HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources July 16 20021
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Natural Resources Committee
July 16, 2002
The meeting was called to order at 9:30 a.m. by Committee Chair Sharon
Roy in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington,
Present:
Dan McShane
Also Present:
L. Ward Nelson
Laurie Caskey- Schreiber
Sam Crawford
Absent:
Seth Fleetwood
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
1. DISCUSSION REGARDING MARINE SALMON NET PENS AND SUPPORT
OF WILD SALMON FISHERIES (AB2002 -202)
McShane stated he suggested language for a resolution, but he is interested
in hearing suggestions for changes from the Marine Resources Committee (MRC)
and Nooksack Salmon Enhancement Association (NSEA).
Roy stated a representative from the Washington State Department of Fish
and Wildlife (WDFW) would also speak.
Robin DuPre, Marine Resources Committee, stated the MRC was established
by County Council action. Committee members are appointed by the Executive.
The committee represents a spectrum of interests. The committee has discussed
this issue for many months, and it reached consensus on the materials it will
present at this meeting. The MRC recommendation is based on science. There are
no net pens in the county currently. The Department of Natural Resources
regulates leases for net pens. There are no pending lease applications for net pen
operations in the county. They are not looking at turning out an existing business.
Their big concern is the potential for escapement. There is a fair bit of information
about escapement by individuals and large numbers of fish. Hundreds of thousands
of fish can escape during a large incident. Atlantic salmon were found by the
Pollution Control Hearings Board to be a pollutant under the Clean Water Act, and
to require a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) permit for
their release. The State Department of Ecology (DOE) currently regulates net pens
under the NPDES system. The permit does not institute any best management
practices (BMP's) to prevent escapement. It does not have provisions if there were
an escapement. The permit doesn't place limits on antibiotics that are used. The
largest items of concern are not regulated in the NPDES permit.
Natural Resources Committee, 7/16/2002, Page 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
McShane asked what the permit regulates. DuPre stated it regulates total
suspended solids in the water body. It may regulate nutrient release. That's all.
There are no permit limits for many concerns.
McShane asked if a release is considered pollution. DuPre stated it is,
according to the Pollution Control Hearings Board.
McShane asked if there is a fine, but no controls or standards. DuPre stated
that is correct. The NPDES permit covers all general operations in the state. The
general permits focus on BMP's, not limits. The MRC hoped to see BMP's specific to
escapement, but there are none.
There are escaped salmon from British Columbia in rivers in Canada. They
have found the escaped salmon in the few rivers that have been surveyed. Atlantic
salmon are spawning in British Columbia. They are larger than the native salmon,
and compete with the native salmon. Atlantic salmon are capable of establishing
residency in local waters. They've been found in 79 British Columbia rivers,
according to a very limited survey.
The MRC called the tribes to ask them about their concerns. The tribes have
observed Atlantic salmon in the Nooksack River. The Nooksack Tribe indicated that
to the MRC independent of the person who is a biologist with the Northwest Straits
Commission. Other concerns include antibiotic use. Like any agricultural operation,
the spread of disease is a concern, so the Atlantic salmon are dosed with large
amounts of antibiotics, which is not regulated in any way.
They do use pesticides in net pens. They are not regulated in the NPDES
permit system. Pesticide application is regulated so the applicator has to have a
commercial license. Food waste and feces can lead to high nutrient levels, and will
lead to dead zones under the net pens. Based on their review, the MRC has
concerns. The MRC conclusion is that commercial marine salmon net pens would
jeopardize the success of native salmon recovery efforts in the local waters. In
addition, there are currently no commercial marine salmon net pens operating in
Whatcom County. Precautionary approaches to marine habitat protection are in the
county's best interest. The MRC supports a resolution establishing a moratorium on
commercial marine net pens in Whatcom County.
She submitted a proposed resolution, and the MRC suggests adding,
"Whereas Atlantic salmon have been observed in the Nooksack River." The salmon
net pens are defined as commercial because there may be situations for someone
to use limited net pens for restoration of native salmon runs, for example. Leave
that open for more individual consideration by the Council.
McShane asked for an overview of the MRC. DuPre stated the MRC of
Whatcom County is one of seven that has been established in the Northwest Straits
region. The MRC's were established because of a compromise. A number of years
Natural Resources Committee, 7/16/2002, Page 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
ago, there was a push to create a national marine sanctuary in the Northwest
Straits. It was very controversial. At that time, Senators Murray and Metcalf set
up a panel to explore sanctuary designation. They decided to try something that
was less top -down. There was a lot of concern about a federal regulatory hammer.
They came up with the idea of a Northwest Straits Commission, which is authorized
by Congress. There is some funding support of the Northwest Straits Commission
and the MRC's. They established the Northwest Straits Commission, which is a
multi - stakeholder commission, and the seven MRC's in each of the affected
counties. They'd hoped that each county could work on marine issues important to
them, and meet benchmarks set up in the congressional resolution that would allow
them to take a new approach to marine conservation to avoid federal regulations.
The MRC's are charged to meet benchmarks for success. The Whatcom County
MRC was established by County Council action. The MRC is doing collaborative
projects with other MRC's. They are working on several projects. They are working
on active studies, potential restoration, and also in an advisory capacity to the
County Council.
Nelson asked the size of the industry in the State of Washington. DuPre
stated they are not opposed to aquaculture if net pen operations are moved out of
harms way. It might be a viable industry for Whatcom County to pursue in an
upland environment where escapement can be contained. Atlantic salmon reared in
marine net pens in Washington State produce over 10 million pounds of fish per
year, with an economic value of $40 million. The aquaculture industry supports
200 people in Washington. Atlantic salmon are preferred for aquaculture because
of their fast growth and resistance to disease. Three major escapes, totaling
591,000 fish, have occurred since 1996.
Nelson stated this is a large industry. Eating fish has positive health aspects,
and is one of the primary sources of protein worldwide. It seems this may be a
type of species that people would try to introduce into different areas so they could
supplement their proteins and enhance the food chain. DuPre stated that in
Norway, they found that the Atlantic salmon have colonized their rivers. She
doesn't know of any studies on that.
Nelson asked if there has been colonization. DuPre stated only accidentally.
Most land managers recognize that they should not introduce non - native species.
Nelson asked how this is different from agricultural operations. DuPre stated
the concern is escapement and competition with native runs. There is evidence of
that in the paperwork she submitted.
Nelson stated that there isn't any evidence of that in all the literature he has.
He can't find anything that indicates an independent run has been established or
where escapement has been successful. Many domesticated species of animals,
such as chickens and cattle, have not been successful in the wild. DuPre stated
they are domesticated species. Atlantic species evolved to live in the wild in the
Atlantic. That is a different issue than raising domestic animals or crops. These are
Natural Resources Committee, 7/16/2002, Page 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
animals that evolved to use the ecosystem that they already have a native run in.
There is already an industry in Whatcom County. There is a commercial fishing
industry. It is one of the few viable fleets left. There are few runs left. To honor
their heritage, they need to honor the fishers who are now running in Alaska
because they can't fish here.
Nelson stated it seems that they should advocate aquaculture production to
supplement the food need so the natural runs can be restored to their natural
densities. DuPre stated the commercial fishing representative brought this to the
MRC. It is a depleted industry. She has not spoken with one commercial fisher
that supports net pen operations to solve their problem because it won't put them
back to work. The issue becomes the risk. The precautionary principle is that they
err on the side of safety until they get the science. Allowing the pens is
counterproductive to the enormous effort in the county to restoring the native
salmon.
Roy stated she's heard that the Atlantic salmon farmed fish do not contain
the healthy omega fats. DuPre stated the MRC did not look at the health aspects.
McShane asked where the feed for the fish comes from. DuPre stated many
aquaculture operations use ground up fish.
Margo Burton, Water Resources Division intern, stated they grind up little fish
for feed. The Atlantic salmon are carnivores. They get the feed fish from the
southern hemisphere, which takes away the fish from the poorer countries. The
feed is formed into pellets. The pellets are just dropped into the net pens. Often,
the fish don't eat all the pellets, so the pellets just sink to the bottom, which
contributes to the nutrient problem.
Nelson asked what kind of fish are used as feed fish, and how Ms. Burton
knows they are a protein source for these other countries. Burton stated the
research materials have said that the fish feed is taken away from the native
ecosystem and the other animals that might eat it. They are taking away a large
amount of protein.
DuPre stated they are using multiple kinds of species. The point isn't that
the people in the other countries are necessarily eating those fish. The point is that
a harvest of millions of pounds of those fish out of the ecosystem is like harvesting
millions of pounds of forage fish out of the Puget Sound ecosystem. If they don't
have sustainable populations, it will cause an impact. They have to take a large
look at the entire ecosystem and the industry's affect.
Nelson stated there may be an excess somewhere else. DuPre stated that
ecosystems don't usually have excesses. They are usually pretty well balanced.
Jeremy Brown, Nooksack Salmon Enhancement Association (NSEA) Director,
stated he used to be a salmon fisherman. The principal fish that are used from the
Natural Resources Committee, 7/16/2002, Page 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
southern hemisphere for fish feed are principle anchovy. Elsewhere they are using
sardines, herring, or byproducts from fish processing. This tends to be a most
expensive component of fishmeal. Therefore, it's getting substituted with soy
protein and corn meal, which produces Omega 6, not Omega 3. Omega 6 does not
have the health benefits. Other things that went into fish meal in Europe include
bone meal, which was contaminated. They used bentonite as a binder, which may
have been contaminated with PCB.
The science of the biology is new. There were attempts to establish Atlantic
salmon runs 80 years ago that failed. Technology has improved. They've seen a
trend of increasing success in the likelihood of colonization. It is possible and
occurring, according to one study. These aren't chickens. They are one of the few
carnivores that they farm for food. There is no shortage of salmon in the market.
As director of NSEA, he was concerned about the previous resolution. Net
pens are an important component of what can be done to restore native salmon
runs. He submitted a proposed resolution. There are two key Whereas statements.
The residents have shown themselves to be committed to restoring native salmon
runs. The NSEA is a volunteer based organization. They get wonderful support
from the community. It's difficult for residents and landowners to make
considerable sacrifices if they are not backed up. The precautionary principal
makes it clear that, in the absence of clear scientific evidence, they have to proceed
as if harm will result from their actions. The scientific information is quite clear that
harm likely will result from the introduction of carnivorous nonnative species into
the waterways. Clarify the net pen language. Net pens can be used for
enhancement in the future.
McShane stated the MRC suggested defining the resolution as commercial net
pens. He asked if NSEA agrees. Brown stated he does.
Roy asked if what the tribes do with native salmon is considered commercial.
She's hearing that the problem is not net pens, but escapement of the non - native
species and the resultant antibiotics. That could be considered commercial.
Crawford stated a federal agency wrote a report last fall.
McShane stated that someone else did that report for the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS).
Crawford stated they are analyzing the effects of this, and disagree with
NSEA and MRC conclusions. They have some areas of concern that need to be
addressed. This is a resolution, and has no force of law. This is all being studied
extremely carefully. The industry is currently regulated. Ongoing areas of concern
are being addressed and considered for regulation. He suggested that it is
premature for the Whatcom County Council to pass judgment on this industry. He
hoped that everyone gets a copy of that study.
Natural Resources Committee, 7/16/2002, Page 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Roy asked if the MRC researched that study. DuPre stated she didn't cite it.
Crawford stated this was a federal study done last fall.
McShane stated it was an issue paper that ranked the risks.
DuPre stated the MRC contacted the DNR, which holds the leases for net pen
operations. There are no current net pens in Whatcom County. There are no
current lease applications for new net pen operations in Whatcom County. There
are no outstanding leases. This is why the MRC wouldn't take anything away. The
MRC is not opposed to farming fish. The MRC is recommending opposition to
commercial marine net pens. There is a growing focus on moving aquacultural
operations upland. That could be a base that could be explored. Escapement and
impacts to the ecosystem would be minimized.
Nelson asked if Mr. Brown is a nutritionist. Brown stated he is not.
Nelson stated Omega 3, Omega 6, and healthy fatty acids are both essential
for human consumption.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
Brown stated he reviewed a NMFS paper that is the update of the paper
referred to by Councilmember Crawford.
Nelson asked why they are bothering with the restoration dollars if there is
no shortage of salmon. Brown stated it's because of the Endangered Species Act
(ESA).
Nelson stated the amount of fish now doesn't compare to 60 years ago.
Brown stated that locally they have severe problems. That's not true globally.
Crawford asked if Rogue River salmon is wild or net pen. Brown stated for all
intents and purposes, they are wild captured fish.
Barry Wenger, Department of Ecology (DOE), stated he has been involved in
salmon net pen and aquaculture operations for 16 years. He's a state - recognized
expert in aquaculture. He read over the Whatcom County shoreline master plan
aquaculture section. It covers many of these issues. However, it was developed
many years ago. They have more information now than then. They have learned
an enormous amount in the last five years.
Aquaculture is an array of different operations, including enhancement
projects. Enhancement projects are to mostly put smolt into a small net pen, feed
them until they grow larger, and then release them within three to six months.
Natural Resources Committee, 7/16/2002, Page 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
McShane asked if the smolt are hatchery fish that are raised in the estuary to
have a better survival rate in the ocean, instead of letting them grow larger in the
hatchery. Wenger stated that is correct. It's more cost efficient to do it that way.
They are all native stocks. It is to boost some of the runs. It is successful in a
number of areas. They still have to feed them and, in some cases, give them
antibiotics. In general, they are smaller fish and don't eat as much. The
byproducts tend to be ten percent of what is in the net pens. The 1986 interim
guidelines for located salmon net pens address those numbers and the
environmental impacts of those enhancement pens. They are not a problem if they
are located properly. The 1986 guidelines are still in effect. They deal with a lot of
issues. The Atlantic salmon are a threat because they are prone to sea lice
infestation. In the high numbers, they have to put commercial fish in the net pen.
That creates a great breeding area for sea lice. Native fish swimming by a net pen
can get the sea lice. In Canada, the infestation is enough to kill the fish. They can
track the infestation along the same path as there are net pen operations. In other
areas where there aren't net pens, the sea lice exist at ambient levels.
There are many species of salmon. If they look at that globally, there are
still salmon available. However, some of the runs have been hard hit. Some of the
stocks of the species have been hard hit or are already extinct. They need to
protect all the salmon because they all play a part in the lifecycle collectively.
The salmon are what produces the unique carbon compounds in the ocean.
They need to go into the ocean to feed to bring the nutrients back in the rivers.
That is the only way those nutrients get into the rivers.
A salmon net pen was approved in Whatcom County on Lummi Island. It
never was developed. Market conditions could change and force more emphasis on
Whatcom County.
The Council has the ability in the master program to limit the species raised
in the net pens. The DOE worked with the industry on raising specific Pacific
salmon in densities that are low enough to not have to use antibiotics, which are
expensive. It has become more and more common with the lower price of fish to
crowd the fish together to try to make it economically viable. That means they
have to use more antibiotics. Pacific salmon tend to be hardier in these waters. If
they do escape, they are native fish. There is no question about whether or not
they will cause a problem as an invasive species. Once nonnative species become
established, it would be difficult to sort them out from the native species. They
need to look at a precautionary approach for nonnative species of any kind.
Nelson stated there are numerous examples of negative effects of nonnative
species. There are also many examples where people have done transplants that
have produced economic benefits, such as corn and coffee. The idea of being
fearful of new food and comfort sources is not beneficial. Wenger stated they don't
have to be fearful, but they have to be cautious.
Natural Resources Committee, 7/16/2002, Page 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Nelson stated that information in the NMFS study came from previous NMFS
evaluation of the risk of Atlantic salmon in Pacific Coast states or from NMFS and
ESA related status reviews. It was published in 2002. It states that there is little
risk that salmon farms will increase the incidents of disease among wild fish. There
is no difference. The information about the sea lice infestation should have been
included, if it is such a problem. Wenger stated he would research that issue. The
sea lice data is coming in. NMFS is a big federal organization with its own
perspective. Most people prefer to have local control. A good example is the
Cherry Point herring stock. NMFS stated that the herring at Cherry Point are the
same stock as all other stocks in Washington. However, the State believes that
they are genetically different.
Crawford asked if DOE disagrees with the NMFS study on the salmon.
Wenger stated he would have to read the study.
Andy Appleby, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Aquaculture Coordinator, stated he is a fish and wildlife biologist. WDFW has
regulatory authority over the critters in the state. The DOE has regulatory control
over the environment, and the DNR has regulatory authority of the substrate of the
lands, which these net pens are in. There has never been Atlantic salmon
established anywhere in the world, outside of their native range. There have been
attempts to establish Atlantic salmon around the world and in the United States.
WDFW purposely released Atlantic Salmon smolts for two years in the 1980's. It
didn't work. Atlantic salmon are notoriously poor colonizers. That has been well
documented. Numerous attempts worldwide failed. The reports of natural
reproduction in British Columbia are accurate if taken in context. In 1998 and
1999, three juveniles found in streams in British Columbia were believed to be from
escaped adults. That has not happened before or since. The Department of
Fisheries and Oceans finished a survey of 80 streams last year, and found no
juvenile Atlantic salmon. The reports in the popular press that Atlantic salmon have
been found in 79 or 80 streams in B.C. are accurate. The truth is, over the last ten
years, they've found at least one Atlantic salmon in 80 different streams. Rarely do
they find one in more than one year. They are all escaped adults. The industry in
British Columbia is about ten times the size of the industry in Washington State.
They raise about 80 percent Atlantic salmon and 20 percent Pacific salmon.
The WDFW would have significant concerns if the industry in Washington
State chose to rear Pacific salmon instead of Atlantic salmon. The issues are about
interaction between farmed salmon and native salmon. If native salmon are being
reared in those net pens, then he knows the interaction in the biological
requirements are 100 percent, including spawn patterns and locations. He has
been assured by NMFS that they would also have grave concerns about that.
Atlantic salmon have similar but significant differences in their biological
requirements given that they have a 60 -year history of being poor colonizers. They
are more comfortable that the industry in Washington State is 100 percent Atlantic
Salmon.
Natural Resources Committee, 7/16/2002, Page 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
The 2001 legislature passed a house bill called the Marine Fin Fish
Aquaculture Act. It provided the WDFW additional regulatory authority over marine
net pens because the Department of Commerce has a goal of doubling aquaculture
output in the United States in the next 20 years. The United States has a $7 billion
per year trade deficit in aquaculture products in this country. WDFW believed that,
with that kind of interest by the federal government, they would more than likely
see an application for other species of marine fin fish. Those other species are
liable to be more of a problem than Atlantic salmon because they would be native
species. They are currently drafting additional rules for that law. Those rules, as
well as the NPDES permit both require escape reporting, prevention, and rapid
recapture plans for marine net pen operators. The NPDES permit has that
requirement in it now.
Roy asked if the testimony they heard earlier that Atlantic salmon have
colonized in Norway, and that a fish biologist from the Nooksack Tribe saw Atlantic
salmon in the Nooksack River is disputed. Appleby stated Norway is Atlantic
salmon native range. They have seen Atlantic salmon in the Nooksack, Dungeness,
Green, and other rivers.
Roy asked if they are escaped adults, and have not colonized. Appleby
stated correct. They have not had a reportable escape in Washington State in a
year and a half.
Roy asked if the salmon they are seeing are escaped adults and not juveniles
that colonized. Appleby stated that is correct. They are capable of reproduction,
but the growers are using them for brood stock.
Nelson asked about the sea lice issue. Appleby stated he read a couple of
papers on it. One paper was done in Scotland or Norway. There was a
documented juvenile mortality in salmon due to sea lice. Sea lice are indigenous to
the Pacific Northwest. Pacific salmon regularly have sea lice. They don't live in
fresh water. There were some reports of pink salmon mortality due to sea lice
infestation in British Columbia, but they are doing studies on that issue.
Nelson stated the two major concerns are escapement and pollutant loading.
He asked if the Atlantic salmon are competing with native stock when they escape.
Appleby stated 94 percent of escaped adults are not feeding.
Nelson asked what the aquaculture industry locally uses for food. Appleby
stated worldwide fishmeal production has remained stable for the last 20 or 30
years. The majority goes into animal feeds. It is very digestible and palatable.
The aquaculture industry likes fishmeal, but it is expensive. It typically comes from
South American anchovy and /or East Coast fisheries. The argument could be made
that folks who regulate the harvest manage those stocks in the U.S. waters. The
idea is to manage those stocks in a sustainable way. The aquaculture industry is
looking at alternatives to fishmeal because of the cost.
Natural Resources Committee, 7/16/2002, Page 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Nelson asked if there are toxins in farmed fish. Appleby stated there are a
couple of studies that looked at contamination levels. Look at both of those
studies. They had different conclusions.
McShane stated a fundamental concern is the liability of escapement. His
impression is that there are a number of fish scientists who say that is a low risk.
He asked if the escapes mentioned in Volpe's study were the ones Mr. Appleby
quoted in 1993, 1998, and 1999. Appleby stated Volpe is the most vocal author
and has done the most original research on this topic. It was some of Mr. Volpe's
work in 1998 and 1999 where they documented juvenile Atlantic salmon in Eastern
Vancouver Island. Beyond that, none have been found. They hope to institute an
Atlantic salmon watch program. British Columbia has done a watch program well.
They are doing a lot to document where they show up. Washington State doesn't
have a program for Atlantic salmon, but watches juvenile pacific salmon. They
have found juvenile Atlantic salmon in two streams in Washington. Both rivers
have juvenile Atlantic salmon production facilities on them. This year, they
identified seven escaped juveniles just downstream of one of the facilities and eight
downstream of the other facility. All were documented to have been refuges from a
juvenile facility located upstream. That is where the net pen operators get their
Atlantic salmon. They have not imported Atlantic salmon in Washington State since
1991. Only one company rears Atlantic salmon in Washington State. They operate
all the existing net pens in five different locations with nine total lease sites. They
generate all their own smolts.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side 8.)
McShane asked about the company that does this. Appleby stated they are a
wholly owned subsidiary of a multinational corporation called Pan Fish, which also
owns a number of the British Columbia net pen firms.
McShane stated there is a concern about the effect that the Atlantic salmon
production has on fishing industry. Appleby stated farm raised salmon have been
more than half of the total salmon worldwide output for the last five or six years.
McShane asked why the Atlantic salmon do so poorly here in establishing
themselves. Appleby stated the main reason is because Atlantic salmon stocks that
are reared locally are highly domesticated. They have been selectively bred to do
well in net pens. In a net pen of pacific salmon, they constantly swim in circles.
The domesticated Atlantic salmon in net pens just sit on the bottom. When they
are fed, they come up to the surface to eat, and then they hover near the bottom
again. The hatchery programs on the East Coast for endangered native Atlantic
salmon don't work as well as the Pacific hatcheries.
Nelson asked if there is any prohibition of these types of programs in British
Columbia. Appleby stated in 1995, they put a moratorium on licensing new sites.
They had a moratorium until there were industry reviews. Reviews were done in
Natural Resources Committee, 7/16/2002, Page 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
1997 and 1999. They are on the verge of lifting the moratorium. They are allowing
existing sites to relocate to better environmental or land base locations.
McShane suggested that the Natural Resources Committee read through the
suggested language and information they've received today. He may craft
language to bring forward. He preferred to hold this item in committee.
Roy agreed.
Nelson stated concerns have been raised that are somewhat nebulous. He is
concerned about the shoreline program and aquaculture practices. Make sure they
review that. Look at strengthening the codes to protect against environmental
concerns that have been raised and location concerns. He would like to know what
is required for shoreline permitting. He is not overly concerned about aquaculture
practices themselves. There may be some concerns with the potential of disease
management. Look at DOE rule making and permitting. Look at WDFW rules to
help protect against some of these concerns.
McShane stated the resolution would send the message that they are
concerned. There are three areas of discussion. One area is a concern about a
global balance of harvesting and importing the food. The local economy is
significant. He can't ignore that it's a threat to the local economy's fisheries. Wild
fish is not that expensive. The risk potential issue is another concern he wants to
think about.
Bob Wiesen, 3314 Douglas Road, stated they are being led into issues where
they have little control. Local, more important issues are getting put aside.
2. DISCUSSION REGARDING WHATCOM COUNTY'S PURCHASE OF
DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRAM AND REVIEW OF DRAFT
CONSERVATION EASEMENT LANGUAGE (AB2002 -216)
Kraig Olason, Senior Planner, stated he wanted to provide background
information on the conservation easement. It is central to what they will be doing
with the Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) program. He provided a draft.
There are things to consider about the easements. Conservation easements are
permanent. They remove specified rights from a property through restrictions
applied to the property. The easement runs with the land. They need to be
maintained over time by the landowners. The County doesn't own the land, but it
owns the right to restrict the land. To ensure compliance, the County does annual
monitoring. The Land Trust would work with the County. They would provide
ongoing monitoring.
Staff worked with the PDR Committee for months to make sure they were
incorporated into the easement. They tried to make sure they didn't hamper
agriculture to any extent. Another goal was to try and maintain the resource base.
One question is how much they need to get into landowners' lives for monitoring.
Natural Resources Committee, 7/16/2002, Page 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
It gets back to the primary purpose of the conservation easement being there to
protect agriculture for the future. The easement before the Council is a draft. Staff
is pretty happy with it. a couple of sections are the most important for the Council
as the grantors of the purchase.
Staff wanted to keep permitted uses and activities pretty broad. When they
talk about buying an easement for long -term protection, they are reserving the land
base for agricultural use. However, in doing that, they can't require someone to
farm. That is one of the issues that could come up. They might drive by an
easement property some day that doesn't look like its being farmed. It may sit
idle. That is not a condition in here. There might be other things going on on that
property.
Roy asked why they can't require that it be farmed. Olason stated it is
private property. The County is buying the right away from the seller to any future
development. The County does require a farm plan. There should be some
conscious effort at maintaining that soil and doing best management practices.
They are trying to get strategically placed properties that have a buffering affect for
the entire area. The land could sit fallow for a while. Someone can buy it and do
something with non - commercial agriculture.
Caskey- Schreiber asked if the County has any need to have first right of
refusal when the land goes up for sale. Olason stated they decided that the
easement itself would be a stand -alone document. If the County wants a first right
of refusal, it could be a separate document that is also attached to the deed.
Originally they thought about putting it in the easement. However, it doesn't have
to be in the easement as long as it is attached to the deed. They don't have the
details on how to implement that fairly. If that is necessary, they could require
development of a first right of refusal process. It will be a big effort to do that.
Staff is trying to be as concise as they can be in terms of what they absolutely need
to have to have a program for adoption in September.
When staff worked on this, they wanted to make sure that the Council
understands they are buying a limited right. When they have to maintain it, it
becomes an expense. They don't want to do more than they have to to maintain
that resource base openly. They are looking at trying to limit the size of the
residential structure by limiting the size of the footprint. They are also trying to
limit the coverage of the area. It gets down to things that would not be dependent
on soils if someone wants to exceed the allowed coverage area. The goal is to
make this as simple as possible.
One question that has come up recently is about matching funds. They are
looking at matching funds from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, up to 50
percent. Their next round of applications is coming up the first of the year. The
schedule is being moved up a bit from last year. The County will provide
information this fall on the amount it estimates is needed for next year. That will
be the basis for the State's request for allocation from the federal government.
Natural Resources Committee, 7/16/2002, Page 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
After that, requests for projects will happen in January. They are looking for firm
offers. The monies that come in from the federal dollars don't come in like a grant.
It's based on an evaluation of specific farms that have tentative agreements. The
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) would evaluate the applications for
the sales.
The public hearing date for this program is September 10. Once adopted,
staff would be ready to begin. The proposed timeline may be a bit tight to have
agreements ready in January or February. Program implementation was initially
scheduled for November 1. The new proposal for implementation is to schedule it
to begin by October 1. They can also shorten the opening period by a couple of
weeks. To do that, staff is going to have to look at the budget and decide if it
needs to bring in additional assistance on the procedures manual and with the
ranking committee. The Council will see a supplemental budget request to bring in
a coordinator. In terms of additional consulting funds, they were authorized to use
$30,000 on developing this PDR program. They spent about $16,000 of that.
There are some additional funds that could assist in bringing in additional review of
the final product.
Caskey- Schreiber stated she is pleased that the staff is willing to accelerate
the timeline.
Roy asked if the match is $.50 on the dollar. Olason stated it is.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 11:40 a.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Sharon Roy, Committee Chair
Natural Resources Committee, 7/16/2002, Page 13