I get reader e-mails often when a controversial outdoor topic is in the news. I sometimes wonder why certain are even controversial. One such topic is the planned rails-to-trails project in Union County. It seems to me that anytime you get an opportunity to get people outdoors and away from motorized vehicles, it's a good thing. Apparently not everyone agrees.

I got e-mails from a couple readers who think the money for this particular project could be better used in other ways, such as saving R.B. Winter State Park from closure. That may be true, but unless I read things wrong, it's not an option. My understanding is that the funding for this project came in the form of a grant which specifies it be used for non-motorized transportation projects. In other words, the money couldn't be used for anything other than a project of this sort.

I also understand that this money has been set aside for projects of this sort and someone is going to use it. If it's not us it'll be Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Erie or some other area. You can argue whether we should be earmarking tax dollars for projects such as this one, but in this case it's already been earmarked and someone is going to use it. I figure it might as well be us.

There are others who apparently worry about the impact a project such as this may have on the areas that surround the trail. While concerns such as this are understandable, I know people who hike and bike on trails such as this in other parts of the state and I've not heard of problems. The only problem I've heard about, and it's strictly an anecdotal observation, is lack of use. Apparently on some of these trails, you can have a pretty solitary experience. For some reason I doubt that would be the case here. I think this trail would be used a lot.

In the end, I guess I want it all. I want more state game lands, more state forest lands, more state parks, more hiking trails, more wilderness, more stream improvements, more wildlife habitat improvement and a partridge in every pear tree. In the end though it's just like everything else. How much outdoor paradise can we afford? That is the $64,000 question. I hope a lot of readers will have no idea what the $64,000 question was, because that would prove that young people do, indeed, read newspapers.

Speaking of state game lands, I'm surprised at the number of people who think that state game lands, like state forest lands, were paid for using tax dollars. The fact of the matter is that state game lands are paid for by hunting license dollars and were originally intended to assure that hunters throughout the state would have access to a place to hunt. These tracts have been opened for other uses, but that's due to the hospitality and generosity of the state's hunters. Hunting however, is the No. 1 priority on these tracts and that is as it should be.

Spawning stress

The lower Susquehanna River has recently seen some pretty serious fish kills, and the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission thinks it knows the cause. Fish commission biologists say the fish deaths have been caused by what's known as "spawning stress." According to a PF&BC news release, spawning is very stressful to fish. That stress makes the fish much more susceptible to viruses and bacteria. Anglers who observe dead or dying fish are asked to report the sighting to the PFBC's hotline at 814-359-5110.

n E-mail comments to jdsteese@yahoo.com.