A recent proposal from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has placed six species of giant clams under the Endangered Species Act. Three species, Hippopus hippopus, Tridacna derasa, and Tridacna gigas, are native to Guam, and the proposed listing has drawn the ire of Guam Delegate James Moylan (R). The regulation would effectively make harvesting, killing, collecting, or possession of the clams illegal. For many Guamanians, though, the act is a potentially massive blow to a quintessential aspect of their daily lives and culture.
Moylan’s concern stems from how the island utilizes these clams to make jewelry and consume them as a food source. In a statement questioning the NOAA recommendation, Moylan wrote, “This decision by NOAA, needs to be reconsidered from a cultural perspective as well… While we recognize the scientific analysis in their decision, particularly since NOAA claims that very few of the clams native to Guam are found in the wild, there needs to be a delicate balance to allow certain cultural usage, while also preserving the species.” The presence of clams is tied to Guamanian culture as a whole, and making it illegal to harvest or collect them, raises social concerns.
Acknowledging the scientific basis upon which NOAA made its recommendation, Moylan advocates for solutions that do not involve moving the giant clams under the Endangered Species Act. Recently, Moylan requested that the NOAA find creative solutions that allow Guamanians to preserve their culture while protecting endangered clams.
A forum allowing for public comment regarding the new rules on giant clams in Guam was released on July 25. Residents will be able to share their thoughts until October 23.
Numerous comments are already decrying the NOAA’s plan. A common sentiment of many is that the sweeping ban on all clam hunting and collecting will effectively ruin the livelihood of thousands of residents, causing them to seek alternative methods to make a living that could inflict severe economic damage upon thousands of territorial residents.
Additionally, many believe that the NOAA’s plan could eliminate sustainable giant clam aquaculture, meaning that sustainable captivity of the clams is illegal. Many believe that this would likely force companies to catch wild clams, thus furthering the endangerment issue. According to one resident, “This proposal, if approved would be another blow to not only giant clams but to the reefs they originated from. The ability to keep these animals ensures that they are studied, understood, captive-bred bred, and appreciated. Otherwise, they will silently disappear.”
Despite the concerns of many residents, the NOAA’s detailed report outlined the past drawbacks of aquaculture in territories such as Guam, claiming that persistent issues with aquaculture have been widely detrimental for many giant clam species in the regions. The report states, “In Guam, a giant clam hatchery was established at the Guam Aquaculture Development and Training Center and in the past has received a number of shipments of T. derasa broodstock from the PMDC (Wells, 1997)… The current status of this initiative is not clear, but similar to American Samoa, many sources indicate that past attempts at giant clam mariculture in Guam have been plagued by persistent poaching.”
Due to the controversial plan to place multiple giant clam species under the Endangered Species Act creating significant friction between Guamanians and the NOAA, future NOAA hearings regarding their decision will be held in the coming weeks.
Until that point, tensions continue to rise between NOAA and Guamanians. On one side, NOAA seeks to prevent the poaching and over-cultivation of giant clams in the territories. Yet with a significant source of livelihood and cultural lifeblood on the line, many Guam residents remain firmly at odds with NOAA as pressures rise regarding the future of clam cultivation in the territory.
0 Comments