Friends of the Forest Pres. v. N.Y.S. Adirondack Park Agency
| Decision Date | 22 October 2019 |
| Docket Number | No. 69,69 |
| Citation | 115 N.Y.S.3d 171,138 N.E.3d 1055,34 N.Y.3d 184 |
| Parties | In the Matter of ADIRONDACK WILD: FRIENDS OF THE FOREST PRESERVE et al., Appellants, v. NEW YORK STATE ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY, et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
34 N.Y.3d 184
138 N.E.3d 1055
115 N.Y.S.3d 171
In the Matter of ADIRONDACK WILD: FRIENDS OF THE FOREST PRESERVE et al., Appellants,
v.
NEW YORK STATE ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY, et al., Respondents.
No. 69
Court of Appeals of New York.
October 22, 2019
OPINION OF THE COURT
Chief Judge DiFIORE.
The Adirondack Park is a world-renowned treasure in our own backyard. Created in 1892, its six million acres include 2.6 million acres owned by New York State and 3.4 million acres which are privately held. Larger than several New England states and incorporating more territory than Yosemite, Yellowstone, Glacier, Grand Canyon, and Great Smoky Mountain National Parks combined, there are 3,000 lakes and ponds and 30,000 miles of rivers and streams in the Adirondack Park (Adirondack Regional Tourism Council, https://visitadirondacks.com/about/adirondack-park [last accessed Oct. 15, 2019] ). Our state's constitutional commitment to conservation for more than a century has ensured the continued protection of the region's iconic landscapes while providing extraordinary outdoor recreational experiences to citizens of this state and tourists from around the world. Agencies charged with managing park property must balance, within applicable constitutional, statutory and regulatory constraints, the preeminent interest in maintaining the character of pristine vistas with ensuring appropriate access to remote areas for visitors of varied interests and physical abilities. In this appeal, we review a challenge brought by environmental groups to a determination of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation ("DEC") made in consultation with the Adirondack Park Agency ("APA") that, among other things, permits seasonal snowmobile use on an existing roadway on property recently acquired by the State and added to the Adirondack Forest Preserve. Because we are unpersuaded by petitioners' contention that the determination either contravenes controlling motor vehicle use restrictions in the Adirondack Park State Land Master Plan ("Master Plan") and Wild, Scenic and Recreational Rivers System Act ( ECL 15–2701 et seq. ["Rivers Act"] ) or is otherwise irrational, we affirm the challenged portion of the Appellate Division order.
In 2012 and 2013, New York State acquired two tracts of land in the Adirondack Park—the 18,100–acre Essex Chain Lakes Parcel and the 960–acre Indian River Parcel—from The Nature Conservancy, which had recently purchased the land from a pulp and paper manufacturing company named Finch,
Pruyn & Co. ("Finch") to facilitate its inclusion in the Adirondack Forest Preserve. Finch had owned the land since the 1800s and used it for commercial timber production. Parcels of the land were leased by Finch to private hunting and fishing clubs for recreational use by members and guests. Upon the State's acquisition of the land, adjacent areas of state-owned property were reclassified and
combined with the two newly-acquired parcels to form the Essex Chain Complex Area (the "Complex Area") of the Forest Preserve, encompassing the disputed land at issue here: a one-mile stretch of an
existing road called Chain Lakes Road (South). The one-mile portion of the preexisting road is located within one-half mile of the Hudson River where the river is designated "Wild" under the Rivers Act (see ECL 15–2713[1][c] ). Both the Rivers Act and the Master Plan restrict motor vehicle use in Wild river areas, with certain exceptions.
As required by Executive Law § 816, DEC, in consultation with the APA, created a management plan for the Complex Area titled the Essex Chain Lakes Management Complex Plan ("Complex Plan") outlining the actions DEC planned to undertake for the recently acquired land in the Complex Area, including the disputed section of roadway. To inform the Complex Plan, the agencies commissioned a law firm to investigate the history of the Essex Chain Lakes Complex Area, with particular emphasis, as relevant here, on the establishment of roads and the use of motor vehicles. In March 2015, the law firm issued the "Schachner Report," compiling information from public records and the affidavits of 19 individuals familiar with the use of the land, including, among others, former Finch employees, members of private recreational clubs and the descendants of the local families who operated area hunting lodges. The report detailed constant motor vehicle use on existing roadways, beginning in the 1920s and including the use of trucks and other heavy machinery for logging as well as other vehicles, including snowmobiles, for transportation and recreation. Crediting the information in the Schachner Report, DEC concluded that the "operation of motor vehicles, including snowmobiles" constituted "an existing land use on the roads within the Complex Area River Areas." DEC explained in the Complex Plan:
Before being acquired by the State, much of this Complex Area had been used by the public to access
the remote wilderness areas, and later for timber production by Finch Pruyn Company who also provided access for recreation by lessees, licensees, invitees and the public. The local towns created and maintained a road network for public travel and recreation, [that] was later maintained by Finch Pruyn to facilitate access within and throughout the property. Use of these roads predates and continued regularly after the enactment of the [Rivers] Act. (Complex Plan at 26).
With respect to Chain Lakes Road (South) in particular, DEC noted:
[R]esearch of historical documents, including local town records, and review of testimony from individuals with personal knowledge of the area, indicate that motor vehicle use of the Chain Lakes Road (South) and, seasonally, along this road through the Wild Forest Corridor north of this point, predates, and continued regularly after the enactment of the [Rivers] Act. (id. at 28).
DEC acknowledged that compliance with the Rivers Act, particularly its motor vehicle use restrictions, was required with respect to the portion of Chain Lakes Road (South) that passes within one-half mile of the Hudson River in an area where that body of water has been classified by the legislature as "Wild." However, DEC found "that continued motor vehicle use on this road within the Wild River [corridor] ... is authorized to continue" pursuant to the River Act's existing land use exception (see ECL 15–2709[2] ) and related regulations (Complex Plan at 28). The Complex
Plan restricted such motor vehicle use to seasonal snowmobile use and access by other motor vehicles only during the two-month fall hunting season, to be further "constrained by measures adopted by DEC in order to limit public motor vehicle
access, and restrict parking to designated areas" (id. ).
Accordingly, the Complex Plan permits snowmobile use on a portion of Chain Lakes Road (South) as a link to a 20.6–mile snowmobile corridor connecting the towns of Indian Lake and Minerva in the Adirondack Park. In addition, the Complex Plan allows public motor vehicle access on this road during big game hunting season (from October 1 through early December). In devising the Complex Plan after considering several other alternatives, DEC concluded that the limited seasonal continued use
of Chain Lakes Road (South) as a snowmobile trail and road would alleviate the need to disturb natural resources on undeveloped land for the construction of new trails and would facilitate the closure of 23 miles of other roadway resulting in the establishment of a larger primitive area. After a public hearing and comment process, the Complex Plan was submitted to the APA, which determined that it complied with the Master Plan. DEC formally approved the Complex Plan in March 2016.
Soon thereafter, petitioners brought this combined CPLR article 78 proceeding and declaratory judgment action in Supreme Court. Relevant to this appeal, in the third cause of action petitioners alleged that DEC's approval of public snowmobile use on the portion of Chain Lakes Road (South) designated "Wild" under the Rivers Act violated both the Rivers Act and the Master Plan. Petitioners contended that the Rivers Act's existing land use exception was inapplicable because it was superseded by more restrictive provisions in the Master Plan which they claim contains no similar exception and, in any event, asserted that the determination that public snowmobile use was an existing land use was irrational. Supreme Court converted petitioners' action for declaratory relief into a CPLR article 78 proceeding, denied relief and dismissed the petition in its entirety. Regarding the third cause of action, Supreme Court concluded that DEC was authorized to permit snowmobile use...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Friends of the Forest Pres. v. N.Y. State Adirondack Park Agency
...34 N.Y.3d 184138 N.E.3d 1055115 N.Y.S.3d 171In the Matter of ADIRONDACK WILD: FRIENDS OF THE FOREST PRESERVE et al., Appellants,v.NEW YORK STATE ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY, et al., Respondents.No. 69Court of Appeals of New York.October 22, 2019OPINION OF THE COURTChief Judge DiFIORE.34 N.Y.3d 1......