Dan's Papers - May 16, 2008

Last summer, a Brooklyn woman named Nancy Opitz was issued a ticket for surfing with an "artificial swimming aid" at the north bar area at Montauk Point. East Hampton Town Justice Lisa R. Rana dismissed the ticket, saying that the officer had cited an incorrect statute of the law. But a few days later, New York State Parks Police issued more tickets to surfers at the north bar, citing the same statute that the judge said didn't apply to surfboards. This group of ticketed surfers soon became known as the "Montauk 8." With the surfing community rallied behind them, they headed to court last week.

T-shirts created to campaign for the Montauk 8 read, "Surfing is Not a Crime" - and East Hampton Town Justice Catherine A. Cahill agreed. The judge dismissed the case against the Montauk 8 last Thursday based on the fact that there is no mention of surfing in the statute cited on the tickets. Her decision stated, "The cited section of the statute herein, 377.1(h) of NYS 9 NYCRR regulates swimming, diving, bathing and wading. There is no mention of surfing. While it is possible to believe that the legislature might have meant to include surfing, it seems doubtful, when they specifically mention the activity of surfing in the very next section of the law."

The statute incorrectly cited by the Parks Police refers to artificial swimming aids including tubes, floats, swim fins, aqua-lungs and skin diving equipment of any kind, or any other inflated or buoyant objects or mechanical aids for swimming or diving. The law goes on to specifically distinguish surfing from swimming several times, thus the basis of Justice Cahill's decision.

"It's a big victory for us," said Joe Giannini, a local activist and attorney who represented the Montauk 8 and has argued since the beginning that there is no legal restriction banning surfing at Montauk Point. "I kept saying that a ban on surfing was illegal in itself. Finally, the statute that the State Parks Commission was citing for years was tested in court, and it turns out the statute doesn't apply." Giannini also played an active role in lifting the restriction of surf access at Camp Hero in 2004.

"Can't we all just get along?" comes to mind, but the ongoing dispute is an old one - surfers want access to the waves surrounding Montauk Point and the surfcasters want the surfers banned. The surfcasters were there first, and claim that sharing the waters put surfers at risk. But a trial period at Camp Hero in 2004 proved the two groups could co-exist.

"We've showed that surfers and surfcasters can get along. I haven't heard of a single surfer who has been hurt by a surfcaster," said Giannini. But he and the surfing community want all state parks in Montauk to be open to surfers, and it's clear why the surfers feel unjustly denied - if one group of people is permitted to enjoy the waters, why isn't another? Giannini added, "The waters are safer with surfers in it," explaining that surfers often go to the rescue of surfcasters, swimmers and boaters.

The Surfrider Foundation Eastern Long Island chapter held a benefit at Stephen Talkhouse last November called "Free the Montauk 8," which, combined with t-shirt sales, raised $3,000 for legal fees. "Our chapter is celebrating the judge's decision to dismiss the tickets," said Mara Dias, co-chairman of the non-profit grassroots organization. "Montauk State Park should be accessible for everyone to enjoy." The Montauk 8's victory will be celebrated at the Surfrider Foundation ELI chapter's spring fundraiser on May 16 at The Alley Bar at East Hampton Bowl, where there will be live music, drink specials and food.

Having the "Surfboarding Prohibited" signs removed from Montauk State Parks is next on the agenda, and with the recent victory, surf access activists have more ammunition to battle the Parks Department. "I've been fighting for surfing access since the '60s," said Giannini. "It's absolutely crazy that we're still doing this in 2008."