Murphy DEP Considering Privatization, Commercialization, Development And Logging State Lands

Preserved Green Acres Lands Targeted In DEP “Hot Topics” Proposal

[IMPORTANT Update Below]

Just days after Governor Murphy spurred public outrage over his betrayal of his “commitment” to stop the bear hunt, the Murphy DEP just grabbed the third rail of NJ’s Green Acres conservation legacy with both hands!

The Murphy DEP just floated an outline of plans to privatize, commercialize, develop, and even expand logging of State lands, including Green Acres.

Repeat: DEP is actually considering plans to destroy Green Acres lands.

This outrageous move by DEP – which is certain to prompt another round of public outrage when the public finds out about it – comes after horrible plans to log Pinelands forests and expand logging on Sparta Mountain.

The DEP proposal is so absurd on its face that I actually initially thought it was a hoax.

It goes far beyond and is worse than the Christie administration’s horrible “privatization” and revenue generation plans for State lands, most visibly displayed in the huge battle over Liberty State Park.

Has DEP lost their minds? How is it possible that something like this could be issued by DEP as a serious proposal? Is anything sacred?

Are there no issues that are off the table? Is everything up fo grabs?

The DEP Green Acres revisions were distributed in a “Dear Partner” letter to the conservation community seeking “Stakeholder” meetings on Green Acres program revisions.

The November 17, 2022 DEP letter attached a “Hot Topics” proposal for revising the hugely popular Green Acres land preservation program and regulations.

Notably absent from DEP’s issues for Stakeholder discussion were common sense science based necessary new initiatives, like afforestation (expanding forests), increasing urban forestry, addressing the climate emergency, addressing environmental justice, and collecting market based revenues from existing leases and concessions on public lands.

For today, just to get the word out and let the public know what’s going on, here are just some of the more outrageous proposals in that DEP “Hot Topics” trial balloon – we will discuss the individual proposals in future posts.

The DEP puts the objective right up front – and it is very clear it is about “allowing” uses of public lands:

What considerations should govern whether, and in what circumstances, NJDEP should allow the following types of uses on parkland:

Here is what DEP wrote(emphases mine):

What considerations should govern whether, and in what circumstances, NJDEP should allow the following types of uses on parkland:

• Restaurants/Food Service Vendors
• Limit to certain types of venues such as marinas and golf courses?

When are these uses amenities as opposed to operation of commercial businesses on parkland?

• Event Space (particularly for weddings, but also indoor event spaces)
• Overnight parking
• Flood control facilities
• Green infrastructure
• Leasing of Parkland

How can NJDEP improve its oversight of the leasing of parkland, while protecting the public interest and natural resources?

Are changes needed to NJDEP oversight of farm leases on parkland?

• CSAs (community supported agriculture)
• Greenhouses

How can NJDEP better articulate the criteria for use of historic buildings on parkland?

Bond counsel review requirements for leases of bond-funded parkland by commercial entities

Hunting-–Although hunting is not required on Green Acres encumbered parkland, where it is allowed, how can OTPLA ensure that hunting privileges are administered fairly?

Small Scale Solar Projects on Parkland—Should NJDEP allow small scale solar projects on parkland to support the State’s clean energy goals and provide revenue for park maintenance?

Forestry

What constitutes “forestry” on parkland?

Should forest stewardship plans be required when forestry management is undertaken on parkland (as opposed to woodland management plans or other types of plans)?

How to address tree removal by utilities?

Tree compensation requirements for disposals, diversions and temporary use of parkland

How can NJDEP Improve the Diversion/Disposal Application Process?

DEP is sure to have created a hornets nest of controversy with this trial balloon.

I’m predicting that these “Stakeholder discussions” will be nixed as a result.

If the “conservation community” can’t reject this DEP trial balloon out of hand and instead engages in the DEP “Stakeholder” process, they are worse than lame.

[Update: We suspected that lame NJ conservation groups would participate and play the inside DEP Stakeholder game. As suspected, we just were made aware of that fact.

Check out Julia Somers, Highlands Coalition, email distributing the DEP invitation to local groups who DEP had shut out.

Julia clearly was aware of this DEP initiative and she failed to raise a red flag and warn her own member groups, never mind alerting the press and warning the public about these threats to Green Acres lands. Yet this clueless idiot is “surprised” to learn the people were pissed off. Look how she points the finger at DEP’s failure to “publicize the LAST of these meetings” (which means Julia was aware of PRIOR meetings!

Julia was distributing this DEP email invitation:

So, now the lame conservation community will sit around the table negotiating the fate of public Green Acres lands, with absolutely no public awareness or participation!

Who the hell do these people think they are? They don’t own the public lands!

We know how that always turns out. After months of meetings, they will mount a campaign AFTER THE PUBLIC FINDS OUT AND AFTER DEAL IS DONE.

Despicable.