Guys, I try. I really do. But it is hard not to end up totally disgusted with COB, especially anytime they engage in “habitat restoration”.. i.e, fish projects.
I have been a big critic of fish restoration projects because too often, they are only intended to benefit the fish, ignoring the reason that fish bearing streams have been so important for biodiversity.. it is all about riparian habitat.. which allows other species to have connectivity corridors, access to water, food, refuge, and genetic diversity in breeding.
So I got really excited to read this, “The project benefits all wildlife,” said Renee LaCroix, ecology and restoration manager. “Not just the salmon.” Yeah!!!
Followed immediately by this, “At first, the trees and vegetation along the new stream corridor will be cleared……”. Say What?? Sure, later on the city claims it will go back and restore the vegetation, but what does the city think that wildlife will do in the meanwhile? Will they be given rental vouchers to cash in with private property owners, just like they do with the homeless?
Because it will take years before comparable habitat value will be achieved, if ever. What does the city think happens to wildlife in the meantime? And by then, perhaps the city will decide that the homeless are sleeping in the riparian corridors and forgo the replanting, just like the butcher job at Maritime Heritage Park. The city has not committed to any time period for mitigating and addressing temporal loss, although this is something that WDFW rules require.
All I can say is that any time you hear the city stating it is doing something, anything, for the benefit of wildlife and habitat, be very, very, very critical. I will bet you a buck it is a scam.
If you look at the reroute path, you will see it focuses on new trails and roads, none of which benefit wildlife, and it routes the creek right through businesses and medical facilities, to James Street and Irongate. Does anyone believe this route was chosen to maximize wildlife benefit?