A New Rule Balances Wildlife and Off-Road-Vehicle Use on a North Carolina Beach
Comments
New rule balances wildlife and ORV use.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 2012/06/18 - 7:22am.
You cannot take an ORV on the beaches is Nags Head, Kitty Hawk, Kill Devil Hills, Southern Shores, Duck. Yet these adjacent towns are thriving, full of tourists. Hurricane Irene changed the game plan in Hatteras and the National Seashore, by opening a new Inlet and causing a temp bridge to be erected. This change in ocean currents also causes shoaling in the Hatteras Ferry route to Ocraccoke. Federal money, our taxes are paying for the dredging to maintain open waterways, removal of sand and ocean over wash on roads, and repair of roads. How much coin must fill your hands before you give something back in return. Protecting vital areas of the beach for other species is the parks directive from our government, by all the people, for ALL the people. National Park Employees are wonderful and should not be rudely treated. Please ask yourselves, how long could your family, children have survived with a home in a street, vehicles dashing by daily smashing ,disrupting your lives. Compassion, empathy and plain common sense informs you a roadway is not a homesite. Fighting makes people uncomfortable, think about it when you wonder where all the tourists are.
fact checking
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 2012/06/18 - 7:19am.
I have to admit I was wrong in my choice of fact checking regarding some of this issue but seeing Walker Golder was used by your publication for this article I almost gagged. Please.
Totally biased story
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 2012/06/17 - 10:18am.
The article starts with a premise that ORVs were responsible for most of the deaths of birds when natural causes have been documented to cause far more than the anecdotal examples offered as proof as the best science available. Please read the the reply to this and other aspects of this issue at: http://islandfreepress.org/CatBeachAccessIssues.html
There's nothing that can be
Submitted by Cro (not verified) on Sun, 2012/06/17 - 10:49pm.
There's nothing that can be done about natural causes of reduced productivity. But it's irrational to insinuate that because there are natural losses, it's okay to allow even more losses from ORV and other human disturbances.
There's nothing that can be
Submitted by Cro (not verified) on Sun, 2012/06/17 - 10:28pm.
There's nothing that can be done about natural causes of reduced productivity. But it's irrational to insinuate that because there are natural losses, it's okay to allow even more losses from ORV and other human disturbances.
I think the title of the
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 2012/06/17 - 9:33am.
I think the title of the article needs to changed, to be more accurate it needs to read:
Audubon uses its political power to bully the NPS into creating unbalanced new rules at Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area. Suffering businesses and visitors seek help from their local representatives and introduce bills to Congress to seek a more balanced plan.
...or more accurately Audubon
Submitted by Cro (not verified) on Mon, 2012/06/18 - 3:44pm.
...or more accurately Audubon used the law to "bully" the NPS into compliance after decades of the ORV advocates bullying the NPS into relaxed and nonexistent regulating of ORVs on the seashore. After decades of ORV advocates managing the seashore by political power - getting superintendents removed, getting natural resource and law enforcement personnel reassigned or removed from Buxton, telling the NPS where there should or should not be protective closures etc, etc.
“The folks that use ORVs in
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 2012/06/17 - 9:20am.
“The folks that use ORVs in Cape Hatteras are only about two percent of the people that visit the seashore.” – Audubon, Heather Starck
Where did Audubon get this number? I think this number is grossly inaccurate.
Much of this piece is full of
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 2012/06/16 - 7:54pm.
Much of this piece is full of half-truths and full on mischaracterizations. You of course have every right to publish whatever you wish. I am concerned however, that you are intentionally using tactics to mislead your donors and court potential donors, many of whom may not be familiar with the area, it's precious resources (both natural and man-made), it's stark beauty, and it's geography. I would do anything to protect this area and it's resources, it is my heaven on earth. The vast majority of locals, visitors, and even ORV users would do the same...and many have.
Add comment
Most Popular
- Win a Signed Copy of the ‘Crossley ID Guide: Raptors’
- May-June 2013
- 10 Things You Can Do For Birds
- How to Tell a Raven From a Crow
- 2012 Photo Awards Top 100
- Roseate Spoonbills Send Warning Signs About the Florida Everglades
- The Big Year According to Birders
- Audubon Priority Bird: American Oystercatcher
- Teachers Inadvertently Spread Invasive Species
- What Happens When Seabirds Drink Saltwater?
Hi Tom, Still flailing away
Hi Tom,
Still flailing away at strawmen, I see. I went back and can't find a post where I "bashed" statistics. Although, I have bashed your ignorance on the topic.
You've yet to support your assertion why a statistical analysis is needed to know the common fact that when ORVs are driven on breeding beaches used by plover et al, nests and chicks are in danger of being ran over. All you've done is whine about "statistics".
As far as your quoted paragraph:
“Statisticians provide crucial guidance in determining what information is reliable and which predictions can be trusted. They often help search for clues to the solution of a scientific mystery and sometimes keep investigators from being misled by false impressions.” Don’t these 2 sentences exactly describe the NPS Piping Plover data on the OBX???
No.