Here we are in the middle of the Covid-19 pandemic. Beaches, parks, and other fishing areas are closed or restricted. Bait and tackle shops are closed unless you can call in your order and do curbside pickup. How is it possible that there are critical public access issues that need to be addressed right now, especially when there is widespread public support for stay-at-home and social distancing? Unfortunately, there are two public access issues that need to be addressed during this crisis.
The first public access issue is at the Bay Point Condominiums in Point Pleasant Borough. The condo property is on the east side of the Point Pleasant Canal at the end of Bay Avenue and includes a public access point. In late March or early April someone put up a sign and a barricade at the entrance to the public access point. The sign says, “In accordance with the Governor’s Stay at Home Order Please maintain the State mandated 6 feet social distancing as well as staying 6 feet from our homes/properties for all our safety. . . .” It goes on to say, “THE POLICE WILL BE PATROLLING - BPH RESIDENTS.” Well that sure sounds pretty official, doesn’t it? Except it is not. I checked with the Borough Administrator for Point Pleasant and he wrote back in an email, “As far as the DEP easement for fishing surrounding the condo complex, the Borough of Point Pleasant has repeatedly told the association there that we will not enforce any of their wishes on that property nor do we have the jurisdiction to. The only thing we will do is have our Police Department respond to appropriate calls dealing with emergency situations. Any action happening on the easement there is solely being done by the Bay Pointe Harbor Condo Association.”
It appears that the sign and barricade were put up by the residents of Bay Point Harbor, on their own, without authorization from any governmental agency. This is not the first time the condo association or some of the homeowners have tried to restrict access. The 1982 CAFRA permit for the construction of these condos required a 6-foot-wide public access easement along the canal. In 2013, a homeowner called the police on an angler who was sitting in a chair in that 6-foot-wide access. Anglers were also told that fishing would not be allowed beginning in 2014. As a result of this, a public access complaint was filed with DEP in late 2013. In March 2014, the DEP wrote to the Bay Point Harbor Association and told them that the association was in violation of their CAFRA permit, they could not prevent people from using the access area, and they could not stop people from fishing. Since then, people who fish in the canal in that area have been repeatedly harassed by some homeowners who come out and yell at them. These homeowners tell anglers that they do not belong there and they threaten to call the police. All of this is part of the history of multiple attempts to block public access.
It gets more interesting, though. Immediately south of the Bay Point Condos, at the end of Bay Avenue and adjacent to the condos, is a municipally owned fishing pier and boat ramp. Both the pier and ramp have remained open during the crisis. The Borough feels that there is ample room for social distancing and there have not been any problems there. So how is it that there are no problems at the public area, but a problem at Bay Point Harbor? Sounds to me like the sign and barricade are just the latest attempt to abuse the public’s right to access this area.
In response to the sign and barricade, an email was sent, this week, to DEP Commissioner Catherine McCabe requesting that the sign and barricade be removed. We have not heard back yet but will let you know once we hear back. We will follow up with a formal complaint after the Covid-19 crisis calms down.
The other public access issue is the Edwin B. Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge’s draft Recreational Fishing Plan. This plan is important to us because it will set how both saltwater and freshwater anglers can fish in the refuge. The refuge starts in Atlantic County and extends north to Brick Township in Ocean County. That is almost 50 miles of NJ’s coastline.
There are three components of the plan we need to be aware of and comment on; 1) freshwater fishing; 2) saltwater fishing; and 3) a proposal to ban lead while fishing in the refuge.
Freshwater Fishing
Freshwater fishing is only permitted at Lily Lake in Galloway Township, Atlantic County. The draft plan opens another fishing area at the Middle Branch Trailhead in Lacey Township. Any fishing access (fresh or salt water) should include reasonable accommodation for people who are handicapped.
Saltwater Fishing
This plan ignores opening any other areas to saltwater fishing. Nearly all saltwater fishing in the refuge requires a boat. There are hundreds of miles of tidal streams open to boat fishing in the refuge, but land-based fishing is only permitted at Holgate Beach (closed to all users April 1 to August 31 for nesting birds) and Graveling Point. Two additional land-based fishing (mostly bait fishing) and crabbing locations are Cedar Run Dock Road and Parkertown Dock Road in Southern Ocean County. In total there are four land-based locations in the almost 50 miles of coastline in the refuge.
The fishing plan needs to be revised so that saltwater anglers can walk into fish the refuge using existing sandy, tidal shorelines or in the water along those shorelines. This will not damage the marshes or sod banks. Fishing should be permitted in those locations and not be restricted to reaching them by boat.
It may also be possible to allow additional land-based locations if the access points are effectively managed. New access points through the marshes or sod banks can be monitored to gauge the impact of people walking through to a fishing location. Access points or fishing areas can be rotated to limit wear caused by people using those areas. There are ways to open access while limiting the impact.
We should also not be subject to getting a ticket because we walked in through tidal waters to fish or clam. Right now, it is difficult to tell when you are in the refuge or in an area that is closed. This needs to be clarified in the plan to avoid any confusion.
The Lead Ban
The idea of banning lead in the refuge is based in part on the idea that bird hunters using lead shot have left large amounts of lead in the water. As a result, birds like ducks and geese ingest the shot as they graze the bottom. The birds bioaccumulate the lead passing it up the food chain. We need to oppose this for several reasons to make sure the use of leads while fishing continues to be permitted in the refuge.
First, while freshwater anglers use lead split shot for sinkers, they use one or two at a time and do not lose large amounts of split shot while fishing. The amount of split shot lost by freshwater anglers is statistically insignificant as to the impact that it has on wildlife.
Second, saltwater anglers typically do not use split shot.
Third, both saltwater and freshwater anglers use lead in jigs, lead heads, lures, sinkers, and other tackle that weighs from ½ ounces and up. Leads of this size will not be ingested by birds or other wildlife.
If you would like to view or download the draft of the plan, you can use this link to get a copy. Comments on the plan should be sent directly to the refuge using one of the addresses below. You have until May 1st to submit comments.
