The Chesapeake Bay has seen a drastic decrease in one of its most vital resources known to date, the eastern oyster (C. Virginicana). Over the past two hundred years, the native oyster to these waters has changed roles from being the world’s largest marketable oyster supply, to a dwindling count in need of our help. Being a top keystone species of the Bay, the native oyster has great impacts on the entire ecosystem and other organisms that thrive there as well. As the Chesapeake Bay’s health decreases, so does the oyster population which if ever lost, could only make matters worse.
The oyster industry of the Chesapeake Bay has taken a huge hit with the decline in native oyster numbers. The economic effect that this decline is causing is of great concern to the local businesses in the area. In recent years, the states of Maryland and Virginia have dramatically reduced the number of oyster harvesting licenses for the Chesapeake Bay due to critically low numbers of native oysters (Committee on Nonnative Oysters in the Chesapeake Bay, National Research Council 102). The new limits place harvest restrictions, meaning fewer boats are needed to fish for the oysters causing a loss of jobs for shipmen. This doesn’t only affect the shipmen, with fewer oysters being harvested, cutbacks are having to be made in the processing plants employment due to decreasing revenue. With the oyster industry in the Chesapeake Bay region suffering, it is only compounding to the Nation’s already deteriorated economic state.
The idea of introducing a new species of oyster to the Bay has been floating around for some time. The Asian oyster (C. ariakensis) has been chosen to test and is seen by many as our best bet in saving the Chesapeake’s oyster population. Known to grow at faster rates and through the winter months, the Asian oyster at first glance seems like an easy fix to our fishing market, but many risks are associated with their introduction to the Bay.
Human consumption of the Asian oyster is a large concern. Asian oysters are filter feeders, and have the ability to filter toxins and other pathogens from the water, which they accumulate in their tissues. Not only would this accumulation of toxins affect humans, but also the oysters’ predators, which humans also consume. The blue crab and various species of fish feed upon the Bay oysters and could possibly acquire the toxins themselves and transfer to humans when consumed, a process called biomagnification. A study released from Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health states that, “Findings showed that C. ariakensis, when grown in aquacultures, effectively and efficiently remove human pathogens from the water. However, the researchers also found that some human pathogens accumulated and persisted in Asian oysters up to five times longer than in native oysters. They concluded that the nonnative oysters could pose a health threat if harvested from polluted waters and were consumed raw,” (http://www.jhsph.edu/). The potential of the Asian oyster to be unhealthy for consumers could possibly end up shutting down the entire oyster industry of the Chesapeake Bay.
In previous attempts to introduce non-native species in areas of the United States, new diseases have occurred and been transferred to other areas such as the Chesapeake Bay. Introduction of the Japanese oyster to the Delaware Bay led to two diseases, MSX and Dermo, which made their way to the Chesapeake and are now a large concern for the native oyster population. Will introducing the Asian oyster introduce even more diseases to our Bay and potentially harm other water bodies in the area?
The effect that the chosen solution to the oyster decline will have on human life style and identity is also a concern. Since the early 1800’s, the Eastern oyster has been one of the representative species of the Chesapeake Bay, much like the Bald Eagle represents the American lifestyle and values. As a tourist attraction, the Bay represents the East Coast lifestyle. Introducing the Asian oyster would change the identity of the Bay from one of true American marine wildlife to one tainted with foreign placeholders. The aesthetic value of the oyster is also important to the Bay’s reputation. Tourism brings in much of the revenue from people all over the world, anxious to experience this famous estuary. As mentioned previously, there is a risk of increased toxicity associated with the Asian oyster, resulting from a polluted Chesapeake Bay. Not many people would spend their hard earned money on a vacation to a polluted cesspool. How the Bay is viewed by the public is important not only for its national reputation, but also to the people who earn their living entertaining vacationers to the area.
Ecosystem services and ecological health of the Bay are among the top issues when choosing a solution to the decline in oyster populations. Native oysters have the unique habit of building reefs in which they grow. Populations of the eastern oyster were once so great, that at low tide the reefs would scrape the bottom of boats as they passed. These reefs provide habitats to many other marine organisms and are vital for their survival. The decreases in the native oyster populations have left us with fewer reefs which prove to be an integral part of the Bay community. “Rock oysters” are the type of oysters that grow upon flat substrates instead of having the ability to grow upon each other. The Asian oysters are classified under these “rock oysters,” and are unable to provide the Bay with essential reef niches, vital to the survival of many organisms in the Bay.
It is obvious that the oyster populations of the Bay need our help in their survival. Introducing the Asian oyster as we have explained is not the best choice economically, ecologically, or aesthetically. We need to focus on the preservation and rebuilding of our own native oyster population and eliminating the need for foreign oysters. Our money should be put towards the restoration projects for the eastern oyster instead of tests for the non-native species. There are too many unknowns of what would become of the Bay if this non-native species was introduced, and too much time and money are being wasted on an idea that we will never be able to fully understand. Too much risk is at stake economically and ecologically to choose the “quick fix” solution of introducing the Asian oyster. Our best bet and safest option to save the oysters of the Bay is to go the native way!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
References will be posted shortly.
ReplyDeleteGroup A is argues that the decline in the native oyster population is detrimental to the oysters themselves, bay health, and the economic state of the surrounding region. The best solution to this includes introducing an exotic asian oyster species into the bay that could help boost population, and improve bay health through filtering processes performed by these exotic oysters. However, the filtering process presents a dual-edged sword. Sure the filtering will eliminate toxins from the bay therefore improving bay health and consequently human health, but if humans decide to eat these oysters containing the toxins just filtered, they ingest these toxins completely negating the good affects from the oysters; this seems counter-intuitive. Introducing the exotic oyster into the bay also poses a threat to the native ecosystem, the aesthetic appreciation of the native oyster, and pose health dangers as well in the forms of foreign diseases. In conclusion, introducing the alien species is the easy way out instead of allowing the ecosystem to rebound by itself through natural processes.
ReplyDeletea couple more comments I've come up with:
ReplyDeleteThis topic reminds me a lot of the debate between techno-skeptics and techno-optimists. To draw a relation, the techno-skeptics would argue for keeping the status quo and allowing the native oysters to thrive; this is nature’s way, and it knows best so it should stay that way. Techno-optimists, however, would argue for the Asian oyster because in their opinion, this is a new form of ‘technology’ that can only prove beneficial since the idea was the product of the human mind.
great paper!
Group A provided information from both sides of the argument and supported their side saying that even though it could be harmful to the Chesapeake Bay, Asian oyster should not be introduced to the Bay. I would have liked to hear more about the effects on the ecosystem in the Chesapeake Bay if the eastern oysters became distinct. This idea was assumed and not supported. It would add much the importance of the issue because you would better be able to weigh the opposing sides. If the extinction of the eastern oysters would be more detrimental than the harmful toxins the Asian oysters may bring, than it may be better for the Asian oysters to become a part of the Chesapeake Bay biome.
ReplyDeleteTeam A’s position was that the proposals to introduce Asian Oysters into the Chesapeake Bay should be halted, even if doing so harms the ecology and economy of the Bay. In their position paper they stated that officials were mulling over the idea of introducing Asian oysters into the bay. They were concerned with this idea because these oysters work as filters in the water. The toxins they filter out of the water build up in the oysters tissues. This causes them to be hazardous to humans if eaten raw. Group A argues that if these oysters are introduce into the bay that it could potentially put a stop to the harvesting of all oysters in the bay. What I was to know is if there is any way to make the distinction between these oysters and the native ones. If so, could they only serve the native oysters raw and make sure to only serve the Asian oysters cooked? They also made a point the European oyster is the representative of the bay, much like the bald eagle is to the United States and that introducing these Asian oysters would change the identity of the bay. I think that having no oysters in the bay at all would be a bigger loss. The oysters serve a vital ecological purpose and if there are none left the bays health would continue to steeply decline. All in all, I think that team A made a very good argument to keep the Asian Oysters out of the Chesapeake Bay.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteGroup A provides information both for and against the introduction of the Asian oyster. This information is helpful in giving an overall view of the situation before going into further detail to support the opposition of the Asian oyster. They did a good job creating an image of the negative chain reaction that could be set off by the introduction of the Asian oyster. It is obvious that something must be done to aid the health of the Chesapeake Bay and the declining native oyster population, but I would have liked to have seen other alternatives and solutions for this worsening situation.
ReplyDeleteGroup A feels that any species that is not native should not be introduced. They equate the oyster with the bald eagle in terms of Americanism and worry that if the Asian oyster is introduced, other American icons could be next in line to be undermined. They close by saying that the uncertainties with the Asian oyster are too great to understand and we should say our money and quit our meddling. I would counter that not understanding the way we affects fragile ecosystems has never stopped mankind in the past. Why now?
ReplyDeleteGroup A is trying to say in their argument that the Asian oyster is a potential health hazard and also will drive down tourism to the bay due to the lack of native oysters. One of the aspects they failed to overlook is that all oysters are filter feeders and the oysters currently being harvested and consumed from the bay carry the same toxins that the Asian oysters would. However as the native oysters continue to decline the toxins in the bay will get worse and the oysters will become more polluted. If the Asian oysters were introduced to the bay they would clean the water and after several years the quality would improve greatly and the oysters would be safer to eat than the native oysters.
ReplyDeleteGroup A argues that proposals to introduce Asian oysters to the Chesapeake Bay should be halted, even if doing so harms the ecology and economy of the Cheaspeake Bay. There are risks involved in introducing the Asian oysters, one being human health and possibility exposure to diseases, in which we cannot predict the outcome. Group A provides a substantial amount of information for both sides of the debate as a background for the topic as well as supporting and defending their position. I still question why are we care so much about these native oysters and their possible extinction with the Asian oysters?
ReplyDeleteAsian Oysters should not be introduced into the Chesapeake Bay because it can throw off the growth cycle of the local environment. By allowing these new species into an environment it is difficult to determine whether their long term effects in the area will be positive or detrimental. The effects of these Asian oysters is not immediate, rather it will take decades to notice changes in the Bay, if any. Other negative aspects include wiping out other species, exponential population or destroying the habitat. In fact, invasive species have caused over 49% of extinction within the United States (Lodge) If in fact, exotic species were introduced and did cause environmental concern it would take about million years to correct this issue. This implies that in the short term, the problem has zero value. This is also not reassuring for addressing public policy which spans no more than a decade. Rather than introduce exotic species, another solution is to look at genetic altering of the native species by creating strains that are disease tolerant. These arguments are valid in that
ReplyDeleteGroup A established their position on the introduction of the Asian oyster as being an invasive species. Introducing this species to the native oyster population could harm the ecology of the Chesapeake Bay and even extend to the fishing industry and then to the population as we consume the food products of the bay. I find that the assumption about consuming the Asian oyster to be subjective. Native oysters as well as Asian oysters are filter feeders and there has always been a concern for ingestion of toxins by means of eating shellfish. Stronger evidence could be provided to support the fact that Asian oysters are subject to more toxicity than that of the Eastern oyster.
ReplyDeleteGroup A makes several interesting points. The group stated that toxins stay in the exotic oysters’ tissues for up to 5 times longer. This would definitely alter the fishing market. And if one of the reasons the exotic oysters are wanted, then this negates the beneficial effects. There are many good points in this position paper, however, I would like to comment on one aspect. When talking about the aesthetic value of the native oyster, would the exotic oysters really turn the bay into a “cesspool”? In Sagoff’s essay, he comments that the exotic oysters would actually filter the toxins out of the bay, increasing water clarity and bay health. I understand, from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Public School of Health research, that the toxins remain in these oysters for longer periods of time. However, the research says they removed the toxins from the heavily polluted water. If the oysters were allowed to clean the water would, in time, they be safe to eat raw again.
ReplyDeleteA big problem with the exotic oysters Group A shows is the inability to form reefs. If the exotic oysters cannot do what the native oysters did, then they cannot effectively replace them. There are many great points and thoughts brought up by Group A.
-Jacob Estienne
Group A's position is that while, introducing the Asian Oyster may seem like a good idea, it would in fact be harmful. They say that the Asian Oyster would not be viable economically because it absorbs too many toxins to be eaten raw. It would not help the other lifeforms in the Bay because it does not form oyster reefs. Also, it would take away from the some of the meaning behind the oyster culture in the Bay. To me, the most disconcerting of these is that the oysters could be harmful to the consumer's health. Even though this group is against spending more money on researching the Asian Oyster, I think that this is one point that they should further research in case the Asian Oyster is released into the Bay accidentally or illegally. This group brought up some points I had not thought of before. I look forward to hearing their debate.
ReplyDeleteGroup A has very interesting topic that is very controversial, but they put their points together well. Through high school I was involved in raising our native oysters and then letting them go in the Chesapeake Bay. Therefore, I know how they clean our waters, or filter our waters. But, as Group A mentioned our native oysters do not filter our waters as good as Asian oysters do. Group A also mentioned that when these Asian oysters filtrate the bay of toxins, that the toxins stay in them for a substantial amount of time meaning that they would be harmful to eat. This is an interesting point because fishermen and local communities around the bay eat and live off of the oysters out of the Chesapeake Bay, and these toxins could be harmful if eaten raw. As a result, the economic resources for the fishermen would decrease because of the lack of healthy products. Group A’s points about refusing the Asian oyster are critical to further stopping the export of the exotic species of oysters to the Chesapeake Bay in order to reform the bay.
ReplyDeleteGroup A presents a nice argument for saving the native species of oyster. The fact that the species that is being proposed for introduction cannot provide the same habitat that the native species can is a cause for concern. I don’t agree however with fear that the new species will cause anymore harm to humans than the native species, if the bay is that polluted then we probably shouldn’t be eating either species. The other point that I am a little confused about is the one about bringing tourists into a polluted bay and the “increased toxicity associated with the Asian oyster”. I was under the impression that the introduction of this new species was supposed to help get pollution in the bay under control.
ReplyDeleteGroup A described the position of preventing the Asian oyster, a non-native species, into the Chesapeake Bay. Some valid points were made, such as the possible health effects behind eating this non-native oyster or eating anything that predates on it. Has there been any research on whether blue crabs hold in these toxins or not? Also, if the Asian oyster holds in these toxins, could that mean a stronger come back for the Eastern oyster? I think regardless of whether there are Virginia oysters or not in the waters, the aesthetic appeal is going to be similar. People come to the beach for the beach. If the water is dirty, then it is less pleasing, and I’m sure no one would complain if a non-native species helped clean it up.
ReplyDeleteAlso, the idea that Asian oysters won’t provide reed is an important point to make. On the flipside though, Asian oysters will provide habitat for Virginia oysters to then create a reef. Oysters need a substrate in order to begin making reefs. With the lack of Virginia oysters in the bay to be able to grow in each other (oyster reefs), these oysters could grow on the Asian oysters.
ReplyDeleteGroup A introduced both sides of the issue well. They explained that it is important to have a prominent oyster population in the Chesapeake Bay. They are concerned that the introduction of Asian oysters will cause major changes in the Bay. This includes economical problems, aesthetic changes, and ecological problems. They realize that it will be significantly more expensive to restore the Eastern oyster population but they believe that it will be the most effective plan. The paper claims that the Asian oysters are filter feeders and the toxins they collect may be harmful for human consumption and the health of the bay. The Eastern oyster is also a filter feeder, so that point may be mute. The fact that it is a filter feeder is often used as a reason to introduce the Asian oyster in hopes that it will clean up the Bay.
ReplyDeleteGroup A expresses that one of their arguments there will be a loss of identity and their current lifestyle if the exotic species of oysters. This argument may be taken down easily by the defending side if it is not strong. Since this cannot be proven by facts I would make sure to get it as solid as you can by providing more evidence.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteGroup A had a very well-written paper and did an exceptional job getting their point across and using strong points to back up the argument for their position. The argument they made about the bay as a tourist attraction was rather weak as they described the polluted bay full of foreign oysters detracting from its American value. The introduction of Asian oysters, although posing many threats and concerns, would only decrease the toxicity of the bay, making it more desirable as a tourist location. The group did a good job of explaining the possible detriment the Asian oysters could bring to the bay in the aspects of the economy, public health, ecology, and the emotion and symbolism involved with the oysters.
ReplyDeleteGroup A makes several good points in their paper on why we should not introduce the Asian Oyster in the Chesapeake Bay. It is true that there are potential risks that have yet to be explored with this species of oyster. The fact that it is a “Rock Oyster” and cannot grow on the shells of its brethren is disturbing. The native oyster, suited for the habitat in the Bay, can, and does, grow on other oysters’ shells. There seems to be a large misconception in Group A’s defense: they point out that Asian oysters, being filter feeders, can harbor pathogens and other toxins that can be passed on to humans through consumption. They fail to point out, however, that native oysters have exactly the same problem because they, too, are filter feeders.
ReplyDeleteGroup A argues for better management plans to contribute to a repopulation of the native oyster species. They disagree with adding an invasive to an already unstable ecosystem. This invasive asian oyster has several concerns attached to it including the health of the consumers. Asian oysters are capable of storing toxins filtered from the water. If consumed by humans this could lead to new devastating health issues. However, native oysters also filter water in the same process and also accumulate toxins which can lead to bioaccumulation. Another problem with a non native species is the capability to outcompete and maybe lower the native population even more. Group A thinks that adding a nonnative changes the balance towards a non American lifestyle. However, there are already several invasive species in the Chesapeake Bay. If the American public has not realized this then it is unlikely they would notice the difference of one more invasive.
ReplyDeleteRestoration of the native oyster was the solution proposed by Group A. They argued that the negative effects of the exotic Asian Oyster would far outweigh any positive health benefits it may provide the bay. The group did a nice job grounding their arguement with several core values such as human health, identity, and ecosystem services.
ReplyDeleteGroup A argued for the native oyster and did an interesting job of discrediting the Asian oyster. I liked their style of writing where they identified the benefits of an increased oyster population but discredited the Asian oyster as an option for introduction. I think it will be a good debate tomorrow since we seem to have a lot of the same information, just fitting opposite sides. I do not want to respond to some of the points I feel are benefits of the Asian oyster such as increased filtering of the bay as well as the expense and lasck of improvement in the native oyster returing to the bay; since that is what we will do tomorrow. I thought they did a good job describing and defending their side and it should be a fun debate.
ReplyDeleteSo I dont know how to work this and the last post is from Brett flower
ReplyDeleteGroup A talked about why we should focus on restoring the Eastern oyster and not introduce the Asian oyster because of possible unknown risk the Asian oyster might cause. They made good arguments on why bioaccumulation in the Asian oyster could pose possible health risk. I would have liked to see more of the possible risks a non-sterile Asian oyster could pose over the sterile Asian oysters they have been testing. I liked the idea of keeping the ecosystem native and not introducing a possible invasive species. I would have liked to see them talk about the idea if the Eastern oyster goes extinct and what impact will this have and what they would recommend if the extinction of the native oyster could not be stopped.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, people who harvest oysters, crabs, and other fish are called watermen, not shipmen. In reference to the fact that Asian oysters harbor more human pathogens than the natives, why don’t native oysters have similar rates of retention for those pathogens? I agree with the fact that the Asian oysters could harbor more diseases, thereby putting even more of a strain on the oysters and current diseases. Has the identity of the Puget Sound been altered (it has various species of oysters introduced)? You mention that Asian oysters are rock oysters, but I have noticed the eastern oyster growing on many rocks and other substrates more than I have seen them growing on other oysters. I agree that the Asians shouldn’t be introduced, but you need more specifics of how you’re going to restore the native oyster.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWell articulated paper! I have one question. When we debated this issue in Principles of Fisheries and Wildlife, it seemed to me that one of the main arguments was that the exotic oysters were less sensitive to pollutants, and that therefore introducing them would hurt the health of the bay because it would encourage people not to reduce their pollution levels. Is this true?
ReplyDeleteI think that not allowing asian oysters in the bay at all is probably a poor decision. Its necessary for the economy to have some sort of oyster population, and the ecology of the bay would probably benefit from having these animals cleaning the water. It would definately be necessary to clean the waters up as well though, because the pollution levels could be harmful to humans if consumed in high quantities!
ReplyDeleteGroup A argues that non-native species will have negative effects on the Chesapeake Bay and native oyster population. This seems a little extravagant when you consider the Chesapeake Bay and native oyster population have already deteriorated without the presence of the non-native oyster. As filter-feeders the Asian oyster might retain more pollutants and pathogens in their tissue, but then it would be removed from the Bay waters. There was no mention of risks associated with eating the Asian oysters cooked. Both the Native and Asian oyster retain pathogens in their tissues, the Asian oyster just in higher amounts. Already many bodies of water post warnings about eating certain fish raw and in certain amounts because of pollutants, why can’t the same be done with the oysters if both species accumulate harmful substances in their tissues? Already the Bay is experiencing negative environmental effects from the decline in the Native oyster in the Bay, as mentioned in the paper, but none of the harmful effects cited from the introduction of the Asian oyster seem to vary any from existing conditions. It seems like by introducing the Asian oyster conditions can not get any worse.
ReplyDeleteGroup A's position was that Asian oysters should not be introduced to the Chesapeake Bay for health, economic, and recreational reasons. They argued that the Asian oyster could prove to be a health risk to humans if eaten raw as they accumulate human pathogens longer than native oysters. This would in turn, perhaps decrease the amount of oyster gathering which would hurt the economy. They also argued that the native oyster is a symbol of the Chesapeake Bay and introducing the Asian oysters would sully that symbol and hurt tourism, as tourists want to see a traditional symbol. They provided examples of introduced species having negative effects on its environment, and proposed ways of helping the native environment while at the same time, acknowledging the faults and possible setbacks in keeping the native oysters. I was just wondering how the Asian oyster would contribute to pollution in the Bay as it was stated that it was a filter feeder, and that it in fact takes IN the toxins and accumulates which suggests to me that it in fact reduces the toxins in the water. I also think the whole thing of the native oyster being an important symbol was a bit exaggerated, as I think that any tourist that visit the Bay and sees more Asian oysters than native oysters will not see a great difference and see instead just different looking oysters. Also, the Asian oyster would help filter out the waters of the Bay and I would think that this would actually contribute to tourism, not to mention the fact that more oysters would be seeable which would also help. Group A also mentioned the possible economic loss in introducing the oysters as they would be unsafe to eat raw, but they also stated that if native oysters were left alone, they would have to have time to reproduce without intrusion from fisheries which would also provide an economic loss. If the oysters were introduced than there would be no need to cut back on the fishing, all you would need to do would be to cook the Asian oysters. One thing that did stand out to me was the inclusion of the fact that Asian oysters do accumulate toxins longer than native ones, I was not aware of that, and that would is a major point in not introducing them to the Bay. Another thing was the fact that native oysters uniquely produce reefs, I was also not aware of that, and that unique trait seems to me to be a major selling point of reinvigorating the native oysters.
ReplyDeleteGroup A presents the point that no non-native species of oysters should be introduced to the Chesapeake Bay to help with the decreasing oyster population. The native oyster population is down very low so the proposal for the introduction of the Asian oyster was presented. These oysters reproduce much faster than the native oyster. However, the Asian oysters filter the water in which they reside, so with all the chemicals in the Bay, eating these oysters would cause health concerns for humans. Group A presents a very good position on this topic by seeing that even though a quick introduction of the Asian oyster to the Chesapeake Bay would speed up the reproduction of the oyster population, it is not the best and safest option. Therefore, efforts to rebuild the native oyster population of the Bay remain as the best option.
ReplyDelete-Jacob Evans
Group A argues that introduction of the Asian oyster will be a poor choice ecologically, economically, and aesthetically. They state that the new species of oyster will not completely fix the current issues in the Chesapeake Bay and therefore we should abandon the idea and put the funding towards restoring the native oyster population. While I agree that the Asian oyster does not completely replace the function of the native oyster because they are unable to grow on top of each other like the natives and create the reefs that other marine life depend on, I think that the introduction of the Asian oyster may clean up the water enough in the Bay to allow the native oyster to thrive once again. Dissolving more oxygen in the water will allow more sea grasses to grow and permit other species to make a comeback as well as the native oyster. Even though the Asian oyster may not be a long term solution the problems in the Chesapeake Bay, it may work as a remediation effort to repopulate the native oyster.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI disagreed with this groups decision to not allow non-native species into the bay. After reading Sagoff's article "Whats wrong with exotic species?" my view on the matter has slightly changed. While I agree that exotic species can take on a detrimental role when introduced, I believe they can still be a benefit. The native population is greatly declining and needs to be given a booster or the economic and ecological role it serves in the community will be failed having a very negative effect on the environment
ReplyDelete-- Kirsten Dobson
Group A is defending the position that the introduction of the Asian Oysters to the Chesapeake Bay should be halted, even if doing so harms the ecology and economy of the Bay. The Group takes both sides of the issues into perspective. They mention how with the decrease of the Oyster population come a great decrease in the economy for fisherman and factory workers which process them. Many people have lost jobs due to the decrease in the number of licenses. If the Asian Oyster population booms would these people have their jobs back? I would like to know how long it would take before the populations were sustainable enough to begin full harvest as it was before the major decline of the Easter Oyster. They also state how Asian Oysters as filter feeders would pose a risk to human health from consumption, as well as to the wildlife which consumes them which we may also harvest for food. The Oysters have been known to bring diseases with them that have harmed local populations as well. Is this something that would be curable or noticeable? Would fisherman or processing be able to notice these diseases or toxins? Unlike the native Eastern Oyster, the Asian Oyster is unable to build reefs which provide much of the habitat for local wildlife. If the Asian Oyster were to take over there could be potential for other native species to begin to decline. Although habitat for some species may decline, would those species still benefit from the increase in water quality of the bay; as well as benefit from food sources provided by the Asian Oyster?
ReplyDeleteGroup A made good points on why the Asian oysters should not be transplanted into the Bay’s ecosystem. They supported their stance with how the economy, aesthetics, and traditions of the area would be affected. Those were all valid points; however, they could have included a few more. It would have been good if they had shown examples of how introducing as foreign species in the past has been negative. The group could have found and alternative to the Asian oyster, such as an animal that can remain in check, but could temporarily fill the niche of the native oyster and the transplanted animal should come from somewhere in the United States with conditions similar to that of the bay.
ReplyDeleteGroup A states that the eastern oyster is in need of our help in order to increase population and in turn clean up the bay and bring back fisheries. They state that an exotic could cause irreparable damage to the bay and potentially to us. A new species could bring diseases that could wipe out more than the eastern oyster. The prospected exotic the Asian oyster holds pathogens 5 times longer than the eastern oyster posing a health risk to the poeple who eat them. The eastern oyster is also a part of tradition and history giving it an aesthetic value to people which could be lost after introduction of an exotic. Lastly the native oyster supports other life forms through reefs while the ASian oyster grows alone and does not provide habitat for other species.
ReplyDeleteI agree with group A's position simply because the possibilities of harm are too high. We don't know the exact effects that the oysters would have on the rest of the ecosystem in the bay. The introduction would harm the economy, aesthetics, historical value, and potentially much more. I believe that we should either outlaw fishing for oysters for an extended period of time even though the industry would take a direct hit or look for other species that would be more beneficial to our situation.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Group A; the introduction of Asian Oysters into the Chesapeake Bay should be halted, even if doing so harms the ecology and economy of the Bay. If these non-native oysters are introduced then I strongly believe that they will throw off the balance of the ecosystem and take away the nutrients from the native oysters that are trying to repopulate and survive. I understand that the introduction of the non-native oysters could help stimulate the native oyster breeding, but it could also disrupt other species living in the bay or provide too much competition for other species. Group A also makes a valid point in bringing up that the non-native oysters could also be detrimental to humans if eaten raw. This alone is reason enough not to introduce them into our ecosystem, and efforts should be focused strictly on rebuilding the current native oyster population.
ReplyDeleteGroup A believes that the proposes to introduce Asian Oysters into the Chesapeake Bay should be halted because introducing these oysters could have detrimental economical and ecological effects. The Asian Oysters bioaccumulate toxins that they filter out of the water in their tissues. The toxins could make the oysters and their predators dangerous and unfit for human consumption. They could also bring in diseases which could have dangerous effects for other water systems. Group A believes that our efforts should be focused on ways to save the native oysters instead of testing the Asian Oyster to see if it is fit. While I agree with Group A I believe more effort needs to be made to stop the pollution going into the Bay.
ReplyDelete