Drakes Bay Oyster Company: Don't like the legal system? Create your own.

West Marin County - Slip Sliding Away

Who shook the nut tree?

 

If only life were so simple

Not happy with the Supreme Court deciding Drakes Bay Oyster Company's case had no merit, DBOC, along with twenty others, recently decided to work within a legal system newly created by Barbara Scott, a "Deputy Justice of the Peace." It is one outside of what they have spent the past nineteen months inside of. Included was Sarah Rolph, a tea party supporter from Carlisle, Massachusetts. Representatives from The Department of the Interior and National Park Service, while "invited", were unable, or perhaps unwilling, to attend.

 

What would Judge Judy say?

If it's late it's late.

 

Amicus Curiae filed late, but who cares? It's Barbara Scott's legal system.

Barbara Scott states the justification for the creation of the "court" and "jury" was based on an Amicus Curiae filed late with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. To say it was lacking is kind. As described by the court system:

Received original and 0 copies of Amicus Curiae - Pending Barbara Scott brief of 9 pages. Excerpts of record in 0 volumes. Served on: 01/14/2014. Major deficiencies: case closed, untimely. Other deficiencies: No motion to become amicus was filed with brief. [8941285] (MT)  

What would Judge Judy say?

California is what?

 

If the State of California is a corporation, is it also a person? Does it sell stock?

After receiving "evidence," hearing "testimony" from witnesses, and listening to the rector of a local Episcopal church, the "Deputy Justice of the Peace" Barbara Scott asked if there were "any more witnesses." There being none, Ms. Scott excused those who were not jurors in order that a "decision" could be made. As explained to the "jurors," the decision would define the State of California as a "corporation" and the United State Government as a "military corporation with the IMF or whatever you want to call it," and then that leases be transferred to the "California Republic Department of Fish and Game." Confusion was apparent in the questions asked by a juror, but...

 

What would Judge Judy say?

(and what do those fringes on the flag mean?)

This is not how a court is supposed to work!

 

Hold on, a new witness has arrived late, but who cares? It's Barbara Scott's legal system.

Fortunately for those present, a witness arrived so Ms. Scott did not have to explain just what was happening. He was allowed to discuss his opinions of people and how the "fecundity" of Drakes Estero was being diminished by the Johnson Oyster Company. When an "unidentified female voice" said "we thought you were deliberating" she was told "we were" but, well, it's Barbara's court.

 

What would Judge Judy say?

- censored -

 

Jurors revolt and render their own decision.

After the late witness finished the jury got back to its deliberating. Apparently impressed with the evidence and the witnesses, it only took 25 minutes for the jury to reach a unanimous verdict. Unfortunately it was not quite what Ms. Scott had asked them to vote on, leaving out references to what Ms. Scott defined as the "corporate" State of California and the IMF owned US Government, instead choosing to only reference the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. The Department of the Interior has 30 days to appeal. Or maybe 20. Or 5. Ms. Scott was unavailable to clarify.

 

Close enough for Barbara.

 

Close enough for Justice of the Peace Barbara Scott's legal system

Pleased with how well she had orchestrated everything, Ms. Scott thanked everyone for their 90 minutes of time spent in her legal system and adjourned the meeting. A good time was had by all and all agreed this year's crop was bountiful.

Update 8/6: To read an "official" transcript of the "trial" you may click here.

 

[Updated] National Park Service Disclaimer on Seal Monitoring Updates and Drakes Bay Oyster Company Supporter Sarah Rolph

[Update: In response to Chris Miller, Sarah Rolph has acknowledged that it is an overstatement to say the disclaimer “isn’t found on any previous science reports from the Park Service at Point Reyes.” In fact, it is simply false. People might consider investigating further who Sarah Rolph is and the political foundation on which she stands. For one example, consider this story on the The Daily Kos site about how she and her husband/companion Michael Hutchins, with other Ayn Rand supporters of the Ayn Rand Institute, manipulated reviews on a book unfavorable about Ms Rand, Ayn Rand Nation: The Hidden Struggle for America's Soul. Ironic is this sort of manipulation makes up the body of Ms Rolph's amicus brief submitted to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Further, West Marin Citizen, and citizens of Marin County should question just who they are allowing into their network of "reporters."]

Sarah Rolph and Oysterzone Grossly Misstate The Facts

On Park Service Monitoring Update Report

Sarah Rolph, a resident of Carlisle, MA and corporate "story teller" who has provided misleading articles for West Marin Citizen and Jane Gyorgy's "Oysterzone" blog site recently commented on the National Park Service' Harbor Seal Monitoring Updates. That interim update, with others issued throughout the year, is used in part to develop a final annual report on the status of Harbor seal populations in Point Reyes National Seashore area, of which Drakes Estero is part and within which the Drakes Bay Oyster Company is operating, thereby preventing the completion of the only shoreline wilderness area on the west coast (excluding Alaska).

Ms. Rolph's Statement

I was fascinated to see that the Park Service’s seal-count report includes a disclaimer, saying that the data and related graphics “are not legal documents and are not intended to be used as such” and “The National Park Service gives no warranty, expressed or  implied, as to the accuracy, reliability, or completeness of these data.”

This disclaimer isn’t found on any previous science reports from the Park Service at Point Reyes. I find it ironic that they would offer it now, given the clear deficiencies of many of their scientific efforts.

[Refers to: http://www.sfnps.org/download_product/4301/0]

The Facts
The disclaimer which Ms. Rolph declares "isn't found on any previous science reports from the Park Service" is in fact spread throughout the years on numerous Monitoring Updates, exactly as this one. Had Ms. Rolph and Ms. Gyorgy spent a modicum of time researching these reports, their purpose, and what they represent, instead of attempting to smear the National Park Service and others who support the creation of the shoreline wilderness with unfounded claims and vague assertions this would not have occurred. But Ms. Rolph chose to simply write without researching, similar to the reporter she wrote so belittlingly about in the West Marin Citizen who inaccurately reported a 2012 outbreak of vibriosis traced to Drakes Bay Oyster Company oyster was in 2013. It comes around.

Ms. Rolph is little more than a mouthpiece for conservative groups who care little for the employees of Drakes Bay Oyster Company, and whose "articles" are repeated and re-printed with little to no vetting. It is hardly Pulizter Prize material and a recipe for a flat soufflé.

As the resident from Massachusetts, Ms. Rolph wrote in a recent article in West Marin Citizen:  "These people want control of your community.   Are you going to let them take it?" Good question Sarah. West Marin citizens would do well to ask just what "people" you're referring to.

A few NPS reports with disclaimers Ms. Rolph has failed to "report" on.
2009
Fiscal Year 2009 in Review, http://www.sfnps.org/download_product/1728/0 (p.16)

2010
July http://www.sfnps.org/download_product/1498/0 (p.5)
August http://www.sfnps.org/download_product/1499/0 (p.6)

2011
June http://www.sfnps.org/download_product/2559/0 (p.6)
April http://www.sfnps.org/download_product/2455/0 (p.6)

2012
August http://www.sfnps.org/download_product/2954/0 (p.7)

Drakes Bay Oyster Company: Their Corporate Vision for Drakes Estero

 

The Drakes Bay Oyster Company has revealed their 

corporate vision for what a seashore wilderness should be.

(from Drakes Bay Oyster Company's Facebook site, 8/22)

As they say, "What's wrong with this picture?" Nothing if you believe commercial operations should be allowed to exist in a seashore wilderness area. In the case of Drakes Estero, grow out bags for as far as the eye can see are apparently what the Drakes Bay Oyster Company envisions the future of Drakes Estero to be. Is this really what Marin County wants to be responsible for?

 

Save our shoreline wilderness area.

 

Help save Drakes Estero from 

corporate profiteering. 

 

DONATE TO ANY OF THE FOLLOWING TO HELP KEEP WILDERNESS FROM BEING REDEFINED BY CORPORATE LOBBYIST AND PR FIRMS

Environmental Action Committee of West Marin
National Parks Conservation Association
Sierra Club
National Wildlife Federation
Center for Biological Diversity
National Resources Defense Council
Defenders of Wildlife

Department of Health Issues Warning on Illness Contracted from Oysters

Reported infections from Vibrio bacteria in oysters are soaring

[Update 8/18: Food World News reported erroneously that Drakes Bay Oyster Company oysters had caused the California Department of Health to close their operation due to vibriosis traced to their oysters. Their mistake has caused a flurry of attorney calls, emails, retractions, and accusations from DBOC owner Kevin Lunny that it was part of a perceived conspiracy to "damage our business". Fervent supporters Jane Gyorgy and Sarah Rolph also responded with dismay. With the warm summer temperatures not yet over it may have been better for all to let a mistake be recognized as such.]

[Update 8/17: The Department of Health has closed Samish Bay, Reach Island, Hammersley Inlet, Totten Inlet, Oakland Bay and Pickering Passage growing areas to the commercial harvest of oysters due to reported illnesses traced to oysters harvested from those growing areas. Recreational information may be found on DOH website.]

 

The Department of Health has issued a warning to consumers telling them to stop eating raw oysters due to the risk of contracting vibriosis from them. August 13, The Seattle Times wrote:

Reported infections from Vibrio bacteria are soaring in King County.

In the warning issued August 13, the Washington Department of Health notes:

State health officials expect the number of illnesses to rise in the next few weeks due to projected warm temperatures and midday low tides.

Every summer the pattern repeats, in greater numbers each year
Vibriosis is caused by Vibrio parahaemolyticus which is a naturally occurring bacteria which increases dramatically every summer. Bacteria within oysters, natural filter feeders, increases further when day time low tides expose them to the sun. Every summer the pattern repeats with people becoming ill, followed by after the fact closures. The difference is each summer more people become ill.

Center for Disease Control

reported a 43% increase in

Vibriosis contracted in 2012

over 2006-2008

(CDC, April 18, 2013)

For each case reported an estimated 142 are unreported
Megan Kay epidemiologist at Public Health — Seattle and King County, estimates that for every reported case there are an additional 142 which go unreported. The Center for Disease Control also estimates the same number are unreported.

Increasing risk
In California, disease from Vibrio vulnificus (a more virulent strain of vibrio) was brought to zero by banning the import of untreated oysters from the Gulf States during the warm summer months. With the increasing use of genetically modified "triploid" oysters they become more palatable during the summer months (they are sterile so do not "spawn" and become milky). This in turn leads to increased numbers of people being put at risk, especially those whose immune systems are suppressed or who simply take antacids (acid helps to break down the bacteria). This on top of warming waters from climate change leads to increasing risk and increasing illness.

Economic hardships
To date the industry has resisted firmly what is the logical step, treating oysters to kill the bacteria before they enter the food stream, as California requires those from the Gulf States to be. While industry complains of economic impacts to their companies, there is also an economic cost to families, the health system, and companies impacted from people who contract vibriosis.

For now ...
Until meaningful actions are taken the best suggestion is found in The Seattle Times article published on August 14:  Don't eat raw oysters.