Lake Davenport Topics: No argument from me
(Lake Davenport Specific)
1 messages
Updated 2/16/2011
Lakes Online Forum
84,091 messages
Updated 11/8/2024 10:28:12 AM
Lakes Online Forum
5,204 messages
Updated 9/14/2024 10:10:50 AM
(Lake Davenport Specific)
1 messages
Updated 2/16/2011
Lakes Online Forum
4,172 messages
Updated 9/9/2024 5:04:44 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,262 messages
Updated 11/6/2024 6:43:09 PM
Lakes Online Forum
2,979 messages
Updated 6/26/2024 5:03:03 AM
Lakes Online Forum
98 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
LifeTime Laker
-
|
Subject:
|
No argument from me
|
Date:
|
9/24/2007 2:15:40 PM
|
|
Being concerned about water levels however, does not mean that folks believe we should hold water to the detriment of those downstream. Outside of the businesses that are directly tied to the lake, it is JUST RECREATION. Jobs are on the line downstream and nobodies recreation should take precedent over that. As I have stated, the lake businesses are back to normal now that the season is over. If the lake filled up this week, it would still be absent the crowds this weekend. I understand the concern is for next year, but once again that is putting our pleasure above others welfare.
I am concerned with secrecy also. Mav claimed to be in contact with such 'high officials' yet doesn't name them. Why would that be? IF everything is so above board, why the secrecy about who they are in contact with? And then there is the reference to other things they are pursuing for the greater good of the lake. What are these things? And how can they claim to represent ALL stakeholders when members of the leadership were in a lawsuit to prevent certain boats form being able to enjoy the lake?
Any group, club, organization, or person who is afraid of scrutiny and opposing viewpoints deserves even greater scrutiny. Only dictators wish and work toward silencing the opposition. In a free society debate is welcomed and embraced. If you have the best argument, why be afraid to argue it?
|
|