Professor of Marine Biology Writes on Why Drakes Estero Should Become Wilderness

 

Suggests those who claim benefits from the farm's continued

operation should "review a college-level ecology textbook"

 

Placement of grow-out bags in Drakes Estero

Wilderness?

 

On July 31, the Marin Independent Journal published an editorial by Professor Joe Mueller, a local professor of marine ecology and environmental science, and winner of the prestigious T Award in 2008. In that editorial he writes why it is misguided to believe a commercial shellfish operation growing 20 million* non-native oysters benefits the marine ecosystem of a designated marine wilderness area.

(*Note: The figure of 20 million non-native oysters referred to is Kevin Lunny's estimate of how many non-native oysters, along with 2 million non-native Manila clams, would have to be removed if he were forced to close. It is part of his sworn rebuttal, signed on January 16, 2013. Some ardent supporters, such as east coast writer and corporate story teller Sarah Roph, claim the number of 19 million presented by the Coastal Commission to Superior Court is somehow distorted.)

 Professor Mueller's editorial from MarinIJ.com is copied below.

 

Marin Voice: Doing what's right for the ecology

 

I COMMEND the level of public engagement in the debate over whether to protect Drakes Estero marine wilderness or continue commercial oyster operations in our local national park. While the decision did not rest on scientific matters, fundamental ecological principles have always supported protecting this estuary.

 

As a local professor of marine ecology and environmental science for the past 25 years, I would be remiss if I didn't voice strong disagreement with those that feel growing and extracting 20 million non-native oysters from the Drakes Bay Ecosystem is in any way commendable as an environmentally healthy practice.

 

Proponents of maintaining this substantial cultivation and harvest fail to realize many fundamentals of ecological science. In fact, from what I can gather, advocates believe that maintaining this operation is somehow beneficial to the Drakes Bay ecosystem.

At its foundations, the Drakes Bay tidal estuarine ecosystem functions when both phytoplankton and salt marsh plants package sunlight and materials into carbohydrate. The tides then scour the embayment and surrounding coastal area with nutrients.

When we come along and funnel many of those nutrients into oysters for tourists then the system is not able to provide adequately for all the other components of the system (marine invertebrates, fish, birds, marine mammals etc.). This may be somewhat sustainable from a human-use point of view, but it clearly short-changes the non-human aspects of the system.

Of course this is the same fundamental havoc the human species is causing world wide, with 20 percent of the world population using 80 percent of the resources, the very ecosystems we all depend on are suffering, and we've exceeded our footprint.

This provides a unique conundrum for some people in West Marin. How do they maintain their well-earned reputation of environmental sustainability and still extract 700,000 pounds of oysters per year from an ecosystem slated for wilderness 40 years ago? In fact, the wilderness designation allows humans to be visitors to revel in the natural wonder that ultimately provides the attraction for tourists in the first place.

National park and wilderness advocates are asking to save one (yes, just one) estuary on the entire western coast of the United States. This would honor an agreement that Congress made and fulfill the vision to protect Drakes Estero after the oyster lease expired, as planned and paid for. Protecting this estuary for wilderness would spare wildlife from human disruption by thousands of roaring motorboat trips, water pollution, artificial modification through invasive species and nutrient extraction.

There are a few scientists who claim oysters are needed for the Drakes Bay ecosystem to function, essentially stating that the ecosystem wouldn't or couldn't function in a pristine state without human intervention. I would respectfully recommend that these individuals review a college-level ecology textbook to see the flaws in their claims.

I think most agree that nitrogen has been cycling in tidal estuaries for eons without the help of human intervention.

There are a host of other reasons I believe that the pro-oyster company side of the argument is not compliant with healthy ecosystem science. This includes, but is not limited to, five miles of toxic creosote treated wooden racks that continuously add toxins to the water that are spread throughout the embayment with every tide, thousands of plastic tubes that have littered the embayment and surrounding coastal area, impacts from invasive species on eel grass communities, impacts from invasive Manila clams, marine mammal disturbances, and the regular din of motorboat traffic.
This leads me to believe that some sustainably minded Marin residents mean well, but don't fully understand the science behind the controversy.

Joe Mueller of Fairfax is a professor of marine biology at the College of Marin.