Letters To The Editor

THE QUICK AND THE DEAD

Cougar debacle, cover-up disgusting

I couldn’t believe the news about the cougar death cover-up. It not only made me sick to my stomach, I was angry and disgusted as well. Not only because people from the state Department of Fish and Wildlife (aren’t they supposed to protect animals?) had to lie about killing the cougar, but then felt they had to cover the lie up.

I used to have great respect for the department, but what they just showed my kids is that it’s OK just to go out and shoot an animal. My kids were just sick, not to mention angry, when they heard what happened.

I can see justifying killing an animal because it is hurt or poses a danger to humans. But killing one that’s in a tree and scared? Then, they couldn’t even provide a net for it’s fall.

What is happening to our government departments? What has happened to their pride?

If the person who shot the cougar had been a civilian, he probably would have gotten 10 years in jail for doing the same thing Department of Fish and Wildlife guy did. Now, the man has to go through a “process” to see if he can keep his job?

What happened to the process of a scared animal? What if the animal had been a mother or pregnant? What would her process have been? I’m sure glad all humans aren’t so cold.

I hope the man who did this loses his job. He and anyone else connected with this makes me ashamed. C.G. Thomas Spokane

Agency killed its credibility, too

I read in shock and outrage the article, “Agents Lied - They meant to kill cougar” (May 17).

After reading the article several times, I still do not understand why the decision was made to shoot the cougar with a lethal dose of the drug.

I also question the integrity and character of the veterinarian, Luther McConnell. When he was asked to kill the cougar, why didn’t he refuse and walk away? His comment, “I was caught in the middle of a tailspin there, and we crashed,” shows great lack of judgment. That excuse is not acceptable from my own children and shows a lack of maturity to me.

Please, in the future, preserve the life of animals. Don’t kill them because of someone’s poor judgment.

Yes, the Department of Fish and Wildlife admits it made a mistake. It was a very costly mistake that will jeopardize the public’s future trust. Who will want to call this department when the next wildlife is spotted in Spokane? Susan M. Norton Spokane

How thoroughly, inexcusably wrong

Watching the footage of the mountain lion being shot and falling 40 feet to the ground with nothing to cushion its fall was heartbreaking. Those feelings pale in comparison to the sickening reality of what was done to that beautiful animal.

This situation had to be resolved because the mountain lion could have posed a threat to children and domestic animals. The resolution that was chosen was cruel, inhumane and totally unforgivable.

The veterinarian who tranquilized the mountain lion lied on television when he said the cat would survive. The veterinarian had been told to give the mountain lion a lethal dose of tranquilizer.

Bruce Smith of the Department of Fish and Wildlife said he didn’t fault Luther McConnell, the veterinarian, who was just following orders.

Since when did we as individuals lose our ability to choose? If McConnell, who is listed as being affiliated with the Associated Veterinary Group of Spokane, had no choice but to slay the mountain lion, then I ask why? Is it because of a financial contract with the Dept. of Fish and Wildlife? Is it because he is mindless and spineless? Is it because, like Sgt. Ray Kahler, he does not place any value in a humane resolution to people-wildlife conflicts?

Smith, I am touched by your apology. The “error in judgment” committed by Kahler happened under your watch. How many other errors in judgment have resulted in unnecessary cruelty to animals? Jamie S. Harris Spokane

Killer will face gentler justice

In response to May 17 story, “Agents lied, they meant to kill the cougar”: The law of an eye for an eye does not prevail here because we are too civilized, I am told. We are not allowed to shoot the cat murderers with poison darts and drop them from two-story buildings.

Were the cougar to receive a fair trial, his representative might have pleaded for his life. He could have argued this was just an adolescent who made a faulty judgment in wandering into a neighborhood where free animals are not allowed. He might have argued it was the cougar’s first offense. And he could have begged the court for mercy, asking that the responsible parties, in good conscience, spare the life of this young trespasser.

How lazy, how deceitful, how irresponsible that the life of this beautiful animal was snuffed out with a very lethal weapon, without deliberation, without honesty, without thought to accountability. Myrna L. Petersen Spokane

THE ENVIRONMENT

Boise Cascade sought only security

In a recent Associated Press story, the Idaho Sporting Congress, a preservationist group, alleges wrongdoing by Boise Cascade related to the Grade-Dukes timber sale, located in the Payette National Forest. These allegations are absolutely untrue. The story is inaccurate and extremely misleading.

This undertaking has been opposed by preservationists from its inception. After much planning by the U.S. Forest Service and extensive public comment and review, the sale was awarded to Boise Cascade in August 1994. To date, we have harvested roughly 25 percent of the sale. Further harvesting is on hold, pending the outcome of litigation brought by the preservationists.

Soon after the sale was awarded, we began preparing for the harvest. In an April 24, 1995, letter to the Forest Service, we submitted our harvest plan and asked the agency not to make public our operating plans, including our harvesting timetable. We felt compelled to ask this because extremists might use such information to jeopardize the safety of our people or disrupt our operations. Extremists have done these things during previous harvests.

Our request was legal and fully appropriate, despite assertions to the contrary in the AP story.

The AP story erroneously implies that our letter asked that data about old growth be withheld from the public. The letter and issues regarding old growth are completely unrelated. Our company had nothing to do with the old growth information and learned only recently of its existence.

Sadly, the AP story is the worst kind of journalism: baseless allegations by a highly biased source, combined with careless, inaccurate reporting. This kind of sloppy reporting does a disservice to the reputation of our company and employees and also misleads the public. Dave Van De Graaff, Idaho region timberland manager Boise Cascade Corp.

Revelation encouraging

I was pleased to see the timber industry take a severe blow recently (“Furtive log plan uncovered,” News, May 12). Proof that Boise Cascade and the Forest Service misled the public should cause people to question the ethics of many timber companies.

The public should be aware that making money is the only concern for many of these companies. Those who profit from the activities of these companies often have no ties to the land and thus have no reservations about exploiting our forests.

Northwest people ought to question the logging practices that are stealing our forests. Had it not been for the persistent efforts of the Idaho Sporting Congress to stop the proposed cut, Boise Cascade would have gone on with its profitable deceit.

It is great to see the paper putting this information on the front page. Crimes against the environment often seem to go unpunished and unnoticed. By making this information more accessible, the paper may have opened the eyes of many future environmentalists. R. Kanyon Anderson Cheney

Logging too often ruinous

A May 14 letter regarding the value of logging discussed the question, “What do you think about the logging issue in the Northwest?”

It mentioned how the logging industry employs over 100,000 people in the Northwest alone and that annually the logging industry brings in hundreds of thousands of dollars. Plus, logging opens space for growth.

I wonder which timber outfit gave this writer her information. Was it perhaps Boise Cascade or Weyerhaeuser?

I, too, have been researching industrial forestry for many weeks. I become furious at the information I find. My research is not only reading books and periodicals. I am originally from the Skagit Valley, which was once surrounded by hills overflowing with beautiful forests.

Those hills have been stripped of forests and now carry the burden of clearcut. The land has been trashed by industries looking only for money. Quickness is more important than preserving what’s left of the forests. This is sickening.

I understand that many jobs are at stake if industrial logging is terminated. Why not have those loggers clean up the clearcutting mess? That job ought to last at least a few centuries, if the damage can be fixed at all.

The environment is not a small issue. It includes, wildlife, the air we breathe, water we drink, the ecosystem, watershed and much more. Compare that to the supposed good logging can do if these precious, lifesustaining things are destroyed. Decide for yourself which pales in comparison. Stephanie M. Dahlstedt Cheney

Replace squabbling with accord

Environmentalists and the timber industry have been butting heads over proper use of our forests for years. It’s time for the two groups to come to a compromise through communication and collaboration.

I’m not suggesting everyone give up their beliefs. It is time, though, to look for new options that will build trust and get old things done in new ways.

Clearcutting our forests should stop. Optional ways of cutting timber, such as selective cutting, which increases the strength and beauty of the forest, should be utilized. Timber companies should not be allowed to cut in old growth forests where endangered species live.

Environmentalists must be sure that endangered animal studies are reliable and up to date. They should agree that it is healthy for dead and diseased forests to be cleared, if some dead trees are left for cavity nesters.

Use of our forests is not just for timber companies. It’s also for people’s recreation and for animal and plant life habitat. People and timber interests must give and take in a form of face-to-face decision making that will identify a common cause, goal and take action in ways that will benefit all parties involved. Trevor B. Shoemaker Spokane

THE MILITARY

Rules must apply equally to all

As an Air Force retiree who served in this nation’s lost war, I feel a special obligation to express an opinion on the Lt. Kelly Flinn matter. I tend to agree more with staff writer Jamie Tobias Neely’s editorial (“Target in a wild, bluenosed yonder,” From Both Sides, May 16) than with Opinion editor John Webster’s (“Her calling requires exemplary conduct,” May 16).

I agree with them that some disciplinary action is merited. But general force morale is more apt to be adversely affected by the hypocrisy implicit in selectively harsh treatment applied to junior members, given what senior people have gotten away with. (I’m not referring to flag officers when I say that.)

Morale can’t help but be more affected by the unnecessary sacrifice of our people in both Vietnam and Somalia and the cavalier treatment of veterans complaining of Gulf War Syndrome. These matters are decided at levels above those of the highest-ranking officers. But what’s done doesn’t escape the notice of lower-ranking personnel.

We may rue the day our leaders decided to cut the number of military personnel, as has been drastically done of late. Although I applaud the application of technology that saves lives, I’ve yet to see a case in which a drastic cutback of military personnel did not result in a miscalculation. I think cuts should be more gradual, if we are to escape such consequences and avoid serious impact on morale.

In any case, general force morale fares better when junior members perceive that everyone, from the top down, is really obliged to live by the same rules. Philip J. Mulligan Spokane

GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

NASA cutbacks ill-advised

In recent years, we have witnessed more and more cutbacks of federal spending and the elimination of many government programs. Taxpayers want their hard-earned money to be spent efficiently.

As a taxpayer, I want my tax money to be used on programs that will enhance life and benefit me.

Over the past few years, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration has undergone major financial cutbacks and has been forced to eliminate many programs. What are we doing? How many of us are enjoying the technological advances made in just the past few years?

I love my satellite TV programs, global communication, Internet access and the pride of knowing that we were the first to make it to the moon. We cannot stop this progress.

By cutting back on NASA’s funding, we are cutting back our future and our children’s future. Progress is the future. Jeff A. McClure Cheney

Beware these dog owner regulations

The Doris Day Animal League filed a petition with the U.S. Department of Agriculture Animal (and) Plant Health Inspection Service in 1995 that would force anyone who owns a sexually viable dog or a hunting dog to comply with the Animal Welfare Act. This Act is basically for animal research facilities.

What this means to the average dog owner is that he or she would have to bring their homes and property up to government standards as set forth in the Animal Welfare Act, and that their homes and property would have to be open to inspection at any time. Ironically, humane societies and animal rights groups had themselves exempted from the original Animal Welfare Act, as it was too stringent for them to be able to comply with.

Deadline for writing in opposition to the DDAL petition is May 27, 1997. Each letter must be accompanied by three more copies of the letter to be acceptable. The address is: Docket No. 97-018-1 Regulatory Analysis & Development PPD, APHIS, Suite 3C03 4700 River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238.

Dog owners just found out about this petition within the past two weeks and have been rallying letter writers across the country. Cherie R. Graves Newport

Produce could be better used

Since Rep. Richard “Doc” Hastings and the Apple Commission are urging fourth and fifth graders to make race cars out of fruits and vegetables (Public Periscope, May 19), are they then proposing that the 1.5 billion starving people and the 2 billion severely malnourished people in this world eat delectable viands such as transmissions, tires, oil, gasoline, and windshields? It’s only logical.

Such moral leadership is distinctly underwhelming. Margaret E. Koivula Spokane

REMEMBRANCE

Finch’s dedication honored still

In response to Dick Bopp’s recent letter, Norman Finch is far from forgotten.

His portrait and commemorative plaque greet all who visit The Spokane Humane Society.

There is a Norman E. Finch Humanitarian Award presented annually by the Washington Federation of Animal Control Agencies to the person who best exemplifies his philosophy.

His 30 years of service to the animals and The Humane Society are featured in our 100th Anniversary book, “In Pursuit of Compassion.”

Finch epitomized all that The Spokane Humane Society is today and what we shall remain: a haven for any animal in need, with no reservations, where they are treated with love and kindness. Dona M. Van Gelder, interim director Spokane Humane Society