Helen,

I have to disagree with you about the need to repair levees. This
land was historically saltmarsh which is one of the scarcest habitats
in Puget Sound. In terms of ecological productivity saltmarshes are
definitely more productive than the freshwater habitats you are
advocating protecting. In addition, opening the diked areas to
saltwater exchange will increase habitat for salmonids, something
which the diked areas presently do not provide.

I suggest you talk to Steve Herman and Dennis Paulson concerning the
benefits of retaining the dike breaches and allowing saltwater
interchange. This discussion has come up recently on tweeters (with
the bias towards opening up the levees and restoring saltmarsh). I
have forwarded your message to that listserv.

Also, I am at a loss seeing how repairing the dike breach will aid in
educating people about estuarine processes. You said:

"There is no other place on Puget Sound that can do the job of showing
the natural science of an estuary with its marine plants and animals
and the freshwater riparian zone and wetlands communities, with such
class as Nisqually."

Returning the area to basically farmland will teach people about
farmland. How will it teach them about estuarine processes? The
freshwater wetlands you are referring to are not connected to the
estuary and play a very small role in the estuary processes. Likewise
the riparian areas you talk about are for the most part outside the
dike. What you are advocating saving is human controlled and
manufactured habitat. It has value, but does not aid in educating
people about estuary processes.

Mike Scuderi