While the final paperwork has been signed concerning an off-road management plan at Cape Hatteras National Seashore, the arduous task of formalizing a rule means the seashore will continue to operate next summer under a consent decree.
The National Park Service's Southeast Region office signed off Monday on the seashore's preferred alternative for managing ORV traffic in a way to protect bird and sea turtle species that receive protection under the Endangered Species Act. To mark the occasion, Tom Strickland, the assistant Interior secretary who oversees fish and wildlife and parks, congratulated the Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for developing a plan that blends recreation and species protection.
"The work of these two agencies shows that the conservation of fish and wildlife and its habitat on the Outer Banks can be consistent with the transportation, recreation, and economic needs of local communities,” said Mr. Strickland in a statement. “I applaud the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Park Service for their commitment to engaging the local communities, gathering ideas, and applying the best science to guide wise management decisions.”
An ORV management plan has been long in coming for Cape Hatteras, though it remains to be seen whether this plan will survive intact. In 2007 two conservation groups -- the Audubon Society and Defenders of Wildlife -- sued the National Park Service for lacking an ORV management plan at Cape Hatteras, which offers nesting and breeding habitat for piping plovers (a threatened species) and five species of sea turtles (Kemp’s ridley, leatherback and hawksbill are all listed as endangered species, while the loggerhead and green are listed as threatened in North Carolina).
Under a consent decree issued as a result of the lawsuit, and intended to guide ORV use on Cape Hatteras until a formal ORV plan could be adopted, tight regulations have governed ORV travel -- overnight driving was banned and temporary closures at times were enacted during breeding seasons.
The ORV plan that the seashore arrived at has been criticized as overkill by ORV and surf caster groups -- they argue the federal government has greatly exaggerated the threat posed to wildlife by ORV driving on the beach, and that the current rules make it unreasonably difficult to get to traditionally popular fishing areas -- and termed lacking by conservationists, who say it fails to provide adequate year-round protections for wildlife.
Under the Record of Decision signed Monday, the one both sides have criticized, new parking areas will be built along Highway 12 as well as new access ramps to the beach, and a new trail will allow pedestrians to walk down through the dunes to the beach. It also provides for a "seasonal night-driving restriction ... established from 9:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. during turtle nesting season, although areas with no turtle nests could open to night driving from September 16 through November 15." Additionally, it calls for an "alternative transportation study and would encourage the establishment of a beach shuttle or water taxi."
Overall, the approved plan will allow for 27.9 miles of year-round designated ORV routes on the seashore, 12.7 miles of seasonal routes, and 26.4 miles of vehicle-free miles.
Whether this option will be challenged in court remains to be seen.
While the Record of Decision has been approved, much work remains before the ORV plan will actually be implemented at Cape Hatteras, according to seashore Superintendent Mike Murray.
The Record of Decision was needed before the seashore staff could draft a proposed rule, which in turn must be approved by both the Interior Department and Office of Management and Budget, the superintendent said Monday. Then draft rule then must be published in the Federal Register and go through a 60-day public comment period, he continued.
After the comment period closes, seashore staff must review the comments and, if necessary, tweak the draft proposed rule.
“The likelihood is that the proposed rule will be published in the first quarter of the new year," said Superintendent Murray. "The final rule is likely to be published sometime in the summer.”
Rather than change the management direction in mid-summer, seashore officials will wait until the fall before implementing the new ORV management plan.
"It would be challenging for everybody. It's kind of hard to switch horses in the middle of a busy season like that," Superintendent Murray said. “We’ll operate under the consent decree until then.”
Comments
SS!
Though I do not agree with some of the content of your comment, I would like to thank you for the tone in which it was written. You are correct in some of what you say. More importantly, you made your points without resorting to extremes and with respect some. I would hope that Kurt would not be appalled. Two factors I would like to bring up. One, The Access Groups fear the Environmental Groups. We Believe the vast majority despise us. Our feelings toward them resulted from this. We did not try to take anything away from them. We were put on the defensive and remain there. Two, The reason we fear the Environmental Groups is they tend to be extreme. Example, the 1000 meter buffers and the desire to punish all for the bad deeds of a few. There demands point to an effort to eleminate our orv use on the beach.
Had the negotiations been conducted in the proper manner, such as our conversation, things might be different today. One extreme attitude attitude begot another in return. I think we may have been taught that method of negotiating by our beloved Government. Forget rational, Go for a billion when its only worth a million. Thats fine if you end up at a million. Unfortunately, the todays mediators sometimes just say give um the billion. Hope that makes sense. I still say , no matter what is established as a policy at this time, Audubon and Defenders of Wildlife will never stop persuing their agenda until they get everything they can. This will just be the end of round one. This is their Business. Therein lies a big difference.
As to the "war chest", Man, I hope you are right. But, I'm afraid it's more like David against Galiath.
Nough said. Hope you have a Great Christmas and hope we all get a little of what we want in the coming year.
Ron (obxguys)
Va. Beach & KDH
ncbba & obpa
Wow every time I see a response from SS! I think of a Dictator from Germany so long ago.
"The ORV lobby has been accumulating a war chest of money. They will go to court. "
Really And you seem to blame those ORV Crowd types for doing so.... I see you did not criticize the Enviros and they have done this several times!!!!
"1. The building of the CC dunes and permanent placement of highway 12 (this has disrupted coastal process resulting in less ocean beach."
I see you do not mention the cutting down of all the original trees on the island long before the CC. I guess you did not either know about that or chose to ignore it. If these trees were not cut down the entire seashore landscape would be different (more like Sanibel Island in Florida) and not so inviting (if 20 or less pairs is inviting) to the Threatened Plover
"2. The complete development of all the villages on Hatteras Island that border the ocean beach."
Well if I read it right these villages were to be set aside for development and the areas in between pristine wilderness. I see that it is exactly that. OOPs forgot that their used to be trees covering the island (read the history sections on the NPS website) and if we really want to restore the island to its pre-human state then I suggest tearing down the dunes and planting trees across the entire island.
"3. The uncontrolled number of ORVs that come and use the increasingly narrow Park beach as a highway, parking lot, and staging area for their considerable amount of recreational gear."
This is not entirely true, because I have driven my 4 door Chevy Silverado onto the beach with only a bottle of water and a kayak to surf the waves. I guess my form of access is extreme to some, but I pay taxes, ORV's are an other form of recreation mentioned in the designation of the park and technically I am a future generation described in the original park designation.
"The majority of ORV users try to be good stewards and enjoy wildlife resources on their own terms, even though most couldn’t tell you the difference between a tern and a gull or a plover or sanderling henceforth the lack of understanding of the critical nature of the resource issues at CAHA."
I can tell you that none of the above are endangered! I did not realize that this was one of the criteria to enjoy Cape Hatteras???? I will Brush up on my bird recognition so I can tell the difference in a book, because with these overly huge closures you cannot see them in real life.
"None of the other groups who oppose the ORV management recommendations has suggested or attempted to eliminate ORV use at CAHA."
Really prove it.
Hey Matt,
SS stands for Southern Shores NC, where I’m writing.
I’m not criticizing ORV proponents (or conservationist) for going to court.
Whatever degradation the timber industry did by logging back in the 1600’s is long done. I don’t know of anyone who suggests that that logging had anything to do with the current (since the 10930’s) beach erosion. I doubt growing trees on the barrier island would make any difference nor do I think Hatteras Island was ever all wooded, only sections where the island was wide enough for a maritime forest to be establish. You can think what you want.
Of course the village are going to be developed nothing the Park or you can do about that, just saying.
I don’t have a problem with kayaks, surfboards, kite boards with anyone recreating with any of those things. What I have a problem with is that the amount of people concentrating all that gear basically anywhere anytime they want. To you and your friends the beach is just a staging area, for me the beach itself is an integral part of the national park experience at CAHA. It appears many of your ilk see CAHA solely as a recreation area. It was clearly intended to be more than that.
“Except for certain portions of the area, deemed to be especially adaptable for recreational uses, particularly swimming, boating, sailing, fishing, and other recreational activities of similar nature, which shall be developed for such uses as needed, the said area shall be permanently reserved as a primitive wilderness and no development of the project or plan for the convenience of visitors shall be undertaken which would be incompatible with the preservation of the unique flora and fauna or the physiographic conditions now prevailing in this area . . .”
“I can tell you that none of the above are endangered!”
It doesn’t make any difference (see the enabling legislation) for instance Black Skimmers are unique to the seashore (raccoons are not).
“ "None of the other groups who oppose the ORV management recommendations has suggested or attempted to eliminate ORV use at CAHA."
Really prove it.”
Other than ORVers conspiracy theories none of the groups involved in the CAHA ORV fiasco have ever either in print or a public statement suggested the elimination of ORV use in CAHA if you have information otherwise I’d love to see it.
Oh yea, I pay taxes too.
"Whatever degradation the timber industry did by logging back in the 1600’s is long done. I don’t know of anyone who suggests that that logging had anything to do with the current (since the 10930’s) beach erosion."
From what I have understood from watching the hurricanes batter the barrier island the areas with trees do not breech as easily. So therefore trees would prevent some of that. I only mention this because of the constant mentioning of leaving areas pristine like they were before humans. Unless this only means before humans were on the beaches which dates back to the 1600's and some even earlier (The Algonquins are believed to have been on the Outer Banks since around 500 A.D.)
"Unfortunately, the combination of logging and allowing livestock to run freely all over the island destroyed much of the island’s natural vegetation, leaving great bare spots of sand. The sand blew freely in the constant winds and, at Kinnakeet, began to form great migrating sand dunes that could be quite destructive to property and any remaining plants."
Quotes above taken from http://www.hatterasguide.com/history/
"To you and your friends the beach is just a staging area, for me the beach itself is an integral part of the national park experience at CAHA. It appears many of your ilk see CAHA solely as a recreation area. It was clearly intended to be more than that."
I disagree because I utilize this area to get away from the day to day lifestyle I lead and enjoy the availability of the seashore to provide this relaxation on a level that a Virginia or Myrtle beach cannot.
"Primarily a seashore is a recreation area. Therefore in its selection, the boundaries should be placed in such a manner that the maximum variety of recreation is provided. Thus while provision for bathing may be the first consideration of these areas, it must be kept in mind that a far greater number of people will be more interested in using a seashore area for other recreational purposes. It is desirable therefore to provide ample shoreline for all types of beach recreation. The Cape Hatteras National Seashore provides such an area in that there is extensive shoreline for all forms of recreation both for immediate use and for future development."
Next paragraph "Secondarily, the area should include adjacent lands which by reason of historical, geological, forestry, wildlife, or other interests, have sufficient justification to be preserved by the Federal Government."
Next paragraph "Thirdly, it is important to include in the area, lands necessary for proper administration and lands which serve principally as a protection for the recreational and other developments which are the primary purpose of the area. "
Above taken from http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/unrau-williss/adhi4l.htm
"ther than ORVers conspiracy theories none of the groups involved in the CAHA ORV fiasco have ever either in print or a public statement suggested the elimination of ORV use in CAHA if you have information otherwise I’d love to see it."
1000 meters in all directions on a barrier island eliminates anyone from attending (size taken from the DEIS).... More than any other location that plovers live.
June 29, 1940, Congress amends the enabling legislation and the words
“Recreational Area” are added to further emphasize the recreational
nature of the seashore as a destination for beach goers and fishermen.
• On May 10, 1954, the National Park Service gave administrative permission
for the staff to use the shorter name “Cape Hatteras National Seashore” in
all but the most formal memoranda and legal documents in place of the
more cumbersome “Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area.”
This administrative short cut created a nickname, but never changed the
official name.
This National Seashore was always intended to be a Recreational Area. That is why Congress passed the above legislation. By not including Recreational Area in all legal documents the NPS is breaking the law. In the above article by NPS why do they not mention this is a RECREATIONAL AREA? It is NOT A REFUGE which is what they are treating it like. GIVE US OUR BEACH BACK.
It has always interested me in this controversy that the ORV advocates point to the environmentalists as the unreasonable side who started this mess. Who filed the first lawsuit in this controversy? It was the ORV groups who filed the lawsuit challenging the designation of critical habitat for the plover on the Seashore. They threw the first punch and the environmental organizations responded with their lawsuit and simply ko"ed the ORV groups. All this talk of lost opportunity for cooperation is amusing in that context. If you start a fight you can't blame your opponent for winning.
Another undereducated ANON.... Look into your Cape Hatteras history a little more and please keep things in context better.
Your first mistake is that this is not an ORV issue, but an access issue. If you doubt me please go ahead and attempt to walk on the beaches in Cape Hatteras where orv's are not allowed. Then you will no longer be an undereducated ANON, but a ticketed pedestrian or even jailed.
This is your free lesson.
Add to logging and livestock, the USFWS. They created impondments, wetlands, and burn vegetation annually. If it weren't for their efforts I bet Pea Island would look more like the heavily vegetated area between Avon and Rhodanthe/Salvo/Waves. Note, there is never overwash in this area.