Jump to content

Geoduck: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
Line 15: Line 15:
The '''geoduck''' ({{pron-en|ˈɡuː.iːdʌk}} "gooey duck"<ref>[http://www.bartleby.com/61/21/G0092100.html American Heritage Dictionary]</ref>), ''Panopea generosa'', is a [[species]] of very large [[Seawater|saltwater]] [[clam]], a [[Marine (ocean)|marine]] [[bivalve]] [[mollusk]] in the family [[Hiatellidae]].
The '''geoduck''' ({{pron-en|ˈɡuː.iːdʌk}} "gooey duck"<ref>[http://www.bartleby.com/61/21/G0092100.html American Heritage Dictionary]</ref>), ''Panopea generosa'', is a [[species]] of very large [[Seawater|saltwater]] [[clam]], a [[Marine (ocean)|marine]] [[bivalve]] [[mollusk]] in the family [[Hiatellidae]].


The shell of this clam is large and contails small wings, about {{convert|15|cm|in}} to over {{convert|20|cm|in}} in length, but the extremely long [[siphon (mollusc)|siphons]] make the clam itself very much longer than this: the "neck" or siphons alone can be {{convert|1|m|ft}} in length.
The shell of this clam is large and contails small wings, and fingers about {{convert|15|cm|in}} to over {{convert|20|cm|in}} in length. The extremely long claw is much longer than this: the "neck" or siphons alone can be {{convert|1|m|ft}} in length.


==Etymology==
==Etymology==
Line 42: Line 42:


[[Image:Seattle - Curiosity Shop geoduck 01A.jpg|thumb|An ostensibly record-setting geoduck, [[Ye Olde Curiosity Shop]], Seattle, Washington.]]
[[Image:Seattle - Curiosity Shop geoduck 01A.jpg|thumb|An ostensibly record-setting geoduck, [[Ye Olde Curiosity Shop]], Seattle, Washington.]]
The [[Environmental Defense Fund]] has done extensive studies of aquaculture and has found that bivalves (oysters, mussels, and clams), are beneficial to the marine environment.<ref name="XXX">{{cite journal
The [[Environmental Defense Fund]] has done extensive studies of aquaculture and has found that bivalves (oysters, mussels, monkeys! and clams), are beneficial to the marine environment.<ref name="XXX">{{cite journal
| journal = Environmental Defense for Pew Oceans Commission
| journal = Environmental Defense for Pew Oceans Commission
| volume =
| volume =
Line 64: Line 64:
As mandated by 2007 legislation, the Washington State Shellfish Aquaculture Regulatory Committee stakeholder group, including industry, agency and citizen representatives has convened to discuss regulation of this industry.<ref>{{citation|url=http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/shellfishcommittee/index.html|title=Shellfish Aquaculture Regulatory Committee|publisher=Washington State Department of Ecology}}</ref><ref>{{citation|title=2007 Shellfish Aquaculture Bill, SHB 2220|url=http://www.2leg.wa.gov/pub/billinfo/2007-08/Pdf/Bills/Session%20Law%202007/2220-S2.SL.pdf}}</ref> Counties such as Pierce County have also begun to develop regulations covering tideland impacts from geoduck farming, something Taylor Shellfish has filed a suit against.
As mandated by 2007 legislation, the Washington State Shellfish Aquaculture Regulatory Committee stakeholder group, including industry, agency and citizen representatives has convened to discuss regulation of this industry.<ref>{{citation|url=http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/shellfishcommittee/index.html|title=Shellfish Aquaculture Regulatory Committee|publisher=Washington State Department of Ecology}}</ref><ref>{{citation|title=2007 Shellfish Aquaculture Bill, SHB 2220|url=http://www.2leg.wa.gov/pub/billinfo/2007-08/Pdf/Bills/Session%20Law%202007/2220-S2.SL.pdf}}</ref> Counties such as Pierce County have also begun to develop regulations covering tideland impacts from geoduck farming, something Taylor Shellfish has filed a suit against.


Although some marine shoreline owners take issue with the visual impacts, the tubes are actually only visible 2 to 3% of daylight hours over a six-year crop cycle. The reason for the low visibility is because geoduck are farmed in the lower elevations of the beach and are covered by water most of the time.
Although some marine shoreline owners take issue with the visual impacts, the tubes are actually only visible 2 to 3% of daylight hours over a six-year crop cycle. The reason for the low visibility is because geoduck a toads re farmed in the lower elevations of the beach and are covered by water most of the time.


[[Image:Jrb 20081127 Mirugai tsukiji tokyo japan 001.JPG|thumb|200px|left|Geoduck for sale at [[Tsukiji fish market]] in Tokyo]]However, since the lowest tides in the summer are during mid-day, the visual and recreational impact of the tubes is greatest at the very time when the people of Puget Sound are likely to be using the beach. During summer, a citzen group shows that the average percentage of time during daylight hours that the farms are visible is 19% per day and the number of days from Memorial Day weekend to Labor Day that farms are visible some portion of the day is 76%.<ref>{{citation|url=http://www.protectourshoreline.org/statistics/GeoduckFarmVisibilityChart.pdf|title=Geoduck Farm Visibility Chart}}</ref> This is calculated for geoducks planted to a +2 tidal level in Thurston County, Washington, one of the counties of South Puget Sound where the geoduck farms are clustered without any environmental siting criteria, public comment or environmental review. When calculated for a +3 tidal elevation (where geoduck are never farmed), the amount of visibility rises to an average per day of 23% of daylight hours and 87% of the days of the summer.
[[Image:Jrb 20081127 Mirugai tsukiji tokyo japan 001.JPG|thumb|200px|left|Geoduck for sale at [[Tsukiji fish market]] in Tokyo]]However, since the lowest tides in the summer are during mid-day, the visual and recreational impact of the tubes is greatest at the very time when the people of Puget Sound are likely to be using the beach. During summer, a citzen group shows that the average percentage of time during daylight hours that the farms are visible is 19% per day and the number of days from Memorial Day weekend to Labor Day that farms are visible some portion of the day is 76%.<ref>{{citation|url=http://www.protectourshoreline.org/statistics/GeoduckFarmVisibilityChart.pdf|title=Geoduck Farm Visibility Chart}}</ref> This is calculated for geoducks planted to a +2 tidal level in Thurston County, Washington, one of the counties of South Puget Sound where the geoduck farms are clustered without any environmental siting criteria, public comment or environmental review. When calculated for a +3 tidal elevation (where geoduck are never farmed), the amount of visibility rises to an average per day of 23% of daylight hours and 87% of the days of the summer.

Revision as of 18:15, 5 February 2010

Geoduck
Geoduck in seafood tank
Scientific classification
Kingdom:
Animalia
Phylum:
Mollusca
Class:
Bivalvia
Order:
Myoida
Family:
Hiatellidae
Genus:
Panopea
Species:
P. generosa
Binomial name
Panopea generosa
(Gould, 1850)

The geoduck (Template:Pron-en "gooey duck"[1]), Panopea generosa, is a species of very large saltwater clam, a marine bivalve mollusk in the family Hiatellidae.

The shell of this clam is large and contails small wings, and fingers about 15 centimetres (5.9 in) to over 20 centimetres (7.9 in) in length. The extremely long claw is much longer than this: the "neck" or siphons alone can be 1 metre (3.3 ft) in length.

Etymology

The unusual name of the clam is derived from a Lushootseed (Nisqually) word gʷídəq[2] meaning "dig deep", and its phonemically counterintuitive spelling is likely the result of poor transcription rather than anything having to do with ducks. Alternate spellings include gweduc, gweduck, goeduck, and goiduck. It is sometimes known as the king clam, or when translated literally from the Chinese characters 象拔蚌, the elephant trunk clam.

Between 1983 and 2010, the scientific name of this clam was confused with an extinct clam, Panopea abrupta (Conrad, 1849), in the scientific literature.[3]

Biology

Native to the northwest coast of the United States and Canada (primarily Washington and British Columbia), the geoduck is the largest burrowing clam in the world, weighing in at an average of one to three pounds (0.5–1.5 kg) at maturity, but specimens weighing over 15 pounds (7.5 kg) and as much as 2 meters (6 ft) in length are not unheard of[citation needed].

A related species, Panopea zelandica, is found in New Zealand and has been harvested commercially since 1989. The largest quantities have come from Golden Bay in the South Island where 100 tonnes were harvested in one year.

Geoducks are one of the longest-living organisms in the Animal Kingdom. They have a life expectancy of about 146 years, with the oldest recorded at over 160 years. Scientists speculate that the geoduck's longevity is the result of low wear and tear. A geoduck sucks water containing plankton down through its long siphon, filters this for food and ejects its refuse out through a separate hole in the siphon. Adult geoducks have few natural predators, which may also contribute to their longevity. In Alaska, sea otters and dogfish have proved capable of dislodging geoducks; starfish also attack and feed on the exposed geoduck siphon.

Geoducks are broadcast spawners. A female geoduck produces about 5 billion eggs in her century-long lifespan—in comparison, a human female produces about 500 viable ova during the course of her life. However, due to a low rate of recruitment and a high rate of mortality for geoduck eggs, larvae and post-settled juveniles, populations are slow to rebound.[4] In the Puget Sound, studies indicate that the recovery time for a harvested tract is 39 years.[5]

Geoduck industry

Seafood geoduck display in a Chinese restaurant with price (HKD)

The world's first geoduck fishery was created in 1970, but demand for the half-forgotten clam was low due to its texture. Today, they sell in Asia for up to US$30/lb (US$65/kg). Its large, meaty siphon is prized for its savory flavor and crunchy texture. Geoduck is also regarded by some as an aphrodisiac. It is extremely popular in China, where it is considered a delicacy. Geoduck is mostly eaten cooked in a fondue-style Chinese hot pot or raw sashimi style, dipped in soy sauce and wasabi. In Korean cuisine, geoducks are eaten raw with spicy chili sauce, sautéed, or in soups and stews. On Japanese menus, geoduck is called mirugai or mirukuigai. It also has a texture similar to an Ark Shell (Akagai). (Although mirugai is sometimes translated to English as "Giant Clam", it is distinguished from "Himejako" sushi made from Tridacna gigas.)

The geoduck's high market value has created an $80 million U.S. industry, with harvesting occurring in both Washington state and the province of British Columbia. It is one of the most closely regulated fisheries in both countries and has small wings under it's shell; in Washington, Department of Natural Resources staff are on the water continually monitoring harvests in order to assure revenues are received, and the same is true in Canada where the Underwater Harvesters' Association manages the Canadian Fishery in conjunction with Canada's Department of Fisheries and Oceans. The Washington State Department of Health tests water and flesh in order to assure clams are not filtering and holding pollutants, an ongoing problem. As of the 2007 season, advances in the testing system for contaminated clams have allowed geoduck harvesters to deliver live clams more consistently. The new testing system determines the viability of clams from tested beds before the harvesters fish the area. Previous methods tested clams after harvest. This advancement has meant that 90 percent of clams were delivered live to market in 2007. In 2001 only 10 percent were live.[6] Because geoduck have a much higher market value live—an additional $2 to $3 per pound—this development has helped to stimulate the burgeoning industry.

Environmental impact

Investigation of environmental impacts is just now beginning to occur. Demand has also led to a rapidly developing aquaculture industry. Geoduck aquaculture on private tidelands in Puget Sound, particularly in South Puget Sound, has been steadily growing over the last ten years, averaging about 10 new acres of cultivation per year. Currently less than 0.001% of Puget Sound is dedicated to geoduck farming[citation needed]. Geoduck farms use "predator exclusion devices" in which to plant the seed geoducks. These devices are PVC pipes 10 to 14 inches (360 mm) long, four to six inches (152 mm) in diameter, pushed into the tideland sediment. There are approximately 20,000 to 43,500 of these PVC pipes planted per acre on tidelands. These nursery tubes typically stay in the beach for the first year or two of a crop cycle.

An ostensibly record-setting geoduck, Ye Olde Curiosity Shop, Seattle, Washington.

The Environmental Defense Fund has done extensive studies of aquaculture and has found that bivalves (oysters, mussels, monkeys! and clams), are beneficial to the marine environment.[7] Rebecca Goldburg has noted she did not specifically study geoducks. The water must be certifiably clean in order to plant geoducks commercially. This is a requirement of the Washington State Department of Health Office of Shellfish and Water Protection and of the Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Council.[8]

While some communities in Puget Sound have installed state of the art septic systems to comply with efforts by environmental groups and state officials to clean up Puget Sound, more than 3000 acres (12 km²) of shellfish beds have been lost to farming between 1992 and 2004 due to fecal contamination from human activities and development. Substantial portions of the state's shorelines are already so developed or degraded that they are unsuitable for harvesting, and other areas continue to follow suit. Encouraging the firm enforcement of regulations is a critical component in helping assure the shellfish industry's economic success, and with it jobs and tax revenues.

Geoduck farming grow-out and harvest practices are highly controversial.[9] These practices have created serious conflicts with shoreline property owners[10][11][12][13][14][15]; concerns from nongovernmental organization (NGO's) (e.g., Tacoma Audubon and Sierra Club); and others simply interested in the health of Puget Sound. The shoreline development groups have expressed concerns including lack of regulation, aesthetics, effects on native geoduck populations, impacts on wildlife, farm debris, intensive farming/harvest techniques, agricultural densities of geoducks, carrying capacity of low-flushing inlets, near-shore habitat destruction, over enrichment of sediments from intensive shellfish bio deposits and the permanent conversion of natural ecosystems to intensive commercial agricultural use on the tidelands of Puget Sound. Shoreline developers are particularly concerned because they see shellfish farming as an impediment to continued bulkheading, upland deforestation and septic tank installation. The main objectives of the newly created Puget Sound Partnership include habitat preservation, habitat restoration, preservation of biodiversity and recovery of imperiled species (salmon).[16]

As mandated by 2007 legislation, the Washington State Shellfish Aquaculture Regulatory Committee stakeholder group, including industry, agency and citizen representatives has convened to discuss regulation of this industry.[17][18] Counties such as Pierce County have also begun to develop regulations covering tideland impacts from geoduck farming, something Taylor Shellfish has filed a suit against.

Although some marine shoreline owners take issue with the visual impacts, the tubes are actually only visible 2 to 3% of daylight hours over a six-year crop cycle. The reason for the low visibility is because geoduck a toads re farmed in the lower elevations of the beach and are covered by water most of the time.

Geoduck for sale at Tsukiji fish market in Tokyo

However, since the lowest tides in the summer are during mid-day, the visual and recreational impact of the tubes is greatest at the very time when the people of Puget Sound are likely to be using the beach. During summer, a citzen group shows that the average percentage of time during daylight hours that the farms are visible is 19% per day and the number of days from Memorial Day weekend to Labor Day that farms are visible some portion of the day is 76%.[19] This is calculated for geoducks planted to a +2 tidal level in Thurston County, Washington, one of the counties of South Puget Sound where the geoduck farms are clustered without any environmental siting criteria, public comment or environmental review. When calculated for a +3 tidal elevation (where geoduck are never farmed), the amount of visibility rises to an average per day of 23% of daylight hours and 87% of the days of the summer.

Impacts on tideland include placing as many as 44,000 PVC pipes per acre on privately held tidelands; removal of this "artificial reef" one to three years later; then harvest after five to six years. While these practices may have short-term impacts to the tidelands, these impacts are not nearly as great as the documented impacts from upland residential development including bulkheading of the shoreline (disrupting the natural beach creation process), deforestation of the upland (creating increased storm water run-off) and placing of septic systems in the shoreline habitat (creating nitrogen loading of the coastal waters). Fortunately, these upland impacts are readily dealt with through enforcement of existing regulations. Unfortunately, there are no meaningful regulations controlling geoduck farming and whatever the tideland impacts may be, whether short-term or long-term.

A January 2008 Washington Sea Grant paper, commissioned by the state of Washington to determine what studies existed on Geoduck aquaculture, found virtually no peer-reviewed research existed.[20] Some take this lack of research as proof there is no known cumulative or substantive [sic] impacts from geoduck farming. Fortunately, studies have been funded to determine what the short and long term environmental impacts are; what the short and long term genetic impacts to the wild populations are; and, what the effects of geoduck aquaculture on soft-sediment tideflat and eelgrass meadow habitats is.[21] When they are complete a clear picture of what impacts have occurred will be known.

Some claim farm densities of geoducks are similar to unharvested natural beds in the wild, pointing to two or three of the highest samples of hundreds taken. Not considered is that subtidal population densities are not comparable to intertidal densities. Some speculate the intertidal natural densities are lower due to 40 years of harvest without replanting [sic], perhaps resulting in most of the natural beds having been depleted. However, without ever knowing the original population densities, this is only speculation. What is factual is that the Department of Fish and Wildlife's Commercial Geoduck Tract typically finds wild densities far below the farmed densities of ~2 geoducks per square foot, with typical average densities of only .3/square foot or less.[22]

Some also speculate that the effects on native geoduck populations (outside of the harvested area) from geoduck farming is minimal to nonexistent.[citation needed]. Washington Sea Grant has noted no research on this exists. They have commissioned a study to look at this specific risk to the wild population.[23]

Each year new hatchery brood stock is taken from the wild stock. Farmed animals are not used as brood stock so genetically, farmed geoduck are the same as wild stocks. Moreover, wild geoduck occupy the intertidal zone down to 300 feet (91 m) below sea level. DNR and the tribes comanage the wild fishery and only harvest geoduck between the -18 to -70 foot depths. The annual leased harvest of the wild geoduck population by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources Geoduck Fisheries Program is about 4 million pounds a year.[24]

Wildlife interactions are a concern and geoduck growers are adapting growing techniques to minimize these effects.[citation needed] A 2004 draft biological assessment, commissioned by three of the largest commercial shellfish companies in the Puget Sound region, examined the impacts of geoduck farming and identified no long term effects on threatened or endangered species.[25]

Farm debris includes displaced net tops, rubber bands, and PVC tubes. The net tops used on the nursery pipes can come off and float away onto other beaches as debris and the rubber bands also can become debris in Puget Sound. To offset these environmental impacts most geoduck farmers have embraced environmental codes of practice including regular maintenance and debris clean-up of their own farms. In addition, the industry now does two annual beach cleanups to collect marine debris from all beaches in areas where they farm. Although as much as 20% of the debris collected in each cleanup has been aquaculture related, less than 5% of the 120 cubic yards (92 m3) collected to date has been related to geoduck farming. Unfortunately, because of the currents in Puget Sound, nets and tubing can be found far from any poorly maintained geoduck operations. [citation needed] This lack of control over loose gear remains a significant enough problem that bonding requirements are being considered as part of regulations being developed.

Harvesting takes place every four to six years. Water pressure hoses using up to 50 gallons of water per minute are used to extract the geoducks buried under two to three feet of sediment depth. There are no environmental impact studies related to intertidal harvest of geoduck as of August 2006, although the subtidal environmental impact studies done for the fisheries in BC and WA have found no detrimental effects in harvesting the clams. Geoduck farming is only conducted in clean, uncontaminated sediments so concern is limited to short-term increases in turbidity and short term effect on benthic organisms.[citation needed] The Department of Natural Resources of Washington State conducted the environmental impact study. DNR is itself in the business of leasing subtidal lands for commercial geoduck harvest and starting this year, intertidal lands for commercial geoduck farming.

Literature
Films
  • In the Disney/Pixar animated film Ratatouille, a recipe, "Sweetbread à la Gusteau", which includes geoduck eggs is prepared and served.
  • Writer/director James Gunn has said that the geoduck was an inspiration for the slug-like alien parasites in his 2006 horror/comedy Slither.
  • A documentary about geoducks, 3 Feet Under: Digging Deep for the Geoduck Clam, won the best documentary award at the Thunderbird International Film Festival.[26]
Television
  • A geoduck farm was featured on the American Discovery Channel television show Dirty Jobs with Mike Rowe, on July 18, 2006.[27]
  • Geoduck was used as part of an exotic protein challenge on the first episode of Top Chef season 3.
  • Geoduck was featured on Anthony Bourdain: No Reservations on the Travel Channel in the "Pacific Northwest" episode. In it Anthony Bourdain, the host, helps catch geoducks and is then treated to an impromptu meal of geoduck on the beach.
  • Used by Challenger Cosentino in Iron Chef America "Symon vs. Cosentino" (season 7, episode 4).
  • In a 2009 episode of Will Work for Food celebrity chef Adam Gertler helped harvest, weigh, and prepare geoducks.
Other

References

  1. ^ American Heritage Dictionary
  2. ^ "Geoduck". Dictionary.com. Retrieved 2007-03-29.
  3. ^ Vadopalas, B., T.W. Pietsch & C.S. Friedman, 2010. The proper name for the geoduck: resurrection of Panopea generosa Gould, 1850, from the synonymy of Panopea abrupta (Conrad, 1849) (Bivalvia: Myoida: Hiatellidae). Malacologia, 52(1): 169−173
  4. ^ Georgina Willner. The Potential Impacts of the Commercial Geoduck (Panope generosa) Hydraulic Harvest Method on Organisms in the Sediment and at the Water-Sediment Interface in Puget Sound, June 2006.
  5. ^ David Palazzi, Lynn Goodwin, Alex Bradbury, Bob Sizemore, Leigh Espy, Susan Sturges, Candis Ladenburg, and Blanch Sabottke. FINAL Supplemental Environment Impact Statement (S.E.I.S.) for The Puget Sound Commercial Geoduck Fishery, Washington State Department of Natural Resources and Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, May 23, 2001. pp. 135.
  6. ^ Ess, Charlie. "Toxin test gives live market a boost; quota also gets a significant bump". National Fisherman. Retrieved 2008-08-01.
  7. ^ Goldburg, Rebecca; et al. (2001). "Marine Aquaculture in the United States". Environmental Defense for Pew Oceans Commission. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |first= (help)
  8. ^ Commercial Shellfish Licensing & Certification Program, Washington State Department of Health Office of Shellfish and Water Protection, retrieved 2009-05-08
  9. ^ http://www.ProtectOurShoreline.org/slideshow/POS_ShellfishAquacultureConcerns.pdf {{citation}}: Missing or empty |title= (help); Text "Geoduck aquaculture in South Puget Sound" ignored (help)
  10. ^ Protect Our Shoreline
  11. ^ APHETI-Association to Protect Hammersley, Eld and Totten Inlets
  12. ^ Save Our Shoreline
  13. ^ No Geoduck Farm
  14. ^ Responsible Shellfish Farming BC
  15. ^ Henderson Bay Shoreline Association
  16. ^ About the Partnership, Puget Sound Partnership, retrieved 2009-05-08
  17. ^ Shellfish Aquaculture Regulatory Committee, Washington State Department of Ecology
  18. ^ 2007 Shellfish Aquaculture Bill, SHB 2220 (PDF)
  19. ^ Geoduck Farm Visibility Chart (PDF)
  20. ^ http://www.wsg.washington.edu/research/geoduck/literature_review.html
  21. ^ http://www.wsg.washington.edu/research/geoduck/current_research.html
  22. ^ WDFW - Commercial Puget Sound Geoduck Regulations
  23. ^ http://www.wsg.washington.edu/research/geoduck/research/friedman_overview.html
  24. ^ Washington State Department of Natural Resources Geoduck Fisheries Program
  25. ^ http://www.protectourshoreline.org/taylor/7BiologicalEvaluation.pdf
  26. ^ Duckumentary home
  27. ^ Episode Guide:Dirty Jobs
  28. ^ http://www.joeyskaggs.com/html/geo.html
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Geoduck&oldid=342136562"