Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout134 South Bay Road Shellfish Survey 1 TO: Conservation Commission FROM: Natural Resources, Town of Barnstable DATE: April 24, 2023 RE: APPLICATION: Modification of existing pier converting from seasonal to permanent APPLICANT: JMS Holdings LLC 280 Summer Street, 6th Floor Boston, MA 02210 LOCATION: 134 South Bay Road Osterville, MA 02655 REPRESENTATIVE: Alene 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 March 30, 2023 from 1:30P.M.-2:45P.M. by Elizabeth Lewis and Ben Sacco of Natural Resources. Low tide occurred at 2:21P.M. (height +1.6ft.). Harvest was done by steamer rake on dry plots (0-40ft.) and by lined basket rake and by hand for subtidal plots. 36 sample plots (1 sq. ft.) were examined for substrate type and shellfish. Intertidal plots were dug to a depth of 12 inches. The plots were located at transect intervals of ten feet along the centerline of the pier and out to the float (Transect B). Two more transects were drawn with plots again at intervals of ten feet, each plot 10 feet on either side of the center line as depicted below. 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 Shore 10ft 10ft Pier 10 20 30 40 50 120 Transect: C B A From 0-70 feet, the sediment consisted of larger grain sand, highly suitable for softshell clams, starting at 30 feet from the beginning of the pier. The bottom slightly changed at around 80 feet where the sediment began to get a little darker. At 110 feet the sand started to have worms and slightly more organic material and at 120 feet there was fine grain sand and mud mixed in. The water depth at the end of the pier located by the float was 3.0 ft on a +1.6ft. tide. We only began to feel the effects of where the pier was jetted out at about 100 feet, but otherwise there was no evidence of holes from posts as is the case with many areas with large grain sand bottoms. The survey revealed a rich band of softshell clams (Mya arenaria) throughout the intertidal zone and about 20 feet into the subtidal. The area also holds a significant amount of healthy quahogs (Mercenaria mercenaria) ranging in size from less than a half inch to over 3 inches. This indicates a healthy population from multiple year classes. The 30 1ft² sample plots contained 35 quahogs and 29 softshell clams. This is considered a productive area by Division of Marine Fisheries standards (310 CMR 10.35(1-7)). ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: The proposed pier project is located in SC22.0 and is classified as “Approved” by Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries. It is in the open status for shellfishing. The shellfish habitat was rated a 9 by the Natural Resources 2011 Working Group; one person found the area not significant and no participants were not familiar with the area. More significantly, this area is located within the West bay Shellfish Relay Area (West) which is an area designated for the protection of shellfish and shellfish habitat. Changing a pier from seasonal to permanent is still altering the habitat from its current state which is protected. 310 CMR 10.34(3(b)) states the following: 10ft. East West 3 “Land containing shellfish shall be found significant to the protection of land containing shellfish and to the protection of marine fisheries when it has been identified and mapped as follows: by the conservation commission or the Department, based upon maps and written documentation of the shellfish constable or the Department. In making such identification and maps the following factors shall be taken into account and documented: the density of shellfish, the size of the area and the historical and current importance of the area to recreational or commercial shellfishing”. Here it shows the land or habitat is just as important as the shellfish since it is the “land” containing the shellfish and both recreational and commercial shellfishing need to be considered, as deemed by the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries. The access to this area is through South Bay Road where parking is available. From there, it is a short walk to the site. The information in the NOI is incorrect in that access is from Bridge Street or by boat. This area is frequented by recreational shellfishers and by commercial shellfishers both with and without boats. Not all commercial shellfishers have boats and this is one area that has access to back up a truck at the landing and walk your catch in. This information is misrepresented in the NOI and this type of determination of people shellfishing an area should be quantified by Natural Resources that has the data and information and not by consultants. Ms. Wilson states there is “no recovery” of habitat from a seasonal pier unless the owner abandons the pier. If this was the case, we would still find holes from pilings, we would not find shellfish within the footprint, and we would not find any year classes past the original installation of the pier. You also can’t have it both ways to suit the situation; on the one hand, piers have no impact – that is stated right in the filing of the NOI, but here she is stating that the area doesn’t recover from a pier. It is my professional opinion that jetting posts has a negative short-term effect on the habitat, but the larger issue is the habitat and space that the pilings and posts take up from a pier and the changes in water flow and sedimentation as the tides and waves move around posts and pilings. If we are worried about spat being able to settle in turbidity, we too should be worried about water running into posts pushing that spat around and the larvae having to keep swimming because they cannot settle where there is wood in the ground. Additionally, there is turbidity every time a boat motor is turned on. If we are honestly concerned about turbidity that happens twice a year, we should also be concerned about boating activity. Considering there is 3 feet of water at the end of the pier on a +1.6 tide, on an average low, there is only about a 1.4 feet of water below that motor in a highly rated habitat. That draft will be stirring up the bottom on even an average low tide. Due to the abundance of shellfish found in the survey, the highly rated habitat, and that the pier is located within a protected relay area, this proposed project of turning a seasonal pier into a permanent one cannot be supported by Natural Resources. It is not in the best interest of the shellfishery. Sincerely, Elizabeth A. Lewis, Shellfish Biologist 4 5