Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinfish Aquaculture Project - Draft Environmental Statement• • r C 0 1 0 ly D•- S©u77ez0 - RUeG/c DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Relating to the Proposed FINFISH AQUACULTURE PROJECT FOR THE PRODUCTION OF SUMMER FLOUNDER (PARALICHTHYS DENTATUS). LOCATION: Hatchery - 10 Acres County Road 48, Southold Grow Out - 200 Acre Site, Gardiners Bay Processing - 3.3 Acres Site, Sterling Ave., Greenport APPLICANT: Mariculture Technologies, Inc. P. O. Boz 461 Greenport, NY 11944 (516) 477-1777 - Robert Link LEAD AGENCY: N.Y.S. Dept. of Environmental Conservation SUNY Campus - Building 40 Stony Brook, NY 11790-2356 (516) 444-0365 - John Wieland PREPARER: Peconic Associates, Inc. One Bootleg Alley Greenport, NY 11944 (516) 477-0030, Merlon Wiggin, PhD. and Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. P.O. Boa 958 Water Mill, NY. 11976 (516) 726-1919, Bruce Anderson, MS. DATE OF PREPARATION: November 1993 to May 3, 1995 DATE OF ACCEPTANCE: 12Z/ DEADLINE DATE Z � / FOR COMMENTS: /`j� w INQUIRIES REGARDING THE PUBLIC HEARING ARE TO BE DIRECTED TO JOHN A. WIELAND, NEW YORK STATE DEC BUILDING # 40 - STONY BROOK, NY 11790-2356 TELEPHONE: 444-0368 State Environmental Duality Review Notice of Completion of Draft/Final EIS Project Number Pending Date 12/18/9f This notice Is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Env'ronmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental Conservation Law. A Draft or ❑ Final (check one) Environmental Impact Statement has been completed and accepted by thet�etc State Da cgs, as lead agency, for the proposed action described below. Comments on the Draft EIS are requested and will be accepted by the contact person until 02/08/96 Name of Action: Mariculture Technologies, Inc., Finfish Aquaculture Project for the Production of Summer Flounder Paralichthys dentatus. Description of Action: Develop a commercial aquaculture operation for the production of summer flounder Paralichthys dentatus. The proposal includes construction and operation of a hatchery facility to rear summer flounder from eggs to fingerlings for approximately one year. The proposal also includes the construction and operation of 14 acre open net pens for the grow -out phase of the operation. The total §row -out area could reach 200 acres. Location: (Include street address and the name of the municipality/county. A location map of appropriate scale is also recommended.) Grow -out - S/E of Plan Island, Town of Southold, Suffolk County (see attached location map). Hatchery - Clarks Beach, on County Road 48, bounded to the east by Inlet Point Count- Park and the north by Long Island Sound, Town of Southold, Suffolk County aP; SEOR Notice of Completion of Draft/Final EIS Potential Environmental Impacts: Degradation of existing water quality with the resultant adverse impact upon �? marine resources including endangered species. Other potential impacts exist for y the traditional commercial fishing industry, recreational water use and navigation. A Copy of the Draft/Final EIS may be obtained from: Contact Person: John A. Wieland Address: NYSDDC, Bldg. #40, SUNY, Stony Brook, NY 11790-2356 Telephone Number. ( 516) 444-0368 A Copy of this Notice and Draft EIS Sent to: 'Commissioner, Department of Environmental Conservation, 50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 122334=1 'Appropriate Regional Office of the Department of Environmental Conservation 'Office of the Chief Executive Officer of the political subdivision in which the action will be principally located. Persons Requesting Draft EIS 'Other involved agencies (if any) See Attached List One copy of the Draft Final EIS must also be included (see 617.10(e) .• :2, 4 .tu. _. 36 37 24 m ' l 1Ht.�Ra E I�c Ra' '' "EDI 40Et1 r•' • �. i \ s0 > _ 812': ' k R / '` : 4� •' J?_ 33GEw a` / i3utt+e N N �4 41 Z :1.(• �.. ip 47 78 :: r °i � 38 R► `i I N 1 29:' 7 52 31 i.. w20fel.:orN `sir+ � i�s; ... 57 4 t_.. � _ 2 . - , \t1 .... ` 2. 1 52 52 SO FI ss 35A t2M: L L cpp" ! 73 :8A 34 37 - &Aarl / 58 < 42 MORN C '1A' g7Nuneous RA ; i ° •t) 1..... 91 40 02 46 /71 72 75 0 47 ::/ :: 58 / ,�� ° '�5 btni) 086 tn� S3 G5 i0 . 56 E x ./96 96 93 ! 266 m ,... cros Elan :.Oven 1 99 78/Ssh 4 79 128 118 A�,9 trA �S2 71. 1993. 1994 / 155 !64......•y.y1990 6, ws . 71 ! b 1 136 ;58: 1V L. 71 V=. 66 /\ i 82 91 % 89 FI R 4s BELL 1: 74 ODse., 17 5a -Sd_ _ It ` . 2 109 78 77 I 10C'm 1� t I 129 / 203 1 17 �� 5 SA ISO 7 M 91 /, ,� / 0cs" 107 S G SAI 179 204 41156 71 101 / I 158 I 190 3 7208.3 c 125 122 195 t 1", 100 I 210 _ 1 T 121 161 156 1648148 S< X 296 FlR t' ids Is. s. I� 290°m 1 249 204 � .. a %o I (11.4 mil 110°m —. G aF 248 132 l I 1 1 22 $ ! VALIANT ROCK BELL 1 119 113 I17' �' D v• In .p. :� Jp t6s y i G ' r $ ? .D D i 16 / 1. / ,\ 163 ' GSt N' 237 x;199 G 231 ,� 113 273 % :203 / /�/ 30 ! / i19 16,i, i a 1 Rw •Pr '_ ✓ ^.M S G 42 ' P'PikpP i Ve No (A) NMIS 95 o to <8 i 217 $ 186 �\ '%47 1V o CV /'171 191122 63 to g+ 122 OV 176 � to � I Ia � � 166 '%0 71 5'�� J3f . a: i' Se ! 32 131 urraE�uui ' i 1 3. F91A15M G i �� 1 SEE PAGE 34.rt9 1a��1;'°�_3�� �;Y ;, s sP BI 33 i 144 ! 16 _ ! t� . 52 ! YEOMAN 1 r - _ _ 41 10.6 r l 118 135 \ L 8 / j 721' 1t00 WN tai��•' ; 'r 1 96 7213.1 210 49 S3 164 69 f� ' 196 AIV i :9 153 1 Plu Island U 5 Gol .mMent 70 36 i :• _ ! lepe•ty and .s cosed to the pu 32 '.r .121 I� ° 41 13.8 l33 b / 8I PA -�. 22: _ i I .. <r�: .30 :.24'. 37 h� 70 92 72 04.0 I: 23 O ' '14!' 138 hrd3Al J3" 3 E �i ?2 23 51 2 �.2 639 i a� 134 ' ��.:: -:ir 266786 57 _ _. a t 16m l— t4 26 `�. 52 ' f 80 ::e': 9 r 1I I4,.1 ' 2 & 22 65 89 1 2 �����A'7PG• �aMK l0 2 rF 3i 20,ti,� : _26 ��< G M 71 323 R R 4s �i F� I. 8 yF' 22 /y 49 �� ► BE Ll / l � Z Ss SOn PLT �' 7 /�. + `•' • • '• 1 'K ~1 11E1. S� _14 1 4 —ie uNuw RI ?.. GOLItEGs P , J 90 ! 69 OL11G ,�._� PROPOSED NET PEN SITE 33 N 2- /I04 ,cr ♦ i{9Ft0a�RX11. .M"<• _ 39 39 42 ' 'VS 66 Z 1 dl a 't male 46 80 4y� A71 i~ LAT N 41 ° 10' 20' i 53M•' � I -� 9 j LNG W 720 10' 25' in... P..a;er••G 186 G.,� �1. 133 83 69 1 bS '4' S b9 1 ,..: • /74 C ' '4r"L 121SO22:' �LA� '94 . ~ 300°RI I '4 122 l 4583 35 e 16:' 36 9f2 r So KavtnyE (7.g 95 85 ! 7S 1 So 101. Ns C mJllf200 G•IGr GS . 101 R la1 X '448 F1 G 4: GONG 37 76 60 'oatr' 25 ! 49 , 1 54 39 4 56 /a7 1 F, as ,411 ` sa3 34 pa NG AR _ 09.0 ' pl, i9 f 4717 47 diner 72t`i; R1rMs13 72090 ! 73 39 15 24 42 ; t ! %J 30 o �3 to co - , 3i— - S :. /33 P T 79 e� 34 25 141 29 37!44D Otn�l 34 j' :=1 36 Ji7? o 34 \6' - 31 24 %} `:� ,? �..• a -,-AsirP E37 .ti 9 3Af 6 1�aotn37 % 26 ° 1R C G \ tl 439 ! 27 _ �' Q4 / 3 /� ? 21- 215 36 . - 29tl ' \ C 40 C26 If 23 '' } t 1744 3 29 10 R2`'Z. 315 ft�2� : •• 12 ' 18 •18�� 35 --29 T7 7- 32: 29 SLbe 9. �.s 12 34 s39j0'� �' Cs.�Me.a 3E rtr," for 70 MARICVLTURE TEC"HOLOGIESCN 127 Sterling Street • PO Box 461 • Greenport, NY 11944-0461 • Ph: (516) 477-1777 • Fax: (516) 477-1789 0 ! Mariculture Technologies was formed to bring seafood production into the 21st Century. Our goal is to culture Fluke and related species from egg to maturity to satisfy the growing world shortage for finfish. The state of our ocean's fisheries has been widely documented as being in serious trouble, perhaps irreparably The commercial fishing grounds of Canada, New England and Georges Banks combined once made up the largest and most productive fishery in the world. However, due to the continued exploitation beyond sustainable yield, government has restricted these fishing grounds, in some cases, to the point of closure. Consequently, fishermen are out of work, • unable to finance their boats or supply fish to shore side processing and distribution facilities. This fallout has created a wave of destruction for our maritime economy and fishing communities, ripple effects will extend well beyond our fisheries. To address the immediate impacts the federal government has dedicated millions of dollars in the form of disaster relief monies to salvage what r little is left. While here in the U.S. we fight over what's left of wild stocks, the rest of the world has been turning to farming the seas for its food supply in response to their dramatically diminished natural fish stocks. Unfortunately, and truly hard to believe, the United States lags far behind the rest of the world in advancement of fish farming. Norway, England, Spain, Japan, Philippines, China and South America all have established mariculture industries where great strides have been made perfecting techniques, and applying new technologies to ensure greater ! success, healthy fish, large harvest, and sufficient economic return. With proper management, improved technology, and building on existing knowledge Mariculture Technologies hopes to bring fish farming to a new level of success never seen before in the U.S.. ! The two most sought after species of finfish in the U.S. are Flounder (Fluke), and Cod. The two species combined comprise approximately 701/o+ of all finfish consumed in the U.S.. All other species compile the balance of finfish consumption in the U.S.. Farm raised fish will compliment existing harvests, providing supply when wild harvests fall short. Mariculture will provide a more consistent product than is now readily available. World wide consumption of fish continues to rise despite sharp declines in supply. Here in the U.S., per capita 0 " TAKING SEAFOOD INTO THE 21ST CENTURY" • consumption is half the worldwide average and steadily growing as population 41 continues its upswing and consumers are turning to healthier seafood diets. The concept of Mariculture Technologies is based largely on a three point plan; improving employment, attracting new and related technologies as a foundation for economic strength, and education. Mariculture Technologies is bringing awareness to the state of our fisheries and alternatives available to earning a living from the water, so future generations will be able to enjoy our resources as we have. Mariculture has made great effort to welcome and plan educational experiences for all ages by providing public tours of our facility as well as providing opportunities for scientific research projects on the academic and federal • level. So, in combination with employment, technology, and education Mariculture will be a strong positive contribution to Eastern Long Island and be recognized as a world leader in fish farming. • C7 • C S a i DOTES S 1. "Dwindling fish stocks have affected many national economies." UNFAO Fisheries Info Data. 1992 - 1993. 2. "Wild stocks of Fluke are in serious decline, and fishing pressures on them need to decrease." •' John H. Dunnigan Executive Director of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission - Personal Communication 1995. 3. "Marine aquaculture is a new industry that will provide local economic development while preserving our environment and the quality of life • that east -enders have fought so hard to maintain." State Senator Kenneth P. Lavalle. 4. "An estimated 200 million people world-wide depend on the fishing industry for their livelihood, many of them now fear for their jobs." World Marine Fisheries - Lennox Hinds. September, 1992. 5. "The strong demand for fish and their rising prices can be expected to continue to make aquaculture a growing industry." Journal of Commerce. September 29, 1992. • 6. "Most finfish are not in good condition, as stocks decline, prices go up. Future generations could be eating more fish grown by artificial means than ones caught in their natural environment." Jack Travelstead, The Virginian Pilot and The Ledger Star. r August 21, 1994. 7. "Nearly 80% of the commercially valuable fish whose status is known are overfished" and "expecting to feed the world's population on wild fish is, in any case, as unreasonable as expecting to sustain humanity on a diet of wild buffalo, squirrels, roots and berries". Dr. Silvia Earle, NOAA Chief Scientist 1990-1992, SEA CHANGE, A Message of the Oceans, 1995. 8. "This Mariculture Project harmonies very well with the East End economy. It will provide jobs, a tourist attraction, and environmentally sound product." Suffolk County Legislator Gregory Blass. 9. "Farming, fishing, and tourism are the strengths of the East End. This ` project addresses all of these and provides a new industry for future employment opportunities." New York State Assemblywoman Pat Acampora. 0 a 0 DEDICATION i This Environmental Impact Statement has been compiled with the assistance of many people from the federal, state, and local government, private sector, scientific community, including friends old and new. It is with great pride • that I submit this document and dedicate it to all the people who encouraged me along the way. When embarking on a project such as this, one needs someone to believe in you. Most importantly for me, that person was Stephen Hendrickson from the Department of Environmental Conservation. Steve's insight, patience and guidance enabled me to chart a course, bringing this dream closer to reality. Bob Link • r 41 • 0 • ii 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 3. Feed Requirements I - 152 4. Broodstock Selection and Testing I - 153 5. Disposal of Unsuitable Materials I - 156 6. Wet Verses Dry Feed 1-158 7. Disposal of Fish Processing Waste I - 158 8. Disaster Response and Notification 1-160 Procedure F. Baseline Field Survey 1-162 a. Diver Survey 1-162 b. Hydrography 1-165 C. Water Quality 1-200 d. Benthic Analysis 1-213 e. Sediments 1-215 f. Infauna 1-219 G. Approvals and Requirements 1-225 H. Maintenance Program 1-228 1. Security / Predator Control 1-228 2. Health / Disease Control 1-231 3. Net Cleaning 1-245 4. Operational Supervision 1-246 I. Closure and Post Closure Plans 1-249 Ab II. Environmental Setting of Water and Land Based Operations for all Sites A. Geology II - 1 1. Surface / Subsurface II - 1 2. Topography 11-7 B. Water Resources II - 11 I. Location and Description of Water Quality 2. Identification of Existing Uses and 11-32 i Levels of Use for Each Site C. Aquatic Ecology 11-38 1. Vegetation 11-38 2. Invertebrate Species 11-39 3. Finfish Species 11-46 • ii 6 FI 4A TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 4. Wildlife 11-50 5. Benthos 11-66 6. Food Web 11-72 7. Habitat 11-73 D. Other 11-84 1. Air Resources 11-84 2. Aesthetics 11-84 3. Cultural Resources 11-85 4. Transportation H - 86 5. Market Analysis 11-88 • III Significant Environmental Impacts A. Water Quality 1. Hatchery III - 1 2. Offshore Net Pens 111-10 B. Transportation 111-15 t Processing Site 111-15 IV. Mitigation Measures to Minimize Environmental Impact A. Hatchery IV - 1 B. Grow Out Site IV - 2 C. Transportation IV - 11 D. Economic Benefits IV - 12 V. Adverse Environmental Effects that Cannot be Avoided if the Project is Implemented Adverse Environmental Effects V - 1 VI. Adverse Environmental Impacts Adverse Environmental Impacts V - 1 VII. Alternatives A. Alternative Sites VII - 1 B. Alternative Size VII - 18 1-7 ill 0 • • IV 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE C. Alternative Operation Scheduling VII - 23 D. Alternative Technologies VII - 28 E. No Action Alternative VII - 39 Impacts of No Action VII - 39 VIII. Growth Inducing Aspects ! Growth Inducing Aspects VIII - 1 IX. Effects on the Use and Conservation of Energy Resources Energy Resources Ix- 1 40 X. References References X - 1 XI. Appendices A. List of Consultants XI - 1 B. List of Appendices XI - 3 • • IV 0 U— r LIST OF FIGURES PAGE u A Figure 1. Geographic Boundaries and Site Locations 1-18 of the Proposed Project. Figure 2. Location of the Proposed Grow Out Site 1-20 in Gardiners Bay. Figure 3. Wind and Wave Band Sectors at the 1-31 Proposed Net Pen Site. Figure 4. Closed Recirculation Treatment System. 1-66 Figure 5. Phase Timing Schedule for the Culture of 1-86 Summer Flounder. Figure 6a. SFB+3 - Predicted Particle Dispersal. 1-169 Figure 6b. SFB+3 Tidal Current Chart Long Island Sound 1-170 and Block Island Sound (NOAA, 1979). Figure 7a. SFB+4 - Predicted Particle Dispersal. 1-171 Figure 7b. SFB+4 Tidal Current Chart Long Island Sound 1-172 and Block Island Sound (NOAH., 1979). Figure 8a. SFB+5 - Predicted Particle Dispersal. 1-173 Figure 8b. SFB+5 Tidal Current Chart Long Island Sound 1-174 and Block. Island Sound (NOAA, 1979). Figure 9a. SEB - Predicted Particle Dispersal. 1- 175 Figure 9b. SEB Tidal Current Chart Long Island Sound 1- 176 and Block Island Sound (NOAA, 1979). Figure 10a. SEB+I- Predicted Particle Dispersal. 1- 177 u A a 4 a 4 4 0 • a LIST OF FIGURES V1 PAGE Figure IOb. SEB+1 Tidal Current Chart Long Island Sound 1-178 and Block Island Sound (NOAA, 1979). Figure 11 a. SEB+2 - Predicted Particle Dispersal. 1-179 Figure l lb. SEB+2 Tidal Current Chart Long Island Sound 1-180 and Block Island Sound (NOAA, 1979). Figure 12a. SEB+3 - Predicted Particle Dispersal. 1-181 Figure 12b. SEB+3 Tidal Current Chart Long Island Sound 1-182 and Block Island Sound (NOAA, 1979). Figure 13a. SEB+4- Predicted Particle Dispersal. 1-183 Figure 13b. SEB+4 Tidal Current Chart Long Island Sound 1-184 and Block Island Sound (NOAA, 1979). Figure 14a. SEB+5 - Predicted Particle Dispersal. 1- 185 Figure 14b. SEB+5 Tidal Current Charts Long Island Sound 1-186 and Block Island Sound (NOAA, 1979). Figure 15a. SEB+6 - Predicted Particle Dispersal. 1-187 Figure 15b. SEB+6 Tidal Current Chart Long Island Sound 1- 188 and Block Island Sound (NOAA, 1979). Figure 16a. SFB - Predicted Particle Dispersal. 1-189 Figure 16b. SFB Tidal Current Chart Long Island Sound 1-190 and Block Island Sound (NOAA, 1979). Figure 17a SFB+I - Predicted Particle Dispersal. 1-191 V1 EA a LIST OF FIGURES PAGE .1 V11 Figure 17b. SFB+1 Tide Current Charts Long Island Sound 1-192 and Block Island Sound (NOAA, 1979). Figure 18. Location of the Proposed Net Pen Site 1-201 in Gardeners Bay Figure 19. Location of Alternate Grow Out Site. 1-201 Figure 20. Sampling Locations for Macrobenthic Invertebrate 1-214 and Sediment Chemistry Sampling. Figure 21. Bottom land Contours of the Grow Out Site 11-8 and Beyond. Figure 22. Topography of the Proposed Hatchery Site 11-10 (Clarks Beach). Figure 23. Temperature Profiles for Stations 1 and 2 11-27 on August 8, 1994. Figure 24. Temperature Profiles for Stations 1 and 2 11-28 on August 31, 1994. Figure 25. Salinity Profiles for Stations 1 and 2 on 11-29 August 8, 1994. Figure 26. Oxygen Profiles for Stations 1 and 2 11-30 on August 8, 1994. Figure 27. Oxygen Profiles for Stations 1 and 2 11-31 on August 31, 1994. Figure 28. Model Food web in Gardiners Bay. 11-73 Figure 29. Aerial Photograph of Clarks Beach. 11-75 .1 V11 a • a U C viii 0 LIST OF FIGURES PAGE Figure 30. Sampling Locations for Macrobenthic Invertebrate IV - 9 and Sediment Chemistry. Figure 31. Location of Proposed Grow Out Site VII - 15 Figure 32. Location of Alternate Grow Out Site VII - 15 • Figure 33. Phase Timing Schedule for the Culture of VII - 25 Summer Flounder. Figure 34. Single Pass Treatment System. VII - 29 s Figure 3 5. Single Pass Partial Treatment System. VII - 31 Figure 36. Closed Recirculation Treatment System. VII - 34 • a U C viii 0 0 • LIST OF TABLES ix 0 PAGE Table 1. Wind Data 15 Nautical Miles East of Proposed 1-27 Net Pen Site. Wind Direction by Month (Percent) in Band Sectors. Table 2. Wind Data 15 Nautical Miles East of Proposed 1-28 Net Pen Site. Wind Speed by Month (Percent). Table 3. Wave Data 15 Nautical Miles East of Proposed 1-29 Net Pen Site. Wave Height by Month (Percent) a Table 4. Wave Data 15 Nautical Miles East of Proposed 1-30 Net Pen Site. Wave Periods by Month (Percent). Table 5. Wave Data 15 Nautical Miles East of Proposed 1-32 Net Pen Site. Wave Occurrence. (Height 0-1 and 1-2 meters) Table 6. Wave Data 15 Nautical Miles East of Proposed 1-33 Net Pen Site Wave Occurrence. (Height 2-3 a and 3-4 meters) Table 7. Wave Data 15 Nautical Miles East of Proposed 1-34 Net Pen Site Wave Occurrence (Height 4-5 meters) 1 Table 8. Wave Fetch. 1-35 Table 9. Current Velocities July 5 and 6, 1994. 1-38 Table 10. Current Velocities - October 4, 1994. 1-42 Table 11. Location of Land Based Processing and 1-73 Storage Facilities. ix 0 0 r LIST OF TABLES PAGE 4k x 1 Table 12. Number of Employees Per Phase. 1-75 Table 13. Parking Per Phase. 1-76 Table 14. Vehicle Round Trips Per Day. 1-89 w Table 15. Schedule of Operations - Broodstock. 1-108 Table 16. Schedule of Operations - Early Larvae. 1- 117 Table 17. Schedule of Operations - Weaning. 1-122 Table 18. Schedule of Operations - Juvenile 1-127 Table 19. Schedule of Operations - Fingerling. 1-131 Table 20. Schedule of Operations - Grow Out 1- 145 Table 21. Schedule of Operations - Processing 1- 150 Table 22. Fish Waste Processing. 1-159 Table 23. Comparisons between Project Site Current Flows 1-194 and that of the NOAA Tidal Current Charts. Table 24. Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, Salinity with 1-204 Respect to Depth determined at Sample Location #1 on August 8, 1994. Table 25. Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, Salinity with 1-206 Respect to Depth determined at Sample Location #1 on August 31, 1994. 4k x 1 a a LIST OF TABLES i Table 26. Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, Salinity with Respect to Depth determined at Sample Location #2 on August 8, 1994. Table 27. Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, Salinity with Respect to Depth determined at Sample Location #2a on August 31, 1994. Table 28. TOC and Total Solids in Sediments at the Net Pen Site. Table 29. Sediment Grain Size Analysis for Net Pen Site Table 30. Required Permits, Licenses, Leases, Etc., Net Pen Site. Table 31. Required Permits, Licenses, Leases, Etc., Hatchery Site Table 32. Required Permits, Licenses, Leases, Etc., Fish Processing Site. Table 33. Salt Water Test Well Data. Table 34. Nitrogen Analysis for Station #1 Collected on August 8, 1994 with Respect to Depth. Table 35. Nitrogen Analysis for Station #2 Collected on August 8, 1994 with Respect to Depth. Table 36. Average Nitrite and Nitrate Nitrogen Concentrations with Corresponding Range from Samples Collected at 41° 13.24' Lat. and 72 °05.30' Long. (NYOSL, 1976). • xi PAGE 1-209 I-211 I-216 I-218 I-225 1-226 1-227 II -20 II -22 L LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table 37. Waste Characterization During Peak Hatchery 111-7 Operation. Table 38. Organic Loading from Net Pens - Phase I. III - 11 Table 39. Organic Loading from Net Pens - Phase II. III - 11 Table 40. Organic Loading from Net Pens - Phase III. 111-12 Table 41. Organic Loading from Net Pens - Phase IV. 111-12 Table 42. Organic Loading from Net Pens - Phase V. III - 13 Table 43. Organic Loading from Net Pens - Phase VI. III - 13 Table 44. Waste Concentrations Per Treatment System. VII - 37 Table 45. Effluent Loading Per Treatment System. VII - 37 1 4 xii Cl I I n Description of the Proposed Action 4 • f E a a • C t 0 1 40 1 A. PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED 1. BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT The widespread decline of the natural fish stocks throughout the eastern United States and beyond as reflected in declining landings of commercial finfish has lead to the unprecedented growth in the aquaculture industry. Among the commercially harvested wild stocks most effected by over -exploitation have been the various species of flounder. Commercial stocks of flounder have undergone such declines as to warrant the closure of expansive areas of the Georges Bank which traditionally supported the largest flounder fishery in the world. To address the declines of commercially valuable ground fish, federal and state government have funded research in population dynamics and aquaculture. These research efforts have lead to the inescapable conclusion that aquaculture will play an important role in offsetting these declines. Summer flounder, (Paralichthys dentatus) is among the investigated species that show the greatest potential for aquaculture in this area due to their rapid growth and all around heartiness. In the first large scale effort of its kind, Mariculture Technologies, Inc. has applied the wealth of information derived from such concerted research efforts in the development of its proposal to culture summer flounder. The overall project proposed by I-1 Km] Mariculture Technologies, Inc. encompasses the rearing of summer a flounder from egg to market size, including the harvesting, processing and marketing of the resultant fish products for consumer use. The proposed project is comprised of three basic I! components: Hatchery, Growout and Processing. The Hatchery Component, consisting of the rearing of summer • flounder from egg to fingerling is to take place on a 17 acre site locally known as Clarks Beach located in the Town of Southold. More specifically, the hatchery component consists of 1 the selection, conditioning and spawning of brood stock and the rearing of early larvae, juvenile and fingerling summer flounder. The rearing from egg to fingerling is expected to take • approximately one year. Fingerling summer flounder are to be transported live to the proposed ocean net pens for grow out to market size. a The Growout Component of the overall proposed project is to take place in one of three floating net pen types deployed in the northeastern portion of Gardener's Bay. All ocean net pen types provide for off bottom culture. Cultured summer flounder will be confined to the net pen cages protected from all potential 7 predators, fed and closely monitored. The cultured summer flounder are to remain in the pens until they reach marketable size, + after which they will be harvested and transported to an upland processing site. I-2 a The Processing Component of the overall proposed project is to 40 take place at the existing Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Plant situate Greenport, New York. One half of the market sized cultured summer flounder will be packaged at the processing site and sold as whole fish. The remaining harvested cultured summer flounder will undergo full processing resulting in fillets, other consumable fish products, and other waste products to be sold as non food items. Importantly, Mariculture Technologies, Inc. has applied the state of the art processing technologies providing for full utilization and subsequent marketing of approximately 99% of all harvested summer flounder by weight. Mariculture Technologies, Inc. proposes to implement the above project in six distinct phases providing for the incremental production of cultured summer flounder. The incremental growth of this proposed project in accordance with the six distinct phases is 0 intended to provide for greater flexibility in culture operations so as to apply the best management practices as they become available as well as to reduce the environmental impacts associated 0 therewith. The mass culture of summer flounder in accordance with the six proposed phases is set forth below: 11 AW I-3 E7 0 As proposed, implementation of the six phases of production is to take place over a six year period. Accordingly, on going detailed evaluation of the of best management practices and environmental impact and mitigation will occur as implementation of the proposed • project proceeds. • 7 s 2. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY The World's fisheries are presently in a state of drastic decline. Closure of fishing grounds in both North American and European waters has greatly decreased the supply of fish. Meanwhile, demand for fish products has greatly increased. Foreign countries turned to aquaculture many years ago in an attempt to satisfy the increasing demand for seafood. I-4 Production Level a Phase (Number of fish) I 45,000 II 150,000 III 500,000 IV 1,100,000 V 3,000,000 VI 5,000,000 As proposed, implementation of the six phases of production is to take place over a six year period. Accordingly, on going detailed evaluation of the of best management practices and environmental impact and mitigation will occur as implementation of the proposed • project proceeds. • 7 s 2. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY The World's fisheries are presently in a state of drastic decline. Closure of fishing grounds in both North American and European waters has greatly decreased the supply of fish. Meanwhile, demand for fish products has greatly increased. Foreign countries turned to aquaculture many years ago in an attempt to satisfy the increasing demand for seafood. I-4 • In United States, both federal and state governments are beginning to see aquaculture as a method to increase the supply of fish and shellfish to consumers. The federal government, under the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1994, has ! provided funds in an effort to address the decline of traditional fisheries in the Northeastern U.S.. The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration ("NOAA"), National Marine Fisheries Service ("NWS"), has made funds available to explore aquaculture as a means for enhancing natural production of ground fish and shellfish stocks as well as alternative employment for displaced fisherman. One of the best government sponsored studies on mariculture was performed by the Washington State Department of Fisheries. They conducted an extensive study on the environmental impacts of net pen fish culture in Puget Sound, Washington. This study resulted in an EIS (Wash. Dept. Fish., 1990) for net pen fish culture which provides an extensive list of recommendations pertaining to the avoidance of adverse effects to the environment. These recommendations include the following: o Baseline field studies prior to approval of net pen sites to 0 determine the site's suitability for net pen culture. As set forth in Washington State's EIS, site suitability depends on various factors, including depth, current velocity and Ab I-5 • direction, sediment structure, sediment chemistry, water quality (temperature, salinity, turbidity, pH, oxygen, and nutrients), and benthic infaunal composition. o Placement of large scale commercial farms in areas where the minimum average current velocity is 5 cm/sec. o Siting restrictions in areas sensitive to organic enrichment such as those with low current and poor flushing and those that are important as spawning and nursery areas for fish including salt marshes and areas with eelgrass beds. o Annual monitoring of water quality, sediment composition and benthic infauna after operation begins to determine if the farm has had an effect on the surrounding environment; and o Require fish farms to use only those antibiotics approved by the FDA and report any such usage to state agencies. Importantly, this proposed project meets and exceeds all of the 0 above stated recommendations. The University of Massachusetts ("UMASS") received a grant through the Salton -Stall Kennedy program to conduct an extensive study to investigate the potential of summer flounder for I-6 0 i domestication and mass culture (Athanas, 1994). The project was 0 accomplished in cooperation with the University of Rhode Island ("URI"). The research was divided into four major components: (1) Controlled reproduction of summer flounder, including 0 collection and conditioning of spawning stock; (2) Larval culture, including the determination of nutritional requirements; (3) nursery culture of newly metamorphosed flounder, including engineering of heated sea water recirculation systems to permit more rapid growth and culture throughout the year, and; (4) grow out culture to harvestable size, including the formulation of a palatable and economic diet. The project is on going and final results are not yet available. 40 The state of Maine grants water column leases for the culture of both finfish and shellfish through their Department of Marine Resources ("MDMR"). As part of the application process, the applicant must meet several requirements which include the following: • o Description of the location of the proposed lease tract, o A list of the species to be cultivated and their source, 1 o An environmental evaluation of the site (Site Review) which includes: tide levels, current speed, bottom characteristics, physical and chemical characteristics of the I-7 water column and inventory of existing flora and fauna, and a o Description of commercial and recreational fishing activity in the area (MDMR, 1990). • There are several sites for which leases have been granted for shellfish and salmon aquaculture. The majority of these • sites are located in protected coves or behind coastal islands where there is shelter from ocean waves (MDMR, 1993; 1994). • In 1983, the state of New York passed the Aquaculture Planning Act, which requested the Sea Grant Institute of the State of New • York and Cornell University to undertake a study to develop a statewide aquaculture plan. The study described several advantages resulting from the development of aquaculture in New York State which include the following: o Aquaculture could have the potential to supplement • New York's fishery resources and stabilize the supply of fish stocks. C7 o Aquaculture provides employment and economic development through the production of food products in an industry compatible with the economy and lifestyle of the • rural and coastal communities of New York State. I-8 0 • o Aquaculture provides high quality seafood products to the ! benefit, health, and safety of consumers. Clearly, aquaculture has the potential to play an important ! role in the future development of New York State. Several state agencies, including those in Texas, California, a and South Carolina were contacted as part of a search for existing Environmental Impact Statements relating to marine aquaculture. These efforts revealed no such documentation available from those agencies at this time. [: G 0 0 3. PUBLIC NEED. The proposed project is unique in that the lands proposed to be utilized for the culture of summer flounder are located within the Incorporated Village of Greenport, Town of Southold and State of New York. Accordingly, the discussion of community development plans is segregated with respect to each of the proposed sites: a. Net Pen Grow -out Site The proposed site for which summer flounder are to be reared in ocean net pens is in a 200 acre area located in the waters of Gardiner's Bay. Given that this area is located in I-9 a • 0 [] • L U G 0 C7 waters owned or controlled by the State of New York, there are no applicable community adopted development plans for this area. Similarly, there are no State adopted development plans for this area. Even so, as discussed later herein under Objectives, a positive finding may be made with respect to the use of these lands for the culture of summer flounder based upon the State's adoption of the Aquaculture Planning Act of 1983. b. Hatchery Site A 15 acre parcel within the Town of Southold and owned by the Incorporated Village of Greenport, locally known as Clark's Beach, has been selected as the proposed hatchery site. In addition, an adjoining 2 acre site owned by the County of Suffolk has been selected for the proposed hatchery site. Both parcels fall within the Town of Southold and therefore are subject to Southold's adopted community development plans. The hatchery site is presently zoned R-80 which provides for residential development of minimum lot size equaling 80,000 square feet. A hatchery is not a permitted use' within this zone. Accordingly, it is proposed that the site be re -zoned to a Marine II Zone for which aquaculture is a permitted use. Thus, at present, the proposed hatchery is I-10 0 U a 0 • • 1 • E 0 not in conformance with community development plans for which the zoning is based. However, the Town Board is empowered to amend the zoning over the Clark's Beach Site by granting a change of zone. It is believed that such a change of zone would be in the best interests of both the Village of Greenport and the Town of Southold and thus it is anticipated that the requested change of zone will be granted. The Town of Southold has not adopted a Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan. Accordingly, there is no basis for comparing the proposed hatchery site with respect to the policies which, as required, must accompany any local waterfront revitalization plan. C. The Processing Site As disclosed herein, the proposed processing for the market size summer flounder is to take place within the existing Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Plant in the Incorporated Village of Greenport. The Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Plant falls within the Waterfront Commercial District for which fish and shellfish processing are permitted uses. Accordingly, use of the proposed processing facility for the cultured summer flounder is consistent with Greenport's chief land use document: its I-11 0 0 • • • E a 0 1 • zoning code. The Village of Greenport is unique in that it has adopted a Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan ("LWRP"). Among the adopted policies as set forth in Greenport's LWRP is to "restore, revitalize and redevelop deteriorated and underutilized waterfront areas for commercial and industrial, cultural, recreational and other compatible uses. " In the case of the Winter Harbor Fisheries site, the LWRP has declared this site to be under-utilized. Furthermore, the expansion of use that would occur as a result of the implementation of this project would be consistent with the stated policies in Greenport's LWRP. There is no question that there is public need for this proposed project. The public need is summarized as follows: o Need for economic growth which will result in increased employment; o Need for attracting clean industries which are compatible with the traditional industries of Eastern Long Island, specifically including fishing and farming. Of worthwhile note, is the fact that the proposed project is viewed as a combination of I-12 • [7 0 both fishing and farming; o Need for providing a high quality seafood product to the market place in a consistent or regular basis as to offset consistent declines in the harvesting of natural fish stocks; o Need for providing greater choices and consistent quality to • the seafood consumer; and o Need to raise public awareness of the decline of native • fisheries stocks and the opportunity provided by aquaculture to off set the decline. • • • • i a 4. OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT SPONSOR Mariculture Technologies, Inc. was formed to bring seafood production into the 21st century. The objective of Mariculture Technologies, Inc. is to culture summer flounder from egg to marketable size to satisfy the growing shortage of finfish. In a phrase, Mariculture Technologies, Inc. is creating "Food for the Future". Realizing the potential benefits derived from aquaculture, State I-13 • Senator Kenneth LaValle proposed the Aquaculture Planning Act • of 1983. Subsequently, the New York State Legislature passed the Aquaculture Planning Act and on May 17, 1983, then governor Mario Cuomo signed this bill into law. As part of this legislative • process, the State Legislature found, among other things, that there is significant potential for growth in the aquaculture industry of New York and that this potential provides an opportunity for • local economic development and expansion in the commercial cultivation of marine finfish. Importantly, the State Legislature declared that the development of aquaculture is compatible with the • economy and lifestyles of the state's coastal areas. The Aquaculture Planning Act culminated in a study prepared by • New York Sea Grant Institute ("Sea Grant") (1985). The study found that the wild fishery resources of New York and elsewhere are maximally harvested, although today, it is widely known that • the wild fisheries resources are have been over exploited. Importantly, the study also found that aquaculture remains the only feasible way of increasing the production of biological products • from the sea. In a closing statement written by Donald F. Squires, Director of the New York Sea Grant Institute it is stated, ...If New York wishes to become a producer of more of the seafood • consumed in the state, and outside of the state; if New York wishes r: I-14 r] s to poise itself on the frontier of industries emerging from ID biotechnilogical science, then the state must consider the role aquaculture might play in its future. 0 Unfortunately, up to now, there has been little progress in the expansion of the aquaculture industry in New York State. In fact, there has been no growth in the commercial culture of summer 0 flounder in New York State. In deed, Mariculture Technologies, Inc.'s proposal detailed herein represents the first effort to commercially culture this fast growing, high vigor and high valued 0 species. In bringing this proposed project to fruition, Mariculture Technologies Inc., has reached out to the scientific community throughout this country and beyond. With proper management, 0 improved technology, and building on existing knowledge, Mariculture Technologies, Inc. intends to bring fish farming to a new level of success never seen before in the U.S.. The 0 further objectives of Mariculture Technologies, Inc. include the following: (1) to increase employment in eastern Long Island; (2) to attract new and related technologies as a foundation for continued economic strength; and, (3) to raise awareness about the declining trends of New York's traditional fisheries. The traditional labor force of eastern Long Island will have the opportunity to truly • become the future farmers of the sea without contributing to the 0 0 I- 15 • further decline of commercially exploitable wild stock. At the same • time, implementation of this proposed project in accordance with the stated objectives will result in a direct benefit to the purveyors and consumers of seafood by bringing more high quality product to • the market place on a consistent basis. Mariculture Technologies, Inc. believes strongly in merging its • goals with those of the local, regional and state community. Mariculture is an industry that is environmentally friendly and especially compatible with Long Island's maritime heritage. Mariculture Technologies, Inc. has the ability to employ local baymen and benefit from those who have skills in working on the water, handling fish, fishing gear, nets, boats etc. Mariculture • Technologies, Inc.'s vision is for Eastern Long Island and New York State to be recognized as a world leader in fish farming. • ! • i I-16 0 • B: LOCATION OF AQUATIC AND LAND BASED • OPERATIONS • 1. GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARIES The geographic locations for the facilities associated with the • commercial culture and processing of summer flounder are set forth in Figure 1. The principal locations for all proposed facilities are as follows: • LM CM • 0 i 7 a. Hatchery: Clarks Beach, County Road 48, Town of Southold, NY.. This 17 acre site, owned by the Village of Greenport and Suffolk County is surrounded by the following: o Inlet Point County Park to the East; o Privately owned land to the West; o Long Island Sound to the North, and o County Road 48 to the South. b. Processing facilities: Winter Harbor Fisheries Site situate Sterling Avenue and adjacent to Stirling Basin in the Village of Greenport. I-17 LONG ISLAND SOUND TOWN OF SOUTHOLD COUNTY ROAD W ORIENT HARBOR \` LONG BEACH CLARKS BEACH POINT STERLING Cotw" P BASIN WINTER HARBOR FMMPJ" dr GREHVPORT N nuM AIVD PROPOSED ? NET PEN SITE \` ZM ACRES A PLUM GUT ORIENT POWs GARDINERS BAY Figure 1. Geographic boundaries and site locations of the proposed project. • C. Grow -out: a rectangular 0.32 mile by 1.0 mile (200 acre) • area in the northeastern portion of Gardiners Bay (see Figure 2.) under the jurisdiction of New York State. • • • • • • • C :7 The above locations were chosen based upon unique qualities attributable to each site and are detailed as follows: o Clark's Beach in the Town of Southold was chosen as a possible hatchery site because of its proximity to an plentiful source of salt water, Long Island Sound; its availability as a site for the proposed project; the availability of Greenport utilities at a competitive rate and the support of the Village of Greenport for such a project. Mariculture Technologies, Inc. and the Village of Greenport have conducted extensive negotiations over the appropriate use of the Clarks Beach Site. These negotiations have culminated in a general agreement of the appropriateness of the Clarks Beach Site for the construction and operation of a commercial hatchery. o The northeastern portion of Gardiners Bay was chosen as the net pen grow out site for the following reasons: (1) its remoteness from privately owned shoreline areas; (2) high currents velocities to maintain high oxygen levels and excellent water quality as well as to provide wide dispersal I-19 0 POINT PLUM GUT PLUM ISLAND GARDINERS BAY C, Alk N' 3� THE SLUICEWAY PROPOSM :0000� N" rEN SITE 201 ACRES GARDINERS\V POINT "000( FIGURE 2. LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED GROW OUT SITE IN GARDINER'S BAY. 0 • of fish feces and unconsumed feed; (3) compatibility with • the findings of local commercial fishermen that the site is not critical to their fishery due to submerged rocks and high currents; (4) shelter from North East storms; and • (5) avoidance of existing navigational channels. 3. The Winter Harbor Fisheries site was chosen as the • proposed fish processing and storage site due to its preexisting conforming use as a processing plant; available vessel docking space for loading and off loading; easy • access to navigable waters adjacent to the proposed net pen grow out site; and ample space for cold and feed storage. • It should be noted that except for a few boulders along the south shore of Plum Island, there are no submerged objects, such as • pipelines, cables or shipwrecks, in the immediate vicinity of the proposed sites. There is a submerged cable extending from Orient Point to Plum Island, but its existence is not relevant to this • proposed project. 7 7 I-21 7 0 • 2. DESCRIPTION OF ACCESS TO AQUATIC AND LAND BASED SITES a. Hatchery- Access to the proposed hatchery location at Clarks Beach is via Route 48 which runs along the southern boundary of the site. b. Net Pen Grow out site- Access to the proposed net pen grow out site in Gardiners Bay will be via vessels docked at Winter Harbor Fisheries situate Stirling Basin in Greenport. Stirling Basin has an outlet to Greenport Harbor, which in • turn has access to Gardiners Bay. C. Processing Site- Land access to Winter Harbor Fisheries is via Sterling Avenue in Greenport. Water access is via • Stirling Basin through a channel from Greenport Harbor. .1 C • 0 3. NAVIGABLE WATERS / CHANNELS Navigable waters of concern to the proposed project are those adjacent to Winter Harbor Fisheries and the net pen grow out site as follows: I-22 • 0 • • • 0 r, s 0 J 0 o Stirling Basin o Greenport Harbor o Gardiners Bay o Plum Gut o The Sluiceway o The Race All of the above listed waters have channel depths in excess of 20 feet with the exception of Stirling Basin whose channel depth is 10 feet. It should be noted that these depths are more than adequate for the use of the vessels proposed herein. 4. HISTORIC SITES There are no historic sites adjacent to any of the proposed locations. 5. LOCATION OF ALL LAND BASED SUPPORT SITES a. Hatchery site- The proposed hatchery site is located on County Road 48 in the Town of Southold (See Figure 1.). Along the eastern boundary of the site is Inlet Point County Park and to the north is the Long Island Sound. The 2 acre area owned by the County of Suffolk (see survey and site plan in Appendix A.) will house a laboratory, visitors center and other support facilities. I-23 11 • 6. HYDRODYNAMIC/OCEANOGRAPHY: • J • 0 Waves, tides, and related physical parameters, are important considerations in the design of the net pens. Probably one of the best references for understanding the phenomenon of waves is Chapter XXXIII entitled "Ocean Waves" from Bowditch's "American Practical Navigator" published by the U.S. Defense Mapping Agency Hydrographic/Topographic Center (See Appendix C.). Waves are caused primarily by wind. Waves are I-24 b. Processin Site- The proposed processing site is Winter • Harbor Fisheries located on Sterling Avenue in the Village of Greenport (see Figure 1.). The site is adjacent to Stirling Basin which possesses ample bulkhead space for • vessel dockage (see survey and site plan in Appendix B). This vessel dockage area allows for the loading of fingerling summer flounder and feed to be transported by water to the • grow out site in Gardiners Bay; as well as off loading of market size fish to be sold or processed. In addition to processing, this site also contains adequate feed and cold • storage space for production Phases I through IV. Bulk transport is being considered for production phases V and VI. The Winter Harbor Fisheries Site is already serviced by • Greenport electric, water and sewer utilities. • 6. HYDRODYNAMIC/OCEANOGRAPHY: • J • 0 Waves, tides, and related physical parameters, are important considerations in the design of the net pens. Probably one of the best references for understanding the phenomenon of waves is Chapter XXXIII entitled "Ocean Waves" from Bowditch's "American Practical Navigator" published by the U.S. Defense Mapping Agency Hydrographic/Topographic Center (See Appendix C.). Waves are caused primarily by wind. Waves are I-24 E very nearly the shape of an inverted cycloid. The highest part of the • wave is called the crest and the intervening lowest part, the trough. Since the crest is steeper and narrower than the trough, the mean or still water level is a little lower than halfway between the crest and • the trough. The vertical distance between the trough and the crest is called the wave height (H). The horizontal distance between • successive crests, measured in the direction of travel, is called the wavelength (L). The time interval between the passage of successive crests at a stationary point is called the wave period (P). • Wave height, length, and period depend upon a number of factors including wind speed, the length of time the wind has blown, and its • fetch (the straight line distance it has traveled over the surface of J • • • 0 the water). Currents also have an effect on waves. A following current increases the wavelength and decreases the wave height. An opposing current has the opposite effect; decreasing the wavelength and increasing the height. The potential energy of a wave is related to the vertical distances of each portion of the wave from its still -water position, and therefore moves with the wave. The kinetic energy of a wave is related to the speed of the wave. To give an example of the significance of wave energy, a 4 -foot, 10 -second wave expends more than 35,000 horsepower per mile. The following tabular I-25 • wind, wave and tide data has been developed and summarized • based on U. S. Army Corps of Engineers twenty year data (1956- 1975) at a location 15 nautical miles to the east of the net pen site. The data is summarized in separate tables and figure set forth • below: (Also reference Appendix D.). • • • • • • C I-26 • • • • • • • • • • e • Table 1. WIND DATA - LOCATION 41.00 NORTH 71.75 NEST * The band center is equal to the angle measurement of a line bisecting a particular sector (i.e. sector 00 has a band center direction of 00). ± 15 NAUTICAL MILES EAST OF PROPOSED NET PEN SITE SOURCE: U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS - 1956 TO 1975 (20 YEARS) OCCURENCE OF WIND DIRECTION BY MONTH (PERCENT) DIRECTION OF BAND CENTER* (DEGREES) JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC TOTAL ------------------------------------ =----------------------------------------------------------_--_---_------- 0 12.0 12.1 11.7 11.4 8.4 5.9 4.6 8.5 11.0 10.2 11.5 11.9 9.9 45 7.6 10.5 9.3 6.7 6.6 5.2 3.0 5.8 11.6 10.8 8.4 8.5 7.8 90 5.0 7.0 7.2 4.5 5.4 3.9 2.0 2.4 7.0 7.3 6.4 7.5 5.5 135 4.6 6.6 7.3 7.6 6.6 5.9 4.1 4.5 6.3 6.5 5.8 6.5 6.0 180 7.5 6.7 8.3 11.5 15.4 16.5 16.2 12.7 11.2 10.5 12.5 8.6 11.5 225 12.2 10.3 10.5 17.6 23.7 30.9 33.4 29.8 18.9 15.6 15.0 12.4 19.2 270 22.2 21.1 19.6 22.3 20.5 21.9 26.6 23.0 19.3 21.9 20.1 19.7 21.5 315 28.9 25.7 26.1 18.4 13.4 9.7 10.1 13.1 14.7 17.2 20.2 25.0 18.5 * The band center is equal to the angle measurement of a line bisecting a particular sector (i.e. sector 00 has a band center direction of 00). 0 0 0 0 0 0 Table 2. 0 0 40 9 0 WIND DATA - LOCATION 41.00 NORTH 71.75 WEST + 15 NAUTICAL MILES EAST OF PROPOSED NET PEN SITE SOURCE: U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS - 1956 TO 1975 (20 YEARS) OCCURENCE OF WIND SPEED BY MONTH (PERCENT) SPEED M/ SEC MPH JAM. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC TOTAL ------------------ ____=_=---------_--_----------------__------ -- -_---- 0 TO 2.5 0 TO 6 1.8 1.8 2.5 2.9 4.6 5.1 4.8 5.7 5.3 3.5 2.4 2.1 3.6 2.5 TO 5.0 6 TO 11 22.2 23.7 24.3 35.5 46.6 54.1 60.9 60.3 49.6 38.6 27.3 24.7 39.0 5.0 TO 7.5 11 TO 17 20.0 20.5 21.9 26.8 30.0 29.0 25.7 25.1 26.3 25.0 23.5 19.8 24.5 7.5 TO 10.0 17 TO 22 23.1 24.8 26.6 24.5 16.4 11.2 8.2 7.8 14.9 20.8 24.2 21.1 18.6 10.0 TO 12.5 22 TO 28 14.7 12.8 12.4 6.9 1.8 0.6 0.3 0.7 3.0 7.6 11.5 13.4 7.1 12.5 TO 15.0 28 TO 34 11.4 11.8 9.2 3.4 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.9 3.5 8.5 12.6 5.2 15.0 TO 17.5 34 TO 39 2.6 2.4 1.6 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.4 3.4 1.0 17.5 TO 20.0 39 TO 45 2.9 2.0 1.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.9 2.3 0.8 ABOVE 20.0 ABOVE 45 1.0 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.5 0.2 NOTE: 0.0 EQUATES TO LESS THAN 0.1% MAXIMUM WIND SPEED 26M/SEC (58 MPH) AT 325 DEGREES IN DECEMBER 1964 • • • ! • • • i r 0 A Table 3. WAVE DATA - LOCATION 41.00 NORTH 71.75 WEST + 15 NAUTICAL MILES EAST OF PROPOSED NET PEN SITE SOURCE: U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS - 1956 TO 1975 (20 YEARS) OCCURENCE OF WAVE HEIGHT BY MONTH (PERCENT) ---------------------------- _-- _--------- ____-_____----------------- _- _--_- _-----------------_--- HEIGHT (M) (FT.) JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC TOTAL 0 -0.5 0 - 1.6 0.5-1.0 1.6- 3.3 1.0-1.5 3.3- 4.9 1.5-2.0 4.9- 6.6 2.0-2.5 6.6- 8.2 2.5-3.0 8.2- 9.8 3.0-3.5 9.8-11 65.0 3.5-4.0 11 - 13 4.0-4.5 13 - 15 4.5-5.0 15 - 16 5.0-5.5 16 - 18 5.5-6.0 18 - 20 6.0-6.5 20 - 21 6.5-7.0 21 - 23 7.3 8.0 8.0 8.0 11.1 6.0 9.7 13.0 12.2 9.5 10.2 8.2 9.3 28.2 29.0 28.8 40.2 46.4 60.1 64.7 65.0 56.4 43.2 30.7 27.6 43.4 26.8 24.9 28.7 27.3 27.9 26.2 21.0 17.8 19.9 26.4 24.9 23.1 24.6 18.1 18.2 18.1 13.4 10.3 5.6 4.0 3.1 6.2 4.8 17.5 18.4 12.1 8.5 10.0 7.8 6.5 3.1 1.2 0.3 0.7 2.6 2.2 9.3 10.3 5.4 5.2 4.8 4.1 2.4 0.9 0.2 0.1 0.3 1.9 0.4 3.5 5.6 2.6 3.3 2.7 2.2 1.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 W 0.6 0.1 1.9 3.4 1.4 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.8 W W W -- 0.3 -- 1.2 1.9 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.2 W -- -- -- W -- 0.5 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 W -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 W -- -- -- -- -- -- W 0.2 0.1 W W W -- -- -- -- -- -- -- W 0.1 W WW W -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- W W -- W -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- W W W - WAVES THIS HEIGHT OCCURRED AT LEAST ONCE BUT LESS THAN 0.1% OF THE TIME. • Table 4. NAVE DATA - LOCATION 41.00 WORTH 71.75 NEST ± 15 NAUTICAL MILES EAST OF PROPOSED NET PEA SITE SOURCE: U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS - 1956 TO 1975 (20 YEARS) OCCURENCE OF NAVE PERIODS BY MONTH (PERCENT) NAVE PERIOD IN SECONDS JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC TOTAL 3 TO 4 7.7 7.7 8.0 8.2 5.5 4.9 5.8 9.5 9.0 8.9 8.3 6.5 7.3 4 TO 5 19.9 18.8 19.8 17.1 11.8 12.0 9.8 13.4 17.0 18.0 17.6 15.7 15.9 5 TO 6 18.1 17.7 17.8 12.4 10.6 13.9 12.2 12.3 11.9 15.5 16.8 16.1 14.6 6 TO 7 9.9 10.2 10.0 9.5 17.5 22.6 20.7 19.4 12.3 10.0 11.0 9.8 13.6 7 TO 8 8.3 8.5 9.8 12.3 22.9 27.7 26.7 25.2 20.3 16.3 9.5 9.5 16.5 8 TO 9 8.8 9.1 9.8 14.1 16.9 12.3 17.6 12.6 17.0 16.3 10.7 8.8 12.9 9 TO 10 12.2 8.2 11.0 12.5 10.0 4.4 5.3 4.8 7.9 8.1 10.8 11.4 8.9 10 TO 11 7.2 9.2 7.6 8.8 3.4 1.4 1.3 1.5 4.0 4.1 8.6 11.7 5.7 11 TO 12 5.5 6.5 4.2 3.8 0.9 0.5 0 0.9 2.1 1.8 4.5 6.5 3.2 12 TO 13 1.8 2.9 1.4 0.8 0.3 0 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.4 1.2 2.5 1.0 13 TO 14 0.5 1.1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0 0.2 0 0 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 f THE f � SLUICEVyAY 9D GREAT C GULL ISLAND A� / PLU 3150 00 450 IS 3 cur ■ 2700 90° I 225° 135° 180° ORIENT PLUM POIN GUT GARDINERS BAY The circle divided into eight 45 ° sectors represents GARDINERS the wave band directions possible at the proposed POINT net pen site. Each sector of the circle depicts the direction from which the wave band center could have traveled to the site (00 = north, 900 = east, 1800 = south and 2700 = west). The band center is equal to BOSTWICK the angle measurement of a line bisecting a particular POINT sector (i.e. sector 00 has a band center direction of 00). FIGURE 3. WIND AND WAVE BAND SECTORS AT THE PROPOSED NET PEN SITE. Table 5. WAVE DATA - LOCATION 41.00 NORTH 71.75 WEST + 15 NAUTICAL NILES EAST OF PROPOSED NET PEN SITE SOURCE: U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS - 1956 TO 1975 (20 YEARS) AVERAGE NUMBER OF TIMES PER YEAR THAT THE FOLLOWING OCCURED (WAVE HEIGHT IN METERS - PERIOD IN SECONDS) --------------__________-----===_______- _=__________:__ ______ ___ ------ _________------ ==-------- ------- WAVE HEIGHT 0 TO 1 0 TO 1 0 TO 1 0 TO 1 O TO 1 0 TO 1 1 TO 2 1 TO 2 1 TO 2 1 TO 2 1 TO 2 1 TO 2 WAVE PERIOD 3 TO 5 5 TO 7 7 TO 9 9 TO 11 it TO 13 13 TO 15 3 TO 5 5 TO 7 7 TO 9 9 TO 11 11 TO 13 13 TO 15 _ =ac ---------------- DIRECTION OF BAND CENTER (DEGREES) 0 68 -- -- -- -- -- 38 18 -- 45 28 3 -- -- -- -- 6 33 -- 90 21 20 44 40 18 1 4 40 21 9 3 1 135 29 56 234 107 28 3 5 56 70 46 19 2 180 67 174 212 56 8 -- 9 116 144 86 17 1 225 79 50 5 -- -- -- 7 82 14 1 -- -- 270 119 -- -- -- -- -- 56 13 -- -- -- -- 315 71 -- -- -- -- 71 85 -- Table 6. The average number of times per year (over a period of 20 years) that waves of a particular height and period traveled from each direction (01, 451, 9011, etc.) to the site. Wave height is depicted in one meter increments (i.e. 0 to 1, 1 to 2, etc.) and wave period is depicted in two second intervals (i.e. 3 to 5, 5 to 7, etc.). The band center is equal to the angle measurement of a line bisecting a particular sector (i.e. sector 0° has a band center direction of 01). =assess== ssansa=------______ --- _---- __- ===M=== ___ -__ - ------ --- - - �� NANE HEIGHT 2 TO 3 2 TO 3 2 TO 3 2 TO 3 2 TO 3 2 TO 3 3 To 4 3 TO 4 3 TO 4 3 TO 4 3 TO 4 3 TO 4 MANE PERIOD =M===------------ 3 TO 5 5 TO 7 7 TO 9 9 TO 11 11 TO 13 13 TO 15 3 TO 5 5 TO 7 ____________________ 7 TO 9 _____���_=== 9 TO 11 11 TO 13 13 TO 15 =2-=�=----__----- ��___��____��______-_�___-__�__�___�_ DIRECTION OF BAND CENTER (DEGREES) 0 -- 18 -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- 45 -- 10 2 -- -- -- -- -- 6 -- -- -- 90 -- 9 13 1 -- -- -- -- 7 3 -- 135 -- 5 22 15 6 2 -- -- 4 9 4 1 180 -- 6 34 37 11 1 -- -- 5 9 5 1 225 -- 4 14 -- -- -- -- -- 3 1 270 -- 3 -- -- -- -- -- 3 -- - -- 315 -- 31 -- -- -- -- -- 1 1 • • • (a 0 r 0 6 i ! Table 7. The average number of times per year (over a period of 20 years) that waves of a particular height and period traveled from each direction (00, 450, 900, etc.) to the site. Wave height is depicted in one meter increments (i.e. 0 to 1, 1 to 2, etc.) and wave period is depicted in two second intervals (i.e. 3 to 5, 5 to 7, etc.). The band center is equal to the angle measurement of a line bisecting a particular sector (i.e. sector 00 has a band center direction of 00). a=xcaassss=asssass- sa=a=z=cssrssss:saassszsxs=zssass ssassse=� WAVE HEIGHT 4 TO S 4 TO S 4 TO S 4 TO S 4 TO S 4 TO S WAVE PERIOD 3 TO S S TO 7 7 TO 9 9 TO 11 11 TO 13 13 TO 1S DIRECTION OF BAND CENTER (DEGREES) 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- 45 -- -- 1 -- -- -- 90 -- -- 1 2 -- -- 135 -- -- -- 1 1 -- 180 -- -- -- 2 1 -- 225 -- -- -- -- -- -- 270 -- -- -- -- -- -- 315 -- -- -- -- -- -- r • 0 4 0 a 0 0 0 . 0 Table 8. WAVE FETCH DISTANCE IN NAUTICAL MILES FROM CENTER OF PROPOSED NET PEN SITE DIRECTION (DEGREES) CORRESPONDS TO CENTER OF BAND WIDTH IN THE ATTACHED WIND AND WAVE DATA DIRECTION OF BAND (DEGREES) DISTANCE - NAUTICAL MILES 0 0.75 45 1TO8 90 OVER 25 135 4 TO 12 180 7 225 7 270 1 315 0.8 i • Current measurements were conducted by E.E.A., Inc., Environmental Consultants "E.E.A." with headquarters at 55 Hilton Avenue, Garden City, New York. The initial current meter study was conducted on July 5, and 6, 1994, using three Aanderra RCM - 5 recording current meters positioned at the following coordinates: 410 10' 19" Lat., 72° 10'39" Long. using an onboard LORAN. • The water depth at these coordinates measured 37 feet. The meters were set near the surface at 14 feet, midwater at 26 feet and bottom �A at 35 feet. The meters were turned on at 0938 hours, 0948 hours 41 and 1001 hours, respectively. The bottom meter entered the water at 1038 hours, the midwater meter at 1108 hours and the surface meter at 1115 hours. The initiation of current measurements began when all meters were deployed. The meters were retrieved on July 6, 1994. The surface water meter came out of the water at 0929 hours, the mid water meter at 0930 hours and the bottom meter at 0932 hours. Upon retrieval, the midwater current meter impeller was observed fouled with sea lettuce (Ulva lactuca). The data tapes from each meter were sent to the New Jersey Marine Science Consortium for analysis. The surface data was intact, but no data had been recorded for the i mid water meter. The bottom meter only recorded data for the first I-36 i 40 minutes of operation. No additional data was collected from the 0 bottom meter. On September 7, 1994 a second attempt was made to collect the missing data. A single RCM -5 current meter was deployed at the mid water depth at the above coordinates. The surface buoy disappeared during deployment. It was not able to be recovered by the divers at the conclusion of the video survey which took place on September 9, 1994. 41 Cl 1 • r'I Therefore, on October 3 through 5, EEA conducted a side scan survey to find and recover the missing current meter. The meter was not found during the side scan sonar and diver survey. EEA then repeated the entire current profile study on October 4th. The survey was completed using an EG&G (TM) SACM-3 smart acoustic current meter. The instrument was deployed from an anchored boat in approximately 34 feet of water at the same coordinates as the first attempt on July 5th and 6th. The current measurements were taken at 2 meters, 5 meters and 10 meters below the surface. The current measurements were initiated at 0802 hours and terminated at 1913 hours representing one complete tidal cycle. The specifications for this instrument are included with the data sheets in Appendix E. 1-37 • On July 5th and 6th, the current speed in cm/sec at 14 feet 0 ranged from 5.1 cm/sec (0.10 knots) to 56.9 cm/sec (1.10 knots). The current flowed in basically two directions, easterly (20°-60°) 0 during a ebb tide and, westerly (250°-300°) during a flood tide. The current speed on October 4, 1994 in cm/sec ranged from 0.04 to 77.6 (1.5 k/hr). The current occurred in basically two directions 0 one in the 250°-300° range during flood tide and one in the 30° to 80° range during ebb tide. The average current and direction * (degrees) for both current studies are summarized in Tables 9. and 10. below: I-38 • TABLE 9. CURRENT VELOCITIES - JULY 5 AND 6, 1994 DEPTH 14 FEET CM/SEC (KNOTS) 1 CENT/SEC =.019433 KNOTS 41b DIRECTION SPEED TRAE (MAGNETIC) CM/SEC KNOTS 1120 60 33.1 0.64 1130 44 28.4 0.55 1140 24 21.1 0.41 1150 14 21.1 0.41 1200 348 17.7 0.34 1210 334 13.8 0.27 1220 312 13.3 0.26 1230 283 11.6 0.23 1240 278 9.3 0.18 • 1250 277 9.6 0.19 1300 276 8.5 0.16 1310 263 9.6 0.19 1320 253 9.0 0.17 1330 255 9.9 0.19 1340 254 10,7 0.21 4b 1350 259 11.9 0.23 I-38 • • 1-39 • TABLE 9. CURRENT VELOCITIES JULY 5 AND 6, 1994. (CONTINUED) DIRECTION SPEED TIME (MAGNETIC) CM/SEC KNOTS 1400 261 13.8 0.27 1410 267 15.5 0.30 S 1420 267 18.0 0.35 1430 269 21.4 0.42 1440 270 25.6 0.50 1450 277 28.4 0.55 1500 276 30.9 0.60 1510 270 33.7 0.65 1520 270 37.1 0.72 1530 264 38.2 0.74 1540 271 41.3 0.80 1550 261 47.4 0.92 1600 263 48.5 0.94 1610 265 49.9 0.97 1620 262 50.5 0.98 1630 268 55.5 1.08 1640 271 56.9 1.10 1650 278 52.5 1.02 1700 290 40.7 0.79 1710 289 34.8 0.68 rA 1720 384 34.8 0.68 1730 276 32.0 0.62 1740 265 38.2 0.74 1750 270 41.8 0.81 1800 268 43.5 0.84 1810 261 39.3 0.76 1820 274 39.9 0.77 1830 274 41.5 0.81 1840 274 41.3 0.80 1850 282 39.0 0.76 1900 284 38.7 0.75 1910 278 36.8 0.71 * 1920 274 37.0 0.72 1930 278 37.6 0.73 1940 289 35.6 0.69 1950 290 24.8 0.67 2000 282 27.3 0.53 2010 263 24.2 0.47 • 2020 264 26.7 0.52 2030 251 29.2 0.57 2040 268 27.5 0.53 2050 267 22.5 0.44 2100 264 19.1 0.37 2110 257 12.7 0.25 2120 241 10.5 0.20 2130 230 6.3 0.12 1-39 • a s 4 0 a I r, v TABLE 9. CURRENT VELOCITIES JULY 5 AND 6, 1994. (CONTINUED) DIRECTION SPEED TIME ------------------------------------------------- (MAGNETIC) CM/SEC KNOTS -------------------------------------------------- 2140 187 5.1 0.10 2150 151 5.1 0.10 2200 121 8.2 0.16 2210 115 12.7 0.25 2220 102 18.3 0.36 2230 95 25.0 0.48 2240 86 32.6 0.63 2250 80 38.7 0.75 2300 76 41.3 0.80 2310 68 41.3 0.80 2320 61 38.5 0.75 2330 42 34.3 0.67 2340 37 33.1 0.64 2350 12 28.1 0.55 2400 2 19.7 0.38 0010 338 15.5 0.30 0020 309 9.6 0.19 0030 298 8.5 0.16 0040 295 9.3 0.18 0050 290 9.9 0.19 0100 278 9.9 0.19 0110 266 9.3 0.18 0120 265 10.2 0.20 0130 268 11.0 0.21 0140 275 13.8 0.27 0150 267 14.4 0.28 0200 269 15.5 0.30 0210 275 20.9 0.41 0220 269 26.4 0.51 0230 266 27.5 0.53 0240 263 30.1 0.58 0250 262 33.4 0.65 0300 258 39.9 0.77 0310 260 43.2 0.84 0320 261 44.6 0.87 0330 264 46.7 0.91 0340 259 42.7 0.83 0350 260 42.9 0.83 0400 264 40.4 0.78 0410 265 41.5 0.81 0420 265 41.8 0.81 0430 275 41.3 0.80 0440 280 38.7 0.75 0450 280 40.1 0.78 0500 276 39.6 0.77 0510 284 37.3 0.72 0520 272 34.5 0.67 I-40 KI TABLE 9. CURRENT VELOCITIES JULY 5 AND 6, 1994. (CONTINUED) DIRECTION SPEED TIME (MAGNETIC) CM/SEC KNOTS 0 • 46 I-41 0 0530 271 31.2 0.61 0540 272 29.2 0.57 ♦ 0550 276 29.8 0.58 0600 278 29.8 0.58 0610 278 29.2 0.57 0620 274 28.9 0.56 0630 289 31.7 0.61 0640 296 29.2 0.57 0650 286 31.5 0.61 0700 286 34.3 0.67 0710 288 33.7 0.65 0720 284 33.4 0,65 0730 289 33.4 0.65 0740 281 37.1 0.72 +� 0750 283 38.5 0.75 0800 293 37.9 0.74 0810 295 35.4 0.69 0820 293 29.5 0.57 0830 287 25.0 0.48 0840 278 23.6 0.96 46 0850 274 15.5 0.30 0900 261 16.3 0.32 0910 248 19.1 0.37 0920 218 16.3 0.32 0 • 46 I-41 0 • . TABLE 10. CURRENT VELOCITIES - OCTOBER 4, 1994 CENTIMETERS/SECOND AND (KNOTS) 1 CENT/SEC =.019433 KNOTS I-42 a AVERAGE CURRENT IN CENT/SEC. AND KNOTS AT DEPTHS OF 2, 5, AND 10 METERS DIRECTION TIME (MAGNETIC °) DEPTH IN METERS --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 METERS 1 5 METERS 1 10 METERS 0802-0810 278 45.8 (0.85) ------------------------------------------- 0820-0835 275 ---------------------------------------- I --------------------- 39.6 (0.77) ------------------------------------------- 0836-0850 251 ----------------------------------------- -------------------- 26.4 (0.51) --- --------------------------------------- 0853-0905 275 ----------------------------------------- --------------------- 28.9 (0.56) ------------------------------------------- 0906-0919 277 ----------------------------------------- --------------------- 26.1 (0.51) ------------------------------------------- 0921-0935 255 ----------------------------------------- --------------------- 12.8 (0.25) --- --------------------------------------- 0937-0951 244 ----------------------------------------- --------------------- 10.0 (0.19) ------------------------------------------ 0953-1008 208 ----------------------------------------- --------------------- 3.6 (0.07) ------------------------------------------- 1010-1029 115 ----------------------------------------- --------------------- 4.7 (0.09) ------------------------------------------- 1031-1046 92 ----------------------------------------- --------------------- 17.5 (0.34) - 1048-1103 -------- - 86 ------------------------------------------ --------------------- 31.5 (0.61) ------------------------------------------- 1105-1118 64 ----------------------------------------- --------------------- 27.5 (0.53) * -- --------------------------------------- 1120-1135 75 ----------------------------------------- --------------------- 50.7 (0.99) ------------------------------------------- 1136-1150 66 ----------------------------------------- --------------------- 43.2 (0.84) - ----------------------------------------- 1151-1207 57 ----------------------------------------- --------------------- 17.1 (0.33) ------ ------------------------------------ 1208-1223 29 ----------------------------------------- --------------------- 27.2 (0.53) ------------------------------------------- 1225-1242 311 ----------------------------------------- --------------------- 20.5 (0.40) -- ---- ------------------------------------- 1245-1303 251 ----------------------------------------- --------------------- 21.0 (0.41) 8 ------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------- ---------------------- I-42 a 0 ! TABLE 10. (CONTINUED) CURRENT VELOCITY - CENTIMETERS/SECOND AND (KNOTS) DIRECTION TIME (MAGNETIC °) DEPTH IN METERS --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 2 METERS 1 5 METERS 1 10 METERS 1325-1340 301 18.8 (0.37) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- 1342-1356 261 10.0 (0.19) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- 1358-1412 274 7.2 (0.14) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------I----------------------- 1414-1428 286 15.2 (0.30) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- 1430-1444 250 22.1 (0.43) ---- --------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- ---------------------- 1446-1501 232 20.4 (0.40) s I-43 I -------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- ---------------------- 1504-1520 248 22.7 (0.44) -------------------------------------------------- 1522-1537 244 ------------------------------------------- ---------------------- 23.1 (0.45) -------------------------------------------------- 0538-1553 240 ------------------------------------------- 36.9 (0.72) ---------------------- 44 -------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- --------------------- 1555-1610 248 44.2 (0.86) -------------------------------------------------- 1612-1628 247 -------------------------------------------- --------------------- 38.6 (0.75) -------------------------------------------------- 1630-1644 256 -------------------------------------------- 62.7 (1.22) --------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- --------------------- 1646-1705 260 67.4 (1.31) -------------------------------------------------- 1706-1720 256 -------------------------------------------- --------------------- 64.0 --------------------- (1.24) -------------------------------------------------- 1722-1737 274 -------------------------------------------- 69.6 (1.35) -------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- --------------------- 1739-1755 271 58.7 (1.14) -------------------------------------------------- 1757-1812 -------------------------------------------------- 259 -------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- --------------------- 43.5 --------------------- (0.85) s I-43 I a TABLE 10. (CONTINUED) CURRENT VELOCITY - CENTIMETERS/SECOND AND (KNOTS) W • • To better understand the observed currents at the proposed site on October 4, 1994, reference is made to the tide and current predictions for that day, contained in the 1994 Atlantic Tide and Current Almanac - Northeast Edition. Specifically, characterization of ebb and flood tides for The Race, NY is set forth below: I-44 ---------------------------------------- DIRECTION ---- TIME (MAGNETIC °) DEPTH IN METERS --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 METERS 1 5 METERS 1 10 METERS ---------------------------------------------------- 1814-1832 279 - 51.6 (1.00) --------------------------------------------------- 1833-1845 272 ------------------------------------------- --------------------- 41.2 (0.80) ------------------------ 1849-1902 -------------------------- 265 --------------------I----------------------- --------------------- 39.3 (0.76) --------------------------------------------------- 1904-1913 261 ------------------------------------------- --------------------- 52.2 (1.02) W • • To better understand the observed currents at the proposed site on October 4, 1994, reference is made to the tide and current predictions for that day, contained in the 1994 Atlantic Tide and Current Almanac - Northeast Edition. Specifically, characterization of ebb and flood tides for The Race, NY is set forth below: I-44 • 41 The Race, NY Floods 302°, Ebbs 112° true 3.6 max ebb 1:56 am slack 5:04 am 3.5 max flood 7:59 am • slack 11:14 am 4.0 max ebb 2:21 pm slack 5:34 pm 3.6 max flood 8:25 pm slack 11:40 pm NOTE: The current is in Knots, the direction true and the time EST. • Tidal ranges for Plum Gut Harbor, located on the western side of Plum Island, were also determined for October 4, 1994. Ebb and 0 Flood tides for Plum Gut Harbor are set forth below: Plum Gut Harbor, NY. Tide predictions r Tide Range Time High 3.6 feet 9:28 am Low -0.2 feet 3:54 pm 0 (Coastal Computer Co., 1987-1993). The above predictions represent an approximation of average tides i for the net pen site. The mean tidal range for the Gardiner's Bay is 2.5 feet above mean low water with a peak tide height of 4.0 feet. t A storm peak tide height is +6.0 feet above mean low water (Eldridge, 1995). I-45 • 4 C7 0 • W a E The proposed net pen site is approximately six (6) miles to the West of the Race and 1 1/2 miles to the East of Plum Gut. Both of these areas provide two of the major passages of water between Long Island Sound and Gardiner's Bay, including Block Island Sound. The predicted times of high and low tide for the net pen site are expected to be between those times for The Race and Plum Gut Harbor. The time of high and low tide at the net pen site would also be expected to be closer to that of Plum Gut Harbor due to the proximity of the site to the location of the harbor. I-46 i C. DESIGN, ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION OF AQUATIC AND LAND BASED FACILITIES AQUATIC STRUCTURES Three net pen manufacturers have been selected for the construction and subsequent deployment of the proposed net pen systems. These manufacturers are as follows: o Net Systems, Inc., 7910 N.E. Day Road West Bainbridge Island, WA 98110 Contact: Mr. Larry Houghton Telephone 206/842-5623; o New Seafarm Systems Ltd. 7660 Hopcott Road Delta, BC, Canada V4G 1136 Contact: Mr. Ron A. MacDonald Telephone 604/946-0550; and o Atlantic Aqua Cage Systems, Inc. Pennfield, Charlotte County, New Brunswick, Canada EOG 2R0 Contact: Mr. David J. Armstrong, Telephone 506/456-3307. These three companies were selected because the designs of the all i respective net pens are assured to meet or exceed U.S. Coast Guard requirements, Lloyds of London Standards, American Bureau of Shipping Standards, A.S.T.M. Standards and OSHA Standards. I-47 V Mariculture Technologies, Inc. proposes to initially deploy two net a pens from each three aforementioned net pen manufacturers. The a II rI r� u • purpose of these initial simultaneous net pen deployments is to evaluate the performance of each of the respective net pen types with respect to weather conditions and related physical stress, the ease of servicing each net pen type and the success of the culture operations to take place therein. The first net pen type considered for the grow out of cultured summer flounder is Net System net pens manufactured by Net System, Incorporated ("Net System"). The Net System is the largest of the three net pen types being considered by Mariculture Technologies, Inc. The cross sectional design of the net pen reveals a slight trapezoidal shape with the upper surface measuring 59 feet across and the bottom surface measuring 80 feet across. Accordingly, the Net System provides for a surface area of 6400 square feet for the grow out of summer flounder. Unlike the other two net pens under consideration, the Net System is the only net pen type that does not rely upon a super structure to maintain the spatial integrity of the net pen. Instead, Net System relies on tension rigging accomplished by an array of anchors, interconnecting lines including spar pennants and gridlines and buoys. Since the Net System is maintained by tension rigging, the bottom panel consisting of a double mesh I-48 • system is stretched tightly thereby reducing the potential negative • effects of heaving and billowing. The corners of the net pens are supported by spar buoys. The spar • buoys are to be constructed out of steel. Both the inner and outer surfaces of the spar buoy are hot dipped galvanized to prevent corrosion. The buoys are designed and manufactured to • distribute the loads from all attached rigging over a broad area. The buoys themselves are held in place by the rigging connecting the series of 10 foot screw anchors to the net pens. This rigging • design results in a highly stable structure. As proposed, the Net System provides for the primary net to be LI suspended 15 feet below the surface thereby providing for approximately 20 foot clearance between the bottom of the net pen and the ocean floor (based on an average depth of 35 feet at the net • pen site). Although not specified by the manufacturer, a knotless synthetic mesh of 1 inch will be used as the primary net. The design for the Net System also provides for a predator control net of W synthetic material which is assembled in a box configuration. Each panel is connected by a series of zippers. r� Harvesting of the cultured summer flounder contained in the Net System is a relatively easy process. Essentially, the harvest vessel ties up along the side of a net pen and the bottom corners of the net are attached to spar winches aboard the harvest vessel. The I-49 FA C7 corners are then lifted by winch towards the surface thereby 41 concentrating the fish contained therein which may be removed by dip net or similar means. The net pens themselves can be maintained or repaired as needed. C • • • 1 • 0 The major benefits offered by Net System include reduced costs on a square foot basis achieved by the larger size of the net pens themselves, reduced maintenance costs largely achieved by the lack of a super structure, easy deployment, servicing, maintenance and harvest. The major disadvantages of the Net System includes the trapezoidal cross section and the resultant possibility that cultured summer founder may be trapped in the corners of the net pens. The trapping of summer flounder in the net pen may lead to snout abrasion for the cultured summer flounder as well as the reduced ability for summer flounder to locate and consume feed introduced into the net pen. Additionally, because the Net System is larger than the other alternative net pen types, the population of cultured summer flounder contained in each net pen will be larger thereby increasing the risk of disease outbreak. If the above stated performance criterion is achieved in superior fashion, 11 Net System net pens will be deployed as the project enters Phase II. The resulting net pen cluster is expected to increase the anchorage strength and with increasing numbers of clusters, reduce the current velocity running through each net pen I-50 • also reducing sway. Furthermore, far greater efficiency in servicing • of the net pen clusters is expected to be achieved due to proximity of each respective net cage. • The second net pen type under consideration is New Seafarms ("Sea Farms") net pens manufactured by New Seafarm Systems, Ltd. This is the smallest of the three net pen types containing approximately 2500 square feet bottom area each. The reduced size of the Sea Farm Net Pen is expected have certain benefits over the other two net pen designs in terms of easier management of • cultured summer flounder, more efficient feed delivery, reduced • potential of disease outbreak as the population of summer flounder is less per net pen and easier servicing of the primary nets attached thereto. The New Seafarm net pens are essentially square in shape. • However, the corners of each pen are rounded as to preclude the undesirable effects expected to be realized in the case where summer flounder swim into the corners. That is, rounding of the 1 corners will prevent summer flounder from otherwise being trapped in the corners resulting in excessive snout abrasion and perhaps also, the inability of cultured summer flounder to locate the feed • pellets introduced into the net pens. The New Seafarm Net Pens also feature a tension frame installed along the bottom of the net pen designed to preclude the undesirable effect of heaving and • billowing which otherwise could have physiological implications on I-51 • • the cultured summer flounder contained therein. n The New Seafarm Net Pens also feature a super -structure consisting of 7 foot wide decks, 18 foot wide turn-arounds and 1 railings all constructed out of 6061-T6 marine grade aluminum. Buoyancy is achieved by deployment of polyethethylene floats seven feet high and four feet wide in sets of four at each corner of • the net pens below the turn-arounds. Net pens are held in place by an array of polypropylene rope having a break strain of 50,000 pounds which is attached to anchor chain rated at 58,000 pound • break strain extended from the outer portion of the turn -around to the ocean floor. Screw type anchors of approximately 10 feet in • length are proposed. Primary nets constructed out of knotless polypropylene of similar synthetic material having a 1 inch stretch mesh will be attached in • panels along the inside of the superstructure and extended 20 feet below the bottom of the superstructure. Additionally, a predator control net also constructed out of polypropylene or similar synthetic material having a stretch mesh of 2 to 3 inches will be suspended 24 feet from the bottom of the superstructure. Concrete weights will serve to anchor the predator control net. Because the • primary nets are to be attached to the inner side of the super structure and the predator control nets are to be attached to the outer side of the super structure, the distance of separation between 1 the primary nets and predator control nets is approximately 7 feet. I-52 • 0 However, the separation distance will vary in accordance with i current velocity. Finally, a second predator control net of similar specifications will be stretched across the top of the net pen to prevent predation upon the cultured summer flounder from diving avians. If the above stated performance criterion is achieved in superior r fashion, 30 New Seafarms net pens will be deployed as the project enters Phase II. 0 E E1 1 n i The third net pen type under consideration is Atlantic Aquacage Net Pens manufactured by Atlantic Aqua Cage Ltd. ("Atlantic Cage"). The Atlantic Cage is synonymous with the Armstrong Ground Fish Cage. Representatives of Atlantic Aqua Cage, Ltd. report that a total of 225 Atlantic Cages are in operation today. The Atlantic Cage is a 23 meter octagonal cage which provides for a 4400 square foot bottom surface. Accordingly, the size of the Atlantic Cages are intermediate between the New Seafarm Net Pens and the Net System Net Pens. The octagonal shape of the Atlantic Cage has similar advantages to the New Seafarm Net Pens in that 90 degree corners are avoided thereby minimizing negative effects to the cultured summer flounder including snout abrasion and the possible difficulty of summer flounder locating feed pellets introduced into the net pens. The bottom of the Atlantic Cage consists of a treated metal mesh designed to reduce or preclude the I-53 2 open link galvanized chain. Anchorage is achieved by connection of the galvanized rope and chain to each corner of the octagonal superstructure with a series of Danforth type or granite block . anchors weighing 2800 to 4000 lbs., each. The weight of each cage is approximately 50,000 lbs. . A primary net is attached to the inner surface of the super structure extending down twenty feet below the surface of the water. Even though the net pen bottom is designed to provide a clearance of 5 0 feet from the ocean floor, clearance will actually range from 10 to 15 feet in this application. The primary net is to be constructed out I-54 r. u effects of heaving and billowing. Like the New Seafarm Net Pen, the Atlantic Cage contains a superstructure manufactured out of coated steel. The steel is • coated with zinc primer (Carboline 858 or equivalent) to a thickness of 3 mils once dry. A top coat of cross-linked epoxy . (Carboline 890 or equivalent) is applied onto the primer coat to a thickness of 5 mils once dry. Together, these applications provide for a coating of 8 mils thickness dry, assured to be sufficient in thwarting excessive corrosion of the underlying steel. The superstructure features a 1.5 meter wide walk way constructed around the perimeter of the net pen fastened together by a series of vertex joints specially designed for this application. Buoyancy is achieved through cylindrical, air filled perimeter piping. Net pens are held in place by an array of 1" galvanized rope attached to 1.5" open link galvanized chain. Anchorage is achieved by connection of the galvanized rope and chain to each corner of the octagonal superstructure with a series of Danforth type or granite block . anchors weighing 2800 to 4000 lbs., each. The weight of each cage is approximately 50,000 lbs. . A primary net is attached to the inner surface of the super structure extending down twenty feet below the surface of the water. Even though the net pen bottom is designed to provide a clearance of 5 0 feet from the ocean floor, clearance will actually range from 10 to 15 feet in this application. The primary net is to be constructed out I-54 r. u C1 of knotless polypropylene of similar synthetic material having a • stretch mesh of 1.25 inches. Additionally, a predator control net also constructed out of polypropylene or similar synthetic material having a stretch mesh of 2 to 3 inches will be extended from the r outer surface of the superstructure. Because of the width of the perimeter walk way, separation between the primary net and predator control net is approximately 1.5 meters. However, f separation distance will vary in accordance with current velocity. Finally, a second predator control net of similar specifications will be stretched across the top of the net pen to prevent predation upon • the cultured summer flounder from diving avians. If above stated performance criterion is achieved in superior • fashion, the 13 Atlantic Cage Net Pens will be deployed as the project enters Phase II. Obviously, the in -water predator control nets would only be attached to the outer surfaces of each net pen • adjacent to open water. The resulting net pen clusters are expected to greatly increase the stability of each net pen in terms of anchorage and reduced sway. Furthermore, far greater efficiency in servicing the net pen clusters is expected over singular net pens due to their proximity. s Initial deployment of each of the three net pen types constitutes a test with respect to the above stated performance criterion. • Mariculture Technologies, Inc. will select the net pen type judged superior in design for the implementation of Phases II through VI. I-55 • • Each manufacturer has provided schematics detailing the structure • of their prospective net pens including single pen and pen array top view and cross section diagrams, as well as type of mooring, mooring system and holding capacity for each system. In addition, the maximum number of net pens per production phase and area of the grow out site covered in each phase are included for each type • of net pen should they be chosen. The schematics are included in the Appendices under each manufacturer as follows: • Net Systems Appendix F. New Seafarms Appendix G. Atlantic Aquacage Appendix H. • With respect to mooring, it should be noted that the manufacturers of the various net pens have designed their mooring 1 systems based upon wind and wave data determined for the proposed net pen site. The wind and wave data used in the design • of the mooring systems is contained within this DEIS. Mariculture Technologies, Inc. does not intend to utilize barges, • or any attached structure containing storage for oil, gasoline I-56 J • r • • • • 0 1 11 • V or other materials as well as sanitary facilities. Instead, Mariculture Technologies, Inc. proposes to use two types of vessels for the purpose of servicing the net pens. The first type will be a work/crew boat approximately 30 feet in length. This boat will provide for the transportation of maintenance personnel and security to and from the mainland. It will also function as overnight and sleeping quarters for staff that are on guard duty. The vessel is expected to be powered by a gasoline inboard / outboard "I.O." engine, have small galley facilities, and sleeping quarters for two. Sanitary facilities will include head and appropriate holding tanks with pump -out capability which will preclude the need for a permanent facility attached to the net pens. This boat will also be utilized to transport miscellaneous supplies and equipment between the mainland and the net pens. On the work boat will also be mounted an air compressor and water pumps to be used for any cleaning of the net pens. The second type of vessel will be similar to the type manufactured by Atlantic Aqua Marine ("Aqua Truck") and will be capable of hauling pelleted feed (see Appendix I). The Aqua Truck is proposed to make daily deliveries of feed to the net pens, precluding the need for an on site structure for storage. The 1-57 • Aquatruck will also carry containers for the transportation of live i fish to and from the net pens. This vessel will also be equipped with minimum galley and head facilities, appropriate holding tanks • and pump out, but no sleeping accommodations. • • 1 There will be docking facilities at two locations within the selected net pen array where the vessels can be tied off. These areas will provide safe mooring for the crew/work boat during moderate inclement weather. With respect to fuel, Mariculture Technologies, Inc. does not intend to place fuel storage tanks at the net pens. Both types of vessels will be equipped with onboard fuel tanks and will be refueled at appropriate sites where fuel for boats is sold. In addition, the net pens will posses solar panels and battery packs to power the required navigational lighting and the proposed predator control devices. The net pens will require lighted Aids to Navigation as per • the United States Coast Guard requirements: 33 CFR SS2, 62,64,66 and 14 USC SS83,84,85. The first Coast Guard 0 District, Boston, Massachusetts has advised that for structures 1- 58 7A • not exceeding 800 feet in length, three hazard lights will be required. These hazard lights consist of yellow strobes flashing at a rate of 60 pulses per minute (1 flash every second) and must be visible at a minimum distance of four nautical miles. When the • net pen site reaches its maximum size during Phase VI, four large lighted buoys, one at each corner will be provided. In addition, intermediate lighting will be required. The extent of this additional lighting will be determined by the Coast Guard upon further review. Mariculture Technologies, Inc. has agreed to install all navigational • lighting as may be required. • 2. LAND BASED STRUCTURES: a. Hatchery Facilities: The proposed hatchery is to be located on a portion of an • approximate 15 acre site known as Clark's Beach. Negotiations between the Village of Greenport Trustees and Mariculture Technologies, Inc. has culminated in a general agreement of the • appropriateness of the Clarks Beach Site for the construction and operation of a commercial hatchery The proposed leased area would exclude the location of the Village of Greenport's • Municipal Sewer Plant outfall line and the beach area. I-59 • • These areas would be retained for the exclusive use by the Village • of Greenport. The additional 2 acre site owned by the County of Suffolk is • proposed to be leased or sold to Mariculture Technologies, Inc. and would house facilities for a visitors center, laboratory, and other support facilities. • The hatchery will consist of four main structures - two 200 X 500 foot buildings which will house primarily the tanks and specific • hatchery functions, a 70,000 square foot support facility that will be used for a visitors center, laboratories, and other support • facilities, and a hatchery water treatment plant. The structures are proposed to be approximately a story and a half in height, with selected areas of skylights for natural light. All four structures will • be constructed on reinforced concrete slabs. The site will include appropriate access, parking, security, and lighting. (See Survey and Site Plan in Appendix A.) The hatchery facilities will be serviced by Greenport water, sanitary, • and electricity. Mariculture Technologies, Inc. is negotiating with the Village of Greenport to run a primary feeder from the nearest Village primary into the site with a new sub -station. Water and • sanitary facilities will be only that for personnel and visitors. The I-60 0 • principal water supply for the hatchery will be salt water supplied • by salt water wells located on site. This source is projected to • provide optimum quality salt water with minimal initial treatment. Salt water from the proposed hatchery will be supplied by a salt water well. The projected salt water well flow requirements • during Phase IV are approximately 400,000 gallons per day or 300 gallons per minute. This water will be filtered and sterilized prior to introduction into the rearing tanks. • The culture of summer flounder produces several types of waste products that degrade water quality. These materials must be removed in order to maintain superior water quality in the hatchery. This is accomplished through the operation of an advanced water • treatment system. The water supply and treatment system for the hatchery is an • integral part of the hatchery. It involves complex waste control processes necessary in maintaining water quality. A review • of operating hatchery water treatment systems in Europe was conducted to determine the water circulation requirements in the proposed hatchery system. I-61 40 0 • • • I] • • • :7 0 The greatest demand for water in the hatchery occurs during the summer flounder juvenile and fingerling rearing stages. During these two stages, the optimum water flow rate provides for a complete change in tank volume every two hours or twelve times per day. This flow results in a significant volume of water needed to be circulated through the hatchery every day. The peak flow would occur during March or April of each year beginning with Phase IV and IVA when the tanks are fully utilized. At this time, Phase IV fish will be reaching the end of the fingerling stage and Phase IVA fish will be reaching the end of the juvenile stage. The volumes of water required during phases IV and IVA are as follows: PEAK HATCHERY WATER FLOWS CM/DAY MGD Phase I & IA 2,760 0.73 Phase II & IIA 12,080 3.20 Phase III & IIIA 40,830 10.80 Phase IV & IVA 90,000 23.80 CM=Cubic Meters MGD=Million Gallons per Day In order to understand the treatment process, it is necessary to characterize the types of waste found in the hatchery effluent. The waste water from the proposed hatchery would contain I-62 • contaminants of concern such as Biological Oxygen Demand ('BOD"), suspended solids ("SS"), nitrogen (ammonia, organic, nitrite, nitrate) ("N"), and phosphorus ("P"). The quantity of these compounds varies depending on the type of fish operation. These • contaminants are described as follows: • • • • OR • CI 0 1. Biochemical Oxygen Demand ('BOD") BOD is recognized as the most widely used parameter for measuring the quality of a liquid waste stream. The BOD test measures the amount of dissolved oxygen that microorganisms would consume in the biochemical oxidation of organic matter. Therefore, measurements of BOD reflect the efficiency of the treatment process. A portion of the BOD is associated with uneaten fish food and feces. BOD is also associated with the organic and nutrient portion of the waste stream that is either suspended or dissolved. BOD can be reduced by removal of the settleable solids. 2. Suspended Solids ("SS") Solids generated at a fish hatchery can be in multiple forms: I-63 • suspended, floatable and dissolved. The suspended solids represent the bulk of these solids and would be generated by the waste products of the fish as well as by the feeding of • the fish. The settleable solids are those that can be readily settled in a quiescent environment such as a settling tank or clarifier. Removal of these solids results in a direct • reduction of BOD and nutrient loading to downstream units. • 3. Nitrogen ("N") 0 Nitrogen is found in several forms: nitrogen gas, organic • nitrogen, ammonia -nitrogen (ionized and unionized), nitrite - nitrogen, and nitrate nitrogen. Fish feed and feces contain • quantities of organic nitrogen that can degrade into ammonia nitrogen through bacterial action upon the feed and feces. Ammonia -nitrogen is also excreted as urine. • Ammonia nitrogen is further reduced to nitrite and finally nitrate nitrogen through chemical oxidation. Problems arise • due to the lethal toxicity of fish to low levels of ammonia and nitrite nitrogen. In order to prevent these compounds from reaching toxic levels, it is necessary to convert • ammonia and nitrite nitrogen to nitrate nitrogen. Nitrate I-64 0 V, C C • • C: • • • • 0 nitrogen is not regarded as a major concern to fish culture. Studies have shown that fish have a high tolerance for elevated levels of nitrate (Stoskopf, 1993). Nitrates generally do not reach extremely high levels in hatchery systems. Instead they are removed with the separation of solids from the hatchery water and/or through denitrification. 4. Phosphorus ("P") Phosphorus is a nutrient that should be addressed in a closed system. Phosphorus, if discharged into the receiving waters, should be monitored and controlled. The preferred hatchery system is one that contains a closed recirculation system (see Figure 4.). The hatchery water treatment system will utilize new technology recently developed by a U.S. and European team effort aimed specifically as fish hatchery recirculation systems (Caldwell, 1994). The system has been used successfully in Europe to raise trout, salmon and halibut. This system incorporates rearing tanks which are designed to remove 98 % of the solids that settle to the bottom of the tank such as fish feces and unconsumed feed. These tanks are designed to be self cleaning and consist of a sloping bottom and utilize the movement I-65 "R'• CAMERON PECONIC ASSOCIATES ENGINEERING, P.C. CLOSED RECIRCULATION TREATMENT SYSTEM * Suite 410 aoc°""`" R° SIMPLIFIED PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM Westbury. New York 111590 FIGURE NO. 4. FISH HATCHERY BOD REDUCTION ALKALINITY AND NITRIFICATION ADDITION AEROBIC BIOLOGICAL UNIT WELL REARING REARING FIXED RAW WATER OR SETTLING SUSPENDED GROWTH TANK SYSTEM I REARING REARING I I a I RECIRCULATION (OPTIONAL) UL -------------------- ------- W SLUDGE SETTLED SOLIDS HOLDING RE -AERATION SETTLED SOLIDS TANK SS = 1.781 LBS/DAY (OPTIONAL) SS = 8.905 LBS/DAY RECYCLED WATER DISINFECTION (OZONATION/U.V.) FILTRATION SS = 593 LBS/DAY SS = 10.686 LBS/DAY BOD = 525 LBS/DAY N = 96 LBS/DAY P = 26 LBS/DAY TRANSFER TO DISPOSAL BACKWASH TO RECEIVING WATER PLOT: 1-1 "R'• CAMERON PECONIC ASSOCIATES ENGINEERING, P.C. CLOSED RECIRCULATION TREATMENT SYSTEM * Suite 410 aoc°""`" R° SIMPLIFIED PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM Westbury. New York 111590 FIGURE NO. 4. 0 of water to concentrate solid wastes in the center. The solids are collected in a patented particle trap ("ECO-TRAP"TM). Once collected, these materials are removed immediately through a drain in the tank bottom before they have a chance to dissolve in the tank A water. The solids are subsequently subjected to a particle separation process to remove as much water as possible. Only five percent of the water remains in the sludge. The remaining * thickened solids are then directed to a sludge holding tank which would be aerated to maintain aerobic condition prior to transfer and disposal at an appropriate facility. The centrate remaining from the centrifuge process would be combined with the normal water discharge from the rearing tanks and directed to a biological filter for the reduction of BOD and nitrification of ammonia and organic • nitrogen to nitrate nitrogen. • i 0 J 0 Biological filters suitable for this application include fixed growth systems such as trickling filters and rotating biological contactors as well as suspended growth systems such as activated sludge and fluidized bed reactors. Biological filters aerate and strip the system water of carbon dioxide as well as converting toxic ammonia to less toxic nitrate (nitrification). All biological filter systems provide large surface areas for the growth of nitrifying bacteria of the genus Nitrosomonas and Nitrobacter. Whichever method is chosen, all biological systems will be provided with aeration and I-67 EJ alkalinity addition to maintain appropriate oxygen, alkalinity and • pH levels necessary for nitrification. Once through the biological filtration system , the hatchery water would then be passed through a settling tank to remove additional suspended solids. The solids would then be directed to the • aforementioned sludge holding tank. The hatchery water would then be subjected to additional mechanical filtration. This filter would also function in the removal of phosphate from the system • water as well as a final polishing and removal of suspended solids. Biological removal of phosphorus can be accomplished utilizing a • suspended growth system or in a flash mixing, sedimentation system with the addition of alum or sodium aluminate. This process would occur prior to filtration. The chemical coagulant is • introduced upstream of the filter to assist in the formation of a flocculant that can be settled out and removed. Typical removal • systems would include multi -media, (anthracite and sand) filters equipped for backwashing of captured solids from the media. This filter would require daily backwashing to clean the filter media. • The resultant water from this backwash would be discharged to the receiving waters. • 0 I-68 • The hatchery water would then be subjected to a disinfection • process with ozone injection or UV light. Ozone is the triatomic form of oxygen (03) and it is highly unstable. Ozone breaks down rapidly, but is soluble in water. Ozone is usually generated by • passing dry air over an active electric spark. Ozone is usually introduced into the water stream after biological filtration and • solid removal. The best method of mixing ozone with water is in an ozone reactor (Moe; 1982, 1992). The reactor is a container that trickles water over a large surface area filter media in a pressurized • atmosphere (2 to 3 PSI). Maximum efficiency is attained if ozone is injected counter current to the water stream (Moe; 1982,1992). • That is, the water flow and ozone stream must go in opposite directions to insure maximum contact time of the ozone with the • • • • 0 water. Once in the water stream, the unstable ozone molecule breaks down, leaving an oxygen molecule (02) and a single oxygen molecule. This single oxygen atom is highly ionized and will oxidize most inorganic and organic molecules it contacts. However, ozone does not oxidize nitrogenous compounds beyond ammonia. Ozone also controls bacteria, viruses and some microorganisms. Ozone enters the cell and destroys the nuclear chemistry of the cell, thus killing the organism (Moe; 1989, 1992) I-69 • Ozone has several drawbacks in that it is toxic to both humans and • aquatic animals. Care must be taken to prevent the leakage of ozone into the hatchery area. Ozone is toxic to fish in that it burns delicate gill tissue. Ozone also reacts with chloride and bromide ions forming hypochlorite and hypobromite. These compounds are stable oxidants and can damage sensitive fish gill tissue and • beneficial microorganisms. The use of ozone in a hatchery must be carefully controlled as larvae are especially susceptible to damage from ozone. Excess ozone and other oxidants can be removed • be removed from the water by activated carbon filtration. Residual ozone in marine system water should be no more than 0.5 ppm for • fish treatment (Moe; 1989, 1992). For continuous treatment, ozone concentrations should be less than 0.5 ppm. Residual levels • of 0.1 ppm to 0.3 ppm are indicated to prevent growth of bacteria and viruses. With respect to the above factors, it is important to monitor and • control the amount of ozone in the water system. Ozone levels can be estimated through determination of the redox potential or • the use of a orthotolidine ("OTO") test kit for chlorine. Ozone regulation can also be accomplished with commercial automatic control units. These units continually monitor the redox potential • and adjust ozone input accordingly as to maintain a specific redox I-70 49 P C potential. Disinfection may also be accomplished with ultraviolet light sterilization ("UV"). UV light between the wavelengths of 190 and i 300 nanometers produces energy that kills bacteria, viruses, fungi and small protozoa (Moe; 1989,1992). UV units consist of a germicidal bulb encased in a quartz glass sleeve which in turn is • contained in a chamber though which water from the system passes through. In a multitank system, the best placement of a UV unit is 0 in the return line. The water is sterilized after it leaves the filters, • but before it returns to the rearing tanks. The effect of UV light is confined mostly to the area around the germicidal bulb, however oxidants may be produced by the UV in the water may have a positive effect on the redox potential. Unlike ozone treatment, 0 there is little potential for destruction of any microorganisms that do not pass through the UV unit. The efficiency of the UV unit is based on various factors including: • o Bulb energy: measured as the number of microwatts delivered each second for each square centimeter of contact area. 35,000 uw/sec/cm2 is suggested as a minimum (Moe; 1989,1992). o Bulb age: the efficiency of the bulb declines after six months (5000 hours) o Species and individual characteristics of target microorganisms; I-71 40 r� u • C • C • • • J o Temperature of the bulb and system: optimum temperature is about 106°F (40T). As temperature drops, so does efficiency. o Distance between the bulb and target organism: not more than one inch (2.5 cm) for maximum irradiation. o Duration and intensity of exposure as determined by the flow rate through the unit and the turbidity of the water; and o The presence of biological and mineral deposits on the quartz sleeve. In addition to the above mentioned treatment it will be necessary to conduct a 20% volumetric exchange of the hatchery water per day. This water change is required to prevent the increase of toxic metabolic products such as ammonia and maintain superior water quality essential for the culture of summer flounder. New water will be filtered and sterilized with ozone or UV prior to introduction into the rearing tanks. Spent process water would exit the hatchery system after disinfection by ozone and be discharged into the receiving waters. Discharge at this point will ensure that water entering the receiving waters would be as clean as water used for maintaining the cultured summer flounder. b. Processing, Loading and Off -Loading, and Feed Storage Facilities: • These facilities are projected to be located at the present Winter I-72 0 • Harbor Fisheries site in Greenport. Included in the existing structures will be fish processing, cold storage, freezer, and feed storage up through Phase III. During Phases IV through VI it is • anticipated that the quantity of feed required for the net pens will dictate a bulk transportation system. The processing, cold storage, freezer and feed storage locations are set forth in Table 11. • TABLE 11. LOCATION OF LAND BASED PROCESSING AND STORAGE FACILITIES • PHASE PROCESSING COLD FREEZER FEED STORAGE STORAGE I WH WH WH WH • II WH WH WH WH III WH WH & PS WH & PS WH IV WH WH & PS WH & PS NR V WH WH&PS WH&PS NR VI WH WH & PS WH & PS NR • WH = WINTER HARBOR FISHERIES PS = PUBLIC STORAGE NR = NOT REQUIRED - BULK DELIVERY PLANNED TO VESSEL LOADING FACILITY. • Dock, loading, and off-loading facilities are also contained at this • site and will include docking provisions for the two crew vessels and docking facilities for two of the aqua truck type vessels. Two docking facilities are proposed: one alongside the bulkhead line • at Winter Harbor Fisheries which will be utilized primarily for fish 1-73 41 • unloading; the second facility will be constructed to facilitate the loading of bulk feed. The facilities will include an existing small hydraulic crane; the docking facilities for support vessels; and docking facilities for loading and off loading containers containing • fingerlings, feed, and live fish. Arrangements to accommodate the above are depicted in the Site Plan in Appendix B. Support for these facilities are already in place including the road access via Sterling Avenue; Greenport water; Greenport electricity; and Greenport sewer. Holding tank pump out equipment will be installed to service the support vessels. ! C. Parking Facilities: Two (2) employee and visitor parking facilities are required. One will be at the Hatchery/Laboratory Visitors Center and support facilities on County Road 48. (See Site Plan - Appendix A.) The second parking facility will be located at the Sterling Avenue Processing Facility in Greenport. This parking • site will include employees for the net pen security, the divers for net pens, the vessel crews, and those used for fish harvesting activities. Also included at this site will be general and • administrative personnel for the company, which will include its officers, professional staff, consultants, and visitors. Shift ! schedules will be utilized for the security personnel at the net pens I-74 C U • • • • • • a Ij and also during Phases IV, V, and VI of the fish processing activities which will reduce the total number of parking spaces required. Additionally, bus transport of personnel is under consideration as to reduce the number of parking spaces required. The proposed parking for this site is depicted on the Site Plan in Appendix B. To better determine the parking requirements, and employee parking schedules have been developed for each of the six (6) phases in Tables 12 and 13 below. TABLE 12. NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES PER PHASE PHASE HATCHERY & GROWOUT LABORATORY ADMINISTRATIVE & PROCESSING I 6 12 II 6 16 III 10 44 IV 20 72 V 20 119 VI 20 174 I-75 0 L� 0 L� r • 0 L� F� 0 TABLE 13. PARKING PER PHASE PHASE CLARKS BEACH GROWOUT HATCHERY VISITORS ADMINISTRATIVE & PROCESSING VISITORS I 6 10 12 2 II 6 10 14 2 III 8 12 36 4 IV 12 12 61 (36) 4 V 12 20 76 (40) 6 VI 12 20 110 (60) 6 Note: The number in parentheses ( ) represents the parking required in addition to bus transportation if utilized. I-76 • D. DESCRIPTION OF LAND USE RIGHTS 1. LAND BASED SITES • The project requires the use of three (3) upland parcels as follows: a. Hatchery Site The hatchery facility as proposed will be located on a portion of a 17 acre site referred to locally as Clark's Beach. Fifteen acres of this site is owned by the Village of Greenport, but originally procured for the purpose of construction of a sewer processing plant. It is, however, totally within the Town of Southold, and its use for a fish hatchery will require the following actions: o Lease from the Village of Greenport. o Change of Zone (now zoned R-80 Residential) from the Town of Southold. o Zoning variance (parking) • o A Coastal Erosion Permit from the Town of Southold. • o A Consistency Review from New York State Department of State Coastal Zone Management. o Site Plan Approval - Town of Southold and the • Village of Greenport. I-77 0 r] n t • r-, L1 rl • 0 o Utility connections - water, sanitary, and electrical - approval from the Village of Greenport. o Water and Sanitary plans - Village of Greenport and Suffolk County Department of Health. o A SPDES Permit - New York State D.E.C. o A Site Plan coordinated review with Suffolk County Planning Board. o A Building Permit from the Town of Southold. The ability to lease this 15 acre site from the Village of Greenport is justified based upon Greenport's objectives to increase local economic development and related public benefits. The lease of a County owned 2 acre parcel which is immediately adjacent to that owned by the Village of Greenport will also be required. The previously described property for the Hatchery is not adequate to provide the other required support facilities which include the laboratories, storage, visitors center, and other related support activities. Therefore, this second property, now owned by the County of Suffolk, is proposed to be used for the above activities and thus would require the following 1-78 • actions: CJ o Lease or purchase from the County of Suffolk; o A Change of Zone - now zoned R-80 Residential - from the Town of Southold; • o Variance (parking) o A Site Plan Approval - Town of Southold; Utility • connections - water, sanitary, and electrical approval from the Village of Greenport; o Water and Sanitary plans - Village of Greenport and • Suffolk County Department of Health; o A Site Plan and coordinated review with the Suffolk County Planning Board; and o A Building Permit from the Town of Southold. 46 The ability to lease this 2 acre site from the County of Suffolk is justified based upon Suffolk County's long term objectives for economic development and related public • benefits. b. Processing Site s The Winter Harbor Fisheries property has been proposed for processing, loading, unloading and feed storage. This • 3.3 acre property is presently leased by Mariculture I-79 CJ 0 The proposed grow out site consists of a rectangular tract of i 200 acres (1.0 miles X 0.32 miles) located in Gardiner's Bay (See Figure 2). The waters and bottom are both owned and under the jurisdiction of the State of New York. Permits and Approvals for I-80 41 Technologies, Inc. for ten (10) years for the purposes of loading and off-loading vessel and boat dockage, feed storage, fish processing, and parking facilities. This land area is currently zoned as Waterfront Commercial, for which the proposed uses are permitted. However, the improvements for the loading and off-loading facilities will require: o Village of Greenport Wetlands Permit; o Coastal Zone Management Consistency Review by the New York State Department of State; o Navigable Waters Permit by the Corps of Engineers; o Site Plan by the Village of Greenport which include employee parking and vessel loading and off-loading facilities (see Appendix B.). 2. AQUATIC SITES The proposed grow out site consists of a rectangular tract of i 200 acres (1.0 miles X 0.32 miles) located in Gardiner's Bay (See Figure 2). The waters and bottom are both owned and under the jurisdiction of the State of New York. Permits and Approvals for I-80 41 the use of this area will include the following: • o Water Column Lease from the State of New York; o Navigable Waters Permit from the Corps of Engineers; ♦ o Aids to Navigation Permit from the United States Coast Guard. 6 It is generally perceived that all the New York State Waters are held in public trust. However, such lands are commonly devoted to private use. Perhaps the best example of public lands extended for • private use includes marinas. That is, most marinas include structures (i.e. docks) extended over public bottom lands which fo provide for exclusive private use of same. A second example whereby public lands are devoted to private use includes the installation of fish traps and gill nets in State Waters. Fish traps 4 clearly limit navigation and use of the public waters. Even so, fish traps are widely permitted by New York State as a matter of economic development. Finally, the lease of public land for the commercial culture of shellfish is common in New York State. Such leases are also granted as to enhance economic development. • Therefore, there is ample precedent for securing exclusive rights for use of surface and underwater areas. As with the above discussed I-81 • I examples, the proposed lease agreement between Mariculture • Technologies, Inc. and the State of New York will have the benefit of enhancing economic development in the State of New York. Accordingly, the granting of such lease by the State of New York is 4 justified. 7 • 0 4 7 :M • I-82 1 i 1. TYPE OF OPERATIONS Several major types of operations are required in the culturing of summer flounder which include the following components: a The hatchery operations consists of broodstock conditioning and spawning, egg hatching, early larval stage growth, as well as f rearing of weaning and fingerling summer flounder. These functions are tied into the production of specific numbers of marketable fish in accordance with the phases set forth below. 46 Yields of fish with respect to the proposed phases are as follows: i I-83 0 o Brood Stock o Early Larvae • o Weaning o Juvenile o Fingerling • o Grow -Out o Fish Processing and storage a The hatchery operations consists of broodstock conditioning and spawning, egg hatching, early larval stage growth, as well as f rearing of weaning and fingerling summer flounder. These functions are tied into the production of specific numbers of marketable fish in accordance with the phases set forth below. 46 Yields of fish with respect to the proposed phases are as follows: i I-83 0 • 0 E • • a s • o Phase I 45,000 o Phase II 150,000 o Phase III 500,000 o Phase IV 1,100,000 o Phase V 3,000,000 o Phase VI 5,000,000. Phase I production will be accomplished by the eventual production of fingerlings to take place in the proposed hatchery, or alternatively, by direct purchase. The direct purchase option is proposed herein to address the logistical unknowns pertaining to the overall regulatory process for this proposed project. Accordingly, fingerlings may be purchased form out of state or from Cornell Cooperative Extension Service utilizing their existing facility at Cedar Beach in Southold, New York. The principal hatchery and support functions of Phase II through Phase IV is projected to be located on an approximately ten (17) acre site referred to locally as Clark's Beach. The proposed hatchery at Clark's Beach is designed to accommodate phases I through IV. A selection process for a second hatchery site large enough to accommodate additional production phases V and VI is ongoing. 46 The Grow -Out operation is scheduled to occur at the 200 acre net pen site in Gardiner's Bay. I-84 w :-I Finally, the Fish Processing operation will occur at the Winter Harbor Fisheries Site in Greenport. The timing of implementation each of the respective phases is set forth in the Phase Timing Schedule (Figure 5.) It should be noted that the time frame from the early larvae stage to the harvest stage is an eighteen (18) month period, with the implementation of • Phase I scheduled to start in May 1995. • 41 a 0 4b I-85 0 PHASE MAY JUNE JULY AUG ISMIOCTINOV DEC Jim M I MAR APRMAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC 1995 1996 Ea arvest I Wean Juvenile Fingerling Growout IA Early Larvae Wean Juvenile Fingerling Upland GProwout 1996 1997 IIS Larvae Wean Juvenile Fingerling Growout arvest IIA Early Larvae Wean Juvenile Fingerling n9 n9 U rowout 1997 1998 Early arvest Larvae Wean Juvenile FingerlingGrowout [j Earl Larvae Wean Juvenile Fingerling Upland U Growout 1998 1999 IV Early Larvae Wean Juvenile Fingerling �g ng Growout arvest IV Larvae]rWean Juvenile Fingerling Grolwout Figure 5. Phase Timing Schedule for the Culture of Summer Flounder. Ci 0 4 C7 • a a 0 The operations can be described in terms of location as follows: a. Net Pen Operations: A variety of operations will occur at the net pen grow -out site. They will include security. It is proposed that security personnel will be provided around the clock, seven (7) days a week. The security personnel are proposed to stay aboard a 30 foot crew boat, which will be equipped with sleeping quarters, sanitary, and galley facilities for up to two (2) people. During the six (6) month Grow -Out period, the net pens will be serviced daily by dive personnel who will inspect the fish to evaluate their condition, health, disease, and general well being. They will also determine whether the summer flounder are currently being fed an adequate amount of feed. Finally, they will also remove any dead fish ("morts") from the pens for transport to the freight vessel for movement back to Greenport for waste processing. The feeding operation will include the unloading of the feed from the aqua -truck freight vessel into outboard powered skiffs, which will move the bags of feed to each of the net pens. As stated above, these operations are scheduled daily except when weather conditions would prohibit the safe movement of personnel 1-87 KI and feed. The harvest operation is expected to take place over a minimum period of two (2) months in which the bottom of the net pen will be raised to within several feet of the surface to permit easy removal of the fish from the net pens into water filled containers. The summer flounder will be hoisted aboard the freight vessel for transport back to the ! processing site. b. Land Operations: The loading and off loading facilities will be at the Winter Harbor Fisheries Site on Sterling Avenue in Greenport (see Site Plan- Appendix B.). These operations i that will take place include: the onloading of fingerling summer flounder from the hatchery, feed, and materials as well as off-loading of the morts from the hatchery and the net pens for separate non-food related processing. Transportation of necessary personnel to and from the net pens will also occur from the Winter Harbor Fisheries Site. The vehicle movement over roads is of interest, not only to • the Village but also to the local residents. Accordingly, the use of a company owned bus to transport a significant portion of employees to and from the processing site is 40 under consideration as the project reaches Phases IV 1-88 ! • through VI. The following Table 14. depicts the projected vehicle movements at the Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Site for all phases of the project. ! I-89 TABLE 14. VEHICLE ROUND TRIPS/DAY WINTER HARBOR FISHERIES EMPLOYEE TRUCK TRUCK PHASE VEHICLES DELIVERIES (1) SHIPMENTS (2) I 17 2 4 II 20 2 4 III 44 2 4 • IV 50 (23) (3) 3 6 V 60 (59) (3) 5 8 ! VI 70 (104) (3) 6 10 (1) DELIVERIES INCLUDE SUPPLIES, FEED, HATCHERY MORTS ! (2) SHIPMENTS - LIVE, PROCESSED AND FROZEN FISH, USABLE WASTE (FERTILIZER AND FROZEN CHUM) (3) ASSUMES OWNER SCHEDULED BUS TRANSPORTATION FOR EMPLOYEE NUMBERS IN BRACKETS • ! I-89 I-90 1 Transportation is an important aspect in the culture of summer a flounder. The transportation includes the following groups of operations: o Movement of the Fingerlings from the hatchery site to the loading site at Winter Harbor Fisheries in Stirling Harbor. This will be done by enclosed tanks trucked to the site. o Movement of the Fingerlings to the Grow -Out Site. This involves the water transportation of fingerlings in the aforementioned enclosed tanks from the loading site in Greenport to the Grow -Out Site in Gardiner's Bay. This operation also includes the movement of crew personnel to • service and maintain the net pens. Initially, one (1) freight type vessel similar to an Aqua -Truck, and two (2) crew/service vessels approximately 30 feet in length are proposed. Phases IV through VI of the proposed project will require two (2) Aqua truck type vessels as a minimum. The transportation of live fish also includes the harvesting of the fish at the end of the Grow -Out period and the subsequent loading of same onto a freight vessel for transportation back to the fish processing site. As the fish will need to be fed and the net pens serviced daily, there will I-90 1 • be daily trips of both the freight type vessel transporting feed, and the crew type vessels transporting personnel to and from the Grow -Out Site. In addition, one of the crew vessels will provide the needed on site security. 4 2. SCHEDULE OF OPERATION The culture methods employed for summer flounder are 0 categorized by the following operations as follows: (1) the capture, maintenance and conditioning of wild stock adults for breeding purposes (broodstock); (2) the rearing of early larval stage flatfish 0 through metamorphosis; (3) the weaning of post metamorphosed summer flounder onto artificial diets; (4) the rearing of post larvae summer flounder to the fingerling stage, (5) the rearing of 41 fingerlings; and (6) the growout to marketable size fish in ocean net pens. The first five stages set forth above are to take place at a site known as Clark's Beach in the Town of Southold. The final stage set forth above will take place in ocean net pens which will be gradually deployed over a six year period. • A quantitative summary of each of the above listed operations is contained in the Phase Outline Schedules enclosed herein. • I-91 • A review of the literature pertaining to the design and operation of • hatchery facilities was conducted in the formulation of these tables. The Phase Outline Schedules are the planning documents for the numbers of fish to be stocked; the number of tanks; water flows; feed requirements, and the amount of feed and cold freezer storage needed. They also include tabulation of effluent and waste products. A detailed description of the operations outlined in the Phase Outline Schedules is enclosed below. • • C CI 0 The culture of the summer flounder is inextricably linked to its biology and life history. A description of the biology and life history of the summer flounder is set forth below: Life History of Summer Flounder The summer flounder, Paralichthys dentatus, is found in estuarine and continental shelf waters ranging from Nova Scotia to Florida (Grimes et. al., 1989; Poole, 1961; Rogers and Van Den Avyle, 1983). However, the summer flounder is most abundant from Cape Cod, Massachusetts to Cape Hatteras, North Carolina (Hildebrant and Shroeder, 1928; Malloy and Target, 1991). Wilk et. al. (1980) report that two distinct populations of summer flounder are found within this range. There is scientific evidence supporting the I-92 finding that a northern stock indigenous to these waters exhibits 1 greater tolerance to the cooler waters of the northern Mid Atlantic Bight and grow faster than the southern stock (Malloy and Target, 1991). • • LI Morse (1981) reports a sex ratio among adult summer flounder to be 1:1. However, a survey of adult summer flounder revealed male dominance among summer flounder ranging between 21 and 3 5 cm total length ("TV) (Morse, 1981). In contrast, female summer 1-93 Peak annual migrations from estuarine waters to depths of 20 to 100 fathoms on the continental shelf occur during the fall and • winter (Bigelow and Shroeder, 1953, Morse, 1981). Morse (1981) has noted that peak spawning coincides with the breakdown of stratification in oceanic waters of the Continental Shelf. In waters • off of New York, turnover is expected to occur during the month of October. Morse (1981) observed a sharp increase in gonad size occurring from late September through early November. • Nevertheless, the length of the spawning period can vary widely with accounts of early spawning in July as far north as Naragansett Bay (Herman, 1963) through January in the Mid Atlantic Bight • (Able et. al., 1990). The summer flounder is decidedly a serial spawner and eggs are continuously matured and shed throughout this protracted spawning period as they move out of the estuaries into deeper waters (Morse, 1981). • • LI Morse (1981) reports a sex ratio among adult summer flounder to be 1:1. However, a survey of adult summer flounder revealed male dominance among summer flounder ranging between 21 and 3 5 cm total length ("TV) (Morse, 1981). In contrast, female summer 1-93 • Embryonic development of the summer flounder is well • documented in the literature. Johns and Howell (1980) describes the embryonic development in terms of three stages. Stage 1 C, I-94 • flounder dominated all sampled fish ranging greater than 45 cm TL • and males were absent in all sample groups greater than 55 cm TL. (Morse, 1981). The paucity of males greater than 45 cm TL is believed to be a result of differing growth rates between the sexes • and a greater maximum age of sexual development for female summer flounder (Poole, 1961; Smith and Daiber, 1977). Finally, Morse (198 1) observed that the larger summer flounder matured • earlier than smaller summer flounder. The reported size and age differences between males and females and the timing of sexual maturation has important implications in the initial collection of • wild stock for breeding purposes and the culture methods proposed herein are designed to take advantage of these life history parameters. • As discussed above, summer flounder are serial spawners and spawning appears to take place as summer flounder are migrating • out of the estuaries into waters of the Continental Shelf. Fecundity in summer flounder is extremely high ranging from 463,000 to 4,188,000 eggs for females ranging from 366 to 680 mm TL • (Morse, 1981). Embryonic development of the summer flounder is well • documented in the literature. Johns and Howell (1980) describes the embryonic development in terms of three stages. Stage 1 C, I-94 • • 0 r� 0 encompasses the development events between fertilization and the blastophore closure. The notochord and eye become discernible during this stage. Phase 2 is described as the period between blastophore closure to the period when the embryo bends out of its axial plane. Myomeres become visible and the first signs of pigmentation occur during this phase. Phase 3 encompasses the remainder of the egg development through hatching and the major development events include formation of the eyes, an increase in myomere number and further pigmentation. Eggs of the summer flounder are spiracle, opaque and non adhesive (White and Stickney, 1973). Smith and Fahay (1970) found summer flounder eggs to average 1.02 mm in diameter at the time of spawning. The time required for hatching is highly variable and temperature dependent (Johns and Howell, 1980; Keefe and Able, 1993). In the laboratory, hatching was found to occur 48-96 hours following fertilization at temperatures ranging from 15 to 21'C (Johns and Howell, 1980, Johns et. al., 1981). Larval development of the summer flounder has been described by Keefe and Able (1993) in terms of eight distinct development stages beginning at hatching and continuing through metamorphosis. Metamorphosis is described to begin with the commencement of eye migration, and ending at the point when eye migration is complete and adult morphology is achieved (Keefe and Able, I-95 0 • 0 0 11 C� • i • 1993). As with egg development, the larval development process also appears to be temperature dependent with faster rates achieved at higher temperatures (Johns, et al., 1981). Keefe and Able (1993) found that laboratory reared summer flounder completed metamorphosis between 20 and 32 days at an average temperature of 16.6°C. The variability in larval development and survival with respect to temperature has been implicated in the success of natural recruitment, to wit: poor recruitment may be attributed to poor survivability of larvae in the natural environment owing to slow larval development and resulting greater predation as well as temperature induced mortality. Having completed development through metamorphosis, growth observed in the young of the year ("YOY") summer flounder is extremely rapid. Szeldmayer et al. (1992) reported YOY summer flounder to achieve 200-326 mm TL within one year. Growth rates of natural stock have been estimated at 1.9 mm to 2.0 mm per day between May and September (Able et. al., 1990; Szeldmayer et. al., 1992). However, growth of YOY summer flounder is also temperature dependent and perhaps also salinity dependent with growth rates calculated at 3.8 mm per day at 18°C and high salinity (Malloy and Target, 1991). The extraordinary growth rate reported in the natural stocks of summer flounder has generated much interest in its commercial culture. I-96 l� t Smith and Daiber (1977) have documented the food preference for summer flounder based upon observation of gut contents as follows: • However, the food preferences for summer flounder vary widely in accordance with size and prey availability. For example, Smith and Daiber (1977) note that summer flounder less than 45 cm TL showed a tendency to feed on invertebrates while summer flounder over 45 cm TL tended towards feeding upon fish. Clearly, squid is a preferred prey item in New York Waters but is not available for prey throughout most of the year. In deed, Great Bay Aqua Farms maintains their brood stock on squid and butter fish at their broodstock facility in Massachusetts. Typical growth curves for most teliost species are asymptotic. That • I-97 • 41% sand shrimp (Crangon septemspinosa) 33% weak fish (Cyanoscion regalis) • 20% mysid (Neomysuis americana) 4% squid (Loligo sp.) 2% silverside (Menidia menidia) herring (Alosa sp.) hermit crab (Pagurus longicarpus) isopod (Olencria praegustor) • However, the food preferences for summer flounder vary widely in accordance with size and prey availability. For example, Smith and Daiber (1977) note that summer flounder less than 45 cm TL showed a tendency to feed on invertebrates while summer flounder over 45 cm TL tended towards feeding upon fish. Clearly, squid is a preferred prey item in New York Waters but is not available for prey throughout most of the year. In deed, Great Bay Aqua Farms maintains their brood stock on squid and butter fish at their broodstock facility in Massachusetts. Typical growth curves for most teliost species are asymptotic. That • I-97 • • 0 A great deal of attention has been afforded to temperature tolerances for post larvae and YOY summer flounder (Szedlmayer at. al., 1992, Malloy and Target, 1991, Peters and Angelovic, 1971). Temperature tolerance has important implications to recruitment or the year class strength (abundance). Smith and • I-98 0 is, the most rapid growth is observed in the early stages of adult • development followed by a much slower growth rate as the fish approach maximum size. Even though growth of the YOY summer flounder is extremely rapid, the growth rate is expected to • significantly decrease as the fish enter Age Group 1. However, there is only a paucity of growth data available for summer flounder as it develops beyond the YOY age class. One investigation of • growth rate between male and female summer flounder demonstrated diminishing growth rate with increasing age (Poole, 1961). Indeed, what has been learned from the culture of turbot, a • similar flatfish species, is that market size is achieved no sooner than 18 months from fertilization despite rapid growth in the YOY class ( Person -Le Ruyet et. al. 1991). Accordingly, the underlying • assumption in the culture of summer flounder employed herein is that while rapid growth will be experienced during the YOY growth stage, a marketable summer flounder will not be achieved • until mid way through first year class, a time frame of approximately 18 months from hatching. 0 A great deal of attention has been afforded to temperature tolerances for post larvae and YOY summer flounder (Szedlmayer at. al., 1992, Malloy and Target, 1991, Peters and Angelovic, 1971). Temperature tolerance has important implications to recruitment or the year class strength (abundance). Smith and • I-98 0 • • I-99 r-] Daiber (1977) reported catches of summer flounder in water • temperatures ranging from 1.6°C to 26.8°C while Malloy and Target (1991) report a temperature tolerance of 2 to PC. over a four week period. However, these studies were performed on post • larval fish or YOY fish. Nevertheless, Edwards et. al. (1962) reported live catches of adult summer flounder at water temperatures of 6.6°C and hypothesized that older fish may have an • increased tolerance to colder water temperatures. It is known that water temperatures in the eastern portion of the Peconic-Gardeners Bay Estuary System can approach 0° C during the winter months. • Within the context of culturing summer flounder, it is believed that summer flounder will cease to feed at temperatures below 8 to 10°C and may not survive water temperatures below 2 to PC if • these temperatures persist over a prolonged period of time. Given full grow -out period of 18 months during which the proposed ocean net pen system would be utilized for culture only 6 months • out of the year, approximately one half of the production of cultured summer flounder will occur utilizing a land based system. Essentially, the full land based growout system for summer flounder • would be utilized in alternate years with the partial land based culture system that also utilizes the proposed ocean net pen system. • I-99 r-] • The Culture of Summer Flounder • Step 1: The Capture. Maintenance and Conditioning of Wild Stock for Breeding Purposes. • Adult summer flounder will be collected by otter trawl by contracting local commercial fishermen. Wild stock collection can • occur during any part of the year, although collection from spring through the following fall is most desirable as summer flounder may be more difficult to capture after they have already migrated onto • the Continental Shelf. Captured adult summer flounder will be maintained on the vessel in live wells and subsequently transferred to the hatchery at Clarks Beach. Prior to any stocking, broodstock • tanks will undergo a continuous exchange of water for a period of at least two weeks to leach any impurities associated with the tanks themselves or the piping connected thereto. Initially, twenty adult • summer flounder, ten of length ranging from 21 to 35 cm TL and ten summer flounder of greater length than 45 cm TL will be captured and held for breeding purposes. The selected lengths are • intended to ensure ample quantities of both male and female summer flounder. It is estimated that the collected wild stock fish • E • will weigh on the average, approximately 1.5 kilograms each. As presently proposed, the initial capture of wild stock for breeding purposes is to take place during the summer of 1995. 1-100 • C Adult summer flounder will be individually tagged to track their reproductive efficacy over time and placed in several broodstock tanks. Summer flounder expected to be male will be intermingled (held in the same broodstock tank) with summer flounder expected • to be female as to promote sexual development in simultaneous fashion. The proposed maximum stocking density for broodstock is 6.7 fish per meter square. The proposed stocking density is • regarded as extremely light, representing approximately one half the optimum density for summer flounder broodstock (D. Bengston, Ph.D. Personal Communication). The advantages of the proposed • reduced stocking density include reduced crowding effects and reduced risk of disease outbreak. • • The proposed broodstock tanks will be constructed out of fiberglass and will be circular having a diameter of approximately 3.5 meters and an area of 10.5M2 . A constant depth of 0.5 meters will be maintained for each broodstock tank. Saline waters generated from an on site salt water well will be used as a water supply for the proposed broodstock tanks. These saline ground • waters will undergo treatment processes including screening, and ozone treatment. As with other aspects of the hatchery, a recirculation system will be employed to provide a constant source • of clean, bacteria free water. However, in the case of the proposed • 1-101 • • broodstock tanks, 100% of the volume of each broodstock tank • will undergo recirculation with an estimated total volumetric exchange once every 10 hours. The high exchange rate proposed for the broodstock tanks is intended to ensure excellent water quality by preventing metabolite build-up. Broodstock will be fed on a diet of live, recently killed or frozen squid and butter fish at ration of 1:1 squid:butter fish and at a rate of 40 grams feed per fish per day. The use of squid and butter fish for maintaining broodstock is based upon the high protein • content of these items as well as their high fatty acid content. The high protein and fatty acid content of these food fish are expected to promote better egg quality and hence improved hatching rates as • well as better survivability of larval summer flounder. USDA (1987) has determined the protein content from squid and butter fish to be 15.6% and 17.3%, respectively. It is expected that under • the proposed feeding regime, approximately one third of the delivered food by weight will be eliminated as fecal wastes while the other two thirds will be utilized by the brood fish for minor • growth, maintenance and egg or sperm production. The method utilized in conditioning the broodstock have been • developed to mimic the natural environment. Essentially, spawning of summer flounder is believed to be largely controlled by • 1-102 40 n u temperature and to a lesser extent, photo period. It is to the • advantage of Mariculture Technologies, Inc. to capture fish as early in 1995 as possible so that conditioning methods can be gradually employed as broodstock become accustomed to the tank • environment. In the natural environment, summer flounder are known to spawn when water temperatures approach 10-12°C with a photo period of approximately 11 hours daylight and 13 hours • darkness. The temperature of the saline ground waters entering the hatchery is approximately 15°C. In the day to day culture practices employed herein, tank waters will be cooled at a rate not to exceed • 0.5°C per day. This means that a minimum of 8 to 10 days would be required to approach a proper spawning temperature. In reality, the process is expected to take much longer because of the time • needed to acclimate wild stock to the broodstock tanks as well as for the photo period adjustment. With respect to photo period adjustment, the shortening of the light period as to mimic natural • conditions is to be accomplished at intervals not to exceed 20 minutes per day. Accounting for the acclimation of broodstock to the broodstock tanks together with photo period and temperature • adjustment, the conditioning process for the broodstock is expected to take approximately 4 to 6 weeks. • Essentially, the objective for conditioning the brood stock for spawning is to bring about an enlargement of the gonads. In the • 1- 103 0 • • 1-104 0 natural environment, gonads tend to remain small and flaccid • throughout most of the summer (Smith and Daiber, 1977). Subsequently, gonads show signs of enlargement by late summer and spawning begins to take place as the fish migrate offshore. • However, in an artificial environment, most summer flounder will not spawn despite enlarged gonads. Accordingly, methods have been developed to induce spawning. The methods for inducing • spawning in summer flounder were originally developed by Smigielski (1975). To aid in the handling of ripened summer flounder, the fish are initially anesthetized with Tricaine Methane • Sulfonate (MS -222) at a concentration of 1:20,000. Thereafter, carp pituitary hormone (in freeze dried powder dissolved in isotonic sodium chloride) is injected into the summer flounder using an 18 • gage, 169 cm syringe or similar device. Injections are made into the anterior muscles below the dorsal fin. Carp pituitary hormone is delivered at a rate of 0.5 mg per 454 grams fish weight. Within • 3 days following hormone injection, eggs can be drawn directly from females and when these eggs approach 1 mm in diameter, spawning is imminent. Generally, a second injection is administered • 3 days following the initial injection as to bring about uniform spawning among the selected broodstock. It has been suggested that Gonotropin Ripening Hormone ("GNRH") may be more • effective in inducing spawning for teleosts (C. Sullivan - Personal • 1-104 0 n L :7 • Communication), but its efficacy for summer flounder has not been tested. Spawning of summer flounder in the hatchery is accomplished by hand. Ripened Summer flounder are anesthetized by methods described above. Subsequently, female summer flounder are hand stripped, the eggs being deposited into a small receiving vessel. Average egg diameter is expected to be approximately 1.02 mm and will contain an attached oil globule measuring 0.25 mm • (Smigielski, 1975). Eggs of the summer flounder are spiracle, buoyant, non adhesive and amber in coloration. Males are hand stripped immediately following the stripping of eggs and the resultant milt (approximately 2-3 ml per male) may be mixed with a • small amount of sea water. Given that sperm is only viable for approximately 2 minutes in sea water (D.Bengston, Ph.D. - Personal Communication), the sperm mixture is immediately added • to the egg vessel and gently stirred. Broodstock are then returned to the broodstock tanks. Fertilization is expected to be complete • within 30 minutes. Following fertilization, eggs are placed upon a 550 um mesh and • washed to remove excess sperm following the methods of Itzkowitz et. al. (1983). Subsequently, the eggs are placed into a second vessel with several inches of sea water added thereto for diagnostic 1-105 • purposes. Essentially, the fertilized eggs will tend to float on the • surface while non-viable eggs will tend to sink. The differences in density between the fertilized and non -fertilized eggs provide for easy separation to wit: the fertilized eggs are siphoned off the top • and deposited into incubation jars. The incubation jars themselves may be variable in design essentially • mimicking the McDonald -type jars utilized in many public and private hatcheries in the U.S.. However, the hatchery jars are designed and operated to provide for upward circulation as to • maintain the fertilized eggs in suspension. Care will be taken to adjust flows so that fertilized eggs do not collect on the outflow screen. Incubation of the eggs is largely dependent upon • temperature and the selected temperature for the hatching jars will be approximately 18°C. Under these conditions, hatching is expected to take place between 72 and 96 hours from fertilization. • As stated above, initially, wild stock will serve as brood stock for this proposed aquaculture project. However, through time, the • wild stock will be replaced with wild stock that has become adapted to the culture environment. Utilizing the classic methods of selective breeding employed throughout the aquaculture industry, • that is, summer flounder selected for better growth and all around heartiness, a true broodstock will have been developed. • 1-106 0 • C C • • C • �J 0 Importantly, Mariculture Technologies, Inc. is not proposing direct gene manipulation in the development of their broodstock. Accordingly, any summer flounder that escapes from the culture environment will not have the potential for impacting the natural gene pool of the summer flounder. The Mariculture Technologies, Inc proposal for the culture of summer flounder has been divided into six phases to be implemented over an extended period of time. As stated above, summer flounder brood stock will be maintained in the brood stock tanks at the light density of 6.7 fish per square meter. This density will be maintained throughout all proposed phases. Furthermore, the proposed feeding regime of squid and butter fish in equal proportions at a rate 40 grams per brood stock fish will similarly be maintained throughout all proposed phases. Accordingly, the amount of feed and resultant organic waste loading are functions of the quantities of brood stock fish held which for Phase I consists of 20 males and 20 females further increasing to maximum of 100 males and 100 females encountered in Phase VI. Similarly, the number of tanks and facility area are 3 and 180 square feet, respectively, for Phase I and these quantities increase to a maximum of 29 tanks and 9,000 square feet, respectively, as the project enters Phase VI. The Phase Outline Schedule for the Brood Stock Function is attached hereto as Table 15. 1-107 TABLE 15. MARICULTURE TECHNOLOGIES PHASE OUTLINE SCHEDULE - SUNNER FLOUNDER H A T C H E R Y F U N C T I O N S B R O O D S T 0 C K -------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NO. OF ORGANIC HARVEST WILD FISH TOTAL NO. OF TANKS FEED WASTE YIELD COLLECTED WEIGHT EGGS WATER FLOW K/DAY LOADING FACILITY AREA NO. OF FISH (1) MILLION CU. M./DAY & TYPE K./DAY SQ. FEET PHASE (THOUSANDS) NUMBER KILO (2) & (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) - - 20 - - F. - - - - - - - - - - - - I 45 20 M. 60 2.7 3 ----------- 7.2 1.6 0.5 --------- 180 -------------------- ------------- 30 ---------- F. --------- ------------------------ -------------- II 150 30 M. ---------- 90 3.75 3 -------------------- 10.8 ------------------------ 2.4 0.8 --------- 350 -------------- -------------------- ------------- 100 F. III 500 100 M. ---------- 300 12.75 3 -------------------- 36 ------------------------ 8.0 2.7 --------- 945 -------------- -------------------- ------------- 220 F. IV 1100 220 M. ---------- 660 30 7 -------------------- 80 --------------- 18 5.9 2205 -------------------- ------------- 600 F. --------- --------- -------------- V 3000 600 M. 1800 81.8 17 220 48 16 5400 -------------------- ------------- 1000 ---------- F. -------------------- ------------------------ --------- -------------- VI 5000 1000 M. 3000 136.4 29 360 80 27 9000 (1) AVERAGE 1500 GRAM/BROOD FISH (4) BASED ON EXCHANGE EVERY 10 HOURS AND 100% RECIRCULATION (2) BASED ON TANK DENSITY OF 6.7 FISH PER M2 (5) BASED ON 40 GRAMS/DAY EACH OF 20 GRAMS EACH OF SQUID AND BUTTER FISH (3) ONE TANK = 10.5 M2 - 0.5 M/DEPTH (6) BASED ON 1 K. OF WASTE PER 3 K. OF FEED (7) BASED ON 1 M2 OF TANK/30 SQ. FT. • Step 2: The rearingof f early larval stage summer flounder through • metamorphosis For the purposes of this EIS, the early larval stages begins at • hatching and extends through metamorphosis. The process of metamorphosis was described previously herein. The early larval stage is expected to take approximately 60 days at temperature • of approximately 20°C. Immediately following hatching, the early larvae are transferred into • early larval rearing tanks. The early larval rearing tanks are to be circular, constructed out of fiberglass or food grade materials measuring 10 feet in diameter. Each early larval tank will be filled • to a depth of 0.25 meters thereby holding approximately 2000 liters. As with the brood stock tanks, a continuous flow of water • will be run through each tank and attached piping for a period of two weeks as to leach any contaminants associated with the tank or connecting pipe surfaces. The early larval tanks will be fed with a . continuous supply of recirculated hatchery water at an exchange rate not to exceed 600 liters per hour per tank. The proposed stocking density for the early larval tanks is 10,000 summer • flounder per cubic meter. Importantly, only 20 % of the stocked early larval summer flounder are expected to survive through metamorphosis resulting in a final stocking density of 2,500 • 1-109 0 • metamorphosed summer flounder at approximately 60 days from • hatching. Accordingly, the final stocking density is regarded as moderate to light. • Full absorption of the yolk sac is expected to occur within four days following hatching (Smigielski, 1975). At that point , the larvae will begin to actively feed. The preferred feed at this point in the • summer flounder early larval period is Brachiones plicatillus or similar species commonly referred to as rotifers. Since there is significant variation in the timing of yolk sac absorption, rotifers are • to be introduced into the early larval tanks at day two thereby providing a food source for the more quickly hatching summer flounder larvae. In the hatchery setting, rotifers must be cultured as • a food supply for early larval summer flounder. However, the culture of rotifers is only accomplished through successful culture of algae, the primary food supply for rotifers along with bakers • yeast added as a food supplement. Algae culture is to take place in 250 liter circular tanks with a • diameter of 18 inches, having a narrowed funnel shaped base to allow for easy draw down. Essentially, algae is cultured under static conditions although an air stone is inserted at the bottom of • the culture tank to aid in vertical mixing. Each algae culture tank is thoroughly washed and then inoculated with Isochrysis sp. or • I-110 0 • • • '7 • • 0 similar algal species. Isochrysis sp. inocullum may be obtained from any number of commercial shellfish hatcheries in the northeast, or alternatively, from the National Marine Fisheries Service Laboratory in Milford, Connecticut. The algae inocullum is induced to bloom by the addition of Gullards F/2 (TM) fertilizer which consists of trace metals, vitamins, phosphorus and nitrogen. Gullards F/2 is regarded as the industry standard fertilizer for private or public shellfish hatcheries throughout the U.S. (Greg Rivara, Cornell Cooperative Extension - Personal Communication). High output fluorescent bulbs (4 foot tubes) are placed around the algae culture tanks and remain lit 24 hours a day. That is, no dark period is required in the culture of algae. On the average, it takes approximately eight days to generate an acceptable concentration for the purpose of providing food for rotifers. Accordingly, the volume of algae culture needed to properly feed the cultured rotifers equals 1.15 times the rotifer tank volume. The algae culture is delivered to the rotifer culture tanks by drawing down unit algal tanks depositing the flocculant algae culture directly into the rotifer culture tanks. The algae culture is added to the rotifer culture tanks at equal volumes. Subsequently, each algal culture tank will be thoroughly scrubbed and rinsed, filled with hatchery water and inoculated; the culture process thereby repeating itself. s • 1-112 0 Cysted rotifer inocullum may be obtained from a variety of commercial aquaculture supply companies in the U.S.. A unit rotifer inocullum, typically containing 10,000 rotifer cysts, is added directly to the rotifer culture tanks. The rotifer culture tanks are to be 200 liters each, cylindrical and constructed from fiberglass or similar food grade material. The rotifer tanks will be thoroughly scrubbed and rinsed, 50% of the volume for which will be supplied • by draw down of the algae culture tanks, the remaining volume being comprised of treated hatchery water generated from the on site salt water wells. As with algae culture, rotifer culture will take place under static conditions, vertically mixed by turbulence generated from an inserted air stone at the bottom of the tank. Hatching of the rotifer cysts is expected to take approximately 2 • days. Thereafter, rotifers will reproduce continuously and spontaneously. Under hatchery conditions, a rotifer culture containing 300 rotifers per milliliter is expected to be produced • within seven days. In order to provide for improved larval summer flounder growth • and development, the nutritional quality of the rotifer culture will be enriched with fatty acids manufactured by Selco Product Artemia Systems (TM) or a rival supply company. The fatty acid • enrichment is delivered in emulsion form and added to the rotifer • 1-112 0 0 tanks at a concentration of 0.3 to 0.6 grams per liter rotifer tank volume. At day 15 (following hatching) brine shrimp will be introduced as a food supply to the developing summer flounder larvae. In order to • do so, brine shrimp must first be cultured in the hatchery. Brine shrimp will be cultured in 250 liter conical tanks constructed out of fiberglass or food grade plastic materials and having an 18 inch • diameter with a funnel base. As with the rotifer and algae tanks, • 1- 113 • The resultant rotifer culture, already enriched with a fatty acid • emulsion, is fed directly to the developing larvae by draw down of the rotifer culture tanks, a process that begins two days following the hatching of the summer flounder eggs. At the onset of initial • feeding, each summer flounder larvae is expected to ingest 30 to 50 rotifers per day. Feeding of fatty acid enriched rotifers as the primary diet to summer flounder larvae is expected to continue • through day 15 (from hatching), at which time summer flounder larvae are expected to be ingesting approximately 300 rotifers per day, per larvae. Thereafter, the number of rotifers fed to developing summer flounder larvae will be gradually reduced with the food supply being augmented by Artemia sp. commonly known as brine shrimp. At day 15 (following hatching) brine shrimp will be introduced as a food supply to the developing summer flounder larvae. In order to • do so, brine shrimp must first be cultured in the hatchery. Brine shrimp will be cultured in 250 liter conical tanks constructed out of fiberglass or food grade plastic materials and having an 18 inch • diameter with a funnel base. As with the rotifer and algae tanks, • 1- 113 • • 1-114 0 brine shrimp tanks will be thoroughly scrubbed, rinsed and any t contaminants adhering to the tank surface will be leached therefrom. The culture of brine shrimp also takes place in a static environment although an air stone will be inserted to the bottom of • the tank to aid in vertical mixing. Brine shrimp may be purchased from a brine shrimp manufacturer • in the U.S.. The origin of most brine shrimp is from Great Salt Lake situate Utah. Brine shrimp is actually purchased in cyst form and the cysts will be hatched out in the proposed hatchery. • Arriving in cans or vials, brine shrimp cysts are purchased in volumetric quantities typically expressed in cubic centimeters. One cubic centimeter of brine shrimp cysts weighs 0.5 grams. One • gram of brine shrimp cysts produces 250,000 live brine shrimp. Thus, the resultant concentration of brine shrimp is 125,000 brine shrimp nauplii per cubic centimeter. Brine shrimp will be cultured • in the proposed hatchery at a concentration of 500,000 brine shrimp nauplii per liter of hatchery water. As with the proposed rotifer regime, the nutritional quality of brine shrimp will be • enriched with fatty acids. Utilizing the Selco Product Artemia Systems (TM) the fatty acid enrichment delivered in emulsion form will be added to the brine shrimp tanks at a concentration of 0.3 to i 0.6 grams per liter. The hatching of brine shrimp takes approximately 1 day but this culture process may be extended in 1-114 0 0 order to produce progressively larger brine shrimp to be fed to summer flounder larvae as they attain larger size. At the onset of the introduction of brine shrimp nauplii, each summer flounder larvae is expected to ingest 50 brine shrimp nauplii per day. At metamorphosis, expected to be complete within 60 days from hatching, each summer flounder is expected to be ingesting 300 brine shrimp nauplii per day. At the culture concentration disclosed above, one brine shrimp tank which • contains 250 liters will produce 125,000,000 brine shrimp nauplii, enough to feed 416,667 summer flounder larvae at day 60. 0 • s • 0 The Mariculture Technologies, Inc. proposal for the culture of summer flounder has been divided into six phases to be implemented over an extended period of time. As stated above, the culture of early larval stage summer flounder through metamorphosis involves the culture of algae, rotifers and brine shrimp. A compilation of these various components integrated with the production of early larvae are set forth in the Phase Outline Schedule for Early Larvae. The Phase Outline Schedule for Early Larvae envisions the production of 45,000 marketable summer flounder at the end of Phase I. However, the Phase Outlines for the subsequent ocean net pen grow -out provides for the direct purchase of fingerling summer flounder. The apparent 1-115 1-116 0 inconsistency arises out of an uncertainty as to when all required ! permits will have been secured in the overall regulatory process. Such a complicated regulatory process may delay implementation of the early phases of hatchery operations and so the direct purchase option is presented herein to address this logistical unknown. Even so, the Phase Outline Schedule for early larval rearing sets forth the capacity required for the rearing of early 0 summer flounder larvae including the culturing of algae, rotifers and Brine Shrimp. The assumptions set forth in the Phase Outline Schedule for early larval rearing pertaining to ingestion rates or 0 food requirements are previously addressed herein. These rates are directly related to the various production rates by phase in the Phase Outline Schedule. Given a relatively light stocking density of 0 10,000 pre -metamorphosed early larvae in relation to probable survivability, the number and size of all tanks for all aspects of early larval rearing are directly related to floor space required to support 4 these functions. The required facility area for Phase I is approximately 1000 square feet. However, the required floor area has been increased proportionately with the production levels of the summer flounder to be realized in subsequent phases. By the time the project enters Phase IV the stocking of 9,350,000 early larval summer flounder will be required in order to achieve the overall production of 1,100,000 market sized summer flounder. The Phase Outline Schedule for the rearing of early larvae through metamorphosis is attached hereto as Table 16. 40 1-116 0 w 0 ♦ • 6 a 0 0 • • • HARVEST YIELD NO. OF FISH PHASE (THOUSANDS) I 45 -------------------- II 150 -------------------- III 500 -------------------- IV 1100 -------------------- V 3000 -------------------- VI 5000 -------------------- (1) BASED ON 20% SUR' (2) BASED ON 10000/M' (3) 200,000 ROTIFERS (4) 1.15 TIMES ROTIF: TABLE 16. MARICULTURE TECHNOLOGIES PHASE OUTLINE SCHEDULE — SUMMER FLOUNDER 9350 ------------- 25600 ------------- 42800 ------------- JIVAL 3 2000 L TANKS (L + 50% BACK 'sR TANK — 250 936 2560 4280 JP X 7 DAYS 73500 --------------------- 201600 --------------------- 337000 --------------------- (5) BASED (6) NUMBEI (7) BASED 2000 1 84750 --------------- 232000 --------------- 387500 --------------- ON PRODUCTION 01 t OF 2000 AND 251 ON 3 SQ. FT. OF — 13 SQ. FT. — 3000 8250 13750 500 NADP: LITER TAI FLOOR AR& 250 L — 1 468/ 645 1280/ 1767 2140/ 2953 [LII /DAY/FI: 1KS k/SQ. FT. 01 .8 SQ. FT. 21700 ------------- 60000 ------------- 99400 ------------- iH — 250 L TAN TANK H A T C H E R Y F U N C T I O N S E A R L Y L A R V A E T O 60 D A Y S ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FOOD PRODUCTION STOCKING TANK ----------------------------------------------- ARTEMIA TOTAL # FACILITY NUMBER CAPACITY ROTIFER TANKS ALGAE TANKS TANKS OF TANKS AREA (THOUSANDS) M3 LITERS LITERS LITERS 2000 L/ 2000 L/ (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 250 L (6) (7) 19/ 375 38 3000 4500 --------------- 500 21 1000 ------------- ---------- --------------------- --------- ---------- 62/ ------------- 1250 124 9750 11250 500 86 2800 ------------- ---------- --------------------- --------------- --------- ---------- 212/ ------------- 4250 424 33500 38750 1500 295 9800 9350 ------------- 25600 ------------- 42800 ------------- JIVAL 3 2000 L TANKS (L + 50% BACK 'sR TANK — 250 936 2560 4280 JP X 7 DAYS 73500 --------------------- 201600 --------------------- 337000 --------------------- (5) BASED (6) NUMBEI (7) BASED 2000 1 84750 --------------- 232000 --------------- 387500 --------------- ON PRODUCTION 01 t OF 2000 AND 251 ON 3 SQ. FT. OF — 13 SQ. FT. — 3000 8250 13750 500 NADP: LITER TAI FLOOR AR& 250 L — 1 468/ 645 1280/ 1767 2140/ 2953 [LII /DAY/FI: 1KS k/SQ. FT. 01 .8 SQ. FT. 21700 ------------- 60000 ------------- 99400 ------------- iH — 250 L TAN TANK Step 3: The weaning of post metamorphosed summer flounder onto an artificial diet. Once the summer flounder develop through metamorphosis, perhaps the most critical stage in their physiological development, they will be transferred into weaning tanks. Each weaning tank will be circular, constructed out of fiberglass and double stacked. Each tank will be thoroughly scrubbed and rinsed and hatchery waters will be run through each tank for a period of two weeks in order to leach any contaminants associated with the weaning tanks and piping connected thereto. A constant depth of 0.25 meters will be maintained in the weaning tanks. A recirculation system will be employed in the growout of summer flounder through the weaning stage and flows through the weaning tanks will be adjusted to achieve 100% volumetric exchange every 2 hours. At the time of stocking, metamorphosed summer flounder are expected to weigh approximately 0.4 grams each. By the time the weaning process is complete, each summer flounder will be expected to weigh approximately 1 gram. The expected survival rate during this process is 80%. So, accounting for expected mortality, metamorphosed summer flounder will be stocked at rate • of 1440 summer flounder per square meter. Accordingly, the C-1 1- 118 11 • resulting stocking rate will be 1200 summer flounder per square w meter. • The specific nutrient contents of the proposed starter feed is proprietary. However, the gross proximate concentration of the starter feed is as follows: • • 1-119 0 As the metamorphosed summer flounder are stocked into the • weaning tanks, the primary food supply will be brine shrimp provided at a rate of 300 brine shrimp per summer flounder per day. At the same time, an artificial diet consisting of grain sized pellets • will be delivered to the tanks. Experimental flatfish hatcheries have for the most part utilized salmon starter as the initial artificial diet. However, great strides in the development of specialized feed for • specific cultured species have been made in recent years. For example, Moore -Clark Co. of Vancouver B.C., has developed a specialized starter feed for several marine species including turbot. • The starter feed features hydrolyzed fish protein, phospholipids and starch which are fortified with a variety of micro -nutrients such as vitamins and carotenoids. Importantly, no antibiotics will be incorporated into the starter feed as to preclude the undesirable long term effect of resistance. • The specific nutrient contents of the proposed starter feed is proprietary. However, the gross proximate concentration of the starter feed is as follows: • • 1-119 0 C: a • • • • W J • 0 Moisture 8-10% Protein 59-60% Fat 16% Ash 10% As stated above, the transition from brine shrimp to an artificial diet will take place gradually, but by the end of the weaning process, all summer flounder will be feeding exclusively on an artificial diet of the type proposed above. This process will be complete within 30 days of stocking or 90 days from hatching. The Mariculture Technologies, Inc. proposal for the culture of summer flounder has been divided into six phases to be implemented over an extended period of time. As stated above, the weaning of cultured summer flounder is expected to take over a period of 30 days. The operation involves weaning post metamorphosed summer flounder from a diet of brine shrimp to an artificial starter diet of feed pellets. The Phase Outline Schedule for weaning indicates a final stocking density of 1200 fish per 1M2. At Phase 1, 75,000 summer flounder are to be stocked in 63 1M2 tanks. During Phase IV, 1,870,000 summer flounder will be stocked in 1,560 1M2 tanks to ensure the production of 1,100,000 market size summer flounder. The floor space required for the weaning function is 630 ft2 and 16,000 feet2 for Phase I and Phase 1-120 • IV, respectively. It is again noted that the Phase Outline Schedules • for the subsequent ocean net pen grow -out provides for the direct purchase of fingerlings for the start up operation and the Phase I. The apparent inconsistency arises out of an uncertainty as to when • all required permits will have been secured in the overall regulatory process. Such a complicated regulatory process may delay implementation of the early phases of the hatchery and so the direct i purchase option is presented herein to address this logistical unknown. The Phase Outline Schedule for the weaning of post metamorphosed summer flounder onto an artificial diet is • attached hereto as Table 17. • U • • 7 1-121 LM -------------------- HARVEST YIELD NO. OF FISH PHASE (THOUSANDS) I 45 -------------------- 11 150 -------------------- III 500 -------------------- IV 1100 -------------------- V 3000 -------------------- VI 5000 -------------------- (1) BASED ON 80% SUR' (2) BASED ON 0.4 GRA] (3) BASED ON FINAL Ti (4) BASED ON EXCHANG] TABLE 17. MARICULTURE TECHNOLOGIES PHASE OUTLINE SCHEDULE — SUMMER FLOUNDER H A T C H E R Y F U N C T I O N S W E A N I N G 30 DAYS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- AREA OF STOCKING AVERAGE TANK WATER EFFLUENT ORGANIC FACILITY AREA NUMBER TOTAL M2 FLOW FLOW FEEDING WASTE (THOUSANDS) WEIGHT CU M/DAY CU M/DAY & TYPE LOADING SQ. FT. (1) K (2) (3) (4) (5) K/DAY (6) K/DAY (7) (8) 75 ------------- 38 ---------- 63 --------- ----------- 190 4 --------------- 4 --------- 4 --------- 630 -------------- 250 ------------- 125 ---------- 208 --------- ----------- 624 13 --------------- 13 --------- 7 --------- 2100 -------------- 850 ------------- 425 ---------- 708 --------- ----------- 2124 45 --------------- 42 --------- 11 --------- 7100 -------------- 1870 ------------- 935 ---------- 1560 --------- ----------- 4680 98 --------------- 94 --------- 24 --------- 16000 -------------- 5120 ------------- 2560 ---------- 4270 --------- ----------- 12810 267 --------------- 256 --------- 64 --------- 43000 -------------- 8560 4280 7130 21390 446 428 107 72000 fIVAL (5) EFFLUENT BASED ON 25% RECYCLED/DAY OF TANK VOLUME S TO 1 GRAM — AVERAGE 0.5 1 CU. M/DAY = 264 GAL/DAY kNK DENSITY OF 1200 FISH/M2 (6) AVERAGE 10% OF BODY WEIGHT (5 TO 25) 's EVERY 2 HRS. IN 0.25 M DEEP TANKS (7) 25% OF FEED (8) BASED ON 1 M2 TANK AREA/10 SQ. FT. (2 HIGH) • Step 4: The rearing of juvenile summer flounder. • Following completion of the weaning stage, summer flounder will be transferred into juvenile rearing tanks. The juvenile rearing i tanks are to be circular, of variable dimension and constructed out of fiberglass. Each tank will be filled to a depth of 0.25 meters which is more than adequate for rearing. Additionally, the juvenile rearing tanks will be stacked two high as to reasonably maximize the floor space area of the hatchery. Each tank will be thoroughly be scrubbed, rinsed and hatchery water will be run • through each tank for a period of two weeks as to remove any contaminants associated with the weaning tanks and piping connected thereto. 41 0 • • • Ell Juvenile summer flounder will be stocked at the rate of 550 fish per square meter. A 90% survival rate is expected thereby resulting in a final stocking rate of 500 fish per square meter. At the time of stocking, the average length of the summer flounder will be approximately 0.5 inches and also having an average weight of approximately one gram. As stated above, summer flounder will have been weaned onto an artificial diet by the time that they are stocked into the juvenile rearing tanks. However, the artificial starter diet will be 1- 123 gradually replaced by a commercial artificial grow out diet. The • selected commercial artificial grow out diet is based upon the Skretting turbot diet which has been used widely in Europe. Since its widespread use in Europe, other diets have been developed for other species. In the case of turbot farming, Moore -Clark Company of Vancouver B.C. began the refinement of the commonly used turbot diet for the expressed purposes of culturing Mahi-Mahi. The Moore -Clark Company reports that the refinements made to the original turbot diet have resulted in a 17% higher growth rate for Turbot (Greg Decon - Personal 40 Communication, 1995). Accordingly, what is now known as Mahi-Mahi Extruded Fish Feed is now preferred over the artificial fish feed commonly used in commercial culture of turbot and as now proposed, summer flounder. The ingredients for the Mahi-Mahi Extruded Fish Feed is as follows: fish meal, fish oil, wheat, cane molasses together with a vitamin premix containing Retinyl Acetate (A), Retinyl Palmitate A), Vitamin D3, dl-Alpha-Tocopheryl Acetate (E), Calcium D- Pantothenate, Riboflavin, Nicotinic Acid, Thiamine Mononitrate, Pyrodoxine Hydrochloride (B6), Vitamin B-12, D -Biotin, Folic Acid, Inositol, Ascorbyl Polyphoshonate (C), combined with a • mineral supplement containing Manganese Sulfate, zinc Sulfate, Calcium iodate, and Betaine. The guaranteed gross analysis of the commercial Mahi-Mahi Extruded Fish Feed is as follows: 1-124 0 J Crude Protein (minimum) 56.0% • Crude Fat (minimum) 14.0% Crude Fiber (maximum) 1.0% Calcium (actual) 2.4% • Phosphorus (actual) 1.7% Sodium (actual) 0.6% Vitamin A (minimum) 2500 IU/Kg s Vitamin D3 (minimum) 2400 IU/Kg Vitamin E (minimum) 100 IU/Kg • Initially, juvenile summer flounder will be fed at rate of 5% of fish biomass per day. Rapid growth is expected to result. • However, as the fish gain in size and weight, the amount of food required in terms of percent biomass to achieve maximum growth will be expected to decline. Accordingly, by the end of the juvenile w grow out period, summer flounder will have been fed at the rate of 4 % of the fish biomass per day. By the end of this stage, summer flounder are expected to be approximately two inches in length and • weighing, on average, approximately 10 grams. The juvenile grow out process is expected to take approximately 90 days. • The Mariculture Technologies, Inc. proposal for the culture of summer flounder has been divided into six phases to be implemented over an extended period of time. As stated above, 1- 125 • C7 • • F, • • • • 0 the grower diet will be gradually replaced by a commercial artificial grow out diet based upon the Skretting Turbot diet. The juvenile flounder will initially be fed at a rate of 5% body weight per day to stimulate rapid growth. However, as juvenile summer flounder attain greater size, the feeding rate will be gradually reduced to 4% of fish biomass. The rearing of juvenile summer flounder is expected to take approximately 90 days. The final stocking density is expected to be 500 fish per M2. During Phase I, 60,000 summer flounder are expected to be stocked in 120 IM2 tanks. During Phase IV, 1,500,000 summer flounder are expected to be stocked in 3,000 1M2 tanks. The space required during Phase I and IV is 1,200 feet2 and 30,000 feet2, respectively. The Phase Outline Schedule for the grow out of juvenile summer flounder is attached hereto as Table 18. 1-126 • R • 0 -------------------- IV 1100 -------------------- V 3000 -------------------- VI 5000 -------------------- (1) BASED ON 90% SUR' (2) BASED ON STOCKINI (3) BASED ON FINAL TA' (4) FLOW BASED ON 1 1 - 1 CU M/DAY = . 1500 15000 3000 9001 ------------- ---------- --------- --------- 4100 41000 8200 24601 6850 68500 13700 41101 fIVAL 3 SIZE 1/2" - 1 GR TO FINAL 20 GR - AV 10 GR kNK DENSITY OF 500 FISH/M2 EXCHANGE EVERY 2 HRS. IN .25 M DEEP TANKS 183 GPM --------------- 150 --------------- 410 --------------- 690 --------------- (5) EFFLUENT BAS] VOLUME (1 CU (6) DRY FEED AT (7) BASED ON 2.5 (8) BASED ON 1 M' 750 2000 3400 3D ON 20% 1 M/DAY = 21 i K/100 K 1 K/100 K 01 TANK ARE; 375 1000 1700 MCYCLED / Di 54 GAL/DAY )F FISH/DA ? FISH/DAY k/10 SQ. F' -------------- 30000 -------------- 82000 -------------- 137000 -------------- ,Y OF TANK I C (AVERAGE) (AVERAGE) C. (2 HIGH) TABLE 18. NARICULTURE TECHNOLOGIES PRASE OUTLINE SCHEDULE - SUMMER FLOUNDER H A T C H E R Y F U N C T I O N S J U V E N I L E 90 DAYS -------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- AREA OF ORGANIC HARVEST STARTING AVERAGE TANK WATER EFFLUENT FEEDING WASTE YIELD NUMBER TOTAL FLOW FLOW AVERAGE LOADING FACILITY AREA NO. OF FISH (THOUSANDS) WEIGHT M2 CU M/DAY CU M/DAY K/DAY AV.K/DAY SQ. FT. PHASE (THOUSANDS) (1) K (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) I -------------------- 45 60 ------------- 600 ---------- 120 --------- 360 ----------- 6 --------------- 30 --------- 15 --------- -------------- 1200 II 150 200 2000 400 1200 20 100 50 4000 III 500 680 6800 1360 4080 68 340 170 13600 -------------------- IV 1100 -------------------- V 3000 -------------------- VI 5000 -------------------- (1) BASED ON 90% SUR' (2) BASED ON STOCKINI (3) BASED ON FINAL TA' (4) FLOW BASED ON 1 1 - 1 CU M/DAY = . 1500 15000 3000 9001 ------------- ---------- --------- --------- 4100 41000 8200 24601 6850 68500 13700 41101 fIVAL 3 SIZE 1/2" - 1 GR TO FINAL 20 GR - AV 10 GR kNK DENSITY OF 500 FISH/M2 EXCHANGE EVERY 2 HRS. IN .25 M DEEP TANKS 183 GPM --------------- 150 --------------- 410 --------------- 690 --------------- (5) EFFLUENT BAS] VOLUME (1 CU (6) DRY FEED AT (7) BASED ON 2.5 (8) BASED ON 1 M' 750 2000 3400 3D ON 20% 1 M/DAY = 21 i K/100 K 1 K/100 K 01 TANK ARE; 375 1000 1700 MCYCLED / Di 54 GAL/DAY )F FISH/DA ? FISH/DAY k/10 SQ. F' -------------- 30000 -------------- 82000 -------------- 137000 -------------- ,Y OF TANK I C (AVERAGE) (AVERAGE) C. (2 HIGH) Irl • • • • • • C7 • • 0 Step 5: The rearingof fingerling summer flounder. After the summer flounder complete the juvenile rearing stage, a process estimated to take approximately 90 days, summer flounder will be transferred into fingerling rearing tanks. At the time of stocking, summer flounder will have been expected to have attained a length of approximately 2 inches with an average weight of 10 grams by this time. The fingerling rearing tanks are to be constructed out of fiberglass or similar material, circular and having a 3.5 meter diameter and filled to a depth of 0.25 meters which will be maintained by a stand pipe. Additionally, each tank will be stacked two high as to economize floor space within the proposed hatchery. Prior to stocking, each tank will be thoroughly scrubbed and rinsed and hatchery water will be run through the tanks in order to leach any contaminants associated with the tanks and piping attached thereto. The fingerling tanks will be stocked at rate of 55 fish per square meter. Accounting for the expected survival rate of 90%, the final density of stocked fingerlings will be 50 fish per square meter. A recirculation system will be employed in the fingerling tanks with a total volumetric exchange occurring once every 2 hours. Fingerling summer flounder will initially be fed at a rate of 4 Kg fish feed per 1- 128 • 100 Kg of fish per day, but this feeding rate will gradually be • reduced to 2 Kg of fish feed per 100 Kg of fish per day by the end of this process. • As previously stated herein, the source of water for the rearing of fingerlings and the other life stages to take place in the proposed hatchery, will be derived from on site salt water wells. The volume • of water needed for the rearing of fingerlings is a function of tank volume and percent recirculation. These volumes are to increase in proportion to the production levels associated with the six phases • of implementation proposed herein. With respect to the rearing of fingerlings, 20% of the volume of each fingerling tank per hour will undergo recirculation. The high exchange rate is intended to • preclude any significant accumulation of metabolites during this stage of growth. fingerling growth stage is expected to be complete within 6 to 8 months at which time the fingerlings are expected to attain a length of 12 inches along with a corresponding average weight of • approximately 0.5 Kg. At this point, fingerlings will be of sufficient size to stock into the proposed ocean net pens or in an upland growout facility. • • 1-129 0 • • r, u • C E C 11 PA 0 The Mariculture Technologies, Inc proposal for the culture of summer flounder has been divided into six phases to be implemented over an extended period of time. As stated above, the rearing of fingerling summer flounder is expected to take approximately six to eight months. Initially, the summer flounder will be fed at 4% of their weight per day. This amount will be gradually reduced to 2% per day. The final stocking density of fingerling summer flounder will be 56,000 fish in 800 1M2 tanks at Phase I and 1,350,000 fish in 27,000 1M2 tanks in Phase IV. The floor space required at Phase I and Phase VI is 8000 feet2 and 1,234,000 feet2 (tanks stacked 2 high) respectively. The Phase Outline Schedule for the rearing of fingerling summer flounder is presented in Table 19. 1- 130 -------------------- HARVEST YIELD NO. OF FISH PHASE (THOUSANDS) -------------------- I 45 -------------------- II 150 -------------------- III 500 -------------------- IV 1100 -------------------- V 3000 -------------------- VI 5000 -------------------- (1) BASED ON 90% SUR (2) BASED ON STOCKIN, 12" = FINAL 500 (3) BASED ON FINAL T (4) BASED ON EXCHANG TABLE 19. NARICULTURE TECHNOLOGIES PHASE OUTLINE SCHEDULE SUMMER FLOUNDER H A T C H E R Y F U N C T I O N S E EVERY 2 HRS. IN .25 M DEEP TANK F I N G E R L I N G 6 TO 8 MONTHS ---------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL AREA OF FEEDING ORGANIC STOCKING WEIGHT TANK WATER EFFLUENT & TYPE WASTE FACILITY AREA NUMBER (K) FLOW FLOW K/DAY LOADING (THOUSANDS) STOCK/ M2 CU M/DAY CU M/DAY STOCK/ K/DAY SQ. FT. (1) FINAL (2) (3) (4) (5) FINAL (6) STOCK/ (8) FINAL (7) --------- 400/ 140/ 80/ 56 8000 800 2400 40 400 --------- 200 -------------------- 8000 ------------- ---------- 3600 --------- ----------- --------------- 150/ 75/ 180 90000 3600 10880 180 1800 --------- 900 ----------------------- 36000 ------------- ---------- 12200/ --------- ----------- --------------- 480/ 240/ 610 305000 12250 36750 610 6100 --------- 3050 ----------------------- 122000 ------------- ---------- 27000/ --------- ----------- --------------- 1080/ 540/ 1350 675000 27000 81000 1350 --------------- 13500 --------- 6750 ----------------------- 270000 ------------- ---------- 74000/ --------- ----------- 3000/ 1500/ 3700 1850000 74000 222000 3700 37000 --------- 18500 ----------------------- 740000 ------------- ---------- 123400/ --------- ----------- --------------- 5000/ 2500/ 6170 3085000 123400 370200 6170 61700 30850 1234000 VIVAL (5) EFFLUENT BASED ON 20% RECIRCULATION OF TANK VOLUME s SIZE OF 2" — 20 GR TO (6) BASED ON 4 K/100 K OF FISH/DAY TO 2 K/100 ,R (7) BASED ON 2 K[100 K OF FISH/DAY TO 1 K/100/DAY (STOCK/FINAL) ANK DENSITY OF 50 FISH/M2 (8) BASED ON 1 MZ TANK AREA/10 SQ. FT. (2 HIGH) E EVERY 2 HRS. IN .25 M DEEP TANK • Step 6: The growout to marketable size fish in ocean net pens. • • The growout of summer flounder fingerlings to market size is to take place in ocean net pens. Mariculture Technologies, Inc has reached out to a variety of ocean net pen manufacturers for net pens. Three net pen manufacturers have been selected by • Mariculture Technologies, Inc. for the design, construction and deployment of the ocean net pens. They are: Net Systems, Inc. of Bainbridge Island, Washington; New Seafarm Systems, Inc. of Is Delta, Brittish Columbia, Canada; and Atlantic Aqua Cage Systems, Ltd. a division of the Armstrong Group of Pennfield, New Brunswick, Canada. These three companies were selected because the designs of the all respective net pens are assured to meet or exceed U.S. Coast Guard requirements, Lloyds of London Standards, American Bureau of Shipping Standards, A.S.T.M. Standards and OSHA Standards. • Startup and Phase I of net pen deployment are set forth in the Phase Outline Schedule: Grow Out Function, which provides for the • deployment of two net pens from each of the three net pen manufacturers. The purpose of these initial simultaneous net pen deployments is to evaluate the performance of each of the • 1- 132 0 IF, The first net pen type referred to in the Phase Outline Schedule as • Net System is manufactured by Net System, Incorporated ("Net System"). The Net System is the largest of the three net pen types being considered by Mariculture Technologies, Inc. The cross • sectional design of the net pen reveals a slight trapezoidal shape with the upper surface measuring 59 feet across and the bottom surface measuring 80 feet across. Accordingly, the Net System • provides for a surface area of 6400 square feet for the grow out of summer flounder (see Appendix F.). • 1- 133 0 respective net pen types with respect to weather conditions and related physical stress, the ease of servicing each net pen type and the success of the culture operations to take place therein. As set forth in the Phase Outline Schedule for the Grow Out Function, • the preliminary stage consisting deployment of two of each net pen types will be stocked with summer flounder at a reduced density of one fish per 27 square feet. This initial deployment will provide the • essential base line information in accordance with the performance evaluation criterion described above, irrespective of stocking density. Implementation of Phase 1 will provide the needed • replicate data with respect to the performance evaluation criterion also providing evaluation of the proposed stocking density of 2.2 fish per square feet which will remain constant as the project enters all subsequent phases. The first net pen type referred to in the Phase Outline Schedule as • Net System is manufactured by Net System, Incorporated ("Net System"). The Net System is the largest of the three net pen types being considered by Mariculture Technologies, Inc. The cross • sectional design of the net pen reveals a slight trapezoidal shape with the upper surface measuring 59 feet across and the bottom surface measuring 80 feet across. Accordingly, the Net System • provides for a surface area of 6400 square feet for the grow out of summer flounder (see Appendix F.). • 1- 133 0 • • • • • • r. • 0 Unlike the other two net pens under consideration, the Net System is the only net pen type that does not rely upon a super structure to maintain the spatial integrity of the net pen. Instead, Net System relies on tension rigging accomplished by an array of anchors, interconnecting lines including spar pennants and gridlines and buoys. Since the Net System is maintained by tension rigging, the bottom panel consisting of a double mesh system is stretched tightly thereby reducing the potential negative effects of heaving and billowing. The corners of the net pens are supported by spar buoys. The spar buoys are to be constructed out of steel. Both the inner and outer surfaces of the spar buoy are hot dipped galvanized to prevent corrosion. The buoys are designed and manufactured to distribute the loads from all attached rigging over a broad area. The buoys themselves are held in place by the rigging connecting the series of 10 foot screw anchors to the net pens. This rigging design results in a highly stable structure. As proposed, the Net System provides for the primary net to be suspended 15 feet below the surface thereby providing for an approximate 20 foot clearance between the bottom of the net pen and the ocean floor. Although not specified by the manufacturer, a knotless synthetic mesh of 1 inch will be used as the primary net. 1- 134 • The design for the Net System also provides for a predator control net of synthetic material which is assembled in a box configuration. Each panel is connected by a series of zippers. • Harvesting of the cultured summer flounder contained in the Net System is a relatively easy process. Essentially, the harvest vessel ties up along the side of a net pen and the bottom corners of the • net are attached to spar winches aboard the harvest vessel. The corners are then lifted by winch towards the surface thereby concentrating the fish contained therein which may be removed by • dip net or similar means. The net pens themselves can be maintained or repaired as needed. Top view, side view and other design and engineering plans and specifications for the Net Systems w net pens are attached hereto as Appendix F. The major benefits offered by Net System include reduced costs on • a square foot basis achieved by the larger size of the net pens themselves, reduced maintenance costs largely achieved by the lack of a super structure, easy deployment, servicing, maintenance • and harvest. The major disadvantages of the Net System includes the trapezoidal cross section and the resultant possibility that cultured summer founder may be trapped in the corners of the net • pens. The trapping of summer flounder in the net pen may lead to snout abrasion for the cultured summer flounder as well as the • 1- 135 • n C • reduced ability for summer flounder to locate and consume feed introduced into the net pen. Additionally, because the Net System is larger than the other alternative net pen types, the population of cultured summer flounder contained in each net pen will be larger thereby increasing the risk of disease outbreak. If the above stated performance criterion is achieved in superior • fashion, 1 I individual Net System net pens will be deployed as the project enters Phase II. A schematic diagram of Net Systems showing a typical net pen arrangement and the build -out of these • net pens with respect to the various phases are set forth in the Phase Outline Schedule - Grow Out is attached hereto as Appendix F. • The second net pen type referred to in the Phase Outline Schedule as Sea Farms is manufactured by New Seafarm Systems, Ltd. This • is the smallest of the three net pen types containing approximately 2500 square feet bottom area each. The reduced size of the Sea Fane Net Pen is expected have certain benefits over the other two • net pen designs in terms of easier management of cultured summer flounder, more efficient feed delivery, reduced potential of disease outbreak as the population of summer flounder is less per net pen • and easier servicing of the primary nets attached thereto. • 1- 136 0 • The New Seafarm Net Pens are essentially square in shape. • However, the corners of each pen are rounded as to preclude the undesirable effects expected to be realized in the case where summer flounder swim into the corners. That is, rounding of the • corners will prevent summer flounder from otherwise being trapped in the corners resulting in excessive snout abrasion and perhaps also, the inability of cultured summer flounder to locate the feed • pellets introduced into the net pens. The New Seafarm Net Pens also feature a tension frame installed along the bottom of the net pen designed to preclude the undesirable effect of heaving and • billowing which otherwise could have physiological implications on the cultured summer flounder contained therein. • The New Seafarm Net Pens also feature a super -structure consisting of 7 foot wide decks, 18 foot wide turn-arounds and railings all constructed out of 6061-T6 marine grade aluminum. • Buoyancy is achieved by deployment of polyethethylene floats seven feet high and four feet wide in sets of four at each corner of the net pens below the turn-arounds. Net pens are held in place by • an array of polypropylene rope having a break strain of 50,000 pounds which is attached to anchor chain rated at 58,000 pound break strain extended from the outer portion of the turn -around to • the ocean floor. Screw type anchors of approximately 10 feet in length are proposed. Primary nets constructed out of knotless • 1- 137 0 • C • • 0 If the above stated performance criterion is achieved in superior fashion, the New Seafarm net pens will consist of three clusters of 10 net pens as the project enters Phase II. The resulting net pen cluster is expected to greatly increase the stability of each pen in terms of anchorage and reduced sway. Furthermore, far greater 1- 138 polypropylene or similar synthetic material having a 1 inch stretch • mesh will be attached in panels along the inside of the superstructure and extended 20 feet below the bottom of the superstructure. Additionally, a predator control net also • constructed out of polypropylene or similar synthetic material having a stretch mesh of 2 to 3 inches will be suspended 24 feet from the bottom of the superstructure. Concrete weights will • serve to anchor the predator control net. Because the primary nets are to be attached to the inner side of the superstructure and the predator control nets are to be attached to the outer side of the • super structure, the distance of separation between the primary nets and predator control nets is approximately 7 feet. However, the separation distance will vary in accordance with current velocity. • Finally, a second predator control net of similar specifications will be stretched across the top of the net pen to prevent predation upon the cultured summer flounder from diving avians. Top view, side • view and other design plans for the New Seafarm net pens are attached hereto as Appendix G. C • • 0 If the above stated performance criterion is achieved in superior fashion, the New Seafarm net pens will consist of three clusters of 10 net pens as the project enters Phase II. The resulting net pen cluster is expected to greatly increase the stability of each pen in terms of anchorage and reduced sway. Furthermore, far greater 1- 138 L efficiency in servicing of the net pen clusters over single net pens • are expected to be achieved due to the proximity of each respective net pen. A schematic diagram of the New Seafarm net pens showing the net pen clusters and the build -out of these clusters • with respect to the various phases set forth in the Phase Outline Schedule - Grow Out is attached hereto as Appendix G. • The third net pen type referred to in the Phase Outline Schedule - Grow Out as "Atlantic" is manufactured by Atlantic Aqua Cage Ltd. ("Atlantic Cage"). The Atlantic Cage is synonymous with the Armstrong Ground Fish Cage. Representatives of Atlantic Aqua Cage, Ltd. report that a total of 225 Atlantic Cages are in operation • today. The Atlantic Cage is a 23 meter octagonal cage which provides for • a 4,400 square foot bottom surface. Accordingly, the size of the Atlantic Cages are intermediate between the New Seafarm net pens and the Net System net pens. The octagonal shape of the Atlantic • Cage has similar advantages to the New Seafarm net pens in that 90 degree corners are avoided thereby minimizing negative effects to the cultured summer flounder including snout abrasion and the • possible difficulty of summer flounder locating feed pellets • 1- 139 0 • introduced into the net pens. The bottom of the Atlantic Cage net • pen consists of a treated metal mesh designed to reduce or preclude the effects of heaving and billowing. • Like the New Seafarm Net Pen, the Atlantic AquaCage contains a super structure manufactured out of coated steel. The steel is coated with zinc primer (Carbolise 858 or equivalent) to a • thickness of 3 mils once dry. A top coat of cross-linked epoxy (Carbolise 890 or equivalent) is applied onto the primer coat to a thickness of 5 mils once dry. Together, these applications provide • for a coating of 8 mils thickness dry, assured to be sufficient in thwarting excessive corrosion of the underlying steel. The superstructure features a 1.5 meter wide walk way constructed • around the perimeter of the net pen fastened together by a series of vertex joints specially design for this application. Buoyancy is achieved through cylindrical, air filled perimeter piping. Net pens i are held in place by an array of 1" galvanized rope attached to 1.5" open link galvanized chain. Anchorage is achieved by connection of the galvanized rope and chain to each corner of the octagonal • super structure with a series of Danforth type or granite block anchors weighing 2800 to 4000 lbs., each. The weight of each cage is approximately 50,000 lbs. • • 1-140 0 • A primary net is attached to the inner surface of the super structure extending down twenty feet below the surface of the water. Even though the net pen bottom is designed to provide a clearance of 5 feet from the ocean floor, clearance will actually range from 10 to • 15 feet in this application. The primary net is to be constructed out of knotless polypropylene of similar synthetic material having a stretch mesh of 1.25 inches. Additionally, a predator control net • also constructed out of polypropylene or similar synthetic material having a stretch mesh of 2 to 3 inches will be extended from the outer surface of the superstructure. Because of the width of the perimeter walk way, separation between the primary net and predator control net is approximately 1.5 meters. However, separation distance will vary in accordance with current velocity. • Finally, a second predator control net of similar specifications will be stretched across the top of the net pen to prevent predation upon the cultured summer flounder from diving avians. Top view, side • view and other design plans for the Atlantic AquaCage net pens are attached hereto as Appendix H. • If the above stated performance criterion is achieved in superior fashion, the Atlantic Cage will consist of one cluster of 8 net pens plus one cluster of four net pens and one single net pen as the • project enters Phase II. Obviously, the in -water predator control nets would only be attached to the outer surfaces of each net pen • 1-141 0 0 adjacent to open water. The resulting net pen clusters are expected to greatly increase the stability of each net pen in terms of anchorage and reduced sway. Furthermore, far greater efficiency is expected over singular net pens due to their proximity. A schematic diagram of the Atlantic AquaCage net pen cluster and the build -out of these clusters with respect to the various phases set forth in the Phase Outline Schedule - Growout is attached hereto as 0 Appendix H. • 1-142 9 Initial deployment of each of the three net pen types constitutes a test with respect to the above stated performance criterion. Mariculture Technologies, Inc. will select the net pen type judged superior in design for the implementation of Phases II through VI. By the time the proposed project enters Phase II, all summer flounder to be stocked in ocean net pens will have been raised from egg to fingerling in the proposed hatchery. Fingerlings are to be stocked in the ocean net pens at a density of 2.2 fish per square foot or 25 fish per square meter. The stocking density is considered light in comparison to stocking densities adopted in the commercial mariculture of turbot in Europe. Even so, 10% mortality is expected to occur within the ocean net pens. Accordingly, by the time summer flounder have achieved marketable size, their densities i will have decreased to approximately 2 fish per square foot or 22 fish per square meter. • 1-142 9 As presently, proposed, the Mahi-Mahi Extruded diet has been 0 selected as the preferred food pellet for summer flounder based upon its success in the commercial culture of turbot. Feed pellets will be delivered at a rate of 2% fish body weight per day 0 throughout the net pen culture operation. The resulting feeding rate and generation of organic waste is set forth in the Phase Outline Schedule for the Grow Out Function. The Phase Outline 45 Schedule for the Grow Out Function relies on an average fish weight of 0.75 kg in predicting feeding rate and organic waste loading. This means that the actual feeding rate and organic waste loading for the summer flounder fingerlings is over-estimated at the time of stocking while underestimated at the time of harvest. Yet at the same time, the assumptions contained in the Phase 41 Outline Schedule for the Grow Out Function provides for a rational evaluation of the quantities of feed required over the entire grow out function and the resulting organic loading the environmental effects for which are evaluated herein under Significant Environmental Impacts. The Phase Outline Schedule for the Grow Out Function sets forth all such culture specifications and expected loadings over all proposed phases. This Phase Outline Schedule assumes a survival rate of 90% reflecting the general heartiness of Age Class 1 Summer Flounder. At the time of stocking, summer flounder are a 1- 143 0 expected to weigh approximately 500 grams. At the time of harvesting, summer flounder are expected to weigh approximately 1 kilogram (2.2 lbs.), a market sized fish. As stated above, the grow out function is expected to take approximately 6 months. At start up, a total of 1000 summer flounder will be stocked among the various net pen types. Thereafter, stocking densities will be increased to 2.2 fish per square foot and this stocking density will remain constant throughout all subsequent phases of implementation. Accordingly, at Phase VI, a total of 5,550,000 summer flounder will be stocked in one of the three net pen types. The Phase Outline Schedule for the Ocean Net Pen Grow Out is presented in Table 20. • 0 a 1-144 0 0 • • r i a a a • N • TABLE 20. KARICULTURE TECHNOLOGIES PHASE OUTLINE SCHEDULE - SUMMER FLOUNDER GROW OUT FUNCTION -------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0 P E N W A T E R 6 MONTHS HARVEST STOCKING AVERAGE FEEDING ORGANIC TOTAL YIELD NUMBER TOTAL SQ. FT. M2 AVERAGE WASTE NO. OF PENS NO. OF FISH (THOUSANDS) WEIGHT OF PENS OF PENS K/DAY AV K/DAY 6400 SQ FT 2500 S.F. 4400 S.F PHASE (THOUSANDS) (1) (K) (2) THOUSANDS (3) (4) (5) NET SYSTEM SEA FARMS ATLANTIC START UP -------------------- 1 ------------- ---------- 2.5 --------- 40 -------------------- -- -- --------- 2 ---------- AND 2 AND 2 ------------------ I -------------------- 45 50 ------------- 37500 ---------- 22.5 --------- 2100 -------------------- 750 375 --------- 2 ---------- AND 2 AND 2 ------------------ II -------------------- 150 160 ------------- 120000 ---------- 75 --------- 7000 -------------------- 2400 1200 --------- 11 ---------- OR 30 OR 13 ----------------- III -------------------- 500 550 ------------- 412500 ---------- 225 --------- 21000 -------------------- 8250 4100 --------- 35 ---------- OR 90 OR 40 ------------------ IV -------------------- 1100 1220 ------------- 915000 ---------- 550 --------- 51200 -------------------- 18300 9200 --------- 86 ---------- OR 220 OR 98 ---------- -------- V -------------------- 3000 3330 ------------- 2498000 ---------- 1500 --------- 135500 -------------------- 50000 25000 --------- 234 ---------- OR 600 OR 260 ---------- -------- VI 5000 5550 4162000 2500 --------- 232500 ---------- ---------- 83200 42000 -------------------- 390 OR 1000 OR 430 I ---------- I -------- (1) BASED ON 90% SURVIVAL (4) MOIST FEED AT 2 K/100 K OF FISH/DAY (AVERAGE) (2) BASED ON STOCKING WEIGHT OF 500 GR TO FINAL WEIGHT (5) BASED ON 1.0 K/100 K OF FISH/DAY (AVERAGE) OF 1000 GR - AVERAGE 750 GR (3) STOCKING DENSITY APPROXIMATELY 25 FISH PER M2 (2.2/S.F.) 0 Step 7: Processing • The processing of cultured summer flounder is to take place at the existing Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Plant in the Village of Greenport. It is important to note that all processing done by Mariculture Technologies, Inc. will follow strict guidelines set forth by the USDA and the National Marine Fisheries Service's Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point Program ("HAACP"). The Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Plant will undergo inspections and records will be maintained as required under HAACP regulations. The HAACP program represents the highest quality control standards for fish processing in existence in the U.S. today. A complete list of HAACP requirements for fish processing are contained in Appendix J. • Harvested summer flounder will be hoisted from the ocean net pens into live wells aboard the Aqua Truck Type Vessel and transported to the processing plant where off loading will occur. Fifty percent of all fish harvested will be directly sold as live whole fish. Accordingly, only half of the harvested fish will undergo processing. The harvesting and subsequent processing of summer 0 1-146 0 i flounder will occur over a 60 day period for Phases I through III. i Due to the increased production of summer flounder occurring in Phases IV through VI, the harvest/processing time is extended to 80 days. Half of the harvested fish will go into the processing facility and be • filleted by hand. The fillet accounts for approximately 44% of the whole fish by weight. A second 44% of the whole fish by weight will be processed into fish block utilizing a Paoli (TM) Processing • Device (See Appendix K.) manufactured by Stephen Paoli International Corporation. Fish block is manufactured through the Paoli Processing Device by taking the usable remaining portions of the filleted summer flounder. Essentially, the filleted, eviscerated summer flounder are fed into the Paoli Processing Device whereby the summer flounder carcass is ground and the resultant bones are separated leaving a ground fish product known as fish block. The • fish block is edible and marketed as such. Fish block accounts for a second 44% of the harvested summer flounder by weight. This means that 88% of whole fish by weight is processed as food product. • 0 1-147 G The remaining 12% of the summer flounder undergoes processing 40 by a second Paoli Processing Device reserved for non-food purposes. Essentially, the head portion and viscera of the summer flounder are combined with the bony portion of the summer flounder (remaining after the production of fish block) and sold as fertilizer and chum logs. U • 4b • • 0 • 0 The water used in the processing operation, including that from wash down and cleaning of the processing equipment, will be filtered or settled to remove solids. This is necessary to meet waste effluent criteria as to not exceed 300 mg/L of either BOD or suspended solids. The solids removed by this process constitutes less than 1 % by weight of the processed summer flounder. These solids will be transported to an appropriate waste disposal facility. The residual water is discarded with ordinary sewage leaving the plant which will subsequently undergo sewage treatment at the Village of Greenport Sewage Treatment Plant. Accordingly, the disposal of this residual water will not cause processing difficulties at the Village of Greenport Sewage Treatment Plant. The quantities of both usable and unusable portions of the harvested summer flounder are set forth in the Phase Outline 1- 148 a [-1 9 46 • 1-149 0 Schedule, Fish Processing tables which follow. The Phase Outline 4W Schedule, Fish Processing Tables assumes a harvestable fish to weigh two pounds. The breakdown of pounds of the various usable and non -usable fish products are based upon percentage weight of 16> the harvested whole fish as set forth above. The Phase Outline Schedule, Fish Processing tables also set forth the cold storage and ! freezer requirements. The cold storage facility to be housed within the Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Plant has been sized to accommodate four times the amount of summer flounder processed • on a daily basis. The freezer space required has been estimated based upon 30 lbs. processed summer flounder per square foot of w freezer storage. The Phase Outline Schedule for the fish processing operation is attached hereto as Table 21. [-1 9 46 • 1-149 0 s • ca . 0 • • 0 • 0 s TABLE 21. NARICULTURE TECHNOLOGIES PHASE OUTLINE SCHEDULE - SUMMER FLOUNDER F I S H P R O C E S S I N G F U N C T I O N -------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FOOD PRODUCT - THOUSAND POUNDS WASTE PRODUCT PLANT HARVEST HARVEST (2) POUNDS/DAY (3) PROCESS PROCESS AREA YIELD (THOUSAND -------------------------------- --------------------- #/DAY SQ. FT. NO. OF FISH POUNDS) FISH FERTILIZER/ UNUSABLE THOUSAND PHASE (THOUSANDS) (1) WHOLE FILLET BLOCK CHUM LOGS WASTE POUNDS/ (7) 100% 44% 44% (4) (5) PROCESSOR(6) I -------------------- 45 ------------- 90 45 ---------- 20 --------- 20 ----------------------- 75/23 2 -------- 0.75/1 --------------------------- 500 II -------------------- 150 ------------- 300 150 ---------- 66 --------- 66 ----------------------- 225/69 6 -------- 2.5/2 ------------ --------------- 500 III -------------------- 500 ------------- 1000 500 ---------- 220 --------- 220 ----------------------- 825/253 22 -------- 8.4/12 --------------------------- 500 IV -------------------- 1100 ------------- 2200 1100 ---------- 484 --------- 484 ----------------------- 1275/391 34 -------- 14/20 --------------------------- 840 V -------------------- 3000 ------------- 6000 3000 ---------- 1320 --------- 1320 ----------------------- 3375/1035 90 -------- 38/52 --------------------------- 2200 VI 5000 10000 5000 2200 2200 5625/1725 150 63/86 3600 1. 2 LB/FISH 4. 75% AND 23% OF THE TOTAL WASTE PRODUCT (USABLE) 2. 44% FILLET AND 44% FISH BLOCK S. 2% OF THE TOTAL WASTE PRODUCT TRANSPORTED TO A WASTE 3. 12% OF TOTAL FISH PRODUCT PLUS ALL DEAD FISH PROCESSING FACILITY (UNUSABLE) (MORTS) FROM HATCHERY AND GROW OUT FUNCTIONS 6. BASED ON 50% OF HARVEST IN 60 DAYS. PHASE IV TO VI IN 80 DAY 7. BASED ON 42 SQ. FT./PROCESS PERSON AND 730 LB/DAY/PERSON --------------------- -------------------- HARVEST YIELD NO. OF FISH PHASE (THOUSANDS) I -------------------- 45 II -------------------- 150 III -------------------- 500 IV -------------------- 1100 V -------------------- 3000 VI -------------------- 5000 TABLE 21. (CONTINUED) NARICULTURE TECHNOLOGIES PHASE OUTLINE SCHEDULE - SUNNER FLOUNDER F I S H ------------------------- COLD STORAGE ------------------------ THOUSAND SQ. FT. (POUNDS) (7) (8) 5.4 160 15 500 ------------- --------- 50 1500 ------------- ------- 55 1650 ------------- --------- 96 2880 160 4800 -------------------- ------------- I ------- 7. FOUR TIMES THE DAILY PROCESS. 8. BASED ON 30 LBS./SQ. FT. 9. BASED ON 30 LBS./SQ. FT. 10. BASED ON 0.4 GAL/LB. OF FISH PROCESSED P R O C FREEZER STORAGE SQ. FT. (9) 160 500 1500 1650 2880 4800 E S S I N Q POTABLE WATER THOUSAND G.P.D. (10) 0.3 1.0 3.4 5.6 15.2 25.2 F U N C 7 THOUSAND G.P.D. (11) 0.4 1.3 4.2 7.0 19.0 31.5 I O N (COr ------------ EFFLUENT ------------ BOD LB/DAY (12) 5.5 17.5 59.0 98.1 266.2 441 ----------- I ---------- I ---------- I ------------ 11. BASED ON 0.5 GAL/LB. OF FISH PROCESSED 12. BASED ON 200 TO 1000 MG/L AV. 600 13. BASED ON 100 TO 800 MG/L AV. 500 14. BASED ON 15 DAY STORAGE - 350 LBS/SQ. FT. --------------- FEED STORAGE THOUSAND LBS./ SQ. FT. (14) --------------- 25/72 --------------- 180/520 --------------- 275/800 --------------- 604/1800 --------------- 1650/4800 --------------- 2800/8000 3. FEED REQUIREMENTS At the start up, stocking of the deployed net pens is expected to occur in May 1995. The amount of feed required is as follows: May 1995 500 kg/day R' June 625 kg/day July 750 kg/day August 875 kg/day September 1000 kg/day October <1000 kg/day November <500 kg/day • The monthly pounds of feed required at maximum production (Phase VI) are as follows: V May 1999 41,600 kg/day June 62,400 kg/day ft July 83,200 kg/day August 104,000 kg/day September 124,800 kg/day W 1- 152 • 0 C� W r 0 • • 0 October <124,800 kg/day November <62,400 kg/day December <10,000 kg/day In October of all Phases, harvest of the summer flounder will begin. The amount off feed will be reduced proportionately as the summer flounder are harvested. When harvesting is completed, no feed will be required at the net pen site until the following April or May. 4. BROODSTOCK SELECTION AND TESTING Five levels of brood stock testing are proposed as part of the overall hatchery operation. They are: (1) selection of wild stock by size to insure proper representation of males and females in initial brood stock hatchery population; (2) evaluation of adaptation of wild stock to the tank environment; (3) evaluation of reproductive efficacy of selected brood stock by tagging; (4) evaluation of ripening by direct measurement of egg size; and (5) the long term selection of brood stock from summer flounder already accustomed to the culture environment. 1-153 With respect to selection of wild stock by size, as previously i described herein, initially, twenty adult summer flounder, ten of length ranging from 21 to 35 cm TL and ten summer flounder of length greater than 45 cm TL will be captured from the wild and • held for breeding purposes. The selected lengths are derived from the known life history parameters of the summer flounder intended r to ensure ample quantities of both male and female summer 0 flounder. The subsequent evaluation of adaptation of wild stock to the tank environmental is accomplished by direct observation of adult • summer flounder in the brood stock tanks. The most obvious selection criterion is the ability for brood stock to survive in the brood stock tanks. However, other behavioral criterion will be simultaneously applied. These additional criterion relate to feeding behavior, any evidence of territorial behavior as well as evidence of ripening. As stated previously herein, Mariculture Technologies, Inc. intends to purchase wild summer flounder as early on in the reproductive season as possible. The early capture of summer 1 flounder will enable early evaluation of the ability of summer flounder to adapt to the tank environment. • 1-154 G As previously, stated herein, each of the captured wild stock will be S tagged. The purpose of such tagging is to provide easy identification of male and female summer flounder thereby tracking the reproductive efficacy of the brood stock. The tagging of broodstock will continue throughout all proposed phases of implementation. The evaluation of ripening of summer flounder is to be accomplished by direct sampling of eggs contained in female summer flounders. Eggs will be drawn from the female summer flounder by catheter or similar device and when these eggs approach 1.03 mm in diameter, spawning will be considered • immanent. Finally, Mariculture Technologies, Inc. intends to implement the traditionally accepted practice of selective breeding. Over time, the initial wild stock will be replaced by subsequent generations of cultured summer flounder already known to be adapted to the culture environment. Evaluation of broodstock will focus on the • qualities of better growth and all around heartiness. Importantly, no direct gene manipulation is proposed. a I-155 0 5. DISPOSAL OF UNSUITABLE MATERIALS i Materials of concern include fish feces, uneaten feed, and dead fish from both the hatchery and the net pen grow out site, as well as the unusable waste from the processing facility. As previously stated, all dead fish from the hatchery and the grow * out site will be taken to the Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Plant on a daily basis. These dead fish will be processed through a Paoli Processing Device (See Appendix K.) reserved for only non food related processing. The product of this processing is expected to be separated into the following products: • Fertilizer 75% Chum Logs 23% • Unusable Waste 2% The unusable portion of the waste constitutes materials that • are washed off in the cleaning of the processing equipment. These materials will be filtered or settled to remove the majority of the solids. This is necessary to meet waste effluent criteria as not i to exceed 300 mg/L of either BOD or suspended solids. The solids removed by this process will be combined with the AD 1-156 0 unusable waste generated by the processing of the marketable ! summer flounder and transported to an appropriate waste disposal facility. The unusable waste generated by the processing of the marketable summer flounder and morts constitutes 2 % of the total waste product. The residual water is discarded with ordinary sewage leaving the plant which will subsequently undergo sewage treatment at the Village of Greenport Sewage Treatment Plant. Accordingly, the • disposal of this residual water will not cause processing difficulties at the Village of Greenport Sewage Treatment Plant. • 0 1 • i • Fish waste and uneaten food in the hatchery waters will be collected as settleable solids through a centrifuge process. The thickened solids will be directed to a sludge holding tank for storage prior to transport to an appropriate disposal facility. At the proposed grow out site, fish waste and unconsumed feed is expected to exit the net pens as the fish are fed and excrete waste. There is no technology available to collect these wastes. However, the growout site experiences high velocity current 1- 157 prevalent throughout the area. It is expected that these currents • will promote wide dispersal over several square miles thereby precluding any deleterious effect these materials may have. 0 6. WET VERSES DRY FEED • A moist sinking pellet is proposed as the preferred food for the net pen culture of summer flounder. The moisture content of Moore Clarks Extruded Mahi Mahi diet is 7 to 8%. Additionally, these • food pellets will sink at a rate of approximately one meter in ten seconds. r 7. DISPOSAL OF FISH PROCESSING WASTE w The methods by which culture summer flounder are to be processed was applied to the disposal of fish processing waste as set forth above. Essentially, disposal of fish processing waste is limited to approximately 2% of the processed summer flounder consisting mainly of blood and perhaps some scales which are collected in the daily cleaning operations (hosing) of the processing plant. These materials will be collected and disposed of at an appropriate waste disposal facility. • 1- 158 • 0 In addition to the processing waste, the dead fish "morts" from both the hatchery and the grow -out site will be collected on a daily basis, transported to the processing plant and processed in the same manner as the processing waste using the second Paoli Processing • Device reserved for non food purposes. The quantities of same are included in the Phase Outline Schedule as the difference between i the numbers and weights of fish stocked versus that which is removed for each phase and function. (See the Phase Outline Schedules.) A summary of the projected fish waste by phase and • function, along with its disposition, is included in the following Table 22. • • TABLE 22. FISH WASTE PROCESSING FISH WASTE/DAY (1)LB/DAY PHASE TOTAL FERTILIZER FROZEN CHUM UNUSABLE LOGS WASTE 1- 159 0 I 100 75 23 2 II 300 225 69 6 III 1100 825 253 22 IV 1700 1275 391 34 • V 4500 3375 1035 90 VI 7500 5625 1725 150 (1) ASSUMES THAT PORTIONS OF FINGERLING AND GROW OUT • COULD OCCUR SIMULTANEOUSLY AND THAT THE JUVENILE AND PROCESSING PHASES COULD OCCUR SIMULTANEOUSLY. 1- 159 0 Because none of the morts will be processed into edible food 40 product, there are no public health concerns related to its disposal. 8. DISASTER RESPONSE AND NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE It is difficult to predict the complete listing of all of the emergencies or disasters that might occur. The most potential ones would • include the following: o Major Loss of Fish at the Grow -Out Site. • o Hurricane or severe storm that damages the net pens including the aids to navigation. o Loss or collision of vessels due to mechanical breakdown, • storms, or weather conditions. o Entrapment of seals or sea turtles in the net pens • o Personnel injury. To provide for a disaster response and notification procedure for the above potential incidents, a disaster response plan will be prepared to include a list of agencies and individuals by title to be notified. These plans will be updated on an annual basis or as may be required pursuant to permit conditions. These plans, in booklet form, will be maintained on each of the vessels and be provided to [1 1-160 0 11 • 1-161 0 the New York State D.E.C. Emergency Office, as well as to the • Southold Town Police. The principal disaster response initiator person would be the Operations Manager or his designated alternate, one of which would always be available by telephone. For a major loss of fish or problems at the grow out site, the principal organization to be notified will be New York State D.E.C. In the case of sea turtles or seals becoming caught in the net pens, Okeanos Ocean Research Foundation will be notified through the DEC or the Southold Town Police which will provide for • immediate response. For the other type disaster response involving personal injury, damage to facilities, vessels, and so forth, the 0 principal contact will be the Southold Town Police, which can be notified from the vessel on Channel 16, or by telephone at 911, or 765-2600. They in turn would act as a coordinator to notify other • agencies such as the United States Coast Guard, local Fire Department, Corps of Engineers, U.S.D.A. at Plum Island, and the 106th Air Sea Rescue, as examples. In all of these cases it is expected that the Operations Manager, or his alternate, will provide on -scene assistance and coordination. i • 1-161 0 • • CM :7 • • F. BASELINE FIELD SURVEY The baseline field survey presented herein represents the specific characterization of the proposed growout site. The baseline field survey is comprised of six distinct components, including: o Diver Survey o Hydrography o Water Quality o Benthic Analysis o Infaunal Analysis a. DIVER SURVEY A dive study was conducted on September 7th, 8th and 9th • within and beyond the area designated for the proposed net pen system. Atmospheric conditions during the survey period were uniformly sunny days with a southwesterly wind at 10-15 mph. Sea conditions ranged from flat clam seas to seas with maximum wave heights of 2 feet. Diving activities began at approximately 0800 hours each morning and were terminated at approximately 1600 • hours each afternoon. Dive time did not include dock side 7 1-162 7 • preparation and breakdown. The location of the transect ran from 0 (72° 1 P08" Longitude, 41' 09'56" Latitude) to a position of (721 09' 54" Longitude, and 41 ° 1 P 10" Latitude). The water depth averaged approximately 35 feet. The total length of this transect (repeated several times) was 1.8 miles. The transect was located using a Magellan (TM) Differential GPS System located aboard EEA's 25 foot research vessel. The divers were equipped with a Sony (TM) Model, 101 Video Camera enclosed in a Amphibico (TM) water tight housing unit. Videos were taken both with and without a halogen light. To help aid in the movement of divers along the transect, each diver was equipped with an underwater scuba scooter powered by an underwater battery. Dives were conducted at all tidal stages. Unfortunately, visibility was poor during all times of the dive and at all stages of the tidal cycle. In fact, visibility ranged from a minimum of 6 inches to a maximum of 3 feet. The best visibility was encountered during high slack water. The poor visibility was attributed to a cloud of suspended sediments and other flocculants. Attempts to • photograph the bottom proved unsuccessful. Thereafter, NYSDEC was informed of this problem and agreed that submission of photographic data would not contribute to the informational base of • bottom lands beneath the site. Accordingly, NYSDEC waved this requirement. • 1- 163 • • Nevertheless, direct observation revealed the bottom to be uniformly flat and sandy with a fine sediment layer of approximately 2-10 centimeters thick suspended above the ocean floor. Approximately 8-10 erratic boulders 3 to 6 feet in diameter were encountered in the three days of diving activity. Additionally, areas of sand waves were encountered along the transect. Attempts to collect core samples for the expressed purposes of • determining the discontinuity layer proved unsuccessful due to the highly unstable and uncompacted sand stratum observed throughout the transect. That is, the highly liquefied sediments • could not be contained within the coring apparatus. The biota observed was minimal. The most prevalent organisms • observed were the flat -clawed hermit crab (Pagurus pollicaris) for which 20 to 30 individuals were positively identified along this 1.8 mile transect. The most common finfish observed was the sea robin • :7 CJ 0 (Prionotus sp.). All observed sea robins were identified to be juveniles ranging from 3 to 4 inches TL. Due to their small size and the limited visibility of the site, the observed sea robins could not be identified to the species level. In addition, the following species were observed in numbers not exceeding two (total throughout the transect): 1-164 [] • 0 Channel Whelk Knobbed Whelk Little Skate Winter Flounder Windowpane Flounder Busycon canaliculatum Busycon carica Raja erinacea Pleuronectes americanus Scophthalmus aguosus The erratic boulders were covered with encrusting organisms * including barnacles, hydroids and sponges. Additionally, the marine algae, Irish Moss (Chondrus crispus) and common kelp (Laminaria agardhii) were observed attached to the erratic 0 boulders. • 0 0 The chemosynthetic bacterium Beggiatoa sp. commonly found on sediments devoid of oxygen were not present at the proposed net pen site. b. HYDROGRAPHY The current meter data consisting of the sampling of surface, midwater and bottom velocities and direction was originally collected on July 5th and 6th, 1994. Due to problems experienced in the original sampling efforts, current data at surface, midwater and bottom velocity and direction were again collected on October 1-165 0 4, 1994. The October 4, 1994 sampling event included direct • measurement of current velocity and direction at depths of 2, 5 and 10 meters below the surface. The original current meter study conducted on July 5, and 6, 1994, consisted of the deployment of three Aanderra RCM -5 recording current meters positioned at the following coordinates: 41° 10' 19" Lat., 72° 10'39" Long. Maximum depth was 37 feet at this location. The current speed measured in cm/sec at 14 feet ranged from 5.1 cm/sec (0.10 knots) to 56.9 cm/sec (1.10 knots). The current flowed in basically two directions, easterly at 20°-60° during a ebb tide and, westerly at 250°-300° during a flood tide. Direct measurements at the remaining two current meter depths did not generate viable data for reasons previously described herein. Therefore, the entire sampling regime for current velocity and direction was repeated on October 4, 1994. This sampling event utilized a SACM-3 smart acoustic current meter manufactured by EG&G Marine Instruments (TM) instead of the previously employed Aanderra RCM -5 recording current meters. The SACM- 3 Smart Acoustic Current Meter recorded current direction using magnetic north as its reference for all measurements. Meter accuracy and precision for all parameters in the SACM-3 Smart Acoustic Current Meter are shown below: 1-166 0 a 0 0 • • C7 Ip • • 0 SACM-3 Current Meter Accuracy and Precision Parameter Accuracy Resolution Range Response Speed ±1.0 cm/s 0.1 cm/s 0-350 cm/s 0.2 sec Direction ±2.0 degrees 0.1 degrees 0-360 deg. 0.2 sec TOC ±0.05°C 0.01°C -20C -350C 1.0 min. Sampling was conducted for a period of 12 hours in order to obtain data over one complete tidal cycle. As previously stated, the project site experienced average tides during the sampling period. As consistent with the initial current readings, the current exhibited an east/west directional flow. Variations in current direction and speed indicate that some eddying occurs due to the large volumes of water having to pass through the constrictions at Plum Gut to the west and the Sluiceway to the east in addition to the large variations in depth in these areas. Average current velocities ranged from 7.2 cm/sec (0.14 knots) to 69.6 cm/sec (1.35 knots) at 2 meters on a flood tide. The average current velocity at 5 and 10 meters was 32.5 cm/sec (0.63 knots) and 30.1 cm/sec (0.58 knots), respectively for a flood tide and 37.4 cm/sec (0.73 knots) and 16.4 cm/sec (0.32 knots), respectively for an ebb tide. The bottom of the net pens will be 4-5 meters below the surface. It follows that excess feed and the fecal material leaving the 1-167 11 confines of the ocean net pens will be subject to the mid water • current velocities at the various tidal cycles upon leaving the bottom or lower sides of the proposed net pens. Therefore, current 1 velocity and direction measurements taken at 5 and 10 meters would be most important in determining dispersal patterns of • unconsumed feed and fecal material. With respect to the potential impact to water quality and benthos resulting from the release of excess feed materials leaving the ocean • net pens, a specialized food delivery system is being considered. Such a system, if constructed, would be designed to deliver feed to the cultured summer flounder from the center of the net pens or updrift therefrom. • Tidal Current Charts have been developed by the U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA. These charts depict the horizontal flow and direction of the current. There are also hourly recorded current • flows from a previously placed current meter Southeast of the proposed Net Pen Grow -Out Site. These charts are identified as SFB (Slack Flood Begins) plus the hours, SEB (Slack Ebb Begins) plus the hours using The Race as the reference. In evaluating the • 1-168 0 • • • • • 1-169 0 effect of current velocity with respect to the fate of unconsumed • feed and fecal material, consideration was given to the horizontal component as depicted by the NOAH current charts as well as to site current velocity and direction measurements. Using the • combined data from the site current measurements and the NOAA current charts, a projected direction for the movement of the • organic matter has been graphically presented from 0800 Hours, hourly, to 1900 Hours for a typical day. For comparisons and explanation, each of the projected current flows are coupled with • the NOAA current chart for that particular time of day to assist the reviewer in visualizing the movement of unconsumed fish feed and fecal material. They follow as Figures 6a. through 17b.. • • • • 1-169 0 f a a r • • • • • • 0 Figure 6a. SFB+3 • • • LM 7 • CM • Cm • Niantic Y �, �1 S�E �✓ ^ 2✓ 0 1 .,,e 1, •5 [/( �, a O L/TILE .%ARRACt\SETT BAY:- NIANIX 7 ae e .0 --- BAY .4 1.6 1. 7 1. 5 East Pt. 1 .6 ' Black Pt. 1.3 `' r7l�° 1.6 1.9 r R, %ace T 1 .9 12.4 �yE .P 6 2.0 3. 3 3aal Rk.l 1 .9,. fSLil t4 . S (;o Gull I.le • 6 qjIF 1.8 3.0 1.4 M 2.6 1 .1 r 0.9 1 .3 2.8 1.3 C K � 0 1.8 B � 2.0 0.4 1.0 0.5 ~ 0.8 0.9 0.5 0.8 e 0, 4 c q ARDINERS I. C r Kill Pt. Eastern Plain Pt. 0.3�.1, 0.2 F 2 Culloden Pt. 04.0 -&3q r t- 0.2 Hod Creek Pt. 1 t NAPEAGUE BA Montauk �ed r 0.7 e sprind. 0 9 1.0 z *1 1.2 1 S L t Asnadaneett colt Ess! Ha.. plan / It? MON•t �V� 2 2 Figure 6b. TIDAL CURRENT CHART LONG ISLAND SOUND AND BLOCK ISLAND SOUND This chart is deigned,Frr toe urth the prrrliait d - tiwes and mf-ifiss ru the cerrrnt at The Ran. TM daily prrdictivaa an ghee in the Tidal Camel Takla Atlantic Coast of Vorth Arnenca publwhcd annually by the National Areanie and At -ph -c AdrninutrafinnrVationd Areae Senile. NOTE: Sr A prawn we fa ame of soma curnna. To determine the speed for a particular time, then speads must be adjusted by use of the table "Focan for correcting Special" given on pope 2. The arrows show the direction and the figures the spring speed in knob at the current at times indicated at bottom of chart. Meter nota: Top depth er-� Lower depth e ------- a- SFB+3 • a • • • • • • 0 0 Figure 7a. SFB+4 0 n L 0 • Ll 0 • L 0 -- - -- NianticY ---------� 0.81� S:'�'1f fyt �• I � `` I( ' r �` WEitk'i : ti , LITTLE SARRAO.L\'SE,rTTT88.•4 t' � f ,VIA.VTIC ~�T i GYM H eAy9� 0.9 0.9 0.6 1 .2 1.0 East Pt. 0.9 Black Pt. 1 .2 -4 i�-E 2? 0.7 ' ' ��,� ,�D 1 .4 ).6 0.6 �`1 1 .6 Recd 2.1 �A 1.6 r 2.7 1.7 1.0 1 .0 c`�.,�o�iit13.7 1r 2.1 1.0 r LUN . 1.8 0.8 E-• 0.6 S A-"0.9 6 1 .�'1 .0 C K F .Q . . Jt.•r I � 1.2 B 1.3 0.4 0.6 0.4 R 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.3 �. 0.3 G+ I .ARDI\ERS L c� Hill Pt. Eastern Plain Pt. +° '9 ,p O 4, Culloden ��,• li! 0.1 1 Pt. O - y 4BAV �'-i4 nk �lONtI'li / 1 7 Hod Creek Pt. edar t NAP�t Montauk ° 1! /- Spnnlj. 0 4 �� lUR lnecott East Hampton tion Amadansetl Figure 7b. TIDAL CURRENT CHART LONG ISLAND SOUND AND BLOCK ISLAND SOUND -- Thu rh°rt is hitig.rd /:v xsr nirh the pmlirred '... and rrlrxitt. of the rxmrnt at Thr Re - The daily YmdirNnns nrr rp rets in the F'dul Curr,nrt Tables Arl°ntir Carat , \beth An,rriav ptblished axeualty by the .\utioxat Orraxic and Atmospheric Administrutian,.�btiuxul OMvmn Sr,kv. NOTE: Speeds shun are for 9me of SpvV curtsns. To determine the speed for a patticubr time. In1ee speeds must De adjusted by up of the table "Factors for be Spews" given an pogo 2 rrw. The aos snow Int direction one Me founts the spam speed in knots of ten current at bines indicated at bottom of chart. Meter data: Top dead, Loser depth 0.....-. 0.• SFB+4 0 Figure 8a. SFB+5 �� • Lm • 0 • • 0 Nianlic I _. \ -_ _^%_ _ --r FW t7 LITTLE AARRAGA.VSETT B•iY NIA.VTIC BAY r 0.2 0. 1 .N ocb �, 0.1 �,.. 0.6 0.3 Feet Pt. WEAK t aleck Pt. 0 . 5 EAK 0.2 J g AA"'0.9 0 • 1 Race ,.a Pt.; Tye X0.4 0.9 1.4 P e 0.9 1.`Sy� 4 0.6 Live G.112.61. 2 . 1 Great Gull 1. 0.3� 2 R0.3 0.3 R 0.6 0.2 4- 0.1 A,* 0.3 l S t. 0.4 ac�Q` • °`'� 0.5 C K B L 0 0.4 0.3 0.4 � 0.3 0.3 0.2 � y O.2 0.2 0.3 � - ' 0.2 Cq -OARDI\ERS I. �¢ IC Hill Pt. Eastern Plain Pl. 40 WEAK 4' Culloden Pt. 0. 6 0 0 q y 0. 1 Onr arMi SIO ���v 0 .0 Hod Creek Pt. 0.1 1O NAPEAGUE BAY ed T �+ Montauk . 4 0 Goff Pt. 0t Spnndo �}r,ii OR necott ion Amadiensett East Hampton Figure Sb. TIDAL CURRENT CHART LONG ISLAND SOUND AND BLOCK ISLAND SOUND This chart u designed )'or nae with the pmlichd - tian and vlocitm of the canrnt ut The Rare. The daily prcdictiuna re giver in the Tidal C -f Tables Atlantic Cost ,if X-th Astaire published uanually by the .National (k-fi, and Afei.phrnc Administration,.Vational Orenn Service. NOTE. Spsads Ytown oro tar etrw Of ee^rV currena. To determine IM Speed fat a paniculer time. inhe speeds must be odjusted by use of the table "potion for Correcting Speeds' given on page 2. The orrows show the direction and the Baur" the spring speed in knots of the Current W terse indicated at bottom of Chart. Meter data: Top dealt �► Lower deal e•--•-'- 0- SFB+5 0 Figure 9a. SEB • • • • • r-1 L-A Ll • • J -- -- ianti,�p -t �1 ��N�4' F ""I,;'q� z v�oy f { �' 11 L/TYLE \'ARRAGA.\SETT BA e 1 .VIA.vTIC ^'. .Oa 1 �1.11,01:11 0. BAY /V'h1�__ � � 1 . S �'" roC 10 0.4� 11.0 Exel Pt. Black Pt. 0 . 4 0 9 1 2 �- .D ' 0.4 a�g 0.5 1 .34;2. tea 1 . �t`ry ryF1.5 WEAK 0.5 I �y • 0.1 WEAK, 0.1 2.6 �• W�ikK Ae 1 .5 utue Geu WEAK 1 .5 1 .8 co t6.nu 10. 1 ;•1 3. -� 0.6 L 0. 7--* � s 5 , ^y� , A 0. c�a g 0.4 K ' 0.3 o c B L � 0.1 0.7 0.2 1.0 0.4 0.8 0.8� 0.� • (� '9 ARDINERS 1. d", ;K C Hill Pt Eastern Plain Pt. 1K 'Po f ( ti 2 WEAK• E'lf (Culloden Pt.� 0.1 0.3 •� e .2 Hob CreekO0t.3 7 f 0 0.1 ��4 \ N� u+ta■kIJiON tP mat 4 % [Sprind. IVA GJ'BAY I /-\ w�) �fontxu3 3corn Pt. � OR nsaott ion East Hampton Ama/atnsett Figure 9b. TIDAL CURRENT CHART LONG ISLAND SOUND I AND BLOCK ISLAND SOUND I` This cAnrt is drriyxed JOr r.xe'.rA thr pr. •. :1 tirxre ned rrinrities ., the �nrn nt ,, Thr F.,rc Thr dnily prrdirfinns nn pi rr n .n thr T,.Irr! t' .-n nr 7746WAtluxfie I nx if by thr .YntinnaI O'..nmc r.d atn,...yh, nr Adminutnninq.\irtixenl !knits-�.•n•irr. NOTE. Speeds shown are fa 9ma of sprmp currents To determu+a the speed for 0 pan,ouiar ame. tbese speeds must be adjusted by use of Me table "FoCtOrs for Correct. no Speeds" preen On pope Z. The anOws Maw IM dneChOn and the '9,1011 the Spring speed in knots of the Currant Of !mea �ndicotsd bt aonom of coon Maier data: Top depth tower depth •------- w- SEB 0 Figure 10a. SEB+1 1 Viantic�0� f �)��t�11 WEIkK LITTLE .\'ANN.a GAA'SETT BAY,', �. o` 1 VIA.vTIC J+� a �., 2.3 to BAY 1. _'} a 2.4 ~• .6 1 . 4..: 1 . 9 Fast Pt. Black Pt. 1.3 3 1 .9 1.6a...�y I g'�,,,° 0.2. 1 . 4 0.2 1.9 c LtiEO � 2-O.A, 1 . �4 0.7 � 3.5 , , ', 1 .2 3.5 valiant 3. 1 y IRM Grq,dllGdiltl. 2.3 3.5 `WEAK 4.1. 1.2 S 3 . `Q4 UMcG "-..A 1 .,3 K 1 . T 1.1 C - B L a WEAK 1 .7 I WEAK0.E� 0• 1.a 3 aipARDI\ERS I. • C.q R Hill Pt. Eastern Plain Pt. 0.2 � �ti 411 3 • 0 2� Culloden Pt.l / 0. e 0.2 ' ` 0 '9 y � �ti �� :x , �[ov�i' Hod Creek Pl. o t, NArc-'alf"p, BAY 7\lonlauk east .9 31 q j p I Sprinds .6 tBOR Amsdansett • 'ainseott East Hampton talon Cl 7 Figure 10b. TIDAL CURRENT CHART LONG ISLAND SOUND AND BLOCK ISLAND SOUND Thi, oharf is dnxiyxrd jor xer ui,A fhr yredichd h— ..it I�Wtw. nj the, rnnraf of Thr Rua•. Thr daily pndirtioxs nn• p0•rx ie thr ndaf Cerraxt Tnhlr•f Atlantic C.xut of .ninth A-4. p.h10a4 nxnx illy by thr' \'dinxnl Ikrnxic ..it Atrxrwphr•r{r AdrxixixfnJiux, A'afinxof tkarx Srnirr. NOTE. Speeds stklwn ars for erne of sprxq curwet To determine In* speed for a ponculOr nme. these spesdf must be diffusedby use of the table "Potton for Correcting Speeds' given on pope 2 rr. The aow, show ow dxecaon and the Ipuree the spring speed In knob Of fes current at times ,ndlcobd at bosom of chon. MOW data: Top depth 0 -----0— Lower depth a ....... ► SEB+ 1 • • i • • ♦ • • • 0 Figure 1Ia. SEB+2 • L • • Niantic ,V/SAYIC ,y — .00 X 1 .6 A �r Black Pt. „ - LITTLE NARRAGAASETT BA)" /1 2.5 ;fes=� tee d 1. 4 2 1 East Pt: 5 1.3 2.1 a s ND 0.8,E 0.7 ce 3y 2.0�� 5.4 5 . 2 Valiant Rk. Gree 2.7 3.4 X0.7 2.0• > t $ L 0 1,7 2.0 0.5� 1 1.0 1. 1 0.2 0.7� 1, ...� 2.1 �j G+ ARDINERS I. .Q C Hill Pt. Eastern Plain Pt. 6 .0pO c► +° 4 0.3, f41 00 0.3 .� Culloden Pt. 'N, -task bION't l• Hod Creek PZ. � 1 cent t. NAP OE BAY O �s Montauk a ' 1 0 G.H Pl. 1 Springs 4 1 Amadanee t East Hampton Figure 11b. colt TIDAL CURRENT CHART LONG ISLAND SOUND AND • BLOCK ISLAND SOUND Thu chart is dtatpntd for ■se nnth the predi W — Mea a.d tvkur iea of the repent at The Rare. The daily predictions are piles is the Tidal C. -I Wks ANantie Coast q( North Awerim prbh htd annually by the National Orwnir dad Atwospherie Adeleietnntidn,Naiiodal Octan SwWca. NOTE: Speade shoed oro for Mea d sprnp Cunene To dewm ne Ow speed for a paroeufar tma. • Mew spews mus be od)ueed by tw d the t" "Foetdrs or Correotkq Speeds' ON" on pope 2. The anode show aN dkeolion and M figures are spring speed M knots of an Current at Wm indiCONd at ooaom of coon. Mee data: Top depM s---� Lowe OWM M--••-- 0-. SEB+2 • 4 i Figure 12a. SEB+3 r, Nientic 0 T L p.j'^�z' LITTLE VARRAGANSETTBAl, ` �'/A.VTIC �er`e✓ s J S Z Z etch i, ,�. BAY 4 al.1 .2,.,�� 1.9 Eent I�t. • ! Bieck Pt. 1 1 1.9 1 .2,..a� 1.0 0.9 R e V 0 2. 5.3 3.3 5. OvaR,At 2. 1�� llt 2.6 3.3 Great t 0. 2.9 i LC' S Ay 1 . 3 . o�a4 ��r • • •, 2. 1 K 12.0 0 oi BL C 1.9 � 0.4 0.3y 1 . �i 2.0 0.3 4 (�+ GARDINERS I. act Val.9 C Hill Pt. Eastern Plein Pt. 0.50.3 0.3 iCullodon Pt. 0.3 0.2.% 0.23 4,4 antawk. Hob Creek t.' (� ed r t' NAPEACUEI BAY B7 Montauk 1•7 � 9 p lGolif Pt. / .7 9 1 Sprit/e ` v' 0 I RBOR ainecott East Hampton tenon to 0 Amadaneelt Figure 12b. TIDAL CURRENT CHART LONG ISLAND SOUND AND BLOCK ISLAND SOUND Thu -hart a i—jr d f, n u.e -th the prwlicnd times and "lacetw f the r.—t at The Rare The daily prediction. ane yiren in the Difol Cuneef Tables Atlnetic C'auf of Sorth Arneri-o ptbhshed atonally by fhe Natioanl Oce o r and At—phrn- Adninistmtioo \ntinnal Ocean Se-tce. NOTE: Speeds shown an to ems of spring currents. To determine the speed for a panculor time. these speeds mus. be adWsled by use of the table 'Factors far Correcting Speedi' gwen on pope 2. The arrows thaw the direction and Me figures the spring speed in knots of the current of tunes Micaled dl bottom of Chan. Motor data: Top depth fie► Lower depth •------- si— SEB+3 a 0 0 a • • & i • Figure 13a. SEB+4 • • 0 i a 0 • 0 P, - - - - -- -- p L/TTL£ A.4RRAGA.\SETT 8A)' `t cc+.vrlc ,oma/ 7 s .0 0.9 °.* 1 .5 East Pt. 9!A 1 a 1 ti-- Black Pt. 0.8 1 . 4 0.7..W � `s� 0.5 �a�0.7 1.1 Rac3 2 7�� 3 LR ''�1 4 4.6 2.9 4.2 valudat. 2.0 %11 C^ �i k SG . . 2 . reatl`(i��t'�[p u�r1l` 2 2. 1 `' 0;5 .3 1.6 1.6--� 1 S l` 2. c`Qv AcG) • , 1 ;9 1.9 0 B L 0.2 0.4� WEAK 0.9 .� 0.3 �:1 y 0. l'yk t CARDLviERS I. .9 R �C Hill Pt Eartsrn Plain PL 4.7 o i 0.5 0.3 �� 0 3� F Culloden Pt. Hod Creek PI.WEAK o� t. NAPA UE BAY ontauk s .5 .5 0 1 Goff Pt. . 5 sprinis . 5 )0 (BOR sinecolt Eaet Hampton talion Amadansett Figure 13b. TIDAL CURRENT CHART LONG ISLANDAND SOUND BLOCK ISLAND SOUND This churt rs irsiyned fur we math fhr pmlicted timrs and rrhx+tits y the ram•at at Thr Ran. The daily pmlictioes me p- ie the 7ida1 Cnnrst TabW Attnntio C.wst rj .V.rfh Amrnm pabtishrd aanunlly by tAe .\'atonal Onnnic nod Atmwphrnc Adnrinistrutae•Naensal Orme Senxt. NOTE: Speeds Yawn are for ems of sprrW cwrsnb. To denk mme the speed for o pancuar nme, ffn @ speeds must be adrusted by use Of " fobN " Focan for Cornafinq Speeds- prven an pope T The orrows show the dincbon and the Apures d» eprel0 speed in knob at the eurwt at limas indicated of bobom at Chan. Mann data, Top dpef °----i Lower dwM •------- - SEB+4 * 0 0 • r a 1 i • • • Figure 14a. SEB+5 A 0 w a 0 NIANTlC BAY 0.5 .5 g r ° 0.4 016 Black Pt. 0. 1.0 0 4 0 1 r- - 37'���T - • W v , O � LlttLE .VARRACA.VS£tt 8A1 0.9 ✓ 1`�t�ti 11 0.4.* 0.9 Eaat Pt. 8 0.4 0.8 .Iv 0.4,; vw 0.4 0.5 0.5 R�• 2`. 8 0.8 2.3 �� 3.3 0.4 3. 0 volianl, 1 . 7 e� Rk. 2 . but. Gull 1. 1 . 8 1 . 4 Get Gull 1. 1.6 1.1 0.2 0.1 1.0 :1 1 cum/�� g - ot'Oc�¢`^ o,1 .4 C 1.3 � o B 0.3� 0.9� 0.2 0.4 0 0.' -91.0 0.5 C ARDINERs t .9 C Hill Pt Eastern Plain Pt. 0.3 0.2,Z f41 0.5 0.2 Culloden Pt. 0. r Hoa CreoX. 8 r E • WEA ��e �takk tNAPEAGUE BAB. 1 Montauk D �. 0 1 ® /•�tr�bK Springs U BOR Amaaanaett • •inscoit East Hampton i$tion L, 0 ?,u* Figure 14b. TIDAL CURRENT CHART LONG ISLAND SOUND AND BLOCK ISLAND SOUND Thu chart u drnpsed for nae "CA the predicted times and •rloritita of the turrimt at The Raft. The daily predicfiona an Poe' is the Mat C.reent Table. Atla'tie Coast of North Awerita p lih-hed annnally by the Natfowl Ocwsie and Atnraphenc Adainutration,Nationa! Oras Seraim NOTE: SpwOs shows am for Waw of $prep Curfents. To determine dN speed for o PiNbcUIaf ten*, thewspeeds muu be odjwtsd by use of the loom ..Foefon for Conaetlnp Speedo" a -- w pogo 2. The orroes sloe the daecbon and M dgurw the $orkp speed in knots of the wrrem a emw indiooted at ookom of chart MOM dote: Top deplh Lower depth •------- SEB+5 C t a • a 0 • 4 • 0 0 Figure 15a. SEB+6 Niantic I WEAK¢ o ,, v1 .l2 v W7 �I a 4` O ~ O - el LITTLE AARRAGA.VST7 EBAY 4 .VI.4.VTIC IA �� 0 T 0' ateti t i BAY 1 � r o . 1 0.2 East Pt. �0.1 of 0.2 Black Pt. 0.1 0.7 0.1 .9 X0.6 �e r0.1 0.1 e '9 R IV 5 P �'7 1.5 �a .2 1.5 I 1 7 100.3 • 1. 3 1' 4 valiant, 1 .2 •�� Rk. iUtil. Gau I. 0 2 Great Gull L 1 .0 WtA o 7** 0.7 0.4 0.2 � 2LUM y 0.4-0- 1 S `Q4 c�,�►c.0.6 1 0 K 0. �6 C ,0.5 0 B 0. 1 0.2� r 0.1 0.9 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.9 ARDINERS I. ,9 C HM PI. Eastern Plain Pt. IC WEAK Culloden Pt. 0.1 ' s W N4 0. 1 �ar$Y key aION S�0K Hof Creek PI.I 0Q O t NAPEAGUE BAY 'Z 97 Montauk s 4 0.9 4 9t. Sprints 0 • 8 /� l R Cott n L] 1 If" East Hampton Amafaneett Figure 15b. TIDAL CURRENT CHART LONG ISLAND SOUND AND BLOCK ISLAND SOUND ---... This ehsrt u draiyned for w with the pndiehd timea bed tr/odtfea of the nrrcnt at The Ran. Thr daily prrdichi, te are yitrrn in the Td t C.errat Tables All -tie G.ul gf.Voefh Amerxw p.hh.hed a..../ly by the Muti-I lk-w and Almuryhreie Adminutrolwsn N.tur.al Orn,. Sm*w.. NOTE: Speeds atmos, we for ems of spmp cunena To delermins the speed for o po tcular hme. Bleee speeds must be adjusted Dy u" of the table "Factor for Corrch.q Speeds" phen an tope 2. The Orrawe show the duction and Me f4iurs the sp" speed in knob of the cuttenl at snve indicated Of bottom of chort. Meter data: Top depth lower depth 0 ....... a - SEB+6 Figure 16a. SFB Ot Ll u 0 J 0 7 7 Nianlic �p ASIANTIC BAY .1.1ack Pt. 1.3 .4'� 1.2 .2 ani_n i 1 0 \'x° �O . �j LITTLE .VARRAC. AW" BAY,- p 0. 7 �a 1 0 1 .00.9 I A,-0.7 East Pt. 1.2 f'� 0.8 h tee` ° y 0.8 • 0.8 0.8 Race Pt. / Tye <� . 7 0.6 V� *1-00,84' 1.1 0.5VIP WEAK Z'*''' 0.6-P 0. 1 0 &A. Galt 1. 0.4 gall L WEAK 1.3 1.2 \`. LUM 1.4 0.8 i• 0.3 tl•° 0.3 s L - 8 �. 0.2 K 0 0.3 C ' B t, 0 0.80.9 j 0.8 0.1 0.1 1.2 0. 7 1.1 .ARDMI RS I. Hill Pt. Eastern Plain Pt. 0.1 0.1 �fN�, 0.1 1 Culloden Pt. 0 46E 4Hop Cre ad t. y 0.2 NAPEAGUE BA $� ek Pt. n 2 I o ). r J 1.4daflt / Sprint.1 .5 :BOR .linacott East Hampton "tion Aura janaelt - Figure 16b. TIDAL CURRENT CHART LONG ISLAND SOUND AND BLOCK ISLAND SOUND Thi• h.,t u dr.iyr..A jur n.. rrrth rhr Pndrrnd tiu.y and -1-it- nj thr cum nt of Thr Rnrr. Thrdoily purl. f"'.s urr w". m fhr Trdul t'un.nt TnMr. Alk.fic Cuuf q -th A.. r,v p.bluhd --lip by the Natw tti Orrn.ic and Atm.ayhene .Llnrinufm,n. \'afiunnl 0-14 Sen". NOTESpeeds shown" tar am. Of SP -9 cunena. To dolermiM the speed for a W C,ar len.. those Speeds must W .dryned of use Of the lows "Factors for Correcong Speeds- 9,,m.on pool 2. The arrows show the d rection and the I gures the Soong speed m knots of the currant at .mors - Wd=led OI 0000. of Chan. Nater data: Top depth a---�►- I wer lodope, 0, -------- SFB Ah S . a • 0 i 6 9 Figure 17a. SFB+1 Niantic � �Z P N ✓'( p s BAY oC �10b . 1 O 0 L/TTLE NARRAC.L SETT NIA eh 1 .3 1. 5 1 .4 East Pt. 1.9 Bleck Pt. C 1 • 3 1.7 ND 1.3 1 .4: =''� 1 .5 x$40 V4 *0000'r 1 .4 �` `. Rtsce Pt. � 0.9 1.8 T` 1 .s `•2 0.2 Rk. 1 t . Cull 1 .2 GG .Gull 12 9 2.6 1.5 CUM. 2.5 1. 1 N 0. 7 0 C 1.7 0.3 B L 1.2 1.9 1.3 001.1 0.2 1.2 d` v 0.3 C 9 ARDTNERB I. ck i C Hill Pt Eastern Plain Pl. 1° 0. 20 --4, 0.2 ld1 0 2 Culloden Pt. 4 9 �.. 0.3 r' h b10Nrt ��K 1 .4 Hod Creek Pt. Y 0.2 �O 1 der t. NAPEAGUE BAY �� Montauk 1.3 9prinde • 5 .5 BOR eintoott Etat Hampton tation • 0 0 Amadaneett Figure 17b. TIDAL CURRENT CHAR LONG ISLAND SOUND AND BLOCK ISLAND SOUND Thu chart is designed for use with the predidcd rimes aid reloeitin of the mrrevt at The Race. The daily predictions an vim in the Tidal C.mr.t Tables Atlantic Coast rrf \oath America p0h hied --ally by the National Oceaeic and Atnawpheric Admi.utratiorr, National Oren. Service. NOTE: Speeds stroYm am lot time at spring currents. To Selermins the Speed for a particular time. :"se spade must be adjusted try use Of the obte Foetom for Correcting Soviets" pawn on page 2. The arrows show the direction and Me figura the spring speed in knots of tte current at tense ,ndlcotem ha d at bosodf crt. Meter door: Top depth ��► Lower depth 41, ------- P-- SBF+ 1 r1 u A comparison between the current flows of the project site as determined in the field and those depicted in the NOAA current charts is summarized in Table 23 below: is NOTE: The opposite site currents from 1300 hours to 1700 hours are probably the result of an eddy caused by high velocity currents flowing through "Plum Gut" and "The q1 Sluiceway" between Plum Island and Orient Point and between Plum Island and Fishers Island, respectively. During these same • 1-194 TABLE 23. COMPARISONS BETWEEN PROJECT SITE CURRENT FLOWS AND THAT OF THE NOAA TIDAL CURRENT CHARTS ------- --------------------------------- CHART CURRENT CHART SITE CHART CURRENT SITE TIME REFERENCE CURRENT CURRENT DIRECTION CURRENT K/HR K/HR DEGREES DIRECTION 0800 SFB +3 0.8 1.3 290 SAME 0900 SFB +4 0.5 1.0 291 SAME 1000 SFB +5 0.1 0.4 280 SIMILAR 1100 SEB 0.6 0.4 80 SAME 1200 SEB +1 0.5 1.0 80 SIMILAR 1300 SEB +2 0.4 1.9 80 OPPOSITE 1400 SEB +3 0.3 2.1 80 OPPOSITE 1500 SEB +4 0.4 1.9 80 OPPOSITE 1600 SEB +5 0.8 1.4 80 OPPOSITE 1700 SEB +6 1.2 0.6 70 OPPOSITE • 1800 SFB 1.0 0.2 280 SIMILAR 1900 SFB +1 1.02 0.9 290 SIMILAR NOTE: The opposite site currents from 1300 hours to 1700 hours are probably the result of an eddy caused by high velocity currents flowing through "Plum Gut" and "The q1 Sluiceway" between Plum Island and Orient Point and between Plum Island and Fishers Island, respectively. During these same • 1-194 • periods the chart current recording direction is approximately 90 • degrees to that of these two high velocity channel currents. • • ! 9 0 0 The complete current velocity measurements are contained in Section IB -Hydrodynamic. To predict the fate of fecal material and unconsumed feed it is necessary to make a determination of the settling rate of both the fish feces and the unconsumed food pellets. This analysis forms the basis for the vertical component of the dispersal model discussed herein. Fish feces are smaller and less uniform in size than food pellets. Feces composition will depend upon the composition and digestibility of the food pellets. While the settling rate of feces varies, the Washington State Department of Fisheries (1990) reports fecal settling rate to be less than pellet settling rate. Therefore, the vertical component of the dispersal model underestimates the dispersion of fecal material. The settling rate of feed pellets was determined using a settling tube constructed out of a one inch tygon tubing (inside diameter) mounted on a vertical surface and closed with a stopper at the bottom. A measurement of two meters was marked on the tube 1- 195 [� • 1-196 i with "0" near the top and "2" near the bottom of the tube. The tube was filled with sea water which was collected during an incoming tide to insure a salinity of approximately 30 ppt. Feed pellets f obtained from Moore Clark Co. situate Vancouver B.C. were used in the determination of settling rates. A complete analysis of the composition of these pellets is previously described herein. The pellets, comprised of 92% to 93% solids and 7% to 8% liquids are available in various sizes. Since the settling rate of the pellets at the net pen grow out site is of concern, only pellets of appropriate size for fingerling to market size summer flounder were tested. Two different sized pellets were tested: those averaging 8.5 mm. in diameter and 10 to 13 mm in length; and those averaging 11 mm in diameter and 13 to 15 mm in length. The pellets were placed w into the top of the tube and allowed to sink with time of descent recorded using a hand held stop watch. Because of a delay in descent due to the surface tension in the confines of the settling 4P tube, the water level was filled above the "0" mark and the pellets timed after descent began. Descent measurements began once the "0" mark was reached and terminated once the "2" meter mark was reached. The distance traveled in centimeters (200) divided by the • 1-196 i time required for the pellet to travel two meters resulted in a • settling rate in centimeters per second. Ten replicates were performed for each size category to determine the range of settling 0 of each sized pellet. The 8.5 mm pellets had a settling rate of 10.0 cm/sec to 11.7 cm/sec and the 11 mm pellet had a settling rate of 8.6 cm/sec to 10.0 cm/sec. At these rates, it would take a pellet approximately 10 seconds to descend one meter in a static environment. L-. Occasionally, air bubbles would form as the pellet began to sink, causing a slower rate of descent. Normally, these air bubbles • dissipated within the first few centimeters of descent as increasing pressure caused them to burst. Contrary to what would be expected, the 1 I mm pellets had a slower descent than the 8.5 mm • pellets. This anomaly could only be attributed to variations in the density of the pellets as related to their manufacture or increased 0 surface friction against the inner sides of the settling tube due to their larger size. 40 As indicated previously, it is estimated that it will take approximately ten seconds per meter for a typical feed pellet to C 1-197 0 • descend in the water column. Due to their slow rate of descent, the • fate of these feed pellets is entirely dependent upon the movement of the current. Accordingly, there will be little or no accumulation of unconsumed food that will remain in the vicinity of the net pens Instead, these materials will be widely dispersed, both into the Sound via Plum Gut and the Sluiceway, as well as out into Gardiner's Bay over a wide area, thereby eliminating any significant impact to the benthos and water quality. Furthermore, given that fecal is less dense than feed pellets, any fecal material leaving the net pens will be dispersed over a wider area than food pellets. The area of dispersal is conservatively estimated to cover [1 several square miles. Current velocity influences the sediment structure of a particular Q area (Day et. al., 1989). In areas with high current velocity, sedimentation rates are low as fine materials are carried away and do not accumulate on the bottom. The sediments are well sorted and have high percentages of sand. High current velocity also facilitates higher oxygen levels in sediments and in the water column which is important for net pen aquaculture. In contrast, 40 low current velocity promotes high sedimentation rates causing higher percentages of silt and lower oxygen levels in the sediments. • 1-198 • Low sedimentation rates have also been responsible for creating 0 sparse benthic communities due to the lack of food available to infaunal organisms (Hoffman et. al., 1981). During the periods of slack tide settling rates are maximized. However, because of the proposed site's proximity to the high tidal currents in the Plum Gut and Sluiceway, and because of the lightness of the feces and the unconsumed feed, it can be positively predicted that the material will not stay in the vicinity of the net 41 pen site. Previous diver inspections of the bottom of Plum Gut indicates that 0 all fine materials have been removed from these high current areas, leaving only large stones and boulders. Therefore, materials more dense than feed pellets and fecal material do not stay in these areas. 41 Moreover, Plum Gut and presumably the Sluiceway exert considerable force in dispersing low density materials including unconsumed feed and feces. • • • The base line site field survey bears out the expected sparse benthic communities. Even with the higher current velocities prevalent throughout the area, it expected that there will be trace sedimentation below the net pen site. However, the resultant 1-199 0 small increase in food consisting of unconsumed feed and fecal • material) would result in a positive impact to the diversity and richness of the benthic communities (Wash. State. Dept. of Fisheries, 1990). 0 C. WATER QUALITY Two detailed water quality assessments were performed at three 4P sites in order to determine dissolved oxygen concentrations, temperature, and salinity with respect to depth, nutrient availability as reflected in ambient nitrogen concentrations, as well as light 49 penetration as determined by sechii depth measurements. Site #1 was chosen to correspond with the location in which hydrographic data was collected. Site #2a and Site #2b were chosen to 41 correspond with Alternative Site (proposed Net Pen Area). Figures 18 and 19 show the proposed net pen site and the alternate net pen site. • 7 • I-200 0 0 7 Lm 7 Lm LM M FIGURE 18. LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED GROW OUT SITE IN GARDINER'S BAY. sc A sc so 711I lw Yb w 1]? 03l Ib7 W 03if {/ ,; .. .n- a�'1...T'.....�� .. s~{ sl #3113-b y,l aqt RI y s IM f7 u 1~/� 1+1{{ Q Me7 IMIrfl 7Ilf r,.w,iW.11 1�a0/.a u1���/�fI a17 ` 7� l>J.�.. • ,%,Eyf 1.5•,�1to•lw..�'u�/YMi+�✓lfl2r 0lA00,( / >r,% ~79 µ N „ w f30 m -ft* a/ 7 } 70 '° a ab aos 17 132 1 213fl x {7 » as m 7x 711 174 1.17 ab e 44 71 •L3 aX1 1.h1 r. Il0 O1 04 •U•Nas'�'�L'/qr1/ �G1tY/ii�i� 11 '-•4 µ » M 1 j1 ..3 t w {, ,S . 2i f 73 r N f0�!- 71 �M'�,�,r�. 0t y 10 •: �� 77 t y • s{ rss�t3'r �Iu 7 +u a a 73 74M S7 47 �0 72\t 100 Ifa •� M % {a • w + !0 , N N »ly N . • a N i of Y 77 1177 G % a{•rjr\`„ 1{ \ 117 /{ 33 ) ai ♦ 61 i p 0{ { 4 23 23b7 N 30S{ H {{ N /b. �IfYf 40 ♦ N., {S • 1✓ "]S t SS t of f4 R M IS t FIGURE 19. LOCATION OF ALTERNATE GROW OUT SITE. 0 Ten sample locations with respect to depth were determined by dividing the total depth by ten thereby establishing equidistant sample locations throughout the water column. The coordinates for Sample Location #1 is located in accordance with the following Loran Coordinates: 410 10' 19" Latitude, 720 10'39" minutes Longitude. The initial water quality assessment for Sample Location #1 was performed on August 8, 1994 between the hours * of 6:15 am through 7:30 am during which the tides were at slack low. At that time, skies were sunny, winds as measured by were 0 to 5 knots out of the northeast and seas were less than 1 foot. • Determination of depth was performed using a standard depthometer as verified by a weighted line lowered to the sea floor it and measured by means of standard tape measurement. Maximum depth at Sample Location #1 was 35 feet and therefore, temperature and dissolved oxygen concentrations were determined • at 3.5 foot intervals. Temperature and dissolved oxygen were determined using a YSI Temperature/Oxygen Meter (TM) calibrated for altitude and salinity. The YSI Temperature/Oxygen • Meter (TM) is standard equipment used in evaluating dissolved oxygen with respect to temperature in a wide variety of commercial aquaculture operations. Salinity was determined at each of the ten • sample locations using a standard hand held refractometer. Also, a [A I-202 0 standard 1 foot diameter sechii disk was lowered into the water • column in order to determine light penetration. Sechii disk measurements at the various sampling locations during the August 8, 1994 sampling event were 12 feet below the surface. In addition to oxygen determination by YSI Temperature/Oxygen Meter (TM), approximately one liter of sea water was collected at each of the respective depths using a Van Dorn Bottle constructed out of plexiglas. Samples collected by this means were carefully drained with a minimum of agitation into 250 ml glass sample bottles allowing for at least a three fold overflow. Upon collection of the • samples by Van Dorn Bottle, samples were immediately fixed in accordance with methods set forth in Standard Methods for the Winkler Titration (Azide Modification). Samples were held on ice is and in darkness and transported to a licensed laboratory for dissolved oxygen concentration by the Winkler Method. The laboratory results for dissolved oxygen are attached herewith as • Appendix L. The summary results for temperature and dissolved oxygen are set forth in Table 24. • • C` I-203 0 0 Data collected from Sample Location #1 reveal relatively i uniform temperature throughout the water column. The difference in temperature between surface and bottom samples was 0.5°C. Additionally, dissolved oxygen concentrations were • relatively uniform throughout the water column. These data reveal a complete mixing of the water column. Additionally, dissolved oxygen was found in saturated concentrations throughout the water • I-204 7 Table 24. Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, Salinity with respect • to Depth determined at Sample Location #1 on August 8, 1994. Depth Temperature Salinity Dissolved Dissolved (feet) °C (ppt) Oxygen Oxygen (mg/l - by probe) (mg/l - by Lab) 3.5 19.5 30 9.2 7.6 0 7.0 19.5 30 9.2 7.6 10.5 19.5 30 9.2 7.3 14 19.5 30 9.2 7.4 0 17.5 19.0 30 9.0 7.7 21 19.0 30 9.0 7.6 24.5 19.0 30 9.0 7.8 0 28 19.0 30 9.0 7.5 31.5 19.0 30 9.0 8.1 35 19.0 30 8.8 7.9 • Data collected from Sample Location #1 reveal relatively i uniform temperature throughout the water column. The difference in temperature between surface and bottom samples was 0.5°C. Additionally, dissolved oxygen concentrations were • relatively uniform throughout the water column. These data reveal a complete mixing of the water column. Additionally, dissolved oxygen was found in saturated concentrations throughout the water • I-204 7 • column. Finally, salinity was determined at 30 ppt throughout the water column. These analyses reveal excellent water quality at Sample Location #1. • 1-205 0 Regardless of whatever future monitoring requirements may be set forth as conditions attached to NYSDEC Approval of the proposed project, monitoring of dissolved • oxygen is a standard operating procedure for small and large scale aquaculture operations. Therefore, it is critical to Mariculture Technologies, Inc. to obtain reliable • information with respect to dissolved oxygen as survival and growth of summer flounder partially depends upon adequate dissolved oxygen concentrations in the water column. Additionally, • the quality of the dissolved oxygen data was under question by the authors of this DEIS largely because of the scatter in data collected with respect to depth and differing sampling methodology (Winkler • Method versus Probe). Accordingly, Sample Location #1 was re- evaluated with respect to dissolved oxygen and temperature on August 31, 1994. All sampling activities occurred between 9:30 am • and 10:30 am during slack low tide. Cloud cover ranged from partly cloudy to overcast. Winds were from the southwest at 0 to 5 knots and seas were less than one foot. The sample location for the 40 August 31, 1994 sampling event was the same location for the • 1-205 0 �M Both data sets in Table 24 and Table 25 disclose essentially uniform temperature throughout the water column. Accordingly, 1-206 F� August 8, 1994 sampling event as reflected in identical Loran • Coordinates. The laboratory results for dissolved oxygen are attached herewith in Appendix L. The summary results for temperature and dissolved oxygen for the August 31, 1994 • sampling event are set forth below in Table 25. Table 25. Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen with Respect to • Depth determined at Sample Location #1 on August 31, 1994. • Depth Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Dissolved Oxygen (feet) ° C (mg/l - by probe) (mg/1- by Lab) 3.5 20 9.6 8.2 7.0 20 9.6 8.0 10.5 20 9.6 7.6 14 20 9.6 7.5 17.5 20 9.6 7.8 21 20 9.4 7.8 24.5 20 9.4 7.6 r 28 20 9.4 7.5 31.5 20 9.4 7.6 35 20 9.2 7.5 • Both data sets in Table 24 and Table 25 disclose essentially uniform temperature throughout the water column. Accordingly, 1-206 F� • this particular area of Gardeners Bay does not undergo seasonal • stratification. The principle explanation accounting for uniform temperatures are attributed to complete mixing of the water column achieved by high current velocity and wind action. • The slightly elevated water temperatures occurring on the surface at Sample Location #1 during the August 8, 1994 sampling event were attributed to increased warming from • sun exposure. This slight elevation in temperature was not detected during the August 31, 1994 sampling event due to partly cloudy and overcast conditions occurring earlier in • the morning which prevented surface warming from the sun. In comparing detection methods between the Winkler Method and Direct Method by probe, it is clear that • dissolved oxygen as measured by oxygen probe was significantly higher than dissolved oxygen as measured by the Winkler Method. On the average, dissolved oxygen • measurements were 1.56 mg/l higher as measured by oxygen probe than as measured by the Winkler Method. Even so, dissolved oxygen concentrations reflected 40 saturated conditions throughout the water column as evidenced by both the Winkler Method and direct measurement by probe. Saturated surface waters at Sample • Location #1 are attributed to complete mixing of the water • 1-207 0 • column as well as algal production which adds oxygen to • the water column. Dissolved oxygen, Temperature and Salinity were • determined at an alternate sight ("Sample Location #2) on August 8, 1994 approximately 1/4 miles southeast from Sample Location #1 at the following Loran Coordinates: • 410 17' 22" Latitude, 72° 11'61 ". Sample collection and analyses of dissolved oxygen and temperature took place between 8:05 am and 9:15 am. Laboratory results for this sampling event are • attached hereto in Appendix L. The summary of the results are set forth bellow in Table 26. 7 • • • • 1-208 0 • • Table 26. Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen with respect to Depth at Sample Location #2 on August 8, 1994. Depth Temperature Salinity Dissolved Oxygen Dissolved Oxygen (feet) (Degrees Q (ppt) (mg/1- by probe) (mg/1- by Lab) 2.1 19.5 30 9.4 8.2 • 4.2 19.5 30 9.2 8.4 6.3 19.5 30 9.0 7.8 8.4 19.5 31 8.8 7.8 • 10.5 19.0 32 8.8 7.8 12.6 19.0 32 8.8 7.8 14.7 19.0 32 8.4 7.9 16.8 19.0 33 8.6 8.0 18.9 19.0 32 8.6 8.0 21.0 19.0 32 8.6 7.9 • Data as disclosed in Table 26 reveals a slight warming of the water column brought about by increased sun exposure occurring later in the morning. Also, salinities in the lower portion of the water column were slightly elevated over samples obtained at Sample Location #1 on August 8, 1994. These slightly elevated salinities are attributed to the onset of flood tide, during which, there is an influx of oceanic bottom waters • 1-209 0 • greater in salinity and density. Furthermore, these higher salinity waters, because of their greater density, will tend to flow along the bottom (Mann and Lazier, 1991). • Dissolved oxygen concentration detected in at Sample Location #2 during the August 8, 1994 sampling event were slightly elevated as compared to dissolved oxygen collected • at Sample Location #1 on August 8, 1994. These differences however were not regarded as significant being attributed to increased algal production occurring later that • same morning. Increased algal production was attributed to greater sun light intensity also occurring later in the morning. Again these data reveal saturated oxygen concentrations throughout the water column. Temperature and dissolved oxygen with respect to depth • was analyzed at a alternated site (Sample Location #2a) on August 31, 1994 proximate to Sample Location #2. The Loran Coordinates for Sample Location #2a are as follows: • 410 17' 6" Latitude, 72° 11'42" Longitude. Sample collection and analyses of temperature and dissolved oxygen took place between 10:45 am and 11:30 am. Laboratory results are attached hereto in • Appendix L. The summary results are set forth below in Table 27. • I-210 • • Consistent with the data obtained for Sample Location #2 • during the August 8, 1994 sampling event, the later time in which these samples were collected and analyzed resulted in a slight warming of the upper portion of the water column • attributed to greater sun light intensity. As with all other sample analyses conducted during the various sampling events and locations, the data reveals dissolved oxygen • I-211 • Table 27. Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen with respect to Depth at Sample Location #2a on August 31, 1994. • Depth Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Dissolved Oxygen (feet) ° C (mg/l - by probe) (mg/l - by Lab) 3.2 22 8.6 8.5 • 6.4 21 8.8 8.5 9.6 20 8.8 7.9 12.8 20 8.8 8.4 • 14.0 20 8.8 8.5 17.2 20 8.8 8.2 20.4 20 8.8 8.2 • 23.6 20 8.8 8.1 26.8 20 8.8 8.0 32 20 8.4 7.8 • Consistent with the data obtained for Sample Location #2 • during the August 8, 1994 sampling event, the later time in which these samples were collected and analyzed resulted in a slight warming of the upper portion of the water column • attributed to greater sun light intensity. As with all other sample analyses conducted during the various sampling events and locations, the data reveals dissolved oxygen • I-211 • • concentrations at saturation levels throughout the water • column. The slightly depressed dissolved oxygen concentrations detected at the bottom sample is not regarded as significant and may be attributed to minor • biological/chemical oxygen demand brought about by suspended sediments. However, the slight depression of dissolved oxygen on the bottom is not a cause for concern • either to Mariculture Technologies, Inc. nor presumably, government agencies having jurisdiction over this proposed project. • In summary, as reflected in all of the temperature measurements made in the various sample locations, this • particular area of Gardeners Bay does not undergo seasonal stratification. Furthermore, dissolved oxygen was detected in saturated concentrations throughout the water column • during each sampling event. Therefore, it is concluded that water quality, as reflected in these data bases, is excellent. Furthermore, the excellent water quality only increases the • likelihood of success for this commercial mariculture operation. • • C] 1-212 • d. BENTHIC ANALYSIS • Twenty stations at the net pen site (see Figure 20) were selected to • collect samples for benthic analysis. Attempts to obtain single sediment cores using a 30.5 cm hand corer were unsuccessful due to the unconsolidated nature of the sediments. The entire length of • the hand corer penetrated the bottom with no resistance. Upon removal, the sediment would not remain in the corer, • precluding collection of such. Alternatively, samples for sediment analyses and macrobenthic infauna were collected on July 5, 1994 using a 0.1 M2 Smith-MacIntyre benthic grab. Sub samples of • each grab which constituted less than one quarter of the total grab sample were collected for sediment grain and total organic carbon (TOC) analyses, placed in glass jars and maintained at 4°C until • analyzed by New York State licensed laboratories. The remaining 3/e of the grab was sieved through a 0.5 mm sieve to retain benthic macro fauna for identification to the lowest taxonomic level • practical. • • 0 I-213 0 0 • • • v • • 0 0 O - 9 0 115' 70 PA O 35 010 •14 10 6 : * 2Z 7 /17 \. a -76 64 • 8 6o 36 �'�—� .4 •18 �' : fit'. 10 96 1w 22 26 14 _ ter` 29 16 20 �Q' 15 22 / 1.9 �f 3 "t maintd 11/77 3SO - (28 �YlMe 2 12 1 34 0 20 34 1.1 1.0 I � _ • 14 133 sa . III �10 65 1 r P� 47 o; 47 18 �1�2i 1Cw �' 103..jar- 56 a 56; \ �' 95 85 85 "16 I" G S ' -V' 39 8`4 7j 60 c% 8 i ' 30 i 72 Pt � � t f` 9 9 Sampling Locations for Macrobenthic Invertebrate and Sediment Chemistry Sampling Figure 20. • e. SEDIMENTS • Analyses for TOC and Total Solids were performed according to methods outlined in the EPA manual (1988) for sediment testing • and were conducted by H2M Labs Inc. of Melville, N.Y. Samples were collected, placed in glass jars with teflon or aluminum foil and cooled to 4°C until analysis. Each test sample was treated with • acid and heated to 75°C to remove inorganic carbon. The sample is then pyrolized in the presence of oxygen to remove organic carbon which is analyzed using gas chromatography, infrared detection, or • thermal conductivity detection. TOC averaged between 388 mg/kg at Station 2 to 2230 mg/kg at • Station 10. Currently, there are no established limits for TOC samples (Matthew Billerman, EEA- personal communication). Nevertheless, TOC is regarded as reflective of other estuarine • environments on eastern Long Island. Total Solids ranged from 74.3% at Station 5 to 80.4% at station 8. • Higher percent solids indicate higher percentages of sand present in the sediments. TOC and Total Solids results are shown in Table 28. The complete data sheets for the TOC analysis is contained • in Appendix M. • I-215 • CA • • • • 0 • • • 0 Table 28. TOC and Total Solids in Sediment at the Growout Site. STATION TOC (mg/kg) TOTAL SOLIDS % 1 454 77.5 2 388 79.3 3 502 77.8 4 798 76.0 5 947 74.3 6 2040 76.3 7 938 76.9 8 539 80.4 9 853 77.3 10 2230 78.3 11 637 79.4 12 755 79.4 13 1120 79.6 14 1250 77.0 15 1440 77.4 16 615 77.0 17 687 78.8 18 1330 76.8 19 1360 77.1 20 556 79.5 1-216 The sediments are dominantly characterized as very fine to medium sand with traces of silt. Stations ranged between 88.4% sand at • station 10 to 98.8 % sand at stations 8 and 20. The remainder of the percentage was comprised of gray silt. These small percentages of silt indicate that there is little sedimentation due to the • occurrence of high velocity current at the proposed site. Sediment composition analyses are shown in Table 29. The complete data sheets for the sediment grain analysis are contained in Appendix • N. L 0 I-217 Sediment grain size analyses were performed in accordance with • methods set forth by the American Society for Testing and Materials (1993), and conducted by Soil Mechanics Drilling Corp. of Seaford, N.Y.. The raw data is attached hereto as Appendix O. • Test samples from each aggregate were dried in the laboratory to a constant mass at a temperature of 110±5°C. After mass determination, the each sample was washed through a series of • nested sieves of progressively smaller openings to determine particle size distribution. After sufficient sieving, the mass of each increment was determined. The masses of all increments were then • added and compared to the mass of the original dry sample. If the values differed more than 0.3% based on the original dry sample weight, the results were discarded and the test repeated. The sediments are dominantly characterized as very fine to medium sand with traces of silt. Stations ranged between 88.4% sand at • station 10 to 98.8 % sand at stations 8 and 20. The remainder of the percentage was comprised of gray silt. These small percentages of silt indicate that there is little sedimentation due to the • occurrence of high velocity current at the proposed site. Sediment composition analyses are shown in Table 29. The complete data sheets for the sediment grain analysis are contained in Appendix • N. L 0 I-217 • 1-218 • Table 29. Sediment Grain Size at Net Pen Site. • SAMPLE %GRAVEL % SAND % SILT % CLAY 1 0 97.8 2.2 0 • 2 0 98.3 1.7 0 3 0 95.5 4.5 0 4 0 96.0 4.0 0 • 5 0 91.4 8.6 0 6 0 95.6 4.4 0 7 0 96.8 3.2 0 • 8 0 98.8 1.2 0 9 0 97.0 3.0 0 10 0 88.4 11.6 0 • 11 0 98.7 1.3 0 12 0 98.4 1.6 0 13 0 94.0 6.0 0 • 14 0 96.9 3.1 0 15 0 97.1 2.9 0 16 0 98.2 1.8 0 • 17 0 98.4 1.6 0 18 0 96.4 3.6 0 19 0 96.4 3.6 0 • 20 0 98.8 1.2 0 • 1-218 • C: • f. INFAUNA The remainder (3/4) of each of the previously mentioned 0.1 MZ Smith-MacIntyre grabs collected on July 5, 1994 for the sediment and infaunal collection, was washed through a 0.5 mm mesh sieve to remove fine particles. Invertebrates retained by the sieve were transferred to jars and preserved with buffered 10% formalin. Rose Bengal solution was added to aid in later sorting of the organisms. Invertebrates were then sorted and identified to the lowest practical + taxonomic level. Macrobenthic invertebrate densities for all stations at the proposed site are shown in appendix O. The infauna is primarily dominated by polychaete worms in both number of species and abundance of individual species. There are over 5300 described species of polychaetes (Barnes, 1987). Polychaetes are very common in the marine environment, often comprising as much as 40 to 80 percent of the infauna in a particular area. Therefore, it is not surprising to find them r dominant at the proposed site. Polychaetes primarily are dioecious and reproduce sexually. Gametes usually develop as projections or swellings within the body cavity rather than in distinct organs. • Developing eggs are either released into the water column, brooded • 1-219 40 • • f 0 • • • • 0 or layed in masses and attached to various objects. After gastriculation, all species develop into a larval form known as a trochophore. These may be pelagic, feeding on plankton; or bottom dwelling and lecithotrophic (yolky and nonfeeding). After this stage, the larva metamorphoses into an adult form. It is through these means that the observed polychaetes are believed to have colonized the project site. Sediment structure, particularly grain size, is a determining factor in what organisms choose to live there as many species are restricted to certain types of sediment (Gray, 1974). Deposit feeders are often found dominant in silt/clay areas while suspension feeders are often found dominant in sandy areas. Polychaetes fall into one of two classifications: errant (free moving) or sedentary. Of the species found at the site, nearly one third were errant forms. Most errant polychaetes are carnivorous. However, some errant forms are omnivorous and use their jaws to feed on algae and detritus. Some errant polychaetes are active burrowers in sand and mud while others crawl about on the bottom among rocks and shells. Errant polychaete species found at the site were as follows: 1-220 • • The remaining two thirds of the polychaetes found at the site were sedentary forms. These sedentary polychaetes generally construct • I-221 0 Nephtys picta • Nephtys incisa Polynoidae sp. Arabella iricolor • Drilonereis longa Pholoe minuta Lumbrineris fragilis • Notocirrus spiniferus Glycera dibranchiata Glycera americana • Eumida sanguinea Harmothoe imbricata Sigalion arenicola • Nephtys picta was the most dominate errant polychaete found. It was present at all of the stations whereas all other errant polychaete worms were found at four or less stations and in lower numbers among all stations. Ranging from Cape Cod to South Carolina, Nephtys picta is known to be an active predator of other r invertebrates. It is not surprising to find it at the proposed site, as it is a common burrower in sand or mud. • The remaining two thirds of the polychaetes found at the site were sedentary forms. These sedentary polychaetes generally construct • I-221 0 0 0 • • • LI= 0 • 7 tubes or burrows into the bottom. They may be deposit feeding or filter feeding. Some sedentary polychaetes are equipped with special feeding structures with which they collect detritus and plankton from the sediment or surrounding water. Material adheres to mucus secretions on these feeding structures and is subsequently carried towards the mouth along ciliated tracts or grooves. The sedentary polychaetes select digestible organic material from the mixture, discarding non preferred materials such as sand. The sedentary polychaete species found at the site were as follows: Mediomastus ambiseta Aricidia catherinae Spiophanes bombyx Polygordius triestinus Sabellaria vulgaris Scolecolepides viridis Polydora socialis Polydora ligni Polydora sp. Tharyx acutus Travisia carnea Scolelepis squamata Ampharete arctica Caulleriella killariensis 1-222 • 0 • • n • 0 17 • Magelona papillicornis Orbinia ornata Owenia fusiformis Cirratulus grandis Clymenella zonalis Ophelia denticulata Mediomastus ambiseta was the most dominant sedentary polychaete, followed by Aricidea catherinae, Spiophanes bombyx, and Polygordius triestinus. All of these species were present at fifteen or more stations. All are infaunal burrowers and deposit feeders. The remaining sedentary polychaetes species present at the site were observed in half of the sample grabs or less and in lesser numbers. Besides polychaete worms, other invertebrates common at the site include the bivalve Tellina agilis, and the amphipod Haustorius canadensis. Both of these species are also active burrowers. The fact that all of the dominant species at the proposed site are infaunal burrowers is not surprising. The current velocities prevalent at the site are such that small surface dwelling organisms 1-223 would be easily swept away. The ability to burrow into the sediment allows these animals to remain out of the current flow. High current velocity also inhibits many of the tube building species as the sediments tend to be unstable. Therefore, tube building forms were not found to be prevalent at the proposed site. In the scoping outline for this DEIS, the involved agencies 41 expressed concern over the possible presence of the bacterium Beggiatoa sp. at the proposed site. The chemoautotrophic bacteria Beggiatoa sp., commonly grows as a mat over the sediment surface in areas devoid of oxygen (Day, et al, 1989). However, these bacteria were not detected at the site. The absence of Beggiatoa sp. at this site is attributed to the high current velocity, lack of anoxic sediment on the bottom and the high concentrations of dissolved oxygen detected throughout the water column. El 0 1-224 0 G. APPROVALS AND REQUIREMENTS • Each of the proposed three (3) project sites, hatchery, grow out, and the processing, will require a series of local, State, and Federal Permits, licenses, and so forth. Tables 30, 31 and 32 list the projected requirements that include the document, the agency having jurisdiction, and additional information for each of the three proposed sites. • ft I-225 • TABLE 30. REQUIRED PERMITS, LICENSES, LEASES, ETC. NET PEN GROW OUT SITE ITEM AGENCY REMARKS WATER COLUMN LEASE NYS OGS WATER QUALITY NYS DEC CONSTANCY REVIEW NYS COASTAL MANAGEMENT • NAVIGABLE WATERS US CORPS OF ENGINEERS HAZARDS TO NAVIGATION US COAST GUARD LIGHTING AND MARKING NET PENS NPDES USEPA OPEN OCEAN DISCHARGE ft I-225 • • • TABLE 31. REQUIRED PERMITS, LICENSES, LEASES, ETC. HATCHERY SITE ITEM AGENCY REMARKS PROPERTY LEASE VILLAGE OF GREENPORT APPROXIMATELY 8 ACRES PROPERTY LEASE SUFFOLK COUNTY HATCHERY SUPPORT FACILITY 2 ACRES CHANGE OF ZONE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BOTH PARCELS CURRENTLY ZONED R-80 RESIDENTIAL • VARIANCE OR WAIVER TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PARKING COASTAL EROSION TOWN OF SOUTHOLD VILLAGE PROPERTY ABUTS LIS BLUFF SITE PLAN TOWN OF SOUTHOLD CONDITIONAL SITE SUFFOLK COUNTY REVIEW UTILITIES CONNECTIONS VILLAGE OF GREENPORT POTABLE WATER AND WATER AND SEWER SUFFOLK COUNTY VILLAGE SEWER MAINS ARE ADJACENT ELECTRICAL FEEDER VILLAGE OF GREENPORT PLAN IS TO EXTEND SUFFOLK COUNTY VILLAGE ELECTRICAL TO NEW YORK STATE SITE • S.P.D.E.S. VILLAGE OF GREENPORT REVISION TO EXISTING SUFFOLK COUNTY PERMIT TO INCLUDE HATCHERY DISCHARGE CONSISTENCY REVIEW NEW YORK STATE CHANGE IN OUTFALL PIPE COASTAL MANAGEMENT MARINE HATCHERY NEW YORK STATE DEC MARINE DISCHARGE NEW YORK STATE DEC NAVIGABLE WATERS US CORPS OF ENGINEERS CHANGE IN OUTFALL PIPE HIGHWAY CURB CUTS AND SUFFOLK COUNTY CROSSINGS S.E.Q.R.A. FOR ALL OF THE ABOVE AS APPLICABLE 1-226 UA 0 0 TABLE 32. ITEM REQUIRED PERMITS, LICENSES, LEASES, ETC. FISH PROCESSING SITE AGENCY REMARKS SITE PLAN VILLAGE OF GREENPORT PARKING AND LOADING AND OFF LOADING FACILITIES WETLAND PERMIT VILLAGE OF GREENPORT LOADING AND OFF NEW YORK STATE DEC LOADING FACILITIES CONSISTENCY REVIEW NEW YORK STATE LOADING AND OFF COASTAL MANAGEMENT LOADING FACILITIES NAVIGABLE WATERS US CORPS OF ENGINEERS LOADING AND OFF LOADING FACILITIES WATER AND SEWER VILLAGE OF GREENPORT FISH PROCESSING ALLOCATIONS NEW YORK STATE DEC REQUIREMENTS BUILDING PERMIT VILLAGE OF GREENPORT MODIFICATIONS TO EXISTING FACILITIES S.E.Q.R.A. FOR ALL OF THE ABOVE AS APPLICABLE • • 40 0 I-227 1 • • • • • • CI ri i • • H. MAINTENANCE PROGRAM 1. SECURITY / PREDATOR CONTROL Potential predators upon cultured summer flounder raised to market size in the proposed ocean net pens include seals and diving avians. To address the control of these potential predators, two types of predator control devices are proposed. They are: the installation of predator control nets and the possible deployment of an acoustic seal deterrent device. Two predator control nets are proposed for each net pen. The first predator control net will be stretched vertically from the surface to a point below the primary net for each net pen type. The vertical predator control net will be attached to the outside of the superstructure or outside the primary net thereby providing for some degree of separation between the primary net and the predator control net. The degree of separation varies among the three net pen types proposed and is also subject to some degree of movement in response to prevailing currents at the Net Pen Site. The vertical predator control net is intended to provide protection of the cultured summer flounder from seals. A second predator control net will be stretched horizontally above and across each net pen. The horizontal predator control net is intended to protect I-228 • cultured summer flounder from potential predation attributed to • diving avians. Both the vertical and horizontal predator control net will be manufactured out of polypropylene or similar synthetic material also featuring a stretch mesh of 2 to 3 inches. • A seal deterrent device is further proposed to control seals from Technologies, Inc., that with deployment of a seal deterrent device, seals will simply avoid the Net Pen Site. Furthermore, as consistent • with the Connors Brothers experience, the Washington State EIS (1990) declared that the deployment of seal deterrent devices are • 1-229 • preying upon the cultured summer flounder. The seal deterrent i device emits a sonic signal which discourages harbor seals from swimming up to the proposed net pens. Powered by an on site battery or a solar power device, the seal deterrent device will be • operational 7 days a week, 24 hours a day. The sonic signal emitted by the seal deterrent can be heard by employees servicing the net pens or providing the needed security for the net pen • facility. The actual sound emitted by the seal deterrent device is similar to the sound of chirping crickets. Seal deterrent devices have been successfully operating at the Connors Brothers Salmon • Farms in northeastern Maine for some time thwarting predation of cultured salmon from seals and yet, at the same time, doing so without any apparent effect to seals. The production managers at the Connors Brothers Salmon Farms have advised Mariculture Technologies, Inc., that with deployment of a seal deterrent device, seals will simply avoid the Net Pen Site. Furthermore, as consistent • with the Connors Brothers experience, the Washington State EIS (1990) declared that the deployment of seal deterrent devices are • 1-229 • • effective in controlling seal predation without causing harm to seals. Designs and description of the seal deterrent device are presented herein as Appendix P. The prevention of potential vandalism of the net pens and theft of the cultured summer flounder contained therein is to be accomplished by on site, around the clock security. Security • personnel will stay aboard the proposed 30 foot crew boat which will be equipped with sleeping quarters, sanitary, and galley facilities for up to two (2) people. Security personnel will monitor • the net pens continuously except when inclement weather conditions threaten their safety. However, it is during times of inclement weather when the risk of vandalism is minimal. All proposed net pens to be deployed at the Net Pen Site will be continuously monitored by a team of divers under the employ of • Mariculture Technologies, Inc. The purposed of the dive team is to monitor the performance of not only the net pens themselves, but also all the operations over their use. Divers will monitor the structural integrity of the net pens to insure that no tears occur. Upon observing a structural defect in the primary net, the dive team will immediately affect any needed repairs or primary net pen 1 replacement, as appropriate. In this way, the control of escaped penned animals will be accomplished. 1-230 E Each net pen type provides for adjacent tie up of all service vessels. Accordingly, the risk of spilling cultured summer flounder during the stocking and harvest operations are minimized. With respect to he harvest operation, the design of each net pen type provides for the lifting of the bottom panel of the net pen towards the surface through the use of winches installed either aboard the proposed Aqua -truck vessel or on the superstructure of the net pens themselves. Accordingly, cultured summer flounder will be hoisted to the surface and concentrated, where they will be dip netted and transferred on to the harvest vessel for safe transport back to the processing facility. It is through these means that prevention of escapes during stock transfer will be avoided. 0 2. HEALTH / DISEASE CONTROL Existing scientific accounts of fish diseases specific to fluke, Paralichthys dentatus are sketchy, incomplete and poorly documented. Accordingly, the treatment techniques have not been specifically applied to the intensive culture of this particular species. Rather, detailed studies of fish pathogens within the context of aquaculture have for the most part been dedicated to the culture of a variety of salmonids, trout, channel catfish, carp, American and • European eel, and the yellow tail flounder cultured for decades in • I-231 0 • The term nutritional disease is perhaps a misnomer as it for • the most part applies to the physiological effects caused by inappropriate food items or the effects of starvation. Nutritional diseases in the natural environment are rare. • However, nutritional deficiencies or imbalances typically result in poor growth and are often enable other infectious diseases to take hold in fish undergoing physiological • (nutritional) stress. Surprisingly little information is • I-232 0 Japan. Nevertheless, the study of fish diseases are for the most part • comprised of investigations of nutritional diseases, viral pathogens, bacterial pathogens and parasites. None of these broad classes of fish diseases are expected to pose a significant threat to the early life stages of the summer flounder raised in the proposed hatchery because hatchery waters will be provided through salt water wells, will undergo an initial prophylactic treatment with • ozone and all fish rearing facilities (e.g. hatchery jars, larval tanks and post larval tanks) will undergo periodic cleaning and rinsing. Therefore, the concern related to potential fish diseases and • corresponding treatments is limited to the final grow -out (net -pen) facilities. • a. Nutritional Diseases The term nutritional disease is perhaps a misnomer as it for • the most part applies to the physiological effects caused by inappropriate food items or the effects of starvation. Nutritional diseases in the natural environment are rare. • However, nutritional deficiencies or imbalances typically result in poor growth and are often enable other infectious diseases to take hold in fish undergoing physiological • (nutritional) stress. Surprisingly little information is • I-232 0 • • • [7 • • CI C: • 0 available concerning nutritional diseases specific to summer flounder. However, Lall and Torrissen (1992) have reported thiamine deficiency in flatfishes being fed on purified diets under experimental conditions. More generally and perhaps more importantly, nutritional disease has been attributed to rancid fish feed. Nutritional problems are for the most part restricted to fat soluble vitamins, copper, selenium and fluoride (Lall and Torrissen, 1992). The pathological signs associated with nutritional disease related to rancid fish feed include liver lipid degeneration, microtic anemia and steatitis (Lall and Torrissen, 1992). However, the nutritional make-up of the commercial feed proposed herein is as follows: Fish meal, fish oil, wheat, cane molasses together with a vitamin premix containing Retinyl Acetate (A), Retinyl Palmitate A), Vitamin D3, dl- Alpha-Tocopheryl Acetate (E), Calcium D -Pantothenate, Riboflavin, Nicotinic Acid, Thiamine Mononitrate, Pyrodoxine Hydrochloride (B6), Vitamin B-12, D -Biotin, Folic Acid, Inositol, Ascorbyl Polyphoshonate (C), combined with a mineral supplement containing Manganese Sulfate, zinc Sulfate, Calcium iodate, and Betaine. The guaranteed gross analysis of the commercial Mahi-Maki Extruded Fish Feed is as follows: I-233 • U • • • • L • • • Crude Protein (minimum) 56.0% Crude Fat (minimum) 14.0% Crude Fiber (maximum) 1.0% Calcium (actual) 2.4% Phosphorus (actual) 1.7% Sodium (actual) 0.6% Vitamin A (minimum) 2500 IU/Kg Vitamin D3 (minimum) 2400 IU/Kg Vitamin E (minimum) 100 IU/Kg The risk associated with rancidity is minimal due to the quick turnover of feed with respect to the shelf life of the feed itself. Finally, the most common nutritional diseases are associated with refusal to accept feed. The important factors include inadequate feeding, feed rancidity, nutrient deficiencies, improper pellet size, overfeeding to the extent whereby water quality is significantly effected, physiological stress and behavioral problems (Lall and Torrissen, 1992). Food refusal over a prolonged period of time results in weight loss, fin erosion, skin ulceration and darkening with respect 1-234 u • r, u • C7 • • Is to inadequate feeding. Feed will be delivered at a rate of 2% biomass per day as is the accepted practice for the commercial culture of turbot. Accordingly, there is no expectation that the nutritional diseases arising out of inadequate feeding will occur. With respect to feed rancidity, the fast turnover of fish feed and the extended shelf life of the feed itself will preclude the occurrence of nutritional disease. With respect to improper pellet size, the size of the pellet to be delivered to the summer flounder will be based upon the mouth size of the summer flounder at that time. Accordingly, there is no expectation that nutritional disease will arise due to improper pellet size. With respect to overfeeding as related to water quality, there is no expectation that nutritional diseases will arise from this vector due to the high current velocity at this locale which will disperse both unconsumed feed and fecal material over a broad area. b. Viral Pathogens Extensive review of the literature reveals only one viral disease which is known to effect both summer and winter flounder to a potentially significant degree: Viral I-235 • • • • • • • 1 C. • • Is Erythrocytic Necrosis ("VEN") also known as Piscine Erythrocytic Necrosis ("PEN"). McAllister (1992) describes VEN as an Erythrocytic disease of punitive viral etiology occurring in species from 23 genera including Paralichthys. The Erythrocytic Necrosis Virus has not been isolated in cell culture but its viral etiology is based upon experimental transmission of the disease (McAllister, 1992). Furthermore, the mechanisms for transmission in the natural environment are unknown but is thought to be contracted through direct contact (Evelyn and Traxler, 1979). VEN is diagnosed by the occurrence of cytoplasmic inclusions on Giemsa stained erythrocytes using electron microscopy. Mortality attributed to the VEN Virus is rare. Rather, fish infected by the VEN Virus undergo physiological stress which can culminate in mortality attributed to secondary bacterial infections. Finally, no treatment nor control of VEN have been developed. Bacterial Pathogens Cytophaga-like Bacteria ("CLB") are specifically known to effect summer flounder. CLB is a general term applied to a I-236 • C • [] • • U, 1 • • Al multitude of taxonomic varieties which cause fin rot, a septicaemic infection, in a variety fish including summer flounder (Mahoney, et. al., 1973). Transmission of CLB in nature is probably through direct contact. Furthermore, CLB are most likely secondary invaders (Inglis, et. al., 1993) and their effect on pathogenesis remains unclear. Even so, dorsal fin rot in Atlantic salmon was found to be caused by repeated bite wounds, with bacteria being present for only a short period of time. Furthermore, bacteriologic concentrations in Atlantic salmon were found to decrease rapidly following re-establishment of epithelial contiguity (Inglis et. al., 1993). The risks of CLB infections to cultured summer flounder are unknown. However treatment with oxytetracycline as incorporated into the fish feed is known to be highly effective in treating this disease. Oxytetracycline is marketed under the trade name, Tetramycin for Fish by Pfizer, Inc. If needed, oxytetracycline will be delivered to the cultured summer flounder by direct purchase of specialized antibiotic feed manufactured in compliance with FDA guidelines. Bacterium of the genus Vibrio are regarded as one of the most significant marine fish bacterial pathogens. Marine 1-237 0 • • • • • • C • • 0 vibrios including the fish pathogens are found in all saline waters (Inglis et. al., 1993). The disease caused by species of this genus has been termed Vibriosis. Scientific knowledge of this pathogen was spurred by research efforts related to the culture of eels and salmon. The first vibrio to be isolated was named Vibrio anguillarum after its target host, the eel. Thereafter, Vibrio salmonica was isolated after being implicated as a significant pathogen of the Atlantic salmon resulting in Hitra disease. The species of Vibrio known to infect summer flounder has not been isolated. However, most Vibrios occur in marine waters characterized as stagnant, with soft underlying benthos in combination with high organic loading (Inglis et. al., 1993). Accordingly, the selection of the grow -out site as discussed herein are advantageous in terms of reduced potential occurrence owing to the strong currents and hard bottom lands. The effects of Vibriosis include hemolytic anemia. However, this particular disease is most commonly results in infections which take the form of focal haemorrahagic ulcers on the mouth or skin surface, focal neucrotic lesions in the muscle or along the edge of the fins. Finally, Vibriosis can I-238 0 • 11 9 J • 0 1 • take the form of sub -epidermal lesions which result in dark epidermal pigmentation. Typically, the first signs of infections include anorexia or pigment darkening (Inglis, et. al. 1993). Prevention of Vibriosis is largely achieved by maintenance of water quality, good culture technique and low stocking density. However, even when taking these precautions Vibriosis can occur as evidenced by its occurrence in the natural environment. In an intensive culture system, the following antibiotics (as incorporated into feed) have been effective: oxytetracycline, sulfonamides and oxolinic acid (Inglis, et. al., 1993). Only sulfamerazine and oxytetracycline have been licensed by the U.S. FDA with oxytetracycline being the preferred treatment. If needed, oxytetracycline will be delivered to cultured summer flounder by direct purchase of specialized antibiotic feed manufactured in compliance with all FDA guidelines. Immediate diagnosis and treatment is essential because anorexia is an initial symptom for the occurrence of this disease. Bacterium of the genus Aeromas has been implicated as the causative pathogen for Furunculosis. Furunculosis refers to 1-239 :7 a fatal epizootic disease most widely occurring in the • salmonids but also known to effect a wide variety of other fishes perhaps also including summer flounder. In most effected species, Furunculosis is detected by skin lesions • which progresses to multiple skin lesions and finally systemic infections which take the form of marked leukopenia and cyst formation. FDA licensed drugs for the • treatment of Furunculosis have include sulfadimethoxine, ormetoprim, sulfamerazine and oxytetracycline, with oxytetracycline probably being the preferred treatment, at • least in controlling initial outbreaks. However, research J J • efforts on Furunculosis in salmonids have suggested increased resistance to oxytetracycline, suggesting that use of the other licensed drugs may provide superior control should repeated outbreaks occur. If needed, oxytetracycline will be delivered to the cultured summer flounder by direct purchase of specialized antibiotic feed manufactured in compliance with all FDA guidelines. Streptococcal infections arise from a numerous species within the genus Streptococcus. While not specifically known to effect summer flounder, streptococcal infections • are known to effect a wide variety of freshwater and marine • species. Clinical signs for this disease include erratic 1-240 0 • 0 • • 17 • • n u • 0 swimming, darkening of body color, unilateral or bilateral exophthalmia, corneal opacity, hemorrhages on the opercula and the bases of the fins, and ulceration of the body surface (Inglis, et al. 1993). Species of the genus Streptococcus are confined to bottom lands of mud during the cooler months of the year and are released into the water column with increasing temperature. Nevertheless, the most common mode of transmission of this disease is direct contact with infected fish or by contaminated wet fish feed (Inglis, et. al., 1993). Therefore, the major preventative strategy involves immediate removal of infected or dead fish and good quality control of the any wet pelletalized feed. Both preventative strategies have been incorporated into this project. Erythromycin has been shown to be effective in combating this disease, but unfortunately, is not licensed at this time by the FDA for aquaculture. However, substitution of oxytetracycline will most likely offer the most effective treatments among the licensed FDA drugs. d. Parasites Their are a multitude of potential parasites associated with summer flounder in the wild. However, none of these I-241 0 • • 0 • 0 • • • 0 parasites have been specifically documented in the Peconic- Gardeners Bay Estuary. It is assumed that the lack of documented accounts of parasites to summer flounder reflects a lack of basic research in New York State in the area of parasitology. Nevertheless, it is generally accepted among the scientific community that most successful parasites do not directly kill their hosts as they rely upon living hosts to complete their life cycles. Rather, the effects caused by parasites are more likely to weaken the fish thereby increasing the risk of viral and bacterial infection and malnutrition. The major preventative strategies with regard to the culture of these and other species include: maintenance of good water quality, prevention of over crowding in fish stocked in net pens and adequate nutrition provided to cultured fish species. A rather extensive listing of parasites effecting left eye flounder (presumably including summer flounder) has been assembled by Poynton (1992). Approximately 19 genera of parasites represented among 12 phyla are known to effect summer flounder in varying degrees. A more precise listing of both genera and phyla effecting left eye flounder (from Poynton, 1992) are listed below: I-242 • • • • n L-A • C • • • Parasites of the Summer Flounder Phyla Genera Sarcomastigophora Cryptobia Apicomplexa Haemohormidium Microsporum Tetramicra Theragra Ciliata Trichodina Monogera Cryptocotyle Stephanostomum Cestoda Bothriocephalus Acanthocephala Cornysoma Hirundinea Calliobdella Copepoda Acanthochondria Anchistrotus Caligus Lepeophtheris Neobranchia Phrixocephalus Isopoda Linoneca Nematoda Contracaecum I-243 11 0 • n 0 • • 7 0 Of the 19 potential parasites listed above, 10 are known to directly infect summer flounder. Most are found within the Phyla, Copepoda. Direct parasites include: Tetramicra, Theragra, Trichodina, Calliobdella, Acanthochondria, Anchistrotus, Caligus, Lepeoptheris, Neobranchia and Linoneca. The remaining parasites have complex life cycles resulting in a mode of infection that commonly includes several intermediate hosts. For example, the mode of infection of the Cryptocotyle includes birds as a definitive host, snails as the first intermediate host with summer flounder being the second intermediate host (Poynton, 1992). Those parasites which have complex life cycles are not thought to pose significant risk to cultured summer flounder as proposed herein because these parasites can not be directly transferred from fish to fish. The general prevalence of the above listed parasites range from unknown and uncommon to common. Unfortunately, none of the above listed parasites are specifically known to occur in the Peconic - Gardeners Estuary System reflecting a major research gap with respect to parasitology in this locale. As such, any assessment of parasite risk to summer flounder mortality in culture, would be highly speculative and therefore inappropriate. Furthermore, many of these 1-244 • • • � 7 �J parasites infect summer flounder at various stages of their life cycle including post metamorphosis, juvenile and adult phases. It is therefore thought that given the limited time in which year class one summer flounder are actually present in the ocean net pens, the risk of parasitic infection would be concomitantly reduced as available contact time is reduced. 3. NET CLEANING There are several different methodologies used to keep the pen netting clean so as to permit adequate flow of water through the net pens. The primary one is use of a water -powered scrubber brush. This is powered by a water pump on the service vessel and is handled by a diver who goes over the surface of the nets and scrubs off the growth. One of the newer methods developed for ocean net pens involves direct net replacement. This is accomplished by placement of a • second net inside the existing net pen followed by the subsequent removal of the exterior primary net. The exterior net is brought to • the surface where it can be power washed, and if land facilities are available, taken ashore and dried. • I-245 r, u I u A third method is to take the net that needs cleaning and put it into • a partially submerged drum washing machine, which is powered by a small air motor. The nets are put into the drum washer and grasses, growth, and other debris are removed. A hydraulic crane • mounted on the freight service vessel will be used to lift the nets. As the planned installation is expected to include predator nets on • the exterior of the net pens, these also require cleaning. The standard methodology is to remove them in sections where they • can be cleaned on site by methods described above and replaced. Net pen cleaning activities will occur during the summer months, • the frequency for which will be determined by the extent of fouling. 4. OPERATIONAL SUPERVISION C This overall proposed project requires a high degree and level of operational supervision. The list of operations that require special • attention include, but are not limited to, the following: o Transfer of fingerlings to the marine loading site. • o Movement of the fingerlings by vessel to the net pen grow - out site. o Movement of feed from storage to the marine loading site. • 1-246 17J • o Transportation of feed to the net pen grow -out site. • o The off loading of feed at the net pens. o The inspection of the fish and the net pens on daily basis. • o The harvesting of the fish from the net pens, loading them on the freight vessel and transferring same to the processing facility. A o The scheduling and staffing of security personnel at the net pens. 7 �m CM ;� 7 • 0 In addition to operational supervision, the maintenance and servicing of equipment and facilities will also require management oversight. These functions include, but are not limited to, the following: o Maintenance of all of the water supply and treatment facilities at the hatchery. o Maintenance and servicing of all effluent filters and water treatment equipment. o General maintenance of hatchery buildings and facilities. o Vessel maintenance, o Servicing and maintenance of net pen cleaning and harvesting equipment. I-247 • Mariculture Technologies, Inc. proposes to employ one or more • Operations Managers, who will responsible for all operational supervision of the project. The Operational Supervisor(s) will command a number of professionals in charge of the various • operations, such as hatchery, harvest, net pen servicing, feeding, and so forth. • 0 • • r 0 • I-248 40 ! I. CLOSURE AND POST CLOSURE PLANS These plans would involve facilities at two (2) locations, as follows: HATCHERY SITE The closure and post closure plan for the proposed hatchery includes the donation of these facilities to the Village of Greenport or the removal of same and the subsequent restoration of the site. • NET PEN GROW -OUT SITE 0 Closure and post closure requirements are set forth in the draft Water Column Lease between New York State and Mariculture Technologies, • Inc. attached hereto as Appendix Q. The lease provides for the removal of net pens within ninety (90) days of a written notice of termination. The impact of removal of all in water structures is ! insignificant as the under water lands will quickly revert to their prior condition. • 1-249 7 L 0 • II Environmental Setting of Water and Land Based • Operations for All Sites n r 0 • 0 • • *j A. GEOLOGY 1. SURFACE/SUBSURFACE ! HATCHERY The United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service performed a soil survey of Suffolk County, NY. in 1975. This study characterizes the hatchery site as having a combination of Montauk and Riverhead soils. The soil types are as follows: • o Montauk fine, sandy loam • A band of soil that runs along the southern end of the site, diagonally northeast across the center of the site contains Montauk fine, sandy loam. This soil is on moraines with Is slopes of 3 % to 8 % slopes (USDA, 1975). Also included with this soil are areas of Montauk fine sandy loam soils with 0 % to 3% and 8 % to 15% slopes and Riverhead soils. The soil profile is described as representative of the Montauk Series of soils. In many areas where this soil is found have slopes that are complex and undulating. The • soil has a weak fragipan (area below the surface that is low in organic matter and clay and high in silt or very fine sand). • II -1 a The weakness of the fragipan indicates an intergrade L between Montauk and Riverhead Soils. These areas are also characterized as Montauk Soils that contain 15 to 30 percent gravel in the solum and areas that are sandy loam throughout. The hazard of erosion is moderate to slight for this soil. • o Gravel Pit • The from the center of the site to and along shore line to the northeast corner of the site, the soil is characterized as a gravel pit. The area is generally disturbed and has been f excavated. The soil was probably that of the Montauk Series but since the topsoil has been removed, there are no soil classifications for these areas. • o Riverhead Soils f The soils along the shore to the north western corner of the site characterized as Riverhead sandy loam with 3 % to 8 % • and 8 % to 15 % slopes. These soils are found on moraines and tend to contain amounts of gravel, but are primarily • II -2 ~ GROW OUT SITE On July 5, 1994, sediment samples were collected using a O.1M2 Smith-MacIntyre (TM) Benthic Grab. Twenty stations within the perimeter of the proposed net pen site were chosen for 0 II -3 k1_ marginal to sandy loam. The erosion hazard on these soils is moderate to slight, but in some areas, erosion may be moderately severe particularly in areas with steep slopes. ~ A salt water well was drilled in order to test the quality of the salt water aquifer. A log was kept of the subsurface geology profile. The well profile is as follows: • DEPTH FROM SURFACE SUBSTRATUM 0 to 21 feet Hard Pan • 21 to 25 feet Clay 25 feet Ground Water 25 to 45 feet Clay 46 to 57 feet Course Gravel 58 to 86 feet Gravel/Stone/Sand 97 to 100 feet Course/Fine Sand, Mud • 100 feet Salt Water ~ GROW OUT SITE On July 5, 1994, sediment samples were collected using a O.1M2 Smith-MacIntyre (TM) Benthic Grab. Twenty stations within the perimeter of the proposed net pen site were chosen for 0 II -3 k1_ sampling. Sediment grain and TOC analyses were performed in + accordance with the standard methods previously described herein. 0 area. The sediment characteristics were evenly distributed throughout the proposed net pen site. The lowest percentage of sand and • consequently the highest percentage of silt was present at Station 10 (88.4% and 11.6% respectively). The highest percentage of V Sediment grain analysis revealed that the sediment in the area of the proposed net pens consists of high percentages (88.4% to 98.8 %) of very fine to medium grain sand. The remaining percentage (1.2% to 11.6%) of sediment consisted of gray silt. There was • virtually no gravel or clay present in the sediment. During the diver survey, the bottom proved to be highly unconsolidated. Attempts to obtain sediment cores were unsuccessful because the sediment would not remain in the hand corer. This prevented the determination of a discontinuity layer which apparently does not exist on the site. The entire length of the 30.5 centimeter hand i corer penetrated the bottom with no resistance further indicating the unconsolidated nature of the sediments. Observations during the survey found that the overlying organic layer to be highly variable and in constant motion. This lack of sediment compaction is attributable to the high velocity currents prevalent throughout the 0 area. The sediment characteristics were evenly distributed throughout the proposed net pen site. The lowest percentage of sand and • consequently the highest percentage of silt was present at Station 10 (88.4% and 11.6% respectively). The highest percentage of V i A Ll V C • r, sand and lowest percentage of silt was found at Station 8 (98.8% and 1.2% respectively). Even so, there were no significant differences in the percentages of sand and silt among the stations. The highly unconsolidated nature of the sediment coupled with the high velocity currents and high oxygen content of the water column previously described herein, indicates that excess food and fish feces will be dispersed quickly and widely after release from the net pens. Furthermore, the site contains several sporadically placed boulders, which make the area unsuitable for commercial trawlers. These factors are vital to the success of any aquaculture operation and indicate that the site is ideal for the placement of net pens. Replenishment rates of sediment are low due to the high current velocities prevalent throughout the area. Investigations of Plum Gut by divers revealed nothing but large rocks and boulders on the bottom due to the tremendous volumes of water passing through the constriction. The existence of a large swale south and east of Plum Gut further indicates the ability of the current to remove material. The unconsolidated nature of the ocean bottom at the net pen site indicates that these sediments are vulnerable to movement by the current resulting in low sediment accumulation. II -5 [` • 4 a 11 • • I U C The topography of the bottom in the vicinity of the proposed net pen site is gradual. The net pen site itself is flat with an average depth of 35 feet. The placement of net pens will not effect the bottom in such a way as to promote erosion. Discernible navigation channels are not present in the vicinity of the proposed net pen site. Most of the waters surrounding the site have depths greater than 20 feet and are navigable by most vessels frequenting the area. In addition, the gradual changes in depth throughout the area would largely preclude cave-ins from occurring. PROCESSING SITE The processing site consists of Riverhead and Haven Soils with 0 % to 8% slopes. This soil contains Riverhead sandy loam, Haven loam, or both. These areas have been altered by grading operations for development, in this case, a fish processing plant. Grading of these areas has altered the profile by either removing the surface soil or filling with soil cut from adjoining high points. It is believed that the soils present at the processing site is a result of cut and fill operation. II -6 • :M • • FM • V C�] • 2. TOPOGRAPHY a. Growout Site: The topography of the bottom land of the proposed grow out site is flat, ranging in depth from 30 to 37 feet. To the north of the site, the bottom gradually rises to 15 feet or less as the shore of Plum Island is reached. To the east, there is little change in depth apparent in the immediate vicinity of the grow out site. In contrast, to the west, the depth plunges to nearly 200 feet in Plum Gut then rises gradually to depths ranging from 70 to 110 feet south of the net pen site. On the north side of Plum Gut is a 300 foot depression. These variations in depth are due to the great volumes of high velocity current moving through Plum Gut. These currents have created a scouring effect resulting in a groove like contouring of the ocean bottom west and south of the net pen site. The bottom land contours of the net pen site and beyond are shown in Figure 21. II -7 0 rlm=r%IWqrT PLUM J/ GUT 4w ow THE SLUICEWAY qp GREAT 30 ~-� GULL ISLAND V PLUM ISLAND 30 nxm Gm limmit GARDINERS BAY GARDINERS POINT 1 � BOSTWICK POINT FIGURE 21. BOTTOM LAND CONTOURS OF THE GROW OUT SITE AND BEYOND. The current velocities present in and around the proposed net pen site will determine the deposition patterns of waste feed and fecal material. As previously stated herein, the sedimentation process will be slow as the strong current velocity will tend to disperse small, unconsolidated materials, such as unconsumed feed and feces over a wide area. s' b. Hatchery Site The majority of the Hatchery Site has been cleared and partially f excavated as the result of past mining operations by the Village of Greenport. The elevations (Figure 22) are generally above thirty feet, except along the bluff where the site slopes down rapidly to the beach. .' 1 40 • II -9 0 1 7 a N LONG ISLAND SOUND / h 41P / In 16.0 t i I 29.0 I i I ( 18.01 26.0 4 .0 I I ;12.5 24.0 f� I I I I � � 11 I Ix`28.0 � o � 13.0 SUFFOLK \ VAS 29.0 \ _ _ COUNTY VILLAGE��� OF 32.0 \\ 10\ ` \\ \ GREENPORT \ o ///\ \\\ / r SCALE I" = 200' 56.0 _ / x /325 Figure 22. Topography of the proposed hatchery site (Clarks Beach). L 1 `M C7= V a W B. WATER RESOURCES 1. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY a. QUALITY The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (1986) has set forth regulations regarding the quality of the surface and ground waters of New York State. These regulations detail the water quality classifications and standards for every water body within the state. The water quality regulations delineate several general parameters applicable to all New York saline surface waters. These parameters are as follows: • 1. Garbage, cinders, ashes, oils, sludge, or other refuse. • 2. pH a 3. Turbidity :�M 4. Color 5. Suspended Solids or settleable solids • 6. Oil and floating substances i 7. Thermal discharges f', is 1 11-12 None in any waters of the marine district as defined by Environmental Conservation Law 17-0105 The normal range shall not be extended by more than one- tenth (0.1) pH unit. No increase except from natural sources that will cause a substantial visible contrast to natural conditions. In cases of naturally turbid waters, the contrast will be due to increased turbidity. None from man-made sources that will be detrimental to anticipated best usage of waters. None from sewage, industrial wastes or other wastes which will cause deposition or be deleterious for any best usage determined for specific waters which are assigned to each class. No residue attributable to sewage, industrial wastes or other wastes, nor visible oil film nor globules of grease. All discharges shall assure the protection and propagation of a balanced, indigenous population of fish, shellfish, and wildlife in and on the body of water. s El A a 0 V 1 V 0 Hatchery Site The waters adjacent to the proposed hatchery site are classified as "SD" waters. These waters have the additional standards set forth as follows: 1. Dissolved Oxygen 2. Toxic wastes and deleterious substances. Shall not be less than 3.0 mg/L at any time. None alone or in combination with other substances or wastes in sufficient amounts to prevent survival of finfish, or impair the waters for any other best usage as determined for the specific waters which are assigned to this class. This classification is undoubtedly due to the location of the Greenport Sewage Treatment Plant outfall at the site. Furthermore, the conditions resulting in the "SD" classification are considered to be site specific and do not extend far beyond the proximity of the outfall pipe. This conclusion is supported by the fact that the waters of Long Island Sound further offshore from the outfall pipe are classified as "SA" type waters. Il- 13 W 1 w a V a 4 0 A salt water test well was drilled on April 10th, 11 th and 12th, 1995 by Kreiger Well and Pump Corporation situate Mattituck, NY. On April 12, 1995, salt water was reached at a depth of 100 feet below the surface. On April 13, 1995, the well was developed for a period of three hours before samples were collected and transported to a NYS licensed laboratory. Observations of the water from the well during sample collection found it to be clear and without suspended sediments. In order to determine the suitability of the salt water aquifer for the culture of summer flounder, EcoTest Laboratories, Inc. situate North Babylon, NY. were contracted to perform a water quality analysis of the salt water. Parameters tested for included salinity, nutrients, metals, pesticides, hydrocarbon and general water quality. Samples taken for metals analysis were filtered as they were collected. A complete report on the quality of the salt water obtained from the well is contained in Appendix R. The parameters tested, the concentrations present as well as recommended levels (Stoskopf, 1993; Andrews et. al., 1988; Creswell, 1993) are as follows: 11-14 II - 15 • TABLE 33. SALT WATER TEST WELL ANALYSIS PARAMETER DETECTED RECOMMENDED Salinity 30.13 ppt > 20 ppt Chloride as Cl. 17000 mg/L > 125 mg/L Spec. Conductivity 24000 umho/om > 20000 umho/om Alkalinity total CaCO3 88 mg/L > 125 mg/L pH 6.7 7.5-8.5 Free CO2 50 mg/L < 10 mg/L Ammonia as N 0.12 mg/L < 0.5 mg/L Nitrite as N < 0.002 mg/L < 1.0 mg/L Nitrate as N < 0.5 mg/L < 20 mg/L Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 1.2 mg/L 20 mg/L Ortho Phosphate as P 0.14 mg/L 0.01 - 3.0 mg/L Sulfide as S < 0.1 mg/L < 0.001 mg/L Sulfate as SO4 2400 mg/L 250 mg/L Fluoride as F 0.74 mg/L 0.06 mg/L Cyanide as CN <0.02 mg/L 0.1 mg/L Total Dissolved Solids 29000 mg/L 500 mg/L • Total Suspended Solids 29 mg/L < 1000 mg/L Copper as Cu < 0.10 mg/L < 0.015 mg/L Iron as Fe < 0.25 mg/L < 0.03 mg/L Manganese as Mn < 0.10 mg/L 0.05 mg/L Magnesium as Mg 5100 mg/L < 2000 mg/L Nickel as Ni < 0.50 mg/L 0.025 mg/L Zinc as Zn < 0.10 mg/L 1.0 mg/L Arsenic as As < 0.002 mg/L absent Barium as Ba < 0.25 mg/L 1.0 mg/L Cadmium as Cd < 0.001 mg/L absent Chromium as Cr < 0.10 mg/L absent Boron as B 3.3 mg/L 4.6 mg./L Lead as Pb 0.011 mg/L < 0.03 mg/L Mercury as Hg 0.0004 mg/L 0.002 mg/L Selenium as Se <0.002 mg/L 0.01 mg/L Silver as Ag < 0.01 mg/L absent Aldicarb sulfone (P) < 0.8 ug/L absent Aldicarb sulfoxide (P) < 0.5 ug/L absent so Oxamyl (P) < 1.0 ug/L absent Methomyl (P) < 0.5 ug/L absent 3 -Hydroxy Carbofuran (P) <1.0 ug/L absent Aldicarb (P) < 0.5 ug/L absent Carbofuran (P) < 0.9 ug/L absent 10 Carbaryl (P) < 1.0 ug/L absent Dacthal (P) < 1.0 ug/L absent All Hydrocarbons < 0.5 ug/L absent All Chlorophenols < 0.5 ug/L 0.0001 mg/L All DiChlorophenols < 0.5 ug/L 0.0001 mg/L -41 * note: all detections with "<" indicates the substance was not detected at this sensitivity level. absent = not detectable by most sensitive analytical procedures. P = Pesticide II - 15 • 11 s .r i • • 1 40 s 1 As indicated by the above analyses, the water quality of the salt water aquifer is generally good to excellent for the purpose of culturing summer flounder. The concentrations of CO2, and SO4 are higher than recommended and pH and alkalinity are lower. However these conditions are most likely attributed to the low oxygen conditions of the ground water and can easily be remedied through aeration or as in the case of pH and alkalinity, chemical additive to buffer the salt water (Stoskopf, 1993). Magnesium and total dissolved solids were present at levels higher than recommended. These levels are believed to be caused by the inability to develop the well for a long enough period of time due to the lack of power currently at the site. It is believed that these levels will decrease once the well is allowed to be developed sufficiently. Net Pen Site and Processing Site The waters of the proposed net pen site and Stirling Basin (site of Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Plant) are classified as "SA" waters. This classification represents water quality conditions of oceanic sea water. In addition to the above standards, additional requirements pertaining to SA waters are as follows: 11-16 • i► With respect to the processing site, this project does not require the discharge of materials into the waters of Stirling Basin and therefore will not have a deleterious effect upon the environment therein. Regarding the net pen grow out site, the material to be discharged from the net pens is of natural origin (fish feces). s 11-17 • 1. Coliform The median MPN value in any series of samples 40 representative of waters in the shellfish -growing area shall not be in excess of 70 per 100 ml. f 2. Dissolved Oxygen Shall not be less than 5.0 mg/L at any time. 3. Toxic Wastes and deleterious None in amounts that will substances interfere with use for primary contact recreation or that will be injurious to edible fish or shellfish or the culture or propagation thereof, or which in any manner adversely affect the flavor, color, odor, or sanitary condition thereof, or impair the waters for any other best usage as determined for their specific waters which are assigned to this class. i► With respect to the processing site, this project does not require the discharge of materials into the waters of Stirling Basin and therefore will not have a deleterious effect upon the environment therein. Regarding the net pen grow out site, the material to be discharged from the net pens is of natural origin (fish feces). s 11-17 • • 1 4 Cl • 0 C` V El CA 1 Furthermore, the high currents prevalent throughout the area will promote high oxygen concentrations in the water column and in the sediment as well as wide dispersal of fish feces. Oxygen concentrations measured at the site were greater than 7.0 mg/L. Moreover, it is expected that the proposed net pens will not contravene applicable water quality standards. Samples for nitrogen analysis were collected on August 8, 1994 at the following coordinates of the net pen site: 41' 10.19' Lat., 72° 10.39' Long. (Station 1) and 41° 17.22' Lat., 72° 11.61' Long. (Station 2). Sea conditions were as follows: wave height less than 1 foot, winds out of the northeast at 0-5 knots and skies were sunny. The samples at Station #1 were collected between 6:15 and 7:30 AM. during a low tide. Samples for nitrogen were collected simultaneously with the previously discussed oxygen and salinity samples. The samples at Station # 2 were collected between 8:05 and 9: 15 AM. Samples for total kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N), nitrite nitrogen (NO2-N), and nitrate nitrogen (NO3-N) were collected at depths of 1 meter below the surface and 1 meter above the bottom. These samples were subsequently placed II - 18 0 1 U a i Vi 10 C: in 250 ml plastic bottles, stored in the dark and on ice and transported to the laboratory where they were immediately analyzed. All nitrogen analyses were performed using EPA approved methods by EcoTest Laboratories, Inc, a licensed New York State laboratory situate North Babylon, New York. The methods used for the analyses were as follows: TKN- digestion method, EPA Code # 351.2; NH3-N -ammonia selective electrode method, EPA Code # 351.3; NO2-N- spectrophotometric method, EPA Code # 354.1; and NO3-N- cadmium reduction method, EPA Code # 353.2. Nitrogen results for Station # 1 are presented in Table 34. Table 34. Nitrogen analyses for station # 1 collected on August 8, 1994 with respect to depth. Depth TKN NH3-N NO2-N NO3-N Total N (feet) mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L 3 0.6 <0.05 <0.002 <0.05 0.6 32 0.4 <0.05 <0.002 <0.05 0.4 11-19 • Analysis of nitrogen with respect to the sample locations and depth revealed generally low ambient nitrogen concentrations in the water column. a b. SEASONAL VARIATIONS Due to the high current velocities and water exchange throughout the area, dissolved oxygen and salinity regimes f are not expected to undergo seasonal variations. II -20 1 Nitrogen concentrations for Station # 2 are presented in Table 35. Table 3 5. Nitrogen concentrations for Station # 2 collected on • August 8, 1994 with respect to depth. Depth TKN NH3-N NO2-N NO3-N Total N (feet) mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L 3 0.4 <0.05 <0.002 <0.05 0.4 18 0.8 <0.05 <0.002 <0.05 0.8 • Analysis of nitrogen with respect to the sample locations and depth revealed generally low ambient nitrogen concentrations in the water column. a b. SEASONAL VARIATIONS Due to the high current velocities and water exchange throughout the area, dissolved oxygen and salinity regimes f are not expected to undergo seasonal variations. II -20 1 • • • 0 • [7 U U UA • Temperature is expected to be at a minimum of 0°C during the winter months and a maximum of 20°C to 22°C during the summer months. In an effort to compare nitrogen levels currently existing at the net pen grow out site with historical nitrogen levels and seasonal variations, an analysis was performed on the data set compiled by the New York Ocean Science Laboratory ("NYOSL") situate Montauk, New York. NYOSL conducted a comprehensive study on the physical and chemical quality of the waters of Long Island Sound and Block Island Sound from 1970 to 1973. In order to establish baseline historical nitrogen conditions, data collected by NYOSL at the sample location closest to the proposed net pen area was used in this analysis. This sample location is referred to as N3, situate The Race at coordinants 41° 13.24' Lat, 72° 05.30' Long (NYOSL, 1976). The NYOSL data collected for one year from October 20, 1970 to October 6, 1971 is summarized by month in Table 36. The complete data set for that year at that station from is presented in Appendix S. II -21 Table 36. Average nitrite nitrogen (NO2-N) and nitrate (NO3-N) nitrogen concentrations with corresponding range from samples collected at 41 ° 13.24' Lat and 72° 05.30' Long (New York Ocean Science Laboratory, 1976). i i II -22 • MONTH/ NO2 NO3 • YEAR mg/L mg/L mean mean (range) (range) Oct 1970 0.019 0.04 (0-0.03) (0.01-0.05) Feb 1971 0.001 0.08 (0-0.002) (0.01-0.11) Mar 1971 0.001 0.03 (0-0.002) (0-0.06) Jun 1971 <0.001 0.01 (0-0.0001) (0-0.06) i Aug 1971 0.001 0.01 (0.0006-0.002) (0.001-0.02) Oct 1971 0.002 0.03 (0-0.01) (0-0.05) i i II -22 • • CA II -23 0 Generally, the NYOSL (1976) data set reveals nitrogen • concentrations to be at a maximum during the colder months of the year. In contrast, nitrogen levels are at a minimum during the warmer months. The observed • fluctuations in nitrogen concentration are attributed to the following factors: • (L) Greater precipitation during the cold months of the year, subsequently cause higher nitrogen outputs from the Thames River and Connecticut River, the • largest source of freshwater to Long Island Sound thereby increasing nitrogen concentrations near the net pen site (LISS, 1994). • (2.) Extended periods of high velocity wind events occurring during the winter months result in resuspension of sediments and related nutrients into the water column thereby increasing nitrogen concentrations near the net pen site (Day et. al., 1989). (3.) Lower nitrogen utilization by phytoplankton during colder months of the year (Valiela, 1984) results in an increase in nitrogen concentration in the water column. The lowered utilization capability of the phytoplankton is attributed to the lack of sufficient CA II -23 0 �7 11 • 11 13 0 light for optimum growth (Day, et. al., 1989) and cooler water temperatures. As light intensity increases in the spring months, phytoplankton begin utilizing the available nutrients and nitrogen levels decrease. At some point in the spring or early summer, the algae deplete the nitrogen and their rate of growth slows down (Valiela, 1984). The low levels of nitrogen found in June and August of 1971 correspond with the previously mentioned nitrogen depletion and are consistent with nitrogen data collected as part of this DEIS. As previously stated, this data was collected in August 1994. The 20 year consistency in nitrogen values indicates that the nitrogen regime of the proposed site is stable and not likely to change. C. WATER USE CLASSIFICATION-NYSDEC As previously stated herein, both Stirling Basin and the Grow out site are classified as "SA" waters. The corresponding best use of those waters is for shell fishing as well as primary and secondary contact recreation (swimming and fishing). While the best usage of these II -24 C7 11 s 0 • • • V 0 • waters does not specifically address aquaculture, the proposed culture of summer flounder is regarded as consistent with the best usage of the waters since excellent water quality is essential to the success of this proposed project. The receiving waters are classified as "SD" waters. The corresponding best usage of these waters are not primarily for recreational purposed, shellfish or the development of fish life, and because of natural or man-made conditions, cannot meet the requirements of these uses. d. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS SITE LOCATION, DEPTH AND TIDAL RANGE The proposed net pen site is located in Gardiner's Bay which is a large, relatively shallow embayment. The mean tidal range for Gardiner's Bay is 2.5 feet above mean low water with peak tide height at 4.0 feet. Storm tides peak at +6.0 feet above mean low water. The depth of the bottom below the net pen site ranges from 30 to 38 feet and is flat with several large, sporadically placed boulders. II -25 0 11 0 • 0 0 a U 4 UA CURRENT PATTERN, VELOCITY AND TURBIDITY As previously stated herein, the proposed net pen site experiences an east/west current flow with velocities ranging from 7.2 cm/sec to 69.6 cm/sec (0.14 knots to 1.35 knots). Considerable current eddying occurs at the net pen site due to the large volumes of water passing through the constriction at Plum Gut during an ebb tide. Current flow patterns are depicted previously in Section I -F. Despite large current flows, turbidity in the area is minimal. Secchi depth measurements taken at various locations on August 8, 1994 were 12 feet below the surface. TEMPERATURE Temperature analysis taken on August 8, 1994 and August 31, 1994 revealed no stratification in the water column as is common in other areas during that time of the year. The current velocities prevalent throughout the area thoroughly mixes the water column preventing temperature stratification. On August 8, 1994, surface temperature was found to be 19.5°C, and bottom temperature was 19.0°C at Station 1. Station 2 had a water temperature of 20.0°C II -26 • 11 0 a • 0 0 V 0 • • throughout the water column. On August 31, Station 1 had a surface and bottom temperature of 19.5°C and 19.0°C, respectively. Station 2a had surface and bottom temperatures of 22°C and 20°C, respectively. The differences between surface and bottom temperatures are not considered significant and can be attributed to slight warming of the surface waters as the light intensity increased throughout the morning. Figures 23 and 24 show the temperature profiles for all locations on August 8 1994 and August 31 1994. Station 1. Temperature (C) 18 20 21 22 0 Depth 10 (feet) 20 SO 40 Station 2. Temperature (C) 18 20 21 22 0 Depth 5 (feet) 10 15 20 25 Figure 23. Temperature profiles for Stations 1 and 2 on August 8, 1994. II -27 0 LI E • • • 1 1 i 1 Station 1. Station 2a. Temperature (C) Temperature (C) 19 20 21 22 19 20 21 22 0 0 —�- 5 6 10 10 Depth 16 Depth 16 (feet) 20 (feet) 20 25 25 30 30 35 35 Figure 24. Temperature profiles of Station 1 and 2 on August 31, 1994. SALINITY Salinity measurements were collected at Station 1 and 2 on August 8, 1994. Measurements collected at Station 1. revealed uniform salinity of 30 ppt throughout the water column. Measurements collected at Station 2 revealed a slightly elevated bottom salinity of 32 ppt as the tide began to flood. The consistency of the salinity regime is attributed to complete mixing of the water column and the relative lack of a large freshwater source nearby. Figure 25. shows the salinity profiles for both locations as detected on August 8, 1994. II -28 K7 • 0 0 • CM • ;7 CM Station 1 Salinity (ppt) 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 0 5 10 Depth 15 (feet) 20 25 30 35 Station 2 SaiinRy (ppt) Z M V M n 30 31 32 33 0 6 Depth 10 (feet) 1s 20 26 Figure 25. Salinity profiles for Stations 1 and 2 on August 8, 1994. DISSOLVED OXYGEN Oxygen profiles were taken simultaneously with temperature measurements on August 8 and 31, 1994. Dissolved oxygen concentrations also indicated that the water column was unstratified. Dissolved oxygen concentrations as determined by Winkler Titration ranged from 7.3 mg/L to 8.5 mg/L, representing saturated oxygen concentrations. These uniform oxygen concentrations with respect to depth are attributed to the complete mixing of the water column. Slightly elevated oxygen concentrations at the surface for three of the sampling locations were attributed to surface layer exchange with the atmosphere. II -29 • Figure 26. Oxygen Profiles for Stations 1 and 2 on August 8, 1994. 1 �-M II -30 The slightly depressed surface oxygen concentrations detected at Station 1 on August 8, 1994 are normal for the time at which the samples were taken (6:15 a.m.). These low levels in oxygen concentration are the result of respiration and uptake of oxygen by phytoplankton during the evening hours (Day et. al., 1989). Figures 26 and 27 show the oxygen profiles for all locations on August 8 1994, and 31, 1994. Station 1. Station 2. Oxygen (mg/L) Oxygen (mg/L) 7 8 7 8 � 0 5 � 0 5 pth 10 (feet) pth 10 (feet) 20 • : 15 • 25 30 ♦ ♦ 20 •� 35 25 Figure 26. Oxygen Profiles for Stations 1 and 2 on August 8, 1994. 1 �-M II -30 • • Station 1. Station 2. • Oxygen (mg/L) Oxygen (mg/L) 7 8 7 8 00 5 1 . * 5 Depth 15 �� Depth 15 • (feet) 20 (feet) 20 25 25 30 30 • 35 36 0 7 Figure 27. Oxygen Profiles for Stations 1 and 2 on August 31, 1994. NITROGEN • Samples for nitrogen analysis were collected on August 8, 1994 at two stations previously described herein. Station 1 was located at coordinates 41° 10.19' Lat, 72° 10.39' Long. Station 2 was located at coordinates 41 ° 17.22' Lat, 72° 11.61' Long.. Samples were collected at 1 meter below the surface and 1 meter above the bottom. Analyses were performed to determine total kjeldahl nitrogen, ammonia nitrogen, nitrite nitrogen, and nitrate nitrogen. Total • II -31 7 0 • • [J • 0 • 0 C • kjeldahl nitrogen ranged from 0.4 mg/L to 0.8 mg/L, ammonia and nitrate nitrogen concentrations were less than 0.05 mg/L and nitrite nitrogen concentrations were less than 0.002 mg/L. Nitrite nitrogen and nitrate nitrogen concentrations are comparable to concentrations found in sampling performed in August 1971 by the New York Ocean Science Laboratory (NYOSL, 1976). 2. IDENTIFICATION OF EXISTING USES AND LEVELS OF USE FOR EACH SITE. PROCESSING SITE The processing site at Winter Harbor Fisheries is a preexisting structure whose use conforms with its zoning code. The Village of Greenport's Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan declares this site to be underutilized. The proposed project will fully utilize the existing plant to its capacity which is adequate to sustain the processing operation through Phase VI. The utilization of the Winter Harbor Fisheries Site for the proposed project will have no II -32 • impact upon existing uses of the site except to enhance its currently • underutilized state. The proposed use of the Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Plant as such is compatible with its existing permitted use. • HATCHERY • The proposed hatchery site at Clark's Beach is currently vacant. Its only use is that of access to the beach along the adjacent Long • Island Sound. In addition, the Greenport Village Sewage Treatment outfall pipe lies underneath a dirt road which transects the site. Due to the impact of the existing sewage treatment outfall • pipe, the site offers little desirability in terms of its potential use for swimming. • The upland portion of the site is presently underutilized and is buffered from nearly all of the surrounding residential development. With the exception of an out -parcel immediately adjacent and west • of Clarks Beach, and a parcel on the opposite side of Route 48 to the south, all lands surrounding the site are vacant. Accordingly, the potential impact of the proposed hatchery to the surrounding 1 neighborhood will be minimal. Mariculture Technologies, Inc., • II -33 1 0 C • • • • • • 0 • proposes to lease ten acres of Clarks Beach, excluding a section adjacent to the shoreline which will remain for the exclusive use of the residents of the Village of Greenport. Additionally, given that the proposed lease of the hatchery site with the Village of Greenport provides for continued and improved access the beach, use of the beach for recreational purposes will not be precluded. Furthermore, the use of Clarks Beach as a hatchery site is compatible with the traditional livelihood of local residents; specifically, fishing and farming. GROW OUT SITE Careful consideration was given to the selection of a net pen grow out site. In consulting with local commercial fisherman, the principals of Mariculture Technologies, Inc. quickly discovered that the proposed site was not utilized by commercial trawling vessels due to the high velocity currents and boulders present in the area. These boulders snag bottom trawling nets making the area unsuitable for commercial harvest of finfish by those means. The site itself does not contain significant shellfish beds because of its depth. Blue Mussel (Mytilus edulis) beds are reported to be present in nearby, shallow areas along the shores of Plum Island (Chris Smith CCE, Personal Communication). However, due to II -34 0 the trespassing restrictions imposed by USDA, Plum Island, these 0 sites are not utilized for commercial mussel harvest. Furthermore, repeated inspections of the site did not reveal more than two conch pots in the vicinity. The lack of numerous conch pots in addition to the results of the baseline field survey suggests that the growout site is not productive for conch. Therefore, the use of the site will not preclude commercial fishing in this area to a significant degree. • The grow out site itself is not utilized to great extent by recreational fisherman. Rather, recreational fisherman prefer nearby areas such as Plum Gut, the Sluiceway, the north side of Plum Island and off the Ruins at Gardiner's Point. The area does not contain significant fisheries habitat due to the relatively poor habitat for finfish. However, the installation of net pens and their corresponding mooring system will result in increased fisheries habitat. In essence, the net pen system will be akin to an artificial reef environment. Organisms that adhere to hard surfaces will colonize the structures of the net pens and mooring system. Small fishes will be attracted to the net pen system for shelter which will in turn attract larger predatory fishes. Therefore, it is expected that the deployment of the proposed net pens will actually enhance fish habitat in the area. 1 • II -35 • • The proposed grow out site itself is not allocated within or close to any important navigational channels. However, major shipping lanes do exist north of Plum Island in Long Island Sound. Access to these lanes is through The Race for large ships destined for ports in Connecticut and New York City. Accordingly, deployment of the net pens at the proposed net pen site will not impede use of the shipping lanes. • • • • • • A ferry utilized to transport government employees to and from the USDA center on Plum Island crosses Plum Gut several times on a daily basis. The ferry leaves a dock adjacent to the Orient Point Marina, traverses Plum Gut and enters Plum Gut Harbor on the western shoreline of Plum Island. Another ferry from Saybrook Connecticut also enters Plum Gut Harbor on a daily basis. The placement of the net pens will not impede the daily travel of the Plum Island ferries as their course does not bring them into close proximity of the proposed grow out site. A passenger ferry crosses Long Island Sound from a terminal on the Thames River to a corresponding terminal at Orient Point, Long Island. The ferry traverses Plum Gut several times daily on its course to and from Orient Point. The ferry's course does not bring it into the area of the proposed net pen site and therefore the proposed project will not impact upon this navigational channel II -36 • The Ruins, located on Gardiner's Point, were built in the 1800's as a coastal defense fort. However, due to the sandy nature of the point, the foundations could not support the weight of the installed canon and cracked. The site was subsequently abandoned 40 and used for aerial bombing practice until sometime prior to the 1970's. Since then, all operations have ceased an access is prohibited. Currently, the only military movement nearby is by • submarines traversing The Race on their way to and from the General Dynamics Submarine Contractors on the Thames River, Connecticut. As the proposed net pen site is too shallow for submarine travel, such movements will not be effected by placement of the net pens. Plum Island is the only upland area adjacent to the proposed net pen site. Owned by the U.S. Government, the island is utilized as a research center for the USDA. There are no residential dwellings in existence on the island and public access is strictly prohibited. Gardiners Island, 3.75 miles to the south, is the next nearest land mass under private ownership. There are no • residential development in close proximity to the net pen site. • • 0 Therefore, there are no aesthetic concerns relating to residential properties and the secluded area of the net pen site establishes the compatibility of the site with respect to adjacent upland areas. II -37 i w • • • • • • • 0 C. AAQUATIC ECOLOGY The aquatic ecology of the net pen site encompasses several characteristics described herein. How these components interact defines the ecology of a particular area. These components include the following: o Vegetation o Invertebrate Species o Fish Species o Wildlife Species o Benthos o Food Web Interactions o Habitat 1. VEGETATION The dive survey conducted on September 7th, 8th, and 9th revealed two species of marine algae, Irish Moss (Chondrus crispus) and the Common Kelp (Laminaria agardhii), to occur on and near the grow out site. These algae were attached to the sparsely distributed boulders. There were no algal species growing on the bottom sediments due to the scouring effect of the current. Based on the observation of Ulva lactuca fouling the impeller of II -38 0 • C J LI • • • u the midwater current meter, its occurrence in nearly shallow waters is regarded as likely. Accordingly, the growout site does not support submerged aquatic vegetation to a significant degree. 2. INVERTEBRATE SPECIES The diver survey and the field survey indicated that a variety of infaunal invertebrate species inhabit the bottom lands of the proposed net pen site. Even so, there is some expectation that more mobile species could be present at the net pen site. The following is a list of invertebrate species documented to exist or potentially inhabit the grow out site. Species whose presence have been confirmed through the diver survey and the infaunal analysis are marked with an asterisk (*) after the common name. II -39 • • INVERTEBRATE SPECIES OCCURRENCE AT THE GARDINER'S BAY SITE * KNOWN TO BE PRESENT • U • • • • • • C� COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME OCCURRENCE Lion's mane Cyanea capillata summer Sea nettle Chrysaora quinquecirrha summer Moon jelly Aurelia aurita spring -summer Frilled anemone Metridium senile year round Flat worm* Phylum Rhynchocoela year round Round worm* Class Nematoda year round Arrow worm* Sagitta sp. year round Red Crust (bryozoa)* Schizoporella unicornis year round Stephanosella sp. year round Stomachetosell sinuosa year round Lacy Crust (bryozoa)* Callopora craticula year round Membranipora tenuis year round Slipper Shell* Crepidula fornicata year round Crepidula plana year round Crescent Mitrella* Mitrella lunata year round New England Dog Whelk* Nassarius trivittatus year round Odostomes* Odostomia sp. year round Pyramid Shell* Turbonilla nivea/stricta year round II -40 • • 0 Utriculastra canaliculata year round Polinices diplicatus Gastropod* • year round Busycon canaliculatum Lobed moonshell Busycon carica Northern moonshell Lyonsia hyalina Channeled whelk* • year round Nucula proxima Knobbed whelk* Tellina agilis Glassy Lyonsia* Spisula solidissima Black Clam* • year round Mytilus edulis Near Nut Shell* Modiolus modiolus Tellins* Ensis directus Surf clam* • April -November Nephtys picta Quahog Nephtys incisa Blue mussel* Polynoidae sp. Horse mussel • year round Polygordius triestinus Razor clam* Scolelepis squamata Long finned squid Caulleriella killariensis Red -Lined Worms* • year round Notocirrus spiniferus Polychaeta* Polychaeta* Polychaeta* Polychaeta* Polychaeta* • Opal Worm* Opal Worm* • 0 Utriculastra canaliculata year round Polinices diplicatus year round Lunatia heros year round Busycon canaliculatum year round Busycon carica year round Lyonsia hyalina year round Arctica islandica year round Nucula proxima year round Tellina agilis year round Spisula solidissima year round Mercenaria mercenaria year round Mytilus edulis year round Modiolus modiolus year round Ensis directus year round Loligo pealei April -November Nephtys picta year round Nephtys incisa year round Polynoidae sp. year round Mediomastus ambiseta year round Polygordius triestinus year round Scolelepis squamata year round Caulleriella killariensis year round Arabella Tricolor year round Notocirrus spiniferus year round II -41 0 0 Arabellid Worms* Drilonereis longa year round Scale Worm* Harmothoe imbricata year round Burrowing Scale Worm* Pholoe minufa year round 0 Burrowing Scale Worm* Sigahon arenicola year round Lumbrinerid Worms* Lumbrineris fragilis year round 41 Blood Worms* Glycera dibranchiata year round Glycera americana year round Paddle Worm* Eumida sanguinea year round 0 Orbiniid Worms* Aricidia catherinae year round Orbiniid Worms* Orbinia ornata year round Sand Builder Worm* Sabellaria vulgaris year round 0 Mud Worms* Spiophanes bombyx year round Mud Worms* Scolecolepides viridis year round Mud Worms* Polydora socialis year round 0 Mud Worms* Polydora ligni year round Mud Worms* Polydora sp. year round Fringed Worms* Tharyx acutus year round Fringed Worm* Cirratulus grandis year round Opheliid Worms* Travisia carnea year round Opheliid Worms* Ophelia denticulata year round a Ampharetid Worms* Ampharete arctica year round Rosy Magelonas* Magelona papillicornis year round C II -42 0 • • C: • • • • • U Bamboo Worm* Owenia fusiformis year round Bamboo Worm* Clymenella zonalis year round Horse shoe crab Limulus polyphemus year round Springtail* Anurida maritima year round Ostracoda* Ostracoda sp. year round Barnacles* Balanus amphitrite year round Cumacean* Oxyurostylis smithi year round Isopod* Cyathura polita year round Cirolana concharum year round Chiridotea coeca year round Edotea montosa year round Sphaeroma quadridentatum year round Salamae cocina year round Amphipod* Ampelisca abdita year round Ampelisca vadorum year round Ampelisca verrilli year round Byblis serrata year round Unciola irrorata year round Gammarus oceanicus year round Haustoriidae sp. year round Acanthohaustorius millsi year round Haustorius canadensis year round Monoculodes edwardsi year round Leptocheirus pinguis year round Paraphoxus epistomus year round II -43 Mantis shrimp • Northern lobster Long Clawed Hermit Crab Flat Clawed Hermit Crab* • Spider Crab Commensal Crabs* 41 • • • • • • • Rock Crab Green Crab Lady Crab* Blue Crab Purple Sea Urchin Sea Star Sand Dollar* Squilla empusa Homarus americanus Pagurus longicarpus Pagurus pollicaris Libinia emarginata Pinnixa sp. Pinnixa chaetopterana Pinnixa sayana Cancer irroratus Carcinus maenas Ovalipes ocellatus Callinectes sapidus Arbacia punctulata Asterias forbesii Echinarachnius parma year round year round year round year round year round year round year round year round year round year round summer summer year round year round year round The vast majority of invertebrate species found at the proposed net pen site are present year round. A complete listing of invertebrates species found at the net pen site via infaunal sampling is contained in Appendix O. Polychaete worms (Class Polychaeta) were the dominant invertebrate form found at the site. Polychaetes often comprise as much as 40 to 80 percent of the infauna found in a particular area (Barnes, 1987). The second most dominant group of invertebrates present at the site were of the Class Crustacea, II -44 particularly the Gammeridian Amphipods (Order Amphipoda). The Amphipods most prevalent were those species which burrow in the sediment. The third and fourth most dominant group at the site were of the Phylum Mollusca. Of this Phylum, members of the Class Bivalvia, particularly the species Tellina agilis, which actively burrows in the sediments, were most abundant. Also, several species of the Class Gastropoda were present at some of the stations. These included the channeled whelk (Busycon canaliculatum) and knobbed whelk (Busycon carica). The remaining benthic community consisted of Bryozoans (Phylum • Bryozoa), Nemertean Worms (Phylum Rhynchocoela); Round Worms (Phylum Aschelminthes, Class Nematoda); Hydroids (Phylum Cnidaria, Class Hydrozoa); and Arrow Worms (Phylum Chaetognatha). Many of these forms were present at only a few stations, and some only at one station. In no case did their occurrence exceed five individuals at any one station. In general, the benthic community was distributed sparsely throughout the net pen site. • 0 II -45 L • • i 3. FINFISH SPECIES Finfish are more difficult to enumerate because of their greater mobility. In addition, many species are seasonal, migrating from one geographical area to another. The following is a list of species expected to be present in the area of the net pen site with respect to appropriate season for which they would occur. Species that have been confirmed as present at the site during the diver survey are marked with an asterisk (*). • FINFISH SPECIES OCCURRENCE AT THE GARDINER'S BAY SITE * KNOWN TO BE PRESENT • • • • • 0 COMMON NAME Smooth Dogfish Spiney Dogfish Little Skate* Clearnose Skate Winter Skate Barndoor Skate Shortnose Sturgeon Atlantic Sturgeon American Eel SPECIES NAME Mustelis canis Squalus acanthias Raja erinacea Raja eglanteria Raja ocellata Raja laevis Acipenser brevirostrum Acipenser oxyrhynchus Anquilla rostrata II -46 OCCURRENCE summer -fall year round summer spring -summer winter winter year round (rare) year round (rare) year round (young) summer (adults) • • II -47 40 Conger Eel Conger oceanicus year round Blueback Herring Alosa aestivalis spring -summer Alewife Alosa psuedoharengus spring -summer American Shad Alosa sapidissima spring -summer Atlantic Menhaden Brevoortia tyrannus spring -summer Atlantic Herring Clupea harengus spring -summer Bay Anchovy Anchoa mitchilli year round Inshore Lizardfish S nodus oetens y f year round Oyster Toadfish Opsanus tau year round Goosefish Lophius americanus year round Atlantic Tomcod Microgadus tomcod summer (young) Pollock Pollachius wens summer (young) Silver Hake Merluccius bilinearis summer (young) Red Hake Urophycis chuss summer (young) Spotted Hake Urophysis regia summer (young) Halfbeak Hyporhamphus unifasciatus summer Ballyhoo Hemiramphus brasiliensis summer Atlantic Needlefish Strongylura marina summer Atlantic Silverside Menidia menidia year round Bluespotted Cornetfish Fistularia tabacaria summer (young) White Perch Morone americana year round Striped Bass Morone saxatilis spring -fall 0 Snowy Grouper Epinephelus niveatus summer (young) Black Sea Bass Centropristis striata year round • II -47 40 i 4b 0 Pristigenys alta Short Bigeye Priacanthus arenatus Bigeye Pomatomus saltatrix Bluefish Rachycentron canadum Cobia Echeneis naucrates Sharksucker Alectis ciliaris African Pompano Caranx bartholomaei Yellow Jack 4 Crevalle Jack Oligoplites saurus Leather Jacket Selene vomer Lookdown 0 Atlantic Moonfish Seriola dumerili Greater Ambedack Seriola zonata Banded Rudderfish 0 Florida Pompano Trachinotus falcatus Permit Lu Janus griseus Grey Snapper Eucinostomus gula Silver Jenny Archosargus probatocephalus Sheepshead Stenotomus chrysops Scup Cynoscion regalis Weakfish Chaetodon capistratus Foureye Butterflyfish Chaetodon ocellatus Spotfin Butterflyfish Tautoga onitis Blackfish Tautogolabrus adspersus Cunner 4b 0 Pristigenys alta summer (young) Priacanthus arenatus summer (young) Pomatomus saltatrix spring -fall Rachycentron canadum summer (young) Echeneis naucrates summer Alectis ciliaris summer (young) Caranx bartholomaei summer (young) Caranx hippos young (summer) Oligoplites saurus summer (young) Selene vomer summer (young) Selene setapinnis summer (young) Seriola dumerili summer (young) Seriola zonata summer (young) Trachinotus carolinus summer (young) Trachinotus falcatus summer (young) Lu Janus griseus summer (young) Eucinostomus gula summer (young) Archosargus probatocephalus spring -fall Stenotomus chrysops year round Cynoscion regalis spring -summer Chaetodon capistratus summer (young) Chaetodon ocellatus summer (young) Tautoga onitis year round Tautogolabrus adspersus year round II -48 U] II -49 0 Striped Mullet Mugil cephalus summer i Northern Sennet Sphraena borealis summer (young) Northern Stargazer Astrocopus borealis summer Striped Blenny Chasmodes bosquianus year round American Sand Lance Ammodytes americanus year round King Mackerel Scombermonis cavalla spring -young Atlantic Mackerel Scomber scombrus spring 41 Little Tunny Euthynnus alletteratus summer Atlantic Bonito Sarda sarda summer Butterfish Peprilus triacanthus summer 0 Northern Searobin* Prionotus carolinus year round Striped Searobin* Prionotus evolans year round Sea Raven Hemitripterus americanus year round 0 Grubby Sculpin Myoxocephalus aenaeus year round Lumpfish Cyclopterus lumpus year round Flying Gurnard Dactylopterus volitans summer (young) 4 Summer Flounder Paralichthys dentata summer Fourspot Flounder Paralichthys oblongus year round Windowpane* Scopthalmus aquosus spring -summer 0 Winter Flounder* Pleuronectes americanus year round Hog Choker Trinectes maculatus year round Orange Filefish Aluterus schoepfi summer (young) 0 Planehead Filefish Monacanthus hispidus summer (young) Gray Triggerfish Balistes capriscus summer Northern Puffer Sphoeroides maculatus summer • II -49 0 i Most of the above listed species are seasonal residents, occupying the net pen site and similar habitats a few months out of the year. Several will only pass through the area on their way to and from their spawning grounds in the Peconic Estuary or in areas around Long Island Sound. Many of the summer residents are juveniles of species normally found far to the South. These juveniles are often 41 carried by the northerly flow of the Gulf Steam, and subsequently swept into the Gardiner's Bay on the incoming tide. If these organisms do not become prey to larger fish, such as Fluke and Bluefish, they perish when water temperatures drop below their tolerance during the colder months. s 4. WILDLIFE i In the New York region, the Okeanos Ocean Research Foundation ("Okeanos") situate Hampton Bays, New York is recognized as the expert on marine mammals and sea turtles. Okeanos routinely conducts research on populations of marine mammals and sea turtles and keeps record of all occurrences of these animals in • New York Waters. Mariculture Technologies, Inc. consulted with Okeanos about the concern over marine mammals and sea turtles present in the proximity of the grow out site. II -50 0 11 s. C7 • 0 a V El y 0 SEA TURTLES The most common sea turtles that may be present at the net pen site are the loggerhead (Caretta caretta), Kemps ridley (Lepidochelys kempii) turtles and the green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas) (Okeanos, 1993). These three species are detailed below: Loggerhead Turtles (Caretta caret ta) The distribution of the loggerhead includes the subtropical waters, continental shelves and estuaries along the coasts of the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Oceans. In the western Atlantic, the loggerhead ranges from as far north as Newfoundland to as far south as Argentina and Chile (NRC., 1990). In 1978, the loggerhead was listed as threatened throughout its range pursuant to the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973. Adult and subadult loggerheads are primarily predators of benthic II -51 0 mollusks and crustaceans. Coelenterates and cephalopod mollusks are a large part of the diet of turtles in their pelagic stage. Additionally, posthatchling loggerheads ingest macroplankton found along weed lines in the sargassum raft community. • Finally, loggerheads have been known to occasionally scavenge fish and fish parts. 4b The loggerhead's primary nesting sites are located on the Atlantic coast beaches of Florida. Nesting also occurs in Georgia, the Carolinas and along the gulf coast of Florida. Mating takes place in late March to early June before the nesting season which occurs from May to July along the Southeastern U.S. coast. Females usually select steeply sloped, high energy barrier beaches with a gradually sloped offshore approach. Nesting occurs at night. Clutch size averages between 100-126 eggs. Females may nest one to seven times per season. Incubation ranges from 54 to 63 days depending on temperature. After hatching, the juveniles enter the sea and engage in a swimming frenzy which takes them 22-28 km offshore where they become associated with sargassum rafts. In I this pelagic stage, they may spend 3 to 5 years circumnavigating the Atlantic before they migrate to near shore and estuarine habitats along the eastern U.S. and begin their sub adult stage. It is during • II -52 • 0 0 this latter stage that loggerhead turtles may enter the Peconic - 48Gardiner's Bay Estuary System. There are no nesting sites for the loggerhead in New York Waters. Loggerhead turtles occur in New York Waters from late May to October. Individuals found in bays and Long Island Sound are primarily juveniles. Adults occur mainly along the south shore Ah up to 40 miles or more offshore. Limited tagging data indicates that some animals that return the New York region for a period of several years. Approximately 800 individuals are present in New York Bight (Okeanos, 1993). 0 Kemp's Ridley Turtles (Lepidochelys kempi) • 0 [] In the western Atlantic, Kemp's ridley turtles occur as far north as Long Island and Vineyard Sound, Massachusetts. However, most are found in the Gulf of Mexico (NRC, 1990). The northern extent of this range seems to be a result of hatchlings becoming caught in the Gulf Stream current and taken northward. It is uncertain that these turtles have the migratory capability of returning to the Gulf of Mexico. Even so, adults are almost entirely II -53 • • r P 4b J • i, 0 found in the Gulf of Mexico. The Kemp's ridley is listed as an endangered species pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973. Adult, sub adult and juvenile Kemp's ridley turtles feed on crabs and other invertebrates. Hatchling feeding behavior has not been observed in the wild, but it is presumed that they feed on a variety of organisms found in the pelagic region of the Gulf of Mexico. The beach at Rancho Nuevo in the Gulf of Mexico is the primary nesting area for Kemp's ridley turtles. Males and females congregate near the nesting site to mate several weeks before the nesting season in April, May and June. The females emerge to lay the first clutch four weeks after mating. Many females gather offshore of the beach and then come ashore together to lay their eggs in a synchronized fashion over a period of several hours. Nesting occurs during the day with females a laying an average of 105 eggs per clutch. Incubation time of Kemp's ridley turtles averages 50-55 days. The growth rates of wild hatchlings are unknown, but studies indicate that it may take 6 to 7 years for a turtle to reach adult size. There are no breeding and nesting areas for the Kemp's ridley turtle in New York Waters. II -54 Cl Kemp's ridleys are present in New York Waters from June 41 through October. Cold stunned individuals are found as late as December. Long Island Sound, Block Island Sound, as well as portions of the Peconic - Gardiners Bay estuary system have • been found to be significant as more Kemp's ridleys are found in these areas than elsewhere on Long Island (Okeanos, 1993). Estimates indicate that there are 100 to 300 individuals present in New York Waters each season (Okeanos, 1993). 0 Green Sea Turtle (Chelonia mydas) The green sea turtle is found in the New York Bight, but w to a lesser degree than the loggerhead and Kemp's ridley (Okeanos, 1993). The green sea turtle is usually found in shallow water bays and occasionally in Long Island Sound. Its primary lb habitat includes bottom lands supporting submerged aquatic vegetation, specifically Ulva sp. and Codium sp.. Extensive research on the green sea turtle has not been undertaken. V Therefore, this species is not as well understood as the loggerhead and Kemp's ridley. Green sea turtles are found in Long Island Waters during June through October. Cold stunned individuals 40 occur from November through December. There is a wide range in size of the individuals found in Long Island Waters representing • II -55 0 several year classes. Existing data indicates that there are i approximately 100 turtles in Long Island Waters each year (Okeanos, 1993). r1 The potential impact to sea turtle populations resulting from this 40 project as proposed is regarded as insignificant. Reasons in support of this conclusion are in part based upon the lack of reported a II -56 0 In Long Island Waters, sea turtles are faced with various threats to their survival including entanglement in lobster -pot lines or other floating lines, entrapment in pound nets, ingestion of plastics and • floatable debris, and cold stunning (NRC, 1990). Entrapment in pound nets constitutes the live capture of sea turtles entering the net. The mesh size of the net used in the construction of the pound net precludes the entanglement of turtles in the net. Mariculture Technologies, Inc. proposes to use the same size mesh in the construction of the predator nets to preclude entanglement of turtles in the net itself. Furthermore, necropsies on sea turtles have indicated that ingestion of plastics and floatable debris is the cause of considerable mortality. Cold stunning, particularly for Kemp's ridleys, causes mortality as the ambient water temperature drops during the fall months. The phenomenon of cold stunning may account for the greatest degree of mortality in New York Waters. The potential impact to sea turtle populations resulting from this 40 project as proposed is regarded as insignificant. Reasons in support of this conclusion are in part based upon the lack of reported a II -56 0 r� I& s 0 4 lb I C -A 0 incidents of sea turtle moralities due to net pen placement, reduced mesh size of the predator control nets and the constant monitoring of the net pens as proposed herein which would result in prompt rescue of any turtles even if they become entangled in the proposed predator control nets. Finally, the proposed project will not result in the generation of plastic or other floatable debris released into the water column thereby eliminating this potential impact to Sea Turtles. HARBOR SEALS A colony of harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) were observed utilizing the rocky shoreline of eastern Plum Island. The harbor seal is a circumpolar species associated with in the northern cold and temperate waters (Bonner, 1990). In the western North Atlantic, the harbor seal ranges from the southern coasts of Greenland to the eastern shores of Baffin Island and Hudson Bay to the New York Byte (King, 1983). Occasional stragglers are reported from Virginia and North Carolina. Unlike other species, harbor seals are not found on ice flows, preferring to remain in areas that are kept ice free by currents. Harbor seals, known to 11-57 4 1 0 s follow rivers to fresh water, are usually found in fairly concentrated colonies on sand and mud banks in river estuaries or as more dispersed populations along rocky shoreline. Pups are born between mid -may and mid-June in Nova Scotia and late June to early July in the more Arctic regions of the seal's range. Three or four weeks after birth, the pups are weaned and begin to feed on small invertebrates until they learn to catch live fish which constitutes the preferred prey of the harbor seal. Mating commences after the pups are weaned. As with other species, harbor seals feed on whatever fish species that are most readily found in the vicinity. Harbor seals will feed on both pelagic or bottom fishes, having no preference for either, and will also feed upon invertebrates. During recent years, harbor seals have been reported to remain in Long Island Waters year round (Okeanos, 1993). The population is largest from November through May. However, harbor seals have been reported to pup (give birth) in the New York region where they have not been known to do so before. Sam Sadove of Okeanos (Personal Communication) indicates that this is due to the increase in population of harbor seals in recent years. 11-58 A In New York Waters, there are various threats to seal populations. i Commercial fisherman regard the seal as an important competitor for fish resources. Because of damage to the fisheries, a bounty was place upon the seals from 1927 to 1976 (King, 1983). 7 Dwindling fishery stocks also threaten seals as their food source disappears. Seals have been known to be caught in gill and trammel nets in near shore waters off the California coast, but there is little evidence of entrapment in New York Waters. In Long Island Waters, most seal strandings are probably due to disease and ingestion of floatable debris. 1 C; There is evidence to support the notion that harbor seals have the ability to readily adapt to human presence. For example, reports of harbor seals becoming accustomed to boat traffic is well documented (Bonner, 1990). Additionally, harbor seals have been known to frequent coastal areas utilized for similar mariculture activities without consequence. In deed, harbor seals can prey upon cultured fish raised in net pens. However, the proposed project includes implementation of predator control nets, and if • necessary, a seal deterrent device in order to prevent seals from preying upon cultured summer flounder. Such a system has been in place at the largest salmon farm in the U.S., owned by Connor Brothers Aquaculture, Inc. ("Connor Brothers") situate Eastport, II -59 0 w Maine. The deterrent system consisting of predator nets and an 6 acoustic device have been operating at the Connor Brothers Salmon Farm for a number of years with great success. In fact, Connors Brothers have reported no losses of cultured Atlantic Salmon as 7 well as no mortality to the harbor seal with these implemented predator control strategies. Moreover, the Washington State Net Pen EIS (1990) determined that properly hung and maintained anti predator nets should cause little or no harm to seals. With a similar system in place, it is believed that harbor seals will not pose a serious threat to the culturing of summer flounder and at the same a time, the deterrent strategies proposed are not expected to cause significant harm to the harbor seal. Even if harbor seals were to • become entangled in the predator control nets, their immediate rescue would be achieved as part of the monitoring operations conducted by on site divers as proposed. HARBOR PORPOISE * Harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) are present in inshore waters during December through June. During the last 10 to 15 years, harbor porpoise were rare in Long Island Waters. However, their populations appear to be increasing (Okeanos, 1993) in Long Island Sound, Block Island Sound, as well as the Peconic - t II -60 0 0 a 1, t 0 0 • U Gardiners Bay Estuary system. Sightings within the Peconic - Gardiners Bay system usually consist of three or less animals. Occurrences in Long Island Sound consist of five or less animals and groups of 12 or more animals occur offshore (greater than 12 miles). Strandings along Long Island shorelines occur from December through June when the porpoise are present inshore. The proposed project is not expected to significantly harm the populations of Harbor porpoise in New York Waters due to their inherent ability to detect the net pens acoustically. Furthermore, there have been no reported instances of porpoise becoming trapped in pound nets or net pens (Marine Mammal Protection Act, 1972 Annual Report, 1993). BOTTLENOSE DOLPHIN Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) occurs as two subspecies in Long Island Waters. The first occurs year round, offshore, beyond the 50 fathom contour, particularly around Hudson and Block Canyons. The second occurs inshore during June through September in Gardiners Bay, Block Island Sound, Long Island Sound and along the south shore of Long Island. These groups usually average approximately 20 individuals. Bottlenose dolphin are listed as a species under special concern pursuant to the Marine II -61 Mammals Protection Act of 1972. Estimates indicate a population of no more than 500 individuals within the Long Island region. The proposed project is not expected to significantly harm the 1 populations of bottlenose dolphin in New York Waters due to their inherent ability to detect the net pens acoustically. Furthermore, there have been no reported instances of dolphin f becoming trapped in pound nets or net pens (Marine Mammal Protection Act, 1972 Annual Report, 1993). a NORTHERN RIGHT WHALE Northern Right Whales (Eubalaena glacialis) occur in the New York Bight. It is listed as endangered pursuant to the Marine Mammals Protection Act of 1972. Sightings of northern right whales occur regularly in the New York Bight and are sighted mainly along the south shore of Long Island. Sightings also occur occasionally within Long Island Sound, Block Island Sound, and Gardiners Bay (Okeanos, 1993). Most sightings take place 1 in March through June and very few involve animals that linger in the area for extended periods. Accordingly, the presence of northern right whales in New York Waters appears to be a function • of the species' migrational patterns from northern waters to those farther south. • II -62 V • a C7 V U 171 • Cl • I The proposed project is not expected to significantly harm the populations of northern right whales in New York Waters due to their inherent ability to detect the net pens. Furthermore, there have been no reported instances of whales becoming trapped in pound nets or net pens (Marine Mammal Protection Act, 1972 Annual Report, 1993). OSPREY Ospreys (Pandion haliaetus) are widely distributed throughout the world. What was once the largest known breeding colony of ospreys existed on Plum Island (Bent, 1961). Charles Slover Allen (1892) first visited the island in 1879. The owners at that time claimed that over 2000 ospreys roosted nightly on the island and that over 500 nests had been built there. Subsequently, Mr. Allen reduced those number by one half and in 1885, the island was sold to a syndicate who planned to develop the island. In the late 1800's, most of the ospreys from Plum Island are believed to have moved to nearby Gardiner's Island, which in 1961 held the largest breeding colony known (Bent, 1961). Since the 1970's numerous nesting platforms have been constructed on Plum Island. Currently there are 16 osprey pairs that nest every year on the island (Ed II -63 U] Hasseldine-Personal communication). The osprey have been observed feeding on herring in the shallow water along the south shore of the island. From the 1950's to the 1970's, osprey populations crashed primarily due to the widespread use of DDT, which was subsequently implicated as the causative agent for egg thinning resulting in high mortality among osprey hatchlings (Ehrlich, et. al., 1988). The osprey was placed on the American Birds Blue List from 1972 to 1981. It was upgraded to Special Concern in 1982, and to Local Concern in 1986. Thereafter, the osprey was listed as a threatened species by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Today, coastal populations of the osprey have largely recovered aided by the DDT ban and conservation programs including the placement of nesting platforms near the shoreline. Ospreys prefer to inhabit areas near the shorelines of freshwater lakes and rivers as well as coastal estuaries such as those on Long Island. Ospreys are seasonal visitors to Long Island, migrating from wintering grounds in Chile and Argentina each spring to nest and raise their young. Often, their nests can be seen on top of poles along the shoreline particularly on the eastern end of Long Island. Ospreys build their nests out of sticks, seaweed, sod and occasionally rubbish. • II -64 • [1 0 • i • r • • The osprey is monogamous and mates for life. Upon returning to Long Island in the spring, osprey pairs rebuild their old nest from the previous year and engage in and elaborate courtship flight behavior before mating. Females are fed entirely by the male from pair formation to egg laying. Three eggs are usually laid which subsequently hatch asynchronously about 32 to 43 days later (Ehrlich, et. al., 1988). The male continues to deliver food to the nest where the female feeds the young. Fledging occurs 48 to 59 days after hatching. Ospreys almost exclusively prey on fish and can conceivably prey upon cultured summer flounder. However, there have been no reported incidence of ospreys coming in conflict with net pen aquaculture farms as evidenced by Connor Brothers Aquaculture, Inc. situate Eastport, Maine whose site falls within the northern range of this species. The proposed mariculture project includes the deployment of an anti -predator nets which will be stretched above each of the proposed net pens. Similar anti -predator systems have been used extensively in net pen aquaculture (Wash. Dept. Fish., 1990) and have proven to be both effective in controlling predation of the cultured species by birds and at the same time, preventing injury to bird species. The proposed net pen culture of summer flounder is expected to have no detrimental effect upon osprey populations. Reasons to II -65 • support this conclusion include the osprey's excellent eye site, which would allow the bird to see the anti -predator nets placed above the pens and thus avoid contact with it. In addition, the cultured summer flounder are bottom dwelling fish, and therefore, will remain on the bottom of the net pens except during the time in which they are being fed. Given that ospreys are not deep divers, being able to capture prey only on or near the surface; it is concluded that the osprey will not be able to prey upon cultured summer flounder. Furthermore, the aforementioned predator deterrent system coupled with the osprey's inherent aversion to • man's activities may cause the birds to avoid the site altogether. • W • • 0 5. BENTHOS Benthic Infauna A benthic infaunal analysis was conducted by EEA, Inc., on July 5, 1994 at twenty stations throughout the proposed net pen site (See Figure 20). Among the organisms identified, 74 were identified to the species level; 8 were to the genus level; and 3 were to some higher taxonomic level. The organisms identified by this analysis, the number of stations each was present at and the total number of individuals are listed below: II -66 Ll II -67 • # STATIONS TOTAL # OF COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME PRESENT ANIMALS Flat worm Phylum Rhynchocoela 1 1 Round worm Class Nematoda 6 12 Arrow worm Sagitta sp. 1 1 Red Crust (bryozoa) Schizoporella unicornis 4 7 Stephanosella sp. 2 3 i Stomachetosell sinuosa 2 3 Lacy Crust (bryozoa) Callopora craticula 1 1 Membranipora tenuis 4 15 • Slipper Shell Crepidula fornicata 4 14 Crepidula plana 4 20 Crepidula sp. 2 17 Crescent Mitrella Mitrella lunata 3 4 New England Dog Whelk Nassarius trivittatus 9 21 Odostomes Odostomia sp. 1 1 Pyramid Shell Turbonilla nivea/stricta 2 2 Gastropod Utriculastra canaliculata 1 1 Channeled whelk Busycon canaliculatum 2 2 Knobbed whelk Busycon carica 2 2 Glassy Lyonsia Lyonsia hyalina 1 1 Black Clam Arctica islandica 1 1 i Near Nut Shell Nucula proxima 1 2 Tellins Tellina agilis 18 104 Surf clam Spisula solidissima 5 6 II -67 • E • II -68 0 COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME # STATIONS # ANIMALS Blue mussel Mytilus edulis 1 1 Razor clam Ensis directus 2 4 Red -Lined Worms Nephtys picta 20 150 * Nephtys incisa 4 6 Polychaeta Polynoidae sp. 1 5 Mediomastus ambiseta 19 242 Polygordius triestinus 19 66 Caulleriella killariensis 8 8 Scolelepis squamata 4 8 Opal Worms Arabella Tricolor 1 3 Notocirrus spiniferus 1 1 Arabellid Worms Drilonereis longa 3 3 Scale Worm Harmothoe imbricata 1 1 Burrowing Scale Worm Pholoe minuta 1 3 Sigalion arenicola 2 2 Lumbrinerid Worms Lumbrineris fragilis 1 1 Blood Worms Glycera dibranchiata 1 1 Glycera americana 1 1 Paddle Worm Eumida sanguinea 1 1 Orbiniid Worms Aricidia catherinae 17 120 Orbinia ornata 4 4 i Sand Builder Worm Sabellaria vulgaris 3 18 • II -68 0 • • II -69 0 COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME # STATIONS # ANIMALS Mud Worms Spiophanes bombyx 15 77 Scolecolepides viridis 5 24 Polydora socialis 3 16 • Polydora ligni 1 1 Polydora sp. 1 2 Fringed Worms Tharyx acutus 10 22 Cirratulus grandis 1 1 Opheliid Worms Travisia carnea 10 19 Ophelia denticulata 1 1 Ampharetid Worms Ampharete arctica 4 8 Rosy Magelonas Magelona papillicornis 6 8 Bamboo Worm Owenia fusiformis 4 4 • Clymenella zonalis 2 2 Springtail Anurida maritima 2 3 Ostracoda Ostracoda sp. 14 36 Barnacles Balanus amphitrite 5 78 Cumacean Oxyurostylis smithi 1 1 Isopod Cyathura polita 2 2 Cirolana concharum 1 1 Chiridotea coeca 9 18 Edotea montosa 1 1 • Sphaeroma quadridentatum 1 1 Salamae cocina 2 4 • II -69 0 0 As previously discussed herein, the benthic community is dominated by polychaete worms. Of the polychaetes, the species Mediomastus ambiseta and Nephtys picta were the most abundant species present followed by Aricidia II -70 COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME # STATIONS # ANIMALS 0 Amphipod Ampelisca abdita 4 10 Ampelisca vadorum 10 53 Ampelisca verrilli 3 90 Byblis serrata 1 1 Unciola irrorata 7 20 Gammarus oceanicus 2 2 Haustoriidae sp. 3 14 Acanthohaustorius millsi 2 3 Haustorius canadensis 14 152 Monoculodes edwardsi 1 2 Leptocheirus pinguis 1 2 Paraphoxus epistomus 16 49 Flat Clawed Hermit Crab Pagurus pollicaris 20 20-30 Commensal Crabs Pinnixa sp. 3 5 Pinnixa chaetopterana 1 1 Pinnixa sayana 4 9 Lady Crab Ovalipes ocellatus 4 4 Sand Dollar Echinarachnius parma 3 6 As previously discussed herein, the benthic community is dominated by polychaete worms. Of the polychaetes, the species Mediomastus ambiseta and Nephtys picta were the most abundant species present followed by Aricidia II -70 • • C] C9 • KI • C • • • catherinae, Spiophanes bombyx, and Polygordius triestinus. Other species found to be common include the bivalve Tellina agilis and the amphipod Haustorius canadensis. All of these species were present at fifteen or more stations. As indicated above, none of the species exceeded more than 250 individuals with 20 stations. Only five species were represented by more than 100 individuals within twenty stations. This demonstrates a relative sparseness with respect to benthic communities. Station # 5 had the highest density of 250 individuals present. Studies of benthic fauna have revealed densities greater than 1000 individuals per MZ in marine sub littoral communities (Day et. al., 1989). A complete list of all species including their distribution and abundance for all stations at the proposed site is contained in Appendix O. All of the species found to be dominant at the net pen site are infaunal burrowers. This is not surprising as the current velocities prevalent throughout the area makes the area unsuitable for other forms. None of the benthic infaunal species identified are listed as protected, rare or endangered. II -71 U 0 • f • U • • • r] 6. FOOD WEB Predator - prey relationships are important in understanding the interactions between different aspects of any aquatic community. The relationships between the plankton, benthos and nekton (fishes) can be described in terms of trophic levels through a food web analysis. An investigation of the food web existing in the area of the grow out site was performed. The results of this analysis is depicted in Figure 28. II -72 • SEALS.GULLS • OSPREY • SECONDARY FISH PREDATORS WINTER FLOUNDER BLACKFISH SILVERSIOES ANCHOVY SCUP EEL • CRUSTAC DOGFISH SKATES TURTLES • r, J 0 • Figure 28. Representative food web in Gardiners Bay. II -73 0 0 U • • • 0 • 0 The main linear food chain runs from the plankton to the small benthic macro invertebrates which are eaten by the secondary fish predators which in turn are eaten by the major predatory fishes. The major predatory fish and secondary fish are subsequently preyed upon by the seals, osprey and gulls. This food web represents a model food web for the geographic area around Gardiners Bay. 7. HABITAT HATCHERY SITE The hatchery site as proposed is to be located at the Clarks Beach Site. An aerial photograph of Clarks Beach is included herewith as Figure 29. The habitat found on the Clarks Beach Site is comprised of an upland area, a bluff area and a beach area. The bluff and beach area are to remain in their existing condition accessible to the public. The proposed hatchery is to be located on the upland portion of the site. II -74 Y: t PY r •y ` Jr•� .l4 IF 7 V r A` M;Y' �,. t �1.•i.ryr�� f. ,Fn ..�; Ct;.��'+7t�.� ..R �,_ _}�,, v t►�'.,,1�i.� r 41 Pon M^. •,� }` ` '', i I♦ u��G. y. a;�� .�,� ti ram= _?> :i. �� -' ,... T' Y,r{ t!�, _,M.;rY►, -C Z •fit a .0-: 4,j— 1 s rY- f w•1�'L i 7.. r 0 • LI 0 • 11 • 0 • • Approximately one half of the upland site has been previously cleared, graded and partially excavated. Additionally, widespread illegal dumping of household garbage, bulk debris, construction and demolition materials has occurred throughout the cleared upland areas, bluff and beach. The remaining natural vegetative communities on the upland portion of the site are dominated by a canopy of consisting of black cherry, choke, cherry, and locust. These vegetated communities are best described as early successional forest growth. The understory is for the most part dominated by northern bayberry, beach plum, blackberry, raspberry and a variety of weeds and other herbaceous growth. A plant inventory was conducted over the entire site. The following plants were documented to occur at the Clarks Beach Site: Black Cherry Prunus serotina Choke Cherry Prunus virginiana Red Cedar Juniperus virginiana Red Oak Quercus rubra Black Oak Quercus vedutina Black Locust Robinia pseudo -acacia Mimosa Mimosa sp. Raspberry Rubus idaeus I1-76 0 The design and layout for the proposed hatchery minimizes impacts to the upland portion of the site by substantially 0 locating the associated structures on land already cleared, excavated and otherwise disturbed. Furthermore, the • II -77 0 Multiflora Rose Rosa multiflora 0 Green Brier Smilax glauca Cat Brier Smilax rotundifolia Bush Honeysuckle Lonicera sp. 0 Northern Bayberry Myrica pennsylvatica Staghorn Sumac Rhus typhina Beach Plum Primus maritima 0 Pussy Willow Salix discolor Inkberry Ilex glabra St. Johnswort Hypervicum spathulatum 40 Cross Vine Bignomia capreolata Common Reed Phragmites communis Rugosa Rose Rosa rugosa 19 Beach Grass Ammophila brevigulata Bearberry Arctostaphylos uva-ursi Switchgrass Panicum virgatum 0 Goldenrod Solidago sp. Burr -weed Sparganum sp. Various Grasses • The design and layout for the proposed hatchery minimizes impacts to the upland portion of the site by substantially 0 locating the associated structures on land already cleared, excavated and otherwise disturbed. Furthermore, the • II -77 0 • • • • • • • • • • • remaining two habitats including the bluff area and beach area will remain in their existing condition. Even so, the construction of the proposed hatchery will result in the removal of approximately four acres of the above described upland habitats. Because a significant amount of dumping and littering of the entire site has occurred, Mariculture Technologies, Inc. has proposed a general cleanup of the entire site. All refuse and debris swill be removed from the site and transported to an approved upland disposal site. The performance of the cleanup is expected to bring about an improvement of the overall site from the stand point of aesthetics as well as improvement of habitat presently despoiled which will nonetheless be preserved. An inventory of fauna using or likely to use the hatchery site was conducted. Existing fauna comprised of avian and mammals that were either present or expected to be present is set forth below. II -78 0 • • • • • C. 7 0 AVIANS PRESENT OR EXPECTED TO BE PRESENT AT THE HATCHERY SITE Red Tailed Hawk * Buteo jamaicensi Morning Dove * Zenaida macroura Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica Ruby -Throated Hummingbird Archilocuus colubris Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus Red -bellied Woodpecker Melanerpes carolinus Hairy Woodpecker Picoides villosus Downy Woodpecker Picoides pubescens Eastern Wood Pewer Coutopus vixens Tree Swallow * Tachycineta bicolor Bank Swallow Riparia riparia Northern Rough -Winged Swallow Stelgidoteryx serripennis Barn Swallow Hiruudo rustica Blue Jay * Cyaciocitta cristata American Crow * Coruus brachyrychos Black -Capped Chickadee * Parus atricapillus Tufted Titmouse Parus bicolor White Breasted Nuthatch Sitta carolinesis Brown Creeper Certhia americana House Wren Troglodytes aedon Carolina Wren Thryothorus ludovicianus Northern Mockingbird* Mimus polyglottus II -79 • Brown Thrasher Toxostoma rufum American Robin * Turdus migratorius European Starling * Sturnus vulgaris Common Yellow Throat Geothlypis trichas • Northern Oriole Leterus galbula Common Grackle Quiscalus quiscula Northern Cardinal * Cardinalis cardinalis House Finch Carpodacus mexicanus Rufous -Sided Towhee Pipilo erythrophthalmus Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia American Woodcock Philohela minor Ring-necked Pheasant Phasianus colchicus Bobwhite * Colinus virginianus • Osprey * Pandion haliaetus • MAMMALS EXPECTED TO OCCUR AT THE HATCHERY SITE Eastern Chipmunk Eastern Cottontail* Eastern Mole Gray Squirrel* Masked Shrew Meadow Vole • 0 II -80 Tamias striatus Sylvilagus floridanus Scalopus aquaticus Sciurus carolinensis Sorex cinereus Microtus pennsylvanicus • Opossum* Raccoon* Red -Backed Vole Red Fox • Short Tailed Shrew White Footed Mouse* White Tailed Deer* Wood Chuck • • J • • • * Species observed on the site Didelphis virginiana Procyon lotor Clethrinonomys gapperi Vulpes fulva Blarina brevicauda Peromyscus leucopus Odocoileus virginianus Marmota monax All avians detected at the site or expected to potentially utilize the site are common and distributed throughout most developed areas in eastern Long Island. With the exception of the osprey none of the species of fauna are designated rare species. The osprey reported above is known to nest on top of the taller trees on the Suffolk County Park Land Parcel to the east of Clarks Beach. The osprey has been designated as threatened by the NYSDEC although their numbers have been on the increase over the last couple of decades due to the banning of DDT which was shown to reduce osprey populations largely due to the physiological effect of egg thinning. Importantly, the proposed project II -81 0 0 • • Cj • • 0 • u will not impact the osprey as no nesting sites will be removed or destroyed and no impact prey species are expected to occur. As stated above, the construction of the proposed hatchery will result in the approximate removal of four acres of upland habitat. Accordingly, those species of fauna presently utilizing such habitats will initially be displaced from the site. These species will undergo population declines in the long term. Notwithstanding the above, no significant declines in diversity is expected as all fauna are common and are associated with at least some degree of human habitation or disturbance. GROW OUT The habitat at the growout site consists of flat bottom with a few sporadically distributed boulders. The sediments consist of large percentages of unconsolidated, fine, gray sand. High currents throughout the area promote high oxygen concentrations in the sediment and in the water column. The high current velocities restrict benthic II -82 a • • • • • • • 11 • 40 populations to those that have the ability to burrow into the sediments and avoid being swept away. In addition, little sedimentation occurs because most particles are carried away with the current. Consequently, the benthic community is sparse due to the lack of food and unconsolidated nature of the sediments. Furthermore, aquatic vegetation is sparsely distributed over the site. Upon completion of the project, the environment will be transformed from primarily a two dimensional bottom habitat to a three dimensional habitat somewhat like an artificial reef. The addition of the proposed ocean net pen structures is expected to creates a surface for encrusting and adhering organisms to colonize. This in turn attracts small fishes to the area for food and shelter from predators. In addition, the presence of these small fish attract higher predators. Depending upon the type of mooring chosen, there will be more or less surface area for animals to colonize. Block anchors would have more exposed surface area than would screw type anchors. None of the proposed anchors would have a deleterious effect upon the bottom which would remain in essentially in the same condition as exists currently. II -83 0 0 U • • • • 0 C7 • • PROCESSING SITE Existing habitat at the Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Site are comprised of buildings, parking areas, roads and limited turf areas. Additionally, the shoreline adjacent to the processing site is completely bulkheaded. Accordingly, the habitat value of the processing site is minimal. Because the proposed project largely makes full use of the existing facilities, there is no expectation that existing habitat will be effected. II -84 0 0 D. OTHER • • AN 0 • • 7 7 10 1. AIR RESOURCES Eastern Long Island has few industrial companies which emit effluent into the air. Therefore, air quality on Eastern Long Island is excellent. During the summer months, the prevalent winds are from the south and southwest. No impact to air quality is expected to occur as a result of this proposed project as the project does not necessitate the discharge of effluent into the air. 2. AESTHETICS Grow Out Site The setting of the project will entail an array of net pens in a secluded corner of Gardiners Bay. The area is separated from residential land owners as to minimize possible conflict. Additionally, the proposed net pen site has been located away from navigational channels and, accordingly the aesthetic impact to commercial and recreational beaters is minimized. II -85 lJ Hatchery Site • When completed, the hatchery site will consist of four large buildings amid a landscaped setting. Three of the four buildings • are located well away from County Road 48. The remaining building which is closer to County Road 48 will be substantially screened by landscaping. The landscape design for this project will • undergo site plan review by the Town of Southold Planning Board. Accordingly, aesthetic impacts relating to the proposed hatchery will be minimized. Processing Site • The overall setting the processing site will not change. Therefore, there are no significant aesthetic impacts associated with the use of this existing facility. • 3. CULTURAL RESOURCES • There are no important cultural resources associated with the proposed hatchery site, growout site and processing site. • Even so, the proposed expansion of the limited aquaculture industry existing today in eastern Long Island is actually viewed in some • II -86 • 0 respect as a return to the past. The traditional industries of eastern • Long Island include fishing and farming. Greenport itself was once a thriving whaling port and shipbuilding area. Aquaculture is consistent with the traditional livelihood of the local residents and is expected to enhance these traditions through the creation of 150 to 200 jobs. Employment is desperately needed as most fisherman in the area are finding it harder to make a living with fewer and fewer • fish to catch. Aquaculture is a clean industry and will not be detrimental to the • existing natural and cultural resources. The hatchery is to be located as to exclude an area along the shoreline of the sound and to preserve public access to the beach at the site. This access is • likely to be enhanced to Village residents through improvements made to the existing road. Furthermore, the hatchery is intended to provide a tourist and educational facility which will add to the • existing tourism industry in the area. • 4. TRANSPORTATION The transportation of the cultured summer flounder to and from the © net pens is expected to take place with the use of the Aqua Truck vessel. The operation begins at the hatchery, where the • II -87 U • fingerlings are placed in water filled containers and transported to the loading site at Winter Harbor Fisheries. The containers will be • placed upon the Aqua Truck vessel and transported to the net pen site where the fingerling summer flounder will be placed into the nets. Once in the net pens, the summer flounder will not be removed until harvest unless circumstances require such action. To a remove the summer flounder, the bottom of the net pens will be raised near the surface to allow the flounder to be easily netted. The flounder will then be placed in the same water filled containers • previously mentioned above and transported back to Winter Harbor Fisheries for processing. • Upon arrival at Winter Harbor Fisheries, one half of the summer flounder will be packed in water filled containers and taken by truck to Kennedy Airport to be flown to live markets in Japan. The remainder of the fish will be processed and transported by truck to national distribution centers. L7 • II -88 9 • • • 0 • A 5. MARKET ANALYSIS The demand for fish products is increasing. Flounder commands the largest percentage of fish consumed in the U.S. and has a strong overseas market. More flounder is sold at retail markets than any other type of fish. As the market for flounder already exists, the sale of cultured summer flounder only requires the establishment of a marketing network. The network will be accomplished through a series of existing food fish brokers in the United States. Networks such as this already exist for the sale of cultured catfish, shrimp, trout, and salmon as well as other seafood products. The advantages of marketing cultured summer flounder include the following: o Greater price stability o More stable and steady supply su 1 of fish o Appropriate sizing for market demand Utilizing existing food fish brokers, cultured summer flounder can be marketed along with other wild caught fish. As with other cultured fish species, restaurants can offer summer flounder on a 0 regular basis. 0 II -89 a The demand for fish in the world market is far greater than what i can be supplied The far eastern countries consume more than twice the amount of seafood per person, per year, than the United States. Because consumption of fish is high in the far east, the far eastern countries continue to search the World for additional seafood products to satisfy their growing need. The closing of commercial fishing grounds in Japan, Norway, and Iceland that have reduced * the supply of seafood for the foreign consumer. Additionally, the closing of prime fishing grounds in the United States and Canada, will cause the supply of flounder to further decrease. The world market is losing over one million metric tons of harvestable seafood per year. The declines in natural stocks have been in part offset by the growth of the aquaculture industry. In fact, cultured species now represent 17 % of the worlds supply of seafood. Therefore, as a result of the high demand for fish product, it is expected that farm raised summer flounder will find ready acceptance in the currently existing fish markets. • • II -90 0 i a � III Significant Environmental Impacts LM L� • 0 a A. WATER QUALITY Water quality can be impacted from two possible sources in the proposed project which include the following: 1. HATCHERY The operation of the proposed hatchery will have the potential to generate significant quantities of BOD, nitrogen, phosphorus, and suspended solids. The hatchery water system is expected to include the following: ♦ o Salt water wells as the supply for hatchery water make up; C o Water Circulating Treatment Systems to remove excess food, feces, oxygen demand, ammonia, • nitrite, nitrates and phosphates. The dissolved ammonia in the water will be converted to nitrite and subsequently nitrate utilizing a combination of biological filters and sequencing batch reactor technologies; 0 0 U [� U 0 ii i Cj 0 0 o A Sludge Collection System to receive solid material from the Circulation Treatment System; and o A disinfection system utilizing ozone or UV sterilization. The hatchery at Clarks Beach will reach full production in Phase IV during May 1998. The masses of fish present in the hatchery during Phases I through IV have been calculated for each month. The hatchery system will require complete volumetric circulation through the treatment system every 2 hours with a 1.9 million gallons exchanged each time. This means that the recirculation pump will result will have to pump a total of 23 million gallons per day. Fish culture generates several contaminants of concern to water quality which include the following: Biological Oxygen and BOD: The amount of dissolved oxygen that microorganisms will consume in the biological oxidation of organic matter. An increase in BOD will be primarily from fish feces and unconsumed feed. BOD is also associated with the organic and nutrient portion of the waste treatment and may be either suspended or dissolved. 111-2 0 C� • CA • r. 0 0 Nitrogen L The fish feces and fish feed contain quantities of organic nitrogen that can degrade into ammonia -nitrogen by bacterial action. Ammonia nitrogen (NH4) is also an end product of fish metabolism. NH4 is toxic to fish and must be removed or converted to nitrate - nitrogen ("NO3 ") as part of the circulation process. Ammonia -nitrogen would be converted to nitrate -nitrogen by biological oxidation. Nitrate nitrogen is not of particular concern with regard to fish culture. NO3 is either flushed from the system during solid removal (Bovendeur, et. al., 1987) or that denitrification takes place during the aeration process (Tchobanoglous and Schroeder, 1985; Spotte, 1979). The level of nitrates as total nitrogen is not of concern to the receiving waters as studies of Long Island Sound have shown that keeping the levels of nitrogen static or reducing nitrogen will improve the water quality if the Sound. Phosphorus (Pl: A certain amount of phosphorus will also be discharged into the circulation system with the fish feces. Suspended Solids: The solid content of unused feed and fish feces will also result in an increase in the amount of suspended solids in the hatchery water and into the effluent. 111-3 i i a U C 0 • i i t V The feed composition, the feed rate, and the fish metabolic rate all effect water quality. The byproducts of fish metabolism include carbon dioxide, ammonia, nitrogen, and fecal solids. The water flow through the hatchery along with the rate of feeding and fish metabolism have a significant impact on the quality of the water in the system (Losordo, In publication). Pelletized feed generally have a protein content of 50% to 60%. If not assimilated by the fish, these pellets produce a high organic waste which can impact water quality, primarily dissolved oxygen and ammonia ("NH4"). In order to predict the amount of waste that will be generated at the proposed hatchery, an analysis of the proposed hatchery system was conducted by Cameron Engineering, P.C. ("Cameron") of Westbury, NY. (See Appendix T.). Their analysis included a review of the literature pertaining to hatchery recirculation systems as well as information in the Phase Outline Schedules enclosed herein. III -4 0- [l a r 0 'S' E71 0 0 There are four methods used to calculate the amount of waste generated in a hatchery. Two methods utilize the biomass of the fish present in the hatchery while the other two methods use the amount of feed distributed to the cultured fish on a daily basis. Cameron based their estimates upon an average of all four methods investigated. The volumes of water discharged into the receiving waters must also be considered. The projected water volumes to be discharged into the receiving waters are as follows: CM/DAY GD Phase I & IA 46 12,150 Phase II & IIA 200 52,800 Phase III & IIIA 678 178,200 Phase IV & IVA 1,500 396,000 CM/DAY = Cubic Meters per Day GD = Gallons per Day The above volumes of water discharged represent the backwash water from the final polishing filter in addition to a 20 % volumetric water change of the hatchery system water per day. The only additional discharge from the 111-5 G a 0 Z R) 4) 1; U 40 hatchery will be that resulting from the occasional cleaning of the hatchery tanks. Given the above listed volumes, and the mass of fish present in the hatchery at a given time, it is possible to predict the total amount and concentration of nitrogen, BOD, suspended solids (SS), nitrogen and phosphorus generated by the hatchery system each day. May 1998 through April 1999 represents the period of peak operation of the proposed hatchery. Table 37. projects the average waste characterization for this time period. From Table 37, the average BOD generated is estimated to be 10,508 pounds per day in April 1999 (Phase IV). In a totally closed recirculation system, it is expected that the BOD loading would be reduced by 90% resulting in a concentration of approximately 5.5 mg/L remaining in the hatchery water. It is estimated that 11,873 pounds of suspended solids will be generated each day. In a closed recirculation system, it is 111-6 Table 37. Waste Characterization - Summary of References Average Average Average Average Month Mass of Fish Pounds of Pounds of Pounds of Pounds of Pounds of 1000 K Feed BOD Nitrogen Phosphorous Suspended Solids May 1998 27 1307 402 61 18 455 June 157 7599 2340 356 107 2644 July 287 13891 4278 651 196 4833 August 417 20183 6215 945 285 7023 September 547 26475 8153 1240 374 9212 November 28 1355 417 63 19 472 December 158 7647 2355 358 108 2661 January 1999 287 13891 4278 651 196 4833 February 419 20280 6245 950 286 7056 March 562 27201 8377 1274 384 9465 April 705 34122 10508 1598 482 11873 4 U expected that the suspended solids level could be maintained at a 90% reduction level resulting in a SS concentration of approximately 6.2 mg/L remaining in the hatchery water. An estimated 1,598 pounds of nitrogen would be generated a per day in the hatchery. In a closed system, the nitrogen in the system would be converted into nitrate -nitrogen. The amount of nitrogen would be reduced resulting in a concentration less than 6.0 mg/L in the hatchery water. At peak operation, it is expected that a total of 642 pounds • of phosphorus will be generated per day. In a closed recirculation system, the level of phosphorus could be lowered to less than 1.7 mg/L through chemical addition, settling and filtration. The volume of water discharged from the hatchery in addition to the known concentrations of BOD, suspended solids, nitrogen and phosphorus in the hatchery water can be used to calculate the amount discharged per day of each of the above components. These calculations are summarized below: 111-8 0 46 a a- a s 0 0 BOD 5.5 mg/L 525 lbs/day SS 6.2 mg/L 593 lbs/day N <6.0 mg/L 96 lbs/day P <1.7 mg/L 26 lbs/day Because of the high volume of flow, the concentrations appear low, yet the mass loadings calculated from the total daily flow are significant. It should be noted that these values represent a 90 % to 95 % reduction of the volume waste load expected to be generated within the hatchery. That is, only 5% to 10 % of the waste generated will enter the receiving waters. As previously discussed herein, all the hatchery tanks and piping will need to be leached for a period of at least two weeks to remove any contaminants. It should be noted that these contaminants are residual, originating from the manufacture of the tanks and piping. Leaching of new tanks is standard practice in the aquaculture industry and any contaminants resulting would be present in trace amounts below the detectable limits of standard testing methods. In addition, as the contaminants would be present 111-9 • 0 Ci i 0 a V) 0 in the hatchery effluent for a relatively short period of time, it is expected that there would be no adverse effect upon the surrounding environment resulting from their discharge. 2. OFFSHORE NET PENS As previously stated herein, the water quality classification for the waters of the proposed net pen grow out site is "SA". The impact to the existing water quality occurring through the operation of the offshore net pens has been calculated based on the average total weight of fish, and the average amounts of feed fed each day. The amounts of BOD, Suspended Solids, nitrogen and phosphorus can also be predicted based on the average total weight of fish in the pens for each phase of the operation and each month of the grow out. The loading from the net pens for Phases I through VI are summarized in the following tables: III -10 a ORGANIC LOADING FROM NET PENS TABLE 38. PHASE I MONTH AVERAGE TOTAL ORGANIC WASTE BOD & SS NITRATE PHOSPHORUS WEIGHT OF FISH(1) KG/DAY (2) KG/DAY (3) KG/DAY (4) KG/DAY (5) 11 MAY 25,000 250 125 12 5 JUNE 30,000 300 150 15 6 MONTH AVERAGE TOTAL ORGANIC WASTE BOD & SS NITRATE PHOSPHORUS JULY 35,000 350 175 18 7 KG/DAY (4) AUG 40,000 400 200 20 8 SEPT 45,000 450 225 22 9 800 400 40 16 JUNE 96,000 OCT 480 50,000 500 250 25 10 JULY 112,000 (1) FISH STOCKED AT 500 GRAMS EACH; HARVESTED AT ONE KILOGRAM. 56 22 (2) BASED ON 1.0 KG/100 KG OF FISH PER DAY. (3) BASED ON 0.5 KG/100 KG OF FISH PER DAY. AUG 128,000 1280 640 (4) BASED ON 0.05 KG/100 KG OF FISH PER DAY. SEPT 144,000 1440 (5) BASED ON 0.02 KG/100 KG OF FISH PER DAY. 29 11 TABLE 39. PHASE II MONTH AVERAGE TOTAL ORGANIC WASTE BOD & SS NITRATE PHOSPHORUS WEIGHT OF FISH(I) KG/DAY (2) KG/DAY (3) KG/DAY (4) KG/DAY (5) MAY 80,000 800 400 40 16 JUNE 96,000 960 480 48 19 JULY 112,000 1120 560 56 22 i AUG 128,000 1280 640 64 26 SEPT 144,000 1440 720 72 29 OCT 160,000 1600 800 80 32 • r 46 TABLE 40. ~ PHASE III i MONTH AVERAGE TOTAL ORGANIC WASTE WEIGHT OF FISH(l) KG/DAY (2) BOD & SS KG/DAY (3) NITRATE KG/DAY (4) PHOSPHORUS KG/DAY (5) 610,000 MAY 275,000 2750 1375 138 55 7320 JUNE 330,000 3300 1650 165 66 4270 JULY 385,000 3850 1925 192 77 480 195 SEPT 1,098,000 10,980 5490 549 220 AUG 440,000 4400 2200 220 88 SEPT 495,000 4950 2475 248 99 OCT 550,000 5500 2750 275 110 TABLE 41. PHASE IV MONTH AVERAGE TOTAL ORGANIC WASTE WEIGHT OF FISH(1) KG/DAY (2) BOD & SS KG/DAY (3) NITRATE KG/DAY (4) PHOSPHORUS KG/DAY (5) MAY 610,000 6100 3050 305 122 JUNE 732,000 7320 3660 366 146 JULY 854,000 8540 4270 427 171 AUG 976,000 9760 4880 480 195 SEPT 1,098,000 10,980 5490 549 220 OCT 1,220,000 12,200 6100 610 244 0 111-12 IF" i TABLE 42. TABLE 43. PHASE V PHASE VI MONTH AVERAGE TOTAL ORGANIC WASTE BOD & SS NITRATE PHOSPHORUS BOD & SS NITRATE WEIGHT OF FISH(1) KG/DAY (2) KG/DAY (3) KG/DAY (4) KG/DAY (5) KG/DAY (3) MAY 1,665,000 16,650 8,325 832 333 1380 JUNE 1,998,000 19,980 9,990 990 400 670 JULY 3,885,000 38,850 19,420 1940 780 AUG JULY 2,3311,000 23,310 11,655 1166 466 4,995,000 AUG 2,664,000 26,640 13,320 1332 533 55,500 SEPT 2,997,000 29,970 14,985 1498 599 OCT 3,330,000 33,300 16,650 1670 670 i TABLE 43. PHASE VI MONTH AVERAGE TOTAL ORGANIC WASTE BOD & SS NITRATE PHOSPHORUS WEIGHT OF FISH(1) KG/DAY (2) KG/DAY (3) KG/DAY (4) KG/DAY (5) MAY 2,775,000 27,750 13,870 1380 560 JUNE 3,330,000 33,300 16,650 1670 670 JULY 3,885,000 38,850 19,420 1940 780 AUG 4,440,000 44,400 22,200 2220 890 SEPT 4,995,000 49,950 24,980 2500 1000 OCT 5,550,000 55,500 27,750 2780 1110 111-13 E. 4W t i R 0 4 9 0 The average current velocities at the Gardiners Bay Site far exceed the minimum recommended by the Washington State Department of Fisheries for fish culture in net pens (1990). In addition, these current velocities will promote the wide dispersal of fish feces and unconsumed feed. The potential impact to the benthic environment resulting from this project is expected to be minimal due to the sparse community that exists at the proposed site. In fact, it is expected that the benthic community at the net pen site will increase in diversity and richness due to a small percentage increase in food availability. This enhancement of the benthic community will subsequently attract those invertebrates and fish which feed upon benthic organisms, which in turn will attract larger fishes such as striped bass (Moron saxatilis) and bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix). It should be noted that it is in the best interest of Mariculture Technologies, Inc. to maintain excellent water quality at the proposed net pen site. Any degradation of water quality would undoubtedly detriment the growout of cultured summer flounder and the success of this proposed project. 111-14 ft IV B. TRANSPORTATION 3 2 V PROCESSING SITE 4 Vehicle activity during Phases IV, V, and VI to and from VI the Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Plant is expected to 6 have some impact. The Village streets in the residential areas surrounding the Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Plant are narrow. The vehicle movement to and from the fish processing site during Phase IV, V, and VI are E tabulated as follows: EMPLOYEE TRUCK TRUCK PHASE VEHICLES DELIVERIES SHIPMENTS IV 73 3 2 V 119 5 8 VI 174 6 10 Access to the processing site from Route 48, is via Main Street to Sterling Avenue. Route 48 is the major truck route in the area. Alternate access for non truck vehicles is via Carpenter Street to Sterling Avenue. E� The employee vehicle round trips will occur over a twenty - i CM i four hour period with the majority of them within the normal work day, Monday through Friday. The truck deliveries and shipments are expected to occur only A during regular daylight hours. It should also be noted that the employee round trips do not take into account any potential car pooling, but are based on each employee driving their own vehicles. C� • EJ • 111-16 C:J 0. ID FOA Ll Mitigation Measures to Minimize Environmental Imaact Ll a ,s a D A. HATCHERY 0 The principal mitigation proposed to reduce the impact of water quality from the hatchery is to construct a water recirculation ~ system. This system would provide for 5 % to 10 % of the total water flow to be discharged to Long Island Sound via the existing sewage outfall pipe at Clarks Beach. This discharge will be derived i primarily from the backwash of the filters and partial volumetric water replacement of the culture tanks themselves. The hatchery recirculation system is expected to utilized a new technology developed by U.S. and European team effort specifically for fish hatchery recirculation systems (Caldwell, 1994). This system represents the state of the art in recirculation systems, utilizing a unique hatchery tank design with a patented particle trap. The particle trap removes 98 % of the fish waste and unconsumed feed from the hatchery tanks (Caldwell, 1994). This prevents the material from dissolving and degrading the water quality of the system. The process also includes mechanical filtration to remove suspended solids from the hatchery water Biological filtration equipment would be included in the filtration system for nitrifying and potential denitrification. The system reduces the total BOD, suspended solids, nitrogen and phosphorus by 90 % to 95 % volumetrically. • 0 IV - 1 Z B. GROW OUT SITE A The expected loadings in accordance with the various proposed implementation phases are set forth in the Phase Outline Schedule - IV -2 Due to the high velocity current flows and the volumes of water passing through the proposed net pen site, it is expected that the fish feces and unconsumed feed will be dispersed over a wide area. Gowen et. al. (1990) characterized four general types of impacts ♦ resulting from intensive aquaculture operations which presumably would include this proposed project. They are: (1) the risk of hypernutrification ; (2) benthic enrichment; (3) increase in • biological oxygen demand; and (4) bacteriological changes. However, attempts to precisely model these environmental impacts within the context of defined aquaculture practices have proved • extremely difficult. In deed, a modeling study conducted by Silvert (1992) indicated several weakness in utilizing such models. For example, certain conceptual problems arise when a model incorporating static quantities such annual yield are used in calculating highly variable quantities such as dissolved oxygen (Silvert, 1992). Furthermore, Silvert (1992) points out that estimates of the maximum safe degree of nutrient enrichment is difficult to obtain or even to define. A The expected loadings in accordance with the various proposed implementation phases are set forth in the Phase Outline Schedule - IV -2 L Grow Out Function. A summary of the expected organic loadings with respect to the implementation phases based upon an assimilation efficiency of 50% is set forth below: Average organic waste loadings (K/Day) with respect to the proposed phases of implementation at the grow out site. f Phase Organic Loading I 375 II 1200 III 4100 IV 9200 V 25000 VI 42000 A central problem in predicting the resultant impact on water quality is the fact that the proposed grow out site can not be treated as a closed system. It is the position of Mariculture Technologies, Inc. that the resulting impacts to water quality will be insignificant 0 due to the proximity of high current velocity (flushing) areas including Plum Gut, the Sluiceway and the Race to the proposed grow out site. However, even if, a static model was to be applied in this instance, the resultant estimated effect to primary production would remain highly speculative because the relationship between • IV -3 i nutrient levels and primary production is not well established in marine waters (Schindler, 1979, O'Connor, 1979, Lee and Jones, 1979). In an apparent effort to supplant these and other significant research gaps, the Washington State Department of Fisheries (1990) has published recommended siting criterion for intensive 4 marine aquaculture and the State of Maine Department of Marine Resources (1992) developed a Finfish Aquaculture Monitoring Program. Importantly, as previously disclosed herein, the siting 0 criterion for marine aquaculture as recommended by the Washington State Department of Fisheries (1990) has been met and exceeded in this application. • The monitoring program established by the State of Maine Department of Marine Resources is comprised of three basic components. They are: (1) Diver Survey; (2) Water Quality Monitoring; and (3) Benthic Analysis. a The Diver Survey includes the filming of the bottom land within the foot print of the net pens and extending 60 meters (200 feet) beyond the ends of the system along the axis of the primary current as well as the relative abundance characterization of aquatic fauna it IV -4 } a as follows: abundant, always present within the diver's view; common, seen occasionally throughout the dive and rare, only seen one or in a few places. Unfortunately, as previously described herein, the filming of the ocean floor will not provide any meaningful monitoring data in this instance because of poor visibility that exists today. Nevertheless, Mariculture Technologies, Inc. proposes to implement a diver survey to determine the relative abundance of aquatic flora in accordance with the specifications described above already adopted by the State of Maine. Two diver surveys will be conducted on an annual basis, one during the spring between April and May and one during the fall between October and November as consistent with the State of Maine Monitoring Requirements. Data gained from this monitoring exercise will f be combined in an annual monitoring report to be forwarded to the NYSDEC for agency review. A The water quality monitoring as now required by the State of Maine is comprised of direct measurement of dissolved oxygen, temperature and salinity. As consistent with the monitoring requirements of the State of Maine, water quality will be monitored in accordance with the following specifications: (1) One water sample will be analyzed for dissolved oxygen, temperature and salinity every two weeks from July 1 st IV -5 i a W 1 0 • M through September 30th. Samples will be collected down current from a centrally located peripheral net pen at mid cage depth no further than 5 meters (15 feet) from the net pen. (2) Two additional samples will be sampled at a distance of 100 meters (300 feet) from a centrally located peripheral net pen, one upgradient (up current) and one down gradient (down current). Analyses of dissolved oxygen will be conducted by a NYS Licensed Laboratory. Analysis of temperature will be conducted by probe and analysis of salinity will be conducted using a hand held refractometer. (3) A complete dissolved oxygen, temperature and salinity profile will be conducted annually during mid August at a central location in the grow out site. Ten equidistant samples and measurements will be taken throughout the water column in the early morning hours one hour before slack low water. As to further address the potential impacts of hyper- eutrophication and biological oxygen demand in nearby waters, Mariculture Technologies, Inc. proposes to expand on the requirements set forth by the State of Maine to IV -6 AL a Ci E 1 a I* include analysis of chlorophyll a, total nitrogen and biological oxygen demand. This proposal includes the collection of two samples one meter above the ocean floor (for oxygen demand and total nitrogen) and two samples one meter below the surface (for analysis of Chlorophyll a). Samples will be collected at a distance of 100 meters (300 feet) upgradient (up current) from a centrally located peripheral net pen and at a distance of 100 meters (3 00 feet) downgradient (down current) from a centrally located peripheral net pen. Upgradient samples versus down gradient samples will provide a basis of comparison to determine the environmental impacts, if any, related to the proposed project. Samples are to be collected on the same date during which the detailed dissolved oxygen, temperature and salinity profiles are taken, although subsequent to the profile measurements or slack low tide. Analytical measurements of chlorophyll a, total nitrogen and biological oxygen demand will be conducted by a NYS Licensed Laboratory, the results for which will be forwarded to the NYSDEC as part of the proposed annual momtonng report. IV -7 i A IV -8 IR Monitoring of the benthos as proposed is comprised of two components: sediment analysis and infauna analysis. As consistent with the monitoring requirements adopted by the State of Maine, these monitoring efforts will be conducted every other year commencing after implementation of Phase H. Due to the highly unconsolidated nature of the bottom sediments, sediment and benthic samples will be collected using a 0.1 M2 Smith- MacIntyre Benthic Grab as opposed to a plexiglass corer. Approximately 1/4 of the collected sample volume will be analyzed for sediment composition. The proposed sampling plan incorporates several of the peripheral sampling locations set forth in Sample Locations for Macrobenthic Invertebrate and Sediment Chemistry Sampling. Specifically, the proposed sampling sites include the following locations: 1, 6, 10, 18, 20, and 5. (See Figure 30.) As consistent with the baseline benthic survey presented herein, sediment grain size analysis will be performed in accordance with methods set forth by the American Society for Testing and Materials (1993). Sediment samples will be analyzed for sediment grain size (% gravel, sand, silt, ect.). Additionally, grab samples will be analyzed for Total Organic Carbon by methods outlines in _ the EPA manual (1988) for sediment testing. The results of these analyses will be included in the proposed annual monitoring report A IV -8 IR i • 0 0 to a 10 0 90 I 94- 8 15 70 -76 64. ham, _.r 60 36 -A PDQ / 35-*' 10 3 �- 7 3 .70 _ T 22 26 14 _ie r�M � '::..••II .14 29 to� K -f5 22 �U I. " lo- .. 20 2 / 19 z� 22 a 9 3 13 "t Maintd If 35O JT' 2 12 1 2'11 34 O 16 3 20 � 4 11 p5 19' G 49 cc 1.0 .1 J .14 133 v ilt � O ES I. 1 r' 54 1 n 47 I 47 o 1s '9 ll 121 103 56 ; \ -�' 95 85 85 G S4 39 BEL 7%rO-j ' 30 72 Pt 9• ` % I 9 Sampling Locations for Macrobenthic Invertebrate and Sediment Chemistry Sampling Figure 30. a (every other year). Accordingly, these results as compared to the baseline results previously reported herein, will provide a basis to evaluate what impacts, if any, have resulted from the implementation of this proposed project. • The remaining 3/4 of the O.1M2 Smith-MacIntyre Grab will be washed through a 0.5 mm mesh sieve to remove fine particles. Invertebrates retained by the sieve will be identified to the lowest practical taxonomic level. Macrobenthic invertebrate densities for all proposed stations will be reported. Comparison between infauna previously collected as baseline data with infauna collected as part of this proposed monitoring program will provide a basis to evaluate what impacts, if any, have resulted from the implementation of this proposed project. It should be noted that it is in the best interest of Mariculture Technologies, Inc. to maintain excellent water quality at the proposed net pen site. Any significant degradation of water quality would undoubtedly jeopardize the growout of cultured summer flounder and the success of this proposed project. Accordingly, with the approval of the NYS DEC, Mariculture Technologies, Inc. intends to implement the above stated monitoring program. IV - 10 L C. TRANSPORTATION Mariculture Technologies, Inc., is considering the use of an employee shuttle bus to mitigate traffic impacts as the proposed project enters Phase V. This bus would originate at central points in the local area to provide transportation of employees on regular work days. An analysis of the expected considered use of this bus service will result in a projected reduction of employee vehicle ! round trips per day as follows: EMPLOYEE VEHICLE ROUND TRIPS PER DAY f PHASE WITH BUS WITHOUT BUS V 60 119 VI 70 174 As appropriate, Mariculture Technologies, Inc. will encourage car pooling among its employees to further reduce the number of employee vehicle trips per day. i IV - 11 t 0 D. ECONOMIC BENEFITS The economic benefits of the proposed project include the following: o Need for economic growth which will result in increased employment; o Need for attracting clean industries compatible with the traditional industries of eastern Long Island specifically fishing and farming. This is especially true with the increasing numbers of fisherman unable to make a living from commercial fishing, and t 0 • 0 o Need for providing a high quality seafood product to the market place in a consistent basis to offset declines in the harvest of natural stock and to replace the revenue lost with those declines. The mitigation measures proposed herein will cause certain economic costs to Mariculture Technologies, Inc.. These costs include the following: IV - 12 o Cost of two diver surveys per year of the proposed net pen site, o Cost of collecting and analyzing samples for dissolved oxygen, temperature and salinity every two weeks from July 1st through September 30th at the net pen site, o Cost of annual hydrographic profiles of the net pen site and subsequent laboratory analysis, * o Cost of BOD, total nitrogen, and Chlorophyll a monitoring and laboratory analysis, o Cost of sediment grain size analysis and TOC analysis every other year, o Cost of benthic infaunal sampling and analysis every other year, o Cost of construction and operation of a closed recirculation system for the hatchery water treatment, and o Cost of maintaining and operating a company owned shuttle bus to minimize impacts due to increased traffic. • IV - 13 0 • 0 0 V i Adverse Environmental Effects that Cannot be Avoided if the Project is Implemented s • r a �j Li a 0 ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS Environmental effects that can be expected to occur regardless of mitigation include nutrient loading from both the proposed hatchery and the net pen sites. The expected loadings of BOD, suspended solids, nitrogen and phosphorus from the hatchery during peak operation (Phase IV) are as follows: 0 BOD 525 lbs/Day SS 593 lbs/Day N 96 lbs/Day • P 26 lbs/Day Mariculture Technologies, Inc. proposes to construct a closed, recirculating hatchery system. The system will include state of the art technology in solid, BOD and nutrient removal. It is expected that 90% to 95% of the wastes generated in the hatchery will be removed prior to discharge into the receiving waters. The numbers listed above represent such reduction. The expected loadings from the proposed net pen site during peak operation (Phase VI) are as follows • V-1 0 a The average current velocities at the Gardiners Bay Site far exceed the minimum recommended by the Washington State Department of Fisheries for fish culture in net pens (1990). In addition, these current velocities will promote the wide dispersal of fish feces and unconsumed feed. The potential impact to the benthic environment resulting from this project is expected to be minimal due to the sparse community that exists at the proposed site. In fact, it is expected that the benthic community at the net pen site will increase in diversity and richness due to a small percentage increase in food availability. This enhancement of the benthic community will subsequently attract those invertebrates and fish which feed upon benthic organisms, which in turn will attract larger fishes such as striped bass (Moron saxatilis) and bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix). • V-2 4 MONTH AVERAGE TOTAL ORGANIC WASTE BOD & SS NITRATE PHOSPHORUS WEIGHT OF FISH(1) KG/DAY (2) KG/DAY (3) KG/DAY (4) KG/DAY (5) MAY 560 2,775,000 27,750 13,870 1380 JUNE 3,330,000 33,300 16,650 1670 670 JULY 3,885,000 38,850 19,420 1940 780 AUG 4,440,000 44,400 22,200 2220 890 SEPT 4,995,000 49,950 24,980 2500 1000 OCT 5,550,000 55,500 27,750 2780 1110 (1) FISH STOCKED AT 500 GRAMS EACH; HARVESTED AT ONE KILOGRAM. (2) BASED ON 1.0 KG/100 KG OF FISH PER DAY. (3) BASED ON 0.5 KG/100 KG OF FISH PER DAY. (4) BASED ON 0.05 KG/100 KG OF FISH PER DAY. (5) BASED ON 0.02 KG/100 KG OF FISH PER DAY. The average current velocities at the Gardiners Bay Site far exceed the minimum recommended by the Washington State Department of Fisheries for fish culture in net pens (1990). In addition, these current velocities will promote the wide dispersal of fish feces and unconsumed feed. The potential impact to the benthic environment resulting from this project is expected to be minimal due to the sparse community that exists at the proposed site. In fact, it is expected that the benthic community at the net pen site will increase in diversity and richness due to a small percentage increase in food availability. This enhancement of the benthic community will subsequently attract those invertebrates and fish which feed upon benthic organisms, which in turn will attract larger fishes such as striped bass (Moron saxatilis) and bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix). • V-2 4 0 • L 0 J • • cl • 4 vI Adverse Environmental Impacts 4 0 ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS As previously stated, it is expected that environmental impacts expected to 0 occur regardless of mitigation include waste loadings from the proposed hatchery and the net pen sites. However, these effects at the net pen site are expected to be minimized by the high currents and flushing prevalent throughout the area. 0 The effluent loadings at the proposed hatchery are expected to be minimized with the installation and operation of a closed recirculation system which would reduce the potential loadings by 90 % to 95 %. a • El • VI - I 0 s • A. ALTERNATIVE SITES • The proposed culture of summer flounder encompasses three basic components. They are: (1) Hatchery; (2) Grow -out; and (3) Processing. Mariculture Technologies, Inc. conducted a rather • detailed assessment for site selection with respect to each of the three components which culminated in the selection of Clarks Beach for the hatchery site, the northeastern portion of Gardeners 0 Bay for the grow -out site, and Winter Harbor Fisheries for the processing site. The site selection process encompasses due consideration of the following factors: • (1) The biological constraints of summer flounder; (2) Availability of land as related to the proper sizing of 1C all facilities to achieve maximum culture efficiency; (3) Suitability of alternate sites to accommodate design requirements; (4) Restriction of aquaculture from navigational channels; (5) Environmental impact mitigation; (6) Mitigation of all possible use conflicts, (7) Compatibility with regional objectives; • VII - 1 0 (8) Accessibility of site; (9) Water quality at hatchery and pen sites; (10) Proximity of the proposed facilities to any point source discharges or facilities; and (11) Economic considerations. In evaluation of all three components of the overall project with respect to each of the three components, several of the above listed selection factors did not play a role in evaluation of preferred sites 0 and their alternatives. For example, selection of the hatchery site was not influenced by compatibility of regional objectives as the only stated regional objective was set forth in the Aquaculture Planning Act of 1983 and the New York Sea Grant Study (1985) which followed. Neither the legislative act nor the study set forth specific locations where aquaculture should take place. Similarly, the site selection process for the grow -out and processing components was not influenced by point source discharges as none were found proximate to any of the alternative grow -out sites and 0 the selection of a processing site would be not be influenced by this criterion. Obviously, the selection of the hatchery site was not influenced by restriction of aquaculture from navigational channels 40 as no docking facilities are proposed at the hatchery site. 0 VII -2 • • Nevertheless, where applicable, the remaining factors were applied in selection of sites to accommodate facilities for each of the project components as follows: Hatchery Site Perhaps the most fundamental consideration in the selection of any hatchery site is its location proximate to the coastal environment. It is clear that any hatchery facility for the culture of marine species requires a coastal location to insure availability of salt water 0 whether derived from direct intake of coastal waters or by salt water well(s). Furthermore, any marine hatchery facility requires the ability to discharge saline waters back into a coastal • • 41 • 0 environment. That is, discharge of saline waters in an upland area such as a recharge basin or sump would cause severe adverse impacts on the freshwater aquifer for which the entire population of Suffolk County relies on for potable water supplies. Discharge of hatchery effluent into an upland receiving facility would cause salt water contamination to the aquifer and desalination of hatchery effluents is clearly cost prohibited. Even so, available sites adjacent to the coast are extremely limited. In fact, most adjacent areas to the coast have already been developed in Eastern Suffolk County. These development patterns were established over many decades as the economy of past times was in large part driven by fishing and other water dependent uses. VII -3 s Alternative hatchery sites were considered early in the selection i process with the end result clearly indicating the proposed Clarks Beach Site to be far superior in several respects for the mass culture of summer flounder than all other sites potentially available to Mariculture Technologies, Inc.. Initially, it was believed that the Winter Harbor Fisheries Site could 0 accommodate a hatchery in addition to a processing facility. The Winter Harbor Fisheries site includes the existing processing facility on the south side of Sterling Avenue which presently is 0 underutilized along with the approximate half acre undeveloped lot adjacent to and north of the processing site across Sterling Avenue. Upon determination of the needed floor space required for the 0 culture of summer flounder, the Winter Harbor Fisheries Site was quickly ruled out. A& Phase I of the Hatchery Function as set forth in Phase Outline Schedule requiring one or more building structures of at least 3090 square feet could be accommodated on the vacant lot across the street from the existing Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Plant. While Phase II of the Hatchery Function as set forth in the Phase Outline Schedule requires a building structure of at least 9610 • square feet which conceivably could also be accommodated in the vacant lot across the Winter Harbor Fisheries Site, these area • VII -4 0 L • CA L estimates include only the space required for the proposed tanks themselves, thereby excluding all support facilities associated therewith. Accordingly, a building structure located on the vacant lot would greatly exceed 9610 square feet thereby encompassing nearly all of this lot. Additional support facilities most particularly including parking could not be accommodated on this vacant lot thus from a practical stand point, the vacant lot across the street from the existing Winter Harbor Processing Facility would not be of sufficient size to accommodate the culture of summer flounder at Phase II. Finally, Mariculture Technologies, Inc. decided that a proposal for the use of the entire area of the vacant lot across the street from Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Plant might lead to use conflicts or at least heightened quality of life concerns expressed by the adjacent residents to the north of this site. In the early planning stages for this proposal, the use of the Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Facility for one or more of the hatchery functions was considered. However, these considerations resulted in the conclusion that the required retrofitting of the existing structures at the Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Building was cost prohibited. Consideration was also given to a multitude of other sites located in Towns west of Southold. All such sites were quickly ruled out in VII -5 the selection process due to extended transportation time of fingerlings to the grow -out site. The extended transportation time required to link the hatchery function with the grow -out function would result in greatly increased trucking costs, higher risk of fingerling mortality due to the greater amount of time for which fingerlings would be held in live wells on trucks during transportation, and higher liability which results in increased insurance premiums over fish transport. The choice of the Clarks Beach Site is one that has clear advantages 0 in terms of use conflicts, quality of life issues, and local economic development. Use conflicts over the Clarks Beach site is minimal. Due to the location of the sewage treatment outfall at Clarks Beach, the adjacent coastal waters are not desirable from the standpoint of swimming or bathing. Presently, the Clarks Beach Site is under-utilized. The Clarks Beach Site is significantly buffered from nearly all of the surrounding residential development. The site is adjacent to the Long Island Sound to the north and County Road 48 to the south. Additionally, the County of Suffolk 0 holds title to an approximate 36 acre parcel to the east which is bordered by a small parcel held by the Town of Southold. Only two dwellings are located adjacent to the Clarks Beach Site. 0 The first dwelling is located on an out parcel adjacent to the Clarks 0 Beach Site to the west and the second dwelling across County Road 48 to the south. Accordingly, the potential impact of the proposed hatchery site to the surrounding neighborhood is minimal. • Finally, the choice of Clarks Beach as the preferred hatchery site has other definite economic advantages. These advantages include the following: (1) proximity to the coast; (2) available electric • hook-up to the Village of Greenport resulting in significantly reduced power rates over that assessed by LILCO; (3) available hook up for hatchery discharge into the existing discharge point • presently utilized by the Village of Greenport Sewage Treatment Plant; and (4) available hook up of both water and sewage to the Village of Greenport Water and Sewage Treatment Plant to • accommodate the water usage and sewage generation of personnel and visitors. • Grow -out Function As graphically portrayed and described throughout this EIS, the • proposed net pen site is located in the northeastern portion of Gardeners Bay. However, prior to selecting this location for grow - out, Mariculture Technologies, Inc. considered a number of other sites. These sites included a 200 acre site in the Long Island Sound adjacent to LILCO's Shoreham Facility, a second 200 acre site on • VII -7 41 the southwestern side of Gardener's Island locally known as Cherry • Harbor, and a third 200 acre site adjacent to and south of the proposed net pen grow -out site. • There were no significant differences among the three alternative sites for grow -out with respect to availability of land, compatibility with regional objectives and point source discharges or facilities. • All alternative grow -out sites are found in open water thereby satisfying the design criterion of availability of land. With respect to compatibility with regional objectives, the only stated regional • policy pertaining to aquaculture was found in the Aquaculture Planning Act of 1983 and the New York Sea Grant Institute Study (1985) which followed. Neither the legislative act nor the • technical study included site specific recommendations as to where net pen culture could take place. Rather, these planning initiatives sought to encourage the expansion of aquaculture in New York • State. Accordingly, all three alternative grow -out sites are compatible with regional objectives. Finally, no point sources discharges were found in close proximity to any of the alternative • grow -out sites. Even with respect to the proposed grow -out site and the alternative adjacent site, the only point source discharge in the vicinity was found on the north side of Plum Island far away • from these sites. Nevertheless, a host of other physical, biological, and social factors resulted in the selection of the proposed grow - 0 VII -8 40 • out site as the preferred grow -out site over the remaining • alternative sites. The first alternative site to the proposed grow -out site was a 200 • acre area in the Long Island Sound off shore of the LILCO Power facility in Shoreham. Extensive informal discussions in consideration of this site between the principals of Mariculture • Technologies, Inc. and representatives from LILCO and the Town of Brookhaven were generally unproductive. That is, neither the Town of Brookhaven nor LILCO embraced the concept of locating • a 200 acre facility at this locale. The lack of enthusiasm on the part of LILCO and the Town of Brookhaven was not construed as an 41 objection to this alternative site. However, there were other factors • associated with this site that are clearly undesirable from the practical standpoint of culturing summer flounder. For example, deployment of a net pen facility at the Shoreham Site has the • distinct disadvantage of maximum exposure to the prevailing wind and wave direction occurring during most storm events. That is, net pens deployed at the Shoreham Site would be directly exposed • to the prevailing winter time winds and waves generated from the north and northwest as well as the most severe prevailing storm winds and waves which come from the northeast. Finally, the principals of Mariculture Technologies, Inc. reached out to the commercial fishermen (draggers) of the area who pointed out • VII -9 41 • • C • C L FJ t 40 40 that large quantities of late summer seaweed are carried by prevailing currents through this area. Accordingly, it was judged that the seaweed flows occurring during the precise time that summer flounder would be present in the ocean net pens would lead to a high degree of adherence to the net pen surfaces, creating extreme maintenance difficulties for the net pens themselves thereby reducing the likelihood of success for the grow -out of summer flounder contained therein. Accordingly, the Shoreham Site was ruled out by Mariculture Technologies, Inc. The second grow -out site under consideration by Mariculture Technologies, Inc. included a 200 acre area on the southwestern side of Gardiners Island locally known as Cherry Harbor. The Cherry Harbor Site had definite advantages even over the proposed grow -out site from the standpoint of reduced storm and wind exposure and site accessibility. The Cherry Harbor Site offers superior protection from wind and waves derived from the north, northeast, east, southeast and south and is located closer to the loading and off loading facilities at the Winter Harbor Fisheries Site. Initially, for these reasons, the Cherry Harbor Site was the preferred site. However, further evaluation of this site resulted in the identification of several significant disadvantages. These disadvantages included: (1) greater use conflicts; (2) reduced VII - 10 0 0 J • Ll Ll • i flushing or circulation; (3) increased aesthetic impacts; (4) relatively shallow depths; and (5) increased impacts to navigation. With respect to greater use conflicts, Mariculture Technologies, Inc. reached out to the commercial fishermen in the area during a meeting sponsored by Cornell Cooperative Extension in October, 1992. Local Commercial Fishing Groups advised Mariculture Technologies, Inc. that the Cherry Harbor Site was an important fishing ground for draggers as well as conch fishermen. Further investigations of this site lead to the finding that the site was also important to the recreational fishing industry. In contrast, the proposed grow -out site is not greatly utilized by commercial draggers due to the presence of boulders along the bottom which tend to snag nets and repeated field inspections of the site revealed no more than two conch pots deployed over the site at any given time. Finally, the proposed grow -out site is not utilized by recreational fishermen to any significant extent. Instead, the high use areas for recreational fishermen include: (1) Plum Gut; (2) the north side of Plum Island; (3) the Sluiceway; and (4) the Ruins. With respect to reduced flushing, current velocity and direction was examined using the Tidal Current Charts developed by the US Department of Commerce, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration ("NOAA Charts"). Comparison of the current velocity at the Cherry Harbor Site with the proposed grow - VII - 11 • out site as set forth in the NOAA Charts lead to the observation • that current velocity at the Cherry Harbor Site was 5 to 10 times less than the proposed grow -out site. This lead to the conclusion that deployment of the net pens at this location would result in far • greater accumulations of organic materials including unconsumed feed and fecal material thereby impacting the underlying benthos and water quality to a greater extent. • With respect to aesthetic impacts, the deployment of net pens at the Cherry Harbor Site was expected to cause greater impacts to the • residents of East Hampton as well as the boaters utilizing Gardiners Bay. Specifically, the Cherry Harbor Site is in direct view of the residential developments of Hog Creek Point and wide spread • boating activity which occurs in the western and central portions of Gardiners Bay. In contrast, the proposed grow -out site is situate in an area of Gardiners Bay shielded from residential development and • much more infrequently used by boaters. With respect to depths, the Cherry Harbor Site is characterized by • depths ranging from approximately 20 to 25 feet while average depths at the proposed grow -out site is approximately 37 feet. Accordingly, the net pen floor at the Cherry Harbor Site would be • approximately 5 to 10 feet off the ocean floor thereby limiting the • VII - 12 0 E C 0 • • • • 0 • • 0 dispersal of unconsumed feed and fecal material. In contrast, the depths at the proposed net pen site provide for much greater clearance and hence wider dispersal of unconsumed feed and fecal material. With respect to increased navigational impacts, the Cherry Harbor Site is proximate to the highly utilized navigational corridor between the red nun off the shoal near Cartwright Island and Accabonac Harbor. Vessels traveling through this navigational corridor would be largely precluded from entering Cherry Harbor with deployment of the net pens at this location. In contrast, the proposed grow -out site has been located further from navigational channels than the Cherry Harbor Site. In fact, the proposed grow - out site is located approximately 1.5 nautical miles from the Ruins which is the most widely used navigational corridor linking the Peconic-Gardeners Bay Estuary to Montauk Point, Fishers Island and Block Island. Furthermore, the proposed grow -out site is located beyond and out of the way of Plum Gut and the Race which are the most important navigational corridors linking Eastern Long Island and Connecticut. The grow -out site at Cherry Harbor was rejected as an alternative for these reasons. VII - 13 0 • • • • C, • • El • 0 The third alternative grow -out site is a two hundred acre site adjacent to and south of the proposed grow -out site (see Figure 31 and 32). This site was selected as an alternative site early on in the selection process when field investigations were conducted. Moreover, the selection of this site was largely influenced by an internal risk assessment conducted by Mariculture Technologies, Inc. in the event that submerged vessels and large erratic boulders were detected at the proposed grow -out site. Since no submerged vessels were found and erratic boulders were relatively small and sparsely distributed throughout the proposed grow -out site, this alternative site was judged to offer no additional benefit over the proposed net pen site. In fact, the selection of this alternative site over the proposed grow -out site has several distinct disadvantages. They are: (1) greater navigational impacts due closer proximity to the Ruins; (2) reduced shelter from winds and waves originating from the north, northwest, and northeast; and (3) greater aesthetic impacts to boaters using the east -west navigational corridor at the Ruins. For these reasons this alternative site was rejected by Mariculture Technologies, Inc. VII - 14 i 0 0 0 0 • • • r. • 0 a, FIGURE 31. LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED GROW OUT SITE IN GARDINER'S BAY. FIGURE 32. LOCATION OF ALTERNATE GROW OUT SITE. 0 • 0 C G • • U • U Processing Function At the onset of the initial planning efforts of the overall proposed project, an executive decision was reached on the part of Mariculture Technologies, Inc. whereby an existing processing facility would be utilized over the construction of a new processing plant. The primary reasoning behind this decision was economic and environmental. The principals at Mariculture Technologies Inc. were quick to observe the declining state of our natural fish stocks, the lack of a finfish mariculture industry in Eastern Long Island and the degree of under utilization of existing processing facilities not only in Greenport but throughout Eastern Long Island and beyond. The ability to utilize an existing processing facility had certain economic advantages including little or no construction costs, available infrastructure and reduced regulation. Furthermore, the use of an existing processing plant precluded all short term environmental impacts associated with construction and development of the required infrastructure. Accordingly, the environmental impacts relate only to the increased use of existing underutilized fish processing plants all of which were originally designed and operated to process far more seafood product than they process today. Negotiations with a variety of existing processing plants were initiated by Mariculture Technologies, Inc.. While the specifics of the negotiation process are held confidential, VII - 16 these negotiations lead to the selection of the Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Plant as the preferred site in accordance with the considerations outlined and discussed above. • • • C C: V • VII - 17 • a B. ALTERNATIVE SIZE U • As set forth previously in Project Purpose and Need, the public or community need is summarized as follows: • 0 VII - 18 C The extent and significance of environmental impacts related specifically to the depth of the proposed net pens is uncertain. Accordingly, the initial implementation of the Start Up Phase and Phase I provide for means by which alternatives of project size, as related to depth and dimensions, can be evaluated. Evaluation of alternative net pen types with respect to depth and dimensions will be based on direct observation to wit: frequent and regular inspection by divers will provide for the evaluation of the performance of the respective net pen types along with the potential environmental impact relating to the build-up of organic materials below the net pens themselves. Information gained through this means will be shared with regulatory agencies having jurisdiction over the net pen site. The net pen type which demonstrates superior performance in the grow out of summer flounder and, at the same time, the least degree of environmental impact will be selected for all subsequent phases of implementation. • As set forth previously in Project Purpose and Need, the public or community need is summarized as follows: • 0 VII - 18 C 0 (1) Need for economic growth which will result in 40 increased employment; (2) Need for attracting clean industries which are compatible with the traditional industries of Eastern Long Island, specifically including fishing and farming. Of worthwhile note, is the fact that the proposed project is viewed as a combination of both a fishing and farming; (3) Need for providing a high quality seafood product to the market place in a consistent or regular basis as • to offset consistent declines in the harvesting of natural fish stocks; (4) Need for providing greater choices and consistent quality to the seafood consumer; and (5) Need to raise public awareness of the decline of native fisheries stocks and the opportunity provided a by aquaculture to off set the decline. As proposed, the project is to be implemented in six distinct phases. • Even so, full implementation of the proposed project is expected to provide for the greatest benefit to the local community. Full implementation of the proposed project will clearly provide for the S greatest degree of job growth and the greatest production of a high quality seafood product to the market place. The remaining public C: VII - 19 0 i benefits provided by the proposed project are independent of 40 project size although arguably the need for attracting clean industries may lead to some future determination over the size of this or other aquaculture project. As set forth in Mitigation of Environmental Impacts, the long term monitoring of this proposed project as it progresses into the latter phase of implementation will enable such determination to be made in objective fashion. i • C 0 • U The Draft Water Column lease provides for the utilization of a 200 acre area for the net pen grow -out of cultured summer founder and, as proposed, the Grow Out Site is located in the northeastern portion of Gardeners Bay. Rather than deploying ocean net pens over the entire leased area all at once, the proposed project has been divided into six distinct implementation phases. The six distinct implementation phases provide for the incremental production of market size summer flounder as follows: VII -20 Production level Phase (Number of Fish) I 45,000 II 150,000 III 500,000 IV 1,100,000 V 3,000,000 VI 5,000,000 VII -20 a The proposed implementation phases provide for a tiered approach a with respect to the utilization of the proposed 200 acre lease area. The full utilization of the 200 acre lease area will occur in accordance with the proposed implementation phases regardless of which net pen type is selected. Utilization of the lease area over time and with respect to the various implementation phases directly corresponds with the proposed production levels because the proposed stocking density (2.2 fish per square foot) is to remain constant from Phase I through Phase VI. The tiered utilization of the Grow Out Site with respect to the proposed implementation phases is set forth below: 40 The proposal of the six implementation phases and the resultant tiered utilization of the Net Pen Site provides for two critical issues • VII - 21 0 Area Utilization • of Net Pen Site Phase (Square Feet) I 22,500 II 75,000 III 22,500 IV 55,000 V 1,500,000 VI 2,500,000 40 The proposal of the six implementation phases and the resultant tiered utilization of the Net Pen Site provides for two critical issues • VII - 21 0 a evaluated. 0 C VII - 22 to be addressed: (1) the performance and success of the overall culture operation; and (2) the control of environmental impacts associated therewith. Evaluation of the culture operation encompasses the performance of the proposed net pens in terms of Jr their lasting structural integrity over physical factors impacting upon them (i.e. waves and currents) as well as the operations which will take place therein (i.e. growout). The environmental impacts ~ associated with the grow out operation will be addressed through implementation of the proposed monitoring program described in the preceding section of this DEIS entitled, Mitigation Measures to Minimize Environmental Impacts. Both Government Agencies having jurisdiction over the Net Pen Site and Mariculture Technologies, Inc. share the common goals of developing a successful mariculture industry in New York State and controlling the environmental impacts associated therewith, and the incremental implementation of the various phases will provide for an objective, mutually agreeable means by which these common goals can be evaluated. 0 C VII - 22 a • C. ALTERNATIVE OPERATION SCHEDULING 1. COMMENCE OPERATION AT A DIFFERENT TIME The biological requirements most particularly pertaining to growth and reproductive periodicity provide for certain constraints over alternative scheduling. As previously explained herein, the collection, maintenance and conditioning of wild stock is to take place in the late summer as consistent with the natural reproductive rhythms of the summer flounder. Therefore, at least initially, wild stock collected during the summer will undergo conditioning • throughout the late fall into winter as to provide for the eventual production of early larval summer flounder in the spring Thereafter, the rearing of larval summer flounder to market size is a expected to take approximately 18 months. Regardless of whether spawning is to take place in the spring or r fall, the time required for full growout remains constant throughout all proposed phases of implementation. Furthermore, the proposed grow -out to market size relies upon the use of ocean net pens and 1 due to the biological constraints of the summer flounder as related to water temperature, grow out in the ocean net pens can only C VII -23 • C occur from the spring to the following fall of any given year. Accordingly, summer flounder are to be grown in batch quantities. As previously explained herein, under Operations, purchase of summer flounder in the start up phase of implementation as well as for Phase I is proposed as to provide for appropriate testing of the various net pen types. The testing of the proposed net pen types is to commence upon securing all required permit approvals pertaining to the grow out function. Notwithstanding the above, the proposed timing of implementation is set forth in the Phase Timing Schedule (Figure 33). While, Figure 33 discloses implementation of Phase I to commence in the i spring of 1995, anticipated delays in obtaining the required federal, state and local approvals along with the actual construction of the proposed hatchery will move the implementation date further into the future. Accordingly, the commencement of implementation of the various phases of operation will occur either in the spring or fall of any given year. Accordingly, only two alternatives for the commencement of operation exist, the spring and fall. • • VII -24 0 • i • a a 0 • a r 0 1 PH�sE MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV I DEC I JAN I no I MAR APR MAY 1JUNEIMLY AUG I SEPT OCT NOV DEC 1995 1996 Ealy awes t <> j Larvae Wean Juvenile fingerling Growout jA Larvae Wean Juvenile Fingerling Urowout 1996 1997 jj Earl Larvae Wean Juvenile Fingerling Growout arvest ' HA Larvae Larvae Wean Juvenile Fingerling U land 1997 1998 Ea.r{y arvest Larvae Wean Juvenile .Hngerling Growout j Early Larvae Wean Juvenile Fingerling Upland Growout 1998 1999 IV Larvae Wean Juvenile Fing�ng Growout arvest Early Wean Larvae Juvenile F�ngerli.ng Upland Growout :•`'fit`.:;•:.: ti::`.;;^L'.i++. '.. Figure 33. Phase Timing Schedule for the Culture of Summer Flounder. a 1 a 0 i 46 0 2. PHASE OPERATION Implementation of the proposed project is to take place over an extended period of time in accordance with six distinct phases. The production of summer flounder in accordance with the proposed phases of implementation is set forth below: Proposed Production Phase (# of summer flounder) I 45,000 II 150,000 III 500,000 IV 1,100,000 V 3,000,000 VI 5,000,000 As set forth in the previous section Mitigation Measures to Minimize Environmental Impacts, extensive monitoring of the natural environment within and beyond the net pen site will provide a basis for environmental control to preclude all significant short and long term environmental impacts. VII - 26 3. RESTRICT OPERATION TO WORK SCHEDULE • P, i t a a There are no appropriate alternatives regarding the restriction of operation to the work schedule of the employees to be hired by Mariculture Technologies, Inc. That is, the rearing of summer flounder from egg to market size requires on site operations and supervision in the hatchery 7 days a week, 24 hours a day. The grow -out of summer flounder in the proposed ocean net pens will require on site operations and supervision 7 days a week during day light hours. The only case where the work schedule will be disrupted, is during times where inclement weather represent clear danger to the safety of the employees of Mariculture Technologies, Inc. VII - 27 A i VII - 28 0 D. ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES HATCHERY There are three possible treatment systems for the treatment of hatchery eluent (Cameron, 1995). These include a single pass system, a partial treatment system and a closed recirculation system. Each type is discussed below. (See also Appendix T.). a. Single Pass Treatment . Single pass treatment is the most common type of system utilized in hatchery systems in Europe (Losordo in press) The hatcheries are located adjacent to existing water bodies that serve as both source for raw hatchery water as well as S receiving water for discharge. Figure 34. illustrates the process flow and mass balance for an operation in which all incoming water is used one time in the hatchery and is i subsequently discharged into the receiving waters. i VII - 28 0 FISH HATCHERY 0 = 23 MGD SS = 11,873LBS/DAY (61.8mg/1) BOD = 10,508LBS/DAY (54.7 mgt) N = 1,598LBS/DAY (8.3 mg I) P = 642LBS/DAY (3.3 mg/1) RECEIVING WATER 0 = 23 MGD SS = 11,873 LBS/DAY 61.8mg/1) BOD = 10,508 LBS/DAY 54.7 mg/1) N = 1,598 LBS/DAY 8.3 mg/1) P = 642 LBS/DAY (3.3 mg/1) FIGURE NO. "�R'• CAMERON PECONIC ASSOCIATES 2 1 ENGINEERING, P.C. SINGLE PASS TREATMENT SYSTEM 340 , Suite Old Country Roos suite 4 10 SIMPLIFIED PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM Westbury. New York 11590 • U1 S 0 1 lit 0 U - 0 The total expected daily loadings for BOD, Suspended Solids (SS), Nitrogen (N) and Phosphorus (P) are provided based on 23 MGD flow rate. The average daily concentrations for the respective waste components are 54.7 mg/L, 61.8 mg/L, 8.3 mg/L, and 3.3 mg/L. Actual concentration for the waste components will vary throughout the course of the day as solids are removed from the rearing tanks and filtration system. In a single pass operation, all wastes generated in the hatchery are discharged into the receiving waters. In addition, operations such as cleaning tanks will impart additional waste loads to the effluent on a periodic basis. There were two primary considerations in the rejection of a single pass treatment system which include the following: o Long Island Sound surface water quality, particularly due to the proximity of the Village of Greenport's sewage treatment outfall pipe. The VII - 30 0 a 1 U C 4 4b Cj plant possesses a SPDES permit which allows direct discharge of certain concentrations of chemicals into the Sound, o The difficulty in providing treatment to reduce the loadings of the fish hatchery effluent, primarily because of its high flows and low concentrations of wastes, and o The volumes of raw water needed for a single pass system would be prohibitive. b. Single Pass Partial Treatment System Figure 35. illustrates the single pass partial treatment system. This treatment system represents an improvement on the single pass system. In a partial treatment system, settleable solids and suspended solids consisting of fish feces and uneaten feed material is captured and removed from the process water. This type of system has been shown to remove a significant portion of the solids (World Aquaculture, 1994). Upon removal of the solids, other waste components such as BOD, nitrogen, and phosphorus VII - 31 0 r r r 66 ♦ +► N N i 6 FISH HATCHERY O = 23 MGD SS = 11,873 LBS/DAY 61.8mg/1) BOD = 10,508 LBS/DAY 54.7 mg 1) N = 1,598 LBS/DAY 8.3 mg 1) P = 642 LBS/DAY (3.3 mg/1) NATER MGD 168 LBS/DAY 15.5mg/1) 105 LBS/DAY 32.8 mg/1) 98 LBS/DAY 6.2 mg/1) 21 LBS/DAY (1.7 mg/1) TRANSFER TO DISPOSAL 0 = 0.03 MGD SS = 8,905 LBS/DAY 50,000mg/1) BOD = 4,203 LBS/DAY 23,997 m I) N = 400 LBS/DAY 2,284 mg� P = 321 LBS/DAY 1,832 mg/I PI OT: 1.1 "9 R'• CAMERON PECONIC ASSOCIATES FIGURE No. Y ENGINEERING, P.C. SINGLE PASS PARTIAL TREATMENT SYSTEM 350 # ; 1400Old Suite 410 Country Rood SIMPLIFIED PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM Westbury, New York 11590 v a a a 4 Ab rj are reduced. The effluent discharged from a partial treatment system indicates a 40 % reduction in BOD; 75% in suspended solids, 25% in nitrogen, and 50% in phosphorus (Cameron 1995). These reductions represent an improvement of effluent quality over a single pass, no treatment option. Comparison to standard reductions achieved in municipal waste water treatment indicates that these reductions are reasonable. In the partial treatment system, the solids removed from the rearing tanks would be directed to concentrating devices (whirl separators) to remove as much of the solids as possible and place them into an on-site aerobic sludge holding tank. Aeration would be provided to the tank to maintain aerobic conditions until transfer and disposal of these solids at an appropriate facility.. C. Closed Recirculation Treatment System Figure 36. depicts a closed recirculation treatment system. The raw sea water generated by the on-site wells will be used to create make up water on a daily basis. VII -33 1 "'R• CAMERON PECONIC ASSOCIATES FIGURE No. Y ENGINEERING, P.C. CLOSED RECIRCULATION TREATMENT SYSTEM 36. Suit!uite 410 c°""`" Rood SIMPLIFIED PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM Westbury. New York 11590 FISH HATCHERY BOD REDUCTION ALKALINITY AND NITRIFICATION ADDITION AEROBIC BIOLOGICAL UNIT WELL REARING REARING RAW WATER FIXED OR SETTLING SUSPENDED GROWTH TANK SYSTEM I REARING REARING I I � Q I I RECIRCULATION (OPTIONAL) L) L-------------- — — — — 1 `— — — — — 0 — SLUDGE SETTLED SOLIDS HOLDING RE—AERATION SETTLED SOLIDS TANK SS = 1.781 LBS/DAY (OPTIONAL) SS = 8.905 LBS/DAY RECYCLED WATER DISINFECTION (OZONATION/U.V.) FILTRATION SS = 593 LBS/DAY SS = 10.686 LBS/DAY BOD = 525 LBS/DAY N = 96 LBS/DAY P = 26 LBS/DAY TRANSFER TO DISPOSAL BACKWASH TO RECEIVING WATER PLOT: 1_1 "'R• CAMERON PECONIC ASSOCIATES FIGURE No. Y ENGINEERING, P.C. CLOSED RECIRCULATION TREATMENT SYSTEM 36. Suit!uite 410 c°""`" Rood SIMPLIFIED PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM Westbury. New York 11590 i 0 A r 44 1 It is estimated that the raw water requirements would be 5% to 10 % of the single pass treatment system. In the closed recirculation system, maximization of process water treatment is the goal, with collected solids removed from the system and transported off site for disposal. In such a facility, it may be possible to discharge to the receiving waters some waste streams such as backwash water from a multi -media filtration system. The rationale would be that this type of waste would be a high volume and low concentration material that would require extensive tankage to receive and treat on site. The rearing tanks will be designed for the removal of settleable solids consisting of unconsumed fish feed and feces. The quantity of water associated with solids removal is estimated to be approximately 1% to 3% of the total daily flow requirements. If separation of the solids is accomplished with whirl separators, the quantity of water will be considerably less. Once collected, the solids will be transferred to an aerobic sludge holding tank. The tank VII -35 i f A I 1 Cl U i=J F] Ar will be supplied with adequate aeration to promote aerobic digestion of the solids. Once collected, the sludge could be transported off-site for proper treatment or disposal or it may be processed into a product such as fish, animal or plant feed. The sludge is expected to have high nitrogen content and therefore have a potential market value for fertilizer. The supernatant water will then be directed, along with the water exiting the rearing tanks, to a biological filtration unit for BOD reduction and nitrification of ammonia and organic nitrogen to nitrate nitrogen. The types of filters employed in this process include either trickling filters, rotating biological filters or suspended growth filters. All biological filtration systems will include aeration in order to maintain adequate dissolved oxygen, pH, and alkalinity. After biological filtration, the system water will be disinfected using ozone or UV sterilization. There is considerable difference in concentrations of the waste components on a total flow basis. These variations for each type of treatment system are summarized in Table 43. VII -36 a f In addition to the variations in total waste loadings of the VII -37 w Table 43. Waste concentrations per treatment system. Single Pass Partial Treatment Closed Recirculation BOD 54.7 mg/L 32.8 mg/L 5.5 mg/L SS 61.9 mg/L 15.5 mg/L 6.2 mg/. L N 8.3 mg/L 6.25 mg/L < 6.0 mg/L P 3.3 mg/L 1.7 mg/L < 1.7 mg/L While the above concentrations appear low, when calculating the mass loading based on the total daily flow, the resultant loading is indeed significant. There is also considerable difference in the loadings between the various treatment systems. These differences in loadings with respect to treatment type are summarized in Table 44. Table 44. Effluent loadings per treatment system. i BOD SS N P Produced 10,508 11,873 1,598 642 Single Pass 10,508 11,873 1,598 642 Single Pass w/settling 2,968 6,305 1,198 321 Recirculation 593 525 96 26 f In addition to the variations in total waste loadings of the VII -37 w >r hatchery treatment options, there are differences in raw sea 4 water requirements for each of the above treatment systems. A single pass, no treatment system requires the highest volume of water (23.8 million gallons per day) and the closed recirculation system requires the least amount of raw sea water (0.73 million gallons per day). While raw sea water requirements are lower with the closed recirculation system, total pumping requirements are greater due to the various treatment options. Mariculture Technologies, Inc. intends to install a closed, 46 recirculation type system utilizing the latest available technology. In summary, this treatment system allows for a 90% to 95% reduction in contaminant (BOD, SS, N and i P) discharge. Furthermore, the closed recirculation system represents the best possible alternative to hatchery waste water treatment. .P VII -38 0 F-1 4 a 4 0 4 I f 40 40 E. NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE IMPACTS OF NO ACTION The No -Action Alternative entails not moving forward with any aspect of the proposed project. This means that there would be no land based aspect of the proposed project, no deployment of net pens, and the existing Winter Harbor Fisheries Processing Plant would remain underutilized and mostly vacant as it exists today. a. Effect on Public Need Selection of the No -Action Alternative by any Involved Agency would preclude all positive aspects of the proposed project. As disclosed herein under Project Need and Objectives, the proposed project provides a means by which the following public needs and benefits are addressed: (1) Need for economic growth which will result in increased employment; (2) Need for attracting clean industries which are compatible with the traditional industries VII -39 a U 6 4 0 A V i S of Eastern Long Island, specifically including fishing and farming; (3) Need for providing a high quality seafood product to the market place in a consistent or regular basis as to offset consistent declines in the harvesting of natural fish stocks including the summer flounder; (4) Need for providing greater choices and consistent quality to the seafood consumer; and (5) The benefit associated with the implementation of the proposed project in educating the public at large of the plight of our natural fish stocks and the solutions to the related problems provided by a commercial aquaculture project such as this. As stated above, selection of the No -Action Alternative would preclude the positive aspects listed above from occurring. What remains include low employment, a policy of discouraging environmentally compatible industry in Eastern Long Island, no progress in providing a high quality seafood product to the market place, less choices for VII - 40 a A Jr, a e 0 a i 40 the seafood consumer, and no progress on raising public awareness on the decline of natural fish stocks and the role aquaculture might play in alleviating this problem. b. Effect on Private Developers' Need As disclosed in the earlier section of this DEIS entitled Objectives of the Project Sponsor, (T)he objective of Mariculture Technologies, Inc. is to culture summer flounder from egg to marketable size to satisfy the growing shortage of finfish. Selection of the No Action Alternative by any involved agency would preclude the stated objectives of Mariculture Technologies, Inc. from occurring. As part of the development of this proposal, Mariculture Technologies, Inc. conducted extensive evaluations pertaining to site selection in accordance with the biological requirements of summer flounder, siting recommendations set forth in existing scientific studies as well as input provided by various user groups. These evaluations VII - 41 1 z a culminated in the selection of the Clarks Beach Site for a proposed hatchery, the northeastern portion of Gardeners Bay and the Winter Harbor Fisheries Site for the proposed processing site. It is Mariculture Technologies, Inc. view that these proposed sites are the among the most appropriate sites in New York State. If precluded from pursuing its proposal to raise summer flounder by agency selection of the no action alternative, Mariculture Technologies Inc. would be forced to pursue its objectives elsewhere in a coastal area outside of New York State. 0 C. Beneficial or Adverse Environmental Impacts P f JO 0 Agency selection of the no action alternative would have the corresponding effect of no environmental impact associated with the proposed hatchery and grow out site. At the same time, selection of the no action alternative would result in negative impacts to the social fiber of the local environment. That is, the no action alternative would preclude the important economic benefit of increased employment including the opportunity for the VII - 42 a • a I • E economic diversification of local fishermen and others who have developed obvious skills in working the waters of New York State. Therefore, for the reasons set forth above, selection of the no action alternative would be contrary to the interests of both Mariculture Technologies, Inc. and, more importantly, the public at large. VII - 43 a 0 • VIII A Growth Inducing Aspects a 0 VA 6 a F, G t • A 1 1 40 GROWTH INDUCING ASPECTS As previously discussed herein, in 1983, the State Legislature of New York declared that there is significant potential for growth in the aquaculture industry of New York and that this potential provides an opportunity for local economic development and expansion in the commercial cultivation of marine finfish. Mariculture Technologies Inc. proposal to culture summer flounder to market size represents the first large scale commercial marine finfish aquaculture project in New York State. Because this proposal is the first of its kind, the incremental expansion of this project in accordance with the proposed production phases has been proposed. Growth of this project in accordance with the proposed implementation phases will provide both Mariculture Technologies, Inc. and governmental agencies having jurisdiction over all associated operations, an objective means for evaluating the efficacy of marine aquaculture in the State of New York and the environmental impacts associated therewith. If this proposed project is found to be economically viable over the long term and the environmental impacts associated therewith do not violate the public trust, the potential for similar aquaculture projects in New York State will have been firmly established. Therefore, under this scenario, similar benefits will accrue with expansion of the aquaculture industry. VIII - 1 Mariculture Technologies, Inc. recognizes that this proposed projects may have certain potential growth inducing aspects associated therewith. However, any further expansion of the aquaculture industry in New York State will be subject to the prevailing market conditions and availability capitol investment at that time. Even so, with respect to growth inducing aspects, the only expectation on the part of Mariculture Technologies, Inc. is that any future aquaculture project will be subject to the same level of IR scrutiny that has been afforded to this project, as reasonable. 1 LA a [I 0 a VIII - 2 40 Cl s w Im U Effects on the Use and Conservation of Energy Resources • a t L3 0 i ENERGY RESOURCES Electric power for the hatchery and processing facility is available from the Village of Greenport Municipal Power Authority at a lower cost than energy provided by LILCO. In addition, if this project provides 35 new jobs, the Village of Greenport has the ability to apply to the Power Authority for an additional one megawatt of PANSY power. Greenport's ability to obtain more power, as well as the lower cost of that power, are a significant factors in making this proposed project economically viable through a reduction in energy costs. HATCHERY SITE The projected principal use of energy will be at the hatchery portion of the project. A Because of the high total flows of recirculating water through the hatchery, estimated at 23 million gallons per day, the energy consumption is estimated to be approximately 500,000 kilowatt hours per month. The principal methods of energy reduction will be utilized. Water circulation pumps with variable speed motors will be installed to accommodate the varying flows associated with changing stocking densities and tank requirements. Translucent roof panels will be r incorporated into the construction of the hatchery buildings to take advantage AW I • of natural sunlight rather than artificial lighting. In addition, the principals of Mariculture Technologies, Inc. is considering the use of alternate solar or wind power where applicable. 7 • L7 a GROW OUT SITE At the grow out site, the principal energy user will be the aids to navigation/obstruction lighting. It is planned for all of these to by powered by solar panel, similar to that used by the U. S Coast Guard. The use of these solar panels will preclude the need for generators or other non renewable fuel power sources. PROCESSING SITE Energy consumption at the processing facility is not expected to change significantly. Mariculture Technologies, Inc. intends to install newer, more energy efficient equipment to preclude the need for higher energy usage. IX -2 s a i X Ll REFERENCES a 1 4 r s a a • L REFERENCES Able, Kenneth W.; Matheson, Edmond R.; Morse, Wallace W.; Fahay Michael P.; Shepherd, Gary; 1990, Patterns of Summer Flounder Paralichthys dentatus Early Life History in the Mid -Atlantic Bight and New Jersey Estuaries, U.S. Fishery Bulletin, 88(1) pp. 1-12. t Allen, Charles Slover. 1892. Breeding Habits of the Fish Hawk on Plum Island, New York., Auk, 9:313-321. In: Bent, Arthur Cleveland. Life Histories of North American Birds of Prey. (1961), Dover Publications, Inc., New York. 409 pp. + American Society for Testing and Materials. 1993. Annual Book of ASTM Standards. Philadelphia. pp. 57-59; 79-81. Andrews, Chris; Exell, Adrian; and Carrington, Neville. The Manual of fish Health. 1988. Salamander Books Ltd., Tetra Press, NJ. 208 pp. Athanas, Ronald P., 1994. Domestication and Mass Culture of Summer Flounder (Paralichthys dentatus), S -K Summer Flounder NA-90-AA-H-SK033, University of Massachusetts Marine Station, Gloucester, Mass., 25 pp. + Atlantic Tide and Current Almanac - Northeast Edition 1994. 1993. Better Boating Association, Inc. Rockland, Mass. and Marine Trade Publications Port Ludlow, WA. Barnes, Robert. D. 1987, Invertebrate Zoology, Saunders College Publishing, . Philadelphia. pp. 267-311. Bent, Arthur Cleveland. Life Histories of North American Birds of Prey. (1961), Dover Publications, Inc., New York. 409 pp. Bigelow, H.B. and Schroeder, W.C. (1953), Fishes of the Gulf of Maine, U.S. Dept of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Fishery Bull. 74, Vol. 53, 577 pp. Billerman, Matthew J., Project Manager, Energy & Environmental Analysts, Inc., Garden City, NY. Letter to Merl Wiggin, Peconic Associates, Greenport, a NY. October 11, 1994. X- 1 • Bonner, Nigel W., (1990), The Natural History of Seals, Facts on File, Inc., New • York, NY., 196 pp. Bousfield, E.L. 1973. Shallow -Water Gammaridean Amphipoda of New England. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY. In: Gosner, Kenneth L.1978. Peterson Field Guides Atlantic Seashore, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 329 pp. • Bovendeur, J., Eding, E.H., Henken, A.M., 1987. Design and Performance of a Water Recirculation System for High Density Culture of African Catfish, Clarias gariepinus (Burchell 1822), Aquaculture 63: 329-353. In: Rosenthal, Harald, and Black, Edward A., Recirculation Systems in R Aquaculture, Techniques for Modern Aquaculture, Proceedings of an Aquacultural Engineering Conference, Spokane, Washington, 1993 Bowditch's American Practical Navigator Volume I. 1984. U.S. Defense Mapping Agency Hydrographic / Topographic Center. 1000 pp. IV Burreson, E. M. 1982 The Life Cycle of Trypanoplasma bullocki (Zoomastigophorea: Kinetoplastida), J. Protozool. 29:72-77. Burreson, E. M. and Zwerner, D. E. 1982. The Role of Host Biology, Vector Biology and Temperature in the Distributions of Trypanoplasma bullocki Infections in the Lower Chesapeake Bay. J. Parasitol. 6:306-313. Burreson, E. M. and Zwemer, D. E. 1992. In Fish Medicine. Edited by M. K. Stoskopf. W. B. Sauders Company. Philadelphia. 712 pp. Caldwell, Dave. 1994. European, U.S. Technology Produce Unique Recirculation Systems. World Aquaculture. September 1994. Cameron Engineering, P.C., Fish Hatchery Waste Characterization, Treatment and Processing, 1995. Cameron Engineering, P.C., Westbury, NY. Canning, E. U., and Lom, J. (1986). The Microsporidia of Vertebrates. Academic Press, London, p. 289. In: Fish Medicine (Ed. Stoskopf) W. B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia. 1992. Carawan, Roy. Processing_ Plant Waste Management Guidelines for Aquatic Fishery Products In: 1991 Seafood Environmental Summit Proceedings. 1992. University of North Carolina Sea Grant College Publication No. UNC -SG -92-06. 0 X-2 M C-] Coastal Computer Co. 1987-1993. Tide Master N.Y. 1994-1995. Zephyr Services, Pennsylvania. • Creswell, Leroy R. Aquaculture Desk Reference. 1993. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York. 206 pp. Day, John W.; Hall, Charles A. S.; Kemp, Michael W.; and Yanez-Arancibia, • Alejandro. Estuarine Ecology, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1989, 558 pp. Edwards, R.L., Livingston, R., Hamer, P.E. 1962. Winter Water Temperatures and an Annotated list of Fishes - Nantucket Shoals to Cape Hatteras: t Albatross III Cruise No. 126. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Special Scientific Report, 397 pp. In: Malloy, Kirk D. and Targett, Timothy E. 1991. Feeding, Growth and Survival of Juvenile Summer Flounder Paralichthys dentatus: Experimental Analysis of the Effects of Temperature and Salinity. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 72:213-223. Ehrlich, Paul R., Dobkin, David S. and Wheye, Darryl, The Birders Handbook, A Field Guide to the Natural History of North American Birds, (1988), Simon and Schuster, Inc., New York, 785 pp. Eikebrokk, B. and Ulgenes, U. Characterization of Treated and Untreated Effluents from Landbased Fish Farms. In: Fish Farming Technology, Proceedings of the first International Conference on Fish Farming Technology. (1993) Edited by: Reinertsen, Helge; Andre Dahle, Lars; Jorgensen, Leif, and Tvinnereim, Kare. p. 361-366. Eldridge's Tide and Pilot Book 1995. 1994. Marion Jewett White. Boston, Mass. 272 pp. Emerson, C. J., Payne, J. F., and Bal, A. K. 1985. Evidence for the Presence of a Viral Non-Lymphocystis type disease in winter flounder Pseudopleuronectes americanus (Waldbaum), from the northwest Atlantic. J. Fish Dis. 8:91-102. EPA Region II, Environmental Services Division, 1988. Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal. Testing Manual. Prepared By: Kahn, Lloyd, Quality Assurance Specialist, Monitoring Management Branch, Edison, NJ. Evelyn, T. P. T., and Traxler, G. S., 1978. Viral Erythrocytic Necrosis: Natural Occurrence in Pacific Salmon and Experimental Transmission. j. Fish Res. Bd. Can. 35:903-907 X-3 AP Fauchald, Kristian. 1977. The Polychaete Worms Definitions and Keys to the Orders, Families and Genera. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County and The Allan Hancock Foundation University of Southern California. 110 pp. Ferguson, H. W. and Roberts, R. J. (1975) Myleoid leucosis associated with sporozoan infection in cultured turbot (Scopthalmus maximus). J. Comp. Pathol. 85:317-326. Gaffney, Robert J. 1993. Annual Environmental Report of Suffolk County, Suffolk County General Services, 79 pp. • Geiger, James G. and Parker, Nick C. 1985. Survey of Striped Bass Hatchery Management in the Southeastern United States. Progressive Fish Culturist 47(1):1-13. Gosner, Kenneth L. 1978. Peterson Field Guides Atlantic Seashore, Houghton a Mifflin Company, Boston, 329 pp. Gowen, R. J.; Rosenthal, H.; Makinen, T.; and Ezzi, I. 1990. Environmental Impact of Aquaculture Activities. In: Silvert, William. 1992. Assessing Environmental Impacts of Finfish Aquaculture in Marine Waters. Aquaculture 107:67-79. Gray, John S. 1974. Animal -Sediment Relationships. Oceanography and Marine Biology Annual Review. 12:223-261. R Grimes, Barbara H.; Huish, Melvin T.; Kerby, J. Howard; Moran, David; Pendleton, Edward; 1989. Species Profiles: Life Histories and Environmental Requirements of Coastal Fishes and Invertebrates (Mid - Atlantic): Summer and Winter Flounder. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 82(11.112). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, TR EL -82- 4. 18 pp. Herman, S. C. (1963). Planktonic fish eggs and larvae of Naragansett Bay. Limnol. Oceanogr. 8, 103-109. Herwig, N. (1979) Handbook of Drugs and Chemicals used in the Treatment of Fish Diseases. Charles C Thomas, Springfield, Illinois. Hildebrand, S.F., and Schroeder, W.C. 1928. Fishes of the Chesapeake Bay. U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, 1024:366pp. In: Grimes et. al., 1989. • X-4 I 0 Hoffmann, E. E., J. M. Klink, and HG. A. Paffenhofer. 1981. Concentrations and Vertical Fluxes of Zooplankton Fed Pellets a the Continental Shelf. Mar. Ob Biol. 61:327-335. In: Valiela, I. 1984. Marine Ecological Processes. Springer -Verlag New York, Inc. 546 pp. Huguenin, John E. and Colt, John. Design and Operating Guide for Aquaculture Seawater Systems. 1989. Elsevier. New York, NY. 250 pp. • 11 Inglis, V., Roberts, R. J. and Bromage, N. R. 1993. Bacterial Diseases of Fish. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York. Itzkowitz, Norman; Schubel, Jerry R.; and Woodhead, Peter. 1983. Responses of Summer Flounder, Paralichthys dentatus, embryos to thermal shock. Env. Biol. Fish. 8(2):125-135. Johns, D.M. and Howell, W.H. 1980. Yolk Utilization in Summer Flounder (Paralichthys dentatus) Embryos and Larvae Reared at Two Temperatures. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 2:1-8 Johns, D.M.; Howell, W.H.; Klein-MacPhee, G. 1981. Yolk Utilization and Growth to Yolk -Sac Absorption and Cyclic Temperatures. Marine Biology, 63, 301-308. Johnson, Frederick G. and Stickney, Robert R., Fisheries - Harvesting; Life From Water 1989, Kendall / Hunt Publishing Co., Dubuque, Iowa, 423 pp. Keefe, M. and Able, K.W. 1993. Patterns of Metamorphosis in Summer + Flounder, Paralichthys dentatus, Journal of Fish Biology, 42, 713-728. King, Judith E., (1983), Seals of the World, Cornell University Press, NY., 240 pp. Klein-MacPhee, G. 1978. Synopsis of Biological Data for the Winter Flounder (Pseudopleuronectes americanus) (Walbaum). NOAA Tech. Rep. NMFS Circ. 414. 43 pp. Lall, S. P. and Torrissen, O., J. 1992. Marine Cold -Water Fish Nutrition. In: Fish Medicine. Edited by M. K. Stoskopf. W. B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia. pp. 688-696. X-5 f • Lee, G. F. and Jones, R. A. 1979. Application of the OECD Eutrophication Modeling Approach to Estuaries. In: B. J. Neilson and L. E. Cronin (Editors), Estuaries and Nutrients. Humana Press, Clifton, N. J., pp. 549- 568. Lom, J. 1986. Protozoan infections in fish In: Pathology in Marine Aquaculture (Vivares, C. P., Bonami, J. R. and Jaspers, E. eds.) European Aquaculture • Society, Special Publication No. 9, Bredene, Belgium, pp. 95-104. Long Island Sound Study: The Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan. 1994. EPA, 168 pp. Losordo, Thomas M. An Introduction to Recirculation Production Systems Design Engineering Aspects of Intensive Aquaculture, Proceedings from the Aquaculture Symposium, Cornell University, 1991. Losordo, Thomas M. Engineering Considerations in Closed Recirculation Systems In Publication Mahoney, J. B., Midlidge, F. H. and Deuel, D. G. 1973. A Fin Rot Disease of Marine and Euryhaline Fishes in the New York Bight. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 102(3), 596-605. [l Maine Department of Marine Resources, Aquaculture Lease Regulations, Aquaculture Agency, 1990., 23 pp. Maine Department of Marine Resources, Finfish Monitoring Program. 1992. 4 pp. • Maine Department of Marine Resources, Department Site Review 92-11 F, by Laurice U. Churchill, March 16, 1993., 12 pp. Maine Department of Marine Resources, Department Site Review 94-1F, By Laurice U. Churchill, August 12, 1994., 14 pp. Malloy, Kirk D. and Targett, Timothy E. 1991. Feeding, Growth and Survival of Juvenile Summer Flounder Paralichthys dentatus: Experimental Analysis of the Effects of Temperature and Salinity. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 72: 213-223. Mann, K.H. and Lazier, J.R.N. Dynamics of Marine Ecosystems Biological cal - Physical Interactions in Oceans, 1991. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Cambridge, Mass., 466 pp. • X-6 ,0 • McAllister, P. E., 1992. In: Fish Medicine. Edited by M. K. Stoskopf. W. B. • Saunders Company, Philadelphia. pp. 697-711. Moe, Martin A. Jr., The Marine Aquarium Handbook, 1982, 1992. Green Turtle Productions, Florida., 318 pp. Moe, Martin A. Jr., The Marine Aquarium Reference Systems and Invertebrates, ! 1989, 1992. Green Turtle Productions, Florida., 512 pp. Morse, W.W. 1981. Reproduction of the Summer Flounder, Paralichthys dentatus (L.) Journal of Fish Biology, 19, 189-203. National Marine Fisheries Service New York State Commercial and Recreational landings data 1979-1992. NOAA. National Ocean Service. Long Island and Block Island Sound Tidal Current Charts, 1979. Rockville, MD. National Research Council, Committee on Sea Turtle Conservation, Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology, Board on Biology, Commission on Life Sciences, 1990, Decline of the Sea Turtles Causes and Prevention, National Academy Press, Washington D.C., 259 pp. New York Ocean Science Laboratory. 1976. Environmental Analysis of Block Island and Long Island Sound Waters 1970-1973. edited by Dr. Rudolph Hollman; pp. 1-11. f New York Sea Grant Institute. 1985. Aquaculture Development in New York State. State University of New York and Cornell University, 93 pp. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Water QualitL Regulations Surface Water and Ground water Classifications and Standards, New York State Codes, Rules and Regulations Title 6, Chapter X Parts 700-705, 1986 NYSDEC. 30 pp. New York State Legislature Statewide Aquaculture Planning Act 1983. 40 Newman, M. W. 1978. Pathology Associated with Criptobia Infections in a Summer Flounder (Paralichthys dentatus). J. Wildlife Dis. 14:299-304. O'Connor, D. J. 1979. Modeling of Eutrophication in Estuaries. In: B. J. Neilson and L. E. Cronin (Editors), Estuaries and Nutrients. Humana Press, • Clifton, N. J. pp. 183-223. X-7 .• Okeanos Ocean Research Foundation, Special Issue Publications No. 13, Species Composition and Distribution of Marine Mammals and Sea Turtles in the New York Biaht Final Report to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, by Sadove, Samuel S., and Cardinale, Phillip. December, 1993. 47 pp. Person -Le Ruyet, Jeannine, Baudin-Laurencin, Felix; Devauchelle, Nicole; 0 Metailler, Robert; Nicolas, Jean-Louis; Robin, Jean; and Guillaume, Jean; Culture of Turbot (Scopthalmus maximus); In: CRC Handbook of Mariculture Volume II Finfish Aquaculture, Edited by: James P. McVey, Ph.D., 1991, CRC Press, Inc. Boca Raton, Florida; pp. 21-41. Peters, D.S. and Angelovic, J.W. 1971. Effect of Temperature, Salinity and Food Availability on Growth and Energy Utilization of Juvenile Summer Flounder Parahchthys dentatus. In: Malloy, Kirk D. and Targett, Timothy E. 1991. Poole, J.C. 1961. Age and Growth of Fluke in Great South Bay and Their Significance to the Sport Fishery. New York Fish and Game Journal, 8(1)1-18. Poynton, S. L., 1992. In: Fish Medicine. Edited by M. K. Stoskopf. W. B. • Sauders Company, Philadelphia. pp. 711-735. Robins, C. Richard; Ray, G. Carleton; Douglass, John. 1986. Petersons Field Guides Atlantic Coast Fishes. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston. 354 PP. • Rogers, S.G., and Van Den Avyle, M.J. 1983. Species Profiles: Life Histories and Environmental Requirements (South Atlantic) Summer Flounder. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-82/11.15. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, TR EL -82-4. 14 pp. Rosenthal, Harald, and Black, Edward A., Recirculation Systems in Aquaculture Techniques for Modern Aquaculture, Proceeding of an Aquacultural Engineering Conference, 1993. Spokane, Washington. Schindler, D. W. 1979. Studies of Eutrophication in Lakes and Their Relevance to the Estuarine Environment. In: B. J. Neilson and L. E. Cronin (Editors), Estuaries and Nutrients. Humana Press, Clifton, N. J. pp. 71-82. • X-8 A 0 7j 41 Silvert, W. 1992. Assessing Environmental Impacts of Finfish Aquaculture in Marine Waters. Aquaculture, 107. pp. 67-79. Sindermann, C. J. 1985. Recent studies on marine fish parasites and diseases. In: Parasitology and Pathology of Marine Organisms of the World Ocean (Hargis, W. J. ed.). NOAA Technical Report NMFS 25. U. S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service. Washington, D. C., pp. 7-14. Smigielski, Alphonse S., 1975. Hormone -Induced Spawnings of the Summer Flounder and Rearing of the Larvae in the Laboratory. Prog. Fish. Cult. 37(1):3-8. Smith, Ronal W. and Daiber, Franklin C. 1977. Biology of the Summer Flounder Paralichthys Dentatus, in Delaware Bay. Fishery Bull. 75(4):823-830. Smith, W.G. and Fahay, Michael P. 1970 Description of Eggs and Larvae of the Summer Flounder (Paralichthys dentatus). United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Fisheries and Wildlife, Washington D.C., 21 pp. Sparrow, R.A.H. Hatchery Effluent Water Quality in British Columbia. Bio - Engineering Symposium for Fish Culture. p. 162-166 • Spotte, S. Fish and Invertebrate Culture, 1979. Wiley Interscience Publication, John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY. In: Timmons et. al., Design Principals of Water Reuse Systems for Salmonids, Agricultural and Biological Engineering Draft Extension Bulletin # 462., Dept. of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. Stoskopf, Michael K. D.M.V., Ph.D. Fish Medicine 1993. W.B. Saunders Company. Philadelphia, PA. pp. 882. Szedlmayer, S.T., Able, K.W., and Roundtree, R.A. 1992. Growth and Temperature -Induced Mortality of Young -of -the -Year Summer Flounder (Paralichthys dentatus) in Southern New Jersey. Copeia. 1:120-128. Tchobanoglous, and Schroeder, 1985. Timmons, M.B.; Youngs, W.D.; Bowser, P.; Rumsey, G.; Design Principles of Water Systems for Salmonids, Agricultural and Biological Engineering Draft Extension Bulletin # 462, Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. X-9 A • Tchobanoglous, G. and Schoeder, E.D., Water Quality: Characterization, Modeling, Modification., 1985. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, Mass. In: Losordo, Thomas M. An Introduction to Recirculating Production Systems Design., Engineering Aspects of Intensive Aquaculture Proceedings from the Aquaculture Symposium, Cornell University, 1991. United States Army Corps of Engineers. Wind and Wave Data (1956-1975) • U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA. United States Department of Agriculture, Human Nutrition Information Service Composition of Foods: Finfish and Shellfish Products Agricultural Handbook No 8-15. 1987. Washington D.C.: Government Printing • Office. • • • • United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and Cornell Agricultural Experiment Station, Soil Survey of Suffolk County, New York., 1975, 101 pp. United States Department of Commerce, Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 Annual Report January 1, 1992 - December 31, 1993. NOAA, NMFS Office of Protected Resources. 136 pp. Valiela, I., 1984. Marine Ecological Processes. Springer -Verlag, New York, 546 pp. Washington State Department of Fisheries. 1990. Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Fish Culture in Floating Net Pens. Prepared by: Parametrix Inc. Bellevue, WA., 161 pp. Wheaton, F. and Lawson, T. Processing Aquatic Food Products. 1985. Wiley and Sons, New York. White, David B. and Stickney, Robert R. 1973. A Manual of Flatfish Rearing, Skidaway Institute of Oceanography, Georgia, 36 pp. Wilk, S.J.; Smith, W.G.; Ralph, D.E.; and Sibunka, J. 1980. Population Structure of Summer Flounder Between New York and Florida Based on Linear Discriminant Analysis. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 109(3)265-271. X-10 0 0 0 XI APPENDICES • • • • El 0 • 0 0 A. List of consultants or private people consulted in the preparation of this impact statement: John Allen, Ph.D., Huntsman Marine Science Center, St. Andrews, New Brunswick, Canada, EOG2XO David J. Bengston, Ph.D. University of Rhode Island, Zoology Department, Biological Sciences Center, Kingston, RI 02881 • Matthew J. Billerman, Senior Ecologist, Energy and Environmental Analysts, Inc., 55 Hilton Avenue Garden City, New York. Stanley Butler, Industrial Development Engineer, 250 Harbor -way, Shorham by Sea, West Sussex, United Kingdom, BN4-5HZ. Structural and Engineering Design of Proposed Net Pens. Laurice Churchill - State of Maine Department of Marine Resources. • Greg Decon-Nutritionist, Moore -Clarke Company Feeds. Vancouver, B.C. Sandra A. Dumais, BS. - Research Associate Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. • Cameron Engineering, P.C., Westbury, NY. Christopher Duffy, Great Bay Aquafarms, 74 High Street, Stratham, NH 03885 EcoTest Laboratories, Inc., North Babylon, New York. Energy and Environmental Analysts, Inc., 55 Hilton Ave. Garden City, New York. Tom Fox, Southold Maritime Services, P. O. Box 76, Southold, NY 11971 • Greg Goff, Ph.D. Brany Cove, St. Andrews, New Brunswick, Canada, EOG2XO 112M Laboratories, Inc., Melville, New York. 40 Ed Hasseldine. Facility Manager - USDA Plum Island, NY. XI_ I Is • Grant Krucik. Professional Engineer and Project General Manager. New Seafarm Systems Ltd., 7660 Hopcott Road, Delta, Brittish Columbia, Canada. Net • pen design and deployment. Matt Litvak, Huntsman Marine Science Center, Brandy Cove Road, St. Andrews, New Brunswick, Canada EOG2XO Moore -Clark Company Feeds Vancouver B.C. Ron A. MacDonald, President. New Seafarm Systems, Ltd. 7660 Hopcott Road, Delta, Brittish Columbia, Canada. Overall net pen design, construction, deployment and maintenance. • Mark Malchoff, New York Sea Grant, 39 Sound Avenue, Riverhead, NY 11901 Michael Marran, P. O. Box 451, East Hampton, NY 11937 Okeanos Ocean Research Foundation, Hampton Bays, NY. Greg Rivara, Cornell Cooperative Extension, 39 Sound Ave. Riverhead, NY 11901 Samuel S. Sadove, Research Director, Okeanos Ocean Research Foundation Hampton Bays, NY. Chris Smith, Cornell Cooperative Extension, 39 Sound Ave., Riverhead, NY 11901 1 Soil Mechanics Drilling Corporation Seaford, New York. Craig Sullivan, North Carolina State University, Department of Zoology, Campus Box 7671, Raleigh, NC 27695-7617 • Mark Wagner, Cameron Engineering, P.C., Westbury, NY. Kenneth Waiwood, Ph.D. Dept. Fish. & Oceans, Canada Biological Station, St. Andrews, New Brunswick, Canada EOG2XO • • XI -2 • • • XI -3 • B. List of Appendices Appendix A. Hatchery Site Survey and Site Plan Appendix B. Processing Site Survey and Site Plan Appendix C. American Practical Navigator Chapter XXXIII Ocean Waves • Appendix D. Wind and Wave Data 1956 - 1975 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Appendix E. SACM - 3 Smart Acoustic Current Meter i Appendix F. Net Systems Net Pens Appendix G. New Seafarms Net Pens Appendix H. Atlantic AquaCage Net Pens • Appendix I. Aqua Truck Work Boats Appendix J. HAACP Regulations a Appendix K. PAOLI Food Processing Machines Appendix L. Dissolved Oxygen Analysis Data Sheets Appendix M. Sediment TOC Data Sheets • Appendix N. Sediment Grain Size Analysis Data Sheets Appendix O. Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities Data Sheets Appendix P. Seal Deterrent Device Appendix Q. Draft Water Column Lease • XI -3 • • Appendix R. Salt Water Test Well Data • Appendix S. New York Ocean Science Laboratory Nitrogen Data (1976) Appendix T. Cameron Engineering Report on Hatchery Waste • Water Treatment Systems and Waste Generation • • • • • XI -4 •