Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

West Adirondack Land

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • West Adirondack Land



    I'm hoping a conservation group is secretly looking at this purchase, but they rarely raise an eyebrow for this part of the world.
    Last edited by montcalm; 12-06-2021, 01:40 PM.

  • #2
    Wow, that is some nice property. I share your hope - Nature Conservancy, where are you on this?
    "Everyone must believe in something. I believe I'll go canoeing."
    - Henry David Thoreau

    Comment


    • #3
      I've spent a lot of time in the open easement properties there over the years, sure would hate to see it go totally private. Ice Cave Mountain, the headwaters of the Black River, Horn Lake, etc. It is immediately adjacent to private extensive holdings of the Adirondack League Club property. i don't know if they are looking for new land to close to public access, hopfully not.
      "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

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm not sure if the new owners can limit public access... it may be deeded.

        I don't know much about these easements, but I was reading on the NYS site and they do close public access when they are logging. Probably for liability reasons.

        The 10k+ acres on the north part of North Lake is the most interesting to me. It's heavily degraded, as you can see from the sat images. Lots of clear cut logging, but also what looks like shelter wood cuts, etc... either way, being in the forest preserve for 30 years would alleviate it.

        They claim it's productive, but I'm tending to think they probably got the easy money out and that's why it's for sale.

        There's also two other tracts. One is north of Haderondah more or less smack in the middle of Independence river WF. Not that interesting to me, but there are public access trails that cross it. The other is just south of Haderondah along Rte 28. This is not particularly appealing to me, but again there is a public access trail which runs along the Rte 28.

        A purchase by a conservation group might be able to best decide what should stay private and what is best to be turned over to the state in the future. But it's just a thought...
        Last edited by montcalm; 12-07-2021, 01:42 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Maps and additional info here:

          The 127,135-acre Black River Wild Forest is located within the southwestern foothills of the Adirondack Forest Preserve and offers a broad spectrum of recreational opportunities, from snowmobiling near the adjacent communities of Old Forge and Otter Lake to hiking on foot trails in remote areas.


          Acreage listed by the realtor and the DEC doesn't quite match up.

          APA maps say the land north of Haderondah is 6k acres, and JB tract easement is 6k acres. The land north of North Lake is listed as almost 12k acres.

          Bit conflicting but according to the sat maps there is a large section of heavily logged land to the west of the JB easement.
          Last edited by montcalm; 12-07-2021, 01:25 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Sections were occasionally closed to public access by DEC notification where active logging was taking place, most recently a month or so ago.
            "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

            Comment


            • #7
              iirc, an easement transcends ownership as it is now part of the property deed.
              "There's a whisper on the night-wind, there's a star agleam to guide us, And the Wild is calling, calling . . . let us go." -from "The Call of the Wild" by Robert Service

              My trail journal: DuctTape's Journal

              Comment


              • #8
                I'm quite certain the easement itself cannot be removed. It does transcend ownership. I'm not sure if the rights of the easement can be altered though, as we know, not all easements provide the same access rights.

                The answer is probably somewhere on the APA website. Perhaps I'll dig more later.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I had forgotten about an encounter regarding easments I had a couple of years ago

                  BSA Cedarlands camp, near Long Lake, had extensive property with an easement agreement, allowing the public access (outside of the central core administrative property) during most of the year outside the period of summer resident scout season.

                  When it went up for sale, I heard that the easement rules were to remain in effect. I happened to be on site when a potential buyer and his real estate agent drove up in a big black SUV (with NJ plates as I recall) to visit. His idea was to develop it into a wilderness family camping resort, but when the easement was explained to him, he got real nervous about the potential of the public having access to "his" land. I even offered to guide for him. As far as I know he never returned to seal the deal.
                  "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

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Interesting, but he may have been misinformed. Someone looking to make that sort of investment should consult with a lawyer who specializes in APA law.

                    My simplified, common sense thought about easements is this: The state lifts its tax burden from the property, and possibly any liens the property might have had, so whatever the concessions are of the easement, I'd assume the state wants to negotiate for something that they deem worth that tax income loss. That may be in the form of public access, but not all easements allow this, so for some, it may simply be protecting sensitive lands from development. If the owners are using the land for logging, I'd assume public access would have to be on the table because the state is not gaining anything in terms of protections... although it may have some say on how/what may be logged. Just from what I can tell from looking at sat pics, that doesn't seem to be the case.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      IANAL but my understanding is that easements fall under that pesky "Forever Wild" business. Even if NY State wanted to, the state legally can't give any easement up without an amendment to the NY State constitution. The state can purchase additional rights from the property owner through additional easements (or purchase the land outright) but can not sell or give any of those easement rights back to the property owner (or anyone else, for that matter) without a constitutional amendment.

                      So when the land gets sold, the easement remains as is- and the new owner must also abide by the easement restrictions.

                      In the case of what NY State gains when logging is allowed but public access is not permitted- further development of the property is typically prohibited, plus the state usually gets oversight of the specifics of the silvicultural plan as well as the harvesting practices to ensure that it is done sustainably.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        So if there was public access granted, it cannot be removed without a constitutional amendment. Good to know...

                        Public access aside, it still seems like a good watershed to protect with an actual forest preserve designation that would prohibit future timber harvest.
                        Last edited by montcalm; 12-07-2021, 03:18 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by DSettahr View Post
                          further development of the property is typically prohibited,
                          I know there's been issues with this on some easement lands with existing buildings, where owners (or leasees in the case of hunting camps) have run afoul of the easement agreement by trying to add additions or even large porches to some of the buildings.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by montcalm View Post
                            So if there was public access granted, it cannot be removed with a constitutional amendment. Good to know...
                            I think you meant "without a constitutional amendment," but yeah.

                            A great example is the AMR. There's no "take backs" on that one, no matter how much money they might conceivably offer to the state.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              WHoops - yeah, without.

                              re: a constitutional amendment, those often go in favor of private party it seems, although they need to offer up some concession. At least the ones I have seen in recent years.

                              My back of my mind thought was that if you put enough money (lawyers and advertising) into something you can get around pretty much anything.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X