A lawsuit was recently filed in Federal court by the Delmarva Fisheries Association (DFA) and the Maryland Charter Boat Association (MCBA). The suit challenges a mandate for new Striped Bass fishing regulations in Maryland. The mandate is from the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission.

Since the lawsuit was filed there has been an outpouring of support from those who understand this mandate has already had and will have a devastating impact far beyond watermen and charter boat captains.

Others impacted negatively include Eastern Shore hotels, motels, restaurants, businesses, and merchants who depend upon wild fishery harvests and charter boat tourism.

The Rural Counties Coalition of the Maryland Association of Counties (MACo) has expressed the following concerns. “These regulations will affect local small business models that operate in the charter boat and commercial fishing industries as well. Rural counties along Maryland’s shoreline depend on these industries and oppose these changes, as they will dramatically affect economic development and the livelihood of small business owners. Many of Maryland’s waterfront businesses will undoubtedly bear financial losses due to the restrictions. For many years, these industries have operated with restrictions in harvesting and strict regulatory compliance yet have remained in operation. The proposed restrictions will be a point that may force good businesses to close and may prohibit other businesses from locating within Maryland’s coastal counties. “In addition to the MACo support letter, the Boards of Commissioners in Dorchester County, Queen Anne’s County, and Kent County have submitted comparable letters. More are expected.

Support for the DFA and MCBA lawsuit goes well beyond Maryland.

The East Coast Fishing Coalition (ECFC) represents over eight hundred for-hire charter and party boats across Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and Maryland. The president of ECFC has written “We share in your concerns, as these actions threaten not only the present viability of our businesses but also the long-term sustainability of the for-hire sector of the fishing industry. If these decisions are not rectified, we anticipate a significant decline in business that will persist well into the future. The ramifications also extend beyond our industry, impacting businesses such as hotels, restaurants, tackle shops, and other merchants that rely on our operations to sustain their own livelihoods.”
DFA and MCBA are represented by the McCloud Law Group in Chestertown and Meeks Butera & Israel, Washington, D.C.

Captain Rob Newberry
Chair Delmarva Fisheries Association.

Almost exactly four years ago, virtually every segment of American life was placed on indefinite hold as our nation and the world fell into a public health crisis.  As we navigated those uncertain times, our government leaders repeated the following phrases:

Trust the science. Listen to the experts.

Indeed, following that advice is surely a sensible way to approach any situation, certainly one for which data is still being collected and analyzed. However, you don’t always get the best results if you only subscribe to one statement and not the other. 

The Maryland General Assembly is facing one of those very situations as it considers the fate of Senate Bill 546 and its House version, House Bill 655. Currently, any tidal waterfront landowner looking to stabilize their shoreline, protecting their investment in their property, must either construct a living shoreline or qualify for a waiver from the government.  To put it bluntly, that waiver process completely ignores the practicalities associated with private residential properties, most notably the cost.  

In most cases, living shoreline construction is significantly more expensive, both up front and over the long-term, than structural alternatives like bulkheads and revetments.  For now at least, homeowners that have structures in need of being replaced may do so with the same measures.  SB 546 and HB 655 will largely remove that possibility for applicants, and it will greatly alter licensed marine contractors’ ability to go do the very work the State is asking its residents to fund.

It must be said that the Maryland Marine Contractors Association (M.M.C.A.) is supportive of living shorelines. In most cases, they are the most environmentally sustainable way to counter the effects of shoreline erosion while also protecting local marine habitat.  As a practical matter, living shoreline projects tend to be more financially lucrative for our members than alternatives, because they need to be maintained over time, sometimes substantially modified, re-planted, or even reconstructed. These concerns are exacerbated when site conditions like a high or heavily vegetated bank significantly reduce the chances of success, or make the project cost prohibitive from the start. For projects that often reach six figures, it becomes a sizable gamble the government is asking homeowners to make.

These projects also often equate to a zero-sum game, where one vital natural resource – such as submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) – is disrupted simply for the prospect of new marshland.  For many properties, the secondary aspects of the earthwork needed landward of the shoreline just to make it all work is effectively a second project entirely, sometimes even on par with the cost of the shoreline construction. 

Furthermore, because of the more extensive project footprint associated with living shorelines, we are typically subject to “time of year” restrictions that cut our yearly working days on these projects in half.

The M.M.C.A. is a tireless advocate for the protection and promotion of the marine construction industry in Maryland.  It was our organization that championed the marine contractor licensure legislation back in 2010 with the goal of raising the professional bar within the industry and establishing a mutually beneficial working relationship with Federal, State, and Local regulators.  Our members build more of these living shorelines in the state than anyone, and we are professionally trained to respond when homeowners need a solution for shoreline erosion.  

This legislation would take that responsibility away from the professionals and give it to those who have the best of intentions, but not the training or experiential knowledge to make decisions of that magnitude. Experience has shown that an impractical approach to shoreline restoration will motivate many homeowners to skip the permitting process altogether and turn to uncredentialed contractors for the sake of affordability. Results in those instances are painfully predictable.

The M.M.C.A. fully supports the use of living shorelines to combat erosion in a way that contributes to cleaner and healthier waterways. Unlike the bill sponsors, our members recognize there are instances when they simply are not practical, and we have the professional experience to know the difference. For the sake of Maryland’s homeowners, small business owners and ecologically sensitive bodies of water, our legislative leaders should, once again, trust the science but also listen to the experts.

Brandon Weems
President, Maryland Marine Contractors Association
Easton

I write this history of my family’s escape from the horror of life under the Russians during the early 1940s because I feel deeply that Ukraine under the Russians would be tragic. My story begins when I was a little girl in Latvia.

It must have been a traumatic experience in 1944 for my parents, Janis (John) Zeltins, 38, and Alma Asaris Zeltins, 36, to pack what they could carry and with four children, Zigrida Emilija, 12, Rita Olga, 9, Eriks, 5, and Benita Lidija, 1, in tow, to start a journey with destination unknown from their native country, Latvia.  It is truly said that the fear of the unknown is really great, but in this case, the fear of the known was greater than the fear of the unknown. To fully understand what might seem like a “foolhardy” decision, some background is in order.

At that time, Latvia suffered under communist dictator Stalin’s ruthless domination. Our father, being a Baptist minister, was scrutinized for his activities and reported to the Russian government during their occupation. Many people during this time mysteriously vanished, especially people with influence, such as teachers, clergy, and other community leaders. Some were killed outright but many were deported to Siberia for hard labor. Families were sometimes separated; children were taken from their parents for indoctrination into the Russian dogma. Our family had been on the list to be deported but fortunately we were able to escape this fate.  As a matter of fact, knowing what occupation under the Russian regime was like, one million (half of Latvia’s inhabitants) left the country.  To this day, you can find Latvians in every part of the world as a result of WW II and the Russian occupation.

My family was very fortunate to be able to board a train heading toward Germany. Since we were not Jews, Germany was relatively safe for us, although trains were a risky form of transportation during a war. They were used to transport supplies and troops to the fighting armies, so we were in danger of being bombed by both the Russian and American air forces. When airplanes were detected, the train was stopped, all got off and laid in ditches or fields, in case the train was bombed. If we happened to be near or in a potato field, we’d be assured of dinner. So we continued until we reached Germany. Germany was inundated with refugees from every country bordering Russia. It was a mass exodus. 

We traveled, by whatever means possible, further and further west. At one point, we were put up at a large well-to-do farm that needed farm hands since all the able bodied German men were serving in their army. Now our father had steady work and ample food for the family. Our mother was able to work in the garden as well. We had a small apartment on top of the animal barn. The heat generated by the animals and feather down blankets kept us warm. 

The end of the war came suddenly. One day, the American army arrived at the edge of the village, and before entering, they discharged some tank artillery down the street to see if anyone would shoot back. None did! The American troops peacefully occupied the village by slowly passing through the street in their tanks. People cautiously came out of their houses and greeted the Americans. We were happy and finally felt safe.

The hope was that we’d be able to go back home soon. That hope was short-lived. It seemed that Germany was to be divided among the Allies and whatever else was occupied by Russians would become status quo! That meant that Latvia would remain under Russian domination and the area where we were in Germany would become part of the Russian zone. Our journey, once again, had to continue toward the unknown, as far away from the Russians as possible.

This turned into a trek by foot on the German autobahn, dragging our belongings in a small farm wagon, with Benita and Eriks perched atop our “riches”. While our parents pulled the wagon, Rita and Zigrida trailed behind. We shared the autobahn with the American troops as they moved west toward what was to be the American zone of Germany. So, if we were going in the same direction as the Americans, we should end up in the same place. When the American troops saw the sight of us walking, some of them generously threw some oranges and chocolate bars to us. I remember that sometimes we also got rides in American army trucks or jeeps. So we continued until we arrived in Hanau, a city near Frankfurt, which was definitely in the American zone of Germany. So we sighed a sigh of relief that we had arrived at a safe place. 

Housing for displaced people in Germany was the next step in our lives, and from there my family was fortunate to be welcomed into a small town in Pennsylvania where my parents found work and eventually were able to send my sisters, brother and me to college.  How different our lives were in America than had we lived under communist rule.

As I think about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, I am reminded of the reason my parents chose to endure a very risky journey to the unknown in order to escape Communism.  Should Ukraine fall to the Russians will Latvia again in the future suffer its cruel repression?  What about Poland and other neighboring countries?  The Ukrainians are fighting valiantly to remain free of the evil Russian control.  The United States must fund its effort.

Rita Zeltins Heacock
Easton

Please share with your readers that the Colonel Tench Tilghman Chapter of the Sons of the American Revolution will meet on Saturday, March 2, 2024, at 11:00 AM at the Chester River Yacht & Country Club in Chestertown, Maryland. Anyone interested in joining should email Warren Tewes at [email protected] by February 28, 2024.

We’ll also talk about the Children of the American Revolution’s 2024 project, “Play It Loud,” which uses music therapy to help veterans.

Wes Hagood, Publicity Director
Colonel Tench Tilghman Chapter of the SAR