About Gwendolyn Craig

Gwen is an award-winning journalist covering environmental policy for the Explorer since January 2020. She also takes photos and videos for the Explorer's magazine and website. She is a current member of the Legislative Correspondents Association of New York. Gwen has worked at various news outlets since 2015. Prior to moving to upstate New York, she worked for a D.C. Metro-area public relations firm, producing digital content for clients including the World Health Organization, the Low Income Investment Fund and Rights and Resources Initiative. She has a master's degree in journalism from the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications at Syracuse University. She has bachelor's degrees in English and journalism, with a concentration in ecology and evolutionary biology, from the University of Connecticut. Gwen is also a part-time figure skating coach. Contact her at (518) 524-2902 or gwen@adirondackexplorer.org. Sign up for Gwen’s newsletter here.

Reader Interactions


  1. Contrarian says

    Maybe Adirondacks legislators should worry about the consequences of NOT having clean air and water, in a region where the private sector economy is almost entirely based on outdoor tourism.

  2. Scott says

    Define: clean

    My automobile puts out exhaust. I am now depriving everyone other New Yorker of clean air. My 1000 cow cattle farm produces tons of methane a year from the animals, again – air pollution. My septic tank has a leach field where the liquids flow into. Eventually that hits the water table. I am now depriving any neighbors using a well of cleanest water possible. Your municipal government uses salt and sand in the winter on its roads. That runoff goes into streams, rivers, and lakes. You can now sue the state and town for an unlimited amount of money because that water and soil is now contaminated.

    See the potential problems now?

  3. Gary Broderick says

    This Green Amendment is no different than a politician promising ‘I’m going to do good things’ but not providing any definition of what good they are going to do. I’d love to see concrete ideas instead of setting this up for New Yorkers to vote on a ‘Concept’. This will allow groups to sue on everything that goes on in this state because there is no guidelines to what it means…….which means the courts will decide what it means, not the people of the state. That is a bad idea.

  4. Dominic Jacangelo says

    I keep trying to get my arms around exactly what this provision would do? I know that it must do something since some groups are pushing so hard for it. All I can see is that the provision will create another cause of action for lawyers to challenge decisions that have been made consistent with SEQRA.
    Please give me one example of where this provision would have made a difference and I could change my mind.

  5. Ja says

    It sounds like a bunch of people dont want to be seen as liable for polluting and well that’s the point. You are liable and you should be concerned. You can miss me on the excuses, we need a green new deal NOW!

  6. Tom Paine says

    A serious scary piece of legislation. Very unclear definitions of dirty and clean. Leaves decisions open to unelected Albany bureaucrats and their Environmental lobbyists buddies. Far to much control to Albany.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *