National Parks Traveler

d-2, Bob Janiskee has recently conspicuously reveled in "satire", even at the risk (in fact, "cost") of flak from the relatively clueless and overly stiff among his readership. He continues to hone his literary artistry, in this very post. Bob describes how one Ranger made gestures;

I've never heard of a pot-head maxing out credit cards and ravaging bank accounts to support their habit. Crack, coke, junk, PCP, meth, even opiates, yes. But you can't smoke enough pot to clear out your bank account or credit line, unless you have a $500 limit. You'll go broke faster due to alcoholism that due to weed.

Rick Smith, Perhaps you overestimate the difficulty of assessing a law enforcement context. There are easily enough facts in view in this case, to see that the interdiction was probably unprofessional to the point of being "amateurish".

These 5 male and 1 female "perps" (buncha local kids?) could have been dangling their bodies over a precipice, risking injury & death ... and putting others at risk and costing the public money attempting to rescue them ... and that would have been 'approved recreation'.

I agree that it is most assuredly not a victimless crime. The substance abUSERS are not the only ones that hit rock bottom. Before that happens, families are ravaged. Abusers get high, get into debt (max out [cash advances, too] credit cards off the charts), empty bank accounts, come close to or actually lose jobs, lie, steal & whatever it takes.

Lepanto et al,

Oh, come on Ted Clayton. The endangered species law was EXACTLY written to do this because it was the last gasp of the effort to stop America from destroying its diversity of species. Real laws of nationwide land use, habitat destruction or releasing chemicals into the environment were too little too late.

Alas, it would seem that the bill may have died in committee yesterday. Voting was divided strictly along party lines. Go figure. The vote was close, though. From the "Island Free Press":

As several on this page have stated both sides are adament in thier beliefs. I have been visiting and driving on the beaches of NC for more than 40 years . Before the advent of the SUV and when there were no restrictions. Each year there are more and more restrictions and less area to enjoy.

Something that is being missed here is that during bird closures these areas in question are off limits to all human activity. Not just ORV's but anyone that takes a notion to stroll along the seashore risks arrest and heavy fines just for walking on the beach in a protected area. What an incredible shame that this is allowed to happen in a National Seashore that our tax dollars pay for.

Bob, I have posted here testimony compiled and submitted by Hatteras Local Virginia Luizer. I apologize for the length, but it does tell the whole story, from the beginning toi where we are now, in the most concise single document I've seen yet. I'll back away for a while now. Sorry to jump in twice so early in the thread.

I don't see any end in sight for this controversy. Neither side is going to be happy with anything, and I doubt the success of the RegNeg committee. People hold their beliefs too tightly on both sides.

ORV Impacts "Preliminary analysis indicates that major storm events may have the ability to �wipe the slate clean� as they move sediment off shore. In terms of the compaction, sediment grain sizes, and beach faunal communities, storms may remove all damage that is caused by ORVs, allowing new populations of animals to inhabit the area."

Yes, Barky, there's a very distinct attendance spike in October. The GRSM attendance data for the most recent five-year period (2003 through 2007) show that average visitation in October is 1.13 million, while September visitation averages 883,000. October visitation actually exceeded both September and August visitation in all five of those years.

Bob says, "I do admit it disturbs me to hear an ex-police officer like yourself say "If you don't look out for yourself, nobody else will."