For years folks have used off-road vehicles to negotiate some of the farther reaches of Cape Hatteras National Seashore. And for years the National Park Service failed to develop a management plan for those ORVers. And now it's time to pay the piper.
On April 3 a federal judge will consider a request by Defenders of Wildlife and the National Audubon Society to restrict ORV access to South Ocracoke, Hatteras Spit, North Ocracoke, Cape Point, South Beach and Bodie Island Spit for up to three years because of the presence of piping plovers, which have been considered a "threatened" species under the Endangered Species Act since January 1986.
The lawsuit contends the Park Service has run afoul of the National Park Organic Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the enabling legislation for the seashore, and the Park Service's own Management Policies by implementing an interim ORV management plan and failing to produce a long-term management plan.
The National Park Service’s Interim Plan and the ORV use it allows are substantially harming – and will continue to harm – important populations of endangered and threatened sea turtle species, threatened, special concern, or significantly rare bird species, and a threatened plant species, as well as other natural resources, serenity, and other recreational uses of the Seashore generally, reads one of the claims.
On Saturday, in a protest against the conservation groups, an estimated 200 ORV supporters showed up in a gale at Cape Point on the seashore to attend a rally.
In Sunday's editions of the Charlotte Observer, meanwhile, outdoors writer Tim Higgins satirized the situation by looking into the future to listen to a conversation between a young boy and his grandfather over why they no longer fish at Cape Point.
What's unfortunate is that the Park Service might have avoided this situation by acting sooner on developing a management plan for ORVs.
Comments
Just a couple of points
1. Foxes are not native to Hatteras Island. They migrated over the Oregon Inlet Bridge.
2. No matter what you call this unit of the NPS, it is still subject to the same management policies as any other NPS unit. Calling it a recreation area is not going to suddenly make the endangered species act, migratory bird act, or any other legislation go away.
3. The enabling legislation does not give special rights to local residents.
4. I was personally appalled one day at the point when the fish were running hard and it was packed shoulder to shoulder several vehicles deep. Now, I admit this isn't my idea of a day at the beach but-whatever floats your boat. No, the appalling part was the poor man who had the gaul to have a heart attack at the point. What was awful was asking folks to move so we could perform CPR. You see the problem was we were taking up valuable fishing real estate and folks were actually stepping over him as he was having his heart attack to get to his front line spot. The fishermen were actually offended we were in their way! Now, some of you will say that didn't happen. Fishermen (and women) will always help each other. Yes, a few were concerned but most were interested in taking his spot. I'm sad to say, this didn't happen just once but several times. It was about that time I decided that it was time to move to a different park where maybe folks cared if someone was having a heart attack.
ORV groups have helped in cleaning up the seashore, but so have environmental groups. Environmental groups have supported educational information and efforts, and so have ORV groups. But I can tell you one thing the environmental groups haven't done that the ORV groups have done...ORV groups or their members have made threats against NPS staff members. Employees of the seashore have become prisoners in their own homes because ORV groups and their members have made personal attacks against them including posting fliers with directions and phone numbers to employee’s homes in the towns in the seashore. How can you have open dialogue in that type of environment?
The damage from a nor'easter will do far more damage to the beach than the orvs can do in five years tell me how many of these happen every year?
It's always painful to read comments like some of those above that advocate the loss of access to ORV users at Cape hatteras national Seashore Recreation Area. And yes, that is it's proper name. The Dept. of Interior dropped the "recreation area" part, not Congress. Whats sad is that the extreme majority of persons that wish to ban access do so with no real knowledge of CHNSRA, it's environment or the nature of beach use by those that enjoy the Seashore. Shorebird, your refrence to "the cape" and incessant discussion of wetlands and development establishes you as someone totally unfamilliar with this area and the issues at hand. I live here (Buxton, N.C.), I work here and I fish here. I do so by way of 4x4 vehicle and must as I suffer a 45% permanant partial disability negating any and all thoughts of walking any distance in the sand. So, if I may, a brief tutorial.
We live on an island that at Buxton is roughly thirty miles out to sea vs. the mainland. The Island goes from a few hundred feet to a couple miles wide and back to a thin strip as you travel from one end to another. We have but two options in terms of access to our homes. One by ferry to Ocracoke, the other via Hwy. 12 to the north. Hwy 12 passes through Pea Island before crossing the Bonner Bridge connecting us to Bodie Island and then by way of yet another bridge, the mainland. I mention Pea Island and the Bonner Bridge for several reasons. One being that Pea Island is a National Wildlife refuge that contains dune systems and wetlands. These were created not by nature, but by the CCC in the 1930's. Pea island also happens to be the site of the largest migratory bird slaughter I know of. Recently, USFWS gassed thousands of Canadian Geese because they were overtaxing the man made ecosystem and complaints about goose poop were being brought up by "McMansion" homeowners up in the developed areas of Duck, Corolla and Nags Head..far to the north.The road Ive been told that spoils Pea Island is our one real evacuation route and ironically preserves the wetlands and birds covered by the MBTA. Without road clearings and work to preserve the dunes, the wetlands will be destroyed.
Plovers dont do well there either in spite of no ORV traffic. The same is true of the Bodie Island side of the bridge, but more on that later.
Hatteras Island is a bit different in that a few villiages scattered along about sixty miles of Rt. 12 dot the seashore. These villages are bounded landward by CHNSRA and are extremely limited in development. As with Pea Island, most all of the wetlands and dune systems are man made. Have a look at Google earth..you might learn something. We have the luxury of being surrounded by an extremely active environment that remains unpredictable every day of the year. In terms of wildlife, we have the sea, the sound, and a thin strip of sand that hosts an amazing variety of birds, reptiles and mammals, crustaceans, fish, shell fish and some sea turtles too. And we care for them all.
Im sure that when most folks read about whats going on here and see the term ORV (Off Road Vehicle) they include motocross bikes, ATV's, and dune jumping sand rails and the like, but thats not what happens here. All vehicles on the beach have to be licensed vehicles, driving on the dunes is prohibited and speed limits are in force as well; 25mph but most do much less because of the nature of the beach. This is not even remotely like driving on Daytona Beach. And unlike beaches to the north, no mechanical device is needed to scour the beach of trash in the morning. We, the ORV users, didn't take a week to clean up the styrofoam from the ceiling fans, we got the vast majority of it up in one day. It was a day later that the first volunteer environmentalists showed up to help out. Less than 20. Because less than 100 ORV's occupants had already done the work. I was there and took bags of that stuff off the beach. It was NPS that asked the tackle shops for help and brought bags...and they got it. But then, that's what we normally do. We sit at the point where the Labrador current and Gulf Stream collide therefore we get alot of stuff washed up on our beaches from elsewhere, so we clean it up, by hand, on our time, and at our expense.
As for the birds, what do I say? We're on the EXTREME northern end of the Plover wintering grounds and the EXTREME end of the southern end of their breeding grounds. Plovers breed in areas of frequent overwash. Please come to this Island in a storm and show me where that isn't. Yes isn't. Frequent overwash means chick mortality. That has nothing to do with ORV use. In fact it's the native Ghost Crab that is responsible for the majority of chick mortality regardless of bird species. ORV use has gone down over the years, bird enclosures have been established earlier, have been larger and have been in existance for a greater perion of time and yet bird numbers dont expand. The Black Skimmers and Least Terns that DOW, SELC, N.C. Audubon are complaing about not being in the park nested last year on a newly created dredge spoil island near Hatteras Village within a couple hundred yards of the Park boundry, But since those birds didnt follow the rules and nest within the Park, they dont count. Neither does the largest tern colony on the east coast because it's on top of a certain store at a shopping center well outside of the bounds of the Park. Last time I checked, when wild animals breed where we tell them to, because we wont count their numbers if they dont, it was called a zoo.
The fact is thats it's the ORV users that care for this National Recreation area. Birds have wings and will nest where THEY want. Larger closures for longer periods has resulted in increased vegetation thereby limiting breeding grounds not by ORV but by the sea. It was ORV users that begged for the moving of turtle nests that were in "The Narrows", a section of beach regularly overwashed. The nests werent moved and the turtles drowned. Two of them(nests). They werent in our way, just in a place we knew they wouldn't survive. I challenge anyone to prove that on any "given day of year" you can find 2000 vehicles on the limited amount of beach we have left open to access. I was on the Point today and within the nine or so miles I could see less than twenty vehicles on the beach. Most of what is Plover breeding area was still under water and the entire beach still bore remnants of the almost complete innundation that occured over the weekend.
The attempt to close human access to these beaches is a travesty and an insult to those of us that do so much to care for this amazing place. Our economies will be destroyed all the while predator populations will soar, vegetation will increase, bird populations and suitable nesting areas will decrease.
I could go on but it's late and I have to go to work to a job, a living that some would seek to eliminate here. Because of my handicap, its about the one thing I can do. I can barely do that. But saturday morning, I will venture out on the beach once again to be in a beautiful environment where I have no power to change a thing. I will see Willets, Gulls, Ospreys, Terns, Gannets, Pelicans, Sanderlings, Cormorants, Oystercatchers and cetera. I will be at peace. And I will think of all the children that you would wish to deny this.
No, you dont have a clue, you dont understand and paint us with a broad brush thats entirely based on perception tainted by false data and data that has been excluded.
Take the time to know us before you condem us. We have just as much right to Life, Liberty and the Persuit of Happiness as do you.
Jeffrey
First off, I must ask why such involvement from some people when they fully admit they've never even been to the beaches at the frontline of this debate? To me, making statements/claims and observations about the ongoings of the CHNSRA seems to be a stretch given that you've never witnessed the acts you've accused people of. Most concerning is the labeling and generic branding of all ORV's as being oil dripping machines.
You keep asking an obviously loaded question about how ORV's can be good for the evnironment - yet the same can be asked of you concerning other conveniences you utilize every day. When visiting Yellowstone (or any other "park") - do you not travel on their roadways? I am sure the EIS for that project clearly stated that it's construction was detrimental to the habitat. Why was it allowed? Simple - it was for the betterment of the public (including you). Obviously, this is a overly simplified comparison, however, the point remains the same ....... sometimes things are done for the betterment of people as a whole knowing that a resulting impact (large or small) would/could occur.
Same goes for these beaches. One would be foolish to think that ORV useage is BENEFICIAL for the environment - but using such as example as a bullet point for your agrument is no different then my roadway comparison above. And who gives you the right to dictate what level of interference or damage is acceptable? More so, what doesn't work in your favor is the argument concerning the extent to which ORV usage damages the beach and the surrounding environment.
Already, its been pointed out that: A) pedestrain traffic does more damage and with the possible closure to ORV's, an increase in dune damage/disruption significantly increases as people will grow tired of having to walk from specific access points to navigate the beach and actually utilize the protective dunes as a short cut to beaches. B) storm swell and the ensuing beach migration typicall of all barrier systems cause more damage/death to the piping plover (and other animals) population and nesting grounds C) predation continues to be the most obvious cause for the lacking plover population D) no explination is being given by those who don't support ORV access as to why such a plan would benefit native species when it's clear that such hasn't worked on Pea Island.
Being that I have spent a significant amount of time on the beaches of OBX (mostly at the Point), I challenge your claim that we are the cause of damage you are looking to control. To the contrary, I find that those of us who utilize the beach for fishing and recreation do so because we have a great respect for the wildlife and the ecosytem of the area. As has been said many times, we all charge ourselves with being guardians of the beach - whether that means picking up debris/trash or monitoring the actions of our fellow beachgoers.
These beaches are unique in many ways, ways that have been enjoyed by generations of my family as well as families around the world. And who gives you the right to say your concerns are any more valid then ours? Whose to say your hobies outweight mine? It's as simple as that.
The real issue here is finding a way that agrees with your beliefs and one that agrees with those of the ORV supporters. Considering much of the area already has restrictions in place - I believe our side to have been compromising thus far. However, I don't think our side is not willing to discuss and develop a reasonable plan either beyond the one currently (referring more to the restrictions) in effect. That being said, I believe asking for year round beach closures is asking way too much and isn't a compromise or discussion at all.
Additionally, it needs to be considered that such a harsh stance concerning beach closures not only affects those who vacation and enjoy the beaches, it will also destroy the livlihoods of those who depend on it. This area draws a HUGE portion of its visitors as a result of enjoying the beach and when you compromise it's availability - you no longer appeal to the masses. Just with the closures being discussed, you can ultimately alienate those who come here to fish (which is a large base of the tourist dollar) and the asscoiated businesses.
You state we are being selfish in our views, yet our concern lies in a large part with the community as whole. Your stake in this revolves around a bunch of conveluded and unsopported data over a bird .............................
Will
Southern MD
As a 55 year old ecology concerned person, I have been turned from that frame of mind by the actions of who I considered my friends. I “had” always been concerned for the environment and been wary of my affects on the wildlife and natural aspects of my surroundings. BUT, I have been duped and I now find out that by “my” years of monetary and material contributions to the many various environmental groups (including the Audubon) I have, in fact, caused the problem and find myself faced with no longer being able to enjoy what I was trying to protect. From the times when my parents took me to Hatteras and over my lifetime I had enjoyed the beaches of the Outer Banks. Being able to go swimming, snorkeling, bird watching, windsurfing, fishing and shelling at Cape Point, along the beach and the other beautiful inlets. I remember many a night sitting out on Cape Point and at Hatteras Inlet and Ocracoke Inlet watching the fantastic sunsets, shooting stars and of course just sitting and enjoying the sounds of the lapping waves and watching the birds. Only if you have been there do you know that is only possible by access by vehicle. So it looks like those days are numbered and the ability to enjoy what was available to many for generations will only be available to those elite that are empowered to go out and enforce and control nature by shooting and trapping those animals they determine don’t belong. That leaves the beach and the unique and very special places that are only accessible by vehicle enjoyable by no one. I have been duped and brainwashed that I would help preserve these places for future generations and instead I am about to be barred from ever going there again. It is so sad and it is amazing that it could come to this. So for my final 30 years on this earth, the environmentalist have pushed me over the fence and I really can’t care anymore about what species may or may not survive at the sacrifice of humans peaceful enjoyment of our surrounding. I was foolish thinking that a group of humans with an agenda would really be helpful in maintaining an area for everyone to enjoy. It is obvious to me that it their plans are to revert areas to the conditions before man was on the earth by keeping them from it, what was I thinking, but it is my own fault.
Snowbird06
Former environmentalist: I truly feel sorry for your doomsayer comments...pathetic but also sad! Nobody wants to lock stock your playland but only to see that there is a fine balance between man and wildlife, a masterplan that can be implemented to please all responsible parties at the Cape. Your crocodile tears don't slay me for I have seen enough damage in my own backyard from ORV's...and that angers me with tears.
Get real, Ride a bike? on sand? and with all the tackle you would have to carry, oh but you would say we don't need the tackle cause we would be out to hurt the poor little fishes. You should really learn to think your way through life instead of FEELING everything. If you were to think intelligently about this whole thing you would see that we conserve and protect the flora and fauna of the outer banks as well as recreate. Like I said, GET REAL!!!!!!!
God bless this wonderful country that allows such a freedom of speech even for uninformed persons such as "Snowbird". He is allowed his opinion without regards to it's merit.
The shame of it all is that this we also have a freedom of litigation which allows lawsuits no matter how ignorant and unformed they may be.
That category fits the DOW and Audobon, who imo have no real concept of the beaches, wildlife, park service, or people who inhabit and PROTECT and PRESERVE the very areas that they are trying to close. If they had a clue (which they don't) they would see that the very people whose access they are trying to prohibit are the real stewards of the seashore.
How much money does the DOW and Audobon pull by promoting these ill-founded lawsuits? I bet they are giving themselves a good salary. What a scam they are.
Good luck to the OBXers,
Steve C.