After reading Rich Preall’s Guest Commentary on Jan. 9 and Mike Damp’s rebuttal commentary on Jan. 15, I feel I need to explain “the rest of the story.”

Mike Damp indicated that “Rich Preall’s friends and former colleagues, who are a handful of people opposing the marina, had 15 months of public meetings and a public hearing to bring up questions.” Not true! The fact is no one brought up the subject of the fishery for 13 months, not a single discussion at any committee meeting nor the so-called experts of the LA Group proposing the project. I attended a meeting and was shocked when I listened to studies completed on visual impacts to the area and wetlands, and heard nothing about the impact on aquatic plant life or the fishery. In fact, the LA Group cited this as trout water in its first news release!

I immediately alerted the 350 members Saranac Lake Fish and Game Club and the parent organization of the club, the Franklin County Federation of Fish and Game Clubs (1,000 members) to the oversight by both the review board and the LA Group in regard to any investigation of the impact of the project on the fishery. (My position in the federation is that of legislative vice president, and my duty is to represent them on all matters with governmental agencies.) Both groups (unanimously) requested that I investigate this issue.

Representing the Saranac Lake club and the federation (not a few friends), I contacted recently retired Senior Aquatic Biologist Richard Preall for information on the fishery in regard to the two sites on Lower Saranac Lake involving this project and its impact on the fishery. He provided me with the results of the studies that he himself had completed.

I noted from his information that the location of the main site was a deep-water site that posed no problem. However, the Annex in Ampersand Bay would create a major problem with the installation of floating docks because the location is the major breeding ground and nursery for several warm water species of fish. Because of its shallow bottom, weed cover and the outflow of Lake Colby, that location is essential to fish production. Mr. Preall’s report results were submitted by me and provided to the town Planning Board in writing, along with my presentation at the public hearing in October.

Mr. Damp claims the LA Group has done a lot of research since the October meeting. They were basically attempts to reinterpret the results of Mr. Preall’s work. LA Group staff also tried to compare studies from other bodies of water. The fact that no body of water has the same conditions makes them not comparable. If there are no other studies in the bay area, you must accept Mr. Preall’s findings or complete another study that would prove that there is not a spawning ground and nursery, or prove that self-standing docks would not impact that habitat for fish production. Fish don’t reproduce just anywhere. They require special conditions for each species, and unfortunately for the LA Group, those conditions have created a significant spawning area in Ampersand Bay.

Mr. Damp also claims that the area in question has been a commercial marina since the 1930s, that their expansion is not a change of use but an expansion, and that the fish have survived there for 165 years of commercially use with no evidence that they will not continue to do so. However, he forgot to mention the boat slips were along the shore and not out in the spawning beds.

Mr. Preall did not ask to speak to the Planning Board, as Mr. Damp implies. He offered to attend a meeting if they needed more information; Chairman Baker decided to telephone Mr. Preall instead. When Mr. Baker contacted the Planning Board about his conversation with Mr. Preall, his interpretation of that conversation was quite the opposite of what Mr. Preall had thought was communicated. This resulted in confusion among the Planning Board members.

The Planning Board is made up of well-intentioned citizens of Harrietstown who have volunteered their time and efforts on behalf of all of us to carry out a demanding task. However, they cannot rely on hearsay from one member when making decisions on important issues that might impact the future of the lake. They were prudent in their decision to call a public hearing on this issue scheduled for Feb. 9.

The sportsmen and -women that I represent want a marina as much as or more than anyone. (I have had a slip in the Annex for 40 years.) However, we must be extremely careful that it does not destroy the spawning bed in Ampersand Bay. There are several alternative options for the LA Group to have expanded spaces without disturbing the spawning area. We need a marina, and at the same time we need to protect the spawning area. Surely if a hotel can offer to modify its building plans on one end of the Saranac Chain for a better view, a marina on the other end can modify its plans to save a major fish breeding area. It’s time for creative thinking. We deserve it!

—

Robert E. Brown lives in Saranac Lake.