Re: “Environment: Rural interests finally being heard”. (TNT letters, 4/1)
The writer seems to think that rural people are chortling with glee at the prospect of EPA funds being drastically cut. He makes no mention of any direct benefit to those people who “have made their living and enjoyed Washington’s beauty and recreation” yet have been “ignored and suppressed.”
It would be instructive to know why the writer thinks rural people would be happy to prevent the restoration of Puget Sound. In what specific ways have they been ignored or suppressed? Don’t they want the salmon and oyster industries to continue? Do they think now they can freely let their fertilizers run off into nearby streams and on into the Sound? Do they want to let their cows muck up fishing holes? I have trouble imagining how cleaning up the dead spots of Puget Sound is “squandering federal funds.” Perhaps the letter was an April Fool joke?