[env-trinity] Dan Walters- Oregon dam removal may cost California

[FISH1IFR at aol.com]

In a message dated 12/4/2011 6:22:07 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
danielbacher at fishsniffer.com writes:

I  disagree with Walters' contention that using public money for Klamath 
dam  removal is unwarranted.  


However, we must absolutely remove ANY Klamath dam removal money from the  
Water Bond, which creates the infrastructure for a peripheral canal and new  
dams.

Daniel... I was only commenting on Walters assertion that tax money should  
not be invested in Klamath restoration efforts at all, in any way.   
Fortunately, there are many other ways to do this than the current Water Bond,  
with all its warts, riders and hanger-on projects, including the "peripheral  
canal" in disguise, many of which California does not need and should  not 
build.  Point well taken.  While PCFFA supports California  investments in 
the Klamath per se, we OPPOSED the current Water Bond because of  its 
"peripheral canal" poison pill attachment.  
 
But investing in salmon restoration measures in the Klamath is a good  
investment in itself, and deserves support in and of itself.  That was my  
point, if there was any confusion in what I previously wrote.  

=============================================
Glen H. Spain, NW  Regional Director
Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations  (PCFFA)
PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370
O:(541)689-2000 --  Fax:(541)689-2500
Email: fish1ifr at aol.com
Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/)   


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20111204/16a6aa5b/attachment.html>