The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About150 Carriage Road Shellfish Survey 1 TO: Conservation Commission FROM: Natural Resources, Town of Barnstable DATE: December 27, 2022 RE: APPLICATION: Construction of permanent pier for dinghy and kayak with end platform and stairs APPLICANT: Stephen M. & Beth F. McParland, Trustees McParland Family 2014 Revocable Trust LOCATION: 150 Carriage Road – 2006 Oyster Harbors Osterville, MA 02655 REPRESENTATIVE: Arlene M. Wilson A.M. Wilson Associates, Inc. 20 Rascally Rabbit Road, Unit 3 Marstons Mills, MA 02648 SHELLFISH SURVEY RESULTS: A shellfish survey was conducted on December 27, 2022 by Shellfish Biologist Elizabeth Lewis and Shellfish Technician Benjamin Sacco. Low tide occurred at 8:51 A.M. (-0.1 ft.) with the survey occurring between 8:35 and 10:02 A.M. The proposed project was staked only at the edge of the marsh with no indication of trajectory; this was estimated based on angle of the stake at the bulkhead and edge of the salt marsh. Thirty (30) sample plots (1 sq. ft.) were examined for substrate type, shellfish, and habitat suitability. The plots were located at transect intervals of ten (10) feet from the stake at the bulkhead along the centerline of the proposed pier (transect B) and two feet to both sides of the centerline (transects A and C) to fully observe the potential impact of the pilings. Sample plots correlate with the distance seaward from the stake at the bulkhead. Harvest by steamer rake was conducted on intertidal plots and by basket rake (approx. 3/8” lined mesh) on subtidal sample plots. The first 45 feet from the bulkhead consisted of grasses and salt marsh. The edge of the marsh contained a healthy population of ribbed mussels, Geukensia demissa. The intertidal area had large grain sand with medium sized rocks until about 6 inches down. Beneath that, was very dense old peat from the marsh and decaying roots. Various softshell, Mya arenaria, holes were observed throughout the intertidal area and large depressions gave evidence to extensive duck predation on the Town of Barnstable Marine and Environmental Affairs Department 1189 Phinney’s Lane, Centerville, MA 02632 Derek Lawson, Director 508-790-6273 / Fax 508-790-6275 www.townofbarnstable.us Animal Control 508-790-6274 Natural Resources 508-790-6272 Harbormaster 508-790-6273 Sandy Neck 508-790-6272 Marinas 508-790-6273 Sandy Neck Gatehouse 508 -362-8300 Moorings 508-790-6273 2 softshell population near the grass. The first plot examined was at 50 feet. From there, the sandy sediment extended out to around 80 feet where the bottom changed to a little muddier with small rocks and worm holes. At about 110 feet, the sediments consisted of less sand with consistently more mud and finally became tacky at 130 feet. At no point in the survey did the bottom appear anoxic, just simply dense sediments with mud mixed in. The maximum depth of water at 136 feet is 2.6 ft. at this particular low tide (-0.1 ft.). No softshell clams (Mya arenaria) were found in the intertidal plots despite clear siphon holes in the general vicinity. Larger holes in this zone indicated burrows for mantis shrimp (Squilla empusa), several which were dug up in the survey (picture 4). Softshell clams (Mya arenaria), stout razor clams (Tagelus plebeius), and quahogs (Mercenaria mercenaria) of various sizes were found subtidally. Over thirty (30) sample plots at one square foot each yielded 28 quahogs, 2 softshell clams, and 2 stout razor clams. The area supports a healthy population of shellfish. While most of the quahogs out in slightly deeper water were larger and many over 3 inches in size, we still saw much variability in the 70-100ft range where the sediment was less tacky. This shows the habitat is suitable for both settlement and recruitment of quahogs. In fact, just on the other side of the neighboring pier was where I planted one of my first crops of quahogs due to the suitability of the bottom in the area. Attached is the shellfish survey data sheet containing specific information for each plot including distance from the bulkhead and number and size of shellfish found. Each plot is numbered as distance in feet from the stake at the bulkhead along with a letter indicating the transect. B is the centerline, A is the southern transect and C is the northern transect. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: The proposed project is located in the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries designated growing area (DMF/SC22.0); classified as approved and open to the harvest of shellfish. This area never undergoes seasonal closures and is open to both recreational and commercial harvest. There are several parts of this pier design that will have significant impacts on the habitat and shellfishery. A permanent pier of this length will take up a large amount of space with just the pilings alone permanently removing this area as shellfish habitat from the fishery. Another concern is that in the winter time, permanent dock owners run ice eaters so that the pilings are not frozen in the ice and then forced up out of position. With such shallow depth of water, the ice eater will create scouring of the bottom similar to the propeller of a boat would in shallow water. On an average low, there is only 2.7 feet of water according to the charts so on a potential minus tide, many of which we see during the night time in the winter when temperatures are at their coldest, there is potential for that ice eater to scour the bottom in only 7 inches of water. With no ice eater, these pilings from piers have been known to drift to different parts of the bay and several are still littering areas of the shoreline from icy winters years ago. While we firmly believe this pier in any form is unnecessary for simply putting kayaks in the water, a permanent pier should be taken off the table for the aforementioned reasons alone and is something that should be considered with any pier in shallow depths. 3 At the end of the proposed pier are a set of stairs going down into the water. This will create changes to the flow of water whereby under 310 CMR 10.25 measures need to be taken to minimize these adverse effects. These stairs proposed at the end of the pier will create scouring in one area and accretion in another just by blocking natural water flow. A structure like this is equitable to putting a mini jetty in the water and degrades shellfish habitat. There are both benefits and detriments to seasonal vs. permanent piers, and this can be argued at length either way. While it is unfortunate that seasonal piling holes do not fill themselves in when the pier is removed, it does not mean that the better alternative is a permanent pier that permanently removes shellfish habitat, as I have said before. At least with a seasonal pier, it is gone for half of the year and natural processes can take place often during the most critical spawning/settlement time for shellfish in early spring. While alternatives to piers are the best option, a seasonal pier at least is only there for part of the year. In this case of 150 Carriage Road, the habitat is incredibly suitable for shellfish and should be regarded as such. The shallow water does not allow for a motorized vessel and kayaks can easily be carried from shore, perhaps over a boardwalk to the beginning of the beach. No pier is necessary in such a valuable area; the impacts on significant shellfish habitat from this proposed project can be avoided. After consideration of these facts, Natural Resources cannot support this proposed project. Sincerely, Elizabeth A. Lewis, Shellfish Biologist 4 5 6 Picture 1: Just a note on the survey done by Environmental Consulting & Restoration, LLC; the number of animals were not added up correctly resulting in a lower number of shellfish per sq. ft. than was actually found. Picture 2: Stake located at the edge of the saltmarsh. This also allows one to see the distance from the bulkhead to the edge of the marsh. 7 Picture 3: Center transect showing length of pier and where the stairs at the end would be located Picture 4: Two mantis shrimp, Squilla empusa, dug up in the intertidal area. 8 Picture 5: Seed quahog found in plot. Picture 6: Quahog burrowed in the dense substrate in the deeper plots.