The BulleTin • SaTurday, July 30, 2022 B5
EDITORIALS & OPINIONS
AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER
Heidi Wright
Gerry O’Brien
Richard Coe
Publisher
Editor
Editorial Page Editor
Should Bend ban
stores from selling
dogs and cats?
L
ooks like the Bend City Council may vote Wednesday to
ban stores from selling dogs, cats or rabbits. None of the
pet stores in Bend sell them now. So it won’t be much of
a change.
Why bother, then? Why fix
something that is not a problem?
It will prevent a store from do-
ing it in the future. The city says the
idea of pet stores selling dogs and
cats is considered “increasingly out-
dated and socially unacceptable.”
Sometimes pet stores elsewhere
in the country have been outlets
for puppy mills that produced an-
imals with little regard to breeding
healthy pets, just breeding dol-
lars. The city argues the ordinance
may promote awareness of animal
welfare and reduce the burden on
shelters.
We’d argue it’s better to adopt
anyway. Shelters work hard to make
sure they find the right pet for the
right family. Many pet stores in
Bend actually host adoption events.
Much of that shut down during the
worst of the pandemic.
Breeders are an option, too.
Maybe not all breeders are perfectly
motivated. Of course, many are or
come close. We don’t have to tell
you to do your research.
Just to be clear, the ordinance
language specifically says the ban
does not apply to breeders, ani-
mal care facilities or animal care
organizations.
Do you think Bend should
ban stores from selling dogs, cats
and rabbits? We do. You can let
councilors know what you think at
council@bendoregon.gov. You can
see the proposed ordinance here,
tinyurl.com/Nodogscatsrabbits.
Historical editorials:
It wasn’t too much
Fourth of July
█
Editor’s note: The following historical editorials
originally appeared in what was then called
The Bend Bulletin on July 19, 1907.
“T
he Bulletin comes to
hand this afternoon, five
days late. Everybody in
town has been inquiring about The
Bulletin. There is but one explana-
tion for the delay. Too much Fourth
of July.” — The Prineville Review.
We must admit that we cele-
brated. We could not have done
otherwise when there were so
many congenial friends from out-
side points to help us in that cel-
ebration. But the mode and the
manner of our “good time” was not
of the nature implied by the Re-
view man. The Bulletin was mailed
out of the office that week on Fri-
day evening — its usual time. If it
failed to make its appearance in
Prineville the fault was either the
postmasters or the stage drivers.
And in this connection The Bul-
letin desires to register a vigorous
kick. Numerous complaints have
come to us in which subscribers
stated they did not receive The
Bulletin regularly — not on the
date that it should appear. Many of
these complaints have to do with
the mail that passed through the
Prineville office. Whether that of-
fice is to blame for these delays or
whether the fault lies elsewhere,
we do not know. But one thing we
█
do know and that is that if these
complaints continue to be heard,
a determined effort will be made
to locate the blame and as deter-
mined an effort made to see that it
is corrected. There is no sufficient
reason why it should require five
days for The Bulletin to travel from
Bend to Prineville. Why that is as
slow as the record the railroads
make in moving freight.
• • •
A Bend man remarked this
week that those of us who are now
booming this country and who
have great faith in it, will be greatly
surprised to see what is will pro-
duce in 15 or 20 years. He implied
that our prophetic vision was not
strong enough to see the full devel-
opment of future years and that we
were only telling half the truth. He
undoubtedly is correct. Practically
every new country that is opened
to settlement surpasses the fond-
est dreams of its most enthusiastic
friends in the abundance and diver-
sity of the crops that are produced
on it in later years. This same result
is already seen to some extent in
the Bend country. Each year sees
more tender vegetables, more fruit
and better crops grown. This sea-
son promises to lead all others in
that respect. Twenty years — yes, 10
years — will see a development in
Bend country of which none of us
now dream.
Editorials reflect the views of The Bulletin’s editorial board, Publisher Heidi Wright, Editor Gerry O’Brien
and Editorial Page Editor Richard Coe. They are written by Richard Coe.
My Nickel’s Worth
Right thing to ask voters
on psilocybin
Commissioners Adair and
DeBone did the right thing by voting
to send an opt-out to Measure 109 to
the voters. Our voters should decide
if psilocybin should be manufactured
and services provided in unincorpo-
rated areas of our county.
We learned a valuable lesson about
local opinion after the legalization
of marijuana. Community members
have shared with me they did not ob-
ject to personal use of marijuana but
did not want marijuana production
going on next door to their homes.
Data supports this decision. Mea-
sure 109 passed in Deschutes County
by nearly 7,000 votes (126,249 bal-
lots cast, 53% approved and 47% op-
posed). Not a mandate by any means.
This measure was mainly carried
by voters in the city of Bend, with
Sisters split 50-50, Redmond and La
Pine opposed the measure, and 19
unincorporated area voting precincts
out of 24 voted to oppose Measure
109.
This tells the story of the voter base
and therefore, an opt-out measure is
appropriate to gain further guidance.
Voters approved a measure to legal-
ize use; doesn’t mean they want those
substances manufactured in their
communities.
I hope Measure 109 helps individ-
uals with mental health issues. Now
with an opt-out measure, the voters
can decide if they want psilocybin
use and manufacture in rural De-
schutes County.
Individuals will have access to psi-
locybin therapy even if voters decide
to opt-out in the rural/unincorpo-
rated areas of our county.
This was the right decision to send
this important issue to our voters for
guidance, as we should whenever
possible.
— L. Shane Nelson is the
Deschutes County sheriff
Building over our
water capacity
The future sustainability of Central
Oregon? It is beyond comprehension
to me that the governments of Cen-
tral Oregon is allowing the ridiculous
amount of new development in an
area with fragile water sources. There
is no amount of revenue that is worth
the over taxing of the aquifer.
Central Oregon has a population
capacity that is limited. It’s great that
everyone wants to move here but
water is life. I am extremely disap-
pointed that developers are given this
license to build entire communities
with zero responsibility to the natural
resources that make Central Oregon
so very special. This is my first public
reach out on this subject. I have been
in contact with the state water de-
partments to begin learning the dy-
namics of Central Oregon hydrology.
The development must stop or we
all will pay the price. As we say in ag-
riculture — the numbers just don’t
pencil.
— Eric Little, Terrebonne
Explore potential
for better rail service
Thank you, Don Senecal, for your
July 22 Bulletin letter, “Improve rail
service” about the lack of Amtrak
train service to and from Bend. We
appreciate you raising the issue and
opening that door.
First an update: The bus connect-
ing Amtrak to Bend no longer has a
Chemult stop and, instead, bus ser-
vice directly connects Bend Haw-
thorne Station and the Portland Am-
trak Station; a long and boring ride,
but for now, it works. More informa-
tion as well as an Amtrak ticket kiosk
is available at the Hawthorne transit
station, 334 NE Hawthorne Ave.
We concur with Mr. Senecal that
the rail potential for this area is, at the
least, worth exploring. And for those
who prefer train travel and feel aban-
doned here, patience and planning
will find a good ride.
We have made numerous train
trips to Seattle and Portland and suc-
cessfully relied on local transit to get
us to most anywhere we wanted.
Just in case, keep in mind one of
the dictums of travel: Getting lost is
just part of the adventure.
— Patricia and Ronald Schauer,
Bend
Letters policy
Guest columns
How to submit
We welcome your letters. letters should
be limited to one issue, contain no more
than 250 words and include the writer’s
phone number and address for verifica-
tion. We edit letters for brevity, grammar,
taste and legal reasons. We reject poetry,
personal attacks, form letters, letters
submitted elsewhere and those appro-
priate for other sections of The Bulletin.
Writers are limited to one letter or guest
column every 30 days.
your submissions should be between
550 and 650 words and must include
the writer’s phone number and address
for verification. We edit submissions
for brevity, grammar, taste and legal
reasons. We reject those submitted
elsewhere. locally submitted columns
alternate with national columnists and
commentaries. Writers are limited to one
letter or guest column every 30 days.
Please address your submission to either
My nickel’s Worth or Guest Column and
mail, fax or email it to The Bulletin. email
submissions are preferred.
email: letters@bendbulletin.com
Write: My nickel’s Worth/Guest Column
P.O. Box 6020
Bend, Or 97708
Fax:
541-385-5804
Time is running out to give Zelenskyy the military aid Ukraine needs
BY JOSH ROGIN
The Washington Post
R
ussian artillery and heavy ar-
mor are pounding Ukrainian
forces in the country’s south
and east, grinding out small advances
using brutal, scorched-earth tactics.
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s
new war objective is to occupy as
much territory as possible before the
winter freeze and attempt to annex
it to cement his gains, which would
make achieving peace far harder.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr
Zelenskyy believes that if Russia holds
large parts of the south when win-
ter arrives, such as the Kherson and
Zaporizhzhia regions, Ukraine will
lose its ability to function as a via-
ble state. He says the next few weeks
will determine the country’s fate, and
Ukraine is already mounting a coun-
teroffensive. He’s right when he says
that if the United States doesn’t give
him the tools to succeed — and fast —
Washington and Kyiv will both regret
it later.
Speaking to a delegation of five U.S.
lawmakers last week in Kyiv, Zelen-
skyy repeated his requests for more
and better U.S. weapons. He also re-
vealed that he has been asking the
Biden administration to deploy U.S.
military personnel in Kyiv to improve
U.S.-Ukraine coordination on all as-
pects of the war, three of those law-
makers told me.
Rep. Michael Waltz, R-Fla., asked
the Ukrainian president whether he
supported sending more U.S. military
personnel into Ukraine to boost co-
ordination. Zelenskyy jumped at the
idea.
“As soon as I raised it, he cut me
off and said: ‘We’ve been asking for
it. We’d welcome it. We’ve proposed
that,’” said Waltz, who told me, “The
problem is with the White House.”
Zelenskyy proposed that U.S. and
Ukrainian military personnel form
three joint coordination cells, focused
on planning, logistics and strategic
communications. Waltz said U.S.
troops would not be deployed to the
front lines. They would work out of
the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, which is
struggling right now to reestablish op-
erations with a skeleton staff.
Congressional confidence in the
$40 billion U.S. weapons and aid pro-
gram in Ukraine will wane without
more direct supervision, Waltz said.
“From an oversight standpoint, we
have to know where this stuff is go-
ing,” he said. “Also, it would help the
Ukrainians use it more effectively.”
House Armed Services Commit-
tee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash.,
who led the delegation, told me that
he, too, supports Zelenskyy’s idea to
deploy more U.S. military personnel
in Kyiv. But some Biden administra-
tion officials are concerned about fur-
ther deepening U.S. military involve-
ment in the conflict, he said. “The
resistance is because the Biden admin-
istration feels it would be escalatory,”
Smith said. “And also, if we’ve got U.S.
personnel working in an operations
center inside Ukraine, they become le-
gitimate military targets.”
A National Security Council spokes-
person told me the United States is
coordinating extensively with the
Ukrainian military at the leadership
level and among troops on the ground
in neighboring countries. The law-
makers said this coordination, mostly
in Germany and Poland, is inferior to
working together inside Ukraine.
There’s also resistance within the
Pentagon to providing Ukraine with
other weapons Zelenskyy is asking
for, including longer-range missiles
and advanced, long-range drones.
Officials are worried about depleting
U.S. stocks and fear the drones might
be captured by Russia and then re-
verse-engineered or used against us,
Smith said.
“I understand that risk. It’s not in-
significant,” he told me. “But I think
that the risk of the Russians winning
and carving up Ukraine so that it
ceases to be a country is greater.”
Zelenskyy told the lawmakers his
army needs the MGM-140 Army Tac-
tical Missile System (ATACMS), a sur-
face-to-surface missile that can travel
about 190 miles, nearly quadruple the
range of the missiles the United States
is currently providing. These muni-
tions would allow Ukrainian forces to
move farther away from Russian artil-
lery while striking deeper into the ene-
my-held territory and forcing the Rus-
sians to lengthen their supply lines.
Biden’s officials fear Ukraine could
use them to strike inside Russia, trig-
gering further escalation. Zelenskyy
has given the White House assurances
these missiles wouldn’t be used inside
Russia. Another delegation member,
Rep. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., told me
that Zelenskyy has proved he can be
trusted to keep his word.
Slotkin, like the other lawmak-
ers, emphasized the urgency of Zel-
enskyy’s requests. She said the next
weeks and months present a window
for Ukraine to claw back territory. If
Kyiv fails, she said, hopes for a negoti-
ated solution will further suffer.
To its credit, the Biden administra-
tion has given Ukraine an enormous
amount of aid — but that entire effort
could falter without a new weapons
surge. If Putin establishes territorial
gains this year, next year he will only
push further. Time is running out to
give Zelenskyy what he needs to win
or at least negotiate from a position of
strength.
█
Josh Rogin is a columnist for the Global
Opinions section of The Washington Post.