• Home
• Opinion
• Press Editorials

The problems posed by all-terrain vehicles, or ATVs, are not new. Let's recap:

First, there are only a handful of places to ride ATVs legally in New Jersey. It is illegal to ride them on all state-owned land such as parks, refuges and wildlife areas. It is, of course, illegal to ride them on private land without permission.

Second, because there are so few places to legally ride ATVs - motorcycle-like vehicles designed for off-road use, often with three wheels - illegal riding is rampant.

Third, the rampant illegal riding has caused significant destruction in the Pine Barrens and other natural areas. The powerful vehicles destroy vegetation and habitat and tear up trail beds. In 2002, the state Department of Environmental Protection said 340,000 acres of public land had been affected by these vehicles; at one point, the department was spending approximately $900,000 per year on enforcement and restoration work tied to ATV use.

Fourth, the Legislature has been diddling with this issue for years.

We have little sympathy for ATV enthusiasts. One bill currently in the Legislature - versions of it have been kicking around for years - would increase ATV registration fees and fines for illegal riding. Another bill would require the DEP to designate three areas around the state for legal ATV riding. ATV enthusiasts are apparently a powerful enough special interest - go figure - that lawmakers have agreed to link the bills and approve the bill increasing fees and fines only if the parks bill is approved.

But the DEP has been trying for years to find suitable sites for legal ATV riding. It's not easy. The Egg Harbor Township Police Athletic League operates one ATV area. Dale Freitas, head of the New Jersey Off Highway Vehicle Association, has been trying to get zoning approval for an ATV park in Little Egg Harbor Township that would get DEP funding.

ATV enthusiasts say the state has a responsibility to provide legal places to ride the machines if it is going to collect registration fees for them. We're not so sure of that. The registration crackdown is needed to help enforce the law against illegal riding.

State taxpayers have no obligation to subsidize this hobby. The fact that there is just about no place to ride an ATV legally in New Jersey always seemed to us to be a darn good argument for not buying an ATV in the first place.

If you want to buy one and tear up your own backyard, have a ball. But the rest of us don't want our natural areas destroyed by illegal ATV riding and don't understand why we have any obligation to provide legal places to ride a machine that you knew had very limited use when you bought it.

60 comments:

• hylaandersonii2 (17) posts 8:23 pm

  Informed, not sure about your latest post, but here's a brief response to your previous. I don't know who is accountable for the $900,000. I will see if I can find out. Also, you say, "It is a shame that we all can't just enjoy life in our own way without others always interjecting what they think is right. I think we all deserve to enjoy what we like about life so please instead of trying to do away with ATVs let's agree that we need to make a legal area where ATVs can be used." I hope you understand that if it weren't for the outlaw and irresponsible element among the riders, there would be no issue. No one deserves to enjoy ruining beautiful vegetation and wildlife communities, especially when it happens on land that we all own in common. I hope we do find a place for legal use of ATV's, but we can't trade valuable wildlife habitat for motorized recreation.

• Informed (4) posts 3:05 pm

  Can I ask why my most recent remark was not posted?

• Carleton_Montgomery (1) posts 10:23 am

  There's an awful lot of misinformation about the issue and about Pinelands Preservation Alliance in this string. Suggest people go to our web site (wwww.pinelandsalliance.org) to see what our positions really are! On the Stafford Business Park, PPA fought the development tooth and nail (where were the riders?), but we lost. When we realized our legal challenge had little chance of ultimate success due to the Pinelands Commission's bizarre dedication to making that development happen, we settled on the conditon Walters Group pay $1 million to the Natural Lands Trust for land acquisition in the Barnegat Bay Watershed. Not a penny goes to PPA! Problem is, Walters Group has now defaulted on the third installment of that money, claiming it cannot afford to meet its legal obligations due to the economy. We don't have a lot of sympathy, since Walters Group is still suing towns to get more development approvals.

• hylaandersonii2 (17) posts 5:35 pm

  Lou, thanks for the clarification. Apology accepted. I'm not interested in debating PPA's actions with respect to the Stafford Business Park, but I do encourage you to do more research into the public record on that topic.

• LouToti (33) posts 9:58 am

  hylaandersonii2, My mistake and I apologize. It was a settlement not a donation! the amount was $1,000,000 not $2,000,000. http://www.nj.gov/dep/njnlt/pdf/annualreport2007.pdf If I remember the NJ Pinelands Commission approved the project and your group as well as another group brought litigation against the parties involved. Stafford agreed to pay $1,000,000 in a settlement so they could move forward with the Stafford Business Park project. There was also some controversy over the settlement and what should be done with the money. So a recommendation was made to establish a “Threatened & Endangered Species Conservation Fund.” I also saw your name in one of the articles and I'm sure you can shed more light on why it was to agree to a settlement instead or fighting and preserving the habitat and animals that were part of that project?

• hylaandersonii2 (17) posts 8:37 pm

  Lou, you ought to get your facts straight before making these kinds of allegations publicly. What is your source for the claim: "10 years later Mayor Block and a local developer proposed building the Stafford Commons Retail Site and again your group opposed it at first, but backed down after The Developer and the Township agreed to make a $2,000,000+ donation to your organization." That's a pretty serious allegation, and one that I know for a fact is false. Back up your claim. Who gave $2,000,000 to who?

• SnoDrtRider (7) posts 5:38 pm

  Quote... Dude, it's a newspaper editorial. The paper's editorial staff, in this case The Press of Atlantic City's editorial staff, wrote it. Not all editorials are written by staff writers and even if they were they should identify themselves or the source of the article, opinion or information.

• SnoDrtRider (7) posts 5:38 pm

  Quote... Dude, it's a newspaper editorial. The paper's editorial staff, in this case The Press of Atlantic City's editorial staff, wrote it. Not all editorials are written by staff writers and even if they were they should identify themselves or the source of the article, opinion or information.

• kennedy (204) posts 3:31 pm

  ****Who wrote this editorial? Are they afraid to sign their name to this very biased work?**** Dude, it's a newspaper editorial. The paper's editorial staff, in this case The Press of Atlantic City's editorial staff, wrote it.

• quadracer85st (6) posts 1:14 pm

  Russel, im am certainly not in denial of the legal processes for this project to get up and running, im am in the business of building schools, like the new egg harbor city middle /elementary school, new pemberton school,egg harbor twp high school addition, woolrich municipal building, swedesboro elementary and middle schools just to name a few. so i am familiar with the zoning processes, etc. and i am for environmental protection, if not then this state would be full of housing developments and shopping malls. but i feel we are being denied this project for the wrong reasons. every site that seems to be proposed we feel is shot down for discrimination reasons. we find old gravel pits, sand mines, places that have the least economical impact as we can, to propose these parks. and it seems every time, its shot down. if these sites are not approved than what other places are their to be suitable for this to happen,we truly are trying to accommodate. we clear entire land and bring in fill to build school projects, pour concrete with silica and aggregate into the ground to be there long after any of us are around in an area that is all woods at one point. but its ok because of the sda and the state has a hand in it. but it seems we can never find a suitable area that is already open and clear for the state to accept an ohv park. im not trying to compare the education system to off roading, but the theory is the same. the more population of one group the more sites there has to be to accommodate them. and right now off roading seems to be overpopulated. would it be better to propose on wet lands, pine lands, etc. i dont expect environmentalist to turn there backs but to have an understanding, this proposed plan should be considered an an education facility as well as an ohv park. its no suprise that some off roaders need to be educated before throwing a leg over these machines, which is one of the intentions of this park. to educate and be in a controlled safe environment that is safe and legal in the process. i know that the state doesn't want this to happen, because it is more difficult, they just want to increase fines laws etc, and be done with it, but just like you, we will not walk away without a fight. we are more than willing to play ball but no one will play the first inning with us.

• Informed (4) posts 12:36 pm

  After reading this article I must ask. Where is the $900,000 renovation of destroyed land going on? I have been riding throughout southern NJ since I was a boy and I can tell you I have never seen any area that we have ridden on be restored or even cared about after we were kicked off. All of the old trails all have regrowth on them from natures own doing not from any human input. I would have to say like most taxpayer money in this state that the supposed $900,000 was spent on fattening the pockets of the politicians instead of doing any real good. It is a shame that we all can't just enjoy life in our own way without others always interjecting what they think is right. I think we all deserve to enjoy what we like about life so please instead of trying to do away with ATVs let's agree that we need to make a legal area where ATVs can be used. This could only be good for everyone. More state revenue in registration, insurance, park fees, and even the taxes fromt he increase in sales of ATVs due to somewhere to use them. Why can't the naysayers see that the ATV industry creates jobs (sales, park rangers, park attendants, etc...), tax money to help lower everyone's taxes, and a way for some people to stay out of real trouble like drugs and crime. Please rethink your position on this if you are against ATVs having a legal place to ride in this state.

• cincrft1 (31) posts 12:23 pm

  Russell, the problem is that there is a demand for this sport and not place to go legally. Each side needs to understand the other sides position. I am sure if we do this we can come to some kind of aggreement and solution for illegal riding. I am willing to try......

• LouToti (33) posts 11:54 am

  Russell, Living down here in LEH we've seen all kinds of issues as far as what groups like yours oppose and what they roll over for. Stafford Commons which was the old Stafford dump is one that comes to mind. The NJDEP as well as a group of OHV enthusiast proposed that location as a suitable OHV park. If I remember your group as well as Mayor Block opposed that site so the OHV park didn't happen there. 10 years later Mayor Block and a local developer proposed building the Stafford Commons Retail Site and again your group opposed it at first, but backed down after The Developer and the Township agreed to make a $2,000,000+ donation to your organization. Yes there were all kinds of threatened and endangered spices on that property, but your group made an exception and this was in the Pinelands preservation zone same as the Sahara Sand Monroe location. Unfortunately don't believe the people developing the LEH OHV park have $2,000,000 to donate to your cause, so I guess that's why Fred and Theresa are at all the meetings?

• hylaandersonii2 (17) posts 7:13 am

  Lou: I will look into this business of what is going on around Chatsworth right now, but I'm not sure what we are trying to determine. You are saying now that the park is closed there is no illegal riding in the vicinity? Cindy: I agree that we should learn to work as a team and get this problem taken care of. Question is, how do we define the problem and what is the appropriate goal. If the goal is for conservationists to not oppose plans to set up a park, then we have to select a site that doesn't have conservation issues. SDR: These kinds of exaggerations are not helpful. Let's focus on specific cases and specific issues. Quadracer: This is not a dispute about fundamental rights and American freedom. Most of us are not opposed to having parks. You have to accept the reality, though, that if you propose to put a specific kind of development in a specific place, then people are going to examine that place and evaluate the potential impacts. That's what happens when anyone proposes to develop any piece of land. Again, you can wish the conservationists in the state would look the other way, but it just isn't going to happen. Pick an appropriate site, and you can build a park. If you are having a hard time finding an appropriate site, that's because you are proposing a high-intensity use for a big piece of land. It should be no surprise that you are going to have to confront the realities of environmental issues.

• quadracer85st (6) posts 7:38 pm

  quote from jfk "The world is very different now. For man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human life. And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe -- the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God.".................. jfk "the rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened."............... abraham lincoln “Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves.”........... abraham lincoln “The dichotomy between personal liberties and property rights is a false one. Property does not have rights. People have rights.”.......... russel, we must all learn to work together and co-exist with one anothers viewpoints. to get a little, a little must be given. if not then this is nothing more than a constant climb to see who gets to the top first. neither party will ever be happy unless there is an ohv park and illegal riding has slowly diminished. a park will help stop most illegal offroading. its a win - win situation both parties must listen to the others, for this to be accomplished. lets not forget that this country is about freedom and democracy, where a lion and a lamb and sit down and talk about what there going to have for lunch. not the lion eating the lamb.-steve

• SnoDrtRider (7) posts 6:29 pm

  It's always the same old story... If I owned 200 acres of farmland and decided to open an Off Road Park when I went before my town board for the variance to change land use Fred and his cronies would show up and claim that some plant or animal would be endangered even though for the past 50 years the ground has been plowed, fertilized, sprayed for insects, etc, etc , etc. just to keep Off Road Vehicle enthusiasts from enjoying their chosen sport.

• cincrft1 (31) posts 5:29 pm

  Russell, ok, well maybe I am not as aware of those things like you and your fellow followers. But I would like to think that I do have some common sense about things and anything is possible if we could just learn to work as a team and get this problem taken care of. I sure that we can come to some agreement - it can not be all one sided. Please.........

• LouToti (33) posts 5:17 pm

  Russell, First your group is making claims that there is a increase of unlawful ATV use around the Chatsworth ATV park! This is false!!!! Drive around the park and through Woodland township, what you will see is GRASS and SMALL TREES GROWING IN ALL THE TRAILS! In the pine barrens it takes YEARS FOR PLANTS TO REESTABLISH HABITAT and by them growing in the old ATV trails on ALL THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES is proof that the activity doesn't exist in the areas surrounding the park as your associates keep saying. PLEASE TELL THE TRUTH and ADMIT THE CHATSWORTH ORP WORKED!!!!

• hylaandersonii2 (17) posts 4:45 pm

  Cindy I don't mean to imply that you don't care about the environment. However, it may be that you are not fully aware of the impacts of motorized traffic on wildlife communities. I would invite you to research this matter. A site like the former park at Chatsworth probably does not affect the local deer population, but we have to take into account the entire ecological community, not just a few of the abundant species like deer. And environmentally sensitive land certainly IS a problem for any kind of developer. Just ask a few of them who have had their plans denied by the Pinelands Commission. Yes, some of them get away with murder. But if they do, it isn't because the conservation community is willing to walk away from the fight.

• cincrft1 (31) posts 3:56 pm

  Russell, Well, just because we ride does not mean that we don't care about the environment. It can not be all one way here.I am not asking them to look the other way but maybe they can help to locate and find a place that would be more suitable. Use their knowledge so that both sides are happy and get along. If every piece of land is environmentally sensitive then how come this is not a problem for builders or construction companys. Ok for them but not us. You know I have been at Chatsworth @ 7 am waiting for them to open and have seen wildlife on the track. We were feeding the deer while we were eating at the picnic table. Everyone and everything can learn to share this beautiful country we have. Tomorrow is not promised to anyone... PS: my grand daughter is going to be 10 and is waiting in line for her turn to learn how to ride as her mother (my daughter) did. Just as her Uncle Nicky does. We are making family memories..........

• hylaandersonii2 (17) posts 3:44 pm

  Lou, if you will give me a specific case misleading or false statements that have come from any of my associates, I will be happy to address the matter. As for the reduction of illegal ORV activity in Egg Harbor, if that is indeed true, it would be the result of a combination of the park as well as enforcement. If we can get that combination going in more places, I think that would be great. But, as we have all seen, creating an ORV park is no small task. The difficulties are inherent in the type of activity involved. If there are environmental issues with a piece of land, you can't blame the conservationists for pointing that out. The realities are what they are. Don't blame the messenger.

• hylaandersonii2 (17) posts 3:32 pm

  Cindi, I sincerely hope that some parks get built, for the sake of riders like your son, but I doubt there could ever be enough legal riding space in NJ to satisfy all the riders. And you can't expect citizens who care about the natural resources of the state to just look the other way and let parks be built on environmentally sensitive land. For that reason, I cannot see the establishment of parks as a remedy for the illegal activity. It may help a little.

• cincrft1 (31) posts 2:17 pm

  hylaandersonii2, Russell It may be a complex topic but a necessary one and I really do think that having a legal and safe place to go would indeed reduce the amount of illegal riding. My family is the third generation of us riding and now we have introduced our son to it. Now here is a kid that gets A's & B's, has his own lawn cutting business and is 16. This sport has taught him to believe in himself and to trust and respect his limits. He knows his atv is not a toy and how important safty is. I know that he misses riding at Chatsworth and wants to go back to his hobby / sport. Knowing how much enjoyment Nick gets from riding I also enjoy the fact that I know under his helment he is wearing a smile from ear to ear. This is his recreation and dream - and I as his mother will keep pushing to help make this happen.

• LouToti (33) posts 2:13 pm

  hylaandersonii2, no one said they are opposed to registration enforcement, fines and penalties. As an owner of property that was being trespassed I too would want something to be done, but I also feel that just fining someone isn't going to stop it from happening again. I also think If there was an off-road park in the area I wouldn't have any problems with trespassing as is the case in Egg Harbor township where they have a a PAL sponsored ATV park and have all but eliminate unlawful use of ATVs in their community. As anyone from Chatsworth and they will tell you that the park eliminated ATV traffic there. ATV parks work and you can't hold 1% of those that cause the problem from the other 99% that want to do thing right.

• LouToti (33) posts 2:00 pm

  Russell, buying land isn't that easy! the problem is even if you own the land you still have to get permission to use the land for off-road recreation and to do that you have to get a USE VARIANCE. The only people exempt of local oversight is the state which owns 25% of all the land in the state. The model of buying and developing a park is happening right now by a group right here in LEH. Only problem is people from your community like Fred Akers are trying to tie-up the meetings with misleading and false statements about the Chatsworth park and everyone that's attended the meeting have witnessed it. What's troublesome is Fred's and Theresa aren't even LEH residents and the proposed ORP isn't in the preservation area of the pine barrens. The feeling many from the off-road community is getting is your community isn't interested protecting the environment, just controlling it and it's just a delay tactic on your groups part with the hopes that those supporting the off-road park project just give up and go away. Hopefully the off-road people stick with it, because there's overwhelming support down here in LEH for such a park.

• hylaandersonii2 (17) posts 1:54 pm

  Lou, if you owned a piece of land, and people insisted on trespassing on it, and you couldn't get effective law enforcement, and you put up signs, and the criminals kept tearing them down, and you put up fences, and they tore down the fences, and you tried blocking the routes, and they kept going around or tearing up your blockades, what would you do?

• hylaandersonii2 (17) posts 1:47 pm

  Cindi, thanks for the reply. Good to hear that you are on the legal side, and that you try to discourage the outlaw elements. Obviously, the establishment of parks is a complex topic. Even if they can be established, though, do you think that having a few parks available would reduce the amount of illegal riding out there?

• LouToti (33) posts 1:09 pm

  hylaandersonii2, I was there the day your group was cutting down the trees at the Chatsworth off-road park. I still remember seeing Fred Akers there smiling and laughing with a chain saw as well as others from your group with the same enthusiasm. My son asked me why they were cutting down the trees and I said they were returning the property back to nature. He looked at me somewhat confused and asked how is cutting down trees preserving nature? I looked at him and I have to say that as an adult that was the first time I didn't have answer for him. We just drove out of the off-road park with our two dirt bikes on the trailer to our home in Little Egg Harbor.

• cincrft1 (31) posts 12:59 pm

  Russell, The federal gov has set aside money for this type of sport. The DEP bought a peice of land in Monroe Twp and you will never guess what happened. Low and behold they are now rare plants and animals according to Fred Ackers. That project cost the state over 1 million dollars and we still can not use that land either. Oh but let me be a builder for a neighborhood or strip mall and those plants and animals would mean nothing.

• cincrft1 (31) posts 12:55 pm

  hylaandersonii2, Russell You are correct, our atv is legal. I am outraged that they cut down "new" trees instead of all of the ones that have all ready fallen on their own. Did anyone climb those tress to see if there was anything "rare" living on the tree before it was cut down? No - I saw them with those chain saws in the woods cutting stuff down the last two weeks before the park was even closed. Chatsworth should have been in my opinion been left open and allowed to operate as usual until another place was located. How do you know that I am "not" outraged at some of those out there breaking the laws, and let me tell you something I have stopped people while riding in the woods by my house and told them about how I feel and that they need to join us in finding a legal place to ride and get their bikes legal. You see I live near woods and I have people that do not live in my developement that come and unload and go and ride and I will go a say something to them just as I would say something to someone driving while on the phone, cutting me off on rt 295 and 42. I guess my mistake is that I think everyone else has the same values and morals as myself and they don't. I am a law abiding citizen and I am not afraid to speak my mind. Why can't everyone get together and try and find a solution to this mess. Dale has been working with Little Egg Harbor twp to get a place open but this is becoming another yet policital battle that does not need to be. The longer it takes to open a new location the more damage that is being done. The worst or two evils is what? What lenghts will the environmental groups go to before they realize that they are part of the problem of not having a legal place to ride as well. This sport is not meant for everyone but it is what we enjoy doing and we would like to get an equal use of the land in this state for "our" sport/hobby. Every try riding an ORV?

• hylaandersonii2 (17) posts 12:36 pm

  Cindi, why don't you and your fellow law-abiding riders pool your resources, get in touch with a real estate agent, and buy or lease a piece of land where you can do your sport?

• cincrft1 (31) posts 12:10 pm

  hylaandersonii2, I invite the landowners in our battle to open a park so we can and will have a legal and safe place to ride. I am sorry that there are outlaw riders as you call them but that is not "ALL" of us. It is just like there are some people that will abide by the laws while driving and some don't. Speeding, phone, wreckless driving, driving while drunk...... not everyone is perfect and neither are you. You may not enjoy this sport but we do and we just want to be able to have an equal share of the land for us just has every other sport or hobby has. So instead of causing this mess to continue and more damage done, why don't you step up to the plate and help to come up with a solution to this mess so that both sides can get along.......

• hylaandersonii2 (17) posts 12:09 pm

  Cindi, come on, it's no big mystery. It's not that hard to navigate past the screen names. My name's Russell, and I work for PPA. Now, would you please explain why you are so outraged that NJCF had to create blockades to try to keep outlaw riders from trespassing? And, since presumably you are among the law-abiding, why you are not outraged that some of your fellow riders are giving you a black eye because of their illegal activities?

• hylaandersonii2 (17) posts 12:05 pm

  Cindi, come on, it's no big mystery. It's not that hard to navigate past the screen names. My name's Russell, and I work for PPA. Now, would you please explain why you are so outraged that NJCF had to create blockades to try to keep outlaw riders from trespassing? And, since presumably you are among the law-abiding, why you are not outraged that some of your fellow riders are giving you a black eye because of their illegal activities?

• cincrft1 (31) posts 11:36 am

  Lou, are you kidding with those pictures of Chatsworth? This is a disgrace. A bunch of selfish people - that was once my son's 2nd home. I did notice that the person / persons that dumped those tires there should have at least made them dirty so it looks like they have been there for a while considering all of the dust and everything from the riders. I was there after the park closed and this is indeed not how it was left. This is really making me mad - those that did this are not any better then the outlaw atv/dirt bike riders. Lou, did you ever find out who hylaandersonii2 group is, did you? He would not tell?

• hylaandersonii2 (17) posts 11:08 am

  Hi Lou. I'm glad you shared that photo album with us, because it helps to highlight a couple of important points. First, NJ Conservation Foundation had a legal contract with the folks who were leasing that property. That contract stipulated that the park had to be closed down at a certain point in time. From everything I have heard, the folks who were leasing that property were part of the LAW-ABIDING element of the ATV/ORV/OHV community, and they followed through with their legal obligation to close the park down. However, as we all know, there is also an OUTLAW element of the ATV/ORV/OHV community, and they cannot be trusted to stay off properties where they are not allowed. Since it is very hard to apprehend these perpetrators of criminal trespass (a fact many of them freely admit with great pride), landowners are compelled to go to great lengths to find ways to block access to the properties. I seriously doubt that any of them enjoy having to invest all that time and effort. Nor do any of them relish the idea of dropping trees, in an effort to form a blockade. This becomes a big challenge when the landowners find that some of the perpetrators of criminal trespass are so determined to continue to trespass, they not only circumvent the blockades, but also tear down or haul away the blockages. Perhaps, since you are apparently well acquainted with the ATV/ORV/OHV community, you can offer advice as to how landowners can find economically feasible ways to discourage such cases of criminal trespass.

• LouToti (33) posts 9:25 am

  hylaandersonii2, If people such as you and your organization care so much about protecting the environment then how do you account for what your organization did to the Chatsworth off-road park after it closed. The destruction that your organization did to the property is thousands of times worse than any ATV could ever do. Here's an album of photos of what you're group did to the property all in the name of keeping ATVs out and protecting the environment! http://s491.photobucket.com/albums/rr275/njorvp2009 Talk about destruction:

• hylaandersonii2 (17) posts 10:00 pm

  Lou, which organization is immaterial to the specific points I have made. You suggested that certain portions of state lands should be open for ORV recreation. I have given you specific reasons why I think that is not an acceptable proposal.

• LouToti (33) posts 9:02 pm

  hylaandersonii2, so what organization are you with?

• hylaandersonii2 (17) posts 2:38 pm

  Lou, you ignore the factual points I offer, and try to change the subject. I'm not interested in the bait. You don't need to invent far-fetched convoluted motivations for the conservation community when the obvious reasons are plain to see. People who care about our natural resources don't trust the ORV recreation community, because the ORV recreation community--by and large--seems unable to confront certain facts about the impacts of their chosen form of entertainment. The sizable law-breaking element within the group has repeatedly shown flagrant disregard for their fellow citizens, for law enforcement, and for natural resources. A few bad apples among an overwhelming majority of decent law-abiding recreationists? Perhaps, but if that is so, it defies the evidence and logic. And even if it were true, those "few" bad guys are part of your club. If you can't rein them in, then their reputation tarnishes yours.

• LouToti (33) posts 2:00 pm

  hylaandersonii2, your argument is the same as that of Fred Akers! Which would imply that it's coming from the same circle of people. As you can see over the last year there has been very little if any press on New Jersey ATV issues in any of the regions Newspapers. Then all of a sudden there's two stories a day! Why is that? Maybe it's because organizations such as yours have a well managed PR machine that's focused on bringing attention to a non-issues such as ATV use. Maybe it’s something your group can hang their hat on, by saying “hey look we banned ATVs in New Jersey!” It’s also funny how this seems to be a well coordinated effort and it's happening right before the state legislator summer recess ends and the decision makers up in Trenton reconvene and Isn’t there some legislation about ATVs pending up at the state house? All this press wouldn’t have something to do with that? Would it?

• hylaandersonii2 (17) posts 11:24 am

  Lou, I didn't say the ATV community IS an outlaw group. The ATV/ORV/OHV community is composed of both law-abiding and law-breaking elements. The problem is that the REPUTATION of the group has been ruined by the law-breakers. In my own neighborhood I routinely see people running down the road on ATV's in order to trespass on local lands. That's illegal. Out in the state forests I routinely come across evidence of people riding off the designated roads. That's illegal. I know dozens of people who would readily confirm that riders have made hundreds of mud-holes out of what used to be globally rare plant and wildlife communities. That's illegal. I don't see such evidence of routine illegal activity by any other user group. I can't imagine how you could spend any time out there and NOT SEE the evidence of this illegal activity. You may try to minimize it, or you may try to excuse it (these are the typical responses by so many riders--the ones who are part of the problem) but to deny that it is happening is just simply not credible.

• LouToti (33) posts 9:40 am

  hylaandersonii2, First the ATV community is not and Outlaw group and the only people that perpetuate that myth is those from the environmental community. I keep hearing about unlawful ATV use and damage, but anytime I'm in any of the wildlife management areas of state forest I have yet to see any signs of their activity as in tire tracks. Even around the old Chatsworth NJ off-road park all the trails with woopdeedoos have grass and trees growing in them which would imply that the park was a success and any unlawful riding that might have occurred there in the past is long gone. As far as people riding ATVs in rural communities it's pretty much a way of life out here replacing pickup trucks which use to be the means of transportation 30 years ago. Actually the only time I run into ATVs in the woods is during hunting season and that's with some 50+ year old guy tending to his feed lots. Also there was an article yesterday about a two day state police crackdown in Buena Vista where they used state police Helicopters and over a two days period they only were able to write six summons. Yes they recovered a stolen bicycle, but that seems like a lot of tax payers money to spend recover stolen bicycle. Point is the off-road parks work! In every state where an off-road vehicle program that included off-road parks was put into effect the use of off-road vehicles on public and private land drastically decreased. Off-Road Parks Work!

• hylaandersonii2 (17) posts 1:16 pm

  The reason we don't want ATV's to have (legal) access to state land is because the ORV community has developed a reputation as an outlaw group, so, as a group, they cannot be trusted. You don't get respect by saying, in effect, "Hey, we are going to keep being outlaws until we get what we want." You get respect by behaving decently first, and using legal means to try to get what you want. Besides, everyone knows that the ORV community would not be satisfied with a few hundred acres here and there. Why should they be? Too many of them are outlaws, and they will go wherever they please until they have to pay unpleasant consequences.

• LouToti (33) posts 9:09 am

  Pinesboi, I don't think that's what anyone that rides ATVs is saying. What everyone is saying is we want to be accountable for what we do and we’re willing to pay registration and user fees to do it. All we're asking is if you're going to charge us registration and user fees give use something in return like state land which we've all paid for to ride on. There's more people riding ATVs in the state than all the hikers combined, but those opposed to ATVs don't want the ATVs to have access to state land. We're not asking for access to all state land just a few hundred acres here and there. That's no much considering to ask considering that the state owns close to a million acres in New Jersey and none of it generates any revenue for the state or New Jersey residents. Think about it, give up some land and you eliminate the problem and the state generates revenue as well as tourism dollars... Hey it’s eco-tourism! Can’t be any Greener than that!

• rmannlefty (2) posts 9:22 pm

  Pinesboi, thats a very interesting and grown up opinion you present. Mr. Akers, is this the type of people you represent?

• Pinesboi (10) posts 5:06 pm

  Don't tell me what i can do with my ATV. After all I paid for it and it's mine. I'll ride on your private property, tear up your land, violate No Trespassing signs, start fires and scare off the wildlife. I'll waste precious resources - time, fuel and the environment so I can get some cheap thrills. Remember - it's my atv and I'll do what I want with it.

• SnoDrtRider (7) posts 5:17 pm

  Who wrote this editorial? Are they afraid to sign their name to this very biased work? I partially agree that people who by these machines should be sure they have a place to ride them legally but once the state starts charging to register them they should also provide access to a place to ride them. I'm not saying the state should foot the bill to develop and run riding areas but they should clear the way of all the obstructions thrown up by the tree huggers and all of the other Fred Ackers clones out there that find fault with every area public or private that someone tries to turn into a legal riding area.

• cccjjn (19) posts 8:02 am

  This was once a free country. I have not been on a motorcycle in 20+ years but when I was in my teens nobody bothered you and nobody really cared. There were trails all along route 55 that could take you anywhere from Malaga to Port Elizabeth. It is a real shame for the youth of today that we have become such a nation of buzy bodies. People should learn to mind their own business. If they are not riding on your property, who the heck cares? Mind your own business! If you don't want people riding on property that you actually own post it and enforce it. Cut this saving nature crap as well. All this is about is people jelous over others who are out having fun. Mind your own business people. This was once a free country.

• LouToti (33) posts 7:58 am

  Thrillcrafter, I have to ask this question, how is it that THIS editorial sounds like it was picked up (word for word) from one of your press releases? I can't imagine that a fine paper like the Press of Atlantic City's would write a one sided editorial that was based on content, lies and distorted facts from your organizations press releases on ATVs. I'm under the impression that this isn't about ATVs at all, but the total control of what anyone can do on public and private land as your organization advocates.

• cincrft1 (31) posts 10:09 pm

  Thrillcrafter - Mr. Fred Akers, Where are you coming from - false claims, social threats and fear tactics used by atv riders. It may be your position to keep the natural areas and that is good but you need to share - equal rights for the use of this land and it does not all belong to the environmental community. Let me come in with millions of dollars to make a strip mall or housing developments and that would not be an issue. Ok lets see - now that this issue is knocking on our doors and everyone concerned can accept that fact that this is a problem but you do not want to be part of the solution. Fred, you can do better trying to help move this along instead of keep fighting with us. Come to terms that this is not your type of sport but it is ours. What makes your reasons better then ours? You are part of the wasteful spending that it is causing everyone to try and state his or her case and stay in front of everyone else. That zoning meeting was a big joke - keep asking dumb questions and keep dragging thing out time and time again. And all the time while this big game of who is going to win more and more damage is being done to hurt the environment. But just remember one thing - not everyone rides illegal and I resent the fact that you imply that we do. You talk about corruption and myths around this proposed park in LEHT and the fact that the atv riders are terrified of the registration and enforcement bill. Get your head out of your butt. Here is an idea - once the park is open it will be a requirement to register your bike before riding. It's that simple. When you pay for something you always get something in return. This group is no different. You need to only speak your mind and not make it sound like everyone is one your side. Fred, thanks for caring for the environment but back off and let the system work. We as a group just want a safe and legal place to ride - What the heck is wrong with that. And just let me inform you of something - ATV'S are NOT THE ONLY ONES riding illegally in the woods. Jump off the ban wagon with your grudge against ATV's. Be part of the solution not part of the problem. oh yea - by the way we are registered - the dealer did it for us ......

• Thrillcrafter (2) posts 8:16 pm

  You can try to fool a lot of people, but evidently you cannot fool the Press of AC Editors on the ATV issue. This was their position in the past, and obviously they are not impressed by all the false claims, social threats, and fear tactics continually used by the illegal ATV operators. In fact, they are even stronger in their position for law and order than before, and I quote: “illegal riding is rampant”, “rampant illegal riding has caused significant destruction in the Pine Barrens and other natural areas”, “the Legislature has been diddling with this issue for years”, “We have little sympathy for ATV enthusiasts”, “ATV enthusiasts are apparently a powerful enough special interest - go figure - that lawmakers have agreed to link the bills and approve the bill increasing fees and fines only if the parks bill is approved”, “ATV enthusiasts say the state has a responsibility to provide legal places to ride the machines if it is going to collect registration fees for them. We're not so sure of that. The registration crackdown is needed to help enforce the law against illegal riding.” There is no question that these folks are not fooled by all the ATV myths and lies. They understand that we already have a whole generation of ATV kids and ATV adults without any respect for laws and law enforcement. But they don’t know that the conservationists agreed with the legislation sponsors early on to stay silent for a companion bill for one park in an appropriate location, and then the rider lobby got Jeff Van Drew to try to kill the registration and enforcement bill and add two parks for a total of three, at the last minute. And they don’t know that while the conservationists did not oppose the bill for three parks at the final Senate Environmental Committee vote, the lobbyist for the riders opposed the registration and enforcement bill at the last minute in a vicious double cross. And then the registration and enforcement bill got pulled from the Senate vote, but the bill to create three parks passed. So now the new myth is that the “Off-Road and Environmental communities are in agreement that ATV/Off-Road parks are needed if the ATV registration program is going to work.” Another new myth is that the environmental community supports the ORV park location in LEHT. So while the lies and the myths and the corruption builds around the proposed ORV Park in LEHT, at least the Editors of the Press of AC are not fooled as they write, “the registration crackdown is needed to help enforce the law against illegal riding.” And the fact that the ATV riders are terrified of the registration and enforcement bill is no myth.

• LouToti (33) posts 5:01 pm

  VoicelessNF, The problem with the fine and penalty model is that it's only going to cause more environmental destruction to endangered wildlife habitat. Why? Because those that choose to break the law are only going to go farther back into the woods so to avoid law enforcement who are already stretched thin. Do you think someone who knows they're breaking the law is going to stop for a law enforcement officer? Why risk stopping if you know you’re going to risk points on your drivers license, confiscation of your ATV and thousands of dollars in fines? NO WAY, I'd bet everyone is going to takeoff and run anyone over in the process. What we’ll create in the process is a whole generation of kids without any respect for laws and law enforcement. Without a comprehensive state OHV registration program that includes ATV education, ATV parks and trails the proposed Off-Road legislation is going to be a failure. The point is we are at a very rare point in time where both the Off-Road and Environmental communities are in agreement that ATV/Off-Road parks are needed if the ATV registration program is going to work.

• cincrft1 (31) posts 4:19 pm

  VoicelessNF Your smart remarks shows your mentally level. Engage your brain before starting your tongue. You were trying to make a point and may I say without thinking. There is a point here and your just not getting it. Increasing the fines will not work and seizure will not either. How many three time offenders are there out driving while drunk on our roads. They do not seam to learn their lesson.... Money is not always the answer

• cincrft1 (31) posts 3:03 pm

  Sincerely, Ok but how many meetings do we all have to have before someone make an executive decision to more on with this. How much more time and money is it going to take to move forward? if the surrounding property owner has his way this may not be the location either. Also Mr Tittel just needs to help this process along and he will not have the problems with illegal riding. Mr. Tittel was also quoted as saying" that the reason we wear all of the gear when we ride through the woods is to cover up who we are so no one can tell who we are so we don't get caught" Mr. Tittel needs to understand that the gear is called safety equipemnt. And we are not giving up.......

• cincrft1 (31) posts 2:50 pm

  VoicelessNF, Increasing the fines is not the answer either. Look at the fines for DWI - people are still doing it even after they get caught more then twice and even then they break the law and drive after they have lost the privilege to do so. Maybe those fines are not high enough. Why don't you put an ATV between your legs and enjoy the thrill of riding........

• LouToti (33) posts 1:52 pm

  I'm at a loss of words! Surely this Editorial is not the opinion of this Newspaper... Is it?

• Sincerely (37) posts 1:45 pm

  It is absolutely NO surprise that there will be Opposers to this Park. I hope our officials see that there is a MUCH Stronger turn out FOR this park then the opposing community of which in this town WILL ALWAYS have. WE have loads of seniors that have no interest in ANY improvements here or even interest in the having recreation other then their golf courses. I think this is a Fantastic idea for the majority of middle aged to younger adults here for recreation. The area selected is ideal! Mr. Jeff Tittel's exact words: "Environmental groups prefer that location to other proposals for using public lands to create off-road trail and track facilities, said Jeff Tittel of the Sierra Club, which is pushing for stricter enforcement efforts against illegal riding."

• cincrft1 (31) posts 12:25 pm

  Ok - now your are making false statements that are much of what is called "hear say" First there is one place to ride which is run by the PAL of LEH which is almost never open. You try calling to see if they are open and no one answers the phone. I am not going to travel that far if I am not sure if they are open or not. The other place is Atco Raceway - some Tuesdays and Friday nites during the summer then only Fridays in the fall. You pay $40.00 to get in and ride for 20 minutes and then get off the track so the next size/age group can go. So you are off the track for 40 min and ride for 20. You do the math. That track is set up for dirt bikes more then ATV's. Where are you getting this "three wheels"? There are not many of them left anymore.I can tell you don't ride - It is either two or four wheels. These vehicles belong to a special group of people that just happen to enjoy this as a sport or hobby and I am glad to be one of them. The DEP and Green Acres have realized that off road riding is a problem and that they need to look at this problem differently. Instead of not having a place to go to ride then help us get a place to go so that we get an equal share of the land for us to use like every other hobby has. Go figure as you say it - lawmakers see this as something that needs to be addressed. We have rights just like you. The registration crackdown as you put it will only shows who the bike belongs to. If there is now place to ride then this problem is not going to go away. My son's is registered and insuranced and has been from day one. Taxpayers pay for other hobby areas in this state, why is this any different? Look here, what we do for our hobby is not really your business and we are not going away. There is enough land in this state for all of us. Did your parents not teach you how to share? We were memebers of Chatsworth and let me tell you that the plants still grew and there were plenty of animals around and we all got along just fine. I guess you are one of those people that has nothing else better to do. Why don't you try riding you might like it.

• VoicelessNF (12) posts 9:19 am

  The solution is simple. Forget increasing the fees. However, increase the fines for illegal riding. Make those fines so high that the ATV riders are terrified to get caught and have to pay them. And make it so that the penalty for a second offense is seizure of the vehicle. Without their ATV between their legs, you won't get too many three time offenders.

PressofAtlanticCity.com offers everyone the opportunity to comment on published stories. However, it is impractical for editors to screen all comments.
If you believe a comment is offensive, please click on the abuse-reporting link and your objection will be considered by an editor. We encourage participants to use their real names, but inoffensive screen names are acceptable. Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them.
Please post responsibly. Do not post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy.
Be polite. Don’t hate. Users who don’t play by the rules may be blocked from participating.

View our full terms of service and privacy agreement

Click here to report a comment as abusive.

You must login to post a new comment