1. We had toxic events in 1974 (5 dead) 1989 (reported 17 intoxicated, 3 dead), Dic. 2000 to Nov. 2001 (at least 54 intoxicated , no deaths)

   P. bahamense is detected in the water almost year round, but most abundant from the onset of the rainy season, with the highest numbers from Set-Nov (peak of reiny season). During 1999, Spondylus calcifer meat analysis shows toxin profile that resembles Gymnodinium catenatum, which occurs, usually with lower concentrations, w/ the P. bahamense blooms.

2. During 1999 and 2000, I informed the Instituto Costarricense de la Pesca (INCOPESCA) and health authorities of the danger. But I had been warning them since the 1989 bloom, every time I observed an increase in cell concentration of G. catenatum and P. bahamense. I had no way to prove the toxin accumulation in shellfish until Drs. Kodama and Ogata, from Univ. of Tokio (1999) performed the analysis by HPLC and proved that the toxin concentration in S. calcifer was high enough to kill an adult person (S. calcifer is the species that accumulates the highest levels of toxins, although it is not the favourite of consumers). Therefore, I informed the authorities again in June, July and November 2000. Still no one pay attention (it probably sounded like "the wolf is coming" over and over) since in previous years no human poisonings were reported. However, we constantly get unofficial (anecdotic) reports of someone that has been poisoned by PSP or DSP.

   After the first human poisoning in Jan. 2001, the government decided to monitor the shellfish toxin content in shellfish.

3. Newspaper from Nicaragua reported closure of shellfish grounds during previous years, coincident with times of increase of P. bahamense in the Golfo de Nicoya, in Costa Rica. In 1999, I convened a short workshop with people from Central America and with the invaluable help of Roberto Cortés-Altamirano from Mexico. A short training on phytoplankton taxonomy was followed by a discussion of the ubiquitous occurrence of P. bahamense and the local needs for creating the facilities for a monitoring program. The sad conclusion is that, exception made of Guatemala and Costa Rica, the other countries do not have the most elemental facilities to work with phytoplankton (microscope, basic labware, etc.), they do have people that might be interested in training and working in monitoring.

4. See below list of shellfish mostly consumed. Shellfish are harvested by artisanal fishermen families, mainly women and children. Several projects are on way to re populate some areas that were over fished devoid of shellfish and to teach women and children to grow and harvest them. From Jan-October 2001 the government invested US$1.5 million in assistance to the people whose income depended on shellfish and in the sampling program.

5. I am in the process of writing a recommendation of a monitoring program. However, I do not see possible that the government alone can carry it out. Researchers from the Universities must lend a hand.

The only regulations, so far are the legislation that bans shellfish harvesting.