Burley Lagoon Meeting: Why aren't new structures in Burley Lagoon being permitted?

November 1: A meeting between Taylor Shellfish, Pierce County's Jill Guernsey (Gig Harbor Mayoral candidate and recipient of Taylor attorney's campaign donation) and Ty Booth, the Department of Ecology and Department of Fish and Wildlife will take place to discuss permitting of aquaculture in Burley Lagoon. The public is not invited to attend.

 

Burley Lagoon

Transformation of a passive activity to an industrial operation
After Taylor Shellfish leased the tidelands of Burley Lagoon from the Yamashita family a transformation of this once passively managed area has occurred. Citizens throughout the area have asked Pierce County, the Department of Ecology, the Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Taylor Shellfish why none has required any permits. The response, "It's just a continuation of what was there before."

It's not aquaculture, it's the structures
The issue lost on the agencies responsible for protecting the shorelines of Puget Sound is not whether aquaculture has existed in Burley Lagoon. It is how modern aquaculture is now being practiced. Mr Yamashita is no longer placing oyster shells with spat on the tidelands and waiting for clutch to form. Wide swaths of tidelands are being covered in netting. Structures - in fact hazards to navigation - are appearing throughout Burley Lagoon. Industrial pumps pressurize hoses to spray shell from barges at 2AM in the morning. And, of interest to those concerned about removing structures in Drakes Estero, the old wooden structures seen in the picture below were allowed to be removed without concern to adverse impacts. Some, however, were replaced with new structures.

Old raft structures, most now removed

without any permitting required - or

environmental harm.

(Take note Drakes Bay Oyster.)

 

New structures which replaced the old.

No permits.

New navigational hazards on the tidelands.

No permits.

 

Expansive netting on the tidelands.

No permits.

 

Netting and metal structure

creating a navigational hazard.

No permits.

 

Good morning Burley Lagoon (day time picture

of what occurred at 2AM in Burley Lagoon).

No permit.

 

Proposed - PVC pipes and netting

for 30 acre geoduck farm.

Permits? Stay tuned.

 



The Future of Gig Harbor - Who will be the Mayor?
In the middle of all this is Jill Guernsey, currently the attorney for Pierce County. She is also a  candidate for the position of Mayor of Gig Harbor whose urban growth boundaries are beginning to encroach into lands near Burley Lagoon. She has gladly accepted financial contributions from Taylor Shellfish's legal firm Plauche and Carr. No doubt Taylor Shellfish has been pleased no permitting has been required for any of their activities currently transforming Burley Lagoon. How voters will feel about it remains to be seen.



Restraining Order Issued Against Gold Coast Shellfish [Oyster] Owner Scott Grout

[Copied below is the article from the Shelton-Mason Journal dated October 24, 2013. As noted, the restraining order was to end October 2014.]

October 24, 2013

LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Judge grants protection order to WDFW officer
Shelton man must stay at least 500 feet from officer

By NATALIE JOHNSON

SHELTON, Washington (SmallTownPapers) -- A Mason County District Court judge granted a Washington state Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) officer's request for a protection order against a Shelton man Oct. 18.

WDFW law enforcement officer Matthew Jewett, 37, accused Scott Grout, 41, of Shelton, of following him in his vehicle on several occasions in the span of about an hour Oct. 1.

Judge George Steele issued an order requiring that Grout stay at least 500 feet from Jewett or his house.

Jewett was represented by Michael Young of the Washington state Attorney General's Office, and Grout was represented by Shelton attorney Eric Valley.

Jewett told the Journal he was satisfied with the out-come of the hearing.

Valley commented to the Journal on behalf of his client.

"This is an unfortunate misunderstanding. There is no ill will to Mr. Jewett or the Department of Fish and Wildlife," Valley said. "This could have been resolved with a phone call."

Steele heard arguments and testimony related to the request for a protection order on Oct. 11 and Oct. 18.

Jewett told the court Oct. 11 that in the early evening of Oct. 1, Grout followed him on several separate occasions in Shelton and on Arcadia Road.

Jewett gave testimony regarding previous contact between himself and Grout, which he characterized as negative.

On April 23, Jewett and another WDFW officer, Chris Smith, cited Grout, who owns Gold Coast Shellfish, with multiple counts of failure to label shellfish with certification tags.

On Sept. 16, Grout was ordered to pay a $400 fine for the April citations.

Jewett filed the request for a protection order against

Grout on Oct. 2. He requested that Grout be required to stay a half-mile away from him, his wife and three children.

On Oct. 3, Mason County District Court granted a temporary protection order to Jewett and his family.

Valley argued during the Oct. 11 hearing that his client was not purposely following or stalking Jewett.

The Oct. 18 order requires Grout to stay 500 feet away from Jewett, but does not include his family members. The order expires in October 2014.

[Update 2/13: Read Shelton-Mason County Journal article here. For clarification, the article noted a "protective order" was issued, not a "restraining order." Read about the differences here. WDFW harvest records referred to were received through a FOIA request to WDFW.]

The Mason County Journal reported Thursday, October 24, that the Mason County District Court had issued a restraining order against Scott Grout, owner of Gold Coast Shellfish [Note: It is presumed the article meant to report Gold Coast Oyster]. It was reported that a Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) law enforcement officer had been harassed by Mr. Grout.

The article stated Mr. Grout had been cited and convicted on multiple counts of failing to label shellfish with certification tags by WDFW enforcement officers. Mr. Grout was fined [ordered to pay] $400 for the infraction.

In 2008 Gold Coast reported to WDFW they had harvested over 94,000 dozens of oysters. In 2012, WDFW reported nothing having been harvested by Gold Coast Oyster.

Drakes Bay Oyster Company Legal Advice: Follow the money - if you can.

California Political Fair Practices Commission Announces Settlement

ProPublica, October 24

 

A $1 million dollar cashier's check keeps the curtains drawn

hiding donors to extreme political groups behind them.

 

Two dark money groups linked to conservative billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch have paid a record $1 million in fines to California to settle allegations that the combined $15 million [1] they spent on two ballot proposals in the state was not properly disclosed.

 [Note: Ironic to what follows is that one of the Koch Brothers has been fighting a commercial wind farm off the shores of his Nantucket home for over 12 years now. Apparently he believes a commercial operation creating “visual pollution” of his view is not in his best interest, but a commercial operation creating “visual pollution” for those in a wilderness is just fine.]

As noted on this site and others, Drakes Bay Oyster Company has been the recipient of free legal help from a number of organizations with ties to the Koch Brothers, starting with Cause of Action (who was asked to step back when Phyllis Faber realized what their agenda was) and now Pacific Legal Foundation who has filed a brief amicus curiae in support of an en banc hearing. Hidden behind the legal curtain created when the Supreme Court decided corporations were "people" are the sources of millions of dollars flowing into and out of "non-profit" organizations promoting various corporate agendas.

Specific to Drakes Bay Oyster Company is the acceptance of commercial operations within wilderness areas. Claims of DBOC only being a small family run company, providing sustainable seafood to San Francisco sound wonderful. But it masks the reality of this being a commercial operation far greater than a small building selling oysters.

Perhaps now that the California Fair Practices Commission has its time freed up it may begin investigating who donors to Cause of Action and Pacific Legal Foundation are.

Geoduck Farming Expands Impacts on Puget Sound Tidelands

A new No Trespassing sign appears.

Concerns about tripping over the sandbags?

Recently over 100 sandbags were placed into the tidelands of Puget Sound. It's unclear where the sand came from, although nearby sources are obvious. In addition to the new structure, a 4X4 sign with a fresh "No Trespassing" sign has also appeared. Were the sandbags supposed to be the property line? (Where is that property line anyway?)

What the low tide revealed. +2 MLLW elevation? No.



 

As the tide receded it became apparent the sandbags were most likely related to a recently planted geoduck farm. Perhaps the sandbags were placed to divert the freshwater outflow from a nearby wetland. Or maybe they were intended to help "geoform" the area and through slowing the current create additional area for planting more geoduck. It may be they are to serve as a bulkhead to slow the wave energy crashing onto the tubes.

Whatever their purpose it is simply one more example of how geoduck farming continues to alter Puget Sound's tideland habitat and patterns of use which have existed for generations. For the growers' benefit. And with grow-out nurseries it is expanding into the higher tidal elevations.

Drakes Bay Oyster Company and Kevin Lunny File Petition Requesting Rehearing of Appeals Court Denial

Attorneys for Drakes Bay Oyster Company have filed a petition with the 9th Circuit Court requesting a panel of 11 judges ("En Banc") rehear their plea to remain open under a preliminary injunction. The 9th Circuit's panel ruled they did not have jurisdiction over then Secretary Salazar's decision to not issue a permit to Drakes Bay Oyster Farm after their existing agreement expired in 2012. The panel also stated it was unlikely that Drakes Bay Oyster Farm attorneys would be able to prove "...that the Secretary violated constitutional, statutory, regulatory, or other legal mandates or restrictions. The panel further held that Drakes Bay was not entitled to a preliminary injunction not only because it failed to raise a serious question about the Secretary’s decision, but also because it had not shown that the balance of equities weighed in its favor."

[Note: Click here for more details of the "en banc" process of the 9th Circuit. Requires Microsoft Word.]

Drakes Bay Oyster Company will be joined by the conservative Pacific Legal Foundation group in its appeal, further continuing to tighten the knot to ultra conservative Tea Party like groups whose "other agendas" so shocked Phyllis Faber when she realized who Cause of Action was really fighting for (it was not the employees of DBOC). The same groups who almost brought the United States to another recession through their "objectivism" philosophy, where personal gain trumps all.

Drakes Bay Oyster Company: Invasive Tunicate Didemnum Vexillum Found to be Colonizing Eelgrass in Drakes Estero

Updated 10/17

Drakes Bay Oyster Company harvesting

oysters covered with Didemnum  Vexillum

Colonies dislodge and are spread

throughout Drakes Estero.

During the hearing for Taylor Shellfish's proposed expansion of an additional 58 rafts the threat of further spreading Didemnum Vexillum from growing and harvesting mussels in Totten Inlets was glossed over. The new evidence found in Drakes Estero clearly shows an impact from shellfish farming which was previously not acknowledged.

Invasive Didemnum Vexillum

on Eelgrass in Drakes Estero.

From the Environmental Action Committee in West Marin:

Drakes Bay Oyster Company Causing “Alarming” Amounts of Invasive Marine Vomit

New Research States Marine Vomit Infestation Threatens Eelgrass, Must Be Removed

Point Reyes, California.  A new scientific report released today reveals that the controversial Drakes Bay Oyster Company’s production of millions of non-native Japanese oysters is perpetuating “alarming” amounts of the highly aggressive and invasive “marine vomit” that threatens the ecological health of Drakes Estero marine wilderness area.

The study, prepared by Jude Stalker, an experienced Bay Area invasive species removal specialist, documented that  Didemnum vexillum (Dvex or marine vomit) has infested the Drakes Bay Oyster Company's non-native oysters and oyster infrastructure. Alarmingly the marine vomit has invaded both dead and live eelgrass that exists on the floor of Drakes Estero. Dvex is considered to be a significant threat to the health of marine ecosystems because of its documented ability to spread rapidly, smother native flora and habitats, and thereby reduce the biodiversity of natural areas. Because eelgrass dominates the bottom habitat of Drakes Estero, the potential adverse impact from the existing Dvex infestation is substantial.

“The Drakes Bay Oyster Company’s operations and practices in Drakes Estero that are spreading marine vomit represent an undeniably dangerous threat to the native flora and fauna of Drakes Estero marine wilderness area and must stop immediately,” said Amy Trainer, executive director of the Environmental Action Committee of West Marin. “Despite awareness of the increasing Dvex infestation on its non-native oysters, the company has failed to take responsibility for or remediate this serious ecological disaster in the making,” Trainer said.

The report is based on a kayak survey of Drakes Estero and states that the amount of Dvex documented represents “a trend of increasing infestation” as well as a “new ability” of Dvex to spread onto eelgrass within Drakes Estero. Eelgrass is the critical base of the marine food chain that dominates the bottom habitat of Drakes Estero, and approximately 5-7% of California’s remaining coastal eelgrass is in Drakes Estero. Thus, the ongoing and future harm to numerous native flora and fauna that utilize eelgrass for food and habitat is cause for “serious concern” the report said.

The report notes that the “abundant population of Dvex observed on the DBOC infrastructure [oyster racks] provides a significant source of Dvex in both larval and fragmental form in Drakes Estero.” The Drakes Bay Oyster Company’s harvesting practices of pulling Dvex-infested hanging culture lines and tubes from the racks, transporting them on open barges, separating and cleaning the Dvex-ridden oyster shells on the dock and returning the fragmented Dvex colonies back into the water “are all likely facilitating the spread and persistence of this highly invasive species.”

Dvex colonies are aggressive and rapidly-spreading invasive marine organisms. In some cases, rapid expansions like the one going on in Drakes Estero cause significant changes in the natural community structure.

The report noted that Dvex research elsewhere concludes that the environmental and economic damage from an uncontrolled Dvex infestation is great. “This survey indicates an increasing potential for that outcome in Drake Estero.”  

 

Research has shown that a rapid response to a Dvex infestation is essential to successfully manage and ensure its removal from a natural area. The report recommended the immediate removal of Dvex from all infested sources in the Estero, including infested oysters, infested oyster cultivation infrastructure, infested live and dead eelgrass, and any other infested natural substrate.

 

The California Coastal Commission ordered the company to deal with its marine vomit problem in February, but the company instead sued and has done nothing to date to address the issue. The Drakes Bay Oyster Company was denied for the second time a preliminary injunction to keep operating by the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals on September 3^rd. Drakes Bay Oyster Company was removed from the Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch Partner list more than 3 years ago and is being supported by the Koch brothers funded Pacific Legal Foundation and Americans For Prosperity in its quest to commercialize Drakes Estero Wilderness. Today’s report comes on the heels of the Sonoma County Democratic Central Committees overwhelming support for Interior Secretary Salazar’s decision to allow Drakes Estero to run wild.

 

 

# # #

Amy Trainer

Executive Director

Environmental Action Committee of West Marin

P.O. Box 609 Point Reyes, CA 94956

amy@eacmarin.org

(415) 663-9312 office

(415) 306-6052 cell

Protecting West Marin for over 40 years!

www.eacmarin.org

www.savepointreyeswilderness.org

Drakes Bay Oyster Company - Jim Linford and Legislative Intent

Supreme Court Justice Scalia: “The manner in which the law ‘could have been written,’ has no bearing; what matters is the law the Legislature did enact. We cannot rewrite that to reflect our perception of legislative purpose.” Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Company, No. 08-1008, slip op. at 9 (March 31, 2010)

The Perception
Jim Linford, semi-retire appellate attorney, writes in the October 10 online issue of the Marin Independent Journal about his perception of what the Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit judges agreed on in their 2-1 ruling against Drakes Bay Oyster Company's continued commercial operation within Drakes Estero, part of the Phillip Burton Wilderness. In his opinion piece he writes on his belief that all judges agreed on what the "intent" of Congress was decades ago when the Phillip Burton Wilderness was created. In support of this belief he lifts part of one sentence from the decision and includes it in his writing:

The dissent fully develops this understanding of the original congressional intent, and the majority acknowledges "the accuracy of the dissent's recitation of the legislative history of the 1976 Act." [The Point Reyes National Seashore]

Marin County Fog
In resolving the issue of whether the Secretary of the Interior had the discretion to issue or not issue a special use permit, selectively pulling pieces of relevant documents (in this case the Court's decision) fogs the reality of the decision. Mr Linford neglects to point out that the decision also contained this paragraph written by the majority, specifically focused on the relevance of the minority's idea of what may have been the "intent" of Congress:

The dissent’s reliance on decades-old legislative pronouncements about the Johnson oyster farm for the proposition that Section 124 was intended to foreclose the Secretary from considering his department’s own policies with regard to Drakes Bay stretches even the most liberal use of legislative history to the breaking point. “[U]nenacted approvals, beliefs, and desires are not laws.” Puerto Rico Dep’t of Consumer Affairs v. Isla Petroleum Corp., 485 U.S. 495, 501 (1988). (emphasis added)

As they note, whatever the perceived "intent" of Congress one may have, and whether it was accurately recited or not, it is irrelevant to whether the Secretary had the discretion to issue a permit. The majority writes clearly and forcibly:

Regardless of the accuracy of the dissent’s recitation of the legislative history of the 1976 Act, the dissent’s citation to congressional statements in support of designating Drakes Estero as wilderness in 1976 do not reliably reflect that the Congress that enacted Section 124 was of the dissent’s view that Drakes Bay’s operations were “not an ‘obstacle’ to converting Drakes Estero to wilderness status.”

Planting Ideas in the Record Does Not Grow a Law
Relying on snippets pulled from letters submitted or read into the record during the creation of a bill is a far cry from what is actually written, voted on and signed by the President. As United States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has noted, "legislative intent" is often created by proponents of a bill to persuade a court to interpret the statute in a way that they were not able to persuade the legislative body to adopt when passing the bill. He believed it was "...legal fiction that committee reports reflect congressional intent."  Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz v. United States (08-1119. He wrote further:

"...it is utterly impossible to discern what the Members of Congress intended except to the extent that intent is manifested in the only remnant of 'history' that bears the unanimous endorsement of the majority in each House: the text of the enrolled bill that became law." Graham County Soil, No. 08-304, slip op. at 12. (emphasis added)

The Wilderness Act as Law is Clear

Finally, Mr Linfield's attempt to redefine the "intent" of the Wilderness Act as being lands set aside to be viewed from "...behind a brass railing and a thick glass window..." only helps the thrust of public relations firms and lobbyists to create a corporate definition of "wilderness" far different than the law written, passed and signed into law.

Sonoma County Democrats Overwhelimingly Support Wilderness at Drakes Estero

From the Environmental Action Committee of West Marin:

 

Sonoma County Democrats Overwhelmingly Pass Resolution Supporting Wilderness At Drakes Estero

On Tuesday evening, October 8th, the Sonoma County Democratic Central Committee overwhelmingly passed a resolution supporting the Obama Administration’s decision to protect Drakes Estero in Point Reyes National Seashore as “a marine wilderness area for the enjoyment and benefit of all current and future generations of Americans.”

 

By a 3 to 1 margin, the Sonoma County DCC voted 18-5, with one abstention, to join other California and national democratic leadership such as U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chair Barbara Boxer (CA) and U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chair Ron Wyden (OR) in applauding the Obama Administration’s decision to let the Drakes Bay Oyster Company’s lease expire on its own terms, ushering in the establishment of the West Coast’s first marine wilderness at Drakes Estero.

 

The Sonoma County DCC also took a position rejecting the Company’s claims that the State of California, not the National Park Service, has primary management of Drakes Estero – claims that several State agencies, the State Attorney General’s Office, and California Senate Budget Chair Mark Leno have rejected.

 

The October 8^th vote follows last month’s 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that rejected the Company’s request for an injunction that would let it keep operating pending the ultimate outcome of its litigation, stating that the Company is unlikely to win its lawsuit and that the public interest and balance of equities do not favor the Company’s continued operation. The Company, supported by the Koch-brothers funded Pacific Legal Foundation, has stated its intention to challenge the 9^th Circuit ruling.

 

Amy Trainer

Executive Director

Environmental Action Committee of West Marin

P.O. Box 609 Point Reyes, CA 94956

amy@eacmarin.org

(415) 663-9312 office

(415) 306-6052 cell

Protecting West Marin for over 40 years!

www.eacmarin.org

www.savepointreyeswilderness.org

Ocean Acidification: It's Complicated

As added material to consider in what is becoming a deeply controversial topic, the University of Washington's Cliff Mass questions some of the fundamental conclusions reached in the recent Seattle Times articles on Ocean Acidification.  His "Ocean Acidification and Northwest Shellfish: Did the Seattle Times Get the Story Right?" gives another perspective. From his piece, he states:

My conclusion is that this series has some serious problems and draws several unwarranted conclusions. Particularly that recent shellfish problems are the result of past or current CO2 levels in the atmosphere.

More than Commercial Shellfish Matter to Puget Sound, Whatever the Cause of Calcium Carbonate Depletion
If one accepts the fact that CO2 is changing the oceans water chemistry and preventing the formation of Calcium Carbonate, then every marine species dependent on that molecule is impacted. Pushing forward with the significant expansion promoted by the shellfish industry in its "Washington Shellfish Initiative" and "National Shellfish Initiative" will do more harm than good through the "sponge effect" of massive shellfish farms currently being promoted soaking up the diminished supply of Calcium Carbonate. While good for the corporations promoting 58 raft mussel farms, it's bad for the native marine species who are also vying for the same Calcium Carbonate for their calcifying.

Alternatively, if there is a question about the cause of the diminishing supply of Calcium Carbonate, then more research is needed before the massive expansion being promoted is allowed. As an example of the size of what is envisioned, Jim Gibbons with Seattle Shellfish spoke before Washington representatives about how Spain, in an area the size of south Puget Sound (south of the Tacoma Narrows) is producing 600 million pounds of mussels each year. Currently, there are less than 2 million pounds of mussels being produced.

Strategic Marketing Matters, But You'd Better be Correct

Following the strategic marketing plan developed by Governor Gregoire's Blue Ribbon Panel on Ocean Acidification, Mr Manning and Mr Taylor build further on the Seattle Times three part series on Ocean Acidification in their "Guest" piece entitled "What we can do about ocean acidification and climate change". From the Blue Ribbon Panel's "Ocean Acidification: From Knowledge to Action" (4Mb): 

Educating elected officials, resource managers, business and industry leaders, and the general public (including youth) is a key prerequisite to action.

To improve understanding of ocean acidification and engage stakeholders in solutions, information needs to emphasize four key points. First, information must communicate
that ocean acidification is affecting jobs and resources here in Washington State. Second, materials must emphasize the importance of the ocean to our health, coastal economies, and well-being. Third, the information must explain the rapid change in ocean chemistry, the consequences of this change for marine life in Washington, and what it means for individuals and Washingtonians collectively. Finally, the information needs to show the value of early action and highlight the role that Washingtonians can play in developing and implementing solutions. (page 79)

Strategic marketing happens all the time in business and in politics. But if it is fundamentally flawed then there is a problem. In the case of Ocean Acidification, it needs to be examined closely. One small example of why that may be a wise course is to look south to Willapa Bay where not only native Olympia oysters are beginning to re-establish themselves, but so too are the Pacific oysters.

Cliff Mass is a professor at the University of Washington with a PhD in Atomospheric Sciences. He has taught at the University of Washington since 1981 and has authored "The Weather of the Pacific Northwest."

Jay Manning was Director of the Department of Ecology before being shifted to Governor Gregoire's Chief of Staff from which he resigned in 2011, saying he felt "worn out." In October of 2011 Mr Manning became partner at the Cascadia Law Group and returned to the Washington Environmental Council where he is currently President.

Bill Taylor is with the Taylor Shellfish Company.

How to Help Ensure Puget Sound's Nearshore Environment is Protected

In Puget Sound there are currently two groups on different legal levels who intend to hold the shellfish industry to the same standards as upland property owners are. Case Inlet Shoreline Association (a member of the Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat) and APHETI (the Association for the Protection of Hammersley, Eld and Totten Inlets) are both appealing various permit approvals. CISA is focused on geoduck farms and has appealed permits to the Shoreline Hearings Board. APHETI is focused on a 58 raft mussel farm at the mouth of Totten Inlet and is now at the Superior Court in partnership with Thurston County, appealing a reversal by the Shoreline Hearings Board of the County's denial of Taylor Shellfish's permit application. All are in south Puget Sound, south of the Tacoma Narrows.

Geoduck Farm

~40,000 PVC pipes/acre

Is this really benign?

South Puget Sound is perhaps the most intensely developed areas in all of Puget Sound. While in the early 1970's shellfish aquaculture was, perhaps, a relatively benign operation run by small families, like all industries it has grown and evolved. It is now controlled by a few large companies who are generating immense profits from geoduck farming. These profits are being poured into local governments to craft the updated Shoreline Master Plans such that "industrial" levels of aquaculture are considered a "preferred use." Lobbyists and public relations firms have been hired. It is an industry.

You can help ensure that the future of Puget Sound's shoreline will include the protection of the nearshore environment below the high tide line, into the intertidal and subtidal areas. This habitat supports species which have evolved over thousands of years to be able to take advantage of a shoreline area which is continually exposed and covered, twice each day. It is unlike anything anywhere else and is one of the primary areas which the Shoreline Management Act was intended to protect. It is an area being transformed forever by the shellfish industry and if allowed to continue will never be the same.

Donations to CISA or APHETI will have long term returns which our children, and theirs, will enjoy. Get involved and make a difference.

Washington Department of Health Lifts Closures Due to Vibriosis from Washington Oysters

[Update 10/4: Flooding and heavy rainfall continue to keep some growing areas closed to all shellfish harvesting. As examples, portions of Burley Lagoon, Henderson Inlet, Oakland Bay and Samish Bay remain closed. Recreational harvesters should check the DOH website for updated information.]

On October 1, Washington's Department of Health lifted the closures to commercial harvesting of oysters due to vibriosis which was traced to oysters harvested from the following growing areas in Washington's Puget Sound. Included were:

Burley Lagoon (Pierce County), Hammersley Inlet (Mason County), Oakland Bay (Mason County), Peale Passage (Mason County), Pickering Passage (Mason County), Reach Island (Mason Couty), Totten Inlet (Mason County), Dabob Bay (Jefferson County), and Samish Bay (Skagit County). Popular names of oysters from these areas include "Totten Virginicas", "Pickering Sweets", "Oakland Bay Kumos" or "Hammersley Oysters."

Steps taken to control vibriosis from the consumption of raw oysters harvested by certified growers in Washington continues to fail in its attempt to lower the number of cases. Between 2006 and most recently reported numbers in 2013, cases of vibriosis traced directly to Washington state oysters have risen from just over 50 to near 80, a near 60% increase. The Huffington Post has recently reported vibriosis from oysters harvested from the east coast have also increased.

A naturally occurring bacteria, Vibrio blooms with each summer's warming temperatures. Some have blamed the genetically modified triploid oyster being more "palatable" to consumers during the summer, resulting in an increased number of raw oysters being consumed. Bob Rheault with the East Coast Shellfish Growers Association claims Vibrio may be becoming "more virulent" or the numbers are only "statistical noise."

At the end of October the FDA and industry will meet for the biennial Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference where they will once again attempt to come up with a means to control this increasing number. To date, controls proposed by the FDA have been met with strong resistance from the industry who believe an "economic hardship" will result if the current "reactive" methods in place are changed to a more "proactive" focus (e.g., forcing post harvest processing to kill the bacteria in all oysters harvested during the "no R" months or, in the extreme, banning the sale of oysters from raw consumption during the warm summer months from areas consistently shown to result in vibriosis).

Drakes Estero: Op-ed on the Significance of a Shoreline Wilderness

Note: You may help support the efforts to allow Drakes Estero to become the shoreline wilderness Congress intended by donating to the West Marin Envirionmental Action Committee or the Natural Resource Defense Council.

 

Doug McConnell

OpenRoad.TV



The Marin Independent Journal has published an Op-ed by Doug McConnell on why Drakes Estero should be allowed to become the shoreline wilderness area Congress intended. Mr McConnell was host of Bay Area Backroads from 1993 to 2009. He is currently the co-Founder and Managing Partner of ConvergenceMedia Productions (CMP) in Sausalito, California. One of CMP's principal products is OpenRoad with Doug McConnell, Exploring the West for Public Television nationally. It is copied below with emphasis added.

Marin Voice: Restoring Drakes estuary

is a 'critical' opportunity

by Doug McConnell

Marin Independent Journal, 9/30/2013

IN CALIFORNIA, many of us are lucky to live near the ocean and estuaries, where salt water mixes with fresh water from rivers and streams to create ecologically rich yet vulnerable natural environments. I've spent most of my life within walking distance of three famous and beautiful estuaries: Alaska's Cook Inlet, Washington's Puget Sound, and our very own, San Francisco Bay.

 

These and other estuaries have long attracted commercial activities and are vital engines of our coastal economy. But as our population has grown dramatically, concerned citizens have had to play catch up to save these bays from being overrun by development. They've struggled with mixed success to give nature a seat at the bargaining table as they've sought to strike a balance between our economy and our environment.

 

Meanwhile, not a single estuary on the west coast has been preserved and managed solely as a wilderness sanctuary, where commercial and motorized activities are set aside to prioritize nature in its wild form.

It would be extraordinary to have at least one bay on the Pacific shore where we can cease our enterprises to simply watch, enjoy and study the life of a relatively unfettered estuary.
As we recently commemorated the 25th annual National Estuaries Week, that would be a grand gift to nature, to ourselves and to future generations.

Fortunately, such an opportunity exists in our own backyard.

In the 1970s, far-sighted leaders passed legislation promising that Drakes Bay in Point Reyes National Seashore would eventually become an aquatic wilderness. The company planting and harvesting oysters commercially in Drakes Bay was given fair warning that when its lease expired in four decades the operations would have to be removed. When the time came to fulfill the contract, the oyster company took the National Park Service to court, challenging the Interior Secretary's decision to let the lease expire as planned.

The fate of Drakes Bay and its oysters has stirred significant controversy with wise and well-intentioned people lining up at opposite ends of what's become a profoundly divisive issue in Marin County.

I've listened closely to the passionate arguments by close friends on both sides of the debate. But with due respect to those who believe that oyster farming should continue, I hope that the recent 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling will be upheld and that Drakes Bay will finally receive the unique wilderness protection it was promised long ago, allowing nature to find a new equilibrium.

Confronted with enormous 21st century challenges such as climate change and ocean acidification, we and our coastal environments face great uncertainties. It will be a tremendous benefit to nature and all of us to have at least one estuary on the edge of the Pacific that's free of commercial activity.

Drakes Bay is a special but fragile environment that nurtures thousands of migratory birds and one of our state's largest harbor seal colonies. Wilderness protection will give all these native residents and visitors to Drakes Bay a buffer from the changes that are assaulting them and their ancient ecosystems, while giving us a laboratory to monitor their reactions and learn lessons we might apply to aid estuaries elsewhere in the years ahead.

Since the Wilderness Act became law nearly 50 years ago, we've benefited from the protection it has provided to important terrestrial ecosystems across the country; places we can visit and enjoy more on nature's terms than our own. Drakes Bay adds a critical piece of our marine environment to that long and treasured wilderness legacy.

Such an achievement will be celebrated for generations to come.

Doug McConnell of Corte Madera is an environmental media producer, host of public television's "Open Road with Doug McConnell: Exploring the West" and former host of "Bay Area Backroads".