Farmers flood Wallkill River Refuge expansion with complaints

Warwick — Paul Ruszkiewicz’s family has been farming in the Black Dirt of Pine Island for many years. He and many others like him treasure their land, some of the richest soils in the country. That is one reason why he and so many others came out last week against a plan by the Wallkill River National Wildlife Refuge to more than double the size of the refuge. “Most of the land in the northern part is actively farmed,” said Ruszkiewicz. “This is productive, active farmland. There is no reference to impacts on agriculture. Taking this land out of production would have a big impact. I strongly object to this. You can protect wildlife but not at the expense of the farmers.” The Refuge is comprised of land in seven municipalities in both New Jersey and New York. The Refuge plan includes adding 9,500 acres to the current 7,500 already protected. About 450 of those proposed acres are in Warwick and Minisink. Edward Henry, the Refuge manager, said the plan is just that — a plan. Areas marked for protection are the lands desired by the Refuge. All properties acquired are done so with willing sellers only. “We do not use eminent domain,” said Henry. “It is completely voluntary to sell land to the Refuge.” He said that in order to protect the wildlife it is necessary to preserve the land without being interrupted by development. Flooding Marie Springer, president of the Friends of the Wallkill River volunteer group, is in favor of the plan. She said that expanding the Refuge will help with flooding in the Black Dirt area. “It’s impossible to control the water flow in some areas,” said Springer, whose property is in the proposal. “There should be no housing in the flood plain. You can’t control the flow of water.” The Black Dirt region has been hit by some horrendous floods over the past few years. Black Dirt farmer Chris Pawelski said he is against taking valuable farmland out of production. He said there have been three 50-year floods in the past two years. “If what is proposed makes our flooding worse, I’m against it,” said Pawelski. “I don’t want to see the farmer become an extinct species either.” Ken Witkowski from the Bergen County Audubon Society said he is an active support of the Refuge. “I am a great advocate of this plan,” said Witkowski. “I support alternative B. The public use of the Refuge will increase and I’d want more staffing. I’m in favor of restoring this to its natural state with seasonal flooding.” Andrew Gurda is a fourth generation farmer. His concern is the border farms. “I don’t want this to create havoc for the farmers,” he said. Different states, different issues Tom Zangrillo, president of the Orange County Vegetable Growers, said he has no issues with the plan on the New Jersey side, but “on the New York side, I have lots of issues,” he said. “Eminent domain is totally unacceptable. You would be fought by all powers of the community. The New Jersey plan sounds great. Management of border farms must be addressed. We’re all multi-generational growers and hope to be here a long, long time.” Alex Kolcutt is one of those farmers and he’s not sold on the plan. “I’m a fourth generation farmer,” Kolcutt said. “I hope there will be a fifth. I want to preserve the environment but I wonder if the farmers will be here if they expand the refuge.” There are several options with this plan. First option would be to leave everything the way it is. No expansion. Option B would give the Refuge the opportunity to expand. Proponents say it would expand the trails and wildlife observation, increase staff, and provide better protection for endangered species. Option C would be a compromise, adding some additional land to become reforested.