A volunteer working for a Canadian researcher Dave Delaney of McGill University just found a 22 mm female Asian shorecrab (Hemigrapsus sanguineus) on the north shore of Schoodic Peninsula, (presumably Gouldsboro.
This is unfortunate news. Now the ASC has colonized the southern (Isle au Haut) and northern extents of Acadia National Park. Even more alarming, the found organism was a gravid female with only a few eggs remaining.
This is the furthest north that the lobster-threatening invasive crab has been confirmed.
The staff of Acadia National Park, especially Jim McKenna and David Manski, have been assisting in the crab-watch.
This crab has had impacts in more southern Atlantic states. (massive population growth in the intertidal, crowding out other crustaceans.)
The strategy the Canadian resaerch calls for: start a trapping program throughout Acadia and the rest of Maine to control for the invader. The invader green crab now has an official trapping fishery with a commercial license. )
Jul 23, 2005
Jul 14, 2005
Rockland Dredge Disposal Site - state to mandate more community involvement.
Changes are in the wind for how decisions are made about dumping dredge spoils in Penobscot Bay. Towns will have to become experts. A held over bill LD 1592 at the state legislature will require all towns where dredging is to take place to develop a plan for the disposal of dredge spoils. In an email sequence below, Maine Port Authority head Brian Nutter has Maine Port Safety Forum staffer Eileen Lord forward to a broad spectrum of the state maritime community an email from Jay Clement of the US Army Corps of Engineers. Titled "Dredging/Disposal and the Rockland Disposal Area" it apparently refers to the bill, which was held over by the legislature till the next session or special session.
Read the bill at this link or below pasted in below the email.
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/LD.asp?LD=1592
The last paragraph of the bill is the added language, the only change it would make in this law: http://janus.state.me.us/legis/statutes/38/title38sec480-d.html .
-BayBlog
-----Original Message-----
From: Nutter, Brian
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 12:00 PM
To: Lord, Eileen
Subject: FW: Dredging/Disposal and the Rockland Disposal Area
Eileen,
Please forward this to the Port Safety Forum.
Thanks, Brian
Brian C. Nutter, Executive Director
Maine Port Authority
16 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04333-0016
Tel. 207-624-3564 Fax 207-624-3251
Brian.Nutter@Maine.gov
www.maineports.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Clement, Jay L NAE [mailto:Jay.L.Clement@nae02.usace.army.mil]
Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 1:42 PM
To: brian.nutter@maine.gov
Subject: Dredging/Disposal and the Rockland Disposal Area
Brian:
I didn't want to wait until October so feel free to pass this message along to the members of the forum. Apparently the legislature instructed DOT and DEP to work together on the issue of use of the Rockland Disposal Site. At DOT the POC is Chris Olsen; and at DEP it is Judy Gates or Jeff Madore. At this point in time no outcomes are pre-ordained nor has a work group or even a work plan been developed, let alone a time table. It is likely that nothing will happen until at least September. Our office would expect to be involved, particularly since we've worked with your shop and DEP for many years on dredging/disposal issues.
I may have more information by the October forum meeting or I may not. This initiative seems to have had some gas in the beginning but now the tank is empty.
Jay
----------------------End of Emails----------------------------------------------
The bill LD 1592's language. The addition of the last paragraph about municipalities is the ONLY change.
LD 1592. An Act Regarding Disposal of Dredged Materials.
Introduced by Representative KOFFMAN of Bar Harbor
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows:
Sec. 1. 38 MRSA §413, sub-§2-C, as amended by PL 1989, c. 656, §1, is repealed:
Sec. 2. 38 MRSA §480-D, sub-§9, as amended by PL 2001, c. 248, §1, is
further amended to read:
9. Dredging. If the proposed activity involves dredging,
dredge spoils disposal or transporting dredge spoils by water,
the applicant must demonstrate that the transportation route
minimizes adverse impacts on the fishing industry and that the
disposal site is geologically suitable. The Commissioner of
Marine Resources shall provide the department with an assessment
of the impacts on the fishing industry of a proposed dredging
operation in the coastal wetlands. The assessment must consider
impacts to the area to be dredged and impacts to the fishing
industry of a proposed route to transport dredge spoils to an
ocean disposal site. The Commissioner of Marine Resources may
hold a public hearing on the proposed dredging operation. In
determining if a hearing is to be held, the Commissioner of
Marine Resources shall consider the potential impacts of the
proposed dredging operation on fishing in the area to be dredged.
If a hearing is held, it must be within at least one of the
municipalities in which the dredging operation would take place.
If the Commissioner of Marine Resources determines that a hearing
is not to be held, the Commissioner of Marine Resources must
publish a notice of that determination in a newspaper of general
circulation in the area proposed for the dredging operation. The
notice must state that the Commissioner of Marine Resources will
accept verbal and written comments in lieu of a public hearing.
The notice must also state that if 5 or more persons request a
public hearing within 30 days of the notice publication, the
Commissioner of Marine Resources will hold a hearing. If 5 or
more persons request a public hearing within 30 days of the
notice publication, the Commissioner of Marine Resources must
hold a hearing. In making its determination under this
subsection, the department must take into consideration the
assessment provided by the Commissioner of Marine Resources. The
permit must require the applicant to:
A. Clearly mark or designate the dredging area, the spoils
disposal route and the transportation route;
B. Publish in a newspaper of general circulation in the
area adjacent to the route the approved transportation route
of the dredge spoils; and
C. Publish in a newspaper of general circulation in the area
adjacent to the route a procedure that the applicant
will use to respond to inquiries regarding the loss of fishing
gear during the dredging operation.
A municipality that is adjacent to coastal waters in which
dredging operations take place shall develop a plan for the
disposal of dredge spoils.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY
Current law exempts holders of a permit issued under the
United States Clean Water Act, Public Law 92-500, Section 404
from obtaining a waste discharge license for the disposal of
dredged materials into waters of the State. This bill removes
that exemption. The bill also requires coastal municipalities to
develop a plan for the disposal of dredge spoils.
End of bill
----------------------------------------------------
The law below, exempting dredger-wannabes from needing to get state permits will be repealed by the bill as well:
38 MRSA §413, sub-§2-C
Waste Discharge Licenses.
2-C. Dredge spoils. Holders of a permit obtained pursuant to the United States Clean Water Act, Public Law 92-500, Section 404, are exempt from the need to obtain a waste discharge license for disposal of dredged material into waters of the State when the dredged material is disposed of in an approved United States Army Corps of Engineers disposal site. Disposal of all dredged materials is governed by the natural resource protection laws, sections 480-A to 480-S. [1989, c. 656, §1 (amd).]
Read the bill at this link or below pasted in below the email.
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/LD.asp?LD=1592
The last paragraph of the bill is the added language, the only change it would make in this law: http://janus.state.me.us/legis/statutes/38/title38sec480-d.html .
-BayBlog
-----Original Message-----
From: Nutter, Brian
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 12:00 PM
To: Lord, Eileen
Subject: FW: Dredging/Disposal and the Rockland Disposal Area
Eileen,
Please forward this to the Port Safety Forum.
Thanks, Brian
Brian C. Nutter, Executive Director
Maine Port Authority
16 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04333-0016
Tel. 207-624-3564 Fax 207-624-3251
Brian.Nutter@Maine.gov
www.maineports.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Clement, Jay L NAE [mailto:Jay.L.Clement@nae02.usace.army.mil]
Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 1:42 PM
To: brian.nutter@maine.gov
Subject: Dredging/Disposal and the Rockland Disposal Area
Brian:
I didn't want to wait until October so feel free to pass this message along to the members of the forum. Apparently the legislature instructed DOT and DEP to work together on the issue of use of the Rockland Disposal Site. At DOT the POC is Chris Olsen; and at DEP it is Judy Gates or Jeff Madore. At this point in time no outcomes are pre-ordained nor has a work group or even a work plan been developed, let alone a time table. It is likely that nothing will happen until at least September. Our office would expect to be involved, particularly since we've worked with your shop and DEP for many years on dredging/disposal issues.
I may have more information by the October forum meeting or I may not. This initiative seems to have had some gas in the beginning but now the tank is empty.
Jay
----------------------End of Emails----------------------------------------------
The bill LD 1592's language. The addition of the last paragraph about municipalities is the ONLY change.
LD 1592. An Act Regarding Disposal of Dredged Materials.
Introduced by Representative KOFFMAN of Bar Harbor
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows:
Sec. 1. 38 MRSA §413, sub-§2-C, as amended by PL 1989, c. 656, §1, is repealed:
Sec. 2. 38 MRSA §480-D, sub-§9, as amended by PL 2001, c. 248, §1, is
further amended to read:
9. Dredging. If the proposed activity involves dredging,
dredge spoils disposal or transporting dredge spoils by water,
the applicant must demonstrate that the transportation route
minimizes adverse impacts on the fishing industry and that the
disposal site is geologically suitable. The Commissioner of
Marine Resources shall provide the department with an assessment
of the impacts on the fishing industry of a proposed dredging
operation in the coastal wetlands. The assessment must consider
impacts to the area to be dredged and impacts to the fishing
industry of a proposed route to transport dredge spoils to an
ocean disposal site. The Commissioner of Marine Resources may
hold a public hearing on the proposed dredging operation. In
determining if a hearing is to be held, the Commissioner of
Marine Resources shall consider the potential impacts of the
proposed dredging operation on fishing in the area to be dredged.
If a hearing is held, it must be within at least one of the
municipalities in which the dredging operation would take place.
If the Commissioner of Marine Resources determines that a hearing
is not to be held, the Commissioner of Marine Resources must
publish a notice of that determination in a newspaper of general
circulation in the area proposed for the dredging operation. The
notice must state that the Commissioner of Marine Resources will
accept verbal and written comments in lieu of a public hearing.
The notice must also state that if 5 or more persons request a
public hearing within 30 days of the notice publication, the
Commissioner of Marine Resources will hold a hearing. If 5 or
more persons request a public hearing within 30 days of the
notice publication, the Commissioner of Marine Resources must
hold a hearing. In making its determination under this
subsection, the department must take into consideration the
assessment provided by the Commissioner of Marine Resources. The
permit must require the applicant to:
A. Clearly mark or designate the dredging area, the spoils
disposal route and the transportation route;
B. Publish in a newspaper of general circulation in the
area adjacent to the route the approved transportation route
of the dredge spoils; and
C. Publish in a newspaper of general circulation in the area
adjacent to the route a procedure that the applicant
will use to respond to inquiries regarding the loss of fishing
gear during the dredging operation.
A municipality that is adjacent to coastal waters in which
dredging operations take place shall develop a plan for the
disposal of dredge spoils.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY
Current law exempts holders of a permit issued under the
United States Clean Water Act, Public Law 92-500, Section 404
from obtaining a waste discharge license for the disposal of
dredged materials into waters of the State. This bill removes
that exemption. The bill also requires coastal municipalities to
develop a plan for the disposal of dredge spoils.
End of bill
----------------------------------------------------
The law below, exempting dredger-wannabes from needing to get state permits will be repealed by the bill as well:
38 MRSA §413, sub-§2-C
Waste Discharge Licenses.
2-C. Dredge spoils. Holders of a permit obtained pursuant to the United States Clean Water Act, Public Law 92-500, Section 404, are exempt from the need to obtain a waste discharge license for disposal of dredged material into waters of the State when the dredged material is disposed of in an approved United States Army Corps of Engineers disposal site. Disposal of all dredged materials is governed by the natural resource protection laws, sections 480-A to 480-S. [1989, c. 656, §1 (amd).]
Jul 8, 2005
Maine fishermen fight Navy assault ship plan.
Maine fishermen fight Navy assault ship plan.
Rockland. In an ironic departure from efforts to retain naval ships in Portsmouth, angry fishermen from one of Maine's top lobstering areas rounded on the US Navy today, filling the Rockland Harbormaster's office in a hastily called meeting and demanding that the USS Wasp , scheduled to make a courtesy call to the town during the Maine Lobster Festival, move its anchoring location from choice lobstergrounds north of the Rockland Breakwater either a half mile south (closer to the Breakwater Lighthouse) or to the anchorage traditionally used by visiting navy ships off Owls Head across the harbor which has little fishing activity.
While no Navy officials attended the meeting, the Navy's concern was said to be the existence on the harbor nautical chart of a submerged wreck that could entangle anchor lines or foul the deep draft vessel. The Wasp is an 840 foot long, 106 foot wide amphibious assault ship, drawing 26 and one half feet.
The fishermen say the carrier and its surrounding no-vessels-allowed security zone will block dozens of fishermen from their traps for up to a week.
Representatives of the US Coast Guard and Marine Patrol joined the fishermen and harbormaster at the meeting. Asked by the fishermen if they would compensate them for the lost earnings, festival promoters at the meeting said no. The harbormaster was similarly unwilling to discuss compensation.
The meeting ended with the following plan: the harbormaster will hire a professional diver to videodocument the site and a sonar sweep of the wreck area will be taken and recorded. The results will be sent on to the navy, if they show that the wreck on the local nautical chart has crumbled into the seafloor, in hopes that the Navy will review it and consider anchoring the Wasp in that area, instead of prime lobster grounds.
Regardless of the ultimate location of the USS Wasp, fishermen say that the heightened security around Navy vessels since 911 has made life a bit less pleasant whenever a navy vessel visits Rockland harbor. One harbor fisherman described the eerie sensation of being tracked by a watchful seaman wielding a 50 caliber machine gun last summer while fishing his traps near a visiting warship then.
Rockland. In an ironic departure from efforts to retain naval ships in Portsmouth, angry fishermen from one of Maine's top lobstering areas rounded on the US Navy today, filling the Rockland Harbormaster's office in a hastily called meeting and demanding that the USS Wasp , scheduled to make a courtesy call to the town during the Maine Lobster Festival, move its anchoring location from choice lobstergrounds north of the Rockland Breakwater either a half mile south (closer to the Breakwater Lighthouse) or to the anchorage traditionally used by visiting navy ships off Owls Head across the harbor which has little fishing activity.
While no Navy officials attended the meeting, the Navy's concern was said to be the existence on the harbor nautical chart of a submerged wreck that could entangle anchor lines or foul the deep draft vessel. The Wasp is an 840 foot long, 106 foot wide amphibious assault ship, drawing 26 and one half feet.
The fishermen say the carrier and its surrounding no-vessels-allowed security zone will block dozens of fishermen from their traps for up to a week.
Representatives of the US Coast Guard and Marine Patrol joined the fishermen and harbormaster at the meeting. Asked by the fishermen if they would compensate them for the lost earnings, festival promoters at the meeting said no. The harbormaster was similarly unwilling to discuss compensation.
The meeting ended with the following plan: the harbormaster will hire a professional diver to videodocument the site and a sonar sweep of the wreck area will be taken and recorded. The results will be sent on to the navy, if they show that the wreck on the local nautical chart has crumbled into the seafloor, in hopes that the Navy will review it and consider anchoring the Wasp in that area, instead of prime lobster grounds.
Regardless of the ultimate location of the USS Wasp, fishermen say that the heightened security around Navy vessels since 911 has made life a bit less pleasant whenever a navy vessel visits Rockland harbor. One harbor fisherman described the eerie sensation of being tracked by a watchful seaman wielding a 50 caliber machine gun last summer while fishing his traps near a visiting warship then.
Apr 14, 2005
Dragon agrees to cap its pile!
Dragon agrees to cap its toxic cement kiln dust pile!
The pressure of the NSD lawsuit and the gloomy results of water testing around Dragon's cement plant. has apparently changed Dragon's mind about their Cement Kiln Dust (CKD) pile. Carla Hopkins of Maine DEP's Bureau of Remediation and Waste Mgmt reports that Maine DEP has received from Dragon Cement Products a "submittal for a closure plan" of the company's 825,000 ton CKD pile.
Maine DEP's engineering people are looking at this and if it is approved, the capping of the dragondust pile could take place during the summer and fall 2005 construction season.
Under the plan, thirteen of seventeen acres would be capped with clay and soil and revegetated. The other three acres would be the working face that they are actively removing dust from to try different ways of re-use. This would end the addition of toxics into the air, surface water and groundwater.
The state is preparing to issue a Schedule of Compliance, establishing a strict timeline for the company to bring its operations into compliance with the law as written by MDEP's Carla Hopkins has been vetted and passed by her immediate supervisor. It is now in the hands of Bureau Birector Steve Davis; once he approves it, the Schedule of Compliance goes for the commissioner's signature. There may be a last minute change to incorporate Dragon's new pile closure plan.
The pressure of the NSD lawsuit and the gloomy results of water testing around Dragon's cement plant. has apparently changed Dragon's mind about their Cement Kiln Dust (CKD) pile. Carla Hopkins of Maine DEP's Bureau of Remediation and Waste Mgmt reports that Maine DEP has received from Dragon Cement Products a "submittal for a closure plan" of the company's 825,000 ton CKD pile.
Maine DEP's engineering people are looking at this and if it is approved, the capping of the dragondust pile could take place during the summer and fall 2005 construction season.
Under the plan, thirteen of seventeen acres would be capped with clay and soil and revegetated. The other three acres would be the working face that they are actively removing dust from to try different ways of re-use. This would end the addition of toxics into the air, surface water and groundwater.
The state is preparing to issue a Schedule of Compliance, establishing a strict timeline for the company to bring its operations into compliance with the law as written by MDEP's Carla Hopkins has been vetted and passed by her immediate supervisor. It is now in the hands of Bureau Birector Steve Davis; once he approves it, the Schedule of Compliance goes for the commissioner's signature. There may be a last minute change to incorporate Dragon's new pile closure plan.
ME apprpriations Committee approves the Stockton Harbor/Coastal Trust Fund bill
Maine state representative Jeff Kaelin's bill LD 1234 to "Re-create the Maine Coast Environmental Trust Fund and re-fund it to pay for the Stockton Harbor study" has passed unanimously. Committee members were "pretty offended by the "looting" of the Stockton Harbor money," according to one who attended the meeting. the money vanished from a state account more than two years ago.
Read the bill:
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/LD.asp?LD=1234
Details about the Stockton Harbor pollution issue are at http://www.penbay.org/gacalum.html
Committee of Reference: Appropriations and Financial Affairs, Tue Mar 15, 2005Public
TEXT OF LD 1234
SUMMARY "This bill reestablishes the Maine Coast Environmental Trust Fund in the Department of Marine Resources. The purpose of the trust fund is to protect and improve the quality of the State's marine environment by providing grants to qualifying organizations. This bill requires the department to develop a competitive grant program, including qualifications and application procedures, and report back to the Second Regular Session of the 122nd Legislature with the department's recommendations.
The bill also appropriates start-up funds to the trust fund and funds to be used to restore the clam flats in Stockton Harbor."
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows:
Sec. 1. 12 MRSA §6136 is enacted to read:
§6136. Maine Coast Environmental Trust Fund
1. Creation of trust fund. There is established the Maine Coast Environmental Trust Fund, referred to in this section as "the trust."
2. Purpose of trust. The purpose of the trust is to protect and improve the quality of the State's marine environment by providing grants to qualifying organizations for activities to advance scientific research concerning the nature, magnitude and effect of pollution of the State's estuarine, near-shore and off-shore marine environments and the means to abate pollution or preserve and enhance estuarine, near-shore and off-shore marine habitats.
3. Sources for trust. Money obtained from the following sources must be paid to the Treasurer of State for the benefit of the trust:
A. Gifts, bequests and donations to the trust from private individuals or corporations desiring to protect and improve the marine environment through applied research;
B. Grants to the trust from private or public foundations desiring to protect and improve the marine environment through applied and basic research;
C. Funds stipulated for deposit in the trust as part of the terms of settlement of legal actions against corporations, partnerships or individuals for violations of environmental laws, rules or regulations;
D. Funds for research received under any federal oil spill trust fund;
E. Revenues that may be from time to time realized through public bond issues; and
F. Federal grants and loans.
4. Use and administration of trust. Trust funds must be used to provide grants to meet the purposes of this section. The department shall administer the trust as follows.
A. Unless otherwise specified by the source of a contribution to the trust, 50% of a contribution to the trust must be deposited in a principal account and maintained as a permanent endowment. The income earned on funds held in this account, combined with the remaining 50% of funds contributed to the trust, must be deposited in an operating account and made available for disbursement as grants to accomplish the purposes of this section and as expenditures for purposes of administering the trust.
B. An executive agency is not eligible to receive funding from the trust unless the agency jointly undertakes a research proposal with another entity that is not an executive agency.
C. The department shall give preference to institutions, organizations and entities located and operated in the State.
D. Principal, or interest earned from principal, with special instructions from contributors must be awarded in accordance with the contributors' instructions.
E. All money in the trust not immediately required for payment, pursuant to the provisions of this section, must be invested by the Treasurer of State as authorized by Title 5, section 138, except that the securities in which the trust money is invested must remain part of the trust until exchanged for other securities and the income from all investments must remain a part of the trust unless prohibited by federal law.
5. Report, amendment and termination of trust. The department shall file a report as follows.
A. The department shall report to the Legislature on a biennial basis concerning the activities of the trust.
B. In the event the department determines that the provisions of the trust should be amended, the department shall make appropriate recommendations to the Legislature in its biennial report.
C. The department may recommend in its biennial report that the trust be terminated if termination is determined to be appropriate. In the event that the Legislature terminates the trust, the principal and operating funds must be disbursed in a manner consistent with the purpose of the trust.
Sec. 2. Development of competitive grant program; report. The Department of Marine Resources shall develop a competitive grant program, including qualifications and application procedures, for the improvement and protection of the State's marine environment pursuant to the Maine Revised Statutes, Title 12, section 6136. The department shall report by January 15, 2006 to the Second Regular Session of the 122nd Legislature with its recommendations and any necessary implementing legislation.
Sec. 3. Appropriations and allocations. The following appropriations and allocations are made.
Maine Coast Environmental Trust Fund Initiative: Provides funds to reestablish a competitive grant program and to restore the clam flats in Stockton Harbor.
GENERAL FUND 2005-06 2006-07
All Other $52,300 $0
__________ __________
GENERAL FUND TOTAL $52,300 $0
Read the bill:
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/LD.asp?LD=1234
Details about the Stockton Harbor pollution issue are at http://www.penbay.org/gacalum.html
Committee of Reference: Appropriations and Financial Affairs, Tue Mar 15, 2005Public
TEXT OF LD 1234
SUMMARY "This bill reestablishes the Maine Coast Environmental Trust Fund in the Department of Marine Resources. The purpose of the trust fund is to protect and improve the quality of the State's marine environment by providing grants to qualifying organizations. This bill requires the department to develop a competitive grant program, including qualifications and application procedures, and report back to the Second Regular Session of the 122nd Legislature with the department's recommendations.
The bill also appropriates start-up funds to the trust fund and funds to be used to restore the clam flats in Stockton Harbor."
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows:
Sec. 1. 12 MRSA §6136 is enacted to read:
§6136. Maine Coast Environmental Trust Fund
1. Creation of trust fund. There is established the Maine Coast Environmental Trust Fund, referred to in this section as "the trust."
2. Purpose of trust. The purpose of the trust is to protect and improve the quality of the State's marine environment by providing grants to qualifying organizations for activities to advance scientific research concerning the nature, magnitude and effect of pollution of the State's estuarine, near-shore and off-shore marine environments and the means to abate pollution or preserve and enhance estuarine, near-shore and off-shore marine habitats.
3. Sources for trust. Money obtained from the following sources must be paid to the Treasurer of State for the benefit of the trust:
A. Gifts, bequests and donations to the trust from private individuals or corporations desiring to protect and improve the marine environment through applied research;
B. Grants to the trust from private or public foundations desiring to protect and improve the marine environment through applied and basic research;
C. Funds stipulated for deposit in the trust as part of the terms of settlement of legal actions against corporations, partnerships or individuals for violations of environmental laws, rules or regulations;
D. Funds for research received under any federal oil spill trust fund;
E. Revenues that may be from time to time realized through public bond issues; and
F. Federal grants and loans.
4. Use and administration of trust. Trust funds must be used to provide grants to meet the purposes of this section. The department shall administer the trust as follows.
A. Unless otherwise specified by the source of a contribution to the trust, 50% of a contribution to the trust must be deposited in a principal account and maintained as a permanent endowment. The income earned on funds held in this account, combined with the remaining 50% of funds contributed to the trust, must be deposited in an operating account and made available for disbursement as grants to accomplish the purposes of this section and as expenditures for purposes of administering the trust.
B. An executive agency is not eligible to receive funding from the trust unless the agency jointly undertakes a research proposal with another entity that is not an executive agency.
C. The department shall give preference to institutions, organizations and entities located and operated in the State.
D. Principal, or interest earned from principal, with special instructions from contributors must be awarded in accordance with the contributors' instructions.
E. All money in the trust not immediately required for payment, pursuant to the provisions of this section, must be invested by the Treasurer of State as authorized by Title 5, section 138, except that the securities in which the trust money is invested must remain part of the trust until exchanged for other securities and the income from all investments must remain a part of the trust unless prohibited by federal law.
5. Report, amendment and termination of trust. The department shall file a report as follows.
A. The department shall report to the Legislature on a biennial basis concerning the activities of the trust.
B. In the event the department determines that the provisions of the trust should be amended, the department shall make appropriate recommendations to the Legislature in its biennial report.
C. The department may recommend in its biennial report that the trust be terminated if termination is determined to be appropriate. In the event that the Legislature terminates the trust, the principal and operating funds must be disbursed in a manner consistent with the purpose of the trust.
Sec. 2. Development of competitive grant program; report. The Department of Marine Resources shall develop a competitive grant program, including qualifications and application procedures, for the improvement and protection of the State's marine environment pursuant to the Maine Revised Statutes, Title 12, section 6136. The department shall report by January 15, 2006 to the Second Regular Session of the 122nd Legislature with its recommendations and any necessary implementing legislation.
Sec. 3. Appropriations and allocations. The following appropriations and allocations are made.
Maine Coast Environmental Trust Fund Initiative: Provides funds to reestablish a competitive grant program and to restore the clam flats in Stockton Harbor.
GENERAL FUND 2005-06 2006-07
All Other $52,300 $0
__________ __________
GENERAL FUND TOTAL $52,300 $0
Mar 27, 2005
Dragon Huggers: read this, look at these:
Ah, the Dragon-huggers!
Referencing:
Neighbors sue dragon in federal court
Do they understand that it's not counting coup on the company, it's solving a simple problem.....It helps to consider this in a larger context. The ol' seven generations mode works well: unearth the environmental legacies--positive detrimental and neutral--of the 3 generations preceeding ours, couple that with our own contributions, benign, restorative and/or destructive, and try to crystal ball from those what the likely outcomes will be for the Maine of our great grandkids if we take one action or another. Or no action.
Dragon Cement products and its two drainages
So, you tot up what's been done, dumped and dischargd at that site--from quarrying to cement making to dust "stockpiling"--from great grandpa's time to now, and then triage out what it is technically and economically realistic for this magnificent economic engine, its product so fundamental to our way of life, to do to minimize and reduce, even end, the uncontrolled movement of its wastes offsite, be it above ground or below. To think otherwise it to hold that is okay to salt the area wells and springs with lead, arsenic and the rest of the chemicals and elements that make up Dragon's Brew. Read letters and memos from Maine DEP to Dragon about its poor potty training
The point of the photo and document links is to show that when you have an uncapped pile of this kind of material, (1) erosion happens, and when it does, (2) leachate (CKD tea) is produced, and (3) (here you must go to the writings of the state geologist) leachate pooled on the surface of a heavily fractured bedrock formation leaks into that formation and enters the groundwater, (4) groundwater reenters the surface world in springs, seeps, and wells, as well as percolating into either of the two rivers flanking the plant.
See the eroding waste piles at Dragon.
& More erosion
Then take a look at the contaminated runoff leaching into Thomaston groundwater & even more contaminated water .
Referencing:
Neighbors sue dragon in federal court
Do they understand that it's not counting coup on the company, it's solving a simple problem.....It helps to consider this in a larger context. The ol' seven generations mode works well: unearth the environmental legacies--positive detrimental and neutral--of the 3 generations preceeding ours, couple that with our own contributions, benign, restorative and/or destructive, and try to crystal ball from those what the likely outcomes will be for the Maine of our great grandkids if we take one action or another. Or no action.
Dragon Cement products and its two drainages
So, you tot up what's been done, dumped and dischargd at that site--from quarrying to cement making to dust "stockpiling"--from great grandpa's time to now, and then triage out what it is technically and economically realistic for this magnificent economic engine, its product so fundamental to our way of life, to do to minimize and reduce, even end, the uncontrolled movement of its wastes offsite, be it above ground or below. To think otherwise it to hold that is okay to salt the area wells and springs with lead, arsenic and the rest of the chemicals and elements that make up Dragon's Brew. Read letters and memos from Maine DEP to Dragon about its poor potty training
The point of the photo and document links is to show that when you have an uncapped pile of this kind of material, (1) erosion happens, and when it does, (2) leachate (CKD tea) is produced, and (3) (here you must go to the writings of the state geologist) leachate pooled on the surface of a heavily fractured bedrock formation leaks into that formation and enters the groundwater, (4) groundwater reenters the surface world in springs, seeps, and wells, as well as percolating into either of the two rivers flanking the plant.
See the eroding waste piles at Dragon.
& More erosion
Then take a look at the contaminated runoff leaching into Thomaston groundwater & even more contaminated water .
Mar 1, 2005
Maine Bay Management Leaders Meet, discuss LURC-ing Maine's marine environment
Augusta. At a February 25, 2005 meeting of the staff and project managers of the Maine Bay Management Study in Augusta, two plans for innovative management of Maine's nearshore marine environment were reviewed, and a proposal was presented that the state create marine zoning based on the model of the Land Use Regulation Commission's rules. A government official described Baldacci Adminiustration opposition to a bill before the legislature that would clarify that under state law, towns with acccepted comprehensive plans have the power to block development or pollution discharge projects, even if they get state permit approvals
The Bay Management Study's steering committee consists of Paul Anderson, Director, Maine Sea Grant, Kathleen Billings, Chair, Soft Shell Clam Advisory Council; Town of Stonington, Heather Deese, Science Director, Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance, Dewitt John, Director of Environmental Studies, Bowdoin College, Evan Richert, Program Director, Gulf of Maine Census on Marine Life, Jim Salisbury, Retired CEO, Supreme Alaska Seafoods David Schmanska, Harbormaster, St. George, Barbara Vickery, Director of Conservation Programs, ME Chapter of the Nature Conservancy.
The two adopted bay management prototype projects were described by the grantees:
Steve Perrin of Friends of Taunton Bay described his bay management project, which will draft a single shellfish and worm ordinance for the Sullivan Franklin and Gouldsboro three towns ringing and dividing Taunton Bay.
"The boundary between the thee towns meets in the middle of the bay," Perrin told the meeting. describing them as "three seperate jurisdictions along the shore that are not in any way uniform." This has led to severe overharvesting of those organisms, he said, describing how when a Sullivan clamflat that had been closed by pollution for years opened up.
"Fifty three clammers came, and wiped it out on the first day."Perrin said. "That was the end of that clamflat. So they learned that they have to regulate their resources and they have a vested interest in doing that."
Jennifer Atkinson representing the Quebec-Labrador Foundation described her project which includes surveying the people of the Muscongus Bay area and collecting historic reports and whatever data she and her associates can compile, and holding two open meetings for Muscongus Bay area residents to attend. The end result will be a a profile of the bay's marine ecology, a study of the socioeconomic and cultural relationships of the coastal communities and users of Muscongus Bay, and a proposal for improving the interaction between the two .
Deirdre Gilbert of DMR discussed DMR's "planned approach for investigating this problem of conflicts and gaps in marine governance systems," She described planning for the 'public discussion' meetings, the staff decisions to simplify the meeting process, focusing less on specific solutions from the public and more on general themes of problems citizens may have with state coastal regulations.
Sue Inches of Maine DMR described the administration's efforts to block passage of, or drastically amend, LD 582 "An Act To Change the Effect of Local Ordinances on the State" The bill, before the Maine state legislature, would clarify that under state law, towns with acccepted comprehensive have the power to block development or pollution projects, even if they get state permit approvals.
"State agencies that I've talked to are not very comfortable with the bill," Inches told the meeting. She said they are coming up with an alternative proposal to make all local ordinances advisory with respect to state agencies. "The governor's office is being very bold on this one, saying yes, there are state priorities that have to be met and the towns should not be in a position of being able to prohibit state goals from being met." Inches said. The bill was presented by Senator Bromley of Cumberland and cosponsored by Representative Koffman of Bar Harbor and Senator Damon of Hancock, Representatives Beaudette Of Biddeford, Smith N of Monmouth.
Evan Richert, former head of the Maine Coastal Program and now a private consultant, reviewed the history of the state's land use zoning process and described how parts of it could be applied as model for ocean zoning. Richert noted that land zoning began in Maine in the 1920s, but did not approach the coastal environment until passage of the Mandatory Shoreland Zoning Act inthe 1970s
He said that municipal land zoning ordinances are insufficient for bay and marine zoning because they define the land by two dimensional property lines which don't exist in the marine environment. Instead, he said, the Bay Managrement Study should look at the rules of the Land Use Regulatory Commission as a better model.
Richert said "Chapter 10 of those rules is its zoning ordinance that identifies and establishes zoning lines almost entirely on natural resource-based features instead of perperty lines. LuURC jurisdictions are zoned for a different purpose than municipal zoning, more for resource management purposes.
"So the unorganized territories are much more comparable to Taunton Bay or other bays," he said. "Where people might say this is an aquaculture bay, a working bay, there are similarities there. In the marine environment it's a three dimensional space."
Richert compared it to a three dimensional scrabble game "not only the surface but the air space, the various depths of the water column, and the seafloor."
END
The Bay Management Study's steering committee consists of Paul Anderson, Director, Maine Sea Grant, Kathleen Billings, Chair, Soft Shell Clam Advisory Council; Town of Stonington, Heather Deese, Science Director, Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance, Dewitt John, Director of Environmental Studies, Bowdoin College, Evan Richert, Program Director, Gulf of Maine Census on Marine Life, Jim Salisbury, Retired CEO, Supreme Alaska Seafoods David Schmanska, Harbormaster, St. George, Barbara Vickery, Director of Conservation Programs, ME Chapter of the Nature Conservancy.
The two adopted bay management prototype projects were described by the grantees:
Steve Perrin of Friends of Taunton Bay described his bay management project, which will draft a single shellfish and worm ordinance for the Sullivan Franklin and Gouldsboro three towns ringing and dividing Taunton Bay.
"The boundary between the thee towns meets in the middle of the bay," Perrin told the meeting. describing them as "three seperate jurisdictions along the shore that are not in any way uniform." This has led to severe overharvesting of those organisms, he said, describing how when a Sullivan clamflat that had been closed by pollution for years opened up.
"Fifty three clammers came, and wiped it out on the first day."Perrin said. "That was the end of that clamflat. So they learned that they have to regulate their resources and they have a vested interest in doing that."
Jennifer Atkinson representing the Quebec-Labrador Foundation described her project which includes surveying the people of the Muscongus Bay area and collecting historic reports and whatever data she and her associates can compile, and holding two open meetings for Muscongus Bay area residents to attend. The end result will be a a profile of the bay's marine ecology, a study of the socioeconomic and cultural relationships of the coastal communities and users of Muscongus Bay, and a proposal for improving the interaction between the two .
Deirdre Gilbert of DMR discussed DMR's "planned approach for investigating this problem of conflicts and gaps in marine governance systems," She described planning for the 'public discussion' meetings, the staff decisions to simplify the meeting process, focusing less on specific solutions from the public and more on general themes of problems citizens may have with state coastal regulations.
Sue Inches of Maine DMR described the administration's efforts to block passage of, or drastically amend, LD 582 "An Act To Change the Effect of Local Ordinances on the State" The bill, before the Maine state legislature, would clarify that under state law, towns with acccepted comprehensive have the power to block development or pollution projects, even if they get state permit approvals.
"State agencies that I've talked to are not very comfortable with the bill," Inches told the meeting. She said they are coming up with an alternative proposal to make all local ordinances advisory with respect to state agencies. "The governor's office is being very bold on this one, saying yes, there are state priorities that have to be met and the towns should not be in a position of being able to prohibit state goals from being met." Inches said. The bill was presented by Senator Bromley of Cumberland and cosponsored by Representative Koffman of Bar Harbor and Senator Damon of Hancock, Representatives Beaudette Of Biddeford, Smith N of Monmouth.
Evan Richert, former head of the Maine Coastal Program and now a private consultant, reviewed the history of the state's land use zoning process and described how parts of it could be applied as model for ocean zoning. Richert noted that land zoning began in Maine in the 1920s, but did not approach the coastal environment until passage of the Mandatory Shoreland Zoning Act inthe 1970s
He said that municipal land zoning ordinances are insufficient for bay and marine zoning because they define the land by two dimensional property lines which don't exist in the marine environment. Instead, he said, the Bay Managrement Study should look at the rules of the Land Use Regulatory Commission as a better model.
Richert said "Chapter 10 of those rules is its zoning ordinance that identifies and establishes zoning lines almost entirely on natural resource-based features instead of perperty lines. LuURC jurisdictions are zoned for a different purpose than municipal zoning, more for resource management purposes.
"So the unorganized territories are much more comparable to Taunton Bay or other bays," he said. "Where people might say this is an aquaculture bay, a working bay, there are similarities there. In the marine environment it's a three dimensional space."
Richert compared it to a three dimensional scrabble game "not only the surface but the air space, the various depths of the water column, and the seafloor."
END
Feb 20, 2005
Artificial lobster bait before Maine Legislature
Artificial lobster bait issue being considered by Maine Legislature: LD 527 An Act To Authorize the Commissioner of Marine Resources To Regulate the Use of Artificial Bait in Marine Fisheries.
See bill at http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/ld_title.asp?ld=527
What's happening: Following the onset several years ago of large scale marketing and use of artificial lobster bait, worry arose among lobstermen about the impact that this change in diet would have on Homarus americanis, the American Lobster. The issue was brought front and center at the 2004 Maine Fishermen's Forum, where some advocated prohibiting artificial bait based on an obscure antilittering law. This was not felt sufficient by the state attorney general. In response to requrests, the Maine Department of Marine Resources drafted the following bill. The bill as presently being considered by the Maine legislature simply empowers the DMR to create rules about artificial bait. It does not define the rules:
LD 527 An Act To Authorize the Commissioner of Marine Resources To Regulate the Use of Artificial Bait in Marine Fisheries.
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows:
Sec. 1. 12 MRSA §6175 is enacted to read:
§6175.__Alternative bait
The commissioner may adopt rules to regulate the use of alternative bait in marine fisheries. Rules authorized by this section must be adopted in accordance with the procedures in subchapter 2 and are routine technical rules as defined in Title 5, chapter 375, subchapter 2-A.
SUMMARY
This bill authorizes the Commissioner of Marine Resources to regulate the use of alternative bait in marine fisheries.
See bill at http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/ld_title.asp?ld=527
What's happening: Following the onset several years ago of large scale marketing and use of artificial lobster bait, worry arose among lobstermen about the impact that this change in diet would have on Homarus americanis, the American Lobster. The issue was brought front and center at the 2004 Maine Fishermen's Forum, where some advocated prohibiting artificial bait based on an obscure antilittering law. This was not felt sufficient by the state attorney general. In response to requrests, the Maine Department of Marine Resources drafted the following bill. The bill as presently being considered by the Maine legislature simply empowers the DMR to create rules about artificial bait. It does not define the rules:
LD 527 An Act To Authorize the Commissioner of Marine Resources To Regulate the Use of Artificial Bait in Marine Fisheries.
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows:
Sec. 1. 12 MRSA §6175 is enacted to read:
§6175.__Alternative bait
The commissioner may adopt rules to regulate the use of alternative bait in marine fisheries. Rules authorized by this section must be adopted in accordance with the procedures in subchapter 2 and are routine technical rules as defined in Title 5, chapter 375, subchapter 2-A.
SUMMARY
This bill authorizes the Commissioner of Marine Resources to regulate the use of alternative bait in marine fisheries.
Feb 8, 2005
Bay Management Blues
Maine's Bay Management Project off to Shaky Start.
Rockland. If the beginning of Maine's coastwide Bay Management Project is any indication, citizens, interest groups, state agencies and industry sectors will have to work hard if this long-awaited project to reform management of Maine's nearshore marine environment and its ecosystems is to reach its goal. For critics warn the present initiative appears to have many of the flaws of its predecessor, the Maine Aquaculture Task Force, whose January 30, 2004 report to the legislature resulted in the creation of the Bay Management Project.The February 3, 2005 Bay Management meeting brought eleven state officials to Rockland for what was billed as Sharing Public Waters: a Community Discussion to explore and document potential new and innovative concepts for the management of Maine’s embayments”. An early meeting planned for Ellsworth was postponed twice, once by weather and then by an automobile accident involving a vehicle carrying state agency staff to the meeting. See background on Maine Bay Management project. (Includes a transcript of the February 3rd meeting.)
The meeting program consisted of a series of power point presentations, followed by division of the attendees into breakout groups which each pondered a different element of bay management. The attendees then reformed, and a representative of each breakout group gave a short summary of the ideas and issues that its participants had identified.
Moderated by Esperanza Stancioff who has two two positions: University of Maine Cooperative Extension & Maine SeaGrant, the presenters included Kathleen Leyden, head of the State Planning Office's Coastal Program, Maine Department of Marine Resources Ecology Division director John Sowles, and Todd Burrowes, policy specialist with the State Planning Office.
Other officials at the meeting included Seth Barker DMR GIS coordinator, Mary Costigan, DMR aquaculture hearing officer, Vanessa Levesque, coastal fellow with SPO & DMR, Elizabeth Stevenson, a Coastal Program intern and University of Maine researcher, Jim Connors, senior planner at the Coastal Program, Sherman Hoyt fisheries outreach, Maine SeaGrant, and Sarah Gladu , a phytoplankton and water quality coordinator with SeaGrant and Maine Cooperative Extension.
Some of the ideas and issues generated by the groups included improved information sharing between municipalities to facilitate the work of town conservation committees and harbormasters; finding a way to give more weight to local input in the aquaculture decisionmaking process; giving more attention to the impact to the nearshore environment of increased herbicide and pesticide runoff from growth in coastal areas.
Several specific locations were identified as nearshore flashpoints: looming sprawl on the Saint George peninsula could increase pesticide runoff into southwestern Penobscot Bay, home of Maine's richest lobster grounds; and protection of eelgrass around Sears Island (many of those eelgrass meadows narrowly escaped elimination when a hotly contested industrial port proposal for the island was finally withdrawn in the mid 1990's).
It was noted in one group that a 1993 decision by the Maine legislature to exempt aquaculture from one of the state's chief environmental laws should be re-examined. While arguably helpful during the initial growth phase of commercial aquaculture in Maine state waters, the exemption of aquaculture from meeting the standards of the Site Location of Development Act keeps the Maine Department of Environmental Protection from sharing its considerable expertise on understanding landbased impacts to and from areas where aquaculture permits are sought.
While the meeting went smoothly, a number of criticisms were leveled at the process: instead of a public hearing or public meeting, the event was defined as a "community conversation". There was no opportunity for meeting attendees to give individual testimony or statements to the assembled officials; input was only taken during the small group breakout meetings, and that input was then summarized and abstracted before being presented to the full meeting by each subgroup's facilitator in two minute summaries. Further, there was no follow up discussion on those summaries; the meeting was ended once the last summary was concluded.
Another issue is the makeup of the advisory committee for the Bay Management Project. Glaringly absent from the advisory committee are any members of the Bay Management Coalition, which includes the Conservation Law Foundation, Sierra Club, Maine Coast Heritage Trust, Friends of Blue Hill Bay, East Penobscot Bay Environmental Alliance and many others. Many of the advisory committee members picked instead also served on the state Aquaculture Task Force, whose final report took a dim view of bay management's potential for improving public participation in nearshore issues, instead seeing it as a potential threat to the growth of aquaculture.
Additional "community discussions" of the Bay Management Project will be held Feb 8th in Portland and shortly thereafter elsewhere on the Maine coast. They will be followed by 'midcourse workshops' in the summer and fall of 2005, and more public meetings in January and February of 2006. After a year of review and analysis, recommendations are to be delivered to the Maine legislature in January 2007.
END
Rockland. If the beginning of Maine's coastwide Bay Management Project is any indication, citizens, interest groups, state agencies and industry sectors will have to work hard if this long-awaited project to reform management of Maine's nearshore marine environment and its ecosystems is to reach its goal. For critics warn the present initiative appears to have many of the flaws of its predecessor, the Maine Aquaculture Task Force, whose January 30, 2004 report to the legislature resulted in the creation of the Bay Management Project.The February 3, 2005 Bay Management meeting brought eleven state officials to Rockland for what was billed as Sharing Public Waters: a Community Discussion to explore and document potential new and innovative concepts for the management of Maine’s embayments”. An early meeting planned for Ellsworth was postponed twice, once by weather and then by an automobile accident involving a vehicle carrying state agency staff to the meeting. See background on Maine Bay Management project. (Includes a transcript of the February 3rd meeting.)
The meeting program consisted of a series of power point presentations, followed by division of the attendees into breakout groups which each pondered a different element of bay management. The attendees then reformed, and a representative of each breakout group gave a short summary of the ideas and issues that its participants had identified.
Moderated by Esperanza Stancioff who has two two positions: University of Maine Cooperative Extension & Maine SeaGrant, the presenters included Kathleen Leyden, head of the State Planning Office's Coastal Program, Maine Department of Marine Resources Ecology Division director John Sowles, and Todd Burrowes, policy specialist with the State Planning Office.
Other officials at the meeting included Seth Barker DMR GIS coordinator, Mary Costigan, DMR aquaculture hearing officer, Vanessa Levesque, coastal fellow with SPO & DMR, Elizabeth Stevenson, a Coastal Program intern and University of Maine researcher, Jim Connors, senior planner at the Coastal Program, Sherman Hoyt fisheries outreach, Maine SeaGrant, and Sarah Gladu , a phytoplankton and water quality coordinator with SeaGrant and Maine Cooperative Extension.
Some of the ideas and issues generated by the groups included improved information sharing between municipalities to facilitate the work of town conservation committees and harbormasters; finding a way to give more weight to local input in the aquaculture decisionmaking process; giving more attention to the impact to the nearshore environment of increased herbicide and pesticide runoff from growth in coastal areas.
Several specific locations were identified as nearshore flashpoints: looming sprawl on the Saint George peninsula could increase pesticide runoff into southwestern Penobscot Bay, home of Maine's richest lobster grounds; and protection of eelgrass around Sears Island (many of those eelgrass meadows narrowly escaped elimination when a hotly contested industrial port proposal for the island was finally withdrawn in the mid 1990's).
It was noted in one group that a 1993 decision by the Maine legislature to exempt aquaculture from one of the state's chief environmental laws should be re-examined. While arguably helpful during the initial growth phase of commercial aquaculture in Maine state waters, the exemption of aquaculture from meeting the standards of the Site Location of Development Act keeps the Maine Department of Environmental Protection from sharing its considerable expertise on understanding landbased impacts to and from areas where aquaculture permits are sought.
While the meeting went smoothly, a number of criticisms were leveled at the process: instead of a public hearing or public meeting, the event was defined as a "community conversation". There was no opportunity for meeting attendees to give individual testimony or statements to the assembled officials; input was only taken during the small group breakout meetings, and that input was then summarized and abstracted before being presented to the full meeting by each subgroup's facilitator in two minute summaries. Further, there was no follow up discussion on those summaries; the meeting was ended once the last summary was concluded.
Another issue is the makeup of the advisory committee for the Bay Management Project. Glaringly absent from the advisory committee are any members of the Bay Management Coalition, which includes the Conservation Law Foundation, Sierra Club, Maine Coast Heritage Trust, Friends of Blue Hill Bay, East Penobscot Bay Environmental Alliance and many others. Many of the advisory committee members picked instead also served on the state Aquaculture Task Force, whose final report took a dim view of bay management's potential for improving public participation in nearshore issues, instead seeing it as a potential threat to the growth of aquaculture.
Additional "community discussions" of the Bay Management Project will be held Feb 8th in Portland and shortly thereafter elsewhere on the Maine coast. They will be followed by 'midcourse workshops' in the summer and fall of 2005, and more public meetings in January and February of 2006. After a year of review and analysis, recommendations are to be delivered to the Maine legislature in January 2007.
END
Feb 2, 2005
MORE mussel rafts applied for between MDI and Lamoine
Narrow picturesque Eastern Bay - between Mount Desert Island and the Lamoine mainland - is under threat of floating mussel rafts that would join two other mussel farms already in operation in this narrow waterbody connecting Blue Hill Bay and Frenchman's Bay. Concerned citizens are rising to challenge this latest proposal, which sources say would be seeded, maintained and harvested by Great Eastern Mussel while under the legal ownership of Tim Levesque. Stay tuned.
Jan 14, 2005
Maine legislature - Conservation, environmental and marine resources bills for 2005
So it begins. (this page will be updated as links to bills appear on the state's website. - RH
(1) Conservation related bills:
(1) Conservation related bills:
LD 27 An Act To Ensure That Sears Island Will Be Used for Industrial and Commercial Purposes
LD 22 Resolve, Directing the Commissioner of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife To Issue a Policy Clarifying Public Access Requirements for Ponds To Qualify for Fish Stocking Programs
LD 35 An Act To Authorize a General Fund Bond Issue in the Amount of $75,000,000 for the Land for Maine's Future Fund
LD 48 An Act To Ensure the Safe and Timely Retrieval of Wounded Bear BY REQUEST
LD 50 An Act To Ban Remote-control Hunting
LD 78 An Act To Fund the Acquisition of Land by the Land for Maine's Future Board from the General Fund
LD 89 An Act To Give the Commissioner of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife the Authority To Allow the Operation of Snowmobiles Registered outside the State at Special Events Occurring in the State.
LD 115 An Act Enabling Municipalities To Establish Municipal Land Banks Funded by Local Option Real Estate Transfer Taxes
LD 117 An Act To Amend Provisions of the Maine Land Use Regulation Commission Law
Environmental Bills
LD 99 An Act To Include Specific Bodies of Water within Class C Standards Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources .
LD 126 Resolve, Authorizing the City of Gardiner To Refinance Certain Temporary Bond Anticipation Notes Issued for Its Wastewater Project
Marine Resource related bills
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sen. Raye of Washington
LD 228 An Act To Provide Funding for the Downeast Institute for Applied Marine Research and Education
LR 1231 An Act To Authorize a General Fund Bond Issue in the Amount of $850,000 for the Downeast Institute for Applied Marine Research and Education
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clough Scarborough
LR 2012 An Act To Protect the Recreational Harvesting of Surf Clams in Saco Bay
Rep Adams Portland
LR 276 Resolve, Regarding Marine Invasive Species
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percy Phippsburgh
LD 167 An Act To Provide Flexibility for Sea Urchin Zones
LD 189 RESOLUTION, Proposing an Amendment to the Constitution of Maine To Provide Property Tax Relief to Owners of Property Used for Commercial Fishing and Homestead Land
LR 1200 An Act To Encourage Recreational Lobster Fishing License Holders To Participate in Current Conservation Efforts of the Commercial Lobster Industry
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sen. Bartlett II of Cumberland
LR 955 An Act To Allow Maine Licensed Vessels Holding a Federal Permit To Lobster in Maine Waters
LR 956 An Act To Allow Certain Maine Licensed Lobster Vessels To Land Lobsters in New Hampshire and Massachusetts
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sen. Martin of Aroostook
LR 71 An Act To Prevent the Upstream Migration of Exotic Species of Fish above the Fish River Falls and into the Fish River Watershed
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rep Fletcher of Winslow (?)
LR 2015 An Act To Limit the Harvesting of Downstream Migrating American Eels in Maine Rivers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kaelin
LR 1377 An Act to Reestablish the Maine Coast Environmental Trust Fund within the Department of Marine Resources
LR 2070 An Act To Establish a Demersal Finfish Ecologist Position at the Department of Marine Resources
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Damon (Hancock)
LR 861 An Act To Adopt the Recommendations of the Soft-shell Clam Advisory Council
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pingree
LR 1023 An Act To Encourage Local Affordable Housing, Open Space and Shore Access through a High Valuation Transfer Tax
LR 1848 An Act To Amend the Hours for Lobster Fishing
LR 1962 Resolve, To Encourage the Scallop Industry
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Schatz Blue Hill
LR 1214 Resolve, Directing the Joint Standing Committee on Marine Resources to Meet with the Marine Resources Advisory Council and Interested Parties
LR 1215 An Act To Exempt Seafood Dealers with Fewer than 20 Employees from the Department of Marine Resources Statistics-Gathering Requirements
Jan 4, 2005
Cement lawsuit proceeding well
Earthjustice DC sends word that their federal case against EPA about Cement Kiln Dust has gotten off to a good start See The case was filed against the Bush Admin for its EPA's failure to meet the deadline for creating rules to regulate cement kiln dust pollution. Because the rules aren't there, neither Dragon Cement Products nor other kilns have any federal pollution regulations to meet, so by definition they're never out of compliance. Get it?.
Defendant EPA tried to have the case dismissed, but the judge instead has given EPA a January 20th deadline to explain to the court why they haven't done what they're supposed to regarding CKD pollution regs, and then EarthJustice has until January 31st to respond to EPA's response, at which point the judge ponders the whole mass of evidence, testimony etc etc, and works up his or her verdict.
Defendant EPA tried to have the case dismissed, but the judge instead has given EPA a January 20th deadline to explain to the court why they haven't done what they're supposed to regarding CKD pollution regs, and then EarthJustice has until January 31st to respond to EPA's response, at which point the judge ponders the whole mass of evidence, testimony etc etc, and works up his or her verdict.
Dec 31, 2004
End of year bay scuttlebutt
* State Legislature: Marine Resources Committee co-chair Sen Dennis Damon also a bigwig in the Taxation Committee, so don't expect him to pay to much attention to the fishies...Historic event: John Eder is the first-ever Green Indy Party state representative on the Marine Resources committee. Maybe a deep ecology point of view can emerge on that committee.
Fisheries: Shrimping is perking along okay, though a lot of guys stayed in haven't gone out yet. The bigger shrimp haven't come inshore yet. Processors will ramp up after the new year (mid-January) Dock price has not been fabulous; from 40 to 80 cents per pound. Last year the stats showed pretty dismal at the Portland fish market, There was a lot of anger at last years fishermen's forum over that year's tiny season, because shrimping is needed to fill in the wintertime gap economically speaking for many a fisherman.
Groundfish inshore is pretty much nothing. Scallops inshore not so hot, on top of small catches, the competition from the Nantucket Shoals fishery completely dominates the market.
Aquaculture. Erick Swanson's abrupt switchover from salmon to mostly mussels is a harbinger of things to come. Mussels are the growth sector in aquaculture. Prince Edwards Island mussel aquaculture is maxed out.
Great eastern needs competitors; its getting them in the persons of Swanson and others.
Absentee aquaculture is as bad as absentee forestry. Its best to be local aquaculture. With lobster, Maine zoned it regionally and forbids corporate ownership or license transferability. We should structure the lease process similarly so that aquaculture leases are not transferable.
Bay Management At least one Penobscot Bay area proposal (Bagaduce River) has been sent in for consideration - state has some $$$ various groups are scuffling over.
LNG - No sign of it sneaking into the bay - the energy seems to be in the area of deciding the fate of Sears Island - shall MDOT retain a chunk to keep its future port dreams alive? Or will the local residents in unison with the Penobscot Nation make it a non industrial natural destination site.
More to some...
Fisheries: Shrimping is perking along okay, though a lot of guys stayed in haven't gone out yet. The bigger shrimp haven't come inshore yet. Processors will ramp up after the new year (mid-January) Dock price has not been fabulous; from 40 to 80 cents per pound. Last year the stats showed pretty dismal at the Portland fish market, There was a lot of anger at last years fishermen's forum over that year's tiny season, because shrimping is needed to fill in the wintertime gap economically speaking for many a fisherman.
Groundfish inshore is pretty much nothing. Scallops inshore not so hot, on top of small catches, the competition from the Nantucket Shoals fishery completely dominates the market.
Aquaculture. Erick Swanson's abrupt switchover from salmon to mostly mussels is a harbinger of things to come. Mussels are the growth sector in aquaculture. Prince Edwards Island mussel aquaculture is maxed out.
Great eastern needs competitors; its getting them in the persons of Swanson and others.
Absentee aquaculture is as bad as absentee forestry. Its best to be local aquaculture. With lobster, Maine zoned it regionally and forbids corporate ownership or license transferability. We should structure the lease process similarly so that aquaculture leases are not transferable.
Bay Management At least one Penobscot Bay area proposal (Bagaduce River) has been sent in for consideration - state has some $$$ various groups are scuffling over.
LNG - No sign of it sneaking into the bay - the energy seems to be in the area of deciding the fate of Sears Island - shall MDOT retain a chunk to keep its future port dreams alive? Or will the local residents in unison with the Penobscot Nation make it a non industrial natural destination site.
More to some...
Dec 30, 2004
Dragon Cement's toxic groundwater plume (1).
Cement company's waste pile and leacheate pond (orange water partly obscured by wingstrut)close to homes on Thomaston's Marsh Road. Groundwater test wells in between show high levels of chromium and sulfate, and very high pH.
Maine Bay Management public meetings scheduled
"SHARING PUBLIC WATERS: a community discussion on managing Maine's Bays See: Maine Bay Management Website
January 26, February 3, February 8. Maine Coastal Program and the Maine DMR are co-hosting a series of public listening sessions along the Maine coast to hear your input on whether and how the state treats the marine life, marine resource users and shorefront landowners that inhabit, use and live around Maine's bays. The results will be analyzed and presented to the legislature with recommendations for reforming and consolidating bay-related laws and regulations
Share your ideas and concerns at one of these three upcoming public meeting in your area.
Ellsworth (Ellsworth City Hall) Wednesday January 26, 2005 (Jan. 27) 7-9 p.m.
Rockland (Rockland High School) Thursday February 3, 2005 (Feb. 9) 7-9 p.m.
Portland (Portland High School) Tuesday February 8, 2005 (Feb. 10) 7-9 p.m.
DMR's Bay Management point of contact: Lorraine Lessard at 207-287-1486.
January 26, February 3, February 8. Maine Coastal Program and the Maine DMR are co-hosting a series of public listening sessions along the Maine coast to hear your input on whether and how the state treats the marine life, marine resource users and shorefront landowners that inhabit, use and live around Maine's bays. The results will be analyzed and presented to the legislature with recommendations for reforming and consolidating bay-related laws and regulations
Share your ideas and concerns at one of these three upcoming public meeting in your area.
Ellsworth (Ellsworth City Hall) Wednesday January 26, 2005 (Jan. 27) 7-9 p.m.
Rockland (Rockland High School) Thursday February 3, 2005 (Feb. 9) 7-9 p.m.
Portland (Portland High School) Tuesday February 8, 2005 (Feb. 10) 7-9 p.m.
DMR's Bay Management point of contact: Lorraine Lessard at 207-287-1486.
Dec 18, 2004
Nothing but crabs shall fill the Gulf of Maine.
University of Maine marine scientist Bob Steneck's recent gloomy report on Gulf of Maine kelp forest changes (PDF file)
Click Here Doesn't look good, folks, a future GOM dominated by crabs.
Click Here Doesn't look good, folks, a future GOM dominated by crabs.
Dec 15, 2004
Swannie goes mussel!
Eric Swanson - colorful character that has run a brace of salmon farms in Blue Hill Bay and nearby waters despite the most strenuous efforts of local bay group Friends of Blue Hill Bay - is dropping the fins for the shells and becoming a mussel farmer, with a tiny specialty organic salmon sideline about 5K fish at a time - about 1% of the # of fish he'd been raising. The last straw must have been Conservation Law Foundation's November 12 challenge to DMRs decisions a month earlier renewing Swanson’s Hardwood Island lease and granting him a new site off Tinker. Iintrepid Maine marine news reporter Aaron Porter tells all about it.
Dec 14, 2004
Sears Island Stockton Harbor, Cape Jellison
Lower Penobscot River meets Upper Penobscot Bay. Sears Island and Cape Jellison on the western side of the bay and river. For more about Sears Island , Click here.
There are a variety of activities going on to liberate Sears Island from the MDOT yoke. Cape Jellison, alas, is experiencing SPRAWL without much if any resistance.
There are a variety of activities going on to liberate Sears Island from the MDOT yoke. Cape Jellison, alas, is experiencing SPRAWL without much if any resistance.
Dec 13, 2004
Sears Island Frenzy
Island protection advocates Organizing. See gallery of Sears Island aerial photos
* The Sierra Club & Islesboro Island Trust are doing what they do best - negotiate-with- the-govt-behind-the-scene Sears Island dance, though this time the Penobscot Indian Nation hsa joined in the effort.
* Penobscot Bay Alliance? While saving Sears Island ought to be the "coming out" campaign of this outfit, two of the group's key leaders are acting on Sears Island from their parent organizations Sierra Club and Islesboro Island Trust, spurning any appearance before the media or in public as leaders of what appears to be a perpetually not-quite-ready-for-prime-time PBA.
* A Searsport municipal comittee has been holding somewhat murky dealings with MDOT.
Now charette style public meetings are underway with everyone from the MDOT and BPL to the Penobscot Incdian Nation and the eco-yuppies conversing on possible futures for the island.
MDOT hopes to get Searsport to sign a Memorandum of Understanding giving DOT permanent rights to the SW corner of the island. Residents of Searsport just voted to re-impose a moratorium on industrial development by an overwhelming margin
*A bill has been been put together to enable Maine DOT to transfer the island to the Bureau of Parks and Lands. Presently under state law MDOT can SELL or LEASE land under its control to private interests. It can't TRANSFER land to another agency (except the Maine Housing Authority gets first dibs if the land has been declared "surplus", which wouldn't be the case for Sears Island).
How a bill is introduced into the Maine Legislature As noted at the above link, the bill that's submitted by a legislator goes to the Revisor's Office, Office of Policy and Legal Analysis, and Office of Fiscal and Program Review. Their staff checks the wording and passes it back to the legislator for approval or not, until it says what he or she wants it to say.
* Legislators to sponsor/co-sponsor John Eder, of Course, Our beloved Green Party legislator. Stay Tuned
* The Sierra Club & Islesboro Island Trust are doing what they do best - negotiate-with- the-govt-behind-the-scene Sears Island dance, though this time the Penobscot Indian Nation hsa joined in the effort.
* Penobscot Bay Alliance? While saving Sears Island ought to be the "coming out" campaign of this outfit, two of the group's key leaders are acting on Sears Island from their parent organizations Sierra Club and Islesboro Island Trust, spurning any appearance before the media or in public as leaders of what appears to be a perpetually not-quite-ready-for-prime-time PBA.
* A Searsport municipal comittee has been holding somewhat murky dealings with MDOT.
Now charette style public meetings are underway with everyone from the MDOT and BPL to the Penobscot Incdian Nation and the eco-yuppies conversing on possible futures for the island.
MDOT hopes to get Searsport to sign a Memorandum of Understanding giving DOT permanent rights to the SW corner of the island. Residents of Searsport just voted to re-impose a moratorium on industrial development by an overwhelming margin
*A bill has been been put together to enable Maine DOT to transfer the island to the Bureau of Parks and Lands. Presently under state law MDOT can SELL or LEASE land under its control to private interests. It can't TRANSFER land to another agency (except the Maine Housing Authority gets first dibs if the land has been declared "surplus", which wouldn't be the case for Sears Island).
How a bill is introduced into the Maine Legislature As noted at the above link, the bill that's submitted by a legislator goes to the Revisor's Office, Office of Policy and Legal Analysis, and Office of Fiscal and Program Review. Their staff checks the wording and passes it back to the legislator for approval or not, until it says what he or she wants it to say.
* Legislators to sponsor/co-sponsor John Eder, of Course, Our beloved Green Party legislator. Stay Tuned
Dec 3, 2004
Feds feeding New England's Ivory Lighthouses
Nov 29 04 But what about dealing with the sea squirts fouling Georges Bank?.....In
today's Federal Register the National Marine Fisheries Service announces that the
New England Fishery Mgmt Council (NEFMC) is holding a public meeting of its Research Steering Committee on Dec 14, 04, (with committee recommendations brought to
the full NEFMC for formal consideration and action, if appropriate.)
They are going to "consider experimental fishery
permit requests and develop related comments for consideration by the
NEFMC and Regional Administrator. They will continue discussions on
2005 research priorities, particularly in relation to the long-term
programs currently underway in the Northeast such as the cod tagging,
study fleet and industry-based survey initiatives. They will also
coordinate comments on final reports that have been funded through
NMFS' cooperative research program and begin to develop a consistent process
for the various research set-aside programs provided for in the NEFMC
fishery management plans." More info at the above hyperlink.
today's Federal Register the National Marine Fisheries Service announces that the
New England Fishery Mgmt Council (NEFMC) is holding a public meeting of its Research Steering Committee on Dec 14, 04, (with committee recommendations brought to
the full NEFMC for formal consideration and action, if appropriate.)
They are going to "consider experimental fishery
permit requests and develop related comments for consideration by the
NEFMC and Regional Administrator. They will continue discussions on
2005 research priorities, particularly in relation to the long-term
programs currently underway in the Northeast such as the cod tagging,
study fleet and industry-based survey initiatives. They will also
coordinate comments on final reports that have been funded through
NMFS' cooperative research program and begin to develop a consistent process
for the various research set-aside programs provided for in the NEFMC
fishery management plans." More info at the above hyperlink.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)