By Philip Terrie
Last December Gov. Kathy Hochul signed legislation committing New York to conserving 30% of its land and water surface by the year 2030. Known as “30×30,” such an achievement would protect biodiversity, wildlife habitats and clean water and would significantly contribute to our state’s efforts to limit climate change. At the time, roughly 20% of New York’s surface was protected in some fashion: municipal, county, and state parks; state forests; conservation easements; and, most important, the 2.9 million acres of the state forest preserve, 2.6 million acres of which are in the Adirondacks, 300,000 in the Catskills.
The forest preserve, rigorously guarded by the provision of the state constitution, which provides it be “forever kept as wild forest lands” and that logging and removing timber for any reason are prohibited, is the most secure of all these acres (and indeed is among the best-protected public lands on the planet). The goal of reaching 30% is ambitious but essential, and the key to success is more protected land in the Adirondacks, especially through an aggressive campaign to enlarge the preserve.
When the Legislature created the forest preserve in 1885, the state owned between 700,000 and 800,000 acres; vague compass-run boundaries, often difficult to locate, inevitably meant uncertainty, a problem that has diminished over time but still keeps lawyers busy. The story of the preserve is one of growth and consolidation. New York has been a leader in conservation since the 1880s, and the 30×30 goal extends its commitment to maintaining that status.
How has the state acquired these thousands upon thousands of acres of peaks, forests, and water? For the first few decades it was mostly accomplished after logging companies stripped the merchantable timber and then opted not to pay taxes. After a few years, ownership of these abandoned lands passed to the state. Over roughly the last century, the preserve has also grown through purchase, as the state has dedicated millions of dollars to enlarging and consolidating its lands. From the start, the state has paid taxes to local government and school districts. The tax payments—on lands that do not need snow plows or school buses—constitute a reliable, stable income stream for Adirondack towns.
Many additions to the preserve in the last half century have been spectacular. One of the first was Newcomb’s 12,500-acre Santanoni Preserve in 1972, where the mechanics of moving this historic tract from private hands to the state was critically greased by the Adirondack Chapter of The Nature Conservancy. While the acquisition apparatus for the state was cumbersome and time-consuming, the conservancy could move relatively quickly, secure title and then hold on while the state satisfied all sorts of regulatory red tape. Five years later, the state negotiated the purchase of 9,300 acres, including the summits of 11 of the 46 High Peaks, from the Adirondack Mountain Reserve. A year after that, it secured over 15,000 acres in the Nehasane Tract, including the stunning Lake Lila.
Stay connected
This article appeared in the current issue of Adirondack Explorer magazine.
Start your subscription today!
In 1997, Gov. George Pataki’s administration negotiated the purchase of the 14,500-acre Little Tupper Lake from Whitney Industries. Pataki styled himself a Teddy Roosevelt Republican, and he oversaw vital open-space protection projects around the state, finishing his tenure with around a million acres of newly guarded land, through both outright acquisition and conservation easements. About two thirds of these were in the Adirondacks, including 29,000 acres along the Grasse and St. Regis rivers.
This was followed by the dramatic maneuvering around 161,000 acres owned by Finch, Pruyn of Glens Falls leading to the addition of about 65,000 acres, including the Essex Chain of Lakes between Newcomb and Indian Lake and the unparalleled wonders of Boreas Ponds, to the constitutionally protected forest preserve. Nearly all the remaining Finch lands were protected by conservation easements.
On every conservationist’s wish list for future acquisition are the 36,000 acres of Whitney Park in Long Lake, the 14,000 acres around the historic Follensby Pond (currently owned by the conservancy), and critical wetlands around Massawepie Mire, among others. The recreational opportunities on all these parcels are obvious, but what are the other reasons for enlarging the preserve?
As our world rushes into the unpredictable and probably chaotic climate future, one thing is certain: forests capture and hold carbon. They remove carbon from the atmosphere every summer, and they sequester much of it thereafter, both in the trees themselves and in the soil. The capacity of forests to grab and hold carbon is a fundamental element of all international climate planning. Hochul’s 30×30 initiative and the goals spelled out in the 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act depend on protecting the forests we now have and adding to our total of forested acres.
The best way to make sure forests are doing their job is to add them to the public domain. Our forest preserve has been a spiritual and recreational treasure for nearly a century and a half. It has protected our rivers and has been home to myriad forms of wildlife. It has soothed the souls of countless hikers and paddlers. These contributions to New York’s welfare will continue and expand, while a growing forest preserve also plays a vital role in the world-wide struggle to avoid climate catastrophe.
I certainly can’t argue with wanting to protect the environment, but it scares me to think you want the State to do it. The State is already creeping more and more into and controlling our lives. Turning more land over to them and having them control it will come back to haunt us.
Please suggest a better model. Also, in what way is land conservation “creeping more and more and into controlling our lives”?
This is not “Frontierland”…
Well said Nick… you’re 100% correct.
Thanks to Phil Terrie for this fine account of New York State’s truly wonderful Forest Preserve.
Our citizens, both now and in the future, owe a debt of gratitude to the many people – conservationists, visionary political leaders, civic minded men and women, and altruistic wealthy landowners, who have lent their hands to creating and expanding this extraordinary reservoir of natural habitat for the benefit of all life forms – but especially for all those among us whose interaction with nature is their “touchstone” for a life well lived.
May our unique and wonderful Forest Preserve continue to expand in coming years with the acquisition of other key wildland tracts that remain vulnerable to exploitation. May we also have the political will needed to protect our public lands adequately and wisely come what may.
Maybe we should sell it back to the lumber companies for a quick buck.then,they can recreate a moonscape,stiff us on the taxes,muddy the Hudson and mohawk,kill all the fish,destroy property values,the vacation industry; and then lecture us on their “rights as property owners.
The problem is more than just the state controlling it. Elitist groups that don’t believe in multiple use, only their own vision of how the public should be allowed to use their own lands dominate the management of the forest preserve. Through cumbersome lawsuits (that the taxpayers end up paying for) they box professionals into a do-nothing approach.
I am all for the expansion of Conservation Easements within the Adirondacks that allow for public recreational use. Like it or not, we need timber management (yes logging) to provide young forests for a wide variety of wildlife dependent those early to mid-successional stages of forest development. Logging does not have to mean a carbon desert either. Let’s get back to the conservation ethic of the wise use of our natural resources. With it we can provide jobs for our communities, critical wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities for all.
So who gets to define “wise?”
Sustainable.
That just shifts my question. Who gets to define “sustainable?” Do you think timber corporations will define it the same way the enviros do or whichever interest group you choose to focus on?
Well, that’s one way to look at it. But if some of these “elitist groups” didn’t keep the DEC’s and APA’s feet to the fire, “forever wild” would be developed and paved over in a heartbeat. We need watchdogs.
Sustainable.
Not for recreational development, not for economic development, not for carbon management. The only argument that survives hard analysis for protecting or expanding State land is… Wilderness Solely for Wilderness’s Sake.
Other secondary goals may not require government ownership of land. An economy-wide carbon tax or direct payments to landowners to manage land for carbon can promote carbon storage and user fees on private lands can allow for recreation…
But unfortunately Widerness for the Sake of Wilderness is not valued by most New Yorkers, or it’s politicians.
“would significantly contribute to our state’s efforts to limit climate change”. absolute rubbish. I wish people would wake up to the climate change nonsense and certainly the absurd idea that “saving” 10,000 more acres will have an impact on ANYTHING globally.
New York State cannot manage what they already own.
I too agree with Nick.While I am glad that there is a forest preserve I must ask when is enough? The state does not manage these lands well at all and I don’t trust them or their land classifications.It appears that more land acquisitions are being pushed by the more radical preservationist organizations that want to force local residents out.With the present restrictive regulations we now have an over mature, unhealthy forest as just one example.
i agree TOM. THE STATE NEEDS TO HIRE ALOT MORE FOREST RANGERS BEFORE ANY MORE PURCHASES ARE MADE. NO WHERE ENOUGH RANGERS ALREADY