The article in the March 26 Sunday Valley News, “Carrying on a Vermont Trapping Tradition,” seems to have sparked a fire of two different opinions on wildlife ethics.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion; sadly though, opinions may lack factual information. If not for the hunter and trapper, many of the animals that are loved would now be extinct. Fish and game laws are what determine the legality of these activities; science is a big part of this process.
With the landscape changing, it is important to monitor the health and well-being of wildlife. The hunters and trappers are a tool to tell biologists this; they create revenue and spend hundreds of wonderful hours in the outdoors. As development increases, places that once could support more wildlife may no longer be able to.
Some readers have commented that beavers are a great source for water, but they can also do much damage and cause harm if allowed to become overpopulated.
As for the reader who does not want to claim trapping as a Vermont state tradition, tradition is determined by past history.
What a shame these young men have to defend their love of wildlife and the outdoors. I am sure they love these animals as much if not more than the people who have a negative opinion. Thanks for the unbiased article.
Dave Taft
Windsor
A recent headline “Largest Ever Vt. Solar Array OK’d (March 30)” might have been “A Pretty Face that’s Walking Backwards.” Local and state governments, businesses and household consumers need to examine closely “utility scale” solar projects that look good on the surface but do not deliver real public benefit.
We have an electrical grid infrastructure based on 120-year-old technology. It runs on equally outdated economic models that maximize financial profit from large, centralized generation, mostly carrying electrons in one direction to remote consumers who pay for the delivered electricity, as well as the capital and operational costs for a grid infrastructure that loses about 62 percent of the electrical input before it reaches the end user.
This means that for every dollar on your monthly bill, the electricity you receive often represents a value that’s really only worth 38 cents.
Coolidge Solar is a centralized, private project, subsidized with millions of dollars of tax credits, paid for by taxpayers like you and me, plus the sale of out-of-state of renewable energy credits that will allow utilities in Connecticut to keep burning dirty coal. It’s a simple sleight of hand: Renewable energy credits for power generated in Vermont are sold to out-of-state utilities and tragically subsidize dirty carbon-based power.
The Coolidge Solar Project should be built in Connecticut, where the energy can be delivered and used without huge transmission losses that in the end are paid for by consumers who should have their own cheaper, more reliable, local clean power. Meanwhile, the capital expenditure involved in building 20 megawatts from a huge centralized project for grid power could also build small, decentralized 150 kilowatt community solar projects in about 50 Vermont towns.
The cost of solar photovoltaic panels has dropped by 80 percent since 2008 and now new technologies for efficient micro-grids and battery storage are demonstrating that local renewable power will transform the production, efficiency and cost of electric power.
To pass along a livable planet for our children and our grandchildren, let’s get this right.
John Fago
Bethel
The recent withdrawal of the American Health Care Act was celebrated by some and jeered by others. In this writer’s opinion, the most disturbing aspect of the interlude, however, was the emergence of not-so-veiled attitudes and biases toward several groups of people.
In an effort to appease the most conservative members of the House and secure passage of the bill, the final compromise removed a minimum requirement for covered services, including maternity and emergency services among others. Those others included mental health and substance use disorders.
I am shocked and appalled to see this prejudice toward individuals with psychological conditions so blatantly on display. When will we, once and for all, remove the distinction between physical and mental health and the stigma that drives it? One in three people meet criteria for a psychological condition at any one time. One in three. Should they all be ashamed of seeking care for the distressing and debilitating conditions they face? I think not. It is time to tear the walls down.
Dom Candido
Hanover
The letter writer is a psychologist and CEO of Enhance Health.
Thankful for the VA
When I came to the Upper Valley to go back to school after over six years of active duty service in the Army, including a deployment to both Iraq and Afghanistan, I thought that my education would prove the highlight of my experience.
However, when I’m searching for words to describe my transition, the first thing that comes to mind is my experience at the White River Junction VA Hospital. The VA hospital provides a level of medical care and compassion that far exceeds my expectations and I’m sure exceeds their duties as medical providers. I am truly thankful for the community of people who make the White River Junction VA hospital an outstanding and special place.
Courtney Miller
Hanover
I am writing to inform dog walkers who use the Milt Frye Nature Area in Norwich of a new policy. Dogs must be on a leash at all times. As always, but often ignored, dog owners and professional dog walkers are required to pick up any waste from their animals. We provide dog bags and a waste can at the trailhead.
There are several reasons for this change in policy, but chief among them is the irresponsibility of a critical mass of dog walkers. The Norwich Town Ordinance requires that dogs be under their owner’s control. Dogs not in control on the nature area trails are frequently reported to run up to other people — their owner’s calls notwithstanding — sometimes jumping on them, and sometimes frightening them or potentially putting them at risk of a fall. Additionally, dogs are being allowed to run where they will, leaving their waste behind, apparently beyond the owners’ ability to clean it up. Later on, the dog waste is inadvertently discovered by a schoolchild who then tracks it into the school, or by any of the many people who come to the nature area to enjoy nature, not step in dog poop.
It has become a veritable obstacle course of dog feces in sections of this beautiful natural area. Our hope is that keeping dogs on leash will mitigate the first of these concerns, and keep the poop where it can be scooped by the owner.
The next step, if this new policy, is ineffective, would have to be banning dogs from the Milt Frye Nature Area at all times. This would be unfortunate for the many dog owners who are enjoying and respecting the area responsibly. If you enjoy dog walking here and you see a fellow dog walker endangering the future use of the area for all dogs, please encourage that person to do the right thing.
Lindsay Putnam
Milt Frye Nature Area Committee
Norwich