ku # 276 ~ a matter of life and death?

-15F, North Hudson, NY (the Hudson River starts here) • click on photo to embiggen I have a question for the environmentalists/conservationists in the audience.

Outside of the High Peaks region of the Adirondacks, the landscape is made up of tightly clustered mountains in the 1,550-3,000ft range. As I have mentioned before, all public land in the Adirondacks is protected as "forever wild" by an amendment to the NYS Constitution. In addition, the Adirondack Park Agency was established in 1972 to ensure that the lands were so protected. The APA also governs all private land use in the Adirondacks as a super zoning board of sorts. The net result is an inhabited wilderness that has emerged as a unique worldwide model of sustainability.

The other net result is that cell phone coverage in the Adirondacks is virtually non-existant. A few villages have managed to avoid line-of-sight restrictions by camouflaging cell facilities in church or town hall towers, but the reality is that, in an area bigger than the state of Vermont, cell coverage is the exception, not the rule.

The dilema is this: a few days ago, a couple from the NYC area was returning home from Montreal via I87, a 4-lane interstate that traverses the Adirondacks, inside its eastern boundary, through many desolate areas. Around 2:00AM they crashed, leaving the highway, essentially disappearing from view and ending up trapped in their car (by their injuries). They were not found until 32 hours later. The husband survived for 13 hours before succumbing to hypothermia. The wife, who tried to call for help using a cell phone, survived.

There was no cell coverage. The APA has been petitioned to allow cell towers in the form of those fake tree things which, around here, are called Frankenpines. To date, the APA has not allowed them on the basis that; they violate the "forever wild" restrictions on public land, and, on private land, they violate line-of-sight (and other) restrictions.

What's your take on the subject - Does the preservation of the wildereness and the wilderness character of private land justify an occasional (and very rare) death?

publisher's comments: hey gang, a well tempered discussion for such a hot topic. Thanks for all your thoughtful participation. One point I would like to make is on the notion of "consistency". It was suggested that one must be "consistent" and "non-contradictory" in making one's decisions about what is "good" or "bad", in this case, about what level of technologies to allow into a wilderness environment.

As an example, it was stated that if one has a desire to live in an area that "time forgot", "...why not go all the way and rip out the power lines, the paved roads, and anything else that smacks of "technological intrusion"?.

Well, my answer is a simple matter of discernment, I want to use electricity and drive (mostly) on paved roads. However, because I want to use electricity, it does not follow that I have to own and use every electronic device known to man. I can be discerning in how I use electricty. I am also grateful that the paved roads the Adirondacks, with the lone exception of I87, are paved two-lane roads that conform the lay of the land and don't bulldoze their way through it. The fact that I choose not to embrace cell technology and support a position that limits cell use in the Adirondacks is an act of discernment regarding what level of "technological intrusion" I want in my life and in the community in which I live. It in no way contradicts or is inconsistent with my use of electricity and paved roads.

The people of NYS, acting through their elected representatives, have expressed their discernment regarding what level of "technological intrusion" they want in the Adirondack Park. They decided over 100 years ago that the public lands within the park will be free of all commercial use, i.e., "forever wild". This desire was expressed, not with an "opinion", but with the full protection of an amendment to the NYS Constitution. It is enshrined in law - law that can not be changed without the full rigor of the constitutional process. More recently, the APA was created by duly elected representatives to oversee these protections of public land and to protect the wilderness character of the whole of the park. The APA is empowered to discern, according to its mandate from the people of NYS, what level of "technological intrusion" to allow within the borders of the park.

The creation of the APA was an act of discerment by the people of NY which essentially determined that protecting the wilderness/wilderness character of the park was an environmentally and economically sound position to take. The environtmental benefits shuld be obvious. The econimic benefits become apparent with the realization that the region's economy is based on tourism.

That said, here's an interesting update: Politicians, state agencies, some residents, and other groups (Brooklyn Orthodox Jewish community demands cell coverage) have latched onto the tradegy. Many are excoriating the APA and environmental/conservation organizations as culpable in the deaths and as obstructionists. What they are conveniently ignoring is the fact that 4 years ago the APA, with the expressed backing of environmental and conservation groups, approved a plan for 32 30ft cell towers (less coverage per tower, hence, more visually discreet towers) along the remote stretches of I87 - a compromise that balances the interests of public safety and the lawful requirements of the NYS Constitution, the oversight interests of the APA, and those of conservation groups.

Now here's the kicker - the project, a joint venture with the State Police, the Dept of Transporation, and Crown Technologies, was scrapped because it was deemed economically unfeasible by the cell-phone company.

Ahh, the free-market at its very best. But that's another story.

Comments

[gravitas et nugalis]

Paul,

Thanks very much for your comments on The Landscapist. I appreciate thoughtful participation, pro and con, and I am sure that "... there is far more that we would agree on pertaining to this nutty world than disagree on."

The whole cell tower thing is a kind of tip-of-the-iceberg issue here in the Adirondacks. It is a very visible (literally and figuratively) issue that , in a way, symbolizes a zillion other less visible assaults on the wilderness/wilderness character of the region.

FYI, there are 4 cells phones in my household. I am not opposed to cell phones, just cell phone towers in the Adirondacks - they really are a very visual blight on the landscape.

I might also mention that many in the tourism business, the economic backbone of the region, agree. It is the perceived, real or "delusional", wilderness character of the Adirondacks that is its main asset tourism-wise. People come here to get away from it all.