An unprecedented federal assault threatens the future of California's beautiful and environmentally fragile coastlineFrom rocket ships to oil rigs—how twisted does a tale have to be to connect the two? In this exploration, it will all come together, like a hospital gown.SpaceX, proposed oil rigs and the Commerce Department’s review of California’s coastal-management program are all pieces in the fight over who controls the California coast. Washington and California fundamentally disagree about what the coast is for. One would think it would be for California.The story picks up where Elon Musk decides to go to Mars. Musk poured money into SpaceX, and by 2024 Vandenberg Space Force Base in Santa Barbara County had launched 46 SpaceX Falcon 9 rockets. Musk aimed to push launches to 100 per year to speed deployment of the Starlink satellite internet constellation.The California Coastal Commission (CCC) was alarmed by this and began reviewing the proposed increases. California voters created the California Coastal Commission in 1972 to give the state a strong voice in protecting its coast.Alarmed, the commission began reviewing the proposed increase in space launches. SpaceX said it didn’t need the commission’s permission. A clash over who gets to greenlight a rocket turned into a struggle over who approves new oil rigs.The commission’s objections cited increased sonic booms, wildlife disruptions and public coastal closures. After reviewing the proposed increase and repeatedly seeking information that SpaceX and the Air Force did not provide, the commission objected to the additional launches, E&E News reported.Enter President Trump, no fan of California“I hate the way California is being run,” Trump said in January 2026. “Maybe we’re just going to have to make them pay … because they don’t listen to us,” he said in October 2020.Connected to Musk in the good-old-billionaire-boy network, Trump signed an executive order in August 2025 directing federal agencies to accelerate commercial space development. Two months later, the Air Force authorized the increase. But the order did something else. On May 20, 2026, the Commerce Department ordered a full formal review of California’s Coastal Management Program, the legal machinery that gives the state a voice when federal activities affect its coast.Emma Haydocy, senior manager of coasts and climate initiative at the Surfrider Foundation, says attempts followed in Congress to restrict the commission and weaken provisions of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act, but those legislative efforts went nowhere.Keep Reading
Scientists catalogued the highest number of dead marine mammals in over a decade on the North Coast’s beaches last month — almost triple the typical monthly average.Twenty-eight marine mammals were found dead last month. Researchers usually find 10 in July, Dawn Goley, the director of Cal Poly Humboldt’s Marine Mammal Stranding Program, told the Outpost. Most of them were seals and sea lions, but at least two dead humpback whales were included too. The program has tracked dead marine mammals over a 140-mile stretch of coastline from northern Mendocino County up into Del Norte since 2012, checking out the same spots at the same times to ensure consistency.It’s too soon to tell what’s causing the inflation, Goley said, and many of the animals are too decomposed to examine anyway. This year’s El Niño hasn’t gathered enough strength yet to heat coastal waters close to shore, but it’s getting warmer further out to sea. The ocean also sometimes suffers through heat waves, which have become more common over the last five-ten years, Goley said. Boat strikes may have killed some of them. Some may have starved. Researchers don’t have exact data on the amount of living creatures here either; an increased sea lion and seal population, as well as increased boat traffic, might be driving the rate up as well. “But,” Goley said, “Given the magnitude of it, something else, something unique, is going on this year, and I’m sure it has to do with environmental changes.”Keep Reading
California’s coastline is one of the nation’s greatest conservation success stories. From recovering sea otters and nesting snowy plovers to migrating gray whales and the vibrant national marine sanctuaries that many species call home, generations of Californians have fought to protect the wildlife and places that make this coastline extraordinary.Few may realize these conservation successes are made possible, in part, by a little-known but critically important federal law: the Coastal Zone Management Act.For more than 50 years, the act has given California and other coastal states a meaningful voice in federal decisions affecting their shorelines. Through the law’s federal consistency program, California works with federal agencies and project proponents to ensure that offshore drilling proposals, pipelines, ports and other federally authorized activities are consistent with the state’s coastal policies.Contrary to the perception that California simply says “no” to any coastal development, the overwhelming majority of projects reviewed under the program ultimately move forward. Critical work happens behind the scenes when California state agencies negotiate changes that reduce harm to wildlife, protect coastal communities and improve projects before they are approved.The partnership has restored more than 100,000 acres of habitat, from kelp forests and estuaries to coastal dunes. It has removed over 26 million pounds of trash from beaches and waterways and given Californians a voice in decisions affecting their shoreline.Now, that partnership faces its greatest threat.The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is conducting a premature, out-of-cycle review years before its typical 10-year schedule and before the previous review has even concluded. On paper, it may look routine. It is anything but. If a review results in decertification of California’s coastal management program, it could mean the state loses its strongest tool to resist federal actions over harmful decisions affecting the coastline’s prosperity.So why is the federal agency pursuing a review now?The timing is difficult to ignore. It follows the California Coastal Commission’s rejection of Elon Musk and SpaceX’s 2025 proposal to expand rocket launches from Vandenberg Space Force Base and comes as the Trump administration plans to advance a draft leasing program that could reopen California’s federal waters to oil and gas drilling for the first time in more than four decades. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has said the review is meant to ensure California gives “proper weight” to federal priorities and to prevent what he called “obstructionist policies that delay critical national infrastructure.”What does this mean for Californians and residents of other coastal states? It means that our voices could be silenced.Now is the time to speak up for our wildlife, communities and coastal economies that depend on it as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is accepting public comments through Aug. 22.Keep Reading
Workshopping the new Humboldt Bay Area Plan, the county’s Planning Commission is highlighting the importance of offshore wind energy but leaving industrial port activity open for other uses.The extent of restricting heavy lift marine terminals – which will be necessary for wind energy but could also be used for other industrial purposes – was weighed as the commission held two workshops on the plan.Consensus on how to address heavy lift marine terminal use was reached at the second workshop, on Aug. 6, after lengthy discussion.Enthusiasm for wind energy has been tempered by a disappointing turn of events.One of the holders of an offshore ocean wind energy development lease – RWE U.S. Offshore – is vacating its Humboldt area lease and others in New York and Louisiana. The global company agreed to a payoff settlement with the Trump administration and will instead pursue U.S. natural gas development.The turnabout was in mind as commissioners discussed language on heavy lift marine terminal use in a port overlay zone, which is a separate, higher-level layer of policy.Facilities supporting oil and gas drilling and offshore mining are prohibited in the overlay plan, as the county is preparing an ordinance banning them.But commissioners said marine terminal use should be open to other businesses besides wind energy.Though Commissioner Jerome Qiriazi agreed, he noted public comment from the previous workshop, where speakers warned against allowing heavy and potentially impactful industrial uses.During the commission’s ensuing discussion, there was reluctance to narrowly focus the heavy lift terminal policy to wind energy.The discussion resumed at last week’s workshop, with the uncertainty of future wind energy development figuring in.Keep Reading
On Aug. 14, the Humboldt County Fair hosts Shell-ebration, celebrating all things related to oysters in Humboldt Bay. And there is much to salute. Our region produces most of the oysters consumed in California and a very high percentage of the shellfish seed — some 470 million baby shellfish in 2024 — grown out on the West Coast and beyond. These oysters, and the companies and families who rely on them for their livelihoods, deserve this recognition.There should be a serious parallel debate about whether California should reindustrialize Humboldt Bay or instead direct massive heavy industrial development to already-industrialized Los Angeles Harbor. What we are talking about here is the proposed Samoa Heavy Lift Terminal Project and all of its long-term ramifications.Before colonization, there was a string of major coastal marine estuaries in California that served as home and nursery to seabirds, fish, crabs, clams, oysters — everything that made California’s coastal waters rich with life. These estuaries had many names, more recently known as San Diego Bay, San Pedro Bay, San Francisco Bay, Tomales Bay and Humboldt (Wigi) Bay.I grew up near San Pedro Bay, also known as Los Angeles Harbor. My grandfather and great-uncle were high-seas tuna fishermen. My father ran a marine electronics business in the harbor. During the summers, from elementary school through the end of middle school, I got to go to work with my dad — in shipyards, in Fish Harbor, in yacht marinas and at massive industrial sites throughout L.A. Harbor. In high school, I was employed as a deckhand on working harbor watercraft. I spent most of my young life in and around the water and lived with L.A. Harbor pollution every day, including bay water coated with floating oil and industrial grime, bay water with strange colors and bad odors, pier pilings without even barnacles growing on them and air pollution that made our lungs hurt by late afternoon.Keep Reading
