The seashore's off-road vehicle rule is now final
Friday 20 January 2012 at 7:53 pm.
The National Park Service today released to the public the final off-road vehicle rule for the Cape Hatteras National Seashore.
The rule will be published Monday, Jan. 23, in the Federal Register and will become effective on Wednesday, Feb. 15.
The long-awaited, much anticipated, and hotly debated final ORV rule had no surprises or significant changes from the proposed regulation, released for public comment last July.
The final rule established permits for ORV use on the beaches, but it doesn’t address – and wasn’t expected to include – the information that the public is anxiously waiting for – the cost of the annual or weekly permits.
In a release from the seashore, officials said that they would release more information on obtaining the permit – presumably including the cost – before Feb. 15.
The Park Service says it received more than 21,000 public comments, but made only a few changes. A table of the changes takes up only one page in the 82 pages of material released today.
“It is definitely a disappointment,” said David Scarborough, a member of the board of directors of the Outer Banks Preservation Association, which has advocated for free and open access to the seashore’s beaches. “I can’t see that there were many changes.”
“It is what it is” was the attitude of many advocates for more reasonable ORV access, who have opposed most of the Park Service’s plan for ORV management.
On the other hand, the environmental groups that sued the Park Service in 2007 over its lack of ORV regulation on the seashore issued a media release praising the regulations and declaring victory in the effort to protect “baby” birds and sea turtles on the seashore.
“The Park Service’s rules are a compromise that provides protections for both pedestrians and wildlife while still allowing responsible beach driving,” said Julie Youngman, senior attorney, Southern Environmental Law Center. SELC represented Defenders of Wildlife and the National Audubon Society, the groups that brought the lawsuit.
“With both the number of hatchlings and visitors to the beach climbing, the success of responsible beach management is clear,” said Jason Rylander, senior attorney for Defenders of Wildlife. “The new rules will ensure that Cape Hatteras continues to provide enjoyment to beach users while protecting the unique wildlife that call the seashore home.”
More than 50 pages of the document released today are devoted to comments on the proposed rule and Park Service response to the comments.
One page is a table of the changes the Park Service made in the proposed rules after receiving the comments. You can find that table on Page 58 of the document.
A few changes are worth noting.
First, officials have removed the phrase “in person” from the language on obtaining a permit. Currently, the plan calls for ORV users to apply in person for the permit and to watch a seven-minute video on beach driving. Many expect the crush of visitors on summer weekends showing up at trailers at just three locations on the seashore to get their permits will be a disaster and will discourage visitation.
Removing the “in person” language opens to door to selling permits on the Internet at some point or at least to not having to renew in person every year.
Second, the changes allow transporting a mobility-impaired person to the beach in an ORV and allowing the ORV to remain on the beach while the person is there. In the proposed rules, the ORV could drop a person off but would then have to leave the beach. Many thought this was a safety issue.
Special use permits will be available to transport mobility impaired persons in only one area where the beach is closed to vehicles during the summer – in front of the villages. Mobility impaired people cannot be transported to beaches that are vehicle-free.
The rules for night driving were clarified to include language that portions of those beaches that are designated ORV routes may be opened for night driving from Sept. 15-Nov. 15 if no turtle nests remain in the area.
One change that access advocates had hoped for did not happen.
The superintendent has latitude to use adaptive management of resource closures, which is good and access advocates want. That means that he or she could change such things as buffer distances in the future if the situation on the ground or the science changes.
Many hoped for adaptive management of designated ORV routes – giving the superintendent latitude to change the routes if conditions on the beach or usage of the beach changed.
In its response to comments, the Park Service said any change in designated routes will require additional environmental impact statements and a new proposed and final rule.
In its responses, the Park Service basically wrote off comments that the science behind resource management, such as buffer distances for nests, and the economic study are flawed. Once again, officials defended both.
Public comments on the rule and comments in this and other media have concerned the perception that the Park Service’s preferred alternative in the Final Environmental Impact Statement, Alternative F, was biased toward environmental concerns, rather than recreation.
In fact, many residents and visitors feel the Park Service has failed in its mission to provide recreation and public access to the Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area, the name give the seashore by Congress in 1950. It was never changed by Congress, but the “Recreational” phrase was just eliminated over time by the Park Service.
Here is the response to these comments:
“As stated in NPS Management Policies 2006, Section 1.4.3, Congress recognizes that the enjoyment by future generations of the national parks can be ensured only if the superb quality of park resources and values is left unimpaired. Congress has therefore provided that when there is a conflict between conserving resources and values and providing for enjoyment of them, conservation is to predominate. This is how courts have consistently interpreted the Organic Act.”
Beginning on Page 59, the Park Service explains some of the principal elements of the rule in a question-and-answer format. There are answers to many frequently asked questions in here, but nothing we haven’t known before.
The actual regulation begins on Page 73 and is fairly brief.
The chart of designated ORV routes is on Pages 77-78.
There are a few things to note here:
- It is true, as the environmental groups note in their press release and have emphasized before, that 28 miles of the seashore’s 67 or so miles are set aside for ORV routes, “only” 26 miles are set aside as “vehicle-free” areas, and 13 miles are seasonally open to ORVs. However, remember that many of the 28 miles of designated ORV routes will be closed to vehicles – and pedestrians – during nesting season, which is basically from March through August.
- If you want to come to the seashore, get a permit, and drive to the beach in your ORV during the nesting season, you will be able to get to the beach, but not necessarily the area of the beach you want to get to. That may be closed for nesting birds and turtles.
- And we note again that while environmental groups are very pleased to have these vehicle-free areas set aside for pedestrians only, even pedestrians can expect to be prohibited in many areas during nesting season.
- Night driving will be prohibited from May 1-Sept. 14 during the hours of 9 p.m. and 7 a.m. Under the consent decree, driving is prohibited from 10 p.m. until 6 a.m.
- Vehicles can park on the beach in the ORV areas in single file – not double parking or “circling the wagons” for a wind block.
- There will be no limit on the number of permits sold, but there will be a carrying capacity on the beach. The maximum number of vehicles allowed on any ORV route at one time is the length of the route – or portion of the route that is open divided by 6 meters, which is 20 feet. This is the equivalent of 260 vehicles per mile.
- The ORV permit goes with the vehicle, not the driver. So if you have more than one vehicle you drive to the beach, you will need a permit for each one.
In a little less than a month, island residents and visitors will see a major change in the way we have traditionally and historically used our beaches.
It’s now a final plan with little hope of changing or amending it.
FOR MORE INFORMATION
To read the entire final rule document released today, click here.
To read a previous blog on ORV permits, “Come the new year, we will pay to drive on the beach," click here.
To read more about the November, 2010, Final Environmental Impact Statement, click here. The EIS will largely provide the framework for the plan and access to the beaches.
To read more about the draft ORV regulation, published last summer, click here.
140 comments
I have not read the final rule nor have I read the comments, but I do know that if the comments were truly not considered or addressed, I believe this is a violation of the Administrative Procedures Act. Agencies that violate the APA can be sued and an injunction can be issued which could delay the implementation of this rule. I would also ask if they prepared a complete Regulatory Flexibility Analysis that addresses the significant number of Small Businesses that would be affected by this rule. These are just my thoughts but I believe the interested parties really need to have their legal teams look into this.
Annette (Email ) - 20-01-’12 22:35
well, that’s that then. End of an era, and a grave miscarriage of justice.
pumpkinboy - 21-01-’12 00:43
The outer banks will become a gost town with this in place. People will go other places to fish now
red - 21-01-’12 01:18
Its the end of the Banks as we know it. The extreme environmentalists will now go to work on driving the residents off the islands. It is another example of government run amuck and a minority opinion setting policy.
Jim Robinson (Email ) - 21-01-’12 05:28
I suppose droves of additional NPS personel with be required to enforce these regs! Sad, when you know that this area was originally established for recreational enjoyment by an act of congress!
The original and intended use has now been twisted into a venue that is completely different!
It’s disheartening to see the power the Federal Government and it’s agencies have over the public.
I’m especially sad for the economic consequences that surely will occur for the working resident population.
A TOTAL BOYCOTT OF ALL NPS PERSONEL BY ALL BUSINESSES OF HATTERAS ISLAND MAY GET SOME ATTENTION
BLOCKADE THE BEACHES…….IF THE PUBLIC CAN’T DRIVE ON THE PROTECTED AREAS THEN WHY SHOULD THE NPS BE ALLOWED?
I still don’t get it…if you drive by a bird, it stays where it is…if you walk by a bird if gets scared and flies away. If you bring a poop machine (dog) with you leash or not the bird flies away….the only time its not scared is when you are in the vehicle…crazy!!!!
Annie - 21-01-’12 07:14
well i guess the outer banks wont be having me as a guest,,, the feds are messin up again,, and making people lose their lively hood,,due to a small group of narrow minded consevationist,,and beauracratic baloney,, i was coming every year and spending at least one thousand dollars,,, they wont see a cent of that now,,,hope a real good hurricane comes and makes it inhabitable for any one,,especially the park service,,and the conservationist
charles mullins - 21-01-’12 08:46
just another brick in the wall…fed DEMOCRATS are the worse! EddieA
e anderson (Email ) - 21-01-’12 09:04
Mr . Mullins, if you no longer wish to visit Hatteras Island, that is your decision and yours only. Your quote, " hope a real good hurricane comes and makes it inhabitable for any one,,especially the park service,,and the conservationist, " shows what a fool you really are.
Mike O'Connell - 21-01-’12 09:32
A real good hurricane? Have you lost your mind?! Yeah, NPS has made this place a ghost town in years to come but what about us? The people that live here? You wish that upon us as well? We have tried fighting NPS but they never listen. They waste our time with having public meetings leading us to believe they really care. If I were you Mr. Mullins, I’d rethink your statement. I’m just as upset as anyone else. This is my home & they are taking it away from me & everyone else.
Lauren (Email ) - 21-01-’12 11:45
The federal gov’t has been doing this for decades!!! Now I know how the Native Americans feel!
Iris Long (Email ) - 21-01-’12 12:46
Well, this is a fight that I’ve been involved in (in one way or the other) since 2003. Many people believed, and stated, that it would never happen. I always knew in my heart that it would.
I will still come to the island because I love it with all my heart and I have family there that I want to visit. But it will never be the same. It is truly the end of an entire culture and way of life. My heart is broken for all the local people and for all the visitors that will never again get to experience the Hatteras that we knew and loved.
Renee Tomberlin - 21-01-’12 13:17
I think this is a shame. It seems to be all about money. If this were truly an issue about a bird there would be no access to the beach area at all rather then you guys charging fees at all. What this does for families like ours is limit a life that is already limited to our child with cerebral palsy that is in a wheelchair. We have taken our child to OBX the last 10 years of her life ( she is 12). You can’t push a wheelchair in the sand, so being able to drive on the inlet and let her sit in her chair on the sand like any other was a blessing to us. I hope cost isn’t a reason to hold us back from letting our child experience something as simple as being able to sit by the ocean. There are no other places in my state of Va. where she is able to do so
. The area of corolla is going to be so congested you will start seeing a decrease in rentals, that I have no doubt about. I think this is a very poor and money oriented decision that will affect your revenues tremendously in a matter of time. As well as take away places for families with special needs children that go now.
Since the left and most Democrats seem to be in love with the Occupy anything movement, why not have an Occupy Cape Hatteras Movement. Lets get all of the New York, DC and San Francisco occupiers to drive to Cape Hatteras go on the beach and set up camp indefinately. Since they are allowed to break all the rules in occuping those cities what harm could come if they break the new Park Service rules? The same people that support the NPS and the so called wildlife defenders are the same people who are having a slobbering love affair with the occupiers. We have been traveling to the Banks for a long time. As dissapointed as I am in the new rules, we will still continue to come and enjoy ourselves. I just hope that people start taking note of how the government forced this on the people. The same people that they are supposed to be serving. This is happening not only on Cape Hatteras but all accross thia country. People wake up and take your country back.
Rick Lafferty (Email ) - 21-01-’12 14:25
It is what it is, and with the exception of those who ignored the court ordered NPS actions, we knew the FEIS would bring change to to off road use at Cape Hatteras Natl Seashore. Rather than your usual sword rattleing and NPS bashing, it is refreshing to see some explanation of the FEIS in layman terms. Keeping everyone informed with just the facts will help with the implementation on Feb. 15.
Dennis - 21-01-’12 14:34
Why is a change to permits considered a loss in the beach-driving battle? Permits are always a pain. But this could have been much worse.
Anonymous - 21-01-’12 15:30
If the N.P.S wants to Shut us out of our Beach, I believe it is time to tell them, that they can get all their goods and services North of the Bridge. A TOTAL BAN from all Stores on Hatteras Island for all of their Employees.
Time to put up or Shut UP, I’ve been told our new sign will be going up on the 15th..
JAM
JAM (Email ) - 21-01-’12 15:56
That really was a poor comment about the hurricane.
Shame what these groups have been able to accomplish. Need some fisherpeople in D.C. from N.C. andsurrounding states to get this turned around. For something this idiotic to happen really speaks to how broken our gov. is.
At first I said I would never be back to HI. But when I think of all the great memories and the great people. I have had the pleasure of meeting and fishing with.I will always be a advocate for changing this outrageous BS by the NPS.Shame on the NPS.And God Bless all the great residents of HI.
surffishn (Email ) - 21-01-’12 18:00
I don’t think its a bad thing totally, they did that to us her in Delaware to and we thought that it would hurt our beach fishing but it really didn’t…I have been coming to the OBX for 20 yrs and will not stop..
mnirishmen (Email ) - 21-01-’12 19:01
I love the idea about the occupy suggestion! Lets all get together and drive on the beach the day the fees are put in place and hold out as long as possible!!! I know I have a job and responsibilities like many others but this is crazy that we are restricted on where to drive, let alone have to pay to drive on land we have already paid taxes for and continue to pay taxes on to manage these areas!! This whole thing just drives me nuts!
Doug - 21-01-’12 20:32
Anyone want to bet against that the turtle that the NPS ran over last summer will be a major star in the required video?
Mike (Email ) - 21-01-’12 21:18
Yeah Mike, I wonder what would have happened if it had been a child playing in the sand instead of a turtle? We have been coming to the OBX for a lot of years and now this. Now we can see why Jefferson and Madison along with our fore fathers put forth the second amendment! We the people had better wake!! I believe in conservation just like any good hunter or fisherman, but reprimand the violaters, do not violate the rights of decent folks!!!
David Maupin (Email ) - 22-01-’12 07:18
The rule is here for now and legally we forced to abide by it until common sense changes are made. I am not happy about it but my love for Hatteras Island will never change. Its certainly not clear what is now being closed from previous years. Can someone put together a couple maps for comparison? There would be a "before the consent decree", "after consent decree", and "final rule" maps.
Can we find historical nesting location of CWB/PIPL’s so that we can legally recreate near these locations and hopefully discourage these birds from nesting there? Like encouraging recreation at the narrows before the Point, maybe put some picnic tables near there? Are kites still allowed in the Park? Maybe we should organize a spring kite event near these locations? I don’t want to harm any birds but want to discourage them from nesting in locations are most popular to visitors. Just some ideas…
MovingForwardIdeas - 22-01-’12 11:19
I have banned the Park Service from my businesses for years, even though I know people that work for them as good people, it was something I felt the island could do as a whole to get attention as to how unfair this issue is to everyone that loves Hatteras Island. I still believe we could fight this with the right political representation in Washington and locally. Laws can be changed and funds can be cut for the dept of interior. Don’t give up, it’s worth fighting for.
Carol (Email ) - 22-01-’12 17:12
They all should have listened to you Carol… I sure did… And I will never give up….JAM
JAM (Email ) - 22-01-’12 17:26
The very sad part of this is that it all revolves around money. Permits being required = money, Lawyers defending both sides in all of it = money, Park service bowing to the pressures of the environmentalists = money (unseen money), Legal decisions being made on pretend facts = money (once again unseen money, If anyone believes the judicial system works without the “greasing of palms” I am sorry for your blindness), Saying that business owners should boycott Park Service employes and the like = money ( it is hard for a business that is hanging on by threads to say no to a willing paying customer). The list can go on and on as to how this revolves around the “Almighty Dollar”. I think just making it known to the parties that have dealt this blow collectively to this Island we all call home would possibly raise some thought, a nice “Audubon, Park Service and Defenders of Wildlife Not Welcome” sign as well as T-shirts and bumper stickers would help some get the idea. One must be careful in these areas as it may cause them to yell discrimination which it is not as you are just saying they are not welcome, you are not refusing them any goods or service. A check into the Unruh Civil Rights Act may shed some light in that area. There are times when the people just need to fight back. If anyone thinks the government or their senator or congressman will help that is not going to happen, The world of politics = money. Hatteras as we all knew it is gone, it will not return, you either change and accept, fight any way you know or move on.
dale (Email ) - 22-01-’12 17:42
Examples that show the extent of loss by our community. The Consignment shop, Changing Tide, is now closed because they couldn’t pay expenses. This shop raised funds for young people to have healthy alternative recreation. This is a poor community, made more poor by the NPS for almost a decade. They couldn’t even support this shop. The reasons given was the lack of business this summer by the TOURISTS! and the effect of the hurricane.
The most northern business on the island was an eco-tourist kayac place. It quickly failed and has been vacant for a number of years. Several others are now trying to attract those looking for green activities. One in Buxton has recently gone out of business. This is what the NPS and the Defenders of Wildlife this week have said will support the local economy. I’m not seeing green. I’m seeing red!
Barbara Ackley (Email ) - 22-01-’12 18:12
Dale you can refuse anyone goods or services, as long as color, religion, or sex is not involved. Legal… Our Sign goes up On the 15th, as along as they hold their course.
JAM
Has anyone stopped to think about what the costs to the island are? How often would the road need repairs with only 4,000 residents of Hatteras and Ocracoke Islands? How many fire companies would we need? What about the extensive water rescue facilities? Without our tourist economy and the ability to enjoy our beaches as we have in the past (recreation and social), why should we do anything to encourage the NPS?
Make it impossible for them to get goods and services on Island. Even better yet, let’s start charging the NPS for the costs associated with hosting 2 million visitors.
Ginny - 22-01-’12 20:05
Doom and gloom has been predicted for five years now, and largely it hasnt happened. The economy stinks, so businesses fail. Thats a fact of life. The consigbment shop is hardly a tourist draw and its closing had little to do with ORV. It took the Hurricane to really screw things up. Successful businesses will adapt and some are. The future of the island depends a lot more on the weather and on changing demographics than it does having to get a permit to drive on the beach. Hatteras is changing. That is obvious to all who open their eyes, and the ORV issue is not the cause. It’s a mere symptom, so focusing ire on NPS or the enviros or this plan is futile. Threats of staying away don’t help. Maybe marketing HI to families as well as fishermen and providing some more amenities to encourage people to stay south of Nags Head would be a start. Maybe Dare could spend some of its PR money, you know, promoting tourism instead of telling people to stay away. Complaining ain’t gonna encourage anyone to come.
Cap'n obvious - 22-01-’12 20:08
Dam Cap’n u related to the fella over seas that fell into the life boat…..Open your eyes we have been recession proof since the depresion days, FACT…. Nice try, I have adapted and overcame …..I’ll do fine but I’m gonna Fight Fight Fight….
JAM
JAM (Email ) - 22-01-’12 20:14
JAM, I appreciate your response and I did read a bit on the turning people away and being drug into a discrimination conflict, it is a touchy area. My main point was there are ways to fight this and stay within all boundaries and give them what they started. Enjoy my friend, I also have a business and will put up a sign.
dale (Email ) - 22-01-’12 21:19
Hopefully a pro states rights, pro fishing attorney can opine on the legalities of ‘we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone’ sign. Just a shame to create a bunch of rules and controversy over one of the best places to get away from it all. The thing we need to remember is it is YOUR land. Money for permits, money for enforcement, treating every fisherman like they are a criminal? Time for some “not civil disobedience…”—-I would love to see the State of NC fix the breach, annex Pea Island and tell the Feds to come take it….
John Snider (Email ) - 22-01-’12 21:56
‘Maybe marketing HI to families as well as fishermen…..”
cape hatteras has been marketed to the outdoor recreation crowd. but the ‘recreation’ is being taken out of the equation. no fishing here, no driving here, no surfing here, no kiting here, no walking on the beach here………..
bbc - 23-01-’12 00:02
‘That is obvious to all who open their eyes, and the ORV issue is not the cause.’
i beg to differ, it’s just one of the causes. as a long time business owner we have seen the demise of our weekend business when the beach is closed to driving, especially in the spring but also in the summer. and, we have adapted our business, one way by cutting two staff positions.
bbc - 23-01-’12 00:12
I have been watching this discussion and am uncomfortable about the direction it is heading.
We are all angry and emotional. There will be large changes in our lives and lifestyles.
I think it’s fair to blame the NPS leadership in D.C. and even the environmental groups for what has happened here.
However, I don’t think it’s fair to blame the Park Service employees and ban them from local businesses.
This approach only hurts the people, most of them good people, who are trying to do their jobs and earn a paycheck. They are not in a position of power here, but want only to keep on working.
I don’t have any problems with them, and I bet you don’t either.
It seems that many need to refocus their anger and their actions toward something more productive than punishing the little guys.
Not sure what that action is, but please don’t blame the rrank-and-file NPS employees.
Irene
Irene (Email ) - 23-01-’12 00:56
I doubt all businesses will ban the NPS, because no matter how much they spend in their business the money is welcomed.
When one business forbids, another will open their arms.
And, I wonder how many of the transplant fools will try and go chew the ass of a native that continues to serve the NPS.
None of the people will dare. They are only internet heroes and think they are tough.
I ‘ve seen several of the posters here spouting off for four years now about what they were going to do too the NPS and others and they’ve never done a thing, but continue to talk tough on the internet.
Curious - 23-01-’12 06:13
Changes. We are use to that. I have been here for 76 yrs and every time some one moves in here they try to make it like they came from. If it was so good they should have stayed there. I don’t blame the NPS as much as I do some of these fat natives that sold there birth rights for a few bucks and now it is Who is me. If the NPS hadn’t come in here it would be like north of OI and the fat natives and come in hers would be in control of the beach and you wouldn’t even be able to walk on it. I still r ember how it was when a bunch of New Yorkers owned from where the CG Station is to the inlet and they had a armed guard to keep the natives off. Don’t get me wrong but some of these fat cats need to rember the wind don’t blow up the same dogs tail all the time.
Leon - 23-01-’12 07:00
“I don’t think its fair to blame the Park Service employees and ban them from local businesses” Irene.
No one forces these people to work for the NPS. This is a choice, dont like the treatment by the community, request a transfer.
Maybe if the NPS had kept their promises to the residents and visitors, or managed CHNSRA as a recreational area as mandated by Congress, the relationship wouldn’t be what it is.
Jim Higham - 23-01-’12 08:04
@ Irene with up-most respect… No workers = No Park… The higher ups don’t know what is going on down here and they think everything is peachy, Murray Just got an AWARD for God sakes. If we would have done this from the start, he would have recieved no award the d.c crowd would know there are problems here..Look I know and am friends with some of these folks, if they choose to work for the enemy, they will be treated as such. At Curious, we tried the hi road, look where it got us… The Nazi’s had sympathisers too, and they were treated special… When you are in a WAR, you’ve got to take out the Little People, to get to the big people…
I was told by MURRAY to my face several years ago that if the plan was done fair, neither side would be happy. Well the press releases from the DARKSIDE, seems to me like they got everything they wanted..
As far as Inet Toughguy, thats jovial, I have done everything I have said I would do, and I’m gonna do MORE…. I don’t need the Inet to be Tough, ask most anyone down here…
JAM
JAM (Email ) - 23-01-’12 08:13
Jam,
You’ve not everything you’ve said.
You post a lot on a lot of sites.
You said you were done with the beach and would have nothing else to do with it, when the closures began. Yet, now you have a new truck and drive it on the beach regularly.
You even went as far as getting a commercial NPS driving permit, when you know nothing about commercial fishing and are a joke to those that are true watermen.
You’ve threatened for years to take out those individual locals that you felt sided with the enviromentalist the first time you saw them out in public and yet you’ve still done nothing to them.
But, I guess in all these years you’ve yet to run into them on this small island.
You are an antagonist that has done not one productive action for beach access.
People like you and those like you are the very reason why it’s hard for the beach access orgs to be taken seriously by the enviromentalists, goverment and the public.
If every business on HI is to ban NPS employees from goods and services it will end, nor change a thing.
The NPS will get all their goods and services north of the bridge. they will send more needed money in HI to other areas and even pass their overhead costs onto the ORV public in the permits.
That’s a good plan. You think that up all by yourself?
Thanks for causing more economic impact for my family and I. You and those that support you are just as bad as the NPS.
Take a bow.
Curious - 23-01-’12 08:52
Never said I was done with the beach access issue, as I have been fighting the whole time. I Stayed off the beach from 2007-2011 November,(to prove a point, and be able to say that I have less impact on the beach then they do) when I took my good bye to the beach tour…and your point….(Thats was the entire run of the consent decree, Thats four years, I wanted and stated I was saying good bye to all the spots I have fished. And that I would not be partaking of the new Permit if one was ever instated. Well I’m NOT, I have a COM PERMIT… I have had my new truck on the beach 6 times, today will make seven, as I say GoodBye to the HOOK….
No Need for a Bow, I moved to this Island 10 years ago to fish my life away, I was content with that, until they took it away from me… Now In the Words of Mr. Murray
“THEY CAN DEAL WITH ME”
What have U done????
PLEASE
JAM
How do you know what I know about com fishing???
Stated first off that I WILL BE THE WORST COM IN THE HISTORY OF HATTERAS ISLAND, cause I will be hook and Line, ONLY…
Well I have not seen Derb here since the public meeting at the school, where I had 4 Dare County Sherrifs around me. Ain’t seen Syd either….. Nor Jim Lyons… Gee Why is that as you say its a small Island…
Went to 11 NEG REG meetings, handed out flyers, helped with stand in the sand for several years…..and have worked in Tackle shops Educating the public on a daily basis for going on 10 years….Wings over Water, that was a Fun 3 months for them.. The taking of the Inlet last summer by YAK….And my List goes on..so your right I have done nothing..
Work at the Docks everyday, and nobody seems to think I am a Joke. I fish over 200 days a year, by all ways and means, from Boats to Kayaks to Beach…I have earned the respect of some of my IDOLS/Island Living Legends, who’s families have fished these banks for over 300 years, do we agree on everything no, but we have some really good discusions. And I listen to them on a regular basis. Where do you think I get some of my ideas????
Good luck with that going North to get goods and services… Gonna take ya a Half a tank of gas just to fill up everytime… That should work out well… I hope it doesn’t get to that, all I want is for our voices to be heard, and some common sense to be used. If they want to continue to Ignore us, I will be the squeaky Wheel..
What have you done ??????
JAM (Email ) - 23-01-’12 09:41
this is a good rule that balances public access to the beaches for recreational use with the need to protect wildlife. i can’t believe the strident, bellicose words from people who don’t like attempting to strike such a balance. selfish and narrow minded, unable to see anything but their own point of view.
contrarian (Email ) - 23-01-’12 09:49
Irene,
I concur with your thoughts on the direction of the comments. Banning NPS personnel from ones business? What is next, making NPS employees and their families sew a star on their clothing.
My heart goes out to the NPS men, women and their families of the Outer Banks Group, who have to endure this harassment on and off the job. The NPS personnel are members of the community, who own homes, pay taxes, raise their families and contribute to the well being of the Outer Banks. Many are long term or locals whose families have served proudly in the National Park Service for generations.
History tells the story of haters, who are not happy with their lives or circumstances and find an excuse to demonize a group of people be they NPS personnel or otherwise. If a business owner/employee in Hatteras was experiencing a robbery or break-in and a member of the NPS Law Enforcement staff were in the vicinity (on or off duty), does the same banning rule apply?
There is usually a certain amount of hesitation and reluctance when change occurs and that is to be expected. Irene, you have the capabaility and responsibility to ease those fears by posting what you consider important facts that every reader should know about the changing rules of ORV use on CHNS. You may even want to throw in some positives of the FEIS at the risk of becoming one of the targets of the haters.
Dennis - 23-01-’12 10:15
I was told that both sides would not like the new rule, if it were done corectly…. Why Is one side jumpin for joy then?????
They got everything they asked Belli for back in 03, thats why…26 miles gone for good, the other 28 will have bird and turtle closures for apparently 11 months out of the year…
Thats fair and open minded? Wheres the Science? 1000 Meter bufers on an Island that avereges 1,500 feet in width?????
You could close every inch of Beach On the Cape Hatteras National Sea Shore Recreation Area , and not create one inch of habitat. Why not a hands on approach, protective areas, with netting and observation decks, for both Turtles and Birds, lets BREED these things, and let the visitors, come and see…LETS CREATE HABITAT…. Lets do something POSITIVE to help, not just close it down and say Oh Well when a storm approaches…
If you want more birds on CHNSRA, call a Chicken Farmer, he’ll teach ya how to make Birds..
Ohhhh but its not aout the Critters, its about the GREEN, GREENBACKS that is..Goin to the HOOK if you would like to discuss, in a Friendly manner…..
contrarian, currious, ray, or whoever you are….I don’t Hide
JAM
JAM (Email ) - 23-01-’12 10:20
It is not about fishing on the beach or even protecting the birds. Its about a bloated government taking away another freedom !! When will it end-they even tell us what kind of light bulbs we can use…Face it people the politicans are in bed with the left envirimentnuts. It makes me sick in my stomach to see this happen to HI. I was born and raised here. What would the old timers do? They would have tarred anad feathered them!!
tickedoff - 23-01-’12 10:33
Well , I was thinking about moving to my home in Pirates Cove, thanks for helping me make up my mind. It will be for sale. If your in Georgia stop by and I’ll show you what a real beach for visitors is like.
Greg (Email ) - 23-01-’12 11:49
While there are many issues within the NPS’s ORV rule that will negatively impact our enjoyment of the beaches within the seashore, the reduction of “nighttime” driving hours is particularly peculiar. During the summer, sunrise is well before the proposed 7 a.m. start of ORV access. How can this be viewed as night? The loss of seeing the sun rise, while casting to early cruising Spanish mackerel, will be hard to bear.
Stan (Email ) - 23-01-’12 12:04
âGovernment big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. The course of history shows us that as a government grows, liberty decreases.â
â Thomas Jefferson
It is wonderful 50 degrees here today. The Seashore is completely open for the last winter. Come and enjoy it with us!
You can walk anywhere you want but after this year you may not drive anywhere you want. You will have to drive to wherever you want to walk, though, and it may take an ORV to get there. The trails for non-ORVs and parking areas will not be completed probably for a long time.
When you come, join us in wondering why the beaches are closed when there is no nesting going on. There are few people on the beach and you can walk or drive anywhere this year and rarely see another person. why the inlets and soundsides of the inlets will be permanently closed defies all observational science! It hurts me that I won’t be able to even gather shells on the southbeach from the hook or from 1.5 miles north from ramp 49. It is absolutely impossible for me to walk that distance, in cold or hot weather!
Barbara Ackley (Email ) - 23-01-’12 12:29
Barbara’s e-mail is part of the problem I was talking about. Not to single her out. And not that I don’t understand the emotion. But in winter there will be at least 39 miles to drive on, including the points and spits, as both the seasonal and designated ORV routes should be open without any resource closures.
As for NPS employes, what Dennis and Irene said. You only hurt yourselves, not them.
Cap'n Obvious - 23-01-’12 13:50
my concern is we have a large family with only two 4 wheel drives we have to make at least 2 trips to get everyone on the beach, how is that suppose to work? if i go out drop of my people then go back to get the others, will i be allowed back?
glenda worrell (Email ) - 23-01-’12 14:44
Well said Irene. That took guts.
Glenda,
Are you talking about getting someone out on the beach in front of the villages who can’t walk out there? If so, you can leave the vehicle there with a handicapped permit. Otherwise, if the area is open to ORV access you don’t have to "drop people off" and leave.
Irene,
I seem to recall a provision that states there will be a post-storm review of the ORV plan.
Seeing how Hurricane Irene made major alterations of some of the areas, shouldn’t we be calling for that immediate review? They may just say since the rule hasn’t been promulgated yet, it can’t be done, but since the rule is based on pre-Irene conditions, they should at least take a look at it.
Crotalus - 23-01-’12 15:55
Hmmm. Everyone fear not! “Everyone Qualifies for the Mobility Impairment Designation”. The government’s rules are if you say you are “Mobility Impaired” than you are mobility impaired. Just like when voting, no qualifying certification needed. Stumped toe, bad back, too old, too young etc etc “mobility impairment” is a totally ambiguous word. Use it frequently when attempting to drive on the beach.
screwthegovernment - 23-01-’12 15:56
we like to go out ramp 55, there is so many of us, my husband has to make two trips for us to get out there, what im asking if he drops the first load of us with fishing gear, etc, will he be able to go back, get the rest of our family, or is it once you are on the beach if you leave you loose your spot?
glenda (Email ) - 23-01-’12 16:41
With all due respect, I am in agreement with Irene in regards the Island Park Service employees and other branches of the Department of the Interior.
I am sure I will be blasted on what I am about to say but it is how I feel. I hope those that know me know by now how deeply and passionately I care about our Island and her people.
I will continue to use all the proper legal and political avenues to voice my opinions and preferences in regards to the right of traditional beach access. I have not given up.
At the same time, at this time, adaptation to what has been handed to us is required.
I have a responsibility to the many people who depend on our business to put food in their familiesâ mouths and a roof over their head to succeed. I owe it to them to not only survive but succeed.
In my eyes, the real danger is in not adapting. Change is what we do/ have always done to survive on this sandbar we call home. I will not give up my home. For sure we did not win our battle. However, in order to have ANY say, we MUST to continue to be upstanding citizens. Having integrity, honor and respect for others will get us much further with those that CAN make change than being hostile, close-minded or even violent.
No matter what happens we have to hold onto that part of our Island heritage that is honorable, hospitable and visionary.
Beth Midgett (Email ) - 23-01-’12 17:37
I have to disagree with you Beth. I work for a Sheriff’s office here in Va. Some of the NPS officers come in to our jail with prisoners they arrest on the parkway. They don’t care about you or the Outer Banks. Just talking to them one on one, they have a totally different attitude towards us non-feds. Even the ones down there have a bad attitude towards tourists. I have never had a good interaction with them. I always have the feeling that they are waiting for me to mess up so they can pounce on me with a ticket.
Steve (Email ) - 23-01-’12 18:10
Hear, Hear, Beth!!
Glenda, do you mean if the beach has "hit its limit" of ORVs per mile? I guess that would be up to whomever is manning the ramp, but if there are already "bodies" there rather than an ORV, it seems to me one could leave and return to the beach.
Steve,
Since you obviously believe it’s okay to judge all people in a group for the behaviors of a few in that group, it seems rather disingenuous for you to complain about others doing it.
Thanks Beth for renewing my belief that the people of HI have core values of honor and integrity. Salute!
Dennis - 23-01-’12 19:04
Beth,
Are you saying that there will not be a “sign” at Teach’s Lair as claimed?
Is Midgett Realty prepared to put up the same “sign” as its employees at your sister company, Teach’s Lair.
Curious - 23-01-’12 19:41
A quote from the “skinny-dipping” article: “such as hassling visitors for tossing a cracker to a seagull, a child for reaching hand under a rope to pick up a shell, and a family for coming early in the morning to watch the sunrise by claiming they were sleeping in their car”
Ms. Nolan, I’m afraid that I have to disagree with you about the rank-and-file employees at Cape Hatteras. I’ve had the same feeling that Steve shared earlier about the local NPS employees searching for trivial violations so they can pounce. I’m sure most visitors can look back and find similar incidents to the ones cited by Mr. Parr in his article.
The policies may have come from the offices in Washington and the environut HQs, but the local NPS employees seem to have embraced them and are fully participating in the effort to make visitors to Cape Hatteras unwelcome. They appear to be part of the problem and not the solution.
Mike (Email ) - 23-01-’12 20:09
From a practical point of view, you would think that NPS employees are bussed in from DC to supervise the Federal facilities on the Island. But aren’t most of the NPS employees people who are from the OBX and who live here as well as working here? Did they forget where they were born, or do they just like a paycheck better than they do their neighbors?
I think the new beach regulations are poorly thought out, poorly written, and poorly executed. They are a great example of a Federal bureaucracy that knows nothing about the places they are trying to regulate. Regrettably, knowing nothing never stopped a bureaucrat from doing anything, did it?
There are a lot of comments here that I think are equally foolish, though. I’ve voted Democratic all my life, and I don’t want to close the beaches as the Feds are doing. This effort began a long time before the current administration, and has much more to do with entrenched Federal attitudes towards Federal lands than it does with any one administration. Administrations come and go every four years, or eight, but Federal employees are lifers. The only way they don’t retire out of Federal jobs is if they happen to die first. So don’t blame the party in power- not all of us are tree huggers, some of us fish and hunt, and a lot of us drive on the beach. Most of the visitors from up North during the season are coming from places in the USA where the Democrats are in the majority, and they sure don’t want to close the beaches here.
I also think the comment from Mr. Mullins who wants us to endure another hurricane that wipes us all out is a particularly sterling example of the kind of stupidity that can only come out of the mouth of a person who wakes up every day on the wrong side of the bed, no matter which side it is. OK- so our government, the one we all share, to our disgust, is making the beach inaccessible by vehicle for most of the people who want to go there. So the solution is a hurricane that wipes us ALL out? Mr. Mullins can’t fish, so we all get to die in an epic tragedy because of it? Got it. Sure seems fair to me. NOT.
I don’t live on the Island. I am a new nonresident owner, from Maryland, and I can tell you that the hand of the Feds falls just as heavily on those of us up here as it does on residents of the OBX. We are all suffering together, trust me on that one. I hope it’s not too late for the new regulations to be held up by an organized group that is able to get the courts to stop them, and end up with a sane and reasonable beach regulation policy that everyone can live with.
Jim Rosenthal (Email ) - 23-01-’12 20:36
Mike,
Visitors should be "hassled" for violating the law by feeding gulls. Not sure why you would approve of violations of laws which are decades old.
I’ve also not seen evidence anyone has been ticketed for those infractions, just "hassled" by a request they stop and being told they’re violating the law. There’s no mention of feeding the wildlife citations in the LEO reports.
Visitors who think they should be allowed to violate the laws, and take offense to being told otherwise, should be made to feel unwelcome. Hatteras will be a better place for it.
ever since mr. reed left as the head guy at the park (it’s been years……nice man) park service employees have made me feel unwelcomed here and we’ve been here over 30 years. me, my family and friends have all been hassled at one point in time over trivial things. none of us were breaking any law or doing anything wrong.
as a business owner i will not tell NSP employees they can’t come in my store. we’ve gotten to know some of the seasonal employees and they are just people happy to have jobs. but i must say a lot of them are not happy working for the NPS and most of them are using the job as a stepping stone to another park or another job outside of the park service. several of them have worked part time for us over the years, so i’m hearing it straight from them.
bbc - 23-01-’12 22:40
Where’s Mac Midgett? It’s time fight…..he’s the only real local that ever did! Get your lawyers too, you will need them shortly.
kenny - 24-01-’12 07:48
Just curious, does NPS have it’s own fuel depot on the island? Or do they buy it at retailers? That’s how you hurt them, it works in every war.
On another note, if the NPS is so adamant that their mission is "wildlife first", let’s hold them to that, in every park.
Yes, let’s start with one in Washington DC, called the National Mall. As some may know the 10 mile square know as DC was once swamp land (and some would argue it still is), environmentalist love to call this "wetlands" and get all excited about protecting and expanding it. So let’s sue and make them do that.
Shouldn’t parts of the Mall be permanently closed for wildlife and restored to "wetlands"? And what about buffers zones seasonally for the birds and squirrels? I’m sure we could find some endangered insect or something there, the environmentalists always do, even if they have to make it up. And what about the "carrying capacity" ever been there in the summer? It’s elbow to elbow.
Yes let’s make NPS apply this evenly to ALL parks. I’d love to see the mental gymnastics they go through then to say "well not all parks" Well duh you morons, all parks are different and founded for different purposes. You can’t have the same management rules for a canyon that you do for a mountain, or a forrest, or a seashore or a recreation area, or a battlefield or other historic place. What idiot can’t understand that? ( the NPS)
Denny in Dayton (Email ) - 24-01-’12 09:51
crotalus, yes thats what im asking “hit it’s limit or orv per mile, will he have to wait till somebody leaves to get back to us, or what?
glenda worrell (Email ) - 24-01-’12 10:05
the only way the NPS will take notice is if people stop giving them $$$, other than that it will be business as usual
bbc - 24-01-’12 10:21
I am not sure why the collecting of fees for beach driving is so important or even necessary, other than a money maker for the NPS. Seems to me the beach-driving education alone would be enough. I think the whole process will have to be fine-tuned over time and actually is something I think I can adjust to and live with.
But what really bothers me is that, if the history of recent past summers is any indicator, large sections of the park beaches will continue to be closed not only to vehicles but also to PEDESTRIANS due extensive bird protective enclosures that block beach access down to the tide line. Now, I know the environmentalist and bird biologists will insist that these large enclosures are necessary and point to âbest available scienceâ and also point to other sections of the beach that are still open. But I think reasonable people could have sat down and talked and reached a compromise in the consideration of the overall welfare of BOTH the human species and bird species, and a workable plan could have been formulated that would have been palatable to everyone and still allow PEDESTRIAN access to the most cherished point beaches at: Oregon Inlet, Buxton, Hatteras Inlet and Ocracoke Inlet. It is a true shame this did not happen, and I think this Point Beach access issue is what is causing much of the friction.
The loss of all access to these particular beaches in summer, especially South Point at Ocracoke Inlet will be very saddening to me personally. On a warm summer morning, to stand at the edge of the ocean there and watch the sunrise as the gulls wheeled overhead was something that refreshed my soul. In a way, it was my church. This was also the place I proposed marriage to my wife on a soft summer morn long ago. Looks like I will never be able to visit that wonderful place on that date ever again.
Joe - 24-01-’12 10:31
This is beyond a joke. Audubon has been laughing at us since day one. Our whole problem, we are not unified, nor will we ever be, unfortunately. I’m a wildlife lover; the “junk science” , “best available science” is what gets me the most. It’s all about zero human access. Thanks NPS for the “F” plan. Soon beaches will be closed for trying to grow beach amaranth.
BG - 24-01-’12 11:02
One thing I have never seen is a budget for CHNSRA. I’d like to know how much money is spent on “resource management” (bird and turtle watching, animal killing), VS “visitor accommodations”. I know on the national budget level resource management has grown and exceeded the money spent on visitors. I’d like to know just how much those 10 plovers that fledged this year cost the taxpayers, that might make a nice billboard. I’ll bet they cost more per pound than an F-22 raptor.
On the note of only 10 fledged this year, why didn’t the enviros mention this big decline the same way they trumpeted the increase the previous year as evidence of success? Wouldn’t this be equally evidence of failure? The truth that intelligent people know is despite millions of dollars the nature of the habitat is bad for the birds and you will never have them here in large numbers. It’s a waste of money and a community is being destroyed by this effort to “make water run up hill”.
Denny in Dayton (Email ) - 24-01-’12 11:34
Denny, I’ve been wondering the same thing and have not been able to find anything yet. I do remember that there was a claim of at least 5 new “biotechs” at the start of the Consent Decree? Does new rule require more staff resources than the Interim Plan and if so by how much? There is no question that there a lot of new changes to the management of the seashore in the new rule. The “Outer Banks Group” unit of the NPS must have been doing a really bad job, and all this change has and is going to cost more money.
I’ve been a visitor to Cape Hatteras for a long time and love to surf fish. The negative economic impact is clearly evident to me before the rule was even published! The loss of access in spring and early summer is incredible. How can you say this won’t affect tourism with a straight face? I believe ORV access is a MAJOR component to Cape Hatteras tourism industry and the NPS does not take into consideration whatsoever.
Another thing, I have a hard time understanding the OMB $100 million dollar impact rule. What kind of timeline does that cover? Is there even a $100 million dollar yearly economy on Cape Hatteras? The OMB review did not take into consideration the completely flawed/inaccurate RTI economic study. OMB either did not know about the study or it was hidden from them or some illegal thing happen or their completely useless idiots.
7ounce - 24-01-’12 13:03
One other thing that I brought up some time ago, Salvo Jimmy commented on and Irene wrote an editorial about: Can they implement a plan they can’t fund? Is it legal for them to give us the restrictions and closures with out the new roads ramps and parking lots in the plan? They certainly won’t be ready for this year, and given the budget of NPS I don’t see them being built anytime soon. (they have billions in maintenance backlogs, yet cut construction spending, while increasing land purchases). The permit fees won’t cover much, they’ll have to put in a request and see if or when they get it. I don’t see how they can implement only part of the plan legally.
Denny in Dayton (Email ) - 24-01-’12 13:37
Even RTI is backing away from their economic study, they recently removed it from their publications site.
http://www.rti.org/publications/abstract..
“The Cape Hatteras Visitor Intercept Survey was conducted by
RTI International to support the Environmental Impact
Statement and Rulemaking for managing off-road vehicles
under contract number T2310081036. The Office of
Management and Budget clearance number is OMB #1024-
0258 (NPS 10-001), expiration date: 2/28/2013”
It clearly states how it was used to “support” the EIS. What a joke. This is the kind of crap people are upset about. They justify this new rule with lies. Plain and simple. There has to be something illegal about this study and OMB’s handling.
7ounce - 24-01-’12 13:41
“The permit fees wonât cover much,”
Right Denny, they will be collecting permit fees to pay for collecting permit fees.
Denny,
Perhaps no one’s complained about the "decline" because 10 chicks fledged was still in the top 3 out of the last 20 years. Only last year (15) and 1998 (12) have more chicks fledged.
All wildlife populations have natural cyclic reproductive success, with "good" years and bad years, that’s why recovery plans look at 5-year and long term avgs. The current 5-year avg is greater than any previous 5-year avg since record keeping began.
And no community is being destroyed that I can tell. Changed perhaps, but not destroyed.
As far as I can tell, since 2008, nationally, resource stewardship takes up about 15 percent of the NPSs’ budget with the rest going to admin/visitor services.
7ounce,
Yes, and the purpose of the permit/fees is visitor education, both about driving on the beach to prevent incidences we all know about and about resource protection.
Crotalus, I don’t think the community can be destroyed, these people are tough and will reluctantly adapt in order to survive.
Though, community is being harmed in many ways and altered by the NPS. Traditions and cultures have and are being destroyed by the NPS. Maximum generic resource protections are being used without regard to state agencies recommendations by the NPS. A laughable attempt at an economic study of the community is being used to support these actions by the NPS.
I want real numbers, I want an economic study of the "Outer Banks Group" NPS unit. I want to see how much money they used to put a community through this crap…
7ounce - 24-01-’12 15:37
I don’t think its unfair to ask where the money collected for the permits will go. And saying “resource protection” is not good enough, the people deserve to know exactly where this money is being used. Does the new rule require the NPS to spend more on “resource protection” or not? Banning people from the beach for “breeding activity”, really? Its taken to far and you know it. There are NO ENDANGERED BIRDS ON CAPE HATTERAS stop pretending like there are!
Another thing I don’t get about this process. Why ask for public comments if you are not going to take the public(which included the community) into inconsideration?!
7ounce - 24-01-’12 15:52
7ounce,
There doesn’t have to be endangered birds on the seashore for them to protect them. They are mandated to protect the resource, not just endangered resources.
The state can make all the recommendations they want, see above.
The money is being used for trailers, staff, printing. policing and all other costs associated with the permits.
They did take comments into consideration and listed reasons why they would or would not take action because of the comments. You can’t say they ignored the comments when they did make changes because of the comments, or stated why they wouldn’t.
Crotalus - 24-01-’12 16:08
“They are mandated to protect the resource, not just endangered resources.”
Confused here. Can you please define resouces as you are using it there?
Crotalus, can you please define’ res
Confused - 24-01-’12 16:37
The change in protection methods are beyond the state’s recommendations. Blanket management practices are bad and are not taking into consideration the local environment. I realize the NPS hides behind all sorts of Act’s but doesn’t make it right.
With an overwhelming opposition apparent in the comments, don’t you think they have reconsidered and possibly work closer with the community to address the problems? While hiding agenda and process, they cherry a few comments, and a few beauties, to respond too…
Do any local NPS employees truely feel that this rule was implemented fairly?
Are you proud of putting this stress, anxiety and hardship on the community?
Do you patronize local business with your head held high as you pass all the “save beaches” signs and donation jars? Must be tough…
And for what?
7ounce - 24-01-’12 16:37
sorry, my thoughts are faster than my fingers… some edits:
With an overwhelming opposition apparent in the comments, donât you think they would have reconsidered and possibly worked closer with the community to address the problems? While hiding agenda and process, they cherry a few comments, and a few beauties, to respond tooâ¦
Do you patronize local business with your head held high as you pass all the âsave the beachesâ signs and donation jars? Must be toughâ¦
7ounce - 24-01-’12 16:42
I guess they no longer want any tourists to come…….how is that going to work for you? I am truly saddened by your decision
Lois (Email ) - 24-01-’12 18:53
For those of you who are thinking of an Occupy-type demonstration, you may have picked up an ally. There is an AP article discussing how the NPS is being slack in enforcing its no camping rules against Occupy DC. A South Carolina congressman responded, “I’m going to be making sure that anyone who wants to camp throughout the United States, as long as they say they’re protesting, can do whatever they want in federal parks.” What’s good for one side is good for the other.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DC_OCCUPY_DC_VAOL-?SITE=VANOV&SECTION=STATE&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Mike (Email ) - 24-01-’12 19:51
Confused,
The "resource" is all the natural abiotic and biotic properties of the park.
7ounce,
I’ve never seen a published set of protocols from NC for the state-listed species. But it still doesn’t matter what rhetoric Gordon wants to hide behind, according to mandate the NPS must protect them and according to system-wide NPS policy they must treat state-listed species no differently than federally-listed species. If Gordon doesn’t want them protected, he should go to the state legislature and have them de-listed because the NPS isn’t going to change policy for one park without sound biological reasons. And even should those species be removed from the state list, that does not relieve the NPS of its mandate to conserve those species for future generations.
The number of comments for or against the rule doesn’t matter. It’s not a vote or a popularity contest.
All relevant comments were placed in a "type" and responded to after the DEIS went out for comment. If those comments were repeated for the FEIS, yes, they would not be addressed again. They took the comments on the DEIS and altered the FEIS accordingly and within the scope of their dual mandate and statutory obligations.
Comments on the FEIS, should have been on implementation of the plan, not that there shouldn’t be a plan because of whatever, those comments (about alternatives) were addressed earlier. Comments about holding off on the implementation of VFAs in areas until there was infrastructure in place to account for the changes were appropriate.
Actually, I do throw my change into those jars….
Crotalus - 24-01-’12 19:56
READ BELOW AND APPLY IT TO HATTERAS….
OCCUPY DC HEARINGS:
Rep. Danny Davis, D-Ill., said he thought the protests were a First Amendment right that does not require congressional intervention, and added that he was "delighted" homeless people have joined the movement.
Citizens of a free country should not have to ask permission to occupy spaces, he said, adding that free speech must be protected not just for Occupiers, but for all citizens.
“CITIZENS OF A FREE COUNTRY SHOULD NOT HAVE TO ASK PERMISSION TO OCCUPY SPACES”
LETS USE THEIR OWN WORDS AND IDEOLOGY ON THEM IN HATTERAS. LETS SEE HOW FAST THE HYPOCRITES RUN FROM THEIR OWN WORDS WHEN WE DO IT!!!
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/..
WILLI - 24-01-’12 20:01
Answer me this Crotalus, will I have to stay below mean tide line again to by pass the closure to fish the Point this spring? And can we stand on dry land this year? If so, again my Dad won’t be coming down for our traditional spring surf fishing trip, renting a room, and patronizing the local businesses because he can’t make the hike to the Point. Thanks again!
7ounce - 24-01-’12 20:08
“And even should those species be removed from the state list, that does not relieve the NPS of its mandate to conserve those species for future generations.”
How many other units in the NPS have same species in them? And if you completely wiped out the every PIPL that landed on CHNS the species would still be around for future generations. This is not the only area they exist. The future of the CWB does not hinge on the their success at CHNS. I don’t buy.
Where does it end? If we close the entire island, we could maybe get 30-40 fledglings? Then what?
Crotalus your drowning on the kool aide of the NPS. You won’t trust local knowledge over “system-wide policy”, really? Thats not very smart…
7ounce - 24-01-’12 20:27
7ounce,
Unless there’s a specific bird closure, no. And all you have to do is stay below the high tide line as long as there’s not a breeding closure to the low-tide line.
But according to the report maps there’s a pair of plover that prefer the east side and their nests appear to usually be less than the 75 meters to the low-tide line. So it all depends on when they decide to "get busy".
7ounce,
If the species are extirpated from the seashore, the park service has failed in its mandate to “conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.”
What “local knowledge”?
Crotalus - 24-01-’12 20:53
//Quote crot//:~~
If the species are extirpated from the seashore, the park service has failed in its mandate to âconserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.â
What happens if they fail their mandate on some sort of species? Surely it’s happened before.
Whoopsie, nice try y’all!
dood - 24-01-’12 21:27
Just to anwer a couple questions that seem to keep coming up:
First, the ORV permits are a cost recovery program, which basically means that the charges will cover only the personnel and other costs needed to adminster the program. Nothing will benefit the seashore in other areas.
Obviously the park will have to hire folks to sell permits, which they have already done or are close to doing. The positions were adveristed last summer.
Mike Murray said in December that the park will also need additonal law enforcement and maintenance folks, but he will “hold off” on hiring for some positions until they know more about how many permits will be sold.
Murray says that the park got a bump in base funding after the consent decree came down almost four years ago, and should not need a lot more to implement the ORV rule.
The seashore is about to contract for an environmental assessment for the new infrastruture — ramps and parking, etc. — needed for the new plan. Interesting, isn’t it?
The EA will involve public scoping, and he hopes for a finding of no significant environmental impact (FONSI).
About the money needed for the new infrastructure, Murray says that NPS bosses in Atlanta and DC “all agree that if it’s in the plan we need to fund it.”
Murray does not believe that will involve an increase in base funding, but will be accomplished through project funds “that are easier to come by.”
Seashore officials also apparently see no legal problems with implementing the final rule before the infrastructure improvements.
Marray called the new ramps and interdunal roads “redundant.” He said they would provide backup access if some ramps open to ORVs are closed, for instance to protect birds and turtles.
He also says the NPS may not have the funds to get all the improvements done in the first year.
And, indeed, it seem likely that the first year may be taken up with the Environmental Assessment.
The need for an EA is an irony that is not lost on the Park Service. If the ORV rule had been made final back in the 1970s, the EA would not have been necessary.
A few other points:
—The position we find ourselves in today is not a partisan problem. It was not caused by one party or another. The executive order in 1972 to implement an ORV plan was issued by Republican President Richard M. Nixon. No president since then — Democrat or Republican — has tried to reverse that order.
Furthermore, Judge Terrence Boyle, whom many access advocates love to hate, is a Republican first nominated to the federal bench by the late Sen. Jesse Helms. It was Democrats who blocked his later nomination to the Court of Appeals.
—As for the media release from the environmental groups:
As Crotalus himself has noted, one or two years of increased nesting success does not make a trend. Mike Murray has noted the same in his appearances before Judge Boyle to report on the consent decree.
The science is suspect no matter what NPS says about “best available science.” As other have noted, why not just submit it all to the National Academy of Sciences and let unbiased scientists weigh in on it?
The RTI economic study is an embarrassment and a disaster. The environmentals can say all they want about how visitation is up and Dare County is rolling in sales and occupancy tax income since the consent decree.
First, the NPS formula for computing visitation is convoluted and, some say, totally off base. And, then, if Hatteras Island is separated out from Dare County, you will see a different picture of the economy — especially in Buxton and especially in the spring and summer when the most desirable areas of the beach are closed by enormous buffer distances that many think are not justified.
Also, to Crotalus:
I had forgotten how little I missed your absence from this blog for many months. So happy you are back to explain this all and set us straight.
I am sure you know that many think you are a federal employee.
If so, I am sure you are aware that your arrogant and condescending remarks to residents and the visiting public are unbecoming a federal employee.
But, hey, what would we do without you? Just saying.
Irene
Irene - 24-01-’12 21:52
Poetry, that which bears repeating:
Also, to Crotalus:
I had forgotten how little I missed your absence from this blog for many months. So happy you are back to explain this all and set us straight.
I am sure you know that many think you are a federal employee.
If so, I am sure you are aware that your arrogant and condescending remarks to residents and the visiting public are unbecoming a federal employee.
But, hey, what would we do without you? Just saying.
"Unless thereâs a specific bird closure, no. And all you have to do is stay below the high tide line as long as thereâs not a breeding closure to the low-tide line."
Crotalus, so if there’s a breeding closure to the low-tide line, I can’t walk in either? Are these piping plover chicks good swimmers?
What happens if I get caught walking in the wash below the breeding closure to the low-tide line? It is a felony or misdemeanor charge?
You know, I thought this was ORV rule? Seems more like an access rule.
So does the cost of the permit go up or down if they sell a lot of permits? Since, according to Irene, the permit fee’s money is to be only used to fund the new permit process. How very cute! Every resident practically just got handed a $100 per beach vehicle fee.
“If the species are extirpated from the seashore, the park service has failed in its mandate to âconserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.â
But history shows that without all these new rules and closures that there always been a small population of the birds. Sure, by closing vast areas of seashore to all, you would expect a few more birds. So what? From what I’ve read, I don’t see the crisis here.
7ounce - 24-01-’12 23:51
Irene,
Obviously our definitions of "arrogant and condescending" are juxtaposed. I donât see anything in this thread written by me (others most definitely) that could be consider as such. Are you speaking historically about trading insults with people? Meh, who cares, thatâs the point of trading insults. It just seems odd you always want to call me out by name for it, but give everyone on Team Free and Open Access a free pass. Yes, I know this is just an "editorial blog" and you’re not encumbered by any journalistic standards here, like to the âunbiased truth".
I interestingly enough find single-sourced and unsupported statements about what is or isn’t best available science "arrogant and condescending," as should everyone with just a modicum of skepticism.
It’s funny, because you’ve been repeating that story to your readers for some time now, but never did your job as a journalist to settle the question. (Keeping the hit count up? Just sayingâ¦) Why haven’t you taken it to National Academy of Sciences to settle the issue? As a member of the 4th Estate, it’s your job to keep government honest, and not just keep a special interest group riled up. I mean you really should know this, itâs journalism/PolySci 101. So what you have now is the government, backed by a half-dozen scientists, who may be biased in favor of protections because theyâve actually, you know, studied the birds, backed by the peer-reviewed lit , saying it’s the "best available science" against a lone scientist who is biased in favor of access. A journalist should depend on more than those two sources and seek other sources and work the story until thereâs some consensus, some closure.
If Woodward and Bernstein had stopped at two sources, Nixon would have completed his term. And hey if the claims the science is lacking held up, you could be responsible for an injunction against the implementation of the new rule because of a flawed EA, every reporters dream.
Speaking of Nixon, the EO wasnât written on a whim, it was written because Congress passed NEPA, which required the POTUS ensure agencies within the Executive Branch complied with the new law.
I’m not a federal employee, but if I were, that would not remove my rights to free speech or to respond to personal attacks (there’s a SCOTUS ruling on that – Garcetti v. Ceballos ).
None of this is intended to be arrogant or condescending, not even the âhit countâ joke.
(Ramp49er forgot to close his Ital tag so I closed it at the beginning of my post)
Crotalus - 25-01-’12 00:14
dood,
If a species were extirpated from the park, the ensuing court ruling would make the CD look like the best thing since sliced bread.
Just an speculative opinion based on a hypothetical, of course.
Crotalus - 25-01-’12 00:19
7ounce,
You say history shows there’s always been a small population of which species? And what do you by history? 20 years? What was the breeding population in 1700? 1800? 1870? 1920? 1950? 1970?
Crotalus I hate to prove you wrong…again. Regarding park spending, from the NPS budget "green book" (should be the red book) FY 2010 spending resource management $345,498,000 visitor services $240,792,000. The rest of the expense are in "park protection (law enforcement) and Facility Maintenance & Operations and some administrative overhead. In their request for FY 2012 they want a considerable increase in resource management, while park protection and facilities remain basically flat. That’s why I question when or if they will get the funding for the new ramps, roads and lots that are supposed to be part of this plan.
Regarding fledge rates, this is a horrible use of resources (money) if your true concern is plovers, this money would be far better spent somewhere else where the habitat is more suitable. The last few years the weather has been ideal, what’s going to happen when you get a few the other way? DOW and SELC have beat their chests and taken credit for the increase, then they must take credit for any decrease. Before the 60’s there were no nesting plovers in any bird counts, that was before the bridge and all the traffic. We could spend millions and probably never see them nest in any numbers. The only part of the protection that has probably improved fledge rates is the trapping and killing of everything that moves. Predators and storms have always accounted for nearly all losses. You’ve killed the predators and gotten lucky with the storms and 10 is success? At what cost?
Denny in Dayton (Email ) - 25-01-’12 09:43
“You say history shows thereâs always been a small population of which species? And what do you by history? 20 years? What was the breeding population in 1700? 1800? 1870? 1920? 1950? 1970?”
Crotalus, you said in a previous post:
“Perhaps no oneâs complained about the “decline” because 10 chicks fledged was still in the top 3 out of the last 20 years.”
I am using your history that there have been counts for 20 years.
Is there a special sub species of piping plovers that is only found on Cape Hatteras?
7ounce - 25-01-’12 11:16
Perhaps 7ounce and Crotalus could exchange emails and keep the bickering back and forth to themselves
tired of it - 25-01-’12 11:59
I am tired of it too. Can I legally walk in the water around an breeding/nest closure to fish? It’s been problem for accessing the Point and Inlets the past couple of years and I don’t see that issue specificly addressed in the new rule. That’s all I want to know and I think the rule stinks and I’m done.
7ounce - 25-01-’12 14:47
Denny,
I counted law enforcement and facility management/admin as visitor services. But I would agree a small portion of that probably doesn’t go to visitor services or support of visitor services.
As far as what has impacted fledge success, we only know for certain for the past 5 years or so. Based on what Iâve heard, the weather wasnât good for the plover last year because it was too dry during brood rearing and a majority of the foraging habitat dried up at Cape Point. All the fledglings came from there and Bodie Island Spit. Ocracoke with 4 or 5 pairs continues to have zero to low productivity for all species (see cats).
Before the 80s, there was no one really looking for the plover on the OBX. Even the nest in the 60s was discovered by accident, during a CWB survey. Prior to then, they had been documented nesting on Oregon Inlet/Pea Island in 1900-1905. According to that report, even then human-introduced cats at the life-saving station were decimating the nesting shorebird and waterbird populations. While you may think itâs okay to destroy all their habitat and âmakeâ them go elsewhere (they wonât), I donât and canât understand that thinking.
7ounce,
Nothing about my statement implied that was the natural historical levels of the birds, so I’m not following you.
I hear Vegas is working on odds for how soon after release of the FEIS / ROD for the new infrastructure that it will take for SELC to request an injunction to stop construction while the adequacy of the documents is argued before the courts.
Salvo Jimmy (Email ) - 25-01-’12 17:42
What gets my goat is that ive been driving this beach since 1949 and Ive got to listen to somebody that doesn’t know his but from a hole in the ground tell me how to drive in the sand. I aint going to do it. Murry and his goons can put all the permits out there they wont ill use my boat to fish. The NPS took 60 acres of my dads land when they built this thing didn’t give him a thing for it. Now I have to pay to drive on it.
Leon (Email ) - 26-01-’12 07:19
It is clear that the NPS dont care about residents like Leon. THey want to make Hatteras Island a day trip destination from Nags Head, and to run all locals off island. This will strangle Okracoke, and ease the turning all of HI and OI into a bird refuge.
pumpkinboy - 26-01-’12 10:59
well there’s 20 grand i’ll save by not coming to hatteras 4-5 times a year
or should i say there’s 20 grand i’ll spend somewhere else BYE BYE HI sorry to see you go
good luck to all the locals lord knows you are gonna need it
angry tourist (Email ) - 26-01-’12 11:12
I for one am very happy with this change. I love the OBX but do not care to see vehicles on the beach. It’s simply not necessary.
Regina Hart - 26-01-’12 12:16
Regina, what you may not realize is this new rule also prevents PEOPLE from beach. When the breeding/nest closures are established, like historicly on the way to Cape Point, no one can access the beach, not people and not vehicles. This is not just about ORVs.
I’m curious where you got your information from. And have you ever walked to Cape Point or Hatteras Inlet or even been Cape Hatteras Island?
A little civil disobedience is not unjustified here. Why not have as many people as possible park their vehicles so that they totally block off access in and out of the NPS offices/facilities, and put up signs, posters, placards, etc. there to protest the intrusive policies they are implementing. Get the local garages to agree to refuse any towing requests from the NPS for that effort, and get as much media coverage as we can. Stay as long as it takes to get someone to listen and take some action on this.
Buxton OBXer - 26-01-’12 15:57
Why is it that the enviromentalist have a press release from from day one of the annoucement, but the pro-access groups don’t say a aword a week later?
Are the ORV groups waiting to see if they can surprise the public with a lawsuit?
Not one person between 3 different orgs can write a response?
Whatever.
Anon - 26-01-’12 17:01
Irene, et al lets stick to the issue and not personal attacks. Croat, you are the one with guts. You keep giving us facts and information long after us with different opinions that did not agree with the access bullies gave up. I don’t care where you work, because it is none of my business. Real information trumps most of the manure I have been reading on this issue.
Dennis - 26-01-’12 18:26
Come on people, this is Hatteras! Now more than ever Hatteras needs tourists. I’ve been going there since I was a kid and I’m 45 now. Things have changed big time over the years and yes, this sucks, but we have to adapt and get better organized. One lesson is that these environmentalists are better organized and funded than those with sentiments of free access. But it was free access w/o restriction which allowed ignorance to exist and ruin it for us all. Take for example Canadian Hole. Sometimes I go there and the place is littered with trash. Yes the wind does some of it, but its more punks and ignorant ppl who don’t give a damn. I makes me furious to see people disrespect the place for others and nature. I feared the NPS would see this stuff too often and then charge permits at that place, so I always police the place for garbage for the sake of it. Ppl trashed the beach and drove where they weren’t supposed to go and didn’t care what physical impact they were making. We should have been there before the environmentalists, protecting our turf! Now instead of us making the rules, the feds made them for us, spurred by the enviros. That’s how I see it, I’m sorry. I hate the limitations like you, but its not going to sour my feelings about Hatteras. The place truly means to much to me. I’ll see you this Sunday and again this spring, summer, fall and winter.
Dan - 26-01-’12 21:58
The libs protesters are allowed by the NPS to occupy w/o permit and destroy McPherson Square and Freedom Plaza in DC. The law will enforce fines of $5,000 and up to 1 year in jail for destroying a bald eagles egg, but in 8 states, a 14 year old minor can have her 9th grade teacher okay her abortion at a clinic w/o her parents’ consent, however, the next day, she cannot attend a class field trip with the same teacher w/o permission from her parent. These pathetic contractions are made possible by political will. This side has not focused its thoughts and energy enough to become politically effacious. And since it will take Congressional pressure and a conservative adminstration to change this final rule, I say to you, why waste your time and energy doing anything else?
Dan (Email ) - 26-01-’12 22:34
Dennis,one thing you seem to miss and Crotalus dismisses,is the loss of freedom in this country.Intrusion of government into every facet of American life has become intolerable…7oz.,Crot doesn’t give a damn about your dad being able to get anywhere.
Hawk Hawkins (Email ) - 27-01-’12 16:07
i’d like to know just how many people in this discussion have walked from the jetties to the point and back. i have, many times, and it’s a long haul. i can’t imagine doing it carrying a bunch of recreational supplies. i can’t imagine getting stuck out there with a quick weather change like we can sometimes get.
bbc - 27-01-’12 23:13
Group expectations are the strongest predictor of the future and negative thoughts create reality.
Why would anyone want to visit an island consumed by negativity, anger, and hostility?
marsh rabbit - 28-01-’12 06:17
marsh rabbit…….why would anyone want to support the people that started all this is the first place?………..it wasn’t the islanders or our visitors.
bbc - 28-01-’12 08:59
Just saying that most people do not look for places consumed with negativity, anger, and hostility when they are planning a vacation.
marsh rabbit - 28-01-’12 09:20
Ok 2 weeks to go and we still do not know the price or required equipment. What’s the big secret? Something smells.
Last time—I will do nothing to help the NPS—no services, no goods, no nothing. NPS employees not on duty and not operating on behalf of the NPS are exempt. This should have been the approach a long time ago. Anything else is penny wise and dollar foolish. Also, as I said before the NPS should be assessed for the added services we need to supply in support of the tourism they bring. This will make up for the lower levels of tourism.
As for the economy. Give me a break. Interest rates are negative. Inflation is low. A park with no fees is the cheapest possible vacation available. Visitation should be good, investment actually should be as well although I doubt many would think about it until they see the details of the plan implementation and the impact.
Finally, the small amount the NPS contributes to gas stations, grocery stores, etc. is nothing compared to what we stand to loose. This battle was lost because the businesses either could not show solidarity or didn’t believe it could happen. Either way it was shortsighted.
Ginny (Email ) - 29-01-’12 12:28
Ginny,
As to the statement “I will do nothing to help the NPS—no services, no goods, no nothing”, please advise us just what type of business you own? Could the answer be none? It is easy to offer your bravedo when you have nothing to lose from any lost sales isn’t it?
anon - 29-01-’12 13:03
anon,for someone who is “anon” why do you think you have status to berate or question a person who does NOT hide their identity ?Dennis thinks the anonymous snake has guts ? You both may have guts but you certainly don’t have b—-s…In fact,Ginny has far more than either of you,combined.
Hawk Hawkins (Email ) - 29-01-’12 14:02
What is the purpose of charging folks $$ for a permit to drive on the beach?? What will become of the $$ the Fed-Mafia collects?? Will vast improvements be seen or will they just split the money amongst themselves?? Politics ain’t pretty and it certainly seems that there is an anti-social, anti-native, anti-anybody, don’t touch my little part of this world attitude among the Feds and environmental freaks!! Hey, there IS room for all. Just use common sense. What a shame the Outter Banks and its residents and visitors are being treated this way.
W. Jenkins (Email ) - 30-01-’12 19:22
Hawk,
Despite your baiting, I will continue to remain anonymous on the web. There are many unhinged folks out there and I would prefer not to be stalked, threatened and have my employer(s) harassed, again or worse. But seriously, I do appreciate your concern for my testicular fortitude.
Crot,I fully understand your and anons reasons for being “anon”…however,I do think it is somewhat cowardly to complain about or “bait” people who are fully known by calling them “knuckle dragging” troglodites or wanting details of what business they may run.I have no concern for the integrity of your testicles or lack thereof (you may be female,for all I know).
Hawk Hawkins (Email ) - 31-01-’12 08:48
What about the migratory patterns of humans who will flock to the beach this summer.
Like they have for every previous summer.
M. Martin - 01-02-’12 10:39
All the OBX businesses that are refusing service to NPS employees – you’ve got it all wrong. What you need to do is require a permit – charge them $50 for 7 days or $120 for a yearly permit to shop in your store. Maybe make them watch Piping Mad or Voices of the People before they can enter. Don’t let them go near the beer cooler or ice cream freezer from March until October.
Boogamite (Email ) - 02-02-’12 10:01
Was wondering , can we wear bathing suits on the beach ???? And damn, no circling of the trucks, what the hell ??????? If needing to go to the bathroom, will there be portty potties set up, or can I go in the ocean…….? Regulations out the ass, Money maker on the 120.00 fee !!!!! Its run by the govt, it will be misused again…. Bush s fault again…. I am so ashamed of our govt!!! This isnt my country anymore…. So sad..
nosreme,s. (Email ) - 02-02-’12 11:16
i would like ot say that i am with the hi people 100 % i am from pa and i have been coming down there for almost 36 years and i love it. i will still keep coming as long as i can still breath. i know alot of people and i hope see them real soon. god speed ron powell
ron powell (Email ) - 05-02-’12 10:58
I’d personally be happy to see all these people in their redneck trucks stop coming to the Outer Banks. Go back to Virginia. All for all you overweight North Carolina locals, try walking, it’s not that bad. They also make these other vehicles called "boats". They are great for fishing and accessing the beach. Good luck and if you don’t like the rules, stay home. Please tell your 4 wheelin’ friends to stay home too.
Foghorn Frank - 19-02-’12 21:48
Never mind, it’s still in there, way near the end after the listing of the ORV routes.
“(C) A vehicle operator must slow to 5 mph when traveling within 30.5 meters (100 feet) or less of pedestrians at any location on the beach at any time of year.”I“m just wondering Ginny or anyone else who’s there and gone through the re-education camp if this rule is in any of the information or on the new signs or is it a dark little secret they can spring when they want? I’ll assume anyone who has exited a vehicle becomes a pedestrian, that pretty much will make the speed limit 5 mph most weekends and the summer. That’s insane.
Denny in Dayton (Email ) - 20-02-’12 10:27
Just another example of the Fed trying to make a buck!
I agree this will hurt tourism, which I would guess is a major contributor to the lively hood of this small island. If you want to regulate access for safety reasons, wildlife, etc that’s one thing, but charging for simply driving on the beach shows they’re real agenda, greed. It’s not enough we have to pay a road tax.
As far is the animal activists, screw you! If you really care, get permits to section off certain areas and stand guard. If you feel strongly about something, do it yourself so you’re the only one suffering.
Did anyone else notice the change of the speed limit to 15 mph AND that drops to 5 mph when within 100 ft of a pedestrian? assuming people who have parked and are out side of their ORV are pedestrian, how often in season, particularly with less beach available, will you be 100ft from a pedestrian? The speedlimit has effectively been reduced to 5 mph. How many problems will this cause? and where did this solution in search of a problem come from?
Denny in Dayton (Email ) - 20-01-’12 22:34