Park dog ban disappointing
Park dog ban disappointing
I was raised in Ashland and spent my youth growing up in Lithia Park. I had an opportunity to return two weeks ago while visiting my grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
I was happy to see that the city has done a good job maintaining such a wonderful place. I wasn't able to enjoy it directly this time because I had my Labrador with me (on a leash).
Many signs warned me not to allow my dog on the park grounds. So I watched my relatives from outside looking in. What a shame and disappointment.
I remember the days when we didn't have so many restrictions on our enjoyment of the park — I don't recall dogs being a problem. I don't know when this rule went into effect, but it certainly spoiled my trip to Ashland and bothered me enough to write this.
Why not change the signs to say that well-mannered dogs and dog owners are welcome, and that the usual restrictions should apply? Picking up after your pet, controlling them and respecting other people who may not share the love of your pet as you do — would that be so bad? My dog and I could enjoy the park together.
Praise for Honore's movie review
Highest praise for Chris Honore's review of "A Most Wanted Man."
He makes it clear why Le Carre's novels are challenges to present as film and this film is no exception. Honore shows just how and why the unfolding story of the film requires patience as the plot progresses.
Given the material, such an effort pays off as, at the end, we see what a vicious world those secret agency types have constructed. In the end, we are left with betrayals, pain, and no sure sense of what praise-worthy goals have been reached. You know, just like in the real world.
Ragan and Gerry Cavanaugh
Wealthy influence big decisions
In Jackson County, we successfully defeated the corporate inflow of campaign contributions when we supported 15-119, a measure protecting family farms from corporate influence.
But for the most part, the 1 percent of our population who own 40 percent of the national wealth are able to influence decisions vastly more than the 99 percent, who are the actual voters and who should be represented. Democracy is threatened by the inordinate influence that money has on both election campaigns and what representatives do while in office.
A similar threat exists in addressing climate change. Fossil fuel corporations are funding a campaign that denies the accepted science on the process and cause of climate change, and is contributing heavily to candidates who will protect their income even at the expense of future generations.
When deciding for whom to vote in November, please consider voting against candidates funded by a few wealthy sources and supporting those funded by many small contributors.
Republicans still promote pollution
We can lead a horse to water but we can't make him drink. Similarly, we can have a clearly established scientific consensus around the world, the recent IPCC report, chaotic weather patterns emerging before our very eyes, and still Republican congressional representatives continue to promote carbon pollution.
Even when four past Republican EPA administrators urged them see the light at an Environment and Public Works Committee this June, House Republicans barely deigned to listen. One would think Congressional Republicans might listen to former Republican Treasury secretaries (Schultz and Paulson) pointing out how big the cost of climate change will be.
And now The White House Council of Economic Advisers estimates that every decade of delay to cut greenhouse gases will cost us an extra 40 percent. Floods, fires, famine, wars and pestilence, are part of the social and economic costs of global warming and climate change. It should be clear that we must address this problem now.
Congressional inaction and obstructionism are inexcusable. Let us urge Rep. Greg Walden to show leadership. Congress should support the EPA, make polluters pay and lead us into a future where our grand-kids can live. And if Walden won't, let's elect someone who will.