Saturday, November 10, 2012

Lost Brook Dispatches: Three More Economic Strategies

I have been in the middle of a series of arguments for building the Adirondack economy by promoting the region as a premier wilderness destination, something it is not widely known as now.  A wild Adirondack Image will resonate in a much different way than current conceptions of the region bring to mind.  It will become more unique, more valuable and more appropriate for answering the large and growing national demand for wild places.

The first two strategies of my five point economic proposal argued that a wild Adirondack Image can be a powerful tool in promoting wilderness tourism and recreation.  Now I will move onto three additional strategies for leveraging a wild Adirondacks

The first is to move the Adirondack Park to the forefront of the burgeoning outdoor education industry.  There is an almost dizzying array of programs and initiatives to use wilderness and outdoor experiences to assist troubled youth, develop leadership, provide exposure of the natural world to people in urban communities, to provide beneficial programs to the poor and disadvantaged who would otherwise never experience wilderness.   This is a potentially explosive area of growth in wilderness use.

Outdoor education is nothing new in the Adirondacks: from SUNY Cortland’s Huntington Memorial Camp to ATIS’s High Peaks Camp to Paul Smiths, numerous organizations and programs in the Adirondacks cater to a variety of potential students.  But I know of no park-wide strategy to promote outdoor educational as part of the Adirondack Image.  The very fact of the public-private mix here, the existing infrastructure of towns and roads winding through so much forest preserve, the climbable nature of the mountains and the navigable water all contribute to making the Adirondacks a second-to-none locale for wilderness education.  Not only that but we have a rich tradition of guiding upon which to draw, along with top-shelf educational institutions integrated into the life of the park.

The mind boggles at the number of people who could be drawn here, first to take part in a wilderness education program for themselves or their children, then as returning visitors because they have fallen in love with the place.  Imagine a coordinated outreach program, complete with first-class promotional materials, that was distributed electronically to every school – public and private, primary, secondary and college – in the United States.  We have the perfect place for wilderness education.  Let’s market it with a park-wide strategy and focus.

Second, it seems to me that we can do a better job of marketing our magnificent history, again with a park-wide strategy instead of piecemeal promotion of specific attraction.  The Adirondack Image has a powerful history story that is deeper and greater than any other wilderness area in America, yet no one except local history buffs really knows it.  We have a great exemplar of the powerful draw of the region’s history in the world-class Adirondack Museum.  But there is so much more to leverage, most of it inextricably wound with the idea of the wilderness that we have preserved here.

A strategy to meld interest in history with an Adirondack Image would seem to naturally split into two areas:  the Lake Champlain corridor and everything else.  This The Lake Champlain corridor is its own draw which from out here in the heartland is somewhat understood, though not as anything Adirondack.  There is a heck of an argument to make that the cradle of liberty is here just as much as Philadelphia, given that the fate of the continent was settled in the Champlain valley not one but at least three times.

Recently I was perusing the web site for the Lake Champlain Region tourism organization.  Their history narrative is right on the money and their integrated regional approach and branding is an example of the kind of thing I’m thinking about.   They even call themselves “The Adirondack Coast,” sort of a special case of an Adirondack Image

But the rest of the park has much to offer as well and no cohesive image to promote it.  I’m thinking in particular of the romantic appeal of failed attempts to settle in, survive and make good in the wilderness: pioneer homesteads and ruins and ghost towns and abandoned enterprises.  There is a uniquely American passion for that kind of past, of unknown men and women laboring on the frontier, the remnants of their efforts still visible even as their names and lives and histories have been lost in the mists of time.

This kind of history not only plays off of wilderness but even enhances the allure of wilderness.  Thus it would be an integral part of a wild Adirondack image.  “Wow, this place is so wild, it couldn’t be settled.”  Unfortunately when people think of frontiers, pioneers and ghost towns they think of Wyoming, not the Adirondacks.

I think there are numerous opportunities to leverage this kind of draw.  Here are two.  Nobody outside of the region knows that John Brown is moldering in an Adirondack grave except well-informed civil war buffs.  But with an increasing interest in the history of the African American experience in this country why not tie John Brown’s farm to a larger canvas, the mystery of Timbuctoo.  Here is a poignant and ghostly Adirondack echo.  Or what of Tahawus and Adirondac?   So far as I’ve heard (which is little, lately) the development of historic district is on hold.  But here we have a ghost town nonpareil, what with the remoteness, the dense, surrounding forest and massive mining machinery and works still imposing themselves on the surrounding wilderness.  Just the journey back to Adirondac itself, along a dead-end road, with a palpable fell of immersion into the wild, makes it an otherworldly experience.  Now the possibility of train service is on the horizon.  I think the story and allure of Adirondac is marketable as part of a broad Adirondack strategy to promote pioneer history.  Imagine the shot in the arm to Newcomb.  Tahawus is a perfect example of the melding of romantic history to wilderness.

The third economic strategy is to use our wild Adirondack Image to promote telecommuting: relocating to the Adirondacks and living in paradise while working elsewhere.  This is the most compelling way to create an infusion of new residents with money and means.  It becomes more and more obvious to me that this one is the game-changer, the strategy with the most potential to reverse the declining fortunes of many Adirondack towns and bring the unique balance between an increasingly wild park and vibrant local communities to full fruition.

Unbeknownst to many Adirondackers, there is a talented, dedicated group of extremely capable people leading the way and laying the groundwork to make this economic strategy fly.  I have been talking with them and will devote next week’s Dispatch to their story and the potential of telecommuting to change the fortunes of the park.

Photo: MacNaughton Cottage at Adirondac

Related Stories


Pete Nelson

Pete Nelson is a teacher, writer, essayist and activist whose work has appeared in a variety of Adirondack publications, and regularly in the Adirondack Almanack since 2005. Pete is also a founder and current Coordinator of the Adirondack Diversity Advisory Council, which is working to make the Park more welcoming and inclusive.

When not writing or teaching mathematics at North Country Community College, Pete can be found in the back country, making music or even walking on stilts, which he and his wife Amy have done professionally throughout the United States for nearly two decades.

Pete is a proud resident of Keene, and along with Amy and his dog Henderson owns Lost Brook Tract, a forty-acre inholding deep in the High Peaks Wilderness.




41 Responses

  1. Renee says:

    Bravo on this one Pete!

  2. guest says:

    I just can’t get my arms around this whole “Pete Nelson Lost Brook Dispatches” thing. Here’s a guy who enjoys private recreation and solitude on private property, while promoting additional state land acquisition that will extinguish the exact kind of tourism that he is promoting, tourism that is already in place. Frankly, I find it quite hypocritical. I’ve read all of his “dispatches”.

    Don’t you realize that families come from hundreds of miles away to use private recreational leases, and spend millions of dollars in the Adirondacks already?

    Please define to me exactly what percentage of Adirondack GDP should come from tourism, and I’d like to hear your projections on the cost of the marketing efforts. Then we can examine your potential Return on Investment.

    Governor Cuomo thinks the Finch Land purchase will bring all kinds of tourists to Newcomb and MInerva, but then he went on to say that these towns would have to step up to the plate with marketing efforts and infrastructure improvements to attract the money. I’m involved with marketing budgets and I can tell you that it would take at least a half million dollars spend per year to draw in tourists, when in fact, the current tourists spend around ten million per year.

    I think you are just trying to justify an incredible waste of tax dollars.

    Please explain yourself in real terms.

  3. Pete Nelson Pete Nelson says:

    Dear Guest (that sounds so disappointingly anonymous):

    First and foremost, thank you for reading all my Dispatches. I appreciate that. I also appreciate your opinions and challenges. I have ideas and proposals, not answers, so the more debate the better. However I will admit that the debate would lack credibility if I were in fact a hypocrite as you have suggested, so your accusation bothers me.

    This is not the first time someone has made that accusation. The basis of the claim that I am a hypocrite seems to be that I advocate for public land in the park while at the same time owning and enjoying private land in the park. Is that really your position? Does that make any sense whatsoever?

    Do you think I oppose private ownership of land in the Adirondacks? If so then I suggest you reread my Dispatches because you missed something the first time around. Do you think that private landowners abdicate their rights and responsibilities to support, protect and enjoy public land? Of course not, that would be un-American. Do you think my position is that private land cannot be as well protected as public land? If you do you’re wrong: I think private land can be better protected than public land, almost by definition.

    What about my ownership of private land makes me a hypocrite by default? Nothing, otherwise everyone who owns land yet enjoys and wants to protect public land as wilderness would be a hypocrite. So in other words, nearly everyone. The only difference is that I write about it publicly.

    So if I am a not hypocrite by default then it must be the details of my situation, right? Let’s try that. First of all, do you yourself own land in the Adirondacks? I’m going to assume yes, for the sake of argument. Let me ask you some questions:
    • Do you have or would you allow motorized vehicles on your land?
    • Do you log your land or would you permit logging?
    • Do you have or would you cut even as much as a trail or small road sufficient in width to allow snowmobiles, ATV’s, or horses?
    • Have you cleared any space and planted non-native species of any kind including grasses, flowers or shrubs?
    • Most important, have you posted your land?

    If any of your answers are yes then you have less standing to argue for more public protection of land than I do, because every single one of my answers is “No.” My standard for the land is to protect it at least at the same level as State Wilderness. Furthermore I have not posted it; if you can find it, you can explore it, subject to rules and regulations that are my prerogative to establish in order to protect a virgin forest.

    What detail of my position on my own land do you find hypocritical? Or is it instead perfectly obvious that I strive to apply the same principles to my private situation that I do as an advocate for public wilderness? When you let anyone walk on your land at any time you can try calling me a hypocrite again.

    Assuming that I can proceed without the scarlet letter of hypocrisy, then we can argue substance. We disagree about what will or will not extinguish tourism, that’s the point of the last several Dispatches. I claim the demand for wilderness is a tremendous driver that can grow the Adirondack economy. You asked me to explain myself in real terms. I have shared all kinds of data and a plethora of statistics to support my positions. You can disagree, sure, and I could be wrong, sure. But I think I have explained myself in real terms to any reasonable reader.

    You wrote this: “Please define to me exactly what percentage of Adirondack GDP should come from tourism, and I’d like to hear your projections on the cost of the marketing efforts. Then we can examine your potential Return on Investment.”

    I’m with you all the way. These are good steps to take, though I’m not sure what purpose the word “exactly” serves except to be snarky. But if any of these ideas I am promulgating are worth consideration then someone ought to do as you ask.

    I guess in the end you don’t have to get me. But if you keep reading and commenting, then I welcome your input.

    Except the “H” word.

  4. guest says:

    …the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform; pretense…

    That about covers it. Your practice is recreating on private land, while your ideal is promoting unsupported economic theory for public land.

    I have managed and protected THOUSANDS of acres of both publicly held and privately owned land.

    Think carefully about promoting unsupported ideals. That practice is nothing more than propaganda; it is false and misleading. If you can support your concepts with realistic information, then by all means do so. We are all waiting to hear from you on how to improve our economies.

    • John Warren says:

      “I have managed and protected THOUSANDS of acres of both publicly held and privately owned land.” Can you support that concept with real information? You can’t even support your own name with real information.

      It looks as though you don’t identify yourself in order to slander others and make wild claims about yourself.

      That makes you a troll. Find somewhere else to troll.

      Pete, please don’t feed the trolls. Especially anonymous ones.

    • Local Yokel says:

      Speaking of realistic information, do you happen to have any evidence (other than your unsupported claim) that the soon to be dispossessed leaseholders in Newcomb spend anything close to 10 million dollars there per year??? A Gooley Club member once told me that he spends $4000 a year there. He also stated that the club sees about 1200 visitors per year. Even if every single one of these folks spent $4000 during their visit (highly unlikely), that is still well short of the figure you claim. Where are your numbers coming from?

      I think it also needs to be stated (again) that all of those club members were given the option to relocate their leases onto lands that remain held in conservation easements. They declined the offer, so the blame for the assumed loss of income to the surrounding towns rests squarely on their shoulders, not the state of New York.

  5. Pete Klein says:

    Pete,
    As usual and unlike the “guest,” I think you have some good ideas.
    But the guest does point out a problem many who live in the Adirondacks do have.
    Just look at the recent election returns for Hamilton County. Hamilton County voted straight Republican. It even voted for Wendy Long. Why would anyone other than old white men want to live here when they know from the politics that they are not welcome?

    • Bill Ott says:

      I am an old white man and I will register as a Republican if I get a chance to move to Hamilton County. As an outsider, I am very hesitant to comment on what should “be or not be”. I don’t think I would like it if people from Wanakena told me how we should run Lakewood. However, the ideas here seem level headed and call for discussion.

      Bill Ott
      Lakewood, Ohio

      • Pete Nelson Pete Nelson says:

        Agreed. The discussion is better with ideas and advocacy, not “shoulds.” I think the more we protect and promote wilderness the better because I think it is in everyone’s best interests in the long run. To that end I don’t mind arguing for what the State of NY should or should not do, since that is the essence of participatory government. But telling people what they should or should not do is a different story. Balance is important.

  6. guest says:

    Pete, how did we end up with all “old white men”? Didn’t have to do with any government policy did it?

  7. Pete Nelson Pete Nelson says:

    Pete:

    What, are you reading my mind, dude? I have a column brewing in my mind about encouraging diversity in the park. In the mean time, while I hear you about Hamilton County, I did notice that Bill Owens won. I also noticed a couple of moderate republicans who support gay marriage won. Hope springs eternal.

    John:

    I’m sure you are right about feeding trolls. But some times I can’t help myself. Case in point: it’s hard to resist the fun of pointing out to Mr. Guest how appallingly stupid it is to reiterate that I’m a hypocrite because I recreate on private land and then in the same comment allege that he himself has managed thousands of acres of BOTH public and private land. Well, Mr. Guest, I sure hope that while you were managing all that private land you were extremely careful not to recreate on it at all, because that would make you a hypocrite.

    John’s right, of course: personal attacks – which by the way concern me about as much as what Mr. Guest had for breakfast – are always a waste of time, but even more so when one can’t even wield even a basic command of logic.

    Okay, I’m done, but honestly that was a little bit fun.

  8. Pete Klein says:

    Just pointing out the Adirondacks are about as lily white and old as you can get.
    For the average young person, this place is totally boring and far too conservative to want to live here even if they could find work here.

  9. guest says:

    So I guess we’re not going to see revenue and expense projections on all this conceptual talk then, are we?

    I’d be happy to support my statement on the revenues and expenses generated by private clubs. First, I’d like to state that I think they are an integral component in the definition of Productive Forestland, that is, private forestland owners have found private recreational leases to be an important part of their business model.

    Finch Pruyn leased land to over 200 clubs. The Gooley Club was their largest leaseholder, and they paid over $100,000.00 per year in lease fees. One of their BOD mentioned that their annual Accounts Payable Disbursements ranged close to $500K for payroll, materials, expenses, maintenance, provisions, etc. and the vast majority of the payments went to vendors within or very near the park. They said that in addition to direct expenses, their members purchased gear, licenses, and provisions, averaging around $4000.00 per year, and that they did not know what guests spent in the area.

    There are DOZENS of clubs like this. They all need to be considered as businesses, because that is what they are. They have revenues and expenses just like businesses do.

    I was also led to believe that they have a lot of members from out of state, so I guess that makes them tourists, doesn’t it?

    Regarding the relocation offer, I have heard from other clubs that the offer was completely unrealistic and was made for media purposes only. I don’t know of any clubs who have “relocated”.

  10. guest says:

    Too boring? What about, ” There is an almost dizzying array of programs and initiatives to use wilderness and outdoor experiences to assist troubled youth, develop leadership, provide exposure of the natural world to people in urban communities, to provide beneficial programs to the poor and disadvantaged who would otherwise never experience wilderness. This is a potentially explosive area of growth in wilderness use.”

    Or is this just more drivel?

    • Bill Ott says:

      Have to get the word out. Is there any agency in the Daks that communicates with the media? The Adirondacks are ripe for those fake survival shows, and how about a PBS documentary, or something on the History Channel. Just keep them out of the Five Ponds area, please.

      Bill Ott
      Lakewood, Ohio

  11. Peter H says:

    Bill, here is a show to support tourism:

    http://adkdeercamp.com/

  12. Paul says:

    • Do you have or would you cut even as much as a trail or small road sufficient in width to allow snowmobiles, ATV’s, or horses?

    First how did you get a bullet in this kind of comment box?

    • Do you log your land or would you permit logging?

    From another dispatch:

    “Small and medium spruces are different, a utilitarian part of our forest bounty, but even so I feel a small pang of regret as I approach the selected tree. I fell the spruce, trim it and strip the bark, which peels off of a fresh-cut spruce with close to the same effort as peeling the casing off of a summer sausage. The smell of the revealed wood is heavenly. I cut the three logs I need to size.”

    Probably not too much different, relatively speaking, that doing a little logging on a much larger parcel.

    Don’t have any problem with this activity. Just trying to keep you honest.

    The economic question about clubs verses other uses doesn’t need to be debated. It can be studied. In other areas where they have sold land to the state and created easements (and displaced clubs) has there been a positive economic impact in those areas? Are we afraid to look at the data? Has anyone done this? Based on these other areas what is the estimated real impact of these new “wilderness” lands? For the modeling did they look at Wild Forest (increased business activity for things like marinas and snowmobile dealers etc.)versus Wilderness (increased revenue for outfitter type places etc.) etc.

  13. Paul says:

    Sorry, I meant to delete that first copied bullet. You did describe building a trail on your land in that same dispatch, but I assume that you feel it cannot accommodate these other things you describe. But is a trail.

  14. Bill Ott says:

    This is a great forum, but I wish somebody from the park agency or the DEC would join this discussion. There are probably technicalities that we gomers don’t know about. A little knowledge of these unknowns would help this discussion be more relevant and carry more weight.

    I am an intruder.

    Bill Ott
    Lakewood, Ohio

  15. Peter H says:

    Paul, the State has published statistics on the economic value of working forests and has found that every acre contributes $475.00 per year to NYS’ GDP. This includes Forest products and recreation & tourism. They have determined that private recreation is valued at around $100.00 per acre, or around $6.5 million per year based on the current model. The figures are somewhat outdated.

    I have found no statistical information for the economic contribution of “forever wild” land.

  16. Peter H says:

    Bill, DEC won’t ever chime in on these “little details”. It took a FOIL request to get them to admit they have no invasive species control plans for Forest Preserve land, and they will not have any plans in the foreseeable future, because the controls are prohibited by law.

  17. Bill Ott says:

    Pete:

    Who runs the DEC any way? Maybe some of us could talk / e-mail him/her/them. How is it structured. Do they listen to people? Otherwise, I am just half awake in bed having some kind of dream. Are we just talking to hear the sound of our own voices?

    Bill Ott
    Lakewood, Ohio

  18. Peter H says:

    Bill, Joe Martens is the DEC Commissioner. He was the President of The Open Space Institute who invested $25 million in this deal.

    He has refused to communicate.

  19. Paul says:

    Sometimes it surprises me that so many “preservationist” types seem to promote economic expansion. This is very similar to the drive to open as many waterways as possible to recreational use.

  20. Peter H says:

    Paul, by no means does state acquisition open more waterways. This excuse for acquisition is a ruse.

    • Paul says:

      Pete, I am talking about things like the Sierra Clubs suit to open the Moose River to the public across Adirondack League Club property. I am talking about private property not public property.

  21. Russ says:

    AHA there it is in bold print! Participatory Government. New York is part of the United States. The United States is a Constitutional Republic. This Participatory Democracy crap you liberals keep talking about is nothing more than a failed government model, that has most recently been adopted by the Occupy Movement. New York has no right to buy private property. If the owners of the property want to allow recreation or logging or whatever on their property fine. If they don’t thats fine too. But if you think Eco Tourism and turning the Adirondacks into a Juvenile Detention Center are going to provide more economic oppurtunities than Forestry, Sportsmen and motorized recreation. Well Sir then you are either confused, or a bold faced liar. How dare you tell me that my tax dollars have to go to purchase land that I don’t want. Then my taxes go up again to cover the taxes and lost revenue. Then the crunchy granolas from everywhere get to use the property for free. Wake up people when the Governemnt owns everything then we have no country.
    ” Labor was prior to capitol, but Property is the fruit of all labor. Property is desireable and is a positive good to the world” A. Lincoln

    • John Warren says:

      “This Participatory Democracy crap you liberals keep talking about is nothing more than a failed government model”

      Now there’s a classic. I need to start keeping a list of good ones.

  22. JR says:

    Local Yokel says “I think it also needs to be stated (again) that all of those club members were given the option to relocate their leases onto lands that remain held in conservation easements. They declined the offer, so the blame for the assumed loss of income to the surrounding towns rests squarely on their shoulders, not the state of New York.”

    Well sir, this was a blatant lie that looked pretty in print, as our club was not offered to move our camp/lease, here is exactly what we were told.

    “Unfortunately TNC or Finch is not in the position to subdivide and sell a portion of the parcels at this time. TNC has struck a deal with NYS in which they will be purchasing all TNC lands in the Town of North Hudson.
    I would suggest that you contact some of the other property owners along Blue Ridge Road and see if they are willing to sell you a lot to put your camp on. Also, you might want to contact F & W Forestry (518-480-3456) who manages the former Finch Lands on the south side of Blue Ridge Road to see if they have any lands for lease or if the Hoffman F & G Club is looking for members and can accommodate your camp.”

    Not that you care, but don’t believe everything you read in the Adirondack Explorer.

    Taken from the Explorer:
    “Most of the lands are leased by hunting clubs. The Nature Conservancy agreed to extend their leases through September 2018. As the state acquires the lands, however, the leases will be modified so the clubs have exclusive use only to their cabins. The public will have access to the surrounding property. Eventually, the cabins will be removed. All of the clubs were offered the chance to relocate to adjacent easement lands.”

    • Paul says:

      JR and others. I was also in a club displaced by one of these land transactions. It is unfortunate. But at the end of the day the private owner (in this case Fynch) gets to decide what they want to do with their land. When you lease land you are at the mercy of the leaseholder. These folks are running a business, it is not a charity for hunting clubs. I am sorry you got shoved out like we did but that was the risk we all took with a lease. I prefer that the land be kept in easements. It may be the best economic strategy for the region, but in the end business is business and private land is private land. Despite what someone said above a private landowner can sell to whomever he or she wants that includes NYS.

  23. guest says:

    Isn’t APA supposed to enforce the SLMP?

  24. Bill Ott says:

    Hi Pete,

    I e-mailed Joe Martens twice and gave him my phone number. Waiting by the phone.

    I can see by his resume that he has quite a lot to do, but if I am willing to state my real name and address on this site, I think he should enter this discussion. As you said this is a discussion of ideas, not who is right or wrong.

    Bill Ott

  25. Peter H says:

    Bill, when you speak with him, would you please be sure to ask him how the acquisition purchase squares with the SLMP? I’d like to hear what he has to say.

    When you point out to him that these clubs are small businesses that are of economic importance to the region, please ask how he can justify closing them.

    He may say that this is a “balanced deal” because they opted to purchase easements on 94,000 acres, but chose to purchase 65,000 acres in fee title. Please ask him how that is balanced.

    Could he explain to you how NYS can justify the expenditure of
    $50 million for forestland when there’s $30 billion of repair work necessary to keep thousands of families from living in dire circumstances.

    We’d all like to hear.

    On a personal note, I’d like to hear how Opens Space Institute did in this deal.

    Thanks very much.

    Keep us posted. Would you start a string in Friday’s This Week’s Adirondack Web Highlights please? I’m sure this string will be off the page by tomorrow.

  26. Peter H says:

    Bill, one other thing, please ask him what he thought of the Gooley Club’s offer to purchase. You can see that offer here:

    http://adirondackcitizen.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/gooley-club-offer-to-dec.pdf

    • Paul says:

      Peter,

      250k for that 100 acres including lakefront and an easement for access? That would have been a steal for your club. Maybe they would have considered something more like a million or so?

      • Peter H says:

        Paul, what do you think the stewardship agreement is worth, considering the club would eliminated DEC burdens?

        • Paul says:

          Peter, It is a fine idea, but there is no way that you can guarantee any of it. Your members, like any club members, are free to leave the club at any time right? If few folks can get in there easily once the roads are closed there will be little need for any maintenance. You and I both don’t like this outcome but that is what is probably going to happen. This boondoggle is complete. Try and find a private parcel for your club and move there. Even if you could have gotten an easement here and maintained your club you will always have the chance that something else would happen in future and you would get kicked out again. It sounds like the hunting on that club was and still is very good. The hard part will be finding land that has as many deer.

          • Peter H says:

            Paul, the thing is that if the club owned the in-holding, we would have all the incentive in the world to maintain the stewardship. It would benefit everyone; the general public who want access to the rivers, the local businesses, DEC, everyone.

        • Paul says:

          Peter, Yes there would be incentive but like I said no guarantee. The in-holding idea is off the table – looks like forever. Move on. It seems like you guys have a strong group. Find private land and re-group. Good luck.

          It will be no conciliation. But in a decade or so you can look back on this and say I told you so. There will be very limited economic impact from this land transaction, especially if the land is mostly classified as wilderness.

          Your club, like the display in the Blue Mt. Lake Museum of an old hunting club camp, will be part of the lost history that Pete proposes to use as a marketing tool. See if you can save it somewhere else.

  27. ADK Deerwalker says:

    It just doesn’t stop does it? Soo much time, soo much emotion, soo much energy. If you love the Adirondacks soo much, go gather some mylar balloons, fall is the ideal season for finding them.
    I grow weary of the self-appointed keepers and organizers and supporters of this and that. The misuse of the word ‘resource’ in relation to ‘forever wild’ has me nauseous. Every square inch, including parking lots, is watershed and that’s about it. Stop trying to qualify and quantify the park. You can have your Agendarondacks. You squabblers, lefties and righties, job creators, resource managers, conservationists, preservationists, visionaries, tree huggers, and ink spillers ought to be ashamed of yourselves. I know I am. Maybe we should get off our collective asses and do some cleaning of our own mess first… I can only shake my head