Park Service Cleared in Point Reyes Oyster Operation Complaint

Park Service Cleared in Point Reyes Oyster Operation Complaint
Environmental Effects of Industrial Shellfish Operations Remain Murky
Published on Jul 24, 2008 - 9:56:22 AM

WASHINGTON, D.C. July 24, 2008 - An official investigation has dispelled charges that the National Park Service was trying to drive a controversial commercial oyster operation at the Point Reyes National Seashore out of business, according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). A new report by the U.S. Department of Interior's Office of Inspector General concluded that Park Service employees engaged in no "disparate treatment" of the enterprise located in Drakes Estero, one of the most sensitive stretches of the national seashore.

The investigation was prompted by a wide-ranging complaint filed by the oyster company (Drake's Bay Oyster Company) operating within the park. After a year-long investigation, the Inspector General concluded that:

* There was "no indication" to support the main allegation by the oyster company that Park Service personnel were attempting to prematurely remove the company from the park;

* The oyster company operated illegally within the park for more than two years, until it finally agreed to sign a permit that will lapse in 2012 and cannot legally be extended; and

* Park Service scientists did not falsify scientific data, as the oyster company charged. Any inaccuracies in Park Service reports were corrected but since the reports carried no regulatory weight, the significance of any discrepancies was negligible.

"This report demonstrates that the Park Service employees acted professionally and in keeping with their obligations to protect and preserve the park's natural resources," stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch whose organization defends federal, state and local resource professionals who are targeted for retaliation in connection with trying to defend the environment. "We hope this report will end the long campaign against the dedicated staff at the Seashore. These public servants should be able to enforce the permit rules for all entities operating within the park without fear of being unjustly vilified."

The larger question of the environmental impacts of large scale oyster and other shellfish operations was not addressed by the Inspector General and remains unresolved. The law requires the Park Service to manage Drakes Estero as wilderness. Thus, after the 2012 permit expires, all mariculture operations must cease.

"This investigation is part of a concerted effort by this company and its lobbyists to build a case for amending the Wilderness Act in order to exempt this particular enterprise," Ruch added. "The Point Reyes National Seashore employees are charged with ensuring that the unique ecosystem of Drakes Estero is properly protected through its Congressional designation as wilderness. They should be allowed to do their jobs."

See the Inspector General report on Point Reyes:
www.peer.org

In the interest of fostering civil and issue-oriented discourse, YubaNet does not publish reader comments identified by anonymous Internet "handles" (fake user ID names like "farfromthinkin"). Your full and real name will be published with your comment. Your email address will not be shown, unless you specifically "uncheck" the box 'Hide my email.' By submitting a comment you consent to our rules.

Comments

Sarah Rolph
25 Jul 2008, 11:11

This report is incorrect. The Inspector General's report did indeed find that data was falsified.

Here is the SF Chronicle's first sentence about this same report:

(07-23) 20:43 PDT -- National Park Service officials overstated scientific data and deleted a key e-mail in a bitter dispute over an oyster farm's ecological impact on Drakes Bay in Marin County, according to a federal investigation.

Your statement "Park Service scientists did not falsify scientific data, as the oyster company charged" is untrue. Your attempt to weasel-word: "Any inaccuracies in Park Service reports were corrected" is certainly a novel way of presenting the fact that the team in question subsequently tried to cover up their lies. Your assertion that "but since the reports carried no regulatory weight, the significance of any discrepancies was negligible." is simply comical. Lies were perpetuated about this small business. That is not something most people would consider “negligible.”

Your article also misrepresents several other aspects of the controversy. "The larger question of the environmental impacts of large scale oyster and other shellfish operations was not addressed by the Inspector General" –yes, and so it is misleading to include this issue in your report. The IG was investigating the scientific misconduct of the NPS officials, and found that this charge was true. The IG was not investigating the issue of environmental impact, and so this is irrelevant; your inclusion of this issue seems meant to imply that there are negative "impacts," which is not true. It is misleading to say that this question "remains unresolved" because there is in fact a lot of scientific data showing that the estuary is being improved, not harmed, by the presence of the oyster aquaculture. That data is being ignored because of the NPS interest in disbanding the aquaculture, but it is readily available to those who seek it.

It is also false to claim that "The law requires the Park Service to manage Drakes Estero as wilderness. Thus, after the 2012 permit expires, all mariculture operations must cease."

In fact, this is an issue that is very much open to interpretation, which is the crux of the problem. When Point Reyes was turned into a National Seashore in the 1970s, the guidance document designated Drakes Estero, where the oyster farm is located, as "potential wilderness." Potential. The lease is in fact renewable in 2012. NPS has made a concerted effort to pretend otherwise, but the facts here, too, are readily available.