INSIDE THIS ISSUE:

Next Meeting: Feb 12^th - Tim Visel speaks on: Aquaculture in the Classroom ........................page 1
Professor Harald Rosenthal Highlights Recent Trends in European Aquaculture...................................page 2
Report on the Longline Shellfish Aquaculture Technology Conference...................................page 3
Report on the Conference on Shellfish Restoration at Hilton Head, SC........................page 6
Upcoming Meetings.............................................page 9
Are Hard Clams Stocks Dwindling?...................page 10
New CRMC Regulations for Marine Leases.......page 12

Next Meeting -Wednesday, February 12^th at 7:00 PM URI, Main Campus, Chafee Hall, Room 277

Guest Speaker Tim Visel, Director of the Sound School Regional Vocational Aqua-culture Program in New Haven, CT will be speaking on the subject of Aquaculture in the Classroom.

Aquaculture provides an ideal vehicle for teaching a host of concepts in an integrated fashion, helping students see how the various classes they are taking can be applied to real-life challenges. Concepts as diverse as chemistry, biology, mathematics, and physics all gain relevance when taught in a framework of water quality monitoring, animal health and nutrition, business management, and hydraulic systems; unified under the umbrella of an aquaculture curriculum.

Several curricula have been developed for secondary schools and college level educators and the response of students has been very enthusiastic. Connecticut has invested heavily in vocational aquaculture programs at the secondary school level, while several other states (Rhode Island among them) are starting up various educational programs geared around aquaculture.

Tim Visel will describe the various programs available in Connecticut, highlighting some of the successes and challenges he has faced getting these programs started.

Our meetings are free and open to the public.

For information contact OSAA president Robert Rheault, (401)783-3360 e-mail to: oysters@ids.net

Professor Harald Rosenthal Highlights Recent Trends in European Aquaculture

Professor Harald Rosenthal, of the University of Kiel in Germany, gave two impressive presentations on aquaculture at URI in December. First, Rosenthal met with OSAA members to describe recent developments in the European aquaculture industry. The next day he spoke to URI's Partnership for the Coastal Environment where he described his work with ICES, the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas, where he serves as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Aquaculture Interactions with the Environment.

Rosenthal is a former vice president of the World Aquaculture Society with 35 years of research experience covering topics in limnology, fisheries biology and mariculture. Despite his hectic schedule he tries to spend 10% of his time visiting commercial growers to discuss their needs and help find solutions to their challenges.

Rosenthal was quick to point out that Europe is really a minor player in the world aquaculture picture. While Europeans produce 12% of the world's cultured fish, Asians continue to produce the lion's share (78%) with America contributing a paltry 4%. Nonetheless, there are several examples of successful aquaculture industries in Europe including: Norwegian salmon farms (320,000 tons), Spanish turbot ($50 million), French oysters (147,000 tons) and mussels (65,000 tons) and thousands of small-pond fish farmers in Germany.

Rosenthal sees aquaculture as an "ideal model for the good husbandry of the environment and ecological stewardship." European farmers have learned to work in harmony with the environment because "aquaculture is the only industry where the final product is a perfect bioindicator of the health of the ecosystem." Europeans are faced with intensive demands on very limited land and water resources. Aquaculture must compete side by side with a multitude of other uses such as agriculture and small industry. Growers who are not able to produce economically with efficient use of their available resources are rapidly pushed aside. European aquaculture has therefore been refined to a science with little room for the types of entrepreneurial experimentation so common in the systems he sees in the US. Prospective German fish farmers must enroll in a multi-year educational program to be certified, much like our engineers.

These pressures have forced a strong emphasis on efficiency, recirculation, resource reuse and waste minimization. In the past ten years the industry has increased the use of low-nitrogen, nutrient-dense diets to achieve a dramatic 66% reduction in the quantities of nitrogen and phosphate wastes generated per pound of fish produced. At the same time food conversion efficiencies (the amount of food necessary to produce a pound of fish) have improved to nearly 1:1 from an average of 1.8:1 ten years ago.

In the face of extreme resource limitation Europeans have learned to recognize wastes as resources. Growers are reexamining ancient practices of using human waste as fertilizer for agricultural and aquacultural production. New treatment technologies make it possible to separate or sterilize the pathogenic contaminants in sewage so that the nutrient components can be safely and effectively used to sustainably grow fish for food. With proper hygienic treatment up to 90% of household wastes can be recycled. Fish ponds are increasingly being used to polish agricultural runoff and sewage.

Rosenthal was skeptical about the rush to embrace increasingly complex, high-tech recirculating systems. He noted that while these systems enable growers to utilize marginal land and limited water in temperate climates, these advantages come at a great price in terms of complexity and initial capital costs. He questioned whether the advantages of being able to intimately control the system justify the expense. He noted that there are over 200 US patents on recirculating systems, but only a handful of commercially viable enterprises. Rosenthal pointed out that "sometimes you solve problems by adding problems and with the added complexity often comes added risk."

Another trend in Europe has been to increase the use of polyculture systems. By growing a variety of species, either together or in sequence, farmers are integrating entire production systems to achieve a better utilization of all of the inputs. Rosenthal pointed out that "Polyculture increases the stability of the system by mimicking the natural state, and brings the added benefits of diversifying product lines and increasing per acre yields."

Europeans are also demanding healthy foods with strict limitations on chemical and drug residues. Fish farmers have responded by reducing their reliance on hormones and antibiotics by 99% in the past six years, while overall production has nearly doubled. This has been achieved through increased use of vaccines, lowered stocking densities and better husbandry practices. Hormone and drug use is strictly regulated, while the use of genetically modified organisms is prohibited.

Rosenthal feels that aquaculture is currently being over-regulated in Europe; however, with the unification of the European common market there is an effort to standardize regulations between nations to level the playing field. Growers are far more willing to accept regulations if they can be assured that they will not be undercut by producers growing a tainted product or showing less concern for the health of the downstream ecosystem.

Rosenthal submits that "in the final analysis it must be recognized that the health of the entire ecosystem is the ultimate goal." Everyone has both a legitimate claim to exploit the available resources as well as a responsibility to see that his actions do not adversely affect the downstream environment. "The challenge is to optimize the utilization of all natural resources for maximization of sustainable use." This goal will become increasingly elusive as the world's population grows and people continue to migrate to the world's coastal zones.

Rosenthal's visit to Rhode Island was made possible in part by a grant from USDA through the Northeast Regional Aquaculture Center's Regional Extension Project, which provides support for state aquaculture associations through Sea Grant Cooperative Extension.

BACK TO INDEX

Report on November's Longline Shellfishing Technology Workshop

When Jill Fallon of The Aquaculture Coalition (TAC) learned that Neville Thompson, of Marine Production Systems, New Zealand, was traveling to the US she grabbed the opportunity to have Thompson come speak to an audience in Massachusetts. With the help of Richard Morris of MIT Sea Grant and co-sponsorship from the Mass. Ocean Technology Network and the Urban Harbors Institute, Fallon organized a workshop in Cambridge on Nov. 18 to highlight some of the deep-water shellfish aquaculture success stories around the world. While the workshop title suggests that the subject matter is shellfishing, all of the discussion centered on shellfish aquaculture technologies.

Dr. Tom Sephton of Canada's Division of Fisheries and Oceans gave an update on the progress of Canada's blue mussel aquaculture industry. Serving as the Atlantic Region's Aquaculture Coordinator, Sephton works closely with growers in New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island. He described the rapid growth of the mussel aquaculture industry there since its birth in 1978. Today 100 full-time farmers grow blue mussels in suspended culture on 6,000 acres. Their combined output now totals 17 million pounds annually and has an export value of $13.5 million (US). The industry supports 425 seasonal employees, seven processing plants and a number of spinoff industries such as boat building, mussel processing and equipment manufacturing.

Sephton attributes the dramatic success of the mussel industry to certain critical factors including an ideal biological environment and strong support from both the local community and the Canadian government. Community support was possible because there was no existing commercial mussel fishery fearing competition and little fishing activity in the protected bays that supported mussel aquaculture. In addition, these bays had little recreational traffic and few riparian land owners to complain about aesthetic issues. All these factors combined with mussel culture's image of being a "green" industry with proven ecological and economic benefits formed a recipe for strong community support.

The Canadian government provided early technical assistance for research and development, as well as subsidies for new equipment investments. At the outset the Government zoned each of the bays around P.E.I. deciding how and where aqua-culture development should occur. This eliminated the need for most of the contentious public hearings and divisive review that are so common with aquaculture proposals in New England.

Don Bishop of Fukui Net Co. gave a presentation similar to the one he gave at the November OSAA meeting (See NL 96:4). Don displayed the Fukui line of growing gear while providing some universal maxims governing aqua-culture that growers everywhere should take to heart. As Vice President of Operations for Fukui North America, Don has traveled widely and seen growers around the world, working with dozens of different species, all confronted by similar constraints. He boils down the common challenges into three fundamental questions: How can I get better production out of my capital expenditures on gear? How can I cut my labor costs? and How can I increase my yield per unit area? One answer to all three questions is to use what Bishop calls "appropriate gear technologies." Fukui manufactures a line of durable pearl nets, lantern nets, spat collection bags, and other types of equipment designed to make shellfish culture less labor intensive and more cost effective.

Bishop's slide show featured a sea scallop farming cooperative in northern Japan where 80 farmers produce 800 metric tons/yr using spat collectors, lantern nets, pearl nets, and ear hanging. The cooperative operates on the chilly south coast of Hokkaido in depths up to 150 meters. They try to use almost all of the water column, but they keep growing gear five meters off the bottom to avoid predators and five meters beneath the surface to avoid fouling and wave action. Shellfish growth is not as fast in deep, oceanic waters, but the reduction in labor costs (cleaning nets) more than compensates for the slow growth.

Don offered two rules for succeeding in aquaculture: Rule #1- Don't reinvent the wheel. Rule #2- When you think you have everything all figured out, conditions will change; only those who are adaptable will survive.

Keynote speaker Neville Thompson followed with an impressive multi-media presentation illustrating the meteoric growth of New Zealand's aquaculture industry. In 1981 the entire New Zealand oyster and mussel aquaculture industry was valued at just under $4 million (US). Since that time shellfish aquaculture has grown 27-fold in just 12 years. New Zealand's green mussel (Perna perna) has proven to be an excellent species for longline aquaculture. Mussel culture has exploded to a value of $80 million in 1995 and a projected $95 million in 1996. As of 1995 there were about 450 mussel farms in New Zealand exporting 50,000 tons, primarily to markets in Japan and the Pacific Basin.

Early growers exploited a fleet of inexpensive fishing vessels that were idle because the "crawfish" fishery had collapsed due to unregulated overfishing. These boats were refitted with modified hydraulic equipment and put back to work tending mussel longlines. Today dozens of new vessels are being built with increased mechanization to enable small crews to handle several tonnes of mussels per trip.

As the industry moves further offshore, the emphasis has shifted to faster, more efficient boats. Thompson showed a video featuring a fleet of fast new aluminum catamarans, each capable of laying up to 25 km of new mussel socks in one day. The result of these efforts has been to improve on the economies of scale and productivity of labor to the point where growers are able to profit even with prices as low as 35 cents/kg.

Thompson pointed to several key success factors that helped the mussel industry thrive. Chief among these was selection of a native species that grows quickly, has a proven market and feeds itself. In the early stages growers shared information, marketed through cooperatives and made good use of idle, inexpensive fishing vessels. As the industry has developed it has taken an active role in coastal zone management and public education, while remaining very conscious of the importance of a clean visual appearance. Governmental programs in research, education and demonstration also played an important role, as did innovative tax incentives that made aquaculture investment attractive to large corporations.

Oyster culture has also grown, but less dramatically, because of its dependence on limited intertidal leases. Oyster aquaculture was valued at $1.4 million in 1981 and grew to $8.2 million in 1993. Industry innovators there have developed barges with removable wheels, allowing them to tend their intertidal rack-and-bag farms, and then drive back to their maintenance sheds. Their emphasis remains on increasing mechanization to keep labor costs down and improve productivity.

New Zealanders have also started an ambitious program of scallop culture for stock enhancement. (See story on page 6)

Two panel discussions followed to identify the primary obstacles to aquaculture development in New England and to highlight critical changes that would be needed to open the doors to a viable aquaculture industry. Ron Smolowitz of the Westport Scallop Project described his frustrations involving his three-year battle to establish a temporary experimental sea scallop aquaculture project south of Martha's Vineyard. Ron pointed out that there is currently no mechanism for establishing leases in federal waters and that NOAA and NMFS still do not acknowledge that aquaculture development was identified as a national priority by the National Aquaculture Development Plan way back in 1976.

Ron stated that two critical actions are necessary to move forward; the Magnuson Fisheries Management and Conservation Act must be amended to incorporate aquaculture, and a memorandum of understanding must be signed designating who among the Army Corps, NMFS and the EPA will handle which responsibilities and how.

Several common themes came out of the presentations and the panel discussions that followed. One was the point that many farmers have benefited immensely from marketing cooperatives, especially in the formative years of an emerging industry. The rationale is that cooperatives allow growers to compete globally instead of locally, invariably leading to better farm-gate prices. However, cooperatives require trusting your fellow man and sometimes it takes growers years to recognize the fact that the global markets are big enough to take all that they can produce even if the local markets are saturated. Without marketing cooperatives, growers selling to local markets, continually undercut each other's prices until no one is making any money.

Several speakers pointed to the importance of demonstration projects and education efforts directed at secondary schools or the general public. These are clearly areas where state, local and even federal government agencies could provide needed assistance at relatively low cost.

There was a consensus that even though aquaculture development is a priority in Washington DC, that message has not trickled down to the regulatory agencies and fisheries management councils where it is most needed.

It is also interesting that there was little discussion of government subsidies at the workshop. Around the world we see that early governmental assistance has been a critical element to virtually every major aquaculture success story. Governmental support has come in the form of loans, tax incentives, training programs, marketing assistance and in many cases outright grants. Unfortunately it does not appear likely that US growers will see much of these types of assistance in our current political climate.

BACK TO INDEX

Excerpts from The International Conference on Shellfish Restoration

held in Hilton Head, SC on November 20-23, 1996

I felt fortunate to be able to attend this conference and I found many of the presentations to be interesting and useful. In addition to dozens of talks on the oyster diseases Perkinsus and MSX, there was a host of fine presentations from around the world on subjects as varied as habitat restoration, public enhancement, pollution remediation, and aquaculture.

What follows are my impressions of a handful that I particularly liked and a distillation of the discussion by a panel that met to discuss apparent declines in hard clam abundance along the East Coast.

Neville Thompson of New Zealand's Marine Production Systems, described that country's attempts to revive the Queen scallop fishery. At one time this industry supported over 100 fishermen, but poorly regulated over-fishing led to a collapse of the fishery in the late 1970s. In 1980 Japanese scientists were invited to demonstrate their spat collector bags and evaluate circulation patterns at several sites. A large bay off northern New Zealand selected and an ambitious enhancement project was started in 1983.

The fishing grounds were zoned into each of the following classifications: closed, recreational, spat collection, and three commercial fishing zones that are worked in a three-year rotation. Each year fishermen are contracted to deploy spat collectors, assess stocks and place the juvenile spat on the growing grounds at the end of the season. A major shore-side industry sprang up simply to fabricate the spat collector bags to be suspended on hundreds of 200-meter subsurface longlines.

The program was paid for by taxing the landings of the scallop fishery and became self-funding by 1991. The commercial fishery is carefully managed under a quota system now and the latest harvest exceeded $23 million. (The line between fishing and aquaculture is very unclear here. This is the only example I can think of where the term "wild-harvest" actually makes sense.) This is probably the best example of a shellfish enhancement project that has been proven successful and is clearly economical. Thompson attributes the success of the project to several key factors: practical application of sound science; strong public acceptance; a large recreational fishery; and coordination of fishermen, regulators and the public.

Thompson pointed out that "the new fishery is strictly managed by the fishermen through a limited-entry quota system that allows the fishermen to control their own destiny." They set the quotas and their economic future is determined by their own ability to do the job properly. Most of the fishermen can still remember the boom and bust of the scallop fishery over the last 20 years, so they are highly motivated to manage their stocks intelligently.

The New Zealand experience suggests great possibilities for the restoration of New England's sea scallop populations. However, I fear that it may take a total collapse of the fishery to get New England fishermen to accept concepts such as closed fishing zones and limited entry management. It is also unlikely that we will see a major initiative to set out thousands of scallop spat collectors. It takes a great leap of faith to invest heavily in your fisheries when all we have done in the past is reap without sowing.

Sandy Macfarlane of the Conservation Department in the town of Orleans, MA gave two presentations describing her efforts in comprehensive land-use planning and stormwater remediation as tools to restore shellfishing grounds. As part of Orleans' comprehensive plan, ten different watersheds leading to three different estuaries were mapped, while sources of pollution were identified and prioritized for remediation.

The town's primary business district is adjacent to one of the most productive shellfish habitats of the town. Three major highways converge in Orleans and lead to the Cape Cod National Seashore, one of the most frequently visited national parks in the United States. The town has 45 miles of shoreline, and many of the residents have waterfront or waterview homes. Most are single family residences, (40% seasonal occupancy) built primarily on one-acre lots. Over 50% of the population is 50 years of age or older.

Many of the town's prime shellfish beds have been closed to shellfishing and nearly all are suffering from severe eutrophication.

The community is trying to deal with the opposing goals of preserving and restoring the environment while planning to accommodate an eventual build-out that will nearly double the population. They identified several pollution sources including individual septic systems, storm water drainage, pets and wildlife, and lawn and garden fertilizers. Perhaps the least contentious of these was stormwater and other conduits entering the estuaries from local, state and private roads. Drainage systems were identified and prioritized with respect to shellfish resources, swimming areas and/or anadromous fish runs, and cross referenced with the volume of drainage, the watershed of the system, and the amount of fecal coliform bacteria entering the estuary from the pipe.

The town appropriated over $400,000 to design and build five new storm drains, and the state provided additional funding for retrofitting existing catch basins to provide leaching capability. As a result, bacterial counts at most sites show dramatic improvement. Meetinghouse Pond, closed to shellfishing since 1982, was reopened in December of 1994 as a direct result of this effort.

As a way to assess the community's willingness to pay for certain remediation alternatives, and to build a consensus around the bond initiative, a questionnaire was circulated to 5000 Orleans residents and landowners. The questionnaire first attempted to determine which activities were most popular at the various beaches and ponds in town. Nearly 1000 respondents ranked the following activities as their top priority: scenic beauty 15%, swimming 15%, shore walking 14%, fishing and shellfishing 12%, beach activities 11%, sailing 8%, power boating 7%, public dock access 6% etc.

Respondents were also asked if they would support activities that enhance boating, but might impact water quality. Respondents were in favor of expanding mooring areas and private docks and increasing parking at town landings, but paradoxically they opposed new marinas or launching ramps. When asked which "green" activities were worthy of continued funding, the most popular response was to expand the town's shellfish seeding program (82%), followed by continuation of the stormwater remediation program (78%) and support for a public shellfish grow-out facility (66%). Reducing the number of moorings garnered the support of only 8%. Nearly 80% of respondents indicated they would be willing to reduce or eliminate fertilizer use, while about 60% said they were willing to pay more for a shellfishing permit, pay for shellfish seeding, pay for better enforcement, use pump-out facilities or pay for surface water runoff elimination.

Only 40% indicated a willingness to install a nutrient-reducing septic system. As the town tries to address the other pollution sources, the issue of sewers or denitrifying toilets promises to be the most inflammatory. Even properly designed, well maintained septic systems eventually release most of their nitrogen to the ponds. Macfarlane noted that "the residents will eventually have to grapple with the fact that they essentially have three choices: sewers, denitrifying toilets or eutrophication." It is encouraging to note that the residents place such a high value on their recreational shellfish resources and that they were able to identify problems and agree to allocate precious funds to solve them.

Clean waters for recreation and the ability to go down to the water and grab some safe shellfish for dinner are elements that contribute to our quality of life. These are valuable resources that need to be protected and preserved as well as enjoyed and exploited. "We hope to create a situation where we can maximize use and enjoyment, but stop at the point where we start to destroy the very things that make the area attractive in the first place." explained Macfarlane. It is a delicate balancing act when things are stable, made more difficult by the fact that coastal communities everywhere are undergoing explosive growth.

There is much that other communities can learn from the Orleans experience and I hope that I can convince Sandy to come to RI to give us a presentation on her program.

Jerry Diamantides of Economic Analysis Inc. in Providence, R.I. discussed the ways in which we evaluate our recreational and commercial shellfisheries resources.

The restoration of shellfisheries can provide significant economic benefits to local communities, but assessing those benefits to justify restoration efforts can be challenging. While the economic impact of commercial fisheries is relatively straightforward to assess, the value of recreational fisheries is rarely as obvious, yet often exceeds the value of commercial yields if evaluated properly.

Commercial fisheries have a market value that can be measured in terms of expenditures, revenues and employment. The value of recreational fisheries lies primarily in what Diamantides calls "non-market values." These non-market values are composed of "use values" (an individual's willingness to pay for a license or the value of recreational and subsistence activities) as well as "non-use values" (aesthetic value or simply assurance that the fishery is there if the one wants to take advantage of it.)

These intangible qualities are difficult, but not impossible to evaluate. Through surveys that assess the public's willingness to pay for certain activities, Diamantides is able to attach a dollar value to each activity.

His findings suggest that recreational shellfishers value their experience considerably more than the fees they pay for licenses and rakes. They derive value from their shell-fishing experience through their harvest, through the act of shellfishing itself -- being out on the water and engaging in an act of self sufficiency -- and through identifying with a community that remains tied to the natural resources of the area.

One final consideration in the evaluation of the resource is the value of subsistence fisheries. Subsistence fisheries rarely fit into anyone's analysis because they are very difficult to quantify. Assessing this segment may require additional extensive targeted interviewing.

The result of Diamantides' research effort is a tool to calculate the potential economic benefits of restoring the recreational shellfisheries so that communities can justify the merits of proposed water quality or habitat restoration initiatives. In Rhode Island's case we need to convince the whole state that our shellfisheries are a resource worth preserving since our shellfish management is run at the state, rather than local, level.

BACK TO INDEX

UPCOMING MEETINGS

Next OSAA meeting - February 12^th, 7:00 PM, Chafee Room 277, URI. See cover for info.

WORLD AQUACULTURE SOCIETY '97, February 19-23, Seattle, WA. For information contact (206) 485-6682 or email at worldaqua@aol.com

17th MILFORD AQUACULTURE SEMINAR February 24-26,1997

For registration information contact Walter Blogoslawski, NMFS, Milford Laboratory, 212 Rogers Ave., Milford, CT 06460, tel. (203)-783-4235, Fax (203) 783-4217. This is probably the most useful meeting each year in terms of valuable information that a grower can take home and use to improve his bottom line. The emphasis has traditionally concentrated on shellfish, but finfish topics will also be addressed. To accommodate the growing audience for this event, the location has been moved to the Quality Inn Conference Center, New Haven, CT 06525 for reservations call (203) 387-6651.

BOSTON SEAFOOD SHOW, March 18-20, 1997 Hynes Convention Center, Boston. Hundreds of exhibitors on products from catfish to oysters, pressure washers to icemakers, fish processing and packing, marketing, shipping and sales experts, aquaculture equipment and more. For information call (207)842-5599 or on the world wide web at www.bostonseafood.com

ISLAND AND TROPICAL AQUACULTURE, May 4-9, 1997 - Martinique F.W.I. Contact the European Aquaculture Society secretariat at +32 59 32 38 59 or email at eas@unicall.be.

BACK TO INDEX

HARD CLAMS: GETTING SCARCE OR JUST HIDING?

By: Gef Flimlin, Marine Extension Agent, NJ Sea Grant Marine Advisory Service, Toms River, NJ.

At two recent National Shellfisheries Association (NSA) annual meetings there have been sessions which have examined the question of whether the hard clam stocks on the East Coast are at lower levels than in the past. The general consensus was that there were some problems, the most striking of which was the fact that there is very little known about the overall status of these stocks and what causes fluctuations in the populations. Most people who make their living harvesting quahogs in the wild were of a single mind that the abundance of clams has definitely dropped over the past 25 years.

In late November at the International Conference on Shellfish Restoration at Hilton Head SC, a panel of hard clam experts was convened to further discuss this perplexing situation and to suggest some guidelines for future work. This session was designed to determine which factors affect the hard clam and how a concerted effort could be initiated to examine the stocks in the coastal states and determine an appropriate course of action to rehabilitate them. Panelists addressed their area of expertise as it impacts the overall stocks.

The panel coordinator was Eric Slaughter of the EPA's Coastal Management Branch. The panel members and the areas they discussed were: Dr. Arnold Eversole, Clemson, The Role of Reproductive Capability of Hard Clams and Potential Problems; Dr. John Kraeuter, Rutgers, Impact of Predation; Dr. Charles "Pete" Peterson, UNC, Higher Order Interactions in Hard Clam Populations; Dr. Stephen Fegley, Maine Maritime, Assessing Population Dynamics of Hard Clams; Sandy Macfarlane, Town of Orleans, Importance of Management of a Quahog Fishery to Local Economy; and Bob Pfeiffer, MD Oyster Recovery Partnership, Beginning a Task Force to Address Shellfish Rehabilitation.

Following these speakers the audience was invited to participate and joined in quite enthusiastically. Despite all that is known about hard clams and the huge economic value of the fishery, there are still huge voids in our understanding of the status of the fishery and what is behind the apparent decline in stocks. Landings data are poor at best and relatively worthless if you don't have good effort data to match them up with. Harvest fluctuations are often driven by gear innovations, prices or unemployment rates rather than by stock abundance.

We cannot say for sure whether there has been a decline in effort or whether the drop in landings might be caused by environmental degradation or a shift in the predator assemblage.

The scientific community cannot agree whether larval abundance or post-set survival are more important in controlling recruitment success, or even something as fundamental as if a relationship between the stock size and the recruitment rate even exists. In some locations it is clear that harvest pressure has depleted stocks to the point where spawning has been impacted (recruitment over fishing), but many areas (like Rhode Island) have vast populations of clams protected behind pollution closure lines serving as giant spawner sanctuaries. We still don't know whether spawning sanctuaries work or what the best density of adults should be for optimal spawning success. And after years of planting millions of clam seed we still do not have any solid scientific evidence to say whether or not enhancement efforts really work or if they are economical.

In the midst of all this uncertainty there is a general consensus that landings are in decline and that we need some solid scientific initiatives to figure out why. Panel participants agreed that the April 1997 National Shellfisheries Association meeting in Fort Walton Beach would be an ideal opportunity to continue planning for the future of this endeavor. Volunteers were solicited to form an ad hoc steering committee for proceeding. From the panel, Drs. Eversole, Kraeuter, Fegley, and Peterson came forward, as well as Jeff Kassner, Town of Brookhaven, NY; Tom Landry, Canada DFO; Dale Leavitt, WHOI Sea Grant, Dr. Bob Rheault, Moonstone Oysters, RI.; Dr. David Vaughn, Harbor Branch Oceanographic Inst., FL; Jim Joseph, Bureau of Shellfisheries, NJ EP; and Gef Flimlin, NJ Sea Grant MAS.

This group encompasses a good mix of research scientists, industry and management personnel. We will organize a Hard Clam Strategic Planning Session at NSA to focus on the issues identified in Hilton Head and develop proposal priorities.

We have already reached consensus on the need for several items, most important of which is a survey of quahog populations to establish baseline data for future efforts. Industry experts agree that hard clams are not as abundant now as they were in the past, and that may be an indicator of overall estuarine health in many of the bays which are being impacted by development and increased commercial and recreational pressure. There may also be a shift in the numbers of other molluscs and crustaceans in the estuaries, which may be caused by anthropogenic forces.

This group will petition USEPA for a potential partnership between EPA, the academic researchers and industry, so that investigations into this stock decline and possible rehabilitation of this economically important shellfish can begin.

BACK TO INDEX

New Application Procedures Implemented at the CRMC

The Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council has recently implemented new preliminary determination (PD) procedures for new aquaculture proposals. These procedures do not apply to experimental applications or modifications to existing CRMC permitted aquaculture operations. The new procedures are essentially a pre-application process, whereby new aquaculture proposals will now be required to submit a PD application prior to submitting a formal application for approval of a lease site by the Council. According to Grover Fugate, Executive Director of the CRMC, these new PD procedures should provide better information for the applicant in preparing their formal applications while facilitating the CRMC permitting process for aquaculture leases. The new procedures are as follows:

1. Applicant submits a Preliminary Determination application with the $50 fee to the CRMC, consistent with the newly revised CRMC aquaculture checklist (see revised checklist dated 11/22/96).

2. When the PD application is accepted by CRMC staff, the applicant is sent a letter notifying him/her that the proposed aquaculture lease site must be marked within 10 days as specified in the letter.

3. After CRMC staff are notified by the applicant that the site has been marked accordingly, staff will arrange a meeting with the applicant, DEM (Arthur Ganz or designee), Army Corps of Engineers, local Town Planner, and the local Harbor master. This meeting is likely to be held at the Town Planner's office. Other attendees such as Conservation Commission or Harbor Management Commission members may be invited at the discretion of the Town Planner. This meeting will allow for initial input by all of the above noted parties regarding the proposal and ways to address any potential concerns.

4. Preliminary Determination reports will be prepared by CRMC staff and mailed to the applicant and Town Planner within 30 days after the meeting.

5. Once the applicant has received the PD report, he/she can file a full application with the CRMC as per current CRMC procedures. The formal application should reflect any modifications as recommended by CRMC staff in the PD reports.

One of the major problems facing the Rhode Island aquaculture industry today is the identification of suitable sites for aquaculture leases. The CRMC currently evaluates each proposal on a case-by-case basis without the benefit of state-wide aquaculture siting plan. In lieu of this plan, it is hoped that the new PD process will stimulate those discussions and result in finding good sites for aquaculture operations. As noted above, the PD meeting held at the town hall will bring together the applicant with CRMC, DEM and Army Corps of Engineers staff members with local officials. This opportunity allows for input by everyone present at the meeting and should facilitate constructive discussions regarding site location, gear types and other potential impacts on existing uses. This pre-application process should assist in alleviating extensive hearings regarding aquaculture proposals. Recognizing that not all application processes are perfect, the CRMC will modify this process as necessary. In particular, the PD process will be eliminated when a state-wide aquaculture siting plan is developed by the CRMC. For further information please contact the CRMC at 277-2476.

The Ocean State Aquaculture Association is a non-profit 501-c3 corporation chartered to promote the interests of practicing commercial aquaculturists in Rhode Island through a program of public education and active participation in policy formation. Our goal is to introduce Rhode Islanders to the benefits and positive aspects of aquaculture through our newsletter, meetings, guest lectures, and demonstration projects. Copies of our by-laws are available on request.

If you would like information about joining the OSAA or participating in any OSAA events please contact Robert Rheault at (401) 783-3360 or oysters@ids.net. Unless otherwise noted, the viewpoints expressed herein reflect the opinions of OSAA President Robert Rheault and may not represent the policies of the OSAA, URI, the USDA or the Northeast Regional Aquaculture Center.

About this Special Publication issue -- This is an OSAA Special Publication funded through a grant to the OSAA from the USDA through the Northeast Regional Aquaculture Center's Regional Extension Project and administered through the Rhode Island Sea Grant Cooperative Extension Program. As such there are no advertisements for our regular sponsors and no recruiting information is offered. We will go back to our regular format for newsletters (complete with notifications of dues, membership information, and advertising placements for our sponsors) in the next issue. There is no implicit endorsement of OSAA policies or the subject matter herein by the USDA, NRAC, Sea Grant or URI.

Circulation 850