Good Editorial By Watertown Daily Times Perry White

You can use the link below to see Mr. White's editorial.

http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/blogs10/a-scenic-area-is-home-to-an-ugly-fight-20150424

My comment to Mr. White's editorial which also appears in the comments under the editorial is as follows:

Mr. White,

I basically agree with the thrust of your arguments and you comparison to national parks is more relevant than you might imagine.

 I find it very disappointing that  a fundamental and relatively benign effort to protect the 1000 Islands meets so much controversy, when as you point out, it doesn’t appear the SASS designation would inhibit development in any substantial way, but could bring a host of positives.

It seems the potential upside to this designation might far outweigh any regulation it might impose, which by your admission appears minimal.

I find your comparison to the national parks of Grand Canyon, Grand Teton, and Yosemite, and the 1000 Islands very interesting.

Most of the year I live about an hour from Grand Canyon, and have  hiked there a number of times.  My wife has twice run the Colorado River through Grand Canyon on extended raft trips, and within our family are river guides.  I have climbed and summited the Grand Teton at 13,700 ft.  In Yosemite my wife and I completed a 5 day 40 mile winter ski expedition trip across Yosemite.  Currently we hike and adventure all over the West, but particularly the Desert South West.

But with the good fortune to live with the incredible world class tourism, scenery, and outdoor opportunities on our doorstep,  we still seek out the incredible beauty of the 1000 Islands for three to four months every year.  I agree with you that the 1000 Islands are no less spectacular, from the ”Bridge”, a boat, or just relaxing on the shore.

And isn’t it interesting that the Canadians had the foresight to designate some islands in the 1000 Islands as a national park.  Frankly it makes the American side look a bit foolish to not have greater vision with an official designation and protection of the Islands.

It is interesting that environmental issues such as the SASS designation always seem to come back to a fundamental set of issues, money vs. environmental, scenic, or historical protection.  The SASS designation and the 1000 Islands are no different.  It is the same with wind energy development in our area, the promise of money vs. the visual destruction of our region.  With the massive and increasing size of wind turbines one large wind development can have staggering wide ranging visual  impacts as we all now know from the Wolfe Island wind farm.

And if all the local wind development proposals were to  come to fruition the region will undergo a staggering wholesale environmental and visual transformation from renowned scenic destination to a vast industrial energy complex.  Sheer insanity that should never be allowed or even considered!!!

It is also interesting the national parks you compare were at one time under similar threats from some industry or moneyed interest trying to exploit natural resources (timber, mining etc.) vs. others trying  to saving these spectacular places for future generations.

 In Grand Canyon for example  it was our own  government proposals for huge hydro dams right in the Grand Canyon!!!  Which now to the reasonable person seems idiotic.  

The PBS series by Ken Burns on our national parks showed the evolution of our parks from places of exploitation to protection and national treasures.

 I would think that most people who visit our national parks and other nationally protected treasures would now agree  the protections, significant laws, and regulations that protect these treasured places are appropriate.  And the regulations in these places are generally very tough and restrictive, and in some there are large tracts designated as wilderness where you  not only can’t develop, but no mechanical means of travel is allowed, and the area is to be left in a natural state unaltered by man forever.

In all my experience in wildernesses and talking to people about it, I find that to some, the idea that large tracts of land be left undeveloped is an extremely foreign concept, almost obscene to some!

You can’t just do NOTHING with the land.

I don’t understand the fuming of the people opposed to SASS.  The 1000 Islands is far far from undeveloped, it has been developed bit by bit for over a century in terms of tourism and vacation homes and the services that support them, and it will continue, SASS or no SASS.   

For God’s sake why so much griping?    It’s not exactly like historically there has been some radical unreasonable restriction on development in this region…and no one from what I can tell is proposing that.

So I find it a bit absurd when we talk about a relatively benign but important protection for the 1000 Islands, to bring it national and international recognition.  Recognition which could actually enhance the beauty and the tourism economy at the same time.  Yet some get their underwear all  in a bunch in an irrational fear that it is too restrictive. This seems a bit  over reactive.

When you examine the forces that once threated our national parks, you find it took visionary and courageous people, like Teddy Roosevelt or John Muir,  for example, to stand against the complete exploitation of our treasured places and realize the wisdom of protecting them.

So just like our national parks the historical environmental  fight goes on right here in the 1000 Islands area.

 Now in our region the flame that lit the fuse in this ongoing historical environmental debate  is industrial wind energy.   The people, who if allowed, would completely exploit and transform a region for basically a gold rush scheme based on false green promises, against those who have some vision and wisdom for the preservation of a world class environmental resource and scenic treasure.

Ultimately the people who stand for the unreasonable exploitation of treasured  areas like the 1000 Islands and Golden Crescent, and would willingly sacrifice it, don’t realize that their excesses are what bring the cries and reaction for more protections as a result.

It’s a simple formula proven over and over by history, and the national parks Mr. White talks about are testament to how those excesses were brought to awareness, hotly debated, and then defeated.

The silver lining in local  wind development is that it ignited an extremely important and heated environmental  conversation about the essence,  meaning, and value of our area that is probably long long overdue.  The debate is so important for example, it has already brought unprecedented change in that it overturned an entire town government in Cape Vincent, and brought an NYAG investigation regarding the ethics of the people who should have placed the environmental stewardship of our region ahead of self interest.   They didn’t realize it or intend it, but ironically that debate was brought to us by the very people willing to exploit our treasured scenic resources with unreasonable excesses.

 Indeed we are now like Grand Canyon, Grand Teton, and Yosemite, National Parks with a historical environmental connection no less important, and not only by comparison to their beauty!

It’s not that the debate is an ugly one Mr. White, or that either side has made errors.  It’s that there is finally a long overdue highly visible and contentious debate over the protection and future of our regional scenic and environmental treasures.