http://www.nj.gov/governor/news/news/552011/approved/20111102a.html
Wharton SF is one of 3 sites to be priortorized
Wharton SF is one of 3 sites to be priortorized
Plan to keep NJ state parks open announced.
- Thread starter 46er
- Start date
God I really hate the sound of this. I love the pine barrens, especially Wharton because of the solitude. The last thing we need is for the area to be marketed as an attraction.....awful.
New article posted to the Press of AC tonight:
http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/...cle_6a1566ee-0cd2-11e1-bc63-001cc4c03286.html
http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/...cle_6a1566ee-0cd2-11e1-bc63-001cc4c03286.html
Am I the only one who thinks this is obscene? Public land for private profit. It is going to become a huge mess and the first thing that will be lost is public access. I can already see the "This Area Closed" signs. Maybe privatizing the government that runs this state is a better idea, atleast there is a chance the budget will be in the black and out of the red.
Update on this.........
A chain restaurant in Wharton State Forest. A Ferris wheel at Liberty State Park. Weddings, flea markets, and corporate events taking over New Jersey's historic sites and scenic lands.
That could be the future if the state goes forward with plans to privatize parts of its park system, some warn.
"Next thing you know, you have to pay more for everything and the public's access is limited," said Jeff Tittel, director of the Sierra Club of New Jersey. "You'll be getting fee'd to death."
The state has a different vision. Lou Valente, chief project adviser for the state Department of Environmental Protection, foresees parks that retain their character while better serving the public, cost less to operate, and generate more revenue.
Private entities would provide lifeguards, event-planning, boat rentals, enlarged food service, even small stores with camping supplies. Nonprofits would take more responsibility for interpretive programs, freeing up DEP employees for other duties.
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/n...g_parts_of_N_J__park_system_stirs_debate.html
A chain restaurant in Wharton State Forest. A Ferris wheel at Liberty State Park. Weddings, flea markets, and corporate events taking over New Jersey's historic sites and scenic lands.
That could be the future if the state goes forward with plans to privatize parts of its park system, some warn.
"Next thing you know, you have to pay more for everything and the public's access is limited," said Jeff Tittel, director of the Sierra Club of New Jersey. "You'll be getting fee'd to death."
The state has a different vision. Lou Valente, chief project adviser for the state Department of Environmental Protection, foresees parks that retain their character while better serving the public, cost less to operate, and generate more revenue.
Private entities would provide lifeguards, event-planning, boat rentals, enlarged food service, even small stores with camping supplies. Nonprofits would take more responsibility for interpretive programs, freeing up DEP employees for other duties.
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/n...g_parts_of_N_J__park_system_stirs_debate.html
This has already happened in at least one state park, Island Beach I am familiar with. The 501c(3) coordinates activities and interpretive programs, vendors run the food concession at the bathing beachs and the canoe trips and rentals out of the parks marina. The state still hires the lifeguards. DEP has reduced staff. To some extent, to my knowledge it is also done at Allaire SP, Batsto, Ringwood and Barnegat Light SP. Licenses(hunting, fishing etc) are done via vendor. Probably campground reservations will be next, as that is pretty simple and done in many other states; as examples, PA uses INFOSPHERIX, NY, CT, DE, NH use RESERVEAMERICA.
From the horses mouth;
http://nj1015.com/gov-to-allow-some-privatization-in-nj-parks/
Everythings a compromise when there is little money. IMO, it would be far more depressing if the parks closed or were left to decay.
Hi 46'er,
I suppose my initial reaction was to imagine larger crowds and the inevitable litter, doggie droppings, etc that can come with it. That and the fact that I love the isolation when out in the parks. I have to agree with you though, that if the parks were forced to close, it would be far worse.
Chilehead
I suppose my initial reaction was to imagine larger crowds and the inevitable litter, doggie droppings, etc that can come with it. That and the fact that I love the isolation when out in the parks. I have to agree with you though, that if the parks were forced to close, it would be far worse.
Chilehead
Along come fees, gates, fences, endless rules and hours of opening and closing.
Besides many state lands were aquired under various funds, perhaps even federal, and our hard earned tax dollars and should not be commercialized.
Lack of money is BS.....money is there......priorities are elseware.
Besides many state lands were aquired under various funds, perhaps even federal, and our hard earned tax dollars and should not be commercialized.
Lack of money is BS.....money is there......priorities are elseware.
I think the woods will always be free, because it would cost too much money to fence them off and patrol them. To save money they could close down campgrounds, beaches, visitor centers, etc. I know that would upset some people but personally I think that would mean less tourists, less people out in the woods.... maybe not such a bad thing after all.
They don't have to fence them off, all they would have to do is start catching people out there and start fining them or throwing them in jail and you would see a rapid decine of individuals out there for fear of what may happen. Doesn't sound like the good old USA does it?
Guy
Guy
Exactly. If they can't or won't catch people in the specific places that are known to be a problem today, how could they ever patrol all the forests? I just can't imagine it would ever come to that. I think they could care less who wanders around the woods.
A couple years ago when the political haggling over the budget was going on, there were some threats that they would close the state forests and keep people out. Turned out to be no more than political posturing to make a point about the budgets and was clearly not something they ever could or would do.
I think the budget cuts would only impact the "developed" parts of the parks and not the state forests themselves.
A couple years ago when the political haggling over the budget was going on, there were some threats that they would close the state forests and keep people out. Turned out to be no more than political posturing to make a point about the budgets and was clearly not something they ever could or would do.
I think the budget cuts would only impact the "developed" parts of the parks and not the state forests themselves.
True, but if lets say they decide to close the forests it would be quite easy to pick on any individual who is 10 feet off the road and not back 3 miles into the woods.
Guy
Actually state parks, beaches, marinas and the like, including most all NJ govt offices, were closed in the summer. It's pretty difficult to close a forest
State park employees were furloughed. All part of Corzines brainstorm plan to raise taxes, and it worked. Certainly glad he's gone to where he belongs.http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/02/nyregion/02corzine.html?pagewanted=2