Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    Site Admin MikeTrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Overland Park, ks
    Posts
    4,186
    +1
    48

    AWA Nationwide Alert: Padre Island National Seashore

    Send in your pro-PWC public comments

    Padre Island National Seashore has released the Environmental Assessment (EA) for PWC use on these public waters.

    Although the public notice given for the EA release leaves much to be desired, it pales in comparison to the all out anti-PWC agenda in the assessment.

    The plan is to permanently BAN PWC from these public waters, while allowing all other types of motorized boating to continue unabated.
    Keep in mind there are oil and natural gas rigs within the park, yet PWC are determined not to “fit in with the natural surroundings” of the this public land.

    Indeed, the document appears to be based on worn out anti- PWC boating studies and questionable innuendo offered by radical California environmental groups. In fact, it looks as if the “no-access crowd” wrote the document.

    TAKE ACTION: First, log onto

    http://parkplanning.nps.gov/document...cumentID=13889

    Fill out the required information and make your voice heard. Keep it short and sweet. Please use some of the below talking points:

    “The data used in the document is based on outdated information. Over half of all personal watercraft are environmentally friendly four stroke models.”

    “The document states that no more than 5 personal watercraft are observed in the park at any one time. Future use is predicted to increase to 7 PWC by 2014. How can such insignificant impact reasonably lead to a total ban on lawful boaters?”

    “This is plain and simple discrimination of a select group of taxpayers based on dubious information.”

    “The EA is clear that PWC have no more impact than any other type of motorized craft, yet still recommends a ban on boats owned by hard working citizens.”

    “This is about fairness; how can all other boats be allowed, yet environmentally friendly personal watercraft be banned?”

    “I urge you to restore PWC use in the seashore as previously managed prior to 2002.”


    If you don’t speak up, who will? Join us on the basic Freedom of Access Issue.

    Second, have family, friends, and fellow riders to do the same. You may never ride Padre, but the extreme “no PWC cause we say so” position is a clear indication of things to come.

    Third, send the AWA your email address. Most AWA member’s email address are already on file, and this is the most cost effective way for the AWA to keep you informed of threats to your Freedom to Ride. However, you may need to update it. Just click onto “contact us” and shoot us the address.

    The AWA never gives out member information to anybody, or any group. We will only contact you in case of a membership question, or more critical, a legislative alert.

    The more you know, the better.

    The American Watercraft Association …Defending the Freedom to Ride


  2. #2
    BertInTexas's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    377

    Padre Island PWC Ban

    Your decision to ban PWC use at Padre Island NS is based on outdated information and inaccurate data.The PWC of today are i.m.h.o. more environmentally friendly than most boats equipped with outboard motors.The PWC industry has worked diligently and made significant progress in all areas of concern from an environmental standpoint.The recent use use of four stroke technology,as well as advances in cleaner burning two stroke technology have made todays PWC much cleaner,quieter,and more efficient than ever imagined before.A growing majority of PWC owners are mature,responsible adults,and not at all the stereotypical and maniacal rider obviously envisioned by your panel.I respectfully request that the parties responsible for this decision reconsider and base any further legislation on more current and accurate data.Sincerely,R. Cohee

  3. #3
    fabrication guru rapidacceleration's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Lake Travis austin, TX
    Posts
    1,156
    +1
    2
    that sucks
    they tryed that same stuff on my lake where the local law enforcment, sheriffs and park&wildlife all were running twin 2 strokes v6's on there patrol boats. but were trying to say that it was the pwc's poluting.
    someone showed up at the meeting with pics of all the patrol boats from all three agencys that were all twin merc v6's 2 strokes and thats all it took to win that fight for now.

    hmmm 12cyl of 2 stroke vs. 3cyl of 4stroke

    anyway heres what i sent, hope it wasn't to much



    I urge you to restore PWC use in the seashore as previously managed prior to 2002.

    This is plain and simple discrimination of a select group of taxpayers based on dubious information.

    The data used in the document is based on outdated information. Over 75% of all new personal watercrafts are environmentally friendly four stroke models. and within the next year all new models will be 4strokes and or exceed all epa regs.

    but yet MOST fishing and pleasure boats are still running 2 stroke outboards, or worst yet 2 v-6 2 stroke outboards ive noticed on most patrol and law enforcment boats. thats 12 cylinders of two stroke NON-enviromental freindly engines that will be enforcing these laws agaist our 4-stroke watercrafts. seams that the rules should begain with the outboard boats doing the most damage and at a much larger scale.

    The document states that no more than 5 personal watercraft are observed in the park at any one time. Future use is predicted to increase to 7 PWC by 2014. How can such insignificant impact reasonably lead to a total ban on lawful boaters? especially when i can see dozens of 2stroke outboards boats runing around freely.

    The average PWC rider is NOT going to be ridding in a fish rich evirorment. our "jet drive propultion" will not altering the underwater envirorment or damage weeds and other areas that fish and other marine life may call home. unlike a PROP driven boats that cuts and slices there way through marine habitats and is more likely to be trolling or fishing in these delicate areas.

    The EA is clear that PWC have less impact than any other type of motorized craft, yet still recommends a ban on pwc's owned by hard working citizens.

    This is about fairness; how can all other boats be allowed, yet environmentally friendly personal watercraft be banned? This discrimination is against a group of people that enjoy and respect the waterway just like all others boater. except our impact is much much less then that of a large twin v6 outboard boat or any boat for that matter.

  4. #4
    BertInTexas's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    377
    Well put Rapid!!

  5. #5
    Looking for a job gtxsc03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    St. Charles, MO
    Posts
    1,426
    Great job guys, hope you don't mind that I copied and sent the best of both.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. south padre island
    By john2008 in forum Sea Doo Open Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-07-2012, 01:11 PM
  2. South Padre Island to Corpus Christi by ICW
    By pituco in forum Southwest
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-29-2008, 12:51 PM
  3. Gulf Islands National Seashore in Mississippi and Florida
    By MikeTrin in forum Sea Doo Open Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-12-2006, 02:29 PM
  4. AWA National Jamboree
    By RM_RXP in forum Sea Doo Open Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-17-2005, 09:02 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •