# Public Comment Period Open for Proposed ORV Rule at Cape Hatteras



## MRC (Jan 4, 2008)

http://www.parkplanning.nps.gov/documen ... ntID=41993


----------



## tjbjornsen (Oct 31, 2009)

Odd,
I followed link and found nothing on Cape Hatteras.
Also used search engine and got nothing.
TjB


----------



## SNDFLEE (Sep 8, 2010)

I don't find it odd that time has come and gone according to the powers that be. Public comment was a formality what was going to be done was going to be done which is obvious as we sit and stare at ropes and signs telling us what we cannot do or where we cannot go! The worst part is the worst is yet to come if that can be imagined.


----------



## MRC (Jan 4, 2008)

tjbjornsen said:


> Odd,
> I followed link and found nothing on Cape Hatteras.
> Also used search engine and got nothing.
> TjB


I'll try again.

http://www.parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkID=358&projectID=10641&documentID=41993


----------



## hifu (Aug 3, 2006)

That works....


----------



## French (Jun 18, 2005)

Here is the Federal Register posting today. I will be making public comments, and I strongly encourage each of you to do the same. You can submit comments on www.regulations.gov referencing RIN 1024-AD85

A key bullet to focus on:

1) All federal rulemaking is required to conduct a cost-benefit analysis and make exemptions for any rulemaking that will have an economic impact of over $100 million. According to their study http://www.parkplanning.nps.gov/caha any losses will be recouped by allowing the extra traffic with permits. If you have economic data to the contrary (not anecdotal), include it in your comments and NPS is legally required to respond in the final rule.

For those of you who don't want to read through the full document, here are some key bullets:

A) Regulation will designate ORV routes at the CHNPS, establishing requirements to obtain a permit, and imposing date and 
time and other restrictions related to operation of ORVs, including 
vehicle and equipment standards. 

B) An off-road vehicle'' or ``ORV'' means a motor vehicle used off of park roads (off-road). Not all ORVs are authorized for use at the Seashore; however, all ORVs are 
subject to the vehicle requirements, prohibitions, and permitting requirements. To receive a permit to operate a vehicle on designated ORV routes, your vehicle must be registered, licensed, and insured for highway use and comply with inspection regulations within the state, country, or province where the vehicle is registered. It must have no more than two axles and its tires must be U.S. Department of 
Transportation listed or approved.

C) All authorized vehicles need an ORV Permit. To obtain an ORV permit, you must complete a short education program, acknowledge in writing that you understand and agree to abide by the rules governing ORV use at the Seashore, and pay the applicable 
permit

D) Both weekly (7-day, valid from the date of issuance) and annual 
(calendar year) ORV permits would be available.

E) There would be no limit to the number of permits that the 
Superintendent could issue. However, use restrictions may limit the 
number of vehicles on a particular route at one time.

F) The Superintendent may temporarily limit, restrict, or terminate access to routes or areas designated for off-road use after taking into consideration public health and safety, natural and cultural resource protection, carrying capacity and other 
management activities and objectives. *PLEASE INSERT COMMENTS ON THIS TOPIC*
G) Once you obtain an ORV permit, you may operate a vehicle off road 
only on designated routes described in the tables located below. The tables also provide dates for seasonal restrictions on 
driving these designated routes. Maps of designated ORV routes would be 
available in the Office of the Superintendent and on the Seashore Web 
site.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BODIE ISLAND--DESIGNATED ROUTES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YEAR ROUND.................................. Ramp 2.5 (0.5 miles south of the southern boundary of Coquina
Beach) to 0.2 miles south of ramp 4.
SEASONAL--September 15 to March 14.......... 0.2 miles south of ramp 4 to the eastern confluence of the
Atlantic Ocean and Oregon Inlet.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HATTERAS ISLAND--DESIGNATED ROUTES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YEAR ROUND.................................. 1.5 miles south of ramp 23 to ramp 27.
Ramp 30 to ramp 32.5.
The following soundside ORV access routes from NC Highway 12 to
Pamlico Sound between the villages of Salvo and Avon: soundside
ramps 46, 48, 52, 53, 54 and the soundside ORV access at Little
Kinnakeet.
Ramp 38 to 1.5 miles south of ramp 38.
The following soundside ORV access routes from NC Highway 12 to
Pamlico Sound between the villages of Avon and Buxton: soundside
ramps 57, 58, 59, and 60.
0.4 miles north of ramp 43 to Cape Point to 0.3 miles west of
``the hook''.
Interdunal route from intersection with Lighthouse Road (i.e.,
ramp 44) to ramp 49, with one spur route from the interdunal
route to the ORV route below.
Ramp 47.5 to east Frisco boundary.
A soundside ORV access route from Museum Drive to Pamlico Sound
near Coast Guard Station Hatteras Inlet.
Pole Road from Museum Drive to Spur Road, with two spur routes to
Pamlico Sound (one at the terminus of Spur Road and one commonly
known as Cable Crossing) and four spur routes to the ORV route
below.
Ramp 55 southwest along the ocean beach for 1.6 miles, ending at
the intersection with the route commonly known as Bone Road.
SEASONAL--November 1 to March 31............ 0.1 mile south of Rodanthe Pier to ramp 23.
Ramp 34 to ramp 38 (Avon).
East Frisco boundary to west Frisco boundary (Frisco village
beach).
East Hatteras boundary to ramp 55 (Hatteras village beach).
September 15 to March 14.................... Interdunal route south of the intersection of Pole Road and Spur
Road stopping at least 100 meters from the ocean or inlet
shoreline.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OCRACOKE ISLAND--DESIGNATED ROUTES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YEAR ROUND.................................. Ramp 59.5 to ramp 63.
Three routes from NC Highway 12 to Pamlico Sound located north of
the Pony Pens, commonly known as Prong Road, Barrow Pit Road, and
Scrag Cedar Road.
1.0 mile northeast of ramp 67 to 0.5 mile northeast of ramp 68.
A route from NC Highway 12 to Pamlico Sound located near Ocracoke
Campground, commonly known as Dump Station Road.
0.4 miles northeast of ramp 70 to Ocracoke inlet.
A route from ramp 72 to a pedestrian trail to Pamlico Sound,
commonly known as Shirley's Lane.
SEASONAL--September 15 to March 14.......... A seasonal route 0.6 mile south of ramp 72 from the beach route to
a pedestrian trail to Pamlico Sound.
A seasonal route at the north end of South Point spit from the
beach route to Pamlico Sound.
November 1 to March 31...................... 0.5 mile northeast of ramp 68 to ramp 68 (Ocracoke Campground
area).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

No need to... Sounds bad,but that is the way it is... Don't try and confuse them with the facts thier mind is made up....


----------



## AbuMike (Sep 3, 2007)

SNDFLEE said:


> I don't find it odd that time has come and gone according to the powers that be. Public comment was a formality what was going to be done was going to be done which is obvious as we sit and stare at ropes and signs telling us what we cannot do or where we cannot go! The worst part is the worst is yet to come if that can be imagined.


Not really.....once this last hoop is gone thru the real fun begins and we start to take back our beaches......


----------



## French (Jun 18, 2005)

I agree that the political appointees have their minds made up, but they are legally required to respond to any concern raised in the comments. If you site concrete data, they HAVE to justify whiy their data is correct when they publish the final rule. If their data is wrong, then NPS is subject to a lawsuit for violating the Small Businessand Regulatory impact requirements. It also becomes ammo for any friends you may have on Capitol Hill.

If you waive the white flag, this will only be the beginning. Your opposition is well funded, organized, and has much stronger branding a prescense with policy-makers. Counter it with coordinated passion and truth.


----------



## dirtyhandslopez (Nov 17, 2006)

Agreed. 
The FOIA is a wonderful thing if used appropriately. Or if used period.


----------



## SNDFLEE (Sep 8, 2010)

AbuMike said:


> Not really.....once this last hoop is gone thru the real fun begins and we start to take back our beaches......


I hope you are correct and I will stand by your side and do so! I just feel the powers that be look at this as a legal obligation and no more and that's the problem it goes no further I wish it were different but the last few years show it is not. When the fun begins and the taking back starts I am all in with ya brother!!!!!!!


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

French said:


> I agree that the political appointees have their minds made up, but they are legally required to respond to any concern raised in the comments. If you site concrete data, they HAVE to justify whiy their data is correct when they publish the final rule. If their data is wrong, then NPS is subject to a lawsuit for violating the Small Businessand Regulatory impact requirements. It also becomes ammo for any friends you may have on Capitol Hill.
> 
> If you waive the white flag, this will only be the beginning. Your opposition is well funded, organized, and has much stronger branding a prescense with policy-makers. Counter it with coordinated passion and truth.





dirtyhandslopez said:


> Agreed.
> The FOIA is a wonderful thing if used appropriately. Or if used period.


 Dh and French,both of you go right ahead and knock yourself out writing letters to these folks being lead by a lawsuit from enviros,with the enviros science (totally unreasonable buffers for birds that could be protected without closing whole beaches),no consideration for the avg citizen that lives on Hatteras Island ie Bonner Bridge (saftey issue for all),the "taking" of two and a half inlets (just south end of Ocock,Portsmouth will be a little later).. They are stalking bigger game now,Fla Keys,Padre Island.. We were just used as an example of what they are capable of while many representatives that sit in powerful seats in congress aplaud thier efforts..

Just like they were suppose to take the 200plus pages of a workbook and take that into consideration when the plan began to form... I've watched as many have spoken that were much more knowlegable than I about turtles and plovers,as well as read articles by folks that not only knew what they were talking about,but were in usfwl,get totally ignored.. This is as much a farse as the reg-neg was.. The only way to get some change is to vote in change,trust me they ain't going to read a dam thing written on paper or spoken...

That's right,I'm bitter.. Spent at least 3 nights after work filing out paperwork that I'm sure was thrown in the trashcan.. Have sent numerous letters,even called a few folks.. About all that can be done is to listen to congressmen,and pres canidates and listen to where they would stand on these issues,as well as possibly amending the esa so that special interest groups can be stripped of some of the powers they have,and of course vote for those canidates.. Writing letters to nps or usfwl or even dept of interior is falling on deaf ears,especially with the people that have infiltrated thier ranks.. This and only this is what will change this course.. Hatteras is just a small part of what this will eventually all be about.. In short,if new representation in gov is not put into the possition of changing this, fishing access of any kind is in jepardy... jmho..


----------



## Dr. Bubba (Nov 9, 1999)

This article from the Island Free Press is definitely worth a looksie, and provides some additional insight to where we are in the process of this whole fiasco.

Park Service publishes proposed ORV rule;
public comment period is open


Kenny, while I fully understand your frustration, we must comment again at this stage in the process. Although it appears our comments fall on deaf ears, if we give up now we won't be taken seriously later.


----------



## dirtyhandslopez (Nov 17, 2006)

What the Doc. said Kenny. Don't let them grind you down. Fly Wacko said it best when the books first came out, it will in all likelyhood be settled in court. Just need the right lawyer and the right court


----------



## French (Jun 18, 2005)

Ken,
I know it is a nightmare, and it is much more impactful to you and your family than it will ever be to me. This is the one part of the process where your comments become public record and can't be disgarded. I won't kid you and say they will receive serious consideration by the current policymakers at NPS, however it at least forces their decisions to receive public scrutiny. Also, you can't place too much hope in elections over the next couple of cycles. Even if Republicans sweep into office, the fact that the permit program would already be in place and serve as a revenue source for NPS would make it very difficult for the issue to be dealt with in legislation. Their focus will be on general spending cuts and reform of entitlement program. Compared to those issues, most national law makers would consider beach access a minor blip. It sucks, but that is reality. The NPRM public comment process is the best vehicle you have at this point to make the program more friendly to the interests of the folks who either want to fish or whom their well being will be effective.

Trust me when I tell you, I know it is a huge pain in the hindquarters. My organization has had to respond to 11 requests for public comment on federal healthcare regulation ranging from the Meaningful Use of Health IT to the Accountable Care Organization program. It is a nightmarish process of reading an analyzing trite government speak, developing a detailed, fact based response, and anticipating potential opposition. However, it does effect some degree of change.

Bare minimum, if ANY of you reading this are members of any kind of fishing association, contact their national office and find out if they are responding for this request for comment. If so, volunteer to participate in developing the comments, and if not, cancel your membership and find an association that is monitoring and lobbying on your behalf.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

French said:


> Bare minimum, if ANY of you reading this are members of any kind of fishing association, contact their national office and find out if they are responding for this request for comment. If so, volunteer to participate in developing the comments, and if not, cancel your membership and find an association that is monitoring and lobbying on your behalf.


 As you can plainly see,I'm over it..... Although,this IS a good idea...


----------



## French (Jun 18, 2005)

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-07-06/html/2011-16878.htm

All that pontificating, and I forgot the link. Fail.


----------



## Dr. Bubba (Nov 9, 1999)

*Rubber meeting the road....*

I don't make it a practice of cross posting from other forums, but I believe this is worth a read. Pay attention to some of the comments from kas11471. Not only does it pertain to and give some insight to the the current comment period, but it may provide some ideas for your comments.

Final Rule Comment


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

My public comment to them is F.U. 

I will make their lives here on this Island as misreable as possible, if you work for the NPS your best bet is to steer clear of ME.. I am done following THEIR RULES, Processes, and in general, I am done with them... No More HOOPS for me, I've had a belly full. And for those that feel they will get the beach back through litigation, let me know how that works our for ya in 20 or so years... The time for being nice and playing by the RULES is long over, it is time to RUN them off the Island...They will not be my neighbors, and I will not live with them...It is time to go OLD SCHOOL on their @sses...

JAM


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

Don't get me wrone I will write them a Book but I expect NO RESULTS, but I will have my name on the list, because I plan My own LawSuit.. No economic impact, can't wait to show them my tax returns.. 

JAM


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

*If you ever wonder why we are SCREWED just take a look at the Views of this thread...*

491 pathetic, yet fishing report or a pic 1,551 views... Well when its gone, I don't want to hear JACK SH!T from anyone, don't ask me whats open or whats closed, YOU WON"T LIKE THE ANSWER... 

JAM


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

JAM said:


> 491 pathetic, yet fishing report or a pic 1,551 views... Well when its gone, I don't want to hear JACK SH!T from anyone, don't ask me whats open or whats closed, YOU WON"T LIKE THE ANSWER...
> 
> JAM


 Yeap,next year we get the FULL TREATMENT from a plan that was implimented by,no not nps,not doi,not usfwl,but audubon,dow,selc.... Strange how $ talk,when you have an agenda with lots of $ backing you to carry it out.. Of course, throw in a few lawsuites as ya go,and of course get $ for doing so.... Not quite there with Jam,but these folks drive you to the brink with thier power over the fed government on my tax dollars........


----------



## AbuMike (Sep 3, 2007)

JAM said:


> 491 pathetic, yet fishing report or a pic 1,551 views... Well when its gone, *I don't want to hear JACK SH!T from anyone, don't ask me whats open or whats closed, YOU WON"T LIKE THE ANSWER...
> 
> *JAM


Been saying it for a couple years now......If you cared enough you would be informed and know all this.....To most it only matters when it's time for their stay....


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

*This November, we will get the "Full Treatment"*

"Yeap,next year we get the FULL TREATMENT from a plan that was implimented by,no not nps,not doi,not usfwl,but audubon,dow,selc"

Then the 150.00 goes into place for a permit, that loud sucking sound you will hear, will be our economy going out the window. 

We have all ready felt the effects of the Fishermen who no longer come here to fish, I have seen maybe 20 percent of the folks I used to drum fish with. The permit will scare away the rest of them and the UN-Informed will not pay to play either.. 

Jokes on them Kenny, they are afraid to come here, ain't seeing many birder types, can't wait to ruin Wings over Water for them this year..

If we can't enjoy and use it, as far as I am concerned, no-one will... 

My Scoarched EARTH policy will be taken up a notch...

JAM


----------



## BrentH (Jul 25, 2011)

I'll be honest, I didn't read the entire document and I don't know much about politics either. I agree with JAM especially about the fees. I used to surf fish Assateague Island year round when I lived in Md and it cost me 80 bucks to access the beach at any time whenever I wanted. At first I thought that was a little high, but we camped on the beach (one person always awake appearing to be fishing just in case). As far as I know nothing has really changed up there. I understand the burn bans right now down here, but from what I understand up at Hatteras, they make you extinguish open fires at like 9 or 10pm? I've only been there once years ago, but since I moved to NC, I planned to replace Assateague with OBX & the other beaches here. Unfortunately, not being able to build a fire on the beach kind of ruins it for us since we've always done it. There have never to my knowledge been any problems at Assateague with open fires catching brush on fire. (to my knowledge)

We looked into Freeman Park down here and heard some bad reviews on the place, then found out the price of the permit. It seems a little high for me, although we still need to check the place out. But I think we may end up just taking the 5 hour drive to Assateague. If those fee's end up going up, I'm not paying for it. I can drive 3-4 hours to the NC coast, pay $150 worth of fees or whatever OR drive 5 hours and have freedom to do what we do. 

Sorry if my post is off topic a little.


----------



## Samblam (May 22, 2011)

Ok Im from va and I only make it down to hatteras once maybe twice a year. What cab I do to help? I'm not impacted economically, and I'm not a constiuant(sp) off those in power. Furthermore, I just dont know what to say other than this tptal bs and its killing the folks that live on the island.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

Samblam said:


> Ok Im from va and I only make it down to hatteras once maybe twice a year. What cab I do to help? I'm not impacted economically, and I'm not a constiuant(sp) off those in power. Furthermore, I just dont know what to say other than this tptal bs and its killing the folks that live on the island.


 Go here and read as many post related to access as possible,go to Red Drum Tackle.com go to Fishmilitia.com.. Get some background on it.. After you read some of the post you will have PLENTY to write,trust me... 

PS,you may want to read the link post #18 on this thread by Dr Bubba,some pretty good stuff right there to put on paper...


----------



## Dr. Bubba (Nov 9, 1999)

In addition. Here are some excellent ideas in regards to comment as a "few times a year" user of the park and angler perspective. 

We are all a constituents in this issue, whether we fish or surf or just enjoy public beach access. Please comment, and try to add something of your own so it doesn't get tossed as a form letter. 

This National Park was designed to provide the "everyman" with vast access to the shoreline that was and has disappeared to private landowners everywhere.

ORV Rule Comment Instructions and Suggestions


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

Dr. Bubba said:


> This National Park was designed to provide the "everyman" with vast access to the shoreline that was and has disappeared to private landowners everywhere.
> 
> ORV Rule Comment Instructions and Suggestions


 *NOTE: not being disagreable here,just stating what I have seen here...*

You could not prove that by this island.. NPS USFWL have all been running scared and bow down to special interest,fearing law suite.... jmho,from what I have witnessed here on this island ( they are as of now sueing to stop a bridge that will probably save many folks when the old one falls in the dern water).....


----------



## Dr. Bubba (Nov 9, 1999)

I'm with ya Kenny. The federal agencies have let a lot of people down. And the so called environmental do gooders are just fleecing the govt and the taxpayers. They aren't protecting the wildlife and the environment, they are misusing environmental laws to exert control and laughing all the way to the bank. And, it appears there are some employees of the federal agencies you mention that seem to welcome this. It's sickening, quite frankly.

I'm following the bridge issue as well. Luckily NCDOT and FHWA will tell them to go f themselves.


----------



## Phaedrus (Mar 25, 2011)

Coupla things.

I went through the govt document and have my own thoughts that I will put down to submit, but I do not get all of the little stuff in there that could force more negative stuff to happen. 

Is there anything that is already out there that breaks this down point by point and illustrates what the negative consequences can be?

Lastly, does The NCBBA or OBPA organize anything to educate the vacationers and seasonal fisherman down there? Do they make themselves visible in front of the Park Service buildings? Do they organize any sort of boycotts of Park Service facilities? Do they organize local campaigns down there to raise money to fight these lawsuits? Are there NPS facilities that currently require payment? 

I think if more of the average people that travel down there new what was going on, there could be more financial and vocal opposition.


----------



## duneyeti (Feb 5, 2009)

Any chance of getting this thread pinned in the open forum? I realize CHNS *Recreational Area* lies within NC, but as stated in some other threads this could ultimately effect everybody who frequents this board, including those who travel from out of state to fish, and those in other states with NPS/Government run parks.

Thanks...Billy


----------



## slevinkelevra (May 13, 2011)

I got an email today from NCBBA that said only 311 people have sent in a response to the NPS on the proposed rules. I cant believe that! Not only are some of us fighting for our fishing and vacation spots, but the residents are fighting for their way of life. Shame on everyone that fishes the island or vacations there that does not write the NPS.


----------



## Adam (Feb 19, 2001)

Well for what its worth, I just wrote my officials(again) and commented on the proposed rule. So far in 2011, this is the first year in my 28 years, that I have yet to set foot on HI, and its absolutely tearing me up inside. This crap has got to stop ...wish the NC gov't could just stand up and say NO and kick all this mess out.

Secession might not be a bad idea ...


----------



## drumchaser (Jan 14, 2003)

Im with you adam, last year was my first in 30. Not likely to go this year and it hurts.


----------



## Dr. Bubba (Nov 9, 1999)

Do it before midnight tomorrow....


National Park Service
ORV PROPOSED RULE (RIN 1024-AD85)

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed rule RIN 1024-AD85.

I am a 25 year visitor to the Cape Hatteras National Seashore. My particular favorite activity is the world class surf fishing. My father before me discovered this, passed it on to me, and we’ve had numerous times to enjoy it together. Being from Virginia, weekend trips during shoulder season were very common. The fishing was good at these times of year and lodging reasonable. But as of late these trips have been pared back with the unpredictability of beach closures. In the past the wildlife closures were reasonable and effective and I supported them. Recently I learned the proper name of the “Park” was the Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area (CHNSRA). This implies to me that the mission was/is to provide beach and shoreline that is available to all in this country, specifically for recreational purposes. ORV access to remote areas always was understood not as only a privilege but a necessity. As of late, it appears to many people that there is a goal to severely restrict and potentially eliminate this form of access.

This proposed rule appears to confirm that notion. I have followed and previously commented during this rulemaking process. I have seen many substantive comments brushed aside with mention of “best available science”. I believe my National Park Service (NPS) has done a poor job in this rulemaking process. The NPS has used incomplete science and justification for the ORV restrictions we currently face and continues using it in the proposed restrictions. The most egregious being the current rules instituted by the now famous consent decree. This is policy making at its worst. The rules have been administered with zero public participation, touted as restrictions based on “best available science”, and then wind up as the basis for all action alternatives in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). Is that how we develop and craft policy now? 

The proposed rule continues the flawed process and it appears the NPS seeks to lock in bad policy making decisions. This rush to completion is unsettling and as stated in the preamble of the proposed rule, “OMB has determined that this rule raises novel and legal or policy issues,…”. This leads me to believe the OMB questions many of the flaws in the rulemaking process, particularly the existing rules resulting from the consent decree.

Upon reading the proposed rule, I am at odds with much of it. The process that has resulted in this proposed rule is incomplete, weak, and should be redone. I am most at odds with the designated ORV routes, a permit system, and the night driving restriction.

The proposed routes refer to ramps and access points that do not currently exist. The proposed routes refer to interdunal roads that do not currently exist. There is mention within the proposed rule of parking lots that do not currently exist. How can these designated routes be based on the possibility that a ramp or parking lot is approved and built? In the meantime why are existing routes being taken away? These routes should be preserved until additional ramps and interdunal roads are in place.


I do not support a permit system unless it is free or of a very small administrative cost, and is readily available online with no limit on the number available. For newer beach drivers, educational materials could and should be made available. In-person educational requirements would be cumbersome at best. Not to mention, many beach drivers and locals in particular, are the most experienced there are anywhere in navigating the beach by vehicle. How insulting would it be for a Hatteras or Ocracoke Island native to be required to complete a beach driving course? If revenue is needed for the Recreational Area, maybe a toll booth would make more sense so that all visitors to the Recreational Area could share in providing revenue. Holding one segment of the visiting public responsible for upgrades such as those mentioned in the proposed routes section seems rather arbitrary and unfair.

The night driving restriction is also arbitrary. It is presumed that vehicles operating on the beach at night are having dire impacts on nesting sea turtles. The Park Service has still not been able to make this connection with their “best available science”. Just because something sounds right, doesn’t mean it is. The night driving restrictions appear politically motivated and do not belong in this proposed rule.

Finally, in lieu of Hurricane Irene, there are people who likely planned to submit comment but may find it hard or impossible to meet the deadline. Please consider extending the comment period for an additional 30 days.

In conclusion, I believe the proposed rule is merely continuation of bad policy making. It is part of a rush to put in place what should have been finalized long ago. Certainly there needs to be some final policy. But, the Park Service has warped, polluted, and stretched the public’s trust in transparency during this rulemaking process long ago, and this proposed rule reflects that haphazard approach. I believe the Park Service should return to the Interim Management Strategy, and begin the process again of developing an ORV rule that is not so flawed.

Sincerely,


----------



## CJS (Oct 2, 2006)

For every pro OSV comment I read there were 10 of these

All life is precious. You must protect the animals whose homes we are invading.

Why does wildlife always have to accommodate us? We do not have to drive on our protected beaches to enjoy them. Let the wildlife have their fair share of our coastline! DH

We need to stop degrading these ecosystems with ORVs and start taking care of our seashore in order to benefit human health, tourism and the healthy maintenance of our ecosystems to provide ecosystem services for generations to come. 

...enforceable and science-based protections for wildlife....

Please do NOT allow driving on the beaches at Cape Hatteras.

Tough reading.


----------



## Dr. Bubba (Nov 9, 1999)

CJS, almost every one of those comments does not include reference to the RIN number for the proposed rule (RIN 1024-AD85). These comment will likely be thrown out for not following instructions. Make sure to include the RIN number with your comments!


----------



## CJS (Oct 2, 2006)

Hope that is the case. I searched by the RIN number as directed in the write up and all those responses came up.


----------



## jlove1974 (Oct 9, 2009)

*here's my .02*

I am a longtime resident of NC, but I had not been to the CHNSS until last year in November. When I read and heard about the access issues facing residents and visitors of Cape Hatteras, I became alarmed. 
Unlike many of the commenters and members of special interest groups, I have actually been to every INCH of this National RECREATIONAL seashore. It is one of the most beautiful places to take my family, and recommend to friends.
I am both a conservationist AND a hunter and fisherman, much like our great President Theodore Roosevelt. I believe he would be upset that a government entity like the NPS would betray the very ideals that founded the Cape Hatteras National RECREATIONAL seashore. It is a land of many uses for everyone to enjoy. Thus, Pea Island National REFUGE has been established for everyone's, as well as the ORV areas that already exist. In restricting access, this is favoring one well-funded SIG over the residents, fisherman, and families that have enjoyed this area for over 50 years.

In short, I am NOT in favor of implementing this UNNEEDED rule on ORV access at CHNSS. Please stop bowing to the influence of groups such as SELC, Audubon and others. This land was donated for everyone, not just some. Please keep the ideals our forefathers envisioned for the NPS.

Thank you,

Jeremy


----------



## Dr. Bubba (Nov 9, 1999)

Good comment Jeremy! Make sure you submit it addressed to the NPS and reference the RIN number (RIN 1024-AD85) preceding your comment.


----------



## French (Jun 18, 2005)

My comments are submitted. More folks need to reply because it appears the birdy folks and DOW have utilized their legislative action centers to allow members to just put their name in, and then generate organization approved language over and over and over again. Generally, proposed rules are not a numbers game, but the coordinated response will be used as justification for ignoring legitimate concerns.


----------



## Tommy (Jan 24, 2001)

The dark side is flooding the Comments page with form letters. 

Sickening


----------



## slevinkelevra (May 13, 2011)

I sure hope that the NPS sees all the form letters and throws them out. Then again, that requires a government office to do something sensible. It's amazing to go through them though and see the vomit that spews from those comments.


----------



## Dr. Bubba (Nov 9, 1999)

16,000 comments were thrown out on the DEIS comment period.
looks like we may be going for a new record!

This is why it's actually important to submit something substantive in the proper manner.


----------

