(In Your State?) ORV - Soil Retention - Carbon? What Da?!!! They're Serious! | OVERLAND BOUND COMMUNITY

(In Your State?) ORV - Soil Retention - Carbon? What Da?!!! They're Serious!

  • Hi Guest, you may choose a LIGHT or DARK theme that works best for you with the "Style Chooser" button at the bottom left on this page!
  • HTML tutorial

MOAK

Rank V
Member

Member II

2,835
Wernersville, PA, USA
First Name
Donald
Last Name
Diehl
Member #

0745

Hmmm, so the person is asking a question. I’m not offended by the question. Seems reasonable to me. However, an honest research effort must prevail. If that happens then people will cherry pick the data they need to enable them to maintain their entrenched opinion. I don’t mind the question, I do mind dishonesty (cherry picking data) being used to manipulate decision makers.
 

NJCoastal

Rank III
Member
Adventure

Enthusiast I

498
Rancocas Woods, Mount Laurel Township, NJ, USA
First Name
Joe
Last Name
Mezick
Member #

29853

Hmmm, so the person is asking a question. I’m not offended by the question. Seems reasonable to me. However, an honest research effort must prevail. If that happens then people will cherry pick the data they need to enable them to maintain their entrenched opinion. I don’t mind the question, I do mind dishonesty (cherry picking data) being used to manipulate decision makers.
I agree. Ambiguous about where the commissioner’s comment will ultimately reveal in future meetings minutes and resolutions. “Requires additional inquiry”.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MOAK

smritte

Rank V
Member

Member III

2,827
Ontario California
First Name
Scott
Last Name
.
Member #

8846

Ham Callsign
KO6BI
Without access to the power point, you cant see if there were pictures of the illegal off road use. It looks like the meeting was about carbon, new pine growth vs old growth and fire. There was mention of grassland and displaced birds. At the end the question was asked if illegal off road use had an impact in this. My first thought is, yes it does. As @MOAK mentioned, one or two pictures presented in the correct light can easily sway a committee. Especially if this person is a good speaker (salesman).

The years I spent doing Adopt a Trail work, these things as well as soil erosion and water contamination issues were brought to the table by "academics" at quite a few of the forest and desert meetings. As much as it pains me to say, they were 100 percent correct. I have been around long enough to see the destruction done by people "blazing trails" with their off road vehicles. The same people screamed when forest service started closing roads. Granted, quite a few of these were made by people cutting trees but the completely trashed meadows, the hill sides where people just drove up repeatedly with nowhere to go, the paths down the center of the creeks was out of control.
This is the ammunition used against off road use, legal or illegal. I attended quite a few meeting where someone put up slide after slide of the devastation "off roaders" did. Of course, it was only the real bad areas but, now who's cherry picking? Back at my club meetings, people were outraged because its our right to drive there. So what if its only one meadow that got destroyed, it wasn't us. Ever seen the pictures of the damage done to the Race Track in Death Valley? How about where someone defaced pictographs that were a thousand years old? Because you had to drive down a long dirt road, off roaders were blamed for it. That's just two that come to mind.

The problem normally isn't the conscious off roader, its the "Yahoo". To this day, they still seem to out number us. With the factories building lifted, locked vehicles, these people have better luck "getting away from the crowds". If that means driving up a stream bed, pushing through the bush's and trees, they have a "set up" vehicle ready to do that. All it takes is someone photographing the one vehicle crashing through the brush, driving up that creek and bringing it to a meeting with the people who's job it is to keep this from happening. One person is enough to get the ball rolling for closure's to start. Once someone puts down a set of tracks, others think that's a legitimate road and follow it to see where it goes. The cycle starts there.

Back to the "meeting minuet's" in the first post, all one can do is hope the illegal off road usage isn't bad enough to force another closure. Too bad it normally does though.
 

NJCoastal

Rank III
Member
Adventure

Enthusiast I

498
Rancocas Woods, Mount Laurel Township, NJ, USA
First Name
Joe
Last Name
Mezick
Member #

29853

Without access to the power point, you cant see if there were pictures of the illegal off road use. It looks like the meeting was about carbon, new pine growth vs old growth and fire. There was mention of grassland and displaced birds. At the end the question was asked if illegal off road use had an impact in this. My first thought is, yes it does. As @MOAK mentioned, one or two pictures presented in the correct light can easily sway a committee. Especially if this person is a good speaker (salesman).

The years I spent doing Adopt a Trail work, these things as well as soil erosion and water contamination issues were brought to the table by "academics" at quite a few of the forest and desert meetings. As much as it pains me to say, they were 100 percent correct. I have been around long enough to see the destruction done by people "blazing trails" with their off road vehicles. The same people screamed when forest service started closing roads. Granted, quite a few of these were made by people cutting trees but the completely trashed meadows, the hill sides where people just drove up repeatedly with nowhere to go, the paths down the center of the creeks was out of control.
This is the ammunition used against off road use, legal or illegal. I attended quite a few meeting where someone put up slide after slide of the devastation "off roaders" did. Of course, it was only the real bad areas but, now who's cherry picking? Back at my club meetings, people were outraged because its our right to drive there. So what if its only one meadow that got destroyed, it wasn't us. Ever seen the pictures of the damage done to the Race Track in Death Valley? How about where someone defaced pictographs that were a thousand years old? Because you had to drive down a long dirt road, off roaders were blamed for it. That's just two that come to mind.

The problem normally isn't the conscious off roader, its the "Yahoo". To this day, they still seem to out number us. With the factories building lifted, locked vehicles, these people have better luck "getting away from the crowds". If that means driving up a stream bed, pushing through the bush's and trees, they have a "set up" vehicle ready to do that. All it takes is someone photographing the one vehicle crashing through the brush, driving up that creek and bringing it to a meeting with the people who's job it is to keep this from happening. One person is enough to get the ball rolling for closure's to start. Once someone puts down a set of tracks, others think that's a legitimate road and follow it to see where it goes. The cycle starts there.

Back to the "meeting minuet's" in the first post, all one can do is hope the illegal off road usage isn't bad enough to force another closure. Too bad it normally does though.
Legitimate points. I plan to continue gathering additional information from the Pinelands Commission's (NJ) future meeting minutes and resolutions to see where it ultimately leads.

Years ago in the 1980s, when I was on our township's Zoning Board of Adjustment, we would have access to the upcoming application packets soon after our monthly meeting so we could prepare for the next meeting. An equivalent to an "executive summary" was part of the packet so we could understand what adjustments the applicants were actually requesting. Granted, zoning boards function differently from land use commissions, but the meeting structures are similar.

I went through the past four years of the Pinelands Commission's public documents (the search feature inside of PDF files is a true time saver) and unless I entered the wrong keywords, I could not find any public meeting statements that would prompt a discussion about the ORV impact on carbon. Only ORV impact on soil retention. Soil retention and carbon are in the same sentence so I included both details in this topic because both are associated with ORV use.

I'm curious about what actually prompted this comment about carbon from the commissioner and what is forthcoming. Stay tuned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MOAK

NJCoastal

Rank III
Member
Adventure

Enthusiast I

498
Rancocas Woods, Mount Laurel Township, NJ, USA
First Name
Joe
Last Name
Mezick
Member #

29853

My experience with statements like that, tell me someone is either misinformed, partially informed or is playing on the ignorance of the group to push an agenda. Its not like we haven't seen that before.
Yep. On the surface the commissioner’s comment is close to the definition of a “dog whistle”. Time will tell.
 

Overlanding Lawyer

Rank II
Member
Adventure

Contributor III

357
Fayetteville, GA, USA
First Name
Tom
Last Name
Kirkbride
Member #

30006

Ham Callsign
K1EOD
Service Branch
Army
Sadly, many are not good ambassadors of the outdoors. Leave no trace (lack of it) is present in every outing I do. Trash, getting off established trails, toilet paper. If everyone in this group committed to bringing out one more bag of trash then you took in, man what a difference.
 

9Mike2

Rank V
Member

Member III

2,741
Garden Grove, California
Member #

2706

This reminds me of what my Bro-in-law told me about a friend who has a sheep farm in the Calif. central valley. He went to a Enviro meeting that the local Tree-huggers wanted to catch and "spade" the trouble Coyotes that he was having trouble with, this went on for an hour of catch and release. When The Farmer got up to talk, had only one thing say, " the Coyotes aren't screwing my sheep, they's eating them"
 

NJCoastal

Rank III
Member
Adventure

Enthusiast I

498
Rancocas Woods, Mount Laurel Township, NJ, USA
First Name
Joe
Last Name
Mezick
Member #

29853

This reminds me of what my Bro-in-law told me about a friend who has a sheep farm in the Calif. central valley. He went to a Enviro meeting that the local Tree-huggers wanted to catch and "spade" the trouble Coyotes that he was having trouble with, this went on for an hour of catch and release. When The Farmer got up to talk, had only one thing say, " the Coyotes aren't screwing my sheep, they's eating them"
I think you're on to figuring out what is actually going on faster than me. Great story! LOL!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9Mike2 and M Rose

NJCoastal

Rank III
Member
Adventure

Enthusiast I

498
Rancocas Woods, Mount Laurel Township, NJ, USA
First Name
Joe
Last Name
Mezick
Member #

29853

Suspicion confirmed: NJ ORV Policy (link)

“Background

The term "off road vehicle" refers to a broad array of vehicles now in use by the public:
  • Any motorized vehicle with two or more wheels or tracks that is capable of being operated off of regularly improved and maintained roads shall be classified as an ORV. This includes all pickup trucks, sport utility vehicles, motor cycles, dirt bikes, all terrain vehicles and snowmobiles.
  • Class I ORVs include all vehicles that are licensed, registered, insured and inspected as required to legally operate on any road or highway of the State designated for vehicle traffic.
  • Class II ORVs includes any vehicle lacking one or more of the criteria needed for operation on any road or highway designated for vehicle traffic. Class II ORVs may be operated on public lands only with a special permit or on private property with the permission of the landowner.
 
Last edited:

NJCoastal

Rank III
Member
Adventure

Enthusiast I

498
Rancocas Woods, Mount Laurel Township, NJ, USA
First Name
Joe
Last Name
Mezick
Member #

29853

Sadly, many are not good ambassadors of the outdoors. Leave no trace (lack of it) is present in every outing I do. Trash, getting off established trails, toilet paper. If everyone in this group committed to bringing out one more bag of trash then you took in, man what a difference.
I like that approach. During the Little League days, when my son was in elementary school, the fathers would attend field work days to repair and improve the ball fields. The township are the property owners and our organization’s role was keeping the fields in good playing shape. Children who were not members of our Little League played on the fields at times when we had no practice or no games. We’re caretakers of the public property regardless of who does the playing. A win-win for everyone.
 
Last edited:

North American Sojourner

Rank III
Member
Adventure

Contributor III

828
Mid-Missouri, MO, USA
First Name
Dave
Last Name
Zimmer
Member #

30139

Service Branch
USN (ret)
My experience with statements like that, tell me someone is either misinformed, partially informed or is playing on the ignorance of the group to push an agenda. Its not like we haven't seen that before.
LOL, Ya think?
First it's NJ. Second, we all need to cut to the chase and admit this is nothing more than a continuation of efforts to hammer shut the entire off road community taking all of drag racing, NASCAR, INDY and everything else with it. If you have time read and understand the RPM act and what it really means for all of us.
Recognizing the Protection of Motorsports Act of 2021 (RPM Act) | Specialty Equipment Market Association (SEMA)
Thanks
Zim
 

NJCoastal

Rank III
Member
Adventure

Enthusiast I

498
Rancocas Woods, Mount Laurel Township, NJ, USA
First Name
Joe
Last Name
Mezick
Member #

29853

LOL, Ya think?
First it's NJ. Second, we all need to cut to the chase and admit this is nothing more than a continuation of efforts to hammer shut the entire off road community taking all of drag racing, NASCAR, INDY and everything else with it. If you have time read and understand the RPM act and what it really means for all of us.
Recognizing the Protection of Motorsports Act of 2021 (RPM Act) | Specialty Equipment Market Association (SEMA)
Thanks
Zim
ALARMING!

Given the evidence about administrations, agencies, and departments restricting our freedoms on numerous fronts, thereby undermining the laws passed by our representatives in Congress, there is a “Hail Mary” option, a true “long shot”.

A bill to “Protect Original Intent, Precedents, And Definitions”

A one size fits all bill to eliminate the erosion of all liberties having been approved by Congress, unless strictly authorized by Congress to do otherwise. The bill would discourage the “PAC MAN” method of infringements.

The Wilderness Act = forever wild.

The Library Act = forever free.

Just a thought
 
Last edited:

North American Sojourner

Rank III
Member
Adventure

Contributor III

828
Mid-Missouri, MO, USA
First Name
Dave
Last Name
Zimmer
Member #

30139

Service Branch
USN (ret)
ALARMING!

Given the evidence about administrations, agencies, and departments restricting our freedoms on numerous fronts, thereby undermining the laws passed by our representatives in Congress, there is a “Hail Mary” option, a true “long shot”.

A bill to “Protect Original Intent, Precedents, And Definitions”

A one size fits all bill to curtail the erosion of all liberties having been approved by Congress, unless strictly authorized by Congress to do otherwise. The bill would discourage the “PAC MAN” method of infringements.

Just a thought
EPA is killing it. Case in point.
PFI speed shop out of Colorado sold 26 ECM'S (engine control modules) that had been modified (by the company that made them). All PFI did was sell the ECM. They were charged $180,000 for the infraction. If you have a diesel truck and add a bullydog chip to enhance fuel mileage, you are guilty of modifying a ECM and can be charged.
There are many cases out there right now.
It's only the beginning.
Zim
 

NJCoastal

Rank III
Member
Adventure

Enthusiast I

498
Rancocas Woods, Mount Laurel Township, NJ, USA
First Name
Joe
Last Name
Mezick
Member #

29853

Update 10.26.2021: §100101. Promotion and regulation (NPS)

"§100101. Promotion and regulation
(a) In General.—The Secretary, acting through the Director of the National Park Service, shall promote and regulate the use of the National Park System by means and measures that conform to the fundamental purpose of the System units, which purpose is to conserve the scenery, natural and historic objects, and wild life in the System units and to provide for the enjoyment of the scenery, natural and historic objects, and wild life in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."

Policies supersede laws passed by Congress? We’re in BIG TROUBLE!

The entire thought process is skewed because they’re not anchored to the original intent of our natural resources. Primarily set aside for people to enjoy our forests and parks in the outdoor settings.

The original intent is NOT to keep people indoors where health issues are prevalent, but outdoors using whatever mobility available to the citizens allowing us to remain healthy.

Check out how automobiles were the catalyst for the expansion of national parks and forests.

How does one enjoy the outdoors if the outdoors is restricted? A contradiction not conforming to the original intent.

Original Intent (how it all began): (outdoors is for "enjoyment" - no mention of "keep out")

“… and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations. (U.S.C., title 16, sec. 1.)” (1st paragraph last sentence)

AN ACT TO ESTABLISH A NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES, Approved August 25, 1916 (39 Stat. 535)
 

Attachments

Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 9Mike2

NJCoastal

Rank III
Member
Adventure

Enthusiast I

498
Rancocas Woods, Mount Laurel Township, NJ, USA
First Name
Joe
Last Name
Mezick
Member #

29853

EPA is killing it. Case in point.

PFI speed shop out of Colorado sold 26 ECM'S (engine control modules) that had been modified (by the company that made them). All PFI did was sell the ECM. They were charged $180,000 for the infraction.

If you have a diesel truck and add a bullydog chip to enhance fuel mileage, you are guilty of modifying a ECM and can be charged.

There are many cases out there right now.

It's only the beginning.

Zim
Another overreach problem created by the EPA. The EPA entered too far into the trees so now they're unable to see the forest. Your example is another series of unrealistic expectations.