Saccostrea glomerata in subtidal shellfish reefs in South‐East Queensland. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

Introduction Richardson et al. contest the identity of oyster species that historically constructed subtidal shellfish reefs in South‐East Queensland, Australia, suggesting that “ historical drift/dredge oysters may have been misidentified as S. glomerata .” Objectives To provide historic scientific evidence pertaining to subtidal shellfish reefs along Australia's east coast, to help inform the conservation status of Saccostrea glomerata . Methods Evidence provided by Richardson et al. is reviewed and compared to historical evidence. Results Evidence provided by Richardson et al. remains consistent with historic evidence that S. glomerata is capable of recruiting to both intertidal and subtidal habitats. Increased historical survival of S. glomerata spat in subtidal areas prior to 1893 was probably due to what observers at the time described as “astronomical recruitment,” facilitated by a lack of sedimentation and eutrophication. In contrast, subtidal spat settlement today is severely constrained by sedimentation and algal turfs, Queensland Unknown disease, and possibly also by relatively increased predation due to a potential Allee Effect. Conclusions The misidentification hypothesis appears to be built on a logical fallacy arising from shifting baseline syndrome.