You are here

Public Comments Run Against Extension of Oyster Company Lease at Point Reyes National Seashore

Share

Due to pressure from U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the National Park Service is performing an exhaustive environmental impact statement on an oyster farm that operates in Drakes Estero at Point Reyes National Seashore. NPS photo of the estero.

Spurred by a U.S. senator determined to reverse congressional action from four decades ago, Point Reyes National Seashore officials are compiling a voluminous environmental impact statement on whether an oyster farm or official wilderness should occupy Drakes Estero.

The costly undertaking isn't without public appeal. While fewer than 200 comments were received on Grand Canyon National Park's mule rides, more than 4,000 comments were fielded by Point Reyes officials on whether Drakes Bay Oyster Co. should have its lease expire in 2012, as Congress directed in 1976, with the estero then being designated official wilderness.

That would have been the case if not for Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who in 2009 attached a rider to an appropriations bill giving Interior Secretary Ken Salazar the authority, but not a mandate, to extend the operation's lease another 10 years. With that nudging from the California Democrat, the Interior secretary saw that the Park Service conduct a full-blown EIS on the question of extending the lease, something it did not have to do.

An opinion from the Interior Department's solicitor in 2004 made it clear that the oyster farm would be incompatible with a wilderness designation. In that opinion, the solicitor's staff said "the Park Service clearly has the authority to terminate the Reservation and to direct (the oyster company) to vacate the property on which it operates," and that "(R)emoval of (the oyster company) from the Point Reyes National Seashore property and its oyster farming from the Estero, would allow the Service to begin the conversion of the area to wilderness status, which directive Congress charged the Park Service to accomplish."

Sen. Feinstein's pressure, however, gave the Interior Department and the Park Service the opportunity to officially examine the impacts of the oyster farm and hear what the public thought of it.

“It’s been debated in the press, it’s been debated in many forums, but this is actually the first time the public’s had an opportunity to weigh-in in a formal compliance process," said Brannon Ketcham, the park's hydrologist.

Along with examining water quality issues and biological impacts on the estero by the oyster operation, part of the environmental review, Mr. Ketcham said, will include revisiting the history behind the oyster farm's lease.

That history dates to November 1972 when Charles Johnson, owner of the Johnson Oyster Co., sold the 5 acres on the shores of Drakes Estero on which his processing facility sat, to the Interior Department for $79,200, with the understanding that he, or any successors to his company, could maintain operations for 40 years, or until November 30, 2012.

Four years later Congress passed the Point Reyes Wilderness Act, which directed the Park Service to manage the estero as official wilderness once the 40-year period was up. Since then, the oyster operation was purchased by the Lunny family, which has lived in the area for three generations.

The estero is a biologically rich and important landscape for wildlife, according to a Park Service fact sheet on the estero.

Drakes Estero is one of the most ecologically pristine estuaries in California and the only coastal waters in the California that are in the National Wilderness Preservation System. Biotically, the estuary is exceptional:

• Extensive eelgrass beds support rare and specially protected species

• Reduced presence of non-native species: recent surveys show that many invasive species are only found where mariculture and oyster racks occur, but not in Limantour Estero (on the eastern end of the estero).

• One of the largest harbor seal populations in California with numbers surpassing 1800

• Identified as significant area for the US Shorebird Conservation Plan: 86 Species of birds recorded in 2004, including Osprey and Black Brant.

• USFWS recognizes 18 species of concern, including Red-legged frog, Western Snowy Plover, Brown Pelican, Peregrine Falcon, and Marbled Murrelet.

• Recent fish survey identified over 30 species of fish, including rare and endangered species such as coho salmon, steelhead trout and three-spined stickleback.

• Rare plants occur along the shoreline of the estuary.

But controversy has dogged the Park Service's handling of the oyster company operations. The National Research Council was highly critical of a Park Service report that outlined the oyster operation's impacts to the estero. That report, the research council said in May 2009, was "selectively" manipulated in several areas, and inconclusive overall.

"...the adverse or beneficial effects of oyster farming cannot be fully understood given the existing data and analyses," stated a news release from the council, which is an arm of the National Academies that also includes the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. "Furthermore, the National Park Service report, 'Drakes Estero: A Sheltered Wilderness Estuary,' in some instances selectively presented, over-interpreted, or misrepresented the available scientific information on DBOC (Drakes Bay Oyster Co.) operations by exaggerating the negative and overlooking potentially beneficial effects."

A study of shellfish mariculture in Drakes Estero compiled by the Ocean Studies Board of the National Academy of Sciences pointed to both benefits and impacts of the oyster farm. That 2009 study pointed out that the native Olympia oysters were lost to over-harvesting in the mid-1800s and that while the Pacific oyster now being farmed "is not a direct replacement of the native populations of the Olympia oyster, it may be viewed as providing similar biogeochemical functions and ecological resilience."

But the study also noted that the lack of eelgrass below the suspended racks of oysters "represents a small-scale and localized impact on the biogenic habitat." Additionally, "(N)umerous boat propeller scars in the eelgrass beds, partially affecting a total area of about 50 acres, are also evident and attributable to oyster culturists because they are the only ones allowed to use motorized vessels in the estero.

"Nevertheless, the total percentage of eelgrass area lost (1%) or partially degraded by propeller scars (7%) and thus attributable to oyster mariculture represents about 8% of all eelgrass habitat in Drakes Estero as of 2007."

The estero is important habitat for harbor seals, according to the study, which notes that it supports "about 20 percent of the mainland California population."

Along with considering the findings of those studies, Mr. Ketcham said the seashore staff also would look into a wide-range of issues raised during the public comment period, including the socio-economic impacts of the oyster operation.

Park Service officials system-wide state that public comments should not be construed as votes that they have to follow. Nevertheless, according to an analysis of the public comments by the National Parks Conservation Association, a 3-1 majority opposes an extension of the oyster company's lease.

Point Reyes officials hope to have a draft EIS ready for public review late this summer, with a final EIS in the spring of 2012 with a record of decision signed before the current lease expires.

Comments

While it's true that eelgrass growth has been less underneath the racks, there can be means to alleviate this in the future. I've actually heard that overall eelgrass growth in the area **around** the oyster racks has been much improved, although light restriction might restrict eelgrass growth. The following report cites sources that suggest that it could be mitigated via different spacing of the racks to allow more light in.

http://www.alsamarin.org/pdfs/CSG%20report1%20070508.pdf

Interestingly, species diversity and richness were greatest close to the oyster racks, which indicated that the physical structure of the oyster racks provided resources for a variety of fish species (e.g., feeding opportunities and/or refuge). He [UC Davis masters thesis writer Jesse Wechsler] concluded:

Because species richness and species diversity were greatest in the samples taken adjacent to the oyster racks, it is likely that the physical structure associated with the oyster mariculture facility has enhanced habitat complexity, thereby providing additional resources (e.g., cover and feeding opportunities) for fish.

** **

Wechsler’s thesis was funded by the National Park Service. It is reasonable to assume that Neubacher wanted Wechsler to find major impacts of the oysters on the local ecology. However, he concluded that oyster mariculture in the Estero:
• has had no negative impact on eelgrass beds;
• has had no negative impact on the diversity and abundance of fish species;
• has provided habitat for many fish species for both feeding and refuge leading to an increase in fish species richness; and
• has had no negative impact on water quality.
In short, there is substantial evidence suggesting that the oyster farm has had no negative impact on the ecology of Drake’s Estero. Moreover, there is evidence that the oyster facility has positively impacted the richness of a number of fish species, and that removing the oyster facility from Drake’s Estero would eliminate an important structural feature supporting the Estero’s native fish biodiversity.

** **

The study also examined eelgrass beds in light of the concern in coastal environments that oyster facilities might lead to a loss of eelgrass beds. Wechsler reported that eelgrass beds are prevalent throughout the Drake’s Estero ecosystem, and that the normal distribution of eelgrass beds in Schooner Bay indicated that its productivity was not affected significantly by oyster mariculture. He did find that eelgrass growth is restricted directly beneath the oyster racks due to light attenuation, but he went on to suggest that this could be alleviated simply by changing the spacing between the oyster lines. Wechsler also studied the impact of the oyster farm on water quality. He found no indications of any deterioration in water quality adjacent to the oyster racks.

** **

In contrast to the claims in the local popular press, the evidence shows that the eelgrass beds are healthy and that they have significantly expanded in their coverage from 1991 to 2007. The Department of Fish and Game (DFG), in collaboration with the PRNS, have used high-resolution aerial photographs of Drake’s Estero at low tides from 1991 and 2007 to compare the extent of the eelgrass coverage. In 1991, there were 367.8 acres of eelgrass in Drake’s Estero, whereas in 2007 there are 736.3 acres, a doubling of the coverage, with eelgrass growing closer to and surrounding the oyster racks. Moreover, independent scientists from both DFG and U.C.’s California Sea Grant have reported that the eelgrass beds appear very healthy. This is good news, since along the California coast, eelgrass beds have otherwise been retreating and are in decline.


YPW,
I'm impressed, really to see such a logical, practical and factual presentation. Not often seen or acknowledged in present day environmentalism from the demonization of the public, private sector, mules in the Canyon, loss of range or even existence for Wolverines EXCEPT in instances of allowing Sierra Club Members to ride mules to catch their raft trips on the Colorado or hike the John Muir Trail at the expense of very shy Wolverines (none exist there anymore). You can look throughout NPS and their relationship with SC and other radical organizations that have created an industry funded by the tax payers paying for attorney led suits against ourselves. Environmental pimps clinging to their message. If these organizations could refrain from filing lawsuits against the governments that EMPLOY their co-conspirators it would help the deficit if that's not to much to ask. What IS the amount that the taxpayers pay for the suits that are filed against, yes, the taxpayers. Just bringing a topic of conversation. Inquiring minds want to know, especially when it's on their ticket. I would like to hear a rebuttal if I'm wrong in anything I've presented.
YPW, I'm saying this as a big supporter of wild things on the California coast and how much it means to the people that connect to it "and get a little dirty."


I just wanted to clarify what the 40 year reservation of use actually says:

http://www.marinmagazine.com/Marin-Magazine/November-2008/The-Oyster-War/

Neubacher insists the oyster farm RUO doesn’t contain that option. “There wasn’t a conversion clause in the RUOs,” he says. Nonetheless, language in the oyster farm’s RUO certainly seems to support Lunny’s argument: “Upon expiration of the reserved term, a special use permit may be issued for the continued occupancy of the property for the herein describe purposes.” (Emphasis added.)

Oyster farm opponents contend, however, that the more restrictive provisions of the Point Reyes Wilderness Act, passed four years after the Lunny’s RUO was written, take precedence.

As far as I'm concerned, the oyster farm is a net plus for the environment of Drakes Estero. If you really want to do something to benefit the wildlife, it's going to take banning kayaks from the waters and removing the hikers from nearby trails. And good luck keeping aircraft from flying overhead.


y_p_w, I'm not sure what the point is of underlining the language concerning extending the special use permit. The lease also clearly states its initial duration was 40 years. Four years after that lease was signed, Congress passed the wilderness legislation for Point Reyes and, according to the solicitor's office, made clear its intent that the estero should become wilderness.

So it would seem that that permissive clause pretty quickly became moot, no? And even if the wilderness intent wasn't made clear, the language does not mandate the Park Service to extend the lease. If anything, the lease language gave the agency ample ways to terminate the lease.

And the beneficial or negative merits of the farming operation also would seem to be moot if one accepts the solicitor's finding that the operation -- good, bad, or indifferent for the estero -- on its face is a non-conforming use in a wilderness area.


Change the Wilderness designation for Drakes Bay. That would accomplish the right thing rather than make the reality moot. Change it to make the designation right with the facts or is it the intention of NPS decide against reality? Oh man, did I say those words, LOL!

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!".....Benjamin Franklin


Deep, you do raise the obvious solution, though I wonder whether that would open yet another can of worms? Would the entire 1976 Point Reyes National Seashore Act have to be dispatched, or could Congress do selective surgery?


Kurt, pretty obvious that government has got the idea they can do anything they want. Doesn't matter whether it's good for the country or not. Just crazy out there.
I am POSITIVE there could be an amendment correcting a wrong. There could be willingness, I suppose, by some to lay off the pressure on the Oyster operation and renew the lease rather than take the chance of scrutiny going beyond this singular issue. Pretty frustrating for individuals working day in and day out being productive in one of the most compatible uses when their fate is tossed around in a purely political way. Need to get rid of POLITICAL CORRECTNESS and the world would be better off, LOL!


Kurt Repanshek:
y_p_w, I'm not sure what the point is of underlining the language concerning extending the special use permit. The lease also clearly states its initial duration was 40 years. Four years after that lease was signed, Congress passed the wilderness legislation for Point Reyes and, according to the solicitor's office, made clear its intent that the estero should become wilderness.

So it would seem that that permissive clause pretty quickly became moot, no? And even if the wilderness intent wasn't made clear, the language does not mandate the Park Service to extend the lease. If anything, the lease language gave the agency ample ways to terminate the lease.

Terminate the lease? Maybe let it run its course, but probably not terminate. I do understand that former Supt Neubacher even threatened to have the lease terminated early for some permit and other violations that dated back to the Johnson ownership. I've heard that the Lunnys would like to fix them, but how do you justify extensive repairs if it's only going to condemned in less than two years.

Also - I wanted to point out the renewal clause because someone reading your article without background would be under the impression that in 1972 it was written up as a strict 40 year term with no means of renewal. I know it gets complicated because of the 1976 Point Reyes Wilderness Act, and it gets even more complicated with Senator Feinstein's rider in that omnibus appropriations bill.


Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.