Letters to the Editor

Bridge was money unnecessarily spent

I am writing to applaud the letter of Mr. Jack Lay, in the March 2 Herald, concerning the replacement of a culvert with a bridge across the Kingston tide flat.

Mr. Lay correctly states that there has been no “expert, unbiased and independent support for this project.” Rather, self-serving politicians and local hyperbole.

A little over 100 years ago, this area was heavily wooded. Small streams were restricted by fallen trees and forest debris. Such conditions can not now be duplicated.

Restricting one’s use of their property and the waste of large sums of money on the fanciful idea of restoring fish habitat is silly.

If any salmon were to attempt to go up Carpenter Creek, the culvert would not have been the least impediment.

Any person who has watched salmon move up a stream, through shallow water, over falls, around snags and move from pool to pool, to find gravel beds to spawn, can attest that little deters a salmon headed home.

As Mr. Lay so well states, a large sum of money has been wasted at this location. Repeating such, at any other place, would be a very poor decision.

Earle L. Willey
Indianola

 

We encourage an open exchange of ideas on this story's topic, but we ask you to follow our guidelines for respecting community standards. Personal attacks, inappropriate language, and off-topic comments may be removed, and comment privileges revoked, per our Terms of Use. Please see our FAQ if you have questions or concerns about using Facebook to comment.

Read the latest Green Edition

Browse the print edition page by page, including stories and ads.

Sep 12 edition online now. Browse the archives.