# Beach Access at CHNSRA--the second shoe has dropped



## for access (Jul 18, 2005)

The first shoe to drop regarding beach access was Judge Boyle’s ruling a few months ago. I regret to inform you that the other shoe was dropped today. DOW, Audubon and Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC) have declared war. If you are a supporter of free and open beaches, the following links are a must read.

SELC PRESS RELEASE -- http://www.southernenvironment.org/newsroom/2007/10-18_hatteras_complaint.htm

The above press release states:



> The suit filed today will challenge the Park Service’s failure to adopt regulations to manage beach driving, its failure to ensure preservation of natural resources and violation of the federal Endangered Species Act.


The above referenced suit can be found at 
http://www.southernenvironment.org/lawlibrary/coast/2007-10-18_hatteras.pdf

One of the remedies of the suit is:



> In the interim, until a long-term plan to manage ORV use at the Seashore is implemented, issue an injunction ordering Defendants to restrict ORV use at the Seashore to provide adequate protection to resources and minimize conflict with other uses of the Seashore.


If anyone can figure out what the definition of resource protection and user conflicts is or who decides what qualifies, please let me know.

Finally, a new 60 day notice of intent to sue has been filed (http://www.southernenvironment.org/cases/hatteras/60_day.pdf ). The conclusion of the intent to sue is as follows:



> Despite repeated warnings from the undersigned organizations and other stakeholders, the NPS has adopted an interim protected species management strategy that continues to violate the law by emphasizing ORV use over protection of listed and non-listed species. By authorizing, funding, and implementing ORV activities at CAHA at the expense of the seashore’s native wildlife, the NPS is violating the ESA and numerous other federal laws and regulations.
> NPS’s continued failure to comply with the requirements of the ESA and other environmental laws—including those that specifically govern management of CAHA—in authorizing ORV use must be remedied immediately. If these violations are not addressed within 60 days, the undersigned organization will bring suit in federal district court.
> Yours truly,
> Derb Carter
> ...


I’m not sure how this one differs from the original 60 day notice, except that it states that performance measures for the current plan were not met.


----------



## FishinAddiction (May 9, 2006)

They're Bluffin' Again!


----------



## Cdog (Mar 18, 2002)

FishnAddiction said:


> They're Bluffin' Again!


This is serious. They dont have to bluff after that judge did his order. Pay a lil attention before making stupid statements. Sorry, that was harsh but this is no joking matter...


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

Yeap,you're so right,Dawg,it *ain't no bluff..*

Looks like back to court. They most definatly want the WHOLE BEACH cause right now there are turtle closures,bird closures up and down the beach at many locations.. They have been in netreg hashing it out.. Probably aren't getting the "wholepie",so this will be the recourse.. BTW,Ginny,I thought DOW and Audobon where both in netreg,and not allowed to sue due to that fact??


----------



## FishinAddiction (May 9, 2006)

sorry guys....just thought based on past experiences that they were up to the same ol tricks.


----------



## Mullet Breath (Nov 15, 2006)

Drumdum said:


> BTW,Ginny,I thought DOW and Audobon where both in netreg,and not allowed to sue due to that fact??


That's what I thought, but I aint no lawyer. Regardless, this to me shows that you can't just sit back anymore and think everything's cool, DOW, Audobon, and the others aren't sitting back that's for sure.


----------



## Redhorse (Mar 1, 2006)

What is the strongest grass roots group supporting ORV access? 

Is there an umbrella group representing all the fishing clubs, surfers, recreation seekers, etc...who want to maintain ORV access to some beaches? 

This is the time for all corners to come together on this. A unified stand is the only way to block total beach closures. 

Animal rights advocates, and environmentalists all have good intentions (I consider myself and environmentalist, having a degree in fish and wildlife management). However, their ranks are filled with zealots who have a no compromise attitude toward their ultimate goal...which is no fishing or hunting. They want the entire world to become vegan :--| and they think once that happens we will all be living in a Walt Disney movie.

This is more than serious...it's scary. Look for additional lawsuits to be filed by the likes of PETA and The Humane Society of America, once they see a good fight they can throw their weight behind it will be "game on".

We are constantly battling anti-gun/anti-hunting/anti-something here in Ohio. Our last big animal rights battle was over dove hunting. We spanked the liberal bliss-ninnys so hard they decided their money would be better spent in a different state and they havn't been back for several years. 

Solidarity is the answer...together we stand, divided we fall and all that


----------



## notso (Jul 18, 2005)

Redhorse said:


> What is the strongest grass roots group supporting ORV access?


The OBPA (outer banks preservation assoc) is probably the biggest Org that is pro access. Also, the NCCBA (Northcarolina Beach buggy assoc) is another good one.


----------



## for access (Jul 18, 2005)

*You are 100% right*



Drumdum said:


> Yeap,you're so right,Dawg,it *ain't no bluff..*
> 
> Looks like back to court. They most definatly want the WHOLE BEACH cause right now there are turtle closures,bird closures up and down the beach at many locations.. They have been in netreg hashing it out.. Probably aren't getting the "wholepie",so this will be the recourse.. BTW,Ginny,I thought DOW and Audobon where both in netreg,and not allowed to sue due to that fact??



*What's wrong with this picture *

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-IMP...y-28/i12012.htm

So participants in negoriated rulemaking
:
5. Southern Environmental Law Center, member Derb Carter, 


6. North Carolina Audubon, member Walker Golder, alternate Sidney
Maddock (National Audubon Society)


8. Defenders of Wildlife, member Jason Rylander, alternate Andrew
Hawley (Defenders of Wildlife)

are filing a suit and a filed a second letter of intent.

Furthermore, the below Jim Lyons has been actively seeking to influence public opinion and discredit me on another board 

24. Cape Hatteras Recreational Alliance, member Jim Lyons

while nearly every other member of the committee has adheared to the suggestion that they keep a low profile by avoiding discussions in such forums. This includes some persons that are normally quite active (i.e. Croakers Mom, Davidobx, Glamour Kitty, etc.).


----------



## for access (Jul 18, 2005)

*I guess they came here*



Redhorse said:


> What is the strongest grass roots group supporting ORV access?
> 
> Is there an umbrella group representing all the fishing clubs, surfers, recreation seekers, etc...who want to maintain ORV access to some beaches?
> 
> ...


Now you know where they are spending their time.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

I'll tell Rob,he likes get'n "Redfin's" dander up...


----------



## for access (Jul 18, 2005)

*So far*



Drumdum said:


> I'll tell Rob,he likes get'n "Redfish's" dander up...


HappyHarry criticised one of RedFin's attacks (basically said that by constantly forcing me to defend my statements, he was turning the disucssion into a personal boxing match) and the thread got deleted.

In another thread I posted the links to the current court stuff and Dennis (sometimes I think Redfin's alter ego) tried to turn the thread into a personal issue. Renee objected and new responses were blocked.

It is getting darn to post notices of events let alone discuss any issue.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

for access said:


> HappyHarry criticised one of RedFin's attacks (basically said that by constantly forcing me to defend my statements, he was turning the disucssion into a personal boxing match) and the thread got deleted.
> 
> In another thread I posted the links to the current court stuff and Dennis (sometimes I think Redfin's alter ego) tried to turn the thread into a personal issue. Renee objected and new responses were blocked.
> 
> It is getting darn to post notices of events let alone discuss any issue.


 They want it that way,Ginny.. That way,they look like they are being objective,but really are far left.. Just like the groups you mentioned above can create law suites when in a regneg committee and get away with it,when you know full well if OBPA or anyother group on our side of the fence did it they'd get repremanded.. Seems like the laws are all slanted to those with $,and plenty of time to stir as much as possible,because NONE of them have REAL jobs..


----------



## for access (Jul 18, 2005)

*It isn't over, here is the latest*

http://www.journalnow.com/servlet/S...e&c=MGArticle&cid=1173353235938&path=/opinion

talk about inaccurate.:--|


----------



## Dyhard (Oct 24, 2002)

I will be E-X-T-R-E-M-E-L-Y A-N-G-R-Y IF THEY CLOSE OFF THE BEACH"
I can remember how it felt when they closed Sandbridge Beach.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

> But they have a very legitimate complaint if the interim rules are not protecting the nesting areas.
> 
> 
> > IF is the key word there.. IF they can prove ONE BIRD has been run over by an ORV,or one human,I'm not from Missouri,but SHOW ME ANYWAY..
> ...


----------



## Redhorse (Mar 1, 2006)

The sad thing is...quite often no proof is necessary when dealing with these people. It will come down to who throws the most money at it, and what judge happens to be sitting on the bench when it's time for the ruling 


What we need to do is get some "human habitat" designations at some of our beaches... :beer: opcorn:


----------



## TreednNC (Jul 1, 2005)

Redhorse said:


> The sad thing is...quite often no proof is necessary when dealing with these people. It will come down to who throws the most money at it, and what judge happens to be sitting on the bench when it's time for the ruling
> 
> 
> What we need to do is get some "human habitat" designations at some of our beaches... :beer: opcorn:


Help protect the rare and endangered TreednNC....only migrates down for a couple weeks a year. Habitat designation from Coquina Beach to South Point of Ocracoke will be nessecary. Migration is via ORV. Please support this cause


----------



## WALT D. (Dec 18, 2003)

Drumdum said:


> They want it that way,Ginny.. That way,they look like they are being objective,but really are far left.. Just like the groups you mentioned above can create law suites when in a regneg committee and get away with it,when you know full well if OBPA or anyother group on our side of the fence did it they'd get repremanded.. Seems like the laws are all slanted to those with $,and plenty of time to stir as much as possible,because NONE of them have REAL jobs..



Very insightful Kenny, it's amazing how this is playing out. Some of the same groups that are supposed to be working to create negotiated regulations are already positioning themselves to say whatever is decided won't work. To file suit at this stage of the game is bad form, they should be denied any legal recourse and be required to give the process a chance to work. JMO.

Walt


----------

