A Report upon the Mollusk Fisheries of Massachusetts

Part 20

Chapter 203,213 wordsPublic domain

=============+======+=========+=================+===========================+ | | |1907 PRODUCTION. | TOTAL AREA. | | | +--------+--------+-----+-----+-------+-------+ |Number| | | | | | |Mussels| TOWN. | of | Capital | | | | | |and Eel| | Men. |invested.|Bushels.| Value. |Sand.| Mud.|Gravel.| Grass.| -------------+------+---------+--------+--------+-----+-----+-------+-------+ Duxbury, | 5 | 60 | 700| 600| 800| -| - | 2,700 | Kingston, | 4 | 50 | 500| 450| 150| -| - | 450 | Plymouth, | 6 | 60 | 3,000| 2,500| 400| 100| - | 1,100 | Barnstable, | 25 | 200 | 700| 550| 200| 150| - | 50 | Yarmouth, | 5 | 40 | 600| 500| 25| 15| 10 | - | Orleans, | 30 | 200 | 3,000| 3,000| 125| 50| 20 | 5 | Eastham, | 36 | 250 | 4,000| 4,000| 100| 50| 30 | 20 | Wellfleet, | 11 | 300 | 800| 640| 450| 5| 150 | - | Truro, | 1 | 2 | 50| 60| 50| -| - | - | Provincetown,| 5 | 15 | 400| 320| 400| -| - | - | Chatham, | 10 | 400 | 1,500| 1,200| 330| 10| 20 | - | Harwich, | - | - | 100| 80| 10| 10| 10 | - | Dennis, | - | - | 50| 45| 25| 15| 10 | - | Mashpee, | 2 | 20 | 50| 45| 20| 5| 20 | 5 | Falmouth, | - | - | 200| 175| 40| 5| 5 | - | Bourne, | - | - | 100| 100| 5| 5| 30 | - | Wareham, | 6 | 100 | 800| 800| 15| 10| 75 | - | Marion, | 1 | 15 | 100| 100| -| -| 10 | - | Mattapoisett,| 1 | 15 | 100| 100| -| 5| 5 | - | Fairhaven, | - | - | 100| 100| -| 25| 25 | - | New Bedford, |320[18] - | 300| 225| 5| 5| 15 | - | Dartmouth, | 4 | 50 | 200| 160| 15| 10| 5 | - |

=============+======+===================+===========+======+============ | | PRODUCTIVE AREA. | | | | +--------+----------+ | | | | | |Barren Area| Waste| Possible TOWN. |Total | Good |Scattering|possibly |Barren| Normal | Area |Clamming| Clams |Productive | Area |Production. -------------+------+--------+----------+-----------+------+------------ Duxbury, | 3,500| 5 | 10 | 800 | 2,685| 83,000 Kingston, | 600| 5 | 5 | 150 | 440| 18,000 Plymouth, | 1,600| 10 | 50 | 440 | 1,100| 58,000 Barnstable, | 400| 10 | 10 | 330 | 50| 39,000 Yarmouth, | 50| 5 | 10 | 25 | 10| 6,000 Orleans, | 200| 25 | 50 | 75 | 50| 27,000 Eastham, | 200| 25 | 50 | 100 | 25| 30,000 Wellfleet, | 605| 3 | 12 | 250 | 340| 28,000 Truro, | 50| 1 | 2 | 47 | -| 5,000 Provincetown,| 400| 3 | 3 | 200 | 194| 21,000 Chatham, | 360| 10 | 50 | 300 | -| 44,000 Harwich, | 30| 1 | 5 | 10 | 14| 2,400 Dennis, | 50| 1 | 4 | 30 | 15| 4,200 Mashpee, | 50| 2 | 8 | 30 | 10| 5,400 Falmouth, | 50| 2 | 8 | 40 | -| 6,400 Bourne, | 40| - | 30 | - | 10| 6,000 Wareham, | 100| - | 50 | - | 50| 10,000 Marion, | 10| - | 10 | - | -| 2,000 Mattapoisett,| 10| - | 10 | - | -| 2,000 Fairhaven, | 50| - | 25 | 25 | -| 7,500 New Bedford, | 25| - | 15 | - | 10| 3,000 Dartmouth, | 30| 5 | 15 | - | 10| 5,000

_Decline of the Natural Clam Supply._--The decline of the clam supply is a matter of general knowledge. People who live along the seashore realize that they can no longer gather the amount of clams they once could dig with ease from the same flats. On the southern shore of the State especially it is oftentimes difficult to obtain even enough for family use. The consumer also realizes the loss of the clam, as he is forced to pay higher prices.

If specific cases of this decline are demanded, the following instances should show the exact depletion in the various localities. Even in the best clam-producing town of the State, Newburyport, where the clam production, according to statistics, has apparently increased during the last twenty-five years (as a result of more men entering the fishery), the supply has shown signs of failing. Essex now possesses many acres of flats formerly productive which now lie in a practically barren condition. Gloucester can no longer boast of her former clam industry, as the flats in Annisquam River are in poor condition. Hardly 30 men now make a business of clamming in that town, whereas 92 men were engaged in the fishery in 1879. Passing south of Gloucester, we find great evidence of decline in the Boston harbor flats. Even before the edict closing the harbor from clammers was in force, the production did not by any means equal that of 1879. Plymouth harbor, including the three towns of Duxbury, Kingston and Plymouth, furnishes an excellent illustration of this decline. Here an area of flats as extensive as all the other flats of the State combined now lies practically barren, whereas in former times great quantities of clams were taken. These flats had already become depleted to a marked extent by 1879, and to-day practically no clams are shipped to market from the Duxbury flats, although you can still read "Duxbury clams" on the menus of the hotels and restaurants, showing how important a clam industry this town once possessed. Buzzards Bay district lies at present unproductive except for supplying home consumption and the demands of the summer people. The shores of Cape Cod no longer yield their former supply of clams, and the most striking example of the extinction of a flourishing fishery is found in the town of Chatham, which now does not produce one-tenth part of its production in 1879. The Fall River or Narragansett Bay district does not come up to its past productiveness, and now chiefly yields clams which in former times would have been considered as too small to use.

As can be seen by the following table, which gives a comparison between the industry in 1879 and 1907, the localities south of Gloucester all show a decline in their production, and there is no town on the coast which has not shown some depletion in the natural clam supply. The localities of the north shore, while indicating by their statistics a gain in production, nevertheless have not their former abundance, and the actual diminution of the supply is concealed by the fact that more men have entered the industry.

=====================+=========================+=========================== | 1879. | 1907. LOCALITY. +-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------- | Men. |Bushels.| Value. | Men. |Bushels.| Value. ---------------------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------- Ipswich, | 75 | 11,500 | $4,600 | 136 | 25,000 | $18,750 Salisbury and | | | | | | Newburyport, | 60 | 28,800 | 11,520 | 241 | 70,500 | 77,500 Essex, | 75 | 11,500 | 4,500 | 50 | 15,000 | 12,750 Gloucester, | 92 | 13,978 | 5,200 | 31 | 6,000 | 8,000 Boston harbor, | 90 | 40,000 | 20,000 | 350[19]| 7,500 | 6,000 Duxbury, | -[20]| 5,000 | 2,500 | 5 | 700 | 600 Plymouth | -[20]| 5,000 | 2,500 | 6 | 3,000 | 2,500 Harwich, | 15 | 1,125 | 400 | - | 100 | 80 Chatham, | 150 | 35,000 | 12,250 | 10 | 1,500 | 1,200 Nantucket, | -[19]| 2,253 | 872 | 4 | 400 | 350 Edgartown, | -[20]| 4,000 | 1,570 | 7 | 1,200 | 1,000 New Bedford district,| -[20]| 5,800 | 2,900 | 332[19]| 1,600 | 1,685 Fall River district, | -[20]| 3,375 | 3,121 | 25 | 5,315 | 5,290 =====================+=======+========+========+========+========+==========

_Causes of the Decline._--The same cause which has been stated in the general report has contributed to the decline of the clam supply, _i.e._, the increasing demand which has led to overfishing. Thus the decline can be directly attributed to the exploiting of natural clam resources by man, although it must be admitted that natural agencies, such as geographical changes, destroy the clam flats of certain localities and build up others.

This decline has become possible through the indifference of the towns to the welfare of their clam fishery, and by not restricting, through town laws, the extermination of the clams in time to allow nature to replenish the flats. Some towns, such as Ipswich, have regulated this matter by placing closed seasons on portions of the flats, which has been the partial means of preserving their natural supply. Thus the town laws have proved inadequate, as most towns have no laws at all, or have such unwise ones that they often defeat their own object.

It is again necessary to emphasize the need of reform in the clam industry. This Commonwealth once possessed an extensive supply of clams, and still possesses part of its former abundance; but the present supply is diminishing at such a rate that it will not be a quarter of a century before the natural clam fishery will be commercially extinct. On the south shore clams are now commercially extinct, and it is only a question of time, if the present methods are allowed to remain, before the north shore clams will also disappear. The experiments of the Massachusetts department of fisheries and game and the work of men who have planted this shellfish all show that thousands of dollars can be brought into the State by utilizing the waste clam areas, and that the production can be so increased as to even exceed that of former years. Immediate action is necessary, if this important industry is to be saved.

_The Remedy._--The remedy is comparatively simple, and abundant proof of its success is at hand. By restocking the barren and unproductive areas of the Commonwealth the present production can be increased many times. Experiments have shown that clams can be readily, successfully and economically transplanted, and that it is a completely practical undertaking. Not only can the barren areas be restocked, but the yield of the productive areas can be much increased. Clam farming is the only practical method of restocking these areas, and only through such means can the clam flats be made to yield their normal harvest.

_Clam Farming._

The subject of clam farming has received a good deal of attention the past few years, and much has been said concerning the enormous profits which would result from the cultivation of this shellfish. While the newspaper statements have been for the most part correct, there has been considerable exaggeration and many details have been inaccurate. To remove any misapprehensions, the following account of clam farming is given.

The value of clam farming has been perhaps overestimated. While no fabulous returns are ever to be expected, the yield is large in proportion to the labor, and steady returns are sure. The methods used are simple, the capital required is small, the area suitable for raising clams is extensive, and clam farming gives promise of becoming one of the most prominent and remunerative shore industries. The profits derived from such a system should furnish steady employment for hundreds of men on the Massachusetts coast.

Massachusetts possesses thousands of acres of tidal flats which are capable of producing clams. Most of these flats are practically barren, _i.e._, produce no clams in paying quantities, and yet if planted with small clams will yield in from one to two years large quantities of marketable bivalves. This large area of barren flats should be divided into small farms, which should be leased to individuals for the purpose of planting and raising clams.

_The Necessity of Clam Farming._--It is a well-known fact that the natural supply of clams is becoming rapidly exhausted, and that this important fishery will become commercially extinct unless steps are taken to check its decline. The only practical means known at the present time is _clam farming_. In the past, methods such as close seasons and restricting the catch have been used, but with poor results, as these have been economically wrong. The correct method in such cases is not to restrict the demand, but to increase the supply. Clam farming offers the only means of increasing the natural production, and not only checking the decline, but establishing a large industry.

_Is Clam Farming Practical?_--Clam farming is not a theory but an _established fact_. Clams will grow if planted in suitable places, and will yield large returns. For three years the Commission of Fisheries and Game have made numerous experiments in clam farming in many seacoast towns. They have not only proved its complete practicability, but have also shown that large profits result from successful planting. Records are on file at the State House showing the exact results of these experimental farms, which indicate the future success of clam farming.

Besides the experiments of the Commission on Fisheries and Game, _successful clam farming_ is now being carried on in several towns of the State. The leading town in this line is Essex, where at least 15 grants are held by the clammers. The only protection given is based upon public sentiment, which, however, is sufficient to insure the success of the enterprise. All these grants were staked out on flats which were producing no clams when granted, although part of this area was once very productive. So far these grants have proved most successful, thus proving by actual experience that clam farming is a worthy rival of agriculture.

_Historical Attempts at Clam Farming._--Clam farming has been in existence for years. The first record of any legislation upon this subject is found in an act to regulate the clam fishery in and around the shores of Plymouth, Kingston and Duxbury in 1870, whereby a license was granted for a term not exceeding five years to any inhabitant of these towns to plant, cultivate and dig clams. This license cost $2.50, and gave the exclusive use of the flats and creeks described to the licensee and his heirs during the time specified, and also the right in an action of tort to recover treble damages from any person who, without his consent, dug or took clams from said grant. Evidently nothing was done to follow out this law, which was soon forgotten.

In 1874 an act was passed to regulate the shellfisheries (including clams) in the waters of Mount Hope Bay and its tributaries. The terms of this act were practically the same as the Plymouth act, the only difference being the substitution of the word _shellfish_ for _clam_.

In 1888 an act was passed by the town of Winthrop, authorizing the planting of clams on the shores of that town. The grant was to consist of not over 2 acres of _barren_ flats, situated more than 500 feet from high-water mark. The other provisions of this act were the same as those of the Plymouth act of 1870.

The most important clam culture law was passed in 1888. This authorized the planting of clams on the shores of Essex. Here the provisions of the law were followed out, and the first energetic attempt at clam farming started. The law, the provisions of which were nearly the same as the previous laws, reads as follows:--

ACTS OF 1888, CHAPTER 198.

AN ACT AUTHORIZING THE PLANTING OF CLAMS, IN AND AROUND THE SHORES OF ESSEX.

_Be it enacted, etc., as follows:_

SECTION 1. The selectmen of the town of Essex may by writing under their hands grant a license for such a term of years, not exceeding five, as they in their discretion may deem necessary and the public good requires, to any inhabitant of said town, to plant, cultivate and dig clams upon and in any flats and creeks in said town now unproductive thereof, not exceeding two acres to any one person, and not impairing the private rights of any person.

SECTION 2. Such license shall describe by metes and bounds the flats and creeks so appropriated and shall be recorded by the town clerk before it shall have any force, and the person licensed shall pay to the selectmen for the use of said town two dollars and to the clerk fifty cents.

SECTION 3. The person so licensed and his heirs and assigns shall for the purposes aforesaid have the exclusive use of the flats and creeks described in the license during the term specified therein, and may in an action of tort recover treble damages of any person, who, without his or their consent digs or takes clams from such flats or creeks during the continuance of the license.

SECTION 4. Said town of Essex at any legal meeting called for the purpose may make such by-laws, not repugnant to the laws of the commonwealth, as they may from time to time deem expedient to protect and preserve the shellfisheries within said town.

SECTION 5. Whoever takes any shellfish from within the waters of said town of Essex in violation of the by-laws established by it or of the provisions of this act shall for every offence pay a fine of not less than five or more than ten dollars and costs of prosecution, and one dollar for every bushel of shellfish so taken.

SECTION 6. This act shall take effect upon its passage. [_Approved April 9, 1888._]

In the report of the United States Commissioner of Fish and Fisheries for 1894 Mr. Ansley Hall gives the following account of clam culture under this act:--

During the first two years (1889-90) the people were slow to avail themselves of the privilege of planting, for fear that after they had spent their time and labor they would not be able to secure protection from trespassers; but in 1891 and 1892 lots were obtained and planted. In 1892 there were 25 acres that were quite productive, about one-third of the entire catch of the section being obtained from them. The catch from these lots is not definitely known, but is estimated at about 2,500 barrels.

Cultivated clams possess some advantage over the natural growth, from the fact that they are more uniform in size, and are as large as the best natural clam. They bring $1.75 per barrel, while the natural clams sell for $1.50 per barrel. This is the price received by the diggers. One acre of these clams is considered to be worth $1,000, if well seeded and favorably located so as not to be in danger of being submerged with sand. This valuation would be too high for an average, since all the acres are not equally well seeded and located. The clammers are generally impressed that the industry can be extensively and profitably developed, and their only fear is that they will not be able to secure lots permanently. The greater part of the land available for this purpose is covered by the deeds of people owning farms along the river, and the consent of the land owners has to be obtained before lots can be taken up. It seems probable, however, that the business will continue to progress unless checked by complications that may arise relative to the occupancy of the grounds.

The result of this first practical attempt at clam culture was a complete failure, and after a few years' trial the clam farms were all given up. The main reason for this failure was lack of protection both from outsiders and from one another. Nevertheless, this attempt proved that with proper protection a most successful industry could be made of clam farming. The following statement by Prof. James L. Kellogg, in the United States Fish Commission Bulletin for 1899, describes the failure of clam culture at Essex:--