Search Articles:

 

Breaking News......... Governor orders flags at half-staff for U.S. Army Sgt. Terry Lynch......... Missoula Street Jam 3 on 3 hoops this weekend......... Inspectors to check commercial vehicles in Glacier......... Tester putting wilderness areas on front burner......... Local News......... 8-year-old Missoula girl electrocuted on 4th; Man dies in Flathead boating accident........Missoula may require bear-proof containers in vulnerable areas........Rattlesnake residents upset by cost of connecting to sewer........Departing doctors: State faces shortage of primary-care physicians........Departing doctors: Physicians may face legal hurdles if they leave hospitals........Primary-care physician losses minimal in Billings........

Global warming

Running's response to Choteau overboard

I'm a “wing nut” and “willfully ignorant.” And that's coming from a person I've never met! Ego-battered Steve Running was denied to speak at a Choteau school concerning man-made global warming (Missoulian, Jan 17), and his liberal-elite predictable response went a little overboard.

Instead of respecting the school's decision, Running couldn't resist the opportunity and attacked non-believers with the same mentality of a 4-year-old being told “no” at a candy factory. I'm truly impressed with the maturity and professionalism Running exhibited regarding his response. But it is not surprising. I was waiting in anticipation to see some Hillary tears as well.

I generally attempt to educate myself by reading or researching both sides of an issue. I believe that is the mature and responsible thing to do before creating an opinion. For every Running, there is a scientist who has evidence contradicting his theories. Some scientists state the ice cap on Greenland is melting; others state it is not. But no matter what you believe, to be attacked and called childish names from a Nobel Peace Prize winner is pathetic. I would be embarrassed. But Running's response is in complete step with his buddy, Al Gore. Gore was recently quoted at a global warming seminar saying that scientists with conflicting views should be censored - period. He said this! There is no spinning what he said. So much for freedom of speech! Why not have several scientists with different theories speak at the same function? That would make sense, and the students would have a more rounded platform to create their own ideas. But you won't see that happen. Liberals would never allow it.

I realized global warming is a hot issue (get it?), but Running went too far and needs to refrain from making immature comments.

Andy Roy, Missoula

Puppy mills

Depiction of pet stores not always true

Puppy mill. We all know the term and the horrible images that term brings to mind. Being an avid dog lover, I do agree with most of Karyn Moltzen's guest column, (“End puppy mills' cycle of abuse, Jan. 13). However, her depiction of pet stores is a generalization that is not always true.

I work at Petland in the Southgate Mall and can say without a doubt that our puppies do not come from puppy mills. We purchase puppies from licensed breeders. The kennels are USDA inspected each year. We offer two health warranties on each puppy we sell - something Petland would financially not be able to offer if our pups did not come from reputable sources. We are always very open about where we get our dogs and have no problem answering questions about the kennels and breeders we work with.

Moltzen is correct that breeding puppies is expensive, which is why the dogs Petland sells are more expensive than what you can buy out of the want ads. I'm not saying that dogs sold in the paper are bad. Petland has guarantees that compensate the customer should a puppy we sell suffer from a health issue that will affect the quality of its' life.

I, personally, am a big fan of adopting from the pound. Unfortunately, not all people find a dog that will be compatible with their lifestyle at the local animal shelter (which is why a good portion of them end up there in the first place).

Dogs do hold a special place in our hearts. Not all people treat them with the respect they deserve. But not all pet stores contribute to to the form of disrespect known as the puppy mill. At least, Petland in Missoula doesn't. If they did, I wouldn't work there.

Wendy Maltonic,

Petland, Missoula

Travel plan

Public lands belong to everyone

George Wuerthner's recent comments (Guest column, Jan. 27) concerning his personal abhorrence of ATVs, Jet Skis, snowmobiles, etc., are breathtaking in their arrogance, convoluted logic and superfluous use of ad hominems. RV users contrasted with child abusers? “Abusement” parks? “Neotenous” adults? C'mon, George! His basic premise of “I know what's best for us all. What you might think is of no significance and of no consequence, and undeserving of any consideration” is just plain wrong.

Public lands are just what the name implies: public lands to be protected and enjoyed by all the public, and not just an environmentalist fringe long known to be elitist, condescending and obstructionist. Wuerthner is entitled to his view, but to no greater an extent than is any other citizen. The future of this beautiful land we Montanans are privileged to call home is of vital concern to every citizen, not just Wuerthner, and every citizen should have a voice in this matter. That, as we all know, is the American way. Most responsible citizens have a general, if as yet undefined, vision of some form of public lands multi-use; stringently protecting these lands while allowing legitimate, reasonable enjoyment by all their owners. This vision is properly an inclusive vision, and not exclusive as Wuerthner would have it. But, implementing such a vision has for too long been beset by polarizing ideologies, and pertinent details, as yet hazy and unclear, have yet to be worked out by good citizens of good will working for the public good. And, that is what will be needed to finally and adequately resolve this issue: good citizens of good will working for the good of the entire public. Based on the tenor of Wuerthner's comments, I'd say he doesn't qualify.

James H. Whalen, Seeley Lake

Off-roaders tired of negative spin

When responding to a U.S. Forest Service travel plan, it is important to be courteous, whether at a meeting or by letter. Your response should be sight-specific to an area of consideration as well. The guest column by Tim Lydon on Jan. 24 was neither. What he tried to do is lump together everyone who rides off-road to be harmful to the land. He didn't distinguish between summer or winter, wheeled vehicles or snowmobiles. He states, “In reality, riders do a great harm to our public lands. Their impacts are permanent in terms of a human lifetime.”

His ignorance of the matter is obvious since snowmobiles ride on the snow - not the ground. In reality, we ride off-road if the conditions allow us to do so. In the subject of off-road, my frustration is warranted and justified.

It seems that those of us who consider ourselves responsible forest users are tired of the negative spin and close-it-first attitude. The people who misbehaved at the Darby meeting must be an example of their frustration as well. This cannot be condoned, however, their point is well taken. If there is a place that warrants a special consideration, the user should have the common sense not to damage the resource.

The political ploy to attempt to portray all of the off-road users in a negative light is unjustified. I think it's time to designate areas for off-road recreation. This should be done acre for acre in the next wilderness designation.

John Shotwell, Clinton

Trapping

No accountability over animal deaths

Is there a justifiable explanation for trapping wild animals and birds?

Is it exciting to bait and set a steel trap, then leave and anticipate a later return to claim the mangled and tortured catch?

The recently publicized tragedy of our golden eagle is an example. This is explained to us as “set by someone with no trapping experience” (Missoulian, Jan. 22).

The fact that Fish, Wildlife and parks does not bother to track our protected animals and birds caught in traps, is disgraceful and an insult to the public intelligence.

We should demand and receive more accountability than this.

Alice Centers, Hamilton

Think about horse stepping in a trap

Is the recent guest column about the benefits of trapping representative of Missoula's views toward dangers of traps to pets? If so, I will make it a point to not come to the area for any kind of outdoor experience.

I wonder if Kathleen Edman (Jan. 30) would feel the same way about trapping if she were to take her horses on a public trail and have one of them caught in a horse-sized trap?

Any trapping on public land near trails is totally irresponsible and should not be legal. At the very least trappers should be willing to post the fact that there are traps so that our pets and children do not fall prey to them. Public land is for all of us, not just people who want exploit them for personal gain.

Deb Berglund, Bozeman

Eagle's story was tragic, horrific

Thank you, Kate Davis, for providing the photograph of the golden eagle that had been caught in the conibear trap for several days prior to being euthanized. And thanks go to the Missoulian for publishing it (Jan. 22). This horrific photograph of the unfortunate eagle's foot is the reality of trapping. According to statistics provided by Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks, every year some 40,000 target animals are trapped. No doubt many, if not most, of those animals suffer horribly, as did this eagle. No one knows how many nontarget animals, like this golden eagle, die each year in such traps. I recently joined Footloose Montana, an organization that aims to stop trapping on public lands. Check out their Web site. This eagle's tragic story makes me doubly glad this organization is out there.

Deborah Slicer, Missoula

---

---

Add your comment now! Write your comment in the form below.
(Email address is for verification only. If you'd like to email a story, look for the link above)

---