It’s great that Kelly Wolf and his crew have restored so much stream habitat. Why, though, is habitat restoration so admirable, while Mr. Wolf rejects the simple conservation of healthy habitat, which is the goal of Ordinance 2013-18? I suppose our culture prefers expensive efforts to fix things rather than seeking not to break them in the first place.
I agree that tax incentives and education are strong tools, but we also need Ordinance 2013-18 as a part of a many pronged effort to maintain and restore our salmon populations, some of the few strong runs left on Earth. The ordinance would prevent damage and pollution to spawning areas, and help property owners do the right thing through a permitting process. It is a modest proposal. Implementation of the ordinance is not very expensive, especially compared to the cost of habitat restoration. I own property with anadromous waters and I support passage of the ordinance as written.