what the hay?

[pinelandpaddler]

Someone recently told me that it is illegal to clear State Forest Streams if such clearing entails the pruning of branches and the like. My sense tells me that this can't be so. But then again, many rules set by our State are nothing less than ridiculous. If anyone has information on this, I'd be glad to hear about it.

Gabe

[TeeGate]

Someone recently told me that it is illegal to clear State Forest Streams if such clearing entails the pruning of branches and the like. My sense tells me that this can't be so. But then again, many rules set by our State are nothing less than ridiculous. If anyone has information on this, I'd be glad to hear about it.

Gabe

I don't know the answer to that, but I can bet it is illegal.
Guy

[BEHR655]

Someone recently told me that it is illegal to clear State Forest Streams if such clearing entails the pruning of branches and the like. My sense tells me that this can't be so. But then again, many rules set by our State are nothing less than ridiculous. If anyone has information on this, I'd be glad to hear about it.

Gabe

I would imagine you cannot do it unless 50lb of paper work is involved.
If you read the rules and regulations of state forests I believe it says no cutting. But I won't tell.

[TeeGate]

Someone recently told me that it is illegal to clear State Forest Streams if such clearing entails the pruning of branches and the like. My sense tells me that this can't be so. But then again, many rules set by our State are nothing less than ridiculous. If anyone has information on this, I'd be glad to hear about it.

Gabe

I would imagine you cannot do it unless 50lb of paper work is involved.
If you read the rules and regulations of state forests I believe it says no cutting. But I won't tell.

We have all done it at one time or another. They just want to stop the people who cut complete trees down, or more than they should. Then again I may be wrong.

Guy

[pinelandpaddler]

thanks for the feedback, Guy and Steve.

I can see the sense in prohibiting large-scale clearing. Hopefully, that is all that the law entails. I mean, if we ordinary folk can't keep our streams navigable, then who will? The park rangers?

[mullicaman]

If you fellow paddlers are interested in petitioning the state re: clearing
state forest streams, then let's get organized. Would the Pinelands
Preservation Alliance be interested in sponsoring a river clearing group?
I 'm a member of American Rivers. They have an online action network
that advocates restoration of endangered rivers. Bill Wiegand

[pinelandpaddler]

Methinks that is a mighty good idea that you have there, Bill. I volunteer to be a member of any such group.

[mullicaman]

Renee said she would talk with Russ Juelg/PPA today about river clearing
sponsorship. If they're not interested I'll try my river action network
through American Rivers. Stay tuned, and drum up volunteers if you
can. May the Great Manitou be with you.. Bill Wiegand

[bach2yoga]

Renee said she would talk with Russ Juelg/PPA today about river clearing
sponsorship. If they're not interested I'll try my river action network
through American Rivers. Stay tuned, and drum up volunteers if you
can. May the Great Manitou be with you.. Bill Wiegand

Bill,

I talked with Russ yesterday. He said you could talk to Carlton, but his gut feeling is that they would say no, for these reasons: when you clear a stream you make the current faster. Some plant species survive only in slow moving currents, and it would also change the hydrology of the area, causing the surrounding seepage areas to drain, which could potentially impact the buffers, some of which are important ecologically to rare species. (I hadn't thought of that, and it seems to be a valid concern). His second reason was the flip side of making the river more accessible. That would increase traffic flow on the river and would in the end be detrimental to the health of the stream and the surrounding ecosystems. Where once you had only a few going through, keeping it open enough, with minimal impact, there would be many.
He also told me that he was once he was canoeing and stopped to cut the dead branches off a fallen tree that was in the way and a ranger stopped him, even though it was a fallen tree, told him it wasn't permissible. His response was that he knows the canoe liveries cut back - he's seen it, that they will cut whole living trees - but he was told that it was not permissible no matter what, for him or the canoe liveries.

Sorry I couldn't have been more help.
Renee

[mullicaman]

:spank: Gotcha! It makes sense from a flora and fauna point of view. I guess it's better just to hike/snowshoe out to these tributaries and enjoy
what's there without interference. Thanks to this NJPB website and your
connections I've learned a valuable lesson. Mea culpa..
I will confine my avid kayaking to open rivers! Speaking of which,
have you been watching your Oswego trip forum recently? It's busy with
a few newcomers.. Bill Wiegand

[TeeGate]

but his gut feeling is that they would say no, for these reasons: when you clear a stream you make the current faster. Some plant species survive only in slow moving currents, and it would also change the hydrology of the area, causing the surrounding seepage areas to drain, which could potentially impact the buffers, some of which are important ecologically to rare species.


They better find a way to arrest beavers. :rolleyes:

Guy

[bach2yoga]

They better find a way to arrest beavers. :rolleyes:

Guy

That's an idea...we could train the beavers!
Renee

[mullicaman]

My first thoughts today after hearing the PPA's rather purist view of
altering the ecosystem (Calvinism without the Christianity) in your
e-mail, Renee, was:

AREN'T BEAVERS CHANGING THE RIVER LEVELS AND
THEREBY ALTERING THE ECOSYSTEM?

A case in point: The number of beaver dams on the Mullica, both at
Goshen Pond and at what I call the "Savannah" near the old Mullica
Camp have been on the increase. Look at all the dead trees in Goshen
Pond. You can't tell me the beavers haven't had an impact on rare
flora and seepage/drainage areas. Another case: have you seen the
trees the beavers are bringing down on the Oswego? There are now
sunlit clearings in the cedar stands. No impact on the types of vegetation?
Maybe this should be a new forum topic in Politics in the Pines? Bill W.

[irishman]

Personally, I don't see the fact of beavers instinctive behavior as justification for allowing anyone to alter the ecosystem at will. I'd rather see a beaver dam than a canoe full of a@#holes with saws hacking their way through the brush anyday. Though I'm relatively sure the people on this list would clear responsibly and with respect, everyone knows there are far too many out there that would not.
Brian

[mullicaman]

Say, forest friend, I am no a#%*h&*, as you put it,
in love with my tools/toys and oblivious to the natural
world. I just think I can be a good steward to the rivers
if I can descend them and that means pushing through
debris, running over submerged logs or pushing them
out of the way, snapping a branch now and then. When
our Lenni Lenape glided down their sacred Atsiunc/Amintonck
to go shellfishing at its coastal mouth, I'm sure that they
pushed through their obstacles and ran the chutes over those
beaver dams. And it was still a sacred experience for
them, as it is for me. Yes, here's where I part with some
environmental groups--they almost want to exclude human
presence from the forests and rivers or severely/austerely
control human behavior therein/thereon and do so with a
positivistic/materialistic/ scientific outlook. Remember your
Emerson and Thoreau and the Quaker John Muir? Have you
read Arthur Versluis's introduction to Sacred Earth
called "Nature as Theophany"? Don't mean to get too
pedantic, it's just that some environmentalists won't include
spiritual protocols, which includes more than just the folklore and
supernatural peculiarities of the Barrens. Why not the Great
Manitou, too? And the human presence there to appreciate it!

[irishman]

very cool headed response mullicaman, nicely done.
I was not talking about you or those on this list that respect the environment, I'm sure there are many like you out there who would take the care to clear the river with thought and compassion. I was talking about the "outdoorsmen" I have come up against, as I'm sure you have as well, tearing through the woods or rivers with no regard whatsoever to the plant or animal life there. It was not my intention to insult you, I just don't bother to check my words sometimes to insure that they'll be taken as I mean them. I spend the majority of my free time in the woods, so I would not want access to these places restricted any more than anyone else, but I can see the reason for rules that are intended to help maintain the natural order. It's a shame that rules are needed, that all people would not treat the Earth as the caretakers we are instead of the owners we (as a species) proclaim ourselves to be. Reminds me of a bumpersticker I saw once...Humans are not the only species on Earth, we just act like it...
I love Emerson & Thoreau, and have had less experience with but still very much enjoyed Muir, and I totally agree with your assesment that some environmentalists leave the spirtitual aspect out of their agenda, choosing to deal exclusively with the scientific. I am glad they are out there and that they are doing the work they are, but my conection to Nature is much more spirtual, much more sacred.
Brian

[mullicaman]

No offense taken, friend. It's Ackerman & Pratt with
their $400,000 estates bordering the access to
Alquatka and calling themselves Wharton Acres (hah!)
that's doing the most damage, not us. I tell you, Brian,
I grew up in Connecticut and watched industry destroy
the Housatonic and Connecticut River valleys, and when
I moved here and discovered Wharton, I fell in love with
it. We, the PPA, the hikers, kayakers, NJPBers, Piney
folklorists and fiddlers, nature mystics and Transcend-
entalists--all of us are united to preserve this beautiful
place. I apologize for being stubborn. Thanks, Bill W.

[bach2yoga]

One of the things we do need to remember is that this ecosystem was not always a pristine wilderness.
It was burned by the Lenape.
It was sawed down and burned by the settlers....you could hear the forges hammering all the way from Atsion to Batso. The trains ran through. These were some productive towns in their time, and there were acres upon acres of land cleared in any one area.
I think I have swung on the pendulum from an extremist in preservation to realizing that the very things that damage our habitats are also the very same things that can create the same habitat.
Take for instance pickering's morning glory--the largest stand in the pines was created by ATV disturbance to an area. And yet those same ATVs can VERY easily be its demise.
Some plants NEED a LITTLE disturbance or they won't survive--but in SMALL amounts.
Bog asphodel savannahs can be wiped out by cedar growth as well as a number of other things, such as changes in hydrology--this is the type of area that could be impacted by what Russell was describing.
Controlled burns have almost decimated a population of pickerings, a lone plant remaining. But they are important for the wildlife-urban interface. Sometimes controlled burns help a plant, and other times they don't, there is no way of knowing beforehand what the results will be.
The bottom line is that succession is the enemy of diversity, as the old botanical saying goes, and sometimes some management can go a long way....and other times it can go way too far. And managing for one thing may often be to the detriment of something else. I think it's really hard to say how much we should be managing, and I think the priority for managing needs to be for those that are species of concern.

Say, forest friend, I am no a#%*h&*, as you put it,
in love with my tools/toys and oblivious to the natural
world. I just think I can be a good steward to the rivers
if I can descend them and that means pushing through
debris, running over submerged logs or pushing them
out of the way, snapping a branch now and then. When
our Lenni Lenape glided down their sacred Atsiunc/Amintonck
to go shellfishing at its coastal mouth, I'm sure that they
pushed through their obstacles and ran the chutes over those
beaver dams. And it was still a sacred experience for
them, as it is for me. Yes, here's where I part with some
environmental groups--they almost want to exclude human
presence from the forests and rivers or severely/austerely
control human behavior therein/thereon and do so with a
positivistic/materialistic/ scientific outlook. Remember your
Emerson and Thoreau and the Quaker John Muir? Have you
read Arthur Versluis's introduction to Sacred Earth
called "Nature as Theophany"? Don't mean to get too
pedantic, it's just that some environmentalists won't include
spiritual protocols, which includes more than just the folklore and
supernatural peculiarities of the Barrens. Why not the Great
Manitou, too? And the human presence there to appreciate it!

[bach2yoga]

No offense taken, friend. It's Ackerman & Pratt with
their $400,000 estates bordering the access to
Alquatka and calling themselves Wharton Acres (hah!)
that's doing the most damage, not us. I tell you, Brian,
I grew up in Connecticut and watched industry destroy
the Housatonic and Connecticut River valleys, and when
I moved here and discovered Wharton, I fell in love with
it. We, the PPA, the hikers, kayakers, NJPBers, Piney
folklorists and fiddlers, nature mystics and Transcend-
entalists--all of us are united to preserve this beautiful
place. I apologize for being stubborn. Thanks, Bill W.

I like happy endings. Specially since I agree with what both of you have been saying.

"I go to the swamp as a sacred place...."

Renee

[NewSchoolPiney]

Just a side note on this Wharton Acres deal. I noticed an ad in the Central Record a month or two ago for this new development and it said:

Wharton Acres: 3 acre plots from the low $900,000's

Does everyone believe that the world will end because of our environmental sieges on the planet and we won't live to see the end of our mortgages?

I have lived in Indian Mills (I choose to call it that, not Shamong. I was too young when they voted to change it) since 1985. Since then, I have been appalled at how it has turned into the likes of Medford without the commercial properties. The size, and expense of these houses just never ceases to amaze me. All the while, the natural and historic awareness of the area has dwindled.

I can go on and on about this Indian Mills vs. Shamong debate. But, I'd love to leave this post with a hilarious quote experienced first hand. I was at Countryside (Lynbrook Tavern . . . another name change I can't bear) last Thanksgiving around last call at the bar. There were 4 extremely inebriated middle aged men at the corner of the bar. One was passed out on the bar, one was slumped in his stool, and the other two were in a friendly argument. I really thought I was in some sort of cartoon or movie, just picture this scene. I happened to catch the subject of the argument being the nomenclature debate of Indian Mills vs. Shamong. Here was the quote that will forever ring in my head:

"Shamong Day? We could throw one hell of an Indian Mills day I'll tell you that!"

I rest my case and my rant and Ben, I'm sorry for going off topic.

Justin

[pinelandpaddler]

A most interesting discussion this has become! Many excellent, controversial, and thought-provoking points have been made, and all in a spirit of respect! Good stuff indeed.

Bill, I like the way you think, bro. Gotta love Thoreau and Emerson! And one needs be weary of certain policies of the "environmental" establishment, for a most flawed premise seems to be at the root of this very river-clearing issue: the idea that nature is best left untouched by man. By the way, what do you eman by calvinism without the christianity? Sounds intriguing.

Renee, thanks for all the info.

Peace!

Gabe

[bobpbx]

I will confine my avid kayaking to open rivers!

Bill if you do that you'll miss out on a lot of good exploring. This is much ado about nothing. The Pine Barren Exploring Club has a motto...."don't ask, don't tell", when it comes to where we go and whose property we cross.

We don't hurt anything and neither will you by cutting a few dead snags and hanging branches. I know a guy who is doing it today at 93 years old. He cut his way 2 miles up a stream never before navigable. Took him 4 or 5 years to do it but its a labor of love.

It lets the sun in and allows the orchids and lillies to shine! :P

[bach2yoga]

BTW, Bill, Russ wasn't against everyone canoeing those less navigable rivers. He would just personally rather see it confined to a few, just enough to keep things somewhat open enough to keep back some succession, though most of the plants that are more bothered by succession are more on the nearby savannahs than on the river itself.
Renee

[Gerania]

NewSchoolPiney said:
....I was at Countryside (Lynbrook Tavern . . . another name change I can't bear)....

What sort of world do we live in when even Pat's on 72 changes its name.

Gillian

[mullicaman]

Thanks for your concerned responses, friends. I just returned from a
wedding in Portland, Maine this weekend and driving up I-495 through
Lowell and Lawrence, Mass, I had several bridge views of the Concord
and Merrimack Rivers. All I could think of was my naturalist/transcend-
entalist hero, Henry David..
He and his brother spent a week canoeing these rivers back in 1839.
His simple river descriptions were interrupted by the burgeoning mills
and industries that lined its river banks, and soon his book became a
dreamy Transcendentalist manifesto. Needless to say it didn't sell well.
When I saw the boarded-up windows of the huge brick mills in Worcester
and Lawrence and Lowell (many no longer in business) and I saw how
timelessly serene those rivers still are, I had a strange hope...nature will
win in the end. Whatever we do to her, she will prevail. The Concord
and Merrimack are still beautiful. I recalled a stanza from Emerson's
poem "Two Rivers":

I see the inundation sweet,
I hear the spending of the stream
Through years, through men, through nature fleet,
Through love and thought, through power and dream.

The Mullica and the Batsto and the Wading and the Oswego are still
protected by Wharton State Forest and that is such a unique thing in
our industrial Boswash corridor. It is something Emerson and Thoreau
could only have hoped for.. a undisturbed wild presence that yields
spiritual renewal. Bill Wiegand