California to Consider Aquaculture Industry's Development of Best Management Practices Plans

When: July 17, 1 PM to 3 PM

Where: Marconi Conference Center, Buck Hall

18500 Shoreline Highway (SR 1)

Marshall, CA 

*Note building change due to large interest.

(See map below)

What: Consider development of "Best Management Practices Plans" (BMPP)

[Click here for overview, map and discussion paper]

Why: Currently, amending leases is considered to be an "excessive administrative burden" by agencies and growers.

allow different species to be cultivated 

or culture method to be changed

Should changing from growing clams in the sediments

to oysters in suspended cages require an

amendment to the lease or merely 

industry developed BMP Plans?

PIA - Politics in Action: BMPP's
California's Natural Resources Agency (CA Fish and Game Commission and the CA Department of Fish and Wildlife) will hold a meeting on July 17 from 1 PM to 3 PM to consider whether they should allow the aquaculture industry (and possibly public - if involved) to develop "Best Management Practices" (BMP) plans (BMPP). These broad based plans would be reviewed, perhaps every 5 years, and allow for changes in species grown and methods used without lease ammendments. Currently, when an operator wishes to change a species grown or a method used, a lease must be amended. The analysis which precedes the amendment has been described as being "an excessive administrative burden" (EAB).

California Aquaculture

without BMP Plans

(Tomales Bay, 2014 before public pressure rose 

forcing growers to clean up derelict gear.)

From the Coastodian

Washington Aquaculture 

with BMP and ECOP

Public resources will only be protected if the public is involved.

Get involved. This is a political process which can be easily bent to placate an industry's desire for expansion with less oversight. BMP's in Washington's Puget Sound result in loose PVC pipes, despite 10 years of "BMP" and "Environmental Codes of Practice" (ECOP). Navigational hazards continue to impact the public's use of navigable waters in areas of Puget Sound. Nighttime noise continues to disrupt residential neighborhoods, despite "good neighbor" plans. This is an industry made up of a few large corporations which is motivated and well funded, who wants to expand into critical marine ecosystems. If they are allowed to develop "BMP Plans" without public involvement there will be irreversible impacts. Get involved. Washington's residents weren't and are now picking up the pieces.

California - Consider these examples of the shellfish industry in CA. Then act.

One merely need look to Drakes Estero for an example of what happens when an operator's lease ends, leaving taxpayers to clean up the mess. One only need look to Humboldt Bay to see what the industry wants with Coast Seafoods' proposed expansion (a permit denied) into the native eelgrass beds to grow non-native oysters, and the cleanup the state is requiring because Coast was unable to on its own. Consider these examples and that actions now being taken elsewhere are only being done as the direct result of public pressure from a few. 

Meeting Location

Here Come the Chinese: Lust for Big Clams Brings Largest Shellfish Facility on the West Coast

Hummingbird Cove Shellfish Hatchery

Small bird, big hatchery, big numbers, big impact.

365,000 square feet:  A lot of space costs a lot to produce big clams in big numbers.

The Powell River Peak writes about a Chinese aquaculture firm, Pacific Aquaculture, which has followed the path set by Chinese energy firms who have invested in the west and elsewhere to ensure a steady supply of carbon based fuels far into the future. Pacific Aquaculture has currently invested $10 million in a shellfish hatchery which opened on the 19th. They plan to invest an additional $40 million over the next five years to create a shellfish facility which, at 365,000 square feet, will dwarf anything on the west coast, or most likely in the world. The project, in conjunction with Hummingbird Cove Lifestyles, was first described in Hatchery International in October of last year but was then far smaller.

US Shellfish Companies: Now just

big clams in a little tank?

We used to be the big clams here

In comparison to Pacific Aquacutlure's 365,000 square foot facility, Taylor Shellfish - purported to be the largest shellfish producer in the United States - has a hatchery on Dabob Bay estimated to be 30,000 square feet in size. Production facilities in Shelton are estimated at 27,000 square feet, with those at Samish Bay being estimated at 9,000 square feet. As noted, Pacific Aquacutlure's will be 365,000 square feet.

Aloha from Goose Point Oyster in Hawaii.

We'll always have the condo.

20,000 square feet is big?

Is that Aloha a hello or goodbye to profits in the shellfish industry?

Unlike the Taylor hatchery in Dabob Bay being able to adapt to what is currently felt to be problems caused by ocean acidification, the Nisbet family's Goose Point Oyster simply scaled back their "Whiskey Creek" hatchery facility in Willapa Bay and built a new 20,000 square foot facility in Hawaii. As the article in the Seattle Times notes,  only a handful of hatcheries supply West Coast farmers, including Whiskey Creek and Taylor Shellfish. With a facility now in operation, which at 365,000 square feet will dwarf anything on the west coast, flooding the market with shellfish seed, including geoduck, how long can the profits in the shellfish industry be expected to last?

They said I'd make money. Why should I care?

I never promised you a shellfish garden.

Because shellfish companies no longer have tidelands to use, they lease tidelands from private individuals and promise "great" returns in exchange for encumbering their property, in some cases for decades. Any concerns about their role in the creation of these point sources of plastic pollution, loose nets, and fractured tideland ecosystems, along with fractured relationships with neighbors, many nurtured over generations, are diminished by the salve made from promises of monetary cream being rubbed onto these tideland owners' palms. The Chinese, however, through Pacific Aquaculture, will no longer be beholden to shellfish companies in the northwest supplying artificially constrained supplies, and inflated prices, of geoduck. Revenues will drop and the gravy train will stop. As investments in energy failed when supply overtook demand, so too will investments - and promises of riches - in the shellfish industry fail when oversupply drives prices down and the Chinese are able to supply themselves with geoduck. Leaving behind plastic tubes and structures, as Drakes Bay Oyster Company did when they walked away from Drakes Estero, leaving the taxpayers to clean up the remains.

Chinese do not like 

paying artificially inflated prices

for geoduck so will grow their own.

Sorry, I don't think that was part of the permit.

Who will pick up what's left behind when companies are no longer profitable? This bubble is no different than any bubble which has preceeded it. It will pop. Pacific Aquaculture is a big pin with a strong hand pressing on the bubble. And when it pops, Puget Sound will be left with PVC, nets, and plastic to cleanup.

Get involved. 

Demand that bonds be required for all shellfish farms currently permitted to guarantee Puget Sound is not left in the state Drakes Estero was when Drakes Bay Oyster Company decided it was best to just walk away, leaving taxpayers to pick up the mess.

Drakes Bay Oyster Company: What is stewardship of Drakes Estero best determined from?

Scuba diving in Drakes Estero - inches away?

(from Richard James, Coastodian.org)

A kayak in Drakes Estero - feet away?

Tubes pulled from the bottom and piled

onto wooden racks in Drakes Estero.

(from Richard James, Coastodian.org)

A second floor office in San Francisco - 35 miles away?

"a superb example of how people can produce high-quality food 

in harmony with the environment." June 14, 2014

Press release from Tina Walker, Singer Associates 

on Pacific Legal Foundation web site.

An "office" next to the Willow Oaks Country Club in Virginia - 2,500 miles away?

"They are the best stewards that paradise could have."

Tom Kent, Kent Communciations, February 6, 2014

Partner with Sarah Rolph in trying to

raise money for projects now not clear, 

supporting DBOC remaining in Drakes Estero.

A home in Carlisle, Massachusetts - 2,700 miles away?

"The Lunnys are known as careful stewards of the land and water"

Website created in part by Sarah Rolph

supporting Drakes Bay Oyster Company's

continued commercial operation in

the Philip Burton Wilderness.

How to determine stewardship - West Marin citizens need to step out of the fog 
If one were to determine whether Drakes Bay Oyster Company has been a "good steward" of the marine environment as they claim, where would be the best place to determine whether in fact that was the case? Citizens of Marin County need to step out of the fog which public relations firms and individuals have surrounded this commercial operation with. Claims of environmental stewardship sink when facts are revealed through pictures on Coastodian.org.

Pawns in a greater game
This is not what lobbyists from San Francisco, a public relations firm in Virginia, and a self proclaimed "story teller" in Carlisle, Massachusetts describe it as. It is a commercial operation whose owners and employees are being used in a greater game by those whose objective is to open wilderness areas to other industrial commercial operations and to redefine wilderness so future wilderness areas are not protected. DBOC has not been a good steward of this wilderness estuary and it is far past time to go.

Drakes Bay Oyster Company: Case Management Meeting Monday July 7 To Determine Next Steps

Update 7/8: Time to wind it down.

Judge Gonzalez has given the Department of the Interior and Drakes Bay Oyster Company 30 days to develop a plan to wind down and cease the commercial operation in Drakes Estero. Another meeting will take place August 11. It has been suggested that DBOC consider relocating the operation to other tidelands in California, with Humboldt Bay being mentioned as a possible alternative. There the shellfish industry has been working with state officials to open large tracts of the northern portion. The image below shows for comparison the size of the two bodies of water. The red line is equal to one mile. Were the workers motivated money to start their own company would most likely be readily available for them to start their own company, providing wealth far beyond that from being an employee.

Humboldt Bay proposals (L, in blue) 

and Drakes Estero (R)

(click to enlarge)

(Humboldt Bay image information taken from 

shellfish industry paper dated August 29, 2013.)

Update 7/7: Perks and taxes - more responsibilities.

"You shall meet all commitments you make in your Campaign including, but not limited to, delivering all Perks you offered with your Campaign."
"You are responsible for collecting and remitting any taxes on Contributions, and any taxes due in connection with your Perks."

How regulated is crowdfunding and what

legal responsibilities are there?

The Press Democrat has reported Judge Yvonne Gonzalez will meet with attorneys for Drakes Bay Oyster Company and the Department of the Interior. After the Supreme Court refused to hear DBOC's case last week the injunction which had allowed the company to operate for the last 19 months without a permit was lifted, allowing for the completion of the marine wilderness area.

Awe shucks
At hand is how the operation will be brought to an end, something Kevin Lunny has claimed will devastate his business, but something which he knew full well would end November 29, 2012 when he purchased the operation. That Mr. Lunny chose not to plan for an orderly closure but instead fight a legal battle to the level of the Supreme Court was his choice and his alone. He has claimed it is not over until the last oyster is shucked. It is now time to shuck the last oyster and cease operations.

Hand full of gimme and a mouthful of much obliged
In the mean time, DBOC public relations people continue to ask for money from the public on one of the internet "crowdfunding" sites where individuals promote their causes asking for money from the public. In the case of DBOC, their initial attempt was to raise money to "maintain" an already existing website and expand their on-line presence. Various "perks" were offered to donors who provided funds, including free oysters, tours and picnics. A second "tranche" is now being sought. But...

Was that an expressed or implied contract offered to donors?
Sarah Rolph, "story teller" from Carlisle, Massachusetts and hoping to publish her 2nd book (on Drakes Bay Oyster Company) has posted a note that the "oyster farm picnic" is no longer available to those who donated funds at a certain level. She has suggested others who were promised oysters for donations at another level "visit as soon as you can," implying that offer may soon be off the table. It was unclear if those who donated and would not receive what they expected would have a portion of their donation refunded or what other legal obligations DBOC may have.  DBOC's public relations attorney Peter Prows may want to consider whether those offers of "gifts" for donations were an implied or expressed contract.

[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)

Is this what Marin County has fallen to?

One of OLT’s [Orient Land Trust's] main goals and reasons for forming was to help preserve naturism [nudism] at VVHS [Valley View Hot Springs] forever. (from Trojan Herring blog site)

Newly created web site focused on dismantling Marin County's

Environmental Action Committee tars the

credibility of Drakes Bay Oyster supporters

Movie producers seek out scripts written like this. Networks salivate for sitcoms with this much humor. Authors wake from sleep wishing they could remember the dream as inspiring as this. What is it? San Juan County's Ed Kilduff's Trojan Heron blog clone, the Trojan Herring, using an anonymous petition complaining about a land trust's Board straying from nudism to attack the Environmental Action Committee. Is this what Marin County wants?

Note: In an "infomercial" Ed Kilduff was interviewed by Marin County's Robin Carpenter on whether San Juan County and Marin County are similar and "why all the name calling" was going on. An earlier post commented on that interview, questioning the depth of reporting.

Bleating like a lost sheep in the field, the Trojan Herring blog site professes to proclaim that an anonymous "petition" with 100 signatures, with the following as one of its main points, is of significance to Marin County:

 The naturist lifestyle, which has been enjoyed for decades at VVHS, is now being altered. Some of the Board’s decisions have resulted in a decrease in naturism at VVHS, to where many of the members no longer feel comfortable practicing naturism. One of OLT’s main goals and reasons for forming was to help preserve naturism at VVHS forever. 

The former members of VVHS were promised before OLT was formed, that the word “naturism” would be placed in the OLT’s mission statement – and that was done. Although partially covered in the deed restriction, the new mission statement omits the word “naturism” entirely and it is no longer one of the mission statement’s goals. 

Clearly, saving nudism at the Hot Springs is not the case today. The new wording to the mission statement and the removal of the word “naturism” is a perfect example of how the original values of VVHS and OLT are being lost.

Maybe in San Juan County Ed Kilduff can motivate people this way. But in Marin County? Apparently it is the Marin County Ed Kilduff and his supporters at Freedom Foundation think it should be. As the Trojan Herring blog site notes:

This website is the sister site to TrojanHeron blogspot — the website for a nearly identical community in the San Juan Islands

Citizens in Marin County need to wake up and see through the fog being created by well paid lobbyists and public relations firms who care little for an oyster farm, but care greatly for commercial operations in designated wilderness areas.

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.

California Coastal Commission Has Acted Appropriately Against Drakes Bay Oyster Company

(Editors Note: Sometimes a response to an Op-ed piece is better made by commenting directly within the article.)

 

Background: In the February 16, 2012 issue of the Marine Independent Journal is a "Guest op-ed" by Phyllis Faber, a co-founder of the Marin Agricultural Land Trust and a creator/former commissioner of the California Coastal Commission. It is copied below with comments on her thoughts. Ms. Faber is respected and has devoted most of her life to the preservation of open spaces through conservation easements, and through the California Coastal Commission (CCC), helped control developments on shorelines. That said, Ms. Faber does the CCC and the Wilderness Act a disservice in her well intentioned but misplaced support for the continued operation of the commercial shellfish farm in Drakes Estero.

 

Ms. Faber

Photo, Marine Independent Journal

 

California Coastal Commission uses distorted information to condemn oyster farm, 2/16/13, Marin Independent Journal

Comment: Drakes Bay Oyster Company was not condemned by the California Coastal Commission (CCC). It was brought before the commission to address past violations it did not act on