Land owner was wrong to divert creek

I read the Sept. 3 article, “Caught in a regulatory net,” about Ron Lavigueure and his unlawful diversion of Woods Creek. I do not sympathize with him as he chose to break the law and obtain no permits to change the problem with the creek flooding his land. He could have done things legally and worked through the proper channels. I don’t believe that just because you have a title to a piece of land that you can do whatever you want with it.

Has the Department of Natural Resources thought about the damage that will be caused by taking out all the “improvements” that Mr. Lavigueure has done to his property? It seems odd that the DNR would have the property owner return the creek to its original course when the damage to the creek could be worse than what was caused years ago when Mr. Lavigueure made his changes. I do realize that I only have the facts as presented in The Herald, but it does make you wonder what is going on.

Make the property owner pay some fines and do some community service for breaking the laws, but think about what the changes to the creek will mean now. How will putting the creek back the way it was years ago help the land now? Will the changes effect other property owners in the area downstream or upstream? Will it help the salmon? I hope the DNR looks at the big picture and not what one property owner did to his land.

Everett