As a resident of Lagoon Pond with an aquaculture plot right in front of my house, I have to say I am shocked that the Natural Resources Advisory Committee essentially let the foxes draft the document for henhouse security.
Editors, Vineyard Gazette;
As a resident of Lagoon Pond with an aquaculture plot right in front of my house, I have to say I am shocked that the Natural Resources Advisory Committee essentially let the foxes draft the document for henhouse security.
Shellfish constable Danielle Ewart — a reliable voice for science and for our environment — clearly states her objections to most of the proposed changes, and suggests that our current regulations are not in need of change. I heartily agree with her. One example of the proposed changes, eliminating the need for shellfish aquaculture applicants to submit their supporting paperwork to the town, is almost laughably self-serving.
Given the unsightly nature of floating cages, as opposed to floats for submerged cages, I would hope in particular that we would continue the ban on the former. My colleagues at the Lagoon Pond Association have uncovered scientific papers which suggest that we would need to raise one million oysters per year on the pond to get the desired nitrogen reduction that I believe is part of the motivation for aquaculture. I’m imagining what the pond would look like with cages floating on it that were requisite to raise one million oysters.
I know for a fact that the folks at Husselton Head — in front of my house — have had difficulties raising shellfish in their assigned plot because it turns out the environment below the surface is not suitable. Hence their desire to have an approval of floating cages.
In summary, I’m not sure we need to revise the regulations regarding henhouse security to accommodate the needs of the foxes. There is essentially nothing wrong with the regulations as they are currently written.
David Forbes
Vineyard Haven
Comments
As one of your neighbors, it
Good for the goose TisburyAs one of your neighbors, it’s sad to see name calling and innuendo. For those reasons, it makes it difficult to associate value with your concerns. It’s my understanding, the regulations were reconciled with our neighboring towns. Including Oak Bluffs, the town we share the water body in question with. I actually reached out to a few farm owners and they regularly order oyster seed in 500,000 plus increments. Water quality is a priority for us all and it’s going to take a number of measures for our pond to stand a chance. NIMBY (the farm you constantly harass being directly in front of your house) costs us concerts, affordable housing and more. Let’s hope the Selectpersons don’t let it cost us our ponds too
Where is the name-calling?
David Forbes TisburyWhere is the name-calling? Where is the innuendo? And where is the harassment? A lot of words with no facts here.
And Seriously — “cost us our ponds“?
It has been sad to watch the
Bob Rheault Barnes Rd.It has been sad to watch the water quality in Lagoon Pond deteriorate over my lifetime to the point where hypoxia kills everything at depth in August. Sad too that the health of the pond takes a back seat to green lawns and objections over a few small oyster farms. Excessive nitrogen is something every resident has contributed to, and yet few feel compelled to remediate. Maybe when the pond becomes a fetid swamp people will wake up and invest in denitrifying septic systems and sewers and stop over-fertilizing their precious lawns. Oysters can't fix the pond, but they can be a small part of the solution. However, since there is no oxygen at depth, floating gear is the only way they can be farmed now. A million oysters can be grown on 2-3 acres. Ten such farms would take a tiny fraction of the pond's area and each would compensate for the nitrogen waste from several dozen septic systems and lawns. Or we can ignore the problem and watch the ponds continued decay.
Just for the record, we are
David Forbes TisburyJust for the record, we are already in the process of adding nitrogen reduction technology to our septic system. And my understanding is that Huddleston Head is only growing oysters to a small size on LP and finishing them elsewhere. Very small oysters make a minimal contribution to nitrogen reduction, making them a very small contribution indeed.
The very people that care
It's odd LagoonThe very people that care more about the pond (aquaculture farmers) and the very people that work their tails off (once again, aquaculture farmers) are the one's that are constantly barraged at meetings, getting sued by wealthy pond owners, harassed in the letters to the editor sections and not given the benefit of the doubt by town officials (shellfish warden and selectmen).
So you have floating gear outside in a pond that people are trying to clean up. It started that you were against Husselton Oysters because you couldn't maneuver your boat to your dock. That was proven false so now the truth comes out. It's just unslightly to you.
Add new comment