October is National Seafood Month and the fish on your plate might not be coming from where you think.

The U.S. imports 90% of the seafood it consumes. Offshore fish farming has come to dominate wild harvest in recent decades, with farmed salmon making up 80% of global salmon supply. Oregon does not have regulations to stop the practice.

Johnny Fishmonger, executive director of the group Wild Salmon Nation, said legislation proposed in Congress could make fish farming more prevalent in federal waters. He compared large-scale fish farming practices to dairy and poultry farms.

"It's like on land -- concentrated animal feedlot operations, CAFO -- so concentrated aquaculture feedlot operations where the fish are farmed intensely in high densities," Fishmonger explained.

Fishmonger noted sea lice infestations are common and devastating problems for fish farms. The AQUAA Act would allow aquaculture companies three miles offshore in federal waters. The SEAfood Act would create aquaculture assessment and grant programs. Supporters of large aquaculture operations said they are needed to feed the world's population.

Fishmonger stressed the aquaculture companies wanting to operate in federal waters are not mom-and-pop operations.

"One of the real distressing parts of that is there's no such thing as a small, family owned fish farm, except for like trout farms on land," Fishmonger contended. "Every farm in the ocean has been taken over by huge, multinational corporations."

Rob Seitz, a fishing boat captain, who opened South Bay Wild Fish House in Astoria, said there is other legislation to boost his line of work, the Domestic Seafood Production Act. The bill would require congressional approval for offshore aquaculture operations and invest in local fishing communities. Seitz argued fewer fish farms would be good for the environment.

"Wild catch fishing has the lowest carbon footprint of any form of food production," Seitz pointed out. "All of our fisheries in this country are sustainable pretty much now."


get more stories like this via email

During President Joe Biden's final weeks in office, the Interior Department has announced $41 million in support of water resources and ecosystem health, including two projects in Montana.

The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law will fund work to restore irrigation channels in two Western Montana watersheds.

Chris Edgington, Jefferson watershed project manager for Montana Trout Unlimited, one of the partner groups, called federal funding "critical" to support conservation work, which also benefits agricultural producers.

"We're working with a landowner who voluntarily gives water back to the river for fish," Edgington explained. "It's a great partnership and a 'win-win' project."

More than $1 million will help restore nearly 8,000 feet of side channel and critical trout habitat along the Jefferson River and $1.3 million more will restore nearly 11,000 feet of stream bank and five acres of flood plains on Flint Creek.

Tess Scanlon, project manager for Trout Unlimited, who will oversee the Flint Creek project, said riparian habitat and water quality have degraded due to historical mining, grazing, road-building and other land uses. The effects are extensive, she added.

"Different land use practices have reduced vegetation along the stream banks," Scanlon pointed out. "Which, of course, then impacts habitat quality, has degraded in-stream channel conditions for fish, and has a lot of long term-impacts on stream bank erosion, which affects downstream water quality."

Scanlon noted the solution means rebuilding habitat and stabilizing stream banks with plantings and natural materials, and building fencing and off-stream stock water sources to protect the water and help livestock managers.


get more stories like this via email

The Environmental Protection Agency would be in charge of protecting and restoring the Ohio River Basin under recently proposed legislation by Reps. Morgan McGarvey, D-Ky., and Erin Houchin, R-Ind.

Other waterways around the country, such as the Chesapeake Bay and the Great Lakes, have dedicated federal restoration funding, but the Ohio River does not, said Michael Washburn, executive director of the Kentucky Waterways Alliance. He added that a large portion of the nation's commerce relies on the 204,000-square-mile river basin.

"What this means," he said, "is that we've had decades, if not longer, of people, communities and industries treating the river more like a machine than like an abundant natural resource that it is."

The Ohio River Restoration Program Act would require monitoring and data collection, habitat restoration, farm conservation, invasive-species control and management, support for homeowners concerned about their local watershed, and investments that help communities prepare for the impacts of extreme storms and flooding.

A 2023 report by American Rivers found the Ohio River is the second most endangered waterway in the nation.

Heavy industry dumped more toxic pollution into the Ohio River watershed than any other in the United States in 2020, according to data from Environment America. Washburn pointed to mounting challenges, such as addressing PFAS contamination, which makes the need for federal funding even more critical.

"Twenty-five million people live in the basin," he said. "Five million of those folks directly get their drinking water from the main stem, but many millions of other folks get their drinking water from tributaries that are also in peril that need help. "

A recent poll from the Environmental Protection Network found nearly 70% of voters say they want the EPA to implement federal protections, such as the Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act.


get more stories like this via email

More than 143 million Americans are at risk of toxic PFAS, so-called forever chemicals, in their drinking water, according to new test results released by the Environmental Protection Agency and with just 40% of water systems fully tested, the number is expected to rise.

Even low doses of PFAS have been linked to compromised immune systems, fetal harm and cancer.

Ken Sansone, attorney at SL Environmental Law Group, said PFAS, developed by companies including 3M and DuPont, are both very useful but very dangerous.

"It was used in thousands of different kinds of consumer and commercial products, including food packaging, cleaning products, cosmetics, cookware, stain resistant coverings for clothing and furniture and carpets," Sansone outlined. "The list goes on."

The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment has identified 27 water systems, serving 268,000 customers, exceeding new federal PFAS standards. Colorado lawmakers have moved to phase out PFAS use by 2028, and last year extended restrictions to include cookware, dental floss, menstruation products and others.

Sansone pointed out despite sizable legal settlements with PFAS producers, it will not be enough to cover the costs of shoring up water treatment systems. The American Waterworks Association projects the cost of compliance will be well over $50 billion.

"There's going to be some costs here that ultimately ratepayers at these water utilities are going to remain on the hook for," Sansone emphasized.

The Environmental Working Group estimated nearly 30,000 industrial polluters are still releasing PFAS chemicals. Sansone noted the new drinking water restrictions on PFAS, the equivalent of four drops in 20 Olympic-sized swimming pools, will apply to every public water system in the nation.

"They will need to ensure within the next few years that the water they are serving to their customers does not exceed these limits," Sansone stressed. "They are very low limits. For PFOS and PFOA, they are set at four parts per trillion."


get more stories like this via email