Information It our burihMS.
CHESAPEAKE BAY 1994 OYSTER FISHERY
MANAGEMENT PLAN. AGREEMENT COMMITMENT
REPORT REVISION
(U.S.) ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, ANNAPOLIS, MD
DEC 94
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Technical Information Servica
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
PB95-171708
Report Nos: CBP/TRS-123/94
Title: Chesapeake Bay 1994 Oyster Fishery Management Plan. Agreement Commitment Report
Revision.
Date: Dec 94
Authors: N. H. Butcwski.
Performing Organization: Environmental Protection Agency. Annapolis. MD. Chesapeake
Bay Program.
NTIS Field/Group Codes: 48D (Forestry). 98F (Fisheries & Aquaculture). 68D (Water
Pollution & Control). 57H (Ecology)
Price: PC A05/MF A01
Availability: Available from the National Technical Information Service. Springfield.
VA. 22161
Number of Pages: 84p
Keywords: *Fish management. *Oysters. *Environment management. *Aquatic ecosystems.
*Project planning. *Chesapeake Bay. interagency cooperation. Project planning.
Mollusks. Agreements. Virginia. Maryland. Pennsylvania. US LPA. District of Columbia.
Production. Water quality. Habitats. Crassostrea virginica.
Abstract: The 1994 Chesapeake Bay Oyster Management PUr, is a continuing effort to
fulfi 11 the Living Resources Commitment of the 1987 Chesapeake Bjy Agreement. The 19S4
Plan is a revision of the original Chesapeake Bay Oyster Management Plan that was
developed and adopted in 1989. The participants agree to wor1, v.ogether to imolement.
by the dates set forth in the Plan, the management actions recon.nended to address. (1)
disease mortality: (2) repletion efforts; (3) habitat restoration and water quality
improvement: (4) increased oyster production: and (5) collection of management quality
data. The State of Maryland further commits to special management efforts for oyster
recovery areas.
-------
2CC
«C1 P595-1717C2
a 0 c r i a 1 d 4 5 C / V ? c / o ? u / 3 ? -!
s 2 i Cescriotors: «cish ^Brs^Tsnt/ *C ystsrs/ *:"nvirorirant nsnagenent/
"Aquatic ecosystems/ ^Project clsnrinc/ "Chesapeake ?5y/ ^Interagency
cooperatior/ Project pUnrinj/ M.olluskS/ iqrae;nr. a n t s / Vip;iri?/ Maryland/
Pennsylvania^ US 5' A/ listrict of ColurnDie/ Prcauct-'on/ Water cuality/
riaDitats.
325 Icenti*lar5: Crussostrea virgiricd.
»c7 The 19'* Chaseoftcke ray Cyster Msnageir^nt °l?n is a continuing effort to
fulfill the Livin; Pesotrcas Commitment of tne 1 * c 7 Chasepcaks e e y Agraemart.
The 19 9 4 Plan is a revisior of t*e original Chasaraakc cay Oyster fan = ceirent
Plan tn at u, a s oavelopsc arc adcotec ir 1 y fc-9. Tn a participants a cr e e to work
tojetner tc ii-ple-rent/ by t r •» catas sat Tortn in t h a c 1 a n / t h a irana-ament
actions rscon'-sncec to »<3cress: (1) cisease mortality/ (?) rsoleticn efforts/
(3) hacitat restoratior arc water cuality l^in. rove.t ant/ (4) increased oystsr
procuction/ sr. d (5) collection of irenc jjment cuality data. The State of
•larylard furthar ccxmits *c spacial menace-rant eftorts for oyster racovary
areas.
-------
Chesapeake Bay
Oyster Fishery Management Plan
Agreement Commitment Report Revision
October 1994
Edited By Nancy H. Butowski
Primed by ihc U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the Chesapeake Bay Program
-------
Chesapeake Bay
Oyster Fishery Management Plan
Agreement Commitment Report Revision
October 1994
Edited By Nancy H. Butowski
Primed by ihc U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the Chesapeake Bay Program
-------
Adoption Statement
We, the undersigned, adopt the 1994 Chesapeake Bay Oyster Munngement Plan, as a
continuing effort to fulfill the Living Resources Commitment of the 1987 Chesapeake Bay
Agreement. The 1994 Plan is a revision of the original Chesapeake Bay Oyster Management Plan
that was developed and adopted in 1989
We agree to accept the revised Oyster Management Plan as a guide to enhancing the
production of oysters in the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem. We further agree to work together to
implement, by the dates set forth in the Plan, the management actions recommended to address:
(1) disease mortality; (2) repletion efforts; (3) habitat restoration and water quality improvement,
(4) increased oyster production; and (5) collection of management quality data. The State of
Maryland further commits to special management efforts for oyster recovery areas
We recognize the need for long-term, stable financial support and human resources for the
task of enhancing the oyster resource. In addition, we direct the Living Resources Subcommittee
to review and update the 1994 Plan yearly and to prepare an annual report addressing the
progress made in achieving the Plan's management recommendations
Signatures
DattCohi^r 1*1, Mu
For the State of Maryland
For the United States of America
For the Commonwealth of Virginia
For the Commonwealth of Pennsylvi
For the Chesapeake Bay Commission
For the District of Columbia
-------
? 1LE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iv
THE FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLAN PROCESS • . .. vi
INTRODUCTION . 1
Ecological Role 2
Current Status of the Oyster Fishery 2
FMF Status and Management Unit 3
Goals aid Objectives 7
MANAGEMENT SECTION 1.
BAYWIDE PROBLEM AREAS AND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
Disease 8
Repletion Programs 11
Habitat/Water Quality 14
Management to Increase Oyster Production 16
Collection of Management Quality Data 21
Implementation Matrix 23
MANAGEMENT SECTION 2.
MANAGEMENT FOR MARYLAND OYSTER RECOVERY AREAS (ORAs)
Strategy 1 28
Strategy 2 28
Strategy 3 29
SECTION 3.
BIOLOGICAL BACKGROUND
Biological Parameters 30
Habitat Requirements 30
Habitat Issues 33
Disease 33
Fishery Parameters 34
The Historic Fisheries 34
The Oyster Resource 34
Laws and Regulations 35
Status of Traditional '• ishery Management Approaches .... 38
References 39
APPENDIX I: Maryland's Governor's Committee Recommendations.. 1-1
APPENDIX II: Virginia's Holton Plan (Blue Ribbon) Report .... II-l
APPENDIX Ills Summary of MDNR 1993 Oyster Program ..111-1
APPENDIX IV: Summary of VMRC 1993 Oyster Program IV-1
APPENDIX Vi Draft Maryland Oyster Aguaculture Permit
Guidelines, 1994 V-l
i
-------
LIST OF TABLES
1. Schedule I or reviewing fishery management plans viil
2. Habitat requirements for oyster eggs, larvae, spat and
adults .. 32
list or rxoimss
1. Maryland commercial oyster landings by reason 4
2. Virginia oyster ground production by season 5
3. Maryland spat set, 1939-1993 6
4. Oyster fecundity versus size 31
ii
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The 1994 Chesapeake Bay Oyster Management Plan was developed
as a revision of the 1989 Chesapeake Bay Oyster Management Plan
under the direction of the Fisheries Management Plan Workgroup.
Staff from the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MDNR),
Tidewater Administration, fisheries Division were responsible for
writing the plan and addressing comments on the draft versions.
Support was pi-ovided by staff from the Virginia Marine Resources
Commission (VMRC). We express gratitude to members of the Maryland
Oyster Roundtable, the Maryland Oyster Steering Committee, the
Virginia "Blue Ribbon" Panel, and other Chesapeake Bay Program
committee members for reviewing and commenting on the plan.
Members of the Fisheries Management Workgroup were:
Mr. K.A. Carpenter, Potomac River Fisheries Commission
Mr. James 0. Drummond, Maryland citizen representative
Mr. William Goldsborough, Chesapeake Bay Foundation
Dr. Edward Houde, UMCEES/Chesapeake biological Laboratory
Mr. W. Pete Jensen, Chair, Maryland Department of Natural Resources
Dr. R. Jesien, Horn Point Environmental Lab
Dr. Ron Klauda, MDNR, Chesapeake Bay Research and Monitoring
Ms. Anne Lange, NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office-
Mr. Richard Novotny, Maryland Saltwater Sportfishermen'i? Assoc.
Mr. Ed O'Brien, Maryland Charter Boat Association
Mr. Ira Palmer, D.C. Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs
Mr. Larry Simns, Maryland Watermen's Association
Mr. Jack Travelstead, Virginia Marine Resources Commission
Ms. Kary Roe Walkup, Citizen's Advisory Committee
Col. Franklin I. Wood, MDNR Natural Resources Police
Staff to the Fisheries Management Workgroup were:
Ms. Nancy Butowski, MKDR
Mr, Christopher Judy, MDNR
Ms. Beverly Sauls, MDNR
Mr. Har.tey Speir, MDNR
Dr. James Wesson, VMRC
Mr. William Outten, MDNR
iii
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction
A Chesapeake Bay Oyster Fishery Management Plan was developed
in 1989 as one of the strategies for implementir7 ' he T^ving
Resources Commitments of the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreer "\e
ecological value of oysters to water quality was .d
disease became more limiting, an improved framework
managing the oyster resource. Through committee rec.ou >ns
from the Maryland Oyster Roundtable and the Virgin a Ho-. in,
the 1994 Chesapeake Bay Oyster Fishery Management Plan (i was
developed. The revised 1994 Oyster FMP was drafted by the v-iryland
Department of Natural Resources (IJDNR) , the Virginia Marine
Resources Commission (VMRC), and the Potomac River Fisheries
Commission (PRFC). A FMP workgroup consisting of members from
government agencies, the academic community, tn.^ fishing industry
and public interest groups reviewed and commented on the revised
plan. The oyster plan revision is part of the fishery management
process to update the status of the resource, include new
biological information, control fishing mortality and address
habitat issues.
Goal and Objectives
The goal of the 1994 Oyster Fishery Management Plan is:
Enhance the production of oysters in the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem by restoring
habitat, controlling fishing mortality, promoting aquaculture and continuing the
repletion programs.
In order to meet this goal, a nur;ber of objectives must be met.
These objectives are incorporated into the areas of concern and
management strategies summarized below.
Areas of Concern and Management Strategies
Section 1. Bayvide Management Strategies
Disease: The oyster parasite diseases, MSX and Dermo, have impeded
the restoration of oyster stocks in the Bay. Currently, there are
no known disease-resistant oysters but disease-tolerant oysters do
exist. The Bay jurisdictions will monitor the prevalence and
intensity of parasite diseases and attempt to minimize their
spread. A coordinated, multi-year, goal-oriented disease research
program will be implemented and evaluated after five years.
Research will continue on developing disease-resistant oysters.
State Repletion Programs: State repletion programs have focused on
moving shell and transplanting seed oysters to enhance oyster
harvest. The programs are limited by natural reproduction (spat
set) , disease infection, the amount of available shell, and
iv
-------
funding. The state repletion programs will be adapted to promote
natural oyster production, meet the changing needs of the oyster
resource, and respond to the initiatives recommended in the 1994
plan. Repletion efforts will be monitored then evaluated after a
three-year period (1997).
Hi itat/Water Quality: Overfishing has contributed to the reduction
oi oyster habitat by removing shell. With reef flattening, oysters
are particularly vulnerable to siltation and increased mortality.
The reduction in reef surface area also reduces the amount of
substrate for spat settlement. Oysters are an important part of the
Bay ecosystem especially in their role as filter-feeders. Adequate
water quality is essential for oysters to reproduce, grow and
maintain health. The Bay jurisdictions will conduct a phased
program to evaluate and implement projects to restore the physical
habitat for oysters. In addition, the jurisdictions will ensure
that water quality is maintained at levels necessary to support
healthy oyster populations.
Management to Increase Oyster Production: The disease problem, the
lack of oyster habitat, variability in recruitment, and harvest
pressures have placed constraints on oyster production. New
technology is needed for the restoration, culture, and production
of oysters. The Bay jurisdictions will work to improve and increase
oyster production in the private and public oyster fisheries.
Increased oyster production will be accomplished by focusing effort
and finances into aquaculture projects. Guidelines will be
established for controlling fishing mortality.
Collection of Management Quality Data: Improvements in the
collection and analysis cf oyster data are necessary. In addition
to research on disease, research should be encouraged on natural
and fishing mortality rates, the stock/recruitment relationship,
spawning stock densities needed to repopulate an area, and factors
affecting abundance, survival and growth of larvae and juveniles.
The Bay jurisdictions will continue to collect quantitative data on
oyster stocks, habitat and diseases1
Section 2. Management for Maryland oyster Recovery Areas (ORAs)
Oyster Recovery Areas: Geographic areas termed "oyster recover
areas" (ORAs) will be designated in low salinity reaches of t. Bay
and tributaries where MSX and Dermo are less viable. These areas
will be managed to limit transplantation activities that have the
potential to introduce disease and new rehabilitation techniques
for restoring oyster populations will be evaluated.
Strategy 1: The implementation of activities within the ORAs will
be guided by an independent advisory committee.
Strategy 2: Each ORA will be comprised of from one to three zones
and specific activities will be defined for each area.
Strategy 3: criteria will be defined for determining the boundaries
of each ORA and then adopted into Maryland regulation.
v
-------
THE FISHERY MANAGEMENT FLAN PROCESS
what in a fishery management plan?
A Chesapeake Bay fishery r^nagement plan provides a framework
for the Bay jurisdictions to take compatible, coordinated
management measures to conserve and utilize a fishery resource. A
management plan includes pertinent background information,
management strategies, recommended actions, and implementation
dates.
A *' shery management plan is not an endpoiht in the management
of a fi_:iery but part of a dynamic, changing process consisting of
several steps. The first step consists of analyzing the complex
biological, economic and social aspects of a particular finfish or
shellfish fishery. The s":ond step includes defining the concerns
of a fishery, identifying potential solutions, and choosing
appropriate management strategies. Once specific goals have been
defined, it is important to measure progress towards meeting the
goals, establish accountability and engage the general publi *.
Plans must be adaptive and flexible to meet the changing needs of
a particular resource. They are annually reviewed and updated in
or-j.^r to respond to the most current information on the fishery.
Management Flan Background
As part of the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement's commitment to
protect and manage the natural resources of the Chesapeake Bay, the
Bay jurisdictions developed a series of fishery management plans
for commercially, rec ationally, and selected ecologically
valuable species. A comprehensive and coordinated approach by the
various local, state «..id federal groups in the Chesapeake Bay
watershed is necessary for successful fishery management. Bay
fisheries are traditionally managed separately by Pennsylvania,
Maryland, Virginia, the District of Columbia, and the Potomac River
Fisheries Commission. There is also a federal Mid-Atlantic Fishery
Management Council (MAFMC) which has management jurisdiction for
offshore fisheries (3-200 miles), and a coastwide organization, the
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), which
coordinates the manag ment of migratory species in state waters
(internal waters to 3 ailes offshore) from Maine to Florida
A Fisheries Management Workgroup, under the auspices of the
Chesapeake Bay Program's Living Resources Subcommittee, was formed
to develop baywide fishery management plans. The workgroup's
members represent fishery management agencies from the District of
Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, the Potomac River Fisheries
Commission, Virginia, and the federal government; the Bay area
academic community; the fishing industry; conservation groups; and
interested citizens. Establishing Chesapeake Bay FMPs, in addition
to coastal FMPs, creates a forum to specifically address problems
vi
-------
that are unique to the Chesapeake Bay. They also serve as the basis
for implementing regulations in the Bay jurisdictions.
The Chesapeake Bay Program's Fishery Management Planning Process
The planning process starts- with input by the Fisheries
Management Workgroup and development of a draft plan. This is
followed by a review of the management proposals by Bay Frograin
committees, other scientists and resource managers, and the public.
Comments are incorporated into a final draft of the management
plan. It is endorsed by the Chesapeake Bay Program's Living
Resources Subcommittee (LRSC), the Implementation Committee (IC),
and the Principal Staff Committee (PSC). The plan is sent to the
Executive Committee (EC) for adoption.
Upon adoption by the EC, the appropriate management agencies
implement the plan. In 199C, the Maryland legislature approved
Section 4-215 of the Natural Resource Article giving the Maryland
Department of Natural Resources authority to regulate a fishery
once a FMP has been adopted by regulation. In Virginia, FMP
recommendations are pursued either by legislative changes or
through a public regulatory process conducted by the Commission. A
periodic review of each FMP is conducted by the Fisheries
Ma: agement Workgroup to incorporate new information jnd to update
management strategies as needed.
The first group of fishery management plans, including
oysters, was completed in 1989. - Additional plans have been
completed each year encompassing 16 finfish and shellfish species.
With time and changes, it became apparent that a substantive review
of each FMP at regular intervals would be necessary. The FMP
workgroup developed a review schedule to upgrade each plan (Table
1) . The revised FMP must be sent through the regular Chesapeake Bay
Program's fishery management planning and adoption pro Tosses. Since
the major review schedule extends over a 5-ye.ir period, import mt
minor changes are addressed through an amendment procedure, this
entails developing a description of the proposed changes and
sending it through the FMP workgroup for endorsement. The amendment
must be published for public comment and reviewed by the LRSC and
the IC for their comment and approval. The PSC has been given
authority by the EC to approve amendment changes.
vii
-------
Table 1. Schedule for reviewing fishery management plans
SPECIES
ADOPTION
DATE
REVIEW DATE |
Shad/Herring
1989
June 1995
Blue Crab
1989
1994
Oysters
1989
1994
Striped Bass
1989
August 1995 1
Weakfish/Seatrout
1990
March 1996 I
Bluefish
1990
June 1995
Croaker/Spot
1991
1996
American Eel
1991
1996
Summer Flounder
1991
March 1996 I
Black Drum
Red Drum
1993
1993
1997 I
Catfish
July 1995
2000 1
Mackerel
1994
1998
Black Sea Bass
July 1995
2000
Tautog
December
1995
2000
Horseshoe Crabs
1994
1999 1
viii
-------
INTRODUCTION
The oyst fcrassostrea vircrinica) resource in the Chesapeake
Bay has been significantly impacted by the oyster parasites MSX and
Dermo, habitat losses, water quality, and harvesting. In 1989, a
Chesapeake Bay Oyster Fishery Management Plan (FMP) was completed
for oysters and included strategies to address the problems of
harvest decline, recruitment, disease mortality, leased ground
production, habitat issues, shellfish sanitation, market production
and the repletion program. The oyster commercial harvest continued
to decline and special committees were organized to review the
situation. In Maryland, the role of the State in oyster management
was analyzed and evaluated by a special committee appointed by the
governor. As a result of the committee recommendations, the
Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) increased oyster
taxes and license fees, developed a seed supply for private
aguaculture, continued the repletion program, developed stock
assessment efforts and increased disease research and monitoring
(Refer to Appendix I for a summary of major recommendations from
the Governor's Report, also known as the Wolman Report).
In Virginia, a 33-member "Blue Ribbon1* Panel met to discuss
oyster issues and develop recommendations for restoring Virginia's
oyster industry. Four potential oyster sources were considered:
traditional state and private culture of £. virainica: off-bottom
culture in approved waters; on-bottom culture of a non-native
species, £. aiaas: and on-shore depuration of moderately polluted
oysters. The recommendations of the Virginia Blue Ribbon Panel were
prepared and reported in the Virginia Holton Plan (Refer to
Appendix II for a summary).
As the ecological value of the oyster resource to water
quality was recognized and disease became more limiting, an
improved framework was needed for managing the oyster resource.
The Chesapeake Bay Program's Scientific and Technical Advisory
Committee (STAC) initially played a dominant role in coordinating
efforts to draft a baywide oyster restoration action agenda. After
several workshops, eight problem areas were defined to maintain the
oyster fishery and restore the oyster reef community. These problem
areas were: restoration of habitat; recognition of ecological
function; control of fishing mortality; improvement of the
repletion program; management around disease; support of research;
promotion of aquaculture and the establishment of oyster
sanctuaries. The STAC work provided the framework for revising the
1989 Oyster FMP. Specific action? and details for each of the
problem areas were taken from recommendations made by the Maryland
Oyster Roundtable (MOR) and the Virginia Holton Plan (VHP).
Although these efforts were independent, the Chesapeake Bay
management plan attempts to coordinate and direct baywide efforts
in regards to oysters. The Virginia and Maryland committee reports
served as the source documents for the 1994 Oyster FMP.
1
-------
One of the major innovations resulting from the MOR was
defining oyster recovery areas (ORA'.s) . Restoration areas will be
established in the Chester, Choptank, Magothy, Nanticoke, Patuxent,
and Severn Rivers. These areas will be targeted for restoring
oyster populations then scientifically monitored to see how well
the new techniques are working. A non-profit corporation will be
formed by aquaculturists, environmentalists and watermen to play a
major role in developing and applying innovative oyster restoration
techniques. The delineation of ORA's has resulted in two management
sections in the revised 1994 Oyster FMP, the first section
addresses baywide strategies and actions, and the second section
addresses Maryland strategies and actions for the ORA's. The
biological background section from the original 1989 Oyster FMP has
been updated and included after the management sections, in
addition to establishing ORA's, Maryland DNR will also establish a
pilot permitting program for oyster aquaculture demonstration
projects.
Ecological Role
The ecological value of oyster reefs to the Chesapeake Bay
ecosystem includes the effects of oyster filtration on water
quality and the biological diversity associated with reef
communities. Oysters filter phytoplankton and other organic
particulate matter from the water column, thus clarifying the water
and reducing organic loads contributing to anoxia (STAC 1992).
Results from oyster modelling (Ulanowicz and Tuttle 1992) suggest
that increasing oyster stocks either by aquaculture or enhancing
natural oyster bars would augment the attainment of water quality
goals. Although the ecological role of oysters in the Chesapeake
Bay ecosystem is recognized, its benefit is indirect and hard to
measure. Few data are available to quantify oyster reef community
structure and function. Myatt and Myatt (1990) conducted an
ecological study of hard-substrate communities within the
Chesapeake Bay. They concluded that an artificial reef program
would be an asset to the Bay environment, since ecological
functions overlap with other problem areas, specific actions
addressing these issues have not been developed. Strategies and
actions that restore oyster habitat and enhance/increase oyster
production will benefit the ecosystem.
Currant Status of the Oyster Fishery
Currently, oyster harvest from the Chesapeake Bay is at an all
time low. The fishery is restricted to a few areas where legal-
si zc-r oysters can be harvested. These are low salinity areas, where
natu l recruitment (spat set) is low and unpredictable, where the
statt s repletion programs expend the greatest effort, and where
/rNt? are at greatest risk from the influx of freshwater (also
t nov.n as freshets). During the 1992/1993 oyster season, 124,000
bushels were harvested from Maryland, 64,500 bushels from Virginia
and 105,000 bushels from the Potomac River. Preliminary 1993/1994
2
-------
commercial oyster landings from Maryland are 76,000 bushels. This
is the seventh consecutive year of harvests below 500,000 bushels
(Figure 1 and 2). Preliminary 1993/1994 oyster harvests from
Virginia and the Potomac River were 30,000 and 223 bushels,
respectively. Oyster surveys in Maryland indicate that oyster
diseases have expanded their range. Oyster spat set has been
variable (Figure 3), The 1991 spat fall index, the average number
of young oysters found on a given amount of oyster shell, was the
highest recorded in 27 years at over 200 spat per bushel. The 1993
oyster spat set was 16.2 spat per bushel. For more details on the
biology and life history of oysters and an historic perspective on
the oyster fishery, refer to the biological background section (p.
26) .
Biologists from the Virginia. Marine Resources Commission
(VMRC) recommended a moratorium on the harvest of market oysters
from public grounds during 1993. After public hearings, the VMRC
decided to shorten the oyster season and set a 6,000 bushel limit
from October 15th through December 31st, restrict the length of
tongs to 18 feet, and prohibit harvest after 12 noon. The VMRC's
actions did not affect the harvest of oysters from private grounds.
The restrictions were similar to those approved by the Potomac
River Fisheries Commission (PRFC) in response to high oyster
mortalities. Mortalities as high as 90% were reported in parts of
the Potomac River due to a high freshwater influx from spring
rainfall and snowmelt.
FMP Status and Management Unit
A Chesapeake Bay Oyster Management Plan was ^mpleted in 1989.
The 1994 Oyster FMP supersedes the 1989 FMP. The management unit is
the American or eastern oyster (Crflggpgtrefl virorinical throughout
its range in the Chesapeake Bay. The Virginia oyster industry has
two different environments, the Bay and Seaside. Management
considerations for the Virginia resource are for the Bay oyster
bars and do not include the intertidal Seaside bars.
3
-------
Figure 1. Maryland Commercial Oyster
Landings by Season
Million bushels
1958 1963 1968 1973 1978 1983 1988 1993
Year
-------
Figure 2. Virginia Oyster Ground
Production by season
Million bushels
Year
Public Landings
Private Landings
-------
Figure 3. Maryland spat set, 1939-1993
300
Number of spat/bushel
b
i i i i i * i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
1939 1944 1949 1954 1959 1964 1969 1974 1979 1984 1989 1994
Year
Baywide WW 55 Key Bars
-------
Goals and Objactives
The overall goal of the 1994 Oyster FMP is as follows:
The Bay jurisdictions will enhance the production of oysters
in the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem by restoring habitat,
controlling fishing mortality, promoting aquaculture and
continuing the repletion programs.
The objectives defined by the Maryland Oyster Roundtable are:
1) Maximize and enhance the ecological benefits of oysters;
2) Maximize and enhance the economic benefits derived from
harvesting in the public and private oyster fisheries; and
3) Maximize the ability of government to respond effectively
to the magnitude of the problem.
The objectives defined by the Virginia Holton Plan are:
1) Determine fair and justifiable harvest quotas through a
data collection and analysis system.
2) Rejuvenate the public oyster fishery by redesigning the
repletion program and evaluate the effectiveness of a
redesigned oyster repletion program.
3) Implement a limited entry program for fisheries in order to
protect both full-time fishermen and the resource.
4) Implement regulatory reforms and technical auvisory service
to strengthen off-bottom culture.
5) Explore the feasibility and ultimate construction of a
depuration facility for oysters from both the private and
public bottom.
6) Test in the laboratory and, conditionally, in the York
River, the suitability of the non-native oyster, £. aiaas. as
a factor in the rejuvenation of Virginia oyster industry.
7
-------
SECTION 1.
BAYWIDE PROBLEM AREAS AND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
Disease
Haplosporidium nelsoni and Perkinsus marines (rarmo) are
the major impediments to restoring oyster stocks to the level of
abundance of recent decades in 'ne Chesapeake Bay. Approximately
100* of Maryland and Virginia oyster beds are infected with
disease^ MSX and Dermo are single- celled parasites that grow within
oyster tissue. They cause signii.'c *nt mortalities within the first
two years of life and have alt: --d the size and age structure of
the oyster population. There i~- v ostantial variation in population
structure and relative oyste*. *1 undance from area to area (Smith
and Jordan 1992) . Maryland sto^.c survey data from limited areas,
indicate moderate numbers of juvenile and premarket oysters but
greatly reduced numbers of marke—sized oysters. Although oysters
exhibit highly variable growth rates, they can reach market size in
about 3 years. This is enough time for diseases to eliminate all
market-size oysters on a bar. Younger, less than 3" oysters, can
still reproduce and maintain moderate recruitment success or spat
However, fecundity (the number of eggs produced) increases
exponenrxaliy vith j.ze (see biological background section, Figure
4). Oysters .larger than 3" contribute considerably more to the
reproductive cayaoity of the population. It is speculated that
continued removal of large oysters due to disease and/or harvest,
may confer a compo-i'. ive advantage on early reproduction and
ultimately result ir_ a population of small oysters. Climate and
subsequent changes in salinity affect disease distribution and
infection. Salinities belo^ 10-15 ppt and above 30-32 ppt are
associated with decreased MSX activity. MSX can inhibit oyster
growth and gametogenesis jr. spring. Dermo can tolerate lower
salinities and is more persistent and damaging to oyster
populations than MSX.
Currently, there are no known disease-resistant oysters
available but there are several species that are disease-tolerant.
Rutgers has developed an MSX tolerant strain which can become
infected with MSX but will survive to market size. This strain,
however, is more susceptible to Dermo than regular oysters. The
native North Carolina seaside oyster can reach market size in 12 to
18 months with about 25-30% cumulative mortality (Brown et al.
1994) . A major breakthrough in 1993 was ^he culture of Dermo in the
laboratory and the ability to detect Dermo in the water column.
These breakthroughs will make it easier to study the organism and,
hopefully, facilitate some advances in disease research. In order
to provide a successful research program, stable and carefully
targeted funding must be provided over several years. After a pre-
determined time frame, the researr' and management program should
be critically evaluated to determj. 'ts effectiveness in reversing
the decreasing trend in oyste ;tocks and progress towards
controlling MSX and Dermo.
8
-------
Strategy 1.1
The Bay jurisdictions will monitor the prevalence and intensity of
MSX and Dermo in the Bay and attempt to minimize the spread of
disease.
Actions;
l.l.l
1.1.2
The Bay jurisdictions will continue the annual disease
survey, increase sample size and develop new disease
detection techniques at the Oxford Laboratory and the
Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS).
Implementation l.l.l
continue existing sampling schedule during
October/November and March.
The Bay jurisdictions will establish a protocol for
certifying oysters, including seed oyster?, for the
prevalence and intensity of MSX, Dermo, or other
pathogens.
Implementation 1.1.2
1995
1.1.3 Maryland and Virginia will continue their repletion
programs using natural seed with low levels of MSX and
Dermo contamination until hatchery produced, disease-free
seed is produced. At that time in Maryland, movement of
seed which cannot be certified (Action 1.1.2) will cease.
Techniques for disease monitoring will include
histocytology (thioglycolate assays and histological
analysis), immunological detection tests and
histopathology.
Implementation 1.1.3
Continue. Implement movement of disease-free seed
from hatcheries as it becomes available.
1.1.4 The jurisdictions will continue to rotate seed areas to
avoid transport of older year classes that have a higher
probability of disease infestation.
Implementation 1.1.4
Continue
l.l.5 The jurisdictions will conduct a pilot study to test the
difference in survival between seed moved in the fall
compared to seed moved in the spring and investigate
other approaches for seed planting to reduce the
possibility of disease infestation before transport (part
of improved repletion program).
9
-------
Implementation 1.1.5
September 1994- April 1995
strategy 1.2
The Bay jurisdictions will implement a National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) coordinated, multi^'ear, goal-
oriented research program to identify, understand, prevent and
control MSX, Dermo, and other potential pathogens. Funding for this
research should be stable, carefully targeted for specific research
issues and followed by an evaluation after five years to assess
progress and determine ccr/cinuation.
Actions:
1.2.1 The Bay jurisdictions will delegate responsibility for
coordinating the research program to a specific
person/agency.
Implementation 1.2.1
1994
1.2.2 Maryland will initiate the first five-year phase of a
multi-year research program aimed at early detection,
prevention, and control of MSX and Dermo which will
include the following:
1) Improve the methodology for early detection of disease
during all life stages of oysters;
2) Obtain a better understanding of the life cycle of MSX
and Dermo,. including environmental requirements and
identification of alternate hosts;
3) Identify existing information and intensify research
on the physiological aspects of MSX and Dermo, including
immune system function;
4) Determine why sore cyster species are not susceptible
to MSX or Dexmo;
5) Utilize cell culture to learn Dermo's requirements for
survival and the best methods of eradicating it;
6) Understand the effects of cold temperature and low
salinity on parasites ar.d relate them to various
management scenarios;
7) Examine the response, of f- vircinica from other
regions (outside the Chesapeake 'ay) to MSX and/or Dermo
when transplanted in thj Bay.
Implementation 1.2.2
1995-2000
strategy 1.3
Research will continue on disease-resistant, oysters, i jridization,
and the possible effects of introducing a hybrid or ex' ic species
into the Bay.
10
-------
Actions:
1.3.1 The Bay jurisdictions vrill follow the guidelines set
forth in the Exotic Species Policy developed by the
Chesapeake Bay Program's Living Resources Subcommittee.
implementation 1.3.1
1994
1.3.2 Maryland will initiate a pilot field program to plant
strains of £. virainica from North Carolina to the
Chesapeake Bay in higher salinity areas of the Bay and
its tributaries. Adequate precautions will be taken to
prevent the introduction of new disease strains and
undesirable genetic stock (see Action 1.3.1).
Implementation 1.3.2
1995
1.3.3 A) Virginia, through the Virginia Institute of Marine
Science (VIMS), is conducting an environmental impact
assessment on the introduction of a non-native oyster, C.
qigas. Specific guidelines on the research of triploid
individuals arc being developed.
B) Maryland will conduct an environmental impact
assessment of the potential introduction of a non-native
oyster specie* as a contingency plan if the action items
in this plan -re not enough to increase oyster stocks in
the Bay. Maryland will utilize the results of the
Virginia assessment (Action 1.3.3.A) to avoid duplicating
efforts.
Implsacatmtion 1.3.3
a) Continue b) Open
Repletion Programs
State repletion programs have focused on increasing the size
of the oyster harvest by moving shell and transplanting seed
oysters. Currently, state agencies move seed oysters to grow-out
regions so watermen who pay a license fee can harvest them for
market. Since there is little to no production from natural bars,
the repletion program supports a put-and-take fishery.
The State repletion program is the major source for
harvestable oysters in Maryland at this time. It is limited by
natural reproduction (spat set), disease infection, the amount of
available shell or cultch, and funding. Because of high disease
pressure in most lower-Bay locations, seed repletion programs move
oyster seed from high salinity, high spat set areas, to low
salinity, low spat set areas which have slow growth and low
disease. Maryland and Virginia currently have no disease-free,
11
-------
seed-producing areas and transplanting seed nay facilitate the
spread of disease throughout the Bay. The repletion program in each
state should be adapted, as appropriate, to the initiatives
recommended in this plan. Monitoring efforts should continue and
adjustments made to the timing ana location of shell and seed
plantings in order to enhance oyster production without encouraging
the spread of disease. (Refer to Appendix III and IV for a summary
of each state's repletion program during 1993).
strategy 2.1
The Maryland and Virginia repletion programs will minimize the
possibility of spreading MSX and Dermo.
Actions:
2.1.1 The Bay jurisdictions will implement NOAA recommended
disease strategies and actions defined in the Disease
Section of this management pi "n to minimize the spread of
disease.
Implementation 2.1.3
Variable, depending on actions defined in the
previous management section.
Strategy 2.2
The Bay jurisdictions will maintain and adapt their current state
repletion programs to promote natural oyeter production and meet
the changing needs of the oyster resource. This includes adjusting
plantings based on salinity patterns and disease information. Th-s
programs will be modified as new initiatives from the MOR and VHP
are implemented. Repletion efforts will be monitored then evaluated
after a three year period (1997).
Actions:
2.2.1 Maryland will maintain the state repletion program as
funds are available at a level of at least 2 million
bushels of shell and 500,000 bushels of seed if spat set
levels permit. The amount of shell and seed may be
variable depending on availability. As new initiatives by
the MOR are implemented, the repletion program may be
modified.
Implementation 2.2.1
Continue. Seed plantings begin in April 1994 and
shell plantings in June and early July 1994.
2.2.2 Maryland will continue the fall dredge survey which
provides data on oyster mortality, recruitment (spat
set) , and disease patterns, to dir-ect the oyster
repletion efforts.
Implementation 2.2.2
Continue
12
-------
2.2.3 Maryland will provide fresh shell to the state hatchery
and to community groups for habitat enhancement and
develop a polic> v.n the minimum desiccation period to
prevent the spread of MSX and Dermo with fresh shell.
Implementation 2.2.3
1995
2.2.4 Maryland DNR will support the ORA efforts by providing
the program with a percentage of available shell. The
amount of shell will be determined annually. For
1994/1995, 200,000 bushels of shell will be available.
Implementation 2.2.4
Beginning in 1994 and continuing annually.
2.2.5 Virginia will restore two. major areas where setting is
good, the James and the Rappahannock Rivers, forming
sanctuaries for maintaining the biological stock.
Restoration efforts will include: 1) locating the best
substrate; 2) prohibiting harvest in these areas; 3)
adding shell or other material to build reef structure;
4) adding seed; and, 5) monitoring the growth of oysters.
Implementation 2.2.5
Begin in 1994
2.2.6 Virginia will turn and clean or add cultch on a rotating
basis on oyster beds near sanctuary reefs in the James
and Rappahannock Rivers to prepare them to receive spac
set from the sanctuary areas. The cleaning and shelling
procedure will include: 1) identifying the best areas; 2)
delineating the best time to turn or shell the beds; 3)
monitoring the growth of new oysters; 4) opening the beds
to harvest and setting a quota; and, 5) closing the beds
once the quota is met and starting the process again.
Implementation 2.2.6
1995
2.2.7 A) The Bay jurisdictions will continue to monitor their
repletion efforts and adjust the timing and location of
shell and seed planting based on the best available data.
B) Virginia will establish a computer data-base systen to
monitor the progress of the repletion program on a bar by
bar basis.
Implementation 2..
a) Continue b) 1995
13
-------
2.2.8 When the hatchery production of seed is adequate to meet
planting needs, the repletion programs will be modified
to eliminate the spread of disease with seed plantings.
Implementation 2.2.8
Open. Dependent on seed production.
Habitat/Water Quality
Historically, overfishing has contributed to the reduction in
available oyster habitat in the Chesapeake Bay by breaking up reefs
and removing shell. Oyster bars have become small mounds with
relatively thin layers of shell scattered over the bottom. Reef
flattening has taken oysters out of the higher water column where
currents bring fresh food supplies and oxygen, making them
particularly vulnerable to siltation. Heavy sediment loads from
agricultural and urban run-off, construction activities, natural
erosion, channel dredging, forestry activities, and seafood
harvesting practices can impact oyster bars. The reduction in reef
surface area has also reduced the amount of substrate for oyster
larvae to settle. Oyster shell is the most suitable substrate for
spat settlement and should be considered an important natural
resource. Loss of shell due to the export of oysters out of the Bay
is detrimental to restoring oyster beds. Shell conservation should
be practiced. Oyster beds can be re-established by building up the
base with additional firm substrate. Rebuilding efforts should be
focused in shallow areas (less than 10m) where low oxygen is not a
problem.
Adequate water quality is essential for oysters to reproduce,
grow and .maintain health. Habitat requirements for temperature,
salinity, sediment, pH, and dirsolved oxygen have been summarized
in Table 1 in the Background Section (p.32). Oyster eggs and larvae
can be killed by suspended sediments. Adult oysters can withstand
periods of increased turbidity and sedimentation but extended
exposure can result in damage to their filtering apparatus. Of
greatest concern, baywide, are the effects of excess nutrients and
the impacts of toxic materials.
Oysters are an important part of the Bay ecosystem especially
in their role as filter-feeders. They remove inorganic particles
from the water column and deposit them as pseudofeces. They also
consume large quantities of suspended organic particles, recycle
nutrients, and transfer energy throughout the food web.
Btrategy 3.1
The Bay jurisdictions will conduct a phased program to evaluate and
implement projects to restore the physical habitat for oysters.
14
-------
Actions:
3.1.1 The Bay jurisdictions will restore physical oyster
habitat through the Maryland and Virginia Aquatic Reef
Program (refer to the Aquatic Reef Habitat Plan 1994 for
details).
1) Approximately 5000 acres each of new oyster reef
habitat will be created in Maryland and Virginia and 1000
acres in the Potomac River, over the next 5 years.
2) Oyster harvest will be prohibited within permitted
reef sites.
3) A research plan will be prepared to obtain
hydrodynamics, unit design, and deployment configuration
recommendations.
4) The reefs will be monitored to determine compliance
and evaluate ecological performance.
5) The Reef Program will expand into additional areas and
sites as guided by the findings of research and
monitoring.
Implementation 3.1.1
See specifics in the 1994 Aquatic Reef Habitat Plan
3.1.2 The Bay jurisdictions will redefine sanctuaries with
adequate geographic extent and distinctiveness.
1) Virginia will expand the 25 acre broodstock sanctuary
in the James River (Lower Jail Island/Wreck Shoal)
currently used by the Oyster Repletion Program to an area
not less than 2000 acres, north of the channel and chosen
by the VMRC.
2) Virginia will establish a broodstock sanctuary in a
geographically distinct area of approximately 50 acres in
the Rappahannock River.
3) Virginia will establish a broodstock sanctuary of less
than 50 acres in Mcbjack Bay and manage it according to
the repletion plan.
4) Virginia will continue to use specific areas within
the Piankatank and Great Wicomico Rivers as seed areas
for the repletion program.
Implementation 3.1.2
Variable, but beginning in 1994.
3.1.3 The Bay jurisdictions will evaluate innovative techniques
for restoring physical oyster habitat, conduct projects
such as cleaning bottom areas, and evaluate optimal
physical structures and alternative materials for
rebuilding oyster bars.
Implementation 3.1.3
1995
15
-------
strategy 3.2
The Bay jurisdictions will work to ensure that water quality is
maintained at levels necessary to support healthy oyster
populations.
Actions:
3.2.1 Current programs establishes nder the Chesapeake Bay
Program to reduce pollutant sources that adversely affect
oyster stocks will be maintained. The Tributary
Strategies will identify specific measures to protect and
restore water quality in the Bay and its tributaries for
the benefit of living resources, including Bay oyster
stocks.
Implementation 3.2.1
Continue
3.2.2 Local, state, and federal agencies will utilize their
permitting and environmental review programs to ensure
that oyster habitat is not adversely affect-.ed by the
discharge of pollutants, dredging, and other human
activities.
implementation 3.2.2
Continue
3.2.3 The ORA advisory committees will assess the potential
impact of activities which may adversely affect oysters
in ORA's and provide recommendations to the appropriate
agencies for prevention and restoration of adequate water
uality.
Implementation 3.2.3
1995
Management to Increase Oyster Production
The disease problem, the lack of oyster habitat, variability
in recruitment, and harvest pressures have placed considerable
constraints on oyster production. Current production levels of
certified oyster larvae and seed oysters will not meet the needs of
stocking the ORA's or providing for private aquaculture and
community association projects. Past and current oyster culture
techniques should be analyzed and coordinated with management
approaches to enhance production. New technology is needed for the
restoration, culture, and production of oysters. In the past,
institutional barriers made it difficult to obtain aquaculture
permits. To allow progress toward opportunities for private
aquaculture ventures, elforts should be made to assist and
encourage the private industry. There will be difficulty enforcing
16
-------
property rights relevant to private oyster aquaculture in the Bay
without significant social change. Presently, MDNR has oyster
hatcheries at Deal Island and Piney Point, and the University of
Maryland has a hatchery at Horn Point. Production at these hatchery
facilities in Maryland should be increased to provide spat and
larvae.
The advantages and disadvantages of a 'slot limit' should be
evaluated as a means of increasing oyster production. Lowering the
minimum size to 2.5" in disease impacted areas would allow oysters
to be harvested before they succumb to disease. A 4M maximum size
would protect larger oysters that have survived MSX and Dermo
infestation and allow the possible development of disease-
resistant/tolerant individuals and eventually, the build-up of a
disease resistant stock.
Strategy 4.1
The Bay jurisdictions will work to improve and increase oyster
production in the private and public oyster fisheries.
Actions:
4.1.1 Maryland and Virginia will prepare a comprehensive
analysis of past and current oyster culture techniques in
the Chesapeake Bay and other relevant areas to help focus
effort and finances into projects with the best chances
of success. In preparing the document, existing expertise
and experience in the National Marine Fisheries Service
will be utilized.
Implementation 4.1.1
1995
4.1.2 Maryland will increase the hatchery production of oyster
larvae and seed oysters by maximizing production at Horn
Point and using fresh shells supplied by MDNR. In
addition, field surveys are currently underway to
evaluate plantings of hatchery reared seed which will
guide utilization of larvae and seed from state
facilities.
Implementation 4.1.2
Field study of hatchery reared seed is in its
second year. Shells were delivered to Horn Point in
February 1994.
4.1.3 Maryland will establish remote setting sites for eyed-
larvae purchased from public or private hatcheries, in
appropriate locations with low levels of MSX and Dermo.
Implementation 4.1.3
1995
17
-------
4.1.4 Maryland and Virginia will encourage private companies to
develop oyster hatcheries. Encouragement will include
competitive bidding for contracts to provide oyster
larvae and seed for ORA's and other areas.
Implementation 4.1.4
1995
4.1.5 Maryland and Virginia will initiate a grant program with
matching funds provided by private industry, to stimulate
the development of innovative techniques for oyster
restoration, culture and production.
Implementation 4.1.5
Dependent and limited by availability of funding.
4.1.6 Maryland DNR will establish a pilot permitting program
for oyster aquaculture demonstration projects. The pilot
program will include t. e following aspects:
1) an initial 5 year permit;
2) a limit of 20 permits;
3) permits will be limited to 5 acres per individual;
4) total area under a single permit may include more than
one location;
5) permittees will be required to prepare and submit a
report summarising the activities on the permitted area
to MDNR. The report should include information on what
restoration activities were undertaken, the production
techniques utilized, and amount of oysters planted and
harvested;
6) if a permittee fails to report or does not undertake
any production activities, MDNR may revoke the permit;
Implementation 4.1.6
As of February 1994, a draft document entitled,
Ovster Acruaculture Permit Guidelines 1994 har been
developed (see Appendix V for details).
4.1.7 MDNR will establish an aquaculture permit clearinghouse
service for applicants which will include:
1) designating a single point of contact for questions
related to the regulatory requirements for aquaculture,
tracking permit applications, and coordinating state
agency permitting activities related to aquaculture
permits;
2) coordinating the preparation of a permitting handbook
for potential applicants for aquaculture permits.
Implementation 4.1.7
1994
18
-------
4.1.8 The Bay jurisdictions will define the acreage available
for leasing oyster bottom.
1) MDNR will identify areas to be characterized as
Aquaculture Zones through recommendatic ' by the MOR.
2) VMRC will implement the following for off bottom
culture:
a) VIMS will establish criteria for identifying
potentially productive areas, classifying waters as
appropriate (I), marginal (II), and not appropriate
(III) for aquaculture;
b) establish regulations for aquaculture in
regulation title 28.1, Fish, Oysters, Shellfish and
Other Marine Life (includes a permitting process
for aquacultural off-bottom projects that
accommodates structures of changeable configuration
and permit time-spans of appropriate length);
c) establish Department of Health regulations
specifically for aquaculture through discussions
among the Department of Health, industry
representatives, and advisors;
d) draft a model legislative package by VIMS that
establishes tax incentives for the start-up of
private hatcheries to provide a steady supply of
seed to farmers;
e) designate a technical advisory agent with the
VIMS Advisory Service who will specialize in
hatchery advice, grow-out advice, permitting
assistance and site selection assistance.
3) PRFC will not permit any leasing except by
authorization from both Maryland and Virginia
Implementation 4.1.8
variable beginning in 1994
4.1.9 The enforcement of property rights relevant to private
oyster aquaculture will be added to the public education
program.
Implementation 4.1.9
1995
4.1.10 The VMRC will develop and operate a depuration facility
to utilize oysters in less than optimum water quality
situations. The development of a depuration facility will
not lessen the need to continue to improve water quality.
Implementstion 4.1.10
1995. Dependent and limited by the availability of
funds.
19
-------
strategy 4.2
The Bay jurisdictions will reduce and control fishing mortality.
Actions:
4.2.1 Maryland will utilize the following guidelines for
controlling fishing mortality:
a) The population structure of oysters on a bar will be
established before the harvest season, the areas will be
monitored during the season, and harvesting rates will be
determined. If harvest rates from the previous year
exceed the guidelines (see 4.2.1 b), adjustments will be
made concerning the opening and closing of specific areas
for harvest.
b) Maryland will regulate harvest on open bars at fishing
mortality rates dependent on gear type. The following
annual fishing mortality rates will be established in
repleted areas:
1) Tributaries -
a. Hand Tong 50%
b. Patent Tong 40%
c. Dredge 40%
d. Diver 40%
2) Mainstem -
a. Lower Bay (MD/VA line to Cove Pt) - 50%
b. Mid Bay (Cove Pt. to Holland Pt.) - 40%
c. Upper Bay (Holland Pt north) - 40%
The following annual fishing mortality rates will
be established in unrepleted areas and apply to all
gears:
1) Tributaries - 30% once every 3 years
2) Mainstem -
a. Lower Bay - 50% once every 2 years;
b. Mid Bay - 50% once every 2 years
c. Upper Bay - 0%; area will be closed
Implementation 4.2.1
1995
4.2.2 The Bay jurisdictions will evaluate the potential
advantages and disadvantages of a 'slot limit' with a
minimum size for harvesting of 2.5" and a maximum size of
4" for areas impacted by disease.
1) Slot limit already in effect for PRFC below the hand
scrape line.
2) Maryland will collect oysters over 4" from diseased
areas and test their resistance to disease and the
resistance of their progeny. The patent tong survey data
will be reviewed to provide estimates of the impact of
harvesting small oysters from the population.
20
-------
Implementation 4.2.2
l) Continue. 2) Began collecting in March 1994 and
reviewing patent tong data in April 1994.
4.2.3 VMRC will manage the public oyster grounds in specific
areas by establishing the'following:
James River
1) establish an 18' length limit on shaft tongs to
protect oysters in deeper water;
2) establish a market oyster harvest quota that is
updated yearly and based on estimates of standing stock;
3) increase the minimum size in clean cull areas to 3";
4) as part of the culling practices, reduce the tolerance
for blank shells in seed oysters from 10 quarts per
bushel to 6 quarts per bushel;
5) open Deep Water Shoal to public fishery on a limited
basis;
6) establish beds for intensive repletion near the
sanctuary and manage them according to the repletion
plan.
Rappahannock River
7) expand the prohibited area for patent tonging to
include the area on the southside of the river to the
channel above a line connecting Bailey Point
(Urbanna/Southside) and the mouth of Beach Creek
(Northside) in order to reduce harvest pressure on
productive stocks;
8) establish beds for intensive riepletion near the
sanctuary and manage them acccrding to the repletion
plan.
Pocomoke/Tangier Sounds
9) Prohibit patent tonging and dredging for a 3 year
period and re-evaluate the health of the rocks at the end '
of that period.
Seaside Eastern Shore
10) establish a 3" minimum size limit on market oysters.
Implementation 4.2.3
Variable
Collection of Management Quality Data
Oyster population data and harvest information is currently
being collected but improvements in bar-specific data should be
made. A summary of the Maryland and Virginia 1993 Oyster Programs
can be found in Appendix III and IV. The summaries include
descriptions of various sampling surveys and management programs
already conducted by the states. In addition to the research data
on disease (Strategies 1.2 and 1.3), the following research topics
and data needs should be encouraged:
1) Determine the density of spawning stock necessary to repopulate
an area decimated by disease;
21
-------
2) Determine natural and fishing mortality rates;
3) Define stock/recruitment relationship;
4) Determine factors affecting abundance, survival and growth of
larvae and juveniles;
5} Evaluate the effects of reducing the minimum harvest size from
3" to 2. 5M on oyster stocks including effects on the reproductive
capacity of the population and long term effects on the gene pool.
Strategy 5.1
The Bay jurisdictions will improve the collection of management
quality data.
Actions:
5.1.1 The Bay jurisdictions will continue to collect
quantitative data on oyster stocks, habitat and diseases
and make the information available in an annual report.
Implementation 5.1.1
Annually.
5.1.2 VMRC will establish a computer data-base system for the
collection, storage and analysis on a bar-by-bar basis,
updated weekly, of information to estimate standing stock
and establish yearly catch quotas. Data will include
daily entries for total landings, boat numbers, landings
per boat, where harvested, and number of harvesters per
boat.
Implementation 5.1.2
1995
5.1.3 The fisheries agencies will make oyster data available to
the research community as needed to investigate suggested
research topics or in connection with other research.
Implementation 5.1.3
1994
22
-------
CHESAPEAKE BAY 1994 OYSTER FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX
PROBLEM AREAS A STRATEGIES
ACTIONS
DATE
COMMENTS
1. Diaeaie
1.1 Monitor ihc prrvekoce ind
intensity of MSX and Dcrmo and
attempt to minimize the qpreed of
di*e*»e
1.1.1. Cortioue the irtoial diaeaie Mirvey, increaae itmple «ize and develop
new diteaae detection techuiquc*.
Continue
New technique* will be developed at the Oxford
Lab and VIMS.
1.1.2. EitabliA a protocol for certifying oyitcrt, including teed oyitcri, lor
the prevalence and iotemity of MSX, Dermo, or other pathogen*.
1995
1.1 J. Continue the repletion program* tiling natural iced with low level*
of MSX and Dermo coataoanatioa until hatchery produced, di*ea*e-fne
teed i* produced. At that time in MP, movement of *eed which camM be
certified will ceaae.
Continue
Technique! for diaeaae monitoring will include
hiatocytolofy (thioglycolate auay* and hiatological
analyiii), immunological detection tc«* and
hiMopathology. ImplemeK movement of diaeaae-
lite teed from hatcheriet ea it become* available.
1.1.4. Continue to rotate teed area* to avoid trintpoct of older year claaae*
that have a higher probability of diieaae infection.
Continue
1.1 J. Conduct a pilot itudy to ie*t the difference in aurvtvai between teed
mowed in the (all compared to teed moved in the tpring. Invutigate other
approachea to reduce diacaae infertation before uanapott.
1994-1995
Pan of the improved repletion program.
1.2 Implement ¦ coordinated re*earch
profrtm.
1.2.1. Delegate mpooaftiKty for coordinating the ictearch program to a
•pecific petaon/ageaey.
1994
1.2.2. MD win initiate the firat 5-year phaee of a mutti-ycar rttearch
program aimed at early detection, prevention and control of MSX and
Dermo.
1995-2000
1.3 Continue reaearch an dieease-
reaatent oyMera, hybridization, aad^
poeaible efleet* of introducing •
hybrid or exotic *pecie*.
1.3.1. Follow the guideline* tet forth in the Exotic Speciea Policy.
1994
1.3.2. MD will iohiate a oilot field proa ram to olant rtiaina of C. virtinica
from North Carolina If the Cheaapeake Bay in higher taliaity area* of the
Bay and tributaries
1995
Adequate precaution* will be taken to prevent the
introduction of new diteaae (Mint and undeniable
genetic Mock. |
1.3 J. a) VA i* conducting an envtrcximei^al impact aueatmect on the
icttoductija of t noo-oative oytter, £. titu.
b) MD will cooduct aa environmental impact *a*e**ment on the introduction
of a aoo-native oyater aa a contingency plan if the action Hem* in thia plan
am not enough to increaae oyater atoek* in the Bay.
Continue
Open
R
Specific guidelinea aa the reiearch of triploid
individual* am being developed.
Maryland will uiiSre the reiult* of the VA
a**e**ment to avoid duplicating effort*.
-------
1994 OYSTER IMPLEMENTATION (cont'd)
| PROBLEM AREAS A STRATEGIES
ACTIONS
DATE
COMMENTS
2. Repletii Program!
2.1 Minimus the possibility of
fiuvlnj M5X and Demo.
2.1.1. Implement the dimw strategies and actions defined in the Ditent
Section of lhi( management plan to minimize the iprcad of diaeaae.
Variable
Implementation depends on actions defined in the
prcvios management section.
2.2 Maintain and adapt current
repletion program to promote natural
oyster production and meet the
chanfing needi of the resource.
2.2.1. MD will maintain the state repletion program a» funds are available
at current levela (2 million buahela of shell A 500,000 budiela of teed if
aptt act permits). As new initiatives by the MOR arc implemented, the
repletion program may be modified.
Continue
The amount of shett and seed may be variable
from year to year depending on availability.
Repletion efforts will be monitored then
evaluated after 3 years (199'/).
2.2.2. MD will continue the fall dredge survey.
Continue
The survey provides data on oyster mortality,
recruitment (spat set), and disease patterns that
help direct the repletion elTofts.
2.2.3. MD will provide freA died to the state hatchery and comm'inily
groups for habitat enhancement and develop a policy on the minimum
desiccation period to prevent the aprcad of MSX and Dermo with frerfi
shell.
1995
2.2.4. MDNR will support the ORA efforts by providing the program
with a percentage of available atiell. The amount of ahell will be
determined annually.
1995
For 1994/1995,200,000 bushels of shell will be
available.
2.2..S. VA will restore two major areas where setting is good, the James
and Rappahannock Rivsra, forming Mnctuaries for maintaining the Mock.
Bcgip in 1994
Restoration efforts will include: locating the best
¦ubitmc; prohibiting harvest; adding ahell or
other material lo build reef structure; adding
aeed; and, monitoring growth. [
2.2.6. VA will turn and clean or add cullch to oyster beds near aanctuary
reefs in the James and Rappahannock Riven to prepare them to receive
spat set from sanctuary areas.
1995
The cleaning and shelling procedure will include: |
identifying the best areas; delineating the best II
lime; monioring growth; setting a harvest quota;
and, implementing the quota.
2.2.7. a) Continue lo monitor the repletion efforts and adjust die timing
and location of shed and seed planting baaed on the beat available data,
b) VA will eaublirfi a computer data-baae system lo monitor the progress
of the repletion program on a bar by bar basis.
a) Continue
b) 1995
Marykod has been compiling a computer-based
oyster data system as an on-going effort.
2.2.8. When the hatchery production of seed is adequate to meet planting
needs, the repletion programs will be modified lo eliminate the spread of
disease with seed plantings.
Open
Impkmcnation is dependent on aeed production.
-------
1994 OV \ IMPLEMENTATION (corU'd)
PROBLi_.. AREAS & STRATEGIES
ACTIONS
DATE
COMMENTS
3. Hibiut/Wucr Quality
3.1 Conduct a phated program to
evaluate and implement project! to
reatore th» rjyiical habitat for
oyater .
3.1.1. Re More phyaicai oyater habitat through the Maryland and Virginia
Aquatic Reef Program.
Variable
See ipecifica is the <994 Aquatic Reef Habitat
Han.
3.1.2. Redefine aanctuariet with adequate geographic extent and
diitinctivencta.
Variable,
beginning in
1994
3.1.3. Evaluate innovative techniquea for reatoring phyaicai obiter habitat,
conduct project! auch aa cleaning bottom areai, and evaluate optimal
phyaicai atiucturea and alternative material! .'or rebuilding oyater Kara.
1595
3.2 Will work to enaure that water
quality ii maintained at level*
neceuary to aupport healthy oyiter
I population!.
3.2.1. Currant program eaublirfied under the CBP to reduce pollutant
anurcea that adveraely affect oyater Mocka will be maintained.
Continue
The Tributary Strategy will work to identify
^ecific meanirei to protect and rcitore water I
quality for the benefit of living teaourcei 1
including Bay oyitera. |
3.2.2. Local, aute, and federal ageaciei will utilize their permitting and
environmental review programs to eoaura that oyater habitat ii net
adveraely affected by the diacharge of polhitanta. dredging, and other -
human acthritiei.
Continue
3.2.4. The ORA adviaory committeea will aaacaa the potential aspect of
activitiea which may adveraely afTect oyater m ORA'a and provide
recommendation! to the appropriate agencie* . ir prevention and
re Mora lion of fadequaie water quality.
1995
4. Manafcmci* to bcitaac Oyater
Production
4.1 Woft to improve and increaae
oyater production is the private and
public oyiter ftAeriea.
4.1.1. Prepare a coopfcheaaive analyaa of pert and current oyater culture
techniquea and other nbvid a real to help focui effort and financea itto
projecu with the b-it rhanrea of aucceaa.
1995
ftdrting axpettiae and experience in the
National Marina Firiteriea Service will be
utilized.
4.1.2. MD win increaae the hatchery production of oyiter larva* and aeed
oyiten by maximizing proaoction at Horn ft. and uaing feab AeUa
aupplied by MDNR.
Corainue
Field auiveya are currently underway to 1
evaluate planting! of hatchery roared aeed 1
which will guide utilization of larvae and aeed 1
from Mate faciUtiea. f
-------
1994 OYSTER IMPLEMENT/-! iON (cont'd)
| PROBLEM AREAS & STRATEGIES
ACTIONS
DATE
COMMEOTS
] 4. Management to Increase Oyster
Production (cont'd)
4.1.3. MD will edablirfi remote Kiting sites for eyed-tarvae purchased
from public or private hatcheries, in appropriate locations with low levels
of MSX end Dcrmo
1995
4.1.4. Encourage private companies to develop oyster hatcheries.
1995
Encouragement will include competitive bidding
for contra eta to provide oyster larvae and seed
for ORA's and ether areas.
4 1.5. Initiate a grant progrt vhh matching fundi provided by private
industry, to stimulate the development of innovative technique! 'or oyiter
restoration, culture and production.
Dependent on
funding
4.1.6. MDNR will iiuUiA a pilol permitting pmjram for oy*cr
aquacuhure demonatmion project*.
1994
At of February 1994, a draft document entitled,
•er Aouaculture Permit Guidelines 1994 has
•i developed (see Appendix V in this plan for
detaila).
* 1.7. MDNR will establish an aquaculture permit ctearinghouae aervice
for applicants.
1994
Includea: designating a single point of contact,
tracking permit applications, coordinating atate
agencies and prepariiig a permit handbook.
4.1.9. Will define the acreage lilable for leasing oyster bottom.
Variable
beginning in
1994
4.1.9. The enforcement of properly rights relevant to private oyuer
aquacuhure will be a^ded to the public education program.
1995
4.I.1C. VMRC will develop .nd operate a depuration facilii) to utilize
oysiera in leaa than optimum w -r quality aituationa.
1995
The development of a depuration facility will not
leuen the need to continue to improve water
quality.
4.2 Reduce ind control fulling
mortality.
4.2.1.Maryland will utilize specific guidelines to cosin.. ' .ling
moftality.
1995
Harvest ralo will be determined and adjustments
made on annual fishing mortality ntes.
4.2.2. Evaluate the potential advantages and disadvanugea of a "alot
limit* wii a minimum size fot harvesting of 2.5* tsi * maximum abe of
4* for areas impacted by diaeaae.
Begin in 1994
Slot limit already in effect for PRFC. MD will
collect oysters over 4* from diseased areas and
test their resistance to diseaae. The patent long
survey will provide estimates of the impact of
harvesting small oystet from the population.
-------
1994 OYafER IMPLEMENTATION (cont'd)
PROBLEM AREAS A STRATEGIES
ACTIONS
DATE
COMMENTS
4 .2 Rrtf« and control fulling
anfirCtj (cot*'d).
4.2 J. VMRC will manage Ike pub5c oyWtr grovnda in Ac Janet River.
Rappahannock River, Pocomoht/Tangier Sounda and Scaaide Eaiteni
Shore.
Variable
3. Collectimi of ManagementQuality
Data
S.I.I. Coaunne lo cdHct qualitative data on oyater itocka, habitat and
diaeaaea and make Itw infonraboo available in an annual report.
Annually
5.1.2. VMRC will eatabliih a computer data-btae ayateni for die
edketioo. menge and analysis on a bar-by-bar baiii, updated weekly, of
infor nation >c eatimale Handing atock and eatablirfi yearly catch quotai.
1995
Data wiU include daily cntriea for total landinga,
boat number*, landinga per boat, area harvested, |
and number of harveaters per boat. |
J.1J. The fiAenea ageaciea wiU make oyterdata available lo (be
research cooamnity aa nrtdtd (o investigate auggeatad reaearcfc topici or
in connection with other re.earcb.
1994
LEGEND:
CBP - Chenpukt Bay Program
MDNR - Maryland Dcyi.imm of Natural Reaouicea
MOft • Oyater Rmadubk
ORA - Oytfer SLtccvtry Am
PRFC - Potomac Rhrer Fuktriei Co- .oiujon
VIMS - Virginia Innituta of Marine Science
VMRC • Virginia Marine Fuberiea Coasnisaioa
-------
Section 2.
Management for Maryland Oyster Recovery Areas (ORAs)
Due to the dominating impact of MSX and Dermo on Chesapeake
oyster stocks, geographic areas termed oyster Recovery Areas
(ORAs), will be designated in low salinity reaches of the Bay and
its tributaries where MSX and Dermo are less viable. Restoration
projects are not limited to these areas and might in the future
also include areas along the entire salinity gradient and in
diseased waters. The objective? for managing these areas are l)
limit transplantation activities which would serve to perpetuate
MSX and Dermo in a region and 2) evaluate different methods to
rehabilitate, rebuild, plant and otherwise restore oyster
populations in the5e areas. The following section describes the
specific, intensive management effort that will be implemented in
the ORAs.
Strategy 1
The implementation of activities within the ORAs by the MDNR will
be guided by an advisory committee.
Actions:
1.1 Each ORA advisory committee will be constituted by MDNR
an' include representatives of the following
organizations and interests: watermen; aquaculture;
environmentalists; scientists; Departments of Natural
Resources, Agriculture, and Environment.
1.2 A technical committee of scientists will be established
to determine ths experimental design and oversee the
monitoring and evaluation*of the ORAs.
Strategy 2
Each ORA will be comprised of from one to three zones and must
include a Zone A and/or a Zone B. Specific activities will be
defined for each area.
Actions:
2.1 A) Zone A will be in the lowest salinity area of the ORA.
The following activities will apply:
1) Clam and oyster harvesting will be suspended for
five years, to reopen consistent with management
objectives.
2) Sections will be managed as ecological, brood
stock sanctuaries.
3) Natural bars will be rehabilitated to facilitate
natural set.
4) Intensive monitoring for MSX and Dermo will
occur.
5) Only certified seed will be planted on cultch
placed on prepared bottom. Plots may be used for
28
-------
experimental off-bottom culture techniques and
other pilot programs. Other plots vill be left
undisturbed for monitoring purposes.
6) A portion of the plantings will become a
permanent sanctuary for broodstock.
7) Sections will be transferred to higher salinity*
growout areas after l, 2, and 3 years. Aquaculture
permits may be obtained for parallel grbw-out
experiments using water column and floating raft
culture.
B) Zone B will be immediately downstream of Zone A, or in
a river without zone A. The following activities will
apply;
1) Shellfish harvesting will be allowed.
2) Only certified seed will be planted.
3) Natural bars will be rehabilitated.
4) There will be intensive monitoring for MSX and
Dermo.
C) Zone C will be a large zone downstream from Zone B.
The following activities will apply:
1} Shellfish harvesting will be allowed.
2} Natural seed will be imported until it can be
replaced with certified seed.
3} Experimental seeding will be allowed in selected
areas.
4) Natural bars will be rehabilitated in selected
areas.
5) Intensive monitoring for MSX and Dermo will
occur.
6) One or mere sanctuaries will be established to
test techniques for rebuilding and rehabilitating
oyster populations.
Strategy 3
A subcommittee of the Oyster Roundtable will define the criteria
determining where the boundaries of ORAs are and submit them to
MDNR for their adoption by regulation.
Actionss
3.1 The Chester, Choptank, Magothy, Nanticoke, Patuxent, and
Severn Rivers will be designated as initial sites for
ORAs.
3.2 The Oyster Roundtable will review the progress of
activities in the initial ORAs and recommend the
designation of additional ORAs if warranted, with a long-
range objective of restoring and rebuilding all natural
bars.
29
-------
Section 3.
Biological Background
American or eastern oysters occur along the east coast of
North America from the Gulf of St. Lawrence, Canada, to Key
Biscayne, Florida. In the Carribean, the range of American oysters
extends to the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico and the West Indies of
Venezuela. Chesapeake Bay, which provides optimal environmental
conditions for the species, is close to the center of its
geographical distribution. However, oyster production varies within
the Bay system depending on environmental and habitat conditions.
Oysters generally spawn from May through September in the
Chesapeake Bay. Increases in water temperature to 18-20°C stimulates
spawning activity. Eggs hatch into free-swimming larvae that settle
to the bottom, two to three weeks after hatching. They attach to
oyster shells or other hard substrates and the attaching phase is
termed "setting." The newly attached oysters are called "spat."
Oysters grow at the rate of about one inch per year. Growth rates
can be affected by temperature, food quantity, salinity and
parasitic infection. Shell growth usually occurs in the spring and
soft body tissue growth occurs after spawning. Oysters usually
enter the market three to five years after spat settlement.
Oysters are filter feeders and depend on phytoplankton for
their energy requirements. Oysters play an important role in
filtering the water. It has been hypothesized (Newell 1988) that
the decrease in oyster abundance ?.n the Bay has contributed to an
apparent shift to microbial food webs and an increase in
zooplankton and their predators (ctenophores and jellyfish).
Biological Parameters
Natural mortality rate: Currently, very high due to disease
and freshwater inflow.
Fecundity:
Longevity:
Age at maturity:
5-15 million eggs at one spawning.
Smaller oysters produce lesr c~ggs
(See Figure 4).
Up to 15 years.
2 years
Habitat Requirements (refer to Table 1)
Spawning season: May through September.
Spawning area: Throughout Cnesapeake Bay.
30
-------
Figure 3. Oyster fecundity vs
Millions of eggs
70 r
60
j
i
»
50'
40!
i
30 [-
20 i
i
i
i
Size (inches)
-------
Table 1.
Habitat raquimnanu for oyater i||i, larvae, qui, and adulu. Biffii an baaed on broad
location (from Habitat RaquiretMnta for Pheaipealni Bay Livioi hwnwi. 1991).
and nay vary viik fogriptuc
LIFE STAGE
LIFE
ZONE
TEMP.*
•c
SALINITY*
PI*
SEDIMENT4
gL'
pH
DISSOLVED C\
mgL"1
Egg*
ColuQB
19-32
12.5-35*
7.5-22J*
<0.25
6.75-
1.75
7
Lama
column
19-32
12.5-27.0-
<0.5
6.75-
1.75
•
**
hard
anbamta
0-32+
15.0-22.5'
7
7
f
Yomm
(30-SOb—)
bemhoe
<0 at 10**
0.1-1.49 at 2«?
2.75-4.9* at 30*?
li ithni
¦arrival
0-32+
0-36+
7
7
—1(5 dajra)
1 fllJlHg
6-32;
(1S-23
'optima*)
5+
<0.4
7
7
growth
6-32;
<15-25
'optimum")
12+
7
7
7
7.5-30+
10+
7
7
7
20±
10+
7
6-10
7
'lalinit *aa affect ttMperMuieleiefaaeee, and vioa vane. Tolanaca to taov«Mw* la roughly adult*^>valigarlar>M>sygotae.
kEfleck, -'^poo type aad liie of panicle; rtperimeoUlvaluee have baan higher than valuaenofMDyenawAered to aa&meicapt during
• Adulu annlimeieil Id 36.0-27.9ppt; optimal egg developaeaf at 22 J ppt aad nfti—I lanral grow* at 17.5 ppt.
4 Aduhi aocllmitiii Id 9 ppt; optimal agg dev*lapae*a at 10-1) ppt.
* Marilaa mortality Htma hi aoo*ia: II houiv for tlpm larvaa; larval in I—nliig ratae wafheiedai O-SmgL'* for up to 12 boun.
' Spat had been eat at near marina aallnhtaa.
' Mediaa mortality tatee la anoxia: ISO boun far 16mm ^et.
1 LC.-PQ, (mgL
-------
Habitat issues
Some of the more important environmental factors affecting
oyster distribution include substrate type, depth, salinity, and
disease prj\.*lence. Oysters need a clean, stable substrate on which
to set ana grow. Soft mud, shifting sand or silted bottom are
unsuitable. Oysters are generally limited to waters less than 25'
deep due to hypoxic/anoxic conditions that develop in many deeper
waters of the Bay. Salinities above about 10-12 ppt increase oyster
mortality from predation and disease. Man's activities have
impacted the distribution and abundance of oysters. Sediment from
channel dredging, upland construction and agricultural activities
can smother oyster beds and foul cultch to prevent setting.
Nitrogen and phosphorus enrichment from sewage treatment
plants and agricultural runoff have increased the extent of hypoxic
and anoxic conditions. Sewage input results in high coliform
bacterial counts which force the closure of shellfish harvesting
areas. In 1986 only 4 5,500 out of 158,900 acres in the James River
were classified by the National Shellfish Sanitation Program as
approved shellfish growing waters. Maryland oyster samples
collected and analyzed from 1980-1986 revealed that heavy metal or
PCB concentrations were below action levels in all oyster growing
areas sampled in the state. However, these oysters did have levels
higher than would be found in a pristine environment.
Disease
Oyster diseases have been monitored and studied in the
Chesapeake Bay since the late 1950's. Increased natural mortality
has been linked to the spread and intensification of two parasites,
Perkinsus nmrinus (Dermo) and Haplosporldian nelsoni (MSX). These
parasites are single-celled organisms (protozoans) that infect
oysters but have no effects on humans, whether the oysters are
eaten raw or cooked. The exact mechanisms by which the parasites
kill the oysters are not understood. There are no known cures for
the diseases. The only strategy currently available is to move seed
oysters, less than l year old, to areas where diseases are less
prevalent to protect them while they are growing. These areas are
usually less saline ard do nc>. provide the best growth environment.
Low salinity areas rertli " 'I're a good natural spat set. Without
seed plantings, these arr not produce continuing harvests.
See! areas are current]1 for disease during the fall and
spring disease surveys, ' t beirn transplanted to the upper
Bay and tributary grow-u«
There is no evidence ¦ low levels of pollution have any
relationship either to susct^Aibility to the diseases or to their
virulence. There is also very little information that any habitat
factors except salinity and temperature, have any significant
effects on disease.
33
-------
Fishery Parameters
Status of exploitation: Fully exploited.
Long tern potential catch: Highly dependent on prevalence and
intensity of diseases, harvesting
and freshets.
Importance of recreational
fishery:
Insignificant.
Importance of commercial
fishery:
Historically, highly significant;
harvests have declined in the
Chesapeake region, oysters still
rank nationwide as one of the top
seafood species in dockside value.
Fishing mortality rates:
Highly variable.
The Historic Fisheries
Before the turn of the century, over 10 million bushels of
oysters (which yielded approximately 64 million pounds of meat)
were harvested annually in Maryland by a large dredge fleet.
Virginia harvests at this time were approximately 6-7 million
bushels (38-45 million pounds of meat), and were harvested
primarily by hand tongers. Landings have declined dramatically
since that time and continue to show a downward trend. During the
past 30 years, oyster harvests in Maryland ranged from 3.2 million
bushels in 1973 to 124,000 bushels in 1993. In Virginia, the
harvest of market oysters ranged from 1.9 million bushels in 1964
to 64,500 bushels in 1993. Although commercial landings are used as
an indicator of stock levels, they do not necessarily reflect stock
abundance. Changing market demands can affect commercial landings
without any change in stock abundance.
The Oyster Resource
The Baywide oyster stock can be characterized as severely
depleted. Recent expansions of the range of oyster diseases, MSX
and Demo, and past harvesting practices are primarily responsible
for the population's current status. Low dissolved oxygen episodes
have also contributed to the problem. Average levels of spatfall
have dropped in the past decade (refer to Figure 3) and the number
of natural beds receiving spatfall adequate for replenishment has
been reduced from historic levels. In Maryland, the 1983 and 1984
spat sets were virtually non-existent. Although the 1985 spatfall
was exceptionally high and wall distributed, the year class hes
been effectively wiped out in those areas infected by disease.
Maryland's 1986 spatfall was considered average and of limited
distribution. Many of the 1986 year class have been infected by MSX
34
-------
and Dermo and may be killed if high salinities continue in the
Maryland portion of the Bay. Continued low levels and poor
geographic distributior. of spatfall levels occurred during 1987 and
1988. The 1991 spat set was a record high but disease has prevented
any widespread population recovery from the set.
Since 1985, the James River has become the center of the
market oyster landings in Virginia. The low number of surviving
spat and decreasing bushel counts of spat, small, and market
oysters, as determined from the VIMS oyster shoal surveys since the
spring of 1986, indicates that the James River is failing to match
the losses in number of oysters with an equal recruitment of spat.
Since 1992, spat set in the PiankatanJc, Great Wicomico and
Rappahannock Rivers has been at historically low levels.
Lavs and Regulations
Limited entry:
Maryland adopted a limited entry to the commercial fishery, April
1994, which repeals the Delay of Application Process of September
1, 1988, and allows MDNR to limit the number of tidal fish licenses
which may be issued.
Virginia's delayed entry went into effect December l, 1992. It
requires previously unlicensed applicants to wait two years after
registering before a license to harvest oysters with commercial
gear will be issued.
On the Potomac River, only Maryland and Virginia residents may
commercially oyster.
Minimum size limit:
Maryland - 3" with 5% tolerance, market oysters with small oysters
or spat attached may be kept if separating the small oysters or
spat would kill them.
Potomac River- 3" with 5% tolerance, however, market oysters with
small oysters attached must be returned if separating them kills
the small oyster (including spat). High salinity areas 2 1/2"
minimum and a 4" maximum.
Virginia - Clean cull areas - 3". No cull size for seed areas and
leased ground.
Pally catch limit;
Recreational — Maryland, Potomac River and Virginia: no license
required for the taking of one bushel per day from public grounds,
comnarcial — Maryland: shaft and patent tongs, diving - 15 bushels
per licensee, but not to exceed 30 bushels per boat; dredge boat -
35
-------
150 bushels per boat; power dredging (in designated waters of
Somerset county) - 12 bushels per licensee but not to exceed 24
bushels per boat.
Commercial—Potomac River: None.
Commercial — Virginia: None.
Harvest quotas:
Virginia: variable by season and area.
Season factual restrictions determined prior to season) and time
restrictions:
Maryland - Shaft tongs, patent tongs and diving: September 15 to
March 31, Monday through Saturday, sunrise to sunset, except
Worcester County where the season is January 1 to December 31,
Monday through Saturday, sunrise to sunset. Dredging: Sail dredging
in c,r:^ gnated waters state-wide, November 1 to March 15, Monday
through Saturday, sunrise to sunset. Power dredging: in designated
waters of Somerset county, November'l to March 15, Monday through
Saturday, sunrise to 3. pm. Private grounds: no seasonal
restrictions, but harvesting between sunset and sunrise or on
Sunday is prohibited.
Potomac River - Hand shaft tongs: October 1 through March 31. Hand
Scrape: Months of November, December and March. Hand tongs, lawful
only Monday through Friday from sunrise to 12:00 noon EST. Hand
scrapes, lawful only Monday through Thursday during March and
Monday, Wednesdays and Fridays during November and December from
8:00 a.m. to 12 noon each day
Virginia - Shaft tongs or hand tongs: James River Seed Area,
October 1 to July l, sunrise to 12:00 noon. All other public areas,
October 1 to Juno: 1, sunrise to 12:00 noon. Private grounds, no
seasonal restrictions; but harvesting on Sunday or between sunset
and sunrise is prohibited. Patent tongs: October 1 to March
sunrise to sunset, for all public areas not prohibited by Section
28.1-82 of the Code of Virginia or VMRC Regulations and Orders.
October l to the last day of February, sunrise to 2 p.m., in the
Piankatank River, Pocomoke Sound/Tangier and Chesapeake Bay
Management Areas. Private grounds, Sunday and sunset to sunrise
harvesting is prohibited. Dredge: Poaomoke/Tangier Management Area,
15 November-last day of February (sunrise-2 P.M.). Chesapeake Bay
Management Area, 1 November-last day of February (sunrise-2 P.M.).
Private grounds, generally no restrictions, except Sunday and
sunset to sunrise harvesting is prohibited. Bay and tributaries
sunrise to 12:00 noon; Seaside - sunrise to sunset.
36
-------
Gear Restrictions:
Maryland - The legal gear types for harvesting oysters in Maryland
include hand tongs, patent tongs, diving gear, handscrapes and
dredges. The use of each gear type is restricted to certain
designated areas as set forth in Maryland's laws and regulations.
Dredges or handscrapes cannot exceed 200 lbs. in weight or have a
tooth bar greater than 42 inches in length (as measured from the
outside teeth) on dredges used on rock bottom, or 44 inches in
length for dredges uses on mud bottom. No "devil catch", "devil
diver", or similar device is to be attached to the dredge to steer
it to the bottom. No power boat may have on board or in tow any
gear used for dredging unless it is permitted by the Department to
harvest oysters from leased bottom, from State seed areas, or
unless it is a sail dredge boat using its yawl boat on push days.
On Monday and Tuesday during the oyster dredging season a dreags
boat may be propelled by an auxiliary yawl boat in certain area#.
Diving -each person engaged in the diving operation must be
licensed. Not more than two divers can work from a boat at one
time. Each diver shall have one attendant on the boat. An
International Code Flag "A" of the proper specifications must be
displayed. Power assisted lifting devices may be used subject to
specified conditions. Hand tong winders are allowed.
Potomac River - Patent tongs and power or sail scrapes or dredges,
power or hand-operated winch, spoolwinder, are prohibited. Hand
scrapes limited to 22" catching bar. Diving for oysters limited to
recreational harvest of 1 bushel per person per day. Legal gear
types include hand shaft tongs, power assisted hand shaft tongs and
hand scrape.
Virginia - Only one type of gear, either hand tongs, patent tongs
(limit of 2) or a single dredge, is allowed on a vessel at one time
in the Pocomoke/Tangier and Chesapeake Bay Management areas. Only
one type of gear, either hand tongs or patent tongs (limit of 2),
is allowed on a vessel at one time in the Piankatank River
Management Area. Patent tongs -the teeth of patent tongs shall not
exceed four inches in length, and patent tongs exceeding 100 pounds
in gross weight, including any attachments (excluding rope for the
taking or catching of oysters), are prohibited. Dredge - a dredge
and attachment cannot exceed 100 pounds total weight.
Area Restrictions:
Maryland - Hand tongs are li tatewide, with portions of most
tributaries reserved for har ngs only. Downstream of these
areas, diving is allowed t tongs are permitted in the
mainstem Chesapeake Bay, wer Patuxent River and all of
Somerset County. Power dredgxny xs restricted to designated waters
of Somerset County. Sail dredging is restricted to the Mainstem
Bay, Tangier Sound, and portions of the Choptank River.
37
-------
Potomac River - No harvest allowed in 25 acre oyster sanctuary on
Jones Shore. Hand tongs, none except sanctuary. Hand scrapes, not
allowed on Jones Shore or above a line from Herring Creek, MD to
Bonum Creek, VA.
Virginia - Only hand tongs are permitted in most areas, with patent
tongs restricted to those areas specified by the Code of Virginia
or VMRC Regulations and orders (Piankatank River, Chesapeake Bay
and Pocomoke/Tangier Management Areas). Dredging is restricted to
the Pocomoke/Tengier and Chesapeake Bay Management Areas.
Status of Traditional Fishery Management Approaches
Catch-Effort: Commercial fisheries data for Chesapeake
Bay are a reasonable indicator of the
current status of the marketable stock.
In Maryland and Virginia, catch and
effort statistics for the commercial
fishery are, in general, of low quality
and of limited value in developing
fisheries management models. The PRFC
catch and effort data are highly
reliable.
Estimates of mortality: Depends on disease prevalence, freshets,
and harvesting.
Yield-per-Recruit
(spat survival to
markets): Traditionally, very low.
Stock-Recruitment: The stock-recruitment relationship for
Chesapeake Bay oysters is unknown.
38
-------
References
Brown, Butt, A., and K. Paynter. 1994. Performance variation among
native and selectively-bred Eastern oyster strains in North
Carolina. National Shellfisheries Association.
Chesapeake Bay Program. 1989. Chesapeake Bay Oyscer Management
''lan.
Kennedy, V.S. 1991. Eastern oyster. In: S.L. Funderburk, S.J.
Jordan, J.A. Mihursky, D. Riley (eds). Habitat requirements
for Chesapeake Bay living resources, Chesapeake Research
Consortium, Inc., Solomons, Maryland
Newell, R.I. 1988. Ecological changes in Chesapeake Bay: Are they
the result of overharvesting the American oyster, Crassostrea
virginica? In: M. Lynch (ed..) Understanding the estuary:
Advances in Chesapeake Bay research. Chesapeake Research
Consortium Publication 129:536-546.
Myatt, E.N. and D.O. Myatt, III. 1990. A study to determine the
feasibility of building artificial reefs in Maryland's
Chesapeake Bay. MDNR, Tidewater Admin., Fish. Div.
International Weighmaster, Inc. contract #F167-89-008.
Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee (STAC). 1992. Oyster
restoration action agenda. Living Resources Subcommittee,
Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Virginia Marine
Resources Commission.
Smith G.F. and S.J. Jordan. 1992. Monitoring Maryland's Ch*> apeake
Bay oysters. A comprehensive characterization of modified fall
survey results, 1990-1991. MDNR Chesapeake Bay Research and
Monitoring, Habitat Impacts Program. Oxford, Maryland
Ulanowicz R.E. and J.H. Tuttle. 1992. The trophic consequences of
oyster stock rehabilitation in Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries
15(3)257-265.
39
-------
MARYLAND'S GOVERNOR'S COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
I
-------
SUMMARY
COMMITTEE TO REVIEW STATE POLICY FOR FUNDING
MARYLAND'S CHESAPEAKE FISHERIES
Charge: To review the condition of the resource, how DNR manages the
resource, and the costs and returns of management programs
to the State economy.
To recommend future management strategies and whether the
State should subsidize the programs.
M«*mh<»T-R~ Dr. M. Gordon Wolman, Chairman
Russel Dize
Eamonn McGeady
Billy Martin
Dr. Roger Newell
John Parran
Senator Lewis Riley
Sam Shriver
Delegate John Slade
Dr. Ivar Strand
Meetings: August 15, 1989 to August 15, 199u
Monthly
Topics Discussed: Watermen's Compensation Program
Freshwater Hatchery Program
Oyster Repletion Program
Reports: Watermen's Compe. .Ion Program - submitted June 1990
Freshwater Hatchery Program - submitted September 1990
Oyster Repletion Program - submitted September 1990,
released for distribution May 1991
Recommendations:
Watermen's Compensation Program
* Discontinue the Watermen's Compensation Program as structured.
* If data collection needs are justifiable, institute a new program
open to all qualified watermen.
Freshwater Hatchery Program
* Continue the freshwater hatchery program.
Oyster Repletion Progra-i and Oyster Fishery
* Encourage the public 1 >hery and develop the private fishery.
* Continue the repletion program but increase the financial
contribution made by the industry by raising license fees and
oyster taxes. Conversely, decrease the General Fund subsidy.
* Promote scientific rather than polit.-'jal management.
* Develop aquacultuu by removing various legal impediments,
increasing the bottom available for leasing, and pern-itting th*>
use of the water column.
* Intensify enforcement.
> Develop knowledge of oyster pathology, ecology, markets.
* Develop and enforce standard weights, measures, and minimum
quality.
* Scientifically/quantitatively assess oyster stocks, monitor
production and evaluate the quality of oyster beds.
June 1991
-------
MAJOR REC0MK2NDATX0N8
The situation in Maryland's oyster industry is dire and the
State must make some crucial changes if the industry is to
rebound. Recent outbreaks of oyster disease, past mismanagement
and an ever-competitive marketplace have reduced the Maryland
oyster industry and resource to nea„ obscurity. To restore it to
economic, social and ecological significance, major shifts in
policy must ** ^ade. We recommend that the State of Maryland:
A
1. Fxtcourage both the enhancement of the publie oyster fishery
and the development of a private fishery. Public access to
natural oyster beds, a part of Maryland's heritage, should be
sustained by continuing the oyster repletion program. The
promise of the private fishery must be encouraged by the
?tate through research, permitting processes and law
#nforcement.
2. Coitinuc to enhance the publie fishery through the repletion
program but insist that an increasing share of its costs be
•rrne by the public fishery. The repletion program is needed
*or production from public beds and the industry alone is
currently unable to bear the entire cost of the program.
Current policy should be directed towards generating more tax
revenue from the public fishery to offset the existing
subsidy in the repletion program. Thus, gradual increases in
1
. * « }
-------
taxes should be instituted with a long-run goal of program
self-sufficiency. To implement this recommendation, ve
suggest that:
a. The existing severance tax be revised to be a fixed
percentage of dockside price and increased to reflect the
resources scarcity. When established at its present
level in 1982, the current tax of $.45/bushel represented
about 5% of the dockside price. present tax rate is
1.8% of the dockside value. Existing circumstances
warrant a tax increase to at least the 1982 percentage
rate.
b. The export tax be raised froa its current level to an
anount not leas than the replacement costs of exported
shell. When oysters are exported from Maryland, all
legal remedies to guarantee the return of shell are lost.
The replacement cost of the lost shell thus should be
charged on exports.
c. The lioense fees for public harvesters should be raised
froa the current $50 per licensee to $350 per licensee.
Some of the costs of the repletion program are
essentially overhead, with benefits accruing to all (for
example, policing sanctuaries). Raising license fees
will assure coverage of fixed costs.
2
-------
Review the industry*¦ legal and regulatory framework with the
goal of promoting scientific management and enhancing the
efficiency of public harvesters. The regulatory framework
which has accumulated over the last century is unresponsive
to current circumstances.
Remove oertain legal impediments eonstrainii . che production
of oysters through private aquaculture. Although there
appears to be great promise for production from oyster
aquaculture, it must be encouragad by:
a. expanding the bottom available for privat* leasing;
b. establishing a process to permit use of trm water column;
c. increasing the leasehold fee (from $3.50 annual per acre)
to provide funds for enforcing leasehold rights and to
discourage unproductive use of leases.
Intensify the enforcement of regulations related to Maryland
oyster production. The protection of oyster sanctuaries,
enforcement of leasehold rights and the collection of taxes
must be guaranteed to assure equity among industry
participants and public trust in the programs of the State.
-------
Increase its knowledge of oyster pathology, ecology and
markets. Oyster diseases have recently plagued the industry.
A greater understanding of oysters, their diseases and
alternatives to avoid then is critical in developing plans
for the future of the industry. This should be done in
cooperation with adjacent states, the Potomac River Fisheries
Commission and the Federal Government. Likewise, reaching
aquaculture's potential may only be possible through
developing new seed technologies, new product forms and new
markets.
Develop and enforce standard weights, measures and minimum
quality both to protect consumers and to enhance demand.
While efforts cannot be completely independent of Federal
standards, the State, in conjunction with adjacent states,
must develop and enforce internally consistent, replicable
standards essential to a modern commercial enterprise.
Quality control of the oyster product must be guaranteed so
that consumer perceptions of Maryland's oyster quality are
maintained or improved.
Strengthen its role in assessing oyster stocks, monitoring
production and evaluating the quality of oyster beds. In
order to determine policy, appraise programs and assure
consumer safety, effort is required to collect, assimilate
and analyze data. Both the public and private fisheries will
4
0 45
-------
require careful scientific management on the part of the
State. Use of less political influence and more scientific
information in the allocation of resources within and between
the public and private fishery is essential.
046
-------
APPENDIX n
VIRGINIA'S HOLTON PLAN (BLUE RIBBON) REPORT
IX
047
-------
REPORT OF THE "BLUE RIBBON" PANEL
Prepared in late 1991 by a 33-member advisory panel of
scientists, environmentalists, watermen, planters, economists,
and others, this report (also, "Hie Hoiton Plan") sets forth
issues and recommendations for restoring Virginia's oyster
industry. Four potential oyster sources are considered;
• Traditional state and private culture of C. virginicai
• Off-bottom culture in approved waters;
• On-bottom culture of a non-native speces (C. gigas);
• On-shore depuration of moderately polluted oysters.
The eight recommendations in the Holton Plan are summarized
below:
o Data Collection and Monitoring — The State should
establish computerized data base systems for detailed
collection, storage, and analysis of stock assessment
data and landings data, as well as for detailed moni-
toring of the Virginia repletion program.
o Legislation — The Virginia Marine Resources Coiranission
should be empowered to control or limit entry to the
commercial fishery, enabling the VMRC to protect the
full-time fishermen and the resource.
o Repletion -- The State should establish a repletion
program for the public fishery, based upon oyster
biology and river dynamics, and assure systematic
monitoring of the program. The strategy should include
programs to:
Restore two sanctuary reefs in the James and
Rappahannock rivers, and cover them with seed
oysters to maintain biological stock close to
harvest areas (adjacent beds);
Prepare nearby beds to receive spawn from the
sanctuaries, and monitor growth, harvest to quo-
tas, close beds, and repeat;
Plant seed in low-set areas but with good growth
potential, in the Mobjack River and the Pocomoke-
Tangier areas; monitor, harvest, close, and re-
peat .
Initially, this should be a three-year program, with
thorough data collection and monitoring, followed by an
evaluation of the repletion strategy.
O Market Evaluation and Development -- Coiranission a joint
effort with the Virginia Institute of Marine Science
(VIMS) and Virginia Tech to examine the marketing
-------
potential of current oyster products, and possible new
product lines, including depurated oysters. In addi-
tion, there should be a joint industry-academic study
to evaluate current State-funded marketing programs and
recommend new or expended marketing strategies Cor
Virginia seafood products. Finally, a marketing and
economics advisory agent should be appointed through
VIMS to develop economic markets for off-bottom cul-
tured oysters, and to work closely with aquaculturists
and others in the industry.
o Off-»otto* Culture — The State should identify areas
as appropriate, marginal, or non-appropriate for aqua-
culture (VIMS), and establish regulations and a permit-
ting process for off-bottom oyster culture (VWRC). To
encourage start-up of private hatcheries, VIMS should
draft model tax incentive legislation. A technical
advisory agent ahold be appointed through VIMS, who
will specialize in hatchery matters.
o Depuration — The VMRC should estimate oyster stocks
and potential daily supplies of clean and depurable ,
oysters frcm public and private sources, both on- and
off-bottom, supplies that will support year-round
depuration plant operations. After a ccarpiete economic
analysis of such a facility (VIMS), cooperating State
agencies should design a pilot plant. If economic
analyses warrant, the State should establish a public-
private partnership to construct an experimental depu-
ration facility, and design a fee system to make it
self-supporting.
o atanagenent of Public Ground* — Ibis recommendation
addresses specific management steps for the James and
Rappahannock rivers, Pocomoke/Tangier sounds, Seaside
Eastern Shore, Mobjack Bay, and the Piankatank and
Great Wicomico rivers. Included in these specific
steps are limits on shaft length of tongs, quotas,
changes in cull length, increases in sanctuary size,
new repletion strategies, and harvest prohibitions in
some areas.
o Introduction of Non-Native Species -- The State (VIMS)
should conduct full laboratory tests of Crassostrea
gigma, investigating temperature and salinity toleranc-
es, as well as ecological relationships, if prelimi-
nary tests warrant, a pilot study in the York lU/er
shouli be established to evaluate C. gigas' ability to
grow and reproduce in a natural Bay environment. These
studies should include evaluations of disease resis-
tance. Based on success of preliminary studies, C.
gigas sanctury reefs should be expanded. .
2
-------
APPENDIX HI
SUMMMIY OF mm 1393 OYSTER PROGRAM
Am km&as. at saws? aai pngmi stas, wraUsfete #b» sat wgmK "i •«¦** eaa
Pmp*m4 bf Itayfca* DfMM eT N«m8bI Sanmfesa
TO®"** MrnkdmeSm.
R&sdss OMiiea, Sfcsi&ft Psapaai
April if*l
zzz
-------
This report includes, by location, the 1993 effort associated with various surveys and management
programs conducted by Maryland's Department of Natural Resources Shellfish Group. These are indexed
by program and by the location of data files. A substantial amount of this information is stored on
computer files and these are noted in this report. Data source contacts and a brief description of each
program are. included. Computer stored data are kept on the following software packages:
Spreadsheet: Quattro Pro 5.0 for Dos and for Window and Axuci 3.0.
Database: dBase m* and IV, mBase, and Paradox 1.5.
GIS: Mapinfo for Windows.
1
-------
REGION
PROGRAM DATA CONTACT
UPPER BAY EAST
DEEP SHOAL
Tnf rwpciTi
* Ci JmAt itf iCi>* J Car*
HODGES
SWAN POINT
FS
FS
FSiSA
MFSD;SAFT;SSRP3
HA
MA
MAPP
OXUPP.PP'JA
CHESTER mm
UPPER CHESTER
SHEEP FS;SA MAPP
EMORYHOLLOW FStSA MAPP
SPANIARD POINT F$FT:SSRP1 MAPPJA
CUFF FS&SRP1 MATA
EBB POINT _ FS:SSRPl__ .. MATA
DRUM POINT FS MA
BOATHOUSE FSSSRPl MATA
OLDHELD MFSDXASSRPl OXLPP.TA
CHESTER RIVER MIDDLBGROUND FSSSRP1 MATA
BLUFF POINT FS:SSRP1 MATA
HELL'S DEUGHT FS.SSRP1 MATA
BAY BUSH POINT FS MA
PlNEY POINT ESfFTSSRM MAPP.TA
DURDIN FS:SSRPl MATA
HORSERACE mSASSRPI MAPP.TA
CARPENTER ISLAND FS;SA MAPP
LOWER CHESTER
BUO Y ROCK
WICKESBEACH
1JOVE POINT
MFSD;SAFT
mSSRPl
F$FT;SSRPl
OXLPP.PP
MATA
MAPPtTA
KENT SHORE
BROAD CREEK
BRICK HOUSE
GRAVEYARD (KEKT POINT)
FS
FS;SA
FS
MA
MAPP
MA
MILES RIVER
LONG POINT
SECOND POWT
ASH CRAFT
HERRING ISLAND
COFFEE
TURTLEBACK
MFSD
FS
MFS
FS
FS
MFSD
qxl
MA
a\L
MA
MA
an.
WYE RIVER
E/ TERN BAY:
NORTH
FS
MA
MILLS
FS
MA
BRUFFS ISLAND
MFSD
OXL
BUGBY
MFSD
OXL
MIU HILL
FS
MA
BALD EAGLE ADDITION 03
FS.SSRP3
MATA
SAW MIU CREEK
FS
MA
HOOD
SS.SSRP3
MATA
WELL COW
FS
MA
WALTER WHITE
FS
MA
DOMINION
FS
MA
PARSONS ISLAND NARROWS ADDITION
FS.SA
MAPP
-------
REGION
cASTERS BAY NORTH
-------
REGION OYSTER BAR PROGRAM
MIDDLE CHOPTANK (cant) HOWELLS POINT F&SA'
HORNS POINT ADDITION FS
BEACONS ESS4*
CHLORA POINT F&SA'
LOWER CHOPTANK LIGHTHOUSE MFSD.SA•
CHOPTANK LUMPS SA•
TODD POINT 15
DAMSON F$SA
FRANCE FSiSA*
COOK'S POINT MFSD;SA
TRED AVON RIVER DOUBLE MILLS " MFSD
PECK'S POINT FS
TOWN POINT F$SA'
STONE CHURCH FS
FOXHOLE FS.SA
BACHELOR POINT FS;SA*
BROAD CREEK MULBERRY PONT SAS
DEEP NECK MFSD
BROWN FS
CREATBAR FS
ROYSTOS MFSD
HUSH CREEK FS:SA'
HARRIS CREEK LITTLE NECK FS
MILL POINT SA'.SAS
EAGLE POPSTaOStAXi MFS
CHANGE SA*
TtLGHMAN WHARF MFSD
CHEAT MARSH FS ^ -PJ
TRIPPES BAY BRANNOCK SA
BRASNOCK ADDITION SA
DIAMOND FS
HILLS MINT NORTH FS
UTTLE
CHOFTANK RIVER TOWN POINT FS SAS
GRAPEVINE FS
BUTTERPOT FS
CASON MFSD
SUSOVEHANNA FS
SLAUGHTER CREEK FS
CATORS FS
RAGGED POINT MFSD.SAS
PEANUT HILL SAS
CEDAR COVE SAS
LITTLE CHOPTANK SAS
DORCHESTER SHORE PUNCH ISLAND CRLX FS
BSTA CONTACT
MA.PP
MA
MXPP
MAiPP
QXLiPP
PP
MA
ma;pp
MA;PP
oxlpp
OXL
MA
ma:PP
MA
MA;PP
MA.PP
MAJOXL
OXL
MA
MA
Oft
MA.PP
MA
PPiMAJOXL
0)1
PP
OXL
MA.TA
PP
FP
MA
MA
b!A;MA/OXL
MA
HA
OXL
MA
MA
MA
OXLMA,OSL
MA
MA
MA
MA
11-i
4
-------
REGION
HONGA RIVER
OYSTER BAR
TUBMAN'S DRAIN
SMOKE POINT
LAKES COVE
WINDMILL
LONG POINT
NORMAN ADvUOMU
PROGRAM
FS
FS
FSSA*
MfStSA*
FS
MTSD;MS
DATA CONTACT
MA
MA
MA:PP
axkPp
MA
OXLMA
HOOPER STRAITS
UGHWOUU
HOOPER STRAITS ADDITION*!
FS
FS
MA
MA
HOLLAND STRAITS
HOLLAND STRAITS WEST
HOLLAND STRAITS
FS
MFSD
MA
am.
KEDCES STRAITS
OYSTER CREEK
IVESiEXN ISLANDS
KEDCES STRAiT
FS
SASSS"P2
SAS
MA
MA;TA
MA
TANGIER SOUND
UPPER
SHARKF1N SHOAL
HAINES
MUD ROCK
HOLLAND STRAITS
MFSDJA.MS
FS
FS
FS
QXL'PftMA
MA
MA
HA
MIDDLE
TURTLEBGC ISLAND MSS OXL
CHAIN SHOAL FS.SA• MA.PP
MUSSEL HOLE FS MA
GRAVEYARD SA* PP
PINEY ISLAND WEST FS MA
PINE?ISLAND EAST MFSD;SA';MS OXkPPMA
HARRIS ADDITION FS MA
HACK COVE (BACK COVE) MFW;SA*:SSRP2 OXLPPiTA
TERRAPIN SANDS INNER ADDITION FS MA
TERRAPIN SANDS INNER FStSA* MA.PP
LOWER
OLDWOMANSLBS
GREATROCK
MFSD;SSRP3
MFS
OXLTA
OXL
FISHING BAY
dJ-WAY MARK
MIL
OLD HOUSE
GOOSE CREEK
WARESANDS
TEDIOUS CREEK
CLAY ISLAND
EVANS
FS
FS
FS
MFSD
SA
FS
MFS
FS
MA
MA
Ml
OSI
PP
MA
OXL
MA
NANTICOKEAND
WICOMICO RIVERS
UPPER STAKE
MS
MA
WETIPQUIN
MFSMS
OXLMA
HICKORY NUT
FS.SSRPI
MATA
CEDAR SHOAL
F$;SA
MA'PP
LONG SHOAL
FS
MA
CHERRY TREE
FS
MA
OUTER HOLE
SA
PP
-------
REGION
flVVITB d<|b
PRQGRAM
NANTKOKEAND
BEAN SHOAL
FS
WICOMICO RIVERS (cwit)
WILSON SHOALS
MFSiSAMS
ROARING POINT EAST
FS
MIDDLEGROUND
MFS
MOUNT VERNON
MFS
GREAT SHOALS
FS
EVANS
MFS;SA
HALLSPOINT
F$SA
WHITE SHOALS
FS;SSRP3
MAN0K1N RIVER GEORGES MFSD
MARSHY ISLAND ... IS —
DRUM POWT MFS
PBHEY BLAND SWASH FS
MINE CREEK FS
AtC
ANNEMESSEX RJVER i*S ANNBtESSEX FS
WILE
ANNEMESSEX RJVER OLD HOUSE COVE FS
POCOMOKE SOUND MARUMSCO MFSD
CUNBY MFS
FLAT ROCK FS
WARE ROCK FS
TERRAPIN LEAD FS
OLD ROCKS FS
LOWER BA Y EAST CHURCH CREEK FS
FOGPuDTT SAS.SSRP2
UPPER BAY WEST COAL LUMP FS
GALES LUMPS FS;SA
MANO-WAR SHOALS FSSA':FT~
UPPER ANNE BODKIN POINT NORTH HS
ARUNDEL SHORE SEVEN FOOT KNOlL FS.SA*
SIX FOOT KNOLL FS.FT
CAAICIULL LUMPS F$SSdPl
MOUNTAIN POINT MFS. FT
OUTER HACOTIIY FS
YFM / SANDY PO^TSOUTH FS.FT
ARUNDEL HAC- TT POINT MFSD.SA. FT.SSRPI
TOLLY PONT FS.SSRPI
THOMAS POINT NORTH FS.SSRt'1
THREE SISTERS MFSSSRPt
miD GROUND FS
HOLLAND POINT MFSD
SEVERN RAW FERRY POINT HS
DATA CONTACT
MA
OXUPKMA
MA
OXL
OXL
MA
OXUPP
MAiPP
MAcTA
QXL
MA
OXL
MA
m
MA
MA
OXL
OXL
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
ma/oxlta
MA
MAPP
MA.PP-.PP
PP
MAPP
MAPP
MA.TA
OXLPF
MAPP
MAPP
OXLPP.PP.TA
MA TA
MA TA
OXL TA
MA
OSL
TA
-------
REGION
SOUTHRJVER
UPPER CALVERT SHORE
LOWER CALWtT SHORE
PATUXEtfT RIVER:
wwet
MIDDLE
Lamft
ST. MARY? SHORE
POTOMAC RJVBl
upper
MIDDLE
QXiHtJl BAR PROGRAM DATA CQNTAWi
THUNDER AND LIGHTNING SAS TA
SWANREEF FS MA
MARSHYPOm FS MA
HOG POINT ADDmON FS MA
FLAG POM MFSD OXL
imucampom fssa* ma.pp
SIMMONS FSSA' MA.PP
HOG BLAND MFSD;SA OXL.PP
HOLLAND POINT FS MA
BUZZARD ISLAND FS MA
BROAD NBCK FS MA
THOMAS FS MA
PIUSONPOINT FS MA
JACKSMARSH FS MA
BROOMEtSLAND MtSD OXL
GATTON FS MA
HELLEN FS MA
HAWKS NEST FS M\
BARN GATES SA* FP
HUNGEfLFORD HOLLOW FS VA
BACK OF THE ISLAND . MFS OXL
TOWN CREEK FS MA
SANDY tOINT LUMPS SA~HS FfKPP
SWASH FS MA
SOUTHEAST MIDDLBGROUND FSSSRP3 MATA
CEDAR POINT HOLLOW FS MA
ROCKYBEACH FS MA
SHAVING PILE ADDITION FS ~ MA
BUTLER MFSD;SA OXL
POINT LOOK-OUT SASSSRP2 PP;TA
BEACON
POPES CREEK
PASCAHANNA
LOWER CEDAR POINT
SWAN POINT
STONY POINT
WATSONS
COLONIAL BEACH
GUM
OLD FARMS
FS. FT
F&FT
FS.SA'FT
MFSD,SA';FT;.US
FS.SA'.FT
tS
FS
FS
FS
FS
MA.PP
MAPP
MA;PP:PP
OXLPP.PP.MA/ OXL
HAtmrr
MA
MA
*M
MA
MA
COBB ISLAND
SHEEPSHEAD BAY
HERON ISLAND
FS.SA'
FS.SAS
FS
MA.PP
MA;M\/OXL
MA
7
05?
-------
REGION
OYSTER BAR
FRQGRMf
DATA COi
POTOMAC RIVER MIDDLE (ami)
KINGSCOPS1CO
FS
MA
HUCCINS POINT
FS
MA
POSEYSUUFT
FS
MA
COLES POINT
FS
MA
RAGGED POINT
MFSD:SA
- OXUPP
BLaKECREEX
FS
MA
LOWER
PINEY POINT HOLLOW (FINEV POINT)
FS
MA
ST. CEORGESEOAND
FS
MA
HTTS
FSiSAS
MAiMA/QXL
JONES SHORE
SA-JAS
PKMA/OXL
CORNFIELD HARBOR
MFSD;SA,HS
QXLPT.PP
BONUMS
FS
MA
LYNCH POINT
FS
MA
THICKET POINT
FS
MA
HOG ISLAND
FS
MA
GREATNECK
FS
MA
WICOMICO mm
KEY
FfiSA'
pp:pp
STODDARD
FS;SA';FT
MA;PP;PP
COHOUCK
SA*;FT
PPtPP
CHAPT1C0 LUMPS
FS
MA
MIUS WEST
MFSD;SA•
OXLCP
WWDMIIL
F$SA*;SSRF3
M*PP:TA
BftASILBGH CREEK
FS.SA*
MA.PP
WHITE POINT
FS.SA'
MA;PP
LANCASTER
MFSD;SA*;FT
OXLPP.Pf
ROCK POINT
FSSSRFl
MOUTH OF RIVER
HA.PP
ST. CATHERINE
FS:FT;SSRPI
MAiPPtTA
SILVER SPRING
FS
MA
ST CLEMENTS AND
GUEST MARSHES
FS
MA
BRETON BAYS
AMU.
FS
MA
BLACK WALNUT
MPS ~
OXL
BLUE SOW
MPS
OXL
DUKEHART CHANNEL
MFS
OXL
' STMARrSRMBt
UPPER
HORSESHOE
FS
MA
PAGAN
MFSD
OXL
SEMINARY
SAS.HS
MA/OXLMA
GRAVELLY RUN
SAS
MA/OSL
LOWER
COPPACE
IS
MA
THOMPSON CREEK
FS
MA
CHERRY
FS
MA
CHICKEN COCK
NFSD.SA
OXkPP
ST. GEORGES CREEK
HURDLE
FS
MA
PINEY POINT AQUACULWRE t£,\SE
SAS
PP
8
-------
REGION
SMITH CREEK
OYSTER BAg
CRAVES
barnes point
CALVERT BAY
Esamm
FS
FS
SAS
MA
MA
MA
CMNCOTEAGUEBAY:
UPPER
SOUTH POND
SOUTH POND ADDTTJON
HANDY* HAMMOCK
LAMBERSTON LANDING
sms
TUKPIN
ROKNS MARSH
ROWS MARSH ADDfTJON
SCARBORO CREEK ADDITION
NEWPORT
COS
COS
COS
COS
COS
COS
COS
COS
COS
PP
PP
PP
PP
PP
PP
PP
PP
PP
LOWE*
DIAMOND
MARTON POINT
KENNEL
TOBY
WHITE ROCK
STRIKING MARSH
COS
COS
COS
COS
COS
COS
PP
PP
PP
PP
PP
PP
0 5.!)
-------
Key |g Program Abbreviations,
1 Abbreviation
Progrzm Name
Site
Sampling Period
Sampling Gear j
FS
Annual Fall Surrey.
Baywide, 300 to 400
oyater ban.
Oct- Nov.
OytUr dredge.
MPS (MFSD)
Modified Fall Survey
(Dbeaae Sumy).
Baywide, 64 'fay*
tan, 43 diaeaee tan.
Oct.-Nov.
Ojrttr dredge.
SA(SA*)
Ojittr Slock
Aaaaaamant Program.
Baywide, 20,000 to
30,000 acre*
•anuaiiy.
March- Nov.;
SA* liau aurvoya
prior lo 1993.
Patent tonga.
FT
FnaiM Walrh Survey
Baywide, 18 ban.
May- July
Oyxar dredge.
MS
Oyur Mortality
Surrey
Lower Bay, 10-12
oyaUr ban.
ium- Aug.
Oyalcr dredge. 1
"
Oyitar Habiial
Survey
Baywide, ait* number
highly variable.
March- Dec.
Dredge, patent I
tongt, aeounici. 1
SAS
Sead Ana Survey
Baywide, variable
number of aitee.
Spring and Fall
Oyster dredge. H
COS
Chincotaague Bay
Shell/iah Inventory
Couial Bay*, 2,300
aorea of oyalcr ban.
April- Nov,
Hydraulic clam |
eacalaior, handacrape Q
1 SSRP:
|
1 >-Onl(il Ml
] 3-r«k IMI Ptaaw:
I
J 4-NUuW Ph—
| 3-r«u>M h«M.
Seed and Shell
Repletion Program.
Baywide, highly
variable number of
•ilea.
Aptil- Aug.
Planting* made by fl
varioui vcueli. Q
10
-------
Kev to Data Cor, .ct Abbreviations.
ABBREVIATION
DATA CONTACT
LOCATION
PERSON/PHONE NUMBER
MA
Matapeake Terminal, Fisheries
Division.
Roy Scott/
s' 0-643-6785.
I pP
Piney Point Aquaculture
Center, Fisheries Division.
Mark Homer/
301-994-0214.
I TA
Tawes Building, Fisheries
Division.
William Outten, Chris Judy/
410-974-3733. I
1 °XL
Cooperative Oxford
Laboratory, Chesapeake Bay
Research and Monitoring
Division.
Steve Jordan, Gary Smith, U
George Krantz/ I
410-226-0078. 1
-------
SYNOPSIS OF OYSTER PROGRAMS
Fall Survey
Initiated in 1939, this survey was designed to provide geographically extensive information on
the quality of oyster populations and habitat and to assess spatset. During most years, between 300 and
400 oyster bars are sampled as are numerous seed and shell planting sites. Since 1960, the Oyster Disease
Survey has been concurrent with the Fall Survey and in 1990 the Modified fall Survey (see below) was
implemented. Samples are collected from oyster dredge tows with data recorded from 0.5 bushel (26 liter)
subsamples. Records include the number cf live spat, smalls, and markets, the number and stage of dead
oysters (boxes), conditional oyster data, and the extent and type of fouling on bottom materiJ. In
additionjive oyster size ranges and averages are noted, as are water quality data, the type of sample site,
ie. natural, planted with seed, etc., and the geographical position of the sample. A summary of spatfall
and oyster parasite data are included in an annual Fall Survey report. Data records are kept on file at the
Matapeake Terminal.
Modified Fall Survey/Disease Survey
The Modified Fall Survey focuses on a subset of 64 oyster bars that are annually surveyed.
Sampling on these sites involves the collection of 5 independent 0.2 bushei replicate samples. From each
of the 5 samples data are recorded on the number of spat, shell heigKt measurements of each live and
dead oyster (grouped into 5mm interval categories), and the stage of each oyster box. Additional
information as described for the Fail Survey are taken from a pooled sample. At the Disease Survey
locations, a subset of 43 of the "key" bars, 30+ oysters >50mm are randomly selected and shipped to
the Cooperative Oxford Laboratory for disease analysis. Data from the Modified Fall Survey and from
the Disease Survey arc stored in database files linked to a GIS at the Oxford facility. Data from these
surveys are included in an annual report.
12
-------
Ovster Stock Assessment Program
Using a lm3 patent tong-based, randomly initiated systematic sampling scheme, this program
obtains unbiased estimates of oyster abundance and shell quantity. Since its implementation in 1990, this
monitoring program has surveyed over 50,000 acres of charted oyster bottom in Maryland's Chesapeake
Bay. Field records include the stations (corrected) latitude and longitude estimates of the number and
volume of live and spat, smalls, and markets per unit area, the size class distribution of live and dead
oysters, volumetric estimates, per unit area, of surface and subsurface (gray) oyster shell, softclam shell,
recurved mussel shell, and live tunicates, and bottom type and depth. Between 30 and 40 different oyster
bars are surveyed each year, with a subset of IS oyster bars monitored on an annual basis. Between 5,000
and 10,000 acres of oyster grounds previously surveyed in 1975 using similar sampling techniques are
resurveyed. Data are stored at the Piney Point facility on spreadsheet and database files linked to a GIS.
Annual reports are prepared tor the Oyster Stock Assessment Program.
Winter 1993 Freshet Survey
Following the unusually wet winter of 19f . a survey was initiated during May, 1993 to track
freshet related oyster mortality. Sampling 'as conducted using a handscrape on oyster bars in the
Potomac. Wicomico, Chester, and Choptan Rivers and in the Upper Bay. The Eastern Shore tributary
and Upper Bay oyster populations were sampled once, as the freshet was relatively shortlived in these
areas. The Poton:aj and Wicomico Rivers were surveyed intensively, every ten days, over a two month
period as freshet effects in these systems persisted. Data recorded included the number of live spat,
smalls, and markets and the number and stage of spat, smalls, and market boxes. Conditional oyster
information was kept along with water quality data and size range information. Interval and cumulative
oyster mortality was calculated. All data were entered and stored in spreadsheet arv< database files at the
Piney Point facility and two reports were prepare4
13
-------
Qystar Mortality Svrvgy
Previously referred to as the "bay Peak", this effort generally takes place during the summer
months. It's purpose is to provide an early check on the status of oyster parasite infection and related
oyster mortality rates. The biological data are kept on file at the Matapeake Terminal with oyster disease
Information entered and stored at the Oxford Laboratory.
Habitat Surrcya
These are special surveys made when issues arise over the use or proposed use of oyster bottom.
Generally dredge-based, these surveys have also used patent tongs, hand tongs, and acoustic gear to
assess oyster populations and habitat Survey results are generally included in reports or memos with
some data stored on computer files. Field data are kept at the Tawes Building, while cor-puter file
record* re stored at the Piney Point facility.
Seed Area Surveys
m
During the Annual Fall Survey, seed oyster, dredged shell, and fresh shell planting sites are
surveyed to provide information on the biological status of seed oysters from shell and hatchery plantings.
These data are on file at the Matapeake Terminal with disease data stored in the oyster database located
at the Oxford facility. Seed tracking information is included in the annual Fall Survey report.
Chinwtcaguc Bay Shellfish Inventory
In 1993, a program was initiated to survey shellfish resources in Maryland's coastal bays. During
the first year, surveys were conducted on hardclam beds using a commercial hydraulic escalator dredge.
Numerous sampling locations were on previously charted oyster bottom allowing for the accumulation
of data on the current structural status of these areas. In 1994, a more focused effort on the old oyster
bars is scheduled with handscrape samples to be collected from most of these sites. In addition, surveys
of the intertidal zones are planned. All data are stored at the Piney Point facility in spreadsheet and
database files linked to a Gis. Quarterly and annual reports are prepared.
14
-------
Seed and Shell Repletion Program
Since 1961, Maryland has conducted a program to rehabilitate oyster bars through the planting
of dredged and fresh oyster shell, the planting of seed oysters set on dredged shell, and the translocation
of "pollute", oysters from areas of elevated fecal colifbrm counts. Records are kept of all Repletion
Program activ' es including dredged and fresh shell planting quantities and sites, the source, destination,
and quantity of seed and "pollute" oysters, and associated costs. These records are kept on file at the
Tawes Building and are included in an annual Seed and Shell Program report.
15
-------
APPENDIX IV
SUMMARY OF VMRC 1993 OYSTER PROGRAM
!~
-------
Appendix IV
A Summary of the Virginia Marine Resources Commission 1993 Oyster
Repletion Program.
Fall Dredae and Patent Tona Survey
A fall dredge survey has been used by the Repletion Program
for many years to provide a qualitative assessment of oyster
populations. Usually 150 to 200 oyster bars are sampled throughout
Virginia's Bay and tributaries and the seaside of the Eastern
Shore. Sampling efforts provide information on bottom condition
and water quality, qualitative oyster population data, spatset,
mortality rates, and neat condition.
In 199 3, a patent tong-based oyster stock assessment program
was initiated in Virginia. This assessment provides quantitative
estimates of oyster abundance and shell quantity that will provide
a statistically evaluated database for future oyster management
decisions. Most of the actively harvested oyster rocks in the
James and Rappahannock Rivers were sa.npled in 1993. Future
sampling efforts will include all oyster production areas of the
state.
Seed and Shell Repletion Program
Virginia has had a repletion fund for the replenishment of
oyster beds since 1928. During the past 15 years expenditures have
varied from $660,000 to $1,590,000 lor oyster replenishment
activities. In 1933 (Table 1) Virginia planted approximately
500,000 oushels of shell and 12,000 bushels of seed. Several new
prograr were also initiated in 1993, which included the
construction of two oyster reef areas, experiments in methods to
produce disease-free seed oysters in a natural situation and the
evaluat on of a hydraulic excavating machine to recover buried
cultch l.aterial from old oyster bars. The total 1993 expen >ures
were over $686,000 with $426,000 contributed from the General Fund
and $250,000 from Special Funds derived from oyster taxes and
permit and dredging fees.
-------
11 Ml.
5
111
1
it
i sbiH ill!! infill iiHl!
s
I
I II 1 ill
ii
III 1 III!!
It
W W
5 £ S 2 $ E i 8 §
IS
I t
6 I s
3 § S £8
S « 2 iS
§ IS
C 1 8 it
§ S
il l S still
ft F>
I i i P S II
e i 8 8
8 1
8 «11i s i 1111i illila 1 ii11i i
s
i iiiiii liill lalliil lissli
—1.|
? f
i
rs
I
r
i!
i
ii
3 '
>
O
o
•a
a
or
-------
I "3
1- H | § 1 | I IP 15 P |
i
0
1 « 11 f I 18 IS §2
»
H i
s 1 1
s
1
Ss
h
3 I I
1
1 •
t
11
*
2
i i s § • i a s
t 5
if'
1
j«i
1
K !
5
I"
.
1
1 S
.
J
S «* • ® *» P
.
h
I 1 I I I
1 1 t 1 I *
i a a » * 1
8
i
i
!
"Tli, li|ij,s'"
l
i
:
Jfc 1 ^
i j i:; | i
i 1«- 1 ' 1 I I
i I lilt I it i- • 1
-------
070
\
sum
S*«#
«*
«*»<
MCtf
W**
tnrftfw
Cm ft|
TOTAL
oo sir in
- '
M«k
*
Am
it***
/MM*
. iMn
Itews
ft* to few*.
hi Dw
*>inn
tw*SM
tow. Miammm Mm
ifepfci»
»m
5
UJ
m
li.Oi
4 m
'mmmmut
»smi
1
a
•
•
mm
noouM^PTMS
-
ttuw
4t
s»
M.
a
mi-iga.
Herat) LfoUMtf-N* •
l| UiA^fukmMSbmfir4mfim!msa»S'mmmsi
-------
APPENDIX V
DRAFT
MARYLAND OYSTER AQUACULTURE PERMIT GUIDELINES
1994
V
-------
UK AM
far immt *•
lOfTMal
*
•dMc* fee i
mm far
L*«s«rt
4- 103a
4-2*
4-514
4-741
4-742
4-74J
4-lnC4
4-I0M
4-1007
4-ICIJ
M)
i ofr^vmat
i A
tot AnflftA
" 10
iw pu!l—< i
2
2
I
II
II
12
IS
li
17
21
4-1017
4-tOIf UprtrfhfMai
27
4-1020 Ojfkrlna
4-llwn IS
.14.02 *¦¦¦ *¦¦ • ahn ckMHr 14 10)
-1*3
Owwwg Am Smey i
SedieeO
Gayioi of lot mi hpliii—
¦jrltttaMtwteMKTW
fkooc (410) f74-)7)) or Yr
FAX (410) *74-2*00.
AdUU
DMrioa.
Oyster flquaculture
Permit Guidelines
I99i|
I Not Permitting Program
for Oyster Hqusculture
Bemonstratwn Projects
$
%
Zhis yukk tm prepared for the Oyster
Actio* Plan wftkh was developed by the
Oyster Kound VoMc and !s one of many
oyster restoration activities bony
Implemented\
®1£
-------
!!{111! 1 III! iiM. Iliii
------- |