The author’s statement that aquaculture is not being “seriously questioned” shows the general lack of understanding of the peer-reviewed research that has taken place over the last 40 years by private industry as well as the government entities responsible for such research and its review.
The individuals represented in the shellfish initiative article know that the science, which says shellfish are good for Puget Sound, is valid.
What shellfish farmers, as well as any other business that necessitate regulatory oversight require, is a predictable, reasonable regulatory process that allows for federal, state and local regulatory processes to be uniform, not redundant; a timeline that is reasonable in length; and reviews that are comprehensible and non-contradictory.
It is an absolute necessity to be able to assure a business and the people it employs, as well the investors who may be dependent on its success, a regulatory framework that makes a clear, concise pathway and timeline for the issuance of required permits.
If the shellfish initiative is indeed in earnest and streamlining is accomplished, the public will be better served in their rightful ability to review the legal and scientific facts and allow the state required and county managed shoreline master program to function as intended.
