Got in a plover argument last night

[SeaWolf]

there is one fact i do know about fighting usf&w - their law rules. we may not like it, but they go by the facts presented by their employees' reports. this is especially true on the whole piping plover situation. there are so many states effected by this bird. sure, it is easy to get on the "piping plovers taste like chicken" bandwagon. i know, i used to, but i learned to understand the facts, issues, and future. one thing is that we all need to adapt our fishing around this bird while their nesting season is on us. i know it must be especially hard on the islands and outer cape, but it's a necessary "evil" right now.

the 2003 atlantic plover population count was 1676. the numbers were increasing throught that late 90s and into the new century, but were down from 2002 count of 1690. i did not see the 2004 population report yet. these birds need a couple of things to happen before they are removed from the endanged species act (they are listed as threatened in most states): 1.) the population must hit 2000 breeding pairs; 2.) the population must have a breeding surplus (the fledged chicks must prove signs of sustaining and increasing the population) each year for a period of 5 consecutive years, i believe. now, does this mean we have 5 years, 10 years, or 20 years to go before they reach these numbers, i don't know. I do know that i am watching the numbers, working w/ f&w to build a repor with them to show we are trying to live with these birds. when these birds do reach those milestones and are removed from the endangered species act, the local states enforcement will control beach access, birds protection, etc. i would then turn my fight to try and gain the lost beach access areas taken when this bird first became listed at endanagered. i would also work to try and have a controlled time that when the birds are there, access can be limited.

one thing you must remember is who is fighting for the birds well being - green peace, audubon, etc., all "respected" and prosperous organizations. they pay a lot of money to research for this bird and other issues. they do their homework. meanwhile, fisherman are considered a threat. prove them wrong. do your homework, know the facts, and be prepared to argue your points when someone challenges your views.

[Karl F]

No doc # on that seashore report, it is titled the 1999 ORV impact study... plover's , enviro, all covered they can't pin anything on ORV.... interestly enough biggest problem in plover nests that year... washovers.... Darwin award winners, them plovers... biggest cause of erosion as well .. no chit.
Interesting read, and I do remember that MA Audobon was a little peesed at the time this study was released to the public...

[basswipe]

Originally Posted by SeaWolf

one thing you must remember is who is fighting for the birds well being - green peace, audubon, etc., all "respected" and prosperous organizations. they pay a lot of money to research for this bird and other issues.

Greenpeace?!They're almost as fanatical as PETA!

Resepected.Hardly.

Prosperous.Ya because the same Hollywood types who donate millions to PETA do the same for Greenpeace.

Greenpeace and Audubon.Night and day.

[outfished]

Greenpeace and Audubon.Night and day.[/QUOTE]

Audubon isn't much different than the rest IMO. I read that Mass. Audubon is the only one that does'nt allow hunting on its properties while other states do. Mass. Audubon was also a huge supporter of the anti-trapping laws and bear hunting law changes passed several years ago. Tree huggers is all they are.

[Ed B]

Seawolf gives some good advice and I know Karl is involved with the MBBA. Calling people a bunch of crazy treehuggers, enviro wackos or whatever suits your fancy gets you nowhere. The fact is that when an animal is on the endangered species list, a host of federal laws come into effect to protect it.

If you don't deal with these people that you view as the enemy on a rational level you will be doing more harm than good and give them more justifiable reason in their minds to restrict access. Let's face it, they view most fisherman as a bunch of trash throwing social misfits. The smart thing to do is to support those who take up the cause to be actively engaged like the fishing clubs and buggy associations. Let the people who chose to become knowledgeable on the issues discuss the concerns, and never ever mess with a nesting area.

Like it or not, the state Audobon societies are funded by wealthy and politically connected members in our communities, I recently saw the annual financial report from the RI Audobon Society that they send out to their members and they have assets as I recall in the order of $25 million. I would expect Massachusetts Audobon is many times as big as that. We have to stick up for our rights but we have to work with them.

Ed

[likwid]

Originally Posted by outfished

Audubon isn't much different than the rest IMO. I read that Mass. Audubon is the only one that does'nt allow hunting on its properties while other states do. Mass. Audubon was also a huge supporter of the anti-trapping laws and bear hunting law changes passed several years ago. Tree huggers is all they are.

Whats wrong with supporting something they beleive in?
As far as I'm concerned its a heartless and pathetic method of "hunting" (trapping) Any idiot can put a bear trap out with some bait and come back the next day and have something.

And whats wrong with no hunting on THEIR property? Its no different than a landowner telling you not to hunt on his land.

[outfished]

Mass Audubon and the such would rather protect wildlife at all cost than manage it in a scientifically proven way. I've seen deer on those properties and wouldn't hunt them even if I was given the chance. Wildlife that is not managed properly can and does become a disaster very quickly, just look at the beaver, skunk, coyote and fox population explosion in Mass. It's a freakin nightmare! The Audubon society is far removed from what John James Audubon had invisioned. He was a woodsman, hunter and artist(who also killed the birds he drew). Just before the anti-trapping laws were initiated, I was a member of Ma. Audubon as well as a member of the Appalachian Mountain Club that both pushed the issue ahead. I asked that my opinions be printed in their op-ed sections of their publications, for I thought these measures would be both unsafe and unwise. I was immediatelty denied and I revoked my memberships with both organizations. You may not all agree with trapping but some folks still trap for supplementing their incomes as well as feeding their families, Its a long time honored tradition. IMO it's just a start for these folks to eventually force no hunting laws across the country and yes, fishing is also a target for them. They may not be as extreme or radical as PETA but they're not far behind. Have you noticed how these groups are joining together to get a bigger "bang" for their buck? If anyone of us honestly think that groups such as these are here to manage animal populations, you are gravely mistaken.

[likwid]

So go to them with solid PROOF and FACTS. Not just "have you seen the number of woodchucks eating my garden?! OMG!".

Prove what you say and they'll change things.

[outfished]

Originally Posted by likwid

So go to them with solid PROOF and FACTS. Not just "have you seen the number of woodchucks eating my garden?! OMG!".

Prove what you say and they'll change things.

I'm not a biologist of any sorts but we have them at Mass. Dept. of wildlife and fisheries and they gripe about these folks to no ends. Ever talk to one yourself? In a democratic society we should listen to opposing views, weather we agree with them or not. When these groups won't even have the guts to listen to the other side, that spells trouble to me. Solid proof? I guess you don't read the news much. Seen coyote attacks lately? Almost a weekly occurance. No beaver problem? Talk to the countless property owners who have been flooded out causing thousands of $$$$ and to hear the state say there's nothing they can do about it, its the law! Ever hear of rabies? Have you noticed the mutitudes of dead skunks on the roads lately? There's your proof. Seen starving deer lately? Come to my neighborhood, I'll show you some, its pretty pathetic. Woodchucks by the way make great hats and mittens when I catch them on my farm.

[vineyardblues]

I love this plover thread.

I hope they will be off the indanger list soon, I thought they would be off by now.

I remember a few years ago,they closed a beach on Nantucket for the season because of one plover only to have another bird eat it

I also have seen them build a pen for them on state beach(MV) with cars 10 feet away doing 35 ! crazy

And how many did the Gov kill on Monomoy ?????? remember the old seagull's falling from the sky ? lol

Glad to be in America

VB

[SeaWolf]

thanks, ed b.

basswipe, i put the word respected in quotes for that exact reason - our view may not be as respected, but to others, they are respected organizations. it's not just the "hollywood types" that donate. there are hundreds, if not thousands of people in politics, business, or just plain rich that support these organizations and their views. you may never even hear from some of these people as they just give a donation. and, they may not donate $20 or $100 to these organizations, they may donate millions at one time. my point being, they have financial funding - big time. so, research is easily done and paid for while smaller organizations have to do all they can just to scratch for money to "fight for our cause". is that fair? no, but that's the way it seems to work.

now, i'm not saying greenpeace or audubon are equal in their beliefs, but they both have large followings and receive much in donations. that's why i grouped them, as both will favor the plover in this type of debate.

and, just to break off the plover for a minute, do you think that's the only bird or wild animal these organizations could "protect" on our beaches? there are other birds listed on the endangered species list and the same rules could be moved to them next. it is our job as public citizens to understand the laws (both state and federal) when it comes to our rights and the rights of these protected species. to sit back and complain about it on a msg forum helps no one. be one that can respond factually if confronted by someone who sees the view from the other side of the river and not go by what you "hear", which may not have any foundation. even tho' it was edited and removed by sandman, he had some facts to back his position. how many of us here can do the same instead of just shouting the "taste like chicken" stance?