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

Go Back   Adirondack Forum > Current Affairs and Environmental Issues > Current and Historical Affairs
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02-08-2012, 04:45 PM   #61
forest dweller
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 529
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Commissionpoint View Post
LGV is like Placid Main Street, lots of shops, bars, restaurants, etc. Tourist businesses. However, The Village is a 4 block section and is not at all representative of the rest of the basin. I think a lot of people have been on Canada Street and assume the whole 32 mile lake is like that. Its not. We have a huge amount of Wild Forest designated lands as well. We also have a lot of other land which is privately held and zoned low intensity. So the two are not as different as you might think that they are.

We do realize here that a lot of folks want the oppertunity to recreate here in the summer months, and even some in the winter as well. We also do our best to contain all the highly commercial activities to that 4 block section of the Village. That area does provide income for a lot of the families that live close by, and I am sure if you asked any one of them they would say they are not interested in supporting development like that outside of the Village limits. For someone who lives in Hague or Hulets Landing the Village is some distant place that it takes an hour or more to drive to. For me who lives in Diamond Point, its about 10 or 15 minutes away depending on if its the 4th of July or the 4th of January. Don't make the mistake of thinking that Lake George Village is at all representative of the Lake George Park. (Yup, its a park within a park)
I know all of this Commisionpoint, that's why I specifically said that approving a development within Lake George village is a LOT different than approving a rather substantial development in a forest covered area east of Tupper Lake village.
forest dweller is offline  
Old 02-08-2012, 04:55 PM   #62
Commissionpoint
Tent Pitcher
 
Commissionpoint's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Diamond Point on Lake George, NY
Posts: 471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pumpkin QAAD View Post

Call me selfish but I think that was the intention. Even our Canadian friends that come to the park should have a say, eh?
The opposite of that would be that the residents of the Park become self governing and all APA seats must be held by a full time Park residents. Anyone from anywhere else can either abide by what we want or go somewhere else. Neither situation would be that good though. Its another instance of attempting to achieve a balance between the two extremes.
Commissionpoint is offline  
Old 02-08-2012, 05:37 PM   #63
forest dweller
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 529
It's not so extreme to not want to develop inside the Adirondack Park when one considers that the vast majority of land outside of the park is developed or able to be developed. I personally think it's kind of extreme to demand some level of development everywhere regardless. Are the people who want to see old growth redwoods no longer cut down extreme because something like only 3% of it remains? You seem to be more in favor of people who prefer to ignore, or are resentful of the fact, that they live within a park. So you can't really compare or equate your proposal of allowing only pro-development park residents on the APA to "extremists" who want to protect every square inch of the Adirondacks. It's a false equivalency.

Last edited by forest dweller; 02-08-2012 at 07:16 PM..
forest dweller is offline  
Old 02-08-2012, 05:51 PM   #64
chairrock
Indian Mt.Club
 
chairrock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,631
How much as the Wild Center improved the economy of TL? The village and the shopping malls are still depressed...Mickey D's is doing well...Shaheens makes a great sub....

Perhaps a high intensity townhouse development, a conversion of the Wooden Bowl Factory into high end apartments, and a downtown with Brew Pubs, Sushi, and high end clothing stores!

Seriously, once you develop any land , it can never go back....there is only so much left....

Too many people....we are a blight on the planet....
__________________
Be careful, don't spread invasive species!!

When a dog runs at you,whistle for him.
Henry David Thoreau

CL50-#23
chairrock is offline  
Old 02-08-2012, 06:30 PM   #65
Commissionpoint
Tent Pitcher
 
Commissionpoint's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Diamond Point on Lake George, NY
Posts: 471
Quote:
Originally Posted by chairrock View Post
How much as the Wild Center improved the economy of TL?..
I vividly remember sitting in a classroom at Paul Smith's (I can even tell you it was the 2nd floor of Cantwell on the St. Regis side thats how well I remember it) listening to a presentation from the lady who was organizing the Wild Center. This was during the inital phase of planning the center. She was so enthusiastic about how much good it was going to do for Tupper. All I could think the whole of the hour she was presenting was how stupid anyone was to think that the Wild Center would bring any real improvement to the economy there. I viewed it as someones pet project which would provide a nice income for the few who were on the board there, and that was about it. In fact what I took away from the whole thing was that she had some business savvy and recognized that green topics were in vogue and that she could use her talents to organize and operate a not-for-profit which would provide her with a 6 figure income under the guise of being 'environmental'. I could not believe how many students and staff at the presentation ate it all up and praised her for making a contribution to the betterment of the community. I got a D on my paper for being honest about saying I thought it was a scam and she was pulling the wool over everyones eyes. I was proud of that D though because I felt I was the only one with the courage enought to call shenanigans on her.

I wonder if the Adirondack Club proposal had been wrapped up in a nice 'green' bow if we would even be having this discussion at all or if folks would be singing the praises of the developer for having such forethought to create a community of green living.
Commissionpoint is offline  
Old 02-08-2012, 07:25 PM   #66
forest dweller
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 529
Quote:
Originally Posted by Commissionpoint View Post
I wonder if the Adirondack Club proposal had been wrapped up in a nice 'green' bow if we would even be having this discussion at all or if folks would be singing the praises of the developer for having such forethought to create a community of green living.
I don't know about anybody else here, but I personally am not so dumb to support ANY developments which requires roads and removes trees merely because they want to label it green. I don't think many "tree hugger" types (that's a badge of honor I wear proudly) would either. There is nothing greener than just leaving the forest alone.

A few of your suggestions insult my intelligence. Do you really think that would fly with environmentalists?
forest dweller is offline  
Old 02-08-2012, 09:39 PM   #67
Commissionpoint
Tent Pitcher
 
Commissionpoint's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Diamond Point on Lake George, NY
Posts: 471
My point was any extreme was bad for the situation. Neither should only residents control the situation nor should just anyone be able to have a say in what goes on.

If nothing else, sometimes its nice to know that you are indeed on the cutting edge of debate, no matter what side you are on. This is from 1 hour ago.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/09/ny...ates-rift.html
Commissionpoint is offline  
Old 02-08-2012, 10:56 PM   #68
Pumpkin QAAD
Whachu talking about
 
Pumpkin QAAD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,324
So Cuomo appointees to the APA are what's behind this seemingly inconsistent decision in regards to Adirondack development. Largest development ever approved by the APA. How nice.

I want a new job, make one for me......Brush up on your Chinese they'll own our lazy butts one day if not already.
__________________
A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they never shall sit in
Pumpkin QAAD is offline  
Old 02-09-2012, 06:44 AM   #69
forest dweller
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 529
" “With this vote, it is now clear that the park’s anti-environment and pro-development forces have achieved their long-term goal of capturing control of the park agency,” said John Caffry, a lawyer and board member for Protect the Adirondacks, an environmental group. "

That's EXACTLY what I want to know - how they got the AAPPAA to give 10 votes for this monstrosity. I'd like to know if the process on appointing people to the APA has been corrupted by pro-business forces. I'd also like to know how former APA chairpersons feel about this.

Again, can't beat around the bush - a majority of the people on the highest court in this land seems to have been dropped on their heads as babies, so it's not totally crazy to think that something is really fishy here. When the highest court in the land obviously does not know how to interpret the Constitution it's not such a stretch to believe that something is really wrong when an agency whose mission is to protect the Adirondacks from things like this goes ahead and approves it anyway.

And let's be honest here, if Cuomo was a real Democrat he would not be cutting taxes on the highest earners who are doing better than they have ever been before, he would be raising taxes to pay for things like emergency funds for places like Tupper Lake, to be used in a way to get the economy moving again without degradation to the Adirondack Park.
forest dweller is offline  
Old 02-09-2012, 07:07 AM   #70
Pumpkin QAAD
Whachu talking about
 
Pumpkin QAAD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,324
Forest dweller, did you get all that from the times article or are you shooting from the hip?
__________________
A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they never shall sit in
Pumpkin QAAD is offline  
Old 02-09-2012, 07:26 AM   #71
forest dweller
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 529
I got what's in quotations from the Times article - the rest is my interpretation of what he said and what I feel may be going on in the Adirondacks, the APA and the country at large.
forest dweller is offline  
Old 02-09-2012, 08:23 AM   #72
Pumpkin QAAD
Whachu talking about
 
Pumpkin QAAD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,324
In what situation did the Supreme Court not know how to interpret the Constitution?

I don't see how raising taxes on the productive and spending it on short term unsustainable projects makes sense except in a crisis. Sure, people need a safety net for hard times but emergency funds for Tupper Lake, I don't think that is the answer. The problem with this development project, and with your bailout plan is that it sets a precedent. Why should a town like Lake Pleasant manage themselves responsibly when emergency funds are being dished out (with their money!).

I'm actually thinking the emergency fund is even worse of a choice than the housing resort development.
__________________
A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they never shall sit in
Pumpkin QAAD is offline  
Old 02-09-2012, 09:07 AM   #73
Frhill
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glen View Post
Frhill,

I'm not happy that anyone is in that position. I know I speak as an outsider, but if my grandfather could leave his family in Europe and come here on a steamship, enlist in the military to become a citizen, fight in WWI back in Europe , then come back to the US who 4 years later allowed him to bring his family here so he could mine coal in Pennsylvania, surely someone could get in their car and drive 4 hours.

I am generally pretty center on most topics, and I do not long for the good old days of the depression, but really, we are not talking about going halfway round the world, different language, no prospects, etc. And that story was repeated for millions. If these folks aren't working, exactly what are they doing?
Glen,
The same story could be told about my grandparents (my grandpa was a WWI vet too), and I appreciate your point. However, I don’t think you are drawing a valid comparison. For one, your grandfather probably didn’t have a choice: the opportunity simply wasn’t there. Tupper Lakers have an opportunity on their doorstep in the ACR, a project which has OVERWHELMING local support. Why should they have to pass on this and move because folks like you and I want to preserve a viewshed or uphold our conceptualization of what “wilderness” is?

I still think that it is the height of arrogance for outsiders, many of whom are affluent, to tell locals that their economic opportunity is less important than aesthetics. I think communities should have a significant say in what development occurs there. I also think the outcome of this would have been very different if this project was proposed in say, Saranac Lake, where people are generally doing better than in Tupper. If communities want this sort of development, they should be able to have it for better or worse. To send some of the rhetoric back in the other direction: if you don’t like what a community is doing and feel that your “wilderness experience” has been compromised, too bad. Go somewhere else. This is my personal opinion, and I am happy to agree to disagree on this point.

To reiterate, I am NOT in favor of the ACR. I think it will fail miserably. But I also recognize that my financial well-being has nothing to do with the local economy, and I wouldn’t deign to tell others that they cannot have something they need when I really have no stake in the matter.
Frhill is offline  
Old 02-09-2012, 09:20 AM   #74
geogymn
Member
 
geogymn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,721
forest dweller, It gladdens my heart to witness your attempts to "elucidate the transcedental significance of insularity", I've grown to be tired, cynical, and hopeless.
__________________
"A culture is no better than its woods." W.H. Auden
geogymn is offline  
Old 02-09-2012, 09:51 AM   #75
Pumpkin QAAD
Whachu talking about
 
Pumpkin QAAD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frhill View Post
Glen,
The same story could be told about my grandparents (my grandpa was a WWI vet too), and I appreciate your point. However, I don’t think you are drawing a valid comparison. For one, your grandfather probably didn’t have a choice: the opportunity simply wasn’t there. Tupper Lakers have an opportunity on their doorstep in the ACR, a project which has OVERWHELMING local support. Why should they have to pass on this and move because folks like you and I want to preserve a viewshed or uphold our conceptualization of what “wilderness” is?

I still think that it is the height of arrogance for outsiders, many of whom are affluent, to tell locals that their economic opportunity is less important than aesthetics. I think communities should have a significant say in what development occurs there. I also think the outcome of this would have been very different if this project was proposed in say, Saranac Lake, where people are generally doing better than in Tupper. If communities want this sort of development, they should be able to have it for better or worse. To send some of the rhetoric back in the other direction: if you don’t like what a community is doing and feel that your “wilderness experience” has been compromised, too bad. Go somewhere else. This is my personal opinion, and I am happy to agree to disagree on this point.

To reiterate, I am NOT in favor of the ACR. I think it will fail miserably. But I also recognize that my financial well-being has nothing to do with the local economy, and I wouldn’t deign to tell others that they cannot have something they need when I really have no stake in the matter.
All very valid points. However the issue remains that Tupper Lake lies within the boundaries of a park whose stated goal is to preserve the resource for everyone (not just locals). It gives everyone a vested interest.

Yes you do have a stake in the matter, we all do.
__________________
A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they never shall sit in
Pumpkin QAAD is offline  
Old 02-09-2012, 10:20 AM   #76
Frhill
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pumpkin QAAD View Post
All very valid points. However the issue remains that Tupper Lake lies within the boundaries of a park whose stated goal is to preserve the resource for everyone (not just locals). It gives everyone a vested interest.

Yes you do have a stake in the matter, we all do.
Yes, PQ, that is correct. I still think though that communities should have the greater say because they have more at stake than you or I do. The stakeholder equation is not always equal.

Tupper Lake is within the boundaries of the Park, but what about the fact that the town of Altamont existed (as did many towns) before the Park was even created and the boundaries drawn? Or is this a non-issue in most peoples minds? Personally I think it's significant.
Frhill is offline  
Old 02-09-2012, 10:24 AM   #77
Glen
Check please
 
Glen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Huntington Bay, NY
Posts: 1,082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frhill View Post
Glen,
The same story could be told about my grandparents (my grandpa was a WWI vet too), and I appreciate your point. However, I don’t think you are drawing a valid comparison. For one, your grandfather probably didn’t have a choice: the opportunity simply wasn’t there. Tupper Lakers have an opportunity on their doorstep in the ACR, a project which has OVERWHELMING local support. Why should they have to pass on this and move because folks like you and I want to preserve a viewshed or uphold our conceptualization of what “wilderness” is?

I still think that it is the height of arrogance for outsiders, many of whom are affluent, to tell locals that their economic opportunity is less important than aesthetics. I think communities should have a significant say in what development occurs there. I also think the outcome of this would have been very different if this project was proposed in say, Saranac Lake, where people are generally doing better than in Tupper. If communities want this sort of development, they should be able to have it for better or worse. To send some of the rhetoric back in the other direction: if you don’t like what a community is doing and feel that your “wilderness experience” has been compromised, too bad. Go somewhere else. This is my personal opinion, and I am happy to agree to disagree on this point.

To reiterate, I am NOT in favor of the ACR. I think it will fail miserably. But I also recognize that my financial well-being has nothing to do with the local economy, and I wouldn’t deign to tell others that they cannot have something they need when I really have no stake in the matter.

Frhill,

So we'll agree to disagree. I will add that as far as "Overwhelming Local Support", I think you would get the same if you offered good paying jobs and full employment by clear cutting the entire area. If people like me, who do have other options decide to go elsewhere, that doesn't help the local economies. We need to think beyond our own immediate interests and think of what this "Park" will look like 50 or 100 years from now. Development is generally permanent. Construction jobs are not. I admit my opinion is formed through an eye that has seen the ugly side of development.

Glen
Glen is offline  
Old 02-09-2012, 10:37 AM   #78
Commissionpoint
Tent Pitcher
 
Commissionpoint's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Diamond Point on Lake George, NY
Posts: 471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pumpkin QAAD View Post
All very valid points. However the issue remains that Tupper Lake lies within the boundaries of a park whose stated goal is to preserve the resource for everyone (not just locals). It gives everyone a vested interest.
Theres more to it than that though right? I think a lot of people get confused and start drawing comparisons to National Parks, and the rules that govern them. Really the two concepts are vastly different. The Adirondack Park is somewhat of its own model. Its a multi use park with both public and private holdings. Thats a pretty unique thing and I think it adds to some of the misunderstanding people have about what exactly it is. Its never going to be a place that halts all development as much as its never going to be a place that develops everything. It IS a place that both things can co-exist in a responsible manner. Neither developers or preservationists are ever going to get everything they want. Its not in the nature of the design to allow either idea to surpass the other. Thus there is never a total consensus on what exactly should happen in every proposed undertaking.

I support the Tupper Lake development (I guess thats pretty obvious at this point), but I am not willing to go so far as to call Mr. Cuomo or the APA board members shills for development. I support wilderness and wild forest lands too, and would go so far to say that its now time to remove Marcy Dam as its been severly damaged and repairing it is not in compliance with designated land use in that area. So its a very complicated set of issues.

Whats better for those acres outside Tupper? The current constant logging and cutting of skidder roads all over the place on that parcel, or the cessation of logging operations and replacement with responsible approved housing units with deed restrictions that disallow development along an established buffer? As it stands right now its being logged right up to state land borders. In the permit for development a healthy buffer that would prevent any such activity is part of the deal. I think its pretty simple to see that developing a few hundred acres of private land with the understanding the owners will become stewards for the few thousand remaining acres is a win for everyone.

Whatever happens I'd hate to see up go back to the days when we were literally trying to burn the APA out of Ray Brook. Thats probably a story for another thread though.

Last edited by Commissionpoint; 02-09-2012 at 10:53 AM..
Commissionpoint is offline  
Old 02-09-2012, 10:52 AM   #79
forest dweller
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 529
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frhill View Post
If communities want this sort of development, they should be able to have it for better or worse. To send some of the rhetoric back in the other direction: if you don’t like what a community is doing and feel that your “wilderness experience” has been compromised, too bad. Go somewhere else. This is my personal opinion, and I am happy to agree to disagree on this point.

To reiterate, I am NOT in favor of the ACR. I think it will fail miserably. But I also recognize that my financial well-being has nothing to do with the local economy, and I wouldn’t deign to tell others that they cannot have something they need when I really have no stake in the matter.
With regards to paragraph number one, as has been pointed out already a few times here, people in search of wilderness are having a harder and harder time finding it - it's a lot more scarce than communities with good economies are.

And in response to your second paragraph, how can you say that your financial well being has no effect on your local economy? You spend money in your local community, don't you? What would happen to your local community if you and your neighbors for some reason stopped spending money in the businesses in your community? Things are connected and interrelated.
forest dweller is offline  
Old 02-09-2012, 11:07 AM   #80
Frhill
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glen View Post
Frhill,

So we'll agree to disagree. I will add that as far as "Overwhelming Local Support", I think you would get the same if you offered good paying jobs and full employment by clear cutting the entire area. If people like me, who do have other options decide to go elsewhere, that doesn't help the local economies. We need to think beyond our own immediate interests and think of what this "Park" will look like 50 or 100 years from now. Development is generally permanent. Construction jobs are not. I admit my opinion is formed through an eye that has seen the ugly side of development.

Glen
Glen,

One thing we do agree upon is that construction jobs are not any kind of sustainable solution. But I don't think tourism is either. Those jobs are mostly low paying, low mobility, and seasonal to boot.
Frhill is offline  
Closed Thread


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 10:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, 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.