Ralicky, Thomas From: Rod Richardson <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 2:55 PM To: Filipowich, Susan Cc: Curt Schade; Lucy Sachs; John Mackall; Michael Patrick; carl safina; Ralicky, Thomas Subject: Re: Site 840 ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- PS — I had not seen Curt’s reply before I sent this. But I think his response underscores the truth of my point: many will feel as shocked and betrayed as I do. — R On May 29, 2020, at 2:52 PM, Rod Richardson <[email protected]> wrote: Susan, Thank you for the response to my questions. In the initial meetings, I and many others heard SCALP administrators say that “everything was on the table.” But if existing lease sites, particularly 840 - 841, that interfere with navigation rights, are now considered to be grandfathered- in in their current location, no matter what, no matter the objections of neighbors, and if SCALP will not begin to prohibit use of surface gear in the existing and operating sites objected to during the 10 year review process — then everything is NOT on the table. And if these things are off the table, and if you are taking zero action in the interim to limit the placement of NEW floating gear in locations where you know there are heavy objections (like 840) then this 10 year review process is a joke. Up until now I thought you were proceeding in good faith, that everything was on the table, as was said. Now, I suspect that is no longer true. I suspect many will feel as shocked and betrayed as I do. Information about floating gear permits being sought and issued for sites in areas under objection – and therefore highly likely to provoke and escalate conflict – should at very least have been publicly shared with all stakeholders. It was not. Certainly, this is the first I am hearing of it. Once again, the lack of transparency is resulting in lack of trust. I fear county and state bureaucrats are now conspiring – by not share key information, by making misleading statements that prove to be not quite true, by outrageous overreach – to steal the navigation rights of the public, and impair public trust doctrine environmental protections, and effectively rip them to shreds. With respect to your question re the area west of Nappeague State Park, I am not talking about adding NEW lease site. I was responding to a question posed by someone about what areas or lease sites had been identified as least objectionable for floating gear. I was saying that the local boating club and maybe other groups, I believe, have made an offer of compromise, that would avoid further conflict. Curt can chime in if I have it wrong. The offer is (a) SCALP eliminates lease site 838 - 847, which are right in the center of the traditional sailing instruction and regatta area; (b) SCALP relocates the only existing operating lease (841) to any available site among 848 - 853 or anywhere else that is unobjectionable. Sites 848 - 853 are less objectionable, but still objectionable…. it's a 1 compromise. Obviously, if you do nothing to prevent 840 from becoming an operating lease with floating gear, this will make compromise much more difficult. If these solutions are not even on the table now, if 840 and 841 become grandfathered in with the use of floating gear forever, compromise is probably impossible, and the review process is broken. You could put the wheel back on the bus by agreeing to the compromise offered promptly. Thank you for anything you can do to respond constructively. Rod Richardson On May 29, 2020, at 12:58 PM, Filipowich, Susan <[email protected]> wrote: Hello Rod, Thank you for your participation during yesterday's Ten Year Review Advisory Group meeting. Lease site 840 was applied for under the 2016 Lease Application Cycle, as previously noted, the lease application process takes a year plus to complete and this lease agreement was executed in 2017. As I am working remotely, I do not have access to all my leaseholder files but I believe lease site 840 received the required approval from the ACOE in April of 2019. I may have misspoke yesterday and said August 2019. Per Debra Barnes's statement, the NYSDEC DMR issued the required off-bottom culture permit and shellfish bed permit in February of 2020. With respect to your other inquiry about any other empty sites in Gardiner’s Bay that are seeking permits for floating gear, I assume you mean the sites that are leased but are not currently being used for shellfish farming? If so, yes, lease site 852; which many of the people you have CC'd on this email are aware of has applied for permits that would authorize the use of floating gear. I am not aware of any other leaseholders in that areas that have applied for permits for floating oyster cages. Under this Ten Year Review all sites that were leased and still hold a lease are being grandfathered in to those locations; and are automatically being included in the Shellfish Cultivation Zone revision. As discussed, the County is responsible for the location, size and term of a lease; we do not regulate the shellfish farming or harvest methods used. I also want to take this opportunity to address another comment you made during yesterday's meeting about adding lease areas off of Napeague State Park. Are you talking about the area I circled on the attached screen cap? If so, you will see that we already have leases west of there and that a private oyster grant is located just north; oyster grants can only be used/leased by the owner. With respect to the area east of the area I circled off Lazy Point, Advisory Group Members that represent the Town of EH and the EH Town Trustees have expressed their respective group's desire to remove those areas; additionally we received a lot of comments with respect to that area being a high boat traffic area (see second attachment). Any farther east and that goes past the County designated jurisdiction. Thank you again, Susan Filipowich Senior Environmental Analyst Suffolk County Dept. of Economic Development and Planning Division of Planning & Environment H Lee Dennison Building, 2nd Fl. 100 Veterans Memorial Highway, PO Box 6100 Hauppauge, NY 11788 2 631-853-4775 Tel 631-853-4044 Fax practiceGREEN Save a tree. Read, don't print, emails. ________________________________ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail transmission is intended solely for the use of the individual/entity to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information belonging to the sender. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete the original message. -----Original Message----- From: Rod Richardson <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 5:53 PM To: Filipowich, Susan <[email protected]> Cc: Curt Schade <[email protected]>; Lucy Sachs <[email protected]>; John Mackall <[email protected]>; Michael Patrick <[email protected]>; carl safina <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Site 840 ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Susan, Please also clarify the options for what will happen with sites 840 and 841, as a result of the 10 year review. Is it guaranteed that they will have leases renewed allowing floating gear? Are they grandfathered in in those locations? I am not sure I entirely understood your answer in the meeting. Thank you for clarifying, and thank you for holding these meeting to try to resolve these user conflicts. Rod On May 28, 2020, at 5:24 PM, Rod Richardson <[email protected]> wrote: Hi Susan, Please kindly furnish me the dates when various permits were issued for site 840. That was mentioned in the meeting but I did not have the chance to jot it down. 3 Also, have any other empty sites in Gardiner’s Bay sought or been granted permits for floating gear? If so, which ones, and please furnish the details. Thank you! Rod <R.Richardson_email.jpg><R.Richardson_email 2jpg.jpg> 4 Ralicky, Thomas From: Curtis Schade <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 2:05 PM To: Filipowich, Susan Cc: Rod Richardson; Lucy Sachs; John Mackall; Michael Patrick; carl safina; Ralicky, Thomas; Joan Priore; Lansdale, Sarah; Dale, Dorian; Fleming, Bridget; Philip Burkhardt; Curt Schade Subject: Re: Site 840 ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. Thanks for your reply Susan. We have worked in good faith with you and others throughout the 10 Year Review process and remain optimistic that you will take the objections to floating gear in lease sites in this area of Gardiner's Bay seriously and require the lease sites be used for bottom only cultivation with minimal surface marker buoys as intended in your Program Management Guide, or be removed from the program. These lease sites shouldn't even exist as been made apparent by testimony from Bob Valenti who admitted that the only reason these sites were put in place is that Brad Loewen of the FAC didn't want them anywhere and Bob personally wanted to try a few by his leased aquaculture site on the east side of the bay.