ARTICLE
Another round involving
Trap & Skeet
Appellate Court decision
favors town; county
won’t budge
Long
Island Advance
December 3, 2009
By LINDA LEUZZI
Johan and John McConnell
have almost become legal
experts on the Southaven
Park Trap and Skeet
Range, a 60-acre site,
43 of which are used as
a shooting range, right
down the road on Gerard
Avenue. So has their
neighbor John Palasek.
They’re hoping the
recent Appellate Court
decision will stick,
which would make the
county, along with the
operator of the Trap and
Skeet Range, Hunter
Sports Shooting Grounds
Inc., liable for fines
on any noise violations
at the Yaphank locale.
“The District Court will
decide if he’s broken
the laws and gets the
fine,” said Johan
McConnell, president of
the South Yaphank Civic
Association, of the
owner of Hunter Sports.
“If he gets the fine,
then so does the
county.” Brookhaven Town
Councilwoman Connie
Kepert (4th District)
said it was an important
win for Brookhaven Town.
“It means the county was
attempting to again stop
us on our noise
ordinance and asking for
another delay. The court
said no.”
Another court decision
has come down the pike,
or more accurately
Gerard Road, since the
town has stepped up its
enforcement of noise
violations on this
county facility smack in
the middle of the
residential neighborhood
that surrounds it.
Kepert said her office
had been hammering away
at the issue for three
years, since she was
first elected to her
district. “It has been a
long and frustrating
process,” she said. “My
message to the county
is, ‘Find another
location appropriate for
the activity.’”
Not so fast, say
advocates for Southaven
Park Trap & Skeet range.
County Executive Steve
Levy said he inherited a
Trap & Skeet program
that had been approved
by a previous
administration. A
resolution passed in
2003 to bring in a new
operator took place
while he was still a
state assemblyman. “I
took office in 2004 and
people were asking me to
stop it,” he said. “I
met with residents who
asked for money for
noise abatement. I said
I first wanted a written
statement from the town
that they would not
challenge the Trap &
Skeet facility before I
invested money for that
abatement. The town
never gave us that
assurance and have been
trying to close us down.
I was very clear as to
what I would do. I was
willing to take
mitigation measures, but
I wouldn’t do an
expenditure of $1
million if the town says
we don’t believe it’s
the county’s
jurisdiction. Then it’s
not worth it. And that’s
where we’re at.”
For licensee Mark Wrobel,
the decision to apply
for and run the
Southaven Park Trap &
Skeet facility wasn’t a
frivolous one. A regular
customer at the
Southaven location since
he was younger, Wrobel
is also the owner of a
hunting and sporting
business in Massapequa
for 18 years. “I shot
(at Southaven Park) many
times and when it closed
I started to attend the
meetings (regarding a
new licensee) and I
listened to both sides
of the argument,” he
said. “I saw it was a
business to go into. And
I saw that even more
when I saw the amount of
people who went to the
meeting (especially)
when you see hundreds
turn out for it and only
a few are against it.”
The range first opened
in the 1950s. It was
privately owned then and
called the Suffolk Lodge
Game Preserve with a
large buffer of open
private property. When
that buffer of nearby
land was purchased in
the early 1990s for new
homes, residents say
they were told by
developers the facility
was moving. A December
1993 letter from
then-County Executive
Robert Gaffney’s office
to a constituent on
Gerard Road who had
complained about the
Trap & Skeet facility
then stated the
Department of Parks had
been looking for a new
location.
That never happened.
Another potential
licensee was interested
in early 2000, Wrobel
said. “That person wound
up redrawing,” he
explained. “I did
respond to the RFP and
spent a lot of time on
the proposal but it
didn’t work for me
personally. (Later on)
it was a better contract
for me and I decided to
move forward. There were
two major resolutions
voted on in December
2005. One was for the
re- opening, the other
was for the contract to
be authorized. We got an
overwhelming majority
vote. It was bipartisan
and we had a 17-to-1
vote. It required 12. It
went through five major
meetings.” The Trap &
Skeet is open five days
a week. “When you build
around something, it’s
not the fault of the
facility that’s already
there,” Wrobel said.
There were local
residents who use it, he
said. “We have a very
good base within a mile
of the facility with
patrons,” he added.
“There are very few
places on Long Island
for people to use
firearms in a safe and
enjoyable manner.” As
for those against the
Trap & Skeet, Wrobel
pointed out around eight
people showed up at one
press conference against
the facility and at
another time there were
none, he said.
Kepert countered that
comment. “I’m a big
advocate of going
door-to-door and it is
not eight people, it is
the entire community,”
she said. “It is the
entire community being
impaired by the noise so
I would question that
statement. The noise
echoes and bounces off
the sump. You’ll always
have some people out
front on a concern.” In
the minutes of the
Central Pine Barrens
Advisory Committee, held
on March 9, 2006, a
motion to advise the
Pine Barrens Commission
to oppose the reopening
of the facility was
seconded. Five on the
commission voted for the
opposition; two voted
no.
McConnell said over
1,000 signatures had
been amassed by her
organization opposing
the reopening in 2006
and there were at least
two major demonstrations
with 40 and 50 people
attending. “There were
178 homes who had their
assessment lowered
because of that range,”
she said. “It was
lowered in 2007 and it
kicked in for 2008. So
that means lower taxes
to the county and the
school because of it.”
Kepert added she had no
issues with the activity
and that it was a viable
recreational outlet.
“Unfortunately, it is
too close to the
neighborhood and the
county cannot engage in
the mitigation that
would reduce the sound
level,” she said. “That
would be in violation of
the Pine Barrens Act
because it would be
considered construction
and they can’t build in
the core.”
County Parks
Commissioner John
Pavicic said in May that
shooting stations
closest to Gerard Road
were oriented in such a
way so that the noise
sound from the firearm
was projected to the
east. Sound absorbing
panels were placed on
the inside of separate
partitions from top to
bottom and there were
berms to help minimize
the noise as well as
other sound
attenuations. Since
then, Pavicic said, no
other sound abatements
were planned. But lead
reclamation was. A full
environmental
stewardship plan may be
in the works the first
of next year. “We’ll
post it on our Web
site,” Wrobel said.
“We’ve been actively
pursuing lead
reclamation. We will be
doing it next spring.
The water is fine.
Suffolk County comes in
frequently and tests the
water and there’s no
contamination problem.
If someone is going to
make a statement it
should be proven, and I
can prove this.” Wrobel
said he has invested
$238,000 in the Trap &
Skeet and over $150,000
in legal fees. “I’m a
working guy at the range
or at the store in
Massapequa making sure
my businesses are run to
the best of my ability,”
he said. Would he be
willing to sit down with
the local residents? “If
there was a fair meeting
and the common goal was
not to close the range,
yes, I would sit down
with them,” he answered.
■
Possible sites still in
the running
The Brookhaven Shooting
Range in Ridge, The
North Fork Preserve off
Sound Avenue in
Riverhead, and a site in
Manorville are among the
possible relocation
sites for the county’s
Trap & Skeet operation,
said Josh Slaughter,
Legislator Kate
Browning’s aide.
Browning (WF-Shirley)
submitted a Trap & Skeet
Search Committee Report
in March with
recommendations for
other locations sites.
“The one in Ridge
wouldn’t require
purchase money by the
county as Brookhaven
Town is already
operating it,” Slaughter
explained. “It would
have to be expanded and
would need approvals
from the Pine Barrens
Commission. The North
Fork Preserve is in the
process of being
purchased for
preservation purposes
but could always be
looked at because it had
been a private club
where part of the
property was used for
shooting purposes.
Manorville is the least
likely because it would
be costly.” Slaughter
said appraisals have not
yet been conducted. ■
—Linda Leuzzi
|
