Letters To The Editor

IN THE REGION

Company responsible for airport loss

The recent article regarding Colville’s loss of a new airport was devoid of several facts describing the efforts and actions of the Colville City Council and Vaagen Bros. Lumber Co.(Region, March 29).

I represented the city of Colville as negotiator to acquire the land identified for the new airport project, as required by Federal Aviation Administration guidelines for land acquisition. According to FAA guidelines, all offers to purchase real property must be preceded by a qualified appraisal representing market value. The proposed site was appraised twice in 1996.

On Oct. 25, 1996, an offer to purchase at appraised value was presented to and rejected by Vaagen. Multiple requests were made of Vaagen for a counterproposal. No response.

This project was extremely time sensitive in meeting FAA budgeting restraints, performance requirements of the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers permit to develop, the Department of Ecology and Department of Fish & Wildlife.

In January 1996, I received a copy of a letter addressed to Mayor Duane Scott from the FAA Seattle district office, in which Airport Manager J. Wade Bryant stated the need to proceed with the airport replacement project or risk loss of funding. The Vaagen Co. was provided this letter; no response.

Vaagen was again notified that the council must have some type of formal response by Feb. 25, 1996, or all would be lost. No response.

The Colville City Council worked diligently and honestly throughout the negotiation process. The loss of this project was not due to their lack of effort. Donald S. Huddleston Spokane

THE ENVIRONMENT

Craig trying to ‘restore sanity’

Don Hesselgesser’s example (Letters, April 4) of the Forest Service backing down on the 1987 timber cutting proposal on goat habitat near Farragut Park is why many of us feel the appeals process is being abused.

I was on the Soil Conservation District board at the time. The ranger involved proposed what he thought was a reasonable sale, but modified it several times in an effort to meet the objections of those who appealed. As a result, no logging would be done within sight of the lake and the goats would be fully protected.

After all that, an emotional boat parade was organized, mostly by folks who weren’t involved in the hearings and didn’t understand the situation. This caused so much publicity that the ranger dropped the sale as not being worth all the time and expense involved.

Another case was a sale on the Hope watershed, which was appealed by the city of Hope, Idaho. After protracted hearings, a plan was agreed on. This was then appealed by a distant group that sent a mimeographed letter with yet another appeal. This illustrates the frivolity of many appeals.

Some appeals have brought about desirable improvements. But, sadly, timber is now being managed more by the emotions of amateurs than the knowledge of true professionals.

Sen. Larry Craig is attempting to bring some sanity back to the process. By careful logging it’s possible to enhance the multiple values most of us cherish. Hopefully, Craig will formulate a bill that will allow careful logging to proceed without so many unreasonable hindrances. Sonny Poirier Blanchard, Idaho

Burning hardly a cure-all

Paul Lindholt’s April 6 column on fire vs. salvage logging again makes me ask, are we thinking clearly about this? Does he really believe it’s better to burn timber than harvest it?

Sure, the timber industry is against it. So am I. Who wants to see these valuable assets go up in smoke, just to fulfill some ideological fantasy?

He is wrong when he states that “Fire suppression is performed at the behest of retirees, vacationers and private and corporate investors in overgrown woodlots.” Our national forests were designated for the benefit of all. This includes logging, mining, grazing, hunting, fishing, driving, berry picking and bird watching, to name a few. Forests were not designated for the private and exclusive worship of the back-to-nature crowd.

And did he really imply that it would be better to burn out those who have cabins back in the forest, those awful inholders? I hope not.

Finally, Lindholdt states that wildfires should burn uncontrolled for the sake of biodiversity. I wonder how much thought he gave to the wildlife that are going to become an integral part of his biodiversity barbecues. E. “Andy” Johnson Mead

Mind reading yields faulty head count

In her letter of April 4, Sue Nicholson writes that all the people opposed to Sen. Larry Craig’s efforts to give away our national forests were outside protesting at his recent legislative workshop in Coeur d’Alene, instead of sitting inside listening to the testimony.

I was inside from the beginning until the end, as were many other people who believe that our national forests belong to all the people of the nation, not just the timber corporations.

It must be hard guessing the beliefs of another from the way he or she looks, or who they sit with, or the way they listen, but it wouldn’t be the first time that the silent majority was written off.

Come to think of it, maybe that’s why they were protesting outside. Mark Solomon Inland Empire Public Lands Council, Spokane

Pro-firestorm policy senseless

Watching our neighbors’ homes and woods burn during Firestorm ‘91 gave many of us firsthand experience with cleansing forests by fire, suggested by Paul Lindholdt in “Street Level,” April 6.

Like ethnic cleansing, it’s harder on some than on others. Not on the well-heeled Sierra Club yuppies and former yuppies, of course, most of whom live safely in upper-bracket suburbs. The North Idaho and Western Montana fire in 1910 killed 86 people and destroyed countless homes and businesses. The area was far less populated then. The toll would be greater now.

Survivors of such a holocaust have to live in the blackened, devastated area, also, but the yuppies just go elsewhere for their outdoor amusement.

Wildfire destroys healthy timber along with the dead and dying, but salvage logging can be far more selective. It’s also less destructive to wildlife habitat and fisheries, and it pollutes less than wildfire.

Controlled burning is a viable but very limited forest management tool because, like nitroglycerin, it must be handled carefully. Unlike salvage logging, it can only be used safely in certain areas and in fairly rare weather conditions.

If you want a preview of what Lindholdt has in mind, think back to Firestorm ‘91 and to the TV footage of the 1.2 million-acre wildfire clearcut of Yellowstone in 1988, which Lindholdt thinks was just dandy. Imagine a caption on the pictures: Coming soon to your neighborhood or one near you, courtesy of the Sierra Club and the environmental industry. Edwin G. Davis Spokane

Open burning should be stopped

I applaud the state of Washington’s Department of Natural Resources for billing the couple from West Plains part of the cost of battling the fire there last summer. Open-air burning in both Washington and Idaho ought to be completely banned. It is dangerous, frequently abused and a vile, unnecessary act of air pollution.

The ice storm debris is going up in flames around our home on Lake Coeur d’Alene. Stacks of pine needles, tree limbs and brush are being burned because people find it easier to light a match, rather than haul it to the dump or compost it.

Burning is an act of absolute unconcern for one’s neighbors. The smoke is foul smelling, mars the beautiful views of the lake and makes going outdoors to enjoy newly emerging spring weather impossible. In addition, it is extremely dangerous because these fires are being ignited on hillsides, within short distances of propane heating tanks. They’re being left to smolder unsupervised and frequently are fed with things that are supposed to be illegal to burn.

Since the fire departments apparently do not have the manpower to monitor open-air burning, people should be reminded of what can happen if your burn gets away from you and is illegally conducted. Hopefully, a penalty of $1.2 million will make people think twice about these fires they start.

Better yet, let’s all be more responsible and stop burning our rubbish. Take it to the dump. It is safer for us all. S.A. Monk Coeur d’Alene

THE MIDDLE EAST

Hostilities all the Palestinians’ fault

To Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, I say, go head on! (“Clinton fails to revive peace talks,” April 8).

I applaud Netanyahu for his steely strength in standing up for and hanging on to the land that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob gave to his people - Israel - thousands of years ago. God told Abraham, “I will make you a great nation… I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse.” God further stated, “But my covenant I will establish with Isaac” (not Ishmael). Netanyahu is only defending and holding on to what is rightfully theirs.

Why do the media majority always imply that it is Israel that is holding up the peace process in the Middle East? Why is it never implied that the Palestinians are holding it up with their constant whining and unhappiness with everything Israel does or does not do for them?

They are the ones who don’t want to peacefully coexist. They are Muslims. They will not rest until the Israeli race is annihilated and they possess the land. It is the law of Islam. Mohammed, whom they consider a holy prophet, commanded it. (Mishkat al Masabih Sh. M. Ashsraf, 1990)

Wake up to the media and anyone who is sympathetic to the Palestinians only. Keep in mind that it’s not Israel that calls for the annihilation of a people. Michele K. Martin Spokane

Israel forced to defend itself

I am responding to Rick Roush’s outrageous letter of April 4. These “peaceful” Palestinians are being indiscriminately harassed by the ruthless Israelis, he says.

In fact, the Israelis are simply trying to defend their own innocent civilians from random terrorist attacks launched by militant Arabs. The Jews of Israel simply want to live in peace, while organizations like the Palestine Liberation Organization and Hamas still state their goal of destroying Israel.

Another shallow argument that Roush made was that the politicians of the PLO hate the military wing that has carried out terrorist attacks on innocent Israeli civilians. The two factions better start getting along so that peace can be brought to Israel. As long as the Arab politicians refuse to even attempt to halt terrorism, there should be no negotiations and there can be no peace.

Roush states that the Palestinians have lived in Israel for over 2,000 years. Until the early 20th century, however, most of the Arabs in Israel were nomadic. Jewish settlers first arrived in large numbers from Europe after the defeat of the Ottoman Turks in World War I. Most of the land settled by Jews was eagerly sold to them by the ancestors of today’s Palestinian refugees.

The Arabs were not thrown out by greedy, hateful Jews. And remember, the Jews lived in the Middle East 2,000 years ago, too. I think one of them was an obscure figure named Jesus. Nick Sprenger Spokane

OTHER TOPICS

Social Security changes must come

Re: “Stocks no way to fund all retirements” (April 7): I am amazed and bewildered by the lack of knowledge some people bring to the table when attacking proposals to privatize Social Security. While the topic desperately needs to be discussed, these FICA-phobic monologues do nothing to move the discussion forward.

Eldon Hutchins seems convinced that all taxpayers will be mandated to place all Social Security taxes into the stock market. All the articles I’ve read about privatization suggest taxpayers be given an option to invest some of their money in the market - up to a limit of say 5 percent. If an individual didn’t feel comfortable investing, they could continue fully with the trust fund.

Hutchins says 15 percent of stock market investors will lose money, so maybe 15 million Americans will have no retirement income. Outrageous! If one’s 5 percent investment is down 10 percent in a given year, 99.5 percent of the original money is still intact. Furthermore, for most people retirement money is long-term, and it’s the long term that neutralizes much of the risk.

I’m pleased the Hutchins and his grandparents, father, aunts and uncles have benefited from Social Security. Early on there were 30 workers for every recipient. Today there are three. Soon there will be two.

If Hutchins truly expects his children and grandchildren to benefit, he and others like him must acknowledge that significant changes must be made.

Incidentally, Orange County Treasurer Robert Citron didn’t lose $1.65 billion in the stock market, but rather in highly sophisticated, high-risk derivatives. Bill Boaz Liberty Lake

We mistake tolerance for license

Move over cancer. Step aside heart disease. The No. 1 health threat to America’s youths is not gang violence, suicide or AIDS. You can’t blame Philip Morris or the NRA for infanticide.

No, when it comes to abortion, the real culprit is intolerance.

We cringe when a news reporter describes how children playing in a field discover hundreds of fetuses neatly packaged for disposal in cardboard boxes. We tolerate such graphic reminders of this daily American atrocity by changing the channel. We tolerate destructive sex education programs - handing out colored condoms at schools and teaching kids that everyone does it before they know what they are doing. We tolerate the entertainment industry’s vile attempt to corrupt our families every night through our cable TVs.

We tolerate increasing levels of criminal behavior from our adolescents and wonder why our prisons are overflowing.

America is fast becoming the most tolerant society in the world when it comes to moral decay. Yet, ironically, our toleration stops when a judge posts the Ten Commandments on a courtroom wall. Our toleration ends when a student prays over his lunch or tries to form a Bible club at school. When it comes to God, moral standards or the concept of absolute right and wrong, we are increasingly hostile.

In Nazi Germany, it was the Jews, the mentally retarded and the physically disabled who were deemed unfit for life. In America, an inconvenient heartbeat is intolerable. Which is the greater holocaust? Steve Busch Spokane

FINAL WORD

Gov. Locke is family values in action

The April 9 article, “Governor’s family gets rabies shots,” states that “Locke stumbled from bed to change his daughter’s diaper only to spot a bat circling overhead in the master bedroom. I’m glad that the bat problem was taken care of successfully. But what I found interesting in the article is the revelation that the governor changed his daughter’s diaper. To me, it speaks well of the governor - that he would and could carry out this function of taking care of his baby. Josephine J. Lannen Spokane