Happy Holidays from The Southern Residents!!

Christmas Holiday Cards with orca Whales by sandybuckley
Browse more Orca whale cards Cards

Reasons to Love the San Juan Islands in the Winter

By now, I think just about everyone in the country understands why people choose to live on a small island in the Pacific Northwest during the summer months- there are whales, watchable wildlife, birds, cycling, sailing, eagles, sea kayaking..need I go on? Still some may wonder why locals would actually choose to remain on the island paradise long after the tourists depart and the seasons have changed. As the island breathes a sigh of relief from the burgeoning summer crowds, the heartiest islanders find themselves wallowing in the quiet aftermath and relishing in the simple life.

The cooler months beckon the return of lots of winter birds- not the least of which is the Trumpeter Swans who can often be found fishing in the roadside ponds. The Trumpeter Swan is North America's largest waterfowl and one of its rarest native birds. To many people, it is the embodiment of grace, beauty, and unspoiled wildness. We also welcome loons, thrushes, Buffleheads---and many others during the calmer, cooler months.

The Island also start hopping with holiday preparations, all of course, done "Island Style." From tree lighting ceremonies to the Annual Festival of Trees- the winter months begin to unfold as a joyous celebration of community and presence. Island Art Studios burst at the seams with shows which showcase the incredibly talented local artisans, benefit dinners become the norm and concert series begin to send lyrical melodies throughout the streets of local towns. It really has a special place, this season of seemingly bereft loneliness...Simply spend a morning watching a sunrise which is unrivaled in the summer months--and you'll know that even Mother Nature sends us silent applause for our fortitude and love of the natural beauty we call home.

New J Pod Baby!

There's a new baby in town! Yesterday members of J and K pods were spotted heading south along the west side of San Juan Island- a welcome sight to local islanders.

According to Orca Network and folks who were able to catch some photos of the new youngster, the newborn has been reported to be a member of J Pod and was seen traveling alongside Polaris (J 28)- a 16 year old orca favored by many whale lovers. The youngster will be designated J-26. You can view a photo of the new baby, who's sex has yet to be identified by visiting Jeanne Hyde's Blog- where she also provides a great article about the encounter yesterday.

The whales have been infrequently seen throughout the past month, so the news spread like wildfire along local whale enthusiasts. This appears to be the first baby born to Polaris which brings the population of J pod to 27.

I have created a little video of whale photos from the past couple of years that you might enjoy- just a fun photo montage that will help get us through the winter months!!

A Trip Through Time: Port McNeill to Friday Harbor DAYS 1-3

Last month we joined Captain Ronn Patterson of Dolphin Charters and Joe Gaydos of the SeaDoc Society for a picturesque cruise from Port McNeill to Friday Harbor through the protected waters of Vancouver Island's inside passage and beyond. Living on a small boat for 8 days with 6 other passengers, we were treated to our first glimpses of the beauty of the world that lays just beyond the San Juan Islands. This is a region with both history and a natural magnificence that is inspirational...it’s an adventure that takes you through thickly forested mountains that rise up from the sea and whose walls are almost perpendicular to the surface of the water, through inlets of historical significance and opportunities for wildlife viewing that can leave you awestruck. I kept some notes and wanted to share the adventure in photos---so here we go!

DAY 1: WE'RE OFF

Our journey begins in Friday Harbor, where we awoke to a beautiful sunrise offering a surreal pink light cloaked in fog- a fog which shrouded most of the Islands with the exception of the northernmost tip of San Juan. Our departure from Roche Harbor was uneventful, flying about 1/2 hour to Nanaimo, Vancouver Island's second largest city which sits centrally on its coastline. After a brief stop at this town which boasts residences scrolling up the hillsides and evolving across the hills greeting the lapping waters of the Straits of Georgia, we departed for Pt. McNeill. As our travels continued north, the blue green seas met the rolling hills of deforested islands, interrupted with occasional pens of salmon farms dotting the inlets. I was finally witnessing first hand the salmon farming industry's impact on the region which Alexandra Morton has spent tireless years trying to erase from this landscape. Tucked in between the islands which have not escaped the logging industry by any stretch of the imagination, the pens reminded me that our society's footprint travels into the what most consider pristine environments throughout the world.

Three hours after our original departure, we were greeted by Port McNeill, a small village on the shores of the Queen Charlotte Strait, situated on the northern tip of Vancouver Island. We were embraced by rain (and lots of it!), fog and a beatitful harbor nestled in the landscape.

Port McNeill provided us with some great hiking opportunities as we took to the trails in search of bears and wildlife. Lots of scat, no bears to be seen- although we were alert to the cougar population (once warned by locals). We toured the harbor access road watching the loons rest on the water's edge, visiting the Logging Museum for an overview of the area's logging history and made our way through the little shopping village on the waterfront.

DAY 2 PORT HARDY

The second day of our trip would convince us that our all-weather gear had been a good investment- the day began and ended with 30 knot winds and uninterrupted rains. We spent the early part of the morning hiking on a trail nestled in the southernmost side of Port McNeill, bear scat teasing us every 50 feet or so. At the end of the trail's intersect at Miner Road we headed left towards the rocky shoreline and proceeded along the beach headed back into town. Tide was rapidly changing- the exchange was amazingly fast- within 15 minutes of our venture's end, the pebbled shoreline path was no longer visible, the beach now hidden by the ocean's waves. And for the record, we were dry! On to Port Hardy.

The trip on a local bus to Port Hardy lasted about 35 minutes along Highway 19, a richly forested road heading north. The town boasts itself as "the last bastion of civilization on the north side of Vancouver Island," and true to the promise we were greeted by a bustling harbor with all the amenities- a mall, a main street, restaurants, coffee houses, bookstores and a proximity to ocean adventure on both land and sea. This sizable community is slowly moving away from the resource-based economies of fishing, forestry, and mining and the town is gradually developing an economy based on tourism. We spent the afternoon touring the town in the wind and rain- our final interaction with "civilization" for days to come.

DAY 3 THE JOURNEY BEGINS

We awoke to something we had yet to experience in our brief travels- clear skies. The rain stopped for a brief interval, just long enough to capture a beautiful sunrise along the pebbled shoreline. As you can see, fog would again eclipse the day which would take us across the Queen Charlotte Strait in just a few hours.

The water was abosolutely calm, not a ripple on the shorelines. We met the Delphinus at the harbor, boarded and headed east to Malcolm Island, destination: Sointula and a meet and greet with Alexandra Morton, Rob Williams and Erin Ashe.

Billing itself today as a "Taste of Utopia," Sointula has a rich history that began at the turn of the 20th century when a group of Finnish immigrants founded the area, beginning an experiment in cooperative living. According to history, Finnish immigrants who had long been oppressed in the Island's mining industry founded the town, naming their newfound respite "Sointula," meaning "a place of harmony." The town was designed around communal living and equality, everyone participating equally. Eventually the idealism waned and the group sold its assets to the bank. However, remaining settlers would later purchase the land and return to a fishing and logging lifestyle. Today, Sointula still attracts individualists who remain true to the original dreams.

Did I mention we had the chance to meet some of the most prolific and truly passionate people in the region? I was beside myself as Alex Morton boarded the boat- Listening to Whales was a book I read at least 5 times on our wait to finally move to the islands. The title drew me in and I found her words to be a gift- I was and still am enchanted with her creativity and stewardship and have followed her Salmon Farming mission since my arrival here. What can I say? Some people you admire, some you show respect for what they stand for and Alex, to me, is both. Rob and Erin carry on the same torch of integrity and honest regard.

We spent several hours with the group discussing Alex's most recent efforts to impact the Salmon farming industry's impact on the region and Rob and Erin's work in wildlife distribution and abundance as well as impacts of human activities on behavior and energetics of marine mammals. May sound pretty geeky to some but I was in heaven. The talk also laid a good foundation towards understanding the tenuous nature of regional sustainability for the other passengers, not all from the area.

And then we were off to Echo Bay, traveling down the Johnstone Strait to Billy Proctor's dock house by the sea, just down the island and around a cove. On our way, we passed a band of traveling sea lions, foraging and swimming alongside the boat, glancing back at us now and again to ensure our whereabouts.

Echo Bay can only be accessed by private boats. This is a world not visited by ferries, trips for supplies must be planned and expect to last all day. It is here we met Billy Proctor, who runs a small museum of beachcombing finds, has written a few books, and has lived in this area for a very long time, watching the landscape and scenery change. Billy has carved out a life of adventure on this coast as a former logger, fisherman, and do-it-himselfer and he's on the list as one of the seven wonders (people) of Canada. If you're ever in the region, stop by if you can- it will be worth the trip.

Our first day on the water was over as we moored at Billy's pier and prepared for our fist night at sea. The cove was protected and the rain was beginning to fall as a light misty fog rolled in. Next Stop: Bears and Berries in Knight Inlet. Stay tuned!

Subscribe in a reader

Let Your Voices Be Heard- Comment Period Ending On NOAA Proposed Vessel Impact Regulations

PART 2 OF A 2 PART SERIES OVERVIEW

In an earlier blog, I tried to cover the basic history and background of the proposed vessel impact regulations currently open to public comment period. It is important to understand the history and impacts when expressing our concerns and/or providing comments to NOAA. To review the Recovery Plan and a synopsis of the proposal in the prior blog, please visit:

Postcards From Friday Harbor: Proposed Vessel Impact Regulations: Let Your Voice Be Heard

"We need to wake people up to how we have mismanaged our natural heritage, how we have denied the relationship between ourselves and the natural world ...and believe(d) our job is to exploit, manipulate, simplify or manufacture nature to satisfy our short term goals." Howard Garrett

**********************************

AND NOW FOR THE REST OF THE STORY

The first time I ever encountered an orca whale was at The Vancouver Aquarium back in 1991. I did not know about the groundbreaking studies by John Ford nor did I know about the hydrophones which would soon be placed in Robson Bight (1998) and off the shores of San Juan Island, WA (2000) to capture the whales songs for the very first time. It was simply love at first sight as I dragged myself home to the East Coast.

I was not here to learn about the decline of the Southern Resident orcas - I did not follow their story. Living on the east coast, I did not read the Seattle PI's August 21, 2000 article wherein David Bain and Rich Osborne would stress concern about their decline, suspecting links to fewer salmon, toxic water and boat noise potentially interfering with the whales' communication and feeding habits. I did not know that there was a growing concern being expressed that the number of boats on the water could have long term impacts on the whales.

It is now 2009, and I live on the west side of San Juan Island, far removed from Maryland and in the heart of the whales summer playground. In the timeframe since 1991, they have been listed as an endangered species and scientists continue studies on the relationship to their decline with the same impacts suggested back in 2000. I have embraced this beloved icon along with all of the others who have traveled to this region --- the scientists who come to provide insight into sustainability, outdoor enthusiasts and visitors----and admit to my personal footprint being in a cumulative way, part of the problem as well.

Once the orcas made the "A" list as an endangered species, NOAA was tasked with developing protocols to address the critical elements impacting their survival. CLICK here for an overview. One element (of three- see the overview link for more details) is vessel noise, which has already been established as a potential contributing factor to their survival. I am not a scientist nor am I an expert on orca whales. I do know that the proposed vessel regulations have merit and are backed by the best available science- the obligation afforded by the ESA listing. I've followed the Public Hearings on the Proposed Vessel Regulations, attending the last in Friday Harbor on October 5th---and walked away disheartened by the special interests and monetary interests exhibited by the majority of the attendees.

As a resident on the west side of the island I get to see first hand how education and enforcement are not adequate- my observations correlate with the data being kept by Soundwatch- data that suggests that in 2006 ALONE there were 1,281 documented incidents during working hours wherein boats were not adhering to guidelines. I have watched the vessels (referred to by the Whale Watch operators themselves as a "flotilla") literally swarm the whales for hours a day - private boats, whale watching industry vessels, and fishing boats- all hoping to either catch a glimpse of the orcas or benefit from their presence. There have been times where we have counted 24 whales and 97 boats at the height of the summer- some following guidelines, others in the path, many inshore of the whales, some leapfrogging, others motoring along side the whales in an attempt to "get a good photo." The voices from the microphones echo up the hillside- telling visitors about the whales and pointing out behaviors as they occur- a spyhop, a tail lob, oh look, a breach! And all the while, Soundwatch and Straitwatch attempt to keep the whales out of harms way- zigzagging north and south warning boats and educating on the Be Whale Wise Guidelines. Engines roar above water, fishing boats speed through the whales following tide fishery and chasing the salmon themselves. As the day wears on and "enforcement" and "education" boats head home, the remaining vessels crowd in closely to the whales well through the sunset hours, each taking their moment to be free of laws and rationale- closing the day with brilliantly close interactions which we watch helplessly from shore every single night that the whales are here. I had to stop focusing on the violators- it was causing me too much stress in my environment- I became hoarse from yelling at the boats to at least cut their engines and the like. I now try to watch with a different perspective, waiting for the day the regulations are ENFORCED and reporting the most egregious violations directly to NOAA. And it is not only me...click here or here for more stories just like mine.

On the other hand, I have nothing against whale watching or private boaters- I realize that not everyone can or wants to watch from shore. I have even recommended one tour operator to prospective clients, having personally seen the efforts they make towards true regional stewardship. However, I truly believe this proposed rule is a critical piece in the puzzle to protect the whales, with action being long overdue...even if that means sacrifices need to happen- it is time for the rubber to hit the road.

Bottom line, it is worth trying to understand why NOAA has proposed the regulations and what the regulations actually are.

200 YARD APPROACH REGULATION

Existing Be Whale Wise Guidelines and San Juan County Watercraft Regulations require boats to maintain a 100 yard distance while viewing whales. Current collaborative research CLEARLY has documented changes in behavior, feeding (decreased foraging) and communication patterns when boats are present, with the behaviors increasing commensurately with the number of boats. Concerns are that 1) the whales will spend less time foraging & 2) they will use more energy- between energetics, less foraging and louder talking, the stressed whales may actually wind up burning more stored energy than is necessary. Studies have also shown that both behavior and voice changes are dramatically reduced ay 200 yards.

Opponents to the increase in yards suggest that "people will not be interested in watching whales from that distance." To the contrary, one could say that additional respect for the tenuous fragility of the species will be instilled in viewers and their experience will be enhanced when the whales are not surrounded by boats. I think we have lived off the species long enough- and we have done this at their expense. The whale watchers unilaterally opposed this portion in a statement issued but did not complain when the whales were listed as endangered- bringing more customers to the islands. I will absolutely agree, though, that the 200 yards will have no less impact without better education, funding and ENFORCEMENT. This is up to our federal government to decide- and hopefully the public outcry will make them aware of how much our community cares.

PARKING IN THE PATH PROHIBITION

This is the most common infraction on the books and also carries the greatest risk to the whales. Parking in the path of whales is already part of the voluntary guidelines- this addition would now allow enforcement under law (if passed). Hopefully it increases compliance with increased enforcement efforts and presence.

NO GO ZONE

The west side of San Juan Island between Eagle Cove and Mitchell Bay has been proposed as a one-half mile seaward buffer against the effects of vessels, creating a seasonal sanctuary (much like Robson Bight) for the whales and an enforceable regulation if passed. In the past, there has been a VOLUNTARY 1/4 mile no go zone in the exact same area on the west side of the island. The distinction of the zone makes a clear, readily avoidable area which can be easily enforced if violated. Studies have also clearly shown this is a known foraging area for the orcas and has already been earmarked as a critical habitat for salmon and eelgrass restoration. This is also the area where I have personally seen the most heinous violations.

Following the original Proposed Recovery Plan comment period, I find it interesting that many local associations commended the plan and suggested even stronger efforts. Some specifically suggested a no go zone on the west side of SJI, better reflecting the existing critical habitats and shoreline recovery strategies, citing this addition as a great adjunct to Salmon Recovery efforts.

That being said, every special interest group has completely balked at this portion of the regulations, questioning the science behind it. In doing so, people who are not scientists have chosen to question the validity of studies by internationally respected people...names like David Bain, Robin Baird, John Ford, Graham Ellis, Rob Williams, Richard Osborne, Katherine Ayres, Dawn Noren Adams and so many more. Some chose to ridicule NOAA and Lynne Barre's proposal as if this was not one of the most comprehensive and well written documents ever issued by the agency. The lack of respect shown by some was uncharacteristic of the people in this area--these are the very scientists who have no vested interests in the scientific outcome and are only striving to determine the best means by which to ensure the survival of a struggling population.

FINAL THOUGHTS (FINALLY!)- THE SUGGESTIONS

I am in favor of the proposed regulations with a request that NOAA consider the following:

1) In retrospect, perhaps NOAA should have worked with fishermen and local officials to ensure universal understanding while shaping a system of reserves amenable to all...just like the Southern California MLPA process. How can this now be managed to bring the community together?

2) I cannot comment on the commercial fishing issues raised at the public hearings- the suggestion that "all of the fish" are in that 1/2 mile proposed NO GO Zone---but this will wind up being a source of contention if not litigation if not adequately addressed prior to implementation.

3) I believe it is unfair to include kayaking in the no go zone- forcing the kayakers offshore by 1/2 mile poses threats to their safety.

4) I do not agree that a SLOW ZONE should replace the proposed NO GO ZONE. I have watched many sailboats and private anglers traveling less than the 7 knots suggested.... traveling over the top and inshore of the whales. I think diluting this NO GO zone will also make enforcement more difficult.

5) I am in favor of suggestions for a permitting system (for both commercial fisheries and whale watch operators) including hefty fines for violators and permit removal with violations. Let violators pay for the enforcement.

6) Some consideration needs to be given to enforceability with Canada and San Juan County so that litigation can be avoided to the best possible extent.

In the interim, NOAA continues to seek public input regarding the proposed regulations on vessel impacts through October 27th at 5:00pm PST. Everyone has a voice and I ask you to have yours be heard. The hearings have unilaterally been attended by SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS who have monetary interests in muddying the proposal to the point of extinction. NOAA needs to hear everyone's thoughts- even those who support the proposed regulations to obtain a clear indication of what the public believes to be warranted to protect the southern resident community of killer whales. You can submit your comments to NOAA in the following ways:

VIA EMAIL AT : orca.plan@noaa.gov or via the federal e-rulemaking portal

VIA MAIL to : Assistant Regional Administrator, Protected Services Division

Northwest Regional Office

National Marine FIsheries Service

7600 Sand Point Way NE

Seattle, WA 98115

NOAA is seeking comments including alternatives that have been analyzed in the assessment, impacts, your personal experience with the effects of vessels on the whales, economic impacts and other relevant information you think the agency should consider. Please let your voice be heard, even if it is shaky. The whales need your thoughts and the best possible protection in their watery world throughout the Puget Sound and Salish Sea.

Subscribe in a reader

WATCH A PHOTO MONTAGE VIDEO OF THE SOUTHERN RESIDENTS

Proposed Vessel Impact Regulations: Let Your Voice Be Heard

Everyone loves the orcas, the question that begs to be considered is---"How Much is Too Much?"

As most people know, NOAA's Fisheries Service has officially proposed new rules on vessel traffic aimed at further protecting Southern Resident killer whales in the Salish Sea region. This could be the most difficult blog article I have ever written- the problems and issues are complex and diverse and each person I've spoken to has an opinion-and a strong one at that. Capturing the essence of such an emotional debate is difficult--making your point in the myriad of self interests seems almost impossible. What I hope to accomplish, at least, is to provide an overview of the issues at hand and have people realize now is the time that your voices need to be heard.

HISTORY AND BACKGROUND

The Southern Resident community of killer whales was originally listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) by NOAA Fisheries Service on Nov. 18, 2005. With this listing the agency was then required to develop and implement A Recovery Plan , laying out an adaptive management approach and recovery strategy based on the best available science. The plan was drafted with input from concerned citizens, Federal and State agencies, Tribes, non-profit groups, industries, the academic community all in coordination with Canada. The final draft was issued in January of 2008 with the primary goal being restoring the orcas to a sustainable population size wherein they would no longer require protections afforded by the ESA.

THE RECOVERY PLAN OVERVIEW

By giving the orcas Endangered Species protections, NOAA was now tasked with developing and implementing a recovery plan. Original efforts to gather management action items to include in an overall conservation plan had already begun back in 2003 and would continue through 2007. Ultimately, after 5 years of input from all of the groups indicated above, three major threats were identified and agreed upon as having the most significant impact and most immediate need to address to protect the SRKW's: prey availability (lack of food), contaminants (water quality, et al) and vessel effects. The top three priorities were established based on frequency and severity faced by the whales throughout the year. And everyone agreed that the findings were valid...next step---how to address these issues?

Salmon recovery and contaminants are being addressed in alternative venues while NOAA published specific proposed guidelines entitled Protective Regulations for Killer Whales in the Northwest Region Under the Endangered Species Act and Marine Mammal Protection Act which focuses on vessel impacts- the third immediate need indicated in the Recovery Plan. After the proposal was published it was afforded a public comment period with additional public meetings in September and October.

You should definitely take the time to read the PROPOSED RULES as they are the core of the discussion at hand. I also want to say that the proposal, authored by Lynne Barre of NOAA, is perhaps the most informative, well rounded and exceptionally written governmental position paper I have ever read. It is informative, addresses the issues in depth and takes the time to accurately correlate impacts to all special interest groups. It is not a "now take this" proposal- Lynne and the scientists behind the proposal clearly care about protecting this endangered species based on the BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE. A portion of the proposed regulations are basically making the current VOLUNTARY Be Whale Wise Guidelines enforceable by law. However, and I cannot stress this enough, despite guidelines, outreach and education programs and even listing the whales under the ESA, interaction between vessels and whales continue to occur every day in the regions waters. Hence, the proposed regulations.

As an overview, the proposed rules would prohibit vessels from:

- approaching any killer whale closer than 200 yards (AS OPPOSED TO THE 100 YARD RULE IN EFFECT)

- intercepting or parking in the path of a whale (NOW MAKES THIS ENFORCEABLE BY LAW)

- and adds a half-mile-wide no-go zone along the west side of San Juan Island from May 1 through the end of September, where generally no vessels would be allowed.

There would be exemptions to the rules for some vessels, including those actively fishing commercially, cargo vessels traveling in established shipping lanes, and government and research vessels. The no-go zone would also have exemptions for treaty Indian fishing vessels, and limited exceptions for land owners accessing private property adjacent to it.

************************************************************************

Over the past three months NOAA has held three public hearing regarding the proposed new regulations on vessel traffic, the last of which occurred on October 5 in Friday Harbor, WA. The meeting was originally scheduled to be held in Grange Hall but was later moved to the Friday Harbor High School when more than 250 people showed up. I will cover the Friday Harbor hearing and provide my thoughts in a post tomorrow.

In the interim, NOAA continues to seek public input regarding the proposed regulations on vessel impacts through October 27th at 5:00pm PST. Everyone has a voice and I ask you to have yours be heard. The hearings have unilaterally been attended by SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS who have monetary interests in muddying the proposal to the point of extinction. NOAA needs to hear everyone's thoughts- even those who support the proposed regulations to obtain a clear indication of what the public believes to be warranted to protect the southern resident community of killer whales. You can submit your comments to NOAA in the following ways:

VIA EMAIL AT : orca.plan@noaa.gov or via the federal e-rulemaking portal

VIA MAIL to : Assistant Regional Administrator, Protected Services Division

Northwest Regional Office

National Marine FIsheries Service

7600 Sand Point Way NE

Seattle, WA 98115

NOAA is seeking comments including alternatives that have been analyzed in the assessment, impacts, your personal experience with the effects of vessels on the whales, economic impacts and other relevant information you think the agency should consider. Please let your voice be heard, even if it is shaky. The whales need your thoughts and the best possible protection in their watery world throughout the Puget Sound and Salish Sea.

Subscribe in a reader

Freedom to Roam- New Snake River Video Released

Freedom to Roam is Patagonia’s current environmental campaign. Its goal is to create, restore and protect wildways or corridors between habitats so animals can survive. Patagonia’s partners in Freedom to Roam include the Freedom to Roam Coalition, which includes other companies, conservation organizations, rural activists, recreation groups, and those who live on the land. Check out Patagonia's work with Freedom to Roam or go to The Freedom to Roam Coalition's website.

Freedom to Roam has partnered with Patagonia and Save Our Wild Salmon to highlight the crisis and opportunities for salmon and communities of the Snake River corridor.

Take a look at the video below and remember to Take Action!

Save our Wild Salmon is a nationwide coalition of conservation organizations, commercial and sportsfishing associations, businesses, river groups, and taxpayer advocates working collectively to restore self-sustaining, abundant, and harvestable populations of wild salmon and steelhead to rivers, streams and oceans of the Pacific Salmon states.

How Will The Puget Sound Respond to Mounting Pressures?

Looking out towards the Olympic Peninsula from the shores of San Juan Island one sees beauty and magnificence at every turn- majestic orcas in the Straits, eagles soaring overhead, crystal clear waters at your feet -a seemingly pristine ecosystem sprawling into the horizon. But appearances are just that- in reality, the Puget sound and the entire Salish Sea are in jeopardy and have been for many years- clinging to the precarious hope that humanity will take a moment to figure out its future before time takes its eventual toll. While many have watched Hedrick Smith's Poisoned Waters, a Frontline documentary which examines the growing hazards to the local ecosystem and the concurrent impact on the heath of us as inhabitants, most people still do not recognize that the pollution in our environment acts as a chronic cancer slowly eating away at the natural resources so vital to our lives.

Because of the bottom topography, the Puget Sound is very slow to flush out pollutants that endanger fish, mammals, and marine invertebrates. Still, we fail to recognize and acknowledge that whatever goes into Sound ultimately comes into us. The waters not only affect the health of our orcas and salmon but has commensurate rates of human cancers and autoimmune diseases rising as we also absorb the toxic load in our water, air, and food sources.

Sadly, in 2006, the Puget Sound Partnership commissioned a public opinion poll and found that only about 25 percent of the region’s population had a high awareness or concern about the Sound’s environmental health. Research shows that awareness and concern of an issue must be maintained at high levels for citizens to be willing to make and support personal and government actions necessary to bring about change.

In that light, the Seattle Times recently ran an article focusing on various environmental impacts in our region- and I wanted to take the opportunity to highlight their coverage-- which is excellent. A group of journalists from around the country and Canada convened here this summer as fellows with Institutes for Journalism and Natural Resources to learn about the complex issues in this region. They spent nine days in the field, talking with scientists, business owners, farmers, tribal members, politicians and local residents. Seattle Times reporter Lynda Mapes served as director of the trip.

These videos present a snapshot of the journey. The issues are deeper and opinions more varied than what can be captured in several short videos, but the people and places you''ll see are part of the larger conversation about Puget Sound: its past, present and future.

CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE VIDEOS

Subscribe in a reader

Fisheries Service Proposes New Rules to Safeguard Puget Sound’s Killer Whales

NOAA’s Fisheries Service is proposing new rules on vessel traffic aimed at further protecting Southern Resident killer whales in Washington’s Puget Sound. These large marine mammals, the subject of intense curiosity from kayakers to tourists crowding the decks of commercial whale-watching vessels, were added to the Endangered Species list in late 2005.

The proposed rules would prohibit vessels from approaching any killer whale closer than 200 yards and forbid vessels from intercepting or parking in the path of a whale. In addition, the proposed regulations would set up a half-mile-wide no-go zone along the west side of San Juan Island from May 1 through the end of September where generally no vessels would be allowed.

“The idea here is to give these remarkable animals even more real, meaningful protection,” said Barry Thom, acting head of the agency’s Northwest regional office. “Without it, we would undercut the hard work we are all doing to recover the species by improving the sound’s water quality and recovering salmon, the killer whale’s primary food.”

The fisheries agency said there would be exemptions to the rules for some vessels, including those actively fishing commercially, cargo vessels travelling in established shipping lanes, and government and research vessels. The no-go zone would also have limited exceptions for land owners accessing private property adjacent to it.

While Southern Resident whales are also threatened by degraded water quality in the sound and lack of prey, primarily salmon, biologists have known for years that vessel traffic may be tied to their low numbers.

The whales, which depend on their highly sophisticated sonar to navigate and find food, can be affected by underwater noise from boats and disturbed by vessels that approach too close or block their paths. The population peaked at 97 animals in the 1990s and then declined to 79 in 2001. It currently stands at 85 whales. The agency’s recovery plan, released in early

2008, calls for actions to reduce disturbance from vessels.

If adopted, the earliest the rule would take effect would be May 2010. The agency said it will hold public meetings Sept. 30 in Seattle and Oct. 5 in Friday Harbor for people to learn more about the proposed rules. The public comment period on them closes Oct. 27. You can view the proposal and make and make comments here.

UPDATE ON THE CURRENT STATE TO THE PROPOSAL:

Postcards From Friday Harbor: Porposed Vessel Impact Regulations: Let Your Voice Be Heard

EPA Approves Puget Sound Action Plan with Funding to Follow

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency gave its "stamp of approval" on July 15 for the Puget Sound Action Agenda under the National Estuary Program (NEP), paving the way for the agenda to continue to receive federal funding. This move also indicates that the agency is fully committed to helping carry out an agenda to protect an restore the Puget Sound.

"I'm pleased to announce our approval of the Action Agenda," said Michelle Pirzadeh, EPA's acting regional administrator in Seattle. "This makes official what has been true all along: EPA is fully committed to bringing our resources to bear on the critically important work of protecting and restoring our treasured Puget Sound. We pledge to continue to act hand-in-hand with our partners—the state, tribes, local governments and citizens -- to ensure a healthy Sound for future generations."

Federal endorsement of the action agenda under Section 320 of the Clean Water Act means a common plan will guide restoration and protection efforts and provides access to federal funding, including $20 million in 2009.

Puget Sound is a national priority in EPA's Strategic Plan, on par with other great waterbodies and national treasures like the Chesapeake Bay and the Great Lakes and is recognized as one of 28 estuaries of national significance under the NEP. Since 1995, more than $60 million in EPA appropriations have gone to Puget Sound estuary projects. The Action Agenda was announced last December by the Puget Sound Partnership and Washington Governor Gregoire. The ambitious agenda focuses not only on Puget Sound itself but also identifies actions in upland watersheds that will improve the health of the Sound.

The Action Agenda seeks to: Improve water quality in the Sound and nearby watersheds, Aid the recovery of species affected by pollution, Restore impaired water quality at beaches and shellfish beds, and Develop strategies to control toxic and bacterial contamination.

The plan also highlights the need to carefully consider the effects of development and population growth on Puget Sound. The EPA has also made a call for citizen input and is allowing comments on their site.

Please take the time to visit and provide your thought about what you think are the highest priorities to help protect Puget Sound. Your input will help guide efforts to implement the Puget Sound Partnership Action Agenda over the next two years. You may use the provided form below, or email your suggestions to Daniel Steinborn at steinborn.daniel@epa.gov. The feedback period will end July 31, 2009 and the EPA asks you to focus on:

• What general issues or types of projects should be given higher priority?
• Are there subregions or specific locations within Puget Sound that need priority attention? If so, where are they and what do they need?

California water plan aims to save Puget Sound orcas

WASHINGTON — A plan to restore salmon runs on California's Sacramento River also could help revive killer whale populations 700 miles to the north in Puget Sound , as federal scientists struggle to protect endangered species in a complex ecosystem that stretches along the Pacific coast from California to Alaska .

Without wild salmon from the Sacramento and American rivers as part of their diet, the killer whales might face extinction, scientists concluded in a biological opinion that could result in even more severe water restrictions for farmers in the drought-stricken, 400-mile-long Central Valley of California . The valley is the nation's most productive farm region.

The plan has faced heated criticism from agricultural interests and politicians in California , but environmentalists said it represented a welcome departure by the Obama administration from its predecessor in dealing with Endangered Species Act issues.

The Sacramento plan, they add, is in sharp contrast to the plan for restoring wild salmon populations on the Columbia and Snake rivers in Washington state and Idaho . That plan, written by the Bush administration, essentially concluded that the long-term decline in those federally protected runs didn't jeopardize the killer whales' existence because hatchery fish could make up the difference.

The 85 orcas of the southern resident killer whale population travel in three separate pods, spending much of their time roaming the inland waters of Washington state from the San Juan Islands to south Puget Sound . During the winter they've been found offshore, ranging as far south as Monterey Bay in California and as far north as British Columbia's Queen Charlotte Islands. Each orca has distinctive markings, which allows them to be tracked.

In the mid-1990s, there were nearly 100 orcas in the three southern resident pods. The population fell to fewer than 80 in 2001. In 2005, they were granted federal protection as an endangered species. They've been studied closely for only 30 years or so, but historically there may have been up to 200 southern resident orcas.

Researches think that the decline has resulted from pollution — which could cause immune- or reproductive-system dysfunction — and from oil spills, noise and other vessel disturbances, along with a reduced quantity and quality of prey.

With the largest 27 feet long and weighing 10,000 pounds, orcas are constantly on the prowl for food. They've been known to hunt in packs. Their meal of choice: salmon, particularly chinook salmon.

By some estimates, the orcas eat about 500,000 salmon a year.

"We are trying to figure out how killer whales fit in," said Bradley Hanson , a wildlife biologist with the National Marine Fisheries Services in Seattle who studies orcas. "We don't have a lot of information on the movement of southern resident whales down the coast. We don't have a lot of information on adult salmon movements off the coast."

Before 2000, Hanson said, no one was quite sure where the killer whales went when they went to sea. It was a surprise when they showed up near Monterey Bay , he said.

The Sacramento and American river systems combined were once among the top salmon-spawning rivers on the West Coast , trailing only the Columbia and Snake rivers.

Prompted by lawsuits, the National Marine Fisheries Service last month published its latest plan for the Sacramento and American rivers' winter and fall chinook salmon runs. Without further curtailments of water for the federal Central Valley Project — a several-hundred-mile network of dams, canals and pumping plants — and the California State Water Project — the nation's largest state-built water and power development and conveyance system, which supplies water for 23 million Californians — the two runs are in jeopardy of extinction, the plan said.

Without changes, the southern resident killer whales, a run of steelhead and a population of North American green sturgeon almost certainly would disappear, according to the plan.

The killer whale population is extremely fragile, and scientists said the loss or serious injury to just one could appreciably reduce the odds that the southern resident pods would recover or survive.

The scientists who wrote the Sacramento plan also said that hatchery-raised salmon couldn't be counted on to sustain the killer whales' survival.

"Healthy wild salmon populations are important to the long-term maintenance of prey populations available to southern residents, because it is uncertain whether a hatchery-only stock could be sustained indefinitely," the scientists said.

Not only are there concerns about long-term funding for the hatcheries, but scientists also have questions about whether hatchery fish are as genetically strong and healthy as wild ones. Though changes to the hatcheries could improve the fish they produce, there's no agreement on what needs to be done and no guarantees that the changes would work.

The latest plan for the Columbia-Snake wild salmon runs concluded that continued operation of the federalhydroelectric dams on the two rivers was "not likely to adversely affect" the killer whales. Earlier, federal scientists found that "perhaps the single greatest change in food availability for resident killer whales since the late 1800s has been the decline of salmon from the Columbia River basin."

Despite the decline in wild runs, the scientists who worked on the Columbia plan concluded that hatchery fish would be able to make up any deficit in the orcas' diet.

Though the Columbia-Snake salmon plan acknowledges the potential problems with hatchery fish, it dismisses, at least for now, their impact on killer whale food supplies.

Lynne Barre , a National Marine Fisheries Service scientist in Seattle who helped write both plans, downplays any differences.

"I think we say the same thing in both opinions," Barre said, adding that both plans recognize that hatchery fish could be a short-term substitute for wild fish but that there were concerns about whether hatchery fish could be a long-term food source for orcas. "The general principles are similar."

Environmentalists, however, say that the differences couldn't be more obvious.

"The contrasts are striking," said Todd True , a lawyer for the Seattle office of Earthjustice, which has challenged the Columbia-Snake plan in a lawsuit in federal court in Portland, Ore.

True said the Sacramento salmon plan was a "candid piece of work that had a strong independent review and the absence of political interference." As for the Columbia-Snake plan, True said that it "pretends there isn't a problem."

The judge in the Portland case has given the Obama administration until Aug. 15 to indicate whether it'll stick with the Columbia-Snake salmon plan written during the Bush administration or offer a new one. True said he'd raise the orca issue again.

Other environmentalists said that Jane Lubchenco , who heads the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration , which includes the fisheries service, must be aware of the differences in how the two salmon plans addressed killer whales. Lubchenco is a marine biologist who taught at Oregon State University .

"They need to decide which of the contradictory statements are correct," said Pat Ford of Save Our WildSalmon.

$11 Million Dollars Allocated For Salmon Recovery and Estuary Restoration in the Puget Sound

HOT OFF THE PRESSES FROM THE PUGET SOUND PARTNERSHIP

MEDIA CONTACT
Katy Johansson
360.725.5442
katy.johansson@psp.wa.gov

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
05-29-2009

Partnership approves $11 million in critical recovery, protection projects

OLYMPIA – The Puget Sound Partnership this week approved several salmon recovery and estuary protection projects throughout the Sound worth nearly $11 million. 

“Salmon recovery is essential to the overall recovery of Puget Sound, and vice versa. We won’t achieve one without the other,” said David Dicks, the Partnership’s executive director. “The projects we have endorsed advance the priorities of the Action Agenda and our overall mission to bring the Sound back to health.”

The projects are supported by two separate appropriations the Partnership fought for this legislative session in the 2009-11 state capital budget, signed into law last week by the governor.

The budget includes a $33 million appropriation for Puget Sound Acquisition and Restoration (PSAR). The Partnership’s Leadership Council on Wednesday supported five PSAR projects, totaling almost $4.3 million, as part of an accelerated funding round in the PSAR grant program.

“These ready-to-go projects will create much-needed jobs right now, during the 2009 construction season,” Dicks said. The PSAR projects leveraged $766,797 in local matching funds, “demonstrating local support for salmon habitat acquisition and restoration in Puget Sound,” Dicks added.

The capital budget also includes $7 million for the Estuary and Salmon Restoration Program (ESRP). The Leadership Council approved a spending plan for nine top-priority nearshore and estuary protection and restoration projects. While that spending plan totals $9.7 million, three of the projects are alternates and one is only partially funded, bringing the spending total closer to $6.6 million. 

The Leadership Council endorsed the following projects:

PSAR (Request total: $4,274,849)

•    Tatrimima Shoreline Protection: This project will acquire for permanent protection approximately 30 acres of shoreline property along the Nisqually River.

o    PSAR request: $334,922 

o    Project sponsor: Nisqually Land Trust

o    Lead entity: Nisqually River Salmon Recovery

•    Nisqually River Knotweed Control: This project will preserve and improve riparian habitat function on the lower watershed of the Nisqually River and in the priority sub-basins of the Nisqually. 

o    PSAR request: $66,500

o    Project sponsor: Pierce County Noxious Weed Control Board 

o    Lead entity: Nisqually River Salmon Recovery

•    Mashel Eatonville Restoration Phase II: This funding will implement the second phase of a project that includes: installation of engineered logjams to restore and improve in-stream habitat and protect eroding banks; restoration of the riparian buffer; and the acquisition of up to 5 acres of healthy riparian and floodplain forests.

o    PSAR request: $1,165,573

o    Project sponsor: Nisqually Indian Tribe

o    Lead entity: Nisqually River Salmon Recovery

•    Little Quilcene River Delta Cone Removal: This project, the fifth in a series, will remove aggraded sediments to reconnect tidal and freshwater hydraulics, restore 7 acres of salt marsh and place four woody debris jams at the mouth of the Little Quilcene River.

o    PSAR request: $1,007,854

o    Project sponsor: Hood Canal Salmon Enhancement Group

o    Lead entity: Hood Canal Coordinating Council

•    Skokomish Estuary Island Restoration: Part of a greater effort to restore natural tidal hydrology to the entire Skokomish Estuary, this project will obliterate island dikes and levees, roads and borrow ditches – improving salmonid refuge, water quality and dissolved oxygen, and reducing flooding.

o    PSAR request: $1.7 million

o    Project sponsor: Skokomish Indian Tribe

o    Lead entity: Hood Canal Coordinating Council

ESRP (Spending plan total: $9,740,740. Total project spending: $6.58 million. List presented in ranked order. Please note project 6 is only partially funded and projects 7, 8 and 9 are alternates.)

•    1. Nisqually Refuge Restoration: This project includes the construction of setback dikes, enhancement of wetlands and completion of work necessary to restore tidal influence to 762 acres of tidal marsh and swamp at the mouth of the Nisqually River.

o    Project amount: $200,000

o    Project sponsor: Ducks Unlimited

•    2. Lily Point Acquisition Phase II: This project will expand on the successful protection of the southern portion of Lily Point by purchasing and permanently protecting the remaining northern portion of Lily Point – a 146-acre parcel that includes 4,200 feet of natural shoreline and 92 acres of tidelands.

o    Project amount: $860,000

o    Project sponsor: The Nature Conservancy

•    3. Smugglers Slough Tidal Reconnection: This project will use self-regulating tide gates and levee breaches to restore tidal and flood inundation and enhance habitat in 620 acres of the Nooksack-Lummi delta.

o    Project amount: $1,933,200

o    Project sponsor: Lummi Nation

•    4. Smith Island Estuarine Restoration Project: This project will design, permit, construct and monitor the restoration of approximately 400 acres of tidal marsh on Smith Island in the Snohomish Estuary – with the construction of setback dike and removal of existing levee along Union Slough.

o    Project amount: $2.6 million

o    Project sponsor: Snohomish County

•    5. Red Salmon Slough Levee Removal: This project will remove historic levees and dikes within tribal ownership on the Nisqually Delta to restore unconstrained flood water movement and associated alluvial processes across the eastern half of the delta.

o    Project amount: $214,000

o    Project sponsor: Nisqually Indian Tribe

•    6. Livingston Bay Nearshore Acquisition (partially funded): This project will acquire and protect 43 acres of ecologically important nearshore and marine riparian habitat in northwest Port Susan Bay and restore a 10-acre barrier lagoon.

o    Project amount: $1,350,000 (NOTE: only some of this amount will be awarded to the project)

o    Project sponsor: The Nature Conservancy

•    7. Kiket Island Conservation Acquisition (alternate): This project will purchase 95 acres of waterfront property with more than two miles of high-quality, near-pristine shoreline habitat to protect it from development and expand Deception Pass State Park.

o    Project amount: $2 million

o    Project sponsor: Washington State Parks and Recreation

•    8. Gull Harbor-Cushman Easement Acquisition (alternate): This project will provide the balance of funding needed to purchase a conservation easement on the last major unprotected parcel in Olympia’s Gull Harbor, one of the last nearly pristine estuarine areas remaining in Budd Inlet. 

o    Project amount: $350,000

o    Project sponsor: Capitol Land Trust

•    9. Stavis NRCA Boyce Creek Seawall Removal (alternate): This project will remove 550 feet of seawall on Hood Canal and restore 800 feet of stream channel on a DNR-managed property.

o    Project amount: $233,540

o    Project sponsor: Department of Natural Resources

“The Leadership Council and I appreciate the hard work and support of Gov. Gregoire and the Legislature, who, in difficult economic times, demonstrated their continued support for the recovery of salmon and Puget Sound by providing funding for these crucial projects,” Dicks said.

The remainder of the $33 million PSAR appropriation will be awarded to priority Puget Sound salmon recovery projects proposed in future funding rounds for construction in 2010 and 2011.

ESRP will be working with project sponsors to write contracts, which they hope to have in place by early this July.

Despite facing an unprecedented budget deficit, the Legislature demonstrated stalwart support for the protection and restoration of Puget Sound during the 2009 regular session. This continued commitment will help ensure economic, environmental and social benefits, and create and sustain new green jobs in the state’s difficult economy.

“It is gratifying to know that even under such dire economic circumstances, Puget Sound recovery remains a top priority of the Legislature,” said David Dicks, the Puget Sound Partnership’s executive director. 

The Partnership is responsible for overseeing the implementation of its recently adopted Action Agenda to recover the Sound and reporting progress back to the public.

“Thanks to the hard work of Governor Gregoire and Legislature, the Partnership is able to move forward on implementing critical actions identified in the Action Agenda to help bring the Sound back to health,” Dicks said. “The projects they supported this session will result in badly needed green jobs throughout the region, and will help ensure the region’s overwhelming desire to pass on a legacy of a healthy Puget Sound to future generations becomes a reality.”

The Legislature passed capital and operating budgets, and a handful of policy bills, that support the Partnership’s core functions and will help implement key recommendations of the Action Agenda.

###