Letters To The Editor

SPOKANE MATTERS

Don’t blame tool for user mistakes

Interactive editor Doug Floyd’s evident animosity toward consultants discredits his March 25 editorial, “Council caught up in consultant fever.” Floyd actually made his case on the merits of this issue in the first three paragraphs.

The broad-brush argument used in the remainder of the editorial misleads the reader, shoots The Spokesman-Review in the foot and insults a very fine Spokane consultant.

First, the issue at hand is not the hiring of consultants, per se. Rather, it is what the consultant is hired to achieve.

There are many good reasons to hire consultants and many good reasons not to hire them. These depend on such factors as the scope of the engagement, expected results and the value of the work. Those must be judged on the merits of each particular case, not in a simplistic, broad accounting of how much is spent on consultants.

Secondly, even The Spokesman-Review uses consultants. Remember the Peirce Report and the Pizza Papers?

Thirdly, Jerry Haupt is a highly professional and ethical consultant. It’s a shame that Floyd’s method of argument treated him so shabbily. Bill Olson, CMC, president Inland Northwest Society of Consulting Professionals

Officials’ crutch rightly exposed

Great editorial by interactive editor Doug Floyd on the City Council and hiring consultants (“Council caught up in consultant fever,” Our view, March 25)! You could have included the Park Board, Spokane business and just about any group of people in Spokane that is going to make a decision.

It seems with all the wonderful education received by most of us, no one has the initiative or courage to adapt that academic knowledge to Spokane. And there is always someone to blame or reference with a consultant. Jim Allen Spokane

Consultant use is good policy

Since when is it irresponsible for government to privatize or outsource functions to the private sector?

The city contracts with local consultants for management and technical services focused on providing expertise. This relieves government of the need to cover every expertise within its labor force.

Is it unreasonable for an organization (city) with an annual budget of $300 million to spend $5,000 to assist the part-time board of directors (City Council) in the performance evaluation process for its chief executive officer (city manager)? Absolutely not! Nor is it unreasonable to hire facilitation expertise to help the City Council arrive at consensus for city priorities.

It is much too easy to take shots at elected officials and the consultants they employ. Let’s look at the value of technical expertise to engage citizen input, develop consensus from divergent viewpoints and support the professional process of performance review. Wise decisions and processes save money in the long run. Rich Hadley, president Spokane Area Chamber of Commerce

Go, Amend, and let healing begin

Hospice of Spokane extends its appreciation to Gov. Mike Lowry for his timely response to SHB 6226, which would allow Spokane residents immediate action toward instituting a medical examiner system for Spokane County.

We are hopeful, now that this bill has passed, that Dr. Dexter Amend will step down and allow the community to begin to heal. In stepping aside, Amend will hasten the first, most crucial step in the reestablishment of trust needed by families when dealing with the death of a loved one.

In our experience of dealing with Spokane’s bereaved for nearly 20 years, we know firsthand how important it is to reestablish a feeling of security, so that emotional adjustment and healing for the newly bereaved can begin.

Hospice of Spokane looks forward to a time when Spokane County residents will feel assured that their losses will be handled with the compassion, sensitivity and professionalism that a fully accountable medical examiner will bring. Anne Koepsell, RN, MHA, executive director Hospice of Spokane

Thanks to conscientious observer

Although I have two artificial hips, an artificial knee, severe back injuries and possible post-polio syndrome, I do not look disabled. I do have license plates for the handicapped on my car.

Recently, at Fred Meyer on Francis, I parked my car in a space for the handicapped and got out. An older, white-haired lady stopped me, saying, “Shame on you!” When I asked why she said, “That’s a space for the handicapped.”

After I suggested she look at my license plate, she apologized with sincerity.

I was a little miffed at her. But after I entered the store I realized that I was actually grateful that someone cared enough to challenge someone without an obvious disability who parked in a space for the handicapped. I thank her for caring. Edith A. Bradley Spokane

WASHINGTON STATE

Initiative 655 makes good sense

I thank Jack Tabor for bringing to our attention I-655, the initiative that would ban the unsporting “hunting” practices of bear baiting and hound hunting of cougar, bear, bobcat and lynx (“Hunting initiative bad news,” Letters, March 17).

According to the Colorado Division of Wildlife, after a similar initiative passed in Colorado the same number of black bears were killed by hunters as before. If these statistics prove similar in Washington, black bears will not overpopulate.

Vancouver Island, the place with the highest number of cougars killed by hunters, has the highest number of attacks by cougars on humans. However, since 1880, only 14 fatal cougar attacks on people have occurred in all of North America; 3,920 people have been killed by bees; 1,960 have been killed by dogs; and 14,350 people have been killed in hunting-related accidents.

According to Dr. Paul Beier, a wildlife biologist who studied cougars for four years, “… sport hunting does not reduce the risk of cougar attacks on humans.” He also states, “Quite likely the change in cougar population size due to hunting is about 0 percent.” Populations are based on available habitat and prey.

There is enough scientific evidence to suggest that bear-baiting and hounding cougar, bear and bobcat cause more harm than good. Baits can habituate bears to human sources of food. They then become problematic. Hounds often cross private property lines and disrupt livestock. These methods also are damaging to the image of responsible hunters. Garrett Clevenger Pullman

Initiative moderate, sensible, needed

Responding to the letter regarding Initiative 655, “Hunting initiative bad news” (March 17), as a signature gatherer for the initiative, here is why myself and others are pushing to get I-655 on the ballot.

First, hunting bears, cougars, bobcats and lynx with the use of bait and hounds can hardly be called a harvest. Murder would be the more appropriate term. We’re not talking about ears of corn here.

Using bait gives the hunter an unfair advantage and the animals are often treed by hunters’ dog packs. Then the animals are shot down and left for the dogs to rip apart. Not only is this practice ugly to witness, it is liable to push the animals to extinction, particularly bears, since the hunters can sell the bears’ body parts to Asian markets.

We are not out to ban all hunting. In fact, many hunters have signed our initiative, as they agree that baiting and hounding are unfair. As stated in our initiative, if I-655 passes, it will still be legal for government agents to shoot any prey animal they believe is a danger to people, pets, livestock or private property. We just want to protect our wildlife while we can. The creatures belong here too.

Please sign our initiative if you have the chance, and vote yes on I-655. Kelly Tansy Spokane

Hunting foe lacks clear understanding

Regarding “Battle over bear hunting,” (News, March 24), someone should correct the overzealous perspective of carpenter Mike Toutant.

While he recognizes that our region’s ecosystem was pristine and in equilibrium prior to the European settlers some 200 years ago, Toutant fails to acknowledge that we now live in a disturbed landscape. The “hands-off” approach will not promote a lasting balance for wildlife.

All anyone has to do is drive along the I-90 corridor across Eastern Washington and North Idaho or look at an aerial photo to note the extent of land manipulation activities.

Toutant need look no further than the newspaper his quotes were printed in or the petition he so eagerly supports to realize that the fiber had to come from somewhere, whether it’s been recycled or not.

No one denies that hunting is a personal issue and evokes a wide spectrum of emotions. It is undeniably a necessary tool for wildlife population management. However, hunting regulations and methods are designed by professional wildlife biologists to help perpetuate viable wildlife populations, not just as an excuse to bloody a few select hands for the sake of recreation.

I wonder if Toutant would be willing to apply the same amount of energy toward habitat rehabilitation as he dedicates to protesting bear hunting. Remarkably, both achieve the desired result: wildlife for future generations to appreciate. Steve Narolski Coeur d’Alene

GRASS FIELD BURNING

Growers did it to themselves

Finally! I applaud state Department of Ecology Director Mary Riveland’s courageous decision to phase out grass burning by 1998.

Inland Grass Growers Association and the grass growers have forced this decision on themselves. They have wasted money on a questionable mobile field burner, lawyers, public relations persons and TV commercials. How do the above meet their goal to “minimize air pollution through research into alternatives to open field burning,” as stated in their articles of incorporation?

They have wasted valuable alternatives as well by opposing the dethatching proposal of an Oregon researcher, and by allowing only Washington State University future grass research money. All of these actions have served only to undermine the public’s trust.

Grass growers declare that not burning will threaten their livelihood. What has really threatened their livelihood is their own refusal to spend their energy and money on finding legitimate solutions to grass burning. They have endangered public health and polluted public air for too long. Laura Ackerman Spokane

THE ENVIRONMENT

Chenoweth explains crunch

Recently, U.S. Rep. Helen Chenoweth of Idaho made the following statement concerning the Boise National Forest salvage timber sale in the Thunderbolt fire area:

“Timber companies cannot bid on deteriorating timber when they are operating at a loss. By the time a company pays for the minimum acceptable bid stated by the Forest Service, plus the high cost of meeting the environmental requirements, they will have $500 per thousand board feet of investments. The market value today is only $450 per thousand. No business can operate under those conditions.”

And now lumber prices are down to $350 per thousand board feet.

Idaho as a whole is the big loser today, and the environmental extremists are happy about it?

The timber-dependent communities have very little land that is not under federal control. They need timber dollars to help funds schools. County governments, the environmentalists seem to forget, get 25 percent of their gross revenue from federal timber sales, for schools and roads.

Chenoweth hit the nail on the head. We in these timber communities ought to support this kind of thinking, as do Washington state’s U.S. Reps. George Nethercutt and Cathy McMorris because this is the lifeline that will help our area.

The people of Stevens and Ferry counties need to look hard at how dependent we are on timber. Dwayne Ross Kettle Falls, Wash.

‘Low blow’ right on target

Kevin Jones complains about staff cartoonist Milt Priggee (“Cartoonist’s slam a low blow,” Letters, March 21). I’d like to remind Jones not to slay the messenger. Political cartoonists merely point out the obvious.

We are sabotaging our Earth with industrialization and waste. We are allowing consumption of our natural resources at a rate formerly imagined only in science fiction.

We are so used to what we have that we can’t honestly imagine a world without livable air, water and soil. This lack of foresight is rapidly destroying our planet.

Priggee is not the first to perceive the effects of continued logging and deforestation. Jones may blame the weather or other acts of God, but possibly human shortsightedness did contribute. Does no one in our government forestry service every wonder what would happen in a particular area should heavy snows occur? Could they not have thought ahead to spring thaws?

On page B6 of the same day’s paper, Coeur d’Alene tribal leader Lawrence Aripa was quoted as saying, “We have visions of the people yet to come” in planning for his tribe’s future.

When our forefathers stole the natives land and robbed them of all they had, it’s too bad they didn’t steal their common sense, too.

Bravo to Priggee for bravely pointing out that the emperor is stark naked. Abigayle Murray Spokane

FIREARMS

Gun advocate hit bull’s-eye

In Edward B. Keeley’s letter, “Gun rights advocate fires blanks” (Roundtable, March 22), he states letter writer Curtis Stone was duped by lies and phony statistics. He claims the gun lobby lies. Does he think anti-gunners don’t lie?

Stone was right. The study (Stone had mentioned firearm abuse and homicide rates) was done; Florida State University issued the results of this conclusive study by professors Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz.

Keep up the good work, Stone. We know the truth. We will protect our rights and, if need be, our lives. Gust A. Abariotes Spokane

We can’t be locked in time

There have been so many articles and letters in the last few weeks crying for rebuttal that the choice is staggering.

Wallace Baucom’s letter (“Musket-era thinking for M-16 age?” March 26), however, is in a class by itself. Baucom seems to feel that since the Bill of Rights was written in the era of muzzle loaders that muzzle loaders were and are the only firearms people have the right to own and carry.

Using that brilliant logic, The Spokesman-Review has no protection against government censorship since it isn’t printed one sheet at a time on a hand press, as newspapers were when the First Amendment was written. As for radio and television, well …

Was Baucom’s letter written on parchment with quill and ink, or are the selected rights that he wants to exercise allowed to keep pace with progress? D.E.Twitchell Spokane

BELIEFS

I honor anthem in fervent silence

I don’t sing the national anthem, Tom Lande (“I don’t stand for anthem, either,” Letters, March 25). I surely do wish I could.

The fact is, I have lost my vocal cords to cancer - a condition I sought to avoid by quitting smoking in 1976. It’s a hard song to sing and some of the lyrics may be bellicose, but it represents democracy. It stands for the dreams of 100 million immigrants. It symbolizes the world’s best hope for lasting stability. I really wish I could sing it. But I will always honor what it represents. Victor E. Buksbazen Spokane