Living with the river

To The Eagle:

Seems that a lot of time and articles have been dedicated to river problems and suggested solutions to the same problems with many differing thoughts and "plans." This should be expected since most of the county is part of a river system, second largest in the US.

Perhaps the biggest interest is in the huge amounts of money being "handed" out to almost anyone claiming to help our salmon. I was encouraged to once again write to The Eagle after reading the "wonderful" article on how the WDFW is going to once again "solve" a situation they themselves have created. I say again, as this is not the first time WDFW has decided killing fish will help.

In the things that were said in the article, I found some serious contradictions and some things not said. I am not a scientist or biologist, but have spent most of my life in and around fish, sport and commercial, spending much time on the rivers, fishing, hiking and enjoying the natural beauty we are blessed to live with. Yesterday I had the privilege of hauling in a 25ft oldgrowth fir log, (second one this fall) which 16ft will be milled for clear straight grain boards, the rest will be used to warm my home. It happened to be a log from the study at Gorleys. My understanding of how things float and go with the flow, tells me that there is a tremendous amount of water coming back up Seal Slough to bring me these logs from up at Gorleys. That mystery is solved when you see that there is more tidal water coming here (Seal Slough) than the Grays river. The acreage being flooded with the two 13ft culverts is greater than the river channel acreage. This is also the problem we are having with the dike erosion since the CLT project.

There has been a perception that I am against salmon restoration, quite the opposite, I am opposed to poor engineering-planning and not taking responsibility for projects when they are creating adverse effects on neighboring properties.

Reading the "plans and solution" for the wild salmon restoration, I seriously question the statement that says: "The hatchery fish take the spawning grounds away from wild fish." How is that possible when they go to the hatchery, where they are "milked" by hatchery people? Please someone explain that one!

It was also said they take away feed? Salmon pretty much quit eating when entering the fresh water. If they refer to the feed of the smolts, then why are not all the carcasses put back in the river, to process to feed in a natural manner.

A study has just been approved to "study" the effects of nutrition in the rivers. Germany Creek and Abernathy Creek will have one "nourished" and one not! Please explain that one! It takes a study to know that the dead fish turn into feed for the smolts, like in nature? But it takes a biologist and a scientist to decide to use cooked whitefish pellets, totally unnatural saltwater fish pellets? Please, please explain that one.

I am sure a lot of readers are tired of reading my ranting and ravings, but if there isn't some common sense and integrity installed in the organizations that decide on the fate of my beautiful world, then I will keep on writing. I will always sign my name to any comment I make, and will enjoy any discussion pro or con to the same.

Poul K. Toftemark

Rosburg