Letter to the Editor

Underwater logging takes from state without giving something equal in return

I read with great interest your Aug. 31 article, "Georgia to allow underwater logging." I also recently read the obituary of a Georgian famous for inventing a popular fishing lure. It was said that he could catch fish anywhere they were to be found because of his knowledge of fish habitat, particularly emphasizing the underwater topography.

The sunken logs in the Altamaha and Flint rivers provide a great deal of underwater topography in those streams, which were both heavily silted during the period of intense cotton cultivation in Georgiaduring the 19th century. Removal of the logs may well wreck much of that topography and, with it, vital fish habitat.

The question that needs to be asked about this underwater logging is what exactly is the benefit to this state and its citizens from this activity. The log miners get logs to sell to sawmills, but the state has to supervise their activity to minimize its destructiveness.

Permit fees and small bond payments may cover some of the cost of using state personnel for those activities, but what does Georgia get for her logs when they are sold by someone else?
Doesn't the Georgia Constitution prohibit the state from giving its property to other people without receiving an equivalent value in return?

NEILL HERRING
Jesup