Prescribed burns

[smoke_jumper]

I m not familiar with the area but just looking at the map it looks to me like they are trying to put a break to stop a fire from going into the cedar swamp. Not sure why it needs to be a road but if you contact the section warden he should be able to give you a better explanation. Did they do a prescribed burn there?

 

[1Jerseydevil]

As Ronald Regan would say, "here you go again".
This appears to be a continuance of your whining of the "crossroads" fire a couple years ago.
The Forest Service has to apply for permission and review from Pinelands, so maybe you should take your beef up with them.
I suggested 2 years ago that you talk to someone in the Forest Service to get an idea of why they do what they do, have you?. I wouldn't expect the meeting to change your mind, but at least you won't be clueless.
Stop in at Double Trouble, maybe someone will be there to talk to. If not try Coyle Field now that we're in fire season. There's usually somebody there, very friendly people and they're willing to talk and show you around.

In 5 years that road will be assimilated into the woods. I wouldn't be surprised if in the near future they cut firebreaks from that road to Dover Rd. I don't know what they're trying to protect, maybe those 4 houses on the left? I guess those houses don't upset you nor the Miller airpark extension, just fire roads and breaks?

 

[bobpbx]

I wouldn't expect the meeting to change your mind, but at least you won't be clueless.

I'm a burr under your saddle, right JD? I really irritate you. An itch you can't seem to scratch. I exasperate you, and make your eyeballs bulge out when you read my posts on this topic. I am irksome, galling, and grating to your tender sensibilities.

Be careful or you'll blow a gasket.

 

[pinelandpaddler]

In 5 years that road will be assimilated into the woods.

Is that so?

 

[smoke_jumper]

Is that so?

I can point out roads that were made 20 years ago that are still very much here today.

 

[1Jerseydevil]

I'm a burr under your saddle, right JD? I really irritate you. An itch you can't seem to scratch. I exasperate you, and make your eyeballs bulge out when you read my posts on this topic. I am irksome, galling, and grating to your tender sensibilities.

Be careful or you'll blow a gasket.

No, you have no idea of how incorrect you are and how just laid back I really am. I just tire of the same old, same old dribble from clueless people that have the time to whine, but not the time to ask those in the "know". Because this is in YOUR backyard is what upsets you? I alluded to this previously, before Bamber became YOUR backyard what happened here previously was fine with you.

 

[1Jerseydevil]

I can point out roads that were made 20 years ago that are still very much here today. #25
smoke_jumper, Saturday at 11:29 AM

I didn't realize my statement would be taken so literally. What I meant is the ugliness of the fresh bulldoze in about 5 years will smooth over and there will be new plant growth sprouting, starting this summer. Depends on how heavy the traffic, but I wouldn't expect much. The new brush piles will begin to rot, but now they're home to various creatures, snakes, lizards, chipmunks, spiders, etc.
Yes most of the roads in the Pines are very old, 100+ years and open because of traffic. I can show you a few roads that have been abandoned for maybe 30 years that are now more densely grown in than the surrounding "native" woods that it's much easier to walk the woods than the road itself.

 

[bobpbx]

I didn't realize my statement would be taken so literally. What I meant is the ugliness of the fresh bulldoze in about 5 years will smooth over and there will be new plant growth sprouting, starting this summer. Depends on how heavy the traffic, but I wouldn't expect much. The new brush piles will begin to rot, but now they're home to various creatures, snakes, lizards, chipmunks, spiders, etc.
Yes most of the roads in the Pines are very old, 100+ years and open because of traffic. I can show you a few roads that have been abandoned for maybe 30 years that are now more densely grown in than the surrounding "native" woods that it's much easier to walk the woods than the road itself.

JD, if it is allowed to return to its natural state, then they don't need the road, so they never should have bulldozed it. Do you understand that concept?

You and I are different in how we approach things that were done by the state. My nature is to question authority with a skeptical mind. Your nature is to always assume they are right in what they do, and if you just kindly ask them why something was done, why, they'll tell you and you'll accept it.

 

[smoke_jumper]

I didn't realize my statement would be taken so literally. What I meant is the ugliness of the fresh bulldoze in about 5 years will smooth over and there will be new plant growth sprouting, starting this summer. Depends on how heavy the traffic, but I wouldn't expect much. The new brush piles will begin to rot, but now they're home to various creatures, snakes, lizards, chipmunks, spiders, etc.
Yes most of the roads in the Pines are very old, 100+ years and open because of traffic. I can show you a few roads that have been abandoned for maybe 30 years that are now more densely grown in than the surrounding "native" woods that it's much easier to walk the woods than the road itself.

The idea that we can do anything to these woods and they will bounce back is what I have a problem with. I agree prescribed burns and breaks are needed to maintain a healthy forest. But to say that it will grow back better and the brush piles promote homes for all kinds of critters is like saying dumping your yard waste in the woods is good for the environment for the same reasons. There may be a good reason for that road I just can't see one with the information I have right now

 

[1Jerseydevil]

Been busy, so late reply.
Bob. accepting and liking are 2 different things. I don't like a lot of things including what happenes in the Pines, but I can't stop it especially when Pinelands approves. Personally I don't like all the access roads that have been upgraded from the original stagecoach roads. I don't like the maintained trucked in yellow gravel roads, rye fields and strips in Greenwood and other areas. I don't like that abortion of a road behind Bamber, Webs Mill rd between Lacey rd and rt 539 nor all the bulldozed widened roads in the Lacey tract along Forked River Mtn, Jones rd, etc. I have no choice but to accept it.

Smoke Jumper, I was under the impression you were in the FFS, apparently not, you just like using the name. I don't know why the road in question is now there, I haven't asked. What bothers me though is neither have BOTH of you. Maybe the FFS wanted it , maybe it's an expansion request by the park, nobody knows because nobody asked. It also had to be approved by Pinelands. If your afraid to ask the FFS, then ask Pinelands what the hell is going on. All new roads and fire breaks need to be submitted in advance and approved by Pinelands. I even think old fire breaks and old road maintenance need approval, not positive though. If you don't like it perhaps both of you should work closer with Pinelands and the FFS to see what future plans are, THEN voice your objections, not AFTER.

SJ, apparently you've never taken the time to read the history of the Pines. The Pines and streams were raped and F...ked over long before any of us walked them, and they're doing just fine today. Mining operations are probably the biggest destruction as they do change the landscape, then the owners walk away when depleted without even an attempt to restore. Some examples, The Heritage materials in Manchester, 3 pits off Lacey rd. 2 others in Stafford, the one behind Brick Wall in Lacey. These are only a few locally. While they won't heal completely in our lifetime, they're already being reclaimed by nature. The one behind Brick Wall is a good example.
Perhaps you need to watch the TV show "After Mankind".

 

[PINEY WARDEN]

This is the stuff that I am more concerned about. Big Trucks destroying the roads. - Tuckerton Stage Road between Carranza Road and High Crossing

 

[Teegate]

I use to be able to go that way in my car.

Nice photo BTW. Captures it well.

 

[PINEY WARDEN]

I use to be able to go that way in my car.

Nice photo BTW. Captures it well.

Thank You Guy. I am so saddened what these big trucks are doing to our Lovely Pine Barrens. I have lived here my entire life (6 Generation) and this is terrible. The total disrespect some of these folks give to the road structure.

 

[smoke_jumper]

Been busy, so late reply.
Bob. accepting and liking are 2 different things. I don't like a lot of things including what happenes in the Pines, but I can't stop it especially when Pinelands approves. Personally I don't like all the access roads that have been upgraded from the original stagecoach roads. I don't like the maintained trucked in yellow gravel roads, rye fields and strips in Greenwood and other areas. I don't like that abortion of a road behind Bamber, Webs Mill rd between Lacey rd and rt 539 nor all the bulldozed widened roads in the Lacey tract along Forked River Mtn, Jones rd, etc. I have no choice but to accept it.

Smoke Jumper, I was under the impression you were in the FFS, apparently not, you just like using the name. I don't know why the road in question is now there, I haven't asked. What bothers me though is neither have BOTH of you. Maybe the FFS wanted it , maybe it's an expansion request by the park, nobody knows because nobody asked. It also had to be approved by Pinelands. If your afraid to ask the FFS, then ask Pinelands what the hell is going on. All new roads and fire breaks need to be submitted in advance and approved by Pinelands. I even think old fire breaks and old road maintenance need approval, not positive though. If you don't like it perhaps both of you should work closer with Pinelands and the FFS to see what future plans are, THEN voice your objections, not AFTER.

SJ, apparently you've never taken the time to read the history of the Pines. The Pines and streams were raped and F...ked over long before any of us walked them, and they're doing just fine today. Mining operations are probably the biggest destruction as they do change the landscape, then the owners walk away when depleted without even an attempt to restore. Some examples, The Heritage materials in Manchester, 3 pits off Lacey rd. 2 others in Stafford, the one behind Brick Wall in Lacey. These are only a few locally. While they won't heal completely in our lifetime, they're already being reclaimed by nature. The one behind Brick Wall is a good example.
Perhaps you need to watch the TV show "After Mankind".

JD, Please explain to me why you feel I can't be a member of the FFS and care about the environment. Is that not possible? As I have said before I have been active in the FFS from the early 90's to about 6 years ago and have been deployed out west as a member of the FFS many times over that time. If you read my first post I sugested to reach out to the section warden to get an answer as to why the road road was made. There could be a very good reason. I m very aware of the paper trail that is needed to do any type work on state land. But I can say first hand that elsewhere in this country there is much more value placed on our natural resources then we do here. Every new road made just dices up our ever shrinking pines. Do you not agree? It's not about what we have lost but about how we can save what's left. Lead by example. If we, the FFS, are in charge of protecting the pines and just tear it up how do we expect everyone else to treat it?

 

[bobpbx]

Been busy, so late reply.
Bob. accepting and liking are 2 different things. I don't like a lot of things including what happenes in the Pines, but I can't stop it especially when Pinelands approves. Personally I don't like all the access roads that have been upgraded from the original stagecoach roads. I don't like the maintained trucked in yellow gravel roads, rye fields and strips in Greenwood and other areas. I don't like that abortion of a road behind Bamber, Webs Mill rd between Lacey rd and rt 539 nor all the bulldozed widened roads in the Lacey tract along Forked River Mtn, Jones rd, etc. I have no choice but to accept it.

Smoke Jumper, I was under the impression you were in the FFS, apparently not, you just like using the name. I don't know why the road in question is now there, I haven't asked.. All new roads and fire breaks need to What bothers me though is neither have BOTH of you. Maybe the FFS wanted it , maybe it's an expansion request by the park, nobody knows because nobody asked. It also had to be approved by Pinelands. If your afraid to ask the FFS, then ask Pinelands what the hell is going onbe submitted in advance and approved by Pinelands. I even think old fire breaks and old road maintenance need approval, not positive though. If you don't like it perhaps both of you should work closer with Pinelands and the FFS to see what future plans are, THEN voice your objections, not AFTER.

SJ, apparently you've never taken the time to read the history of the Pines. The Pines and streams were raped and F...ked over long before any of us walked them, and they're doing just fine today. Mining operations are probably the biggest destruction as they do change the landscape, then the owners walk away when depleted without even an attempt to restore. Some examples, The Heritage materials in Manchester, 3 pits off Lacey rd. 2 others in Stafford, the one behind Brick Wall in Lacey. These are only a few locally. While they won't heal completely in our lifetime, they're already being reclaimed by nature. The one behind Brick Wall is a good example.
Perhaps you need to watch the TV show "After Mankind".

JD, as to each of your comments, I dare to reply thusly:

JD said: I don't like a lot of things including what happenes in the Pines, but I can't stop it especially when Pinelands approves. Personally I don't like all the access roads that have been upgraded from the original stagecoach roads. I don't like the maintained trucked in yellow gravel roads, rye fields and strips in Greenwood and other areas. I don't like that abortion of a road behind Bamber, Webs Mill rd between Lacey rd and rt 539 nor all the bulldozed widened roads in the Lacey tract along Forked River Mtn, Jones rd, etc. I have no choice but to accept it.

Good. Some things we do agree upon. It may shock some readers on this forum that I support paving Webb's Mill road, from Bamber all the way to 539. It would keep the riff-raff out there down to a minimum, and the road would not be so trashed and ugly. As far as the rye strips, I've grown to like them. It gives variety and distinction to our pines. But, stop now, don't create any more.

JD said: What bothers me though is neither have BOTH of you. Maybe the FFS wanted it , maybe it's an expansion request by the park, nobody knows because nobody asked. It also had to be approved by Pinelands. If your afraid to ask the FFS, then ask Pinelands what the hell is going on.

Sir, you oppugn my manhood. Afraid? me? No, just kind of lazy. Anyway, to satisfy the question, I road out to Double Trouble today to pose the question, but no staff were around. I then called the main office for Double Trouble (now at Lebanon) and did pose the question: "why did you feel it necessary to make that road?". The nice lady took a brave shot at the answer: "((I think)because there are pine beetles out there, and the road will allow us to take the trees out". Now, she was a nice lady, but I don't totally buy that answer. In fact, I think that even if true, they should just let nature takes it's course with pine beetles. It will be very interesting to see what succeeds the pines if they all die off from pine beetles. I seriously mean what I'm saying here JD. I don't see nature taking its course as a big threat. Hell, I've even given up on controlling beaver.

 

[Teegate]

She is a really nice lady and I hope all who calls there remembers this post.

Bob ... I disagree with you on the paving of that road. I hope that does not happen. It will ruin that area and will require either a massive cutting of trees if they just want a stop sign on 539 or a red light there. A stop sign would be a disastrious so I am sure they would want a red light. And they would not just pave the road at the stream, they would alter that intersection and have to build a bridge.

I think you need to rethink this.

 

[bobpbx]

She is a really nice lady and I hope all who calls there remembers this post.

Bob ... I disagree with you on the paving of that road. I hope that does not happen. It will ruin that area and will require either a massive cutting of trees if they just want a stop sign on 539 or a red light there. A stop sign would be a disastrious so I am sure they would want a red light. And they would not just pave the road at the stream, they would alter that intersection and have to build a bridge.

I think you need to rethink this.

I'm still for it. However, I have thought about Clearwater run, and what to do there. Maybe reroute the road a bit north to avoid that stream altogether, and clean that area up and tout it as an important and beautiful natural area where only walking is allowed. Think of what has been done there. Chris and I pulled cedars out of the stream that someone cut with a chainsaw, and there are campfire remnants and beer cans there all the time. People drive there and party at that spot.

 

[46er]

She is a really nice lady and I hope all who calls there remembers this post.

Bob ... I disagree with you on the paving of that road. I hope that does not happen. It will ruin that area and will require either a massive cutting of trees if they just want a stop sign on 539 or a red light there. A stop sign would be a disastrious so I am sure they would want a red light. And they would not just pave the road at the stream, they would alter that intersection and have to build a bridge.

I think you need to rethink this.

The sand trucks would love to see it paved. Personally they should crater that road. I used it a few times when I hunted Greenwood, but it was so beat up most times it wasn't worth it. One trip I came across an idiot in a 60's Cadillac stuck crossways near 539 blocking the road, stuck good. Served him right. I nudged him a bit as I went past and kept going.

 

[manumuskin]

I"m all for allowing nature to take it's course.Still can't figure out how we save the forest from the beetles by mowing it to the ground????

 

[dragoncjo]

I"m all for allowing nature to take it's course.Still can't figure out how we save the forest from the beetles by mowing it to the ground????[/QUOTE

JD, as to each of your comments, I dare to reply thusly:

JD said: I don't like a lot of things including what happenes in the Pines, but I can't stop it especially when Pinelands approves. Personally I don't like all the access roads that have been upgraded from the original stagecoach roads. I don't like the maintained trucked in yellow gravel roads, rye fields and strips in Greenwood and other areas. I don't like that abortion of a road behind Bamber, Webs Mill rd between Lacey rd and rt 539 nor all the bulldozed widened roads in the Lacey tract along Forked River Mtn, Jones rd, etc. I have no choice but to accept it.

Good. Some things we do agree upon. It may shock some readers on this forum that I support paving Webb's Mill road, from Bamber all the way to 539. It would keep the riff-raff out there down to a minimum, and the road would not be so trashed and ugly. As far as the rye strips, I've grown to like them. It gives variety and distinction to our pines. But, stop now, don't create any more.

JD said: What bothers me though is neither have BOTH of you. Maybe the FFS wanted it , maybe it's an expansion request by the park, nobody knows because nobody asked. It also had to be approved by Pinelands. If your afraid to ask the FFS, then ask Pinelands what the hell is going on.

Sir, you oppugn my manhood. Afraid? me? No, just kind of lazy. Anyway, to satisfy the question, I road out to Double Trouble today to pose the question, but no staff were around. I then called the main office for Double Trouble (now at Lebanon) and did pose the question: "why did you feel it necessary to make that road?". The nice lady took a brave shot at the answer: "((I think)because there are pine beetles out there, and the road will allow us to take the trees out". Now, she was a nice lady, but I don't totally buy that answer. In fact, I think that even if true, they should just let nature takes it's course with pine beetles. It will be very interesting to see what succeeds the pines if they all die off from pine beetles. I seriously mean what I'm saying here JD. I don't see nature taking its course as a big threat. Hell, I've even given up on controlling beaver.

Bob, I respect you as a pine barrens explorer but disagree completely with paving webbs, quite suprised you would suggest this.

I think jd has valid points regarding asking questions. No solutions will be reached if people making decisions don't know people care or are disastified. I almost never come to this forum seeking solutions but more so building a militia of sorts to fight something. I have always addressed my issues I have directly with decision makers and I can say without a doubt most have ended with some resolution. Perhaps I've been fortunate to know good people out there, but I think saying your being lazy is a weak excuse. I have a lot of respect for you Bob, I just don't think a lot will be solved or prevented by voicing displeasure here, if anything may make it worse. The people working and making these decisions are employed by all of us, and as such owe us explainations. If they don't then in my opinion they are not performing their job.

NOTE: Edited by Guy for clarity