Tuesday, August 2, 2011

A Place for Wildlife

A walk on Willard Beach with Laura Zitske of Maine Audubon


Chris Hoffman from SMCC introduced Laura Zitske of Maine Audubon, a wildlife ecologist and director of the piping plover and least tern recovery program. She passed around a baby and adult piping plover in shadow boxes (the birds died of natural causes). Everyone introduced themselves to establish what people would like to learn from this field trip; most participants wanted to learn beach wildlife with an emphasis on piping plovers. Because of high tide, Zitske focused on the beach and above. Piping plovers do not nest on Willard Beach but are found nesting on Maine’s sandy southern beaches.


Humans love the beach; however, it is a very stressful place for wildlife. It ranges from cold, windy, and rainy to scorching hot; these are extreme dynamic temperatures. There is no shelter like a forest canopy; being able to burrow into moving substrate is one coping mechanism. Other wildlife use the beach as a place to pass through, and they in turn attract predators.


Piping plovers are beach specialists and nest on the beach, which is why they are endangered. They are called piping because of their high-pitched whistle. They are seen singly on the beach and rest on the upper beach and the beginning of dunes. They arrive in April. Males make small scrapes in the sand and females lay their eggs (usually four) directly in the sand. The female and male incubate the eggs together for 28 days. Heat is a large concern for eggs. The chicks are born precocious and hit the ground running; within four weeks of hatching, they can fly. The beach provides enough food to raise them. Piping plovers do not mate for life, but are philopatric and pair up with old partners. They will return to the scraping spot, if it was successful, the next year.


Adult defense is to distract or camouflage. Chicks freeze: oftentimes people will pick up the “frozen” chick. If you find a frozen chick leave it alone.


Protective fencing allows plovers to leave nests but excludes predators such as fox, raccoon, and dogs. In ’02 there were 66 nesting pairs in Maine—it decreased to 33 by 2011. Fencing enclosures have been essential to increasing plover populations. In MA and NY they have a greater piping plover population because they have more sandy beach.


A “dirty” beach is a healthy beach. People don’t like the wrack line of seaweed on the beach and it is often swept away; however, wrack helps build dunes, and increases moisture content on the beach. Little arthropods live in there. During migration season you can see the wrack line move (from the birds taking off). In natural beach areas were there is no grooming you can see over time how the sand builds up.


The group watched a common tern and cormorant forage off of the beach. The common tern dive bombs into the water. Common terns nest on islands. Migratory shorebirds have to fatten up on the shorelines of Maine and New Brunswick before their two-day direct flight to South America.

Piping plovers are specialists and gulls (don’t say seagulls!) are generalists.


Common birds to see at the beach:

Greater black-backed gull is Maine’s largest gull.

Herring gull is the most common, grey-black gull with a bright yellow bill.

Ring-billed gull is smaller than the herring gull.

Laughing gull has a black head and red bill; they are nesting here more frequently.

Bonaparte’s gull doesn’t nest here, but passes through. They nest in trees, and forage like shorebirds by tapping with their feet and waiting for food to come to the surface.

Cormorants are fish eaters; they lack the oil gland so they are often seen drying their wings in the sun.

Least tern, the smallest tern, is a specialist, colonial waterbird that forages offshore. There are three nesting sites in Maine. Males have a white stripe by the eye and yellow bill. Call is a high-pitched squeak.

Common eiders inhabit the rock line, offshore and exhibit “creche behavior”: multiple females defend a large group of chicks, even females that have lost young will help defend rocky areas.

Short-eared owls forage for rodents on the beach.


— by Annie Cox

The Status of Maine’s Beaches in 2011

Peter Slovinsky, Maine Geological Survey

with Erin, Lydia, and Sarah from the Scarborough Middle School


Data were collected from about 13 of Maine’s beaches between 2007 and 2011. Measurements were taken along the beach profile in the summer and winter to look at changes in the berm. A grading system was assigned to each of the survey locations (including a letter score, a number score, and a written description).


The surveyed beaches were located between York and South Portland. Between 1993 and 2003, the rate of sea-level rise doubled. In 2010, two significant storms in February and March altered the shape of many of the beaches. During the February storm, Portland experienced the second highest storm surge ever recorded at that gauge. The data collected are meant to inform local and state decision makers. It also gives a baseline data of beach dune elevations and volumes.


The beaches surveyed included the following:


Higgins Beach, Scarborough

Scarborough Beach, Scarborough

East Grand / Pine Point Beach, Scarborough

Kinney Shores Beach, Saco

Ferry Beach, Saco

Goose Rocks Beach, Kennebunkport

Goochs Beach, Kennebunk

Laudholm Beach, Wells

Drakes Island Beach, Wells

Wells Beach, Wells

Ogunquit Beach, Ogunquit

Long Sands Beach, York


A subset of beaches were included in the Maine Beach Mapping Project, which uses highly precise GPS technology and a new USGS system called the Digital Shoreline Analysis System to calculate the overall trend of erosion or shoreline accretion (growth).


Overall, for all surveyed beaches, the vegetation line is increasing seaward by 0.01 meters per year while the high water line is moving landward 1.8 meters per year. The trend seems to be that not enough sand is being transported to the back of the beach. Much of the sand is being lost offshore. This trend is reflected by the profile data as well.

Still to come in the Fall of 2011 is a supplement to the State of Maine Beaches report that will include beach profile data collected in the summer of 2011.


For more info see the Status of Maine’s Beaches 2011 report.


-- by Chris Cabot

Plenary II, An Intercollegiate Debate - Coastal Protection and Private Property Rights: Are Maine’s Environmental Regulations Achieving a Balance?

John Davis, Debate Solutions LLC


Debaters:

Alex Parkinson (AP), Catalina Santos (CS), Harvard University

Ben Saunders (BS), Terrel Taylor (TT), Mary Washington University


John Davis (JD): The purpose for providing honest debate is to support civic engagement on complex public policy issues. Debate is a strong method of that allows people to see both sides. Debate challenges how well you speak and how well you listen. Today's debaters will be discussing an issue at the heart of what is brewing here in Maine - protecting the environment while honoring the rights of coastal property owners.


Position: Yes, environmental regulations do unreasonably infringe on the rights of coastal property owners.


CS: The existing environmental regulations unreasonably infringe upon coastal property rights. The regulations are very confusing, and the way they're implemented, they are not reaching the environmental success that they seek to accomplish. A complicated web of red tape is created by various permitting agencies: Army Corps of Engineers, DEP, EPA, local, etc. without consultation with property owners (example given of Lafayette Hotel proposal). Property owners should have more say in the Sand Dune Rules. The rules should be more streamlined. They are not easy to understand and are hard to implement. Regulations prevent tourism and construction income and jobs for Maine, hurt business confidence and competition and discriminate against low income persons. Maine residents lose revenue.


The opposing team asked questions and CS had opportunity for rebuttal.


Position: No, environmental regulations do not unreasonably infringe on the rights of coastal property owners.


BS: This debate forces us to ask critical questions about the role our government plays. This issue is part of a larger political discussion: we are in a world of climate change. Pragmatic solutions don't exist. Erosion and sea-level rise are causing our beaches to eventually disappear. Without a concerted position by state and federal government, how will we prepare for climate change? Does the government need to step in and lead on this issue? After the (Patriot's Day) nor’easter came through, government and environmental leaders developed an eye for prevention vs. fixing a problem that has already occurred. Regulations in place serve as a bulwark against unintended changes to property.


Rights? We have a right to a healthy and clean environment. The public interest is insufficient (CS's point of view). That the regulations are a confusing web calls for reform, not elimination. Let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater. We should not indict the entire system because some of the regulations are confusing. Private interest will take priority over consulting any regulations. Are they strong enough to take care of these beaches? Coastal property owners are focused on their own interests.

They need higher standards and experts other than themselves who would know better how to protect the environment. What about other public interests? 15% of summer beach users are seasonal and from out of town. They don’t see the process of a storm event coming through. They may not know what things are like in the wintertime. It should be a community’s choice: the responsibility should belong in the hands of someone who is neutral and concerned with everyone's rights.


The opposing team asked questions and BS had opportunity for rebuttal.


Position: Yes, environmental regulations do unreasonably infringe on the rights of coastal property owners.


AP: Winston Churchill once said, "Some people regard private enterprise as a predatory tiger to be shot. Others look on it as a cow they can milk. Not enough people see it as a healthy horse, pulling a sturdy wagon." Do you think it right that environmental regulations are overly burdensome? I am not posing that regulations should be totally repealed. I am asking if potential reform can balance. There are alternative solutions.


Individuals who own coastal property and businesses have vested interest in the environment. These are not terrible, malicious people. They have a strong interest in sanctity of the environment.


Business success is the better consultative mechanism. It brings private stakeholders into the system outside of hardline regulatory approach. Now is not the time to overburden. Maine's economy needs business and tourism to generate revenues. There is a place for consultative mechanisms, to foster communication and balance environmental protections and economic development. Private property owners don’t always do what’s in the best interest of everyone, but we can trust them to do things to protect, preserve, and promote tourism. Property owners and business people know where their bread and butter is coming from.


The opposing team asked questions and AP had opportunity for rebuttal.


Position: No, environmental regulations do not unreasonably infringe on the rights of coastal property owners.


TT: Research and science define the true tragedy of today. Instead of collaborating to find mutually gratifying strategies, deals are made under the table with special interest groups. We cannot afford to play this game anymore. Beaches are threatened by unrestrained development; beaches are vanishing in the name of individual property ownership. Meanwhile, climate change is causing rising sea levels. If LD 219 changed setbacks from 250 to 75 feet, natural landscapes that would prevent inland damages could be developed. Natural services are changed by the construction of seawalls. Jetties + storms cause major damage. Pumping sand out to the beach may seem like a simple fix, but why not prevent in first place? Less costly in the long run. Seawalls cause massive erosion, unpredictable devastation at unpredictable locations. While some erosion may be inevitable, they endanger that which they are meant to protect.


Beaches are an important resource: people come, businesses profit. Is the incentive to protect the beaches, or to make a profit? Will short-term efforts be made to abide by protections, or to adhere to the business community? What is the holistic effect on an ecosystem? How can a business or property owner juggle research and do business at the same time? Do we as a community let them flounder on their own? Maine is people. Maine is a community. Let’s not overestimate anyone. Do we let them flounder? Juggle proximate – or do we help them out? Web? Or streamline process – maintaining restrictions.


The opposing team asked questions and CS had opportunity for rebuttal.


Final Remarks


Position: Yes, environmental regulations do unreasonably infringe on the rights of coastal property owners.


AP: Puff Daddy said, “It's all about the Benjamins, baby.” Our persistent call to a balance between government intervention and economic enterprise. Neighboring states deregulating growth are supporting job creation, when Maine is not and in need of jobs. Regulations have deterred jobs and growth. Maine has an 8.9% unemployment rate. Environmental protection has no bearing on climate change, but businesses see a lack of investment by the state. There is a place for revenue and government stimuli. There will be climate change – building will not make the problem worse. Make hay before the sun goes down. Stave off hardships that will come. Evaluate. Do you prefer the status quo? Regulatory schema that we face is oppressive. We need better collaboration with private enterprise.


Position: No, environmental regulations do not unreasonably infringe on the rights of coastal property owners.


BS: This debate is about dealing with the effects of climate change. Hard-pressed, why shouldn’t we do everything we can to stop it? This is a goal worth pursuing –deregulation is not a goal for Maine. Maine could look like Florida or Ocean City, Maryland. This is about ecology vs. jetties, seawalls and beach pumping – erosion and costs of deteriorating beaches – less beach for hotels, less places for enjoyment and tourists, less beaches for our future sons and daughters. Private property owners are not going in the minor direction: LD 387 weakens building restrictions on sand dunes. LD 442 allows cobble trapping fence – prevents littoral drift. LD 219 reduces setbacks from 250' to 75' – no longer a buffer protecting properties and buildings from waves and storm events. The costs of restoration should be moved from the hands of the community into the hands of people who are creating the problems. Businessman Sir Ronald Cohen reminds us that the choices we make are profound when you have to live with them. Preservation of this place today is the only meaningful choice.


Audience Q & A followed the debate.


— by Holli Andrews

Concurrent Session: Saco Bay Communities Working Together

Panelists: Peter Slovinsky, Maine Geological Survey; J.T. Lockman, Southern Maine Regional Planning Commission; Ken Buechs, Biddeford Citizen Representative, Sea Level Adaptation Working Group


Sea level is rising. What are the impacts? How do communities respond? Science shows sea level is rising 1.9 mm/ year at the Portland tide gauge. The rise is trending on the upper end of the IPCC assessment. A stakeholder group formed in 2004 to rewrite coastal sand dune rules to adopt a two-foot increase in sea level. In addition, a coastal wetland was defined to include the highest annual tide level.


Saco Bay is the largest estuarine system in the area and is comprised of four communities: Scarborough, Old Orchard Beach, Saco, and Biddeford. Approximately five years ago, a coastal hazard resiliency tools project began, funded by the Maine Coastal Program with scientific data assistance provided by the Maine Geologic Survey. The project focused not on the causes of sea-level rise, but on adapting to real sea-level rise. The group developed a regional approach, with participation by towns and the Southern Maine Regional Planning Commission. The project showed that sea-level rise could be tied to a tax revenue loss and showed there should be changes to ordinances such as placing new buildings on piers.


Moving forward, a working group was formed that included two members from each community in addition to J.T. Lockman and Pete Slovinsky. It was funded by a regional challenge grant from the State Planning Office and local match. The group developed a vulnerability assessment that showed potential damage to buildings, wetlands, and roads and used a two-foot rise in sea level. They created a vocabulary for communities to understand. They stimulated potential impacts to natural resources by ground-truthing LIDAR data, determining tidal elevations, demonstrating accuracy in simulating existing conditions using tidal elevations to define marsh habitat inundation, and simulating sea-level rise. The caveat is that topography stays the same since current technology limits changes to this in the modeling process.


The group found that low-lying uplands were shown to be wet (high marsh) in the future. The tool can pinpoint areas that will be under water in the future and can pinpoint where the marsh will move. Saco Bay is currently dominated by high marsh and the tool shows a decrease in high marsh with an increase in low marsh.


The tool also shows what buildings will be impacted by sea-level rise. It can determine where the deepest flooding will be and associated costs. The tool also shows impacts to road infrastructure. For example, certain roads that are emergency access points may be flooded.


The project is expanding to York, Kennebunk, and Ogunquit. For example, Gerrish Island in Kittery could have freshwater ponds on the island converted to salt water after a two-foot rise in sea level. Also, the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard could experience significant flooding with a one-meter rise.


The Action Plan included regulatory changes to shoreland zoning, sand dune, NRPA, and Site laws. Local actions included amending local zoning and the floodplain management ordinance. In addition, the plan attempts to work with other groups to save money and be more efficient. The action plan proposes cuts in red tape by standardizing floodplain management, building code interpretations, zoning ordinance review, and allows non-binding comments during development review that affect Saco Bay from other towns.


Potential regional adaptation techniques include land purchase, emergency access re-routing, tidal flow control, removing tidal restrictions, increasing freeboard required by floodplain management standards, utility relocation and elevating vulnerable infrastructure, roads (example given from 10/25/2010 New York Times Article titled, “Front-Line City in VA Tackles Rise in Sea”), plan capital investment plans with sea-level rise in mind, improve shoreland zoning maps using LIDAR, adjust definition of shoreline to leave extra room for sea-level rise (for example, Ogunquit uses a position of four-feet higher than the current highest annual tide).


by Lisa Vickers

Casco Bay and Watershed Cruise

Jeremy Miller, Trip Leader

1.
Visual Observation and Demonstration of a Lobster Trap in a Fouling Community

Participants were shown a lobster trap that is part of a study to determine what types of surfaces marine species prefer to attach to (vertical, horizontal, rough, smooth, etc.). Ongoing monitoring compares and counts non-native tunicates, sponges, crabs, vegetation, and other species. The lobster trap is observed once a month from May-September. Study results will reveal dominant species and which species are competing for land space.

2. Casco Bay Ferry Ride


The 986 square-mile bay is a very healthy system with good water quality. The water is saltier than most bays, which makes it perfect for lobster fishing. There are 856 marine species in the bay and 150 bird species visit the bay.


Willard Beach in South Portland is monitored by the Maine Healthy Beaches Program. Heavy rain events force untreated raw sewage into the bay and lead to occasional swimming advisories at the beach. Untreated sewage and direct release of pollutants are the greatest negative impacts to the beach and bay.


Fore River and dock areas are sources of polluted sediment. Contaminant levels go up as turbidity increases. A study following a 1995 oil spill in the Fore River (Julienne) looked at the surrounding marshes and their recovery responses. A large number of polychaetes (Capitella spp.) were found. The study concluded that certain marshes faired well, while others did not. It is unknown if those mashes that did not recover well were suffering from the oil spill or another unknown source.


-- by Beth Callahan

Concurrent Session: A Place for People

Panelists: Dan Bacon, Town of Scarborough; Bob Foley, Save Our Shores Maine; Mic Harris, Save Our Beaches; Nancy Veihmann, Wells National Estuarine Research Reserve


Changing demographics, economies: access gets reduced.

I. Bob Foley of Wells

A. Moody Beach case

a. Issues that informed the case

Needs not addressed by Wells municipality:

1. Officers

2. Lifeguards

3. Bath house

b. Costly lawsuit

c. Divisions still exist

d. Can town reach out?

B. Wells Beach Eaton case

a. Public access issue

1. Work cooperatively with CPOs

i. Economic needs

a) Tax base along beach

i) Tourist base

ii) Coastline important commodity

b) Harbor dredge

2. Cooperative agreements seem to be the best method to reach common ground

i. Collaboration to regulate where birds are

ii. Should be a model for other towns

iii. Spoke out against regulations

II. Dan Bacon

A. Beach access initiatives

Higgins Beach

ü Partnered with Lands for Maine’s Future

1. Acquired private parking lot

2. 1.2 million funding

3. Maintains beach access in perpetuity

i. Access important to many users

a) Surfers

b) Beach goers

c) Fishermen

d) Dog walkers

i) Needs for property owners

1. Bath house (for people to change in vs. in the open)

2. Privacy

3. Balance of public and private goods

B. Conflicts of users

a) Nuisances

b) Different on-street parking standards

c) A lot of public dismay expressed

Pine Point

a. Land swap with motel to enhance beach access

1. Made motel and town lands contiguous

2. Drop off, boardwalk, sitting area, bicycle storage, etc.

3. Parking

4. Walkway to beach

ü Process negotiations

1. Viewshed

i. Limit on height

a) Lower fences

b) Lower landscaping

c) Private development constraints

2. Concern over fairness of swap

3. Utility of access (no parking or turnaround)

4. Pedestrian access much improved, views maintained

Blackpoint Park

a. Proposed “sister” to Scarborough Beach

b. New beach and pocket park

1. Proposal by Sprague family

i. Beach park

a) 62 acres of woods, fields and beach

b) Parking area (500 cars)

c) Access point to the beach

2. Potential extension of Scarborough Beach

i. Scale in question

a) Condense the scale of the project

b) Lessen visual impact for the neighbors

3. Currently needs to go to the planning board

i. Concerns if allowed with zoning

a) Impacts to natural character of the area

b) Major changes on the property

c) How can a project like this be balanced for beach access and natural resource management/protection?

III. Mic Harris

A. Goose Rocks Beach

a. Divisive issue

b. Year 2 in the litigation

1. Passionate for beach access

A. Private ownership component

a) In Maine

i) Public access different than in many most other places

ii) Beach = front lawn

iii) Allows CPOs to keep people out

iv) Community mindset missing that exists in other places (that have different beach access rules)

c. Grassroots organizing

1. Would it make a difference?

2. Would the town take stock?

3. Created ‘Save Our Beaches’

i. Passions

ii. Create case for access

iii. Lawsuit to protect the beaches

4. Community healing

i. Issues

ii. Meet at the table

iii. Plaintiffs concerns along with beach access organizers concerns

B. Public Access Doctrine

a. Broadened in some areas to include fishing, fowling, navigation

b. Historically interpreted ‘intertidal’ in these ways

1. Beaches are public, however

i. Access more obscure

ii. Getting there can be a problem

C. Purpose today

a. Strategies

b. Uses

c. Economy

d. Assumptions and accountability

IV. Audience thoughts and questions

A. Still sad about Moody (the impasse is still sad)

B. The CPO is not the enemy

1. Need to look at what the resource (public access) can sustain

2. The beach – used to capacity

i. Increasing access

a) What needs to be addressed

i) Everybody can’t use everything all the time

ii) Societal problem

3. The larger the crowd, the less responsible the behavior

4. As the amount of people on wells beach increase, the care of the beach decreases

5. Legitimate concerns

C. Drake’s Island

a. At high tide, beach gets very narrow

b. People having a picnic on your lawn

c. Inappropriate behaviors

d. Alcohol use

D. Higgins Beach

a. How will parking lots and the size affect the number of beachgoers and will the beach be able to withstand pressures

b. Erosion

c. Water quality

E. Sprague proposal or Higgins Beach parking

a. Audience member upset that numbers haven’t been broken down (how many people can the beach sustain)

b. Resource effects / access

V. How should beach use be improved? Peer problem solving.

A. Audience on Higgins lot/budget

a. We need bathrooms and we need changing rooms

1. Needs to be finished

2. Ask the community to fundraise

Examples shared:

· In Wells: All parking fund goes into the beach account for everything – not general fund at all

· In Scarborough: Same

B. Audience on Kennebunk issues

a. We have a coastal association that drives decisions

1. Has not allowed bath house

2. Nothing allowed to be sold on or near the beach

3. Satellite bathrooms with barriers have addressed the changing issue

b. Overwhelming how many people at Gooch’s beach

1. Dogs allowed only at certain times

2. Monitors (27) pick up trash

i. Monitors need support

ii. Tourists and renters that come to the area

a) How to keep them in line?

c. Audience on Scarborough Beach

1. Over-utilized issues a theme for all beaches

d. Audience on Goose Rocks Beach

1. Private property made this country

i. Live on private road

ii. Issues

a) Private property rights infringed upon by beach goers

b) Access

i) There is plenty of access

ii) People take advantage of the inability to control overuse and types of use

iii) Intentional use of something you don’t own

iv) Eminent domain

c) Simple signage

i) Town won’t do it

ii) Private signs cause conflict with town officials

d) More beach availability? People get together and buy land for public use (like Massachusetts).

C. Any ideas on how to monitor or maintain better beach use?

Examples shared:

· In Wells: Lifeguards don’t just sit, they walk around and interact with people over broader safety issues and etiquette

1. Trash

ü Location of nearest receptacles

ü Cues to dispose of trash and recyclables before leaving

2. Children

ü Safety

ü Diaper disposal

Walking of the beach very successful!

· Idea for Gooch’s?

VI. Access pros/cons and peer problem-solving.

A. Can humans and birds / creatures share the beach?

a. Constant need for monitors to educate

b. People need to speak up

c. Ideas for beach carrying capacity:

1. Theater full? Closed. Can we create similar enforcement for beach sustainability?

2. Entitlement issue

3. How can sustainability and carrying capacity be controlled?

4. Parking lots

a) Full? Don’t allow overflow

Examples shared:

· In Wells – Will not be increasing the parking lot size

· In Higgins – Lots of cottages, so impossible to monitor beach use

ü Should be used to inform the size of the proposed parking lot

· Characteristics of Maine Beaches that make Maine unique

Charles Colgan struggles with these differences

ü User numbers difficult to track

ü Cottages vs. parking

ü How much beach visitors are spending

ü Who can undertake? Do surveys?

· In Kennebunk – Beaches surveys are conducted

· In Scarborough – Are we looking at how many bodies can sit on a beach?

B. Are we looking at beaches as a resource to protect?

a. Compare land trust paths, etc.

1. Preserve the beach for the future.

2. Make beach more attractive – green infrastructure.

3. Rules twisted to get what you want.

b. Scarborough Beach use and parking issues – overuse.

1. Threats incurred by parking lot

a) Threats to the beach

b) Threats to everyone.

§ Piping plovers

§ Erosion

§ Zoning issues

c) Town government completely ignores the town people

2. Economic impact

a) Small beach creates revenue @ $2 million / year (1989 figure)

3. Environmental constraints

a) Shoreland zone and parking lot plan –

§ Porous surface

§ Gravel and grass seeded

§ Gravel primary entrance

C. Open access to beaches pro debate

a. South Portland mayor chimes in

1. Encourage people to use open space

How do you say there are too many people using the park? The green belt? How do we define, without turning people away?

2. Re: theater comparison – different scenario completely. Fire code issues.

§ Vibrancy and excitement must be extended to all

§ What improves people’s quality of life?

§ Obesity issues and how they relate to outdoors and access to nature

§ Today people talk about limiting that use

b. Rebuttal

o Walk down the beach stepping on people’s towels, too many people

o Dunes getting flattened – issues from overuse

o There is a limit to space

D. Goose Rocks Beach

a. Drakes Island CPO question concerning Save Our Beaches law case

1. Are you basing your claim that you want beach access rights by description like the Wells Eaton case?

b. Mic Harris answer

1. Like lawsuits do it evolves

i. Historical use perspective

ii. Utilized by community and the public

iii. Laws (drinking and misbehaving always been controlled)

2. At the end of April, the town used $ on deed research

i. Town unveiled deed researched

ii. The 1st deed to Cape Porpoise = 600 acres conveyed to citizens

ü Beach to be protected and held for the citizens.

ü Next generations of deeds all retained that language

ü People started writing in their deeds

ü www.preservegooserocksbeach.org

3. Audience inquiry: access to GRB?

i. Parking spots along the beach

ii. River on both sides

a) Finite geographic area

iii. Raised prices on parking stickers

a) Roughly 100 parking spots (require stickers)

iv. Various spots along 2 1/2 miles -- access walkways

a) Some are popular

b) Portable kayaks, rowboats set on people’s property while accessing the beach

c) Things town can do about that

E. More on capacity issues

a. Quality of water

b. Advisories don’t help

1. Not a pleasant thing to do

F. Foley weighs in

a. Regulatory standpoint

1. Building standards

i. No standards for beach capacity

ii. Interesting thing for a town

2. Scarborough

i. Nothing to refer to

ii. Impose standards? Have to have standards already established to impose

3. Scarborough Beach in 2010

i. 80,000 visitors

ii. New parking lot proposed will double use of the beach

a) This condition creates the need for a standard to be created

1) Avoid "oops, maybe it’s too much…"

2) Use park as a benchmark:

· Reasonable?

· Too crowded?

b) Scarborough needs to develop a standard beforehand

· Discuss capacity, how you judge it and how to mathematically calculate for planning purposes and preservation.

VII. Wrap-up themes

· Preserve water quality

· Open to enjoyment

· Won’t ever be easy answers to the debate


--by Holli Andrews