|
County leaders should protect limited water supplies
To the Editor:
This last weekend in October on Cullowhee Mountain was one of the most beautiful we have had this fall and somewhat busy.
Sunday morning started with a neighbor’s Irish Setter paying a visit and chasing our two cats up a tree. I put him on a leash and took our cat Murphy back home. Cats are OK.
Another neighbor’s horses paid us a visit later in the morning. They seem to like the clover in the field. I helped with the “round up” of the five very pretty horses.
That was kind of fun. I also met another neighbor while photographing Cullowhee Valley from atop Cullowhee Mountain.
With each of the neighbors, I asked how they felt about how much water the five large subdivisions comprising many hundreds of homes that are being built or planned to be built, including an 18-hole golf course on Cullowhee Mountain, would take up. The reply was it would lower our mountain water table.
Yes, but how much it will lower it is the question.
Has Jackson County explored the possibility that our mountain area’s water supplies are not limitless? I think not.
The county has a very strict policy for new construction in certain areas like Cashiers and Sylva that makes sure there is capacity for both water and sewage before permits are issued to build.
Why would a policy of this kind not also be in effect throughout the county?
I feel it is incumbent upon Jackson County to protect the current residents of these mountains from running out of water due to subdivisions moving into their areas.
How? Having environmental studies done by qualified folks before issuing permits. Who is to pay for this? The builder/developer of course.
I would like to see a moratorium placed on current construction of these subdivisions and those being planned, until these environmental studies have been performed.
By the way, an 18-hole golf course will use 100,000 plus gallons of water per day. Not to mention water use by the hundreds of homes that will surround it.
The question is, “who is minding the store?”
Progress needs to be controlled so as to not ruin our mountains and the very reasons we are here. Litigation? It is possible I guess. The county needs to protect its citizens.
Tom Fischel
Cullowhee
Forest Service should consider ‘wilderness’ aspect of Chattooga decisions
To the Editor:
The Chattooga River is a beautiful free-flowing river that runs for 57 miles through three states starting in Jackson County.
The “National Wild and Scenic River System” act passed by the U.S. Congress in October of 1968, (Public Law 90-542) governs this river.
Since 1976 the upper section has been closed to watercraft by the U.S. Forest Service, which has jurisdiction over the river and surrounding areas.
In 2005 American Whitewater filed an appeal that subsequently has led to ongoing approaches and studies as to the opening or closing all or part of the upper river to boating.
This basically was a conflict between boaters and anglers — that is until we of the Chattooga Coalition for Save our Solitude (S.O.S.) jumped in.
What was our beef?
We believed that the Forest Service split the pie between the anglers and boaters and left out a lot of people and subsequently failed to follow the dictates of Congress not only in the Chattooga River “Wild and Scenic River System” act, but the more restrictive “National Wilderness Preservation System” act, Public law 88-577, that Congress passed in September 1964 for people seeking privacy, remoteness and solitude in the Ellicott Rock Wilderness along the Chattooga River.
No one was addressing this act, which covers the Ellicott Rock Wilderness area that’s embedded into the Chattooga River corridor for several miles. Paddlers would have to go though this very restrictive area, if they were allowed in at all, that is designated for remote, primitive solitude.
This act, also known as the “Wilderness Act,” has special provisions distinct and distant from all other acts that are being focused on at this time by the Forest Service.
Ellicott Rock is a monumental landmark that’s very sacred and considered a power place by Native Americans. It is not to be desecrated by people who want to play in its vicinity.
The Ellicott Wilderness area is to, “retain it’s primeval charter and influence,” “has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation.” Remember the key word here is primitive recreation, not modern.
First and foremost Ellicott Rock Wilderness is a “preserve.” That’s not our view, that what the U.S. Congress has passed into law.
Solitude is a state of being solitary or alone; seclusion; remoteness; a lonely or secluded place, e.g.: “Jesus went into the wilderness alone to seek solitude.” He didn’t bring a camel, kayak, rifle, bow or shotgun. Yes, the Forest Service allows hunting not only in and around the Ellicott Rock monument, but along the banks of the river where people hike or blend in with nature.
I have no problem with guns. I was in the Army, but is this the best place for guns, in a place for solitude?
There are many reasons people seek out the most remote and primitive areas of a forest. That’s why Congress set these “Wilderness Areas” aside, not to be disturbed, forever.
Going back to the “National Wild and Scenic River System” act, Sec. 10(b); without reading the entire section, it states that when one act crosses into the other’s turf “the more restrictive provisions shall apply.”
Again it states the same in section (c).
So when American Whitewater and the anglers are considering splitting the river among themselves, they should be considerate of others who have an equal and fair right to its use, especially in the Ellicott Rock Wilderness area. And why not, the anglers have use of the whole 57 miles of river right now, the paddlers have 36 miles of river zoned for them, and for solitude seekers who are looking for that quiet set-aside remote area there is no area in the entire 57 miles corridor for them, not even in the Ellicott Rock Wilderness area that was designated by Congress to have outstanding opportunities for solitude.
Before one paddler or one angler gets another inch of the Chattooga River for themselves, we, the solitude seekers, want our own zoned area in the Ellicott Rock Wilderness area as Congress intended. Because once these primitive remote areas are gone, they are gone forever.
Jim McCarthy
Dillsboro
Some history about the Confederate flag
To the Editor:
I realize that Penny Hill is disappointed in not being able to wear her Confederate shirts in class, but maybe she should take a few moments to do a class paper on the Confederation. It is one thing to be proud of the area you live in and quite another to be proud of its history. This is a very large controversy in the United States still.
There were actually three Confederate flags over the course of the four-year war, and none of them were what is today considered the flag of the South. The very first original Confederate flag was made in 1861. It had a blue square with seven stars (for the seven original confederate states) in the upper left corner and two red stripes and one white stripe running horizontally across the rest of the flag (named “The Stars and Bars”). The flag was later amended in 1863 to include the six joining states of the Confederacy. The third and final flag of the Confederacy was adopted in 1865, shortly before the end of the war. The “southern cross” flag that is widely referred to as the “Battle flag of the Confederacy,” was one of more than 180 separate Confederate battle standards. The design was a square one. The second Confederate Navy Jack is a rectangle precursor of the battle flag. The flag now widely recognized as “The Confederate Flag” is a combination of the battle flag’s colors and the Second Navy Jack’s design and has never historically represented the CSA as a nation. It is often mislabeled as “The Stars and Bars,” which was the Confederacy’s first national flag.
The Civil War was fought largely over the abolishment of slavery, which most southerners considered a threat to their states’ rights. The South wished to secede from the rest of the United States in order to continue with their traditions of the past 200 years. Slavery had been abolished in most northern states since 1776. The Civil War was also fought over tariffs and taxes, sectionalism and states’ rights.
So, to what point does Hill think that slavery was wrong? It is also very highly unlikely that her father and grandfather were there and lived through this war. They may very well be veterans of the U.S. Army, but not the Confederacy. It is also unlikely that her great-grandfather was involved in this war. Should there be pride in a war that caused the most American deaths of any war fought in our history as the United States? More than 620,000 lives, both Confederate and Union, were lost in this sad war. What is the reason that anyone should take pride in the southern flag? Do you suppose the relatives of German soldiers should be allowed to wear swastikas? There is nothing wrong about taking pride in war veterans. Both of my grandfathers are World War II vets, and I take great pride in that. They fought to stop oppression – not uphold it.
Samantha Faust
Whittier
|
