Sure:dwashbur wrote: So why don't you? I hate generalizations like this. If you can name half a dozen, please do so.
****
While I can respect what it takes to get a PH.D. (I never got to finish mine), a degree is by no means a guarantee of either expertise or, more importantly, objectivity. My objection to the whole oil dock thing is the destruction of the life that's already there. And if John is correct, that the end result is basically a "scorched earth" approach, then we're not just talking about the destruction of what's there, but the absence of anything to replace it and virtually ensuring that nothing can grow there. I tend to suspect that's at least as bad as the whole creosote thing, maybe worse.
There are two in the planning stages in the Duwamish (within 5 miles of Elliott Bay, and tidally influenced, I'd call that Puget Sound). There are ~10 projects associated with Commencement Bay that have recently been completed. I believe the Tulalip Landfill has a NRD mitigation project associated with it, and the gas pipeline rupture up in Bellingham had some NRD work associated with it.
WSDOT does mitigation banking, but those might be more in rivers draining to the Sound. Port Gamble's cleanup has been taken over by Ecology (I believe) and has mitigation/habitat restoration as a part of it. If I had to hazard a guess, the Port Angeles cleanup has habitat restoration as a part of it, and I know that King County as well as the City of Seattle have performed small habitat projects within Elliott Bay in the last ten years. And, I'm recalling a big wetlands project in Everett, but can't remember its name.
This doesn't really touch on mitigation required by CWA 404 or 401 permits/certifications, or as conditions on shoreline development.
As for the educational comment, I agree in an abstract sense. Since I waved that thing around (something I rarely do), here is my background:
I went to UCSC, and spent two years helping teach an aquatic toxicology class, as well as working in an environmental toxicology lab who's primary responsibility was the Regional Monitoring Project for San Francisco Bay, a program funded by dischargers and administered by the San Francisco Estuary Institute. SFEI is basically responsible for studying and helping guide the restoration of San Francisco Bay. I'm a lawyer now, so my knowledge of the state of the science is admittedly limited, but things like creosote pilings I have a decent understanding of.