©
An interim plan for management of beach driving at Cape Hatteras National Seashore hasn't brought calamity and ruin to the Outer Banks. The National Park Service's proposed long-term rules for off-road vehicles won't, either.
What the new rules would bring is a greater degree of predictability for recreational fishermen and other park visitors. For the past three summers, they've been forced to navigate an often-confusing set of beach closures as part of a court-approved consent agreement signed by conservationists, a coalition of ORV users and officials from Dare and Hyde counties.
The Park Service's proposal is fairly straightforward: About 28 miles of the 67-mile seashore will be open to beach driving year-round. Roughly 13 additional miles would be open from Nov. 1 to March 31. And 26 miles would be off-limits to off-road driving all year.
The plan also calls for new parking lots and ramps to provide more direct access to hard-to-reach stretches of the beach.
Not surprisingly, some off-road enthusiasts think the restrictions go too far. And, as expected, environmental groups argue the guidelines aren't adequate to achieve the intended goal - protecting vulnerable species of shorebirds and turtles.
That's the nature of compromise. Not everyone is going to get exactly what they want.
It's clear, though, that instituting stricter rules for ORV use hasn't been as disastrous as critics contend. During the first summer the interim rules were in effect, tourism on the Outer Banks suffered - from smoke from nearby wildfires, from high gas prices, from a lousy economy and from wildly exaggerated claims that the seashore had been closed to fishing.
Since then, tourism has rebounded. So, too, have the number of shorebirds and turtles. Economic interests and environmental stewardship can co-exist.
Further adjustments to the ORV plan may be warranted. A few specific stretches of the seashore may need additional protections. And park officials should continue looking for ways to open access to popular fishing spots like Bodie Island Spit and Ocracoke's South Point.
But it's well past time to move forward. Almost 40 years ago, President Richard Nixon signed an executive order calling for ORV rules that honor "wise land and resource management practices, environmental values and other types of recreational activity."
This plan is a solid step toward that. It's not perfect. And it's not likely to end the bickering over how much regulation is too much or too little.
But this plan is a good-faith effort to do what should have been done long ago - balance the Outer Banks tradition of beach driving with the need to protect natural resources. Roll it out.

Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
2nd post redact
A compromise this FEIS is not. Instead it is a significant derogation of the congressionally mandated mission of this Seashore that will negatively affect the lives of tens of thousands of people from all over this nation, many of whom have visited here for generations, as well as those of us that live here. Without the ability to show “considerable adverse effects”, NPS proposes to change the entire nature of this seashore and our environment. This is not a compromise; this is a tragedy unfolding before our eyes.
I encourage Mr. Luzzatto to come and visit Hatteras Island to see and hear firsthand what this proposed rule will mean to the residents and visitors to this island.
Wheat
limit again
If you study the FEIS you will see this. And if you look beyond the published FEIS, you will also see that the reported economic impact of the Consent Decree, somewhat mild in comparison to the proposed rule, has been white-washed by NPS in their thinly veiled attempt at “putting lipstick on a pig”. also first post.
character limit redactions...
1st post,The new rule does not bring predictability to the Seashore except what areas will be permanently closed to both pedestrian and ORV use. The remaining areas will still be subjected to confusing seasonal and nesting closures as they have for the last three years. The proposed new parking areas will not assist anyone in accessing the remote portions of the islands and in fact will eliminate access to significant portions of the seashore to mobility impaired persons such as me.
cont. Per Mr. Luzzatto
Mr. Luzzatto, When I called and spoke to you yesterday and received your blessing to extend beyond the 750 character limit, I neglected to mention Carter’s E.O. 11989 (1977) and the Park Services’ reliance and use of this order in order to justify these immense, proposed closures. This E.O. requires that NPS determine that “considerable adverse effects” either will be caused or are being caused by ORV’s before an area is closed to ORV use. To date, NPS, neither USFWS nor the various environmental groups have been able to demonstrate anything even remotely approaching “considerable adverse effects” as a result of vehicular access to the Seashore. Instead we are confronted with hundreds of pages of speculation, out of date studies, USGS protocols that were “peer reviewed” by the authors, and it gets worse. One study within the FEIS concerns bird behavior in South Africa, perhaps just a short ferry ride from Ocracoke.
A compromise this FEIS is not. Instead it is a significant derogation of the congressionally mandated mission of this Seashore that will negatively affect the lives of tens of thousands of people from all over this nation, many of whom have visited h
A good compromise on Hatteras driving, I should say not!
The fight for access to Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area began long before the now infamous presidential executive order 11644 signed by Nixon in 1972. In fact, the Park Service originally intended that Hatteras and Ocracoke be set aside as primitive wilderness, in complete conflict with the 1937 legislation establishing the Seashore. The Park Service’s new proposed plan is also in direct conflict with that legislation and a healthy dose of other federal statutes designed to guide NPS and other federal agencies in their management decisions.
I received my copy of the FEIS (proposed rule) Thursday the 18th of this month. The scales at the post office put this two volume, 1000 plus page document, at 8 pounds 12 ounces. And in spite of my hard earned knowledge of the subjects at hand, I have only just begun to digest this federal work. I have seen enough already to know that what has been presented in this editorial is flawed and often not fact based.
The new rule does not bring predictability to the Seashore except what areas will be permanently closed to both pedestrian and ORV use. The remaining areas will still be subjected to confusing seasonal and nesting c