Hearing on Race Point Beach Closures

[BasicPatrick]

The NPS is not the big bad guy people seem to think. NPS is bound by the Endangered Species Act, The Migratory Bird Act, The MA Endangered Species Act, and the MA Wetlands Protection Act to name a few. Each of these laws had little opposition when fishing advocates were screaming for public support trying to get them adjusted.

Truth is MA has carried the Northeast Flyway's most amount of birds for over ten years. Over the same ten years, the number of nesting pairs has been above the "recovery goal" in the Piping Plover Recovery Plan. Bottom line is that the people of MA have done all they can while other States on the East coast have not. The Piping Plover Recovery Plan does not allow for "Regional Management" once the "Region" or the "Northeast Flyway" has reached "Recovery numbers" as is the case. To worsen the legal end, Endangered Species Act reform is being taken off the agenda in Congress due the the recent election and the political changes it has brought to DC.

The only place in the legal chain that governs the management of the NPS that DOES NOT REQUIRE a vote in DC is the actual Piping Plover Recovery Plan. This document is written by the Piping Plover Recovery Team that works out of the US Fish & Wildlife Office located in Hadley MA. Headed by Don Fillmnan, outgoing President of MBBA, a strategy has been launched here in MA to negotiate, pressure, and/or take legal action to change the Piping Plover Recovery Plan. The law firm hired is the same firm that has already won a law suit against NPS over the improper designation of Critical Wintering Habitat in the Cape Hatteras National Seashore and is considered to be the best of the best when it comes to challenging the Piping Plover Recovery Plan. This Strategy is being exercised both here in MA and in DC. I am personally involved in the work being done here and in DC and can assure you that both the Recreational Fishing Alliance and The United Mobile Sport Fishermen (UMS) are involved in this strategy.

Meeting attendance and letter/e-mail writing will help but it is not going to be the main way to keep the beaches open. The right people are already involved and the real work happens behind the scenes in a very professional atmosphere.

If you want to really make a difference, the real need is MONEY. We are talking about a strategy that will cost tens of thousands even if there is no law suit.

The Delegates of the United Mobile Sport Fishermen (UMS) have already recognized the far reaching importance of this struggle and donated $2000 just for starters. MSBA will be taking this subject up in the near future.

My challenge is this...We all say that S-B is a club. I agree. Well, then let's act like a club and throw a fundraiser to donate to the MBBA Legal Defense fund for the specific purpose of furthering the strategy that has a shot of working.

If you want tot do something further, call the Cape Cod Chamber of Commerce and tell them how you feel and that you want them involved in funding this action also.

For the record

Captain Patrick Paquette
Executive Director--United Mobile Sportfishermen
National Access Representative--Recreational Fishing Alliance

[Backbeach Jake]

The really rotten part of this is the plovers Have recovered....here in MA. It's the rest of their nesting habitat that has fallen behind. Patrick is right it's money that rules this contest. Now, my half-arsed thought process has been mulling this: Declare ourselves "Lords (and Ladies) Protectors of the Piping Plover". Swear to protect them with our blood if need be. Join the bird nuts and accuse them of slacking in their duties. Ask them to stand aside, thanks, we'll take it from here. Seriously, I bear no animosity toward the wild life on the Outer Cape. I enjoy to my depths of my soul plugging with those little birds running around my feet. I feel in close contact with this Planet at these times when it's just me and the animals who live there, always have. I'll donate to keep that. Don't know what I'd do without it. Time to stand up, guys. I won't leave the beach with my tail between my legs.

[Jenn]

Unfortunately I was unable to make the meeting. I for one travel 4 hours to RP. Have been going there every year since I was 2! Its not just the fishing but a family affair and family tradition. As much as I would love to get up and go whenever I want (birds permitting) I just cant. Fact of the matter is I work for a living as well as having things going on during the weekends so I have to plan my trips around the rest of my life as do most of us. While we always try to make the best of each trip I will say this year has really stunk as far as access during the times I could make it there.. but I will still continue to buy the permit every April for as long as I can. Its the closest thing to a second home that I have. Year after year I sleep in the same campground, see the same folks, shop at the same tackle shops, stores and restaurants that I have grown to love over the years.

The CCNS is a true treasure to all of us and should never be taken for granted. Its beauty is mesmerizing to me, the history of the land intruiging, and its allure neverending.

[Slipknot]

This last part of that article Karl posted a link to seems like a dig to me.

------------------------

"Speaking in favor of protecting the plovers was Provincetown resident Sandra Larsen, who thanked park officials for their enforcement of the plover protection program.

“Your efforts are an inspiration to the generations to come, teaching the lessons that others have lost sight of in their pursuit of recreation which comes at a cost too high to pay,” she said. “Thank you for taking an unpopular stance and please do not yield to those who cannot see that your demonstration of respect for the existence of the plover exemplifies a most profound respect for the rest of us.” "----------------

OK, I don't think anyone at the meeting or any of us fisherman/4x4 offroad users have lost sight of conserving nature, we speak in favor of protecting plovers also. It's the people who use the supposed endangered plovers to keep vehicles(therefore us)off the beaches. Some people just have too much time on their hands and feel the need to take up some cause just to fight something, maybe they are jealous because we enjoy the beaches, those people need to be reminded that we are very respectful of the sensative beaches and it's wildlife. The issue shouldn't be an us against them kinda thing. It's about access and alternatives for access to work around the federal laws to protect nesting plovers.

[BigFish]

I bet she sleeps on down pillows!!!

Hypocrite!

[Flaptail]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

This last part of that article Karl posted a link to seems like a dig to me.

------------------------

"Speaking in favor of protecting the plovers was Provincetown resident Sandra Larsen, who thanked park officials for their enforcement of the plover protection program.

“Your efforts are an inspiration to the generations to come, teaching the lessons that others have lost sight of in their pursuit of recreation which comes at a cost too high to pay,” she said. “Thank you for taking an unpopular stance and please do not yield to those who cannot see that your demonstration of respect for the existence of the plover exemplifies a most profound respect for the rest of us.” "----------------

OK, I don't think anyone at the meeting or any of us fisherman/4x4 offroad users have lost sight of conserving nature, we speak in favor of protecting plovers also. It's the people who use the supposed endangered plovers to keep vehicles(therefore us)off the beaches. Some people just have too much time on their hands and feel the need to take up some cause just to fight something, maybe they are jealous because we enjoy the beaches, those people need to be reminded that we are very respectful of the sensative beaches and it's wildlife. The issue shouldn't be an us against them kinda thing. It's about access and alternatives for access to work around the federal laws to protect nesting plovers.

You are absolutely right Bruce, we have be better them and more radical than them in keeping the protection of the plover first and foremost while also being better than them in thinking up alternate ways to access the beach at the same time. I know this can be done and that collectively we can profer a solution to this, they are only human after all and have way less experience on th beach. We have to be able to also offer undeniable evidence that our way is doable and non evasive to the birds mating and fledging. That is the only way your going to beat this, you have to be smarter and be able to prove it.

[BasicPatrick]

Flap and others have it correct. To just say that the ESA is wrong will get us nowhere. The current strategy to "adjust" the Piping Plover Recovery Plan to allow CCNS & the two local towns to manage both birds and access was based on just that theory. Federal officials continue to push those working on this issue to go for a section 10 permit which would allow for "take" of a bird and this is not what the "pro access" reps want to happen. Unfortunately, it may come down to that being our only option, however we feel that because the Northeast Flyway has been above the "Recovery Goal" of nesting pairs for over ten years, then we should have some relief in the plan. If the whole coast was at the "Recovery Goal", then the whole plan would trigger an automatic shift from protection to management of the species. It gets worse because the actual data on these birds is turning out to be dead wrong with regard to where they will and will not nest. When the interdunal roat to the lighthouse closed becsuse there were two (I think) nest on it, the long held belief that Plovers would not nest anywhere but between the Dunes and the shoreline was shatterred. The scientists can not admit to the theory that the CCNS is actually becoming overcrwded as far as the Plover Population because this would give ammunition to those that beleive we should move into the management phase on CCNS. I get baffled because I would think the Plover Advocates would want to herald this info and would want to use CCNS as a model for other areas. A declaration of recovery, even in the one state, would give them some clout to force protections in other areas on the coast, however it would trigger management here at CCNS. I for one beleive both Man and Plover can co exist on the beach, but we have a lot of work to prove that and then get a couple of competeing government agencies to agree.

[nightprowler]

Originally Posted by BasicPatrick

Flap and others have it correct. To just say that the ESA is wrong will get us nowhere. The current strategy to "adjust" the Piping Plover Recovery Plan to allow CCNS & the two local towns to manage both birds and access was based on just that theory. Federal officials continue to push those working on this issue to go for a section 10 permit which would allow for "take" of a bird and this is not what the "pro access" reps want to happen. Unfortunately, it may come down to that being our only option, however we feel that because the Northeast Flyway has been above the "Recovery Goal" of nesting pairs for over ten years, then we should have some relief in the plan. If the whole coast was at the "Recovery Goal", then the whole plan would trigger an automatic shift from protection to management of the species. It gets worse because the actual data on these birds is turning out to be dead wrong with regard to where they will and will not nest. When the interdunal roat to the lighthouse closed becsuse there were two (I think) nest on it, the long held belief that Plovers would not nest anywhere but between the Dunes and the shoreline was shatterred. The scientists can not admit to the theory that the CCNS is actually becoming overcrwded as far as the Plover Population because this would give ammunition to those that beleive we should move into the management phase on CCNS. I get baffled because I would think the Plover Advocates would want to herald this info and would want to use CCNS as a model for other areas. A declaration of recovery, even in the one state, would give them some clout to force protections in other areas on the coast, however it would trigger management here at CCNS. I for one beleive both Man and Plover can co exist on the beach, but we have a lot of work to prove that and then get a couple of competeing government agencies to agree.

I agree and disagree with this statement.
I for one feel that yes, the majority of people, ones who appreciate nature and will look out for the birds can co-exist with them. The problem I forsee, and I imagine the managers is that your average person who uses the beach wouldn't know where to look or even what a plover is.
How can someone who doesn't know what the bird is pick one out of the sand when they are barely visible, and then avoid them?
For me, knowing the area where the birds are and where the nest is, often times I can't see the birds.
I have heard solutions of allowing a "spotter" to walk in front of the car looking for chicks in tracks to allowing rangers to walk in front of vehicles. I don't know but it doesn't seem economically feasable. Plus what good is a spotter if he doesn't know what he is looking for or doesn't care if there is a bird in the way? Then what do you do if there is a bird in the track? run after it and chase it away?

I think it is going to be very difficult for the birds and people to coexist on the beach. I sure hope it is possible, but i think the bigger issue is that not everyone who uses the beach uses it for fishing and many of the peolpe driving on the beaches couldn't give 2 s hits about the birds at all. Unfortunately just like in the cases of losing access due to trash and noise, the actions of few are hurting us as fishermen. in this instance i think that your average beach goer is hurting us more than the fisherman. generally fisherman are conservation minded and fully support the rebuilding of a species, look no furthur than our striped bass. but its the guy from new york city who wants to run his BMW on the beach that is the problem. Can the park service allow "fisherman access only?"
I don't think there is any easy solution, its a national park, how can it be open for a select group and not for others?
Its a shame that we are losing access left and right, nothing beats a nice on the beach looking for fish. hopefully we won't lose the access that we all seem to be working so hard to maintain.