I was thinking about the debate again when the PPAs Jason Howell kept pushing the liability and safety issue. (by the way John Druding did and excellent job and kept cool) Let me preface this first by saying I think everyone should enjoy the diverse legal activities in the pines, but once you start dictating what people can/cant do then everything will be looked at. I know a lot of people enjoy the trips the PPAs Pinelands Adventures provides. This is not directed at them nor the good people that are employees there either. Its just a talking point about the way these restrictions were presented by a representative of the PPA itself.
Again- realize I am not pointing the finger at anyone. I am trying to say the reasoning presented at the debate for road closures is an absolute exaggeration but can apply to any and all activities.
The PPAs Pineland Adventures makes many trips all summer to and from the canoe drops over those roads.
1) they are bringing people in van loads back there and putting them into the water. What if a health issue or accident was to happen. Didn't the PPA invoke a liability on public land? This was a reason pointed out by Jason about liability
2) Emergency vehicle access was brought up, so isn't it the same thing if an emergency was to happen out in the water, stream, etc where they are surrounded by woods and there are no roads and emergency crews have issues accessing the location? This was a reason pointed out by Jason about safety and the need of maintaining ALL roads
3) they add greatly to the wear on those dirt roads with all their vans and trailers more-so that any normal weekend visitor. This was a reason pointed out by Jason about the cost of maintenance
These reasons can be twisted and applied to ALL activities, not just motorized access. In addition, if we as the public are no longer allowed to access public lands at our own risk and free will, then should someone be trucking people in for fees and using the public land for their own commercial/fundraising purposes?
The access plan prior has been working for years and John pointed out there is no data to prove it wasn't. The PPAs reasons needed to be fabricated to justify restrictions. The harder I look at what really happened here, and the more plastic whips and cameras I see, the more I realize the degree of injustice that was dealt to all of us. Who are these people at the DEP/PPA and I will even bring in the State of NJ responsible for the parks that have that kind of power to do this without pushabck? To fake public input, to skew the data, and to rollout a plan hatched in 2015 that was denied then for lack of public input. This time the input was done for show but blatantly ignored. Then the plan was re-implemented in the exact detail as originally presented in 2015. It’s one thing if we never had access, but we did for our entire existence to this point and I can see for many of us it is a huge part of our lives. That makes it a completely different scenario because they are now taking away something we had.
My point in all this - drop the BS and restore our freedom to roam. It’s such a stretch, not only restricted motorized access but to included bicycles and horses is INSANE.
