Letters to the Editor: The rules, dog park and Fresh Pond
Rules ignored
To the Editor:
Your headline for last week’s editorial (“Stick to rules or change them”) applies to much, much more than the question of grandfathered businesses and to instrumentalities beyond the Town Board.
Want to build, add to or renovate a house that exceeds the code’s stated parameters? Variances routinely granted.
Caught going 55 in a 35 mph zone? Plead it down.
Make science review sessions mandatory at school? Not really, there’s no penalty if they’re ignored or skipped.
Hire illegal immigrants with a wink and a nod? No sweat.
Almost 50 years ago, an Arizona senator ran for president with one campaign observation that has stuck in my mind ever since: obey the law or change it. But don’t just ignore it.
We’re on a very slippery slope in that regard, and not just here on Shelter Island.
DAVID DRAPER
Shelter Island
Dog park concerns
To the Editor:
How very interesting and wonderful that some of our neighbors are seeking to provide a place for walking and attending to their dogs. As dog owners ourselves, we are very tuned in to the needs of our beloved family member. Our “baby” is basically confined to our half-acre yard and we are dedicated to cleaning up after her and making her life comfortable every day. She is with us every day and goes most everywhere we go.
Now having said all this, I wish to address the issue presented in last week’s Shelter Island Reporter, of placing a doggy park at the site of the former highway location on Route 114. On the surface, it seems like a fairly good idea. However, how many of your readers are not aware of the pristine freshwater pond that occupies a portion of that site?
That pond is shared with the Shelter Island Historical Society, true colonial home of the Havens family. If one considers that daily fresh water was so very important to a family in colonial times (an era that pre-dated indoor plumbing, freshwater wells etc.), then the close proximity of an open freshwater pond became vital for that family. It must also be noted that particular parcel of property is directly related to an extremely large freshwater wetland that, in times of very heavy rainfall, connects three freshwater ponds (via that freshwater wetland).
Now if we use a little basic common sense, does it not follow that perhaps a full environmental impact review be given to the location of this proposed doggy park? Does this not raise multiple questions about the times of usage of this future park? Who will police it and who will oversee the operation of this doggy park? Most important is who will watch for the proper use of pooper-scoopers in this future park?
Now we have all been subjected to the seemingly constant issue of porta-potties at our people park on Bridge Street. But this proposed doggy park will be located on ground higher than that freshwater wetlands pond, or ponds. Since there seems to always be so much concern for our aquifer all over the Island, does not this deserve some very serious consideration for that open freshwater pond, surrounded by freshwater wetlands? If nothing else, it certainly should be of concern to the Havens’ family memory.
At the very least, porta-potties are cleaned and attended to often and all potential pollutants are contained and then removed from the site. Pooper-scoopers do serve a purpose. But what about the “old thing” we all taught our children about number one and number two? Remember, it will all run downhill and directly into the pond and then the aquifer.
A potentially great idea. But it certainly deserves more then a simple “Town Board members appear ready to agree with the proponents of a town dog park.” It and our local area residents deserve at least a full environmental impact review on this potential possibility of polluting our aquifer. This is not even a saltwater wetland; it is our fresh drinking water.
I also might suggest that perhaps any environmental impact review costs might best be paid for by the proponents of a doggy park.
Without such a serious review, are we not suggesting an open-air, uncontrolled “doggy latrine,” with a possible very serious impact, once again, on our very precious freshwater aquifer?
A true dog lover with some very serious concerns,
KATHLEEN KRAUSE
Shelter Island
Fresh Pond landing
To the Editor:
Many thanks to Highway Superintendent Jay Card and his crew for restoring the town landing on Fresh Pond. Boaters can once again launch and retrieve their craft with ease, using the new gravel boat ramp. No gas-powered boats allowed. The pond is a great place for both the novice and pro bass fishers. Kids can catch bluegills on a worm and bobber. Lunker bass can be found in the weeds and deeper holes.
The pond is regulated by the DEC and a depth chart can be found on its website. Most people practice “catch, take a photo and release” the fish back into the pond. Taking a trophy bass for mounting is also an option. The New York State DEC and the Department of Health advise that children and pregnant women should not consume any fish from the pond. Others should not eat more than a half pound of these fish per month.
Aside from other contaminants in the pond, the fish have high levels of mercury. Like most ponds and lakes in the Northeast, Fresh Pond suffers from decades of acid rain, atmospheric fallout pollution from coal-burning power plants.
Please, no bumper stickers that read, “I ate a fish from Fresh Pond and lived.” Health advisories and regulations are also meant to protect the most vulnerable: the kids, the babies and those with weak immune systems.
I hope that more people will enjoy fishing and boating on Fresh Pond while respecting the environment and the residents who live there.
VINCENT NOVAK
Shelter Island
Phone book oversight
To the Editor:
For many years my name has appeared under “C” in the Shelter Island phone book: Barbara Clark, insurance broker, 47L South Ferry Road (205C), 749-1193.
The new book somehow left me out. My ad under “insurance” in the back of the book still shows me as representing Amaden-Gay Agencies in East Hampton but there’s nothing under “C.”
I’m still here — haven’t left town. Readers, why don’t you just pencil in my name on page 17 of the new 2012-2013 book? I’d be pleased to hear from you!
BARBARA CLARK
Amaden-Gay Agencies
Shelter Island
Clark correction
To the Editor:
We need a quick correction when you can. Amanda is sincerely grateful for the coverage the Reporter has offered. However, she is participating in the 10K as just a supporter of the three charities [that benefit from the 10K] for her hometown. She is not accepting any money from the fund [for her Olympic sailing campaign] or remuneration for appearances on Shelter Island. She would really like folks to just support the Community Fund, Timothy Hill and East End Hospice.
Again, thank you for the coverage. She is just happy to participate!
GREG NISSEN
Director, Quinipet Camp and Retreat
Shelter Island
Amelia’s photo credit
To the Editor:
Oh my goodness! Amelia is on the floor, she is so excited you used her “too small” photo [on the editorial page of last week’s Reporter]! I cannot thank you enough for encouraging her creativity! She has already figured out the resolution output of the different cameras we have and knows which to use for future possible submissions.
For future reference, it’s Amelia Mulligan (not Sherwood).
The world needs more folks like you.
SARAH SHERWOOD
Amelia’s Mom
Shelter Island
Amelia is 13. She took the photo from a North Ferry boat. — Ed.
Summer 2012
To the Editor:
There is a happy aging man on Shelter Island
who plans to spend most of the summer an idle-in.
The tide will go out, the tide will come in
in any event it’s all fine with him.
On the beach he’ll sit, swim and relax
No phone, no tweeting, no texting, no fax.
And if it’s he you need to find
try looking in the evening at Sunset or Vine.
CON POWER
Shelter Island
