Originally Posted by Nichol
You could say the same for floating bridges, highways, dams & agriculture. Any "new projects" have to pass many regulations to be allowed to be upgraded to today's standard. We have to widen highways to accomodate people to get to work, we build bridges across waterways that may endanger the fish. These projects all get accomplished and they are allowed to be maintained and upgraded due to the fact they already were in existance. Why should it be any different for Evan's Creek?
Everything you mention can be mitigated. Only takes money for the projects you describe. Maybe we should appeal the "Queen Christine" to return the funding she took from the trail system. She took it all.
Was anyone who has posted on this topic at the meeting? What exactly was said? Who said it? What was the context of the comments? I have it second hand. I talked to someone who was there. But what I heard from them was their opinion of what they heard. I have also heard Bob speak of Evans Creek before. I know what he has said of Evans Creek. I know the result of what happened when the District Ranger went on a tour of the area a few years ago. Bob is faced with having to please his boss and please the user (kinda like being between a rock and a hard spot). Bob has regulations that have been thru review and enacted. I wouldn't want to be Bob.