Search results

Make sure they invite them to the stakeholder meetings.

It's a talking point cooked up from Carleton Montgomery's little "GIS exercise" that he told Rob about back in 2015 when they were discussing how to strengthen the argument for the old MAP proposal. It's in the OPRA request that I got from Rob's emails back then. To my knowledge it's never been...

But but but nO PlAcE Is fUrThEr tHaN A MiLe aWaY FrOm aN OpEn rOaD* * one mile through impassible briars

https://www.opentrailsnj.org/petition/ Hi all - I encourage anybody who is interested in having the DEP scrap this new incarnation of their failed 2015 MAP (motorized access plan) and create an access map based on the 1997 USGS topographic maps as adopted by the Pinelands Commission in 2017...

>"Environmentalists say those who frequently use illegal vehicles, such as quads, in the Pine Barrens-based forest, are most likely to oppose the plan to eliminate hundreds of miles of trails in the forest from a map used to delineate approved trails and roads within the state park." Yes...

Brand new.

https://pinebarrenstribune.com/resistance-grows-to-the-new-njdep-plan-to-close-miles-of-rudimentary-ro-p5579-165.htm I think this is a really well written article that gives equal attention to both sides of the issue.

Look at this pro-ORV anti-preservation scofflaw recklessly damaging sensitive plant life while daring to not be part of the Pinelands Prevention Alliance/DEP clique. People like him are EXACTLY why the DEP needs to shut down 50% of the roads within Wharton otherwise who knows what devastation...

I'd love to see a scan of the reverse side. Also I love mid century typesetting.

Good luck with finding homeowner's insurance in Florida now, though.

Oh, okay. I wasn't aware.

The 2015 Motorized Access Plan, which is basically the same as the 2023 Visitor Vehicle Use Map.

Too bad they don't have a higher resolution version that is actually useful.

Jason, if you're referring to this resolution, the map that was adopted was a composite of 71, 82, 95, and 97 USGS topo maps, not 54-59. Or is this something different? If not, is there a copy of the Pinelands Commission USGS composite map? Second of all, what exactly are you trying to say...

"We asked for outreach and to collaborate on a solution and nobody was interested in working with us!" -- The PPA, probably.

I only have mine. So you'd have to bring one. Or I could bring it down to the Mullica some time.

Mr. Ruset is my dad. You can just call me Ben when you're done being passive aggressive. Jason is referring to Bill Caruso, one of the members of OTNJ. On a recent Facebook post in the South Jersey Kayakers group he accused Bill of being an anti conservation corporate lobbyist who "infiltrated"...

So what you're saying is that you're fine doing all of the work to promote the MAP but want someone else to distill the opposing viewpoints into bullet points for you. Saying the quiet part out loud: So that you can go and huddle with more pro-closure people and come up with rebuttals.

There have been plenty of good faith attempts to have dialog with you/Russ/Rob/the PPA. You guys have, time and time again, looked down on anybody who doesn't agree with the plan to reduce access in the forest as extremists. Remember when OTNJ had an event to help erect a gate at Jemima Mount...

I think I'm going to this summer. You should come out this way.