Category Archives: NATURE

Reporter takes historic ‘shelling’ trip

Jeanne says her primary responsibility will be ‘shelling’ but she also promises to file regular reports for this newspaper.

Jeanne says her primary responsibility will be ‘shelling’ but she also promises to file regular reports for this newspaper.

By Jeanne Robertson

Editor’s note: A native of Williamston, Jeanne Robertson has been visiting remote Portsmouth Island for more the 40 years. This year is special – it marks the 50th Portsmouth Village Homecoming. We hope to feature a series of articles as Robertson explores what she considers to be her second home.

CAPE LOOKOUT NATIONAL SEASHORE — Well, to get to Portsmouth Island, I meet the maintenance person at Lola Landing, which is a small ramp not too far from the Cedar Island Ferry. But wait! This spot is off limits to all but the National Park Service!

Getting there early, I got out of the car and was met by a wall of mosquitoes, I mean hundreds of them, working fast to get my stuff out of the car and jumped back in and there were hundreds of the mosquitoes joining me.   I could hardly breath with inhaling them!!

The boat ride over to Long Point was so refreshing as we beat the incoming fog.  The sun was coming up and Portsmouth Island and Long Point was in sight. This was the final day of preparation before the opening tomorrow.  The office staff would be putting the computers in operation for registration and other tasks.

This part of the National Seashore is Remote, with a capital R.

This part of the National Seashore is Remote, with a capital R.

Mary, formerly retired, now works for the National Park Service and has been there for 19 years.  Samantha, just a young thing, has been with National Park Service for seven years. There was a lot of computer goings on, but the lunch break was worth the views and silence interrupted by the passing gulls and birds.

Wednesday, March 15, is Opening Day and the 50th anniversary for Portsmouth Village Homecoming – a one- time event to celebrate the preserving this ‘fingerlet’ island off the mainland of North Carolina. This year also marks the 100th Anniversary of the National Park Service – thanks to good, ole Teddy Roosevelt!

An awesome view and new memories to be made this year — no bands or banners — just the magnificence of Mother Earth. Come join in!!!

For your information: Ferry reservations are by private ferry — Morris Marina in Atlantic, N.C. and two ferries in Davis, N.C. This is ‘Down East’ in all its glory! Cabin reservations through the National Park Service.

‘Stay of execution’ urged for massive tree

The massive Willow Oak looms over Allen Propst Wednesday morning at Lou Mac Park.

The massive Willow Oak looms over Allen Propst Wednesday morning at Lou Mac Park.

By Allen Propst

ORIENTAL — I learned last Thursday that the landmark Willow Oak in Lou Mac Park is slated for removal on February 10, 2016.

This was very disturbing news for myself and just about everyone that I have spoken with in and around Oriental.

The specific reason given for the removal of the tree is that the trunk integrity has diminished to the point where it could be a hazard to individuals walking near this tree. The Oriental Tree Board has been monitoring this tree for years and the formula for removing a tree has caused the Tree Board to alert the Town of Oriental of the need to remove the tree.

This Willow Oak and a second (closer to the river and doing fine) were planted in the early 1920s to honor the two men, who donated land to the town for the purpose of a park. I am not denying the fact that this tree does have some rot in the main trunk and possibly at the base of some primary limbs. I am not denying the fact that the Town of Oriental has the responsibility to safeguard its citizens and visitors from dangerous situations and the town has a responsibility to reduce its liability from known, potentially dangerous situations.

However, I made a simple request at Tuesday night’s monthly town board meeting that the town delay its decision to remove this tree for 90 days until a second opinion is obtained from an arborist or tree surgeon on what possibilities exist to prolong the removal of this picturesque landmark willow oak. The Town took no action because this request was not on the Agenda item, and my comments were made during the comment period allowed at the beginning of each Board meeting. Thus, this tree remains slated for removal next week on Wednesday, February 10, 2016.

According to the formula used by the Tree Board, once a tree loses 30 percent of its trunk strength the tree should be monitored.  Once a tree loses 50 percent of its trunk strength, it should be removed.  According to the Tree Board, this willow oak has lost 43 percent of its trunk strength. Unless my calculations are incorrect, this tree still has some useful life left and now is the time to take action to find out if anything can be done to give this tree a few more years of life.

The Town of Oriental has recently lost two grocery stores in the last 100 days. Many businesses in town are struggling to stay viable because of the economic recession that has negatively affected everyone in Oriental since 2008.  I am confident that the business void left by not having a grocery store will soon be filled, but I will never see in my lifetime another tree as magnificent as the Willow Oak at Lou Mac Park if this tree is removed.

I am realistic that this tree will eventually be removed, but let’s give Oriental a break from all of the other bad news by keeping this landmark tree for a little bit longer. If you feel the same way that I do, please call the Town of Oriental Commissioners listed below and express your support for a 90-day reprieve from removing the tree on February 10, 2016.  This will allow the Commissioners to hear a second opinion from an arborist or tree surgeon on prolonging the removal of this tree.

The Oriental Town Commissioners are:  Sandy Winfrey  252-670-2915 (cell), Allen Price 252-339-9773 (cell), Barb Venturi 252-249-1141 (home), David White 252-515-6978 (cell) and Charlie Overcash 919-210-5168 (cell).  The Mayor is Sally Belangia 252-671-9288 (cell).

Submitted by: Allen Propst, cell number (252) 671-4644.

EGG NEWS

Hen lays a big one in Olympia! But which one ‘dun it?’

tcc111115p1a

With 44 hens and a rooster or two, Olympia resident Ron Casey enjoys his new avocation. He is clearly proud of his flock, but has no idea which chicken should get the credit.

“My chickens like to lay their eggs where there are some already laying in the box,” he explained during a recent interview. .

“Some of the old-timers around here call all of the squawking and carrying-on, the chickens’ ‘egg-laying song.’ Well, we definitely heard a loud squawk last week, but I can’t tell you which one did it.”

Casey, seen above at his grading table, lives in a 100-year-old farmhouse at the end of Bayleaf Road in Olympia, not far from the Pamlico-Craven county line. He now sells most of the eggs at area Farmers Markets.
One day, he hopes customers will beat a path to his door, so he can focus less on marketing and more on production. To reserve some, call him at (765) 914-9884.

Duck’s eye view: Impoundments look great!

On the ground: Residents have a different perspective

Ducks have been flying over Goose Creek Island even before 1750.

Ducks have been flying over Goose Creek Island even before 1750.

Ouch!  Many on the Island, think the corner of this new duck impoundment seems a bit too close to an existing home.

Ouch! Many on the Island, think the corner of this new duck impoundment seems a bit too close to an existing home.

GOOSE CREEK ISLAND – From the air, this remote northeast corner of Pamlico County looks like an ideal stopping spot for migratory waterfowl cruising the Atlantic Flyway, especially so in recent years with an unprecedented proliferation of man-made duck impoundments. However, down on the ground, these shallow, flooded feeding grounds – designed to attract various types of waterfowl, which in turn attracts a bevy of upscale, shotgun-toting hunters – have kindled the ire of many island residents.

A contingent of well spoken Goose Creek Island citizens showed up at Monday night’s meeting of the Pamlico County Commission to ask for some type of regulations to govern both the construction and location of these new impoundments.

Tall berms, which entice youngsters, are a concern of many Goose Creek Island residents.

Tall berms, which entice youngsters, are a concern of many Goose Creek Island residents.

“We are not opposed to hunting,” said Alexis Ireland. “For most of us, these impoundments are a safety issue. There are no fences, no barriers of any type. There is hunting on both sides of the highway. We are concerned about falling birdshot, unexpected loud noises, and construction of impoundments very close to existing homes.”

Peggy Page, who lives and works in the area, echoed Ireland’s comments.

“It’s not about hunting, it’s about safety,” said Page. “These impoundments are virtually being created overnight. I’ve always thought hunting is for the woods,” she added, “but now, some type of zoning or regulations are needed.”

County Commissioner Paul Delamar III did not hesitate in responding. Though clearly empathetic – “I don’t want one of these things 25 feet from my house” – Delamar quickly nixed any prospect of zoning.

“You want to fill up that courtroom over there?” asked Delamar, pointing in the direction of a large room, occasionally used by the County Commissioners for public hearings on controversial topics. “Just mention the Z-word.”

However, the reasonable entreaties did indeed spur the County Commissioners. Delamar requested “a formal legal opinion” to outline what elected officials at the county level can do to address the residents’ concerns. Jimmy Hicks, a New Bern-based attorney who is paid to advise the board on legal issues, promised to produce such a report for the next meeting of the Commission on Monday, July 6th.


Three letters written by Goose Creek Island residents, which were hand-delivered to the board Monday night.

20150617153908630_000120150617153908630_0002


20150617153908630_000320150617153908630_0004


20150617153908630_0005


When in doubt, order a report

In a 5 to 1 decision, commissioners waffle. Only Heath votes to sue re Atlas Tract

BAYBORO – Elected officials declined Monday night to support a pending lawsuit, which is expected to allege that Spring Creek Farms, an Illinois-based entity, violated the nation’s Clean Water Act by converting wetlands to agricultural use.

Instead, the board endorsed a motion made by Commissioner Ann Holton, suggesting the two sides should confer in an attempt to reach a compromise.

Holton, supported by Commissioners Christine Mele, Pat Prescott, Carl Ollison, and board chairman Paul Delamar III, asked for a written report on any “dialogue,” and she specified that the document be put on the agenda for the Commission’s second meeting in January.

Commissioner Kenny Heath explained his decision to cast the sole nay vote. He cited a unanimous board vote in November of 2013, requesting the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to reconsider its initial determination that the site in question is not wetlands.

“I think it is important for this board to be consistent,” said Heath. “I just don’t think the Corps has treated people equally in this matter.”

More than a year ago, Spring Creek Farms clear-cut 251 acres of forest land near the Florence area of Pamlico County, prompting a public outcry about the company’s future plans for the remainder of its land holdings, estimated to be some 4,500 acres.

In a letter to the county commissioners dated Nov. 17, 2014, a principal with the company, Mark Beck, wrote that Spring Creek Farms plans to “engage in farming activities that are an important part of why we spent over seven million dollars to buy this land!”

A large turnout, estimated at more that 100 people, forced County Manager Tim Buck to move the meeting from its normal conference room on the second floor of the Bayboro courthouse to the much larger courtroom.

There, all but one of more than a dozen citizens, urged the commissioners to embrace a lawsuit threatened by the Southern Environmental Law Center and the North Carolina Coastal Federation.

Under the Clean Water Act, any person or entity may bring suit to enforce wetland protections afforded by federal law. However, plaintiffs must first alert all prospective defendants with written correspondence, which is known as a “60-day Notice of Intent to Sue.”

Veteran attorney Derb Carter, representing the Southern Environmental Law Center, told the county commissioners that “this is really about the failure of federal agencies to make a proper wetlands determination,” to which he later added: “We intend to challenge this wrongly made decision. Our purpose is to give the agency a chance to reconsider.”

After Carter, New Bern-based attorney Clark Wright, who specializes in environmental law, offered his assessment of the situation, on behalf Spring Creek Farms.

“We are perfectly prepared to engage in a constructive dialogue as we try to work out a middle ground,” said Wright. Hinting that a cooling off period was in order, Wright said: “There’s no need to act today. You are not the linchpin of this matter. No one wants to see this in a federal court with depositions, discovery, affidavits in court, and all that mess.”

Coyote-wolf ‘hybrid’ trapped, killed in Arapahoe

Expert says five-county effort to introduce red wolves has gone awry


By Fred Bonner | Special to the County Compass

Editor’s note: Fred Bonner is a respected wildlife biologist, avid hunter, and outdoors columnist, who has first-hand knowledge of the state’s Red Wolf Program, which began in 1987.

ARAPAHOE — I’d like to state, upfront, that I’m not opposed to all wolves. They have a definite place in the environment and, in many cases, are vital to the predator/prey relationship in some ecosystems. I testified on the behalf of the gray wolf in Congressional Oversight Hearings when the reintroduction of these wolves into the Yellowstone National Park was news some years ago. Basically many of us felt that since hunting was not allowed in the national parks then, yes, a top predator was absolutely necessary to keep the obviously overpopulated elk herd inside the park under control.

I was, at one time, very much in favor of the introduction of the red wolves here in North Carolina. I was one of the few who met U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Public Information Specialist Don Pfitzer at the Raleigh-Durham International Airport as he brought in a planeload of eight red wolves in 1987.

Some of my articles in The News & Observer (as well as The Washington Daily News) reported very glowing things about these animals. I thought these animals were about “the best thing since sliced bread.”

It’s important to know just how the USFWS went about choosing a few of what they thought that red wolves should look like to begin a captive breeding program.

Jumping back in time to the late 1970s, biologists with the USFWS and several state wildlife agencies estimated that only about 100 animals thought to be red wolves existed in the wild. These animals had been breeding with coyotes and it was difficult to determine just how contaminated these animal’s genes had become with coyote genes. DNA testing was in its infancy and no records are known to exist about the degree of contamination that had already occurred.

The scientists gathered a number of these animals in pens and put their heads together to decide which ones looked the most like what they thought a red wolf should look like. The end result of this screening of ‘look-alikes’ was that 17 of these proclaimed red wolves were sent to a zoo in Seattle to begin a captive breeding program. It was from these Seattle zoo’s red wolves that the eight red wolves were sent to Raleigh and then to the Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge to try and establish a breeding population in the wild in our state.

Several incidents happened that began to change my personal views on the red wolves. Probably the one single incident that really opened my eyes on the red wolf issue was when, about a year after the red wolves were brought into our state, I received word that one of the red wolves had been killed after it had been caught in a trappers leg hold trap.

 

I immediately called USFWS Wildlife Biologist Mike Phillips (who was in charge of the program at that time) to get some idea of just who had done this evil thing to one of our new red wolves. I was stunned when Mike Phillips replied that he himself was the one who had trapped this particular wolf. Phillips was also the one who authorized that this animal be euthanized after the wolf developed an infection in its leg, which resulted in the leg’s being amputated.

When I asked Mike Phillips why this “highly endangered red wolf” (it was, incidentally, a mature female) couldn’t have been saved because even if it had only three legs couldn’t it have served well as mother to bear more red wolf pups? Phillips replied that, “It might have, but I felt that we really didn’t need any more red wolves so I made the decision to do away with this sick animal.”

Mike Phillips has since been lured away from his job with the USFWS to become a personal wildlife manager for the very wealthy Ted Turner at his western ranch.

When we North Carolinians were informed as to the rules that the USFWS was to set up with regard to the red wolves they plainly told us citizens, the N.C. Legislature and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) that the wolves were not to be considered endangered in Hyde, Beaufort, Dare, Tyrell and Washington Counties. In these core counties, the wolves were to be considered “experimental and non-essential.” At the time, this seemingly relaxed some of the very strict laws and regulations having to do with endangered species. The changes satisfied the fears of many of the landowners, hunters and pet owners in the area where the wolves were to roam.

Another fear for many of the residents in this five-county area was having these wolves roaming on their private lands and eating their domestic animals, as well as game animals such as our prized whitetail deer.

The USFWS assured us (in writing) that if a private landowner found wolves on their land and wanted them removed, that the red wolf biologist and technicians were to promptly remove the wolves and place them back onto the federal wildlife refuges where they were supposedly supposed to stay. We were also told that the wolves were not going to kill deer and would feed on other smaller animals such as the invasive nutria, opossums, rabbits, quail, wild turkeys and such.

Large farmers in the five county core area for the red wolves were paid to allow the red wolves to be on their private property. This expanded the land on which the red wolves could roam without fear of being shot, or trapped to move them back into a free zone.

At this time eastern North Carolina did not have many coyotes and for the USFWS and the wolf recovery team this meant that there was less possibility of the red wolves interbreeding with the coyotes, causing even more coyote genes to show up in their already known to be ‘coyote-red wolf genes.’

It’s still not clear exactly who (or what) caused the coyotes to begin to show up literally all over our state, but by the turn of the century it was clear to the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission that our state had a major problem with these predators.

Many western states and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had been trying about every trick in the book to rid the countryside of coyotes for years. They used poison, hired hunters to try and kill off the coyotes out west and still the coyotes flourished. When they began to invade North Carolina, their flourishing and interbreeding with the already hybridized red wolves, the coyotes presented a major problem to the genetic make-up of the red wolves and to the future of the entire red wolf project in our state.

From the very beginning of the red wolf project here in North Carolina, the heaviest mortality among the “experimental and non-essential” animals was being killed by vehicles on the roadways and being killed by hunters who either accidentally shot one thinking it to be one of its blood brother coyotes, or being shot on purpose by local residents who just plain didn’t like the wolves.

The USFWS had a policy not to prosecute a hunter who accidentally shot a red wolf on private property (thinking that it was a coyote) if the ‘take’ was promptly reported to the USFWS. A true test of this policy happened when a landowner in Hyde County was hunting coyotes and shot a radio-collared red wolf. Following the rules set by the USFWS, the landowner called and reported the kill. A USFWS wildlife manager came and examined the animal and confirmed the fact that it was indeed a red wolf. He collected the wolf’s carcass and thanked the landowner for being a good citizen and following the word of the law. It seemed that the landowner was cleared of any wrongdoing.

All this changed a few days later when the federal game wardens showed up at the landowner’s home and charged him with killing an endangered red wolf. The penalty for killing an endangered species is severe and includes heavy fines and actual jail time.

This taking of a red wolf case went to Federal Court in Elizabeth City where the judge listened to both sides of the case and proclaimed the landowner “not guilty” because he’d followed the law after having accidentally killed a red wolf while carrying out a legal coyote hunt and reported to the proper authorities. This establishes a precedent in a federal court and, as far as I know still stands even today.

In other cases where a red wolf was killed — but not reported — and the perpetrator tried to dispose of the dead wolf to cover up his actions, he was prosecuted and punished.

It took a number of years and file cabinets full of data on these “red wolves” before I began to take a really closer look at just what the USFWS had released on us here in Eastern North Carolina. Maybe these animals were not what the federal government was making them out to be.

Our North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, many of our state legislators, and many of our state’s hunters were opposed to the red wolf program. The USFWS and their lawyers insisted the Endangered Species Act took precedence over any state programs that interfered with the Act. When the NC legislators threatened to make it legal to shoot red wolves on private property — or off the federal refuges — the feds threatened to cut off our federal aid monies. The loss of our 75 percent federal aid matching funds would have been a disaster to our North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commissio and for years many of us Tar Heels have been more or less forced to tolerate the red wolves.

North Carolinians’ and our state’s political response to the red wolves was markedly different to that of Virginia Governor Allen. When a radio-collared red wolf from the North Carolina Alligator River Refuge mysteriously appeared in Chesapeake, Va., the gutsy Allen lost no time in telling the USFWS to immediately remove their wolf from his state. Of course, the USFWS denied they had ever placed the wolf in Virginia and said the animal had either swum across the sound or walked across on the Albemarle Sound Bridge.

Our red wolves have been inland as far as Goldsboro and have been ranging well up the Roanoke River wetlands. They do not stay on the refuges where the USFWS said that they’d keep them and, as Tyrrell County landowner Jett Ferebee has recently proclaimed (see Letter to the Editor on Page 28) federal officials aren’t able to effectively remove the ‘red wolf – coyote hybrids’ from his farm near Lake Phelps as he’s demanded that they do.

I must say that the USFWS had conducted a very successful public relations project in convincing many Tar Heels what a great thing the red wolf project is in our state. They aided in forming such groups as the Red Wolf Coalition, commissioned some questionable studies, which reported that red wolves attracted more tourists to the state than the beaches of the Outer Banks and encouraged supporters of the red wolf project to flood newspapers and press outlets with letters of support for the red wolves. They were impressive.

I believe the ever-increasing coyote population in our state may be the turning point in public support for the red wolves. There’s no question that the coyotes are damaging to our wildlife. When our Wildlife Resources Commission took positive steps to control the population of coyotes by allowing night hunting of both coyotes and feral swine (another problem animal), red wolf supporters cried “fowl” and enlisted the aid of the various animal rights groups and environmental law firms to file suit against the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission.

 

A federal court ruling stopped the night hunting for coyotes in Beaufort, Hyde, Dare, Tyrell and Washington Counties because of the danger of some coyote hunter’s mistakenly shooting a red wolf. Some insiders are predicting U.S. District Court Judge Terrence Boyle might even issue an injunction against all coyote hunting, pending a resolution of the lawsuit.

Over the years the USFWS has continued its efforts to establish a breeding population of red wolves in North Carolina. Similar reintroduction programs were tried in western North Carolina and in South Carolina but these attempts failed after several years of intense effort by the USFWS.

After all these years of trying to establish a breeding population of red wolves in eastern North Carolina, one has to question just how valid this project is. The red wolf managers have to constantly monitor the travels of the animals; they trap them regularly to inoculate them against diseases that true wild animals survive; they locate the wolf’s dens where the pups are obviously fathered by coyotes and do away with these half-breed puppies; they’ve trapped wild coyotes and neutered them to try and use a little birth control on these unwanted canines and still the number of the predominantly red wolves seems to, for whatever reasons, grow smaller every year.

We can’t help but question these artificial methods of trying to establish a red wolf population in our state and we seriously question the use of untold millions of dollars of our tax money to support such a program for hybrid coyotes. As tax paying citizens we have every right to demand, through the Freedom Of Information Act, that the USFWS account for all the money that they’ve spent over the past 20-plus years on this project and still have to artificially keep these animals alive by administering medications to them.

I wish our newly appointed North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commissioners the best in their efforts to allow us to have full access to shooting these coyotes that are so detrimental to our wildlife.