Range shouldn’t have
opened
On June 16, the Pine
Barrens Commission (PBC)
declared that the
reopening of the Suffolk
County Trap & Skeet
Range constitutes
“development” under
Article 57 of the Pine
Barrens Protection Act
of 1993. The South
Yaphank Civic
Association has argued
this point since before
the reopening of the
range and has been met
with resistance all the
way, particularly by
those in power who
shepherded the range
back into existence.
The election of
Brookhaven Town
Supervisor Mark Lesko,
along with two new East
End supervisors
(Riverhead and
Southampton) brought
change to the “old
thinking” and it was
Lesko who quickly
grasped the issue and
lent his support to
bring the issue to a
vote of the commission.
New York State
Environmental
Conservation Law, the
Pine Barrens Protection
Act of 1993 as well as
Brookhaven Town law all,
for various reasons,
clearly prohibited the
reopening of the Suffolk
County Trap & Skeet
Range yet the county
chose to reopen the
range anyway.
Though much of the
reasoning for this
surely had a political
bent, the primary factor
influencing the Suffolk
County Legislature’s
decision to reopen was
sadly one of
misinformation. Over the
years, a host of
“reasons” were offered
to the decision-makers
as to why the range
needs to reopen, such
as: The range was here
first, the range was not
abandoned, there’s
nowhere else to put it,
the range is exempt from
noise ordinances along
with a host of other
contentions—none of
which were true. The
legislature was clearly
more enthralled than
enlightened by those
whom they regarded as
“experts.” The red flags
were everywhere, the
facts were overwhelming,
yet they didn’t see the
truth because they
allowed passionate
overture to supersede
fact and reality. At the
time, we didn’t know
what was more
remarkable—that so many
issues were raised or
that everyone associated
with reopening the range
simply ignored every one
of them.
But now there’s a
chance to fix all of
that. To those who voted
to reopen the range
based solely on
political gain; shame on
you.
But to those who
voted to reopen based
upon what they were led
to believe was factual
information, now is the
time to correct that
mistake. Too much
taxpayer money has been
spent already trying to
prove a negative and it
makes no sense to throw
even more good money
after bad chasing after
appeals or “hardship
exemptions.”
While it is quite
possible that this
shooting range may very
well be able to exist at
another location, it
clearly cannot exist
where it is now and it’s
time to do something
about that.
John Palasek
Yaphank
