It was a pretty busy day and I didn't get a chance to post this earlier....I also wanted a little time to reflect on it a bit.
The nickel version on it is this: A KO in the first minute of the second round.
However, this was the
second reading on the matter, and any comments and/or objections were to be heard at the first reading the last time it was on the docket. It went pretty quick, and everybody who was there - myself, DZ, JohnR, Tattoo, Joe and Bobby from Edward's, EdB and several other guys from our club - looked pretty stunned after a very short discusssion on the matter with a quick 5 to 2 vote. The most serious objection was posed by Councilwoman Nance, who spoke eloquently on ROW's and the state constitution in regards to another ROW issue also on Easton's Point. It didn't matter much - like I said earlier, it had already gotten through under anyone's radar. Apparently, hanging a hearing notice in the Town Hall lobby is supposed to be notice enough in M-town. So it goes.
I guess my thoughts are this:
I don't fish there a lot, it's true, but I'll bet the mortgage payment that if I were to go there tonight, I'd find bait boxes, cans and broken bottles, paper coffee cups, food wrappers, hook and plug packages, coils of discarded line, soiled diapers and possibly human feces. I dunno, maybe I'm wrong but I'd guess you'd find the same piles of detritus from "fishermen" in 99% of the spots in RI. Yeah, we're fishermen, too but I don't think any of us would leave that kinda crap behind.
If you asked the abutting property owners (which at this point would be the private Clambake Club and the developer of the waterfront houses still under construction), I'll bet they'd tell you about drinking, littering, yelling, profanity and vandalism - and they just might be right on all counts. I couldn't say for sure based on first hand observation, like I said I don't fish there a lot.
I was under the impression that there wasn't an adversarial relationship between the CC and the fishermen, but apparently that isn't so. But it wasn't the CC that brought the petition before the council, it was the developer who is building the properties.
So again, it all boils down to us versus them. But the "them" - our real enemy - isn't some WASP tooling along in a Mercedes.
The "them" we need to be concerned about - the group responsible for closures - are the people trashing the place, getting drunk, yelling and leaving all their crap behind - both figuratively and literally. The "Us" then would be...well,
us, the fishermen who do none of the above, but just want the opportunity to access a good spot for a while without causing a disturbance.
And the "them" fishing and causing the problem is just as likely to be an arrogant bunch of aging trust fund kids from off-island as a group of Portuguese/Asians/Central Americans. The unacceptable behavior that will be the probable cause for restricting access to any spot has neither ethnic, social nor economic origins.
Or the short form is, if you're a loud, belligerant drunk trashing a spot and leaving #^&#^&#^&#^& behind, we
ALL take the rap and will pay for it since we're all identified as "fishermen" too. Rotten apple theory, ya know.
Sorry for the length, I just don't know too many short stories, I guess, but I'm trying to make a point here - and I may be missing the mark, but I don't think so.
How many spots do you - meaning all of us here at S-B - go to and find pristine? Damned near none. Littering, public disturbances, drinking and vandalism at any spot is gonna give abutting property owners all the ammo they need to petition a town or city council to restrict access and put a lid on it - and succeed. And let's face it, it doesn't matter whether you paid $100K or $100M for your home, NOBODY is gonna allow themselves or their families to be subjected to that kinda horse#^&#^&#^&#^& for long without trying to do something about it.
All in all what I remember most is the faces of all the guys who did show when the vote was taken - it was stunned disbelief, and everybody just got up at the same time and left. Everyone was ready to make an impassioned plea and deliver carefully prepared statements and they never even had a chance. You got the feeling that you'd shown up at a gunfight with a knife. Period. End of story. That's all she wrote.
So while it was the owner of the property who petitioned the council, and the council who voted to restrict access by limiting parking (and thus access) it was the behavior of a certain type of fisherman that set the wheels in motion and ruined it for all of us.
I've seen the enemy and the enemy is "them" - not us.