A house subcommittee today heard testimony on H.R. 4094, a bill introduced by U.S. Rep. Walter Jones, R-N.C., to overturn the final off-road vehicle plan, end a court-agreed-to consent decree, and return management at the Cape Hatteras National Seashore to the 2007 Interim Protected Species Management Plan.
The bill would ?authorize pedestrian and motorized vehicular access? at the seashore and may also be called the ?Preserving Public Access to Cape Hatteras Beaches Act.? If the bill passes, the interim strategy would remain in place until the Park Service devises another long-term plan that is less restrictive.
Apparently H.R. 4094, and a companion bill introduced yesterday in the Senate, have been dubbed the ?roadkill? bill by the environmental groups that sued the Park Service in 2007 over the interim plan and lack of an ORV plan at the seashore. But more about that at the end of this blog.
Today?s hearing was before the House Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands, and was a joint legislative hearing on H.R. 4094 and an oversight hearing on ?Access Denied: Turning Away Visitors to the National Parks.?
In the oversight part of the hearing, the committee heard not just about Cape Hatteras but also about efforts to curtail fishing in the Biscayne National Park in Florida.
?Although today we focused on two examples, Biscayne National Park in Florida and Cape Hatteras in North Carolina, these overly restrictive policies show signs of developing into a nationwide problem. This is a continuation of anti-visitation policies driven by the Obama Administration that will undercut the tourism industry, hurt local businesses, and destroy jobs,? said Subcommittee Chairman Rob Bishop, R-Utah.
Fixing the problem, he said, might require Congressional action.
Three Congressmen, including Jones, gave testimony. Other witnesses included Herbert C. Frost, associate director for National Resource Stewardship and Service at the NPS; two Dare County citizens, John Couch of Buxton, president of the Outer Banks Preservation Association, and Warren Judge, chairman of the Dare County Board of Commissioners; the vice-chairman of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, and two Florida residents.
After the testimony and some questions by members of the subcommittee, Chairman Bishop did not mince words.
?Somehow, someone has to bring reality back to the Interior Department,? he said.
The Park Service?s action at Cape Hatteras he said ?defies common sense,? and, among other things, he characterized the NPS as ?unfriendly? and ?discourteous.??
Go back to your colleagues,? he said to the NPS witness, Frost, ?and tell them they screwed up and to fix it.?
Jones was the first speaker on the panel of lawmakers.
?This bill is about jobs and taxpayers? right to access the recreational areas they own,? he said in his testimony. ?H.R. 4094 will restore balance and common sense Park Service management in Cape Hatteras National Recreational Area. It will reverse the significant job loss and economic decline that Hatteras Island has experienced since access was cut off to many of the most popular areas of the seashore.?
Frost said that the Department of the Interior ?strongly opposes? the bill.
The Department supports allowing appropriate public use and access at the seashore to the greatest extent possible,? he said in his testimony, ?while also ensuring protection for the Seashore?s wildlife and providing a variety of visitor use experiences, minimizing conflicts among various users, and promoting the safety of all visitors. We strongly believe that the final ORV management plan and special regulation will accomplish these objectives far better than the defunct Interim Strategy.?
The interim strategy, he said, was never meant to be in place for the long-term.
While the Interim Strategy took an initial step toward establishing a science-based approach, key elements such as buffer distances for American oystercatchers and colonial waterbirds, and the lack of night driving restrictions during sea turtle nesting season, were inconsistent with the best available science,? he said.
Frost added: ?By contrast, the species-specific buffer distances and the night driving restrictions contained in both the Consent Decree and in the plan/EIS are based on scientific studies and peer-reviewed management guidelines such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Piping Plover and Loggerhead Turtle Recovery Plans, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Open-File Report 2009-1262 (also referred to as the ?USGS protocols,?) on the management of species of special concern at the Seashore. Buffer distances for state-listed species are based on relevant scientific studies recommended by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, USFWS, and USGS.?
OBPA?s Couch was next up on the witness list, testifying for the Cape Hatteras Access Preservation Alliance, which has sued the Park Service to overturn it?s final ORV plan and regulation.
?The rule instituted by the National Park Service on Feb. 15 has effectively taken the nation?s first national seashore designated by Congress to be a ?recreational area? and turned it into a wildlife refuge without congressional authorization,? he said in his testimony. This will forever diminish the visitor experience in ways unintended by the enabling act.?
Couch went on to say that the environmental impact of the final rule is flawed in two significant areas ? visitor experience and economic impact. The rule has been overly restrictive in closing beaches to both ORVs and pedestrians, he said, and the economic impact has been ?substantial.?
H.R. 4094, he said, ?will establish guidelines to ensure punishing and unnecessary closures and restrictions will not be re?created in the future as new rules are promulgated? and that the bill ?will ensure that, as new rules are promulgated, species protection will be instituted based on peer?reviewed science.?
Commissioner Judge also addressed the committee about the flaws in the final plan.?The National Park Service?s ORV Management Plan, and the Final Environmental Impact Statement upon which it is based, are seriously flawed,? he said in his testimony. ?It lacks a sound scientific basis and reflects a distorted economic analysis. It also does not reflect the will of the people that was articulately expressed during public hearings.?
In his written testimony, Judge addresses areas in the plan, such as permits and ORV routes in great detail and he challenges the NPS conclusion that the economic impact of the plan would ?not adversely affect? the economy and other areas of community concern.?
The National Park Service has dismissed and ignored the concerns of the local business community,? he said. ?The hard-working small business owners of Dare County have indeed suffered harm and will continue to do so under the ORV Management Plan.?
The Florida witnesses addressed a Park Service Plan to eliminate access to more than 10,000 acres of prime sportfishing waters at Biscayne National Park.
Subcommittee members asked questions for more than an hour of the two-hour hearing.
Most members who spoke, but not all, seemed sympathetic to the issue of public access to the parks.One very obvious exception was Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., who apparently had been supplied with all of the media releases of the Southern Environmental Law Center.
Grijalva especially dwelled on how the Dare County economy has flourished since the 2008 consent decree, a favorite subject of the environmental groups.
Jones, Judge, and Couch all explained that the figures reflect all of Dare County, and areas north of the Bonner Bridge have had economic growth, while many of the villages of Hatteras and Ocracoke have suffered economically. Jones noted there are ?two economies? in Dare ? Hatteras and the northern beaches.
An archived webcast of the hearing and the written testimony of all of the witness are available on the subcommittee?s website for the hearing.
THE ?BEACH ROADKILL? BILL
While the hearing was both entertaining and informative, the best news from today came in a Southern Environmental Law Center media release on yesterday?s introduction of S 2372, a companion bill to H.R. 4084, by U.S. Sens. Richard Burr, R-N.C., and Kay Hagan, D-N.C.
The language in the Senate bill is identical to that in the House bill.
The statement came from SELC, Defenders of Wildlife, and the National Audubon Society.
The headline reads, ?Hagan and Burr run over sea turtles, rare birds, pedestrians, and tourism to unleash off-road vehicles in Cape Hatteras National Seashore.?
?We can?t be more disappointed in Senators Hagan and Burr?s disregard of facts, sound science, federal laws, and years of public participation and constituents? comments by introducing a bill to overturn the National Park Service plan to manage driving on the beaches at Cape Hatteras National Seashore,? the statement said.
The release goes on to say that most who commented on the Park Service?s ORV plan wanted to protect wildlife and provide safe areas for visitors and families to walk the beach. In addition, the release says the consent decree has the economy of Dare County booming and has resulted in phenomenal nesting success for birds and turtles.
?The Senators? ?beach roadkill? bill introduced April 26 seeks to overturn safeguards by the National Park Service that ensure responsible vehicle operations in the presence of nesting sea turtles and birds, and pedestrians,? the release says.
We are all used to the claims of these groups, which always have some truth to them but leave out significant facts. But this ?beach roadkill? thing is over the top.
As Rachel Maddow would say, ?It?s the best new thing in the world today.? And also the funniest.
Those guys just have a way with words up in Charlottesville.
