On Sep 22, 4:56*am, (Kiyu) wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 16:23:38 -0700 (PDT), DaveS
wrote:

I know it sounds like a big deal for just 40 acres but it is a nice
chunk of river. That's why I bought it. It definitly would not be
everybody's choice. The price reflected the low value for farmers of
the rocky "out ground" along the river. I am encouraged by what
conservation minded farmers have accomplished along the river so far,
and the fact that the State, the Feds and the non-profit efforts have
persisted. Even the old timers say its getting better.

Dave,

It is wonderful what you are doing there as a landowner, and it is a
big deal to me though I'm across the country from you. If only other
users of the land shared a fraction of your concern and acted upon it
we'd all have a much better world to live in.

Well done, Sir.
And many thanks from a fellow world resident.

Kiyu

Thanks for the complement. I hope I can follow thru on my talk. I
don't think we are that alone. There are miles of new riparian
plantings along this river alone, admitedly a target. If the
incentives are there the owner/farmers often do the right thing. But
there has been so much damage it is difficult to see the end of the
tunnel. The food production system we have seems to be a big part of
the problem. I don't know what the answers are but more localized
production and marketing, fresher, local, and seasonal, family
ownership and such I think are worthy interrim objectives.

Dave