T EDITORIAL
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF:
Steven Asbury
MANAGING EDITOR:
Thom Schoenbom
NIGHT EDITOR:
Steven Asbury
EDITORIAL EDITORS:
Ashley Bach & Brian Diamond
editorials, letters, commentary and perspective
NEWSROOM:
(541)346-5511
DISPLAY ADVERTISING:
(541) 346-3712
BUSINESS OFFICE:
(541)346-5512
CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING:
(541) 346-4343
Oakland school problems larger than Ebonics debate
■ OUR OPINION:
The debate over
Ebonics has
overshadowed
many larger issues
for African
Americans and the
Oakland school
system
Coming soon to a University near
you — the infamous Ebonics
debate. After the Oakland
School Board made the “earth
shattering” claim that African-American
children speak a separate language, self
named Ebonics, the entire nation
became obsessed with the Ebonics
debate.
Now, almost two months after the
original bombshell was dropped, the
debate is reaching the University level.
Specifically, a forum at the University
on Ebonics will be held on Feb. 17. With
all the attention it’s getting, it is easy to
think that Ebonics is an important issue.
Relatively speaking, it isn’t.
Even some of the people who are
talking about Ebonics don’t always have
much of an idea what they’re talking
about. While the debate first revolved
around funding for Oakland schools, it
has turned into discussions on
everything from how African-Americans
talk to the roots of the African languages.
Many issues dealing with the African
American community were raised.
Unfortunately, the most important
issues were not.
The fact that the Oakland schools are
run down, under-funded and in
dangerous neighborhoods is much more
pressing than what dialect the students
who go there speak. The fact that
African-American poverty is still at
epidemic levels in the inner-city,
African-American college graduation
rates continue to lag behind the national
average and racism persists at every
level is more important than Ebonics
ever will be.
That the Oakland school board spent
as much time and energy on Ebonics as
it did is unfortunate. That the rest of the
nation eagerly jumped on the Ebonics
debate bandwagon is sad. From local
commentators to Jesse Jackson, almost
no one is free of guilt for blowing what
could have been a one-week discussion
into a national debate.
Because so many “important” people
had so many “important” things to say
about Ebonics, many people were fooled
into believing that Ebonics was the most
pressing issue of the day. And when that
happened, the African-American
community lost out. By focusing in on
such a relatively insignificant issue, the
real issues were pushed deeper under
the rug.
It isn’t too surprising that this
happened. As a society, we have a much
easier time focusing in on small issues
than dealing with big ones. Ebonics, as
silly as the issue seemed to some people,
was something people could sink their
teeth into. Almost everyone has an
opinion on the Ebonics debate, and
almost everyone is willing to express it.
Unfortunately, the same thing can not
be said of the more important issues
surrounding the African-American
community in Oakland. Racism,
poverty and the inner-city — these are
big issues. They can’t be reduced to
small little jokes like Ebonics can. It’s
not as obvious to everyone what to do
about them or why they are with us. In
short, we don’t like talking about these
issues because they aren’t easy.
The best thing that could possibly
result from the Ebonics debate would be
an new awareness that we, as a public,
aren’t dealing with the real problems.
Instead of worrying about the Oakland
School Board’s decisions, we should be
worrying about the conditions of the
Oakland schools and education in
general. Instead of concerning ourselves
with how this African-American
language developed, we should worry
about why urban poverty persists.
The Ebonics debate has been a
distraction from the real issues. And
while solutions to the bigger issues are
harder to find, its just as important that
we find them. Enough time has been
wasted on Ebonics. It’s time to move on
to the real issues.
This editorial represents the opinion of
the Emerald editorial board.
CONTACT US
What do you
think?
Write us a letter
expressing your !
opinion or E-mail
us at ode@ore
gon.uoregon.edu
Letters to the edi- i
tor must be limited j
to no more than j
250 words, legi
ble, signed and the :
identification of
the writer must be
verified when the
letter is submitted.
The Emerald re
serves the right to i
edit any letter for
length or style.
Ill
Drawing
Board
AMERICA
Qnlint
Jsk
s'
y\
. .DONT WORRY
ENGINEERING 1$
WORWN6 ON Our
PRO01EMNOW.
Bipartisanship, ’97..
1 'ntino to work
CtosEiy wnw Both
Of mv lOKXOOCS /'f
I
IU WOftK *4
HfcftMONY WrtMTHe
f*W'UBERAL
DEMAGOGUES
WMO W&NTtO
A*£\«
Correction
Wednesday's
edition of the
Emerald
incorrectly
identified ASUO
Constitutional
Court Justice
Dave Coffman in
a photo on page
one. He was
incorrectly
identified as Dave
Holland.
Department of Forestry is keeping Oregon safe from landslides
For the second time in a year,
Oregon and most areas in the
West have been inundated
with unprecedented rainfall.
The rainfall has caused injuries,
death and property damage in all ar
eas of Oregon from the cities to the
forests.
While the effects of the rainfall
have impacted people in all areas of
the state, the tragic deaths and de
struction in Coos and Douglas coun
ties raised a number of issues. Some
of these issues relate to public safe
ty, land use planning, clear cutting
on steep slopes and forest practice
regulations.
Recently, there have been a num
ber of news stories and editorials re
garding the relationships between
timber harvesting and landslides. In
some cases, information about past
studies has been inaccurate. Some
comments have left the impression
that the state has not and is not will
COMMENTARY
ing to take the necessary action on
behalf of the public’s safety. This is
far from the truth. A number of ac
tions are currently taking place and
planned for the near future that will
address many of these issues.
The Department of Forestry is cur
rently conducting vigorous geotech
nical investigations on the slides
that originated from forest land and
resulted in fatalities in Douglas
County. The purpose is to determine
the cause of the slides, if possible,
and whether there were any forest
practice violations that contributed
to the events.
The Department of Forestry is hir
ing an independent geotechnical
consultant to investigate the factors
that led to the fatalities. Because of
the significance of these events, it’s
important to provide an indepen
dent outside investigation in addi
tion to our own to ensure that all
possible factors are considered.
Governor Kitzhaber has asked sev
eral state agencies to assist in identi
fying actions the state can take to
minimize the threat to public safety
these events have caused. The Gov
ernor cited three major themes to be
considered: the sitting of homes in
areas prone to natural disasters, the
use of early warning systems for
high risk areas and land use prac
tices such as timber harvesting,
which may contribute to landslides.
The Department of Forestry has
added two more study areas from
the November storm to the exhaus
tive ground-based study currently
examining the effects of forest prac
tices on last February’s flooding.
The results of this study will be
completed later this year.
This study will provide accurate
and practical management informa
tion to forest landowners and policy
makers so we can better understand
relationships between forest prac
tices and flood impacts. Our new
study is even more critical now be
cause climatologists are telling us
that we are heading into a potential
ly wet weather cycle. Based on the
study’s findings, the Department of
Forestry may make recommenda
tions that could lead to changes in
current forest laws.
While finding solutions to these
problems won’t be easy, they will be
addressed through a constructive,
open and fair process. The result
will further the department’s com
mitments to reduce threats to life
and property promote sound forest
policies which strive to minimize
environmental effects.
James E. Brown is the Oregon State
Forester and a guest columnist for
the Emerald. His views do not
necessarily represent those of the
newspaper.