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

Go Back   Adirondack Forum > The Adirondack Forum > General Adirondack Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11-04-2013, 02:14 PM   #41
l'oiseau
**BANNED**
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 1,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill I. View Post
NYCO already owns land nearby on another mountain where they can begin mining. When the current mine reaches the end of its life, they will be required by law to "reclaim" it--i.e., fill it in and plant trees.

So they can keep mining on their own land and not bother the voters of the state.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBPDPTI View Post
If the mining company owned land around Lake Colden, and made this proposal in such a (more scenic) portion of the park, would there be ANY debate about this? There would be an overwhelming ‘no’.
Some of the more prominent points were laid out at the beginning. I feel it necessary to re-iterate them in case anyone forgets to start from the beginning.

Despite all the other points, these two points stand out to me as being the most obvious against the prop.

It was not well advertised that the mine had another good site at Oak Hill which it could use once the current mine has "dried up." Lot 8 is simply cheaper and easier for them - it is closer to the current operation and it is assumed the ore is easier to access. Why would they not want to get at it? They are looking to secure healthy future profits, nothing more.

The second point is obvious for any supporter of the parks. Forest preserve is to be preserved; beautiful, ugly or "plain vanilla." This point may not be obvious for those who think the park is a giant waste of taxpayers money and never go there... but they wouldn't be reading here.

And as far actual damage to land, as far as I could tell from aerial photographs, the land at Oak Hill has already been stripped, presumably from test drilling. AFAIK the land NYCO is offering will not be mined. They wouldn't be offering it if they had ore to get at. The land at lot 8 has been supposedly untouched for 100 years. It isn't virgin forest, but it is about halfway to becoming what we would call 'old growth.' 100 years is a long time. All could be wiped out in one vote.

As for the land offered, most likely the state will purchase this anyway in the future - NYCO has no real interest in it and the money raised from it's purchase could help them relocate their mine in a few years (a true win-win). It is true a couple lots could help accessibility of the Jay wilderness, whether you see that as good or not, but certainly not all of it would be added to the wilderness area. Again this could be estimated by looking at current road structure over where the proposed land is. The roads provide access points, but they also define wilderness boundaries.

As it is now, Jay Wilderness is one of the most awesome areas in the park. Any detriment to it, even a mere 200 acres, would be a real low blow.

Last edited by l'oiseau; 11-04-2013 at 02:41 PM..
l'oiseau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2013, 02:49 PM   #42
Mavs00
I am the sith
 
Mavs00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,751
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zach View Post
I have been following this discussion with great interest and intend to vote no tomorrow. I think that maybe there is a typo in the above post by our fine moderator which reverses the intended meaning of the second sentence.
Zach
Indeed there is. Corrected

Now reads: DO NOT denigrate. For examples of denegration, see CP's post directed at me.

Seriously.... I know there are lots of good and valuable comments on each side, and I think this is an great way respectfully debate the issues in a somewhat public forum. It would be a shame to over-moderate a valuable topic because points are made to passionately and in a way that violates longstanding forum rules.

Carry on. I'm facinated by the discussion, even though I cannot vote myself.
__________________
"I can feel your anger. It gives you focus. It makes you stronger. " Supreme Chancellor
Mavs00 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2013, 09:45 PM   #43
TCD
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,733
CP, I'd be careful about denigrating a guy with horns like that. AND, he has a double ended light saber. And (spoiler) he killed Quigon Jinn!
TCD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2013, 11:39 PM   #44
Bill I.
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,587
TOP 10 REASONS TO VOTE "NO" ON PROPOSITION 5
There are many reasons why New Yorkers will be voting NO on "Prop 5" on Tuesday. This page is filled with detailed background commentary and information, but to summarize it all, here are the key points we think you should know:

10 - The land exchange is being motivated by private for-profit interests, and not by a public need.

9 - Lot 8, the land that NYCO wants, was acquired by New York State in the late 19th century, and the forest has therefore enjoyed more than a century of natural growth.

8 - Recent visitors identified sugar maples on Lot 8 that may be more than 200 years old.

7 - If approved, Prop 5 would allow NYCO to remove the forest and pulverize the bedrock to harvest the mineral it wants, destroying what nature patiently created.

6 - NYCO owns another mine a few miles away, and does not need Lot 8 to stay in business.

5 - Prop 5 will create no new jobs, and its rejection will not cause anyone to lose their job.

4 - Lot 8 is part of the Forest Preserve, protected since 1894 by the state constitution as "forever wild."

3 - Multiple conservation groups oppose Prop 5, including Protect the Adirondacks, Adirondack Wild, the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Catskill Mountainkeeper.

2 - Prop 5 will set an example for future amendments because it sets the acceptable exchange rate for which the "boring" parts of the Forest Preserve can be culled and traded for something more "fun."

1 - The voters of New York State have the unique legal right to stand up and defend the Forest Preserve from exploitation!

Vote NO on Proposition 5
Tuesday, November 5 2013


#SayNo2NYCO
Bill I. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 06:39 AM   #45
randomscooter
Native Earthling
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Scooterville, NY
Posts: 1,500
The debate between the guys sitting on my two shoulders has settled neatly into place as a debate between principle and expediency. When I reach that level of clarity principle wins out. Had I failed to reach that level of clarity, for example if there had been a genuine element of urgency supporting the expediency, I would still be struggling. In this case there is no such urgency. See items 5 and 6 above.

I am pleased that Bill's summary list does not include attempts to weigh the relative merits of the parcel being "lost" and the parcel(s) being "gained". The ethical and moral imperatives, the principles, clearly make that messy argument unnecessary. Item 2 in Bill's list succinctly states the underlying principle at stake.

I hope that others who have been wrestling with this one have also found clarity, on whatever side of the issue that clarity may have taken them.
__________________
Scooting here and there
Through the woods and up the peaks
Random Scoots awaits (D.P.)


"Pushing the limits of easy."™

Last edited by randomscooter; 11-05-2013 at 06:51 AM..
randomscooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 07:15 AM   #46
dundee
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,582
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill I. View Post
TOP 10 REASONS TO VOTE "NO" ON PROPOSITION 5

3 - Multiple conservation groups oppose Prop 5, including Protect the Adirondacks, Adirondack Wild, the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Catskill Mountainkeeper.


And ADK supports the swap??


" And ADK is committed to protecting the wild lands and waters our members use and cherish. ADK is the champion of nearly 5 million acres of publicly owned lands across New York State, including the Adirondack and Catskill forest preserves, state parks, state forests, and wildlife management areas.

ADK’s environmental advocacy program grew out of the need for responsible public policies to protect these lands and to ensure they remain accessible to the public for appropriate recreation. ADK also advocates for state funding for land acquisition and stewardship and has been on the frontline in the battle against acid rain, mercury pollution, global warming, and other threats to these resources."
dundee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 07:19 AM   #47
Bill I.
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by dundee View Post
And ADK supports the swap??


" And ADK is committed to protecting the wild lands and waters our members use and cherish. ADK is the champion of nearly 5 million acres of publicly owned lands across New York State, including the Adirondack and Catskill forest preserves, state parks, state forests, and wildlife management areas.

ADK’s environmental advocacy program grew out of the need for responsible public policies to protect these lands and to ensure they remain accessible to the public for appropriate recreation. ADK also advocates for state funding for land acquisition and stewardship and has been on the frontline in the battle against acid rain, mercury pollution, global warming, and other threats to these resources."
Not only did ADK support Prop 5, but I believe they are even taking credit for picking the 1500 acres of exchange land.
Bill I. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 07:36 AM   #48
adkjack
Admin
 
adkjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill I. View Post
Not only did ADK support Prop 5, but I believe they are even taking credit for picking the 1500 acres of exchange land.
Small but important the "ADK" mentioned in the two previous posts is the Adirondack Mountain Club and not the owner operators of this forum or the adkhighpeaks forum.
__________________
"Climbing is about freedom. There's no prize money; there are no gold medals. The mountains are all about going there to do what you want to do. That's why I'll never tell anyone else how to climb. All I can say is, This is how I prefer to do it."
Ed Viesturs
adkjack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 07:44 AM   #49
randomscooter
Native Earthling
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Scooterville, NY
Posts: 1,500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill I. View Post
Not only did ADK support Prop 5, but I believe they are even taking credit for picking the 1500 acres of exchange land.
Not to mention that the 1500 acres of exchange land will not suddenly disappear if this proposition fails. It will still be there for a possible future purchase that involves traditional currency rather than the "new currency" of boring state forest preserve lands.
__________________
Scooting here and there
Through the woods and up the peaks
Random Scoots awaits (D.P.)


"Pushing the limits of easy."™
randomscooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 07:49 AM   #50
St.Regis
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,318
Sugar maples that may be more than 200 years old...sounds like they might be tapped out anyway.

Anyway, I voted NO because, IMO, Forest Preserve Land should remain "preserved".
St.Regis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 09:26 AM   #51
l'oiseau
**BANNED**
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 1,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by adkjack View Post
Small but important the "ADK" mentioned in the two previous posts is the Adirondack Mountain Club and not the owner operators of this forum or the adkhighpeaks forum.
This, I feel, is the danger in supporting groups that become politically charged. At some point you may find yourself in opposition to the group. As you can see, almost every group has a different take on this issue (as well as the other major issues). I'd rather make my decisions for myself on a case by case basis instead of having a group of lobbyist muscle me into conformity.

I'm not sure the position of the HP foundation is, but I suspect it is neutral... if not I doubt there would actually be any discussion.
l'oiseau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 10:32 AM   #52
redhawk
Senior Resident Curmudgeon
 
redhawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: In My Memories
Posts: 10,931
Quote:
Originally Posted by dundee View Post
And ADK supports the swap??


" And ADK is committed to protecting the wild lands and waters our members use and cherish. ADK is the champion of nearly 5 million acres of publicly owned lands across New York State, including the Adirondack and Catskill forest preserves, state parks, state forests, and wildlife management areas.

ADK’s environmental advocacy program grew out of the need for responsible public policies to protect these lands and to ensure they remain accessible to the public for appropriate recreation. ADK also advocates for state funding for land acquisition and stewardship and has been on the frontline in the battle against acid rain, mercury pollution, global warming, and other threats to these resources."
Quite a while back I realized that the ADK is not always the friend of the environment nor does it put principle above all.
__________________
"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 11-05-2013, 10:55 AM   #53
randomscooter
Native Earthling
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Scooterville, NY
Posts: 1,500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dundee View Post
" And ADK is committed to protecting the wild lands and waters our members use and cherish. ADK is the champion of nearly 5 million acres of publicly owned lands across New York State, including the Adirondack and Catskill forest preserves, state parks, state forests, and wildlife management areas.

ADK’s environmental advocacy program grew out of the need for responsible public policies to protect these lands and to ensure they remain accessible to the public for appropriate recreation. ADK also advocates for state funding for land acquisition and stewardship and has been on the frontline in the battle against acid rain, mercury pollution, global warming, and other threats to these resources."
Although not specified, I think a good guess is that this quote is attributable to ADK itself?

If so I see a few disturbing points:
  • "protect" and "stewardship": Is ADK's support of strip mining 200 acres of forest preserve land consistent with the stated misson?
  • "appropriate recreation": Perhaps this is the real litmus test for ADK, rather than protection and stewardship? Secondarily, who defines "appropriate"?
  • "protecting the wild lands and waters our members use and cherish": Am I to suppose their members only use and cherish the lands that offer "appropriate recreation"?

Too little too late, I suppose. <end_rant>
__________________
Scooting here and there
Through the woods and up the peaks
Random Scoots awaits (D.P.)


"Pushing the limits of easy."™

Last edited by randomscooter; 11-05-2013 at 12:48 PM.. Reason: alzheimer's strikes again
randomscooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 11:20 AM   #54
Commissionpoint
Tent Pitcher
 
Commissionpoint's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Diamond Point on Lake George, NY
Posts: 471
Quote:
Originally Posted by TCD View Post
CP, I'd be careful about denigrating a guy with horns like that. AND, he has a double ended light saber. And (spoiler) he killed Quigon Jinn!
LOL!

He knows I'm just playing with him.

If you look at my avatar, you will see that I destroy livestock and eat children. The sith does not intimidate me.
__________________
Are you in possession of all of your marbles?

WAIT a min-u-ete! I am the only one who gets to say "one more time"!
Commissionpoint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 11:26 AM   #55
l'oiseau
**BANNED**
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 1,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by St.Regis View Post
Anyway, I voted NO because, IMO, Forest Preserve Land should remain "preserved".
Same reason I voted NO - I didn't need a lot of hooplah to convince me, that was my first thought when I first read about this months back.

There were a lot of other good points made as well, and I'm glad it helped people make their mind on which way to go.
l'oiseau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 11:57 AM   #56
adkjack
Admin
 
adkjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by l'oiseau View Post

I'm not sure the position of the HP foundation is, but I suspect it is neutral... if not I doubt there would actually be any discussion.
The foundation does not have a position on this or any political position. Our not for profit classification is a charitable organization and as such we cannot.
__________________
"Climbing is about freedom. There's no prize money; there are no gold medals. The mountains are all about going there to do what you want to do. That's why I'll never tell anyone else how to climb. All I can say is, This is how I prefer to do it."
Ed Viesturs
adkjack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 12:12 PM   #57
Justin
Moving along
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,366
Many thanks to Bill Ingersoll for all of his time and hard work in helping to keep the Adirondack Forest Preserve forever wild and preserverd forever!
Job well done my friend!
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 12:17 PM   #58
Bill I.
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
Many thanks to Bill Ingersoll for all of his time and hard work in helping to keep the Adirondack Forest Preserve forever wild and preserverd forever!
Job well done my friend!


I'm planning to spend the evening at my favorite pub. I figure I can either toast in celebration or wash away my sorrows.



It's been an interesting experience, with lots of good responses on the Facebook page.
Bill I. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 01:48 PM   #59
St.Regis
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by l'oiseau View Post
Same reason I voted NO - I didn't need a lot of hooplah to convince me, that was my first thought when I first read about this months back.
Exactly.

I will say that the Propositions were the only thing worth voting for on this year's ballot. In my area, everyone ran unopposed. Should of had an "All of the Above" circle. It would have saved some ink.
St.Regis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 05:44 PM   #60
Bill I.
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,587
A proud statement.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 1441434_553519538060349_1867409608_n.jpg (149.5 KB, 66 views)
Bill I. is offline   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 05:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.