Shore Drive Community Coalition

Article about dredging in Pilot today

From Pilotonline.com including comments:

The city went to court last year to condemn property for public recreational use and the replenishment. Beach officials had asked all the Cape Henry Bayfront owners to sign over public easements to the beach in exchange for the sand. The landowners who wanted the sand to protect their homes from storm damage turned over the easements. But those who wanted to maintain their private property rights, which date back to Reconstruction, refused and were eventually defeated in court.

5 Pics from Friday the 13th 09 Nor’Easter

Note: This was not hi tide.

Executive order expanding grants to protect Ches Bay

From the Official Website:

Federal agencies have released seven draft reports on protecting and restoring the Chesapeake Bay.

They include:

develop focused and coordinated habitat and research activities that protect and restore living resources and water quality of the Chesapeake Bay and its watershed (U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Department of Interior).

Drawing of location of new pound nets off Baylake Pines

Drawing of location of new pound nets.

Click on image to enlarge.

Drawing originally posted here.

Follow up details on incident with new pound nets

According to report:

Incident occurred May 27th at 21:53Hrs.

[...] piloting a USCG 25ft response boat collided with the poles of the pound net adjacent to Lynnhaven inlet.  They turned west out of the channel in good water at 5-10 knots.  Conditions were dense fog.  After the collision, the vessel was taken back to [...] and placed on the trailer for inspection.  There were no injuries or serious damage to the vessel to report.

[...] conducted an investigation to confirm that the structure was properly permitted and constructed by a licensed contractor.  Also inquired as to why no notice was given to the Coast Guard so they could serve notice to mariners about the new obstructions.  He was unable to confirm any efforts by the Waterways Division to have the poles removed as a hazard to navigation.

Previous post.

Incident with new pound nets recently installed near Baylake Beach

The following was recently posted at Tidal Fish, a well known, and heavily used website, & web forum  for the fishing & boating community.

Word is we’ve had our first incident with these nets. The incident that occurred was not with some dumb drunk idiot recreational boater but with a USGC 25’ boat. Apparently the USCG boat was running at night and ran smack into the poles of one of these nets. There was damage to the boat but I don’t know if anyone was hurt. The word I heard is that the poles didn’t show up on their radar. I heard the coasties were very upset about this and were making phone calls to find out who allowed these nets to placed in such a highly traveled area.

I hope nobody was hurt in this incident but am glad to see that the first incident occurred with professional boaters. This goes to show just how dangerous these nets really are. I’m sure that if these nets are allowed to remain after this incident that something will be done because of this. At the very least I would expect that they will be required to have lights placed on them.

I’ll say it again, if these nets are left as is someone is going to die.”

... and they have sent up there concerns to higher authority for Federal interdiction to remove “Hazard to Navigation”. [Their] approach is that Federal Authority in regards to “Hazards to navigation” [supersedes] state jurisdiction, therefore obstructions can be ordered removed by feds. One big factor for USCG authority is the proximity of nets to “Major” shipping channel.

[Note: this incident was confirmed to be accurate before posting.]

Boater dies near Ches Bay Bridge

From Pilotonline.com article:

Both men were thrown into the water, he said. The survivor clung to the boat for several hours before grabbing a fishing line and being pulled to the shore of First Island by a fisherman, Bernstein said.

Poisoned Waters, PBS Documentary airing April 21

More than three decades after the Clean Water Act, two iconic waterways—the great coastal estuaries Puget Sound and the Chesapeake Bay—are in perilous condition. With polluted runoff still flowing in from industry, agriculture, and massive suburban development, scientists fear contamination to the food chain and drinking water for millions of people. A growing list of endangered species is also threatened in both estuaries.

More at PBS’s Frontline.

Audio of VMRC Hearings on pound nets

From Darryl, posted with permission:

I listened to both audio feeds from the 3/24 VMRC meeting regarding 4 pound net applications.  All four were unanimously approved by VMRC.
Items 17 thru 19 were also discussed in a brief closed meeting.  The net in item 17 will be only 50’ from the shoreline.  DCR owns the shoreline property and did not provide comment…..they were asked to comment, but did not.  Lights will be marked on the trap and it will be approx. 3/4 mile from the creek.  450+ people signed a petition on behalf of the applicant in approval of the pound net.  Approx. 14 letters/emails were not in approval.
17.  PUBLIC HEARING: William Haynie request to license and locate a pound net in Chesapeake Bay near Hughlett Point.  THE COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THIS POUND NET APPLICATION.
[Audio Item 17. Link to VMRC MP3 file, audio starts immediately.]
From my understanding of the audio for Items 18 & 19, at least two of the nets, (if not all three) were previously denied in the Fall of 2008.  These were originally located east of Lynnhaven Inlet, but now have been changed to west of the inlet. 
A total of 45 emails/letters were submitted in opposition of items 18 & 19, with 7 in favor.  Delegate Bouchard also sent a letter in opposition.  The Aquarium was opposed due to the nets endangering dolphins and sea turtles.  The Aquarium mentioned if the nets were allowed, they should be fitted with modified leaders to minimize dolphins and turtles from being tangled in the gear.  VMRC said they would wait for the federal government to decide if the nets should be fitted with the modified leaders.  If the fed did not, then they may force them to.  However, VMRC said it would be an all or nothing deal.  Either all the nets along the bay in VA would have the modified leaders, or none of them would….not just these three.  The nets were originally 500 feet from shore, but now have been moved to 1,500 feet from shore.  According to the attached map, it shows the nets starting 500 yards from shore.
A few speakers were in support of the nets, with several others against.  Those organizations speaking against the nets were the Aquarium, OPCL, Chesapeake Beach Civic League and SDCC.
18.  PUBLIC HEARING: Dirk Sanford request to license and locate two pound nets in Chesapeake Bay near the Bay Bridge-Tunnel and Lynnhaven Inlet.  THE COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE APPLICATION FOR TWO POUND NETS.
[Audio Item 18 & 19. Link to VMRC MP3 file, audio starts immediately.]

19.  PUBLIC HEARING: Charles Gregory request to license and locate a pound net in Chesapeake Bay near the Bay Bridge-Tunnel and Lynnhaven Inlet.  THE COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THIS POUND NET APPLICATION.
Darryl

Drawing of location of new pound nets. [added 4.1.09]

Snuffleupagus released at FIrst Landing State Park at 2pm today

According to the Pilot:

The Virginia Aquarium Stranding Response Team will release “Snuffleupagus,” a rehabilitated male harp seal this afternoon from First Landing State Park.

The seal was found March 1 in Sandbridge with a broken jaw and will be released at 2 p.m. today, according to a statement from the Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science Center.

VMRC approves pound nets based on unproven leaders

Pound Pole Fishing Nets – The Virginia Marine Resource Commission (VMRC) approved 2 permits for a total of 3 new nets west of the Lynnhaven Inlet.  The vote was 6-For, 0-Against, 3-Abstentions.  The board’s decision was based on the location of the nets being 1500 feet from shore and the required use of a modified leader that may help reduce dolphin kills.  5 residents spoke in opposition and 5 members of the fishing industry spoke in favor.  The VMRC received 45 emails of opposition and 7 in support.  The board was not swayed by the possible safety and recreational impact to the community or the possibility of killing more dolphins.  In the end, the rights of the fishermen overruled those of the community. 
Possible appeal of the VMRC is being investigated as well as Federal legislative action. 
Audio of the hearing can be found listed after Item #18 at VMRC audio minutes

Trade group pulls support for Asian oysters in Bay & Lynnhnaven

A key champion for introducing Asian oysters into the Chesapeake Bay abruptly dropped its campaign Tuesday after eight years, saying it no longer will experiment or lobby for the exotic species, despite years of success.

Read & comment on article at Pilotonline.com.

SDCC opposes new pound net application for Ocean Park & Baylake Pines

...In addition to opposing those new licenses, the SDCC requested that the VMRC act to change legislation and code to prohibit any future licenses from being acquired off the shores of Virginia Beach. This request was based on the fact that the Virginia Beach shorelines are the most densely populated sections in the City of Virginia Beach and that any new pound nets in these areas will result in the same problems mentioned above.

Read entire VMRC Pound Net Letter [2pg pdf] submitted for the official record.

Pound pole fishing net application - Update

The following email was received from Jack Travelstead regarding the VMRC hearing time for the pound pole applications.

Yes, the pound net items will be heard after 1 pm on Tuesday and not before. In all likelihood, given the length of the agenda, the items may not be heard before 2pm, but just to be safe, I would say be here by 1 or 1:30.

The Virginia Aquarium has also sent a letter of oppostion to the VMRC.  The letter can be read here.  Aquarium_pound_net_letter_March09.pdf

3 pound nets proposed off the shores of Baylake Pines and Ocean Park neighborhoods

A Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VMRC) hearing to review these applications is scheduled for Tuesday March 24th 2009.  The applications are listed as agenda items 19 & 20.  See agenda here.

The proposed pound nets would be similar to the ones currently located off the shore of Cape Story by the Sea. 

The proposed net locations are approximately 1500 feet from shore and located in the areas shown on map below.

3 similar nets were proposed on Nov. 25th 2008 off the shore of Cape Story.  These nets were opposed by residents, the Cape Story by the Sea Civic Association and the Virginia Aquarium based on possible impact to residents and increased death of dolphins.  See letters of opposition.  The VMRC staff was apposed to these nets and the VMRC board voted unanimously against these nets.  [See below.]

Excerpt from the 11.25.08 VMRC hearing on pound net application off the shores of Cape Story by the Sea and First Landing State Park below.

Associate Member Robins said when you balance this out he did not think this was in the public interest. He said there was an intense area of conflict there when you consider the amount of recreational traffic here. He said in additional there was the dolphin entanglement, as Associate Member Bowden said it is a significant risk and the entanglement in the gill nets have brought massive restrictions on it. He said he was also surprised that there had been that number of entanglements without additional restrictions on this area. He said that what is there seems to be “grandfathered” and would be foolhardy for the Commission to allow these nets and taking this risk.

Associate Member McConaugha seconded the motion. Commissioner Bowman said the regulation is clear and the Public Trust Doctrine must be considered. The motion to deny the applications carried unanimously.

.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Read the entire transcript here [pdf]
CSBTS Pound Net Response [pdf]
SDCC’s Pound Net Opposition Letter [pdf]
Public Notice for Pound Net Application [pdf]

Bay oyster determination on native vs. asian coming soon

From the Pilotonline.com:

More than 2,000 people wrote the corps about oysters. Comments came from scientists, environmentalists, regulators, state officials from Maine to Texas, students, watermen and seafood merchants.

A clear majority favor a strategy excluding the Asian oyster, even in controlled experiments. They argue that the species from China and Korea is risky and could spark a new type of disease in the Bay.

Non-native oyster bill defeated in Senate

According to Lynnhaven River Now:

State Senate Oyster Bill

The full Senate rejected SJ 411 in a vote Tuesday evening!  Thank you for taking the time to contact your Senators about this important issue.  Senator Stolle voted against the resolution and Senator Wagner voted for it.  Here is the complete information on how all of our Senators voted:

SJ 411 Oysters; sterile non-native; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to support responsible cultivation.
floor: 02/10/09 Senate: Rejected by Senate (16-Y 22-N)

YEAS—Blevins, Cuccinelli, Hurt, Martin, McDougle, Newman, Norment, Obenshain, Ruff, Saslaw, Smith, Stosch, Stuart, Wagner, Wampler, Watkins—16.

NAYS—Barker, Colgan, Deeds, Edwards, Hanger, Herring, Houck, Howell, Locke, Lucas, Marsh, McEachin, Miller, J.C., Miller, Y.B., Northam, Puckett, Quayle, Reynolds, Stolle, Ticer, Vogel, Whipple—22.

NOT VOTING—Petersen, Puller—2.

Check out the new LRNow.org now.

Report shows Hampton Roads lacks public parkland

Check new report, Bracing for Change at The Trust for Public Land.

By comparison, much more crowded New York City actually has more parkland than all five of the Hampton Roads cities combined. And even though the five Hampton [Roads] cities cover a much larger area than New York, Boston or the main cities of San Francisco Bay, the other three regions all have more parkland as a percentage of their cities’ land area than Hampton Roads.

ACOE asked to deny introducing alien oysters in Ches Bay

From Grace:

Dear Mr. Mansfield

Thank your for your willingness to accept and consider comments from the public regarding the introduction of Asian oysters into the waters of the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries and estuaries.  Let’s face it:  if you introduce it anywhere within the Bay, it will eventually be everywhere, whether your original specimens are sterile or not.

I attended the USACE presentation on the Eastern Shore and also attended the Lynnhaven River Now organization’s summary of the issue.  Although I am no biologist, I believe I grasp the basics, which are these:

1.  While the Asian oyster is resistant to the two primary diseases which have devastated the native oyster, it is vulnerable to another, equally deleterious disease.  Who is to deny that it also might lose its immunity to the two others it presently resists?

2.  It may contain human pathogens not currently present in the Chesapeake Bay oyster population.

3.  We have no way of knowing how the presence of the Asian oyster will affect current efforts to restore the native oyster population, which, to date, has been encouragingly successful in the Lynnhaven River, at the Southern edge of the Chesapeake Bay basin.  Previous introductions of non-native specie, from spartina grass, to nutria, to kudzu (all for well-intended, beneficial reasons), are cautionary lessons.

There are many other causes for misgivings.  The only reason I can see for this push to introduce the Asian oyster is the desperate plight of the Chesapeake Bay watermen.  Indeed, it is the only reason which supports your consideration.  However, the long-term consequences of failure are too great for all of us, including these fine people.  It would be a better use of funds to use our limited funding to 1) provide temporary employment of these watermen to restore the health of the Bay and/or engage in aquaculture while the native oyster continues to re-establish and 2) continue to fund the native oyster restoration, as you have been doing so admirably.

The Army Corps of Engineers has come a long way since I was a girl who heard at every turn that the USACE did not care about the environment it was impacting.  Today, many of you have become wonderful stewards of our natural resources.

Please keep it up.
Thank you,
Grace Moran
Roanoke Avenue
Virginia Beach, VA 23455

SDCC Officially endorses ONLY native oysters in Ches Bay

From Todd:

December 12, 2008

Department of the Army
Norfolk District, Corps of Engineers
Attn:  Mr. Mark Mansfield
Chief, Planning and Policy Branch
803 Front Street
Norfolk, VA 23510-1096

Subject: Support for increased oyster restoration and aquaculture activities in the Chesapeake Bay using native Crassostrea virginica oysters only.

Dear Mr. Mansfield,

I am sending this letter on behalf of the Shore Drive Community Coalition (SDCC), an umbrella organization of civic and community associations representing approximately 8000 homes in the Bayfront area of Virginia Beach.  At its November 24th general meeting, the SDCC voted unanimously to support Lynnhaven River NOW’s position for increased oyster restoration and aquaculture activities in the Chesapeake Bay using native Crassostrea virginica oysters only.

SDCC members concur with the Lynnhaven River NOW position that our native oyster, Crassostrea virginica, is better suited to our ecosystem than C. ariakensis for the following reasons:

  1. C. ariakensis is more susceptible to low dissolved oxygen events than is C. virginica, and according to the most recent DEQ 303d Report, 90% of the Lynnhaven is considered impaired for dissolved oxygen.
  2. One of the commercial growers in the Lynnhaven who has participated in the Virginia Seafood Council study recently reported to us that he has found the native C. virginica oyster to be superior to C. ariakensis.
  3. C. ariakensis harbors human pathogens more so than our native oyster, posing greater risk for human consumption.
  4. C. ariakensis is more susceptible than our native oyster to several oyster predators that we have in the Lynnhaven, including polydora worms, which decrease the desirability of oysters for market.

Thank you for your time and for listening to our concerns.  If you have any questions, I can be reached at 667-8533 Cell or todd@sdcc.info.

Sincerely,

Todd R. Solomon
Shore Drive Community Coalition, President

Distribution:
Mayor Oberndorf
Mr. Clay Bernick
Laurie Carroll Sorabella, LRNOW
Mr. Kal Kassir, BAC Chairman
SDCC Officers
Bayfront Advisory Committee Members

ACOENativeOysterSupport.pdf [2pg PDF]