Shocking!!! The bottom line is the ppa wants to limit access to the greatest extent possible. Just look at Jaclyn Rhoads quote in the article where she says the ppa sees trail closures (the original MAP) as a starting point.
ORV Management In Sensitive Areas Of Wharton
- Thread starter Teegate
- Start date
Shocking!!! The bottom line is the ppa wants to limit access to the greatest extent possible. Just look at Jaclyn Rhoads quote in the article where she says the ppa sees trail closures (the original MAP) as a starting point.
How many Park Police do you feel would be adequate for Wharton's 180 square miles? As a point of reference, the 400 Troopers of the Alaska State Police are responsible for 663,268 square miles, which includes normal police work and fish/wildlife issues; roughly 1 trooper for each 1650 square miles.
I'd think that population density might be relevant here.
I miss Phil, he was a member of my gun club. A lively character to say the least.
He made me a very nice white cedar hiking stick the year that he passed away. He died July 1, 2014.
He made me a very nice white cedar hiking stick the year that he passed away. He died July 1, 2014.
NJ CO's can (and will) write careless driving tickets for destruction of a recreation area.
I don't think there is much of a population density within Wharton. More to the point is the area covered and access to that area.
Thanks for proving my point, Jason. The recent DEP enforcement plan addresses every point brought up in that article. First, by increasing officers and posting them up at Batsto. Second, increasing fines signicantly and include impounding the vehicle. Third, closing and targeting a dozen specific problem areas. Rather then praising it's release you want more now. I seriously doubt your extremist views represent the majority of the PPA members. This is a plan we all need to volunteer and stand behind to help protect WSF for future generations.
I think it is great that the DEP is listening to the stakeholder groups and has put a form of resolve into play to address the concerns that we all heard in just about every town meeting that we attended. The signage is excellent as well as the call out for volunteers to assist in placement. More officers on duty and dedicated to Wharton is a great thing. The only concern that lingers waaay in the back of my mind is the thin line between enforcement and the possibility of harassment. We have all heard stories of what can and has happened. Don't get me wrong, I am all for what is happening and optimistic on the outcome it will provide, and consider it a huge move in the right direction, however, that thought lingers with me. Some are going to say if you aren't doing anything wrong, then you should not be bothered, of course, some ideas of not doing anything wrong and enforcement's idea may not coincide, parking or using a cut around come to mind. I think there will be growing pains on each side of this for a little while. I feel we may see some heavy hand enforcement as well as the alternative.
Oh gee, here I had thought that Wharton Sate Forest was densely populated. Silly me.
Jason, I straddle the fence here. I see the need for strict enforcement and a lot of what has been proposed by the DEP seems sensible to me. I questioned Jeep Jamboree type events (which were inexplicably permitted by the superintendent of Wharton). But when I was at the Pineland Short Course I cornered a member of the PPA, a nice guy whose name I did not catch. He claimed that with MAPS no area of Wharton is more than a 1/2 mile hike from a "Designated" road, and that is simply just not true. I drove in from Carranza Rd this morning to a location on the western edge of Friendship Bogs. That drive was over a mile, on a road that would be, under MAPS, a "non-designated" road. If MAPS were law, I would have to hike over a mile with 25 lbs of photo gear, just to get to my starting point. Which I've done, but it imposes real hardship, not just for me but for less able people. The road I drove in on seems like a real road through the woods, not a wetland. In my opinion, any MAPS plan has to include more roads that remain open (if a MAPS is implemented).
Last edited:
It is not the population within Wharton that is relevant, it is the megalopolis that surrounds Wharton. As I 'm sure your aware it is no longer (and has not been for awhile) just locals visiting the forest but thousands of folks from PA, DE, NY looking to test their dual sport bikes and 4x4's.
The addition of Trail cams, Drones and occasional Helicopter assist should act as a force multiplier for Law Enforcement. Restricting access to specific areas like Jemima Mount and Quarter mile have been a challenge for Law Enforcement but by having targeted enforcement (and using force multipliers) they should have more success. It's probably not in the budget but I would like to see steel gates and other barriers used for those locations. Protecting spungs, savannahs, vernal ponds, wetlands and stream/riverbanks is of critical importance. Designating these specific areas for additional protection and/or road restriction is necessary and I believe that the DEP will work towards those goals in future plans. The added addition of impounding vehicles (beyond a simple fine) should act as a significant deterrent once word gets out. It would be great if Law Enforcement videotaped the impoundment and put it on youtube with " NJ Pine Barrens" "mudding" "fourwheeling" tags to deter other mentally deficient folks. It's important for concerned citizens to continue to monitor and report if additional damage is occurring so that Law Enforcement and the DEP can develop additional plans to halt damaging activity.
Last edited:
Hi Pines Advocate, I am not sure of your experience here or with the individuals who are responsible for this, but I know them quite well as I grew up in this region. This is not an easily deterred bunch and the trail cam/helicopter/drone talk is really just fantasy. It takes two officers to run a drone and they only have 2 or 3 on patrol at any given time, not to mention a drone can not impound a vehicle. They have to go out an actually find these people in the forest. Helicopters are extremely expensive and requires even more personnel.
This release is part positive action and part smoke and mirrors.
Hi Jason, I have been visiting the Pines since the early 70's and have seen the significant damage caused by irresponsible drivers in our State forests. I don't believe that the new DEP plan will stop all of the folks who misuse the forest but I do think that with this renewed emphasis on enforcement some constructive and meaningful positive changes can occur. As it is impossible from a logistics standpoint for our Park Police to be at every sensitive site 24/7, modern tools like trail cameras with Infrared Photo ability can be a great resource for Law Enforcement to track who is entering restricted areas and to pursue them accordingly. A properly positioned trail camera should be able to capture the face of the driver and the front license plate. Regarding Drones, the civilian drones available would be insufficient, I am not certain if they will be using the commercial or military drones. If the latter they should be able to cover vast swaths of the state forest and report to ground units on current law breaking activity. Helicopters as you stated are very expensive and I see them being used very rarely. The onus is now on OTNJ, and similar organizations (including enduros) to be very proactive with there membership to not go off trail/road for any reason. In addition the designation of Natural Areas, Non-Motorized Areas, and restoration areas is fully within the purview of the requisite State agencies. If necessary additional sites can be identified and closed accordingly. As I mentioned in my previous post, it is critical that spungs, savannahs, vernal ponds, wetlands and stream/riverbank channels must be protected from any motorized impact. If a small localized area or even partial road closures are necessary to achieve that, so be it. Thanks for reading.................
Last edited:
I envision 4x4 drivers wearing clown masks with duct tape over their license plates and gun turrets on the roof to shoot down the drones. Enforcement is a fantasy unless the budgets are increased. What IS real is responsible users of Wharton will follow the rules and be shut out of the forest, and the same people that are riding through streams and tearing up wetlands will continue to do so.
Just a note on the trail cameras. You have to position them so far off the area that the resolution on the cameras is not sufficient enough to get license plate detail. Much of this activity is at night and those cameras are almost completely useless for capturing license plate detail at that time. Also, the lawbreakers out there know about the cameras and are looking for them! We are just creating an easter egg hunt for these guys with expensive cameras as the prize. They still need to be used, but we should be aware of their limits.
As far as the drones, I have worked with them on film productions(not the cheapo ones) and they are very limited as to what they can actually do as for as enforcement is concerned, great for filmmaking though. The DEP is not going to employ military drones, they require enormous infrastructure and even they have their limits.
Like we said before there is only going to be 2-3 officers on patrol at any given time, less than in 2001. They have no budget for this stuff- it's just smoke and mirrors. Had they double or tripled the amount of Park Police in Wharton, maybe then the enforcement plan could have been serious.
Jon, this latest policy decision from DEP is very favorable to all lawful users of the forest. The previous iteration would have closed in excess of 250 miles, I am unaware of any road closures with this new policy. Regarding duct tape covering license plates...that would be illegal as would gun turrets
This new policy is a step in the right direction. I also believe the budget needs to be increased to provide for a greater law enforcement presence...but until then...should we do nothing?Interesting, I was under the impression that ultra high resolution 20mp trail cams with IR (available through Cabelas) had a 100 foot range. We put folks on the moon, we should be able to figure this out. Hiding them from theft and vandalism would be a challenge however. I am not involved in politics, but if you have any suggestions on who "we" should contact to advocate for increased money towards maintenance and enforcement that would be great information to have (I am thinking of legislators not superintendents).
I saw two (the only two?) Park Police vehicles at the intersection of Carranza and Tuckerton a few weeks ago. I have never seen them deep in the forest, maybe others have. If multiple official vehicles aren't actively patrolling where the "mudders" go, no one gets fined, and there is no enforcement. I agree that action follows policy, so we'll see if there is deterrence. I am afraid, based on previous blunders and the blind and illogical advocacy of some groups, that roads will still be closed. Too many roads.Jon, this latest policy decision from DEP is very favorable to all lawful users of the forest. The previous iteration would have closed in excess of 250 miles, I am unaware of any road closures with this new policy. Regarding duct tape covering license plates...that would be illegal as would gun turrets
In the last year since this whole thing started I think I've heard thousands of opinions on both sides. No matter what side you are on nothing would change without enforcement. We now have a plan for just that. This should be the starting point, not closing roads and trying figure that out later.
After listening to ALL the stakeholders the DEP has come up with a plan that best satisfies all envolved. Are there too many roads? Yes. Is any plan going to stop everyone? No. Is this the final plan? No.
Whether or not they use drones, helicopters or sting operations should be up to them. They now have a plan. Just remember, they will never catch everyone but as they catch some and word will get out. It's the fear of getting caught that will get people to think twice about their actions.
After listening to ALL the stakeholders the DEP has come up with a plan that best satisfies all envolved. Are there too many roads? Yes. Is any plan going to stop everyone? No. Is this the final plan? No.
Whether or not they use drones, helicopters or sting operations should be up to them. They now have a plan. Just remember, they will never catch everyone but as they catch some and word will get out. It's the fear of getting caught that will get people to think twice about their actions.
Last edited: