NorthWest Kayak Anglers
Regional Discussions => Oregon Kayak Fishing => Topic started by: alpalmer on February 17, 2018, 02:04:06 PM
-
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/bill_monroe/index.ssf/2018/02/south_oregon_coast_crabbing_sh.html#incart_river_home
-
It's my fault. I bought a shellfish tag again and am being punished for being irrationally optimistic...
-
I don't understand this. In WA, they close beaches for clamming for D.A. (I think). Which is understandable since you def. can get the domoic acid poisoning eating clams/oysters/mussels. Crab harvest is usually still allowed since they say it stays in the viscera and isn't found in the meat. Am I confused about this? I do feel a little squeamish eating crab from areas where shellfish harvest is closed though...
-
What's hard to understand? There's a toxin in crabs that cannot be neutralized by cooking, for which there's no antidote, and which is poisonous to more than just people - and the discarded viscera, with its toxins, ends up somewhere in the environment.
It's aggravating, but I'm okay with someone making a conservative judgment call on this.
-
I don't understand this. In WA, they close beaches for clamming for D.A. (I think). Which is understandable since you def. can get the domoic acid poisoning eating clams/oysters/mussels. Crab harvest is usually still allowed since they say it stays in the viscera and isn't found in the meat. Am I confused about this? I do feel a little squeamish eating crab from areas where shellfish harvest is closed though...
The way I understand it, the domoic acid leeches out from the viscera when the crab is cooked whole, thereby "contaminating" the meat. I have no evidence to support this theory, but I would think that if one "backs" the crab prior to cooking the risk is minimized. But closures are closures. Recent test results can be found here: http://www.oregon.gov/ODA/shared/Documents/Publications/FoodSafety/CurrentCrabBiotoxinData.pdf
-
Good answers, thanks. I guess I was wondering more about the difference between the rules of the two states. Better to err on the side of caution.
-
Both Oregon and Washington appear to both use the 20 parts per million standard. I would assume both crab and clams are tested simultaneously and when one species shows elevated levels, that increased scrutiny is applied to the others. But, I could be wrong. Not sure why crab might not be affected when razor clams are other than location where they are harvested, water depth possible, distance from shore/beach.
-
What's hard to understand? There's a toxin in crabs that cannot be neutralized by cooking, for which there's no antidote, and which is poisonous to more than just people - and the discarded viscera, with its toxins, ends up somewhere in the environment.
You missed the point Tink. What’s hard to understand is why two neighboring states view the hazard completely different. Has nothing to do with polluting the environment. It was a simple question.
-
Flew right over it.
-
I guess I could have talked about how each state is allowed to set its own health standards or something similar but that seemed too obvious an answer for the question. Oregon and California take very similar approaches to closures for domoic acid content in shellfish. Washington apparently does its own thing.
-
+1 for Zac. Nice to be able to ask a reasonable question ???
-
Razors retain DA for a very long time relative to other invertebrates. That's why razors are closed and crab can be open in the same area at the same time.