Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Snowy Plovers Soon to Close Oregon Beaches
Oregon State Parks ^ | NA | DepartMent Administration

Posted on 05/25/2004 6:09:54 AM PDT by Mr.Atos

Oregon’s beaches are for everyone. Those lucky enough to live here point to them with pride. We tell the story of how forward-thinking Oregonians have kept the beaches in public hands, safe from private ownership and development. That took planning, debate and consensus. We need those same skills now that we're faced with a challenge: protecting the western snowy plover (a threatened bird covered by state and federal Endangered Species laws) and allowing people to continue to use the beach.

Snowy plovers and beach recreation

For nearly two years, the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department has been collecting information, holding public meetings and creating a draft plan. It's not too late to get involved. The open, public dialogue continues today. You can start by reading about the tiny birds you see on this page, and decide for yourself how we can best share the beaches they call home.

Now, on to some specific questions and answers ...

Q1. What is going on with the beaches? Are they being closed to certain uses? No. Oregon State Parks is in the middle of a series of public meetings to gather opinions on a plan for the ocean shores and for conservation of the western snowy plover. The latter plan, called the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), proposes some restrictions on some areas of some beaches to help the bird population recover. It is complicated, but the bottom line is this: if any beach restrictions occur, they are at least 2 years away, in selected spots, and would not be imposed without massive public input, which is in essence just beginning.

The western snowy plover is on the federal and state threatened and endangered species list, and because OPRD manages the ocean shoreline, we are obligated to show how we propose to manage the beaches to avoid harm to this species. [Back to questions]

Q2.How can I voice my opinion? You can comment by email, letter or in person by April 2, 2004. PLEASE NOTE THIS NEW, EXTENDED DATE! Send your emails to OSMP.HCP@state.or.us. The next public meetings are:

Pacific City Kiwanda Senior Center Building Tuesday, March 16, 7–9 pm

Tillamook Tillamook High School cafeteria, Tillamook Wednesday, March 17, 7-9 pm

[Back to questions]

Q3.What is the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP)? The HCP is a document that analyzes the status of the western snowy plover in Oregon, and recommends ways to increase the likelihood of its survival as a species. It is part of a submission to the US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS), which has authority for managing species that are on the federal threatened or endangered species list. The western snowy plover is on this list.

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) essentially requires that agencies like OPRD describe how we will conduct business so that the plover is not adversely affected. The HCP does this.

OPRD’s submission to USFWS, if successful, will allow OPRD to get something called an “incidental take permit.” This, in turn, allows OPRD to conduct routine business such as issuing permits, managing parks and so on in the presence of a listed species. It also defines more or less precisely where the beaches will—and will NOT—be managed for the plovers. The other 170-plus miles of beach will not be managed (except for an exclosure if a nest is discovered). [Back to questions]

Q4.What happens if a plan is not adopted? Without a plan, OPRD could inadvertently violate the ESA just by conducting routine business on the ocean shore, like managing parks, issuing permits for special events and so on. OPRD would also be liable for public recreational use that results in harm to the plover.

Without a plan, federal or other state biologists may be obligated to prescribe how we must manage the beach. And, as has happened many times before in endangered species issues, the courts could order restrictions. That in itself could create more—and more severe—restrictions than the HCP now proposes. [Back to questions]

Q5.How much beach will be affected? Where? About 57 miles (out of 230 miles of sandy beach) are proposed to be restricted, either year round or just during the plover breeding season (mid-March to mid-September). These beaches are located in 23 designated areas, called emphasis areas, from Columbia River South Jetty Spit in the north to Pistol River in the south. The emphasis areas are divided into “occupied”or “unoccupied” depending upon whether plovers currently nest at these sites or not. There are 8 occupied emphasis areas in Oregon. The longest stretch of beach proposed is 6.7 miles at Bandon. The shortest stretch is about a half mile on Sand Lake Spit North. [SEE MAP]. [Back to questions]

Q6.What kinds of restrictions is OPRD proposing?

OCCUPIED EMPHASIS AREAS (where nesting occurs) Proposed to be Prohibited Year-Round Beach camping except in designated areas and by permit Off-road vehicles (prohibited anyway without a permit) Firework (prohibited anyway without a permit) Driftwood collection and removal, except by permit Proposed to be Prohibited from March 15 – September 15 Dogs Kiteflying Walking, horseback riding, and other activities (on dry sand only) Motor vehicles UNOCCUPIED EMPHASIS AREAS (no nesting yet, but the habitat is good) Proposed to be Prohibited Year-Round Beach camping except in designated areas only and by permit Off-road vehicles (prohibited anyway without a permit) Firework (prohibited anyway without a permit) Driftwood collection and removal, except by permit Proposed to be Prohibited from March 15 – September 15 Dogs Motor vehicles

The new restrictions are just proposals at this point, and we are gathering public opinion. The ultimate objective is to help the plover population recover, and be taken off the endangered species list. Restrictions will ebb if the bird population grows and its habitat improves. Some of these changes are not new rules ... they emphasize old rules (such as limitations on driving and fireworks). No areas currently designated for ATV riding are affected by these changes.

[Back to questions]

Q7.How long will they last? The 25 years you’ve heard about refers to the length of time that the incidental take permit would be valid for OPRD. It does not mean that beach restrictions would last that long. [Back to questions]

Q8.How did you decide which areas are emphasis areas? Several federal and state agencies have been working together for years on this, and eventually came to a compromise. The 57 piecemeal miles of Oregon shoreline is less than half of the 130 miles originally proposed in 2001 in the USFWS draft recovery plan for the plover. [Back to questions]

Q9.When will this all begin? The new restrictions, if adopted, will probably take a few years to implement, largely due to the rest of the USFWS process of obtaining an ITP. [Back to questions]

Q10.How do you know that people’s activities are harming the birds? Many studies and direct observations point to eggs being crushed, chicks dying or adults abandoning their nests when disturbed by people, ATVs, dogs, horses, even kite flying. These are skittish birds. They flush easily and if they leave their nests too many times, they won’t return. Also, with the adult away from the nest, the eggs are more susceptible to predation. [Back to questions]

Q11.What else can be done besides curtailing people’s activities and enjoyment? Controlling predators (such as crows, ravens, foxes) and invasive plants (European beachgrass) are extremely important to the survival of the plover. State and federal agencies are already monitoring broods and nests, and in some places, erecting fences to keep predators out. Public education helps, as do signs, volunteer patrols and law enforcement. European beachgrass is a chronic problem. This non-native plant takes over the open beach that plovers need; it spreads rapidly, and offers cover for predators. [Back to questions]

Q12.Most of these birds live on the south coast. Why is the north coast involved? One of the ways to help the plover population recover is to encourage a wider distribution of nesting sites. If all the plovers are concentrated in one area, a natural disaster (or accident) could destroy an entire breeding season. [Back to questions]

Q13.What happens next? The “paperwork” process of the HCP is really just beginning. A number of federal and state analyses must be conducted if and when the USFWS approves OPRD’s incidental take permit. Those include specific site plans on any emphasis areas that OPRD manages. This process could take 3-5 years. [Back to questions]

Q14. How can I get involved in plover recovery? You can educate yourself about the issue, and make your opinions and ideas known by emailing us at OSMP.HCP@state.or.us or by attending the upcoming public meetings on March 16 and 17. Public education and outreach are critical, and volunteers are always needed. [Back to questions]

How can I stay abreast of this issue? OPRD’s website is regularly updated. Check our home pages and www.prd.state.or.us/osmp_hcp.php for more information. [Back to questions]


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Oregon; US: Washington
KEYWORDS: beaches; birds; coast; dogs; endangered; environment; epa; oregon; plover; species
March 23 Update: The US Fish and Wildlife Service has announced that it will conduct a review of the status of the Pacific Coast population of the western snowy plover. This review is to determine if the species should be "de-listed" from the federal list of threatened species. What does that mean for OPRD's plans?
1 posted on 05/25/2004 6:09:55 AM PDT by Mr.Atos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

Note that for the entire spring and summer (seasonally speaking), March 15 to September 15, no dogs will be allowed on the beach... in addition to Kite flying and many other assorted activities.


2 posted on 05/25/2004 6:13:11 AM PDT by Mr.Atos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Atos

Means lawsuit city for the USFWS if they attempt to delist and interfere with OPRD's socialist plans.


3 posted on 05/25/2004 6:13:32 AM PDT by cake_crumb (UN Resolutions = Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Atos

Can't someone come up with an epidemic that affects only snowy plovers and is 100% lethal?


4 posted on 05/25/2004 6:15:00 AM PDT by ThanhPhero (Ong lam hanh huong di La Vang)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Atos

Doesn't mean a thing to those plans. Those folks don't care about the status of the snowy plover except as it may provide an excuse to close off more land to human use other than their own.


5 posted on 05/25/2004 6:16:49 AM PDT by ThanhPhero (Ong lam hanh huong di La Vang)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThanhPhero

BB guns


6 posted on 05/25/2004 6:17:06 AM PDT by Porterville (oOOOo USA against the World in this summer Olympics oOOOo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Atos

I'm headed for the Oregon coast this weekend, while I still can....


7 posted on 05/25/2004 6:17:21 AM PDT by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Atos

"We tell the story of how forward-thinking Oregonians have kept the beaches in public hands, safe from private ownership and development."

Very telling comment in the lead paragraph. "Forward thinking" and "safe from private ownership" shows their socialist mindset right off the bat.


8 posted on 05/25/2004 6:22:33 AM PDT by CSM (Vote Kerry! Boil the Frog! Speed up the 2nd Revolution! (Be like Spain! At least they're honest))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb
USFWS is only looking at de-listing because they are being sued. Turns out the snowy plover is genetically identical to the inland plover and they are all over the place.
OPRD has stated they pretty much don't care if the bird is federally de-listed, Oregon has its own listing and screw the public.

Public input is something they have to arrange for but they can pick and choose what they want to implament Endangered species are picked by how much damage they can incur to the public. If they can't use the plover, they will have another critter lined up. USFS has used slugs for this very purpose, even after they were shown to be more then originally stated.
9 posted on 05/25/2004 6:28:38 AM PDT by Cold Heart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ThanhPhero

Yes...it is called "Snowy Plover Season"!!!


10 posted on 05/25/2004 6:30:16 AM PDT by gr8eman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ThanhPhero

Shotguns? "We hate Snowy Plover Day"


11 posted on 05/25/2004 6:30:26 AM PDT by Jack Black
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Atos
I can understand the "no dogs" ordinance, since too few people clean up after them...but what, exactly, does "kite flying" have to do with protecting snowy plovers??
12 posted on 05/25/2004 6:41:33 AM PDT by cake_crumb (UN Resolutions = Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cold Heart
"Turns out the snowy plover is genetically identical to the inland plover and they are all over the place."

Hmmmm....a lot like stocked Cohoe salmon being genetically identical to wild Cohoe salmon, but in this case, the lawsuit is based on a scientific misnomer...

How unsurprising and Algore-like.

13 posted on 05/25/2004 6:44:04 AM PDT by cake_crumb (UN Resolutions = Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Atos; sasquatch

I published a prediction on this beach taking for plovers three years ago. It was obvious. Snowy plovers nest from Washington to Mexico. The theory goes that if they are scarce in one place that they are "locally endangered." There is no support for this in the ESA.

For the FWS to list a local population, they must have designated it to be an Evolutionarily Significant Unit. That means that they are genetically distinct, isolated, and significant to species survival; it can't be just one of those; it has to be all three. Of course, the definition of what is "significant to species survival" is entirely up to the local bureaucrats and their dependent scientists. Anyone who would have a contrary opinion and supporting data is usually systematically frozen out of the process.


14 posted on 05/25/2004 6:45:59 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (There are people in power who are truly evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThanhPhero

Browning makes several...


15 posted on 05/25/2004 6:47:22 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (STAGMIRE !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Atos
What does that mean for OPRD's plans?

I am not familiar with Oregon law but if it's anything like California's then it only means that if the Feds delist a source of money dries up.

16 posted on 05/25/2004 6:47:56 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (There are people in power who are truly evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
I published a prediction on this beach taking for plovers three years ago

Yep, I remember that part, pretty predictable aren't they?

17 posted on 05/25/2004 7:04:45 AM PDT by forester ( An economy that is overburdened by government eventually results in collapse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
After all these years of rabid environaziism, is there anywhere in the US where delisting doesn't mean nothing more than the funds drying up?

In PA and NY, we're trying to get timber rattlers delisted, on the grounds they're only rare in the places which don't have the rock formations suitable for denning.

While in PA it's now legal to take two rattlers if you have a current fishing license, it's going to be a long, uphill battle.

18 posted on 05/25/2004 7:06:44 AM PDT by cake_crumb (UN Resolutions = Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

On Cape Cod, the Piping Plover, causes beaches to close, denies people access to THEIR homes, all so the plover can raise more plovers. Only in America are birds
more important than humans. The gubmint evens hires sharp-shooters to kill coyotes that might eat the plovers eggs.Talk about screwed up priorities.

Richard


19 posted on 05/25/2004 7:33:57 AM PDT by capecodderathome
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb

The problem is that you have a dependent coiterie of bureaucrats involved for whom maintaining a scarcity of rattlesnakes is a life and death matter.

IMHO, until you can prove that you have a superior alternative means of managing the system, the status quo is the order of the day when the issue comes to the court.


20 posted on 05/25/2004 7:39:24 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (There are people in power who are truly evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Atos

WHICH Oregon beaches will be "closed" (no dogs...???)....All of them? We take our dog to a lonely beach in Oregon to run....sheesh.


21 posted on 05/25/2004 7:40:44 AM PDT by goodnesswins (Countries around the world are ALIENATING ME...an American!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Atos
Just noticed THIS...!!!

"Q11.What else can be done besides curtailing people’s activities and enjoyment?

Controlling predators (such as crows, ravens, foxes) and invasive plants (European beachgrass) are extremely important to the survival of the plover. State and federal agencies are already monitoring broods and nests, and in some places, erecting fences to keep predators out. Public education helps, as do signs, volunteer patrols and law enforcement. European beachgrass is a chronic problem. This non-native plant takes over the open beach that plovers need; it spreads rapidly, and offers cover for predators. [Back to questions]

22 posted on 05/25/2004 7:44:05 AM PDT by goodnesswins (Countries around the world are ALIENATING ME...an American!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Atos

And the snowy plover is important to protect why?


23 posted on 05/25/2004 7:44:18 AM PDT by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
"The problem is that you have a dependent coiterie of bureaucrats involved for whom maintaining a scarcity of rattlesnakes is a life and death matter."

Exactly. They don't care about the snakes or any other species on the endangered speciaes list, just their jobs. It won't go to court until someone is killed. Which I expect to happen within the next two years.

24 posted on 05/25/2004 7:56:05 AM PDT by cake_crumb (UN Resolutions = Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Atos

...one word...Barbeque.


25 posted on 05/25/2004 8:55:47 AM PDT by skinkinthegrass (Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you :)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThanhPhero; Mr.Atos
...except as it may provide an excuse to close off more land to human use other than their own.

A couple of years ago, my daughters and I went to Skyline Drive (VA) to hike the hills, and wander in the mountains...

One of our favorite trails is about 1.75 miles from road to top, with a lot of steep paths. On that day, there was a notice and a yellow tape across the bottome of the trail, stating that they were releasing some falcons, back from captivity, into the wild.

Being the person i am, I ignored their sign, and we went on up the mountain (I am part cat, I guess, because I am curious about everything). Near the top, we were stopped by a fellow and a dog!!!

He informed us that the trail was closed because they did not want anything to scare these newly released birds. After a few moments discussion, I ignored him, and watched with the rest of the folk there (about 30-35).

May be I don't know about birds, but I do know about dogs, and I do not believe that dog was going to be less distressful to those little falcons, than we humans (who had been nurturing these chicks since hatching).

We are all individuals, with our own agenda. Our country was founded on that very principle, yet there are those who think their rights are better than yours!

Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness... wouldn't that be nice! I don't think that is what we've got!!!

26 posted on 05/25/2004 9:08:26 AM PDT by pageonetoo (rights, what Rights'. You're kidding, right? This is Amerika!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Atos

The enviorwackos are after us again, aren't they?


27 posted on 05/25/2004 9:16:45 AM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1Old Pro


If the spotted owl could kill the livlihood of thousands of loggers and small communities on the West Coast, the people of Oregon should certainly be able to give up going to the beach to save the snowy plover. Fair is fair.


28 posted on 05/25/2004 9:22:07 AM PDT by kittymyrib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb

Kite flying is an activity done by people who enjoy life and don't loath themselves. Same with Dog ownership. Liberals are self loathing, and loath those who don't loath themselves. They also own cats.

There will be no-non self loathing activities on the beach. It's bad for the environment. Only gay sex and needle exchanges will be allowed.


29 posted on 05/25/2004 9:22:38 AM PDT by Dead Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Dead Dog

Looks like there's a bunch in LA..better close those beaches too.

30 posted on 05/25/2004 9:40:24 AM PDT by Dead Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: CSM

As a Oregon Republican I am proud of the way other Oregon Republicans were able in a non-partisan manner to designate Oregon beaches as public highways. This action made our beaches and ocean access available to all for recreation and other legitimate use. The vast majority of Oregonians like it this way. There is nothing socialist about using public highways.


31 posted on 05/27/2004 6:43:17 PM PDT by rogator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rogator

You may claim to be a Republican, but you are no conservative. Collective ownership is socialism, your pride in supporting it is as telling as the statement in the article. Seems to me that Oregon Republicans are a little left of center.


32 posted on 05/28/2004 4:51:58 AM PDT by CSM (Liberals may see Saddam's mass graves in Iraq as half-full, but I prefer to see them as half-empty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: CSM

What do you want to do, sell off our highways? How about our National monuments? Should we sell our Capitol building and white House to a private owner and let them rent them to the government?
Oregon Republicans are just like any others. Some are RINOs, some, like myself are conservative. Like most Republicans anywhere, we make up our own minds about each issue. We don't feel that we have to march in lockstep to the orders of a self-proclaimed arbiter of what is conservative and what is not on any given issue.
Restricting the right to use our beaches and ocean are like selling the atmosphere to private enterprise and having to buy the air we breathe each day.


33 posted on 05/28/2004 5:59:26 AM PDT by rogator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: rogator

Beaches are not highways or museaums or the white house. An attempt to confuse the issue with those labels is noted. Using the classification of "highways" to "collectively own" the beaches is an even bigger indication of "republican" supported socialism.

What you end up with when the government owns property is their ability to restrict all citizens from that property, take national parks as an example. It also degrades their respect for private property, take eminent domain as an example. To support any further "collective ownership" of property is just giving them the tools to further their agenda to eliminate all private property. To do so as a conservative is treasonous!

As an aside, yes I think all property should be privately owned. Private entities would be much more efficient and cost us "citizens" a lot less. Would you want to have all services paid for with tax revenue to be owned by the government?


34 posted on 05/28/2004 6:19:29 AM PDT by CSM (Liberals may see Saddam's mass graves in Iraq as half-full, but I prefer to see them as half-empty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: CSM

"Beaches are not highways..."
Oregon beaches are highways. They have a speed limit of 25 MPH. We drive on them to collect firewood, reach clamming areas, launch dories, surf fish and many other purposes. You haven't got a clue about Oregon or its beaches.

"As an aside, yes I think all property should be privately owned."
You want to pay a toll every time you leave your driveway or walk on sidewalk?
Should our rivers and atmosphere be privately owned?
You seem to have a totally different concept of freedom than I do.


35 posted on 05/28/2004 6:45:03 AM PDT by rogator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson