Tuesday, June 02, 2015


SW WIND 10 TO 15 KT.
WIND WAVES SW 2 FT AT 4 SECONDS.
W SWELL 3 FT AT 12 SECONDS.
 
A petition has been filed with the Marine Board of the State of Oregon by an individual proposing to establish a "Navigation Safety Zone" on the south side of Cape Kiwanda in Pacific City, Oregon.
 
The said safety zone would essentially prohibit surfing whenever boat traffic was occurring at the Cape. The proposal stems from the accident in 2008 when a young Bend surfer, Cole Ortega, had his arm severed by a dory prop coming in through heavy surf.
 
The State and Ortega were found to be negligent in varying degrees and the boat operator cleared of any responsibility.
 
Now, 7 years later, Oregon surfers are faced with restrictions and the potential loss of a popular and protected surf spot. Surfrider has a petition to prevent the passage of this new and restrictive proposals...you can sign it here. Please do!
 
 

Although, I have serious doubts even about the Marine Board's jurisdiction in this matter, here's the letter I sent to them in May:
 
In Summary, the Proposed Petition to Establish a Navigation Safety Zone on the Pacific Ocean at Cape Kiwanda proposes to:
 
·         Establish a navigation safety zone on the Pacific Ocean at Cape Kiwanda in Tillamook County
·         Prescribe the marking of the safety zone with lighted markers
·         Make operation of a surfboard within the safety zone whenever dory rigs and trailers are parked on the beach a violation of ORS 830.365(1) (operation of a water ski, surfboard, or similar device in a reckless or negligent manner).
The actual end result of the passage of the Petition would be an effective “ban” on a specific user group (surfers using surfboards “or similar device”) within 1100 feet south of the Cape Kiwanda; currently, a popular surfing location due to several factors including, but not limited to, wind protection, favorable currents and access. Additionally, due to the wording in the petition of “or similar device”, such a ban could potentially be expanded to include other user groups; kayaks, stand up paddleboards, or even swimmers.
While to a non-surfer, a ban on surfing in an 1100 foot section seems reasonable as there are many miles of beach beyond the proposed “Safety Zone”, most quality surf locations in Oregon are tied to protective headlands or jetties; such as, Seaside, Indian Beach, Oswald West, Neakahnie Cliffs, Tillamook Jetties, Cape Lookout, Cape Kiwanda, Otter Crest, Yaquina Head, Newport Jetties and so on south. Cape Kiwanda is no exception, the best surfing typically occurs between the Cape and south to the car ramp. While the open beach break further south can be utilized for surfing, it does not provide the protection (from wind and currents) or the consistency of surf (due to refraction, bottom contour and currents) that the surfing of the lee side of a headland, cape or jetty provides. Elimination of Cape Kiwanda as a surfing option could mean that the next closest “protected” option would be Cape Lookout to the north (with inherent access complications) or Otter Crest to the south; both likely over an hour away and with far fewer options than the surf at Cape Kiwanda.
The “ban” or “prohibition” on “operation of a surfboard” in the area would be in effect “whenever dory rigs and trailers are parked on the beach”. If followed literally, surfing would be permitted if only one dory rig and trailer were present but a violation if two were present. If a surfer (or surfers) were in the water before any dory rigs and trailers were present would the surfer(s) be required to vacate once two dory rigs and trailers were parked on the beach? How long before they were in violation? Often, sea conditions will determine when a dory can safely launch and land; the same conditions often determine when certain surfers can safely enter the water. Large surf which may prevent dories from launching may free the area south of the Cape for surfers, but might also encourage beginning surfers to enter the water in conditions beyond their ability. Calm, small surf summer days are obviously days when dory rigs and trailers fill the beach and when surfers of all levels of ability also crowd the waters…and non-surfers crowd the shoreline. By all accounts there have been numerous close calls with beachcombing tourists unaware of a dory sliding onto the beach; in the event of an accident here, will beach walkers be banned or will dories be limited in their access to launch on the beach below the Cape?
Following the tragic injury of Cole Ortega, in which the 14 year old’s arm was severed, there were concerted efforts to communicate the dangers surrounding the launch and landing practices of Pacific City Dories below Cape Kiwanda. Local surfers and dory operators worked together to address safety, educate the public and preserve beach access for all users. The State and Ortega were both found to be negligent at varying levels. Posted warnings of the potential dangers to raise awareness for beach and surf users seem a better alternative than instituting a “violation” atmosphere targeting a specific user group; i.e. A “No lifeguard present. Swim at your own risk” or some equivalent signage, as seen on other of Oregon’s beaches but tailored, obviously, to the more specific risks and dangers at Cape Kiwanda. Additionally, the very notion of “enforcement” seems problematic in its own right both logistically and financially for Tillamook County; not to mention the cost of installation and maintenance of any “safety zone with lighted markers” near a Cape with violent winter surf regularly in excess of 20 feet.
Ultimately, any ban or restriction will be bitterly contested and will bring in outside interest groups. Further proposals and recommendations on limits to specific users (Dories, Jet Skis, Dog Walkers, Horses, Etc.) will be bandied about and contested, fought and argued. The end result will be an increasingly thick book of rules and regulations until the list of restrictions resembles those of California beaches. Even if the proposal “wins”, everyone will lose in the end.
The real issue at hand is the massive popularity and increase of use at Cape Kiwanda, especially in the summer. The natural beauty of the area is strong draw and offers many recreation options, surfing among them. While the proposed petition may have good intentions; every added rule creates precedence for other rules, and every exclusion creates yet other exclusions.
In ORS Chapter 830 (390.010 Policy of state toward outdoor recreation resources), in section 5 states:
(5) It shall be the policy of the State of Oregon to supply those outdoor recreation areas, facilities and opportunities which are clearly the responsibility of the state in meeting growing needs; and to encourage all agencies of government, voluntary and commercial organizations, citizen recreation groups and others to work cooperatively and in a coordinated manner to assist in meeting total recreation needs through exercise of their appropriate responsibilities.
Thus, any proposal or restriction that adversely affects a specific user group seems clearly at odds with Oregon State policy itself. Clearly, surfers, who would be excluded from use of the area immediately south of Cape Kiwanda do not support this proposal; nor does the Pacific City Dorymen's Association as I understand. The following was released to local media 5/12/15:
The PCDA board has released the following statement:
The Pacific City Dorymen’s Association has never proposed nor supported restricting access to any user group at Cape Kiwanda.
In over 100 years of dory launchings and landings at Cape Kiwanda less than four dorymen fatalities have occurred, making it one of the safest ports in Oregon.
In over 50 years of sharing the area with surfers there has been only one serious accident.
Instead, we have chosen to work in collaboration with the surfing community, the Oregon State Marine Board, Oregon State Parks, Oregon State Police, United States Coast Guard, Nestucca Rural Fire Protection District, and the Tillamook County Sheriff’s Department to educate all user groups to provide for a safer Cape Kiwanda.
The Board of Directors will again review current safety measures and may propose additional concepts.
This statement was approved by the majority of the board and is based on motions made and approved in previous meetings.
Ryan Cruse, Field Coordinator for Surfrider Foundation’s Oregon Chapter:
“[Surfrider is] very much opposed to this proposed ‘safety zone.’ We believe that the most productive way to handle safety in this zone is for EDUCATED surfers and dorymen to work together to manage this area.”
Under the basic precepts of 1967’s Oregon Beach Bill “the public has free and uninterrupted use of the beaches along Oregon´s 362 mile-long coastline. The Beach Bill also directs that the ocean shore be administered as a state recreation area. The Oregon Parks and Recreation Department is charged with the protection and preservation of the recreation, scenic, and natural resource values found on Oregon´s ocean shore”. [from Oregon.gov “Oregon Parks and Recreation Department: Rules and Regulations”]. I would argue that the waves that break upon Oregon’s beaches are a natural resource of the highest value in a recreational sense for surfers and other users.
I believe that if this restrictive petition passes it will only create counter petitions in an endless and contentious fight over access to the waters below Cape Kiwanda. Surely, there is a solution that does not infringe upon, limit or exclude the user rights of one group to the benefit of another…regardless of whether it is the 100 year tradition of dory launching or the 50 year plus tradition of surfing at Cape Kiwanda. Coexistence, not exclusion is the sensible path to take for Oregonians.
Thank you for your consideration.

2 comments:

mine craft said...

http://www.bestbuyx.com sex

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.ACEOFBEAUTY.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com sex

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com sex

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com sex

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com sex

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com sex

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com
http://www.bestbuyx.com sex

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com sex

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com sex

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com sex

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com sex

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com sex

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

http://www.bestbuyx.com

http://www.sextamina.com

thedevilcorp said...

Good post.