Jan. 28 Letters Part 2: Our Readers’ Opinions

Selective hearing

Cheryl Probert, Nez Perce-Clearwater Forest supervisor, recently wrote a Jan. 18 letter to the editor about the upcoming forest plan. She said “the plan was constructed by assembling tens of thousands of comments into management scenarios across the 4 million-acre landscape.”

... She must have selective hearing since most of the new plan caters to a small group of local special interests and motorized recreation users. Most of the comments that Probert actually received call for more protection of existing roadless areas and the protection of fish and wildlife habitat, but these comments don’t seem to carry much weight.

The new plan only protects 17% of the existing roadless areas and will increase the level of timber harvest to 190 million board feet to 210 million board feet per year, which is a four-fold increase over the 50 million board feet average of the last 20 years. There are virtually no measurable standards in the new plan for the protection of water quality, fisheries and wildlife habitat, only vague, nonbinding goals and objectives that will likely be ignored in the quest to produce more timber and open areas to motorized recreation.

My last letter to the Tribune took two weeks to get published so you may not see this letter before the objection period ends Monday. At this point, the best thing you can do to stop this proposal in favor of a more balanced approach is to contact the White House (whitehouse.gov/contact) or your elected representatives.

Harry Jageman

Moscow

Don’t let fear prevail

Idaho’s Republican Party 2022 platform emphasizes honoring each person’s dignity and freedom. However, proposed House Bill 384 (which recently was pulled for possible rewrite) contradicts these principles by deeming those who are different as obscene and advocating their exclusion from public and school library books in Idaho.

This contradicts the essence of libraries as places of discovery, not indoctrination. It’s ironic that a party concerned about indoctrination in schools is stifling discussions it disagrees with. Let parents decide what’s best for their children, avoiding imposition by a vocal minority.

Idaho should protect the freedoms of all citizens, allowing dissent without denying access to diverse content. Respecting independence means letting individuals decide what’s appropriate, not imposing restrictions. Granting First Amendment rights to all Idahoans, regardless of differing views, strengthens the state’s values. Stripping librarians of curation authority disrespects their profession and the dedication they bring to it.

Banning books or restricting them share a common motive — fear of knowledge. True freedom is not fueled by fear; it is about embracing liberty and respecting diverse perspectives. Idaho’s values should withstand dissent and foster an environment where knowledge, not fear, prevails.

Scott Funk

Lewiston

It takes both parties

How convenient: In Patrice Yeatter’s Jan. 16 letter, she states that the original Republicans were the country’s original Democrats. Not according to history: The Democratic Party was formed in the 1830s and it is the oldest political party in the world.

Sadly, both parties have had their share of racists. The late Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., was a member of the Ku Klux Klan before renouncing it and running for political office. He organized a filibuster to stop the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Democrat Hubert Humphrey and Republican Thomas Kuchel, devised a successful plan to defeat the filibuster and move the legislation into law. It took both parties. It worked because this country is not racist.

There are 39 million registered Republican voters in the United States and 49 million Democrats. A little more than 2,500 counties vote Republican while a little more than 500 vote Democrat. High-density populations generally vote Democrat while rural America votes Republican. Democrats tend to like large government, but Republicans, not so much.

But with all of our differences, as was proven in 1964, we can rise above politics and get it right.

Dan Long

Clarkston

Bring back the CCCs

In the 1960s and ’70s, I remember the Civilian Conservation Corps’ camp along the Selway River. I don’t really know what they were about but believe that was where young men could go to work on projects that were needed. They received food, housing and a little income to get their lives and future in order to support themselves and their families.

I wonder if something similar could be done for homeless individuals. Remove the age and men-only stipulation. Have these individuals — men and women — work on similar state and federal projects that will help themselves and others. Find out if individuals really want to support themselves, or just live off others’ charity.

I’m sure there are many who would tear this idea apart, but it’s just a thought. Redirecting current welfare funding to support this might make this happen.

The phrase, “God helps those who help themselves” is a motto that emphasizes the importance of self-initiative.

Jim McIver

Lewiston