1.1 At the Joint Committee meeting in September a proposal was discussed to relay seed mussels in an area adjacent to existing mussel beds off Morecambe. The proposal was to relay and subsequently harvest the mussels by dredging.

1.2 The purpose of the relaying was to determine whether seed mussels, if relayed in the area, would survive and grow to marketable size. This information could be of value to the Committee in helping to identify possible areas for future shellfish cultivation within the Morecambe Bay area.

1.3 In order to carry out a well-defined experiment, and to obtain meaningful results, it is necessary for the operation to be strictly controlled. This cannot be done under Byelaw 12. The inability to restrict the number of authorisations issued under Byelaw 12 means that the operation would become a "free-for-all", and it would be impossible to control, monitor and adequately assess the outcome of the experiment.

1.4 It was therefore proposed to carry out the experiment under Byelaw 1, which allows the Committee to authorise fishing for scientific, stocking or breeding purposes. There is considerable precedent for authorising such activities under Byelaw 1 in Morecambe Bay. In the 1990s a number of areas within Morecambe Bay were experimentally re-seeded, the most successful of these was an area along the west side of Foulney Twist (known at the time as "Barrow 1").

1.5 Such Byelaw 1 authorisations apply only to the recovery of the mussels, and not their deposition. Although the initial harvesting of the seed mussels requires an authorisation from the Committee, we have no powers to direct what shall be done with the seed. The operators are therefore at liberty to relay the seed where they choose (subject to other legislation), but they could not subsequently harvest the relayed mussels by dredging unless the Committee granted a further authorisation.

1.6 It is this ultimate recovery operation that has been authorised under Byelaw 1, and restricted to a single operator so that full details of the stock, its position, and the size and condition of the shellfish can be accurately assessed.

1.7 Once the viability of an area has been established, then it clearly becomes inappropriate for the Committee to authorise further operations under Byelaw 1, as this would effectively grant exclusive commercial rights to an individual or company. This is the situation with "Barrow 1". The initial operation was authorised under Byelaw 1. The area has subsequently been used for overwintering mussels on a number of occasions, and by a number of operators. Ongoing harvesting of half-grown mussels from the area by dredging has been authorised under the more general powers of Byelaws 12 and 15.

2.1 Subsequent to the September Joint Committee Meeting, two further applications for experimental mussel cultivation, and harvesting under Byelaw 1, have been received. These are for areas near Bare (East Morecambe) and on the east side of Foulney Island. These areas are shown at Annexes A and B.

2.2 Officers believe that it would be valuable to test these areas for mussel cultivation suitability. There are potential difficulties in doing so, however. Any further trial cultivation will have to be discussed with Natural England, to ensure that it is compatible with conservation of the habitats and species of the Morecambe bay SAC and SPA. Additionally, such Byelaw 1 experiments must be of an appropriate scale – sufficiently large to properly test the feasibility of commercial mussel cultivation, but not so large as to confer an unfair commercial advantage on the operator. As interest in experimental mussel cultivation seems to be increasing in Morecambe Bay, Officers believe that it would now be appropriate for the Committee to establish guidelines for the scale of cultivation experiments authorised under the exclusive terms of Byelaw 1.

3.1 The presently authorised experiment, near the Baiting Knott at Morecambe, is for the relaying of a maximum of 500 tonnes of mussels. Officers believe that this quantity of mussels represents a suitable level for experimental cultivation.

3.2 It is clear that mussels must be laid at an appropriate density and over a sufficient area to reflect an actual commercial operation. Future bottom cultivation of mussels in Morecambe Bay is likely to be on areas that are not natural mussel beds, but which are sufficiently sheltered from strong winds and tidal currents that mussels can survive there to maturity. As mussels naturally colonise virtually all suitable hard-substrate areas in the Bay, the layings are likely to be on a soft substrate. This means that the mussels will rely upon attachment to each other for anchorage. If laid at too low a density, they will not adequately attach to each other. If the density is too high, then they will build up too much soft mud, and will become stressed which results in poor byssus formation. In either case, therefore, the mussels will be lost.

3.3 As well as density, the scale of the operation is important. A small-scale relaying will expose the mussels to erosion around the edges of the area. Also, the performance of the mussels is likely to vary across an area, in a way that is impossible to predict in advance.

3.4 A third consideration is that operators must have sufficient incentive to carry out the experiment, and to conduct it in a diligent and thorough manner. This involves considerable investment and time commitment. By their very nature, the outcome of the experiments is uncertain, so there is much risk inherent in the operations. Relaying experiments therefore will not take place if the operators do not have a reasonable expectation of a return on their investment.

3.5 For these reasons, Officers suggest that 500 tonnes should be considered a suitable level for an operation where exclusive harvesting rights are granted under Byelaw 1.

3.6 The optimum density of mussels laid down on an area will depend upon several factors, but experience shows that rates of between 25 and 100 tonnes per hectare can be successful. The relaying operations that have taken place this summer have been at a recommended density of 50 tonnes per hectare, as research has shown this to give the best return when typical Morecambe Bay seed mussels are relayed in the Menai Strait.

3.7 If 500 tonnes of mussels were relayed at 50 tonnes per hectare then 10 hectares of ground would be required for a relaying experiment. Officers believe that it would be appropriate to allocate 20 hectares of ground to an individual operator for an experiment, to accommodate for relaying trials at a lower density.

3.8 The areas shown at Annexes A and B are larger than 20 hectares. The area at Bare is 30 hectares in extent, and the "Barrow 2" area amounts to 145 hectares. The "Barrow 2" area was used for mussel relaying in 1997, when it was divided into 6 equal plots of approximately 24 hectares each, which were offered to individual operators. It is noted that the 1997 relaying was not very successful, but it is thought that the eventual scale of the relaying was too small.

3.9 Officers therefore suggest that the current applicants should be limited to a single 20 hectare plot within their proposed areas, and that Byelaw 1 authorisations to recover mussels should be limited to this more tightly defined area. Officers will identify two suitable 20 hectare plots, and these will be presented to the Sub-committee for approval.

3.10 The operators will be required to record and submit full details of the experiment to the Committee. This will include: