Hi all, The following is copied from a facebook page of Jetski Junkies. I have deleted some names of posters and some email addresses...to protect the privacy of others.
Florida Keys Call to Action - This guy Sean Morton, The Florida Keys Sanctuary Superintendent, has a real problem with PWCs no matter where they are. Just doesn't like them or us, not even a little bit. This email below is from Peggy Mathews our PWC lobbyist here in FLA.
-----Original Message-----
From: MathewsPH@aol.com [mailto:MathewsPH@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 8:15 AM
CC:
Subject: Keys Management Plan comments
Hi Everyone-
I've started my initial review of the 2007 Management Plan. I will prepare complete comments for submission but I feel it is important to inform you of the disturbing text I have found so far.
Summary -
NOAA is going to state "user conflict" as an issue against PWC.
NOAA is going to start with Appendix G as recommended changes to the current plan.
Appendix G recommendations range from a ban to, large no-entry areas, and riding areas like Monterey. Even #1 Status quo is deceiving because PWC will be regulated in other action plans in the management plan.
This is going to be a long contentious process. Our strategy will be simple, "No action", current rules and regulations are sufficient. However, we will submit comments to allow PWC in the Refuges, to get them something to focus on.
Call or email if you have any questions.
FKMNS 2007 Management Plan Page 98-100
Strategy R.2 Regulatory Review and Development
(5) Reduce Impacts from Personal Watercraft (PWC) and Other Vessels. This activity will consider
the issuance of new or revised regulations addressing the impacts from PWC and other types of
vessels. The issue of personal watercraft operation within the Sanctuary received the largest volume
of public comment during the nine-month review of the draft 1996 management plan. The issue of
personal watercraft continued throughout the comment period to be among the Sanctuary Advisory
Council’s most heavily debated issues. Actions implemented in 1997, beginning with the final
regulations, took a proactive approach to dealing with this issue based on recommendations from the
Sanctuary Advisory Council.
Since implementation of the 1996 FKNMS management plan, the controversy over PWC operation
has diminished some, but local concerns continue to be frequently voiced. While the PWC industry
has made efforts to address noise and pollution, conflicts among PWC users, the resources, and other
Sanctuary users continue. The problems created by these conflicts continue to be brought to the
attention of FKNMS managers by the Sanctuary Advisory Council and others in the community.
Following implementation of FKNMS regulations, Monroe County attempted to resolve PWC issues
through its Marine and Port Advisory Committee and Board of County Commissioners. The efforts
did not move forward and the issue continues to be brought before the Sanctuary Advisory Council.
The Sanctuary Advisory Council established a PWC Working Group in 1998, held a series of public
meetings and followed a rigorous schedule in an attempt to resolve the conflicts. The PWC working
group presented a series of options or recommendations to the Sanctuary Advisory Council in June
2000.
In addition, the Sanctuary Advisory Council’s Regulatory Working Group spent many hours
reviewing the minutes of PWC Working Group meetings, held throughout 1999, 2000 and 2001, and
established the regulatory alternatives that will be considered during the two years following the
acceptance of this plan (See Appendix G). These alternatives will be incorporated into the required
National Environmental Policy Act documentation that will be prepared in conjunction with any
draft regulations. These draft alternatives are being considered for the management of all vessels in
the Sanctuary, including personal watercraft.
Appendix G ‐ Vessel Operations/PWC
Management Regulatory Alternatives
1. Status Quo - No action beyond activities implemented in other action
plans related to PWC use (e.g. additional WMAs, concentrated nearshore enforcement,
boater-education initiatives).
2. In addition to the existing idle speed from 100 yards of residential
shorelines regulation, establish a 400-yard, point-to-point travel corridor from shorelines where
repeated high-speed maneuvers for all vessels would be restricted except in specifically
identified rental-riding areas, to be determined in conjunction with rental operators. Beyond 400
yards, vessels should operate in a reasonable and prudent manner. Establish PWC rental-riding
areas. Guided tours for renters will be permitted outside of rental-riding zones.
3. In sensitive shallow seagrass areas determined to be detrimentally
impacted by vessel operation, establish WMA – No-motor Zones. Increase the number and spatial
extent of WMAs to effectively manage natural-resource impacts occurring from all vessels
operating in shallow water throughout the Sanctuary. Designation and placement of the areas
would coincide with recommended no-motor zones identified in the working group’s scoping
process. Placement will also be guided by public input and scientific findings throughout the
Keys, beginning with the scoping meetings held by the PWC Working Group in 2000 and 2001.
Numerous shallow-water areas on the Florida Bay side of the Keys have
been identified as significant areas to Sanctuary wildlife. Additional flats and nearshore
areas on the ocean side have been also identified as important habitats in the Middle to Upper
Keys (Marathon to Key Largo). These areas serve as examples of candidate sites for WMAs. An
associated activity is to work with rental operators to establish marked areas for operation of
rental PWCs throughout the Keys. This activity will include consultation with rental operators
and law enforcement.
4. In addition to the 100-yard Idle-Speed-Only Zone from residential
shorelines regulation, establish a 400-yard, point-to-point travel corridor from all shorelines
where repeated high speed maneuvers for all vessels would be restricted except in specifically
identified renta lriding areas, determined in conjunction with rental operators. In areas
identified by homeowners as having a need for regulatory markers, establish a process to
install 100-yard Idle-Speed-Only markers to address all vessel use, including personal
watercraft.
5. Prohibit PWCs throughout the Sanctuary. The Sanctuary Advisory Council
has recommended that PWC operation be prohibited within the Sanctuary. This
recommendation has raised some questions as the State legislature has passed legislation
prohibiting local ordinances from singling out PWCs. Since the state is a co-trustee and
partner in the management of the Sanctuary, this recommendation by the Sanctuary Advisory
Council raises a difficult issue.
In October 2001, the Sanctuary Advisory Council voted to ban the operation
of all vessels in less than two feet of water in the Sanctuary. Although NOAA
questions the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary final Revised Management Plan
feasibility of such a regulatory action, considering the diurnal changes
in tides and wind driven currents and the enforceability of such a regulation, this option will be
added to the list of regulatory alternatives for consideration during the NEPA process, when
the public may review and comment on suggested regulatory changes.
Take care,
Peggy Mathews
American Watercraft Association
Florida Representative
1520 Big Sky Way
Tallahassee, Florida 32317
850/877-3848
850/566-6778
Like · · Follow Post · June 7 at 3:11pm
2 people like this.
David xxxxx
Please use some variation of letter below if you wish. I would stress the last line-it is all about
the operator not the vessel. And be sure to send an email or letter to both Anne Morkill
Refuge Manager US Fish and Wildlife 28950 Watson Blvd Big Pine Key 33043 and to Sean
Morton. I also sent cc to Sen Marco Rubio, Sen Bill Nelson, and my local Congressman
and Fla State Representative and Fla State Senator. We need to let all of these folks know
that we are mature adults that pay taxes and are responsible riders and we don't appreciate
being unfairly singled out and discriminated against. David
Sean Morton
Sanctuary Superintendent
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
33 East Quay Road
Key West, Fl 33040
June 7, 2012
Dear Mr. Morton,
I am writing regarding current and proposed restrictions
on PWC use in the Florida Keys. I have owned a condo
in Key Largo since June of 1997. I also own and operate
a 26 foot boat and a jetski. I don't think riding one makes
me smart anymore than riding the other makes me dumb.
But that is the way some folks think. The Coast Guard
and the state of Florida categorize a PWC as a vessel
subject to the same rules and regulations as boats. I think
any future or updated restrictions for vessel use in the Keys
should read just that way-vessel restrictions. NO exceptions!
There is no reason to single out PWC for restrictions. I've
seen go fast boats tearing up seagrass in the Keys in
areas that PWC can't even idle through. Does that make
any sense? To continue the ill-conceived notion that PWC
represent some greater threat to the Keys environment is
reprehensible and a farce to anyone that is fairminded. It is
all about the operator, not the vessel.
Very Truly Yours,
David xxxx Tampa Bay Jet Ski Club
cc:US Senator Marco Rubio
cc:US Senator Bill Nelson
cc:Fla House Representative Rich Workman
cc:US Congressman Bill Posey
Kxxxxxx.... Yeah the same Peggy Matthews who had no idea about 10k Islands or who JJ was & promised a call from AWA to get our Membership straightened out. Peggy Matthews the same lady who point blake told me that there is nothing we can do accept get more people to pay their dues to AWA. I wouldn't hold a whole lot of hope in this lady...
40 minutes ago ·
Florida Keys Call to Action - This guy Sean Morton, The Florida Keys Sanctuary Superintendent, has a real problem with PWCs no matter where they are. Just doesn't like them or us, not even a little bit. This email below is from Peggy Mathews our PWC lobbyist here in FLA.
-----Original Message-----
From: MathewsPH@aol.com [mailto:MathewsPH@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 8:15 AM
CC:
Subject: Keys Management Plan comments
Hi Everyone-
I've started my initial review of the 2007 Management Plan. I will prepare complete comments for submission but I feel it is important to inform you of the disturbing text I have found so far.
Summary -
NOAA is going to state "user conflict" as an issue against PWC.
NOAA is going to start with Appendix G as recommended changes to the current plan.
Appendix G recommendations range from a ban to, large no-entry areas, and riding areas like Monterey. Even #1 Status quo is deceiving because PWC will be regulated in other action plans in the management plan.
This is going to be a long contentious process. Our strategy will be simple, "No action", current rules and regulations are sufficient. However, we will submit comments to allow PWC in the Refuges, to get them something to focus on.
Call or email if you have any questions.
FKMNS 2007 Management Plan Page 98-100
Strategy R.2 Regulatory Review and Development
(5) Reduce Impacts from Personal Watercraft (PWC) and Other Vessels. This activity will consider
the issuance of new or revised regulations addressing the impacts from PWC and other types of
vessels. The issue of personal watercraft operation within the Sanctuary received the largest volume
of public comment during the nine-month review of the draft 1996 management plan. The issue of
personal watercraft continued throughout the comment period to be among the Sanctuary Advisory
Council’s most heavily debated issues. Actions implemented in 1997, beginning with the final
regulations, took a proactive approach to dealing with this issue based on recommendations from the
Sanctuary Advisory Council.
Since implementation of the 1996 FKNMS management plan, the controversy over PWC operation
has diminished some, but local concerns continue to be frequently voiced. While the PWC industry
has made efforts to address noise and pollution, conflicts among PWC users, the resources, and other
Sanctuary users continue. The problems created by these conflicts continue to be brought to the
attention of FKNMS managers by the Sanctuary Advisory Council and others in the community.
Following implementation of FKNMS regulations, Monroe County attempted to resolve PWC issues
through its Marine and Port Advisory Committee and Board of County Commissioners. The efforts
did not move forward and the issue continues to be brought before the Sanctuary Advisory Council.
The Sanctuary Advisory Council established a PWC Working Group in 1998, held a series of public
meetings and followed a rigorous schedule in an attempt to resolve the conflicts. The PWC working
group presented a series of options or recommendations to the Sanctuary Advisory Council in June
2000.
In addition, the Sanctuary Advisory Council’s Regulatory Working Group spent many hours
reviewing the minutes of PWC Working Group meetings, held throughout 1999, 2000 and 2001, and
established the regulatory alternatives that will be considered during the two years following the
acceptance of this plan (See Appendix G). These alternatives will be incorporated into the required
National Environmental Policy Act documentation that will be prepared in conjunction with any
draft regulations. These draft alternatives are being considered for the management of all vessels in
the Sanctuary, including personal watercraft.
Appendix G ‐ Vessel Operations/PWC
Management Regulatory Alternatives
1. Status Quo - No action beyond activities implemented in other action
plans related to PWC use (e.g. additional WMAs, concentrated nearshore enforcement,
boater-education initiatives).
2. In addition to the existing idle speed from 100 yards of residential
shorelines regulation, establish a 400-yard, point-to-point travel corridor from shorelines where
repeated high-speed maneuvers for all vessels would be restricted except in specifically
identified rental-riding areas, to be determined in conjunction with rental operators. Beyond 400
yards, vessels should operate in a reasonable and prudent manner. Establish PWC rental-riding
areas. Guided tours for renters will be permitted outside of rental-riding zones.
3. In sensitive shallow seagrass areas determined to be detrimentally
impacted by vessel operation, establish WMA – No-motor Zones. Increase the number and spatial
extent of WMAs to effectively manage natural-resource impacts occurring from all vessels
operating in shallow water throughout the Sanctuary. Designation and placement of the areas
would coincide with recommended no-motor zones identified in the working group’s scoping
process. Placement will also be guided by public input and scientific findings throughout the
Keys, beginning with the scoping meetings held by the PWC Working Group in 2000 and 2001.
Numerous shallow-water areas on the Florida Bay side of the Keys have
been identified as significant areas to Sanctuary wildlife. Additional flats and nearshore
areas on the ocean side have been also identified as important habitats in the Middle to Upper
Keys (Marathon to Key Largo). These areas serve as examples of candidate sites for WMAs. An
associated activity is to work with rental operators to establish marked areas for operation of
rental PWCs throughout the Keys. This activity will include consultation with rental operators
and law enforcement.
4. In addition to the 100-yard Idle-Speed-Only Zone from residential
shorelines regulation, establish a 400-yard, point-to-point travel corridor from all shorelines
where repeated high speed maneuvers for all vessels would be restricted except in specifically
identified renta lriding areas, determined in conjunction with rental operators. In areas
identified by homeowners as having a need for regulatory markers, establish a process to
install 100-yard Idle-Speed-Only markers to address all vessel use, including personal
watercraft.
5. Prohibit PWCs throughout the Sanctuary. The Sanctuary Advisory Council
has recommended that PWC operation be prohibited within the Sanctuary. This
recommendation has raised some questions as the State legislature has passed legislation
prohibiting local ordinances from singling out PWCs. Since the state is a co-trustee and
partner in the management of the Sanctuary, this recommendation by the Sanctuary Advisory
Council raises a difficult issue.
In October 2001, the Sanctuary Advisory Council voted to ban the operation
of all vessels in less than two feet of water in the Sanctuary. Although NOAA
questions the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary final Revised Management Plan
feasibility of such a regulatory action, considering the diurnal changes
in tides and wind driven currents and the enforceability of such a regulation, this option will be
added to the list of regulatory alternatives for consideration during the NEPA process, when
the public may review and comment on suggested regulatory changes.
Take care,
Peggy Mathews
American Watercraft Association
Florida Representative
1520 Big Sky Way
Tallahassee, Florida 32317
850/877-3848
850/566-6778
Like · · Follow Post · June 7 at 3:11pm
2 people like this.
David xxxxx
Please use some variation of letter below if you wish. I would stress the last line-it is all about
the operator not the vessel. And be sure to send an email or letter to both Anne Morkill
Refuge Manager US Fish and Wildlife 28950 Watson Blvd Big Pine Key 33043 and to Sean
Morton. I also sent cc to Sen Marco Rubio, Sen Bill Nelson, and my local Congressman
and Fla State Representative and Fla State Senator. We need to let all of these folks know
that we are mature adults that pay taxes and are responsible riders and we don't appreciate
being unfairly singled out and discriminated against. David
Sean Morton
Sanctuary Superintendent
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
33 East Quay Road
Key West, Fl 33040
June 7, 2012
Dear Mr. Morton,
I am writing regarding current and proposed restrictions
on PWC use in the Florida Keys. I have owned a condo
in Key Largo since June of 1997. I also own and operate
a 26 foot boat and a jetski. I don't think riding one makes
me smart anymore than riding the other makes me dumb.
But that is the way some folks think. The Coast Guard
and the state of Florida categorize a PWC as a vessel
subject to the same rules and regulations as boats. I think
any future or updated restrictions for vessel use in the Keys
should read just that way-vessel restrictions. NO exceptions!
There is no reason to single out PWC for restrictions. I've
seen go fast boats tearing up seagrass in the Keys in
areas that PWC can't even idle through. Does that make
any sense? To continue the ill-conceived notion that PWC
represent some greater threat to the Keys environment is
reprehensible and a farce to anyone that is fairminded. It is
all about the operator, not the vessel.
Very Truly Yours,
David xxxx Tampa Bay Jet Ski Club
cc:US Senator Marco Rubio
cc:US Senator Bill Nelson
cc:Fla House Representative Rich Workman
cc:US Congressman Bill Posey
Kxxxxxx.... Yeah the same Peggy Matthews who had no idea about 10k Islands or who JJ was & promised a call from AWA to get our Membership straightened out. Peggy Matthews the same lady who point blake told me that there is nothing we can do accept get more people to pay their dues to AWA. I wouldn't hold a whole lot of hope in this lady...
40 minutes ago ·
