cost us 25 here in new york, but access closes down completely once the birds show up. so pretty much we get to drive on the beach on the off season damn birds........

This whole thread is about complete denial of access to the most desirable parts of this Recreational Area. It is tantamount to closing Yellowstone's Old Faithful because the soil around it contains a plant that is endangered or Yosemite's Half Dome because the foot traffic to the top is making grooves in the stone (it is under consideration by NPS for this reason) !!

Were it necessary ......... all of us would agree to pay access fees for Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area. In fact the fees are to being used to pay for the newly hired employees, the new trailers, and the movies to collect the fees. Waiting in line on summer weekends will be very unpleasant at the 1 location on Hatteras Island selling permits.....WHAAAAAT? NPS refused to sell them online.....WHAAAAAT?

Our Association is not opposed to the fees although we are feel they are excessive and further remove people from the beach by imposing an unreasonable additional cost to their visit. For all of the KiteSurfing visitors to Canadian Hole..........if you are on the side of the road, on the ramp or not in the parking lot you are subject to a fine and the collection of the access fee. WHY..........because the people and infrastructure NPS hired have to be paid.

The access fee money is not going to improve ANYTHING at CHNSRA!! WE know this because the proposed new ramps, parking lots and all the other suggested infrastructure improvements are undergoing public comment right now and later NPS will request the money to make them happen. Another little kick in the butt by NPS is that comments are only being accepted by US mail or FAX.........WHAAAAAAT? Are the young people in America going to write a letter....NOT! So the NPS has provided another self defeating approach for infrastructure improvements.

Folks.......The only way this systematic removal of us from all Parks not just Cape Hatteras is legislation in Congress. Please ask your US Congressman to support HR bill 4094 restoring free and open access at Cape Hatteras.

You'll need you zip full code so use this tool from the US Postal Service to find yours: https://tools.usps.com/go/ZipLookupAction!input.action

When you're done use either of these links to find your US Congress Representative:

https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

http://www.opencongress.org/people/representatives

Thanks..............its about US......all of US!!

Mike Metzgar
North Carolina Beach Buggy Association
Director, #5559, Life Member
[url]Mike.Metzgar@NCBBA.org[/url]

Are you allowed to ride a bicycle on the beach?

How about a motorized bicycle?

Could you tow a little bike trailer on the beach?

Allowed by man or allowed by the laws of nature?
It is deep sand, for the most part.
Ride a bike there? You'd fall over, or be knackered in 10 minutes.
There is hardly anywhere to park except the side of the road, which they are trying to stop.
There are a few paved lots, often miles apart.
It's not like they are going to make more parking.
The objective is to grab power and land, with no regard to your rights.
And the birds don't care.

My reading of the rules is no motorcycles or ATV's or travel trailers. 4x4's are limited in where and how fast they can go (no more dune jumping) and they have to have minimal recovery equipment to prevent being stuck in the sand including a shovel, low pressure tire gauge, jack and jack support board.

Maybe if it would make sense if you could show how much beach is closed rather than calling us fools?

jake, why not leave it and go back to your ECCEs or or eat a taco, man.

The rules are unreasonable, unfair and illegal.
Just because you relocated to TX where you are stuck with worse rules,
don't spoil it for us back here on the east coast.

Hatteras is a world class destination for kiting, fishing and surfing because it is huge and offers open access to miles and miles of beach. This lets you move to find where the wind is side-on, where the currents are bringing fish in, where the waves are not closing out in 6 ft dumps.
If Hatteras was only accessible at a few points, or very slowly trekking along the beach, 90% of the recreation would not happen.
The ability to do a downwinder or simply have a morning surf followed by afternoon riding in the sound or vice versa, whether it blows NE, SE, SW etc, is what makes Hatteras awesome.
With only a few access points, it would become like everywhere else where you have to sit and wait for just the right wind or swell angle.

Don't make assumptions about the background of anyone that disagrees with you or assume that they are just uninformed. Especially when you are spreading so much disinformation yourself. Either you yourself are terribly uninformed, or you are intentionally misleading people in an effort to bolster support for your position.

Saying things like "Cape Hatteras Beaches are being closed to everyone!" or "complete denial of access" is total B.S. I've posted the actual NPS map below that shows the portions of the beach that are closed to off-road vehicles. As anyone can see from the map, all of the beach is open to pedestrian use, and about half of it is open to driving by off-road vehicles. It's really pretty reasonable.

And while you obviously love to drive to every portion of the beach that you go to, believe it or not, there are many people that want to go sit on the beach and NOT have vehicles driving by. The way they've set up the driving restrictions allows people from each village a nearby spot to drive and a nearby spot that is pedestrian only. Seems fair to me.

Any big adjustment like this is going to have some issues while everyone gets used to the changes. The single office for picking up a pass does sound like a problem. But then fight against that, rather than the whole plan.

If you guys disagree with the rules and want to fight for complete, unfettered, free access, that's fine. That's a valid opinion. And the bill you're trying to promote in Congress is the way to go. But denigrating those that disagree with you and exaggerating the problem do not help your cause. And it means that when you really need to grab people's attention to fight a bigger fight, they might ignore you like Chicken Little.

Gone you're making more sense today but still on the wrong side of the argument.
If any of your last post was aimed at me I have to say this:
I am not jumping to conclusions, crying wolf or making unreasonable assumptions.
Anyone who has studied the environmental movement, Audubon, etc. and what they have done historically, especially in the last 40 years, knows the end game.
Face it.
I live in a state where they got here over a century ago and now practically the whole coast is off limits for most people. And they have designs on the rest.
Hatteras beach recreation has no wildlife impact to compare to 19th C market gunning, but the same mentality and the same groups seek the same solution, bit by bit elimination of man from the shore.
Just let them do this and see what restrictions they introduce in 2020.
Study history.
There is a right and wrong side, and the regulatory side is wrong.
It really is that simple.

BWD I'm going to do all of those things and its going to be awesome. And I'm going to get to speak with my congressman in person sometime in the next few months because I am involved and he is a great guy who supports deregulation. Furthermore, Texans are far more concerned with oppressive federal legislation than any other state. Sure you guys are still fighting the Civil War, but most of us do not recognize we have joined the Union.

FWIW we do have less regulation of 4x4 access to the beach, and at times when I am on the beach here with my children, I do wish there was a little more. But fair beach access to people of all classes, preservation of human use of the beach for all sports e.g. kiteboarding, prevention of undesirable beach developments, and environmental conservation are all important to me.

I have written letters to governments to prevent development of Isla Blanca State Park into a casino, to prevent development of condos in South Africa, to keep kite beaches open in HI, to prevent limits on access to Texas beaches, and to oppose environmental groups' self defeating legislation, for example in creating delays in the clean up of the Savannah River Site or to scuttle Yucca Mountain based on concerns that are not founded on science.

From your ECCE comment I can see you are pretty insightful, but unfortunately you fail to recognize that I am helping you to create a more compelling, coherent and successful argument that will influence a broader group of people to oppose legislation promoted by bird people.

Based on the map above it would appear to me that the entire beach is accessible with less than a 1/2 mile hike? That sucks for me because I like my 12v pump. But sure I will walk and pump for a good wave. Since I am not there, I do not see how this is a threat to access. You want me to write a letter?

Good luck with your cause.

Judging from your earlier post, I'm assuming that you are talking about Virginia. And yes, it does suck that most of Virginia's coast is inaccessible. But that is not because of regulation. It is inaccessible because it is private property, owned by the Nature Conservancy - no connection to the government. The birders got together and had the foresight to buy almost all of those freakin' islands. If only a bunch of kiteboarders were around back then instead.

Because of that history, I think you should be drawing a different conclusion about the National Park Service and regulation than you are. If only the National Park Service had been able to purchase those islands instead, we might all have access to the Virginia coast now. Sure, you might have to deal with some stupid rule or fee, but at least you would have public access. But to have purchased those islands (or even just to have managed them if they were gifts) would have required money - money that the National Park Service might have collected (or financed) through fees just like the ones that you oppose now.