Huguenot Park - Your access today!

[kitester]

Springfielder,

I understand what you are saying and I have to tell you that I felt the same at the beginning. At the first public meeting when the Audubon passionately stated that he park was home to many highly endangered species of birds I started to believe that. When they said that greater protections needed to be set in place I believed that. And when they showed the photo of a small child on the beach and gulls in the air and said that It represented a violation of the International Migratory Bird Treaty Act I accepted that because that there many laws I am unfamiliar with. After all they are the experts right? But when they said Those violations represented  potential fines for the City and the family of the child of over 400 thousand dollars each I was stunned. That would mean that every person walking down the beach that caused a bird to fly up was harming the birds risking huge fines. This would apply to  anyone on any beach every everywhere. But, when I read the IMBTA I found that statement to be completely false.

When they began to tell us of the plight of the diminishing Red Knot and how it is on the brink of extinction I was amazed. How could this bird species go from almost a million strong to less than ten thousand in five years? Could human influence at Huguenot Park be causing the extinction of this bird? What had we done and how had we missed this?!? At first I began to think the park must need to close completely whenever the Red Knots came to its shores. I realized that I needed to become better educated about Red Knots. The first claim the Audubon representatives  made about the bird was that it flew from Argentina on the southern tip of South America to Huguenot Park. And then after feeding they said it flew to Arctic breeding grounds. They said it had done this for thousands of years. But  the park has only existed since the installation of the jetty. A few minutes of internet research revealed the truth. Cornell's studies were one of the first I found but there were many others from many sources. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife service and even the Audubon's own information clearly do not support the statements made to the city and the people of this community by the Audubon. That was when I  became really suspicious.  What was really going on with Red Knots and why was the Audubon lying about it? As it turns out the local Audubon may have been duped by a small group of individuals who don't really care about the birds but have made it a personal goal to ban beach driving where ever they find it. The Duval Audubon Society could have been just the tool to make an attempt at shutting down the park. Its possible that Duval Audubon did not do the simple work needed to check the facts before jumping on the "ban beach driving bandwagon". But I suspect that they knew that they were telling lies and ignoring the truth. It could be that they were shooting for the stars hoping to land on the moon. However, when they had achieved the necessary goals of protection they continued to push for greater and greater restrictions that were clearly unnecessary. The latest attempt to permanently close over half of the park to any access revealed their true intention.

The fact is that Beach driving at Huguenot Park (and I suspect elsewhere) is not necessarily a hazard to Wildlife. If proper protections are put in place a ban on beach driving at the park does not make any sense and cant be supported by any rational scientific information.

I think its awesome that you are a member of Audubon and Part of Cornell's ornithology department. Did you do research or teach there? That would mean that you know better than most where to find the facts. 

But it is possible to be a member of an organization supporting its efforts and still be in the dark. History is full of examples.   I Think its far more important to be in the trenches doing the work with real understanding and passion than to support and accept blindly statements from others because they have a reputation or produce a glossy magazine. This situation proves that one individual with a PhD can tell lies that are accepted as truth while other people with fact based knowledge are disregarded.   

Don't get me wrong. I believe that Audubon in general has been a great champion of the environment and a force of preservation and conservation and still can be. But they need to come clean and quit misrepresenting the facts. I doubt they will. The facts don't support their agenda. The only group cherry picking the information here is them.

You say that there is plenty of off beach parking. I would like to know where it is. There are currently less than  thirty parking spaces inside the park. Those are located between the new and old restroom facilities near the campground. On a busy day the park receives as many as 800 visitors. It is very clear that the only place to park is on the beach. The park revenues have come up short of supporting the cost of maintenance and operations almost every year. Beach driving patrons provide most of the money the park needs to operate.  How much money do you think the city will be willing to lose before deciding that its just not worth it? Do you think the Audubon will provide funds needed to build the required off beach parking, road improvements or continued upkeep of the bollards, ropes and signs? Who pays for the patrolling JSO officers?  So far the only money they have spent in this shootin' match is what they have paid their professional lobbyists. The city has had to pay for everything else including a seasonal on staff bird biologist. When you connect the dots you can see that the city cant continue to support greater and greater costs of keeping the park open. You can see that the Audubon wants the city to fail and wash its hands of the problem. I even suspect that they would graciously offer to manage the area (read lock the gates). To think that the park will survive the loss beach driving is foolish. Even the temporary closures in 2009 were costly for the city. 

By the way Huguenot Park has had the highest number of turtle nests in any one mile stretch of beach with the greatest number of successful hatchlings anywhere in Florida.           

[BridgeTroll]

As it turns out the local Audubon may have been duped by a small group of individuals who don't really care about the birds but have made it a personal goal to ban beach driving where ever they find it.

BINGO!

[BridgeTroll]

BTW... Outstanding first topic and posts kitester!  Welcome to MetroJax!

[kitester]

Dog walker,

Driving on the beach at the Park is far less dangerous than crossing the street down town or driving on regular roads. Statistics prove it. The girls run over in the sand in St Augustine were covered by sand and asleep when the truck rolled over them. During high use months park management sets up no parking/driving zones to separate people and cars. The park also has in place a flexible management plan that allows the number of cars to vary as the available space on the beach changes due to tides. Have you ever gone to the park and not been able to get in? It happens a lot in the summer. If the tide is going to be high in the middle of the day you better go early or go home. It has always been like that. It is common sense. When they run out of room people either have to leave or wait for the tide to drop. But on a busy day in the middle of summer when the tide is out the park often has room left over. On extremely low tides there might be enough room for ten thousand cars! In winter months, more than 50% of the year, there is never an issue with beach driving. I have been to the park on days when I was the only one there.

When we talk about baby birds on the beach we are not talking about newly hatched birds. By the time they can cross the dune to the beach they are highly visible and anywhere from about 8 inches to about a foot across. They can move out of the way and usually do if people or cars approach. They just cant fly yet. At this stage of development they sometimes even approach people. One of the first memories I have of baby birds on the beach at the park was of a woman sitting in a chair reading a book with a fledgling bird standing under the chair.

The efforts of the Scouts was indeed stopped. But the goal of increasing the dune areas was hugely successful. Most of what we see in the center of the CWA began with that simple program.    

Will,

The area that has become Huguenot Park has had beach driving for almost 60 years. Hatteras in North Carolina has cars on the beach as long as there have been cars and horses before that. There is simply no way with out a long hot walk to reach the Atlantic shore with access to the water. You don't seem to have a desire to have access to the beach. Perhaps you don't surf or fish or wish to take your family to the beach. So the only argument you can bring to the table is an emotional and indefensible one. Please try to stick to the facts and avoid name calling.


Buckethead,

You are so right about the narrow minded agenda of a few being imposed upon the rest of our community.          

[Springfielder]

In one breath you're boasting at how on a busy day, the park has as many as 800 visitors...which happens to be revenue for the city....so how is it then, that the city cannot afford to maintain the upkeep? If the city can't afford to pay the "greater and greater costs of keeping the park open"...whom are you blaming? Because the city has to employ a seasonal staff bird biologist, well that's part of being in the business.

As for who is paying for JSO to patrol, we as taxpayers pay...always have and to my knowledge there hasn't been an increase in JSO to support added patrols. Perhaps the park would be better suited if it fell under the state forestry department, where park rangers would handle everything...they do at Little Talbot, etc.

Are you saying that the Audubon didn't tell the truth when they stated that the Red Knots migrate from South America to the Northeast coast? It's true, they do...and the problem that had caused a drop in their population, is the loss of food...mainly the horseshoe crabs. I don't know if the Duval Audubon was dupped, as you say...I didn't attend the meetings, nor have I seen the reports that you reference (which you could post a link for people to read)...do I believe that they're trying to push their agenda of preservation, yes, they are. Do I feel those on the opposing side are doing the same, yes, I do.

I've stated that I believe there can and should be an amicable solution so both sides can come out on a winning side.

[BridgeTroll]

I think the passage in question regarding the migration of the birds is...

it flew from Argentina on the southern tip of South America to Huguenot Park. And then after feeding they said it flew to Arctic breeding grounds. They said it had done this for thousands of years. But  the park has only existed since the installation of the jetty.

[Dog Walker]

The migration has lasted for many thousands of years.  Huguenot Park is one of the diminishing number of places they have to rest and feed. 

Kite, a baby Piping Plover weighs less than 1/2 ounce, is about 1 1/2" long, can run like crazy and is damn near invisible when it stops and crouches in a tire track.  You haven't seen them because you CAN'T see them.

[Overstreet]

FWC says we have 8,400 miles of shore line in Florida. I'm sure that is not straight line measurement.  Beach driving is limited to only a hand full of places. There is less than 100 miles of beach driving. Are the birds that limited that they can't find another place in 8,000 miles?

[Dog Walker]

Pedestrians, dogs, kids, sunbathers, deep water all keep most of our beaches unsuitable for nesting or undisturbed feeding.  Driving on Atlantic beach wouldn't disturb the birds at all.

[Springfielder]

As for the Red Knots, they feed on the horseshoe crabs, so where they are, the Red Knots will stop during their migration.

[kitester]

Springfielder,

Please let me apologize. I don’t mean to be so confusing. The park does have some days that attendance is huge. Labor Day, Memorial Day, The Fourth of July and some perfect days in the middle of summer weekends. But the total amount of yearly revenue the park generates is usually less than what it takes to keep the park running. As a result it operates at a loss most years. ALL of the revenue the park generates goes into a special trust that is then used to fund its operations. When the park comes up short the city covers the rest. I think it would be an incorrect statement to say that the cost of materials and payroll is decreasing.  The increased cost of building, installing and maintaining the additional bollards and signs is an expense that the city has to cover.  They have been extremely fast in accepting that cost and responsibility. Do you think its fair to place an additional and unnecessary strain on an already thin budget? 

You are correct that the tax payers cover the cost for JSO officers in the park. I might add that they are damn good at the task too. They deserve every penny. The city has increased patrols within the park There is even an officer living at the park .  When the issue of how to protect the fledgling birds was raised and the city placed the temporary protection fence across the beach and the U.S. Fish and wildlife  service  approved it with only minor adjustments. I have a question though. Are state forestry officers the same as Fish and Wildlife officers?  Do all state parks fall under the jurisdiction of state forestry? Where do the Florida Wildlife officers have jurisdiction? 

Concerning Red Knots  ….The statement made at the public meetings was that Red Knots migrate from Argentina to Huguenot Park and from there to the Arctic. I was there when they said it. They stated that the bird had feed at the park to build up body weight to make the long migration. They also said that the bird was on the brink of extinction. They did not say that the birds stop at many points along the way to feed. They did not say that many of them fly past Florida before stopping on the east coast. They did not even mention how important the horseshoe crab breeding season in to this particular population of birds or how crab fishing in Delaware Bay has indeed removed the one vital link along the Knots migration. They did not mention that many of these bird fly up the west coast of Florida or that a considerable number don’t migrate beyond the southern tip of Florida.  They denied that the Red Knots came to shore anywhere south of Jacksonville. The facts they left out would not support their claims that the fate of the Red Knot rested on the protections provided at the park. But most of this information is available from many sources world wide. Even the National Audubon studies focus on the connection between Red Knots, horseshoe crabs and climate change. Of course the local Audubon did not mention that Red Knots are found on every continent. They did not say that some populations of the bird migrate up the west coast of the Americas.  That is why the bird is not on the endangered species list. This population may disappear because the small amount of crab eggs cant support a large enough population of Red Knots to continue to maintain its numbers. In 2009 none of the east coast birds were seen in the Arctic breeding grounds. If there is not enough food they simply don’t try to migrate. Some of these birds die every year and its estimated that the last of the east coast Red Knots will vanish in 2010. They may just stop migrating or they may combine with other populations that travel different routes.  To some it all up not one thing that happens at Huguenot Park will affect the outcome. I believe that we have done what we can to allow them to feed unmolested. In the end it may actually speed their passing.


The city has been doing their part. They have kept their word and responded quickly to every protection and safety issue at the park. They continue to install and enforce the protection measures both sides have agreed to in the management plan. And still the Audubon attempts to end run around the accepted and legal reviews. This has been a situation of all give and no take.  The Audubon needs to stand up in the light, admit the lies and work with the city to develop workable solutions.               

[kitester]

Dogwalker.

You may be correct about the Piping Plover chicks size. However they nest in much more northern latitudes. The few Piping Plovers seen in our area are adult birds wintering not nesting. The same bird might be seen in Fernandina one day and Nassau Sound the next. It might show up at the park or you might see it along the "little jetty" in the St Johns River. They move around a lot. They are not at risk by anything that takes place at the park and therefore are not an issue with regard to protection within the park. By the way. If you are close enough to see a PP chick and you do cause it to run that might be considered a violation of State, Federal and International laws. It is listed as an endangered species.       

[Dog Walker]

Brain fade on the Piping Plovers, however, same thing about size and invisibility applies to Least Terns, Gull-Billed Terns, Ruddy Turnstones, and Semi-palmated Plovers which do nest there.  You do know when you are near a Least Turn nest or chick because the adults will dive bomb you from behind, squawk, and shit on you to try to drive you away.  Works too!  LOL!

[kitester]

Dogwalker,

Actually Least Tern and Gull Billed Terns fledglings are just as visible on the beach as Royals or Laughing Gull fledglings. I was a little concerned by your statement that the TernStone and Simi-palmated Plovers nest along the eastern seaboard. I know in almost 40 years as a birder that I have never heard of them doing that. I checked it out and, like the Red knot they go to much more northern latitudes to breed. At the park none of these things are issues. Of the the birds that do nest there none will be found on the beach until hey are big enough to travel up and over the duns and out to the water everyday. When the first baby bird shows up at the top of the last dune the park management puts up the temporary automotive fence. As I said before this has been wildly successful for the protection of fledglings. Also if you are close enough see a tiny, newly hatched baby bird at the park it means you are either using a good pair of binoculars while standing on a ladder or you are in the CWA. Being in the CWA is a serious violation. You will be removed from the park and you can be fined $500.00.

And although it really should not matter, and I think we should take the necessary steps to protect the wildlife, all of the of the species you mention are considered to be birds of "least concern". Which means that their numbers are either growing or have sufficiently large and stable populations (worldwide) that they are not in danger of becoming endangered or even threatened. I invite you to visit the Cornell University's web page "all about birds" There you can find data on life-cycle, distribution and food source for various species. Its good to have someone check my work. Look through anything you can find and let us know about it and how it affects the protection measures at the park. Thanks for taking the time to rread these posts.     

[Shine]

Wow, lots of rich discussion.

First, the incidence of bird fatalities from vehicle strikes in HMP is significantly below that typically encountered in other places with bird/vehicle interactions.  Next, vehicle accidents (pedestrian or other vehicle) in HMP are profoundly below normative data for general vehicle use.  The senior Florida Fish and Wildlife Bird Biologist supports the city of Jacksonville's management plan.  I think these are important facts to start with in this discussion.

As for your right to drive on the beach, Florida Statue 161.58 grants the power to determine if vehicles should be allowed on a beach to the local municipal government. And, recent case law, Trapanier vs. Volusia County, vehicles were ruled by the court to have "Customary Use" rights of the beach just as pedestrians do, where driving on the beach is allowed under FS 161.58.   But in the case of HMP, the issue is beach parking.  There simply is no other place to park the vehicles that bring people to the beach.  I do not support beach driving, per se.  But I support being able to get to the beach and having a place to park.  In the case of HMP, the only practical way to do that is to drive to the beach, on the beach and park. 

As for the notion of parking at the gate or on the jetty spine and walking to the beach, it is about two miles from the gate to the point at Ft. George Inlet.  For the typical person, this would mean a one hour walk in and one hour return -- hauling kids, fishing gear, kite surfing gear or whatever else.

There are about 17 miles of public beach on the coast of Duval County.  Only one mile of 17, HMP allows vehicles and that is due to the unique nature of the property.