The Battle Over a North Carolina Beach Continues
Comments
What the enabling legislation says
Submitted by Joan (not verified) on Thu, 2012/08/30 - 11:52am.
Doesn't say anything about vehicles driving on the beach.
CHNS enabling legislation
Except for certain portions of the area, deemed to be especially adaptable for recreational uses, particularly swimming, boating, sailing, fishing, and other recreational activities of similar nature, which shall be developed for such uses as needed, the said area shall be permanently reserved as a primitive wilderness and no development of the project or plan for the convenience of visitors shall be undertaken which would be incompatible with the preservation of the unique flora and fauna or the physiographic conditions now prevailing in this area . . .
(Aug. 17, 1937, ch. 687, Sec. 4, 50 Stat. 670; June 29, 1940, ch. 459, Sec. 1, 54 Stat. 702; Mar. 6, 1946, ch. 50, 60 Stat. 32.)
ORVs and Wildlife
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 2012/08/30 - 10:59am.
Really is it no different than people running over animals in a national park on the road than running over them on the beach? I do believe there should be some protection against the wildlife that inhabit the beach. I like no driving on the beach during turtle laying/hatching season. Maybe put inplace a speed limit on the beach. (if there is one i've never seen it while driving on the beaches) limit night driving on the beach? set aside areas where ORVs can't go... i'm a huge supporter of Audubon and if they see something wrong i believe that laws and limits should be put in place, but not ban people from driving on the beach entirely, that would be like banning people from driving on the roads/trails in a national park sorta...
ORVers real intent
Submitted by Joan (not verified) on Thu, 2012/08/30 - 10:51am.
Spot on article. I don't live on HI anymore but still have friends that I still visit there. I have a pretty good handle on the situation there.
As long as Highway 12 (the only access on and off the island) and the Oregon Inlet bridge are intact the local economy does great. Business is so good on Hatteras Island that there are strip malls, surf shops, tee shirt shops, gift shops, tackle shops and places to eat everywhere you look. The incredible economic growth that has happened here in the last 20 years is ugly and one of the reasons our family moved away . In addition all that development is ridiculous considering how fragile and vunerable access to Hatteras and Ocracoke Island is. Each year weather related events cause mandatory evacuations of non residents, sometimes restricting visitation for for weeks. Just about every year some part of Highway 12 (the only vehicle access on and off the island) becomes impassible to traffic from weather events (like new inlet through the island). This has a dramatic and immediate affect on local business. The individuals who claim that there are economic problems caused by the new regs are locals who hate the National Park Service and any form of government anyway and could less about the Park or wildlife. They look for any excuse to bad mouth the NPS and environmental organisation and don't concern themselves if gossip they retell is true. They cherry pick some facts out of context and declare that something that is obviously true is not, many still insist that vehicle don't run over chicks or eggs of nesting shorebirds or that piping plovers breeding range is not in the Seashore. They feel they should be able to do what they want when they want on NPS beaches and that they are only individuals entitled to have input on management decisions about the National Park. It is incredulous that they can complain and condemn the NP's predator control program then go out and organise catch and release fishing tournaments for species (red drum) that are illegal to possess. If the anglers catches a big drum they have to call on their cell phone and wait for a judge to come and weigh, measure and register the fish before releasing it back into the ocean. I would think that would be breaking the law.
http://ncbbaonline.com/news/317-june-28-red-drum-tournament-events-prize...
Check out Dare county's own chamber of commerce report to see how well the economy is doing not just in Dare County but on Hatteras Island also.
http://www.outerbankschamber.com/economy-home/economic-reports-for-the-o...
The park's new ORV plan is still a nightmare that caters to ORV users to the detriment of non ORV users and wildlife. If Senate bill S. 2372, Preserving Public Access to Cape Hatteras Beaches Act is passed you can expect it to be much worse. The ORV users will demand that all the beaches in CHNS be ORV accessible with the majority of the beach open to ORV use the majority of the year with no vehicle capacity limits. If that happens they might as well rename "Cape Hatteras National Seashore" to "Dare County ORV Recreation Park" because it won't even remotely resemble a National Park.
This issue is about one user group (ORV users) getting what they want by deceit, intimidation, dirty politics or what ever it takes, nothing is beyond them. Their responses in the comments to this article coincides with the attitude and civility of their leaders. No wonder no one can compromise with them.
Please write or call your senator and the members of the subcommittee on National Parks and tell them to vote no Senate Bill 2372. They have been mislead about the real situation at Cape Hatteras National Seashore. There is a 24/7 local radio station (probably sponsored by Dare County local government) that pontificates a one sided rant about the Park's regulations and environmental management . The local ORV organisations have enlisted conservative National Organizations and their members to barrage congressional leaders to vote yes on S. 2372. They have fooled congressional leaders and others about their true intent for the Seashore.
Contact information
Link to energy committee:
http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/
Subcommittee on National Parks
http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/national-parks
Link to senate contact:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?State=WA
Joan
Wow Joan, your forehead is really large.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 2012/08/30 - 2:24pm.
"In addition all that development is ridiculous considering how fragile and vunerable access to Hatteras and Ocracoke Island is. Each year weather related events cause mandatory evacuations of non residents, sometimes restricting visitation for for weeks."
Yeah, we should remove all from the development from coastal areas of Florida, New Orleans, and Louisiana too. Wonder how many birdies were displaced when they built those new levees...
"The park's new ORV plan is still a nightmare that caters to ORV users to the detriment of non ORV users and wildlife. "
Huh? Ted says its a revolutionary plan! SELC says the plan been success for tourism and wildlife! But, Ted is clueless and SELC gets paid to tell half truths and to distort facts. The plan hardly caters to the ORV users, at peak of the tourism season, ORV access is now cut by about 75%...
The truth is that pro-access groups and visitors want REASONABLE resource protection. I believe the plan went way to far but did so only appease environmental extremists views and agendas. The new plan's resource closures for species are excessive, and most cases are larger and more restrictive than used anywhere. Under the new plan, non-endangered and non-threatened species protection methods often close off popular beaches to PEDESTRIANS, meaning no one can even walk to these areas. Completely closing (no walking or driving) popular areas for most of the tourism season can't be good for tourism no matter how you spin it. The new plan created pedestrian only areas without providing any way to access them and failed to recognize the existing traditionally pedestrian only beaches, like the rather large one called PINWR located within Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area.
There have been species closures, safety closures, and walking only beaches for as long as I can remember on Cape Hatteras Island. So going back to interim plan doesn't remove resource protections, just not as anal and excessive. Reminds of me one of the ORV groups motto, "Preserve and Protect...not Prohibit."
So yes, contact your senator and members of the subcommittee and tell them to support Senate Bill 2372.
I agree that Audubon and SELC have fooled congressional leaders that there is some kind of environmental crisis on Hatteras Island.And that its okay to convert the "recreational area" into a "wildlife refuge" by policy. If you really look at the species success rate before and after the changes that have been made, you can't honestly say the changes have made any real difference.
But hey, this is about exposure and generating donations for Audubon, they have to twist this into something its not... Audubon used its money and lobbying power to shove their agenda down the throasts of visitors and residents of Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area.
ORVers real intent
Submitted by Joan (not verified) on Thu, 2012/08/30 - 10:51am.
Spot on article. I don't live on HI anymore but still have friends that I still visit there. I have a pretty good handle on the situation there.
As long as Highway 12 (the only access on and off the island) and the Oregon Inlet bridge are intact the local economy does great. Business is so good on Hatteras Island that there are strip malls, surf shops, tee shirt shops, gift shops, tackle shops and places to eat everywhere you look. The incredible economic growth that has happened here in the last 20 years is ugly and one of the reasons our family moved away . In addition all that development is ridiculous considering how fragile and vunerable access to Hatteras and Ocracoke Island is. Each year weather related events cause mandatory evacuations of non residents, sometimes restricting visitation for for weeks. Just about every year some part of Highway 12 (the only vehicle access on and off the island) becomes impassible to traffic from weather events (like new inlet through the island). This has a dramatic and immediate affect on local business. The individuals who claim that there are economic problems caused by the new regs are locals who hate the National Park Service and any form of government anyway and could less about the Park or wildlife. They look for any excuse to bad mouth the NPS and environmental organisation and don't concern themselves if gossip they retell is true. They cherry pick some facts out of context and declare that something that is obviously true is not, many still insist that vehicle don't run over chicks or eggs of nesting shorebirds or that piping plovers breeding range is not in the Seashore. They feel they should be able to do what they want when they want on NPS beaches and that they are only individuals entitled to have input on management decisions about the National Park. It is incredulous that they can complain and condemn the NP's predator control program then go out and organise catch and release fishing tournaments for species (red drum) that are illegal to possess. If the anglers catches a big drum they have to call on their cell phone and wait for a judge to come and weigh, measure and register the fish before releasing it back into the ocean. I would think that would be breaking the law.
http://ncbbaonline.com/news/317-june-28-red-drum-tournament-events-prize...
Check out Dare county's own chamber of commerce report to see how well the economy is doing not just in Dare County but on Hatteras Island also.
http://www.outerbankschamber.com/economy-home/economic-reports-for-the-o...
The park's new ORV plan is still a nightmare that caters to ORV users to the detriment of non ORV users and wildlife. If Senate bill S. 2372, Preserving Public Access to Cape Hatteras Beaches Act is passed you can expect it to be much worse. The ORV users will demand that all the beaches in CHNS be ORV accessible with the majority of the beach open to ORV use the majority of the year with no vehicle capacity limits. If that happens they might as well rename "Cape Hatteras National Seashore" to "Dare County ORV Recreation Park" because it won't even remotely resemble a National Park.
This issue is about one user group (ORV users) getting what they want by deceit, intimidation, dirty politics or what ever it takes, nothing is beyond them. Their responses in the comments to this article coincides with the attitude and civility of their leaders. No wonder no one can compromise with them.
Please write or call your senator and the members of the subcommittee on National Parks and tell them to vote no Senate Bill 2372. They have been mislead about the real situation at Cape Hatteras National Seashore. There is a 24/7 local radio station (probably sponsored by Dare County local government) that pontificates a one sided rant about the Park's regulations and environmental management . The local ORV organisations have enlisted conservative National Organizations and their members to barrage congressional leaders to vote yes on S. 2372. They have fooled congressional leaders and others about their true intent for the Seashore.
Contact information
Link to energy committee:
http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/
Subcommittee on National Parks
http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/national-parks
Link to senate contact:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?State=WA
Joan
True Intent of the DOI--another polite pro access post!
Submitted by Ginny (not verified) on Thu, 2012/08/30 - 10:36am.
Intent of Congress as per the Park's Administrative History. Readers, you decide what the "primary" purpose was for Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area.
In point of fact, this history serves as a contract with Island residents. You decide if the contract has been violated?
The Creation and Establishment of Cape Hatteras National Seashore
The Great Depression through Mission 66
6http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/caha/caha_ah.pdf
Audobon Hipocrisy
Submitted by Uncle Slayton (not verified) on Thu, 2012/08/30 - 10:19am.
Here's another example of Audobon's altruism:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7y8C4NH3ls
fuck the audubon
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 2012/08/30 - 12:07am.
fuck the audubon
Hey Jim Brown
Submitted by Brenda (not verified) on Wed, 2012/08/29 - 10:42pm.
Bet your not an avid bird watcher, just another sneaky pissed off ORVer (your Audobon mispelling gave you away), not that there is anything wrong with birding from a vehicle. There are parking lots by all of the ramps, other seperate large parking lots, bathrooms, showers all with close proximity to the pedestrian areas and there are areas set aside where people can take a hike down the beach to do what they like without negotiating your tire ruts or parked vehicles in others words room to get away from others if that is your desire. There is also plenty of beach for you to drive on. Typical ORVer dishonesty.
Add comment
Most Popular
- 10 Things You Can Do For Birds
- Audubon Priority Bird: American Oystercatcher
- May-June 2013
- Win a Signed Copy of the ‘Crossley ID Guide: Raptors’
- 2012 Photo Awards Top 100
- What Do Birds Do for Us?
- Why Do We Never See Baby Pigeons?
- How to Tell a Raven From a Crow
- The Big Year According to Birders
- Roseate Spoonbills Send Warning Signs About the Florida Everglades
1. "So my question, where
1. "So my question, where are all the visitors that are making this a record year? They are not on the beaches. Based upon the number of vacant rental houses, I say quite simply they are not here!"
"First, no one, I repeat no one has proof of density of use on an average day."
No one except you?
2. It is to crowded (with ORVs) because there are not realistic carrying capacity limits. (thanks for bringing it to everyone's attention)
3. PINWR is a model of management. All of the north facing beach of Hatteras Island should be managed the way FWS manages the refuge, no vehicles!
4. What are you talking about you can drive your vehicle to Cape Point, Hatteras Inlet, South Point right now.
5. As far as the science of birds and vehicles, that is a good one. As long as you only drive where there are no nesting, resting or feeding birds and you STAY IN YOUR CAR maybe in some situations vehicles might be less obtrusive than pedestrians. Amazing how you all can pick the science you like and condemn the science you don't like. I bet I could pick that paper apart.