It's not us

A clarification regarding the article "Signs threaten public trail" by John Darling:

Many community members on social media and beyond have made the assumption that the house located to the right of the parking lot (with the black iron gates) is responsible for the no-parking signs and harassment of hikers. We wish to clarify that we do not own the land where the parking lot exists, but we do have an easement on the driveway that leads to our property. We did not post any signs regarding no entry/no parking.

We are dismayed to see a dispute happening over the longtime public access parking area and we hope the city and new property owner above the parking lot are able to come to an amicable agreement moving forward.

Mr. and Mrs. Robert London

Ashland

Cull the deer

It is my understanding that a new Oregon law allows cities to cull deer that have become a nuisance. I also understand that Mayor John Stromberg and some City Council members are not at all interested in even discussing this option. The deer in Ashland are are not only a “nuisance” but are dangerous.

The deer in Ashland are unhealthy, overpopulated and inbred urban deer who have no fear of humans, pets, automobiles or bicycles and because of this are a threat to all of the above.

It seems to me that there are a lot of Ashlanders who would like to see the deer population reduced but that our esteemed mayor only listens to the bleeding-heart deer lovers and the tourists.

For the safety of Ashlanders, our children, pets and gardens, please consider culling the deer. Soon I may have broken windows and a deer in my house.

Betty Jo Reynolds

Ashland

Road controversy ridiculous

As a long-time resident of Dead Indian Memorial Road and also an American Indian (Assiniboine), I find the controversy over the name of my road ridiculous, as do the other five Indian members of my household.

The name is historical and honors otherwise unknown and forgotten deceased Indians. Anyone who takes the time to read the historical marker at the start of the road would know that. Instead, passers-by or new residents to the area take offense and try to erase history in their supposed outrage.

Why do the opinions of vandals who have defaced public property several times seem to matter more than residents of the road, some of whom have lived on their properties for generations? To change the name of the road is to forget those unnamed native people who were unfortunately found dead so long ago. Instead of spending so much time and energy protesting the name of a road, perhaps these offended people and vandals could actually do something positive and helpful like donating to impoverished reservations or volunteering at the local food bank.

Jackie Hassell

Ashland

Revisit park study

The City Council should re-vote with a full council as to whether to spend up to $230,000 on a vision for Lithia Park for the next 100 years.

The Parks Department and commission seem to have done well over the last 100 years without such an approach. Lithia Park has evolved beautifully. Parts need repairs, but with its various sections it is still a gem.

Yes, McLaren, who designed Golden Gate Park in San Francisco, was brought in to formulate the original design, but since then Ashland citizens seem to have figured out what to do on their own. Bringing our citizens together for community visioning sessions about sections of the park can be done without consultants.

The $230,000 would be better spent to repair the Butler Perozzi Fountain, the steps up behind the Butler Band Shell, and other things. The council too often lets department heads out of one of their main jobs, which is to involve the public themselves to formulate long-range plans.

Council, please spend the $230,000 on needed repairs involving concrete, not on soon-to-be-recycled paper. Thank you.

Brent Thompson

Ashland

Unnatural disasters

Thank you for the editorial Sept. 1 connecting climate change to wildfires and hurricane severity.

Those of us who are aware of the connection find it quite amazing that there remain individuals who refuse to accept that this the new normal. In fact, it’s just the beginning of worsening climate-induced chaos we should anticipate.

My only quibble with the opinion is the use of the term "natural disaster." We are well beyond the point when this constitutes a reasonable phrase to describe wildfires, hurricanes, droughts and floods.

The science tells us clearly that hurricanes are rendered more severe by a combination of warming oceans and the increased atmospheric moisture this generates, plus rising sea levels. Then we add locating our city in a flood plain, in a state lacking zoning regulations.

Similarly, when we understand that wildfires are stimulated by rising temperature and reducing snowpack causing soils and vegetation to dry out more in late summer, we realize there’s little "natural" responsibility here either.

When we constantly elect state and federal representatives who deny the science of global warming, it seems the term "natural" is an inappropriate term. Calling it "natural" conveniently deflects responsibility away from the humans causing the distress.

Alan Journet, co-facilitator, Southern Oregon Climate Action Now (http://socan.eco)

Jacksonville