DRAFT

SHELLFISH RESTORATION PLAN

AND

SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

FOR THE NORTH CAPE OIL SPILL

Prepared by:

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management

and

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

May 2002
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment April 2002

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW ................................................................ CHAPTER 1

1.1 BACKGROUND.................................................................................................1

1.2 OVERVIEW OF THE SPILL INCIDENT ..........................................................2

1.3 NATURAL RESOURCE INJURIES ..................................................................2

1.4 PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED ....................................................................4

1.5 OVERVIEW OF USE OF SETTLEMENT FUNDS TO ADDRESS NATURAL

RESOURCE INJURIES ......................................................................................5

1.6 LEGAL REQUIREMENTS.................................................................................7

1.7 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ................................................................................8

1.8 CONTENTS OF THE REMAINDER OF THIS DOCUMENT............................9

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT............................................................................ CHAPTER 2

2.1 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT .......................................................................... 10

2.2 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT ..................................................................... 11

2.3 ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT ......................................................................... 13

2.4 ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES ............................................ 14

2.5 FEDERAL LANDS ........................................................................................... 14

2.6 CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT AND HUMAN USE ....................................... 15
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment April 2002

DESCRIPTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF

RESTORATION ALTERNATIVES ................................................................... CHAPTER 3

3.1 SUMMARY OF SHELLFISH RESTORATION ALTERNATIVES ................. 16

3.2 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ........................................................................ 17

3.3 PROVIDENCE RIVER QUAHOG RESCUE AND TRANSPLANT................. 17

3.4 QUAHOG DOCKSIDE PURCHASES.............................................................. 20

3.5 SURF CLAM RESTORATION......................................................................... 21

3.6 QUAHOG SEEDING........................................................................................ 21

3.7 MULTI-SPECIES STOCK ENHANCEMENT AND RESTORATION............. 22

3.8 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE: LIMITED QUAHOG RESCUE AND

MULTI-SPECIES RESTORATION.................................................................. 23

FINDINGS OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT .................................................... CHAPTER 4

4.1 DISCUSSION AND STATEMENT .................................................................. 34
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment April 2002

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1 COASTAL PONDS OF SOUTH COUNTY, RHODE ISLAND

FIGURE 2 NARRAGANSETT BAY- NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE

AND JENNY’S CREEK SHELLFISH MANAGEMENT AREA

FIGURE 3 NINIGRET AND GREEN HILL SALT PONDS

FIGURE 4 QUONOCHONTAUG SALT POND

FIGURE 5 WINNAPAUG SALT POND

FIGURE 6 NORTH CAPE SHELLFISH RESTORATION: QUAHOG RESCUE AREA

AND POTOWOMUT TRANSPLANT SITE

FIGURE 7 POINT JUDITH AND POTTERS SALT PONDS

FIGURE 8 TRUSTOM AND CARDS SALT PONDS

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1-1 SHELLFISH INJURIES OF THE NORTH CAPE OIL SPILL

TABLE 1-2 USE OF NORTH CAPE OIL SPILL FUNDS FOR RESTORING INJURIES

TABLE 2-1 CHARACTERISTICS OF RHODE ISLAND’S COASTAL PONDS

TABLE 3-1 SUMMARY OF SHELLFISH RESTORATION PROJECTS

AND ESTIMATED COSTS

TABLE 3-2 SUMMARY OF QUAHOG ENHANCEMENT PROJECTED COSTS

TABLE 3-3 SUMMARY OF BAY SCALLOP PROJECTS AND PROJECTED COSTS

TABLE 3-4 SUMMARY OF OYSTER PROGRAM AND ESTIMATED COSTS
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

1

INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW CHAPTER 1

1.1 BACKGROUND

On January 19, 1996, the North Cape tank barge and tug Scandia grounded on Moonstone Beach

in southern Rhode Island after the tug caught fire, spilling an estimated 828,000 gallons of home

heating oil into Block Island Sound and surrounding tidal waters. Oil spread throughout a large

area of Block Island Sound, including Trustom Pond National Wildlife Refuge, resulting in the

closure of a 250-square mile area of the Sound for fishing. Hundreds of oiled birds were

recovered in the weeks following the spill, and large numbers of dead and dying lobsters, surf

clams, and other organisms were found on and collected from area beaches.

The National Contingency Plan (40 CFR Section 300.600) designates state and federal agencies

as trustees for natural resources. The North Cape Trustees include the U.S. Department of

Commerce through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Rhode

Island Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM), and the U.S. Department of

Interior through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). NOAA is the lead Trustee for

case.

On September 15, 1998, the Trustees released for public review and comment a Draft

Restoration Plan (RP) and Environmental Assessment (EA) which described the injuries caused

by the spill and the proposed restoration actions to address those injuries. After incorporating

public comments, a Revised Draft RP/EA was issued on March 31, 1999 and again, public

comments were requested. The Final RP/EA was completed in October 1999, and a Finding of

No Significant Impact (FONSI) was signed by the NOAA, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries

on November 16, 1999. However, before that document could be published in its final form, the

Trustees reached a settlement of the case with the Responsible Party. A Notice of Lodging of

Consent Decree pursuant to the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) was published in the Federal

Register (65 FR 44808, July 19, 2000) seeking public comment on the proposed settlement of the

North Cape case. This document included the details of that settlement, including plans for

restoration. The previous EA and other case documents can be reviewed on the following web

site: www.darp.noaa.gov/neregion/ncape.htm.

The North Cape Trustees reached a settlement with EW Holding Corp. and K-Sea Transportation

Corp., the Responsible Parties (RP) and owner of the tank barge North Cape, on October 6,

2000. The settlement that is embodied in a Consent Decree entered in the case entitled U.S. v.

EW Holding Corp, United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island, Civil Action

Number 00-332T provides that $1.5 million are available for shellfish restoration. The Consent

Decree further states that those funds are to be used for transplanting quahogs from Providence

River ship channel, purchasing and transplanting adult quahogs, and implementing additional

projects that include seeding of hatchery-reared quahogs and the remote setting of oysters. The

Trustees have developed this draft RP/Supplemental EA to more thoroughly consider and

evaluate potential shellfish project alternatives, and develop a preferred alternative for the

shellfish restoration. The Trustees are now seeking public input in preparing and implementing

the final shellfish restoration plan.
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

2

This RP/Supplemental EA document has been prepared to further describe the preferred shellfish

restoration projects and alternatives, as well as fulfill the statutory requirements of the both the

Oil Pollution Act and National Environmental Policy Act. The following materials provide an

overview of the spill incident and resulting natural resource injuries, specifically impacts to

shellfish, and discuss in greater detail the purpose and need for the project, the outcome of the

case settlement, and legal requirements applicable to this proposed restoration.

1.2 OVERVIEW OF THE SPILL INCIDENT

On January 19, 1996, the tank barge North Cape, carrying 94,000 barrels (3.9 million gallons) of

two blends of No. 2 home heating oil, struck ground off Moonstone Beach in South Kingstown,

Rhode Island and began leaking oil into surrounding waters. Winds reaching 50 knots formed

large, breaking waves that dispersed oil throughout the water column, into contact with bottom

sediments, into the atmosphere, and onto the shoreline. Oil skimming and boom operations

began on January 20, 1996 in an effort to control surface oil sheen, remove oil from the water

column, and protect sensitive salt pond and offshore ecosystems. In total, an estimated 828,000

gallons of No. 2 fuel oil were released into the coastal and offshore environments.

1.3 NATURAL RESOURCE INJURIES

The Trustees and the Responsible Party worked together to determine the injuries caused by the

North Cape oil spill. The Trustees recognize that there is some degree of uncertainty associated

with any individual injury determination. In assessing the injuries caused by the spill, the

Trustees used the most reliable sources of information and methodologies available, including

field data, literature review, modeling, scientific reports, and expert analysis. The Trustees

reviewed the results of over 30 studies of potential natural resource injuries caused by the North

Cape spill and consulted with a number of experts in relevant scientific disciplines.

Losses in both numbers and biomass (direct kill and production foregone) were largest in the

offshore environment. Approximately 150.6 million surf clams (364,000 kilograms (kg)) and 9.0

million lobsters (direct kill only, totaling 312,000 kg) were lost as a result of the spill (French

1999, Cobb and Clancy 1998, Cobb et al., 1998). Large numbers (4.9 billion) of worms and

amphipods died from spill effects, although their relatively small size (~0.01 grams each)

resulted in a biomass loss of 80,000 kg (French 1998). Losses of rock and hermit crabs totaled

7.6 million animals, with a biomass of 97,000 kg. Fish losses including skates, cunner and

Atlantic sea herring totaled 4.2 million animals and 111,000 kg.

In the salt ponds, injury to worms and amphipods via contaminated sediment pore water totaled

approximately 6.6 billion organisms, with an associated biomass loss of 164,000 kg. In addition,

approximately 7,100 kg of crabs and shrimp, 12,400 kg of soft-shelled clams and oysters, and

5,000 kg of forage fish also were lost due to the spill. Trustee analysis indicated that 1996

productivity of the piping plover, a federally listed threatened species, was reduced by

approximately five to ten fledged chicks. Mortality to birds was estimated at 2,292 birds,
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

3

responsible for estimated interim losses of 6,274 bird-years. Losses of loons (414), eiders (354),

and grebes (228) were the largest and responsible for 4,477 bird-years lost.

Boat-based recreational fishing was the only human use activity for which the Trustees

assessment confirmed and quantified a loss. Trustee analysis indicated that 3,305 party and

charterboat fishing trips were lost, but recreational activity returned to base levels approximately

six months after the spill.

1.3.1 Shellfish Injuries

The Trustees' analysis indicated that 379,300 kg of bivalve biomass was lost as a result of the

North Cape oil spill including both direct mortality and production foregone. The majority of

the injury was to surf clams (Spisula solidissima), with young-of-the year suffering the greatest

mortality, resulting in a loss of 364,000 kg in biomass (Refer to Table 1-1). Blue mussels

(Mytilus edulis), quahogs/hard clams (Mercenaria mercenaria), soft-shelled clams (Mya

arenaria), and bay scallops (Argopecten irradians) were also significantly affected by the oil

spill. The area of impact was both within and outside the coastal salt ponds, although injury to

surf clams and other bivalves was primarily in the offshore environment, in the Nebraska Shoal

area from Point Judith to Charlestown Beach (French, 1998).

TABLE 1-1

SHELLFISH INJURIES FROM THE NORTH CAPE OIL SPILL

Shellfish Type Total Wet Tissue Weight

Surf Clams 800,800 lbs/ 364,000 kg

Other Marine Bivalves 6380 lbs/ 2,900 kg

Salt Pond Shellfish 27,280 lbs/ 12,400 kg

Total 834,460 lbs/ 379,300 kg

The Trustees had projected that injured surf clam populations would naturally recover to baseline

condition in three to five years. Natural recovery was therefore expected to be quicker and more

cost-effective than active primary restoration alternatives.

1.3.3 Shellfish Restoration Consent Decree Requirements

On October 6, 2000, the federal district court entered a consent decree with the Responsible

Parties (RP). The Consent Decree for the North Cape settlement stipulates project activities that

the Trustees will implement for restoring injuries to surf clam (Spisula solidissima), quahog

(Mercenaria mercenaria) and other shellfish species. To compensate for North Cape shellfish

injuries, the restoration is focused on replacing the lost shellfish biomass (379,300 kg/834,460

lbs, wet tissue weight) due to the spill, including interim biomass losses. The Consent Decree

stipulates that the Trustees shall use $1.5 million of the North Cape funds, plus any accrued

interest, to implement a shellfish restoration program.
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

4

The goal of the shellfish restoration is to replace the lost shellfish biomass through a variety of

projects. The Consent Decree establishes a tiered approach to meet this goal whereby the

Trustees are to first consider transplanting 10.2 million adult quahogs from the area proposed for

dredging in the Providence River navigational channel to designated sanctuaries in Narragansett

Bay. If this goal cannot be met in a cost-effective manner, the Trustees are then to consider

purchasing additional adult quahogs from the market for transplanting, provided the purchase

would not adversely affect market conditions. Lastly, the Trustees are to implement other

shellfish projects such as the remote setting of oysters and/or quahog seeding if the Providence

River navigational dredge channel rescue and dockside market purchase alternatives cannot

supply an adequate number of quahogs to meet the goal of restoring the lost biomass.

1.4 PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED

This Shellfish RP and Supplemental EA has been prepared by the federal and state Trustees to

evaluate preferred and alternative restoration projects for the shellfish resources lost or injured

by the North Cape oil spill. The document also serves to fulfill the statutory requirements under

the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 USC § 4321 et seq.). This Shellfish RP/EA

incorporates public comment, where appropriate, and information obtained by the Trustees

during the earlier Draft RP/EA public comment periods.

The purpose of this restoration project, as discussed in this RP/EA, is to fully address the impacts

to shellfish from the North Cape oil spill by returning injured natural resources to their pre-spill

(baseline) conditions, as well as compensate for interim losses of the shellfish resources.

Regulations for conducting natural resource damage assessments to address the resource

restoration process have been promulgated (15 CFR Part 900 et seq.) pursuant to the Oil

Pollution Act of 1990 (33 USC § 2701 et seq.). The regulations define a process for developing

restoration plans with input from both the public and the parties responsible for the spill.

This RP/EA is intended to inform the public and solicit public comment on the proposed

shellfish restoration actions. The shellfish restoration alternatives described herein are based on

sound conceptual plans and estimated costs. The design, magnitude, and anticipated timeline of

the shellfish restoration project and potential alternatives may change based on public input. The

Trustees believe that public input at this stage is vital to the restoration process. Comments

received by the Trustees will be fully considered, and where applicable, incorporated into the

Final RP/EA.

1.5 OVERVIEW OF USE OF SETTLEMENT FUNDS TO ADDRESS NATURAL

RESOURCE INJURIES

The North Cape Oil Spill Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment identified various

alternatives for restoring the natural resources injured by the North Cape spill, and two types of

restoration were considered. Primary restoration includes any actions taken to enhance the return

of injured natural resources and services to their baseline condition. In some situations, it may

be preferable to rely on natural recovery rather than primary restoration where feasible if cost-
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

5

effective primary restoration actions are not possible, or where the injured resources will recover

relatively quickly without human intervention. The second type, compensatory restoration, is

any action taken to account for interim losses of natural resources and services. The scale of the

required compensatory restoration depends both on the scale or magnitude of resource injury and

how quickly each resource and associated services return to baseline conditions. Primary

restoration expediting resource recovery reduces the requirement for compensatory restoration.

The Trustees evaluated ~25 restoration alternatives with the potential to enhance the recovery of

natural resources injured by the spill and compensate for the losses pending recovery. Besides

the potential shellfish restoration projects, the focus of this RP/EA, the Trustees have

implemented restoration projects for American lobster, piping plover, common loon, and sea

ducks (Refer to Table 1-2 and Appendix A). A plan is also underway to restore alewife runs in

the salt pond watersheds as compensation for lost recreational fishing opportunities due to the

spill. The Trustees have also protected open space lands to compensate for losses to other

marine and salt pond organisms.
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

6

TABLE 1-2

USE OF NORTH CAPE OIL SPILL FUNDS FOR RESTORING INJURIES

Injured Resource Project Types Project Status

Shellfish Shellfish Restoration, Stock and

Habitat Enhancement

Subject of this document;

proposed restoration of bay

scallops, enhancement of quahog

through adult transplants and

seeding; and oyster remote

setting projects

American Lobster Adult Lobster Restocking through

v-notching

Trustees are monitoring RPimplemented project and

working with fishermen to

monitor release of adult female

v-notched lobster, now in Year 3

Salt Ponds Land and Water Quality Protection In 2001, secured conservation

easement on 50 acres of land

bordering Ninigret Pond as a

measure to sustain salt pond

water quality

Common Loon Nesting Habitat Protection and

Monitoring

Funds used to secure

conservation easement in 2001

on lands in northern Maine to

protect nesting habitat on 110

lakes and ponds, and funds for

monitoring and management

Sea Birds Nesting Habitat Protection and

Monitoring

Allocated funds for purchase of

island to protect 600 nesting

pairs off the Maine coast with

purchase expected by summer

2002

Piping Plover Nesting Habitat Protection and

Monitoring

Funds allocated to hiring staff to

coordinate, manage, and monitor

fledgling success on NWR and

non-NWR shore habitats

Recreational Fishing Anadromous Fish Run Restoration Restore alewife access to

spawning habitats in Factory

Brook (Green Hill Pond) and

Saugatucket River (Pt Judith

Pond) watersheds; alewife serve

as forage fish to sport fish such

as striped bass and bluefish
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

7

1.6 LEGAL REQUIREMENTS

This RP/EA has been prepared jointly by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

(NOAA), the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM), and the U.S.

Department of the Interior (DOI) (represented by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS)).

Each of these agencies is a designated natural resource Trustee under the Oil Pollution Act of

1990 (OPA), 33 USC§2706(b), and the National Contingency Plan, 40 CFR Section 300.600, for

natural resources injured by the North Cape oil spill. As a designated Trustee, each agency is

authorized to act on behalf of the public under the state and/or federal law to plan and implement

actions to restore natural resources and resource services injured or lost as the result of a spill.

1.6.1 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Compliance

Any restoration of natural resources under OPA must comply with the National Environmental

Policy Act (NEPA) (40 CFR 1500, et seq.) and the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)

regulations implementing NEPA. In compliance with NEPA and the CEQ regulations, this

RP/EA discusses the affected environment, describes the purpose and need for the proposed

action, identifies alternatives, assesses their applicability and environmental consequences, and

summarizes opportunities for public participation in the decision process.

1.6.2 Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)

Pursuant to Section 305(b)(2) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management

Act, as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996, any federal agency which authorizes,

funds, or undertakes any activity that may adversely affect Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) must

consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). EFH is broadly defined a “those

waters and substrates necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity.”

The areas proposed for shellfish restoration through this plan have been designated EFH for a

variety of federally managed species including winter flounder and other groundfish and pelagic

species. In compliance with EFH regulations, this RP/EA addresses the potential impact that the

shellfish restoration activities may have on federally managed species designated as EFH in

Narragansett Bay and the South County coastal salt ponds.

1.6.3 Federal and State Endangered or Threatened Species

The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, requires any federal agency which authorizes,

funds, or undertakes any activity that may adversely affect federal or state endangered or

threatened species to consult with NMFS and the USFWS, and state agencies to identify any

species in the vicinity of a project. In the State of Rhode Island, RIDEM's Natural Heritage

Program identifies and lists species that are of special concern to the state. Numerous

endangered and threatened species are seasonal or occasional visitors to Rhode Island waters.

Although these species are members of ecosystems encompassing the proposed restoration

project area, available information indicates that no species will be adversely affected.
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

8

1.6.4 Clean Water Act

The Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended (33 U.S.C. 12511 et seq.) protects surface

waters from significant adverse impacts. Under Section 404 of the CWA, the Army Corps of

Engineers (ACOE) is responsible for authorizing permits for discharging dredge and fill into

waters of the U.S. including coastal waters. As part of this project, the Trustees will submit

materials to the ACOE for review, although it is anticipated that the proposed work will qualify

under the ACOE’s Programmatic General Permit in Rhode Island. Additionally, an application

will be submitted to Rhode Island’s Coastal Resources Management Council (CRMC) for

authorization, and Section 401 Water Quality Certification may be required by RIDEM for the

proposed work activities.

1.6.5 Coastal Zone Management Act

The CZMA of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq)requires that federal actions in state

coastal waters be consistent with the state’s federally-approved coastal management plan. A

CZM consistency determination will be provided to CRMC for review and concurrence that the

proposed project is consistent with Rhode Island’s CZM program to maximum extent

practicable.

1.7 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

The original Draft RP/EA was placed in the Administrative Record (AR) on September 14, 1998

and the revised draft was entered in the AR on March 31, 1999. The Trustees previously

received various comments from the public on the original North Cape RP/EA, and

modifications were made to the RP/EA document where appropriate. Public review of the Draft

and Revised Draft RP/EA was an integral component of the restoration planning process.

Through the review process, the Trustees sought public comment on the analyses used to define

and quantify natural resource injuries and the measures proposed to restore injured natural

resources or replace lost resource services. The Draft and Revised Draft RP/EA provided the

public with information on the nature and extent of resources injuries and restoration alternative

evaluated.

This Draft Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment for the North

Cape oil spill is a means for seeking public review and soliciting comment on the preferred and

other project alternatives. A legal notice indicating the release of the document and seeking

public comment has been published in the Providence Journal. Additionally, the Trustees have

scheduled two public meetings, to be held in two locations in relatively close proximity to the

proposed shellfish restoration. Announcements of the meetings have been posted in various

local newspapers and public office buildings. The Trustees will compile all public comments

provided at the meetings and incorporate them into the final Shellfish RP/EA.
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

9

1.8 CONTENTS OF THE REMAINDER OF DOCUMENT

The remainder of this document presents further information about the shellfish resource

injuries, the environment that may be affected by the project actions, and the proposed shellfish

restoration alternatives for the North Cape oil spill.

• Chapter 2 briefly summarizes the physical and biological environments that may be

affected by the project, as required by the NEPA, and describes the cultural and

economic importance of Narragansett Bay and coastal salt pond natural resources.

• Chapter 3 describes the various shellfish restoration alternatives including the

preferred alternative, and evaluates the positive and negative environmental and

socio-economic impacts of each of the of the restoration alternatives.

• Chapter 4 is the Findings of No Significant Impact (FONSI) as it pertains to the

proposed shellfish restoration actions.
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

10

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT CHAPTER 2

2.1 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

This Chapter presents a brief description of the physical and biological environment potentially

affected by the North Cape oil spill shellfish restoration. The physical environment includes the

South County coastal salt ponds and Narragansett Bay.

Rhode Island’s coastal shoreline encompasses 420 miles and the watershed to Narragansett Bay

is 1,647 square miles. Over 2 million people live in this watershed comprised of 100 cities and

towns, with 60 percent of the watershed in Massachusetts and 40 percent in Rhode Island. The

three major tributaries to the bay are the Taunton, Blackstone, and Pawtuxet Rivers. The bay

receives 2,400 million gallons of freshwater daily from rivers, streams, rainfall events, winter

storms, sewage treatment facilities and combined sewer outfalls (CSOs). Narragansett Bay’s

average salinity is between 29 to 31 parts per thousand (ppt), and its average depth is 26 feet

with the deepest point of 184 feet located in the East Passage near Castle Light. The tidal range

for the Bay is 3 to 5 feet with an average tidal current of 1.5 knots, and water temperature ranges

between 32° and 70° F. Narragansett Bay was formed from retreating glaciers over 10,000 years

ago and is composed of three drowned river valleys now known as the East and West Passages

of the Bay and the Sakonnet River. Most of the Narragansett Bay shoreline consists of cobble

and gravel deposited by glaciers. The shoreline landscape is influenced by the high frequency of

hurricanes, which strike, on average, once in every seven years (Olsen and Lee, 1985).

A band of nine coastal ponds and contiguous marshes lies along the southern coast of Rhode

Island (Refer to Figure 1). The salt ponds located within the North Cape spill area and are a key

focus of this restoration plan and are described in Table 2-2. The North Cape barge grounded

immediately south of Trustom and Cards Ponds. Point Judith and Potters Ponds lie to the east

and Ninigret and Green Hill Ponds to the west, with Quonochontaug and Winnapaug Ponds

situated farther west. Of the nine salt ponds, five have permanent armored breachways

constructed in the 1900s. Permanent breachways were constructed in Point Judith Pond in 1910

and in Ninigret Pond in 1952. Winnapaug and Quonochontaug Pond breachways were

constructed in the late 1950s. A permanent tidal connection was established for Green Hill Pond

in 1962 by connecting channel with Ninigret Pond (ACOE, 2002). These ponds are affected by

the ocean and influenced by tides, currents, and sedimentation processes. Only Cards and

Trustom Ponds are closed to the ocean most of the year resulting in lower water salinity.

The physical environment of southern Rhode Island has been affected by land development in

the watersheds of the coastal salt ponds in the towns of Charlestown, South Kingstown,

Narragansett, and Westerly. These communities generate pollution to the ponds through release
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

11

of road runoff, fertilizers, fish processing waste, and individual sewage disposal systems (ISDS)

contamination of surface and ground waters. These contaminants have caused bacterial

contamination and elevated nitrogen levels in some of the coastal salt pond waters. High

nitrogen levels have led to increased eutrophication, decreased eelgrass beds, increased sediment

hypoxia, and other detrimental effects of fish and wildlife habitats (Olsen and Lee 1985; Short et

al 1996). Storm-water runoff containing gasoline and fuel oils has also been identified as a

potential threat to the salt pond ecosystems (Olsen and Lee 1985). The port of Galilee, situated

at the entry to Pt Judith Pond, supports a fleet of commercial fishing vessels. Fishing pressure

has reduced once-abundant harvests of fish and shellfish in the salt ponds, as has habitat

alteration caused by such activities as release of excess nutrients, dredge and fill operations,

sediment transport, and damming of brooks and rivers.

TABLE 2-1

CHARACTERISTICS OF RHODE ISLAND’S COASTAL SALT PONDS

Coastal Pond Area

(Acres)

Average Depth

(Feet)

Tidal Connection Salinity

Modifier

Point Judith 1,530 6

Permanent, wide

breachway opening Euhaline

Potters 329 2.5

Permanent, narrow

connection to

Pt. Judith Pond

Euhaline

Cards 43 1.5

Intermittent opening to

Block Island Sound Oligohaline

Trustom 160 1.5

Intermittent opening to

Block Island Sound Oligohaline

Green Hill 431 2.5

Permanent, narrow

connection to

Ninigret Pond

Polyhaline

Ninigret 1,711 4

Permanent, wide

breachway opening Mesohaline to

Polyhaline

Quonochontaug 732 6

Permanent, wide

breachway opening Euhaline

Winnapaug 446 5

Permanent, long, curved

breachway opening Euhaline

2.2 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT

There are 13 coastal habitat types of Narragansett Bay (~123,006 acres) comprised of salt

marshes, sandy beaches, rocky shores, tidal flats, freshwater streams and rivers, steambeds, sand

dunes, Phragmities-dominated and brackish marshes, eelgrass beds, oyster reefs and shellfish
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

12

beds. These areas play host to a wide assortment of marine mammals, plants, finfish, shellfish

and birds. There are about 252 fish species in Narragansett Bay representing 95 families which

are commercially and recreationally fished such as striped bass, summer and winter flounder,

tautog, and bluefish. Bivalves typically found in the bay include quahogs, oysters, blue mussels,

and bay scallops. The lobster is also another economically important shellfish species found in

Bay and fished commercially for over 150 years. Harbor seals are a common winter visitor to

the region. Common marine birds such as herring gulls, cormorants, terns also inhabit the Bay.

Rhode Island’s salt ponds are a critical part of the coastal ecosystem, serving as essential

spawning, nursery, and growth areas for coastal fish and shellfish, including the commercially

and recreationally important winter flounder (Baczenski et al. 1979, Crawford and Carey 1985,

Ganz et al 1992, Crawford 1990). Like most estuaries, the coastal salt ponds are also important

links between terrestrial and marine environments, converting terrestrial inputs into marine

biological production. Silversides, striped killifish, mummichogs, sheepshead minnows,

polychaetes and amphipods are important forage items of the complex food web of the salt

ponds. The salt ponds also provide valuable habitat for a host of resident and migratory bird

species. During the winter months, marine waters support seabirds and waterfowl populations

including loons and grebes, sea ducks, and diving ducks. Winter diving ducks and dabbling

ducks; include scaup, American black duck and mallard also inhabitants of the salt ponds. Over

200 species of migratory birds use the coastal pond area during the spring and autumn months.

Seals and sea turtles are also occasional visitors to the salt ponds.

2.2.1 Summary of Salt Pond Baseline Shellfish Survey - 2001

The existing shellfish resources of the coastal ponds are of particular importance to this North

Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan. In summer 2001, Ninigret, Quonochontaug, and Winnapaug

Ponds were surveyed by RIDEM with assistance from the University of Rhode Island’s Graduate

School of Oceanography (URI-GSO) to collect baseline information on the shellfish populations.

This survey was the initial phase of the North Cape Shellfish Restoration project and was funded

by both settlement monies and a private grant to URI-GSO. To complete the study, RIDEM first

established a 100-square meter (m 2) grid overlay for each pond. For each grid selected for

surveying, three 1 m 2 substrate plots were sampled to a depth of one foot to determine sediment

characteristics and shellfish species and their abundance and size.

This survey involved sampling 176 stations covering 1,711 acres in Ninigret Pond, 125 stations

covering 632 acres in Quonochontaug Pond, and 118 stations covering 446 acres in Winnapaug

Pond (Ganz, pers. comm.). Preliminary results indicate that theses salt ponds are dominated by

quahogs. Soft-shell clams were locally very abundant and very few oysters or bay scallopswere

observed in the ponds. This survey established quahog densities of .058/m2 in Winnapaug,

2.26/m2 in Ninigret, and 2.43/m2 in Quonochontaug, averaging 25.4 mm in width, and soft-shell

clam densities of .023/m2 in Winnapaug, 1.04/m2 in Ninigret, and 1.25/m2 in Quonochontaug.

Survey results are similar to previous shellfish surveys conducted by RIDEM (Ganz, pers.

comm.). The Trustees will thoroughly evaluate the survey results as part of selecting potential

shellfish restoration sites in these coastal salt ponds. Additional baseline surveys are anticipated

for Pt. Judith Pond and possibly other coastal salt ponds during the summer of 2002.
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

13

2.3 ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT

Pursuant to Section 305(b)(2) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management

Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) and Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) regulations as amended on

January 17, 2002, all federal agencies are required to conduct a consultation with the Secretary

of Commerce on any actions that may adversely affect EFH. Consultations are required through

the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Relative to this RP/EA, NOAA's Restoration

Center conducted a Programmatic EFH consultation with NMFS for its Community-Based

Restoration Program (CRP) EA in August 2001 (The Programmatic EA can be reviewed at

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/habitat/restoration). NOAA, through its CRP, implements projects similar

in scope to the shellfish restoration proposed for the North Cape project, and many of the

guidelines and conservation measures identified in the CRP consultation apply to this project.

NMFS' Northeast Regional Office specifically reviewed and contributed to the programmatic

consultation. The outcome of this consultation process identified potential impacts that

community-based restoration in general and shellfish restoration specifically may have on the

EFH environments in Narragansett Bay and Rhode Island's coastal salt ponds.

Rhode Island waters encompass a wide variety of marine habitats within Narragansett Bay and

the coastal salt ponds including estuaries, salt marshes, rocky and sandy shorelines. Specific

marine environments of the Bay and salt ponds harbor several benthic organisms, shellfish beds,

oyster reefs and submerged aquatic vegetation such as eelgrass beds and widgeon grass. The

restoration project will be implementing the EFH conservation recommendations provided in the

CRP programmatic consultation to avoid and minimize any potential adverse affects on the EFH.

Conservation measures will include avoiding work activity during critical fish spawning and

nursery periods, employing Fishery Management Plan (FMP) conservation measures where

applicable, provide training for project staff and volunteers, conducting performance monitoring

throughout the project, and restoring habitat impacts should they occur.

The proposed shellfish restoration projects will incorporate BMPs for protecting fish species and

their habitats including species addressed by the FMPs. Field restoration techniques will be

employed to minimize direct and secondary disturbances to the species and habitats. For

example, work activities and equipment and material staging areas will be prohibited or limited

in areas containing sensitive habitats such as submerged aquatic vegetation (SAVs) and tidal

marshes. Project staff and volunteers will be instructed and trained to avoid SAVs and marshes,

and if in the vicinity of these habitats, will adhere to designated pathways and work areas

avoiding these habitats. Shellfish relays and seeding will have negligible impacts on EFH other

than minor, temporary and localized substrate disturbances. Oyster restoration will involve

placing a thin veneer of shell material at specific, localized sites, that may result in short term,

minor impact to benthic organisms. The proposed remote setting for oyster restoration would

include clean shell from a shucking facility and hand placement into restoration sites to minimize

turbidity to the water column and direct smothering of benthic organisms.

The Trustees will incorporate monitoring and assessment into the shellfish restoration work

activities to properly evaluate the projects for potential impacts to EFH. Through the state and

federal regulatory programs, NMFS NER staff will be consulted once the specific project
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

14

locations and activities have been developed to ensure all proper BMPs are employed to avoid or

minimize potential adverse effects to EFH.

2.4 ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES

The Endangered Species Act of 1973 instructs federal agencies to carry out programs for the

protection of endangered and threatened species and to conserve the ecosystems upon which

these species depend. The Rhode Island Natural Heritage Program also identifies species that

are of special concern to the state.

The Block Island Sound ecosystem provides particularly valuable habitat for the piping plover, a

bird included on the federal list of threatened species. The southern beaches of Rhode Island

contain the largest piping plover nesting area in the state. The birds feed on invertebrates in

intertidal pools, washover areas, mudflats, sandflats, wracklines, and shorelines of coastal ponds,

lagoons and salt marches. Special management activities at Trustom Pond National Wildlife

Refuge (NWR) enhance the nesting success of piping plovers.

Management programs also exist to reduce disturbances to roseate terns at Trustom Pond.

Roseate terns, federally recognized as an endangered species, are frequently found resting and

feeding around Trustom and Cards Ponds. Migrating bald eagles, a federally listed threatened

species, occasionally utilize the salt ponds of southern Rhode Island as a migration stopover.

Other endangered and threatened species are seasonal or occasional visitors to Rhode Island's

southern shore and Narragansett Bay. Several species of sea turtles may be present from June

through November. These include the threatened Atlantic loggerhead and the green sea turtle,

and the endangered Atlantic leatherback and Atlantic Kemp’s ridley (Gould and Gould 1992).

State and federal agencies have been contacted for identifying endangered or threatened species

that are located within the proposed project area or may be affected by the project. The RINHP,

USFWS, and NMFS were consulted and it is expected that no adverse impacts to endangered or

threatened species will result from the proposed projects.

2.5 FEDERAL LANDS

Trustom Pond and Ninigret Pond NWRs are located on the south coast of Rhode Island in the

Towns of South Kingstown and Charlestown, Rhode Island. They are two of over 500 NWRs in

the United States comprising the National Wildlife Refuge system. Trustom Pond NWR was

established in 1974 and encompasses ~1000 acres of wildlife habitat. Ninigret NWR was

established in 1970 and encompasses 407 acres (Figure 1). In addition to providing important

nesting and foraging habitat for resident and migratory waterfowl, shorebirds and songbirds, the

NWRs provide valuable services to other flora and fauna of the region. Management objectives

include maintaining a natural diversity and abundance of fauna and flora on refuge lands and

preserving organisms and ecosystems represented on the refuge which are rare or threatened in

the region.
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

15

In Narragansett Bay, Hope, Patience and Prudence Islands are part of NOAA’s Narragansett Bay

National Estuarine Research Reserve (NBNERR) encompassing 2,478 acres with 1,781 acres of

tidal waters surrounding the islands to the 18-foot isobath (Figure 2). The land area includes

2,182 acres on Prudence Island, 205 acres on Patience Island and 91 acres on Hope Island. The

Jenny’s Creek area of Prudence Island is in the vicinity of the NBNERR site and conservation

lands.

2.6 CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT AND HUMAN USES

Rhode Island waters including the coastal salt ponds and Narragansett Bay, support both

substantial commercial and recreational harvesting of finfish and shellfish. These fisheries

support a wide range of fishermen utilizing various gear types. Lobsters, quahog, and winter

flounder comprise a sizable portion of the annual catch. These species are harvested extensively

in the Block Island Sound and Rhode Island’s salt ponds (Olsen and Seavey, 1983). In 2000,

Rhode Island’s commercial landings were valued at $73 million dollars. The recreational

industry comprised of saltwater anglers, tackle shops, marinas and charter boats was valued at

$150 million. As a whole, Rhode Island ‘s seafood industry has been valued in excess of $700

million. These values include domestic market landings and sales to restaurants and fish

markets, $146 million; sales to other states, $95 million; and transportation and storage of

seafood, $132 million. This information is based on the Stock Status of Marine Resources and

Summary of Fisheries Management in Rhode Island, A Report to the Rhode Island General

Assembly. In 2000, the state’s commercial landings for shellfish were dominated by quahog with

landings of 845,467 pounds valued at $4.9 million, followed by the Eastern oyster with landings

of 95,000 pounds valued at $607,515, and the soft-shell clam with landings of 33,809 pounds

generating a value of $199,544.

The Rhode Island economy is heavily dependent on summer tourism as a source of revenue.

Travel and tourism is the second largest industry in the state, generating 38,931 jobs and $3.26

billion in total sales in 2000 (Tyrell, 2001). The coastline along Block Island Sound harbors an

extensive network of town and state beaches to cater to seasonal visitors. Recreational dive trips

and charter boat fishing also contributes to the local economy. All of these human activities are

dependent on the condition of the coastal and offshore living marine resources and their habitats.

Narragansett Bay, Block Island Sound and the coastal salt ponds are favorite centers for

recreational boating and other water-based activities. Rhode Island's Coastal Resources

Management Plan designates most of the coastal salt ponds as Type 2 waters, referring to their

high scenic value and significant recreational boating and residential uses including seasonal

mooring areas, fish and wildlife habitat, and good water quality. Winnapaug, Quonochontaug,

Ninigret, Green Hill, Potters, and Point Judith Ponds are all designated Type 2 waters. Cards and

Trustom Ponds are the only salt ponds designated Type 1 waters, defined as conservation areas,

and include waters within and adjacent to the NWRs and conservation areas and waters of

significant, unique scenic value. Tidal waters around Prudence Island have been designated as

Type 1 or 2 with waters in the NBNERR categorized as Type 1 due to their significant

conservation value. Much of the remainder of Narragansett Bay is classified as multi-purpose

(Type 4) or high-intensity boating (Type 3) waters.
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

16

DESCRIPTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF

RESTORATION ALTERNATIVES CHAPTER 3

3.1 SUMMARY OF SHELLFISH RESTORATION ALTERNATIVES

The Trustees have considered and evaluated a full suite of restoration alternatives for

compensating shellfish injuries from the North Cape oil spill. This included seeding and

transplanting surf clam that were the shellfish species most adversely affected by the spill.

Quahog, bay scallop, and oyster provide ecological services (e.g., water filtration, benthicpelagic coupling from feeding activity; food for fish and invertebrates that prey upon molluscan

larvae and seed, benthic biomass; and habitat value) similar to those functions lost due to the

North Cape shellfish injuries. Since these shellfish species have declined relative to their

historic populations due to heavy fishing pressure and habitat loss and degradation, it is

reasonably certain that their restoration would result in enhanced ecological services in the area

of spill impact. Thus a net ecological benefit to compensate for the oil spill injuries to natural

resources is expected. Finally, shellfish restoration in the salt ponds and adjacent waters of

Narragansett Bay is a feasible and proven technique, since restoration of shellfish has a long

history in Northeast estuaries, with well-developed grow-out methods and reasonably well

documented results. These results have provided important lessons on successes as well as

failures.

The following discusses various alternatives that were considered for the North Cape Shellfish

Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment (RP/EA). The restoration and stock

enhancement project alternatives focus primarily on quahog, bay scallop, and oyster resources.

Table 3-1 is a summary of the anticipated costs for the preferred shellfish restoration and

enhancement programs.

TABLE 3-1

SUMMARY OF SHELLFISH RESTORATION PROJECTS

AND ESTIMATED COSTS

Restoration Project Elements Projected Costs

Quahog Projects $290,000.00

Bay Scallop Projects $365,000.00

Oyster Projects $305,000.00

Project Oversight $300,000.00

Contingency $240,000.00

Total for All Shellfish Projects $1,500,000.00
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

17

The reader will note that funds are proposed to allocate relatively evenly to the three shellfish

species. These cost projections are based on a 4-year program for each species. Additionally,

project oversight costs have been projected and would be required for the North Cape project.

The oversight costs are based on funds required to contract and dedicate a shellfish restoration

specialist full-time for the 4-year project period, and includes salary and benefits. The oversight

costs also include an assumed hiring of two or three seasonal (summer) field technicians each of

the project years to assist the restoration specialist. This staff would be required to fully develop,

implement and monitor the preferred project, as well as work with the public and volunteers

involved in the community-based project activities. A contingency cost was also added at

$60,000 per year to address work activities, materials and equipment that may be required

beyond the conceptual preferred work scope for adaptive management purposes and based on

results of the project. A more detailed discussion of the preferred shellfish restoration alternative

for the coastal salt ponds and Narragansett Bay is provided in Section 3.8. The remaining

RP/EA sections discuss each of the other restoration alternatives thoroughly considered and

evaluated by the Trustees including a No-action alternative and those addressed in the previous

RP/EA including surf clam stock enhancement to address the North Cape oil spill injuries to

shellfish resources.

3.2 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires that the Trustees evaluate a “Noaction” alternative, and is also an option that can be selected under the Oil Pollution Act. With

this alternative the Trustees would take no direct action to restore the natural resource injuries or

compensate for lost services pending environmental recovery, and so would rely only on natural

recovery and resource management conditions to occur. While natural recovery would occur

over varying time scales for the various injured shellfish resources, the interim losses incurred

would not be compensated for under the No-action alternative.

The Trustees’ responsibility to seek compensation for interim losses pending environmental

recovery is clearly set forth in the OPA, and cannot be addressed through a No-action alternative.

While the Trustees have determined that natural recovery was appropriate as primary restoration

for the surf clam injuries, the No-action alternative is rejected for compensatory restoration since

substantial interim losses occurred during the period of recovery of the North Cape spill.

Technically feasible and cost-effective alternatives exist to compensate for these losses, and have

been addressed through other project alternatives as discussed in the following sections.

3.3 PROVIDENCE RIVER QUAHOG RESCUE AND TRANSPLANT

The North Cape Consent Decree indicates that the Trustees shall use settlement monies to

implement a shellfish restoration project. It specifically indicates that an adult quahog transplant

of 10.2 million quahogs (an equivalent to the total shellfish biomass loss) be considered for

designated spawning sanctuaries in Narragansett Bay and the coastal salt ponds. A source of

quahogs to be considered is the Providence River, which is scheduled for dredging by the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) as part of its Federal Providence River and Harbor
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

18

Maintenance Dredging Project. The ACOE's Providence River dredging is to restore navigation

efficiency and safety of its shipping channel for deep draft vessel traffic by restoring the

authorized depth to 40 feet (12 meters) and width to 600 feet (180 meters) (ACOE, 2001). The

dredging project is slated to begin in November 2002 (Oliver, pers. comm.). It is anticipated that

quahogs dredged from the channel area would not survive the dredging and disposal. Further,

channel edge slumping is suspected after the dredging is completed, and which may cause

additional quahog mortality due to smothering by sediment overburden.

Because of the shellfish closures of the Providence River, quahogs found in this area are

primarily adults and contribute to the overall recruitment of quahogs in upper Narragansett Bay.

Rescue of the quahogs from the planned dredge area and subsequent transplanting to sanctuaries

would save them from premature death and lost recruitment, and therefore, provide ecological

and resource services otherwise lost as a result of the ACOE's proposed dredging plan.

The Trustees assessed the quahog densities in the proposed dredging location to determine

potential cost-effectiveness of quahog harvesting and transplanting. Most of the proposed

channel dredge area is characterized by low to very low quahog densities. Sabin and Bullock

Point Reaches were identified as having the highest quahog densities along the side slopes of the

Providence River, ranging from 0.03 to 14.4 individuals/m2 (Battelle, 2000; RIDEM 1997-2001).

Density of quahogs appears to be highly variable and very patchy in these reaches. Other river

dredge channel areas sampled for density of quahogs revealed even lower quahog densities, and

therefore, quahog rescue in these areas would result in substantially higher costs to harvest

potentially fewer quahogs. The Trustees concluded that harvest of the slide slopes of the entire

Providence River dredge channel would not likely achieve a harvest of 10.2 million quahogs, nor

would it be cost-effective, and therefore, the alternative was eliminated from further

consideration.

The Trustees then focused on a Providence River dredge channel quahog rescue at the Sabin

Point and Bullock Point Reaches where the highest quahog densities along the side slopes of the

channel are present. While quahog densities might prove to be cost-effective for harvesting in

these areas, there are regulatory restrictions presently implemented that affect this rescue

alternative. Regulations set forth by the Rhode Island Department of Health (RIDOH) and

RIDEM Water Resources (promulgating federal shellfish sanitation regulations and laws) would

result in costs to address public health concerns for this geographically restricted quahog rescue

alternative. Under current regulations, the dredge channel area north of Gaspee Point, including

the Sabin Point Reach, is not available as a source area for transplanting quahogs due to

industrial and sewage pollution. Transplants from this area would require a sanitary survey.

This would involve a shoreline survey and contaminant analysis, and this would require

significant time and costs for state and federal agencies to complete this work. RIDOH would

require a determination as to which areas, if any, north of Gaspee Point could be opened for

transplanting purposes. While RIDEM has previously conducted quahog transplants, the agency

has not transplanted quahogs from this region. RIDEM and RIDOH indicated that transplanting

quahogs from this region is not prudent. Therefore, the Trustees eliminated the alternative of

harvesting and transplanting quahogs from any dredge channel areas north of Gaspee Point

including the Sabin Point Reach.
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

19

The Trustees then considered potential locations for relaying and transplanting quahogs that

could be rescued from the Providence River dredge channel south of Gaspee Point. Two

transplant areas were considered: coastal salt pond sanctuaries and Narragansett Bay sanctuaries.

Each are discussed in the following sections.

3.3.1 Coastal Salt Pond Sanctuary Transplants

Rhode Island tidal waters including Narragansett Bay and the coastal salt ponds are managed by

RIDEM supported by input from the Rhode Island Marine Fisheries Council (RIMFC). These

organizations promulgate the management area designations pertaining to shellfish activities and

conservation strategies. There are two types of shellfish management areas that have been

designated for the coastal ponds - shellfish closures (permanently and/or conditionally due to

pollution) and spawning sanctuaries. Of the eight coastal salt ponds, Ninigret, Quonochontaug,

and Winnapaug Ponds have shellfish spawning sanctuaries (Refer to Figures 3 through 5).

The Trustees evaluated the feasibility of transplanting quahogs from the Providence River dredge

channel to one or more of these salt pond sanctuaries as compensatory shellfish restoration for

the North Cape oil spill. The estimated cost to remove quahogs from the Bullocks Point Reach

and transplant them to the salt ponds was estimated to cost between $136,000 and $170,000.

Much of the cost for this transplant project would be expended on transportation of quahogs to

the salt ponds and requisite enforcement. The Trustees concluded that the alternative in using

North Cape funds to harvest quahogs from the entire channel dredge area south of Gaspee Point

would not be cost-effective due to high transportation costs, and therefore, this transplant was

considered a non-preferred alternative. Further, transplanting quahogs from a prohibited

shellfish harvesting area (i.e., permanently closed to shellfishing due to pollution) to

uncontaminated, potential harvest locations could generate a significant amount of adverse

public sentiment due to the stigma associated with polluted shellfish.

3.3.2 Narragansett Bay Sanctuary Transplants

RIDEM has designated 21 shellfish management areas for the state, nine of which are in

Narragansett Bay. Of these areas, RIDEM and RIMFC have designated the High Banks and

Sakonnet River Areas as shellfish spawning sanctuaries. All other designated areas such as

Bissel Cove, Bristol Harbor, Greenwich Bay, Mt. Hope Bay/Kickamuit River, and Potowomut

are considered shellfish management areas. These areas have specific management protocols

restricting shellfishing activity. These areas are subject to restricted openings and closures

depending upon RIDEM quahog transplanting programs or rainfall events or seasonal pollution

high fecal coliform bacteria levels.

Of the shellfish management and spawning sanctuary areas, the Trustees identified the

Potowomut Shellfish Management Area as the most feasible location to transplant quahogs from

the Providence River (Refer to Figure 6). This area was considered due to its relatively close

proximity to the dredge channel and the scheduled RIDEM fishery management restrictions for

the area. The Potowomut designated area will be closed to shellfishing for a 2-year period

beginning in the 2002 fishing period. This will allow the rescued quahogs to depurate (purge

themselves of potentially harmful fecal coliform bacteria) and also provide potential recruitment
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

20

prior to opening the area to fishing. Other RIDEM shellfish management areas (e.g., High

Banks, Sakonnet River) were not considered feasible because of the scheduled immediate reopening of commercial shellfishing in these areas in 2002.

Rescuing quahogs from Bullock Point Reach and transplanting to the Potowomut Spawning

Sanctuary is a more cost-effective approach to the rescue and transplanting. The projected cost

of this project is $60,000. Further, RIDEM has previously transplanted quahogs to the

Potowomut Spawning Sanctuary as part of its Quahog Management Plan. RIDEM considers this

area as a feasible transplant site for the Providence River quahogs. Based on these conditions,

the Trustees considered this project alternative further as a part of the preferred alternative.

The transplant of adult quahogs would have minimal adverse impacts on Narragansett Bay.

RIDEM has been transplanting quahogs from closed waters to sanctuary locations for many

years with no apparent adverse impacts. Sanctuaries are periodically opened to harvest on a

rotating basis and it is anticipated that after approximately two years of protection, harvest of the

transplanted quahogs will be allowed, thereby benefiting the local fishery. The transplant from

the Providence River would occur in accordance with state health regulations and the Interstate

Shellfish Sanitation Conference guidelines. The quahogs would be placed in closed sanctuaries

where they would be allowed to depurate and, therefore, pose no public health concerns.

3.4 QUAHOG DOCKSIDE PURCHASES

A quahog dockside purchase and release alternative was evaluated by the Trustees to address lost

shellfish injuries. The Trustees evaluated the effects of such a program on the state market

supply and demand, public health, enforcement, and shellfish disease transfer and costs of

disease screening. The Trustees determined that the Rhode Island quahog market could supply

10.2 million chowder-sized (>77mm) quahogs to a dockside purchase program, although this

project alternative would have to be implemented over an extended, multiple year period to

prevent over-stimulating a “run” on the chowder market (Gates, pers. comm). This program

would need to implement substantial market controls to prevent potential fraud, human health

concerns, shellfish disease transfer and other shellfishery-related impacts. Specifically, the

Trustees would need to control the origin of shellfish to ensure that only Rhode Island quahogs

were utilized and to verify that quahogs would be harvested from approved, open waters for

shellfish consumption. Additionally prior to transplanting, quahogs would need to be tested for

shellfish diseases, requiring available lab staff and additional costs.

This alternative would require control at the point of purchase ( e.g., buy directly from the

harvesters or pass all sales through wholesale dealers). Presently, Rhode Island General Law

(RIGL) indicates that shellfish must be bought and sold to a certified shellfish dealer. If such a

program were implemented, it would require that a purchase location be designated on-water or

at a designated pier, and account for additional handling fees for the wholesale dealers. By

controlling the point of sale, there would be greater likelihood that the shellfish harvested would

be from approved waters. The program would need to prevent illegal harvesting behind closure

lines, particularly at night, and such a program would require a significant enforcement cost.
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

21

This program would require coordination of activities with RIDEM's Enforcement Division,

commercial shellfishermen, wholesale dealers, RIDEM fishery scientists, and the RIDOH. An

annual dockside purchase season would need to be designated by RIDEM. Since quahogs

purchased under this program would need to be transported to designated spawning sanctuaries

or shellfish management areas in Narragansett Bay and/or coastal salt ponds, the time of

purchasing would need to take into account the sanctuary transplanting needs. This alternative

would need to incorporate long-range planning along with consideration given to the natural

spawning of quahogs to minimize impacting the recruitment potential for each designated

harvest region.

The market controls that would need to be implemented would be very costly, and cannot be

underestimated since they could directly affect human health and scientifically based shellfish

management. Based on the analysis of these factors, the Trustees considered the dockside

purchase alternative to have a substantial risk. The Trustees concluded that other more costeffective shellfish restoration alternatives are available and eliminated this alternative from

further consideration.

3.5 SURF CLAM RESTORATION

In the September 15, 1998 Draft North Cape Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment

and the March 31, 1999 Revised Draft RP/EA, the Trustees evaluated two alternatives for surf

clam restoration to address the shellfish injuries caused by the oil spill. These alternatives

included the stocking of hatchery-reared juvenile surf clams and transplanting of adult surf clams

into Block Island Sound. The Trustees rejected these alternatives from further consideration for

a number of reasons including the likely natural recovery of surf clams within several years of

the oil spill without any enhancement of the Block Island Sound stocks, cost-ineffectiveness, and

the lack of proven success implementing such techniques. The reader is referred to the two prior

draft documents for a more detailed discussion of these alternatives. These documents are

located in the North Cape administrative record at RIDEM, 235 Promenade Street, Providence,

RI 02908, attention Grace Smith, 401-222-6607, or at the following web site address:

www.darp.noaa.gov/neregion/ncape.htm.

3.6 QUAHOG SEEDING

Stocking of hatchery-reared quahogs in Rhode Island waters has been identified as a potential

restoration alternative to provide compensation for the shellfish injuries. This project alternative

was identified in the original Draft North Cape Restoration Plan. Assuming adequate habitat

area is available, stocking of large quahog seed (>20mm) could increase populations in

Narragansett Bay and/or the coastal salt ponds. While such a project could potentially succeed in

increasing the number of quahogs in state waters, the Trustees believe that utilizing 100 percent

of restoration funds on purchasing large quahog seed from commercial hatcheries and releasing

to Rhode Island's coastal waters would not necessarily result in the best ecologically-based

conditions. Rather, a thorough, assessment is required to determine the scientifically based

number of seed for needed for release and the costs associated with different sizes of
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

22

commercially available quahog seed. The Trustees considered a variation of this alternative as

one of the components of the preferred alternative discussed in Section 3.7.

The alternative would require use of local broodstock for the production of quahog seed to

ensure genetic populations are sustained and potential for disease transfer is minimized. The

addition of hatchery-reared quahog seed should have minimal adverse impacts on the waters of

Rhode Island. With proper management and monitoring, quahog populations would increase as

a result from the seed stocking. Since commercial quahogging is a major industry with

significant economic value to Rhode Island, this alternative with managed conditions would

likely result in benefits to commercial and recreational fisheries of the state.

The Trustees noted that targeting seeding efforts on only a single shellfish species would pose a

greater potential risk of project failure with limited success due primarily to unpredictable

environmental and industry supply factors. The Trustees concluded that release of multiple

species would other restoration alternatives are available and eliminated the quahog seeding

alternative from further consideration.

3.7 MULTI-SPECIES STOCK ENHANCEMENT AND RESTORATION

The Trustees identified the enhancement and/or restoration of multi-species as an alternative that

addressing not only quahog, but other bivalves including bay scallop (Argopecten irradians),

blue mussel (Mytilus edulis), soft-shelled clam (Mya arenaria) and surf clam (Spisula

solidissima) affected by the North Cape oil spill. Eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica) was also

identified as another potential species targeted for restoration even though this species was not

significantly affected by the North Cape spill. This alternative would be to restore or enhance all

of these species by employing various aquaculture technologies and proven on-the-ground

seeding and grow-out practices now available. RIDEM staff would conduct these projects with

support of contractors and oversight by the Trustees.

Several issues have been identified that would need to be addressed in selecting this multispecies alternative. First, the potential source of substantial numbers of larval or juvenile seed or

adults for each species would need to be addressed. Some species are not readily commercially

available such as surf clams or blue mussels. One option would be to establish or fund a

shellfish hatchery or hatcheries to sustain requisite seed production for multiple species or very

large numbers of a single species. Secondly, nursery, grow-out and final planting or release

areas would need to be identified and designated as project areas. This would require identifying

and selecting candidate shellfish restoration work sites and obtaining regulatory approvals to

implement the projects. Thirdly, some culturing techniques may involve using suspension or

bottom gear that may affect other uses of Narragansett Bay and salt pond waters. Relatively

small tidal water areas would likely have to be restricted from boating or other uses at least on a

seasonal basis and possibly for as long as several years. Lastly, local broodstock should be used

for the production of shellfish seed to sustain the genetic make-up of existing stocks and

minimize the potential for shellfish disease transfer.
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

23

The Trustees concluded that multi-species stock restoration and enhancement using seeding,

grow-out, and/or aquaculture hatchery techniques is a desirable alternative, but concluded that

this alternative is considered only one component of a more comprehensive approach that also

includes a quahog rescue. This alternative is thus combined with the rescue alternative described

in Section 3.3 and the Narragansett Bay transplant alternative discussed in Section 3.3.2.

The release of hatchery-reared quahog, bay scallop, oyster, surf clam, and soft-shelled clam seed

would have minimal adverse impact on Rhode Island coastal waters. Some culturing techniques

may have minor adverse localized effects on other water-based uses and would require full

assessment and approval by Rhode Island's Coastal Resources Management Council (CRMC)

and ACOE 404/10 regulatory programs. A shellfish hatchery-rearing alternative targeting on

multiple species would likely have a positive impact on enhancing existing shellfish populations,

restoring bay scallop populations, and benefiting Rhode Island's commercial and recreational

fisheries. Should a hatchery facility be established, its siting and construction would be

conducted to avoid any adverse impacts to salt marsh and other sensitive and regulated habitats.

3.8 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE: LIMITED QUAHOG RESCUE AND

MULTI-SPECIES RESTORATION

The Trustees' preferred alternative is a combination and variation of previously identified

alternatives: (1) conduct a limited quahog rescue from the planned Providence River Federal

Navigational Channel dredge area; and (2) implement multiple stock enhancement and

restoration projects targeting quahogs, bay scallops, and oysters. This alternative is similar to the

preferred alternative identified in the 1999 North Cape Restoration Plan.

The multi-species stock enhancement and restoration project approach will be conducted in

conjunction with other shellfish programs implemented in the state. The preferred restoration

alternative addressing multiple shellfish species has been conceptually developed so that the plan

would be executed expeditiously within a 3 to 5-year time frame and at a funding level that is

available through the North Cape shellfish settlement funds. These projects are expected to

provide substantial ecological and economic benefits to the shellfish resource of the state and

provide sufficient compensatory restoration for the spill shellfish injuries. Additionally, the

Trustees anticipate that these enhancement and restoration projects will provide opportunity for

greater public involvement in the projects thereby generating public support and promoting

community-based restoration activities. The following sections discuss in greater detail the

specific types of projects for each of the target species.

3.8.1 Quahog Stock Enhancement

There is strong evidence that numbers of quahogs in Narragansett Bay and the coastal salt ponds

have been substantially reduced from historic levels due primarily to overfishing (Baczenski et

al., 1979; Boyd, 1991; Crawford, 1984; Ganz et al., 1992; Rice, 1989). RIDEM, as part of its

shellfish management program, has designated quahog transplant and sanctuary areas in

Narragansett Bay and the coastal salt ponds, and has a track record of transplanting quahogs

from restricted waters into these areas for purposes of increasing population size and benefiting
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

24

local fisheries. The Rhode Island Shellfishermen's Association is also interested and engaged in

quahog stock enhancement programs by working with the University of Rhode Island and Roger

Williams University. These collaborative programs are aimed at reseeding quahogs in test sites

to assess predation, survival, growth rate factors to help evaluate the potential for conducting

large-scale reseeding efforts in Narragansett Bay (Scott, pers. comm.). Further, with the success

of commercial shellfish hatcheries and advancing, cost-effective nursery techniques, quahog

reseeding programs have flourished throughout the Atlantic and Gulf coasts of the United States

(Flimlin, 2000). Many states and municipalities have successful quahog management programs

that include transplanting as well as reseeding to enhance their quahog stocks.

3.8.1.1 Project Objectives

The Trustees have identified objectives for the quahog stock enhancement component of the

preferred alternative that are designed to increase quahog resources in the South County coastal

salt ponds and Narragansett Bay.

• Implement a limited, cost-effective quahog rescue from the Providence River channel dredge

area that will result in transplanting quahogs to spawning sanctuaries and quahog recruitment

that otherwise would be lost due to the dredging;

• Establish a nursery as part of RIDEM's Quahog Management Plan;

• Conduct releases of hatchery-reared native Rhode Island quahogs to the coastal salt ponds

and possibly Narragansett Bay;

• Establish a Rhode Island community-based program by recruiting citizens to be actively

involved in the enhancement projects to help foster interest and awareness of Rhode Island’s

premier shellfish industry; and

• Monitor the survival and growth of the releases and overall benefits to the quahog stocks and

managed shellfishery.

3.8.1.2 Quahog Rescue and Spawning Sanctuary

The Providence River quahog rescue would be geographically restricted to the area south of

Gaspee Point. It would target the higher density quahog areas associated with the channel slopes

in the Bullock Point Reach, a rescue area totaling approximately 37 acres (Refer to Figure 7).

This alternative was discussed above in Section 3.3. This limited quahog rescue would result in

the most cost-effective and expeditious approach to harvesting and transplanting the quahogs

prior to the ACOE's channel dredging, scheduled to begin in November 2002. Based on

previous RIDEM transplant programs, this project is expected to require about 30-field days to

complete and will relay approximately 250,000 pounds of quahogs in the topneck commercial

size category. This quahog rescue addresses the stipulation of the North Cape Consent Decree

that the Trustees are to transplant quahogs from the Providence River ship channel. The quahog

rescue will result in ecological benefits similar to those provided by surf clams, the shellfish

most adversely affected by the spill.
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

25

As previously discussed, the rescue and transplant of adult quahogs would have minimal adverse

impact to Narragansett Bay tidal waters of the Providence River and at the in the vicinity of the

proposed Potowomut Shellfish Management area transplant site. The substrate of the Bullock

Point Reach channel slopes would be affected by clam rescue dredging, although these areas will

also be altered by the anticipated ACOE channel dredging. The channel dredging for

navigational improvements will encompass substrate disturbances in the same location as the

proposed quahog dredge rescue and will result in substantially greater substrate alteration than

the rescue project. The rescue would occur using a small dredge towed behind a vessel to collect

quahogs at or near the substrate surface. Minor, localized temporary turbidity would occur, but

would be negligible to the navigational dredging that is scheduled to begin November 2002. To

add, RIDEM has been transplanting quahogs from closed waters to spawning sanctuary locations

for many years with no apparent adverse impacts.

The RIDEM shellfish sanctuaries are periodically opened to harvest on a rotating basis, and it is

anticipated that after approximately two years of protection, managed harvest of the quahogs will

be allowed, thereby benefiting not only the quahog stocks, but also the local fishery. The rescue

from the Providence River would occur in conformance with state health regulations and the

Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference guidelines. The quahogs would be placed in a closed

sanctuary area where they would be allowed to depurate and, therefore, pose no public health

concerns.

3.8.1.3 Quahog Reseeding

States and towns typically implement reseeding programs by either purchasing larger sized (>10

mm) quahog seed for direct placement in open fishery areas or greater quantities of smaller sized

(~1mm) quahog seed for placement in shellfish nursery growing facilities (Damery, 2000;

Flimlin, 2000). The option of purchasing large quantities of small quahog seed (~1 mm) from

commercial suppliers requires that the seed be grown for period of time before release. In many

of the existing programs, agencies employ both types of propagation methods to better ensure a

reasonable seed survival for commercial and recreational shellfish activities (Marcotti, pers.

comm.). It has been demonstrated that agencies able to implement diverse propagation programs

that include nurseries can grow quahog seed to a size at a lower cost in comparison to purchasing

similar size seed directly from the commercial hatchery. The cost for purchasing only large size

seed (10+ mm) from commercial hatcheries for broadcasting directly to the shellfish grounds

ranged between $38 to $63 per 1000 seed. In contrast, the cost of purchasing small seed (1-2

mm) for nursery grow-out, ranged between $11 to $33 per 1000 seed ( Damery, 2000). Labor,

equipment and operational costs were included within these cost estimates.

For the North Cape project, the Trustees propose to use Rhode Island “white” quahogs as adult

broodstock for the production of quahog seed for planting over a 4-year period. Selected

broodstock will be transported to a commercial shellfish hatchery for larval production. After

settlement, small quahogs (500 u to 1 mm) will be transported to a field-based upweller nursery

system at the RIDEM Coastal Fisheries Lab on Pt. Judith Pond. Approximately one million seed

will be purchased annually from commercial hatcheries for this program and raised in upwellers

for four to six months, depending on growth rates for planting in the fall. The project also calls

for annually purchasing 1 million large size seed (~20 mm) for direct field planting in the fall.
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

26

As part of the evaluation process, the Trustees will prepare regulatory application materials

describing the proposed projects, their locations, and potential impacts for review and approval

by the Coastal Resources Management Council (CRMC). The CRMC permitting process

involves a public review. The proposed project plan will also be submitted to the ACOE for

review under their regulatory program. The Trustees will work with volunteers and citizens

groups to complete the project. Follow-up monitoring of seeded beds will determine growth and

survival rates.

3.8.1.4 Quahog Program Environmental and Socio-Economic Impacts

The release of seed quahogs should have negligible adverse effects on the coastal salt ponds and

Narragansett Bay waters. Quahog seeding programs have been previously conducted in Rhode

Island waters by RIDEM with no adverse impacts. All shellfish propagated by commercial

hatcheries for use in this project will be rigorously tested for potential shellfish disease, and any

seed found to be diseased shall be rejected. These designations typically occur with extensive

coordination with the shellfishing industry. The seed releases should have positive effects on the

existing quahog stocks, and the projects will involve and cooperatively work with shellfishing

industry and local communities to place quahogs in designated areas that will have minimal

adverse consequences for existing uses. The Trustees will consult with all potentially affected

stakeholders to minimize conflicts with navigation, dredging, commercial or recreational fisheries,

local residents, and other users of the salt ponds and adjacent waters of Narragansett Bay.

3.8.1.5 Projected Quahog Stock Enhancement Program Costs

Table 3-2 summarizes the projected cost for these projects and is based on a 4-year program.

These costs include three major elements: the quahog rescue, quahog small seed and nursery

project, and large quahog direct seeding project. Monitoring and assessment are integral,

additional costs for assessing the progress and performance of the projects.

TABLE 3-2

SUMMARY OF QUAHOG ENHANCEMENT PROJECTED COSTS

Cost Element Projected Costs

Quahog Rescue and Transplant Program $60,000.00

Quahog Nursery and Small Seeding Program $75,000.00

Quahog Large Seeding Program $125,000.00

Monitoring, Assessment, and Evaluation $30,000.00

Total for Quahog Projects $290,000.00

3.8.2 Bay Scallop Restoration

Historically, Rhode Island salt ponds produced substantial amounts of bay scallops usually in a

“boom-or-bust” fashion. Of the salt ponds targeted for shellfish restoration actions, Point Judith,

Ninigret, and Quonochontaug have had a long history of producing bountiful crops of bay

scallops. During the 1950s, bay scallop landings steadily averaged 81,160 pounds for the decade
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

27

but declined drastically in the 1960s. During the 1960s, landings only totaled 11,100 pounds

valued at $13,390. However, the 1970s fetched 634,800 pounds, and 1978 was the "last great”

bay scallop season when 448,700 pounds were harvested and valued at $1,265,128 (National

Marine Fisheries Service data). During the 1980s and 1990s, bay scalloping failed to produce

any significant landings. In 1983, Rhode Island harvested only 44,150 lbs. with a value of

$282,325. For the past four years, Rhode Island has not experienced a recreational or

commercial harvest, suggesting that bay scallop stocks have been severely reduced.

The Trustees propose to implement measures for purposes of restoring the salt pond bay scallop

stocks and achieve a sustainable resource.

3.8.2.1 Restoration Objectives

The Trustees have identified objectives for the bay scallop projects to restore resources in the

South County coastal salt ponds.

• Implement a multi-year program to restore coastal pond(s) bay scallop stocks;

• Establish bay scallop spawning sanctuaries and nursery in Point Judith Salt Pond;

• Employ artificial spat collectors to monitor larval recruitment;

• Seed and restore bay scallops into multiple coastal salt ponds;

• Establish a community-based bay scallop program recruiting local organizations and other

volunteers to assist in project implementation; and

• Monitor the survival, growth, and recruitment to evaluate the progress and performance of

the scallop projects.

3.8.2.2 Overview of Project Types

The bay scallop restoration will involve implementing spawning sanctuaries, spat collection and

reseeding as methods to restore scallop populations in the coastal salt ponds. This effort is

intended to involve the community in project implementation. The reseeding program will be

designed to include multiple salt ponds impacted by the North Cape oil spill. Additionally, this

program will establish a bay scallop nursery program using land-based and field-based

techniques at the RIDEM Coastal Fisheries Lab in Point Judith Salt Pond. Although a majority

of the bay scallop seed will be planted in coastal salt ponds, some seed will also be utilized in

establishing temporary spawning sanctuaries using transient gear (spat collectors) as in Point

Judith Salt Pond.

The Trustees propose to conduct this program over four years. Initially the program will be

focused on demonstrating the application methods and determining the merits of using various

scallop restoration techniques. . Assuming initial success, the Trustees then intend to scale-up the

techniques and expand the reseeding program. The bay scallop nursery, spat collection,
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

28

spawning sanctuary, and reseeding projects will allow opportunity for community volunteer and

educational institution involvement. There will also be opportunities to assist in monitoring

growth, survival, and recruitment. This community-based restoration effort will promote a

stewardship interest in the bay scallop resource and foster greater regard for following and

enforcing fishery regulations and improving salt pond water quality.

3.8.2.3 Bay Scallop Reseeding

Over the last decade, bay scallop recruitment failures have been widespread. The reasons for

these failures are unknown, but evidence suggests multiple factors such as nuisance algal

blooms, poor water quality, industrial waste, fishing pressure, anomalous environmental

conditions, habitat loss and predation are causes. A factor causing fluctuations in bay scallop

populations is the short life span of the species, typically living only 20 to 24 months in New

England waters. The short life span coupled with the other factors previously mentioned is

presumably responsible for the decline in scallop harvests. The most common restoration

practice is to release seed scallops to natural beds. Tettelbach and Wenczel (1993) reported

using hatchery-reared scallops for reseeding efforts in Long Island waters. Their extensive

reseeding since 1985 has helped the native bay scallop population decimated by brown tide

blooms. Recently, researchers from Long Island have incorporated spawning sanctuaries and

over-wintering and spring seed transplanting projects as part of their reseeding projects

(Tettelbach, pers. comm.).

The objective of this program is to re-seed multiple coastal ponds with large (25mm) juvenile

bay scallop seed. Approximately 1.5 million seed will be purchased annually from commercial

hatcheries for this program. Under the direction of the Trustees, the scallops will then be seeded

in designated locations with the help of volunteers and citizens groups. Follow-up monitoring of

seeded beds will determine growth and survival estimates.

3.8.2.4 Spawning Sanctuaries and Spat Collection

Another common method utilized to enhance scallop stocks is artificial spat collectors. The

collection of natural larval seed with artificial spat collectors supplemented by reseeding has

been effective in stabilizing scallop fisheries elsewhere including New England (Tettelbach and

Wenczel, 1993; Tammi, K. A., 1996). The bay scallop restoration program proposed by the

Trustees will employ spat collectors and sanctuaries to restore bay scallop populations in the

coastal salt ponds. This program will establish manageable populations of adult broodstock.

Bay scallop spawning sanctuaries will be established at various locations in Point Judith Salt

Pond. Specific locations have not been identified, but several sites will be evaluated based upon

historic scalloping activity, presence of eelgrass beds, estuarine flow dynamics, and potential

water user conflict. In general, bay scallop spawning sanctuaries will consist of multiple floating

cages containing adult scallops and a series of artificial spat collectors at each site.

3.8.2.5 Bay Scallop Program Environmental and Socio-Economic Impacts

Growing and releasing sscallops will have minimal impact to the coastal salt ponds. Bay scallop

mortality is mostly affected by predation, habitat degradation, climatic changes, and harmful

algal blooms; potentially harmful pathogens have not been significant issues with bay scallops as
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

29

have been with quahogs. The Trustees will submit regulatory application materials to CRMC and

the ACOE for full consideration of potential impacts. The Trustees will develop specific projects to

minimize minor habitat disturbances and potential conflicts with navigation, commercial or

recreational fisheries, local residential activities, and other users of the salt ponds.

3.8.2.6 Projected Bay Scallop Program Costs

Table 3-3 summarizes the cost for these projects based upon the program extending for 4 years.

The cost for the bay scallop restoration program includes three major elements: the reseeding

program, spawning and spat collection projects, and bay scallop nursery program. Purchasing

scallop seed and nursery and grow-out equipment are the primary costs. Additional costs are

associated with performance monitoring.

TABLE 3-3

SUMMARY OF BAY SCALLOP PROJECTS AND PROJECTED COSTS

Project Type Projected Cost

Reseeding Program $230,000.00

Spawning Sanctuaries and Spat Program $30,000.00

Scallop Nursery Program $75,000.00

Monitoring, Assessment and Evaluation $30,000.00

Total for Bay Scallop Projects $365,000.00

3.8.3 Oyster Stock Enhancement

Another important Rhode Island shellfish is the eastern oyster. Goode (1884) reported that

oysters were once prevalent in Rhode Island’s coastal salt ponds, but populations have declined

in recent years (Ganz 1997). The Narragansett Bay oyster fishery thrived between the 1800s and

1930s. In Rhode Island, the Oyster Act of 1864 set forth a requirement for oyster companies to

comply with a mandatory cultch program stating that all disposal of oyster shell material must go

to leased oyster grounds. At the height of Rhode Island’s oyster industry in 1910, 8100 hectares

of Narragansett Bay was farmed, producing 7000 metric tons of oysters with the shell cultch

recycled back into the bay (Rice et al, 2000). In addition to providing jobs, the Rhode Island

Shellfish Commission (1880-1920) reported that the state received revenues from the oyster

ground leases valued at over $700,000. By the 1920s, the oyster industry slowly declined for a

number of reasons including industrial pollution, increased eutrophication from sewage disposal,

increased sedimentation from land development, and the Great Hurricane of 1938 (Rice et al,

2000). In the late 1990s, Narragansett Bay oyster population rebounded in some locations, but

recent decreases are probably due to fishing pressure, lack of successful sets and the effects of

the shellfish parasite, Dermo (Perkinsus marinus) (Valliere, pers. comm. 1999; Gomez-Chiarri

2002). The economic importance and historical value of the state’s oyster industry is well

recognized with the recent passage of the Narragansett Bay Oyster Restoration Act, RIGL 20-2-

45, enacted in 2001. This act declares the importance and need for the state to continue,

“restoring and maintaining both the oyster population and oyster habitat.”
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

30

3.8.3.1 Summary of Objectives of the Oyster Restoration Program

The Trustees have identified several objectives for the oyster restoration project:

• Implement remote setting project to restore oysters;

• Establish oyster nurseries in Point Judith Salt Pond and at the Jenny’s Creek Shellfish

Management area on Prudence Island. These nurseries will be devoted to sustainable

shellfish enhancement and propagation projects;

• Complete bed cultch projects to enhance oyster bed habitat before planting spat;

• Implement oyster plantings in one or more coastal salt ponds and Narragansett Bay;

• Apply oyster gardening techniques as part of community-based program for establishing

oyster spawning sanctuaries in Narragansett Bay and coastal salt ponds;

• Minimize site conditions adversely affecting other recreational fisheries; and

• Improve the water quality in Narragansett Bay and the coastal salt ponds by increasing

populations of oysters.

3.8.3.2 Overview of the Project Types

This project proposes to restore oyster populations in Rhode Island waters by using the remote

setting technique. Remote setting is a proven cost effective method of producing large numbers

oysters for public enhancement projects along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts of the United States

(Bohn et al., 1995; Marcotti, pers. comm; Meritt and Leffler, 2000). Remote setting is a method

that produces large numbers of oyster seed from the eyed-larval stage. Adult oysters are

conditioned and spawned at a hatchery in a controlled environment to produce millions of eyed

larvae. The larvae are introduced to large setting tanks filled with shell known as cultch. Cultch

consists of oyster, surf clam or ocean quahog shell material loosely bagged in plastic mesh.

Within 24 hours, eyed larvae settle onto the cultch, and the shell bags are then moved to field

nurseries to continue growing before final planting.

Natural oysters commonly grow on large clusters attaching to hard substrates and other shells,

forming large oyster beds and reef structures providing a suitable substrate for oyster larvae

settlement (Bahr and Lanier, 1981). Often oyster beds can experience sedimentation that may

result in the suffocation of adult oysters as well as reduce the availability of suitable habitat for

the settlement of larval oysters. Planted cultch material provides a clean surface for the larvae to

settle, attach to and grow on and improves the overall health and condition of the oyster bed

(Loosanoff, 1961).

Oyster gardening is the process of culturing a population of oysters in aquaculture gear called

Taylor Floats for educational and ecological purposes. Oyster gardening was developed in the

Chesapeake Bay along the shores of Maryland and Virginia as a means to augment the natural
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

31

oyster population impacted by shellfish diseases (Leffler, 1999). These programs have received

overwhelming public support involving more than 300 gardener families, 40 classes graduating

more than 200 students. In Maryland, with the help of NMFS and local non-profit organizations,

a “Master Gardeners” program was initiated. Citizens enrolled in this program receive training

and education on such topics as basic oyster biology, oyster reef habitats, shellfish diseases,

monitoring equipment and growth. Once completed, the Master Gardeners become the point

persons and link with the research scientists and data collection (Leffler, 1999). Oysters

monitored through these programs are eventually planted on the public shellfishing grounds to

rehabilitate the oyster reefs.

3.8.3.3 Remote Setting and Oyster Nursery Projects

Rhode Island oysters will be collected and held in tanks as adult broodstock for the production of

oyster larvae. Weathered cultch material will be purchased from local suppliers. The most

common cultch material for the larval oysters is clean oyster shell. However, if abundant

sources of oyster cultch are not available, clamshell will be used and which are readily available

in the Rhode Island. The shell material will be screened to retain large shell fragments for use as

setting cultch. Shells will be placed into tubular extrusion netting and sealed at both ends. Shell

bags with weathered shell will be transported to a commercial shellfish hatchery for setting eyedlarvae. After settlement, the shell bags will be transported to designated nursery sites at Jenny’s

Creek on Prudence Island (Figure 2) and in Pt. Judith Pond near the RIDEM Coastal Fisheries

Lab (Figure 7). Trustom Pond, situated on a National Wildlife Refuge (Figure 8), may also serve

as an oyster nursery site. Each nursery site will require a small area, approximately 1000 square

feet. Shell bags will be placed on racks and/or wooden pallets within the intertidal zone region.

It is expected that the oyster spat will grow to planting size (~20mm) in these nurseries within

three months.

Once the oysters reach this size, the spatted cultch material will be transported to designated

areas, likely 3/4 to 1 acre in area, with the material spread in a thin layer (~1-inch thick) on top

of the bed cultch material. Planted sites will be monitored to determine long-term survival,

growth, and recruitment in evaluating the performance of the project. These sites will also be

monitored for the effects of predation and presence of any disease. Bed cultch will be monitored

to assess long-term stability, effects of sedimentation, and ecological characteristics.

3.8.3.4 Habitat Enhancement Project

This program proposes to stabilize designated oyster planting sites by utilizing shell material to

harden the bottom substrate prior to planting. Free-planting locations will be designated under

the guidance of RIDEM. These locations will be in close proximity to the oyster nurseries in the

coastal salt ponds and Narragansett Bay. Shell fragments remaining from shell bag production

will be used for the bed cultch. Bed cultch material will provide a firm foundation for the

spatted cultch to minimize sedimentation and suffocation. Approximately 20 to 30 cubic yards

will be dispersed to a depth of no more than several inches over designated planting grounds

approximately 1 acre in size. Bed cultch will be loaded from the staging areas onto trucks, boats

or barges for dispersal. Components of this project will be developed to involve community

groups, volunteers, local universities and colleges, agencies, and non-governmental
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

32

organizations. As part of this habitat enhancement component, monitoring will evaluate the rates

of spat settlement and growth, as well as sedimentation or other adverse effects.

3.8.3.5 Oyster Gardening

This small-scale oyster gardening component is expected to provide a source of oyster stocking

material as well as generate increased public awareness for restoring oysters in Rhode Island

waters. The Trustees anticipate that the oyster gardening projects will provide substantial

educational opportunities. Public and private marinas, educational institutions, nongovernmental organizations, and private citizens will participate in gardening by hosting (using

private docks to hang oyster baskets for grow-out) and monitoring survival and growth of seed

oysters for eventual planting on the public grounds. This program could be incorporated into

RIDEM’s aquatic outreach educational programs.

3.8.3.6 Oyster Program Environmental and Socio-Economic Impacts

The placement of remotely set oyster spat and/or seed should have minimal impacts on the

coastal salt ponds or Narragansett Bay. Oysters will reach harvest size in two to three years,

thereby benefiting the local fishery.

The proposed nursery sites at Jenny’s Creek and in Pt. Judith Pond can be managed effectively to

ensure the success of the remote setting project. These sites were chosen because recreational

and commercial shellfishing activities are presently prohibited at these locations. The Jenny’s

Creek Shellfish Management Area (Figure 2) was established by the Rhode Island Marine

Fisheries Council and RIDEM in 2001 to specifically allow for shellfish restoration.

Implementing the oyster restoration projects will not add any additional shellfish restrictions at

the existing recreational and commercial shellfish areas in Rhode Island waters.

The placement of cultch on the bottom to enhance and stabilize oyster habitats in the coastal salt

ponds and Narragansett Bay should have positive environmental effects. Although this practice

may have minor negative impact by temporarily displacing organisms on some bottom types,

these areas are expected to rapidly colonize with various oyster reef biota. In most cases, oyster

rehabilitation areas will be determined from analyzing the historical oyster regions, shellfishing

activity, present or recent oyster habitat and potential user conflicts. Habitat enhancement

projects will be properly sited to minimize the potential for obstructions to navigation, and any

areas constructed would be properly marked with buoys. The positive effects of cultched

bottoms include an increase in habitat diversity, species richness, and overall biomass. Cultched

areas tend to attract benthic invertebrates as well as various finfish species such as striped bass

(Dame 1979, Dame et al., 1984).

The impact of mixing genetically distinct shellfish populations is a potential concern, but can be

obviated by using local oysters as broodstock. Moreover, shellfish seed of other species have

been transplanted into the salt ponds and Narragansett Bay in the past, with no apparent adverse

affects on the native populations. These projects are subject to adhering to BMPs for shellfish

disease prevention established by the Biosecurity Board and promulgated under Rhode Island

General Laws Section 20-10. These projects will go through a public review through the CRMC
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

33

regulatory process and possibly RIDEM Division of Water Resources and ACOE 10/404

regulatory programs. In regulatory processing, potential environmental impacts and conflicts to

commercial and recreational fisheries, local residents, and other water-based users of the salt

ponds and Narragansett Bay will be fully evaluated.

The occurrence of high mortality due to disease has been observed in both cultured and wild

populations of oysters since the early part of the twentieth century (Ford and Tripp, 1996).

Principle infectious diseases of the eastern oyster include Dermo (Perkinsus marinus) and MSX

(Haplosporidium nelsoni), both protozoan parasites. These parasites are ubiquitous, and

outbreaks of diseases are potentially related to environmental conditions (Ford and Tripp 1996).

Juvenile Oyster disease (JOD) is another disease thought to be the causal agent for high mortality

of larval and juvenile oysters (Bricelji et al., 1992).

MSX appears to be restricted to only a few locations in Rhode Island, whereas, Dermo is

widespread and established in wild Rhode Island oysters present in some of the coastal salt

ponds and portions of Narragansett Bay (Gomez-Chiarri, 2002). The intensity and prevalence of

Dermo in wild oysters ranges from moderate to high, or has remained unchanged or increased

from the initial surveys conducted in 1998. To help reduce the impact of disease, only certified

disease-free oyster stocks will be used for the oyster restoration projects. The likelihood of

project success can be improved by diversifying the projects among several locations. With

careful site selection, proper project design and monitoring, it is highly probable that shellfish

restoration using disease-tested oysters will succeed in meeting the restoration objectives for the

coastal salt pond and Narragansett Bay projects.

3.8.3.7 Projected Oyster Program Costs

Table 3-4 summarizes the cost for the oyster program based on a 4-year program. Cost for the

oyster restoration program includes three major elements: remote setting projects, habitat

enhancement projects, and oyster gardening activities. Additional cost elements include shellfish

disease monitoring, baseline surveys and field assessments, and performance monitoring. The

major cost of the remote setting is the cost of the eyed larvae and nursery and grow-out

equipment. The major cost for the oyster habitat enhancement is transporting cultch material to

staging area(s) and planting grounds. The major cost element for the oyster gardening program

is related to purchasing equipment and materials for the spawning sanctuaries.

TABLE 3-4

SUMMARY OF OYSTER PROGRAM AND PROJECTED COSTS

Project Type Projected Costs

Remote Setting Program $215,000.00

Oyster Gardening Program $15,000.00

Habitat Enhancement Program $5,000.00

Baseline Survey and Assessment $30,000.00

Monitoring, Assessment and Evaluation $40,000.00

Total for Oyster Projects $305,000.00
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

34

FINDINGS OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT CHAPTER 4

4.1 DISCUSSION AND STATEMENT

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Marine Fisheries

Service is the lead Trustee for the North Cape Case, and is the lead federal agency for this

Shellfish Restoration Plan and Supplemental Environmental Assessment. The NOAA

Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6 (revised May 20, 1999) defines nine criteria for determining

the significance of the impacts of a proposed federal action. These criteria are discussed below

as they pertain to the North Cape Shellfish Restoration Project:

1. Can the proposed action be reasonably expected to jeopardize the sustainability of any target

species that may be affected by the action?

The proposed action is not expected to jeopardize the sustainability or adversely affect any target

species. The proposed shellfish restoration is to enhance existing quahog stocks and restore bay

scallop and oysters by seeding and habitat enhancement projects having negligible effects on

living marine resources and their habitats.

2. Can the proposed action be reasonably expected to allow substantial damage to the ocean

and coastal habitats and/or EFH as defined under the Magnuson-Stevens Act and identified

in Fishery Management Plans (FMPs)?

The proposed action is not expected to result in substantial damage to the ocean, coastal habitats

and/or EFH as defined under the Magnuson-Stevens Act and identified in the FMPs for the

Northwest Atlantic. The area affected by this action has been identified as EFH for species

managed by the NMFS in Narragansett Bay and the coastal salt ponds. The only species

addressed by an FMP that could be affected by this proposed shellfish restoration is winter

flounder. Winter flounder are found seasonally in the project area, but the proposed restoration

will have minimal area and disturbance effect on benthic habitat which winter flounder are

known to use. This project is not expected to have an adverse impact on EFH.

3. Can the proposed action be reasonably expected to have a substantial adverse impact on

public health or safety?

The proposed action is not expected to have a substantial adverse impact on public health or

safety. The quahogs that would be rescued from the Providence River dredge channel are in

fecal coliform contaminated waters, but will be transplanted to spawning sanctuaries closed to

shellfishing for at least two years to allow for depuration. All shellfish seed purchased from
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

35

commercial growers is required to be grown in non-contaminated waters for release as

potentially harvestable shellfish.

4. Can the proposed action be reasonably expected to have an adverse impact on endangered

or threatened species, marine mammals, or critical habitat of these species?

The proposed action is not expected to have an adverse impact on any federal or state

endangered or threatened species, marine mammals, or critical habitat for these species. The

project activities and location under this restoration effort will not impact threatened or

endangered species in Rhode Island on the basis for the formal agency determinations made in

previous consultations with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or Rhode Island's Natural

Heritage Program.

5. Can the proposed action be reasonably expected to result in cumulative adverse effects that

could have a substantial effect on the target species or non-target species?

The proposed action is not expected to result in cumulative adverse effects that would have a

substantial effect on target or non-target species. The proposed shellfish restoration will result in

minimal disturbances to marine and estuarine waters, and have negligible cumulative effects on

any target or non-target species. The proposed projects may have a cumulative positive effect on

one or more of the shellfish species targeted for restoration or enhancement.

6. Can the proposed action be reasonably expected to jeopardize the sustainability of any nontarget species?

The proposed action is not expected to jeopardize the sustainability of any non-target species.

Positive effects may result in enhancing the sustainability of quahogs, bay scallops and oysters in

the project area within Rhode Island coastal waters.

7. Can the proposed action be expected to have a substantial impact on biodiversity and

ecosystem function within the affected area (e.g., benthic productivity, predator-prey

relationships, etc.)?

The proposed action is not expected to have a substantial impact on biodiversity or ecosystem

function within the affected area. Shellfish restoration efforts are expected to improve the health

of the ecosystem by providing more filtration to reduce phytoplankton and zooplankton levels.

Improved shellfish habitat would enhance existing finfish and shellfish habitats and likely

increase biodiversity.

8. Are significant social or economic impacts interrelated with significant natural or physical

environmental effects?

The shellfish restoration effort is not expected to result in significant negative social or economic

impacts, nor significant natural or physical environmental effects. The proposed shellfish

restoration should result in positive social and economic benefits by increasing shellfish stocks
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

36

supporting recreational and commercial fisheries. The projects are also expected to have

community involvement in helping to restore quahog, bay scallop and oyster stocks.

9. To what degree are the effects on the quality of the human environment expected to be highly

controversial?

The measures contained in this action are not expected to adversely affect the quality of human

environment, and therefore, the projects should not be controversial. Shellfish restoration

implementation will require regulatory review and approval by state and federal agencies that

includes public review and input.

Findings of No Significant Impact Statement: Based on the analysis presented in this

document, the North Cape shellfish restoration will not significantly affect the quality of the

human environment. The proposed projects will include a quahog rescue and multi-species stock

restoration and enhancement using seeding, habitat enhancement and other techniques in Rhode

Island’s coastal salt ponds and Narragansett Bay. This conclusion is specifically in reference to

criteria of Section 6.02 of NOAA Administrative Order NAO 216-6, Environmental Review

Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act.
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

37

REFERENCES CITED

Baczenski, P., A. Ganz and L. Delancy. 1979. A Shellfish Survey of Point Judith and Potter

Ponds. RIDEM Leaflet 55.

Bahr, M. L. and W. P. Lanier. 1981. The ecology of intertidal oyster reefs of the south Atlantic

coast: a community profile. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Oofice of Biological Services.

FWS/obs-81/15. Pp. 105.

Bohn, R.E., D.W. Webster and D. Meritt. 1995. Producing oyster seed by remote setting.

Northeastern Regional Aquaculture Center, Bulletin no.220. 11 pp.

Boyd, 1991. The Narragansett Bay Shellfish Industry: A historic perspective and overview of

the problems of the 1990’s. pp. 2-10. In: M. A. Rice, M. Grady and M. L. Schwartz (eds.).

Proceedings of the First Annual Rhode Island Shellfisheries Conference. Rhode Island Sea

Grant, University of Rhode Island, Narragansett, Rhode Island.

Bricelji, V.M., S.E. Ford, F.J. Borrero, F.O. Perkins, G. Rivara, R.E. Hillman, R.A. Elston and J.

Chang. 1992. Unexplained mortalities of hatchery-reared, juvenile oysters, Crassostrea virginica

(Gmelin). Journal of Shellfish Research 11: 331-347.

Cobb, J. S. and M. Clancy, 1998. North Cape Oil Spill: Assessing Impact on Lobster

Populations. AR 4.02.1a #13

Cobb, J. S., M. Clancy, and R. A. Wahle. 1998. Habitat-based Assessment of Lobster

Abundance: A case Study of an Oil Spill. AR 4.02.1.a#14,4.02.1.b.2 #2

Crawford, R. 1984. Rhode Island lagoon fisheries; The consequences of 100 years of habitat

restoration. In Kepetsky, J. M. and G. Lasserre (eds.): Management of Coastal Lagoon Fisheries,

pp. 271-294.

Crawford, R. and C. Carey. 1985. Retention of winter flounder larvae within a Rhode Island Salt

Pond. Estuaries 8 (2B): 217-227.

Crawford, R. 1990. Winter Flounder in Rhode Island coastal ponds. Rhode Island Sea Grant

#RIU-G-90-001.

Dame, R.F. 1979. The abundance, diversity and biomass of macrobenthos on North Inlet, South

Carolina, intertidal oyster reefs. Proceedings of the National Shellfisheries Association 69: 6-10.

Dame, R.F., R.G. Zingmark and E. Haskin. 1984. Oyster reefs as processors of estuarine

materials. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 83: 239-247.

Damery, D. T. and P. G. Allen. 1999. The feasibility of developing a municipal shellfish

hatchery on Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Report to the Cape Cod Cooperative Extension.

December 31, 1999. Pp. 24.
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

38

Flimlin, G. 2000. Nursery and grow-out methods for aquacultured shellfish. Northeast Regional

Aquaculture Center Publication. NRAC 00-002, February 2000. Pp. 15.

Ford, S. E. and M. R. Tripp. 1996. “Diseases and defense mechanisms” in The Eastern Oyster

Crassostrea virginica, V. S. Kennedy, R. I. E. Newell and A. F. Eble, eds. Maryland Sea Grant,

College Park, MD. p. 581-569.

French, D. P. 1998. Updated Estimate of Injuries to Marine Communities Resulting from

The North Cape Oil Spill Based on Modeling of Fates and Effects. Report to NOAA Damage

Assessment Center, Silver Springs, MD, September 1998. AR 4.03.1.a#6.

French, D.P. 1999c. Revised Surf Clam Injury Estimate and Restoration Scaling Report to

NOAA Damage Assessment Center, August 1999. AR 4.03.1.a #9.

Ganz, A., P. Fletcher and R. Montefeltri. 1992. A Shellfish Survey of Ninigret Pond,

Charlestown, RI RIDEM leaflet.

Ganz, A. 1997. Environmental Concerns of Breachway and Channel Siltation: Winnapaug

(Brightman) Pond, Quonochontaug Pond, Ninigret (Charlestown) Pond, Washington County, RI.

RIDEM Division of Fish and Wildlife.

Gomez-Chiarri-, M., Rice, R. A., Carrington, E., Ovaitt, C. O. and A. Ganz. 2002. Bivalve

disease survey, state of Rhode Island. Report to the Rhode Island Department of Environmental

Management, Division of Fish and Wildlife, February 2002. Pp. 13.

Goode, G.B. 1884. The Fisheries of Rhode Island: Part IV. The Fisheries of the United States.

Vol. 2, Washington, D.C. U.S. Bureau of Fisheries.

Gould, M. and L. Gould. 1992. Wildlife. In Habitat Inventory/ Resources mapping for

Narragansett Bay and Associated Coastline. Narragansett Bay Project, Providence, Rhode

Island.

Leffler, M.1999. Oyster sanctuaries: an ecological approach to restoration. Maryland Sea Grant

Publication, Marine Notes Vol. 17, No. 4. Pages 1-3.

Leffler, M.1999. Oyster gardening in the Chesapeake Bay. Maryland Sea Grant Publication,

Marine Notes Vol. 17, No. 4. Pages 4-5.

Loosanoff, V. L. 1961. Treatment of cultch to collect heavier sets of oysters. U. S. Department of

the Interior. Fish and Wildlife Service Bureau of Commercial Fisheries Biological Laboratory,

Milford, CT. Bulletin No. 8. Vol. 25, October 3, 1961. Pp. 5.

Merrit. D. and M. Leffler, 2000. Oyster restoration in the Chesapeake Bay looking back, looking

forward. Maryland Aquafarmer. Maryland Sea Grant Cooperative Extension. Issue 2000-04. Fall

2000. Pages 1-2.
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

39

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1997. Annual Landings Results,

http://remora.ssp.nmfs.gov/MFPUBLIC/owa/mrfss.MF_Annual_Landings.Result.

Olsen, S., and G. Seavey. 1983. The state of Rhode Island Coastal Resource Management

Program as amended. Prepared for the Rhode Island Coastal Resources management Council,

Wakefield, Rhode Island.

Olsen, S., and V. Lee. 1985. Rhode Island’s Salt Pond Region: A Special Area Management

Plan. Prepared for the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council. Adopted

November 27, 1984.

Rice, M. A., C. Hickox and I. Zehra. 1989. Effects of intensive fishing effort on the population

structure of Mercenaria mercenaria (Linaeus 1758) in Narragansett Bay. J. Shellfish Res. 8:345-

354.

Rice, M. A., A. Valliere, and A. Caporelli. 2000. A review of shellfish restoration and

management projects in Rhode Island. J. Shellfish Res. Vol. 19, No. 1:401-408.

Short, F. T., D. M. Burdick, S. Granger and S. Nixon. 1996. Long-term decline in eelgrass,

Zostrea Marina, L., linked to increase housing development. In J. Kuo, R.C. Phillips, D.I.

Walker, and H. Krikman (eds.). Seagrass Biology: Proceedings of an International Workshop.

Rottnest Island, Western Australia, January 25-29: pp. 291-298.

Tammi, K. A. 1996. Settlement, recruitment and growth of northern bay scallops, Argopecten

irradians irradians in the Westport River Estuary, Massachusetts. 1996. Master of Science

Thesis, University of Rhode Island. pp.146.

Tettelbach, S. T. and P. Wenczel. 1993. Reseeding efforts and the status of bay scallop

populations in New York following the appearance of brown tide. Journal of Shellfish Research

10: 273 - 280.

Tyrell, T.. 2001. Rhode Island Travel and Tourism Report. Volume 13. Number 1, April 30,

1996. Office of Travel, Tourism and Recreation. Department of Resource Economics, College

of Resource Development, University of Rhode Island Kingston, RI . 31 pp.

Personal Communications

Arthur Ganz, Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management, Jamestown, RI

Tom Marcotti, Barnstable County Shellfish Department, Barnstable, MA

Lawerence Oliver, U.S. Army Corp. of Engineers, Northeast Division

John Gates, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI

Tim Scott, Roger Williams University, Bristol, RI

Steve Tettelbach, South Hampton University, South Hampton, New York

April Valliere, Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management, Jamestown, RI
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

40

APPENDIX A

OVERVIEW OF NORTH CAPE RESTORATION PROJECTS

Lobsters- Restoration is designed to address the 9 million lobsters killed by the oil spill. The

Responsible Party (RP) has implemented a lobster restoration project involving the purchase, vnotch marking and release of 1.25 million adult female lobsters. This project is expected to

increase egg production and eventually replace the 9 million lobsters killed by the oil spill.

Through a cooperative project with the University of Rhode Island, the Trustees are monitoring

survival and egg production of the v-notched lobsters over the life of the project. The first two

years of the project have been completed with approximately 340,000 lobsters purchased, vnotched, and released into Block Island and Rhode Island Sounds and Narragansett Bay. After a

number of unanticipated problems developed in the first year of the project which caused adverse

impacts on the lobster fishery, the Trustees and RP’s representatives implemented a pilot

program in Year 2 which incorporated the direct participation of the commercial lobster

harvesters into the project. Based on the successful implementation of the pilot program, the RP

and Trustees will be expanding the effort in Year 3, that is from May through November 2002.

Salt Ponds- In 2001, approximately 50 acres of land bordering Ninigret Pond was protected

through a conservation easement. By protecting this open space, the lands will remain

undeveloped, thereby eliminating the potential water quality and habitat impacts that may have

resulted from developing the 42 residential lots on this land parcel.

Birds- Actions have been implemented or are proposed that will aid in the protection of bird

species injured by the spill. Funds totaling $140,000 have been set aside to distribute equally

over five years for implementation of management measures to help protect piping plover

(Charadrius melodus). These monies help to fund U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)

staff to coordinate piping plover work both on the Ninigret and Trustom Pond National Wildlife

Refuges (NWRs) as well as other non-NWR South County shore areas. Activities include

installing and maintaining predator exclusion structures and symbolic fences, locating new

nesting habitat, and monitoring fledgling survival. The goal of the Trustees is to increase piping

plover productivity. To address sea bird injuries, USFWS is working with the State of Maine to

purchase an offshore island in Maine to help protect ~600 nesting pairs of common eider

(Somateria mollissima), a species that seasonally overwinters along the Rhode Island coast but

nests in northern latitudes. Funds totaling $300,000 have been set aside for this land purchase to

meet or exceed the goal of protecting at least 315 nesting common eider pairs. An additional

$100,000 in North Cape settlement funds have been allocated for managing and monitoring this

nesting eider population. Lastly, $500,000 in North Cape funds were allocated as part of a $30

million conservation easement on the 750,000-acre (1,172-square mile) Pingree property in

northern Maine to help protect nesting habitat for common loon ( Gavia immer). The loon is a

species that also overwinters along the Rhode Island coast but nests in more northerly latitudes.

At least 24 known nesting pairs will be protected on 110 lakes and ponds on this large Maine

parcel. Another $200,000 in North Cape funds have been dedicated to loon monitoring and

management (floating nest platforms) at the Pingree property, and $50,000 was used in 2001 to

complete habitat assessments on three large potential land purchases. Remaining funds may be

used to help purchase nesting habitat in New Hampshire and/or Maine.
North Cape Shellfish Restoration Plan/Supplemental Environmental Assessment

41

Recreational Fishing- To address impacts to recreational fisheries adversely affected by the oil

spill, the projects being pursued focus on restoration of anadromous fish runs to the South

County salt pond watersheds. Anadromous fish are species that spend most of their lives in the

ocean but return as adults to spawn in freshwater streams and rivers. Juveniles anadromous fish

typically spend a portion of their lives in freshwaters before outmigrating to the marine

environment. Alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus), an important forage species to various

sportfishes such as striped bass and bluefish, is the target species for this restoration effort. The

projects planned for alewife run restoration include installing an Alaskan steep pass fishway on a

5-foot high dam on Factory Pond Brook that drains to Green Hill Pond in South Kingstown. By

constructing the fishway, adult alewife will have access to high quality spawning habitat in the

stream and Factory Pond above the dam. Alewife run restoration is also planned for the

Saugatucket River that discharges to Pt. Judith Pond in South Kingstown. One project in this

watershed is to retrofit a spillway on an earthen dam to provide access to the 220-acre Indian

Lake that is characterized by high quality spawning and nursery habitat. Both the Factory Pond

Brook and Indian Lake dam retrofit projects are scheduled for completion by late fall 2002.

Other alewife passage projects are being considered in the Saugatucket River and Cross Mills

Brook watersheds. Approximately $160,000 is available in settlement funds for the herring run

restoration projects.