Now what? Bourne vs DNR

[Poppr]

In a move that is sure to shock some and make others think Christmas came a month late the Town of Bourne Selectmen voted 4-1 to GUT the Town’s DNR office.

In a move that surprised the dozens of residents at last night's selectmen meeting, the board voted to ax the director of the Department of Natural Resources and completely reorganize the town agency.

http://www.capecodonline.com/cctimes/bourneselectmen25.htm

I don’t have any answers and need significantly more details to determine whether this was a head hunting expedition or a decision based upon science – purported lack of success of upweller operations, economics – one destroyed and potentially under/uninsured marina facility, or some other viable reason besides the normal friction between humans in political office and public services. Probably a combination of a heavy dose of number three along with a smidgen of number two and one.

No PMs please. If it is not something you want to add into the public/open discussion save it for yourself.

I don’t have any answers at this point. I am shocked by the decision and need time to digest some of the facts in the article and available documents at Town Hall.

That and I need to squeeze in digging for littlenecks before Noon. :brow My own informal survey shows that my harvest is approx. 50/50 split on seeded or natural littlenecks.

[BobG]

Well, the upweller program has been a dismay failure. --124-3 Conservatively speaking, 12,000,000 quahog seed are MIA. :confused:
The marina we lost in Dec's storm appears to not have been insured.
Moral among employees is at an all time low.
We completly lost one herring run, and the other is now threatened.

Skip Barlow might have a good argument for change IMHO.

[Bigcat]

Barlow is always in the middle of something :confused:

[Poppr]

Barlow's motion included: having the town administrator assume responsibility for the shellfishing program, the three marinas in town and the administrative secretary; giving harbormaster, animal control and zoning responsibilities to the police department; eliminating the director position; and creating a shellfish committee to determine the best course of action and report back in six months.

Replacing the boss is change. Giving all responsibilities, enforcement, and reporting to other town entities is a bit more than a change.
I'm not even sure if it can legally be done that way...budgetarily speaking. For example, is the only way that "enforcement" action can take place under the new organizational chart be for a police officer(s) to be in a boat or dedicated to shoreline activity for an entire shift? At the exspense of other depatrment needs, etc... Just one example and I'm sure I could come up with 100s more if given time....but I think the department heads that were just given these duties by the Selectmen are asking themselves the same questions.

At least I hope they and the Town Administrator are. I'm not sure the Selectmen did. :confused:

It will take a bit for the dust to settle but I will be tuning in for the replay on local cable Thursday evening at 7. Missed the meeting last night in person and on TV due to illness.

As for justifying a dismissal I always live by "the buck stops here" mentality when I was in charge of a group/division/comittee/etc.. Others live by the "the buck does not even come into this room" mentality. Apparently there might be more than a few of those types in the Bourne Town Hall.

[Poppr]

Conservatively speaking, 12,000,000 quahog seed are MIA.

I need some help with this number. I went back to the town report for 2002, the year the upweller was started---per Acting Director at that time (M. Gratis)

Those numbers show "1.5 million 1.5 mm seed were purchased for growth and distribution in the fall" -- of 2002.

Now, 3 more seasons have passed -- did the upweller facility grow to have the capability to process and additional 10.5 million seeds for the 2003, 2004, and 2005 seasons? -- That is 3.5 million seeds per season versus the initial 1.5 if I want to reach approximatly 12 million.

I'll check the Town Hall for those reports tomorrow as the last hard copy I have here at the house is from 2002. But I will appreciate anyone with hard numbers per the reports. I already was down there once today and don't feel like a second trip.


BTW, I'm also doing a comparrison on the herring numbers as well. Glad the folks kept all those annual reports from the 90s. It is making the research a bit easier. :)

[BobG]

Gary,

You're aware there are three upwellers? One @ Mo Beach, one @ Brierwood, and one in the Pocasset River.

As for herring figures, here's some I have right on my desk:
year harvested actual return

'92- 50,295- 304,018
'93- 54,000- 252,366
'94- 73,080- 144,255
'95- 47,013- 433,113
'96- 60,156- 536,440
'97- 54,000- 398,929
'98- 61,000- 329,180
'99- 57,023- 213,270
'2000- 672,000
'01- 450,000
'02- 225,212
'03- 172,311
'04- 161,000
'05- 102,000

Sorry I don't have harvest figures for the period 2000-'05, but I took those figures off my chart, and I couldn't pull up the harvest figures for those years for some reason. However, I believe the harvest for last years ('05) was below 100 fish.

[Poppr]

Bob,

I thought there were 4.

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:H1znjmImwXkJ:www.capenews.net/story.php%3Fid%3D5867+bourne+upweller+program&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

According to this article in the Enterprise (August 2005-web cached link above) the goal of the program was to raise 1.5 million per year.

In the article both the former head G. Weinart and 2002 Acting head M. Gratis lists numbers of quohaogs/year that would put us at closer to 6 million not 12, but I will check the annual reports tomorrow to see what if any numbers were reported. Same for the herring. 2002 annual report lists 32,092 legally harvested herring.

I'm not sure if I'll find any definitive numbers on mortality of seed before release but I would assume losses of 20-30% of seed would not be excessive in initial stages of the operation and perhaps even higher mortality rates due to enviromental and operational issues. Not to mention the impact of crab populations, other predatory factors, and enviromental issues; just a general feeling from town administration that the system is broken.

Was the extension of the oyster harvest in town this year due to upweller activity or strictly due to mother nature?

"Waiting is the hard part," Mr. Weinert said. "It’s not a process for those who want instant gratification," he said

Now, I'm not claiming that they all survive or that the operation is a glowing success but since I now know what they look like I know I have been harvesting what I would consider "significant numbers" of upweller grown bivalves. I've also been throwing back and seeing in my muck good numbers of sub-legal home grown quohogs.

Just my observations and not meant to be a statement concerning the health of the fishery. I'm trying to get as many facts as I can before I tilt to the system broken or sunshine pumping sides of the fence.

Right now I'm firmly planted on the middle ground. :)

[clambelly]

its head hunting, pure and simple. ill say it cause its true. the current board of selectmen have been after the director's job since they started. notice that their wasn't the uproar about this before the last election.

im no big fan of the way the DNR handles the propagation program, as some of you have probably read in the past. however, i like all of the people who work there. they are good people. i respect the directors opinion, but disagree with him on most of the decisions he's made. saying all of this, the way the selectmen treat him is dispicable. the lack of PUBLIC respect they show to this man is appalling. they have no quams about insulting him on television.

now, im only 26 years old so i haven't been around all that long, but it seems to me that our town leaders act like toddlers. i personally have been in front of them speaking, only to see one member rolling his eyes at my comments. the fact that the local papers often write editorials questioning their behavior speaks volumes. these people are adults, yet they act like children. these people are SUPPOSED to be our leaders!

:mad:

[Poppr]

clambelly,

I agree with your assesment of town leadership.

I really loved it when one of them did not want to listen to a citizens thoughts on an issue last week at the sewer commission meeting. During the women's comments on an item before the commission the only retort one individual had was "you have not been in town long enough to know what you are talking about" and dismissed her VALID comments out of hand.

Rolling eyes and having side discussions during public comment period should not be tolerated by the chair and I'll be there Tuesday night to see it does not continue unchallenged.

[Poppr]

Bob,

I checked some additional town reports this morning and I'm still not able to track down 12 million seeds.

2002 showed program start and 1.5 million seeds.

2003 showed no numbers at all on the program but no mention of the number of upwellers. For the sake of argument I'll stick with 1.5 million for that year. It also went on to say the shellfishery was impacted by the #6 Oil spill that occured in late April. All shellfish numbers were down significantly that year in Bourne so I'm not sure of the impact it woud have had on the seeds... either in the upwellers or when distributed to local beds.

2004 showed 1.75 million total in 3 town upwellers and a 4th donated by the Upper Cape Tech. Oysters added to the mix as well.

2005 report is not yet available. I know the year closed out June 30th but 8 months to get the report to and back from the printer is unacceptable IMHO.

Given that lets stick with 2004 numbers since the number of upwellers did not increase. Another 1.75 million

That makes a grand total of 6.5 million so I'm still confused with the 12 million number.

In adition, the reports do not detail the towns program to include upweller type, food source, water quality, size and location where and when released, size at release, etc... I'd love to get that data but sticking my head into the DNR office is not what I would like to do right now. I'll save that question for the selectmen since they and the town administrator are in charge of the office right now....I think.

Any objective assesment of how the program is either working or broken is impossible IMO without that type of data. The attached files (pdf) give anyone interested a quick idea of what we are talking about and how others are having success and failure. From everything I've found on the 'net, size at release is extreamly important.

As for the herring; the catch in 2003 was 20,826 and 2004 was 15,504. Not good

[CMP]

Small town politics at its worst. Get used to it, unfortunately. People with an agenda using situations to their advantage. The Chatham Harbormaster is taking shots across his bow right now and IMO, it's just not fair. Blowhard selectmen and their cronies with axes to grind making political hay. Ahhh, the people's republic of massholachusetts, I miss it so!!!

CMP

[BobG]

Gary,

Numbers aside, doesn't the fact that under George Weinert's supervision, 6.5-12 million quahogs have been seeded, and virtually nobody can find them in substantial numbers concern you? :confused:
I know it bothers the hell out of me. :mad: Given the amount of digging I've done so far this winter, and the amount of littlenecks I've dug, I've only found one (1), as in O-N-E quahog that was a result of the upweller program.

Look at it this way. Let's forget the about the fact we differ on just how many quahogs were raised. Let's say there 150 mixed quahogs in a limit of quahogs. If 6.5 million quahogs were seeded, that's 43,000 limits! If 12 million were released, that's 80,000 limits! So either way, somewhere between 43,000, to as many as 80,000 limits are out there in Bourne waters that almost nobody can find in any meaningful numbers. I know someone will make the case that some mortality is inevitable, and they would be correct. But even if the mortality rate was as high as 50%, we are still talking about some staggering numbers of quahogs which should be out there, and ready for harvest.
IMHO,they were either stocked in water too deep to harvest, and are now lost. Or, they were overcrowded in their pens, did not grown much beyond 3-4mm, and died shorty after release.

Either way, thus far the program is a miserable failure IMHO. :rolleyes:

[clambelly]

Bob,
you would be correct in your assesment of the propagation program. im sad to hear you say that you have only found 1(one) cultured quahog. ive found more then that, but not as much as i would hope to.

as for the numbers and the mortality: the number of shellfish grown is somewhere between your number and poppr's, 6mil-12mil. that is a TON of shellfish.

here's the number one problem, their distribution process is totally wrong. Weinert will tell you that he is doing what every other town does, and for the most part, thats true. most towns grow their shellfish, drive around in the boat and scatter the shellfish by hand. he also says they wait until the crabs go dormant so their isn't much mortality due to predators. well, i say hogwash to all this. if you look more closely at some of the most successful towns, ie. barnstable, they grow their shellfish in upwellers and then for the first winter, they plant them under nets. they PLANT them, just as an aquaculturist would. 50/square foot. if you ask any aquaculturist, they'll tell you to expect almost 50% mortality this way. by doing this, your at least ensuring yourself that even if only 50% survive, these survivors are the heartiest of the bunch and upon replanting they will thrive b/c they will be to large for predators to get at.

now, imagine what the mortality is when they are just scattered, at a much smaller size then is required for ideal survival, 18mm-25mm. id say our current system puts it closer to 80-90% mortality.

its too depressing to say much more tonite.

[Poppr]

Clambelly,

I'm sure there is pelenty of blame to go around and I hope that this thread can become a place for me (and others?) to begin to get a handle on SOLVING the problem. The reason I posted the files was to turn the discussion towards the PROCESS of raising shellfish and to move it away from criticism of individual(s).

Some locations do not limit upweller growth to one season. Some go longer and let the clams "winter" in upwellers. Although in areas with cold weather this would be near impossible unless grown indoors.

Until I can see some of the Bourne DNR's numbers and project guidlines, funding, and proceedures from the Selectmen I would have to agree that there is a ton of shellfish not MIA but KIA.

My discussion of the numbers is driven to clearly define the scope of the issue. For the sake of argument if I say 6 mil and Bob goes with 12 we are already 50% apart from reaching any concensus. If we then factor in different rates for mortality, seed distribution, etc.. we continue to drift further and further apart if we don't start with a common set of numbers.

For example if 80% of 6 million died I wold expect to see only 1.2 million survivors over X number of acres of habitat in Bourne. Bob would see 2.4 M for a much higher density. If they survived the planting those would have been harvest size after 24-30 months from Fall 2002. Winter - summer of 2004. From the data I can find on the 'net it would take somewhere between 24-36 months for seed to reach a size that could be harvested.

Are they missing in deeper waters? What was the distribution rate and location? Was there a split between commercial and recretional areas -- both currently open and closed?

Depending on the numbers used and unknown survival rates for Bourne seed it could be that there are not yet sufficient numbers of market size bivalves and thus using rakes to harvest we are not yet "catching" many home grown bivalves.

That being said, if the information I have found is correct Bourne may have released the seed into the wild with relatively little chance of survival due to the size at release. Without that measurement at release it is difficult to use any science I can find on the net to make an assumption on mortality rate.

And for the sake of the discussion the Town of Bourne SELECTMEN run the shellfishing progam not the DNR or any one individual. Accountability for success or failure should rest directly with those in control of the program. In the Town of Bourne that chain starts with the Selectmen, runs to the Town Administrator, and then to the Dept Head. Same scenario if it was a sewer problem, landfill problem, etc.

Wheter or not and in what manner they choose to exercise that control and any assoiated accountability is the topic for another day. (#$119)

As a side note --- I watched the replay of the Selectmen's meeting from the 24th and IMO that is a group that needs to be disbanded. Personality makeup of the board and petty infighting have made public discussion of Town issues no more than a schoolyard brawl. I know which 5 people I will never vote for again no matter what the issue.

[BHenchy]

You can't do this to a public official speaking on a matter of public concern, which this issue plainly is:

http://www.capecodonline.com/cctimes/bourneofficial28.htm

Whatever your position on the Selectmen's proposed changes, this man has every right to inform the public with his opinion. The Board can only silence him with respect to internal personell issues, not political speech.

They're over the line.

[BobG]

http://bostondirtdogs.boston.com/Headline_Archives/schultz_180.jpg


Hey, I live in this town, and I'm not sayin' nuthin'! I don't want to People in Grey to show up an my front door at 2am to take me away! --125-3 --125-3

[ToddMan]

Amen Bob, you warned me a few months ago about the small town politics. Now I live next door to on of the selectmen.geeeeeeesh

[clambelly]

remember when shellfishing was all about...
well, shellfish... (#$119)

[Poppr]

Was that you out there yesterday in a Carolina Skiff type boat with a Merc (75+-)?

I saw somebody (commercial) go by the house and launch at Electric Ave and wondered if that was you (Grey F-150).

I may have also run into you at a Shellfish Working Group meeting back in September. I was the guy who scoffed at the idea from a selectmen to give folks a 4th day to fish if a holiday was on a Monday.

Looks like you had some success with the home grown bivalves. :-%

A great tide today and tomorrow for us non-commercial types. Good thing the week starts on a Sunday and ends Saturday. Makes a set of minus tides like this and warm weather a real plus. --127-3-

[Poppr]

If the time line in the front page CC Times article (previous pages link BHenchy post) is correct the radion interview was Tuesday. Not sure which show but I can imagine drive time a.m.

Selectmens meeting where gutting (o.k. realingment for the PC crowd) the DNR dept was Tuesday evening with a "new option I just threw together" from one of our town comrades.

Article today states suspension retroactive to Tuesday, day of the show and meeting.

Nuf said.

[BobG]

A great tide today and tomorrow for us non-commercial types quote

You can say that again Gary! :brow I went out and dug today before work when I saw the temps and the minus tide. Beautiful January day to be out! :brow
Had a limit in under 45 minutes, 206 count of all littlenecks. They are delicious in drawn garlic butter. ;)

[clambelly]

poppr,
ya got me.
i knew someone would probably get the drift by seeing that picture.
those "homegrown" quahogs, as you called them are the only ones ive caught. they came from a very small area, maybe a strip about 100ft. long in the buttermilk bay area. they were in shallow water, so im not sure if they were planted by hand, or scattered from the boat.

but since the upweller program started in 2001, this is the ONLY CASE in which ive found any sort of congregation of the "homegrown" stuff. ive on occassion found a few here and a few there, but thats about it.

on a different note...
i talked to an NRO today and he told me that the director gave that particular interview on wednesday morning, after the selectmen's meeting of tuesday nite.

[Poppr]

Clambelly,

Don't dash my hopes of a deeper conspiracy with facts the newspaper has wrong. --124-3 You know that they are always correct.




If I see you coming back in some time I'll stop and talk to you. Don't want to hold you up on the way out. I'm interested in talking to commercial fishermen to get their take on how the shellfishing can be improved and you seem to have some good ideas.

FROM MY PERSPECTIVE ONLY the recreational side could be better but I normally only take about an hour to limit out and that includes leaning on my rake for a few minutes during the digging. That being said I have an area where I'm getting good success and the lower the water the better. I'm not one of those folks standing in ankle deep water, afraid of the muck, etc.. who normally dig only Memorial Day - Labor Day.

Other areas in town where we used to dig are no longer productive; we think. Since we don't dig for the fun of it (this isn't golf) we have not been back to those spots for several years and some are inside Buttermilk Bay. Perhaps there has been a comeback for those spots -- I hope :confused:

BTW is there still a shellfish working group that meets at the sportsmens club near the landfill? I left my number last time when I signed in but no returncalls for additional meetings, etc. I am interested in attending more meetings and perhaps becoming involved with whatever group takes shape if the Town moves forward with reorganization following the meeting on the 21st.

[clambelly]

poppr,
for you or anyone else who is interested, the bourne shellfish working group still meets once a month at the monument beach sportsman club, usually the last monday of the month.

i can't understand the reason why you wouldn't have gotten a call back, but i can tell you that they forgot to call me this last time, a week ago monday. the chairman recently handed over the callback reigns to a wife of one of the members, so this might explain the mix-up. i talked to the chairman on thursday and he told me that they were going to move the february meeting up to coincide with the public hearing on the 21st. the working group meeting is tentativly scheduled for the monday before, the 13th of february. i won't be able to make that meeting b/c ill be in florida, but i will be back for the public meeting with the selectmen. that should be interesting.

if you want, PM me and i can give you the chairman's name and number so you can get into contact with him to make sure you get a call in the future.

[Fin Addiction]

"Numbers aside, doesn't the fact that under George Weinert's supervision, 6.5-12 million quahogs have been seeded, and virtually nobody can find them in substantial numbers concern you? http://www.reel-time.com/forum/images/smilies/confused.gif
I know it bothers the hell out of me. http://www.reel-time.com/forum/images/smilies/mad.gif Given the amount of digging I've done so far this winter, and the amount of littlenecks I've dug, I've only found one (1), as in O-N-E quahog that was a result of the upweller program."

Bob, Maybe they planted the seeds in their own UDL...--125-3

[BobG]

I'm still a big proponent of the old relay recovery shellfish program in our town. Yes, I'm sure the upwellers might be the way to go eventually, but not until we can get it right.
At any selectmen's meeting I attanded, Weinert always touted to economics of raising quahog seed in upwellers, then planting them in the wild. On paper, it sounds fantastic! Raise a quahog for literally a couple pennies, stock it in the wild to augment our belleaguered wild stocks, and leave it there until it reaches legal size, who could argue that if it worked?
But in actuality, it isn't working. Some may argue that the upweller seed isn't being seen because it's still too small to come up in a rake. That may be a valid argument if you're raking from a boat. But I always find seed when I rake along the shore. In the area I was in yesterday, I found loads of seed, all about the size of a nickle. The good part here was, it was all wild!
When the previous director (Clarence Merritt) was working with relay recoverery (stocking contaminated shell fish, and letting them cleanse) we were up to our armpits in shellfish in our familiy areas. Granted, the per unit cost was higher going in b/c you're buying a larger quahog which had to be extracted from the wild, bagged, then resold. Handling these quahogs was difficult b/c they are naturally heaviers than seed. But, the survival rate was astronomical! There were no "variables" like we presently are encountering with the upweller seed which ultimately throw off your entire equation.
It's easy for George Weinert to say it costs a couple pennies per to raise seed in his upwellers. But, what is the survival rate to maturity(legal size)?
If only a small fraction actually do survive, them this is a very expensive program.
I don't suggest we abandone upweller. Not at all. But I would go back to relay recovery, and cut back, and work on the upwellers, and closely monitor their success until we get it right.

[clambelly]

bob,
quality control is the key.
Weinert absolutely refused to insert any kind of quality control into the equation, that is, until severe pressure was put on him by parties from all sides. Only then did he plant some seed in small plots in a few different areas, and even this isn't really good enough.

the normal way the DNR and some other towns do this is they scatter the seed by hand from a boat as it drives around the shoreline. However, when Weinert did his quality control, it was completely different then the way they normally disperse. they planted them by hand in a small plot along the shoreline. the troubling thing about this is, in my eyes, the small plots WILL SHOW SUCCESS! how is this troubling? well, the fact that the plots will and HAVE shown success, and the lack of success in so many other areas where seed has been "scattered" from the boat shows that maybe, or most likely, our way of seeding is all wrong to begin with.

just my .02, but i think if they really wanted to have a successful program, it wouldn't be a problem, they would just need a dedicated professional who knows what they are doing, who is given the control over the entire operation, and with a few extra hands to do the dirty work.

[BobG]

clambelly,

You can correct me if I'm wrong. But, didn't the DNR (George Weinert) used the patrol boat to plant seed this fall as opposed to one of the work skiffs?

[Bob Parsons]

Seed in Barnstable Harbor is spead by boat not planted. But I do not know the size of the seed. I know the results are good since it supports a lot of people shelling fishing each week.

[clambelly]

clambelly,

You can correct me if I'm wrong. But, didn't the DNR (George Weinert) used the patrol boat to plant seed this fall as opposed to one of the work skiffs?

they've always used the patrol boat, as far as i know.

[BobG]

clambelly,

That's what I thought, but I wasn't certain since I didn't see it myself. But see, that's my whole point, Weinert even used the wrong boat.
Under Clarence M and his shellfish recovery program, the DNR would load up the work skiff with quahogs, the guys would don the hip boots and rain gear, and they would plant the seed. The work skiff was flat bottom, and it only drew a few inches of water. The seed was planted in areas that recreational diggers could harvest it once it matured.
Now, they use the town's patrol boat. How big is that, 23'? Are they planting this seed in 4,5 or 6' of water. This is why I strongly suspect most, if not all of this seed from the upwellers has been planted in water too deep to dig? :rolleyes:
You found a little patch of homegrown in Buttermilk Bay, and Poppr finds a few here and there where he digs. To date, in spite of all the littleneck I've dug thus far this winter, I've only found one.

[Poppr]

Despite all the posts with "GW did this wrong" "he did that wrong" "why not this way", etc.. I would like to know who is ultimately responsble for the program and why they did not force change if required, during the process. This is a program that began in 2002 (by Town report anyway) and to date I see no policy decisions by the selectmen or town manager to clearly define how it was to be implimented.

My take on organizational responsibility places the lack of supervision and direction in this or any other town program from one direction only....THE TOWN SELECTMEN and/or TOWN ADMINISTRATOR. Really, a clear case of following instead of doing what they are paid for -- LEADERSHIP and POLICY DECISIONS.

All the questions raised in this thread are valid. Questions regarding seed size, growing medium, quality control, dispersal of the seed in digging areas, etc are all valid points and should have been decided on by those responsible for the program...THE TOWN SELECTMENand/or TOWN ADMINISTRATOR; not left up to the discretion of a single individual.

While the day to day operation of a department (in this case DNR) is handled by the director, POLICY, PROCCEDURES, PRIORITIES and PLANNING should be managed by the SELECTMEN and/or TOWN ADMINISTRATOR with input from the Director.

Not micromanaged on a day to day basis but clear goals and roadmaps on how to get there are the ultimate responsibility of THE SELECTMEN and/or TOWN ADMINISTRATOR. When a department would then stray to far from the roadmap provide by the selectmen/town manager THEN and only then should other disciplinary or administrative action be taken.

For the sake of discussion let's say the program was a complete failure. How can it be fixed? What specific steps would you take to get it done right ---- with the assumption that it takes 20-30 months following release of seed to get a market size bivalve?

Think about equipment, associated manpower needs, growing time, food sources, water sampling, seed dispersal, etc. Don't worry about the cost involved. We will work on that after we determine what is required to do it right...then we'll start to make compromises and refinements based upon $$$.

Yeah, I'm asking you to do what I think is the responsibility of the selectmen's and town manager's job. Since they did not do it the first time (or listen to the comitte they formed) you and I can help them if we choose to continue upweller operations under the current division chief or the Police Chief if the town decides to go that way. (#$119)

For this exercise please use only the upweller method --forget about relays for a few minutes. We can revisit those after we fix this problem. :)

[Poppr]

IF they survived, can you imagine an additional 6 - 12 MILLION bivalves in water just to deep for the recreational fisherman to dig but completing the reproduction cycle annually?

That would be up there with one of the best things that could happen to help sustain recreational and commercial harvest in the Town of Bourne.

IMHO


EDIT -- for a thread on quohogs mainly between just a few members (BobG, Clambelly, and myself) over 870 views is pretty good! C'mon lurkers , register and be heard.

[BobG]

For this exercise please use only the upweller method --forget about relays for a few minutes. We can revisit those after we fix this problem.

Gary,

You threw a lot out there, but I think we need to still rethink abandoning relays. IMHO, the DNR should not have bet the farm soley on upwellers until they could assure positive results. I realize this is all hindsight right now, but we should have continued a certain portion of the shellfish relay program just in the event things don't work as planned with upwellers. That's why we're (and George W) is in the prediciment we're in. By doing that(shellfish relay), we'd still have ample stocks of quahogs to satisfy offseason recreational diggers, while we worked to get the bugs out of the upwellers.
Now we have nothing. We have no hard data as to the success/failure of the upwellers, and we also don't have a hell of a lot of quahogs left in town to boot. (#$119) Going back to "square one" would not even describe the present situation b/c to fix this, it might take 4-5 years! :rolleyes:

As far as who's ultimately responsible? Tough, complicated answer. When Clarence Merritt was running the show, things were pretty good. We had quahogs, animal complaints were answered, etc. But Clarence retired.
Ex town admin Bill G hired George Weinert, a man with no shellfish or marine background other that owning a sailboat. Communication problems began immeidately. Then George W put the DNR (and the town) into the marina business, and the wheels pretty much came off the wagon from that point on.
Town admin Bill G leaves Bourne to run another town, in comes present town Admin Tom Guerino who clearly inherits a mess of the highest order.

[Bigcat]

I might be wrong, but didn't the town hire some women expert to work with the upwellers a few years back?

[clambelly]

poppr,
i like your question, mainly b/c it puts people on the spot to come up with solutions, not just bellache about the problems the town is having. i understand that not everyone knows the in's and out's of growing quahogs, and i am no expert myself on the subject, but these are my ideas/suggestions:

1.)immediately re-start contaminated relays to keep a fresh supply of quahogs coming into town, and to compliment the upweller program while it gets the wheels rolling.

2.)hire a dedicated professional with a backround of success. i understand that the town these days isn't in the best of financial straights (a disscussion for another day), but if you want the job done right, you have to have the right man for the job. i suggest hiring someone from chatham or barnstable, two successful towns when it comes to the growing of quahogs.

3.)stage three upwellers in three different areas of town. one in the buttermilk bay area(taylors point marina), one in the monument beach area(phinney's harbor marina), and one in the cataumet area(kingman's or parker's boat yard).

4.)disperse donated county seed equally into the three different upwellers. on average, the county donates between 1 and 1.5 million seed at 1-3mm in size. by evenly distributing the seed through the 3 upwellers, each upweller would hold between 300,000 and 500,000 pieces each, ideal for the size upwellers we are currently using. this would allow proper room for the seed to grow to a survivable size upon planting(if applicable).

5.)at the end of the growing season, choose an area near each of the upweller locations to "winter" the seed. ideally, these areas should be somewhat subtidal. the process is as follows: plant the seed as an aquaculturist would, then lie nets atop of the dug in seed. in the spring, dig the clams as an aquaculturist would and then replant into designated areas.

6.)use rotational plantings. example: the phinney's harbor upweller. one season, plant seed into back river/eel pong. next season, plant seed into phinneys harbor. next season, plant seed into tobey island/little bay. etc.

7.)as another alternative, use of raised racks.the use of raised racks was successful in the town of bourne for one season, but it was discontinued for a reason that is unknown to me. i do know that the seed was placed in the racks and nets were placed over the top. bi-weekly the racks were checked for crabs and grime growth and at the end of the season the seed showed great growth and was dispersed evenly throughout town.


i understand that all of this costs money, but if you want a good program, you have to spend the money. all of what i have suggested is just that, a suggestion. its not the right way or the wrong way to do things. i am very concerned of what the future holds for shellfish in the town of bourne, and if things don't change soon, we may be in for a long recovery. understand this, any recovery is going to take at least 2-3 years before we will see any success, but with the right person and the right leadership from the top, anything is possible.

[clambelly]

i got these pictures off of the town website.
note:the first picture had this caption.

"We painted some of the seed bright orange, so it could easily be identified in the future. Don't worry, the paint doesn't hurt them.
10/28/03"
found any with this paint on them???

second picture
bob, here's the proof to say they use the patrol boat to disperse the seed.

third picture
here is the size of the seed when it is received. pretty small eh?

[Poppr]

Clambelly,

I did not expect one person to fix the problem but I totally agree with your options. Each could be tweaked in some way but as a whole I think it is a great place to begin the discussion and hopefully bring a positive solution for all concerned.

Starting a relay system would do two things:

1. Begin a stream of harvest ready stock the quickest AND
2. Show a willingness to listen to both sides of the upweller situation.

I agree for the need for a professional in the field of aquaculture to as a minimum give solicited advice and ensure quality controls are being met by local voulenteers and DNR staff. I'm not sure we would have to "hire" someone if we could find the right educational or institutional advisor.

The only area where I have some concern is the rotational plantings. I would like to see the seed distributed to those areas that have the highest usage rates by commercial and recreational diggers. I would think the DNR could make an educated guess by making observations during normal patrol activity.

Planting all the seed in only one or two locations per year would take years to cover all the towns areas. Showing some "bang for the buck" to more license holders might give the project some additional growing time if more folks see a benifit.

[BobG]

clambelly,

Photo number 2 is the most telling one. Given that they used the patrol boat to plant the seed instantly tells me that any of the areas I normally dig will not have any upweller quahogs. At low tide, I'm in water up to my ankles. Even at high tide, the 23' patrol boat, with a large outboard, a couple adults, a tank of fuel and a load of seed would draw far too much water to plant seed close to shore. :confused: As I mentioned earlier, for years quahogs were planted from the flat bottom work skiff which drew far less water, and would allow DNR officers to plant quahogs effectively in verey shallow areas.

I heard they colored some seed orange. But I didn't realize it was as many as shown in your photos! :eek: Needless to say, I haven't seen any of those in spite of all the diffing I've done the past four winters. I think I might have noticed an orange quahog. :brow

[BobG]

I did not expect one person to fix the problem but I totally agree with your options. Each could be tweaked in some way but as a whole I think it is a great place to begin the discussion and hopefully bring a positive solution for all concerned.

Gary,

Why can't one person solve this problem?
We're talking about clams here, not stem cell research. IMHO growing quahogs is one step above growing rocks. You place them in screened cages, don't overcrowd them, supply them with an ample source of clean flowing water and they grow. Right? You don't even have to feed them.
It simply can't be that hard IMHO. ;)

[Roop]

I know that the planted beds off Tahanto in Pocasset were swept away in one of the last big storms... were those part of the program?

If so, while they are no longer in the tidal area, arean't they going to survive?

[Poppr]

We're talking about clams here, not stem cell research. IMHO growing quahogs is one step above growing rocks. You place them in screened cages, don't overcrowd them, supply them with an ample source of clean flowing water and they grow. Right? You don't even have to feed them.


Bob,

I saw the wink at the end of your post so I'm hoping that quote was all tounge in cheek and maybe was even a quote from someone in the DNR office or Board of Selectmen who would like to see the program fail.

But if it wasn't ---

I don't think stem cell research would be the right analogy since we are talking about a process that has already been completed successfully elsewhere.

Our situation is more a case of outpatient surgery. Yeah it is not that big of a deal but we still need a professional to do it, with the proper proceedures followed, good equipment and facilities for the job, and follow up visits to make sure the proceedure went according to plan. This includes clear documentation about the process so if any problems occur we can all point fingers at the culprit and say I told you so.

If one person can solve the problem we would not be discussing it. What I agree with are clambelly's individual points in his post. He calls for the problem to be addressed by a professional aquaculturist with proper funding and equipment. If proper industry guidlines are followed and no enviromental or disease factors crop up we should see approximately 500K bivalves planted and ready for harvest in a recreational or commercial area 24-30 months after beginning the program. Meanwhile a relay system would have already delivered thousands of cleaned fish to the areas as well.

This shining example of community activity will bring an end to years of ill will, break down barriers to communication and allow us to move on and privitize our landfill, build new schools for all our children, provide excess sewage capacity, and begin the process of finding affordable housing for anyone who seeks it. All at no cost to the taxpayers of the Commonwealth or the town proper.--125-3

If you were serious about the comments in you're previous post, please go back and read those articles I posted. Growing these suckers is not as easy as growing rocks. ;)

[clambelly]

poppr,
you are correct in saying that its not as easy as maybe bob thinks it is. he may be joking with his comment, but it really isn't that easy. the process is fairly straightforward, but to get 500K-1Mil quahogs to grow, is not a simple task.

by aquaculture standards, quahogs, along with mussells, are about the easiest thing there is to grow. the difficulty grows exponentially from there with oysters, which are very hard to grow and keep alive. diseases can spread like wild fire when so many oysters are in such close proximity.

soft-shelled clams are probably the hardest, from what ive heard, when it comes to shellfish. many have tried and failed, but a few people have succeeded, although not as many as you would hope. that was what, i think, roop was talking about. the dnr put spat nets on tahanto to catch any spat that the existing clams there emitted during spawning.

[BobG]

but it really isn't that easy. the process is fairly straightforward, but to get 500K-1Mil quahogs to grow, is not a simple task.

OK, if this is in fact the case, then George Weinert deserved a failing grade for plunging Bourne's entire quahog program headlong into something he was totally unfamiliar with. Not the DNR, just the director. Right?
Shellfish stocks, along with license sales and revenue have declined precipitously since he assumed command. Right?
Clambelly, you're clearly far more versed on shellfish propogation than I am. I'm not being facitious, you just seem to know of what you speak.
However, other towns on Cape Cod are growing upweller quahogs with resounding success. But here in Bourne we continue to waste $$$ on something which to date has not produced an iota of promise.

[clambelly]

bob,
i understand your frustration. i won't disagree with you that one man has to be held accountable for the failures of the propagation program. the nro's can only do what they are told, and unfortunatly, their leader was not qualified enough to give them proper guidance.

i don't have an answer for why recreational license numbers have fallen. it may corolate with the fact that we don't have tons of shellfish, but it may be other things too. as for the commercial numbers, they have been steadily declining for awhile now. i can only say that its not economicly viable for a lot of guys(pc answer).

other towns are having success, mainly b/c they have been at it for much, much longer then the town of bourne has. unfortunatly, bourne got such a late start nipping a problem that was clear as day, in the bud. its pretty easy to see when the shellfishing is good, and when its not so good. some towns got started early, and never really suffered a downturn. here in bourne, however, we waited until the bottom was about ready to drop out before any thought about propagation or upwellers. at the same time, the relay program was halted b/c a few folks didn't like it. so instead of having a new crop of shellfish coming into town while a propagation program was getting going, we had/have nothing.

i don't know all the details, facts or figures, but here's my guess as to why the upwellers haven't been producing as many of us would have liked. as has been documented, the town recieves about 1-1.5mil seed/year from the county. for maximum efficiency, the upwellers we have should hold between 300,000 - 600,000 quahogs. the current director was almost doubling the amount of shellfish in each upweller for the first 2 years, until we got the third upweller. the previous director, the acting director put almost 1mil. IN ONE UPWELLER!! the quahogs cannot get maximum growth when there are so many on top of each other. they need the room so they can all get enough food. then the bigger ones are culled out of the smaller ones so they have a better chance to eat and grow.

i hope this helps some.

[BobG]

Thank you for sharing that Clambelly! :brow For the record, I never critisized any of the NRO's, only the director. But I'm sure you realized that.

So, based on the info you just gave, was my figure of 12,000,000 quahog seed which went MIA since the inception of the program close to accurate?

[BobG]

Clambelly,

Do you know how they made that seed turn orange in your photo?

[clambelly]

Clambelly,

Do you know how they made that seed turn orange in your photo?

spray paint, i assume.

[BobG]

:confused: :confused: Spray paint? :rolleyes: Is that an approved method of marking shellfish?
You mean they went to all the trouble of raising those quahogs in upwellers, only to paint them with spray paint when they're in their most vulnerable state?
Did it ever occur to George that spray paint contains toluene. Not only is it an extremely dangerous compound, which can adversely effect every organ in the body, if inhaled it can make a rhinoserous high! (#$119)
I'll bet the reason nobody found any of those quahogs was b/c they died after they absorbed the paint. :rolleyes:

[clambelly]

bob,
don't quote me on that, but that is the only logical answer i can come up with. i know a number of year ago, maybe 20?, the dnr was growing quahogs in raised racks in some places and they did the same thing with the paint. another fisherman told me they had to discontinue it b/c people were catching them, bringing them home and when steaming them, the paint was melting off into the water. this is just what i heard, not sure if its exactly true.

[clambelly]

i found this link while doing a little research.
if you live along the shoreline, give it a shot, plant your own quahog garden!
http://www.mbl.edu/goetz/quahog/airlifter.pdf

[Flotsam]

More in this thread than I could sift through, but reminded me of a chapter or two in "Rowing Forward, Looking Backward," by Sandy Macfarlane, former shellfish agent of Wellfleet.

There's a few chapters in the book that talk about different propagation methods, and it seems like upwelling worked best for her. Book came out about three years ago, so apologies if you've already read it. Book digresses into a number of other issues, as well, but the propagation chapters might be relevant to this discussion.

[Onshore]

Dennis is using up-wellers to raise their seed. When I asked one of our DNR guys if they ever spray painted them; he laughed for a couple minutes then said no. They saw no need to do that; that it was just an ego trip for those that do it.

[clambelly]

:rolleyes: thats comforting.
thanks for the info bill.

[BobG]

I guess we're lucky George Weinert isn't involved is tagging bass. :rolleyes: Who needs spagetti tags, just break out a can of spray paint. :rolleyes:

[BobG]

Bill,

Do you have any idea just what percentage of the quahogs you dig are from upwellers, and how many could be from wild stock? It sounds like your town has a good program in place. :brow

Given Bourne's success, I think if this were made into a movie, it could be called The Silence of the Clams. (#$119)

[Bob Parsons]

Just to throw an evil thought into the mix.

Commercial clammers can fish deeper water than recreational clammers if they are using a skiff and a long handled bull rake. What if most of these clams are taking that route to the market? purposely?

[BobG]

Bob,

I have a feeling Clambelly can shed far more light on this. :brow Given that he's digging commercially, he's far more qualified to comment IMHO.
Bourne used to have a small fleet of commercial quahoggers back in the day, and the shellfishing was mighty good! :brow Your's truely was a comm guy when we first moved to the Cape in the 70's, when my hair was blond, and my back was strong --124-3 , and I needed to make extra $$$.

But I think there are only a small handful of comm guys left in Bourne, of which Clambelly is one. I don't think the comm diggers can be blamed in this case.

[Onshore]

Bill,

Bob,
Do you have any idea just what percentage of the quahogs you dig are from upwellers, and how many could be from wild stock? It sounds like your town has a good program in place. :brow


I'll find out tomorrow. Actually, we have three sources; wild stock, stock from up-wellers and one cove where they set out young stock from contaminated areas, leave area closed for three years and then open it. Actually, there are four areas in that cove stocked this way and they are opened and restocked on a rotated basis. That way, the planted clams have three years to grow and clense themselves.

I still want to talk to you. Let me know when yoiu will be around the shop

fishinthecape@aol.com

[clambelly]

it has long been fashionable to blame commercial fisherman for the ills of all things ocean, and in some cases it is warrented. this, however, is not one of them.

as bob stated, there are very few people commercially digging shellfish in the town of bourne. there are currently only TWO(2) full-time commercial quahoggers, with a handful of parttime guys, maybe 5 total. the fact that we the commercial guys can't find the seed is even more disheartening. we can cover much more ground then the average recreational fisherman, and i can attest to only finding one small spot where i discovered only a small amount of locally grown shellfish.

if anything, the DNR has gone out of their way to seed the main recreational areas, from what i hear. areas like tahanto flats, taylors point flats, phinny's harbor/tobey island flats have been heavily seeded. this information comes from the NRO officers themselves, and also witnessing it personally.

************************************************** ********

ive been doing some research over the past few days and i must say i may see an alternative to blaming the director for all the fails in the program. i recently read in a white paper about aquaculture that a grower can expect from 80-90% mortality while wintering over the smaller seed. now these numbers are crazy! i know we can say that the director should have maybe grown less seed to allow that seed to grow to a larger size, which in turn would have given the seed a better chance of survival.

couple this information with the fact that the past three winters have been historicly bad winters. that can only stack the deck even more against the fragile critters. with the warmer then normal temps that we have experienced this year, you might see a jump in the numbers over the next few years.

i guess, just keep your fingers crossed.

[Bob Parsons]

CB thanks for the input. It was only a random thought. I see the diggers in Waquoit bay up to their necks digging and it's a hard way to earn $$. Most commercial clamming in Barnstable harbor is aquaculture although we have had some excellent sets of soft shell clams which a few of them will dig when not working their plots. We also have a huge bed of blue mussels. I see one guy occasional collect those. He tows a second boat over to increase the amount he collect.

[Poppr]

CB

Thanks for taking time to find literature on mortality numbers. It echos data that I've found on the net. The bigger the better at release for any chance at survival from all the data I can find.

I've been absent from the post due to mainly negative comments directed at an individual. I'm not here to place the blame...that time is past.

I'm glad that you also appear to be looking for a solution instead of a scapegoat. That is the path I'm on and I look forward to seeing eveyone concerned at the Town meeting on the 21st; or whatever day they decide to move it to.

Now...on to a few :-% and some football!

[clambelly]

poppr,

glad to see your back in the mix. i understand your frustration and i feel the same way. the name calling and blame game won't fix any problems. people (the town leaders) need to start coming up with real solutions to our problems or things will stay status quo.

--124-3

[BobG]

I've got to give you two guys an "A" for patience, tolerance, or simply turning the other cheek. :brow
Either that, or we simply run in different financial circles. Just for the sake of discussion, let's ignore the fact that millions of quahog seed have either died or somehow vanished. But let's address the fact that vast amounts of town money was also lost/wasted/squandered, or what ever else you care to call it. (#$119)
This program was NOT cheap! The town had to buy the seed, build the upwellers, pay for the electricity to run them, and pay the man hours involved in running it.
So, when someone says "you can expect 80-90% mortality", that also says you're throwing away 80-90% of your money! Sadly in this case, it's probably closer to 100%. :rolleyes: Fiscally speaking, the town has money troubles right now, and I live in this town to, and am entitled to my opinion. These are $$$'s we can't afford to waste.
I feel this program needs to be put on hold, and the guy who was in charge (who I'll leave nameless so as not to offend) needs to tell us residents how he intends to turn things around, and why he should keep his job.
As Ricky Ricardo used to say "Lucy, you got a lot of splaining to do..." :rolleyes:

[clambelly]

bob,
im just as frustrated as anyone as all of my previous posts have stated. as you know im a commercial fisherman and my finacial well-being depends on a thriving shellfish population. im also frustrated with the director for his overall management of the entire department. i think he is a nice enough guy, but i just don't agree with any of his policies. saying that...

just to clear one thing up ... FYI - the town doesn't pay a dime for the seed. it is all donated from the county by way of a grant. i guess you could say it comes from taxpayer money somewhere down the line, but the town of bourne does not directly pay for any of the seed.

all aquaculture operations deal with the same conditions when it comes to mortality. the guys who lease their own private grants know this, but they find a way to make it financially viable. the natural cycle of the ocean deems it necessary that so many die ... only the strong survive. there are, however, certain things we could do better as we all have pointed out, ad neasaum.

i hope there is some kind of plan presented at the public hearing. thats all i want to see. i don't want any more blame game, i don't want any more handringing. all i want to see is a plan of action. something that the selectmen will say, this is the way we are going to run things.

[BobG]

CB,

Interesting, I didn't realize the seed was free. Or sort of, via grant money. :brow That makes things a little better. ;)

[Onshore]

I'm being pressed to put my name in to our Shellfish Commission. Anyone ever don that and have any feedback? Wonder if it's just an effort in frustration.

[Poppr]

I don't speak from any personal expirience...only from observation.

If you want to know what it feels like to be on a "town commission or working group" here is an exercise to see if you can handle it.

Step(s)

1. Run at wall.....full speed.
2. Hit wall head first. Don't worry, it is only painful the first couple of times.
3. Continue steps 1 and 2 until unconcious or until you reach a conclusion town leadership endorsed prior to forming commission or working group.

Hope that helps. :)

[clambelly]

bill,
don't mind poppr.
i think he may be reffering to the way our shellfish advisory committee (along with others) was treated here in bourne. the current administration of selectmen and town administrator haven't been particulary open to any kinds of suggestions, which has made being a volunteer very tough. it also has made FINDING volunteers very tough.

i say go for it. especially if you are passionate about shellfish(ing). if you have a Natural Resources Department that is open-minded, you should find working with them to be easy. another reason is, its always good to have more eyes and ears and minds working on any particular problem/issue.

besides...you'll get to find out all the hot spots! --127-3-

[Poppr]

Sorry if I sounded to negitive in my description of public input oppertunities.

CB is correct. My most recent expirience is here in Bourne but I have dealt with municipal govenrment in several stateside as well as overseas locations. Both on formal and informal working groups, Tiger Teams to fix problems, and as an auditor for operational proceedures.

In some circustances it is very rearding to see input that you brought to the table recognized, debated, improved upon (if possible :brow ) and enacted.

But if all else fails try my checklist...it has worked for me. --125-3

I'm still a voulenteer and do give my input when invited and also when not invited. I can stir the pot with the best of them.

BTW -- Charter review comitte meeting here in Bourne Wednesday - 7 p.m. in the HS Library

http://www.capecodonline.com/cctimes/update/index.htm

Should be interesting if we can get some of the changes before voters this year. --123-3

[clambelly]

any of the locals gonna be at the fireworks display tonite?

unfortunatly, i can't make it.

updates would be greatly appreciated! :)

[Bigcat]

I would love to go but I am working tonight :brow

[BobG]

I'll be there, wouldn't miss this one for the world! :brow
Hope they had the presense of mind to hire a police detail, there might even by a lynchin' afterwards! --125-3

[clambelly]

bob,
any reports??
:-%

[BobG]

Yup,

I was there, but had to leave by 10pm. The most interesting selectmen's I've ever attended would be an understatement. :rolleyes: The meeting started out with Tom "Tommy" Barlow, and Selectmen Lafarge instantly, publically going for each other's throats. --125-3

Reader Digest version, the overwhelming majority of those who chose to speak was "We're here to give you, the selectmen a slap on the wrist (more like a kick in the A$$). Essentially saying, "with one exception, you're all on an ego trip" "get over yourselves, and do what we the people elected you to do!"
I did not take this as a vote of confidence for the embattled director, George Weinert. But rather a directive to the selectmen to drop this vendetta, and leave the DNR intact.
Most there felt betrayed by the recent actions of the selectmen, and felt their actions are turning Bourne into a laughing stock.

[Poppr]

Instead of waiting for the CC Times to post an article, hopefully in Wednesday's paper, I'll fill you in on the outcome of tonight's meeting: if you are still up to read it.

Indicision in the face of public outcry would be an appropriate byline.

I would estimate that a minimum of 100-150 folks showed up (versus the normal 15) and only ONE individual supported the reorganization as suggested and voted on by Selectmen January 24th.

After listening to the requisite back bitting between Seleman T. Barlow and R. LeFarge I would estimate 20 to 30 folks took to the podioum to speak; including representatives speaking for the Shore and Harbor comittee and Shellfish Working group, both of which had unanimous votes AGAINST reorganization.

Everyone else who took the podium expressed different ranges of disatisfaction with the PROCESS being used to make changes to the Natural Resources Department. Numerous speakers challenged the validity of the outside study comissioned by the Selectmen as well as the numbers proposed by the town administrator of any cost savings to be made by any type of reorganization.

After approximately 2 hours of public comment, and with no selectman willing to forward a motion to dismiss the entire idea, Selectman Zuern made a motion to recess the meeting and open the item for discussion again at next weeks selectmen's meeting.

This was done for procedural reasons as town charter would force enactment of the earlier vote for reorganization no earlier than 90 days from the close of public comment.

Plenty of unhappy voices with that decision and several older women who passed me on the way out vowed to continue to circulate recall petions and to see that process through.

The recess is stricly a delaying tactic and if you are either for or against the idea you should make every attempt to attend next weeks meeting to make you're voice heard.

[clambelly]

poppr,
thanks for the update.
i wish i could make these meetings, but im taking an emt training class on tuesday and thursday evenings and can't afford to miss any sessions. i may, however, send some sort of correspondence to hopefully be read by someone down there.

we've gone over this subject so many times, its ludicrous to continue. but i think bob is right. their is a sense of discomfort with the whole regime currently running the dnr. but this isn't the issue. the issue is the selectmen's arroganant way of doing business.

[Poppr]

http://www.capecodonline.com/cctimes/bourneresidents22.htm

For folks without access to a hard copy of the CC Times there is the link to the article describing last nights meeting.

[Poppr]

Looks like some concerned citizens are moving forward with recall actions following the inability of the selectmen to immediately withdraw their DNR action.

http://www.capecodonline.com/cctimes/backersto23.htm

I'll be looking for the recall petition at the local post office, Shaws, Cumby's, etc. 2,600 signatures are required to call an election and that might be a tough bar to get over at this time of the year.

[clambelly]

around town is that they are almost there. the petition has been circulating for about 2 weeks now. it all came about the same night the selectmen made the DNR decision. they also basicly silenced a member of the public from giving public comment on a non-agenda item. the chairman heard about what he was going to speak on and had a police officer present to have him removed if he attempted to speak. the DNR issue only made things worse.

put two and two together and you've got yourself a recall!

im in! --126-3-

[BobG]

The next few weeks ought to be mighty interesting if you're a Bourne resident (and even if you're not). (#$119)

[Poppr]

For those still interested don't forget that tomorrow night is part II of the discussion on DNR reorganization starting at 7 p.m.

Other agenda items hold interest of the folks who use the town's waterways:

7. Shore & Harbor Committee - Mooring Moratorium

8. DNR Reorganization Public Hearing/Discussion

9. Water-Skiing on Little Bay; Waterways Rules & Regulations

and

11. Pocasset River Marina - Harbor Cruise Business

See you at the meeting and I'll post comments afterwards in case the CC Times drops the ball.

[clambelly]

thanks poppr
wish i could make it.
ill be looking forward to your post.

those other topics should have some contentious moments as well. a mooring moratorium is long overdue, in my opinion. but then again, my opinion is somewhat skewed towards the shellfish side of things. in most all cases where its moorings vs. shellfish, the mooring just about always win. they bring in much more money and thats what towns want. i know our humble director was in the process of wanting to expand the mooring program which would have included placing moorings in the last area where scallops actually grow from time to time. it just illustrated one more time that he was in the business of making the town money, not looking out for the best interest of the shellfish.

ok, enough of the rant.

thanks poppr.

[ToddMan]

How many of use are Bourne residents, and who plans to attend tonights hearing?

Todd
Mo Beach

[BobG]

I'll be there. But I wouldn't expect a lot of fireworks tonight. IMHO the selectmen are still removing egg from their respective faces. (#$119)

[Poppr]

OK,

Just got back from the meeting....I stay for the whole thing. Glutton for punishment I guess.

Anyway, the DNR issue is just about dead. I say just about because proceedural rules call for another public posting of the issue prior to it being removed from the books once and for all. That proceedural vote is to take place at the next selectmen's meeting currently scheduled for March 14th. This evening a vote was taken to rescind the January 24th vote calling for a reorganization but final closure will be made in two weeks time.

In the interim, the town administrator has been directed to reinstate the DNR directors salary into the town budget for next year and update all documents accordingly.

On the other agenda items:

Mooring moratorium lifted -- 116 additional moorings suggested. Recomended to reduce overall moorings through attrition and removal of illegal moorings. Waterfront property owners may now move forward with requests for moorings in areas outside current mooring areas without having to be on wait lists. 116 new moorings would be enough capicity to reduce wait lists by 50% IF the users wanted moorings no matter which area they are in.

Little Bay water skiing -- removed from agenda and will be discussed at a future date.

Pocasset River Marina -- Harbor cruise business Aplicant not present and unable to be reached for notice to appear -- delayed for notice and discussion.

I'm sure the underlying issues are still bubling with why the DNR should stay or go but for now there is no political will to tackle the issue. Much talk from the public about setting goals and priorities for the division but nothing forthcoming (IMHO) from the selectmen or administrator as to what those should be.

See you at the next meeting.

Now it's :-%

[clambelly]

thanks poppr.
great info.

glad to see the selectman finally made a rational decision. i can't say i agree with the mooring issue, but i guess if you live on the water you should have a place to keep you boat. they pay enough in taxes just to justify one little morring. and to be honest, id rather see a mooring then a huge dock. at least i can work around a mooring.

[BobG]

So, does this also mean that we'll continue to throw away a small fortune on a shellfish propagation program that's producing nothing but excuses thus far? :confused: :rolleyes:

[Poppr]

Bob,

My short answer is "yes, but.."

The reason for the but is because I hope that there will be continued pressure on the Selectmen to establish procedures and goals for the DNR (or and ALL OTHER town departments as well) to follow. Maybe propogation will be abandoned or perhaps strict guidlines and professional growing advice will be directed.

Now remember, this was not a vote to maintain the status quo. Every side of the argument agreed that changes might be required. I don't think there was a single person in attendance or that I have spoken with who said --"Everything is perfect/don't change a thing" It was the METHOD used to enact those changes that was not agreed upon.

In my view, Leadership (selectmen/administrator/director) needs to establish priorities for what policies/programs they want to fund and/or mandate as baseline services with the ability for the customer (us) to validate the progress or lack there of, for services we pay for.

How do they determine what issues are important? Listen to the committees they already have in action. Shore and Harbor, Shellfish working group, etc. Surveys to the citizens for additional input could be used as well.

Most of the folks who posted comments here are recrational fishermen and boaters with a couple of commercial folks mixed in. So our issues were mostly along those lines.

Seasonal guests might have more of an open access issue for the shoreline or day launch facilities other than the BBay Marina. Still others are interested in protecting the resources or enforcement of existing regulations. There are 100s of valid tasks the department might handle in the course of the year but maybe the customer should have more of a say in the product they are paying for.

Marina operations, mooring issues, waterway safety, animal control, shellfish propogation, etc, etc, etc, ..... need to be racked and stacked by priority and then scarce resources allocated to meet the needs for those programs.

If at the end of the day you have a list 40 items long and only enough funding to cover 20 leadership must then step in and decide which 20 are of the highest current priority or find a means to fund the remainder.

Now since the next budget is already finalized the earliest a relay program could be funded is FY 2008. Anything earlier is going to be a budgetary issue for the purchase of contaminated shellfish, movement/dispersal, etc. Can it be done --Heck yes! But only if the demand is there and priorities allow.

I've been around long enough to remeber twice daily mail delivery and twice weekly trash pick-up so I don't enter the challenge going forward totally ignorant to the way things used to be here in Bourne.

I encourage all those interested in charting the way ahead to stay involved with the issue in whatever way they can. Attending meetings of the various committies, talk to your neighbors, and give feedback to our elected officials....at the ballot box, mailbox, or whenever you see them around town.

[clambelly]

poppr,
great post.
do you have confirmation that the relays won't be done until 08? i had heard that the DNR has already completed the paperwork to get a relay done for this upcoming spring. the selectmen had ordered it for this past year, but the director dropped the ball on that task. i can't say my info is absolute, but i did get it from a reliable source from someone who works part time for the department.

[Poppr]

CB,

I'm not 100% on that at all.

I don't know if that was an item that any money was budgeted for but I'll look into it. During the budget discussions I saw on the cable access channel I never heard anybody comment on relay money specifically.

I was using the 2008 budget info with the assumption that no changes would be made as long as the current director did not recieve direction to start one. During the public discussion of this issue I have heard folks wanting to start one but never did I hear from the DNR or elected officials that it was in motion. And I was at more than one meeting where GW was asked and never did he state he was going in that direction.

Hopefully this is not a case of a individual doing paperwork without direction of the department head or a further drop in services by taking on more tasks than they have manpower for.

If relays are being started I would say that is another area where the folks in place at various levels of supervision could have headed off alot of criticism.

If they clearly and publicly stated that relays would begin anew some of the criticism of the department head would have been immediately eliminated. Information should not reach the public by having to find "a guy who works there part time".

I'm not saying you or anyone else is right or wrong on the director "dropping the ball" on any issue. You're example does give us all a perfect example though of the problem with not having clear and measurable goals for a department.

GW keeps trying to raise about 1.5M seeds a year. Why? Is that his lucky number or the number of times he gets blasted at public meeting? Is that the limit of seed the county gets him?

As a hypothetical, perhaps a more defined level of service from the department head or board of selectmen would be "increase quohog stock by 500K per year in recreational areas and 500K per year in commercial fishing areas." Then it would be measureable, defined which category had priority (this case 50/50 split). It could be further defined for a mix of upweller/relay use to reach the goal or left to the department director which method or mix would help to achieve this goal in the short term (relays) or long term (upweller operations) based upon $$$ in the budget. The options are limited only by our immaginations.

If in our example 500K/area was not met we could then ask educated questions as to why not, follow that up with a workable plan, provide additional resources if needed, administrative action against the department head, or some other action to reach the goal the following year.

Thanks for helping to keep this thread informative and level headed. :)

[clambelly]

looks like the selectmen finally made the decision they should have months ago. if they wanted to reorganize the DNR, they should have formed this working group instead of polarizing the town to the point of a recall election.

this was from the cape cod times' website today.

Midday News Update
March 15, 2006 / Last updated: 03:05 p.m.
Copyright © 2006, Cape Cod Times

Bourne seeks DNR review
BOURNE - Although the Bourne Department of Natural Resources will remain intact, selectmen still think improvements can be made.

The board this week voted 3-0 (Selectmen Carol Cheli and W. Thomas Barlow were absent) to form a committee charged with reviewing the functions currently performed by the DNR.

The seven-member committee will consist of two members of the shore and harbor committee, two representatives from the shellfish working group, one member of the conservation commission, one finance committee member and a citizen at large.

The decision comes after selectmen reversed a controversial decision to reorganize the department and eliminate the director's position. That move prompted a local citizens group to seek the recall of Cheli and Selectman Galon "Skip" Barlow.

Selectman Linda Zuern said it's important for the committee to get started.

"I don't think we should be the ones deciding because we have other things to do," Zuern said. "If we could have a committee looking at how the DNR could run more efficiently, then I'd like to do that."

Read more about the decision in tomorrow's Cape Cod Times.
- By Aaron Gouveia

[Poppr]

CB

Thanks for posting the update. I was at the meeting this week and though I'm glad they changed their minds on the issue I was still surprised that they had no real ideas of their own on what policies to set for the administrator to act upon and impliment.

I think a committee is a good idea and can help to form a consensus on what priorities the department should enact based upon what the users/tax payers expect. On issues ranging from propogation to animal control there are a full spectrum of folks who have differring prioities. But having a committee report 6-8 months from now delays any change in direction that the department could/should follow NOW. And if there is no requirment for the selectmen to follow the committee's findings than close to a year will pass with nothing being done or accomplished. :mad:

Oh well.....at least some change is possible and I'm willing to give this a try for the next year or so. There will be a different makeup to the board when the committees findings are reported so I'm still looking at the glass as half full.

I'll attend as many of those committee meetings as possible and regret not being in town for the shelfish working group meeting on the 27th.