|
Additional Greenway
Commentary
October 2004
The recent Gazette feature, “Divided on
Moses,” and its related articles presented an outstanding overview of the
Niagara Heritage Partnership proposal for parkway removal and natural
landscape restoration along the gorge rim. It was comprehensive,
providing information that enabled readers to see an assortment of facts
sorted into clear perspectives. It also included a fair sampling of
opposing views.
To amplify and respond to several
parts of the feature: NHP strongly supports Mayor Anello’s plan for
parkway removal south of Findley Drive. We believe the plan speaks to his
vision and courage, and we look forward to seeing the concrete dug out,
the Whirlpool overpass being dismantled, and a Frederick Law Olmsted
parkland emerging, fully accessible to tourists and residents, with ample
provisions for handicapped and wheelchair visitors. Undoubtedly, Niagara
Falls residents will support this initiative and, like NHP, will stand
ready to help it become a reality. We do not, however, share Anello’s
ideas about what should happen to the parkway north of Findley, and will
continue to advocate its removal for reasons we’ve often stated.
Lewiston Village Mayor Soluri was
quoted as saying, “I met with Baxter and that whole group over and over,”
and also said he was tired of talking about the issue. He has not,
however, met with me or any group of NHP members to discuss the issue, not
even once, let alone “over and over.” So if he’s tired of talking about
the issue, it’s certainly not from talking to us. We remain open to such
a discussion. This refusal to be informed about an issue before opposing
it may extend to Assemblywoman DelMonte and Senator Maziarz. DelMonte
participated in a meeting between State Parks and Lewiston officials where
a case for parkway retention could be made. When we asked that such a
meeting be arranged for NHP, she told us not to worry, that public
hearings would be held before a decision was made. They were not. Maziarz
publicly praised a biased survey that favored parkway retention. In spite
of these actions, both DelMonte and Maziarz enthusiastically endorsed Gov.
Pataki’s idea for a lake-to-lake greenway, DelMonte announcing in recent
campaign literature she is “working to develop” this greenway, under the
heading of “Revitalizing Tourism.” Given these endorsements, we invite
DelMonte and Maziarz to refocus their perspectives, to recognize the NHP
proposal as an appeal for a genuine greenway along the Niagara gorge, as
part of the Pataki concept for a greenway lake-to-lake--and, because they
both serve on committees concerned with tourism, Maziarz as chair of the
Senate committee, to thoroughly investigate the potential for ecotourism
in our region, an important component of our proposal.
The Gazette article reported that,
when it was suggested that State Parks had never seriously considered the
NHP proposal, Wendy Gibson, Park’s spokesperson, became indignant and said
the idea was “laughable.” Without evidence to refute the charge, she
resorted to attitude and ridicule. The so-called pilot, however, was
never intended as a test, but a solution, a compromise, and so, naturally,
no other options were considered. The pilot was a sham from the start,
which we indicated in a March 2001 letter to Tom Lyons, State Parks
Director of Environmental Management. Gibson now speaks of the pilot as a
“compromise” they’d hoped would be acceptable. This reveals her
continuing failure (and that of State Parks) to understand the NHP
proposal.
In this case, Gibson’s job as
spokesperson is to defend the indefensible. The State’s December 2003
evaluation of its “pilot” is a lame attempt to justify their decision to
make it permanent. The NHP response to the evaluation report and the
Lyon’s letter are posted at www.niagaraheritage.org. Readers can check
out these documents to decide for themselves the extent to which the
State’s report makes sense and whether or not the NHP proposal was given
any consideration.
As a judge of what’s “laughable,”
Wendy Gibson probably knows the State’s evaluation report would win top
prize in that category, though she can’t say so. But when those in power
make bad decisions and then scramble around trying to justify them, it’s
never funny.
If Gibson grows indignant over
NHP’s refusal to accept State Park’s faulty reasoning re the gorge
parkway, how will she spin our continued criticism of State Park’s failed
stewardship of Niagara’s parks? Goat Island, the Niagara Reservation, is
being steadily transformed into an amusement venue, violating both the
letter and spirit of the law that established it as a natural park, to be
free of commercial exploitation according to the philosophy of Frederick
Law Olmsted; Parks seems to casually accept their maintenance garage
being located on the unique gorge rim; the over forty year desecration of
Devil’s Hole State Park by parkway lanes and the NYPA access road
continues; a toxic brew seeps out of the Hyde Park Landfill through the
gorge walls and into the river a short distance upstream from the public
fishing dock. Are these concerns laughable, too? Perhaps the Niagara
Greenway Commission will consider these transgressions and decide
otherwise.
Sincerely,
Bob Baxter, Conservation Chair
October 18, 2004
HOME
|