IMEP #136: The Rise and Fall of Oyster Sets

[BlueChip]

IMEP #136: The Rise and Fall of Oyster Sets

Oyster Industries and Oyster Habitats of Clinton, CT

"Understanding Science Through History"
Does Nature Have A Role In Fisheries Management
Restoring Shell Bases Post Navigation Dredging
Viewpoint of Tim Visel, no other agency or organization
Thank you, Blue Crab Forum™ for supporting these habitat History Reports


Over 300,000 views to date - This is a delayed report February 2021
Tim Visel Retired from The Sound School June 30, 2022
A Note from Tim Visel

Climate and Oysters 

The oyster is perhaps one of the best species in which to study climate.  It shares in New England a specific temperature range in which to spawn.
Suddenly, it is persistent in the habitat – it shells take a long time to dissolve an often lies buried beneath organic/soil horizons.  Lastly it is a yearly event, we can observe gonad ripening, spawning in the water and then spat falls, i.e. "sets."  At one time the industry would monitor and report an oyster setting as an important natural event.  Such reports would detail water temperature, storm (freshet) conditions, and "counts" on shell surfaces.  These counts were recorded and made available to the public as state reports.  Sadly, that information temperature, gonad development, larval surveys, and per bushel counts (set information) no longer exists in Connecticut – at least to my knowledge – T. Visel. 

I recall that in the not so distant past the southern states and Canadian Maritimes would maintain "spat fall hot lines" in which growers could call in as to inquire as to the presence of larval stages in the water.  This information helped guide shell planting as natural bio films made cultch placement timing critical – sometimes affording only a 10 day window "to catch the spat."  Bacterial bio films and silt would cover planted shells making it difficult to have a good set.  Lip or mantle sets was possible on river beds as oysters growing produced new shell all season so these sets created the vertical upward movement of beds to reefs.  Planted shell resulted in "plate sets" oysters on flat horizontal surfaces that over time would need space in which to grow.  In the historical literature heavy or great sets were at times problematic so many oysters set on a shell they would quickly "over grow" and requiring spacing and thinning to provide for adequate growth – similar to thinning carrots.
The historical records frequently mention efforts to keep planted shells clean of silt and once set to keep silt from suffocating small oysters.  The history of sets also tells of a climate transition now linked to the NAO – North Atlantic Oscillation.   

Oyster Fisheries and Oyster Habitats – A Clinton Case History

Natural protection from the storms by a bar - Sandy Island and later Cedar Island made the lower end of the Hammonaset River a large oyster habitat.  The fresh water at low tide kept starfish out while salt water at high tide kept salinities high enough for good oyster growth.  A shell midden at The Route 1 bridge (north of what was once Griswold Airport) showed that native inhabitants once utilized them heavily for food (personal communications to T. Visel from George McNeil 1980s).  Some road work excavations at the end of Dudley Lane south of Route 1 and very near the Miller Homestead (now part of the State Park) thick deposits of shell were below the street (T. Visel observations).  Many years ago, Emil Miller recalled that Dudley Lane was one of two original Nature American trails to the park – the other was a rock bridge from Signal Hill Road.  (This was blasted for the new Route 1 decades ago).  The Dudley Lane was built over shells (mostly oyster) along this path on high ground which gave an access on firm ground.  It was colonial practice to also use these trails as many roads today are the early trails made centuries ago by native peoples.

On page 233 of 1884 J. B. Beers History of Middlesex County Connecticut is a section about Clinton's oyster industry.  Oysters were a food of value because it if properly kept moist in sawdust could survive in cellars for months.  This became an emergency food supply in times of heavy snow falls.  Aquaculture by planting of seeds (seed oysters) started in the 1850's and especially after 1855 when it became possible to claim titled to submerged farms for shellfish.  These seed oysters mostly at first were mostly from the Chesapeake Bay were often termed "southern plants" in the historical literature and planted on designated lots.  (Local deeds to these areas still exist today).  From Beers, 1894 page 233 is found this statement:
   
   "The Oyster Trade"

"This is a present one of the leading industries of Clinton, and it has been developed within the last half century.  Mr. A. J. Hurd, one of the principal dealers, commenced planting within the borders of this town, about 30 years ago (about 1855 – T. Visel).  He now plants from 3,000 to 5,000 bushels.  These are brought from Virginia, and various points on Long Island Sound.  Clinton Oysters are among the best in the market."   

George McNeil who grew out seed from New Haven harbor felt the lower river (site of the Hurd deeds he now owned) produced a white strong shell and salt for taste.  That is one of the reasons his father purchased the Hurd deeds about 1905 – great taste and clean "certificate" waters free of sewage that ruined many of New Haven oyster beds for direct harvest.  Many New Haven growers at this time (1900's) looked to cleaner out of state waters to raise New Haven seed oysters in sewage free waters.  That is why they moved his family oyster shop from City Point (The pink granite, stone wharf is still visible outside of the present day Sound School Cafeteria) to Clinton for final grow out in "clean" eastern Connecticut waters.  Open waters relays were to open to storms – so coves and rivers were stable enough in which to plant oysters according to George McNeil who once sold seed oysters to plant in eastern Connecticut coves including Quiambaug Cove in Stonington – George McNeil personal communication, T. Visel, 1980's.

Clinton's oyster industry was also detailed in The Fisheries Industry the United States of Labor Statistics 1889 – pages 91 to 140 details eastern Connecticut's with Clinton highlighted on page 138.  It included the boundary of the designated ground (deeds) as reported by E. K. Redfield (my comments, T.  Visel):

"All the designated oyster ground in Clinton is in the harbor, and is located in the channel, extending from west wharf (foot of Commerce street) nearly down to white bar (the tip of Cedar Island apposite present day Clinton Public Beach).  The length is about 8,800 feet and the area of ground is about twelve acres.  A part of this ground has been planted for thirty six years (1856, T. Visel).  The privilege to plant in the channel was obtained at a town meeting.  There was unanimous vote in favor of allowing the planting of oysters in the channel from the west wharf as far as far down the channel as the persons applying for the ground saw fit.  About ten years later the state passed a law that a committee of the town might designate ground for the purpose of cultivating oysters, and the parties (oyster planters, T. Visel) had previously planted grounds and partly planted each spring with oysters (converted to deeded grounds, T. Visel) that are (now) from three to five years old.  Some of these oysters about double in size during the summer and fall, and acquire a fine flavor." 

This is the first designation to A. J. Hurd, a local Clinton oyster dealer – later the grounds of J. P. McNeil.

In History Repeated by Bertram Smith, a local Clinton publication, which explains oyster farming on pages 79 to 82 (See Appendix #5).  It details that larger oysters were preferred as some of the market then was for oysters to be fried or cooked for stews.  A late fall market for "fryers" also included oysters for stuffing.  Well shaped oysters, those not hook or bents, ended up in oyster bars to be consumed raw in the "half shell trade."

When I started meeting with George McNeil, he had retired from oystering on a commercial level about a decade before 1971.  This is the year we started mooring our 16 foot Brockway at J and J Lobster (now Lobster Landing at the foot of Commerce Street) and we noticed a tall thin figure frequently gave us a wave, and not knowing him just gave a polite wave back – in short order we would be greeted at the dock.  Frequent looks and questions about lobstering with my brother Ray and me, the catch, the bait, etc.  We always showed George our lobsters which we kept in a large green barrel with the top on to discourage competition.  Even if lobstering was great, it was always "slow" or "fair" to onlookers but not George.  In the years to come, I would see him raking on a sand flat just south of the oyster shop – four bamboo flags marked this bed, part of the Hurd grounds but out of the direct channel which was periodically dredged and over the years, which had removed the shell base.  The Dolan Brothers now worked these beds but short relay only from Guilford or seed collected on the New Haven grounds.  Navigation dredging had largely ended the culture of oysters but with the lower Clinton Harbor still open to direct harvesting adult oysters were placed on firm channel edges and free of bacteria cleansed and then made suitable to market.  As you can imagine many oysters were lost, but its 50 percent returned (plus summer growth) it was worthwhile (Frank Dolan – T. Visel comments).  I would ride on the Dolan's Oyster Boat Teal dropping hundreds of bushels here to purify to be dredged up in late fall when oyster prices were higher.  We when relayed we also got a wave from George.  It was George McNeil that started telling me about New Haven oystering and the families move to Clinton after much of the New Haven Harbor had so much sewage bacteria direct harvest was ended.  We would meet many times and he let me copy his scrapbook in 1983.  An April 23, 1953 Clinton Recorder newspaper article featured George McNeil with a title of "Oyster Man Fights for Clinton Crop."  In those days a bushel of two years old oysters went for 8 dollars (150) or a little less than 6 cents each.

It was 1972 in which Clinton Harbor obtained an intense oyster set.  I recall avidly how excited he was when we unloaded our lobsters and pointed to a shell covered with set in late August.  The early sets were not uncommon – we once put the skiff up on the out Cedar Island to look for thatch oysters as mentioned by George.  We wanted to surprise him with some oysters.  (Here the land is in Clinton but Madison retained its shellfish rights once held by Guilford).  A long the shore was small single oysters by the hundreds, some do doubt would be killed by the first fall storm that east them above the wrackline to dry or freeze in the coming winter.  But along the low tide line was small golf ball shape oysters which we collected a bushel basket in about an hour and George was thrilled with them but today was different this was a set he got on shells he collected from the fish market.  He made a special point of walking over and showing us this shell.  George was making "spat collectors" from chicken wire (they looked like large pillows) to keep the shells from being buried in soft muck.  He had opened the chicken wire and observed the set on shells.  He was very excited about this set which he had not seen for many years.  By 1974 seed oysters had filled Clinton Harbor.

In the 1970's, Clinton Harbor was quiet, absent the brutal storms of the middle 1950's.  It was George McNeil who told me of the barrier spit break called the Dardanelles after the thin ismus in Northwestern Turkey Aegean Sea.  How this name came to Clinton remains a mystery but the storms came into the inner harbor and at times no doubt a hazard to shipping and fishing vessels.  This breach in Cedar Island (old maps have it named Sandy Island) was mentioned by the US Fish Commission 1881, The Oyster Industry by Ernest Ingersol description of the Clinton Oyster industry is in the section Oyster – Industries East of New Haven below –

Department of the Interior
The History and Present Condition
Of the Fishery Industries
The Oyster Industry
By
Ernest Ingersoll
Washington: Government Printing Office 1881

58.  The Fisheries of The United States
F.  Coast of Connecticut
24. Oyster-Industries East of New Haven

Oysters in Clinton – "At Clinton, a little village settled under the name of Kenilworth (afterwards corrupted into Killingworth), at the mouth of Hammonasset River, the oyster-business is of long growth, and is somewhat peculiar.  The harbor, in old times, contained an abundance of large, succulent oysters, but these have been all-but exhausted in one way or another.  About twenty-five years ago the planting began in the harbor, the seed then used being caught mainly at home or brought from Block Island.  The harbor, at present, contains about 200 acres suitable for oyster-growth.  Formerly there was much more, but a few years ago the sea made a breach through the peninsula which encloses the harbor, by which the southerly storms are given so fierce an entrance into the bay, that any attempt at oyster work, or even at navigation, over much of the water space, is rendered utterly futile.  If this breach, locally known as the Dardanelles, could be filled up – and the cost, I was informed, would not exceed $1,000 a thousand acres, or more, would be added to the oyster bottom.  The bottom is hard, the water nowhere too deep for tonging, and of about the right degree of freshness.  Mud and sand drift so badly in winter, however, that no oysters can be left down during that season."

Clinton was a major ship building region with shipyards where the fire station and Town Hall today (note Clinton was part of 1680 Kenilworth (Killingworth after 1838) produced dozens of large wood sailing vessels and hundreds of captains and crew.  One of these trips may have brought the name Dardanelles back to Clinton.  (A historical bulletin titled "Old Sailing Days in Clinton" by Thomas A. Stevens, 1963, reprinted in 1972, details this maritime history).

The Danger of Black Mayonnaise

By 1974, The Hammonaset River that widened at its terminus into Clinton Harbor has a series of oyster sets.  Oysters it seemed were everywhere but our first attempt at oyster culture in Tom's Creek was closed by recreational harvesting and then bacterial testing.  In 1974 John Baker (Aquaculture Division Chief) introduced me to the National Shellfish Sanitation Program a national program created in 1925 that sets water bacterial harvest standards for oysters and other shellfish in response to diseases associated with bacterial contamination (See Appendix #3).  Tom's Creek was closed to direct harvest ending our fall shucked oyster market.  We then turned our attention to a growing seed oyster fishery in the upper reaches of the Hammonasset River.  After years of heading down river to hand haul lobster pots, we now headed up to huge beds of new overgrown oysters.  Oysters were so thick they were dying and up to 30 seed oystermen per day were harvesting seed for western CT and out of state.  This is when George McNeil started to tell me of the New Haven Oyster Industry at City Point, originally termed Oyster Point.

Tens of thousands of bushels of oysters had come out of the Hammonasset River to be replanted on Cape Cod or Western Connecticut.  And the sets contained to increase on discarded shell dredged by hand scattered over the same area.  This more shell brought to the surface the more seed oysters had set.  This changed in 1984-85 when the lower river was dredged and many shells were covered in mud.  This was quickly followed by an immense outbreak of MSX the parasite oyster disease after Hurricane Gloria in late 1986.  An oyster survey in 1987 with the Clinton Shellfish Commissioners found almost all the oysters were dead – buried with shell still paired.  At the same time winter flounder had shown an increased presence of the parasite similar to MSX.  Seed oysters from Clinton and Westbrook had been relayed to Massachusetts beginning in 1974.  The annual report of the Town of Bourne (Cape Cod) – year ending December 31, 1981 contains this segment on page 78.

"During April, 200 bushels of adult oysters were purchased from Westbrook, CT and transplanted in the Monument Beach Oyster Bed.  These oysters were harvested during November and December."

I met with George McNeil regarding this huge oyster loss and this is when George McNeil first mentioned the Dardanelles – in the 1940's Clinton Harbor was very different and had a breach making Cedar Island a true island.  When the Dardanelles was filled and waters "took the long way out" the water slowed and dropped organic matter before it left the river.  According to George McNeil it had be a constant battle to keep oysters from suffocating in this ooze.  This material also filled the channel reducing navigation.  That is when he showed his notebook of newspapers about the Harbor one of which July 6, 1950 is shown below.

From the Scrapbook of George McNeil
The Clinton Recorder – July 6, 1950
Harbor Dredging Making Progress
Now Pumping in Vicinity of the Dardanelles, Now Filled with Rocks

"The work of dredging the channel in Clinton Harbor is progressing well and a channel 150 feet wide and nine feet in depth has thus far been excavated from above the newly constructed town dock at the foot of Maplewood Drive down toward the sand bar which extends across the channel near the harbor entrance, ending before it gets there just past the McNeil Oyster company.  The work is being done by the Jensen Dredge Company of Freeport, L.I. under a contract made by Mark Hagel of Grove Beach with the government.  Fill from the operations was first placed on property of Fisher A. Buell down toward the Neck road extension, then in the vicinity of the William Petri market and the town dock and still later on property at the Clinton Country Club.  More recently pumping has been going on in the vicinity of the Dardanelles, where years ago a channel was cut through to the Sound from the harbor and this providing an unsuccessful venture as a short cut exist from the harbor, it was stopped up with huge brownstone boulders, although this did not prevent the tide from roaring through there at certain stages of the tide and wind.  It has often been suggested that the Dardanelles could be bridged and a road opened from Cedar Island through the State Park, thus giving the islanders access to the outside world without using a boat.  Several years ago, two or three large yachts could be found along the wharf throughout the summer, and this before any dredging was done.  At high water slack there is about nine feet of water in the channel on the bar, as it is called.  The 57 foot yacht, Coquina, owned by F. J. Platt of Scranton, PA., and Madison, is docked at the foot of Commerce street and it is said that several yachts are waiting for mooring space in the harbor."

And Clinton Harbor in the middle of 1980's became a focal point for a proposed dredging project to remove 11.4 acres of black mayonnaise a sticky leaf matter gelation that had suffocated hundreds of thousands of oysters.  The amount of organic matter now covering the oysters was at times so thick a hand hauled dredge came up with a few black stained oyster shells.  (Personal observations with Tom Brennan of the Clinton Shellfish Commission). 

The Oyster Habitat Succession, The Build Up of Black Mayonnaise
One of the items that is mentioned in the historical oyster industry records is the danger of mud.  Mud could cover shells eliminating a chance for an oyster, spat to "set" could suffocate living shellfish and then create a "dead bottom."  The oyster industry wanted oyster growing (and setting) habitat in an area that had little mud.  A spring flood however, could dislodge millions of leaves leaving the bottom brown. This blanket of leaves if not removed by the end of March could kill oysters and turn into a smelly ooze (personal communications, George McNeil – Hammonasset River, Clinton CT and John C. Hammond Oyster Pond River Chatham, Mass).  Oyster growers would seek to remove these leaves from oysters before the oysters perished.  If leaves become thick and settled an organic compost resulted that near shore fishers termed as a jelly like mayonnaise substance.
Sapropel is frequently called black mayonnaise is a marine compost which can build quickly in heat and first killed deep water Long Island Sound in 1890 during a previous period of extreme heat.  Sapropel in these circumstances becomes rich in toxic sulfide (only a few table spoons in a room can fill it with a sulfide smell in just a few minutes) and frequently is described as "the smell of rotting eggs."  When subjected to sulfide oysters stop feeding and if sulfide persists (stagnant water or dead zone today) oysters can starve to death. 
In time these areas collect organic debris, leaves, bark, cut grass clippings, etc., and combined with dead algae oysters become buried in a soft blue-black organic ooze.  Sealed from dissolved oxygen in seawater or in periods of very low oxygen levels this organic undergoes sulfate metabolism the process of bacterial decay by bacteria strains that use sulfate as an oxygen source.  As sulfate reducing bacteria obtain much less energy by using sulfate they are slow to breakdown organic matter and deposits may rise rapidly and cover oysters.  It is when dredging occurs does this provide a type of archeologic "dig" as to what oysters experienced – a climate record provided by the depths of sapropel layers and layers of bivalve shell. 

We have numerous reports of burial and retrieval of shell in the dredging projects along our coast providing insight into climate and a connection to those shell deposits on land – Native American shell middens.  More important perhaps is like pollen grains found in terrestrial bogs and peat – organic deposits along the coast hold cysts and spores of algal blooms – some toxic to us.  It also provides an opportunity to compare "old" carbon – carbon fractions that are reused in a pattern of decay and reuse by climate and sea level rise.  Sulfate reducing bacteria naturally act to complex heavy metals – in fact in the mining literature they are known as the "ore builders" sulfate a byproduct of using sulfate as an oxygen source naturally complexes heavy metal ions.  The longer that sapropel collects its ability to precipitate heavy metal ions increases.
Finally dredging projects may offer substantial opportunity to recycle estuarine bivalve shell – primarily oysters in rivers that hold large deposits of sapropel.  These could be reused to build oyster reefs.  Many dredging projects have cut into long buried oyster reefs and perhaps could be reused to mitigate shell loss.
Oysters and Mud – A Race of Burial in Rivers and Bays

The H. J. Lewis Oyster Company Versus the United States (Decided October 7th 1952) brings into detail how oysters have a thin grip on the habitat in which they live.  On page 6 of the court decision as to dredging impact to oyster beds (In the United States Court of Claims Case #48806-1947) contains this segment (Section 8 in full) in Bridgeport and Norwalk, CT.
"An oyster is essentially a living mechanism of pumping turbid water through a sieve, removing all the particles except a small proportion of the smallest size, rejecting part of this material and passing part of it through its mouth and digestive tract.  This process is accomplished by means of the oyster's gills and palps or lips of the oyster's mouth.  Both the matter rejected and that passed through the oyster become agglomerated by a kind of mucous and from time to time may be ejected from the oyster by the snapping of its shell.

The oyster therefore is itself a creator of mud and since it cannot change its location it cannot move away from the mud it produces.  It has been said that the life of an oyster is a race with mud, and desirable oyster beds are those which are located when currents or scouring prevent the accumulation of mud is sufficient quantities to harm the oysters.  It is agreed by authorities that oysters when covered by mud, either of their own creation, or by deposit from external sources, will be killed.  Authorities disagree as to the effect upon oysters of excessive turbidity of the water in which they live.  Dr. Loosanoff, a recognized authority on oysters, has found that the immediate effect of increasing the turbidity of the water is to slow the oyster's rate of feeding.  Whether this effect could continue, if prolonged, has not been demonstrated.  It is a fact that oysters do live and thrive in water of a considerably higher turbidity than occurs in Bridgeport Harbor."

The Lewis Oyster Company sought damages for suffocated oysters (claimed by the Harbor dredging process) and cost of "stirring" a practice in which oyster companies lifted and rinsed mud from oysters, keeping them alive.  Section 14, pg. 9 of this case is detailed below (in full):

"Plaintiff claims a large sum for harrowing the oyster beds in order to stir up the deposited mud and allow the currents to carry it away.  This operation is one which is normally performed every year before the spawning season, in order to brighten up the shells lying on the bottom for receiving the spat.  Plaintiff claims that by reason of the mud precipitated from the dredging operations this harrowing or stirring operation was much more extensive and required more time at an expense of $500 per day the operation of its three oyster boats.

In view of the history of the oyster beds in Bridgeport Harbor, and in view of the normal turbidity of the water in the harbor area, it must be assumed that the normal scouring of the currents in the harbor, which has prevented any appreciable siltation over the years, is the primary agency for removing any silt deposited from the dredging.  Unless the widening and deepening of the entrance channel has materially changed such currents, a fact which has not been demonstrated, it must be assumed that the normal operations of stirring the deposited mud, aided by such currents, will restore plaintiff's oyster lots to their former condition."  (This is also mentioned as stirring, T. Visel).

What concerned George McNeil was he supported navigation dredging but wanted to have the shell replaced.  He had watched dredging projects that contained much shell only to have it dumped offshore at disposal areas.  The cost of placing several thousand bushels of shell could mitigate any shell loss – as removing excess muck was a positive activity in helping oysters grow.  Oystering with mechanical dredges tended to keep channels clear and could possibly remove or reduce dredging projects in the future.  At the same time Mr. McNeil felt that the shell should be restore oyster setting as well.  It was his experience that channel dredging left soft sides that simply in time collapsed into the dredged area.  Removing the shell base or banks left a "soft" edge.  I had 1980s in the West River in Guilford Connecticut.  This is a segment from "comments To The Clinton Shellfish Commission Winter 2007" Tuesday, January 9, 2007, Tim Visel – 8 pages – contains this section:
"When the West River in Guilford was dredged in 1981-1983 we did use crushed oyster and clam shell to stabilize the dredged channel edges and it worked well, I toured the area and it became a popular blue crab spot.  Much better I felt, for habitat then bulk heading."

This project was endorsed by William Green, Town of Guilford Engineering Department and Chairman of the Guilford Oyster Ground Committee (See William Green Municipal Shellfish Programs in Connecticut pg. 27 to 29 Seventh Conference for Shellfish Growers, March 3-4 1997 Olympia Washington 69 pages).  The Guilford Oyster Ground Committee was the first such town agency to undertake cooperative shellfish management agreements with commercial shellfish companies.  A second cooperative agreement to restore the shell base of the East River – also in Guilford was conducted in 1989.  (Mitigation of Dredging Impacts To Oyster Populations – Timothy C. Visel Journal of Shellfish Research Vol 7, No. 2 Pages 267-270 1988).
The lower reaches of rivers and bays clays are washed off land with organic particles creating silt.  This silt washing was accomplished by drags or just open oyster dredges.  It was a way to hold habitat benefits to those organisms that lived in near or fed upon them.  Once of those was winter flounder who would be found on the oyster beds during and just often such cultivating work.
It was known that constant cultivation was needed in areas of estuarine deposition of "suspended solids" that was dead algae or bits of leaves.  In time these conditions would kill oysters and was well established in the oyster industry.

In a July 8, 1982 Interview in the Village Advertiser by J.P. Neath, Dick Nelson who owned the Cotuit Oyster Company (and represented three generations of his family involvement in the oyster industry, T. Visel) provided this description of oyster culture:

"Nelson equates aquaculture with agriculture like a farmer tills the land, the shellfish farmer cultivates the bottom every year."  If you don't turn the soil, it gets chocked out.  It is the same with the sea.  If the present area weren't being formed for oysters, Nelson said it would be weed filled.  Like Land Farmers, the Nelsons have learned by experience that planting is better at some times than others.  Like the farmer, they are to contend with pests, diseases and are affected by the weather."

In a memorandum (email) titled "Shellfish At Risk" to the Long Island Sound Habitat Restoration Committee, my comments are below (sent Friday, May 29th 2009):
"I believe a key discussion issue about natural oyster bed (reefs) is the fact that that they are not constant habitats without change.  Ecosystems that contain natural oyster populations are a point in time; habitats change or succeed over time and respond to both man-made and natural impacts.

In our state, one of the mechanisms that can sustain oyster habitats is what is often described by harvesters themselves the opportunity to work (harvest) them.  This "work" tends to keep the shell base clean, wash silt from the shells and prevent death by burial.  Therefore, this process sustains a selected habitat value."

Shellfishermen often entered into this habitat/work discussion with the example of lawns.  People choose to do the work (cut the grass) to maintain a certain habitat value, the lawn.  George McNeil felt that if let alone (natural), the desired habitat value would be far different over time and quite  unrecognizable in a decade.  For green lawns, it was a habitat that people wanted to maintain and promote.  He felt the same about oyster beds.

I wrote up his account of this viewpoint in a paper I prepared for Connecticut Shellfish Commissions in 2008.  "A Review of Shellfisheries for Natural Oyster Populations in Tidal Rivers" see – East River pages 7 to 14.  It's on our Sound School website – publications bar – click on directory of shellfish – Marine Technology and Marine Historical –its paper #32.

It offers a different view on oystering which has been part of management discussions here for quite some time – "Oyster Problem is Not Simple" and comments by Victor Loosanoff.
But the practice of lifting and rinsing shells and oysters also introduces oxygen into these oyster soils – and contributes to the destruction of cysts.  It is important to note that the MSX disease outbreak in the Hammonasset occurred after a navigation project in 1984-85 and Hurricane Gloria.  It is believed that long ago cysts or spores were perhaps uncovered during a prolonged hot period with large amounts of nutrients that depleted oxygen levels.  Pathology tests in 1983 showed that MSX was not present – after the dredging it appeared.  During a Mumford Cove Shellfish Survey in Groton, CT (1981), Dr. Edward Wong and Dr. Sung Feng told me that red tide cysts buried under several feet of mud became active when exposed to light and alkaline seawater (See EPA Mumford Cove Shellfish Survey Groton, CT- June 1981-A).  This information was made available to John Volk CT Aquaculture Division Chie of the CT Dept of Agriculture who requested no hydraulic harvesting.  (State 2/23/11 Advisory Biotoxins – protocols for Hazardous Algal Blooms "Additionally, the use of a hydraulic dredge is not permitted in Mumford Cove in order to prevent the re-suspension of cysts of HAB causing organisms."  A complete write up of this survey in Groton (1981) is found in IMEP #97 Estuarine Coves Records Harmful Bloom History, posted Oct 21, 2021 on the Blue Crab Forum™.

Buried MSX cysts deep in ammonia rich marine composts is explained by the first researchers who found MSX cysts in the intestines of marine worms.  Once cysts are exposed (in this case heat and low oxygen) they can again bloom.  Research in New York concerning harmful algal blooms have found buried cysts density highest in shallow organic rich sapropel.  (See Appendix #1 – Brown Tide linked to New York Flushing").  It is thought that high ammonia in sapropel protects these cysts and spores from bacterial action – and explains why the MSX cysts are found in the intestinal track of marine worms unharmed.

Ammonia levels in dredged sapropel can be very high as recorded in the agricultural use of these composts for soil nourishment.  It was the EPA agency that issued the first warning to those involved in dredging that ammonia needed to be rinsed from dredged material samples before toxicology tests could commence.  The ammonia level in some samples was so high it was lethal to the test organisms.
A dramatic rupture of cysts by sulfuric acid burst following reintroduction of oxygen (usually by storms) is now thought to give rise to blooms commonly called "HABs."
Dredging Offers Opportunity to Recycle Oyster Shell

Dredging articles and excerpts of local newspapers from the Scrapbook of George McNeil, Clinton, CT (1984, July 1) provided to Tim Visel, my comments in (  ).
One of the issues that George McNeil mentioned was navigational dredging.  Dredges could in some areas remove the oyster crop and shell base below.  George felt strongly about returning the shell but glad to see the muck go- he felt that after dredging the remaining oysters grew faster (greater food ability, T. Visel) and just wished that the shell could be recovered.  At first George McNeil that just the lower reach of the harbor was dredged but as wharfs transitioned from commerce to recreation the dredging went up river into the natural bed:  That came to a public controversy first in 1929 but every 20 years or so dredging happened.  His scrapbook contained some timelines which I copied during our meeting.  This is when I first learned of the Dardanelles a breach in long sand bar that connected Cedar Island to the easterly end of Hammonasset State Park.  At times Clinton Harbor had two outlets dating back to the 1870s.  Because of the roughness of the center harbor wharfs first developed in the Indian River.  George McNeil wanted the Army Corps "out of the oyster business" mostly over the return of oyster shell a critical part of oyster culture and natural bed habitat.  He thought that some device could be constructed (a screen perhaps) to save the shell but remove the muck.  According to George McNeil any oysters on the edges after dredging grew twice as fast (not confirmed, T. Visel) so as quickly as the shell could be replaced oyster culture or natural growth could begin again.  I had seen George Sousa's marine float docks that held oysters and quahogs at the surface in 1981 and the growth in these marina floats (of bottom culture, T. Visel) was amazing to see which I did in Falmouth Massachusetts in 1982.  Some of the scrapbook articles George McNeil let me copy off this scrapbook and have been reprinted in other IMEP Habitat history posts.  The following notations are new to the IMEP posts and include them here as to help establish a habitat history for Clinton Harbor.

Notations and dates from George McNeil notebook detailed below,
The Clinton Recorder –

Town Landing, April 11, 1929 Pg 1 – Dredge To Draft Vessels Over West Wharf Oct 31, 1929 Pg 1 – Deep Water for Navigation.
Need to Dredge the Hammonasset River, April 22, 1943 (Note most war time dredging projects were postponed until after World War II – Tim Visel).
January 29, 1948 Pg 1 "Cultivating The Succulent Clam"
February 24, 1949 "Oyster Industry Coming" Pg. 1
March 3, 1949 "Town Desires Boat Terminal"
April 14, 1949 "Meeting To Seek Public Use of Dredged Sand"
April 22 Special Town Meeting Dredging Project Plans "Engineers Recommend Improvement at Shore" (Engineers most likely The Army Corps of Engineers – Tim Visel).
It is here that George McNeil said an irony occurred in the regulations.  Power vessels could not use mechanical dredges to harvest oysters on natural beds but the Army Corps could – take the live oysters and shell base and "no one said anything" recalls George McNeil.  He asked permission to remove as many oysters as possible from the natural beds (to outside beds) by mechanical oyster dredge (not hand hauled dredge) before the Army Corps mechanical dredge killed them (After 1949 -1950 he was allowed to dredge up river if he shelled (cultch) the same areas for seed to sustain the bed).  A similar situation was developing in the Patchogue River in Westbrook (from scrapbook) "Patchogue River To Be Dredged "Sept 28th 1950, and in Guilford (Joe Dolan) – Harbor Dredging Postponed – The Oyster Problem Is Not Simple, December 1, 1949 and reprinted Shorelines Times Dec 8, 1949) (See IMEP #81: Oyster Bed History for Guilford, CT 1848 to 1988, posted December 28, 2020, The Blue Crab ForumTM).  The article as it appeared in The Clinton Recorder, December 1, 1949 "Oyster Problems Is Not Simple."

In general, the few remaining oyster companies asked to use mechanical dredges to move seed oysters to private areas before being killed by dredging.  If these natural beds were to continue to produce seed oysters they would need replacement shell.  (in the middle 1980s only the Dolans of Guilford had the equipment to mitigate navigational damage to natural oyster beds in the East River Guilford (see Journal of Shellfish Research, Vol 7, #2, pgs. 267 to 270, 1988 - Mitigation Of Dredging Impacts To Oyster Populations.  The Guilford Shellfish Commission approved the oyster restoration project in 1984).  Although Mr. McNeil thought a way to recycle the shell from The Hammonasset River, he estimated that dredging removed thousands of bushels of shell from the natural beds – shell needed and so hard to replace - George McNeil.
From George McNeil's Scrapbook -

July 1st The Clinton Recorder 61,900 Appropriation for Harbor – Senator Raymond E. Baldwin (1949) "Filling in of the channel at what is known as the "bar" near the mouth of the harbor it became impossible to navigate at various town meetings, it has been proposed that the deposit collected in dredging operations be spread upon the meadow thus forming additional land for building purposes."
May 5, 1949 The Clinton Recorder - Clinton Harbor Fill In House Bill   
"Director of State Parks Donald Matthew explained that the government has been authorized to dredge Clinton Harbor and it signifies willingness to deposit 50,000 yards of fill in the marsh and laying in back of Meigs Point – Cedar Island in future prove valuable as an addition to recreation areas."
(Note – it was still the practice to drain or fill salt marsh to eliminate Malaria in CT.  This eliminated the disease vector – the wet habitats of the coast home to the salt water mosquito Aedes sallicitans.  The last outbreak of Malaria was in the Deep River marshes in 1938 – Tim Visel).

A scrapbook notation – reads handwritten by Mr. McNeil – "The Clinton Recorder May 26, 1949 Senate Approves State Park Bill" "Shellfish Bill Passes Senate June 2, 1949.

And also,
"Harbor Dredging Operations Began Filling Land, Fisher A. Buell, Oct 27, 1949."
"Harbor Dredging Postponed – The Oyster Problem Dec 8th 1949 Shoreline Times – Guilford.
The Harbor federal channel in 1984-85 eliminated the shell base on the Dolan (previously McNeil's) designated bed and its closure to direct harvesting ending (July 2, 1985) the culture operations in this area.  The result of dredging was a burial of oysters at the edges as a mud slide occurred.  Dredging left a "hole" which just filled in as edges slid in.  (Mr. McNeil's comments can be found in – "A Review of Fisheries Histories for Natural Oyster Populations in Tidal Rivers" – 68 pages 2008 – from 1984-1988.  Mr. McNeil had asked before dredging that the shell base be moved and replaced.  In 2007 this issue of oyster shell replacement post dredging was again a topic for the Clinton Shellfish Meeting January 9, 2007.

The dredging was needed and that it restored better tidal exchange helped oyster growth (Mr. McNeil personal comments to Tim Visel, 1980s) it just the shell needed to be replaced.  It was during the Dardanelles – a historic breach in the long barrier island complex that is called Cedar Island today.
This is one of the articles I copied in July 1984 from Mr. McNeil's oyster scrapbook.
The Clinton Recorder, May 26, 1949 Senate Approves State Park Bill
"Depositing of Silt from Clinton Harbor Seems to be Uncertain"

According to Mr. McNeil the lower position of the river (high energy) did have a large percentage of sand – something that could pass as sand but that the upper reaches was quite different material that one would not want on a beach.  This was the smelly mud that was suffocating oysters – he claimed was from decaying leaves.  What made the harbor suitable for oyster culture also carried a high organic load which when the current slowed organic matter fell from the water column.  That is when Mr. McNeil mentioned the Dardanelles (Clinton at one time had over 100 sailing vessels and captains and some were involved in international trade) and a much shorter pathway out.  Filling in the Dardanelles had caused a huge bank of mud to build on the north side of the lower Hammonasset River – just west of the Cedar Island Marina wood bulkhead. 
Within two years this deposit was in the middle of an extensive study to remove it by dredging and by doing that expand Cedar Island Marina.
Oyster Habitat Succession and Energy (work is missing from many restoration proposals)

A visit to the shore in summer months gives one the impressive of habitat stability – when over time it is often referred to a high energy region.  In summer the rising air inland draws cooler air inland and the south westerly breeze becomes an almost daily event.  The storms come mostly from the west cool fronts with northwesterly winds.  These can break the hot stagnant conditions of late August.  By November shore conditions can be very different stronger winds now come from the east and colder water takes away the sand that warmer waters deposited.  In February the winds create sandstorms in bitter cold – any shellfish left exposed at low tide may freeze.  Oysters, however, have a slight edge in this habitat zone, if partially frozen and not disturbed will defrost with high tide.  The large change in temperature and the storm waves of Northeasters removes the "sands of summer" leaving rock and cobbles in many areas.

Strong storms of the 1950's and 1960's could cast up huge numbers of seed bay scallops to freeze.  The national literature pertaining to the scallop fisheries has numerous accounts of small scale fishers utilizing pitch forks and hand dredges to move them to deeper water before winter freezing.  Ice walls of the 1960's formed along the New England coastline.  To escape these conditions off bottom culture efforts were started by researchers in the middle of this cold and storm filled NAO – and met with little success (See Appendix #1: National Fishermen, June 1956, Vol. 37, Issue #5).
This project is detailed online titled Raft Culture of Oysters in Massachusetts by William N. Shaw 1962.  In the early 1970s New England's climate moderated and then warmed.  In a few years with warmer water oyster sets had returned to Clinton and also organic deposits.  The need of dredging would also increase as well.

Appendix #1
National Fishermen, June 1956, Vol. 37, Issue #5
To Grow Oysters on Racks

Platforms and rocks will be constructed or anchored in an Oyster River, West Chatham have experiments will be undertaken this spring and summer to study the effect of elevating on growth and survival of oysters.  A group of oystermen working with Dr. Paul Galfsoff, Fish and Wildlife Service will carry out the program.  J. C. Hammond of the Chatham Oyster Grower Associates representing the growers."


Appendix #2

STATE OF CONNECTICUT
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE – AQUACULTURE DVISION
ROGERS AVENUE                MILFORD, CONNECTICUT 06460
P.O. BOX 97                                   TELEPHONE 874-XXXX

February 25, 1974

Mr. Tim Visel
Florida Institute of Technology
School of Marine and Environmental Technology
Jensen Beach, Florida 33457

Dear Mr. Visel:

   Your interest in obtaining information concerning what tests what kinds of tests are made by town officials can best be answered by the town themselves.  I have enclosed a list of the coastal towns for your benefit.

   The determination of an unsatisfactory coliform level has been set at those tests that average above 70 total coliform per 100 ml of water.  This number was set in 1925 with cooperation of the Food and Drug Administration, the State Department of Health and the industry.  Recently, a meeting was held in New Orleans with Food and Drug Administration, Health Department officials and members of the Shellfish Institute of North America to try and compromise the concept of total coliform and substitute a new criteria using only the fecal coliform test instead.

   As to Mr. Schroeder's tests, I have not as yet received a report from him.

   I hope this information has helped you in your endeavor.  If further information is needed, please don't hesitate to call on us.

                     Sincerely,

                     John E. Baker
                     Director
JEB: pt
Enc.


Appendix #3

History Repeated by Bertram Smith
OYSTER FARMING
Connecticut Style
And The Fair Haven Sharpie
OYSTERING OLD STYLE
Hand Tonging

OYSTER FARMING       (Self published – See Clinton Public Library)

Acknowledgements

   If you happen to be trying to remember incidents and happenings of some 70 or 90 years ago, it is so nice to discover others who remember also.  I am grateful to the following folk for their interest and helpfulness.

   Some of these pictures were loaned and the incidents retold through the kindness of the following friends;

George McNeil             Mrs. Kenneth Mansfield
Roger P. Smith             Steven Smith
Joseph Dolan            Martha Foster Wooding

Actually, this is not to be a history of Oysters or the Oyster Businesses in Connecticut – or even its Eastern Shoreline.

Rather it will include some old facts and an exercise in memory, with thoughts of old Fair Haven, City Point, Stony Creek, Guilford and of course Clinton.  All these places are or were famous at one time or another as Oyster growing, farming, and harvesting areas.

But the researching almost became an obsession.  So frequently a casual remark or comment would open wide the doors of memory to incidents long forgotten, and this would lead to a sequence of findings which continually urged me on.

Then, of course, there was the famous, in the old days, Fair Haven Sharpie, and it's important part in the Oyster gathering during the early 1900's.

A growth of about four years is required to bring them to "select" or the most popular selling size.  So it is rather a long range type of farming.

One would think that the "selects" were tops for both size and flavor, but there was special demand for even a still larger size which were called "counts."  These oysters were picked out by hand from the average run of dredged selects.  These were for special trade, the Philadelphia Oyster Bars or Taverns, and of course commanded a considerably higher price.

Now there was another large area around New Haven where the Oyster was King – CITY POINT.  Although there were a goodly number of Companies involved in the cultivation and harvesting of Oysters, none of them was as large as the H. C. Rowe Company on the Quinnipiac River.  But probably the Jeremiah Smith Company could lay claim to being the largest of the City Point fleet.

Possibly as early as the late 1700's the only two families in the Oyster business at City Point, New Haven were R. W. Law and the Walsh Rolands.  Now one doesn't associate the world "emigration" with moving from a short distance like from Long Island, N.Y. to Connecticut.  But that is probably what happened, as it was said that R. W. Law "migrated" across the sound to the Milford area then later again to the City Point region of New Haven.  Also, the Walsh Roland family might have been their friends on Long Island.

Then later they were to be joined by the F.T. Lanes, Thomas Thomas, Jerimiah Smith, and the Wetmores.  These all started what developed into good size Oyster businesses.  This all happened in the mid 1800's and they were soon followed by the McNeil family.  They too had discovered that the City Point area seemed to be a prime place to establish an Oyster business, because in the deep waters off the City Point shoreline, there grew some of the best flavored Oysters to be found at that time.  So it seemed that in the next fifty years the waterside land on south Water Street of City Point was packed side by side with Oyster shops.

We have started that many of the earlier Oystering families came (migrated) from Long Island Sound but the "why" of the migration to that area is lost in dusty, forgotten records, or else the stories of the old – oldtimers are too vague to be considered accurate.  But one fact was discovered – after deciding that the City Point area had what they were looking for, a group of carpenters was recruited to come over from Long Island.  Many of the ornate houses of South Water Street and Howard Avenue were constructed by them for these same Oystering families.

Appendix #4

Ecological Considerations in Oyster Bottom Culture
WS Foster Marine State Library, Bar Harbor, Maine 6-1977

Coastal Resource Center Inc., Bar Harbor, Maine
Research Bulletin No. 37
Study Preformed for Coastal Resources Center
Bar Harbor, Maine
By Walter S. Foster

"High energy areas are generally avoided by oyster growers hard clam sand free of organic matter are signs of strong current flow.  Water moving over shell surfaces tends to bury them. 

Low energy areas subject to organic burial (often termed silt) kill oysters by suffocation.  High salinity allows salt water predators to predate planted crops and gave rise to the "drill line" an area at which drills and starfish cannot live and large rivers often contain historic "natural beds."

[Since oyster growing habitats change with energy, they have a habitat clock (John C. Hammond conversations – T. Visel, 1981-1983) and a time at which oyster culture declines and at times become impossible.  Oyster drills and eelgrass were two of the largest constraints on the Cape at the end of his oyster culture career – T. Visel]

Foster highlights these two concerns and even mentions John Hammond on page 7.

Problem flora – Pg. 6

"Eelgrass reduces circulation and water exchange, consequently slowing oyster growth.  Cape Cod and Maritime beds that have been overgrown with eel-grass have been those where tongs have been the methods of cultivation.  It may be that routine use of drags or dredges would prevent the establishment of eelgrass on active oyster beds."   

And on page 7 –

Problem fauna –

"Of the several snails on the Maine coast that can bare small holes through the shells of other mollusks and kill them, only the oyster drill, Urosalpinx C. appears to be a potentially serious predator."

"Drills may be trapped by placing nine-inch square tiles covered with barnacles in the culture area.  The barnacle-covered tiles may be lifted every day or two by means of an eye cemented in the center.  J. C. Hammond a Cape Cod oyster grower, has caught as many as 450 drills on one tile."


Appendix #5

Adult Education Workshop – A Gathering of Shellfish Commissions
April 28, 2007
Factors Associated with Determining a Commercial Oyster Set
Timothy C. Visel

What Is A Good Set?
According to George McNeil and Hillard Bloom, a good set was around 4,000 per bushel of oyster shells.  Under 2,000 per bushel was seen to be the lower limit of purchasing "seed" oysters. It was anticipated that, at best, only 500 oysters out of 2000 would survive to market size (about twenty dozen per bushel) 6 to 8 thousand set per bushel was excellent, and over that "outstanding".  That may seem like a lot, but a bushel of shells can contain up to six hundred shells – or over a thousand potential setting surfaces.  At 2,000 set per bushel, that would only be about 2 oysters per surface.
Determining the Set Count
Before seed oysters (newly set oysters on shells) were purchased, the set count needed to be calculated. Oysters were harvested from an area which was sampled. These samples combined to predict the average set per bushel.  Shells would be collected from 5 bushels and each sampled until 5 coffee cans of shells would be taken. 25 coffee cans of shells equal that of one bushel – and the shells are "counted out."  The other method is to take one coffee can from each bushel – count that out and multiply by 25.  At about 20 shells to the can at 2 set/shell or 40 set/can x 25 = 1000 set/bushel or low to "poor."  I have seen some shells with up to 50 set on each or 1000 set/can x 25 = 25,000 set/bushel which is outstanding (MacKenzie, Jr.). "Oyster Culture in Long Island Sound" records sets of up to 50,000 set/bushel (1970).
Price Paid By Volume

According to Richard Roberts, a natural growther for many years, it was too time consuming to count out each bushel of set, so the prices were paid on a per bushel or volume basis.  If the set count per bushel was 2,000 and the price negotiated, then it is possible that 200 shells with an average of 10 set, or 2,000 could be combined with 800 empty shells or "blanks" in a bushel measure.  Or it could be 1000 shells at 2/shell, the price would be the same, 2000 seed oysters in a bushel measure.  If the set count dropped, a price was renegotiated. If the count dropped below commercial levels, buying from natural growthers would stop.
Buy Boats

To accommodate natural growthers in the 1990's, "buy boats" would sometimes be anchored close to the natural bed and deliveries made directly on the water.  This assisted in the planting of oyster beds and subjected the seed oysters to a lesser degree of transportation damage.  A "tally" or mark was kept and accounts settled at the end of the day. When seed oysters were plentiful, natural growthers would bring several boat loads of sets. In the evening, the day's purchase would be taken to oyster grounds, washed overboard and thus "planted."
River Natural Beds


What was a good set on offshore natural beds and commercially planted (shelled ground) beds was very different from natural beds in creeks and rivers. Here, oyster populations were subjected to terrestrial events, heavy runoff, silt, leaves and marine algae. Setting surfaces were often restricted to new shell growth around the mantle – so they have additional constraints and usually a much lower set count – 250 to as much as 750 set/bushel (up to 50% of the set can be on living oysters).  Cycle Mackenzie, Jr. has done research on how to reuse buried shells and clean natural beds in preparation of spatfalls.  In 1968, he observed that "black shells" obtained from muddy bottoms could be planted immediately and, being free of fouling organisms, would catch about as many spat as clean dock–stored shells.  River natural oyster beds have shown increased setting rates after modest cultivation schedules, suggested by Mackenzie, were implemented. 

Sampling River Oyster Beds

Sampling creek and river natural beds was also more difficult. Although a smaller version of the oyster dredge was used, it often proved to be unreliable.  It was Richard Roberts who showed me how to sample natural beds in rivers.  This required, at times, a great deal of patience and hard work!  To properly sample the bed, it was necessary that all the leaves and sticks be raked off first.  The natural beds were often tightly packed, so the hand oyster dredge tended to bounce off the bed.  It sometimes would take an hour or more of 30 second to one minute tows with a hand-hauled oyster dredge to clean sticks and leaves from the oyster bed.  This was followed by another 30 minutes to an hour to break the edge of the bed loosening the oysters.  Care had to be taken not to "bill" the oysters, slicing off the tops by towing too fast. Once the oysters were loosened, you would start to "catch." Only then would a sample accurately portray what condition or how abundant the oysters were. The main difference is that set/bushel counts were much lower but survival generally higher since starfish and oyster drills are largely absent from these areas.  The chief cause of mortality in these natural oyster beds was from silt and organic debris burial.
For more information on the preparation and surveying oyster beds sets, please review – Commercial Fisheries Review (Jan. 1970, pages 27-40) OYSTER CULTURE IN LONG ISLAND SOUND, 1966-69 by L. Mackenzie Jr. Original publication – US Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service #859, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries Biological Laboratory, Milford, CT 06460.