by: Peter Benton- Sullivan
The Cape Hatteras National Seashore is located on North Carolinas Outer Banks. The Outer Banks is a set of barrier islands that stretch out from the land toward the Atlantic Ocean. The Cape Hatteras area was first established under the Cape Hatteras lighthouse, which is located right on the beach. The area was authorized to become a national seashore in 1937, but was not actually established until 1953. It was the first National Seashore created under the relatively new National Park Service. The area stretches over 70miles from Bodie Island to Ocraoke Island. The area was once filled with small beach towns that catered to the ocean lifestyle including a heavy fishing industry.
This all began to change however in the latter part of the 20th century when the Outer Banks and in particular the Cape Hatteras National Seashore became a large tourist pull due to its exceptional fishing, beaches, and surfing. The area grew incredibly fast and began attracting people from all over the eastern seaboard. My family in particular still vacations here and relatives come from states as far away as Illinois.
As mentioned above, one of the greatest parts of the National Seashore is its beaches. They attract fishermen, families, water sport enthusiasts, birdwatchers, and international tourists. However, within the past two years, an issue has arisen in terms of park management and National Park Service policies.
The National Park Service, under a bill passed by Congress in the 1970s, is supposed to implement plans and policies regarding keeping their beaches environmentally and publicly friendly. This means creating smart plans to deal with off road vehicle (ORV) use. However, they never did. In the summer of 2008, the North Carolina Audubon society along with several other local environmental groups sued the National Park Service (NPS) for not having put in place policy regarding ORV use. They won their battle in a North Carolina court, and a federal judge forced the NPS to close all of the beaches along the National Seashore to ORV use and in some cases even pedestrian use. The reason the environmental groups did this was to protect natural and in some cases endangered bird species that live and breed on the beaches. The environmental groups contended that the use of ORV on the beaches destroyed the birds natural habitat, and in some cases prevented the piper species to reproduce because they nest on the actual beach.
The beach closures immediately created tension on the Seashore because many locals believed that this would diminish tourism, and therefore revenue for the area greatly. With beach closures to ORVs and in some cases even to pedestrians, many people would not want to come because they could not be on the beaches as they planned.
The dilemma for the National Park Service is creating policy and rules that will be satisfactory to both sides of the issue. They need to meet the environmental requirements that protect the native bird species, while at the same time allowing for tourism to continue with as little interruption to people’s vacations as possible.
17 comments:
This is a tricky issue. How do you find a balance between protecting the environment and harming the economy. But are the Off Road Vehicles really necessary? Would running a shuttle to and from the beach be an effective option? This would cut back on the number of cars going back and forth disturbing the birds environment.
if local businesses are so concerned with losing customers due to lack of off-road vehicle areas, why don't they start one of their own? Sound like a pretty good business to me, the competition has just been effectively eliminated. Sure it won't be on the beach, but if you can go to the same place to enjoy off roading and hit up the beach, it seems like a win-win for the tourists, environmentalists, and businesses.
I think getting rid of off road vehicles seems like a pretty good plan. If they want to keep the ORV industry, maybe they should only be allowed at certain times of the year when it would affect the natural species the least. I think preventing pedestrians may be a little extreme, in regards to the local economy. They should evaluate where the most harm is being done and set some sort of regulations for the park visitors.
Couple of things........A shuttle? You have never been to Cape Hatteras where fishing from private vehicles have been a way of life since vehicles were invented. Cape Hatteras has only had roads since the late 1940's and even now they wash out on these barrier islands. The birds are not the problem! Vehicles have coexisted with the birds and turtles since vehicles traveled the beaches. Its only now that the overzealous "conservationists" that have never been to Cape Hatteras are involved. PEOPLE on foot create more issues with nesting birds that vehicles do! Cape Hatteras publishes the numbers of intrusions into closed areas each year......50:1 people on foot, and especially people with unleashed animals are the vast majority of closed area violations. Off road travel is a way of life on these barrier islands and only the people that have never been here don't understand that! The locals and the visitors have co-existed with nature in this Park quite well until 2004 when people from outside the area felt the need to intrude to "make things better for the birds and turtles".....its baloney and it has begun the economic destruction of 7 villages in the Park on the Outer Banks. Removal of vehicles from the beaches will deny access for thousands of American with disabilities…….a violation of Federal Law. What is more important for the people that own the beaches?
Mike Metzgar
www.ncbba.com
Witt, Corey, and Courtney,
You are welcome to your point of view, but it is clear that your grasp of the issue is not from an experience of the Outer Banks. I wrote this article on beach access closing issue back in July recounting my view. Clearly, my view may be a bit slanted since I own a beach house on Hatteras Island, but what is mystifying to me is how a drunk driving charge could have turned into this fiasco. Despite the image that may be painted, the traffic on the beaches do not compare to the Jersey Turnpike. In addition, most of the travel is down by the ocean, not in the nesting areas where the birds are.
If you have been to Hatteras Island and actually met the people who live there, you will know that they are not only very down to earth but some of the most environmentally conscience people you could meet. For years, they and the Park Service has done a great job of preserving and protecting the flyway and the sea turtles who visit the Outer Banks every year.
For year a balance existed that now has been broken by interference by people who have no understanding of the Outer Banks.
-- Dan
Outer Banks Revealed
I think that the comment about restricting the vehicles to only certain times of the year that will have the least effect is one of the best options, but I also have never been to the area so can not be positive.
To me protecting our environment is always more important than allowing people to have a good time at a high environmental cost. I am glad to see that courts are finally starting to come to decisions that are infavor of the environment instead always being concerned about money. They way I see money and materials will always be replacable but the environment will not. The environment is full of too many complex systems for humans to correctly duplicate it. Therefore it is up to us to preserve the environment in order to protect our earth for years to come.
I think simply eliminating the use of off road vehicles would be the best option for this situation. Keeping the rest of the tourist attractions like fishing and water sports would still allow the local area to benefit economically and I don't think eliminating off road vehicles would cause too detrimental of an impact. The area is designated as a National Seashore with species of endangered birds, it should be protected accordingly. I like Corey's idea of allowing local businesses in the area to start their own off-roading businesses that don't interfere with the protected seashore area.
restrict ORV on certain times is a great idea. Maybe only allow them in the winter and when the birds are not migrating and nesting. If the ORV drivers respect the area, they can minimize their impact on the environment.
I live near a beach with a simmial problem. When piping plovers nest on the beach they close it off to ORVs. People get extreamly angry! I personaly believe the plovers deserve to be there far more than the campers and jeeps. I think the sacrifice asked of ORV users is trivial when compared to the surviaval of a species.
I was in a national park on the great barrier reef that was dealing with this issue. An island that is used for swimmers at the reef is also a habitat for birds, they have moved the tourists around to diffrent spots to let the bird population regenerate and have extremly strict rules about who can go where. If you break the rules your removed from the reef by the marine park authority. The part of the island i was on there were 1000's of birds and 100 tourists coexisting
I would be interested in reading a published ecological study that details the effect of anthropogenic ORV and pedestrian traffic on species richness and diversity in the outer banks beach ecosystem.
The park service's priority first and foremost is preservation. That is the sole reason that they exist, to preserve the land they govern. Thus, providing for tourists and ORV users absolutely must not come at the cost of the wildlife or the landscapes integrity.
Maybe they should get some ideas from the policies of The Great Barrier Reef in Australia. They seem to know how to use the beach in a sustainable way for the most part. Ecotourism is another option, where they could promote sustainability through tourism.
It seems that problems such as this arise all the time. Where environmental needs need to be met, but at the same time different people or groups will be alienated as a result. I feel that in situations like this the environment should hold more importance than various political groups. With that said, I believe as much as possible should be done to both help the environment and those people living in a particular area.
If the beach closing is more based off of a drunk driving accident than a threat to the sustainability of the native birds than the beaches should not be closed. Often legislation is passed when blame is placed in a more effective area such as an environmental concern because most people will not argue that reasoning.
Imposing restrictions on recreational activities will always be controversial.
Recreationalists feel they have the historical right to access, while environmentalists believe they have the right to impose restrictions. Probably will require segregation of certain environmentally sensitive areas. Local businesses should also be considered when making restrictions.
Post a Comment