- About Us
- Local Savings
- Green Editions
- Legal Notices
- Weekly Ads
Commuters aren't the problem.
I'm submitting this letter in response to your reader who wrote
last week about "Gravel pit isn't the problem." I share his strong sense of
support for a company (Weyerhaeuser) that has employed many like him
in our Valley. However, his perspective on where the problem is centered
is not a view many of our Valley residents share.
You see, I came to this Valley 12 years ago and have worked in
my home office in rural North Bend the whole time. I support local
businesses and have gotten involved with community groups that have searched
for non-confrontational solutions to land use. I, personally, tried to become
part of the solution, not someone who starts fires as many of my neighbors
While I respect the writer's views on Weyerhaeuser, I must take this
opportunity to point out that Weyerhaeuser is the landowner
that sold all this beautiful property we live on. Had they decided to keep it in
forest use, we would not be here.
As for the need for gravel, this state has more gravel mines than
cities. What we who live in North Bend are suggesting is that a strong
economic reason for having one more mega-mine be fully understood. And if it
is concluded that we need one more mega-mine, why not allow the
current stewards at Exit 38 to continue to supply that need or is Cadman's
desire to use Exit 34 simply based on personal gain, greed and pride in
jamming a few hundred gravel trucks onto our roads with direct competition
to school buses and trucks at Exit 34?