Sarah Rolph 
Member since Nov 14, 2012


Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.


  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Ninth Circuit Rejects Oyster Farm's Appeal

It's not correct to say that "the oyster farm's request for appeal was rejected by the entire Ninth Circuit." It was a split decision. Read the opinion here:… The dissent begins on page 38.

1 like, 5 dislikes
Posted by Sarah Rolph on 01/14/2014 at 5:12 PM

Re: “Monday Must Read: Senators Reach Bipartisan Deal on Immigration Reform; Judge Seemed Unsympathetic to Oyster Farm's Arguments

The idea that the oyster farm's continuing operations would "delay the creation of the first marine wilderness on the West Coast" is nonsense.

This area is part of a National Seashore that gets roughly three million visitors per year. There's a road running through it. Drakes Estero is widely used for both private and commercial kayaking, launched from the same exact spot as the oyster farm's shore operations. The Park Service is saying it isn't going to change any of that. So there is no sense in which the estero will actually become "wilderness." Its designation on paper will simply change. It is already a spectacularly pristine estero. I have paddled there and you can't even see the oyster farm after the first few minutes of the paddle.

This is a manufactured controversy. The Park Service is trying to cover up the fact that it lied about the oyster farm causing environmental harm. NPS has been peddling the same sorry lies for the past seven years. Look around on the web at other sources and you will see that this outfit, the East Bay Express, is just about the only place that is still promoting the false narrative created by the Park Service.

Please read what Peter Gleick has to say about this topic:…

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Sarah Rolph on 01/29/2013 at 4:27 AM

Re: “The Oyster Farm Goes to Court

Please read this for the facts of the matter:

1 like, 2 dislikes
Posted by Sarah Rolph on 01/25/2013 at 6:53 AM

Re: “Drakes Bay Oyster Company Is Still Illegal

Name-calling is not a sign of credibility. Ms. Hanson insists she is correct, but offers no facts.

Sadly, this is typical of the anti-oyster-farm activists. Lots of emotion, but no real argument.

3 likes, 7 dislikes
Posted by Sarah Rolph on 11/21/2012 at 3:54 AM

Re: “Drakes Bay Oyster Company Is Still Illegal

The California Coastal Commission is not a "state regulator." It is a state agency that has limited oversight and is mostly famous for having way too much power to push people around. The Pacific Legal Foundation is a good place to start if you want to learn about what the Commission spends its time on.

The relevant state agency here is the California department of Fish & Game, which oversees Drakes Estero (the location of the oyster farm). If there were any serious complaints against the oyster farm, they would be lodged with Fish & Game. **This has never happened.**

The CCC has been making nuisance complaints against the Lunnys for years as part of the campaign against the oyster farm. The complaints are manufactured for the express purpose of making life hard for the Lunnys (and easy for the EAC). For example, I was at the oyster farm two weeks ago and saw the latest manufactured complaint--the oyster shack now has some big planters in front of it so that cars won't park so close to the door. Those planters are "unpermitted activity" that the CCC says must "cease and desist."

Do readers wonder why these stories about Drakes Bay Oyster always quote both Amy Trainer and the CCC? But nobody else? Folks, these are press releases that you are being fed as news stories.

10 likes, 17 dislikes
Posted by Sarah Rolph on 11/14/2012 at 10:07 AM

Readers' Favorites

Most Popular Stories

© 2017 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation