Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout310 North Bay Road Shellfish Survey 1 TO: Conservation Commission FROM: Natural Resources, Town of Barnstable DATE: January 6, 2023 RE: APPLICATION: Conversion of seasonal pier to permanent APPLICANT: Shawn D. Martin, Trustee The 310 North Bay Realty Trust 17465 SE Conch Bar Avenue Jupiter, FL 33469 LOCATION: 310 North Bay Road 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 January 6, 2023 by Shellfish Biologist Elizabeth Lewis and Natural Resource Officer/ Aquaculture Specialist Kaitlyn Carpenter. Low tide occurred at 6:08 P.M. (+0.1) with the survey occurring between 3:00 P.M. and 4:20 P.M. Due to a late tide during the week and only workable daylight hours, the intertidal zone was not exposed during the survey period. 33 sample plots (1 sq. ft.) were examined for substrate type, shellfish, and habitat suitability. The plots were located at transect intervals of 10 feet from the edge of the revetment along the centerline of the footprint of the seasonal pier. This formed transect B. 10 feet on either side of the center of the footprint and again every 10 feet, formed two more transects one to the North and one to the South forming transects A and C respectively. These transects run roughly from East to West and a small diagram is located on the shellfish survey datasheet for your reference. Sample plots correlate with the distance in feet from the bulkhead and transect. Due to the high tide and not able to dig deep enough to expose softshell clams (Mya arenaria), siphon holes were counted as a low end estimate for the number of softshells located within each plot. Below are example pictures to visualize how defined these siphon holes are to determine number of softshell clams in each square foot plot. With this, it is a low end estimate because many times with any sand movement from standing 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 at the area the holes may fill in. A large population of softshell clams was found from 20 feet to about 40 feet from the revetment and follows along the edge of this shoreline. 25 softshells were counted in total over the sample plots in the intertidal zone. The sediment is made up of small rocks and large grain sand with shell mixed in. Small areas of fresh water present itself as orange, iron rich sediment. After 40 feet, shellfish was harvested using a basket rake with 3/8” lined mesh to retain any seed shellfish. Quahogs, Mercenaria mercenaria, were sporadically found in this area out to around 100 ft. ranging in size from less than ½ inch to over 3 inches. Sediment remained consistent throughout the survey plots. Large grain sand and shack were observed with every pull of the rake and occasionally a dark spot from richer sediment underneath. 26 quahogs were found in the sample plots. The quahogs, though stained orange from iron or dark from the richer sand below, were visibly healthy and showed no sign of shell wear. Attached is the corresponding shellfish survey data sheet showing a healthy population of shellfish and significant habitat. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: “Docks and piers when placed in land containing shellfish or shellfish habitat have an adverse impact on the resource area value…” (Chapter 703: Private Docks and Piers, Town of Barnstable). This is not up for debate as it is in the town’s regulations adopted by the Conservation Commission and therefore these adverse effects should be accepted as fact. With the addition of a permanent pier, the permanent habitat loss is from the actual piling taking up space. The sediment type and pier location factor into the extent that the structure itself degrades the shellfish habitat. Twice a year annual maintenance cannot be considered a “significant” reduction in turbidity impacts as this whole section of Cotuit Bay sees boating activity and boats on docks are responsible for most of the turbidity surrounding piers. “The post holes become sinks for very fine and organic sediment staying in a liquefied state for months after fall removal activities” is actually an incorrect statement. We cannot base every seasonal pier and these activities on one case study that was performed in one location. Many factors go into determining how long those holes will stay present. This was the case in one such pier that Ms. Wilson pointed out in EXH L, but this does not hold true for all such piers just as one scientific paper on a subject cannot be used to make such a broad statement; it is scientifically inaccurate. We need many samples of piers to come to this conclusion. One of the neighboring seasonal piers at 260 North Bay Road is a case and point. No sink holes were found on that site in the footprint of the pier. The sediment type and the flow through the narrows aided in returning the area to its natural state. This is exactly the intent of having a seasonal pier. It allows time for the area to recover. There is still a good population of shellfish located on site and the habitat is suitable for both settlement and recruitment of shellfish as evidenced by the variation in population of quahogs. It is a fact that pilings “change water flow patterns” around them and as a result it alters shellfish habitat (Coastal Georgia Research Council, 2005). The pilings themselves are known to slow water flow causing settlement of materials creating a deposition area which in turn changes the chemistry of the bottom after accumulation 3 occurs. “Properties within 100 ft. to 150ft. of a 50ft. pier could be subjected to wrack algae accumulation, sand deposition and shellfish population changes” (Kelty and Bliven, 2003). With a seasonal pier, these pilings are much smaller thus impeding less flow and it is gone half the year allowing the area to have a break and recover. As much as pumping in and out the pilings causes areas of disturbance and turbidity twice a year and localized liquidation of sediments, some of these habitats are able to recover such as this particular location. We were able to locate the holes of the pilings though they were not completely soft and I could stand in the middle of it confidently. The depressions were still present and a change in color of the sediment, but the impacts were not as great as EXH L. The large grain sand means this area has potential to recover upon removal of pilings and we are seeing that in this area. With the removal of the seasonal pier it allows for commercial pumping activity to harvest the softshell clams and important access to the resource. If the permanent pilings were in place, commercial harvesters would have a challenging time harvesting this area that historically has been very valuable. Furthermore, if it were true that, “seasonal docks are not stable enough to allow shellfishing in close proximity to them” (A. Wilson, Project Description Martin Pier Modification), we should not have docks in town because any shellfish found around a seasonal pier would not be able to be harvested. In this particular case, commercial harvesters would be missing out on a great financial opportunity. If these piers were also unsafe for shellfishing, it would also appear to be unsafe to allow people to walk on them and tie boats up to them. Fortunately, this is a false statement. I regularly hold Learn To Shellfish Classes next to the seasonal pier at Cordwood Landing with novice shellfishers. We have never had an issue. I also do surveys around seasonal piers while they are in place. I did not realize that the structural integrity of a seasonal pier was in question; perhaps the applicant should pay to have the pier inspected prior to my surveys to ensure my safety. According to Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, “All structures subject to Chapter 91 must be structurally sound and not pose an unreasonable threat to navigation, adjacent structures or public health or safety” (MA DEP, 2003). The habitat supported an abundance of shellfish in 2002 when the original pier was proposed. Tom Marcotti’s survey results (attached) indicate the area was good for settlement and recruitment of shellfish and stated the importance of this area to the shellfishery. As a result, The Commission saw fit to allow a pier, but to make it seasonal due in part to the resource and shellfish habitat. Now that a seasonal pier was granted and 20 years has passed, there has been opportunity for the area to degrade due to a wide variety of factors, not limited to this pier being in place. This pier being converted from seasonal to permanent will set a precedent that if an applicant gets a seasonal pier and waits long enough for that pier to alter the habitat, they will then be able to come back and get a permanent pier. Natural Resources cannot support this project. Sincerely, Elizabeth A. Lewis, Shellfish Biologist 4 Sources: Georgia Coastal Research Council. (2005). Environmental Effects of Docks and Marinas Prepared for Stakeholder workgroup Merryl Alber and Janice Flory June 2005. Kelty, Ruth & Bliven, Steve. (2003). Environmental and aesthetic impacts of small docks and piers, workshop report: Developing a science-based decision support tool for small dock management, phase 1: Status of the science. MA DEP. (2003). A guide to permitting small, pile supported docks and piers. Retrieved from https://archives.lib.state.ma.us/bitstream/handle/2452/849017/ocm54388383.pdf? sequence=1&isAllowed=y 5 6 7 Picture 2: Tom Marcotti’s survey of 310 North Bay Rd from 2002. 8 9 Picture 3: Sample of one rake pull and size range of quahogs. Pictures 4 and 5: Sample photos of siphon holes of softshell clams counted.