Hi - I'm looking for any follow-up info and opinions you may have on this topic posted in another thread by SleazyRider, where he said, "in the Neversink River Unique Area on County Road 101 (Cold Spring Road), an officer from the DEC came and closed it down [shooting area in gravel pit]! He explained that a lead study will be conducted due to concerns about the aquifer and nearby development."
I'm curious about the DEC's summarily deciding to post a restriction there, versus their refusal to do that at other abused sites just as bad where people have complained about all the usual things they would find offensive at them. If neighbor complaints can get that sign put up pretty easily and conveniently, doesn't it set a precedent that can be demanded in other places? If somebody in Ulster county makes the same complaint, can they use the precedent as pressure to get the same response? Or have it backfire and embarrass DEC into taking down the Neversink sign?
I'm also skeptical about DEC's claim of intent to do a lead investigation. I doubt they want to do that.
If there is not some kind of urgent need, an unusual or severe safety concern, some imminent threat to humans or the environment, is there a law empowering DEC to outlaw something that the legislature made legal? If the reason they gave SleazyRider was lead, then that may qualify as imminent danger if it appears to be threatening surface or ground water, thus the no-shooting restriction, but it would be bogus if they only used that as an excuse and are not doing anything about the lead, but only closed the place to appease somebody. So I wanted to know about this lead thing.
I wrote the DEC and asked if Neversink was restricted to "no shooting" because of lead, as mentioned above. I don't want to embarrass the DEC person who replied, in case their reply wasn't what it should have been, politically speaking. He's not in a politically appointed position making him a public figure, just a guy doing his job. However, I believe he gave me the truth, due to the nature of his reply, and the particular kind of job he has in the organization. He researched the matter and found that it was closed because neighbors complained about "an extraordinary amount of shooting," and he said that they are NOT doing a lead contamination study. In a second contact with him, he noted that he had specifically checked on the lead thing because I asked about that.
Oh, and there's another reason I believe him: DEC does not want to get into cleaning up lead at every shooting area on state land.
So which is it? The story they gave SleazyRider or the one they gave me? Or the one they gave the people who complained?
Another member here said that he saw a Forestburgh town board meeting where a citizen complained about the range last July. I verified that. Here is what was said at the meeting (names left out for their privacy, even though it is a public document - the write-up reads awkward but this is an exact copy cut-and-paste from their minutes):
My contact with DEC was VERY recent, and their position on the matter was clear: Complaint of too much shooting led to a no- shooting restriction, and there is no lead investigation.
I don't believe this stuff about them making a regulation about paper targets only. What if I bring out a plastic target? At home I shoot at a plastic Folgers coffee can hanging from a string. They hold up nicely, don't shatter. I've been up and down the regs plenty, and all I see is "no breakables" (clays, glass, etc.), as everyone here knows. And obviously anything else shot and left behind is either litter or dumping (which is what I call TVs and microwaves). But DEC staff are not the only ones to blow smoke when asked a question, which is what it sounded like the town super got (or made up).
So, if the town complained to the DEC about lead, DEC must have declared it a non-issue (as I know they have done at other unofficial ranges on state land). I don't think they wanna go near the lead thing without about $50million added to their budget, because it would be a massive project to clean up the lead at all of these sites. They will only act on it if somebody points to a situation where there is likely to be endangered water. They get real touchy about lead in the water.
So unless Mr. Yyyyyy makes a strong case for a threat to the water he mentioned, DEC is going to shrug their shoulders and say, "There is no law against target shooting on state land." They may not like that position, but politically and fiscally, they need to stick to it. I don't think they have a choice, the way the law currently sits.
I hope to keeps tabs on this thing, and I'll let you know what comes up. I would appreciate any other info on it, and of course all your insights.
Best to all
EG
I'm curious about the DEC's summarily deciding to post a restriction there, versus their refusal to do that at other abused sites just as bad where people have complained about all the usual things they would find offensive at them. If neighbor complaints can get that sign put up pretty easily and conveniently, doesn't it set a precedent that can be demanded in other places? If somebody in Ulster county makes the same complaint, can they use the precedent as pressure to get the same response? Or have it backfire and embarrass DEC into taking down the Neversink sign?
I'm also skeptical about DEC's claim of intent to do a lead investigation. I doubt they want to do that.
If there is not some kind of urgent need, an unusual or severe safety concern, some imminent threat to humans or the environment, is there a law empowering DEC to outlaw something that the legislature made legal? If the reason they gave SleazyRider was lead, then that may qualify as imminent danger if it appears to be threatening surface or ground water, thus the no-shooting restriction, but it would be bogus if they only used that as an excuse and are not doing anything about the lead, but only closed the place to appease somebody. So I wanted to know about this lead thing.
I wrote the DEC and asked if Neversink was restricted to "no shooting" because of lead, as mentioned above. I don't want to embarrass the DEC person who replied, in case their reply wasn't what it should have been, politically speaking. He's not in a politically appointed position making him a public figure, just a guy doing his job. However, I believe he gave me the truth, due to the nature of his reply, and the particular kind of job he has in the organization. He researched the matter and found that it was closed because neighbors complained about "an extraordinary amount of shooting," and he said that they are NOT doing a lead contamination study. In a second contact with him, he noted that he had specifically checked on the lead thing because I asked about that.
Oh, and there's another reason I believe him: DEC does not want to get into cleaning up lead at every shooting area on state land.
So which is it? The story they gave SleazyRider or the one they gave me? Or the one they gave the people who complained?
Another member here said that he saw a Forestburgh town board meeting where a citizen complained about the range last July. I verified that. Here is what was said at the meeting (names left out for their privacy, even though it is a public document - the write-up reads awkward but this is an exact copy cut-and-paste from their minutes):
Surprise! Nothing happened. No mention of the letter or a reply in any board meetings since then. It did not come up in the town board meeting minutes again until the same Mr. Yyyyyy raised it again in January 2012. Again, the odd text is what they have on record."Also down in that neck of the woods, I have mentioned this to a few members of the Town Board, there is an issue going on down at the gravel banks on Cold Spring Road, and it's dumping of sorts, actually. Every weekend, for years, there are people that are down there shooting firearms on Saturdays and Sundays, and not just sighting in rifles with five or ten shots, but hundreds and hundreds of rounds per hour, have been dispensed down there. I would guess that over the years, there are probably tons of lead that has been deposited in that gravel bank, causing, obviously contamination to the ground and the water supply. Now it's a real concern to all of us who live in that area as it's our water supply, but at the same time, it's the same water supply that Lost Lake is going to use. Supervisor Xxxxxx stated that after Mr. Yyyyyyy mentioned this to him, about a week later he was driving by and there was a DEC officer there, so I stopped and asked him about it. He said he would look into it, but it was like her [he] never thought about it before I mentioned it all to him. Councilman Zzzzzz also stated that it's used for a garbage pit down there. Mr. Yyyyyy stated that the unfortunate part is that in the beginning, when people were just going down there to shoot for target practice, it was almost like it was an acceptable use, but what is going on there now is more than just target practice. It's going to be a contamination issue. Councilman Zzzzzzz stated that the DEC allowed it and Mr. Yyyyyyy replied absolutely and quite a few people on the road are concerned about it. Supervisor Xxxxxx stated that he would write a letter to the DEC about it."
That is the last record of it in town board meetings so far."The one thing that I have raised in the past and there are new people on the town board and they need to be made aware of this also. The "shoot 'em up" that is continuing at the gravel bank on Cold Spring Road. Besides it being a noise nuisance to the residents in that area, it has been, still is and is only going to get worse, with regard to an environmental issue, with the amount of rounds and the amount of lead that is being deposited in that place. I urge you again, do what you can with the DEC because they are in control of that property, I spoke with a DEC officer who lives down that way months ago, he said all he can do, they created regulations where people were bringing in microwave ovens and everything else to shoot at, so they created a regulation that you can only shoot at paper targets. But that is not enough, there is still pounds and pounds of lead that is left some evenings and most weekends. It's even going on this time of year, and I thought it would stop. In the last couple of years, I would guess that there are tons of lead that has been deposited in that gravel bank, only to the detriment of the aquifer, the creek and while we are talking about it, this is the aquifer that Lost Lake is tapping into. This is a real problem that the DEC needs to resolve. Anything you can do or get them to move on will be greatly appreciated. Superintendent Aaaaa stated that it sounded to him like the DEC authorized a rifle range down there. Ask the DEC for a copy of their management plan for their shooting range. Attorney Bbbbbbb stated that a meeting with the DEC should be requested to find out what is going on. Mr. Yyyyyy stated that if you asked the DEC how much lead are people allowed to dump there, I'm sure their response would be they aren't allowed to dump any lead there. Councilman Zzzzzz stated the property is a disgrace, someone picked up about five bags of garbage from around there and left them there and I picked it up. When I was there, I walked down there the place is an absolute disgrace. It's a garbage pit besides lead. Supervisor Cccccc asked Attorney Bbbbbb to write a letter to the DEC and schedule a meeting so we can walk through this together and see what we can do. "
My contact with DEC was VERY recent, and their position on the matter was clear: Complaint of too much shooting led to a no- shooting restriction, and there is no lead investigation.
I don't believe this stuff about them making a regulation about paper targets only. What if I bring out a plastic target? At home I shoot at a plastic Folgers coffee can hanging from a string. They hold up nicely, don't shatter. I've been up and down the regs plenty, and all I see is "no breakables" (clays, glass, etc.), as everyone here knows. And obviously anything else shot and left behind is either litter or dumping (which is what I call TVs and microwaves). But DEC staff are not the only ones to blow smoke when asked a question, which is what it sounded like the town super got (or made up).
So, if the town complained to the DEC about lead, DEC must have declared it a non-issue (as I know they have done at other unofficial ranges on state land). I don't think they wanna go near the lead thing without about $50million added to their budget, because it would be a massive project to clean up the lead at all of these sites. They will only act on it if somebody points to a situation where there is likely to be endangered water. They get real touchy about lead in the water.
So unless Mr. Yyyyyy makes a strong case for a threat to the water he mentioned, DEC is going to shrug their shoulders and say, "There is no law against target shooting on state land." They may not like that position, but politically and fiscally, they need to stick to it. I don't think they have a choice, the way the law currently sits.
I hope to keeps tabs on this thing, and I'll let you know what comes up. I would appreciate any other info on it, and of course all your insights.
Best to all
EG