I attended today's (March 3) meeting on the EA options for managing ORV access to Race Point area. It was nice to see all the fishermen there and I got a chance to introduce myself to Rich from Nelson's and say hello to ptmike. There were many good comments put forth, especially regarding the questionnable necessity of having to wait until the beach access is restricted to .5 miles before the preferred options are triggered. This issue was mentioned 4 or 5 times and I'm still not certain that we got a good answer from the Park Service.

In any case, two topics came up that I think could be related:

One was about the qualifications of the volunteers that assist the National Park Service in the monitoring of piping plovers. It seems that anyone can volunteer and that volunteerism is encouraged.

The other was a question I asked as to the primary cause of plovers failing to reproduce successfully. The answer is that the #1 reason is predation (and NOT human activity).

This got my old brain to thinking (which doesn't happen that often). Plovers may attempt to produce a brood up to three times per season, but only if a previous attempt is unsuccessful. This means that some birds (who failed earlier in the season) may still be attempting to raise a brood in late July or early August. However, if they are successful the 1st time, they will not nest again. Once that nest is abandoned (5 days or so), that area of the beach has no reason to remain closed. It seems to me that we could speed beach openings by helping to ensure that the plovers are successful on their first try and thus do not attempt to nest later in the season (of course we can't do anything about a blow-out from a Nor'easter). If it were possible to organize volunteers to assist in monitoring nesting sites and warding off predators for that critical 1st 3 weeks or so, focusing on critical access points such as the ranger station (north and south), the jeep trail near the lighthouse, and High Head, could we not assist in more limited closures and earlier re-openings?

Just food for thought.

sweet;while it's fresh on your mind send your feelings in print to the site or hand written.I waited to comment in writing until todays hearing because i wanted a verbal response to those questions[i asked] now i'll respond in writing.it's bothered me for a long time about "the fox running the hen house"and who's actually doing the monitoring.if we don't understand the workings of "the system"we're not going be able to change it.now i'm going out for chinese and a movie.flaptail:i'm hungry from that walk.

A good summation of the meeting.

Attendance was down from the last one, maybe about 50 to 75 people. Supt George Price gave an overview,then Head Ranger Prokoff(spelling?) outlined proposed actions as well as rejected ones, then opened it up to comments.

There were a few of the obligatory "thank you for looking at this issue and working with us, etc etc etc", and questions about the mating habits of the plovers, but Sweetwater hit the nail on the head - two main points which are intertwined - why wait until less than 1/2 mile of the 8.5 is open before you do anything (and then only open up the other area's UP TO the 1/2 mile amount) and then the resource/labor issue and as it relates to having volunteers work with the plover program.

Saltfly brought up the 1/2 mile issue, it was discussed for a good while, but myself and others don't think a totally satisfactory reason was ever really set forth (maybe we missed it:huh:). The best I got out of it was that the Seashore has a certain number of people, and when the birds are nesting they require ALOT of time and effort to monitor exactly where the birds are, the status of the nests, broods and so on. Therefore, this minimizes the labor which may be used to normally monitor areas of the beach open to orv/scv's. Therefore, they felt they only had enough labor to cover a total 1/2 mile??

Don't really know if that's right or not, but it led to the discussion of volunteers. As Sweetwater said, if the birds were really protected/watched over more against predators,whatever, maybe they would be more successful in earlier hatching and leaving, versus re-nesting etc. So, if a small army of volunteers could be trained/"certified" to assist the Seashore in monitoring, :eyes: :eyes: etc., we would be helping the birds, the Seashore, as well as us. The Seashore did discuss this abit amongst themselves at the meeting and it seems they might be intersted in doing "something" along these lines, and I will pursue this with them.

Of note, the Audobon Society was present and came out in support of the options presented for emergency access, EXCEPT for the Herring Cove option. They felt the Supt. was given flexibility in the Negociated Rulemaking of the 90's to address this sort of thing, but did not want to open any beach (Herring Cove) that was not included in the 8.5 miles finalized by the rulemaking.

LAST POINT - The review period is open until March 17. While it is great the Audobon Society took a rational view on this, I have it on good authority that other user groups are voicing strong opinions to the Seashore for them to do nothing. It is critically important for all to continue to send their comments into the Seashore - e-mail or snail mail.

Sorry for the long post, but a BIG THANKS for all who attended and have communicated to the Seashore!:thanks: :thanks: :cheers:

The real problem with reopening anything outside of the Negotiated Rule.. (Wood End, Herring Cove, etc.).. is that the Negotiated Rule would have to be re-opened.. when you look at the 20 plus "Interested Partys".. and see the Organizations listed.. you realize that would NOT be a good idea.. well over two thirds are anti ORV/people groups.. you would be lucky to have anything open for use, if they went thru the Negotiated Ruling process again.

The NPS #1 priority is preserving resources for future generations.. well.. as was said at the meeting.. that is all well and good, but if the current and future generations can't get out there to observe & enjoy them.. why bother?

Thanks to all in attendance, and Thanks Rich, and Bob, and others that spoke so well, and made some fine points.

I agree that an explanation of the 1/2 mile thing was not clear at all. It seems to me what he said had to do with resources, so they seem to be blaming it on lack of resources, so they let the closures close the beaches all the way down to that 1/2 mile total before opening something else. That is their reasoning? :huh: Well I don't buy it for one bit. Seems to me that not long ago they operated just fine on $65 yearly permit fees, now at $150 a few years later, that isn't even close to inflationary increases:bsod: so what gives here? They raised the price maybe because of supply and demand, then found the solution to the mass panic trying to buy a permit before they sold out on the first day, and now the price remains the same and their resources are still stretched:huh: That extra income should be plenty, and should have added a air station at Coast Guard in Truro if you ask me.

I guess the proposal is better than nothing, maybe it's a step in the right direction but I did not feel that good about the future after that meeting. Atleast they are doing something.
Rich, thanks for all your efforts and comments, you too Sweetwater :btu:

I'll be writing them again about their supposed explanation to the 1/2 mile lack of resource thing.

I think that the price increase was to decrease the amount of drivers on the beach, ultimately. Didn't work so now we get squeezed into 1/2 mile. Some give up on the season and they give us a LITTLE more room. Or not, as they see fit. My inner Pollyanna got a kick in the arse listening to the double speak yesterday. The question of volunteers got a definate maybe with nothing clear whether volunteering would help keep trails open. Stonewall made of marshmallow.

Iwish I could of made it!! I lke to eat ploveras. And IUm still drunk

This is thbe deal.;
Fish and youll vcatch
south side eARLIY
eels on youtr antennea signify big fish@@
I eatg youtr fish
My

Mikey. you caught a lot of BIG fish when no one else was. Lond sand death marches pay off.:musc:

Seriously, I'd be a volunteer to look after dem penguins. I really like those fuzzy little bunnies.:devil2:

I sent an e-mail to the NPS about this situation. It seems like there is a full court press against ORV access along the whole east-coast all the way down to Hatteras and Texas too. I also joined the NJ Beach Buggy Assoc. for the first time. Keep us up to date on how we can help and work together to keep our access.
Karl F, I'll be cranking out some plugs for access real soon too....