least invasive solution to control the plants and algae that throw off our natural balance.

Evaluating the chemicals covered by our water quality permits

We issue permits that allow the use of chemicals to conditionally treat noxious weeds, native nuisance plants, and algae in and around water. Two of these permits cover the use of chemicals in Washington waters. These are the Aquatic Plant and Algae Management and Aquatic Noxious Weed Control general permits. Our scientific review allows us to determine if we should – or should not – allow specific chemicals under our permits.

For these permits, we’ve evaluated:

Algae under a microscope.

• Algaecides - A chemical compound that kills or reduces the growth of algae or cyanobacteria (known as toxic algae or blue-green algae).
• Herbicides - A chemical compound that kills or inhibits the growth of plants.
• Phosphorus inactivation products - Products used to bind phosphorus in the water column and sediments making it unavailable to aquatic life. Phosphorus is a key ingredient in algae blooms.

These chemicals are only effective at targeted plants and algae. Our permits ensure the chemicals used, and the methods by which they’re applied, are the least impactful to animals and other plants. Permits limit which chemicals are allowed to be used, where they can be used, and who may use them. They also require public notification before a water body is treated, and outline specific rules around the reporting and timing of applying the chemical.

Learn more about invasive plants and the risks they cause to our way of life from the Washington Noxious Weed Control Board.

Why not just remove them by hand?

Non-chemical options are not always the best solution with the least environmental impact. Physical and mechanical methods of removing these plants can be damaging to aquatic habitats. These non-chemical options can have negative effects on water quality, disrupt sediment, and can kill the insects, snails, and fish trapped in the plants. These methods may be so expensive that they’re not really attainable to water managers. In addition, they can lead to a new infestation of noxious weeds by leaving behind plant fragments that then take root in the sediment.

Allowing pesticides to manage Washington waters

The federal Clean Water Act gives Ecology the responsibility to protect state waters. Chemicals used to manage Washington waters must be approved for use by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Washington State Department of Agriculture. As a third layer of protection, we require anyone wanting to use one of these chemicals to get a water quality permit from us.

Water quality permits are a legal tool to allow – and limit – a discharge of pollution into the water. Each permit is different and sets specific methods for release, monitoring, and mitigating any potential environmental damage.

When used carefully under a water quality permit,
chemicals can help maintain the waters we love.
Photo credit: Tristan Hervouet via freeimages

When used carefully under a water quality permit, chemicals can help manage the water we need for the way we live.

For example, water management protects:

• Community use
• Aquatic habitat
• Human and pet health
• Agricultural purposes
• Livestock
• Commerce and navigation
• Boating
• Recreational and commercial fishing
• And much more

The prolific overpopulation of noxious and nuisance plants threaten the waterways Washingtonians know and love. Toxic algae can be dangerous to people, wildlife, and pets. We carefully consider and evaluate all potential solutions for managing Washington waters. The environmental review we’re currently seeking comments on is part of that ongoing evaluation.

Our current environmental review

We recently completed our draft of a new environmental review for our general permits for managing Washington waters. This review, called a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), helps us determine the potential environmental impact of certain chemicals used to treat unwanted plants and algae. Now, we want your feedback on our draft before we finalize the report.

Variable-leaf milfoil in Blue Lake.

We are always seeking more environmentally-friendly ways to manage Washington waters. This environmental study is pivotal to that search. Our goal is to give better tools to those tasked with managing our waterways. We want solutions that target the unwanted plants and algae, and reduce impacts to neighboring plants and animals. We also want solutions that are effective and have a low risk of unwanted plants developing a resistance to the chemical.

Protecting the health of the native ecosystem is our top priority. New information is learned all the time, so it’s important to continually review what we permit with the best science and technology available.

This environmental review is neither a permit nor a decision, but it will inform decisions we make around aquatic plant management in the future.

Send us your comments

We are now accepting comments on our environmental review of the chemicals used in these two permits. We will take input on the Draft SEIS for Aquatic Plant Management until 5 p.m. on June 6, 2017.

Submit comments using our online form.

We will also accept comments by mail:

Nathan Lubliner
Washington State Department of Ecology
PO Box 47696
Olympia, WA 98504-7696

By: Jessie Payne and Tim Lewis, Water Quality program communications

Commercial net pen aquaculture planning meeting March 23

You are invited to attend the next planning meeting for updating the Recommendations for Managing Commercial Net Pen Aquaculture in Washington’s straits and estuaries.

Join us in person or by phone

Those interested may attend in person or by phone. Directions on how to participate through the conference call are listed below.

When: March 23
Time: 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.
Where: Washington Department of Ecology headquarters auditorium
Address: 300 Desmond Drive SE, Lacey, WA, 98503

State employees learn more about day-to-day operations
from Keven Bright of Cooke Aquaculture Pacific.
Photo by Lori LeVander/Ecology.

Updating the planning tools for commercial net pens

We are working with the Washington departments of Fish & Wildlife and Agriculture to update the state's 30-year-old management guidelines for commercial net pen aquaculture.

Through this project, we aim to deliver modern scientific information to guide state agency, tribal and local government decision makers in siting, managing, and regulating net pens in Washington’s marine waters.

The final report will provide recommendations only - not a rule or law. Regulatory agencies will determine how these recommendations will be incorporated into their decisions around managing commercial net pen aquaculture. A key objective is to provide tools that enable decision makers to protect native Pacific salmon.

Learn more about the project on our Recommendations for Managing Net Pen Aquaculture webpage. Subscribe to the project listserv to receive email updates.

New commercial fish farm (net pen) management tools being developed: Provide your input on project scoping by March 4

NOTE: We have decided to extend the deadline for public input after receiving several requests for more time. This blog was edited Jan. 11 to reflect the new deadline for feedback March 4, 2017.

Washington’s 30-year-old management guidelines for commercial, marine fish farms (net pens) are getting an overhaul. Ecology has partnered with the state departments of Fish & Wildlife and Agriculture, and the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science to write new management recommendations useful for the industry and coastal managers – including state and local government regulators.

View from the water of a commercial fish farm near Bainbridge Island. Photo by Jessica Payne/Ecology

We’re just getting started, and we want your input

The multi-year project is just getting underway and you are invited to provide input on early decisions made by the project team. Two documents are available for review and comment. You can view and download these documents on our project website.

1. A summary of draft scoping decisions that describes early decisions made by the team regarding:

• Geographic and topical scope
• Scientific and technical review
• Outreach and opportunities for interested parties to influence the outcome

2. A writing outline that will guide the project team through fact-finding and identification of suitable safeguards and management practices. The team is especially interested in feedback on topics you would like to see addressed in the final document. This will serve as a table of contents for the final guidance document.

We’re accepting public comments now through March 4. 

This project is designed to give us up-to-date information on this use and better understand the concern of citizens. What we learn will help us ensure any new facilities are sited and operated consistent with current science and modern management practices. It is not designed to determine whether or not future net pens will be allowed.

Learn more on our Frequently Asked Questions page.

State employees learn more about day-to-day operations
from Kevin Bright of Cooke Aquaculture Pacific.
Photo by Lori LeVander/Ecology.

Send us your feedback

Please send us your feedback and help influence project outcomes.

Submit input by March 4 to:

Ms. Cedar Bouta
Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program
WA Dept. of Ecology
P.O. Box 47600
Lacey, WA 98504-7600.
Email: Cedar.Bouta@ecy.wa.gov

Visit our project webpage to learn more. Subscribe to our listserv to get email updates and make sure you have the latest information.

By: Cedar Bouta, Shorelands and Environmental Assistance program

Water’s Edge: Planning for salmon farms

Science and the law leads the way in regulating salmon net pens

By Cedar Bouta, shoreline environmental planner

Alevin (newly hatched salmon) with yolk sac.
Photo: PNW Salmon Center.

Washingtonians are passionate about our salmon. We give smoked salmon as presents and take visitors to the Pike Place Market for salmon tossing. We also use images of them on beer, t-shirts and other products. In addition, native peoples harvest and consume wild salmon as an important part of their cultures.

Our conversations about wild versus farmed salmon are passionate too.

That’s why the University of Washington’s Northwest Environmental Forum sponsored a March 22-23 gathering that brought together about 65 stakeholders with differing perspectives about commercial salmon farming in Washington. The forum was a success in bringing together parties who – although on opposite sides of lawsuits or with differing points of view – were willing to come, learn and listen.

The forum highlighted:

• The stakeholders’ shared commitment to a healthy marine environment, recovery of native salmon, and local jobs.
• A growing demand for seafood and the health benefits of eating more salmon.
• The complex oversight provided by local, state and federal permits and authorizations for commercial fish farms.
• A need for more sharing of science and other information about Washington’s existing fish farms.

Commercial salmon net pens near Bainbridge Island, Washington. 

The state of salmon in Washington

Salmon are part of our state’s legacy. Washington has a coordinated, scientifically-rigorous recovery plan spearheaded by the Puget Sound Partnership to ensure wild salmon are part of Washington’s future. The plan contains programs and projects designed to restore native salmon runs and protect endangered and threatened stocks.

Many of the stakeholders represented at the March net pen forum have contributed to salmon recovery in Puget Sound and are working towards addressing urban runoff and other threats.

Feeding a seafood-hungry world

As committed as we are to our native salmon, forum participants learned that our hunger for seafood is growing and imported, farmed salmon is filling the gap. During the years 2000-2004, Americans consumed an average of about 284,000 metric tons (more than 617 million pounds) of salmon annually, of which approximately:

One-third of salmon consumed was wild and two-thirds was farmed.
One-third was domestic production (farmed and wild) and two-thirds was imported.

From January 2015 through March 2016, over 27 million pounds of fresh and frozen Atlantic salmon were imported from other countries through the Port of Seattle. This was almost twice as much as the annual production of commercial salmon farms in Washington.

Forum participants also learned that salmon aquaculture is one of the most resource-efficient sources of ways to produce protein.

Science leads the way, learning more about net pens

Ecology regulates net pen operations, like this one in
Port Angeles, through water quality permits
and shoreline master programs.

We have information describing our current approach to shoreline planning and commercial salmon net pens on our website. We also have video of scientific presentations and an expert panel discussing net pen operations, fish health, escapement, genetics, water quality and management tools.

Ecology will continue to let science and the law lead the way – adapting our findings and requirements as needed. Working together, we and other stakeholders can ensure commercial net pens do not put wild salmon recovery at risk.

Learn more about Ecology’s role
with net pens on our website.