Page 4A
OPINION
East Oregonian
Thursday, April 13, 2017
OTHER VIEWS
Founded October 16, 1875
KATHRYN B. BROWN
Publisher
DANIEL WATTENBURGER
Managing Editor
TIM TRAINOR
Opinion Page Editor
MARISSA WILLIAMS
Regional Advertising Director
MARCY ROSENBERG
Circulation Manager
JANNA HEIMGARTNER
Business Office Manager
MIKE JENSEN
Production Manager
OUR VIEW
Still staking out
middle ground
on wolves
Wolves are never far from the
And that brings us to the second
bit of news.
minds of Oregonians, and never far
Nineteen Oregon legislators,
from our front pages.
Re-establishing a predator that
all from the west side of the state,
wrote a letter to Gov. Kate Brown
had been absent from the state for a
century has been a continual process and ODFW noting their opposition
to any revision to the wolf plan that
with plenty of ups and downs.
Many of us have come to terms with would allow for the hunting and
sharing our space
trapping of wolves.
with another apex
They ended their
predator, others are
letter
with: “Taking
Two bits of
not quite there yet,
a strong stand today
recent news (against wolf hunting)
and some never will
be. Those whose
will help Oregon
have once
economic livelihood
avoid the bitter
again changed social conflict and
is negatively
impacted by wolves
sport
the trajectory divisiveness
are understandably
hunting and trapping
opposed to long-term
of wolves has caused
of the wolf
population growth of
in other states.”
debate in
animals that harass
We don’t buy it.
Not being willing to
and sometimes kill
Oregon.
consider hunting is
livestock.
This week, two
what’s truly divisive,
especially to us out here who are
bits of recent news have once again
much more apt than our urban
changed the trajectory of the wolf
counterparts to fish and hunt.
debate.
The first is that wolves did
We’ve always tried to be right
down the middle on wolves. We
not fare as well in 2016 as many
understand their biological role
experts predicted. After fast-paced
population expansion from the
in our ecosystem. We understand
northeast corner of the state in
they need additional protections as
westerly and southerly directions,
they re-establish, especially from
wolf populations saw little or no
poachers who have ingrained disdain
growth in the last year, according to
for the animal.
the Oregon Department of Fish &
But we also think, once they are
Wildlife.
recovered, they should be managed
like each and every animal in
Although these counts are
notoriously unscientific and likely
Oregon. We do not think 19 west
missed many wolves living in
side legislators (who likely have
Oregon, the results were still rather
no wolf packs living in any of
shocking.
their districts) should be able to
keep an important management
Could wolves have run up
tool and sporting opportunity from
against the limit of habitat where
Oregonians.
they can repopulate? Seems
In the future, Oregon should be
unlikely. Still, the surprising results
home to a healthy population of
require additional study and a tap
wolves and a season for hunting
on the brakes when it comes to
them. Perhaps 2016’s poor results
parroting Oregon’s superior record,
delay both, but it doesn’t mean either
compared to neighboring states, on
should be forgotten.
reintroduction.
Unsigned editorials are the opinion of the East Oregonian editorial board of publisher
Kathryn Brown, managing editor Daniel Wattenburger, and opinion page editor Tim Trainor.
Other columns, letters and cartoons on this page express the opinions of the authors and not
necessarily that of the East Oregonian.
LETTERS POLICY
The East Oregonian welcomes original letters of 400 words or less on public
issues and public policies for publication in the newspaper and on our website.
The newspaper reserves the right to withhold letters that address concerns
about individual services and products or letters that infringe on the rights of
private citizens. Submitted letters must be signed by the author and include
the city of residence and a daytime phone number. The phone number will not
be published. Unsigned letters will not be published. Send letters to managing
editor Daniel Wattenburger, 211 S.E. Byers Ave. Pendleton, OR 97801 or email
editor@eastoregonian.com.
With Syria attack, Trump uses
element of surprise — on his voters
B
elligerence is in the air in
appears tenuous at best — unless
Washington. President Trump
Trump makes the effort to build public
is enjoying (extremely rare)
support.
bipartisan praise for a cruise-missile
“He needs to realize that there is a
attack on Syria. There’s tough talk from
level of explanation that he needs to
some Republicans about more. And
do, particularly when you’re about to
even tougher talk about Russia. North
put American lives potentially at risk,
Korea, too.
given that starting point of 60 percent
Meanwhile, the public’s reaction
unfavorable,” Winston says. “It’s not
Byron
is ... huh? For millions of American
that people are going to disagree with
York
voters, the two most striking aspects
him, but when they hear something
Comment
of the U.S. action against Syria were
he has done, 60 percent of the country
1) How quickly Trump moved, and 2)
starts off with the viewpoint of, ‘That
How little he explained his actions.
guy I don’t like.’”
Explaining — laying the groundwork,
Trump’s no-explanations style is
making a case — is an essential part of
particularly bad for his political fortunes
presidential leadership.
because, beyond what he promised would be
That’s especially true when what is involved a quick, intense, and winning effort to destroy
is an act of war. Leaders contemplating military ISIS, he did not campaign on the idea of going
action prepare the public to support that action. to war. Just the opposite; Trump campaigned
They explain why it is needed. They explain
day after day on a platform of keeping the
why it is in the national interest of the United
United States out of the mess in the Middle
States. Then they repeat the explanation.
East. Trump often excoriated George W. Bush
No, that doesn’t mean they reveal exactly
for the “big, fat mistake” of going to war in
what they’re going to do and when they’re
Iraq.
going to do it. Trump said many times on the
Now, Trump’s quick conversion to military
campaign trail that he would not telegraph his
action has left some prominent supporters
actions to foreign adversaries. To do so, he
unhappy — and warning of problems to come.
“The thing that’s most important right now
said, would be to give up the critical element of
for Donald Trump is to remember those core
surprise.
But leaders don’t surprise the voters with an issues that he so successfully campaigned on,”
conservative radio host Laura Ingraham said
out-of-the-blue act of war. In the case of Syria,
on Fox News Tuesday morning. “It was all
Trump moved so quickly, and with such little
focused on America first. Jobs, the economy,
effort at public persuasion beforehand, that he
wages going up — that’s it.
maintained the element of surprise on his own
“What I think is difficult at the same time is
voters. That’s not a good idea.
to manage this war footing that we increasingly
Indeed, the public reaction, measured by
seem to be on,” Ingraham continued. “I do
early polls, is not optimistic for the president.
have my concerns about this administration
After the attack, Washington Post pollsters
getting mired again in another conflict in the
asked, “Do you support or oppose President
Middle East ... I’m not sure getting rid of
Trump’s decision to launch a missile strike on
Bashar al-Assad was at the top of the list of the
a Syrian air base in retaliation for the Syrian
people in Pennsylvania.”
government using chemical weapons against
At the same time, Trump is winning
civilians?” The result was 51 percent support,
plaudits of those in his party who tried hardest
40 percent oppose. Among registered voters,
to defeat him. Bill Kristol called the White
Trump’s support level was a bit higher at 57
House execution of the attack “impressive”
percent.
and welcomed Trump as a potential convert to
Then the Post asked, “Would you support
regime change. “It would be ironic if Trump,
or oppose additional U.S. air strikes against
who campaigned against regime change, ends
the Syrian government at this time?” Just 35
up pursuing it in both Syria and North Korea,”
percent said support, while 54 percent said
Kristol tweeted Tuesday. The day after the
oppose. Again, Trump’s support was a little
attack, Kristol tweeted, “Punishing Assad for
better, 39 percent, among registered voters.
use of chemical weapons is good. Regime
Either way, the fact is, the barest of
change in Iran is the prize.”
majorities supports a new president sending
No, that is probably not what Trump voters
military forces into action for the first time as
in Pennsylvania had in mind. If Trump has
commander-in-chief.
changed his views from what he said in the
“They are not good numbers,” says
campaign, or even if he has simply decided
Republican pollster David Winston. Winston
points out that it is often hard to assess Trump’s that Syria should be a one-time exception to his
general opposition to military interventionism,
poll results because he won the presidency
he owes voters all around the country more of
with an unfavorable rating of 60 percent —
an explanation than he has given so far.
that alone should tell everyone that Trump is
■
a different kind of president, as far as polling
Byron York is chief political correspondent
is concerned. Nevertheless, it’s possible to
for The Washington Examiner.
conclude that support for more military action
YOUR VIEWS
ODOT needs to change
dangerous intersection
Another person has been killed
by a truck at the intersection of
East Elm and Highway 395. The
decision to designate this a truck
route was bad to begin with and is
worse now considering the increase
in traffic.
I think it is time for the Oregon
Department of Transportation to
reconsider making East Punkin
Center the east/west truck route,
rather than the existing East Elm
route. It might even be possible
to make the intersection of East
Punkin Center and Highway 395 a
roundabout intersection.
Carlisle Harrison
Hermiston
Fuel standards
important to farmers
Whether it’s for cattle or crops,
farmers and ranchers have been
on the forefront of conservation.
Many frontline harvesters of the
land and sea are also leading efforts
to find new ways to cultivate and
care for soil and water, fisheries
and farmland. Partnerships, like
the Renewable Fuels Standard,
between the agriculture community
and the alternative energy industry
show the valuable opportunities
that can arise when we all come
together.
Confronting our environmental
problems requires us to remember
that our states, our communities,
and our professions — our
people — are more complicated
that we often think. But changes
like this don’t come easy. Congress
must stay consistent so that our
industry can do what we do best.
I encourage Congressman Greg
Walden to maintain the RFS as it
is and give Oregon’s agricultural
community and economy the
certainty to grow.
As a rancher, we want to leave
the land, air and water a little
better for our children. Long-term
stability in biofuel production and
the Renewable Fuel Standard is
good for Oregon and the ranch.
Curtis Martin
North Powder
Old PGG building
better site for fire hall
As a concerned citizen living
here since 1948, and having come
from being an engineer on the
McNary Dam project, I have seen
changes good and bad.
I agree we need a new fire
station and equipment, but not
at the presently planned location
of the old St. Anthony Hospital
property, while the old Pendleton
Grain Growers building is
available.
It is cement-reinforced concrete
and steel, which could easily be
adapted to the needs of the fire
station, at a much lower cost. The
PGG property has plenty of room,
both indoor and outdoor, and is
logistically located in the center of
town.
In 1959, the fire station was
moved to 10th and Southwest
Court, to better access the North
Hill and the west end. This area
is being built up, as more than
75 new commercial businesses,
two new schools, a college with
existing schools, eight apartment
complexes and condos, a motel and
a convention center. Seventy-five
percent of the work force is in the
west end, and the relocation of the
fire station is 2 1/4 miles to the east
of the present location. The old St.
Anthony lot could be better used
for a 100-unit apartment and condo
complex, since Pendleton is short
of housing.
The PGG building would be a
much more suitable location.
Vote no on the bond measure for
replacement of Fire Station 1.
Bob Byer
Pendleton
Moving chamber not
in city’s best interest
I am very proud to be a resident
of the city of Hermiston. When we
moved to the city ten years ago,
one of the things that impressed
me was the forward thinking of the
city leaders and the effort to make
Hermiston a desirable place for
new businesses to locate.
One of the key components in
the forward movement of our city
has been the Hermiston Chamber
of Commerce.
The leadership of Debbie Pedro,
her staff and the chamber board
of directors has been a major
catalyst in the development of this
community and for new companies
locating in the Hermiston area.
How is moving our chamber
offices to a basement a step forward?
Do we really want
representatives from a corporation
going to a basement office to
meet with the director of our
chamber? That is declaration
to all newcomers the Chamber
of Commerce is considered
insignificant in the growth and
development of our city.
Offering the basement offices
of the old city library to the
chamber is a clear message from
the city manager, assistant city
manager, mayor and city council
to the chamber of commerce just
how insignificant they view the
chamber’s role in our city.
The conference center was built
through the generous donation of
hundreds of thousands of dollars
by the residents of this community.
The city manager and council
should remember that facility is
there because the residents made
it possible. They should be asking
the citizens how they would like
that facility to be used, not just by
the executive decision that is being
proposed. Please, clearly explain to
the community how the chamber
is losing money. The finance
reports that have been given seem
to show the funding from the hotel
tax designated for their use has
not been fully expended by them
on any given year. This should be
fully addressed at a public council
meeting.
This is not in the best interest
of our city. It is not forward
thinking and is in fact a hindrance
to the advancement of our city.
The justification for such a
move has been based upon some
questionable facts that have the
appearance of not providing
accurate details of the actual
financial base of the chamber.
F. Dean Hackett,
Hermiston