Letters to the Editor Sept. 9, 2010

Thanks to those who supported health, safety needs for Warriors

As an EMT volunteering with the Del Norte Warrior football team for the last 19 years, I know how supportive our community is toward Del Norte sports.

Nevertheless, I was extremely gratified from the response I got when I solicited help for training room hydration and safety supplies. I want to give my heartfelt thanks for money or product donations from CCPOA PBSP Chapter, Elk Valley Rancheria, Home Depot, McDonalds, Safeway and Wal-Mart.

I know your support is a hearty, “GO WARRIORS.”

Rick L. Kelley

Crescent City 

Fines would make owners rethink letting vicious animals run loose

In a beautiful place like Crescent City, an environment where people would benefit from walking and jogging outdoors — obvious health benefits to that — I wonder why there is no crackdown on loose dogs. That is, large, aggressive dogs loose on unfenced property, a situation that seems to be OK with their owners.

I live in an area outside town near Railroad Avenue and thought, before I moved here, that it would be a nice place to walk and jog.  However, I have found that when I wish to do these things, I have to steel myself against a series of potential attacks from pairs of running pit bulls, etc, who are guarding not just their owners’ property but also the road outside it that I have to pass.

One neighbor has a lovely Doberman, Rottweiler and poodle trio known for killing neighbors’ cats and chickens and for biting young children who play outside.  I have been told that Animal Control has been called about this repeatedly but never follow through on threats to impound the animals.

Since the problem is not the fault of the animals, why aren’t the owners at least fined for allowing this to happen? If they were to receive a series of escalating fines, that should make them change their minds about giving their animals such freedom at the expense of everyone around them, and it would be a source of extra income for the county budget.

Pauline Holmes

Crescent City

Time to enact laws to prevent breeding of big cats in U.S.

The current Bulgari ad in American Express’ Departures magazine and on billboards around the world features actress Julianne Moore holding lion cubs to showcase Bulgari’s products.  Though some may think it is adorable, I find it reprehensible!  Having lion cubs, only weeks old, used as photo props to sell designer merchandise, is unacceptable to me and should be outlawed.

I know the reality of where these lion cubs will end up.  The breeder can’t possibly afford to feed, house and care for dangerous carnivores, once they’re adults, for another 20 years.  Every accredited big cat facility in our country is full.  They will, in all likelihood, flow into the pipeline of the illegal exotic animal trade. When we see restaurants serving lion meat, that could be the future for these cubs.

Our country has more tigers and lions languishing in cages here than all the wild ones left roaming our planet. That isn’t a statistic to be proud of!  I do not want more and more babies ripped from their mothers so the mothers can be bred over and over again, to be used purely as marketing tools by a corporation.

Both Bulgari and American Express have corporate mission statements that promise a “commitment to social responsibility” and holding themselves “to the highest ethical standards.” This outright abuse of an endangered and threatened species is just the opposite.

It is time to enact legislation that will put an end to the breeding of big cats in our country.  We cannot depend on the ethical character of corporations or breeders to do this.  It is up to our legislators to protect the public, as well as enforce animal welfare by halting out-of-control breeding.

Nicola Christiane Grobe

Crescent City

Vacation Guide a wonderful resource for local residents too

Thank you, Daily Triplicate and Curry Coastal Pilot, for printing your wonder-filled semi-annual Vacation Guides.  You may think only tourists read them, but I can assure you that there are plenty of local residents who take short mini-trips around our area using your guide as a roadmap.

Why, just as an example, over the Labor Day weekend, with “Coast” in hand, my significant other and I filled up the car’s gas tank and headed for Crescent City. We have been here for 18 years and never yet taken Howland Hill’s bumpy, dusty, unpaved, pot-hole-ridden and winding road into the redwoods.

Your article in this latest “Coast” guide convinced us it was a scenic trip worth the effort.  What we saw was some of the most awesome scenery this side of heaven, and the only downside was the incredible amount of dirt that had accumulated on the sides of my car. Still, not nearly the amount of dirt our politicians will be throwing at each other from now until November, and at least we have several great local car washes that can almost instantly get us clean again. 

We just would like everyone who reads this letter to check out the Vacation Guide and go off on a spur-of-the-moment mini-trip to seek a place of wonder whenever they are faced with worry, stress or anger.

Jan Norwood

Brookings, Ore.

Environmental groups feign fair-mindedness, are arrogant

Ever notice the imbalance on this discussion about hunting? First off, I have been known to take a hike, snapped a picture of nature and I enjoy this area for its God-created beauty. I also have hunted, fished and driven off-road vehicles in the wilderness before.

I am not a fanatic from either side, but certainly an American with a strong connection and belief in our founders’ beliefs. These are truly what separate us from the rest of the world. In the discussion over the Tolowa State Park hunting, like with many of these types of debates, you can see the hypocrisy of the left.

These environmental groups, the politically progressive believers, always hide behind the proposed pacifist camouflage. Always appearing to be on the peaceful and lawful side of the arguments. They campaign on the premise that they are the tolerant and fair minded.

But are they? In the application of “natural law,” those that seek gain in a one-sided manner are known as arrogant or acting unsociable. Further application of these laws note that anyone that enters into an agreement of peace should not require any right unto himself that he is not willing to extend to another.

This to me sounds as if both points of view should be honored and equitable rights afforded. To date, I have not read any of the pro-hunting group suggest that hikers stay out of the wilderness, or that regulations be set to the amount of pictures that one can take, or the hours of day that they can be snapped. No quoting of loosely substantiated documentation or studies that claim low birth weight of wildlife or breeding environments being intruded and stressful animal psychosis being a result of presence of human hikers.

It would appear to me that it is easy to see which side of this debate is intolerant. I see that there is a simple solution to allow both groups to co-exist. I believe I've seen that on a bumper sticker somewhere. What would be so unfair in hunting in a defined area, during a certain period of months, hours of the day and regulation to the limit of catch?

The rest of the area and the year is left to hike, bike and take pictures. God created this all for us, not just for those that claim to understand more thoroughly the purpose of their existence. Understand that there is a big difference between the definition of “higher intelligence” and “wisdom.”

Larry Young

Crescent City