For the past 8 or so years, the nonprofit conservationist organization Protect the Adirondacks has been locked in a contentious lawsuit against the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the Adirondack Park agency. The state Court of Appeals finally made a ruling just this past May in favor of Protect the Adirondacks. The subject that caused this much contention in the court systems was the construction of snowmobile trails. The construction of such trails did not directly contradict written elements of the New York State Constitution, though it was correctly the responsibility of the courts to interpret the spirit of the law. As such, the ultimate ruling was what was best for the conservation of Adirondack wilderness. 

For reference, it is first necessary to know that Article 14 of the New York State Constitution, the “forever wild” clause, states that the Adirondack woods “shall not be leased, sold or exchanged, or be taken by any corporation, public or private, nor shall the timber thereon be sold, removed or destroyed.” In order to construct these snowmobile trails, it would be necessary to cut down a significant amount of forest. This is where the premise of the lawsuit came from, as Protect the Adirondacks argued that cutting down around 1,000 trees per mile of trail, as well as the manipulation of the land to create the slopes of the trails, violated the “forever wild” clause. 

While this may seem like an obvious violation of the clause, lower courts ruled in favor of the defense on multiple occasions. The reasons were that the amount of tree cutting was less than other cases that had not been taken to court, and also vague phrasing in the original constitution specifically protected larger, healthier trees, whereas trail construction would harm mostly smaller trees. The specific wording of this clause of the constitution is exceptionally vague, and so it is hard to find any concrete evidence against the construction of such trails or to point out any specific violations.

However, as is the case with many old documents, it would be impossible for those who wrote the originals to anticipate problems centuries into the future. The construction of these trails certainly violates the spirit of the “forever wild” clause. The clause was written for a reason, and so rather than finding loopholes in old wording, it should be our responsibility to maintain the purpose of the laws in the first place. Even with relatively vague wording, it is also abundantly clear that trail construction contradicts this clause. 

The final decision of the Court of Appeals was that regardless of the size of individual trees, cutting down that much forest would have significant negative impacts on the ecosystem without immediately benefiting the general public. Old documents ultimately need to be interpreted through a modern lens. A lot is possible when taking advantage of strange wording. Also, the argument that past cases, with worse violations, had not been taken to court seems illogical since we cannot correct for those mistakes. Regardless, the final decision was the right one, and it’s quite frankly a little bit discouraging that it took so long to come to.

Works Cited

“Article 14 Lawsuit Update.” Protect the Adirondacks!, 25 Apr. 2021, https://www.protectadks.org/article-14-lawsuit-update/ 

Cerbone, Aaron. “New York’s Highest Court Rules against Dec Tree Cutting.” New York’s Highest Court Rules against DEC Tree Cutting | News, Sports, Jobs – Adirondack Daily Enterprise, https://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/news/local-news/2021/05/nys-highest-court-rules-against-dec-tree-cutting-restricting-future-trail-work/ . 

“Wow, we CAN make a change and help the animals!” – I still vividly remember my first reaction to watching a TV documentary on rehabilitating the Amur (Siberian) tiger population by capturing them and encouraging the mating of the remaining tigers in the area. I was fascinated, and so the wildlife rehabilitation/ refuge projects are what drew my attention to the “conservation” and essentially brought me to choose this FYS. I was excited to find out that the Adirondacks also had its own wildlife refuge, but also shocked to find out it has been temporarily closed.

The Adirondack Wildlife Refuge, run by Steve and Wendy Hall, plays a crucial role and contributes to the conservation of the Adirondack’s “wilderness” as a whole. Although it recently has been forced to close due to several violations of the laws and regulations, the Department of Environmental Conservation should recognise the necessity of having wildlife refuge such as AWR to maintain the healthy Adirondack’s ecosystem in the long-term.

The rehabilitation centers/ refuges of wildlife are critical to the conservation of the entire ecosystem because they help protect its biodiversity. Ecosystems with high biodiversity are generally more stable and healthier, meaning that they are more resilient after the disturbances. Moreover, as listed as one of the Adirondack Wildlife Refuge’s goal, “Wildlife Rescue, Rehab and Release, as well as Public Education,” refuges often function as an education opportunity.

Therefore, facilities like AWR is so important to the area that both values and depends on wilderness like the Adirondacks. However, the refuge came to a close due to the issues such as the inappropriate and insufficient management of the animals, repeated violations of state and federal laws, regulations and licence conditions (Gwendolyn, 2021). These violations have been confirmed for several years, including the time when the two bears have escaped in 2019 and 2021, which shows their lack of intentions to improve and follow the regulations.

In response to the consequence that DEC has finally brought earlier this month, Steve wrote “The DEC always claims that they are protecting the public and the animals, but the real result of forcing us to rehome the wolves, bears, etc. has been the loss of a key educational center for students, as well as an economic benefit to High Peaks hotels, restaurants and other merchants” (Gwendolyn, 2021).

Overall, I think the violations of the Halls must be fairly penalised and they must acknowledge the damage they have done to both the community around and the animals in the refuge. However, I also believe that the DEC must give much more careful consideration. For example, Ahote, a black bear the Halls raised since she was a cub, died after arriving at Maine Wildlife Park, following the closing of the refuge, due to “capture myopathy.” Such non-infectious disease is caused by stress, often seen in relocated/captured animals. Many more deaths across different species after relocation from their “home” in the Adirondacks were confirmed – the harm it does to the animals is evident.

From the case of the Adirondack Wildlife Refuge, we can learn the immense importance of co-operation between non-governmental and governmental organisations in order to be “successful” in conservation. Furthermore, it also highlights the room for improvements for the DEC to take a more considerate action, for example, and the significance of the constant reminder of who/ what we are doing these conservation efforts for.

I mean, what’s the whole point of all this “conservation” thing, if we are killing the animals we are supposed to protect for human’s convenience – right?

Citations:

Gwendolyn, Craig. “Embattled Adirondack Wildlife Refuge Relocates Its Animals.” Adirondack Explorer, 6 Nov. 2021, https://www.adirondackexplorer.org/stories/refuge-animals.

Hall, Steve, and Wendy Hall. “Adirondack Wildlife Refuge.” Index, http://adirondackwildlife.org/.

I was leading our group coming down to Avalanche Lake when I saw her. Perched a couple of hundred yards off the trail at the edge of the lake, minding her own business. As the group leader, Sophie, would come to tell us, the black bear’s name was “Yellow-Yellow,” and she just happened to be the most infamous black bear in the region. Known for having no fear of humans, noise, rubber bullets, and especially bear-proof canisters, she was not a bear to mess with. Thankfully, yellow-yellow did not seem to pay us as much attention as we were paying her and as we reached the edge of the lake, she disappeared into the wilderness. This would be the first and last time I ever saw a bear in the ADKs, and sadly for yellow-yellow, one of her last interactions with humans in the park as well. This 2011 interaction I had with her, would come one year before her death at the hands of hunters in the fall of 2012. But what is most remarkable about yellow-yellow, is that it shows the importance of bear tagging, despite its dangers to the taggers. This coordination system has helped to protect both humans and the bears of the park while providing valuable information to biologists.

Bear tagging has come to be an essential part of mapping and tracking the ADK bear population as it not only helps keep track of the number of bears currently in the park but also is a way to identify them and learn their habits and lifestyle compared to others. Typically, bears in the ADKs are tagged at a young age with both a tracking collar and tags in their ears. This process is performed by DEC wildlife biologists who place tags in each ear to identify the bear and a tracking collar around their neck to observe and study its movements. In the case of yellow-yellow, she was tagged in the early 2000s in the first two years of her life with two yellow tags, one in each year, thus leading to her nickname of yellow-yellow. For years, people and DEC biologists alike were easily able to identify yellow-yellow thanks to her tags. Unlike most bears, she was never scared of humans; However she never showed aggression towards them, but she possessed the uncanny ability to unlock supposedly bear-proof food canisters. Over the course of her life, she was tracked with ease thanks to the countless sightings and her not too stealthy stealing of campers’ food. What ultimately lead to her demise, was the inability of a hunter to recognize her tags, a sign that is supposed to tell hunters not to shoot as their target is a state monitored animal.

Sources:

Wichelns, R. (2016, October 20). The Legend of Yellow-Yellow: New York’s Most Infamous Bear. RootsRated. https://rootsrated.com/stories/the-legend-of-yellow-yellow-new-york-s-most-infamous-bear

Crane, D. (2012, November 14). A Yellow-Yellow Obituary –. The Adirondack Almanack. https://www.adirondackalmanack.com/2012/11/a-yellow-yellow-obituary.html

The earth’s warming is unprecedented in recent geologic history. Decades of research from climate scientists and policy reforms from world leaders have not been enough to stop the abrupt warming of the planet. The Kyoto Protocol, where 38 countries failed to meet their targets, and the Paris Agreement, which might not meet its goal to hold the rise in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, might not be enough in saving our planet (Maizland, 2021). With only 150 years of data and an enormous uncertainty of the future, the solution to climate change could be more complicated than the problem itself.

The Paris Climate Agreement was one of the few revolutionary climate conventions that aimed to limit global warming. It vowed to restore 344 million hectares of forests and considered planting trees viable to mitigate climate change (Frost,2020). However, some research suggests that forests have warming effects and many more-complex and uncertain climate impacts (Popkin, 2019).

One problem with trees is that forested land surfaces are darker than most land with grass or snow. Since dark surfaces absorb more heat, a land filled with trees will trap a lot of the heat from the Sun and increase the local temperature of a place. As a result, in some regions, specifically with snow, planting more trees could result in net warming (Marshall, 2020).

An analysis of the amount of carbon dioxide sequestered by a tree on dailykos.com states that planting one trillion trees overnight can only be half of the present human emissions (Holloway, 2019). Considering the world has about 3.04 trillion trees right now, planting a trillion trees would be an ambitious project that would not be significant to stop global warming over the long term.

Droughts and land degradation are consequences of global warming. One of the countries severely affected by this problem is China, where 27.4 percent of its land is desertified land (Petri, 2017). To combat its expanding deserts, China implemented the Three-North Shelterbelt Project to plant millions of trees along the 2800 mile border of the northern encroaching desert (Petri, 2017).

On the other hand, research in 2016 has shown that the new ecosystems formed as a result of the Three-North Shelterbelt Project- planting millions of trees along the 2800 mile border of the northern encroaching desert in China (Petri, 2017)- absorb the water from rainfall and reduce the amount that ends up in the rivers. Furthermore, scientists are worried that planting more trees could further worsen water scarcity and worsen the droughts in China (Zastrow, 2019).

I am, by no means, suggesting stopping efforts to combat deforestation, but trees can only help us slow climate change; they can’t reverse climate change by themselves. Regions like the Adirondack are crucial in absorbing carbon dioxide and slowing the earth’s warming. However, the climate will keep changing for decades, which could also affect patterns of tree growth. Instead of relying on these carbon sinks, our goals should stop emitting the primary sources of greenhouse gases. Trees can be a stopgap until countries transition from fossil fuels and other sources of greenhouse gases to greener, reliable alternatives. Climate change is a problem of the modern world, and the solutions proposed today could have repercussions over the long term.

Citations:

Maizland, Lindsay. “Global Climate Agreements: Successes and Failures.” Council on Foreign Relations, 21 Nov. 2017, https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/paris-global-climate-change-agreements.

Popkin, Gabriel. How Much Can Forests Fight Climate Change? 15 Jan. 2019, https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00122-z.

Marshall, Michael. Planting Trees Doesn’t Always Help with Climate Change. 26 May 2020, https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200521-planting-trees-doesnt-always-help-with-climate-change.

Holloway, R. “About That Climate-Mitigation/Tree-Planting Study That Seems Too Good to Be True…” Daily Kos, 6 July 2019, https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/7/6/1869929/-About-that-climate-mitigation-tree-planting-study-that-seems-too-good-to-be-true.

Petri, Alexandra E. “China’s ‘Great Green Wall’ Fights Expanding Desert.” National Geographic, 4 May 2021, https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/china-great-green-wall-gobi-tengger-desertification.

Zastrow, Mark. “China’s Tree-Planting Drive Could Falter in a Warming World.” Nature News, Nature Publishing Group, 23 Sept. 2019, https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02789-w#ref-CR5.

Would you rather wear an exploited animal or plastic that released incredibly toxic chemicals? It’s a debate that challenges morality and environmental care. Those in favor of real fur rely on the argument that the process of creating faux fur is incredibly damaging to the environment, while those against argue that real fur promotes animal brutality. Without a doubt, faux fur is the better option as it leads to the least amount of harm to the environment and its species. Acknowledging what type of fur is better for the environment and most moral will help us evolve and create policies and ways to help preserve our environment in a moral way.

Weighing our options.

Real fur supporters argue that the creation of faux fur leads to the production of harmful chemicals, harming the environment. Most, present-day, faux is made from synthetic fibres… including polyester (Bustle). Furthermore, the process of the creation of polyester uses an abundant amount of petroleum. Polyester alone “uses almost 70 million barrels of oil a year” (Green Living Detective). But what exactly does this mean for the environment? The creation of faux fur is harmful to the environment because all the emitted toxins contribute to the amount of greenhouse gases and pollution affecting our planet. This contributes to global warming, affecting the cycles of earth’s atmosphere. Furthermore, people also argue that Faux fur is non biodegradable, and therefore, detrimental to our environment. Essentially, this means that the plastic used to create this fur is unable to break down and be recycled or reused through the process of decomposition. Due to this, faux fur will ultimately end up in landfills (unlike real fur which will decompose and be used again through soils). Although faux fur seems to be the worst option because it harms the environment, real fur also harms the environment and promotes animal brutality. 

Real fur’s foundation is built upon animal exploitation. Morality is a concern when it comes to the usage of fur. On PETA’s website, there’s an opening statement describing that, “animals endure a life of misery, pain, frustration, and fear and many are skinned alive.” Killing an animal in such a way is both disturbing and immoral. Wanting real animal fur as a coat does not justify the pain that animals are forced to endure. In addition, the production of real fur also has negative impacts on the environment. “Emissions of nitrous oxide and ammonia from mink manure are a serious issue” (Faunalytics). Nitrous oxide is a greenhouse gas that is “300 times more harmful than carbon dioxide” (CBCNews). The farms and overbreeding of animals release many toxic chemicals into the air, creating a negative environment, just like plastic fur. Real fur is worse, as it has multiple ways to harm our environments.

Rabbit fur explored during FYS class on October 30, 2021.

Morality and the environment are both at stake. I have decided that real fur is not the option I will be choosing because, not only are animals brutally murdered, but the process also involves toxins going into the atmosphere.

Bibliography

Cutler, Lauren. The Boar, 18 Oct. 2020, https://theboar.org/2020/10/fur-fashion-morally-wrong-sustainable-alternative/. 

“Faux Fur Ruched Throws.” Pottery Barn, https://www.potterybarn.com/products/faux-fur-ruched-throw-collection/. 

Mortillaro, Nicole. “Nitrous Oxide, More Harmful to the Climate than CO2, Increasing in Atmosphere, Study Finds | CBC News.” CBCnews, CBC/Radio Canada, 8 Oct. 2020, https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/nitrous-oxide-climate-1.5753907. 

The Green Living Detective One day. “How Green Is It… to Wear Synthetic Fabrics?” Green Living Detective, Green Living Detective, 10 Apr. 2019, https://www.greenlivingdetective.com/how-green-is-it-to-wear-synthetic-fabrics/. 

Schneider, Desiree. “Fur Kills Animals, Faux Fur Kills the Environment. What Is Better?” Medium, The Overtake, 26 June 2019, https://medium.com/@overtake/fur-kills-animals-faux-fur-kills-the-environment-what-is-better-6580a1b7ef47. 

Sharkey, Lauren. “Is Faux Fur Bad for the Environment?” Bustle, Bustle, 10 Feb. 2020, https://www.bustle.com/p/is-faux-fur-bad-for-the-environment-21784082. 

The New York constitution was missing a statement that protects the state’s Environment, and most importantly, clean air and clean water. On November 2nd of this year, a vote was cast on the proposal to “add a right to clean water, clean air, and a healthful environment to the New York Constitution’s Bill of Rights,” (Ballotpedia, 2021). The legislation passed with not much backlash and New York State will now join six other states that have also made this leap. (Gutierrez, 2021) Publicly, the idea had a lot of support, and the only backlash was from Republican political figures. The ironic part about the backlash is that many of these Republican lawmakers work inside the Adirondack Park, the most serene and natural piece of the state. (Craig, 2021) While this amendment may not have a direct impact on the Adirondacks, it is a step in the right direction for the state and now that the law has been passed it makes it easier to pass future environmental policy legislation, which would have an effect on the Park.

On November 2nd, the amendment was put into effect immediately after the overwhelming majority voted for it. (Gutierrez, 2021) How does this amendment constitute change? The biggest impact the amendment has is the regulations that are put on new developments and the emissions from large factories and plants. The executive director of Environmental Advocates, Peter Iwanowicz, says that the amendment “could help prevent pollution and environmental damage before it happens,” (De Socio, 2021). The law for clean air and clean water promotes human health and works to prevent climate change and protect the land. It generally would be beneficial to all citizens and has been successful in other states where it has been implemented. So who was against the proposal?

The backlash came from the more conservative legislature seen in upstate New York. According to Mike De Socio of the Adirondack Explorer, “some Republican lawmakers cited concerns that the amendment would lead to a flood of litigation” (De Socio, 2021). The argument coming from these lawmakers does have some validity to it. One piece of their argument is that the definitions of what is clean in the amendment are quite ‘loose’ (Craig, 2021). Loose legislation leads to a higher frequency of lawsuits, which makes it hard to get anything done in the state. 

It is important to see both sides of the argument on amendments such as this because of factors that are not obvious like the word clean having a loose definition, resulting in a higher frequency of lawsuits. This clean air and water law was certainly worth the trouble for New York State and will help out a lot in the future when it is time for further environmental regulations within the Adirondacks. Since the proposal passed with an overwhelming majority, it can be assumed that N.Y. citizens support environmental policy and will work to protect their state’s 6 million acre park.  

Literature Cited

BallotPedia. (2021). New York Proposal 2, Environmental Rights Amendment (2021). https://ballotpedia.org/New_York_Proposal_2,Environmental_Rights_Amendment(2021)

Craig, G. (January 2021). Adirondack lawmakers wary of adding clean air and water to state bill of rights. Adirondack Explorer. https://www.adirondackexplorer.org/stories/adirondack-lawmakers-wary-of-adding-clean-air-and-water-to-state-bill-of-rights

De Socio, M. (September 2021). On the ballot this fall: Adding clean air and water to state bill of rights. Adirondack Explorer. https://www.adirondackexplorer.org/stories/green-amendment-before-voters

Gutiérrez, Nydia. (November 3, 2021). Environmental Rights Amendment Passes In New York. Earth Justice. https://earthjustice.org/news/press/2021/environmental-rights-amendment-passes-in-new-york

Many would think that an increase in hikers would be a great addition to the Adirondacks. But, that may not be true. With the increase in hikers, there is an increase in the amount of search and rescues taking place within the Adirondacks. As more people begin to venture into the woods to hike, there is a greater portion of individuals who do not properly prepare for their hikes. Therefore, even if someone is going on a small day hike that seems relatively easy, it is essential to always be prepared for the worst. Preparation is essential to safely and successfully hiking within the Adirondacks.

The Adirondacks has seen a record increase in the number of searches and rescues within the past year. Because of the pandemic, more people went outdoors which resulted in a significant amount of people being unprepared for the conditions and needing help. For example, in 2019 there were 216 search and rescues while in 2020 there were 285 search and rescues(Record Number of Search and Rescues). Obviously, some of these search and rescues are due to freak accidents like breaking an arm or leg. However, many of these search and rescues are preventable, as many of them are due to the unpreparedness of hikers. The Adirondacks saw an increase in the number of hikers who solely relied on their smartphones to guide them for light or navigation. Using a smartphone when hiking is not a proper navigation or light source as many areas within the Adirondacks loose cell coverage causing phones to be unable to find location. This is why it is essential for individuals to bring compasses and maps when hiking. Not only that, many hikers within the Adirondacks have underestimated the duration and difficulty of many of the hikes within the Adirondacks. This has caused people to become stuck in the dark, get lost, and be in need of a rescue mission. For example, a forest ranger noted that, “We’re seeing a lot of people who are calling because they have been overcome by darkness, and they did not have the proper equipment to see their way out of the woods”(Record Number of Search and Rescues). As we can see, unprepared hiking is a very common issue within the Adirondacks which is leading to an increase in search and rescue missions. 

Search and rescue efforts that are related to being unprepared can be extremely preventable. Essentially, if hikers learn to be prepared with the necessary equipment and materials before venturing into the woods, it would significantly reduce the number of rescues. The weather and conditions within the mountains can change instantly so it is essential that hikers pack for the unexpected. Some key aspects to ensure safety and preparedness when hiking include: multiple clothing layers to ensure warmth, a map, a compass, waterproof clothing, headlamp, extra nutrition, and extra water. There are additional resources that can be important depending on the circumstances. However, if every hiker brought the necessary equipment listed above then there would be a significant reduction in search and rescues. Therefore, it is apparent that hikers must be prepared when hiking in the Adirondacks. 

Literature Cited:

 “Hike Smart NY.” HIKE SMART NY – NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation, www.dec.ny.gov/outdoor/28708.html.

“Rangers Respond to Lost, Injured Hikers and Hunters -.” The Adirondack Almanack, 20 Oct. 2021, www.adirondackalmanack.com/2021/10/rangers-respond-to-lost-injured-hikers-and-hunters.html.

“Record Number of Search and Rescues This Year.” Adirondack Explorer, 26 Oct. 2020, www.adirondackexplorer.org/stories/record-number-of-search-and-rescues-this-year

“Immigrants are disposable”, This is what mining recruiters used to think when mining was a huge industry in the Adirondacks. Immigrants were taken advantage of in the early days of the Adirondack mining industry, and deserve more recognition for how much they contributed to the history of the land. People today only see the Adirondacks as a place of beauty, failing to realize the history behind the landscape which they admire so much.

The mining that was done in the Adirondacks did a great job of employing people while also introducing a very diverse group of people to the region. While this sounds good at the surface, there was actually a darker side to the story of mining in the Adirondacks. There were recruiters for the mines that would take immigrants directly from the docks of New York and give them an opportunity to work. While innocent at first, the jobs given to these immigrants were inherently dangerous and they weren’t treated well.

What was done in these small mining towns located in the Adirondacks was cold and calculated. Some towns were “ethnically segregated…exacerbating tensions between old and new immigrant groups – which served to reduce the chances of miners finding common cause and striking, or, worse, unionizing” (Mining in the Adirondacks). Unfortunately, the way that these mines were run, their only purpose was to increase profits and production by exploiting workers. A clear example of this exploitation is when Italian mine workers “had to pay for their own tools and…pew rents in the local parish that new immigrant workers could not afford”(Mining in the Adirondacks). It is a shame to see what was done to these people, but all of this grueling work didn’t go to waste.

New discoveries today show that some of the mining waste and tailings that were left over from the past work done in the area still have ample amounts of rare earth metals that can be valuable to us today. These rare earth metals are essential to certain types of production, so if the effort is taken to extract these materials from the tailings and waste, what was once just pollution will become useful. It is truly unfortunate how these mines were run in the past, but there certainly have been good things to come of it. Not only was mining a great way of making money back during the Adirondacks’ early years of exploration, but benefits still might be seen today.

Immigrant mine workers were essentially the backbone of the region. Mining used to make up a huge part of the economy. Although this may not be the case today, the history of the land should at least be recognized to some extent. Not only has mining been pushed out of a lot of people’s view of the Adirondacks, almost no one would know about the immigrant workers that actually worked in the mines. People want to have this false vision of what the Adirondacks were, but the true history should not be hidden from the public no matter how dark it may be. What these workers did was essential to the development of the land, so they should hold their place in history when the Adirondacks come to mind.

Works Cited

“Mine Waste in the Eastern Adirondacks May Be Untapped, Accessible Source of Rare Earth Element Minerals.” Mine Waste in the Eastern Adirondacks May Be Untapped, Accessible Source of Rare Earth Element Minerals, 22 Dec. 2020, https://www.usgs.gov/news/mine-waste-eastern-adirondacks-may-be-untapped-accessible-source-rare-earth-element-minerals.

 “Mining in the Adirondacks.” Adirondack Experience, 9 Apr. 2021, https://www.theadkx.org/mining-in-the-adirondacks/.

“Love is like wildflowers; it’s often found in the most unlikely places,” written by Ralph Waldo Emerson, is one of my favorite quotes in the past nineteen years of life. The wildflowers in the Adirondacks, as one of the unique features of the Adirondacks, attract tons of tourists. Simultaneously, since some of the flowers are rare to find while very useful, it is important that the US government should take initiative to preserve them.

Let me show you a few beautiful wildflowers of the Adirondacks. The Picture 1 shows Buckbean (also called Bogbean), one species native to the Adirondacks. In spring and early summer, it produces clusters of star-like white flowers. Thin silk wound on the petals so that the flower appears in a fancier sense. Do you see the little insect resting on the flower petal? I felt the strong emotional bonding between different organisms when I looked at the picture at first glance. It is one of the typical scenes showing the harmonious relationship among species in the Adirondacks. Furthermore, Buckbean flourishes in “wet soil or shallow water on the edge of ponds, blogs, and marshy ground,” where living conditions are unsatisfactory. Despite this, Buckbean is versatile. It is commonly used as both a food and a medicine. In Europe, the leaves were sometimes used as a substitute for hops in beer brewing and were also boiled in honey to make mead. Powdered Buckbean roots were reportedly mixed with flour as a bread additive (Martin, Zim, Nelson).

Picture 1: Buckbean flowers

Another wildflower that I appreciate is Grass Pink (Picture 2). It often springs from peat or sphagnum moss, and the bearded lip easily recognizes its petal and long, narrow, grass-like leaves (Chapman). Plus, it is famous for its sweet-smelling smell when it generally blooms in late June or early July. The petals of the flower have a delicate fragrance, said to be reminiscent of red raspberries or sweet violets. The lower lip petal is deeply fringed in the center with yellow bristles. Nevertheless, this plant is listed by the US Department of Agriculture as “exploitably vulnerable” in New York State, leading to my awareness that more conservation actions are needed to protect wildflowers like Grass Pink from getting harmed (Newcomb).

Picture 2: Grass Pink flower

As for me, whenever I experience a low point in life, flowers usually bring me hopes as they bloom and create beautiful moments of life in whatever weather conditions. I believe it is the courage and optimism that allow wildflowers like those in the Adirondacks to create serendipity. I am looking forward to meeting serendipity in my future hiking in the Adirondacks!

Work cited:

Alexander C. Martin, Herbert S. Zim, and Arnold L. Nelson. (1951) American Wildlife & Plants. A Guide to Wildlife Food Habits. New York Dover Publication.

(September 2008) Outdoor Recreation Activity Trends: What’s Growing, What’s Slowing?  A Recreation Research Report in the IRIS Series1.

Lawrence Newcomb. (1977) Newcomb’s Wildflower Guide. Little Brown and Company.

William K. Chapman. (1997) Orchids of the Northeast, A Field Guide. Syracuse University Press.

Although Western blazes consuming the land area equivalent to small northeastern states come to mind when the topic of forest fires comes up, the Adirondacks has its own history of devastating forest fires. Adirondack fires were at their most destructive in the early-to-mid 20th century. Fires in the Adirondacks, caused by logging, poor forest management, and railroads, destroyed much of the Adirondacks in this time period. The destruction of the wildfires invigorated the conservation of the region, while the causes of the fires contributed to the anti-industry sentiment in the Park. Together, these factors created the new era of Adirondack conservation and land use that continues to the present day.

The fires of 1903, 1908, and 1934 burned hundreds of thousands of acres of forest and destroyed millions of dollars worth of property, proving how vulnerable the Adirondacks are to fires. The Great Fire of 1903 was the most destructive fire in the Adirondacks, burning more than 600,000 acres of land (Menice). Although there were no fatalities, the fire cost $3.5 million dollars and led to the unemployment of hundreds of people (Nelson, DuQuette, Suter). The Great Fire of 1903 first brought attention to the fires within the Adirondacks. Although no subsequent fires were able to match the size nor destruction of the Great Fire of 1903, fires in 1908 and 1934 continued to prove that wildfires were a threat to the Adirondacks. These fires further cemented the idea that humans can start and exacerbate forest fires, leading people within the Adirondacks to work to minimize the likelihood of future fires. 

The major fires of 1903, 1908, and 1934 coincided with the peak of logging and industry within the Adirondacks. Unregulated logging contributed significantly to the spread and size of these fires. At the time, enforcement of environmental protections was nonexistent and many industries abused the region (Nelson). Flammable debris left by clear-cutting made vast swaths of the region vulnerable to forest fires (Nelson). While logging provided the fuel for the fires, railroads provided the spark. Trains in the Adirondacks ran on coal or wood, which sent off sparks as they traveled (The Adirondack Experience). Train sparks started the main fire of 1908, and likely also started the Great Fire of 1903 (Halasz; The Adirondack Experience). It is clear that the forest fires were started by humans, and made worse by human activities in the Adirondack Park.

The legacy of the Adirondack fires is immense. Fire towers constructed in 1909 helped detect and put out fires before they could spread (The Adirondack Experience; Adirondack.net). Legal changes prevented future fires and preserved the forests of the Adirondacks. Stricter laws banned the use of coal and wood in trains for petroleum, which does not spark. The governor obtained the power to close parts of the Park to visitors when the risk of fires became too high (Halasz). The fires of the Adirondacks forced people to consider the effect of human activities on the land, and the destructive consequences of the previous century of exploitation of the Park’s natural resources.

Works Cited

DuQuette, Jon J. “Holocausts Razed Huge Areas of Adirondacks.” Adirondack Daily Enterprise, 30 Sept. 1989, localwiki.org/hsl/Forest_Fires. Accessed 27 Sept. 2021.

Halasz, Sunita. “Historic Forest Fires of the Adirondacks and Saranac Lake.” Adirondack Daily Enterprise, Ogden Newspapers, 13 Nov. 2021, www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/opinion/columns/2020/11/historic-forest-fires-of-the-adirondacks-and-saranac-lake/. Accessed 27 Sept. 2021.

Menice, Alice. “A View of St. Regis Mountain Fire Tower -.” The Adirondack Almanack, Adirondack Explorer, 30 Aug. 2021, www.adirondackalmanack.com/2021/08/a-view-of-st-regis-mountain-fire-tower.html#more-189043. Accessed 27 Sept. 2021.

Nelson, Pete. “Lost Brook Dispatches: The Fires of 1903 -.” The Adirondack Almanack, Adirondack Experience, 14 Apr. 2012, www.adirondackalmanack.com/2012/04/lost-brook-dispatches-the-fires-of-1903.html. Accessed 27 Sept. 2021.

Suter, Herman Milton, and United States Bureau of Forestry. Forest Fires in the Adirondacks in 1903. Internet Archive, vol. 26, Washington, D.C., Washington, Govt. Print. Off., 1904, archive.org/details/forestfiresinadi26sute. Accessed 27 Sept. 2021.

The Adirondack Experience. “The Adirondacks Are Burning: A Brief History of Forest Fires.” Adirondack Experience, Mannix, 4 Apr. 2017, www.theadkx.org/the-adirondacks-are-burning-a-brief-history-of-forest-fires/. Accessed 27 Sept. 2021.“The History of Fire Towers: Protecting the Adirondacks in the 20th Century.” Adirondack.net, Adirondack.net, 19 Apr. 2018, www.adirondack.net/history/fire-towers/. Accessed 27 Sept. 2021.