Bidwells Dredge poll

[BigSexy]

Lets see what the general opinion is on Maintaining Bidwell's Creek. Should the State be responsible to keep the Inlet open and maintain the length of the Creek?

The two main arguments can be read in the Delaware Bay Forum. Please read that post and then vote

Also, please post your reasoning if you could.

[zar2754]

you know my opinion...state established, state should maintain it..period.

[Sirc59]

you know my opinion...state established, state should maintain it..period.

same here we pay for this in fish and wildlife and yaxes why not geta benfit from it

[R & R]

we pay for this in fish and wildlife

When do you pay Fish & wildlife?

[toolguy73]

First of all, I don't fish out of bidwell, don't have a boat there, and don't personally know anyone who does. The only time I'm even near the creek is when I'm on a weekend joyride down route 47. 2 or 3 times a year. i don't know much more about it, other than my Father-in-law and I looked at the Marina on 47 & Bidwell creek MANY years ago when it was for sale. I do own a boat that stays in the water during the season, and have never considered running out of there. Just seemed too far from home.........

It isn't a privately owned waterway used exclusively by a single individual or company. Taxpayers use this waterway, and I'm sure municipal/protection/police/commercial entities also use this waterway from time to time, or on a regular basis. There's a value to Bidwell creek. If it turns into a stream or swamp, most of that value will disappear. If it gets dredged, that value would increase.

Unfortunately, the area isn't prized by any of the decision makers who can actually designate the funding. Sparsely populated, low voter count, off the beaten path since newer roads and routes when in, and not in a 'Destination' area. It's a place most of them pass through while they are going somewhere else.

In spite of how they see the area, government should fund the dredging. The value would increase, and we may even see progressive development surrounding the creek because of it.

The government should fund the dredging.

[zar2754]

well said dom.

[K'S Krew II]

It isn't a privately owned waterway used exclusively by a single individual or company. Taxpayers use this waterway, and I'm sure municipal/protection/police/commercial entities also use this waterway from time to time, or on a regular basis. There's a value to Bidwell creek. If it turns into a stream or swamp, most of that value will disappear. If it gets dredged, that value would increase.

Unfortunately, the area isn't prized by any of the decision makers who can actually designate the funding. Sparsely populated, low voter count, off the beaten path since newer roads and routes when in, and not in a 'Destination' area. It's a place most of them pass through while they are going somewhere else.

In spite of how they see the area, government should fund the dredging. The value would increase, and we may even see progressive development surrounding the creek because of it.

The government should fund the dredging.

I have been saying this all along. Very well put!

[WANDERER]

In addition to already stated positive reasons for maintaining this area is 2 more.
NJ is one of a very few States,(I think last survey said 0nly 2) that does not use all marine fuel tax for the benifit of boating and recreation. Instead it goes into the general fund, small portion into highway infastructer maint. fund. BTW remember just a couple of years ago when there was so much surplus in this fund they stole the money and used it for other programs.

Secondly if they dredged the inlet and built up the beach area there would be more area for the King crabs to lay there eggs for those poor starving RedKnots.
Some of you guys kill me if it doesn't directly affect you personally then Screw everybody it might help. HEY YOU ASKED FOR MY OPINION

[R & R]

Some of you guys kill me if it doesn't directly affect you personally then Screw everybody it might help. HEY YOU ASKED FOR MY OPINION

As when as some of you guys.... " all the state does is waste money but its ok to waste $$ on me". Can't have it both ways.

[zar2754]

As when as some of you guys.... " all the state does is waste money but its ok to waste $$ on me". Can't have it both ways.

r&r , ur argument is simply based on "it doesnt affect me, why should i pay" mentality.....when people complain bout wasted tax dollars they complain because it seems o help NO ONE, just because the users of the creek dont represent a large opulation should not mean our issues go unresolved, this is a country were the minority commands equal treatment.

[fishy]

it happens all over the place they invested millions on the beach up here and the end result was a decrease in depth of maybe 3 ft. and decrease in the width

[R & R]

this is a country were the minority commands equal treatment.

That was the funnest thing typed yet. You really don't think that do you?


Don't answer that. I'm done with this topic. The more I think about that statement the more assonine it is to me.

Your getting your recreation fixed 7 paid for by the Gov. Good for you. Now take a big deep breath.

[zar2754]

ooooohhh hooooooooooo

serenity now!

[woolst]

Never heard of it, but someone has, and therefore it is important to them... I am all for it.

[WANDERER]

As when as some of you guys.... " all the state does is waste money but its OK to waste $$ on me". Can't have it both ways.

I'm not sure what your talking about, you probably don't know either. My definition of real waste is taking money from people who WORK AND GIVING IT TO THOSE WHO WONT. I have no problem with helping someone out a little if their sick or disabled but generally free loaders and illegals should be on there own. OMG I better stop talking now or I'll sound like you, A KNOW IT ALL