The sunny weather provided prime viewing for boaters and shoreline observers, as the huge radar platform — called the Sea-Based X-Band Radar, or SBX — moved out of Elliott Bay and up through Puget Sound.

The radar ship is part of the U.S. Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) and is the only vessel of its kind in the world. One of the upgrades during refit was a new electrical system to allow the ship to operate with offshore power instead of running its diesel generators while in port.

The radar that sits on top of an oil-drilling platform is extremely powerful and can cover a huge area, limited mainly by the Earth’s curvature.

“You could put the SBX in the Chesapeake Bay and it could track something the size of a baseball hit outside here from Safeco Field, provided it could get over the curvature of the earth,” Army Col. Mark Arn was quoted as saying on the Seattlepi.com website after the ship arrived in Seattle. Arn is the Missile Defense Agency’s project manager for the X-band sensors.

In operation, the radar is designed to track missiles in flight, with the ability to distinguish between a hostile missile warhead and decoys, according to a fact sheet (PDF 148 kb) from the Missile Defense Agency and a booklet called “A Brief History of the Sea-Based X-Band Radar-1” (PDF 3.4 mb) Data collected from the radar system can be transmitted to interceptor missiles that are sent out to destroy the incoming missile before it strikes its target.

When the SBX first came in, I wondered what the radar equipment looked like under that white dome, which stands 103 feet high and is made of a synthetic inflatable fabric that apparently can withstand 130-mile-per-hour winds. I found a photo on Boeing’s website that shows the ship under construction and the radar being installed. Click on the Boeing SBX link and click again to see a large version.

The SBX is 240 feet wide and 390 feet long, larger than a football field. It towers more than 280 feet from its keel to the top of the radar dome.

The main deck houses living quarters, workspaces, storage, power generation, bridge, and control rooms, as well as the radar antenna array plus command, communication and data-analysis centers.

The video embedded on this page was produced by Erik Hyypia, a kayaker who paddled a little too close to the docks to get this shot when a patrol boat asked him to move back. The later shots were taken yesterday from Seacrest Park in West Seattle as the platform passed by.

Erik, who works as a senior engineer at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, enjoys taking video in his spare time. His YouTube channel features a variety of kayaking and hiking videos.

Share on Facebook

Would they search for evidence to show that aliens could not possibly exist, declare the idea a hoax and insist that any defense of our planet would not be worth the cost? Or would they study ALL the evidence, analyze the risks and look for the best way to address the uncertain crisis?

I keep thinking about this hypothetical alien scenario when I hear certain members of Congress ignoring climate change and essentially spitting in the face of climate scientists by calling their best research a “hoax.”

Greenhouse warming may seem like an alien concept to some people, but here’s my point: If you run and hide until the aliens have landed, you face a much greater peril than if you face the problem in a practical way.

Now I’m all for discussing the many uncertainties — such as how high ocean waters may rise under various assumptions. But please don’t tell me that some basement scientist has disproved the idea that temperatures are rising or has shown that humans could not possibly affect the Earth’s climate.

Here’s what I’m wondering: Would those who turn their backs on climate change act the same way if the entire Earth were under attack from a common enemy? Maybe our nation’s leaders would be better able to deal with a direct attack, uncomplicated by the uncertainties of science.

That’s more than I wanted to say about people who choose to ignore climate change. What I really wanted to write about is the U.S. Navy’s serious approach to the topic, which can provide an example for the rest of us.

In May of 2009, the Chief of Naval Operations established “Task Force Climate Change,” designed to ensure that the Navy meets its national security obligations as the oceans and shorelines undergo significant changes.

Heading the task force is Rear Adm. Dave Titley, the Navy’s chief oceanographer. Titley said he was once a climate-change skeptic (see top video). But after he dug into the data, he changed his mind.

Now Titley is focused on updating the Navy’s mission, force alignment, tactics, facilities and research. He sees countries throughout the world working together to deal with the effects of climate change.

“In this context, climate change may be viewed as a ‘common enemy’ that will bring nations together towards a common end,” Titley said during the United Nations Conference on Climate Change two years ago in Copenhagen.

The Navy task force has called on more than 400 people from 120 government and non-government entities around the world to help the Navy prepare for the future.

Last year, when the task force outlined its priorities, Titley had this to say:

“We must ensure our Navy is fully mission-capable and ready to meet national requirements in the future. That responsibility includes anticipating the impact of changing climatic conditions on mission requirements, force structure and infrastructure.”

Titley outlines some of his thoughts in the video you’ll find at the bottom of this page.

Meanwhile, last month, Titley was pleased with new guidance from the National Research Council titled “National Security Implications of Climate Change for U.S. Naval Forces.”

The review committee stated in the report:

“Even the most moderate current trends in climate, if continued, will present new national security challenges for the U.S. Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard. While the timing, degree, and consequence of future climate change impacts remain uncertain, many changes are already under way in regions around the world, such as in the Arctic, and call for action by U.S. naval leadership in response.”

The report made six recommendations for action:

1. Support ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Law of
   the Sea: The Arctic and other regions are becoming prone to geopolitical disputes because of potential new shipping lanes and access to natural resources.
2. Prepare for anticipated strain on Navy capabilities: More severe or more frequent droughts, floods, storms and other events can reduce available food and water supplies, calling for increased humanitarian aid and putting greater stress on governments around the world. Geopolitical conditions in the Arctic may require increased ship deployments, including specialized vessels such as icebreakers.
3. Address vulnerabilities at coastal installations: Sea level rise will occur at different rates in different places. Each naval installation should assess its specific risks and develop a plan to maintain capabilities.
4. Consider climate change effects in relation to U.S. allies and their militaries: Vulnerability assessments should be conducted at overseas installations, taking into account the risks of localized conditions. To cover contingencies, develop or expand maritime partnerships with other nations.
5. Address technical underpinnings that allow the Navy to operate throughout the world, especially in the polar regions: The Navy will need to maintain its navigation and communication systems as well as oceanographic data as it increases its mobility. Also, submarine movements and training should be increased in the Arctic.
6. Support research and development with implications for Navy operations: Consider a philosophy of increasing access to previously classified information that can aid climate researchers and ultimately help the Navy prepare for changes. The Navy should become more involved in specific research, such as sea-level rise and ice depths in specific locations.

All the while, the Navy is working hard to address its contribution to greenhouse gases and its use of nonrenewable energy supplies. For examples of this effort, check out the latest issue of “Currents” (Winter 2011), the Navy’s environmental magazine.

One last thing: Titley is one of many people featured in a new PBS documentary called “Earth: The Operators’ Manual” about creating a sustainable society. The program is scheduled to air on many stations (including Spokane’s KSPS) tonight at 9 p.m. After that, it should be available as streaming audio on the “Earth: The Operators’ Manual” website.

KCTS, Channel 9 in Seattle, will delay the program until April 24 at 3 p.m.

The video below describes Titley’s views on why the Navy cannot ignore climate change.

Share on Facebook

Here are my favorites that seem suitable for general audiences. If you have heard a good joke about the military that you can share in good conscience, please feel free to write it down in the comments section below. If you know the source or remember where you first heard the joke, please mention that as well.

The boat was off course

A friend, driving home from a fishing trip in northern Michigan with his boat in tow, had engine trouble a few miles inland from Lake Huron. He didn’t have a CB radio in his car, so he decided to use his marine radio to get help. Climbing into his boat, he broadcast his call letters and asked for assistance.

A Coast Guard officer responded, “Please give your location.”

“I’m on Interstate-75, two miles south of Standish.”

The officer paused, “Could you repeat that?”

“I-75, two miles south of Standish.”

A longer pause. Then an incredulous voice asked, “How fast were you going when you hit shore?”

— About.Com
—–

Living in hypotheticals

An ensign was sitting his first qualification board for officer of the deck at sea. After several hours of watching the young officer answer difficult questions from the members of the board, the ship’s captain decided to finish off the board by placing the ensign in a completely hypothetical emergency situation.

“What would you do if a sudden storm sprang up on the starboard side?” he asked.

“Throw out an anchor, sir,” the ensign replied.

“And what would you do if another storm sprang up aft?”

“I’d throw out another anchor, captain.”

“And if another terrific storm sprang up forward, what would you do then?” asked the captain.

“Throw out another anchor, sir,” the ensign said.

“Hold on,” said the captain. “Where are you getting all those anchors from?”

The ensign smiled. “From the same place you’re getting all those storms, sir.”

— Jeff Edwards, Navy Jokes
—–

Who’s in charge here?

Transcript of a radio conversation between a U.S. Navy ship and Canadian authorities off the coast of Newfoundland:

Americans: “Please divert your course 15 degrees to the north to avoid a collision.”

Canadians: “Recommend you divert your course 15 degrees to the south to avoid a collision.”

Americans: “This is the captain of a U.S.Navy ship. I say again, divert YOUR course.”

Canadians: “No, I say again, you divert your course.”

Americans: “This is the aircraft carrier U.S. Abraham Lincoln, the second-largest ship in the U.S. Atlantic fleet… I demand that you change your course 15 degrees north … or counter measures will be undertaken to ensure the safety of this ship.”

Canadians: “This is a lighthouse. Your call.”

Versions of this joke have been floating around for years and are often cited as a true story, but Snopes reports that it is fiction.
—–

How about some change?

Officer: “Sailor, do you have change for a dollar?”

Sailor: “Sure, buddy.”

Officer: “That’s no way to address an officer! Now let’s try it again! Do you have change for a dollar?”

Sailor: “No, SIR!”

— USS Walton
—–

Knowing up from down

A new ensign was assigned to submarines, where he’d dreamed of working since a young boy. He was trying to impress the chief of the boat with his expertise learned in sub school at Groton.

The master chief cut him off quickly and said, “Listen, ‘sir;’ it’s real simple. Add the number of times we dive to the number of times we surface. Divide that number by two. If the result doesn’t come out even, don’t open the hatch.”

— Military.Com Forums
—–

Share on Facebook

The benefits of these satellite tags would be to track the Southern Residents during winter months when they head out into the ocean and disappear for periods of time. Knowing where the whales go is important if people are going to protect their habitat, according to Brad Hanson, chief investigator with the Northwest Fisheries Science Center, a research arm of the National Marine Fisheries Service.

It is conceivable that the whales are visiting some favored spots for hunting salmon. Finding and protecting important forage areas from human intrusion could increase the whales’ chances of long-term survival, officials say.

On the other hand, some observers are raising concerns about this research project as well as the cumulative effects of all research on the endangered killer whales. To attach a satellite transmitter, a boat must get close enough to an orca for an operator to fire a dart from an air gun. The dart penetrates the skin on the dorsal fin of the animal.

One concern is the risk of infection from the darts. Another is hitting a major blood vessel in the vessel-rich dorsal fin. But experience involving other species of whales as well as transient killer whales has given the researchers confidence that the risk is very small.

As for cumulative effects, some killer whale advocates are concerned that the various research projects are adding to the stress on the Puget Sound orcas. I have heard from some people who say researchers need to minimize their interactions with the whales. Others say less intrusive methods should be tried first, such as enhancing visual sightings and possibly deploying hydrophones to listen for Southern Residents, whose vocalizations can be readily identified. In fact, there is an ongoing argument that data is already available via Navy buoys and other potential listening stations that need to be made available to researchers.

According to a supplemental environmental impact statement on the project, eight federal permits have been issued that allow relatively close encounters with Southern Resident killer whales. In 2010, researchers were authorized to make a total of 2,875 close approaches for various reasons, ranging from photo identification to attaching suction cups with monitoring equipment.

In light of the existing permits and the ongoing effects of whale-watching boats in the summer, the effects of the six satellite tags were judged to be relatively minor. The supplemental EIS (PDF 732 kb) states:

“It is not that any single stressor has contributed to the population decline of SRKWs over the last few years, but rather a combination of the above (NMFS 2008). For instance, the tremendous amount of vessel traffic around these animals daily during the summer, in combination with shortages of prey due to anthropogenic alteration of habitat, may produce enough pressure on the whales to hinder reproduction, care of young, or individual health.

“The only addition to the factors listed above associated with the proposed permit amendment would be one additional research vessel closely approaching and tagging these animals. The applicant’s research would be conducted at times when the whales are not subject to whale-watching vessels (i.e., spring, winter). While vessel traffic is a high priority management issue, the benefits of gathering data would outweigh the short-term harassment to the whales. In addition, researchers would be cautious in their approach and would limit harassment times to only those necessary to facilitate research. Excess time with the animals would be avoided.

“In summary, authorization of this research is not likely to significantly contribute to cumulative effects to SRKWs. Annual reports indicate that harassment from research is minimal, including reactions of other killer whales to satellite tagging. Monitoring will be conducted to the fullest extent possible. Although other stressors stated above cannot be mitigated under this permit (e.g., pollution, prey reduction), vessel approaches and tagging efforts will be conducted in a manner to cause the least harassment to the target animals. NMFS has determined that tagging will not result in a significant adverse impact alone or in combination with the above listed actions.”

As I mentioned in my story, The Whale Museum has requested an extension of time and a public hearing on the proposed permit. In a letter from NMFS (PDF 68 kb), a two-week extension was granted but not a public hearing. See also today’s Federal Register notice.

Fred Felleman, vice president of board for The Whale Museum, argues that the National Marine Fisheries Service should take time to better inform the public about this project, explain the risks and benefits of various types of research, and help people understand research findings and how they may be used.

I referred to The Whale Museum as a killer whale “advocate” in my story. Fred corrected me, saying it is an education and research organization. For that reason, he said, The Whale Museum is pushing for a wider discussion about the risks and benefits of the research.

Here are a couple of documents related to the permit itself:

Request for amendment of Permit 781-1824-01 (PDF 360 kb)

Assurance for Animal Care and Use (PDF 416 kb)

Share on Facebook

Darrell Hogue of Seabeck wades into Hood Canal at Scenic Beach State Park to rescue oysters lodged high on the beach, where an estimated 178,000 were stranded.
Kitsap Sun photo by Larry Steagall

Without explicitly blaming the USS Port Royal for the problem, Navy officials said they would take steps to make sure that it doesn’t happen again. Check out my story from Wednesday’s Kitsap Sun.

A lot of Hood Canal residents believed the Port Royal was to blame, because they saw this massive 567-foot guided-missile cruiser operating at high speeds off their shores. They naturally connected the ship to the big waves hitting their beaches at the same time. I tended to believe the local people, but I wasn’t sure how anyone could actually prove that the Navy was to blame.

Perhaps the best evidence came in a video I first revealed to you in Watching Our Water Ways on Aug. 27, thanks to the taping by Gary Jackson in Dabob Bay.

After this, I tried to get some simple questions answered by the Navy, but I was frustrated by the fact that three different Navy groups were playing a role. Each one kept referring me to another, and it appeared that nobody really wanted to talk about it.

For example, the ship itself belonged to the Third Fleet, so my questions were directed to a spokesman in San Diego. Because damage claims were involved, I was directed to a spokesman for the Admiralty and Maritime Law Division of the Judge Advocate General. And because the Dabob testing range on Hood Canal is operated by the Naval Undersea Warfare Center – Keyport, I was directed to a spokesman for Navy Region Northwest.

After getting the runaround again and again, I asked in late September if they could talk to each other and tell me where I should address my questions. They did that and told me that I would have my questions answered by Third Fleet, where the ship is based. I went so far as to put my questions in writing so there would be no confusion. Two weeks later, my questions still were not answered, so I sent out another e-mail.

This is where I need to give credit to Sean Hughes and the other public affairs officers for Navy Region Northwest. They have always been helpful to me, and I think that leaving these questions unresolved were beginning to trouble them as well. Sean told me that he was able to take over the questions from Third Fleet and quickly get answers from local folks running the Dabob range.

I’m guessing that the issue of financial liability for loss of the oysters was creating a reluctance by Navy officials to discuss the situation. I can understand that. At the same time, I’m glad that Sean Hughes and other officials at Navy Region Northwest appreciate the need to be responsive to the local community where they operate.

Share on Facebook

A Navy investigator visited affected residents on Misery Point yesterday, though it remains unclear when a report may be issued. According to folks along the beach, the investigator was able to smell the stench of rotting oysters still drifting about in that area.

I’m afraid there was some initial confusion about the timing, because some people discovered the washed-up oysters on Friday, Aug. 13, and I believe they assumed the event had occurred on Thursday, Aug. 12. Witnesses on both sides of Hood Canal have now confirmed that the Port Royal was speeding up and down Dabob Bay on Wednesday, Aug. 11.

One witness who documented the event is Gary Jackson, who owns property on Dabob Bay. In a letter to Gov. Chris Gregoire, he said his small unoccupied boat and two others were swamped by the wake. (Click here to download his letter (PDF 36 kb), and check out the video above.)

The letter includes this:

“Although the swamping of the boats was a concern, my greatest concern was the possible impact to the shoreline and shellfish. The rolling action of the waves was like a washing machine constantly churning the shoreline and tossing all marine life in the tidal zone. I feel that this turbulence that went on for hours stressed the oysters to the point that they are now struggling to survive. The oysters are in their spawning phase now and are in a more delicate period than normal. So it isn’t just the fact that they are being out of the water for long periods of time, they were too damaged to survive. That is only my opinion and the experts may or may not agree….

“As a Navy veteran from a family that has served this country at sea for four generations, I completely understand the Navy’s need for vigorous training and real world practices. I am alive today as the result of the excellent training that was provided to me and my ship mates when I was trapped in a ship board inferno that resulted when the ship that I was on collided with another Navy vessel. It was the training and readiness that saved my life as well as the lives of my shipmates. So I do understand the Navy’s need and right to use Dabob Bay to ensure that our ships and crews are prepared.

“I am asking that the State perform a thorough analysis of the ecological and economic impact of this event. I would also hope that the Navy will review the activities that occurred that day and possible ways to prevent or reduce this type of problem.”

Gary concludes by expressing concerns about the fragile nature of Hood Canal and the potential effects of the ship’s action on the sealife.

In a later attachment, he reports that volunteers were able to save some oysters on Dabab Bay, but many more were lost:

“There are miles and miles of shoreline along Dabob Bay that may have been affected. The marine life that was churned up and destroyed that day was not only oysters but other species vital to the ecosystem such as juvenile crab and the eel grass beds. The State should have put more resources on site throughout the Dabob Bay area immediately after being notified about the problem so that a timely analysis could have been done by professional.”

In addition to the video on this page, Gary Jackson offers these videos he posted on YouTube.

Hope It Doesn’t Happen Again
Between the Waves
Saturday, Aug. 21

As for news reports, my previous post on Water Ways contains links to the first stories. Kitsap Sun reporter Derek Sheppard wrote a story and posted a video about the cleanup at Scenic Beach State Park last Friday. The cleanup at the park was completed on Monday. See Kitsap Sun story.

Share on Facebook

The guided-missile cruiser USS Port Royal operates off the coast of Hawaii during Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) in 2008.
U.S. Navy photo

The USS Port Royal, a 567-foot guided-missile cruiser, was operating in the Navy’s Dabob Bay testing range on Thursday, and the oysters were found high up on the private beaches across Hood Canal the next morning.

Camille Speck, a shellfish biologist with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, inspected the waterfront at Scenic Beach State Park on Tuesday. She told me that she was surprised at how far some of the oysters had been moved:

“I have never seen a scour line that high on the beach. The oysters are alive, but I can tell they have been thrown around a little bit.”

Frankly, I have never heard of this kind of damage from any ship, and I don’t blame readers for being skeptical. But there seems to be no question that the oysters were washed up on the beach, that the Navy ship was in the vicinity about that time, and that a ship of this size is capable of producing a huge wake. It’s called circumstantial evidence, at least until I find someone who actually saw something happening.

Here are the stories I’ve written on the subject so far:

Ship’s Wake Prompts Oysters to Wash Up on Shore Near Seabeck (Aug. 13)

Residents Assessing Oyster Damage From Ship’s Wake (Aug. 16)

Volunteers Sought for Oyster Rescue Effort in Seabeck (Aug. 18)

Several years ago, residents living along Rich Passage between South Kitsap and Bainbridge Island complained that the wake of high-speed passenger-only ferries were washing away the gravel and undercutting their concrete and rock bulkheads. Washington State Ferries was ultimately forced to pull the ferries out of service. Local officials are still hoping they can find a ferry that can make it from Bremerton to Seattle in about half an hour without creating wake damage.

I’ve also heard complaints from shoreline property owners about wakes from huge freighters. Such comments have come up during discussions about revised shoreline regulations that could become part of Kitsap County’s Shorelines Master Program. Some folks who live on the east side of the Kitsap Peninsula say wakes from these massive cargo ships cause more damage to habitat than anything a shoreline owner might do.

If true, it may be time to address the wake issue, beginning with studies of actual damage caused when the ships come through. Do we need government intervention? I can’t say, but rules to control wakes could be problematic, because the movement of ships is mostly controlled by the federal government.

Share on Facebook

Dolphins will be used to guard the Navy's submarine base at Bangor, similar to operations at King's Bay, Ga., and other places.
U.S. Navy photo by Veronica Birmingham

Roger Natsuhara, acting assistant secretary of the Navy for installation and environment, signed the record of decision (PDF 1.7 mb) on Wednesday. Check the document for official details about the program.

Reporter Ed Friedrick wrote a story about the decision for Thursday’s Kitsap Sun. His article includes the following description of how the Navy plans to use the marine mammals.

The dolphins, accompanied by handlers in small power boats, will work at night. If they find an intruder, they’ll swim back to the boat and alert the handler, who will place a strobe light on a dolphin’s nose. It will race back and bump the intruder’s back, knocking the light off. The light will float to the surface, marking the spot. The dolphin will swim back to the boat, join the handler, and they’ll clear out as security guards speed to the strobe to subdue the intruder.

Sea lions can carry in their mouths special cuffs attached to long ropes. If they find a suspicious swimmer, they clamp the cuff around the person’s leg. The intruder can then be reeled in.

The dolphins’ sonar is better than any that man has made and they’re best for moving quickly in open water. Sea lions can see and hear better underwater and are better for shallower work around piers

Share on Facebook

In any case, a bout with some kind of respiratory bug has knocked me back about five days. I would call it the flu, except that I didn’t have much of a fever.

So now I find myself with a backlog of news stories that I had planned to discuss with you all. Since time doesn’t stop, there will be more stories tomorrow and the day after that.

So I’ll mention some of the interesting stories from the past week and offer you a chance to comment on any of these things. If something provokes your interest or concern, I’ll be happy to moderate or join the conversation.

Fuel spill at PSNS (Thursday)

Last Thursday, 500 gallons of jet fuel spilled from the USS Abraham Lincoln. Fortunately, the ship had been preboomed, so the spill was contained and did not spread out across the harbor.

I covered the first news story on this spill, and I still have some questions, but I haven’t been back to work long enough to get them answered. For example, I have always been told that you shouldn’t preboom highly volatile liquids, such as gasoline and kerosene, for fear they could catch fire. Has something changed about this idea? (I know one boom was already in place, which is now a standard Navy precaution. But they added another.)

Salmon migration (Sunday)

Sunday’s Kitsap Sun featured my annual story encouraging people to go out and watch chum salmon migrating upstream. As usual, the package included a map of local streams (interactive map for online viewers) and tips for watching the fish without disturbing them.

Wherever you live, you may be interested to know how the runs are shaping up, which I covered in a general way. Chum are doing quite well, but not like the records of the recent past. Pinks were amazing. Coho are coming in large, but their abundance varies by location.

Ueland gravel operation (Monday)

Reporter Derek Sheppard filled in well for me on a story I have been following for a couple of years. I’m talking about the public hearing to decide whether a gravel mine, rock quarry and possible concrete batch plant should be built west of Kitsap Lake. There are a lot of issues involved, including traffic on Northlake Way and water quality and quantity going into Chico Creek. The hearing was continued to Dec. 10, so there will be more discussion.

Gravel zoning in Jefferson County (Tuesday)

The Washington State Court of Appeals agreed that the Jefferson County commissioners acted properly in zoning 690 acres in East Jefferson as a “mineral resources land overlay.” Here’s a question: I had understood that the zoning was a prerequisite to the proposed pit-to-pier project, whether or not the zoning stood by itself. But the appeals court ruling states, “(the) future project is not dependent on the proposed action.” If someone would clarify for me, that would be great.

Brown pelican removed from endangered list (today)

I’m not sure how many people check the “Water, Water Everywhere” list at the top of this blog for stories, research and government actions, but I link to a lot of stuff there that I don’t have time to address in detail. Such was the case today with the nationwide de-listing of the brown pelican. Go to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service news release as well as an L.A. Times story.

Share on Facebook

Kitsap County’s shoreline planning effort will move into full swing during the second half of this month. That’s when county officials will hold a series of meetings to share information with representatives from more than 100 organizations.

The importance of this process is not being overlooked by county planners, who realize that the outcome must protect the environment and property rights at the same time.

A letter is scheduled to go out next week to various groups, including civic clubs, community and neighborhood groups, chambers of commerce, environmental organizations, property rights groups, land conservancies, news media, yacht clubs, environmental restoration and recreational organizations, economic associations, and environmental and science educators.

Also included are various cities, tribes, county agencies, water districts, port districts, school districts and colleges.

Those who attend any of the five meetings will learn about state requirements as well as county plans for updating the Kitsap County Shoreline Management Master Program. Those who wish to participate in detailed work on the plan may be asked to join an advisory group, which will provide opinions on various proposals for the next two to three years.

The county commissioners recently approved a 25-page contract with the Washington Department of Ecology. Download the contract from the Kitsap County commissioners agenda (PDF 72 kb). The $650,000 contract outlines in detail what the county will be required to do over the next three years.

The work is organized into five phases
Phase 1: Preliminary assessment of shoreline jurisdiction and public participation plan.
Phase 2: Shoreline inventory, analysis and characterization.
Phase 3: Draft of shoreline management plan and cumulative impacts analysis.
Phase 4: Restoration planning and revisiting Phase 3 as needed.
Phase 5: Adoption process.

The vision developed by the planners includes these goals:

• Comply with legislative mandates including requirements for no net loss of shoreline ecological functions and values.
• Protect private individual property rights consistent with the public interest.
• Create a shoreline stewardship program that fosters reasonable and appropriate shoreline uses while protecting valuable and fragile natural resources.
• Engage a wide variety of stakeholders, citizens and interests in developing goals and policies.
• Integrate and support County development plans, policies, and regulations.
• Ensure predictability, accountability, and efficiency during shoreline development review and decision making.
• Have a strong scientific basis.

Share on Facebook