The Coeur d'Alene press. (Coeur d'Alene, Idaho) 1892-1907, 1905-03-04

benefit Occur d'Alene ought to be en-
couraged. To spend so much money
here is desirable if it does not injure
Others.
b. H. williams am in favor of
raising rather than lowering the
lake, The annual income from the
lands that would be covered with
water by raising the lake is not so
great that the government could not
we'll afford to buy the property l
am somewhat familiar with values in
the river valleys and think this plan
feasible.
n. S, PAUL think the lowering
of the lake would be detrimental to
the best interests Of the people, but
to raise it and buy out all damaged
interests would be beneficial. The
amount Of money expended by the
government in such an enterprise
would make great city of Occur a.
Alene. Let the lake be raised and
the money spent here II you want to
see a lively town.
William Dollar-This is a big
question. Ii not only involves the
interests Of farmers along the two
rivers, but the mine owners Of Sho.
shone county and citizens Of this city
are deeply interested. am opposed
70 any proposition for lowering the
lake, but believe the government
might raise it to advantage. This is
undoubtedly better than to lower it.
But it is a matter that should be
given the most careful aud thorough
investigation. Hasty action might
result in irreparable damage and men
trained in that line should study all
phases Of the question before definite
action Is taken.
+. W. Collins-I am opposed to
making any change in the natural
level Of the lake. To raise or lower
it will be Of damage to vital interests.
1t seems to me that nature has made
things around here handy and use
full for man, both from a business
and pleasure point of view and any
changes that might be made will not
improve things. Vested rights and
interests should not be disturbed.
The expenditure of a few millions
would be all right while it lasted,
but the proposed changes are for all
time.
James Roche-Let the lake remain
as it is. l see no advantage in max
ing change and there are many dis
advantages not necessary to mention
as any one can see what they are.
P. W. Johnson have read the
report Of Engineer Noble published
in the Press. l favor raising the
lake two feet above present low water
by dams at Post Falls, with flood
gates sufficient to let the high water
run off rapidly. This would make
the river navigable for small steamers
and logs and be Of great benefit.
Mills and docks have been built TO
suit the present stage Of water and
any great change either way would
prove detrimental to these interests
as we'll as others. Government i'm
provements that make no material
change in the natural level would be
desirable.
L. y. Lindberg-I think 1t would
be an injustice to raise or lover the
lake as either would materially inter
fere with vested rights. To lower it
would certainly be an injury to the
sawmills and to raise it will injure
other interests. Leave it as it Is.
G. J. Shoemaker do not approve
of the proposition to lower the lake.
/ would be pleased to see the govern
ment spend its money here, but the
damage from draining the lake would
be too great. It might not be so bad
to dam it up and raise the water.
o. E. Bari do not think It adj
visable to either raise or lower the
lake. It should remain a. it j. We
can gain nothing by making the lake
a big reservoir for the Big Bend aside
from the expenditure of the money
for the improvements here.
f, b. Keller / think the raising
Of he lake would benefit great deal
more country than 1t would injure.
The government should buy up the
land that would be flooded aud 20
ahead with the proposition to raise
the water. Even to lower the lake
would be- Of greater benefit than in
jury on account of the great sum If
money that would be expended in the
Improvements. II means big thing
for this city.
J. L. Robinson The present con
dition Of the lake Is good enough for
me and think It should be let alone
To either raise or lower the lake m9af