Its not hubris, its ignorance in they way he refuses to separate the individual from the cause. Meaning anyone opposed to the MAP has to be a destructive off roader, couldn't possibly have any other reason for not wanting this program
ORV Management In Sensitive Areas Of Wharton
- Thread starter Teegate
- Start date
Its not hubris, its ignorance in they way he refuses to separate the individual from the cause. Meaning anyone opposed to the MAP has to be a destructive off roader, couldn't possibly have any other reason for not wanting this program
I'm not your enemy guys. I support this management for good reason and I know you here also have good reasons why you're against it.Its not hubris, its ignorance in they way he refuses to separate the individual from the cause. Meaning anyone opposed to the MAP has to be a destructive off roader, couldn't possibly have any other reason for not wanting this program
Its not hubris, its ignorance in they way he refuses to separate the individual from the cause. Meaning anyone opposed to the MAP has to be a destructive off roader, couldn't possibly have any other reason for not wanting this program
The 'Kool-Aid Crowd' in action.
"Iron in the Pines" is one. There are plenty of others. I will include "motor-vehicle enthusiasts of varying stripes" in my next email.
"We’re the oldest (and funnest) off-road club in the southern and central New Jersey area and we want to welcome you to the world of off-roading. This is where you’ll find information about our club, ideas for where to get parts and repairs, photos from our trail rides, and a calendar of local and some not-so-nearby events.
We have members from all over the area including New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania. We hit the local trails every month and various members of the club participate in events across the eastern US. Our more experienced members even sponsor the local Jeep Jamborees every year so you can see we really are serious about our off-roading."
"...There are plenty of others...."
That's one. The term 'groups' and 'others' are plural. Would not a concerted effort to reach out to these 'groups' resulted in a more targeted and effective way to educate them on the effects of their actions, then closing roads that impacts all visitors to the forest? Common sense says it would, and is what other states have done for similar issues, notably NY state. Apparently no research was conducted for alternate solutions.
That's one. The term 'groups' and 'others' are plural. Would not a concerted effort to reach out to these 'groups' resulted in a more targeted and effective way to educate them on the effects of their actions, then closing roads that impacts all visitors to the forest? Common sense says it would, and is what other states have done for similar issues, notably NY state. Apparently no research was conducted for alternate solutions.
I disagree. Ignorance suggests he doesn't understand what he is saying/doing. But the reality is the truth doesn't fit into the activists narrative, nor will it rally his troops, so he purposely concocts this story using inflammatory language and demonizing many legal and respectful forest users to create impact. The way he claims to be on our side, the way he states his beliefs are facts, the way he talks down to others - that is hubris
Its not hubris, its ignorance in they way he refuses to separate the individual from the cause. Meaning anyone opposed to the MAP has to be a destructive off roader, couldn't possibly have any other reason for not wanting this program
My friend, there are off-road groups organizing against this management plan. Are you saying that is not the case? I have already promised to include a more diverse term in future member emails.
While you're on the Iron in the Pines website you might want to click on the "In the News" section and check out their suggested links for info about environmentally sensitive areas.
Just as there are hunters, hikers, equestrians, motorcyclists, etc. read as citizens. The PPA handbook is good at lumping like thinkers into one group that suits their needs.
Actually, there are also PPA members and supporters (myself included) who are against this plan.
Ahh to have all the answers, so glad we have 'friends' like you looking out for us common folk. What you say in your letter is misleading at best and I'm hard pressed to believe that was anything but your intention. The forest has been open to legal and law abiding users, including "off road groups", and should remain that way. If you really wanted to do something to help with the issue you blame on the legal users, try sitting down and working with them rather then demonizing them. I'm going to bet the vast majority of 4x4 guys want the damage to stop as much as I or anyone on this site do. Truth is a preservationist just wants everyone out, and this plan is just one more step in that direction.
I am common folk. I personally want as many people into the Pines and Wharton as we can get. I want citizens to care about this place as much as you all do and I'm sorry if I offended you previously. We need to stick together on the big picture even if we disagree on some issues.
I'm pretty sure your vision of the big picture and mine are quite different, so I'm not really sure where we will stick together. I do appreciate your effort to find common ground, but the issue at hand is the push to limit access to the forest, this time through the MAP, which is rooted in the PPA's Class 1 Motor Vehicle Plan, on which we obviously do not agree. Bottom line, there is a small group of activists that have been pushing for years to limit access to the forest & trying to come off as mainstream. They need a scapegoat to get the support from their general membership and this time it is apparently the 4x4 guys. First it was the enduros, now its all Class 1 vehicles, who is next?
The Township of Pemberton just passed a resolution opposing the MAP!
