Public Comments for 02/09/2026 Agriculture, Chesapeake and Natural Resources - Chesapeake Subcommittee
HB747 - Chesapeake Bay Watershed Implementation Plan; consolidation of agricultural commitments.
Hello Delegates, I am writing in opposition of HB1396. This bill had been brought fourth by landowners groups that falsely claim to represent and maximize property owners rights when in fact they are property owners that want to end the tradition of hound hunting. This is proven by these groups comments on their own social media pages. These groups have made claim that only 8 states allow the use of hounds to hunt, a stat quoted by delegates in the subcommittee, that is simply a false statement, currently only 9 states allow hounds to be used to hunt deer but nearly every state allows the utilization of dogs to hunt other game species many not requiring an special license to do so. I ask the delegates to understand that the vast majority of the members of the hound hunting organizations are land owners as well in addition to all of the landowners who lease or allow hound hunting on their land support the tradition of hound hunting. This bill creates a permit allowing the DWR create and issue permits on a may issue criteria with visual permit requirements for hounds and vehicles. If Additional funding is needed to police game laws the bill should be amended to a license just like an archery or muzzleloading license that is a shall issue. Additionally the cost for said license should be reduced and required for all that utilize or partcipate in any type of hunting that utilizes a dog. Dogs are already required to have owner contact info on their collar and their vehicles have state issued license plates therefore marking is not necessary. Lastly the only ones who should be exempt from license purchase are those that utilize dogs to hunt on their own land. This simplifies the requirements and makes it fair for all parties. Basically if big game is harvested and checked in and the use of dogs is checked as a part of big game license registering process they should be required to have a dog hunting license or be exempt as a land owner. I hope that you find this as a reasonable comprise. Additionally there needs to be some sort of recourse for false complaints or accusations. If this bill continues as is it will create more tensions between those who utilize dogs to hunt and those who don't like the use of hunting dogs. False complaints will continue to increase cause additional hunter harassment and tension between hunters and those that oppose it. Thank you for your time. V/R, B. C. Bunch
Vote to help our community!
If you’re tired of the 9-to-5 grind or just want a way to put some extra cash in your pocket every week, I have something for you. Companies are currently looking for remote writers to handle: Article Writing Blog Posts Social Media Content Live Chat Support No experience is necessary and full training is provided. But before you apply, you need to see which role you’re best suited for. Go here to take the Writing Job Quiz. ---> http://PaidToWrite.Online/ Once you finish the quiz, you’ll get a breakdown of the best opportunities available for you right now. Visit -----> http://PaidToWrite.Online/
Invasives should be pulled or killed by herbicide and not be permitted to be sold in nurseries
HB880 - Biosolids; monitoring requirements for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances.
Hello Delegates, I am writing in opposition of HB1396. This bill had been brought fourth by landowners groups that falsely claim to represent and maximize property owners rights when in fact they are property owners that want to end the tradition of hound hunting. This is proven by these groups comments on their own social media pages. These groups have made claim that only 8 states allow the use of hounds to hunt, a stat quoted by delegates in the subcommittee, that is simply a false statement, currently only 9 states allow hounds to be used to hunt deer but nearly every state allows the utilization of dogs to hunt other game species many not requiring an special license to do so. I ask the delegates to understand that the vast majority of the members of the hound hunting organizations are land owners as well in addition to all of the landowners who lease or allow hound hunting on their land support the tradition of hound hunting. This bill creates a permit allowing the DWR create and issue permits on a may issue criteria with visual permit requirements for hounds and vehicles. If Additional funding is needed to police game laws the bill should be amended to a license just like an archery or muzzleloading license that is a shall issue. Additionally the cost for said license should be reduced and required for all that utilize or partcipate in any type of hunting that utilizes a dog. Dogs are already required to have owner contact info on their collar and their vehicles have state issued license plates therefore marking is not necessary. Lastly the only ones who should be exempt from license purchase are those that utilize dogs to hunt on their own land. This simplifies the requirements and makes it fair for all parties. Basically if big game is harvested and checked in and the use of dogs is checked as a part of big game license registering process they should be required to have a dog hunting license or be exempt as a land owner. I hope that you find this as a reasonable comprise. Additionally there needs to be some sort of recourse for false complaints or accusations. If this bill continues as is it will create more tensions between those who utilize dogs to hunt and those who don't like the use of hunting dogs. False complaints will continue to increase cause additional hunter harassment and tension between hunters and those that oppose it. Thank you for your time. V/R, B. C. Bunch
I strongly support these bills that will increase regulation and oversight for PFAS manufacturing facilities, use of biosolids and treated effluent on agricultural land, set limits for allowable concentrations of PFAS compounds in wastewater, and allow jurisdictions to impose limits and regulate practices relevant to PFAS contamination. These bills are needed to address the very serious issue of PFAS contamination, which is present even in rural areas of Virginia and is an enormous threat to our health and our water supplies.
I support H.B. 880.
I support H.B. 1048 and H.B. 1049. Healthy and sustainably managed populations of menhaden will protect economic opportunities in VA, while also protecting wildlife and recreation. Menhaden are foundational parts of the Bay's ecosystem. I support H.B. 880, which will help to protect VA farmers from the lasting and severe impacts of PFAS contamination in soils, which in turn protects rural economies, wildlife, and people. The impacts been devastating in other states such as Maine. Regular testing is essential. I support H.B. 1072. We should empower VA communities as they seek to protect residents from the harmful impacts of forever chemicals and to minimize harms related to sewage sludge.
Seven generations for the future
If you’re tired of the 9-to-5 grind or just want a way to put some extra cash in your pocket every week, I have something for you. Companies are currently looking for remote writers to handle: Article Writing Blog Posts Social Media Content Live Chat Support No experience is necessary and full training is provided. But before you apply, you need to see which role you’re best suited for. Go here to take the Writing Job Quiz. ---> http://PaidToWrite.Online/ Once you finish the quiz, you’ll get a breakdown of the best opportunities available for you right now. Visit -----> http://PaidToWrite.Online/
Invasives should be pulled or killed by herbicide and not be permitted to be sold in nurseries
HB938 - Publicly owned treatment works; monitoring of PFAS.
Hello Delegates, I am writing in opposition of HB1396. This bill had been brought fourth by landowners groups that falsely claim to represent and maximize property owners rights when in fact they are property owners that want to end the tradition of hound hunting. This is proven by these groups comments on their own social media pages. These groups have made claim that only 8 states allow the use of hounds to hunt, a stat quoted by delegates in the subcommittee, that is simply a false statement, currently only 9 states allow hounds to be used to hunt deer but nearly every state allows the utilization of dogs to hunt other game species many not requiring an special license to do so. I ask the delegates to understand that the vast majority of the members of the hound hunting organizations are land owners as well in addition to all of the landowners who lease or allow hound hunting on their land support the tradition of hound hunting. This bill creates a permit allowing the DWR create and issue permits on a may issue criteria with visual permit requirements for hounds and vehicles. If Additional funding is needed to police game laws the bill should be amended to a license just like an archery or muzzleloading license that is a shall issue. Additionally the cost for said license should be reduced and required for all that utilize or partcipate in any type of hunting that utilizes a dog. Dogs are already required to have owner contact info on their collar and their vehicles have state issued license plates therefore marking is not necessary. Lastly the only ones who should be exempt from license purchase are those that utilize dogs to hunt on their own land. This simplifies the requirements and makes it fair for all parties. Basically if big game is harvested and checked in and the use of dogs is checked as a part of big game license registering process they should be required to have a dog hunting license or be exempt as a land owner. I hope that you find this as a reasonable comprise. Additionally there needs to be some sort of recourse for false complaints or accusations. If this bill continues as is it will create more tensions between those who utilize dogs to hunt and those who don't like the use of hunting dogs. False complaints will continue to increase cause additional hunter harassment and tension between hunters and those that oppose it. Thank you for your time. V/R, B. C. Bunch
I strongly support these bills that will increase regulation and oversight for PFAS manufacturing facilities, use of biosolids and treated effluent on agricultural land, set limits for allowable concentrations of PFAS compounds in wastewater, and allow jurisdictions to impose limits and regulate practices relevant to PFAS contamination. These bills are needed to address the very serious issue of PFAS contamination, which is present even in rural areas of Virginia and is an enormous threat to our health and our water supplies.
Seven generations for the future
If you’re tired of the 9-to-5 grind or just want a way to put some extra cash in your pocket every week, I have something for you. Companies are currently looking for remote writers to handle: Article Writing Blog Posts Social Media Content Live Chat Support No experience is necessary and full training is provided. But before you apply, you need to see which role you’re best suited for. Go here to take the Writing Job Quiz. ---> http://PaidToWrite.Online/ Once you finish the quiz, you’ll get a breakdown of the best opportunities available for you right now. Visit -----> http://PaidToWrite.Online/
Invasives should be pulled or killed by herbicide and not be permitted to be sold in nurseries
Please vote YES on this.
HB952 - Chesapeake Bay Watershed Nutrient Credit Exchange Program; certain industrial stormwater permittees.
Hello Delegates, I am writing in opposition of HB1396. This bill had been brought fourth by landowners groups that falsely claim to represent and maximize property owners rights when in fact they are property owners that want to end the tradition of hound hunting. This is proven by these groups comments on their own social media pages. These groups have made claim that only 8 states allow the use of hounds to hunt, a stat quoted by delegates in the subcommittee, that is simply a false statement, currently only 9 states allow hounds to be used to hunt deer but nearly every state allows the utilization of dogs to hunt other game species many not requiring an special license to do so. I ask the delegates to understand that the vast majority of the members of the hound hunting organizations are land owners as well in addition to all of the landowners who lease or allow hound hunting on their land support the tradition of hound hunting. This bill creates a permit allowing the DWR create and issue permits on a may issue criteria with visual permit requirements for hounds and vehicles. If Additional funding is needed to police game laws the bill should be amended to a license just like an archery or muzzleloading license that is a shall issue. Additionally the cost for said license should be reduced and required for all that utilize or partcipate in any type of hunting that utilizes a dog. Dogs are already required to have owner contact info on their collar and their vehicles have state issued license plates therefore marking is not necessary. Lastly the only ones who should be exempt from license purchase are those that utilize dogs to hunt on their own land. This simplifies the requirements and makes it fair for all parties. Basically if big game is harvested and checked in and the use of dogs is checked as a part of big game license registering process they should be required to have a dog hunting license or be exempt as a land owner. I hope that you find this as a reasonable comprise. Additionally there needs to be some sort of recourse for false complaints or accusations. If this bill continues as is it will create more tensions between those who utilize dogs to hunt and those who don't like the use of hunting dogs. False complaints will continue to increase cause additional hunter harassment and tension between hunters and those that oppose it. Thank you for your time. V/R, B. C. Bunch
If you’re tired of the 9-to-5 grind or just want a way to put some extra cash in your pocket every week, I have something for you. Companies are currently looking for remote writers to handle: Article Writing Blog Posts Social Media Content Live Chat Support No experience is necessary and full training is provided. But before you apply, you need to see which role you’re best suited for. Go here to take the Writing Job Quiz. ---> http://PaidToWrite.Online/ Once you finish the quiz, you’ll get a breakdown of the best opportunities available for you right now. Visit -----> http://PaidToWrite.Online/
Invasives should be pulled or killed by herbicide and not be permitted to be sold in nurseries
HB1048 - Menhaden reduction fishing; Marine Resources Commission to prohibit in the Chesapeake Bay.
The moratorium on Menhaden in the Bay is long overdue - even Maryland says they cannot catch any Menhaden in their Chesapeake Bay Bait Fishery due to overfishing in the Virginia Bay. Osprey adults and chicks are starving. Rockfish populations are in collapse. Blue Crabs are at all time lows. Charter captains taking out recreational fisherman businesses are failing and closing. However, the moratorium needs to extend to the Virginia seaside. The overfishing extends along the eastern shore of Virginia and off Virginia Beach and the mouth of the Bay where industry can heavily fish a 236 million lbs quota with the ability to heavily impact the migration of Menhaden into the Bay. There is no research or data that refutes the theory that industrial fishing boats with purse seine nets will not relocate to the Virginia waters outside the Chesapeake Bay Bridge tunnel and deny the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem the food supply that is in desperate need for both nature and the economy. See the net set fishing chart from 2024 by industry. Over 100,000 jobs are connected to the Rockfish/Striped bass fishery in a 2016 study and the recreational catch is down over 50% since then - and an economic impact of nearly $8 Billion in 2016 - 50% reduction equates to a loss of 50,000 jobs and $4 Billion. For Virginia the number of jobs depending on Striped Bass was over 1500 jobs and the decline of over 50 of catch threatens 1,700 jobs in the fishery. (See McGraw Hill study attached) A moratorium on fishing in Virginia is necessary to get a true accurate assessment of the Bay ecosystem. The quota for Virginia is 236 Million lbs and as much as 112 million lbs can be caught in the Chesapeake Bay by industry - the quota set aside for wildlife? 0 Rhode Island manages their Narragansett Bay menhaden population by using the same method as industry using overflights with trained pilots to count the fish in surface schools. They set aside 2 million lbs. of Menhaden for wildlife at all times - we need to determine how much is needed to restore the Virginia saltwater ecosystem both in the ocean and the Bay.
I support H.B. 1048 and H.B. 1049. Healthy and sustainably managed populations of menhaden will protect economic opportunities in VA, while also protecting wildlife and recreation. Menhaden are foundational parts of the Bay's ecosystem. I support H.B. 880, which will help to protect VA farmers from the lasting and severe impacts of PFAS contamination in soils, which in turn protects rural economies, wildlife, and people. The impacts been devastating in other states such as Maine. Regular testing is essential. I support H.B. 1072. We should empower VA communities as they seek to protect residents from the harmful impacts of forever chemicals and to minimize harms related to sewage sludge.
My name is Joseph W. Smith. For 32 years (1983-2015) I handled the fishery-dependent data for the Atlantic and Gulf menhaden fisheries at NOAA's Beaufort (NC) Laboratory. I recently published a book on the menhaden resource, the characterization of the menhaden fisheries, and the importance of the menhaden fisheries to the U.S. at large. I am writing to the Subcommittee today in opposition to both Carr bills, numbers 1048 and 1049. As per the latest coastwide stock assessment for Atlantic menhaden, they are not experiencing overfishing, nor are they over fished. Moreover, they have been exceptionally abundant in the northern half of their range (NJ to Maine) in recent years - a sign of a robust and healthy stock. Much has been made on social media and in the press in recent months about the lack of menhaden in Chesapeake Bay during summer 2025. Menhaden distribute during along the Eastern Seaboard by size and age compostion with the oldest (age-3+) and larger fish migrating as far north as the Gulf of Maine. Typical age composition of the menhaden catch in Chesapeake Bay during summer is age-1 and -2 fish with a few age 3s. The lack of menhaden in Chesapeake Bay in 2025 may have been due to two consecutive poor year class (2023 and 2024); you should know that there is a very poor relationship between the number of spawners in the stock and the number of subsequent recruits to the population. Alternately, menhaden distribute where the food resources are optimum. Age-1+ menhaden tend to concentrate in areas where larger phytoplankton and zooplankton occur. There is some evidence that the plankton community in Chesapeake Bay has been tending towards the smaller phytoplankters, food items not optimum for the menhaden diet. Much has been made of the starving opsprey issue in the Virginia portion of Chesapeake Bay. Historical data shows that for the five years 1987-1991 the menhaden reduction fishery removed on average 160,000 metric tons of menhaden from the Virginia portion of Chesapeake Bay annually (NOAA NMFS Technical Report #144); this is when two factories operated at Reedville, VA, with a combined fleet of about 24 vessels. My read of the historical osprey data as cited by William and Mary researchers suggests ospreys did quite well during this time frame as per their hatchling success. Currently, with only one factory at Reedville and about six vessels, the fleet removes up to only 51,000 metric tons of menhaden from the Bay - or less - as per the Chesapeake Bay Cap. Thus, ospreys did quite well in Virginia during the late 1980s and early 1990s when over three times as many menhaden were being removed from the Bay as compared to contemparary times. Clearly, something else is going on with osprey reproductive success beyond menhaden availability. In closing, the menhaden fishery is a world-class fishery and is over 150 years old. In many respects the fishery is the economic engine that drives Northern Neck Virginia and beyond. Moreover, there is a great deal of science yet to be explored relative to menhaden distribution and abundance in Chesapeake Bay. Indee, $2.5 million of Federal funds have recently been appropriated for just this reason. Please allow the incipient science to guide your deliberations.
Chair and Members of the Committee, On behalf of Lynnhaven River NOW and our 16,000 members, I respectfully urge you to support HB 1048, HB 1049, and Budget Item HB30 (introduced) 145 #2h to advance science-based, precautionary management of Atlantic menhaden in the Chesapeake Bay. Menhaden are a foundational forage fish – they convert plankton into the energy that fuels iconic Bay predators and valuable fisheries. VIMS notes that menhaden are filter feeders and a key food source for species such as striped bass and bluefish, as well as for seabirds and marine mammals; they are also widely used as bait across the commercial and recreational sectors. In Virginia Beach and throughout Hampton Roads, that forage base underpins the recreational fishing experiences and biodiversity that our region’s economy and identity depend on. At the same time, the Bay is changing rapidly. NOAA reports that climate change is already shifting where fish spend time and when they migrate in and out of the Chesapeake Bay, complicating management of shared public resources. And the most recent ASMFC assessment update clarified that estimated menhaden biomass across the time series is substantially lower (about 37% lower on average) than previously estimated, largely due to improved understanding of natural mortality – highlighting how management outcomes can change materially as science improves. HB 1048 is the appropriate precautionary step: it would prohibit purse-seine reduction fishing for menhaden in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries until the Secretary of Natural and Historic Resources can certify – based on Bay-specific research – that the reduction fishery does not negatively impact other fisheries or menhaden-dependent species. This approach aligns with the reality that Bay-specific uncertainty persists. In fact, Virginia’s own science advisors have already mapped out priority research needs: VIMS’ menhaden research planning report calls for work such as analyzing spatiotemporal fishing patterns, assessing the possibility of localized depletion, and quantifying recreational and broader economic implications – exactly the information policymakers need to make durable decisions. If HB 1048 does not advance, HB 1049 is a strong, science-forward alternative. It would require VMRC to implement quota-period management for the Bay Cap (reducing “pulses” of removals) and to establish 10% observer coverage to independently document catch composition and weight – basic accountability tools widely used in modern fisheries management. Finally, funding is essential in either scenario. The proposed budget amendment HB30 (introduced) 145 #2h would provide $1 million in each fiscal year to VIMS for menhaden research in the Chesapeake Bay – helping Virginia answer the Bay-specific questions that have delayed resolution for years. Along the Atlantic coast, Virginia hosts the only remaining large-scale menhaden reduction fishery – making it even more important that Virginia sets the bar for precaution, transparency, and Bay-focused science. For our waters, our fish and wildlife, and the communities that rely on them, we urge your support for HB 1048, HB 1049, and 145 #2h. Respectfully, Lynnhaven River NOW
I am in Favor of HB 1048 and HB 1049. The study on Atlantic Menhaden in the Chesapeake Bay has been funded by the Federal Government and will begin shortly. There are so many signs that the menhaden population in the Bay is depleted - please allow the pause in reduction fishing until the Study proves it is not impacting other dependent fisheries, wildlife, and businesses that rely upon the other fisheries as directed by HB 1048. The reduction fishery can make its quota in the ocean and would not result in any job losses at their processing plant. I am in favor of HB 1049 as an alternative to HB 1048. The Atlantic Menhaden reduction fishery should have observers on the boats due to the significant amount of by-catch of commercially important fish, and the lack of oversight over the years. As to the fiscal impact, this can be resolved by phasing in the program and adding a budget item to fund it.
Please support this important bills.Industrial fishing is destroying the bay.Make Omega fish in the ocean.
I support HB1048 and ask that this bill be passed. I have witnessed the tragic death of osprey chicks as their parents struggle to find enough fish. Because osprey feed almost entirely on fresh fish they are a harbinger of the broader damage that is clearly happening as menhaden populations are decimated in the Chesapeake Bay by large scale commercial fishing. These operations can move their spotter planes and boats outside the 3-mile limit where supplies are more plentiful and allow the Bay to be studied in depth and recover. This is not just about a few jobs in Reedville - it's about the health of the Bay and all the local fishermen, sport fishing guides and wildlife that depend on it. Please save our Bay and stop Omega now.
HB 1048 the menhaden fishery needs to be protected from overfishing to protect many other up the food chain species that depend on menhaden. HB109. Invasive plant species should not be for sale from any nursery, garden supply store of individual. The cost to remove these species when they grow beyond their intended location is costly to land owners that did not plant the species. They crowd out and outcompete native species as well as important economic plants (farming). Many of these plants require the use of strong herbicides that are not without their own risks. HB1396- this is a poorly written bill that isn’t specific enough in requirements and what would actually happen in a multitude of different situations. It shows a lack of understanding of the different types of hunting with dogs and things that can, and are done, to minimize issues and conflicts with anointing land owners. There are also laws already in the books that should be enforced against those that are breaking the law instead of creating new laws that will cause hardship on those that follow all current laws and regulations.
Chair and Members of the Agriculture, Chesapeake and Natural Resources Committee Chesapeake Subcommittee, Thank you for the opportunity to submit this comment in support of HB1048 and HB1049. My name is John Goodman. I am a U.S. Coast Guard–licensed captain who works on the waters of the Chesapeake Bay. I earn my living directly from the condition of this resource, and I witness the effects of management decisions on the water and in the working communities that depend on it. Every member of this body has been entrusted with responsibility. That responsibility is not always visible, but it is permanent. The decision before you is not complex, but its consequences are enduring. HB1048 and HB1049 exist for a clear purpose: to protect Virginia’s people, Virginia’s public waters, and a fishery that must endure for generations, not quarterly profit. This is not about preserving the balance sheet of a corporation headquartered elsewhere. It is about how the Commonwealth discharges its legal duty under the public trust doctrine. The public trust doctrine requires Virginia to manage public waters for the benefit of the people, not for private extraction. Public trust obligations are not limited to residents; they attach to the resource itself. The Chesapeake Bay is not expendable. It is the Atlantic Coast’s nursery, and damage to a nursery does not recover on a legislative timeline. Decisions of this magnitude must be made free from undue influence. Public trust resources should not be governed by lobbying pressure, political action committee contributions, or outside interests seeking preferential access to a shared resource. The obligation of this committee is to the people of the Commonwealth and the long-term health of Virginia’s waters, not to donors or corporate entities with no enduring stake in Virginia’s future. The people affected by this decision are not lobbyists or political donors. They are commercial watermen, charter captains, bait dealers, marina operators, and small business owners across the Commonwealth. They are working communities already paying higher costs as local forage disappears and economic opportunity declines. The citizens of Virginia deserve positive experiences through local economic growth generated by a healthy Bay, not extraction that benefits a foreign-controlled entity. Public resources should serve the public interest of this Commonwealth, not be treated as inventory for outside profit. This is not about shutting down a company. That company will continue to operate wherever profit can be extracted. Virginia cannot relocate its Bay. The people who live and work here absorb the consequences in their homes, livelihoods, and local economies. Once this body casts its vote, it becomes part of the permanent legislative record. History will not ask how difficult this decision was. It will ask whether this committee protected the long-term future of the Commonwealth. This is not about individual legacy. It is about the legacy of Virginia — what was protected and what was passed on intact to the next generation. I respectfully urge you to support HB1048 and HB1049 and to act in defense of Virginia’s public trust. John Douglas Goodman USCG Captain - Master Shark_man7@yahoo.com 804-901-1004
Madam Chair, members of the subcommittee, I am Robley Jones, and I speak today as a member of and on behalf of The Old Dominion Smallmouth Club. We urge your support to both HB1048 and HB11049. As sportfishermen, we have observed the degradation of the fish populations in Virginia during our lifetimes. Recently, the decline in the striped bass population has been notable, and we also have observed the decline in the osprey population. We believe this is attributable to the decline in the menhaden population in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. We hope our children, grandchildren, and generations that follow will have the same opportunity to enjoy fishing and the beauty of our Commonwealth as we have. We believe that you have an opportunity to save the striped bass, the osprey, and other species dependent on the menhaden for nourishment. When I was a boy, the American shad were abundantly present in the James River. Now, they are very rare. Let us not say the same about the striped bass and the osprey years from now. Please do the right thing and support HB1048 and HB1049. Let me close by thanking Delegate Carr for placing these bills before you. Thank you.
Menhaden are a foundational species in the marine food web and essential to the long‑term health of the entire Chesapeake Bay. Their populations have been dramatically reduced over many decades, destabilizing the broader ecosystem and accelerating the decline of the Bay’s natural resources. Current management practices have not been sufficient to protect this species, and decisive action is now required to safeguard the remaining population. As an aquatic ecologist with decades of experience studying and managing Chesapeake Bay programs, I can state unequivocally that this bill represents a necessary step forward and should be approved.
I support HB1048 (Delegate Carr). It is simple common sense to have the information you need in place to determine if the menhaden reduction fishing in the Bay is sustainable. Virginia is operating blind and keeping the status quo with no supporting data that is Bay-specific. Pause the fishery and get the facts. I also support HB1049 (Delegate Carr) to develop a quota management system for the same reasons as stated above. Trained observers to document actual menhaden catch on at least 10% of the reduction fishery’s trips is warranted to keep everyone honest. If the industry is complying, they have nothing to fear. I do not know what our local representative thinks about these bills. But I and many other Eastern Shore folks - across party lines - can tell you that protection of menhaden is very important to us. Thank you for your honest consideration of these bills.
The implementation of a moratorium is crucial to prevent further ecological collapse among our Bay ecosystems.
The Cape Henry Audubon Society, which works in the Hampton Roads area, supports - HB1048 - to pause the menhaden reduction fishery in the Chesapeake Bay until the necessary science has been conducted to make sure this large scale reduction fishery is not having negative impacts on the many other fish, bird, and terrestrial species dependent on menhaden at the base of the food chain, and - HB1049 - to direct the Marine Resources Commission to develop and maintain a quota period management system for the menhaden reduction fishery to mitigate the aforementioned negative impacts of concentrated, high volume menhaden removals from the Bay. In the birding community, we are alarmed at the studies showing a severe decline in the success of osprey nests across the Chesapeake Bay. Osprey, also known as fish hawks, are entirely dependent on catching fish and Osprey chicks are starving to death. The 2025 breeding survey found the reproductive rates for osprey nests across most of the Chesapeake Bay were below replacement rates. (See report from the Center for Conservation Biology at William and Mary - https://ccbbirds.org/2025/10/01/deficit-in-breeding-performance-expands-for-chesapeake-bay-ospreys/) Feeding on menhaden is essential not just for osprey and other birds, but for many species, including striped bass, bluefish, summer flounder, and other popular fish targeted by commercial and recreational fishing industries. A new stock assessment released by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission this past October indicated the Atlantic Coast menhaden population is about 37% smaller than previously thought. We must take a cautious stance and protect the remaining menhaden population until additional studies by the Virginia Institute of Marine Science are completed. A healthy menhaden population is important to both ecological and economic interests throughout the state. We urge you to vote yes on both HB1048 and HB1049.
Scientists at William and Mary, say ospreys in the Bay Area and other parts of the Chesapeake Bay are not able to feed their young to adulthood at a sustainable rate. Their main food there, Menhaden, are caught by trawlers who use huge nets to catch the schools as they enter the bay for the first ten months of the year. Other States have required these trawlers to leave state waters because they have caused great depletion of Menhaden in these states. Menhaden also feed Rockfish for charter boat workers. Rockfish will eat crabs when they can’t get Menhaden which hurts the crab harvest. Bluefish eat Menhaden. They will eat shad and herring if they can’t get Menhaden which hurts shad and herring fisheries. Many watermen will depend on these fisheries for years to come, and they may all be depleted if the Menhaden are fished out. Please Recommend HB1048.
A case for ending reduction fishing. The reduction industry claims any changes to their fishery will cause them to close. Let’s make a case for that outcome. In 1878, the menhaden reduction fishing industry was founded in Virginia as a source of cheap oil to replace decimated whale populations. America has a long history of wiping out wildlife on an industrial scale; whales, buffalo, birds, beavers, seals, and more. Reduction fishing is our last holdout of outdated 19th century ideals and technology. The species key to abundance in the Chesapeake is more important than supplying industrial protein pellets to foreign owned salmon farms. There is currently one indisputable scientific fact. The end of reduction fishing would allow half a billion wild animals to survive every year, and serve the purpose nature intended for them.
I'm writing in opposition to both HB 1048 and HB 1049. The pause in Menhaden fishing in the Chesapeake Bay is, not only unwarranted, but could be a potential death knell to the economic survival of Northumberland County. Omega provides employment for approximately 260 people, making it one of our county's most important employer. They pump an estimated $10 million into our economy annually. Omega also contributes a significant amount of money to charitable causes in our community. But, the important facts here are that pausing menhaden fishing is not necessary. Let's follow the science and not just hear say or antidotal information. The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) states that the "striped bass declines have been driven primarily by recreational overfishing, environmental changes, and disease, not by menhaden harvest levels". Furthermore, the Maryland Department of Natural Resources released its 2025 Young-of-Year Striped Bass Survey results, and for the third year a row, THE NEWS IS CLEAR: Atlantic menhaden remain widespread and abundant throughout the Bay. Concern for Osprey, and Striped Bass populations are clearly a concern but how to address this problem, based on the science, the answer is not halting menhaden fishing in the Chesapeake Bay. So, shutting down Omega, even for a little while, will very likely cause them to close up shop here in Northumberland County which would, very likely, plunge our county into an economic collapse. VOTE NO ON BOTH HB-1048 and HB-1049
I oppose bill HB1396. This bill is just another way to “tax” the people. The permitting system that is in this bill will cause some people to stop hunting which will result in even lower license sales in the state.
Please support both of these bills. The menhaden population is critical to the health and life of the Chesapeake bay. Allowing commercial fishing by omega/Cooke with no regulation is destroying the bay and its entire ecosystem. They are blatantly and arrogantly destroying the waters for their own financial gain.
Vote YES on HB1048 and HB1049 to ban menhaden fishing in the Chesapeake Bay and limit catches. Industrial vessels don’t belong in our Bay. They are destroying menhaden and harming countless other species—often for out-of-state or foreign profit. Protect our Bay now.
Please enact legislation that limits to a prohibitive level, or flat prohibit large operation menhaden fishing in the Chesapeake bay. It directly impacts the ecosystem when large quotas are fulfilled in our waters to satisfy demand across the world. It’s unnatural.
Please vote yes to prohibit the fishing for menhaden withing the chesapeake bay and its tributaries (HB1048) and to limit its catch (HB1049). Those fishing vessels have no business fishing inside the bay and the negative effects are obvious to anyone that doesnt have a financial benefit of the vessels fishing within the bay. No vessel should be in the bay destroying the menhaden population and the population of all the bicatch especially those owned by an out of state or foreign nation.
Please vote yes to prohibit the fishing for menhaden withing the chesapeake bay and its tributaries (HB1048) and to limit its catch (HB1049). Those fishing vessels have no business fishing inside the bay and the negative effects are obvious to anyone that doesnt have a financial benefit of the vessels fishing within the bay. No vessel should be in the bay destroying the menhaden population and the population of all the bicatch especially those owned by an out of state or foreign nation.
If you’re tired of the 9-to-5 grind or just want a way to put some extra cash in your pocket every week, I have something for you. Companies are currently looking for remote writers to handle: Article Writing Blog Posts Social Media Content Live Chat Support No experience is necessary and full training is provided. But before you apply, you need to see which role you’re best suited for. Go here to take the Writing Job Quiz. ---> http://PaidToWrite.Online/ Once you finish the quiz, you’ll get a breakdown of the best opportunities available for you right now. Visit -----> http://PaidToWrite.Online/
I support HB1048 and 1049 to reduce or eliminate the menhaden reduction fishery in the Chesapeake Bay. As a fisherman, I'm concerned with large-scale population declines that menhaden have experienced in recent decades. Menhaden sit towards the bottom of the food chain, and are a staple food of fish that I fish for, like striped bass, cobia, and spanish mackerel. They are also important to support osprey and eagle populations. If menhaden continue to experience population declines, we will (and are) seeing it in lower populations of fish that many of us like to try to land too. We need to protect these fish from the harmful reduction industry that takes these fish from the bay at the expense of everyone and everything else. Please support these bills to protect menhaden in one of their last refuges on the Atlantic Coast, the Chesapeake Bay.
Invasives should be pulled or killed by herbicide and not be permitted to be sold in nurseries
Menhaden are a publicly owned fisheries resource of the Commonwealth public that is being exploited to the extreme detriment of the resource by an intensive reduction fishery owned by Omega Protein, a Canadian firm. As I understand it, modeling efforts that assess the health of the menhaden population are based on regional, coastwide data and do not address stock depletion at the local level. So to assign conclusions based on regional data to local impacts can be very misleading. Nonetheless, a 2025 ASMFC stock assessment report for Atlantic coast populations suggest that menhaden biomass is lower than previously indicated; this conclusion is likely exacerbated at the local level where extremely heavy exploitation occurs within the confines of the Chesapeake Bay. The population is particularly vulnerable to over exploitation through the use of spotter planes that target dense schools of menhaden concentrated by the geographic constraints of surrounding land masses. This population is in dire need of protection from overexploitation because of its extreme ecological importance as plankton feeders and a food resource for a multitude of species within the Bay from whales to ospreys to predatory recreational and commercially important fisheries species. I urge this committee to vote to eliminate the intensive reduction fishery of this important species within the Chesapeake Bay until scientific data indicate that the Chesapeake Bay population is deemed to be stable. Otherwise, the cascading effects of local menhaden stock depletion will lead to unknown consequences for food webs dynamics within the Chesapeake Bay. Please vote YES on HB 1048! Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this critical issue.
HB 1048 & HB 1049 The Menhaden Needs to be protected NOW from overfishing. This species has already been overfished. The Menhaden are a Keystone species and vital to the health of the Chesapeake Bay. Limits on their harvest need to be put in place an enforced. The osprey population is suffering as are other species that depend on a healthy Menhaden population. HB 1091 Solar Energy is the most cost effective clean source of energy we can install right now. I totally understand residents not wanting industrial solar arrays installed too close to where they live, but with that said it is better to install these solar panels on agricultural land that is not being used rather than deforest more land in order to install these solar arrays. HB 129 Why should you be able to kill deer out of season on your property if they are damaging your fruit trees, crops, or personal property..? The land owner should be made to better secure their fruit trees, crops, and personal property rather than be allowed to kill deer because they are unwilling to invest the time to better secure their property from deer. HB1396 Hunting with dogs and allowing them to run over others personal property Needs to be prohibited! Why the leash laws do not pertain to hunters using dogs makes Zero sense. This has Nothing to do with tradition, and that is not an argument that should be used in support of hunting with dogs. If Sportsman hunting with dogs want to continue using dogs to hunt, they should be made to fence in the property before releasing their dogs. HB45 All fees associated with hunting, fishing, and trapping in the commonwealth should be collected. For what reason should people be allowed to do these activities for free, partially discounted, or get reimbursed. The wildlife they are hunting, fishing, and trapping belong to all the residents of Virginia. Therefore they should pay the associated fees when engaging in an activity that removes them from the wild spaces all residents have a right to enjoy.
Please stop hound hunters right to retrieve on private property. We have multiple where incidents every year where hunting dogs attack our pets on our private property causing harm, loss of life, and vet bills. Private property should remain private year around.
Listen, your most important job on this planet should be to protect and preserve whatever still wild places we have left. Our legacy is in our natural resources. The disappearance of our native menheden fish, will impact our wildlife across the board. Protection, and preservation is key! Likewise, my right to offer sanctuary to wildlife should not be trampled by another's sport of hunting with dogs allowing them to run wildlife and terrorize livestock. Hunting with dogs is a bad idea. It is cruel, it is certinally not a sport , nor does it take skill, and often dogs are poorly kept and abandoned when they are no longer useful. My property rights shall not be thought-less of. My sports, my dogs, none of it is carried on through their property. Wouldn't they be shocked. Again! Preservation is key! And this can Garner tax revenue! Just please use your brain, have some foresight and compassion! That is what your legacy can be.
Vote yes on this bill
I ask yall respectfully vote no on this bill dog hunting has been in Virginia since Virginia started as a state to loose our heritage would be would be crippling to our families. Please vote No on these bills.
Menhaden are a prime food source for many fish within the Chesapeake Bay including but not limited to striped bass, bluefish and other marine life. The commercial overfishing in Virginia and Maryland has had a noticeable impact on stripd bass and other fish populations. The catch numbers have reduced leading to stricter limits on these fish, without any restriction on the men Haden that these fish eat to survive. Maryland implemented stricter harvest/commercial fishing regulations. Virginia did not and those commercial vessels are indeed taking advantage of Virginia's lack of response to their over fishing. There needs to be more inspections of boats while fishing from USCG, Virginia Marine Police and Virginia Dept. of Wildlife Resources. The dangerous unregulated, unchecked and unimpeded commercial harvesting of these menhaden that are a food source for other fish including sport fish is an ecological disaster waiting to happen. When those menhaden are depleted the ecosystem will have longterm damage that will cost billions to restore and we will lose more species than the manhaden and stripers.
Please support HB 1048, to protect the menhaden fishery in the Chesapeake Bay. The bill would direct Virginia Marine Resources Commission to pause the menhaden reduction fishery in the Chesapeake Bay until studies show that the menhaden reduction fishery is not harming other fisheries and menhaden-dependent species, such as the osprey. The osprey decline is alarming. Osprey depend on the nutrient rich menhaden fish, and we are aware that the osprey chicks are starving. Thank you kindly, Tyla Matteson, Chair, York River Group Sierra Club
Menhaden are a natural resource for all Virginians and users of the Chesapeake Bay. They are the primary keystone species that feeds almost all the other animals in the ecosystem. Their primary function should not be as an industrialized food pellet for Canadian fish farming. Canadian owned Omega Protein takes our resource at pennies on the dollar, lining their pockets at the expense of tens of thousands (not just a couple hundred) of Virginians who require a healthy abundant Chesapeake Bay to make a living.
Menhaden is a public resource for ALL Virginians. I love the Bay and its inhabitants -from the seabirds, marine mammals and predatory fish. Menhaden is vital to the Bay and to the tourism and game fishing industry. Omega Fisheries is a Canadian company feeding our resource to their salmon and destroying jobs in our Virginia. We need a scientific study that determines the state of the menhaden. For years we have asked the legislature to fund a study and every time they have refused. A study only makes sense ! We are allowing blindly Omega to overfish our waters. This has a detrimental effect on all of the Bay! As a Virginian I am asking you to protect our resources as you should. Thank you!
I strongly support this proposed pause on menhaden harvesting until studies can determine its effect on the food web and the ecology in the Chesapeake Bay, including most notably the osprey and the striped bass. Ospreys depend on menhaden, and osprey populations are in danger of collapsing. Please vote yes on this bill
Please pause menhaden harvesting until further studies can determine the impact on other fish and birds such as the Osprey. Osprey populations are dwindling around the Chesapeake Bay and menhaden fish are a primary food source for the young "fish-hawks". Please take action on industrial menhaden fishing until science can prove there is no disruption to the food web such as for the striped bass. Temporarily halt industrial harvests. Thank you. Judy Hinch-424 Shorebird Lane Chesapeake VA
HB1049 - Menhaden reduction fishery; quota periods in Chesapeake Bay.
I'm must say I'm shock that this bill has found its way into the Appropriations Committee. This bill, if funded, will effectively, per testimony from people who represent Omega and employees of the company shut this company down. Was their testimony even taken into consideration when the vote was taken to send the bill to this committee? While I love the Chesapeake Foundation, they are dead wrong on the position they've taken. If this bill is funded and moves forward I hope there is an annual amount of $10 million dollars allocated to compensate Northumberland county's government so our county can continue to exist! Exactly, how do the members of the Appropriation Committee think our county can continue to function without the money Omega generates annually for our economy? You may say "the health of the bay and its fisheries are more important than the economic health of Northumberland County.". Well, the simple answer is that if this committee would take the time to actually READ the salient reports, they would find that the health of the menhaden population is HEALTHY and GROWING! Please, go read the reports. I also strongly suggest that the members of this committee actually go to the Omega factory located in Reedville so they can view the presentation this company has put together which gives an excellent overview of their operation and its benefits to their employees and the charitable contributions that make to local charitable foundations. The Chesapeake Foundation has not, as far as I can tell, provided any concrete information to back up their claims. I simply implore the Appropriation Committee to vote AGAINST providing money for the support of this bill. Thanks you for your consideration.
I am writing in support of HB1049 in order to improve the management of the menhaden fishery in the Chesapeake Bay. Virginia has a responsibility to better protect the menhaden in the Chesapeake Bay for the sake of striped bass, osprey and future generations of Virginians.
Hello Delegates, I am writing in opposition of HB1396. This bill had been brought fourth by landowners groups that falsely claim to represent and maximize property owners rights when in fact they are property owners that want to end the tradition of hound hunting. This is proven by these groups comments on their own social media pages. These groups have made claim that only 8 states allow the use of hounds to hunt, a stat quoted by delegates in the subcommittee, that is simply a false statement, currently only 9 states allow hounds to be used to hunt deer but nearly every state allows the utilization of dogs to hunt other game species many not requiring an special license to do so. I ask the delegates to understand that the vast majority of the members of the hound hunting organizations are land owners as well in addition to all of the landowners who lease or allow hound hunting on their land support the tradition of hound hunting. This bill creates a permit allowing the DWR create and issue permits on a may issue criteria with visual permit requirements for hounds and vehicles. If Additional funding is needed to police game laws the bill should be amended to a license just like an archery or muzzleloading license that is a shall issue. Additionally the cost for said license should be reduced and required for all that utilize or partcipate in any type of hunting that utilizes a dog. Dogs are already required to have owner contact info on their collar and their vehicles have state issued license plates therefore marking is not necessary. Lastly the only ones who should be exempt from license purchase are those that utilize dogs to hunt on their own land. This simplifies the requirements and makes it fair for all parties. Basically if big game is harvested and checked in and the use of dogs is checked as a part of big game license registering process they should be required to have a dog hunting license or be exempt as a land owner. I hope that you find this as a reasonable comprise. Additionally there needs to be some sort of recourse for false complaints or accusations. If this bill continues as is it will create more tensions between those who utilize dogs to hunt and those who don't like the use of hunting dogs. False complaints will continue to increase cause additional hunter harassment and tension between hunters and those that oppose it. Thank you for your time. V/R, B. C. Bunch
The moratorium on Menhaden in the Bay is long overdue - even Maryland says they cannot catch any Menhaden in their Chesapeake Bay Bait Fishery due to overfishing in the Virginia Bay. Osprey adults and chicks are starving. Rockfish populations are in collapse. Blue Crabs are at all time lows. Charter captains taking out recreational fisherman businesses are failing and closing. However, the moratorium needs to extend to the Virginia seaside. The overfishing extends along the eastern shore of Virginia and off Virginia Beach and the mouth of the Bay where industry can heavily fish a 236 million lbs quota with the ability to heavily impact the migration of Menhaden into the Bay. There is no research or data that refutes the theory that industrial fishing boats with purse seine nets will not relocate to the Virginia waters outside the Chesapeake Bay Bridge tunnel and deny the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem the food supply that is in desperate need for both nature and the economy. See the net set fishing chart from 2024 by industry. Over 100,000 jobs are connected to the Rockfish/Striped bass fishery in a 2016 study and the recreational catch is down over 50% since then - and an economic impact of nearly $8 Billion in 2016 - 50% reduction equates to a loss of 50,000 jobs and $4 Billion. For Virginia the number of jobs depending on Striped Bass was over 1500 jobs and the decline of over 50 of catch threatens 1,700 jobs in the fishery. (See McGraw Hill study attached) A moratorium on fishing in Virginia is necessary to get a true accurate assessment of the Bay ecosystem. The quota for Virginia is 236 Million lbs and as much as 112 million lbs can be caught in the Chesapeake Bay by industry - the quota set aside for wildlife? 0 Rhode Island manages their Narragansett Bay menhaden population by using the same method as industry using overflights with trained pilots to count the fish in surface schools. They set aside 2 million lbs. of Menhaden for wildlife at all times - we need to determine how much is needed to restore the Virginia saltwater ecosystem both in the ocean and the Bay.
I support H.B. 1048 and H.B. 1049. Healthy and sustainably managed populations of menhaden will protect economic opportunities in VA, while also protecting wildlife and recreation. Menhaden are foundational parts of the Bay's ecosystem. I support H.B. 880, which will help to protect VA farmers from the lasting and severe impacts of PFAS contamination in soils, which in turn protects rural economies, wildlife, and people. The impacts been devastating in other states such as Maine. Regular testing is essential. I support H.B. 1072. We should empower VA communities as they seek to protect residents from the harmful impacts of forever chemicals and to minimize harms related to sewage sludge.
My name is Joseph W. Smith. For 32 years (1983-2015) I handled the fishery-dependent data for the Atlantic and Gulf menhaden fisheries at NOAA's Beaufort (NC) Laboratory. I recently published a book on the menhaden resource, the characterization of the menhaden fisheries, and the importance of the menhaden fisheries to the U.S. at large. I am writing to the Subcommittee today in opposition to both Carr bills, numbers 1048 and 1049. As per the latest coastwide stock assessment for Atlantic menhaden, they are not experiencing overfishing, nor are they over fished. Moreover, they have been exceptionally abundant in the northern half of their range (NJ to Maine) in recent years - a sign of a robust and healthy stock. Much has been made on social media and in the press in recent months about the lack of menhaden in Chesapeake Bay during summer 2025. Menhaden distribute during along the Eastern Seaboard by size and age compostion with the oldest (age-3+) and larger fish migrating as far north as the Gulf of Maine. Typical age composition of the menhaden catch in Chesapeake Bay during summer is age-1 and -2 fish with a few age 3s. The lack of menhaden in Chesapeake Bay in 2025 may have been due to two consecutive poor year class (2023 and 2024); you should know that there is a very poor relationship between the number of spawners in the stock and the number of subsequent recruits to the population. Alternately, menhaden distribute where the food resources are optimum. Age-1+ menhaden tend to concentrate in areas where larger phytoplankton and zooplankton occur. There is some evidence that the plankton community in Chesapeake Bay has been tending towards the smaller phytoplankters, food items not optimum for the menhaden diet. Much has been made of the starving opsprey issue in the Virginia portion of Chesapeake Bay. Historical data shows that for the five years 1987-1991 the menhaden reduction fishery removed on average 160,000 metric tons of menhaden from the Virginia portion of Chesapeake Bay annually (NOAA NMFS Technical Report #144); this is when two factories operated at Reedville, VA, with a combined fleet of about 24 vessels. My read of the historical osprey data as cited by William and Mary researchers suggests ospreys did quite well during this time frame as per their hatchling success. Currently, with only one factory at Reedville and about six vessels, the fleet removes up to only 51,000 metric tons of menhaden from the Bay - or less - as per the Chesapeake Bay Cap. Thus, ospreys did quite well in Virginia during the late 1980s and early 1990s when over three times as many menhaden were being removed from the Bay as compared to contemparary times. Clearly, something else is going on with osprey reproductive success beyond menhaden availability. In closing, the menhaden fishery is a world-class fishery and is over 150 years old. In many respects the fishery is the economic engine that drives Northern Neck Virginia and beyond. Moreover, there is a great deal of science yet to be explored relative to menhaden distribution and abundance in Chesapeake Bay. Indee, $2.5 million of Federal funds have recently been appropriated for just this reason. Please allow the incipient science to guide your deliberations.
Chair and Members of the Committee, On behalf of Lynnhaven River NOW and our 16,000 members, I respectfully urge you to support HB 1048, HB 1049, and Budget Item HB30 (introduced) 145 #2h to advance science-based, precautionary management of Atlantic menhaden in the Chesapeake Bay. Menhaden are a foundational forage fish – they convert plankton into the energy that fuels iconic Bay predators and valuable fisheries. VIMS notes that menhaden are filter feeders and a key food source for species such as striped bass and bluefish, as well as for seabirds and marine mammals; they are also widely used as bait across the commercial and recreational sectors. In Virginia Beach and throughout Hampton Roads, that forage base underpins the recreational fishing experiences and biodiversity that our region’s economy and identity depend on. At the same time, the Bay is changing rapidly. NOAA reports that climate change is already shifting where fish spend time and when they migrate in and out of the Chesapeake Bay, complicating management of shared public resources. And the most recent ASMFC assessment update clarified that estimated menhaden biomass across the time series is substantially lower (about 37% lower on average) than previously estimated, largely due to improved understanding of natural mortality – highlighting how management outcomes can change materially as science improves. HB 1048 is the appropriate precautionary step: it would prohibit purse-seine reduction fishing for menhaden in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries until the Secretary of Natural and Historic Resources can certify – based on Bay-specific research – that the reduction fishery does not negatively impact other fisheries or menhaden-dependent species. This approach aligns with the reality that Bay-specific uncertainty persists. In fact, Virginia’s own science advisors have already mapped out priority research needs: VIMS’ menhaden research planning report calls for work such as analyzing spatiotemporal fishing patterns, assessing the possibility of localized depletion, and quantifying recreational and broader economic implications – exactly the information policymakers need to make durable decisions. If HB 1048 does not advance, HB 1049 is a strong, science-forward alternative. It would require VMRC to implement quota-period management for the Bay Cap (reducing “pulses” of removals) and to establish 10% observer coverage to independently document catch composition and weight – basic accountability tools widely used in modern fisheries management. Finally, funding is essential in either scenario. The proposed budget amendment HB30 (introduced) 145 #2h would provide $1 million in each fiscal year to VIMS for menhaden research in the Chesapeake Bay – helping Virginia answer the Bay-specific questions that have delayed resolution for years. Along the Atlantic coast, Virginia hosts the only remaining large-scale menhaden reduction fishery – making it even more important that Virginia sets the bar for precaution, transparency, and Bay-focused science. For our waters, our fish and wildlife, and the communities that rely on them, we urge your support for HB 1048, HB 1049, and 145 #2h. Respectfully, Lynnhaven River NOW
I am in Favor of HB 1048 and HB 1049. The study on Atlantic Menhaden in the Chesapeake Bay has been funded by the Federal Government and will begin shortly. There are so many signs that the menhaden population in the Bay is depleted - please allow the pause in reduction fishing until the Study proves it is not impacting other dependent fisheries, wildlife, and businesses that rely upon the other fisheries as directed by HB 1048. The reduction fishery can make its quota in the ocean and would not result in any job losses at their processing plant. I am in favor of HB 1049 as an alternative to HB 1048. The Atlantic Menhaden reduction fishery should have observers on the boats due to the significant amount of by-catch of commercially important fish, and the lack of oversight over the years. As to the fiscal impact, this can be resolved by phasing in the program and adding a budget item to fund it.
Please support this important bills.Industrial fishing is destroying the bay.Make Omega fish in the ocean.
I support HB1048 and if it's not successful then HB1049. I have witnessed the tragic death of osprey chicks as their parents struggle to find enough fish. Because osprey feed almost entirely on fresh fish they are a harbinger of the broader damage that is clearly happening as menhaden populations are decimated in the Chesapeake Bay by large scale commercial fishing. These operations can move their spotter planes and boats outside the 3-mile limit where supplies are more plentiful and allow the Bay to be studied in depth and recover. This is not just about a few jobs in Reedville - it's about the health of the Bay and ALL the local fishermen, sport fishing guides and wildlife that depend on it. Please save our Bay and stop Omega now.
Chair and Members of the Agriculture, Chesapeake and Natural Resources Committee Chesapeake Subcommittee, Thank you for the opportunity to submit this comment in support of HB1048 and HB1049. My name is John Goodman. I am a U.S. Coast Guard–licensed captain who works on the waters of the Chesapeake Bay. I earn my living directly from the condition of this resource, and I witness the effects of management decisions on the water and in the working communities that depend on it. Every member of this body has been entrusted with responsibility. That responsibility is not always visible, but it is permanent. The decision before you is not complex, but its consequences are enduring. HB1048 and HB1049 exist for a clear purpose: to protect Virginia’s people, Virginia’s public waters, and a fishery that must endure for generations, not quarterly profit. This is not about preserving the balance sheet of a corporation headquartered elsewhere. It is about how the Commonwealth discharges its legal duty under the public trust doctrine. The public trust doctrine requires Virginia to manage public waters for the benefit of the people, not for private extraction. Public trust obligations are not limited to residents; they attach to the resource itself. The Chesapeake Bay is not expendable. It is the Atlantic Coast’s nursery, and damage to a nursery does not recover on a legislative timeline. Decisions of this magnitude must be made free from undue influence. Public trust resources should not be governed by lobbying pressure, political action committee contributions, or outside interests seeking preferential access to a shared resource. The obligation of this committee is to the people of the Commonwealth and the long-term health of Virginia’s waters, not to donors or corporate entities with no enduring stake in Virginia’s future. The people affected by this decision are not lobbyists or political donors. They are commercial watermen, charter captains, bait dealers, marina operators, and small business owners across the Commonwealth. They are working communities already paying higher costs as local forage disappears and economic opportunity declines. The citizens of Virginia deserve positive experiences through local economic growth generated by a healthy Bay, not extraction that benefits a foreign-controlled entity. Public resources should serve the public interest of this Commonwealth, not be treated as inventory for outside profit. This is not about shutting down a company. That company will continue to operate wherever profit can be extracted. Virginia cannot relocate its Bay. The people who live and work here absorb the consequences in their homes, livelihoods, and local economies. Once this body casts its vote, it becomes part of the permanent legislative record. History will not ask how difficult this decision was. It will ask whether this committee protected the long-term future of the Commonwealth. This is not about individual legacy. It is about the legacy of Virginia — what was protected and what was passed on intact to the next generation. I respectfully urge you to support HB1048 and HB1049 and to act in defense of Virginia’s public trust. John Douglas Goodman USCG Captain - Master Shark_man7@yahoo.com 804-901-1004
Madam Chair, members of the subcommittee, I am Robley Jones, and I speak today as a member of and on behalf of The Old Dominion Smallmouth Club. We urge your support to both HB1048 and HB11049. As sportfishermen, we have observed the degradation of the fish populations in Virginia during our lifetimes. Recently, the decline in the striped bass population has been notable, and we also have observed the decline in the osprey population. We believe this is attributable to the decline in the menhaden population in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. We hope our children, grandchildren, and generations that follow will have the same opportunity to enjoy fishing and the beauty of our Commonwealth as we have. We believe that you have an opportunity to save the striped bass, the osprey, and other species dependent on the menhaden for nourishment. When I was a boy, the American shad were abundantly present in the James River. Now, they are very rare. Let us not say the same about the striped bass and the osprey years from now. Please do the right thing and support HB1048 and HB1049. Let me close by thanking Delegate Carr for placing these bills before you. Thank you.
I support HB1048 (Delegate Carr). It is simple common sense to have the information you need in place to determine if the menhaden reduction fishing in the Bay is sustainable. Virginia is operating blind and keeping the status quo with no supporting data that is Bay-specific. Pause the fishery and get the facts. I also support HB1049 (Delegate Carr) to develop a quota management system for the same reasons as stated above. Trained observers to document actual menhaden catch on at least 10% of the reduction fishery’s trips is warranted to keep everyone honest. If the industry is complying, they have nothing to fear. I do not know what our local representative thinks about these bills. But I and many other Eastern Shore folks - across party lines - can tell you that protection of menhaden is very important to us. Thank you for your honest consideration of these bills.
The Cape Henry Audubon Society, which works in the Hampton Roads area, supports - HB1048 - to pause the menhaden reduction fishery in the Chesapeake Bay until the necessary science has been conducted to make sure this large scale reduction fishery is not having negative impacts on the many other fish, bird, and terrestrial species dependent on menhaden at the base of the food chain, and - HB1049 - to direct the Marine Resources Commission to develop and maintain a quota period management system for the menhaden reduction fishery to mitigate the aforementioned negative impacts of concentrated, high volume menhaden removals from the Bay. In the birding community, we are alarmed at the studies showing a severe decline in the success of osprey nests across the Chesapeake Bay. Osprey, also known as fish hawks, are entirely dependent on catching fish and Osprey chicks are starving to death. The 2025 breeding survey found the reproductive rates for osprey nests across most of the Chesapeake Bay were below replacement rates. (See report from the Center for Conservation Biology at William and Mary - https://ccbbirds.org/2025/10/01/deficit-in-breeding-performance-expands-for-chesapeake-bay-ospreys/) Feeding on menhaden is essential not just for osprey and other birds, but for many species, including striped bass, bluefish, summer flounder, and other popular fish targeted by commercial and recreational fishing industries. A new stock assessment released by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission this past October indicated the Atlantic Coast menhaden population is about 37% smaller than previously thought. We must take a cautious stance and protect the remaining menhaden population until additional studies by the Virginia Institute of Marine Science are completed. A healthy menhaden population is important to both ecological and economic interests throughout the state. We urge you to vote yes on both HB1048 and HB1049.
I oppose bill HB1396. This bill is just another way to “tax” the people. The permitting system that is in this bill will cause some people to stop hunting which will result in even lower license sales in the state.
Please support both of these bills. The menhaden population is critical to the health and life of the Chesapeake bay. Allowing commercial fishing by omega/Cooke with no regulation is destroying the bay and its entire ecosystem. They are blatantly and arrogantly destroying the waters for their own financial gain.
Vote YES on HB1048 and HB1049 to ban menhaden fishing in the Chesapeake Bay and limit catches. Industrial vessels don’t belong in our Bay. They are destroying menhaden and harming countless other species—often for out-of-state or foreign profit. Protect our Bay now.
Please enact legislation that limits to a prohibitive level, or flat prohibit large operation menhaden fishing in the Chesapeake bay. It directly impacts the ecosystem when large quotas are fulfilled in our waters to satisfy demand across the world. It’s unnatural.
Please vote yes to prohibit the fishing for menhaden withing the chesapeake bay and its tributaries (HB1048) and to limit its catch (HB1049). Those fishing vessels have no business fishing inside the bay and the negative effects are obvious to anyone that doesnt have a financial benefit of the vessels fishing within the bay. No vessel should be in the bay destroying the menhaden population and the population of all the bicatch especially those owned by an out of state or foreign nation.
Please vote yes to prohibit the fishing for menhaden withing the chesapeake bay and its tributaries (HB1048) and to limit its catch (HB1049). Those fishing vessels have no business fishing inside the bay and the negative effects are obvious to anyone that doesnt have a financial benefit of the vessels fishing within the bay. No vessel should be in the bay destroying the menhaden population and the population of all the bicatch especially those owned by an out of state or foreign nation.
If you’re tired of the 9-to-5 grind or just want a way to put some extra cash in your pocket every week, I have something for you. Companies are currently looking for remote writers to handle: Article Writing Blog Posts Social Media Content Live Chat Support No experience is necessary and full training is provided. But before you apply, you need to see which role you’re best suited for. Go here to take the Writing Job Quiz. ---> http://PaidToWrite.Online/ Once you finish the quiz, you’ll get a breakdown of the best opportunities available for you right now. Visit -----> http://PaidToWrite.Online/
I support HB1048 and 1049 to reduce or eliminate the menhaden reduction fishery in the Chesapeake Bay. As a fisherman, I'm concerned with large-scale population declines that menhaden have experienced in recent decades. Menhaden sit towards the bottom of the food chain, and are a staple food of fish that I fish for, like striped bass, cobia, and spanish mackerel. They are also important to support osprey and eagle populations. If menhaden continue to experience population declines, we will (and are) seeing it in lower populations of fish that many of us like to try to land too. We need to protect these fish from the harmful reduction industry that takes these fish from the bay at the expense of everyone and everything else. Please support these bills to protect menhaden in one of their last refuges on the Atlantic Coast, the Chesapeake Bay.
Invasives should be pulled or killed by herbicide and not be permitted to be sold in nurseries
Menhaden are a publicly owned fisheries resource of the Commonwealth public that is being exploited to the extreme detriment of the resource by an intensive reduction fishery owned by Omega Protein, a Canadian firm. The population, while within the confines of the Chesapeake Bay, is particularly vulnerable to over exploitation through the use of spotter planes that target dense schools fo menhaden concentrated within the geographic constraints of surrounding land masses. This population is in dire need of protection from overexploitation because of its extreme ecological importance as plankton feeders and a food resource for a multitude of species within the Bay from whales to predatory recreational and commercial important fisheries species. I urge this committee vote to curb the intensive reduction of this important species within the Chesapeake Bay! Please vote YES on HB 1049! Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this critical issue.
HB 1048 & HB 1049 The Menhaden Needs to be protected NOW from overfishing. This species has already been overfished. The Menhaden are a Keystone species and vital to the health of the Chesapeake Bay. Limits on their harvest need to be put in place an enforced. The osprey population is suffering as are other species that depend on a healthy Menhaden population. HB 1091 Solar Energy is the most cost effective clean source of energy we can install right now. I totally understand residents not wanting industrial solar arrays installed too close to where they live, but with that said it is better to install these solar panels on agricultural land that is not being used rather than deforest more land in order to install these solar arrays. HB 129 Why should you be able to kill deer out of season on your property if they are damaging your fruit trees, crops, or personal property..? The land owner should be made to better secure their fruit trees, crops, and personal property rather than be allowed to kill deer because they are unwilling to invest the time to better secure their property from deer. HB1396 Hunting with dogs and allowing them to run over others personal property Needs to be prohibited! Why the leash laws do not pertain to hunters using dogs makes Zero sense. This has Nothing to do with tradition, and that is not an argument that should be used in support of hunting with dogs. If Sportsman hunting with dogs want to continue using dogs to hunt, they should be made to fence in the property before releasing their dogs. HB45 All fees associated with hunting, fishing, and trapping in the commonwealth should be collected. For what reason should people be allowed to do these activities for free, partially discounted, or get reimbursed. The wildlife they are hunting, fishing, and trapping belong to all the residents of Virginia. Therefore they should pay the associated fees when engaging in an activity that removes them from the wild spaces all residents have a right to enjoy.
Please stop hound hunters right to retrieve on private property. We have multiple where incidents every year where hunting dogs attack our pets on our private property causing harm, loss of life, and vet bills. Private property should remain private year around.
Menhaden are a prime food source for many fish within the Chesapeake Bay including but not limited to striped bass, bluefish and other marine life. The commercial overfishing in Virginia and Maryland has had a noticeable impact on stripd bass and other fish populations. The catch numbers have reduced leading to stricter limits on these fish, without any restriction on the men Haden that these fish eat to survive. Maryland implemented stricter harvest/commercial fishing regulations. Virginia did not and those commercial vessels are indeed taking advantage of Virginia's lack of response to their over fishing. There needs to be more inspections of boats while fishing from USCG, Virginia Marine Police and Virginia Dept. of Wildlife Resources. The dangerous unregulated, unchecked and unimpeded commercial harvesting of these menhaden that are a food source for other fish including sport fish is an ecological disaster waiting to happen. When those menhaden are depleted the ecosystem will have longterm damage that will cost billions to restore and we will lose more species than the manhaden and stripers.
Please support HB 1049 - Menhaden Reduction Fisheries: quota periods, observers. This legislation would direct VA Marine Resources Commission to set up a quota period management plan to allow menhaden-dependent larger fish and other marine life, to include the osprey birds to have year-round access to vital nutrients derived from the menhaden. The legislation also sets up observers on 10% of the menhaden fishing trips which would provide independent data on catch composition and weight. Yours truly, Tyla Matteson, Chair, York River Group Sierra Club
HB1072 - Sewage sludge; local authority to test and monitor land application within its political boundaries.
Please vote with PFAS in mind. This is a serious issue being covered up by chemical companies like 3m and dupont. Please get ahead of this while we still have fresh water. Look into what happened at Dalton Utilities in GA. PBS Frontline just did a documentary on it if you need an fast and easy way to learn about the topic.
Hello Delegates, I am writing in opposition of HB1396. This bill had been brought fourth by landowners groups that falsely claim to represent and maximize property owners rights when in fact they are property owners that want to end the tradition of hound hunting. This is proven by these groups comments on their own social media pages. These groups have made claim that only 8 states allow the use of hounds to hunt, a stat quoted by delegates in the subcommittee, that is simply a false statement, currently only 9 states allow hounds to be used to hunt deer but nearly every state allows the utilization of dogs to hunt other game species many not requiring an special license to do so. I ask the delegates to understand that the vast majority of the members of the hound hunting organizations are land owners as well in addition to all of the landowners who lease or allow hound hunting on their land support the tradition of hound hunting. This bill creates a permit allowing the DWR create and issue permits on a may issue criteria with visual permit requirements for hounds and vehicles. If Additional funding is needed to police game laws the bill should be amended to a license just like an archery or muzzleloading license that is a shall issue. Additionally the cost for said license should be reduced and required for all that utilize or partcipate in any type of hunting that utilizes a dog. Dogs are already required to have owner contact info on their collar and their vehicles have state issued license plates therefore marking is not necessary. Lastly the only ones who should be exempt from license purchase are those that utilize dogs to hunt on their own land. This simplifies the requirements and makes it fair for all parties. Basically if big game is harvested and checked in and the use of dogs is checked as a part of big game license registering process they should be required to have a dog hunting license or be exempt as a land owner. I hope that you find this as a reasonable comprise. Additionally there needs to be some sort of recourse for false complaints or accusations. If this bill continues as is it will create more tensions between those who utilize dogs to hunt and those who don't like the use of hunting dogs. False complaints will continue to increase cause additional hunter harassment and tension between hunters and those that oppose it. Thank you for your time. V/R, B. C. Bunch
I strongly support these bills that will increase regulation and oversight for PFAS manufacturing facilities, use of biosolids and treated effluent on agricultural land, set limits for allowable concentrations of PFAS compounds in wastewater, and allow jurisdictions to impose limits and regulate practices relevant to PFAS contamination. These bills are needed to address the very serious issue of PFAS contamination, which is present even in rural areas of Virginia and is an enormous threat to our health and our water supplies.
I strongly support the right of municipalities and political jurisdictions to impose testing requirements on sludge and treated effluent planned to be used or spread on agricultural lands. We are starting to see problems wit h PFAS contamination here in rural Virginia (Rockbridge Co) and need to be able to take measures to protect our water.
I support H.B. 1048 and H.B. 1049. Healthy and sustainably managed populations of menhaden will protect economic opportunities in VA, while also protecting wildlife and recreation. Menhaden are foundational parts of the Bay's ecosystem. I support H.B. 880, which will help to protect VA farmers from the lasting and severe impacts of PFAS contamination in soils, which in turn protects rural economies, wildlife, and people. The impacts been devastating in other states such as Maine. Regular testing is essential. I support H.B. 1072. We should empower VA communities as they seek to protect residents from the harmful impacts of forever chemicals and to minimize harms related to sewage sludge.
As an Albemarle County resident and member of the Natural Heritage Committee, I strongly urge the passage of this bill to test biosolids for toxic PFAS and any toxic contaminants. Local governments must be given the ability to protect residents and natural resources locally.
Madame Chair and members of the committee. My name is Beth Novick, and I’m a resident living in an area with several large farms as well as a lot of aquaculture on the Coan River in Northern Neck Virginia. I support HB 1072. I believe this bill would allow farmers and localities to get the data they need to make informed decisions about biosolids. We have a lot at risk here - the oyster, crabbing, and fishing industries will be negatively impacted if there is runoff from agricultural fields that are using sludge as a fertilizer option. I know that our local farmers and watermen want to work together for the good of the economy and the community. I'm friends with folks in both occupations, and my son and his wife are organic farmers in Monroe, VA. Please help them be able to make informed decisions by passing this Bill. In addition - this Bill provides an opportunity for some job growth in the region: Providing training opportunities for local government staff involved in biosolids monitoring Thank you ~ Beth Novick, 886 Bundick Rd. Lottsburg, VA 22511
My husband and I live right across the road from a farm that has been spraying biosolids on its land for several years every spring and fall. We support HB 1072 because it will allow our neighbor and our county to get the data they need to make informed decisions about the dangerous health consequences to people, animals, water, and land of applying biosolids to farm land.
Seven generations for the future
If you’re tired of the 9-to-5 grind or just want a way to put some extra cash in your pocket every week, I have something for you. Companies are currently looking for remote writers to handle: Article Writing Blog Posts Social Media Content Live Chat Support No experience is necessary and full training is provided. But before you apply, you need to see which role you’re best suited for. Go here to take the Writing Job Quiz. ---> http://PaidToWrite.Online/ Once you finish the quiz, you’ll get a breakdown of the best opportunities available for you right now. Visit -----> http://PaidToWrite.Online/
Invasives should be pulled or killed by herbicide and not be permitted to be sold in nurseries
Very much in favor of authorizing this testing so we can begin to address the PFAS forever chemicals , pharmaceuticals, heavy metals, landfill leachate, industrial wastes, etc, that are contaminainants in sewage sludge. I would suggest that this bill be married with Sen Stuarts bill SB 386. Please support this bill HB1072. Once we have testing in place we can begin to determine how best to deal with these toxic wastes and limit appling to farm land where it is contaminating the soil and the crops growing there, and hence animals and people consuming then. Even PFAS is considered "forever" there are biological organisms (extremophiles) that have been demonstrated to be able break it down in soils with in a few months. The organisms can be accessed from Soil Saviors.org . They should be incorporated into any long term management strategies.
1396 Keep dog hunting No solar panels 1091 129 let owners kill deer 1169 leave small farms alone 1072 do not regulate sludge applications
Please vote YES on this.
Re: HB1072 - Local authority to test and monitor the land application of sewage sludge within its political boundaries Virginia's Department of Environmental Quality has put local governments in an awkward position. The Department has incorrectly interpreted state law to say that any locality with a biosolids testing and monitoring program may not test sewage sludge (aka biosolids) for PFAS, no matter who pays for such tests. When local government officials understand that toxic contaminants in land-applied sewage sludge present an urgent issue, they have shown they are willing to test the sludge coming into their jurisdictions. But, as it stands now, local governments are left with two very bad options: one is to defy DEQ's position and test anyway, with unknown consequences; the other is to take DEQ to court. Please support HB1072, which, by clarifying local governments' testing authority under state law, will also: • prevent the state from further usurping local authority • promote transparency to protect a farmer's right to know • protect the health of local residents and the environment • ensure property values are maintained and liability is minimized. The Department has voluntarily restricted its own testing and monitoring of biosolids to the minimum federal regulations issued by EPA in 1993. These regulations cover 4 types of indicator pathogens and 9 heavy metals. But the Department already has the authority (and, in fact, the legal mandate) to do more, evinced in various sections of state law, including Virginia's Water Quality Standards, which require the Department to test, monitor, and regulate sewage sludge land application for "...toxic substances (including those which bioaccumulate)," 9VAC25-260-20. PFAS chemicals are indisputably included in that category, since they were declared hazardous substances under CERCLA in 2024 and they have been proven to bioaccumulate. Underwriters of commercial property owner's insurance, including insurance for farmers, are increasingly issuing policies with PFAS exclusions. These riders leave the property owner responsible for contamination clean-up and lawsuits, with no help from their liability insurance. While the land application of sewage sludge is not the only potential source of farmland contamination from PFAS, the practice is an obvious culprit that needs more scrutiny and better, common-sense management and regulation.
HB1356 - Precipitation design standards; non-stationary precipitation, climate-adjusted rainfall.
Hello Delegates, I am writing in opposition of HB1396. This bill had been brought fourth by landowners groups that falsely claim to represent and maximize property owners rights when in fact they are property owners that want to end the tradition of hound hunting. This is proven by these groups comments on their own social media pages. These groups have made claim that only 8 states allow the use of hounds to hunt, a stat quoted by delegates in the subcommittee, that is simply a false statement, currently only 9 states allow hounds to be used to hunt deer but nearly every state allows the utilization of dogs to hunt other game species many not requiring an special license to do so. I ask the delegates to understand that the vast majority of the members of the hound hunting organizations are land owners as well in addition to all of the landowners who lease or allow hound hunting on their land support the tradition of hound hunting. This bill creates a permit allowing the DWR create and issue permits on a may issue criteria with visual permit requirements for hounds and vehicles. If Additional funding is needed to police game laws the bill should be amended to a license just like an archery or muzzleloading license that is a shall issue. Additionally the cost for said license should be reduced and required for all that utilize or partcipate in any type of hunting that utilizes a dog. Dogs are already required to have owner contact info on their collar and their vehicles have state issued license plates therefore marking is not necessary. Lastly the only ones who should be exempt from license purchase are those that utilize dogs to hunt on their own land. This simplifies the requirements and makes it fair for all parties. Basically if big game is harvested and checked in and the use of dogs is checked as a part of big game license registering process they should be required to have a dog hunting license or be exempt as a land owner. I hope that you find this as a reasonable comprise. Additionally there needs to be some sort of recourse for false complaints or accusations. If this bill continues as is it will create more tensions between those who utilize dogs to hunt and those who don't like the use of hunting dogs. False complaints will continue to increase cause additional hunter harassment and tension between hunters and those that oppose it. Thank you for your time. V/R, B. C. Bunch
Chair and Members of the Committee, On behalf of Lynnhaven River NOW, a Virginia Beach-based nonprofit dedicated to protecting clean water and healthy coastal ecosystems, I write in strong support of HB1356 to establish climate-adjusted precipitation design standards for public infrastructure. As the climate warms, heavy downpours are becoming more common – and in many places more severe. The Fifth National Climate Assessment reports an upward trend in heavy precipitation across the contiguous U.S. since the 1950s, with the largest increases in extreme-rainfall days in the Northeast and Midwest and broader evidence of increasing frequency and intensity particularly east of the Rocky Mountains / across the eastern U.S., with clear implications for flood risk and infrastructure planning. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change similarly finds that extreme precipitation intensifies with warming, consistent with fundamental physical processes that increase atmospheric moisture. Despite these trends, engineering standards often rely on precipitation frequency estimates that are derived from historical observations. In Virginia, stormwater regulations explicitly reference site-specific precipitation frequency data recommended by NOAA Atlas 14. Atlas 14 remains the current national standard, but it does not provide future climate-adjusted estimates of precipitation frequency. NOAA Atlas 15 – intended to incorporate nonstationary methods and climate-model information to account for future trends – is under development, with preliminary peer review and publication milestones described by NOAA. Virginia should not delay strengthening design practices while federal updates proceed. HB1356 provides a prudent, science-based pathway. It designates the State Water Control Board as the lead agency to establish and maintain precipitation design standards that incorporate the most recent NOAA precipitation frequency atlas estimates and account for observed and projected changes, with at least annual review for adequacy. Importantly, the bill also directs interim guidance: until Atlas 15 is published and adopted, precipitation values derived from Atlas 14 must be increased by at least 20% for design purposes –helping ensure near-term projects reflect changing conditions and reduce long-term risk. Virginia Beach’s experience underscores feasibility and urgency. The City’s stormwater planning and design approach has incorporated an Atlas 14 + 20% rainfall adjustment as part of resilience-focused standards, demonstrating a workable model for reducing flood damage and protecting water quality. Finally, HB1356 aligns with work products posted by the General Assembly’s Joint Subcommittee on Recurrent Flooding, which has circulated draft rainfall design standards language incorporating climate-adjusted precipitation and an interim Atlas 14 + 20% approach. For these reasons, Lynnhaven River NOW respectfully urges you to report HB1356 with a recommendation to pass. Sincerely, Lynnhaven River NOW
Each year, DWR is spending over $1.25 million dollars responding to hunting dog related complaints with almost no enforcement tools available to address the presence of dogs on properties where they are not wanted. DWR currently lacks the legal authority, financial means, and personnel to adequately address this ongoing conflict. The proposed permit system outlined in HB1396 is purposely designed to respect the subject matter expertise of the DWR staff and its regulatory authority to create a framework allowing the department the ability to address the conflict at the agency level rather than returning to the General Assembly. HB1396 does not impact a single lawful hunter, it simply targets the bad actors. I believe that this permit system will resolve the issues created by the presence of hunting dogs where they are not desired. HB1396 balances the interests of landowners and the hunting community by allowing the tradition of dog hunting to continue while ensuring locations, such as my pastures, aren’t inundated by hunting dogs that have no business being there. I strongly urge you to support for HB 1396 and vote yes. Thank you.
Please support HB1356. Rainfall has changed in the last decade or so and we need to use the latest data.
I am asking you to vote NO on HB1396!! We do not need more restrictions on hound hunting! We already have regulations that have been set forth through the years. Adding more permits to our licenses will only make it more bureaucratic and add to the expense of hunting with hounds! It seems you are determined to remove another part of our heritage in Virginia and I see NO NEED TO FURTHER RESTRICT our right to lawfully run /hunt our hounds. I respectfully ask YOU to VOTE NO on this proposal!!
If you’re tired of the 9-to-5 grind or just want a way to put some extra cash in your pocket every week, I have something for you. Companies are currently looking for remote writers to handle: Article Writing Blog Posts Social Media Content Live Chat Support No experience is necessary and full training is provided. But before you apply, you need to see which role you’re best suited for. Go here to take the Writing Job Quiz. ---> http://PaidToWrite.Online/ Once you finish the quiz, you’ll get a breakdown of the best opportunities available for you right now. Visit -----> http://PaidToWrite.Online/
I strongly oppose the bill Hb1369
Invasives should be pulled or killed by herbicide and not be permitted to be sold in nurseries
HB1424 - Onsite sewage system designs; Board of Health to establish a pre-certified library of designs, etc.
Hello Delegates, I am writing in opposition of HB1396. This bill had been brought fourth by landowners groups that falsely claim to represent and maximize property owners rights when in fact they are property owners that want to end the tradition of hound hunting. This is proven by these groups comments on their own social media pages. These groups have made claim that only 8 states allow the use of hounds to hunt, a stat quoted by delegates in the subcommittee, that is simply a false statement, currently only 9 states allow hounds to be used to hunt deer but nearly every state allows the utilization of dogs to hunt other game species many not requiring an special license to do so. I ask the delegates to understand that the vast majority of the members of the hound hunting organizations are land owners as well in addition to all of the landowners who lease or allow hound hunting on their land support the tradition of hound hunting. This bill creates a permit allowing the DWR create and issue permits on a may issue criteria with visual permit requirements for hounds and vehicles. If Additional funding is needed to police game laws the bill should be amended to a license just like an archery or muzzleloading license that is a shall issue. Additionally the cost for said license should be reduced and required for all that utilize or partcipate in any type of hunting that utilizes a dog. Dogs are already required to have owner contact info on their collar and their vehicles have state issued license plates therefore marking is not necessary. Lastly the only ones who should be exempt from license purchase are those that utilize dogs to hunt on their own land. This simplifies the requirements and makes it fair for all parties. Basically if big game is harvested and checked in and the use of dogs is checked as a part of big game license registering process they should be required to have a dog hunting license or be exempt as a land owner. I hope that you find this as a reasonable comprise. Additionally there needs to be some sort of recourse for false complaints or accusations. If this bill continues as is it will create more tensions between those who utilize dogs to hunt and those who don't like the use of hunting dogs. False complaints will continue to increase cause additional hunter harassment and tension between hunters and those that oppose it. Thank you for your time. V/R, B. C. Bunch
If you’re tired of the 9-to-5 grind or just want a way to put some extra cash in your pocket every week, I have something for you. Companies are currently looking for remote writers to handle: Article Writing Blog Posts Social Media Content Live Chat Support No experience is necessary and full training is provided. But before you apply, you need to see which role you’re best suited for. Go here to take the Writing Job Quiz. ---> http://PaidToWrite.Online/ Once you finish the quiz, you’ll get a breakdown of the best opportunities available for you right now. Visit -----> http://PaidToWrite.Online/
Invasives should be pulled or killed by herbicide and not be permitted to be sold in nurseries
HB1443 - Owners of sewage treatment works; land application, marketing, or distributing of sewage sludge.
Hello Delegates, I am writing in opposition of HB1396. This bill had been brought fourth by landowners groups that falsely claim to represent and maximize property owners rights when in fact they are property owners that want to end the tradition of hound hunting. This is proven by these groups comments on their own social media pages. These groups have made claim that only 8 states allow the use of hounds to hunt, a stat quoted by delegates in the subcommittee, that is simply a false statement, currently only 9 states allow hounds to be used to hunt deer but nearly every state allows the utilization of dogs to hunt other game species many not requiring an special license to do so. I ask the delegates to understand that the vast majority of the members of the hound hunting organizations are land owners as well in addition to all of the landowners who lease or allow hound hunting on their land support the tradition of hound hunting. This bill creates a permit allowing the DWR create and issue permits on a may issue criteria with visual permit requirements for hounds and vehicles. If Additional funding is needed to police game laws the bill should be amended to a license just like an archery or muzzleloading license that is a shall issue. Additionally the cost for said license should be reduced and required for all that utilize or partcipate in any type of hunting that utilizes a dog. Dogs are already required to have owner contact info on their collar and their vehicles have state issued license plates therefore marking is not necessary. Lastly the only ones who should be exempt from license purchase are those that utilize dogs to hunt on their own land. This simplifies the requirements and makes it fair for all parties. Basically if big game is harvested and checked in and the use of dogs is checked as a part of big game license registering process they should be required to have a dog hunting license or be exempt as a land owner. I hope that you find this as a reasonable comprise. Additionally there needs to be some sort of recourse for false complaints or accusations. If this bill continues as is it will create more tensions between those who utilize dogs to hunt and those who don't like the use of hunting dogs. False complaints will continue to increase cause additional hunter harassment and tension between hunters and those that oppose it. Thank you for your time. V/R, B. C. Bunch
I strongly support these bills that will increase regulation and oversight for PFAS manufacturing facilities, use of biosolids and treated effluent on agricultural land, set limits for allowable concentrations of PFAS compounds in wastewater, and allow jurisdictions to impose limits and regulate practices relevant to PFAS contamination. These bills are needed to address the very serious issue of PFAS contamination, which is present even in rural areas of Virginia and is an enormous threat to our health and our water supplies.
Seven generations for the future
If you’re tired of the 9-to-5 grind or just want a way to put some extra cash in your pocket every week, I have something for you. Companies are currently looking for remote writers to handle: Article Writing Blog Posts Social Media Content Live Chat Support No experience is necessary and full training is provided. But before you apply, you need to see which role you’re best suited for. Go here to take the Writing Job Quiz. ---> http://PaidToWrite.Online/ Once you finish the quiz, you’ll get a breakdown of the best opportunities available for you right now. Visit -----> http://PaidToWrite.Online/
Invasives should be pulled or killed by herbicide and not be permitted to be sold in nurseries
Please support HB402. It will allow small cottage foods producers to grow reach a larger consumer base, without the need to upgrade to a commercial kitchen, which is exceedingly expensive and lots of red tape for permitting. This is also a way to make it less restrictive for anyone wanting to get started with home produced uninspected foods which will support independence and community food resilience and keep revenue cycling within the local economy.
HB1519 - Chesapeake Bay Watershed; generated by point sources or nonpoint sources, sunset.
Hello Delegates, I am writing in opposition of HB1396. This bill had been brought fourth by landowners groups that falsely claim to represent and maximize property owners rights when in fact they are property owners that want to end the tradition of hound hunting. This is proven by these groups comments on their own social media pages. These groups have made claim that only 8 states allow the use of hounds to hunt, a stat quoted by delegates in the subcommittee, that is simply a false statement, currently only 9 states allow hounds to be used to hunt deer but nearly every state allows the utilization of dogs to hunt other game species many not requiring an special license to do so. I ask the delegates to understand that the vast majority of the members of the hound hunting organizations are land owners as well in addition to all of the landowners who lease or allow hound hunting on their land support the tradition of hound hunting. This bill creates a permit allowing the DWR create and issue permits on a may issue criteria with visual permit requirements for hounds and vehicles. If Additional funding is needed to police game laws the bill should be amended to a license just like an archery or muzzleloading license that is a shall issue. Additionally the cost for said license should be reduced and required for all that utilize or partcipate in any type of hunting that utilizes a dog. Dogs are already required to have owner contact info on their collar and their vehicles have state issued license plates therefore marking is not necessary. Lastly the only ones who should be exempt from license purchase are those that utilize dogs to hunt on their own land. This simplifies the requirements and makes it fair for all parties. Basically if big game is harvested and checked in and the use of dogs is checked as a part of big game license registering process they should be required to have a dog hunting license or be exempt as a land owner. I hope that you find this as a reasonable comprise. Additionally there needs to be some sort of recourse for false complaints or accusations. If this bill continues as is it will create more tensions between those who utilize dogs to hunt and those who don't like the use of hunting dogs. False complaints will continue to increase cause additional hunter harassment and tension between hunters and those that oppose it. Thank you for your time. V/R, B. C. Bunch
If you’re tired of the 9-to-5 grind or just want a way to put some extra cash in your pocket every week, I have something for you. Companies are currently looking for remote writers to handle: Article Writing Blog Posts Social Media Content Live Chat Support No experience is necessary and full training is provided. But before you apply, you need to see which role you’re best suited for. Go here to take the Writing Job Quiz. ---> http://PaidToWrite.Online/ Once you finish the quiz, you’ll get a breakdown of the best opportunities available for you right now. Visit -----> http://PaidToWrite.Online/
Invasives should be pulled or killed by herbicide and not be permitted to be sold in nurseries
HB487 - Norfolk, City of; Marine Resources Commission to convey easement for certain property.
Hello Delegates, I am writing in opposition of HB1396. This bill had been brought fourth by landowners groups that falsely claim to represent and maximize property owners rights when in fact they are property owners that want to end the tradition of hound hunting. This is proven by these groups comments on their own social media pages. These groups have made claim that only 8 states allow the use of hounds to hunt, a stat quoted by delegates in the subcommittee, that is simply a false statement, currently only 9 states allow hounds to be used to hunt deer but nearly every state allows the utilization of dogs to hunt other game species many not requiring an special license to do so. I ask the delegates to understand that the vast majority of the members of the hound hunting organizations are land owners as well in addition to all of the landowners who lease or allow hound hunting on their land support the tradition of hound hunting. This bill creates a permit allowing the DWR create and issue permits on a may issue criteria with visual permit requirements for hounds and vehicles. If Additional funding is needed to police game laws the bill should be amended to a license just like an archery or muzzleloading license that is a shall issue. Additionally the cost for said license should be reduced and required for all that utilize or partcipate in any type of hunting that utilizes a dog. Dogs are already required to have owner contact info on their collar and their vehicles have state issued license plates therefore marking is not necessary. Lastly the only ones who should be exempt from license purchase are those that utilize dogs to hunt on their own land. This simplifies the requirements and makes it fair for all parties. Basically if big game is harvested and checked in and the use of dogs is checked as a part of big game license registering process they should be required to have a dog hunting license or be exempt as a land owner. I hope that you find this as a reasonable comprise. Additionally there needs to be some sort of recourse for false complaints or accusations. If this bill continues as is it will create more tensions between those who utilize dogs to hunt and those who don't like the use of hunting dogs. False complaints will continue to increase cause additional hunter harassment and tension between hunters and those that oppose it. Thank you for your time. V/R, B. C. Bunch
Oppose house bill 1396
Public Comment on HB 487 – § 28.2‑1200.1(E) I oppose HB 487 as drafted, specifically § 28.2‑1200.1(E), because it is structurally incompatible with Virginia’s constitutional public‑trust framework and cannot be cured through clarification or narrowing language alone. State‑owned bottomlands are held by the Commonwealth in trust for the people, pursuant to Article XI of the Virginia Constitution and long‑settled public‑trust doctrine. Local governments possess no inherent authority or property interest in these lands; they may act only as instrumentalities of the Commonwealth and only within powers expressly delegated in a manner consistent with fiduciary trust obligations. The Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VMRC) functions not as a discretionary landowner, but as a fiduciary trustee charged with protecting public rights in navigation, fisheries, and access. Subsection E departs from this framework by providing that certain localities “shall be deemed to hold a legal property interest” in state‑owned waters, bottoms, or subsurface soils. This language does not convey title, grant a lease, or authorize an easement through VMRC’s established statutory processes. Instead, it declares a property interest into existence by legislative fiat—without trust findings, without case‑specific review, and without meaningful judicial oversight. This approach presents multiple constitutional tensions. First, it risks reordering the beneficiaries of the public trust, elevating the operational needs of particular localities over the Commonwealth’s duty to manage these resources for the benefit of the people as a whole. Second, it bypasses VMRC’s fiduciary role by substituting a categorical legislative declaration for individualized trust analysis. Third, by insulating the deemed interest from downstream scrutiny, it functionally undermines separation‑of‑powers principles. Virginia doctrine looks to function, not labels; calling an interest “necessary” for a project does not cure a structural transfer of authority. While the provision could be cured in theory, doing so would require rewriting it into something materially different: eliminating the deemed property interest; limiting localities to eligibility to apply for a time‑limited, non‑possessory easement or lease; requiring written trust‑consistency findings by VMRC; and preserving full judicial review. Those changes would restore constitutional alignment—but they would also defeat the purpose of subsection E as drafted. Accordingly, subsection E is not merely overbroad or imprecise. It is structurally incompatible with Virginia’s public‑trust framework because it attempts to manufacture a local property interest in public‑trust resources without conveyance, findings, or review. For these reasons, I respectfully oppose HB 487. — KJH/Virginian/Veteran/In the Commonwealth
If you’re tired of the 9-to-5 grind or just want a way to put some extra cash in your pocket every week, I have something for you. Companies are currently looking for remote writers to handle: Article Writing Blog Posts Social Media Content Live Chat Support No experience is necessary and full training is provided. But before you apply, you need to see which role you’re best suited for. Go here to take the Writing Job Quiz. ---> http://PaidToWrite.Online/ Once you finish the quiz, you’ll get a breakdown of the best opportunities available for you right now. Visit -----> http://PaidToWrite.Online/
Invasives should be pulled or killed by herbicide and not be permitted to be sold in nurseries