Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Could a ban on sea farms save Canada’s salmon?

News Feed
Thursday, October 3, 2024

On a clear August morning, Skookum John manoeuvres his fishing boat, Sweet Marie, out of the Tofino harbour and into the deep blue waters of Clayoquot Sound on Canada’s west coast.On shore, the late summer sun shines on visitors from all over the world who have flocked to the bustling fishing town on Vancouver Island, where they wander in and out of surf shops, art galleries and restaurants and pile into small boats in the hope of glimpsing orca, humpback and grey whales.“You’ll never find this anywhere in the world,” John says, gesturing through the Sweet Marie’s window at the mosaic of islands and mountains, cloaked in thick green rainforests, that form part of the Clayoquot Sound Unesco biosphere reserve.The Sweet Marie motors deeper into Clayoquot Sound, past a web of inviting channels and inlets, and cruises past a raft of sea otters resting in the gentle swells. Hunted nearly to extinction, sea otters are one of the celebrated species found in the reserve, along with sea lions, seals, wild salmon and bald eagles.Dan Lewis, co-founder of Clayoquot Action, with a map of the fish farms in Clayoquot Sound. Photograph: Jeremy MathieuJohn, a member of Ahousaht First Nation, makes his living on the water, where he helps train coast guard members in marine rescue, ferries passengers to islands and hot springs and takes visitors on whale watching tours. Today, he is taking members of Clayoquot Action, a conservation group focused on protecting wild salmon, to the site of one of the area’s more controversial industries: open-net pen salmon farms.Dan Lewis, the co-founder and executive director of Clayoquot Action, is incredulous that industrial salmon farming is allowed to take place in a globally recognised protected area. “Why are we doing this here?” he says, gesturing at the rich waters, home to a colourful array of sea life that includes giant rock scallops, tufted anemones in green, pink and white, dark green kelp forests, red sea urchins and purple-tinged Dungeness crabs.Clayoquot Sound is also home to some of the last 60 salmon farms left on North America’s west coast. For decades, as many as 100 farms in Canadian waters have raised mostly non-native Atlantic salmon in pens in the Pacific Ocean.A farm uses a semi-closed containment system, which reduces the exposure of wild fish to sea lice. Photograph: Jeremy MathieuBut now the salmon farming industry, blamed for contributing to the collapse of wild salmon stocks, faces an uncertain future. In June, the Canadian government announced a ban on open-net pen salmon farming from coastal waters in July 2029, as part of a commitment “to protecting wild salmon and promoting more sustainable aquaculture practices”.Concerns about the industry’s impact on wild salmon played a leading role in the closure of about three dozen farms in British Columbia over the past seven years, after Clayoquot Action and other groups documented sea lice outbreaks and other diseases in farmed fish, including at farms along migration routes for wild salmon.The decision to ban all remaining British Columbia farms, lauded by conservation groups and wild salmon advocates, has been soundly criticised by Canada’s salmon farming industry, which largely consists of multinational corporations that farm salmon around the world, including in the UK. The industry says moving salmon farming to closed containment systems on land or in the water, as the government suggests, is not logistically feasible and would be prohibitively expensive.A coho salmon smolt infected with sea lice. Photograph: Fernando Lessa/AlamyFor John, who has been campaigning against salmon farms since 2015, the Canadian government’s new 2029 deadline may just be an empty promise, after its earlier, unfulfilled commitment to remove open-net pen salmon farms by 2025. “I won’t believe anything that the government says until I see it happen,” he says, as the Sweet Marie slowly circles a floating salmon farm in a small bay, barely a stone’s throw from the seaweed-strewn shore.John’s scepticism is shared by Hasheukumiss, hereditary chief of the Ahousaht Nation and president of the Maaqutusiis Hahoulthee Stewardship Society, which manages economic development for the nation. But the two men have very different perspectives on the salmon farming industry, mirroring broader divisions about whether open-net pen farms should be allowed to operate in Canadian waters.Hasheukumiss, Richard George, says sea lice and the pathogens are his main concerns. Photograph: The Canadian Press/AlamyIn 2010, the Ahousaht Nation signed an agreement allowing Cermaq Global, a Mitsubishi subsidiary that also farms salmon and trout in Norway and Chile, to operate in its territorial waters. The agreement was subsequently renewed with changes, according to Hasheukumiss, also known as Richard George.“One of the things that I wanted to address was the environmental concerns because we are the true stewards of our back yard,” he says. “It was the sea lice and the pathogens that were the biggest concerns we had.”According to Hasheukumiss, Cermaq was responsive and worked with the nation to address that concern.Hasheukumiss’ assessment of the Canadian government’s handling of fish farms is less rosy. Since he inherited his title in 2020, he says he has discussed the issue with three different cabinet ministers, yet has seen little in the way of consultation with his nation.A five-year transition away from open-net pen farms is not a realistic timeframe for the industry, he says. “In five years, there is no way this industry – or any industry – can go to fully contained systems.”As the Sweet Marie noses slowly towards a rectangle of floating walkways bordered by black net fencing, John stands and slips the engine into neutral. He calls out to one of the salmon-farm workers, jokingly asking why he’s pretending to be busy. It’s his nephew, who recently started working at the Cermaq farm, one of 13 facilities in Clayoquot Sound that employ about 20 Ahousaht members.The two chat while Lewis stands at the Sweet Marie’s bow, peering through the nets to get a view into the pens, as part of the group’s regular monitoring of the industry’s operations.Sweet Marie approaches Cermaq’s fish farm and delousing boat, Aqua Service. Photograph: Jeremy MathieuAt an unstocked salmon farm nearby, the Cermaq’s delousing boat, Aqua Service, towers over the Sweet Marie from its berth. The vessel has a large rear deck fitted with a patented delousing system, which pulls fish from the pens and uses seawater to flush off the lice. The treatment process takes just two tenths of a second, aiming to reduce stress and fish deaths.In Ahousaht territory, Cermaq has been experimenting with technology to reduce the industry’s impact on wild salmon. A semi-closed containment system – consisting of a semi-permeable bag that stretches 25 metres below the water – is used to raise young salmon smolts while reducing their exposure to sea lice. The bag draws water from deep in the water column where sea lice can’t survive.Fewer sea lice on the farmed smolts make it less likely wild salmon swimming past the farms will pick up the parasites. After a year, the young salmon are moved to open-net pens to grow to marketable size.The semi-closed containment system Cermaq is trialling is expensive – costing C$20,000 (£11,000) a month in diesel alone. Brian Kingzett, executive director of the BC Salmon Farmers Association, representing Cermaq and other companies, says there is little appetite to make big investments and navigate the time-consuming licensing process for new technology, especially with the future of the industry in question.In 2022, conservationists highlighted the risks of salmon farms to wildlife after sea lions broke into a Cermaq farm off the coast of British Colombia. Photograph: Jeremy Mathieu/Clayoquot Action“There are lots of reasons why farmers want to go to closed containment for that first year; Cermaq has been trying to do it,” he says. “It took them six years to get a licence. We only have a five-year window.”Kingzett says the industry was “completely gobsmacked” by the Canadian government’s decision to remove open-net pen salmon farms by 2029, calling closed containment “an unfeasible option”.Setting up a medium-sized land-based salmon farm, capable of producing 5,000 tonnes of fish a year, could cost C$1.8bn (£1bn), according to a 2022 report commissioned by the British Columbia government. The report’s authors said it was difficult to estimate the costs of setting up large-scale farms because there are no land-based salmon farms in the world that are reliably producing large amounts of fish.BC’s first land-based salmon farm, Kuterra, is now raising steelhead trout, after achieving barely one-third of its production target, according to the BC government report. Another land-based venture, West Creek, has stopped farming salmon altogether. And on the other side of the country on the Atlantic coast, a land-based salmon farm, Sustainable Blue, suffered a mass die-off, reportedly because of an equipment malfunction, and is now in receivership.But Lewis says closed containment systems on land are the only option if the Canadian government is serious about protecting wild salmon stocks.“To our understanding, there is nothing that can actually have zero discharge that’s in the water,” Lewis says. “What we want to see in the next five years is all the farms come out of the water. We don’t believe there are any in-water solutions.”Kingzett says closing down open-net pen salmon farms will harm small coastal communities. Any land-based containment systems will need to be close to plentiful power and water supplies, not to mention customers, he says.Skookum John has campaigned against salmon farms in Ahousaht territory for almost a decade. Photograph: Jeremy MathieuIf BC’s salmon farms disappear, Kingzett is confident farmed salmon will still be sold in the country’s supermarkets – but it will come from places such as Chile and Norway.Inside the Sweet Marie’s cabin, John has placed a sticker with the hashtag #FishFarmsOut near the helm. He is eager for the industry to leave Ahousaht territory, even if it means losing the money fish farming has brought to the community.“Wealth isn’t money,” he says. “What we have in our territory, what we have in the ocean, what we have in the air, that’s wealth.”

A row over sea life, lice and livelihoods is dividing communities as the government plans to end open-net pen farming in British Columbian watersOn a clear August morning, Skookum John manoeuvres his fishing boat, Sweet Marie, out of the Tofino harbour and into the deep blue waters of Clayoquot Sound on Canada’s west coast.On shore, the late summer sun shines on visitors from all over the world who have flocked to the bustling fishing town on Vancouver Island, where they wander in and out of surf shops, art galleries and restaurants and pile into small boats in the hope of glimpsing orca, humpback and grey whales. Continue reading...

On a clear August morning, Skookum John manoeuvres his fishing boat, Sweet Marie, out of the Tofino harbour and into the deep blue waters of Clayoquot Sound on Canada’s west coast.

On shore, the late summer sun shines on visitors from all over the world who have flocked to the bustling fishing town on Vancouver Island, where they wander in and out of surf shops, art galleries and restaurants and pile into small boats in the hope of glimpsing orca, humpback and grey whales.

“You’ll never find this anywhere in the world,” John says, gesturing through the Sweet Marie’s window at the mosaic of islands and mountains, cloaked in thick green rainforests, that form part of the Clayoquot Sound Unesco biosphere reserve.

The Sweet Marie motors deeper into Clayoquot Sound, past a web of inviting channels and inlets, and cruises past a raft of sea otters resting in the gentle swells. Hunted nearly to extinction, sea otters are one of the celebrated species found in the reserve, along with sea lions, seals, wild salmon and bald eagles.

Dan Lewis, co-founder of Clayoquot Action, with a map of the fish farms in Clayoquot Sound. Photograph: Jeremy Mathieu

John, a member of Ahousaht First Nation, makes his living on the water, where he helps train coast guard members in marine rescue, ferries passengers to islands and hot springs and takes visitors on whale watching tours. Today, he is taking members of Clayoquot Action, a conservation group focused on protecting wild salmon, to the site of one of the area’s more controversial industries: open-net pen salmon farms.

Dan Lewis, the co-founder and executive director of Clayoquot Action, is incredulous that industrial salmon farming is allowed to take place in a globally recognised protected area. “Why are we doing this here?” he says, gesturing at the rich waters, home to a colourful array of sea life that includes giant rock scallops, tufted anemones in green, pink and white, dark green kelp forests, red sea urchins and purple-tinged Dungeness crabs.

Clayoquot Sound is also home to some of the last 60 salmon farms left on North America’s west coast. For decades, as many as 100 farms in Canadian waters have raised mostly non-native Atlantic salmon in pens in the Pacific Ocean.

A farm uses a semi-closed containment system, which reduces the exposure of wild fish to sea lice. Photograph: Jeremy Mathieu

But now the salmon farming industry, blamed for contributing to the collapse of wild salmon stocks, faces an uncertain future. In June, the Canadian government announced a ban on open-net pen salmon farming from coastal waters in July 2029, as part of a commitment “to protecting wild salmon and promoting more sustainable aquaculture practices”.

Concerns about the industry’s impact on wild salmon played a leading role in the closure of about three dozen farms in British Columbia over the past seven years, after Clayoquot Action and other groups documented sea lice outbreaks and other diseases in farmed fish, including at farms along migration routes for wild salmon.


The decision to ban all remaining British Columbia farms, lauded by conservation groups and wild salmon advocates, has been soundly criticised by Canada’s salmon farming industry, which largely consists of multinational corporations that farm salmon around the world, including in the UK. The industry says moving salmon farming to closed containment systems on land or in the water, as the government suggests, is not logistically feasible and would be prohibitively expensive.

A coho salmon smolt infected with sea lice. Photograph: Fernando Lessa/Alamy

For John, who has been campaigning against salmon farms since 2015, the Canadian government’s new 2029 deadline may just be an empty promise, after its earlier, unfulfilled commitment to remove open-net pen salmon farms by 2025. “I won’t believe anything that the government says until I see it happen,” he says, as the Sweet Marie slowly circles a floating salmon farm in a small bay, barely a stone’s throw from the seaweed-strewn shore.

John’s scepticism is shared by Hasheukumiss, hereditary chief of the Ahousaht Nation and president of the Maaqutusiis Hahoulthee Stewardship Society, which manages economic development for the nation. But the two men have very different perspectives on the salmon farming industry, mirroring broader divisions about whether open-net pen farms should be allowed to operate in Canadian waters.

Hasheukumiss, Richard George, says sea lice and the pathogens are his main concerns. Photograph: The Canadian Press/Alamy

In 2010, the Ahousaht Nation signed an agreement allowing Cermaq Global, a Mitsubishi subsidiary that also farms salmon and trout in Norway and Chile, to operate in its territorial waters. The agreement was subsequently renewed with changes, according to Hasheukumiss, also known as Richard George.

“One of the things that I wanted to address was the environmental concerns because we are the true stewards of our back yard,” he says. “It was the sea lice and the pathogens that were the biggest concerns we had.”

According to Hasheukumiss, Cermaq was responsive and worked with the nation to address that concern.

Hasheukumiss’ assessment of the Canadian government’s handling of fish farms is less rosy. Since he inherited his title in 2020, he says he has discussed the issue with three different cabinet ministers, yet has seen little in the way of consultation with his nation.

A five-year transition away from open-net pen farms is not a realistic timeframe for the industry, he says. “In five years, there is no way this industry – or any industry – can go to fully contained systems.”


As the Sweet Marie noses slowly towards a rectangle of floating walkways bordered by black net fencing, John stands and slips the engine into neutral. He calls out to one of the salmon-farm workers, jokingly asking why he’s pretending to be busy. It’s his nephew, who recently started working at the Cermaq farm, one of 13 facilities in Clayoquot Sound that employ about 20 Ahousaht members.

The two chat while Lewis stands at the Sweet Marie’s bow, peering through the nets to get a view into the pens, as part of the group’s regular monitoring of the industry’s operations.

Sweet Marie approaches Cermaq’s fish farm and delousing boat, Aqua Service. Photograph: Jeremy Mathieu

At an unstocked salmon farm nearby, the Cermaq’s delousing boat, Aqua Service, towers over the Sweet Marie from its berth. The vessel has a large rear deck fitted with a patented delousing system, which pulls fish from the pens and uses seawater to flush off the lice. The treatment process takes just two tenths of a second, aiming to reduce stress and fish deaths.

In Ahousaht territory, Cermaq has been experimenting with technology to reduce the industry’s impact on wild salmon. A semi-closed containment system – consisting of a semi-permeable bag that stretches 25 metres below the water – is used to raise young salmon smolts while reducing their exposure to sea lice. The bag draws water from deep in the water column where sea lice can’t survive.

Fewer sea lice on the farmed smolts make it less likely wild salmon swimming past the farms will pick up the parasites. After a year, the young salmon are moved to open-net pens to grow to marketable size.

The semi-closed containment system Cermaq is trialling is expensive – costing C$20,000 (£11,000) a month in diesel alone. Brian Kingzett, executive director of the BC Salmon Farmers Association, representing Cermaq and other companies, says there is little appetite to make big investments and navigate the time-consuming licensing process for new technology, especially with the future of the industry in question.

In 2022, conservationists highlighted the risks of salmon farms to wildlife after sea lions broke into a Cermaq farm off the coast of British Colombia. Photograph: Jeremy Mathieu/Clayoquot Action

“There are lots of reasons why farmers want to go to closed containment for that first year; Cermaq has been trying to do it,” he says. “It took them six years to get a licence. We only have a five-year window.”

Kingzett says the industry was “completely gobsmacked” by the Canadian government’s decision to remove open-net pen salmon farms by 2029, calling closed containment “an unfeasible option”.

Setting up a medium-sized land-based salmon farm, capable of producing 5,000 tonnes of fish a year, could cost C$1.8bn (£1bn), according to a 2022 report commissioned by the British Columbia government. The report’s authors said it was difficult to estimate the costs of setting up large-scale farms because there are no land-based salmon farms in the world that are reliably producing large amounts of fish.

BC’s first land-based salmon farm, Kuterra, is now raising steelhead trout, after achieving barely one-third of its production target, according to the BC government report. Another land-based venture, West Creek, has stopped farming salmon altogether. And on the other side of the country on the Atlantic coast, a land-based salmon farm, Sustainable Blue, suffered a mass die-off, reportedly because of an equipment malfunction, and is now in receivership.

But Lewis says closed containment systems on land are the only option if the Canadian government is serious about protecting wild salmon stocks.

“To our understanding, there is nothing that can actually have zero discharge that’s in the water,” Lewis says. “What we want to see in the next five years is all the farms come out of the water. We don’t believe there are any in-water solutions.”

Kingzett says closing down open-net pen salmon farms will harm small coastal communities. Any land-based containment systems will need to be close to plentiful power and water supplies, not to mention customers, he says.

Skookum John has campaigned against salmon farms in Ahousaht territory for almost a decade. Photograph: Jeremy Mathieu

If BC’s salmon farms disappear, Kingzett is confident farmed salmon will still be sold in the country’s supermarkets – but it will come from places such as Chile and Norway.

Inside the Sweet Marie’s cabin, John has placed a sticker with the hashtag #FishFarmsOut near the helm. He is eager for the industry to leave Ahousaht territory, even if it means losing the money fish farming has brought to the community.

“Wealth isn’t money,” he says. “What we have in our territory, what we have in the ocean, what we have in the air, that’s wealth.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

England facing drastic measures due to extreme drought next year

Government and water companies are devising emergency plans for worst water shortage in decadesWater companies and the government are drawing up emergency plans for a drought next year more extreme than we have seen in decades.Executives at one major water company told the Guardian they were extremely concerned about the prospect of a winter with lower than average rainfall, which the Met Office’s long-term forecast says is likely. They said if this happened, the water shortfall would mean taking drastic water use curtailment measures “going beyond hosepipe bans”. Continue reading...

Water companies and the government are drawing up emergency plans for a drought next year more extreme than we have seen in decades.Executives at one major water company told the Guardian they were extremely concerned about the prospect of a winter with lower than average rainfall, which the Met Office’s long-term forecast says is likely. They said if this happened, the water shortfall would mean taking drastic water use curtailment measures “going beyond hosepipe bans”.Droughts are usually multi-year events. While much of England went into drought this summer, with hosepipe bans across large swathes of the country, things were not as bad as they could have been because it had been a rainy autumn and winter the year before. This meant reservoirs were full and that groundwater – storage of water under the soil – was charged up.But months of record dry weather meant a lot of that water was used, and it has not been replaced, despite roughly average September and October rainfall. Average reservoir storage is at 63.3% compared with the average of 76% for this time of year. Ardingly, in West Sussex, and Clatworthy and Wimbleball in Somerset, are below 30%.Groundwater takes significantly longer than reservoirs to recharge, and the situation in England is still fragile despite recent rainfall; South East Water has applied for a local water restriction order, which would ban some businesses from using water for certain things, such as cleaning buildings and equipment or filling hotel pools.Alastair Chisholm, the director of policy and external affairs at the Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management, said: “In UK drought management terms, a second dry winter is when things start to get serious. So Met Office warnings of increased risk of dry spells through an important time of year for recharge of our water resources will ring alarm bells. This, coupled with dry weather next spring and summer will mean more drought orders – more abstraction from rivers when they’re at low levels, more hosepipe bans and likely restrictions on some business water use.”England has a lack of water resilience, with a growing population, higher risks of hot, dry summers and the fact no new major reservoir has been built in more than 30 years. This means that the country is reliant on consistent rainfall to keep taps running, and when we do not get it, rivers have to be sucked dry and hosepipe bans imposed.Chisholm said building new reservoirs was not enough, and that water efficiency measures for businesses and homes could be taken very quickly, for example by stopping leaks, more widespread smart metering and ensuring water-efficient appliances were installed in new homes.He said: “Whilst government has been fixated on announcing new reservoirs it’s been far less proactive or ambitious on its water efficiency policies. Reservoirs will take decades to build whilst water users can be supported to reduce their consumption quickly. This is nonsensical. It’s not an either-or question on these. We’re a densely populated nation facing increasingly extreme and variable weather, with growing water demand to support new homes, datacentres, food production and more. Without new reservoirs and leakage reductions alongside ambitious water efficiency and domestic or development-level rainwater harvesting and reuse, droughts are likely to become a growing problem for the UK.”The drought is expected to continue into next year. If that happens, and we have a spring and summer with below-average rainfall, England runs a risk of running out of water.The Met Office’s chief meteorologist, Dr Will Lang, said: “This year has been characterised by notable rainfall deficits across much of England. By 28 October, provisional data shows England had only 61% of its expected annual rainfall, when we’d normally have about 80% at this time of the year (based on 1991–2020 average).“Looking ahead, there is an increased risk of dry spells through late autumn and early winter and regional differences in rainfall continue to be likely. Without sustained and widespread precipitation, a consistent recovery from drought remains uncertain.”Water minister Emma Hardy said: “We are closely monitoring all regions – especially those still experiencing drought – and working with the National Drought Group and water companies to maintain supplies. We face increasing pressure on our water resources. That is why this government is taking decisive action, including the development of nine new reservoirs to help secure long-term water resilience.”Hydrologists are alarmed by the extent of the drought and the very real possibility it could cause problems next summer. The strategy of waiting for significant rain carries big risks.Prof Hannah Cloke, a professor of hydrology at the University of Reading, said: “We now need exceptional rainfall all winter just to recover. Even with recent improvements in some areas, many drought orders and hosepipe bans are staying in place. That tells you how serious the water resource deficit really is. Some reservoirs are sitting at less than a third of their capacity, which is alarming at this point in the year.“With climate change drying Britain out for longer periods in the future, we need to adapt to the climate we have now. Building new reservoirs will help, but we also need much more management of demand, and a more ambitious plan for water resilience.”Dr Megan Klaar, associate professor in the School of Geography at the University of Leeds, said: “We know that climate change is making rainfall patterns more variable, with longer dry periods and more intense wet periods. This growing volatility makes it harder to plan or foresee with certainty making the reliance on rain to arrive ‘just in time’ an unreliable strategy.”There are actions the country could take now, she said: “Nature-based solutions including restoring wetlands, reforesting catchments and improving soil health all help retain water in the landscape and slow its movement through river systems. Households can also help by reducing water use, especially during dry periods, and slowing and storing water during high rainfall by replacing impermeable surfaces like concrete and installing water butts to collect rainwater from roofs which stores water locally and reduces runoff during heavy rainfall.”

Many of Altadena's standing homes are still contaminated with lead and asbestos even after cleanup

A study led by a community group found that even after cleanups were supposedly complete, many standing homes in Altadena remain contaminated with lead and asbestos.

More than half of still-standing homes within the area the Eaton fire’s ash settled had significant lead contamination even after extensive indoor remediation efforts, according to new findings announced Thursday from the grassroots advocacy group Eaton Fire Residents United. Additionally, a third of remediated homes tested positive for asbestos.The results from 50 homes within and downwind of the Eaton burn area provide the first widespread evidence that the remediation techniques pushed by insurance companies and public health officials have not sufficiently removed contaminants deposited by the fire.Long-term exposure to asbestos increases the risk of developing mesothelioma and other cancers, and long-term exposure to lead can cause permanent brain damage, especially in children, that leads to developmental delays and behavioral problems. No level of exposure to lead and asbestos comes without risks of adverse health effects.“This is a community-wide problem,” said Nicole Maccalla, who leads EFRU’s data science. “It doesn’t matter what remediation you’re using, one pass is not establishing clearance based on the data that we have, which means that it is not yet safe to return to your home.”That’s an issue given that many residents who have been staying elsewhere are returning home — especially those whose insurance money for temporary housing is running dry. EFRU leaders are encouraging residents to test their homes after remediation work, and, if the results show contamination, to keep remediating and testing until the lab results come back clean.EFRU — born in January out of a frustration that no level of government was adequately addressing Altadena residents’ environmental health concerns — started by asking owners of standing homes to share the results of testing they had commissioned from professional labs both before and after remediation.In March, EFRU was the first to publish comprehensive results from inside homes that had not yet been remediated: Out of the 53 professional testing reports homeowners shared with the organization, every household that tested for lead had found it. A similar process was employed for this latest, post-remediation report. Homeowners hired testing professionals to come collect samples and run tests at certified labs, then they shared those results with EFRU. The organization then collated them in a database to give a wider-scope view of contamination in standing homes than any one single test could show.Of the 50 total homes included in EFRU’s report, 45 were tested for lead, and 43 of those had at least some level of lead contamination.Out of the 18 homes where professionals tested for lead on windowsills specifically, nine exceeded the corresponding level at which the Environmental Protection Agency typically requires further remediation. And out of the 24 homes tested for lead on floors specifically, 15 exceeded the EPA’s remediation level.There are no official EPA remediation levels for asbestos dust on surfaces. However, asbestos dust was found in nine of the 25 homes that were tested for it in the EFRU report. The average concentration within those homes was significantly above the ad-hoc remediation level the EPA used in New York after 9/11.“The number of houses tested is still very low, but considering that most of the homes have been remediated by professional companies, we would expect that all the homes should go below the EPA level,” said François Tissot, a Caltech geochemistry professor who began testing standing homes after the Eaton fire damaged his own. “That’s the promise of professional remediation.”Now, EFRU is calling on the California Department of Insurance to implore insurers to cover testing and, if needed, multiple rounds of remediation. The group is also asking Gov. Gavin Newsom to declare an “ash zone,” which would formally recognize the impact of the fire’s smoke and ash beyond the immediate burn zone.An ash zone, EFRU says, would raise public awareness around health concerns and take some of the burden off individual residents to prove to insurance companies that their home was affected. The Department of Insurance did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Tissot, who is not involved with EFRU but has been in communication with the group, previously found that wiped-down surfaces had about 90% less lead than those left untouched since the fire. It made EFRU’s findings particularly surprising. “To see that we are not even breaking 50% with professional remediation is rather alarming,” he said.While state and federal officials, in collaboration with researchers, have developed playbooks for addressing contamination in drinking water systems and in soil after wildfires, standing-home remediation is something of a Wild West.Instead of a central government agency working to ensure indoor remediation follows a research-backed recovery approach, a revolving door of insurance adjusters and a hodgepodge of remediation specialists with wildly different levels of qualifications and expertise have set different policies and standards for each home.EFRU reviews test results primarily from industrial hygienists, who specialize in identifying and evaluating environmental health hazards, most often in workplaces such as manufacturing facilities and hospitals. In its review, EFRU found many tests did not even look for lead or asbestos — despite the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health clearly warning that the two contaminants are known issues in the post-fire area. Those that tested for asbestos often used less-sensitive methods that can under-report levels.EFRU hopes to work with researchers and officials to develop an indoor contamination playbook, such as the ones that exist for drinking water and soil, designed to help residents both safely and quickly recover.“We need coordinated effort from all the different agencies with the elected officials — either through legislation or pressure,” said Dawn Fanning, who leads EFRU’s advocacy work. “We can come up with the answers for these residents and for future wildfires.” How to get your blood tested for lead Environmental health experts encourage lead blood testing for individuals who might be routinely exposed to the contaminant, particularly kids. Anyone concerned about their exposure to lead due to the January fires can call 1-800-LA-4-LEAD to request free testing through Quest Labs. Most insurance companies also cover lead blood testing. More information is available on the LA County Department of Public Health’s website.

Rachel Reeves to confirm changes to ‘outdated’ planning system

Changes intended to reduce ‘burdensome bureaucracy’ and make it easier to build windfarms, reservoirs and housingMinisters are making it easier to build new windfarms, reservoirs and large housing developments as part of a series of changes to the government’s planning and infrastructure bill designed to bolster the confidence of developers.The changes – which were first revealed by the Guardian – will be confirmed on Tuesday by the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, as part of a pre-budget push to underline the government’s commitment to economic growth. Continue reading...

Ministers are making it easier to build new windfarms, reservoirs and large housing developments as part of a series of changes to the government’s planning and infrastructure bill designed to bolster the confidence of developers.The changes – which were first revealed by the Guardian – will be confirmed on Tuesday by the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, as part of a pre-budget push to underline the government’s commitment to economic growth.They include reducing the role of Natural England in helping decide on relatively minor applications and freeing up developers to build turbines near seismic sensors in southern Scotland.Officials say the amendments to the bill were required in part because the government damaged investor confidence by watering down the bill earlier in the summer.Reeves is hoping the bill will pass the Lords in time to be factored into the growth forecasts by the Office for Budget Responsibility, which could give her around £3bn extra breathing room against her own debt rules.Reeves said in a statement: “The outdated planning system has been gummed up by burdensome bureaucracy and held to ransom by blockers for too long.“Our pro-growth planning bill shows we are serious about cutting red tape to get Britain building again, backing the builders not the blockers to speed up projects and show investors that we are a country that gets spades in the ground and our economy growing.”Steve Reed, the housing secretary, said: “Britain’s potential has been shackled by governments unwilling to overhaul the stubborn planning system that has erected barriers to building at every turn. It is simply not true that nature has to lose for economic growth to succeed.”Reeves and Reed have agreed a number of amendments to the planning bill, which is due back in the Lords on 20 October.One will allow ministers to stop councils refusing planning permission if they are considering “calling in” the application to be decided at a national level. Recent examples of planning applications which have been called in include controversial plans to build a large new Chinese embassy near Tower Bridge.Another is specifically aimed at allowing developers to build wind turbines near the Eskdalemuir seismic array, which monitors nuclear test activity around the world. The MoD had raised concerns its equipment could be undermined by nearby turbines.A third will aim to limit when Natural England, the environmental regulator, should be involved in planning decisions.Reeves is keen to go further in freeing up the planning system, including with a nature bill later in the parliament, which will mean the UK abandoning EU rules on protected species and drawing up its own instead.But ministers and officials cannot agree on the need for a separate second planning bill. Some in government want to legislate again to make it easier to build large infrastructure projects such as a third runway at Heathrow, but others think such a bill would be a politically damaging and unnecessary distraction.

UK ministers take control of £10bn Lower Thames Crossing

Exclusive: National Highways Agency stripped of oversight with project handed to DfT amid Labour government drive for growthMinisters have stripped the government’s road-building agency of responsibility for a £10bn tunnel under the River Thames amid a drive by Keir Starmer’s cabinet to take tight control over important infrastructure projects for fear of cost overruns and delays.Oversight of the Lower Thames Crossing – the UK’s largest planned infrastructure project – has been taken away from National Highways, and handed to the Department for Transport (DfT). Continue reading...

Ministers have stripped the government’s road-building agency of responsibility for a £10bn tunnel under the River Thames amid a drive by Keir Starmer’s cabinet to take tight control over important infrastructure projects for fear of cost overruns and delays.Oversight of the Lower Thames Crossing – the UK’s largest planned infrastructure project – has been taken away from National Highways, and handed to the Department for Transport (DfT).Internal consultation documents, seen by the Guardian, said that the costs of the Lower Thames Crossing will be overseen by the DfT, leaving National Highways to “focus on managing, maintaining, and renewing the network”.However, campaigners warned that the move could in fact lead to HS2-levels of overspending and ministers quietly approving developments which would harm the environment behind closed doors.Treasury officials are thought to be behind the shift to centralise the management of large infrastructure projects after the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, made clear her frustration at “bats and newts” delaying major schemes and adding to the final costs.The consultation documents showed that the “Tier 1” project – which is considered by the DfT to be “one of the largest, highest risk, novel and/or contentious” schemes now being undertaken – will be overseen by the transport secretary, Heidi Alexander.Reeves and Starmer have put planning reform at the heart of their growth plans after drafting legislation earlier this year to make it easier to build without paying as much for expensive wildlife protection.The chancellor is keen to include a number of initiatives designed to allow developers to build houses and infrastructure projects, in the hope that higher economic growth will fill about £3bn of an estimated £30bn shortfall in the Treasury’s finances.Earlier this week, Reeves was taped claiming that she had unblocked a development of 20,000 homes that were being held up by a rare snail.The new Thames crossing has received final planning consent and secured £590m for early-stage excavation, surveys and consultations. In addition, the construction firm Balfour Beatty has landed a £1.2bn contract to build roads connecting to the tunnel.However, funding for the full project has been delayed while the chancellor searches for a partner that could contribute as much as £2bn to the scheme in return for charging a toll. Work is expected to get under way before the end of the decade.The site lies east of the Dartford crossing, which takes traffic from the M25 and lorries travelling to and from the ports of Dover and Folkestone.Environmental campaigners argue that vital habitats on Kent’s north shoreline and the south Essex coast will be lost if the tunnel goes ahead. It will also increase carbon emissions without solving congestion on existing roads, they added.skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Business TodayGet set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morningPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionChris Todd, director of Transport Action Network, said: “The government is continuing to throw good money after bad at the Lower Thames Crossing.“Taking it outside of National Highways’ roads programme and treating it as a stand-alone project, with a DfT-signed blank cheque, risks going the same way as HS2 with ballooning budgets and no accountability.”Supporters of the project say the new tunnel will reduce traffic jams in Dartford and allow commercial vehicles en route from Europe to the Midlands and the north to circumvent the most congested parts of the M25.Alexander said earlier this year that the government was “finally getting on” with the crossing, adding that the “crucial project” had “been stuck in planning limbo for far too long”.National Highways has said that an extra connection between north Kent and Essex is also needed to allow for maintenance on the existing Dartford tunnels.It is understood that National Highways will remain responsible for the development of the crossing and will publish a breakdown of costs in its annual report, but decisions over the scope and funding of the project will be taken by ministers.A Department for Transport spokesperson said: “Backed by £590m, the Lower Thames Crossing is the most significant road-building project in a generation – and will cut local congestion, better link up motorists and businesses in the Midlands and north with key ports in the south-east, and spreading growth throughout the regions, as set in our plan for change.”

Crocodile made famous by Steve Irwin ‘wrongfully arrested’ and should be returned to wild, traditional owners say

Exclusive: ‘Old Faithful’ was captured after Queensland authorities deemed him ‘a problem crocodile’, but Rinyirru Aboriginal Corporation says the government is mistakenGet our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcastTraditional owners have called on the Queensland environment minister to return an iconic saltwater crocodile to the wild, arguing his capture was a “wrongful arrest” – but that his case could prove “a landmark” in redefining consultation with First Nations people and the management of crocodiles.Rinyirru (Lakefield) Aboriginal Corporation chair, Alwyn Lyall, wrote to the environment minister, Andrew Powell, on Friday saying the removal of a crocodile longer than 4 metres, known as “Old Faithful”, from Rinyirru – or Lakefield national park – last month was based on a “flawed and outdated” test of his behaviour and highlighted “a bigger problem in how crocodiles are managed”. Continue reading...

Traditional owners have called on the Queensland environment minister to return an iconic saltwater crocodile to the wild, arguing his capture was a “wrongful arrest” – but that his case could prove “a landmark” in redefining consultation with First Nations people and the management of crocodiles.Rinyirru (Lakefield) Aboriginal Corporation chair, Alwyn Lyall, wrote to the environment minister, Andrew Powell, on Friday saying the removal of a crocodile longer than 4 metres, known as “Old Faithful”, from Rinyirru – or Lakefield national park – last month was based on a “flawed and outdated” test of his behaviour and highlighted “a bigger problem in how crocodiles are managed”.Sign up: AU Breaking News emailThe letter called on the state government to dismantle all crocodile traps and cease removals from the park – described as “Queensland’s Kakadu” – until the problems highlighted in the case of Old Faithful were resolved.The crocodile, which Lyall wrote was about 4.5 metres long, has a distinctive white scar across his belly and jaw and was made famous by Steve Irwin in his 1990s series, when Old Faithful was “hazed” by “The Crocodile Hunter” in an effort to instil fear of humans into the big reptile.Almost 30 years later, the crocodile was captured once again and, this time, removed from Rinyirru on 8 September by wildlife officers. He is being held in a government facility in Cairns, more than 250km south, awaiting transfer to a crocodile farm.After his removal, the Queensland environment department said they had been monitoring Old Faithful due to reports from the public and observed him “displaying concerning behaviour” in the prized barramundi fishing hole on the Normanby River that has been his territory for decades. So, the department said, the crocodile was “removed to ensure public safety”.Old Faithful is being held at a government facility in Cairns after his removal from the wild. Rangers also removed a smaller saltwater crocodile, between 3metres and 3.5m metres long. The department said the decision to remove both crocodiles was made after consultation with traditional owners.But in his letter, Lyall wrote that “key information” was “withheld” from traditional owners by the department during that consultation in what he now believes was “the hope of gaining our approval and expediting the removal process for their own agenda”.“We have reason to believe that Old Faithful was not the crocodile targeted for removal and that the animal reported by the public as the ‘problem crocodile’ was the smaller, emaciated crocodile, also caught during the trapping process,” Lyall wrote in a statement.“Our board have engaged with many stakeholders and we strongly believe Old Faithful was caught as a wrongful arrest.”The Kuku Yalanji man wrote that the “simulated fishing test” where a crocodile is lured with bait was “designed to elicit the behaviour needed to warrant removal” and likened it to “constantly throwing bananas at a cassowary at Etty Bay until it feeds, or kicking a dingo on K’gari until it bites”.“If you throw a barramundi out on a piece of rope and drag it back in and throw it out again and drag it back in and throw it out … You’re gonna get that crocodile’s attention sooner or later,” Lyall said.The Rinyirru Aboriginal Corporation chair said that big crocodiles like Old Faithful were a major tourist drawcard – but the attraction had proved a double-edged sword.While some were “just happy to see that crocodile on the bank”, others wanted the crocodile “right in front of them”.“If all of these people are feeding these crocodiles so they can take a photo of it, it makes that crocodile become lazy … it depends on hand outs,” he said. “Then our iconic crocodiles become the problem, because they are just sitting there waiting to be fed.skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Breaking News AustraliaGet the most important news as it breaksPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotion“I find that to be very unfair – I think more onus should be coming back to the visitors that come into the park”.Lyall said he believed the department was “eyeing off” another three big crocodiles from Rinyirru as a result of the behaviour of visitors and the standard of tests used to determine if a crocodile was “a problem”.“For that reason, our board have asked the Queensland government to halt any further removals and to dismantle traps currently set in the park until a better plan is developed,” he wrote.Lyall wrote that the Rinyirru corporation’s board had engaged crocodile scientists emeritus professor Gordon Grigg and Dr and were advised that a captured crocodile could be returned to the wild and that there was precedent for it being done.“Old Faithful could be 80 or 100 years old – he deserves to live out his life in peace,” Lyall wrote.“We are asking that Old Faithful be returned home. He doesn’t belong to the Queensland government. He belongs to Rinyirru, and Rinyirru belongs to him.”The Environmental Defenders Office, acting on behalf of advocacy group Community Representation of Crocodiles (Croc), has requested and is awaiting a statement of reasons from the department to explain Old Faithful’s removal.A department spokesperson responded to questions with a statement saying “public safety is our top priority” and that the department “extensively monitored the crocodile after reports from the public raising safety concerns”.“We understand people were using food to lure the animal from the water to take photos,” the spokesperson said. “Habituating crocodiles is detrimental to the animal and dangerous for people.“The crocodile was displaying repeated and concerning behaviour that was escalating. It was ultimately removed to keep people safe.”

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.