Niagara Gazette — And now everyone, Ceretto, Dyster, and to some degree, Maziarz, et al, including State Parks, seem content to pretend the EDR study never took place. They didn’t like the conclusions. Never mind facts and evidence: They know what they believe, they know what they want. The results of the State Parks “scoping” of the issue reflects this bias.
Several weeks ago I sent Ceretto a letter asking him to reconsider his position and support total removal. I mapped out a rationale and sources where he could find out more about the details. But he didn’t give me the courtesy of a reply. If you’d like to see that letter, email me at email@example.com and I’ll send you a copy.
In the end, Mark Thomas of the OPRHP and the rest of the politicians will do what they want, regardless of a mountain of contrary evidence pointing to a different course of action. We know at whose feet the final responsibility for wrong action here is to be placed.
Maziarz can go on with his public endorsement of “Option 3” (keeping the parkway on the best part of the gorge rim); he can go on trotting out Wallenda; he can continue to say “restoration of native landscapes in several areas” to journalists for quotation as if he believes those words stand for something worthwhile, rather than what they will translate to in reality: the spotty planting of a few native trees and shrubs along a two-lane road; he can go on disparaging the EDR study without naming it, revealing his confusion about it and other earlier “plans” and schemes; he can go on noting that Option 3 got the “highest rating from public response forms received to date,” while ignoring the 4000+ signatures of those endorsing total removal and the 80 organizations who also support total removal.