You are here

Congressman Making Run To Jettison Off-Road Vehicle Rules At Cape Hatteras National Seashore

Share

A congressman from North Carolina is making a bid to have the off-road vehicle regulations at Cape Hatteras National Seashore tossed out. NPT file photo.

It may be “back to the drawing board” for off-road vehicle rules at Cape Hatteras National Seashore.

Back in February North Carolina Congressman Walter B. Jones, Jr. introduced a bill to void the latest “final rules” regarding pedestrian and ORV use on the seashore. After extensive recent public comments and years of legal wrangling, those final National Park Service rules were announced on January 23 and took effect February 15.

Proponents of Rep. Jones' legislation have named H.R. 4094 the “Preserving Access to Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area Act.” If passed, the legislation would roll back management of ORVs and pedestrians to the regulations that were in place under the Interim Protected Species Management Act issued by the National Park Service in 2007.

The bill also would permit future restrictions under the Endangered Species Act, “based on peer-reviewed science and after public comment.” But it would also constrain managers’ choices, requiring that future closures under the Endangered Species Act may “only restrict, by limitation, closure, buffer, or otherwise, pedestrian and motorized vehicular access ... for the shortest possible time and on the smallest possible portions” of the Seashore.

The Act would also require that Cape Hatteras’ restrictions be “no greater than” those in place “for that species at any other National Seashore,” and that pedestrian and vehicular corridors be designated “of minimal distance on the beach or interdunal area around closures implemented” ... “to allow access to areas not closed.”

Passage of the proposed bill would specifically eliminate and make non applicable the recent “final rule” Off-Road Vehicle Management (77 Fed. Reg. 3123-3144), and the consent decree of April 30, 2008.

In March the bill was referred to the House's Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law.

On Wednesday a petition campaign was launched by the North Carolina Conservation Network in association with the Southern Environmental Law Center. The group’s petition urges North Carolinians to contact their federal legislators to oppose the bill.

The groups’ e-mail stated that, “The good news is, after an extensive review process the NPS has released a plan to limit off-road vehicle (ORV) use at Cape Hatteras. The bad news is U.S. Representative Walter Jones introduced a bill, that would circumvent the NPS’ off-road vehicle management plan and allow for ORV use across the entire park putting nesting sites for sea turtles and rare shorebirds in danger.”

Similar legislative efforts to overturn park management plans have resulted in the past after public comment periods. In 2008, U.S. Sens. Richard Burr and Elizabeth Dole, both of North Carolina, offered similar legislation to overturn ORV regulations contained within a consent decree that settled a lawsuit over the seashore's lack of ORV regulations. In defending her legislation, Sen. Dole testified before the committee that her constituents were suffering undue economic hardships as a result of the consent decree.

Under that consent decree, the seashore's staff greatly restricted off-road vehicle travel and limited pedestrian travel to protect nesting shorebirds and sea turtles. Opponents of the decree, though, claimed it was over-reaching what reasonably was needed and that the economy that depends on Cape Hatteras was tanking.

Another attempt, also unsuccessful, was made in 2009 to reject the temporary ORV regulations contained in the consent decree.

In its February 2012 final rules announcement, the National Park Service said the rules designate, “ORV routes and authorizes ORV use within the Seashore in a manner that will protect natural and cultural resources, provide a variety of safe visitor experiences, and minimize conflict among users.” The announcement stated that “in general,” ORV use was prohibited off road unless specifically permitted and that an ORV permit would be required.

Comments

On another note the NPS has been questioned dozens of times on why it does not keep the closure areas up to date for visitors to insure they can provide the activities sought out by vacationers. They currently do not update the list of areas closed and imagine spending thousands of dollars on a rental and 50.00 on a permit only to find beaches listed as open (see sign above) severely restricted to you standing in the water the whole time. You are also shocked because you were told therfe were miles of beaches open to ORV only to find most is now closed or packed due to further restrictions.
Just because you booked a room on an island do not expect to see the sea...


You might  as well rename CHNS to Dare County ORV Recreation Park if the Interim plan is put into place.The local  ORV groups had pulled all the right strings and believed the Interim Plan would be the  foundation  for the final plan. That Interim Plan was developed by Superintendent Murray when he was the darling of the local ORV access groups. Back then at public meetings the same ORV access advocates publicly expressed their deep gratitude, praising Superintendent Murray for his good work. It was all nod nod wink wink between the superintendent and the local ORV access advocates then (it is a different story now).The Interim  Plan gave little concessions to conservation groups.  As a result of this the plan did not address documented recreational conflicts between ORV access and non ORV access, did not adequately address safety concerns for pedestrians on ORV beaches and did not implement the USGS recommendations for protecting  nesting birds and turtles in CHNS. It is believed  by many ( but not tested)  that the plan will not satisfy a number of congressional acts. The  Interim Plan  is overwhelmingly biased for ORV access.As much as I am upset by the final plan (little consideration for NPS esthetics, poorly designed vehicle free areas and restricted access)  going back to  the Interim Plan would be a  huge  step backwards.  All the crocodile tears about the pedestrian access  is kind of funny because the Jones's bill would change all of those areas back into ORV areas. There would be next to no vehicle free areas if the Interim Plan was put into affect. 


SS1, agreed on reverting back to the interim would not be the best way to go. Also agreed that the NPS did not think this new plan through. They also are (in my opinion) about to be exposed on the inability to back the science they used to get here in the first place. As neither of us are politically connected (I assume)I guess we will have to wait and see how this all plays out. Until then I will spend my spare time like i did today climbing trails with my kids At places like Crabtree falls and humpback rock overlook instead of fishing and sandcastles in hatteras.


Been to Crabtree Falls, beautiful place. I  can't  remember the name of the campground near there but remember my young daughter playing in the mountain stream near our campsite. Maybe we are not   so far apart  as I thought.


Trip to Crabtree went extremely well. Took the back off road to the upper parking area and hiked to the falls and then proceeded down to see the falls from the lower viewing areas. There were several camping areas along the route in along the streams we will try in the future.


It’s the "Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area” America! It was never deemed to provide an area as large as an air craft carrier for one nesting bird called the National Bird Nesting Area People!

FACT: Visitors do not come to places that deny access. Without access one cannot recreate!

Go to

http://www.preservebeachaccess.org/newsreleases/special_history_name.pdf which shows ….

The Dare County campaign to preserve access to America’s beaches refers to the first national seashore as the “Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area.”. The full name of the “Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area” is historically accurate and serves to remind us today of the unique recreational heritage of the first national seashore. The founding pioneers called it by this name at the official dedication ceremony.

Preserving this name will help future generations understand the history, tradition and recreational purpose of the “Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area.”. A study of history reveals the importance of including the words “Recreational Area” today.

-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 beachgoers 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.

-At the official dedication ceremony on April 24, 1958, representatives of

both the Department of Interior and the National Park Service repeatedly

referred to it as the “Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area.”

-Although the full name with the words “Recreational Area” subsequently fell from use by the Department of Interior and the National Park Service,

it was never officially changed by Congress.

CHRONOLOGY OF THE NAME –

-June 23, 1936 Passage of the Park, Parkway and Recreational Area Study Act

-August 17, 1937 Act of Congress establishes the Cape Hatteras National Seashore to provide recreational access to the general public

-June 29, 1940 Congress amends the authorizing legislation to permit hunting. At the same time the term “Recreational Area” was added to the park’s name o address NPS sensitivity to the issue of hunting and to further

emphasize the “recreational” nature of the seashore as a destination for beachgoers and fishermen.

-May 10, 1954 NPS determines administratively that the name “Cape Hatteras National Seashore” may be substituted in all but the most formal

memoranda and legal documents for the cumbersome “Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area”

April 24, 1958 Remarks made at the official dedication ceremony:

* Asst. Secretary of the Interior, Robert Ernst…”It is a privilege to represent the Department of the Interior at this dedication of the country’s first national seashore recreational area.

* Conrad Wirth, Director of the National Park Service made 3 references

1. “The Service recommended that the Cape Hatteras National Seashore be preserved as a National Park Recreational Area.”

2. ....”Secretary of the Interior formally established the Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreation Area.”

2. “We take great pride in being intrusted with the administration of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreation Area


ksw40bx, 
There's another date and point not to overlook, from the seashore's enabling legislation:

August 17, 1937 -- 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 . . .

After more than 70 years, the seashore still hasn't gotten around to designating wilderness. 


Regardless of whether or not you want to define the place as a "National Seashore" or "Recreation Area", it's still under NPS control. As someone who has visited quite a few of both, there may not actually be a difference in management given the inherent qualities of the area.

At Golden Gate NRA, there are specific issues that NPS is dealing with because of the Endangered Species Act, as well as other laws. Regardless of what you want to call it, they're not going to be able to override the ESA. Of course I have heard that some CAHA ORV enthusiasts have been trying to get a modification of the ESA.


Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.