# ORV Access Banned at Cape Hatteras



## basstardo (Jun 5, 2006)

This ruling came down today. I don't know if it's wrong to link to other boards, but given the gravity of the information, it shouldn't be a problem.

http://www.reddrumtackle.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10996

You need to read this and you need to respond. This could be the beginning of the end folks.


----------



## Shooter (Nov 14, 2004)

OK folks, there are people with OBPA and NCBBA all over this and they will find out what all is going on so untill then NO THREATS OF DOING ANYTHING STUIPD or they will be choped.

We will keep everyone posted of what is happening and who to contact so till then keep praying and writing letters and phone calls to your goverment reps but please speak like you have sence.


----------



## NTKG (Aug 16, 2003)

bump


----------



## Dr. Bubba (Nov 9, 1999)

Interesting....

Same judge that stopped the Navy dead in their tracks over the the whole NC OLF gig. And that was made about the birds too....

This is somewhat bizarre, yet not too surprising to see them find a loophole in Nixon's executive record to close things down.

If folks didn't think this was a real fight before, I think they will now. Or, maybe you have no pulse.


----------



## Sea2aeS (Jan 7, 2005)

I wonder whos pockets hes in???? The irony reeks


----------



## basstardo (Jun 5, 2006)

Dr. Bubba said:


> If folks didn't think this was a real fight before, I think they will now. Or, maybe you have no pulse.


Let's hope so. If people don't get off their butts and start letting their voices be heard to any and all government entities, they have no right to fuss when this is all shut down. My letters will all be going out in the morning.


----------



## Katmaster Jr. (Apr 24, 2006)

Who do we send a letter to? This really sucks!


----------



## Surf Fish (Dec 16, 2005)

basstardo said:


> Let's hope so. If people don't get off their butts and start letting their voices be heard to any and all government entities, they have no right to fuss when this is all shut down. My letters will all be going out in the morning.


I'm confused as to A) whom to write to and B) what to say. 

If I understand correctly, the original issue was the Bird Watchers and the NPS vs. The Fishermen. 

Now a federal judge has said the NPS isn't doing their job, and put them on notice. 

Who do you write to when you want to complain about federal judges and the decisions they make ?


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

*Don't jump the gun on this follks..*

This morning we will know for sure if all efforts to stop this have failed,after that,try to go for the throat with letters,emails,and phone calls..

If it is indeed the same judge as DrBubba implied,we are in deeep trouble...

Good way for dow,bluewater to get what they want and have their hands left clean,huh??


----------



## cocoflea (Aug 1, 2002)

OK help me out I need to know who to write even though I'm way up here I was planning an Oct vacation down there and this ruling will spoil it


----------



## SteveZ (Nov 30, 2006)

Write to your US Representative and to your two US Senators. You can google 'em...


----------



## FishinAddiction (May 9, 2006)

Drumdum said:


> This morning we will know for sure if all efforts to stop this have failed,after that,try to go for the throat with letters,emails,and phone calls..
> 
> If it is indeed the same judge as DrBubba implied,we are in deeep trouble...
> 
> Good way for dow,bluewater to get what they want and have their hands left clean,huh??


Kenny,

Im pretty sure (about 99.9%) that this IS the same judge. This is bad news folks. A sad day for us all.


----------



## Webmaster (Jun 13, 2005)

*quoted*

"""" 10 mins of 5am now..I am out the door to see if they try the Criminal in the dark approach.. 

I guess it's easy for a Punk Judge that makes a 1/4 million dollars a year from the tax payers to make decisions that doesn't impact his wallet.. 

I am trying to make sure my bail money is in place... 
you guys know how I feel.. 

I know I am going to Die...So, Fun is at the top of my Ch!t to do list.. 

Good Fun or evil Fun...It's all the same to me.. 

I don't call this the Militia for Nuthin.. 

Pray,cross fingers,burn a candle,whatever...do what you do for our access 

I hope when I go that I get Mr Boyle as a my Judge..I bet you I can get an extra 6 months added to my time by saying just 3 words """"

-------------

Blatant acts of anarchy will not regain our access to the beaches, it will
only reinforce the beauracracies resolve. As the closures were instigated
within the law, therefore the re-gaining of access to the beaches must also
be effected within the law.

Roy Allen


----------



## FishinAddiction (May 9, 2006)

For those of you who dont know, the above post was taken from FishMilitia.com. Rob Alderman, the owner of the board and host of the show "Outer Banks Angler," made the original post. I will make it clear that while I do admire his enthusiasm, I do not endorse his methods.


----------



## seaBreeze (Oct 4, 2006)

...Can't this ruling be challenged in a Superior Court? ...i am by no means a legal beagle but it looks like one man is holding our beaches hostage!

..maybe we could get Homeland Security to check this guy out, sounds like a terrorist plot to me 

..Again it never fails to amaze me that laws that were intended to benefit all have been grossly abused to kaw-tow to the whims of the tree huggers..i do not care one bit about the evnvironmentalist movement which are insanely taking away our rights and freedoms...I DO care about our natural resources and again we all have to suffer because there are Godless idiots who care only about destroying what has made our state and country great...Get the offenders instead of blanket policy that hurts everyone...i do not care one bit about Al Gore's greenhouse agenda but i do agree with one observation he has made...that our judges are after the truth only if it fits the convienenc e of thier agenda...

>>Thnak you for listening to my rants and raves..with that being said i have already contacted the local news source up here in the Triad and i am writing our elected officials letting them know how i feel about this..


----------



## Shooter (Nov 14, 2004)

OK folks a bit of good news, just off the phone with someone in Buxton and as of this moment the beachs are still open so keep praying, keep writing them letters and if you can send OBPA any donation for they have been leading the fight for all of us to keep our beachs open and free.
www.obpa.org/


----------



## for access (Jul 18, 2005)

*court order & contact links*

http://capehatterasanglersclub.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=96&Itemid=2

http://capehatterasanglersclub.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=53&Itemid=81

As for the other ongoing issue critical habitat, see the sticky we need your help. The critical habitat designation which includes the spits, the point, Buxton and Frisco beaches seems to pale in comparison to a total ban on ORVs. However, keep in mind the critical habitat applies to ALL human activity.:--|


----------



## Dr. Bubba (Nov 9, 1999)

Drumdum said:


> This morning we will know for sure if all efforts to stop this have failed,after that,try to go for the throat with letters,emails,and phone calls..
> 
> If it is indeed the same judge as DrBubba implied,we are in deeep trouble...
> 
> Good way for dow,bluewater to get what they want and have their hands left clean,huh??


Kenny, same judge. I also posted this on Rob's board....the following is from the NO OLF website.... 

January, 2004 - SELC, on behalf of National Audubon Society, North Carolina Wildlife Federation, and Defenders of Wildlife, and Kennedy Covington, on behalf of Washington and Beaufort counties, file suit in federal district court against the Navy. 

February, 2004 - Plaintiffs ask for preliminary injunction to halt all Navy action at the site of the proposed OLF until the merits of the case are heard. 

April, 2004 - Judge Terrence Boyle grants preliminary injunction, ruling the conservation groups and the counties have a strong chance of prevailing in the case. 

October, 2004 - Boyle rejects the Navy´s request to stay the preliminary injunction. 

November, 2004 - Navy files motion to stay preliminary injunction with 4th Circuit of U.S. Court of Appeals. 

You can read more about it here: http://noolf.com/index.cfm/sid.370/oid.1153 

either way, Boyle has obviously dealt with DOW, Audobon, etc. before


----------



## cobia man (Jun 12, 2007)

Fish Addiction: For the very first time, I agree with you. Well said.


----------



## FAST EDDIE (Nov 14, 1999)

*While I'm not a lawer..........*

After reading the ruling a few times, a few of my initial thoughts are as follows:

1. This was a criminal trial brought about by an individual who, himself, was driving recklessly and endangering others on the beach. For the judge to extend his ruling beyond the punishment of the violator (Vasile Matei) to a blanket closure of the entire CAHA resource to all ORV usage is too broad in scope. I would like to hear an attorney's point of view on this. Would an appeals court allow such a broad construal to stand, or would they reasonably expect the punishment to be more narrowly defined to the individual and not extended to the entire class (all ORV users)?
2. While all of us on these boards believe, to varying extents, in the preservation of our natural resources (not withstanding the continuing conflict and debate regarding bird and turtle closures), the Judge's diatribe to these areas has no place in this legal ruling. The defendant was not charged with violating closed areas. Nor was it indicated that he actually drove over the dune (as I have read comments to such on other boards). The brief stated he, "*attempted to drive a large four-wheel drive vehicle off the beach and into an area adjacent to the dunes, ultimately intending to exit on the ramp*." Plain and simple, this is a reckless driving case and nothing more, based on the testimony cited.
3. The courts had, just days prior, approved an interim management plan. By all accounts then, is there not a Plan in place? And even if there was not a written plan, that has been collaboratively developed by NPS, USFWS, OBPA, et al, could it not be argued that a plan still exists by nature of the NPS guidelines and laws, the signage posted at all access points, the signage and markings designating nest closures, etc? Somewhere it is written that the beach speed limit is 25 mph (although most drive well below that limit), firearms are illegal, no camping, no public intoxication, no driving on dunes, no entering roped off areas, etc., etc. This, coupled with the access ramps (maintained by NPS and others), sounds very much like we have regulations in place to govern ORV traffic.
4. The dis-Honorable Judge Boyle concludes, in his brief, that, "*without an ORV plan in place, the Park Service is without the manpower to enforce the rules in place......*" - WOW!! right there he states that there are rules in place!! Sounds like we have a plan. Further his attempt to correlate Park Service resource to the existence of a plan is laughable and without merit.

It may take some time, but this is going to be over-turned.


----------



## FishinAddiction (May 9, 2006)

cobia man said:


> Fish Addiction: For the very first time, I agree with you. Well said.


Glad to hear it bro......this is a time for us all to stand together and shout with one solid voice.


----------



## Tinybaum (Mar 8, 2004)

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1605849/

Go there and take the poll.

Tiny


----------



## JimInVA (May 17, 2005)

What I've heard...

I'm in Nags Head, overseeing the reconstruction of our condo's pool. The project foreman's wife works with the NPS (I believe). He called her to find out what was going on (after I mentioned "my understanding") and was told that the judge had apparently been misquoted. She states that access, other than that for protection of the plover, has not been limited or curtailed.

I pass this... for what its worth...

Jim


----------



## seaBreeze (Oct 4, 2006)

http://www.nps.gov/archive/caha/bdriv.htm

...hmm the above looks like a plan....but what has gotten me madder is the fact that the regulations state the max fine is $500.00 and the un-american who ruined it for us was only fined $100.00 ....:--| (finally a chance to use this emotocon!)


----------



## FishinAddiction (May 9, 2006)

JimInVA said:


> What I've heard...
> 
> I'm in Nags Head, overseeing the reconstruction of our condo's pool. The project foreman's wife works with the NPS (I believe). He called her to find out what was going on (after I mentioned "my understanding") and was told that the judge had apparently been misquoted. She states that access, other than that for protection of the plover, has not been limited or curtailed.
> 
> ...


I hope that the light at the end of this tunnel isnt a train.


----------



## Newsjeff (Jul 22, 2004)

*Latest from the NPS*

National Park Service News Release
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: DATE July 18, 2007
CONTACT: 252-473-2111 ext. 148

NPS ANNOUNCES UPDATE ON BEACH ACCESS

Superintendent Mike Murray stated today that the National Park Service (NPS) is currently evaluating and considering how to respond to the recent Court Order that was issued by U.S. District Court Judge Terrance W. Boyle on Tuesday, July 17, 2007. The order indicates that NPS is not in compliance with legal requirements to authorize and manage off-road vehicle (ORV) use at the Seashore. For the time being the Seashore continues to operate under an Interim Strategy and beaches remain open to off-road vehicles (ORVs) for the immediate future, with the exception of beaches that are closed due to resource protection areas, annual seasonal village closures and safety closures. 

As background, ORV use on Outer Banks beaches predates the 1937 authorization of the Seashore. Prior to paving NC Highway 12 in 1954, island residents and visitors routinely used the beaches and interdunal areas as a transportation route. The completion of the Bonner Bridge across Oregon Inlet in 1963 made access to Hatteras Island much easier which resulted in increased vehicle use of beaches for recreational purposes and use has continued to increase. ORV are currently used to access the beaches for many forms of recreational activities including swimming, sunbathing, surf fishing, bird watching, surfing, shell hunting and scenic driving.

Executive Order 11644 (1972), amended by Executive Order 11989 (1977), required certain federal agencies permitting ORV use on agency lands to publish regulations designating specific trails and areas for this use. Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations Section 4.10 requires units of the National Park System allowing ORV use to designate use areas and routes by special regulation. Despite previous efforts since the late 1970s, the National Park Service (NPS) has yet to develop an ORV management plan or regulation that would provide the necessary management and regulatory framework to manage ORV use at the Seashore. 

To address these issues, Seashore staff has been working on a three-pronged approach. First, in January 2006, NPS issued an Interim Protected Species Management Strategy (Interim Strategy) to guide protected species management practices within the park for approximately 3 years until a long-term ORV management plan and regulation can be developed. A final decision document and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the Interim Strategy was approved on July 13, 2007 by Regional Director Patricia Hooks. Second, on December 11, 2006, NPS announced in the Federal Register the intent to develop an ORV management plan and environmental impact statement, and has since completed the initial public scoping in March 2007 for that planning process. Finally, on June 28, 2007 NPS published in the Federal Register a Notice of Intent to establish a negotiated rulemaking committee to assist the NPS with development of the required ORV regulation. The public comment period for this Notice of Intent ends on July 30, 2007. 

In addition to the procedures and restrictions identified within the Interim Strategy, other federal regulations apply to ORV and beach use. These include, but are not limited to, prohibitions on unsafe operation of a motor vehicle, reckless driving, carrying open containers of alcoholic beverages in a motor vehicle, and driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs; requirements to comply with posted speed limits, use seatbelts, stay within posted ORV corridors, and stay out of posted closures; and prohibitions on disorderly conduct, pets off leash, illegal camping, illegal beach fires, and littering.

More information about these planning processes can be obtained at the Cape Hatteras National Seashore Off-Road Vehicle Negotiated Rulemaking and Management Plan project website at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/caha. If you wish to receive electronic information regarding the Off-Road Vehicle issue, please contact the park at or call 252-473-2111 ext. 148 or send an email to [email protected] and request to be added to the mailing list. 

--NPS--


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

The gates ain't locked yet.. No where in that document states that beaches will be closed.. Says we are in violation,but never states he's closing them... 
It could happen,but hasn't yet.. Hopefully it won't because he failed to mention we have an "interim plan" that has been in place while the reg-neg is going on.. 
Just trying to think possitive.. As of right now it is our only thread of hope.. A federal judge is a very powerful man. To my understanding the only ones really over him are the supreme court and the pres.. That would be a good reason not to make threats or do anything stupid to p&ss this guy off more than he already is.. jmho

I posted this on open forum as well.. Mainly because I think cool heads in this case are very important..


----------



## FishinAddiction (May 9, 2006)

Drumdum said:


> The gates ain't locked yet.. No where in that document states that beaches will be closed.. Says we are in violation,but never states he's closing them...
> It could happen,but hasn't yet.. Hopefully it won't because he failed to mention we have an "interim plan" that has been in place while the reg-neg is going on..
> Just trying to think possitive.. As of right now it is our only thread of hope.. A federal judge is a very powerful man. To my understanding the only ones really over him are the supreme court and the pres.. That would be a good reason not to make threats or do anything stupid to p&ss this guy off more than he already is.. jmho
> 
> I posted this on open forum as well.. Mainly because I think cool heads in this case are very important..


very well said DD!


----------



## fishinmama (Oct 14, 2006)

*just home from a business convention*

and i see this fiasco!! been reading up on it on the RDT site too.
sounds like everyone was blindsided by the judge's ruling--makes me wonder if there was a hidden agenda....why does this 1 guy's speeding infraction go before a judge insteda of being taken care of by the local cops or NPS?

as to the suggestion that there is no ORV management plan, i have to wonder just how "official" a plan has to be to be considered a "plan", after all there are rules & regs established by NC state & by NPS which are enforced by them -- is this not an "ORV Management Plan"? I would think that the rules and regs that are in place might be construed to be a management plan.

doing emails & letters now & you all should too, because this isn't gonna go away quick.

one bright note--although temporary --
http://www.witntv.com/home/headlines/8578037.html
remember however that this is TEMPORARY & keep writing & or emailing.


----------



## Vernad Ogonowicz (Sep 18, 2003)

The reason the Federal Judge is involved instead of a local judge might be because it happened on federal property. An individual was caught driving on lighthouse road (on federal property) a few years ago and went before a Federal Judge who sentenced him to 6 months in a federal prison. He did do the time in a fedral prison with all the associated killers, rapist, drug dealers, etc.


----------



## Newsjeff (Jul 22, 2004)

*Here we go*

Ya'll knew this was comin':  

Judge Bans ORV Use on Beaches (Defenders of Wildlife Press Release)

comments: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE July 18, 2007
Contact: Jessica Brand, Defenders of Wildlife (202) 772-0239

Federal Judge Declares ORV Use at Cape Hatteras National Seashore Illegal Defenders of Wildlife Calls for Management Plan

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The following is a statement from Jason Rylander of Defenders of Wildlife regarding Judge Terrence Boyle's order barring the use of off-road vehicles (ORVs) at Cape Hatteras National Seashore in North Carolina.

"Judge Boyle's order should serve as a wake-up call to the National Park Service. If the Park Service had implemented a responsible ORV management plan and designated trails in appropriate areas, as we have been urging them to for years, this never would have happened. 

"Judge Boyle's order declaring ORV use at Cape Hatteras National Seashore illegal was issued on his own volition in a case involving reckless driving on the beach. It was not done at the request of Defenders of Wildlife or any other conservation organization. Nevertheless, the order is good news for wildlife.

"The Park Service has continued to allow ORV use in sensitive areas of Cape Hatteras in clear violation of the law. Federal law, Park Service regulations and presidential executive orders clearly state that the Park Service may not permit ORV use on federal parklands without first putting a management plan in place. No such management plan exists at Cape Hatteras National Seashore.

"At Cape Hatteras, poorly managed ORV use is damaging sensitive wildlife habitat, harming endangered and threatened sea turtles and piping plovers, and disturbing nesting populations of seabirds like the least tern and American oystercatcher. Seasonal restrictions on ORV use, a ban on night driving on the beach, and other appropriate management tools would go a long way toward ensuring that both people and wildlife can safely enjoy this natural treasure.

"We hope that Judge Boyle's order will prompt the Park Service to expeditiously create a management plan that will protect the seashore's abundant wildlife while allowing appropriate public uses. Such a plan is long overdue."

###

Defenders of Wildlife is dedicated to the protection of all native animals and plants in their natural communities. With more than 900,000 members and activists, Defenders of Wildlife is a leading advocate for innovative solutions to safeguard our wildlife heritage for generations to come.


----------



## SkunkApe (Dec 9, 2006)

*Those people....*



Newsjeff said:


> Ya'll knew this was comin':
> 
> Judge Bans ORV Use on Beaches (Defenders of Wildlife Press Release)
> 
> ...


Those people make me sick:--| If there was a human baby and a Mole in the same room of a burning house, they'd rescue the Mole and leave the baby to die. They make me sick:--|


----------



## Crashman65 (May 29, 2007)

I do not care much for tree huggers but then again I'm against damage caused to the Seashore by idiots in jacked up trucks and 40" tires doing donuts. Some of my best friends are guys like that.  

That being said I hope that the NPS will put forth a plan which will help *all* of us be able to enjoy the Seashore for decades to come. It seems to me that nobody wants to take away our rights to fish and enjoy Hatteras Seashore but only to manage it from safety and environmental stand points.

Thanks NewsJeff for the NPS release and to all others who have posted useful information. That gives me a better understanding of the situation and now I can react intelligently.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

Crashman65 said:


> I do not care much for tree huggers but then again I'm against damage caused to the Seashore by idiots in jacked up trucks and 40" tires doing donuts. Some of my best friends are guys like that.
> 
> That being said I hope that the NPS will put forth a plan which will help *all* of us be able to enjoy the Seashore for decades to come. It seems to me that nobody wants to take away our rights to fish and enjoy Hatteras Seashore but only to manage it from safety and environmental stand points.
> 
> Thanks NewsJeff for the NPS release and to all others who have posted useful information. That gives me a better understanding of the situation and now I can react intelligently.


 Truely,I do not think you understand the situation,if you deduced that from what you read from Jason Rylander... 
To listen to DOW,is just the reverse of listening to people that do donuts,speed,run through bird closures,drive on the dunes,and drink while on NPS land... Rylander and the ilk,want Cape Hatteras as a refuge.. If a plan was installed by him,it would be the beginning of the end for drumfishing,and FISHING PERIOD.. I PROMISE!!


----------



## sand flea (Oct 24, 1999)

I think Crashman65's point was that he wants there to be responsible use that prevents idiots from causing trouble, not the elimination of offroad access. Most other federal parks have something a little more controlled with permits, serious enforcement, and one-on-one-off rules once capacity has been reached. I wouldn't be surprised to see Hatteras end up with something similar.

I know everyone is teed off right now, but let's not forget that this moron who decided to break the law gave the judge a reason to set this ball in motion. If we don't control the idiots in our own camp, then the groups that want all access shut down will get just the ammunition they need.

A little bit of self-policing will go a long way here.


----------



## NTKG (Aug 16, 2003)

sand flea said:


> I think Crashman65's point was that he wants there to be responsible use that prevents idiots from causing trouble, not the elimination of offroad access. Most other federal parks have something a little more controlled with permits, serious enforcement, and one-on-one-off rules once capacity has been reached. I wouldn't be surprised to see Hatteras end up with something similar.
> 
> I know everyone is teed off right now, but let's not forget that this moron who decided to break the law gave the judge a reason to set this ball in motion. If we don't control the idiots in our own camp, then the groups that want all access shut down will get just the ammunition they need.
> 
> A little bit of self-policing will go a long way here.



flea the sad part is that he prolly wadnt in the fishing circle unless he had a wally world 5.99 rod next to his six pack... its sad that one idiot can make such a mess


----------



## Newsjeff (Jul 22, 2004)

Well, the story made the news.  

http://wavy.com/global/video/popup/pop_player.asp?clipid1=1600309&at1=News&vt1=v&h1=Off+%


----------



## fishinmama (Oct 14, 2006)

*wral*

here's an interview with ppl who seem to care about the ORVers plight & seems supportive of our issues
www.wral.com/news/local/story/1613619

don't know why, but the video took a long time to load for me -- i ended up watching it thru "buffering" stops...but it is worth it


----------



## fishinmama (Oct 14, 2006)

on another site ppl are having toruble accessing video -- yeah it was LONG time for me, too --- click on "seashore officials working on plan" ...yada..yada..yada

this is directly under the video camera link icon -- don't think you can miss it


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

sand flea said:


> I think Crashman65's point was that he wants there to be responsible use that prevents idiots from causing trouble, not the elimination of offroad access. Most other federal parks have something a little more controlled with permits, serious enforcement, and one-on-one-off rules once capacity has been reached. I wouldn't be surprised to see Hatteras end up with something similar.
> 
> I know everyone is teed off right now, but let's not forget that this moron who decided to break the law gave the judge a reason to set this ball in motion. If we don't control the idiots in our own camp, then the groups that want all access shut down will get just the ammunition they need.
> 
> A little bit of self-policing will go a long way here.


 Flea,I've always been on that side of the spectrum. In the middle,a moderate.. This youngen that drove like an idoit,should have gotten more.. IMO,anyone that drives on the beach and drives like he did should automatically loose their license.. I've wanted permits for quite some time,but many dissagree.. I feel as though paying 50 dollars for a permit would filter out many of these "one time abusers".. Most that will break laws and destroy property won't pay 50 bucks for a one time fling on the beach.. Those that are here with permit will think twice before they get drunk on the beach or run through bird closures only to loose their right to drive the beach... Designated paths are a good thing. BUT to halt all fishing (Year round with the wintering closures) in areas like OI,Hatteras Inlet,Buxton Point,S end of Ocracoke is taking it to another level,imho... After they take all that for 10 months of the yr,the n beaches are left,and they close it due to overwash.. As far as night time closures,I don't even beleive Aseteauge has that,does it??

All that being said there is a different designation here in Hatteras than in Asateauge.. We are a "NATIONAL PARK" Pea Island and Asateuge are both sanctuarys.. YES,INDEED they are to protect the wildlife within the park,but allow the enjoyment of the park lands as well.. These special intrest groups have taken a GOOD LAW to protect wildlife and made it a weapon against fishing,hunting,or anyother passtime... I'm for protecting these birds,but if you saw and were here,you would see they want to go overboard.. Flea it's not what you see on tv or even read anymore..Much of what has happened is behind the scenes,with these same groups pulling the strings of USFWL.. They are attempting to dictate the way our lives are to be lead down here,starting with the OI bridge... IMHO,this is not the way of a public park.. 

Flea,Mr Rylander is on the complete left of this issue.. There is a "gameplan" and hidden agenda that DOW is slowly but surely carrying out.. The OI bridge is the first step..  There are many things that are behind the scenes here that aren't spoken of.. Rylander,and his cronies (behind the scenes) have something to do with all these things.... He also speaks from both sides of his mouth,imo.. If he has his say,I can promise you you'll be better off fishing in Va Beach,at least you'll have a couple of spots to fish there.....

Sorry for the rant,and you may feel I'm one of the "hotheaded" ones.. Believe me when I tell you,I'm on the moderate side...


----------



## FishinAddiction (May 9, 2006)

Drumdum said:


> Flea,I've always been on that side of the spectrum. In the middle,a moderate.. This youngen that drove like an idoit,should have gotten more.. IMO,anyone that drives on the beach and drives like he did should automatically loose their license.. I've wanted permits for quite some time,but many dissagree.. I feel as though paying 50 dollars for a permit would filter out many of these "one time abusers".. Most that will break laws and destroy property won't pay 50 bucks for a one time fling on the beach.. Those that are here with permit will think twice before they get drunk on the beach or run through bird closures only to loose their right to drive the beach... Designated paths are a good thing. BUT to halt all fishing (Year round with the wintering closures) in areas like OI,Hatteras Inlet,Buxton Point,S end of Ocracoke is taking it to another level,imho... After they take all that for 10 months of the yr,the n beaches are left,and they close it due to overwash.. As far as night time closures,I don't even beleive Aseteauge has that,does it??
> 
> All that being said there is a different designation here in Hatteras than in Asateauge.. We are a "NATIONAL PARK" Pea Island and Asateuge are both sanctuarys.. YES,INDEED they are to protect the wildlife within the park,but allow the enjoyment of the park lands as well.. These special intrest groups have taken a GOOD LAW to protect wildlife and made it a weapon against fishing,hunting,or anyother passtime... I'm for protecting these birds,but if you saw and were here,you would see they want to go overboard.. Flea it's not what you see on tv or even read anymore..Much of what has happened is behind the scenes,with these same groups pulling the strings of USFWL.. They are attempting to dictate the way our lives are to be lead down here,starting with the OI bridge... IMHO,this is not the way of a public park..
> 
> ...


Listen to the man. DD knows what he's talkin bout....well said!


----------



## sand flea (Oct 24, 1999)

Drumdum said:


> I feel as though paying 50 dollars for a permit would filter out many of these "one time abusers".. Most that will break laws and destroy property won't pay 50 bucks for a one time fling on the beach..
> 
> BUT to halt all fishing (Year round with the wintering closures) in areas like OI,Hatteras Inlet,Buxton Point,S end of Ocracoke is taking it to another level,imho...


Absolutely. I don't think any of us would be for nighttime closures or year-round closures. And you're right--Assateague is open 24/7 and has a permit system, which I think would go a long way toward stopping some of the problems on the OBX. It also prevents crowding by enforcing a one-one-one-off rule once the beach reaches capacity. Yeah, it's a pain in the neck when you have to wait in line at the ramp but it's great to be on a beach that's not overcrowded.

They do have plover closures every once in a while, but they're sensible about it and doesn't last too long.

So is OBPA lobbying for its own management plan? I didn't see anything on their site about getting involved in the process to make sure the right decisions are made.


----------



## for access (Jul 18, 2005)

*What you didn't get from the DOW press release is*



Crashman65 said:


> I do not care much for tree huggers but then again I'm against damage caused to the Seashore by idiots in jacked up trucks and 40" tires doing donuts. Some of my best friends are guys like that.
> 
> That being said I hope that the NPS will put forth a plan which will help *all* of us be able to enjoy the Seashore for decades to come. It seems to me that nobody wants to take away our rights to fish and enjoy Hatteras Seashore but only to manage it from safety and environmental stand points.
> 
> Thanks NewsJeff for the NPS release and to all others who have posted useful information. That gives me a better understanding of the situation and now I can react intelligently.


1. A plan for protecting sensitive enviornment and wildlife species has been approved. This plan specifies when areas will be closed to ORVs. This plan has been labeled as having no significant impact and USFWS even said it may likely result in improvement of critical habitat for the wintering plover.

2.That DOW filed a notice of intent to sue months ago when the USFWS opinion was issued.

3.That responses to DOW comments asking that the point and the inlets remained closed to ORVs, night driving, etc. simply state that such restrictions are not needed to protect the species or habitat.

4.That Rylander is DOW representative on the committee that is developing the ORV rule, thus he is well aware of the process that is ongoing. (Yes, officially it hasn't started yet since the make up of the comittee had to be presented for public comment. That said, in a heroic effort to expediate the process many of the training meetings have been held and open to the public.)

Herein lies the problem. With comment period for the comittee being open and with Rylander and DOW being listed as comittee members, they could cause themselves trouble by actually filing the suite against the species protection plan. They know that and that is why CHNSRA was excluded from an earlier suite filed by BlueWater calling for an immediate ban on ORVs in the many other parks that have not formulated an ORV rule.

However, now that a judge has declared ORV use at CHNSRA illegal, who can fault DOW for asking for enforcement of the law. A back door way of getting the point and inlets closed and eliminating night driving without regard to the conclusions and decisions reached during the protected species planning process.


----------



## for access (Jul 18, 2005)

*Go to the nps planning site*



sand flea said:


> Absolutely. I don't think any of us would be for nighttime closures or year-round closures. And you're right--Assateague is open 24/7 and has a permit system, which I think would go a long way toward stopping some of the problems on the OBX. It also prevents crowding by enforcing a one-one-one-off rule once the beach reaches capacity. Yeah, it's a pain in the neck when you have to wait in line at the ramp but it's great to be on a beach that's not overcrowded.
> 
> They do have plover closures every once in a while, but they're sensible about it and doesn't last too long.
> 
> ...


http://parkplanning.nps.gov./parkHome.cfm?parkId=358

This site has information on all plans recently completed or currently underway.

The NPS had a public scoping meeting for the ORV plan. Simultaneously, a committee made up of interested stakeholders (DOW's Rylander and OBPA among them) will be writing a rule as well.

The comment period for the committee makeup is open now.

The process has actually started already with training meetings being held and open to the public at large.


----------



## Crashman65 (May 29, 2007)

Thanks Flea. 

I really don't want groups like DOW telling me I can't drive out to the beach and fish and we all need to realize they are a powerful and large voice. By the same token I think *everyone* has the right to enjoy the beach by ORV. 

I agree with DD about regulating the access by annual or daily permit or one-on, one-off methods. The permit fees could fund beach restoration and add an extra park ranger or two to monitor vehicles. (yeah, just what we need, more cops!) We can all make a difference by setting a good example and abiding by the Off-Road Regulations and encouragung others to do the same. We don't need vigilante militia tactics, just common courtesy and respect for the beach.

The tree huggers aren't going to go away or give up. We need to stand together if we want to keep our rights to drive on the beach and fish. From the sounds of things the NPS is on everyone's side looking to benefit all. After reading many posts and articles on the situation I am optimistic.

Thanks to all who represent our rights and opinions in this negotiation.


----------



## for access (Jul 18, 2005)

*I wouldn't mind permits*

if they didn't come with limits and waiting lines.

If I go to ramp 49 and find grass or dirty water then have to sit in line again to get on at another ramp, I don't have the time required to seek my prey and will not surf fish nearly as hard as I do now.

Waiting lines and limits on numbers are no solution. They are not needed, unless of course you close down the point and inlets, in which case crowding will be a problem to the extent that I will not go to the beach except off season.


----------



## fish militia (Nov 1, 2004)

Also..

no one wants it to come to this,the hopes being that this can work itself out..And I stated no type of violence..jus civil unrest..Yes it's a vague statement,but I wish no one any harm

As much money as I have helped to raise for the OBPA and the overwhelming amount of time I spent volunteering to help them.. I Can say honestly that I support them.My list of things done for the OBPA and the diplomatic side are long and distinctive..Please do not quote me for one of your lectures..

I am just letting everyone know where I stand IF and WHEN all Else FAILS..

I am sure I've earned that right as an American


----------



## FishinAddiction (May 9, 2006)

Cooler Heads Will Prevail

Lay Aside Our Foolish Pride

Approach This Logically And Methodically


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

*So is OBPA lobbying for its own management plan?*

Yes,Flea,they are one of the members sitting on the "reg-neg" committee... I know they will fight the good fight,some pretty sharp folks... This reg-neg may take quite a while,hopefully the judges ruling will see it through with the interim plan,and not close us down perminate,as Rylander wants so bad he can taste it...


I think FM is pretty upset by this whole issue,as am I we vent differently,but both of us want the same thing.. Hopefully,my freind,you will keep a "Cool Head".. As far as his claims about helping OBPA (the diplomatic side>> OUR SIDE) he has done much more than his share...


----------



## sand flea (Oct 24, 1999)

When facing the wrath of England during the Revolutionary War, I think Ben Franklin put it best:

_We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately._

And Drumdum, you are wise about cooler heads prevailing. The worst thing this community can do is let our anger knock us off balance. Everyone needs to remember that what we say and do is being watched. We are reasonable people, and reasonable people always win.


----------



## fishinmama (Oct 14, 2006)

*DRumdum & sand flea got it as right as its gonna get*

"United we stand, divided we fall"
let the petty differences remain just that-petty.
no need to argue amongst ourselves--we all wish for the same outcome--positive efforts for a positive solution.


----------



## fish militia (Nov 1, 2004)

Got to say kenny..ehile I would pay for a permit I do not agree with it.."Free and Open Access"

Paying permits will equal less people to an extent

So would ramp limitations..

Lets remember that this is about access an our economy Less people is bad anyways you look at it.Plus..Permits will not rid us of stupid people..it may lessen them.

I damn sure don't want to be sitting at a ramp waiting to get onto the beach..I don't care how they do it up North


----------



## C.Salp (May 30, 2002)

Not trying to wade into the larger "permit" debate, but I wouldn't necessarily equate a permit system with limitations or waiting lines. I strongly agree that access should NOT be limited, and we have to be wary of the slippery slope in that regard.

How about a nominal permit for say 3 or 4 bucks, just to identify folks driving on the beach...if someone is convicted of a serious violation [driving like it's the Indy 500], or accumulates a set number of less serious violations, their permit is yanked. That person will not be driving on the beach for at least a couple of years.

Having spent a fair amount of time on Assateague Island's permitted ORV beach, it seems to me -- and this is by no stretch a scientific observation -- that there is far, far less joyriding/unsafe/unethical driving. I'm NOT suggesting that Assateague is a model for CHNRS -- one HUGE difference is that there is just one ramp onto the entire 12-or-so mile AI Maryland beach. I'm just sharing my observation of this one aspect of their system. 

CS


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

fish militia said:


> Got to say kenny..ehile I would pay for a permit I do not agree with it.."Free and Open Access"
> 
> Paying permits will equal less people to an extent
> 
> ...


 I think we agree on one thing,we have to get rid of joyriders,and flatout drunks on the beach... If you go to a NPS beach,you should do so respecting the right to do so.. IMHO,I think it would weed out bunches of rifraff (that want to ride the beach,get drunk for a day and tear up chit),and not hurt the economy of this island one bit... jmho

CSCALP the biggest difference I see between Assateague and our beach is our's is a NATIONAL PARK,your's is a WILDLIFE SANCTUARY...


----------



## DERFM (Jun 19, 2004)

Drumdum said:


> ..........................................
> CSCALP the biggest difference I see between Assateague and our beach is our's is a NATIONAL PARK,your's is a WILDLIFE SANCTUARY...


humm , hate to disagree with ya kenny but it is a " National Seashore "
http://www.nps.gov/asis/index.htm


----------



## thebeachcaster (Aug 7, 2006)

*I thought I*

was allowed to drink a cold one on the beach. I don't think I should be allowed to drive drunk, bring glass bottles or litter. But if I want to drink a beer with my dad on the sand, I think it is my right as an American. I am not making an argument for drunken lawlessness but I do think a cold beer is part of fishing... You tell me I can't have a beer while fishing and what is next? I am not allowed to have a rod? NPS has seen me with a beer in my hand and never wrote me a ticket. I know this is not the point of this thread, and sorry for jacking it.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

DERFM said:


> humm , hate to disagree with ya kenny but it is a " National Seashore "
> http://www.nps.gov/asis/index.htm


 Thankyou Fred,I stand corrected,spoke out of turn,but am more educated about Assateague now... :redface: 

Assateague is not a "sister" of ours in the way it is laid out though.. Our park is "married in" with our community and economy.. If our park were paterned on Assateague,it would desimate the economy of Hatteras Island..


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

thebeachcaster said:


> was allowed to drink a cold one on the beach. I don't think I should be allowed to drive drunk, bring glass bottles or litter. But if I want to drink a beer with my dad on the sand, I think it is my right as an American. I am not making an argument for drunken lawlessness but I do think a cold beer is part of fishing... You tell me I can't have a beer while fishing and what is next? I am not allowed to have a rod? NPS has seen me with a beer in my hand and never wrote me a ticket. I know this is not the point of this thread, and sorry for jacking it.


 Bear in mind this is JMO.. 
Most,maybe not all would go with a no alcohol policy,if it meant fair access to our beaches... Alcohol,imho,is not a required elliment to fish..


----------



## DERFM (Jun 19, 2004)

> Assateague is not a "sister" of ours in the way it is laid out though.. Our park is "married in" with our community and economy.. If our park were paterned on Assateague,it would desimate the economy of Hatteras Island..


 ya got that right kenny ...
there is no comparison except there is a beach and water there !!
the same thing could be said about cape cod .
hatteras is unique !! and it needs a unique solution !!
copying what has been done at other parks isn't the answer ....


----------



## TreednNC (Jul 1, 2005)

Drumdum said:


> Bear in mind this is JMO..
> Most,maybe not all would go with a no alcohol policy,if it meant fair access to our beaches... Alcohol,imho,is not a required elliment to fish..


I agree 100%...and would elaborate more, but there are too many people on here that think in order to relax, you HAVE to have a beer or drink while you fish....Ill just leave it at Id be willing to bet that there are more alcohol/fishing accidents than alcohol/hunting accidents.


----------



## TreednNC (Jul 1, 2005)

Drumdum said:


> Bear in mind this is JMO..
> Most,maybe not all would go with a no alcohol policy,if it meant fair access to our beaches... Alcohol,imho,is not a required elliment to fish..


I agree 100%...EDIT: too contoversial and would get jumped bc ppl think they have to have a beer while they fish.


----------



## Surf Fish (Dec 16, 2005)

thebeachcaster said:


> But if I want to drink a beer with my dad on the sand, I think it is my right as an American.


Sorry, but you are incorrect. Beer isn't mentioned in the United States Constitution, which spells out your rights as an American. 

One of the things I find most amusing about the beach access discussion is the use of the word "right"; it's my RIGHT to drive on the beach, it's my RIGHT to drink beer on the beach.

I think if you check, you will find that the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights (amendment to the United States Constitution) give us the right to bare arms (which means we can wear sleeveless tshirts on the beach, I think) but don't give us the "right" to drive anywhere, including the road more less the beach, and it doesn't give us the "right" to drink beer anywhere. 

Driving on the beach, and drinking beer are PRIVILEGES, not rights, and as such can be taken away from us at any time. 

Usually it only takes one or two idiots to have privileges removed from a large group of people. We used to be able to drive on the beach on the entire lenght of the island where I live. Then a couple of idiots ran over a few people who were laying on towels on the beach, and our privilege to drive on the beach went away. 

Which may not be a bad thing. I'd rather walk to the beach to fish than have idiots running over little kids that are playing in the sand.

Anytime somebody gives us a PRIVILEGE, we should do our best to use it wisely and always remember that it can go away at any time. And we should also do our best to insure the idiots don't ruin it for the rest of us.

Major problem with America is idiots. If we could solve the idiot problem, a lot of other things would take care of themselves...


----------



## sand flea (Oct 24, 1999)

I regularly visit three federal parks/refuges and none of them enforce alcohol rules unless you're acting like a drunk idiot or driving out of control. And honestly it's not worth getting hung up on booze rules when there's a bigger question at stake.

I agree that Hatteras is a unique place, but in my experience _all_ coastal refuges/parks/seashores are unique places. We're only talking about what might work down south because it's been successful elsewhere (and not just at Assateague). I didn't mean to raise hackles by mentioning permits--only meant to say that 1) they're not the end of the world and 2) I've seen them actually do some good in keeping the idiots out.


----------



## fish militia (Nov 1, 2004)

DERFM said:


> ya got that right kenny ...
> there is no comparison except there is a beach and water there !!
> the same thing could be said about cape cod .
> hatteras is unique !! and it needs a unique solution !!
> copying what has been done at other parks isn't the answer ....




Derf,

ya took the words right outta my key board:beer: :beer: 


Policies that have worked else where may not be as affective on the Obx or may have a bad affect here..


Most would find it hard to fish here if the ramps were limited..

Guys like myself and friends,people who own get away houses or trailers would have the beaches hemmed tight and would not leave during potential drum bite days..Everyone else would play hell trying to get out on to a particular ramp.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

sand flea said:


> I regularly visit three federal parks/refuges and none of them enforce alcohol rules unless you're acting like a drunk idiot or driving out of control. And honestly it's not worth getting hung up on booze rules when there's a bigger question at stake.
> 
> I agree that Hatteras is a unique place, but in my experience _all_ coastal refuges/parks/seashores are unique places. We're only talking about what might work down south because it's been successful elsewhere (and not just at Assateague). I didn't mean to raise hackles by mentioning permits--only meant to say that 1) they're not the end of the world and 2) I've seen them actually do some good in keeping the idiots out.


 Booze control,isn't a requirement to keep our park in tact,but is often the problem.. Back in the ole days,much of the area was dry down here,ya had to go elsewhere to buy.. There weren't many places to buy either.. No,a no alcohol policy shouldn't be a requirement,Flea,but as I stated,it shouldn't be a "prerequisit"mps to fish here (like some think) either.. Take my word,I'm not standin on no pulpit here,cause I take a snort once and a while myself,promise..  

I agree with you on the permits,but as you saw there is a 50/50 split that will not.. Main reason,is because many see it as a way to control the numbers on the beach.. We have a lot of area to drive right now,a lot is at stake,there are really NO ANSWERS set in stone..

Bottom line here is that "OUTSIDERS" most of which have probably never wet a line or enjoyed the out of doors to hunt,are trying to control our destiny,through the legal system and $ behind them.. Our previlege to hunt and fish is being threatened throughout this country under the pretext of wildlife,which most hunters and fishermen want protected in the first place.. Much of this is used as a tool to rid this country of hunters and fishermen,*this is what angers me the most..*


----------



## rdjr3 (Jul 11, 2007)

DD and Rob are right. The OBX is not like Assateague or many of the other beaches in the NPS. Most of the great fishing spots you have to drive several miles on the beach to get to. I dont believe that limiting our access to the beach is right either. Yes it may not say in the Bill of Rights that I can drive my 4x4 on the beach but this is the United States of America not the Soviet Union. Don't mean to offend anyone but I have fished on Hatteras Island for twenty plus years. I would love to take my kids and grandkids to try to catch a drum at Ocacroke,the Point, or Avon in the near future not have that taken away by a judge.


----------



## Carolina Rebel (Aug 25, 2005)

A permit would not be the end of the world. Part of me wants to say maybe we should go along with that kinda thing without question, just to show our outlook isn't entirely different from the bird lovers.
After all, we do want the incredible place that is the OBX maintained, right?
On the other hand, I know how liberal lefty commuticians work, and I would hate to get the same kind of shafting that the American Indians did in the latter half of the 1800s (wherein they signed treaties and then got attacked anyway). 
Its a shame, but with this opponent there really is no easy solution. Heck, fishermen at the Outer Banks help clean up the beaches when needed, use more sense driving around than the vast majority of general tourons, and there's no question they pour a whole lot more money into the local economy there than any bird lover ever could. I'd like to think some of that money goes towards habitat maintenence. Its a well known fact that hunters and fishermen, through things like the Pittman-Roberson fund, pour more money into funding environmental upkeep than all other outdoors enthusiasts combined.
That said, I believe total beach closure would be an enormous mistake that for a variety of reasons the hippy morons would be forced to regret in short order. Additionally the more I think about it the more I like the idea of a permit, maybe something like $10 a day, $30 for a monthly permit, $100 for a yearly one. That might seem steep, but its really not a big price to pay for open access to some of the most outstanding surf fishing on the east coast. It costs alot more for a year's access to most crappy piers, not to mention all the good ones. Such a permit would thin out joyriders and idiots in general. Really, how many of those guys that tangle everyone up at the point would be willing to pay to get to do that? The money could obviously pay for better fencing and marking for nests, and like it or not it could help fund a little more enforcement.
It angers me that an idiot driving up the dune brought all of this about. There is no shortage of signs telling folks over and over not to drive on the damn dunes, thats on any beach you can drive on! It sounds like just about any other problem the lefties have tried to resolve though......a case where increased enforcement would fix things up neatly, but they try to take the easy way out through more rules. Think gun control. We will all have to work to make sure they fail in this venture, and it won't be easy. As has been stated over and over in this and other related threads, write your congressmen! It only takes one confused judge to screw things up, and given his nature I doubt writing him would do any good. Maybe, just maybe your representatives would be able to more effectively alter his outlook on the situation. A mailbox full of hate mail from high-ranking government officials would at least make him think a little. The hard times the OBX would go through this Fall with no beach access would make him think alot more.
Times are changing, there's no question about that. It wasn't all that long ago that there wasn't anything on Hatteras, and now its a bustling beach with tourist shops, no shortage of beach houses, and even grocery stores. Unfortunately as more and more people show up everywhere, outdoor enthusiasts as a whole are gonna have to work harder, and do so together, to maintain the little bit of adequate habitat still remaining, or else lose it forever. We can't wish harm on the piping plovers and sea turtles, they've got at least as much right to the beaches as we ever did. Given the Hatteras area's limited capacity as a nesting grounds for these species though, there's absolutely no reason we can't all coexist. Its not a colonial nesting ground, and really in the time I spent there I didn't see that many nesting sites. Unbiased, properly done research I've looked at on the matter seems to support this, and as such I really can't picture this situation bringing about the closure of the beaches as a whole, as long as we work to ensure that common sense, or sense in general, prevails.


----------



## hic-lock (Jun 27, 2001)

*Full And Free Access!*

The American Indian analogy speaks volumes.

I don't trust these Eco-Wacko-Lefty-Commys as far as I could throw them. You will not make true friends w/them, work w/them or be able to live in harmony w/them. They'll lie through there teeth to our face. They will not stop until the get a total ORV ban - period

The users of the resource will give a little, has been proven. Have these Environmental groups budged any? I haven't noticed any compromise with NOW, Bluewater? If I'm missing something let me know.

Will someone tell me what's the REAL problem with the current management of the habitat? When the birds are discovered, action is taken to assure they have room to do their thing. The users (us) give way, we adapt to not going here or there until given permission again. It appears to me THAT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH anymore!

The users are the ones that REALLY CARE about the resource. How about the recent styrofoam clean up? I don't know one single fisherman that wants to see trash on the beach, kooks driving the beaches like maniacs or idiots killing nature needlessly. Not one! Yes, I know bad things happens but its not the norm. Bad judgment can be delt with by education, and if necessary a slap on the hand.

These groups do not want to be our friends. They want to dictate what we can and can't do in our day-to-day lives.

There can not be any other settlement than FULL AND FREE ACCESS!


----------



## catman32 (Apr 20, 2005)

*Here is the real question.*

Ok ,I usually sit back and let most of this go. But the real question is what can we do ,or can we do anything about this. Talking is great ,emails are great,letters are great. But are not working. What can we do. What is the next step. Not just sitting back and seing what happens. Im just saying its easy to sit back and type. I want my kids and there kids to be able to see the beach the way those of you out there have shown me and my wife the beach. I asked this on another board ,but it seems there is no one that can answer it . Is there no answer. Just curious and im sure others are also.


----------



## Carolina Rebel (Aug 25, 2005)

I'm sure that once the beaches actually close there will be alot more going on than just letter writing, e-mailing and the like.


----------



## thebeachcaster (Aug 7, 2006)

*Wow*

Should I say sorry for the comment about the beer on the beach? Wasn't trying to set anyone off. 

Well on paper your probably right right Surf Fish. On the Bill Of Rights and the Constitution, I am not promised the right to drink. I also think it is a privilege just as it is to drive on the beach. I can enjoy a beer in a responsable manner. Others can't........If I must forfit my PRIVILEGE to a beer in order to keep access, i will do it gladly. 

My first time at Hattie I was 6 years old. I have fished off and on there for 22 years now. I remember my first blue. It wasn't my first saltwater fish, but my first good one. I could go on and on and cry ya a river but I think my point is this. I know how to prioritize, I am not an idiot, and I am on the right side for the right reasons. If my above post gave anyone the impression that my privilege to drink over-rode their privilege to access, I did not convey my feelings and emotions accurately .....and for that I am sorry. I


----------



## catman32 (Apr 20, 2005)

*Here is the real question.*

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok ,I usually sit back and let most of this go. But the real question is what can we do ,or can we do anything about this. Talking is great ,emails are great,letters are great. But are not working. What can we do. What is the next step. Not just sitting back and seing what happens. Im just saying its easy to sit back and type. I want my kids and there kids to be able to see the beach the way those of you out there have shown me and my wife the beach. I asked this on another board ,but it seems there is no one that can answer it . Is there no answer. Just curious and im sure others are also.


----------



## Digger (Jan 4, 2000)

catman32 said:


> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Ok ,I usually sit back and let most of this go. But the real question is what can we do ,or can we do anything about this. Talking is great ,emails are great,letters are great. But are not working. What can we do. What is the next step. Not just sitting back and seing what happens. Im just saying its easy to sit back and type. I want my kids and there kids to be able to see the beach the way those of you out there have shown me and my wife the beach. I asked this on another board ,but it seems there is no one that can answer it . Is there no answer. Just curious and im sure others are also.


Right now I would guess money is needed in the right places. Since this is in the courts. A couple of pro bono laywers would be nice. Pressure to get a workable plan in place is the real requirement right now. So you senator would ne a good start.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

catman32 said:


> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Ok ,I usually sit back and let most of this go. But the real question is what can we do ,or can we do anything about this. Talking is great ,emails are great,letters are great. But are not working. What can we do. What is the next step. Not just sitting back and seing what happens. Im just saying its easy to sit back and type. I want my kids and there kids to be able to see the beach the way those of you out there have shown me and my wife the beach. I asked this on another board ,but it seems there is no one that can answer it . Is there no answer. Just curious and im sure others are also.


 Erick,I think there is an answer,just don't know the right person, or have the influence to do it..

We need a NATIONAL GROUP to back us,as well as backing up other hunters and fishermen across this nation,that are facing the same problem.. As has been said many times,this is not about birds,it's about taking our hunting and fishing rights away one piece at a time... NRA is one of the types of groups I'm referring to.. Big lobbying body in Congress,with untold amounts of influence... These are the only types of groups that can compete and really win against the likes of DOW Bluewater and such,imho.....


----------



## catman32 (Apr 20, 2005)

*Kenny*

You say a national group right. Well isnt that what we are. Can we start a web page dedicated to this . Can we talk to everyone we can about this. Can we do anything other than send the emails and letters. I am more than willing to donate at least 100 dollars to the effort to get something going. 100 people at 100 dollars is at least enough to get us more support and more publicity than we have now.


----------



## hic-lock (Jun 27, 2001)

Right-on brother! I'm with ya. It just does't seem like it's enough.

I'm sitting here now drafting another letter. I'm wacking ALL my buddies to do the same. Letters, e-mails and phone calls don't seem like much but trust me, their hearing us. I'm making a cash donation to OBPA too! Do it man! The only thing that won't work is if you're quiet. JMHO!

And speaking (above) of the lawyer types, that poster "for access" is definatly a plus to our side.

BTW - I got a bonus today so I'll become a P&S Subscriber now too, it's about time huh Flea...

Mark


----------



## catman32 (Apr 20, 2005)

*Trust Me*

Shooter, myself and my wife Melissa have and will keep helping the OBPA. At this point i feel that this may not be enough. I have helped with the emails and letters but , I just do not feel it is enough.


----------



## Ryan Y (Dec 1, 2005)

*Eric, Shooter and all else....*

At least this may be the saving grace for some of us in regards to the fence riders out there. WHat I mean is that there are allot of businesses that have yet to stand on one side or the other even though it is thier livelyhood.

I know you guys support allot of the businesses up there. (well, down there to you) as allot of us. I too keep sitting here reading all the time without to much reaction to the posts. Now is the time that everyone has to come to come together.


----------



## TSsurfphisher (Jun 7, 2007)

I know this probably doesn't have to deal with this particular thread, but I read an article in Carolina Country Magazine about the Ocracoke Fish House, how is it going to effect them with the tourist trade and fishing (bait wise), the article said that surf fisherman buy bait from them??


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

catman32 said:


> You say a national group right. Well isnt that what we are. Can we start a web page dedicated to this . Can we talk to everyone we can about this. Can we do anything other than send the emails and letters. I am more than willing to donate at least 100 dollars to the effort to get something going. 100 people at 100 dollars is at least enough to get us more support and more publicity than we have now.


 We can do this as well as support OBPA,as we have in the past and will do in the future.. BUT,imho,it's going to fall short unless we have a group that is national and deticated to stand in the way of DOW and Bluewater.. This group is going to have to lobby in Congress,get the media attention,as well as have some judges that can be relied on to back hunters and fishermen when the chips are down..
I can promise you this,folks in say "Seatle Wash." have no clue as to what is going on down here. Does DOW and Bluewater obtain donations from these people to help defeat us and impose thier will??? You can bet your bottom dollar...


----------



## catman32 (Apr 20, 2005)

*Just wanted more answers*

Here is the real question. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok ,I usually sit back and let most of this go. But the real question is what can we do ,or can we do anything about this. Talking is great ,emails are great,letters are great. But are not working. What can we do. What is the next step. Not just sitting back and seing what happens. Im just saying its easy to sit back and type. I want my kids and there kids to be able to see the beach the way those of you out there have shown me and my wife the beach. I asked this on another board ,but it seems there is no one that can answer it . Is there no answer. Just curious and im sure others are also.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

catman32 said:


> Here is the real question.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ...


 Erick,typing,and phone calling is not just sitting back... Stuffing mailboxes and covering up their answering machines,is not just sitting back. Supporting groups that care,is not just sitting back..
I'm not a lawyer,if I were,I'd be digging up as much dirt on the contracts with USFWL from the past about access as I could.. I'm not a biologist,or I'd be finding every loophole in their biological studys about the wildlife here as I could.. IMHO,most of what they have brought to the table is bogus.. If I were a spokesperson,I'd contact every media outlet that would give me airtime and go for it.. Although many times when the media joins in the special intrest groups get the last say in the story... A suggestion would be to get ole Johnboy and Billy in on it.. Yeap,it's a comedy show,but they get national attention,and the OBPA might go for the interview..The type of people that work with DOW and other groups have no other job,don't know about you,but I actually have to work to earn a living.. 
I understand and understood your question,but it's going to take a group and a big group like NRA,not ASA,to put a stop to this across the country.. That's the best I can do with the question.. Still not answered..


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

*OK Catman*

Here's a possitive note:

You'll like this.. 
COMMITTEE APPROVES NEW GOP SUBCOMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS


WASHINGTON - Senator Pete Domenici, ranking member of the Senate
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, today announced new
subcommittee assignments for Republican members. The assignments were
approved by the full committee during a business meeting this morning. 


As part of the changes, Domenici announced that Senator Larry Craig
(R-Idaho) will become ranking member of the Subcommittee on Forests and
Public Lands, while Senator Richard Burr (R-NC) will take over as
Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on National Parks. Senator John
Barrasso (R-Wyo.) will assume membership of the subcommittees that
Senator Thomas served on. 


"The ranking member assignments are an important function of our
subcommittees, so I'm pleased that the Committee took action today to
finalize their membership. As a former Chairman of the Public Lands
Subcommittee, Senator Craig's leadership and experience will serve him
well as ranking member, and I know that Senator Burr's interest in our
nation's parks will be an asset to the Parks Subcommittee," Domenici
said. 


The Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests has legislative
responsibilities relating to national mining and minerals policy,
reserved water rights, and public lands administered by the U.S. Forest
Service and the Bureau of Land Management. 



The Subcommittee on National Parks has jurisdiction over the nation's
National Parks and Trail Systems, national monuments, and military parks
and battlefields. Senator Burr will fill the ranking member spot left
vacant by the late Senator Craig Thomas.


Bob Eakes 

You might want to send Mr Burr an e-mail with your thoughts...


----------



## dirtyhandslopez (Nov 17, 2006)

Peeps, this is my thought. Hope no one minds that it's a quote of mine from another board; "Perhaps Sen. Burr should be invited down for a fishing trip with only the best. Lend him the best tackle, give him the best bait and put him on some fish. Let him see whats exactly goin' on. And make sure he hooks up." That's positive action I reckon.


----------

