This morning the PPA released a new call to arms, looking to get people to sign their petition to support the Wharton MAP. And yet again we're greeted with a deluge of hyperbole and disinformation.
I have yet to see one person claim that Wharton should be a motor sports park. The vast majority of people who reject the proposed MAP also agree that illegal activity needs to be stopped.
They keep trotting out "access for forest fighters" which is absolutely ridiculous. If their goal is to close roads off to traffic then eventually they'll grow over with vegetation. How will forest fighters be able to travel them then? During a fire the forest fire service often will make new roads to get to the fire. They have been doing this since the 1930s! In fact some of the roads that they want to close are roads that the forest fire service themselves made and failed to close off after the fire was out.
This all stems from an incident where a forest service truck allegedly got stuck. They haven't mentioned any specifics about what happened, where it happened, the skill of the driver, etc. There are so many factors that can come to play with a vehicle getting stuck. Blaming it on ORV damage without proof is disingenuous. Remember, these are the same people who released a photo of a spot that the state had dug dirt out of (likely for road repair) and then claimed it was a vernal pool that had been destroyed by off-roaders. Hilariously several environmentalists called them out on this deceit when they posted it on their Facebook page.
The PPA has no qualms about lying to get their way.
Rob Auermuller, the superintendent of Wharton State Forest, kicked off this initiative. Rob is a radical environmentalist with strong ties to the PPA, and it's clear that the PPA had a strong influence in planning the MAP. The MAP was planned in a vacuum, without oversight from superiors in the DEP, input from forest stakeholder groups, legislative oversight, and input from the public. Basically, the MAP does what Rob and the PPA want: to severely curtail access to the forest by making it incredibly difficult to be out there. They feel that the Pine Barrens are best experienced through a solid pane of glass -- look but don't touch.
And lest you think that this is just about motorized vehicles, Rob has made offhand comments about closing off the tributaries of the Mullica, Batsto, and Wading Rivers to kayakers and canoeists. They want people to stay on the "officially opened" rivers and use the crowded "official" launching points. The next restrictions to come might limit your favorite activity.
The MAP closed over 50% of the roads and trails in the forest. In some areas they blocked the trails by cutting live trees and dragging the carcasses across the road. All done at the direction of Superintendant Auermuller and with the help of several prominent PPA members. How would someone bike over that? How could a forest fire service vehicle get over that?
Again - they want YOU out of the forest.
The DEP has put the MAP on hold because of the massive outcry from the public who are rightly concerned that their ability to access the forest is being severely curtailed. The MAP is on hold while meetings between stakeholder groups, the public, and the DEP are arranged.
The PPA does NOT want you to have a say in this at all. They do not want these meetings to go forward. They want to be the final arbiter over what can and can not happen in the woods. Your opinion is irrelevant, so long as you agree with what they have to say. (And donate money.) A very vocal PPA member recently blogged "When has it become necessary for the Superintendent of the Forest or the Forest Fire Service to consult the public about how to save the forest from abuse and fire prevention?" The answer: when you plan on cutting off public access to over 50% of the roads and trails that have historically been open for decades, if not centuries. Who is that guy to say that you don't have the right to have a say?
They wanted this plan rolled out in secret because they KNEW there would be massive outcry from the public if it was done transparently. Remember - they started closing roads and trails before the MAP was even announced.
What's the bad policy? Getting input from the people who use the forests? Can they really say this with a straight face? They're happy to take your donations, happy to sell you a spot on a canoe ride, but your opinion? "We know what's best for the forest. Stop talking, your opinion isn't wanted." (Only your money.)
The actual bad policy is rolling out a land use plan that massively closes off (or otherwise makes it incredibly difficult) access to the forest in such a way that seems like the only "stakeholder" consulted was the PPA - in secret and behind closed doors.
Does the PPA feel like Wharton State Forest is their exclusive domain? Plenty of people drive their Jeeps and trucks through the woods safely, courteously, and respectfully. Read between the lines: emails like this from the PPA are saying that they want exclusive access to the forest, and anybody who disagrees with them should be shut out. (Don't forget to donate money while you're at it.)
Yes, the damage is real. Nobody disputes that. There are people who go and drive their off-road vehicles irresponsibly and cause damage. They will put videos of it up on Youtube. This has not been a secret. The people who do this are the minority of people who drive in Wharton. They're usually driving in areas that have been closed for decades, but still receive traffic because the state has failed to enforce those closuress. How would closing off even more roads make a difference if they've got no plans to increase law enforcement?
And how about this for hypocracy? Here's Albert Horner, a vocal MAP supporter and PPA member, driving his vehicle through a large puddle in the Pine Barrens:
Doesn't look very destructive, does it? That's because it isn't. But according to Al, and others like him, people driving through puddles like that are "laying siege" to the Pine Barrens! The vast majority of people driving through the woods are our there for a nice day of exploring, hunting, geocaching, and paddling and have to get there in normal SUVs, pickup trucks, and Jeeps. The casual drivers in the Pine Barrens are being dis-proportionally punished by the DEP and the PPA with the MAP as initially proposed. But it makes a much more compelling case for the PPA to paint everybody who drives on the roads and trails in the forest in a negative light to push their own selfish agenda.
Or how about this? Here's Mr. Horner again, on the roof of his vehicle lining up what will end up being a beautiful photograph of the Pine Barrens. (Notice that it's the same vehicle as the one in the movie above.) How'd he get that truck there, you ask? By going down the same kinds of roads that he now feels ought to be closed off.
Why the double standard, Al?
Here's the thing. All through this process people have been agreeing with the premise of what the DEP and the PPA have been saying. There's a problem. It's been going on a long time. It's a known problem. A solution needs to be reached.
The difference between the PPA and everyone else is that people want to be able to have input into shaping that solution. There are very reasonable proposals from this website as well as groups such as OpenTrails NJ that want to attempt to reach a compromise. We feel that targeted closures of specific areas determined by a strict scientific criteria followed by increased enforcement is the way forward. We'd like to come to the table and work with environmentalist groups like the PPA as well as all of the other organizations that represent the users of the forest to come up with something that balances protection with allowing access to the forest.
We have a real opportunity here to help create a plan that will preserve the forest for future generations. Everyone else is ready to work together and compromise. Why won't the PPA do the same?
Wharton State Forest is not a motor sports park. Stop the illegal activity that destroys habitat and makes access for other users (including forest fire fighters) impossible.
I have yet to see one person claim that Wharton should be a motor sports park. The vast majority of people who reject the proposed MAP also agree that illegal activity needs to be stopped.
They keep trotting out "access for forest fighters" which is absolutely ridiculous. If their goal is to close roads off to traffic then eventually they'll grow over with vegetation. How will forest fighters be able to travel them then? During a fire the forest fire service often will make new roads to get to the fire. They have been doing this since the 1930s! In fact some of the roads that they want to close are roads that the forest fire service themselves made and failed to close off after the fire was out.
This all stems from an incident where a forest service truck allegedly got stuck. They haven't mentioned any specifics about what happened, where it happened, the skill of the driver, etc. There are so many factors that can come to play with a vehicle getting stuck. Blaming it on ORV damage without proof is disingenuous. Remember, these are the same people who released a photo of a spot that the state had dug dirt out of (likely for road repair) and then claimed it was a vernal pool that had been destroyed by off-roaders. Hilariously several environmentalists called them out on this deceit when they posted it on their Facebook page.
The PPA has no qualms about lying to get their way.
NJ Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) staff spent 4 years mapping all the roads, trails and unofficial access points in Wharton State Forest in order to get a handle on the damage occurring there. In August they released an in-depth Motorized Access Plan (M.A.P.) - an essential step in reversing the damage.
Rob Auermuller, the superintendent of Wharton State Forest, kicked off this initiative. Rob is a radical environmentalist with strong ties to the PPA, and it's clear that the PPA had a strong influence in planning the MAP. The MAP was planned in a vacuum, without oversight from superiors in the DEP, input from forest stakeholder groups, legislative oversight, and input from the public. Basically, the MAP does what Rob and the PPA want: to severely curtail access to the forest by making it incredibly difficult to be out there. They feel that the Pine Barrens are best experienced through a solid pane of glass -- look but don't touch.
And lest you think that this is just about motorized vehicles, Rob has made offhand comments about closing off the tributaries of the Mullica, Batsto, and Wading Rivers to kayakers and canoeists. They want people to stay on the "officially opened" rivers and use the crowded "official" launching points. The next restrictions to come might limit your favorite activity.
The M.A.P. designated 225 miles for motorized vehicles and placed sensitive areas and forest fire service road cuts (that were not roads) off limits to vehicular traffic - leaving them open for walking, biking, and horseback riding.
The MAP closed over 50% of the roads and trails in the forest. In some areas they blocked the trails by cutting live trees and dragging the carcasses across the road. All done at the direction of Superintendant Auermuller and with the help of several prominent PPA members. How would someone bike over that? How could a forest fire service vehicle get over that?
Again - they want YOU out of the forest.
Now the DEP has put the M.A.P. on hold and are deciding whether to adopt or scrap the plan!
The DEP has put the MAP on hold because of the massive outcry from the public who are rightly concerned that their ability to access the forest is being severely curtailed. The MAP is on hold while meetings between stakeholder groups, the public, and the DEP are arranged.
The PPA does NOT want you to have a say in this at all. They do not want these meetings to go forward. They want to be the final arbiter over what can and can not happen in the woods. Your opinion is irrelevant, so long as you agree with what they have to say. (And donate money.) A very vocal PPA member recently blogged "When has it become necessary for the Superintendent of the Forest or the Forest Fire Service to consult the public about how to save the forest from abuse and fire prevention?" The answer: when you plan on cutting off public access to over 50% of the roads and trails that have historically been open for decades, if not centuries. Who is that guy to say that you don't have the right to have a say?
They wanted this plan rolled out in secret because they KNEW there would be massive outcry from the public if it was done transparently. Remember - they started closing roads and trails before the MAP was even announced.
We can't afford to see this bad policy replicated in every forest throughout our state.
If you care about New Jersey's State Forests and their plants, wildlife and the rights of citizens to enjoy some parts of the forests without motorbikes, jeeps and trucks please take action today!
What's the bad policy? Getting input from the people who use the forests? Can they really say this with a straight face? They're happy to take your donations, happy to sell you a spot on a canoe ride, but your opinion? "We know what's best for the forest. Stop talking, your opinion isn't wanted." (Only your money.)
The actual bad policy is rolling out a land use plan that massively closes off (or otherwise makes it incredibly difficult) access to the forest in such a way that seems like the only "stakeholder" consulted was the PPA - in secret and behind closed doors.
Does the PPA feel like Wharton State Forest is their exclusive domain? Plenty of people drive their Jeeps and trucks through the woods safely, courteously, and respectfully. Read between the lines: emails like this from the PPA are saying that they want exclusive access to the forest, and anybody who disagrees with them should be shut out. (Don't forget to donate money while you're at it.)
The Damage is Real and it is all on YouTube . . .
Yes, the damage is real. Nobody disputes that. There are people who go and drive their off-road vehicles irresponsibly and cause damage. They will put videos of it up on Youtube. This has not been a secret. The people who do this are the minority of people who drive in Wharton. They're usually driving in areas that have been closed for decades, but still receive traffic because the state has failed to enforce those closuress. How would closing off even more roads make a difference if they've got no plans to increase law enforcement?
And how about this for hypocracy? Here's Albert Horner, a vocal MAP supporter and PPA member, driving his vehicle through a large puddle in the Pine Barrens:
Doesn't look very destructive, does it? That's because it isn't. But according to Al, and others like him, people driving through puddles like that are "laying siege" to the Pine Barrens! The vast majority of people driving through the woods are our there for a nice day of exploring, hunting, geocaching, and paddling and have to get there in normal SUVs, pickup trucks, and Jeeps. The casual drivers in the Pine Barrens are being dis-proportionally punished by the DEP and the PPA with the MAP as initially proposed. But it makes a much more compelling case for the PPA to paint everybody who drives on the roads and trails in the forest in a negative light to push their own selfish agenda.
Or how about this? Here's Mr. Horner again, on the roof of his vehicle lining up what will end up being a beautiful photograph of the Pine Barrens. (Notice that it's the same vehicle as the one in the movie above.) How'd he get that truck there, you ask? By going down the same kinds of roads that he now feels ought to be closed off.
Why the double standard, Al?
Here's the thing. All through this process people have been agreeing with the premise of what the DEP and the PPA have been saying. There's a problem. It's been going on a long time. It's a known problem. A solution needs to be reached.
The difference between the PPA and everyone else is that people want to be able to have input into shaping that solution. There are very reasonable proposals from this website as well as groups such as OpenTrails NJ that want to attempt to reach a compromise. We feel that targeted closures of specific areas determined by a strict scientific criteria followed by increased enforcement is the way forward. We'd like to come to the table and work with environmentalist groups like the PPA as well as all of the other organizations that represent the users of the forest to come up with something that balances protection with allowing access to the forest.
We have a real opportunity here to help create a plan that will preserve the forest for future generations. Everyone else is ready to work together and compromise. Why won't the PPA do the same?