Thank You Basic Patrick
 

You know If the tree huggers block this for good it is going to happen all over the east coast, very sad that these groups with big budgets can do this to the smaller groups that actually use the resource

they are now thinking about ending ORV use up at Plum Island by the end of 2010, (just a rumor though)

Attention UMS Affiliates:


On Thursday, February 26th 2009, Mike Murray, Superintendant of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore, acting in his role as the Designated Federal Official (DFO) for the Cape Hatteras National Seashore Negotiated Rulemaking Committee, agreed with a determination of the independent facilitators that committee consensus could not be reached. Mr. Murray then promptly thanked the committee members for their service and declared the committee work over, essentially ensuring there will be no short term solution to the ongoing legal battle to preserve the historic cultural activity of beach driving in the Cape Hatteras National Seashore.


Over the past four plus years, the Federal Advisory Committee was selected, trained and began work under the guidelines set forth by the Federal Negotiated Rulemaking Act. The goal of the committee was to develop what would become the "preferred alternative" in the ongoing traditional rule making for the first formal ORV Management Plan for the beaches and south side access of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore. The strategy behind NPS choosing to convene the committee was that only a compromise plan coming from regulated negotiation could prevent years of court battles and lessen the risk of economic ruin for the communities of the Outer Banks that are heavily dependent on tourists that enjoy vehicle access to both local and remote beaches of the park. There are a t otal of less than 1000 legal public parking spaces over three islands. The annual visitation to the park is well over two million people per year.


Unfortunately, the committee was distracted from the beginning due to three of the members (Defenders of Wildlife, Audubon & Sothern Environmental Law Center) filing an anti beach driving law suit just days before the committee was to begin deliberations. The result of that law suit was a "consent decree" which was for the most part forced upon NPS & the local community by a Federal Judge in lieu of having all beaches in the Park closed to driving during the rulemaking process.


Although the committee did reach provisional consensus on Vehicle Characteristics, Self Contained Camping Areas, Safety Closure language and a base system for a permit that would pay for a sustainable ORV plan, the documents could not be considered complete because the provisional consensus was linked to the amount of beach available to the public. In the end, that issue could not be resolved.


As the primary seat holder representing both the United Mobile Sportfishermen (UMS) and The Recreational Fishing Alliance (RFA), I want to thank my alternate Mr. Ronald Bounds without whose NPS policy expertise we could not have done as complete a service to our constituents as we feel we=2 0provided. Mr. Bounds and I want to make sure that our members know that on the last day of meetings, a poll of committee members was taken to test consensus on a proposal of ORV Routes and Areas by a group of committee members of which we were a part. This proposal agreed to keeping more than half the beach closed to ORV use. Even with this painful and in our opinion extreme compromise which still allowed for natural resource closures in the few ORV areas left open to the public, the committee count kept coming up with 17 members, including NC Wildlife Resources Department, voting in favor of the proposal and the same 5 stakeholders blocking consensus and not willing to compromise enough for a solution to be reached. The National Park Service and US Fish & Wildlife felt it appropriate to remain neutral and abstained. Mr. Bounds and I are currently participating in a majority group of committee members that are putting together a package of information to be included in the final report of the committee to the Department of Interior.


The next step in the traditional rulemaking is for NPS to finish creating alternative proposals on its own and sometime in the Fall, the NPS will release the alternatives and begin a round of public hearings.


Unfortunately, it is widely anticipated that what ever comes out of the final rule expected to be released in the Spring of 2010, legal action will be initiated by either the extreme environmentalists or the recreational community in attempts to protect their interests. In either case, all recreational access organizations should closely watch this situation and be preparing to fund what could be a very expensive and lengthy legal battle to preserve the East Coast's largest drivable beaches. The people and the business owners of the outer banks need our prayers and support as the next couple years promise to be troublesome at best.

Patrick Paquette
UMS Executive Director

I've never met Patrick,but the week after Christmas,I spent on the OBX.I hooked up with a guy(from the other site)and he took me for a beach ride(there were NO bass)after explaining the trouble down there,he told me that Patrick was working hard to keep access open.Until then,I thought he was just a Ma fisherman on SB.Com.I wish I had found the time at TFCTFN,to say "hi",and "Thanks".Bobby

He does a crapload of good work on our behalf as anglers and for access.

I think the real reason is so he doesn't need to do real work :rotflmao:

(with that in mind, send him some real work if you need some house painting done)

And yes, Thank you Patrick :btu:

As for the groups blocking consensus, ^^$*#)@ You!

once again, big gov interfering with our lives. people that use hatteras,we feel your pain. capecod is essentially shut down june, july and most of aug. when its "open" there's only like 7.5 miles to drive on. a far cry from the 50 to 60 we used to have before the park service, ccns and fat (and thankfully almost dead) ted kennedy saved us. don't worry in the next 20 years we'll be swiping bar codes just to leave our houses. "Land of the free?" yea right. how bout "land of the s#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&g off the government tit" if i sound bitter its because i am. time for a revolution, time to get back to the constitution. now i need to go to work and pay for some aholes stupid earmark.

titanium chain together a bunch of old wrecks on the beach in a row

MANY laws get PASSED.....
then they are publicly protested and over turned.

That's just my view ! http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c6...gn-GUYS/TY.png Patrick

Fight the power PP!

This issue really p!$$es me off!

Someday I hope these tree hugging bird loving freaks will be found out for what they really are...it must take one HUGE amount of self-loathing and hatred of HUMANS to put non-human animals first! Can they really hate their own species that much? After all, aren't we who fish just as human and deserving of having our right and freedoms protected as the "environmentalists"? Are they so disgusted and replused by their own selves that they can't bear to look at another human, prefering instead to "watch birds" or other wildlife?

Funny thing here is we wouldn't have a National Park Service, or anything like it at the state level either, if it weren't for President Teddy Roosevelt creating the NPS to preserve public access to wildlife - and this was clearly spelled out as public access to freely hunt and fish on private and public lands in this great nation. Where did this all go so very wrong?

I respect the rights of environmentalists to have and voice their opinions, this is all part of what our democratic society stands for. This does not however seem to be reciprocated by them regarding our rights and opinions.

Since apparently it is now in vogue to put the rights of little birds and other animals too stupid or helpless to care for themselves above the rights of humans, how about this little bit of logic for a strategy:

1) I am a human. All humans are animals. Therefore I am an animal, and so I deserve to be protected like any other animal.

2) I do not stay in one place. I move about in search of food that I catch to survive. This food migrates with the seasons. Therefore, I am a migratory animal, just like a bird.

3) Given the truth of the above statements I expect, no demand, that my migratory routes and feeding grounds be protected and my access to the beaches, fields and streams I rely on be kept free of development and open to me.

The bit about keeping my migratory routes free of development may be the hardest. Don't get me wrong here, I am not opposed to letting people who can afford to build a home on the beach, but just follow the money trail. I'll wager that much of the $$$ that fund the legal battles by so called environmental groups halt our access comes from those who want to build their mansions by the sea and claim the beach as their own private domain.

Just such a move over 100 years ago by the "elite" of society to buy up the land and lock out the average citizen from being able to hunt and fish was what motivated President Teddy to enact the National Park System and start the public Fish and Game management initiatives at the State level. The goal was to preserve public access to hunt and fish so we could all "enjoy nature". This is where the uniquely American concept that the "game" and wildlife belonged to the people and not the landowner cam from. This flew in the face of the dominant European system of the time wherein the "game" belonged exclusively to the landowner, which meant if you weren't so fortunate as to be weathy you couldn't hunt or fish.

It scares the #^&#^&#^&#^&ens out of me that a rising American Aristocracy will use our own system of government against us, and treat us all like a bunch of peasants by denying us the same rights and privileges they enjoy.

Thanks TattooBob, and let's all keep spreading the message. Write your state representatives.

Very well put Togue