Pound net Notice off Northumberland County

[ssellard]

Any coment against will reqire a hearing to held so all sides can be heard. Any coment should be made to Jack Travelsted @ VMRC. We had one proposed near us "other side of bay". With a little looking into, I discovered the fellow had his coordinates way off. He was informed that the whole process had to be done over and that thier was opposition mounting. Not sure why, but he has not reapplied to date and that was 2 years ago. As others have said not much can be done if it not a nav hazard or the site does not has aquatic vegitation. Good luck.

[rlcharters]

Capt. Dave,

Nor do you want to run into one. But you do very little boating after dark. We have many sailboats enter our creek late in the evening as we are well thought of as a point of anchorage. Coming from the Rapp, this net is out far enough to be a nuisance. My biggest concern lies in the fact that notice has to be given and comments of concern sent to VMRC. Most pound nets meet with little or no resistance, like the one outside of our creek that is a half mile offshore. It is located, however, where there is little boat traffic because boats going to the Great Wicomico are aware of Dameron Marsh. There is a lot of traffic in the 7-14 feet going to Indian Creek. If there is opposition, then VMRC needs to take that opposition into account. On this site, everyone is leading us to believe that unless right in the channel, you have no chance of having it put elsewhere. If that's the case, why have the notice. VMRC can make the decision without our imput; however, i don't think that's the way it should be done. If there is enough opposition, and there is, then a compromise should be in order. I'm against its location. Move it jarther south and there will be no opposition from me.

[Tom Powers]

rlcharters,

It is an inaccurate statement to say that "unless right in the channel, you have no chance of having it put elsewhere" . . . . IMO there is a potential to have the permit denied or moved. The chance is higher that it be moved. One single letter or email is enough to get it brought before the Commission.

If it is a single letter then you have to watch out for it being pulled from the agenda when an agreement is reached between the applicant and the one person who objects. I personally think that this practice is wrong as once the meeting agenda has been announced others who object will show up and speak their opinions. I have seen this happen and folks get grumpy when there was no hearing and the permit was issued.

Like I said earlier . . . if folks are not willing to show up then the Commission will likely be of the opinion that it must not be that big of a deal.

This process was initiated when someone put a pound net right up to the beach at a condo complex on the Rap. There was very little public notice and no one at the complex realized that there was an application until after it was approved. The matter went back and forth before the Commission for like 3 or 4 years. In general it was a big mess.

The current approach is to let the public know in advance which takes the legitimate concern of the permit holder that they have already spent $10,000 putting the net in the water when there are after the fact complaints.

[rlcharters]

Tom,

I doubt that you have any idea how many pound nets there are in the NN (perhaps you do). Few have had any complaints registered. The placement of this is an exception. I hope the Commission will take into account the complaints. Better yet, I hope the individual will decide to move it farther south. I know that Jack has brought our concerns to the individual.

[Tom Powers]

rlcharters,

While I do not have specific knowledge about that area I am pretty sure that the number is like 50 maybe 75 nets. I also understand that most applications are not objected to that strongly and are approved. I have been posting these things for about 3 years now and most just drift to the bottom of the page and even if they go to pubic hearing there are few objections; no one shows up; and they are approved.

I have seen a few with objections get denied or moved. A few in the upper/mid bay and a few in the lower bay. Usually on denied permits the person making the application comes back a few months later (often after working with staff) with an application that is approved. For instance a few years ago there was a series of permits on the east side of Lynhaven Inlet that were strongly objected to and denied. They were later permitted on the west side of the inlet several hundred meters off shore of the beach. Folks objected to the latter but (IMO) because they worked with staff to pick the new locations they were approved.

Hopefully there is compromise on this application and things work out. Like I said multiple times, I can assure you that if no one shows up and the net placement is actually legal then it will most likely get approved.

Tom

[Mushy]

These nets have been a tradition and a part of our history for years. To see the wooden work boats pulled up along side working the way they have for over a hundred years is awesome. Soon you will only see such a sight in a museum. These working Waterman have plenty of rules and quota to work by. Sorry if it blocks someone's short cut or crowds someone's favorite spot. The Waterman should not have to feel guilty for trying to make a living. I suggest you slow down or even pull along side and chat with them, see if they have any peelers or see what they are catching. Mutual Respect.

Mushy

[profire31]

Mushy said it all and very well.

[CyberDish]

I agree .... Nice comment Mushy!

[rlcharters]

I agree with everything you have said; however, if there is objection, there should be compromise. Watermen have every right to work the water, but if there is objection ...That's the way it is with most every business or industry. You can't just do what you want to do because you want to do it. Clearly there is objection to this net being put where the man wants to put it, and it's being objected to by the people that it will adversely affect. Yoou might feel differently if you felt it was adversely affecting you. As I read the statute, there are no rules governing the placement of pound nets. If you live on the water and someone wants to put a net just off your property and you have no objection, then I understand why you make the statements that you make. If not, then try to understand the position of many on my creek. True, it's not off of anyone property. per se, but it right where people have been using the water regularly for more than 60 years that I know of. If it were land, squatters rights would be invoked and he wouldn't be allowed to stop us from crossing over it. My last comment.

[DonQx]

OK, so everyone has a right to object. What if someone has an objection to a coupla charter captains bringing boatloads full of bubbas from the West End to fish off our backyards and doing it all for commercial gain. Who do we object to? How about if we ask you charters to just move a little farther south of the good fishing, to be fair to the rest of us. (Your words).
You can't have it both ways, gents. Either you recognize an honest man's right to try to make a living from the fishery, or you don't.