Best fortunes Old Hannah.

Old Hannah...Pr 21:9

Good luck Hannah. I had my first surgery this year. Pre-op stuff is no big deal. You'll do fine.

As far as not using the beach as much, it is sad. I used to go down at least once a week year 'round. I'm ashamed to say I can count on one hand how many times I've driven down since low beach closed in the spring. Now that I can't get to the camp by vehicle anymore, I just don't take the time. At least my jeep won't rust out quite as fast now. I hose off after every beach ride but parts are still seized up when I work on it.

I had to get a rear window for a truck on the island a couple weeks ago. I went by the local body shop to source a used one. The guy I spoke to is an old beach user that used to go religiously for many years. He stopped going in the mid 80's before the '87 break. It was nice to share some old memories.

I sometimes forget that most of the people using the beach now don't even know there was a whole village of camps east of the south village and that the beach used to run all the way down past mainland Chatham.

I sometimes sit at the lighthouse parking lot and listen to the people who think they know what they're talking about explain to others what they're looking at. Most don't have a clue. I'm happy to educate them if they ask, but most often I just sit, smile, and enjoy my memories of what used to be.

Edited by author 11-05-2009 10:25 AM
Yes you'll do just fine OH. The new drugs are quite nice and will give you a good rest! Very poetic Bob. Our new poster must be "Eau d'eau," Essence of water, or what the frenchman said when he first saw the outer beach, "Oh de water!"

BTW, NMTR. Today's 1:34 5.4 tide will be the highest of this set. Still expecting 30 mph winds on Friday.

OH A good rule of thumb is to choose a doctor who has done a lot of fishing. I always go to Mayo Johnson Chief of Surgery at Beverly Hospital. As a kid I watched him hone his technique filleting flounders on Pleasant and fishing under the strict eye of Harry Hunt! Good Luck!!

Its November and Piping Plovers are still causing trouble. I wonder just how much longer Dr. Thomas French, assistant director of the division of fisheries and wildlife and his minions (Scott Melvin et. al.) are going to hold sway over property rights?

Plover Habitat Nixes Plan To Relocate North Beach Camp
Families Will Probably Appeal State Decision

by Tim Wood

            CHATHAM --- Plans to relocate a North Beach camp to land at the southern end of North Beach Island have run into a mighty, albeit tiny, roadblock: the piping plover.

            The Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife has ruled that the proposal by the Coppedge and Fuller families will cause short and long-term adverse effects on plover habitat and therefore cannot be allowed under the state’s wetland regulations and the Massachusetts Endangered Species Act. The piping plover is listed as a threatened species in Massachusetts and is also federally protected.

            However, based on a consultant’s opinion after viewing the site Monday, the camp owners will probably appeal the decision, according to their attorney, William F. Riley.

        Consultant Dr. Robert Kennedy, director of natural sciences at the Nantucket-based Maria Mitchell Association, was “pretty firm” in his opinion that the spot where the camp is proposed to be located is not piping plover habitat at this time, Riley said.

            “Some day in the future, when it’s exposed to washovers, which we think it going to be 20 years from now, it would be,” Riley said. He expects to file an appeal when Kennedy provides a written report in about a week.

            Meanwhile, the Coppedge-Fuller camp remains in storage at Ryder’s Cove Boatyard, where it was moved in June after an early summer northeaster washed over the southern tip of North Beach and knocked it off the cribbing on which it was resting. The storm led to the demolition of three other camps, leaving only one remaining out of the 12 that made up the First Village prior to the formation of the new inlet in 2007. That camp, owned by William Hammatt, was lost in a storm two weeks ago.

            The Oct. 23 letter from Dr. Thomas French, assistant director of the division of fisheries and wildlife, stated that the project will alter actual habitat of the piping plover and result in a “take,” meaning that the tiny shorebirds would either be killed or prevented from nesting in the area due to the activity.

            “The sparsely vegetated areas at and immediately adjacent to the site where the cottage would be placed constitute suitable nesting, breeding, foraging, and chick-rearing habitat,” French wrote. The presence of the cottage, as well as the accompanying human activity, would create “physical, visual, and noise disturbance sufficient to inhibit plovers from using an area substantially greater than the actual ‘footprint’ of the cottage.”

            The determination is a “final decision,” French write, and can only be appealed to an adjudicatory hearing.

            Riley said the area where the families want to move the camp --- currently owned by Joshua Nickerson --- is at elevation 10, the highest on that section of the beach. The area is heavily vegetated, not the sandy coastal beach and dune environment plovers prefer. That might change if the area is overwashed, but that may be some years in the future.

            In their application to the conservation commission, the Coppedge and Fuller families described both how the camp will be moved to the island and how it will be removed.

            “When this area becomes subject to overwash, the building will be removed,” Riley said. “Their hope is that they would get about 20 years out of it.”

            The conservation commission continued the hearing on the proposal until Nov. 10, according to Conservation Agent Kristin Andres. The commission also agreed to hold off on spending any of the $4,000 the Coppedge and Fuller families were asked to post so the town could hire its own consultant. Andres went along on the visit to the island Monday, as did the commission’s consultant, Brian Madden, a senior wildlife scientist with LEC Environmental Consultants of Bourne. The commission will cover the cost of the consultant for the time being, she said.

            Cape Cod National Seashore Superintendent George E. Price Jr. also expressed concerns about the proposal. In a letter to the commission, he said the seashore did not object to camps being moved within their immediate neighborhood, because the sites were already developed and there were emergency situations. However, moving a camp to an undeveloped parcel in a totally different area of the new island, that will probably be subject to the same emergency conditions someday, is “problematic.”

I didn't see any mention of the required annual Piping Plover report, that documents the number of, locations of, and success rate of nesting pairs. That report would clearly document if any PP nested in that area, last year or the years before. If they did what the success rate was, and how many nests were there.

More overly conservative speculation from Patrick's administration. And as for Superintendent Price's comment, taken from the fellow that wants to wipe out the dune shacks in the Peaked Hills area well I didn't expect much support anyway.

I'm not familiar with Superintendent Price's position regarding the Peaked Hills dune shacks, but I can say that he has been quite cooperative and supportive of the efforts to save the first village camps for as long as possible, the proposed moving of the inside trail on the Chatham section of North Beach, and even efforts to resume orv use on South Beach.

As for plover habitat and reports, that's something that will get hashed out through the appeal process, I'm sure.

This quote amuses me,however: The presence of the cottage, as well as the accompanying human activity, would create “physical, visual, and noise disturbance sufficient to inhibit plovers from using an area substantially greater than the actual ‘footprint’ of the cottage.”

Do they really think that a family using a camp is going to cause more of a disturbance than the hundreds of people that come over by private boat or shuttle service on a nice sunny summer day?

Hi Bob, I posted this link a while ago, it since has had the benefit of having comments posted as well. This is a NPS website, so that should be taken into account when reading the body, as well as the comments some of which I suspect are/were made by 'shack' dwellers, former and current owners and others. The dune shacks in the Province Lands area, and for that matter the Camps they owned in Chatham present an enigma to agency that is not used to managing property and park boundaries that has dwellings on it.

http://www.nationalparkstraveler.com/2009/...tional-seashore4729

I agree that Dr. French quote, does show just how distant they are from the true heart of the matter. The unfettered and often unmanaged groups of day trippers wreck havoc far more that Camp owners.

My only point on the PP annual census reports is that they would either buttress Dr. French arguments or refute them in their entirety.

Bob I also enjoyed your earlier comments about the way things were pre 1987, and certainly pre 2007. The best one heard in passing at the Chatham Lighthouse parking lot was, "…that from here you can see Nantucket just the edge mind you, but those house over there are on Nantucket." as the older gentlemen sweeps his arm towards second village.

Good point about the sunny summer days. One July weekend this summer a local shellfish warden counted 117 boats at the north end of NBI. This is where a nesting area was, and the only authority of any kind was one woman who was the plover monitor. So whatever your personal stand is on the relocation of the camp, I think FW argument is weak. As for the CCNS I agree with Bob that they have been cooperative with the town's management programs, without those programs, our beaches would be under CCNS management. It stands to reason that they would be opposed to a new building in a previously undeveloped area which never had an improved property on it in the past, regardless of the plover argument.

Thanks for the link, CW. The CCNS admittedly is not the best landlord.

I agree, Tom, but some clarification on a couple points for those that may not be as familiar with the area: The Coppedge/Fuller camp is not viewed as a new building as it replaced an existing camp originally built prior to the formation of the National Seashore. Also, as previously mentioned, the Nickersons had 2 camps on that parcel up until just after the '87 break. The main camp which is now at the Atwood House museum and the bunkhouse which was turned into a party barge for one tumultuous summer. That was a long time ago, but remember that a similar argument was made for resuming vehicle use on south beach ("we did it for a long time, we just took a break for a while").

Thanks Bob, I was pretty sure that there was a Nickerson Camp there, as I have a key to it, from when my grandfather and Josh Nickerson would use each others Camps. The deadbolt locks were the same and they each keys that would work in either Camp.

If the weather was too bad, Josh would just stay at our Camp and if my grandfather and his chums (Edwin Taylor to be sure) was at the south end of the beach fishing or fowling and the weather or tides turned he would just use the same key to open Josh's Camp.

Bob, CW..I must have just missed you yesterday, I saw your tracks in the wet sand of your driveway, but flag was down. I will come by next time I see flag up, thanks for invite. It is actually written in the deed Nickerson gave TOC that residents must be given access across the property to get to the point, where ever that might be, both on the outer and inner beaches. Of course 87 changed the access, but it is nonetheless still in effect.

Most likely, we left a little earlier than normal, due to my sons having to play basketball for a company team, and my concern for the delay caused by the Sagamore reconstruction work.

Plus that water coming in with the high tide fills the drive up quick and I didn't want to rut it up too much. The NW wind yesterday was pushing it that way as it flows, the SW wind pushes it up and a bit past the drive.

Look forward to your visit.

Tom,

My private property deed, also derived from Nickerson, grants an easement to TOC residents to pass over my private property to access TOC property.So Nickerson thought of everything when he gave the property to the TOC and also when he restored ownership to former quitclaim holders. BUT, there is NOTHING that says where the right of way must run. By agreement, and as a convention, the First Village property owners granted access down the middle road and also along the bay side. The outside beach was closed off by CPD at the property owners request. Why folks who were neither property owners nor TOC residents thought they too had an easement always puzzled me. However, since TOO and TOC sold them stickers and Officer Love urged them on, we had no choice but to let it pass.

Tomorrow calls for 25-35 mph NNW winds. 2:16 AM tide 4.6, 2:24 PM tide 5.35 feet. Perhaps others have better figures, but Judging from present rate of roll over on N/B Island I would expect that section of beach would become plover nesting habitat in far less than 20 years.