Hi, and welcome to my "Editor's Blog"! In this space I'll be attempting to keep our readers informed on fast-breaking news and issues affecting our islands. Visit often. There's a lot going on!

Enjoy the Island Free Press and, even more importantly, enjoy our wonderful barrier island!!!




Latest Comments

Kenneth Clark (Commissioners get…): The state needs to quit maintainin 12. Go back to the way it was in the 50s. Maintain to Oregon inlet…
Steve (Commissioners get…): All of this talk of beach erosion is just not happening in Salvo. I was out yesterday walking the bea…
Ray Midgett (Commissioners get…): Wow! Dewey, now all of a sudden you are calling me and others up here who want fairness in taxation, …
Dewey Parr (Commissioners get…): Ray Midgett, I think you have brought up a good point when it comes to the Buxton Beach Nourishment P…
bbc (Commissioners get…): Something needs to be done in the short term and then a long term plan needs to be put in place. Th…
Ray Midgett (Commissioners get…): Now that the beach nourishment bids for the KH, KDH and Duck projects have come in over the estimated…


Powered by PivotX - 2.3.2 
XML: RSS Feed 
XML: Atom Feed 

« Happy New Year - we h… | Home | The seashore's off-ro… »

We are not alone

Thursday 12 January 2012 at 5:07 pm. Last month, Kurt Repanshek, founder and editor of the National Parks Traveler website, posted a column that was titled, “Reader Participation Day: Why Are National Parks So Controversial?”

“When I first started the Traveler back in '05,” he wrote, “I never expected some stories about the National Park System to be so controversial.”

“Who thought the snowmobile issue in Yellowstone National Park would still be slogging on, a decade and more than $10 million since it first arose back in 2000? And would anyone think that some birds and turtles would be such a hot-button topic at Cape Hatteras National Seashore.”

Repanshek went on to write that he figured writing about national parks would be “relatively safe, a continuing series of feel-good stories about some of the most gorgeous and interesting (culturally and historically) places in America.”

“But instead it seems there is controversy (not to mention firebrand politics!) lurking in every nook and cranny of the park system,” he says and asks readers why they think that is the case.

Controversy and politics are issues we’ve become increasingly familiar with here at the Cape Hatteras National Seashore as the effort to formulate an off-road vehicle management plan has dragged on and on for decades.

And the longer it continues, the more contentious the relationship between the Park Service and the people who live here or visit the seashore gets.

The animosity extends to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which manages the Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge on northern Hatteras Island.

Case in point is The Island Free Press survey on Hurricane Irene response.  The National Park Service was one of the agencies readers were asked to evaluate on the preparation for the storm and the response to its aftermath.

The National Park Service response was rated as poor or unacceptable by the majority of residents, non-resident property owners, and visitors.

In their comments on the Park Service, most of the respondents admitted that they didn’t know that much about what park officials did after the storm so they didn’t have a specific criticism of their performance.

They just said they plain don’t like the Park Service – having nothing to do with the hurricane.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service got even worse rankings.

However, as Repanshek wrote, there is controversy lurking in every nook and cranny of the Park Service.

We are not the only community that is increasingly taking issue with the Park Service’s sometimes heavy-handed tactics, seemingly uncaring attitude about the people, reliance on pseudo-science, and the perceived inclination to cave to the demands of the very litigious and well-funded environmental lobby.

It’s happening at parks across the country.

Mike Metzgar, a member of the board of directors of the North Carolina Beach Buggy Association, spends a good deal of time keeping us informed of Park Service and Fish and Wildlife Service controversies elsewhere.  

During November and December, especially, we got link after link to stories in other publications.

I think it’s worth sharing them with you, so I’m providing links to a good sampling of controversies that say something about our struggle for more reasonable access to the seashore beaches.

There are links at the end of this blog, if you want to read some of these articles, but here’s a brief summary.

  • Of special interest is the situation at Point Reyes National Seashore in northern California. An oyster farm that has leased Park Service land in an estuary for more than 70 years is in danger of not having its lease renewed because of the possible disturbance to seals in the area. A Park Service Draft Environmental Statement released last year favored closure of the oyster farm and several environmental groups also oppose renewing the lease. Residents near the seashore support renewing the lease.

This situation is interesting because front and center in the controversy is a fierce argument over the science that the Park Service used to justify not renewing the lease and whether it was tweaked to make the owners of the farms appear less than environmentally friendly.

If this sounds familiar, it’s because there are questions about the science that the Park Service is using at Cape Hatteras to justify huge beach closures, especially for piping plover chicks.

  • Folks at Chincoteague in Virginia are fearful of a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposal to move a parking area and beach access near the town and shuttle beachgoers and all of their belongs to another beach.  The service cites erosion and sea-level rise as the reason.  The residents see this as a measure that will kill their economy.
  • The Park Service is trying to block a power line project that would go through the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area. The Park Service has the backing of environmental groups, and its preferred alternative is not to build the line at all.
  • The Park Service has released a General Management Plan that would close a good deal of the Biscayne National Park near Miami to fishing.  The plan is opposed by some stakeholder groups and The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.
  • In Alaska, members of the Congressional delegation inserted language in an appropriations bill that would block the Park Service from conducting boat checks in the Yukon Charley National Preserve.  The lawmakers and some others believe that the NPS went too far in trying to control Alaska waters.
  • Bicycling enthusiasts are alarmed that the National Park Service is about to ban bicycles on the Blue Ridge Parkway.
  • Hikers and campers have rallied to oppose new fees the Park Service wants to impose on backcountry camping in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park.
  • A columnist for The Examiner in Washington writes that the Park Service could expand its “ever expanding land-grabs” with a report from the Wildlife Conservation Society that promotes wildlife migration corridors.  The group conducted a workshop for the Park Service recently on “conserving migrations” in or near national parks.
  • Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., held a meeting to oppose a proposal by the National Park Service to double most of the parking fees at the Sandy Hook Unit of Gateway National Recreational Area.

One of the controversies that the Park Service was involved in last year actually went against the wishes of environmental groups – and the public, for that matter.  That was a proposal to ban plastic, disposable water bottles in Grand Canyon National Park.

Just two weeks before the ban was to go into effect, Jonathan Jarvis, director of the NPS, put it on hold.  Some charged that Jarvis did so to appease the Coca-Cola Co., which makes large donations to benefit the parks.  

Jarvis eventually allowed park superintendents to ban the bottles, but only after extensive studies.

However, some still charge that Jarvis tried to cave to Coca-Cola, which I guess means the company has more money than environmental groups.

Thanks to Mike Metzgar for reminding us that we are not alone.

Enjoy the articles. Peruse them as you have time.


Links to various articles on the Internet about the National Park Service and its conflicts with stakeholders and communities.


















Dewey Parr

Thanks for taking the time to let us know that we are not alone in our struggles with the National Park. What we need to do is get everyone nation wide together and approach Congress to make some changes in the laws that govern the National Park Service. Especially appreciate all the links that tell of the problems others are having with the NPS.

Dewey Parr - 13-01-’12 14:11
Hawk Hawkins

The NPS seems to have become the enforcement arm of some bloated beaurocracy…DOI? WHO voted for these people to control/restrict our movements using our money to do so? When did park rangers become para-military police “protecting” animals from humans,rather than humans from animals? Smokey the bear must have died…

Hawk Hawkins (Email ) - 13-01-’12 15:17
Tony Hess

So why don’t we get all the groups that are fighting the NPS heavy handed approch to running OUR national parks/seashore together and present a united front to fight for our rights. Maybe as a larger group our voices might be heard a little better. Time to take this national, not just local. I’m amazed that most people here in PA don’t know that there is even a problem with restricted beach driving. I go to Island Beach State Park in NJ during the summer, when we aren’t down in Hatteras, and almost to a person I have asked other fisherman if they know of the problems at CHNS and except for one or two who go down there not one knew there is a problem. Time to get the word out. It’s an election year. Make your lawmakers aware of your opinion about what is happening to our nationals parks/seashore. The more noise we make the better. Hopefully some one will take notice.

Tony Hess (Email ) - 15-01-’12 08:24
Hollow Daze

Vote Ron Paul for President. His Plan to Restore America cuts DOI in its entirety. Problem solved.

Hollow Daze (Email ) - 15-01-’12 08:51

this is from the sierra club website. i find it interesting that they stopped a new ski area being built in montana.

“Backcountry skiing and winter mountaineering are popular recreation activities as well as big-game hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, environmental education, and horseback riding. On any given weekend 12-15 vehicles will be parked at the popular Mormon Peak Trailhead with outdoor enthusiasts destined for Lolo Peak’s summit or to fish in Carlton Lake, or to view the awesome scenery from Carlton Ridge overlook. Traditional access, recreation and opportunities for solitude would be lost forever. Free, year-round access would be replaced by $70 lift tickets.”

i like the comment about free year-round access…….hum……….

bbc - 15-01-’12 12:10

Jarvis is bad for DOI, his policing mentality is ruining parks all over the country. They spend more money on weapons and extreme resource protections then they do on anything else.

haha - 15-01-’12 12:31
Mike Metzgar

Irene……I’m taken aback to be acknowledged before many others including yourself that dedicate themselves daily to the future of the Island residents and CHNSRA.

The Lunny family in California is a microcosm of what is happening across America……US Senator Diane Feinstein has become the “Champion” in the halls of Congress for this family and opposes the egregious actions of DOI/NPS. Senator Hagan is the “Champion” for the Bonner Bridge replacement? Where is the “Champion” from North Carolina for CHNSRA? What good is a bridge to nowhere?

The information I uncovered further substantiates the feeling that there is a systematic plan by DOI/NPS to remove the public from our Parks and Seashore Recreational Areas across America. Read the articles .. NPS overreach is a National pandemic!!

Tony Hess from NJ mentioned above that joining forces with other organizations provides a unified front against DOI/NPS. NCBBA, OBPA and CHAC belongs to such an organization (UMAPA) representing 18,000 surf fishing men and women from MA to NC including the New Jersey Beach Buggy Association in his state. UMAPA has contributed time, talent and money in the fight for Access at CHNSRA. Why? Because we all know that if NC becomes the template for NPS policy……expect to see the template applied to EVERY Beach on the East Coast that they control.

Is this about CHNSRA….yes it is! But it REALLY involves a systematic removal from DOI/NPS controlled lands from sea to shining sea. Get involved or be prepared to lose!

[email protected]

Mike Metzgar (Email ) (URL) - 15-01-’12 13:54

Just to put it in perspective, the NPS and USFWS manage more than 1,000 properties and the (not all inclusive I’m sure) complaints listed above amount to less than 1 percent of those properties.

Change is never easy and it usually takes the dying off of the "old guard" rather than changed minds, before things get better.

Crotalus - 15-01-’12 23:15
Hawk Hawkins

Just to put it in perspective,the “managed properties” are not like motels and the complaints are not as banal as missing shampoo.The negative issues with NPS are legion and far greater than your (not all inclusive,I’m sure) skewed vision of our world.The dying off of the “old guard” will never happen,Crotalus,because we have children who bear our memories and our love of freedom.Don’t tread on us!

Hawk Hawkins (Email ) - 16-01-’12 07:33

Crotalus quote:
"Change is never easy and it usually takes the dying off of the "old guard" rather than changed minds, before things get better."

Before things get better? What you really mean is before things are just accepted as normal. The next generation just accepts that massive restrictions and outright closures are normal because that is the way it’s always been in their memory. The closure and restrictions to access with many of our most treasured public parks and recreational areas BECOMES THE NEW NORMAL.

That is why so many in this generation will fight this and other unconstitutional incursions into our liberties to the bitter end. We see sweeping and shocking transformations to our country with JUDICIAL ACTIVISM and REGULATORY EDICT rather than by legislation. A clear short circuit to our constitution.

I’m guessing you also bought into hope and change during the last election. How’s that working out? If you want to live with more Socialism then move to France but stop trying to import Europe to the U.S. Our country’s founding, laws and long success is based on avoiding that hell hole not modeling our self in its image.

Willi - 16-01-’12 10:01
Bud Nelson

Perhaps the NPS is unable to handle managing ’1000’s of properties’ and should be relieved of the responsibility of managing CHNSRA.

Bud Nelson (Email ) - 16-01-’12 10:57

Hollow Daze…I think you have the right idea, and I plan to vote for him in the VA primaries coming up. Check him out people!

AmyS (Email ) - 16-01-’12 11:23

No, by “old guard” I meant all those beholden to immediate gratification with no thoughts or concerns of the future, whether it be children or even grandchildren. Eventually there will be a generation that realizes there’s more to life on this planet than gratifying their selfish desires.

No, I meant the mindset described above.
The perversion of this issue into some kind of Constitutional issue is just another lame attempt to distort the issue by those who obviously have never read the Constitution.
If the NPS ran the park system as a free market – for profit – enterprise, rather than the socialist enterprise that it is (public ownership of property is socialism) access would be far more restrictive and a lot more expensive.

The NPS only manages about 400 of the more than 1,000 properties. Perhaps you’re unaware, but they have a dual mandate – visitor use and conservation. But I can understand how people like you with no concerns for the future would be against the conservation of places like Cape Hatteras and would want to remove that responsibility for the NPS.

Crotalus - 16-01-’12 16:11

Eventually there will be a generation… All this talk of waiting for death of anyone, old people or children is downright creepy. Sounds like we have a proponent of UN Agenda 21 or a serious Orwell fan on this forum.

If the NPS ran the park system as a free market… This is a nonsensical proposition. You “obviously” don’t understand the “free market.” In a “free market” neither the government generally nor its agency specifically would “run” the park system, if there even was a “park system.” Maybe private property owners, especially those involved in profit making enterprises, would benefit from increased access to beaches at a lower cost.

The NPS only manages…. Long before there was an NPS, local people all across this country were concerned about the future, about “conserving” their lands for their kids and future generations. To think that now only a few elites in faraway Washington, DC, with their lawyers, fees, and bleeding hearts, know what’s best for the local communities is a statist fantasy.

The reality of our current debt ridden government actually borders on the absurd. 16 trillion in debt but we can pay citizens to keep other citizens off the country’s beaches for the benefit of certain animals. The bloated bureaucratic welfare/warfare state that is the US is on the verge of a monetary collapse, just as its socialist mentor states in Europe are. On a macro level, we will need to return to founding principles going forward or prepare to suffer under the rule of the elites who think they are our betters. Arguments with trolls on the internet over beach access will seem trite.

Lampropeltis (Email ) - 16-01-’12 18:44

Lampropeltis (my, my, so clever),
Yes, generally with any change or new idea even, few minds are changed which were in opposition to that change. Do you think the people who opposed suffrage for woman suddenly changed their minds when women got the vote? No, they slowly died off (escept for Ann Coulter) and were replaced by a population which believes it’s a basic right, regardless of gender.
My point about the parks being ran as a business was a direct response to someone claiming it should be operated as a business.
Conservationists of old would be outraged at what’s become of lands allegedly placed in conservation. The NPS must preserve the lands and all resources contained within for future generations. It doesn’t matter how big of a tantrum you throw because you don’t get to contribute to its destruction, unless of course you can get Congress to change the laws which mandate the protection of the Nation’s natural resources.
Finally, the owners – all the American people – of properties saved for future generations are not obligated to allow those properties to destroyed, just so interests outside those gates can turn a buck. It’s not and shouldn’t be about what’s best for the feeding the greed, but what’s best for the resource. But as far as I can tell, the NPS could condemn and take over every property on the islands, but as long as people could still drive on the beach not many, outside those persons evicted, would care. So save me the crocodile tears.

Crotalus - 16-01-’12 20:31

On the die-off, I won’t get circular because Willi made the point about the new normal.
Overall, I think most folks get the idea of conservation but, like a lot of things in this day and age, there has been a good deal of overreach by the government. It’s a source of healthy debate and I think you know where I stand on that. However, as a resident property owner on Hatteras Island who supports responsible beach access your suggestion about the public’s view of condemnation of private property for government purposes (a.k.a some politician’s view of the greater good) seems rather glib.

Lampropeltis - 16-01-’12 21:07
Bud Nelson

The NPS only manages about 400 of the more than 1,000 properties. Perhaps you’re unaware, but they have a dual mandate – visitor use and conservation. But I can understand how people like you with no concerns for the future would be against the conservation of places like Cape Hatteras and would want to remove that responsibility for the NPS."

No concern for the future ? Sorry you don’t know squat. The last 3 NPS superintendents have shown no regard for ‘the future’ of HI which like it or not IS the CHNSRA. Looking back it’s like watching a clown car in the circus. Every clown that gets out is worse than the one before him. Since the NPS in unable to protect the resources that they currently are responsible for it would be hard to imagine any other entity doing a worse job. But since the NPS can’t do the job they need to restrict access. They are little more than Puppets.

Bud Nelson (Email ) - 16-01-’12 22:57

Re: die-off. You two are confusing cause and effect. And overall, people are pretty naive about conservation. Many seem to think all you have to do is refrain from developing on a property.
No, I don’t know you so have no idea where you stand on anything.
I admit my impression of the reaction to a hypothetical condemnation is colored by years of interactions, but I stand by it and do not see it as "glib". The faux-concern for "the locals" is nauseating. So yeah, if the entire OBX was going to be a park and there were no ORV restrictions, few outside the community would care, just as long as they could drive where they want.
You’re absolutely correct. These restrictions should have been implemented 30 years ago.

Crotalus - 17-01-’12 07:43

NPS Management by lock and key is coming!! What you don’t know is the Superintendent can authorize fees at any time. The FEIS has nothing to do with this!! Can you imagine how many folks will be in line for a beach pass on Saturdays and Sundays this summer? I hope there is sufficient law enforcement present to maintain order.

The realtors, restaurant owners and shop keepers in Currituck County are licking their chops. They’ll need the mid sound bridge in 2013 and beyond. RT 12 North will be a parking lot all the way to Grandy!! Corolla and north will look like VA Beach. Hope the County is planning for more Beach cops…….because it will be crowded like never before.

Can you imagine an NPS vehicle at the busy ramps looking for access stickers and turning people away. Can you imagine how many people will never come back after this summer? Can you imagine the HI villages as ghost towns in 2013?


Hatrasfever (Email ) - 17-01-’12 07:47
Hawk Hawkins

Crot,the “immediate” gratification and “faux” concern of my family for the people of and the OBX,itself,go back over fifty years…not so immediate and a long way from “faux”.Should the NPS be run as a business? No,it should be run…out of town!

Hawk Hawkins (Email ) - 17-01-’12 08:38

“ The NPS must preserve the lands and all resources contained within for future generations.”

they did a fabulous job with the flooding out by the campground this fall……..

bbc - 17-01-’12 08:52

Oh please, the campground flooding isn’t their fault. The state won’t allow them to open the drain unless it’s an emergency – lives and private property are in danger.

Crotalus - 17-01-’12 20:34
Salvo Jimmy

Help me understand your logic on draining the swamp vs state law, Crot.

NPS complies with state law on the swamp but ignores state input on the state law not agreeing with NPS providing ESA protection to state listed species of concern. And as I recall NPS treatment of state listed species is based on policy, not law.

Salvo Jimmy (Email ) - 17-01-’12 21:54

Crot, you are incorrect on the Cape Point campground flooding. NPS refuses to drain the flooded campground and highway. More bad management. Research it. I did. You’re afraid of the TRUTH.

BG - 17-01-’12 22:32

NPS Management Policies (2006) mandate state-listed species (in every NPS unit in every state) be treated no differently than federally-listed species. Those mandates are the result of public input and Congressional oversight. If Gordon doesn’t want them protected, he should grow a pair and take it to the state legislature and have them de-listed rather than hide behind it (NPS policies) and try to deflect the blame on the NPS.

That’s not accurate. I did research it. The NPS was draining the area until in 2005 when either someone complained to the NCDWQ or they discovered it and DWQ shut them down and informed them it might be permitted if private property or lives were in danger. An emergency had to exist and a flooded campground wasn’t an emergency.
It doesn’t cause any flooding of the highway and besides, it would be NCDOT’s responsibility to remedy that flooding…..

Crotalus - 18-01-’12 00:05
Salvo Jimmy

Like I said, Crot, policy not law.

And I guess the water I many times drive thru on the road getting to the Point is virtual.

Salvo Jimmy (Email ) - 18-01-’12 07:37

By the lack of maintnence on the DRAIN System, a series of pipes and valves, all of this system is inoperateable.. The Pipes have colapsed, and all the valves have frozen up… Even if they wanted to use it, they could not. I was back there checking the system out a few years ago, and is was in an unuseable state. I guess E-Coli, and Bug Born Sicknesses Don’t count..You could not pay me to drive through that water, it will destroy a Truck in no time… I avoid driving in salt water…Great to see that more places have problems with the Naational Park Service listening to them…. Not gonna matter as long as they are on this Island, they will do what they want.. Ignore the Snake and he will go away, worked over on the other site….


[email protected] - 18-01-’12 07:49

Policy very much is "law" if it takes an act of the director or SoI to contradict it. And even then, they would have to have a very good reason to not protect NC’s state-listed species while continuing to protect the state-listed species in the rest of the nation.
They would need a better reason than people just wanting to drive on every inch of the beach.

JAM, I’ve not gone anywhere. :-)

Crotalus (Email ) - 18-01-’12 14:00

Mr Snake,

No one wants to drive on every inch of beach. We want a reasonable closure to protect the species. 1000 is excessive, 600 m is reasonable. Why is this so hard for you to underastand?

pumpkinboy - 18-01-’12 14:21

When PIPL chicks travel about twice as far as your 600 meters (first time I’ve ever heard this "counter proposal") how do you arrive at the conclusion 600m is "reasonable"?

Looking at the old resource report maps and measuring on GoogleEarth, 600m also doesn’t appear to open anything up. Are you looking for a Pyrrhic victory? Just sayin’

Crotalus - 18-01-’12 14:53


the only reason you use 1000 m is it is the maximum allowed under the recovery plan. 200-600m has beeen successfully used in the past, at no lower fledge rate the the current excessive closures. 600M, in most cases, allowed access to the point, an area where PIPL do not nest. 1000 M distance was choosen to restrict access not help and breeding birds. And as for those birds the decide to take a walk, they are watched all day, every day. Surely one on the techs could move an enclosure along the beach with them.

As for Pyrrhic victory, I’d venture that is more your motive, your reassignment from the Seashore must have left a mark on your psyche.

Have fum counting sunflowers, just saying

Pumpkinboy - 18-01-’12 15:38
Salvo Jimmy

Come on Crot. Don’t try again to make it all a driving issue. It is clearly NOT. Closed for wildlife is closed. PERIOD FULL STOP. No tires, no Birkenstocks.

No comment on water on the road, huh (Your statement that it does not flood the highway).

Oh, sorry, I get it. It depends upon the meaning of the word highway.

Salvo Jimmy (Email ) - 18-01-’12 15:42

I’m not "dougie", Walker. But nice try, and great Poe, you’re within 10 letters of my name. :-D

And 600 meters closes the narrows and most or all of Ramp 44 – depending on the year, which closes access to the Point and that’s only if AMOYs or CWBs haven’t already closed it.
The 1,000 meter distance was set long before it was ever used at Hatteras – see 1996 recovery plan. So your looney tune conspiracy theory, is just that. Nuts.
Also according to the annual reports, no they’re not watch all day long. Having minimal closures and techs out there chasing birds around with signs – one person per sign, about 60 techs? – makes little sense and is a recipe for disaster. (e.g. AMOYs south of ramp 55 in 2006)

Yes it’s just about ORVs, so let’s not pretend it isn’t.
The only highway on the islands is NC12, correct? He said the NPS was flooding the highway.

Crotalus - 18-01-’12 18:42
Hawk Hawkins

I LIKE the idea of a bunch of “bird techs” following chicks around with ‘symbolic” fencing and signs and midievel-type streamers…like Knights of the New Order !Clacking coconuts on invisible horses-searching for a shrubbery!Going, “NEE”!The three stooges at another nest,bonking each other with sticks…and the Marks Brothers with a spy-glass following a dodo around for one thousand meters…“did I ever tell you about the time I found a plover in my pants…“Thank God for the New World Order!

Hawk Hawkins (Email ) - 19-01-’12 08:40
Salvo Jimmy

Sorry Crot, it is not just about ORVs. You and others use that as the short term tactic, spinning the whole truth, because it garners support from uninformed folks. Sooner or later, more will understand the NO TIRES, NO BIRKENSTOCKS strategic reality.

BTW folks, OBPA has posted on Facebook that OMB has finally released the FINAL PLAN to NPS, which I think means it should be officially promulgated very soon.

Salvo Jimmy (Email ) - 20-01-’12 07:50

No, it’s all about ORVs. In the public comments people for pedestrian access were asking for either a total ban on ORVs or more VFAs, for a more "natural" experience.

Crotalus - 20-01-’12 13:56
Hawk Hawkins

For a more “natural” experience they should skinny dip…

Hawk Hawkins (Email ) - 20-01-’12 14:44


It’s over

pumpkinboy - 20-01-’12 15:05

The public has no say over public lands. And the NPS has too much power. At the Sandy Hook, NJ, leg of Gateway National Park, the NPS ignored overwhelming public and (local)Congressional opposition when a private investor wanted to come in to “rehabilitate” the dilapidated Ft. Hancock Officer’s Row, and turn these historic buildings into commercial properties. Naturally this was to generate a profit for his investment group. He had secured a 60 year lease with the NPS! SIXTY years!!!!! This use of a National Park is quite the contrary to the original declaration by Roosevelt, “for the benefit and enjoyment of the people”. Fortunately, for the thousands of people that visit Sandy Hook beaches, the deal fell through when the investor could not secure financing due to the economy and the banks reluctance to lend out money. It’s sickening to think that it is just a matter of time before a similar deal will take place. The NPS’ latest move at Sandy Hook is to double daily parking fees. Again, the overwhelming public opposition at public meetings (what a joke) has been meaningless.

GreenoJ - 20-01-’12 22:20
Mike Brooks

Great article. To think that this is only the list of NPS abuses that have been deemed important enough to media attention. The NPS needs a complete overhaul in personnel and culture. Hopefully, the next administration will put a Secretary of Interior and NPS leader in place who recognizes that humans and their recreational pursuits are part of the environment, and not a danger to it.

Mike Brooks (Email ) - 21-01-’12 21:16

Mike says:
Hopefully, the next administration will put a Secretary of Interior and NPS leader in place who recognizes that humans and their recreational pursuits are part of the environment, and not a danger to it.

That would be a nice soothing bed time story to go to sleep to every night, unfortunately the empirical evidence from around the planet shows otherwise.

Crotalus - 21-01-’12 22:51
Tony Hess

Crotalus, You sound like an educated and well informed man. I have a hypothetical question for you. If it were within your power, what would YOU do about the situation that now exists a CHNS? I’d be interested to hear what you have to say. You can reply off comments to my email if you like. Thanks

Tony Hess PS I don’t live in NJ. I’m in Pa and we have property in Frisco. Tony Hess (Email ) - 22-01-’12 08:42
Clark Fortney

The overriding issue is the corruption of the original law that established The Cape Hatteras National Recreation Seashore! The will of the people has again been subordinated to the money and power of special interest groups. This is a governmental trend throughout our nation! It’s sad!

Clark Fortney (Email ) - 23-01-’12 06:22


Willi - 24-01-’12 19:43
Tony Hess

Crotalus. Just wondering you are going to respond to my request? I am really interested in what you have to say. As I said you can reply off "comments" if you like.

Tony Hess (Email ) - 27-01-’12 15:43

Sorry, I didn’t see your original request. I guess we need to define "solution" to the situation which exists.
One in which everyone is happy? One which solves the problems, long-term? I’m rather pessimistic.

Crotalus - 28-01-’12 21:02
Tony Hess

Crotalus, Good point. I guess for the long term, and keeping both parties happy. If that’s possible.

Tony Hess (Email ) - 29-01-’12 16:09

(optional field)
(optional field)

Comment moderation is enabled on this site. This means that your comment will not be visible until it has been approved by an editor.

Remember personal info?
Small print: All html tags except <b> and <i> will be removed from your comment. You can make links by just typing the url or mail-address.