Forwarded from the Washington state Audubon list. Managers at Dungeness
want to restrict some recreational activities that infringe on wildlife,
but they face political resistance. Comment letters [which take an entire
5 or 10 minutes to write] are due by 1 July 96.

David Wright
Seattle, WA
dwright at u.washington.edu

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 96 07:35:10 PST
From: Tim Cullinan <tcullinan at audubon.org>
To: audubon-washington at igc.apc.org
Subject: Black Oystercatchers need you!

The Black Oystercatchers and about 250 other species of birds at Dungeness
National Wildlife Refuge need your help in saving their home.

The Department of Interior has released a long-range plan for the managemen=
t of
public use on the refuge. The refuge managers are proposing to strictly li=
mit
many recreational activities that could have a detrimental impact on wildli=
fe.
This is necessary because human recreational use of the refuge has almost
doubled in the last 10 years. Most Audubon members and wildlife profession=
als
I've consulted with agree that the refuge staff's plan is a reasonable one =
that
tips the balance of refuge management back in favor of wildlife--where it
belongs.

Some local elected officials and proponents of unrestricted human use of th=
e
refuge don't agree. They are placing enormous pressure on the refuge staff=
to
adopt a weaker plan--one that would emphasize the recreational wishes of pe=
ople
over the habitat needs of wildlife. If they are successful, the result wil=
l be
fewer birds and diminished opportunities for wildlife associated recreation=
--
such as birding--on the refuge. Furthermore, it would set a dangerous
prcedent, by sending the message to local elected officials elsewhere that =
a
little political heat is all that's needed to force the Department of Inter=
ior
to reduce its commitment to protecting birds.

Now is the time for Auduboners to come to the rescue! The Olympic Peninsul=
a
Audubon Society passed a resolution and made a strong showing in support of=
the
plan at the public hearings this week. But the refuge staff needs to hear =
from
folks in other parts of the state (and country) as well. Please take the t=
ime
to write a brief note to the refuge managers, encouraging them to adopt the=
ir
proposed plan.

Below are some more facts about the refuge and the proposed plan, and some
exaples of points you may want to make in your letter.

Thanks.

Tim Cullinan
Washington State Office
___________________________________******__________________________________=
____

FACTS ABOUT DUNGENESS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE
AND THE PROPOSED MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR PUBLIC USE

Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) is a 630-acre sanctuary encompassi=
ng
the 7-mile-long Dungeness Spit, Graveyard Spit, and associated tidelands of
Dungeness Harbor in Clallam County, Washington.

Dungeness NWR provides habitat for over 250 species of birds and 50 species=
of
mammals. Eel grass beds and tidal mud flats are especially important to
waterfowl, shorebirds, and juvenile salmon. It is primarily important as a
migration and wintering area, but is also home to some nesting birds such a=
s
Black Oystercatchers. Bald Eagle, Peregrine Falcon, Marbled Murrelet, and
Snowy Plover are some of the threatened species that use the refuge.

The refuge was established by Executive Order by President Woodrow Wilson i=
n
1915. The order specified that Dungeness spit "is hereby reserved and set
apart for...use...as a refuge, preserve, and breeding ground for native bir=
ds.
[And] shall insure the protection of the native birds therein."

The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge system is to "preserve...lands =
and
waters for the conservation and management of fish, wildlife, and plant
resources." Regarding recreation, the goal is to provide refuge visitors w=
ith
"enjoyable recreational experiences oriented toward wildlife, to the extent
these activities are compatible with the purposes for which the refuge was
established." Thus, any recreation permitted must meet two criteria: 1) it
must be wildlife oriented, and 2) it must not conflict with the conservatio=
n
goals.

In the past nine years, public use of the refuge has increased from 66,000
visits per year to 113,000 visits per year. Most of the visits were for
wildlife oriented recreation (such as birding), but a minority of incompati=
ble
recreational uses--such as horseback riding, jogging, wind surfing, volleyb=
all,
jet skiing--threatens both the wildlife and the quality of wildlife depende=
nt
recreation.

Black Brant, other waterfowl, and shorebirds are increasingly disturbed by =
all
of the human use. To protect these birds, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Servi=
ce
has proposed new rules restricting public use of the refuge. The intent is=
to
meet the needs of wildlife first, recreation second. Five alternative rule=
s
packages are evaluated in an Environmental Assessment (EA) recently issued =
by
refuge staff.

The "preferred alternative" selected by refuge managers would close parts o=
f
the refuge to human use during critical wintering and migration seasons, wh=
ile
keeping most of the refuge open for wildlife viewing. It would prohibit al=
l
wind surfing and jet skiing, and restrict horse riding, jogging, and other
beach use to a small area away from the most important bird habitat areas.

The Olympic Peninsula Audubon Society and Audubon's Washington State Office
have reviewed the EA and determined that Alternative D, the "preferred
alternative," is a reasonable and balanced approach addressing the needs of
wildlife and the desires of recreationists.

Local elected officials, some of whom are heavily influenced by the "wise u=
se"
movement, have vowed to fight the new regulations. They insist that the co=
unty
and local communities should have the right to obtain maximum revenues from=
the
tourist industry, even if at the expense of wildlife.
Despite surveys showing that most refuge visitors come here to view wildlif=
e,
county officials believe any restriction of human use will result in fewer
tourism dollars.

Your letters are needed to encourage the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to =
take
a strong stand for the protection of wildlife on the Dungeness Refuge. Bel=
ow
are some points you may want to make in your letter.

"Alternative D" as described in the environmental assessment is a fair and
balanced approach to accommodating both wildlife and recreation. The refug=
e
managers should adopt this alternative as their long range plan.

The incompatibility of refuge uses is a conflict between the DESIRES of peo=
ple
and the NEEDS of wildlife. Recreation is a luxury. Habitat for wildlife i=
s a
necessity--without it the birds cease to exist. There are plenty of places=
on
the northern Olympic Peninsula where people can run, swim, play frisbee, hi=
ke,
ride a horse, etc. There are few eel grass beds and rich tidal mud flats f=
or
waterfowl and shorebirds. Wildlife should have first priority in the limit=
ed
habitat that remains.

A 1995 survey conducted by the North Olympic Peninsula Visitor and Conventi=
on
Bureau revealed that 65% of visitors surveyed stated that one of their reas=
ons
for visiting the Olympic Peninsula was to "view wildlife." Only "visit
national park" and "sightsee" received higher responses. Conversely, only =
1%
said they came to wind surf, 3% to ride horseback, and 4% to motor boat or
water ski.

Recreational activities that are incompatible with wildlife threaten the
ability of the refuge to meet its mandate to provide a safe haven for birds=
.
The impacts of human disturbance on birds have a variety of consequences:
=F9 Disturbance of birds may cause them to leave nests unattended, exposin=
g the
nestlings or eggs to predators.
=F9 Continued disturbance may prevent birds from feeding. This is especia=
lly
important for waterfowl and shorebirds, which feed in shallow water or on m=
ud
flats. These birds must concentrate a full day's feeding activity into the=
few
hours that the tide is low. Continued intrusions by people during low tide=
can
prevent these birds from feeding during critical hours of the day.
=F9 Continued disturbance of birds may cause them to abandon the area, and=
move
them into lower quality habitat, where they have fewer food resources or ma=
y be
more vulnerable to predators.
=F9 Even if feeding is not disrupted, continued disturbance may take its t=
oll.
Every time a bird is flushed, it is forced to use energy it would otherwise=
use
for maintaining its body temperature, storing as fat for its migration flig=
ht,
or using for reproduction. Excessive use of such energy may lead to reduce=
d
survival or reproduction.

Incompatible activities also reduce the quality of the recreational experie=
nce
for people who come to view wildlife. In recent years, refuge staff have
received hundreds of complaints from people who came expecting a quality
birding experience, only to find that all the birds had been frightened off=
by
careless joggers, riders, boaters, etc. The refuge managers have an obliga=
tion
to make wildlife-dependent recreation a higher priority than that not orien=
ted
toward wildlife.

Refuge managers must keep in mind that Dungeness NWR is a national asset, a=
nd
must be managed for the benefit of all Americans--not just for the local
chamber of commerce. Americans expect that the refuge will be managed to
fulfill the mission and goals of the National Wildlife Refuge System, and w=
ill
not be sacrificed to the demands of a local minority who want it to serve a=
s a
county recreational park at the expense of wildlife.

* * * * * * * =
*
* *
Please take the time to write a short letter to the manager of Dungeness
National Wildlife Refuge--and help save this treasure for the birds! Addre=
ss
it to:

Refuge Manager
Washington Coastal Refuges Office
33 South Barr Road
Port Angeles, WA 98362

Comment letters are due by July 1, 1996. Thank you.

Tim Cullinan
National Audubon Society
Washington State Office