For your reading pleasure this holiday weekend, the Island Free Press is sharing the transcripts of federal Judge Terrence Boyle?s two status conferences this year to hear updates on the 2008 consent decree that ended a lawsuit against the National Park Service by environmental groups.
Defenders of Wildlife and the National Audubon Society, represented by the Southern Environmental Law Center, sued the Park Service over its lack of an off-road vehicle management plan.
Dare and Hyde counties were defendant-intervenors.
All parties settled the lawsuit with a consent decree that dictated management of natural resources at the park until there was an ORV plan in place.
The terms of the consent decree were to end when the ORV plan became effective, which happened in February, 2012.
However, Boyle apparently does not consider the case closed and has continued to monitor resource and ORV management at the seashore.
In fact, Boyle had two status conferences this year, so the U.S. attorney representing the Park Service, the plaintiff environmental groups, and seashore officials could fill him in on the status of the plan and the nesting success of birds and sea turtles.
The first was on Jan. 23, and the second was July 31. The Island Free Press published stories on both conferences, but the Outer Banks Preservation Association, an access advocacy group, requested transcripts.
The transcripts finally arrived, so now you can read every word that was spoken in court by Boyle, park officials, U.S. attorney Rudy Renfer representing the Park Service, and the lawyers representing the environmental groups.
I found the transcripts really interesting, especially Boyle?s questioning, which sometimes seems totally out of left field.
I also found it interesting that Julia Youngman, an attorney with SELC provided the court with charts and graphs on the huge success of the consent decree and the ORV plan and final rule. In the July conference, the charts were actually presented to seashore Superintendent Barclay Trimble for him to interpret for the judge.
Consider this exchange from July between Boyle (The Court) and Renfer:
MR. RENFER: Actually, this has been only six months since the last status conference.
THE COURT: We did one in February?
MR. RENFER: Yes. So we would be happy to — actually,Your Honor, I have to commend Ms. Youngman for preparing the charts that she has done beautifully and has given them to Superintendent Trimble, and I would be happy to tender him to the Court to review these if you would like.
THE COURT: Yes, I think that would be appropriate.
MR. RENFER: Your Honor, Ms. Youngman handed me a copy for The Court.
Here?s an exchange between Boyle and SELC attorney Derb Carter from the January conference:
THE COURT: Mr. Carter, the law of unintended consequences appears to be taking over this case. If you end up with a higher density of beach driving than lower I wonder how that would play out. But yet we’re still seeing, I suspect, vast improvements in the wildlife habitat. I guess the unintended consequences are very positive consequences because you’re having a better environmental posture and more enjoyment of the beach, and they don’t have to be mutually inconsistent.
MR. CARTER: Yes, Your Honor. The other piece of this that’s important is the way the beach has been apportioned to focus driving in certain areas and other areas for pedestrian use, and a great effort to identify the areas that are most important for wildlife and especially providing protection at critical times of the year.
THE COURT: So hopefully everyone’s interest has been enhanced.
MR. CARTER: From every way we can look at that in terms of the objectives, statistics, whether it’s the increase in turtle nesting, bird nesting, occupancy on Dare County site in terms of how many people are staying in motel rooms and rentals and these statistics from the superintendent in terms of the way people are using the beach and complying with the restrictions, it seems everything from our perspective appear very positive.
Here are some of Boyle?s remarks from the end of each conference:
THE COURT: Well, there’s a lot of interest in this topic, and I think this Court needs to continue to monitor the outcome and deal with whatever may come up in the future if
there are any changes.
THE COURT: All right. Well, thank you for your preparation, and The Court will continue to monitor the performance of the plan and be available to any further needs of the parties in the case, but that will conclude this hearing. Thank you.
Obviously, the judge has no intention of letting go of his oversight of the lawsuit, the consent decree, or the ORV plan and final rule.
Now, the case that the Cape Hatteras Preservation Alliance filed against the Interior Department and the Park Service in federal court in Washington, D.C., has been transferred to Boyle.
That lawsuit seeks to overturn the ORV plan and final rule.
Defenders of Wildlife and the National Parks Conservation Association are defendant-intervenors on the side of the Park Service in this case.
All sides are still filing requests for summary judgments and responses in that case and will be for several months to come.
It should be interesting.
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Click here to read the transcript of the Jan. 23, 2013 status conference.
Click here to read the transcript of the July 31, 2013 status conference.
