Printed letters, May 16

By Staff
Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Bill Grant’s opinion-page article warned us that if Mitt Romney gets in as president, our public lands are in danger of being given away to the states or private owners. This is a far reach from reality.

The president does not have the power to give away any of those lands, nor would Congress or the courts allow such a thing to happen. That isn’t including the environmentalists who would fight tooth and nail to stop such a thing.

For something like this to happen would take years and, in my opinion, which I believe is better than Grant’s, it could never happen.

Grant’s column was more political than factual, and the far left and far right have a bad habit of stating such untruths.

JOHN A. HOTCHKISS

Hotchkiss

Colorado court ruling puts state in line with Texas

In the view of those of us living in the Marcellus shale of the Appalachians, Colorado is gaining on Texas. The decision of Judge Ann Frick to toss out the case brought by Bill and Beth Strudley, formerly of Silt, concerning health claims is heartless.

Perhaps she works too hard and doesn’t know what is going on in shale drilling fields. Perhaps she doesn’t talk to anyone but suits, and consequently doesn’t get information from people living out in the hinterland where drilling takes place.

The symptoms observed by the Strudleys are quite common in any shale drilling field. In the East, the medical community is outraged by Pennsylvania’s Act 13, which prevents doctors from freely obtaining information on the effects of shale drilling and discussing it with their patients. It is obviously designed to confound good medical practice to benefit the drilling companies.

Texas is still the leader in sociopathic treatment of its citizens, but the truth will out some of these days. People living in the shale fields know what is going on, and so do the companies, which don’t let on. It is the political leadership that is in the shade.

S. THOMAS BOND

Jane Lew, W.Va.

Will Delta’s truck bypass really prove to be effective?

I think it’s time we talk about the Delta truck bypass, what we were told it will do and how we are to pay for it.

First, the city of Delta will own and have to do all the upkeep on said bypass. You see, the state of Colorado does not have any vested interest in the bypass. We all know what that will look like in a few years. All we have to do is drive down any of the city streets.

No, I do not mean Main Street. You see, that street belongs to the state of Colorado and the Colorado Department of Transportation takes care of it.

I have talked to many truck drivers, and most say the same thing: If you stay in the far left lane, and do a little over the 30 mph speed limit, say do 33 mph, then a truck driver can usually drive through town without stopping. At the most, you may get stopped at Sixth Street.

Now, if the trucks do use the bypass, they will have to stop at the south side of town where there will be a signal light by the Stockyard restaurant. This will be needed so as the trucks and cars going south on U.S. Highway 50 can merge without any problems.

I have talked with CDOT personnel on the subject of the bypass and it supposedly being for trucks carrying hazardous material. They said that trucks hauling hazarous materials do not have to take the bypass, that the bypass is there to speed up the trucks going through town. But if they have to stop at the south end of town, then how much time will they save?

If the city of Delta really wants to keep the hazardous-materials trucks off downtown streets, it will have to make an ordinance and post it on both ends of town stating that such trucks are not allowed through town and must use the bypass.

Will people who drive through Delta say. “Boy! This town is looking after its people,” or “Boy! Are they trying to run everybody out of town?”

FRANK TRANCHINA

Delta