share.triangle.com - Ban beach driving? - Comments

Cape Hatteras is a recreation area - not a wildlife refuge

Manteo gal — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 15:25:09 -0400

As a lifelong North Carolina resident who has lived from the mountains, to the bustling modern Triad and Triangle regions and now to the Outer Banks ... I would like to point out that North Carolina has 427,823 acres in national wildlife refuges. And this does not count the Great Dismal Swamp refuge which is in NC and VA. Of those 427,823 acres, 95% are in northeastern North Carolina, the home of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore. In fact, Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge is located within the boundaries of Cape Hatteras National Seashore and occupies 5,834 acres (land), 25,700 acres (Proclamation Boundary Waters). It covers 13 lateral miles of the barrier island from shore to sound.

Northeastern North Carolina is one of the poorest sections of the state, with little industry or service businesses other than tourism. Visitors come here primarily for the great outdoors. This section of North Carolina is committed to resource and wildlife conservation and already gives more than its fair share. Cape Hatteras National Seashore is not the only nesting area available to threatened species.

Unlike many other national parks, Cape Hatteras had established communities within the boundaries before the National Seashore was ever established in 1953. In the original language “said area shall be, and is, established, dedicated, and set apart as a national seashore recreational area for the benefit and enjoyment of the people and shall be known as the Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area”.

In addition, this area is prone to natural disasters and near constant shaping and reshaping by the environment. Currently a wildfire caused by lightning is raging in the Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge which occupies 12,000 acres in Hyde, Tyrell and Washington counties (adjacent to the Outer Banks). 10,000 acres have already burned and smoke is drifting over the Outer Banks as we speak. Given current weather conditions, experts say the peat fire will burn for days if not weeks. What wildlife has perished due to natural disaster in this wildlife refuge and how will it affect wildlife in Pea Island and on Cape Hatteras National Seashore?

In September 2003, Hurricane Isabel slammed northeastern North Carolina and particularly the Outer Banks. The force was so great that it carved a new inlet in the seashore, severing the road and stranding southern seashore residents for more than two months. The communities on the Outer Banks were devastated. How did this affect the wildlife of the area?

It has been argued that we must do everything to preserve and encourage endangered or threatened species, in this case the piping plover which has a habitat range from the Gulf Coast to the Great Lakes and Canada. We cannot harness wildfires and hurricanes. We cannot stop foxes and seagulls from plucking tasty eggs from the beach … although the Park Service has certainly tried. The following “predators” were removed from the seashore last year: red fox (18), gray fox (6), raccoon (135), opposum (85), feral cat (57), nutria (77), muskrat (1), otter (2), mink (1). No count for seagulls.

The consent decree protects a few species (which it may be argued are not even in danger) while restricting the rights of another species … humans. The Park Service was succeeding in managing these habitats while also meeting the needs of its visitors before the lawsuit. Now the management of this issue has been removed from their hands and without public input by one activist judge.

Apparently I and the millions of visitors to national parks each year are not a stakeholder and have no voice, nor do we in fact any longer have real access to Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreation Area. That right is only provided to birds, now protected by daily changing buffer zones ranging as long as 11 football fields. As humans and taxpayers, we only have the right to foot the legal bills for the plaintif non-profit special interest groups and the Park Service as the defendant.

A solution in search of a problem

Bernie McCants — Thu, 01 May 2008 08:05:57 -0400

It will be hard to measure any improvement with this draconian ORV plan since no birds or turtles have been killed or injured by ORVs in years with the existing ORV management policies in place. The interim plan in place last year and was to be in place while the permanent plan was developed was compliant with the Piping Plover Recovery Plan and approved by US Fish & Wildlife.

Weather events and predation by ghost crabs, gulls, racoons, etc. are the culprits. And how do Defenders of Wildlife and Audubon plan to get the birds to begin nesting in the predator-rich areas they insist is prime habitat when terns and skimmers seem to be content in nesting and thriving on the spoil islands in Hatteras and Ocracoke inlet. Somehow these birds don't count.

Rather than work with the National Park Service to create and enhance nesting and foraging habitat away from the surf zone, these environmental groups use the one-trick pony of lawsuits to ban human access to public areas as the be-all, end-all solution.

The effects of this lawsuit-driven plan will be minimal at best. The impact on the ability of the public to enjoy this National Seashore, expressly created to preserve recreational opportunities for the public, will huge.

Just an Opinion

The Welch's of Morgantown, WV — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 12:13:47 -0400

As a visitor to Hatteras for more than 20 years, as my family owned a home in the area for much of my youth, I now bring my own family to the shores of Hatteras. I was appalled when I hear that environmentalists want to eliminate any sort of human contact with the shore. My mother-in-law is physically handicapped, and since we have been bringing her with us to Hatteras, she has actually been able to enjoy a beach vacation. Her limited mobility made it impossible for her to do much of anything, and by driving her onto the beach, we were able to give her the vacation she had been dreaming of. Our family has always been very respectful of the beach, beach-goers and wildlife, and have always been treated respectfully by other visitors enjoying the beach. We have never driven in protected areas (which in all my years have always been roped off and inaccessable) and we have NEVER attempted to interact with or harm any of the wildlfe or plants. It scares me that the best vacation spot on earth could be lost and our children will not be able to experience the island the way we always have. We are visiting the "banks" in 8 days for our yearly vacation (which we work hard for, and look forward to all year) and we hope that the vacation traditions our family has enjoyed will be preserved.
The idea of paying a fee to drive on the beach sounds reaonable to our family and it is better than finding a new vacation spot - because if beach driving is banned - that is what we will be doing!
KEEP HATTERAS BEACHES OPEN FOR BEACH DRIVING!

Tina K

Visitor — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 20:38:12 -0400

Tina, have u ever been to the Outer Banks? Do u know anything about this area? Have u ever surfed fished? Do u know what supports the local economy? Do u know there are no jobs but the ones the locals provided. Do u know how many places are ran by the families that live at the Outer Banks? DO YOUR HOMEWORK BEFORE u make comments as u did!!

It seems that Tina has never

Visitor — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 11:51:27 -0400

It seems that Tina has never visited the Outer Banks beaches in person. She would know that most fishing areas are not within walking distance, even if ample parking were available somehere.

Yes- There Should Continue to be Beach Driving

John Barnes — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 11:46:27 -0400

The remote OBX beaches can not be reasonably accessed without a 4WD vehicle. Beach driving is part of the tradition of recreational activity there and part of the culture and economy of the locals. Those that drive on the beaches are good stewards of the environment, almost always guarding nesting areas and turtle crawls from interference, because the Park Service does not have the manpower to do it. Beach driving rights MUST be preserved.

You are so

Visitor — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 22:43:13 -0400

You are so wrong........humans do own the world........read the Bible.....God made the world and all in it to humans....and as for walking to the beach..get real lady....who in the heck can walk that far and long and carrying fishing equipment.......you say to share with all creatures?........lets see you build a house in the mts and try to share with a man eating mt lion......after he rips your ass apart and half eats you....then will you come to your senses and realize that man cannot share with ALL creatures......and that the beach belongs to all humans....not just birds...

Well stated

Visitor — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 15:13:33 -0400

Thanks Wheat. I agree 100%. I have been coming there for 30 years and the last 8 have been the most disturbing. The enviros have taken a little bit more each year and this has been a calculated plan on their part towards and ultimate closure. I will be in Raliegh tomorrow and have been hoping and praying for the best. For everyone involved, not the least of which are my two children (5 and 8). They have enjoyed this right since birth and they have both voiced there concern. We are set for two weeks this year, as always, and are not quite sure what we will do.

Supporting the cause from the 'burg. Huck.

Ewol_Smith

Wheat — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 23:07:08 -0400

I'm left in wonderment regarding your reply.

I surmise that you have never been to Hatteras and so don't understand how things work here. We use our ORV's to get to nature that's unlike anything anywhere on Earth. We cherish this place and are its stewards.

All it takes is a good rain or a nice blow like were having now or over-wash, which is frequent, and any remnant of our beach usage is completely erradicated. That's why the government sand compaction studies failed. Every time they began to accumulate a few days wort of data, one of the above would happen. They tried several times and then gave up because such a study cant be done.

I'd love the chance to take a few folks that favor banning ORV's out to the Point sometime. I would show you a group of people comprised of lawyers, doctors, molecular biochemists, retired veterans, IT personell, engineers, and cetera that all call this place Paradise...and often you hear the phrase "I'm home". I would show you nature..how about standing on the sand and watching an Osprey a hundred feet away from you dive into an active surf and come back with its meal. Have you ever watched them rise from the water, hesitate and shake the water off their wings in mid air?

Have you ever watched Gannets at work? When schools of bait move down the Island, Gannets will gather to feed, something we frequently see from Cape Point. Sometimes they gather by the thousands. That's a sight you can never forget. They dive from sometimes a hundred feet off the water at incredible speeds and often resemble a heavy rain hitting the surface of a still pond. Whats amazing is that they take turns. Instead of going right back up to dive again, they form a line of sorts and all the birds that just came out of the water fly to the back of the line.

I'm going to have to take issue with your statement "So, leave your cars on the artificial roads and do not bring them to the wild homes of Nature." If only because your home, your house, and the roads you drive on to feel entombed therein once were " a wild home of nature"

I do however, totally agree with you when you wrote "We are too far removed from Nature in our lives--it's a deficit we ignore--we sit entombed in cars and offices throughout our lives." That is after all why most people come to Hatteras. To get away, to be able to rest and watch the sun rise and set from the same spot. To be surrounded by nature.

Go figure...

Wheat

The areas proposed to be

outside_of_apex — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 19:50:43 -0400

The areas proposed to be closed by the impending injunction will not only be closed to ORVs but to people period. Not just for 3 months of the year, but for each month of the year for at least 3 years. It's not like you will be able to lug your cooler, fishing gear, chairs etc two miles over deep sand to reach a good spot, even if you were so inclined.

The areas proposed to be closed are some of the prime surf fishing spots left in this once free country today.

Don't believe me? Let's look at the maps, first the interim plan which exists today then the injunction plan:

http://media.putfile.com/Frank-Folb-with-maps-of-beach-closures

allow driving

Visitor — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 16:27:37 -0400

I wonder if the special interest groups would agree to no more cars in the cities. After all, look at all the pollution it causes! That makes about as much sense as to close our beaches. Please tell me where we will park at the little or no beach they will allow us to go on. I bet most that are for the ban, have not been here before. There isn't a whole lot of parking. I sure hope they don't think it would help the environment to walk over the dunes. The few that are here protect our communities from storms. And what about the handicap people. Do they realize by driving on the beach is the only way they can get to the beach? And what about the people who built rental homes that won't get rented, who are already suffering due to the economy? And what about the locals who were forced to give up their land to the Park Service and where promised to always be allowed to drive on the beach and were promised their way of life would never be changed? The people who live here live a hard, simple and very expensive life. Why? because we love the beauty of our island. Because here everyone hurts when one hurts and rejoices when one rejoices. Who can live in one of the safest places ever. We love our simple life. We don't want our home to be like Virginia Beach or other big coastal cities. We will be the first to tell you no malls or fast food restaurants or large chain stores. We don't want to hurt the wildlife. We want them protected. We only want to be able to ride to the beach and swim, fish and surf and even collect a few seashells. Even with lots of cars there, it is still a little piece of Heaven out there. There should be more patrol, that is all. They need to stop the ones who are abusing our beaches and all the locals couldn't agree more. And by the way, Dogs already have to be on leashes. Trust me! I have the ticket to prove it. Even though my dog was out swimming in the sound, it was still considered serious which I get.

They want to close it 12

John Benson — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 15:23:03 -0400

They want to close it 12 months of the year, 24 hours per day. There are presently many protections in place, especially for the turtles. All of us who drive on the beaches and fish, picnic, surf, court, etc love and protect the turtles and other animals visiting the beaches.

Ban...

VCHawk — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 14:35:21 -0400

Wheat,there is nothing I can add to what you said...you said it all...Oh,the armchair preachers!Leave your truck parked in your cubicle at work!Walk from your desk job for 200 miles to the beach!What's another two miles with your gear to fish the point?Worship the creatures more than the Creator!Not One of us who loves Hatteras,does not love wildlife...it's part of the package.Please don't sit in your home or office far away from this land and preach to the choir who sings the song of life on the island.Join them or leave them alone...

I agree that there needs to

Visitor — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 14:19:58 -0400

I agree that there needs to be a compromise solution. I happened to be at OBX when 1,000 locals came together in Buxton to discuss the issues. The N&O was nowhere to be found at this meeting, considering that 1,000 OBXer's is equivalent to 100,000 Raleigh-ites gathering for an issue in Raleigh. A week before that, 1,500 people gathered at the point to rally and I didn't see that covered in the N&O either.

I attended the meeting because I wanted to learn more about the issue and see the local residents' side of the issue. What I observed is a judicial and rulemaking process that completely disenfranchises these residents in a manner that reminds me of Britain controlling its American colonies long ago. The local residents are completely underrepresented in the federal rulemaking process and the judicial process is taking place in Washington DC. At the meeting, it was clear that the locals really care about the environment and don't mind reasonable limits one bit. They believe that there can be a common ground and they fear that the decision makers are too far removed to find the best solution.

At the meeting, one gentleman outlined how they have been involved with submitting the required plans for ORV usage for the past few decades. The environmental group's statements to the contrary appear to be misrepresentations.

These beach areas are quite large and it appears that lines could be drawn that limit the ORVs during nesting season to allow just enough room to park and pass during the highest of high tides rather than an all out closure. The focus needs to be on reducing the predators and perhaps requiring that dogs be leashed, etc.

Keep in mind that these closures aren't limited to off road vehicles. Pedestrians and fisherman alike will be completely banned from even walking to any of these areas.

Ban beach driving

Ewol_Smith — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 14:04:33 -0400

We are too far removed from Nature in our lives--it's a deficit we ignore--we sit entombed in cars and offices throughout our lives. So, leave your cars on the artificial roads and do not bring them to the wild homes of Nature. Do not adulterate the natural with the artificial.

Ban beach driving?

mwilliam — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 17:20:11 -0400

Should beach driving be banned to protect wildlife?

Click here for the story.

Should beach driving be banned to protect wildlife? Click here for the story.