Logging? Not on Mt. Nimham, Locals Say

Proposal for a Model Forest and Logging Project Draws Protests in Putnam County

By Marc Ferris
Kent

A Proposal to establish a forestry and logging project on Mount Nimham in
Putnam County has brought a small but determined wave of opposition from
local people.

The program, which would cover land that is primarily used for recreation,
is intended to inform visitors of a variety of different forest uses and to
serve as an outlet for education about forest issues.

The model forest that the Department of Environmental Conservation and its
forestry partners want to establish at Mount Nimham would cover 415 acres
of land, though logging activity would initially be conducted on 85 acres
said Matt Burns, a spokesman for the department.

The project is one of a number of research efforts around the 2,000 square
miles of hills and valleys that drain into the city's 19 reservoirs
upstate. All of them are intended to find ways to sustain use of land
around the reservoirs producing enough money to avoid conversion to
subdivisions, which is the worst possible outcome from the city's
perspective. The tension, thus, has three forces: supporters of sustainable
logging, antilogging environmentalists and pro-development forces.

Opponents who want to keep the land intact fear that any logging will cause
erosion that taints the water quality in the West Branch Reservoir, which
is a short distance down slope from the project.

The model forestry project, proposed by the New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation, is subject to the agency's final approval. Last
month, at a public meeting attended by officials from the agencies
involved, including the state Department of Environmental Conservation and
the New York City Department of Environmental Protection, a dozen local
residents denounced the proposition, prompting the state to extend the
public comment period.

Originally scheduled to expire on Nov. 14, the comment period has been
extended through Dec. 31.

"They blindsided us," said Annmarie Baisley, supervisor of the town of
Kent, where the mountain is situated. "The proper format is to come to the
town first, but we found out by accident that they were having this meeting."

Mount Nimham, the county's second-tallest point, is named after Chief
Daniel Nimham, a leader of the Wappinger Indian tribe, who died fighting
for the Colonists against the British in the Revolutionary War. Remnants of
a 1700's Wappinger village are believed to be buried in the mountainside
and old arsenic mines dot the mountainside. The state owns 1,023 acres on
Mount Nimham, which is administered as a mixed-use recreation area and
hunters, hikers and mountain bikers often traipse there.

The state has the final say over the proposal, which is expected to cost
$60,000. "This is part of the New York City Watershed Model Forest
Program," Mr. Burns said, "and is designed to be a living classroom to
demonstrate what are deemed to be appropriate management practices for soil
and water quality protection." The Model Forest Program runs three other
sites in the Delaware/ Catskill Watershed, the source of drinking water for
nine million people in lower New York State.

The program at Mount Nimham, to be administered by the Watershed
Agricultural Council, a private group that administers the model forests
and based in Walton, N.Y., is designed to be a demonstration project, its
planners say. The plan calls for the upgrading of a dirt road to
accommodate logging trucks, the creation of skid trails for dragging logs
across the forest floor, the clear-cutting of 16 acres of timber and the
use of herbicides to kill invasive Japanese barberry vines.

Jeff Green, a founder of Plan Putnam, an environmental group (whose Web
site is PlanPutnam.ORG), and his organization are spearheading the fight
against the project. "It's not a logging issue:' he said, "It's about how
we use our lands."

The proposed forestry project would occupy a slope above the West Branch
Reservoir, a catch basin for the Delaware/Catskill System, which sends
unfiltered drinking water to Westchester County and to New York City.

According to a draft amendment to the Hudson Highlands Unit Management
Plan, the main goal is to "conduct research on forest management treatments
and their impacts on water quality" in addition to "conducting education
workshops for forest landowners, professional foresters, timber harvesters,
researchers, and others."

Of the watershed's 1,972 square miles, "about 85 percent is privately
owned," said Kevin Brazill, the watershed forestry program manager for the
Watershed Agricultural Council. "No one can argue with maintaining water
quality and one of the preferred land uses to do that in the watershed is
forests, but taxation issues make it hard to maintain private forests. If
I'm a landowner who loves woodlands and I want to send my kids to college,
I can grant logging leases to keep the woods relatively intact and have
them work for me."

Critics counter that leaving forests untouched is the best way to filter
water. "If they're going to log and clearcut areas the water is going to
run right over the dirt," Ms. Baisley, the Kent supervisor, said, "and if
they disturb any of the arsenic mines, they're really going to create a
problem."

The D.E.C. will study the arsenic deposits and monitor any runoff, Mr.
Burns said.

Unless the city or the state can find the money to buy the privately owned
watershed lands, the property may be sold to developers who will build
subdivisions, which is worse for the water than well-managed forests, said
James Tierney, New York City watershed inspector general.

"It is far better to have those acres remain as properly managed forests
than as malls and McMansions," he said. "That said, this model forest is
located in a sensitive place. This is a steep slope and it's important to
keep sedimentation from running down the mountain, especially if there's
clear-cutting. The whole concept is to avoid risk and stop pollutants from
coming out of the tap in the first place. You don't wait until the gun has
gone off. Do we need another model right here?"

Mr. Brazill counters that moving the proposed model forest to another
location would defeat its purpose.

"We want to create a living museum to help people learn more about
pressures on the ecosystem," he said. "If we put this 25 miles away from
any water source, it wouldn't be making its point. There are homes on the
mountainside with impervious surfaces and sewers. If nature is the ultimate
filter, then perhaps everyone living in the watershed should move out for
the benefit of the nine million people who depend on the water."

Rene Germain, chairman of the New York City Model Forest Committee and
associate professor of forestry at the State University of New York College
of Environmental Science and Forestry in Syracuse, expressed surprise at
the level of opposition the proposal has generated.

"It's NIMBY-ism at its worst," he said. "I respect their opinion, but
everything we're doing is based on science. They're making us out to be the
most evil people in the world, but folks who live in urban and suburban
areas use wood products, including the peopie who want to tar and feather
us, except they want it to be harvested in British Columbia."

Opponents of the program are unmoved. Gil Tarbox, an environmental advocate
and leader of the Nimham Mountain Singers, said: "After a heavy rain, water
runs off this mountain for days. Are they going to be out there 24 hours,
seven days a week monitoring water quality?"

The D.E.C. plans to hold another public meeting about the proposal next
month in Kent.

Finding the middle ground has been difficult. Mr. Tierney said.

'They may have a very carefully thought out program, where they haven't
gone off in a haphazard way," he said. 'But it's easy to question the
location, the terrain, and the clear-cutting."