Who likes the Beach?

[kamloops]

Thought some might be interested in the newest effort by the "protectors" of the environment.
This may be looked upon as non-fishing related, but can you say Pacific city?

http://www.prd.state.or.us/osmp_hcp.php

[skein]

It's time to get angry, folks. Remember, they were going to quietly slip closures and new regulations through, but got caught and embarrassed pretty badly when they were forced to advertise a public meeting. Now they've "scaled" it back, but what they propose is still untenable. Go to the link below and see:

Plover proposal

Especially note phrases like "has reduced the quantity of western snowy plover management areas and the number of miles where plovers would be managed" and "The original plan called for 23 plover management areas. This number has been reduced to 16 by deferring ...

Only because people got wind of it and showed up in mass - and angry.

And who is "they?" I see we now have a new acting director, Tim Wood. What happened to the old director, Michael C (Crittendon or something like that)? If he is gone, that is good. He was rolling over to every group that wanted to lock us out of our land.

I am not an activist. Not even close. But I will fight to keep our beaches open, our marine areas open, and our national forests open - to you and me! My stomach actually gets tied up in knots when I think about what they're trying to pull over on us.

Thanks, kamloops, for bringing this up!

Skein

[kamloops]

It was very spooky how these *open for public meetings*,
meetings get set under the radar....
The Seaside Signal newspaper was trying to cover this
scandal last spring/summer.

Up here in King County last night at 12:00midnight the council just passed a property rights land grab legislation "CAO" CRITICAL AREA ORDANANCE, that prohibits owners of suburban King County undeveloped 5acre and larger land parcels from developing 65% of their land.

This may be coming to a neighborhood near you.


You cant even walk on your land.

[Miss B Haven]

Tom- Sounds like WA is finally catching up with Oregon in the denial of personal property rights. They probably still have a ways to go to catch Washington County though.

I seem to remember hearing about a Country that declared Independence and went to war over things like this.

[kamloops]

Doggonitttt Mel, I knew that would get you up.

Oh Yeh, you still have the privledge of paying full tax on your worthless investment.

[Miss B Haven]

Doggonitttt Mel, I knew that would get you up.

Hey- I've been awake...I've just been busy smoking and canning all those Snowy Plovers you gave me! Good but not much meat on them things, especially the legs!

[kamloops]

Sparky and Tony will be in hog heaven. No wander they both gave up pheasant hunting in the beach dunes.

[KeyWest]

Your both bad

Do plovers taste like spotted owl or bald eagle?

[whaleraddict]

Kamloops,

I have been in Seattle the last two days and this topic is really hot. We may see a new county appear "Cascade County" which would encompass the rural areas of king county. Essentially, if you own a 20 acre parcel you can not touch 13 acre's of it unless you have existing structures or use it already (garden, horse pasture, etc.). However, is you bought 20 acres and plan to build you will only be able to use 7 acres and will not be able to subdivide into the minimum 5 acre parcels. 1000 friends of Washington sponsored this bill and it is going to cause a major problem. Also, you cannot touch 50% of your land if your property is 5 acres or less. They also, increased the buffer zone from 50' to 100' on all creeks, rivers and lakes. If you have a creek running through your property you are even more constrained. Also, they want to provide a buffer zone of 7.5 acres for all known nesting areas of certain birds such as the Red Tail Hawk. This new land use ordinance if the most restrictive in the country and makes Washington county look like a Mecca. A friend of mine bought 85 acres in rural Washington that is mostly harvestable Timber and has a creek running through it. His plan is to sell the timber when he retires to fund their retirement. If this type of ordinance passed in Washington County he could only harvest 15 acres instead of 80 (He already has cleared 5 and build his home on it). Also, he has several Hawks nesting on his property that may prevent him from touching any of his land. Although there are some provisions for harvesting timber it is very restrictive. One of the 1000 friends of Washington called in (Seattle Talk Radio) saying how great this is because it will prevent landowners from subdividing the land into five acre building parcels. He commented that a house every five acres was way to crowded. When asked where he lived he responded Downtown Seattle in an apartment. This is a sad day for rural king county land owners .

[lost_sailor]

Man, them stupid animals got a lotta nerve livin' our OUR planet!

LS,
The critical habitat for the plovers needs to be protected but what is being done is a total lock up of a big chunk of the coast.
BTW, It wouldn't bother me one bit to see more restrictions on ORV use in the dunes but I wouldn't actively go after their use of public property.

[lost_sailor]

I looked at the proposed actions, and nothing seemed that horrible. Is it the kite-flying restriction that everyone is upset about?

I don't drive on the beach, and avoid "automotive" beaches for the most part. I know some people love their beach-driving. I like to let the dog off the leash, but she's not interested in DRY sand (Lab)..

What am I missing here? Is beach access being eliminated? Seems like just a little awareness and behavior modification.

I can say "Pacific City" but I can't find it listed as being affected. Slippery slope? Green helicopters? COMMUNISM?

[CATCH AND EAT]

Lost Sailor you crack me up sometimes.

Its a land grab without merrit just like the spotted owl deal of years ago. Closing access is not the answer. Next thing ya know and they will close the Stonewall banks to fishing. Oh yeah, that is on table right now is'nt it?

I am sorry but I am weary of these closures for the sake of some stupid bug, bird, rat, snake.....ect... Oh how wonderful it is that the California Sea Lion has recovered to historic levels. Whoops, boy they are sure eating a lot of salmon are'nt they. oh man I am going to stop here before my rant gets me booted today.

Just be rational when it comes to this stuff instead of reactional concerning wildlife closures. Pretty soon there will be no where for us to go and that just does not sound to great to me.

[Snakebite]

From what I understand, The beaches around Pacific City are "potential" habitat, and there has not been any documented use by nesting plovers there. I could be wrong, but this is what I remember reading somewhere. If that is the case, then the proposals for that area are a travesty, and yet another way for the environmentalists to exclude public use of public land. The proposed golf course on the south side of Sand lake has fueled this contoversy, and as a land owner up there I oppose the golf course myself for other reasons, but making up stories like the Snowy plover thing is ridiculous, and irresponsible. They even go so far as to say that one of the threatened and endangered species at that location is the great blue heron, which is an out and out untruth. Sure, they are on the T & E list on the east coast, but not on this one. :tongue:

[lost_sailor]

Who's being reactionary? Maybe if someone would look at the links up above, we can discuss REALITY.

[CATCH AND EAT]

Okay LS, the links have been read as suggested and I do NOT stand corrected. Perhaps it is you that should re-read the links dude.

The revised plan calls for 48 miles of protected habitat and 16 sites for management. Sneeking around at first the original plan was for 57 miles and 23 sites until they were called on the spot trying to sneak this through.

So for occupied area they want us off the dry sand areas and are going to devastate current environmental and esthetic value of these areas by erecting signs, fences, and rope off these areas? Now that is responsible. Pot calling kettle black from the conservation side. And no dogs or kite flying? Just plain dumb! Then they also want to manage non lethal preditors. Gets better all the time. About the only thing I agree with is prohibiting motorized vehicles in these areas. That is smart thinking there.

Best part of this is that they want to increase their staff to help manage UNOCCUPIED areas. I see more taxation looming here. And then they want to close areas like the South Jetty of the Columbia too. Be afraid, be very afraid LS.

[lost_sailor]

Far be it from me to interfere with your God-given right to stomp on bird nests.

I just can't understand how you equate marking the nesting areas with "closing" the beach. The proposed actions seem to me like a reasonable compromise between the needs of both species. I can't convince you that the "environment" is WHERE WE LIVE.

[CATCH AND EAT]

Did I say I wanted to stomp on a birds nest LS? That's silly. As far as the environment being where we live we agree on that issue. This is just the spotted owl all over again. Knee jerk reaction to a non-event.

By the Way, was there documentation that folks were stomping nests to begin with? That's just what I thought.

[Snakebite]

Did I say I wanted to stomp on a birds nest LS? That's silly. As far as the environment being where we live we agree on that issue. This is just the spotted owl all over again. Knee jerk reaction to a non-event.

By the Way, was there documentation that folks were stomping nests to begin with? That's just what I thought.

Snowy plovers have a stupid way of laying their eggs out in the open sand without any sort of nest. The eggs are so sand camoflaged that it is a great way to avoid predators. That being said, anyone walking, riding an ATV, or a dog running around could disturb the "nest" or crush an egg. Not part of the evolutional concept there. The whole problem with this is that because the "critical habitat" is in an area (just south of Florence) where there is a very active and popular dunes recreational area, that draws many people and their atv activity. It's economically driven, and to "try" to offset that destruction of plover habitat, the powers that be are trying mitigate that debacle by shutting down otherwise accessible beaches that are not important habitat. It's all political! It has nothing to do with responsible wildlife habitat management! If one wants to keep folks from "stomping on eggs" then do it where it counts the most. Please don't go for the "politically correct/ignorant" excuse. As I've said before, mitigation is not going to correct the real problem. It's a band aid! Don't get me wrong here. I stand on the fence as usual.

[CATCH AND EAT]

I stand corrected that that people don't stomp on the eggs. I am sure that it may happen inadvertantly.

However the closure of beach access is the case in point. The land grab they have outlined for non-occupied beach areas is plain silly and wrong. Sorry, will never buy that load of taurus.

[Snakebite]

Trust me C&E, I wasn't dissing you. I agree with you, but the "other side of the fence" folks are the real Knee jerk reactionaries. If one doesn't live there or use the area regularly, then one shouldn't spout an opinion that is ignorant. I've spent a lot of time on that beach and the dunes there, and I've never seen a Snowy plover, period. And I've been a birder since 1959! But then again, I'm just a fish biologist, so what do I know? :grin: