Sunday, December 6, 2015

    So. There was a meeting last week where we learned that Fish and Wildlife are going to stick with the plan and open only after they've had a double "all-clear." Kind of disappointing but kind of expected in a risk-averse bureaucracy in a litigious society. So. Of the nine sampling sites, three tested clear on their most recent tests and the other six are close. If they test this week I would be surprised if there weren't seven passing grades. Santa Barbara needs to take care of their loose cannon, 1000 ppm red crabs. I mean, what the hell, SB? Are you trying to make Fort Bragg look better after their screw-up? Trying to make them look better by making a bigger ass of yourself is just sad. The most recent numbers can be viewed here.
    On the fishing front there were a few rockfish caught this week during a brief calmer spell. Nobody has sent in any photos to post, so I'm going to have to dig through my discard pile for pictures. Send your pictures to lawsonslanding@gmail.com , please, even if they're from last summer. Anything is better than this:

at

6 comments:

  1. UnknownDecember 6, 2015 at 2:32 PM

    Hell that's a great pic Willy.

    ReplyDelete
  2. SethoniousDecember 7, 2015 at 9:03 AM

    Can you please link to the numbers again? Also, do you have access to the records that DFW is doing an adequate data validation? If they are actually validating the data they can toss outlying points out of the sample. I would hate for our season to be held up because of a statistical or lab error. Most people might think that the data validation looks like a bunch of meaningless garbage, but it means something to me, so I would really like to see how they have established that these data are significant.

    ReplyDelete
  3. JHFishDecember 7, 2015 at 10:03 AM

    Willy, What was the Fort Bragg screw Up?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Willy VoglerDecember 7, 2015 at 10:32 AM

    The Fort Bragg "screw up" was just that while all the other ports were busy dropping their numbers, FB went up. It is possible that the samples came from different locations out of FB (bays seem to be cleaner than the open ocean) and that's why the numbers varied. If you look at the linked list, some of the testing sites seemed to change which could cause the numbers to change as well, I would think. As for the lab data validation, I don't know. It does look like there were two bad crabs off of San Miguel island, one at 1000 ppm and a second one that was probably close to 300 ppm. Two high crabs seem less likely to be someone sticking their finger in the flask, but one never knows.

    ReplyDelete
  5. ab fishDecember 7, 2015 at 4:03 PM

    So only 1 crab could kill you and it's not a dugeness open it allready. If it doesn't open soon the bay is gonna get flushed and cow shix gonna make em green or of to much fresh they won't stick around. What about a test on crab cleaned before cooking safer?

    ReplyDelete
  6. AnonymousDecember 8, 2015 at 9:57 AM

    http://www.cdph.ca.gov/pubsforms/Documents/fdbFrSSda10.pdf
    Latests test results

    http://www.cdph.ca.gov/HealthInfo/Pages/fdbDomoicAcidInfo.aspx
    Page where all test results can be seen.

    ReplyDelete