Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Intertidal Aquaculture topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Growers, trustees discuss intertidal oyster site; board to await trustees' decision
Summary
Oyster growers asked the Harbor Shellfish Advisory Board to support creating an intertidal (wintertidal) aquaculture site near Wires Point. Board members, trustees’ representative and growers discussed access, bird predation, and parity among growers; trustees and state agencies must weigh in before any formal action.
Oyster growers asked the Harbor Shellfish Advisory Board on June 17 to explore creating an intertidal aquaculture site on the northeast side of Wires Point to allow year‑round bottom‑gear farming.
The request, raised by grower Sean Fitzgibbon, drew discussion about who must sign off on intertidal use, how many growers would be affected, and whether intertidal gear would reduce bird predation problems that affect floating gear. Diane (Trustees manager) said the Trustees of Reservations have been consulted and that their jurisdiction stops at the high‑tide line; they are preparing to discuss the matter at a higher management level. Board members agreed the trustees’ leadership should make a formal determination before the board takes further steps.
Board members and growers described current use of intertidal sites on the island: some growers already operate from year‑round intertidal parcels (a two‑acre site northwest of Pulpus Harbor was referenced), while others do not. Several board members said any new allocation should be available to all growers and cautioned that a single site could raise questions of equity if it benefited only a subset of farmers.
Growers and trustees staff discussed practical concerns if a site is approved: access (boats vs. vehicle access at low tide), equipment‑intensive maintenance such as pressure washing of gear, and potential disturbance to nearby recreational users. Several speakers noted intertidal gear tends to be submerged much of the day and, in other Massachusetts towns cited in the discussion, has been less attractive to cormorants than floating gear.
Board members noted procedural steps that remain: an authoritative letter or nod from the trustees, a possible recommendation from the Harbor Shellfish Advisory Board to the select board, and a survey by the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF) if the area is newly proposed for aquaculture. No motion was taken; members said they would wait for the trustees’ decision and additional information before making recommendations.
The discussion closed with offers from growers to provide maps and photos to help staff and board members visualize proposed parcels and with agreement that staff (and trustees) should clarify the chain of approvals needed before a site can be licensed or surveyed by DMF.
