Eugene Weekly : Letters : 01.08.04

SPORTS AND NATURE

The turf wars between naturalists and "organized sports" which Alan Pittman accurately described in his 12/24 piece ("Sports vs. Nature: What are the City's Parks For?") can be mitigated in the short term and avoided in the long term.

In the short term, the "organized sports" organizations (including, but not limited to: Kidsports, Little League, Babe Ruth, Pop Warner, AYSO, City of Eugene adult leagues, Oregon United Soccer Academy, FC Willamette and other youth soccer clubs) need to have a legitimate forum, where each organization has equal access to scheduling and gets a fair shake on fees. This will discourage piecemeal field development promoted by individual organizations, which encroaches on natural areas, pitting "naturalists" against "athletes." Inconsistent and unfair scheduling processes exaggerate the field inventory problem.

In the long term, the community needs to recognize that Lane County users (not just Eugene residents) are beneficiaries of Eugene's parks and are exacerbating the demand to an insufficient inventory of city and school athletic fields.

Lane County government should be actively planning a project similar to the Tualatin Hills Recreation Center. Such a project would include an indoor swimming pool, 16-18 soccer fields, basketball courts, baseball/softball fields and a skateboard park. Such a complex would centralize the organized sports offerings, creating enormous economic efficiencies and would put an end to the unnecessary turf wars and open land encroachment. Further, such a complex would serve individual Lane County users of all ages and would bring much needed revenues to the community via regional, state, and national tournaments.

Sports or nature? Both. Organized sports groups need to be encouraged to work collaboratively in scheduling and fee structures. County government should seize the opportunity to plan and bond a project which will satisfy naturalists, athletes, recreational users, and stimulate the tourism industry.

Steve Barnes, Eugene

PUTRID WATERWAY

Thank you to Kera Abraham for writing her excellent article (12/18), "A Stream-Ditch Runs Through It: Is there hope for the ditched and dirty Amazon?" (Her title ingeniously refers to Norman Maclean's wonderfully poetic and tragic novella A River Runs Through It.) I live near the Fairgrounds and frequently take evening walks along the Amazon creek-ditch.

I often wonder, "Is it legal for water to be this dirty?" What has surprised me the most is the supposed level of environmentalism this city advocates, yet the appalling quality of this waterway. I have been intrigued and repulsed by the murky color and often putrid smell of water in this cement channel that still offers a home to: mallards, red-winged black birds, killdeers, green herons, swifts, northern harrier hawks, ravens, kestrels, muskrats, raccoons, human sleepers, and arsenic, lead and E. coli.

Why is it taking so long to clean it up? Abraham does a fine job of listing several agencies and groups who are working to clean it up, but significantly the burden rests on individuals like you and I who live here. Taking small actions like washing your car on the lawn, driving less, not pouring cooking oil in the kitchen sink, or re-planting along the stream are necessary. In addition to individuals, it seems obvious that higher education should take some form of action. Where are the biology graduate students and professors to test the water and its impact on wildlife and humans? Or, how about the environmental law students and professors? Where are the environmental writers and teachers to galvanize the public and student population to become more involved in local environments? Who will protect the inalienable rights of water to live a free and unpolluted life? You and I must.

Michelle Satterlee, Eugene

THE SPIRIT OF AMAZON

I appreciate Kera Abraham's wide-ranging and informative article on Amazon Creek and the complex issues that surround it (12/18). As one who lives in its neighborhood in southeast Eugene and who has been photographing it and walking along it for years, I'd like to offer yet another perspective.

Despite the degradation, flood control alterations and pollution of the creek over the years, a spirit still presides in its waters. This is palpable for anyone who takes the trouble to observe, who stops long enough to look. The Amazon is not a lifeless ditch.

In areas where vegetation grows, especially near 24th Avenue, I've watched in astonishment displays of wave patterns and plumes of light as ducks bathe and preen in the water. I've seen herons in the high grasses. And one day, a bearded face appeared in the silver ripples, captured in a photo — a kind of Green Man image. Ever since then, I've felt protective of this sometimes homely waterway. It's a living part of our "shire."

I believe that the natural world responds to attention, giving out beauty to the loving eye and heart. Water, especially, reflects what's around it: clouds, willow branches, amblers; or — bulldozers, paint cans, plastic streamers. With some help from its friends, the creek could return to life along much of its length. If citizens take the time to really see the Amazon, maybe they will be moved to join others in work to revitalize it. It cheers me that groups like the Long Tom Watershed Council exist, and that landscape architects like Jerry Diethelm are envisioning a transformed waterway circuit in which natural beauty and urban utility can be integrated.

Claudia Lapp, Eugene

CONFUSING THE ISSUES

A lawsuit was recently won by the family of a UO student who died while at Sacred Heart Hospital with an unexpectedly lethal illness. A few days later someone responded with an opinion that the verdict was unfair and the defendants not guilty. His arguments were compelling, but what do I know? I'm not a doctor and I wasn't on the jury. All I do know is that when I go to the doctor or the hospital, and they look at me for maybe seven minutes, they better have some real incentive to get it right.

Some folks say this suing business has gotten out of hand — there are too many, it's ruining the industry, it's limiting our choices. George Bush has declared that tort reform is a key part of his "pro-growth" agenda, saying that it, "would have made a difference" to benefit the economy. But a recent study by the National Center for State Courts found that medical malpractice lawsuits per capita have actually decreased. Fewer cases went to trial in 2002 than in 1962.

While Bush claims, "everybody pays more for health care" due to "excessive litigation," the president of the American Tort Reform Association said in 1999, "We wouldn't tell you or anyone that the reason to pass tort reform would be to reduce insurance rates."

Malpractice premiums as a percentage of all health costs have declined from 0.95 percent in 1988 to 0.56 percent in 2000, while prescription drugs costs make up about 11 percent of all health costs, projected to rise to 14 percent by 2010. Controlling the cost of drugs will have far more impact on insurance premiums than malpractice reform. Despite these facts, the president and Oregon's senators chose to support a Medicare bill that would prevent the Medicare administrator from negotiating lower prescription drug costs.

As is so often the case these days, some folks try really hard to confuse the issues. Don't be fooled; don't give up your power. The president and his friends are not on your side, they just want your money.

Tim Mueller, Eugene

BETTMAN DESERVES PRAISE

After reading the comments about City Councilor Bonny Bettman in The Register-Guard's front-page story on Sunday, Dec. 21, I wanted to share my own experience working with Bonny when I was a county commissioner.

I found that Bonny was always well prepared for meetings. She expressed herself eloquently, and she considered the opinions of others carefully. She was very responsive to her constituents' concerns. She exhibited the sort of work ethic that I admire in any elected official — conservative or liberal.

I noticed that in 2003, Bonny made efforts to bridge the usual rifts in local politics. For example, in September she worked with Jack Roberts, the Executive Director of the Lane Metro Partnership, on a plan to offer incentives for McKenzie-Willamette to locate its new hospital in Eugene.

I think our community benefits from strong advocacy by both progressives and conservatives. Bonny Bettman helps to maintain the balance by zealously representing her constituents in south Eugene. I hope she wins reelection in 2004.

Tom Lininger, Eugene

NO CLASS

Re: "Oral Sex," ("Living Out," 12/18). I fail to understand why EW published this vapid, sensationalistic piece. Ms. Sheklow may teach writing, but she has no class.

Michelle Eldridge, Eugene

ANTI-BUSH PLATFORM

Am I alone in finding it singularly difficult if not impossible to distinguish between the Democratic contenders for president? Excepting Congressman Kucinich, the field of candidates seem intent solely upon a game of one-upmanship as to who most dislikes President Bush.

I myself have been given to knee-jerk loathing of the man. Shameful that, I admit. However, he is just a man, and as certain as no man is an island, no man is either a nation. However justified, the Democrats' anger-driven, single-minded focus on the person of President Bush, rather than his palpably unjust policies, will be their undoing.

An anti-Bush platform cannot, by itself, hold the weight of all the pressing national needs deserving of center stage. An anti-Bush platform only serves to confirm the negative nature of politics, and harden the assumptions of powerlessness many feel to change what is. An anti-Bush platform presumes the president as the cause of all our problems rather than, as is more likely, the result of them.

As we begin what will certainly prove a bitterly divisive political new year, I caution fellow Democrats to take great care not to descend to the same low levels we are opposing. Demonstrate instead the strength of our national spirit, which far surpasses that of any one man to suppress it.

Todd Huffman, M.D., Eugene

NOT VERY LIBERAL

Liberal readers of EW should be aware that the mainstream media has been painting Howard Dean to be a liberal, but he is not. His positions are available at www.deanforamerica.com Note that he is not against the death penalty ("I believe the death penalty should be available for extreme and heinous crimes, such as terrorism or the killing of police officers or young children. But it must be carried out with scrupulous fairness."); nor is he for substantially stricter gun control ("I don't think we need a lot of new federal laws. But we do need to do a few things at the federal level, like requiring Insta-Check on all retail and gun show sales. We also must do a better job of enforcing the laws on the books."). He has considered reducing benefits or extending the age of eligibility for Medicare and Social Security under the guise of making these programs fiscally sound. ("Assure that Social Security and Medicare are adequately funded to meet the needs of the next generation of retirees." Obvious code words for these benefit reductions.) He supports a strong military. The list goes on and on.

Although it is true that he has an excellent record on the environment, civil unions, and women's rights, liberals who think they support Dean should take note: Dean is no run-of-the-mill liberal; rather, he is a social centrist and fiscal conservative in the mold of a "Rockefeller Republican" or Clinton. McGovernites will have to look elsewhere.

James McClelland, Eugene

RED FLAGS

Money continues to be the driving force in Eugene, even when misused; even when grossly misused, as in the boondoggles of expanding Autzen Stadium and replacing Mac Court for a multi-million dollar figure that continues to mushroom.

Alan Pittman (cover story, 12/24) was dealing with a lesser amount — "just" $25 million for community sports and recreation. I have no answers for the debate over how much should go for each deserving area. But when money goes to sports facilities, red flags should go up.

A case in point is the spending of $1.7 million for four new high school stadia. Money probably was well spent — except it should not have had to be spent. The decision to spend came because the use of Autzen Stadium for weekly prep games was to end since Autzen was to replace artificial grass with the real stuff. Fear was the living blades might lose some of their luster if Autzen had more than six games a year. So, goodbye high schools.

But wait, the Ducks still play on artificial turf. They changed their minds about real grass. Only the rush to build a separate tiny stadium for each high school already was under way. So money was unnecessarily spent, and Autzen sits empty on what used to be high school game nights.

We may go hungry in other areas. But, heck, we still have games to play.

George Beres, Eugene

UNFAIR TAX

Please contact the Board of Commissioners at 682-4203. This is the main line to get individual emails or extensions. They are considering a tax on pet food and requiring vets to open private records to ensure registration of pets to raise money for the impoverished LCARA.

A tax on food is always unfair to the poor who cannot choose whether or not they should indulge in nutrition. Veterinarians say most of the very poor take excellent care of their pets (sometimes their only companions in life), already spending much more than the wealthier sector proportionate to income. Those who welcome a tax could choose to send a donation to LCARA instead! Opening (private) pet records to public officials would only create yet another bureaucracy of auditors whom would require a salary as well as require more paperwork from vets, thus raising consumer costs. This would also increase the chance that unregistered owners would choose to not get rabies shots.

Compared to the many places I've lived, we restrictively limit the number of dogs one can legally own. Increasing that number would encourage many people to register who haven't out of fear.

Perhaps some of the financial burden of caring for unwanted pets should fall on the people creating them.

I've ties to the rescue community and there are actually a handful of irresponsible backyard breeders who create a surprising amount of shelter animals. Maybe selling animals could be taxed with a credit system for responsible breeding.

Sondra Arrache, Eugene

CORRUPTED TALE

Being a strong admirer of J.R.R. Tolkien, I was saddened by the recent recreation of Lord of the Rings. The grandeur of Tolkien's original work lay its portrayal of true goodness and noble courage in the face of great darkness. All of this is lost in the film, because the characters have been corrupted from their original spirit.

For instance, for those who have seen the films, none of the following events actually happened in the books upon which the films were based: Gandalf the "white" wizard beats up another he disagrees with, later murders him, and ignobly wears mud on his face. Frodo the pure-hearted is tricked and rejects his only true friend. Eowyn the brave and valorous wears her helm lopsided, making her look foolish right at the moment of her triumph. Sam the humble hobbit gets morbid satisfaction from killing and delivers one of the many one-liners in the film ala Arnold Schwarzenegger. Elrond the noble elf king shows his contempt for his daughter by scoffing at her love for a human man. The film is wholly infected with these subtle but profound corruptions.

You may say it's just a film, and different than the books anyway. But what saddens me the most is how few people can recognize it for what it is. All the chaotic violence, internal squabbling, and negative energy is portrayed as "noble and good," even though it is only a lesser shade of the darkness represented by the demons and orcs. We have become lost as a society when this decay is so omnipresent that few people anymore can discern a meaningful difference between good and evil. We can't look to traditional authority figures to teach us, because they have shown they are just as clueless. In a nutshell, are we doomed to destroy ourselves?

David A. Caruso, Eugene

STINKING SHIP

Hmmm, three straight days of front page headlines about mad cow. You've got to admit, it's more than a little ironic that the so-called "animal rights wackos" that Rush and his ilk love to deride, could have saved the meat "industry" all the financial hardship that is crashing down around them now. You see, the "wackos" have been trying for years to end Big Meat's brutal practice of dragging or bulldozing downers (animals too sick or injured to stand) across asphalt so they can be slaughtered for profit, rather than allowing them to be euthanized humanely. No go — thanks to soulless meat industry lobbyists and their prey — weak-kneed legislators.

Now Big Meat's apologists, and the Bush administration's pathetic USDA, are scrambling to tell us that contrary to popular belief, we don't reap what we sow — everything is just fine. Think Big Meat's pig and poultry operations are any more sanely or humanely operated? One look at The Humane Farming Association's website (www.hfa.org),and you'll realize were not in Dorothy's Kansas anymore.

The good news it that you can walk away from Big Meat's stinking, sinking ship. Not only can we choose from an amazing array of great non-meat, high protein products that taste good. For a buck or two more, we can buy organic and free-range meat, poultry, and dairy products. As always, we Americans have a choice, one of which we alone are accountable for.

Robert Hermann, Eugene

SADDAM: BFD

So they finally captured Saddam Hussein — defeated, unkempt, and hiding in a hole — hardly a threat to the world. Yet now since he is captured, we are heroes, the Iraq war was justified, and a good thing. The media even quotes Shakespeare, saying: "All's well that ends well." Whatever.

So how obvious does it have to get? Within hours of his capture the "liberal" media spins this event to strengthen George Jr.'s re-selection campaign.

Never mind that Hussein's secular regime had nothing to do with Al Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden, or Sept. 11, 2001. Never mind that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were destroyed in the 1990's, their destruction proven, and that the U.S. provided them in the first place. Never mind that we launched an unprecedented, unprovoked, and pre-emptive war on a country far weaker than our own, defying the will of the rest of the world. Never mind the deaths of thousands of Iraqi civilians and hundreds of American soldiers, the thousands wounded who don't get adequate treatment, and the countless civilian lives devastated by years of pointless sanctions, tons of deadly radioactive DU, and extreme lack of water and electricity.

Never mind that the people we "freed" are under a brutal occupation that imposes strict curfews, denies basic services, shoots innocent civilians, (mistaking them for attackers) and controls their main resource — oil.

So they captured Saddam. Couldn't they have done that over a decade ago? Do you feel safer? What about Osama — remember him? How many terrorist attacks were prevented by this event? Will this get you to vote for President George W. Bush?

So they finally captured Saddam Hussein. Big f**king deal.

Todd D. Johnson, Eugene

QUOTABLE

Remember the classic quote from the Vietnam War attributed to an American soldier: "We had to destroy the village in order to save it." That quote captured the insanity of a war in which more than three million Vietnamese and 58,000 Americans died needlessly.

Since the beginning of the war on Iraq, I have heard many things that I couldn't believe were for real, but the following quote may become a classic in years to come because it symbolizes the absurdity and contradictions of our occupation and "liberation" of Iraq. In a New York Times story on Dec. 7, about the new tough tactics being used by the American military in Iraq, Colonel Sassaman of the Fourth Infantry Division was quoted as saying: "With a heavy dose of fear and violence, and a lot of money for projects, I think we can convince these people that we are here to help them." Oh yeah, and the story went on to talk about how Colonel Sassaman's troops wrapped the village in barbed wire and issued resident identity cards to inhabitants that were done only in English. Amazing!

Pete Mandrapa, Eugene

HONORABLE OMNIVORE

Contrary to popular mythology, not everyone can live a healthy life without meat. I know this because I am one of them. About nine years ago, at age 36, while a director of a vegetarian organization, I developed a rare life-threatening and traditionally incurable auto-immune illness called pemphigus. I also had problems with my thyroid, experienced constant chronic fatigue and had very poor muscle tone. My bones had started to soften.

At that time, my future was destined to be either non-existent or filled with the side effects of lifelong doses of prednisone or other immunosuppressive drugs. As sick as I was, I believed that had I been eating animal products, I would be a lot sicker. I was wrong.

As I began to understand my biology and evolution, I learned that my blood type O body was not designed to live as a vegetarian. By learning to feed myself appropriate foods, foods that are healthy for me, including some meats, I was able to say goodbye to expensive medical treatments, prescription drugs, supplements, herbs and illness. I was and still am very concerned about the ethics of eating animals. As an urban resident, I am proud to know local farmers and many others who naturally raise, care for and kill their animals in a highly ethical way.

I have also learned to honor the life and death of a plant to the point where I acknowledge its suffering and death in the same manner that I acknowledge an animal's life and death. I consider the act of cutting a vegetable from its stalk and then chopping it into pieces as violent as killing an animal.

I commend those who choose to live their lives as vegetarians and who are able to thrive while doing so. Toward that end, I am participating in a study directed by Dr. Michael Klaper to learn why some people fail to thrive (or in fact become quite ill, as I did) on a vegan or vegetarian diet. Perhaps one day I will be able to thrive without meat, but that day is not here yet. So until then, I will consciously continue to include meat from these farms in my diet.

Steve Shapiro, Eugene