Petition to stop new MCR time restrictions

[Broad Bill]

Originally Posted by Ken Lyons

Once again people this is private property. We have no more right to go there or your back yards. Appealing will very likely be more successful than demanding. The public utility commissions of both NJ and PA would be where I think the most help would come. My opinion. Fingers crossed.

Appealing and demanding will have exactly the same results which is no results. Hammer4reel is spot on, the only way to counter this is through legal means and only then if there was language in the original agreement that discussed recreational rights being grandfathered to the general public. And even if that language does exist in the original documents, all the consortium of utility companies needs to do is say this is a national security measure to secure hydro electricity and/or power plants and they could just as easily entirely shut the impoundment down to recreational use.

[Ken Lyons]

Which is why appealing rather than demanding might have a better chance. There could be, a public relations benefit and they all are subject to the “good will,” of the regulators. Unfortunately there doesn’t seem to be a lot of leverage for us here.

[Broad Bill]

Ken if this involved a goodwill response to a public uproar to the MCR Commission to protect profits like what Anheuser Busch is going through right now, I'd agree with you. This decision has already been made by the Merrill Creek Owners group, their Board and attorneys. Demands, I agree, won't do a thing, the point of my previous post is in this situation appeals won't either. Decisions have already been made, conglomerates like these don't reverse decisions because of public pushback unless there's severe economic consequences which in this case there's not. I'm sure they expected it and factored it into their decision well before the decision was announced

Only chance here is if an earlier closure and more restrictive access rights represents a violation to the terms of the initial agreement or any subsequent modifications. I'm sure that was checked as well but it's another angle and in my opinion the only possibility of this decision being reversed.

In today's world, limiting public access, liability exposure, security and profits for the benefit of the entitled few far outweighs the intrinsic benefits of everyone else. Just look at how long the issue of public launch access at GWL has been going on..

[reason162]

Originally Posted by Broad Bill

Appealing and demanding will have exactly the same results which is no results. Hammer4reel is spot on, the only way to counter this is through legal means and only then if there was language in the original agreement that discussed recreational rights being grandfathered to the general public. And even if that language does exist in the original documents, all the consortium of utility companies needs to do is say this is a national security measure to secure hydro electricity and/or power plants and they could just as easily entirely shut the impoundment down to recreational use.

I think you're spot on, and this might be an unpopular opinion but I've witnessed the nonsense going on at that ramp every other trip there during the good weather months - people staying out past the sundown ramp closure, people showing up with prohibited watercrafts and getting into heated arguments with staff, people taking a dip when swimming is prohibited, walking out of the parking lot with waders on when wading is prohibited, forcing staff to stay past their closing time and generally being dickheads. Ditto for the tournament boats making noise at 4:30am next to residents (whose complaints MC actually has to care about), and I completely understand the owners' decision to restrict hours. In fact if I were an employee who had to deal with that BS I would say the owners are being good bosses in that regard.

I don't see any evidence that this is some kind nefarious first step to complete closure, bc in fact they can decide to close it tomorrow if they choose, and there's nothing any of us can do to stop it. Remember they shut down during the first few months of covid and afaik they didn't need to consult the public to do that. Instead I take what they say at face value, bc I've seen it first hand countless times over the past few years.

It's always the few bad apples ruining things for the rest of us, and if that kind of boorish behavior continues they will shut it down for good and no amount of protesting and petition signing will make a difference.

[Broad Bill]

Well said. We've all seen too many public places privatized and areas closed due to a handful or more of idiots who don't think twice about ruining it for everyone else.

If I were the Warren County Commission, I'd consider approaching MCR ownership group with the following. Turn a negative into a positive. If the security concerns they're discussing involve inappropriate or unauthorized use of the MCR facilities as opposed to something more sinister like terrorism, address the cause of the problem as opposed to the residual consequences.

Impose a $1,000 fine to any person who violates protocols. That would include any regulation that is posted and not complied with including getting back to the launch site late, littering, use of waders, swimming or bass boats using their motors at 4:30 a.m. etc. If necessary, confiscate fishing equipment and boats. I'd guarantee any person fined once won't violate regulations a second time.

I'd also recommend having everyone who uses the facility be provided a number to report violations. Aside from posting that information, pass out cards at the gate which has a number to call in the event violations are witnessed. Let the 95% of the people who care about preserving and enjoying the beauty of the impoundment help ownership maintain the safety protocols and regulations in place as opposed to allowing the 5% minority who don't give a shit dictate policy decisions and ruin it for everyone else.

If MCR adopted these regulations, three things will happen. First, you immediately empower the recreational community and align their interests with those of MCR ownership. Second, you address the current problem by penalizing the violators while raising significant amounts of revenue to be used for additional enforcement or in any way deemed beneficial to promote and preserve the natural beauty of MCR for all the people who need that resource today more than ever. Third, you reward the people who care about MCR as opposed to penalizing them for the actions of those who don't. And in the process you promote custodianship to protect and preserve the future of this much needed resource.

Problem solved without restricting access to all the people who need this impoundment and depend on it to help deal with life's challenges.

[thmyorke1]

Originally Posted by reason162

I think you're spot on, and this might be an unpopular opinion but I've ...

I dont get why we are solutioning and brainstorming why they are in the right for cutting hours.
If the main issue is people overstaying over hours then reducing the hours is surely going to have more of those occurrences lol.
All those other issues you list are pathetic excuses,
wading? swimming? ... oh no...
the staff on site right at the launch was already handling those "issues" well anyways

Residents?
ah yea surely the 5 houses on Merril Creek Road surely are DYING to the noise of traffic as they are 100+ feet away from the road with huge ass lawns.

Surely hope no one is just biassed and just likes the idea of restricting access to their favorite lake so it gets less pressure.

[acabtp]

Originally Posted by thmyorke1

I dont get why we are solutioning and brainstorming why they are in the right for cutting hours.
If the main issue is people overstaying over hours then reducing the hours is surely going to have more of those occurrences lol.
All those other issues you list are pathetic excuses,
wading? swimming? ... oh no...
the staff on site right at the launch was already handling those "issues" well anyways

Residents?
ah yea surely the 5 houses on Merril Creek Road surely are DYING to the noise of traffic as they are 100+ feet away from the road with huge ass lawns.

Surely hope no one is just biassed and just likes the idea of restricting access to their favorite lake so it gets less pressure.

Because it is super entitled thinking that we are in the right for telling private property owners what to do with their land. Just discontinue stocking and move on. Or eminent domain the reservoir, have the state compensate the utility, and then run it as a public resource. But telling private property owners what they should do with their land... that's not going to help anything.

[thmyorke1]

"Just discontinue stocking and move on. Or eminent domain the reservoir, have the state compensate the utility, and then run it as a public resource"

both are valid, I and hopefully others just wish it doesnt need to come down to that and they can just keep the hours as it was.
Dare anyone speak up against another loss of access.
It's not evil to say "this is stupid" even when someone has the legal right to do it.

[reason162]

Originally Posted by thmyorke1

I dont get why we are solutioning and brainstorming why they are in the right for cutting hours.
If the main issue is people overstaying over hours then reducing the hours is surely going to have more of those occurrences lol.
All those other issues you list are pathetic excuses,
wading? swimming? ... oh no...
the staff on site right at the launch was already handling those "issues" well anyways

Residents?
ah yea surely the 5 houses on Merril Creek Road surely are DYING to the noise of traffic as they are 100+ feet away from the road with huge ass lawns.

Surely hope no one is just biassed and just likes the idea of restricting access to their favorite lake so it gets less pressure.

It comes down to gaming out the reality of the situation - if the MC owners are legally beholden to the public in some way, then our efforts to pressure them into reversing their decision makes sense. If they are not - and I see no evidence that they are - then forcing them to deal with the fallout could backfire, esp if anyone feels entitled enough to express some of the sentiments I've read in this and other threads in person, at the ramp or the office.

Broad Bill's solutions seem logical if we take MCR owners' words at face value. If there is no legal recourse to stop the new hours, it's in everyone's interest to police the existing rules, bc there will be no legal recourse to prevent them shutting the whole thing down permanently.

As for your snarky last paragraph - I'll repeat myself here - if the new hours reduce or eliminate tournaments, I'll see that as a silver lining. If that makes me biased, I don't really care.

[thmyorke1]

true, right thats good. last thing i wanted to hear, especially on this site, were excuses favoring why they SHOULD be restricting the hours. Sorry if I came off snarky. I'm biased against tournaments too I guess though LOL