Comments for The In Box

Comment on Tues news roundup: Massena Memorial, graduation rates, home buyouts by Nora Flaherty

Nora Flaherty — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 18:27:35 +0000

Yes, thanks for catching! It’s been fixed now.

Like/Dislike this comment: 0 0

Comment on The splintering of the Adirondack Park’s “green” voice by Will Doolittle

Will Doolittle — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 18:22:50 +0000

Dave,
How would I “not agree with the agencies’ responsibility to uphold them” in reference to state law? Of course I agree with the responsibility of state agencies to uphold laws they were formed to uphold. The statement is absurd. As Paul said, when the agency responsible for interpreting the regulations spends years on a project, and approves it, and other environmental groups such as the Adirondack Council, agree that the laws have been followed, it only makes sense to look for other explanations than your simplistic “an attempt to force the regulating agencies to actually regulate matters according to the actual regulations.” That explanation can be as simple as having differing interpretations of the law. On the spectrum of interpretations, these two groups under discussion, I think they themselves would agree, are on the extreme “green” side.

Like/Dislike this comment: 0 0

Comment on The splintering of the Adirondack Park’s “green” voice by Paul

Paul — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 18:00:58 +0000

Didn’t the APA board vote 11-1 to approve ACR? Didn’t the permitting process go on for years? Wasn’t it scrutinized from every angle? If so there has to be some reason other than what you suggest Dave for that particular lawsuit. I find it difficult to believe that those 11 (rather smart and well informed of the regulations) board members don’t understand how to legally apply the regulations? That lawsuit is nothing more than attempt to brand themselves in some way.

Like/Dislike this comment: 0 1

Comment on Tues news roundup: Massena Memorial, graduation rates, home buyouts by Susan K

Susan K — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 17:25:49 +0000

Clifton-Fine is in St. Lawrence County, not Franklin County.

Like/Dislike this comment: 0 0

Comment on The splintering of the Adirondack Park’s “green” voice by Dave

Dave — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 16:20:44 +0000

The lawsuits are an effort to promote their brand, or an effort to express ideological purity?

How cynical does one have to be to come up with this sort of stuff?

There is a much simpler, far less devious explanation. The lawsuits are an attempt to force the regulating agencies to actually regulate matters according to the actual regulations.

Nothing more.

Now, you may not agree with their interpretations of the regulations, or the agencies responsibility to uphold them, but insulting them by diving into cynical speculation and conspiracy doesn’t seem all that productive.

Like/Dislike this comment: 3 1

Comment on The splintering of the Adirondack Park’s “green” voice by Paul

Paul — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 15:58:02 +0000

It is also probably a challenging time for some of these organizations. Since this easement land has been protected (and with the sale and protection of the Finch timber-lands) you are maybe starting to see the beginning of the end as far as what is left inside the Blue Line to add to the Forest Preserve. Unless you start getting into going after smaller parcels for inclusion in the Forest Preserve the job in some respects is already done. That is maybe why we see some branching out into new areas like scrutinizing logging practices on easements or quibbling about how big a boat house should be. You gotta do something if you are going to take your members money.

Like/Dislike this comment: 0 0

Comment on The splintering of the Adirondack Park’s “green” voice by Paul

Paul — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:41:09 +0000

Placing a million acres of private land into NYS owned conservation easements was a coup for environmental groups. This is a move that will lead to the eventual addition of that acreage into the Forest Preserve. I don’t know if this was the plan for them but it is really brilliant. Once the development rights are gone from those lands, as they are now, the only value that remains is the timber. Once you strip that value as we see now then nothing is left. These timber-lands are no longer owned by logging companies, they are owned as real estate investments. Bad ones at that. Their investment cycles runs 10-15 years where the land is then sold. It is almost time to sell many of these parcels. The only buyer interested in land that is this worthless is NYS for addition to the Forest Preserve. I am sure the REITs had as a plan:

1. Sell the easements ($$$)
2. Sell the timber ($$$) (Lease if we can $)
3. Sell the land to NYS

Environmental groups did a fabulous job facilitating the transaction.

Like/Dislike this comment: 2 1

Comment on The splintering of the Adirondack Park’s “green” voice by Will Doolittle

Will Doolittle — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:19:44 +0000

I agree with you about the Finch deal, Brian, but disagree about the importance of the two projects you mentioned — the Adk. Club & Resort and the NYCO mining land swap. But you’re right about the Finch deal and other huge land acquisitions of the last decade or so — they have remade the Park in a profound way, and in the exact way the environmental groups wanted. Now, much of the backcountry land the environmental community wanted to protect is protected. They have not won on every issue, but from a wider perspective, they have realized their goals. They have won, which may be why the more mainstream groups such as ADK and Adirondack Council have taken a more compromising stance.

Like/Dislike this comment: 0 2

Comment on The splintering of the Adirondack Park’s “green” voice by Paul

Paul — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:09:42 +0000

“Clearly some have struggled to recruit enough members and supporters, as demonstrated by their struggles with fundraising.”

Any idea how many members these groups have? If you look at Adirondack Wild’s 2012 annual report it doesn’t even look like their membership even fills one page? I do see that one member is their amphibian expert that worked for them on the ACR testimony.

Like/Dislike this comment: 1 1

Comment on The splintering of the Adirondack Park’s “green” voice by Paul

Paul — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:57:44 +0000

This story here is that these groups are not really “green” groups. What these groups are up to was made clear during the “paddling rights” bruhahah. They are fighting for the recreational “rights” of their particular user group. They are not much different than a snowmobile club. When you argue for making sure that a common law gives paddlers the right to go on hundreds of miles of carefully stewarded private waterways you are not a “green” group you are a paddling club. The silly “motor-free-water” things is the same deal. They are fighting for exclusive use of some waterways for their special group of clients. I have never seen anybody arguing to throw paddlers off waterways with motor boast? These are not environmental issues they are “who gets to play in the sandbox” issues.

Like/Dislike this comment: 4 2

Comment on The splintering of the Adirondack Park’s “green” voice by Brian Mann

Brian Mann — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:54:05 +0000

Some interesting arguments here. Let me speak to a couple of them.

1. I think ADK and the Adirondack Council clearly have the largest memberships, but the smaller, more focused groups appear to represent important constituencies. Clearly some have struggled to recruit enough members and supporters, as demonstrated by their struggles with fundraising. The Nature Conservancy is also a big, big player, with a lot of resources and influence, though they function in very different ways — less traditional advocacy and more deal-making.

2. The green groups are certainly reshaping the Park in big, permanent ways. The Finch Pruyn deal, engineered by TNC, is only the latest map-reinventing effort. Protect the Adirondacks’ litigation against the Park Agency could also really move the needle on policy inside the blue line. Their role during the public hearing process for the Adirondack Club and Resort was a big factor in how the permits were shaped.

3. I think it’s perfectly appropriate — even possibly a positive advantage — for there to be a wide range of views within the environmental community. But it still matters, especially in the political arena. When green groups disagree, or side with local and state officials against positions other activists are taking, it changes the dialogue.

–Brian, NCPR

Like/Dislike this comment: 2 0

Comment on The splintering of the Adirondack Park’s “green” voice by Will Doolittle

Will Doolittle — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:43:46 +0000

Brian,
The environmental groups are not reshaping the Adirondack Park in profound ways, not that I can see.
Some of them, in particular the more extreme ones you mention (Adirondack Wild, Protect the Adirondacks) are engaging in the angels on the head of a pin sort of quibbling, niggling, never-ending, lawyer-enriching lawsuits that you also reference. These lawsuits are the opposite of profound. Viewed cynically, they are efforts to promote a particular organization’s brand, to position the organization at the far edge of the debate where it can be seen as the purest, greenest group in the Adirondacks, immune to compromise. More charitably, they are expressions of the members’ own ideological purity and their belief they serve their cause of wilderness protection best by refusing to engage with others whose views differ and by resisting compromise. But these are not big issues. Plans do not equal realities and I think few people believe the Adirondack Club & Resort will be built as planned. As for the mining, it’s a speck of land. It doesn’t set a precedent, because any such swap must go through the laborious constitutional amendment process.
What I find too bad is the lack of initiative by North Country journalists to challenge dubious statements these groups frequently make, such as the recent release from Protect the Adirondacks, claiming that quiet paddling experiences are hard to find on Adirondack lakes:
http://www.protectadks.org/2013/06/the-myth-of-quiet-motor-free-waters-in-the-adirondack-park/
Tell me, Brian, you live up there: Is it hard to find times you can go out on local lakes and enjoy a quiet, lovely experience?

Like/Dislike this comment: 1 2

Comment on The splintering of the Adirondack Park’s “green” voice by Brian (MOFYC not NCPR)

Brian (MOFYC not NCPR) — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:39:51 +0000

A wide variety of people care about the environment. So why shouldn’t “green” groups reflect that diversity? Their constituents are no more homogeneous than the “business community” (which comprises mom and pop stores and Wal-Marts).

Like/Dislike this comment: 2 1

Comment on The splintering of the Adirondack Park’s “green” voice by Pete Klein

Pete Klein — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:24:53 +0000

A couple of observations concerning the above debate.
Supposedly, the Adirondack Park is composed of public and private land. I say supposedly only because the idea of a park composed of public and private lands is a very unique concept. Normally, when they think of a park, they think all the land is public.
Over the years, the public portion has grown while the private lands have decreased. This fact is what angers many if not most of the locals.
Many of the locals view these environmental groups as tax free entities that provide employment for their paid staff who have no concern for those who live, work and pay taxes here.
The dislike of these groups becomes extreme when they push for more private land to become part of the public land. Their anger explodes when the environmental groups push to have newly acquired land classified as Wilderness. Why? Simple. Wilderness is the least public of the state owned lands.
Possible solution. Classify all future purchases as Wild Forest and reclassify all current Wilderness as Wild Forest. In that way the state owned lands would truly be public lands.

Hot debate. Like/Dislike 2 5

Comment on The splintering of the Adirondack Park’s “green” voice by Paul

Paul — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:21:21 +0000

Brian, what is the size of the membership of each of these organizations. For example Peter Bauer and Dave Gibson seem very vocal and seem to get some good press but who are they actually speaking for?

Like/Dislike this comment: 1 1

Comment on The architecture of a different America by knuckleheadedliberal

knuckleheadedliberal — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:51:17 +0000

Actually, the contention that we already knew how to “do this” – to detain the prisoners from Enduring Freedom and other silly named military programs – is wrong. We apparently didn’t know how because we invented a whole new infrastructure in order to put people into a form of purgatory from which even people who are considered innocent or no longer a threat cannot be extricated. We invented ways to do evil that previously had not existed. There is no limit to the imagination of Ivy League educated lawyers.

*****************
Mervel – sarcasm.

Like/Dislike this comment: 1 1

Comment on The architecture of a different America by Brian Mann

Brian Mann — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:02:17 +0000

Paul –

Inappropriate government scrutiny of the tea party and other groups has been acknowledged by the IRS. Meanwhile, CNN and other have reported on the scrutiny of the Occupy political movement by the FBI and by police counter-terror agencies. This from CNN:

“The FBI extensively monitored the Occupy Wall Street movement around the United States, using counterterrorism agents and other resources, according to recently released FBI internal documents.”

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/26/us/fbi-occupy

–Brian, NCPR

Like/Dislike this comment: 1 0

Comment on The architecture of a different America by mervel

mervel — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:16:18 +0000

Why are we always the ones trying to persuade others to go to war? I see one of the things we are doing now is working to persuade other countries that we should all should get more involved in the Syrian civil war. I mean why are we always the ones doing the convincing? It seems to me that if this were important the world in general would be trying to convince us to get involved, not the other way around.

But it goes to Brian’s point about having the capability and thus we seek a mission to use it.

Like/Dislike this comment: 1 0

Comment on The architecture of a different America by mervel

mervel — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:12:42 +0000

Contracts and cronyism IS big government. Government resources and power are government resources and power regardless if they are being spent by GE, Booze Allen or the NSA, its all the same.

Limited government is not the point, reducing the power and unconstitutional actions of a government that is far to powerful and intrusive is the point.

How can you look at the picture above and be proud of your government,our big wonderful government? Big government is not helping the poor, big government is in the end persecuting the poor and weak.

We should not get caught up in the momentary politics of this.

Like/Dislike this comment: 2 0

Comment on The architecture of a different America by knuckleheadedliberal

knuckleheadedliberal — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 01:19:29 +0000

What we need is limited government…so that we can contract out the fighting and the spying and the prisons and the education and the educational testing (you get the picture) out to the private sector.

Like/Dislike this comment: 0 2