Letters To The Editor

Young refugee

I pray boy will get to stay

I’ve been sitting in front of the fireplace, looking at a statue on the mantle. It is of a beautiful woman dressed in a shining white garment belted with a thin golden chain and partly covered with a sky-blue cape. She looks down from her platform of jagged brown rocks on a small boat almost smothered by the seas. There are three men in the boat looking upward and seemingly calling for help.

The statue is called Nuestra Senora de Cobre. She is the national saint of Cuba. The statue reminded me of praying like the three men in the boat must have been doing. I did that a couple of times during the night. I prayed hard that Clinton wouldn’t win this one. George B. Valentine Sr. Post Falls

Cuba far from being unfit

In response to John Webster’s Jan. 7 editorial on Cuba being no place to raise a child, I beg to protest.

I have been to Cuba twice in the last five years and have seen firsthand the living conditions that this child endures. I would like to make several points.

Cuba’s medical system has allowed it to have the lowest infant mortality rate in Latin America. This, in spite of a U.S.-sponsored embargo that seeks to deny those same infants and children the food for proper nutrition.

I never once felt endangered while walking the streets of Havana at night, or at any time for that matter, or in any of the many locations I visited. Has Webster been to Miami lately?

U.S. policy toward Cuba has been supported by a small, vocal contingent in the Miami area that is intent on making all Cubans suffer for the acts of Fidel Castro. China’s human rights policies make Castro look like the pope, yet we have done everything but give the Chinese the keys to the safe in order to keep our trade doors open to them. If we must measure countries, let’s use the same yardstick.

And who is the United States to dictate what is right and wrong in this world of ours? Douglas Larsen Spokane

Law and justice

Throw the book at really bad parents

Re: “Couple may avoid jail in child abuse case,” (Jan. 6). Anyone proven responsible for keeping children in the kind of conditions these people reportedly did should have their kids taken away permanently, be sterilized and be put in prison for the max. There is no excuse for such neglect and abuse. Those kids don’t deserve that kind of treatment. Judy Capparelli Hayden Lake

Hold parents accountable

I couldn’t believe the article about the Post Falls couple and their house full of filth and human waste. I was appalled that anyone would make an excuse for how they treated their children.

The quote from Morgan Richardson that “some families don’t realize how important hygiene is for their children” defies common sense. This was not a dirty diaper left unchanged but a pig sty where even animals don’t belong.

Irresponsible adults should be held accountable for their actions, not slapped on the wrist. When did it become OK to treat children like garbage? Debbie L. Benning Spokane

We have some odd priorities

An article by Angie Gaddy and Heather Lalley was published on Jan. 6 about a family in Post Falls that severely neglected its children. I was glad to see that neglect of children finally rated a rather large article in the paper. (Why didn’t it go on the front page of section A, rather than page 2 of section B?)

Recently, a couple was jailed for letting their dogs/ puppies lay in their own feces, not feeding them and in general neglecting them. Can anyone tell me why, when puppies are mistreated and neglected, they rate numerous headlines and the perpetrators do jail time for doing exactly what this Idaho couple did to their children? Neglect your child and your punishment is that the child gets removed for a short time. What message are we sending?

I work in a profession in Spokane where I see children who are neglected just as badly as the ones in Idaho. Spokane, we have a big problem no one wants to talk about.

First, we all but got rid of counseling through Spokane Mental Health Center for these families. Now we are talking about reducing or eliminating public health nursing positions. In the future, where will these overstressed families go for help? Mae Johnson Spokane

Accepting consequences is vital

Syndicated columnist Ellen Goodman says zero tolerance is a symbol of bankruptcy (Opinion, Jan. 7). She notes, “Michael Campbell will be in a Colorado court a month after his father’s death from cancer, after sending an AOL message to a Columbine student that he was going to `finish what he’d begun’ there.” She laments, “It’s no wonder that nervous Colorado officials take one online threat as if it were the real thing.”

Well, thank goodness! I bet if someone tried to knock off Goodman and then someone else wrote her an e-mail message that they were out to “finish the job,” she wouldn’t label it as “bankrupt” if the authorities took that little “one-time threat” seriously.

Goodman makes a common mistake in arguing that zero tolerance and understanding and compassion are at odds. The best of countries (and parents) do both.

Instead of advising second chances for teens who, without any reason at all, mauled others after a game, the proper approach would be to help the teens accept the consequences and become stronger for working them though. “Well guys, now that you’re not going to be in this school for a while, how do you go about studying at home or on the Internet, or at the community college?”

Accepting responsibility means acceptance of consequences for decisions, behavior and choices. And it is this definition that unhappy presidents, overprotective parents and liberal columnists all have trouble with. Foster Cline Sandpoint

The environment

Taxpayers, forests deserve change

National forests belong to the citizens, not just to Idahoans but to all U.S. citizens. U.S. taxpayers have subsidized logging of these national forests to millions of dollars a year. Logged areas have been left trashed, not cleaned up or reforested.

Forest Service management of the property of all U.S. citizens has been absolutely deplorable, a travesty. The destruction of ecosystems located in old-growth forests is the worst feature of the excessive logging the Forest Service has authorized. The Forest Service has absolutely not acted in the best interests of the American people.

Cessation of road building in roadless areas over 1,000 acres in size, in all 50 states - no exceptions - is a moderate, long-overdue action. K. Julian Powers Spokane

Closing land not good management

Many people are concerned about President Clinton’s effort to proclaim millions of acres of forest wild and roadless. Closing this forest land would be economically and socially devastating to the local communities.

Anyone who calls this a blessing must have an agenda foreign to the working people who live in this area. Severely limiting availability to this forest to many activities enjoyed by citizens with diverse hobbies and sporting interests smacks of elitism.

A vision of a monolithic corporate giant prepared to rape and pillage the forest is not reality, just simplistic scare tactics. The forest industry and U.S. Forest Service have made mistakes in the past but that is not the situation today. Obviously, The world has changed over the last 1,000 years. Can we sit back and allow the forest to slowly rot and burn over the course of generation after generation, as the forest naturally goes through 100-year cycles?

Perhaps it would make sense to use modern scientific methods to manage this forest. The need for wood products is a given in today’s society. Would it not be better to provide these products from our own nation’s properly managed forests than to supply our needs from Third World countries that have no environmental regulations?

Everyone fortunate enough to live in this beautiful area loves the forest. We must all respect the land and each other’s enjoyment of it. Let’s work together to provide the attention it deserves to be a healthy heritage. John Brucklier Malo, Wash.

If anything, Clinton’s plan is too tame

It’s a shame editorial writer D.F. Oliveria fails to see the importance of wilderness.

In his commentary, he blasts Clinton’s roadless policy as a “land grab,” “locking up the land.” He whines that the “timber state” of Idaho already has four million acres “tied up” in wilderness. But, there’s less than 9 percent of native forests left in the country, and logging on our public national forests only accounts for about 4 percent of the timber cut.

Counties with wilderness areas in or near them are the most economically vibrant in the country. Wilderness and intact public lands attract recreation and new businesses to relocate near the outdoor opportunities and a clean environment.

Wilderness is public land open for all to enjoy. It provides the cleanest, most reliable drinking water and natural protection against flooding from high rainfall and snow melt. It is a stronghold for native salmon and trout, and the last refuge for wildlife such as bear, lynx, elk, and caribou - species for which the Northwest is famous.

Oliveria is correct that this policy is political. The protection of irreplaceable roadless forests could easily be overturned by the next irresponsible cut-and-run administration. That’s why roadless wild forests should be protected as wilderness with Congress’ approval.

Clinton’s policy doesn’t go far enough to protect threatened roadless areas. It doesn’t apply to roadless areas which were not included in earlier Forest Service surveys, leaving out nearly one million acres of pristine forest in Washington. Guadalupe Flores Kennewick

Old management system worked well

When the preservation groups used figures like a half million miles of forest roads and $4 billion of deferred road maintenance, the public disregarded them because it is a usual ploy of such groups to grossly exaggerate the situation to make a point. When a deputy chief of the U.S. Forest Service picks up these figures, as one did in a recent article in The Spokesman-Review, it is time to get concerned.

In the 1950s through the 1980s, when the Forest Service was engaged in resource management, it would call meetings each spring with co-operators (major timber purchasers, industrial landowners, the Bureau of Land Management and state timber agency). They would determine the amount of maintenance required, the cost, the timber volume to be hauled or the acres of land accessed by the roads, and then tax themselves the money to do the job. This system worked very well and it still does in areas like the upper Clearwater, where the Forest Service is a minor landowner.

Independent landowners, such as Potlatch, Crown Pacific, Plum Creek, Bennett Lumber, the Idaho State Lands Department and others recognize their road system is a major capital improvement, and as such needs to be properly maintained as do buildings, machinery or any other capital improvements.

Hopefully, when the current administration is replaced, the Forest Service will get back to resource management, and repair our deteriorating forest lands and road systems. Frank J. Favor Coeur d’Alene

We have plenty of wilderness now

Re: Idaho challenges roadless forest plan (Dec. 31).

We already have enough land set aside as wilderness. All remaining roadless areas should remain open. The American public has a right to use its public lands. Also, by closing these areas, you are closing them to proper management and fire control. These roadless areas should not be closed. J. Wesley Goodwin St. Maries

Unmanaged forests are ruined forests

Re: “National forests must be preserved,” (Letters, Dec. 29). Is the locking away of millions of acres truly preservation? Or is the maintenance of the health of a sustainable forest more truly preservation?

Without access, disease elimination and firefighting are next to impossible. A national forest which is a stand of blister rust and beetle kill, burned stubble and blow downs is not what I would wish to leave the future, any more than large tracts of clearcuts.

Only with access can the scourge of fire be fought and disease controlled. Harvesting when done selectively can be a benefit, allowing room for new growth, jobs and financial support for schools.

I cannot recall once in the past 60 years here in North Idaho when access to the national forest has been a large paved nonremovable road. Most of those built in the 1920s have disappeared entirely. Many of those I drove on in the 1950s now have 20-inch trees growing in them. Access does not mean large permanent scars but it does mean those who wish to can go and enjoy the beauty. High-quality outdoor recreation cannot be had in a roadless jungle, at least not by the 98 percent of us who cannot canoe or parachute into the area.

The president’s directive to lock away the forests from all, be they interested in the area for recreation, making a living or preserving the health of the forest, seems far more concerned with the appearance of political correctness than reality. Gerald E. Sarff Kootenai, Idaho

It figures that companies oppose mine

It was hardly news that Schweitzer Mountain’s management joined Coldwater Creek in opposition to the Rock Creek Mine. Still, it was disappointing to watch the watchdogs in the media lap up the phony environmental explanation. If reporters would look a little deeper, they’d find a more plausible explanation for the stance taken by these two businesses: the bottom line, as driven by employee salaries.

Their fans in the press routinely describe Coldwater Creek and Schweitzer as among the largest employers in the region. Just as routinely ignored by the media is the fact that their jobs are largely seasonal and/or part time, and that they don’t pay living wages. The last thing the owners of Schweitzer and Coldwater want is somebody driving up regional wages. The Rock Creek Mine would do just that.

The mine would pay employees about $35,000 a year, plus excellent benefits. What do Schweitzer and Coldwater pay? Nothing near that - unless, of course, you’re the owner. Documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission show that Coldwater executives Dennis and Ann Pence were paid at least $764,260 last year. They got a substantial raise, even while they were laying people off.

I don’t know what Stimson Bullitt (owner of Harbor properties which owns Schweitzer) was paid but the Bullitt Foundation’s Web site says it gives money only to environmental groups and that for Idaho alone, “An estimate of the amount awarded by the foundation in 1998 was $567,250.” That’s almost enough to pay the Pences for nine months. Ed Eggleston Libby, Mont.

Government and politics

Democrats run short of ill-gotten gains

Re: “GOP war chest scares Democrats” (Jan. 9).

Poor, pathetic, whining Democrats crying the blues because they’re going to be in the same financially strapped campaign position for the upcoming presidential election that Bob Dole was in for the 1996 presidential election. My heart really bleeds for them.

What I don’t understand is how could the Democrats possibly be in this predicament? Have they run out of nuclear technology information to pass on to the Chinese communists for large campaign donations? Have they run out of rich Buddhist monks to shake down? Has the Hollywood left finally figured out that they aren’t getting the bang for all the bucks they’ve been sinking into the Democrat campaign coffers all these years?

Well, for whatever reasons, this will certainly put a small crimp into the Democrat Party’s ability to spread the usual lies and misinformation that we’ve become accustomed to throughout the years, election after election. We do know, however, that the lies and misinformation, although diminished, will continue to be propagated by Dan, Tom, Peter, Sam, Cokie and the rest of their pro-Democrat ilk in the mainstream liberal media.

Sure is nice, however, to be able to salt down the bad with a little good for a change. Bill R. Klein Nine Mile Falls