Letter: Decision raises more questions

To the editor

Published
8:52 pm EDT, Saturday, March 16, 2013

The Times Union applauds a Hamilton County judge's decision holding that a public highway runs through the Shingle Shanty Brook wetlands due to its capacity to be traveled by canoes. The Northern Harriers and American Black Ducks, species sensitive to human disturbance that nested along the waterway last year, won't be so enthusiastic.

For more than 160 years, the Shingle Shanty wetlands have been a place where controlled access has limited ecological threats. It seems that era might have come to a close with the rise of the view that the state's natural heritage is principally a recreational resource where value is measured by the number of people who derive pleasure from it.

In the mid-19th century, when Benjamin Brandreth purchased the property from New York, the highest court held the Raquette River flowing from Colton through Potsdam and on to Raymondville was not a public highway under the common law. Seven generations later, the common law has been expanded to such an extent that a headwater stream can fit within the definition of a public highway.

While laws should adapt to some degree, settled expectations form the bedrock beneath property rights. This decision seems to throw into question the rights of any property owner in New York with wetlands that a canoe or airboat might be able to travel through.

Long after we all are gone, our descendants will be dealing with a world and challenges none of us can anticipate. I am glad they will know that we did what we could to protect the Shingle Shanty wetlands and the species that depend on them and preserve their ability to do the same.