Huguenot Park - Your access today!

[PeeJayEss]

So by taking only the part of the quote that suits your needs and twisting the real message you are just like Audubon or Sierra Club.  

Taking part of what quote? I didn't quote anyone at all (except for you in the specially-marked boxes). I know that quote is from Mike Hogan, but I didn't mention him at all. So no idea what you are talking about for the first 4 of 5 paragraphs addressed to me. Also I'm fairly certain that Bridgetroll did not say any of the stuff for which you are giving him credit, at least not recently.

You say some lands have "very little ecological or historical value." I assure you, before Jacksonville was built, all the land here had ecological value. If you removed the development, it would have ecological value again. Just because we have developed land in the past doesn't mean it can only be used for holding concrete in the future. Like cline said, there is value besides economic to ecological preservation.

I say we fill up all the development we already have before we start eliminating protections for lands. How can you justify paving over a nature preserve when there are hundreds of empty buildings in this city and even more empty lots?

[kitester]

There is a project going on at the park and volunteers are needed. It is not hard work just hot and tiedious. The few of us that have been there all week could use a hand. The contact info is below.

Hello Friends of Huguenot Memorial Park,
The City of Jacksonville and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission are teaming up to restore some very important coastal habitat, within Huguenot Memorial Park, and we would like your help. From March 15th through the 21st we are looking for volunteers to help us remove exotic plants inside the dunes. These plants have overgrown and are now affecting the areas used by the Royal Terns during their nesting season. Removing these plants will help improve the dunes, and give the Royal Terns more space for their upcoming nesting season. This is a big task, and we will not be able to do it alone. With your help we will be able to greatly benefit the park, and help Florida’s wildlife at the same time. If you are interested, please see the project details below. If you would like to sign up, or if you have any questions, please contact the Huguenot Memorial Park Manager (Chris Winterman) at 904-251-3335. We hope to see you out there!
Project Details
Dates: March 15th through the 21st
Time: 10:00 am to 4:00 pm. There is no obligation to stay until 4:00 pm, you may leave whenever you would like.
Where to meet: Huguenot Memorial Park, 10980 Heckscher Drive, Jacksonville, FL 32226. On the beach in Zone 11.
The work involved: We will be removing the exotics Mexican tea (a shrub from Central and South America) and Durban’s Crowfoot Grass (a grass from Egypt) by hand and with hand tools such as shovels and rakes. The plants will be bagged up and carried out of the dunes to trucks for transport away from the area. This work will require stooping, kneeling, pulling, bending over at the waist, walking and standing on uneven terrain and some lifting.
What to bring: Huguenot Memorial Park will provide water, hand tools, plastic bags and gloves. Please wear close toed shoes and bring sunscreen and a hat. Be aware this is rain or shine so raingear may be necessary depending on the day. If you are planning on staying through 12:00 pm, please bring a lunch. We are unable to provide lunch for volunteers.
Note: City volunteer release forms must be completed. Children under 18 must have a parent or guardian sign the release.

Christopher Winterman
Manager
Huguenot Memorial Park
Jacksonville FL, 32226
904.251.3335 Phone
904.251.3019 Fax

[Garden guy]

PJE

Well now that you mention it (and of course out of context) There is good solid logic in examining the possibility of the city generating VERY MUCE NEEDED revenue by disposing of lands that have little ecological or historical value. That is especially true if the alternative is to shut down important government functions such as school programs or to reduce services like fire/rescue and police.  So lets have the whole quote........

"I think everything is on the table, It depends on where we are at that particular point in time. If it's pristine (land) or if it has some significant ecological significance, then of course that would not be on the table. If it's not encumbered, if it's uplands, then it could be."

He is talking about lands that have useful commercial value and little else. 99% of the city's population have not nor ever will visit these lands. So why not allow them to generate some boost of income and future tax revenue. That revenue could then be used to create better access for the park system or anywhere that the city might need the funds.   

So by taking only the part of the quote that suits your needs and twisting the real message you are just like Audubon or Sierra Club. That is what they do and they ARE good at it. It has many people buffaloed into think that the controversy at the park is about wildlife and bird protections. IT IS NOT. all of those issues have been well answered by the city. They were even approved by the Audubon reps that have badgered the city for years. Each time the city met the requirements they came back with more demands for restrictions and closures at this man made beach. Their continued efforts demonstrate their resolve. I see them every time
I visit the park taking pictures of people walking, fishing, swimming, kitesurfing, kayaking or surfing on or near the shoals. They complain that people are accessing the shoals, not by car, but on foot! And the "trained " bird stewards from Audubon are sent out to gather the photo "evidence". When some stranger runs up to you and snaps your picture and then takes a picture of your car (parked in the proper area) it is clearly harassment. 

Bridge,

You are right that I would support the candidate who will reasonably examine all the possibilities and not support the candidate who without consideration rejects those possibilities. I think any candidate who accepts support from an organization who's representatives have openly stated that they wish to see Huguenot Park turned into part of the very inaccessible preserve should be clear about the issue. Does she support the closure of the park or will she stand behind the people of this community to maintain access for all of us?

You would support Moran, Audubon and Sierra Club if they wished to close the park? This effort is clearly driven by both organizations. I hear it every time I go to the committee meetings. Aslo I never said anything about "taking over the whole city". There is however a very real effort all over this country to close access to public land from both these groups. Its real and undeniable. Look at what they are responsible for in Hatterass N.C. Up there they are considered persona non grata. Many long standing family business that were already having trouble because of the economy could not stand the strain beach closures had on business there. They are gone. The people that own homes there are prevented from access to the beach and water by huge unnecessary, restrictions. In some cases they are not even allowed to walk to the dunes on their own land across boardwalks they built and paid for. Some business even hang signs telling Audubon to go home. Most area business will not serve anyone associated with them or the Fish and Wildlife Service. I am sure that in many instances Both the Audubon and Sierra Club have done good works. But that is not the case here and in many other places. They are not saints and should not be given any status beyond "special interest group".

Our battle here is much smaller but it still carries huge implications for the people of this town. Going to the beach is not a "right", its a privilege and I want the candidate that will make sure that privilege remains intact.                 

   

It's people like this that will allow our public lands handed over to the riches guy around and any work toward this should be stopped now...this person must work for the port auth. or something...i've seen our mayor take marsh land and turn it into a parking lot a offices...enough of this already....stop the thievery of our land....

[kitester]

The theft of our parks is what I have been talking about this whole time. Its not the sell off of public lands that is the real threat. It is the loss of access due to the overzealous efforts of the Audubon and Sierra Club. There is one place left in this area that people have real access. They have consistently tried to remove that access. The statements made by candidates are (most of the time) presented in a way that covers their butts. So when one of them says all options are on the table including the one for selling off public lands they usually qualify it by adding those lands would have to meet certain criteria. Hogan said he would consider it is as long as those lands held no ecological or historical value. All land has some element of both DUH! What scares me is when a candidate is endorsed by a group that has already stated that closing Huguenot Park to make it an ecological preserve is a goal for them. I would not support any candidate that would take support from any organization that has specifically targeted this last true beach access place for the people of this city. I hope all of us who enjoy the beach will vote to keep access and improve it not to restrict it to the point we all just have to sit home and watch beach tv.

[kitester]

The above mentioned dune project has been nearly completed. Between 5 to 10 volunteers spent 4 t0 6 very hot hours a day for the past 4 days on it and got it done! Thanks to all those who helped remove the invasive vegetation from the Tern nesting area. Today will see the final clean up of the area. Any who show up to help can be part of the clean up of trash in the dune areas. There is not much. Where long pants and a light color long sleeve shirt. The sun is brutal and the area does have rattle snakes in it. The clean up is organized in the first pavilion (the one closest to the ocean)

[kitester]

Well its been a while and it seemed like a balance had been reached between the audubon's agenda to remove people from the park and the park patrons ability to enjoy it. The bird fence was in place a week before baby birds fledged onto the beach forcing the park to close the gate at LOW TIDE on the Memorial Day weekend. And, while the Red Knot migration did not reach the protection trigger number of 50, volunteers were on hand to direct people away from the few that did arrive at the park for a few weeks. The Laughing Gull chicks are running early this year and many are already flighted. The Tern Chicks are on schedule and there are probably several hundred on the beach in zone 12 near the north point.  But, alas there seems to be no rest on the part of the Audubon to push for more unnecessary closures. The city was trying to keep the inside shoreline open for the jet ski crowd, fishermen to the only deep water access in the park. It seems now that there is a chance that some Terns might fledge out onto the point along the back side. The response is to close ALL of the inside shoreline instead of just the affected area. Again the Audubon is attempting to remove as much access as possible in an attempt to turn the park into a bird sanctuary. Remember that it is their goal to shut down the park as much as possible. They have said it, the Sierra club has said it and they continue to push for it. And even though they have been quiet about it lately they will not stop until all driving on the beach is eliminated. Audubon has been caught in outright lies (not just here) and because they field representatives that seem to be experts their word has been accepted as truth. But I can tell you this. It has come down to money. Paid Audubon representatives are dependent on the controversy for their livelihood. The more conflict they can cause the more secure their paid positions are. Now I do not refer to the volunteers that you may see on the beach. They believe they are doing a good deed and in many ways the do. Asking people not to chase the baby birds or feed the gulls is worth while.  But they have been unwittingly led into this controversy. So don't blame them. They just believe they are trying to help. And by the way the "education" Audubon is giving these volunteers is very lacking. I had one that tried to get me to walk right where the baby birds were instead of away from them. The paid lobby behind the efforts to close the park should be removed from the equation. I bet that if those people were not being paid they would not spend their days in 100+ degree heat carrying cameras and tripods and notebooks through the soft sand. If you think they are just there to take pictures of the birds you are wrong. They are there to try to photograph anything that could be used to support the claim that people need to be removed from Huguenot Park. And now there is a new development. As in any normal, natural environment when you have a large colony of nesting birds you will always have predation. That is nothing new. Laughing Gulls eat the Tern eggs and chicks as well as their own chicks and eggs. Eagles and hawks have been snaking on baby and adult gulls and probably terns (I have not seen any predated tern bodies yet). But apparently there has been some evidence of a fox in the area and possibly an opossum. This is great news! The natural order is returning. After the controlled burn ran all the predators out of the area there was a huge explosion in the gull population. That is one of the reasons the Audubon wants this area so badly. They believe they can prevent most natural predation of the birds there.

On the north end of Talbot Island only 4.5 miles from Huguenot Park there is a place very much like the Park that is three times it's size. It is the original nesting ground for the terns and gulls. But you cant get there by car and its a long, long walk through the sand and you can only walk there at low tide and access through the woods is very hard and limited. In short the only people up there are the ones who go there by boat mostly to fish. Most of the area is posted most of the year or all of it to prevent people from walking where birds are nesting. In addition there is an actual island where Black Skimmers and terns nest. But the area is exposed to the natural predation that occurs every where. Fox, raccoon, opossum, bobcat, snakes, hawks, eagles and possibly bears all have access to the area and of course will take an opportune meal if possible.

We used to have all those at the park with the possible exception of bears.  The Audubon pushed for the controlled burn to encourage terns to nest there. In the process they effectively removed the competing wildlife. They also created the "perfect storm" of Laughing Gulls which now outnumber all the other bird species in the park many times over. In effect they they set up a huge imbalance through their meddling. Many of the different bird species we used to have at the park have gone elsewhere because of the very aggressive gulls. But wait! If natural predation is returning to the park wouldn't that be a good thing?

Not according to the Audubon. They now want the city to set traps! Just as they have pushed for in North Carolina where natural predators are shot or trapped they are pushing to maintain the imbalance at the park by trapping animals that might prey on birds. If anything the city should reintroduce natural predation. Not only would it bring the bird populations back to normal but as with any natural environment those populations would produce healthier offspring and better stock for future generations. We would have a more diverse bio-culture at the park and that is a sign of a truly healthy environment.

It is very clear that all normal logic and commonsense has been set aside in favor of a paid lobby that sees further conflict and imbalance as a way to job security.                             

[north miami]

Last time I was at Huguenot was late last fall.

Normally that time of year finds me in the area hunting woods;lease,National Forest and state lands we have fought hard to protect.

With plenty of hunt season left and mindful of past harsh winter, the Seabreeze land called.It was snowing in Ohio,and here I was with incoming tide swirling around my waist,favorite spin rig in hand,fancy newest life like lure,exact real thing fish rendition other than the two sets of treble hooks.

Being out in these places creates for many folk a reflection on things, conservation politics.In my mind I pictured the faces and thanked God for those that worked to preserve Talbot,Ft.George.And the mind wanders to current regression,the likes of Kitester et al..........

Cast is flubbed,the lure suspended in the sea breeze..........rod bends....heart sinks.....a Gull has snatched it.....and now another hooked on the fake fish...gulls swarming in from all points.....like an out of control kite,a horrendous blob that snaps the 8 lb. mono.

I have not been back since.Good for all of us both human and avian.

Many of us inclined toward a little stroll to the cut can simply skip Huguenot,the cut is easily accessed via Talbot State Park southerly parking lot.It's better there.

[kitester]

Its interesting how I am some how linked to some sort of a regression. But, think of it more as form of balance. it is a sad thing that we are forced to choose us or them by people who really don't have any better way of making a living than to try to bring about more conflict in a place where coexistence should be available for all. The truth is that there is nothing to "save" or "preserve" there except public access. None of the species found at the park are endangered or even listed as threatened. There is no huge environmental injustice to be righted or some last bastion of a disappearing animal there. The bird lobby chose this area because they saw a chance to make money. Its what all lobbyists do. Someone offered to pay people to push for their own little agenda and the lobbyists jumped at the chance to get some.  If there is no "us or them" and everyone is happy with the current protections employed at the park there would not be any conflict to seize upon and no reason to pay people who disguise them selves as protectors. It would be time for them to move on. Well guess what. IT IS! 

If I am part of a regression it is because of the twisted narrow minded actions of groups like Audubon and Sierra Club. For most of my life I worked with those groups and others spending hundreds of hours on bird surveys. I spent many freezing cold mornings in the woods recording owl calls and many days slogging through mud and marsh counting birds. And I did it because I felt there was a real need to collect that data to better understand what was happening to bird species.  I was one of the boots on the ground guys willing to go to great lengths to record numbers as carefully as possible. We were never paid and we had to provide our own transportation and food. At other times I was involved with rehabilitation of wild animals, mostly birds, collecting and transporting sick and injured animals to Bird Rescue or BEAKS.  Even today I still stop to help animals in distress. I have spent many hours cleaning oiled birds. And I still would.

But Audubon, Sierra Club, Defenders of Wildlife and organizations like them have pushed me to a place I never thought I would be. I now see the picture in terms of $$$s. And not in the normal sense. Apparently preservation/conservation pays big bucks. The Audubon listed assets over 80 million several years ago.  And the money pours in from people who believe they are doing a good thing. All the dollars from magazine subscriptions that encourage people to give more money to save the environment stuff the pockets of those organizations. In turn they seek out situations where environmental concerns need a champion. In theory its a good idea. In practice its easy to twist the information until a conflict needing resolution emerges. Then you need to hire people to "study" the problem and lobby for the cause.       

I still would like to think of myself as environmentally conscious. I still help the sick or injured birds or other animals I find. But the lies and efforts of organizations like Audubon and its lobbyists have opened my eyes to the reality that its not really about the wildlife, the birds or the environment. Its about making people believe that there is some sort of cause that must be answered and figuring out how to make a buck off it. Now thats regression.                 

[Noone]

kitester,
I enjoy your perspective. Can you show me that part of our county in the weeks ahead that you have so much pride in?
Legislative protectionism. I'd like to discuss that with you.

[Garden guy]

It's true....there are no indangered birds there and never have been...this space is not a natural space.....we made it...without us...there would be no jetties..its a man mad structure...they were created and should recieve no special support from any group...i don't get it..i've been going there since i was a month old and this place is and will always be a fight for it.

[north miami]

kitester,
I enjoy your perspective. Can you show me that part of our county in the weeks ahead that you have so much pride in?
Legislative protectionism. I'd like to discuss that with you.

the Gulls are really swarming!
Noone,I would say your hands are plenty full already-we take a stand according to where we sit,you have produced some elevation for yet again another largely obscure beat up waterway basically thanks to emerging Internet driver -dangling between a legislative past and future with that waterway.
I bet you will really enjoy the Huguenot/Ft George/Talbot area,and do check out most masterful Kayak put in at Nassau Sound public boat ramp,Byrd Islands.
Learning this area is graphic help in explaining preferences over Hogans Creek,presence of existing Talbot area Vendors.

Kitester,your list of suspect organization lacks reference to one that has helped implement significant regional public access,conservation.Talbot,Ft George,Jennings Forest,Guana,Water Management District TMDL,a full time NE Fla office,Florida Affiliate to the National Organization.Wrote and lobbied the Conservation and Recreation Lands act,Everglades restoration initiative.Public lands access champions,board comprised of hunters,NRA,scientists,general public.Like a church or religion,a different "product" over the Audubons et al............yet still often cast as "anti".That is not balance,that is regression.The Organization: Florida Wildlife Federation

Why not focus on State Agency critique,with as much research and information as if you were entering lawsuit.Personally I have found this approach helps in achieving balance.

Might elevate this thread to something worthwhile.15 pages and waiting.

[kitester]

North,

I am sure you have an opinion like most everybody and yours might not jibe with mine. I do not discount any of the good and valuable achievements accomplished in the past by any of those organizations. I have always supported true conservation and preservation.  The situation at Huguenot Park simply does not apply. As Garden correctly stated the park is a man made construct. The animals there are not in danger or endangered. The real value of the park is as a true public access to the Atlantic and the rivers around the park. Also if this thread does not meet your criteria to make it worthwhile I suggest you spend your time elsewhere instead of belittling the the discussion or the people engaged in it. NOW if you REALLY have something to add please join in. As a real user of the park I am there almost every day in the summer and many days in the winter. Since you have not been back to the park in almost a year I suspect your point of view is to stand back and point a finger. If all you did at the park or Talbot is top water fishing with a plastic lure I would agree that it is probably not the best place. Gulls don't care about the different appearance between artificial and natural baits. They just go for it. Perhaps you would have a better experience if you went to the place known as Black Rock Beach at the north end of Big Talbot Island. Its a long walk through the woods. Its hot and buggy (be sure to wear lots of OFF) and you have to mind your step because of the rattle snakes (pigmy, canebrake, diamondback) and coral snakes. Don't worry 'bout the very large banana spiders that cross the path. They are not poisonous to humans. When you get to the beach you may have to climb down through dense underbrush. And be careful about how you step because what looks like rock is really an outcropping of hard clay that can be very slippery at times. once on the beach you may find that you will be nearly alone except for the people who fish the area from boats. Still most of them are after flounder and other fish but, at least the numbers of Laughing Gulls will be smaller. Terns don't go after artificial baits most of the time. They don't eat trash the way gulls do. In this place you will be able to enjoy a truly preserved piece of original North Florida. This protected and preserved area is many times the size of Huguenot Park and there for all to experience the natural wonder of nearly undisturbed florida coastline and estuaries. If on the other hand you want to take the family for a day on the beach and play in the surf then Huguenot is the place to go.               

[kitester]

It might also be interesting to note that this thread topic in this part of the forum exceeds all but the ones concerning healthcare in views and replies. Clearly this is important to the people of this community. More people use the park for recreation each year than go to Jaguar's games. The loss of access to the park is a real issue for this city.   

[kitester]

SO how many people were listening to the NPR story yesterday about the explosive gull population in San francisco? It seems that the environmental groups there have been trying to convert old salt ponds back into natural wildlife areas. For over one hundred years these ponds have been used to harvest salt. The normal, natural environment was disrupted and a different balance developed. One that included the presence of the salt harvesting industry. And did you get that part about 100 years? That is along time for an area to be disrupted. So long in fact that the disruption has become the norm.  But the rest of the world has continued to move forward in time. Compare the human population 100 years ago in the area to todays numbers. I don't know what they are but how can anyone be surprised that inserting an anachronism such as a redefined bubble of 100 year old "natural" environment into any present day urban area would result in a sustaining  pre-industrialized natural area? Its impossible.  It is just like what we have had happen here on a smaller scale. You can not turn back the clock. Trying to do so more often than not has very undesirable results. I am not against the re-purposing of areas that were used for industry. But to think that the pre industrial balance will be reestablished is ludicrous.

In our case the meddling of the environmental groups is driven by the effort to remove driving on our beaches. This effort has been disguised as a preservation initiative and the birds are just a political tool. And the situation is growing worse. Every one of the Audubon reps I have asked about the gulls over the past several years have told me they detest them. Laughing Gulls are so disruptive to other bird species that most of those species have fled the area to places where the gulls are not so thick. Once again attempts to manipulate the wildlife have back fired.  In public the song and dance of the Audubon and Sierra Club is one of how important and endangered the gulls are. Most people at the park know that the gull population is out of control and the phrase "rats with wings" is used often. And the analogy seems to be accurate in more ways than one. It appears that there has been a third round of breeding activity and egg laying among the gulls. Because of the ample food source, i.e. the city dumps, baby terns and tern eggs, and the ample fresh water from the retention pond near the base of the bridge combined with the exclusion of the natural predation gulls are breeding like rats. Not only did they start about 6 weeks early this year but new fledgling birds have just emerged from the dunes on the point. Less than a week ago I saw gulls breeding. A fourth clutch of gulls may be on the way. To the Audubon this will be music because the management plan they were successful in ramming down the city"s throat states that areas with flightless baby birds should remain closed until three days after the last baby can fly. Last year wild life officials kept the park closed for an extra week because ONE bird did not fly off. The test is to see if you can make them fly by clapping your hands  as you approach. That bird just walked into a half inch of water thirty feet from the person doing the test and stood there. Less than two minutes later people walking down the beach flushed it into the air and it flew several hundred yards. If the breeding season lasts all summer we have baby laughing gulls well into the fall. And the Audubon will shout hooray! Any piece of the park that can be shut down is a victory for them. Any longer period of closure is a victory for them. Even if it means using a bird species they privately hate as a tool to that end. What will happen if the next round of chicks doesn't fly until November? How long will it be before the driving access to the point is permanently lost?   

And how off base can things get? We have  environmental groups causing environmental damage under the guise of preservation and using that damage to further their agenda of removing public access from a man made area. And to be sure it will only get worse. The birds that are breeding at the park are birds that were fledged at the park. Its the only place they know to nest. Once that pump was primed the flow of gulls will continue to increase every year. We now have several generations of adult breeding gulls (and terns) at the park. If the gulls actually are successful in a fourth round there may be no stopping it until drastic measures are used. Unfortunately the solutions sound like anti-environmentalism.  It is not.                     

If these birds were prevented from nesting at the park they would relocate the colony back to the traditional nesting grounds 4.5 miles north at Nassau Sound. If they could be "encouraged" to do that for several years they would probably stay there. The populations would be more in balance and healthy, the colony would be in a much larger area where human intrusion is very minimal and the people of this community would have the access at Huguenot Park restored and protected. That would be a win, win situation. The gull population would diminish over several years, the Tern populations would be healthier, birds that left the park because of the gulls would return and the park would remain as an important access to our peoples best resource, its water.

Its hard to oppose groups like Audubon or Sierra Club. Not only do they have vast resources and are skilled in lobbying techniques. They also seem to have a mandate that makes it hard for our elected officials to stand up to them. They misinform their contributors with warm and fuzzy pleas for support and donations. Their letter writing scams are intended to bend our elected politicians to their will and agendas and they dupe volunteers into "evidence" gathering. Recently one such "volunteer" was caught hiding behind cars photographing people walking on the beach in the no driving zone. When asked what he was doing he said he was taking pictures of people intruding on the wild life area. So it seems they are not going to be satisfied until the park is closed.     

                   
       

[PeeJayEss]

SO how many people were listening to the NPR story yesterday about the explosive gull population in San francisco? It seems that the environmental groups there have been trying to convert old salt ponds back into natural wildlife areas. For over one hundred years these ponds have been used to harvest salt. The normal, natural environment was disrupted and a different balance developed. One that included the presence of the salt harvesting industry. And did you get that part about 100 years? That is along time for an area to be disrupted. So long in fact that the disruption has become the norm.  But the rest of the world has continued to move forward in time. Compare the human population 100 years ago in the area to todays numbers. I don't know what they are but how can anyone be surprised that inserting an anachronism such as a redefined bubble of 100 year old "natural" environment into any present day urban area would result in a sustaining  pre-industrialized natural area? Its impossible.  It is just like what we have had happen here on a smaller scale. You can not turn back the clock. Trying to do so more often than not has very undesirable results. I am not against the re-purposing of areas that were used for industry. But to think that the pre industrial balance will be reestablished is ludicrous.       

So once any area of the world is developed, it must stay developed for the rest of time?
100 years is a geological blink of an eye. Stop tending a developed area for 100 years, and you won't know there were ever humans there.

Is your aim to remove the natural animals from the area so that you can have better access to enjoy the natural splendor of the world around you, but without all those pesky god damn wild animals?
It seems that you want beach access, but that the miles of easily accessible beach decimated by development in most of the county are not good enough for you to use. You seem to prefer the less-developed, less occupied, more natural beach, which I understand completely. But when you get there, you still want all the convenience afforded to you in Jax Beach (access to any point along the beach in your car, bathrooms with running water, etc). There is no shortage of easy beach access around here, does it all have to be that way? If you just want to drive to the beach, go to Jax Beach, where all the natural animals have already been driven out. When I want to get away from the crowd and get some solitude, I put in the work to get there (walking). I'd prefer it if that solitude wasn't interrupted by some lazy jackass in a pickup truck with his stereo blasting, who just ran over a couple of birds to get here.

Mostly I'm just annoyed at this thread, which is no more than a kitester soliloquy of environmental group-bashing by a purported conservationist, who apparently doesn't care much for that nature when its not neatly packaged. It doesn't appear that you have posted on this forum about anything other than Huguenot Park (so bragging about the length of this thread that is made up of almost exclusively your own posts is ridiculous). Perhaps if you were more involved here, we could take you more seriously. As it is now, you are just a pro-Huguenot-access mouthpiece. By the way, are you involved with any organization concerned with beach access? (Surfrider, American Littoral Society, or one of the many non-profits representing fisherman)