The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

South Carolina Oyster Industry: A History by Victor G. Burrell, Jr. V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

The Oyster Industry of South Carolina

by Victor G. Burrell, Jr.

December 2003

i V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Graphic design and layout by Karen R. Swanson

iii V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... v

GLOSSARY ...... vii

PERSONAL COMMUNICATION ...... ix

INTRODUCTION ...... 1

LIFE HISTORY ...... 1

PREHISTORIC PERIOD...... 2

COLONIAL PERIOD TO 1865 ...... 3

POST CIVIL WAR TO 1900 ...... 6

1900 TO 1945 – THE HEYDAY OF THE CANNER...... 10

1945 TO THE PRESENT (2002) ...... 22

SOME OF THE SHUCKING HOUSES OPERATING OVER THE YEARS...... 32

IN 2002 ...... 43

MARICULTURE...... 43

TOOLS OF THE TRADE ...... 44

RECREATIONAL HARVEST ...... 47

EPILOGUE ...... 47

APPENDIX...... 49

BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 59

iii V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

iv v V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS relating his experience in the oyster Bill Anderson of the This work would have been industry in the 1930s, 40s and 50s; Shellfish Management Section impossible without the input of Bergen Berry, historian of the North shared with me material that many individuals dating back to the Myrtle Beach area, who provided he had collected over the years. 1950s when I was involved in the interviews and articles that he had Laura Von Harten, daughter oyster business at Little River, S.C. recorded as well as local lore; Larry and granddaughter of early Beaufort The list of those who took and Tina Toomer, who gave me free seafood harvesters, a historian and time from their busy lives to run of their operation at the Bluffton writer provided me with copies of spend a few to too many ses- Oyster Company and took time to many interviews with oystermen sions with me includes all those explain how it all works; Sharon and others she has published over cited as personal communications. Bennett, archivist at the Charleston several years. These added much Several of these made old pho- Museum who made available their insight and color to this work. tographs available and these are photographic collections but most Ray Haggerty of the Shellfish acknowledged in the figure captions. especially the ledger of an oyster com- Management Section provided me with Sometimes many sessions were in- pany that operated 1869-1871; Selden statistics that he had summarized for volved with follow-up phone calls and Hill, curator of the Village Museum, the DNR and helped me evaluate the not one of these people objected to my McClellanville, who provided ma- early catch statistics and Nan Jenkins questions or made fun of my ignorance. terial on the oyster history of the of the Statistic Section helped me to It is hard to single out any in- McClellanville area and the Magwood update and interpret landing records. dividuals, but of especial help was family; Andrew and the late Clarence Helen Ivy, librarian at DNR Fort Thad Bailey, who spent many hours A. “Junior” Magwood, who allowed Johnson, was very helpful in obtain- with me and even fed me an occasion; me to use tax records, license forms ing references and especially valuable Woody Collins, who brought out his and photographs of the Magwood in getting permits to use some of the oyster artifacts and explained use of oyster activities; the Flowers of Edisto material that was under copyright. each; Mrs. Agnes Baldwin, who gave Beach, who provided family history George Steele worked with me a copy of her insightful review of and photographs; Jamie Westendorff old, dim photographs to make the “Cape Romain Controversy” and who shared with me his historical oys- them more suitable for publication. explained how all of it related to the ter records and explained the oyster Karen Swanson digitally en- oyster industry; Clark Lowther, who catering business; Suzannah Miles, hanced many of the old photographs sat with me and explained the ins who provided me with references more or less bringing them back to and outs of the way Gilbert Maggioni she had relating to oyster history; life. She also was responsible for worked with other lease holders to Buford Mabry and Jim Quinn, Chief the diagrams of the various oyster supply the factory with raw material; Counsel and Assistant Chief Counsel operations. She worked with very Erwin Ashley, who over many years of the S.C. Department of Natural rudimentary sketches and I think shared his knowledge of oyster cul- Resources (DNR) who permitted Matt came up with excellent depictions. tivation and observations of growing Rosbrugh, their intern to research Yvonne Bobo and Loren Coen read conditions, and provided oysters for oyster legislation for this paper; and the text and suggested improvements. yield determinations; A.P. Brownlee, Charles Newell who helped with his- Clyde Mackenzie and Nancy the manager of the Maggioni factories tory of shellfish sanitation regulations. Hadley reviewed the text and pro- at Ladies and Yonges Islands in the I drew from many long conversa- vided many valuable comments. 1950s and 60s, who explained the tions with the late Gilbert Maggioni, Emily Schroeder has my eternal mechanics of the operations as well an association dating back some gratitude. She efficiently deciphered as the financial dealings with the pick- forty years. He not only knew the my long hand scrawl to produce ers; Jerry Reeves, president of Resorts mechanics and finances of the oyster many drafts of this paper. Her Services, Inc. who took time out from canneries but also had a keen insight cheerful attitude and encourage- his busy schedule to discuss and make into the sociology of the period. ment added much to my enjoyment available the records of the Bluffton Willis J. “Skipper” Keith, head of working with this material. Oyster Company before and while of the Shellfish Management Section he owned it; Joel Jackson, a long time of the SCDNR and student of history, harvester, planter and maintenance generously shared his knowledge, man at Shelmore Oyster Company, publications, artifacts and photogra- who sat with me on many occasions phy, which added much to this study. iv v V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

vii V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

GLOSSARY poor meat yield to shell volume. Gutters or Marsh drains - small riv- Adductor muscle – The muscle that Cove oysters – steamed canned erlets that channel tide flow in and closes and keeps the oyster shell oysters. They are consumed in out. Many go dry at low tide and closed when the oyster is not feeding. salads, stews, soups, dressings and often contain good yielding oysters. This must be cut by shuckers to re- as lunch time snacks by laborers. Heat shock – using a hot bath to relax move the oyster meat from the shell. Crocus sack – a burlap or gunnysack the oyster adductor muscle to facili- Bag Oysters – Onion or crocus commonly used for bag oysters until tate shucking. Sometimes referred sack holding “a bushel” or spe- supplanted by plastic onion sacks. to as the “Pringle” Heat Shock cific weight of oysters e.g. - 50 or Often these bags were originally method after Mr. Somers B Pringle 55 pounds. Sold to individuals used for grain and feed and recycled who was responsible for it being or oyster roast caterers. Some by the oystermen. An oyster roast- an accepted means of processing sold as “selects” are substantu- er, when using a simple sheet metal oysters for interstate shipment. ally higher priced than those sold over a concrete block-roasting pit, Intertidal – the areas lying between as “clusters” as they are usu- would wet sacks and place over the high and low tide where most all ally culled to be singles or doubles. cooking oysters to provide steam. South Carolina oysters grow. Flat Bateau – A 16 to 18 foot wooden skiff. Culch or cultch – a hard material topography makes this a very large It is wide beamed, cross planked placed on oyster beds to provide area in coastal South Carolina. and often “butt-ended” - e.g. not an attachment surface for “spat”. Larva – the early stage of young pointed on the bow - used before to It is usually molluscan shell. oysters that is found in the wa- the advent of fiberglass reinforced Culling – the act of breaking up ter column prior to settling. boats by oyster men to load and clusters of oysters to remove Leases – the right to control wetland carry oysters from the beds to larg- small oysters and dead shell to areas for cultivation of shell- er vessels for transport to dock or improve the quality of the product. fish - administered by the state to carry shell to beds for planting. Cull in place – culling on the – supplanted by permits in 1985. Blowers or Aerators – a round vat oyster bed in order to leave Lighters – barges used by the oyster with a conical bottom, usually small oysters there to grow. industry to transport oysters or constructed of aluminum or stain- Culling iron – a tool used to cull oysters oyster shell. They came into general less steel, used to wash shell pieces – sometimes just a light hammer, but use in the late 1920s as motor pow- and grit from shucked oysters. may be a curved rod that is also used ered towboats became available. The vat was filled with fresh to break clusters loose from the bed. Low Country – this is a name water and a quantity of shucked Dribble spawning – a release of oyster used when referring to the oysters (15 to 20 gals in a 100 gal sex products through out the warm coastal counties of the State. aerator) and then pressurized air season characteristic of intertidal Mason or fruit jars – a wide mouth was injected through a pipe in the oysters. This is in contrast with one glass jar used to can fruit and bottom to agitate the shellfish so or two concentrated spawns of sub- vegetables. Raw oysters were that unwanted material settles out. tidal oysters. This results in a clus- packed in these by early purveyors. Chipper or Cracker – “an inverted T” ter oyster, as the spat set on older Mosquito Fleet – a name given to a shaped device that is placed on a oysters and build up large clumps. fishery operated in Charleston that shucking table to provide an edge Depuration – the process of relaying worked the near shore waters using that when the oyster shell is placed oysters from a restricted area to all manner of non-descript vessels on it and struck by a hammer, the bill clean waters or tanks to rid them 20 to 35 ft in length to provide fish end is removed, leaving an opening of harmful bacteria so that they and shellfish for local hucksters. It for the insertion of the knife. The are safe to eat. This may be done operated throughout the 19th and knife is inserted and the adductor in approved water or in tanks first half of the 20th century and the muscle cut, opening the oyster. where ozone or ultra violet treated men involved were mostly black. Cluster oysters – also referred to as water is circulated through the Oyster bed – shoal – or reef - area “coon”, “raccoon” or “bunch” oys- oysters held in trays or baskets. where oysters grow in South ters. This is the common form of Green shell – shell from raw shucking Carolina intertidal areas or in rare intertidal oyster growth. As com- operations that is replanted before instances, subtidally in densities pared with subtidal oysters, they small oysters not shucked die. It that make them a noticeable part are small, thin shelled, irregularly must be planted quickly usually of the surroundings. These may shaped, difficult to shuck and of within three days to be effective. be fringing reefs on the banks

vii V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

of water bodies or flats, which Plankton – an organism that occurs in Shell midden – a pile of shell- are present out from the shores. the water column and moves chiefly fish shells that were near or in Oyster “bill” - the end of oysters by wind and currents. Oyster lar- South Carolina Indian encamp- opposite the hinge. Usually it vae are planktonic from fertiliza- ments. Some were very large is the thinnest part and growth tion until they settle to attach on indicating long term use of the site. is most evident here because some hard surface. The oysters mi- Shell rings – circular deposits of pale color and sharp edge. croscopic food is also planktonic. of shells around a central de- Oyster cookers – apparatus used to Public Grounds – oyster produc- pression possibly of religious roast oysters. Some generate steam ing areas maintained for the significance to Amerinds. and others heat water to raise the tem- exclusive use of recreational or Shucker – a person who removes perature of the oyster until it gapes non commercial oyster pickers. the meat from an oyster. and is easily opened by the eater. Raccoon oysters – see cluster. Skimmer – a non-corrosive metal Oyster dredge – a box-like metal frame Raw Shucking – oysters opened as or plastic table with small per- with a chain bag attached. When they come off the beds or after being forations in the bottom to allow the device is pulled behind a boat, heat shocked. They are a perishable drainage. Fresh-shucked oys- oysters are lifted from the bottom product requiring refrigeration. ters are placed on this and are by the front bar of the dredge and Relaying – a method of depurating of sprayed with potable water to collected in the bag. Some dredges shellfish by moving them from closed wash out grit and shell fragments. go to the bottom due only to their grounds to beds in approved areas. Single oysters – those that grow unat- weight alone, others have deflec- Roller – a worker in a shucking house tached to other oysters or those that tor plates that force them down. who loads oysters on shucking have been broken off from a cluster. Oyster factory – name given to can- tables and removes shell after the Soup companies – concerns that neries, but it often also referred oyster meat has been removed. pack oyster soups or stews. to large raw shucking operations. They also serve to clean up at the Spat – the young oyster at the time it Oyster grab – short handled iron tongs end of the working day. Most all ceases to be planktonic and settles used to harvest intertidal oysters. of their work is carried out using on culch. Spatfall refers to the act Originally developed to handle nails. a wheelbarrow. Hence, the name. and often success of recruitment. Oyster plantation – a lease or Seed oysters - those smaller than Standard oysters – smaller raw granted area where oysters commercial size that are moved shucked oysters that number over are cultivated commercially. to growing areas. Formerly, 300 per gallon. They are used pri- Oyster shed or house – a raw shuck- they were planted subtid- marily in dressings, pies, and stews. ing establishment and may ally and grew to a quality product. State Grounds – oyster producing areas be referred to as a “factory”. Select oysters – shucked oysters maintained by the State for commer- Oyster sloop – a gaff rigged sailing that number less than 300 per cial and recreational oyster pickers. vessel used to move oystermen gallon and are fairly uniform in Steam chests – a horizontal iron and bateaux to oyster beds and size. Or shell stock, which has chamber with steam tight gates return harvested oysters to can- been rigorously culled so that on each end. The gates permitted neries - used in the South Carolina it consists mostly of single or cars of oysters to enter and leave, industry up until the 1940’s. double oysters. They are consumed but when closed allowed steam Oyster tongs – a scissor-like device fried or on the half shell mostly. to enter under pressure and heat having two wooden handles up to Shaker – a cylinder made up of oysters until they gape – used by 12 or 14 feet long with a toothed metal rods arranged with a 3⁄4 inch early canneries prior to the Sterling metal basket attached to one end. gap between them so that when Harris brine floatation system. The handles articulate on a fulcrum oysters were placed in them after Sterling Harris system – a method of just above the basket. They are heating, the meats fell through using an upright retort, a shaker used to harvest subtidal oysters. the gaps into a brine bath as the and a brine flotation tank to Permits – replaced the lease as a device rotated. Empty shell re- eliminate hand shucking in can- means of controlling shellfish tained in the cylinder were moved neries – developed by Mr. Harris. grounds. They have a term of by gravity out the far end on to a Subtidal area – where the bottom five years and may be renewed conveyor and then to a shell pile. is covered at all stages of the with the approval of the SCDNR. Shell stock – oysters in the tide. Oysters growing here are Picker – an oyster gatherer. shell for processing or sale. high quality and usually single viii ix V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

or double and well shaped. Once PERSONAL Bellamy, Jarvis. Retired. Owner. common in South Carolina, COMMUNICATION Bellamy’s Seafood. 323 Park St., subtidal oysters are now rare. North Myrtle Beach, S.C. 29566. The following people are cited “Tabby” or “Tapia” – a cement-like in the text as personal communica- substance of lime, oyster shell, sand Bennett, Sam. Retired. Oyster tions. The dates of these contacts are and water used in colonial days Picker. 160 Buck Island only general in that the subject may in construction of walls, houses, Rd. Bluffton, S.C. 29910 have been discussed on several occa- and forts. The lime was derived sions, but the date puts it in a time from burning oyster shell in kilns. Bennett, Sharon. Archivist. frame of two or three years. Some Water cannon – a fire hose fitted with Charleston Museum. 360 Meeting conversations such as those with Gilbert a metal nozzle at one end and con- Street, Charleston, S.C. 29403 Maggioni were two numerous to count nected to a high-pressure saltwater and cover a span of over 35 years. pump. Used in the oyster industry Berry, C.B. Historian. P.O. Box 1479

to wash shell off a lighter on to beds. North Myrtle Beach, S.C. 29598. Anderson, W. Shellfish Management

Section, S.C. Department of Boozer, Tom. Boat Carver and Natural Resources. P.O. Box Historian. 6431 Meggett Creek 12559, Charleston, S.C. 29412 Rd. Yonges Island, S.C. 29449. Ashley, Erwin. Owner. McClellanville Britzius, Kathy. Exec. Secretary. Seafood Company. P.O. Box Greater Charleston Restaurant 314, McClellanville, S.C. 29458 Assoc. 409 King Street #500, Charleston, S.C. 29403 Bachman, Thomas. Owner. Bachman Seafood Company. Sol Legare Brown, Nathaniel. Bluffton, S.C. 29910 Road, Charleston, S.C. 29412 Brownlee, A.P. “Bill”. Retired Bailey, Thadeus. Owner. Bailey Manager. Maggioni Cannery, Seafood. 25 Old Bailey Creek Ladies Island 82 Alston Road, Okatee, S.C. 29910 Road, Beaufort, S.C. 29901. Baldwin, Robert. Shellfish Culturist Brownlee, Jr., A.P. 1707 Battery and Harvester. P.O. Box 262, Creek Road, Beaufort, S.C. 29901. McClellanville, S.C. 29458. Bush, Leon. Son of old time Baldwin, William R. Author oyster worker. P.O. Box and Historian. P.O. Box 185, 172, Bluffton, S.C. 29910 McClellanville, S.C. 29458. Carson, W.Z. “Joe. Retired. Chief Barber, Robert. Owner. Bowen Island of Licensing. SCDNR, P.O. Box Seafood Restaurant. Bowens Island 571, Eutawville, S.C. 29048. Road, Charleston, S.C. 29412. Chaplin, Chappy. Manager. Bearden, Charles. Retired. Nances Seafood Restaurant, Chief, Office of Fisheries Murrells Inlet, S.C. 29576. Management. S.C. Department of Natural Resources, P.O. Box Clemons, David. Owner. Clemons 12559, Charleston, S.C. 29412 Tackle Shop, 1471 Highway 17, Little River, S.C. 29566 Beasley, Roddey. Manager. Maggioni Seafood. Eddings Point Road, St. Helena, S.C. 29901.

viii ix V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Colcock, W.O. Son of long time Gordan, Eddie. Former Long, Dan. Vice President. Bluffton resident. 17 Chrystal Owner. S.C. Crab Company, Crosby Seafood, 382 Spring Beach Dr., Bluffton, S.C. 29910. McClellanville, S.C. 29458 Street, Charleston, S.C. 29401.

Collins, Woodrow “Woody”. Graves, Mary. Sister of the late Low, Robert. Fishery Statistics Former Oysterman and J.S. Graves of Graves Oyster Section. SCDNR, P.O. Box Restaurant Owner. 25 Pelican Company, 85 Calhoun Street, 12559, Charleston, S.C. 29422. St., Hilton Head, S.C. 29928. Box 97, Bluffton, S.C. 29910. Lowther, Clark. Owner. Lemon V.E. Cox. Deceased. Owner of Cox Greene, Harlan. Charleston Island Marina, Inc., 310 Okatee Oyster Company, Little River, S.C. Public Library, 58 Calhoun Highway, Okatee, S.C. 29910. Street, Charleston, S.C. 29401 V.S. Cox. Deceased boatman. Lubkin, Walter, Jr. President. Hadley, Nancy. SCDNR, Box Coastal Pride, Inc. P.O. Duke, Legare. Deceased. Retired. 12559, Charleston, S.C. 29412. 628, Beaufort, S.C. 29901 Former Participant. Bulls Bay Seafood, 2 Legare St., Hancock, Arthur. Former participant. Maggioni, Gilbert. Deceased. McClellanville, S.C. 29458 Mulligan Oyster Company, 72 Doe President. Ocean, Lake, River Island Rd., Bluffton, S.C. 29910 Seafood Company and opera- Duke, Thomas. Deceased. tor of Maggioni’s Ladies Oyster Owner of Bull’s Bay Seafood, Harney, Thelma. Longtime oyster Cannery. Beaufort, S.C. 29901 McCellanville, S.C. 29458. shucker. P.O. Box 279, 1609 River Road, McClellanville, S.C. 29458. Maggioni, Ralph. Son of Paul Edge, Albertha. Retired. Oyster shuck- Maggioni. L.P. Maggioni er. 4694 Little River Neck Road, S.C. Howell, Kirk. Retired License Manager. Company. 400 Airways SCDNR. St. George, S.C. 29477. Ave., Savannah, Ga. 31408. Frasier, Anthony . Oyster Picker. Rt. 1 Box 131, Bluffton, S.C. 29910 Hudson, Mrs. Bennie. Owner. Magwood, Andrew. Oyster planter Hudson Marina, 175 Squire Pope and Son of Capt. And Mrs. C.A. Felger, M.R. 12 Clifford Street. Rd., Hilton Head, S.C. 29926 Magwood. 2624 Goldbug Avenue, Charleston, S.C. 29401. Sullivans Island, S.C. 29487. Jackson, Joel P. Retired employee. Ferguson, J.W. “Buster”. Shellmore Oyster Cannery, Magwood, C.A. “Junior”. Deceased. Deceased. Owner of Fergerson P.O. Box 322, 205 N. Pinckney Owner. C.A. Magwood and Seafood, Remlick, Virginia St., McClellanville, S.C. 29458. Son Seafood. 110 Haddrell St., Mt. Pleasant, S.C. 29464. Flowers, Bernard. Flowers Oyster Johnson, Sherrill. Manager. Company, 426 Highway 174, Port Royal Seafood, 111 11th McCracken, Naomi. Daughter of Edisto Island, S.C. 29438. St., Port Royal, S.C. 29935 Capt Jack McCreary. Operator of several oyster canneries. P.O. Flowers, Jr. Steve. Owner. Flowers Keith, Willis J. Head, Shellfish Box 287 Bluffton, S.C. 29910. Seafood, Edisto Beach, S.C. 29438 Management Section. SCDNR, P.O. Box 12559, Charleston, S.C. 29422 McGinn, Hugh. Retired. Long Time Flowers, Sr. Steve. Deceased. Seafood Producer. 4410 Mineola Owner. Flowers Seafood , Kyser, Florence. Daughter of Steve Ave., Little River, S.C. 29566. Edisto Beach, S.C. 29438 Flowers. Sr., Edisto Beach, S.C. McKenzie, M.D. Special Projects Gadsden, Clifford. Retired Leland, Rutledge III. President. Manager. SCDNR. P.O. Box Oysterman. Heyward Carolina Seafood, Inc. P.O. Box 12559, Charleston, S.C. 29412. Street, Bluffton, S.C. 29910 285, McClellanville, S.C. 29458.

x xi V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Mintz, Donnie. Deceased Reeves, Jerry, III, President. owner. Cox and Mintz Oyster Resort Services, Inc. P.O. Co., Little River, S.C. 29566 Box 295, Bluffton, S.C. 29910

Mintz, Leroy. One time Oyster Simmons, William. Simmons Purveyor. P.O. Box 525, Seafood, Mt. Pleasant, S.C. 29464 Little River, S.C. 29566 Tarbox, Glennie, Jr. Independent Mitchell, Mattie. Fifty plus year em- Seafood, Inc., 1 Cannon St., ployee. Maggioni Oyster Cos., 1 Red Georgetown, S.C. 29440 Oak Drive, Beaufort, S.C. 29902 Thames, William. Nephew of Mitchell, Willie May. Retired. Oyster C.A. Magwood. P.O. Box shucker. Bluffton Oyster Company, 539, Johns Island, S.C. 29457 34 Kitty Road, Bluffton, S.C. 29910 Toomer, Mrs. Cecile. Widow of Moise, Ben. Retired Conservation S.V. “Chief” Toomer, Jr. 36 Officer. SCDNR. 31 Smith Fording Island Rd., Extension, Street, Charleston, S.C. 29401 Hilton Head, S.C. 29926

Morgan, Robert. 2421 Witherbee Toomer, Larry. Operator. Bluffton Road, Cordesville, S.C. 29434 Oyster Company, P.O. Box 924, Bluffton, S.C. 29910 Newell, Charles. Shellfish Manager. SCDHEC, 1705 Oak Street, Toomer, Simpson V. III. 36 Myrtle Beach, S.C. 29577 Fording Island Road Extension, Hilton Head, S.C. 29926 Ohlandt, John. Owner. Block Island, 1005 Oceanview Toomer, William S. “Billy”. Road, Charleston, S.C. 29412 Retired. Owner. Toomer Oyster Co. 3 North Calibogue Palmer, Ed. Operator. The Cay, Hilton Head, S.C. 29928 Oyster House, Sol Legare Road, Charleston, S.C. 29412 Vereen, Max. Retired. Partner. Cox and Mintz Oyster Payne, David. Shellfish Sanitation Co. Wampee, S.C. 29568 Program Manager. SCDHEC, 1313 13th St. Port Royal, S.C. 29935. Waskiewicz, Stanley. Retired President. Blue Channel Pinckney, Roger, X. Deceased. Corp., Port Royal, S.C. 29935 Beaufort Coroner and Raconteur. Beaufort, S.C. Westendorff, Jamie. Chef, Inventor, Collector of South Carolina Poulnot, Edwin, III. 2820 Marshall Memorabilia and Raconteur. Blvd., Sullivan’s Island, S.C. 29482 Owner. Charleston Outdoor Catering, 1596 Carterett Powell, George. Jack-of-all-trades. Avenue, Charleston, S.C. 29407 Bluffton Oyster Company, P.O. Box 924, Bluffton, S.C. 29910 Young, Joseph. Oyster picker. Bluffton, S.C. 29910

x xi V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

1 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

He said, “the rich consume oysters jects. Only a tiny percentage of larvae with champagne and the poorer survive this far. Predators eat many INTRODUCTION classes consume oysters and beer.” juvenile oysters, but oysters grow fast The eastern oyster, Crassosstrea The oyster industry was the most and some survive to reach market size. virginica, is present from Canada south valuable South Carolina fishery from The sex is separate in the Eastern into the Gulf of Mexico in commercial the late 1880s to just after World oyster but may change during the quantities. In much of its range, it War II. Oysters were responsible for course of its life. Yearling oysters grows subtidally and not in clusters. 45 percent of the value of all South are primarily males and in later years, In South Carolina, it is most abundant Carolina fisheries in 1902 (Report of females dominate the population in the intertidal zone. Very flat coastal the Commissioner 1903). The indus- but changes back and forth do occur topography and relatively large tidal try provided jobs for coastal blacks (Galtsoff 1964; Thompson, et al. 1996). range (five to seven feet) along with as harvesters and shuckers when no Water temperature stimulates the a prolonged and prodigious spawn- other employment existed for them spawning process. First, causing the ing season has resulted in vast beds from around 1900 through the “great maturation of eggs and sperm, and then of clustered oysters lining river and depression” in the 1930s until World to trigger their release. Fertilization creek banks and creating large shoals War II got underway (Maggioni and takes place in the water column with in the estuaries of the state (Figure 1). Burrell 1982). William Baldwin relat- first the discharging of sperm, which The extensive banks of oysters im- ed how the 1893 hurricane destroyed is the stimulus for egg release. The pressed early European explorers and everything in McClellanville and resulting larvae are planktonic for settlers (Catesby 1731; Cunynghame the oyster industry started because 14 to 21 days at which time they that was the only means of existence 1851). Several permanent features settle from the water column. If a left (Baldwin, pers. comm. 2001). were named for the presence of the suitable substrate is available, the South Carolina shellfish. Most notable young oyster, which at this time of these was Oyster Point, which is the LIFE HISTORY The oyster has a life history simi- is called spat, loses its locomotive site of present day Charleston. Oyster appendages and takes up a sedentary lar to that of other bivalve mollusks. Bay is another of the names that have life style. Their most common settling Males shed sperm into the water and persisted over the years. In the mid to site is shell of other oysters, but any then females shed eggs into the water late 1800s, oysters were a popular food hard surface will suffice. In South where fertilization takes place. The for all classes of people. They were Carolina, spawning may begin in larvae drift in the currents as they much cheaper than beef, chicken or early May and extend into November swim, feed and grow for about 2 weeks. fish (MacKenzie and Burrell 1997). in warmer years. The intertidal oyster, They then settle and attach perma- Mackey (1859) observed that every- which dominates in South Carolina one ate oysters that could get them. nently to oyster shell or other hard ob-

Figure 1. Dense intertidal oyster beds typical of the South Carolina Coast (Keith photo).

1 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina populations, may spawn repeatedly damage by boring sponges (Clione The oyster has been utilized by during the summer months. This so spp.) and annelid worms (Polydora man for at least 4000 years in South called “dribble” spawning is contrary spp.) (Bahr and Lanier 1981; Burrell Carolina. Middens containing mostly to that of subtidal populations which 1986; Carriker 1955; Lunz 1960). oyster shells dating back to 2000 BC may have only one or two concentrat- The oyster diseases MSX present through-out coastal South ed spawning periods a year (Burrell (Haplosporidium nelsoni) and Carolina indicate that oysters were 1986; Galtsoff 1964; McNulty 1953). “Dermo” (Perkinsus marinus) which used extensively by the native Indians Continual spawning and suc- are responsible for mass mortalities in as food and the shells as tools and cessive attachment of new spat to the Chesapeake, mid Atlantic and in trade items. (Catesby 1731; Keith the same oysters result in clusters the case of “Dermo,” Gulf of Mexico and Gracy 1972; Marrinan and Wing of oysters of many sizes. This phe- oyster populations, while present, do 1980; News and Courier 1965). Some nomenon is responsible for the large not seem to be a problem in South of the shell piles were very large, intertidal reefs of clustered oysters Carolina, except in hot dry summers indicating long time occupation of characteristic of the South Carolina (Bobo, et al. 1997). Heavy infections the site. One near Awendaw was as coastal water bodies. Intertidal beds of “Dermo” were observed over several large as “three football fields” (News often spring up on soft muddy terrain years in studies at the South Carolina and Courier 1965). Several of these by an oyster spat attaching to some Marine Resources Research Institute shell accumulations were arranged solid object more or less floating on but larger die-offs were reported by in- in a well-defined circle around a the mud. Other spat attach to this dustry members only during dry years central depression. The significance early set and as the cluster develops appear to indicate that South Carolina of these so called “shell rings” is not the initial individuals sink into the oysters have developed resistance to mud and perish. This process contin- this disease. However, when oyster ues until the lower part of the column food is scarce, the combined stress of live and dead oysters reaches a solid of inadequate nutrition along with substrate. From this initial set, subse- seasonally high temperatures may quent sets may grow out laterally from lower disease resistance and result in the original column to form a shelf mortalities (Bobo, et al. 1997; Burrell, over the muddy area. This overlying 1997; Burrell, et al. 1984; Cheng, et area may be many oysters in thick- al. 1994; F. Smith 1986; Soniat 1996). ness and support a fairly heavy load The oysters’ food consists chiefly Figure 2. Oyster shell ring at Fig Island without breaking through; however, of algae, but detritus and bacteria as- (Keith photo). it is vulnerable to mechanical or other sociated with it may also be a source of major perturbation and once this mat- nutrition (Langdon and Newell 1996). known for sure but it is conjectured trix is broken through tidal currents Water currents, silt loads, alga size that they had a religious significance can destroy a large part of the bed. and species and submergence time to the Amerinds (Keith and Gracy This has been a deterrent in develop- are factors in the feeding of oysters 1972; Spieler 1972) (Figure 2). ing intertidal mechanical harvesters. (Loosanoff and Engle 1947; Newell Shucking of raw oysters may Oyster growth occurs through- and Langdon 1996; Shumway 1996; also date back to Indian utilization of out the year in South Carolina, but Shumway, et al. 1985). In dry years, it oysters. A stone tool shaped to fit the slows considerably in colder months is surmised that food becomes a limit- hand and allow opening of raw oysters (Burrell, et al. 1981). Growth may ing factor on condition of oysters, i.e. by chipping off the blade has been almost reach two inches in a year and little or no wash down of nutrients from found on shell middens by W. Collins harvest size is reached in two to three high ground may reduce abundance of (Figure 3). Oyster roasts originated years (Burrell, et al. 1981; Manzi, et algae and thus slow their growth and with South Carolina Amerinds as ear- al. 1977; News and Courier 1905b,c). affect their physiology (Soniat 1996). ly as 4000 years ago as evidenced by Oyster predators include drills fire blackened shells in middens found (Eupleura and Urosalpinx) whelks, PREHISTORIC PERIOD throughout the state’s coastal region. (Busycon spp.) crabs, (Callinectes spp. Native Indians used oysters for and Xantheridae) starfish, Asterias ( ) food, and the shells for tools and trade fish, Rhinoptera ( and Pogonias) and items. Shell middens and circular shell flatworms Stylochus( ). Subtidal oysters arrangements are found along the in addition are subject to considerable banks of many estuarine water bodies.

2 3 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

part of the present day Cape Romain first began is not known precisely, Wildlife Refuge (Baldwin 1972). however a David Truesdale received Early colonists found that lime a grant from the State for some 400 produced by burning of oyster shell, acres of marshland for an oyster plan- when mixed with sand, water and oys- tation in 1845 (S.C. Dept. of Archives ter shell, made an excellent concrete- 1845) (See Appendix). Subsequently, like building material called tapia or a landing or dock consisting of a built “tabby” (Keith and Gracy 1972; Salley up base of oyster shell was constructed 1925). Many remains of “tabby” on the marsh side of Sullivan’s Island walls and foundations remain in the by Truesdale. This was a substantial coastal area (Harden 2000) (Figure construction and undoubtedly is Figure 3. One of several stone tools found 4). Spieler (1972) lists several build- evidence of the processing of many in shell middens. They were thought to be ings and structures around Beaufort oysters. The present owner of this used by Indians to open raw oysters (W. built of “tabby”. The importance of dock surmises that this indeed could Collins collection). oyster shell lime was evidenced as be the spot from where the submarine early as 1801 when James Schoolbred Hunley launched the attack on the COLONIAL PERIOD TO took his Kiawah Island neighbor, federal warship, USS Housatonic, General Augustus Vanderhorst, to due to its proximity to Breech Inlet 1865 court because he suspected that the (Ragan 1999; E. Poulnot, pers. The period from colonial settle- general’s field hands were making off comm. 2001). This oyster operation ment to 1865 marked the beginnings of with his oyster shell (Trinkley 1998). is mentioned in 1850 by Irving; 1863 the oyster industry. Individual settlers Lime produced from oyster by Smythe and in 1905 by Fait (News obtained grants from England and shell was used for fertilizer also. and Courier 1905b). References to eventually from the state so they could George Washington used burned the Truedale operation being a viable control oyster beds for themselves. oyster shell on his lands in Virginia enterprise were found up until at least They used the oyster shells to make (Caldwell 1990). Oyster shell the early 1900s (News and Courier a primitive concrete, lime for their was crushed and used for chicken 1905a,b). Truesdale’s heirs retained farms, for chicken feed and even for feed and for agriculture purposes possession until 1980 (Felger, pers. docks. In Charleston, a fleet of boats prior to 1843 according to Edward comm. 2000; Swindell 1999a,b). and crews harvested the oysters along Ruffin’s diary (Matthew 1992). The mosquito fleet was the creek banks. The oysters then were When use of these areas exclusive- name given a hodgepodge of small peddled from carts and eaten in homes ly as a source of oysters for commerce boats that fished in the near-shore by all classes from poor to rich, and in commercial eating places which served raw oysters on the half-shell. Early settlers sought control of the salt marsh areas to secure ownership of the shellfish resources, which included oysters. Three types of grants were given, Proprietary (1670-1719), Kings (1719-1776), and State after 1776, when the colony became independent (Baldwin 1972). These grants continued to be made by the legislature and State Sinking Fund Commission up until the 1950s. Some of these grants were for large areas of marshlands and creeks. One to John Bowman in 1791 was for 16,992 acres and included much of the wetlands from the present Intracoastal Waterway to the sea in Figure 4. The remains of Fort Frederick at Beaufort, S.C. This was one of the largest the McClellanville area. This area is “Tabby” forts. Built 1735-58 (Burrell photo).

2 3 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

“Old Kate, the Oyster – Wife – tools were valued items as it was A Dirge” implied that they were handed down by Ralph Rhyme to those who survived “Old Kate”. She’s dead ! old Kate the oyster wife, Oysters were prominent in the fare of Charleston society prior to “The You’ll hear her cry no more, War Between The States” as evidenced As, “oyesh-taa! Lady oyesh – taa!” She, by the menu of a ball given by Mrs. Was wont to cry of yore. Charles Aston in 1851. It included four She’s dead, old Kate, the oyster wife, hams, four wild turkeys, 60 partridges, Her oyster days are o’er other wild fowl and ten quarts of oys- And many a sable fishwife weeps, ters in the meat courses (Deas 1974). Probably little effort to cultivate Who never wept before. oysters occurred before 1830 except “Yaa, oyesh-taa! Lady oye-esh-taa!” for possibly some raking down of inter- Figure 5. Fisher slave tag (property of Who hath not heard her cry, tidal oysters to the upper subtidal area Charleston Museum). And stopt and listen’d to her notes, to improve size and shape. Between waters of Charleston (Bishop, et al. Ere they pass her by? 1830 and 1869, the millpond oyster was cultivated, not by a conscious effort to 1994; Fleetwood 1995; News and And stopt again, and listen’d aft, improve the bivalve, but by lumbering Courier 1888). The fishermen were As echo backward rung, mostly blacks and in winter some practices that resulted in a fine “table “Yaa, oyesh-taa! Lady oye-esh-taa” of them harvested oysters for sale oyster”. Those superior shellfish to Charlestonians. This was not As plain as Kate’s own tongue? grew in millponds created to provide an easy life and in 1848, several But, now the steps where on she sat tidal waterpower to operate the lumber drowned when their boats capsized The live long winter’s night. mills. Oyster spat attached to sunken logs in these impoundments and grew in a winter storm while returning And “oyesh taa! Lady oyesh taa!” cried from an oyster harvesting expedi- at a rate to keep above the silt while the With all her main and might. tion (Charleston Courier 1848). logs decomposed, the result was large Slave tags were required when So silent and so sad they seem single oysters with excellent flavor. one slave owner rented a slave to an- So darksome and so drear, With the advent of steam and the other slave owner. These were issued The pany-cake, groundnut girls, abandonment of ponds for power, the millpond oyster disappeared. Effort between 1800 and 1864. They had the No more assemble there. to bring back this prized product trade of the slave stamped on them Her bucket and her calabash, such as servant, porter, carpenter, etc. failed because no one understood Have pass’d to other hands, The “fisher” tag was considered one what elements had to be present for of the fewer number issued. Some of And e’er her rusty oyster pot the oyster to prosper (Colson 1888). the early mosquito fleet members and On stranger bricks now stands. Raw bars were in operation others harvesting shellfish from the While laughing damsels as they list, prior to the “War Between the States” in Charleston. One “Tivoli” land probably were among those thus And learn the old wife’s fate, identified (Civil War Collectors Price restaurant advertised in the News Walk slower past the market steps, Guide 2000; Greene, pers. comm. and Courier newspaper referring to 2002; Mikell 1923; Westendorff, And, sigh, “alas, poor Kate”! their oyster business before the hos- pers. comm. 2002) (Figure 5). tilities (News and Courier 1865a,b). Street peddlers or hucksters One may surmise from this verse Oyster roasts appeared to be sold the oysters, usually shucked, how oysters were processed by vendors social occasions in the years prior from carts or on the street side. A of the day. The pot was supported over to the War Between the States. One poem lamenting the passing of a small fire to heat water. The oysters such event was recorded by I. Jenkins one such individual is quoted from in the shell were placed in the heated Mikell (1923) in his wonderful book, the Charleston Courier (1846). water long enough to relax the adduc- Rumbling of the Chariot Wheels, about tor muscle which facilitated opening pre-Civil War days on Edisto Island. them. The oysters were shucked into My life, as a young boy, in ante- the bucket and sold by the gourd-full bellum days, was – like Gaul, of dipped from the bucket. Likely these

4 5 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Caesar’s time, was divided into made. It was to be a full day’s the articles. With soldier-like three parts. One third I spent work for the host. Rustic tables exactness and punctuality the in Charleston, one third on the and seats for twenty-five or arrangements were carried out. plantation, while the other more were put in place. Cords At noon, the fire for the roast third did not matter… This was of oak, hickory and cedar- for was started. At one o’clock when our home, Point Saint Pierre, the aroma-ten feet long, were the guest arrived, the oysters anglicized into “Peter’s Point.” brought in and placed ready for were poured on the live coals by Its name simply came down the torch. The roads and bridges barrelfuls, and were soon ready. to us. We do claim, however, on the long causeway leading to The oyster course had begun. that Lafayette re-embarked Botany Bay were smoothed off on his steamer from here in his and put in order for the carriages As the guest seated themselves, Southern itinerary, 1825-6… of the guest. This “Botany Bay” at each place was an individual was an adjunct to the plantation, plate mat of coarse linen to hold Christmas week all work was an island of live oaks, palmettos the wooden platters of oysters, an suspended. Master and slave alike and cedar - - a tropical jungle, oyster cloth on the left, an oyster rested from all labor. Among the impenetrable twenty yards from knife, with protective guards, on planters, it constituted a social the beach, five miles long and the right. A tumbler for each was clearing-house, in which all one half wide, inhabited only not left off. First came the butler, obligations of a festive kind for by half-wild and lawless cattle with a silver pitcher of steaming the past year were liquidated. (hence the name), wild hogs and hot punch, filling the glasses; And one had to keep busy to get marsh tackys. Deer abounded hot, old-time-knock-down- round. The annual “oyster roast” in a wild state and the beach drag-out-whisky punch; not of the Honorable John Townsend was unsurpassed on the Atlantic your Manhattan or Bronx poison, to his family connections at his coast. The “white foot” oysters but punch made of lemons, hot baronial home “Bleak Hall” was at were obtained a few yards from water, sugar and double-proof hand. It was called “oyster roast” the “camp” and left in the salt imported Irish peat whiskey. No for want of a more comprehensive water until the last minute so as to vermouth, no bitters, no absinthe. name. The “roast” was no more preserve their peculiar flavor and The lighter wines were in reserve than the salad course, so to tang of the sea, for which they are for the main course - - the dinner speak, in the entertainment. noted. They were named after proper. Those old worthies of the tribe of “White-foot” Indians, all ages and both sexes, did not As entertainments of this nature a subdivision of the Edistoes who know of and did not care for, the and on this scale have become claimed and maintained their modern hygienic theory that one of the “has beens,” and dominion over the territory on oysters and whisky together mean as the memory of them has many a hard fought battleground poison. Their constitution and almost passed away, it may not among themselves. In later years, past experience disproved this, be uninteresting to give a brief the presence there of the oyster and they drank. The host arose account of a typical one, or was due to their inaccessibility and inclined his grand old classic perhaps one of the best type, to the “oyster pirate.” head. Then lifting his glass he as illustrating the customs, the simply said: ‘To our kinsfolk, our people and the times of “Old The morning of the 27th broke guests – welcome!’ Immediately Edisto.” Some two weeks before bright and temperate. By sunrise, a dozen little pickaninnies rushed Christmas, to forestall any other wagons were moving, containing from the fire with platters filled engagement or invitation, our everything pertaining to an with hot, sputtering oysters and grand old man, citizen statesman elaborate feast, from the humble placed one before each person, and writer, quietly remarked to oven to drinking water, (not, and for a time nothing was father at church one Sabbath: “We however, used to any great extent) heard save the knife struggling hope to see you and yours at Bleak from the ancestral silvery and with an obdurate oyster. The Hall on the 27th to join us in our table napery to the aristocratic trimmings to this course were Christmas festivities – an oyster champagne glass, accompanied also in evidence. Not too much roast.” Nothing more. All knew by a host of household and – they were purposely limited, what this meant. No one ever kitchen servants. None of these dinner was only one hour off. declined an invitation there… things were ever stolen, or even in danger. They were of no value A rest. Then came the On the day before the 27th, all to the slave. Besides, their pride in embarrassing, and to the men, arrangements possible to be the family possessions protected the amusing disentanglement made before “the” day were of the young women from the

4 5 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

stationary benches on which they noted for its varied and fine menu of age and was available from at least were seated. The men simply oysters (News and Courier 1865a,b). 1855 to 1891 from Alva Gage who stepped over them. Not so the Raw oysters were restricted to operated an ice facility at this time women. With their long, balloon home use and quick consumption in Charleston. Gage advertised shaped gowns and the hoops of if acquired from a purveyor until “Arlington Lake” ice, presumed to be the day, it was some job getting refrigeration became available, first shipped in by boat. In the late 1880s, out. For the custom, the modesty of the times, did not allow more as shipped in ice and then mechani- he installed a mechanical ice machine than the toe of a woman’s foot cal produced ice in the later 1880s (Charleston City Directory 1859; 1891; to be seen. If, by any ill chance, (Charleston City Directory 1889). Directories for Charleston City 1998). the white glint of silk hose, just An oyster company headquartered Oyster shell was important as above the shoe top, be seen for an at 21 Bee Street in Charleston and op- road paving material in the late 1800s. instant, confusion overcame her, erated by Thomas McCrady sold whole Shell was used for road paving in and “first aid to the distressed” oysters that were barreled, shucked nearly every low country town and was given by some sympathetic meats and steamed cooked oysters at in many rural areas. Charleston used matron. I do not know of least from 1869 through 1871. It’s led- 36,981 bushels of shell in 1890 just to any casualties taking place ger listed 59 customers with accounts, maintain Meeting Street. In 1900, they during the disentanglement, so suppose none happened… and some from as far away as New were still keeping it up with 54,459 York City, Louisville, Kentucky and bushels required. This apparently was POST CIVIL WAR TO 1900 Augusta, Georgia, as well as 13 South not the best material for a well-used Carolina cities. In February 1870, the thoroughfare as rainwater tended to During the period from 1865 to firm sold 1,205 quarts, 44 gallons, dissolve it and according to the com- 1900, an industry that was to grow 8 bushels, and 13 barrels of oysters ment by the road commissioner “the to substantial size developed around to these accounts. The three largest Meeting Street shell road is an expen- the oyster resources. Oysters ini- customers were Charleston grocers sive nuisance” (Charleston City Year tially were eaten locally, but when who purchased chiefly quarts of raw Book 1890, 1899, 1900). This practice ice became available, commercial oysters. The types of oysters were has continued to the present time with firms were formed that sold oysters “channel” (presumed to be subtidal) the use of shell to keep up roads to wa- raw and as shell stock to small cities at $1.25 per bushel, “Mill Pond” at terside facilities and private driveways. in the state and also to nearby states. $1.25 per bushel and 25 cents for three An early organized industry Oyster shell was used to pave many dozen and both types shucked at $1.50 involving shucking houses that em- roads. The first oyster cannery was per gallon and “steamed oysters” (pre- ployed several gatherers (pickers) and constructed and canned oysters were sumed to be intertidal) at 75 cents per shuckers was reported on Daufuskie sold in local stores. By the latter part gallon. The gallon cans were reused Island in South Carolina by T.P. of this period, several generations with the buyer paying a deposit of one Chaplin in the early 1880s and another of oyster pickers had accumulated dollar and receiving the same in credit was operated by L.P. Maggioni in knowledge about the locations of the when returned. A driver apparently 1883 and later a large concern by Emil best harvesting areas, how to per- also delivered oysters about town by Cetchovich (Burn 1991). The market petuate them, and good harvesting horse and wagon and his accounting for the oysters was in Savannah, methods, and commercial firms had of collections indicated that quite a Georgia, where they were transported learned how to process and sell the few individuals also purchased oys- first by sailboats and later motorboats. oysters and make use of their shells. ters from this source (McCrady 1869 An oyster steam cannery was started A large pile of oysters is evident -1871). This company may well have there in 1893 also by L.P. Maggioni in a photograph of the Charleston been the one mentioned as a short- (Burn 1991; G. Maggioni, pers. comm. waterfront, in a Library of Congress lived concern with John McCrady 1970) (Figure 6 a; b; c; Figure 7). collection from 1865 indicating some a principal by Doctor C.B. Colson It was estimated that 50,000 bush- commerce in this resource at the (1888). The company ledger which is els of oysters were processed by 185 time (Whitelaw and Levkoff 1975). archived in The Charleston Museum people working in the South Carolina An article in the Charleston News was most likely deposited there by oyster industry in 1880. This included and Courier in 1865 noted that an this John McCrady who was director just the areas around Charleston and “old and popular resort on Meeting of the museum from 1869 to 1873 Port Royal so it was probably a low es- Street” had reopened. This referred (Sharon Bennett, pers. comm. 2002). timate. These oysters were valued at to the “Tivoli” restaurant which was Ice allowed shipping and stor- four cents per bushel (Ingersoll 1881)

6 7 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

authorize the Board of Commissioners of the Sinking Fund to grant rights or franchises to grounds for oyster cultivation and to establish regulations for the protection of the state’s natural oyster beds and shells. These franchises were limited to 300 acres for an individual or corporation (S.C. Legislature 1891). The phosphate mine inspector assumed the additional duties as Fish Commissioner. Canning oysters using heat to open them and processing them in a glass container probably originated in this country in New York around 1820. Tin plated metal cans later Figure 6. The supplemented the glass. This process Maggioni Cannery was adopted by Baltimore, Maryland at Daufuskie entrepreneurs and it allowed ship- Island in the 1890s ment of oysters all over the country (Maggioni family prior to the introduction of reliable photos a,b,c) refrigeration (MacKenzie 1996). Around 1890, oyster canning moved south and provided a means of utilizing the cluster oysters of South Carolina and Georgia (Burn 1991; Keith and Gracy 1972; Lane 1977). The L.P. Maggioni Company established a cannery in South Carolina on Daufuskie Island in 1893 (Burn 1991; G. Maggioni, pers. comm. 1969). Breslauer, Lachicotte and Company may have had an earlier cannery at Litchfield Plantation near Murrells Inlet, South Carolina (Figure 9). The exact date is not known but it could have been as early as 1878 (Hawkins 1993). Canned oysters were sold in Georgetown grocery stores in 1887 and they may have been produced at this Breslauer, Lachicotte and Company (Figure 8, Table 1). The U.S. Fisheries In the late 19th century, J.W. (Georgetown Enquirer 1887). Commission steamer, Fishhawk, under Magwood had an oyster shucking Three other canners specializing command of J.D. Battle made a survey house built on pilings in Bulls Bay. in oysters were in business in 1891. of South Carolina oyster grounds in Dormitory and kitchen arrangements They were the Berkeley Cannery and 1890. An earlier study by the same allowed its shuckers and pickers to Manufacturing Company, probably group was done for an oyster company live on the facility during the oyster located in the Charleston area. Also in the Winyah Bay area. This concern production season (Leland 1968; the Beaufort Packing Company and had acquired a lease by a special act of C.A. Magwood, pers. comm. 2001; McCabe and Hunt in the Beaufort the state legislature, the only method of A. Magwood, pers. comm. 2000). area (News and Courier 1891). When obtaining one at this time (Battle 1892; Concern for over utilization of the they were established is not known Dean 1892; Keith and Gracy 1972). resource caused the state in 1891 to but it was probably in the late 1880s.

6 7 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Figure 7. An oyster roast put on by Mr. L.P. Maggioni for friends at his facility on Daufuskie Island, circa 1890s. Note “casual” attire in those days (Maggioni family photo).

Figure 8. Oyster landings 1880 to the present.

Figure 9. Labels of the Breslauer, Lachicotte and Company cannery at Waverly Mills (Property of A.H. Lachicotte, Pawleys Island, S.C.).

8 9 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Table 1. Operating units in the oyster industry and estimates of numbers employed from available records 1880-2002.

YEAR CANNERIES SHUCKING SHELLSTOCK NUMBER HOUSES DEALERS EMPLOYED 1880 N/A N/A N/A 851 1902 92 N/A N/A 1910 N/A N/A N/A 16913 1926 16 (11 31 24 35004, 5 operating)

1930 7 36 14 1935 4 27 6 30005 1940 3 19 1945 3 22 49 15005 1953 7* 17 155 1955 10* 17 103 20065, 6 1960 3 29 53 1965 2 32 26 15945, 6 1970 1 205(19)7 34 3177 1975 1 145(10)7 3847 1980 1 15 44 6195, 6 1985 1 12 55 7388 1990 6 46 4288, 9 1995 4 51 3948, 9 2000 2 44 2558, 9 2001 2 39 2938, 9

1- Ingersoll, 1881. 2- Report of the Commissioner, 1903 3- Report of the Commissioner, 1912 4- Maggioni & Burrell, 1982 5- S.C. Board of Fisheries and Successors 6- Fishery Statistics of the United States 7- Gracy, et al. 1978 8- South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control 9- South Carolina Department of Natural Resources Licensing Office (W.Z. Carson and P . Wilkins) * - The South Carolina Wildlife Resources Department (1953, 1955) listed cannery licenses sold, but not those in operation. These numbers may include those bought by L.P. Maggioni and no longer operating, or those that steamed oysters for them, but did not actually can them. Probably only three or four were actually producing a canned product.

8 9 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

1900 TO 1945 – THE Little River Myrtle Neck HEYDAY OF THE CANNER Beach During the 1900-1945 period, oyster production, but mainly from 1900 to 1935, was to be the highest in the industry’s history. The canneries grew in number, employed many Georgetown Murrells Inlet Pawleys Island 0 10 20 30 40 Awendaw workers, processed most of the state’s Miles oysters, and shipped canned oysters to Santee River many parts of the world. Oyster harvesting was limited to state residents. Bulls Bay McClellanville Sailboats towed bateaux to the oyster Charleston beds to harvest oysters for canneries Isle of Palms Mt Pleasant and shucking houses. The sailboats later were replaced with motor boats. The operations on the beds and in can- Folly Beach neries were carried out by hand labor Bluffton Beaufort St. Helena Sound at low cost, but the canneries eventu- Port Royal Figure 10. Coastal South Carolina ally began to mechanize to reduce Port Royal Sound the labor costs. Shell was planted showing the principal oyster industry centers. on beds as cultch and some was sold Daufuskie Island for chicken feed and lime. The South Carolina oyster bushel was much coast to gather information necessary the more the beds were harvested the larger than the U.S. oyster bushel. to create a state fisheries commission better the quality (Kohn 1905a). Mr. Sanitation and licensing regulations (News and Courier 1905a). Meetings Maggioni said his Port Royal plant for shucking houses were passed. were held in Beaufort, Bluffton, had opened 300,000 tubs of oysters The 1930s depression and World War Charleston and Georgetown to receive (each tub contained 1 to 3 bushels) II took many workers away from the input and comments from oyster pro- between October 1904 and April 1905. oyster industry and production fell. ducers (News and Courier 1905a,b,c; He employed 150 Polish immigrants in In 1903, the South Carolina Board FKM 1905; Kohn 1905a,b,c,d) (Figure his factory (oyster canneries and even of Commissioners of the Sinking 10). Testimony of oyster industry large shucking houses were referred Fund proposed to license only South members was reported in newspa- to as factories). Maggioni and a Mr. Carolina oyster gatherers and boats to pers. Some of the highlights follow. Harley said their oysters yielded 24 harvest oysters. This ostensibly to pro- L.P. Maggioni felt that the oyster ounces of meats per bushel. A bushel tect the resource from North Carolina resource was inexhaustible and that was measured as a half wheelbarrow and Georgia canners (Beaufort Gazette 1903a). This proposal did not sit well in the South Carolina coastal counties involved as they derived considerable tax revenue from these operations and felt this might be usurped by the state legislature. This probably indirectly led to the establishment of the Board of Fisheries in 1906 (Beaufort Gazette 1903b; 1905; 1912c; Kohn 1905a,b,c,d; Figure 11. Polish FKM 1905; News and Courier migrant workers 1905a,b,c; S.C. Legislature 1906). at the Varn and In 1905, a delegation of what is now Byrd Cannery on the South Carolina General Assembly, Yonges Island 1913 chaired by Senator Neil Christensen (©photo collection Univ. Maryland, Jr., conducted interviews along the Baltimore County).

10 11 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Figure 12. Polish also exempted this firm from taxes for and black workers several years. The company operated shucking steamed until 1913 or there about (Charleston oysters at the Varn City Yearbook 1904; Charleston and Byrd Cannery City Directory 1903; 1912; 1913). in Bluffton 1913 Mr. L.C. Lachicotte, owner of (©photo collection Univ. Maryland, The Champion Oyster Factory at Baltimore County). Waverly Mills, said he canned oysters, clams, shrimp, and mullet as well as vegetables. He experimented with putting up shad and sturgeon, also. He advocated planting shell on inter tidal beds saying he could harvest “raccoon” oysters there as good as wild stock in two years. He thought the South Carolina oyster was not suitable load at one factory (Kohn 1905b). praised for running a model factory for shell stock shipment even though Mr. W.H. Fait of Charleston Canning with many labor saving devices not he had produced some fine oysters Company said oysters planted subtid- seen in other establishments. He also in a brackish pond (FKM 1905). ally for 10 cents per bushel would yield operated a lime kiln and sold all of his As a result of the findings of the 40 cents per bushel when harvested in shell. He said the rest of the canneries sessions, the state legislature estab- two years (News and Courier 1905b). discard their shell and consider them lished the Board of Fisheries (S.C. Mr. Varn of Varn and Byrd and worthless. He was one of the earliest Legislature 1906). This legislation Company of Yonges Island said they to warn against polluting the waters provided for the hiring of four inspec- employed 100 Poles and they were ex- (News and Courier 1905b) (Figure 14). tors to enforce regulations set forth. cellent workers (Island Packet 1982a) The Charleston Canning Company Their pay was not to exceed 50 dollars (Figures 11; 12; 13). He said that the was one of the industries attracted per month. The Board of Fisheries Yonges Island plant and another they by the Charleston and West Indies was authorized to lease land below the owned at Bluffton had used over Exposition (Chibbaro 2001). This was high water mark for the propagation 250,000 bushels of oysters and had a small scale worlds fair designed to of shellfish, terrapin or fish providing packed 6,938,160 ounces of meats promote the area, which had not yet re- this area did not have commercially for a yield of 27 ounces per bushel in covered from the Civil War. The city harvestable quantities already on it. the 1904-1905 season (Kohn 1905c). Mr. William Fait, manager of the Charleston Canning Company, was

Figure 13. Containers that were hung on the side of steamed oyster cars to be filled by the shuckers with the oyster meats. (W. Figure 14. The Charleston Canning Company dock with sloops along side in the early Collins collection) 1900s (Charleston Museum photo).

10 11 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

The rent was 10 cents per acre for the to state citizens. The Sinking Fund canneries going in South Carolina. first five years and then 25 cents per Commission was prohibited from fur- The greatest years for the canner- acre for up to 15 more years. Shell ther granting of franchises for shellfish ies were between the 1900s and 1930s. planting of 10 to 100 bushes per propagation, although this continued At least 3,500 people were employed acre, determined by the Board, was up until the 1950s (S.C. Legislature in the canning industry in the 1920s required within two years after ob- 1924; S.C. State Board of Fisheries (Maggioni and Burrell 1982; S.C. Bd. taining a lease. A three-inch cull was 1928). These two legislative acts led Fish. 1924) (Table 1). Oysters were set forth with the exception of attached to many court actions because of con- steamed by at least 25 factories at one small oysters that would be destroyed flicting jurisdiction between the Board time or another in 17 locations: Little if removed. This law also exempted of Fisheries and the Sinking Fund River, Litchfield Plantation, Waverly “coon” or “bunch” oysters. A bushel Commission. The board would lease Mills, McClellanville (2), Awendaw, of oysters was specified as a tub 18 land and the other group would grant it Mount Pleasant (3), Charleston, Yonges inches in diameter at the top, 16 inches to another party (Baldwin 1972; Miller Island, Ladies Island (3), Jenkins across the bottom and 21 inches from 1977; News and Courier 1905d). Island, Sam’s Point, Tom Fripp, Port top to bottom. This was roughly 2.24 In 1905 oysters were valued at 9 Royal, Bluffton (3), Ridgeland (2), U.S. bushels (Figure 15). Justification to 20 cents for cluster oysters and up Hilton Head and Daufuskie Island for this large size in relation to a U.S. to 60 cents for subtidal stock of singles (Bailey, pers. comm. 2000; Berry bushel was that cluster oysters take per bushel (Kohn 1905b,c). South 1959; Burn 1991; Lewis 1988; Kohn up more volume in the shell for the Carolina ranked sixth in number of a,b,c,d; G. Maggioni 1995; Missroon same amount of meat yield than single oyster canneries in the United States in 1977a,b; McCracken, pers. comm. oysters found in Northern states. 1900 and second in 1905, and the value 2000; Morgan, pers. comm. 2001; Only citizens of the state could of canned oysters was third among the News and Courier 1914; S.C. State harvest oysters. The act also stipulat- states in 1905 (Fishing Gazette 1907). Gazette 1910; C. and S. Toomer, pers. ed that no oysters in the shell could be In 1910, over five million cans were comm. 2000; W. Toomer, pers. comm. carried out of state in any boat, vessel produced and valued at five cents per 2000; Woody and Johnson 1998; U.S. or any other means of transportation. can (Report of Commissioner 1914). Army Corps of Engr. 1913). Possibly This provision was to prevent Georgia In 1908, 1,062,840 South Carolina another operated in Georgetown (S.C. bushels of oysters were recorded as State Bd. of Fish. 1928; S.C. Dept. harvested in South Carolina (Fisheries Agric., et al. 1927; Tarbox, pers. Statistics of the U.S. 1967) (Figure comm. 2000). All canneries were 8). This figure is suspect because it located on the waterfront, making it is not known how data were gathered easy to unload oysters for processing or computed. The poundage reported and to load empty shell for planting. was double that of any other annual es- Churchill (1920) reported five canner- timate (Fishery Statistics of U.S. 1968). ies at Charleston and six at Beaufort The South Carolina State Gazette and and two or three elsewhere. In 1927, Business Directory 1905-1910 (1910) sixteen were present with only eleven Figure 15. An official South Carolina listed eight canneries at this time, but in operation in the state (S.C. State Bd. bushel basket in use from 1906 to 1924 at least two more were active but not of Fisheries 1927) (Figures 16; 17). on right, beside the one adopted in 1986. included in this report. Three of the L.P. Maggioni had migrated from The earlier one was over twice the size of canneries employed Polish seasonal Italy and settled in Savannah, Georgia. a U.S. bushel and the newer one equals workers who came from the Baltimore From a small beginning selling knick- the U.S. bushel (property of R.E. Ashley, Jr.). area (Maggioni at Port Royal, Varn knacks, he branched out into seafood and Byrd at Bluffton and Yonges and in 1883 opened a raw shuck oyster Island) (Kohn 1905a,c; N. McCracken, house on Daufauskie Island (Burn and North Carolina canners from us- pers. comm. 2001). Many of the work- 1991; Savannah Morning News 1940; ing South Carolina resources needed ers bought their children along and F. Smith 1982). In 1893, he started one by South Carolina canneries (Beaufort some as young as seven years old of the first oyster cannerys in South Gazette 1903a; Galtsoff 1943; Oemler worked in the canneries (Hine 1986). Carolina at the same location (Burn 1894). Later legislation increased the Probably many had experience work- 1991; Lane 1977; G. Maggioni, pers. area one person or corporation could ing in canneries in Maryland and this comm. 1969-2001; F. Smith 1982). lease to 500 acres and limited this knowledge was useful at first in getting His company holdings grew to include

12 13 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

from harvest sites to the canneries. Until the 1920s, most movement from beds to the docks was by sail or oar power, thus limiting travel (Fleetwood 1995; Lane 1977; G. Maggioni, pers. comm. 1970; Von Harten 1999c, 2000a) (Figures 18; 19; 20). The Ladies Island factory employed at least 300 people and in some years, all of the Maggioni canneries together processed 700,000 bushels of oysters from which it packed 300,000 cases of 24 - 5 ounce cans of oysters (Lane 1977). Tomatoes and okra were processed in the sum- Figure 16. The Lowden Cannery at Bluffton in the 1930s (photo courtesy of Arthur mer, keeping the labor force intact Hancock). (Beaufort Gazette 1933a; Lane 1977). Shells were processed and sold as agricultural lime and chicken scratch. In an interview, Mrs. Mattie Mitchell recalled her nearly 50 years working for the Maggionis. She worked at both the Ladies Island and Yonges Island plants, as did her mother. She lived in housing provided by the company during the week and went home on weekends. She shucked steamed oysters and also raw oysters for the factory. A better meat yielding oyster was specially gathered for the raw shucking operations. Her production was 35-50 pounds of steamed meats or five or six gallons of raw shucked per day. She also worked canning okra and tomatoes in the summer. When the Ladies Island factory was upgraded to the shaker and brine system, she inspected oysters coming out of the brine tank for foreign Figure 17. The Shelmore Cannery at Awendaw in the 1930s (Magwood family photo). material and noted that the quality was much poorer (many small oysters) at least six canneries in the state and Carolina canneries in the late teens than the hand shucked ones (Mitchell, others in Georgia and Florida. Some and 1920s. They were located at pers. comm. 2001). This was probably of the canneries also canned shrimp, Ladies Island, Yonges Island, Jenkins true because hand shuckers would and vegetables as well as oysters Island, Sam’s Point, Tom Fripp and not bother with very small oysters (Lane 1977; G. Maggioni, pers. at other times at Daufuskie Island, but the machine did not discriminate comm. 1970; F. Smith 1982). At one Bluffton and Port Royal (Lane 1977; G. and also broke the meats up by the time, the company owned 137 shrimp Maggioni, pers. comm 1970; Savannah tumbling action of the shaker. Shell boats, and several finfish trawlers and Morning News 1940; F. Smith 1982). from the hand shucking operation employed 2,500 people (Lane 1977, The canneries had to be located in were run through the steaming pro- Savannah Morning News 1940). several communities because of the cess and 12 to 15 ounces of meats per Maggioni operated five South difficulty of transporting oysters bushel were recovered (Pringle 1964).

12 13 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Figure 18. The Maggioni Ladies Island Cannery, circa 1970 Figure 19. Two oyster sloops towing bateaux in the May River, (Keith photo). circa 1920s (photo Bluffton Preservation Society, Inc.).

to tow one or two 16 to 18 ft bateaux to the beds. Oysters were loaded onto the bateau and then on to the mother Figure 20. The sloop, Louis Hunter, boat, which held about 200 bushels. loaded with oysters Pickers from smaller canneries often on the way to the rowed to and from the oyster beds Maggioni Cannery (G. Maggioni, pers. comm. 1972). in the 1930s. She The sailboats were sloop rigged was built at Bluffton of two types: a smaller one of under in 1904 (Maggioni 35 feet, crossed planked, flat bot- family photo). tomed and shaped much like a bateau; a larger one, up to 50 feet, called “diamond built”, whose bottom was planked fore and aft. Oysters were first loaded in the holds of these boats When motorized vessels and marketed oysters canned by other but for sanitary reasons after 1905 trucking came into common use, the plants in South Carolina under his la- loads were restricted to the decks. To outlying canneries were closed (G. bel (G. Maggioni, pers. comm. 1970). maximize their carrying capacity, the Maggioni, pers. comm 1969-2000). Oysters used by the canning facto- vessels were extremely wide beamed Several plants were closed after being ries were gathered by Blacks and Poles (Fleetwood 1995). In the summer, the damaged by hurricanes rather than re- from vast intertidal beds lining many larger sailboats were taken into fresh- built (Huckaby 1981; McCracken, pers. creeks and bays from Little River waters and the flat-bottomed sailboats comm. 2001; G. Maggioni, pers . comm south to the Georgia line. In the early and bateaux hauled out on dry land to 1970; F. Smith 1982) (See Appendix). years, it was customary for sailboats avoid shipworm damage. The bateaux Canned oysters were shipped all over the United States and Europe and for many years the Maggioni Company was the largest producer in the world of “cove” oysters, as canned oysters Figure 21. Small were called (Savannah Morning sailboats ebbed out at the Club Bridge News 1940). At first, the canned Creek factory of oysters were sold under the labels of L.P. Maggioni in the Baltimore, Maryland companies but early 1900s. Note soon the company introduced its own the size of the shell brand, “Daufauski”, and it became pile (Brown and known worldwide. Maggioni also Barton photo).

14 15 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Figure 22. The larg- many pickers thought they held more. er “diamond built” They were paid for ten bushels (“Baby oyster sloops tied Ray” Jenkins 1998). The pickers were up at the Maggioni right because inside measurements of Ladies Island fac- these cars were 45,485 cubic inches tory (Maggioni fam- and held 11.2 1924 S.C. bushels or 9.52 ily photo). 1906 S.C. bushels if filled just to the brim, which never occurred. They were always heaped high which would mean two or three more bushels to the car (Jackson, pers. comm. 2000; Lunz 1950). The canneries were able to take advantage of the pickers because they lacked any alternate employment. had to be re-caulked before launch- ers sometimes worked by moonlight. They could underestimate on quantity ing for the oyster harvest season They slept and ate on the towboat. and accept only a good quality oyster (Maggioni 1995) (Figures 21; 22). When the oysters reached the factory, (Brownlee Sr., pers. comm. 2001; G. Starting in the late teens and early they were unloaded and placed into Maggioni, pers. comm. 1975). The 1920s, motorboats began to supple- cars on rails and rolled into steam steam chests held three cars. Steam ment the sailing vessels and by the chests (Figures 24; 25). The pickers was injected under pressure, and the 1940s nearly all the sailboats were were paid by quality and quantity oysters held for 10 to 12 minutes or phased out. (Fleetwood 1995; G. (Brownlee, Sr., pers. comm. 2000). long enough to open the shells. The Maggioni, pers. comm. 1970). When These cars when “full” and “heaped cars were then rolled out the other end motor boats were used, it was common up” were said to hold ten bushels, but of the steam chests and women stood practice to tow 10 to 15 bateaux at a time, cutting them loose one at a time, Figure 24. “Ten” at designated harvesting sites (Jackson, bushel cars loaded pers. comm. 2000) (Figure 23). with the oysters The bateau carried about 40-70 being pushed into bushels of oysters and they were the steam chests. of heavy construction to withstand Note that each was heaped up to increase capacity (Maggioni family photo).

Figure 23. A string of bateaux in tow by a gasoline powered towboat in the 1930s (Maggioni family photo).

the rough oyster shells and the Figure 25. Steam frequent beaching on shelly shoals chests used to hold (Sam Bennett, pers. comm. 2001; G. the oysters, were heated under pres- Maggioni 1995). The pickers often sure until they gaped left the factories on Monday and did open so that the not return until the end of the week meats were readily (Sam Bennett, pers. comm. 2001; removed by shuck- Jackson, pers. comm. 2000; Gadsden, ers, circa mid 1930s pers. comm. 2000; G. Maggioni, pers. (Maggioni family comm. 1970; Martin 1932). The pick- photo).

14 15 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina on each side of the car, and picked the rupted by high tides or stormy weather oyster meats from the gaped shells (Brownlee, Sr. per. comm. 2000). and dropped them into metal contain- Housing for the workers was ers hanging over the side of the cars provided at some canneries. The (Bailey, pers. comm. 1999; Brownlee, Polish workers stayed there for the Sr., pers. comm. 2000; Jackson, entire oyster season (Beaufort Gazette pers. comm. 2000; G. Maggioni, 1912a,b). A dormitory-like building pers. comm. 1970) (See Figures 11; containing 12 to 15 rooms was built 12; 13). The women were paid by by Maggioni on Daufuskie Island weight of meat picked (Bailey, pers. for the migrants. This was called comm. 1999; Brownlee, Sr. , pers. the “Hickey” house (Burn 1991). comm. 2000; Jackson, pers. comm. “Hickey” was the name given the 2000). Six women could shuck a Polish seasonal workers (McCracken, carload in 20 to 30 minutes. Each pers. comm. 2001). Blacks stayed shucker produced 30 to 50 pounds from Monday through Friday and of meat per day (Bailey, pers. comm. returned home for the weekends 2001; G. Maggioni, pers. comm. (Brownlee, Sr., pers. comm. 2000; 1970; M. Mitchell, pers. comm. 2001). Hine 1986; M. Mitchell, pers. comm. G.R. Lunz (1950) computed yield 2001; Pinckney, pers. comm. 2001). Figure 26. Tokens used by both canneries per bushel of shell stock by steam and shucking houses to pay workers for In June, after the oyster canning canneries over a 23-year period. It piecework (W. Collins collection). season, the pickers were hired to plant ranged from 28 to 41 oz per S.C. shell on the beds to serve as cultch for bushel measured by the so-called the five and eleven ounce cans became the next crop of oysters (G. Maggioni, “10 bushel” steaming car. Measured the most popular sizes (Brownlee, Sr., pers. comm. 1990; Sam Bennett, in U.S. bushels increased by the true pers. comm. 2001). The canneries pers. comm. 2000). The shells had measure of the steaming cars this processed oysters from September to accumulated in huge piles alongside would reduce these figures to no more May, the season set by the State Board the canneries and they were loaded than 13 and 19.5 ounces respectively. of Fisheries (S.C. State Bd. Fisheries into bateaux and towed to the beds, Both pickers and shuckers were 1937). In some years, an extension first by sail and then later in the1920s paid with tokens by the canneries. was granted into June to take advan- by powerboats (Sam Bennett, pers. Some were for a volume of meat in tage of a good market or good yielding comm. 2000; Lowther, pers. comm. one or two gallons, or by monetary oysters (S.C. State Bd. Fisheries 1937). 2000) (Figure 27). Barges or light- value, 10 cents - 25 cents, etc. These The workweek was from Monday ers also came into play, as upwards were negotiable at company stores through Friday or Saturday, with of 1,000 bushels of shell could be or at other local establishments and Friday’s and Saturday’s harvest pro- moved at one time and motor powered could be cashed in, usually on Friday cessed on Monday. A day was missed tow vessels were obtained (Lowther, (Bailey, pers. comm. 2000; Collins, only when the oyster supply was inter- pers. comm. 2000; G. Maggioni, pers. comm. 1999; G. Maggioni, pers. comm. 1970) (Figure 26). The cooked oyster meats were washed and placed in tin plated metal cans. After brine was added to the filled cans, the cans were sealed and loaded into a large metal basket, which was placed in a retort and Figure 27. Oysters heated under pressure to sterilize being shoveled the contents. After cooling, the cans onto intertidal beds to provide setting were labeled and placed in cases for surface for a new shipment (Brownlee, Sr., pers. comm. crop. A 1930s photo 2000; Jackson, pers. comm. 2000). At taken in Lacy Creek first, most of the oysters were packed (Maggioni family in one and two pound cans, but later photo).

16 17 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

pers. comm. 1970; 1995) (Figure 28). people survived by eking out a living such as vegetables, finfish, shrimp, The shuckers were often employed in hunting, fishing, and gardening for and condiments (Beaufort Gazette the off-season to can vegetables and their own consumption and sometimes 1933a; Maggioni 1995; Hawkins shrimp at the canneries (G. Maggioni, sale for a little cash money (Murray 1993; Jackson, pers. comm. 2000; pers. comm. 1970; Von Harten 1999a). 1933; S.C. Dept. of Agric., et al. 1908). Savannah Morning News 1940). Several canning factories also incorporated shell crushers in their operations (News and Courier 1905b; Fishing Industries of U.S. 1931; G. Maggioni, pers. comm. 1972; McCracken, pers. comm. 2001). The products were agriculture lime and poultry feed supplement. Mr. Fait of the Charleston Canning Company chided his counterparts in the oyster industry for wasting this valuable resource (oyster shell) (Charleston News and Courier 1905b). At least four shell mills operated in South Carolina in the 1930s (Fishing Gazette 1935; 1936; G. Maggioni, pers. comm. 1972). None operated after World War II (G. Figure 28. Lighter loads of oysters lying off the cannery dock. Note the deck of the light- Maggioni, pers. comm. 1972). Further ers folded up to allow loading in the hold, but mostly they were unfolded to allow easier off loading (T. Boozer per comm. 2000) (S.C. State Board of Fisheries photo). use of shell was for septic tank drain fields and as mentioned before, roads (G. Maggioni, pers. comm. 1972). Nearly every operation of the ear- The canneries were for many areas By far, the greatest use of shell ly canning industry was carried out by the only industry present especially was to provide substrate or cultch for hand labor. In many cases, the pick- during the great depression of the oyster settlement and this practice ers even depended on tidal currents 1930s (Maggioni and Burrell 1982). has been mandated by law since 1906 and oar power to go to and from the The oyster resource was abundant (S.C. Legislature 1906) (Figure 30). beds (Maggioni 1995). Oysters were and could be processed cheaply to In some years, as much as unloaded at the dock and loaded into compete with other canned goods 1,546,354 bushels of shell were record- the cars by hand to be steamed. Meats and demand was good because ed as planted by oyster factories and were removed from the steamed oys- canned oysters could be provided to shucking houses (S.C. State Bd. Fish. ters by the shuckers and the cans filled distant markets by railroad before 1942). These figures may be an exag- and sealed all by hand. Shells were efficient refrigeration was available geration, as often the amount of shell shoveled into wheelbarrows and rolled (MacKenzie 1996). Many canneries planted exceeded by a great margin to the shell pile again with no mechani- made good use of their equipment the amount of oysters harvested. The cal assistance (Figure 29). Shells were and available labor by diversifying Board of Fisheries lacked enough per- shoveled into bateaux for planting and using them to process other items sonnel at times to monitor planting, and and shoveled back out on the beds. So the industry required a lot of labor and they got it at a very low cost. This was so because the south was slow to recover from the reconstruc- tion period after the War Between the States, and few jobs were available for a large segment of the population. For many of the low country blacks, Figure 29. Loading land farming was the only means of oyster shell by livelihood before the oyster canner- wheelbarrow (Keith photo). ies began operations. Many of these

16 17 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Champion factory near Pawleys Island said he had met with more success in spreading shells above the low tide mark. He said this method produces “raccoon” oysters equal to wild stock in two years. He felt this supplied his needs and did nothing to deplete the resource (News and Courier 1905c). Two methods of intertidal planting were employed by the Shelmore cannery at Awendaw. In one case, shells were shoveled from bateaux as they drifted with the late flood tide on the edge of the creeks so that they ended up in the intertidal zone. This type of planting was carried out on the same beds as needed year after year. The other method involved placing eight or ten bateaux loaded with oyster shell in Figure 30. Planting requirements from 1922 to 2000. a line and anchoring them and the tow vessel. The oysters were then shoveled they had to accept figures submitted processing operation. The Shelmore off on one side of the boats to create by leaseholders (Howell, pers. comm. Cannery at Awendaw used steam pow- a ridge of shell. The water depth was 2001; Lunz letter) (See Apendix). er and Magionni used electric power such that the top of the ridge ebbed out The canneries gradually mecha- to operate conveyors, mechanical cap- at low water. These created beds were nized, first to increase profits by pers and labelers to help reduce hand never re-shelled and grew out from the saving on labor cost and then to labor (Jackson, pers. comm. 2000; center to form vast new oyster reefs. compensate for labor lost to other Brownlee, Sr., pers. comm. 2000). They could be harvested after two to jobs as the economy improved dur- Cultivation of oysters was most three years and any year thereafter ing and after World War II. Federal rudimentary. It usually consisted (Jackson, pers. comm. 2000). Mr. H.K. programs to ease the hardships of the of planting shell from oysters pro- Leiding, the owner, also described depression had reduced the number of cessed at the cannery or shuck- how he put out cultch, caught spat employees working in the industry, ing house the past season. Some and transplanted the seed to subtidal and the wage and hour law made growers, however, transplanted areas in the Awendaw-McClellanville some types of labor too expensive seed oysters for grow out on their area on his Shelmore leases. He was for the canneries, while adding many leases (Galtsoff and Prytherch 1927). able to harvest the oysters in two people to the welfare rolls (Burn Mr. J.G. Murray described his years (News and Courier 1931a,b). 1991; Jackson, pers. comm. 2000). subtidal cultivation in 1905. He moved Mr. C.A. Magwood and his Motor vessels were increasingly subtidal seed from near Edisto Inlet to father before him produced well- employed to bring the pickers in their beds in St. Pierre Creek. He planted shaped single oysters by breaking bateaux to the harvesting grounds and about 500 bushels per acre at first and up clusters and replanting subtidally to carry shell for planting as cultch (G. then harvested 100 bushels per acre in selected creeks. The largest ones Maggioni, pers. comm. 1970; 1982; the first year, 300 the second and 300 were planted near creek mouths, the 1995). The pickers, when towed by to 400 bushels every year there after. next size further up and the smallest motor vessels, made daily trips instead He reseeded his beds each year. His at the uppermost point. The lower of staying out all week. When barges oysters were sold for 60 cents per creek oysters were harvested the next came into use to move larger loads to bushel as opposed to the 8 to 20 cents year, the next group the following year and from the oyster grounds, water per bushel the canners paid. He was and the upper creek ones the third cannons supplanted shovels as a means of the opinion that the present rate and year (C.A. Magwood Jr., per. comm to off-load shell on to the beds (Figure methods of harvesting by the canners 2000; Thames, pers. comm. 2001). A 31). Conveyors gradually came into would soon deplete the resource (Kohn similar method was practiced by the play to move the oysters through the 1905c). Mr. L.C. Lachicotte of the Truesdales (News and Courier 1905b).

18 19 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

The state required leaseholders to sort of smell, clinging to the end of were wrong, the opposite happened. plant shell on their leases to provide one’s nose for miles after the oyster Moon phase also affected tides and young oysters a setting place. Over factory is left behind” (Martin 1932). the harvest quantities. After a period the years the amount of shell varied The pickers were often Polish of cold weather, the mud appeared to and substrates such as seed oysters, men at several canning plants around lose some of its moisture, firm up and gravel, cement coated cardboard, 1900 to about 1920 (News and Courier pull away from oysters embedded in bamboo stakes or hog wire were al- 1905c; Kohn 1905a,c; G. Maggioni, it and allow harvest to continue on lowed as substitutes (S.C. State Board pers. comm. 1982; McCracken, pers. beds that had looked to be completely of Fish 1931, 1938, 1947; S.C. Wild. comm. 2001). Blacks also harvested harvested (Bailey, pers. comm. 2000; Mar. Res. Comm. 1986) (Figure 30). oysters then and on to the present L. Toomer, pers. comm. 2000). Canneries were often located (Collins, pers. comm. 2000; Frasier, Old time pickers such as near productive grounds, but with pers. comm. 2001; Palmer, pers. comm. Nathaniel Brown recalled the rigors the advent of both motor vessels and 2000). Skill is required to gather the of harvesting for the canneries. He trucks, it became more economical quality oyster needed for a particular worked for Maggioni from 1929 to to centralize operations and close purpose i.e. for shucking, for bag or for 1935. They went out on Monday and outlying facilities. In the early days, roasting (Collins, pers. comm. 2000; returned Friday, loading the bateau sanitation around the outsides of can- Frasier, pers. comm. 2000; Parker and afterward the sailboat. They neries was not too important so it also 1995). Quality needed also governed slept on the sailboat and sometimes helped that these establishments were the amount a picker could produce in a worked into the night during full sited in remote settings. A reporter day (Sam Bennett, pers. comm. 2000; moons. Low tides were important to for the Charleston News and Courier Collins, pers. comm. 2000; Frasier, expose oysters. Strong tidal currents wrote in 1932 that, “for oystering pers. comm. 2000). A good picker helped the sailboat along when going however profitable, and however sa- could gather 5-7 bushels of singles, to and from the factory. The wind vory the product, it is not a process to 12 bushels of doubles or triples; 30 usually did not blow hard enough to appeal to the fastidious. As a matter bushels for shucking or roasting and move the sailboats against the tide of fact, only the strong of the human upwards of 75 bushels for steaming. so unless the tide was favorable, they race can ever persuade themselves High tides or sparse oysters on the did not go anywhere. It was always beyond the last hundred yards to an beds limited production. If the wind best to reach the factory at near high oyster factory. There is a smell that and tides were favorable, the beds tide so that it was easier to shovel reeks to heaven and is about as effec- were exposed longer and the harvest the oysters onto the dock. Brown tive as a spiked wall. It is a tenacious period was longer. If tides and wind was paid 10 cents per bushel for his catch. (N. Brown, pers. comm. 2000). Many of the present day pickers had early experience working for the canneries, but now gather oysters for shucking and bag sales. One, Anthony Frasier, has in recent years worked for the various operations of the Bluffton shucking house, Lemon Island Marina and with his uncle and other members of his family. He has five brothers who also are involved with oysters. He learned harvesting from his brothers and from the first liked it. When in school at 12 years old, he went with his uncle and brother, Frank, to pick. His mother and grandmother worked at the shucking houses around Bluffton. Anthony said he harvested 50 to 60 bushels per day when five pickers Figure 31. Washing shell onto intertidal beds with a water cannon in 1952 (Lunz worked together for Maggioni. When Collection, Charleston Museum). he worked alone, he would catch as

18 19 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina many as 100 bushels since it was not to to be recalled by older citizens (Burns be shared with the rest. At this time, 1991; Bush, pers. comm. 2000; Graves, oysters were not graded. The oysters pers. comm. 2001; Keith and Gracy were loaded into trucks and measured 1972). The State Fishery Board first by the inside of the truck body. He listed shucking sheds in 1925. The received 65 cents per bushel at first annual report showed 25 to be pres- and later on $1.25. When picking for ent: three in Charleston County, six in a bag or shucking house, he would get Georgetown and 16 in Beaufort (S.C. 50 to 60 bushels. He culled with a claw Board of Fisheries 1926) (Table 1). hammer. By selective picking and During World War I, oyster skillful use of the hammer, many clus- production fell because of labor ters were broken down into singles and shortage and in 1918 only 270,429 doubles. Interestingly, when Anthony bushels were harvested (Fishery had a large order, he worked alone, but Figure 32. Sam Bennett, a long time Statistics U.S. 1965) (Figure 8). By when he needed only 20 to 25 bushels, Bluffton oyster picker, now retired 1919, the industry had recovered and he took someone with him. He did not (Burrell photo). 13 or 14 canneries were in operation say why, but maybe it was for com- (Churchill 1920). By then, nearly pany when he did not have to work followed their fathers into the river, all the Polish workers had been sup- as fast (Frasier, pers. comm. 2001). but his father farmed and raised cows planted by blacks (G. Maggioni 1972). Joseph Young worked for the (Sam Bennett, pers. comm. 2001). State legislation in 1924 reaf- Thad Bailey’s from 1928 to 1999. The mosquito fleet fishermen con- firmed the prohibition of shipping He unloaded oysters every day. tinued to supply hucksters with sea- bulk loads of shell stock oysters out of Sometimes he walked up marsh food for them to peddle on the streets state but added clams to this stipula- creeks and gutters and piled oysters of Charleston from the early 1800s to tion. The shell planting requirement on the marsh edge and would go back well up into the 1900s. They gath- was increased to 100 bushels per acre and get them with his boat when the ered oysters in winter when weather and 1/3 of shells produced by the tide rose. He said the only jobs avail- curtailed their trips to sea (Bishop, canneries were to be planted in areas able were in the oysters business. et al. 1994; Fleetwood 1995; News designated by the Board of Fisheries His wife had also shucked for the and Courier 1888) (Figures 33; 34). (S.C. Legislature 1924). A person or Bailey’s (J. Young, pers. comm. 2001). Records of raw shucking estab- his employee was permitted to gather Sam Bennett related that he lishments were scanty in the early two bushels of oysters per day from began picking for the Ladies Island 1900s, mostly only those in the lower any oyster ground. The size of a South Cannery as a teenager. He recalled part of the state persisted long enough Carolina bushel was defined as a cylin- picking at night by moonlight and torchlight. They loaded the bateaux with 40 to 50 bushels and the sailboats with 150 to 200 bushels. The loaded bateaux and sailboats returned to the factory to be paid by the number of steaming cars they filled at ten bushels per car (Figure 32). Sam also worked with the raw shuck houses of “Junior” Graves, the Bluffton Co-Op, the Reeves, and finally Larry Toomer. Bennett supplied his own shuckers. One of whom was his wife. He paid his crew by the number of gallons his oysters shucked Figure 33. Mosquito out. At the end of his working days, fleet fishermen he owned his own boat and outboard gathering oysters motor and harvested oysters, which he (Charleston Museum sold by the bag. He said most pickers photo, circa 1900).

20 21 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

(S.C. State Board of Fisheries 1927). The Legislature in 1927 vested in the Board of Fisheries complete control of management and leasing of oyster lands. This cleared up some lingering problems with conflicting laws. Lease terms were reduced to five years and a rent scale of 50 cents the first year, one dollar the second, and two dollars the third and five dollars per acre thereafter was adopted by the board (S.C. State Board of Fisheries 1928) (See Appendix). In 1930, the Board of Fisheries reported South Carolina produced 20% of all U.S. canned oysters (S.C. State Board of Fisheries 1930) but the oyster industry was beginning to feel the ef- Figure 34. A young huckster offering oysters in the shell to Charleston residents in 1930s fects of the “Great Depression” of the (Lunz Collection, Charleston Museum). 1930s. In 1931, prices of the same size cans of oysters dropped from $1.25 to der 18 inches in diameter and 16 inches (S.C. Board of Fisheries 1926). A 62 1⁄2 cents per dozen cans. Bulls Bay high or 4071.5 cubic inches volume. certificate of good health was required oysters sold for 35 to 45 cents per quart This contrasted with 2150.4 cu inches of shuckers in raw shuck houses. As a retail as compared to Virginia quarts in a U.S. bushel, but smaller by 700 cu result of recommendations of a 1925 at 55 cents (News and Courier 1933). inches than the South Carolina bushel conference on shellfish sanitation in The Board of Fisheries was very con- adopted in 1906 (Figure 35). Sixteen Washington, D.C., which included cerned about the fall in prices because canneries were present in 1926 and 31 federal and state agencies and industry thousands of people were employed shucking houses. Beginning in 1925, members all agreed to meet standards in the industry and it kept many out licenses for operating a cannery or that would insure a safe product. of the bread lines. The largest num- shucking house were required at a cost These included the requirement that ber of shucking houses, 44, were of one dollar per facility (S.C. Board the picker and dealer keep a record licensed in 1931 along with six can- of Fisheries 1925; 1926). Only 11 of of the source by harvest areas of all neries (S.C. State Board of Fisheries the 16 canners present were operating oysters they handled (See Appendix). 1931;1932; Wilson 1932) (Table 1). at this time and all had much of their States would enforce these regulations The Board of Fisheries reduced inventory unsold because of the oyster with federal oversight. This program rents on leases to the first year’s typhoid scare in the New York area called the National Shellfish Sanitation and poor economic conditions. The Program (NSSP) has continued State Board of Health cooperated with revisions over the years (Frost with the Board of Fisheries and began 1925; U.S. Dept Health and Human inspecting shucking sheds to insure Services 1990). Earlier sanitation that all South Carolina oysters were regulations may have been required handled in a sanitary manner. The of seafood markets (See Appendix). Board of Fisheries would not issue a At this time (1924), oysters cost license until the shed had been passed. the factories 20 cents per bushel to The canneries did not come under the have them gathered (S.C. Board of jurisdiction of the Health Department Fisheries 1925). The Board of Fisheries since it was a cooked canned product. estimated that in the mid 1920s Figure 35. An official South Carolina Further, the U.S. Bureau of Fisheries nearly twice as many oysters were raw measuring container used between 1924 sent ten men to survey oyster grounds shucked than produced by licensed and 1986 alongside the modern U.S. to ascertain which grounds could shucking houses (75,000 total instead bushel basket adopted in 1986 (Burrell be used by the raw shucking trade of 44,199 gallons recorded in 1926) photo).

20 21 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina charges to help the canners and shuck- did not make sense because it took production dropped because of labor ing houses retain their grounds (S.C. two bushels to produce 60 ounces of shortages even though fishing was State Board of Fisheries 1935). All canned oysters or a gallon of shucked. considered a critical industry and rentals became one dollar per acre in This made the tax rate for a bushel deferments from military service 1936 (S.C. State Board of Fisheries used for these purposes one cent and could be obtained (S.C. State Board 1936) (See Appendix). The Board also two and a half cents respectively while of Fisheries 1943; 1945) (Figure 8). recorded all leases on county books on unprocessed bushel it was ten and began to enforce payment of rent cents. (Lunz 1951). These taxes in the for the first time (S.C. State Board form of stamps were removed in 1959 1945 TO THE PRESENT of Fisheries 1931) (See Appendix). (S.C. Wildlife Resources Dept 1960). (2002) The Intracoastal Waterway was Experiments to increase pro- Shortly after World War II, many completed in 1935. This created a duction of oysters were carried out people returned to jobs as oyster pick- channel through coastal Carolina and using Federal funds during 1938 to ers and as workers in oyster canneries permanently altered flow in many wa- 1940. Brush was used as cultch with and shucking houses, and soon oyster ter systems. Some biologists and oys- some success (R.O. Smith 1949). production rose to nearly what it was termen felt that this had a profound del- Shell stock from polluted waters from 1900 to 1945. A system of me- eterious effect on subtidal oyster grow- was moved to clean areas under chanically removing steamed oyster ing areas (Donehue 1959; S. Flowers, the supervision of the Board (S.C. meats from shells was developed, Sr., pers. comm. 1972; S. Flowers, State Board of Fisheries 1941). which eliminated the numbers of plant Jr., pers. comm. 2000; Maggioni The effects of the depression also workers employed, but efforts to mech- and Burrell 1982; S.C. State Board curtailed investments in the oyster anize hand harvesting of oysters were of Fisheries 1941) (See Appendix). canning business. Black Island lying unsuccessful. Oyster roasts became A federal program established the off James Island most commonly popular and one annually attracted Civilian Conservation Corps in 1933 to known as Block Island was purchased several thousand people. Increasing provide jobs for those out of work dur- by a canning company to set up an numbers of oysters were hand- ing the depression. One of the major oyster factory in the 1920s, but due shucked and sold fresh in containers projects was to plant many fast grow- to the poor economy of the late 30s it of various sizes, but the canneries ing pine trees in areas that once had was sold for a pittance to a Charleston produced most of the oysters until hardwoods. This probably increased man, Mr. Joe Welch. He did not want they closed in the 1980s. The closures the rate of drainage and this could have the island but to keep good relations were forced by less market demand also adversely affected the oysters with the firm he served as a broker for canned oysters, labor costs rising, (Langley 2001; Maggioni and Burrell for he made a ridiculous offer and was and cheap oysters from Asia supplying 1982.) Paper mills began to locate on taken up on it. He eventually sold it many markets. Thereafter, all oysters estuaries and their effluent added to to the Ohlandt family and now the were hand shucked or sold as shell- the environment was thought to affect island is the property of John Ohlandt stock. After the late 1960s, commer- oysters (Maggioni and Burrell 1982). (Ohlandt, pers. comm. 2002). Federal cial oyster harvests fell, labor supply Several times in the early 1930s programs to address hardships of the dwindled and oyster stock declined, the Fisheries Board asked for an depression began to lure many to their but recreational harvesting became increase in license fee for canner- unemployment rolls from the oyster in- more important. In the 2000s, com- ies and shucking houses from one dustry in the late thirties (Burn 1991). mercial oyster production has been dollar to five dollars per annum and In the early 1940s, leases were relatively small and nearly all oysters that barges or lighters used in the for a term of five years at $1.00 per are shipped unshucked to markets. oyster trade be required to buy a year. Shell necessary to meet plant- The Bears Bluff Laboratories on license (S.C. State Board of Fisheries ing obligations of 100 bushels per Wadmalaw Island was incorporated 1931; 1932; 1935). This did not pass. acre were getting harder to come by in 1946. Its first charge was to initi- Beginning in 1924, an impost even though 1,340,000 bushels were ate a program of scientific research tax of two cents per 60 ounces of planted in 1941 (S.C. State Board of in oyster cultivation. G. Robert Lunz canned oysters, five cents per gallon Fisheries 1941). A gallon of fresh was its director. At this time, South of shucked oysters and ten cents per shucked oysters was bringing 90 cents Carolina had no fisheries research bushel of oysters in the shell was per gallon delivered from Ridgeland to program. The Board of Fisheries levied by the State (S.C. Board of Columbia (Bailey, pers. comm. 2000). however by law had the authority Fisheries 1924) (See Appendix). This During World War II oyster

22 23 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

……. “to expend such sums as they in 1952 (S.C. Legislature 1952). At the Maggioni’s Ladies Island may deem advisable, not to exceed The first recorded report of an plant, the horizontal steam retorts $100 per annum in the experimental oyster kill in South Carolina was were replaced by a vertical retort, propagation of shellfish upon suit- by Shelmore Cannery in Gray Bay which allowed loading from the top able bottoms….” (Allison 1947; Lunz in 1954. The cause was not deter- and unloading by gravity at the bot- 1970). The laboratories operated at mined (S.C. Wild. Res. Dept. 1955). tom as a modification of the Sterling first on private donations and in 1948 About this time, several cannery Harris system (Brownlee, Sr., pers. on a $3,500 grant from Charleston licenses were sold but probably only comm. 2000; Maggioni, pers. comm. County. In 1949, Lunz secured an ap- four canneries were actually putting 1972; Von Harten 1999b; Waskiewicz, propriation of $17,000 from the State out a canned product. Several raw pers. comm. 2000) (Figures 36; 37). and from then until 1970, it was the shuck operations were also steam- Oysters from the upright retort, after marine research arm of South Carolina ing oysters for the cannery at Ladies being steamed open, dropped into a (Allison 1947; Lunz 1952; Lunz 1970; Island and may have been required shaker, constructed of rods spaced McKenzie, pers. comm. 2000). to have a cannery permit to do this about 3⁄4 inch apart, which rotated, Shortly after World War II or possibly Maggioni may have con- shaking the meats out the bottom ended, many servicemen and those tinued to license the factories that and moving the empty shell out the who had worked in war industries they had purchased but no longer other end (G. Maggioni, pers. comm. returned to jobs in the canneries operated. The cost of this license 1972; Waskiewicz, pers. comm. 2000) and shucking houses and oyster was only one dollar so it was not of (Figures 38-43). The oyster meats production soon approached that any great consequence to purchase fell from the slots in the shaker into a of the late 1930s (G. Maggioni, one (S.C. Wild. Res. Dept. 1956). tank containing a concentrated brine pers. comm. 1972) (Figure 8). Sterling Harris, the president solution, which floated the oyster meat In 1948, the maximum area that of the Blue Channel Corporation in and allowed the shell to fall to the bot- one individual or corporation could Port Royal, developed a system to tom. This eliminated all the shuckers lease was raised to 1000 acres. One mechanically remove steamed oys- needed to pick the oyster meats from cannery (Maggioni) set up three ters from the shell. This consisted the shells after the steaming process. corporations domiciled in South of a large drum called a shaker con- Oysters were moved by conveyer belts Carolina, but headquartered in structed of metal rods placed so gaps through the rest of the process, which Georgia to control over 3000 acres in between the rods allowed the oyster included a wash, an inspection for for- (S.C. Legislature 1948). Several oyster meats to fall through into a super- eign objects and finally, the canning shucking house operators took the saturated salt brine bath. The oyster step. The canning process involved Board of Fisheries to court seeking the meat floated in the brine bath and bits mechanical filling of cans, adding right to lease some of the acreage held of shell and grit sank to the bottom brine to the filled can, capping and by Maggioni (News and Courier 1948 (G. Maggioni, pers. comm. 1972). loading into baskets for the final heat 1949). The record of the ruling on this In 1955, the Sterling Harris process (Brownlee, Jr., pers. comm. case could not be found but Maggioni shucking system for steamed oysters 2001; Jackson, pers. comm. 2000). apparently did not lose any lease was installed at the Maggioni plant All the innovations permitted acreage (Keith, pers. comm. 2001). at Ladies Island and shortly thereaf- the operation of this one facility to In 1945, oysters sold for one dol- ter at Yonges Island and at Leiding’s reduce plant workers from slightly lar per bushel in shell, four dollars per Shelmore plant (Brownlee, Sr., pers. over 300 to 25 or 30 and enabled gallon shucked and 64 cents per pound comm. 2001; Jackson, pers. comm. this cannery to operate for some 20 canned (S.C. State Board of Fisheries 2000, G. Maggioni, pers. comm. years (1965-1986) after all the rest 1946). About this time shrimp became 1977). This development drastically had closed due to labor shortages. the most valuable South Carolina fish- reduced the number of plant workers Efforts to mechanize harvest- ery relegating oysters to second place employed by eliminating shuckers ing were not successful even though except for one or two isolated years (Maggioni, pers. comm 1970; Von several machines were developed when the shrimp catch was very small Harten 1999b). This also reduced (Burrell, et al. 1991). The first machine (Fishery Statistics of the U.S. 1967; quality of oysters by breaking up the developed by Maggioni could not S.C. State Board of Fisheries 1947). meats and hand shucked steamed consistently harvest oysters without The Board of Fisheries became the oysters from other plants were brought unacceptable damage to the beds (G. Division of Commercial Fisheries of the to alleviate this problem (Bailey, pers. Maggioni, pers. comm. 1972) (Figure South Carolina Wildlife Department comm. 2000; M. Mitchell 2001). 44). The next efforts, constructed by

22 23 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Figure 36. A diagram of an oyster factory using the method of shucking prior to the Sterling Harris Brine system. (drawn from a sketch by Joel Jackson of the Shelmore Factory at Awendaw by K. Swanson).

Figure 37. A diagram of the Maggioni Ladies Island plant after installation of the shaker and brine system upgrade (drawn from a sketch of A.P. Brownlee, Jr. by K. Swanson).

Clemson University, were able to over were impractical. The final iteration, could cull oysters so their useful- come this problem, but they were so which was built for the state from a ness to the canneries was limited. complicated and the maintenance was Clemson design, was also too costly The canning industry provided a so time consuming and costly, they for the industry. None of the machines great means of utilizing the intertidal,

24 25 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Figure 38. Upright retorts used at the Maggioni Ladies Island Figure 41. A conveyor belt, which moved the oyster meats from factory for steaming oysters. They allowed top loading and the brine bath through an inspection step to the filler and cap- gravity feed into shakers (Keith photo, circa 1975). per (Keith photo, circa 1975).

Figure 39. Shakers positioned over brine tanks so that as they Figure 42. The filler and capper at the Maggioni Ladies Island rotated, oyster meats fell between gaps in metal rods into the facility (Keith photo, circa 1975). tanks (Keith photo, circa 1975).

Figure 40. The chute from the shaker to the oyster pile for Figure 43. Steam kettles for sterilizing the canned oysters. The removal of shell from the shaker (Keith photo, circa 1975). late Gilbert Maggioni is operating the overhead lift to remove the basket from the cooling vat. The sterilizing kettles are on the left behind W.D. Anderson (Keith photo, circa 1975).

24 25 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Figure 44. The first upon eating raw oysters harvested intertidal oyster from water polluted by raw sewage harvester designed in the New York City area in the mid by Gilbert Maggioni 1920s. While this did not involve in 1970 (Burrell heat-processed oysters, the public photo). was frightened of all oysters (S.C. Bd. Fish 1926). Another was the wage and hour law that was broadened to include all cannery workers; up until then they had been private contractors and thus labor costs for those plants that had not adopted the shaker and brine floatation system increased (S.C. Wild. Mar. Res. Dept. 1972). “raccoon” oyster (FKM 1905). They and Burrell 1982; Pinckney, pers. Yet another was the influx of cheap used the great majority of oysters comm. 2001) (Table 1) (Figure 45). Asian (Korean) canned oysters (G. harvested in South Carolina often But, as better economic times Maggioni, pers. comm. 1986; U.S. exceeding 90% until the 1960s. It provided more job opportunities and Dept. Commerce 1977). And finally enabled people in areas distant from government welfare programs paid as the supply of oysters fell (Beasley, the coast to enjoy oysters before reli- much as factory wages for not working, pers. comm. 2000; G. Maggioni, pers. able refrigeration was available but the labor pool shrank and the canning comm. 1982). This last problem was most importantly it provided jobs for industry began to find it difficult to also intensified because the yield of the vast labor pool of blacks living in make a go of it. (Burns 1991). Besides meats per bushel went down. This the coastal counties of South Carolina. some of the oyster resources were resulted because the remaining pick- In its way, this could be compared destroyed by pollution associated with ers were so much in demand that the with the rice, indigo, and long staple industrial and housing development, quality requirements for good shell cotton industries of South Carolina and lack of demand for the canned oys- stock could not be enforced. Many (Beaufort Gazette 1972). While ter led to the canning industry gradu- of the oysters that were processed in never as profitable as those were, ally dying out (Maggioni and Burrell the 1970s and 80s would have been it was the major industry for many 1982; R. Maggioni, pers. comm. refused by the factories in earlier years in coastal areas and offered the 1998; Beasley, pers. comm. 2001). years (Beasley per. comm. 2000; G. only employment for a large segment Several events forced many can- Maggioni per. comm. 1969-2000). of the populace (Sam Bennett, pers. neries out of business. One was the The Maggioni factory at Ladies comm. 2000; Lane 1977; Maggioni typhoid scare in which people got sick Island in the last of the canning operations was able to continue after all others had closed by mechanizing as mentioned and using many innovative ways to obtain product. Some of these arrangements made with other oyster concerns included buying oysters and in several instances having oysters steamed out for them (Bailey, pers. comm. 2000; Brownlee, Sr., pers. comm. 2001; Lubkin, pers. comm. 2000; G. Maggioni, pers. comm. 1975; W. Toomer , pers. comm. 2000). In turn, Maggioni usually planted their beds for them to meet state shell planting requirements. Other entrepreneurs harvested Maggioni’s Figure 45. Percent of oysters harvested used by the chief segments of the oyster industry grounds along with their own and 1926 to 2000. made a part of the harvest available

26 27 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

to the Maggioni factory (Bailey, pers. 1992; Soloman 1991; F. Smith 1982). comm. 1999; Beasley, pers. comm. After World War II, as people 2000; Collins, pers. comm. 2000; began to holiday at the beach many es- Lowther , pers. comm. 2000). Some tablishments came into being offering oystermen even swapped grounds with roasted oysters as the only menu en- Maggioni to improve each one’s ease trée, while other eateries added them of reaching them (Von Harten 2000b) to their menu in the fall (Chaplin, pers. The Maggioni Cannery at Ladies comm. 2000; C. Smith 1996). Several Island packed oyster stew and smoked stand-alone roasts were in the Little oyster paste for a time in the 1950s, River, Myrtle Beach, Murrells Inlet 1960s and 1970s (G. Maggioni, pers. area, while those around Charleston comm. 1972; News and Courier 1958). generally were associated with In the 1960s, the company was restaurants offering other victuals. divided between two grandsons of Bennie Hudson, at his restaurant the founder, L.P. Maggioni. Gilbert on Skull Creek, roasted a single serv- Maggioni received the factory and ing of oysters as customers ordered producing end and Paul Maggioni them in a stainless steel container got the selling and promotion end (F. holding around a peck of oysters Smith 1982). The Maggioni Family (Hudson, pers. comm. 2001). Robert again split the company in the early Barber at his Bowen Island Restaurant 1980s and Paul ended up with the fac- had a special room reserved for his tory and Gilbert got the land (Island oyster roast patrons. He had an in- Figure 47. A poster advertising the Low Packet 1982b; F. Smith 1982; Spieler Country Oyster Roast (Westendorff 1986). Plans were made to move the Collection). factory to Jenkins Creek from the site on Factory Creek on Ladies Island Some other food usually was when Paul Maggioni’s lease on the offered for those who are not oyster factory site ran out in 1986. However, eaters or would like an additional item because of permitting problems cou- to go with the bivalve. This would be a pled with a massive oyster die-off on low country stew (corn, potatoes, on- company beds, this did not materialize ions, sausage, shrimp boiled together), and the factory closed for good after barbeque, chili, or fried fish (Barber, the 1986 spring season. This brought pers. comm. 2001; Moise, pers. Figure 46. Cookers used by Larry Toomer to an end the oyster cannery industry for oyster roasts (Burrell photo). comm. 2000; Simmons, pers. comm. in South Carolina and, in reality, in the 2000; L. Toomer , pers. comm. 2001; United States (Beasley, pers. comm. Westendorff, pers. comm. 2002). door roasting facility which, when 2000; R. Maggioni, pers. comm. 2001; An oyster roast may be organized in use, also provided heat for the S.C. Wild. Mar. Res. Comm. 1987). for any reason, club meetings, church room. Newspapers served as table- The Maggioni Company marketed outings, visiting friends, fund raising, cloths (Barber, pers. comm. 2000). Korean canned oysters under its label and just for family gatherings (Figures In recent years, 1980s to the pres- for a few years and the company finally 47; 48). Some are traditional, so much ent, many roasts are catered. Often dissolved in 1991 (R. Maggioni, pers. so that permanent roasting ovens oyster roast caterers have very spe- comm. 2001; Solomon 1991). The are constructed (Figures 49; 50; 51; cialized equipment such as cookers Maggioni label was sold to another 52). Others may be annual affairs and tables that can be trailered (L. firm and Asian oysters are marketed and attract large crowds to sponsor Toomer, pers. comm. 2000). One such under the “Daufuski” name. Now charitable causes such as the Low outfit had such a unique configura- this label is all that remains to re- County Oyster Roast at Boone Hall tion that it was mistaken for a rolling mind one of a once thriving business. in Mt. Pleasant. This event uses two liquor still (Moise, pers. comm. 1999). The Maggioni family was the most semi-tractor trailer loads of oysters The entrepreneur furnished a cooker, prominent group in the South Carolina and attracts some 10,000 people knives, gloves, sauce, coleslaws sal- oyster industry from the 1890s until every year. It has raised large sums tine crackers, and oysters (Figure 46). 1986 (Savannah Morning News 1940, of money for various charities in

26 27 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Figure 51. A typical back yard oyster roast at the Lewis Godbold residence on James Island (Burrell photo).

Figure 52. The oyster roast pit at St. James Episcopal Church, James Island. It was constructed to be used by the men of the church when they sponsored, in alternate years, a roast with the John’s Island Episcopal Church in the 1950s and 1960s (Burrell photo).

Figure 48. An oyster roast given for visiting sailors by the German Friendly Society was recorded on post cards dating from around 1910 (Jamie Westendorff collection).

Figure 53. One of Jamie Westendorff’s roasters used at a low country oyster roast. Westendorff and his son-in-law, Figure 50. Oyster eating gets right Gregg Mallard, are waiting for a batch Figure 49. A club outing on James Island. serious at an event in Bluffton in 2000. of oysters to finish cooking (Westendorff (Burrell photo). (Burrell photo). photo).

28 29 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

the low country as well as providing covered with wet gunnysacks. 1⁄2 cups apple cider vinegar. It is some additional funds for the Greater The sacks contained the heat preferred to have the sauce a little Charleston Restaurant Association and the steam and were kept loose so as to cover the oyster (Figure 53). The oysters used at this dampened lest they catch on fire. better. There are some places event have to be brought in from out of that use hot pepper vinegar, At the appropriate moment the also known as “disinfectant,” state, usually Florida and the Gulf of steaming pile was uncovered and to dip their oysters in. Mexico, because local harvesters can- brought to the table a shovelful not provide the necessary volume re- at a time. On the table were Generous amounts of saltine quired (Barbour 2001; Britzius, pers. catsup and horseradish cocktail crackers and paper towels should comm. 2001; Burger 1998; Long, pers. sauces, hot pepper vinegar, piles be provided on the tables. comm. 2001). Roasting apparatus is of rags or gloves for holding the supplied by the caterer for the occa- hot oysters, and implements It may be interesting to note sion (Westendorff, pers. comm. 2002). for extracting the little beasts that oysters belong to the family Ostreidae of which there are The simplest roast occurs in from their shells and delivering them to awaiting palates. three genera: Ostrea, Crassostrea, home kitchens where oysters are and Pycnodonte. Our principal steamed open in the conventional or Ancient methodology has edible oyster in South Carolina microwave oven (Hawkins 1994). succumbed to technology and and the Gulf Coast is the Nearly all oysters produced in now most oysters are steamed in species Crassostrea virginica. South Carolina at the present time various and sundry large retorts are sold in shell and utilized by in much larger amounts than Linnaeus himself waxed poetic roasts (Ashley, pers. comm. 1995; were earlier possible. The debate about the oyster in his 1758 text Beasley, pers. comm. 2001; Britzius, on whether truly roasted oysters Systema Naturae, where he wrote, “Ostrea. Animal Tethys, testa pers. comm. 2000; L. Toomer, taste better than steamed ones varies in intensity according to bivalves inaequivalvis, subdurita. pers. comm. 2000) (Figure 45). who is having to perform the labor. Cardo endentulous and tossula Ben Moise described mod- cava ovata, striisque lateralibus ern roasts very succinctly in Zoe The rhetoric notwithstanding, transverses. Vulva anusve nullus.” Sander’s Entertaining At The an oyster roast by any means is College of Charleston as follows: always a crowd pleaser and follows Unbelievable, isn’t it?! the theory of entertainment Some Musings on the Oyster that if you are standing up In closing, it would be and eating with your fingers, appropriate to say that the In the broad expanses of the you’ve got to be having fun. presence of oysters demands the Spartina marsh that lie between provision of ample quantities of the barrier islands and the The rule of thumb on procuring “appropriate libations” such as mainland south of Awendaw are oysters is roughly 7 people per cold beer and crisp white wine, numerous small hummocks that S.C. bushel or 5 people per 40 lb. as the British do - champagne. were the scenes of oyster roasts of Box. These quantities will vary South Carolina’s first citizens, the according to what else is being It has been seen time and time Seewee Indians.. Large piles of served and the method being again that a guest who has just scorched shells and broken pieces used to cook them. Quantities consumed a succulent oyster of decorated pottery provide may also vary according to followed by a sip of cold beer will mute testimony to the longevity the number of tables used; spontaneously bow his head in a of one of South Carolina’s this applies particularly in moment of silent prayer. Amen. most enduring gustatory reference to larger crowds. traditions, the oyster roast. Ben McC. Moise, Retired Game There are many commercially Warden (Written by flashlight In the non-too-distant past, prepared cocktail sauces for in the predawn hours of a chilly oyster roasts were actually roasts. dipping the shucked oyster into. December morning on a Santee Huge stocks of split oak were One good homemade receipt River rice field dike, waiting brought to the scene, pits dug, is 1 (40 oz.) bottle Heinz catsup, for trespassers to come out fires built, and large sheets of 1 (5 oz.) jar Kraft Prepared of the field). (Sanders 1998). steel were set over the fire. Bushel Horseradish (not horseradish bags of oysters were dumped sauce), 2 Tablespoons Wooster, 1 Along with roasts, sometimes onto the hot metal plates and Tablespoon black pepper, and 1 shucked oysters served as a subsistence

28 29 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina fishery feeding many when economic often made a living in the wintertime local raw shucked oysters. First, they conditions were poor (Berry, pers. during the “depression” by selling bought directly from the shuckers, comm. 1999; Clemons, pers. comm. shucked oysters. They gathered them and later from fish markets that had 2000; Edge, pers. comm. 2001). In in the afternoon of the day before or obtained them from the same shuck- the 1920s and particularly the 1930s the morning of the day which they ers. Inland fish markets offered only when money was scarce, this provided were shucked, and delivered them to Virginia oysters, which were repacked a livelihood for many rural blacks and the customers the same day. Despite from gallon cans. With more concern whites (Berry 1996; Clemons, pers. the lack of ice and highly sophisticated for human health coming into play, comm. 2000; Edge, pers. comm. 2001; facilities, few if anyone ever got sick these local oysters began to be referred G. Maggioni, pers. comm. 1970). from consumption of these shellfish. to as “bootleg” (News and Courier Mrs. Albertha Edge, a retired Albertha is 82 years old, her mother and 1962; 1964; Pringle 1961). Some pur- oyster shucker now in her eighties, uncle lived to be 100 years old, having ists swear that these are the finest fla- described how shucked oysters were oysters as regular food all of their lives vored and still seek out the remaining provided to coastal Horry County (Berry 1996; Clemons, pers. comm. purveyors (Low, pers. comm. 2001). residents in the 1930s and on until 2000; Edge, pers. comm. 2000). Mr. Alonzo Seabrook, director of the late 1950s. She and her mother Oysters were shucked at people’s The South Carolina Marine Fisheries, went by row boat to the oyster beds residences and packed in glass con- sought to curtail the practice of home lining the creeks on the seaward side tainers routinely up until at least the oyster shucking in the early 1950s of Little River Neck in Horry County 1980s (Bearden, pers. comm. 1990; in Little River Neck. He arrested and gathered oysters by hand in the Low, pers. comm. 2001; L. Mintz, eight or nine of the oyster people 1930s (Figure 54). They then brought pers. comm. 2000). The people in- and brought them up before the local them back to the landing, washed volved in this practice took great pains magistrate. The magistrate probably them, heated them in an iron pot filled to supply a good product. Some often was a customer of the oyster people with water and shucked them. The pot scalded the glass jars that the oysters and saw nothing wrong with their was first heated by a wood fire, then method, so he promptly dismissed by kerosene heaters, and at the last by all charges, much to Mr. Seabrook’s a gas burner. Care was taken not to chagrin (McGinn, pers. comm. 1999). overheat or keep them in the pot too A most remarkable woman, Mrs. long, as this would affect the appear- C.A. Magwood, operated a one wom- ance and taste of the finished product. an-shucking house from the late 1920s After shucking into a metal pail, the until the 1970s on Little Bull Island oysters were transferred to another (Figure 55). Her father was Captain metal container with perforations and Dan Legare, a long time operator of washed in the creek nearby. At this vessels that towed oyster bateaux for time, the waters were clear and clean, the Shelmore Cannery (Figure 56). free of any pollutants. The oysters Figure 54. Albertha Edge, retired oyster This island, some 20 miles north of were packed in quart mason jars and worker. (Burrell photo). Charleston on Price Inlet, was very loaded on her father’s wagon. He remote. Mrs. Magwood often picked then hitched up his mule and traveled were packed in and all were careful to her oysters herself when those brought to the nearby communities within a thoroughly wash the shucked oysters in by her children didn’t suit (Figure radius of 15 miles where the oysters (V.E. Cox, pers. comm. 1956; Edge, 57). The children washed them and were sold for as little as a quarter a pers. comm. 2000; L. Mintz, pers. carried them to the shucking house quart or traded for farm products such comm. 2000). After all, their business where Mrs. Magwood opened them. as chickens, eggs, smoked or fresh depended on satisfying customers. In She used a solid metal knife and a pork, vegetables, grits, or whatever. 1927, the Board of Fisheries estimated chipper consisting of a file sharpened The demand for oysters increased that almost half of shucked oysters on one end and the other end inserted and Albertha and others in the com- in South Carolina were produced by in a wooden block. She shucked the munity began to supply oysters to a lo- these unofficial operations and went oysters into a colander, thus getting a cal fish market and finally nearly all of unreported (S.C. State Bd. Fish 1927). completely dry pack, which resulted in the ladies ended up working in shuck- For many years, particularly in the a superior product. She often opened ing houses. David Clemons of Little northern coastal section of the state, ten gallons in a day. Two days a week River, S.C. described how his parents this was the only source people had for Mrs. Magwood went to Charleston by

30 31 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

motorboat with her oysters. Here she (W.M. Mitchell, pers. comm. 2001). delivered them to customers along In the late 1950s, disease Broad Street and other thoroughfares decimated Chesapeake oyster stocks, in the business district. On Fridays, creating a shortage of raw shucked she deposited some of them at the local oysters in South Carolina markets. liquor store and her customers picked This increased the demand for South up their oysters with their weekend Carolina product. Much of the de- spirits. Along with her oyster activi- mand was local, because Virginia ties, she raised eleven children. She had supplied the bulk of the shucked cooked all of their meals, washed all oysters consumed in South Carolina Figure 55. Mrs. C.A. Magwood at work in their clothes and ruled them with an prior to this (S.C. Bd. Fish. 1924; her oyster house in the 1950s (Magwood iron hand according to her sons (C.A. Andrews 1962; Haven, et al. 1978; family photo). Magwood, Jr., pers. comm. 2000; A. S.C. Wild. Res. Dept. 1956; S.C. Wild. Magwood, pers. comm. 2001). One Res. Dept. 1963). As a result, the ten summer she worked in a vegetable year period, 1955 to 1965, saw the cannery for the munificent sum of height of the raw shucking business 20 cents per hour (See Appendix). in South Carolina. The raw shucking Mrs. Willie Mae Mitchell started houses used almost as much of the har- shucking oysters in 1944 at Thadeus vest as did the canneries (Figure 45). Bailey’s shucking house at Okatie. She The Virginia shucked oyster was related in an interview in 2000 that her different from the South Carolina pay was 50 cents per gallon to begin one. It was run through an aeration with and later went to 95 cents. On the process, which ostensibly was to best days, she shucked nine gallons. wash all grit out of the meats. This She worked for Junior Graves and with involved placing shucked oyster the Reeves, the Co-op and finally with meats in a large conical vat contain- Larry Toomer. She liked working ing fresh water. Compressed air was for Bailey and Graves because they introduced through a valve in the Figure 56. Mrs. Magwood’s father, Captain Dan Legare, a long time employ- furnished transportation to and from bottom of the tanks and this agitated ee of the Shelmore Cannery (Magwood work and she didn’t have to rely on the oysters shaking out the grit and family photo). others. She picked crabs one season, shell pieces. It also washed out all but didn’t like it and when possible flavor and added to the volume as the would find other jobs in the summer, oyster tended to take up freshwater. such as working for the sewing plant in Prior to the early 1950s, few Beaufort, at the resort on Hilton Head, shucked South Carolina oysters were and at the Marine Base at Parris Island. eaten by people living away from the Willie Mae remembers crabbing coast, and many were not acquainted when she was as young as eleven with the wonderful salty flavor of years old. She followed oystermen on the local oysters. They preferred the flats when the tide had gone out and bland taste of Virginia oysters and gathered blue crabs that had sought would add seasoning to fries and out the small puddles of water created stews made from them. The Virginia by the depressions caused by their oysters always brought a premium boots. It was not uncommon for her price as opposed to South Carolina to get a crocus sack of crabs on a tide. ones (News and Courier 1933). Her husband, John Mitchell, Virginia oysters were larger and worked for Maggioni’s at Ladies often had a more pleasing appearance. Island and also at Yonges Island. Because they were grown subtidally They were gone all week on the boats. and therefore were usually single and The men got ten cents per bushel deeper cupped (Burrell 1986). They Figure 57. Mrs. Magwood picking oysters in the 1930s. He later worked for were easier to shuck without cutting for shucking (Magwood family photo). Junior Graves at the shucking houses the meat because the shell opened

30 31 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina more readily. Brooks (1891) timed age. Oysters were advertised for 69 from Maryland or the Gulf of Mexico a Maryland shucker who opened 30 cents per pint by some retail outlets and about 100 gallons per day when oysters per minute. This was certainly in 1956 (News and Courier 1956a). opening South Carolina clusters. an exception, as Papparella (1980) Seed oysters from polluted ar- As the cost of the oysters went up found the average for the general run eas were permitted to be shipped to and the yield per bushel fell off, Donnie of Maryland shuckers to be the 8 to 9 Virginia for replanting and depura- closed his Little River house and per minute. Personal observations of tion. This was not successful and moved his operation to McClellanville South Carolina shuckers ran from five only lasted for a few years in the late and joined with Carolina Seafood to a high of 12 per minute in observa- 1950s and early 1960s (Pringle 1964; but that lasted for less than a year tions of 21 individuals over several time S.C. Wild. Res. Dept. 1957; 1961). and then Donnie dropped out of the periods (Burrell, unpubl. data 1999). oyster business in 1978. His son-in- The yield of meat for Chesapeake SOME OF THE SHUCKING law, Max Vereen, said the reasons for Bay subtidal oysters averaged 112 HOUSES OPERATING OVER making the business unattractive were ounces of meat per bushel, whereas problems getting suitable shell stock, South Carolina intertidals ranged THE YEARS wage and hour laws making it difficult from 39 to 48 ounces per bushel The Bellamy Seafood Market was to hire enough good shuckers to keep (Pottinger 1944; Fisheries Statistics located at the Intracoastal Waterway up production, and profit margins de- U.S. 1970; 1975; 1977; Pringle 1961). Bridge at Cherry Grove Beach. During creasing (Vereen, pers. comm. 2000). Chesapeake Bay oysters were the 1960s around Thanksgiving and There was quite a bit of difference graded into five sizes, standards Christmas, it had 35 shuckers split be- in the way the northern and southern to counts, whereas South Carolina tween two shifts who opened upwards raw shucking houses did business shucking houses differentiated only of 150 bushels of shell stock per day. in the state. Those operating north between standards and selects. The Bellamys had leases at Murrells of Georgetown always used the heat Sometimes all sizes were lumped Inlet but bought most of their shell shock method to relax the adductor together with no selects. A gallon of stock from McClellanville harvest- muscle, which allowed the shucker to selects contained 225 to 300 oysters ing firms. At one time, they shipped open the oyster more easily- that is to and a gallon of standards up to 500 shucked oyster meats in five-gallon get the knife into it easier and to avoid (Pottinger 1944; L. Toomer, pers. pails to Virginia for repacking and cutting the meat which would reduce comm. 2000). Most South Carolina sold shell stock to Virginia steaming the yield because its fluid would drain shuckers opened five to six gallons per plants that supplied the soup trade. out (Gordon, pers. comm. 2000; eight hour day, while the most skillful Difficulty getting labor and good- Russell, et al. 1964; Pringle 1964b) opening good yielding oysters would yielding oysters forced them to close (Figure 58). The heat applied also produce upwards of ten gallons (Edge, in 1971 (Bellamy, pers. comm. 2000). may have provided some pasteuriza- pers. comm. 2000; C.A. Magwood, Donnie Mintz opened a shucking tion and increased shelf life (Bellamy, pers. comm. 2000; Pringle 1961). house to take over the trade built up pers. comm. 2000; Russell, et al. Efforts to develop mechanical by Victor E. Cox when he closed his 1964; Vereen, pers. comm. 1999). The shuckers to open raw oysters have met shucking house in the early 1960s. prescribed treatment was to immerse with limited success. Paparella (1970; His first supply of oysters came shell stock in a 145ºF water bath for 1980) reviewed several methods that from Murrells Inlet and later from had been tried including a machine Awendaw, McClellanville and Beau- developed by Sterling Harris of fort. In the mid-1960s, he began Beaufort, S.C. (Peck 1968). None had trucking in shell stock from Maryland proven successful enough to be adopt- and finally from the Gulf of Mexico. ed by industry. A new method using He sold his oysters in eastern North ultra high pressure will open oysters, Carolina and in South Carolina as far but the apparatus is very expensive inland as the Spartanburg area, sup- at this time putting it out of reach for plying chain grocery stores and inde- most operators (Food Engineering pendent markets in between. He had 1999; Island Packet 1971a; Katz 1996). as many as 24 shuckers at the height of Nearly 160,000 gallons were his business and they produced about shucked in 1955-56 season. This was 140 gallons per day when shucking Figure 58. A hot dip tank at the Sol Legare over three times the long term aver- single oysters that were purchased Oyster House (Burrell photo).

32 33 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

from shell stock dealers. Only one oysters were packed in pint or smaller or two shucking house owners had cans and sold in a large part directly leases (Bellamy, pers. comm. 2001; to grocery stores and restaurants with Berry, pers. comm. 1999, Vereen, a few going to fish markets (Vereen, pers. comm. 2001). Shuckers work- pers. comm. 2000; Bellamy, pers. ing on piecework basis were paid by comm. 2001; V. S. Cox, pers. comm. unit volume shucked. Shell stock was 1960; D. Mintz, pers. comm. 1963). almost always trucked to the shucking In the south, at first, shucked oysters houses as often they were not located were packed into five gallon buckets Figure 59. A chipper, hammer, knife and on waterfronts (D. Mintz, pers. comm. (Burn 1991). As more houses opened gloves used by shuckers opening oysters. 1963; Vereen, pers. comm. 2000; (Burrell photo). Palmer, pers. comm. 1999; Leland, five minutes and then shuck them im- pers. comm. 1999). In contrast, south- mediately. (U.S. Dept. of Health and ern shucking houses most often paid Human Services 1990). Some shuck- pickers by volume of meat their shuckers filled the containers that receive the ers opened and the picker paid the oyster meats about one third full with shucker. Often the pickers provided crushed ice to reduce the temperature the shuckers who were family mem- faster (Palmer, pers. comm. 1999; bers or friends. The ratio of pickers Pringle 1964b). In the southern part to shuckers usually was 1 to 3 (Bailey, Figure 61. The Lemon Island Marina of the state, except for a few houses, pers. comm. 2000; Collins, pers. comm. 2000; Lubkin, pers. comm. shucking house. Shuckers Mary Frazier, oysters were opened by placing the bill left; Lavenia Jenkins, right; and roller of the oyster on a chipper and hitting it 2000; W. Toomer, pers. comm. 2000). All southern shucking house own- Charlie Washington at work (Lowther with a small hammer (Figure 59). This photo 1990s). provided an opening through which ers had leases (Bailey, pers. comm. the oyster knife was inserted and the 2000; Hancock, pers. comm. 2001; adductor muscle cut. This method re- Lowther, pers. comm. 2000; Lubkin, up after 1900, the standard became quires skill to avoid cutting the meats pers. comm. 2000). Just about all the gallon can (Bailey, pers. comm. (Bailey, pers. comm. 2000; L. Toomer, shucking houses were located on the 2000; C & S. Toomer, pers. comm. pers. comm. 2000) (Figures 60; 61). water and shell stock was off-loaded 2000). Later on, 1⁄2 pint, 12 ounce The northern South Carolina from the boats directly into the facil- and pint cans were packed by oyster shucking houses purchased shell stock ity across a short pier or small dock. houses but gallon cans still dominat- by the bushel from pickers directly or In the north for the most part, ed. Nearly all oysters from Beaufort, Bluffton, and Hilton Head went through distributors in Savannah, Georgia (Bailey, pers. comm. 2000; Collins, pers. comm. 2000; Hancock, pers. comm. 2001; W. Toomer, pers. comm. 2000), with only a small quantity being sold locally. Oysters from Edisto Island, McClellanville and Folly Beach went to Charleston distributors (S. Flowers, Jr., pers. comm.

Figure 60. The shucking room at the Maggioni factory where oysters were opened for the raw shuck trade (Brown and Barton photo, circa 1950s).

32 33 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

2000; Palmer, pers. comm. 2000; most part of the state were able to and Varn in the early teens. He saw A. Magwood, pers. comm. 2000). operate longer because they sold a potential market for raw shucked Few shucking houses in the meats to oyster breaders and freez- oysters and constructed a shucking north sold shell stock (bag oysters), ers in Florida (Bailey, pers. comm. house on Folly Beach about 1919 but while in the south this was a common 2000). The southern pickers often then moved his operations to Edisto practice for most of the operators. were able to harvest oysters later than Island in 1920. He had brought his In the north, shuckers and pick- April because many of the shucking family to Edisto Island by sailboat ers were always paid in cash usually house owners could sell shell stock from Maryland and they lived in this once a week (Bellamy, pers. comm. to the canneries (Bailey, pers. comm. boat for quite awhile until he was 2000; Vereen, pers. comm. 2000). 2000; W. and C. Toomer, pers. comm. able to build a house. His two sons, In the south, often tokens having a 2000; Lowther, pers. comm. 2000; G. John Jr. and Steve joined the busi- monetary or a volume value were Maggioni, pers. comm. 1972). Several ness at an early age and, after a rocky given at the close of each day or in raw shuck houses also steamed start, it prospered (Lindsay 2000). a few cases as each time a shucker open oysters for sale to canneries. Most of the oysters used at this gave a filled container to the mea- Northern shucking houses had a shucking house were dredged from surer in the packing room. These shorter season that ran mid-September subtidal beds. This gave the Flowers were negotiable at company stores into mid-February most years because a larger yield of meats per bushel and or could be exchanged for “specie of many grocery stores, which were the a higher percentage of selects than op- the realm” once a week, usually on main outlets, would stop handling erators using intertidal stock. On one Friday (Bailey, pers. comm. 1999; local oysters when sales dropped off occasion John, Sr. said he dredged one Collins, pers. comm. 1999; Hancock, during warm spells, which often oc- thousand bushels in a day (Von Harten pers. comm. 2001) (See Figure 26). curred in February. The houses had 2001). Just about all their production In the northern intertidal beds, no other market available that used went to a wholesaler in Charleston tools were often used to cull oysters as enough product to keep them going. (S. Flowers, Jr., pers. comm. 1999). they were harvested by hand, whereas A further difference between In later years, these subtidal beds in the south pickers commonly used northern and southern raw shuck were destroyed by silting over due to grabs for many years and up until the operators was longevity of their storms and changes in water flow pat- late 1950s dredges and tongs were used businesses. In the north, the average terns according to Steve Flowers, Jr. to harvest oysters on subtidal beds length of time in business was less than Most oysters were packed in gallon (Ashley, pers. comm. 1999; Bailey, twenty years and often not more than cans until the 1980s when smaller cans pers. comm. 1999; Sam Bennett, pers. ten, whereas in the south, family op- were introduced. The Flowers were comm. 2000; Collins, pers. comm. erations in several instances spanned only one of two South Carolina facili- 2000; S. Flowers, Sr., pers. comm. three generations (Bailey, pers. comm. ties using aerators or blowers to wash 1973; Frasier, pers. comm. 2000). In 2000; S. Flowers, Jr., pers. comm. their oysters. The other one was used the south, hand harvesting took over 2000; C. Toomer, pers. comm. 2000; in a house in Georgetown (Figure 62). from the grabs after the canneries W. Toomer, pers. comm. 2000). This Steve Flowers, Jr. shut down his closed (Bailey, pers. comm. 2001; probably was because northern opera- Bennett, pers. comm. 2001; Frasier, tors had other occupations in the sum- pers. comm. 2000; B. Flowers, pers. mer and no leased beds that required comm. 2000; C. Magwood, pers. planting or other use of the facilities to comm. 2000; G. Maggioni, pers. keep their workers going all year. This comm. 1969-2000; Oemler 1894). reduced dependence on this one source The season for shucking raw of income as compared with southern oysters lasted from mid-September entrepreneurs, and did not have the ap- to as late as the end of April. Market peal to make this a long-term business. demand for oysters was highest at the Several family businesses stand first of the season, at Thanksgiving out as shucking operations in the and Christmas and through the south. Flower’s Oyster Company months of January and February. If operated from about 1920 to 1986 the weather was bad (cold and rainy), at Edisto Beach. John Flowers, Sr. good sales could continue into April. came to South Carolina to work in the Figure 62. A blowing tank used at the Shucking houses in the southern Yonges Island oyster cannery of Byrd Flowers Oyster Co. (Burrell photo).

34 35 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

shucking house in 1986, due to a lack Figure 63. Steve, Steve, Jr., and John of labor and good quality oysters but Flowers in the 1940s (Flowers family he continued marketing shell stock. photo). This is all that remains of a once thriving business. The Flowers were and still are substantial citizens of Edisto Island. Steve, Sr. at one time owned the only grocery store and garage on the island. He opened another grocery store to handle the summer vacation- ers trade, closing it after the summer season and opening up the old store for the off season. The new store is Figure 64. The still operated by family members. At Flowers Oyster Co. the end of the oyster season, he had an in the mid 30s. This oyster roast for the entire community was built in 1922 and serving oysters, fish and shrimp pre- replaced by a con- pared by his family (S. Flowers, Jr., crete building in the 1950s (Flowers family pers. comm. 1999; Kyser, pers. comm. photo. 2000; Lindsay 2000). At the present time, a grandson of John, Sr., Bernie Flowers, still maintains the beds and Figure 65. The sells shell stock during the season (B. Flowers Oyster Co. Flowers 2001) (Figures 63; 64; 65; 66). from the waterside. The T.M. Bailey Oyster Company located at Okatie was started by Thaddeus Bailey, Sr. in 1920 and run by Thaddeus, Jr. from the time of his discharge from World War II service until the early 1990s (Figure 67). The company shucked oysters Figure 66. The in the early years with about 15 pick- Flowers oyster boat ers and 35 shuckers. They sold much used to dredge sub- of their production to distributors in tidal oysters. Lying astern is the West Savannah, but Thaddeus, Jr. recalls his Ward, which brought father delivering oysters to Columbia the Flowers family for 90 cents per gallon in 1940. At this from Baltimore, Md. time, oysters cost 15 cents per bushel and served as their to harvest and it took two bushels home for several to shuck out a gallon. Shuckers re- years (Flowers family ceived 15 cents to open a gallon, the photo). can cost 15 cents, and with the other expenses, little profit remained. In early days, they often could not hire all the people applying for jobs. Many of the pickers worked for a truck farm operation of the Baileys in summer, and help would be transported in from outlying communities often in stake Figure 67. The Bailey body trucks. In addition, four of five oyster factory on workers brought a carload of workers Bailey’s Creek in 1999 with them. Thaddeus, Sr. also had (Burrell photo).

34 35 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina some cottages where some workers day. “Chief” tried steaming oysters stayed all week with their families. and for a time sold them to Maggioni Thad Bailey, Jr. remembers his but this was a short-lived effort. He father telling him of keeping oysters used a crab-steaming chest to process refrigerated by placing a gallon these oysters. Billy stopped shucking of chipped ice in five gallon cans in 1971 and Lynn L. “Buck” Smith containing four gallons of oysters ran his house paying him 25 cents per and then burying the cans in the gallon for what was packed. “Buck” ground to provide insulation for a Figure 68. Cans used by Baileys Oyster left the next year and a restaurant day or two. They purchased fifteen Company to pack oysters for Maggioni now occupies the site. “Buck” was 300-pound blocks of ice per week (W. J. Keith collection). also the local magistrate and was on a regular basis in oyster season. sometimes referred to as “30 gallons In the 1960s and 70s, they began factory by barges. Maggioni’s work- or 30 days Smith”. He was reported to steam oysters, much in the same ers helped plant shell on the Bailey to have given some pickers who came manner as crabs were processed, using beds at the end of the harvest season. before his court after a too exuberant steam chests. The steamed product Thad Bailey, Jr. closed his shuck- weekend a choice of supplying him was sold to Blue Channel Corporation ing operation in the early 1990s due oysters or taking a term on the chain for use in their stews and soups and mainly to the difficulties in getting gang (W. Collins, pers. comm. 2000). to Maggioni. They were transported help. Whereas in early years, the plant “Chief” Toomer closed his business in four-gallon galvanized pails. often had twice as much help available in the middle 1980s. Loss of labor to The best pickers unloaded at the as they could use, at the last, there the resorts at Hilton Head was one of shucking house while the others put were not enough pickers or shuckers the main contributing factors in the their catch on the steaming house to produce enough volume to war- demise of these houses, along with the dock. The ratio of steaming to raw rant continuing. The Maggioni shell inability to meet wage and hour law shucked oysters was three or four stock operation now buys and harvests requirements. Frank went out of busi- boatloads to one. Many times the raw oysters from the Bailey leases and ness in the 1980s also. Larry Toomer, shucking house oysters were gathered is responsible for planting obliga- Frank’s son, was introduced to the by hand with grabs used only on the tions (Bailey, pers. comm. 2000). oyster business early, as he and his best producing areas. Grabs were used The Toomers are another family siblings were sent out to pick before entirely when picking for steaming. with a long association with the oyster they reached their teens. He worked Several of the oyster shucking industry in the Hilton Head-Bluffton for his Uncle Billy in his plant while in houses got together and began to sup- area. Simpson V. Toomer came to high school, as a roller loading oysters ply oysters to companies that breaded South Carolina in the early teens on tables for the shuckers and taking and froze oysters. These were Bailey, to work at the Maggioni factory on away their shells. After a stint shrimp- Graves, Joe Pinckney and “Chief” Jenkins Island. He opened his own ing in Florida, he returned to Bluffton Toomer and together they shipped cannery in the late teens on Jarvis to run the Bluffton Oyster Company about 1000 gallons per week. The Creek and ran it until 1928. He had his for Jerry Reeves (C. Toomer, pers. oysters were sent to Florida by a truck, own label and shipped canned oysters comm. 2001; L. Toomer, pers. comm. which brought back fruit. Later Paul as far as England. From 1928, until 2000; S.V. Toomer III, pers. comm. Maggioni contracted with Bailey his death in 1958, he produced raw 2000; W. Toomer , pers. comm. 2000). to pack raw oysters under his label, shucked oysters at his plant on Jarvis The Bluffton Oyster Company “Daufuski”. Health officials required Creek and at Buckingham. Three of needs special mention in that it prob- the Bailey permit number on the cans his four sons got into the shucking ably has occupied a site longer than however. Oysters were packed in 12 business - S.V. Junior, “Chief”, took any other oyster-shucking house in ounce, pint and gallon cans (Figure 68). over the Buckingham operation; South Carolina. It did not start out Later on, in the 1970s and William, “Billy”, continued at Jarvis as such. In the late 1890s and early 1980s, the Baileys sold shell stock Creek and Frank had a house on Skull 1900s, it was the meetinghouse for a to the Ladies Island cannery by the Creek. Billy and “Chief” for a while gentlemen’s club. In the early 1900s, truckload. As many as five 200- pooled their production to supply large Clarence “Buster” Martin obtained bushel truckloads per day were sent, accounts in Georgia and this gave it and fitted it out as an oyster house. but the average was three or four. them a good market. Together they He ran it until about 1930 (Colcock, Sometimes oysters were taken to the would sometimes open 300 gallons a pers. comm. 2001). “Junior” Graves,

36 37 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

(John S., Jr.), returned from college the summer at the Trimbleston and businessmen bought the assets of the and started an oyster business there in Bluffton factories keeping his workers Bluffton Co-op, which included the 1932. The building was in very poor busy year round. He was very meticu- building, six acres of land and ques- shape at first. One could see the water lous in planting back his oyster beds tionable rights to the oyster leases (at underneath through the floor and the with shell and put out green shell with- the time a moratorium on renewing and walls did little to keep out the winter in one or two days after shucking. He granting leases was in effect pending winds. Junior made improvements once had to go to court and prevent the enactment of new shellfish legislation) until his facility was a model opera- state from trying to get lease rent from (Heyward 1985; Reeves, pers. comm. tion. The factory was situated at the a King’s Grant he oystered on with the 2000). Mr. Reeves and his partners foot of Wharf Street and Graves had owner’s blessing (Graves, pers. comm. wanted to continue the tradition of to lease it from the Town of Bluffton. 2001). In later years, he and other oys- Bluffton oyster industry and possibly He paid his lease in oyster shell, which termen tried unsuccessfully to force put a restaurant on the site. The Reeves was used to pave the streets of town Maggioni to surrender some of his also operated Island Resort Services, a (Graves, pers. comm. 2001; Town of leases so South Carolina oystermen company providing laundry and linen Bluffton 1947). All the streets of could use the grounds for harvesting services to resorts in the area, and he Bluffton were paved with shell prior to oysters. At that time, Maggioni was had hoped that oyster workers would World War II (Hancock, pers. comm. controlling over 3000 acres through be available to work in the laundry in 2001). A tornado severely damaged three corporations - Chatham Fish and the busy summer season. As it turned the factory in 1933 and it was repaired Oyster Company, Ocean, Lake and out, the laundry business was good and operated at the site until Mr. Fish Company and the L.P. Maggioni all year around with no winter slack Graves built a new house on land he Company (News and Courier 1948; time. The laundry did hire many of owned adjacent to Wharf Street in 1949; Savannah Morning News 1945). the people who had at one time been 1948 (Beaufort Gazette 1933b; Graves, Later on this effort led to legisla- connected with the oyster industry. pers. comm. 2001; Peeples 1962). tion that did free up land for others. Jerry Reeves’ son, Michael, ran Mr. Graves had five brothers, who “Junior” Graves died in 1964 and the oyster business until 1993 when at one time or another worked with his heirs ran the company for a short he was needed back in the laundry. him in his oyster enterprises. He had time (Graves, pers. comm. 2001). Reeves had bought out his partners a factory on Daufuskie Island, another The Bluffton Co-Op was the about this time. He hired Larry Toomer at Trimbleston and he also operated a next group to occupy the facility. to run the Bluffton Oyster Company plant for Maggioni at Jenkins Island The Co-Op was made up of a group as it was again named. Larry and (Figure 69). He learned a lot about the of blacks, many of whom were oys- his sister took over the operation for oyster industry working at the Lowden ter workers who sought to keep the themselves in 1995 and leased the fac- factory located on Bridge Street in concern going and thereby protect tory from Mr. Reeves. Larry bought Bluffton and from his father who was their jobs (S.C. Secretary of State out his sister in 1998 and now he and the oyster inspector for the Fisheries 1969). This operation lasted until his wife, Tina, have made a success of Board in the late 1920s and early 1982 when it went bankrupt (Heyward this business by building up a loyal 1930s (S.C. State Bd. Fisheries 1932). 1985; S.C. Dept. of State 1988). workforce and customer base as well “Junior” processed crabs in Jerry Reeves and group of local as diversifying into shedding peeler crabs in the spring and handling hard crabs in summer along with shrimp and finfish (Figure 70). Clams are also marketed. They cannot meet demands for their oysters most of the season and by careful inventory control, they are able to extend their season by freezing products as weather warms. Catering is a large part of their operation. They feature oyster roasts that include low country stew and fried fish. They have specialized equipment that enables Figure 69. The Graves shucking shed on Daufuskie Island in the 1930s (Maggioni family them to provide food for several hun- photo). dred people almost anywhere in the

36 37 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Beaufort-Bluffton area and beyond (J. Reeves, pers. comm. 2000; Shelton 1995; L. Toomer, pers. comm. 2000 (Figures 71; 72; 73; 74; 75; 76; and 77). Mr. Reeves recently sold the Bluffton Oyster Company, the land and the boat landing to Beaufort County Open Land Trust. A stipula- Figure 74. Oysters to be shucked at Figure 70. Mr. and Mrs. Larry Toomer tion in the sale was that the “oyster Bluffton. Each picker’s harvest is kept resting after a hard day at the oyster com- factory” must be allowed to continue separate and he is paid by the yield pany (Burrell photo). (Burrell photo 1999). operation, thus assuring that this traditional industry will be perpetu- ated in Bluffton (Island Packet 2002). The Bluffton Oyster Company is a typical southern oyster house. The shell stock is unloaded on the docks, washed with fresh water, and put on the shucking tables. Each picker’s oysters are kept separate. The shuckers then open the oysters into stainless steel quart sized cans. When full, the Figure 75. Anthony Frasier and George cans are passed through a window Figure 71. The Bluffton Oyster Company Powell placing oysters on the shucking into the measuring and packing room. in 1999 (Burrell photo). tables (Burrell photo). Here they are washed on a skimmer and then packed into 8, 12, 16, or 32 ounce or gallon size containers and placed in a refrigerated holding area where they are kept at 34 to 37°F until delivered (L. Toomer, pers. comm. 2000) (Figure 78). Ed Palmer operated the “Oyster House” on Sol Legare Road in Charleston. His plant was more like northern shucking houses. Oysters Figure 76. The measuring and packing are trucked in, heat shocked and sold room at the Bluffton Oyster Company. mostly to stores, restaurants, and the Figure 72. Anthony Frasier unloading Note the skimmer and sprayer head on the public (Palmer, pers. comm. 2000) at the Bluffton Oyster Company dock far wall (Burrell photo). (Burrell photo 1999). (Figure 79). Ed had been picking oysters since he was 14 years old and complained that many who gather oysters now lack the skills to do a good job quality wise or quantity wise. When not on the oyster beds, he was a skilled shucker (Berry 1998). The wage and hour law was applied to oyster shuckers in the mid 1960s and this led to some houses closing (Byrd 1965; G. Maggioni, pers. comm. 1970; W. Toomer, pers. comm. 2001). Contracting with the Figure 73. Bag oysters packed for deliv- Figure 77. Washing the oysters before pickers to supply shuckers and to pay ery (Burrell photo). packing them (Burrell photo 1999). them, enabled some to get around hav-

38 39 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Figure 78. A diagram of a typical southern South Carolina shucking house (drawn by Karen Swanson from a sketch by V. Burrell).

returned to McClellanville. She began working as a shucker in the oyster shucking houses of Tom Dukes, Earl Glynns, Shephard and others retiring at 63 as the houses began to close. She got tired of staying at home and after five years she started back to work picking crabs at the South Carolina Crab Company. She said most shucking houses used the hot dip method to open oysters but some used the cracker or chipper. With fat oysters she would open eight to ten gallons in a day (Harney, pers. comm. 2000). Carolina Seafood was the last to shuck at McClellanville. They worked with Donnie Mintz for a short period, but bought him out in the mid 1970s. They had 15 to 18 shuckers mostly former Shelmore Cannery employees. All of their oysters were packed in metal pint cans. With fat oysters, they ing the shuckers as employees, but still the Maggioni Ladies Island establish- produced 600 to 800 pints with the av- shuckers had to get at least minimum ment the sole remaining in the mid- erage shucker opening 40 and the best wages (Hancock, pers. comm. 2001). 1960s (Fleetwood 1995; S.C. Wild. 60 to 80 pints per day. Most were sold During the decade of the 1960s, Res. Dept. 1965; 1967). With the loss from peddler trucks to seafood mar- shucked oysters increased in whole- of the shell stock export business and kets (R. Leland, pers. comm. 2000). sale price from $5.25 per gallon to closure of several shucking houses, In the McClellanville area after $7.00 (Fisheries Statistics of United canned oysters again accounted for the cannery closed in 1965 and shuck- States 1961, 1971). Two of the three nearly all of the harvest (Figure 45). ing houses closed (1979-80), about all remaining canneries closed leaving Mrs. Thelma Harney was born of the oysters have been sold in the in McClellanville some shell. At first many of the oysters went eighty years ago. She went to the shucking houses in the Little to school in Charleston, but River area, but more recently they were bought by oyster roast operators. Erwin Ashley is a one-man McClellanville concern. Prior to Hurricane Hugo in 1989, he employed upwards of 12 pickers who harvested about 300 bushels of oysters per day for Figure 79. The Sol Legare him. At this time, Bulls Bay Seafood Oyster House on James Island operated by Tom Duke and Carolina (Burrell photo). Seafood of Rutledge Leland III each

38 39 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina were producing 300 and 400 bushels daily respectively. In recent years, probably all together, 500 bushels are the maximum brought to the docks per day. After Hurricane Hugo destroyed his facilities, rather than build back his oyster house with a refrigerated holding room and work toward high production, Ashley decided to do all his harvesting, planting and even, in some Figure 81. Oysters being loaded for shipment to Virginia for replanting (S.C. Wild. Res. instances, delivering himself. He is Dept. photo 1959). able to gather by hand picking from 25 to 48 bushels per day of high quality being shipped out of state in bulk but again results were not favorable shell stock. When he is not oystering, (S.C. Legislature 1959). This led to and this effort was abandoned by he has a going clam operation. A col- several oyster operators trucking oys- growers (S.C. Wild. Res. Dept. 1959). lege graduate trained for white collar ter shell stock to Virginia to be used About this time (1959), industrial jobs, he, like many of the oyster men, by soup companies (Bellamy, pers. pollution from the Savannah, Georgia will tell you that there is no desk job comm. 2001; Leland, pers. comm. area caused the Daufuskie oyster that can give him half the pleasure and 2000; Lubkin, pers. comm. 2001; grounds to close. This ended an indus- satisfaction he gets from working on S.C. Wild. Res. Dept. 1960 - 1970). try that at one time provided a livelihood the water (Ashley, pers. comm. 1970). The soup companies paid by the to over 600 people (Pinckney 2000). One of the biggest problems of pound for the yield of meats. Rutledge Hurricane Gracie in 1959 caused McClellanville oyster companies is Leland III, one of the shippers, de- the loss of many oyster grounds due a lack of cultch material. They ship cided it was not lucrative enough for to silt. Heavy rains (30 per cent their shell stock out but many of the him to continue this as his payment above normal) from March 1959 to shells are not returned. Ashley has was $1.00 per bushel to his pickers and March 1960 increased river flow and used hog wire staked out as a good he received less than $1.40 per bushel further damaged the beds. Many substitute cultch and Leland has after they were processed (Leland, areas needed intense shelling to reused bamboo stakes to catch spat pers. comm. 2001). Others continued cover (S.C. Wild. Res. Dept. 1960). (Ashley, pers. comm. 2000; Leland, on into the 1970s when the Virginia In the early 1960s, the State set pers. comm. 2000) (Figure 80). oyster steaming plants lost the soup aside several areas in Beaufort County G. Robert Lunz was a devoted trade to foreign imports (Lubkin, as public oyster grounds after the pub- oyster biologist and worked hard to pers. comm. 2000; U.S. Dept. Comm. lic’s right to access leased grounds was improve utilization of the oysters 1977). The export of oysters to repealed (News and Courier 1956a). In and became Director of the Division Virginia peaked in 1970 (Figure 45). other counties, no non-leased grounds of Commercial Fisheries in 1959. In Oysters tonged from restricted were available (S.C. Wild. Res. Dept. 1958, he convinced the state legis- subtidal beds in the Santee River 1960). A head of household could lature to repeal the act prohibiting were placed on trucks, the cargo doors gather two bushels per day for not oysters and clams in the shell from sealed and then carried to Virginia more than two days per week on these where they were replanted in approved grounds (S.C. Wild. Res. Dept. 1965). waters for depuration (Ashley, pers. Thirteen Public oyster grounds comm. 2000; Leland, pers. comm. and three large State grounds were 2001). This operation was carried out established in the mid 1960s. The under the supervision of the respec- State grounds were for use by both tive state health departments (Pringle the licensed commercial oystermen 1961). Some replanting in Virginia and recreational interests. The Public of oysters from clean South Carolina grounds were for exclusive use by waters was tried in the 1960s, but recreational shell fishermen. This re- survival was very low and this effort sulted in three types of shellfish areas was short lived (Fergueson, pers. - leased, State and Public grounds. Figure 80. Bamboo being cut to length for comm. 1969) (Figure 81). Seed oyster Leases were only from one foot be- planting as culch (Burrell photo 2002) export, also to Virginia, was tried low the low water mark to the high tide

40 41 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

line. Subtidal water cultivation was by the South Carolina Wildlife Resources hard clam fishery using hydraulic es- permit from the Wildlife Department Department was renamed the South calator dredges in 1973. As a bi-catch (S.C. Wild. Res. Dept. 1964; 1965). Carolina Wildlife and Marine of the fishery, many high quality sub- Many restaurants continued to Resources Department (Laurie 1997). tidal oysters were landed (R. Baldwin, offer raw oysters on the half shell, The MRD was charged but often the oysters were brought in with management of from other states, which have a greater the oyster fishery and a supply of attractive single oysters. new facility, the Marine One restaurant in Hilton Head in Resources Research the early 1990s used locally shucked Institute was given oysters placed back on cleaned shells the task of conducting to supply the demand for half shell research that would oysters. These were sold for 10 benefit the industry. cents each and in one season it was Both were located at the estimated that 50,000 of these were S.C. Marine Center lo- served (Collins, pers. comm. 2000) cated at Fort Johnson on Andrew Magwood, the son of Charleston Harbor (S.C. the before mentioned Mrs. C.A. Wildlife 1990; S.C. Wild. Magwood, and the son who con- Mar. Res. Dept. 1972). tinued the oyster business begun The State Board by his grandfather and possibly his of Health and the great grandfather, supplied Henry’s Department of Restaurant in Charleston with large Environmental Control quantities of single oysters for its half in 1973 were merged shell bar. For many years, most all into the Department the oysters the Magwoods sold were of Health and subtidal singles, but after it became Environmental Control difficult to grow oysters subtid- (DHEC) and its Shellfish ally they resorted to culling intertidal Sanitation Program stock to produce singles and doubles certified shellfish grow- (A. Magwood, pers. comm. 2001). ing areas and shucking Some drinking establishments of- house sanitation (S.C. fered an oyster “shooter”. This concoc- Legislature 1976). This tion consisted of raw oyster placed in a was not a task without jigger of whiskey and is ingested with problems (Newell, pers. one gulp - a wasting of good whiskey comm. 2000; Payne, and oysters in the opinion of many. pers. comm. 2000; In 1969, G. Robert Lunz, the one S.C. Board of Health and only director of Bears Bluff, died 1971) (See Figure 82). after a remarkable career in fisher- An outbreak of ies management and research and “black gill” caused sev- on January 1, 1970, the Bears Bluff eral shucking houses to Laboratories, Inc. was leased by its shut down in 1969 and Board of Directors to the U.S. Water 1970. This condition ap- Pollution Control Administration peared to have occurred and ceased to function as the state’s when oysters for some research facility after a 25 year reason were not strong fruitful existence (Lunz 1969; Lunz enough to eject mud 1970; McKenzie, pers. comm. 2000). from their gills (News The Division of Fisheries became and Courier 1970). Figure 82. A copy of a resolution by the DHEC to the the Marine Resources Division (MRD) The lower Santee General Assembly requesting permission to arm its of- in 1970 and shortly thereafter (1972) River was opened to a ficers (copy supplied by David Payne).

40 41 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

(W. Mitchell, pers. comm. 2001) the performance and responsibili- Clemson University engineers ties of state agencies relative to the working with MRD biologists in management and harvesting of the 1970s developed a mechani- shellfish. A moratorium was placed cal harvester for use on intertidal on issuing new leases at this time oysters. This effort eventually led (S.C. Wild. Mar. Res. Dept. 1982). to construction of a harvester to be The MRD discontinued the used by the MRD to harvest oysters licensing requirement for can- from polluted areas and plant them on ners, barges, clam and oyster boats, State and Public grounds (Burrell, et shellfish buy and sell and shucking al. 1981; Campbell 1998; S.C. Wild. houses in 1983 and this left regulat- Mar. Res. Dept. 1975; 1982). This ing of the facilities under the sole machine and others were not practical purview of the S.C. Department of for industry because none could cull Health and Environmental Control oysters brought up. Some times less (Newell, pers. comm. 2000; S.C. than half the material brought up was Legislature 1976; 1982). However, useable (Collins, pers. comm. 2000; licenses were required by the MRD G. Maggioni, pers. comm. 2000). for individual/non-power boats, The Clemson-designed mechani- wholesale dealers, individual land cal harvester was used to transfer and sell dealers and the use of shell- oysters from polluted waters to state fish dredges, grabs, tongs and rakes shellfish grounds for the first time in (S.C. Wild. Mar. Res. Dept. 1983). 1984. A study of the environmental A bill amending the shellfish Figure 83. A pile of single oysters har- effects of the use of the harvester statutes and adding new ones was vested along with clams in the Santee showed they were negligible (Burrell, signed into law by Governor Richard River by hydraulic escalator harvesters in et al. 1981; S.C. Wild. Mar. Res. W. Riley in June of 1985. This bill 1970s (Burrell photo). Dept. 1984). This machine was changed control of shellfish grounds eventually sold as surplus because it from leasing to permitting and pers. comm. 1995; S.C. Wild. Mar. was not economical to operate (S.C. reduced acreage whereby one firm Res. Dept. 1973-1985) (Figure 83). Dept. Nat. Res. 1999) (Figure 84). or individual could hold only 500 Block leasing which consolidated The legislature created a Shellfish acres. The term of permits were five existing leases so that they were cir- Study Committee in 1980 to review years with an option to renew at the cumscribed by natural boundaries the existing leasing system, the discretion of the MRD. Mariculture such as creeks and bays was initiated existing shellfish regulations and of shellfish other than oysters on bot- in the early seventies and efforts to re- establish subtidal oysters were begun (Island Packet 1971b; S.C. Wild. Mar. Res. Dept. 1972; 73). Some subtidal Public oyster grounds were planted with 2000 bushels of seed. Survival was poor and this program abandoned (S.C. Wild. Mar. Res. Dept. 1975). By 1975, some South Carolina shucked oysters were selling for around 10 dollars per gallon and, in 1973, region wide (South Atlantic) about 15 dollars per gallon (Fishery Statistics of U.S. 1976, 1977). DHEC did away with the requirement that shuckers have a health certification in the late 1970s Figure 84. A mechanical harvester developed by Clemson University for use on intertidal beds (Keith photo).

42 43 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

toms was permitted. Acreage of all people with compromised immune IN 2002 shellfish ground was to be measured systems who ate raw oysters were Intertidal oyster beds are still very by the actual shores containing oysters affected but sensational treatment much a part of the landscape in many or capable of growing them. This by the news media caused many to of the estuaries of South Carolina. drastically reduced the areas involved. drop the shellfish from their diets These beds, except on permitted beds, The fee per acre permitted was set (Burrell, et al. 1991b; Haney 1986; contain few if any oysters worth har- at five dollars and 125 U.S. bushels of Oliver 1999; Pineapple Press 1993). vesting. Thirty percent of these beds shell were required to be planted per A massive die-off of oysters oc- are condemned, conditionally opened acre per annum. This surplanted the curred in 1986. Hardest hit were areas to harvest or restricted for removal of 65 S.C. bushel requirement (Figure in the vicinity of Prices Inlet and in shellfish to be depurated (U.S. Dept. 30). Green shell from current op- the Beaufort area south to Georgia. Comm. 1991). North of Charleston, erations must be planted within three This coincided with a very hot and growers find most of the harvestable days after gathering. MRD could dry summer which may have been a oysters in the area between mid-tide require up to five percent of this shell contributing factor by stressing the and marsh grass. Fifteen years ago quota to be planted on state shell- shellfish to the extent that disease before the rediversion of the Santee fish grounds within 25 miles of the (“Dermo” - Perkensius marinus) River, the best oysters grew between permittee’s location. Double credit caused the mortalities (Parsons 1986; the low water line and mid-tide zone. for planting on these areas must be F. Smith 1986; S.C. Wild. Mar. Res. No one has been successful in growing applied to the permittee’s quota. The Comm. 1986). This led, in part, to the oysters subtidally since the mid 1950s standard bushel measure for harvest- L.P. Maggioni Company closing the and the practice of raking down oys- ing, selling, planting and marketing last South Carolina cannery and also ters into the upper subtidal zone to en- of shellfish was reduced from 4071.5 to several shucking houses ceasing op- hance size and shape no longer is suc- cubic inches to 2150.42 cubic inches erations (Beasley, pers. comm. 2000; cessful (Ashley, pers. comm.; Beasley, or the volume of a U.S. bushel (F. S. Flowers, Jr., pers. comm. 2000; pers. comm.; B. Flowers, pers. comm. Smith 1985; S.C. Legislature 1985). A. Magwood, pers. comm. 2001; 2000; G. Maggioni, pers. comm. Oyster meats sold for 30 dol- Solomon 1991; C. and S. Toomer, pers. 1984; Maggioni and Burrell 1982). lars per gallon and shell stock comm. 2000). The last large shucking The value of the oyster industry from 10 to 12 dollars per bushel in operation, T.M. Bailey, stopped shuck- ($1,092,000) ranked fourth behind 1987 (Reeves, pers. comm. 2000) ing in the early 1990s. Most remain- those for shrimp, blue crabs and fin- The flow of the Santee Cooper ing small houses closed one by one fish in 2000. Quahog (hard clams) lakes was re-diverted from the Cooper until 2001, when only two were left. which are harvested and sold by many River back into the Santee River and Forty-three shell stock shippers and oystermen was fifth ($749,000) and in 1988 this resulted in closure of the only two new shucking houses were this added much to their livelihood shellfish beds in the Santee River Delta certified in 2001 indicating how the (Low 2001). The number of people (SCWMRD 1988). Harvest of market oyster industry has changed over the working in the industry has remained oysters ceased, but seed oysters were years (U.S.F.D.A. 2001). Now shell fairly stable in the last ten years, but still gathered there for use as cover for stock shippers account for over 90% pickers and shuckers as a group are hard clam beds (Ashley, pers. comm. of the commercial harvest (Figure 45). getting older and few young people are 1995; R Baldwin, pers. comm. 1995). In 2001, oyster prices were choosing this for a career (Bailey, pers. The South Carolina Wildlife $60.00 per gallon wholesale, $65 per comm. 2000; Lowther, pers. comm. and Marine Resources Department gallon retail and from $14 to $18.00 2000; L. Toomer, pers. comm. 2001). (SCWMRD) became the South per bushel wholesale. Pickers were Carolina Department of Natural receiving $6 to $10 per bushel. Land MARICULTURE Resources (SCDNR) in 1994 under culture permit was 1745 acres Cultivation over the years has and the Marine Resources with 102 permits held by 59 entities. changed very little. The practices Division remained part of it. Fifty-eight State shellfish grounds mentioned of the early oystermen Another oyster scare hurt sales of containing 222 acres and 20 Public are basically the same today. oysters in the mid 1980s. A naturally oyster grounds encompassing 100 Mrs. Arthur Hancock operated a occurring bacterium, Vibrio vulni- acres were present (Keith, pers. comm. shucking house at Bluffton between ficus, which was present in oysters, 2003; Toomer , pers. comm. 2001). 1960 and 1967. Her shuckers depos- was responsible for several human ited shells in 20 gallon trash cans and fatalities in the United States. Only

42 43 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina they would be returned to the beds the next day. Most of the small oysters on these shells survived and produced very good shell stock in a year or so. Her method of cultivation produced oysters that yielded 80 to 90 percent selects (Hancock, pers. comm. 2001). Plantings of oysters in saltwater ponds have not proved to be commercially successful in several trials (Colson 1888; Lunz 1955). Figure 86. The shellfish hatchery at the Experimental subtidal seed plantings S.C. Marine Resources Research Institute by Keith and Cochran (1968) and (Hadley photo). Figure 87. An oyster grab (Burrell photo). Burrell, et al. (1981) gave mixed results. Often good survival was char- to research interests in laboratories Most of today’s boats have acteristic only in slow growth areas. and academic institutions (Hadley, fiberglass hulls, as opposed to the Many oyster farmers broke up pers. comm. 1999) (Figure 86). old cross-planked wooden bateaux. intertidal cluster oysters using oyster Each year the Marine Resources (Figures 92; 93) They go individually grabs or by towing a cyclone fence Department Shellfish Section current- to beds powered by outboard motors sheet across them in the off-season ly sends each shellfish permit holder a instead of being towed as in the early (Bailey, pers. comm. 2000, Beasley, notice of his shellfish planting require- days by sailboats and later motorized pers. comm. 2001). This served to ment. Along with this is a list of ac- towboats. After the advent of motor give oysters room to grow and al- ceptable means of meeting individual vessels in the fishery, often 12 to 15 lowing them to improve in quality. planting requirements. These may be boats would be hauled to and fro to the Sometimes oysters were raked down shell planting, seed oyster planting, beds dropping each off at a selected from the intertidal zone to just below intensive cultivation or breaking up harvest site and picking them back the subtidal line. This resulted, in clusters, introduction of hatchery- up after they were loaded and towing many cases, in fine single oysters produced seed, and other innovative them back to the factory (Bailey, pers. (Figure 85). In recent years, for some techniques (Keith, pers. comm. 2001). comm. 2000; Jackson, pers. comm. reason, oysters do not survive after 2000; Brownlee, Sr., pers. comm. being raked down, and this technique TOOLS OF THE TRADE is no longer practiced (Ashley, pers. Intertidal oysters have always comm. 1999; Bailey, pers. comm. been harvested by hand in South 2000; Leland, pers. comm. 2000). Carolina. Early on, the grab became Disease-free oysters are produced the most popular and efficient harvest- in a hatchery at the Marine Resources ing gear for the inter-tidal stock. This Research Institute. They are provided device easily dislodged oysters from clusters and allowed a skilled picker to toss the bivalve into the bateau along side the bed (Figures 87; 88; 89). After the last cannery closed, the grabs were abandoned and all Figure 88. Grabs in use (Charleston harvesting was with culling irons and Museum photo). gloved hands. A culling iron was often used to break oysters from clusters to 2000; G. Maggioni, pers. comm. 1972, fill a basket that would be offloaded 1977). The first powerboat used in the into the bateau (Ashley, pers. comm. industry at Little River was a steam 1999; Frasier, pers. comm. 2000). It launch operated by Victor Cox to tow Figure 85. Larry Cobb raking down in- was also used to break up clusters and oyster schooners across the inlet bar tertidal oysters to the upper subtidal zone knock off small oysters and dead shell around 1905 (V. S. Cox , pers. comm. in hopes of getting some good quality and often to create singles (A. Frasier, 1956). Later in the early teens, a singles (Keith photo 1997). pers. comm. 2000) (Figures 90; 91).

44 45 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Captain Bessent brought in “Miss Legonia” to tow pickers to and from the Little River oyster beds. It was 18 feet long and was powered by a five-horse power Hildreth Engine. He charged 50 cents each way (Bessent 1976). Subtidal oysters were tonged for the most part, but dredges have been used also (Figure 94). An early report Figure 91. A not-so-fancy culling iron of steam dredges harvesting oysters (property of A. Magwood). in Beaufort County is mentioned by Figure 93. A fiberglass reinforced resin hulled boat with an outboard motor typi- Oemler (1894) and for many years stones as several of these have been cal of those in use in the 1980s and after they were towed by motor vessels in found at Middens (W. Collins, pers. (Burrell photo). the Edisto Beach area. More recently comm. 2000) (See Figure 3). Knives good single oysters were taken along of all sorts have been employed. shuckers used various other wooden Everything from dinner and pocket- handled openers of various configura- knives to especially made presenta- tions. Some of these had metal guards tion instruments were used. Early to protect the hands from the sharp knives were made from 3⁄4 inch square oyster shells. Plastic handled stain- iron bars with one end flattened into a less steel bladed knives are the latest blade (Figure 95). The shucker broke to be introduced to the industry. Early shuckers protected their hands with cloth rags. These have been super- ceded by various types of gloves (Hine Figure 89. Loading a bateau (Charleston 1986; Pinckney, pers. comm. 2001). Museum photo). Hot water baths were common in the northern part of the state in shuck- with clams in the Santee River by hy- ing houses, but also used all along the draulic escalator dredges (Ashley, pers. coast by the so-called “bootleg” op- comm. 2000; Baldwin, pers. comm. 2000; L. Duke, pers. comm. 2001). Several machines designed to harvest intertidal oysters have been developed and tried. Each was successful to some extent, but none was without problems. Oysters first may have been opened by Amerinds using sharpen Figure 92. A wooden bateau with a load of oysters. Note the size of the handle on the oar and the sculling notch in the tran- som (Charleston Museum Photo, circa 1930s).

off the oyster’s bill with a stroke of the knife and then inserted the blade into the gap created to cut the muscle and remove the meat. Knives used by the shuckers at the steam canneries were thin bladed with a wooden handle. The average life of these knives was one Figure 90. A fancy culling iron (property Figure 94. Oyster tongs beside a clam of E. Ashley). week (Bailey, pers. comm. 1999). Raw fork (property of L.P. Maggioni Co.).

44 45 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

(Figure 98). The machines used to seal cans were initially hand operated but soon became electric powered. Most often the can manufacturers leased these machines to the raw shuck houses (Figure 99). Plastic cups are now used entirely by the remain- Figure 95. A few of the different types ing raw shuck houses (Figure 100). of oyster knives used by commercial and Figure 96. A stainless steel skimmer at recreational shuckers. The one in the far the Sol Legare Oyster house (Burrell right is made from a shaped bar of steel photo). similar to the earliest types (Burrell photo 1997). were discarded (See Figure 59). The concrete surface was finished very erations. These at first were iron pots smooth and in later years sealed with heated over wood fires and later became epoxy paint before each season. The cast iron bathtubs heated by gas burn- newest tables are constructed of stain- ers. The latest iterations are stainless less steel (Bachman, pers. comm. Figure 98. Cans from some of the steel vats. A half bushel mesh basket 2001; Johnson, pers. comm. 2000; prominent oyster companies (W. Collins containing the oysters to be shucked Palmer, pers. comm. 200l ; L. Toomer, collection). was immersed in the bath long enough pers. comm. 2001) (Figure 97). to relax the muscle (See Figure 58). All raw shucked oysters at first Cold raw shuckers used a chipper were placed in mason jars (usu- and hammer to help them get the meats out whole. Chippers were shaped like an upside down “T”. First they consisted of a metal blade (maybe made from an old file inserted in a wooden block). Later they were made from stainless steel bar (See Figure 59). As mentioned, only two shucking houses used aerators on a regular basis. Other houses did not use them because this removed the salt flavor so much appreciated by low country afi- Figure 97. The stainless steel shucking cionados (S. Flowers, Jr., pers. comm. table in use at the Sol Legare Oyster 2000; Tarbox, pers. comm. 2000). house. The shuckers are from the left: Figure 99. An electric can sealer (W. Skimmers were stainless steel Don George, Anthony Byrd and Kenny G. Collins collection). or plastic trays with perforated bot- (Burrell photo 2002). toms. Shucked oysters were placed on them and washed with a fresh- ally quart size), but very soon after water spray from a plastic or rubber organized shucking houses came into hose with a showerhead or spray being, metal cans became the norm. nozzle on the end. The skimmers The cans were plug type at first, that were most often shaped so that the is a lid was pushed down by hand to oysters could be concentrated at one close the can. All gallon cans remain end and put into cans (Figure 96). this type, but machine-sealed smaller Shucking tables at first were cans replaced the plug types. Some constructed of wood. These were of these smaller size cans (8 to 16 supplanted by concrete ones with oz.) also had a plastic insert in the holes located at each shucking posi- bottom that allowed the customer to Figure 100. Plastic containers used now tion through which the empty shells inspect the oysters before purchasing by oyster houses (Burrell photo).

46 47 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Seafood markets bought oysters in Mechanical intertidal oyster harvest- grounds (S.C. Wild. Mar. Res. Dept. gallon cans and packed oysters in ers developed by Clemson University 1984; S.C. Wild. Mar. Res. Comm. various size paper cups (usually half engineers were used to plant 1988). This operation did not prove to pint, pint and quart) as the customer public beds throughout the 1980s. be economical and the machine was requested. This practice still occurs. In a survey of recreational fish- declared surplus in 1999 (SCDNR ermen in the early 1980s, a major 1999). Public grounds continued to RECREATIONAL HARVEST concern voiced by respondents was be maintained by contracting indus- While not an industry per se, the a need for improved public shellfish try members to plant them (SCDNR recreational or subsistence fishery has grounds (Low, et al. 1986). They 2000). The Marine Resources Act of always influenced oyster regulations presumably wanted the State to keep 2000 again limited recreational har- and thus the industry. Legislation in them planted with oysters for their use. vest of oysters to two days per week to 1924 gave the public right to gather A major revision of shellfish laws gather two bushels per person and three two bushels of oysters for two days in 1985 was enacted with the prime personal limits per boat or vehicle or per week per head of household or purpose of allowing more public combination of both (SCDNR 2001). servant ( Lunz 1951; South Carolina and commercial access to the state’s In 2002, the Saltwater Recreational Legislature 1924). This gave the shellfish resources. This legisla- Fishing License was increased public pretty much permission to tion replaced the lease system with to $10 per year (SCDNR 2002). gather from any oyster bed, leased permitting. An important aspect of or not, for private use. Abuse of this bill was to change legal measure this led to its repeal in 1955 (News of shellfish from 4071.5 cubic inches and Courier 1956a). Sometimes a to 2150.42 cubic inches per bushel group of ten or more individuals or the same as a U.S. bushel. This working in concert would gather reduced the daily allowance for their quota for commercial purposes. gathering oysters for home use. The This legislation required the Board limit was returned to two bushels of of Fisheries to establish public oyster oysters per day per person any day grounds in each oyster-producing of the week in open season from EPILOGUE county for the exclusive use by private Public and State grounds. Written What lies in store for the once citizens (S.C. Wild. Res. Dept. 1956; permission from the permittee must great South Carolina oyster industry? South Carolina Legislature 1959). be obtained to gather from permit- Millions of cans of oysters were It proved difficult to obtain ted grounds (S.C. Legislature 1985). once produced and shipped around grounds at first except in Beaufort The legislature passed the the world by several thousand pickers, County. The other counties had Recreational Fisheries Conservation shuckers and factory hands. The sites all useable land leased or polluted and Management Act in 1991 and this where the oyster canneries and shuck- (S.C. Wild. Res. Dept. 1961). These became law in 1992. It required rec- ing houses were are now occupied by Public ground areas were increased reational shell fishermen to purchase a expensive residences. Golf courses over time (S.C. Wild. Res. Dept. $5.50 stamp annually to gather shell- line many of the waterways that were 1962). Deep water beds as well as fish for personal use (South Carolina formerly the source of vast amounts 13 Public grounds and three State Legislature 1991). A survey of of oysters that fed the canneries and grounds were available to the general recreational fishermen estimated that shucking houses. Nearly all the public by 1965 (S.C. Wild. Res. Dept. during the first year of this new regula- remaining shuckers are at or beyond 1965). By 1974, nineteen Public tion 15,670 people made 69,641 shell- retirement age and no younger men grounds were established in unleased fishing trips for oysters and harvested and women are coming behind them areas and in grounds voluntarily relin- 79,808 bushels. This represented 43% to learn the trade. A few young men quished by commercial lease holders of total oyster landings for the 1993- are choosing the hard life of pickers. (S.C. Wild. Mar. Res. Dept. 1974). 94 season (Langley 1998; Waltz 1996). Human and industrial wastes have put These areas along with State Funds derived from these licenses many once prime growing areas off grounds were planted from time were to be used to improve recreation- limits (Burrell 1982; Conroy 1972; to time with seed oysters and al shellfisheries. The hydraulic esca- LaPeter 1995; Moss 2000; News and shell by contract with commercial lator harvester designed by Clemson Courier 1961; 1990; State 1995; U.S. growers (Moore, et al. 1984; S.C. University engineers was funded for Dept. Comm. 1991). Changed water Wild. Mar. Res. Dept. 1976; 1979). several years to plant Public oyster flow has apparently altered oyster-pro-

46 47 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina ducing sites and increased boat traffic eroded the intertidal zone where oysters once grew abundantly (S. Jr. and B. Flowers, pers. comm. 2000; G. Maggioni, pers. comm. 1980). Recreational shell fishermen far out number the industry members and their catch is coming close to exceeding the commercial harvest (Waltz 1996). All is not gloom, however. Scientists and regulators are looking at the oyster in a broader sense, not just as a table delicacy but as a vital part of a healthy estuarine system (Coen, et al. 1999). The oyster reef provides habitat for both infaunal and epifaunal estuarine organisms which in turn are vital components of the food chain. Figure 101. The Callawassee Home Owner’s Association members planting bags of oyster shell on a site in Callawassee Island, S.C. If successful a new oyster reef will result Wells (1961) found 303 species of mac- (Coen photo). rofauna associated with intertidal and subtidal oyster reefs in North Carolina. Bahr found annual mean frequency of is successful in substantially increas- reef macrofauna to be nearly 38,000 ing oyster acreage, the quality of the animals per square meter including waters and adjacent areas is expected oysters on intertidal oyster reefs in to improve dramatically and this Georgia (Bahr and Lanier 1981). The of course will benefit the industry oysters are highly efficient water filter- (Breitburg, et al. 2000; Coen and ers, recyclers of nutrients and control- Luckenbach 2000; Coen, et al. 1999; lers of phytoplankton blooms (Bahr Island Packet 1998; Moultrie News and Lanier 1981; Chesapeake Bay 2001; Radford 2001) (Figure 101). Foundation 2000; Dame 1972; 1979; To envision greater commercial 1996; Dame and Libes 1993; Dame, production, one must look to in- et al. 1984; Leffler 2001; Newell 1988; novative ways to utilize the inter- Newell and Ott 1999; Wells 1961). tidal oyster. This could include an Oyster reefs are affected by sedi- economical means of mechanical ment and currents but they also affect shucking raw oysters or finding a them. They serve as buffers to help means to make a steam opened oys- prevent erosion on waterways that ter more appealing to the housewife. have become busy with recreational For now though, the “Golden boats and adjacent highlands in case Age” of the oyster industry in South of storm surge (Bahr and Lanier Carolina has like that of indigo, Sea 1981; Burrell 1986; Jones 2001). Island cotton and rice, become history. A program was initiated by the SCDNR to re-establish some of the oyster reefs in coastal South Carolina. Plastic mesh bags filled with oyster shell have been placed in intertidal areas that show promise as oyster habitat. Designed and sponsored by the SCDNR, many educational, environmental and civic organiza- tions have adopted this project. If it

48 49 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

APPENDIX

48 49 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Appendix 1. A copy of 1845 Grant giving David Truesdale 400 acres behind Sullivan’s Island for an oyster plantation (S.C. Department of Archives, State Grants Vol. P, #6 p. 250).

50 51 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Appendix 2. The Maggioni Yonges Island Cannery after a 1940 hurricane. This facility was repaired, but many others over the years were not and the businesses were consolidated into more centrally located facilities (R. Maggioni photo).

Appendix 4. A stamp required for shucked oysters 1924 to 1952 (David Cupka collection).

Appendix 3. An invoice for sale of oysters in 1918 showing a federal license number. Whether or not this meant meeting some sanitary requirements is not known (Westendorff collection).

50 51 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Appendix 5. Lease payment receipts, 1920s – 1940s (Magwood family collection).

52 53 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Appendix 6. An approved 1931 agreement leasing 1.45 acres to Mr. C.A. Magwood (Magwood family collection)

52 53 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Appendix 8. Payment for dredge damage to oyster beds by Intracoastal Waterway workers (Magwood family collection).

Appendix 7. Mrs. C.A. Magwood’s pay stub for a week’s work at Apte Brothers Cannery in 1940 (Magwood family col- Appendix 9. Washing oysters on Little lection). Bull Island in the 1970s (Magwood photo).

Appendix 10. Washing oysters at the Maggioni facility on Lady’s Island in 2001 Appendix 11. Delivery (Burrell photo). of oysters at the Maggioni facility on Lady’s Island in 2000 (Burrell photo).

54 55 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Appenedix 13. A traveling table used by the Larry Toomers’ at oyster roasts (Burrell photo).

Appendix 12. Terry Annibale demonstrates that good-sized oysters are still available for those willing to put the effort into finding them (Burrell photo 2000).

Appendix 15. A sketch by Mrs. Naomi McCracken of the Lowden Cannery at Bluffton in the mid-1930s. This factory was destroyed in a hurricane in 1939 (Sketch property of Emmett McCracken). Appendix 14. Part of the crowd at the Lowcountry Oyster Roast listening to some of the entertainers (Westendorff photo 1999).

Appendix 16. The John S. “Junior” Graves oyster shucking Appendix 17. Mr. and Mrs. Joel Jackson in 2000. He worked and crab picking house at Trimbleston on Sawmill Creek prior for the Shelmore Cannery from the early 1930s until 1965 to demolition in 2002 (Burrell photo). (Burrell photo).

54 55 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Appendix 18. Mr. A.B. Brownlee, manager of the Maggioni Lady’s Island and Yonges Island canneries, 1950s and 1960 (Burrell photo).

Appendix 19. Ralph Maggioni and various stages of oysters from fresh to steamed to the can (Maggioni family photo).

Appendix 20. An oyster cannery at Biloxi, Mississippi around 1920. This operation was identical to those in South Carolina (photo property of V.G. Burrell).

Appendix 21. Tag required by law to be attached to each bag of oysters by the harvester (S.C. DHEC 2001).

Appendix 22. Tag required by law to be attached to each bag of oysters handled by a wholesale shellfish buyers and shippers. (S.C. DHEC 2001).

56 57 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Appendix 23. A letter regarding estimates of shell planting by oyster companies.

56 57 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

58 59 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

BIBLIOGRAPHY ______. 1933a. Maggioni Burger, A. 1998. Get shucking Allison, A.W. 1947. Bears Ad. Offering to buy local toma- at festival. Post and Courier. Bluff Laboratories. Bears toes. Beaufort, S.C. June 29, 1933. Charleston, S.C. Jan. 14, 1998. Bluff Laboratories, ______. 1933b. Bluffton Burn, Billie. 1991. An island Wadmalaw Island, S.C. 29487. checks tornado damage. named Daufuskie. The Reprint Contributions (unnumbered). Beaufort, S.C. Aug. 10, 1933b. Co. Publ. Spartanburg, S.C. Andrews, J.D. 1962. Oyster mortal- ______. 1972. Indigo, Burrell, V.G. Jr. 1982. South ity studies in Virginia. MSX in Rice and Colonial Beaufort. Atlantic region over view. In James River public seed beds. Proc. Beaufort, S.C. Sept. 14, 1972. K.K. Chew (ed) Proc. No. Amer. Nat. Shellfish. Assoc. 53:65-84. Oyster Workshop p. 125-129. Berry, C.B. 1959. Notes on interview World Maric. Soc. Spec. Publ. 1. Bahr, L.M., and W.P. Lanier. 1981. of Essie Maybell Bessent McCorsley The ecology of intertidal oyster (Born 1887) Sept. 28, 1959. ______. 1986. Species reefs of the South Atlantic Coast: profiles: Life histories and en- Berry, C.B. 1996. Some centenarians a community profile. U.S. Fish vironmental requirements of of Little River Neck. Sun News. Wild. Ser. Biol. Ser. Prog., Wash., coastal fishes and invertebrates. Myrtle Beach, S.C. June 15, 1996. D.C. FWS/OBS 81/15 105 pp. (South Atlantic) --- American Baldwin, A.L. 1972. A re- Berry, D. 1998. Harvesting oyster. U.S. Fish Wild. Ser. Biol. oysters: Its in the eyes and Rep. 82 (11.57). U.S. Army Corps examination of the 1928 Cape hands. Charlotte Observer. of Engineers TR EL08204. 17p. Romain decision in South Carolina. Charlotte, N. C. Dec. 20, 1998. Unpubl. Ms. 37 p. + appendices. ______. 1997. Molluscan Bessent, C.B. 1976. Early Little shellfisheries of the South Atlantic Barbour, C. 2001. Boone Hall River Days. The Independent region of the United States. In Festival is part of a strong oyster Republic Quarterly. Vol. 10: 7-9. Mackenzie et al (eds). The his- tradition. Charleston Post and tory, present condition and future Courier. Thursday, Jan 18, 2001. Bishop, J.M., G. Ulrich, H.S. Wilson. of molluscan fisheries of North and 1994. We are in trim to it: A Battle, J.D. 1892. An investiga- Central America and Europe p. 171- review of Charleston’s Mosquito 185. NOAA Tech. Rep. NMFS 127. tion of the coastal waters of Fleet. Rev. Fish. Sci. 2(4): 331-346. South Carolina with reference to ______. M.Y. Bobo, and oyster culture. Bull. U.S. Fish. Bobo, M.L., D.L. Richardson, L.D. J.J. Manzi. 1984. A comparison Comm. 1891. Vol. 10:303-330. Coen, and V.G. Burrell. 1997. A of seasonal incidence and inten- report on the protozoan pathogens Beaufort Gazette. 1903a. Sinking sity of Perkinsus marinius between Perkinsus marinus (Dermo) and subtidal and intertidal oyster fund after Beaufort oyster licenses. Haplosporidium nelsoni (MSX) in Beaufort, S.C. Oct. 8, 1903. populations in South Carolina. J. South Carolina shellfish popula- World Maricul. Soc. 15:301-309. ______. 1903b. Beaufort tions. S.C. Dept. Nat. Res., Mar. can protect her own interest. Res. Div. Tech Rep. No. 86. 50p. ______. J.J. Manzi and Beaufort, S.C. Oct. 8, 1903. W.Z. Carson. 1981. Growth and Breitburg, D.L., L.D. Coen, M.W. mortality of two types of seed oys- ______. 1905. Fish Luckenbach, R. Mann, M. Posey ters from the Wando River, South Commission organizers here. and J. A. Wesson. 2000. Oyster Carolina. J. Shellfish Res. 1 (1): 1-7. Beaufort, S.C. April 13, 1905. reef restoration: Convergence of harvest and conservation strate- ______. J.J. Manzi and ______. 1912a. Port gies. J. Shellf. Res. 19(1): 371-377. C.B. O’Rourke. 1991. Assessment Royal. Beaufort, S.C. May 3, 1912. of mechanical transplanting is a Brooks, W.K. 1891. The Oyster. Johns means of rehabilitating intertidal ______. 1912b. Port Royal. Hopkins Press. Baltimore, Md. 230p. Beaufort, S.C. Oct. 12, 1912. oyster beds. Proc. Gulf. Carib. Fish. Inst. 40th Ann. Mtg. 228-240. ______. 1912c. Trade conditions in Beaufort. Beaufort, S.C. Sept. 7, 1912.

58 59 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

______. J. Sample, C. ______. 1899. Lucas- Coen, L.D., M.W. Luckenbach, and Batey and Y.M Bobo. 1991. Richardson Lithograph and D.L. Breitburg. 1999. The role of Concentration of Vibrio vulnificus Publishing Co., Charleston S.C. 1900. oyster reefs as essential fish habitat: in oysters Crassostrea virginica a review of current knowledge ______. 1900. Walker, grown in ponds with Pacific white and some new perspectives. Pp. Evans and Cogswell Printing shrimp, Penaeus vannamei; J. 438–454 in L.R. Benaha (ed) Co., Charleston, S.C. 1901. Shellf. Res. 10(1):227. Abstract. Fish habitat: essential fish habitat ______. 1904. Lucas- and rehabilitation. Amer. Fish Byrd, M. 1965. Low Country Richardson Lithograph and Soc. Synop. 22. Bethesda, MD. Oystermen alarmed over wage Printing Co., Charleston, S.C. 1905. scale. News and Courier. Colson, C.B. 1888. History of Charleston, S.C. Sept. 24, 1965. Charleston Courier. 1846. For the mill pond oyster and cause the Courier. “Old Kate”, of its disappearance. Proc. Caldwell, Elizabeth. 1990. The The Oyster Wife – a Dirge. Elliott Soc. Charleston, delectable oyster. In Early Charleston, S.C. Feb. 13, 1846. S.C. March 1888 p. 191-201. American Life. February 1990. Charleston Courier. 1848. Conroy P. 1972. The water is Campbell, B. 1998. Winter oysters. Melancoly Accident. wide. Houghton Mifflin. 260 p. Islander. Johns Island, S.C. Vol. 8. Charleston, S.C. Feb. 11, 1848. No. 13. January 29–February 4, 1998. Cunynghame, A. 1851. A glimpse at Cheng. T.C., W.J. Dougherty and the great western republic. Richard Carriker, M.R. 1955. Critical V.G. Burrell. 1994. A pos- Bentley, Publ. London. 335p review of biology and control sible hemocyte surface marker of oyster drills Urosalpinx and Dame, R.F. 1972. The ecological for resistance to Haplosparidum Eupleura, U.S. Fish Wild. Ser. energies of growth respiration nelsoni in the oyster Crassostrea Spec. Sci. Rep. Fish. 148.150 pp. and assimilation in the intertidal virginica. Research and Review American oyster Crassostrea vir- Catesby, M. 1731. The natural history in Parasitology 54(1): 51-54. ginica . Mar. Biol. 17:243-250. of Carolina, Florida and the Bahama Chesapeake Bay Foundation. Islands. Text in 1985. Catesby’s ______. 1979. The abun- 2000. Restoring Chesapeake Birds of Colonial America dance diversity and biomass of Gold. Chesapeake Bay p.135–169. A. Feduccia. (ed) Univ. macrobenthos on North Inlet, South Foundation. Annapolis, Md. 17p. N.C. Press. Chapel Hill, N. C. 176p. Carolina, intertidal oyster reefs. Chibbaro, A. 2001. Images of America: Proc. Natl. Shellfish Assoc. 69:6-10. Charleston City Directory. 1859. the Charleston Exposition. Arcadia Mears and Turnbull Compliers. ______. 1996. Ecology Publishing Co., Charleston, S.C. Walker, Evans and Cogswell. of Marine Bivalves: An Printing Co. Charleston, S.C. 243 p. Churchill, E.P. 1920. The oyster ecosystem approach. CRC and the oyster industry of the Press. Boca Raton, Fla. 254 p. ______. 1891. Southern Atlantic and Gulf Coasts. U.S. Directory and Publishing Co. ______and S. Libes Bureau of Fisheries, Rep. of the Lucas Richardson Printers. 1993. Oysters reefs and nutrient comm. of fish for fiscal year 1919. retention in tidal creeks. J. Exp. ______. 1903. Walsh’s. W.H. Appendix 8 (Doc 890) pp. 1-51. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 171: 251-258. Walsh Printing Co., Charleston, S.C. Civil War Collector’s Price ______, R.G. Zingmark, and ______. 1912. Walsh’s. W.H. Guide 2000 Publishers Press E. Haskins. 1984. Oyster reefs as Walsh Printing Co., Charleston, S.C. Inc., Orange, Va. 22960. processors of estuarine material. J. ______. 1913. Walsh’s. W.H. Coen, L.D. and M.W. Luckenbach Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol 83: 239-247. Walsh Printing Co., Charleston, S.C. 2000. Developing success Dean, B. 1892. The physical and criteria and goals for evaluat- Charleston City Year Book. 1890. biological characteristics of ing oyster reef restoration: Walker, Evans and Cogswell the natural oyster grounds of Ecological function or resource Printing Co., Charleston, S.C. 1891. South Carolina. Bull. U.S. Fish exploitation? Ecol. Engr. 323-343. Comm. 1890. Vol. 10:335-361.

60 61 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Deas, A. 1974. A ball in Charleston, S.C. Fishing Industries of the United Haney, D.G. 1986. Experts recom- Historical Magazine. Vol. 75. p. 49. States. Rep. Div. Stat. Meth. mend avoiding raw shellfish. Fish. 1920. Append. V Rep. Savannah Morning News, Directories for the City of U.S. Comm. Fish 1921. 187p. Savannah, S.C. March 13, 1986. Charleston, South Carolina. 1998. The years: 1849, 1852, ______. Rep. Div. Stat. Harden, J. 2000. Bank de- 1855. Hagy, J.W. (ed) Clearfield Meth. Fish. 1918. Append X Rep. molition paving the way for Co., Inc. Baltimore, Md. 176p. Of U.S. Comm. Fish 1918 167p. planned dig. Post and Courier, Charleston, S.C. Dec. 14, 2000. Donehue, J.D. 1959. Local oysters ______. 1931. U.S. are scarce. News and Courier, Gov. Printing Office. Haven, D.S. W.J. Hargis, P.C. Kendall. Charleston, S.C. Dec. 6, 1959. Wash., D.C. 1932. 440p. 1978. The oyster industry of Virginia: its studies, problems Fisheries Statistics of the United FKM. 1905. Shellfish and promise. Virginia Inst. Mar. States for 1960. U.S. Gov. Commission. News and Courier. Sci. Gloucester Point, Va. VMS Printing Office. 1961. 460p. Charleston, S.C. July 12, 1905. Spec. Pap. Mar. Sci. No. 4. 1024 p. ______. 1965. U.S. Fleetwood, W.C. Jr. 1995. Tidecraft. Hawkins, M. 1993. Yesteryears in Gov. Printing Office. W.B.G. Marine Press. P.O. Box 178. Murrells Inlet. Breslauer, Lachicotte Wash., D.C. 1967. 756p. Tybee Island, GA. 31328. 356p. and Co. South Carolina’s first can- ______. 1967. U.S. Food Engineering. 1999. Ultra high nery. Inlet Image, Murrells Inlet, Gov. Printing Office. pressure revolutionizes seafood S.C. No. 24, 1993. Vol. 1 No. 15. Wash., D.C. 1969. 490p. processing. Oct. 1999. p. 18-19. Hawkins, C. 1994. Oyster roasts can ______. 1968. U.S. Frost, W.H. 1925. Report of com- move inside. Post and Courier, Gov. Printing Office. mittee on sanitary control of the Charleston, S.C. March 9, 1994. Wash., D.C. 1971. 578p. shellfish industry in the United Heyward, H. 1985. Bluffton Oyster States. Supplement No. 53. Public ______. 1970 U.S. Co. – Op sold. Island Packet, Health Reports. Nov. 6, 1925. 17pp. Gov. Printing Office. Hilton Head, S.C. Dec. 13, 1985. Wash., D.C. 1973. 489p. Galtsoff, P.S. 1943. Increasing Hine, L.W. 1986. Lewis Hine: the production of oyster and ______. 1971. U.S. photographs of child labor in the other shellfish in the United Gov. Printing Office. new South (ed. Kemp. Jr.) Univ. States. Fishery Leaflet 22. 14p. Wash., D.C. 1974. 424p. Miss. Press. Jackson, MS 108p. ______. 1964. The American ______. 1975. U.S. Huckaby, L. 1981. Maggioni oyster Oyster, Crassostrea virginica Gov. Printing Office. plant opens 111th season. News. Gmelin. Fishery Bulletin of the Wash., D.C. 1978. 418p. Press. Savannah Ga. Nov. 8, 1981. Fish and Wildl. Serv. Vol. 64. 480p. ______. 1976. U.S. Ingersoll, E. 1881. the oyster in- Galtsoff, P.S. and H.F. Prytherch. Gov. Printing Office. dustry. In G. B. Goode (ed) The 1927. An Investigation of the Wash., D.C. 1980. 419p. history and present condition coastal waters of South Carolina of the fishing industries. Gov. with reference to oyster culture. ______. 1977. U.S. Print Office. Wash., D.C. 251 p. Gov. Printing Office. Bur. Comm. Fish. Eco. Circ. No. 61. Wash., D.C. 1984. 497p. Irving, J.B. 1850. Local events and in- Georgetown Enquirer. 1887. Wm. cidents at home. Charleston Library O. Bourke, dealer in choice fam- Fishing Gazette. 1907. Oyster Canning Society. Miscellaneous pamphlets. Industry. 16 (15) April 13, 1907. ily groceries. Georgetown, S.C. Vol. VIII (10). Nov. 30, 1887. Island Packet. 1971a. New oyster ______. 1935. Oyster shucking device. NMFS – opens Gracy, R.C., W.J. Keith and R.J. shell products. Ann. Rev. 1934. oyster, clams, scallops, mussels. Rhodes. 1978. Management Hilton Head, S.C. Mar. 18, 1971. ______. 1936. Fishery and Development of the Shellfish by-products. Ann. Rev. 1935. Industry in S.C. S.C. Mar. Resour. Ctr. Tech Rep. No. 28.

60 61 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

______. 1971b. Local ______. 1905d. State Fish Loosanoff, V.L. and J.B. Engle. 1947. oyster man says industry thriving. Commission. News and Courier, Effect of different concentrations Hilton Head, S.C. March 18, 1971. Charleston, S.C. July 9, 1905. of micro-organisms on the feeding of oysters (O. virginica). U.S. Fish ______. 1982a. Original Lane, R. 1977. Gilbert Maggioni in- Wild. Ser. Fish Bull 42. Vol 51:31-57. oyster workers. Polish. July 1, 1982. terview. April 1977. Unpubl. MS. In collections of the Georgia Historical Low, R. A. 2001. South Carolina ______. 1982b. Oyster site Society. Savannah, Ga. 26p. Marine Fisheries 2000. S.C. sought. Hilton Head, S.C. July 1, 1982. Dept. Nat. Resour. Charleston, Langdon, C.J. and R.E. Newell. ______. 1998. S.C. makes S.C. Dat a Rep. 38. 45p. 1996. Digestion and Nutrition in plans to steam shells. Hilton larvae and adults. Chap. 6. p. 231 Low, R. A., W. Waltz, R. Martore and Head, S.C. January 12, 1998. – 269. In Kennedy, V.S. et al eds. C. J. Moore. 1986. South Carolina ______. 2002. May The Eastern Oyster. Maryland Marine Recreational Fishery River land purchase a com- Sea Grant. College Park, Md. Surveys, 1985 and 1986. S.C. munity milestone (an editorial). Mar. Res. Ctr. Tech. Rep. No. 65. Langley, L. 1998. Shrimping Hilton Head, S.C. January 4, 2002. out-shines oyster, clam Lunz, G.R. 1950. Production and Jenkins, James. “Baby Ray” season. Post and Courier. yield of the oyster canning in- 1998. Interview with Gene Charleston, S.C. Sept 13, 1998. dustry of South Carolina. Bears Morrison, Document in ar- Bluff Laboratory, Wadmalaw Langley, L. 2001. National forest chives of Village Museum. Island, S.C. Contr. No. 9. 14p. official searches for history of con- McClellanville, S.C. 29458. servation corps. Post and Courier. ______. 1951. Laws Jones, C. 2001. The excit- Charleston, S.C. Sept. 2, 2001. for the oyster farmer. Bears ing life of an oyster. Coastal Bluff Laboratories, Wadmalaw La Peter, B. 1995. Oyster beds Carolina Business Journal. Island, S.C. Contr. No. 10. closing, Island Packet. Hilton Florence, S.C. Vol. 3(2): 40-41. Head, S.C. August 2, 1995. ______. 1952. Bears Bluff Katz, F. (ed.) 1996. New treat- Laboratories 1948 to 1953. Bears Laurie, P. 1997. History of South ment promises safe oyster. Bluff Laboratories, Wadmalaw, Carolina’ Marine Resources Food Processing. May 1996. Island, S.C. Contr. No. 13. Division 1972-1997. S.C. Sea Grant Keith, W.J. and H.S. Cochran, Jr. Consortium. Charleston, S.C. 56p. ______. 1954. State 1968. Charting of subtidal oyster Marine Resources need develop- Leffler, M. 2001. Oyster reefs: beds and experimental planting ing. South Carolina Wildlife. S.C. Key to restoring bay grasses. of seed oysters in S.C. Contr. Wild. Res. Dept. Winter 1954. Maryland Marine Notes. Bears Bluff Lab. No. 48.17p. Maryland Sea Grant College, ______. 1955. Cultivation Keith, W.J. and R.C. Gracy, 1972. College Park, MD. Vol. 19(1): 1-5. of oysters in ponds at Bears History of the South Carolina Bluff Laboratories. Proc. Leland, Jack. 1968. The Baron of Oyster. S.C. Wild. Mar. Res. Dept. Nat Shellf. Asso. 46: 83-87. Little Bulls. News and Courier, Mar. Res. Div. Ed. Rep. 1, 19 pp. Charleston, S.C. Nov. 26. 1968. ______. 1960. Intertidal oys- Kohn, A. 1905a. Our oysters are ters. Wards Nat. Sci. Bull. 34 (1) 3-7. Lewis, C.H. 1988. Little River. Coastal inexhaustible. News and Courier, Courier. North Myrtle Beach, ______. 1969. Annual Charleston, S.C. April 12, 1905. S.C. Thursday, February 4, 1988. Report 1967 – 1968. Bears ______. 1905b. Oyster lore Bluff Laboratories, Wadmalaw Lindsay, N. 2000. And I’m glad. An for the public. News and Courier, Island, S.C. Contr. 49. oral history of Edisto Island. Tempus Charleston, S.C. April 13, 1905. Pub. Co., Charleston, S.C. 29401. Lunz, E.M. 1970. Bears Bluff ______. 1905c. Must pro- Laboratories, Wadmalaw Island, tect or lose. News and Courier, S.C. 1945 – 1969. Bears Bluff Charleston, S.C. April 15, 1905. Laboratories, Wadmalaw Island, S.C. Contribution (unnumbered).

62 63 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Mackey, Charles. 1859. Life Matthew, W.M. 1992. The Private Newell, R.E. 1988. Ecological chang- and Liberty in America. Diary of Edward Ruffin – 1843: es in Chesapeake: are they a result Smith, Elder & Co. NY., N.Y. Agriculture, Geology and Society of over harvesting the American in Antebellum South Carolina. oyster (Crassostrea virginica)? Mackenzie, C.L. Jr. 1996. History Univ. Ga. Press. Athens. 368p. Pp 536 – 546. In: Lynch, M.P., E.C. of oystering in the United States Krome (eds.). Understanding the and Canada, featuring the eight McCrady, T. 1871. Ledger book of an estuary: Advances in Chesapeake greatest oyster estuaries. Marine oyster company located at 21 Bee Bay Research. Chesapeake Fisheries Rev. 58(4) p.1-78. St. in Charleston. Book is in the ar- Research Consortium. Publ. 12 chives of the Charleston Museum. Mackenzie, C.L. Jr., and V.G. Burrell, CBP/TRS. Glochester Point, Va. Charleston, S.C. dated 1869-1871. Jr. 1997. Trends and Status of Newell, R.I.E., and J.A. Ott. 1999. Molluscan fisheries in North and McNulty. 1953. Seasonal and Macrobenthos communities and Central American and Europe. A vertical patterns of setting off eutrophication. Coastal and synopsis in C.L. Mackenzie, Jr., Wadmalaw Island, S.C. Bears Estuarine Studies. Vol. 55: 765-293. V.G. Burrell, Jr., A. Rosenfield, Bluff Laboratories, Wadmalaw and W.L. Hobart (eds) 1997. The Island, S.C. Contrib. 15. 17 p. Newell, R.I.E. and C.J. Langdon. history, present condition and 1996. Mechanisms and Physiology Mikell, I. Jenkins. 1923. Rumbling future of the molluscan fisheries of larval and adult feeding. of the chariot wheels. State of North and Central American Pages 185-229. In Kennedy, Co. Columbia, S.C. 273p. and Europe. Vol I Atlantic and V.S., R.I.E. Newell and A.F. Gulf Coasts. U.S. Dept. Comm. Miller, G.B. 1977. Tidelands owner- Able eds. The Eastern Oyster NOAA Tech. Rep. 127, 234 p. ship questioned. News and Courier, (Crassostrea virginica). Maryland Charleston, S.C. March 22, 1977. Sea Grant. College Park, Md. Maggioni, G.J. 1995. The South Carolina flat bottom oyster sloop. Missroon, E. 1977a. Oystering: News and Courier. 1865a. Tivoli In W.C. Fleetwood. Tidecraft. nothing new to McClellanville. Restaurant (advertisement). W.B.G. Marine Press. Tybee Island, Georgetown Times. “The best oysters supplied by Ga. Appendix 2; pages 305-310. Georgetown, S.C. May 12, 1977. the dozen, plate, quart, gallon, or bushel in shells or pickled to or- Maggioni, G.J. and V.G. Burrell, ______. 1977b. The der.” Charleston, S.C. Jan 16, 1865. Jr. 1982. South Carolina Oyster Returns. Georgetown Oyster Industry. In K.K. Chew Times, May 12, 1977. ______. 1865b. We (ed.) Proc. N.Amer. Oyster are glad to learn about this old Workshop. P. 132 – 137. World Moore, G.J., H. Mills and D. Cupka and popular resort on Meeting Mariculture. So. Spec. Publ. 1. 1984. Recreational shellfish Street has been reopened. gathering in South Carolina Charleston, S.C. March 31, 1865. Manzi, J.J., V.G. Burrell, Jr. and W. 1980-1981. Mar. Resour. Z. Carson. 1977. A comparison Div. Tech. Rep. No. 37. 8p. ______. 1888. of growth and survival of subtidal About fish and fishermen. Crassostrea virginica Gmelin in Moss, B.A. 2000. Jewell of the Charleston, S.C. Feb. 5, 1888. South Carolina salt-marsh impound- South. Charleston Magazine ______. 1891. ments. Aquaculture 12: 293-310. pp 74-76. May – June 2000. The Oyster Industry. Marrinan, R.A. and E.S. Wing Moultrie News. 2001. Oyster Charleston, S.C. Dec. 3, 1891. 1980. In B. A. Purdy (ed.), Project builds 33 reefs: recy- ______. 1905a. General Conferences on Florida’s cling bins, ready for season. Mt. Assembly: Work of the Senate. Maritime heritage p. 22-24. Fla. Pleasant, S.C. September 2, 2001. Charleston, S.C. Jan. 26, 1905. State Museum. Gainesville, Fla. Murray, C.S. 1933. Outlook better ______. 1905b. A model Martin, C.R. 1932. Beaufort on Sea Island. News and Courier. oyster cannery. Charleston Canning. plant cans 400 cases of oysters Charleston, S.C. Dec. 17, 1933. Charleston, S.C. April 14, 1905. each day. News and Courier, Charleston, S.C. Jan 25, 1932.

62 63 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

______. 1905c. ______. 1962. Crack- Peeples, A. 1962. Money in the Shellfish Commission. down on bootleg oystering by Devil’s Elbow. News and Courier, Charleston, S.C. July 12, 1905. state health agents underway. Charleston, S.C. March 11, 1962. Charleston, S.C. Feb. 2, 1961. ______. 1905d. Deed Pineapple Press. 1993. Raw declared invalid: a bombshell ______. 1964. Oyster-men oyster kills in South Carolina. for Charleston Canning Co. call for efforts to stop boot-legging. Aug. 1993. Sarasota, FL. Charleston, S.C. Sept. 17, 1905. Charleston, S.C. May 15, 1964. Pinckney, Roger XI. 2000. Date ______. 1914. News of ______. 1965. Near line Daufuski. Sandlapper McClellanville. Charleston, Awendaw: 4000 year old mound Magazine. Autumn 2000. S.C. May 30, 1914. probed. Charleston, S.C. Feb. 7, 1965. Pottinger, S.R. 1944. Preparation of ______. 1931a. ______. 1970. Puzzling oys- fresh eastern oysters for market. Great strides made in oyster ter malady curtails Beaufort sheds. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish & Wild. Ser. culture in South Carolina. Charleston, S.C. Oct. 18, 1970 Fish. Leaf 50 (Rerun 1956) 8p. Charleston, S.C. June 7, 1931. ______. 1990. Closed oyster Pringle, S.B. 1961. The South Carolina ______. 1931b. Spring grounds will limit State’s harvest. report on the “Hot Dip” or shock oyster bed planting com- Charleston, SC. Oct. 3, 1990. method of opening oysters. Proc. pleted at McClellanville. Nat. Shellf. Sanit. Workshop. Nov. Oemler, A. 1894. The past, pres- Charleston, S.C. June 7, 1931. 28-30. 1961. Appendix D pp 62 -74. ent and future of the oyster ______. 1933. industry of Georgia. Bull. U.S. ______. 1964a. Economic Advertisement for oysters. Fish. Comm. 13: 263-272. and conservation aspects of the Charleston, S.C. Mar. 11, 1933. cooperative study of the shock Oliver, J.D. 1999. MBC visit- immersion or “Hot Dip” process in ______. 1948. S.C. oystering scholar reports on bacte- commercial handlings of shellfish men protest bed lease to Georgians. ria research. Environs. Duke in South Carolina. Proc. 5th Nat. Charleston, S.C. Aug 21, 1948. University Marine Laboratory, Shellf. Sanit. Workshop Nov. 17- Beaufort, N.C. Autumn 1999. ______. 1949. Suit 19, 1964 Appendix V pp.169-172. against Board of Fisheries Paparella, M.W. 1970. Gaping ______. 1964b. Heat shock sent to special master. oysters by shock wave energy. method of preparation of oysters Charleston, S.C. July 21, 1949. Chesapeake Sci 11(2): 111-116. for shucking. Proc.5th Nat. Shellf. ______. 1956a. Greater oys- ______. 1980. Information Sanit. Workshop Nov. 17-19, ter industry profits predicted in S.C. tips to improve the process- 1964 Appendix V pp 173-176. Charleston, S.C. April 29, 1956. p. 16. ing of seafood. Univ. MD. Radford, D. 2001. Volunteers help Sea Grant 80-1. Jan. 1980. 5p. ______. 1956b. Ad for replenish bivalve in Morgan Triangle Grocery Offering South Parker, J. 1995. Oyster culture facing River. Beaufort Gazette. Carolina oysters for 69 cents per sunset of life. News and Courier, Beaufort, S.C. June 24, 2001. pint. Charleston S.C. Feb. 16, 1956. Charleston, S.C. Nov. 27, 1995. Ragan, M.K. 1999. The Hunley: ______. 1958. Oyster stew Parsons, A. 1986. Last year’s submarine’s sacrifice and suc- oyster disease may mean a cess in the Civil Way. Narwhal being canned in Lady’s better harvest. Island Packet, Press Inc. Charleston, S.C. 244p. Island Factory. Charleston, Hilton Head, S.C. Jan. 22, 1986. S.C. Dec. 23, 1958. Report of the Commissioner for 1903. Peek, T. Jr. 1968. Beaufort man U.S. Commission of fish and fisher- ______. 1961. in-vents oyster shucking ma- ies. U.S. Govt. Printing Office. 1905. Shellfish gathering ban. chine. News and Courier. Charleston, S.C. Dec. 20, 1961. Report of the Commissioner for Charleston, S.C. Oct. 15, 1968. the fiscal year ending June 30, 1912. U.S. Gov. Printing Office. Wash., D.C. 1914.

64 65 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

Russell, R.T., R.J. Hammerstrom, ______. 1985. Shellfish South Carolina Department of S.B. Pringle and M. Walsh. bill quietly passes in S.C. State. 1988. Declaration 1964. Studies of the heat shock Senate. Island Packet, Hilton of dissolution by forfeiture. process for oysters. Proc. Head, S.C. May 15, 1985. Columbia, S.C. May 20, p. 88. Shellfish Sanitation Workshop. ______. 1986. Oyster lov- S.C. Department of Natural Nov. 17-19, 1964. Wash., D.C. ers get bad news. Island Packet, Resources. 1996. Annual Salley, A.S. Jr. 1925. The Spanish Hilton Head, S.C. Oct. 16, 1986. Report. July 1995-June 30, 1996. settlement at Port Royal. Smith, R.O. 1949. Summary of oys- ______. 1999. Annual 1565 – 1586. S.C. Historical ter farming experiments in South Report July 1, 1998-June 30, 1999. Magazine. Vol. 26 (1): 37. Carolina. 1930-1940. U.S. Fish and ______. 2000. Annual Sanders, Z.D. 1998. Entertaining Wild. Ser. Spec. Sci. Rep. No 63. 20p. Report July 1, 1999 to June 2000. at the College of Charleston. Smythe Letters. 1863. S.C. Historical College of Charleston Foundation, ______. 2001. Saltwater Society Collections. Nov. 20, 1863. Charleston, S.C. 155p. Fishing in South Carolina: Solomon, L. 1991. Seafood Company Marine Resources Act. of Savannah Morning News. 1940. L.P. to close. Savannah News Press. 2000. Columbia, S.C. 24p. Maggioni & Company. Most im- Savannah, Georgia. April 27, 1991. portant basic industries. Savannah, ______. 2002. Rules Georgia. October 31, 1940. Soniat, T.M. 1996. Epizootiology and Regulations for 2002- of Perkinsus marinus disease of 2003. Columbia, S.C. ______. 1945. Senator Eastern oysters in the Gulf of charges oyster monopoly. South Carolina Legislature. 1891 Mexico. J. Shellf. Res. 15(1):35-43. Feb. 5, 1945. Savannah, GA. Statutes at Large. Act 700, 701. South Carolina Board of Fisheries. Shelton, F. 1995. His world is ______. 1906. No. 60. An 1924. Annual Report for 1923. oysters. Island Packet. Hilton act to establish Board of Fisheries. 1925. Annual Report for 1924. Head S.C. Feb. 17, 1995. 1926. Annual Report for 1925. ______. 1924. Acts 622, 623. Shumway, S.E. 1996. Natural South Carolina Board of Health. Environmental Factors. Chap. ______. 1948. 1971. Resolutions to allow agents 13p. 467-513. In the Eastern Statutes At Large. of shellfish section to carry arms. Oyster (Crassostrea virginica). ______. 1952. V.S. Kennedy, R.I.E. Newell and South Carolina Department of Code of Laws. Sec. 28. A.F. Eble eds. Maryland Sea Agriculture, Commerce and Grant. College Park, Md. Immigration. 1908. Handbooks ______. 1959. of South Carolina Resources, Code of Laws. Sec. 28. ______. T.L. Cucei, R.C. institutions and industries of Newell and C.M. Yentsch. 1985. ______. 1962. the state. Second Edition. The Particle selection, ingestion and ab- Article 50-17-1260. State Company, Columbia, S.C. sorbtion in filter feeding bivalves. J. ______. 1976. Sec. 44-1-40. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 91:77-92. South Carolina Department of Agriculture, Commerce and ______. 1982. Smith, C. 1996. Nance Family Industries and Clemson College. See 44-1-40 Amended. tradition continues on Creek 1927. South Carolina Handbook. Front. Georgetown Times, ______. 1985. An The State Company, Columbia, S.C. Georgetown, S.C. January 2, 1996. act to amend Article 5 of South Carolina Department of Chapter 17 of Title 50. Smith, F. 1982. Maggioni family still Archives. 1845. Vol. 16, p.250. harvests seafood. The Island Packet. ______. 1991. The Recrea- Hilton Head, S.C. July 1, 1982. South Carolina Department of Heath tional Fisherman’s Conservation and Environmental Control. and Management Act. 2001. Shellfish Regulations.

64 65 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

______. 2002. Sec. 50- ______. 1947. 41st Annual ______. 1956. Report for 5-1920 South Carolina Secretary Report. Columbia, S.C. 35p. fiscal year July 1, 1955 - June 1956. of State. 1969. Certification ______. 1949. 43rd Annual ______. 1957. Report for fis- Certificate. August 14, 1969. Report. Columbia, S.C. 9p. cal year July 1, 1956 - June 30, 1957. South Carolina State Board of South Carolina State Gazette and ______. 1959. Report for fis- Fisheries. 1927. 21st Annual Business Directory. 1905-1910. cal year July 1, 1958 - June 30, 1959. Report. Columbia, S.C. 18p. 1910. State Pub. Co. Columbia, S.C. ______. 1960. Report for fis- ______. 1928. 22nd Annual South Carolina Wildlife. 1990. Eighty cal year July 1, 1959 - June 30, 1960. Report. Columbia, S.C. 17p. years for wildlife. Vol. 37 (1). 80p. ______. 1961. Report for fis- ______. 1930. 24th Annual South Carolina Wildlife and cal year July 1, 1960 - June 30, 1961. Report. Columbia, S.C. 13p. Marine Resources Commission ______. 1962. Report for fis- ______. 1931. 25th Annual Annual Report for 1985- cal year July 1, 1961 - June 30, 1962. Report. Columbia, S.C. 17p. 1986. 1986. Columbia, S.C. ______. 1963. Report for fis- ______. 1932. 26th Annual ______. Annual Report. cal year July 1, 1962 - June 30, 1963. Report. Columbia, S.C. 21p. 1987-1988. 1988. Columbia, S.C. ______. 1964. Report for fis- ______. 1933. 27th Annual South Carolina Wildlife and cal year July 1, 1963 - June 30, 1964. Report. Columbia, S.C. 22p. Marine Resources Department. 1972. Annual Report for ______. 1965. Report for fis- ______. 1934. 28th July 1, 1971-June 30, 1972. cal year July 1, 1964 - June 30, 1965. Annual Report. 20p. ______. 1973. Annual Report ______. 1966. Report for fis- ______. 1935. 29th Annual for July 1, 1972 to June 30, 1973. cal year July 1, 1965 - June 30, 1966. Report. Columbia, S.C. 21p. ______. 1974. Annual Report ______. 1967. Report for fis- ______. 1936. 30th Annual for July 1, 1973 to June 30, 1974. cal year July 1, 1966 - June 30, 1967. Report. Columbia, S.C. 19p. ______. 1975. Annual ______. 1968. Report for fis- ______. 1937. 31st Annual Report for July 1974 to June 30, 1975. cal year July 1, 1967 - June 30, 1968. Report. Columbia, S.C. 27p. ______. 1976. Annual Report. ______. 1969. Report for fis- ______. 1938. 32nd Annual For July 1975 to June 30, 1976. cal year July 1, 1968 - June 30, 1969. Report. Columbia, S.C. 23p. ______. 1979. Annual Report ______. 1970. Report for fis- ______. 1939. 33rd Annual for July 1, 1978 to June 30, 1979. cal year July 1, 1969 - June 30, 1970. Report. Columbia, S.C. 20p. ______. 1982. Annual Report Speiler, G. 1972. The oyster industry ______. 1941. 35th Annual for July 1, 1981 to June 30, 1982. in Beaufort. Beaufort Gazette, Report. Columbia, S.C. 26p. Beaufort, S.C. Nov. 16, 1972. ______. 1983. Annual Report ______. 1942. 36th Annual for July 1, 1982 –June 30, 1983. ______. 1986. County Report. Columbia, S.C. 27p. has only steam oyster can- ______. 1984. Annual ______. 1943. 37th Annual nery. Beaufort Gazette, Report July 1, 1983 to June 30, 1984. Report. Columbia, S.C. 36p. Beaufort, S.C. Sept. 16, 1986. ______. 1985. Annual ______. 1944. 38th Annual ______. 1993. Commercial Report for July 1, 1984 to June 1985. Report. Columbia, S.C. 30p. shrimping and oystering. Sea South Carolina Wildlife Resources Island Scene. Vol. XI (11). p.27. ______. 1945. 39th Annual Department. 1954. Report of fiscal Report. Columbia, S.C. 37p. ______. 1999. Italians year July 1, 1953 – June 30, 1954. 38p. prominent in history of Beaufort ______. 1946. 40th Annual ______. 1955. Report of fis- area. Beaufort Gazette, Report. Columbia, S.C. 33p. cal year July 1, 1954 to June 30, 1955. Beaufort, S.C. Oct. 12, 1999.

66 67 V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina V.G. Burrell, Jr.: The Oyster Industry in South Carolina

State. 1995. States oyster industry U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Woody, H. and T.L. Johnson. in trouble. State newspaper, 2001. Interstate certified shell- 1998. South Carolina postcards. Columbia, S.C. Nov. 28, 1995. fish shippers list U.S. Dep. Vol. II. Southern Carolina: Health and Human Services. Beaufort to Barnwell. Arcadia Swindell, B. 1999. Sullivan Public Heath Service. ISSN Pub. Charleston, S.C. 128 p. Island land oyster rights dis- 0364 – 7048. Vol. 01 –5. 37p. puted. Post and Courier. Charleston, S.C. Jan 25, 1999. Von Harten, L. 1999a. Brownlee remembers early days of oystering ______. 1999b. Hate industry in Beaufort. Beaufort crimes stymied. Post and Courier, Gazette. Beaufort, S.C. Feb. 16, 1999. Charleston, S.C. Jan. 27, 1999. ______. 1999b. Mechanical Thompson, R.J., R.I.E. Newell, oyster shucker ended tedious V.S. Kennedy and R. Mann. “hand work.” Beaufort Gazette. 1996 Reproduction processes Beaufort, S.C. Sept 28, 1999. and early development. P. 335 – 370 in V.S Kennedy, R.I.E. ______. 1999c. Maggioni Newell and A.F. Eble (eds). oyster factory opens into the 1980s The Eastern Oyster. Maryland on Lady’s Island. Beaufort Gazette. Sea Grant. College Park Rd. Beaufort S.C. June 8, 1999. Town of Bluffton. 1947. An ordi- ______. 2000a. Boat build- nance granting John S. Graves, Jr. er’s daughter tells tales of early oys- a 20 year extension on his lease of ter industries. Beaufort Gazette. an oyster house located at the foot Beaufort, S.C. Jan. 18, 2000. of Wharf Street. Minutes of town ______. 2000b. Beaufort council meeting. Oct. 30, 1947. 2p. seafood includes more than Trinkley, M.B. 1998. The Settlement shrimp. Beaufort Gazette. Legacy. Kiawah Island. Beaufort, S.C. Feb. 22, 2000. Legends Vol. IX (1): 44 – 51. ______. 2001. Christensen U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1913. recalls father’s efforts to protect Jeremy Creek. McClellanville map. fisheries. Beaufort Gazette. House Doc 660. 63rd Cong., 2nd Ses. Beaufort, S.C. May 1, 2001. U.S. Department of Commerce. Waltz, Wayne. 1996. South Carolina 1977. A comprehensive review Saltwater fishing stamp survey of the commercial oyster indus- 1994. S.C. Dept. Nat. Resources. tries of the United States. NOAA. Mar. Res. Div. Charleston, NMFS. Office of Fisheries S.C. unpublished Rep. 30 p. Development. March of 1977. 63 p. Wells, H.W. 1961. The fauna of ______. 1991. The 1990. oyster beds, with special ref- National Shellfish Register of erence to the salinity factor. classified estuarine waters. Ecol. Monog. 31: 239 – 266. NOAA, NOS. State Legislative Whitelaw, R.N.S. and A.F. Levkoff. Branch. Rockville, Md. 100 p. 1975. Charleston, come hell U.S. Department of Health and Human or high water. R.H. Bryan Services, Public Health Services Co. Columbia, S.C. 231 p. F.D.A. 1990. National Shellfish Wilson, E.O. 1932. Pay taxes early. Sanitation Program. Manual (an editorial). Beaufort Gazette. Operation. Part II. 1990 Revision. Beaufort, S.C. Feb. 4, 1932.

66 67