Audubon Magazine article really misses the mark
Friday 15 June 2012 at 7:44 pm.in early May, a reporter for Audubon Magazine contacted the Outer Banks Preservation Association by e-mail. The reporter, Anna Sanders, wanted to interview someone from OBPA about the beach access situation at the Cape Hatteras National Seashore.
OBPA board members decided to pass on the invitation, both because of a pending lawsuit against the National Park Service over the final off-road vehicle plan and regulation and because, well, advocates for more reasonable beach access just don’t trust the environmental groups that have been involved in this issue.
On May 15, Sanders posted a message on my May 4 blog, again trying to find folks to interview for her article.
“Hi all,” her chatty post read. “My name is Anna Sanders and I’m a reporter with Audubon. I’m working on a story about Cape Hatteras right now and would love to hear everyone’s insight into the National Park Service’s ruling, Rep. Jones’ bill, the Burr-Hagan bill, or the Cape Hatteras Access Preservation Alliance’s civil suit against the DOI, NPS, and others. Please send me an email if you would like to comment on Cape Hatteras and ORV use, whether or not you support unregulated ORVs on the shore. If you email me and would like to speak over the phone instead, I can give you a call.”
I and others answered her post, noting that no one – or certainly not many people – supports “unregulated” ORVs on the seashore.
“Just to clarify,” she answered, “I meant ‘unregulated’ in the sense that the interim plan that was in place was only a draft and not finalized. Before the final ruling, there were regulations, per say, but not final ones…I understand this is a very contentious issue, but I am trying to represent all sides”
I gave her the benefit of the doubt and urged Carol Busbey, co-owner of Natural Art Surf Shop,” who had been answering Sanders on the blog, to contact her for an interview. I really hated to see no one coming forward on this issue.
Carol seemed like a good person to speak for more reasonable access. She’s not a hothead, but a reasonable, smart woman. She’s not a member of OBPA and not a beach driver.
She and her husband, Scott, have lived on Hatteras permanently since 1977 when they opened their shop in Buxton.
She’s old enough to remember when environmental activists had a good name and considered herself one of them in the past.
And, most importantly, the Busbey shop has taken a beating since the 2008 consent decree greatly decreased the amount of beach open for access, especially around the popular area of Cape Point and the Hook. The die-hard surfers, who made quick trips to Hatteras when they heard surf was good, just don’t bother anymore. Her weekend business has taken a real beating.
It’s a small business, but the Busbeys worked hard and had a nice income and a comfortable life on the island.
Well, Busbey did contact Sanders and was interviewed for the article and now we both are sorry.
The Audubon Magazine article, posted online on Tuesday, makes no attempt to portray both sides of the issue. It is propaganda, pure and simple.
It’s nothing more than an expansion of the media releases, regularly sent out from Audubon and its partners, Defenders of Wildlife and the Southern Environmental Law Center.
Now you would expect that a media release from an environmental group would be aimed at furthering its agenda, increasing its membership, and getting more donations.
But, here was an article that the writer had said would tell both sides.
The headline on the article gives a hint of what is to come – “A New Rule Balances Wildlife and Off-Road-Vehicle Use on a North Carolina Beach.”
The article begins like this:
“Five years ago tire tracks carved by recreational off-road vehicles traced a path of destruction over dead birds and demolished eggs. Today least tern chicks, nesting loggerhead sea turtles, and piping plovers are flourishing at North Carolina’s Cape Hatteras National Seashore.”
Now that’s enough to stop you dead in your tracks, so to speak.
A path of destruction? Dead birds and demolished eggs? Five years ago in the seashore?
The next sentences are:
"After a legal battle waged by Audubon North Carolina and Defenders of Wildlife, represented by the Southern Environmental Law Center, the National Park Service issued a new rule put into effect this past February that allows ORV access in certain areas within the seashore while also protecting sea turtles and birds. Yet despite this initial compromise, pending congressional legislation and civil litigation could negate the park service’s ruling, threatening bird species, other wildlife, and plants on the shore.”
The article goes on to declare victory on all the usual fronts with the stuff you are used to hearing from Audubon and friends – nesting success is terrific, visitation is up, the economy of Dare County is thriving.
I have written before about how some of these things are partially true, but none is totally true, so I won’t go back over all that.
The article goes on to say that bills in Congress and a lawsuit are threatening all that the environmental groups have worked so hard for.
It even quotes the infamous Ted Williams, an Audubon field editor who writes his own propaganda that mischaracterizes ORV users on the seashore.
This time, Williams gets in another good shot with a quote that urges readers “to consider all Americans for all time, not the immediate appetites of a few loud, greedy ORV operators.”
After her 15 minute interview, Carol Busbey – the other side -- was dismissed with one paragraph at the end of the article that makes her sound like a whiny business owner and does nothing to portray her passion for the island traditions and lifestyle that are being lost to this new regulation.
Busbey got an advance copy of the article to “fact check” the part that quotes her.
She says she wanted to throw up when she started reading it.
She eventually replied to the editor who sent her the draft that she thought the story was not balanced and would like her quotes removed.
The magazine declined, as it has every right to do, since Busbey freely contacted them.
“She must not have been listening to me,” Busbey said about the reporter.
She says she doesn’t mind that she got involved, but she is even more disillusioned about environmental groups.
“I used to donate to one of them,” she says, declining to be specific. “I will never, ever do that again.”
I was appalled also by this lack of any pretense of balance in the story.
There were other misstatements, including this comment on the legislation and lawsuit.
“Both are designed to abolish the regulation and return to prior management measure under which protected species had declined.”
The legislation and the lawsuit would both overturn the final plan and rule, but both order the Secretary of the Department of Interior and the director of the National Park Service to go back to the drawing board and devise a more balanced rule.
However, I couldn’t get that first sentence out of my mind – the one about the mass destruction of chicks and eggs by ORVs.
I e-mailed the writer and the editor, Julie Leibach.
This was Leibach’s response:
“Thanks for writing. We fact check our articles, and I was the fact checker for this piece. I verified this information with Walker Golder, Audubon North Carolina's deputy director. I'm copying Susan Cosier, the story's editor, so that she's in the loop.”
I was speechless.
Audubon Magazine fact checks statements about chick mortality at the seashore with the state deputy director of Audubon, one of the groups that sued the Park Service.
Now that’s really appalling.
POSTSCRIPT
When I contacted seashore superintendent Mike Murray about dead chicks and smashed eggs at the seashore, he directed me to Volume I, Chapter 3 of the Final Environmental Impact Statement, released in November.
The chapter deals with, among other things, federally listed protected species at the seashore – piping plovers and sea turtles – and state-listed species of special concern.
He further directed me to the parts of the chapter about human activity and those species.
The relevant pages are 226-228 for piping plovers, 236-239 for sea turtles, 250-252 for American oystercatchers, and 261-263 for colonial waterbirds.
If you read those chapters, you will find that some chicks and turtle hatchlings have been run over and some eggs smashed by ORVs since the seashore staff has been tracking these things in the 1990s.
But the discussion hardly paints a picture of wonton destruction by beach drivers.
In fact, except for the very publicized death of the nesting loggerhead sea turtle that was run over in 2010 by an ORV operating illegally on the beach at night on Ocracoke, one least tern egg squashed during an illegal foray into a closure in 2008, and four turtle eggs crushed in 2007, there have been few chick or hatchling deaths by ORV since 2005.
Here are a few highlights:
-
No deaths of piping plover chicks or destruction of eggs are documented. There have been cases of illegal entry into bird and turtle closures, more often in recent years by pedestrians than vehicles.
-
There is the case of the death of the nesting loggerhead in 2010 and the four eggs smashed in 2007. Also, in 2004, 10 hatchlings were killed by ORVs in two separate incidents.
-
Three oystercatcher chicks were crushed by ORVs in 1995. Three more were killed during the 2003 breeding season. Also, a 2008 report by North Carolina State University mentions two three-day old chicks died of exposure and predation after being abandoned by their parents that were disturbed by an ORV after dark.
-
In the 2003 breeding season, four least tern chicks on Hatteras and 10 black skimmer chicks were found dead or dying in ORV tracks. Several colonial waterbird chicks were killed by vehicles in 2001 and six in 2002. And there was the one least tern egg squashed by on ORV operating illegally in a closure in 2008.
Electronic copies of the FEIS are available online at: http://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkID=358&projectID=10641&documentID=37448
49 comments
It is a cring shame that special intrest groups make a lot of money,printing lies like that. I have been going to Hatteras for 40 years. I have never seen dead birds with tire tracks. Maybe a dead one after a big storm not that is nother nature not ORVs. The truth will set our beaches free.
Annette Barr - 15-06-’12 21:41
It seems Audubon’s understanding of journalism and truth only exists in some strange and twisted Orwellian sense.
R. M. Callaway (URL) - 15-06-’12 22:48
Julie A. Liebach, our Brooklynese environmental expert at Audubon, would LOVE to hear from you on her open Facebook page….
Midgette - 16-06-’12 02:03
We need another revolution. Find a remote island with nothing on it, so there is no damage to wildlife and it’s habitat and put these turkeys on it- Audobon members, southern environmental law center folks and defenders of wildlife. Only thing they defend is the money from unsuspecting well meaning folks that line their pockets.
Jose Simon - 16-06-’12 07:57
This comes as no surprise to me. The eco nazis will say what ever furthers their flawed agenda. They don’t care if they twist the truth, manipulate the facts or flat out lie. To them the means justify the end. As I said in an earlier post we need to get this issue of beach access out to the public, off island. Why can’t we get national media attention. Educate the public off island, get the word out!!Why can’t we get some type of media person to show our side of the story. Unless we do the other folks will continue to spew out their flawed eco logic. What was that line from that movie? Oh yeah, “I’m mad as hell, and I’m not going to take it anymore” Food for thought…………
Tony Hess - 16-06-’12 08:18
Audubon, Defender’s of Wildlife, & SELC have completely tarnished their credibility. The TRUTH will prevail.
Kim Mosher - 16-06-’12 08:31
In the knowledgeable birding community, I hear that Audubon’s practices are in question. That is a good thing, because one day soon they will be revealed to all for their twisted fund-raising, land & money-grabbing, and bad “science”. Look at what they are doing with the Slick tract they were given as an undeveloped coastal preserve on the northern Outer Banks.
Thank you for an excellent blog, Irene.
What did you expect the magazine of the organization that has been behind most all of what has happened down there. The Audobon Magazine is not a newspaper stuck with following what ethics are left in journalism it is a propaganda tool for the whacko side.
Forget about moderation in this fight otherwise it will continue to lose out because the other side is not moderate about anything.
JIm Robinson - 16-06-’12 08:55
It is so sad for our island this is all happening. All we can do is keep fighting it. Thanks Irene for the well written article.
Wes lassiter (URL) - 16-06-’12 09:20
we just need to start accepting offers for interviews and when they arrive, just knock em off!
Dare Local - 16-06-’12 09:58
It sounds to me like we have lost more soldiers in one day of fighting a senseless war than we have lost wildlife since 1995!Whats wrong with picture!!!The groups of people with all this money are the ones putting our Politicians in office!If you donate research before you do!
Randy - 16-06-’12 11:19
“When I contacted seashore superintendent Mike Murray about dead chicks and smashed eggs at the seashore, he directed me to Volume I, Chapter 3 of the Final Environmental Impact Statement, released in November.”
BUT FACT CHECKED this document??? Unbeliveable….
What our legislators don’t get is this is the TEST CASE… they win this and Byscanne Bay, every park in the nation will become the place behind the glass wall
Jack - 16-06-’12 11:26
Apparently being a “fact checker” for Audubon Magazine does not require one to be able to tell fact from fiction. What a disgrace to journalism. I would urge everyone both local and non local to keep this story and the situation on Hatteras, in the news in any way possible. Thank you Irene, you always get it right.
Ess - 16-06-’12 11:53
I have always considered myself an environmentalist, and a birder. My Peterson Field Guide is a constant companion. When I first came to the Outer Banks I was so impressed with how the locals took care of turtle hatchlings; asking all beach-front homes to keep outside lights off during hatching; marking off the beach with yellow tape. Indeed, protecting the environment.
I am dismayed at the one-sided view point of the Audubon Society and their ilk. And, please, I’m no fan of unregulated beach driving. As a retired judge, I’m used to hearing both sides of any dispute, and reaching the most equitable result. There will always be some tension between extremists on both side of this issue. It’s a shame that the cooler heads of the reasonable folks in this dispute can’t prevail.
Interesting that someone responded to my comment, calling my facts lies when the information came directly from NPS Resource Reports. Also interesting that the response to my info was posted out of order chronologically!
Barbara Ackley - 16-06-’12 16:53
When I first moved; We worked with the turtles etc.. move they needed to be moved to higher ground we did it.covered them with nets.. blocked with light blocks and have watches for the hatchings..they now do not want locals to help.we are not aloud too…let nature take its course..will if they want nature to take its course.. than why protect these couple birds who make a bad decision to nest were they get over washed..there should be no..blocking of the beach to encourage such a behavior..let Nature take its course…T me this is a little stupid..there is no sense in what is going on..they kill birds to band them! are they really wanting to save anything or just get a pocket full of money…and lie to all that give it to them…
pat avon - 16-06-’12 17:01
If you are on facebook and have Jam as a friend go look at this.
http://www.facebook.com/#!/media/set/?se..
NC WILDLIFE AND USDA with guns bait and boat at cora june island hunting gulls.
Ginny - 16-06-’12 17:17
And one day Lucy won’t pull the football away just as Charlie tries to kick it.
But hope springs eternal- he’ll have to keep trying, too.
“The folks that use ORVs in Cape Hatteras are only about two percent of the people that visit the seashore.” – Audubon, Heather Starck
Where did Audubon get this number? I think this number is grossly inaccurate.
7ounce - 17-06-’12 09:20
i sent a comment to audubon with the list from the highlights of the FEIS report (above) along with the list totals of the 2010 and 2011 predator elimination program and reminded them that the NPS also drives SUV’s on the beach……they didn’t post it.
bbc - 17-06-’12 15:14
I am a retired scientist (entomologist) who greatly appreciates nature and respects wildlife. Throughout my entire career I have been concerned with statistical data concerning many scientific projects. Nowhere in this voluminous document (Consent Decree) have I seen any statistical data, which incriminates Off Road Vehicles (ORV’s) with the decline of Piping Plover (PP) populations on the Outer Banks (OBX) of North Carolina.
The DECIS lists the ebb and flow of PP populations over the years but no statistics on this data is presented which links population decline with the use of ORV’s. Rather, there is incrimination by inference. As mentioned in the DECIS, many factors affect Piping Plover populations such as climate, predators and other natural phenomena. I could not find any statistical data which points to ORV’s rather than climate or say predators instigating the decline of PP numbers.
North Carolina is the southern most range of the PP. No PP’s were found in South Carolina during the 2008 survey. A clear majority of the population was found in the northern states of Massachusetts (566) and New York (443) while 64 were found in North Carolina. The state of Maine on the other hand is the most northerly range of the PP where 10 were counted in 2008.
This population distribution can be graphed into a bell shaped curve i.e. Normal Distribution graph. Variability exists in every biological population. The greatest variability in the PP population exists at its extremities (North Carolina and Maine). The least variability is found in the states, which harbor the largest numbers (Massachusetts and New York). Statistically speaking, it is very difficult if not impossible to have a high degree of confidence in North Carolina PP numbers used to make important decisions on beach closures.
As a result of my above commentary, I strongly disagree with the National Park Service (NPS) decision to regulate ORV traffic and close beach access based on PP population numbers. I will be one of the first people to applaud ORV beach closures if shown concrete statistical evidence that ORV’s are to blame for reducing marine bird populations. This ia a case of horribly bad science and a disgrace to the NPS.
Thomas S Gallo - 17-06-’12 16:49
Did you honestly think you were gonna get a “FAIR” Story from them.. That is Laughable, the “MainStream” Media, distorts and tells the lies, taken right from the Audubon.. Lets see what this week brings in Congress..
JAM
JAM - 17-06-’12 16:52
The best thing I read in the article so far (meaning what I got the best laugh out of) was Dennis’ comment.
Renee - 17-06-’12 18:37
GRANJE——YOU CAN’T EVEN TRUST 60 MINUTES ANYMORE.—-IT’S LIKE YOU ORDER A RIPE TOMATO, AND TURN ON THE TV AND SEE A ROTTEN APPLE. FIGURING OUT WHO TO TRUST, AND WHO WILL TELL THE PUBLIC THE TRUTH HAS BEEN THE HARDEST THING IN THIS BATTLE.
STEVE.(MULE)
Steve C. Sink - 17-06-’12 22:18
(as a side note i saw two oystercatchers mating in the parking lot at the ABC store last week. can you imagine the uproar if the parking lot there got closed down?)
bbc - 18-06-’12 06:51
I suggest Mr. Gallo attempt to post his remarks on the comments section following the article on the Audubon website. I attempted to post some comments there this weekend that were apparently rejected.
Ted - 18-06-’12 09:09
i was down for a week at memorial day, bought the permit, and drove all over the beach going to fish and sightsee. some areas are closed, but a lot are open. i did not like paying a fee for a permit for what has been long standing open free access, but i do understand this is nps policy in their other seashore parks. you see the park service monitors going up the beach each day looking for new nests to mark.
from all the angry commenters i must be out of touch but the orv situation did not seem onerous to me. better to err on the side of giving these endangered species the best break possible in balance with continuing to drive orv’s to the beach and around, which i did and it went fine. fishing was good too. as mentioned i didn’t like the permit and fee rule, but i don’t get everything my way in this world of 7 billion people. i am disappointed i am not as upset as all my neighbors, but i just am not feeling like i have completely lost my liberty and freedom.
frisco - 18-06-’12 11:05
Frisco, please list the endangered species located within CHNS and let me know which areas of the beaches they are located in. Then explain to me why most of the beaches from Salvo to Buxton are closed. thank you in advance.
John Benson - 18-06-’12 14:28
Frisco,I am disappointed that you are NOT upset at not completely losing your liberty and freedom…just most of them…or ANY of them.Do you you think liberty and freedom are parted out?
Hawk Hawkins - 18-06-’12 15:58
Just imagine your favorite outdoor place..maybe it is a mountain, a stream, a river, a lake, a beach, or a trail. Maybe its a place where your mom or dad introduced you to when your were a kid. A place that you have brought your own children to enjoy, or plan on it. A place preserved by our great National Park System. Even as a young kid I realized the importance of setting aside special recreational places for the enjoyment of all. I was comforted knowing that this place is always going to be like this. I thought, “Isn’t it great that no one is going to build a condo complex or a go kart track here destroying the landscape or cutting off access.” Back then I was proud that there were organizations like the Serria club and the Audobon out there defending our lands keeping anything “bad” in check; an advocate for the environment. How shocking now to realize that these very groups are the ones exploiting the environment for monetary gain, not some greedy developer! Your Federal Parks are now being closed little by little. Using “Ecological misinformation” to flat-out propaganda and lies. The NPS, Sierra Club, and the Audobon Society are systematically shutting down access to your public Federal Parks all over the USA. Week by week they are using your donations to fatten their bank accounts, land grab, hire lawyers, and gain political power. The closing of a Federal Park should be a crime along with the fabrication of photos and so called scientific data they use to do it! —- Our Parks are getting smaller and smaller due to privatized interests and ecological lobbying scams. Its so sad that these once noble organizations have lost their way. Now they are being run by people that are praying on the care and concern of the American people to make easy money. These folks have found out, that it is a lot easier to sit in your pajamas and type up lies on your computer which generates MILLIONS in donations than to actually go out and make a difference by solving the tough problems, “heck trying to stop someone from killing a whale is dangerous, you might get shot at!! Why bother?” Sarcasm aside…don’t think for a moment that this is limited to a few obscure areas. They are coming for your favorite place next, they have to keep the revenue stream going.
HatterasKeith - 18-06-’12 22:24
Hatteras Keith, well said.
As for the post by “Frisco” I am concerned we are being a little harsh. There was nothing in his or her post that I found to be outrageous, in fact some of the things brought up may be legitimate questions that someone not as familiar with the issues may pose. As much as they have been asked and answered, I believe it serves us much better to keep a cool head and answer the questions based in fact and reasoning. (I think we have done a great job of that in responses to the audubon story on their web site, let’s keep it going on our own turf!)
I will attempt to answer some of your questions, because I was not in the least offended by your post. I am speaking from my point of view as a VERY limited ORV user, but a strong advocate for Hatteras Island and individual freedom.
It is true that a lot of areas are open, but many of the most popular areas are closed. Of course the fishing was great. This is Hatteras Island. But imagine what it could have been if you were able to get to the most productive areas (and the fee would be a LITTLE easier to swallow if you could get to them)!
I strongly believe this area was set up for human enjoyment. It was not established as a wildlife refuge. With that said, I have never seen anyone intentionally harm wild life, and have only heard of a few instances of ORV use causing any damage.
And finally, you are absolutely correct that not all of us are going to get our way. This issue alone is not a total loss of liberty and freedom, although this is the local manifestation and it hurts the area deeply. This is just a piece of the picture that seems to be escalating every day from Washington to Raleigh and beyond. It’s only a little freedom and liberty you are giving up, but we seem to be forced to give up more every day. You give an inch they take a mile, as we have seen with the changes from the consent decree to the final rule. I will fight it wherever I can, especially in a state I am very proud to call home, and an Island who’s people and resources I treasure.
Irene, I’m sorry to hijack so much of your comment space, but I really believe that we need to be the cool, calm side. I said my peace on the other side’s article, and was accused of being a part of a “posse” and told that anyone driving on the beach was going to kill other people, birds, turtles, etc. just for fun. We need to stay above that mess, keep trying to educate others in a calm, measured response as mad as we are (and deserve to be), and still try to fight like heck!
Matt - 19-06-’12 00:11
Audubon Mag article is written to raise money, not educate. As a money making tool, it is well written to it’s audience.
anon - 19-06-’12 07:58
One person, Frisco, tried to interject a modicum of intelligent adult conversation and for this he’s mocked and accused of being a shill for Audubon. You people have economic interests and cultural habits that are at odds with the national policy, and since I’m sure you’re all very big on property rights, keep in mind that most the the island is the Property of USA, which means every citizen in the nation.
Go-Fearing, Freedom-loving, Red, White and Blue American (from the part of the country that fought to keep the Union) - 20-06-’12 11:57
If you can’t post comments on Audubon Magazine’s page…go over to their Face Book page & post them. I sure some of their contributors over there would love to hear from the other side of the issue.
Jody - 20-06-’12 15:43
Wow…Go-Fearing, Freedom-loving, Red, White and Blue American (from the part of the country that fought to keep the Union).
I’m going to go a little out of order here, because based on the “name” you used it appears for me that you have very little respect for the Southern portion of the United States, and based on your post you have even less knowledge of the history of the Outer Banks and Hatteras Island. Because you name yourself using references to the Civil War, that is where I will start.
Hatteras Island actually attempted to secede from the State of North Carolina and rejoin the Union shortly after North Carolina left the Union. This movement even went so far as to elect officials to represent the area, but they were rejected by officials in Washington.
I defended Frisco earlier. I see that you may have overlooked that. I believe (and I do not speak for anyone but myself) that some over reacted. I called attention to that. But people are frustrated, fed up, and have every right to be!
Also, I am absolutely concerned about the economic and cultural habitat of Hatteras Island. But do not think for a second that we are not concerned about the natural resources of the area as well. I personally have had several incidents where wisely or unwisely I have confronted people for littering, walking on the dunes, picking sea oats, etc. (All of them were from the part of the country that fought to keep the Union).
Finally, I would like to remind you that the United States property on Hatteras and Ocracoke Island only exists because local residents decided to sell and donate their land. In return they were granted “free and open access.” We see how that turned out.
Matt - 20-06-’12 23:26
This is an answer to Ted’s responce which said…. “I suggest Mr. Gallo attempt to post his remarks on the comments section following the article on the Audubon website. I attempted to post some comments there this weekend that were apparently rejected.
Ted – 18-06-’12 09:09”
I tried to post my comments on the Audubon website about a week ago and they have not been published to date. I thought they wouldn’t publish it since they can’t refute my commentary on the use of statistics to justify beach access.
Thomas S Gallo - 22-06-’12 10:01
Mr Gallo, your comment was posted and our favorite person(Crotalus) has responded.
http://www.audubonmagazine.org/articles/..
Anon,thank you for that link,it worked well.The birders spurt even more venom when they think they are on safe turf.Crot is still cooly scientific and Dennis is still whining about personal attacks,even as he launches them.They still seem to think we want to destroy all birds and turtles and drive all over each other and would be if it wasn’t for the glorious NPS.One wag even said we had bullied the NPS into submission and run some out of town.Them bird watchers sure is nice folks!
Hawk Hawkins - 22-06-’12 14:59
Mr. Crotalus (Audubon’s favorite person) did respond to my posting on this article. If you read his comments and then my response on the Audubon’s website you’ll see that what he says is nothing but a lot of “hot air” devoid of any factual data to refute my original posting.
Thomas S Gallo - 24-06-’12 13:50
Through the appearance, experience, http://www.beatsheadphonesstore.com/mons.. Monster Beats Lady Gaga with classic and mini style and above all, superb sound quality, it is obvious that huge and also generate. If you are a music lover, the desire to listen to your favorite music for long periods of time, better headphones fit the bill perfectly. They are designed to ensure a meeting emozionantemusica for long periods without causing pain for the user disagioo. http://www.beatsheadphonesstore.com/ Monster Beats By Dr Dre in addition to their groups have assembled a well used line of headphones high quality facing the lovers songs with hiphop fans, especially. The Declaration of a State of execution is that these types of headsets have got over 36 months involving the investigation and the growth before these people were introduced to the audience.
Soccer Cleats Shop (URL) - 12-09-’12 09:21
It is not apparent that visitors are not buying as much surfing related clothing and gear as the past because there were plenty of people shopping this summer on Hatteras Island.
The competition for what surf shops sell is intense and has gotten more so on Hatteras Island. Try counting just the kite board shops on Hatteras Island, some of whom sell everything sold in a surf shop, every brand of clothing, every type of board that a person can float on the water and give lessons for all of it. Then consider how many other businesses now sell tee shirts , body boards etc. and rent all of the equipment that surf shops do. I am surprised some have stayed in business at all. It is easier to complain and make up stories about government/environmental conspiracy regulations they personally don’t like than it is to admit they have been out competed.
I MISS HATTERAS!!!!
Bob Ruhle - 15-06-’12 21:08