Adirondack Almanack: Commentary: Teresa Sayward's 'Us Versus Them'

Monday, December 07, 2009

Commentary: Teresa Sayward's 'Us Versus Them'

Assemblywoman Teresa Sayward, who last winter got her wish with the closing of local campgrounds by the DEC, is working hard on her plan to privatize more of the Adirondacks. In a recent opinion piece sent to local media entitled "Preserving The Rights of Adirondack Families," Sayward argued that the Willsboro mining operation NYCO Minerals should be given permission to mine 250 acres of the Jay Mountain Wilderness, the smallest wilderness area in the Adirondacks.

NYCO built the world's largest wollastonite mine and processing facility in Sonara, Mexico in 1997, so they can't be too concerned with American jobs, but that is exactly Sayward's pitch for the required amendment to the State constitution. "Without this amendment," she says, "future operations at NYCO could be shortened by many years." NYCO's Chairman Jay Moroney told the Adirondack Daily Enterprise that handing over the Forest Preserve lands to private mining company "could provide an extension of life to [their] operation." How long? Five to nine years, according to Moroney.

I suppose the lack of wisdom in that plan is obvious, but what really gets me is Sayward's divisive attack on her neighbors whose future she claims is "grim" thanks to late-arriving environmentalists. "My family, friends and neighbors are being forced out of existence and few seem to care," Sayward says in a classic "us locals are being oppressed by them newcomers" argument.

Sayward's opinion piece targeted her neighbors who support Protect the Adirondacks, the environmental conservation organization that began in 1901—nearly 110 years ago. "When people first began discovering the Adirondacks, we carried their packs, cut their trees, built their homes, dug their ditches, labored in their mills, taught their children, healed their sick and welcomed them like family" Sayward writes. "Most have become our friends and our neighbors, but those who came with their own agenda have stood Judge and Jury."

I've come to expect a lot of "common man" rhetoric from politicians, but Sayward is so far off the mark it's disgraceful—she misstates her own connections to the region and insults her neighbors as outsiders.

In the past two months the Adirondack community lost two people Teresa Sayward apparently saw as enemies, Clarence Petty of Coreys, Canton and Saranac Lake and Nellie Staves of Tupper Lake. Both were avid supporters of the Forest Preserve, the Adirondack Park, and Protect the Adirondacks. Both, then, according to Sayward's twisted logic, were in part responsible for her "family, friends and neighbors . . . being forced out of existence." Combined, Staves and Petty had more then 160 years of Adirondack experience under their belts.

As far as I can tell, Sayward didn't even live in the Adirondack Park until the 1972 when Willsboro was brought within the Blue Line. Sayward lived in Connecticut in 1960s before moving to Willsboro.

So what about Sayward's family? If she is only a part-time Adirondacker, surely her family comes from the Adirondack Park? Surely they were some of the Adirondack guides, loggers, carpenters, ditch diggers, mill hands, teachers, or doctors she claims they were right? Well - no, they weren't. In fact, only Sayward's mother lived inside the Blue Line, and only late in life.

Teresa Sayward's father Joseph Riley, whose family was apparently from Willsboro, died at least 20 years before that town was added to the park in 1972. Sayward's mother, Beatrice Garrow, was born in Plattsburgh in 1917 the daughter of William and Rose (D'Amour) Garrow.

So Sayward should lay off the hateful "us locals versus them outsiders" nonsense. Environmental conservation, supported and encouraged by those who live here, have helped shape the Adirondack way of life for 125 years. Sayward's home was only included (apparently against her will) in 1972, if anything, that makes her the late-arriving outsider trying to impose her will.

19 Comments:

TourPro said...

And don't forget she has no problem imposing Gay Marriage on "us".

I suppose it is worth it to note that the Adirondacks do not exist in a vacuum. The world is getting smaller and arguments about "us" vs "them" grow tiresome.

On the mining issue, I'm not ready to sacrifice the Jay Wilderness for less than a decade of economic development.

Anonymous said...

I'm a lifelong adirondacker...
and pro environment.No way I would support mining in the wilderness area.

TourPro said...

I wanted to clarify.

I'm not taking sides on the marriage issue - just wanted to point out the irony of her "us vs. them" argument. Personally, I think we should abolish the secular implementation of "marriage".

It might also be worth checking out the mine they want to expand:
Lewis Mine

Worth noting that this is one of the world's most important Wollastonite sources. I'm not sure of the strategic value of that mineral, nor the future demand. According to some studies, it also has some use in the removal of phosphorus - as in before it enters Lake Champlain.

Tony said...

Teresa Sayward seems to suggest that the interests of NYCO are co-extensive with the interests of her constituents. Not so. In 1998, she supported NYCO’s application to the Adirondack Park Agency to open the mine in Lewis, despite the concerns of residents of the roads over which NYCO’s trucks would travel to and fro the mines. The agency allowed the company to truck 120 loads every day between the mine and the plant in Willsboro. The residents proposed that the trucks use an alternate route either going to or returning from the mine, not only to reduce their share of discomfort but because the roads the company preferred to use was not constructed for heavy traffic and because increased truck traffic increased the risks of accidents. Two trucks had driven off the road the year before, sending their drivers to the hospital. The company rejected the proposal because, it claimed, the costs of gas would reduce its profits. (At the time, those profits exceeded $40 million.) Teresa didn’t lift a finger to help.

Brian said...

Tour: no one individual, let alone a group, "imposed" gay marriage on New York state. Although 57% of legislators voted in favor of legalizing gay marriage (an action supported by 51% of New York citizens), you may have heard that the measure still did not pass.

Will Doolittle said...

You haven't clarified much, TourPro. Gay marriage is not an imposition on anyone. Besides that, this is John Warren proving Theresa's point. Clarence Pettey and Nellie Staves are the old-time Adirondackers that the Adirondack environmental faction has used as tokens for decades. It's embarrassing -- not the environmentalism of Pettey and Staves, but the way the pro-APA folks have seized on them and trotted them out for display over and over -- "See, some real Adirondackers agree with us." They are the exceptions that prove the rule -- the fact that they had to be so often interviewed and put on boards and celebrated and so on shows how hard it has been over 35 years for the APA folks to find longtime residents on their side.

callsign222 said...

I'm not a local, heck, I had to move out two years ago when my employer shuttered their Plattsburgh location, but MAN did I love going to the Jay Wilderness. What a gem-- quiet, totally undeveloped, open ridge-line hiking, spectacular views of the High Peaks and the Champlain Valley, and it's easily accessible.

The unfortunate "us vs them" argument is much in the same line as too much political and policy debate of "you're wrong, I'm right." There's always a hard divisive line and a seemingly simple solution to a complex problem. There is such a misplaced desire for absolutes that the bigger social, economic, historical, geographical, etc. picture is ignored often at our peril.

There is a lot to be said for nuance and gray areas and a suitable complex debate with not-so-easy solutions that are appropriate to the problems at hand.

It really comes down to a question of level-headedness, patience, education, and interest, all of which are too often missing in the public-at-large.

Its gets tiresome.

John Warren said...

I guess I'm missing something Will, could you point me to the 90 or 100 year old residents of the park that have been profoundly important advocates for development? Those who have been vocally opposed to the Forest Preserve, the Adirodnack Park, and the APA in the same way Staves and Petty have supported those institutions?

Who stands on the other side of the great debate?

If anything, the fact of folks like Petty and Staves, demonstrates that the anti-forest preserve, anti-apa, anti-enviros are really just blowing a lot of hot air about being the 'true voice' of Adirondackers.

They have no organized presence on the issues of the park for example. Where are the large 100-year-old citizen groups that oppose the Forest Preserve for example?

The RCPA was a clear indication that locals support environmental protection and limits on over development - where is that group on the other side?

Jon said...

John,
Just a few points piggy-backing off of Will's prior post.
Yes, the RCPA does include some percentage of Adirondack residents, but I don't think that many.
I think it's fair to assume that more park residents fear or resent the additional regulation that comes with being inside of the Blue Line.
If that wasn't the case, I doubt Sayward would continue to get reelected so easily.
The woman is a GOP gay marriage advocate for God sake.
If so many people opposed her stance, I think she would be easily defeated by a Democrat or something similar.
Going one further, the fact that the region is so starkly Republican is even more evidence that the enviros are not a representative sample of Adk residents.
Agree or disagree, I am confident the Assemblywoman's statements speak to a vast majority of those who live and work here.
If you don't agree, go to a town board meeting -- any town board meeting -- and interview the town level elected officials.
More often than not you will find that they were at-least partially elected on anti-APA/forest preserve platforms.
The reason the Staves and Pettey are so cherished in green circles is b/c of a lack a lot of other resident supporters.
Regardless of one's personal feelings, to claim that most Adirondacker's are pro-forest preserve just isn't correct.
If so, it would be reflected in the composition of local governments.

John Warren said...

Jon, I think you've made some sweeping generalizations based on well, no evidence.

I don't doubt that many residents are anti-enviro and anti-apa - but most? Prove it. The evidence I have shows otherwise, and I too have been to many local meetings.

The Adirondack Park Regional Assessment, sponsored by generally anti-APA-ers, shows that more than half of the local government respondents did not believe that the APA had EVER "impeded the achievement of economic goals in their community."

To the question as to whether they believed "there is local resistance to additional land use regulation" 34 responded NO, 29 didn't bother to answer (which assumes at least they didn't think it was all that important) and just 13 said yes.

You still haven't shown me the long standing locally born and raised critic of the APA on par with the longstanding locally born and raised supporters of the forest preserve and APA. If locals are so anti-environment why in the 125 years or so of the Forest Preserve, can you not name one on par with Staves of Petty?

You can claim that RCPA was really not made up with residents, but how about some proof?

And show me the anti-Forest Preserve organization that has sprung up in the last 125 years before you criticize the RCPA - surely there must be one dating from say 1900?

Here's an alternative argument that can be more easily proven - the anti-APA folks have generally been led by developers who have come and gone, or those with development ties. They have gotten a lot of press because it's sexy to have an "us vs. them" approach" like Sayward's. But the record proves, it's mostly hot air with little actual support on the ground.

I doubt being a Republican or a Democrat has anything to do with the way people see over-development of the park. And that sentence just provided as much proof as you did in claiming that because Republicans have an enrollment advantage, then most folks around here are anti-APA. I have here a book by Nelson Rockefeller, Republican NYS Governor and later Vice President - it's entitled "Our Environment Can Be Saved."

Don't you figure Rocky carried the North Country?

Brian said...

Unfortunately, some people want the Park to be just like everywhere else. More generica in an increasingly homogenized nation.

Fortunately, some people like Clarence realized the value of diversity, not just in nature but in society as well. People who like big cities can move to Manhattan. People like suburbia can move to Westchester or Nassau Counties. And I don't begrudge those people a thing. But why shouldn't there be a place for those who want and value something different? Why must every place be like every other place?

Paul said...

"Here's an alternative argument that can be more easily proven - the anti-APA folks have generally been led by developers who have come and gone, or those with development ties.". John, when did you get to the ADKS? Yesterday? This is a totally bogus claim. Anyone who has followed this debate over the years since the early seventies knows that the main opposition to the APA comes from very regular folks that are certainly not led by anyone? That may be why they have been totally unsuccessful in changing any APA policies. When I last checked the APA had so far made their development policies more strict than when they were enacted. They have changed their regulations w/o the approval of the legislature (ie. all the people on NYS) on many occasions. And now they are talking about making regulations more restrictive yet again! The folks that support APA policies on the other hand are clearly "led" by the big 3 environmental groups that hold influence over the APA from a base that is mainly outside the area. I think that some recent revelations regarding potential collusion between the APA and these groups may prove that this has been the case all along. But since you say that your point above can be "easily proven" please go ahead and do that for us.

John Warren said...

Paul,

I think I've made my point above, and I don't see your evidence suggesting otherwise. You're shifting the argument. I gave you results from the Adirondack Park Regional Assessment to back up my claims - and you are ignoring them.

I don't doubt that "the main opposition to the APA comes from very regular folks that are certainly not led by anyone." That doesn't mean they're in the majority, even when it comes to the local elected government officials who answered the survey.

The support for the kind of restraints on over-development the APA act embodies also comes from "regular folks." It has been longstanding, since at least the 1870s.

More significantly, it helped create the awareness of environmental conservation of forests, waters, and wildlife that exists today and is embodied in legislation like the clean air and water acts, the SEQRA, the establishment of the various state agencies since the 1880s responsible for the protection of state's wildlife and forests - and the APA act.

I would venture to say that the entire country (perhaps most of the western world) has made their development polices more strict since the 1970s as an indirect result of the wildlife and wilderness protections enacted here.

You apparently disagree with those policies, but I don't believe you are in the majority here or in the state as a whole.

It's debatable whether your view was in the majority locally even in the 1970s. Vocal, visible, and sometimes violent in their opposition yes, but in actual numbers, I'll bet not so much.

I ask again - where are they now? Who makes these claims about the APA except a few of the same tried and true individual opponents from the 1970s?

The collusion argument is just another in the long line of attacks by the same few vocal people to diminish the impact of zoning based on environmental conservation.

Thanks for reading and commenting.

Paul said...

John,

I don't necessarily disagree with the development policies of the APA. I do disagree at times in the way they are managed. I would argue that there was a place for that agency, and the need for the state to impose development regulations on private land, 40 years ago. But I think that the agency has outlived its purpose. And now when we see it clearly making erroneous judgment calls like with the Lewis farm case and the Silver lake case. Both of these are clear examples of where the APA was wrong in their judgment calls and in turn severely trampled the property owners rights. To do these kinds of things, and then turn around and ask for more regulatory authority, seems crazy in my opinion.

BTW I wouldn't call the AATV anti-APA. If that were the case I doubt that they would have chosen its director to run the APA?

You are right though I have shifted the argument. To your comments of where are the Petty's on the other side... Just open your eyes. Have you never been to an Adirondack hunting camp? I can introduce you to dozens of folks in their 80s and 90s who feel that their rights as private property owners are being trampled by agencies like the APA and the DEC. Granted, they are not as organized and vocal as some on the other side but they are there, and their voices count. One example is man named Jim LaTour. He lived into his 80s and was a WWII veteran, logger, and saw mill owner from Onchiota NY. You will recognize his name for a memorial park on Lake Colby across the street from the hospital in Saranac Lake. His family donated that land, as well as all the land the hospital occupies, to the hospital many years ago (actually he sold it to them for one dollar!). I am sure that you might have found him to be a gruff old battle axe that is "blowing a lot of hot air" as you say. But he is someone who knows how it feels to have folks from outside the ADKS come in and tell him how he should live his life and what he can or cannot do with his land. He may have never been adopted by some organizations as a speaker like some have been on the "other side" but his voice is worth being heard and understood. If you look at a poster for the old Adirondack Museum exhibit for "Adirondack Faces" he is the man in the picture with saw dust on his shirt leaning against a saw blade. They are out there you just have to try a little harder and look in the right places, and listen.

John Warren said...

I should make clear that I said "The Adirondack Park Regional Assessment, sponsored by generally anti-APA-ers" - I got my copy from the Fred Monroe who has been stumping on it around the state since it was released. That, and the way the questions themselves were asked indicates to me that the study had an agenda. It's no surprise to me that only the towns of Chester (where Monroe is Supervisor) and Arietta signed on to co-sponsor the study.

We'll have to disagree on the meaning of the Lewis farm and Silver lake cases. I was just over to the Lewis farm a couple of weeks ago. You can't tell me those houses he built, and those roads he's laid out everywhere, are appropriate.

As I've said, I don't doubt that there are local people on the anti-APA side.

It just does not make sense however, these claims that most local people oppose the APA when you have no legendary leaders (like for instance TR, Colvin, Marshall, I could on), no long-lived organization whatsoever - what you do have are some of the same folks from the 1970s now turning to legal move after legal move to win a battle they couldn't raise an army for.

I'm primarily a documentary historian. I appreciate the value of local history, told by local people (especially older ones!).

What we're talking about here is politics - your voice equal to mine - and there is a reason the APA is still here, the enviro groups are still here, and the anti-APA movement of the 1970s (and to a smaller extent the early 1990s) is not.

Maybe they'll be back, maybe you're the vanguard of a new movement.

I think history is on the other side. That is more environmental protection through controlled development and zoning and the like, not less.

More importantly, I think, is that most people want it that way.

Thanks for having the debate.

Paul said...

I am certainly no vanguard! Like many folks in the Adirondacks (like yourself I suspect) I simply want to see development managed in a fair way. Currently it is not being done fairly in my opinion, and in the opinion of many others involved. Perhaps not a vocal majority, but folks who deserve to be heard non-the-less. In the cases I described I think we finally see folks getting a fair shake from the legal system. There is going to be development on private land in the ADKS that cannot be stopped. Some groups have been quite vocal in stating the case that they feel there should be NO development (or almost none) in the ADKS. It is pretty easy to raise an “army” for that cause when it doesn’t affect most of the constituents with the exception of giving them more open space to recreate in. You are not going to find too many folks outside the area that want to take up the cause of "responsibly developing private land in the ADKS"? That is a tough sell, imagine trying to raise money over the phone with that line! For example I might be all for shutting down development on private land say on all the US Virgin Islands. That is a great place to drink pina-coladas and snorkel, screw the locals! I bet I could put together a group to advocate this. I think I’ll call it “Protect the Islands”!
I will be honest; I own two camps, both on the water in the ADKS. One is on a river and one is on a lake. I grew up there, and like many of my friends had to leave the mountains to find opportunities that I could not find at home. I currently live in the Finger Lakes, much of my family still lives and works in the ADKS. Now I would love to see everything stay as it is or get even less developed. Now that I am set I would love to say “that’s it, no more camps near me!”. “Tighten those regulations, I don’t want anyone spoiling my view, or having what I have”. But is that really fair? Curt Stiles already has a boathouse on Upper Saranac. It’s no sweat off his back to tighten up APA restrictions on boathouse construction. Clarence Petty lived on public land as a boy. If the ADK council were to hear about a local family (or anyone) trying to set up a permanent camp on forest preserve land on the shores of Upper Saranac Lake today they would be all over them like a cheap suit! Rather than an icon, they would view him as an enemy, someone who needs to be taught a lesson. Then they would email their friends at the APA and let them take care of it. What is going on in the ADKS is insane. Things need to change.

Brian said...

Though it was before I started following the news closely, I vaguely remember a mini-uprising in the late 80s/early 90s in some Adirondack towns (especially Warrensburg) protesting the Cuomo administration's plan for the Adirondacks for the 21st Century. I can't find much online about. John, as a historian, are you aware of any books or online material on the topic?

John Warren said...

I don't know of any online sources, aside from the digitized newspapers of the NNLN which are an incredible slog and mostly from the perspective of generally anti-enviro reporters and editors.

I think it's safe to say that there have been two significant times of demonstrations against the APA: 1971 to 1976 and 1989 to 1991.

The first, was in 1971-1976 when the Temporary Study Commission released it's findings and they were endorsed in watered-down form by the state legislature. This resulted in the creation of the APA and teh Local Government Review Board, now headed by Fred Monroe.

The commissions findings were largely the result of the explosion of development that followed the construction of the Adirondack Northway (most of those abandoned motels you see nowadays).

The from 1971 until the early 1990s the anti-APAers / anti-enviro crowd became increasingly violent.

In 1976, there was the attempted arson of the APA headquarters. Anne LaBastille's barn was burnt down, and there were a lot of individual attacks on environmentalists, particular against staff of the APA and the Adirondack Council.

The "Battle of Crane Pond" that Phil Brown wrote about earlier this week was in 1989. It was at Crane Pond that Warrensburg Supervisor Maynard Baker (defeated again in this fall's election) punched the Adirondack Council's John Sheehan and was punched back. I've written about this before here:
http://www.adirondackalmanack.com/2009/07/protecting-adirondacks-new-era-begins.html

This was all magnified with the release of the findings of the 21st Century Commission in the spring of 1990. This resulted in two "freedom drives" attempting to close down the Northway. Despite the fact that the Adirondacks had 67 percent more dwellings from 1967 to 1992, this second commission's findings were never enacted. It was at this time that the Residents Committee was formed.

The main reason for the 21st Century Commission had been the fear that the paper companies (then moving abroad) would sell their vast holdings to developers. Instead, folks like the Nature Conservancy, and the Open Space Institute have stepped in to buy that land and put it under conservation easements (which the same anti-enviros also generally oppose).

There are three sources that discuss these issues at length:

Frank Graham's The Adirondack Park: A Political History covers the earlier period.

Philip Terrie's Contested Terrain: A New History of Nature and People in the Adirondacks (Regional) covers both somewhat more even handedly.

David Helvarg's The War Against the Greens describes both periods and focuses on the violence of the Anti-APA crowd.

On the anti-enviro side is The Adirondack Rebellion by Anthony D'Elia (1979).

If someone wants to contribute to better understanding of this history they could buy me a copy of this last book for the holidays!

Please do feel free to add to this list.

Tony said...

You should probably add Barbara McMartin's 2007 Perspective on the Adirondacks for a partial view of the politics behind the Cuomo Commission report.