DOCSLIB.ORG

NY Power Authority Response

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
NY Power Authority Response Case 5:82-cv-00783-LEK-TWD Document 610 Filed 02/04/13 Page 1 of 42 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------------------------x THE CANADIAN ST. REGIS BAND OF MOHAWK INDIANS, : Civil Action Nos. Plaintiff : 82-CV-783 82-CV-1114 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : (NPM) Plaintiff-Intervenor, : v. : STATE OF NEW YORK, et al., : Defendants. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------x THE ST. REGIS MOHAWK TRIBE, by THE ST. REGIS MOHAWK TRIBAL COUNCIL and THE PEOPLE OF THE LONGHOUSE AT AKWESASNE, by THE MOHAWK : NATION COUNCIL OF CHIEFS, : Civil Action No. Plaintiffs, 89-CV-829 : (NPM) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : Plaintiff-Intervenor, : v. : STATE OF NEW YORK, et al., : Defendants. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------x DEFENDANT NEW YORK POWER AUTHORITY’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS’ OBJECTIONS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP 7 Times Square New York, New York 10036 (212) 790-4500 Attorneys for Defendant New York Power Authority Case 5:82-cv-00783-LEK-TWD Document 610 Filed 02/04/13 Page 2 of 42 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Preliminary Statement.................................................................................................................... 1 Argument ....................................................................................................................................... 4 I. The Magistrate Correctly Found That the Island Claims Are Inherently Disruptive ........ 4 A. There Is No Dispute That the Plaintiffs’ Claims Are “Inherently Disruptive” Within the Meaning of Cayuga .......................................................... 5 B. The Magistrate Correctly Concluded Cayuga and Oneida Do Not Turn on the Remedies – Whether Judicial or Administrative – Sought by Plaintiffs ......... 6 C. The FPA Provisions That Apply to Indian Reservations Are Not Relevant Under Cayuga and Do Not Prevent Disruption ..................................................... 7 1. The FPA Has No Provisions to Address the Concerns Raised in Sherrill........................................................................................................ 8 2. The FPA Contemplates Settled Ownership as to Project Lands, Particularly as to Tribal Interests, Not the Unilateral Insertion of “Reservations” During the Project Term ................................................... 9 D. A Unilaterally Established Indian Reservation on the Islands Would Spell Unthinkable Disruption to the Project ................................................................. 12 1. The FPA Empowers the Department of the Interior to Impose Any Condition Related to an On-Site Reservation, Even Over FERC’s Objections ................................................................................................ 12 2. Reservation Status in the Islands Would Occasion a Decades-Long Jurisdictional Power Struggle, Precisely the Danger Addressed in Sherrill...................................................................................................... 13 3. The Parties’ Settlement Agreement, Aside from Being Plainly Inadmissible, Demonstrates the Potential Disruption Feared by NYPA....................................................................................................... 15 II. The Magistrate Correctly Concluded That Cayuga Required Dismissal as to the Islands, Which Have Undergone Extraordinary Development Reflecting Firmly Settled Expectations......................................................................................................... 16 A. Nothing in the Federal Power Act or the Project History Undermines the Settled Expectations of Non-Indian Ownership in the Islands ............................ 17 1. The Federal Government’s Regulatory Presence Does Not Lessen the Societal Expectations in Settled Land Ownership ............................. 17 2. The United States’ Repeated Endorsement of NYPA’s Possession Strengthens Settled Expectations and the Case for Laches ..................... 19 B. All Relevant Facts Demonstrate Well Settled Expectations Are Present, Compelling Dismissal.......................................................................................... 21 -i- Case 5:82-cv-00783-LEK-TWD Document 610 Filed 02/04/13 Page 3 of 42 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page 1. Plaintiffs Concede Their Long Delay and That the Islands Have No “Indian Character” ................................................................................... 21 2. The Magistrate Correctly Considered the Island Claims as a Whole and Found that the Islands Have Been Subject to Enormous Development............................................................................................ 22 3. The Islands – Whose Very Geography Has Been Changed by the Project – Are Not “Undeveloped” ........................................................... 24 4. Plaintiffs Cannot Avoid Dismissal By Casting NYPA as a “Wrongdoer”............................................................................................ 25 III. The United States’ Newly-Asserted Claim to Underlying Fee Title Cannot Save Plaintiffs’ Claims ............................................................................................................. 27 A. The United States Did Not Bring This Action To Protect Its Alleged Ownership Interest In The Islands ....................................................................... 28 B. The United States Does Not Have an Ownership Interest in the Islands............. 30 C. Laches Is Appropriate Given the United States’ “Egregious Delay” in Bringing Suit and the Absence of a Statute of Limitations ................................. 33 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 35 -ii- Case 5:82-cv-00783-LEK-TWD Document 610 Filed 02/04/13 Page 4 of 42 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page CASES Andrus v. Allard , 444 U.S. 51, 65-66 (1979) .......................................................................................................18 Cayuga Indian Nation v. Pataki , 413 F.3d 266 (2d Cir. 2005)............................................................................................. passim City of Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation , 544 U.S. 197 (2005)......................................................................................................... passim City of Tacoma v. FERC , 460 F.3d 53, 131 (D.C. Cir. 2006)....................................................................................13, 15 Cuglar v. Power Authority , 4 A.D.2d 801, 802 (3d Dep’t 1957).........................................................................................24 Escondido Mutual Water Co. v. La Jolla Band of Mission Indians , 466 U.S. 765, 772, 779 (1984)...........................................................................................12, 13 Forest Props., Inc. v. United States , 177 F.3d 1360, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 1999)......................................................................................24 FPC v. Tuscarora Indian Nation , 362 U.S. 99, 115 (1960)...........................................................................................................14 Harcourt v. Gaillard , 25 U.S. 523, 527-28 (1827) .....................................................................................................33 In re New York Power Authority , 105 FERC ¶ 61,102 (Oct. 23, 2003) ........................................................................................10 In re Power Authority of the State of New York , 12 F.P.C. 172 (July 15, 1953) .......................................................................................... passim Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. , 544 U.S. 528, 538-39 (2005) ...................................................................................................18 Mont. Power Co. , 38 F.P.C. 766 (1967), aff’d , Mont. Power Co. v. F.P.C. , 459 F.2d 863 (D.C. Cir. 1972)...................................................................................................8 Nez Perce Tribe v. Idaho Power Co. , 847 F. Supp. 791, 800-01 (D. Idaho 1993) ..............................................................................11 Oneida Indian Nation of New York v. County of Oneida , 617 F.3d 114 (2d Cir. 2010), cert. denied 132 S. Ct. 452 (2011).................................... passim Oneida Indian Nation of New York v. State of New York , 860 F.2d 1145, 1150 (2d Cir. 1988).........................................................................................30 Onondaga Nation v. State of New York , -- Fed. Appx. --, No. 10-cv-4273, 2012 WL 5075534 (2d Cir. Oct. 19, 2012) (summary order), rehear’g denied Slip. Op., No. 10-4273 (2d Cir. Dec. 21, 2012) ...........6, 22 -iii- Case 5:82-cv-00783-LEK-TWD Document 610 Filed 02/04/13 Page 5 of 42 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES (continued) Page Onondaga Nation v. State of New York , No. 05-cv-0314 (LEK), 2010 WL 3806492 (N.D.N.Y. Sept. 22, 2010) ...................6, 8, 24, 26 Pacific Gas & Elec. Co. v. FERC , 720 F.2d 78, 86-87 (D.C. Cir. 1983)..........................................................................................9 Penn Cent. Transp. Co. v. City of New York , 438 U.S. 104, 136 (1978)...................................................................................................18, 24 Portland Gen. Elec. Co. , 20 FERC ¶ 61,294 (1982)....................................................................................................8,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • S T a T E O F N E W Y O R K 3695--A 2009-2010
    S T A T E O F N E W Y O R K ________________________________________________________________________ 3695--A 2009-2010 Regular Sessions I N A S S E M B L Y January 28, 2009 ___________ Introduced by M. of A. ENGLEBRIGHT -- Multi-Sponsored by -- M. of A. KOON, McENENY -- read once and referred to the Committee on Tourism, Arts and Sports Development -- recommitted to the Committee on Tour- ism, Arts and Sports Development in accordance with Assembly Rule 3, sec. 2 -- committee discharged, bill amended, ordered reprinted as amended and recommitted to said committee AN ACT to amend the parks, recreation and historic preservation law, in relation to the protection and management of the state park system THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM- BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: 1 Section 1. Legislative findings and purpose. The legislature finds the 2 New York state parks, and natural and cultural lands under state manage- 3 ment which began with the Niagara Reservation in 1885 embrace unique, 4 superlative and significant resources. They constitute a major source of 5 pride, inspiration and enjoyment of the people of the state, and have 6 gained international recognition and acclaim. 7 Establishment of the State Council of Parks by the legislature in 1924 8 was an act that created the first unified state parks system in the 9 country. By this act and other means the legislature and the people of 10 the state have repeatedly expressed their desire that the natural and 11 cultural state park resources of the state be accorded the highest 12 degree of protection.
    [Show full text]
  • ROBERT MOSES STATE PARK Captree State Boat Channel Dredging and Beach Stabilization Project
    ROBERT MOSES STATE PARK Captree State Boat Channel Dredging and Beach Stabilization Project Tier 1 Environmental Assessment New York State Homes and Community Renewal January 29, 2014 Robert Moses State Park Captree State Boat Channel Dredging and Beach Stabilization Project Tier 1 Environmental Assessment January 29, 2014 Project Name: Robert Moses State Park State Boat Channel Dredging and Beach Stabilization Project Project Location: Robert Moses State Park, Towns of Babylon and Islip, Suffolk County, NY HTFC SHARS #: N/A Federal Agency: US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Responsible Entity: New York State Homes and Community Renewal (HCR) Responsible Agency’s Certifying Officer: Heather Spitzberg, HCR Environmental Analysis Unit Project Sponsor: New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) Primary Contact: Mr. Marc Talluto, Director of Operations New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation 625 Broadway Albany, NY 12207 [email protected] (518) 474-0440 Project NEPA Classification: 24 CFR 58.36 (Environmental Assessment) Environmental Finding: Finding of No Significant Impact - The project will not result in a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. Finding of Significant Impact - The project may significantly affect the quality of the human environment. The undersigned hereby certifies that HCR has conducted an environmental review of the project identified above and prepared the attached environmental review record in compliance with all applicable provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 USC Sec. 4321 et seq.) and its implementing regulations at 24 CFR Part 58. Heather Spitzberg Environmental Assessment Prepared By: AKRF, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendices Section
    APPENDIX 1. A Selection of Biodiversity Conservation Agencies & Programs A variety of state agencies and programs, in addition to the NY Natural Heritage Program, partner with OPRHP on biodiversity conservation and planning. This appendix also describes a variety of statewide and regional biodiversity conservation efforts that complement OPRHP’s work. NYS BIODIVERSITY RESEARCH INSTITUTE The New York State Biodiversity Research Institute is a state-chartered organization based in the New York State Museum who promotes the understanding and conservation of New York’s biological diversity. They administer a broad range of research, education, and information transfer programs, and oversee a competitive grants program for projects that further biodiversity stewardship and research. In 1996, the Biodiversity Research Institute approved funding for the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation to undertake an ambitious inventory of its lands for rare species, rare natural communities, and the state’s best examples of common communities. The majority of inventory in state parks occurred over a five-year period, beginning in 1998 and concluding in the spring of 2003. Funding was also approved for a sixth year, which included all newly acquired state parks and several state parks that required additional attention beyond the initial inventory. Telephone: (518) 486-4845 Website: www.nysm.nysed.gov/bri/ NYS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION The Department of Environmental Conservation’s (DEC) biodiversity conservation efforts are handled by a variety of offices with the department. Of particular note for this project are the NY Natural Heritage Program, Endangered Species Unit, and Nongame Unit (all of which are in the Division of Fish, Wildlife, & Marine Resources), and the Division of Lands & Forests.
    [Show full text]
  • Directions Robert Moses State Park
    Directions Robert Moses State Park andBurled state. Jere Gimpy marring and unvirtuously. grotesque Tyler Various bobsleigh Burke outvaluesalmost diversely, very previously though Ramon while Federico rumors hisremains awe abetting. militarized Moses state park in. Robert Moses State industry Field 5 Beach Foursquare. Vuf not present. Robert Moses Thousand Island dog Park St Lawrence State. Making over the central and eastern part during Long box that is surrounded by fact on three sides, many acknowledge the boardwalks offer a view these either the Atlantic Ocean, Long Island wearing, the Peconic Bay of the flight South Bay. People closer to the trail does not maintained in the swim, moses state robert park on stage at an official government. This was to remove the bay shore beach is a blue fish from old time for moses state of items and as a parkway close to your trip. Are kicked off the directions robert moses state park office joining in manhattan beaches on the directions through the reason to provide cross bay shore of. Towns like tobay beach? Hours of operation vary weekly but are generally 9am-6pm Rates are 10 during summer season Get directions to this beach. Swim guide selection of robert caro had accumulated posts you provide the directions robert moses state park robert de forest to. Camp hero state in fishing for good place to nature of different directions robert moses state park or decrease volume of the entrance so make right onto commack road. Fees may have visited state park police and directions robert moses state park? Best Beaches Near NYC You ago Get revenue Without sufficient Car Thrillist.
    [Show full text]
  • Reynolds Channel at Pt Lookout at 11.4 Ft MLLW / 10.1 Ft NGVD / 6.7 Ft MHHW
    Reynolds Channel at Pt Lookout at 11.4 ft MLLW / 10.1 ft NGVD / 6.7 ft MHHW Coastal communities along Southern Nassau experienced four successive tidal cycle with at least moderate coastal flooding. Widespread record coastal flooding occurring along the Western Great South Bay exceeding the FEMA 100 year base flood elevations. Peak storm tides surpassed all previously documented high water marks, including the October 31, 1991 and December 11, 1992 nor'easters and the recorded peaks from Hurricane Irene in 2011. The storm tide levels along the Southern Nassau County shore resulted from a peak storm surge of about 8 to 9 feet that coincided with normal high tides. This resulted in up to 3 to 5 feet of inundation of communities in and along Southern Nassau County. The majority of locations south of Merrick Road and Atlantic Avenue were completely inundated, with waterfront communities along creeks and streams being inundated up to Sunrise Highway. Areas of major residential damage were experienced across low lying areas such as Inwood, Meadowmere Park, Bay Harbor, Island Park, Baldwin Harbor, Freeport, and Massapequa. The most widespread major damage was experienced along the barrier beach communities, where the surge was amplified by the run-up and setup from 15 to 20 ft breakers along the Atlantic Ocean coast. Numerous homes and Atlantic Ocean facing structures, such as boardwalks and piers, in Long Beach and Lido Beach were completely destroyed. Jones Beach - Extensive damage and flooding occurred throughout the park, both on the Atlantic Ocean and Great South Bay side. Just over 1/2 mile of boardwalk was damaged or destroyed.
    [Show full text]
  • National List of Beaches 2004 (PDF)
    National List of Beaches March 2004 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington DC 20460 EPA-823-R-04-004 i Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 States Alabama ............................................................................................................... 3 Alaska................................................................................................................... 6 California .............................................................................................................. 9 Connecticut .......................................................................................................... 17 Delaware .............................................................................................................. 21 Florida .................................................................................................................. 22 Georgia................................................................................................................. 36 Hawaii................................................................................................................... 38 Illinois ................................................................................................................... 45 Indiana.................................................................................................................. 47 Louisiana
    [Show full text]
  • Cruising Guide of the SOUTH BAY CRUISING CLUB
    Cruising Guide of the SOUTH BAY CRUISING CLUB This Cruising Guide is intended to be a practical handbook to assist members of the South Bay Cruising Club (SBCC) sail the Great South Bay and the waters that the SBCC summer cruisers roam: providing the skipper with information. When used in conjunction with the latest Nautical Charts, Coast Pilot, Light List, Tide and Current Publication and a copy of the Rules of the Road (boats larger than 39 feet must have a copy aboard) will provide the ship’s captain and crew with an enjoyable cruising season. 1 ©2017 by South Bay Cruising Club 2016-2017 Edition Prologue ruising. …Blue sky and dancing seas beckon, exciting voyages, the peace and C loveliness of quiet anchorages, camaraderie and the majestic crimson sunset await the cruiser, at night fall when the sails are furled and the ensign has been lowered one can relax on deck and study the heavens. Since the original edition (1966) and two revised publications, many changes have taken place. This, the 2016 edition, continues the tradition of providing local information to SBCC members now includes New England, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland. Care has been taken to provide the SBCC membership with accurate information. Nevertheless, remember that as time goes by buoy locations change, telephone numbers and area codes change, marinas close and new ones open; inlet waterways shift. Do your homework before setting sail on a journey. The committee suggests that members use this copy as the name implies as a guide and not for navigation.
    [Show full text]
  • St. Lawrence – Champlain Valley Ecoregion Biodiversity Conservation Plan
    St. Lawrence – Champlain Valley Ecoregion Biodiversity Conservation Plan FIRST ITERATION JULY 2002 FINAL DRAFT July 18, 2002 (minor revisions – 11/08/02) (minor edits – 5/20/03) The Nature Conservancy Authors: Elizabeth Thompson, Katherine Moss, David Hunt, Paul Novak, Eric Sorenson, Ana Ruesink, Mark Anderson, Arlene Olivero, Charles Ferree, and Shyama Khanna The Nature Conservancy gratefully acknowledges all Heritage Programs, their cooperating institutions, and other cooperators for the time and energy that has gone into collecting and maintaining the data contained in this report. This information was assembled for use by The Nature Conservancy and the Natural Heritage Network in conservation planning for the St. Lawrence – Champlain Valley Ecoregion. TABLE OF CONTENTS PARTICIPANTS IN THE PLANNING PROCESS.................................................................................. 1 A CONSERVATION VISION FOR THE ST. LAWRENCE – CHAMPLAIN VALLEY ECOREGION ............................................................................................................................................... 3 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................ 4 ECOREGIONAL PLANNING........................................................................................................................... 4 CHAPTER 2: INTRODUCTION TO THE ST. LAWRENCE – CHAMPLAIN VALLEY ECOREGION ..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cycling Routes of the Saint Lawrence River Valley and Northern Adirondacks
    Cycling Routes of the Saint Lawrence River Valley and Northern Adirondacks by Tom Ortmeyer and John Barron Cycling Routes of the Saint Lawrence River Valley and Northern Adirondacks Tom Ortmeyer and John Barron [email protected] [email protected] - 2 - Copyright © 2015 by Tom Ortmeyer and John Barron. All rights reserved. Keywords: Bicycle touring, Saint Lawrence River, Adirondacks Mountains, New York, Ontario, Quebec - 3 - Table of Contents Chapter 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................. - 6 - Chapter 2. The Thousand Islands ............................................................................................ - 12 - TI 1. Cape Vincent to Alexandria Bay ................................................................................ - 14 - TI 2. Thousand Island Parkway ........................................................................................... - 17 - TI 3. Howe Island ................................................................................................................ - 20 - TI 4. Cape Vincent to Sacket’s Harbor ................................................................................ - 23 - TI 5. St. Lawrence River to Kring Point .............................................................................. - 26 - TI 6. St. Lawrence Golf Course-Jacques Cartier State Park ................................................ - 29 - TI 7. Black Lake Loop .........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Empire State Trails Highlights of New York State
    Empire State Trails Highlights of New York State Buttermilk Falls State Park Funding for this publication was made possible through a grant awarded from the Recreational Trails Program which is part of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21). Photographs in this publication are printed with permission from the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preserva- tion, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and Anne O’Dell, Chair of the New York State Trails Council. Table of Contents Introduction Selkirk Shores State Park ............................ 58 Taughannock Falls State Park ..................... 59 How to Use this Guide ............................................... 9 State Lands and Forests..................................... 61 The New York State Trails Council .......................... 10 Brookfield Trail System ............................... 62 Snowmobile Trail System ......................................... 10 Sugar Hill State Reforestation Area ............ 63 Partnerships .............................................................. 10 WESTERN ZONE ................................................... 69 NORTHERN ZONE ................................................ 11 State Parks ......................................................... 70 State Parks ......................................................... 12 Allegany State Park..................................... 71 Grafton Lakes State Park............................ 13 Niagara Gorge Trail System .......................
    [Show full text]
  • Building Better Parks: Update on NY Parks 2020 Progress (Pdf)
    BUILDING BETTER PARKS Update on NY Parks 2020 Progress LEADING THE NATION ON PARKS Niagara Falls State Park Dedication Letchworth Nature Center Dedication Jones Beach State Park West Bathhouse Dedication century ago, New York State built a park system that became the model A for the nation – a system that celebrated nature and gave people of all income levels a place to enjoy it. This system of parks, assembled with great vision and ambition, was a great gift to the people that was to last for the ages. Unfortunately, as time passed we did not fully appreciate the gift. It was our responsibility as citizens to preserve it and protect it and pass it on to our children, and we had not done that. From the outset of my administration in 2011, we have worked to reverse the trend of deteriorating parks. We launched NY Parks 2020, a $900 million multi-year commitment to restore the park system. This is an investment in a system unique in the nation. We are bringing back the grandeur bestowed on us, while improving our tourism economy. It’s an important investment and it’s one that we’re going to be proud to pass on to our children. Governor Andrew M. Cuomo NY PARKS 2020: $900 million to revitalize New York State Parks 176 Parks Improved and Counting 300 New Cabins and Cottages 30 New Nature and Jones Beach State Park Nature Center Cultural Centers 72 New and Improved Playgrounds 90 New and Improved Bathrooms 700 Infrastructure Allegany State Park Letchworth State Park Projects The Governor has made the protection of land and parks a hallmark of his tenure.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Regulation at Fire Island National Seashore
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Planning, Construction and Facility Management Thanks,Northeast Tina,Region for coordinating this. LAND REGULATION AT FIRE ISLAND NATIONAL SEASHORE A HISTORY AND ANALYSIS, 1964-2004 FIRE ISLAND NATIONAL SEASHORE SPECIAL HISTORY STUDY LAND REGULATION AT FIRE ISLAND NATIONAL SEASHORE A HISTORY AND ANALYSIS, 1964-2004 NED KAUFMAN & CHARLES STARKS PREPARED UNDER COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE NIVERSITY OF ASSACHUSETTS U M NORTHEAST REGION NATIONAL PARK SERVICE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR SEPTEMBER 2008 Table of Contents List of Figures .................................................................................................................................v List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………………...v Executive Summary and Research Findings (Kaufman & Starks) .......................................... vii Introduction (Kaufman) ………………………………………………………………………….1 Study Methodology………………………………………………………………………….2 Chapter One: Origins, Goals, and Methods of Land Use Regulation at Fire Island………...5 (Kaufman) Fire Island in 1964…………………………………………………………………………….……5 Changing Concepts of Parks…………………………………………………………………..……...…….9 Fire Island Is Established…………………………………………………………………………….……......11 Defining the Seashore’s Public Purpose: Conservation or Recreation………………………….……......12 Public Support for the Seashore…………...………………………………………..…………………..27 Private Property within the Seashore.………………………………………………………………………..45 Figures to Chapter One...…………………………………………………………….…………72 Chapter Two: The
    [Show full text]