I had to laugh out loud when I read the “ELF has gone too far” letter. Either that or cry. Of course the district should own the land the watershed is in, otherwise our water supply gets contaminated from human activities like logging. It’s true that forest can regenerate, and some logging seems to be inevita ble as a resource. However, we’re talking about the community water supply here, and about the alternative in a world of shrinking, clean water resources, already compromised with human and airborne pollution.
The environment is going to hell in a handbasket, so it seems the only way to get some action from the powers that be on anything as crucial as water, is to do something “illegal” such as blocking a logging operation, while what “they” do is called “economic development” or, better yet, “progress.” There are other areas of forest to harvest, so why would anyone allow or advocate doing it in the area of the watershed?
Anna Banana, Roberts Creek