WWW.WAS.ORG • WORLD AQUACULTURE • SEPTEMBER 2019 37 council members to ascertain the importance of native oyster recovery to other tribal members and to engage them in restoring a resource of cultural and historic significance. An event at which tribal members elected new tribal council members provided an opportunity to solicit broader input and at the same time impart information to tribal members about the multiple dimensions of native oyster recovery—encompassing ecological, economic, social and cultural benefits. To conduct the survey, three tribal high school students were paid to distribute a questionnaire, which included 10 questions, asking tribal members to rate the importance of rebuilding the native oyster population, ascertain their interest in restoring recreational, tribal, and commercial harvest, and characterize their willingness to pay for water quality improvements. The questionnaire also included one question to capture demographic information about gender and age. One hundred and thirty-five individuals responded to the survey. In response to the first question, 83 percent of the 135 respondents stated that it was very important to have native oysters in Liberty Bay while 85 percent said that it was very important to them to re-build the native oyster populations in Liberty Bay in order to restore harvest activities. When asked why they thought it is important to restore native oysters, responses included “we need them for our culture,” “we need Indian food,” “they belong here,” “keeps our water quality high,” “protects ecosystems and restores diversity of species.” Of those surveyed, 75 percent said that they considered it to be important to increase native oyster populations for recreational, tribal and commercial shellfish harvest, while 84 percent said the predominant need was to improve water quality. Of the 135 tribal members surveyed, 65 percent perceived that native oyster filtration was a valuable ecosystem service; 48 percent stated nitrogen removal; 59 percent said habitat; 38 percent said other or did not know. When asked if native oysters provide services that they would be willing to pay for, 75 percent of respondents cited cultural services, 47 percent recreational, 50 percent ecological, 42 percent economic, 39 percent social, 13 percent other. However, when asked if they would be willing to pay for a septic operation and maintenance program to improve water quality for recreational, tribal and commercial shellfish harvest, only 51 percent said yes. There are some significant limitations to this survey, including low sample size relative to the population (approximately 10 percent) with the likelihood that the responses are skewed towards the tails of the population distribution; the people that feel strongly one way or another are more likely to respond to the survey. As a result, the results outlined above are not statistically significant. However, the survey results do provide a greater understanding of the perceptions of the Suquamish about oyster restoration. Preliminary Conclusions Results from the four focus groups and surveys indicate some degree of consistency across geographic locations in terms of perspectives of benefits and costs of shellfish production and restoration. Generally, participants expressed the view that there are significant economic, social, and environmental costs and benefits, although social benefits stood out as a dominant factor across the four focus groups. The desire to resolve multiuse conflict was explicitly stated as a future goal along with a healthy shellfish industry that does not adversely impact the carrying capacity of the ecosystem. Benefits consistently raised across all four groups include: • Traditional and cultural value • Source of tribal subsistence and commercial food source • Iconic association to the Pacific Northwest and generation of sense of place • Fostering of environmental stewardship • Educational opportunities • Provision of habitat and structure for other species • Provision of ecosystem services such as nutrient uptake and nitrogen removal to enhance water quality • Indicator of ecosystem health • Positive economic impacts to local communities. Costs consistently raised across all four groups include: • Greater impacts to landowners from water quality regulations and waste treatment requirements • Land-use conflicts • Negative impacts to other industries such as tourism • Litter and waste material from commercial aquaculture • Property rights and equality concerns. There are recognized limitations to the focus group work. First, limited resources allowed us to conduct only four focus group meetings, two in case study areas where commercial production dominates and two where restoration of native and Pacific oyster beds is the focus. We were, therefore, not able to interact with stakeholders from the coast of Washington State nor get the desired depth in the selected Puget Sound regions to capture a broader array of opinions. Second, although focus group participants were invited from a wide set of stakeholder groups, those that chose to attend a focus group meeting tended for the most part to be proponents of shellfish production and restoration. As a result, output from the focus group meetings is certainly biased. And finally, sample sizes of the surveys were too small and limited in scope to interpret statistically significant results. Regardless of limitations, the focus group meetings and surveys provided some valuable insights into stakeholder perceptions and opinions about the full range of costs and benefits related to shellfish production and restoration. Notes This activity was funded by Washington Sea Grant under grant # NA07OAR417007. Katharine Wellman, Project Manager, Northern Economics, Inc., 114 West Magnolia Street, Suite 411, Bellingham, WA 98225 Email: katharine.wellman@norecon.com In all focus groups participants asserted that shellfish provide many valuable ecological services. It is perceived that shellfish build habitat for other marine benthic species, remove nitrogen from the ecosystem when harvested, add to biodiversity, support bentho-pelagic coupling, and in general drive efforts to enhance water quality, especially on the part of shellfish growers and the tribes.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjExNDY=