Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current | View Entire Issue (Jan. 28, 2017)
VIEWPOINTS Saturday, January 28, 2017 Quick takes Oregon to consider bill to allow harvest of roadkill They do it all the time in Alaska and it works beautifully. Why let food waste while people go hungry? — Kim Gibson A deer hit me a few years ago. It totaled my car. I would have liked to have a steak out of the deal. — Joe Ream Ewww. — Marvin Williams Hermiston sewer, water rates to jump 15 percent This is exactly why I moved here from Portland. The sewer and water rates were beyond reasonable in Portland. About 3 times Hermiston rates. Move to land with a well and septic. — Jacky Miller The reason I live in the county! — Matt Fisher Pendleton schools decide what to do about snow days I say waiver. People could have vacation plans which start shortly after the school year ends. — Yvette Baysinger Fitzjarrald My children need an education, not more vacation time. Have them make up the time ... I have my priorities straight, their educa- tion is far more important than taking a trip. — Andrea Ellis One of the great lessons of the Twitter age is that much can be summed up in just a few words. Here are some of this week’s takes. Tweet yours @Tim_Trainor or email editor@eastoregonian. com, and keep them to 140 characters. East Oregonian Page 5A Why I participated in the Women’s March By BRIGIT FARLEY T his past Saturday, I joined with about 400 old and new friends — gals, guys, kids and a few dogs — in the Pendleton Women’s March. It was a wonderful day of solidarity and purpose here and worldwide as a new administration came to power. Since then, social media has featured lots of commentary on the event, some of it unaccountably negative and snarky: “these are sore losers,” “Trump is President and you can’t change that,” or “they are throwing a hissy fit.” I cannot speak for other marchers, but I can explain my reasons for participating. They have nothing to do with sore losing, hissy-fitting or denying that Trump is president. I marched because I want to see the social safety net preserved and hopefully strengthened. I know from personal experience that Social Security, Medicare and the Affordable Care Act are the underpinnings of a decent and contributory life in America. My mother was able to go to college on Social Security death benefits and educate Pendleton children for 35 years. Medicare paid most of my parents’ medical bills in their old age, enabling them to enjoy retirement and help their community. Thanks to the ACA, my friend’s daughter was finally able to obtain affordable health insurance for her cystic fibrosis, a pre-existing condition that requires a lot of care. President Trump vowed during the campaign not to touch Social Security or Medicare, and he said he would replace the ACA with something better and more affordable for everyone. But some of his cabinet nominees and Congressional allies have signaled they would privatize, phase out or gut these programs. I marched to hold the President to his promises. I marched to protect the rights of individuals potentially at risk from the Trump administration. I know at least five Staff photo by Kathy Aney Gisele Short marches with her moth- er, Sarah Short, last weekend in the Pendleton Women’s March. couples that benefited from the Supreme Court’s 2015 ruling legalizing same-sex marriage. President Trump has promised to appoint Supreme Court justices in the mold of Antonin Scalia, a known opponent of marriage equality. Accordingly, I wanted to dramatize my commitment to preserving it. At colleges throughout the country, there are “Dreamers,” undocumented people brought here as children who have never known another country. In my experience, they are good students who stand to contribute a lot to this country. I don’t want to lose them to deportation. I also wanted to demonstrate my opposition to President Trump’s talk of a Muslim registry, something that could lead to a Japanese internment-style mass punishment in the event of a terror attack. I hope we can avoid a repetition of that sorry episode. I marched in protest of the harsh words the president had for educators in his inaugural address. He spoke of schools “flush with cash” turning out students “deprived of knowledge.” The teachers I know are always buying supplies with their own money for their classes, and no one works harder at a more challenging assignment. They do their best for all students that come through that classroom door, regardless of economic status, academic ability or conditions at home. If President Trump hopes to make America great again, support for public schools is an essential part of the equation. They represent maybe the only common experience Americans have now, and they have always been the major driver of social mobility and national prosperity from the beginning of the republic. Finally, I marched because it is what people have done throughout American history to show their public officials what they want. Some detractors wonder aloud why marchers were silent about injustices overseas, in Saudi Arabia for example. Americans have virtually no ability to change conditions for citizens of other countries. But they can move mountains here. President Trump wants to talk about America “not winning”? Think about the suffragette protesters of l00 years ago, who endured arrest and imprisonment for their trespass on President Wilson’s sensibilities. They celebrated victory in the 19th amendment of l920. Recall Martin Luther King’s civil rights movement, soldiering on through beatings, bombings and bloody murder to achieve their goal in the passage of the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts of l964 and ’65. And let’s not forget that this country got kickstarted in a protest, a violent one at that — some Boston tea, anybody? Bottom line, I marched because protest is patriotic, as “winning” and American as apple pie. ■ Brigit Farley is a Russian and European history professor at Washington State University-Tri-Cities and lives in Pendleton. Every president needs a dog Hunting, fishing with lead part ’m not sure why so many rural enough other dogs to fill an animal Westerners voted for President shelter. Among others, Teddy had Donald J. Trump. He doesn’t a Manchester terrier, a Chesapeake drive a pickup with a gun rack. He retriever, a bull terrier named Pete doesn’t wear Levis or Wranglers, and a Jack Russell called Skip — the and his hairstyle certainly wouldn’t president’s favorite dog, because he work in a Wyoming wind. He’s found it while he was hunting bears never fixed fence, bucked bales, in Colorado. cut wheat or field-dressed an elk. We Westerners love our dogs. Andrew But most important, he doesn’t Gulliford They do-si-do in the back of our have a dog, and he needs a canine pickup trucks, guard sheep, herd Comment companion in the White House, cattle, flush pheasants, and always especially since his wife, Melania, seem glad to see us. Trump has apparently plans to stay for months in never tied a bandanna around his neck. Manhattan with their son. Trump doesn’t have mud on his boots; he What’s the de facto bachelor president doesn’t even have boots. He needs cowboy going to do? He’ll need a warm heart and boots, a snap-button shirt, leather work a cold nose to come home to. Who’s going gloves, and a pair of fencing pliers in his hip to bring him his slippers and fetch his pocket, but most of all he needs a dog. How newspaper? Oh, I forgot. He doesn’t read the can you trust a man without a dog? news. No matter. He still needs a dog. A lot of rural Westerners voted for Trump. Every president has had one. Trump If he’s going to be our head of state, then he scorns tradition, but maybe a furry, friendly needs a dog to talk to and share confidential creature with paws will make the president briefings with. A good dog listens well, pause and not send out so many bombastic responds to treats, and rarely barks back. tweets. He is going to need a wagging tail But what kind of dog? Out West, we to cheer him up. Yes, he has lapdogs in his have a variety of working dogs and canine presidential cabinet, but that’s not the same. companions. We live with Labrador As Harry Truman famously said, “If you retrievers, border collies, Australian want a friend in Washington, get a dog.” shepherds and blue heelers. But unlike the George H.W. Bush had a springer spaniel dogs that roam ranches and our cherished named Millie. Millie’s Book, as dictated public lands, Trump’s pup would live in a by the dog to Barbara Bush, outsold the penthouse when not in the White House. president’s own memoirs. LBJ famously What kind of dog would fit Donald Trump’s picked up his beagles — named Him and lifestyle? Would it be a fluffy toy poodle Her — by the ears, “to make them bark,” he with ribbons, a diamond-studded collar and said. A maudlin speech by Richard Nixon toenails painted pink? It would have to be a about his cocker spaniel Checkers helped female dog, because a male dog might be too save Tricky Dick’s political career at one competitive and garner too much attention. I recommend a Chihuahua, but we’d point. The public adored FDR’s Scottie, have to be sure the dog arrived in the named Fala. James Garfield named his dog Veto. country legally and acquired a green card. George Washington began his presidency Maybe Putin could send Trump a Russian with black-and-tan Virginia hounds. James wolfhound, but I’d be leery of a hidden Buchanan’s Newfoundland often lay microphone in the dog’s collar. Perhaps motionless for hours, doing nothing, with the best fit for President Trump would be a one eye open and the other eye closed, rather Pomeranian. The hairstyle would work. It’s like Congress. President Rutherford B. a yappy little dog with attitude that needs Hayes, like Trump, lost the popular vote and constant grooming, affection and attention. squeaked by with a narrow electoral victory, On second thought, however, maybe Trump thereby earning the nickname “Rutherfraud.” should get a fish in a bowl or a cat. Hayes sought comfort in his dogs, ■ surrounding himself with a cocker spaniel, a Andrew Gulliford is a contributor to small black mutt, a mastiff, a greyhound, a Writers on the Range, an opinion service of pair of shepherds and two hunting pups. High Country News (hcn.org). He is professor My own presidential hero, Theodore of history and Environmental Studies at Roosevelt, came to Pennsylvania Avenue Fort Lewis College in Colorado and can be with a Pekingese, a St. Bernard, and reached at gulliford_a@fortlewis.edu. I of the American tradition By GARY LEWIS W hen I was 19 years old, a doctor told me I should only eat wild meat. He said it would be much easier to digest. What the doctor didn’t tell me was the pursuit of the wild meat would be hard and the challenge would be good for me too. I have been a conservationist since I was young, learning catch-and-release, learning to preserve places where fish and wildlife thrive. What I didn’t know until later was the money I spent on fishing and, later, on hunting, also supported local jobs and conservation. This week I felt betrayed to learn the outgoing administration undercut hunters and anglers with a ban on traditional ammunition on federal lands and traditional fishing tackle on federal waters. With all eyes on the new president’s inauguration, the outgoing U.S. Fish and Wildlife director Dan Ashe placed the ban which took immediate effect in national parks, wildlife refuges and all other lands and waters administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. What lands and waters are we talking about? As I read Director’s Order 219, the Department of the Interior oversees the Bureau of Land Management and the Bureau of Reclamation, refuges and other divisions. In my corner of Oregon, Prineville Reservoir is managed by the Bureau of Reclamation. Imagine an angler on Prineville Reservoir fishing through a hole in the ice on January 19. He lowers down a skirted jig. Maybe he caught a fish or two or a bucketful. By the time he pulled his jig out of the water at the end of the afternoon, he was fishing illegally. Now imagine a traditional blackpowder hunter going for a hunt on BLM lands. The muzzleloader has historic value, it employs technology that was state-of-the-art in the 1840s when the pioneers filtered into Oregon Territory. By law in the state of Oregon, a muzzleloader, to be legal in a muzzleloader hunt, must be loaded with a lead projectile. Thanks to Director Ashe’s last act in office, it is illegal to use it on BLM land. This underhanded order, issued while no one was paying attention, undercuts hunters, anglers, small businesses and conservation across our country. If Director Ashe cared about environmental protection he would have considered these factors. Hunters and anglers pay for conservation via licenses and stamps and voluntary taxes. Hunters in particular, through the Pittman-Robertson Act (levies an 11-percent tax on guns and ammunition), lobbied for these taxes and fees. Order 219 mandates more expensive bullets and more expensive fishing tackle on many public lands and waters. Some people won’t be able to afford to replace all their tackle or all their ammunition — to hunt on public land they own in common with all other Americans. I see it as another barrier to participation. Whenever it costs more to participate in an activity, we lose the people on the lower end of the economic scale. It hurts kids most because their parents can’t afford to participate in the activity. Fewer hunters and fewer anglers mean fewer dollars for conservation and for wildlife habitat. Why would an unelected, appointed bureaucrat issue such an order on the last day of his job? If it was so important, why didn’t he issue that order earlier in his administration? In my view this is a cheap shot from an anti-hunting, anti-conservation bias. The legal hunter and angler, who pays a voluntary tax to help wildlife, becomes the scapegoat. If this order is allowed to stand it hurts hunters and anglers and harms what it claims to help — wildlife habitat and populations across the United States. ■ Gary Lewis is the author of Hunting Oregon and host of Frontier Unlimited and a columnist for The Bulletin in Bend. Fewer hunters and fewer anglers mean fewer dollars for conservation and for wildlife habitat.
