Friday, September 14, 2007

Open space and open government champion

The Ten Mile Lowlands open space property contains one of the largest stands of mountain laurel shrubs in town as well as wooded swamps and vernal pools.

The 146-acre parcel is north of Jarvis Street and borders the Ten Mile River on the west. The sensitive nature of the habitat has prompted the Environmental Commission to suggest a management plan that calls for restricted use for the property....

"It should not be open to the public," said Suzanne Simone, environmental planner. "Only guided tours" should be allowed, she added. Town Council member Diane Visconti disagrees... "I don't want to stop people" from hiking there....
(MRJ, by Leslie Hutchison).

I agree with Diane on this one. People should be allowed to use the open space that has been purchased with tax dollars.

And speaking of Diane, I just wanted to say that I've enjoyed serving with her. While we have disagreed on policy issues, Diane and I always seemed to agree on the big issues, such as transparency and open government... Unlike others, she was never shy about having a discussion on any topic. And I really appreciate that.

Tim White
Town Council, 4th District

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

There is nothing wrong with limiting public access to this sensitive wildlife area. A good part of the reason for the town buying the property was to protect the wildlife. There are many other places for people to walk and enjoy the outdoors, Cheshire Park, Mixville, the Linear park and Bartlem.

We have been hearing so much about all the damage caused by ATV's and dirt bikes on the 109 acres where the mall is planned. Is this a move to provide a new area for the ATV's?

Is this to be the goto place for ATV's and dirt bikes? Why is this discussion coming up now?

Tim White said...

I'm just saying that people should be able to hike there... I've gone there myself (on the search for turtles a few years ago with the QRWA) and it's beautiful.

Anonymous said...

The public pays for many things that they never directly benefit from, see or even agree with the expenditure for.

Protecting watercourses is in the public interest. Tramping across these areas is not. Suzanne is probably better informed on this matter than councilors Visconti and White. While their hearts may be in the right place their heads are not in this instance.

Anonymous said...

Hi...Diane Visconti here..I agree, Suzanne knows a whole lot more than me about nature. But there is a clearly marked path in the 10 mile lowlands. The planning committee just clarified the management plan on Thursday night. It will go before the council saying that public access is allowed but not encouraged. Which was the intent of the first draft. This property is in the middle of hundreds of homes. Sometimes the residents living near it like to walk to it and in it (like me!!). There is no way we can stop this but we can, and should, educate the public about the land and the need to treat it with respect. The bugs and wet weather will keep people away in the spring and summer (like it always has). And ATVs are not allowed on any town property. And thank you to Tim for kind words about my willingness to talk. Right back at you,Tim!!

Anonymous said...

Diane,

Thanks for your clarification. My concern is with who ultimately controls and/or polices access anyway. Limited public access following designated trails can offer that self-policing remedy and forestall more detrimental uses such as dirt bikes, etc. Limited access makes sense.