Letter to the Editor
Reject measures
Published Saturday, August 23, 2008
Digg
delicious
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!Aug. 21, 2008
To the editor:
No. 1: Gaming Commission. This opens the state to uncontrollable gambling. We will never be able to enforce whatever this new commission, which contains members from the gambling industry, authorizes. We lose. The gambling industry wins.
No. 2: Airborne shooting is probably more humane than other ways of controlling wolf populations in those circumstances in which they so multiply that they kill everything alive. Let our specialists in Fish and Game make these decisions, not Outside money-baggers.
No. 3: Public Campaign Funding. The state puts up money for candidates, and then political action committees are in action. The result: We lose money; nothing changes. This will cost us for no benefit.
No. 4: Water Quality Regulation. This has nothing to do with water quality. It is not about the Pebble Mine. It is about shutting down mining. Mines that cannot expand must close. It takes many years and millions of dollars to explore, define the ore body, obtain the resources and build a mine. The economic impact of mining here is enormous. It impacts construction, transportation and numerous local businesses and suppliers. Passing Ballot Measure 4 will wreck a good part of our economy.
The Pebble Mine will be reviewed carefully, its operations monitored in detail. No damage to Bristol Bay will be allowed under existing laws. The initiative benefits — maybe — only a few high-cost summer tourist resorts. We just do not need an initiative as poorly worded, destructive and inconsistent as Ballot Measure 4.
Oil production is decreasing. The gas line will not produce the revenues Prudhoe Bay provides. Expansion into the federally owned National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska or Arctic National Wildlife Refuge will not replace what we now receive. We could end up being what we have been for over a century — an economy largely based on mining. Ballot Measue 4 will destroy our future.
Think of Alaska first: Vote “no” on all four.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
Mr. Lynch says, regarding Measure 2, that we should let our specialists (by which I assume he means F&G) do the job. Had he carefully read Measure 2 he would have found that is precisely what it calls for. Measure 2 wants aerial hunting by private citizens (presently the case) stopped and for any predator management to be performed by F&G only. So, in saying "no" to Measure 2, Mr. Lynch is essentially telling himself not to vote for what he wants to have happen.
I wonder how many other people will listen to the Alaska Outdoors Council propaganda instead of actually reading the measure and, like Mr. Lynch, wind up voting against themselves.
Amazing....
It is amazing, dobieman, and even more so is his flawed logic on #1. Anyone who thinks gambling isn't rampant in Alaska needs only to find a pull-tab parlor on payday; those who wish to throw away hundreds of dollars on a hunch already have an outlet for their addiction, while those of us who would like a more upscale location for an evenings entertainment have few options in the interior. He says "The gambling industry wins." Isn't that what he asks for in voting against measure 4? For industry to win? I cant believe anyone would be against another industry in Alaska, especially when rising gas prices are taking their toll on the tourism industry.
Casinos require rigid management to succeed, and in so doing provide many chances for employment in the process; joining a multi-state lottery increases revenue to the state; allowing electronic gambling devices cuts the massive amount of paper waste which is inherent with pull-tabs.
Yes on 1 and 2.
Stop calling it hunting, it is PREDATOR CONTROL. How many of you remember when Fish and Game would hold the fur auctions down on College road. The Fish and Game guys would do the shooting and contract people to process the furs and then auction them to the public. Even back then you had people threatening to blow up the planes the Fish and Game guys flew in, times haven't changed.
"To quite an extent, gambling is a tax on ignorance. I find it socially revolting when the government preys on the ignorance of its citizenry. When the government makes it easy for people to take their Social Security checks and pull [slot machine] handles, it relieves taxes on those who don't fall for it. It's not government at its best."
-- Warren Buffett
I find it revolting when the government is asked to protect us from our selves. I can do it just fine. Thanks.
"If the phone doesn't ring, it's me."
-Jimmy Buffett
When hunters do it, it's called hunting. Period.
Yes on 2
I agree with Denali Guy on measure 1. His argument against measure 2 however, conflicts with his reasoning on measures 1 and 4. The aerial wolf hunting industry may be small but it still employs people to do the job that the Department of Fish and Game needs done to effectively manage the wolf population. A vote for measure 2 is a vote for more wolves or more state employees to keep them in check. The bottom line is that aerial hunting provides a cost effective preditor control service for the Department of Fish and Game and provides someone with an income derived from other than State coffers.
Approximately 350 wolves were taken statewide using air transporters in 2004-2005, not by shooting from the plane in flight, but by fly in hunters who were on the ground after spotting from the air or in incidental situations where they were hunting another species primarily. We have 26 game management units the size of an average lower 48 state, each of those areas have wolves. Can we afford to increase the ADF&G budget just to do what hunters are willing to foot the bill to accomplish? Same day airborne is only allowed by permit when preditor control is being intensively managed. It is an effective tool for our state to keep wolf populations in check. Vote no on Measure 2.
As long as the state uses hunters to do the job, it makes it easier to just call for predator control regardless of whether or not it is needed. By putting the entire program in the hands of ADF&G we are controlling the controllers, which obviously needs to be done. We have spent millions of dollars on predator control in the past 5 years, and statistics show that we have 132 FEWER moose harvested in the wolf control areas to show for it. A complete waste of money.
Very simple formula...2 yes's and 2 no's
Yes on 1
Yes on 2
No on 3
No on 4
Even simpler formula:
Yes on 3 - when we have legislators that aren't taking money from so many big money special interests, then we'll know they truly are working for Alaskans, not their rich donors.
By the way, Political Action Committees can only give $1000 per candidate right not, how will they "take control"?
If you have a candidates who uses Clean Elections versus someone else who takes money from oil and gas PACs, who that candidate will really work for is there in black and white (and green).
The Clean Elections system might not be perfect, but it's a darn sight better than the way things are now. If not for the FBI, we might never have known how bad things really were here. It's embarrassing, but at least we know the truth.
I'm willing to give Measure 3 a chance to turn it around.
No No No No.....how easy is that?
I hope you'll go to www.alaskansforcleanelections.org and read more. Hickel, Knowles, Sturgulewski, and Whittaker can't all be wrong.
No No No No are the easiest & most correct answers.
For the record, when the anti-Alaska gang started on 2, they specifically identified it as an "anti-government" measure. They said it isn't "anti-hunting". It's fair chase.
Game management isn't "Fair Chase". The tree buggers don't understand that as the dominant species, humans aren't going away. So resources need to be managed. I believe it's in the state constitution.
The proponents of 2 want to tie the hands of state game management and will do their best to stop any hunting they disapprove of. (That's all hunting isn't it?)
"Compromise is just the first stage of capitulation."
I say YES/NO/NO/NO
If gambling wins, we win!!
Some people will never be able to separate Predator Control and hunting. No hunter I know is wanting to fly in an airplane and shoot wolves while airborne. This measure allows Fish and Game to manage the wolf population while sustaining the moose and caribou population to a healthy number. Animal rights activists and other people who have no clue what happens in Alaska want to jump on the bandwagon and throw money at these parasitical organizations so they can feel good about themselves when they sleep at night. These are the same idiots who don't want drilling in ANWR but probably can't point Alaska out on a map. Seems the caribou population has severely declined since they put the Alaska Pipeline in and the caribou can't cross the pipeline. Propaganda unleashed during an election year. VOTE NO ON #2
AK49mom-
Yes they can.
Knowles, Sturgulewski, and Whittaker can all be wrong most if not all the time.
Yeah, that's kinda what I was thinking...
Was that Bill Knowles or Tony Clinton? Trying to remember them is like the final scene in "Animal Farm" looking at the "leaders" through the window.
Wally Hickel was wrong once or twice, also. Like when he gave up the governor's mansion for a job with Nixon, who then fired him.
That's history, and beside the point. I guess that AK49mom, and others, feel that we should be impressed by these endorsements. I kind of liked Arliss, never liked Tony, and Jim just yesterday ticked me off. Public funding of elections just seems like a step further from freedom of speech and association. I know I cant convince Yes voters, but I dont care at this point, and I'll just say that if you haven't decided yet, vote NO. "For the sake of the children".
Yes, No, No, No...
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.