 |
Aquaculture Bill Would Loosen Oyster Farming, Passes First HurdleWednesday, February 09, 2011 An altered version of Sen. Tommy Norment’s aquaculture bill has cleared committee and has passed through the Senate, despite local supervisors’ objections. The current bill, Senate Bill 1190, amends the Right to Farm Act and would still allow for aquaculture activity on waterfront property without need for local government approval, but only for land zoned for agricultural use with attached piers or docks. Norment filed the original bill months after he wrote a letter in support of York County resident Greg Garrett’s application for an oyster farm at his waterfront home in Dandy, which was denied by the York County Planning Commission in November. The bill would allow Garrett’s business to continue without county approval.The modified bill passed the Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources committee 9 to 6 on Monday, and headed to the Senate floor for discussion and a vote Tuesday. After considerable debate, the bill passed the Senate, 23-17. Last month, the York County Board of Supervisors sent a letter to Norment about the bill, claiming it “egregiously circumvents and usurps local authority over local land use issues” and that the county should have authority to decide whether properties are appropriate for a particular use. According to county spokesman Christie Phillips, the senator’s office has since said they have yet to hear from any York County Board member exactly what authority the senate bill took away from them. Supervisor Tom Shepperd said Tuesday that he feels that too much focus has been placed on Garrett’s connection to the bill in media reports. In Shepperd’s estimation, “the point is allowing residents to have input on the issues of commercial-type businesses around their homes,” which is what they get during the county’s approval process. Many residents, including some of Garrett’s neighbors, shared their thoughts with county staff on the issue around the time of the planning commission decision. After looking at emails, letters and transcribed phone messages, WYDaily found that 45 people supported the application and 17 were against it, including Garrett's nearest neighbors. Others in the Dandy community as well as waterfront property owners in the county, supported his plan. Shepperd is not against aquaculture or oyster farming, but he feels that state code currently doesn’t include aquaculture under the Right to Farm Act likely for a reason. “We haven’t vetted this at all,” he says. He is still opposed to the bill. |
|
Copyright © 2010-2011 WY Daily. Davis Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Website by Web-tactics
Website by Web-tactics
Comments
§ 3.2-2600. Definitions.
As used in this chapter, unless the context requires a different meaning:
"Aquaculture" means the propagation, rearing, enhancement, and harvest of aquatic organisms in controlled or selected environments, conducted in marine, estuarine, brackish, or fresh water.
"Aquaculture facility" means any land, structure, or other appurtenance that is used for aquaculture, including any laboratory, hatchery, pond, raceway, pen, cage, incubator, or other equipment used in aquaculture.
"Aquatic organism" means any species or hybrid of aquatic animal or plant, including fish, shellfish, marine fish, and marine organisms as those terms are defined by § 28.2-100.
(1992, c. 643, § 3.1-73.6; 2008, c. 860.)