To the editor:

Thank you for your “biased” reporting on Little Compton’s resolution objecting to Rep. Edwards House Bill H-5037. It would seem that no one appeared to oppose the resolution, since your article contains no such comments.

For the record, and for Councilor, Golembeske, I am one of the people from Tiverton who did not move next door to a farm, and now complain about its operation. My involvement in opposing unfettered aquaculture development along the Sakonnet River, including the Bowen’s application, arose principally because of the CRMC’s failure to provide adequate notice to Tiverton residents and other stakeholders about the filing.

That involvement morphed into asking hard question of the CRMC about their policies and procedures, which were written to favor aquaculture development over the Constitutionally guaranteed water access rights of Rhode Islanders and visitors to our state. Together, with other local and statewide stakeholders, we have provided thoughtful and meaningful comments, and factually based testimony about the operation of the CRMC to various legislative committees, and to CRMC’s Bay SAMP initiative about aquaculture development. The combined efforts of many led to the CRMC changing some of its policies in respect to notice and early communication between applicants and residents.

More specifically, opposition to the Bowen’s pending application is because the proposed location at Seapowet Point beach and adjacent to the DEM’s Sapowet Marsh and Wildlife Management Area (where significant public funds have been spent to rejuvenate the marsh and its waterways) would significantly impact and interfere with historic, current and future recreational boating, fishing, native aquaculture harvesting, and beach use by locals and underserved communities.

Perhaps it would have been helpful for the councilors to consider, before they jumped feet first into the abyss of supporting the Bowen’s that it is not just newly relocated people, but the RI aquaculture industry who also specifically oppose the Bowen’s proposed aquaculture site. At a 2022 hearing on Representative Edwards’ proposed H- 8244 (the precursor to H-5037), the Executive Director of the East Coast Shellfish Association’s testified before the House Corporations Committee, in relevant part, as follows:

“. . . we believe there are certain applications that are poorly sited that actually damage the industry and we would not support them and we would come out against them. So, this is a very unusual step for an aquaculture association to consider opposing an application, but we believe that this particular application is one of those cases where it’s become such a lightning rod for dissent that we believe it's damaging the ability of serious farmers who have made significant investments to continue to work" — queue to 53:50 for more here

It is not just aggrieved people from “away” now living here who oppose the Bowen’s site as suggested by the article. Rather it is people and groups who thoughtfully consider what are best practices for developing aquaculture along the Sakonnet River in the interest of all, and not just to commercialize Seapowet Point for two brothers from Little Compton.

Donald Libbey

Tiverton