Letters for May 21, 2015
This one time at opposition camp
Re “Fox News Lies” (Letters to the editor, April 23):
The Reno News & Review has certainly provided plenty of opportunity to be in the opposition camp. J.R. Reynolds’ comments give me a perfect opportunity to respond to what in my humble opinion is a bunch of hogwash to be polite. His claims to “hardly” be “a member of the elite liberal progressive class,” are truly delusional.
Over the years I have learned to recognize that almost all liberals think of themselves as elite no matter how much they deny it. As to his claim that Fox News lies on a daily basis, if so, I imagine he won’t have any problems providing examples as proof. Of course, his implication is also that no other news programs make mistakes.
Oops, I suppose the concept of mistakes versus lies may in fact escape him. I hope that he also understands the difference between “News Reports” and opinion shows as most of Fox News shows tend to be. As to his comments regarding Jon Stewart’s commentary on his comedy show, however, I would advise against taking his take on news programming to have any news value. Reynolds’ comment, “Professor Rush, with his many degrees in science,” clearly exposes him as that elite liberal that he is. The proof is that he has no appreciation for exquisite sarcasm.
I can appreciate Jon Stewart’s sense of sarcasm while vehemently disagreeing with his political point of view. While I have little doubt that many liberals have been persuaded of “climate change” and truly believe in the theory, conservatives also are true believers that it’s a hoax perpetrated by the “elite” liberal establishment purely for establishing a power base. What liberals believe to be proof is in fact theory and no more. Furthermore there have been numerous instances where the often quoted scientific establishment has been exposed as being frauds. Remember the “University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit” emails? As to Reynolds’ claims of Republican members of Congress “vilifying the sitting president,” what part of disagreeing with his policies can’t you understand? I ask this with all due respect. I’m sure that Reynolds, as such a reasonable man, would be happy to compromise with me on that issue.
Editor’s note: Politifact did a fact check on 50 lies the Daily Show claimed Fox News told: www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/feb/26/fact-checks-behind-daily-shows-50-fox-news-lies.
Re “Fertile fillies” (Green, April 23):
The passion of my heart is, and has been, to emphasize how nature through its own mechanisms will and should be allowed to maintain natural ecological balance without human intervention. It does this through physiological differences, found within each species inside any given ecosystem. Each of those differences contribute as a vital factor in a broad ecological equation. It also accomplishes this through the numbers or density of any given species of animal or plant within that system, in conjunction with competitive species and the carrying capacity of the land.
There is a misconception, even among advocates of the wild horses, that the only things that are necessary to check wild equine population growth are the presence of its predators and/or natural environmental factors. Although natural predation and environmental impacts are important, density dependent inhibition plays an important role also. In this scenario, this means the numbers or density of wild equines, versus competing ruminants, such as the pronghorn, each will fluctuate in response to the other based upon the carrying capacity of the land, yet always in perfect balance.
In essence, the pronghorn need the presence of wild horses and burros, just as much as the wild horses need the pronghorn. Each population will have the effect of keeping the numbers of competing population at levels that are ideal for the carrying capacity of the land.
Mankind’s sole responsibility has to be focused on keeping the restrictions off of nature, so that nature can be itself, and not an offspring of man’s seemingly brilliance. The moment mankind seeks to alter nature according to a fixed number, or an average of numbers, is the moment that nature and balance itself begins to break down. This has occurred in every branch of nature where mankind has endeavored to manage natural balance, assuming nature to be static and not dynamic. With these thoughts in mind, the tenacious destruction of a vital component of nature’s beauty and balance continues to be removed from the rangelands of the West, even the wild horses and wild burros, by the Bureau of Land Management. It has turned a blind eye to the solid science that opposes the idea that these creatures are a detriment to the ecosystems they exist in. Just as much, it is opposed to the myth that there is overpopulation of our wild equine. The ludicrous concept of the “appropriate management level” of wild horses in any area out west is a lie concocted by the bureau. This is based upon how much forage that the BLM is going to allow the mustangs, as opposed to how much they would actually consume. This is opposed to cattle and other competing ruminants in these same areas, which are allocated the major percentage of the forage by this same bureau.
In a desperate attempt to curb devastating roundups many advocates are succumbing to the pressure of the BLM to utilize the PZP contraceptive on our wild horses. First, the numbers of the wild horses remaining in the wild are not the 20,000 to 30,000 that many assert are out there. The numbers of our wild ones are not even in the teens of thousands. This has its basis upon the liberal use of PZP, the thousands of wild horses and burros already removed, and the adjustment of sex ratios. Added to this are mortality rates in the wild that range between 19 percent to 75 percent annually, both first year and adult.
The proponents of PZP aid the BLM in driving them to extinction. The only answer is to continue fighting for the truth, and to allow nature to remain untouched.
Robert C. Bauer
Don’t give up
Re “Voters exchange liberty for complacency” (Feature story, May 7):
Everyone knows we have the best government money can buy!
You posit the young may decide if nation states have reached the zenith of their power, but I despair such an event may ever occur. The monied classes are too entrenched and all others are too involved in the travails of daily survival to make time for the necessary steps of wresting power from the 1 percent. Political activism, at the national level, seems fruitless and doomed. While you use the term constitutional monarchy, I prefer oligarchy.
I want so much to be optimistic, but I’m afraid the immortal words of Jiminy Cricket come to mind: “It’s hopeless, Pinocchio.”
How do you know?
Re “Water over the lawn” (Notes from the Neon Babylon, May 7):
I would like to have some details on the bird watching tour Bruce Van Dyke went on. My brother-in-law up in Salem, Oregon, is quite the bird watcher, and he recently lost his wife of 45 years. I would like to encourage him to do something like this if he feels it worthy. And, have Van Dyke watch it with the “batshit crazy 70-year-old” remarks. I’m nearly there, and I’m not crazy yet! Remember, if 60 is the new 40, then 70 must be the new 50!
In “Beyond the Shadow of a Drought,” RN&R, May 14, we implied that Marlene Olsen of the Truckee Meadows Water Authority believes there is no drought. This is incorrect. Ms. Olsen’s point was that we live in the high desert in Northern Nevada and sustainable living requires that we fundamentally rethink how we use water.