Christmas came early for Suffolk County voters in the form of a New York State Supreme Court decision on preserving farmland. READ
Special permits and so-called hardship exceptions, which allowed farmers to develop preserved farmland, have been deemed illegal, according to a New York State Supreme Court ruling. READ
While much of Suffolk County abandoned its agricultural heritage in the 20th century, portions of the North Fork’s two towns still serve as reminders of that way of life. READ
Dr. Ralph Caselnova admits he was looking for “open space” when he and his wife, Catherine, bought 16 acres north of Main Road in Orient in 1998. READ
Is there a North Fork homeowner who doesn’t despair about the destruction of their plants, shrubs or trees caused by deer, which are now eating what they once rejected?
For us farmers, deer damage isn’t just a nuisance; it is having a serious impact on our livelihoods.
Deer cause considerable crop damage to our farms by: 1). browsing, 2). destroying plants, and 3). contamination. (more…)
The increase in the value of North Fork farmland pales in comparison to the rise in value of South Fork farmland over the past decade, according to a market study released by Farm Credit East, a local agricultural lender. (more…)
Turn the Peconic Estuary and Long Island Sound into a “critical conservation” area and free up federal funds for local farmers to protect water quality?
It’s a “no-brainer,” North Fork politicians say. (more…)
It’s good to see county government update its 1996 Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan with a more recent and comprehensive study. It’s often said that having only two representatives in an 18-member legislative body puts the five East End towns at a political disadvantage. And while there’s plenty of truth to that, an in-depth update to hone in on concerns and legislative priorities in the area’s most vital industry should not go overlooked. (more…)
A measure by Legislator Al Krupski to amend how the county purchases farmland and open space failed to pass on Tuesday, even after the Cutchogue Democrat revised the proposed bill after it initially drew the ire of some environmentalists.
In June, Mr. Krupski proposed his original farmland preservation amendment, which suggested splitting the use of the county’s Drinking Water Protection Fund 50-50 between open space and farmland purchases. But dedicating a specific portion of the revenue stream to one use or the other proved too much to ask, and the legislator later altered his proposed amendment, pitching a watered-down version of the legislation in July.
Mr. Krupski’s amended bill made no mention of setting aside a certain percentage of land purchases for open space or farmland. It did, however, set a certain threshold that parcels must meet in order to be appraised by the county — a required step before legislators vote to purchase land.
“I find it surprising that in any way, we could find it controversial that we would spend our money more wisely,” he said before the vote at Tuesday’s general meeting.
But the added benchmarks concerned at least 13 legislators, who voted to table the bill in the final meeting of the year Tuesday, effectively killing it.
Attention to Suffolk’s land purchases through the Drinking Water Protection Fund have come to a fore in the past year after the county bonded out against future revenues and subsequently used nearly all of the funding. While land was able to be purchased for historically low dollar values, Suffolk County, Southampton and Riverhead towns were just a few municipalities that borrowed to buy now, rather than later.
Legislator Lou D’Amaro (D-North Babylon) said before the floor vote that he didn’t believe the appraisal rating system was designed to be considered a threshold for whether or not a particular parcel could ever be purchased.
Legislator William Spencer (D-Centerport) said the new regulations would likely favor the first and second legislative districts — the North and South Forks — as it would codify the process in appraising land parcels, and most parcels available for open space and farmland preservation purchases are located out east.
“To set a rule that would cause me to put my constituents at a disadvantage permanently — I have a very difficult time doing that,” he said.
Legislator Kara Hahn (D-Setauket), chair of the county’s environment, planning and agriculture committee, said last week that those thresholds, in effect, favor purchasing farmland over open space, as the new standards are harder to meet for open space buys.
“It’s not treating them equally, and we have a preference for open space because this is drinking water protection money,” she said. “And a wooded parcel that’s open space is protecting drinking water more than preserving farmland would.”
While the bill wasn’t rejected, since it was tabled on Tuesday it would have to be re-introduced next year in order to be considered once again. Mr. Krupski said he doesn’t intend to bring it back up immediately, and will look to see how previously approved alterations in the land-buying process, which go into effect next year, work out.