SHINE — An appeal is expected after a federal court judge dismissed a lawsuit against the Navy challenging a conservation easement that would block development of a 998-foot pier and gravel-loading project sought by Hood Canal Sand and Gravel.
U. S. District Judge Benjamin Settle on Tuesday granted a motion to dismiss, ruling that the Navy did not exceed its authority in granting the 55-year easement on state-owned tidelands along Hood Canal.
Company spokesman Dan Baskins said Thursday he expected the company would appeal Settle’s ruling before the end of October, the 60-day deadline to do so.
“The judge ruled that we didn’t have the right to appeal, but we don’t believe that to be true,” Baskins said.
“We think our case should be heard.”
The easement between the Navy and the state Department of Natural Resources announced in July 2014 would block development — including the project known as “pit-to-pier” — on more than 4,800 acres of state land along Hood Canal.
The land is from the Hood Canal Bridge south to just below the border between Jefferson and Mason counties.
Hood Canal Sand and Gravel, doing business as Thorndyke Resources, of Poulsbo seeks to build a 998-foot pier on state land south of the Hood Canal Bridge to annually load onto barges some 6.75 million tons of gravel that would be transported on a 4-mile “pit to pier” conveyor from a quarry at Shine.
Thorndyke filed actions against the Navy and DNR.
The action against DNR was dismissed by a visiting Jefferson County Superior Court judge in July for which the company has already filed an appeal, Baskins said.
Opposition to the project has focused on possible environmental effects, traffic and the potential impact, including collisions, of multiple Hood Canal Bridge openings required by up to six barges a day.
Project proponents say the environmental impact of a conveyor belt and barge terminal would be far less than if the gravel were transported by truck.
John Fabian, volunteer leader of the Hood Canal Coalition, which opposes the project, characterized the ruling as “clear and concise.”
“We need to protect Hood Canal because its future depends on what we do,” Fabian said.
Fabian said his group will oppose any appeal of the decision and plans to “fight [the project] until it’s dead.”
In a statement, Commissioner of Public Lands Peter Goldmark said he expected the easement would resist further court challenges.
“I’m pleased with the federal court’s affirmation of our easement agreement with the Navy,” he said.
“The agreement preserves precious marine ecosystems and public access to the area while ensuring the Navy’s ability to operate there.”
________
Jefferson County Editor Charlie Bermant can be reached at 360-385-2335 or cbermant@peninsuladailynews.com.
