Recent comments

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 36 weeks ago

    That fox didn't have any kits in the fall/winter. Fox reproduce in the spring. Why the embellishment?

    The plover is a native on the entire eastern seaboard and the gulf coast. Cape Lookout is the extreme southern end of its breeding range, not Cape Hatteras. How many plover does Lookout have? North Carolina appears to be the only state in the U.S. with plovers present year-round. Any field guide would show you that.

    From reading the injunction request, your favorite exotic and non-native predators are a threat to more than the plover. Funny, it seems to me that if the locals and ORVers would have cooperated in removing the invasive predators, this injunction probably wouldn't be happening, and I wouldn't be wondering about my vacation plans. I was driving through Avon last summer and there were cats running around all over the place. I couldn't believe it. Might as well store nucular waste in the backyard, it's no less detrimental to the environment than a cat running loose outside.

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 36 weeks ago

    I never saw anyone other than some of the park rangers giving out trash bags. I filled up about 5 they gave me, and they took it off of the beach after I did. And the insurance company for the freighter brought in a big crew of folks who cleaned the entire beach ... I saw them in the Cape Point bird area with a park ranger watching over them.

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 36 weeks ago

    One other comment. Relook at the pic of Oregon Inlet on Memorial Day clearly a beautiful holdiday weekend and a "worse case" scenerio for ORV congestion.

    Now look to the left of the pic. Nothing but sand. Everything to the inside of the symbolic fencing (stakes with twine ) is off limit of ORVS. Out of sight is a large pond that opens to the Pamlico Sound with a good foraging area. Except for this a narrow strip, the Oregon Inlet spit is reserved for the wildlife.

    And it should be easy to image a Nor'easter or a hard Sou'wester (calling for 30-40 mph SW tonight) pushing water up & flooding entire of spit at high tide and rubbing out the ORV tracks.

    What is most disappointing about this lawsuit is Superentendent Murray did a wonderful job of balancing the needs for the nesting birds and turtles while allowing access when practical. The ORV groups bought into the process and I heard very little serious complaints.

    The plovers did well in spite of the storms and the predation.

    Could it be that DOW, Audubon and SELC are afraid that another successful season will show that active and aggressive (and transparent) managment by the NPS under Murray's leadership can balance wildlife protection and ORV access?

    But then, this is really not about the birds.

  • House Parks Committee To Hold Hearing On ORVs on Federal Lands   6 years 36 weeks ago

    Personally, I feel ORVs are a bigger danger to the parks than guns. They damage the flora, muck up the trails, and increase erosion. They're noisy and they disruit & scare off the wildlife.

    A gun-toter can still responsibly enjoy the parks and not threaten anyone or anything. There is practically no responsible use of ORVs in the NPS, outside of campsites & roadways.

    ========================

    My travels through the National Park System: americaincontext.com

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 36 weeks ago

    OK Snowbird, with all of this, you still don't get it.
    1) The sportsmen that use the ORV's are the best protection the resource has. They bring more resources and footprints to bear when needed than any other group is willing or able to do. Why do you refuse to akcnowledge that or your lack of knowledge about the situation? Wetlands in Cali are far from the eco-system of the OBX.
    2) If the average fisherman on the OBX sees someone "raping" the resource, it will be a very bad day for the perpetrator, guranteed. The fishermen I refer to are not the holiday tourist that come once a year, I am talking about a group of very motivated individuals who have spent a ton of time and money to master one of the most specialized forms of fishing ever known. All the time and effort required to master this sport requires the participant to revere the resource fully.
    3) You only pick the bits and pieces of the situation and comments that are inflamatory. The vehicles are no detriment to the environment on Hatteras when compared to the crap in the rain (some of which came from good ole Cali) and the fertilizers and waste in the water dumped from all areas east of the crest of the Blue Ridge.
    4) Bottom line is, it is NOT your back yard. I do not pretend to be well informed about the plight of the Blacktail deer and how they are dealing with the huge encroachment of humans in California but I am willing to bet I know more about deer overpopulation and vehicular incidents involving deer there than you know about the beaches of Hatteras.

    I and no one else who has posted here wants to see any damage caused to this awesome resource but we appreciate it because we are allowed to use it. We recently began paying for a special fishing license to fish coastal areas. There were complaints but about 5% were about the license, the other 95% were about the fact that the majority of this money will be tapped into for other projects and not used for conservation efforts and habitat improvements as it is earmarked.
    The economic impact will stretch hundreds of miles from Hatteras if the resource is closed. Tackle shops from far away will have no customer for a surf rod or a rod spike.
    There are two positives from this issue though:
    1) The issue is motivating the real protectors of the resource, the outdoors enthusiast who use it.
    2) I have been surf fishing seriously for 15 years and I have never joined the North Carolina Beach Buggy Association or the Outer Banks Protection Association but the radical movements of "Conservation" groups have caused me to write the check!

    Somebody please post contact info for these two groups for the benefit of myself and other enthusiasts who have been slack. I just hope it's not too late.

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 36 weeks ago

    Snowbird, you continue to amaze me. So here's some more facts for you to ignore.
    73 miles of ocean beach on Hatteras Island, less than half of that is open to ORV access in the Winter and roughly 25% or less during the breeding season depending on the size and scope of the closures. The remaining portions of beach are closed for nesting, safety and seasonal closures. The seasonal closures exist to provide pedestrian access in an ORV free zone and for years now, the majority of them have remained closed year round in spite of the lack of pedestrian traffic.

    The picture used in the article is of the beach on the north side of Oregon Inlet on Memorial Day weekend and doesn't come close to an average weekend usage. Average usage during the summer puts less than 50 vehicles in that same mile and change of beach. Assuming the beach isn't covered with water. By the way, that will happen today, tonight and tomorrow because of the winds.

    On the other side of the inlet is Pea Island. No ORV access at any time. And yet no Plovers and breeding success for the other birds is no greater than in areas where ORV traffic is allowed in the proximity of breeding closures.

    The majority of Hatteras Island and almost 90% of Ocracoke are part of the CHNSRA and absolutly no development will ever occur there. So nothing like the nightmare you describe in your back yard will happen here. Again, I suggest you go to Google Earth and have a peek.

    You mentioned an EIS...that can mean one of two things. If youre referring to an envirnmental impact study, the EIS reguarding ORV useage showed No Significant Impact. The same is true about the EIS reguarding the replacement of the Bonner Bridge.

    If youre referring to an Economic Impact study...the data that the Voglesoong study contains; that which DOW, Audubun, and SELC like to tout shows minimal economic impact by closing the beaches. Not hard to do when you dont bother to survey beach users and buisness owners and restrict your survey to a smattering of visitors to the lighthouse and some windsurfers at canadian hole neither of whom need four wheel drive or beach access.

    Compaction studies have been attempted on our beaches in an effort to determine if ORV usage harmed the beaches. The problem was/is that every time it rains all compaction data is erradicated. You cant find impact where none exists. In fact, with todays winds and tonights rains, when I head out to the Point in the morning at dawn, there will be no tire tracks or ruts. Just a pristine beach. We enjoy perhaps the most dynamic beach system on the planet. Our beach changes shape daily. Not because of ORV traffic, just plain 'ol nature.

    Again, this is not a zoo. The birds are not required to nest within the bounds of the park. The N.C. bird survey which was just released shows increased success in breeding. Especially within sight of the Park.

    ORV use within the park has been on the decline since the mid '90's, bird closures have been erected earlier and they are larger than ever. But that has had no real impact on breeding success.
    2007 was one of the most successful breeding seasons for Plovers in years. But it wasn't the larger, earlier closures that did it...it was the lack of storms during breeding season. You may scoff at that but bear in mind that the vast majority of these islands rest less than 8 feet above mean sea level. Even a reasonable storm can flood this place closing the highways and cutting off our access to higher ground. In fact, that happened just last saturday. And might happen again today. And when the highway is flooded, all of the beaches are too; meaning any Tern, Plover, Skimmer etc. looses their nest and chicks. And what the water doesn't get, the ghost crabs do. Please explain to me how my truck on the beach has any effect on the power of mother nature.

    This place is unlike anything you've probobly ever seen in your life. And we do a fantastic job of maintaining it. If I were a millionare I'd offer to fly you out here so you could see it for yourself. Id take the time to show you how things work out here, thirty miles out to sea. You would be in awe. But you would leave with an understaning you dont have now. And in all likelyhood, youd want to stay forever.

    my $.02

    Wheat

  • Segways in the National Parks: Do We Really Need Them?   6 years 36 weeks ago

    I think all this hatred towards the Segway is true ignorance. Finally an invention has come along that not only makes life easier, cheaper, and safer, but it asks nothing of us, and here you are rejecting it. The Segway is like that "nice guy who finishes last".

    Let me make some points of ignorance:

    1. "It's for Lazy People." FALSE: Standing, leaning back and forth, and keeping balance for 15 minutes+ threw changes in terrain requires a lot more energy then sitting in a car. Maybe not as much as walking, but would you really walk 2 miles for a gallon of milk, or are you going to drive? That's right you lazy polluting jerks. You're gonna jump in your car.

    2. "It's for Rich people" FALSE: Since when is a $5000 scooter (that requires no further costs, no fuel, registration, insurance, license, or mechanical maintenance) for "rich" people, yet a $12,000 motorcycles are for the average blue collar American?

    In conclusion, it is in my personal experience that owning and driving a car is many times more stressful, more dangerous, more extravagant, unnecessary, and more expensive for the average American , and we don't even realize it. It's like a dimension we can't see. I ride a Segway (3 years now) and rent cars when I need one. I spend less money then EVERYONE I know on transportation and I'm always driving something nice.

    DISCLAIMER: I work and live with in 4 miles of each other. However, I refused to get work outside of a 5 mile radius from where I live.

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 36 weeks ago

    Thanks to all the folks that have posted and shown you care on both sides of the issue!

    Yes even you BW!

    Big Red

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 36 weeks ago

    The Bodie Island Spit is not capable of holding 1000 vehicles as stated at one time. There is not enough land mass to handle that number unless they are stacked upon each other.

    Someone is using numbers for their own design.

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 36 weeks ago

    I go to the Outer Banks at least 4 times a year. Every year it is the same sight, 100’s of ORV driving recklessly over duns, through nesting grounds which are not marked at all, killing all wildlife in their way…. I even saw one ORV chasing down helpless chicks and killing them just for the fun. Oh wait my mistake what I meant to say is that 80% of the beach is wide open and free from ORV, not because they are limited but because everyone goes to the same few spots (hence the crowded picture, Its only like that a very small percent of the time. Everyone pretty much drives in the same ruts as the vehicle in front of him, at a ridiculously slow speed. Everyone respects the clearly marked nesting signs where ever they may be. Each ORV is a licensed and inspected vehicle, not ATV’s Motorcycles, etc jumping duns like other beaches. Most if not everyone is very respectful. In fact my family started going to the OBX instead of Myrtle Beach because it is definitely less crowded and 99% cleaner beaches. In fact when a huge cargo shipped spilled 1000’s of ceiling fans and tons of Styrofoam into the ocean only to be washed up on the beach, my family and I traveled 748.5 miles to Avon to help clean it up. I guarantee you there were far more ORV drivers, locals, and fishermen out there then the 2 Environmentalist I met. That’s right only 2 (I’m sure there were more, but I met plenty of people that day). Now about this bird problem, it is not the ORV that are killing the birds, it is the birds who choose to nest on a strip of beach that has water only a few hundred yards from it on either side. Every major storm will wipe out the population of all chicks who cannot escape to higher ground. Foxes and Raccoons can’t be trained not to eat eggs or chicks of certain birds. Every time I see a nesting area that is roped off, or a game warded/ranger who lead ORV’s past the nesting area, people are very cooperative and the last thing they have on their minds are hurting the birds. They are just there having a good time with their friends and family enjoying God’s creation. Now I know you do not believe me. (The rest of this sentence was edited to remove an unnecessary attack.) But the solution would be to focus your energy and resources toward saving the birds. Maybe building some sort of shelter, maybe a relocation program (from the storms, not the ORV’s they do that on their own) or setting up some more stable fencing to keep out the Raccoons and foxes. Anyway, it just seems foolish to punish the folks who are probably doing more for the environment, such as traveling 100’s of miles spending 1000’s of dollars in a local community that puts so much of their hard earned revenue back into protecting the environment, then to come up with an actual solution. In fact the enviro’s are going to really screw over these birds, much more than any ORV did. Thank about it, the people who care most about the OBX and keeping it natural are the ones who live there. That is why you do not see large hotels, or why it is not overly commercialized like Myrtle Beach, Daytona Beach, etc. However without the ORV it is going to be so hard to get to the beach, people are going to stop coming. The money that is used to protect wild life will fade away, and the whole local economy will suffer a huge loss. Sure they may be some tourist who take the lighthouse tour and who drive up and down hwy 12 to look at the birds, but people are not going to drive hours past other beaches, to walk farther and fish less. Pretty soon the state will not have the money/interest in protecting the OBX from eroding away and then the little communities known as Buxton, Avon, Hatteras, Ocracoake will be nothing more than a sand bar that is washing more and more into the sea, then where will your birds go? Do you think they would wish they had their miles of roped off protected area? I bet they would.

  • Snowmobilers Continue to Roam Illegally Into Yellowstone National Park   6 years 36 weeks ago

    Feel better?

    I've addressed this quite a few times over the years, but let me try to lay it out for you again.

    There are more than 450 million acres of public lands overseen by the Forest Service and BLM, and most of that is open to multiple use, ie. mountain biking, snowmobiling, hiking, Jet skiing, etc.

    There is just about 84 million acres of national park acreage, and some of that already is open to gas-oriented recreation. There is no need to open all of it.

    The Park Service has a decidedly different mission than the Forest Service and BLM; it's focused more on conservation of the resources, while the other two agencies are focused on multiple use of the resources on their landscapes. In a nutshell, there already exist more than enough opportunities for snowmobiling without a need to break the law.

    To say that snowmobilers should not illegally roam into Yellowstone is not telling them they can't enjoy their sport. As the above figures clearly indicate, there is plenty of space for them to get their kicks without breaking the law and illegally entering the park. Heck, they could legally enter the park if they wanted to observe the rules. That said, for most snowmobilers who head to West Yellowstone, a trip into the park is merely a side trip to their forays into the national forests surrounding the park.

    Mentioning your dislike of NASCAR isn't even germane to this matter, as there's nothing illegal about racing in circles on a track.

    As for whether snowmobiling is beneath me, I've ridden sleds before and think they're great tools for negotiating deep snow where necessary. I don't own one, but I certainly don't wish them wiped from the landscape. I just happen to believe that the land-management agencies have different roles and the general public should respect them.

  • Snowmobilers Continue to Roam Illegally Into Yellowstone National Park   6 years 36 weeks ago

    So to summarize, no one (including the animals) uses this part of the park during the winter and you think there should be more enforcement. Perhaps just charging the snowmobilers what it costs to come out there and rescue them would be a reasonable solution. Why do you care so much about what someone else enjoys doing? The snow melts and there is a hardly a trace of the snowmobilers left there anyway. I agree they should not break the law, but in your articles you make it sound like they should not be allowed to enjoy their sport anywhere and are a nuisance to you. People enjoy different things and enjoy the outdoors differently than you. Besides, people do not normally hike there in the winter anyway. Leaving our human footprint is inevitable, so why don't you enjoy what you do and they will enjoy what they do. Those who break laws should be fined when they are caught and the rest of us can all go about enjoying the earth in our own unique ways. My point is, why is what you enjoy superior/more important than what they enjoy or do you have more right to say your wants are more important than what they want or enjoy? What gives you the right to say they should not be able to enjoy their sport? What makes your beliefs about nature and the environment more important or righteous than someone else's? I like to enjoy these parks in the summertime as well, but I am not about to tell someone else that the way they enjoy their freetime isn't a valid way to enjoy it. Nascar annoys me to no end, but I am not petitioning to have it banned and I don't dislike it because I believe it is beneath me which seems to be the tone you display in your articles. I understand you may not respond on your forum (as it is your forum) but I thought it might be good food for thought for you.

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 36 weeks ago

    Snowbird,

    This need for a plan has been made very clear to all concerned over the last 4 years. What has everybody inflamed right now is a format for developing a plan is in place and the process is underway. Regulated Negotiation was agreed upon as the format that would be used to arrive at an acceptable plan. All interested parties were given an opportunity to be selected to sit at the table and help formulate a management strategy. Rules for conduct, and an interim strategy for managing the park was put into place by the NPS. This plan includes provisions that where accepted by all parties, enclosures and protections for migratory and endangered species and ORV corridors around the enclosures.

    One of the rules of the Regulated Negotiation is that no party involved, shall file suit during the process and all parties will negotiate in good faith to reach a general consensus. Buy filing suit in Federal court, the DOW and associated parties have violated this rule and now put the whole "agreed upon" process in peril.

    I'm sure that you are aware that the D.O.W., Audubon Society, Blue water Coalition and others are extremely well funded and therefore can afford a long drawn out and expensive pursuit of their goal. If you don't trust what I'm telling you, do the research. I assure you we have. The goal of these groups is to "completely" remove all human interference with what they perceive as a bird in immediate danger of disappearing forever. They pursue this goal blindly without taking into consideration facts that don't fit their agenda. In order to achieve their goal, in their opinion, some things will need to be sacrificed, namely, access to the beaches of Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area. In plain language that means, no ORVs, no dogs, and no people will be allowed on the shores, ocean or sound side.

    Sounds extreme doesn't it, especially when you consider that there are eight villages and towns established within the park.

    We, on the side of free and open access for all Americans, have gone out of our way to compromise with the D.O.W. To accommodate them and their declared need for protection of species determined to be threatened or endangered. However it has become increasingly clear over the years that this debate is not about birds but about access. History has proven that the more we give the more they take and that they will not stop until they have achieved their goal of turning this park into a wildlife preserve closed to all but a few biologists.

    The current tactic for this is the lack of a plan for management of the park ordered by President Nixon and not implemented by the NPS. In other words...a loophole.

    The environment here has remained stable, plants, animals, people and ORVs have co-existed here since this area was first colonized. There have been changes to be sure, Hurricanes, the establishment of Villages and mild growths in population have occurred. But to this day Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area remains one of the most pristine and beautiful beaches in the world.

    We are a David in a struggle with Goliath. If my dire predictions in a previous post don't come to fruition, what then and to whose benefit will this battle be for. If the Environmentalist groups have their way, the island will become a ghost town, the Bonner Bridge will collapse and the island will revert to just another sandbar in the middle of the ocean.

    So ask yourself....Should all enjoyment of one of God's greatest gifts to man be restricted to a few scientist and biologist. Should the residents of Hatteras Island whose families date back to the very establishment of life on the island be told that they have to leave and that they no longer have an ancestral home? Should we, as law abiding, hard working Americans accept that we have no right to enjoy the beauty and wonder of this magical place?

    I hope you will join us in our struggle.

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 36 weeks ago

    "Incidentally, my nephew graduated from Duke (with his MBA) some years ago"

    Well, there you go. That's the whole problem here.

    Just kidding...GO HEELS!!

    As far as the concerns about overdevlopment along the coast, you have to remember that the land betweent eh villages on Hatteras Island CANNOT be developed. It will never be developed. So you have the small villages and then you have miles and miles of totally undeveloped seashore between them. Overdevelopment is definitely becoming an issue on the NC beaches that are not part of the National Seashore Recreation Area, but not here.

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 36 weeks ago

    Snowbird06
    Big EL:
    I appreciate the economic in put regarding the Cape and this does shed some light on the complexities of the problem-the local Cape Hatteras economy (as well as it's surrounding wildlife). You do point out some potential political chicanery that might occur to obtain the Cape for future development...defintely a nightmare scenario...and God forbid! This is exactly what I was referring to when I mentioned Redwood Shores development in California. A land filled development that ruined some of the most beautiful inland bay marshes one can enjoy. Now it's a gated community for the well to do. I'm pretty sure the economic base of Cape Hatteras will stay, in which the local community depends on it for it's recreational needs. What I'm basically concerned about is, why hasn't there been a masterplan established along with the EIS. From what I gather here, there is non...just a vague usage plan. It's beyond me why you don't have one. With all those that have reflected there love and devotion for the Cape (on this blog) I would certainly demand vehemently for one and pursue it with earnest. A good comprehensive and holistic long range study the benefits the economy, the visitors and above all, a healthy viable habitat for it's wildlife. Again, thanks Big EL for shedding some light on the economic issues pertaining to Cape Hatteras. Incidentally, my nephew graduated from Duke (with his MBA) some years ago and raved how beautiful Cape Hatteras was at a sunset.
    P.S. Jeff, yes I trail bike but I stay on the well established FIRE TRAILS! Have a good weekend fishing.
    P.S.S. To all of you: Good luck with the bait and happy fishing!

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 36 weeks ago

    I admire the passion and concern -- on both sides of the issue -- that's been exhibited in this forum and, to a large extent, been wielded constructively, informatively, and without malice. What's transpiring at Cape Hatteras in many ways is a microcosm of what's transpiring at many parks, seashores, lakeshores and other units of the national park system.

    Sadly, not all of those issues have such a concerned citizenry.

    Hopefully, the end result at Cape Hatteras can be a model of sorts for how different groups can come together and reach an amiable consensus for how to move forward. Just as the plovers and other shorebirds shouldn't be wiped out, neither should the angling, tourism, or livelihoods that depend on Cape Hatteras.

    It seems that developing a sound management plan that provides for this to transpire has been neglected for too long. That it's taken litigation to move that task forward is unfortunate.

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 36 weeks ago

    Anonymous,

    It's time for a little lesson in reality!

    When you made the following statement I almost fell off of my stool.

    1. Foxes are not native to Hatteras Island. They migrated over the Oregon Inlet Bridge.

    Foxes ARE native to the total island chain located off of the coast of North Carolina simply because at one time in distant prehistory ( About 18,000 years ago at the start up of the last glacial melt which is ongoing today) these were not islands but were connected to the mainland with rivers and streams separating them. ( As the melt continues you will eventually see more islands on what is now the mainland areas of coastal North Carolina appear )

    These animals even predate the last ice age and ascended from the rise of the mammals as we all did with varying amounts of evolutionary change taking place over the millennium's.

    I am sure that Snowbird is aware of the Island Foxes that flourish and evolve on the islands off of the coast of California.

    I tend to find it very doubtful that those crossed over to those island by bridge as they have been there long enough that evolution has dictated that they are smaller and different genetic characteristics have evolved in the species. (Evolution doesnt work really fast as 10k years is but one heartbeat on the evolutionary scale of time) Also one large contributing factor is that to put it simply there are no bridges!

    I personally remember when I was about 10 coming to Hatteras Island for the first time and there was no bridge but there were Foxes present. They would be around the perimeter of our campsites waiting for the opportunity to scavenge our campsite for food when we were gone.

    Snowbird, about your suggestion. I will respectfully decline as I believe the NPS is much more capable of this as long as no undue influence is exercised by outside sources.

    Now for the fly in the ointment. There is a high probability that the Fox that is shown being exterminated in the photo would fall under the same NPS and ESA rules that govern the California Island foxes due to their evolutionary development as a separate sub species.

    Morning BW!

    Sincerely
    Big Red

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 36 weeks ago

    Wow, talk about timing, I have to admit that over development along the "left" coast is a problem. The development along the outer beaches of Hatteras Island has remained reasonable over the 25+ years I have visited, locals realize that they have a prize and keep it that way through strict building regulations and restrictions. Nothing like what happened to Ocean City ,MD. I have 2 words for CA. and there coastal development problem: Eminent Domain. Take the market value, subtract the cost of environmental damage caused, offer it to the property owners and say "I'll be back", (with bulldozers). Hasta la vista baby!!!

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 36 weeks ago

    Snowbird,

    How DARE you take an oil-dripping machine like a mountain bike into a pristine wilderness! How could you possible cause ruts and erosion like that!?! Could you not have walked instead of riding your environment-damaging machinery?

    If you have seen the beach after a hard storm (which you admit you haven't), you would know that the tire tracks are erased by the wind and water. Now go back to where you rode your bike and see if the trail is still there...

    You are a hypocrite.

    Jeff

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 36 weeks ago

    I agree, there is a food chain, then why does NPS shoot fox (see the pictures of the ranger taking a bead on a cute little fox with his shotgun), poison the fox, raccoons, cats, and other native wildlife in the Cape Point area in the guise of protecting the plover. I also agree that tire tracks have a tendency to ruin a pristine environment, so do the marks left by skiers on freshly fallen snow, I think we should stop all skiing so that I can enjoy the freshly fallen snow out west... from my NYC apartment window.

  • Yellowstone's Winter Use Plan: Comment Now   6 years 36 weeks ago

    if it is dangeros and hurts wildlife the answer is no snowmobiles,if it doesnt hurt animals or there breeding ground then yes ,also they must be tested for alchohol previous to entering.

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 37 weeks ago

    There are more animals killed in the Hatteras recreation area by natural predators or shotgun wielding park rangers than by fishermen using off road vehicles. It's ironic that Defenders of Wildlife rose to poplarity after their efforts to protect wolves. They didn't have much to say about the park ranger taking aim on this Hatteras wolf:

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 37 weeks ago

    I remember that! I picked up a bunch of those bags of Doritos and threw them in my truck and put them in the dumpster at the beach entrance. Thats a habit of all the fishermen I know, picking up trash found on the beach. I love going to the Outer Banks and using my truck to access the beach that is offered to me.

  • Researchers Say Meteorite Impact Created Upheaval Dome in Canyonlands National Park   6 years 37 weeks ago

    This is a cool find! I was just up there this past summer. Glad to see some research taking place in the park, and being published too!!

  • Battle Mounts Over Off-Road Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore   6 years 37 weeks ago

    Snowbird, I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and accept that you truly want free and open beaches for all with a balanced plan in place to allow for the native wildlife to flourish unfettered by human involvement.

    If the course that we are currently on, with a judge who has shown that he leans one way more than the other, is seen through without some common sense applied to the situation. Access to all seashore in the Cape Hatteras Seashore Recreational area will be denied, at a minimum for the next three years. This is the projected time frame for completing an accepted and agreed upon management plan for the park.

    In three years how much of the local economy do you think will have survived? Perhaps your thoughts are, the strong will survive or perhaps you think that it can't possibly suffer that much in just three years. This summer the tourist from all over North America will descend on the Outer banks only to discover to there dismay that they can't go to the beach driving or walking. This is what the Plaintiffs in the Lawsuit are after. They won't make return reservations for 2009. This fall the fishermen and wildlife enthusiast won't return. The local economies depend on these two events for their very survival. When the tourist industry on Cape Hatteras crashes it will open the door for whom. I can assure you it won't be tree huggers. It will be investors with an eye toward development. If you understand the politics and the economics of a state such as California perhaps you think that this would never be allowed. But this isn't California its North Carolina and this is not a rich state. Other than Charlotte and The triangle area the Outer banks provides a substantial part of the tax revenues for the state. Without this revenue the state will be desperate to replace these revenues. The investors with powerful political friends will have their way and the thing you claim to hate most will happen at Cape Hatteras. The unspoiled beauty of the Outer banks will be lost forever and it will become the next Myrtle Beach. Wonder what happened to the birds down there?

    I respect your passion and this is not an attack, but don't become blinded to the reality of life in the 21st century.