Clavemeister's fishing spot going away?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/nation...t2N_print.html

Tom, they want to close the beach.

Frank

On Nov 28, 2:01*pm, Frank Reid © 2010 wrote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/nation...hincoteague-fe...

Tom, they want to close the beach.

Frank

These business welfare folk should contact their Congress Person, and
get it to let these Park Service feds know that climate change/global
warming is a Socialist myth, that is IF Grover Norcreep will give the
Congressstooges permission. And of course IF Grover is not occupied
billing his radical Saudi fundamentalist client/pals of his wife for
"access" to Congressstooges formerly "owned" by A_________________,
but now owned by the Krotch Bros.. (Norcreep claims he is no longer on
the payroll of an indited Saudi terrorist financier.)

Dave
Ideology Sucks, but FOX/Murdock snoops
in crime victims phone machines. Which is
a lot more efficient than having real reporters
on staff.

Here's the situation:
Current Refuge manager has a track record of severely restricting access
by other than foot or boat to offshore refuges. However, several
influential types and a lot of semi-influential types frequent
Assateague's beaches. They have attacked the issue in several ways.
First, an influence war behind the scenes. Several administration
officials fish the beach, so that helps. Second, the town of
Chincoteague and the Accomack County officials have demanded access to
ALL planning documents. Review of those should take 2 or 3 years, and
then, step 3, a lawsuit to block the action as a violation of the
original intent of Accomack County in ceding the land to the Feds.
In other words, nothing changes for at least 3 or 4 years, minimum.
By that time, I would guess you might have different refuge management
in place, so all remains as it has since they made the National Seashore
into a National Refuge(about 20 years ago).
Tom

On Nov 29, 4:32*pm, Tom Littleton wrote:
Here's the situation:
Current Refuge manager has a track record of severely restricting access
by other than foot or boat to offshore refuges. However, several
influential types and a lot of semi-influential types frequent
Assateague's beaches. They have attacked the issue in several ways.
First, an influence war behind the scenes. Several administration
officials fish the beach, so that helps. Second, the town of
Chincoteague and the Accomack County officials have demanded access to
ALL planning documents. Review of those should take 2 or 3 years, and
then, step 3, a lawsuit to block the action as a violation of the
original intent of Accomack County in ceding the land to the Feds.
In other words, nothing changes for at least 3 or 4 years, minimum.
By that time, I would guess you might have different refuge management
in place, so all remains as it has since they made the National Seashore
into a National Refuge(about 20 years ago).
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Tom

And now I know "the rest of the story."
Frank Reid
(will keep tying bunker flies)

On Nov 29, 2:32*pm, Tom Littleton wrote:
Here's the situation:
Current Refuge manager has a track record of severely restricting access
by other than foot or boat to offshore refuges. However, several
influential types and a lot of semi-influential types frequent
Assateague's beaches. They have attacked the issue in several ways.
First, an influence war behind the scenes. Several administration
officials fish the beach, so that helps. Second, the town of
Chincoteague and the Accomack County officials have demanded access to
ALL planning documents. Review of those should take 2 or 3 years, and
then, step 3, a lawsuit to block the action as a violation of the
original intent of Accomack County in ceding the land to the Feds.
In other words, nothing changes for at least 3 or 4 years, minimum.
By that time, I would guess you might have different refuge management
in place, so all remains as it has since they made the National Seashore
into a National Refuge(about 20 years ago).
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Tom

So I guess that means that the beach keeps disappearing due to
"climate change" and the rest of the parking lot disappears in the
next storm? . . . meanwhile the "influential types" keep using their
"influence" to maintain their vehicular fishing access, instead of
being leaders in facing up to the facts of "climate change?"

Dave
Beaches come and go even with or without "climate change," leaving
less and less sand in which to bury ones head. The only constant is
the ability of "influentials" to intimidate bureaucrats charged with
protecting the broader national interest in the face of unpleasant
realities.

economic realities and effective resource management realities often
conflict...and politicians are the worst managers of each. i personally
think the pendulum has swung wildly to policies of personal greed and
consumption in most of the southern coastal states. the outer banks and
barrier islands of virginia and the carolinas are unique and precious
resources that need protection from human over-development and
over-consumption. in north carolina, we have limited and managed vehicle
use on our beaches. i'm all for the appropriate management and
limitation of vehicular traffic on beaches. unmanaged, the fools ruin
the beaches for everyone, including those who responsibly travel on the
sand, and for the wildlife. they four-wheel over dunes and sea oats.
they drive over nesting sites. they disrupt and irreparably damage an
already fragile eco-system. that said...weather and sea always have the
final say. i am a proponent of no vehicles on fragile beaches and
barrier islands. hell, i'm a proponent of no vehicles on any beach.
that said...there are some areas and beaches that seem to tolerate the
use. most of nc's core banks...a national seashore including cape
lookout...has a long history of managed beach vehicle use.

....and tom...how about getting the virginia fat cats focused on the
destructive commercial menhaden fishing up there! g

jeff

On 11/29/2011 9:24 PM, DaveS wrote:
On Nov 29, 2:32 pm, Tom wrote:
Here's the situation:
Current Refuge manager has a track record of severely restricting access
by other than foot or boat to offshore refuges. However, several
influential types and a lot of semi-influential types frequent
Assateague's beaches. They have attacked the issue in several ways.
First, an influence war behind the scenes. Several administration
officials fish the beach, so that helps. Second, the town of
Chincoteague and the Accomack County officials have demanded access to
ALL planning documents. Review of those should take 2 or 3 years, and
then, step 3, a lawsuit to block the action as a violation of the
original intent of Accomack County in ceding the land to the Feds.
In other words, nothing changes for at least 3 or 4 years, minimum.
By that time, I would guess you might have different refuge management
in place, so all remains as it has since they made the National Seashore
into a National Refuge(about 20 years ago).
Tom

So I guess that means that the beach keeps disappearing due to
"climate change" and the rest of the parking lot disappears in the
next storm? . . . meanwhile the "influential types" keep using their
"influence" to maintain their vehicular fishing access, instead of
being leaders in facing up to the facts of "climate change?"

Dave
Beaches come and go even with or without "climate change," leaving
less and less sand in which to bury ones head. The only constant is
the ability of "influentials" to intimidate bureaucrats charged with
protecting the broader national interest in the face of unpleasant
realities.

On 11/30/2011 8:33 AM, jeff wrote:
economic realities and effective resource management realities often
conflict...and politicians are the worst managers of each. i personally
think the pendulum has swung wildly to policies of personal greed and
consumption in most of the southern coastal states. the outer banks and
barrier islands of virginia and the carolinas are unique and precious
resources that need protection from human over-development and
over-consumption. in north carolina, we have limited and managed vehicle
use on our beaches. i'm all for the appropriate management and
limitation of vehicular traffic on beaches. unmanaged, the fools ruin
the beaches for everyone, including those who responsibly travel on the
sand, and for the wildlife. they four-wheel over dunes and sea oats.
they drive over nesting sites. they disrupt and irreparably damage an
already fragile eco-system. that said...weather and sea always have the
final say. i am a proponent of no vehicles on fragile beaches and
barrier islands. hell, i'm a proponent of no vehicles on any beach. that
said...there are some areas and beaches that seem to tolerate the use.
most of nc's core banks...a national seashore including cape
lookout...has a long history of managed beach vehicle use.

...and tom...how about getting the virginia fat cats focused on the
destructive commercial menhaden fishing up there! g



see prior reply to Dave on the details of how the entire coast on the
Eastern Shore is managed. I think it's a workable compromise, having one
island with some access.
As for the bunker fishing, I didn't realize the little devils were all
that threatened. Hell, around 2 million of them turn up in harbors from
Quimby down to Cape Charles every year due to oxygen turnover alone. You
could walk across Quimby harbor on a bad day on a layer of dead
bunker(ahem, mehaden). Fill me in, counselor.......
Tom

On Nov 30, 7:33*am, jeff wrote:
economic realities and effective resource management realities often
conflict...and politicians are the worst managers of each. i personally
think the pendulum has swung wildly to policies of personal greed and
consumption in most of the southern coastal states. the outer banks and
barrier islands of virginia and the carolinas are unique and precious
resources that need protection from human over-development and
over-consumption. in north carolina, we have limited and managed vehicle
use on our beaches. i'm all for the appropriate management and
limitation of vehicular traffic on beaches. unmanaged, the fools ruin
the beaches for everyone, including those who responsibly travel on the
sand, and for the wildlife. *they four-wheel over dunes and sea oats.
they drive over nesting sites. *they disrupt and irreparably damage an
already fragile eco-system. *that said...weather and sea always have the
final say. *i am a proponent of no vehicles on fragile beaches and
barrier islands. hell, i'm a proponent of no vehicles on any beach.
that said...there are some areas and beaches that seem to tolerate the
use. *most of nc's core banks...a national seashore including cape
lookout...has a long history of managed beach vehicle use.

...and tom...how about getting the virginia fat cats focused on the
destructive commercial menhaden fishing up there! g

jeff

Here in the upper Great Lakes region the use of motorized recreational
vehicles on beaches (and in some {albeit too few} other sensitive
areas) is, for the most part, strictly prohibited.....especially on
publicly owned land.

Too little, too late.....of course.....but not a bad sop as such
things go.

As a joyous sometime user of motorized recreational vehicles, I can
only wish I had been an early investor in piano wire.

giles
and don't even get me started on commercial fishing.

On 11/29/2011 9:24 PM, DaveS wrote:

So I guess that means that the beach keeps disappearing due to
"climate change" and the rest of the parking lot disappears in the
next storm? . . . meanwhile the "influential types" keep using their
"influence" to maintain their vehicular fishing access, instead of
being leaders in facing up to the facts of "climate change?"

Dave
Beaches come and go even with or without "climate change," leaving
less and less sand in which to bury ones head. The only constant is
the ability of "influentials" to intimidate bureaucrats charged with
protecting the broader national interest in the face of unpleasant
realities.

God only knows what point you are trying to make here, but you are
demonstrating that you have no clue of the relevant details or local
background. Assateague is the northern-most of 8 barrier islands on the
Virginia Eastern Shore. None are developed at all, Assateague is the
only one with a causeway bridge leading onto it. The others are
reachable by a short boat trip. Being barrier islands and all, they all
constantly shift. Not being developed, they effectively protect the
inner coastal regions. Assateague was designated as a national seashore,
thus for public enjoyment, back in the 1960's. It only later got
converted into a National Wildlife Refuge, a decision the locals had no
input into. As for vehicular access, I see no problem allowing it as
always, given the same wildlife inhabits and nests on Cedar, Metompkin,
Parramore, and the rest of the islands down to Smith Island.
Tom

On Nov 30, 7:13*pm, Tom Littleton wrote:
On 11/29/2011 9:24 PM, DaveS wrote:

So I guess that means that the beach keeps disappearing due to
"climate change" and the rest of the parking lot disappears in the
next storm? . . . meanwhile the "influential types" keep using their
"influence" to maintain their vehicular fishing access, instead of
being leaders in facing up to the facts of "climate change?"

Dave
Beaches come and go even with or without "climate change," leaving
less and less sand in which to bury ones head. The only constant is
the ability of "influentials" to intimidate bureaucrats charged with
protecting the broader national interest in the face of unpleasant
realities.

God only knows what point you are trying to make here, but you are
demonstrating that you have no clue of the relevant details or local
background. Assateague is the northern-most of 8 barrier islands on the
Virginia Eastern Shore. None are developed at all, Assateague is the
only one with a causeway bridge leading onto it. The others are
reachable by a short boat trip. Being barrier islands and all, they all
constantly shift. Not being developed, they effectively protect the
inner coastal regions. Assateague was designated as a national seashore,
thus for public enjoyment, back in the 1960's. It only later got
converted into a National Wildlife Refuge, a decision the locals had no
input into. As for vehicular access, I see no problem allowing it as
always, given the same wildlife inhabits and nests on Cedar, Metompkin,
Parramore, and the rest of the islands down to Smith Island.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Tom

Hm.....

Do the boats have motors?

giles
who notes that points are often directional and, if sharp enough,
quite invisible.....at least to some observers, local or otherwise.