Letters for Oct. 31, 2019 | RecordCourier.com

Letters for Oct. 31, 2019

Not a tiny minority

Editor:

In reading Mark Forsberg’s one-page advertisement. (Yes, it was an ad.) I’m curious as to where he gets his 1 percent of the population, as everyone that I’ve talked with is against it. Interesting speculation, and it is only speculation. I’d like to see him back that up. (Fake news?) A “tiny minority?” Please, I’d like to know where you come up with a “tiny minority?” It’s easy to make such statements, but how about some figures and facts to back up such ridiculous comments. In other words, prove it. There’s a whole bunch of people out here that probably feel that you are quite wrong, so I’d like you to prove it or retract it.

Now, about the Muller Parkway and how it will solve a lot of the traffic problems. Well, along with the parkway will be 2,500 homes, most of which will have two vehicles or more. Let’s see, that will add over 5,000 vehicles, which should encourage widening the road. I believe that a great many of those vehicles will be on the road at rush hour, and I suspect that they could somehow increase the traffic and the problems that go with it. So, is there a real advantage to this, other than for the developers who won’t be living there anyway?

Will the plan include schools and some small businesses, or does the county and taxpayers get to pay for it? With an additional residents, there will be lots of children, so schools are important. Just something one of the “hysterical fear mongering” citizens is concerned about.

Lastly, I find it annoying that you have to refer to the good people of this community as you have. I think that most of your descriptions of us would better fit your egotistical mind than us.

Roy Nisja

Gardnerville

What’s impact to aquifer?

Editor:

I believe the letter by Mark Forsberg, which appeared in the Oct. 17, edition of The Record-Courier, did little to garner support for the Park Proposal. I feel comments such as “a few chronically malcontented opponents,” “a tiny fraction of 1 percent of the population,” “the fog of misinformation from an uninformed minority of Douglas County residents,” “the nattering nabobs of negativity,” and “hysterical fearmongering waged by a the small cadre of those who oppose reasonable development,” are not terms one uses when seeking consent. Forsberg apparently is uninformed about the fact these malcontents are part of the majority that elected two of the commissioners that have expressed concerns about the Park Proposal.

While Forsberg attempts to point out the benefits of the Park Proposal he does not, and probably cannot, address the main concern of many of the citizens of Douglas County.

Issues of concern by entities such as the school district, Minden Gardnerville Sanitation, the towns, the water companies, etc., can all be addressed and resolved. While these issues are of concern to the citizens of the county, their major concern has to do with the issue of water. The proposal seeks to change much of the area from a designation of “agriculture” to “residential.”

Currently some of the water from rainfall and snowmelt in the “agriculture” drains into areas such as the Martin Slough, some will evaporate, some is absorbed by vegetation and some, seeking the lowest level, will replenish the aquifer. If the “agriculture” land becomes “residential” most of the land will be paved or covered by structures. Now much more of the run off of rain water and the water from snowmelt will end in areas like the Martin Slough, causing possible flooding, less will be lost to evaporation and vegetation and very little will go to a replenishing of the aquifer. This will occur at a time when there will be an increase for demand for water to service the “residential” area.

While we don’t really know the impact this will have on the aquifer we do know additional water from Tahoe or Topaz will be met with resistance from California. Water from the Carson River will be met with resistance from the tribes, Carson City and probably others.

Where will additional water be obtained if the aquifer is adversely impacted? This is the major concern of many of the citizens of Douglas County.

Sanford Deyo

Minden

Slaughterhouse already a problem

Editor:

We live on Georgia Lane just a short distance from the Centerville site of the proposed slaughterhouse moving into our area from the state of California.

We have been advised that the new facility will be for the good of our community and will not inconvenience us in any way.

Too, we have been advised that this facility will kill and butcher only 60 animals brought in from California per week; it should not be a nuisance “they” say and we will hardly notice it is here.

It’s already a nuisance — and hasn’t been built yet — and clear to many of us a 60-animal limit would be only a starting figure and we are quite confident the limit would be lifted at a future date to adjust for operational profit and loss figures. Someone, somewhere, is assuming we Nevadans are somewhat lacking in common sense.

Further, no one is talking about the great use of one our most dear assets, water; and, what about the damage from the extra traffic — the added large truck use and weight on our Centerville Road (which isn’t properly maintained now); plus the noise problem; and the stench it will introduce to our area.

Oh yes, the stench. We were both appalled and incredulous to read where one resident of our beloved area lived most of her life in California around cattle, and other animals, and the odors produced by them were not so bad and yes some days you couldn’t even smell their presence (or presents whichever the lady prefers). We agree with her to the extent that the cows in our area are not odorous to a fault nor do they present a problem for us.

In agreement, let me assure you, as a young boy and herd boy on the largest Angus ranch in the San Joaquin County of California, the odor from cows, swine, chickens and sheep in the area was seldom noticed and seldom created an offensive situation.

However, the unknown lady must never be allowed to confuse the odor of herds of live animals to the stench of the smell of death and rotting flesh. The odors of life cannot be equated to the stench of death from rotting blood and flesh.

I recall vividly the sickening stench of the slaughterhouse on hot summer days as we made delivery of some our steers for slaughter. Living within a short distance of a slaughterhouse with its stench of death was never a part of this young boy’s greatest dream.

Why must we entertain and be subject to the “Californication” of our great state.

Outsiders should not be allowed to shove California’s controversial ideas down our throats. We have our own problems to solve; vis-a-vis “wild horses.”

We must not be made to rationalize irrational ideas for the monitory gain and benefit of a few California ranchers. Most of them opted to vote for, live with and accept legal California state sanctions on slaughterhouses. We must not allow their laws to be remedied at the expense of Nevadans. California problems need to be addressed by Californians.

Their problems should not be allowed to become our problems, and I assure you we won’t ask them to solve ours.

David and Sharon Bordenkircher

Centerville

Don’t approve special use permit

Editor:

It is unthinkable that you would approve this special use permit for the following reasons:

1. Noise

2. Smell

3. Increased traffic

4. Property value loss

5. Marketability issues

6. This site is on a 100-year flood plain, with a large water flood plain or top of a 2-4 foot water table with an aquifer running under it

7. Our research interviews with experts inform us that their waste water treatment system is inadequate and could contaminate our water supply should it fail.

Please don’t let this happen.

Penny Echan

Zephyr Cove

Advocate for Breast Cancer patients

Editor:

Every October, our community turns out to support Breast Cancer Awareness month — with events ranging from Carson City’s “Think Pink” to “Bunco for Breast Cancer” traditionally hosted by Carson Valley Inn in Minden.

On Oct. 20, Carson Tahoe Health sponsored an eye-opening workshop on metastatic breast cancer. Metastatic breast cancer is breast cancer that has spread to other organs in the body such as the bones, lungs, liver, or brain. The vast majority of breast cancer deaths are attributed to metastatic disease — for which there is no cure. While some progress has been made in prolonging survival, the overall median life expectancy after diagnosis is three years. The disease claims over 42,000 lives — including both men and women — every year. Although about 30% of breast cancer cases become metastatic, under 10% of funding for breast cancer research is dedicated to metastatic breast cancer.

While research has brought some progress is in treating specific tumor types and providing alternatives to IV chemotherapy for metastatic breast treatment, the overall majority of breast cancer research focuses on detection and prevention.

While we wait for funding for metastatic breast cancer research to expand, we can advocate for our friends, mothers, daughters, sisters, and wives — as well as our fathers, sons, brothers, and husbands — who are METAvivors living with metastatic cancer by urging our representatives to support the following pending legislation:

H.R.1730 – Cancer Drug Parity Act of 2019

This legislation will benefit all cancer patients receiving chemotherapy in a tablet—rather than intravenously or by injection. Self-administered anticancer medications are treated as prescription drugs rather than life-saving treatments. The bill has bi-partisan support and is currently pending with the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. Please join me in urging Mark Amodei to join the other 94 cosponsors of this bipartisan effort to relieve the exorbitant burden imposed on cancer patients using new methods of treatment — that are less costly to administer.

H.R.2178 – Metastatic Breast Cancer Access to Care Act

More than 155,000 men and women are living with metastatic breast cancer in the U.S. alone. These patients are subject to a 24-month waiting period to be eligible for Medicare benefits and a 5-month waiting period for Social Security Disability insurance, while they are not working. This bill would waive these waiting periods for metastatic breast cancer patients. Join me in urging Rep. Mark Amodei to support this act of compassion.

Our community generously and enthusiastically supports our breast cancer patients. Let’s step up our game and advocate for our friends, neighbors, and loved ones who are battling this insidious disease.

Kate Cunningham

Minden

Hard to defend the indefensible

Editor:

Every day it becomes more obvious that the current occupant of the White House is not the “Real stable genius” he claims, but a foul mouthed buffoon possessing not a single credential that would qualify him for the presidency. The very antithesis of a statesman, this is a man who is so in love with himself he can’t resist flouting his narcissism at every opportunity; a man who brags about “falling in love” with North Korea’s Kim Jung-un, one of the world’s bloodiest dictators; who congratulated Xi Jinping of China on becoming president for life (“maybe we should try this”); who claims victory after abandoning our allies, the Kurds, to the brutality of the Turks and Russians and then sends U.S. forces back into Syria to defend Assad’s oil fields and who proclaims, “there are good people on both sides” after a deadly rally of white supremacists. And, what of the mindless sycophants at his “mega” rallies chanting, “lock her up, lock her up,” “send ’em back, send ’em back” (think, “Sieg Heil, Sieg Heil”?).

I have participated in every presidential election since I became eligible to vote (at age 87, that’s a lot of elections!) and obviously have lived under many presidents for whom I didn’t vote. Indeed, most Americans have lived and survived under administrations that were not of their choosing, but in our lifetime, there has never been a more chilling scenario then the one now unfolding in our country! History, I believe, will not view kindly those who continue to defend the indefensible.

John O’Neill

Minden

Fire horn for emergencies

Editor:

I’m writing this letter to express my indignation over an incident that happened to me around the middle of March this year. I’m a World War II Navy veteran with disabilities from wartime service in the South Pacific. At 97 years old, I was driving home north on Highway 395 to Genoa after a bit of grocery shopping at the Walmart in South Gardnerville.

Driving through Gardnerville, I observed two large yellow fire engines approaching from behind with lights flashing. I immediately pulled over an stopped. When the first yellow fire engine pulled alongside my car, the driver blasted an extremely loud horn. The powerful sound wave blasted my extra powerful hearing aids from my ears to the floor of the car and left me numb and in shock.

When my eyes focused I could see the fire engine far ahead. I waited to recover a bit, retrieved my hearing aids from where they had landed slowly drove home where I immediately went to sleep.

Six months later, at 98, my hearing nerves have not recovered and I am writing this letter in frustration from the PTS symptoms that accompany the loss of hearing and concussion shock memories. I can only believe that the driver who blasted the horn was not aware of the power of the sound waves it produced and the damage they can do. I am writing this letter to help myself heal and perhaps some firefighters about the power of the horn which is there for his emergency use.

Richard Bell

Gardnerville