County Battles to Preserve Beach Driving on CHNS

Dare County and several user groups filed a motion Thursday to dismiss claims environmental groups are asserting to thwart the public enjoyment of the long standing tradition of driving on the beach within designated areas of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore. The battle is taking place in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina Northern Division.

This motion to shut down access to a large portion of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore to the recreational fishermen is unfounded, stated Attorney Lawrence Liebesman of Holland &Knight LLP, a Washington DC environmental attorney representing the Counties and a coalition of beach access groups. The Counties and the user groups motion to dismiss is based on grounds that the court lacks jurisdiction to intervene in the Service expert management of the Seashore. The Park Service own data contradicts the conservationists claims that a federal judge must intervene now to avoid dramatic declines in shore bird populations due to beach driving while a final plan is being negotiated,? he said.

The Park Service 2007 Report shows that a number of breeding pairs of the piping plover, a shore bird protected under the Federal Endangered Species Act, was the highest since 1999 and equals that of 2006. That report also did not find any direct evidence that vehicles actually caused the deaths of any of this species and other causes such as predation and unleashed dogs were likely responsible.

Last year, the National Park Service put into place an interim plan to protect the habitat, while ensuring vehicle access while it pursues negotiations with numerous stakeholders, including the Plaintiffs, to develop a final vehicle management plan over the next few years. Leibesman asserts that the environmental groups cannot have it both ways? by asking the court to intervene and police? the Park Service management of the seashore while at the same time sitting at the negotiation table.

Dare County has long been active in the ongoing battle for preserving beach access for vehicles in the National Seashore. The official position is justified by positive economic impacts brought by fulfilling a unique visitor experience not found elsewhere and other access oriented legislation. The county signed a resolution in 2006 expressing a need to formulate a resource protection policy in order to fulfill a promise to the public to manage the CHNS for recreation and conservation purposes while ensuring continuous free and open access to pedestrian and vehicular use.

Public access to beaches was guaranteed by the founding legislation creating the Cape Hatteras National Seashore,? said Warren Judge, Chairman of the Dare County Board of Commissioners. ORVs are used at CHNS by our residents and many visitors to enjoy different activities including fishing, bird watching, swimming, water sports, and sightseeing. Beach driving is an essential part of our heritage and an important aspect of our local economy, and Dare County is committed to doing everything possible to ensure this access to our beaches.?

At a scheduling conference today, the court will determine a date to hear the parties motions to begin resolving these issues.

Dare County Public Relations Department

(252) 475-5900 - Office

(252) 473-4594 - Fax

JONES RELEASES STATEMENT ON GROUPS’ MOTION TO STOP BEACH DRIVING ON CAPE HATTERAS

WASHINGTON, D.C. – In response to a motion filed this week in U.S. District Court to ban beach driving in major portions of Cape Hatteras National Seashore, Third District Representative Walter B. Jones (R-NC) issued the following statement:

“I am very disappointed that a few special interest groups have taken the extreme step of filing a motion in U.S. District Court to stop beach driving in major portions of Cape Hatteras National Seashore. This ill-advised action threatens to shatter the good work that Park Superintendent Mike Murray has done to implement an interim management plan for beach driving and to bring all the parties together to negotiate a final rule.”

“This development is especially troubling for many reasons. These groups demanded a seat at the negotiating table but their true intentions must be called into question when they insist on using the courts to short circuit or influence the negotiating process. Furthermore, available evidence suggests that the Park’s interim management strategy has been successful in protecting endangered birds, so it is simply not credible to claim that beach driving needs to be stopped in order to save birds.”

“I urge these groups to rethink their decision, to withdraw their motion for a preliminary injunction, and to return to the negotiating table. Superintendent Murray has laid out a process to resolve this issue. It will take time, and not everyone will be 100 percent happy with the result, but it’s far better than managing the Seashore through the judicial system.”

For additional information, or to schedule an interview with Congressman Walter B. Jones, please contact Kathleen Joyce at (202) 225-3415.

This is a good example of the National Seashore trying to make all sides happy and to give a little to everyone involved. and it seems to not be going the way one group wants it to and now they think they can go above there heads to push there agendas. We need to watch and even write letters if needed, even if it is not a beach you use or far from home out of state other parks will use these findings as examples to have ORV's removed. even with hard facts they don't care they don't want us on the beaches driving and fishing.

This is a good example of the National Seashore trying to make all sides happy and to give a little to everyone involved. and it seems to not be going the way one group wants it to and now they think they can go above there heads to push there agendas. We need to watch and even write letters if needed, even if it is not a beach you use or far from home out of state other parks will use these findings as examples to have ORV's removed. even with hard facts they don't care they don't want us on the beaches driving and fishing.AGREED!!!!!!

INTRO - A preliminary injunction filed in U-S District Court last month could severely restrict driving on Cape Hatteras National Seashore beaches if a judge grants the plaintiffs request. George Olsen has more.Defenders of Wildlife and the National Audubon Society, represented by the Southern Environmental Law Center, sought the preliminary injunction in order to protect threatened and endangered shorebirds. An SELC press release said the plaintiffs are seeking to stop the use of off-road vehicles or ORVs in six areas that constitute about 12 percent of the National Seashore. Foot traffic would still be allowed. But the areas that plaintiffs are seeking to restrict from vehicle traffic are among the Seashore's most popular for recreational fishermen.We've gotten feedback from many business operators, hotel owners that's the heart and soul of the tourist industry in Cape Hatteras. By closing those areas we think will have a devastating effect on the local tourist economy, so that's our big concern. Those are the areas they want to close and the effects could be disastrous.Larry Liebesman is a partner in the firm Holland & Knight which is acting as counsel in opposing the injunction for Dare & Hyde County governments and local business and user groups. The SELC agrees that the sites they're seeking to close are the seashore's most popular fishing spots. But they say interim rules governing beach driving are insufficient and the needs of the shorebirds are immediate enough that waiting for final rules isn't an option.Particularly where you consider that two species did not nest on the seashore completely gold billed terns and black skimmers so we can't wait three more years and risk other species not nesting on the seashore as well, so the interim plan that is in place now is not adequate and not providing the protections that are necessary.Geoff Gisler is an associate attorney with the SELC. Plaintiffs are seeking greater weight be placed in a report by the U-S Geological Survey rather than the interim plan regulating beach driving that the National Park Service produced and put in place last summer. The Geological Survey report he cites recommends more pre-nesting closure of beaches shutting down beach driving before birds arrive which in the interim plan is only provided to areas used by piping plovers protected under the Endangered Species Act for the last three breeding seasons.The other birds, like the American Oyster Catcher and the Colonial Waterbirds, those birds don't get protection until they establish a nest, which is a big problem because when a bird comes in and its trying to establish a territory, out-compete other birds for a spot and attract a mate and create a nest, that's enough of a challenge with the inter-species competition without having ORVs driving through at the same time.Liebesman contends the interim plan the Park Service is currently using took into account the U-S Geological Survey report but balanced it with other policy and regulatory factors they were obligated to consider. Likewise, he says any decline in shorebird numbers can't be attributed to any one factor.If you look at the data and the analysis there are many factors that address the status of these various species out there and effect their productivity predation, the weather, climate, the changing coastline, there are a lot of different factors out there and the allegations that ORVs are the problem is clearly overstated.He adds that piping plover pair numbers are the highest this year since 1999 and is not aware of any reports of bird nests being crushed by ORVs. But that direct threat is perhaps not the plaintiff's chief concern.Some of the specific problems are a lot of the foraging that goes along goes on for the chicks goes on in the rack line, the area where the seaweed and the natural debris from the ocean washes up. We've all seen it on the beach shore. That area is home to a lot of invertebrates if it's left undisturbed. If it's driven over by ORVs, it gets broken down, the invertebrates aren't there, the birds have nowhere to feed.The Seashore does not have a permanent beach driving management plan despite being required to have one, though permanent plans are currently being discussed with all sides at the table. Whether those discussions will continue with the current interim plan or the plaintiff's preference in place could be determined soon. Geoff Gisler with the SELC says a hearing on the injunction should take place early April.

well some more crap that goes on down there ; elimination of predators ....
http://fishmilitia.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3299

apologies for the link , not sure if it is 'allowed' here or not ...

I just learned that this beach is in North Carolina.

What can we do?

:ss:

Make phone calls
send emails
send letters

Names and phone numbers are in the above posts

seems like the whacked out conservationists are seeking the same agenda from one end of the Striper Coast to the other.................

endangered species = fear and misguidance
ignoring science = denied access for the rec anglers
less access = the Largest Single Land Grab in the history of the National Seashore
BIG Land Grab = BIG dollars from the private landowners to state and local coffers

if there was a legitimate beef, i'd say go for it.
clearly, that is not the case with these bafoons!!

email sent. thanks for the heads up, tattoo you.

seems like the whacked out conservationists are seeking the same agenda from one end of the Striper Coast to the other.................

it does look that way ..:realmad:
cape hatteras , then cape lookout ..
assateague island is up for some sort of evaluation ??
now the new topic is the nps wants to take over the deleware ocean parks ...

http://www.charlotte.com/outdoors/story/528586.html

How many member are on this community?

Is there a way to start a poll? Perhaps to measure how many members of this community have sent their emails, phone calls, or letters?

I am drafting my letter and email as I type this.

:cputin:

-Fish360

Probably 4 out of 5000

A lot of these people are ecoligically challenged as I like to call them.
Where do we send e-mails to help the guys down south and eventually us on the Cape (Cod). Thanks

http://jones.house.gov/contact.cfm

http://www.nps.gov/caha/contacts.htm

[This is the letter I have drafted. Should I add anything? I welcome your feedback.]

Congressman Walter Jones
1105-C Corporate Drive
Greenville, NC 27858-4211

Dear Congressman Walter Jones:

As a scientist, I understand all to well the fragility of our ecosystem. However, I also understand that we as a species must coexist with other species. I applaud you in your effort to protect Cape Hatteras National Seashore and for taking a balanced approach to the access and fishing issues on the Cape Hatteras National Seashore.

I have come to understanding that certain groups are claiming that “beach driving needs to be stopped in order to save birds". Why? What is the basis for this claim? I do not understand this extreme approach.

Correct me if I am mistaken, but according to my understanding, fishing is an integral part of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore culture and economy. The preservation of Cape Hatteras National Seashore wildlife and fishing need NOT be mutually exclusive. In fact, when scientists and fisherman work together, maximum results are obtained.

I am a surfcaster. When I go fishing, I thread lightly. I do not litter. I pick up other peoples' trash. I communicate this to my fellow surfcasters; they in turn communicate it to others. If I see violations against nature being performed by someone on the beach, I accost the idiot.

I live in Massachusetts. I have friends in your state. In my next visit to North Carolina, I hope to surf fish via beach buggy.

The Cape Hatteras National Seashore should be enjoyed by everyone (eco-tourists and fisherman included).

I know you are a very busy man. I thank you for your time. And, I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

I would exclude the idiot comment and add something about the elderly and handicapped access problems

Oh and thank you for taking the time to write a letter

tattoobob,

Thank you for the feedback.
I have removed the idiot sentence and add this "Of importance to note is that beach driving is not just for fishing. Many citizens use a 4 x 4 vehicle to transport their family members, food, necessities, and beach gear safely up and down the beach. This particularity true for family members who are elderly or physically challenged. "

You are very welcome.

I am sending the letter out tomorrow via email, fax and snail mail. ...what happened to that carrier pigeon?

the other sides view ...
http://www.nationalparkstraveler.com/2008/03/battle-mounts-over-road-vehicles-cape-hatteras-national-seashore#comment-5511

These people are the extreme, I have been at clean ups with the National Audubon Society and have had these people stand in the tracks so I can't pass yell out stuff, lay boards and sticks in the tracks, and go as far as dig holes in the tracks. they are out to stop all beach driving and they are starting here, then head north they will not stop till all beaches are void of all human life. I couldn't even read the comments they are asinine

I couldn't even read the comments they are asinine

same here ...

tattooboo,

I hear what you are saying. I am having a flash back to went I was reading "Twenty Years on the Cape." by Frank D.

I am glad to see we are "learning from history". I think that we can succeed in keeping our beaches open for access and driving access if we stand united.
What did the anglers during Frank D's time do?

I need to pick up a copy of "The Art of War".






-

Not sure. ask Karl F.

I found the following in a heated thread between a couple of "envrionmentalists" and pro ORV access persons, and after reading it I thought that this person hit the nail on the head from my perspective, he seemed to put into a well thought out reply exactly what I would like to say if I could clear my emotion. If you know or were the person that posted this reply please email me, I couldn't find any way to contact this person and apologize in adavance for copying the thread.

It's always painful to read comments like some of those above that advocate the loss of access to ORV users at Cape hatteras national Seashore Recreation Area. And yes, that is its proper name. The Dept. of Interior dropped the "recreation area" part, not Congress. What’s sad is that the extreme majority of persons that wish to ban access do
so with no real knowledge of CHNSRA, it's environment or the nature of beach use by those that enjoy the Seashore. Shorebird, your reference to "the cape" and incessant discussion of wetlands and development establishes you as someone totally unfamiliar with this area
and the issues at hand. I live here (Buxton, N.C.), I work here and I fish here. I do so by way of 4x4 vehicle and must as I suffer a 45% permanent partial disability negating any and all thoughts of walking any distance in the sand. So, if I may, a brief tutorial.


We live on an island that at Buxton is roughly thirty miles out to sea vs. the mainland. The Island goes from a few hundred feet to a couple miles wide and back to a thin strip as you travel from one end to another. We have but two options in terms of access to our homes.
One by ferry to Ocracoke, the other via Hwy. 12 to the north.
Hwy 12 passes through Pea Island before crossing the Bonner Bridge connecting us to Bodie Island and then by way of yet another bridge, the mainland. I mention Pea Island and the Bonner Bridge for several reasons. One being that Pea Island is a National Wildlife refuge that contains dune systems and wetlands. These were created not by nature, but by the CCC in the 1930's. Pea Island also happens to be the site of the largest migratory bird slaughter I know of. Recently, USFWS gassed thousands of Canadian Geese because they were overtaxing
the man made ecosystem and complaints about goose poop were being brought up by "McMansion" homeowners up in the developed areas of Duck, Corolla and Nags Head far to the north. The road I’ve been told that spoils Pea Island is our one real evacuation route and ironically preserves the wetlands and birds covered by the MBTA. Without road
clearings and work to preserve the dunes, the wetlands will be destroyed. Plovers don’t do well there either in spite of no ORV traffic. The same is true of the Bodie Island side of the bridge, but more on that later. Hatteras Island is a bit different in that a few villages scattered along about sixty miles of Rt. 12 dot the seashore. These villages are bounded landward by CHNSRA and are
extremely limited in development. As with Pea Island, most all of the wetlands and dune systems are man made. Have a look at Google earth you might learn something. We have the luxury of being surrounded by an extremely active environment that remains unpredictable
every day of the year. In terms of wildlife, we have the sea, the sound, and a thin strip of sand that hosts an amazing variety of birds, reptiles and mammals, crustaceans, fish, shell fish and some sea turtles too. And we care for them all. I’m sure that when most folks read about what’s going on here and see the term ORV (Off Road Vehicle) they include motocross bikes, ATV's, and dune jumping sand rails and
the like, but that’s not what happens here. All vehicles on the beach have to be licensed vehicles, driving on the dunes is prohibited and speed limits are in force as well; 25mph but most do much less because of the nature of the beach. This is not even remotely like driving on Daytona Beach. And unlike beaches to the north, no mechanical device is
needed to scour the beach of trash in the morning. We, the ORV users, didn't take a week to clean up the styrofoam from the ceiling fans, we got the vast majority of it up in one day. It was a day later that the first volunteer environmentalists showed up to help out. Less than 20. Because less than 100 ORV's occupants had already done the work.
I was there and took bags of that stuff off the beach. It was NPS that asked the tackle shops for help and brought bags and they got it. But then, that's what we normally do. We sit at the point where the Labrador current and Gulf Stream collide therefore we get a lot of stuff washed up on our beaches from elsewhere, so we clean it up, by hand,
on our time, and at our expense.

As for the birds, what do I say? We're on the EXTREME northern end of the Plover wintering grounds and the EXTREME end of the southern end of their breeding grounds. Plovers breed in areas of frequent overwash. Please come to this Island in a storm and show me where that isn't. Yes isn't. Frequent overwash means chick mortality. That has nothing to do
with ORV use. In fact it's the native Ghost Crab that is responsible for the majority of chick mortality regardless of bird species. ORV use has gone down over the years, bird enclosures have been established earlier, have been larger and have been in existence for a greater period of time and yet bird numbers don’t expand. The Black Skimmers and Least Terns that DOW, SELC, N.C. Audubon are complaing about not being in the park nested last year on a newly created dredge spoil island near Hatteras Village within a couple hundred yards of the Park boundary, But since those birds didn’t follow the rules and nest within the Park, they don’t count. Neither does the largest tern colony on the east coast
because it's on top of a certain store at a shopping center well outside of the bounds of the Park. Last time I checked, when wild animals breed where we tell them to, because we wont count their numbers if they don’t, it was called a zoo. The fact is that it’s the ORV users that care for this National Recreation area. Birds have wings and will nest where THEY want. Larger closures for longer periods has resulted in increased vegetation thereby limiting breeding grounds not by ORV but by the sea. It was ORV users that begged for the moving of turtle nests that were in "The Narrows", a section of beach regularly overwashed. The nests weren’t moved and the turtles drowned. Two of them(nests). They weren’t in our way, just in a place we knew they wouldn't survive. I challenge anyone to prove that on any "given day of year" you can find 2000 vehicles on the limited amount of beach we have left open to access. I was on the Point today and within the nine or so miles I could see less than twenty vehicles on the beach. Most of
what is Plover breeding area was still under water and the entire beach still bore remnants of the almost complete inundation that occurred over the weekend. The attempt to close human access to these beaches is a travesty and an insult to those of us that do so much to care for this amazing place. Our economies will be destroyed all the while predator populations will soar, vegetation will increase, bird populations and suitable nesting areas will decrease. I could go on but it's late and I have to go to work to a job, a living that some would
seek to eliminate here. Because of my handicap, it’s about the one thing I can do. I can barely do that. But Saturday morning, I will venture out on the beach once again to be in a beautiful environment where I have no power to change a thing. I will see Willets, Gulls, Ospreys, Terns, Gannets, Pelicans, Sanderlings, Cormorants, Oystercatchers and cetera. I will be at peace. And I will think of all the children that you would wish to deny this. No, you don’t have a clue, you don’t understand and paint us with a broad brush that’s
entirely based on perception tainted by false data and data that has been excluded. Take the time to know us before you condem us. We have just as much right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness as do you.


this really puts things in perspective

Very well put

Very well put

yes it is , i wish i knew who wrote it so i could give him credit for it . i don't and don't like just copying something and pasting it without giving credit .
but this was just so well put into ink , i had to pass it on .
derf

I sat down and read all the posts in that Blog, and there are alot of folks that lend a helping hand and this guy Snowbird who has never even stepped foot on that beach thinks he can fight to keep fishermen and orv's off the sand. I can't understand his point of view or his goals. it seems like peta type of action to me

Very well written. Thanks for posting it derf. There is more factual local information in this single post then all the articles, posts, gripes, etc. littering the internet. I can only hope that the original author shows up in person to speak at next "town hall meeting" (so to speak).

I love how they say drippy leaky SUV's.
Most trucks are in pretty good shape that drive the beach.
They kind of have to be. It really stinks breaking down out there.
I know that here we have to have a valid inspection sticker and they inspect our vehicle.
I am sure if they saw oil leaking out we wouldn't get our pass.
Once they implement the same thing down in N C there shouldn't even be an issue with that.
That is something that can be brought into the plan.

I love how they say drippy leaky SUV's.
it is called the 'tar heel ' state for a reason , and it isn't the suv's :D
more on the court case ....http://www.islandfreepress.org/2008Archives/03.14.2008-ParkServiceResponds.html
and i'll be dammed if i can figgure out what is going on ...

It's mind boggling.
I can't even read that crap without steam coming out of my ears.
They make it sound like there are buggies all over every beach, when in fact there are only a few areas available for off road use.
But they want it all.
Whenever I meet anyone who share those views I invite them to come out with me.
Once they see the care and respect that we give the beach and catch a few fish they jump off the bandwagon.
So my guess is the enviros have never even had the experience.
One of them must have been bored one day and got the rest of them P & M.
http://bestsmileys.com/angry1/5.gif

Here are some questions I would like "them" to answerer:

1. "How many 'drippy leaky SUV's' drive on and off the beach each week?"
2. "Does the Ranger inspect each vehicle before granting a drive on permit?"
3. "Can you provide the scientific data that imperially proves the hypothesis that driving on the beach is having a measurable adverse effect on the habitat?"

It sounds like "they" are full of unsubstantiated claims and accusations.

They were in the middle of coming up with a management plan I believe when the 'special interest group' threw thier .02 into the fire.
Rules and Regs are all part of the mix. These 'special interest groups'
do not have a clue.

duh , ok ...my head is spinning from trying to understand 'legalese' all week ..
but let's see
the nps at hatteras basically said no contest and said they weren't going to contest the lawsuit.
the counties and chappa picked up the ball and filed this http://www.islandfreepress.org/2008Archives/03.16.2008-FiledOpposition.pdf

so i guess we are still in a wait and see whats gonna happen ...
a confused brain dead 'derf'

derf,

Thank you for the link to the pdf. I only got through page 8.
But, based on the strength of the language that I am reading thus far....."they" (i.e. "Defenders of Wildlife and The National Audubon Society") are in for it.
If this thing gets into court, the NPS attorneys sound like they are going to thread them to shreds.

I am going to print out all 36 pages and read it more carefully; I will post back accordingly.

-Fish360



I

OSV users have been losing ground for years. There is no question in my mind that at some point driving on the beach will be history. There are simply too many of "them" and not enough of "us". If the outer banks goes green we will fall soon after, no question, esp if it is decided in a court.

$5 /gallon for your boat and stay off the beach and no fishing with any lead. Mark my words this will happen in our lifetime....time to find a new hobby.

I have faith in Holland and Knight.
They have won many of these cases.
They are also the lawyers for the MBBA.
I don't understand legalease but from what I could understand H& K
knows what they are doing.

Mr. Sandman,

I hear you. I really do. But, if I am going to go down, I am going down fighting!
I work hard. Play hard. And fight for my freedom even harder!

Are there really more of "them", then "us"? I am joininig the OSV community this year with my new vehicle...but, I have been supporting OSV access rights for 3+ years (writing letters, etc). I do not think I am alone. Why? Because the OSV restrictions is just the start. The next stop for "them" is baning surf fishing. Therefore, I think this issue is more of our rights to fish.

I think "they" should spend more time going after the legislation that is allowing the commercial fishing industry to deplete the ocean bed of all small bait fish (herring, eels, etc).

This needs to be passed to everyone you can


This is a notice for all residents and business owners in Dare and Hyde counties.
I am currently setting up a meeting for Thursday, March 27, at 6:30 p.m. at the Fessenden Center in Buxton.

This will be a public meeting to describe in detail all of the current access issues, including the request by environmental groups for a temporary injunction to close portions of the beaches to off-road vehicles, the lawsuit over the Park Service’s Interim Plan for managing the beaches, and the negotiated rulemaking process to devise a long-term plan.
Warren Judge, chairman of the Dare County Board of Commissioners, will be here to speak to us about these issues. We will be bringing all the current issues to the table and discussing what you might expect could happen to our beach access.

Over the past several months, I have heard numerous islanders and homeowners say that they have no idea about what is transpiring or that they believe it is not possible for any form of government to close our beaches. Unfortunately, the severity of the situation is greater than you know or believe.

The request for a temporary injunction will be heard on April 4 in U.S. District Court in Raleigh. If it is granted, Bodie Island spit, Cape Point and South Beach, Hatteras Inlet and the north and south points of Ocracoke will be closed to ORVs. You could be looking at full closures of these areas until the federal courts have heard the lawsuit against the Interim ORV Plan. If a judge decides in favor of the groups that have brought this lawsuit, there would be a full closure of all ORV access.

The time has come to learn about this situation or to become a believer that this could happen. Don't believe that your state government is coming to help you. Governor Easley has yet to show one ounce of support, and you will not even get a reply from Sen. Elizabeth Dole. Congressman Walter Jones and Senator Marc Basnight have both condemned the ruthless tactics of the special interest groups that are trying to take away your ORV access. However, the federal government supercedes the state government, and there is not a lot they can do at the moment.

So, if you want to hear all of the current information or just learn what is going on, then I encourage you to attend. I am working hard to put this together, and I hope to encourage a few other local leaders to come and speak about just how dire this situation really is.

If you are not a believer, just show up and we will make you one.

Sincerely,
Rob Alderman

beach rally
http://www.islandfreepress.org/2008Archives/03.22.2008-AMessageInTheSandIsASignOfSupportForContinuedBeach Access.html

derf,

I love that picture of the OSVs on the beach!

Did you see that point and white water? I gotta fish this beach. Road trip.

Mr. Sandman...that is a lot of OSVs!

"United we stand, Divided we fall"

More than 600 people packed into the Fessenden Center in Buxton on March 27 to learn more about future public access to six popular beach areas on the Cape Hatteras National Seashore.

Rob Alderman, owner of Hatteras Island Fishing Militia, a surf-fishing guide service, organized the meeting to provide residents and visitors with information on an April 4 court hearing that could result in the closure of areas at Oregon Inlet, Cape Point, South Beach, Hatteras Inlet and Ocracoke Island.

Another informational meeting will be held tonight, Wednesday, April 2, at 6:30 p.m. at First Flight High School. "To think that this will only impact ORV [off-road vehicle] use just isn't true. People won't be allowed to walk in these areas either" explained Dare County Commissioner Allen Burrus.

On Friday, April 4, Judge Terrence Boyle of the US District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina will hear arguments in a request for a temporary injunction against beach driving on the seashore.

In February, the Southern Environmental Law Center, representing the National Audubon Society and the Defenders of Wildlife, requested the injunction until their lawsuit against the National Park Service is resolved.

The lawsuit contends that the park service has failed to manage beach driving in ways that protect shorebirds and sea turtles.

The park has used an interim plan to temporarily protect endangered or threatened animals and plants until a long-term management plan for ORV use is in place.

In 1972, Richard Nixon signed an executive order requiring the National Park Service and other federal public land managers to develop policies controlling ORV use, but the long-term ORV plan for Cape Hatteras National Seashore is still several years from completion.

"It's not the public's fault that the park service didn't do their job for the past 30 years. I only hope Judge Boyle will have mercy on the public" said John Couch, president of the Outer Banks Preservation Association, Thursday.

Bobby Outten, attorney for Dare County, told the audience at the Fessenden Center that the interim plan adequately controls beach driving while protecting shorebirds and other natural resources.

"But, the signals we are getting is that the judge is still attached to the presidential executive order" explained Outten.

Outten said Dare County, as one of the interveners in the lawsuit, could appeal the court's decision on the temporary injunction, but that an appeal might take anywhere from six to 18 months.

"So even if we were to appeal a decision we didn't like, we clearly would be impacted this season and most likely next season" he said.

Frank Folb, a member of the stakeholders committee helping to develop an ORV plan, showed maps of the pre-nesting closures going into effect under the interim plan this spring. Folb noted that the closures were larger than last year.

"But, here's the depressing part" he said as maps of closed areas under a temporary injunction were shown to the audience. "These areas would be closed year-round to vehicles and pedestrians for the next three years. There'd be nothing left for humans. You couldn't even take a boat into the beach" he said.

Couch reminded the audience that the official name of the seashore is the Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreation Area.

"It's not called a wildlife area, but what is happening today is that the Southern Environmental Law Center, the Defenders of Wildlife and Audubon are carving out six more wildlife refuges on our island" he said.

Warren Judge, chairman of the Dare County Board of Commissioners, urged people to contact their federal representatives.

"Congress has intervened before, and we need Congress to act now. We have just seven days from tonight to make a difference" he said Thursday.

NC Senate President Pro Tempore Marc Basnight has asked the state's Congressional delegation to pass legislation "as soon as possible to clarify the Park Service's previously expressed intent to maintain public access, particularly vehicle access, to the Seashore".

Chris Dillon, Basnight's special projects director, said Congress had taken similar action over the use of snowmobiles at Yosemite National Park.

NC Representative Tim Spear has also weighed in on the issue, asking the state Attorney General to consider intervening on behalf of the citizens of North Carolina.

"The citizens of our state stand to lose a fundamental right of access to publicly owned lands in one of the most beautiful and most sought after recreational areas in our state" wrote Spear in a March 18 letter to Attorney General Roy Cooper.

Spear also said the beach closures would harm the economies of not only Dare and Hyde counties but also the state.

http://www.cyberpeasantphoto.com/umsbuxtonvideos

Good Evening Everyone

If you are a NCBBA member please vote online at www.ncbba.org.

For those of us that could not attend the meeting in Buxton last week

The video was published by the Island Free Press, Editor Irene Nolan. We are grateful for Irenes contribution to Hatteras, Ocracoke Island and to all of us that reside elsewhere but support Open Beach Access with our many friends on the Islands.

...watching them now..

If a picture is worth 1,000 words... a moving pictures are worth 1,000,000,000 words!

This is even more serious that I had imagined.

The "magnitude" of this is HUGE. I dare not image the political ripple effects...

I am so glad to learn that there are some people fighting to keep the beach open to SOVs.

FYI...
I am the Stakeholder Representative on the Negotiated Rulemaking Committee and am charged with representing the National Fishermen's interests. Also, being the Executive Director of UMS (United Mobile Sportfishermen) and the RFA National Shore Access Rep, I am very very involved in this fight.

As of today (Thursday evening) I can confirm there is a settlement negotiation ongoing between the NPS and the Plaintiffs aka The Big Three (Defenders of Wildlife, National Audobon & Southern Environmental Law Center).

Today, NPS filed for a one week extension to the hearing on the injunction that is scheduled for tomorrow. The request was not answered today so we do not know what is going to happen tomorrow. The judge could take many roads.

Bottom line is anything more severe than the interim plan will be devestating. If you see the videos posted earlier in this thread you will understand.

The short term does not look good from any angle and the hope for long term preservation of access is up in the air. I can say that the fight is serious and more severe than any before. We have the "best" group ever assembled to wage this battle and are dealing with things in a no holds barred manner.

In the end, this fight will come down to lawyers, lobbyists and money. If you care about beach access make sure you support local and national organizations with membership dues and donations. That is how we wage this war. I will post an update as I know more.

Thanks Patrick,

I am not involved at all, I am just on an email list and wanted to keep all who is interested informed. that last post I posted sounded like I wrote it and I just cut and pasted it is all

Patrick,

Thank you for the update. If you could keep us posted via this thread, that would be great.

I just joined M.S.B.A.

Good luck with this pivotal OSV access issue.

-Fish360

Yesterday the Injunction hearing was held.

the Judge "indicated" he was prepared to issue and injunction but did also speak in a way that seemed to split the two sides arguements. NPS & the Plaintiffs (Enviros) asked for an extension as they were near a settlement. We (Pro access) are not hopeful of a settlement we can live with. As you can imagine there is a alot of strategy talk and discussion with the lawyers underway. Bottom line is we ahve at least another week before getting a significant bit of info. A lot of the message boards are burnign hot on this. We just don;t know yet. I can say it does not look good for the short term.

posted on the 'fishin militia ' board by rob ...

Topic: Friday's Court Hearing From My Perpesctive
Posted: Today at 10:35am
What a giant bowl of suck yesterday was.The court hearing was very depressing and some sad realizations were apparent.

There was almost a full courtroom of people.The ORVs had roughly 75 proponents,while the other side had maybe 12 people.

The judge entered the courtroom and went straight to kicken our A$$.

Judge Boyle's 1st comments were that there was a motion to continue in front of him and before he heard anything from any side that they needed to know that he had found merit for the Injunction and was willing to grant the Injunction right then and there.

Derb Cater from the SELC and who is responsible for the lawsuit from the DOW and the Audubon stood up and acknowledged that the SELC and the NPS had been working on Settlement.Derb was basically done after that for the remaining of the proceeding.

The Judge then went to the NPS lawyer next and what a circus that was.This woman is nothing less than useless and has no true knoledge of this case or of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area.You could have put "Helen Keller" in front of the judge while she was on 4 hits of LSD and she could have done a better job.

The Nps lawyer told the jusge that the NPS and the otherside had come to some agreements and that she needed a few days to get the documents in front of the Dept of Justice and the Dept of the Interior for their final approval.

The judge proceeded to ask the NPS lawyer the following questions,as to wether or not these topics had been included in their settlement agreements

Night time driving

Carrying Capacity ( the amount of vehicles in any given area)

Permits ( schooling for the ORV drivers)

Adequate NPS enforcement Rangers to enforce the laws


differetn plans for different areas of the beach

Different plans for locals versus visitors

Are the areas near the water that are currently open near nesting areas as access corridors are actually the best place for "Shore Birds" to be.

Are big trucks ( Hummers,Duellies) more of an impact to the beach, as opposed to say a smaller ORV like a jeep wrangler?

and the list goes on.

Mainly the NPS lawyer's responses were "I believe so your Honor" or " I don't know your Honor".

Then the judge addressed the Intevenors lawyers (ours).Our lawyer contended that the intevenors deserved the right to sit in and weigh in on any type of settlement the NPS and the 3 Stooges ( DOW,Audubon,SELC)are woring towards.This led to a 45 minute battle between the Judge and our lawyer.Ending with the judge granting our lawyer the right to be a aprt of the settlement talks.

The Judge then remarked that he was continueing the case,until Friday April 11th and expected all of the topics to be touched on.He also commented that he found it hard for all these issues to be covered in 7 days,when they have been unable to do it in the past 32 years.

So here is MY ASSESMENT and you take it as you see fit.

I am not confident that a settlement can be reached that the Judge can live with and based upon his comments I believe he wants some serious changes made immediately for any remaining areas that we would be allowed to drive on.

So here it is My Opinion..

The judge will grant the injunction for the proposed closings and will leave the rest open...But..I believe he will temporarily close the other areas until there is a comprehensive management plan to manage and restrict those areas.

I cannot believe that our lawyer will agree to most of what the settlement is agreeing too,thus jamming the situation and leaving the ball 100% in the judge's end of the court,although it always has been in his end.

The judge already said he would have the final say in the settlement and it better meet alot of his concerns.

Now..none of know just what exactly is being discussed in settlement,other than rumors,but we believe that none of it is good..

So..there ya have it..

We have to just sit back and wait until Friday...

In the words of John Couch.."Things will get dark this Friday,but we will have to fight to regain the light and we shall prevail...

The Militia

We Are All Going To Die,So We Might As Well Have Fun Before It Happens

frank folb's view on the 'hearing' yesterday
(frank folb owns 'frank and fran's tackle shop , and is involved in the reg-neg negations going on .)
MY TAKE ON THE HEARING IN DETAIL posted by Frank, Sr.

Sorry I am so late in my update from the court hearing in Raleigh yesterday, but the line for what happens has been endless in the shop this morning and last night I could not get my website functional.
We entered the courthouse after being greeted at the door by a friend who is retired from the US Marshal’s Office. Entering the courtroom about 45 minutes early it was with pleasure that I was surrounded with comrades (County Commissioners, City Mayors, business owners, visitors to the island who traveled as far as from Florida, Maryland, South Carolina, and all parts of North Carolina) John, Bob, David, David, Judy, Larry, Laken, Wayne, Pat, Beth, ……. And many others were there. Between 75 and a hundred were seated for our cause. I only recognized two people from our island in attendance for the other side except Mr. Maddox who sat with the SELC lawyers. There were several reporters there including the Virginia Pilot and the Coastland Times.
Judge Boyle entered the courtroom and wasted no time in stating that he had read the briefs and was prepared at that time to issue an injunction upon the merits of the injunction request. Because he was prepared to issue this injunction he questioned why there was a need for the continuance requested by both the Plaintiffs and the Defense.
Derb Carter answered that they thought that with very little work over the next seven days that the plaintiffs and the defense would be able to settle the lawsuit before him and do away with the need for an injunction.
Judge Boyle then turned to the NPS(Defendants) lawyer and began questioning her. In many of the questions she was inept in her replies and appeared to know little about the subjects he approached. He then asked her what made her and NPS think that what they had failed to do in the last 32 years could be remedied in the next seven days. He then asked her several specific questions about items he thought should be in the plan:
1. Have you considered curbing or curtailing night time ORV use on the beach?
2. Have you considered that there are three distinct areas that need to be considered?
A. Oregon Inlet that has one Ramp 4 most of the year and major crowding conditions needs one type of management.
B. Hatteras Island that has many ramps (“You know that you can’t just drive over the dunes anywhere, you must use one of the ramps over the dunes to enter the beach.”) may need a different management. “What about the villages on the island, there are four or five aren’t there, and are they incorporated or a part of the county?” He then listed some of the villages missing Buxton and not ever mentioning Hatteras Inlet area.
C. And Ocracoke will most probably be managed even somewhat different since it has fewer visitors with traffic limited to ferry service or coming in by boat. Of course those coming in by boat would not have vehicles anyway.
3. Have you considered permits? “ Isn’t it true that to get a hunting license one must pass a hunters safety course to get a permit to hunt, but to drive on the beach all you have to have is a drivers license and licensed vehicle to go driving on the beach?”
4. Have you considered sizes of vehicles? “There must be a difference in the damage that an 8000 lb. Hummer would have on the beach versus a 1500 lb. jeep.”
5. Have you considered that there is a difference in what the local person that lives there needs to be able to do versus the visitor that might come down from Cleveland for a week to enjoy the beach by vehicle?
6. Have you considered the water’s edge? “Isn’t it true that these small birds need to go to the edge of the water to feed and small creatures of the ocean are living in this area as well?”
7. If settle is reached is park service going to be able to put this settlement into place? “You are aware that since the 1970’s visitation have increased and personnel of NPS have been reduced through the years? If this is true how you can exercise such a settlement?”
NOTE: The quotes are not the exact words of the judge but are the words as I heard them.

After the attorney for NPS stated that thought that they could come to some settlement he quizzed her about whether this settlement would stand without any ability of appealing the settlement. She seemed to think so, but he then stated that there was some notice that there were others in the courtroom that had not been heard on the settlement being the attorneys for Dare County, Hyde County and CHAPA.
With that said he turned to our attorneys and asked why they should be included in the settlement discussions. Our attorneys did a very creditable job of showing need to be a part of the settlement negotiations and stating that should settlement be reached that they indeed had the right to appeal the decision. The judge allowed them to be at the negotiation attempt, but disagreed with the ability to appeal. There was disagreement on the part of the court and our attorneys on this point when the judge granted the continuance and adjourned the hearing for the day.
After the end of the court we went outside the courtroom to be greeted by the media in the area. I spoke on what I believe the effects of this hearing will have on my business and family on Hatteras Island, but we overheard Derb Carter being interviewed by reports when I quote as close as I can his comment. He was asked, what will be the effects of this suit on the economy of the local people and Derb’s reply was, “This is not a local issue it is a national issue!”
I will let you make up your mind what will transpire from now until the next hearing date and will give updates as I get them.

ok more info , and it fills in the blanks and answers some ?? i had ..
and i've been following this or at least trying to for years now ...
http://www.islandfreepress.org/2008Archives/04.03.2008-ShootingTheBreeze.htmlhttp://

Good Afternoon Friends...Negotiated Rulemaking is set to continue in May...The law suit and the request for preliminary injunction that was continued pending a settlement has taken a turn this afternoon...I think the Dare county press release says all there is to say. More when I know...pray for those that live on Hatteras, they may loose their livelyhood in the short term.

For Immediate Release: Dare County

April 11, 2008

Contact: Public Relations Office 475-5900

darecountypr@darenc.com
Beach Driving Negotiations Stall

Dare County, the National Park Service, Defenders of Wildlife, and the National Audubon Society were unable to reach an agreement this week on parameters for beach driving in the Cape Hatteras National Recreational Seashore.



Defenders of Wildlife and the National Audubon Society are Plaintiffs in a lawsuit for a preliminary injunction that would prohibit beach driving in the Cape Hatteras National Recreational Seashore. Last week Judge Terrence Boyle continued the hearing to allow time to finalize a settlement known as a “consent agreement” between the parties.



Negotiations went into the evening on Wednesday, and lawyers for all sides had reached agreement on parameters for a resolution to present to their respective clients. They had agreed on buffers for nesting birds that would create opportunities for recreational access. Those buffers may have caused closures depending on the movement of the birds, but the opportunity for access would still be available.



On Thursday when the two sides met to finalize the details of the agreement, it became clear the Plaintiffs were not willing to agree to the terms discussed in previous meetings. The National Audubon Society and Defenders of Wildlife expanded the size of buffers they were willing to accept to a size that would effectively eliminate opportunities for access and eliminated 5 of the 6 areas of concern from consideration.



Since the changes proposed by the Plaintiffs on Thursday evening essentially eliminated opportunities for access, Dare County and the other Interveners could not agree to those terms. Talks toward an agreement were terminated, and a date for a hearing has not been set.





Dare County Public Relations Department

(252) 475-5900 - Office

(252) 473-4594 - Fax

I see it's clear where there agenda is, and it is no access for anyone but animals

As a young man i sat at town meeting and discussed weather land should be turned over to the feds for a seashore park or kept in private hands. The greatest concern was weather we could continue to use the land as we had always done such as beach fishing out of beach buggies, driving down the beach in winter to duck hunt ,fetch washed up fishing gear, driving to beach camps, picking beach plumbs and rose hips for jelly, clamming and other shell fishing and now i have to see if some member of a wildlife club who lives in middle America and has never seen the shore is going to change the way i live, my children live, and my grand children live.

The word that comes to mind to describe these eco-fanatics is: provincial.
They do not want a solution that benefits everyone. They only want a solution that benefit the birds. There are species in greater danger of extension then these birds...and nothing is done. Go figure. I gotta stop...blood pressure is rising....

I'll re-post once I cool down again.

-Fish360

Late News...I should not comment further than the following story however I will caution that this may or may not be good news...more whn I can talk freely.



Still watching and waiting:
Parties agree to settlement of beach-driving lawsuit;
Public may know details on Wednesday, April 16


By IRENE NOLAN



The three parties involved in the lawsuit to regulate beach driving along Cape Hatteras National Seashore announced on Friday evening, April 11, that they have agreed in principle to a settlement of the case.

Terms of the proposed consent decree cannot be discussed at this time, according to attorneys involved in the case.

The parties are filing a joint motion in U.S. District Court to continue the case until Wednesday, April 16, to allow the Defendant-Intervenors (Dare County Commissioners, Hyde County Commissioners, and the board of the Cape Hatteras Access Preservation Alliance) to vote on the proposed settlement.

Assuming that the settlement is approved by the intervenors, the public will know the details of the agreement when the consent decree is filed in the court on Wednesday, according to Jason Rylander, attorney for the Defenders of Wildlife.

The following are statements from attorneys representing the environmental interests in the case, as well as those representing Dare County and recreational users of Cape Hatteras National Seashore, that were released this evening.

Derb Carter, Southern Environmental Law Center: “We are pleased to have all parties to the case at the negotiating table and in agreement in principle. We will continue to work to ensure that the natural resources and public enjoyment of Cape Hatteras National Seashore move forward hand in hand and look forward to filing a proposed consent decree next week.”

Jason Rylander, Defenders of Wildlife: “We’re pleased to have come to an agreement in principle with all three parties to this important issue. While we can not discuss the terms of the proposed settlement, we remain committed to preserving the wildlife along the Seashore while allowing for continued recreational access to this unique natural area.”

Statement from Bobby Outten and Larry Libesman, attorneys for Defendant-Intervenors: "Bobby Outten, Dare County Attorney, and Larry Liebesman , Holland and Knight LLP , outside counsel for Defendant-Intervenors, are very pleased that the parties have reached agreement in principle and will recommend to intervenors that the settlement be approved as soon as possible next week. John Couch, president of the Outer Banks Preservation Association, has indicated that he will recommend approval of the settlement to his board as soon a possible."

Mike Murray, Superintendent, Cape Hatteras National Seashore: “This is the best of all possible outcomes. I am very pleased all parties have reached an agreement in principle.”

Attorneys for the environmental groups and the federal government had announced on April 2 that they had reached an agreement to settle the lawsuit and the request for a temporary injunction to halt ORV use on popular areas of the seashore until the lawsuit is settled or until the National Park Service has a long-term ORV rule. The attorneys asked U.S. District Court Judge Terrence Boyle for a continuance of a planned April 4 hearing on the injunction request until April 11 so they could work out the details.

Attorneys for the intervenors opposed the continuance.

In his courtroom on April 4, Boyle granted the continuance and also said that he preferred that the intervenors, representing the public, be involved in a settlement, though he did not say what role they should play.

All three parties – plaintiffs, defendants, and intervenors -- had been meeting this week in an attempt to reach a settlement. Earlier today, Dare County had issued a press release that said they were unable to reach an agreement and the talks were “terminated.”

Also, earlier today, Boyle issued an order in the case that granted the intervenors’ motion of April 1 to file supplemental information to oppose the request for an injunction, and he denied the motion of the plaintiffs, the environmental groups, to strike, or not allow, the information because it had not been filed in a timely manner.

http://www.islandfreepress.org/2008Archives/04.16.2008-PartiesOfORVLawsuitAgreeOnSettlement.html

well that just flat out sucks !!

I cannot believe what I just read...

"The end result of the settlement is that management of seashore resources is now in the hands of Judge Boyle and the private, special-interest groups that negotiated the terms of the settlement without input from the public."

Source: http://www.islandfreepress.org/2008A...ettlement.html


...and the ironic part of this is that the taxpayers (we the people) are going to pay for it. Go figure.

I just popped on to post the same article...I can tell you all that the statement about the pro access intervenors had no choice is very telling. Honestly, I think this is going to get even get worse before it get's better. Bottom line is pro access/pro fishing groups are struggling for money in this fight and we are getting outspent for lawyers, for lobbyists, for advocates expenses at all points. RFA is going to announce a dedicated account just for the shore access program but without support it is tough to win. Negotiated Rulemaking continues in May.

April 17, 2008



Good Afternoon…. NCBBA members and other interested parties….



This note is to bring all of you up to date on the Consent Decree your Officers and Board of Directors were presented by the CHAPA (Cape Hatteras Access Preservation Alliance) attorneys.



The Draft Consent Decree and maps are attached…Please take a few minutes and read the document so my comments below will be better understood.



The NCBBA Officers and Board of Directors met Monday evening (April 14, 2008) with other CHAPA members and Dare County Attorney Robert Outten, to confidentially discuss acceptance or rejection the document you have read. At this stage our options were to accept or reject, not further negotiate the Consent Decree. The consensus of the group was that the agreement was less than satisfactory but acceptance was in the best interest of the Outer Banks for several reasons which are listed below:



· Rejection would effectively put a lock and key year ‘round on the Spits and Points for the next 2 years.

· Rejection would put the decision in the judge’s hands and almost certainly meant closure of the areas in the injunction.

· Rejection would mean additional litigation at immense cost with little certainty of a positive outcome in the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals.

· Acceptance allows limited access to the areas in question.

· Acceptance allows NPS flexibility in closure and buffer actions.

· Acceptance prevents a financial catastrophe for the Outer Banks business community at the expense of open and unrestricted beach access.

· Acceptance keeps a majority of the Interim Plan in place which is guiding NPS management right now.

· Acceptance of the “nothing in the Consent Decree sets any precedent for the terms of any negotiated rule nor does it set any binding requirements for the special rule”.



The Board of Directors has voted to accept the Consent Decree in the best interest of the entire Outer Banks ‘Community’ along with the other members of CHAPA. We are now challenged to improve on this Consensus Decree through the Neg-Reg process and we will take that challenge with all the ambition we possess on behalf of our membership.



Thanks you for the words of support and willingness to help NCBBA. The Neg-Reg process has now become more vital to the future access of the Seashore Recreational Area.



Sincerely,

Jim Keene, President, NCBBA





Representing all of our members…“Supporting Recreational ORV Access”

NCBBA Board of Directors

contactus@ncbba.org

We are now challenged to improve on this Consensus Decree through the Neg-Reg process and we will take that challenge with all the ambition we possess on behalf of our membership.

the only problem with that statement is that anything less than what they have gotten now will be taken to court ...
imho , the 'settlement ' should have been rejected ..
yea , the beach would have been closed , but; we would have have not comprised again !! everytime there is a compromise we loose !!

the only problem with that statement is that anything less than what they have gotten now will be taken to court ...
imho , the 'settlement ' should have been rejected ..
yea , the beach would have been closed , but; we would have have not comprised again !! everytime there is a compromise we loose !!

Derf, I am with you 100%. By compromising the way they did they gave those people ALL the negotiating power going into RegNeg. If they don't like what the pro access people are putting forth then all they need to do is stall until the mandated deadline approaches. In addition they now set a precedent for closing those stretches of the beach and a precedent for no night time access:(. They lost no money on this deal since the NPS agreed to pay their legal fees. It is just a bad deal all around. If people look long term on this they would have rejected it and told the judge to close the beaches until reg neg is complete. That way those groups had much less negotiating power. They really sold the farm on this one. The only reason I can see to do what they did was to create a situation where the local businesses had a shot at staying in business.

I really think a counter suit needs to be done challenging the legality of a private entity to privately negotiate the policies of our public lands...but I am no lawyer.

Ughh evertime I think of this it get me steamed.

Ughh evertime I think of this it get me steamed.

gawd my blood pressure is way up ..
trying to set it up to do a trip to portsmouth is nc before they rape that place too ...

Patrick I hear you on the $$$$ part.

I am still thinking about "The Art of War"....i.e. attack your enemy from every possible angle and direction.

How can we get this issue on the front page of all the major new papers?
How can we get this on CNN and Larry King Live?
Do we know someone who is going to be at the next Democratic debate that can ask the candidates where they stand on this issue?

These questions may sound "out there"...but think about it.
The more people that are aware that our freedoms are being taken away from us, the more people will join our struggle to keep beach access open.

Politics and money are bedfellows...no question. But, keep in mind.. "United we stand, divided we fall". They have won this battle, but the war is not over. Let' not let them divide us with this milestone victory.

- Fish360

PS

Are there any attorneys in this community? Are there any law students who want to contribute?