Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Eugene weekly. (Eugene, Oregon) 1993-current | View Entire Issue (April 14, 2005)
TO THE EDITOR cent Easter lawn sign sightings, he’s thinking of placing a sign next spring on the lawn of his home in Eugene. Its message: “Passover: Unleavened Bread Not Risen.” Jerome Garger Yachats TIGHTWAD GAZETTE Thank you so much for the “Swizzle” sec- tion in your 3/10 edition. Your timing was ironic as I was just trying to gather the same information and was going to send it to you soon. I was going to call it the “Tightwad Gazette” and list all the deals and regular en- tertainment at local pubs and clubs. It’s like you read my mind! As far as your normal Clubs listing, I and many others still prefer the old way where you categorized events by the day instead of by the club. It’s a much more reader friendly format when you want to quickly scan What’s Happening on a certain night. I love the Weekly. It’s alternative and posi- tive and essential to our town. Could probably do without the cheesy sex ads on the last page. I don’t think Weekly readers are the type to call those ads. Maybe I’m wrong but it seems to me that space could be better put to use. Anyway, thank you again and for all your effort. Lisa Ann Woodie Eugene NOT HER PASSION? Regarding Eli VanCamp’s reply (3/31) to Mark Frisbee’s commentary (3/17):. While obviously not her intention, her remarks iron- ically back up Mr. Frisbee’s statement: “Animal rights may not be your cup o’tea, and I don’t blame you. It takes a lot to think about someone other than yourself.” Ms. VanCamp, annoyed by his comment, states she is well aware of the despicable practices of much of the U.S. food industry, yet continues to eat meat; she disagrees with those practices and hopes to see them re- formed and properly regulated; and she does not take action because the issue is not her “own personal passion.” : to satisfy her palate preference. It’s never too late to start thinking of someone other than oneself when it comes to making food choices, particularly in Eugene, where animal-friendly options abound. Barb Lomow Eugene She acknowledges that blatant cruelty runs rampant throughout animal agribusi- ness, yet she actively promotes and person- ally participates in this cruelty by consuming meat — and, most likely, dairy and eggs. She supposedly disagrees with the brutal practices, but apparently not enough to take a stand towards ending them. How is Ms. VanCamp able to ignore the suffering and cruelty forced upon living, feeling beings, claiming it is not her “own personal pas- sion?” Quite simply, she chooses to think only of herself, turning a blind eye to the per- petual cycle of violence and deprivation per- petrated against defenseless animals in order LETTERS POLICY: We welcome letters on all topics and will print as many as space allows. Please limit length to 250 words, keep submissions to once a month, and include your address and phone number for our files. E- mail to editor@eugeneweekly.com (please put “letters” in the subject line), fax to 484-4044, or mail to 1251 Lincoln, Eugene 97401. * 1 1 5 ' 9 + & / ' 4 * ' ( ' 9 ' + < ' 0 NOT WORTH IT According to the United States Geological Survey (USGS), there is a 95 per- cent certainty that 5.7 billion barrels of oil can be technically extracted from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. This includes all federal lands, native-owned private lands and state-regulated waters of the refuge. The U.S. Dept. of Energy reports that the U.S. con- sumes 7.31 billion barrels of oil each year, and world consumption is estimated at 29.2 billion barrels of oil per year. Therefore, at current rates of consump- tion, the U.S. would burn through the entire estimated capacity of oil in the refuge in nine months. At what cost? The original “Arctic National Wildlife Range” was created in 1960 by Public Land Order 2214 “for the purpose of preserving unique wildlife, wilderness and recreational values.” Further goals are: to conserve fish and wildlife populations and habitats in their natural diversity; to fulfill the international fish and wildlife treaty obligations; to pro- vide the opportunity for continued subsis- tence uses by local residents; and to ensure water quality and necessary water quantity within the refuge. Would drilling for oil in the wildlife refuge serve any of these goals? There are many plausible alternatives to drilling in the refuge. For example, by in- creasing overall fuel efficiency by only one quarter of 1 percent each year, the U.S. would save 5.98 billion barrels of oil in just 11 years. Alternatively, if we increased overall fuel ef- ficiency by 1 percent every five years, we would conserve 6.3 billion barrels of oil in those same 11 years. Is it really worth drilling in ANWR? John Day Eugene APRIL 14, 2005 7
