E-mail letters, March 28, 2011

By Staff
Monday, March 28, 2011

Solar energy should proceed
in way that protects resources

Colorado has been chosen as one of several Western states where large-scale alternative energy development will soon begin. The BLM has identified four locations on public land suitable for solar energy projects, and these sites are all located in or adjacent to the San Luis Valley.

These projects can cut our dependence on foreign oil, and they hold the promise of jobs and revenue for rural residents. As a Colorado sportsman, I support solar development provided, that like any other development, it is done responsibly. That’s why I question the direction the BLM has taken in
several of its preliminary solar energy decisions:

• In its preferred alternative for development, the BLM leaves 22 million acres of public land in the West open for solar and wind projects, despite the fact that the agency stated only 214,000 acres are needed between now and 2030.
• The BLM has put much effort into identifying “Solar Energy Zones” across the West best-suited for solar energy projects. These zones have great solar potential and can be developed with minimal risks to fish and game habitat. Yet the agency’s preferred alternative proposes development in areas outside these zones.
• The preferred alternative opens the door to widespread habitat fragmentation. This effect would be much less pronounced if the agency limited development to its already established solar energy zones.

I call on my fellow Colorado sportsmen and women to tell the BLM that solar energy development should be limited to the Solar Energy Zones already established, and that it should proceed in a
way that protects our other great public land resource: the state’s irreplaceable fish and game habitat.
Charles Wanner
Five Rivers Chapter,
Trout Unlimited
Durango

Medical marijuana should
be handled like other drugs

The current Grand Junction Municipal Election is an opportunity to end the farce of marijuana dispensaries in the city.

I know that, in a very small percentage of the population, marijuana is a necessary pharmacological solution. I do not wish to take away their medicine, but I do wish to have placed in the hands of medical professionals.

Proponents of medical marijuana have trotted out all the usual suspects in their arguments for the dispensaries, even going so far as to call them medical centers.

There is only one problem, there is nothing medical about these centers. The owners and operators of these stores have no formal medical training. They possess no formal medical knowledge. There are no doctors, nurses or any other medical professional on staff at these stores.

When applying for the medical marijuana card, there is no medical history involved. The patient does not have to go through their primary physician. No interview or questions about what allergies the applicant might have, no discussions of the side effects of marijuana.

There is a limit to the amount of medical marijuana a card holder can possess (two ounces), but there is no limit to the number of times the card holder can go to the shop to receive a prescription. Compare this to an actual prescription from a doctor, where the dosage and frequency and length
of time are spelled out.

If marijuana is truly a medical solution, then it should be handled as such. The primary physician should issue the card. The drug should be dispensed through a professional pharmacy, with specific limitations as to the dosage, frequency and duration of the prescription.

The system as it exists now is no more than an upscale version of the head shop.
Kevin McCarney
Clifton

Anti-capitalists
don’t grow wealth

What do you call someone who believes our capitalist system is unjust? I call them anti-capitalists. Their current mantra is “the concentration of wealth is worse today.” That is misleading. The concentration of wealth is in growth companies. Growth is the key word.

Anti-capitalists must think successful entrepreneurs are like Donald Duck’s uncle, Scrooge McDuck, sitting on bags of money in a vault somewhere. The wealthiest capitalist is Bill Gates. Most of his wealth is tied up in stock in his large-cap growth company, Microsoft. It produces products the world needs and good jobs our economy needs. The majority of Microsoft stock is publicly owned, much of it by retirement plans.

Gates has liquidated some of that wealth and avoided paying any taxes by creating a charitable foundation. He and his wife get to decide which charitable projects that money supports. It’s another one of those evil tax-dodging things the rich do. That foundation does many wonderful things in an effort to improve education. Gates is even a Democrat.

Today’s concentration of wealth is the result of the phenomenal success of entrepreneurs like Gates and Apple’s Steve Jobs. Billions of people worldwide live better lives today because of the affordable products these capitalists developed. They continue to improve those products and create more wealth.

Could anti-capitalists do a better job with that capital? No, they don’t grow wealth. That requires saving. But they are spending experts. 
Dave Kearsley
Mesa

Herzog contributes little
‘wisdom’ to commentary page

The snarky Denny Herzog demonstrates regrettably poor journalistic taste. And on your dime, no less. 
In his attempt to be Charles Krauthammer, Denny goes too far with remarks such as Sarah Palin “wasn’t bright enough to spell cat, even if spotted the c and the a.” I guess this is his — and The Daily Sentinel’s — contribution to the new civility.
Why does the Sentinel feel obliged to publish this guy? What “wisdom” has retirement suddenly brought him that employment did not? 
Unfortunately, we subscribers are paying to provide Denny’s 15 minutes of fame. If you intend to continue underwriting his remarks, would you at least consider giving us subscribers a discount for the duration?
Richard Rininger
Grand Junction

It’s time we learned to live
within our energy means

I’ve reluctantly withheld my sentiments on nuclear energy and our high-risk, high-cost behaviors during this sensitive period of the Japanese catastrophe. I can’t help responding to letter writer Hugo Ernst’s nuclear energy perspective.

Apparently he has completed his calculation of death and morbidity that will ensue from this unfolding nuclear disaster — those consequences that are impossible to calculate beyond the immediate and obvious, except for epidemiological study and the known effects of radiation. Does
“once-in-a-lifetime disaster” mean we are now safe from anything comparable (or worse)?

Maybe Ernst would change his mind if he were one of those living nearby. Maybe he would choose that risk. Most of us would not, were we allowed the opportunity to choose, which for the most part, we are not.

Why have energy conversations following recent ecological and humanitarian, man-made disasters omitted the powerful words “energy conservation and efficiency”? As though we must support some insatiable uncontrollable need for energy? Are we subservient to a monster that forces us to risk our children, our homes, and our land beyond reason and sensibility?

How about finding a way to live responsibly and safely within our own means? If,  an environmental conscience is self-serving, then it is so only in the sense of self-preservation of
ecosystems that sustain all living things.

As to the issue of development, whether coastal, earthquake-zone, or desert, there are certainly assumed risks. Governments would be wise to discourage those risky behaviors, which end up costing all of us. But, nevertheless, the risk of this practice is confined mostly to the unwise or unwary participants.

Never confuse this with the risk imposed undeservedly on the air, water and land, and the well-being of present and future generations, by corporations and governments that promise safety and deliver less.
David Cale
Grand Junction

Herzog column was full
of hate-filled speech

Mr. Herzog,  do you mind if I call you Denny?  Guess I’d rather not be that familiar with you, though, after reading the latest diatribe.

I note you seem to support Jacob Richards for City Council’s open seat, after his undergoing “a remarkable makeover” and is now “passing himself off as a responsible adult.”  Then you exhibit a hate-filled rest of the column in attacking Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck as it they were the sole people responsible for all the ills this country faces.

Now I do agree that they seem to be of the “Rabid Right” for the most part. However you, dear sir, have emerged as the looniest of the “Loony Left” in my view.  I would like to think that a convicted felon could turn himself around. But after watching him pull the stunt of throwing himself in the path of Palin’s SUV on her visit here, I’m not sure.

Funny thing is, I had almost written a letter acknowledging one of your previous columns was not all that bad. But, the March 27 one’s visceral, hate-filled speech has convinced me of the error of my ways.

While Sarah Palin has made some missteps and such, I have always felt that her lack of an Ivy League manner of speech has been the catalyst for demeaning her.  Glenn Beck has trumpeted lots of predictions and, yes, the “planet is still spinning on its axis.”  But I recently read the text and heard the voices of labor leaders discussing how to crash the economy.  Could you please show me how that was nothing more than a comedic rant of fun-loving people sitting around having some drinks?
Creighton Bricker
Grand Junction

Battlement Mesa at risk
from natural gas drilling

This is in reply to the letter, “Reporter ignored key parts of Battlement Mesa study.”

The letter writer cited parts of the Health Impact Study that stated there were several unknown risk factors involved in the proposed gas drilling within the Battlement Mesa PUD. It was implied by the writer that the drilling should proceed since it is unknown if these risk factors would negatively affect the health of the residents of the PUD or negatively impact them other ways.
This attitude is understandable since the writer does not reside inside the PUD.

Battlement Mesa Company stands to make a considerable amount of money from its mineral rights and the placement of explosive gas pipelines, which are to be built in open spaces owned by them within the PUD, among the occupied dwellings.

I reside within the PUD and we currently are being negatively impacted by the gas drilling rigs located on the borders of the PUD because of the known risks stated in the study. I and several of the other property owners are very concerned what other problems the unknown risk factors might cause to our health and property values.

My question to the writer and the “drill baby drill” crowd, is it worth the risk to the approximately 5,000 men women and children residing in the PUD to drill given the known risks and not knowing how the unknown risk factors will affect them? Especially since the amount of gas that would be obtained is miniscule compared to the amount gas that is available in areas that are not so densely populated or negatively impacted.
Garry Evenson
Battlement Mesa

 

Richards is only candidate
for young, working class

As a young person working full-time, barely able to make enough to live, I find Jacob Richards is the only candidate with a clue of what is like to be working-class in Grand Junction.

In addition, I have worked with Jacob on numerous grassroots projects and found him able to compromise and work well with others. While Jacob and I often disagree, I know he is capable of
listening to the citizens of Grand Junction and will work towards solutions that work for all.

I urge voters, young and older, in electing Jacob Richards to the Grand Junction City Council.
Bernie Berlinetta Mullin
Grand Junction

Glenwood school principal
should be reinstated

I was distressed to read about Principal Sonya Hemmen’s paid suspension recently.  I have known Principal Hemmen for many years as a colleague and friend. She has always demonstrated leadership by example and takes a personal interest in the students of her school.

I had the opportunity to work with Hemmen last year through the Service Learning students from Glenwood Springs High School and was impressed with the way she communicated well with so many different age groups.  She is popular with parents and students because of her warmth and caring attitude.

Hemmen expects the best from her colleagues and students and expects the best from herself also.  She is willing to put the needs of others first. 

I encourage the district to reinstate Principal Hemmen as soon as possible. She is very important to Glenwood Springs Elementary School.
Katherine Woodyard
Glenwood Springs

Delta Democrats favor
keeping 3rd CD intact

I feel it is important to clarify the impression that might have been given by The Daily Sentinel’s quote of the comment I made on behalf of the Delta Democratic Party at the redistricting meeting March 19. For the record, neither I nor our party members support moving the northwest counties of the 3rd Congressional District into the 2nd Congressional District.

The Sentinel article said the following: “Some suggested Moffat and Rio Blanco counties, now in the 3rd Congressional District, would fit better with the 2nd Congressional District, which includes Eagle, Grand, Summit, Clear Creek, Gilpin and Boulder counties.”

My comment on this subject was as follows: “We have also heard talk of bringing Eagle County back into the 3rd District, but to offset that increase in population it was suggested that Moffat, Routt and Jackson be moved into the 2nd District. I am not sure that Craig and Rangeley would
enjoy sharing their congressman with Boulder, but it might make for some interesting primaries!”

This comment was not made as a suggestion that the committee make any such change. It was an observation. In my testimony, I stated that we support keeping the Western Slope intact and the 3rd District largely as it is, with the inclusion, perhaps, of either Chaffee County or of Lake and Crowley Counties to make up for a shortfall that now exists in the 3rd District of 12,271 people.

This shortfall is an important detail not mentioned by your reporter. If our district were not needing additional population, the subject of where to draw new boundaries would not be so critical.

The hearings are now over but the public can still comment on this subject. More info is available at http://www.colorado.gov/redistricting. Email comments to .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).
Rick Stelter, Chairman,
Delta County Democratic Party
Paonia

Media shouldn’t tolerate
Obama’s ineptness

Surely there must be many others out there who are just as amused, and sometimes confused and even mystified as myself over the past few weeks, as we watch and listen to our Appeaser in Chief, while he makes “presidential” decisions regarding Libya, the Japan crises, the national budget, etc.

Regarding Libya, Obama says, Gadhafi must go, then he and his staff make conflicting statements such as “We must initiate a no-fly zone,” then “It is too complicated to initiate a no-fly zone,” then, “We must initiate a no-fly zone, but this military action is about protecting innocent civilians, and NOT about regime change.”

Certainly though, he cleared everything up when he stated, “Let me be very unambiguous.”

And while we are at it, let’s tell our enemy that “We will not be putting boots on the ground.” Brilliant military stratedgy. Let’s communicate up front what we will and won’t do, thus giving our enemy a deserved heads-up.

And since we are on a roll, let’s just go ahead and make a decision to engage in yet another foreign conflict, in yet another Muslim nation, and after taking weeks to “ponder” our approach, let’s make a sudden decision to quickly enact this no-fly zone action without ever communicating with, much less asking, for congressional approval. You know, the very thing that Joe Biden and Obama both threatened to impeach George Bush for, if he would have taken such actions without consulting Congress.

Of course, Bush did get the congressional approval, which the president is obligated to do according to the U.S. Constitution.

And if we truly are going to engage in any military action to “protect the innocent’s” in Libya, are we going to do the same for the “innocent’s” in Iran, Yemen, Bahrain, Tunisia, Syria etc. One could certainly get the impression that Obama is making some of these brilliant decisions depending on which way the political winds are blowing each day.

In the early going, while the Libya unrest was brewing and Japan had just experienced the most horrific tragedy in many decades, Obama himself was tragically conflicted on which critical issues to address first. Should I quickly get on board with helping the thousands of dying, injured and displaced Japanese civilians? Should we engage ourselves in Libya? Should I make an honest attempt to produce a serious, legitimate federal budget proposal? Should I make an honest attempt to address the high unemployment in America and the struggling U.S. economy?

Well, he might well have actually had time to focus on some of those things, but for the fact that he was too busy filling out his NCAA basketball draws, attending 2012 fund raisers, golfing, etc.  Would such action — or more appropriately stated, such inaction — on the part of George Bush ever have been overlooked by the liberal media, just as they have given Obama a pass on his blatant ineptness of late?
Don Boyles
Grand Junction

You can’t build up poor
by tearing down the rich

There seems to be a growing movement in this country, fueled by people like Van Jones, Michael Moore and President Barack Obama, to spread the wealth around in the United States. Kind of a Robin Hood syndrome — take from the rich and give to the poor. Wall Street and Big Business have the money and they should share it with those of us less fortunate.

It doesn’t seem to make any difference who takes the risks in operating a business to employ people, we should all have a right to their profits, shouldn’t we ? After all we work to make money for them, don’t we ? I don’t have any money invested in their business, but I should be able to make decisions in how they operate it shouldn’t I?
This isn’t the kind of attitude that made this country great. Everyone has a right for equal opportunity and a chance for success. Nobody owes us a “Free Ride or a Free Lunch.”  President Obama often refers to President Lincoln as one of the great examples to follow. I suggest one of Lincoln’s comments that goes something like this: “You can’t build up the poor by tearing down the rich.”
Neal A. Ward
Delta