Adirondack Forum  
Rules Membership Donations and Online Store Adkhighpeaks Foundation ADKhighpeaks Forums ADKhighpeaks Wiki Disclaimer

Go Back   Adirondack Forum > The Adirondack Forum > Paddling in the Adirondacks
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 09-13-2008, 11:01 PM   #81
adkman12986
Member
 
adkman12986's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Tupper Lake
Posts: 800
Some of you people just amaze me to no end. You seem to forget that currently there are over 432 ponds lakes, and rivers that are motorless. Do I feel that there is a need to have more? Absolutely. Do I feel that there should be some sort of comprimise Deffently. As a former club member located on Lows lake I can tell you that when we had the 14 families taking care of this parcel it was in much better condition then then now. Two years after the State purchased it I went back in because I loved the area and was brought up hunting and fishing there. I was truly saddened to find many ot the trees along the shore line chopped and partially cut down, garbage left all over the place and just trashed. Granted this may not have been caused by all but the bottom line is it was caused by someone that went in by other means then a motorboat. As far as the bass getting into the lake if you would have done some research you would have found out that there were bass in some of the ponds and brooks on the Robinwood club that got out when beaver dams were either washed out or flooded, and washed into Lowes Lake. One other thing that we all need to remember is that state land belongs to everyone. Sportsmen pay fees for licenses, motorboats pay registrations that help maintain the launches we use, trails we hike, and law enforcement to protect our park. I don't pay anything for my canoe, or my kayak. I use the trails and don't pay a cent for the use. How long will it be before the State realizes that this is an untapped income for them and start placing fees on us, and then stop us from using the areas because to many people are using them.
adkman12986 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2008, 11:35 AM   #82
ALGonquin Bob
Lake Lila - Low's Lake carry
 
ALGonquin Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Tonawanda, NY
Posts: 1,105
I'm a paddler and active member (waterways chair) of my local chapter of ADK, but I don't have a problem with a few float planes landing on Low's Lake. I do have a problem with the fact that there is a plan in place, and DEC is violating that UMP by allowing/promoting the use of that lake by the outfitters using float planes and leaving gear on "wilderness forever" state land contrary to state guidelines. Whether or not Mr. Grannis likes it, The DEC should abide by the master plan.
__________________
"Like" my FB page http://tinyurl.com/FB-BuffaloPaddles and visit my map ALGonquin Bob's "BUFFALO PADDLES" Paddle Guide

Check out my "Mountain Blog" http://tinyurl.com/BobMountainBlog2

46er #5357W
ALGonquin Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2008, 12:50 PM   #83
redhawk
Senior Resident Curmudgeon
 
redhawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: In My Memories
Posts: 10,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALGonquin View Post
I'm a paddler and active member (waterways chair) of my local chapter of ADK, but I don't have a problem with a few float planes landing on Low's Lake. I do have a problem with the fact that there is a plan in place, and DEC is violating that UMP by allowing/promoting the use of that lake by the outfitters using float planes and leaving gear on "wilderness forever" state land contrary to state guidelines. Whether or not Mr. Grannis likes it, The DEC should abide by the master plan.
Agreed. If there is a law, it should be enforced, period.

If there is a problem with the law, then it should be changed.

Other wise what happens is it becomes selectively enforced, based on politics and favoritism. Look at the Great sacandaga lake if you want to see an example of wyat happens when the law is not applied uniformly and diligently.

It (Great Sacandage Lake), is located within the Adirondack park. A large chunk of it is state land, that is being altered, developed and disallowing public use.

The argument now is that it's no longer wilderness, therefore the regulations should not reply.

As far as the float planes, I had an incident a few years ago with a party that had chartered a float plane into Long Lake. They seemed to think that because they paid, they were entitled to have a whole lean to to themselves, even though i was already there. I also had occassion to see the Tirrel Pond lean-to "occupied" by a float plane party. Lawn chairs, hammocks, cots, boombox blasting, etc. They had completely spread out from the lean to like a malignant fungus and take over and negatively affect the whole camping area in Tirrel. I was passing through and not camping, but their actions ruined the experience of many of the tent campers in the area. I know because I chatted with a few campers and they were complaing. Had I been a ranger and cited the violations that that particular party had, there would have been enough in fines to repair the dam at Duck Hole

So if I go by my experiences with float plane clients, let them fly to Disneyland but keep them out of the park.

Hawk
__________________
"If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson
redhawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2008, 01:24 PM   #84
Wldrns
Member
 
Wldrns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Western Adirondacks
Posts: 3,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by redhawk View Post
As far as the float planes, I had an incident a few years ago with a party that had chartered a float plane into Long Lake. They seemed to think that because they paid, they were entitled to have a whole lean to to themselves, even though i was already there.
I had a similar experience on Lows (Grass Pond), which I have reported on before. I was watching a pair of loons that I suspected had a nest tucked in the grass on the shore. The plane pulled right up to the campsite where I had dropped my pack... from the water vantage they did not know I was not actually camped there but it was obvious I was standing at the site with canoe, and not wearing a pack.

Without even acknowledging the site might be already occupied, the pilot seemed rushed with 2 clients to unloaded gear on the shore and the pilot quickly left, the plane actually being chased by one of the loons as it taxied. I departed and stashed my canoe some distance away to take a hike, but returned some time later on foot to find a roaring fire with no one apparently nearby to answer my call if anyone was there. Turns out one guy was passed out drunk in the tent, evidenced by a mostly empty bottle of wild turkey on the ground, with rifle standing by next to him. The other guy then came running up the trail with a stringer of bass to show his passed out buddy, caught out of season. He threw them back into the water only after I questioned him on it 3 times, noting I knew the ranger, and pulled out a camera ("but there are lots of fish in there", he says).

Later in the evening, that end of the lake was treated to over an hour of continuous gunfire. I wondered what happened to the loons. The whole incident with other details played out over a couple of days made me wonder why I should be considerate of folks like that who simply pay their fee and are dropped into remote sites by plane. I realize not all clients are like that. But it sure does leave a bad taste when the pilot obviously thinks that is "his" landing spot and campsite, and clients that behave in such a manner are obviously not screened or instructed.
__________________
"Now I see the secret of making the best person, it is to grow in the open air and to eat and sleep with the earth." -Walt Whitman

Last edited by Wldrns; 09-14-2008 at 01:35 PM..
Wldrns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2008, 03:41 PM   #85
adkman12986
Member
 
adkman12986's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Tupper Lake
Posts: 800
Wldrns Instead of being part of the problem by not reporting them may I suggest that you and others (myself included) become part of the solution. When you see this going on don't just threaten to turn people in do it. A few years back there was a canoe race that ended at the Rod & Gun Club in Tupper Lake. When the club went to check the shore line for garbage that was left we couldn't believe the mess that was left. Water bottles and granola wrappers all over the place. We take a lot of pride in keeping the club and it's property clean, safe and free of all garbage. When we approached the race chairman with the issue he made the statement that the mess was left by fishermen. We check the landing almost daily because we let the public use it free of charge and it represents the club and I can tell you it wasn't there before the race. Fishermen usually drink beer and not water and most eat things like chips not granola. We ended up cleaning up the mess ourselves but informed the race chairman that if it ever happened again they would no longer be useing the property. As for the people you ran into at Lows all I can say is that there are bad apples in every bunch and as sportsmen and environmentalist we need to do our part to help clean it up. Don't feel badly about turning in these people. I would weather it be a canoeist or a fisherman.
Please don't take this as a personal attack because it isn't ment to be. Maybe part of the solution would to be a desiginated landing spot for the float plane that wasn't at any campsite he choose, or as far as I know you have to reserve camping spots on state land. Did they have a permit for that site? If permits are not required maybe they should be.
adkman12986 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2008, 04:15 PM   #86
Wldrns
Member
 
Wldrns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Western Adirondacks
Posts: 3,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by adkman12986 View Post
Wldrns Instead of being part of the problem by not reporting them may I suggest that you and others (myself included) become part of the solution. When you see this going on don't just threaten to turn people in do it.
Exactly how was I part of the problem, what did I do that made me the problem???

I wasn't kidding about knowing the ranger, most of them as a matter of fact. I am on very good personal and professional terms with all of them in the areas I roam, through long time backcountry travel and frequent SAR crew boss experience. That's something I doubt is the case for the float plane clients I encountered. What makes you think I didn't report exactly what I saw? However, since I don't choose to have a motorized craft to whisk me back several miles to the ranger's residence, I waited until my paddle trip outbound rather than interrupt a whole day of my backcountry trip. I'll tell you that neither the ranger nor his assistant (who primarily patrols Lows by kayak) were surprised at the story when I mentioned the name on the aircraft. What does that say about reputation and who is "the problem"???
Quote:
Originally Posted by adkman12986 View Post
Maybe part of the solution would to be a desiginated landing spot for the float plane that wasn't at any campsite he choose, or as far as I know you have to reserve camping spots on state land. Did they have a permit for that site? If permits are not required maybe they should be.
Obviously you are not familiar with Lows at all, and don't know general NY state land camping regulations. Pre-arrival reservations or specific campsite check-in at launch site are required at a very few minority of waterways, and all of those are large and heavily used motorboat accessble waters. The free flow system without regulatory permits generally works well for paddlers - if the site is already occupied there are plenty of others beyond open to find. Apparently, both from my experience and what I have heard elsewhere, this is not the case for float plane operators who treat campsites at certain landing sites as "their own".
__________________
"Now I see the secret of making the best person, it is to grow in the open air and to eat and sleep with the earth." -Walt Whitman

Last edited by Wldrns; 09-14-2008 at 05:29 PM..
Wldrns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2008, 08:09 PM   #87
Bill I.
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,587
Let's not forget that Lows Lake was intended to be a canoe-only route ever since the state first started buying land there. Woodspirit can correct me if this assumption is incorrect. If I am correct, then the float planes never had the right to be there in the first place. They essentially stole something that was intended for someone else, and DEC went along with it. DEC does NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY to permit public float plane access to Lows Lake.

Further, every float plane pilot and client has the same rights to enjoy Lows Lake as the rest of the public: they can get in a canoe and paddle. I certainly do not see them as a special class of people entitled to special treatment.
Bill I. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2008, 09:23 PM   #88
Woodspirit
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Albany, NY
Posts: 108
Just a mild disagreement, a matter of only a degree with Wildriver. The Adirondack Park State Land Master Plan sets forth a set of management principles for state land within the Adirondack Park and these principles have a goal of eliminating motorized use at Lows. But these are just principles and are not enforceable on their own. Another state agency, DEC is responsible for the care, custody and control of the state lands constituting the forest preserve and this state agency, which employs the forest rangers and ECOs, is responsible for adopting enforcement regulations consistent with the Adirondack Park State Land Master Plan, something that this agency has failed miserably at.

As to the specifics of the continuation of the public subsidy of the float plane business at Lows Lake and while it is violative of the State Land Master Plan, let us be cognizant that DEC's unwise proposal that violates several laws, is the product of political pressure and has nothing to do with DEC's legal responsibilites of resource protection.

If someone wants to see a real analysis of the problem with the DEC proposal, check out the learned analysis of the state land staffr at the APA at http://www.apa.state.ny.us/Mailing/0...ion%20memo.pdf

If someone wants to see how the APA senior management chooses to be subservient to DEC and a disgrace to the APA, check this out http://www.apa.state.ny.us/Mailing/0...Resolution.pdf
__________________
Woodspirit
Woodspirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2008, 10:54 PM   #89
redhawk
Senior Resident Curmudgeon
 
redhawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: In My Memories
Posts: 10,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by adkman12986 View Post
Wldrns Instead of being part of the problem by not reporting them may I suggest that you and others (myself included) become part of the solution. When you see this going on don't just threaten to turn people in do it.
Simply said, but answer me this. Since this stuff usually occurs in areas where there is no phone service (Although Plumley's does), how do you suggst reporting them? By the time you get to contact a ranger, they're long gone.

Myself I AM part of the solution. In the case at Plumleys, when there waw a reference to the fact that they had gones and i didn't, I related how puzzled and amazed they would be that i could shove their guns up their a$$. in about 10 seconds.

In the case at Tirrell pond, I did notify a ranger as soon as I got out.

But neither I, nor anyone else should have to be the solution, it's not our job.

Perhaps the real solution is to take steps to ensure that these self centered individuals who could give a rat's a$$ about the environment, or other people for that matter, not be allowed to get to places they are too lazy to walk in to.

Or is that over simplifying it?

Hawk
__________________
"If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson
redhawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2008, 11:37 PM   #90
Bill I.
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodspirit View Post
Just a mild disagreement, a matter of only a degree with Wildriver. The Adirondack Park State Land Master Plan sets forth a set of management principles for state land within the Adirondack Park and these principles have a goal of eliminating motorized use at Lows. But these are just principles and are not enforceable on their own. Another state agency, DEC is responsible for the care, custody and control of the state lands constituting the forest preserve and this state agency, which employs the forest rangers and ECOs, is responsible for adopting enforcement regulations consistent with the Adirondack Park State Land Master Plan, something that this agency has failed miserably at.
What I was getting at was this:

Lows Lake has only been open to the public since 1985. Prior to that, according to the acquisition history map in the Five Ponds UMP, all of the lake was in private ownership. I presume the Wilderness and Primitive designations were applied shortly after the state's acquisition, meaning that there was never a period when the SLMP permitted public motorized use of the lake.

Therefore as I see it, this is not a matter of whether an established use should be "grandfathered", but of a use that was nonconforming from Day One.
Bill I. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2008, 11:57 PM   #91
Bill I.
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodspirit View Post
If someone wants to see a real analysis of the problem with the DEC proposal, check out the learned analysis of the state land staffr at the APA at http://www.apa.state.ny.us/Mailing/0...ion%20memo.pdf
Having met Walt Linck a couple times, I imagine there must be a well-worn dent in the wall of his workspace that closely matches the shape of his forehead. And if the APA commissioners ever agreed with him he'd probably die instantly of shock.

He certainly has one of the most unenviable jobs in the Adirondacks, and does it well.
Bill I. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2008, 09:55 PM   #92
adkman12986
Member
 
adkman12986's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Tupper Lake
Posts: 800
Wldrns Seen that you seem to know how little I know about Lows Lake let me clearify some facts for you.
1. I belonged to the Grassy Pond Club for 10 years. I had a Camp in the bay behind Parkers Island. The camp on Parkers Island was owned by Art Parker and LaVern Hart both of Long Lake.
2 Motor boats were allowed on the Lake when it was owned by the Lumber Company. The club members regulated the size and quality of the motors that were allowed.
3 The ranger at the boyscouts (Greg Andrews) is a very personal man and would be more then glad to allow someone to use the phone to call in a problem.
4 Rangers used my camp for years to stay in when marking the state line. that ran behind Grassy Pond along Wolf Mt and onto Cranberry Lake.

As far as you knowing the rangers good for you. Did you tell tyhem about the issue and if so what did your good buddies do to help correct the problem. The float plane operators will have records of all trips into not only Lows but all areas.

Red hawk you are right about us not having to be part of the solution but the rangers are spread so thin and the areas they cover are so vast that it makes it almost impossable for them to be everywhere. We have to be their eyes and ears for the sake of everyone.
adkman12986 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2008, 12:05 AM   #93
Wldrns
Member
 
Wldrns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Western Adirondacks
Posts: 3,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by adkman12986 View Post
Wldrns Seen that you seem to know how little I know about Lows Lake let me clearify some facts for you.
1. I belonged to the Grassy Pond Club for 10 years. I had a Camp in the bay behind Parkers Island. The camp on Parkers Island was owned by Art Parker and LaVern Hart both of Long Lake.
2 Motor boats were allowed on the Lake when it was owned by the Lumber Company. The club members regulated the size and quality of the motors that were allowed.
3 The ranger at the boyscouts (Greg Andrews) is a very personal man and would be more then glad to allow someone to use the phone to call in a problem.
4 Rangers used my camp for years to stay in when marking the state line. that ran behind Grassy Pond along Wolf Mt and onto Cranberry Lake.

As far as you knowing the rangers good for you. Did you tell tyhem about the issue and if so what did your good buddies do to help correct the problem. The float plane operators will have records of all trips into not only Lows but all areas.
What made me think you did not know Lows was your not knowing if permits were required to camp on state land, Lows in particular. It is certainly not the case that permits are required, though Dawn will issue a "permit" for the sake of keeping records of site usage if you know where you are going and she has a chance to chat with you out on the lake. She can also tell other paddlers coming behind you what sites are taken. Yes, i know Greg also and I know where to access the house directly from the flow. I call him to make arrangements for scouts and and visit him every year to set up equipment. He is very helpful and friendly.

Yes, as stated in my previous post, I did tell the ranger the issue I encountered. My "buddies" were already aware and watching. You can't keep many secrets from them.

I camped at an undisclosed primitive site in the woods not far away (since the marked campsite was "overtaken" by the float plane clients). My camp was a base for my plan to bushwhack explore a couple of remote ponds in different directions. This gave me the opportunity to pass briefly by the float plane campsite randomly over a couple of days, just to let them know a concerned someone was watching. The next time I saw them with a mess of fish they were preparing bullheads for dinner. A nice improvement from the earlier caught out of season bass.

Late in the second day, from a distant vantage I noted what appeared to be the ranger's motorboat heading directly to the campsite. It departed after about 20 minutes. I later learned it was indeed Ranger Will Benzel, checking up on them. It's quite unusual for him to directly visit a specific campsite without reason - usually that is the Assistant Ranger's job. He said he did not find anything immediately illegal that they were doing during the visit. Dawn thought that my several visits may have led them to believe I was a ranger or assistant and that thought kept them on their toes. With my usual color of hiking attire, it's not the first time I've been misidentified as such by folks not experienced with rangers up close.

Was Joe Kennedy, when he was a field ranger, one who used your camp?
__________________
"Now I see the secret of making the best person, it is to grow in the open air and to eat and sleep with the earth." -Walt Whitman

Last edited by Wldrns; 09-16-2008 at 11:35 AM..
Wldrns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2008, 01:04 AM   #94
redhawk
Senior Resident Curmudgeon
 
redhawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: In My Memories
Posts: 10,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by adkman12986 View Post
Red hawk you are right about us not having to be part of the solution but the rangers are spread so thin and the areas they cover are so vast that it makes it almost impossable for them to be everywhere. We have to be their eyes and ears for the sake of everyone.
And do what?

Can't take a license number because there are no cars. Can't phone a ranger because there is no cell service. have no enforcement powers and in the case of an altercation, are just as apt to get cited for breach of peace or assault as the other person. And not to mention putting oneself at risk.

I just happen to be one of the people who is probably going to win any altercation and I do take things into my own hands, as many here on the forum will tell you. But I'm the exception, not the rule.

Where is it written that we HAVE to be the eyes and ears?
I agree that anyone seeing things should report it to a ranger and i would go a step further and say that it would be good to speak up to the party as well, but circumstances might dictate that that would not be a wise decision.

It's the way you worded it, as if it's OUR fault these idiots are doing what they're doing. That may not have been your intention, but it's the way it came across.

hawk
__________________
"If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson
redhawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2008, 10:58 AM   #95
adkman12986
Member
 
adkman12986's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Tupper Lake
Posts: 800
It was Howard Graham and Jerry Black who used my camp on Lows. DEdoes require permits if camping more then 3 days I believe.

Redhawk My appoligies to you sir. It was not my intention to mean it was your fault nor anyone else's fault other then the people who were causing the problems. Unfortunatly there are some people weather it be hunters, fishermen, hikers, or canoest that have less then desireable morals and consideration for the land. It may not be written that we have to be the eyes and ears but the point was that if we don't take actions into our own hands weather it be reporting the problems or confronting these people it will just continue. If it does continue it makes us all a looser in the end.
adkman12986 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2008, 11:05 AM   #96
ALGonquin Bob
Lake Lila - Low's Lake carry
 
ALGonquin Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Tonawanda, NY
Posts: 1,105
I'm pretty sure we're all on the same side here on ADK Forum, regardless of raised hackles... Thanks to all for pointing out the dark side of allowing float planes to continue violating the UMP on Low's. (Sounds like a wierd baseball game reference, doesn't it?)
__________________
"Like" my FB page http://tinyurl.com/FB-BuffaloPaddles and visit my map ALGonquin Bob's "BUFFALO PADDLES" Paddle Guide

Check out my "Mountain Blog" http://tinyurl.com/BobMountainBlog2

46er #5357W
ALGonquin Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2008, 02:46 PM   #97
Wldrns
Member
 
Wldrns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Western Adirondacks
Posts: 3,785
APA rejects continued floatplane use on Lows Lake

As reported on WNBZ....

And NCPR breaking news today...

And yesterday on NCPR
__________________
"Now I see the secret of making the best person, it is to grow in the open air and to eat and sleep with the earth." -Walt Whitman

Last edited by Wldrns; 10-10-2008 at 03:15 PM..
Wldrns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2008, 05:06 PM   #98
Neil
Kayak-46
 
Neil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,972
Quote:
But the rejection of DECís proposed permit system for float planes doesnít mean they are now banned from Lows Lake.

Amato had offered a four-year phase out, instead of 10 years, as a compromise during Thursdayís meeting.
Quote:
The DECís Chris Amato said a compromise amendment could be brought back to the agency as soon as next month.
Interesting stuff.
__________________
The best, the most successful adventurer, is the one having the most fun.
Neil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2008, 08:19 PM   #99
Bill I.
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,587
Adirondack Mountain Club
PRESS RELEASE

For Immediate Release: Friday, Oct. 10, 2008
Contact: Paul Ertelt, (518) 449-3870

APA Rejects Plan to Allow Floatplanes on Lows Lake for 10 More Years
Decision Could Impact Management of Nearly 3 Million Acres of Public Land, Water

The Adirondack Park Agency today rejected a proposal by the state Department of Environmental Conservation that would have allowed commercial floatplanes to continue to use Lows Lake for up to 10 years under a permit system. Agency commissioners rejected the plan 6-5.

Neil Woodworth, executive director of the Adirondack Mountain Club, said the decision is not just a win for canoeists and kayakers who use Lows Lake, which straddles the Hamilton-St. Lawrence county border in the western Adirondacks. It is also a victory for anyone who cares about the future management of the Adirondack Forest Preserve, he said.

"There is much more at stake here than whether commercial floatplanes should be allowed on a particular Adirondack lake," Woodworth said. "The real issue is whether DEC is bound by the provisions of the Adirondack Master Plan. APA said today that they are."

In rejecting DEC's proposal, APA commissioners followed the recommendations of APA counsel and staff, who concluded that the proposal was "inconsistent with the guidelines and criteria of the Adirondack Park State Land Master Plan." According to the Master Plan, which is part of state Executive Law, the "preservation of the wild character of this canoe route without motorboat or airplane usage … is the primary management goal for this primitive area."

At 3,100 acres, Lows Lake is one of the larger lakes in the Adirondack Park. The lake stretches about 10 miles east to west and is the centerpiece of two wilderness canoe routes. Floatplanes were rare on Lows Lake until the mid-1990s. Sometime before 1990, non-native bass were illegally introduced into the lake, and as public awareness of the bass fishery grew, floatplanes and motorboat use increased.

In January 2003, when it signed the Bog River Unit Management Plan, DEC agreed to phase out commercial floatplane use of Lows Lake within five years, but the agency never developed the regulation to implement the ban. In May, ADK, the Association for the Protection of the Adirondacks, the Sierra Club and the Residents' Committee to Protect the Adirondacks sued DEC. The lawsuit was adjourned while APA considered DEC's proposed amendment to the Bog River UMP, which would have established a permit system for floatplane operators and limited flights into the lake.

APA's decision to reject the amendment was supported by state law and regulation, including DEC's 2005 regulation to ban motorboats on Lows Lake. DEC rejected a proposal to zone the lake to provide designated areas for motorboat use, noting that "it would not satisfy the legislative intent to manage the waterway 'without motorboat or airplane use' as set forth in the Master Plan." DEC's Regulatory Impact Statement for the regulation also refers to the Master Plan as a "legal mandate."

APA also considered the 1994 UMP for the Five Ponds Wilderness Area that designated the lake as part of a wilderness canoe route. An Oct. 1 APA staff memo noted that that the canoe route was designated "for use by those primarily seeking a wilderness experience."

DEC has argued that banning floatplanes from Lows Lake would cause financial hardship for the two floatplane businesses in the Adirondacks, but APA staff pointed out that economic considerations were irrelevant to compliance with the Master Plan. Steve Erman, APA's economic adviser, said in a memo that DEC had provided "little information to indicate that either of these floatplane operations is truly at risk if flight operations to Lows Lake were halted."

On the other hand, Erman noted that DEC failed to look at the potential economic benefits of paddling on outfitters, lodging, restaurants and other businesses in the Adirondacks. "The economy of the Boundary Waters Area of northern Minnesota has been heavily promoted for paddling for years and it has become a significant economic generator," he said.

Removing commercial floatplanes from Lows Lake will go a long way in bringing to fruition DEC's goal of expanding "quiet waters" opportunities in the Adirondacks. Roughly 90 percent of the lake and pond surface in the Adirondack Park is open to motorized vessels.

"In light of the law and the recommendations of APA staff, the agency really had no choice but to reject DEC's proposed amendment," Woodworth said. "Now it is incumbent on DEC to move forward on a regulation that will enhance the wilderness character of this important canoe route and prohibit floatplanes on Lows Lake before the 2009 season."

In court papers, DEC agreed to promulgate regulations to ban floatplanes if its proposal were rejected by the APA. "If the agency (APA) determines that the proposed amendment does not conform to the Master Plan, this proceeding will likely become moot because DEC will then begin to promulgate regulations eliminating public floatplane access to Lows Lake," according to a motion by Lawrence Rappoport of the state Attorney General's Office.
Bill I. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2008, 09:12 PM   #100
looncry
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
food 4 thought

The way we see it,
The way we use it,[environmental issues]
primitive means limitations of commercial floatboats
on our Adirondack Lakes.
Please stick with the Master Plan. Hats off to ADK and other supporters to enforce rules in the way that esteems the Lake and sets a precedent for other lakes as well. Looncry and family
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

DISCLAIMER: Use of these forums, and information found herein, is at your own risk. Use of this site by members and non-members alike is only granted by the adkhighpeak.com administration provided the terms and conditions found in the FULL DISCLAIMER have been read. Continued use of this site implies that you have read, understood and agree to the terms and conditions of this site. Any questions can be directed to the Administrator of this site.