Pound Nets - Appeal On!

[mwills98]

The appeal is on. I sent over the retainer check for the attorney yesterday to appeal the two permits located off the Chesapeake Beach/Ocean Park area. I know they have already started driving pilings but they might be wise to save their money pending the outcome. Nothing against the commercial guys but this just isn't the place. We'll see what happens.

[cuhollow]

The appeal is on. I sent over the retainer check for the attorney yesterday to appeal the two permits located off the Chesapeake Beach/Ocean Park area. I know they have already started driving pilings but they might be wise to save their money pending the outcome. Nothing against the commercial guys but this just isn't the place. We'll see what happens.

Huh:confused:
They went through the normal procedure and the public hearing and got approval and have actually started work and now you are suing to stop them? Maybe you should save your money... If work has actually started then after they got the use approval for the nets they must have applied for and received some sort of building permits to actually start work; at that point I think it is too late to stop.

[captdavdavis01]

it must be in the view from his condo.


GOOD LUCK buddy!

[FleetonLight]

The appeal is on. I sent over the retainer check for the attorney yesterday to appeal the two permits located off the Chesapeake Beach/Ocean Park area. I know they have already started driving pilings but they might be wise to save their money pending the outcome. Nothing against the commercial guys but this just isn't the place. We'll see what happens.

Wow, your a mighty common rascal for pulling that. I hope you get whats coming to you. :thumbup:

[Brandon]

I do not think anyone should be faulting the guy for putting up his own loot to appeal it. If I remember right there were a lot of people opposed to the placement of these nets, now someone puts up their own money and you guys are giving him a dig, what gives?:scratchchin3:

I give you credit for not just complaining but doing something about it yourself.

[SaltyJB]

Correspondence to VMRC against nets 45 ... for nets 7
Testifying against nets 12 ... for nets 3.
Combine that with the usual commercial bias, and you get ... APPROVAL !!!

[KenG]

I say good luck to you

[rhahn427]

Wow, your a mighty common rascal for pulling that. I hope you get whats coming to you. :thumbup:

Wow is right .......only I think he's an outstanding person ........ he's one of the few that stands up for what he believes and is willing to pony up when necessary ............ and I hope he gets his way ......

On the other hand ......... it's usually "a mighty common rascal" that has to make personal attacks to make a point .........

[Rob Holtz]

There is no way these nets should be allowed to be placed where they were approved. It's a complete injustice to the thousands of people that use that stretch of water. After listening to the recorded minutes of the VMRC hearing on this matter it became clear that none of the VMRC commissioners had any idea how much use this stretch of water sees from the public. This area is one of, if not the most, heavily used stretches of water in the entire state. It is not a place that pound nets should even consider being placed. Like I said in the earlier thread it's no different than placing a concrete barrier on the two outer lanes of Va. Beach Blvd and making all the traffic funnel into the middle lanes. It's a dangerous idea and someone is going to be killed if these nets go in.

You should contact all the Shore Dr. area civic leaques. I'm sure they would all be more than happy to pitch in and help you in this battle. Almost all of those civic leaques were represented at the hearing and spoke against these pound nets.

[hookinfinger]

If anyone reading this thread is interested as to where these nets will be located, click on this thread.


http://www.tidalfish.com/forums/virginia-angler/254812-pound-net-notices-2-24-va-beach-between-lynhaven-cbbt.html

[mwills98]

We'll said Rob. Thanks for everyones' support but you are giving me to much credit. I am in fact acting Pres. of the Ocean Park Civic League and while I did write a personal check, I hope and expect that all impacted leagues along the area will chip in and help defray the cost.

Yes, I can see them from the single family home I built on a duplexable lot but my concern is one of safety as I sail my hobie and occasionally pull the kids behind the Grady when not fishing. This is an accident waiting to happen if it doesn't totally prevent the thousands of people from using this stretch for recreation. As there is nothing to stop anybody and everybody from coming in and placing a few dozen more nets out there if this is not halted and VMRC checked. Times have changed and so has Va Beach, and unfortunately for some pound net fishing just isn't compatible along these shorelines.




There is no way these nets should be allowed to be placed where they were approved. It's a complete injustice to the thousands of people that use that stretch of water. After listening to the recorded minutes of the VMRC hearing on this matter it became clear that none of the VMRC commissioners had any idea how much use this stretch of water sees from the public. This area is one of, if not the most, heavily used stretches of water in the entire state. It is not a place that pound nets should even consider being placed. Like I said in the earlier thread it's no different than placing a concrete barrier on the two outer lanes of Va. Beach Blvd and making all the traffic funnel into the middle lanes. It's a dangerous idea and someone is going to be killed if these nets go in.

You should contact all the Shore Dr. area civic leaques. I'm sure they would all be more than happy to pitch in and help you in this battle. Almost all of those civic leaques were represented at the hearing and spoke against these pound nets.

[Foy]

We'll said Rob. Thanks for everyones' support but you are giving me to much credit. I am in fact acting Pres. of the Ocean Park Civic League and while I did write a personal check, I hope and expect that all impacted leagues along the area will chip in and help defray the cost.

Yes, I can see them from the single family home I built on a duplexable lot but my concern is one of safety as I sail my hobie and occasionally pull the kids behind the Grady when not fishing. This is an accident waiting to happen if it doesn't totally prevent the thousands of people from using this stretch for recreation. As there is nothing to stop anybody and everybody from coming in and placing a few dozen more nets out there if this is not halted and VMRC checked. Times have changed and so has Va Beach, and unfortunately for some pound net fishing just isn't compatible along these shorelines.

I just walked into the house this afternoon and saw the pilings. Thanks for starting the ball rolling. Your observations are similar to mine, Rob's, and Dennis'--as heavily traveled as this stretch of water is, pound nets are a cluster-you-know-what waiting to happen.

Drop me a line at my work email address and I'll pass the hat amongst my family to defray the costs of the appeal.

And the pilings--they're nowhere near the locations initially shown around the March 24 postings, are they? Was the chart as originally shown incorrect, or was there something in the approval process which moved the easternmost site 1,000 yards west?

Come see me this weekend, mwills, I'll be here until Tuesday morning.

Foy

[Tom Powers]

Foy Here is the figure that was lower down in the post from the 24th. I am pretty sure that I got the locations correct from a Lat. Long. standpoint.

http://www.tidalfish.com/forums/attachments/virginia-angler/16333d1235941344-pound-net-notices-2-24-va-beach-between-lynhaven-cbbt-0209-lynhaven-area.jpg

I goofed up on the first image in the post. The red lines are the given lat/long from the public notice.

Here is what was posted for lat and long.
Latitude 36° 55’ 19.1” N and Longitude 076° 06’ 48.9” W
Latitude 36° 55’ 35” N and Longitude 076° 06’ 42” W
Latitude 36° 55’ 05” N and Longitude 76° 05’ 47” W

The black line to the left of the eastern most location is 76d 06m W, so the 76d 05m 47s is kind of correct. I would suggest that someone go out there with a GPS and get some numbers.

I was not at the Commission meeting so you will have to listen to what was said to see if it was moved. You can do that by going to:

COMMISSION ACTIONS (http://www.mrc.state.va.us/Commission_Summaries/cs0309.shtm)

And downloading the .mp3 file. If you down load it you can fast forward through the boring parts.

[surferbill]

The appeal is on. I sent over the retainer check for the attorney yesterday to appeal the two permits located off the Chesapeake Beach/Ocean Park area. I know they have already started driving pilings but they might be wise to save their money pending the outcome. Nothing against the commercial guys but this just isn't the place. We'll see what happens.

Good job. I hope you are successful. :thumbup:

[Rob Holtz]

I am in fact acting Pres. of the Ocean Park Civic League and while I did write a personal check, I hope and expect that all impacted leagues along the area will chip in and help defray the cost.

I'm glad to hear this is a concerted effort of the civic leaques. Is there a petetion somewhere that can be signed? While I don't live in the immediate area I do live off Shore Dr. in Lake Shores, just a few miles down the road. I grew up on that stretch of beach and still use it quite heavily as do all my family and friends.

From listening to the audio record of the meeting I do recall one of the state politicians that represents this area had his letter of opposition read into the record. Has contact been made with the city council or any of the other state reps about this?

Keep us updated.

[Kevin Smith]

Hopefully those that were too bashful to speak up last time will take a stand & join with this brave individual and fight these nets? This is very dangerous placement and someone will most like get seriously hurt or be killed if they go in.

Kevin
Weekend Mistress

[mwills98]

According to the attorney, as I understand it there is really nothing further we can do such as petitions, offer up more evidence, etc. There is no trial per se, the information presented at the VMRC hearing on the 24th is the record and will be sent to the appeals court as it now stands along w/ legal briefs explaining our position for a judge to review and decide whether the commission acted in accordance with the law. Which I of course argue they did not "... the Commission shall also consider the public and private benefits of the proposed project and shall exercise its authority under this section consistent with the public trust doctrine as defined by the common law of the Commonwealth adopted pursuant to § 1-200 in order to protect and safeguard the public right to the use and enjoyment of the subaqueous lands of the Commonwealth held in trust by it for the benefit of the people as conferred by the public trust doctrine and the Constitution of Virginia."

Our state Delegate Joe Bouchard did send a letter that was read into the record oppossing the nets. We have met w/ him since and he again offered his support. Probably not much he can do at this point but pending the outcome could offer new legislation that might change things up a bit.

[cuhollow]

I maintain that once they have started work they have obtained some sort of building permit and you can’t do anything to stop them at this point.

Let us know what happens.

[gordy]

The appeal is on. I sent over the retainer check for the attorney yesterday to appeal the two permits located off the Chesapeake Beach/Ocean Park area. I know they have already started driving pilings but they might be wise to save their money pending the outcome. Nothing against the commercial guys but this just isn't the place. We'll see what happens.

:clap::clap::clap: BRAVO!!!!!!
I don't want that crap in my backyard.

[Foy]

On Tuesday morning, approx 1000 hrs, a deadrise and a pile-driving rig were on scene with a barge load of pilings, so work is continuing.

Tom Powers- I'm too digitally-challenged to mark up the chart and re-post it, and that prevents me from manipulating the audio download. All I can say is the location where the work is proceeding is essentially between the A/B site and the C site on the chart you marked up. If you look at the words "Chesapeake Beach" on the shoreline, there are marked pilings (which actually exist and mark the location of the old YMCA beach). The old Y Beach pilings are on the chart directly north of the "Beach" in Chesapeake Beach on the chart. The pilings are being driven around 300 yards directly north (offshore) of the old Y Beach.

Foy

[Tom Powers]

Two things.

First someone should pull out a chart and see if, based no landmarks contours, etc., I got the placement of the Lat, Long numbers correct. It would not be the first time that I goofed up.

Also someone needs to get out there with a GPS and take some numbers. I doubt that the Commission would have moved the net that far without going through a public notice. Further out maybe but not down the beach.

Third someone needs to listen to the commission meeting just in case they moved it as part of the deliberations.

Foy, Send me your email address. You can go to my profile and send it via a private message or an email.

[Foy]

Tom,
I just posted a "visitor message" in your profile. I'd be glad to hear from you any time.

Foy

[Rob Holtz]

I listened to the entire public hearing right after it happened. There was no mention of moving the nets from the described locations.

[Foy]

Although it seems unlikely a construction project of such expense could be underway at the wrong location, it seems logical to get to the site with a GPS and pull a number. As I've noted a couple of times, the site where the work is under way does not appear to remotely agree with the images of the VMRC-approved locations which were then drawn upon standard charts. I'd be happy to do it myself, but I'm 200 miles away in NC and my boat is at Taylor's in Little Creek.

Foy

[cbdaddy]

Maybe someone could post contact information for VMRC so we could voice opinions to the powers to be before someone gets killed or hurt.....

[fish boat]

There have been pound nets in lynnhaven bay for over a hundred years. My grand father has some photos of nets inthe same location as the new nets.As I understand the fishermen plan to supply the locale tackle shops with fresh and live bait.I guess there are alot of positive things coming from these nets. I had bought live bait from Mr Etheridge the previous owner of the cape henry nets . Can't deal with the new owner.It seems mike wills wants to sue the fishermen for wanting to work to provide for there families.He is claiming safety reasons.I beleive he is worried about hitting the net in his boat.The nets are placed several thousand feet apart. Sounds like he needs to take a boating safety class.The rules of the road states that each vessel while making way should have a proper look out .That includes looking out for pound nets.VMRC's decesion was six to zero in favor of the fishermen.I seriously doubt a judge would overturn there decision.Maybe mr wills should save the fifty thousand dollars he plans to spend on attorney fees and put it something more useful like his childrens college fund or maybe buy the fishermen out.

[FishBonzs]

Good point fish boat!

[Crazee Horse]

Fish Boat maybe you have an Axe to grind here but just because that's the way it has always been is not an argument for that is the way it should be. Maybe you should go buy a crow bar to pry your head out!!! I trust the judge will do as he sees fit and prudent. If the nets come down or stay up that is what the process is all about. I am sure the gentleman you attack here can pilot his craft with proficiency and is concerned with the danger these STRUCTURES clearly present to the less skilled. Taken for granted they are ADEQUATELY marked!!!!!!

[KenG]

If they were on the opposite side of the inlet or the other side of the bridge there wouldn't have been so much opposition.

[mwills98]

Fish boat,

Been piloting my motorboat for for 17 years now, think I do quite well and can avoid a pound net, do admit though that I am not quite an expert with the Hobie Cat or Kite Surfing gear yet. That is my main concern...less experienced recreationalist piloting various craft, barricaded into a confined area. It's an accident waiting to happen.

I know a couple commercial fishermen that support their families very well using less obstrusive fishing gear. They deserve a right to fish and use the waters just as we do, but this just isn't the place for pound nets.

[NightFisher]

Pound Nets have never been high on my list of hazards to navigation. Crab Pots, Gill Nets in shallow water, and Jet ski's are my nemisis. You never know where they will show up, those pound nets always seem to stay put and are pretty visible.

[Foy]

Fish boat,

Been piloting my motorboat for for 17 years now, think I do quite well and can avoid a pound net, do admit though that I am not quite an expert with the Hobie Cat or Kite Surfing gear yet. That is my main concern...less experienced recreationalist piloting various craft, barricaded into a confined area. It's an accident waiting to happen.

I know a couple commercial fishermen that support their families very well using less obstrusive fishing gear. They deserve a right to fish and use the waters just as we do, but this just isn't the place for pound nets.

Mike,

I have to agree with you on this point: Avoiding pound net structures should be a no-brainer for power boaters. There is some potential for problems at night, particularly with the volume of traffic between Lynnhaven and the first Small Boat Channel during rockfish season, where returning skippers NOT running a radar or not running a GPS line could readily stray just a bit south of their course to the entrance mark for Lynnhaven and hit the nets structure. Put a bit of salt spray on the windshield or curtains and the shoreline lights' backscatter makes visual navigation towards Lynnhaven a real challenge.

The bigger issue is, as you noted, the nonpowered watercraft. The predominant summertime blows are SW with some NE and less often a NW thrown in. Fall, Winter and Spring feature lots of NW blows. Any of the 3 would cross the nets at an oblique angle and given the length of the net structures would present the sailboater, windsurfer, or kiteboarder with lots of opportunity to get blown into it. As I noted on another related thread, I've been pinned to the pound net over by Lynnhaven Pier, in a little Sunfish, and it was terrifying. A friendly Good Samaritan with a powerboat anchored on the beach nearby was our only salvation, as the SW summertime wind and an outgoing tide current had us literally pinned to the cable and unable to move, some 300 yards from shore, as the sun sank low in the afternoon sky. I thought my Dad was going to have a cow, he was so scared.

So yeah, there are some potential issues with powerboaters (but they are potentially lethal issues regarding wintertime + nighttime collisions) and a long, long list of warm weather season issues with the public, which uses the many public beach access points, and their hundreds and hundreds of sorties from the beach out into the Bay. If those nets are built, I'd speculate it won't be a year before there is a dramatic rescue (hopefully a rescue and not a recovery) of kids on a sailboard or Sunfish or kayak from the nets, having been pinned against them the way I was back in the 1960s.

Foy

[trex]

There have been pound nets in lynnhaven bay for over a hundred years. My grand father has some photos of nets inthe same location as the new nets.As I understand the fishermen plan to supply the locale tackle shops with fresh and live bait.I guess there are alot of positive things coming from these nets. I had bought live bait from Mr Etheridge the previous owner of the cape henry nets . Can't deal with the new owner.It seems mike wills wants to sue the fishermen for wanting to work to provide for there families.He is claiming safety reasons.I beleive he is worried about hitting the net in his boat.The nets are placed several thousand feet apart. Sounds like he needs to take a boating safety class.The rules of the road states that each vessel while making way should have a proper look out .That includes looking out for pound nets.VMRC's decesion was six to zero in favor of the fishermen.I seriously doubt a judge would overturn there decision.Maybe mr wills should save the fifty thousand dollars he plans to spend on attorney fees and put it something more useful like his childrens college fund or maybe buy the fishermen out.


If you dont have enough experience to keep your blow boat out of a pound net you probably shouldn't be out in the area off of Lynhaven anyways. A pond, or a cove would be about right...

[croakerpoker]

why purposely place hundreds of pilings in the middle of a high traffic area? why create new non-selective nets when there are plenty of ways to commercially target certain size and species without the by-catch? The only answer i can think of is: for one man's financial gain. This effects everyone negatively except for the net owners. Go appeal!

[Foy]

If you dont have enough experience to keep your blow boat out of a pound net you probably shouldn't be out in the area off of Lynhaven anyways. A pond, or a cove would be about right...

These are congested waters, and they're congested with kids on unpowered craft and inexperienced adult boaters. It would be nice if everybody was experienced and took into account wind and current each and every time they left shore, but lots of history and logic says that's an unrealistic expectation. Nobody ever went broke underestimating the experience level and common sense of recreational boaters. You're right, they're fairly dumb. That said, they've always been dumb and they'll be dumb as long as we all shall live. Erecting structures capable of snaring and disabling uppowered craft, hundreds of yards from shore, in waters used primarily by inexperienced operators of unpowered craft, is begging for trouble, in my humble opinion.

Given the great length of the net structures and the predominant wind directions at the sites, incidents are bound to occur, whether they "should" or not. I hope it's not my kids, or my neighbors', or yours who learns about windage, drift, and currents the hard way.

It's a huge Bay. If pound nets are an acceptable method of commercial fishing, they should be erected in places less commonly used by the public. That probably excludes most of Tidewater, and certainly excludes the south shore of the Bay between the CBBT and the Lesner Bridge. The place is absolutely jam-packed from May-September.

Foy

[spotking]

If you hit a pound net its kind of like like natural selection cause you deffently don`t need to be behind the wheel of a boat. Saying they shouldn`t be able to net because they make money at it dosen`t work either because that is there job and doesn`t affect everyone negatively there are millions of people that eat seafood that don`t fish.

[fish boat]

It seems alot of people don't want pound nets in the bay,but the fact is they are allowed.People may complain because they are a safety hazard.Possibbily they are to the unexperienced boater.The case off lynnhaven is not a hazard to navigation, but an eyesore to the people that look at them.It is unfortunate that people move in to an area where commercial fishing has taken place since the first settlers landed at Cape Henry and no longer want to see it.We should consider it to be a privledge to have commercial fishermen and women in our country.I for one do not eat foreign seafood unless I no that country practices substaintal fishing practices.The United States is one of the most regulated countrys in the world.Commercial fishermen although they may seem out for greed feed people just like farmers.These pound net fishermen will feed thousands of people.The Chesapeake belongs to everyone,pound netters,boaters,recreation fishermen,condo owners,and yes even unexperienced sailboaters that have diffculty sailing around pound nets.To be fair to everyone I do know one of the pound netters and believe it to be immoral for someone to sue them for wanting to work and provide for their family.

[Rob Holtz]

Just got back in from an early morning Tog trip. I stopped by the work location, pulled some numbers and plotted them along with the posted numbers of where the work should be going on into my Garmin Bluechart.

Work has only begun at one of the sites. Basically the only piles driven so far are the pound head which is the furthest point offshore for that location. The location is N36 55' 13.3" W76 06' 27.7". A few of the leader piles have been driven and they appear to be aimed at a float that is sitting at N36 55' 03.8" W76 06' 30.9"

Couple observations after looking at everything. Tom, it looks like you plotted the posted numbers almost exactly where they should be. I'm assuming this is supposed to be net B. If correct then it's about 1/3 of a mile off from where it should be. As Foy stated it appears that this net is going directly offshore of where the old pilings are marked on the chart up near the shore. Since this net is going in so far from the permitted position it may be a little easier to get the permit overturned.

Some of you supporters of these nets aren't listening to what everyone is saying here so i'll repeat it again. NOBODY is saying these guys shouldn't be able to place and fish some pound nets. What EVERYONE is saying is that this highly congested area is not the place for it.

[fish boat]

I can agree this area can be crowded at times but don't think three nets are alot.I Think maybe if six nets were placed there it would be to many.Whats the difference between piers being allowed to be placed in the bay and pound nets?lynnhaven has several hundred piers and most are only feet away from the channels.I see no difference in allowing a pier or a pound net to be built.Definetly more boat traffic in there. As for the nets being built at the wrong location it doesn't sound they are to far off.I trust that your gps has recently been calibrated.I know for a fact that the two gps's on my boat read different numbers and they are only inchs away from each other.The important thing here is they stay off the beach the required distance.Also,from my understanding only two of these nets are to be built something to do with being able to keep trout or rockfish.Not sure which.

[Rob Holtz]

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I do believe that even 1 net placed in this highly congested area is a bad idea. The thinking is also that if these nets are allowed to be placed what's from stopping more from being added in the future once the precedent has been set? Is it going to take a serious injury or even a death to convince the powers that be that this is the wrong location for pound nets?

Any pier placed in the bay is very well lighted at night, these nets have no lighting whatsoever. Your going to have to do better to try and convince anyone that there's even a comparasion b/n piers inside Lynnhaven in a no wake zone and these pound nets out in the middle of one of most heavily used beaches/waterways in the area. They are a night time death trap waiting to happen.

1/3 of a mile isn't to far off? You've got to be kidding. Try building anything that far off from a permitted location and see what happens. If my GPS is off it isn't more than by a few feet, there's no doubt this net is going in well away from where it was permitted to be placed. In my eyes this will make it much easier to have the permit overturned.

[trex]

:rolleyes:

[Rob Holtz]

http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u10/Fishallot/Nets.jpg

The waypoints marked Net1, Net2 and Net3 are the permitted locations for the 3 nets. Waypoint 009 is where the pound net head is being installed right now. Waypoint 010 is the bouy that I believe the leader poles are aiming for. You can clearly see this net is being placed in the wrong position. The distance b/n Net1 and 009 is .3 nm.

This shot should be a little tighter.....

http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u10/Fishallot/Nets2.jpg

[Foy]

.......but what's +1,700' among neighbors?

I honestly think it's a shame the fisherman or the contractor put out money they might not be able to recover by putting the pilings in an incorrect, un-permitted location. I haven't been critical of pound nets in general and certainly not of commercial fishing. One of my best friends and longtime neighbors up there has long been involved in commercial fishing. My point, right from the get-go, is waters as congested as these are no place for permanent structures since they present a clear and present danger to the public.

I can only imagine the permitting process is precise, and that the pilings must be removed or the process re-started to seek approval in the locations where they were driven over the last couple or three weeks.

Foy

[KenG]

That location is better than net 2

[spotking]

by what you are saying anything in a well used waterway that doesn`t have a light shouldn`t be there . I quess its time to start removeing channel markers that arent lighted because its the same thing in a tighter area. Those that chose not leave in the day and mark there corse and return on that corse are just as likely to hit one of the mored ships out there come on be serious and just say what you feel not in back yard and they are a commercial net so they have to be bad. With were the nets are going to be there shouldn`t be an issue

[Nutz]

Spotking, are you saying it is as easy to run into an anchored freighter as it is unlit pound nets? Really? Your counterpoints are illogical and plainly absurd. I don't run by that area much and don't really care much one way or the other, but if you are going to argue a point at least make a sound statement.

[Foy]

by what you are saying anything in a well used waterway that doesn`t have a light shouldn`t be there . I quess its time to start removeing channel markers that arent lighted because its the same thing in a tighter area. Those that chose not leave in the day and mark there corse and return on that corse are just as likely to hit one of the mored ships out there come on be serious and just say what you feel not in back yard and they are a commercial net so they have to be bad. With were the nets are going to be there shouldn`t be an issue

spotking-

You will not succeed in trying to put words in my mouth. I'll say it, my way, and as clearly as possible, one more time:

I am not against commercial fishing. I have friends in VB who I admire a great deal and who are commercial fishermen
I am not against pound nets
I understand the Bay waters are public waters
I have a clear understanding that all operators of watercraft are not as experienced and knowledgeable as they could be or should be
I know first-hand how crowded these waters are, and how inexperienced many of the operators are
I am strongly against erecting any structures which seem bound to cause damage, injury, or death in public waters

Several have voiced their opinions that the nets being there "should not be an issue" in terms of being a hazard to navigation. I agree, to a point: Well trained, experienced operators with proper equipment and good common sense should not have a problem with these or any pound nets. The problem is we've already seen 3 adult males die within sight of the permitted net sites in just over 3 months (the two Arizona boaters in January and the individual who died just last weekend). How did that happen? They screwed up, pure and simple. People do that. Expecting everybody who sets out in or on a watercraft to be experienced and always exercise sound judgement is wishful thinking. Instead, somebody will lose power, break rigging and lose control, or just misjudge wind and current and will end up swept into these structures by strong winds or fast current. At that point they'll be a long way from shore and it will be difficult for help to get to them and time will pass before anybody can help them. For about half of each year, the water temps alone can kill before help can arrive. With the level of public use of these waters, hundreds and hundreds of yards of pound nets is a recipe for disaster.

Foy

[trex]

and so is the Bay Bridge Tunnel:rolleyes:

[Nutz]

You talking about the bridge/ tunnel with all those lights on it or is there some low unlit bridge out there I haven't seen at night? Any valid arguements on how these nets do not pose a danger? Last I looked on my chartplotter the bridge and all bouys, lit and otherwise appeared on my screen. Like I said earlier the area in question is not a place I venture through often, I just haven't seen a reason put forward by the pro-netters as to why this spot is crucial as compared to a less traveled area. Stop comparing pound nets to freighters and bridges and give the board members a real reason why this is the end all best spot in the bay for pound nets. I'm gonna guess it has more to do with lower fuel burn from the inlet to get to the catch. Does an extra 5 to 10 miles of travel make pound netting unprofitable?

[trex]

You talking about the bridge/ tunnel with all those lights on it or is there some low unlit bridge out there I haven't seen at night? Any valid arguements on how these nets do not pose a danger? Last I looked on my chartplotter the bridge and all bouys, lit and otherwise appeared on my screen. Like I said earlier the area in question is not a place I venture through often, I just haven't seen a reason put forward by the pro-netters as to why this spot is crucial as compared to a less traveled area. Stop comparing pound nets to freighters and bridges and give the board members a real reason why this is the end all best spot in the bay for pound nets. I'm gonna guess it has more to do with lower fuel burn from the inlet to get to the catch. Does an extra 5 to 10 miles of travel make pound netting unprofitable?

No, you keep referring to the less experienced boaters as well as kids. People who break down, or even people in sailboats that get caught in the current. These are all people that under the right conditions will fall victim to bridges, moored ships, buoys, and anything else out there that in fact CAN be a hazard. Being out on the water is hazardous period. It's unfortunate that we've lost a couple of folks here recently on the water. In both of those cases the people should not have been out on the water in the size/type of vessels that they were in. Neither incident involved a pound net though.

[Nutz]

I think both sides can or should agree that the area in question is a highly used area in terms of recreational use, boats, jet skis, kayaks, wind surfers, etc.... I am asking why is this area so crucial as compared to other areas where recreational use is at a minimum. That should be the basis for the argument, not just because VMRC let them or that being on the water poses some inherent danger to users. There are plenty of out of towners who make infrequent trips to our area to fish and I'm guessing it will not take long for someone not in the know to stumble upon those nets/pilings at night as they transit from crab creek to fish the bridge at night.

[CaptBeach]

It seems alot of people don't want pound nets in the bay,but the fact is they are allowed.People may complain because they are a safety hazard.Possibbily they are to the unexperienced boater.The case off lynnhaven is not a hazard to navigation, but an eyesore to the people that look at them.It is unfortunate that people move in to an area where commercial fishing has taken place since the first settlers landed at Cape Henry and no longer want to see it.We should consider it to be a privledge to have commercial fishermen and women in our country.I for one do not eat foreign seafood unless I no that country practices substaintal fishing practices.The United States is one of the most regulated countrys in the world.Commercial fishermen although they may seem out for greed feed people just like farmers.These pound net fishermen will feed thousands of people.The Chesapeake belongs to everyone,pound netters,boaters,recreation fishermen,condo owners,and yes even unexperienced sailboaters that have diffculty sailing around pound nets.To be fair to everyone I do know one of the pound netters and believe it to be immoral for someone to sue them for wanting to work and provide for their family.


Me thinks Fish boat might have a dog in this fight...I mean he only showed up when this started...all 3 posts I mean...

Hey Fish boat, be honest...if we were to look long enough and hard enough...would we find your name or a family members name on one of these pound net applications?

[Zzzz]

Raised here and now in early to mid-40s and I keep coming back to this discussion like a moth to a flame. I really don't have much of an opinion either way, but I have to ask as I am a bit confounded by the "pound net = almost certain human death" argument.

Does anyone remember anyone dying from a pound net? Seriously? I'll buy a beer to the first person who can document to me a death or near death encounter reported anywhere in Virginia involving a human and a pound net. (And a side bet...I'll bet you another beer that IF you find a death the operator of the vessel was drunk).

It seems to me there are arguments against the nets, but don't they really boil down to, as best as I can tell is

(1) environmental opposition, as in, people who oppose this type of commercial catch;

(2) people who use that stretch of beach to windsurf/kiteboard/sail and do not want the obstruction as they are concerned it intereferes with their use of the water there; and

(3) people who live off that beach and do not want nets obstructing the view from their private beach (NIMBY).

Whether or not one or more of the reasons is a "valid" one is a matter of opinion. I'm not smart enough to know if argument (1) is valid, but that one does not matter - pound nets are legal, like them or not. I don't live on or blowboat/board off that beach, so don't have a dog to fight in arguments 2 or 3.

[MeOff]

:clap::clap::clap: BRAVO!!!!!!
I don't want that crap in my backyard.

This is the MOST HONEST reason brought up by anyone against the nets!

[Foy]

No, you keep referring to the less experienced boaters as well as kids. People who break down, or even people in sailboats that get caught in the current. These are all people that under the right conditions will fall victim to bridges, moored ships, buoys, and anything else out there that in fact CAN be a hazard. Being out on the water is hazardous period. It's unfortunate that we've lost a couple of folks here recently on the water. In both of those cases the people should not have been out on the water in the size/type of vessels that they were in. Neither incident involved a pound net though.

I don't think there are any bridges, moored ships, or buoys which are 500 yards of continuous, unbroken hazard, and surely not 3 of them in one highly congested patch of water. Perhaps that's why there have been no reported injuries or fatalities.

As I stated before, I've been caught in the pound nets over by Lynnhaven pier. I was an 11 year-old on a Sunfish sailboat with my inexperienced father at the tiller. We got caught in an outgoing tide pushed by a building SW wind and although we were cutting water like crazy, we couldn't make headway on a course away from the net. That was in the 1960s when recreational boaters operating nonpowered craft were rare over on that side of Lynnhaven. Nowadays, from mid-April through October, the stretch of beach between Lesner and CBBT is jammed with catamarans, other sailboats, windsurfers, kiteboarders, kayakers, jetskis, and powerboats.

The problem with the nets is that if you get swept into one on a vessel like a catamaran, Sunfish, or sailboard, your centerboard/rudders can prevent you from passing over the top cable, pinning you to the upwind side, so you will likely need assistance to get off. While you're pinned to it, chop pounds against you and there's lots of opportunities to get body parts between the vessel and the piling or the cable. Imagine a blown-over catamaran (an hourly occurence in summertime) and think about how long they remain immobilized as the crew tries to right it, and it's not the least bit difficult to imagine getting swept into what is effectively a very long, unbroken wall. Dad and I were lucky--a fellow with a little Whaler saw our predicament and came-a-running. He backed close enough upcurrent from us to get a line to us, I cleated it to the bow cleat, and he towed us several hundred yards up and across current to a point where we could vector back to our side of Lynnhaven and make headway against the outgoing tide. We were pinned for maybe 10 minutes--long enough for us to wonder what the heck we could do and how in the world we were going to escape that situation.

So, I've been there, done that, seen the dummies on the water there since the 1950s, been a dummy on the water there, and firmly believe if the pound nets are built between Lynnhaven and the CBBT, somebody's going to get hurt.

Foy

[FleetonLight]

Foy, we get it. You sucked at sailing and almost (in your mind) got killed by a pound net. A pound net? You could just as easily walk out in a rainstorm and drown like a Tyson turkey. Like someone said before, try and find an instance of a sober person being killed by a pound net anywhere in VA. Its a moot argument. People will adapt to these nets and life will go in. Yes, going out on the open waters of the bay is hazardous, and people will die this year and every year. But sorry fellas, it wont be from a pound net. It'll be from their own stupidity. If your against commercial fishing, or just think that the nets are ugly, just say it. No sweat. But the safety argument is purely for those guys that are unwilling or afraid to state the real reason's that they're against the nets. Eat fish.

[spotking]

Foy
nimby and I hate commercial fishermen might not fit in your mouth but it does most that are in opposition of the nets
I am not a poundnetter but I do gillnet and with a 7ft flag with a blaze orange flag bigger what is required I have had people pass between my boat and the flag while I setting and pulling a net one case I had less than 100 yards other case I had about 150 yards out both times cost me time and money. A less expirenced boater is alwasys going to screw up be hitting pilons or acting like an ass at the ramp and a pound netter should not be pentalized because of there lack of knowledge. Hitting a frieghter was a small stretch but that far off I have never heard of someone hitting the nets at cape henry witch are in a well traveled area so the new ones will not be any different

[wasabi]

mwills98, you are my hero. Where do I send my donation to the cause?

[mwills98]

Bottomline is the nets may or may not lead to the the certain death or injury of a person navigating these waters, only time will tell. One thing is for sure, anyone who has ever visited this area on a warm summer day and knows the topography of these subaqueous lands can attest, these nets will severely limit the use and enjoyment of this area by the general public which is in direct violation of our constitutional rights. If we don't stop it here and now it will only get worse.

§ 28.2-1205. Permits for the use of state-owned bottomlands.
A. When determining whether to grant or deny any permit for the use of state-owned bottomlands, the Commission shall be guided in its deliberations by the provisions of Article XI, Section I of the Constitution of Virginia. In addition to other factors, the Commission shall also consider the public and private benefits of the proposed project and shall exercise its authority under this section consistent with the public trust doctrine as defined by the common law of the Commonwealth adopted pursuant to § 1-200 in order to protect and safeguard the public right to the use and enjoyment of the subaqueous lands of the Commonwealth held in trust by it for the benefit of the people as conferred by the public trust doctrine and the Constitution of Virginia.



mwills98, you are my hero. Where do I send my donation to the cause?

Donations can be made to: Ocean Park Civic League (OPCL), P.O. Box 55385, Virginia Beach, Virginia 23471

[Zzzz]

ORIGINAL: "these nets will severely limit the use and enjoyment of this area by the general public which is in direct violation of our constitutional rights. If we don't stop it here and now it will only get worse."

Whoa....does this mean the Chesapeake Beach residents are now abandoning their position that this beach is PRIVATE and that other VB residents (or, God forbid, a tourist from Chesapeake) may not walk on the sand above mean high tide? Does this mean all the "No Parking" signs are coming down so the rest of us can exercise our "constitutional rights"?

Let's call a spade a spade. This is about not liking pound nets from a conservation point of view or about not liking pound nets in your own back yard. EITHER is both understandable and defensible. Cloaking it in "constitutional right" is laughable.

[Tom Powers]

There is public beach parking at Crab Creek with a walkover that provides access to the beach next to the net marked net3 in Robs map. Also there is plenty of on street parking for the stub streets just east of the net marked net1, plus you have the pay to use parking at Alexanders. Is more parking needed, by all means. Is there parking for these beaches. Yes there is.

The private beach issue is at the condos on the other side of the bridge. Most of the folks that are arguing against these nets are also fighting to make/keep those beaches public and to provide better access.

[Rob Holtz]

Going over the Lesner bridge today I saw some poles going in that looked to be in the Net1 or Net2 area. If what was installed last week is supposed to be Net3 then it's off by .6 nm.

Either way i'm betting the poles installed last week that are way off are going to either haved to be pulled up and moved or another permit will have to be applied for since the location is so far off.

Some of these replies are cracking me up, some of you supporters are out in left field on this one. Sure they're trying to save fuel by having the nets as close to the inlet as possible. They obviously have no regard for the fact that this is one of the most heavily used strecthes of water in the state. Sure lets throw some solid barriers right in the middle of the interstate and make everyone go around them or crash into them because the VMRC is dumb enough to let us do it. The reason there aren't many reported accidents on the other side of the inlet is because there are so many pound nets over there that the public is more or less excluded from using that stretch of water other than going straight into/out from the beach. This stretch of water is no place for pound nets, let them go in an area much less currently used by the public.

[LECTRICFISHRMAN]

Thx. Rob, you always have a way of putting things in perspective ! :yes: The poles are going to be an issue for everyone else that uses that stretch of waterway for all the years to come once approved. :confused: Obviously the MAJOR benefactor is the netter. :eek2: If it's a business decision than why not fish where there would be LESS IMPACT to the community ? :rolleyes: If this is not STOPPED there will be ramifications , loss of life , maybe not but certainly not an ideal location if the VMRC has a choice ? :nono: Maybe a representative of the City of Va. Beach could help :helpsmilie: ? Thx. for sharing this w/ all of us .......

[trex]

There are pound nets in many of the major rivers as well as off of the eastern shore. Not only are there pound nets, but there are stake nets up as well. Not hearing about any accidents goes alot further than just off of your precious little beach. It goes for the whole state. I share the opinion of alot of others in that most of you guys wont be happy until there are no commercial fisherman left.

[Demasi]

I already marked the first set on my GPS so i dont hit them at night. I recommend everyone do the same. I like to run in from the islands hugging the beach. Its going to be a dangerous summer until people get used to those nets

[FleetonLight]

Well, since you guys are so convinced there will be heavy loss of life from this pound net, why don't you just toe tag yourself every time you leave Lynnhaven. I mean, if its that certain that horrible flaming deaths are going to occur every day because of this net, just identify your body now. Thanks fellas!

[Foy]

Well, since you guys are so convinced there will be heavy loss of life from this pound net, why don't you just toe tag yourself every time you leave Lynnhaven. I mean, if its that certain that horrible flaming deaths are going to occur every day because of this net, just identify your body now. Thanks fellas!


This has the appearance of a concentrated effort to twist the words of some opponents of the nets into a percieved across-the-board condemnation of commercial fishing and simultaneously portray their safety concerns to read "we think horrible deaths will occur early and often". Read the arguments again, gentlemen. I don't think that's what anybody has said (other than yourselves).

It's a big Bay. There are plenty of places for pound nets. I've seen practically no argument, within the context of this present issue, that pound nets shouldn't exist. Lots and lots of boaters, however, use these waters, and +1,500 yards of permanent structures interferes with their use, presents a danger, and benefits a very small handful of others. Why don't you argue those points, gentlemen, instead of arguing against what you think you hear others saying, when in fact they're not saying that which you contend they're saying? Is it just that much easier to divert attention from the real opposition issues, which you apparently have no sound positions against, by presenting other issues which are eye-catchers?

Foy

[KenG]

". Read the arguments again, gentlemen. I don't think that's what anybody has said (other than yourselves). It's a big Bay. There are plenty of places for pound nets.

Move the nets to the other side of the bridge

[mwills98]

For the record, Ocean Park is a public beach. Has been since the early 80's when the city purchased the claims from Ed Linsdey. That's why we get the sand from the inlet and have a nice wide beach and plenty of parking at the boat ramp for the public to enjoy it. Too bad these nets if not removed will prevent many from enjoying one of the few public beachfront recreation areas not overrun by tourist during the summer as they have been for many decades. It's a shame the city wasn't on the ball and standing up for its citizens, may have led to a different outcome.

Also the first net of the two westward nets that was under construction was in the wrong location and it appears the contractor has been relocating the piles as he removes them to the correct position.

[Diamond Reef]

1vvvvvvvvvvvvvv

[Diamond Reef]

The mouth of the Great Wicomico has no less than 10 nets on both sides of the channel. And as far as I know there have been no deaths,not even a splinter from the poles. Soooooooooooooooooo you can rant, rave, even jump up and down but thoes boys are going to have net hanging of those poles in a few weeks. But one thing when you are fishing this summer and come home with nothing but a sun burn you can blame the nets. Sooooooooooooooooo cry boys cryyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

[mwills98]

The mouth of the Great Wicomico has no less than 10 nets on both sides of the channel. And as far as I know there have been no deaths,not even a splinter from the poles. Soooooooooooooooooo you can rant, rave, even jump up and down but thoes boys are going to have net hanging of those poles in a few weeks. But one thing when you are fishing this summer and come home with nothing but a sun burn you can blame the nets. Sooooooooooooooooo cry boys cryyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

That's great, I guess they won't mind having three more up there then? I know it's a little hard for some to understand, but it's fairly easy to avoid a stationary pole and not get a splinter, but throw in some sailors, paddlers, jet skiers, and motorboaters into a confined area all trying to dodge 2500 feet of poles and a few sandbars for good measure, then you have a problem.

BTW, if all you catch is a sunburn during summer, might want to give up the fishing.

[Rob Holtz]

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.

[Mercutio]

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.

Yikes!

[cbdaddy]

Rob
I spke with someone at the CG office localy and they have sent up there concerns to higher authority for Federal interdiction to remove "Hazard to Navigation". Ther approach is that Federal Authority in regards to "Hazards to navigation" supercedes 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. I don't think we'll ever see a freighter in that area but it still falls within the boundries of "International Navigable Waters". Rules are rules..... We'll see what happens

[V.B. wells & irrigation]

It's an absolutely absurd location for the nets. For several reasons. You've got my signature if you need it.

Jimmy

[FleetonLight]

Running into a piling at night "because it didn't show up on my radar"? That's just plain bad seamanship. Sorry charlie.......:rolleyes:

[cbdaddy]

Jimmy
The thing to do is contact the CG at L/C or Hampton roads and voice your concern as they are looking into this issue.

[Zzzz]

Proximity to major shipping channel? It is over two miles from the major shipping channel and in what, 10 feet of water? I am not necessarily "for" these nets at this location, but the CG should focus on training its crews and leave the shallows to the state to control. We already have enough federal overregulation.

[mwills98]

It's actually about 20' of water at high tide and that is just the first of two nets near the bridge. The next net is suppose to start 500' off the north end of the first net and extend out another 1200' into 20-30' of water. Not to mention the extremely close proximity to the small boat channel which should have been reason enough to at least require lighthing which the all knowing VMRC failed to see.



Proximity to major shipping channel? It is over two miles from the major shipping channel and in what, 10 feet of water? I am not necessarily "for" these nets at this location, but the CG should focus on training its crews and leave the shallows to the state to control. We already have enough federal overregulation.

[Thoroughbred]

Not requiring lights on any net is idiotic IMO. You want them out there? Fine but light them up.

[cuhollow]

There are pound nets every few hundred yards around kiptopeke and fisherman's island. Never seen one lit up. Not even all channel markers are lit up. Not saying they shouldn't be but I have never seen one lit. Rob I agree that someone is going to run into these nets but that is basically true about every structure in the bay - eventually someone runs into it but it will be their fault when it happens. This is a high traffic area of course but now they actually have started work..... I think that will make it way harder to stop it.

The link earlier showed all three nets in 20' of water or less.

[Thoroughbred]

This one says it will be lit:

VMRC approves local VB pound nets including one that is 50 feet from the beach


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]

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]
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.


"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." - VCAN Director Schmitt

[Thoroughbred]

Ok so they do have lights on some. Why not require them on every one? Cost the fisherman a few dollars? Ok but it may save a life or two so it's worth it.

[fishnhokie]

Raised here and now in early to mid-40s and I keep coming back to this discussion like a moth to a flame. I really don't have much of an opinion either way, but I have to ask as I am a bit confounded by the "pound net = almost certain human death" argument.

Does anyone remember anyone dying from a pound net? Seriously? I'll buy a beer to the first person who can document to me a death or near death encounter reported anywhere in Virginia involving a human and a pound net. (And a side bet...I'll bet you another beer that IF you find a death the operator of the vessel was drunk).

It seems to me there are arguments against the nets, but don't they really boil down to, as best as I can tell is

(1) environmental opposition, as in, people who oppose this type of commercial catch;

(2) people who use that stretch of beach to windsurf/kiteboard/sail and do not want the obstruction as they are concerned it intereferes with their use of the water there; and

(3) people who live off that beach and do not want nets obstructing the view from their private beach (NIMBY).

Whether or not one or more of the reasons is a "valid" one is a matter of opinion. I'm not smart enough to know if argument (1) is valid, but that one does not matter - pound nets are legal, like them or not. I don't live on or blowboat/board off that beach, so don't have a dog to fight in arguments 2 or 3.

Well Zzzz, almost as old as you, and I do remember one. Hard to remember exact date. But late 70's or early 80's a guy from one of the clubs my dad was in, Jaycee's or Virgina Gentlemen, was in a boat coming back from eating in Maryland (Popes creek, cobb island, or somewhere in those parts) The guys were on their way back and it was dark. Boat hit a pound net and the guy was thrown from the boat, broke his neck, drowned.

Guess you could say the accident was not in VA, since almost all of Potomac seems to be MD water. But it was at/near the VA side where it happened. Not sure of logistics, was a long time ago. But do remember the death, especially every time I'm on the water at night and know nets are in the area.

Lights or at least some kind of reflective tape/markers (not very expensive) should be on the nets. I travel by spotlight at night, and the refective stuff would be helpful.

-Tom