Anadromous Streams Habitat Protection Ordinance is needed

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.

More

Letters to the editor

Chuitna mine threatens Alaska way of life

Read more

Surprising results to fill the assembly seat

When I first walked in the room I was immediately intimidated. I thought there had to be a mistake. I walked into the Clerk’s Office to confirm... Read more

Hacking not tolerated, neither is unethical behavior

Let me see if I understand: Russia hacks the DNC and discovers acts they deem to be unethical by American standards. This information is then... Read more

Looking forward to a better 2017

Happy New Year to all!

The evening after Christmas Day, 2016 and while contemplating possible discussion topics for our next “What the... Read more