Letters To The Editor

Tue., June 6, 2000

THE ENVIRONMENT

Wildfire arguments don’t hold up

One of the loudest yet most misinformed reasons given to continue logging and road building in roadless areas is to combat wildfires by removing “ladder fuels.”

Here are some facts based on science:

Logging removes trunks - the part least likely to burn, and leaves fine fuels - leaves and needles - the part most likely to burn.

Thinning opens up the canopy, drying out the understory. Logging equipment can reduce soil moisture retention.

In an analysis after the Yellowstone fires in 1988, a blue-ribbon scientific committee concluded that the behavior and extent of the fire was likely influenced more by drought and wind than by fuels.

In high elevation areas, moderate and severe fire regimes have not been affected by fire suppression.

In many places, such as the North Lochsa Face area in the Clearwater National Forest, large stand-replacing fires are normal and are not minimized or prevented by logging.

Finally, the Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project and the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project concluded that in the roaded watersheds of the Sierra Nevada and Interior Columbia Basin, all forms of logging contributed to more-rapid rates of fire spread, higher fire intensities and greater fire severity than was the case in unlogged, roadless watersheds.

These points come from numerous scientific papers, including articles from Forest Service research stations.

For those who would like more information, ask the Forest Service for PNW-GTR-486, 355 and 323; and INTGTR-320 and 405. Natalie Shapiro Moscow

Fish, not farmers, are hurting

Robert Lonn’s May 25 letter expressed concern that the Endangered Species Act will destroy the American farmer.

Salmon total only about 10 percent of pre-settlement numbers. Wild salmon numbers have declined 98-99 percent. Half the salmon habitat in the Columbia Basin is gone and the rest is degraded. Conversely, Washington will double to 11 million people by 2045. Irrigated cropland has doubled since 1930. By 2030 it will increase to 10.5 million acres. I hardly think that people or farming are endangered.

Salmon may not be more important than people but their needs sure are!

The lower Snake River project is a major salmon-limiting factor. It irrigates little. We could scrape by without its power. Rails line both banks. It doesn’t take rocket science to look at a map, some balance sheets and conclude that breaching this project is one of the best options for salmon recovery.

If the project remains because of National Marine Fisheries Service hand-wringing, more instream flow will be needed for wild salmon. But hundreds of thousands of acre feet, unauthorized for use on newly developed cropland, is being illegally “spread” in the Basin due to Bureau of Reclamation complacency and the agency’s fear of regional legislators.

Corporations and greed are the threat, not enviros, not fish. It’s time that excessive, unsustainable development and exploitative uses of natural resources cease being promoted under the myth of “local customs, cultures and economy.” The frontier is closed. Historical levels of development and extraction are now unaffordable.

Other critters have needs, too. David Allen Jensen Spokane

Constant fighting counterproductive

In the Inland Northwest, people are divided by a never ending civil war over environmental issues. Problem is, civil wars tend to be destructive. In fact, very little is accomplished.

Economic and societal changes have created some big challenges for certain sectors of the population. These challenges need to be addressed. Government is paralyzed by the infighting. Our politicians like to blame President Clinton but using the president as a scapegoat is a poor political strategy.

The challenge is, can we work together? Can we save the family farm and the salmon by removing the dams?

Why subsidize wheat exports by big corporate farms while losing the family farm and the salmon? Subsidized wheat export mainly benefits foreign countries, deplete the topsoil and make no economic sense any more.

Let’s save the family farm and let’s save the salmon by compromising on a new subsidized agriculture policy. Farmers and environmental conservatives can create a win-win compromise. Bonner County could benefit by a new ag policy that subsidizes the family farmer niche crop growers.

What other compromises between the special interest groups and environmental conservatives might be winwin? A new, compromise, environmentally friendly, subsidized timber policy could be beneficial, replacing the old, destructive subsidized timber policy. S.S. Howze Sagle, Idaho

GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

Gore right on environmental issues

One of the clearest differences between the two major candidates for president is their positions on the environment. The fact that some environmentalists would favor Ralph Nader should not obscure this simple fact: Gov. George W. Bush is plainly not interested in protecting the environment and Vice President Al Gore definitely is.

As governor of one of the most polluted states in the country, Bush proposed a set of voluntary controls for industrial air polluters. Of course, it has had little effect.

Bush also proposed weakening toxic waste rules to improve land values. One of Bush’s top aides has proposed selling federal lands to private bidders.

Gore has a strong record on conservation issues. He has written a thoughtful and well-researched book, “Earth in the Balance,” which lays out his philosophy on global warming and other major environmental problems. Gore has stated that he will not allow oil and gas drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, he will protect the Tongass National Forest and will improve on the president’s roadless areas protection initiative.

Anybody who cares about our environment should work for the election of Gore in November. The choice is clear. Terrence V. Sawyer Spokane

Big money rules with impunity

According to the Hightower-Lowdown publication of Austin, Texas, in 1960 America’s CEOs averaged $190,000 per year in salary, or 40 times the average wage of their factory workers. Today, the average CEO’s salary is $7.8 million - 326 times the average worker’s pay. These wealthiest 10 percent of our people now own about 90 percent of the nation’s assets. How did they amass that wealth? Mostly, they did it the old-fashioned way - from government subsidies, tax loopholes and by defunding most of our watchdog agencies. So while our Congress leaders rage against welfare cheats, how do you hear about the real welfare rip-off of our times, corporate welfare? About $200 billion of our tax money goes into corporate bank accounts each year.

Gallo wines got $16 million just to advertise in foreign countries. Logging companies like Weyerhaeuser get $5 billion a year in subsides to cut down our forests. Why isn’t the public aware of this? Could it be because NBC is a subsidiary of General Electric or because CNN has been swallowed up by Time Warner, because CBS is owned by Westinghouse and because ABC belongs to Disney?

The mass media are largely owned by big-money companies and one thing big money doesn’t want the media to talk about is big money.

So why isn’t campaign finance reform able to get out of Congressional committees for a vote? Quite plainly, the right of free speech is now in the hands of our big corporations. This is ironic, as the motto of our Korean War veterans is, “Freedom is not free.”

Evidently, neither is the freedom of speech! Andy Kelly Spokane

Let’s not gamble with spendthrifts

I got a kick out of Fred J. Meyer’s (Letters, May 29 “Let’s not gamble with Social Security,”) use of the mutually exclusive terms “Social Security” and “savings accounts” in the same sentence. His naivete is being exposed if he thinks that the funds he and his employers “contributed” (were coerced to pay is a better way to put it) are kept in a savings account.

Meyer, those funds are long gone. They went to pay your parents’, aunts’ and uncles’ Social Security benefits. Because there were funds left over, the Treasury issued IOUs to the Social Security Administration and then “invested” the surplus on $400 ashtrays, $600 toilet seats, exhibits of questionable art, etc.

Social Security is no more and no less than a Ponzi scheme. Those who come in at the bottom pay the benefits of those at the top. Unless you recruit more suckers at the bottom it is impossible to pay those at the top. With the huge influx of aging baby boomers beginning to enter their retirement years, the Ponzi pyramid changes its shape due to fewer contributors in relation to payees.

Don’t you think it a better idea to invest any excess contributions in shares, bonds or commercial paper of GM, IBM, et al, as opposed to ridiculously overpriced screwdrivers?

Lee M. Kvalheim Spokane

Whose side is Priggee on?

Re: Milt Priggee’s May 28 cartoon.

After editor Chris Peck laughably tried to compare Rep. George Nethercutt to Father Robert Spitzer, Priggee compares him to President Clinton?

You better be careful, Priggee, or you might be accused of helping out Richard Clear’s campaign. Bryan Potratz Spokane

IN THE PAPER

Juxtaposition could distress some

As I picked up the May 19 edition of The Spokesman-Review, I noticed the large type pertaining to the recent update on the Yates-serial killer trial. The headline read, “Yates charged in 7 more killings.” The article begins describing the killer’s “signature” used on all of his victims. As I read on, I learned that the killer shot victims to death with a similar handgun, moved them by car and dumped them. “Most were found with plastic bags over their heads.”

Directly below these paragraphs is a large color photo captioned, “Heading out.” The first thing I noticed were these two mannequins with plastic bags tied around their heads. Was this float designed by the serial killer or were the plastic bags tied around the heads of the “victims” merely a coincidence?

While I found this coincidence to be sick and uncharacteristically funny, I imagine that some other readers might find this disturbing and unsettling at best. Editors should be a little more careful when selecting photo art.

The article and photo, placed a little farther apart, are innocent in themselves. But when placed together they form a twisted joke. John H. Morgan Pullman

Mug shots fuel stereotyping

Re: “Two charged in killings at Wendy’s” (May 29).

The roots of journalism are clear and concise. Reporting with relevance, precision and context are equally essential. Why was this article accompanied by two, I shall describe them as irrelevant, mug shots of the perpetrators? The photos are not of any particular activity. The story is not local (New York), nor are the suspects at large. The photos are mug shots!

The photos, serving to depict only the race of the individuals in this wire story, are unimportant. When you arbitrarily include photos that do nothing to contextualize this type of article, you are reinforcing or even constructing negative stereotypes. Consider the societal impact of your reporting.

Unless the photo promotes the relevance, enhances the precision or contextualizes the accompanying story, I encourage you to be selective in your journalistic identifiers. Please continue to strive for relevance, precision and context in all aspects of your reporting, whether national, regional or local. The Poynter Report, Summer 1999, page 10, published by the Poynter Institute, dedicated to teaching and inspiring journalists, is a great resource. Vince Lemus Spokane

Meet Our Journalists

Jesse Tinsley

Meet Jesse Tinsley. As a certified drone pilot, this veteran Spokesman-Review photographer often can be seen capturing beautiful aerial photographs of our region. Sometimes though, the job requires getting down with the dogs.
Jim Meehan

Jim Meehan is no stranger to Zag Nation. As the lead writer covering the Gonzaga men’s basketball team, he tells the stories behind the game and gets fans a bit closer to their favorite players.
Molly Quinn

There is no artist in Spokane like Molly Quinn. Her whimsical style is instantly recognizable to readers of The Spokesman-Review. She has painted gorgeous illustrations that instantly elevate the journalism accompanying it. She brings to life the stories that defy photography. She makes our pages better.
Rob Curley

Spokesman-Review editor Rob Curley loves to talk with people and learn about their lives, whether it's a best-selling author or a stranger he meets downtown on his walk to lunch. It's that inquisitive nature combined with a playful sense of storytelling that helps make our newspaper different than most.