Latest

3/4/15

About 10 years ago, Calpine Corporation planned to locate a gigantic transfer terminal for liquid natural gas (LNG), across Humboldt Bay from Eureka. Twice a week, super tankers would dock in Humboldt Bay to discharge huge volumes of LGN. During the operation, the general area, including a considerable portion of the Bay, would be under military-style lockdown. Why? In 2004, a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission report provided this nightmare scenario: if the warmed LNG from one super tanker ignited, it would produce a fire a mile wide and result in second- degree burns two miles away. (We would probably be just fine in Trinidad unless the wind was from the south, and until smoldering refugees came staggering up Scenic Drive from Eureka.) Most of us were pleased that Calpine found different locations for its terminals on a bigger bay.

Abqaiq, Saudi Arabia, in the 1980s, when my wife, Carol and I lived and worked there, was the hottest place on earth. Enormous quantities of waste LNG was flared off on the northern boarder of the immense Rub al-Khali. In spite of the country-club atmosphere in the ARAMCO town, our stay might have been cut short if we had known more about the dangers of LNG. Terrorists do not keep their heads in Arabia. Sharia law is draconian; beheadings are community events. I got in on one, quite by accident. Let me assure you, however, that unless it’s your own, an oil-town barbecued with LNG is far less troubling than a routine decapitation.

In Humboldt County, mega-development schemes often meet with well-informed and strident opposition. We are not likely to allow international thugs and their local toadies to auction off this incredibly beautiful biome! Other settings in North America may not be as fortunate and defiant.

On Capitol Hill, the Senate, like the House, will probably cave in to the corporatedictates and pass “HR-351”.

With weaker “checks and balances,” our restructured Congress evidently intends to give Big Buggering Oil (BBO) the green light to cut North America in half with Keystone XL Pipeline and a free rein to frack the fragile planet!

Let’s get back to this curve of the coast where there’s an element of hope. You probably heard that Fernald, another huge, slavering corporation, also checked us out, probably convinced that the brush monkeys in Humboldt County would be proud to have the world’s biggest coalburning power plant on the Samoa Peninsula. So what if millions of tons of filthy particulate matter was pooped from the furnaces into the planet’s purest air; at least for a short time, we’d have more jobs, right? Like Calpine, Fernald moved on. Local opposition was strong and Humboldt Baykeeper is on guard!

Now — we’re home free — right? The spoilers have given up. Wait! Take nothing for granted. On Feb. 12, the US Mine Corp. presented a sketchy proposal for processing gold ore on Samoa Peninsula to the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District commissioners. Evidently the commission, instead of giving US Mine the boot, gave it 90 days to get its act together.

Perhaps we might eventually agree that greed, like gold, is good! If US Mine begins operations, at least one thousand tons of ore from Canada and South America would be processed yearly, and in less than a decade, we would have millions of tons of toxic slag in our sunset sky! But, let’s not get overly cynical.

Could it be that gold-processing may not be that bad after all? There are plans for a modest extension of the oyster beds in the Bay and since oysters purify the water they would automatically ingest the cyanide and the mercury that is utilized in processing gold. That way, we could have our oysters along with a thin layer of gold leaf on the side.

John Wiebe resides in Westhaven.

Read Original Article

2/23/15

Federal biologists will study whether more critical habitat could benefit an endangered group of killer whales that roams the ocean off the Pacific Northwest, from Puget Sound down to northern California.

Wildlife conservation advocates last year petitioned NOAA’s Marine Fisheries Service, seeking critical habitat designation for the whales’ winter foraging range off the coasts of Washington, Oregon and California. Documents related to the process are compiled here.

The original critical habitat designation covers about 2,500 square miles in Puget Sound, but new research shows the importance of the winter feeding areas in offshore areas.

Currently, only 81 killer whales remain in the Southern Resident population.

“Killer whales are at a crossroads, and protecting their foraging habitat along the West Coast will be essential to their recovery,” said Miyoko Sakashita, oceans director with the Center for Biological Diversity.

The whales travel extensively along the West Coast during the winter and early spring, regularly congregating near coastal rivers to feed on migrating salmon. The Center’s petition sought to protect these areas off the coasts of Washington, Oregon and California as critical habitat.

“Killer whales need new habitat protections to prevent ocean pollution and noise that can interfere with their ability to locate prey. While the Fisheries Service’s announcement is an important step forward, time is of the essence, and those new habitat protections are needed now,” said Sakashita.

Human activities in and near coastal waters threaten these whales by reducing salmon numbers, generating toxic pollution and increasing ocean noise, which disrupts the orcas’ ability to communicate and locate prey.

Critical habitat designations prevent the federal government from undertaking or approving activities that reduce an area’s ability to support an endangered species. Studies show that species with designated critical habitat are more than twice as likely to be recovering as those without it.

Read Original Article

2/24/15

The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors completed straw voting on the last remaining policies as part of the continuing General Plan Update process Monday, with the final items addressing issues relating to water resources and open space.

While completing the policy review portion of the process, the board still has to review several other sections of the General Plan, including the draft environmental impact statement and land use maps. The board is currently scheduled to finish the General Plan Update in late 2016.

The board began Monday’s meeting by revisiting the previously discussed topic of community separation.

The topic is defined in the draft General Plan as “open space areas between urban development areas that separate and preserve unique identities of the county’s cities and communities.”

The board straw voted on a set of policies, standards and a goal relating to community separation, with one of the standards identifying where the community separation areas are located. Two areas made the list after the vote — the McKay Tract Community Forest and forested hillside area in the McKinleyville Community Plan, which separates McKinleyville from the Fieldbrook-Glendale area. Many attendees, along with 3rd District Supervisor Mark Lovelace, wanted the open space area between Eureka and Arcata to also be included.

“While I appreciate that there is language that will help to implement that portion of the McKinleyville Community Plan, it’s not adding anything additional in other places where I have heard concerns from the community,” Lovelace said. “I think there is a lot more included in that concept than the two pieces that we’re talking about here.”

Fifth District Supervisor Ryan Sundberg said that excluding that area from the list will not cause it to be “zoned in such a way where you can’t tell when you go from one place to another.”

“We do not have this massive building and growth in Humboldt County. I think we lost people in the last census,” Sundberg said. “... It’s not a problem. We’re trying to fix problems that aren’t problems. I think that’s the fundamental difference between the two sides of this debate.”

Tina Christensen of the Humboldt Coalition for Property Rights said that several structures in the area between Eureka and Arcata have a substandard water supply, and that the designation would hinder development to fix that issue.

“If there is a house on it, that house has a right to be there,” she said.

Sundberg said the designation of an area does not stop development.

“Community separator zones makes it so you have to conform to certain criteria, which makes it harder and more expensive. It doesn’t stop it though,” he said.

Others like Northcoast Environmental Center Executive Director Dan Ehresman said that he supports 2nd District Supervisor and board Chairwoman Estelle Fennell’s idea of allowing community members to weigh in on the topic at the upcoming land use mapping meetings.

“It is an incremental conversion of our open space land between our communities that I think is the problem,” Ehresman said. “I think it’s only fair to allow those community members to weigh in on that again.”

The board straw voted 4-1 — with Lovelace dissenting — to approve the standard with only the McKay Community Forest and McKinleyville forested hill being included on the community separation area list. Sundberg said that he is open to discussing whether there are more community separators that should be added.

“I don’t see this as being locked in, where we can’t change it at the end,” he said.

Community members will be able to address community separators at the upcoming mapping meetings starting in April.

The board also straw voted unanimously to approve a Water Resources Element implementation measure that calls for the board to “(p)repare an ordinance to provide enforcement capabilities for unpermitted development within critical watershed areas if the development impacts water resources” and “(w) ork with the State Departments of Water Resources and Fish and Game to address illegal water diversions and over-subscribed water right allocations.”

The original language, as recommended by the county planning commission, called for the ordinance to “provide increased enforcement capabilities,” but some supervisors had concerns that the word increased would call for more staffing and thus exceed the county’s financial capabilities.

Blue Lake resident Kent Sawatzky said he was “dismayed” at the recommendation, stating that the county has repeatedly expressed its concern over unpermitted development and its impacts on watersheds.

“Now we’re not willing to put any teeth into water at all,” he said.

Sundberg disagreed, stating that the change allows staff to determine what is feasible and what is not.

“I don’t think it’s taking teeth out of anything,” he said. “We’ve provided that latitude with the changes here.”

Read Original Article

Two proposals for expanding shellfish production in North Humboldt Bay are currently under review by the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation, and Conservation District, which is serving as Lead Agency for environmental review.

Both projects will require permits from the California Coastal Commission, Army Corps of Engineers, and Regional Water Quality Control Board. Resources agencies will also weigh in, including the California Department of Fish & Wildlife, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, and National Marine Fisheries Service. State and federal agencies have No Net Loss policies for eelgrass due to its importance to many species of fish and wildlife. 

Eelgrass is also thought to buffer the effects of ocean acidification, which lowers pH during upwelling events, interfering with marine organisms’ ability to form shells. Indeed, low pH of sea water has been causing major problems for oyster producers in Washington and Oregon for years.

Coast Seafoods Permit Renewal and Expansion Project: Coast Seafoods, the largest oyster grower in Humboldt Bay, is proposing to expand its footprint from 296 acres to 910 acres. The Initial Study seeks input on environmental impacts that need to be addressed in the CEQA process. Comments are due Feb. 23 Feb. 27. The Initial Study is available HERE.
 

The Mariculture Expansion Pre-Permitting Project: The Harbor District proposes to add 550 acres of production, primarily for oysters, but also for edible seaweed and Manila clams. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) is also out for public review and comment, and is posted HERE.

A public hearing will be held on March 4 at the Harbor District conference room on Woodley Island. Written comments are due March 12.

Humboldt Baykeeper and the Northcoast Environmental Center are reviewing these proposals and will comment on the need to avoid or mitigate impacts to eelgrass, shorebirds, migratory waterfowl such as black brant, recreation, and cumulative effects of both proposed projects.