In truth, we're probably lucky that stretches of the upper Cahaba haven't
already been channelized or damned, only used as a sewer at worst. I hope we
can at least avoid active destruction!
--Bruce Stallsmith
Huntsville, AL, US of A
>From: "Crail, Todd" <tcrail_at_northshores.com>
>Reply-To: nanfa_at_aquaria.net
>To: <nanfa_at_aquaria.net>
>Subject: RE: NANFA-- Upper Cahaba Watershed, AL
>Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 11:20:11 -0500
>
>Nice touch :)
>
>Now, what happens if the EPA get's "re-prioritized", the boss' boss' boss
>says
>"this is inconclusive" and then it has to stick that "we must study this
>more"
>and development continues? Or even worse... "We find no issues with
>development in this watershed" ?
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bruce Stallsmith
>
>So my cynicism is based on a feeling that this whole process is a feel-good
>operation designed to disarm any serious questioning of the status quo.
>Local groups like the Cahaba River Society are organizing people to
>participate in this process and, for one thing, make any recommendations by
>this Study legally binding. The meeting conveners didn't look happy at that
>suggestion.... so the struggle continues.
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
/"Unless stated otherwise, comments made on this list do not necessarily
/ reflect the beliefs or goals of the North American Native Fishes
/ Association"
/ This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes Association
/ nanfa_at_aquaria.net. To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get help, send the word
/ subscribe, unsubscribe, or help in the body (not subject) of an email to
/ nanfa-request_at_aquaria.net. For a digest version, send the command to
/ nanfa-digest-request_at_aquaria.net instead.
/ For more information about NANFA, visit our web page, http://www.nanfa.org
</x-flowed>