ACCA is in a battle against rising sea levels and climate to save our tidal estuary, which is already in a state of “ecological collapse.” CT DEEP considers the Ash Creek tidal estuary a priority to protect and restore as evidenced by the recent $600,000 grant for restoration planning to Save the Sound and another $400,000 grant that is pending approval. Save the Sound has asked ACCA to serve as the local organization doing public outreach and local coordination with the municipalities over the next two years as the planning process gets underway.
City Councilperson Scott Burns will hold a public forum soon so we can all have a constructive discussion. Everyone’s voice in the community needs to be heard. We’ve asked that Bret Caulfield, Superintendent of the Bridgeport Parks Department and Chadwick Schroeder, Bridgeport’s Sustainability Manager be present at the forum to answer questions.
In the meantime, here are the concerns that have been raised on Facebook and information you can use to respond to these concerns, if you have the opportunity and are inclined to reply. Otherwise, please just encourage people to attend the public forum and voice their concerns so we can all work together for the good of the community.
How can a section of the shoreline be closed to the public?
Some community members have been upset by the restrictions on usage of the Ash Creek shoreline. They have cited the Public Trust Doctrine that states “The general public may freely use these intertidal and subtidal lands and waters, whether they are beach, rocky shore, or open water, for traditional public trust uses such as fishing, shellfishing, boating, sunbathing, or simply walking along the beach. https://portal.ct.gov/…/who-owns-the-shorethe-public….”
The State also has a duty to protect the shoreline and does restoration of damaged shoreline areas. It is standard practice for the state to require the landowners to prevent access to the shoreline during the restoration process. ACCA advocated for the restoration of the mudflats and tidal vegetation on the north shore of the barrier spit as it had been badly damaged by sandworm diggers. Over 1,000 holes had been dug and tidal vegetation that prevents erosion had been destroyed.
The City of Bridgeport installed the signs in response to an order from CT DEEP to “install appropriate signage” and “implement measures that restrict access to tidal wetland restoration areas”. The Town of Fairfield installed the signs on their area of the barrier spit.
The State ordered the City to do this last June, but the City just got around to it recently. The signs are temporary, but they will stay up until the area is fully restored. We have been encouraging the City to get the plantings installed and fill placed as soon as possible. The sooner the restoration starts, the sooner the signs can come down. .
The destruction to the tidal wetlands has put a tremendous strain on the north shore of the barrier spit. Alarming erosion has occurred over the winter. The City has put restoration plans on hold until CT DEEP can perform another site visit (in July) to reassess the plan. The best case scenario is restorative planting occurs in the fall. It is estimated to take one or two years for plants to fully establish.
We want to clarify that ACCA has no jurisdiction over the park land at St. Mary’s-by-the-Sea or below the Coastal Jurisdiction Line (CJL). The City of Bridgeport owns the land above the CJL and the State of Connecticut has jurisdiction over the tidal areas. Our role is one of advocacy to protect this natural habitat from further damage. We make recommendations to municipal and state authorities based on data and analysis provided by ecological experts.
The fence around the sea grass plantings on the barrier spit is illegal.
Not true. The fence was erected by the City of Bridgeport on their park land. It was put there to protect the 42,000 American Beach grass plugs planted to protect the dunes from wash overs during storms. It did its job in the April Nor’easter, although part of the fence came down. We facilitated the discussions between Fairfield and Bridgeport to enable this protective collaboration. Our volunteers and paid contractors weed the grasses to keep them healthy. The grasses capture sand blown by the wind, and then grow up through the newly deposited sand. In this way, sand dunes increase in height. The higher the barrier spit elevation, the better it serves to attenuate wave action during storms.
What’s wrong with people digging for worms in the mudflat? People have been doing that for centuries.
CT DEEP identified approximately 1,000 holes dug in the mudflats between the north shore of the barrier spit and Great Marsh Island. They also found tidal vegetation had been destroyed and erosion is occurring. They deemed the area a restoration site as they do not believe the mudflats or vegetation can self-recover.
ACCA illegally put up the split rail fences on park land.
Park land is owned by the City of Bridgeport. With permission from the Parks Commission, we installed native plantings to mitigate erosion. The Parks Department approved the installation of split rail fencing to match the fencing of the split rail fence the City had installed across the street in The Preserve. ACCA paid for these improvements which enhanced the aesthetics and biodiversity of the area as the City did not have the money in its budget for a high quality fence. The fence the City had planned to put up would have blocked more views.
Can the public access Ash Creek by walking through tidal wetland vegetation with their kayaks?
Yes, they can. While the trampling of tidal vegetation is not desirable, it’s not restricted unless the plants are destroyed in the process. CT DEEP did stop someone with an amphibious vehicle from making a pathway through the tidal wetlands to gain access to Ash Creek, but that was because the marshes were destroyed in the process. Kayakers can park on public streets and launch their canoes from the shores of Ash Creek, but not in the restricted area.
Does Fairfield own part of the barrier spit?
Yes, the municipal boundary was changed in 1954 to allow the Town of Fairfield to lawfully conduct dredging activities without obtaining permission from the City of Bridgeport. Permission only needs to be obtained if Fairfield wants to stage the dredging from the shoreline, but in recent years they have chosen not to do that and conduct the dredging activities from barges. Prior to 1954, the entire barrier spit was owned by Bridgeport.
Fairfield put “No Trespassing” signs up on their section of the barrier spit as well.
ACCA has no affiliation with any governing body.
This is true. We are an all volunteer grassroots organization. No one has to do anything we ask. We have no authority and no power. All we do is advocate and provide funding and labor for environmental projects.
We do work closely with the Town of Fairfield and the City of Bridgeport on environmental issues that affect Ash Creek. We’ve formed a working committee that meets as needed to discuss issues and work on projects. The emergency plantings at the barrier spit were the result of that partnership.
Some of our Board members either serve on Black Rock NRZ committees or regularly attend their meetings. We keep the NRZ informed of all of our projects and the NRZ meetings are open to the public. We also present any proposed project to the City of Bridgeport Parks Department for their approval. We give updates at a number of Fairfield commission meetings, including the Flood & Erosion Control Board, the Conservation Commission, and the Shellfish Commission. At the regional level, we keep MetroCOG informed by giving updates at their CTAC Committee meetings.
ACCA works in secrecy without input from the community and conducts illegal activities.
ACCA held public forums to explain the erosion at the barrier spit and recommendations for addressing this and other erosion issues in the tidal estuary at four public outreach meetings throughout 2021-2022: 7/13/21, 10/27/21, 12/7/22, and 12/14/22. We also presented upcoming projects for approval (e.g., sea grass plantings, fencing, native plant beds) at numerous meetings with the Parks Commission, which are open to the public in 2023 and 2024 during the implementation phase. We also have kept the Black Rock NRZ informed with periodic updates and those meetings are also open to the public.
We will be doing more public outreach meetings going forward and we hope the community at large will attend in the future. We will focus on outreach to try to get their input . Facebook is not the best place to discuss complex issues, especially not ones where so many interests intersect – nature lovers, boaters, sunbathers, shorefront home owners, park goers, etc. We all want what’s best for the tidal estuary.
How is ACCA addressing the attacks on social media?
We let the commenters know that their concerns were heard. The signs are not our idea of enjoying the beautiful views along our shoreline either and we hope the restoration process gets underway soon so the signs can be removed when the plantings have taken root.
We put up a post on ACCA’s Facebook page to address their concerns about the restoration site, signage, fencing, etc.
Unfortunately, the City did not do a good job of communicating the reasons for blocking off the area, so misunderstandings occurred. The dissenters don’t seem to understand that the City needs to move forward on the restoration or Bridgeport will be fined by the State. There was a tremendous amount of damage done to the mudflats (over 1,000 holes) and tidal vegetation was destroyed by the sandworm diggers. Unfortunately the dissenters have not attended the public forums or read our newsletters, so they don’t understand that the erosion is threatening our tidal estuary.
We need to do a better job of outreach to the broader community and we are committed to doing that. We will be holding more public forums and hopefully the conversation will move from negative attacks online to constructive dialogue in person.
