An Open Letter to Hammond residents

This letter to Hammond residents and the Town Council from local developer Sally Hustings was published in the Courier. Hustings proposes that the town clean up the site and build a park.

From The Hammond Courier, July 14, 2001, page 4.

An open letter to my fellow residents and the members of the Hammond Town Council:

Since the tornado several months ago, the fate of Towering Pines has been the central issue of debate in our town. Indeed, in the past several decades, no other matter of local concern has so dominated our discussions. It seems we talk about it wherever we go—at work, at city council meetings, even at our children’s baseball games.

I fear, however, that the debate has lost its focus in the past few weeks. An increasing number of Hammond residents, including (I regret to say) Mayor Allison, have begun asking, what is the best course of action for Towering Pines? The local members of the National Wilderness Foundation have been especially insistent in asking this question. They recently circulated a flyer arguing that the town has an obligation to leave the preserve untouched, and that the fallen forest will remain an important resource for our town. They remind us that the 1968 charter for Towering Pines states that the preserve should not be “changed or altered by human hands."

It is, of course, commendable to consider the environmental point of view. It is also commendable that these activists hope to honor the town’s past decisions. However, in considering the fate of Towering Pines, the town of Hammond should consider one question and one question only: namely, what is best for the residents of Hammond?

To that end, I believe that we should transform the former preserve into a public park, complete with a large playground, athletic fields, and a running track. As we all know, the former preserve is large enough to accommodate these and additional attractions.

Why is this proposal the best possible course of action for Hammond?

First and foremost, a new park would be good for the town’s children. Regional planners often note that the population of this region will grow considerably over the next several decades. As cities such as New York and Boston become increasingly expensive and crowded—and as a growing number of workers begin to telecommute to their jobs—towns such as Hammond will attract droves of new residents. One study conducted by scientists at the University of Connecticut predicts that the region’s population will double by the year 2020. By building a park on the site of the former preserve, we will ensure that our children will have a safe place for recreation, no matter how large Hammond becomes.

By clearing the area for a park, we eliminate the risk of fire. This issue has been skirted and even overlooked by most of the environmental activists. However, a number of residents have pointed out that, after several years of drought (always a distinct possibility), the downed trees could easily go up in a blaze that would threaten nearby homes and even the town itself. A park, of course, would present no such concern.

Finally, building a park would be good for the local economy. To clear the former preserve, the town could hire local landscape engineers to clear the land. We could also use local architects and builders to plan and construct the park. Some residents have argued that, if we develop the land, we’ll lose tourist dollars crucial to the health of the local economy. This argument, however, fails to account for the fact of the tornado’s destruction. Towering Pines is no longer a tourist attraction. Are there really tourists who want to travel to Hammond to see the wasteland that the forest has become?

I understand that a number of Hammond residents will be unsatisfied with this proposal, as it does not allow the forest to take its “natural course,” whatever that may be. Again, I would suggest that these people are providing answers to the wrong question. We must ask what is best for the town and its people. To protect hundreds of fallen trees (which would make excellent firewood next winter) at the expense of Hammond’s well-being is remarkably irresponsible.

I hope that the town and the City Council will consider enacting this proposal. It, above all others, has the best interests of the town at heart.

Back