Legislators Debate the Oyster Fishery
- Thread starter Crow Bait
- Start date
I wanted to throw one more fact into the mix...
In August 2009, the EIS that studied the restoration of Chesapeake Oysters, and the possible introduction of the Asian Oyster was finalized. After 6years of study, (and $17M) the final reccomendations were - 1) native oysters only. 2) Temporary Harvest moratorium. 3) Transition to aquaculture production. 4) Ramp up restoration.
http://www.nao.usace.army.mil/OysterEIS/documents/Record_ofDecision_2009-08-13-152459.pdf
In August 2009, the EIS that studied the restoration of Chesapeake Oysters, and the possible introduction of the Asian Oyster was finalized. After 6years of study, (and $17M) the final reccomendations were - 1) native oysters only. 2) Temporary Harvest moratorium. 3) Transition to aquaculture production. 4) Ramp up restoration.
http://www.nao.usace.army.mil/OysterEIS/documents/Record_ofDecision_2009-08-13-152459.pdf
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Then, how about a temporary payout to water men until they are allowed to work again?
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Permanent? That sounds totally unreasonable.
Unfortunately with the oyster population at 1% of their historic abundance, even if we stop harvesting them completely, they won't come back without tremendous public investment, and it's going to take a very long time. Possibly 20 years or more.
Surely we can't restore the oyster population to what John Smith saw (reefs that jutted out of the water and were hazzards to navigation), but even if get 20% there, the benefit will be manyfold because they filter the water and provide habitat for fish and crabs.
I would argue that the benefit to other fisheries and economies that rely on the bay (fish and crab industries, sportfishing, etc) would be worth the cost of the permanent abandonment of an oyster fishery that relies on harvesting oysters off public bottom.
Combine that with an aquaculture based oyster industry, and you have the best of both worlds.
Surely we can't restore the oyster population to what John Smith saw (reefs that jutted out of the water and were hazzards to navigation), but even if get 20% there, the benefit will be manyfold because they filter the water and provide habitat for fish and crabs.
I would argue that the benefit to other fisheries and economies that rely on the bay (fish and crab industries, sportfishing, etc) would be worth the cost of the permanent abandonment of an oyster fishery that relies on harvesting oysters off public bottom.
Combine that with an aquaculture based oyster industry, and you have the best of both worlds.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
If an oyster grows to harvest in a year, I don't understand what the problem is? Pay oystermen to stay out of business for, what, a couple of years, coupled with a massive seeding program and, viola, move on to setting appropriate harvest levels and we're gtg, yes?
Unfortunately, it's not that simple of a problem!
If the problem were to simply provide enough oysters for oystermen to catch, it would be much easier. Unfortunately the problem is that our bay is polluted, and oysters are one of the few things that can help clean it up. A single adult oyster can filter 50 gallons of water per day. Based on the status of the bay, we need every oyster we can get, and we need them to stay out there to filter water.
Truly, if there is an alternative to harvesting off public bottom - there really is no need to retain a fishery that depends on it. It's better for the state, the public, the health of the bay, and for the fishermen themselves if they create an aquaculture based industry.
'Waterman's' weapon against pollution: Oysters - CNN.com
If the problem were to simply provide enough oysters for oystermen to catch, it would be much easier. Unfortunately the problem is that our bay is polluted, and oysters are one of the few things that can help clean it up. A single adult oyster can filter 50 gallons of water per day. Based on the status of the bay, we need every oyster we can get, and we need them to stay out there to filter water.
Truly, if there is an alternative to harvesting off public bottom - there really is no need to retain a fishery that depends on it. It's better for the state, the public, the health of the bay, and for the fishermen themselves if they create an aquaculture based industry.
'Waterman's' weapon against pollution: Oysters - CNN.com
Larry Gude
Strung Out
I guess I am missing the alternative to harvesting off the bottom?
The alternative to harvesting off the public bottom is aquaculture.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Foregive me, I'm lost. I thougth aquaculture was 're-seeding' oyster beds?
Are we talking tanks?
Oyster aquaculture can be done in dozens of different ways.
Seeding a parcel of leased bottom, and waiting 2-3 years to harvest is just one method. It is the easiest (labor wise) but has the lowest return, and highest oyster mortality due to predators, disease, siltation, etc.
Other methods include floats (like at Circle C), racks, cages, bags, rafts, etc. All of these methods are similar becuase you protect the oysters from predators, and perform some level of maintenance to keep siltation and fowling from killing oysters or slowing their growth. This methods can produce market oysters in as little as 6 months.
Oysters could be grown in tanks, but it wouldn't really be cost effective because pumping water takes a lot of energy/electricity.
The current oyster fishery relies on harvesting oysters off public bottom that were seeded by the state. The subsidy for this easter egg hunt was 40 million dollars between 1994-2008. Despite the investment of taxpayer money the oyster industry still declined, and so did the overall population of oysters. This is clearly a failed strategy.
Seeding a parcel of leased bottom, and waiting 2-3 years to harvest is just one method. It is the easiest (labor wise) but has the lowest return, and highest oyster mortality due to predators, disease, siltation, etc.
Other methods include floats (like at Circle C), racks, cages, bags, rafts, etc. All of these methods are similar becuase you protect the oysters from predators, and perform some level of maintenance to keep siltation and fowling from killing oysters or slowing their growth. This methods can produce market oysters in as little as 6 months.
Oysters could be grown in tanks, but it wouldn't really be cost effective because pumping water takes a lot of energy/electricity.
The current oyster fishery relies on harvesting oysters off public bottom that were seeded by the state. The subsidy for this easter egg hunt was 40 million dollars between 1994-2008. Despite the investment of taxpayer money the oyster industry still declined, and so did the overall population of oysters. This is clearly a failed strategy.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Gotcha.
It seems to me that there needs to be widespread 'seeding' of beds to get the largest environmental benefits.
We can't kill off the way of life, the tradition of the water-men. So, get the number of permits, figure out reasonable dollar values and subsidize them in a rational fashion so that a little harvesting is going on everywhere but much reduced and rotate people in and out over the next 10 years. Year one Joe fishes, Tom and Ed get paid not to. year two Tom fishes, Joe and Ed paint their boats. Year three Ed is fishing and the other guys are smiling.
Cut the harvest by 2/3 if that is a reasonable number, seeding is going on, populations are rebounding, the tradition is preserved, in 10 years, baring bad droughts, the bay is well on it's way back to health.
How about that?
All very reasonable, except it places the short term needs to preserve a "way of life" above the long term needs of public to have a restored Chesapeake. We've spent 40 years subsidizing the oyster industry while trying to accomplish two goals: 1) Preserve the industry, 2) Restore the oyster population. Unfortunately the result has been a failure; we have a smaller oyster industry (nearly economically extinct) and fewer oysters.
That being said, an abrupt end to the oyster fishery could have some negative impacts if it's not combined with some type of buyout, but at some point we have to come to terms with the idea that oysters create habitat and filter water. We desperately need more habitat, and more water filtered in the bay. To me, this is ecological function is much more important than preserving a way of life.
The Chesapeake watermen's way of life is designed so that they aren't tied to one single resource. Oystering is a part-time job. As I showed above, nobody is making their living on oysters, and I doubt very few are even covering expenses. The loss of this fishery, provided there is some compensation, or assistance in transitioning to aquaculture for those who wish to give it a try, will not cause some great sociological loss. There will still be watermen, they'll just do things a little bit differently.
I also believe the benefits of a restored oyster population and an industry that relies solely on aquaculture production will be far reaching. Not only will there be more oysters filtering more water, there will also be more jobs on the water (in aquaculture). If we leave things alone, the jobs we have will be lost.
That being said, an abrupt end to the oyster fishery could have some negative impacts if it's not combined with some type of buyout, but at some point we have to come to terms with the idea that oysters create habitat and filter water. We desperately need more habitat, and more water filtered in the bay. To me, this is ecological function is much more important than preserving a way of life.
The Chesapeake watermen's way of life is designed so that they aren't tied to one single resource. Oystering is a part-time job. As I showed above, nobody is making their living on oysters, and I doubt very few are even covering expenses. The loss of this fishery, provided there is some compensation, or assistance in transitioning to aquaculture for those who wish to give it a try, will not cause some great sociological loss. There will still be watermen, they'll just do things a little bit differently.
I also believe the benefits of a restored oyster population and an industry that relies solely on aquaculture production will be far reaching. Not only will there be more oysters filtering more water, there will also be more jobs on the water (in aquaculture). If we leave things alone, the jobs we have will be lost.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Please note that at no point have I supported 'leaving things alone'. In my view, the bay is dying. In my view, real estate development, smart growth specifically, cramming so many in so little space, is the huge part of the problem.
It seems you and I are stuck on getting rid of the water men, at least oystering, vs. subsidizing them out of harvesting for awhile. Growing the bay back to health via oysters does not seem to be much of a problem to me. Let numerous contracts for areas all over the bay to be seeded, maybe some water men can get in on the work, set standards, inspect and reward those that perform and make sure there is competition to do the job motivating innovation and efficiencies. Don't make it some boondoggle for some giant corporations. Hell, put people to work, incentivize them, on their waterfronts!
I completely agree that watermen should be offered work on restoration projects. In fact, there have been two on-the-water work programs offered through the Blue Crab Disaster Federal Aid. Watermen have been used to help rehabilitate oyster bars by collecting shell that has fallen off the bars, and they've been put to work collecting crab pots that have lost their floats (also known as ghost pots). Both have been pretty nice projects because it's win-win. I'm pretty sure about $2 million has been spent on these projects each year for the last two (I don't have a source).
I think we only disagree on the idea that someday soon there will be enough oysters to satisfy a harvest on public bottom. Maybe I'm blinded by my views, but I just believe that hardbottom habitat created by oysters is too important to end up on a plate. Aquaculture can easily satisfy the market in Maryland, just as it does in many other states.
I agree that we really do need to seed oysters in the bay, but I believe it should be done for ecological benefits, not economic. If we can agree to that, as a state, the economic benefits will be realized later (more crabs, fish, better fishing, etc.)
This has been a good discussion. Probably the most enjoyable one I've ever had here on SOMD.com. Thanks.
I think we only disagree on the idea that someday soon there will be enough oysters to satisfy a harvest on public bottom. Maybe I'm blinded by my views, but I just believe that hardbottom habitat created by oysters is too important to end up on a plate. Aquaculture can easily satisfy the market in Maryland, just as it does in many other states.
I agree that we really do need to seed oysters in the bay, but I believe it should be done for ecological benefits, not economic. If we can agree to that, as a state, the economic benefits will be realized later (more crabs, fish, better fishing, etc.)
This has been a good discussion. Probably the most enjoyable one I've ever had here on SOMD.com. Thanks.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Keep in mind I don't know any of the details other than what you have provided whereas you, obviously, know much about the details.
That said, it sounds to me like if you'd give a bit on letting traditional oystering go on, at least some, licensed and limited, then we've got a fully rounded program, in my view; The people are working on replenishing and still have their hands on the bay, the connection, the feel, of tradition. I gotta believe traditional harvesting actually would be a good thing if only from a progress measurement stance. Who better to be able to actually see if things are improving than the men who have their hands on coupled with priceless institutional memory?
So, let the majority of the harvest be aquaculture (which I am still not clear on how it works).
In any event, we are totally in agreement that we need the oyster and we need it in abundance first and foremost for the health of the bay and we absolutely agree on the 'downstream' benefits.
I just want to keep some of the tradition alive.
The proposal for the moratorium ignores a couple very inconvenient facts. When previously beds were seeded or restricted in general (some when the state was running the pilot seeding project out of Piney Point that was looking pretty good until they tried to scale it up..which was then a total failure) a 'funny thing' happend. Healthy beds simply 'up and died' in the meantime. So the oysters that were trying to be preserved were lost altogether..not harvested and not restored.
The watermen who know the details of which beds and where are of the opinion that the only healthy oyster bottom is that which is continuously worked and stirred up accordingly. They believe that leaving the beds sit undisturbed caused them to die off due to silt or who knows what. I've seen no real 'scientific' discussion or explanation..heck, I have not even seen the phenomenon acknowledged at the state level.
But whatever it is, it is certainly quite real and any hope that simply leaving a bed lie dormant is necessarily going to assure its survival, much less growth, is a false hope..but that seems to be almost a 'dirty little secret' in the debate at present.
The watermen who know the details of which beds and where are of the opinion that the only healthy oyster bottom is that which is continuously worked and stirred up accordingly. They believe that leaving the beds sit undisturbed caused them to die off due to silt or who knows what. I've seen no real 'scientific' discussion or explanation..heck, I have not even seen the phenomenon acknowledged at the state level.
But whatever it is, it is certainly quite real and any hope that simply leaving a bed lie dormant is necessarily going to assure its survival, much less growth, is a false hope..but that seems to be almost a 'dirty little secret' in the debate at present.
Last edited:
Oysters are supposed to live on elevated bars, not flat on the bottom like a carpet. Over time destructive harvesting practices have flattened almost all of the three demensional structure created by oysters so they are suceptable to siltation. A goal of sanctuary development has to be re-creating 3D structure in places that won't be silted over.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
And here I thought you were gonna say there was no continuously worked bottom when we first found it.