A Step Toward Sustainable Fishing

The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) held a public hearing in Bellingham on November 5, 2003, to consider a Cherry Point aquatic reserve. The draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) is due in February 2004. A number of issues and questions were raised at the November 5 meeting. This article is a verbatim reply to the DNR.

Yes. Webster’s Dictionary defines “reserve,” in part, as set aside for special use, e.g., specifically a tract of land, especially public land, for a particular purpose. The Cherry Point aquatic reserve fits that definition.

Herring and bottomfish are depleted to a crisis level, and the purpose of the Cherry Point reserve would be to replenish depleted stocks in nearby local areas. The Cherry Point–Point Whitehorn aquatic reserve stocks are more than adequate for the purpose of the reserve, and there is abundant evidence that aquatic reserves elsewhere are successful.

The Cherry Point site should extend from Birch Bay State Park south to the Lummi Reservation. It should extend from 200 feet landward from the high tide line to the approximate typical photo limit for important plant life at a depth of about 70 feet. Hence, a boundary at 70 feet would insure that all potential herring spawning areas would be within the reserve. A mile limit would not.

The proposed gas pipeline across the Strait of Georgia to Vancouver Island, if built, will cross the reserve. However, the plan for the pipeline calls for it to pass under the ground at the shoreline and extend under the seafloor until it reaches deep water. Moreover, U.S. federal authority usurps DNR authority. Hence, the gas pipeline should not disrupt the outline of the reserve. However, the DNR should consult with federal and Whatcom County regulatory authorities to insure that the reserve is protected from onshore pollution by construction of, and operation of, the pipeline.

• Herring and other fish stocks at the reserve would repopulate other nearby areas that now are depleted, thus assuring that local commercial and sport fishing could be sustained indefinitely.

• Provide food for wild salmon.

• Symbols do matter. We all need to use symbols; to name two, our national flag, and our national bird, the bald eagle. Orcas have become a Washington state symbol. Recently there has been talk of placing our local orcas on the state endangered species list. They are dying out largely because they are loaded with PCBs and lack enough food. In this case the Endangered Species Act, in itself, cannot protect the orca's habitat to increase its food supply, but the DNR can by protecting sea life on the reserve.

• The Cherry Point aquatic reserve should be managed for the benefit of the people of Washington who own it, and not for the benefit of those who want to catch the last fish.

• The purpose of a Cherry Point aquatic reserve is to promote sustainable commercial and sport harvest of fish and other wildlife. Yet in spite of the lead role of the Department of Natural Resources in establishing and managing the reserve, the DNR has no jurisdiction over fish and wildlife. That authority belongs to the Departments of Fish and Game and Ecology, and to some extent to the Department of Health.

Hence, first and foremost, the Department of Natural Resources must establish a working relationship with those agencies. Unless that is done and those agencies sign onto the environmental impact statement (EIS) due in February 2004, the EIS will, at best, be a weak, grossly incomplete progress report.

Also, the relation of the Cherry Point aquatic reserve to the Lummi Nation is of prime importance. Some time ago I consulted members of the Lummi Business Council in solicitation of support for protecting Point Whitehorn tidelands, which are within the Cherry Point aquatic reserve. While the members of that body appeared to have fully appreciated the benefit, the sticking point was concern over compromising their treaty rights. From correspondence with a spokesperson for the Lummi Business Council, I concluded that the Lummi Nation would largely give de facto respect to the Cherry Point aquatic reserve, but would not do so officially.

Your attention is called to the fact that Point Whitehorn is an unstable feeder bluff, and that numerous homes are planned for the top. Cooperation with Whatcom County should be sought to prevent unnecessary collapse of the bluff and by contamination of the adjacent tidelands by surface runoff. Also, I have found the green algae, Enteromorpha linza, a species that is tolerant of rather low salinity, in the vicinity of the outfall from the Birch Bay sewage treatment plant. Even lower salinities could upset the balance of the now viable ecosystem. Therefore, the DNR should carefully consider whether or not it should grant Birch Bay and the city of Blaine a lease for a substantially increased outfall of fluid from the treatment plant at Birch Bay (should the city of Blaine choose that option).

The DNR aquatic lands management guidelines include two principles that may be diametrically opposed when both are applied to the same site: direct public use and access, and environmental protection. It all depends on what in the environment is to be protected, what the purpose of public access is, and what uses by the public are allowed.

Contrary to conventional opinion, much of the best habitat and the least degraded environment of the Cherry Point aquatic reserve is the stretch of tidelands where the offshore piers are located. I have walked the length of the entire Cherry Point aquatic reserve and have studied and photographed large parts of it many times.

Limited public access to tidelands of the offshore pier area is the reason that, ecologically, they are still in good condition. In one spot where people have found a way to access the beach at one pier, clam diggers have destroyed the vegetation and wildlife.

Nothing is more enlightening in this regard than walking the tidelands from Birch Bay Park to Point Whitehorn where again there is limited access. Very little life is found on Birch Bay tidelands where clam diggers have been digging. As one approaches Point Whitehorn, the ecosystem improves, and at Point Whitehorn the ecosystem is quite good.

But there is a codicil. The outfall of the Birch Bay sewage treatment plant is at Point Whitehorn. For some 20 years the Health Department banned the consumption of clams from Point Whitehorn for health reasons. Then, recently, that ban was lifted. Within months, clam diggers had dug large holes that they left open. They killed vegetation not only in the holes, but side areas surrounding them. Wildlife does not live on vapor. Plants and only plants are the fundamental life support systems for wildlife. Only a sound ecosystem is successful.

But there is more. Let us consider herring. When herring, driven by their hormones, enter shallower water to spawn, they spawn on whatever plant life they encounter. While eelgrass is a common repository of herring eggs, and while eelgrass has become a media symbol of herring habitat, red algae are also very important even though they get no mention in the press. Both red algae and eelgrass grow in low tide and subtidal zones, and both are very important to successful hatching of herring eggs.

Moreover, what do young herring eat? Small critters. But what supports small critters? Any way we look at it, a viable bio-diverse ecosystem is essential to sustain fish and other wildlife in the tidelands.

I see no conflict between a Cherry Point aquatic reserve managed to promote sustainable commercial and sport fishing and water dependent commerce, but with this proviso: Cherry Point does not become a major port for shipping, ballast water cannot be discharged in the reserve, oil spills are prevented, and pollution from industries and port facilities onshore activities is not allowed to reach a level jeopardizing the objective of the reserve. In other words, the present piers themselves, and current commerce to and from the piers, are not in conflict with a Cherry Point aquatic reserve. In my view, the real danger to the reserve is industrial and residential pollution that has destroyed much of the wildlife along Washington’s Pacific coast.

Private and volunteer organizations already in operation in all probability would be glad to have a role. For years, Bellingham-based RE Sources has had a “Baykeeper” who leads volunteers to study and cleanup shorelines from Bellingham north to the Canadian border. Rosario Beach, in the vicinity of Deception Pass, has a strong volunteer group called “Beachwalkers” that could be expanded to include the Cherry Point aquatic reserve, or the Beachwalkers could give guidance on establishing a new unit for Cherry Point. I would like to see the same guidelines that are now in force at Rosario Beach. Some time ago, signs prohibiting collection of anything were ignored. That changed when Beachwalkers came there in force.

Exotic seaweed, Sargassum, is especially abundant in some areas in the southern part of the Cherry Point reserve where it is crowding out native plants that are of much more benefit to wildlife. Volunteers probably would do much of the work of removing it if encouraged by the DNR to do so.

Private and volunteer organizations would have no direct roll in enforcement, but could report flagrant abuses to proper authorities. In any case, I see no significant cost to the DNR. §