Oysters of the West Coast 



225 



lar piece ; those from cultivated beds 

 somewhat larger. 



Although California (San Francisco 

 County) is credited in the report of the 

 United States Fish Commissioner for 

 1904 with producing 300,000 pounds, of 

 the value of $92,000, the principal supply 

 of that city is derived from certain local- 

 ities in Washington, which state, ac- 

 cording to the same report, exhibits a 

 yield of 1,069,461 pounds (equal to 

 152,780 bushels), valued at $279,312, 

 while the Oregon statistics show only 

 6,944 pounds, worth $1,488. It will be 

 seen that the value of "natives" for the 

 year, in the three states, makes a total of 

 $372,800 — no insignificant sum — being 

 more than half the value of the annual 

 output of the Atlantic or transplanted 

 oyster. 



The oyster-beds of Washington are 

 subject to occasional severe climatic con- 

 tingencies. 



The Puget Sound oyster-beds are at 

 Samish Bay, in Skagget County ; Oyster 

 Bay, in Mason County, and Mud Bay, 

 Big Skookum, and North Bay, in Thurs- 

 ton County ; on the ocean coast of Wash- 

 ington, Shoalwater or Willapa Bay and 

 Toke Point cove. The Oregon region 

 is pretty much restricted to Yaquina Bay, 

 in Lincoln County. 



On the night of January 13, 1907, the 

 concurrence of an unusually low tide 

 and a cold snap, the temperature having 

 fallen to 18 degrees below the freezing- 

 mark, was disastrous to the oysters and 

 oyster-beds, both native and eastern 

 plants, in many localities in different 

 parts of Puget Sound. The loss was 

 estimated at "several hundred thousand 

 dollars," as "new beds will have to be 

 planted, and it will be five years before 

 the so-called 'Olympia oyster' will again 

 be on the market." 



All along our western coasts the tides 

 range very large in January, running 

 above average height and below average 

 low water. Here (San Francisco) they 

 ranged from 7 to 8 feet in January. At 

 Olympia they must range nearly three 

 times that (17.2 feet). In June there is 

 a good range, but not equal to January. 



Of course there are certain conditions 

 that decrease or increase the range. 

 Strong southerly winds would run the 

 low tide much below the average. A 

 strong southerly gale on the coast at San 

 Francisco has run the high water to 9.93 

 feet, or more than three feet above the 

 average, as stated by Prof. George David- 

 son. 



The low June tides mentioned by Pro- 

 fessor Davidson, offer exceptional oppor- 

 tunities to the observer and collector of 

 marine life along the shore. So large an 

 area of the sea bed is uncovered that 

 many forms not to be had between or- 

 dinary tides are then obtainable. 



Then, too, the famous geoduck,* known 

 to science as Panopca gencrosa, the 

 "Giant clam of Puget Sound," is ac- 

 cessible. It sometimes reaches the weight 

 of sixteen pounds. From an epicurian 

 point of view, it holds the same relation 

 to other edible mollusks that woodcock 

 and Chesapeake Bay "canvas-backs" do 

 to other birds, and "stewed terrapin" to 

 other dainties. The late Professor Baird 

 would have given a thousand or two dol- 

 lars to have successfully planted this bi- 

 valve on the Atlantic side of the con- 

 tinent. 



South of the boundary line of the 

 United States and Mexico, on the outer 

 shores of the peninsula of Lower Cali- 

 fornia, as well as in the Gulf of Cali- 

 fornia, 600 to 700 miles long, the two 

 shores making a reach of 1,200 to 1,40a 

 miles, we have a region which we may 

 safely assume includes many localities 

 exceptionally well adapted for oyster 

 culture. The general mollusk-fauna of 

 the Gulf is particularly rich in number of 

 species and abundance of individuals. 



This fauna includes several species of 

 oysters, of which two more are of good,, 

 merchantable size and worthy of men- 

 tion, as sooner or later they will find a 

 place in trade quotations. One of these 



* Pronounced gwo'-duck; also known as 

 Glycimeris generosa. See my paper on above, 

 with numerous figures, in Bulletin of the U. S. 

 Fish Commission, vol. in, No. 23, October 19, 

 1883, and Annual Report of the American- 

 Fisheries Society, April meeting, 1885 ; also- 

 Forest and Stream, May 28, 1885. 



