You are advocating a shotgun approach to conservationism, instead of a solution that directly addresses pointed solutions. Shutting down expanded areas of OB's only asset is not a realistic compromise. Please see my first post for an example of a realistic one. As well as turn the area into the Galopagos-esque environment enviro-nazis desire. There is a lot of irony here. The remoteness is exactly what brings the people. Please note that I said "remoteness" and not "animals." No offense, but maybe you should start in OC. Compared to the OB, that area could use a head start. Please, please, please admit that if TR were alive today, enviromentalists would brand him a hypocrit and the media would destroy any chance of him placed in the position that allowed him to do such things. A notorious wild game hunter is your champion. He's probably eaten more sea turtles & exotic bird eggs than you've seen in your entire life. My point is this: The average surfer that is against closing the beach is closer to the spirit of TR than any envrionmentalist. The vast majority of surfers advocate clean water & beaches, as well as natures beauty. Where you differ from the majority of posters here (and TR) is that we see it for us to enjoy and partake of. Please note that they didn't lock Yellowstone and Yosemite down. Negative, Ghostrider...that pattern is full. You just destroyed anything that came after this sentence fragment. They were "installed" for humans to enjoy. I know things may have evolved to include the rest of the sentence, but please don't attempt to dispute it as the original intent. Again...no offense intended, but sell that stuff to the corporations. The delusion that the people will mass to conserve is almost hilarious. Have you ever been to another country??? I think what needs to happen is environmentalists have to call "time out," get into a huddle and try another approach. The self-righteous save-the-world routine is obnoxious as hell and just creates animosity. Just a tip: Good people naturally want to do the right thing and often do. Malicious people don't. The former group is sick of ridiculous rules established to prevent the latter group from doing damage. The latter group doesn't care and creates destruction, anyway.
EC, you misconstrued what I stated, i.e., it would be stupid to call people names or attempt to discredit them based upon some attribute (where they live, what they ride, age, gender, religion...). Also, I invite you to re-read what I said about the Outer Banks, or Hatteras, being more than just S-Turns, the Lighthouse and Frisco Pier. And, when there is no decent surf on the Island it isn't too bad a spot to simply lay low, read a book, take a walk on the beach, or simply chill. Please, pleeeeeaaaaase NO more tourism development on Hatteras Island - there is already too much commercialism on the northern island between KDH and South Nags Head.
Ray F, thank you for your constructive criticism. rodndtube, I'm sorry I misinterpreted your post and I meant no harm.
The problem is that Audobon is keeping beaches closed long after the birds have hatched and fledged. The birds hatch (if they make it past the feral cats and weather) around late June and these long stretches of beach are closed until October. There is no reason for this other than Audobon trying to make a point that they call the "shots." There is a history and a livelihood at stake for the locals who have had roots in this region since Blackbeard. Their economy thrives on their parks and outdoor resources which are being hindered by this subborn point Audobon is trying to make. Try to think from another perspective for a change. These plovers nest anywhere from Delaware down to Georgia. I hope these rangers start closing your home breaks and we'll see how much gratification you have for their feeble attempt at saving a species that isn't even considered endangered.
I found This document quite informative, which is the Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for the Wintering Population of the Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus) in North Carolina; Final Rule As well as this PDF document, which is the Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus) Atlantic Coast Population Revised Recovery Plan, quite useful. Although the latter is a little bit older, you may find some historical information explaining that this has been going on since the increased induction of man to these shores.
Link to a US Fish and Wildlife Service FAQ on the Piping Plover and Endangered Species Act: http://www.fws.gov/plover/q&a.html This also impacts the beach closures in Delaware and made access difficult to one nice former break in CHSP. IMO key paragraphs are the third para in section 10. "Requires that Federal agencies take action to prevent further loss..." and Sections 19 and 20 which essentially say that economic impacts are given relatively little consideration in the listing of a species but is considered in determining critical habitat.
Aloha Matt, I believe you are misreading me here and confusing my points with those made by ECSponger. Look at my postings in this thread on the beach access issues. However, in my last posting I did make the point that I would hope that south Hatteras Island never becomes anything like the northern Outer Banks of KDW-Nags Head with a continuous swath of development of high density housing/rentals, bars/clubs, gas stations, fast food joints, go-kart & water slide "entertainment" and so on. For the most part the people living in Buxton, Frisco and Hatteras aren't for that kind of development, as you alluded to in your last posting. On the other hand, I am very pleased as a U.S. citizen that the federal and state governments of these United States have set aside areas, both lands and seas, as parks, forests, and refuges, and have protected these areas from commercial and industrial development and exploitation, for the enjoyment of generations of Americans and others.
So why the govt??? Okay, point taken. But why on earth do you think the government is the solution??? Government hardly EVER provides a meaningful solution to this sort of thing. I'll tell you what they could do. And by that I mean if Uncle Sam decides he should "save the outer banks from the exploitation of evil men". He'll set up some sort of bureaucracy that will be run by some crazy liberals with no real understanding of the ecosystem, but good-intentioned. Eventually they'll be replaced by self-serving bureaucrats who don't care about anything except convincing the federal govt. that they still deserve your and my tax dollars. So they'll invent crazy ideas about how the outer banks is "so helpless, and the residents are too dumb to take care of their own land...etc, etc, etc". Meanwhile, the only people with a real stake in the islands' prosperity, will suffer. I understand that you care, but screw the government. It's not your friend, and it will ultimately abandon you if you trust your fate to it. Bottom line, the locals hold a stake in the local ecosystem. The fed's don't. The only thing they truly care about it keeping their jobs. Don't believe me? Then you probably haven't worked with fed employees. That's the real deal.
The Federal, state and local governments are responsible for 95 percent or more of the lands in the USA that have been set aside as parks, refuges and reserves. These government entities have done a decent job - not perfect, but what is in this world? The alternative would be no Central Park in NYC, no Yellowstone Park, no Assateague National Seashore and no Grand Canyon as we know it today. And there not be a Cape Hatteras as we know it today - remember when Rodanthe-Waves-Salvo were distinct communities with hwy speed changes between each? Well, it is safe to say that most of the space between South Nags Head and Salvo would consist of a continuous stretch of cottages, hotels, motels and condos. And on south to Avon, Buxton and Frisco and Hatteras Village. Forget about general pedestrian beach access and 4WD beach access. Aside from Cape Hatteras National Seashore access points do you find much beach access in Avon and Buxton unless you own or rent a cottage within walking distance of the beach?
I agree with you there, but that's a separate issue. Land development does not have to mean restricted ocean access. Believe me, I get uber-pissed every time I have to deal with that. Whether it be paying to go on the beach in NJ, having no access due to parking restrictions in OBX, or having some guy hassle me for surfing "his" wave in CA because his property happened to be on the beachfront next to the wave...I don't mess around with that. People who think their beachfront property entitles them to "own the ocean" can go screw a goat. As far as national parks go, however, I don't think you're understanding me. The organization that created places like Assateague and Yellowstone no longer exists. Nobody in Washington cares about that stuff anymore. Nobody is going to come out and say "Build resorts in the valley at Yosemite," but that's only because they'd be labeled a villian. The days of Washington stepping in to help out are over. Back when the big National Parks were created, land was cheap. Saving that space was not the kind of sacrifice that it would be today. Just think how much money you could make if you sold all the land in Yellowstone. I guarantee you that it's been discussed in Wyoming and probably Washington as well. Look at Congress and the Senate and tell me which one of those goofballs would actually lift a finger to preserve nature. NONE. I'm not saying that they're bad people, but they have "more important" things to worry about. The only reason the would pass some sort of "green" legislation is to garner votes. Case in point, if Washington can sleep with Audobon and gain some legitimacy in the environmentalist industry, it'll go ahead and do it. Additionally, we're not just talking about saving plovers. We're also talking about people who depend on tourism to feed their families. They have more interest in maintaining the sanctity of the area than ANYONE, including Audobon. I've mentioned this three times now, and you continue to ignore it. Why do you insist on thinking the government is the only thing that can save Hatteras? Not only does the government not care, but even if it wanted to, it doesn't possess the mechanism to implement a real solution. I understand that you love the place. So do I. But please leave the stewardship to the people who live there. If they need help, they'll ask for it.
Matt, Youre gonna disagree with me for saying this but i remember 15 years ago there was a major effort around Buxton NOT to move the lighthouse. There were lots of signs put up by locals saying that relocating the lighthouse was giving in to mother nature rather than controlling it, and advocated more seawalls, beachfill, and groins. They didnt want to PAY for those erosion control measures, they wanted the federal government to pay for them. If im wrong in my recollection, correct me...Memory doesnt always serve. I guess my point is that locals CAN be on the wrong side of local stewardship issues. The world is full of examples. I actually agree with you on the beach closure issue for the most part, but dont rest your case on the "we live here, we know whats best" argument. Its not convincing, and it wont serve the worthy cause very well.
Doomed They will never get it together in hatteras. They cant stop arguing with each other long enough to have any impact. The federal govt wants to close the beaches all around the lighthouse and charge money to go to the only open beach. Surf there now cause in a few years its gonna be like jersey. All rules no fun pay to play poser-ville. Besides, every time I go down there now I get stuff ripped off. Maybe its better that an era is ending.
Charging for beach access appears the trend (along with toll roads). Delaware charges to visit the beaches (as part of the state park system), access is severly restricted at other DE beaches during much of the year or non-existent at the many gated beach front communities and no parking is allowed along the highway. Ocean City, Maryland, has metered parking many months of the year although there are several places a few blocks from the beach without meters; several areas have no access at all (e.g., high rise condo area) or limited access, but overall not as bad as DE. The Assateague State Park charges an access fee as does the Assateague National Seashore Park ($15/week, $30/year, also good for Chincoteague). To use a 4WD requires a $90 annual fee and there is a total vehicle limit. Similar for Chincoteague in Virginia, which is part of Assateague National Seashore except that a major portion of Chincotegue is closed March 15 - Aug 30. Major portions of the Virginia barrier islands are off-limits and are owned by the Nature Conservancy and/or are wild life refuge areas. Others can fill in the blanks for New Jersey and Virginia and the northern Outer Banks, from KDH up to the state border, but I imagine huge areas are off limits because it is private property. The current crisis in the lawsuit affecting Cape Hatteras seems to be in large part due to the ruling of Judge Terrence William Boyle, one who many would classify as an activist judge. Not the national seashore administration and executive branch and not the legislative branch. Judge Boyle was the minority counsel of the Housing Subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Banking and Currency from 1970 to 1973. In 1973, he was a legislative assistant to Republican Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina. He was appointed to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina by President Ronald Reagan on May 3, 1984. Boyle was nominated to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, by President Bush senior in 1991 and by President Bush junior in 2001, however, Boyle was not confirmed in both instances. Judge Boyle is known for having a fondness of animals and birds, but lacks a similar empathy for people. Defenders of Wildlife and the National Audubon Society initiated the lawsuit against the National Park Service and other federal defendants. Dare and Hyde counties and the Cape Hatteras Access Preservation Alliance were allowed by Boyle to enter the legal action as defendant/intervenors. But the ruling was made by Judge Boyle. The fight is with him and his decision-making and not the national park system.
Matt Aloha, I don't drive here on weekends as you so implied, I live/work here all year. So do you think I think I know what is best for this town? No I most certainly do not. There are people who already make those calls. Do I think they should replenish beaches every four years? But do I have a say in that? No. The big dogs, elected officials, and the big money do that. I have little or no say in the matter. The best I can do is try to educate visitors and guests to our shore about our recycling programs, picking up trash/not littering (especially cigarette butts) and how these beaches are manicured, groomed, and cared for. That's the least I could do for my own town and beaches. My suggestions were meant to be over-the-top and extreme, because now days if you give people too many options nothing will ever get done. It is unfortunate that people are not making the money and life standards have been down because it is believed that is directly affected by beach closures (can't be 100% accurate). But the world still turns, and you gotta go on your way and not blame other people for things that go bad in your life. It sucks that it is the gov't that is closing these beaches, but if you're so upset at them, stop paying your taxes (I would if I wanted to wind up in jail.) If it weren't for the Army Corps of Engineers who would maintain the dune line and all other semi-natural barriers against the onslaught of storms? Who filled in the inlet cut by Hurricane Isabel? Who maintains the dune as soon as you get into Pea Island where it is prone to washouts? What about the replacement of Bonner Bridge? I think the bridge replacement is a bigger issue than closing beaches for defenseless birds. How will people even get to Hatteras and Ocracoke if the bridge is not operational? You should really focus your efforts and interests on the fulfillment of the replacement of that old bridge. I think the traffic and the Preferred Alternative is gonna hurt tourism and local economy way more than simple selective beach closures. Why not let these birds replenish for a few years while your bridge is replaced? The Outer Banks is a fickle *itch, and nature and the ocean will do as it pleases. In the end, nature does not care about local way of life, economy, or beach access.
"They didnt want to PAY for those erosion control measures, they wanted the federal government to pay for them." What is the difference between the locals paying and the feds paying? It's till the PEOPLE's money which is something many in government just don't seem to realize.
people who actually do care about the natural world and love Hatteras and the people of Hatteras know for a fact that this is a bunch of garbage,and it is taking away their way of life,so,to all you who would defend the closures,shut up and go away,it would be too much to expect you to listen,when your whole identity is that you are such a good,caring person because you are 'green,' and it's too much to ask to consider you could be wrong,when if you put 'the environment' label on it your blind faith makes you impossible. you fell for a false religion,ask the locals,there ain't no halo around your 'earth-friendly' head.the locals are the true nature lovers,they had this place designated long before al gore ripped you all off with his phony psycho garbage.
yes some locals didn't want it to be moved. i wish it never was moved. they would have had to rebuild the jetties, making surf better. someone even hacked into the computers, making the light house appear to be falling. or attempting to make it fall. my facts are not straight on this but they might have even TRIED to tip it controlling hydraulics or a pump or something technical anyway. if they didn't move it and didn't rebuild the jetty/make seawall. the lighthouse WOULD be gone. Isabel would have eaten it whole.
