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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-03-2011, 06:04 PM   #1
krummholz
Member
 
krummholz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 59
State acquisition of some former Finch Pruyn land

It looks like the state has bought up some of the land that was held by the Nature Conservancy. The last paragraph in this article pertains to the Boreas Ponds/Essex Chain tracts, which are going to be a much tougher sell..... It seems that public reaction is highly polarized as expected.

http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise....html?nav=5008
krummholz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2011, 06:38 PM   #2
Dick
somewhere out there...
 
Dick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: avatar: Patagonia
Posts: 2,823
More info:
http://www.adkhighpeaks.com/forums/s...ad.php?t=13423

Dick
Dick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2011, 08:11 PM   #3
stripperguy
Hangin' by a thread
 
stripperguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Schenectady, NY
Posts: 2,727
Dick,
Thanks for the link...
And Peakbagr,
Thanks for the info...
stripperguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2011, 09:16 AM   #4
fisher39
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,007
I like this "hybrid" approach. The fewer carrying costs for the state, and the more flexibility for land use (such as logging) the better. The most important thing for me is the conservation easement to prevent development.

FYI, here's an article in the latest Adirondack Explorer on the Gooley Club and the Essex Chain - http://www.adirondackexplorer.org/st...gooleyclub.php
fisher39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2011, 09:37 AM   #5
krummholz
Member
 
krummholz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 59
[QUOTE=fisher39;161029]The most important thing for me is the conservation easement to prevent development.


We definitely are in agreement on that one!

Thanks for the interesting article link.
krummholz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2011, 11:11 AM   #6
chairrock
Indian Mt.Club
 
chairrock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,618
Well I guess that the club leasing Fish Brook Flow won't be stocking Canadian hybrids anymore, ending a 40 year tradition.
And I bet there will be negotiations on the price of the lease....
__________________
Be careful, don't spread invasive species!!

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

CL50-#23
chairrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2011, 11:59 AM   #7
adkman12986
Member
 
adkman12986's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Tupper Lake
Posts: 684
Quote:
Originally Posted by chairrock View Post
Well I guess that the club leasing Fish Brook Flow won't be stocking Canadian hybrids anymore, ending a 40 year tradition.
And I bet there will be negotiations on the price of the lease....
Conservation easements deffinately has some good points as well as the bad ones such as you have pointed out. Look what has happened to Little Tupper Lake with the Haritage trout.
adkman12986 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2011, 01:40 PM   #8
40dog
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 158
seems like alot of money in a time of limited funds for ny.
state cant handle whats on there plate now.supporter of the non development ideas but sounds like a big expense while the state cant even keep lands and rest stops open they have now.does the state collect tax revenue now on this, after the purchase that will be gone if they do .these purchases dont sound good if they cant create revenue from them in some way like logging or special lease. protecting from development is great but the burden of debt sounds greater
40dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2011, 01:43 PM   #9
40dog
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 158
where is the state getting this money
40dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2011, 01:44 PM   #10
TBPDPTI
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by 40dog View Post
seems like alot of money in a time of limited funds for ny.
state cant handle whats on there plate now.supporter of the non development ideas but sounds like a big expense while the state cant even keep lands and rest stops open they have now.does the state collect tax revenue now on this, after the purchase that will be gone if they do .these purchases dont sound good if they cant create revenue from them in some way like logging or special lease. protecting from development is great but the burden of debt sounds greater
This was discussed in a similarly-based thread a short while ago. My basic opinion was that NY is in fiscal crisis mode, but the EPF is not to blame, as it constitutes a mere fraction of the issue of debt, etc. Simply fix the problems in Albany, and this is a moot point.
TBPDPTI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2011, 02:00 PM   #11
fisher39
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by 40dog View Post
seems like alot of money in a time of limited funds for ny.
state cant handle whats on there plate now.supporter of the non development ideas but sounds like a big expense while the state cant even keep lands and rest stops open they have now.does the state collect tax revenue now on this, after the purchase that will be gone if they do .these purchases dont sound good if they cant create revenue from them in some way like logging or special lease. protecting from development is great but the burden of debt sounds greater
My sketchy understanding of the arrangement is that a private company (ATP) will continue to hold the deed and pay the taxes, which is the killer carrying cost. With the exception of incidental expenses to facilitate recreation (patrols, trail maintenance, etc), this will be a onetime expense for the state, coming out of a fund intended explicitly for this sort of thing.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about the above...

The problems arise when the state buys the land, and ends up bearing the costs in perpetuity. Of course this is a bad thing for the state taxpayers, but it is also a bad thing for the towns that are over the barrel because they have most of their eggs in one basket when it comes to property taxes.

I say do everything possible to keep private landowners holding the deeds and paying the taxes, and make it easy for them to sell the development and recreation rights if they so desire.
fisher39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2011, 09:13 PM   #12
40dog
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 158
thanks fisher that was what i was looking for the just a little light on who was covering what in terms of future costs. though the costs to keep and maintain public land use is small compared to the budget crisis in ny. if you look closely we who enjoy the outdoors are taking a big hit when it comes to where to cut general costs . when the moose river rec area was closed this year early in the season.the lack of funds was only a small amount but loss of access was great.the state could have pulled money from elseware but they choose not to . we all would hate to believe new areas for hiking and sporting access are coming and then find the state cant find the money or workforce to maintain them . we the state will own the access rights but we the state wont be able to open them up for the future. Some may think im beating a dead horse on this point or topic but im not for anything that we will pay for and then be the victim of. i know this is the adk forum but all throughout the state this is becoming the case many refuse to accept the facts . We maybe gaining land in the daks but we are not honoring our obligations to new yorkers in other areas. many dayuse areas have lost their maintinance budgets and no fix is in sight as of yet. the next few years will be very rough for public access and land use. but some realy dont care its easy to forget once your out on the trail the daks are beautiful.
40dog 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 12:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, 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.