Marine scientists at Horn Point Lab (HPL) in Cambridge typically labor in the background. They are driven by the quest for data. Facts matter.
In writing an article concerning a study to generate recommendations to preserve the oyster industry so importantly, economically, environmentally and culturally, to the Eastern Shore, I learned that marine science can have a decidedly human dimension. While a five-year study funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) is focused primarily on recommendations palatable and useful by fisheries managers at the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR), it also has an important secondary mission: to develop a process whereby consensus can replace rancor and divisiveness in the management of the oyster industry.
This human-natural nexus really fascinates me. It seems eminently sensible—even logical–for the science community to try to understand and study how we passionate, opinionated humans can hammer out a solution affecting our natural surroundings. I wonder, perhaps too sardonically, if by the end of the study that the scientists may find it easier to study marine animals than those who hunt and manage them. I’m also hopeful that the project will prove fruitful.
In the political world, the commonly used phrase is “finding common ground.” It’s easier to name, than to achieve it. We simply have to follow daily media to know this.
Can you recall when DNR ever announced and implemented regulation of either shellfish or even rockfish without an onslaught of criticism and carping from watermen whose livelihoods hang in the balance?
In nearly 40 years of living in Easton, I rarely have read of even a scintilla of comity between the hardy, independent folks who live off the water and the earnest, well-meaning folks who work in Annapolis and feel obligated—legally compelled–to preserve the shellfish industry.
Oysters or lack thereof provide a constant battleground of verbal combat.
After listening to Dr. Elizabeth North, principal investigator and associate professor of oceanography at HPL, I believe she might be the right person at the right time to calm the waters (didn’t intend to use this pun) and help develop a consensus among 16 members of a stakeholder group. The group’s recommendations are critical to the future of the oyster industry in the Chesapeake Bay region.
Elizabeth North is knowledgeable, conscientious, concerned and driven. She also is a good listener. She has no personal or professional agenda but to succeed at establishing a basis for consensus-driven agreement about the future of the small, provocative oyster.
Ironically, while working on HPL’s OysterFutures article, I read about the controversy surrounding the temporary shutdown of federal funded efforts of the Army Corps of Engineers and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to restore oysters in designated sanctuaries in the Tred Avon River in Talbot County and Little Choptank River in Dorchester County. I had reason to believe that the completion of restoration of the 350-acre oyster reef in Harris Creek in Talbot County was, and would continue to be successful.
Then, I read that local watermen questioned the efficacy of the Harris Creek project, using supposedly incorrect information to compare it to a nearby unrestored reef in Broad Creek in Talbot County. The damage was done. The State House decided to shut down the development of sanctuaries in the Tred Avon and Little Choptank rivers.
I am disappointed in the state-mandated delay. For the reason cited at the outset of this column. Correct data produced by objective scientists should drive decisions. Not an incomplete interpretation of data used in a self-interested way by watermen, who justifiably are trying to protect their fishing area and forswear government interference.
While I understand that patience is difficult when trying to make a living on the water, I believe that the success of the Harris Creek sanctuary, specifically the reproduction of oysters, cannot be measured in a year’s time. I believe it is foolhardy to delay further restoration in the Tred Avon and the Little Choptank; federal money is fungible and can easily be spent in other parts of the country.
I suggest that the most critical result that could emanate from the research being undertaken by Dr. North, her colleagues and the 16-member stakeholder group is trust. It’s in short supply, as we know, whether in the oyster debate in our neighborhood or in the politically toxic Capitol of our nation.
As Bunky Chance said about the research project, ‘“We have to start down the road, which potentially will lead us to a very good place. We already have started gathering data. We need to compare apples with apples, not oranges. We have to sit down and combine experience and science.” ‘
Wise words.
Columnist Howard Freedlander retired in 2011 as Deputy State Treasurer of the State of Maryland. Previously, he was the executive officer of the Maryland National Guard. He also served as community editor for Chesapeake Publishing, lastly at the Queen Anne’s Record-Observer. In retirement, Howard serves on the boards of several non-profits on the Eastern Shore, Annapolis and Philadelphia.
Howard wrote a freelance article in the Jan. 17, 2016 edition of “The Sunday Star” about the Horn Point Lab (HPL) research project led by Dr. Elizabeth North, his second on behalf of HPL. Also, his wife works at the lab as development director.
..
Write a Letter to the Editor on this Article
We encourage readers to offer their point of view on this article by submitting the following form. Editing is sometimes necessary and is done at the discretion of the editorial staff.