# Realistically discussing marine spatial planning



## Ociferscott (Apr 24, 2009)

Since we have such an uproar over post being moved and this topic actually needs to be discussed in an educated and realistic way, I thought I'd start a post to discuss the real issues of marine spatial planning (MSP). Of course, being a Virginia angler, my side of the discussion will focus on my area of the country, but feel free to discuss the affects you may be envisioning.

Focusing first on the Chesapeake Bay, MSP will be targetting primarily our "overfished" and "concerned" species, which is a matter of scientific disagreement, but let's discuss the species that the NOAA has in-mind. First and foremost are the big 3 species that are being exploited in the Bay. These would be Oyster, Blue Crabs and Menhaden. These three species form the base levels of our fishing food chain, and have been exploited since the first fishing fleets arrived in Virginia. So, what will MSP do to protect and/or manage these species.

Well, if state programs that have instituted MSP are any indication, then we will probably see the creation of a few sanctuaries. Now, before you get in an uproar, "sanctuary" does not necessarily mean "no fishing zone". In fact, it can mean excellent fishing for us all. Sanctuary, in this sense, means no harvesting of protected species. So, while you can't harvest oysters in an oyster sanctuary, I bet you could catch more than your quota of Red Drum, Tog and Sheepshead there. Especially when the oyster population in the area start to create a food chain that brings in bait fish and larger fish behind them. In the end, these sanctuaries are good for our fishing habit in the same way, for instance, the hot ditch is good during the winter.

The other, let's call it major, concern of MSP is the creation of bird sanctuaries, which have the very real potential of closing off some of our favorite fishing beaches during bird nesting season. On this count, I can't argue. But closed beaches does not mean no boating in the same way the no-boating (due to, for instance, whale sanctuary) does not mean closed beach access. At the end of the day, we may have to give up some of our beaches for 1-2 months of the year so that birds can nest. It stings, but that may be the case.

Of course, the hardest hit, may well be the commercial fishermen, who will find their best crabbing and oyster holes turned into sanctuaries. But, over time, these sanctuaries will create healthier populations that will spread out from the sanctuary and create viable, renewable and sustainable populations that will benefit us all in the long term.

To sum it all up, I am not opposed to MSP. So, why are you?

***To keep this thread from being moved, please keep your responses valid to the topic at hand. Let's keep the politics out of this discussion***


----------



## c0ch3s3 (Jul 10, 2009)

talk about hitting the nail on the head. well put!


----------



## sprtsracer (Apr 27, 2005)

I fail to see how people fishing from the surf would impact the nesting of birds...call me a dummy, but how would that be any different than a bunch of bird watchers and naturalists with binoculars in their hands instead of fishing rods?

As to the argument on "overfished" and "concerned" species in your area, it is probably justified and has merit. There is scientific data to back it up. Some of you may remember some posts I made in the Florida forum concerning a project I am involved in with the Marine Discovery Center replenishing the oyster beds in the Indian River Lagoon. As an update on that, I can tell you it didn't take long to see the results. Baitfish have returned to the area where our projects are located, and the larger game fish, have followed as a result. Unfortunately, from Florida to the Carolinas, however, there is a ban on red snapper that has NO basis in scientific fact, and it's putting quite a few folks out of business and destroying livlihoods. I'm not just talking about commercial fishermen, either. Here's a quote from Friday's Daytona Beach News Journal Fishing Report:

*"Barry Freeman, owner of the Sea Spirit party boat, said trips are releasing a lot of red snapper and grouper, and getting a bunch of Atlantic sharp nose sharks, keeper triggers and sea bass. As for trolling, he said he's heard of an "occasional dolphin here and there, but nothing real serious." 

Freeman said most offshore charters are gone or for sale. He said the Cookie Cutter and Critter Gitter are for sale. The Prime Time and Reel Gator have been sold and left the area. He said the Sea Lover is for sale. 

"There's only two charter boats left at Inlet Harbor," he said. "My two big boats are for sale, (the Sea Spirit I and Sea Spirit II). We don't have enough business to pay the dockage."*
Notice he said they were "releasing a lot"! Catches of red snapper have not diminished in this area over the last 10 years, and, if anything, have slightly increased. You would think that if red snapper were "overfished", catches would have diminished over time. Not so! The devistation to the local economies as a result of this ill-advised ban is just beginning to be felt, and it is going to get worse!

I certainly have no reservations about supporting conservation efforts when the plans are backed by solid scientific facts and studies. When they aren't, however, it exposes flawed reasoning on the part of the NOAA and it's affilliated agencies. That makes me seriously question their motivation for their decisions, and further question what "outside" groups may be influencing those decisions.


----------



## c0ch3s3 (Jul 10, 2009)

sprtsracer said:


> I fail to see how people fishing from the surf would impact the nesting of birds...call me a dummy, but how would that be any different than a bunch of bird watchers and naturalists with binoculars in their hands instead of fishing rods?


i believe they are worried about people driving on the beach, more than people standing on the beach with a fishing pole, or binoculars. 




sprtsracer said:


> Unfortunately, from Florida to the Carolinas, however, there is a ban on red snapper that has NO basis in scientific fact...


http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/fishwatch/species/red_snapper.htm




sprtsracer said:


> ...and it's putting quite a few folks out of business and destroying livlihoods.


its a 6 month ban, and its already half way over....


----------



## dawgfsh (Mar 1, 2005)

The bird issue at Hatteras closes the beaches for 6-7 months and the turtles close it another month. Not just for ORV, walking isn't allowed either.


----------



## sprtsracer (Apr 27, 2005)

c0ch3s3 said:


> i believe they are worried about people driving on the beach, more than people standing on the beach with a fishing pole, or binoculars.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And they have the option of extending it further! Who gives a damn if it's half way over??? It should NEVER have been instituted in the first damn place!!! Their scientific reasoning is HIGHLY flawed!!! Further...if the beach is closed...It's CLOSED!!! Can you WALK to the beach in that area??? Have fun "grass casting"!!!

In the meantime, try explaining that to the folks operating the "party boats" and be sure you let them know that all will be well in the future...yeah...right...and be sure to give them the addresses of the local food banks for their families while you're at it!!!


----------



## fish bucket (Dec 5, 2002)

hit the nail on the head?
are you joking? 
he missed the nail completely!
if you think "sanctuary" doesn't mean "no fishing zone" i got a bridge to sell you.
in a perfect world he might have a valid point but this is not a perfect world and ...they....can...not....be....trusted!
they lie constantly to further their agenda!
i sure am glad that a lot of people are starting to see through their b s!


----------



## SmoothLures (Feb 13, 2008)

I'm fine with managing our resources. It needs to be done. The DNR does that. Government and fanatic groups need to stay out of it. 

Give them an inch letting them make "sanctuaries" and this is how it will start to end our right to fish.


----------



## sprtsracer (Apr 27, 2005)

Read this: From Florida's Attorney General and others!

http://www.news-journalonline.com/news/local/east-volusia/2010/03/11/delay-sought-on-snapper-ban.html


----------



## Tracker16 (Feb 16, 2009)

Funny this ban extended to the gulf but after enough people complained NOAA found a few million extra pounds of snapper they had stashed away somewhere and opened the fishery back up. How can we trust these guys after this. They need oversite and not from some congressional committee either but from each states DNR scientist. NOAA should only have the power to recommend management stategies with states having the right to accept modify or deny them.


----------



## CHULA VISTA (Mar 14, 2010)

*Marine Petting Zoo*

Here in Texas, We Have 9 MILES OUT as the Fed Boundry,, !

REEFING !!! is the Key to KEEP Fishing,,,As
WE Can Control INSIDE 9 MILES,,,,

MY QUESTION,,, How Can NON-USER GROUPS,,., EDF and OC
GET a SAy ON the NMFS GULF COUNCIL ???

How can a GROUP Like the CHARTER FOR HIRE,
BE Awarded CATCH SHARES($$$$$) of a PUBLIC RESOURCE !!

WE Now OWN???,,, FROM the REC ALLOTMENT????(49%)of the TAC???

IT is A Screwed up System,,, 

Flexibality in the MS, is the Answer!!,, for RED Snapper,, and
For the Survival of the Sport!!!
HALF of the Flower Gardens off Galveston is SOON to 
Ban Hook and Line Fishing,, 

FEDs BUT OUT!!

Pat


----------



## Ociferscott (Apr 24, 2009)

sprtsracer said:


> I fail to see how people fishing from the surf would impact the nesting of birds...call me a dummy, but how would that be any different than a bunch of bird watchers and naturalists with binoculars in their hands instead of fishing rods?
> ...
> Unfortunately, from Florida to the Carolinas, however, there is a ban on red snapper that has NO basis in scientific fact, and it's putting quite a few folks out of business and destroying livlihoods.





c0ch3s3 said:


> i believe they are worried about people driving on the beach, more than people standing on the beach with a fishing pole, or binoculars.


Cochese has got it on the bird sanctuaries. They are significantly more interested in how you're getting to your fishing spots and what you're bringing than in your fishing habits. Unfortunately, we tend to bring line, snacks, and other plastic garbage with us when we fish and not all of us clean up. The ATV's don't help our cause on the bird issue either. That being said, I agree with you that we should be allowed to fish. We just have to find a way to reconcile these points of contention. See Cape Hatteras for more details on this particular issue since they are dealing with it right now.



fish bucket said:


> if you think "sanctuary" doesn't mean "no fishing zone" i got a bridge to sell you.
> in a perfect world he might have a valid point but this is not a perfect world and ...they....can...not....be....trusted!





SmoothLures said:


> I'm fine with managing our resources. It needs to be done. The DNR does that. Government and fanatic groups need to stay out of it.
> Give them an inch letting them make "sanctuaries" and this is how it will start to end our right to fish.


I'll take you up on that bridge offer if you can give me even one example in the US where they have suspended fishing in an area entirely when the "sanctuary" wasn't put in place to protect fish or marine mammals. Simply put, there is none. The only time they have or will create a "no-fishing zone" is when they are trying to protect a fish species. And even then, they usually fall back to regulation (see Striped Bass).
As to the more significant issue of fishing closures without scientific merit, you may want to see the Magnus Stevens Act, which was passed years ago without any of this hoopla, and is significantly affecting many areas of the country (e.g. Black Bass and Red Snapper). This act I do not support, and I would love to see it gone.
So, if you want to hack up some righteous indignation, at least aim it in a helpful direction.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

> I'll take you up on that bridge offer if you can give me even one example in the US where they have suspended fishing in an area entirely when the "sanctuary" wasn't put in place to protect fish or marine mammals. Simply put, there is none. The only time they have or will create a "no-fishing zone" is when they are trying to protect a fish species. And even then, they usually fall back to regulation (see Striped Bass).
> As to the more significant issue of fishing closures without scientific merit, you may want to see the Magnus Stevens Act, which was passed years ago without any of this hoopla, and is significantly affecting many areas of the country (e.g. Black Bass and Red Snapper). This act I do not support, and I would love to see it gone.
> So, if you want to hack up some righteous indignation, at least aim it in a helpful direction.


 Installing "Wilderness Area" protection in areas that have been fished for over a century from the beach,with 100 meter protection area around the shore from boats would qualify wouldn't it?? Would think so,since only one pair of a "concerned species",not even and "endangered species" is what is in question... Also this pair of "concerned species" didn't even show mating behavior.. No nest,no birds stayed,even with this the closure was in place thoughout the summer... (example Hatteras Spit) To let you in on what a "wilderness area" is,all access is prohibited,by vehicle,boat on the ocean or sound within 100 meters,all this coupled with no access by foot.. Imho,this is what constitutes a "no fish zone"....... BTW,we have at least 4 (Hatteras Spit included) that are coming down the pipe on NPS land here in Hatteras and Ocracoke... Oh,and that's not including the wrecks that NOAA is considering in their target zone as well...



SmoothLures said:


> I'm fine with managing our resources. It needs to be done. The DNR does that. Government and fanatic groups need to stay out of it.
> 
> Give them an inch letting them make "sanctuaries" and this is how it will start to end our right to fish.


When we are speaking of bird species that have absolutly no bearing on the ESA (example Hatteras Inlet both sides,OI both sides,Ocracoke Inlet both sides),with no access by boat,vehicle,or by foot,it is considered a "scanctuary" or at least one would think so.... It is these very groups you are mentioning doing this I might add...



Tracker16 said:


> Funny this ban extended to the gulf but after enough people complained NOAA found a few million extra pounds of snapper they had stashed away somewhere and opened the fishery back up. How can we trust these guys after this. They need oversite and not from some congressional committee either but from each states DNR scientist. NOAA should only have the power to recommend management stategies with states having the right to accept modify or deny them.


 Agreed,NOAA should be steered by local science that is *current and relevent*.. 

I'm all for managment of resources,although they are steering close to the cliff without the science to back it... jmo from what has been presented..


----------



## fish bucket (Dec 5, 2002)

the enviro-nazis would like this country to be like it was when the indians ran it.
so would i....but...it just ain't possible!


----------



## Ociferscott (Apr 24, 2009)

fish bucket said:


> the enviro-nazis would like this country to be like it was when the indians ran it.
> so would i....but...it just ain't possible!


Posts like this don't help move the discussion forward at all. Notice this thread is titled "realistically discussing", perhaps I should have put "intelligently" in the title as well.



Drumdum said:


> Installing "Wilderness Area" protection in areas that have been fished for over a century from the beach,with 100 meter protection area around the shore from boats would qualify wouldn't it?? Would think so,since only one pair of a "concerned species",not even and "endangered species" is what is in question... Also this pair of "concerned species" didn't even show mating behavior.. No nest,no birds stayed,even with this the closure was in place thoughout the summer... (example Hatteras Spit) To let you in on what a "wilderness area" is,all access is prohibited,by vehicle,boat on the ocean or sound within 100 meters,all this coupled with no access by foot.. Imho,this is what constitutes a "no fish zone"....... BTW,we have at least 4 (Hatteras Spit included) that are coming down the pipe on NPS land here in Hatteras and Ocracoke... Oh,and that's not including the wrecks that NOAA is considering in their target zone as well...


Just for reference. I've studied the maps (have you?) for the Cape Hatteras closings, and they are nothing like what you represent them to be. First, the areas of beach that are actually closed to all traffic is less than a few hundred yards wide. The remainder of the beachfront is open to pedestrians and ATV's so long as you don't venture more than 100 ft from the mean high tide line. Is that really such a horrifying restriction to raise such indignation?
I'm prone to think that the real worst enemy here is the mis-information being spread. When all the locals say that the beach is closed, then the visitors won't even bother to find out for themselves, and your fishing industry will suffer, even though the beach is almost entirely open to fishing.
And by the way, here is the result of studies for the species being protected at Cape Hatteras:
The Plovers, however, have seen their highest nesting success since 1988 in the years since the temporary beach closures were put into effect.


----------



## Tracker16 (Feb 16, 2009)

Ociferscott said:


> The Plovers, however, have seen their highest nesting success since 1988 in the years since the temporary beach closures were put into effect.


Well if Plovers taste as much like chicken as people say, I guess thats a good thing 

Sorry I couldn't resist


----------



## catman32 (Apr 20, 2005)

*Dd*

Take a deep breath before you reply please.


----------



## dawgfsh (Mar 1, 2005)

Ociferscott

I suggest you GO to Hatteras during the bird closers and see for yourself. Do Not believe what Autobon and DOW tell you. Just go see.


----------



## Ociferscott (Apr 24, 2009)

dawgfsh said:


> Ociferscott
> 
> I suggest you GO to Hatteras during the bird closers and see for yourself. Do Not believe what Autobon and DOW tell you. Just go see.


I'll have to give that a try this summer. But, if you're standing there with accurate maps in hand (printed that day) and you're clearly inside the law, what exactly is the uptight eco-ranger going to do about it without getting himself into more trouble than you'd be in?


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

Ociferscott said:


> Posts like this don't help move the discussion forward at all. Notice this thread is titled "realistically discussing", perhaps I should have put "intelligently" in the title as well.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Believe me I have studied the maps.. As of right now,you are correct,we have a one hundred yard corridor to fish from,EXCEPT for Hatteras Inlet.... There you can't set foot past the False Point.. The rip,and much of the soundside is closed,even BEFORE the actual closures take place when nesting or "bird displays" are put into play...... After that,you will not even be able to access False Point,even on foot.. The study of maps do no good,as they tend to change from week to week,even day to day... I sat through at least 2 of the reg-neg meetings.. After listening to special interest tell NPS,as well as other stakeholders that the orv plan had no bearing on Hatteras Inlet because in their view it was to be made into a "wilderness area" designation,it was enough to explain the indifference that was displayed by all special intrest groups at that meeting.... If NPS promotes a plan not to their liking when the new orv plan is put into play there will be another lawsuite by special intrest,and they will collect all atourney fees from the government in pursuit of this lawsuite..

As far as know what is closed and what is not closed,I live here,and saw what came into play last year... As far as the "success rate" from the decree,if 1 hatched chick over the year before(when it was a rather storm free season we won't even discuss the turtles) is a *big success*,when south of us the rate is much higher,then so be it... 



catman32 said:


> Take a deep breath before you reply please.


 I have been watching this beach access "situation" since 1978.. At that time you could drive from Pea Island to Hatteras Inlet.. Since that time in slow,but deleberate steps they have cut our fishing access "on foot and by orv" to corridors in limited areas.. I have no problem with this,if it is to promote the wildlife and protect the resource.. Having said that,the *pohibition of access* with no reguard in relation to peer review science,nor real data explaining how or why orv or pedestrian traffic have an affect on birds within closures when in fact it works at Ft Fisher,is unacceptable as a fisherman. 

Eric... It's difficult,but I tried..


----------



## fish bucket (Dec 5, 2002)

closing 1 foot of beach for no good reason is too much!
this is not a species issue ...it is a land grab issue.
if they keep pushing they might be the endangered species!


----------



## Ociferscott (Apr 24, 2009)

Hey, I'm just glad we've actually got an intelligent discourse on MSP here. At least both viewpoints are getting some informed coverage. I'll agree to keep a closer eye on the Hatteras situation over the next few months to see how it develops. Keep us informed DD on the day-to-day changes that come up and I'll take that information into my opinion on future MSP projects.
Currently, I agree that you have been inconvenienced, but I haven't seen the doom and gloom, end of fishing as we know it scenarios that are being bandied about. But, I will say that you've affected my opinion, hopefully I've given you and others a few things to consider as well.
By the way, "my" maps came from the NPS website, not Audoban or DOW.


----------



## SPECKS (May 14, 2007)

Ociferscott said:


> Currently, I agree that you have been inconvenienced, but I haven't seen the doom and gloom, end of fishing as we know it scenarios that are being bandied about.


 Inconvenience ? Do you realize the local economy down there is affected by these closures ? People who have traveled for years on end to Hatteras to drive on the beaches and surf fish find other places to go and spend their money rather than deal with the "on the fly" NPS closures. Yep you can plan your vacation but don't set in stone as to what beaches you will be on... vandalism to closures and newly discovered nesting sites can expand these areas at any given time. I'm taking it from your statements you have never even been to Hatteras to actually see the closures and the impact they have.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

Ociferscott said:


> Currently, I agree that you have been inconvenienced, but I haven't seen the doom and gloom, end of fishing as we know it scenarios that are being bandied about. But, I will say that you've affected my opinion, hopefully I've given you and others a few things to consider as well.


 Remember what I said in the post earlier


> small but deliberate steps.....


 They (special interest) have (for prime fishing season as of now,year round later) taken away the best spots on Hatteras and Ocracoke Islands.. Looking at maps or charts now does nothing,look at charts from last May or June..

By name: Bodie Island Spit,N end of OI,both sides of Hatteras Inlet,Both sides of Ocracoke at the inlets,also a good possibility of taking Buxton Point every summer (if an oyster catcher is spotted,or a plover makes a nest within 300 meters of the point).....

In the works... NOAA has already met with several boat captians down here for a "feeling out session" on wrecks... Look for that step next..

NPS and DOI have already consented to regulation by NOAA "tidal waters".. You can look for this step next as well... 

Understood,some is speculation on "what may or may not happen",although the history of our access to beaches on this island leads me and many others to believe the "doom and gloom" scenario is on the horizon...


----------



## Ociferscott (Apr 24, 2009)

SPECKS said:


> I'm taking it from your statements you have never even been to Hatteras to actually see the closures and the impact they have.


Have I been fishing down in Hatteras in the last 2 years, Yes. Have I ever in that time been affected by the beach closures, No. Maybe I was lucky. But, (again based on current maps) I don't see the massive impact that you are quoting. Show it to me. Otherwise, I'm prone to beleive that the doom is actually a self-fulfilling prophecy (You say "doom" and the tourists flee).



Drumdum said:


> Remember what I said in the post earlier They (special interest) have (for prime fishing season as of now,year round later) taken away the best spots on Hatteras and Ocracoke Islands.. Looking at maps or charts now does nothing,look at charts from last May or June..
> 
> By name: Bodie Island Spit,N end of OI,both sides of Hatteras Inlet,Both sides of Ocracoke at the inlets,also a good possibility of taking Buxton Point every summer (if an oyster catcher is spotted,or a plover makes a nest within 300 meters of the point).....
> 
> ...


Let's not setup what if scenarios. Link us some maps or pictures, some evidence that these closures are more wide-spread than the current maps would lead us to beleive. Like I said, I for one will be paying attention this summer to see how bad the problem really is.


----------



## drawinout (May 11, 2008)

You're digging a hole here man. Scott, maybe the reason you're not seeing the "major impact" is because I don't think you've known that stretch of beach without the closures. You have to understand, some people on this board are more affected than others. To some the beaches down there are just another beach to go to when the bite is on. To others, it's where they live and make a living. With all the closures, I imagine the local economy is in a real bad spot. Growing up in NC, I was out there all the time. Had first dates on that stretch beach, learned to drive on that stretch of beach, casted some of my first fishing poles on that stretch of beach, then all of a sudden there are tree huggers and soft handed city kids succeeding in taking it away! I understand they were supposed to implement a plan to manage beach traffic long ago, but to me it's all a bunch of horse crap because I've never seen the need for one. In my eyes they should have left well enough alone! Changing things from how I've always known them is offensive, and I don't even live down there. I can't imagine the negative impact it's had on some with what they've already done. I haven't read all the posts in this thread, and I'm not trying to come across as argumentative, just typing how I feel about what's happening.


----------



## SPECKS (May 14, 2007)

I'm not sure you get it... The additional closures have not started so there is no current map to link to. Today was the date set that all "pre-nesting" closures were to be up. They can and will change at any time so there is no way to forecast exactly what will happen in the months to come. drawinout makes a good point... maybe you don't know the way Hatteras beaches were... Yes closures have been around a few more than two years but they have gotten bigger and bigger. One older closure was on Bodie Island Spit and when it went up it cut off a great spot for both fishing and catching bait. My kids will never know driving out and fishing the point all night long or just going for a quick moonlight drive down there. Id say ask the rental companies, tackle shops and retailers down there if the closures hurt their local economy last summer.


----------



## Ociferscott (Apr 24, 2009)

drawinout said:


> You're digging a hole here man. Scott, maybe the reason you're not seeing the "major impact" is because I don't think you've known that stretch of beach without the closures.


Hey, don't get me wrong. I'm only half playing devil's advocate here. On the other half I'm trying to get information. I can understand it being an emotional issue, but let's face facts, our emotions get in the way of facts. This marine spatial planning is coming down the pipeline and people need to make an informed decision on whether they want it or not.
I'm not trying to get in the way of your fight on Hatteras Island, but that area may well be a poster-child for what we can expect with MSP. So let's get the facts. Frankly, I think you're fighting the good fight when it comes to public access, but let's seperate what we think is happening from what is actually happening and provide some real data so people can choose a side.
Hey, keep me informed, keep us all in the loop. If the worst of the closures are yet to come, then let us know when they come. Throw an update our way every now and then.
Let's not paint me as the guy who's pushing to have MSP instituted around the country, cause I'm not gonna be out there stumping to get this executive order passed. But it may be coming, and with the information I have now, I'm not going to be the guy picketing to oppose it either. Frankly, I just got tired of seeing all of these people throwing out indignation without serving up a few facts to get me to follow along. I'm not going to picket something just because someone with "authority" tells me that it needs to be picketed. Give me the information and let me make up my own mind.
What I can see from this discussion so far is that the MSP issue that will hit us all closest to home is bird protections and beach closures. That being the case, we need to ensure that 1) only species that warrant protection are protected, and 2) protected areas are chosen based on proven necessity. I think I'll let cooler heads prevail for now and not talk about these issues as they pertain to Hatteras until I can both get more data, and see the situation with my own eyes.
And please, don't try to run me over for my opinion (that's all it is) if you see me out on the Hatteras beach.


----------



## PierMan (Jan 27, 2010)

Comments from a tourist: I guess I'm what you would refer to as a tourist? I have been spending at least 1 to 2 weeks every year for the last 6 years in the Outer Banks area: all I go there for is to fish. I usually do a lot of fishing off the piers; with my low vision it is much more condusive to a stress free day/night of fishing. However, when I was a kid (a long time ago) I use to fish off the beachs in Hatteras/Ocracoke with my father and brothers. Up until a couple of years ago, they would join me where ever my wife and I were staying and we would head out for a day on one of the beaches that we use to fish when we were kids. It was a little tough on me, but it was still a lot of fun. Anyway, a couple of years ago, my father got so frustrated because we could not get to any of the places we use to go. In shout he said "the hell with it". Now I know thiat we are only one family, but I would have to say that a lot of familys have had simular experiences. In short, it's not the misinformation or the panic/frustration that appears on forums like this that scare of tourist; it's the bad experiences that we have when we are just trying to do what we have been doing for years.
I'm saying all of this because I appreciate all of your comments; even the ones that predict where all of this might very well be leading to.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

Ociferscott said:


> Hey, don't get me wrong. I'm only half playing devil's advocate here. On the other half I'm trying to get information. I can understand it being an emotional issue, but let's face facts, our emotions get in the way of facts. This marine spatial planning is coming down the pipeline and people need to make an informed decision on whether they want it or not.
> I'm not trying to get in the way of your fight on Hatteras Island, but that area may well be a poster-child for what we can expect with MSP. So let's get the facts. Frankly, I think you're fighting the good fight when it comes to public access, but let's seperate what we think is happening from what is actually happening and provide some real data so people can choose a side.
> Hey, keep me informed, keep us all in the loop. If the worst of the closures are yet to come, then let us know when they come. Throw an update our way every now and then.
> Let's not paint me as the guy who's pushing to have MSP instituted around the country, cause I'm not gonna be out there stumping to get this executive order passed. But it may be coming, and with the information I have now, I'm not going to be the guy picketing to oppose it either. Frankly, I just got tired of seeing all of these people throwing out indignation without serving up a few facts to get me to follow along. I'm not going to picket something just because someone with "authority" tells me that it needs to be picketed. Give me the information and let me make up my own mind.
> ...


 Maybe you would like to see a link that speaks "science" in another aspect??

http://www.preservebeachaccess.org/landingnew/specialdrberry.html

This IS MORE DATA.. Although some (special interest),may not think so.. Piping Plover is "species of concern",the rest (oyster catcher,black skimmer,and least tern) are not even that..... Why do they need the largest areas that are regulated to hatch these birds is anyones guess,but this much in common sense terms we can call bs on... 

5-10 years from now,you can tell me if "we think it's happening or if it is REALLY happening",I promise I'll buy you the drink of your choice if I'm not close to correct......


----------



## Dr. Bubba (Nov 9, 1999)

Ociferscott said:


> I'm not trying to get in the way of your fight on Hatteras Island, but that area may well be a poster-child for what we can expect with MSP....
> 
> ....That being the case, we need to ensure that 1) only species that warrant protection are protected, and 2) protected areas are chosen based on proven necessity.....
> 
> ....And please, don't try to run me over for my opinion (that's all it is) if you see me out on the Hatteras beach.


Scott, I've selectively quoted you in order to bring attention to the link Drumdum placed in his last post. You, and probably others, have a lot of catching up to do, and fortunately Dr. Berry's 5 video summary does just that. Dr. Berry's expert commentary may be specific to the Hatteras issue, but it certainly speaks to what so called "environmentalists" are doing to keep you away from your public lands and waterways.

The times have changed, and environmental NGOs have no problem shutting the general public out if there is control and $$$ in it for them.


----------



## dapster (Mar 2, 2010)

*Knowledge is power...*

...and the lessons gleaned from the CHNSRA ORV issue are good ammo against the coming NOAA MPA onslaught.

Trust NOAA for WX out on the water, after that, I dunno....


Here's the latest out of the MPA director, in response to YOUR public comments:



> "Joining the national system does not affect the management of the park or its existing boundaries or regulations. No new restrictions on fishing, hunting or access are required.”


http://mpa.gov/


Holdin' ya to that Joe, along with your usual Santa performances at area Bass Pro Shops!


----------



## Danman (Dec 13, 2007)

I only know what I read here concerning driving on the outer bank beaches..It seems this is the last frontier of unregulated beach... 

laws tamed the wild west by rules, regulations, etc. for better or for worse. 

It's a shame to take the joy away from those who drive on the beaches to locations not reachable by foot so one can surf fish. 

Thats all: I'm ready warden:fishing:


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

Danman said:


> I only know what I read here concerning driving on the outer bank beaches..It seems this is the last frontier of unregulated beach...
> 
> laws tamed the wild west by rules, regulations, etc. for better or for worse.
> 
> ...


 Actually it was regulated by the "interium plan".. Also a plan had been hammered out MANY YEARS ago.. I'm thinking it was more than one,but would have to research it.. These plans were all sent to DOI with no acknowlegment.. NPS was to have instated a plan,but it appears DOI and NPS would rather have special interest do it through the Concent Decree rather than be in court,and pay the special interest lawyers..

Imho,it's not like the "Wild West",and we are not riding all over the resource (dunes ect).. It is more like they are using ESA as a weapon to totally ban access.. It's not JUST ABOUT orv access,it's about total human access PERIOD..... In areas that are in question (all inlets,much of n beach ramp23 to30,Buxton Point) during the summer (proposed by special interest groups,yr round) there is no access even on foot......JMHO,if you had set at one of the reg-neg meetings you might understand that all special intrest groups at that meeting (armed with Fed court ordered Concent Decree) were not budging on any point of intrest,and were fulling willing to let the reg-neg process fail... 

It was truly a shame too,because even me (a working stiff) could see many areas that could be compromised from both sides,and still have a park working with resource and recreation...


----------



## Tracker16 (Feb 16, 2009)

drawinout said:


> , learned to drive on that stretch of beach, .


That's where I learned to drive too. 41 years ago. Boy have things changed since then


----------



## dapster (Mar 2, 2010)

*Don't put much faith....*



Ociferscott said:


> Have I been fishing down in Hatteras in the last 2 years, Yes. Have I ever in that time been affected by the beach closures, No. Maybe I was lucky. But, (again based on current maps) I don't see the massive impact that you are quoting. Show it to me. Otherwise, I'm prone to beleive that the doom is actually a self-fulfilling prophecy (You say "doom" and the tourists flee).



...in the "Current Maps" you reference. 

The NPS supplied "Google Earth"-based maps have been wildly inaccurate at best, and may go days or weeks without being updated to reflect the closures _du jour._ Boots on the sand is the only way to truly know what is closed _that day_.

Has this issue been overstated in many cases? Sure, but it's also very frustrating to see folks like yourself _understate_ the same issue based on bad data and a lack of on-the-ground knowledge of the realities of these closures. 

You admit that you have been lucky, please take us at our word that we are telling it like it is, and know what it feels like to be "Unlucky"...





Ociferscott said:


> Let's not setup what if scenarios. Link us some maps or pictures, some evidence that these closures are more wide-spread than the current maps would lead us to beleive. Like I said, I for one will be paying attention this summer to see how bad the problem really is.


Per your request, here's a picture taken the 3rd week of June last year, at Ramp 49 in Frisco, looking northward toward cape point from nearly the southern limit of 49 where it meets with houses/ped areas. This is roughly the time of year when the young birds are feeding themselves and nearly fledged, so about the height of the nesting season closures.


(Please note the "More beach closed than Open" ratio.)












Note as the beach arcs to the right, you can see where the ORV's come to an abrupt stop, where Resource Closures for birds begin. As you can see the vast majority of this stretch of beach is ORV free, from this area all the way to Cape Point proper. During turtle nesting season, the ares where ORV's can travel is even more severely limited.

************************************************


Same vantage point/day, looking southward toward Frisco Pier in the distance. I like to share this picture because it clearly shows which user group creates the greatest human density/carrying capacity per square measure of sand.










*************************************************

Here's last year's pre-nesting boundary on South Beach south of Cape Point, takne on Easter Weekend. By this time last year, Cape Point was completely closed "At all tides to pedestrians and vehicles", and did not reopen for _months._ 

The sign speaks very well by itself, no?











***********************************************

There are many scenes like this on HI right now. Only NPS staff is allowed in these areas.











***************************************

Fast forward to July-November when the turtle nesting season gets going. Here's a typical turtle nest closure once it enters the "50-Day Window" after being layed: (Complete with clueless pedestrian violator!)












These closures run dune-to-low tide line, with no way around except to walk up in the dunes or paddle offshore. (The vehicle tracks you see behind this particular closure where for NPS use only.)


Find one of these in between you and where you want to go, and you stop _there_, Jack. From day 50 through about day 70 or so, these closures are maintained, even if they go underwater and the nest drowns in a storm event.

There were over 100 of these within the seashore last year, BTW...

**********************************************

This nest went under during Hurricane Hannah in August, 2008, and was not excavated until later October:











*****************************************


The results where these:

-A mile or two of beach needlessly closed for an extra _two months._ 

-81 dead loggerhead eggs that were opened up one-by-one, put back in the hole, and left for the crabs.










************************************




If you require any further clarifications, please let me know. It's far worse down here than you've led yourself to believe.


----------



## Ociferscott (Apr 24, 2009)

Dapster: Awesome post! Thanks for the visuals, definetely helps the discussion. I'm giving myself some time to reflect and research some more.
Obviously in the case of your dead turtles, the beach should have been reopened, assuming they knew or could have found out the turtles were dead.
The extent of the closures becomes more visible to us all when we share pictures and information like this.
As to the issue of whether these birds and turtles warrant protection, I can't be called an expert but what I've found so far is that both the turtles and the plovers *are* covered under the ESA, due to a policy decision that each "regional community" be considered a different entity. True there are plenty of Plovers around to keep the species alive, but someone decided that the species was in danger of being driven out of it's natural range on the Atlantic coast.
Is that a proper decision, I don't know. I'd need to check into it more and even then it may come down to a decision of what your personal convictions say. Should a species be protected if it's in danger of being moved from it's natural range? I'm not prepared to answer that question.
But, if they are indeed in need of protection, has the environmental lobby gone to far with their protections, or is what's being done the right and necessary amount of enforcement? Is this the price we are required to pay to keep a species alive (or in this case, comfortable in their traditional, natural habitat)?


----------



## dapster (Mar 2, 2010)

*Thanks, and my pleasure!*



Ociferscott said:


> Dapster: Awesome post! Thanks for the visuals, definetely helps the discussion. I'm giving myself some time to reflect and research some more.


When words fail, pix do the trick. 

Reflect away, but you'll never do better research than to give yourself some "Island Time" between now and July 4th, and see all of this for yourself. 

Post your own pix once done, and then we'll talk again.




Ociferscott said:


> Obviously in the case of your dead turtles, the beach should have been reopened, assuming they knew or could have found out the turtles were dead.
> The extent of the closures becomes more visible to us all when we share pictures and information like this.


Not as obvious as it would seem. They _can_ determine if the nests are compromised, but they don't, due to concerns over nest viabilty/sex predominance risks once uncovered, blah-de-blah. They also will not move nests like those shown that are located in low swales that are _guaranteed_ to go under in either perigean moon cycles and/or storm events. 

In these cases, "Nature Rules", but in the event of such things like mammalian predation, not so much. More on that later...




Ociferscott said:


> As to the issue of whether these birds and turtles warrant protection, I can't be called an expert but what I've found so far is that both the turtles and the plovers *are* covered under the ESA, due to a policy decision that each "regional community" be considered a different entity. True there are plenty of Plovers around to keep the species alive, but someone decided that the species was in danger of being driven out of it's natural range on the Atlantic coast.
> Is that a proper decision, I don't know. I'd need to check into it more and even then it may come down to a decision of what your personal convictions say. Should a species be protected if it's in danger of being moved from it's natural range? I'm not prepared to answer that question.
> But, if they are indeed in need of protection, has the environmental lobby gone to far with their protections, or is what's being done the right and necessary amount of enforcement? Is this the price we are required to pay to keep a species alive (or in this case, comfortable in their traditional, natural habitat)?


I can't answer any question you present any better than you have, but I will add this for you to think about:

How arrogant is it for the human _genus_ to assume that it can guarantee that any/all species will never go extinct, simply because it was added to some protection list of its own making? 

Darwin is doing 3500 RPM right about now....


----------



## Dr. Bubba (Nov 9, 1999)

[X] This Thread Delivers.

[ ] This Thread Does Not Deliver.


----------



## dapster (Mar 2, 2010)

*Hey, Dr. Bubba! New around here...*



Dr. Bubba said:


> [X] This Thread Delivers.
> 
> [ ] This Thread Does Not Deliver.



...and I hope I correctly comprehend your scoring system, and will be allowed to continue said delivery of this and other hyperbolic pro-acess garbage, errr ...I, I mean _opinion_. 

***********************

Here's another recent CAHA shoreline pic for your viewing pleasure:


"I tried to take a picture of the Hatteras Ligthouse, but a sign got in the way..."








.



> 5 Man Elec. Band/Tesla:
> 
> Sign, Sign, everywhere a sign
> Blocking out the scenery breaking my mind
> Do this, don't do that, can't you read the sign?


----------



## Dr. Bubba (Nov 9, 1999)

dapster, I believe you comprehend just fine!

someone asked for more info and DD and you provided. Your pictures tell a good story. But I also really hope folks take the time to watch the videos of Dr. Berry that DD posted. They are very important.

Access to the public shoreline is dwindling everywhere, EVERYWHERE! I deal with it in Hatteras and I deal with it at home. In some places it's a species on a list, in other places it's protective property owners that want to keep you away....off "their beach"

I've had it, and I'm fighting back.

If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything....

somebody said that, and I believe it.


----------



## sand flea (Oct 24, 1999)

I appreciate everyone keeping the political bile to a minimum and sticking to actually discussing the impact of some of these rules.

For my part, I'm actually in favor of the Feds taking fisheries control away from the states on some species, so long as there's solid science behind it. The striper moratorium, for instance, caused recs and commercials to howl bloody murder years ago. But you know what? The scientists were right and the fish rebounded. If we're talking about things that swim, the government has done a decent job keeping all the different usergroups balanced.

The birds issue is the one that has made everyone skeptical. I'm not entirely against smart closures that protect threatened and endangered species. As I've said many times before, in my neck of the woods there are plover closures that block off sections of the beach but still allow egress. Everybody wins.

But now that some of the groups like DOW and Audubon have explicitly come out and said that they believe the beaches should be closed even for common species of birds that are in no way threatened, it's plain what they're after: total closure so that birders can pursue their hobby without anyone else in their way. And they've effectively and smartly dressed up their hobby in the guise of a noble environmental cause, bullying the Feds in the process. So I'm leery as hell about what the Feds will do when it comes to balancing the needs of both of our hobbies.


----------



## emanuel (Apr 2, 2002)

I truly hate the birders. We had a bunch of them here last fall and they were shocked/amazed that the feathered rats had a nasty habit of divebombing our baits and swallowing them with the hook inside.

They were not amused about my jokes involving Alkaseltzer tablets or my handling of aggressive pelicans.


----------



## Dr. Bubba (Nov 9, 1999)

with all due respect, Eman, that post does not help at all.

nature lovers come in all shapes and sizes. Some like to hunt, some like to fish, some like the see the birds soar. Some like to eat em, and some like to shoot em in a photo.

Either way, we all like to be able to get THERE to do it. If it gets polarized, kiss it goodbye. Only those in control, and who deem themselves to be experts, will be able to participate.


----------



## emanuel (Apr 2, 2002)

They were a very narrow-minded lot with no sense of humor. Even though every bird we accidentally caught was carefully unhooked and released, they got all incensed that we had bait in the water that could possibly be picked up by their precious birds. One got really upset that when he mentioned the bird was a "royal tern" and I called it a "royal pain in the ass".


----------



## Dr. Bubba (Nov 9, 1999)

I sure hope their lack of "sense of humor" and narrowmindedness doesn't shut down your favorite stretch of beach. 

It's Happened to many, just sayin....


----------



## emanuel (Apr 2, 2002)

FYI, here's the link to the proposal as it stands right now.

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/domes_fish/catchshare/docs/draft_noaa_cs_policy.pdf

The commercial fishing lobbyists are up in arms, so this sounds like they're going to take a hit whereas the recreational guys are not.

The "catch shares" are going to be aimed at the greatest socio-economic impact which I assume means that conceivably areas that make more money off recreational fishing would be allowed a greater share.

We shall see.


----------



## dapster (Mar 2, 2010)

*Ding ding ding!!!!*



sand flea said:


> But now that some of the groups like DOW and Audubon have explicitly come out and said that they believe the beaches should be closed even for common species of birds that are in no way threatened, it's plain what they're after: total closure so that birders can pursue their hobby without anyone else in their way. And they've effectively and smartly dressed up their hobby in the guise of a noble environmental cause, bullying the Feds in the process. So I'm leery as hell about what the Feds will do when it comes to balancing the needs of both of our hobbies.



We have a winner! Anyone doing more than belly-crawling with optics is _persona non grata. _ 


Sand Flea speaks the truth, as the birders are trying their level best to turn a Recreation Area into a Wildlife Refuge. Period. 

I would truly like to see what would happen if a different type of user group, (heck, even shell-seekers/kite-fliers), tried to turn a Wildlife Refuge into a Recreation Area.


----------



## CHULA VISTA (Mar 14, 2010)

*Transferable Catch Shares*

Here in Texas ,, we are Up in Arms obout this,,,RED Snapper Allocations
The Rec Sector is 49% of the Total Allowable Catch(Comms 51%)
The Charter For Hire Guys are to get a % of That,,,
AND Be Able to Sell/Lease/Trade it as an Asset,
Even go to a Bank and Use as Collateral,,,,,,
Or Maybe even Sell it to their Customers
On the Charter Boat, as they Catch It,,,

It's a Damn Shame That NOAA will Gift, Shares, to Historical 
Participants in the Fishery,,, a PUBLIC RESOURCE ,, Owned
By ALL !!!,, Making some of the Guys ,,, Wealthy,,
It Makes Me Puke!!

Enviromental Groups Have Their Footprints all over this,
and Have Pushed for a While,,,,

They Will not Stop Until WE are ALL off the Water and Close The Beach!!!
Make no Mistake,, they want to Ban FISHING !!
Wake UP!!

Pat
Hurst Texas


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

This could give some an idea of what fishermen are up against in Cape Hatteras and Ocracoke.. *Special NOTE:* Check out the judge's NEW REFERENCE to Currituck beaches as well.. OBTW,the way I read it,and could be wrong,he was also including beaches along Nags Head areas....

The part that stunned me as much as anything else was the indifference the judge showed to Murray's statement of evironment (weather,ect.) having a massive impact on bird and turtles...

http://www.islandfreepress.org/2010Archives/03.20.2010-ReportOnJudgeBoylesStatusConferenceOnTheConsentDecree.html


----------



## channelbass (Feb 4, 2008)

dapster said:


> Trust NOAA for WX out on the water, after that, I dunno....
> 
> 
> 
> Ha.....Thats a good one, even the current observations are wrong half the time


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

*I want the Govt out of every aspect of my life...*

Sorry fellas, mismanagement by all the fishery folks, have proven that they have no clue... Prime example, Dog Sharks, endangered, yeah right.. They eat everything, specks, greys...I beleive things run in cycles.. So some think stripers are doing better, I don't... 

USFWS in bed with the folks that are denying us access, they want it closed for the winter... NPS in bed with the enviros... Broken Promises... Its about to hit the fan down here..

A federal Judge that is clueless... When they are done scwewing us, you can bet that they will be coming to a beach near you... 

It has nothing to do with driving on the beach (ATV's) CLUELESS...I don't own an atv... It has to do with HUMAN access... You can't walk there either ....

Can''t wait to get my Government Issued Health Care Tattoo.... Wake up folks.....My days of trusting the Govt are long gone... Just ask an Indian or a Hatterasman...

PS with the fine officers comments about atv's makes me wonder if he has ever even steped a foot on this Island... Please... I have been regualted to death... I will do what I want where I want when I want... Used to be a staunch supporter of rules and regs.. But too many of them have been proven false, so Officer catch me if you can...Over It .... By the way I don't drive 55 either .... 

JAM


----------



## scavengerj (Sep 10, 2007)

Always worth reading...
http://www.newswithviews.com/Coffman/mike2.htm


DMS #525
AMSA #1102
OBPA


----------

