Sunrise at 1/4 Mile Road

[Teegate]

I think we need to keep that idea completly out of our heads. In my mind it is not a good one and not one I would support at all. It does not promote visitors from other parts of the state to come for a day or more, and it makes this state look even worse than it already is. With the majority of the residents being respectful, their tax dollars should do the talking.

Guy

 

[Boyd]

Unfortunately I think it's easily enforced. Just station the park police at popular intersections on the sand roads. If you don't have a permit, you get a ticket. It would be a sad day if things come to this, but I wouldn't be surprised. Lots of potential to raise $$$ there.

I wouldn't mind seeing this if the fee's went back into the park/forest they were collected

Come on, from your other posts here I *know* you are not that naive. Of course, they could say that was the purpose. Then the state would just remove the other sources of funding for the forests, and replace them with the user fees and lots of income from fines.... and as long as they have pulled you over, is your tail light burned out? Were you wearing your seatbelt? How about a spot-check of your emissions?...

I believe they have something like this in other states. I think I saw signs in the state forest in Maryland saying that you needed a permit to drive on the dirt roads.

 

[Broke Jeep Joe]

I think we need to keep that idea completly out of our heads. In my mind it is not a good one and not one I would support at all. It does not promote visitors from other parts of the state to come for a day or more, and it makes this state look even worse than it already is. With the majority of the residents being respectful, their tax dollars should do the talking.

Guy

All very valid points that are food for thought. Just a couple questions, why would it not promote visitation from other parts of the state? What do you mean by making the state look worse? I totally agree with the tax statement, but we all have been paying taxes for years and don't seem to have a very large voice IMHO.

 

[46er]

It does not promote visitors from other parts of the state to come for a day or more, and it makes this state look even worse than it already is.
Guy

You should be at the office of IBSP on the 1st of the year. There are lines of folks from within and out of state waiting to buy a permit. They also offer a 3-day permit for $50.

 

[Boyd]

Oh come on Guy.... it will be feel-good legislation. We could name it "Pines Lover's Law". It will make you smile because you're saving the envi-i-i-i-ronment. And it will be easily passed because the majority of New Jerseyans have no interest in driving around the pine barrens so it won't affect them. And it fits the current mindset that has also brought us carbon credits and proposals to tax you based on where you drive using a GPS in every vehicle. Really - you've got no business driving around the pines anyway. What purpose does that serve? You are wasting gas and polluting the air. How un-green.

This is not the same thing as a permit to drive on IBSP beaches by any stretch of the imagination. I support that. We're talking about a really precious and limited resource - a few miles of undeveloped beachfront. That is a far cry from a million acres of pinelands preserve.

Frankly, I'm disappointed with those who would find such an idea acceptable in any way. Just another way to have the government control your travels and meddle in your everyday life. It would end up being all about random checkpoints and big fines for everybody who didn't have a current permit.

 

[skip3]

Oh come on Guy.... it will be feel-good legislation. We could name it "Pines Lover's Law". It will make you smile because you're saving the envi-i-i-i-ronment. And it will be easily passed because the majority of New Jerseyans have no interest in driving around the pine barrens so it won't affect them. And it fits the current mindset that has also brought us carbon credits and proposals to tax you based on where you drive using a GPS in every vehicle. Really - you've got no business driving around the pines anyway. What purpose does that serve? You are wasting gas and polluting the air. How un-green.

This is not the same thing as a permit to drive on IBSP beaches by any stretch of the imagination. I support that. We're talking about a really precious and limited resource - a few miles of undeveloped beachfront. That is a far cry from a million acres of pinelands preserve.

Frankly, I'm disappointed with those who would find such an idea acceptable in any way. Just another way to have the government control your travels and meddle in your everyday life. It would end up being all about random checkpoints and big fines for everybody who didn't have a current permit.

I can see it now ... why yes officer I did just drive through those wetlands, but I have a permit to do it ....:rofl:

It would be one more law that they enforced at their leisure ......

 

[bobpbx]

Bottom line: The people into snorkles and water in the floor-boards need to understand that this is not their private mudding playground. The majority of users of these Pine Barrens are against this abuse, and we want it stopped without restricting our own access.

 

[Pines Lover]

Here's another easily implented source of control and funding. The mobile sportfishing permit for driving on the beach at IBSP is $195/yr, which is about 53 cents a day, Corsons Inlet is $50/yr; they sell thousands and it goes into the general fund, and the Wharton super is very familiar with the higher priced permit. Such a system for driving off pavement on state land could get them millions from permit sales and violations. I wouldn't mind seeing this if the fee's went back into the park/forest they were collected in and into more enforcement.

Excellent idea.

But would the State keep the $ in Wharton

 

[Pines Lover]

Oh come on Guy.... it will be feel-good legislation. We could name it "Pines Lover's Law". It will make you smile because you're saving the envi-i-i-i-ronment. And it will be easily passed because the majority of New Jerseyans have no interest in driving around the pine barrens so it won't affect them. And it fits the current mindset that has also brought us carbon credits and proposals to tax you based on where you drive using a GPS in every vehicle. Really - you've got no business driving around the pines anyway. What purpose does that serve? You are wasting gas and polluting the air. How un-green.

This is not the same thing as a permit to drive on IBSP beaches by any stretch of the imagination. I support that. We're talking about a really precious and limited resource - a few miles of undeveloped beachfront. That is a far cry from a million acres of pinelands preserve.

Frankly, I'm disappointed with those who would find such an idea acceptable in any way. Just another way to have the government control your travels and meddle in your everyday life. It would end up being all about random checkpoints and big fines for everybody who didn't have a current permit.

Pines lover would be for it as long as the money went to enforcing laws and wetlands restoration.

SO would the Pine Barrens tree frogs and the leopard frogs and the spring peepers and the wood frogs and the carpenter frogs and the Pine Barrens smoke grass and the Canby's lobelia and the large headed beak rush and the Pine Barrens reed grass and the Longs woolgrass and even the Hirst's panic grass would be extremely happy.

They told me do

And I will not let them down

 

[Pines Lover]

I can see it now ... why yes officer I did just drive through those wetlands, but I have a permit to do it ....:rofl:

It would be one more law that they enforced at their leisure ......

N.J.A.C. 7:7A-2.1(a), 2.2(a) and (b), 2.5(f), 2.6(a)
Conducting regulated or prohibited activities in a freshwater wetland, transition area and/or State open water without prior Department approval.

 

[46er]

Frankly, I'm disappointed with those who would find such an idea acceptable in any way. Just another way to have the government control your travels and meddle in your everyday life. It would end up being all about random checkpoints and big fines for everybody who didn't have a current permit.

Every suggestion so far would result in simlar limitations to travel, be they closures or tighter enforcement. What your actually saying is that there is really no acceptable way to prevent the problem, since it is the government that writes the laws and is charged with enforcing them. It will eventually all boil down to the government choosing the poison, as the choice certainly won't be put on any ballot. Might not like it, but it's the reality.

Issues such as this seem to have become more pronounced after the park rangers, who reported to the park/forest supers, became the autonomous park police. There is no line that connects the supers with the park police any longer.

 

[Pines Lover]

Again, I said not that the damage is as severe as driving, but damage is damage for your selective reading problem. If you think for one second that the equestrains are more responsible than the 4x4 crowd, think again. I ran into a woman, or should I say she and her horse ran into me on Devious Mount Road after dark one night. She was very intoxicated, lost and breaking the law. In another instance, a friend and I were sitting in his jeep in the middle of the road awaiting the riders to pass us by when one kicked the mirror from the side of his jeep. Don't tell me how responsible they are. Granted, that was 2 out of many. Most of the equestrian folks are great. I will not do what some on this site do and lump one group into one barrel, as I said I'll take them at face value. There are jackasses in every crowd.

What BS, I ride a horse in the pines and have a permit to ride in WMA's and my friends from the Chatsworth area do state approved endurance and trail/pleasure rides all the time, I have been out with them many times.

And on every ride there is at least 1 problem with ATVs or 4 wheelers that have no respect for them and think its okay to pass them at 30mph while they beep their horn at them.

I know countless horse owners and not one would ever ride their horse drunk in the woods at night.

Tell us another fairy story.

 

[kingofthepines]

How 'bout a little fire scarecrow?

Speaking of smoke grass, ahem..how many froggies and the like become crispy critters when the state does their annual controlled burns? I would think they would appreciate it if you could put a stop to that practice. I would bet fire kills more kermits than wheelers. I actually would like to hear that the fires do very little damage to the small creatures but I imagine thousands get wiped out each year.

 

[woodjin]

Be careful what you wish for....echoing the opinions of others here, I think we have to be REAL careful about suggesting policy changes on how the forest is managed. In the 2002 era when enforcement was increased there were many problems that infringed greatly on our ability to "get away from it all" and enjoy the pines.

Demand a definitive vehlicular access trail map, and you just might discover that 50% of the trails you were using are now off limits. Politicians and law enforcers don't understand the wood like we do. I got a ticket once for driving through wetlands...it was a puddle on a major dirt road after a rain. This is what things could come to on a regular basis.

the people tearing up 1/4 mile are already breaking the law. More restrictions will not correct or prevent the situation in the future. The park police have a responsibility to enforce the existing law in that area and they NEED to act on that. That is what we are paying them for. If the problem arises in a new location then the police need to respond to that as well. Hopefully sooner rather than later.

Pinelover, I know your heart is in the right place and you do care deeply about the pines but please don't accuse another poster of making things up (referring to your reaction of BJJ last post). Also, please stop saying that the grass and frogs are speaking to you....it is starting to freak me out a little

Jeff

 

[mudboy dave]

My view on the permit idea. I originally thought this was a good idea until I thought about it in more depth. Once again, it would need a trail system type set up. Mps availableto every Permit holder of trails they can legally travel down. I know there is a map in the process of being made and trails that would involve scratches would be shut down. I cannot and will not support something of that nature. The wide trails are in better condition then half of our paved roads and under a situation like this, mine as well just become paved public roads such as carranza. I can't see many people buying a permit that would be that restrictive. Speaking with Al Horner I think he has a decent idea and am staying in contact with him about it.

 

[mudboy dave]

Speaking of smoke grass, ahem..how many froggies and the like become crispy critters when the state does their annual controlled burns? I would think they would appreciate it if you could put a stop to that practice. I would bet fire kills more kermits than wheelers. I actually would like to hear that the fires do very little damage to the small creatures but I imagine thousands get wiped out each year.

Oh.... No he didn't!!!!!!! He did not just go there:jeffd: kingofthepines is a speaker of truths

 

[46er]

Any suggestion; be it maps, closures, permits, etc; all boils down to enforcement of whatever is put in place. There are regs/laws in place now. They may or may not be being enforced as rigourously as they should be. Has any organizaiton or newspaper reporter asked the park police to provide their statistics for citations issued in the problem area over the past year or two? Hopefully the powers that be come up with a solution, but based on past issues, I have my doubts that will happen. I hope I'm wrong.

 

[MartGBC]

How did the state stop the circus at the old Hidden Lakes pit off Rt. 72? Whatever they did worked because you longer have all those people back there going wild.

 

[GermanG]

I’ve been in the bleachers on this one so far but I did want to comment on the subject of animals killed by fire, be it wildfire or prescribed burn. Concern for the fate of individuals is a uniquely human trait. In nature it is of little importance. If it were we would be out there protecting the rabbits from the foxes. Protect their environment from destruction and the animal populations and their reproductive capability will usually take care of themselves. And when speaking specifically of fire, remember where we are. If a species could not survive the effects of fire, it wouldn’t be here in the first place. And when weather conditions allow, the state attempts to do its burns earlier in the winter when most herps are still hibernating and less prone to the effects of the burns.

 

[Pines Lover]

Speaking of smoke grass, ahem..how many froggies and the like become crispy critters when the state does their annual controlled burns? I would think they would appreciate it if you could put a stop to that practice. I would bet fire kills more kermits than wheelers. I actually would like to hear that the fires do very little damage to the small creatures but I imagine thousands get wiped out each year.

Controlled burns are done in the late winter early spring when most frogs are still hibernating or safe in vernal pools, unless the illegal 4 wheelers wiped them out.

I can imagine the number of frogs who bred and reproduced in the vernal pools, for thousands of generations, in the scar that now have been destroyed is quite a lot.