beach rally
http://www.islandfreepress.org/2008A...achAccess.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.

thank you for the video link
 

...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 ...

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 .)

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/2008A...ze.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.

settlement details ...
 

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

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.

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?