FKA Kiteboarding Forums  

Go Back   FKA Kiteboarding Forums > MAIN FORUM > ** KITER BUZZ **
Connect with Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/rick.iossi
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-24-2010, 08:12 AM
Jur Jur is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Miami Beach
Posts: 20
Default anchoring at stillstville will be illegal soon, help to prevent this!!!

I have attached a flier that outlines the Parks Service intent to make it illegal to anchor your boats in Elliot Key, and the Sand Bars at Stilltsville and
Sands Key.

The plan calls for the park to install Ten Morrings at Elliot Key / Sands Key, That means only ten boat will be allowed to tie up. Rafting up to those boats as well as anchoring will be illegal.
Needless to say this is not a good thing.
We have until September 3rd. to get our comments and objections in. The best way is in their web page. (see link at the bottom of the flyer) and post your comments.

Please log in as many complaints as you can specially if you have different E mail accounts, and pass this on to as many friends as you have that own boats and enjoy spending time in Elliot Key.

I have filled my comments and it took but a couple of minutes (see attached)
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Elliot Moorings.pdf (128.6 KB, 21 views)
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-24-2010, 09:16 AM
ricki's Avatar
ricki ricki is offline
Administrator
Site Admin
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 8,700
Default

Thanks for the heads up Jur, I had no idea something like this was in the works, yet. I have reviewed the NPS website for more details but it seems to be fairly short on specifics. I tried to call down there but no one was answering their phones and the head of Resource Management is out for the next two days.

You can see some limited information at:
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/projectH...rojectID=26660

along with more specifics but still missing some critical points in the powerpoint presentation at: http://parkplanning.nps.gov/document...cumentID=35785

It seems "Alternative A" involves limited action using existing mooring balls and if they are all taken, anchoring would be permitted? Even now, if you damage sea grass you are liable for a serious fine and restoration charges.

"Alternative B" seems to remove anchoring in sea grass areas, restricting single boats to limited mooring balls. This alternative could have a major impact on kiting within the NP aka Miami Flats. This alternative is deemed to have the least impact on resources. Then again, "Alternative - Ditch The Users" (currently NOT proposed), banning all human access in all forms would have the least impact of all. What is the point of a National Park anyway?

The proposed plans could severely restrict access to and activities within Biscayne Bay within the National Park. The boundaries show up below:



The park pretty much covers everything south of Key Biscayne to just north of Key Largo. That is a lot of territory to lose access to in large measure.

Time to log your comments, we have very little time left. Lacking specifics, it would be good to ask for:

1. Continued access to popular boating, anchoring areas and not restricting boats to a finite number of mooring balls.

2. Existing laws and enforcement protecting sea grasses should be allowed to continue to address powerboat incursions/damage in these areas.

3. Alternative B seems directed at resource protection through the exclusion of the public from visiting the area in traditional, decades old fashion well predating the designation of the National Park.


*** YOU MUST MAKE YOUR COMMENTS BY SEPTEMBER 3, 2010 AT:

http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentF...cumentID=35785



Please jump in and speak your mind otherwise a century old tradition of enjoyment of the vast majority of Biscayne Bay may well get flushed into the past, never to be seen again.

.
__________________
FKA, Inc.

transcribed by:
Rick Iossi

Last edited by ricki; 08-24-2010 at 10:24 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-24-2010, 12:15 PM
ricki's Avatar
ricki ricki is offline
Administrator
Site Admin
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 8,700
Default

It takes next to no time to post a comment. This is what I just posted. It would be a good idea NOT to copy this verbatim.

"I am dismayed by the proposed actions under Alternative "B." This course of action is in some ways akin to removing the users entirely from the resource. If you are underway or drifting no problems, just don't anchor or moor in one place. The hand full of moorings proposed don't seem to be adequate to address current user needs. Banning anchoring near sea grass areas particularly around Stiltsville is in effect banning of traditional access to this area that has gone on for many decades. Far longer than this area has been designated as a Federal Park. There are existing laws protecting sea grass and enforcement actions against harm to them. Why not let this serve as intended without further curtailing access to this unique area. Regarding drunken operation, poor behaviors in these areas, why not just have concentrated enforcement sweeps. I believe the word will get out and in an effective way.

PLEASE PURSUE ALTERNATIVE "A" AND NOT ALTERNATIVE "B" WHICH IN EFFECT REMOVES USERS FROM AREAS ENJOYED FOR OVER 80 YEARS! USE EXISTING LAWS TO MAINTAIN ACCEPTABLE BEHAVIOR IN THESE AREAS.

Thank you"

Please copy your replies here to so as to help others with their comments. Help get the word out, email, repost this on other forums, tweet it, facebook, whatever, just help us to help ourselves!
__________________
FKA, Inc.

transcribed by:
Rick Iossi

Last edited by ricki; 08-24-2010 at 02:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-24-2010, 03:29 PM
Josh Josh is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 19
Default

Posted. Thanks for bringing this to everyone's attention. This would be a huge setback for kiting in Miami given our already limited access.
__________________
Josh Noe
Adventure Sports
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-24-2010, 07:04 PM
Unimog Bob Unimog Bob is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Parrish
Posts: 771
Default

What is the point of a National Park anyway?
Good question. I actually worked pretty closely for a few years on a project in the Canaveral National Seashore. The NPS left me with the strong impression that their goals were multi-fold, but primarily it was to preserve areas under their supervision for generations to enjoy. Yes, enjoy. Think Yellowstone, etc. Unless things have changed, I still believe they encourage visitation/participation within National Parks, not exclusion.

I could be wrong, but I would feel better if I saw first hand a document from the NPS stating otherwise, before I drew that conclusion.
Is there a link to the original NPS document that demonstrates a strong desire/intent to limit mooring to only ten in the area of concern, no exceptions?
I understand people's tendency to be nervous about possibly losing access. I fall into that category often myself.

However, I looked through all I the information I could find that was provided by the NPS regarding BiscayneNP. I saw on multiple occasions statements that referred to public use and enjoyment as a goal.

Quote:
The purpose of this plan is to increase the protection of marine natural and cultural resources while enhancing visitor enjoyment of these resources, as well as to protect human health and safety through the appropriate use of mooring buoys, aids to navigation, and informational signs. Vessel groundings can be dangerous. Vessel groundings, improper anchoring, and visitor crowding in or near sensitive habitats can cause considerable damage to seagrass beds and coral reefs. It can take years and even decades for seagrasses and corals to recover from grounding and anchoring damage, and in some areas, they may never grow back; instead forming sandy areas, such as by the Sand Key sandbar. The park is reviewing its current navigational and mooring system to determine whether moorings and navigational markers should be removed, relocated, or increased in number to protect marine resources and provide for the enjoyment of park resources such as reefs and shipwrecks. The park is proposing appropriate criteria and standards for establishing future mooring sites, as well as defining desired conditions for mooring sites and navigation. The park is also proposing to formalize and expand the Maritime Heritage Trail in order to facilitate access to historic shipwrecks and other submerged archeological sites, by installing mooring buoys and providing diver cards and brochures for each of these sites.
I also got the impression that they wish to preserve the area for future generations (probably the NPS primary mission) by not allowing boats to beach themselves and limiting anchor setting/pulling in sea grass beds within NP. Hopefully that can be accomplished without diminishing use too much.

It's not my area (I don't ride there), and maybe I should keep my mouth shut. But instead of taking such a hostile/negative tack right off the bat, maybe try a more moderate approach stating concerns and offer to lend advice to help reach a resolution? In the end, you are dealing with people (the NPS is composed of them). Most people I have found respond more positively to an idea when not initially placed in a confrontational setting.

If this has already been done, and the NPS is showing evidence of wanting to exclude citizens at any cost, I apologize for my post.

Hopefully concerns can be addressed and solved. Good luck.

Scott Fears
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-24-2010, 07:04 PM
ricki's Avatar
ricki ricki is offline
Administrator
Site Admin
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 8,700
Default

Thank you and you're welcome. Thanks again to Jur!

This is the public comment period, if this concerns you for a trip you plan to take out there in a couple of days or in several years, please TELL THEM WHAT YOU THINK. That is our best response for now it seems. Also, a number of the issues voiced in the NPS documents seem to be enforcement related. The laws are on the books, the officers are present to enforce them, why not give them full encouragement to do just that? Mount some enforcement sweeps, make a point and the word should get out there.

*** YOU MUST MAKE YOUR COMMENTS BY SEPTEMBER 3, 2010 AT:

http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentF...cumentID=35785



I just received information about this situation from someone well placed in the community and familiar with affairs related to this matter. This is what he had to say:


"I think it is very important to act. But I think we need to be informed before we act.

Once you know what you want, the appropriate reaction is to comment to the NPS & tell them what you like/don’t like about the plan. That’s what the comment process is for.

You can get the full environmental assessment and comment opportunity at: http://parkplanning.nps.gov/document...cumentID=35247

Here is an email I sent to some of my friends that had inquired previously:

“THE GOVERNMENT IS SHUTTING
DOWN ELLIOTT KEY, SANDS KEY,
STILTSVILLE, ETC.

NO MORE REGATTA!!”

No they’re not…

Here’s what they’re actually talking about doing. Not quite as drastic or exciting…or negative as the email flyer. The goal is to spread the visitor impact on the resource. The problem is the two sandbars. They are going to do something to reduce the out of control situation there…and it is out of control.

See the attached excerpt from the draft plan environmental assessment. They’re talking about mooring buoys to control the pachangas @ stiltsville and sands cut. These would be no anchor/no beaching zones.

X boats at a time first come first served. You want to play on the sand bar with your kids, get their early and now you don’t have to worry about Lazaro el Lechon harassing your kids in a place that looks like I-95.

Please note what they’re not talking about. While Billy’s would have buoys, if they fill up, you can still anchor. Unlimited anchorage everywhere else along Elliott (except in front of the harbor where they’ll have a no anchor mooring field).

This is just a proposal, it is far from final, but they will not allow the status quo to continue at Stiltsville and Sands Cut.

As for the Regatta, I don’t know what will happen, but I can tell you they HATE it. It is a disaster for them every year and the death toll makes it kinda hard to defend…

Go to http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentF...cumentID=35785 and post your comment.

Since then I have received the following clarifications from the park:

This plan discusses how and where we would add additional mooring buoys along the reef, at some of the shipwrecks (including all of the sites on the Maritime Heritage Trail) and how and where we would better mark shallow flats and a few areas adjacent to navigation channels.

The plan would also provide guidance in reducing crowding at Sands Cut and at the party site near Stiltsville. Although the Sands Cut area is only a tiny little spot in the park, fully 1/5 of all our arrests and incidents occur there. Almost every weekend during nice weather we respond to fights, assaults, etc there.

However, we are not intending to close down these sites. We want to try installing mooring pins at Sands Cut and require people to use the pins when using the area. We can help minimize damage to the shallow flats (this used to be a nice grass flat) and make sure there is room for rangers to get in there to break up the fights or at least rescue the injured. It is very difficult to know exactly how many pins we could install, just by looking at the aerial photography, but it will probably be between 60 and 70 pins. If the pins don't work, we'll try something else. Again, we do not intend to close the area down.

The other concern we've heard is that the proposed Elliott Key mooring area will close down the Columbus weekend event. That is totally incorrect. I don't see the proposed mooring area as having any impact at all on that event. The proposed area is not where most of the boats anchor during that weekend.

As it is with so many of these issues, it’s the 5% of yahoos that cause problems & restrictions that all of us have to live with. We’ve all seen the anchor & boat damage on the reef and the flats. I personally don’t have a problem with a cooling off of the zoo at sands cut (we’ve been there, we’ve seen it…occasionally we’re even part of the problem), and it doesn’t look like they want to tighten it too much too me…but that’s my opinion.

Go to http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentF...cumentID=35247 and give them your opinion. But base it on the facts, not on some incendiary rag that gets everyone’s Speedos in a knot instead of getting the problems in the park resolved.

As responsible users we have to help bring the situations under control for our good and for the good of the park. Responsible use leads to reasonable access. Irresponsible use leads to more & more restrictions. Get involved, get informed, let them know what the reasonable folks want!

Just keep taking pictures (& legal fish) and leaving only bubbles behind"
__________________
FKA, Inc.

transcribed by:
Rick Iossi
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

Do not advertise outside of [COM] Forums.
Do not show disrespect for others in your postings.
Users can be denied access to this Site without warning.
FKA, Inc., it’s officers and moderators are not responsible
for the content of the postings and any links or pictures posted.

Report Problems by PM to “administrator” or via email to flkitesurfer@hotmail.com

Copyright FKA, Inc. 2004, All Rights Reserved.