Resolution from the Clatsop County Democratic Central Committee
Whereas, Northern Star, LLC has proposed a Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) terminal and pipeline at Bradwood Landing, 35 miles up the Columbia River;
Whereas, six Oregon state agencies have reviewed the draft environmental impact statement prepared by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regarding the Bradwood Landing project and have articulated the following major problems with the proposal:
• The FERC has not provided any independent assessment of the demand for LNG to justify the need for the project.
• The terminal project would conflict with regional and national efforts to restore the Columbia River and its estuary.
• Proposed dredging for the terminal, turning berth and pipeline would significantly damage the watershed, water quality, and sensitive species and habitat.
• No commitment has been made for emergency-response resources to operate Bradwood Landing; nor were safety and security implications for the local community adequately assessed.
• Significant fish habitat would be lost, and proposed remedies are inadequate.
• LNG ships would be very disruptive to commercial and recreational fishing boats.
• Air pollution emissions from LNG ships would pose a significant risk to residents of the lower Columbia River area.
• The Bradwood Landing site would present severe natural hazards from landslides, earthquakes, tsunamis and flooding.
Whereas, most of these major problems would apply to any LNG import terminal that might be proposed to be located on the Columbia River; and
Whereas, importing LNG, a foreign fossil fuel, would not contribute to Oregon’s goal of 25% renewable energy by 2012.
Therefore, we, the Clatsop County Democratic Central Committee, call upon Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski, United States Senators Ron Wyden and Gordon Smith, United States Representative David Wu, Oregon State Senator Betsy Johnson and Oregon State Representatives Debbie Boone and Brad Witt, to do everything in their power to stop all LNG import terminal development on the Columbia River.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
"Oasis" appears to be popular...
First these at garageband.com:
Best Male Vocals in Folk, week of 17Sep2007
Best Guitars in Folk, week of 17Sep2007
Best Production in Folk, week of 17Sep2007
Best Melody in Folk, week of 17Sep2007
Then:
Technically, the song is just vocals plus four acoustic guitar tracks, some with effects added.
The new CD, "Mischief" should be available in November.
Best Male Vocals in Folk, week of 17Sep2007
Best Guitars in Folk, week of 17Sep2007
Best Production in Folk, week of 17Sep2007
Best Melody in Folk, week of 17Sep2007
Then:
Technically, the song is just vocals plus four acoustic guitar tracks, some with effects added.
The new CD, "Mischief" should be available in November.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Garageband
This is fun for me. I participate in this international music contest at www.garageband.com. I've actually received quite a few awards over the past year. I appreciate that my musical colleagues occasionally throw accolades at my guitar playing or arranging or producing.
The latest award is for "It's a Shame." I wrote this song in 1979, nursing a hangover in an empty (except for my fellow itinerate musician, Tim Kohler) sports stadium in Flagstaff.
A couple months ago I was in my makeshift studio working on a song that had me rather frustrated. I decided to take a break and blow off some steam. Within about a half an hour I had recorded all the parts to "It's a Shame" and mixed the darn thing. I was going for the original garage band jam sound. I fully expected to delete the result.
On a whim I submitted an MP3 of the song to Garageband.com. As I expected, the guitar hero wannabes dissed my unschooled licks. A few reviewers caught the feeling, but nobody seemed to catch the parody that I intended. Apparently "Garageband" is now a program for Apple computers rather than a way of life.
Imagine my surprise when "It's a Shame" was named Track of the Day in the hotly contested category of Blues Rock. Makes me want to jump on the hood of the Rambler, wailing on my Flying V!
Left without saying goodbye
I'm kinda wondering what the planning commission finally will recommend. I just could not sit through the entire deliberation; kudos to you who did. In any event this LNG thing goes to the Clatsop County Commission for their preference. That may be a good thing...
What! Has Huhtala gone mad?
Hey, back off, I have my reasons to expect the appropriate action from our elected officials. First, I seriously doubt that they are subject to bribery. Second, they are generally very responsive to protecting the interests of businesses and property owners in this county. Allowing this industry in our vicinity is clearly a huge step backward for our economy. I also think that the Commissioners care about the negative cash flow the Clatsop County govenment should expect from doing business with these un-persuasive speculators.
Okay, maybe I'm wrong to trust in the good sense of the Commissioners. In that case this still goes to the Land Use Board of Appeals, and probably beyond. The measured and sensible recommendations of County staff will factor very favorably for sending these cats back to Houston.
What! Has Huhtala gone mad?
Hey, back off, I have my reasons to expect the appropriate action from our elected officials. First, I seriously doubt that they are subject to bribery. Second, they are generally very responsive to protecting the interests of businesses and property owners in this county. Allowing this industry in our vicinity is clearly a huge step backward for our economy. I also think that the Commissioners care about the negative cash flow the Clatsop County govenment should expect from doing business with these un-persuasive speculators.
Okay, maybe I'm wrong to trust in the good sense of the Commissioners. In that case this still goes to the Land Use Board of Appeals, and probably beyond. The measured and sensible recommendations of County staff will factor very favorably for sending these cats back to Houston.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
My testimony for the Planning Commission
Before the Clatsop County Planning Commission, July 10, 2001
Regarding application for development at Bradwood
Thank you for the opportunity to offer some of my thoughts on this application. Overall, I believe that development of an LNG terminal in the Columbia River estuary would have wide-ranging negative effects on our economy, our safety and security, and our quality of life. Locating a receiving terminal at Bradwood would be breathtakingly inappropriate.
Thankfully, Clatsop County and the State of Oregon had the foresight to thoughtfully consider the natural functions and sustainable uses of this magnificent and delicate estuary, and to zone the waters and adjacent lands in a thoughtful and deliberate manner. Your staff report draws the only reasonable conclusion – deny the application.
Although the staff report recommendation is clear and well-reasoned, the material before you suffers from two glaring omissions. First, you have not been provided full and complete details of all public safety issues associated with the transport of LNG through Clatsop County to Bradwood. There is no way to operate the terminal without transport of LNG, including tanker transit from entry into United States waters, to crossing the Columbia River bar, to navigation close to our shores, towns and cities. The planning commission and Clatsop County should not abdicate evaluation of local health and safety issues to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. We’re the ones who would live with the consequences.
Similarly, this commission should have been provided with a thorough independent evaluation of the cost of LNG import to the County. To responsibly consider an application for the heaviest industrial development that this estuary has ever seen, it is vital to understand the direct and indirect cost of emergency infrastructure development and deployment, for example, and the possibility of diversion of services. It is also essential to understand both probable and possible conflicts that this major development would have on existing uses of the estuary and the revenue that streams from these businesses.
There is the obvious likelihood that some existing businesses, from container ship lines to kayak renters, might choose to relocate. A proposal this massive demands big picture economic projections, such as considering what type of businesses would be attracted to this area post-LNG. Would the sustainable companies of the future shy away, companies that value quality of life – clean air, natural beauty, recreation opportunities, choices of cultural activities– for themselves and their employees? Would we be a magnet for dirty polluting industry shunned by other areas? Would the value of our homes decline?
Reluctance to require these studies seems largely based upon inoculation of an incorrect perception that a narrower focus is somehow required. Please don’t forget, at one time this corporation wanted to bypass the Clatsop County process altogether. Why should this proposal not be examined and understood, with light shone on all of its impacts?
*
For the remainder of my time I’ll temporarily narrow my own focus and talk a bit about dredging.
The staff report properly recommends denying the proposed change of 46 acres currently zoned Aquatic Conservation to Aquatic Development, or alternately allowing a conditional use permit. This is a big deal. The applicant proposes a major remodel of the river; digging a huge turning basin at the head of Clifton Channel. This would create a radical alteration of the river’s hydrology smack dab in the middle of the migratory path of salmon, steelhead and other anadromous fishes.
In 1979 and in subsequent revisions of the Columbia River Regional Management Plan, the Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce (CREST), with input from experts in salmon biology, estuarine ecology, and marine geology, delineated areas of the estuary most appropriate for the Aquatic Conservation designation. State and federal agencies, including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the National Marine Fisheries Service, reviewed the CREST plans.
The Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development was closely involved with development of the Columbia River Regional Management Plan, as were Washington State resource agencies.
CREST has earned an extraordinary reputation for objective, science-based environmental evaluation and coastal zone planning analysis and recommendation. The CREST website (http://www.columbiaestuary.org/about.html) offers a brief review of the inception of this organization:
The initial purpose of CREST in 1974 was to gather scientific background material and produce a management plan for the estuary. The data initially gathered resulted in the 1977 publication, Columbia River Estuary Inventory of Physical, Biological, and Cultural Characteristics. The Inventory was used to develop the Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan in 1979, which was adopted in the local comprehensive plans, and shoreline master programs in the early 1980's. Based on data needs identified during the development of the Inventory, Congress authorized and funded the Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program (CREDDP), which provided a wealth of information that is still heavily used by the local governments in resource planning, as well as by state and federal agencies.
The Clatsop County Commission, through the appropriate public process, adopted the Management Plan into the County’s comprehensive plan. The public trust was well served through this succession of events and those involved deserve respect.
The collaborative and well-reviewed designations of the Aquatic Conservation zones near Bradwood stood the test of time. If they are to be revisited at all it should be to consider additional restrictions to protect threatened and endangered species and their habitat.
It is the responsibility of this commission and the Clatsop County Board of Commissioners to protect the integrity and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. In this case, where the federal government would prefer to be calling the shots, it is essential that the County stand firm behind the decisions made through the informed, responsible process that I have described. The planners, advisors and reviewers never suggested that Bradwood and the waters adjacent would be appropriate for a massive and intrusive industrial development as proposed in the application. On the contrary, such use was clearly precluded.
Dredging this huge turning basin has, from when I first heard of this proposal, been the environmental damage too obvious to pass any reasonable scrutiny. Besides the radical change of hydrology at a crucial migratory juncture, we should expect increased turbidity, or material suspended in the water column, and the unleashing of chemical contaminants buried in the river’s sediment. The immediate harm inflicted upon endangered salmon upon the destruction of existing habitat could not be offset by any possible future mitigation.
The communities of the lower river know that pushing these endangered species closer to extinction has a reciprocal effect upon our economy. Managers have, and can be expected to continue to further restrict commercial and recreational fishing opportunities as endangered stocks decline. Fewer opportunities mean fewer fish landed, and that translates to economic losses to fishermen, gear suppliers, the hospitality industry. The losses ripple through the communities of the estuary.
This is just one example of how accommodating LNG development at Bradwood would favor one industry over others while harming the environment at the same time. Please accept your staff report on this aspect of the application and deny the request for rezoning from Aquatic Conservation or issuance of a conditional use permit. The harm to our environment and our economy would be too extreme. Thank you.
Saturday, June 2, 2007
Postpone the LNG hearing
My letter to The Daily Astorian: Sensible or a blatant delay tactic? Whatchathink?
Friday, June 01, 2007
Clatsop County's administration and the commissioners that represent this county's citizens deserve praise for their professional and transparent handling of the Bradwood liquefied natural gas land use application. They've posted relevant documents on the county Web site, resisted taking sides, and, until now have been reluctant to rush the process.
Unfortunately, Clatsop County's apparent commitment to an open public process is under pressure. On May 17, the county issued a press release announcing that its planning commission would hold public hearings on the proposed Bradwood LNG import terminal on July 10.
Five days later, another press release appeared which listed the firms the county had under consideration to perform an independent public safety assessment of the project and deliver findings and recommendations by July 31.
How can the public be expected to participate in this process in an informed manner if vital safety information is not available until 21 days after the public hearing?
The county should postpone any hearing on this matter until the public, and the planning commissioners, have adequate time to review the safety assessment. Information from independent experts on the environmental, economic and safety aspects of the proposal should also be distributed in advance of any hearings. This is clearly reasonable.
Clatsop County's planning decision is about all that remains of local control over the siting of this type of fossil fuel infrastructure.
I'm amazed that an independent economic assessment is not yet under way. The county should insist that the applicant, NorthernStar, pay for such a study. There is honest disagreement about this project's benefits versus costs to Clatsop County. If we would see a net loss in dollars and jobs, shouldn't the planners and the public be aware of this information, from an unbiased source, prior to making far-reaching decisions?
There is no doubt that NorthernStar wants to rush this through. But I believe that our county government can resist the developer's demands. With our economy, our security and the quality of our lives at stake, well-informed and thoughtful deliberation is in order.
Peter Huhtala
Astoria
Friday, June 01, 2007
Clatsop County's administration and the commissioners that represent this county's citizens deserve praise for their professional and transparent handling of the Bradwood liquefied natural gas land use application. They've posted relevant documents on the county Web site, resisted taking sides, and, until now have been reluctant to rush the process.
Unfortunately, Clatsop County's apparent commitment to an open public process is under pressure. On May 17, the county issued a press release announcing that its planning commission would hold public hearings on the proposed Bradwood LNG import terminal on July 10.
Five days later, another press release appeared which listed the firms the county had under consideration to perform an independent public safety assessment of the project and deliver findings and recommendations by July 31.
How can the public be expected to participate in this process in an informed manner if vital safety information is not available until 21 days after the public hearing?
The county should postpone any hearing on this matter until the public, and the planning commissioners, have adequate time to review the safety assessment. Information from independent experts on the environmental, economic and safety aspects of the proposal should also be distributed in advance of any hearings. This is clearly reasonable.
Clatsop County's planning decision is about all that remains of local control over the siting of this type of fossil fuel infrastructure.
I'm amazed that an independent economic assessment is not yet under way. The county should insist that the applicant, NorthernStar, pay for such a study. There is honest disagreement about this project's benefits versus costs to Clatsop County. If we would see a net loss in dollars and jobs, shouldn't the planners and the public be aware of this information, from an unbiased source, prior to making far-reaching decisions?
There is no doubt that NorthernStar wants to rush this through. But I believe that our county government can resist the developer's demands. With our economy, our security and the quality of our lives at stake, well-informed and thoughtful deliberation is in order.
Peter Huhtala
Astoria
Sunday, May 27, 2007
Arthur Lee
I called for stories of our brushes with musical greatness in the post below. I thought that I’d move it up here in case some of you missed it. So, tell us about the stars, or almost stars, that you jammed with, ate with, even exchanged a few words… I find it interesting that many famous people are very down to earth, accessible and gracious, while others are snobby jerks, full of themselves. Hmm, sort of a cross section of the population? Nonetheless, I find your stories, and the insight into the character of successful musicians fascinating. Here’s one of my stories.
In the late 70s I embarked on a hitch-hiking adventure. My pal Tim Kohler and I had been busking at Fishermen’s Wharf and other tourist haunts on the San Francisco streets. I was on a month-long vacation and I was initially singing and playing guitar for tips just so I could tell my grandchildren about it. (Oh, I may yet get that opportunity. See “Quite a phone call” a couple of posts down.)
Well, Tim and I were very successful at busking, so we decided to make our way, by thumb, across the country and get a job playing music on a cruise ship that called at Key West. My vacation would be extended, forever. The next year on the road provided me with extraordinary memories as well as precious experience with the people of America, from the homeless to the fabulously wealthy. This is a snippet from that adventure.
On a chilly January morning in 1979, Tim and I woke up in a eucalyptus grove in San Diego. We wondered down to the Moon Café for the 80-cent breakfast special, then off to Balboa Park to seek our fortune. There were very few people around, but we felt like jamming. Tim was in a particularly energetic phase, ripping wildfire leads on his little Martin 0-18.
A gentleman walked over to listen. When we finished our tune he asked if we knew any songs by Arthur Lee. I said sure and rendered a version of “Signed DC.” I was a fan of Arthur and his awesome 60s band Love, and this particular song (a junkie’s suicide note) was one of the first tunes that my friend, the late Bob Mackey had taught me when we were teenagers. Tim sat out.
When I finished the man shook my hand. Then he dropped a Snow Seal and fifty-dollar bill in my guitar case, handed me his card and said, “If you want to make a record, call me.” I looked at the card as he walked off. It was Arthur Lee himself.
Nearly twenty years later I was telling this story to Leon Hendrix, Jimi’s brother. Leon remembered Jimi talking about getting to play in an LA studio with Arthur Lee in the early 60s, when Jimi was touring as a sideman on the Chitlin’ Circuit. This was during the period when Jimi played with the Isley Brothers, Little Richard and others – before his dramatic ascent to fame. Arthur had written a song called “My Diary” which was being recorded by Rosa Lee Brooks. He arranged for Jimi to play electric guitar. This is considered to be Jimi’s first studio work.
Leon met Arthur in 1994 when Jimi’s star was placed on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. The two became fast friends, and Leon stayed on at Arthur’s house for awhile. Leon suggested that we get in touch with Arthur. Unfortunately, I had to tell Leon that Arthur was in prison. I wrote to him at Soledad, but never got a reply.
Arthur Lee got out of prison in 2001 and toured for several years, including a series of dates that featured a performance of Love’s “Forever Changes” album in it’s entirety. I believe that the 2003 CD from these concerts was Arthur’s last.
Arthur Lee passed away in August 2006. Thank you for the tip, Mr. Lee.
In the late 70s I embarked on a hitch-hiking adventure. My pal Tim Kohler and I had been busking at Fishermen’s Wharf and other tourist haunts on the San Francisco streets. I was on a month-long vacation and I was initially singing and playing guitar for tips just so I could tell my grandchildren about it. (Oh, I may yet get that opportunity. See “Quite a phone call” a couple of posts down.)
Well, Tim and I were very successful at busking, so we decided to make our way, by thumb, across the country and get a job playing music on a cruise ship that called at Key West. My vacation would be extended, forever. The next year on the road provided me with extraordinary memories as well as precious experience with the people of America, from the homeless to the fabulously wealthy. This is a snippet from that adventure.
On a chilly January morning in 1979, Tim and I woke up in a eucalyptus grove in San Diego. We wondered down to the Moon Café for the 80-cent breakfast special, then off to Balboa Park to seek our fortune. There were very few people around, but we felt like jamming. Tim was in a particularly energetic phase, ripping wildfire leads on his little Martin 0-18.
A gentleman walked over to listen. When we finished our tune he asked if we knew any songs by Arthur Lee. I said sure and rendered a version of “Signed DC.” I was a fan of Arthur and his awesome 60s band Love, and this particular song (a junkie’s suicide note) was one of the first tunes that my friend, the late Bob Mackey had taught me when we were teenagers. Tim sat out.
When I finished the man shook my hand. Then he dropped a Snow Seal and fifty-dollar bill in my guitar case, handed me his card and said, “If you want to make a record, call me.” I looked at the card as he walked off. It was Arthur Lee himself.
Nearly twenty years later I was telling this story to Leon Hendrix, Jimi’s brother. Leon remembered Jimi talking about getting to play in an LA studio with Arthur Lee in the early 60s, when Jimi was touring as a sideman on the Chitlin’ Circuit. This was during the period when Jimi played with the Isley Brothers, Little Richard and others – before his dramatic ascent to fame. Arthur had written a song called “My Diary” which was being recorded by Rosa Lee Brooks. He arranged for Jimi to play electric guitar. This is considered to be Jimi’s first studio work.
Leon met Arthur in 1994 when Jimi’s star was placed on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. The two became fast friends, and Leon stayed on at Arthur’s house for awhile. Leon suggested that we get in touch with Arthur. Unfortunately, I had to tell Leon that Arthur was in prison. I wrote to him at Soledad, but never got a reply.
Arthur Lee got out of prison in 2001 and toured for several years, including a series of dates that featured a performance of Love’s “Forever Changes” album in it’s entirety. I believe that the 2003 CD from these concerts was Arthur’s last.
Arthur Lee passed away in August 2006. Thank you for the tip, Mr. Lee.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Friday at the Astoria Coffee House
Friends - This a quick and shameless self promotion. I'll be playing at the Astoria Coffee House this Friday, May 25, from 8 pm until 11 pm, along with the charming and talented Brigado Eduardo and Peter Unander. This is a fun venue to showcase our original songs, including some never before performed in public. We hope to see you there! - Peter Huhtala
PS - If you'd like to hear or download some of my recent recordings, I have a few uploaded to http://www.myspace.com/peterhuhtala
Down the road I plan to write about my experiences as a songwriter and performer. I know that there are many musicians that read this blog, so perhaps we'll draw out some interesting anecdotes. Heck, let's start now. How about sharing your brushes with musical greatness? Who shook Zappa's hand? Who ate breakfast with John Lee Hooker? Who did you happen upon, jam with, open for, work for in the backup band? The lines are open.
PS - If you'd like to hear or download some of my recent recordings, I have a few uploaded to http://www.myspace.com/peterhuhtala
Down the road I plan to write about my experiences as a songwriter and performer. I know that there are many musicians that read this blog, so perhaps we'll draw out some interesting anecdotes. Heck, let's start now. How about sharing your brushes with musical greatness? Who shook Zappa's hand? Who ate breakfast with John Lee Hooker? Who did you happen upon, jam with, open for, work for in the backup band? The lines are open.
Monday, May 14, 2007
Quite a phone call
My daughter, Nirvana, called and left an “I have something to talk with you about” message. The last time she did that I was to be informed that she was completing her quiet conversion to Catholicism, and was sending invites to her first Communion.
Now she’s married to her Catholic sponsor, a delightful man named Scott. They live in the New Jersey suburbs of Philadelphia. I visited them in March, while back east on LNG shenanigans. They are just the sweetest most considerate couple. And Nirvana made wonderful gourmet treats and yummy Finnish carrot soup.
Anyway, I was stuck in meetings all afternoon before I could call back. As it turns out my daughter had only just learned today that she had earned her B.S. in Economics from Rutgers, and had scrambled to get her cap and gown so she could walk on Saturday! It’s too short a notice for me to be there, but I can shop.
Well, if that wasn’t enough, Nirvana then informed me that she had been promoted at work. Hmm, for the cryptic tone of the message, this was going well. I’m very proud of my daughter
Then…. she let slip quite casually that I should become a grandfather about the time of my birthday in December. That rascal had set me up with the other news, even though it was all true. Some Huhtalas have a very dry sense of humor.
I’m absolutely completely pleased. This is one fortunate kid, coming into this world with such wonderful parents. And Grandpa can’t wait to get to know this lucky human being.
I wonder if I can learn to knit?
Now she’s married to her Catholic sponsor, a delightful man named Scott. They live in the New Jersey suburbs of Philadelphia. I visited them in March, while back east on LNG shenanigans. They are just the sweetest most considerate couple. And Nirvana made wonderful gourmet treats and yummy Finnish carrot soup.
Anyway, I was stuck in meetings all afternoon before I could call back. As it turns out my daughter had only just learned today that she had earned her B.S. in Economics from Rutgers, and had scrambled to get her cap and gown so she could walk on Saturday! It’s too short a notice for me to be there, but I can shop.
Well, if that wasn’t enough, Nirvana then informed me that she had been promoted at work. Hmm, for the cryptic tone of the message, this was going well. I’m very proud of my daughter
Then…. she let slip quite casually that I should become a grandfather about the time of my birthday in December. That rascal had set me up with the other news, even though it was all true. Some Huhtalas have a very dry sense of humor.
I’m absolutely completely pleased. This is one fortunate kid, coming into this world with such wonderful parents. And Grandpa can’t wait to get to know this lucky human being.
I wonder if I can learn to knit?
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Okay, that went over real well
Why the heck is anybody interested in what Huhtala does anyway? I'll finish the story in a bit, just for posterity, and because what PMCC is up to right now is so very cool, but I'll refer you back to the Port race (below).
I stand by my endorsements solidly. I'd appreciate it if Hunsinger would slam LNG hard, but you know what, Bill is a straight shooter in the sense that I value. (This is an obscure reference to Jim Bergeron's archery hobby.)
Pat McGee is the man all the way. Even though he lives in town, he's acquired a nose for the solid bodily waste of the male bovine. Sniff away, Patrick, while the rest of us hold our noses.
And, Kathy, Kathy Sanders I can't say enough good things about her as a candidate. The other candidates for Position 4 should just get behind her and make sure she gets voted in (That means you: Don, Ted and Jim.). Get over it, Captain Sanders can take the helm and turn this ship around.
The Port is supposed to be an engine for our prosperity, not a magnet for controversy.
Please vote, even if you think that my opinions reek of that bovine stench.
I stand by my endorsements solidly. I'd appreciate it if Hunsinger would slam LNG hard, but you know what, Bill is a straight shooter in the sense that I value. (This is an obscure reference to Jim Bergeron's archery hobby.)
Pat McGee is the man all the way. Even though he lives in town, he's acquired a nose for the solid bodily waste of the male bovine. Sniff away, Patrick, while the rest of us hold our noses.
And, Kathy, Kathy Sanders I can't say enough good things about her as a candidate. The other candidates for Position 4 should just get behind her and make sure she gets voted in (That means you: Don, Ted and Jim.). Get over it, Captain Sanders can take the helm and turn this ship around.
The Port is supposed to be an engine for our prosperity, not a magnet for controversy.
Please vote, even if you think that my opinions reek of that bovine stench.
Thursday, April 26, 2007
What does Huhtala do? (Part two)
I joined Pacific Marine Conservation Council (PMCC) in the fall of 2000, hired as the Rockfish Campaign Coordinator. I had been honing my skills as an advocate for the environment and on behalf of fisheries for just a few years previous – participating, some say leading the challenge to the Army Corps of Engineers’ plan to deepen the Columbia River shipping channel for over 100 miles, from the ocean to Portland.
When a detractor accuses me of being anti-commercial fishing, this both irritates and puzzles me. I forgive them, because I understand that they are possessed by their investment in a malignant and Neanderthal belief system akin to that of the current Resident of the White House… Whoops, that was my outside voice.
In any event I am proud to be considered an environmentalist. My lifelong interest has been that of a naturalist, and I’ve cultivated my particular fascination with the sea, the rivers, the estuaries, marine life, and fishing. It’s actually fishing that turned on a light bulb that allowed me to realize the unbreakable link, the adamantine fusion of the environment and our economic and leisure lives. Without a healthy marine environment there are no fish to catch.
I was the executive director of the Columbia Deepening Opposition Group (CDOG). It was extraordinary how many diverse interests came to agreement around the channel deepening issues, issues such as the redistribution of chemical contaminants in the river’s sediment, the construction of a pile dike field in an historic gillnet drift, filling in Lois Embayment east of Tongue Point, dumping millions of tons of sand on crab beds and flatfish nurseries, and digging a trench through the Superfund area of the Willamette River. My allies included crab and salmon fishermen, local governments, and environmentalists.
In the end the deepening project was approved, but the Willamette section was removed, the pile dike field was not built, and Lois Embayment was saved. It’s still a bad project, but it could have been much worse.
As Rockfish Campaign Coordinator for PMCC, I was thrust into the eco-political realm of federal management of ocean fisheries. It turned out to be an arena with considerable depth and, so far, endless challenge.
Out of the gate at PMCC, I was swiftly integrated into the small team seeking to implement a strategic plan to bring back the rockfish. I didn’t know a whole lot about rockfish, but the creatures very quickly captivated me. There were dozens of species, all of the genus Sebastes, which I learned meant ‘magnificent.’ And they were. They came in a multitude of colors and patterns. They gave birth to larvae, not eggs. Some of them lived 50 years, 100 years, even 205 years! "Dude, there’s a fish here that claims that the last European type he met was named Meriwether."
The game plan was clear enough to me. We needed to make sure we were counting all the rockfish we killed in our fisheries, whether they were brought to shore and discarded at sea. (It turns out that sometimes more fish are shoveled overboard in the trawl fishery than are put in the hold to be brought to market.). We needed to make sure that the habitat these fish need to grow to maturity is adequately protected. We wanted to encourage fishing methods that were more selective and less destructive. We wanted to help bring fishermen and scientists together to collabate on research projects.
I was amazed to learn that fishery managers were basing many of their decisions on estimates of the total fish killed in the fishery that had no real current data to back them up. PMCC was advocating for an observer program, so scientists could tag along on a percentage of fishing trips to get a better idea of how many fish were discarded. This was vital information. The rockfish have a swim bladder, and when they’re hauled up from deep water the bladders burst, their eyes bug out, and they die. If we were to bring these fish back to a healthy population, we needed to count what we killed. Logical. Well, logical and controversial.
Apparently there was some resistance in the fishing industry to carrying observers on the boats. Some were offended that this meant that the government didn’t trust them, or that it was surveillance that violated their civil rights, an unfair imposition, or potentially in conflict with their business policies, as in, “My boat does not allow women on board.”
At my very first Pacific Fishery Management Council meeting, PMCC’s executive director at the time, Bob Eaton, delivered testimony that basically said that the Council should shut down the trawl fishery on the continental shelf off the West Coast, unless they implement an at-sea observer program. Hearing this, the fellow standing next to me in the back of the room stared at me (the new PMCC guy in suit and tie), broke the handle off of his coffee mug, threw the handle, which impaled in the sheetrock 12 feet away, and stared at me again. Oh. Then I realized that my new job description had me as the primary spokesperson delivering most of such testimony in the future. I was starting to get an inkling about what it meant when Bob said they were going to paint a target on my back….
Undaunted, I went forth testifying up a storm, educating Congress until I had blisters on my feet, meeting the fishermen who supported the Rockfish Campaign and those who detested it, learning the management process, getting to know the scientists of the ocean fishery world, and most important learning to work with the extraordinary science and communication staff at PMCC. I also began associating with the Marine Fish Conservation Network, a coalition where the relatively small world of conservation-minded fishing groups and environmentalists with a marine focus hammered out common positions regarding national fisheries policy.
Within about a year we celebrated success as Congress appropriated money to get a West Coast groundfish fishery at-sea observer program underway. I fully believe that this was the right thing to do and should be celebrated. There are those who disagree, and I’ll have to proudly accept their wrath.
The Rockfish Rebuilding Campaign was off to a good start. And perhaps I’m starting to describe what I do. But the campaign had further to go, and changes were ahead for PMCC. All that and more in Part Three.
Cheers.
When a detractor accuses me of being anti-commercial fishing, this both irritates and puzzles me. I forgive them, because I understand that they are possessed by their investment in a malignant and Neanderthal belief system akin to that of the current Resident of the White House… Whoops, that was my outside voice.
In any event I am proud to be considered an environmentalist. My lifelong interest has been that of a naturalist, and I’ve cultivated my particular fascination with the sea, the rivers, the estuaries, marine life, and fishing. It’s actually fishing that turned on a light bulb that allowed me to realize the unbreakable link, the adamantine fusion of the environment and our economic and leisure lives. Without a healthy marine environment there are no fish to catch.
I was the executive director of the Columbia Deepening Opposition Group (CDOG). It was extraordinary how many diverse interests came to agreement around the channel deepening issues, issues such as the redistribution of chemical contaminants in the river’s sediment, the construction of a pile dike field in an historic gillnet drift, filling in Lois Embayment east of Tongue Point, dumping millions of tons of sand on crab beds and flatfish nurseries, and digging a trench through the Superfund area of the Willamette River. My allies included crab and salmon fishermen, local governments, and environmentalists.
In the end the deepening project was approved, but the Willamette section was removed, the pile dike field was not built, and Lois Embayment was saved. It’s still a bad project, but it could have been much worse.
As Rockfish Campaign Coordinator for PMCC, I was thrust into the eco-political realm of federal management of ocean fisheries. It turned out to be an arena with considerable depth and, so far, endless challenge.
Out of the gate at PMCC, I was swiftly integrated into the small team seeking to implement a strategic plan to bring back the rockfish. I didn’t know a whole lot about rockfish, but the creatures very quickly captivated me. There were dozens of species, all of the genus Sebastes, which I learned meant ‘magnificent.’ And they were. They came in a multitude of colors and patterns. They gave birth to larvae, not eggs. Some of them lived 50 years, 100 years, even 205 years! "Dude, there’s a fish here that claims that the last European type he met was named Meriwether."
The game plan was clear enough to me. We needed to make sure we were counting all the rockfish we killed in our fisheries, whether they were brought to shore and discarded at sea. (It turns out that sometimes more fish are shoveled overboard in the trawl fishery than are put in the hold to be brought to market.). We needed to make sure that the habitat these fish need to grow to maturity is adequately protected. We wanted to encourage fishing methods that were more selective and less destructive. We wanted to help bring fishermen and scientists together to collabate on research projects.
I was amazed to learn that fishery managers were basing many of their decisions on estimates of the total fish killed in the fishery that had no real current data to back them up. PMCC was advocating for an observer program, so scientists could tag along on a percentage of fishing trips to get a better idea of how many fish were discarded. This was vital information. The rockfish have a swim bladder, and when they’re hauled up from deep water the bladders burst, their eyes bug out, and they die. If we were to bring these fish back to a healthy population, we needed to count what we killed. Logical. Well, logical and controversial.
Apparently there was some resistance in the fishing industry to carrying observers on the boats. Some were offended that this meant that the government didn’t trust them, or that it was surveillance that violated their civil rights, an unfair imposition, or potentially in conflict with their business policies, as in, “My boat does not allow women on board.”
At my very first Pacific Fishery Management Council meeting, PMCC’s executive director at the time, Bob Eaton, delivered testimony that basically said that the Council should shut down the trawl fishery on the continental shelf off the West Coast, unless they implement an at-sea observer program. Hearing this, the fellow standing next to me in the back of the room stared at me (the new PMCC guy in suit and tie), broke the handle off of his coffee mug, threw the handle, which impaled in the sheetrock 12 feet away, and stared at me again. Oh. Then I realized that my new job description had me as the primary spokesperson delivering most of such testimony in the future. I was starting to get an inkling about what it meant when Bob said they were going to paint a target on my back….
Undaunted, I went forth testifying up a storm, educating Congress until I had blisters on my feet, meeting the fishermen who supported the Rockfish Campaign and those who detested it, learning the management process, getting to know the scientists of the ocean fishery world, and most important learning to work with the extraordinary science and communication staff at PMCC. I also began associating with the Marine Fish Conservation Network, a coalition where the relatively small world of conservation-minded fishing groups and environmentalists with a marine focus hammered out common positions regarding national fisheries policy.
Within about a year we celebrated success as Congress appropriated money to get a West Coast groundfish fishery at-sea observer program underway. I fully believe that this was the right thing to do and should be celebrated. There are those who disagree, and I’ll have to proudly accept their wrath.
The Rockfish Rebuilding Campaign was off to a good start. And perhaps I’m starting to describe what I do. But the campaign had further to go, and changes were ahead for PMCC. All that and more in Part Three.
Cheers.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
What does Huhtala do? (Part One)
Now and then someone asks me what I do for work. Depending on my mood, I suppose, I answer with varying degrees of substance and detail: “I’m a conservationist.” “I type on plastic keys and talk on the phone a lot.” “I’m a lobbyist for fish – the slimiest kind.” “I work to influence fisheries management to benefit both the marine environment and fishing communities.”
So you see, my answers vary from cheeky to (attempted) clever to canned (no fish pun intended). I’m thinking that I could do better than that.
Okay, my title is Senior Policy Director for the Pacific Marine Conservation Council (PMCC). That’s a start. I could begin to describe my job by talking about PMCC. This is a ten-year-old non-profit organization that, first off is not part of the government. In fact it was formed because a small group of conservation-minded fishermen believed that the government was messing up the management of West Coast fisheries. It was.
At first there were scenes in living rooms around a bottle of Tequila when said fishermen would spew elegant criticism and advice for fishery managers while a fisherman’s wife wrote it down. At least that’s what I’ve been told. They’d send letters to the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC), the advisory body that essentially manages West Coast ocean fisheries, with the (rubber?) stamp of approval from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).
I sincerely hope that you’re not experiencing acronym overload. In my profession it gets worse, I guess because there are so many advisory committees to advisory bodies… Oh, whatever, I’ll try to restrain my acronym reliance.
The West Coast rockfish were tanking. And the soon-to-be-PMCC fishermen knew it. But why? These rockfish (actually dozens of species of the genus Sebastes, marketed as Pacific red snapper) were a mainstay of ocean fisheries along our coast. And one after another they were disappearing/hiding/migrating/vacationing, well there just weren’t as many around. The fishermen had some ideas, having watched as the Russian fishing fleet decimated the Pacific Ocean Perch (not a perch at all, but a rockfish), before getting banned from the U.S. exclusive economic zone in the late 1970s. But who would listen to Tequila swilling (?) fishermen?
The fishermen decided to seek out scientists who had some understanding of the West Coast rockfish. They figured that between the scientists and the fishermen solutions might emerge that could bring fisheries management along.
A small group of private foundations with an interest in solving environmental problems were intrigued by this unusual group emerging from the harbors and campuses. They kicked in some money and PMCC was born. Before long the fledgling organization was in partnership with the Monterey Bay Aquarium to sponsor a conference that brought together fishermen, scientists, managers and environmentalists to focus on what it would take to bring back the depleted rockfish populations – and sustain them for the future.
Well, that’s enough for now. I haven’t even made it to the year 2000, when I joined PMCC as their Rockfish Campaign Coordinator. That’ll be next.
So you see, my answers vary from cheeky to (attempted) clever to canned (no fish pun intended). I’m thinking that I could do better than that.
Okay, my title is Senior Policy Director for the Pacific Marine Conservation Council (PMCC). That’s a start. I could begin to describe my job by talking about PMCC. This is a ten-year-old non-profit organization that, first off is not part of the government. In fact it was formed because a small group of conservation-minded fishermen believed that the government was messing up the management of West Coast fisheries. It was.
At first there were scenes in living rooms around a bottle of Tequila when said fishermen would spew elegant criticism and advice for fishery managers while a fisherman’s wife wrote it down. At least that’s what I’ve been told. They’d send letters to the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC), the advisory body that essentially manages West Coast ocean fisheries, with the (rubber?) stamp of approval from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).
I sincerely hope that you’re not experiencing acronym overload. In my profession it gets worse, I guess because there are so many advisory committees to advisory bodies… Oh, whatever, I’ll try to restrain my acronym reliance.
The West Coast rockfish were tanking. And the soon-to-be-PMCC fishermen knew it. But why? These rockfish (actually dozens of species of the genus Sebastes, marketed as Pacific red snapper) were a mainstay of ocean fisheries along our coast. And one after another they were disappearing/hiding/migrating/vacationing, well there just weren’t as many around. The fishermen had some ideas, having watched as the Russian fishing fleet decimated the Pacific Ocean Perch (not a perch at all, but a rockfish), before getting banned from the U.S. exclusive economic zone in the late 1970s. But who would listen to Tequila swilling (?) fishermen?
The fishermen decided to seek out scientists who had some understanding of the West Coast rockfish. They figured that between the scientists and the fishermen solutions might emerge that could bring fisheries management along.
A small group of private foundations with an interest in solving environmental problems were intrigued by this unusual group emerging from the harbors and campuses. They kicked in some money and PMCC was born. Before long the fledgling organization was in partnership with the Monterey Bay Aquarium to sponsor a conference that brought together fishermen, scientists, managers and environmentalists to focus on what it would take to bring back the depleted rockfish populations – and sustain them for the future.
Well, that’s enough for now. I haven’t even made it to the year 2000, when I joined PMCC as their Rockfish Campaign Coordinator. That’ll be next.
Monday, April 16, 2007
Senator Wyden challenges LNG permits
Finally. A statewide elected politician from the state of Oregon has publicly raised some of the questions that should end any consideration of siting an LNG facility in the Columbia River estuary. The senior senator from Oregon, Ron Wyden, stepped up last month with a sharply pointed letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission – the agency we have come to know as FERC.
Wyden’s coming out is very significant. It does not overshadow the overt opposition that the congressman from southwest Washington, Brian Baird has expressed toward the Northern Star LNG terminal proposal at Bradwood. Hopefully though it will precipitate a similar domino effect, inspiring Oregon politicians to fall in line on behalf of our communities, as has happened in Washington.
Wyden’s letter is intelligently crafted and the questions calculated to get to the heart of certain key issues. The Senator’s awareness of the fundamental problems with LNG import and the smart and experienced staff he has working on energy issues provide us with major advantages. It didn’t hurt that several North Coast citizens (yes, including me) met with the Senator’s DC staff in March to encourage appropriate action.
We’ve all been impatient for political leadership, and the courage to take positions on LNG, either way. That’s often the way of politics, however, and it’s not always bad. I actually prefer that the Clatsop County Commissioners remain neutral about LNG development, thereby preserving an untainted position as they rule on local land use matters regarding Northern Star’s ill-founded proposal. However, there are many city and state politicians that will never be in a quasi-judicial position regarding these fossil fuel speculators, so a big nudge like Wyden has provided could inspire some righteous indignation from our elected ones.
Check out (mostly in my paraphrase) what Senator Wyden asks about how FERC is handling Northern Star’s application and other proposed projects:
How are the comments on the project from Oregon being incorporated into the planning process?
Will state energy facility siting standards be incorporated, such as limits on CO2 emissions and financial assurance that the place will be torn down and restored when the facility is retired?
How will FERC ensure that salmon habitat and fisheries are protected from the site construction, dredging, and pipeline trenching? If FERC relies on mitigation, how will the agency ensure effectiveness?
What steps is FERC taking to involve local governments in pipeline routing, construction, and safety impacts to our citizens?
“Please explain the basis on which FERC is determining the safety of the projects as proposed.” Wyden discusses accidents, floods, tsunamis, and earthquakes.
And he clearly caught the Coast Guard language that tankers larger than 148,000 cubic meter capacity can not be used absent risk analysis for these larger vessels (the very sort under construction now). “How will FERC address project design and economics consistent with this finding?”
“How will FERC assure that … resource gaps are filled as a condition of approval and what is FERC’s statutory authority to do so?” This is about shoreside and waterway firefighting ability, natural gas detection, interagency communication, vessel traffic control, law enforcement and more – essential infrastructure that diverts resources and could cost taxpayer money, to serve a private enterprise.
Wyden also caught the absurdity of the 500-yard security zone to the side of tankers ending at the waterfront. Many structures in Hammond, Warrenton, Astoria, Puget Island and more are within this 500 yards. The Senator asks, “If it is as much a safety as a security zone, how will FERC account for the safety of residents onshore who are within 500 yards of the ship or terminal? What is FERC’s authority to ensure that safety and security requirements continue to be met after a facility is approved and constructed.” (Full disclosure: My office is within that 500-yard zone.)
I haven’t seen the response that FERC sent to the Senator. I do have a good idea about the truthful answers to these questions, and in aggregate they don’t support going forward with any of the Columbia River sites.
Wyden also continues to complain about the erosion of state authority for LNG facility siting included in last year’s energy bill. He rightly states citizen concerns over safety, security, and the environment. The states rights stance should help this Democratic senator connect with Republicans (Greens, Socialists, Libertarians as well!).
I completely understand that this was a short letter, and at that adequate to kill the Columbia River projects if the points are well-taken. Nonetheless, I need to highlight a partial oversight – the adverse economic impacts of an LNG terminal on this river. Wyden does mentions the salmon fishing industry, but many other businesses could suffer if one of these things gets sited.
The Columbia River Business Alliance is building membership. These businesspeople understand that an LNG terminal would be bad for the growing economy of this area. The mission of the Alliance: “The mission of the Columbia River Business Alliance is to achieve sustainable economic development and growth compatible with the heritage, culture and resources of the region. We will meet the needs of the current community while ensuring the quality of life for future generations along the Columbia River.”
Learn more about the Columbia River Business Alliance, and please consider joing, at http://www.columbiariverbusinessalliance.org/
It’s hard to change the course of a big ship of foolishness, but Senator Wyden’s letter is definitely a strong directional correction.
I suppose this blog might set off a wee LNG discussion. It’s been awhile since we were down and dirty with this, so comment away!
Saturday, April 7, 2007
Port of Astoria Commission endorsements
May Day is coming fast upon us. Odd child that I was, I looked forward to this holiday for the chance to work with my Aunt Irma to make up folded paper baskets which I hung on doors around our Astor Court neighborhood. I was of course oblivious to the pagan roots of the traditional rising of the sap celebration, let alone the commemoration of the Haymarket Riot celebrated (still?) in the Communist world. Among my socialist friends May 1st is International Workers Day. Oh, that reminds me; I started out to write about the Port of Astoria elections.
As related to the elections, May 1st is the day the ballots are to be mailed. I’m thinking that it’s getting to be time to decide which candidates to support. During my failed attempt to secure a Commission seat two years ago, the campaign was in full swing by now. The issues are similar this time around, but they’ve matured. The inadequate oversight and fiscal recklessness of the veteran commissioners, as documented in The Daily Astorian, has been added to the disrespect for the public demonstrated by the railroading of the Calpine lease. LNG is more of a side issue this election, but not insignificant.
I’ll take the plunge and let everyone know who I support, and then brace myself for your comments. First off let me say that I’m pleased that viable candidates are willing to serve, and replace the incumbents – because those currently sitting must go.
All registered voters in Clatsop County have the opportunity to vote for candidates in each of the three contested races for port commissioner. Let’s see who we have.
Okay, for Position 2, to serve out the remaining two years of Glenn Taggart’s term (Glenn resigned in the midst of controversy over possible abuse of his position for personal financial gain. There was certainly the specter of conflict-of-interest with the Western Oregon Waste transaction, some of the handling of Taggart Building project on Port property, and Floyd Holcom’s complaints. We may never know whether improprieties actually occurred, and ethics can have fuzzy lines…): Bernard Bjork, who was appointed last fall, by the other commissioners, to fill the vacancy. He fits in with that crowd, which pretty much disqualifies him. He has not distinguished himself in the time he’s served, and has even distanced himself from his old pal Commissioner Larry Pfund. I lost during the last election to Pfund, who later became so concerned about the mismanagement, secrecy and cover-ups at the Port, that he complained to the press and courageously spoke out at Commission meetings. Bjork told Pfund to stop his whining. Bjork is also a long-time LNG supporter and, incidentally spearheaded the campaign against me. No hard feelings, but please let’s give Bjork the boot.
Also up for Position 2 is John Dunzer. Well, he’s an unusual character. He’s berated the lack of intelligence of every elected official in Clatsop County, as I recall. He considers my loss in 2005 as a mandate for LNG development. He did endear himself to me when, at a candidate’s forum sponsored by the American Association of University Women, he turned to the then-current commissioners in a comment regarding the Calpine lease and said, “You fellers really screwed the pooch.” In spite of that high mark, Dunzer’s a dud.
That leaves us with Patrick McGee for Position 2. McGee is the clear choice by default, because he is not the others. But McGee is also an excellent choice. He immediately smelled the foul air around the backroom dealing of the Calpine lease. He is a powerful advocate for transparency in government, and he speaks out for government officials to be held accountable to their constituents. He has a passion for the beauty and livability of our community, and supports economic development compatible with our heritage. Some call him gruff; I call him to-the-point. I trust McGee to act conservatively with the Port finances. Sure, we disagree on some political matters, but listen folks this is a non-partisan race, and we need someone who will do right by this county. I’m pleased that Patrick McGee is willing to serve.
Now let’s look at Position 3, currently held by Jim Bergeron. Bergeron was one of the more promising commissioners years ago, but went south fast with a pre-lease endorsement of Calpine’s LNG deal. His misguided and irrational antics during the last election are only exceeded by the stubborn streak that must inspire running again. It may be a malignant form of pride. I appreciate the contributions Bergeron has made to preserving the history of fishing in this area, through his former work with Sea Grant. He’s really a pretty nice guy. But he made bad decisions around the lease, around the dredging fiasco, around management oversight, and regarding Port finances. Time to bail on Bergeron.
Fortunately, Bill Hunsinger is willing to take on Position 3. Hunsinger is a retired longshoreman with hands-on (literally) experience in a number of ports. He has not been shy in criticizing if not exposing malfeasance at the Port of Astoria. As outspoken as Hunsinger appears, he also has a level head. I have confidence that he will make informed and measured decisions as port commissioner. He wants to see jobs for our community, but he is also realistic and cautious about the type of jobs. He will be an excellent addition to the Commission.
Finally, there’s Position 4, with thick-skinned Commission President Don McDaniel facing three opponents. McDaniel has been back-peddling a bit of late, finally sort of embracing my two-year call for organizational and fiscal audits of Port structure and activities. I say “sort of” because what is underway is short of a charge to investigate the dark corners of the internal dealings (lease, dredging, insider profiteering, collusion to avoid public process) that appear to have tainted Port activities these past few years. McDaniel is a nice guy who should have stepped down. I think he’s running again fueled by that weird pride, or maybe just to prove that old guys can be tough. Dump Don.
Meet Jim Stroup, retired bar pilot, who has filed for Position 4. Actually I’m not sure where to meet him. Stroup has some experience on the Oregon Board of Maritime Pilots and as master of the State Steamship Company. I got this information from The Daily Astorian. Stroup might be okay, but where is he? I expect, perhaps unfairly, some sort of Internet presence to help me learn about the record and vision of candidates. It’s less than a month until the ballots are mailed. Time to get out of the house, if not onto the Web!
Another contender for Position 4 is Ted Thomas, who points to his political experience in the Boilermakers Union. Thomas has been a vocal critic of the Port, especially regarding procedural matters. He is a founder of Clean Slate, a PAC formed to find and support candidates to replace the incumbent port commission. Clean Slate foisted an admirable platform that emphasized open and responsive government. However, no candidates stepped forward to be embraced by (beholden to?) the PAC, so Thomas himself filed. Thomas expresses good intentions, but I don’t see him winning. He has limited ties to this area, and lacks a long-standing record regarding local issues. He also worked to defeat me in 2005. I don’t think that I hold a grudge, but Fins have long, if selective, memories.
That brings us to Position 4 candidate Kathy Sanders, probably the most capable of any in the Port race. Sanders is a former captain in the U.S. Air Force, now turned writer. I’ve spoke with her at length a couple of times, including at one of her Thursday morning coffees at the Blue Scorcher. Sanders is highly intelligent, inquisitive and not at all shy about digging in to uncover facts. She has done her research (which continues) to understand the challenges and potential of the Port. She has a strong commitment to wielding what power the Port has to drive sustainable economic growth. She’s clearly angry at the fiscal mismanagement that has left the Port struggling instead of leading. I find her to be a very realistic person who has the creativity to make the most out of what is available. This is an accessible forthright person who values transparency in government and who clearly believes in the Port’s mission to foster environmentally responsible economic development. This is the right person at the right time.
There you have it, for the Port of Astoria, Huhtala endorses:
Patrick McGee, Position 2
Bill Hunsinger, Position 3
Kathy Sanders, Position 4
Comments?
As related to the elections, May 1st is the day the ballots are to be mailed. I’m thinking that it’s getting to be time to decide which candidates to support. During my failed attempt to secure a Commission seat two years ago, the campaign was in full swing by now. The issues are similar this time around, but they’ve matured. The inadequate oversight and fiscal recklessness of the veteran commissioners, as documented in The Daily Astorian, has been added to the disrespect for the public demonstrated by the railroading of the Calpine lease. LNG is more of a side issue this election, but not insignificant.
I’ll take the plunge and let everyone know who I support, and then brace myself for your comments. First off let me say that I’m pleased that viable candidates are willing to serve, and replace the incumbents – because those currently sitting must go.
All registered voters in Clatsop County have the opportunity to vote for candidates in each of the three contested races for port commissioner. Let’s see who we have.
Okay, for Position 2, to serve out the remaining two years of Glenn Taggart’s term (Glenn resigned in the midst of controversy over possible abuse of his position for personal financial gain. There was certainly the specter of conflict-of-interest with the Western Oregon Waste transaction, some of the handling of Taggart Building project on Port property, and Floyd Holcom’s complaints. We may never know whether improprieties actually occurred, and ethics can have fuzzy lines…): Bernard Bjork, who was appointed last fall, by the other commissioners, to fill the vacancy. He fits in with that crowd, which pretty much disqualifies him. He has not distinguished himself in the time he’s served, and has even distanced himself from his old pal Commissioner Larry Pfund. I lost during the last election to Pfund, who later became so concerned about the mismanagement, secrecy and cover-ups at the Port, that he complained to the press and courageously spoke out at Commission meetings. Bjork told Pfund to stop his whining. Bjork is also a long-time LNG supporter and, incidentally spearheaded the campaign against me. No hard feelings, but please let’s give Bjork the boot.
Also up for Position 2 is John Dunzer. Well, he’s an unusual character. He’s berated the lack of intelligence of every elected official in Clatsop County, as I recall. He considers my loss in 2005 as a mandate for LNG development. He did endear himself to me when, at a candidate’s forum sponsored by the American Association of University Women, he turned to the then-current commissioners in a comment regarding the Calpine lease and said, “You fellers really screwed the pooch.” In spite of that high mark, Dunzer’s a dud.
That leaves us with Patrick McGee for Position 2. McGee is the clear choice by default, because he is not the others. But McGee is also an excellent choice. He immediately smelled the foul air around the backroom dealing of the Calpine lease. He is a powerful advocate for transparency in government, and he speaks out for government officials to be held accountable to their constituents. He has a passion for the beauty and livability of our community, and supports economic development compatible with our heritage. Some call him gruff; I call him to-the-point. I trust McGee to act conservatively with the Port finances. Sure, we disagree on some political matters, but listen folks this is a non-partisan race, and we need someone who will do right by this county. I’m pleased that Patrick McGee is willing to serve.
Now let’s look at Position 3, currently held by Jim Bergeron. Bergeron was one of the more promising commissioners years ago, but went south fast with a pre-lease endorsement of Calpine’s LNG deal. His misguided and irrational antics during the last election are only exceeded by the stubborn streak that must inspire running again. It may be a malignant form of pride. I appreciate the contributions Bergeron has made to preserving the history of fishing in this area, through his former work with Sea Grant. He’s really a pretty nice guy. But he made bad decisions around the lease, around the dredging fiasco, around management oversight, and regarding Port finances. Time to bail on Bergeron.
Fortunately, Bill Hunsinger is willing to take on Position 3. Hunsinger is a retired longshoreman with hands-on (literally) experience in a number of ports. He has not been shy in criticizing if not exposing malfeasance at the Port of Astoria. As outspoken as Hunsinger appears, he also has a level head. I have confidence that he will make informed and measured decisions as port commissioner. He wants to see jobs for our community, but he is also realistic and cautious about the type of jobs. He will be an excellent addition to the Commission.
Finally, there’s Position 4, with thick-skinned Commission President Don McDaniel facing three opponents. McDaniel has been back-peddling a bit of late, finally sort of embracing my two-year call for organizational and fiscal audits of Port structure and activities. I say “sort of” because what is underway is short of a charge to investigate the dark corners of the internal dealings (lease, dredging, insider profiteering, collusion to avoid public process) that appear to have tainted Port activities these past few years. McDaniel is a nice guy who should have stepped down. I think he’s running again fueled by that weird pride, or maybe just to prove that old guys can be tough. Dump Don.
Meet Jim Stroup, retired bar pilot, who has filed for Position 4. Actually I’m not sure where to meet him. Stroup has some experience on the Oregon Board of Maritime Pilots and as master of the State Steamship Company. I got this information from The Daily Astorian. Stroup might be okay, but where is he? I expect, perhaps unfairly, some sort of Internet presence to help me learn about the record and vision of candidates. It’s less than a month until the ballots are mailed. Time to get out of the house, if not onto the Web!
Another contender for Position 4 is Ted Thomas, who points to his political experience in the Boilermakers Union. Thomas has been a vocal critic of the Port, especially regarding procedural matters. He is a founder of Clean Slate, a PAC formed to find and support candidates to replace the incumbent port commission. Clean Slate foisted an admirable platform that emphasized open and responsive government. However, no candidates stepped forward to be embraced by (beholden to?) the PAC, so Thomas himself filed. Thomas expresses good intentions, but I don’t see him winning. He has limited ties to this area, and lacks a long-standing record regarding local issues. He also worked to defeat me in 2005. I don’t think that I hold a grudge, but Fins have long, if selective, memories.
That brings us to Position 4 candidate Kathy Sanders, probably the most capable of any in the Port race. Sanders is a former captain in the U.S. Air Force, now turned writer. I’ve spoke with her at length a couple of times, including at one of her Thursday morning coffees at the Blue Scorcher. Sanders is highly intelligent, inquisitive and not at all shy about digging in to uncover facts. She has done her research (which continues) to understand the challenges and potential of the Port. She has a strong commitment to wielding what power the Port has to drive sustainable economic growth. She’s clearly angry at the fiscal mismanagement that has left the Port struggling instead of leading. I find her to be a very realistic person who has the creativity to make the most out of what is available. This is an accessible forthright person who values transparency in government and who clearly believes in the Port’s mission to foster environmentally responsible economic development. This is the right person at the right time.
There you have it, for the Port of Astoria, Huhtala endorses:
Patrick McGee, Position 2
Bill Hunsinger, Position 3
Kathy Sanders, Position 4
Comments?
Monday, April 2, 2007
Fishing news from Zeke Grader
01:01/01. DETAILS OF BOTCHED FISHER RECRUITMENT PLAN REVEALED: The murky details of a brazen plan by a gang of U.S and Canadian fishermen to recruit young members into the fishing fleet, through raids on Indonesian orphanages, are becoming clearer from Jakarta news reports after the scheme was foiled last week by a local mullah.
Apparently the gang, with members from various fishing ports along the Pacific Coast, from California to British Columbia, frustrated by the dwindling size of their fleet and the lack of interest in fishing by local youth, decided on an aggressive recruitment plan by taking orphans and rearing them in a setting to guarantee entry into commercial fishing when the youth come of age. Three of the gang members, Toivo Fiskkonen of Sointula, BC and brothers Einar and Hjalmar Huhtalamaki of Astoria, OR are in custody in Jakarta after the plane they chartered for a flight to Yukatat, AK was stopped by authorities.
Talking to the local press for the first time, the three revealed some details of the plan. They said Indonesian orphanages were chosen because Indonesia was the one country they could find that breeds for intelligence. “We needed kids that’d be smart, not like the ones we got back home who’ve got the energy and intelligence of a piece of bait that’s been rotting on deck all week long,” said Hjalmar Huhtalamaki. “They’ve got to learn to troll and longline and do those fisheries that require some skill; this isn’t crabbing, if we wanted those fellas, we’d raided a gorilla colony.”
According to the ringleaders, the plan came about with the complicity of directors of different orphanages throughout the Indonesia. The children were to be reared in rural areas of Alaska “where’s there no damn videogames or cell phones,” given a traditional education, provided a small caliber rifle and fishing pole to become self-sufficient, and spend their summers on board fishing boats. After high school, the plan called for sending the youth to small liberal arts colleges in the Midwest where they’d be English or philosophy majors. The idea was to build a cadre of young fishing men and women who were extremely literate, critical thinkers and could not possibly find employment ashore.
“We need good young people who know how to fish and aren’t afraid to take on those bastard bureaucrats and those goddam environmental whores turning tricks for their corporate funders by making deals that are bad for the fish,” mused Huhtalamaki.
Fiskkonen said the three had been inspired by the stories of their great grandfathers who were drafted by the Czar, “because he needed smart Finns to man his ships, not those dumb Ruskies.” Many of these men later jumped ship when arriving in North American ports.
The scheme was thwarted after a mullah who worked with one of the orphanages learned of the plan. Upset that the children might not be taught the tenets of Islam if they were sent to the wilds of Alaska, he notified local law enforcement.
“We never gave organized religion much thought,” explained Einar Huhtalamaki. “We just figured we’d raise them Lutheran, but if they wanted to be Catholic, or Jewish, or Buddhist, or Quaker, or whatever, that’d be okay. We don’t have any problem with them being Muslim either. Hell, when you’re in a storm and your boat’s taking on water, we’re all peeing our pants and praying to the same god, anyway.”
The release of the three appears imminent with a deal that involves taking the mullah with them to assist in the teaching of the children and a promise that each child would be given a waterproof Helly Hansen prayer rug and a compass so they’d know which direction to pray when in the fog. The flight, however, will have to be diverted to Vancouver, after U.S. Homeland Security officials put the group on its terrorist watch list. Other gang members in the U.S. are reportedly being rounded up at the Pacific Fishery Management Council meeting in Seattle and sent on flights under the government’s extreme rendition program.
Apparently the gang, with members from various fishing ports along the Pacific Coast, from California to British Columbia, frustrated by the dwindling size of their fleet and the lack of interest in fishing by local youth, decided on an aggressive recruitment plan by taking orphans and rearing them in a setting to guarantee entry into commercial fishing when the youth come of age. Three of the gang members, Toivo Fiskkonen of Sointula, BC and brothers Einar and Hjalmar Huhtalamaki of Astoria, OR are in custody in Jakarta after the plane they chartered for a flight to Yukatat, AK was stopped by authorities.
Talking to the local press for the first time, the three revealed some details of the plan. They said Indonesian orphanages were chosen because Indonesia was the one country they could find that breeds for intelligence. “We needed kids that’d be smart, not like the ones we got back home who’ve got the energy and intelligence of a piece of bait that’s been rotting on deck all week long,” said Hjalmar Huhtalamaki. “They’ve got to learn to troll and longline and do those fisheries that require some skill; this isn’t crabbing, if we wanted those fellas, we’d raided a gorilla colony.”
According to the ringleaders, the plan came about with the complicity of directors of different orphanages throughout the Indonesia. The children were to be reared in rural areas of Alaska “where’s there no damn videogames or cell phones,” given a traditional education, provided a small caliber rifle and fishing pole to become self-sufficient, and spend their summers on board fishing boats. After high school, the plan called for sending the youth to small liberal arts colleges in the Midwest where they’d be English or philosophy majors. The idea was to build a cadre of young fishing men and women who were extremely literate, critical thinkers and could not possibly find employment ashore.
“We need good young people who know how to fish and aren’t afraid to take on those bastard bureaucrats and those goddam environmental whores turning tricks for their corporate funders by making deals that are bad for the fish,” mused Huhtalamaki.
Fiskkonen said the three had been inspired by the stories of their great grandfathers who were drafted by the Czar, “because he needed smart Finns to man his ships, not those dumb Ruskies.” Many of these men later jumped ship when arriving in North American ports.
The scheme was thwarted after a mullah who worked with one of the orphanages learned of the plan. Upset that the children might not be taught the tenets of Islam if they were sent to the wilds of Alaska, he notified local law enforcement.
“We never gave organized religion much thought,” explained Einar Huhtalamaki. “We just figured we’d raise them Lutheran, but if they wanted to be Catholic, or Jewish, or Buddhist, or Quaker, or whatever, that’d be okay. We don’t have any problem with them being Muslim either. Hell, when you’re in a storm and your boat’s taking on water, we’re all peeing our pants and praying to the same god, anyway.”
The release of the three appears imminent with a deal that involves taking the mullah with them to assist in the teaching of the children and a promise that each child would be given a waterproof Helly Hansen prayer rug and a compass so they’d know which direction to pray when in the fog. The flight, however, will have to be diverted to Vancouver, after U.S. Homeland Security officials put the group on its terrorist watch list. Other gang members in the U.S. are reportedly being rounded up at the Pacific Fishery Management Council meeting in Seattle and sent on flights under the government’s extreme rendition program.
Sunday, April 1, 2007
Another blogger emerges from the estuary
Well, it's true that I live in the region of the Columbia River estuary, and I'm so glad that I do. I'm just settling in after about three weeks on the road, mostly on the East Coast. The best parts of that journey were seeing my son, Ivan, and his girlfriend Cindi on St. Patrick's Day, and staying with my daughter, Nirvana, and her husband, Scott. What delightful people my children have grown into!
I also had the opportunity to participate in a short story discussion group in Washington, DC. These people have been meeting once a month for ten years! We read "Clay" from the Dubliners by James Joyce, and spent a solid hour dissecting the story and offering competing theories regarding Joyce's intent. Delighthful.
Most of the rest of the trip was politics and activist shenanigans. I joined Columbia Riverkeeper and a gang of citizens in filing a fraud complaint in DC regarding documentation for an initial public offering of Northern Star Natural Gas, one of the LNG speculators casting their unwelcome shadows on this precious estuary. A batch of us took a Chinatown bus to New York City to further protest the IPO at NASDAQ, Matlin Patterson (controlling interest) and Citigroup (the underwriter). We had to pick the day of a sleet and snow storm - although it was auspiciously St. Urho's Day.
I eventually found my way back to DC for many meetings - including numerous discussions with Congressional staff and sometimes their bosses - on LNG, on fish, on the future of this country.
A major highlight of the trip was the Board of Advisors meeting for the Marine Fish Conservation Network. What an incredible, bright, strategic and fun group of people. Of course the DC time would not have been complete without dining and socializing at The Reef - one of my favorite Adams Morgan haunts.
I also had the opportunity to participate in a short story discussion group in Washington, DC. These people have been meeting once a month for ten years! We read "Clay" from the Dubliners by James Joyce, and spent a solid hour dissecting the story and offering competing theories regarding Joyce's intent. Delighthful.
Most of the rest of the trip was politics and activist shenanigans. I joined Columbia Riverkeeper and a gang of citizens in filing a fraud complaint in DC regarding documentation for an initial public offering of Northern Star Natural Gas, one of the LNG speculators casting their unwelcome shadows on this precious estuary. A batch of us took a Chinatown bus to New York City to further protest the IPO at NASDAQ, Matlin Patterson (controlling interest) and Citigroup (the underwriter). We had to pick the day of a sleet and snow storm - although it was auspiciously St. Urho's Day.
I eventually found my way back to DC for many meetings - including numerous discussions with Congressional staff and sometimes their bosses - on LNG, on fish, on the future of this country.
A major highlight of the trip was the Board of Advisors meeting for the Marine Fish Conservation Network. What an incredible, bright, strategic and fun group of people. Of course the DC time would not have been complete without dining and socializing at The Reef - one of my favorite Adams Morgan haunts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)