Editor, The News:
Re: ‘Roll back stream setbacks’ (The News, April 16).
When is enough, enough?
When it comes to the realtors, developers and certain members of Maple Ridge council, it would seem that the answer is never.
The other morning, I poured my coffee, sat down with the paper, and the first thing I read was how Coun. Al Hogarth wants to change our stream protection rules.
I can’t help but wonder, Mr. Hogarth, what do you stand to gain from this?
Perhaps you hold a large parcel of land that sits next to one of our amazing salmon bearing streams, and under the current setbacks, won’t allow you to build a 200-home subdivision? (Just what this town needs)
Or do you see a potentially missed opportunity to sell more units and grow your bottom line?
Let me know if I am getting warmer.
Maybe I am way off base, and your only motive truly is to prevent the further spread of invasive species such as blackberries and knotweed.
It would seem to me, though, paving every square inch of Maple Ridge to prevent growth of an invasive species makes us humans the most invasive species of all.
One only needs to take a look at the Silver Valley or Albion corridors to see just how invasive we truly are.
This is where you tell me about all the awards the Silver Valley development has won for its intuitive building schemes and control of water runoff.
To that, I would say: watch the papers this summer for yet another story about a bear or cougar that had to be destroyed because it just wouldn’t stay out of ‘our’ territory.
I grew up in this town and have fond memories of a childhood lived here – entire days spent exploring the wilderness areas full of creeks, tall trees and wild animals.
I am trying my hardest to teach my children the value of living in an area as beautiful as ours, but the voracious greed and ignorance of developers and some members of council is making that task very difficult.
Do our children not deserve to experience some of the remaining beauty that only the slow hand of time and mother nature can create?
Or is a gravel path meandering behind a subdivision of identical homes considered wilderness enough?
Should our children be content with someone else catching their fish instead of us teaching them to catch one from their own back yards?
If we keep down this current path regarding the development of Maple Ridge, our children will have no choice but to be content with it.
In closing, I pose a question: if someone were to try and take from us, our hard-earned money or the material possessions by which we define how rich our lives are, would that person not meet with strong resistance?
So why then, do we allow developers and our elected officials to take from us that which truly makes us rich?
Editor’s note: the motion to replace streamside protection regulations, developed by senior and local government scientists and environmental groups, with less stringent rules was defeated by council Tuesday, 6-1.