Tuesday, July 7, 2026
Sail Boston® Parade of Sail
Watch it live here or at www.youtube.com/@bostonharbor/streams or
Thursday, October 23, 2025
Crystal Lake Invitational Presidential Ice Fishing and Credibility Derby
Spurious: A Frozen Fish Story
NOTE: The ❤️Miami Beach Cupid Splash❤️ is not the first event I have hosted on Valentine's Day weekend. I hope that you enjoy this column I wrote for the Boston Phoenix ( under my pseudonym Spurious) about the Crystal Lake Invitational Presidential Ice Fishing and Credibility Derby that I hosted in Manchester, New Hampshire during the 1988 Presidential Primary.
It was the Thursday before the New Hampshire primary. I had just finished
the first draft of my New Hampshire wrap-up, declaring Dan Rather and CBS — who
had been among the big winners in Iowa (as Dole beat Bush) — the preliminary
and marginal losers in New Hampshire (as Bush beat Dole). I was beginning to go
through the extensive collection of fraudulent but credible (though undated)
Manchester, Nashua, and Conway hotel, motel, and restaurant receipts that my
agents had assembled for the amusement of those bastards in accounting. That’s
when I noticed an increase in both the frequency and intensity of the telephone
calls from my friend, the outdoors editor of our town's newspaper.
It seemed that the arrangements for the First Quadrennial Valentine's Day Invitational Presidential Ice Fishing and Credibility Derby, which he and I were sponsoring at Crystal Lake in Manchester, New Hampshire, were starting to get out of hand.
“Spurious, pal,” he wheezed in his charming Southern fashion. “This is big. Maybe too big. USA Today has confirmed in print that some of the presidential candidates are actually going to show up. And as if that isn’t bad enough, the United States Information Agency called to make arrangements for a busload of Norwegian journalists or something. And now the Secret Service wants to know what the security arrangements are. People around here are starting to take this thing too seriously. If it keeps up, they’re going to take it out of my hands. I need some help.”
I tried to calm him down, but it was too late for that. So I told him to ignore the candidates and the press reports for a while, to concentrate on clearing the snow off the frozen lake, and to arrange chowder, bait, and ice-fishing equipment. “Try to relax, pal. Chill out. And just to be safe, why don’t you keep one of those big ice augers handy to defend yourself with if anybody tries to screw with us on this,” I suggested.
“I don’t even have an auger yet,” he whined. “And what about security?”
“Just call the Secret Service and tell them that they’re welcome to come by but that they can’t fish unless they have New Hampshire fishing licenses.”
“You don’t understand,” he said. “I can’t call them because they are here. At the paper. Now. Live, with black-and-white shoes and everything. Meeting with management about this doomed Republican debate that they are hoping to salvage. I think they are taking this thing pretty seriously. Maybe too seriously.”
The Birth of the Crystal Lake Derby
But try as we might — and we did get a couple of nibbles — we were unable to lure any of them into spending a couple of hours off the beaten trail, alone in a natural setting, fishing by a stream or on a lake in the wilds of Massachusetts. Even though there are a thousand times as many fishermen as there are NRA members, and despite the candidates’ deep attraction to environmentalists and sportsmen, there was no well-organized fishing constituency or serious fishing lobby to arrange a forum for us. We would have to do it ourselves.
We needed a media event designed to bait the presidential candidates into going fishing with us. So it had to be in New Hampshire right before the New Hampshire primary, and it had to be good enough to attract the press. This didn’t seem too much of a challenge. You remember the toilet poll out of Iowa? Dukakis won on the flush. What we had in mind was much more legitimate, more responsible from a conservationist point of view (it wouldn’t waste water), and ever so much more visual: the first-ever ichthyological caucus — the ultimate fishing poll.
The press was sure to eat it up. If the candidates showed up, we could guarantee some great shots: a squeamish George Bush trying to bait his own hook with a shiner, an overdressed Simon hand-reeling a giant pike through the ice, or Pat Robertson hauling a 1,000-pound blue marlin through the hole in the ice and galvanizing everyone to the right of the Unitarians to his crusade. And if the candidates didn’t show, we could go with surrogates. All we had to do was drill 12 holes, assign one to each candidate, rig up the tip-ups with hooks, sinkers, and shiners, set them out on the lake, and wait. The candidate whose hole yielded the biggest (or first) fish would be the winner.
All we needed was the right bait: for the candidates, in any season, the right bait is the press; for the press, in the week before the New Hampshire primary, the right bait is the candidates engaged in some contest, the sillier the better. All we had to do was tell the candidates that the press was coming, and they would take the bait. And once the press found out that the candidates were going fishing in New Hampshire, they would rise to the occasion like trout to a mayfly hatch.
Chaos and Snowfall
By Friday evening, the situation had deteriorated further. It was snowing, and there was likely to be a foot or more of fresh snow on top of what was still on the lake. Our sources told us that the snow was still waist-deep in the parking lot, and Clem, our contact in the Manchester Parks Department, was avoiding our calls. Apparently, he wasn’t up to plowing the snow off Crystal Lake “after what happened last time,” though no one would tell us what exactly had happened. Worse, the Murdoch rag had withdrawn its institutional support of the event, likely due to the embarrassment following the cancellation of its planned Republican debate. This meant it wouldn’t pay for the chowder or the equipment and probably wouldn’t cover the event.
Finally, by Saturday, several candidates had listed the event in their schedules. On Sunday morning, the Boston Globe was reporting that DuPont and Kemp had confirmed their attendance. By then, dozens of journalists were arriving at an unplowed parking lot near a snow-covered lake to attend an ice-fishing derby sponsored by two guys from Massachusetts — one of whom had never even been ice fishing before.
The Event Unfolds
Saddened by my buddy’s illness but delighted to be free of the Murdochian influence, I set off with my editor and a long-time fishing companion, Vann. After gathering supplies — and charging them to the Murdoch tab — we arrived at the freshly plowed parking lot adjacent to Crystal Lake. With the help of a local fisherman named Glenn, we drilled holes, set up the tip-ups, and prepared for the press.
The media showed up en masse, as did Gordon Robertson, Pat Robertson’s son. Despite my mixed feelings about his father’s politics, Gordon was a decent guy. He reeled in the first fish — a nine-inch jumbo yellow perch — making him and Babbitt the mutual winners.
Reflections on the Ice
As we packed up, I reflected on the day. A Norwegian journalist had asked if I was disappointed by the event. I had told him no — the entire experience had been so absurd it was almost transcendental.
In the end, the derby was a ridiculous spectacle, a microcosm of the New
Hampshire primary itself. The whole “first in the nation” primary process often
feels like a parasitic relationship between the media and the campaigns they
cover. Who the real suckers are remains uncertain, but one thing is clear:
there’s something undeniably fishy about the New Hampshire primary.
-30-
Monday, September 1, 2025
We Saved the "B" Buoy - For Now!
 |
Save the "B" Buoy! |
Thanks to comments by thousands of boaters and with the support of elected officials across the Commonwealth and around the region, the Coast Guard has delayed the plan to "discontinue" hundred of aids to navigation including the Boston Lighted Whistle Buoy B LLNR, better known as the "B" Buoy.
Though
we understand the need for modernization, removing these aids to
navigation - including the "B" Buoy - is a bad idea. Mariners rely on them for safety and guidance. Though traditional GPS and navigation apps are terrific, we are all just a dead battery away from relying on paper charts, magnetic compasses, buoys and other navigational aids to make it back to our home ports safely.
Moreover, one severe solar
storm or electromagnetic pulse
could wreak havoc with marine GPS navigation systems and cellular
networks, putting both the commercial fleet and recreational vessels at risk.
The
proposed buoy discontinuation summary can be viewed through a
smartphone or tablet by scanning the QR code above, or for more Proposal
details with other navigation information, through the Coast Guard’s
Local Notice to Mariners interactive tool on the NAVCEN web page at:
Maritime Safety Information Products | Navigation Center here using follow the following steps.
1.
Position the electronic chart to the area you wish to see. You may zoom
in and out to view more detailed or expanded area. (Note: It’s
recommended not to zoom too far out to help limit your selection, so the
appropriate data is rendered)
2. At the top right of the page, left click the layers icon and select the Proposed Notice of Change layer, by checking the small box to the left. Once selected any current Proposal running in the LNM should appear, on the chart. The aids to navigation will be highlighted on the chart.
3. To view the proposed aid to navigation, left click on the highlighted buoy and an information box will appear with more detailed Proposed Notice of Change information.
We expect
the Coast Guard to come back with a revised plan in the coming months,
and will let you know when the public comment period begins.
To stay informed on this, follow bostonharbor on Facebook
Monday, January 13, 2025
From Boston to Miami Beach - With Love
The Cupid Splash “Polar Plunge” Fundraiser is coming to Miami Beach on Valentine’s Day weekend!
On Sunday, February 16th, when water temperatures off Miami Beach are at their coldest, hundreds of brave souls will “get cold for a cause” at the 1st Annual Miami Beach Cupid Splash. Contestants will compete for great prizes including two round trip tickets to any destination American Airlines serves in the Continental United States for biggest fundraiser, with other great prizes for the largest team and best costume. At noon participants will simultaneously dash into the water, making a very big splash!
According to event organizer Bruce Berman, the Miami Beach Cupid Splash was inspired by an annual event on Boston Harbor, which has generated more than $1 million dollars to support free youth environmental education and beach programs on the Bay State’s public beaches.
“For years I splashed in Boston Harbor for Save the Harbor/Save the Bay, where the water temperature in February was a frigid 38 degrees,” said Berman, who served as Boston’s Bay Watcher for more than 30 years. “Now that I am older, wiser and spending the winter in South Beach, I am looking forward to continuing that tradition here in 305, where the water will be a chilly 68 degrees. Sure, we will be cold for a few minutes on the beach, but the warm feeling we will get from raising funds for a great cause will last a long time.”
Miami Beach Mayor Steven Meiner welcomed the Cupid
Splash to Miami Beach. "This event highlights our city's commitment to
protecting Biscayne Bay," said Mayor Meiner. "Let's make a big
splash and contribute to a safer future for our community."
100% of the pledges from the 2025 Miami Beach Cupid Splash will go to the Biscayne
Bay Recovery Fund, managed at The Miami Foundation. Berman, who pioneered
the Boston Splash, expects the event to raise $50,000 to support efforts to
clean, protect and restore Biscayne Bay and support the Zeros Drownings Miami-Dade
Initiative, as well as youth fishing, conservation and environmental education
programs in 2025.
“Florida’s Biscayne Bay is a cherished resource for locals, an undeniable draw
for tourists, and home to some of our State’s most iconic species, including
storm-reducing mangroves and coral reefs,” said Miami-Dade’s Chief Bay &
Water Resources Officer Loren Parra. “We’re inviting residents and tourists
alike to take the plunge as we raise funds to protect our County’s blue heart,
Biscayne Bay. We hope to see you all on the beach!”
This year WPLG Anchor, Reporter and Environmental Advocate Louis Aguirre will lead the charge into the sea on February 16th at Collins Park Beach at 21st Street. Aguirre will also be honored as the first Miami Beach Cupid Splash H2O Hero for his outstanding efforts to focus public attention on efforts to cleanup Biscayne Bay and protect the marine environment.
“As
a staunch defender of our planet's natural resources, including our beautiful
bodies of water, I'm glad to be a part of the Miami Beach Cupid Splash to raise
money for the Biscayne Bay Recovery Fund at The Miami Foundation,” said
Aguirre. “I hope you will support my Splash with a contribution today - and
register, start a team and join us on the Beach.”
You can make a tax-deductible contribution to support Louis Aguirre’s Splash at https://charity.pledgeit.org/miamibeachcupidsplash/@Louis
This year’s Grand Prize for largest fundraiser is two round trip tickets
to any destination American Airlines serves in the Continental United States,
with other great prizes for the largest
team and best costume.
"Biscayne
Bay is more than just a beautiful backdrop—it's the lifeblood of our community,
economy, and environment," said Irela Bagué, former Chief Bay
Officer for Miami-Dade County. "Let’s come together to show our love
for the 'Blue Heart' of Miami-Dade! Register today, rally your friends, raise
funds, and join us on the beach on February 16th for an unforgettable day of
action and celebration. Together, we can make waves of change for Biscayne
Bay—be part of the movement!"
You can make a tax-deductible contribution to support Irela Bague’s Splash at https://charity.pledgeit.org/miamibeachcupidsplash/@irelabague
It is easy to register, start a team, make a donation and raise funds to
support the Miami Beach Cupid Splash at www.cupidsplash.org
Registration is free until February 1, so don’t delay. Register today at www.cupidsplash.org and join us at Collins Park Beach on February 16th.
Learn more about the Miami Beach Cupid Splash on our blog at https://cupidsplash.blogspot.com/
Follow us on Instagram at Instagram at https://www.instagram.com/cupid_splash/
Social Media Hashtags #cupidsplash
#miamibeachcupidsplash
Friday, February 9, 2024
Hopefully Not!
Will this be the last Mass Bay Outfall Science Panel Meeting?
| Thanks to Shane Dwyer of MASS DCR for this great video! |
Please join us on Friday, February 9 for the annual public meeting of the Outfall Monitoring Science Advisory Panel (OMSAP) related to scientific and technical matters of the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA)’s Deer Island outfall and any potential impacts of the discharge on its receiving waters. The meeting will be held from 9:30 AM – 3:00 PM EST with a Public Interest Advisory Committee (PIAC) meeting to follow from 3:00 – 4:00 PM EST.
Join on your computer, mobile app or room device
Click here to join the meeting
Meeting ID:
247 469 702 839
Passcode:
grrEB8
Bruce Berman
2003 Commonwealth Avenue #26
Brighton, Massachusetts 02135
1-617-293-6243
bruce@bostonharbor.com
Michele Barden
US Environmental Protection Agency - Region 1
5 Post Office Square, Suite 100 (06-4)
Boston, MA 02109-3912
Submitted via email: barden.michele@epa.gov
Claire Golden
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, Surface Water Discharge Program 150 Presidential Way, Woburn, MA 01801
Submitted via email: MassDEP.npdes@mass.gov
Michele and Claire,
I am writing to you today as the Chair of the Public Interest Advisory Committee (PIAC) of the Outfall Monitoring Science Advisory Panel (OMSAP) with my concerns and comments on the proposed revisions to the Deer Island NPDES permit MA0103284.
Though the 68 page permit and the accompanying 195 page fact sheet made great summer reading, they are complicated technical documents, which require subject matter expertise to evaluate.
To help me, PIAC, and the public to better understand the proposed changes, I looked to the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) and the Wastewater Advisory Committee (WAC). I share their concerns that the requirements in the draft concerning Ambient Monitoring, Harmful Algae Blooms, CSO sampling frequency, and storm event plans, which are unrealistic, overly proscriptive and inflexible, and place an undue burden on the 43 MWRA cities and towns.
I also urge you to carefully consider the comments from the Outfall Monitoring
Science Advisory Panel and ask you to include a Science Advisory Panel and a
robust monitoring plan with specific questions in the permit.
It is particularly hard for me to imagine that you can pull
together an effective monitoring plan in 30 days. It took more than one year, a
well-attended scientific conference, and countless hours of peer reviewed
research by OMSAP members and others to prepare the white papers on emerging
contaminants and microplastics that inform the current monitoring efforts. The
data set produced by the monitoring program shaped by OMSAP is invaluable to
our understanding of the dramatic changes we have seen in the Southern Gulf of
Maine in the past 30 years and likely will face in the coming years as well. Though
the initial questions we framed together have been largely asked and answered,
new questions have emerged which the monitoring needs to address.
I was pleased to see that in this draft you have revised the well intentioned, but
unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious and costly decision to require the
MWRA’s cities and towns to pull together individual storm event plans based on
speculations about what the situation will be 100 years from now in just 12
months. Under the initial language in the prior draft permit, Community A and B
might produce individual plans using very different assumptions and
methodologies, while adjacent Community C would not be required to produce a
plan at all. Planning for climate change is critically important, but to be
useful it has to be comprehensive and not piecemeal.
This permit clearly took a very long time to produce, as we have been waiting
for the US EPA’s promised draft permit for more than a decade. From my
perspective, it seems unrealistic to expect the USEPA to thoughtfully revise
the permit every five years, which they have been unable to do in the past.
At the same time, given the rapid changes to the Gulf of Maine due to global
warming and storming, which have resulted in dramatic changes in the species,
extent and duration of algae blooms, and the range of black sea bass, lobsters
and invasive species like green crabs and the Asian shore crab, five years is
an awfully long time.
Under the circumstances, I’d urge you to build more flexibility into the
permit, and to continue to provide opportunities for both independent
scientists with subject matter expertise and the public to have near real time
input into thresholds, exceedances and the monitoring regime.
For more than 20 years, OMSAP and PIAC have played a critical role in helping
the regulators and the public understand and respond to the impacts of the Mass
Bay Outfall on the changing marine environment. For reasons that I still do not
fully understand - in part because those who made the decision within the US
EPA are not permitted to freely discuss their thinking – the US EPA has chosen
to remove both OMSAP and PIAC from the permit, which I believe is a big
mistake.
The men and women who volunteer to serve on OMSAP bring subject matter expertise and institutional resources that have clarified our thinking and increased our understanding of the impacts of the 250 million gallons of effluent we currently discharge into Mass Bay.
Their work has made it possible for us to keep the commitment Judge A. David Mazzone and Save the Harbor/Save the Bay’s Founding Chair Beth Nicholson made when the Mass Bay Outfall went online in September of 2000: The Boston Harbor Cleanup would not come at the expense of Mass Bay or Cape Cod.
By my calculation, OMSAP members have contributed more (much more) than $4 million dollars in in-kind contributions to make certain that the Boston Harbor cleanup did not come at the expense of the health of Mass Bay. The idea that the expert advice and institutional resources this panel provides can be replaced by a handful of well-intentioned government regulators with very full plates seems silly.
PIAC also performs two functions that are critical to the continued success of the Boston Harbor Cleanup. We share the public’s questions and concerns about the impacts and potential impacts of the outfall on the public’s health and the health of the Boston Harbor, Broad Sound, Mass Bay and the Gulf of Maine with OMSAP, and share OMSAP’s answers and insights with the public and the press.
Over the past twenty years I have often reached out to the group and individual members of OMSAP with questions from the public and the press about algae blooms, fish kills, unexplained marine mammal mortality, dissolved oxygen concentration and saturation, and emerging contaminants. Sometimes they seemed silly. Sometimes not.
In every case, no matter what the question, I have received a prompt, forthright, and collegial response. They have attended numerous meetings on their own time and at their own expense to explain complicated facts to sometimes skeptical advocates, activists and the public.
Over the same period, I have often reached out to the men and women of EPA Region 1 with similar questions, many of whom I consider my friends and allies. Though they have often been frank and forthcoming, too many times I have been told that they cannot freely discuss the matter with me on the record because of legal, political or policy concerns.
In 2017, for example, Trump Administration officials e-mailed staff to inform them that they could no longer discuss agency research or departmental restrictions with anyone outside of the agency—including news media. That same administration subsequently attempted in 2020 to limit which scientific data and studies the EPA could even consider in its decision making.
Good decisions require good data, sound science, subject matter expertise and peer review. Good public policy requires transparency and the free exchange of ideas.
For more than 20 years, OMSAP and PIAC have provided
decision makers and the public with good data, subject matter expertise, peer
review, transparency and the free exchange of ideas and information critical to
informed decision making.
The direct cost of both OMSAP and PIAC to the Commonwealth is minimal –
postage, a part time staffer, and occasionally lunch at a meeting. I strongly
urge you to find a way to keep both OMSAP and PIAC in the permit. If it helps,
I’ll buy lunch for as long as I am Chair.
Thanks for your time and attention.
All the best,
E. Bruce Berman, Jr., Chair,
Public Interest Advisory Committee, Outfall Monitoring Science Advisory Panel
Saturday, November 11, 2023
Island of the Damned
Island of the Damned
The bombing of a wildlife sanctuary
by E. Bruce Berman, Jr.
First published in The Boston Phoenix on August 14, 1987
The bombing of a wildlife sanctuary
by E. Bruce Berman, Jr.
First published in The Boston Phoenix on August 14, 1987
On Wednesday I dropped by Gus Ben David's house at the Mass Audubon Society’s Felix Neck Sanctuary, on Martha’s Vineyard, having spent three of the previous five hours (starting at 8:30 am.) in an open 26-foot long boat in rough seas watching two Phantom jets bomb and strafe another wildlife sanctuary, Noman’s Island, six miles to the south of Gay Head.
Listen on our podcast on Spotify
Surrounded by owls, eagles, hawks, and other birds of prey,
Ben David, 44, is a former nuclear-weapons specialist who now serves as head
honcho on the Vineyard for the Mass Audubon Society. As we spoke about just why
he favors Navy bombing and strafing at the Noman’s Island sanctuary but opposes
human visitation to the island (especially by picnickers), he tossed shredded
bird wings (with the feathers still attached) to the fledgling kestrel hawk in
the trees.
After an amiable hour or so, we concluded our talk, and he took me downstairs
in his house to show me the biggest damn Burmese python I'd ever seen, which he
doesn’t take out much now that it’s eating whole chickens and could easily kill
a young human.
Ben David lives in the only house at Felix Neck, with a spectacular view of the
sanctuary and the family of osprey that are its best-known new residents. From
his deck he can keep a watchful eye on the property for the Audubon Society
and: care for (and work with) the eagles, owls, falcons, hawks, and other birds
of prey that live in the sheds behind his house. “I took my first red-tail hawk right out of a
nest when I was nine years old. I took it illegally, but that just proves how
much I love them,” Ben David told me. And he has been enraptured by raptors
ever since.
Today’s Ben David's feathered charges are mostly orphans, injured birds brought
to him by woodsmen and nature lovers; though most of them can never be
released, they flourish under Ben David's care and provide a valuable resource
for teaching the island’s children and visitors about birds of prey.
Gus Ben David is not the only naturalist on the island, but he is the best
known. When an animal (even a skunk or raccoon) is injured or abandoned, or a
fledgling hurt in a fall from its nest, people bring it to Gus. And he nurses
it back to health and, if possible, reintroduces it into the wild. Folks know
he cares, and they listen to him and in general share his goals and cooperate
with his efforts — with sometimes spectacular results.
Take the osprey, or fish eagle. Once near extinction because of DDT and the
destruction of the high trees that are its preferred nesting sites, Ben David
secured the cooperation of island residents for a program to place osprey
nesting poles at various sites around the island. In 1971 there were just two breeding
pairs on Martha’s Vineyard; this year, thanks to his efforts, there are 41
breeding pairs of ospreys on the Vineyard. Once again visitors and residents
are treated to the sight of these majestic birds.
Precisely because Gus Ben David is the unchallenged spokesman for and champion
of the wildlife on the Vineyard, it is hard to understand why he defends so
vehemently the Navy's daily bombing and strafing sorties against the wildlife
sanctuary at Noman’s Island.
Since the Navy took possession of the 640-acre island from the Crane family, in the ‘40s, Gus Ben David has probably spent more time on Noman’s Island than any other civilian. He has, to use his military metaphor, “both the time and grade” to speak with authority about the status of the wildlife on Noman’s Island.
As a Vietnam-era “special weapons” expert
in a nuclear-weapons group, Ben David is
proud of his service to the country and
committed to a vigorous national
defense. He also has the “time and
grade” to evaluate the impact of the regular
strafing, burning, and bombing that have
become a center of controversy on the
Vineyard since the island was made a
wildlife sanctuary by the federal government,
in the early ‘80s.
Noman’s Island is the only bombing range in the Northeast air corridor and as such is very important to the military. And because, as a Navy spokesman put it, it would be “prohibitively expensive” to purchase another island to replace it, the Navy is committed to carrying on the bombing and strafing despite local opposition. So, it was not surprising that the Navy turned to Gus Ben David for help in conducting its evaluation of the status of wildlife on Noman’s. They speak the same language and share a similar commitment to a “strong America.”
During our first conversation, Ben David
volunteered the opinion that “it was a
mistake not to use nuclear weapons in
Vietnam.” He describes himself as a
“strong supporter of our nation’s
military”; he maintains, however, that
his approval of the bombing at Noman’s
is based not solely upon its military
importance but on the “relatively
positive’ impact the bombing has on the
island’s ecology and wildlife.
‘“Noman’s Island has been used by the armed
forces as a bombing range since World
War IL, yet it is still pristine, a virtual
paradise on earth for wildlife,” Ben
David told me as he tossed yet another
piece of bloody bird wing to the kestrel.
“The terns and gulls are flourishing. It
provides a secure habitat for four or
five species of reptiles, including
snapping, painted, and spotted turtles.
The greatest threat to that sanctuary is
human use, human visitation. Sure, I see
the irony, but the best way to keep
people off it is to continue the status
quo, to continue to use Noman’s for
target practice, as a bombing range.”
Ben David maintains that the negative effects
of the bombing are minimal. He concedes,
for example, that the live ammunition
and the explosive force of the bombings
result in regular- brushfires, but he
asserts that “controlled burning is a
generally accepted wildlife- management
tool.’” When I pressed him, he admitted
that he doesn’t permit fires at Felix
Neck and has never used controlled
burning as a tool at the Audubon
Sanctuary there. And though he pressed
charges against some local children for
throwing rocks at gulls, he maintains
that the impact of the smoke bombs (euphemistically called “flour sacks”) and heavy-caliber ammunition that the Navy’s Phantoms, F4s,F5s, F15s, and Fi6s throw at Noman’s between 8:30 and 10:00 most every morning is minimal, certainly not as disruptive as day-trippers would be. And he continues to
maintain that the bombing of the Noman’s
wildlife sanctuary is the best way to
protect the wildlife.
Sitting on his deck, watching the peacock
that roams free in his yard, Ben David
observed, “The real danger is human
visitation. Last year the folks in the
peace flotilla planted some Asian variety
of tree out there, to commemorate Hiroshima
Day. This year they may introduce some
other foreign species, like deer ticks,
which could disrupt the island's
ecosystem. Regular picnickers and
visitors would trash that island in a minute,
destroying everything from the bird’s
nests to the beach grass that they claim
to value so highly.”
The trip from Menemsha around Gay Head
and over to Noman’s Island on Thursday
morning took just half an hour on
Captain Chick Lee’s 26-foot-long boat,
the Moby Squid. Unlike the previous
morning, when I'd spent three hours trolling a plug just outside the clearly
demarcated restricted area around Noman’s
watching the bombing and strafing in a
strong northeast wind, the seas on
Thursday were calm, the air was warm,
and everyone, from the network television
crew to the Hiroshima Day Peace Flotilla
organizers, was happy to see the fog
lift and the sun break through.
We tied up to the old pier, still sturdy after 40 years of target practice, and scrambled over the wood and creosote to the shore. I stepped gingerly at first, trying to minimize the impact of my Reeboks on the fragile beach grass. But within a few seconds I stopped trying to step softly because I noticed that, for as far as I could see, the beach grass had been burnt to blackened stalks by the ordnance
that was strewn about the place. There were 30- and 50-caliber shells
everywhere; they had been fired from the
Vulcan cannons and Gatling guns. And
there was lots of larger ordnance, too,
some spent, some not, strewn like giant
blue cigars everywhere you looked. There
were craters from the 500-pound bombs
no longer in use, and within those craters
there were craters from the smaller
ammo the Navy prefers today. There
were-bomb parts, ammo clips, fins, missiles,
and slugs everywhere. And there were
dead birds: common terns and great-black-back
gulls and herring gulls everywhere, in
every state of decomposition.
Gus Ben David is quick to point out that
the presence of dead birds is a positive
sign, indicating that the colony is vital.
“In any flourishing bird population, you
will find dead chicks and dead adults.
It’s part of the process, it’s nature’s
way.”
But my examination of the carcasses led
me to the conclusion that something more
than the natural cycle of life and death
was at work here on Noman’s. And when I
retraced my steps around the island
following the unscheduled mock strafing
and bombing runs that occurred shortly
after the flotilla landed on the beach on
Thursday morning, I discovered half a
dozen bleeding and recently maimed
birds, freshly fallen from the sky,
where the planes had been flying just
400 feet over the island, at about 400
knots.
From a distance the island's flora looks lush and green. But on closer inspection it’s clear that the reports of raging fires on
Noman’s were not exaggerations. The whole island is covered with ashes; the
bayberries and blackberries, brambles and
thickets that cover the land are burnt and
stunted. The topsoil is black from the burnings,
and everywhere the land resembles some
bizarre prairie-dog development, with an
extensive network of tunnels caused by
the repeated strafing and shelling.
As the Hiroshima Day protesters placed
signs that read CAUTION, TERN NESTING
AREA around the island, conducted their
amateur wildlife survey, and caught a
few rays, I spent an hour or so looking
for the pristine paradise Gus Ben David
had described. I couldn't find it. But I
did find signs of the spotted turtles
and other reptiles that he had assured
me were flourishing on the island. The
first turtle I found was dead, burnt
black by brush fires, between the beach
and the ponds on the island. Later —
while the protesters ‘shared their feelings”
and observed Hiroshima Day in a
beautiful ceremony, complete with giant
puppets of white-and-black birds, I found plenty of healthy snappers, painted, and spotted turtles in the ponds, but I was forced to conclude that, if this was a wildlife paradise, I don’t want to know about wildlife hell.
Frankly, it seemed
more like a mortuary than a sanctuary to
me.
The Noman’s Island controversy is a deeply
divisive one. Even among those folks who
oppose the bombing, there are strong
differences of opinion on appropriate
use for the island. The issues of
overdevelopment and land usage, of environmental
protection versus recreation, are deeply
felt on Martha’s Vineyard, where
nature's fragility and power can be
witnessed firsthand every day. These
issues are complicated enough; when
complex war-and-peace issues and
clashing cultures and lifestyles are
introduced, it can get weird as hell.
To understand just why the Noman’s question
cuts so deeply into the fabric of Vineyard
life, one has to understand the pressures
and strains that always lurk just under
the tranquil surface of this island
paradise. There are 20,000 full- time
residents; the population mushrooms to
100,000 on an average summer weekend.
For some permanent residents, the whole
fuss is just the whining of a bunch of
spoiled summer folks who don’t want
their million-dollar views spoiled by
military exercises. One permanent (and
lifelong) resident told me, only partly
in jest, that anything that annoyed the
summer folks was okay with him. And in
the winter, he observed, “the strafing
and bombing is better than any light
show, more exciting than prime-time
television.”
This feeling is shared by many full- time
residents, who blame developers and
summer people for some of the Vineyard’s
woes. And to the extent that the Noman’s
issue is perceived as a development
issue, it touches many a raw nerve.
“There is a sense that there has been
too much senseless development already,”
says contractor Gary Reynolds, 35, a
permanent resident of Edgartown. “Some
people say that if the choice is between
bombing and development, then bomb it.
But that shouldn’t be the choice.”
For some, the bombing is an unnecessary irritant in a beautiful place. Polly Bassett, of Edgartown, says, “You ‘can’t even read your Sunday paper without being disturbed by the noise. And I live 20 miles away from Gay Head.” For others, like David Danielson, of Newton, a lifelong summer resident of the Vineyard, the bombing of Noman’s Island represents a wasted resource. ‘‘It should be opened up for recreation, not Jeeps or motorbikes, but picnickers and berry pickers. And I'd like to see the waters opened up to fishing and lobstering. Frankly, any usage would be preferable to the bombs.”
In Gay Head, which faces the island, the
concerns are more immediate Captain
Chick Lee is concerned about the safety
of local fishermen, himself, and his
family. “They are practicing there, but
they are using real guns, with real
ammunition. Sometimes they fire in direct
line with my house. I can only hope they
never, ever miss.” As in most of
Reagan's America, there are deep
divisions between the peace advocates
(perceived as mostly summer folks,
though more than half of the protesters
with the flotilla were year- round
residents) and those who see a need for
a “strong national defense” and the
training that goes along with it. One
merchant marine on three months’ shore
leave after a tour of duty that took him
to the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean,
said, “My life is on the line out there
every day. My safety, my life, depends
on those pilots and those planes every
day. And there is nowhere else for them
to practice in the Northeast. When I see
them practicing, I feel more secure.”
That attitude wasn’t shared by two Harvard
Divinity School students, who were
angered and frightened by the unscheduled
fly-by during the protest. Said one:
“Now I know what it’s like to be
attacked by my own government.”
There has often been conflict between the
ends the naturalists seek and the means
they employ. Old John James Audubon
himself may have been the best example.
As Gus Ben David points out, “Audubon
killed more rare birds than arty 10
hunters. First, he shot them, and then
he stuffed them. That was how he
preserved them for the future generations.”
I can’t help observing that we can do better. On this beautiful island, it is a shame that there is so much division over the one thing that usually unifies summer folk and full-time residents, the preservation of the environment. It is especially dissonant to hear an Audubon Society bird- sanctuary director argue that bombing a wildlife sanctuary is good for the wildlife — so dissonant, in fact, that some people find it impossible to keep from maligning his motives or from dismissing the people who support the bombing as crackpots or ideologues.
On the Vineyard, after a few beers, the reasoned arguments quickly degenerate into vituperative personal
attacks. “Only a guy with
nuclear-weapons experience would be comfortable with the idea of bombing the sanctuary to save the birds,” one activist railed. ‘That's the kind of thinking that ends with a nuclear winter, after the holocaust finally makes the
world safe for democracy.”
This fall the flotilla organizers hope
to hold another action, this time during
the annual parade of birds of prey, as
falcons, hawks, and eagles migrate
south. Gus Ben David told me that
Noman’s was a spectacular place to view these majestic raptors fly by and that it was an important stopover for them on their annual migration. From what
I saw, it’s likely ‘that some of those
all-too-rare birds will die, victims of.
the Phantom jets with whom they must
compete for space.
Gus Ben David, who might be the only
person who could lead the fight to stop
the bombing and preserve Noman’s Island
for future generations, is certainly a strange
bird himself. He keeps raptors and
raises pigeons for them as food. He is
com passionate and concerned about wildlife
but readily defends the use of nuclear
weapons in Vietnam. He is a bird lover and an accomplished marksman, a hunter who raises
wood ducks.
It’s not Gus Ben David's fault that the
bombing continues, but it doesn’t bother
him much. And it is partly his fault
that the options are perceived to be
either continued bombing and strafing or “a thousand picnickers a day.”
Though he is quick to point out that
it's not his responsibility to develop a
plan to protect Noman’s from development
or human recreation, there could and should be just such a plan. The Navy could find another place to bomb. Noman’s could be made a well-managed wildlife preserve and sanctuary, run by one of the nonprofit conservation groups, or by the government, for the benefit of both the birds and the public.
Meanwhile, Gus Ben David will continue
to support the bombing. As everyone on
the island agrees, Gus Ben David is for the birds.
(Editor's note: On Wednesday Jerry
Bertrand, PhD, president of the
Massachusetts Audubon Society, directed
an Audubon Society biologist to
accompany biologists from the Department
of Fisheries and Wildlife on an investigative trip to Noman’s Island Thursday to determine the effects of the bombing and strafing on the
wildlife. “It may be that the bombing and strafing is incompatible with the island’s protection as a wildlife refuge,” said Bertrand in a statement to the Phoenix. “If so, we'll go to the US Fisheries and Wildlife Service to ask for an immediate hearing to thoroughly investigate and evaluate this issue. The Navy
has to do it right or get out, and it’s
not clear that they're doing it
right.”’
-30-
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)