Cape Hatteras - URGENT!

[toynrnd]

UNITED FOUR WHEEL DRIVE ASSOCIATIONS

ACTION ALERT

For more information contact:
Carla Boucher
[phone]
[e-mail]


Monday, March 31, 2008

WHAT: Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area is threatened by closure of large amounts of beaches to ORV and pedestrian use.

WHEN: A judge in federal district court will hear a motion for preliminary injunction on Friday, April, 4, 2008, in Raleigh, North Carolina. The injunction requests a ban on ORV use in certain beaches within the Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area.

We need your calls today and everyday this week.

WHAT TO DO: Regardless of where you live, call your U.S. Congressional delegation urging them to protect the Outer Banks community. Please call both your Representative and your Senators. Find who represents you in Congress by clicking here www.visi.com/juan/congress/
.
Ask them to pass legislation as soon as possible to clarify the Park Service’s previously expressed intent to maintain public access, particularly vehicle access, to Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area.

Use the talking points listed below in “THE TRUTH” section.

Focus equally on Republicans and Democrats. Democrats particularly champion ESA protection. The organizations requesting the closure are undermining the ESA.

THE ISSUE: Three organizations have brought suit against the National Park Service asking the court to enter a preliminary injunction stopping all ORV driving in areas identified as critical for nesting waterbirds and shorebirds at Bodie Island Spit (Oregon Inlet), Cape Point, South Beach, Hatteras Spit, North Ocracoke, and South Ocracoke on Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area.

ENVIRONMENTALIST CLAIMS: The three organizations make the following claims to the court to support their motion for the injunction of ORV use.
• The economic injury to ORV users and the local economy will be minimal
• The injury to the species will be “irreparable” and cause “extirpation” of endangered, threatened, and rare species
• The injunction would cause only a limited reduction in the area of beach open to ORV driving

THE TRUTH:

• The organizations bringing the law suit are threatening the strength of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) by demanding more than is necessary to protect the species. Each time organizations like these reach beyond the spirit and the letter of the ESA they weaken it to the point that no American can trust the government to use the ESA to actually protect any species.
• Most of the area in question will be closed WITHOUT THE INJUNCTION!
• The injunction is UNNECESSARY. Even without an injunction the NPS has closed all the areas in question except for a narrow strip of sand at the water’s edge. A 100 foot wide corridor will be the most that is left for ORV driving WITHOUT THE INJUNCTION.
• The injunction isn’t a choice between protection and no protection. 3 Action alternatives were prepared by the US Geological Service (USGS) and considered by NPS before implementing the current species protection plan. The organizations asking for the ORV closure only like one of the three actions recommended by USGS. All three protocol alternatives, including the one currently in force, were USGS recommended PROTECTION alternatives!
• The people of the United States were guaranteed in 1952 by Congress and then-Superintendent Conrad Wirth that vehicle access to the seashore would be allowed.
• The economies of Hatteras and Ocracoke depend exclusively on tourism and fishing. Losing access to fishing and tourist beaches will devastate the local economy and have irreparable impact to the entire Outer Banks economy.

[What It Was]

Move out west Or out of the Country... that's where the real freedoms are... Beyond our borders you'll find that the grass is a brighter shade of green and the snow is fluffy and plentiful... Viva la canada "A" hehehe...

[stuck tj]

Wrote into my elected peoples in DC. It should be no problem.

[Deleted]

I'll have my people contact your people. K? Thx. Bye.

[4WDnRocksNmud]

why don't we just use chris' philosophy/ take on bad guys?

These people are "environmentalist" bad guys, so why don't we just shoot them chris?

[Deleted]

cory said:

why don't we just use chris' philosophy/ take on bad guys?

These people are "environmentalist" bad guys, so why don't we just shoot them chris?

Shooting them may be a bit extreme, but it would be fun to taser them a few times until they said uncle.

[LILREDCJ6]

TOMORROW is the big day. it was all over wavy 10 yesterday and today. Hopefully the judge uses some common sense and does the right thing.

Tony

[CORE 4WD]

Yea Mike Murray is finally trying to get the OHV plan together, he deserves a chance to get everything in compliance to let us continue driving on the beach...I love finding "that sandbar" all to myself!!

[YJ Ken]

Any word on what the decision was?

[LILREDCJ6]

His decision was to not make a decision. He wants it worked out by the parties involved first. He seemed to think they were very close to an agreement and he is basically forcing them to make an agreement.

[stuck tj]

www.darenc.com/Announce/Beach%20Driving%20Hearing%20Continued.pdf

Got Some response from my people:

Dear Mr. Day:

Thank you for contacting me to express your concern about regulating
off-road vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore in North Carolina. I
appreciate you taking time to share your thoughts on this issue with me.

As you may know, a small group of organizations recently filed a motion in
U.S. District Court requesting a preliminary injunction to stop beach
driving on the seashore. Park Superintendent Mike Murray has been working
to implement an interim management plan for beach driving and to bring all
the parties together to negotiate a final rule. On Friday, April 4, 2008,
the court chose not to issue an injunction; rather, it decided to give the
parties involved more time to reach an agreeable arrangement.

I believe we should work to ensure that our public lands remain available
for everyone to enjoy for generations to come. I understand your concern
about apparent discrimination against off-road vehicle users. While it is
important that we protect our environment and natural resources, I do not
believe we should discourage or ban responsible recreation activities in
our parks. Please be assured that I will continue to monitor this issue,
and work to support polices that protect our environment without punishing
the American public. Should any legislation come before the House that
addresses this issue, I will certainly keep your views in mind.

As your Representative in Congress, I appreciate your input in this
matter. As always, if I may be of assistance to you on this, or any other
issue, please feel free to contact me in my Washington DC office at (202)
225-6365 or online at randyforbes.house.gov. With kind personal
regards, I am

Yours truly,
J. Randy Forbes
Member of Congress

April 9, 2008
Dear Mr. Day:

Thank you for contacting my office regarding off-road vehicle privileges in the Outer Banks, North Carolina. I appreciate your taking the time to share your views.
As you know, several environmental groups have asked a federal judge to issue an injunction to prohibit off-road vehicle access at Cape Point and several other locations along the Cape Hatteras National Seashore. I understand your concerns regarding the family traditions, tourism, and recreation opportunities available by allowing off-road vehicle access to these areas. The National Park Service (NPS) is currently in discussions with environmental advocacy groups to reach a possible agreement regarding the use of off-road vehicles on Cape Hatteras. As this is an evolving issue, please be assured my staff and I will monitor this issue closely.

I appreciate hearing from my constituents. Your correspondence helps me serve you better in the Senate. I hope that you will continue to share your views with me and my staff in the years ahead.



I would also invite you to visit my website at www.webb.senate.gov for regular updates about my activities and positions on matters that are important to Virginia and our nation.

Thank you once again for contacting my office.

Sincerely,

Jim Webb

United States Senator

[mudslinger]

I just read this from wavy 10. It's good that they came to an agreement and not totally prohibit driving on the beach.

www.wavy.com/global/story.asp?s=8178803

Ray ;D

[toynrnd]

Looky HERE

[LILREDCJ6]

Looks like we still have alot of the access but, they got a big chunk of the beaches.

Tony

[stuck tj]

The environmental groups are entitled to “reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs” to be paid by the federal defendants.
So your telling me we have to pay for this.
Who are these people! do they actually use state parks? Or do they jump the first bandwagon to help them feel better for driving a Suburban or Escalade. Looking at the maps I don't see where the birds will nest on all that area. Was there a study done to determine what part of the beach they use. So the way I see it as the breeding population increases every year the NPS will increase the areas to protect the nesting sites. This means we will loose everything eventually its just a matter of time. Are they going to reduce the needed area if park rangers reports state that the area is over sized? Ben you got a job down there closing gates every night buddy.

Off of Defenders of Wildlife's website agree or not they seem to get into a lot of government topics that effect everyone.

"In September, we took the administration to court in
an attempt to shut down the construction of one section
of the wall through the San Pedro Riparian National
Conservation Area in Arizona, a World Heritage Natural
Area containing one of the last free-flowing rivers in
the Southwest. Our legal team won an injunction
halting construction, but the Department of Homeland
Security responded by exempting the border wall
from compliance with federal environmental laws"

From the report that was used to make the decisions
"between 1995 to 2007 nine chicks that were killed by vehicles were found on Cape Hatteras. The authors report that this is “only a fraction of the total number of chicks killed by vehicles during this time, as dead chicks were located by chance in most cases and many chicks died and were never found.”
This was done by the Department of Zoology at North Carolina commissioned by the National Park Service. So .75 birds died a year but many more died. I won the lottery but don't have the correct numbers so just give me the money.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Oystercatcher
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Status_iucn3.1_LC.svg
Severe cold weather and storms are believed to take their toll on wintering plovers. After an intense snowstorm swept the entire North Carolina Coast in late December 1989, high mortality of many coastal bird species was noted (Fussell 1990). Piping plover numbers decreased significantly from approximately 30-40 to 15 birds. While no dead piping plovers were found, circumstantial evidence suggests that much of the decrease was mortality (Fussell 1990). Hurricanes may also result in direct mortality or habitat loss, and if piping plover numbers are low enough or if total remaining habitat is very sparse relative to historical levels, population responses may be impaired even through short-term habitat losses. Wilkinson and Spinks (1994) suggest that, in addition to the unusually harsh December 1989 weather, low plover numbers seen in South Carolina in January 1990 (11 birds, compared with more than 50 during the same time period in 1991-1993) may have been influenced by effects on habitat and food availability caused by Hurricane Hugo which came ashore there in September 1989. Hurricane Elena struck the Alabama Coast in September 1985 and subsequent surveys noted a reduction of foraging intertidal habitat on Dauphin and Little Dauphin Islands (Johnson and Baldassarre 1988). Birds were observed foraging at Sand Island, a site that was previously little used prior to the hurricane.