Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Opinion & Editorial

by Chris Linkenhoker, Corvallis

We live in a free market society where people buy and sell everything from half-eaten, grilled cheese sandwiches on EBAY, to pork bellies and gold on the Chicago Commodities Exchange. It is the natural order of life based on the principals of supply and demand. It is the only logical way to operate an economy.

We have learned from the Montana DEQ that we have one of the purest aquifers in the nation (right under Hamilton) and it is estimated to contain around 628 billion gallons. This aquifer can suffer extreme degradation from polluted streams and leaking septic systems. So, when we start deciding how many wells can be dug to accommodate an increasing population, and whether or not to protect our streams with setbacks, how do we put a dollar value on this valuable resource before we screw it up, therefore denying future generations the economic value of this aquifer?

Economists use the "willingness to pay" principle to place dollar values on resources such as recreation, grazing fees, clean air and clean water.

Well, let's see, most of us are willing to pay a dollar for 16 ounces of bottled water today, even if the quality is suspect. Simultaneously, earth's population is growing exponentially and water is become depleted and polluted, also exponentially. Knowing this, large corporations are buying up water rights around the world, and in the not-too-distant future, water will be traded just like pork bellies and gold. In fifty years, the market value of pure water will likely be astronomical! Sounds like a good investment, wouldn't you agree?

Protecting our water and other natural resources is an economic necessity, and represents the "highest-best use" when deciding future zoning regulations for the Bitterroot Valley and beyond.

Streamside setbacks needed

Dear Editor,

Can the quality (purity) of our Bitterroot water be protected? There's an abundance of water in the Bitterroot aquifer. John LaFave, hydrologist with Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology, explained this assessment in his recent (1-16-08) Hamilton presentation.

A more pressing concern is protection of our river and streams from pollution by unwise and unregulated building along their banks. A streamside setback committee has answered this danger with plans for timely setback regulations. By putting these safeguards in place now, county commissioners will move to protect this precious resource. Most valley residents would welcome sensible regulations now.

Any further delay would compromise one of our most valuable county assets.

Setbacks now! Protect our river and streams. Please, and thanks from the valley.

John Carbin
Stevensville

Re: Lost Horse Canyon

Dear Editor,

When I first moved to Missoula years ago Lost Horse Canyon was one the very first places I visited. I was instantly amazed by how beautiful an area it was, and how simple it was to access. Over the years Lost Horse Canyon has become a second home to me – whether a day-trip or an overnighter with car-camping luxury, it is always a great time.

I write this letter with great concern as I ponder the proposed re-opening of the Lost Horse Quarry. For years now Lost Horse Canyon has been a sanctuary for myself, and many others, full of silence, wild animals, swimming, and amazing rock climbing. I view Lost Horse Canyon as a great asset to the people of Montana and I am worried that a canyon that so many people love is in jeopardy of facing irreparable damage.

The Bitterroot is facing a new era – a steady influx of people attracted to its beauty and fast development. I understand the need for development, and the resources required to fuel it. However, I believe that the hunters, climbers, backpackers, and many other users of Lost Horse Canyon are far more valuable resources for the Bitterroot community than a gravel quarry. I find it hard to believe that re-opening the Lost Horse Quarry is the only option to meet our demand for resources. Lost Horse Canyon to me, and many others, represents access to: world-class rock climbing that draws people in from all over Montana and even out-of-state, a beautiful area full of wildlife and silence, a wonderful access point to get deep into the Bitterroot-Selway Wilderness, hunting and fishing, and wonderful car-camping for families and people of all physical abilities.

Over the past several years I have used Lost Horse Canyon as one of my primary climbing areas. I can say that there is no other place like it yet discovered in Montana, and that it is a truly unique paradise that fuels the soul of so many people who treat the area with the respect which it deserves. I hope to see Lost Horse Canyon protected from the destructive nature of an operating quarry. It saddens me, and many others, to think of such a magical place being subjected to noise pollution, environmental pollution, wildlife habitat destruction, access closures, and the overall contamination of such a unique Montana Treasure.

Damien C. Powledge
Missoula/Belgrade, MT

Protect all the truly wild places

Dear Editor,

As western Montanans we need to be involved in Idaho's forest planning. The Forest Service is currently taking comments regarding what to do with Idaho's roadless areas. Missoula and western Montana are in close proximity to several of Idaho's largest and wildest remaining roadless areas including a few which straddle the border. These areas include the Hoodoo/GreatBurn, the Bighorn-Weitas, the Lochsa face, and others.

I urge you to comment on their plans and keep a diligent watch on what they're proposing and what they do. These areas, just like the ones here in Montana, are some of the last vestiges of the truly wild left in the US and in the world. Currently we are in the era of making decisions about these last wild places and consequently we need to do it right. The new proposals significantly weaken the protections currently in place. Once these areas are roaded and developed they will be rendered unrecoverable or if they are recoverable it will be an extremely long time before they return to their current state, certainly not in ours or our children's lifetimes. Weakening protections for Idaho's roadless areas doesn't make sense, especially as the pressures on these areas continue to mount. They should be protected from roadbuilding, mining, and commercial logging. And, contrary to some beliefs, roads into these areas are not needed to provide for safety from wildfire.

Existing rules already provide the flexibility to address fire risk to protect communities. Please tell the Forest Service how important these areas are to you and that they will be of much greater use as areas for quality recreation, clean water, and fish and wildlife habitat. The Forest Service doesn't even come close to providing needed maintenance on the roads that already exist so why make more. Idaho's forests have an estimated $660 million backlog of needed maintenance on over 34,000 miles of road. Leaving these areas intact and unroaded will best serve the public, our generation and future generations.

To learn more about the proposed plans log onto http://roadless.fs.fed.us/states/id and then let them know what you think.

Aaron Kindle
Missoula

Concerned about Hamilton investments

Dear Editor,

I am concerned about the rapidly declining value of "mortgage backed securities" that were popular investments for a good number of years. Other citizens and I have been following the "Investment Poicy" of the city of Hamilton for quite some time now, and we are concerned that city officials may be placing assets or funds (up to $2 million) that belong to the citizens of Hamilton into these very risky investments.

I am specifically speaking about the Montana "Short Term Investment Pool" or STIP. This pool is a place where state agencies must place their surplus money. Local governments and schools may invest their extra funds in this pool, if they so choose. The pool is managed by the state Board of Investments.

Last November, Bloomberg Markets Magazine identified Montana and Florida as states where some pool money is invested in risky funds. As of mid-December numerous local municipalities and school districts in Montana had $530 million (or roughly 25% of the total fund) invested in the STIP pool. Two weeks prior, these same local governments and schools had 36% of the total, but began withdrawing funds at an astounding rate due to fear of loss from mortgage-backed investments and the ongoing sub-prime debacle. In an attempt to slow withdrawals, the Montana Board of Investments has stated that less than 1 percent of all STIP assets are made up of sub-prime mortgages. In spite of this, however, at least two other STIP investments are at the "D Rating" level and are triggering liquidation.

Rather than go into any more detail, my concern is that the citizens of Hamilton are at risk of losing precious assets that were entrusted into the mayor's care. Over the years, we have lost a considerable sum of money in those "repurchase agreeements" promoted by a certain local bank, as well as incompetent investment strategies and improper accounting methods from our city finance staff. As a result, we have asked city officials, on numeorus occasions, to limit our investments to CDs and treasury instruments only.

Mayor Randazzo has a duty to assure all residents of Hamilton that not a single penny of their money is at risk in any investment, particularly in the mortgage-backed securities that are on a steady decline in value, even as we speak. No one in city government has the authority to invest public funds in high-risk investments. Therefore, I have requested that the mayor make a public statement to that effect, and that she take full responsibility for the investment of excess funds, which, it the absence of an elected Treasurer, is a duty only she can hold. Given the serious nature of this issue, I would expect that Mayor Randazzo would make this statement immediately, and that she understands that she will be held accountable to the citizens of Hamilton for failure to do so, and for any resulting losses that are incurred.

Lorraine Crotty
Hamilton

Lee Metcalf legacy is about change

Dear Editor,

Lee Metcalf died 30 years ago this month. His life represented political and policy "change" - the very thing now being pursued by candidates and voters alike.

With momentum cresting in this presidential primary season, the watchword is "change."

In both parties the overriding theme seems to be how to make government more relevant to the lives of the citizen, and on the Democratic side, hundreds of thousands of both independent and younger voters seem to be propelling the candidates toward a remodeling, restyling or, perhaps, a revolution of sorts in the way the federal government responds to our desires.

Change is a tall order, particularly when the very people who want it disagree about what "it" really is. As the parties and candidates struggle toward definition and development of the changes they will propose, it would be wise for them – and us – to remember that the presidency represents only one branch of government. If change – real transformation – is the goal, then certainly the U.S. Congress with its 535 members must also change.

As voters try to find the candidates who embody change, we Montanans should recall that we elected Lee Metcalf who changed both Washington, D.C., and us; doing it in an incredibly quiet but effective manner.

Montana's Lee Metcalf was first elected to the U.S. House in 1952 with the narrow margin of 50.3%. Following four terms in the House, he was elected to the Senate in 1960 and served for 18 years.

His life was dedicated to political and policy change and now that change is again in the air, we are well served to consider how Lee accomplished it. First, he is the most experienced Montanan ever to be elected to the U.S. Congress: World War II veteran, a designer of the postwar democratic elections in Germany, a state legislator, Assistant Attorney General, and a justice of the Montana Supreme Court. This unassuming man, who in a quarter century of congressional service refused to issue a press release or read a poll, believed that change comes by both wanting and creating it through simple hard work informed through experience.

Before Metcalf was elected to Congress, seniors didn't have health care insurance coverage, our public schools operated without the benefit of adequate federal financial assistance, the only international experience offered to young Americans was to fight in our wars, the nation's public utilities – particularly in the energy realms – operated virtually out of public view, and our land, air, and water had been despoiled by a century of industrial damage.

Americans then, as now, wanted change and with Montana's Metcalf they got it: Medicare, which Metcalf first introduced ten years before its eventual passage; the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which was originally introduced as the Murray-Metcalf Bill; the Peace Corps, which passed under the leadership of Metcalf and Mike Mansfield; and unlike any other elected official, Lee Metcalf threw the bright light of public scrutiny on the nation's energy companies.

However, it was as conservationist – environmentalist – that Metcalf made seminal change for the West and the nation. Lee's close friend and ally Judge Gordon Bennett summed it up in his dedication speech at the naming of the Metcalf Natural Resource and Conservation Building in Helena, Montana: "In the annals of Congress his name will be memorialized as the author, sponsor or chief promoter of landmark conservation legislation."

From the initial Wilderness Act to landscape restoration, pesticide control to fish and wildlife refuges, Lee Metcalf moved doggedly and with success to preserve the best of the West and in doing so he not only created a whole body of conservation laws for the nation, but he also changed the way we envisioned ourselves on the land.

Through the course of America's history people have wanted change. We have sought safety, security, a sound economy. From government we have wanted responsiveness, honesty, and rolled up sleeves.

The question, of course, is how best to achieve those goals. Although there is no single model to assure change, Lee Metcalf showed us that national change must include both the Congress and the President. He achieved change through dogged determination, not press releases; through experience, not promises.

One of Lee's good friends and trusted assistant was the late Vic Reinemer: "There are two kinds of public officials, the consensual – the many who wait for the majority support before they move – and, to coin a word, the inconsensual, the few trailblazers who light the way of the herd behind. Metcalf was one of those rare point men out front."

Pat Williams
Missoula

Support for Ron Paul

Dear Editor,

Who is Ron Paul?

There have been a couple of letters in one of the Lee Newspaper chain editions recently expressing different viewpoints of a man, who is described either as a saint or devil depending on which letter writer one tends to believe. This should intrigue anyone with an intelligent mind concerned in choosing the next President of the United States. Therefore, believing that I possess one of those, I have set off in pursuit of evidence and have found, to my surprise, a time-travel back to eighteenth century writings, which concerned debates that led to the creation of the Constitution of the United States of America. After reading Dr. Paul's "A Foreign Policy of Freedom," a compilation of all his congressional speeches concerning American foreign policy, I found that Ron Paul's foreign policy, coinciding with the founders' philosophy of friendship and trading with all yet beware of any entangling alliances, is sound. As an avid reader of history, especially American history, these speeches could well have been written by Monroe, Madison, Mason, Jefferson, Franklin, Washington, etc.

Where has Dr. Paul been? Certainly not in the news for the past thirty years! Yet he was elected to Congress in 1976 and has steadfastly held to Constitutional ideals for all his years as a legislator. He is known as "Dr. No" when any bill does not meet his constitutional test. As the back of his book states: "He is known among both his colleagues in Congress and his constituents for his consistent voting record in the House of Representatives: Dr. Paul never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution."

If, and this is indeed a long shot, he were elected President of the United States, the power of the Presidency, which has grown by leaps and bounds beginning with President Lincoln and President Wilson, then exponentially beginning with President Franklin Roosevelt, would begin to subside and return to its Constitutional confines - one should hope. It is important to note here that even when the capitol, Washington D.C., was burnt and ransacked, an elected government in retreat, President James Madison did not suspend the Constitution of the United States of America even when this war threatened the demise of a country not yet a half century old. In contrast, modern Presidents make no amends for actions, which include making war around the world without a declaration from Congress, sending mercenaries (CIA, special forces, etc.) anywhere globally to assassinate foreign leaders and dictators who, after receiving covert help via arms and monetary support, are no longer grateful or useful to the powers that be (i.e. the President's staff and associates).

Though he is running as a Republican, since he is a Republican legislator, he could very well be running as a Democrat-Republican, as some of the Anti-Federalists were labeled during the early American presidential elections. Yet, it is a modern label, Libertarian, now loosely attached to his candidacy that tends to be sticking. But, is this a bad thing, as one of the writers of the aforementioned letters has voiced it to be? The Random House dictionary defines libertarian: 1. one who advocates liberty, esp. with regard to thought or conduct, 2. one who maintains the doctrine of free will (opposed to necessitarian), etc. Dr. Paul is a pediatrician so I would gravely doubt that he "is a radical that will bring the drug culture and those that want to put our children up to the highest bidder for their sexual favors into his fold," as one letter writer suggests. However, to clear this up perhaps one should either ask Dr. Paul himself or check up on him by contacting the thousands of patients he has administered to as their doctor. I find this kind of scare tactic akin to the rumors that if Barry Goldwater were elected the world would soon be nuclear rubble and that he was declared 'mad' by several psychiatrists (stated by some well known magazines and later sued by the Senator, who won).

At this point, I believe Dr. Paul to be the candidate who, if elected, would defend the ideas of freedom and oppose any attempt to destroy these ideals (i.e. The Patriot Act). Therefore, I would suggest that come this following February 5, those who are planning to be part of the Republican Caucus for the state of Montana give Dr. Paul a serious look and vote, should they agree with his message.

David A. Merrick
Corvallis

Thanks to Jahnkes

Dear Editor,

Don and Chris Jahnke are co-owners of the McDonald's Restaurant in Hamilton. For several years, Jahnkes have provided free meal coupons to Department 2 of the 21st Judicial District Court as a congratulations gift in adoption cases. The District Court decrees approximately 30-40 adoptions per year; one of the great services and joys performed by this office.

" . . . The first one gave you life, the second taught you to live it. The first taught you a need for love, the second was there to give it..."

Their generous support over these past years enabled the Court to implement the popular and rewarding practice of distributing a free meal coupon to each child in an adoption family at the end of the adoption proceeding. Often the adopted child is over 3 years of age, and very often the adoption family has at least one other child over 3-4 years old.

This District Court recognizes and appreciates the Jahnkes' long-standing commitment to the Ravalli County community.

James A. Haynes, DistrictJudge
Department No. 2

©2006 Bitterroot Star
This site was Done By Dooney