From the Ocean to Your Table

From the ocean to your table the fisherman is the first link in bringing fresh seafood to you, whether it be in your home or the restaurant. The catch of the day could mean it was caught in the last twenty-four or forty-eight hours. It could mean that is was caught three days ago. Fresh from the river to your plate doesn’t necessarily mean what the consumer thinks it does.

Walking out on the dock of the mooring basin, gillnet boats line the docks like cars in a used car lot. The diversity is just as broad. You can see anything from a twenty-two foot gillnet boats to sixty foot trawler lined up in their slips. Many of these slips have been handed down father to son for generations.

I talked with J, a fourth generation Columbia River fishermen. J fishes off a bowpicker, meaning you pull, and set the net over the bow (stern pickers pull from the front). He has a cabin on it that he can use for a place to cook, eat, and sleep. The boat is made of fiberglass that he repairs, paints, and caulks yearly. He cleans the holds out after every trip to get the bacteria from the fish out. "Fiberglass is a lot more inexpensive to upkeep then the old wooden gillnet boats," J declared. "They would get slimey and were hard to repair if they hit something in the river." According to J, over ninety percent of all fishing vessels are fiberglass, now.

A gillnet is descriptive of the way a net is used. The type of net combined with the method used snares the targeted fish. The fish try to swim through the deliberately sized mesh openings (each net made to catch a specific species). They are unable to squeeze completely through these openings swimming forward because they catch their fins in the mesh. Once in this position, they are prevented from backing out due to the tendency for their gills to become caught. This effectively traps them. The size of the mesh, in theory, allows for smaller types of waterlife to get through the net or doesn't allow the larger species to get their heads caught in. Most often, however, the fisherman spends time throwing back things which are not his intended catch. If the unintended catch are sturgeon caught during salmon season a fisherman will often bring in a couple hundred of these during his drift. He will leave them on his deck until he leaves that area so that the fish aren’t caught over and over again in his net, endangering their ability to survive. Because the deck is very wet, and the sturgeon are very hardy, this method is better than tearing their gills, leaving them with little chance of survival as they are pulled from the net over and over again throughout the day. Another problem with drifts are the amount of logs and other debris caught up in them. Whenever possible, as the fishermen layout they try to avoid this debris, lifting their nets over and placing it around the river's refuse. Repair of nets costs time and labor and lost time on the river means lost money, often the only opportunity they have during a short season.

As there was no season when I visited with J, he explained the fishing to me. "You begin by laying out the net, and waiting several hours until you haul your net in. If the tide’s moving fast, haul your net in sooner. If it’s moving slower you wait longer. As you bring the net in you pull the fish out of the net, and throw them in the hold. If it is February or March and the fisherman catches a salmon with a whole adipose fin then that fish goes into the live box, a box of cold water used to keep salmon alive" [until it can be thrown back into the river at the end of the day after the danger of being recaught in the nets is passed].

J has been fishing the Columbia for over forty years. His father, grandfather, and great-grandfather fished the Columbia as did his mother’s family. He learned many techniques, which he said could bring in good hauls even in short seasons when the competition was fierce. These are techniques each fisherman has, and are closely guarded secrets ranging from when to lay out, to how often, and where. Some fishermen come in earlier on short openings, and others stay out longer. Each way has benefits, and drawbacks both to the freshness of the fish as well as the profit to the fisherman. "I like being on the river, sometimes I even love it," J said. "Especially the sky, either the blue of a real nice day or the stars shining out of a pitch black night." The relationship between the river and the fisherman changes as often as the tides.

When J brings his catch in many options are open to him. If he has the proper license he can sell directly to the public. "Most people think that’s the freshest way to go," J chuckled, "but often if the fisherman is selling for himself he’s stayed out long, and is after as many fish as he can get. He then comes in, and is sitting at the dock, selling the fish from his hold. These fish can be out of the water for 24 hours at this point." J argues that a fisherman is smarter using a wholesale broker who has a good client base. The fisherman will get less per pound but he will sell all of his fish to the broker. If he sells his fish himself he may get more per pound but he also may not get all of his fish sold.

With a broker waiting to purchase the fish as soon as the fisherman brings it in, the fisherman can afford to make a few trips bringing them in throughout the day. He wants to do this so his fish is the better, fresher looking, and will go for the higher price. These fish can be sold to the fish markets to sit in the deli case or in the restaurant to sit nicely on your plate. The other fish go to the canneries to be canned, they don’t need to look as nice and go for a lower price.

Conceivably, a fish can go from the river to the consumer’s plate in as few as twelve hours. From the fisherman to a wholesale broker to a retail broker to the fishmarket to the plate, all that’s needed now is a wedge of lemon, and a good side dish.

Next Step is up to each of us

A gas pipeline explosion in Quebec and its aftermath

What was the next step from last week's post? A brief synopsis of the meeting was LNG bad, river good. Salmon spawning grounds will be jeopardized with anything placed on the river and with any displacement of the river bed or with the water and its temperature. All those who want to save the Columbia River from LNG corporations building along its banks must write to FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) stating, specifically, why they oppose the corporation and its placement of an LNG holding tank on the river. Bradwood Landing connotates a warm, fuzzy feeling that should not be used so everyone is encouraged to always refer to the site as the Bradwood Proposal or simply Northern Star. We say: envision the Landing (and the warm, fuzzy feeling it conjures up) engulfed in a flash of flames, the countryside of trees devastated all around, the local emergency crews unable to cope with the outcome of a incident of any magnitude.

This is not supposition, it is reality. It is concerns that the Department of Energy has written to FERC concerning LNG corporations building in remote areas, and specifically Bradwood, where emergency response teams are not adequate to respond to any degree should any sort of breech of safety arise.

Perplexing is that there are so many state departments that just don't have anything to do with one another. One state department can be concerned with one aspect while another, blithely unaware or apparently uncaring, issues permit after permit. The fact that the State of Oregon has issued water permits to Northern Star before it has been leased or sold any land, or permitted to build is a vexing problem. However, these permits have been issued. In order to counter those permits, what can and does need to happen next is that businesses need to write to FERC and let that agency know how they will be impacted should Northern Star be allowed to build at Bradwood.

The Coast Guard has written a letter that has gone unanswered by Northern Star regarding other ship traffic being totally limited when a tanker hauling LNG is on the river. On the average there will be three tankers per week on the river. This will curtail the cruise ship industry that many of our community businesses have recently committed themselves to during much of the year. A severely crippling effect that must be taken into consideration when Northern Star touts its numbers of bringing in $$ to the local economy. They do not bring an additional amount to the table. It is an either or, sadly, as the nature of the beast tends to knock the other income makers (mainly tourism through cruise ships and the fishing industry) out of the picture.

We would like the reader to understand that we do not have a vested interest in whether or not an LNG corporation comes in to Clatsop County. Northern Star people have a vested interest and they are not going to give you "both sides". We, frankly and forthrightly, do not see Northern Star's or any LNG corporation's side to putting a facility on the Columbia River except that they are in it for the money and it doesn't bring enough money to Clatsop County to make up for the damage done to the river, the potentially colossal damage done to salmon and sturgeon as well as the tourist industry.

The salmon project is a complete waste of time and money. From the studies done by Bonneville Power Administrations' own scientists these programs and projects do not restore the spawning grounds and hatcheries are a dismal failure in bringing back the salmon runs. We, frankly, need to get rid of the dams, but that is another day another fight another post. For now, we need to not even allow another mistake to happen much less then use 50 years trying to correct it.

To top it off, this is gas that is being imported from other countries when we aren't even using our own resources! Furthermore, this liquid gas, for which we are loosing our economy and our river is being changed and our fish our going extinct isn't even for us, it is for California! And inland! NONE of it stays local! We don't get special rates or discounts for taking the risks associated with hosting a energy plant which are targets as well as pipelines which have leaks and cause surrounding lands to be jeopardized with fireballs from mishaps.

You can contact local businesses and tell them about your concerns. Share with them how they need to contact FERC re their Environmental Concerns on the Bradwood Landing Project Docket #CP06-365 Magalie Roman Salas Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N.E.Washington, DC 20426. Businesses, at this point, are crucial to the process because they have a different perspective on the impact that having these tankers on our river will have to our environment and our economy. The businesses, locally, have only been told by Northern Star of the supposed benefits bought through its initial outlay to build the facility. Someone needs to tell them of the draw backs. The impacts that dredging will have on our river's ecology and the fish habitat that is already so desperately out of balance. The impact once tankers are on the river and the loss of cruise ships and fishing boats on the river so that the tankers are safe.

This is something you can do tonight to ensure our river, our community and our children have a safer and healthier tomorrow.

Say it, Believe it, Become it!

Last week a nice woman wrote into the nice local paper and thanked the nice new corporation that wants to put a nice new liquified natural gas holding tank on our river for being such nice environmentally friendly people and contributing many millions of dollars to the local environment. This nice lady noted that "no other" corporation has contributed to the environment like this corporation wants to, if given the chance to put their terminal in at Bradwood.

WHAT?

Lets take this one spin at a time. For this post let's just address that according to Northern Star they are going to have a salmon program, similar to the one provided by good ole Bonneville Power Administration.

According to documents that Northern Star submitted to the state of Oregon, Northern Star Natural Gas has proposed the Bradwood Landing LNG receiving terminal to be built on about 55 acres of a 420-acre site at Bradwood, located between Astoria and Clatskanie at about River Mile 38 on the Columbia River. The facility would be designed to have a peak sendout capacity of 1.3 billion cubic feet per day of natural gas and would be capable of continuous operation. The project also would include a 34-mile long pipeline that would run from the site to Port Westward and then under the Columbia River into Washington.

One point three billion cubic feet of natural gas per day! Even if running at half peek, say 65 million cubic feet per day calculate that at the price of natural gas. Northern Star is proposing approximately 50 jobs for Clatsop, Columbia and Wahkiakum Counties to share. It is donating "up to 59 million" to environmental causes, less than the amount it will make in one day of operation.

This great environmental organization has optained permits to use 4400 gallons PER MINUTE from the Columbia River and 150 gallons per minute from a well for the purpose of hydrostatic pressure testing of storage tanks and associated pipelines. [Where does this water go, how often is this done, is there a pond that returns this water to its natural temperature before it is dumped back into the river?]

Northern Star has obtained permits to use 133.7 cubic feet per second from the Columbia River for the purpose of suction dredging of Columbia River sediments for construction of ship berth and turning basin. [Bye, bye salmon! Spawning grounds? Oh yeah, were going to make fake ones for them to use. Maybe some test tubes. LNG & BPA bring this salmon to you ... or maybe we can raise them for 4-H.]

Northern Star has obtained an additional permit to use 4.456 cubic feet per second from the Columbia River for the purpose of hydrostatic pressure testing of a transmission pipeline. [So this is shot down the pipeline after it is connected at the plant and the Columbia River water ends up where? Because we have so much of it being wasted by BPA so now it can be used to clean out pipes and be used to test them, instead of as spawning waters for our fish?]

THIS is what kills salmon! Taking COLOSSAL amounts of water out of the river and returning it in an altered state! Dredging our river bottom! These are extremely bad ideas! Read more about them and then protest by writing to your congress person.

There are sincere people in some salmon programs that believe they have the answer for the diminishing salmon population, however, these hypothesis have not been proven out. In most cases the salmon recovery projects have been proven to be dismal failures, as all of Bonneville Power Administrative's environmental salmon projects have shown.

Similar to the sacrifices Thugs brought to their multi-armed god, Kali, local thugs will sacrifice what is left of our salmon and sturgeon to the multi-facilities of the "environmentally friendly," power hungry, energy companies the Bonneville Power and Northern Star, unless we speak up and out, often and loud.