Huguenot Park - Your access today!

[buckethead]

Would a "Tastes like chicken" blurb be too insensitive here?

[JettyDog]

Pretty awesome day at Huguenot. Got into the park shortly before 10 am, headed up the hard road to beach access. Spotted the city Gator parked at the end of the hard road and initally thought the tides were too high and the beach was closed. I got closer and saw John, Huguenot Park staff, clutching what I thought was driftwood. I got even closer and realized he was holding a pelican. Seems the bird was hooked on a three prong fishing lure through the top of his wing to midway down the same wing, hindering flight. John asked if I had any side cutters and I replied , I wasn't sure , but I had a set of pliars at least. I searched the Jeep and found a pair of side cutters , luckily, and we proceeded to get the lure off. John made a decision to take the bird up the road to BEAKS for a few days of rehab.
Afterwards, I parked on the beach. John, after completing his task of getting the bird to BEAKS, swung by on the Gator and we spoke briefly. While discussing the incident, John told me the bird was asleep when he found him, ( I say ) undoubtably exhausted from the ordeal of being hooked. While we were talking, a pod of dolphins swam just offshore, feeding. There must have been 15 to 20 in the pod.
It was a good day and some good was accomplished between a park patron and staff.

[kitester]

Just last tuesday the protection fencing for fledgling birds was removed as no more flightless bird were see in the park. The season was extremely successful. People responded well too the information and education about the bird populations and nesting season in the park. The point is open again....for now. There is still a push from the Audubon to close permanently the area from the last trash can all the way around to the large pilling post on the bank just across from the bridge. The city has stated that this area will remain open for public use and driving during non-nesting times of the year. Audubon reps said " they were extremely disappointed by this decision". This is exactly their same response when the city told them they could not/would not prevent people from walking on the shoal at low tide. At that time the Audubon blasted the city for "backing off of environmental protections".  Clearly they intended for the city to give in to their demands. Props and thanks should go to the city staff on this point. They stood up to the bird lobby and told them NO!. Finally our city has grown a backbone! But not all of the "new" tweaks to the management plan are satisfactory. At some point the city officials tried to work out a "deal" with the ARC in Tallahassee. There was an arbitrary decision to expand the area of no driving zones on the beach front to 1500 feet which is much greater than the original area provided for in the plan. Further more those areas will not allow for any parking above them as they did last year. Only a two lane driving distance will be left between the no-drive zone and the tow of the dune. This effectively eliminates about 300 parking spaces for the park. What do the people of Jacksonville get out of this deal? Not one damn thing. We just lose more of the park.  You cant tell me that is not an attempt to remove the public and close the park. Maybe the city's resolve is not up to the task after all. There is no provision to replace any parking anywhere in the park. The non-critical dune areas might be an option but  the Audubon has said they do not want to allow extra parking to be built in the dune area. It has been established that the Critical Wild Life Management Area is only the most northern dune area of the point so there should be no reason not to build parking inside the dunes. It is clear that the goal of the environmental lobby is still the closure of the park Little by little there is a an erosion of your ability to enjoy the last remaining open water access in our area. If as planed, the no drive zones would be attached to the impending post line that will be installed the whole way across the point. During the nesting season a full THREE QUARTERS OF THE PARK WILL BE CLOSED! To access any of the best fishing, deep water launching or the areas most used by kiters there will at least a 2000 foot walk. I dont mind a 300 yard walk but 2000 feet is ridiculous. It is time for the city council and city officials to really tell the bird lobby enough is enough! It is clear that we don't need further posting in the park we don't need no-drive zones and that protections already in place are completely adequate for the protection of birds in the park. In fact FWC has stated that ALL of their requirements for environmental management of the park have been met. Why are we still "dealing" with these people? Very soon there will be some drastic decisions made about access at Huguenot Park. If you sleep through it there will be almost no park to enjoy next year. DONT LET IT HAPPEN. Contact you city councilmen and your representatives in Tallahassee. Let the know enough is enough.             

[kitester]

Well all of you who have visited the park recently may have seen the posts that restrict driving on the shoals at the north end of the point. As the efforts to restrict access to the park continue there is a new restriction that has been introduced and added to the already approved management plan. This new restriction will set a drive only lane of 1500 feet across the front of the Atlantic side. The idea is to attach it to the already restricted area at the north point. This is another sneaky way to exclude as many people as possible with out having to meet the STATE LAW of required replacement parking spaces. By not having any parking within 1500 feet of the point the park will lose about 3/4 of its access for most of the summer. This will happen when the birds start nesting and baby birds fledge onto the beach. The result will be a closure that extends from about the half-way point on the atlantic side all the way around to the highest dune on the pond side. That is really more than 3/4 of the park that will be closed to automotive traffic. This closure is UNNECESSARY for any wildlife protections. It is just another way the bird lobby has cheated the people of this community out of the last real access to the water. I guess the fishermen will just have to fish off the bridges if they are unable to walk the 1/2 mile to deep water access in the park while carrying the gear and coolers. Even the bird watchers will be out of luck. But it's all part of the plan to eliminate the human presence at the park. I have already heard the the city is weighing the option of not renewing the lease or fighting for the park any longer. The park already operated in the red almost every year. Do you think they will keep it open for a few surfers? Not a chance. The result will be a victory for the Audubon/Sierra club Lobby that has already stated that they want to turn this one mile stretch of beach into a bird only place where there will be no access or parking. They are hoping that the tough economic times will force the city to abandon the park.  The bird lobby goal is to make it part of the Timuquan Preserve. The gates will be closed and while the city might operate the camping area for a while the only access to all of the rest of this STATE DESIGNATED RECREATION AREA WILL BE ON FOOT. Bang! the city losses the best resource for public access. If you guys don't want this to happen you better call your councilman. Get on Facebook- Florida Open Beaches and join the effort keep the park open. Its yours... protect it!         

[north miami]

I am a long established routine user of Hugenot Park along with the Talbot Islands,including hand launch small craft vessel access to the outlying Nassau Sound Islands.These endeavours are of no small consequence to users like me.

What Hugenot boils down to is-this is not a matter of effective "Closure" but rather access.
I found recreation conditions at the point improved this summer thanks to vehicle management.(Ok-RESTRICTION.....)
The point is conveniently and reasonably accessible by foot.Past summer vehicle access at the point had it's pluses and absolute convenience but what I discovered on the point this summer was easy foot access and outstanding experience without vehicular and related intrusions.It was an easy matter to employ a small pack for fish gear,grub,beach goodies.There was even life guard presence.

The vast majority of Hugenot users are content to congregate in the vehicle zone.

And the current revised zone allowing point vehicle access while limiting seaward parking seems overall beneficial.

I believe the direction we are headed in the balance of wildlife and recreation is in fact enhancing the human recreation element.

[buckethead]

Clearly you aren't carrying a longboard.

[kitester]

To the people who think that the closure and restrictions to automotive traffic are reasonable please understand that driving on the beach at Huguenot Park is what keeps the park open and available. Without it there will be no Huguenot Park to enjoy. Yes... the idea of "reasonable access" is a good one and sounds like a wonderful idea. BUT, ask the pet owners if the loss of access to the park year round was reasonable. When there is no critical wildlife activity in the park should they be banned? Do you realize that the management plan still has language in it that was put there by the bird lobby that prohibits "wading, swimming and kitesurfing" in all of the areas beyond zone 12? How about the fishermen that have coolers and gear to carry, Or the jet ski users that need the deep water access at the point to launch? Now the city IS fighting back a bit by asking the ARC to approve the lease without those restrictions. The bird lobby still refers to the shoals north of the point as a "critical fish habitat" That is simply NOT TRUE. The letter they used to convince the ARC to close the point was written by an anonymous  source on letter head used by NOAA. Critical fish habitats are places with grass bottoms or rock substrates, not sandbars that dry out twice a day. The real reason they wanted to close it is because it is just one more step in the effort to close the entire park. Now personally I think that people who drive through the water simply don't realize or don't care about the damage they do to their cars. First timers or people who visit infrequently are not aware of the fast incoming tides that might trap them on the shoals. So not allowing driving on THOSE AREAS is perhaps a good thing. So on that basis there is some validity in saying that driving on the shoals should be restricted. BUT, do you realize that the bird lobby wanted to prevent pedestrian access to those areas too? Do you realize that the no drive zone will be extended almost half the length of the park on the atlantic side? Do you realize that they continue to push to make the temporary bird fence a permanent year round thing? If the drive only lane is installed and connected to the newly posted areas at the shoals the closest access to the point during the nesting season will be almost 2000 feet away on the Atlantic side and much further on the pond side. The necessary and responsible measures for wildlife protection were met and maintained by the city without the intervention of the bird lobby. Temporary fencing to protect baby birds was more than adequate. The policing and maintenance of the long established Critical Wildlife Area has been provided for by the city for over 25 years. We know that the bird lobby wants your park BECAUSE THEY SAID SO! Every continued effort to further restrict access is just another attempt by PAID lobbyists to remove the human presence from the park.  So when you refer to the "vast majority of Huguenot Park users"  remember that you eat an elephant on bite at a time. Last year it was the pet owners and large temporary closures of deep water access. (By the way the closure on the pond side was for 3 laughing gull chicks!) Next year it will be the jet skis and kiters banned and permanent closures. The following year they will push to remove more access and user groups until the park will not be worth it to the city to keep open. As the voice of opposition is diminished piece by piece, the park access will fade away and the only thing out there will be laughing gulls.                     

[kitester]

In response to North Miami's post .....The point at Huguenot Park is not just  the front side where the lifeguard is. It also includes the back side directly across from the bridge. How far are you willing to pull a jet ski trailer by hand through the sand? Do you realize that the best fishing will be at least a 15 minute walk if you can park on the Atlantic side? The entire inside shore line was closed for three fledgling laughing gulls this year. It was kept closed two weeks longer than necessary because of inadequate counting (flushing) practices. I witnessed it myself.

There is no doubt that the beach experience would be even better if the environmental lobby or current economics would allow the city to build suitable parking within the dunes between the "pond" and the ocean. There is room for three big lots without even getting near the CWA which is located only on the last bit of the vegetated dune on the point. FWC maintains strict outlines of the area for data gathering purposes. Much of the area is off limits for erosion control only. State parks use this basic type of plan to allow for good access all over the world with little or no impact on dunes or vegetation. 

In other news a recent resolution was sent in to ARC. I am told that the city will push to keep further restrictive amendments out of the management plan. This may seem like a victory but if history has has taught us anything about this issue it will never resolved. The Audubon , Sierra Club, Defenders of Wildlife and the Nature Conservancy will continue to work in the shadows to erode this and other communities access to the beaches and waters we all enjoy.  We all need to do everything we can to expose the lies, backdoor deals and pressure they use to sway public opinion or turn our elected officials against us. Thanks to all who voted to reject Amendment 4. The Sierra Club wasted over $200,000.00 of their subscribers money promoting 4. It is time for these organizations to find new leadership that will guide them back to responsible initiatives that will seek real solutions to human and wildlife use of our natural resources. To be sure the problem has no easy answer but complete and total bans on human access should not be an option and any effort to move in that direction should be examined under a microscope to find the real agenda behind it.           

[north miami]

Former ARC Vice Chair Jack Moller is an aquaintance of mine and a good study
Jack was and is very strong on recreation lands access.He had a camp deep within the Everglades.A giant figure in state land purchase, management and public access champion.NRA Life Member.Former Chair of the Florida Wildlife Federation.Thanks to the Federation's Conservation and Recreation Lands bill we have Guana,Talbot,Jennings State Forest and more.These organizations are bed rock.

The ARC process is not the smoke and mirrors image some would cast.For sure some input,which even wanders out to Amendment # 4 is more about personal political views than viable resource and recreation management.

A reasonable and even "challenging"walk to recreation destination throughout the Talbot and Hugenot area yields great benefits.By law,these benefits are among the purposes for which many of the lands were purchased and a guiding management priciple.

Each and every time I am at Huguenot I look at fellow citizens...and my own profile reflected in the shiny paint on my TRD Off Road Toyota ( love that Truck on the beach) and am reminded of the fact that a walk is a good thing....!!

[kitester]

North Miami,

Please enjoy the walk if that is what you would like to do. You can even go to the beach less than one mile away at Talbot Island. A walk north will be almost a solitary trip. For almost 4 miles of beach is nearly unused and at high tide there is almost no access to the north tip without trekking through the original Florida underbrush. For the naturalist this is a view of how Florida coastline used to be. Its a completely undeveloped natural coastline area that stretches for about five and a half miles north. And, its all there less than one mile from Huguenot Park. So go walk it if that is your thing. There is plenty of off beach parking near the entrance to Talbot Island State Park and for the true walker you can park at several trailheads and walk through the woods, over a mile in some cases, to the beach. Of course some of the beach is not accessible because stairs that used to be there washed away and the bank can be very steep in places. Of course if you are not there to swim, fish, sunbathe or enjoy a picnic with your children its an ideal spot. Take your snake boots and bug repellent and lots of water. And get there early because there are only a few parking spaces at the trail heads. 

Of course those of us that carry more than a a few bottles of water with us would like to have a place where we can go to enjoy the water. Huguenot has access that all can enjoy with their families and friends. It has fishing and good boat or jet ski launching and even those with sail boats can find a smooth, deep water launch. People with small children can enjoy the surf or fishing with out having to walk and carry the heavy coolers, beach chairs or gear more than a few feet. 

If the issue was reasonable access then there should be no problem with converting parts of the interior dune areas into real parking with reasonable boardwalk type accesses to shoreline areas. But that is not what the Audubon or Sierra Club are trying to achieve. Their goal as openly stated by their representatives is the removal of all vehicular traffic from the shorelines at the park. They want to see Huguenot Park become part of the preserve. This would very effectively close the park since public assess at the park is based on the ability of the patron to drive and park on the beach.

Over and over the bird lobby has attempted to gain control and close greater and greater areas of the park. In the latest attempt the they tried to have over 1500 more feet of the park closed permanently to automotive traffic on the beach front. They tried to attache it to the already in place line of posts across the north point. During the nesting season the entire point, nearly all of the inside shoreline and about half of the beach front would be closed and access lost. The bird lobby has proved that they will not give up until they have it all.

So walk if you like. There are a few parking places outside the gate and they wont even charge you to walk in! in fact I ask you to try it. Leave your Toyota outside the park. As you walk and enjoy the fresh air imagine yourself to be a fisherman or a family with small children or even a surfer carrying a board. Put yourself in the shoes of 90% of jacksonville residents. Maybe then you will realize what is at stake. Perhaps then you will understand the reason to fight for the LAST true public access this city has to its greatest resource.       

[kitester]

So as we head into a new administration it looks like more sensible heads will prevail and the access to our park might be sustainable. HOWEVER, I was talking to one of the surfers that frequent the park and he told me a very disturbing story. As you all know the the bird lobby has forced the city install ugly posts and signs across the point to prevent people from driving onto the shoals at low tide. Access to the area is still allowed by pedestrians and all former activities are still permitted there. The management plan specifically allows people to walk, swim, surf, kayak, kiteboard or boat in the waters off the point. The only thing no longer allowed is the driving or parking of cars below the posts which designate the mean high tide mark. It seems that the surfer was parked on the beach on the front side well OUTSIDE the no driving area. As he surfed the current carried him north toward the point. When he came to the end of the surf-able waves he exited the water north of the posted line.  While walking  back to his car a woman in a BIRD STEWARD VEST approached rapidly him and took his picture. She then proceeded to his truck and took a picture of it. He asked the lady why she was taking the pictures and she told him that she had been instructed to take pictures of anyone north of the signs. It was obvious that she intended to turn the photos over to the Audubon Society who is responsible for the steward training program. It is now clear that there is still an quiet on-going effort to build a case for closing park access and turning it into a giant bird breeding ground. Now lets be fair. Suppose that the lady misunderstood her instructions. Perhaps she was only supposed to take pictures of people driving past the signs. Still to what end? The only answer is the continued behind the scenes effort of the Audubon and Sierra Club to close our park. They may be quiet but they are not gone and they still vehemently oppose vehicular access to any of the shore line or beach areas of the park. Now, I could be mistaken but, is it not a privacy violation to take identifying pictures of people or their cars if they are just out in public? Is that a form of stalking? There was a case last year and the year before of a man in a car following people around on the beach out there. He waited till someone drove by and then followed them to where they parked. He would park just a short distance away and sit in his car. It was so obvious that the police questioned him. I believe he was asked to leave the park. He came back again in a different car a few months later. Now that guy might have just been a pervert but it was very odd how he only seemed to be interested in tracking people who were driving next to the water or out onto the shoals near the point. I noticed that he did not seem to have a preference as to the type of beach goer he followed. He only seemed interested in people driving on the point. He followed me many times even though as a matter of practice I usually parked near the high tide line.

I encourage anyone to question any person that is obviously and deliberately tracking you at the park. If you dont feel comfortable going right up to them (and it might not be safe) and asking them point blank what they are doing call the park office and ask for an officer to check it out. If they are taking pictures or recording personal information such as license plates they should be reported immediately weather they are bird people or not. That is absolutely not allowed. One bird person was already warned about this.  So as you enjoy the park keep your eyes open. it is a public venue and you never know who might be watching you. The park personnel are always ready to help and will relay a message to the police officer on duty.

Here is the Huguenot Park Office number. Its also on the COJ web site.  904-251-3335. Of course 911 will work too.               

[cline]

So as we head into a new administration it looks like more sensible heads will prevail and the access to our park might be sustainable. HOWEVER, I was talking to one of the surfers that frequent the park and he told me a very disturbing story. As you all know the the bird lobby has forced the city install ugly posts and signs across the point to prevent people from driving onto the shoals at low tide. Access to the area is still allowed by pedestrians and all former activities are still permitted there. The management plan specifically allows people to walk, swim, surf, kayak, kiteboard or boat in the waters off the point. The only thing no longer allowed is the driving or parking of cars below the posts which designate the mean high tide mark. It seems that the surfer was parked on the beach on the front side well OUTSIDE the no driving area. As he surfed the current carried him north toward the point. When he came to the end of the surf-able waves he exited the water north of the posted line.  While walking  back to his car a woman in a BIRD STEWARD VEST approached rapidly him and took his picture. She then proceeded to his truck and took a picture of it. He asked the lady why she was taking the pictures and she told him that she had been instructed to take pictures of anyone north of the signs. It was obvious that she intended to turn the photos over to the Audubon Society who is responsible for the steward training program. It is now clear that there is still an quiet on-going effort to build a case for closing park access and turning it into a giant bird breeding ground. Now lets be fair. Suppose that the lady misunderstood her instructions. Perhaps she was only supposed to take pictures of people driving past the signs. Still to what end? The only answer is the continued behind the scenes effort of the Audubon and Sierra Club to close our park. They may be quiet but they are not gone and they still vehemently oppose vehicular access to any of the shore line or beach areas of the park. Now, I could be mistaken but, is it not a privacy violation to take identifying pictures of people or their cars if they are just out in public? Is that a form of stalking? There was a case last year and the year before of a man in a car following people around on the beach out there. He waited till someone drove by and then followed them to where they parked. He would park just a short distance away and sit in his car. It was so obvious that the police questioned him. I believe he was asked to leave the park. He came back again in a different car a few months later. Now that guy might have just been a pervert but it was very odd how he only seemed to be interested in tracking people who were driving next to the water or out onto the shoals near the point. I noticed that he did not seem to have a preference as to the type of beach goer he followed. He only seemed interested in people driving on the point. He followed me many times even though as a matter of practice I usually parked near the high tide line.

I encourage anyone to question any person that is obviously and deliberately tracking you at the park. If you dont feel comfortable going right up to them (and it might not be safe) and asking them point blank what they are doing call the park office and ask for an officer to check it out. If they are taking pictures or recording personal information such as license plates they should be reported immediately weather they are bird people or not. That is absolutely not allowed. One bird person was already warned about this.  So as you enjoy the park keep your eyes open. it is a public venue and you never know who might be watching you. The park personnel are always ready to help and will relay a message to the police officer on duty.

Here is the Huguenot Park Office number. Its also on the COJ web site.  904-251-3335. Of course 911 will work too.              

All driving on Florida beaches should be banned in my opinion - especially in parks.  It creates serious safety and environmental and issues.  

[ChriswUfGator]

So as we head into a new administration it looks like more sensible heads will prevail and the access to our park might be sustainable. HOWEVER, I was talking to one of the surfers that frequent the park and he told me a very disturbing story. As you all know the the bird lobby has forced the city install ugly posts and signs across the point to prevent people from driving onto the shoals at low tide. Access to the area is still allowed by pedestrians and all former activities are still permitted there. The management plan specifically allows people to walk, swim, surf, kayak, kiteboard or boat in the waters off the point. The only thing no longer allowed is the driving or parking of cars below the posts which designate the mean high tide mark. It seems that the surfer was parked on the beach on the front side well OUTSIDE the no driving area. As he surfed the current carried him north toward the point. When he came to the end of the surf-able waves he exited the water north of the posted line.  While walking  back to his car a woman in a BIRD STEWARD VEST approached rapidly him and took his picture. She then proceeded to his truck and took a picture of it. He asked the lady why she was taking the pictures and she told him that she had been instructed to take pictures of anyone north of the signs. It was obvious that she intended to turn the photos over to the Audubon Society who is responsible for the steward training program. It is now clear that there is still an quiet on-going effort to build a case for closing park access and turning it into a giant bird breeding ground. Now lets be fair. Suppose that the lady misunderstood her instructions. Perhaps she was only supposed to take pictures of people driving past the signs. Still to what end? The only answer is the continued behind the scenes effort of the Audubon and Sierra Club to close our park. They may be quiet but they are not gone and they still vehemently oppose vehicular access to any of the shore line or beach areas of the park. Now, I could be mistaken but, is it not a privacy violation to take identifying pictures of people or their cars if they are just out in public? Is that a form of stalking? There was a case last year and the year before of a man in a car following people around on the beach out there. He waited till someone drove by and then followed them to where they parked. He would park just a short distance away and sit in his car. It was so obvious that the police questioned him. I believe he was asked to leave the park. He came back again in a different car a few months later. Now that guy might have just been a pervert but it was very odd how he only seemed to be interested in tracking people who were driving next to the water or out onto the shoals near the point. I noticed that he did not seem to have a preference as to the type of beach goer he followed. He only seemed interested in people driving on the point. He followed me many times even though as a matter of practice I usually parked near the high tide line.

I encourage anyone to question any person that is obviously and deliberately tracking you at the park. If you dont feel comfortable going right up to them (and it might not be safe) and asking them point blank what they are doing call the park office and ask for an officer to check it out. If they are taking pictures or recording personal information such as license plates they should be reported immediately weather they are bird people or not. That is absolutely not allowed. One bird person was already warned about this.  So as you enjoy the park keep your eyes open. it is a public venue and you never know who might be watching you. The park personnel are always ready to help and will relay a message to the police officer on duty.

Here is the Huguenot Park Office number. Its also on the COJ web site.  904-251-3335. Of course 911 will work too.               

All driving on Florida beaches should be banned in my opinion - especially in parks.  It creates serious safety and environmental and issues. 

Hard to argue the safety point really. My dad's practice is in Daytona Beach and he's had probably a half dozen cases over the years on the beach for people running over someone laying on the sand. Not sure this is really comparable, the beach down there probably has 50k people on it most days during the summer, this park doesn't get that kind of traffic. But still it definitely happens.

With all that said, everyting entails risk doesn't it? Your risk of getting run over at the beach is no doubt less than your risk of being involved in a car accident every time you get behind the wheel, so following your logic what's next, are we going to ban driving period? Ban walking because you might get hit by lightening on the sidewalk? At some point this safety stuff is absurd, you can't eliminate access to entire classes of activities just because there is some small risk of something bad happening.

And what environmental issues are you talking about? That's a nice catch-all sounding phrase, but what's the difference between driving on the beach and driving on A1A located 50 feet away, with all the runoff water winding up in the same place anyhow? Lol. The couple drops of oil one or two cars might leak are hardly the end of the world, and are going to win up there anyway courtesy of all the roadways we've built next to beaches. It's really a non issue.

[cline]

And what environmental issues are you talking about? That's a nice catch-all sounding phrase, but what's the difference between driving on the beach and driving on A1A located 50 feet away, with all the runoff water winding up in the same place anyhow? Lol. The couple drops of oil one or two cars might leak are hardly the end of the world, and are going to win up there anyway courtesy of all the roadways we've built next to beaches. It's really a non issue.

I wasn't really referring to point source pollution from vehicles at this location.  I was more referring to the fact that this particular beach is a known nesting habitat for birds and driving on the beach can endanger the birds and nests.  At this beach it is more of a environmental concern.  Further south where there are more people and cars on the beach, it is more of a safety concern.  I just think we can probably do without driving on the beaches.

Banning driving permanently?  Perhaps that's not a bad idea  

[BridgeTroll]

I was more referring to the fact that this particular beach is a known nesting habitat for birds and driving on the beach can endanger the birds and nests.

The birds do not nest on the beach.  They nest in the dunes... which has been off limits to cars, humans, and dogs for a long time.  Additionally... during the NESTING SEASON... large areas of beach ARE blocked off from ALL traffic.  Since the birds nest and migrate through during very specific times... those are the times those areas should be closed.

I wonder why the Audobon Society wants the beach closed all the time?