Following a federal proposal to open oil and gas drilling along California’s coastline, an ordinance is in the works to prohibit using Humboldt County harbor district land to support the endeavor.The proposed ordinance prevents the use of property owned by the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District for storing, handling or staging oil or gas produced by offshore drilling.“It’s in reaction to announcements to open federal waters to offshore oil drilling, which the harbor district has no jurisdiction over. But we do have jurisdiction over activities within the bay,” and district-owned property, said Commissioner Stephen Kullmann.The measure is the latest move in a push by local governments in opposition to a drilling plan unveiled late last year. The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors and Arcata’s City Council have each decried the proposal, a draft of which plans for one lease area off the coast of Northern California.Kullmann said the ordinance is solely intended to prevent using harbor district property for offshore drilling, particularly as the district plans for an offshore wind heavy lift marine terminal in Humboldt Bay, which could be used by fossil fuel companies.In a meeting Thursday evening, the ordinance was ultimately unanimously continued to an undetermined future date.Humboldt County is working on an onshore facilities ordinance that would limit these activities, with plans to later embed it as a zoning change in the coastal plan. Harbor officials did not want to hinder the effort, said Harbor District Executive Director Chris Mikkelsen. Staff were directed to coordinate with the county.Commissioners emphasized Thursday that Ordinance No. 21 would not apply to the fueling facility in the bay or businesses that handle oil in day-to-day operations.Keep Reading
An analysis of the costs ratepayers would bear associated with adding infrastructure to Humboldt County to transmit energy generated by offshore wind found the average California household would pay about $1.68 per year more.The analysis, released this month by the Schatz Energy Research Center at Cal Poly Humboldt, found the average cost to ratepayers for building and maintaining the infrastructure would peak at $4.52 per year in 2035 and then decline over time.“You’re talking about a few dollars, or on average less than $2 per year for the average household,” said Tanner Etherton, economic analyst at Schatz.The full analysis, which was conducted by Etherton and Arne Jacobson of the Schatz Energy Research Center and the California Sea Grant Extension Program, can be found at tinyurl.com/maywkvxp.Read More
A request to keep a billboard up along U.S. 101 just south of Eureka was denied by the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors in a 3-2 vote Tuesday. Supervisors Michelle Bushnell and Rex Bohn dissented.A special permit from the board given to Allpoints Outdoor Inc. owner Geoff Wills, who leases the billboard to national outdoor advertising company OutFront Media, allowed it to be rebuilt after falling over in a 2019 storm. But the permit required the sign be torn down by September 2025.Some 50 comments were submitted in support of removing the billboard. Others spoke during public comment, largely calling for the owner to be held to the permit’s 2025 deadline.Environmental organization Humboldt Waterkeeper, which has been on a 15-year campaign to remove billboards from the wetlands of Humboldt Bay, requested steps be taken to remove the billboard and concrete footings, in addition to restoration of the wetlands.Third District Supervisor Mike Wilson pointed to the regulatory history of billboards, like the National Highway Beautification Act and California’s Outdoor Advertising Act, and spoke in support of the findings of the planning department.“The billboard is located in a wetland and environmentally sensitive habitat where new billboards are prohibited,” he said.Read More
The owner of a billboard along U.S. Highway 101 is seeking to keep the sign in place, despite a permit requiring it be torn down by September 2025. The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors will hear the request at their Tuesday.Current regulation prevents new billboards from being constructed on coastal wetlands off U.S. Highway 101. The billboard in question predated these regulations and has been in place since at least 1955, making it legal but nonconforming, according to a staff report.But this changed after it was blown down in 2019, according to county planning staff.In 2020, the Supervisors narrowly signed off on a permit for the billboard to be rebuilt after being knocked over, on the condition it would only last five years. It was rebuilt in 2021.In 2020, environmental advocates at public comment pushed the supervisors to reject the structure’s rebuilding. Billboards are often a hot-button issue at public meetings, with some pushing for the viewshed of Humboldt Bay and the Elk River to be cleared of advertisements.Jennifer Kalt, executive director of Humboldt Waterkeeper, an organization that’s waged a 15 year campaign to rid Humboldt County’s coastal wetlands of billboards, said, “It is long past time for this billboard to removed, because it was given five years, and it’s expired — get it out of there.”She said a petition to get the billboard removed in 2020 garnered 328 signatures.“A lot of people really despise billboards, especially in scenic areas. And, this billboard is in a coastal wetland. It’s along a riparian area. There’s all kinds of reasons why that billboard would never be allowed today,” she said, pointing to coastal regulations, national regulations and local regulations.Keep Reading
A US judge will decide if, as research suggests, a chemical tyre additive is harming endangered fish species
Last week, a district judge in San Francisco, California, presided over a three-day trial brought by west coast fishers and conservationists against US tyre companies. The fishers allege that a chemical additive used in tyres is polluting rivers and waterways, killing coho salmon and other fish. If successful, the case could have implications far beyond the United States.How did the case come about?The case was initiated after the apparent solving of a decades-old mystery: what was causing mass deaths of endangered coho salmon in the Pacific north-west as they returned to streams to spawn. The deaths happened after heavy rain. Before dying, the fish would exhibit unusual behaviour, swimming in circles, their mouths gaping, as if gasping for air. Scientists, suspecting storm runoff, described the phenomenon as “urban runoff mortality syndrome”.It took years for scientists from Washington State University to pinpoint what they now allege is the chemical culprit. In 2020, they published a study in Science that claimed to solve the mystery: they found a toxic substance in leachate from car tyres that killed the fish. Known as 6PPD-quinone or 6PPD-q, it is an oxidation product from 6PPD, a chemical added to car tyres to prevent them breaking down. This transformed chemical, 6PPD-q, leaches into rivers and creeks with, scientists say, devastating results for the protected and endangered species.Who brought the case and why?The case was brought by the Institute for Fisheries Resources (IFR) and the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations (PCFFA) represented by environmental group, Earthjustice, after a slew of scientific studies linking mass deaths of coho salmon and harms to other salmon with a chemical tyre additive, 6PPD. The fishers say they depend on the health of salmon populations for their livelihood.Glen Spain, general legal counsel and northwest regional director of the IFR and the PCFFA, said: “The use of 6PPD in tyres has been shown to harm vulnerable salmon populations. Whether or not this should continue will be up to the court.” What is the central question to be answered?The judge will determine whether the tyre manufacturers are violating the Endangered Species Act by harming fish species, including coho salmon, protected under the legislation. The fisher’s case is that the tyre companies are violating the act by harming 24 populations of fish species protected under it.Keep Reading
