Coastal homeowners in a Massachusetts community are expressing dismay after receiving official guidance suggesting that flying flags on their own property might constitute a violation of endangered species regulations. The alert, issued by the Town of Newbury to residents on Plum Island, has generated considerable controversy just ahead of the nation's 250th anniversary celebrations.
The recent communication from Newbury informed Plum Island residents that the town had become "aware of the use of devices and materials intended to deter" protected shorebirds from nesting or residing in local beach and dune areas. The notice specifically cited "mylar streamers, flags, [and] reflective materials" as examples of such items. It further warned that "Non-compliance may result in state or federal enforcement actions and, thus, the Town urges residents to comply with applicable state and federal wildlife protection laws."
Community Outcry and Patriotic Displays
Long-standing residents of the beachfront community were taken aback by the letter, particularly interpreting the mention of "flags" as a direct challenge to their planned Independence Day festivities. Marc Sarkady, who has resided on the island for more than three decades, conveyed his strong indignation.
Sarkady highlighted that the area boasts approximately "10 miles of open beach" where birds can move freely, completely separate from residential zones. "It’s a nature preserve," he stated. "So to us, it’s like, folks, come on, be reasonable."
Prior to the town's letter last week, Sarkady and other community members had initiated a local effort to distribute American flags and signs to commemorate America's upcoming 250th anniversary. They had distributed about 50 American flags and approximately 100 revolutionary-style flag signs, emblazoned with "Plum Island Honors America," to residents across the island.
"It's really us trying to bring the island together — everybody, by the way, not left, not right, America, American citizens, and really reaching out. That's really the spirit of what I'm trying to do here," Sarkady explained.
Town Officials Respond to Concerns
Newbury Town Administrator Tracy Blais clarified that the town is "not in any way attempting to interfere with the property owner's rights to use their property or to restrict their use of their property for ordinary and patriotic purposes."
According to Blais, the town's action was simply a response to a request from MassWildlife to assist in "spread[ing] the word" about safeguarding endangered species. "The letter merely recited provisions of the law and the Town is not asserting any threat or legal liability — merely reminding property owners that they live in a very special place which comes along with certain responsibilities," Blais affirmed. The town maintained that residents were free to celebrate America's 250th anniversary and denied that the letter suggested otherwise. "The Town is not asserting any rights or control it does not have, and I think the Town's letter is pretty clear on that point," she added in a public statement.
Prior Incidents and Legal Challenge
This is not the first instance of friction between residents and authorities over beachfront displays, according to Sarkady. He recounted an incident last year where an official from the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife allegedly sent a nearly identical letter to one of his neighbors after she placed ornamental banners on her beachside lawn. Sarkady claimed the state official then contacted her directly, reportedly threatening severe penalties if she did not remove them. The state agency has since denied this claim.
"This person actually threatened the citizen from Plum Island, who’s a homeowner with fines and potentially being arrested and put in jail," Sarkady stated, noting that his neighbor ultimately removed her displays due to feeling "very threatened."
Last week, Sarkady and two other neighbors received the town's most recent notice, which prompted them to seek assistance from the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF).
On Wednesday, the legal advocacy group dispatched a letter to Newbury Conservation Agent Mason Ferrick, asserting that the town's demands raised "significant concerns" regarding fundamental property rights and the legal basis for its directives. The PLF letter seeks clarification from the town on whether it truly claims homeowners are legally forbidden from displaying flags, streamers, or reflective materials on their private property. It also requests the legal foundation for how the Massachusetts and federal Endangered Species Acts apply to privately owned beachfront land. PLF emphasized that no court has ever held a homeowner liable under these endangered species acts for displaying decorations on their private property.
"Flying the red, white, and blue on the Fourth of July is as American as apple pie," said Mark Miller, Director of Environment and Natural Resources Litigation at Pacific Legal Foundation, in a press release. "For Massachusetts local officials to claim otherwise violates both the First and Fifth Amendments to the United States Constitution. As Massachusetts Founding Father John Adams famously said, ‘property must be secured, or liberty cannot exist.’"
It is worth noting that Plum Island in Massachusetts is distinct from another Plum Island located off the coast of Long Island in New York, which is owned by the United States government and utilized for research and experiments.
