Committee Rejects Lifting Shellfish Grant Prohibition

CHATHAM – There is one private aquaculture grant in town, and it’s likely to remain that way, at least for the time being.

After a lengthy discussion, members of the shellfish advisory committee last week agreed to table a proposal to repeal the section of the town’s shellfish regulations which prohibit private grants.

That doesn’t preclude someone coming up with a proposal and requesting that the select board waive the regulation, noted chair Robert Davis.

“They should do the heavy lifting up front and come up with a feasibility study and go to the town,” he said. “I see that as a big undertaking.”

Chatham hosts the largest wild commercial shellfishery in the state. Last year, 220 commercial permits were issued along with 2,176 resident recreational permits and 643 non-resident recreational permits. The number of commercial permits has declined slightly over the past several years but is still far and away the highest of any Cape town. The commercial harvest brought in more than $3.4 million last year, while the value of shellfish caught by recreational harvesters was estimated at nearly $300,000.

At last week’s meeting, a half dozen veteran shellfishermen spoke in favor of retaining the current prohibition at the committee’s April 24 meeting, arguing against privatizing any of the town’s shellfish grounds. Several others made the case for allowing grants, reasoning that allowing them could encourage younger people to enter the industry by giving them the ability to make a consistent living.

“You’re not going to make enough money participating in the wild fisheries to stay in this town as a young person or for someone’s children to stay in town, with the cost of living,” said Dominic Santoro. “But with an aquaculture lease, I know it’s possible.”

As the marine environment changes, it may become harder to maintain a wild shellfishery, said SAC member John Garey. Cultivating shellfishing through grants might be a way to preserve the industry, he said.

Chatham has the most productive shellfish grounds in the state, and they are constantly shifting, said longtime shellfisherman Mike Picard.

“Most of us older guys here have fished almost every inch of town,” he said. “I can go anywhere where those guys want to put a grant and I will catch a shellfish that’s suitable to sell and good for our town. You cannot have anybody take any bottom away from us, anywhere in this town.”

He noted that the town is spending millions on a new shellfish upwelling facility, the product of which will enhance the wild shellfishery.

The wild shellfishery has always served as an economic fallback for residents, and commercial shellfishermen often jump between scratching and crewing on fin fishing vessels, said Ted Ligenza.

“If you want to turn the town into aquaculture, you’re going to end that lifestyle in Chatham,” he said. “I’m dead against grants.”

Chatham’s only aquaculture grant is owned by the Chatham Shellfish Company, which raises oysters and other shellfish in the Oyster River. The current prohibition was adopted in the 1990s following a surge in requests for grants, said Shellfish Constable Renee Gagne. The argument against grants then was similar to the issues being raised now, basically the equitability of reserving publicly owned bottom to private individuals, putting those areas out of reach of commercial shellfish harvesters.

The only grants approved in the meantime were for the conversion of existing fish weir grants in Nantucket Sound, she said; those were considered experimental and were not renewed.

The prohibition covers all of the waters of the town. The select board can lift the prohibition and set specific conditions, Gagne said, which would have to adhere to state regulations, which are fairly restrictive.

“Lands that currently have shellfish on them would not be allowed to be permitted (for grants) under the state’s guidance,” she said.

Garey argued that it’s wrong to look at grants as taking away from the wild shellfishery. Grants could make nonproductive ground productive and have a beneficial impact on the wild shellfishery, he said. But Chatham’s shellfish resources shift constantly, and grant areas would be forever off limits to commercial shellfishermen, others said.

“We’ve had a long history of a wild shellfish industry,” said Andy Young, who has shellfished both commercially and recreationally. “It would be a shame to lock that up in a whole series of grants.”

“If you allow that to happen here, you’re making a huge mistake,” said Mike Anderson, who said he’s been a commercial fisherman for 50 years and always relied on shellfishing as a supplement. There’s no way to equitably distribute grants, he said; in Wellfleet, where aquaculture is common, there’s little space to shellfish for those who don’t own a grant.

“If you allow that to happen here, you’re making a huge mistake, because this has been a traditional wild shellfishery, the last one probably on the Cape, and you have to allow it to keep going.”

Garey made a motion to rescind the grant prohibition, but did not receive a second. Davis then tabled the discussion.