A Perfect Solution

It feels like a classic “family dispute”: The Southampton History Museum, as respected and beloved a local organization as there is, and the Conscience Point Shellfish Hatchery, which in its brief life has done plenty to spread goodwill even as it bolsters the local shellfish populations, supports the baymen who rely on them for a living and, as a bonus, helps clean the waters. Plus, the hatchery provides a much-needed link between the storied past and present of aquaculture on the South Fork, and its future, by bringing in a whole new generation of shellfish enthusiasts through educational programs.

As with so many internecine battles, this one is about land. Museum officials note that its nonprofit status requires a close monitoring of activities on its properties to make sure commercial activity isn’t taking place, and they say the hatchery has violated the terms of its rent-free lease to use a portion of the dirt parking at Conscience Point by operating as a commercial shellfish distributor and by subletting use of the bulkheaded shoreline to other commercial shellfish growers.

Southampton Town’s historian, Julie Greene, stepped into the fray uninvited, but she might well have important evidence showing that the town, not the museum, owns the specific piece of land where the hatchery is located, along with a Town Trustees boat ramp. The whole mess has been dumped into the courts for the moment, and everything is largely on hold till May, which is good news for the hatchery in the short term, since eviction was a very real possibility.

The museum has been hewing closely to its position that the hatchery is in the wrong, and activities at the site both violate the lease agreement and are fraught for the not-for-profit museum. And the courts could well dismiss Greene’s historical deeds as unconvincing — though, at least on the surface, peering through the opaque language of historical boundary-setting, those deeds have the appearance of a smoking gun.

And while it’s never a positive to lose ownership of land — and the Southampton History Museum could well have an argument for “adverse possession” over decades, though it’s always been used by the public — the truth is that if Southampton Town owns the waterfront portion of the property, and the museum holds the nearby trail, it would be a perfect solution. The town could strike its own deal with the hatchery to maintain its presence and continue its worthwhile programs, while neighborly agreements could assure that the hatchery becomes a part of the museum’s celebration of history rather than an onerous use taking away from the enjoyment of public lands. There is room for compromise: The parking lot is large and unsightly, and there’s plenty of room to allow a boat launch, the hatchery, some parking for baymen and also the kind of historic parkland envisioned by Southampton History Museum Executive Director Sarah Kautz. Everyone can come away with what they need.

By all appearances, this one is up to the courts to settle. But the museum, the town and the hatchery should get out in front of the issues before a judge rules. All three entities should be eager to cooperate with each other rather than being adversarial. Strip away the incendiary language, and there’s a simple question at the heart of this dispute, and an even simpler resolution to this dispute. It just needs cooler heads to come together and work it out.