A Prison in the Woods: Environment and Incarceration in New York's North Country

A

Prison

in the

Woods

A VOLUME IN THE SERIES

Environmental History of the Northeast

Edited by

Clarence Jefferson Hall Jr.

University of Massachusetts Press

Amherst and Boston

Copyright © 2020 by University of Massachusetts Press

All rights reserved

Printed in the United States of America

ISBN 978-1-62534-536-3 (paper); 535-6 (hardcover)

Cover design by Notch Design

Cover art: (front and back) Collection of Pine Forests by Grop; detail from Silhouette of Watch Tower by Champ 008; (bottom front) Barbed Wire by Baur; (background) Old Paper Canvas Texture Grunge by Abstractor. All art used under license from Shutterstock.com.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Hall, Clarence Jefferson, Jr., author.

Title: A prison in the woods : environment and incarceration in New York’s

   north country / Clarence Jefferson Hall Jr.

Description: Amherst : University of Massachusetts Press, 2020. | Series:

   Environmental history of the Northeast | Includes bibliographical

   references and index. |

Identifiers: LCCN 2020019219 | ISBN 9781625345356 (hardcover) | ISBN

   9781625345363 (paperback) | ISBN 9781613767856 (ebook) | ISBN

   9781613767863 (ebook)

Subjects: LCSH: Prisons—New York (State—History. | Environmental

   degradation—New York (State—History. | Environmental protection—New

   York (State—History. | Adirondack Mountains (N.Y.)—Economic

   conditions.

Classification: LCC HV9475.N7 H27 2020 | DDC 365/.97475—dc23

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020019219

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalog record for this book is available from the British Library.

FOR CLARENCE JEFFERSON HALL

contents

Preface and Acknowledgments

List of Abbreviations

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER ONE

This Great and Important Experiment

Nature, Business, and the Quest for Reform at Clinton State Prison

CHAPTER TWO

Attica of the Adirondacks

Environmental Politics and Mass Incarceration in Ray Brook

CHAPTER THREE

Who Is Going to Live in Gabriels?

Race, Class, and the Nature of Incarceration in Gabriels

CHAPTER FOUR

A Poor Choice

Incarceration and the Legacies of Mining in Lyon Mountain

CHAPTER FIVE

This Town Will Die

Pro-Prison Organizing and Environmental Politics in Tupper Lake

CONCLUSION

Notes

Index

preface and acknowledgments

My connection to New York’s prison system began before I was born. My father worked for the state’s department of correctional services from 1973 to 1998, the majority of that time based at the maximum-security Clinton Correctional Facility in Dannemora. In April 1979, corrections officers across New York State engaged in a three-week-long strike protesting a variety of workplace issues, including salary increases and sick leave provisions. Five days after the strike ended in May, my twin sister, Kerry, and I were born. With my mother on unpaid maternity leave and my father facing stiff financial penalties for violating New York’s ban on public employee work stoppages, my dad took odd jobs to make ends meet. Meanwhile, Kerry and I cried, screamed, and smiled, oblivious to the political earthquake that had ruptured our short time in New York’s North Country.

My father’s job opened a window onto the world of mass incarceration in late twentieth-century New York. Through experiences ranging from the mundane to the surreal, my family became enmeshed in the environment of corrections in the North Country. We regularly passed the penitentiary on car rides through Dannemora, rarely pausing to consider either the institution or its unfree occupants. We overheard Dad’s often-bitter complaints about his sergeant, a man he angrily referred to as Baldy, along with cryptic references to violent clashes between officers and incarcerated men. We consumed food cooked by imprisoned men in a kitchen Dad supervised. We decorated our home at Christmas with ceramic figures painted by incarcerated art students. We witnessed Dad’s grief when colleagues died, including one felled by a heart attack while at work. Once, we observed incarcerated African American men sitting in our driveway, shackled inside a prison van. And we experienced Dad’s constant frustration with a job he neither wanted nor enjoyed. In these ways and many others, the rhythms of the prison system became natural to our family, just as they did for many other families in towns and villages across the Adirondacks.

Growing up, I had only a vague notion that northern New York hosted correctional facilities besides Clinton. My family’s interactions with those institutions were few and far between. I attended wintertime sled dog races held in Gabriels and learned in passing that a minimum-security prison operated nearby. Occasionally I participated in conversations about relatives who worked in correctional facilities in Malone, Altona, and Lyon Mountain. On family outings to Lake Placid, we must have driven hundreds of times past the tiny wooden signs on State Route 86 indicating the locations of the state and federal prisons in Ray Brook. And once, when I was in high school, we passed through a state police roadblock that had been set up after an incarcerated man from Ray Brook had escaped into the surrounding wilderness. That none of these brushes with the area’s penitentiaries left any lasting impression on a local resident is a testament to the correctional planners, environmental regulators, residents, and visitors who worked to ensure the facilities would blend seamlessly into the existing landscape.

Built in 1845, decades before the enactment of New York’s first environmental laws, Clinton Correctional Facility’s cellblocks, guard towers, chain-link fences, and stone wall cast a long shadow over Dannemora. The prison’s dominance of the landscape is so complete that residents and visitors routinely refer to the penitentiary as Dannemora. While Clinton’s highly visible structures are a stark reminder of the once-unregulated circumstances in which they were built, the region’s other correctional facilities, opened between the 1970s and 1990s, also bear the hallmarks of their historical moment. Constructed during an era of heightened environmental awareness and regulation, the region’s younger penitentiaries have operated behind vegetative screens designed to minimize their visual impact. Their nondescript buildings literally hiding in plain sight, the prisons’ near-invisibility in the North Country landscape closely parallels the heretofore obscure connections that have inextricably linked the area’s penitentiaries to their environment.

In this book, I aim to show how the environment played a central role in the planning, construction, and operation of penitentiaries in New York’s North Country. Viewing them as both a remedy for overcrowding in existing prisons and a panacea for the Adirondacks’ chronic economic woes, beginning in the 1840s and accelerating again in the 1970s, lawmakers planned and opened penal institutions in communities across northern New York. In each case, the environment proved a pivotal factor. In the 1840s, correctional planners chose the area that would become Dannemora as part of a scheme to use incarcerated labor to transform the North Country from a rural backwater into an industrial powerhouse. Unburdened by the strictures of modern environmental law, imprisoned workers helped turn an unbroken wilderness into a beehive of economic activity anchored by Clinton State Prison. When again plagued by overcrowding in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, lawmakers in need of prison cells looked to the North Country’s struggling towns and villages. One may be tempted to believe that the environmental regulations, organized environmentalists, and affluent visitors absent in the 1840s might have posed insurmountable barriers to penitentiary construction in the late twentieth century. However, in nearly every case, laws, bureaucrats, and agencies that many assumed to be guardians of environmental and public health often came up short, leaving open the threat of prison-induced damage to woods, waters, and wildlife.

FIGURE 1. Clinton Correctional Facility, Dannemora, New York. Courtesy of the author.

Penitentiaries’ environmental impacts, however, were not always destructive. Incarcerated men left the most invisible, yet indelible, environmental legacy of the Adirondacks’ long carceral history. Without their participation in vital conservation, public works, and infrastructure projects across the region, living and playing in the Adirondacks would be difficult at best, and, at worst, next to impossible. While many North Country prisons may be hidden and difficult to see, residents and visitors alike cannot avoid the countless—albeit unmarked—imprints their unfree charges have created across the landscape of northern New York. Imprisoned men have built roads, blazed hiking trails, constructed ski runs, fought forest fires, controlled flooding, and renovated a panoply of public spaces including churches, libraries, schools, and government offices. Thus, my personal connection to New York’s prison system has not been confined solely to family experiences. Incarcerated men literally built and rebuilt much of the world around me. As such, I aim to show the Adirondack environment is as much a product of its penitentiaries as it is of careful environmental planning. The carceral hand, like the prisons, is hiding in plain sight.

This book is the product of good friends, thoughtful colleagues, caring institutions, and loving family members, without whose support and encouragement it would not be resting in your hands. I offer thanks first to Brian Halley of the University of Massachusetts Press. Brian was the first person to identify my project’s potential as a book. I owe Brian a huge debt of gratitude for his patience, understanding, and care serving as the best editor any writer could hope for. I also wish to thank the anonymous reviewers, and the series editors, Anthony N. Penna and Richard W. Judd, whose feedback helped make this a stronger piece of scholarship, along with Rachael DeShano, Courtney Andree, Sally Nichols, and Julie Shilling, who happily answered each and every one of my long and meandering emails as this project reached its conclusion.

I will be forever grateful for the wisdom, guidance, and friendship I have received from my fellow historians. At Stony Brook University, I continue to benefit from the mentorship and sage advice of Chris Sellers, Nancy Tomes, Donna Rilling, April Masten, and Robert Chase. Though we see each other only rarely, Connie Y. Chiang of Bowdoin College remains a steady presence in my intellectual and professional development. Finally, I offer thanks to colleagues and friends at Queensborough Community College—past and present—whose kindness and support have proven pivotal to my growth as a scholar and teacher, including Peter Bales, Aithne Bialo-Padin, Edmund Clingan, Sarah K. Danielsson, Belinda Delgado, Ed Doherty, Anna Edick, Cameron R. Hawkins, Susan Jacobowitz, Simran Kaur, Tim Keogh, Courtnay Konshuh, Helmut Loeffler, Nicole Lopez-Jantzen, Denise Martinez, Hayes Peter Mauro, Pedro Meza, James Nichols, Peter Novick, Jo Pantaleo, Ken Pearl, Joan Petersen, Stephanie Rost, Dugwon Seo, Danny Sexton, Emily Tai, Amy Traver, Agnieszka Tuszynska, Ron Van Cleef, Mark Van Ells, Gil Visoni, Shiang-Kwei Wang, and Leslie Ward.

The raw materials out of which this project ultimately took shape came from a variety of archives, libraries, and government agencies. I offer profound thanks to the very helpful and patient staff managing historical records at the following institutions: Adirondack Park Agency, Lake Placid Olympic Museum, New York Public Library, New York State Archives, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, New York State Library, Northern New York Library Network, Paul Smith’s College, State University of New York at Potsdam, and St. Lawrence University. Without their kind assistance, this project simply would not have been possible.

I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the significant contributions made by two individuals I am proud to know as colleagues and friends. For nearly two decades, Jonathan Anzalone has been the brother I never had. We moved through graduate school together, enjoying coffees, dinners, movies, and conversations that yielded a strong friendship that has withstood both time and distance. Jon’s wisdom and good-natured advice greatly improved my writing and analytical skills. This book is as much his as it is mine. Second, I want to recognize Martha Swan and her pathbreaking civil rights and freedom education nonprofit, John Brown Lives! Martha and I met in 2013, when this project was in its infancy and her organization was building relationships with individuals implicated in the North Country prison industry. Working with Martha has allowed me to share my work with a wider audience and expanded my understanding of the penitentiaries’ multilayered impacts, both within and outside the Adirondacks. I am humbled to have Martha as a friend and comrade in the ongoing fight for freedom and equality.

Whether they know it or not, my students continue to provide me an unequaled source of strength and encouragement. Their good humor, humility, kindness, and eagerness to learn inspire me to do my best as a person, professor, and scholar. Though by now I have taught thousands of students in different departments spread across several different institutions, I want to acknowledge the following individuals I have had the privilege of teaching and knowing at Queensborough: Andres Frischeisen, Santiago Gonzalez, Sydney Lee, Anca Nicu, Teresa Sierra, Supitcha Tanomwong, and Krystal Williams. It has been a joy working with these highly motivated, mature, and forward-thinking young men and women. It has also been my pleasure getting to know them, providing mentoring, and witnessing their personal and professional development. Their future is bright, and my life is richer for having known them.

Last but not least, my family. Without their unconditional love, care, and support, this project would not have reached completion. I thank my mother, Carol Hall, my sisters, Kim Hall-Stone and Kerry Hall Forgette, my brothers-in-law, Chris Stone and Josh Forgette, my nieces, Courtney Stone, Haley Stone, and Hannah Forgette, my nephew and godson, Noah Forgette, and Supasit Sunko. I end by thanking my late father, Clarence Jefferson Hall. Though our relationship was not always smooth, Dad imparted lessons—and an unusual sense of humor—that help me navigate life’s many challenges. While he did not live to see this project reach the finish line, his constant encouragement and pride in my accomplishments remain an everlasting source of comfort. I dedicate this book to his memory.

Abbreviations

A

Prison

in the

Woods

INTRODUCTION

Revitalizing northern New York’s anemic economy topped the agenda as the commissioners of the Adirondack Park Agency (APA) met in the spring of 1986. New York lawmakers had empowered the agency, created in 1971, to regulate building projects on public and private lands inside the six-million-acre state park. The agency’s commissioners, including the secretary of state, commissioners of economic development and environmental conservation, and eight citizen members appointed by the governor, worked to ensure developments that respected the needs of the park’s 130,000 year-round residents, its visitors, seasonal homeowners, and businesspeople, and a natural environment that for many embodied the essence of the Adirondacks. During that 1986 meeting at APA headquarters in the Essex County hamlet of Ray Brook, commissioners debated introducing toxic waste storage as a potential source of jobs for park residents. At the time, the Adirondack Park was in the throes of a prison-building boom begun a decade earlier. The agency had found itself embroiled in protracted and often-bitter disputes over penitentiary construction in several park communities. Leading the discussion that day was Herman Woody Cole, who as an administrator at the Lake Placid Olympic Organizing Committee (LPOOC) had witnessed the opening of two correctional facilities in Ray Brook in the run-up to the 1980 Winter Olympic Games. Now serving as chair of the APA, Cole suggested hazardous waste storage could not possibly endanger the Adirondack environment since, as he sardonically observed, We already live in prisonland.¹

The question of how best to punish individuals convicted of unlawful activity vexed policymakers long before the first prisons rose in the Adirondacks. To avoid the high costs of imprisonment, residents of colonial America had adopted a hodgepodge system of unevenly applied civil and criminal sanctions including fines, public humiliation, torture, short-term jail sentences, banishment, and execution. A post-Revolutionary surge of nationalism inspired lawmakers to abandon the violence and unpredictability of European colonial legal codes in favor of a supposedly more humane system centered on incarceration. Unfortunately, the promise of America’s early prisons quickly met the grim realities of chronic overcrowding and insufficient public funding.² The following pages explore how one state—New York—sought to meet this significant challenge. During the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the Empire State relied on imprisonment to discipline its growing population of convicted men. Whenever crowding plagued one penitentiary, lawmakers built another. To ensure public support for its carceral projects, legislators planned correctional facilities designed both to confine convicted men and spur economic growth in the remote locales targeted for prison construction. Beginning in the 1840s and accelerating again in the 1970s, New York deployed its penal system as a development program for the isolated and depressed communities of the Adirondack Mountains. Though seemingly beneficial for both state and region, longstanding disputes over the use and meaning of Adirondack nature complicated the planning, building, and operation of penitentiaries opened in New York’s North Country. To an extent rarely seen elsewhere, the non-human world proved central to the growth and day-to-day functioning of prisons in New York’s Adirondack Park.

It may seem counterintuitive to investigate the environmental history of incarceration. The artifice, control, and discipline characteristic of prison life would appear the antithesis of what many perceive as nature. Moreover, in contrast to developments whose environmental impacts are impossible to miss, these geographically remote, socially isolated, and architecturally unremarkable penitentiaries may seem ecologically benign. Perhaps unsurprisingly, then, until very recently scholars have paid little heed to the complex relations tying prisons to their surrounding environments.³ Construction and operation of the U.S. penal system—a network of jails, penitentiaries, and detention centers confining millions and employing hundreds of thousands at an annual cost of more than $180 billion—has entailed significant environmental transformations. Correctional facilities require food, clean water, electricity, sewage disposal, and other services essential to the functioning of similarly large-scale public works. Further, their construction and long-term use have contributed to deforestation, pollution, and habitat decline, among other harmful effects. Finally, the opening of penitentiaries in the Adirondack Park—a place long considered synonymous with wilderness—unearthed long-running conflicts over the use and meaning of nature. For these reasons and others, we must consider incarceration a historically significant environmental phenomenon.

Much as the first Earth Day in 1970 spurred renewed curiosity about environmental history, scholarly studies of the U.S. carceral state have grown in response to the crises of law enforcement that beleaguered American society in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. This interdisciplinary endeavor explores the historical underpinnings of problems ranging from police violence to the War on Drugs and the rise of mass incarceration. Scholars have shown that anti-crime and anti-narcotics initiatives enacted after World War II fueled the growth of a carceral state that pacified anxious whites by condemning primarily poor people of color to long and debilitating terms of imprisonment. However, while studies of the carceral state have uncovered how legal and political forces nurtured a new form of Jim Crow, this emergent scholarship has generally sidestepped the circumstances under which mass incarceration has unfolded in prisons’ host communities. Indeed, scholars’ generally narrow focus on the individuals, organizations, and institutions directly tied to the justice system may leave the impression that questions related to law enforcement apply only to specific sectors of U.S. society. Filtered through the lens of environmental history, studies of the carceral state shine a light on a boundaryless prisonland whose reach extends beyond the precinct houses, courtrooms, and jails of U.S. cities to include correctional facilities built—and unbuilt—amidst protected forests, fragile wetlands, abandoned industrial sites, the country estates of the elite, and the modest homes of the rural poor. In this sense, prisonland perfectly captures mass incarceration as an all-encom-passing historical transformation.

The land upon which the state and federal governments built prisons in the Adirondacks has long been contested terrain. The fortunes of the region’s year-round inhabitants, stymied by geographic isolation, short growing seasons, difficult terrain, and limited public infrastructure, witnessed only scant improvement in the 131 years separating the opening of the area’s first two penitentiaries: Clinton State Prison at Dannemora in 1845, followed by Camp Adirondack at Ray Brook in 1976. Beginning in the mid-nineteenth century, unrestricted logging, mining, and farming provided employment for locals, enriched an array of corporate executives, and degraded large swaths of the landscape. Simultaneously, scores of wealthy industrialists began erecting second homes in the region’s unspoiled wilderness as a refuge from the nation’s increasingly overcrowded and unsanitary cities. Driven to safeguard the area’s business prospects, its rustic aesthetic, as well as environmental and public health, urban elites began in the 1880s to pressure lawmakers to adopt a program of state-directed conservation. The creation of the Forest Preserve in 1885, Adirondack Park in 1892, and enactment of Article XIV of the New York State Constitution in 1894—the Forever Wild provision—placed unprecedented limits on natural resource consumption and took the first steps toward healing a ravaged environment. A bitter conflict, however, promptly ensued between permanent residents accustomed to using nature without restriction and a growing cohort of seasonal visitors for whom leisure and recreation in an aesthetically pleasing environment superseded basic human survival.

Growing interest from business owners and visitors posed increasingly grave threats to the Adirondack environment as the twentieth century wore on. Improved rail and road access accelerated both industrial activity and the construction of second homes on private land, while the park’s undeveloped public properties provided recreation for the masses. Aided by higher incomes and the 1967 opening of Interstate 87, the region’s popularity as a tourist destination skyrocketed in the decades after World War II, but the area’s discovery by a new generation of outdoor enthusiasts reignited nineteenth-century debates over the use and meaning of nature in New York’s North Country. Hordes of middle-class visitors tramping through the mountains threatened irreversible harm to environmental and public health. To forestall disaster, lawmakers created the Adirondack Park Agency in 1971 to ensure that human needs did not overwhelm the non-human resources that for many embodied the park’s very essence. The near-simultaneous contraction of the region’s once-dominant logging, mining, and health care industries forced many Adirondackers to choose between irregular, low-paid work in the burgeoning tourist trade or migration to the Sunbelt. By the mid-1970s, many longtime park dwellers grappled with high unemployment, poverty, and dependence on public assistance programs. For many permanent residents, the collapse of the traditional economy and intensification of state environmental controls reaffirmed the continued dominance of wealthy outsiders for whom nature was only an object of enjoyment. Many feared, much like their forebears a century before, a grim and uncertain future.⁴

FIGURE 2. Adirondack Park. Courtesy of Gerry Krieg, Krieg Mapping.

Political and economic shocks in the 1970s had profound consequences for the Adirondack Park. Signed into law by Republican Governor Nelson Rockefeller in 1973, revisions to the Narcotics Control Act of 1966—popularly known as the Rockefeller drug laws—imposed harsh criminal penalties for most narcotics offenses. Under the act, individuals convicted either of selling two ounces or possessing four ounces of banned narcotics received a mandatory minimum fifteen-year sentence. Moreover, the Second Felony Offender Act of 1973 mandated lengthy imprisonment for individuals convicted of any two felonies committed within a ten-year period. Within two years, New York’s thirty-two correctional facilities were full. As the population of convicted men surged, the worst economic crisis since the 1930s forced lawmakers to manage jam-packed penitentiaries with increasingly scarce resources. While the state’s draconian approach to law and order proved broadly popular, most affluent New Yorkers did not want penitentiaries built in their backyards. Correctional planners thus hoped the depressed communities of the Adirondack Park would prove amenable to becoming New York’s next prison towns. As in the mid-nineteenth century, penal bureaucrats in the 1970s viewed building correctional facilities in the Adirondacks as a potential silver bullet. The region’s remoteness and sparse population, they argued, would mitigate against escapes and NIMBYism from area communities. Further, the area’s numerous shuttered hospitals, public schools, and mining facilities might be cheaply and easily converted for penal use, providing both much-needed cell space and employment for jobless locals. If successful, penitentiaries would simultaneously reduce overcrowding, satisfy anxious white voters, and stimulate northern New York’s struggling economy.

Within these circumstances, two of the most significant historical phenomena of the late twentieth century, mass incarceration and the modern environmental movement, emerged almost simultaneously in the early 1970s. Their coincidental arrival in the Adirondack Park, a time-tested battlefield of environmental politics, complicated the work of correctional planners. Battle lines were quickly drawn. Concerns about environmental and public health drove most local environmental organizations, the Park Agency, seasonal homeowners, and tourists into the ranks of the opposition. Struggling permanent residents, meanwhile, aggressively pursued the high wages, generous benefits, and job security attached to penal employment. The experience of planning, building, and operating prisons, however, often ruptured these seemingly ironclad alliances. With rare exceptions, new penitentiaries endangered environmental and public health in their host communities. Such harm could turn fervent prison advocates into unexpectedly strong opponents. By the same token, political loyalties and practical realities sometimes pushed environmentalists and the APA to endorse correctional facilities that posed grave ecological risks. Finally, the myriad benefits accrued to local communities from the low-paid work of incarcerated men on conservation, public works, and infrastructure projects could make supporters out of prisonland’s bitterest foes. Thus, each penitentiary proposed for an Adirondack town or village from the 1840s through the 1990s forced interested stakeholders to enter age-old debates over the use and meaning of nature in New York’s North Country. From the beginning, then, prison politics and environmental politics in the Adirondacks were indistinguishable.

Studying mass incarceration in the Adirondacks also offers new ways of exploring the racial and class disparities that remain a defining feature of the American carceral state. By the early twenty-first century, the United States incarcerated 2.3 million people in penal institutions scattered across the country. Over three-quarters of the population under confinement were people of color from primarily low-income African American and Latino urban communities.⁵ Convicted men exiled to the Adirondacks arrived in a remote, conservative, low-income, and predominantly white region. While penitentiaries provided the area’s working-class homeowners much-needed job security, their sharp racial disparities—mainly white men confining an incarcerated population composed primarily of men of color—aggravated already-strained relations between officers and imprisoned men. Though tensions in Adirondack prisons almost never exploded into full-blown rebellion, incarcerated men of color often served as convenient scapegoats for facility employees confronted with work-induced stress and anxiety. At the same time many local homeowners fostered a climate of inclusivity by engaging with imprisoned men in penitentiary-sponsored volunteer programs, outreach initiatives, and public events. Thus, divisions that might have conditioned relations inside correctional facilities were not easily mappable onto peoples and places just beyond the razor wire. Though racial animus surely figured in the day-to-day functioning of many North Country prisons, studying their host environments permits a more nuanced view of relationships that were sometimes less fraught than anticipated.

While year-round residents understood the park as a home and workplace, affluent homeowners and visitors valued the region for health, leisure, and recreation. Wealthy locals thus deemed penitentiaries incompatible with the park’s history as an enclave for outdoor play. The concerns of well-to-do residents and tourists also extended beyond potential impacts on the non-human world. Many rich homeowners understood racial and class privilege to be components of the Adirondack environment as natural as its woods, waters, and wildlife. As such, they resisted sharing their wilderness retreats with low-income, incarcerated men of color. For elites, harm to environmental and public health often proved less worrisome than sharing their communities with people whose residence, even if confined behind bars, seemed unnatural. As threatening as any chainsaw or earthmoving machine, imprisoned men became embedded in the North Country’s nature. After all, most of the area’s cash-strapped towns and villages could not have otherwise afforded the numerous conservation, public works, and infrastructure projects that were undertaken by poorly paid incarcerated men. Occupying a servile role that seemed to reaffirm the supposed dominance of well-to-do whites, imprisoned men helped maintain facilities and structures necessary to visitors’ continued enjoyment of the park. By literally reinforcing the park’s status as a wilderness resort dedicated to health, leisure, and recreation, incarcerated men over time gained the grudging acceptance of a North Country elite once firmly opposed to their presence. Examining the history of mass incarceration through an environmental lens shows that, unlike the isolated institutions often depicted in popular culture, penitentiaries did not operate in a vacuum. So long as they buttressed elite interpretations of the park’s mission, seemingly unnatural correctional facilities and their unfree occupants might be considered part of Adirondack nature.

In the chapters that follow, I use case studies of five Adirondack Park communities—Dannemora, Ray Brook, Gabriels, Lyon Mountain, and Tupper Lake—whose involvement in New York’s carceral state underscores the centrality of local communities to the history of mass incarceration. Though sometimes separated by only a few miles, no two Adirondack prison towns were ever the same. Circumstances including past industrial activities, demographics, economic conditions, and residents’ uses of nature shaped a penitentiary’s position within its host community. Thus, A Prison in the Woods shows that while mass incarceration became a nationwide phenomenon, local context is critical to understanding how the carceral state functioned on a daily basis, and town- and village-level analysis illuminates how non-human nature figured in the planning, construction, and operation of correctional facilities. Though existing law granted penal planners almost unfettered authority to build wherever and whenever they pleased, opening penitentiaries in the park involved both formal regulation from the Adirondack Park Agency and informal oversight from residents and environmental organizations. While public hearings and environmental impact statements highlighted prisons’ potential ecological risks, environmental laws often proved a weak barrier to prison-induced degradation. Citizens, however, often achieved results that environmental regulators and activists could not, forcing either ecologically minded design modifications or project cancellations. A Prison in the Woods therefore demonstrates that while the simultaneous emergence of mass incarceration and environmentalism was purely coincidental, the growth of prisons in the Adirondack Park made these seemingly disparate phenomena historically inseparable.