NJ Access Lost Due to Fisherman Selfishness and Bad Behavior.
Two many examples of selfishness and bad behavior lately. Thought I would start a listing of all the places we lost or are in danger of losing.
St. Alfonso's: Most everybody knows the story, that access is now restricted there. This is because some joker tried to take a dump in the rectory's bathroom, and then gave a priest a hard time when confronted about it. Why would anybody in their right mind want to give those priests a hard time? :kooky:
Now they have security guards during peak periods, and a very bad opinion of us fishermen.
Lake Takanassee access update
Public access restored at former beach club site
Mayor: Fence on Tak. property aimed to protect historic structures
BY CHRISTINE VARNO Staff Writer
Local fishermen have their beach access restored at the Takanassee oceanfront site in Long Branch after being denied entry at the fishing "hot spot" by a newly erected fence.
http://atlanticville.gmnews.com/news...e/002p1_lg.jpgPHOTOS BY ERIC SUCAR staff The newly erected fence at the former Takanassee Beach Club site on the Long Branch oceanfront. After putting up a fence along the former Takanassee Beach Club property last week, the owner of the site has agreed to keep the gate open to permit fishermen access to the oceanfront, according to Mayor Adam Schneider.
"The gate is open now and it was open all weekend," Schneider said Monday.
The fence was erected last week after the owner received a permit from the city to fence in the property to protect three historic structures that stand on the former beach club property, according to Schneider.
"[The owner of the property] is looking for a solution to provide access while protecting the buildings," Schneider said. "I don't know that you can do both.
"If you surround the buildings with fences, do you have enough access to allow people to the beach?" he added.
http://atlanticville.gmnews.com/news...e/002p2_lg.jpgThe fence at Takanassee that the fishermen are saying blocks their beach access. Activists and environmentalists, along with Councilman Brian Unger, were seeking last week that public beach access be restored at the Takanassee oceanfront site after learning that a fence was erected at the site.
In an e-mail sent to the state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) on Friday, Unger informed the agency that a fence has been erected on the former Takanassee Beach Club property, blocking beach access for fishermen.
Unger is claiming that the fence is violating the terms and conditions listed in the Coastal Area Facilities Review Act (CAFRA) permit granted to developer Takanassee Developers LLC for a project that calls for 19 homes to be constructed at the site of the former beach club.
"It's clear in the DEP permit that prior to and during construction at the site, public access to the beach has to be provided," Unger said.
According to Unger, under the "Terms and Conditions, Physical Conditions" section of the permit, it states that five public access parking spaces must be provided prior and during construction, and access for parking cannot be impeded during construction of the project.
http://atlanticville.gmnews.com/news...e/002p3_lg.jpgThe fence erected at the Takanassee site. It additionally states that construction of the project shall not impair the ability of local fishermen and others from gaining access to the Atlantic Ocean.
In the e-mail, Unger wrote, "I therefore respectfully request that your unit take appropriate steps to remedy this situation."
Isaac Chera, principal in Takanassee Developers, was issued a CAFRA permit from the DEP on Feb. 28 to construct five single-family homes, eight condominium units and six townhouses on the 4.8-acre site on Ocean Avenue where three original Life Saving stations stand.
With the approval come some 30 conditions the developer must adhere to in order to move forward with the project, including preserving the historic Life Saving buildings.
Late Friday afternoon, Unger spoke with DEP officials and said, "I believe DEP enforcement is trying to come up with an interim solution that includes continuous beach access and protects and secures the historic structures, but also does not put an unreasonable burden on the developer."
The preservation of the historic structures on the site is the primary reason Chera erected the fence on the property, according to Schneider.
"[Chera] got a fence permit from the city to protect the buildings from being vandalized," Schneider said. "He said he was having vandalism problems and his insurance carrier had issues with the site being so open.
"His insurance carrier said that if he wants to be insured, he has to protect the buildings," Schneider said, adding, "There are issues about the buildings being preserved."
Chera could not be reached for comment by deadline Tuesday.
Schneider explained that the CAFRA permit does require that Chera provide public access to the beach, but people are questioning when the conditions of the permit are to be enforced.
Schneider said that it is his understanding that the permit is to be enforced once constructions starts and to be continued upon completion of the project.
"He does not have an obligation to provide public access there now," Schneider said. "I don't think that the permit applies yet.
"Once he builds the project, he must provide public access," he said, adding, "If he chooses not to build, he doesn't have to provide public access."
Schneider has spoken about the issue with the city's assistant director of planning and zoning, Carl Turner.
"Carl doesn't know how Mr. Chera can be responsible to provide access during construction," Schneider said.
"Once he is done [with the project], there are very stringent rules that he must provide access.
"If DEP has required access now, then he has to provide access now," Schneider said, adding, "I don't think they did. [The city] has nothing that says Isaac is required to provide public access now."
Schneider explained that Chera is open for suggestions as to how he can provide public access while protecting the historic structures on the site.
"If somebody can come up with a good way to do it and protect the buildings, I am sure [Chera] would consider it," Schneider said.
Unger suggested that a form of security could be enforced at the site to allow for public access, while protecting the structures.
"We have urged them to protect the structures," Unger said. "I think they have a watchman on the property.
"We need access from sunup to sundown," Unger said, adding, "They can do that by locking the gate and then provide security personnel."
No trespassing on the dunes in Mantoloking
Anyone who fishes OC is aware of a few "hotspots". Go there a few times and people will say "Oh you should fish
1.***
2. ***
3*** , that's where the fish are."
The problem with that is it concentrates people in one area, and the logic is flawed. :don't know why:
Those who spend time scouting at low tide can find at least 30 good holes between PP and IBSP. Following all the other fishermen based on rumors and conversations about catches isn't always the smartest strategy.
In the case of Mantoloking, it backfired, and we fishermen will now have to pay the price.
Fin let me know that there are spots in Mantoloking where "no trespassing on the dunes" signs are now posted. The police are seriously enforcing this, as either a new ordinance was recently passed, or they are concentrating on an old one.
Either way, we fishermen will suffer because of this. 4 tickets have been given out already to fishermen, and the police are very aggressive in ticketing. Allegedly, no warnings are given, only tickets.
I know that access walkways and ramps were ripped up there by the storm, so people have been making their own paths, just like they have been doing all the way to IBSP.
I was told that the Mayor heard enough complaints from residents unhappy about fishermen tresspassing through their properties and disregarding private property boundaries. They went to the police and demanded they do a better job.
Meanwhile, we as fishermen were thoughtless. Several guys phoned complaints in to me of fishermen acting like pigs on the beach with the trash from bait, coffee cups, and other fishing garbage. The residents had enough, and now they struck back.
Please tell your friends to be careful if down there. This is not a Public Trust Doctrine issue, as beach access is not being denied.
We brought this on ourselves, guys and girls. Let's try to be a little more considerate out there. :learn:
1 Attachment(s)
Mantoloking warning letter
Here's a copy of that letter. If you think about it, it's a pretty decent thing for the police to do by putting warning letters on cars. They are giving tickets as well, but as I understand it they're looking less to harass fishermen, and more to protect the rights of homeowners.
That's good news, they're doing their job. The rights of homeowners who have their property trespassed on should be enforced.
I bumped into George from the Mantoloking homeowners association the other week, and had a short conversation with him. He seemed a pretty decent guy, and was actually concerned with the fishermen having enough access. :thumbsup:
He talked of rebuilding a stairway on a particular street we were on. He had some reservations about if they rebuilt it, would the winter storms tear it down again. My suggestion was to leave it until the spring. I don't like to see money wasted, even it it's not mine. IMO they are very pro-active about preserving fishermen access, and should be commended for that. :clapping:
I know we have Constitutional access granted by the Public Trust. However, moving forward on these issues, I've learned there are a lot of underhanded things towns can do to take access away, all perfectly legal.
So let's try to get the word out to respect the properties in this area. If you see anyone littering or acting like an idiot, say something to them, or call the police and report the vehicle plate #.
It only takes a few bad apples to ruin it for us all. In the case of the Mantoloking Homeowners assoc, it seems they are more than willing to meet the fishermen halfway. We should try to show them the same courtesy. :learn:
Attachment 8538
