CTFishTalk.com: Climate Change-Case History for CT-Halibut Fleet 1848-1881 - Connecticut Saltwater Reports ( CT Saltwater Reports ) - A Community Built for Connecticut Fisherman.

BlueChip

Climate Change, Habitat Stability A Case History for CT
Halibut Fleet 1848-1881
IMEP #54

Habitat Information For Fishers and Fishery Area Managers
Understanding Science Through History

(IMEP Habitat History Newsletters can be found indexed by date on The Blue Crab.Info™ website: Fishing, eeling and oystering thread)
and Connecticut Fish Talk.com Salt Water Reports

Climate Change, Habitat Stability and Seafood Abundance
Can The Past Help Us Now?

Timothy C. Visel, The Sound School *

* Tim Visel is a member of the Long Island Sound Study Habitat Restoration and Citizen’s Advisory Committee the views expressed here do not represent either committee nor has consensus has been reached regarding a fisheries environmental history which includes climate patterns.

* Adapted from Gifts from Our Long Island Sound and Connecticut’s
Fishery History – To The West Haven Land Trust
June 8th 2011 St. John Vianney Church,
300 Captains Thomas Boulevard, West Haven, CT
Updated July 2015 for Capstone Proposals

Capstone Questions – Was the Atlantic Halibut Fishery overfished?
Did The Atlantic Halibut Fishery in New England suffer a habitat failure?
ASTE Standards: Aquaculture #4, #6
Natural Resources/Environmental #1, #4, #9, #14

Preface

This talk was modified from a 2008 paper titled “Climate Change and Public Opinion” for the EPA Long Island Sound Study and was also presented to the Long Island Sound Assembly in 2010 and modified slightly for the West Haven Land Trust general membership meeting in June of 2011. That June (2011) was exceedingly hot and St. John Church had been very warm all day and as the evening talk approached it must have been or slightly above 80° F. Amazing Seafood Gifts From Long Island Sound Can The Past Help Us Now? Was a look at seafood abundance, changes in fishing gears and commercial fisheries during climate cycles. As with my opening to the Long Island Assembly I read a section from the 1874-75 eighth annual report of the Connecticut Board of Agriculture printed in 1875. This section on page 325 has a fruit crop report from Philo S. Beers of Cheshire – it was to be his last. Mr. Beers apparently regularly gave his fruit culture reports to the Board of Agriculture and it was on honor to have the opportunity to do so. The Connecticut Board of Agriculture had much influence at the time. The bitter winters then had already caused much damage to the dairy industry and when cattle from the southwest arrived in Connecticut to replace those lost in the cold, they were covered with thousands of small ticks, cattle here died in an outbreak of the “cattle fever” and spread throughout New England. When tick infested disease animals were killed and burned no less than the governor was present – when the Connecticut Board of Agriculture came calling you answered the door. (It is now thought that this was Texas Cattle fever was a tick spread bacterial disease). One of the things that was impacting Connecticut agriculture then was a return of intense cold winters. Pages 326 to 327 had this report – valley orchards, apple, pear, peach and quince were killed by the winter of 1872-73, however apple orchards on hilltops suffered far less.

As farmers read Mr. Beers last discouraging last report – the habitat information he provided left a lasting mark as future orchards would now be primarily planted on hilltops, at the same time small boat fishers were loading their skiffs to the sinking point with bay scallops in Long Island Sound all along Connecticut’s coast (US Fish Commission Reports) and some of the best scallop grounds were adjacent to the Town of Greenwich, CT. While farmers struggled to reconcile years of culture investment now lost in these very cold winters fishers rejoiced in a “new gift” of seafood and the return of bay scallop was “amazing” and at times clearly when it came to climate changes New England farmers had lost a habitat battle – and as Boston, Massachusetts fishers were now reporting the heaviest halibut catches in decades had won. Halibut it seemed were everywhere even on the beaches during this bitter cold. Clearly when it came to climate cycles there were some habitat winners and losers in terms of seafood abundance. As I spoke about the recent increase in blue crabbing here and the demise of lobsters the call went out for fans – it had reached 90° F in the church hall as I described the NAO – the North Atlantic Oscillation and a possible return to cold – it must have been ironic in this heat but in fact the process had already began, we just could not anticipate (nor could I for that matter) how fast the NAO would turn negative and usher in the return of cold and storms along our coast.

I spoke about Mother Nature changing guests at the hotel hanging welcome back signs in 1874 to Atlantic Halibut – lobsters and bay scallops while pushing striped bass – soft shell clams and oysters out the back door with a slam “just leaving sign.” It seems Mother Nature’s was trying to do the same for us – usher us out it was so hot that night but I had a great time – many excellent questions from the group but the NAO had suddenly turned negative – not so much since 1957-59 and blue soon filled the NOAA NAO prediction center chart*. Many West Haven Land Trust members stayed after my talk mostly those who also fished and talked about increasing blue crabs and the decline of winter flounder – many recalled catching many more winter flounder with winters were colder and more severe. (A very nice write up of the evening is on the West Haven Land Trust website). Some of the questions concerned points of Native American fisheries and a related paper on Alewife and Native American shell and fish middens resulted in a Capstone proposal. That report is now IMEP habitat newsletter #20. The Lost Alewife Weirs of Connecticut 1600s – The Cove River site of West Haven, CT (The Blue Crab Forum™ fishing eeling and oystering thread (July 9, 2014). Ten weeks after my presentation Irene hit Connecticut’s coast as the NAO continued to turn sharply negative. We had snow in October from an intense Northeaster not seen here since 1972.

• NOAA provides a mean NAO index since January 1950 – all calendar months and gives a graphic/color representation National Weather Service Climate Prediction Center NOAA.
• The Polar Vortex a feature of the NAO was described by Hurd Willett in a book about Climate Change – Harvard University Press 1953.

Finally, the opinion presented here is mine and does not reflect my participation on two EPA Long Island Sound Committees Citizen Advisory or Habitat Restoration. No consensus has been reached regarding a cycle of climate shifts and its impacts upon Long Island Sound Fisheries or its habitats as of June 2015.

Tim Visel
I respond to all emails at tim.visel@new-haven.k12.ct.us

Addendum –

Since this 2011 presentation to the West Haven Land Trust many questions have been raised about the value of fisheries history when examining climate change. Some have suggested that historical reference has little value regarding climate change (global warming) and believe it is a new environmental issue – not one that could benefit from examining the past. I admit a personal bias – I feel history and climate change cycles is indeed important to the global warming issue. In fact it is a critical missing piece with defining aspects of our basic needs, food, water and shelter. The story of climate change is as old as time itself. We should avail ourselves to every opportunity to examine the history of climate change especially now, my view.

Climate change is a broad term that today encompasses many issues from pollution, contamination, natural resource waste and the knowledge that we can waste resources and that human existence leaves a “foot print.” Many natural resources have limits – some are not sustainable as the world’s population continues to grow. Many of the responses to natural resource use (abuse) however have become extreme and similar to the magic tonics and elixirs of the last century solutions containing bold assurances that often proceeded a purchase. Often a “cure” was delivered on a stage (public platform) to convince a doubting consumer (the public) only to find out that was indeed part of the “act” the cure was just a contractual arrangement to support the claims. The cure unfortunately did not exist beyond the presentation.

Today in the scientific community that is termed false claims but back a century ago it was called fraud. Climate change is a real issue and how we attempt to grasp its significance – is minimized by the avoidance of history and how the past may help now to guide our future. Fisheries history reviews are key to fully understanding changes in seafood abundance. Promising to return cold water species in heat or warm water species in cold should cease as these claims are not realistic (my view). I offer the case of the Connecticut Halibut fleet as perhaps one of first case histories of a fisheries failure that followed a dramatic warm period.

Readers interested in fisheries habitat history – stability and quality may find the IMEP fish and shellfish habitat newsletters found on the Blue Crab Info™ eeling oystering and fishing thread or CT Fish Talk™ Saltwater reports thread of interest.

The return of Blue Crabs in Connecticut post 1998 has raised many questions about our blue crab reproductive capacity in warming waters. A fisher monitored and reporter newsletter “The Search for Megalops” was started in 2010 – on the Blue Crab forum™ - Northeast Crabbing – line, Northeast crabbing resources thread. In 2012 the Megalops newsletter was picked up by the international website Blue Crab Blog spot™.

I appreciate those websites continuing to post our outreach communications from The Sound School.

West Haven Land Trust Presentation
Gifts from Our Long Island Sound – Connecticut’s Fisheries History –
Tim Visel, The Sound School
June 8, 2011

Introduction: Philo S. Beers of Cheshire, Connecticut makes a report to the Connecticut Board of Agriculture in 1874 regarding the bitter cold winter of 1872-73 and its impact upon fruit trees writing on pages 325 to 327”.

“The cause of such a calamity is not in doubt. The winters of 1872-3 was the coldest on record, and the mercury sank to a lower point, according to the records kept in New Haven, than for the last one hundred years. The mercury at my house indicated, on the coldest morning, 22 degrees below zero. No trees were killed either in the nursery or orchard; a very few in the nursery were affected by the cold, showing it in the discoloration of the wood in pruning, but not enough to affect the growth, the following summer.

One-half mile north, and fifty feet lower in a hollow, the same morning, and the same hour, the mercury indicated 30° below 0. There I had another orchard of apple trees, and many limbs were killed entirely, both on grafted and natural trees; they have not, and never will, recover from the effects of that cold morning. In the north and south parts of this town, in the valleys, the mercury sank to 36° below 0, at this time, and it was in these places that some whole orchards were killed, others on a little higher ground suffered less, part of the trees being killed, and others started with a little life and have since blighted and died. Apple, pear, peach and quince trees suffered the same fate. I visited many parts of this state in the meantime, and find in all the valleys more or less loss, according to the depression of those valleys; but little loss has been sustained on high ground in an portion of the state.”

“This communication of Mr. Beers, giving his experience and observation, coincides with that of close observers all over our state. Communication from P.S. Beers – The writer of this communication, Philo S. Beers, of Cheshire, died in January 1875. This is probably his last article on fruit culture.”

The Halibut Fishery – A Connecticut Case History

One of the key issues confronting fishers and the public is how global warming will impact seafood, habitat quality stability and fisheries in general. But we should not under estimate cooling periods as well, we have had several sudden reversals which changed habitat profiles and seafood abundance. This swing in species here in New England are associated with a climate pattern known as the North Atlantic Oscillation but fishers years ago called it the New England Oscillation or the Atlantic Oscillation. First discovered and identified by Nathanial Bowstitch (The American Practical Navigator) as a semi permanent low off the coast of Iceland. He termed it the graveyard of North Atlantic storms and it was. The strength of the low would tend to draw other low pressure systems to it, like a magnet and in the process cold air over Canada stayed in place. A weak or unstable Icelandic low would allow circum polar jets to sag deep into the US, termed the “polar vortex” in 1953.

The NAO is now linked to the strength of the Atlantic Halibut fishery – in times of a negative phase much colder and stronger storms Halibut were abundant a positive NAO – warmer and relatively quiet halibut leaves. The Halibut fishery is turning out to be an excellent example, in the colder 1870s Halibut were caught with handlines on the beach even from dories but as the climate moderated over time Halibut was caught in deeper and deeper waters until it was no longer feasible to set long lines. By 1912 Halibut had “retreated” far to the north even for our most northern fishing ports. But that “retreat” had been going on for quite some time. Nelson J. Huntley gives an outstanding account of the Niantic Bay Connecticut Halibut Fleet, in a colder period Connecticut once provisioned this fleet, catching Halibut within a range of New London and Niantic ports. But Huntley (1906) describes a feature once highly regarded soon became a death zone as warmer temperatures occurred. Most of the Niantic Halibut Fleet had “live wells,” areas in vessels which compartments freely exchanged surface waters so that fish remained alive fresh for commercial markets (pre ice or refrigeration). (This continues in a modified way in the lobster fishery). Huntley then goes on to describe how these live wells in warmer waters became “black holes of Calcutta” (pg 19) as fish struggled to breath and died – rotting quickly. Vessels soon went to packing ice if they could get it, and by the time the fishery “failed.” Huntley describes how overtime the primary Niantic Fleet fishing grounds were “exhausted” and empty. (The Passing Of The Fishery Fleet by Nelson J. Huntley 1906 first date reprinted by the East Lyme public library in 1997). In all likelihood it was the fishers who were exhausted trying to fill holds on grounds long vacated by the colder water preferring Halibut. Overtime the Halibut fleet moved north following the fish to make a last stand in a fishing town called Gloucester and would strike against trawl nets – blamed for the Halibut leaving but by the time trawl nets were introduced Halibut catches were in depths 160 fathoms or more far too deep for trawls – the age of Halibut was nearly over – the benthic flounder fisheries now soared on these offshore banks.

We have some excellent historical references for abundance US Fish Commission and state catch statistics and seafood price market reports (which also contained supply notations such as market slow or not sold out). Connecticut and Long Island Sound lies between two large urban markets, Boston and New York. Travel by vessel on the outer capes was risky (and no early direct rail connection) early market patterns would be governed by New York markets many will recognize as Fulton Fish Market. (Late fish reports Fulton Market New York, The Oysterman and Fishermen pg 14, Vol XII No 16 Friday, March 11, 1915 “Devoted to Seafood and Allied Industries.” To give an idea of the warmth then New Jersey blue crabs were entering the market in March. Compare that to last March and it gives you an idea of ice off on days.

Plentiful seafood was relatively “cheap” by today’s standards so price trends is an important source of information (my first official employment was in 1978 under the direction of Andreas Holmsen a resource economist at University of Rhode Island to plot the prices for 50 years for four ground fish species) – lobsters sold for 32 cents, large cod a dollar and terrapins then considered a delicacy 2 dollars a pound. Blue crabs were already in the market in March 1915 some from New Jersey bays. As abundance declined prices tend to rise – an exception to this was oysters. Oysters aquaculture had made oysters so abundant they flooded local markets (prices dropped) and oyster companies soon realized the advantage of seeking other markets and in time shipping oysters overseas. Landings and price follow the elastic economics of market demand plentiful fish rarely brought high prices but scarcity often did. Market reports and catch statistics provide important clues to habitat conditions as price reports frequently mentioned to location of seafood sources. It is possible over time to compare catches, location and price with actual catch reports. (See appendix #2).

As the climate warmed in the 1890s some landings declined (namely lobsters and bay scallops as other increased blue crabs and soft shell clams). As climates moderated these species declined (often prices confirmed declines) and were replaced by those who had declined. Comments about climate conditions – frequent storms or extreme heat or cold all moderate habitat conditions and seafood supply – some times decades later. Fish can move in response to declining habitat quality especially temperature. Some species become prevalent between great cold and great heat as fishers have noted “they can swim”. (Shellfish is a different matter over time their biological parameters limit reproductive success – hard clams become abundant following great cold and stormy periods, while soft shell clam abundance is highest in heat and few storms). That also reflects upon the remains of coastal peoples – what they consumed is left in historical kitchen refuse called middens. Also changes in fishing gears also measure to some extent abundance – more sophisticated complex gears in scarcity (or strong market demand) lower or simple gears when the resource is very abundant – a look out several historical sources provides a habitat history and that often proceed seafood reversals. That helps us today more fully understand the changes we see today – a die off of lobsters and surge (recent) in blue crabs. The reversal in lobsters and blue crabs happened a century ago in response to climate change – distinct cold and hot periods which we can follow by seafood catches and abundance.

Weather has a role – Overtime Climate as well

The NAO is a major climate feature for New England and the NAO turned sharply negative in 2010-2011 as it did in the middle 1950s. The 1950s was some of the most violent storm filled periods, cold polar air and numerous storms. During this time cold water species did better (the American Shad catches peaked in 1958) and 1955 the years of three hurricanes, cold winters and violent Northeasters, the catch of Niantic bay scallops broke production records not seen since the 1870s.

{A large body of fisheries management policies is now under review (or should be) for habitat quality as shown by the recent attempt to restore cold water salmon to New England’s warming winters after 1972. The waters became hot – containing both thermal and sulfide blocks (the source of the sulfides mostly leaf material) if this Salmon restoration efforts had happened during a negative NAO it would have had a much better chance of success.}

Many recent reports talk about fisheries history in relation to our history of pollution as evidence of declines even at times ignoring any “history” not related to us – a bias or perhaps deliberate misrepresentation but most New England fisheries have waxed and waned from climate changes – fishers call it cycles. We have had four major reversals in two centuries and most likely more as Native American middens are reexamined. For every great heat has been followed by a period of cold and changes in species. While changes in seafood abundance is at times amazing upon examination of historical reports gives as a clue what many happen when the climate change – {update June 2015 more and more researchers are also looking at the NAO in terms of fisheries management and that is a good thing. Until very recently most coastal Connecticut residents have never heard the term (The Polar Vortex made the news several times this past winter) which was described by Hurd Willett in a book titled Climate Changes edited by Harlow Shapley – Harvard University Press in 1953}.

Coastal residents who consume over 50 pounds per person of seafood each year – (national average of about 16 lbs) have a “vested” interest and appreciate seafood and commercial fishery industries as well as a growing significance in recreational fishing. In the 1970s and 1980s some recreational landings matched or exceeded the commercial industry. We now import 84 percent of the seafood we consume (2009). Most industries (fish) have shown declines and habitat loss, chemical pollution and thermal pollution (warm runoff) have all been associated with declines in seafood abundance. However such events do not hold all the habitat quality answers. One species that has increased here is the silversides often called the saltwater shiner (medina) it biomass surged in this warm period.

Where did all the seafood go – A case history for Halibut Habitat failure

The seafood really didn’t go anywhere, it was still have just represented by different species. As one declines another expands – its just not reflected in catches which remain the primary data collection process – As lobsters declines in CT – Blue Crabs increased as Tautog became scarce – Black Sea Bass reproductive cycles became “amazing.” How could the same habitat become great for some and for others so bad. Some time the fish simply moved to cooler waters. That appears to be the case for the Atlantic Halibut.

Most likely the best example of a habitat reversal is the Halibut fishery and what heat did to this fishery. Just as Mr. Huntley started Halibut fishing 1848 a “new” fishing ground to the north had suddenly appeared on Georges Bank an extensive shoal area in the Gulf of Maine that contained vast areas of petrified tree stumps – glimmers of a climate/habitat profile of long ago. The Georges Bank Halibut fishery started to fail in 1848 to 1850 just as the young Huntley was setting sail (History and Methods of the Fisheries – section 2, The Fishing Grounds, The Fresh Halibut fishery, George Brown Goode and J. W. Collins US Fish Commission Section V volume Washington GPO 1887). New fishing ground for Halibut were being discovered – always to the north in deeper (colder) waters. In the end the best catches of halibut were made in deeper colder waters, some times as deep as 600 fathoms 3,600 feet deep, as fishing grounds now were far to the north, even the Connecticut Halibut fleet got a mention on page 5.”

“Though a fleet of Connecticut vessels have long pursued the Halibut fishery, they rarely have gone to the distant grounds, north and east of La Harve Bank but for many years they have engaged in fishing along the southern and western coasts of Nova Scotia.”

But as to confirm Hunley’s report – a Charles Tripland told the authors that the Connecticut Halibut fleet faced an unusual problem – taking the fish to New York alive sailing into warmer waters, was no longer possible. From pg 9 of the Goode –Collins 1887 report has this section:

Mr. Charles P. Tripland tells us that previous to 1858 Halibut were caught by the Connecticut vessels wholly on hand lines and only welled smacks were employed, the fish being taken to New York alive. But the advent of trawling (so that deeper cooler water could be fished) the practice of keeping the fish in ice began (fish trips became longer as fish moved further north – spoilage became a problem), and tight bottomed crafts were used, many of the old smacks having their wells removed and their bottoms plugged up. For several years, he says, after the fishermen of the ports on Long Island Sound began to ice halibut, they resorted too many schemes to keep the fish fresh for a long time.

One method was to sheathe the ice pens with zinc, another to line the sides of the pens (fish holding sections) with straw, packed in about two inches thick this being held in place by laths (strips of thin wood) nailed over it. Some vessels also had a false ceiling beneath the beams for the purpose, as supposed of preventing the heat striking through the deck upon the fish. None of these methods, however proved satisfactory, and after having been thoroughly tested, they all been abandoned.”

In times these smaller, refit vessels not designed for ice pens could no longer could compete economically – fishers were batling climate changes they most likely did not understand – besides the fish, fishing grounds and a tough competitive business – they were going to lose this battle to heat, spoiling what fish were caught and driving a cold water Halibut far from Connecticut ports. A new method of icing Halibut would be even termed the “New London Method” preventing any fish from touching any wood and these vessels the wood became hot and would spoil the fish (pg 19). These wooden vessels in southern waters became hot and white paint seemed to help – oyster vessels continue to be painted white today.

As Halibut continued to move to cooler waters Connecticut fishers soon abandoned the Halibut fishery – but was Halibut overfished or simply responded to a habitat failure from warming waters? Often it was just assumed that overfishing occurred while other causes not investigated. Sometimes we just didn’t look.

The transition from biological surveys (fyke net fish census, seine surveys, observations) to analytical measures – temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen has left a huge void in habitat quality information. The last comprehensive “fish census” (started as part of the US Fish Commission summaries a century ago) was conducted in Connecticut in 1958. Resource assessments lag behind populations and by the time a habitat quality failure occurs – it is often too late, current timely information about habitat is lacking. Often the habitat failure is not noticed until catch landings drop frequently termed the “empty fish net syndrome.” Seafood abundance is often purely measured in US fish catch statistics. If it was a desired seafood and landings fell a decline is reported. However, it may be determined that during our last “hot term” silver sides, (salt water shiners) populations became extremely dense. Since no fishery existed this exchange of biomass was missed. It can happen with edible species as well. The recent Blue Crab explosion happened so quickly 2005 to 2010 lobster fishers could not adapt (many who had lobstered switched to conch) to the abundance of Blue Crabs – most were wasted each winter (I estimated in 2011 about 200 million crabs were in LIS) and only a few thousands crabs entered commercial markets. The Striped Bass and Black Sea Bass it appears benefited the most from this recent temperature upswing, but habitat capacity (lack of suitable reefs) comes into view. (If Connecticut had built subtidal artificial reefs habitat capacity for these fish would have helped). With lobsters we actually helped production by removing large lobsters who are cannibals and with Striped Bass – most likely decreased biomass as its habitat capacity favors larger but fewer individuals – (biomass) Striped Bass managers eventually adopted young of the year indexes to increase management policies. We really don’t have a rapid habitat quality assessment process for many species.

{A recent significant example of this void of information was large quantities of bay scallops moved from offshore deep water beds in late January 2015 into eastern CT rivers – these large adult scallops have remarkably clean shells denoting hard clean bottoms – free of biological fouling. All of the eastern CT Rivers had bay scallops move in as they did in the 1950s (1955 being the highest bay scallop year since 1875) in late January. They were not subject to a fishery although reports of offshore beds were confirmed in early January off Stonington Connecticut.

A half decade ago such reports would have spread quickly for a February-March fishery (most bay scallops perish within 6 months of spawning) only in the coldest periods it’s thought that bay scallops spawn twice as they frequently did in the mid 1950s off Niantic Bay. These adult scallops (post spawning) will perish now before July – August thought to be a genetic “throwback” based upon a now out of sequence biological clock, (very cold) that did not match a current habitat clock (too warm)}. In 1875 during a bitter cold/storm filled period the bay scallop capital of New England was Greenwich, CT – in 1910 Greenwich, CT became famous not for bay scallops but a large Malaria outbreak – it was in the midst of the “hot term” or Great Heat. As the Malaria increased the state allowed salt marshes to be declared health emergencies and filled in. When the cold returned to Connecticut in the 1930s Malaria left, in the warmth of the 1990s mosquito vectored disease has returned again}.

Connecticut has had very warm periods before but the period 1890 to 1910 was dry with intense heat and very few storms. 1880-1920 is when lobsters died off in southern New England 1898-1905 and blue crabs soared 1900 to 1912 in a complete habitat reversal that even altered bottom substrate bacteria (sulfate reduction) of the scale difficult to describe as it largely unseen as just a reversal between Sapropel/eelgrass for cobblestone kelp forests which could be seen. It would be the cobblestone – kelp forests that would provide habitats for the lobster recovery in the 1960s while blue crab megalops sets disappeared and blue crabs retreated back to salt ponds habitat refugia during this cold and unstable habitat period.

It was this period 1880-1920 that New England states built lobster hatcheries even in New York to replace “missing” lobster populations. The heat would impact trout fishers as well – many states proclaiming Brook Trout possible extinction in 1901 as trout streams became so warm they reeked of sulfur. The solution was to transplant more heat tolerant species of brown and rainbow trout to those New England streams, a practice that still continues today. (The trout hatcheries established during the Great Heat did not close as the lobster hatcheries but continue today to support economic valuable recreational fisheries).

The Connecticut oyster industry which depended upon Chesapeake Bay seed oysters in the colder 1870s found these now warming waters in the 1880s great for oyster sets and they became stronger as waters warmed with the set of the century occurred in 1898 New Haven – the year that the “cold water” lobsters died. The 1880s to 1920s would become known for very hot summers, huge disease (bacterial) outbreaks in eastern cities and the rise of summer shore communities all along Connecticut’s coast. I call that period “The Great Heat” and peaked in 1898 which produced a huge a Red Tide bloom in Narragansett Bay, as the last of the deep water bay scallop habitats were then suffocated by eelgrass/Sapropel deepening organic deposits changing the previous habitats against those needed by bay scallops. The year 1898 was of tremendous oyster sets and immense pollution fish kill events. What was clearly “good” for oysters was very bad for lobsters, unless climate is factored in we really cannot draw conclusions about our influence – overfishing or pollution. We cannot and should not base environmental policy upon these seafood resource surveys, many times such assessments conflict – the increase in oysters blue crabs and black sea bass, even striped bass has been at times record breaking in warm periods looking back at the last 50 years while bay scallops, winter flounder and lobster fisheries in southern New England collapsed. The surveys themselves tell incomplete stories – even long sampling periods 10 to 20 years is just not long enough – many of the cycles appear to be 50 and 100 years. Mervin Roberts, author naturalist and once a member of the last Connecticut fish commission reviews this bias in 1985 in one of his many books about shore and sea life – his Tide Marsh Guide has this section on pgs 354-356.

“Biological surveys and censuses are difficult to design and sometimes impossible to carry out so as to be free of bias. They are often hard to compare since very few are conducted under identical circumstances; but then even the accuracy of our national census of people is frequently challenged.

Now please come back to that word which appeared several paragraphs previous: bias. If you are a political or social activist you may have pounced on “bias” and wondered how scientists apply it. As a matter of fact, scientists used it long before it became a catchword. Examples of bias in science are sometimes found in collections of living organisms whose populations is in motion. To be without bias, such a collection would have to be made over an extended period with no regard to inclement weather, ice, time of day or holidays.

Consider the swallows at the Capistrano Mission in California. How would a report on their habitat look it no observations were made during those few days when they were all arriving or all leaving? Consider a flyhatch on a trout stream, all over in one day, only once a year. Consider a run of river herring. If you miss it, no one will be able to make you believe it. Visit a bat cave at noon on a summer day. It will be crowded with adults. Come back at midnight; there will be not one adult bat present.

Alice and Robert Lippson in their book, Life in the Chesapeake Bay, list 108 species of fishes that show up there. A still longer list appears in Hidebrand and Schroeder’s Fishes of Chesapeake Bay. They give us 202, and in a later edition of this classic, John A. Musick added another 80 or so, mostly rare stranglers.

Now, what are all those ocean fishes doing in lower salinity waters? And what are all those fresh water fishes doing in brackish waters? Maybe there is no need to answer. Those questions are “loaded” since it wasn’t they, it was we who set up these salinity distinctions. Let’s take the facts of life at their face value. I submit that we have no business establishing rigid categories for the works of Mother Nature.”

To modify a question in this section about “loaded” questions at then end of Mr. Roberts section I add this to the above (something that now borders on scientific misconduct). Answer yes or no – Have you stopped overfishing the resource? If yes, then the acknowledgement of overfishing is accepted, it no then the perception of overfishing continues. Not taking into account habitat failures (and most fishery failures follow habitat failures) – the fishery itself, social, regulatory and return on assets could be fine, it’s just the habitat failed, and often not because of our actions. The Tidemarsh Guide to Fishers – Mervin F. Roberts, pg 354-356. We see that bias today with nitrogen and oxygen levels – during cold the short nitrogen cycle predominates – coastal waters because of the cold have higher oxygen levels (see Moss CT River report 1965) nitrogen is not quickly utilized but in high heat the long nitrogen cycle occurs – rotting organic matter which poisons coastal waters, with ammonia and supports toxic algal blooms. {June 2015 - Much of the habit quality reversal is being linked to bacterial populations several papers are now on the Blue Crab forum™ Environment and Conservation section that cover these changes.}

The Lovejoy Case – Clean Oysters As Food – Pollution raises seafood concerns

To mobilize public opinion oyster growers of the last century sued cities for pollution in streams mostly over sewage which vectored diseases from shellfish during the same warm period. Lovejoy versus Norwalk – is an often cited legal case but clean water was needed for eating seafood but not its reproduction. Lovejoy lost the case as legal opinion felt it was reasonable to waste waters in this way. Shellfish (oysters) grew well, and the heaviest sets happened during the heaviest pollution events. We have lost billions of dollars of shellfish for the lack of pasteurization (similar to milk) – did heat or humans bring disease to the coast during the Great Heat, both did. But we were only to consider one, the pollution events, Mother Nature it seemed missed the inspection as fishers were one of the first observers of climate change – seafood appeared to come and go – as some species declined – others were complete surprises – they increased. With the temperature and energy changes seafood production also changed – gifts from Mother Nature. Sometimes came as a complete surprise but a resource declined overfishing and pollution was blamed. It was easy to do that, the empty fish nets could be seen, pollution also has a visible component.

John Orcott a popular Connecticut Agricultural leader spokesperson in the 1870s, 1880s (also Agriculture writer for the Hartford Courant and University of Connecticut founder) described stuffing glycerin soaked cotton balls into his nostrils so he could approach the Quinnebaug River – in summer its stench was so bad – it did stink. But this period was also one for the best catches of shad, it was cold in winters and Noank was Connecticut’s lobster capital and of the region in 1874 but by 1910 the lobster hatchery was built there to try to replace “lost” stage 4 lobsters which had disappeared along Connecticut coastline. Local hotels promoted free blue crabbing as an area attraction at the same time for a modest fee. “In 1893 the Bushy Point Resort (Groton) opened for the season with a clam bake and shore dinners and rowboats for rent with fishing gear, bait and crab nets, July 4, 1893” (The Poquonnock Bridge Story by Carol W. Kimbalt 1984 pg 133). In the growing heat sea cabbage (now called sea lettuce) (1889 November 11th The Day newspaper) destroyed all of the 4,000 to 5,000 bushels of seed oysters in Quiambaug Cove (Stonington)” which grows over and entirely covers the beds then suffocating them – not overfishing. Lobster fishers were also blamed for the shortage of lobsters – (1900) until in state reports officials agreed there was no lobsters of any size – not just the ones of edible range (shorts) – there was just no small lobsters at all. It wasn’t overfishing the fishery experienced but a near total habitat failure during the very warm (hot) period. As lobster fishers continued to fish (as they had done before) not realizing the extent of habitat failure they caught less until the fishery was in collapse.

For a century this bias of overfishing can be traced back almost – directly to Connecticut’s DEEP formation to historic conflicts over the Shad resource – itself – The Protection of Sea Fish in the Connecticut River, The CT General Assembly Act of May 1866. When a fish or shellfish species declined it was usually thought from our pollution or our over fishing. For a century fishers however pointed to cyclic events (most accounts were very accurate but lacked scientific terms) and specific habitats or species like turtle grass, duck weed or by species association such as eelgrass provided habitat names (many which remains today ie, alewife cove or eel pond). While over fishing can and does occur few studies mention habitat quality or climate conditions governing such population changes.

Habitat values change with climate conditions

We may need to reexamine an entire body of knowledge about soft bottom tidal habitats because much of the sedimentation and energy profiles were linked to markers of post industrial metals (pollution). Only a few studies mention that sulfate reducing bacteria can naturally complex these same metals over time – it is natural to have sulfate reducing bacteria during heat and limited oxygen complex (concentrate) these polluting metals. We may find in time that warmer periods metals were concentrated in much higher amounts than cold (oxygen sufficient) times of high energy – several cove studies also appear to vastly underreport sedimentation rates – failing to consider bacterial reduction as a “living sediment” hot or cold or energy prevalence, an important link to habitat instability from climate change. {There is growing evidence that some bacterial strains even complex mercury}.

The truth of the matter is sediments are “alive” and undergoing life science chemical reactions. They often mimic pollution events while themselves add to pollution metal levels, especially nitrogen and phosphate cycling. The ability of sulfur reducing bacteria to concentrate metals in New England bogs – had been known since the first settlers from Europe. They had brought knowledge of deep iron concentrates in such sulfur bogs – called bog iron or bog iron ore known since the Viking culture. Madison, Connecticut had a history of such something of bog soils rich in iron. George Lange (Wesleyan University Hiking Trails of Madison 1998) provides this account (pg 12) “Bog iron ore, which is a deposit of ferric hydroxide, was used. The deposits are formed during the process of decay by iron-fixing bacteria.”

From the Madison Historical Society comes this explanation regarding a “bloomery” a primitive but effective iron smelting furnace that operated in the late 1700s in Madison (formerly part of Guilford).

“Bog iron ore in an impure deposit of ferric hydroxide that forms when iron-bearing groundwater emerges from the woodlands as a spring and meets the oxic environment at the surface of ponds, swamps, or bogs. The iron-rich water of these shallow waterways and wetlands are also saturated with organic acids from the great amount of decaying woodland vegetation. These acids and fixing bacteria percolate down into the lower layers of mud and soil, leach out the soluble iron, and bring it to the surface. The reddish-brown iron-are deposits collect in layers at the banks of these wetlands or form smallish round clumps ranging in size from a quarter-inch to two inches or more in diameter. The iron ore is collected and washed, and then is fired in a charcoal-fueled forge hearth at an iron works.”

As habitat quality changed so did its ability at times to sustain seafood species of value – the “market species” that fishers could sell. Much of that habitat change can be traced to bacterial shifts in these coastal bottoms.

Environmental History –The Importance of Long Term Coastal Reviews

The more recent eelgrass case is a variant of habitat protection, or even species protection but also as a way to promote environmental policies beyond the science we possessed. It would take “new science” to promote many of the environmental policies attached to eelgrass, nitrogen, bottom disturbance and species protection. This is a bias that excludes history and oddly even at times climate change. Such reports tend to gloss over or ignore the impact of warm water on habitat quality – some don’t even mention that marine acidic sulfate soil – the product of sulfur reducing bacteria that has any toxic or negative impacts. This is a form of scientific misconduct or termed reference or citation amnesia which occurs when an entire body of knowledge is “forgotten.” The misconduct comes in if the entire body of knowledge forgotten is one that does not support the new environmental policy - with eelgrass that is becoming clear.

{The problem (or trouble) with eelgrass for example is that it has very different habitat characteristics during short nitrogen cycles cold (with oxygen) or long nitrogen cycles – sulfate Sapropel warm periods of less oxygen cycles. This is what fishers experienced – the negative NAO 1950s as eelgrass dominated habitats in a real Jekyll and Hyde drama – in high heat and low oxygen conditions eelgrass turns against its former associations and becomes deadly. The climate condition of heat has marshes now violating nutrient standards and eelgrass meadows purging sulfides that at times becomes so toxic they are termed natures killing fields or death rings overseas. These habitats do not help or assist seafood we value or fishers seek – the social aspect of overfishing and abundant harvests are closely linked but share opposite public policy – viewpoints.

The growing disconnect between observations and perceived value – nitrogen, oxygen saturation habitat types, and seafood populations threaten to boil over into policy discussions. Bottom disturbance policies are not “honest” when attached to habitat services that exclude habitat succession that vary in cold/energy or during heat/quiet. The cycle of eelgrass has benefits and detriments leaving either one out of the discussion by glossing over or “forgetting” previous work when it is a detriment to current beliefs is itself a form of scientific misconduct (my view)}.

Most of the eelgrass science may be tossed aside because it was so biased that it failed to include the consequences of climate change (global warming) itself and that in high heat eelgrass is often deadly. Many of the first observations of habitat quality came from fishers and most about eelgrass. They were honest accounts free of “funding effect” bias. They over time and in various New England states have been extremely accurate. At one time explosives were used in an effort to restore oxygen to stagnant eelgrass flats in Niantic River Connecticut. Numerous, other reports and similar fisher accounts exist. {To restore integrity and to broaden the discussion around global warming environmental policies must include the facts that so many of the habitats we protect could and have in the past in heat turned deadly – the return of the sulfur cycle in a warming planet would be disastrous to those who need oxygen, like us. That is why in part the Long Island Sound nitrogen model keeps having trouble. It didn’t include climate change. It is a natural to have low oxygen when seawater is warm and stagnant (poorly mixed) and why nitrogen is so damaging when it is stored in Sapropel. It is these habitat changes that governs seafood abundance and fishing effort even pollution may or may not have had roles in declines or increases}.

Fishers who harvest the seafood from coastal areas have experienced their own climate habitat wars – governed by heat and low energy and at times cold and stormy periods. They see the species in these habitats reverse often in the same location separated by time. When the sulfur cycle creeps back (heat) some species increase and when oxygen is restored some decrease. This is the dilemma faced by high oxygen levels in very warm water – with the inverse solubility law it is unrealistic to link the two. Nitrogen in the colder 1950s was once thought to limit phytoplankton growth in Long Island Sound Thermal pollution in heated storm water is the next huge issue for the coast, and one that finds eelgrass is not a friend but a foe. (The absence of sulfide toxicity and historical eelgrass habitat succession led to my proposal for a five year research amnesty period for eelgrass researchers to amend or retract some eelgrass research.} This aspect of submerged aquatic vegetation was reported by fishers in the last century all along the Atlantic Seaboard.

Habitat Protection -

The foundation of the fisheries and hunting habitat preservation occurred in the 1940s and Paul Galtsoff of the Fish and Wildlife Service who later was to publish a monograph on oysters in 1964 first urged connecting salt marshes to seafood. It was a colder period and represented the nitrogen short cycle – blooms of algae every spring after an immense over turn or resuspension of organics (by winter storms). Winter flounder and menhaden were frequent visitors into creeks and rivers – during this cold and stormy period. Then the heat returned again. After 1972 our marshes began to discharge the byproducts of sulfate reduction, the long nitrogen cycle high levels of metals, aluminum and ammonia. By 1994 some ecologists were even suggesting that such discharges would not meet water nitrogen discharge criteria themselves (1994 Guilford, CT) and by the middle 2000s the long nitrogen cycle became to dominate marshes which were now a source of non point nitrogen discharges. The heat was what Nichols (1920) documented as entire sections of salt marsh collapsed from sulfate digestion below leaving pools behind. Levels of aluminum from salt marsh SRB is at times above toxic levels. The nitrogen long cycle is very deadly to most organisms sulfide and ammonia generation and in subtidal areas sulfides. The current research so critical to global warming is largely missing – most of the current sulfide/ammonia research is in fact coming from Denmark and Australia.

Although much emphasis has been placed reducing short cycle aqueous nitrogen (human waste) the long nitrogen cycle which is fed by organic mater (human and natural) is much more damaging to aquatic life. In some instances the short cycle nitrate in an oxygen limited situation is a buffer to sulfate digestion. Most wastewater treatment operators realized the importance of using nitrate as a source of oxygen to prevent oxygen collapse in bacterial bio filters. The process of a different type of bacterial (an aerobic ammonia oxidation or Anammox) can oxidize ammonia without oxygen using nitrite as an oxygen source. In high heat removal of short cycle nitrogen allows the long cycle to generate ammonia and sulfides and helps sulfur win. Nitrate may be an important factor in a sulfate reduction buffer – several research projects are underway looking at this. Anammox reduction may also buffer the sulfuric cycle and naturally remove large quantities of ammonia from seawater – naturally. Unfortunately the role of EPA sponsored nutrient coordinators may have influenced state regulatory officials to accept unrealistic nitrogen TMDL limits – a process mentioned as early as 1993 as a possible role of “weeding out inappropriate guidance” and evidenced by a lack of organic marine compost impacts most often reported by fishers.

The consequences of the long nitrogen cycle – the Sulfur/Sapropel cycle is just now coming to light – the product of excessive warming with changing climate. This is what is happening to the eelgrass policy, the collection of organics in shallow waters (described as poorly flushed) is now according to Danish studies natures death rings as sulfate reduction seeps toxic sulfides in warm waters. Shallow water tends to collect more solar radiation making warm water sulfur reduction happen quicker by solar collection. In surveys of Sapropel eelgrass environments oxygen requiring fish fled these hot areas. These observations also appear in the fisheries historical literature.

One of the by products of organic matter digestion the Sapropel cycle (1909) is ammonia which is the ready nutrient for algal species which change habitat quality and produce toxin – the brown and red tides. These blooms themselves degraded habitats by the production of dangerous and toxic compounds. The browns need ammonia and those are often called harmful or HABS.

{The absence of ammonia and sulfide purging in the nitrogen TMDL process may have been discounted and if so, communities that spent heavily on nitrogen reduction efforts for seafood abundance may in fact have a claim for reimbursement as the TMDL may not accurately represent all sources of nitrogen compounds}.

Public Policy and Science

Dr. Galtsoff meeting in Connecticut May 14, 1958 captures much of the environmental policy for the next three decades connecting salt marsh habitats to commercial production of finfish and shellfish. He termed the most important habitats should be considered as one - “that is not understood by the public is that the sea, the sound and bays, and the tidal mashes, form a living entirely, they are not separate units.” {Transcript May 14, 1958 meeting in Hartford, CT.} But we have done exactly what Dr. Galtsoff warned us not to do – we have separated them as habitat types. Some getting preference over others such as (eelgrass) for example.

What Dr. Galtsoff was not aware that environmental protection would go far beyond the habitat but also species protection as well which undermines the value of the public towards seafood which often now perceives environmental protection as just promoting scenic vistas or preserves. (Seafood they can no longer access). (Christine O’Connell, September 20, 2013 presentation CAC Long Island Sound Study Citizen Advisory Committee). The value as seafood is diminished and removes much of the food security or value of habitat discussions, the foundation of which was the value of seafood produced in them. The public fishers often ask – where’s the fish? A complete environmental history could be a help in answering those questions. They have a right to know about habitat reversals, and complete explanation of “empty nets.”

Summary and Comment – Climate Changes and Habitat Stability – Updated June 2015

The eelgrass controversy is now being viewed as a way to investigate the sulfur cycle between eelgrass sub species – shellfishers felt that the aggressive dominating eelgrass strain in the 1950s and 1960s was not native to New England but over powered ecological niches during this largely negative NAO period (John C. Hammond, accounts 1982). In the largely positive NAO period 1972-2012 this eelgrass failed in sapropel, when SRB microbial degradation caused sulfides to rise and sediment sinks produced ammonia. The invasion of Zostera japonica on the west coast has shown a similar capacity to displace “native” Zostera marina now suspected of itself an invasive from 18th century shellfish shipments. The core studies of Nichols (1920) did not show eelgrass plant in marshes or seed material causing speculation that eelgrass thought to be a successive plant appeared to be missing?

It is now thought that we may have multiple strains of eelgrass here – many from the North Sea who have adapted habitat characteristics to that area, cold and habitat instability. In cold and stormy periods this eelgrass strain thrives. We can also see that with the Mongolian phragmites that so quickly “invaded” our marshes. First imported from Mongolia (our Agriculture Dept would pay Chinese missionaries for seeds) as a way to end China’s commercial hemp rope monopoly (1908-1912). Although discarded as a hemp replacement it aggressive soil holding characteristics soon caught the attention of the Bureau of Soils and Land Reclamation of Forest Soils. During the 1940s purified seed packets were given to Boy Scout troops as soil erosion control civic projects in New Jersey. This strain quickly displaced native stands in the New Jersey meadow lands. It was also the plant material utilized upon steep grades when 95 was constructed. In these rapid displacements of once “native” species (there is growing evidence that even eelgrass was extirpated here from the last ice glaciation) is a series of adaptations of abilities changing the habitat itself (termed sediment engineers or architecture) – Phragmities created (engineered) a lens of fresh water peat over salt marshes and eelgrass similar transitions alkaline soils into acidic oxygen depleted soils. Some of the success of Z. japonica is displacing Z marina in its ability to better utilizes soils with oxygen (Silver 2009 The Effects of an non-Native Eelgrass Zostera japonica on Sediment Nitrogen Cycling) and resistance to the impact of sulfur.

The presence of high levels of ammonia is now recognized as inability to conduct nitrogen fixation making eelgrass more reliant upon ambient nitrogen in areas of high ammonia – brings into conflict the harmful algal blooms that requires high ammonia levels that eelgrass meadows help create. Most HABs occur in areas of poor flushing and nutrient enrichment both now associated with the return of sulfur cycle and high ammonia shedding. These same areas are those which are colonized by eelgrass after cold and storm filled periods.

The amount of organic matter beneath an eelgrass/Sapropel crust is almost always associated with low energy and long weak connections to the sea. It is these habitats that fail first for alkaline oxygen soils such as bivalve shellfish as eelgrass engineers a soil type in which it thrives – deriving phosphate and nitrogen from SRB, until it is so hot itself overwhelmed by sulfur – as Danish studies published in February 2014 confirmed}. Nearly all eelgrass studies at some point mention eelgrass meadows capacity to rise over time helping sulfur reducing bacteria as the depth of the organic deposit increases. Its ironic that the first signs of the Sapropel/sulfur cycle negative impacts came from fishers who noticed the sediment changing characteristics of eelgrass themselves many in shallow poorly flushed areas as a detriment and the changes in species composition and abundance as these habitats became “unstable” and then reversed. These accounts were extremely accurate in describing marine habitat succession, the scientific community missed.

Habitat instability along our coast has had four marked reversals, and we can follow the changes in seafood abundance related to each. That is recorded in the US fish and regional fish landings statistics – the observations of habitat change were rarely connected to species abundance (except by fishers) the shifting baselines dilemma brought by Pauley in 1994. A habitat indicator is core studies that record hurricane activity and the presence or absence of defined shell/gravel layers. Even the species of bivalve shell in these core studies are significant – an absence of oysters but prevalence of bay scallops is most likely one of our best indicators of habitat instability for colder temperatures and increased energy. These reversals provide dramatic clues of what is ahead in a warming climate – species that have developed biological and genetic advantage to sulfur will last longer they will appear to reverse with cooler more oxygen dependent strains – just as species that depend upon them. The aspect of time looms large as time blocks of at least one century, two centuries provide much better records. The return of the Sapropel Sulfur cycle would cause greater anoxia – low oxygen conditions. That is natural in warm water conditions. The case of the Atlantic Halibut Fishery deserves a second look was it overfishing or was it climate? A short write up of this fishery is in Appendix #3.

The past four reversals sled some light on these climate change skirmishes but the largest habitat battles lay ahead in continued warming – the final habitat battles will not be fought by us but by bacteria and reported by fishers.

I respond to all emails at tim.visel@new-haven.k12.ct.us

- - - - - -
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
BOARD OF FISHERIES AND GAME
2 WETHERSFIELD AVENUE – HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT

April 17, 1958

Dr. Paul S. Galtsoff
Woods Hole
Mass.

Dear Dr. Galtsoff:

Here in Connecticut we are fighting the seemingly loosing battle of saving our tidal marshes. One of the features of the evaluation of these marshes is that which is contributed through the nutrients and minute animal forms which go into the production of seed oysters and soft clams. I have recently conferred with Dr. Loosnoff of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Marine Laboratory, Milford, Connecticut, and he has suggested that, if possible, it would be well for us to sit down with you and discuss the many values which these tidal marshes have to the production of fin fish and shellfish along our Atlantic Seaboard. Inasmuch as many of us are not Marine Biologists, we would like to be able to reproduce many of the statements which you will give us. Would it be agreeable to you if we brought along a Tape Recorder so that we would be sure to have a record of the many things which will be of value to us? I would appreciate hearing from you as to a convenient time and place at which we might meet and discuss this problem with you.

Yours very truly,

Arroll L. Lamson
ALL:lcs Chief, Game Division

Obtained from CT Board Fish and Game Files
1988 Waterford DEP Marine Fisheries Office

Rekeyed by Susan Weber
For The Sound School- May 7, 2012

- - - - - - -

Northern Office - Southern Office
14th for Masonic Temple - #21-25 South King Street
46 W 24th Street - Hampton, VA
New York -

DEVOTED TO SEA AND FOOD ALLIED INDUSTRIES
VOL XII #16

THE OYSTERMAN AND FISHERMAN – March 11, 1915
LATE FISH REPORTS
_____________
Fulton Market, New York
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 5 TO THURSDAY, MARCH 10.

Fulton Market, New York
__________

Wednesday, March 10, 1915

(Note that shad advanced yesterday over Monday and today over yesterday.)

Hard crabs selling fair with few Sandy Hook hard shell crabs coming in, price $1.50 per hundred. Market cleaning up every day. No Long Island hard crabs. Southern scallops selling from $1.50 to $2.50 per gallon. Not many coming in. Long Island scallops very few coming, $1.50 per gallon. Larger Long Island scallops $2.50. Eastern scallops selling $2.50 to $3.00. Sea scallops $1.50 to $1.60. Smelt market in good shape for large green smelts selling at 25c. Steamer soft clams pretty good, $2.50 per barrel (about three bushels)

The Niantic Halibut Fleet – 1848-1881
Tim Visel

Appendix #3

I had heard stories about Connecticut vessels traveling into northern waters in search of Halibut during some Sea Grant workshops in the late 1970s. At first it was hard to believe that cod fish and Halibut was in range of Connecticut ports but with these accounts was always a mention of cold. It would be decades before I had an opportunity to follow up on these Halibut fleet reports and the US Fish Commission. Report Section V History and Methods of the Fisheries – Volume I 1887 (George Brown Goode) contains a section on The Fresh Halibut Fisheries which confirms these accounts on page 9.

“The Connecticut and New York halibut vessels used to have their ice houses arranged in somewhat different manner from that just described. The walls of the compartments of these were often sheathed with zinc, the fishermen of that section claiming that the halibut would keep longer than on the Gloucester vessels. In former years many welled slops from Noank, New London and Greenport (New York) were engaged in the Halibut fishery but at the present time (1887) only Schooners are employed in this industry from those ports, these being of a larger size than the other vessel of the New York fleet, through smaller than those of Gloucester. The Schooner Scotia of New London, the largest of the Connecticut Halibut Fleet, registers about 65 tons, while her companions average about 45 tons.”

Another aspect of the cold and abundance is mentioned in respect to cod fishing – they would steal cod fish bait and cod fishers would waste Halibut in an effort to reduce this bait – loss close to shore in cool waters. The abundance of Halibut in shallow water meant that even modest vessels could catch large numbers of Halibut – on page 29 of The Fresh Halibut Fishery is a excerpt from the Gloucester Telegraph June 3rd 1837 “four men went out fishing from Marblehead a few days since, and retuned, after an absence of two days with four hundred halibut for which they obtained $1.50 each or nearly $600.” It was common to catch Halibut even along northern Massachusetts beaches.

And during this cold period the Connecticut fleet grew and the fishing grounds moved north to George’s Bank – pg 35 has this section mentioning the rapid growth of the Connecticut Halibut fleet.

“Mr. John Fleet other Wonson’s recollections – Mr. John Fletcher Wonson tells us (Fish Commission) that the Gloucester vessels frequently went to New York with fares of Halibut in early times, and this practice was kept up as late as 1849-1850. Speaking of the abundance of Halibut, he also tell us that at one time he saw ten of them follow the deep sea lead to the surface, biting at it. He remembers to have taken an ice bird out of the stomach of a Halibut, and at ano