Washblog

About the Steakholders Meeting...............
by Cindy Lahti

No this spelling doesn't need correction, especially in comparison to the language used at the meeting last Tuesday night. I do not refer to
profanity, well, maybe I do. I refer to the language of politics; the kind of language used to obtain funding for whatever the political special of the day is being used. For instance: "restoring habitat", for CREATING OR MAKING A SWAMP OR WETLAND. Particularly when using the richest farm bottomland in doing so.

I don't think Rick Nelson and I attended the same meeting. But after some cogitation, I realized what Rick already knew. He couldn't cover the history of this area, the degradation of the environment nor the loss of the salmon runs and loss of small farms in the West End in one
article. He knew, sure as I was sitting next to him, letters to the editor would follow.

Everyone on the West End wants habitat restoration. The goal of re-establishing our salmon runs COINCIDE with the needs of small farmers and homeowners. The end result would be stable banks, less flooding, clean water and a healthy ecosystem.

Restoration of salmon runs means 3 in 1 bank cutbacks in our streams and rivers with "habitat" in the form of rocks and perhaps anchored trees and plantings to insure bank integrity. This restoration would begin with dredging the sediment out of our streams and creeks down to the gravel beds so salmon could once again spawn without benefit of goggles and oxygen masks. These steps are necessary to restore the rivers and watershed to pristine condition.

When rivers were the highways one generation ago, the Grays ran deep and wide, its waters clear. Boats traveled from Astoria to deliver mail, supplies and store bought goods to the Meserve store.

Whole Victorian houses were brought up our river and crops and milk were shipped out by boat. The salmon runs here were wonderful even in later years when I fished the Grays and Deep River. Don't misunderstand, there were "freshets" then but we have floods now.

The reason our practical Nordic relatives settled here was BECAUSE of the freshets as they refreshed the land with new soil, making the richest farmland. Small farms benefit everyone, as they are the last source of healthy food. These farms are not federally subsidized with your tax dollars but family supported.

The goal of Columbia Land Trust is to CREATE swamps and wetlands for salmonoids. Oh, and to restore "native" grasses. (My fields are the only seeded fields out here).

This being said, why are they being funded by Ducks Unlimited? This funding, 2 or 3 millions of dollars, posted on CLT website was denied by Ian of CLT. Of course their Ducks Unlimited engineer, when asked, said the goal was to CREATE wetlands.

Don't ducks eat grasses and salmonoids? Sounds like a private hunting reserve to me.

I thought our area a strange place to pick for a winter habitat for baby salmon, with high tides that would wash all those baby salmon up and over field and leave them aground to die, not to mention our frequent floods. But as usual these people equated the word farmer as being synonymous with stupidity.

I think it important to note the goals of wetland creation and the goals for re-establishing salmon habitat are polar opposites.

CLT has deceived us from the beginning. When Ian was asked at their first public meeting at the Grays River Grange if CLT would breach dikes, or open tidegates he said no. When he was asked if public access would be allowed he said yes, we would be welcome.

CLT, breached the dikes, removed tide gates, installed 2 - 12 foot by 36 foot long side-by-side culverts that open the Kandoll property to the River! They have removed tide gates and filled drainage ditches. They addressed the issue of their dikes, which are 11 feet - the level of the land! Sorry, not a dike. Then they "requested" Kandoll Road be vacated by the County, to deny public access.

Fred Johnson, after research, wrote that Washington RCW's did not allow vacation of roads terminating or providing access to waterways. CLT have since lowered the level of the road and informed us it was on the verge of failure!!!

Well, duh! If the road is allowed to fail CLT could then flood everything to the highway. Wouldn't that be a fun drive?

Maybe new signs would be in order, water hazard ahead or pontoon devises required ahead during flood events?

Walkers, joggers and horseback riders, because of its natural beauty and solitude use Kandoll Road throughout the year. Moreover, Kandoll Road is a safe place to walk in lieu of parks. It is important to note that the county had done a wonderful resurfacing on Kandoll Road just before the purchase by CLT. We have pictures of before and after.

I won't go into flooding and damage to adjacent property as the result of their poor planning and even poorer implementation. Unless the failure of their model was exactly what their intention?

This brings us back to the infamous letter from Fish and Wildlife, which stated, sorry about the loss of property but their goal was to establish a recreational area in this valley. However, F$W were willing to buy any property if someone wanted to sell out. Perhaps Fish and Wildlife funding of Columbia Land Trust becomes understandable in this context?

I wrote a letter to the editor of 8 pages, dealing with the history of our area, the loss of habitat, the increase in flooding and the loss of salmon runs, here and around the state. The how and why of funding, the duplication of studies by each state agency and advisory agency and non-profits. You may think this doesn't concern you and you Couldn't be more wrong. Studies are gold - they mean continued funding and more bellying up to the state and federal trough for salmon restoration.

Not that any real work is done. These are very real turf issues by the agencies fighting and competing for our tax dollars to increase their budgets and area of power. These are the agencies that are supposedly to act as liaisons between landowner and the state and fed. This means these agencies, state, public and private are run by the best bureaucrats, not those best qualified to do the job.

The result costs us taxpayers millions of dollars per year.

Delvin Fredrickson's presentation by our Enhancement Distinct was not even mentioned! I will say, however, that the old Flood Control Board together with the previous management of the Conservation District and Soil Conservation, collected the same data that is being gathered at this time.

Again. Frankly, I don't want CLT heading a project in the upper Grays given their track record. The lesson, hopefully learned by CLT is that you cannot take a portion or segment of land and treat it as though it has no connection to the whole ecosystem. The resulting flooding and property damage in January are an example of their goal of acquisition of land for whatever is their real agenda.

So, who really is in control of our future out here, according to F$W, they are. The irony is F$W funds CLT with our tax dollars! I won't address in this article our tax increases for land that is at risk because of the increase of flood waters brought about by the activities of CLT, to small farmers farmland and local homeowners.

If we want to know what CLT and F$W plan, all we have to do is follow the dollars.

This is a correction - in reference to logging and sediment deposition amounts (mentioned in the Eagle) into the watershed given at the meeting were, from logging to complete failure of the system, (tree roots gone and so is hillside) a 20 year cycle in a normal environment (not 35).

Further, this talk did not address the yearly topsoil loss due to logging and deforestation, high water events, loss from soil saturation and floods which, I am sure are mind boggling. This is how things seem to one woman on the West End.

Take the money away from the studies for implementation. You can make it happen.

Cynthia Lahti