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.

What’s going on with the equipment and dredging by the Lesner Bridge?

From an email from a City staffer explaining it:

The work near the Lesner Bridge is indeed maintenance dredging of the Crab Creek channel that serves the Lynnhaven Inlet Boat Ramp and Beach Use Facility.

This channel system is subject to constant shoaling and requires dredging on an annual basis to maintain access to the boat ramp.  Dredging will be complete by February 28, site restoration and full demobilization of the equipment will be complete by mid-March. 

“Restoring the Legendary Lynnhaven Oysters” at EPA.gov

From EPA.gov:

Oyster lovers and residents near Virginia Beach, Virginia remember a time that oysters from the Lynnhaven Bay watershed were once a celebrated delicacy served to dignitaries. Excessive bacteria levels in the Lynnhaven Bay watershed, however, forced the Virginia Health Department to shut down almost all of the shellfish areas for decades-until recently. Implementing the Lynnhaven Bay, Broad Bay, and Linkhorn Bay fecal coliform TMDL for shellfish areas has helped to reduce bacteria levels. Management actions targeting sources such as boating activities, on-site sewer systems, agricultural areas, and pet waste have successfully reduced bacteria levels. As a result of these efforts, Lynnhaven Bay watershed shellfish areas are reopening and Lynnhaven oysters are returning as an edible, marketable natural resource on local restaurant menus.

Hat tip to LRNow.org’s e-News.

Did you know you can help rebuild the Lynnhaven Fishing Pier?

I didn’t either. I found out from an email from VCAN.

From the Lynnhaven Fishing Pier Blog:

The re-building plans were submitted to the Army Corps of Engineers, the Marine resources Commission and the City of Virginia Beach and approval is anticipated around the middle of January, 2010 with work commencing around the end of March.

The plans include adding a “T” at the end of the Pier and several diamond-shaped stubs on the East side of the Pier, all adding strength to the part of the Pier that has now been twice destroyed. Because they present a high load under strong winds, the sheds will be removed.

Thanks to all for the response so far to the “Buy-A-Board” program!

Hot link to their Buy-A-Board for $100.00.

5 Pics from Friday the 13th 09 Nor’Easter

Note: This was not hi tide.

Corp schedules 3 workshops to focus on cleaning Lynnhaven

The first public forum will be from 7 to 8 p.m. Wednesday at Princess Anne High School, 4400 Virginia Beach Blvd.

The second one will be from 7 to 8 p.m. June 25 at Great Neck Recreation Center, 2521 Shorehaven Drive.

The third is scheduled from 7 to 8 p.m. July 1 at Bayside Recreation Center, 4500 First Court Road.

For more information, call the city at (757) 385-4621, or the corps at (757) 201-7258.

More at Pilotonline.com.

Discover secret places to kayak or canoe in the Lynnhaven River

Mark your calendars now for the April 27, 2009 meeting, when Lillie Gilbert of Wild River Outfitters takes us on a virtual tour of the Lynnhaven River.

Discover its secret places and the best spots to put in your kayak or canoe.

Ocean Park Volunteer Fire & Rescue Station

(intersection of Shore Drive & East Stratford Rd.)

April 27, 2009

7:30 p.m.

Sponsored by the Shore Drive Community Coalition

Secrets of the Lynnhaven Printable Flier to post. [1pg pdf]

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.

Help LRNow with WHRO fund raising by answering phones

From .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) at LRNow:

Hey Friends:
Just in case this is something you’ve thought about trying but haven’t ever gotten around to it:
I’m looking for about 7 folks to help me out on the afternoon of THIS Thursday, March 26th.
It’s answering phones at WHRO’s membership drive.  The non-profit environmental group that I work for (Lynnhaven River NOW:  www.lrnow.org) is providing the man (and woman) power for their membership drive from 2 p.m. - 7 p.m. on the 26th.  If you have any time available, even if it’s just for PART of the five hour shift, and would like to help out, send me an email.
It’s located at 5200 Hampton Boulevard in Norfolk, right by ODU.  Here’s a map.

I’ve been told by someone that they provide some nice snacks for the volunteers too.
I am “hitting up” lots of folks who currently volunteer with Lynnhaven River NOW, but just thought I’d ask you all in case anyone would like to pitch in too!
Thank you,
- Laura

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.

New “Public Policy Committee” Forming at LRNow

From LRNow:

Do you have an interest in public policy that affects the environment in Virginia Beach and across the state of Virginia?  Governor Kaine has made this the year of the Environment and Green Jobs and there is much interest in tackling the challenges ahead of us.  The actions of our elected officials do affect what we are able to accomplish right here in our watershed.  Therefore, LRNow is forming a new Public Policy Committee to help all of our members stay on top of the issues and voice their opinions on important questions and decisions.  As many of you know through your own service on one of our committees, the LRNow committees are vital to the many programs that we offer each year.  We are very fortunate that Dr. Mary Picardi has agreed to chair this committee.  Please contact Karen Forget at kforget@lynnhaven2007.com or 757-962-5398 if you are interested in being a part of this exciting new group.  A kick-off meeting will be planned when we have identified interested participants.

Thank you for considering this new way of working for environmental sustainability in our watershed and across our state.

Kudos to LRNow for their work on the Lynnhaven, mentioned in NYTimes

After another study, oyster harvesting was revived in Lynnhaven Bay in Virginia after bacteria pollution caused by boaters, sewer systems, farms and pet waste was reduced.

States Join E.P.A. Study of Pathogens in Ohio River
You may have to subscribe to read entire article. I’ve been a subscriber and never receive spam from them.

LRNow comments on ACOE consideration of Indigo Dunes

Visit Lynnhavenrivernow.org:

In the interest of the Lynnhaven River’s health, we endorse the City’s Outdoors Plan (2000 update) in its recommendation to preserve Pleasure House Pont as open space, on which the report places, “Top Priority”. Open space provides critical ecological benefits to the Lynnhaven River, such as water filtration, pollutant removal, water percolation and habitat provision. Open space would also provide valuable public access to the river, giving citizens of Virginia Beach the opportunity to appreciate the Lynnhaven River and feel invested in the river’s health and its future.

As stewards of the Lynnhaven River, we strongly support the existing wetland and Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area regulations that are in place to protect the health of the river. Therefore, we believe that any development that is proposed within the Lynnhaven River’s watershed, including the proposed Indigo Dunes project, must avoid impact to wetlands and to the existing buffer (100’ minimum) that falls within the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area.

LRNow Comments. [2pg PDF]

An excellent example letter to ACOE re: Indigo Dunes

Thanks to Nicole L. for allowing us to post her letter:

Nicole L.
Virginia Beach, VA

Thank you very much for the opportunity to voice my opposition to project at Pleasure House Creek submitted by Tate Terrace Realty Investors, Inc.  Specifically, I have grave concerns about the potential wildlife impacts as a result of this development and ask that the Army Corps of Engineers consider the implications to wildlife in the area when considering this project.

Mr. Sandler and his team have stated that “the non-tidal wetlands at Indigo Dunes have low value as wildlife habitat” and his team also stated in their 5 April 2007 response to Virginia Institute of Marine Science questions that “no information on avian habitats has surfaced.” These statements are inaccurate and horribly misleading.  The multitude
of species that depend upon Pleasure House Point and the surrounding ecosystems will be greatly impacted by this proposed development.

In a 27 Oct 1998 site impact assessment, Walter Priest of the Virginia Institute of Marine Science found that the interior tidal wetlands were “integrally
linked to the Pleasure House Creek system” and that “these wetlands and open water areas provide important fish and wildlife habitat that contributes to the high quality habitat found in Pleasure House Creek…”  He further stated that “From the viewpoint of the marine environment, every effort should be made to minimize the filling of these wetlands and open water areas because of their value to the Pleasure House Creek System.”

The site in question is one of the last remaining undeveloped stretches of shoreline in the area.  Dr. Maynard Schaus from the Virginia Wesleyan College Department of Biology frequently visited the area for marine biology and ecology field trips.  He noted that numerous wildlife species use the area as habitat.  He also noted that the loss of these wetlands would harm native wildlife.  These wetlands represent an essential element of the local ecosystem.

During a 1994 review of the western portion of the subject site for a public boat ramp, the National Marine Fisheries Service reported that Pleasure House Creek and surrounding areas are particularly important to the juvenile blue crab (Callinectes sapidus).  The shallow nearshore areas of Pleasure House Creek and submerged aquatic vegetation found in the lower Chesapeake Bay serve as a nursery habitat for the newly settled larvae.  The larvae metamorphose into juvenile blue crabs and spread in to the Bay during Fall and Spring.

Numerous fish species are known to occur in Pleasure House Creek to include the anchovy (Anchoa mitchilli), Atlantic croaker (Micropogon undulates), spotted trout (Cnoscion neblulosus) and striped mullet (Mugil Cephalus).  The 1994 study by the National Marine and Fisheries Service also documented two marine mammals as visitors to Pleasure House Creek: the harbor seal (Phoca
vitulina) and the Atlantic bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncates).  The seals may inhabit the area from December through March and the dolphins are
seen in the summer months.

According to the 1994 National Marine Fisheries Service report, two species of turtle are also known to occur within the project area (specifically, the western portion of the subject site). The loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) and the world’s most endangered sea turtle, the Kemp’s Ridley sea turtle (lepidochelys kempii).  Both species are federally
listed as endangered.  These two species
are seasonal visitors to the shallow water habitat within Pleasure House Creek.  Dr. Schaus has also observed the Diamondback Terrapin (Malaclemys terrapin terrapin) in the area.  This turtle
is listed by the VA Department of Game and Inland Fisheries as a State species of concern and is also a Federal species of concern.

The Lynnhaven estuary is located within the Atlantic flyway, a migratory route utilized by many bird species.  The 1998 site impact assessment by the Virginia Institute of Marine Science noted “Bird
diversity was very high during the spring site visits indicating that these areas are important wintering habitat and migratory corridors for waterfowl and
wading birds.” Among the birds that are known to occur in Pleasure House Creek are the least tern (Sterna antillarum), brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis), the great and common egrets (heodias
egretta and Casmerodius albus), the great blue heron (Ardea Herodias), and the boat tailed grackle (Quiscalus major).  There have also been reports of Bald Eagles (Haliaeetus eucocephalus) in the local area.  The Department of Conservation and Recreation recently noted the potential for Pleasure
House Point to support yellow crowned night herons (Nycticorax Violaceus).  According to the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries and the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, the least tern, yellow crowned night heron and the brown pelican are listed as State species of concern.

Dr. Schaus conducted a detailed census of the bird community composition through the Lynnhaven River, including two sites on the property of interest and three sites adjacent to it.  During his surveys he noted 27 bird species that use the marshes and adjacent waters on site.  The Virginia Institute of Marine Science review of this project noted that if permitted, construction activities will occur over many months to years as the project development occurs in phases,resulting in the disturbance of wading birds and shorebirds currently utilizing
the project area as foraging, breeding, and nesting habitat.  The driving of piles associated with the
construction of the two 11 story towers will likely displace the local population of water birds from the vicinity of the project site for an undetermined period of time.

In a letter from the US Department of the Interior (DOI) dated 29 Nov 1972, the DOI states that the 25 to 30 acres of wetland fill appeared to be a violation
of the Rivers and Harbors Act.  It also referred to these wetlands as a unique and indispensable part of the biotic community by providing food, shelter, and nursery areas for many animals which inhabit the estuarine ecosystem.  The DOI referred to the filling of wetlands as the riparian owner obtaining upland real
estate at the expense of public resources.  DOI’s bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife objected to the filling of wetlands and their significant adverse effects on public fish and wildlife resources, especially where there is no demonstrated public need.

I ask the Army Corps of Engineers to please consider the potential implications to wildlife in the area.  If this project is approved, wetlands of primary ecological significance will be altered and the ecological systems in those wetlands will be unreasonably disturbed.  This project will directly impact a multitude of species that depend
upon Pleasure House Point.  Several of these species are federally designated as endangered, threatened or as species of concern and they deserve our protection.

Thank you,
Nicole L.

Sources
1994 NMFS Pleasure House Creek Boat Ramp Study Draft Environmental Assessment
Dr. Maynard Schaus, Virginia Wesleyan College Letter.
US Department of the Interior letter dated 11-29-1972
Virginia Institute of Marine Science Site Impact Assessment dated 10-27-1998 (Walter Priest)
Terwilliger, Karen. Virginia’s Endangered Species. Blacksburg, VA: The McDonald and Woodward Publishing Company. 1991
Terwilliger, Karen. A Guide to Endangered and Threatened Species in Virginia. Blacksburg, VA:
The McDonald and Woodward Publishing Company.1995
The Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information Service of the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries
The Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Natural Heritage Program
U.S.Fish and Wildlife Services Endangered Species Program
Barrow, Mary Reid. “A Fair Way to Blend Golf and Nature.”  Virginia Pilot. 11 Nov 1996.
“Symbolic Victory.” HamptonRoads Magazine. March 2004.
Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS) review of Indigo Dunes (Project 06-2601)

ACOE comment period for Indigo Dunes extended

Thanks to Ms. Kathryn Edgar, regulator with Army Corp of Engineers, for letting us know the public comment period for Indigo Dunes has been extended until end of business January 16th.
More to follow.

Indigo Dunes’ Public Comment period for renewal of ACOE provisional permit open

Official Notice from Army Corp of Engineers.

The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, state, and local agencies and officials; Indian Tribes; and other interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed activity.  Any comments received will be considered by the Corps of Engineers to determine whether to issue, modify, condition or deny a permit for this proposal.  To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects, and the other public interest factors listed above.

We’ll provide more details, answer questions & more soon.

LRNow opposes introduction of non-native oysters in Ches Bay

LR Now Letter to Army Corp of Engineers. [2pg PDF]

LRNow’s position on introduction of non-native oysters in Ches Bay reprinted with permission:

Dear Lynnhaven River NOW members,

Everyone is looking at the Lynnhaven River’s recovering native oyster population with tremendous excitement.

Over the last 10 years, thousands of students and citizens have worked together with non-profits and governmental organizations to build oyster reefs in the Lynnhaven and to stock millions of reproductive oysters to the reefs. These community-raised oysters reproduce in the river, thus their babies also contribute to the Lynnhaven’s impressive developing oyster population. After only a decade of restoration activities, I am delighted to be able to report that all of this effort is working! Ten years ago, the Lynnhaven’s oyster population was estimated to be at about 1% of historic abundance, and recent calculations estimate that we may have already increased the Lynnhaven’s population to as much as 10% of historic abundance. That is a 10-fold increase in 10 years.

Well today, there is a major threat to our burgeoning native oyster population in the Lynnhaven River.

There is a heated debate underway right now with some parties favoring the introduction of a non-native oyster species to Chesapeake Bay waters. The Suminoe oyster, Crassostrea ariakensis, is the non-native oyster species under consideration. If this oyster is introduced into Chesapeake Bay waters, it will invade the Lynnhaven River and it will surely hinder the restoration of our native oyster population because Crassostrea ariakensis oysters interfere with native oyster reproduction, undermining the exciting oyster restoration progress in the Lynnhaven. In addition to jeopardizing our native oyster restoration efforts, Crassostrea ariakensis oysters harbor human pathogens more so than our native oyster, posing more risk for human consumption, and the Suminoe oyster may cause increased oyster disease risks to our existing native oysters. For these, and several additional reasons, Lynnhaven River NOW, together with the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Oyster Reef Keepers of Virginia, and all of the nearby Mid-Atlantic states are saying “no” to introducing Crassostrea ariakensis to the Chesapeake Bay.

Please let the Army Corps of Engineers know that you oppose introducing Crassostrea ariakensis to the Chesapeake Bay.

Send a letter to the Army Corps of Engineers voicing your position. Comments may be submitted through December 15, 2008 and mailed to:

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

or e-mailed to: Mark.T.Mansfield@usace.army.mil

Comments should reference the Draft PEIS. For more information visit http://www.nao.usace.army.mil/OysterEIS/homepage.asp

Comments need not be lengthy. Here are some more facts, in addition to those cited in the text above, that you may want to refer to when writing your letter but please feel free to compose your own letter as well:

  1. Introducing a of species is always risky, because you cannot predict how the species will function in a new ecosystem, however; once you have introduced them, there is no turning back. Look the environmental consequences of the introduction of Zebra Mussels, Kudzu, Phragmites, and Gypsy Moths, for some examples, plus the unsuccessful introduction a non-native oyster (Crassostrea Gigas) that only successfully introduced MSX oyster disease in the 1950’s, killing 90% of the Chesapeake Bay’s oysters at the time.

  2. The primary motivation for considering a non-native oyster introduction is that “oyster diseases (dermo & MSX) inhibit recovery of the native oyster population” – However, the Lynnhaven has some of the highest disease pressure Baywide, so if native oysters are recovering in the Lynnhaven, then the premise for introducing non-native oysters is flawed in the first place.

  3. C. ariakensis oysters are susceptible to a regional oyster disease, Bonamia, and could become a local harbor for this disease, putting all extant Chesapeake Bay native oysters at risk.

Make sure that you letter references the “Draft PEIS,” and that you state that you oppose introduction of the non-native oyster. Please also feel free to refer to the Lynnhaven River NOW public position letter for ideas.

Thank you for continuing to value and advance native oyster restoration in the Lynnhaven River!

Letter in opposition to introducing alien oysters into Ches Bay

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

Email in opposition reprinted with permission:

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

Subject:  Suminoe oyster (Crassostrea ariakensis); Unintended Consequences of Introducing Non-indigenous Species to Native Chesapeake Waters (Lynnhaven Inlet)

Dear Mr. Mark Mansfield,

Giving full consideration to and appreciation of a very busy schedule, which I am confident you maintain, I will attempt to be as succinct as possible regarding the subject matter.  I may or may not succeed as a matter of perspective.

It is a fair presumption that no one individual or organization has ever intentionally introduced a foreign species with the objective of doing ecological or economical spoil.  Regardless of introductory form, deliberate or inadvertent, non-native species have proven to constitute significant challenges and cost, typically in hindsight.  An exhaustive search and reference could be presented here, however, there are too many documented case studies to enumerate where this type impact adversely effected local, regional, state, and national environments.  As example:

“A native of Japan, KUDZU was brought to the southeastern United States at the turn of the century for use as a soil stabilizer, animal fodder, and ornamental vine. … Where it grows, kudzu has the ability to out-compete and eliminate native plant species and upset the natural diversity of plant and animal communities. Its extremely rapid growth rate and habit of growing over objects threatens natural areas by killing native vegetation through crowding and shading, and can seriously stifle agricultural and timber production”[1]

“Nutria (Myocaster coypus) is a non-native aquatic mammal that has inadvertently been introduced into Maryland wetlands and is proliferating, with negative impacts on natural ecosystems.”[2]

“Shortly after World War II, and before 1952, the brown Treesnake was accidentally transported from its native range in the South Pacific to Guam, probably as a stowaway in ship cargo.  As a result of abnormally abundant prey resources on Guam and the absence of natural predators and other population controls, brown Treesnake populations reached unprecedented numbers.  Snakes caused the extirpation of most of the native forest vertebrate species; thousands of power outages affecting private, commercial, and military activities; widespread loss of domestic birds and pets; and considerable emotional trauma to residents and visitors alike when snakes invaded human habitats with the potential for severe envenomation of small children.”[3]

“Zebra mussels arrived in the United States 20 years ago and quickly spread throughout the country. By 1989, they had made their way to New York; a year later, they were already causing problems.  Considered an invasive species, the tiny mollusk is notorious for clogging the intake pipes of power plants, and damaging boats and harbors. The only way to get rid of them was by using highly toxic, polluting pesticides.”[4]

As you may well know [or not] The United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Natural Agricultural Library (http://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/aquatics/main.shtml) provides an extensive repository of case studies.

Suffice it to say that I am, as are a tremendous number of other local homeowners [that may not take the time/effort to send correspondence], adamantly against the proposal to introduce this foreign species, Suminoe oyster (Crassostrea ariakensis), into native waters.  History tends to prove out actions, no matter how well intended, and it is my belief that adequate history presents this proposal as a highly imprudent consideration, especially if only to bolster oyster production for the benefit of restaurantiers and retailers (greed?), as I understand the primary impetus.  The current effort by LynnhavenNOW and local volunteers is making tremendous progress revitalizing the famous Lynnhaven oyster population.  Sometimes we really don’t NEED what we think we want…

If possible, the allocated funds for this proposal could be redirected to local efforts to restore the pristine characteristics of the Lynnhaven through repopulation of native species - - just a thought.

George Santayana stated, “Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it”.  But of course, George Bernard Shaw stated, “We learn from history that we learn nothing from history”.  The choice is now yours [and others], but the decision will ultimately be your [and the USACOE] legacy.  I strongly encourage a methodical deliberation on this decision.

Respectfully submitted,
Ken Scandell
Cape Henry Drive
Virginia Beach, VA 23451