SAINT GEORGE — Tonight at 7 p.m.,  the Saint George  town office will host the latest fight between attorneys sparring  before the Planning Board for  the two sides in a longterm  struggle for and against keeping Watts Cove, a natural tidal flat, free of piers and floats. All are invited.   St George town office location map

The St. George Board of Appeals meeting was called for follow-up after the planning board on January 10  again rejected the application  by shoreland property owners to put a ramp and float into Saint George's biodiverse Watts Cove.

 This had followed the  December 15 decision by Saint George Board of Appeals to send the application back to the planning board. That decision followed  the November 17, 2016 appeal by Bryce & Gail Molloy of the rejection of  their second application on October 4  to build a ramp with chained floats extending out from the shore of Watts Cove, a small intertidal embayment of the tidal Saint George River.

Saint George resident Matt Stern, a member of the Significant Wildlife Preservation Committee a prominent opponent of the Molly play, said that not all waterfront is the same.

"If you want a place to use powerboats and jets skis" he said, "maybe that shouldn't be done in a wildlife area that's a mudflat. Maybe you should have another place to do that."

According to Saint George resident Matt Stern, Watts Cove's importance for wildlife is well documented by Maine  Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, Stern and other concerned Saint George residents in the Significant Wildlife Preservation Committee  commissioned  environmental consultants Paul Leeper of Moody Mtn Env. (report)) and Sr Ecologist Richard Podolski PhD of the Ecology And Technology firm, (report) . Both identify Watts Cove and surrounds as high quality, highly productive estuarine shore and wading bird and shellfish habitat.  Listen to Matt Stern 22 minute interview on WRFR Community Radio. 

Like many bay towns, Saint George's ordinance looks at all of its shorefront as having more or less the same economic and ecological value. 

 We know that this is not the case. Communities need to adopt ordinances protective of its unreplaceable  natural shoreland and marine habitats and scenic areas. This can be done in such a way it does not fall afoul of  laws  and ordinances protecting landowners'  property rights. 

The state has come up with ways to evaluate the quality of  every town's scenic resources. This can help guid steer development away fromwhat is irreplaceable."  

Stern said the  ordinance" kind of looks at all waterfront as the same." 

We are at a juncture," he said.

The St George Planning Board has denied the application based on the shoreland ordinance  sections 15C (size)  and 16D-4 (ecological impacts) of the shoreland ordinance "

Section 15C: The facility shall be no longer in dimension than necessary to carry on the activity and be consistent with the surrounding character and uses of the area. A pier, dock or wharf in non-tidal waters shall not be wider than six feet for non-commercial use."

Section 16 D-4 : "Will not have an adverse impact on spawning grounds, fish, aquatic life, bird or other wildlife habitat;"

Ron Huber is director of Friends of Penobscot Bay