This all sounds fair, but being new to this sort of debate, I have some questions and comments and critiques to make... all civil and nothing personal...
and also the subject of this thread was about users learning to accept each other, work together and to educate from within..
1. I will do everything I can to make sure any future PPA statements are more sensitive to the distinction between illegal and legal riding.
Thanks,. But I think jeepinjp has a valid point about the definition of legal and illegal and the OHV users want to be able to responsibly enjoy their vehicles in the state, that is something that might be an issue
In return, I would ask that riders (or those sympathetic to them) not make unfounded accusations. And no, it is not PPA's responsibility to quell every unfounded accusation that arises, just because it is perceived by some to be widespread. If we ask someone to back up an accusation with facts and details, that is not "hiding." That's a perfectly fair and reasonable request.
I feel some or all of this was directed towards me, I think I got more caught up in the exchange with pinelandspaddler then the issue at hand.
as far as... it is not PPA's responsibility to quell every unfounded accusation that arises, just because it is perceived by some to be widespread....
again I was talking about what people feel, maybe it was to basic, if I may.., If you were to take 1 hiker, 1 camper, 1 geocasher 1 dirt biker 1 jeep person that all were somewhat familiar with this issue and read or watched members of the PPA speak on the subject and you asked then point blank, is the PPA against OHV's?? I believe most would answer yes. because it's either what that person wants, the end of them in NJ or it part of there leisure time. The PPA would be their ally or enemy, for loss of better words..
on the ask someone to back up an accusation with facts and details, that is not "hiding." That's a perfectly fair and reasonable request
Fair yes, give you that... when I used that statement, there was no venom intended, if it was taken that way, please know that it was not. you ask for evidence, so I asked also, that's all.. part of the exchange as described above.
2. Similarly, I will do whatever I can to make sure PPA does not issue inflammatory statements. Others should make the same commitment in return. Please notice that it is not inflammatory for PPA to point out to the public that there is on ongoing problem out there. Stating facts that make certain people uncomfortable is not inflammatory.
statement above is correct...
when I first heard of the meeting that were sponsored by the PPA last year and read the legislation introduced by Assemblyman Reed Gusciora, to be honest, I was inflamed.
3. PPA has been and is continually engaged in all kinds of educational programs about the valuable resources of the Pinelands. Riders are welcome at any time to forge an alliance with us on these programs or to suggest new programs. However, these programs cannot be viewed as an alternative to the effort to get legislation for the statewide program of registration that we are seeking.
registration is something the PPA is looking for and the 'riders' are looking for, but I think the hang up with the riders is that they are being asked to pay and register, but they are given no facilities to ride in, (OHV parks) or state lands to ride in, like just about every state in the US. Plus there are issue on the extent of the registrations and it's benefits and also the issue of the continued permitting of the special events that have been going on here since prior to 1940
4. PPA has been sending the same message since (I think) the year 2000, that we support the development of ORV parks. It's a position we adopted in response to many, many, meetings and communications and consultation with riders and organized riding groups. That doesn't mean that PPA would support the development of an ORV park that fails to conform with the CMP.
here I think sits a small problem... If it is true and I have read it to be true, but also have read statements like what JR has written further back in the thread... about they would do no good... throwing in that they kill and injure people... so does walking down the street, so does playing football, so does driving a car.. There is a hint of sensationalism, but that is something you have agreed to try to stop or ease. I also think it will be hard to do if you have such OHV haters as Fred Akers and Jeff Tittle walking hand and hand with your organization. If you truely want to accomplish something, some sort of flexibility and compromise is needed and there is zero from them. Everyone knows they are against ORV use... I know someone who knows Fred and has chatted with him on the subject of OHV's that is how I reinforce my conclusion about him plus all that he writes and contributes to
I will do my best to respond with courtesy to any and all who want to discuss these points. I hope we will all proceed with the principles of rational discourse in mind.
That just some 1:15 a.m. ramblings half asleep, I can't wait to see this when I'm awake and wonder how much I edit???
