Marylandís 2012 Chesapeake Bay Oyster Restoration Results Revealed - Page 10
Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 891011 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 119
  1. #91
    Loyal TF Poster - Not a Tidal Fish Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by J.P. Williams View Post
    Matt, ORP doesn't operate in a vacuum, apart from its partners in MD and VA, but yes, the results are measurable, and at this point, the cost of moving forward appears to be reasonable
    . Based on what?

  2. Remove Advertisements
    TidalFish.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #92
    Tidal Fish Subscriber - I support TidalFish.com
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    693

    Default

    Reasonable investment according to the judgments of public agencies providing funds, including the Army Corps of Engineers, NOAA, MD DNR, VMRC, and others like NFWF; and of scientists at UMCES, VIMS, ORP, Lynnhaven River Now!, and CBF.

    If the cost is not reasonable, then how would you get the job done? Or not?

  4. #93
    Loyal TF Poster - Not a Tidal Fish Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    The first thing I would do is stop spending until we have a scientific fishery management plan. This outlandish concept evidently goes against the current restoration scheme, which continues to spend millions without notable improvement. While allowing more "perfectly logical" power dredge harvesting than ever.

  5. Remove Advertisements
    TidalFish.com
    Advertisements
     

  6. #94
    Tidal Fish Subscriber - I support TidalFish.com
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    693

    Default

    Matt, there is a scientific fishery management plan, hammered out over serveral years of hard work by DNR and the broadly-based Oyster Advisory Commission and codified in the Governor's Oyster Restoration and Aquaculture Development Plan, announced in December 2009 (see http://www.dnr.state.md.us/fisheries...nSlideshow.pdf). The plan greatly increased sanctuary acreage for the intensive restoration efforts currently underway, began the watermen's transition from wild harvest to aquaculture, and developed stronger enforcement of management regulations, even with the NRP's greatly reduced resources. Restoration results on sanctuaries are detailed in links in previous pages of this thread. See http://www.dnr.state.md.us/fisheries...11FSreport.pdf for the Fall, 2011 Maryland Oyster Population Status Report, released this past August after a mountain of number-crunching and map drawing. All of this material and more sit on the web site of the MD DNR Fisheries Service. Patapsco Mike, got anything to add?

    So Matt, given that there's a plan, what would you do? Modify it now? Let it run for a couple more years but get the OAC ready to reconvene to begin sifting data and thinking about the next steps? And please tell me what you mean by dredge and dump.

    Best regards, John Page

  7. #95
    Loyal TF Poster - Not a Tidal Fish Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    now we're getting somewhere. Thats not a fishery management plan. Thats a marketing pitch for the partnership's 10 point restoration scheme. While some of the content of the pitch is unarguably good for oysters, its still essentially a status quo restoration plan. No specific goal, no accountability. Just keep spending. And harvesting. With power dredging.

    What I find interesting is that somewhere down the 10 point restoration pitch is this recommendation: "Support a more focused and scientifically managed wild oyster fishery"

    Sounds good but why "Support"? This document is on DNR's website. Are we saying DNR is only "supporting" the concept of a fishery management plan, to be further considered at some point in the future. Sorry JP, you just made my point. In my view, the govt needs to immediately implement a scientific fishery management plan, and stop wasting more money trying to fool mother nature.

    When we simply review data, it is clear that remaining harvesters have shifted heavily to power dredging. This bodes very poorly for any restoration plan. I feel like you are ignoring reality.

  8. #96
    Tidal Fish Subscriber - I support TidalFish.com
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    693

    Default

    Matt, if you study the maps and get out on the water, you'll see that the wild oyster fishery (power derdging included) is more focused on a few reef areas where surveys indicate that there is strong natural reproduction (thanks to scientific monitoring).

    All harvest, however, (very much including power dredging) is excluded from the increased acreage of sanctuaries, where restoration of the rough, three-dimensional profiles with abundant nooks and crannies and initial "carpet-bombing" of spat-on-shell (at rates specified by the restoration guidelines, e.g., 5 million per acre), with later plantings to jump-start additional year classes, all combine to produce strong reef communities.

    On the drawing boards in Maryland, I hear, is some modelling research that will give restoration scientists a better sense of reef locations where natural current flow concentrates eggs, sperm, and larvae to enhance spawning, recruitment, and thus natural spat set. I know that in the Great Wicomico, for example, the eddy behind the long bar at Sandy Point enhances the effects of spawning on that classically three-dimensional reef, and while it is a strict sanctuary, the "shadow" of set around it falls on adjacent leases where companies like Bevans and Cowart have spread shell at their own expense and now harvest market oysters. That research will go a long way toward making MD's sanctuaries more cost-effective, with ancillary benefits to both wild harvest and aquaculture.

    The ten-point plan is much more than a marketing pitch. It's a nuts-and-bolts plan to wrestle with all of the complexities of oyster restoration in an environment of limited resources and waterside communities still dependent on the Chesapeake.

  9. #97
    Tidal Fish Subscriber - I support TidalFish.com
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    693

    Default

    Good discussion, Matt. Gotta sign off now and attend the ASMFC menhaden hearing in Balto., then catch up on other work. If the thread is still active the first of the week, I'll jump back in.

    Best regards, John Page

  10. #98
    Loyal TF Poster - Not a Tidal Fish Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    I sincerely don't understand how, at 1%, you and Naylor think any power dredging is acceptable.

  11. #99
    Loyal TF Poster - Not a Tidal Fish Subscriber
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,706

    Default

    Granted its more efficient, but when your limit is met, regardless of how quickly, your day is done.
    Either way, power dredging only caught about 1/2 the oysters in the '10/'11 season.

  12. #100
    Loyal TF Poster - Not a Tidal Fish Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    in 1990 Maryland harvesters reported over 414K bushels

    in 2011 watermen only reported 123K bushels

    in 1990 only about 3% or 11K of the 414K bushels were taken by power dredge

    in 2011 over 50% of the 123K was taken by power dredge

    at this rate of restoration...

    in 2030 harvesters will take ~50 bushels total, 100% caught by power dredge

    in 2080 harvesters will take 1 bushel by accident

    after that we can declare the bay's population of oyster completely "restored"

  13. Remove Advertisements
    TidalFish.com
    Advertisements
     

Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 891011 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Link to UsSubscription InformationAdvertise Privacy PolicyResourcesContact UsAbout Us

©2012 TidalFish.com. All Rights Reserved.