The question in this case is whether a plan to cut down 6,184 trees for the construction of snowmobile trails in the Adirondack Park violates the State Constitution.
Article XIV, § 1 of the State Constitution states that the lands of the Forest Preserve “shall be forever kept as wild forest lands” and “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.” The Forest Preserve consists of about 2.5 million acres of land, including land within the Adirondack Park.
This case deals with Forest Preserve land located within the Adirondack Park. The State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) planned to construct 27 miles of snowmobile trails, which would require the removal of approximately 25,000 trees, including more than 6,100 trees that measure at least three inches in diameter at breast height. Plaintiff commenced this hybrid CPLR article 78 proceeding and action seeking a declaration that DEC’s plan violated the State Constitution. Specifically, plaintiff claimed that the plan was unconstitutional because it would result in Forest Preserve land not being kept “forever wild” and Forest Preserve timber being destroyed.
After a bench trial, Supreme Court held that the plan was constitutional, but a divided panel of the Third Department reversed. The court unanimously agreed that that DEC’s plan did not violate the “forever wild” provision of the State Constitution. Crediting the trial court’s credibility findings, the trial evidence established that the planned trails were more similar to hiking trails than to roads, and that their construction would not unconstitutionally impair the “wild forest qualities” of the Forest Preserve.
But the court divided on whether DEC’s plan violated the provision prohibiting the sale, removal or destruction of timber in the Forest Preserve. Noting that this provision should be “strictly interpreted,” the majority interpreted it to prohibit the removal of a “substantial extent” and “material degree” of timber from the Forest Preserve. Finding that DEC’s plan would do both things, the majority declared the plan unconstitutional.
The dissenting judge disagreed, asserting that when viewed in context, the plan to remove “approximately 25,000 trees—including 6,100 trees having at least a three-inch diameter—over a system of trails covering 27 miles is neither substantial nor material.”
The State appealed to the Court of Appeals as a matter of right; plaintiffs cross-appealed also as a matter of right.
Return to the case page for Protect the Adirondacks! v. N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation.