A group of North County residents upset about being barred from their favorite oceanside spots are taking their grievance from the beach to the courtroom.

They're plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed Tuesday against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in an effort to force removal of the Pacific coast population of the Western snowy plover from the federal list of threatened species. The listing has meant that parts of the plovers' sandy habitat have been closed to beachgoers.

A coalition of residents calling themselves the Surf-Ocean Beach Commission and the city of Morro Bay each have petitioned the service to have the birds delisted, but say the agency appears to be sitting on the information.

"The only way you can get a response is to file a lawsuit," said Alice Milligan, chair of the commission.

Jim Nickles, a spokesman at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife's Sacramento office, said staff is working on reviewing the petitions. "It's been going on for some time," he said. "We just haven't completed it yet."

The petitions allege that the Pacific coast plover population, which was listed in 1993, actually isn't any different from the inland population, which isn't listed.

Greg Broderick, an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation, which filed the suit, said the petitions both included about 500 pages of scientific data, government documents and news articles backing up the claim -- including a graduate thesis and studies of banded birds.

That work, he said, shows "there's essentially no difference between these birds. They interbreed. They move around."

"We feel strongly that this bird is not unique just to this area," Ms. Milligan added.

Under the Endangered Species Act, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is required to carry out an initial review of a delisting petition within 90 days of receiving it -- "to the maximum extent practicable."

Mr. Nickles said biologists are looking into the plover petitions filed by the commission in July 2002 and by the city of Morro Bay in June 2003, but they're bogged down with work -- much of it the result of litigation.

"We're getting sued on both sides," he said.

The lawsuit, filed in Sacramento, names as defendants the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Department of the Interior, as well as officials of both organizations.

Mr. Broderick said the petitioners "just want the service to respond, tell us if you're going to do any further investigation."

They want the court to order the service to publish a finding on the petitions within 30 days.

Ultimately, they want the plover's beach habitats reopened for all. "We want the people in Lompoc to have access to their beach," Ms. Milligan said.

For several years, much of Surf and Ocean beaches in Lompoc have been closed to the public from March through September. Part of Coal Oil Point Reserve in Goleta also has been set aside for the birds.

"It would be bad enough to do this for a bird that is actually threatened," Mr. Broderick added, "but to do this for a bird that's fine -- not threatened at all -- it's really bad."

The city of Morro Bay also alleges that the beach closures have cost money.

"They rely on tourism," Mr. Broderick said. "When the beaches are being closed, people aren't going to come. When people don't come, businesses suffer. And when businesses suffer, the city suffers."

RAFAEL MALDONADO / NEWS-PRESS PHOTOS

Ann Ruhge, a member of the Surf-Ocean Beach Commission, visits Lompoc's Surf Beach on Tuesday.

Even though the federal government won't play a role in protecting the Gaviota coast, representatives are in town this week to give an ear to locals' concerns.

The National Park Service declared last month that the coast isn't an affordable addition to its network, but they're now pondering two alternative management strategies.

Meetings in Lompoc, Santa Barbara and Goleta drew several hundred people. Another will be held in Solvang tonight.

Some have expressed muted approval of the decision to forego national park status and said they hope landowners won't be burdened with additional restrictions.

Others wondered why the government couldn't find the money to buy some of the coastal land to save it from being carved up for luxury homes.

But either way, the park service won't be involved in buying or managing the land, now that it has rejected the idea of making the area from Coal Oil Point to Point Sal a national park.

"What's next for the Gaviota coast?" said Martha Crusius, a planner with the National Park Service. "You tell me. It's basically up to the local community."

Public comments will be considered before the park service prepares its final report, but that won't change its position that the Gaviota coast won't be feasible as a national park.

The park service is now weighing two alternatives -- neither involving federal management of the land.

One is to change nothing.

The other is to bolster local and state programs aimed at protecting the coast. That could include nonprofit conservation activities, strategies intended to encourage conservation efforts by landowners and efforts to improve access to public lands.

"This is a menu of ideas," Ms. Crusius pointed out. "But they're not things the National Park Service would take on or tell people to take on."

The service regards the second option as "environmentally preferable," but will make a final recommendation, taking into account economic factors and public support, after hearing from locals.

In lieu of a national park designation, conservation groups applauded the second option, but said federal money is needed to defend the Gaviota coast against urban sprawl.

At the Santa Barbara meeting, Bob Keats of the Surfrider Foundation pointed out that $200 million worth of land is for sale along the Gaviota coast and that "a Stealth bomber costs $500Êmillion."

But Jonathan Jarvis, National Park Service regional director, said that the service's allocation is a small portion of the federal budget and that existing national parks are already in dire need of more dollars.

"Is this the time to reach deep into out pockets and spend what we can to support land trusts in their efforts?" one attendee wondered aloud.

But others found a reason to be hopeful.

"When we start working together, we're going to start reaching a lot of solutions," remarked John Gallo of the Conception Coast Project.

"The future in land conservation work is in partnerships," said Mike Lunford, president of the Gaviota Coast Conservancy.

The park service will hold another meeting on the Gaviota study from 7 to 9 p.m. today at the Solvang Veterans Memorial Building.