Attendance: Rich Bartke, Leo Byrnes, Sandy Campbell, John Caskey, William Clark, Richard Conner, Judith Dutra, Bruce Estrella, Eisuke Fukui, Rob Garrison, Harlyn Halvorson, Kim Harrison, Carl Johnson, Tadamitsu Ohtake, Ken Riaf, Mark Simonitsch, Davis Slack, Scott Sores, Ron Smolowitz, Richard Taylor, Tobin Storer, Rick York

1. Welcome Remarks. Harlyn Halvorson welcomed the group on behalf of himself and the Cape Cod Economic Development Council. A great deal has happened since our last meeting and it is important for the members of SSWG to remained informed.

2. JSA meeting update. September 19th Rollin Johnson and Harlyn Halvorson gave a report of the activities of SSWG to JSA and submitted to the new Chair of JSA, Dr. Meryl Bussard, a written statement of the deliberations of SSWG's comments on the National Aquaculture Development Plan. The verbal report outlined the history of SSWG, stressed the importance of a bottom-up approach in dealing with aquaculture, presented JSA with recent publications on SSWG activities and the Blueprint for Sea Scallop Aquaculture in Massachusetts. Finally we emphasized the recommendations outlined in the Blueprint.

3. National Aquaculture Development Plan Update. On September 20th the final of 7 national hearings regional hearing on the Plan was held in Warwick, Rhode Island, organized by NRAC and WHOI Sea Grant. Kim Harrison reviewed the response from the previous regional hearings and stressed the importance of obtaining industry comments, particularly regarding restraints to aquaculture. NRAC did a matrix of aquaculturists, from large to small, in order to arrange a forum in which all views were expressed. The meeting in Rhode Island was the largest one held. Panels were set up to include the spectrum of activity in the Northeast region. Written comments from the speakers are to be supplied within two weeks. Harlyn Halvorson distributed his minutes of the industry presentations at the meeting and noted that the SSWG comments were also submitted there. In response to questions, Kim Harrison said there two ways in which the Plan could be implemented: (1). Legal document - which by virtue of the many agencies involved, would take a long time to pass. (2). JAS adopt it as a working document. It would be quicker to move individual items in this working document. She emphasized that the document will be in place with or without your input - so this is the time to comment. She said the JAS was leaning towards a policy document, which was more convenient given the many agencies involved. Pieces could be moved for legislation, e.g. the bill being promoted by Sen. Kerry. Halvorson noted that Cliff Goudey complained that the Plan did not focus sufficiently on off shore aquaculture. Ron Smolowitz commented that Cape Cod could provide a model for aquaculture through the Farm Bureau. He also suggested that we directly contact congressional staffers.

4. Net Pen Aquaculture. Don Bishop, vice President for Fukui North America subsidiary of Fukui Net Co. of Toyohashi, Japan, reviewed the product line that includes aquaculture growout gear, spat collectors, rope, twine and netline for aquaculture and commercial fishing operations. Mr. Bishop has been researching aquaculture operations throughout the Pacific rim, Canada and the U.S. to examine production methods and gear applications. His presentation on how to develop aquaculture in North America is summarized in Appendix A. They have tried to help shellfish aquaculture in North America based upon their experience in Asia. There are a number of differences, especially in labor costs. They follow two rules: (1) What you've learned today will change tomorrow. (2) Don't reinvent the wheel. More information is needed. For aquaculture to be financially successful the following should be kept in mind:
· Quality of gear for longest amortization period.
· Labor costs to remain constant or decrease.
· Yield to remain constant or increase.

Mr. Bishop then summarized his experiences in the aquaculture industry. In 1993 the Canadian National Strategy was for 14 metric tons of sea scallop / year. In contrast in Japan 80 farmers produce 800 metric tons / year. This industry in Japan is 27 years old - for the first 23 years they depended on wild spat. Following this they had to import seed. The lesson learned in Japan was to think cubic. The most proficient location for cages is 5 meters off the bottom and 5 meters below the surface. Above or below this fowling becomes a problem and diminishes the yield. He then outlined the practice in a bay in Japan - 10 Km across with one end shallow and the other 160 feet deep. Different nets are used in these different locations. In shallow waters lantern nets were used; in slightly deeper waters, gear hangings, and in deeper waters the pearl nets. He described the net size and design of cages (Appendix A) which proved economical in raising scallops and other shellfish. Again the cage choice is site specific. Composition of the cages for longevity and ease of opening them to save labor costs are important considerations. For spat collection bags, larger meshes are required for richer oceans. One needs to experiment for the appropriate cage each site. When they were supplied with spat collection bags, Canadian draggers have found it more profitable to change to raising spad. He also suggested that artificial spawning seaweed, which has proven successful for muscle spat collection in New Zealand, should be tried for sea scallop enhancement. This material has ten times more surface area than fuzzy rope. In the ocean rich waters in Vancouver, the use of a lantern box with a space between boxes (see FB-2) was found to reduce fowling. Finally he stressed the success of forming cooperatives in developing the scallop industry and in educating the bureaucracy.

For further information Mr. Bishop can be reached at P.O. Box 119, Islandview Drive, Golden Lake, Ontario K0J 1XO, Canada. Fukui expects to establish a warehouse for their products in New England in the next few weeks.

5. Right Whale Considerations Leo Byrnes called to our attention a September 24, 1996 United States District Court of Massachusetts decision responding to a suit brought by Richard Max Strahan (Appendix B). When the State is issuing permits for anyone using fixed gear for fishery, especially for lobstering, they are by issuing the permit provides an incidental take for which a permit is required under the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act. The Court ordered the State to file by October 18th applications for permits from NMFS under both of those acts. It did not suspend existing permits. It did order the State to form a working group with the plaintiff to develop a plan to protect the Northern Right Whale. It is a long (70 page) scholarly decision which we will make available to SSWG members on request.

John Caskey, NMFS, said that the ball is now in the States Court. NMFS will be continuing their Section 7 consultations for projects as they come down the line. They are maintaining their position with the Dutra biological opinion of no jeopardy. NMFS does not perceive any new restrictions to result from the recent court ruling against the state. Whatever happens now will come through the State. The worst case scenario is the elimination of fixed fishing gear within Right Whale Critical Habitat. The court has ordered the State to come up with a take reduction/conservation plan by December 18 that will look into time of year restrictions or gear modifications. These options would be more likely to occur than a total ban. The States plan will precede the Right Whale Take Reduction Team's plan which is not schedualed to come out until sometime in early spring. NMFS has offered their help to the State.

Two things that NMFS are doing at this time. First they have submitted their research proposals for the Center for Coastal Studies to continue the plankton studies that are going on so that they will have a better data base on which to make decisions. They expect to be seeing shortly the data from 1995. With the legal action they expect the decisions to be placed on hold until they have further studies on plankton in critical Right Whale Habitats. Secondly, NMFS is offering to hold public informational meetings. The State has held 6 of these in Massachusetts to get input from the industry, and NMFS would like to do the same for other NE areas outside of Massachusetts. There is a pending law suit against NMFS.

Bruce Estrella, representing Jim Fair Mass. Division Marine Fisheries, reported that the State has appealed the United States District Court decision. From the 6 hearings they are collecting information from fixed gear fishermen, primarily lobstermen, on means to minimize the impact. They are trying to couple the concerns on the Right Whale, the abuse going on with the lobster trap limit ,and how to enforce this limit and reduce fixed gear currently in use. If they took the approach of closure this would be coupled with the time that Right Whales were in the area. Other options are to reduce the number of vertical lines in the water, use breakaway buoys, and / or replace floating lines with sinking lines between trap intervals. The material from the hearings has been summarized and a tentative plan prepared by Bill Adler.

In response to a question from Judy Dutra, Mr. Estrella replied that there was a committee to come up with a plan for fixed gear. Their recommendations, along with many others, have been incorporated into the plan prepared by Adler. To communicate with this committee one should contact Jim Fair, Phil Coates or Bill Adler.

Ron Smolowitz asked what is being done about vessel collisions with Right Whales and with mobile gear? John Caskey replied that ship collisions for USCG activities were addressed in the Coast Guard Biological Opinion and will be reviewed further if their law suit goes to court. The Right Whale Take Reduction and Implementation Team's plans will also address what can be done to reduce vessel collisions. The informational group that NMFS could put together would have Kim Thornhurst and Doug Beach (NMFS Protected Species personnel) sitting on the panel to address these issues. Kim is currently analyzing take data on Right Whales and should be coming out with a report in the near future. Only one of the 1996 mortalities can be definitely attributed to a vessel strike, another was possible. Evidence from the other necropsies was not conclusive. Since 1970, from an analysis by the New England Aquarium (Knowlton, 1966), 42 mortalities have been recorded. Of these, 12 were natural calf mortalities, 14 were from ship strikes, 2 from entanglement, and 26 of unknown cause.

Judy Dutra said that the town of Truro wanted to know why since they gave the permit they did not have a voice in this decision. Mr. Estrella relied that the management authority had been given to the Division of Marine Fisheries, whose authority superseded that of the town.

Leo Byrnes was concerned that the efficient equipment described by Mr. Bishop might not be available and noted that the court cited both the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Both of these apply within and outside the critical zone. Mr. Caskey noted that user conflicts are always a problem and that NMFS acknowledged the vast literature on the efficient way to raise sea scallops in hanging pens.

The use of gill nets was discussed and the limitations. Judy Dutra reported that her permission applied to inside one mile from shore and in less than 20 feet of water where one would not expect Right Whales Mr. Caskey acknowledged the Dutra permit is what NMFS came out with to apply generally to shellfish culture in coastal waters. Leo Burns commented that this is just the beginning since you would need incidental permits for all other endangered species. If you have to wait until the plankton studies are finished then this will inhibit marine aquaculture. There was concern expressed about the need and time consumed for the plankton studies. John Caskey explained that it was not the amount of plankton but the dynamics. Right Whales will only feed on certain dense populations of copepods. NMFS's concern was not to disrupt this. The Center for Coastal Studies will be doing the study; NMFS tried to get the Corps of Engineeres to help with vessels or funding - but they said they did not have the money to do this. The funding depends on NMFS. In response to a question from Richard Taylor, if this study is not completed he would have to suspend operations. Another concern was that this study might well be inconclusive; it nearly impossible to predict the growth next year.

This issue will be a continuing one for SSWG. John Caskey invited anyone who has further questions to contact him. Tel (508) 281-9118.

6. NRAC Web Site, Newsletter. Kim Harrison reported on some of NRAC new initiatives. She briefly reviewed the mission of NRAC and their effort to respond to industry needs. The primary way is by providing grants and the secondary way is by communicating what is happening with aquaculture development. One way is through the Home Page (Appendix C) which just went on line last week on the internet. She described the function of the Home Page from how NRAC operates, regional information, publications, directory of producers and of expertise, calendar, to the annual Situation Outlook Report. The question is how to get the producers etc. to access this. The server is at Univ. Mass Dartmouth. She also described the newsletter - which has just gone out to the printer. NRAC is looking to expand their mailing list. Suggestions on how to improve this were requested.

7. Next Meeting. The next meeting of SSWG will be held at the Cape Cod Economic Development Council in Hyannis at 9:30 AM on Monday November 25,1996.

Harlyn O. Halvorson
October 22, 1996