Drakes Bay Oyster Company is Granted an Injunction

Drakes Estero is Not

Invasive Tunicates on DBOC oysters

will continue to be spread in Drakes Estero.

(click to enlarge)

(Heidi Schumann for The New York Times)

 

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has granted Drakes Bay Oyster Company (DBOC) an emergency injunction allowing it to continue commercial operations until May. How the California Coastal Commission acts on its separate cease and desist order remains unknown.

 

What is known is DBOC's commercial operation is allowed to continue to spread the invasive Didemnum vexillum tunicate throughout its 1,000 acres of operation in Drakes Estero and beyond. Colonies growing on DBOC's non-native oysters break loose when harvested and float freely for weeks throughout Drakes Estero until settling onto a suitable substrate, whether they be native shellfish, or the non-native Pacific oysters grown (as seen in the picture above) or any other suitable substrate. This issue was of special concern in the recent cease and desist order issued by the California Coastal Commission.

 

It was weakly argued before the California Coastal Commission that Dv "is everywhere." What is not everywhere is the surface area for it to attach to and grow. More importantly is the movement of colonies throughout Drakes Estero which this commercial operation, and others like it, provide. National seashore or not, commercial shellfish operators do not currently believe their activities make a difference in the growth and spread of Dv. They do and it is significant, whether in Drakes Estero, Puget Sound, British Columbia or elsewhere.

 

Dv growth on aquaculture gear

in Okeover Inlet, British Columbia.

 

Dv growth on Taylor Shellfish mussels

in Totten Inlet, Puget Sound

 

Dv spreading on subtidal areas of Georges Bank

 

 

 

Didemnum vexillum colonies alter marine habitats and threaten to interfere with fishing, aquaculture, and other coastal and offshore activities. The colonies shown here [seen above]  are found on hard substrates that include dock structures and floats, wood and metal pilings, moorings and ropes, steel chain, automobile tires, polythene plastic, rock outcrops, gravel seabed (pebbles, cobbles, boulders), and ship hulls. They overgrow organisms such as tunicates, sponges, macroalgae, hydroids, anemones, bryozoans, scallops, mussels, and oysters. Where these colonies occur on the seabed, they likely cover the siphons of infaunal bivalves and also serve as a barrier between demersal fish and benthic prey. The colonies have been found at water depths ranging from intertidal to continental shelf depths of 65m (213 ft).

Why Does Drakes Estero Matter to the East Coast Shellfish Growers Association?

And why should you care?

click here if you do: http://www.change.org/petitions/protect-drakes-estero-with-the-wilderness-act

and here: https://secure.sierraclub.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=9781 

 

Drakes Estero, Part of

Point Reyes National Seashore

Recently the East Coast Shellfish Growers Association (ECSGA) Director Bob Rheault sent out an email to members describing the National Park Services as being on a "crusade" to eliminate a commercial shellfish operation and having "fabricated evidence and harassed good, hard-working people in their effort to eliminate 60 jobs and half of California's oyster production."

"used against our industry for decades to come."
His real concern wasn't about jobs or the operation. It was about the EIS showing the very real adverse impacts the shellfish operation was having, and would continue to have, on the wilderness shoreline area of Drakes Estero. More important to Mr. Rheault was that information would be "used against our industry for decades to come."  [click here for the EIS]

Invasive Tunicates on Drakes Bay Oysters

Wilderness and the Lunny Family
When the Lunny family purchased the commercial operation they made a tactical business decision which included trying to convince the National Park Service they should renew a lease which they knew expired in 2012. They were aware the National Park Service did not consider the commercial shellfish operation fitting within the definition of "wilderness" and operations would cease.

Debris from the Commercial Operation

Established by Congress in 1964, the National Wilderness Preservation System was created to ensure some areas would be preserved and protected in their natural condition for the permanent good of the people. These areas would be designated wilderness areas, further defined as "an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions." In 1976 it was decided that an area on Point Reyes, making up over 33,000 acres, would be designated "wilderness" or "potential wilderness", including Drakes Estero. Part of that decision included "efforts to steadily continue to remove all obstacles to the eventual conversion of these lands and waters to wilderness status." A major obstacle in achieving this goal was the shellfish operation whose lease expired in 2012.

Drakes Bay Oyster Company

"Wilderness"

In business there is risk. Sometimes it is out of our control. Sometimes it is within our control. When the Lunny Family purchased the commercial shellfish operation they were fully aware of the risk, including the fact that the lease expired in 2012. Their hope was they would be able to muster allies, including members of the shellfish industry, to help convince the Federal Government that somehow their commercial operation did, in fact, fit the definition of "wilderness." It does not.

Why the Shellfish Industry Cares so Much
As part of the decision process which the National Park Service used, an Environmental Impact Statement was required. In that EIS the NPS analyzed the various alternatives and what impacts those alternatives contained. Included in that analysis were impacts from the non-native Pacific Oyster and Manila Clam encroaching into native species' habitat; spreading of the non-native tunicate Didemnum vexillum from the shellfish farm operation; noise; visual; and erosion/accretion from the various structures used by the operation. The EIS was clear in its conclusions about the continued operation:

• It would result in long-term unavoidable adverse impacts on eelgrass, wetlands, wildlife and wildlife habitat (benthic fauna, fish, and birds) due to continued disturbance of sediments in Drakes Estero by another 10 years of DBOC (Drakes Bay Oyster Company)  motorboat use.
• Long-term unavoidable adverse impacts to the benthic fauna would result from the continued cultivation of nonnative species (Pacific oysters and Manila clams...) in Drakes Estero. [adverse impacts included were the establishment of nonnative breeding populations; substrate for the establishment and spread of the nonnative invasive tunicate Didemnum vexillum; and, adverse impacts on eelgrass]
• Noise would disrupt the bilogical activity of birds, such as foraging and resting behavior, potentially leading to a reduction in fitness and reproductive success. 
• The NPS would be unable to create the congressionally designated wilderness area.

Why does it matter to Puget Sound?
NOAA and Governor Gregoire, through lobbying from the shellfish industry at a national and state level, have created the National and State Shellfish Initiatives. Through these programs, immense pressure is being put on agencies to allow for the significant expansion of the shellfish industry along the shorelines and in the waters of Puget Sound. Primary species supported by the programs include the nonnative Pacific oysters and Manila clams, noted in the EIS as having a long-term and significant adverse impact, as well as the nonnative Gallo mussel. In addition, geoduck are being planted in densities and in areas they do not naturally grow, higher in the tidelands, through the use of PVC structures and "nurseries."

"The Wild Olympics are our common ground.

But the tidelands are mine."

 

At the same time, there is a major effort being put forth to create a "Wild Olympics" which would expand the wilderness on the Olympic Peninsula. Not yet included in that effort is the recognition that tidelands play as important a role, if not more so, than the rivers and forests being proposed for inclusion. Instead, these tidelands are being looked at as "shellfish factories" which the proposed wilderness areas will protect. In that function they are being smothered with grow-out bags; filled with PVC pipes, placed every square foot; and covered with netting. All altering the habitat supporting native species.

The nearshore environment is being impacted by far more than upland development. It is now the shellfish industry which is being brought under scrutiny, as it should be. The tone and attitude are reflected in the following email sent to the East Coast Shellfish Growers Association. Will this attitude and tone be what guides the decision on Drakes Estero and the future of Puget Sound's tidelands?

(From Bob Rheault, Executive Director of the East Coast Shellfish Growers Association to its members)

Folks
for the past five years I have periodically shared with you the tawdry details of the crusade by the National Park service to eliminate the oyster farm in Drakes Estero outside San Francisco. The NPS has falsified data, hidden exculpatory evidence, fabricated evidence and harassed good, hard-working people in their effort to eliminate 60 jobs and half of California's oyster production.

In what should beheld up as a sterling example of sustainable food production in harmony with nature, we see instead a farm being vilified by misguided government scientists and administrators.

What is worse is that the shoddy, misleading "science" being used to vilify these good people will be used against our industry for decades to come. We must stand up and defend these guys. We have evidence of fraud, data manipulation, incompetence, violations of national scientific integrity policies. Yet the NPS refuses to pull any of their discredited publications down.

Invasive Tunicate Spreading in Point Reyes Shellfish Farm

Didemnum vexillum ("marine vomit") smothering oysters

in Point Reyes shellfish farm

[click here for the Marin Indepent Journal article]

 

The non-native invasive tunicate, Didemnum vexillum (Dv) is spreading within the commercial oyster farm located in the Point Reyes National Seashore, part of the Drakes Estero area. Dv is considered the most invasive of the tunicate family and is found in Totten Inlet within Taylor Shellfish's existing mussel farm in Gallagher Cove. It spreads when colonies are broken off, in this case during oyster harvesting or, in the case of Totten Inlet, when mussels are harvested.

Invasive Tunicate Dv from

Taylor's Gallagher Cove Mussel Farm



(photo courtesy of Woods Hole Science Center)

[cick here for additional photos from Taylor's Gallagher Cove mussel farm]

 

Dv is a "colonial" tunicate which can spread when portions are dislodged. Those parts float free in the current and are able to re-attach for up to 4 weeks, more than ample time to leave Totten Inlet and enter the waters of south Puget Sound. 

 

A recent peer-reviewed study published in "Bilogical Invasions" has shown that anthropogenic activities, including commercial shellfish farming, can be a threat to increasing the spread of this invasive tunicate, noting: " D. vexillum can inflict ecological and economic damage through biofouling and habitat modification. Natural and anthropogenic processes that fragment colonies of D. vexillum may be accelerating the spread of this invader. Reattachment success and fragment viability were confirmed in the laboratory after four weeks of suspension in experimental aquaria." [click here for abstract]

 

The spread of the invasive Dv tunicate in the Point Reyes National Seashore is most likely tied directly to the operation of the shellfish farm. According to Ted Grosholz, a University of California at Davis marine ecologist who conducted the estero survey, the oyster farm structures provide a base for "fouling species" like D. vexillum. As seen in the picture above, the harvested oysters also provide a suitable substrate.

 

Dislodging colonies during harvesting allows them to drift within the National Seashore area and reattach when suitable substrate is found, including " establishing new colonies on the various structures used in shellfish farming or the planted shellfish.

.

Taylor Shellfish's proposed 58 raft facility will have over 40,000 lines of mussels on which Dv will be able to establish itself, as it did in Gallagher Cove. Each time these mussels are harvested, established colonies will have portions break loose which will be allowed to float free within the waters of Totten Inlet, flowing into south Puget Sound on the outgoing tides.

 

Cumulative impacts are real, in part why the permit for Taylor's proposed mussel farm was denied. Thurston County Commissioners will hear Taylor's appeal to this permit denial November 14.

 

 

 

 

"There isn't any place I'm aware of that the tunicates are causing harm on the shellfish farms,"

Why would Taylor Shellfish state "There isn't any place I'm aware of that the tunicates are causing harm on the shellfish farms,"
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501363_162-57331539/environmental-programs-fall-victim-to-budget-cuts
"When Washington's Legislature trimmed $30 million, or 27 percent, from the state Department of Fish and Wildlife's budget, three employees who had been diving in the Puget Sound to hunt down invasive sea squirts lost their jobs.
The gelatinous invaders, known as tunicates, form a goopy mat on the sea floor, raising fears that they will hurt the shellfish industry, as they have in eastern Canada.
"We are basically addressing tunicates on an emergency basis only," said Allen Pleus, Washington state's aquatic invasive species coordinator..."There isn't any place I'm aware of that the tunicates are causing harm on the shellfish farms," said Bill Dewey, of Taylor Shellfish Farms in Shelton, Wash."
Images from Woodshole seem to clearly show non-native invasive Tunicates causing harm at Taylor Shellfish's mussel rafts in Totten Inlet:
http://woodshole.er.usgs.gov/project-pages/stellwagen/didemnum/images/pdf/wash4b.pdf
The British Columbia Shellfish Growers Association says this on their Aquatic Invasive Species page:
"On Canada’s East coast, invasive tunicates have resulted in significant grow-out, harvesting and processing challenges for the mussel farming industry."
"Tunicates can out compete and suffocate filter feeding bivalves such as mussels and oysters."

Taylor Shellfish has a great deal to loose if their mussel farm is found to be a vector for non-native invasive tunicates.  Taylor Shellfish has a great deal to loose if these tunicates smother their cultured mussels (which the Woodshole images seem to show clearly happening).  Taylor Shellfish has a great deal to loose if what they believe isn't currently causing harm begins to smother oysters which other growers in Totten Inlet and south Puget Sound are culturing.

Sometimes it is better to react to a problem before it becomes an ecological disaster.  Washington State should reconsider its budget cut which eliminated the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's program to control invasive tunicates.  Taylor Shellfish should reconsider their statement, for the good of everyone, and work towards helping reinstate funding for WDFW to control this very real threat to Puget Sound's ecosystem.