Funny! Don't worry z, with a little detective work you'll figure it out... We just don't want floods of people trampling the vegetation and contaminating the water.
Interesting point about the trail. Maybe the best action is to re-route the trail, but even if some of us disagree with the state park's decisions, that's irrelevant to the needs of this area because ecosystems don't care about politics. In other words, we still have individual responsibility regardless of whether we agree with authorities' decisions.
Ideally in a perfect world, I would love it if people posted pictures and talked about it in their trip reports, but the reality is that it would increase foot traffic significantly if this message board does become popular in the future. Whether it needs to be closed right now, I don't know, but I would not want the foot traffic to quadruple in two years as a result of this message board. I only show it to people who respect the environment and aren't going to go tell all their idiot friends about this place. When you think about the small watershed and short growing season, it is a very fragile area.
On another note, I've just been taking the state park's word and assuming that it needs to be protected from too many visitors. It would be nice to see ecological data such as changes in salinity and nitrate levels, populations of species, photos from the 70's, visitor counts, and things like that. I'm assuming the state park has done all that stuff. If they do close the area, then most likely they will have some data to justify that decision.