A Day Afloat
Sunday, October 14: A peaceful floating procession with kayaks and sailboats, banners and trumpets, on NYC waterways to oppose two pipelines that will bring fracked gas to NYC: the Spectra Pipeline and the Rockaway Pipeline. [more…]
October 13: Join CARP on the Jamaica Bay Sunset Cruise
On Saturday, October 13, from 3 to 6 p.m., join CARP members on the Jamaica Bay Sunset Ecology Cruise. Find out what we are fighting to preserve by keeping the Rockaway pipeline project out of Gateway. The three-hour tour is guided by Mickey Cohen and Don Riepe, both immensely knowledgeable and entertaining. Tickets are $45; $20 for children. Purchase tickets online or at the dock. CARP folks will be meeting at 2 p.m. at Pier 4 (Emmons & Bedford Ave.) to do some leafletting in advance of the cruise. If you would like to join us, send us a message: email@example.com
Deadline for Comments on the Gateway General Management Plan: Oct. 5
The National Park Service is preparing a 20-year General Management Plan for the Gateway National Recreation Area. In a beautifully designed glossy brochure, it describes four plans for Gateway’s future. But nowhere is there any mention of the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral shale gas pipeline project.
NPS is seeking comments from the public. We are asking our supporters to take this opportunity to comment online, and specifically, to oppose the Rockaway Lateral pipeline project. The deadline for comments is October 5, 2012.
The online comments page consists of three questions and a final Comments section. Here are some response guidelines to follow.
1. Which draft management alternative best helps Gateway carry out its purpose?
The General Management Plan outlines four alternatives on pages 9–13 of its brochure, New Vision for a Great Urban Park.
A: No-Action Alternative: things stay as they are
B: Discover Gateway: makes the park more accessible to local communities
C: Experience Preserved Places: focuses on the natural and cultural resources of the park
D: Connect Coastlines: emphasizes water-based resources, activities, and transportation
You may choose any of the four plans, or you may leave this question blank.
Question 2: Which draft management alternative do you favor and why?
Here is a sample response for plan C, which the Audubon Society supports:
“Experiencing Preserved Places” offers the best protections for threatened wildlife, including birds, in Gateway National Recreation Area. As public access improves and the region’s population grows, it is imperative to provide sanctuaries for wildlife and places where urban people can experience nature. In addition, pressures from climate change and sea level rise will squeeze populations already reeling from human disturbance.
Question 3: Are there other ideas important to you that are missing from these draft management alternatives?
There is no mention of the proposed gas pipeline. The public is being kept in the dark, and if not for local people and press publicizing this plan, we would not know about it at all. There is no amount of money that can make up for the loss of the integrity of our national park by handing it over to private industrial use.
The Comments Section: This is the crucial section!
Keep the natural gas industry out of our park, our beach, our bay, and our ocean. No Rockaway Lateral pipeline through the park and no metering and regulating gas station in Floyd Bennett Field. Natural gas facilities are not appropriate readaptive uses of historic structures in parkland protected by NPS. They do not support the mission of the park as stated in its enabling legislation.
I greatly object to the planned Rockaway Lateral pipeline. It is not right to give up our national park land for industrial purposes. Even if everything works perfectly, and there is NEVER a spill or leak, the outgasing of pollutants at the metering station in Floyd Bennett Field will disturb people, gardens, birds, and animals. And if, like all pipelines, there are even small leaks, damage will be compounded. If this pipeline carries fracked gas (don’t they all now?) the damage will be exponential, both at the source and throughout the delivery system. I believe that we have sufficient pipeline capacity for our current needs, and that our future energy needs are best met by a combination of conservation and renewable energy, not fossil fuels.
Put your comments in your own words. It is fine to write a brief personal response, and equally appropriate to write a more lengthy and fact-based response.