Hood Canal dodges the low-oxygen bullet
So it’s late November and there are no reports of dead fish in Hood Canal. I thought Jan Newton and Dan Hannafious of the Hood Canal Dissolved Oxygen Program would be pleased, but it wasn’t just that they were relieved not to worry about dead fish. It turns out that higher oxygen conditions gives them some new parameters for the complex computer model being worked on by a host of scientists. If you’d like to read the full story, click here.
![[Post to Twitter]](http://pugetsoundblogs.com/waterways/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/icons/tt-twitter.png){kind=icon}
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
November 29th, 2007 at 8:03 am
Thanks for the excellent overview. Those of us trying to set policy in groups such as the Shoreline Master Programs need solid scientific data on what is really happening, and this story clearly illustrates the need for these studies. If we can identify specific types of septic system issues, it would be a boon to proper regulation. If we can identify the science of how the Canal flushes, it might help in the event of an oil spill, or siting of a new facility.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:23 am
I thought I posted this yesterday. It was aimed at pointing the direction for the money to flow for fixes.
I’ll try again:
The fish kill was a huge positive thing. It brought in real scientists to replace the political scientists that were using whatever happened in the Canal as a means of furthering their personal and political agenda.
I still remember one of the first front page articles in the Kitsap Sun about the fish kills. Tim Botkins was quoted as saying that he gazed from the Seattle Ferry toward Hood Canal and determined it was dying because of septic tanks, road run-off, and development. He didn’t need a single piece of research to support that.
Think of all the money and expense that would have been thrown the wrong way if real scientists hadn’t got involved. Hurray for Hood Canal! Hurray for the scientists!
-Tom Rosendale, 11/28/07
November 29th, 2007 at 10:39 am
Tom,
You posted your comment at the bottom of the story itself, which may be the most appropriate place. But I have no objection to it being here as well. Sometimes discussions on our blogs go a different direction than those on the stories.