Having just read the latest Friends of Casco Bay newsletter, I am scratching my head in amazement and disbelief. I am amazed because I thought that Friends of Casco Bay conducted science, then advocated for the health of the bay based on scientific results. Instead, it appears that they are an advocacy organization that bases their opinions on popular thought and ideas, ignoring science-based efforts. One example is coastal acidification.

According to the newsletter, a Friends of Casco Bay board member noticed that Casco Bay clams nowadays have to be placed delicately in kettles “or else the shells may end up chipped or even shattered” because the clams are “smaller and more fragile” than ones from past years.

The newsletter says that those perceptions “seem to correspond to observations FOCB has been making over the years” that muddy sediment close to the shore where clams live is more acidic than mud further away from land. The insinuation is that coastal acidification causes a reduction in shell thickness that ultimately is linked to a reduction in commercial clam landings around the bay.

During the past three years, I have participated in research in northern Casco Bay conducted by faculty and students at the University of Maine at Machias and Downeast Institute staff; they examined populations of juvenile clams, which are the most susceptible to acidic seawater and mud.

The results, presented last June at the Maine Ocean and Coastal Acidification Symposium, showed unequivocally that compared to predation by fish, worms, crabs and other consumers, coastal acidification was unimportant in explaining the recent decline in clam populations.

It is unclear why Friends of Casco Bay continues to ignore these results, offering instead a popular theory that fits like a glove into their work to reduce land-based pollution. The fact is that invasive and native predators are driving clam population declines.

Chad Coffin

President, Maine Clammers Association

Freeport

Copy the Story Link