|
|
Post by russ on Apr 25, 2011 21:51:24 GMT -5
Well said Russ especially the second half! But this is not true "Individuals from various recreation and user groups have started a South Jersey Trail Lovers Coalition to help state authorities put these recommendations into action." We didn't start the SJTLC it's NJTLC! We also didn't start this to help the state make laws or enforce them. Remember this - The goals and activities of the NJTLC include... • Educating the public about the value of our open spaces. • Raising awareness of the need to protect these places. • Organize cleanup and maintenance parties as needed. I already said I would have recommended revisions if I had had the opportunity. I'll see if there is some way for NJCF to correct these errors. But I can assure you, they were not deliberate. And if you take a careful look at PPA's 12 points, all of them are actions that the NJTLC founding members discussed, and NJTLC supports most of them. In fact, maybe we should start a thread on those points, and discuss them in detail. |
|
|
|
Post by HamiltonLJ on Apr 26, 2011 16:39:36 GMT -5
You know the worse thing about this is? The Park Police are now harassing people out there that are not doing anything wrong. Yes I have a modified Jeep. No snorkel or anything like that just a small lift and legal size tires. Since they stick out a little they want to ticket me $200 a tire. They've gone from doing nothing to nitpicking. We asked them to help with the illegal use now they seem pissed at everyone!
|
|
|
|
Post by russ on Apr 26, 2011 18:22:44 GMT -5
You know the worse thing about this is? The Park Police are now harassing people out there that are not doing anything wrong. Yes I have a modified Jeep. No snorkel or anything like that just a small lift and legal size tires. Since they stick out a little they want to ticket me $200 a tire. They've gone from doing nothing to nitpicking. We asked them to help with the illegal use now they seem pissed at everyone! Let me see if I understand this. Your modifications are legal, but they ticketed you anyway? |
|
|
|
Post by devilstoy on Apr 26, 2011 19:17:20 GMT -5
You know the worse thing about this is? The Park Police are now harassing people out there that are not doing anything wrong. Yes I have a modified Jeep. No snorkel or anything like that just a small lift and legal size tires. Since they stick out a little they want to ticket me $200 a tire. They've gone from doing nothing to nitpicking. We asked them to help with the illegal use now they seem pissed at everyone! yea i agree , there busting balls for every little thing now , it makes me scared to even hit the trails , my jeep is totally legal but the tires do stick out a little , i been thru traffic road blocks with no issue but i know the park police are gonna be dicks about it , they tried talking smack about my firends truck cause it was lifted with bigger tires and a diesel and its not even illegal in anyway and we werent even in the trails, but since it was diesel he made it seem it that if it was a gas truck it would be ticketed and diesels should have the same laws as everyone else and he went on forever about it , wich was also the same park police agent that said njtlc was the source of the problems in wharton but its redicilous |
|
brad
New Member
Posts: 21
|
Post by brad on Apr 27, 2011 6:44:55 GMT -5
You are the lucky recipient of the "zero tolerance" that the ppa has lobbied for.
|
|
|
|
Post by medfordpiney on Apr 27, 2011 7:03:35 GMT -5
You are the lucky recipient of the "zero tolerance" that the ppa has lobbied for. exactly what I was thinking. |
|
|
|
Post by HamiltonLJ on Apr 27, 2011 18:24:13 GMT -5
Technically. Since my tires stick out from the flares I guess it's not totally legal. But as devil said. I've never had any problem and it's been that way for 5yrs. I will be putting wider flares on it to solve the problem!
|
|
|
|
Post by russ on Apr 27, 2011 21:53:16 GMT -5
You are the lucky recipient of the "zero tolerance" that the ppa has lobbied for. exactly what I was thinking. You can't have it both ways, guys. You can't say, "The violators are only a small percentage of the ORV community-- I'm not one of THEM," and then turn around and cast aspersions on PPA whenever a violator gets cited. |
|
|
|
Post by russ on Apr 28, 2011 5:38:55 GMT -5
NJCF tracked down the source of its errors. Evidently they copied some material from a PPA "Pinelands Watch" publication: www.pinelandsalliance.org/downloads/pinelandsalliance_564.pdf, and failed to do some fact-checking. As you can see, PPA got our name wrong, but PPA was only associating us with points 6-11, and NJCF missed that. Of course, even if you focus only on points 6-11, that doesn't properly describe our origin and purposes. I'll keep trying to get both organizations to correct these innaccuracies. |
|
brad
New Member
Posts: 21
|
Post by brad on Apr 28, 2011 5:40:26 GMT -5
If A = B, and B=C.
Then A=C
In this case,
A=ppa
B="zero tolerance"
C= citations.
|
|
|
|
Post by HamiltonLJ on Apr 28, 2011 15:01:13 GMT -5
No I was not ticketed! I could have been.
It's not the PPA's fought for the citations it's the A-Holes that go out there and tear it up. I just don't understand why the Park Police are busting law abiding citizens balls!
|
|
brad
New Member
Posts: 21
|
Post by brad on Apr 28, 2011 15:34:27 GMT -5
The park police are under pressure due to the ppa's lobbying.
With an average of 10 members and 70-90 guest per 24 period can you understand why?
What, you thought they only did a newsletter? At the NJTLC meeting I attended one of the forest reps clearly stated that the head of the park police was meeting with a Local judge based on on public reccomendations.
Put the pieces together for yourself.
|
|
|
|
Post by gregobrien on Apr 29, 2011 15:49:26 GMT -5
The academic concept of outlining what seems logical and right - then pushing for enforcement of those standards - makes sense on paper, but rarely is carried out the way we would imagine.
TYPICALLY, when push comes to shove and pressure is applied - enforcement of any issue almost universally results in:
1) profiling citizens based on visual characteristics
2) stopping (and sometimes harassing) people that are easily accessible
3) reporting that the 'job is done' and 'the pressure is applied' regardless of whether it affected anything
NJTLC needs to carefully consider the end result of its actions. The pressure we encourage applying will certainly blow back on each of us... one way or the other.
|
|
|
|
Post by gregobrien on Apr 29, 2011 15:53:00 GMT -5
NJCF tracked down the source of its errors. Evidently they copied some material from a PPA "Pinelands Watch" publication: www.pinelandsalliance.org/downloads/pinelandsalliance_564.pdf, and failed to do some fact-checking. As you can see, PPA got our name wrong, but PPA was only associating us with points 6-11, and NJCF missed that. Of course, even if you focus only on points 6-11, that doesn't properly describe our origin and purposes. I'll keep trying to get both organizations to correct these innaccuracies. As a professional courtesy, I would hope (and expect) that from here on out the NJCF, PPA, and all other organizations will contact our coalition *directly* for review of press releases or materials referencing NJTLC at least 30 days prior so the information can be discussed among the GC before approving the information.... such a process needs to be added to the agenda for the next meeting. This is certainly not the first time the PPA and NJCF have released questionable information... they need to be more careful. These types of 'errors' cause rifts between organizations in an already awkward relationship. |
|
|
|
Post by russ on May 1, 2011 7:29:11 GMT -5
As a professional courtesy, I would hope (and expect) that from here on out the NJCF, PPA, and all other organizations will contact our coalition *directly* for review of press releases or materials referencing NJTLC at least 30 days prior so the information can be discussed among the GC before approving the information.... such a process needs to be added to the agenda for the next meeting. It strikes me as unrealistic to try to impose such conditions on all the organizations that are liable to publish information on NJTLC. My recommendation is that in any similar cases that arise, we simply use an informal and personal approach, such as the one I have been using. As I have been indicating in this thread, it seems to have both uncovered the reasons for the innaccuracies, and it has alerted both organizations of the need to double-check their statements. This is certainly not the first time the PPA and NJCF have released questionable information... they need to be more careful. PPA and NJCF are similar to every other organization that we are liable to interact with, in this respect, including ourselves. These types of 'errors' cause rifts between organizations in an already awkward relationship. First of all, as I have already indicated, the errors were inadvertent. I don't think there is a rift between our organizations, only a misunderstanding between some of our members and the conservation community. Also, as I keep trying to emphasize, the goals of our organization, and thus one of the jobs of each member of our Governing Committee, is to work toward understanding and cooperation. |
|
