Letters 6/18/2009

Dear Editor,
I am just wondering if it offends others, as it offends me, that our Onteora High School distributed "Shooter" style shot glasses to our seniors as their Senior Prom gifts? The school faculty and/or staff authorized the prom committee to give our 17 and 18 year old seniors ‘tools' for drinking, even as they posted a letter on the front page of their website from D. Holley Carnright, our District Attorney, commending them for having "taken measures to prevent drinking by students at school-related functions and to deter the consumption of alcoholic beverages by individuals less than 21 years old."
The letter goes on to say "As a result of the efforts of the Ulster County Underage Drinking Prevention Team, the law enforcement agencies of our county, and this office, the dangers presented by underage drinking have been identified and continue to be addressed. Any assistance you can render in that regard will be greatly appreciated by all of us, and more importantly, may save the life of one or more of our children and others."
It appears as if our local high school has not identified the dangers of underage drinking, nor rendered any assistance in that regard, and has not "taken measures to deter" the consumption of alcoholic beverages by 17 and 18 year olds, and has given a gift to the Seniors of 2009, that, I believe, most parents would not be pleased with.
I have contacted the school on several occasions to ask the Principal or the Superintendent to explain the reasoning behind the "shot glass" gifts, and the apparent mixed messages they are giving. Perhaps one day they will return the call and explain.
Is it just me, or does this offend anyone else?
Christina Edwards
Chichester, NY

Dear Editor,
Before I read about alleged harassment at the county jail, I had read the following and it is clear to me that the brief excerpt I am about to quote describes the source of muc of the problem causing sexual harassment, discrimination, rape and murder.
"...as on the plane physical, man is not Man - but only boy, rude, forward and solicitous only to the exert and exhibit his strength...so on the plane spiritual, man is not Man, but only materialist, having all the deficiencies, intellectual and moral the term implies.
In rejecting, as the present age has done, the soul and her intuition, man excludes from this system of his humanity the very idea of woman and renounces his proper manhood."
From the introduction to Honore de Balzac's (French novelist, 1799-1850) Seraphita, this edition published in 1907.
Robert Jacobson
Mount Tremper, NY

Dear Editor,
When Dr. David Gunn was murdered in 1993, the militant anti-abortion movement made a hero out of his killer. At least six of the people who publicly declared themselves supporters of Dr. Gunn’s killer, by signing a public declaration praising that murder, went on to do time for anti-abortion violent terrorism, including two murders. Within two years of Dr. Gunn’s murder, seven more people were wounded at abortion facilities, and four more killed. The same radical fringe is calling Scott Roeder a hero and praising him.
Steve Deese, a radio talk show host on WHON in Ohio asked: “Are babies in Kansas safer today than they were yesterday while George Tiller was still taking in oxygen? Yes—is the answer to the question. Maybe the fact that we have a lawless society that has not protected these babies from this infanticide created the Scott Roeders of the world, who in very John Brown-like fashion, illegally took matters into his own hands, saying if the system will not deal with an evil then to hell with the system.”
David Leach, who publishes a newsletter called “The Prayer and Action
News” to which Scott Roeder submitted articles, told The Associated Press that: “He will be the hero to thousands of babies who will not be slain because Scott sacrificed everything for them.” Leach told the Iowa Independent: “So far, the Bible discussion I have seen overwhelmingly supports anyone willing to sacrifice everything in order to physically stop an abortionist from killing thousands of babies.”
The Prayer and Action News web site stated: “So far, the only way to save hundreds, arguably thousands of unborn lives now has been to destroy abortion buildings or kill abortionists.”
Regina Dinwiddie is a long-time anti-abortion militant told CNN, that Tiller’s murder was: “absolutely justified,” and told The Associated Press that she is glad about Dr. Tiller’s death saying, quote, “I wouldn’t cry for him (Dr. Tiller) no more than I would if somebody dropped a rat and killed it.”
Dan Holman, a member of anti-abortion group in Iowa called “Missionaries to the Preborn,” told CNN, that Dr. Tiller’s death was something to cheer, and that he thinks abortion would justify assassinating the president, who Holeman considered, “Deserving of death.”
A reign of terror has existed for over 30 years. There have been eight murders, seventeen attempted murders, forty-one bombings, and one hundred and seventy-one arsons.
Jim O’Leary
Delhi, NY

Dear Editor,
The murder this week of Dr. George Tiller, a brave physician who continued to provide reproductive health care despite being shot in the arms, and having his clinic vandalized and bombed, reminds us that we can never be complacent about our rights. Simply because there is Roe v. Wade, simply because choice is legal, simply because it is the law of the land - does not mean that those of us who fought to put it in place 35 years ago can relax now.
Women's rights to reproductive health care, including abortion, are being squeezed and narrowed as the physicians and health care workers who provide these services are threatened, harassed - and killed.
What can we do, besides weeping for Dr. Tiller or raging against his killer? We can urge the government to revitalize the National Task Force on Violence against Health Care Providers. We can send money and support to Planned Parenthood, Medical Students for Choice, and NARAL-Pro Choice America.
We can speak out against Bill O'Reilly and others who fan the flames of anti-choice violence to cut out the incendiary rhetoric. Dr. Tiller's blood is on their hands.
Sheila Isenberg, Chris Collins
Wittenberg, NY

Dear Editor,
Hooray for Oklahoma !
The state law passed today, 37 to 9, had a few liberals in the mix, an amendment to place the Ten Commandments on the front entrance to the state capitol. The feds in D.C., along with the ACLU, said it would be a mistake. Hey this is a conservative state, based 20 on Christian values...!
Guess what? We did it anyway.
We recently passed a law in the state to incarcerate all illegal immigrants, and ship them back to where they came from, unless they want to get a green card and become an American citizen. They all scattered. Hope we didn't send any of them to your state. This was against the advice of the Federal Government, and the ACLU, they said it would be a mistake.
Guess what? We did it anyway.
Yesterday we passed a law to include DNA samples from any and all illegals to the Oklahoma database, for criminal investigative purposes. Pelosi said it was unconstitutional.
Guess what? We did it anyway.
Several weeks ago, we passed a law, declaring Oklahoma as a Sovereign
State, not under Federal Government directives. That, for your information, makes Oklahoma and Texas the only states to do so. Guess what.........More states are likely to follow. Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, both Carolina's, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri, 20Arkansas, West Virginia, just to name a few. Should Mississippi act, so will Florida . Save your
confederate money, it appears the South is about to rise up once again.
The federal Government has made bold steps to take away our guns. Oklahoma, a week ago, passed a law confirming people in this state have the right
to bear arms and transport them in their vehicles. I'm sure that was a set back for the Kennedys and Ms Pelosi.
Guess what ? We did it anyway.
By the way, Obama does not like any of this.
Guess what? Who cares... We're doing it anyway.
Alan Wikman
Kingston, NY

Dear Editor,
At no other time has there been a greater need for a national health care system. Problematic, however, is that few people realize how severe the personal and economic inequities are, as Washington approaches a decision which will affect our citizens for decades.
From 2000 to 2007, the cost of living rose 22 percent; wages increased an average 20 percent; medical care costs rose 30 percent; while health insurance premiums skyrocketed 73 percent, and continued to increase to the present-day at 90 percent! (Also, interesting to note that most market activity remained stagnant for this period. Not so for health insurance corporations, which continued to receive their highest economic returns in history.)
As our citizenry feels the effects of a declining economy, more of us will, even if we are among the fortunate with health coverage, find our insurance to be unaffordable. We are the only industrialized nation without a national health plan. Yet, as a national economy, we spend twice as much on healthcare as any of these other countries; with less positive result: i.e. the US has a higher infant mortality rate than 25 countries!
As with the many issues facing our nation, nothing will change for the positive unless we, the people, determine to inform ourselves, and state our positions, widely, to our elected government representatives. I urge you to learn about HR676, consider the implications of a nation without health care for all, and understand that single-payer insurance (aka Enhanced Medicare for All) would be easily funded through a 4.5 percent employer tax and a 3.4 percent payroll tax - even together, a far cry from current insurance costs.
Visit www.calnurses.org; www.singlepayernewyork.org; www.pnhp.org; and www.healthcare-now.org for more information.
Ruth Molloy
New Paltz, NY

Dear Editor,
As New York's jobs melt away and its need for health care grows, the Obama administration has proposed cutting New Yorkers' nursing home benefits by some $75 million in just the first year. That's the wrong prescription for New York's economic and health care ailments.
The idea of slashing New Yorkers' nursing home benefits under Medicare Part A originated with the Bush administration. It seems inconsistent with President Obama's core policy goals, job creation and health care reform.
These workers are the key caregivers in our nursing homes. They measurably improve care for a population whose numbers and needs are growing.
These cuts will compound another ongoing crisis: chronic under-funding of nursing homes by state Medicaid rates. Providing skilled nursing care will cost more. Promising quality improvement programs will be threatened. In the end, our ability to care for New York's oldest, sickest seniors will diminish.
Cuts to care and jobs? Our seniors deserve better. So do our workers. President Obama, please reconsider.
Richard J. Herrick, President & CEO
NYS Health Facilities Association
Albany, NY

Dear Editor,
My three years on the School board and my brief tenure as its president are nearly over. I have some thoughts I want to share about how best to move forward.
Our District still lacks a comprehensive plan that considers all of the issues we need to look at – with their associated cost and tax implications. Voters have never been presented this. For me, the results of recent years’ board and budget votes give some indications of direction, but they don’t tell a complete story.
Last year about 2500 out of 4500 voters supported a slate advocating no 5-8 middle school configuration; and opposing the closure of any additional elementary schools. Three years earlier, with 10 people running, the top vote-getter got approximately 1900 out of 4000 votes cast, where the voters’ priority seemed to be low taxes. There are 11,500 possible voters in our district, of which about 6,000 are registered to vote in school elections. Not included are those property owners who have not designated their Ulster County address as their primary one – but do pay a significant part of the total tax levies for our schools, etc. So a wide swath of our taxpayers haven’t weighed in on any of these issues.
Both our School Board and the public need to understand and make decisions reflecting the priorities of our community, but we as a board haven’t given everyone complete information to reflect on, and we’ve tended to view certain votes at certain times as mandates when they reflect a slice of our electorate’s views. It’s the Board and Superintendent’s responsibility to discuss and set all of the district’s projects and programs, inviting community members to join the process, and then survey or get a vote from them on a comprehensive plan. Onteora has spent the last 10 years fighting over one issue or another, and it inhibits our ability to make long-term decisions and allocate resources to support those decisions. I think the only way to overcome this is to develop a thoughtful, inclusive long-term plan.
I recommend that the Board and Superintendent take the next year to create such a plan, incorporating the community in their work. I suggest they use our recent strategic plan (which focused on curriculum) as a model for the process, and that they create task forces on a variety of issues whose recommendations culminate in a long-term district plan. Then this should be presented to the public, so that we all can understand what programs and projects we value enough that can and will support financially.
Budget-building for the 2009/10 school year will begin soon. I recommend before the Board and Superintendent begin this process that they survey voters presenting a rough plan incorporating everything we would ideally want, and which details the costs and tax implications for these things. From this scope we’d get a clear sense from the voters (all 11,000 of them) as to what level of taxation they could bear against the programming it offers. We’ve operated under the impression that taxpayers don’t want any increases. But the truth is that’s impossible to achieve, and we will have to cut many things to stem our rising costs. We have an approximate 170 students graduating this year, with incoming classes of approximately 105-110 students. We need to understand the entire community’s views on how important various programs and configurations, etc. really are and what their costs will be going forward. And we have to keep in mind that none of us want to make our community unaffordable for those with fixed or limited incomes. The programs to consider include the retention of three elementary schools; the variety and breadth of programs we offer; professional development to support and foster improved teaching; ms configuration, the ms and hs electives, the extra-curricular sports and clubs at the ms and hs; the summer school and intervention programs; any departmental curricular innovations that improve learning; facility upgrades –both because our old buildings need it and because there are instances where physical conditions inhibit learning; inclusion of green and sustainability initiatives; technology; class size; and busing. Yes, it’s a lot of issues and many are quite complicated.
We are fortunate to have the in-house capability to do this, with a very able Superintendent, and a very smart board. Encourage them to do this. Write letters, call or email the administration at OnteoraBOE@onteora.k12.ny.us, and LFord@onteora.k12.ny.us. Or come to the Board’s meetings and speak.
Again, I want to thank all who have helped me serve in my three years on the board. It has been an interesting experience, a challenging one, with its accomplishments and its frustrations. There is a very good foundation here – and I hope we can build on it to increase our educational excellence and the entire community’s participation in it. I wish continued success to the Board and to all of the staff and thank them all for their dedication.
Maxanne Resnick
Chichester, NY

Dear Editor,
Re: land use in the town of Phoenicia, I propose that a youth hostel be built on the site of the former Shandaken Arms. Although the sewage issue may pose a problem, a youth hostel would bring in young travelers eager to buy local products and patronize local businesses, anxious to keep the area green and pristine, and contribute to the area’s liveliness.
As a recent college grad who spent a semester abroad in Ireland (my sister spent a year in southern France) I am particularly sensitive to the benefits of youth hostels. I depended on them for clean, affordable, safe, fun, and sustainable accommodation. After seeing first hand the positive effects of youth hostels on European towns and cities, I can testify that they promote healthy traffic of the kind Catskill towns need.
A youth hostel would stimulate local entrepreneurship. For example, an entrepreneur might well open a local bicycle rental offering sturdy bikes, hourly or daily, at affordable prices. Bikes are not only a clean, fun way to travel, they reduce car traffic, especially in summer where parking is an issue.
Likewise, a youth hostel might hire a local resident to manage a communal garden, run by hostel employees and guests alike, reducing food waste.
Finally, a youth hostel would bring in students and other young people from around the world to Phoenicia’s front porch, strengthening the town’s commitment to diversity and culture, in addition to strengthening the local economy.
I ask the town of Phoenicia to seriously consider supporting the construction of a youth hostel in the vacant spot where the former Shandaken Arms used to stand. It would be a smart and rewarding move.
Vanessa Weber
Shandaken & New York, NY

Dear Editor,
There have been numerous letters in our local papers attacking the proposed Resort at Catskill Park. Most of these letters were written by a small group of members of the so called “Catskill Heritage Alliance”. The most recent attacks have unfairly included Belleayre Mountain Ski Center. The CHA has written to Governor Patterson urging him not to allocate any stimulus money for Belleayre Mountain expansion. How is it possible that a group of supposedly concerned citizens, whose primary focus is to stop the private development of a resort in our area, loses sight of the desperate economic plight of our region? As taxpayers and “stakeholders” we personally resent the attack on one of the most viable economic and community oriented resources in our area, The New York State operated Belleayre Ski Center.
To try and deprive Belleayre of any of the much needed budgeted state or stimulus funds, that is needed to maintain and expand this park, is to deprive our community of one of its most valuable life support systems. There are actual human beings, our relatives, friends and neighbors, who work here, and whose livelihood and healthcare depend on the success of this mountain. There are surrounding villages and businesses that have and could continue to benefit if this mountain is successful. The current stagnation due to these incessant attacks is sabotaging our economic future.
We think that it is important to separate the growth of Belleayre Mountain from the development of the resort and approach each as two separate entities. There is no doubt that a resort and state park facility would definitely compliment each other but to think that this area could survive without the park is equivalent to turning your back on the future of our community. Why are we allowing a few to speak for all of us? Why do some people have the need to fulfill their personal differences and vendettas at the expense of “our” mountain? This is a facility created for the people by the people and definitely has proven over and over again to be a pillar within our community.
The park offers down hill skiing, snowboarding, cross country skiing, hiking, picnicking, swimming, boating and cultural events, and so much more, to thousands of visitors to our area each year while maintaining a healthy focus of contributions to our community. The facility offers a variety of affordable plans and programs so that the “average working person” can enjoy outdoor & cultural activities. We are in awe of the great programs offered, such as skiing to the special people of ARC, Adaptive Sports for the disabled, Tuesday’s Children is a program catering to relatives and victims of 9/11 and other programs directed to assist our school children and senior citizens. We found it admirable that the people of Belleayre reached out to help the business community this winter by putting a BOGO (buy one, get one) stimulus program in place. To receive a free lift ticket a guest just needed to buy their lift ticket for that day and turn in a receipt showing that they spent $50 at a local business that was a member of the chamber of commerce.
In addition, Belleayre Center has supported the fundraising efforts of many of our charities such as Margaretville Hospital, Relay for Life, The Boy Scouts of America, two of our local animal shelters and the Alzheimer’s Foundation to name a few.
Did you know that many of the staff members at Belleayre volunteer their time to make these programs and fundraisers available? The staff especially took the extra step this past year with the withdrawal of promised funding by the DEC. Funding that was withdrawn partly because of the pressure from the highly debatable issues brought up by the group trying to stop the resort. And to add insult to injury two ski centers in Greene County and Plattekill Mt. saw these actions as an opportunity to jump on the band wagon.
The people of Belleayre have repeatedly shown their dedication to our community. Now it is our time to show them that we recognize the value of having such a state facility in our backyard and that it is a privilege. This is truly a mountain owned by “we”, the people.
We extend our personal gratitude to the staff and supporters of Belleayre who did a tremendous job of keeping the Ski Center open in spite of lack of funding, deep cuts in staffing and constantly being bombarded by unfair and inappropriate accusations. It was hard to keep your spirits up but you did a fabulous job!
Mark and Ann Lukin
Margaretville, NY

Dear Editor,
Let's be real clear about why Belleayre Mountain Ski Center isn't getting federal stimulus money. Stimulus funding to expand facilities at Belleayre Mountain Center ( BMSC) has been delayed due to failure of NYS DEC to complete a Unit Management Plan (UMP) in 2002 as required by DEC guidelines. The UMP was delayed so that it could incorporate changes requested by the developer of The Belleayre Resort in Catskill Park. This delay made a "shovel ready" project impossible in 2009 since neither the BMSC UMP or the Environmental Impact Statement from Crossroad Ventures have yet been done. If the BMSC UMP had been done in 2002 as mandated, then expansion of facilities at BMSC would be a "shovel ready" project now and able to get stimulus money in an area that needs it badly. Assertions in a recent letter that the Catskill Heritage Alliance (CHA) has been attacking BMSC are absurd and misleading. The Catskill Heritage Alliance has been a long time strong supporter of Belleayre Mountain Ski Center as a valuable regional resource and will continue that support.
Kevin Millar
Owego, NY

Dear Editor,
Recent letters accusing the Catskill Heritage Alliance (CHA) of personal attacks on the Belleayre Mountain Ski Center and its employees, and accusing us of trying to torpedo stimulus funds for the Ski Center are factually wrong on all counts. Not only do we support the Ski Center and applaud the key role it plays in the community, we’re also on record that the Ski Center should be expanded to its full complement under the 2002 draft Unit Management Plan (UMP).
We did not and do not oppose stimulus funding for the Ski Center; we simply flagged suspicious entries on the list of stimulus requests asking for $62 million to expand the publicly owned Belleayre Ski Center, “and with it, the development of the privately owned Belleayre Resort.” Using stimulus funding needed for infrastructure and economic development for private luxury ski condos clearly would have been an abuse of the program.
It is not CHA’s work (as if we had such power – we can’t even get in to see DEC staff or obtain documents through our FOIL requests!) that torpedoed stimulus funding and continues to bedevil the Ski Center expansion we all want to see. It’s the inappropriate, damaging, and apparently deliberate strategy of blurring the lines between the public Ski Center and the private Resort, so that the private developer can lay claim to public aid in his bid to build a highly inappropriate project on sensitive, steep-slope forestland.
This situation came about because the 2002 UMP was never implemented, as it should have been, and was later discarded as the developer’s plans for the private Resort evolved. In 2007, an Agreement in Principle (AIP) was rammed through by then-Governor Spitzer calling for a new UMP requiring the state to purchase the old Highmount Ski Center and create ski-in ski-out capabilities for the private luxury Resort. We are still waiting for that new UMP today, but the premises for it laid out in the AIP are so confused, linking the public Ski Center and the private Resort so inextricably, that even experts have trouble telling where one ends and the other begins. That confusion is calculated to help the developer get the Resort he wants, but it hurts the rest of us.
So far, derailing the 2002 UMP and adopting the AIP have held up Ski Center expansion for seven years. The murky, joined-at-the-hip approach of expanding the Ski Center “and with it” building the Resort effectively disqualified the Center from stimulus funding it might otherwise have gotten. Those are both losses for the public interest, and more will accrue until the Center and Resort projects are de-linked.
No one disputes that the Ski Center and the people who work there are pillars of this community. The best way to support them and enhance the Center’s role as an economic engine is to cut its expansion loose from the burden of an inappropriate private project that threatens to enrich the developer at the expense of our local economy and environment.
Richard Schaedle, Chairman
Catskill Heritage Alliance
Pine Hill NY

Dear Editor,
It is sad that the Townsman has ceased publication. It performed great service in keeping us up to date in civic and political matters and on environmental matters relating to the waterways, regulatory disputes and regulations. Newspapers all over are closing both from lack of profit and decreased usage. The use of internet instead of papers is a growing trend and it could be dangerous by reducing the diversity of news sources. Will our information be controlled by the voices of those who have gobbled up the independent voices? Let us support our newspapers.
Mescal Hornbeck
Woodstock, NY

Dear Editor,
I am having a problem with your fairness, and your judgement. In the past you have returned a letter or two as being less than acceptable for publication. You requested revisions or a better choice of words. Those letters never encompassed name calling, derogatory terms or descriptive adjectives. They may have been "left handed" compliments as I am inclined to do in written or spoken communication.
In the Olive Press of June 4, 2009 a letter adressed to you, the missal begins Dear Editor; "To Cheney the Dick" and proceeds to attack all Republicans with inappropriate hysteria, vile and venom. That's OK. I love the the First Ammendment which is protected by the Second Ammendment, the only ammendment of 27 that according to some state what the people cannot do. All the rest are about what the government cannot do.
My complaint is in the public addressing of a former Vice-President. We can and do speculate as to what Mr Cheney's activities were and where he was at times. We have seen a number of "senior moments" on tape experienced by VP Joe Biden and no one has declared him to appear as other than a decent person.
Perhaps we would do better to turn off the David Lettermans and others with over active imaginations or wishful thinking. In many letters I have criticized Mr Cheney, GW Bush , Rush Limbaugh and others. I have suggested we support President Obama and let him take whatever errors into retirement whenever.To Mr J. Andrew Smith of Bloomfield, and those that support his brand of humor I would recommend keeping company with the "lolly-pop" crowd. You are too imature for the rest of us. And you have enough to do with Corzine's high Blomfield taxes.
Glenn T. Anderson
Olivebridge, NY

Dear Editor,
You move to a new town . You are walking your dog - look at him prancing along, secured by his harness and six foot leash when you notice dirty looks from your neighbor. Or, worst of all, the authorities come to your home and inform you that you must remove your dog from the town, or surrender him to be killed. Do these things happen in America? Yes, they do...
These nightmares. and others like them, are the GRIM REALITY of breed specific dog regulation or BSL. Across America, more than 300 communties have restricted or banned outright 36 different breeds of dogs. Is your dog obedience trained, a therapy dog, or just a spoiled couch potato? It may not matter. If your town decides that your dog is a member of any of the banned or restricted breeds, you will have fewer rights than your neighbor. Even if that neighbor allows his dog to run loose and become a nuisance in the community, or if he has chained his unsocialized dog in the far corners of the yard, his dog may still be viewed more favorably than your cherished, family companion. Towns and cities across a America ban or restrict dogs without regard to any actions of the dogs themselves, or the degree of acre and control excercised by responsible owners.
Want to take your dog to visit a relative? Depending where your relatives live, you may be placing your beloved pet in jeopardy, because that community has enacted a broadly worded, draconion statue that targets dogs that look like your dog. Many people don't learn about breed specific legislation until a police officer or animal control officer knocks on their door and tells them the dog sitting on their couch has been declared a dangerous animal.
Once enacted, breed specific regulation is hard to repeal. The task force that studied dog issues in Prince Georges's County, Maryland concluded that the countys breed ban was expensive and and ineffective. Denver’s breed ban was expensive and the harshest in the country, Under the terms, authorities have killed thousands of dogs, many of whom were wonderful & loved family companions.
Enormous amounts of studies show that this is not working and instead what need as to be focused on is enforcing leash laws nd promoting owner education.
What can we do? Know the animal ordinances in your town. Don't just be a good pet owner. Insist that your town hold all pet owners to the same high standards to which you hold yourself, what ever kind of dog they share their lives with.
Breed specific laws are cruel. They don't make our communites safer. Humane care of companion animals does. And REMEMBER those dogs who do search and rescue?. German shepherds, Rottweilers, Labrador Retrievers? Can you imagine if they banned them in NY? Who would have looked for suvivors of 9/11? Maybe a Chihauhua or Boston Terrier?
Let’s not jump on media "hysteria" breed specific with false information provided by the papparazzi, good people of Shandaken, with a "lynch mob mentality" in the Catskills. Education and taking responsiblity is the tool needed here. As for the building permit for the kennel to house these dogs are you now in the kennel business, Mr. Christie? Also. I don't believe that Jen is a certified dog trainer, because she had her dog , who is a wonderful dog mind you, trained in Kingston at Canine Crazy.
Anyway, the main conclusion of the studies was that breed specific legislation doesn't work for several reasons: that there are inherent problems in trying to determine a dog's breed, making enforcement difficult at best; that fatal attacks represent a very small portion of the bite related injuries and should not be the major factor driving public policy; and that existing non- breed legislation already exists and offers promise for the prevention of dog bites. The focus should be on enforcing leash laws and promoting owner education programs. Learn the facts people do some research. You'll be surprised how many other breed dogs cause attacks.
At perhaps no time in history has mankind been as ignorant of natural canine behavior as we find ourselves in the 21st century. The human/dog bond. Dogs have been around for over 31700 yrs. the most complex and profound inter-species relationship in the history of mankind - has been reduced to a a simple axiom: bred of dog = degree of dangerousness
The fact remains that dog owners, of any breed of dog, is the ownership issue. Punish the deed, not the breed. For more info on these important issues I compiled some websites for anyone interested www.hsus.org;www.petitiononlin.org; www.akc.org; www.americanhumane.org; www.avna.org; or www.aspca.org.
Janet Chirrick
Big Indian, NY

Dear Editor,
The 9th Annual Women's Health and Fitness Expo is complete and we're just beginning to look at the impact and meaning of this growing event. Each year seems better than the last, and once again I'm overwhelmed by the community's enthusiastic reception. I'm especially moved by the growing number of people who come forward offering help, wanting to be a part of it. People learn of the Expo from others who have attended or volunteered; previous volunteers ask if there isn't more they can do. I feel deep gratitude that I live and practice in a community in which people care about health and about one another and are eager to do something about it.
This year the Expo was fortunate to have once again the many volunteers from the community. Victoria Langling, with the help of her regular employer Markertek, once again came on board to help organize volunteers. Numerous other volunteers, from teens to senior groups, handed out flyers and spread the word to their community groups. Several organizations distributed flyers including The Jewish Federation, local Little Leagues, The Kingston Chamber of Commerce, The Kingston City Schools, Adam's Fairacre Farms and numerous others.
The day of the event, Laurie Kelley, Director of UARC in Kingston, was invaluable in organizing registration and admissions at the event. Amanda LaValle and Annie LaValle served as zone leaders. Students from Ulster Boces and Chef Alec served as assistants to celebrity chef Sara Moulton, on and off stage. Members of several groups including League of Women Voters, RSVP, Hudson Valley Horrors, Kingston High school, Onteora High school, The Daily Bread Soup Kitchen, Woodstock Film Festival, Markertek, Labcorp, Hudson Valley Foot Associates and many others were on hand leading up to and on the day of the event.
Special thanks to Wendy Lamb, Angie Vigliotti and Laura LoPresti who helped organize the event and served as coordinators. Pam Tack served as artistic director with the help of Adam, Ben and Sydney. Web and Expo production were made possible with the help of Christine Baldelli and Matt Deakin of Lilypod Media.
Ulster County Executive, Michael Hein; Deputy County Executive, Adele Reiter; Senator John Bonacic; Nina Postupak, Ulster County Clerk; Alice Lawliss, Deputy Clerk; Susan Cummings, Ulster County Legislator; as well as Lori DuBord, representing Congressman Maurice Hinchey, and Ashley Dittus, representing Assemblyman Kevin Cahill, were on hand the day of the event offering support.
Such local involvement, with over 150 booths, seminars, workshop, fitness and cooking demos by local hospitals, businesses, community and non- profit organizations, demonstrates our commitment to building a healthier community. Sponsors contributing to the Expo this year were Markertek, MVP Healthcare, Medical Associates of the Hudson Valley, Mid-Valley Cardiology, Northern Dutchess Hospital, River Radiology, Adam's Fairacre Farms and many more.
In addition, these community members have not only given of themselves, but have brought family and friends on board. My husband, Dr. Craig Moss, and my daughter Jessica helped in many ways from fundraising to working onsite at Tech City, giving out flyers and volunteering the day of the event. My colleagues at Medical Associates of the Hudson Valley, Dr. Marc Tack, Dr. Michael Sheran, Dr. Charles Kutler and and Dr. John Froude, as well as all the Medical Associates of the Hudson Valley staff, have supported the Expo since its inception and continue to be a part of the event.
This major undertaking is nurtured and guided by the dedication of The Women's Health and Fitness Foundation Board. The support of Joyce Lieblich, Dr. Jane Ferguson and Marc Braunstein, as well as many members of the supporting board, have allowed both the EXPO and the Foundation to grow and develop.
The Foundation's goal is that Ulster County be the healthiest in the state and we believe this starts with individuals adapting a healthy lifestyle and spreading the word. The Expo would not be possible without the enthusiasm of the entire community. It is your willingness to be involved and the excitement you bring to the hard work of making the Expo happen that makes me believe, without a doubt, that we can achieve the goals we're setting for a Healthy Ulster County. You've proven that you care and you've demonstrated that caring about health, making choices for health, helping others understand that they too can make a change, is infectious in the best of all possible ways.
Together we are creating a new way of looking at health. Together, as a community, we will make Ulster County the healthiest county in the state. Thank you for helping to build healthier families, a healthier community, a healthier Hudson Valley.
Debra Karnasiewicz, M. D.
Kingston, NY

Dear Editor,
On behalf of the Board of trustees of the Olive Free Library I would like to express my sincere appreciation to all the members of the community who helped make the Olive Free Library's 50th Anniversary Celebration a great success. Thank you to all the community members who donated items for the Silent Auction and to the Boiceville Supermarket and the Boiceville Wine and Spirits for donations of food and wine. Thank you to Lisa Menard for a wonderful afternoon of music, to Rosalie Burgher and Ruth Anne Muller for their great contributions to the program and to all the people who came out to celebrate this historic event. The Olive Library is a true asset to our community and is here today because of the foresight of Olive residents who believed a town library could be a center of knowledge and community activity, which it certainly is today. Here’s to the next 50 years of the Olive Free Library!
Mary Ann Shepard, President
Olive Free Library

Dear Editor,
I regret that circumstances have not until now afforded an opportunity to respond to Jeff. Lieberson’s lengthy letter in response to my article(s) on the current national "Food Safety"bills. His letter’s content, taken verbatim et literatim from Representative Hinchey’s website, is a blanket response to criticisms of HR 875 rather than to my own article (which dealt specifically with that very response, called the FWW statement, in part three of the article, as well as critical comment on the bill). Replying to a reiteration of the document I had already dissected is in no way meant to be an attack upon the Congressman or Mr. Lieberson, who graciously agreed to the interview which I drew upon for my recent article(s). Rather, it is directed toward the unsigned stonewall document quoted in the letter which did not originate in Hinchey’s office but is being used widely and deviously to deflect earnest critique of indefinite and very questionable sections of the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009, HR-875, which Rep. Hinchey agreed to co-sponsor with scores of other legislators who may or may not have actually studied the bill..
After attempting to discredit the bill’s detractors with ad hominem characterizations and erroneously portraying inquiries and criticisms from small farmers, legal observers and others concerned with the bill’s language as "Internet hysteria" and a "misinformation campaign," the FWW statement cites the Organic Trade Association and the Organic Consumer’s Association for support As even their Wikipedia profile points out the "OTA has been criticized for being an agent of big business interests working to undermine the credibility of the organic movement," and played a hand in diluting the accepted definition of "organic" in the 2006 Agricultural Appropriations Act, leading the Chicago Reader to observe "Organic...Means Whatever the Feds Say It Means." The FWW statement also fails to mention that, although approving of parts of it, the OCA does NOT support the bill, saying: "We share the concerns of the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, which opposes the bill because it could be interpreted to impose onerous regulations on small farms..." They sagely add that "(t)he number one thing we could do to increase food safety is to stop the factory farming of animals" which, of course, are primary factors in foodborne illness today.
The statement, which first appeared on the Food & Water Watch website (and, with aggressively organized distribution, quickly on virtually every other website backing the bill), masterfully misguiding many soon after public reaction began to emerge, also makes use of the Annenberg Political Fact Checker website, which is often useful, particularly to Progressives seeking to verify or disprove partisan political claims and those who just relish the perverse joy of exposing the lies of politicians but, looked at objectively, is as unbiased as Fox News is "fair and balanced," with a worm jar of funding ties to an elite foundation which operates above the tug of left-right debate but shows not inconsequential links to Senator, now President, Obama,, whose Chief-of-Staff, Rahm Emmanuel, who had been the point man for NAFTA in the 1990s, has lived rent-free in the Washington D.C. home of Representative Rosa DeLauro, who is the primary sponsor of HR 875, which meshes with Obama’s long-standing ties to the biotech industry as outlined in my article, and so on...
While conservative pundits typically miss the point in these tangles, sparing their corporate friends to chase independent geese, the network of associations from which these food bills emerged commonly tramples party boundaries in pursuit of global objectives. Invariably crafted by industry attorneys, this kind of legislation benefits consumers only inadvertently. Often the actions proposed in such bills mandate new technologies to benefit business sectors at the expense of the general public- such as irradiation, to cite just one example, which strips food of nutritional value in order to prolong product shelf life rather than devise strategies to localize supply.
We have entered a new era in which food and water supply are destined to become areas of intense conflict in the very near future and, although few in the political arena seem anxious at the moment to point it out, the national sectors of food and finance are on parallel tracks to total globalization of national resources, "harmonized" with World Trade Organization rules and objectives. An assertive rollout of expanding biotech initiatives this Spring rides shotgun with the new legislation, trackable on industry sites like Biotechcheck.org, with Monsanto & company strengthening their hands in China and elsewhere around the world as bills like HR 759, the FDA Globalization Act of 2009, S-384, and the others seek to mandate the presence of genetically modified microorganisms in food aid to Africa and more (see Food First’s Policy Brief No. 18; "Why the Lugar-Casey Global Food Security Act will Fail to Curb Hunger" or Nicole Johnson’s astute article "The 2009 Food ‘Safety’ Bills Harmonize Agribusiness Practices in Service of Corporate Global Governance" at the FarmWarsInfo or OpEdNews.com). It is, as the Food-To-Consumer Legal Defense Fund contends, a federal takeover of the national food supply to tailor the system to global aims and, despite legislators’ denials, it’s clear that the biotech industry is in the engine room.
Last month, the prestigious American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) joined the call for an immediate moratorium on the industry’s GM foods experiment on the American public, issuing a position paper which recognizes, in review of research studies, that ‘(t)here is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects. There is causation." As biologist David Schubert of the Salk Institute has observed, since GM-related illnesses develop over time, their causes are difficult to trace and can have serious long-range consequences for children.
The AAEM study notes: "Specificity of the association of GM foods and specific disease processes is also supported. Multiple animal studies show significant immune dysregulation, including upregulation of cytokines associated with asthma, allergy and inflammation. Animal studies also show altered structure and function of the liver, including altered lipid and carbohydrate metabolism as well as cellular changes that could lead to accelerated aging and possibly lead to the accumulation of reactive oxygen species (ROS). Changes in the kidney, pancreas and spleen have also been documented. A recent 2008 study links GM corn with infertility, showing a significant decrease in offspring over time and significantly lower litter weight in mice fed GM corn. This study also found that over 400 genes were found to be expressed differently in the mice fed GM corn. These are genes known to control protein synthesis and modification, cell signalling, cholesterol synthesis and insulin regulation. Studies also show intestinal damage in animals fed GM foods, including proliferative cell growth and disruption of the intestinal immune system."
In short, the simplistic gene modification being employed to transfer toxins into cells via "guns" or bacterial and viral vectors ignore complex cellular networking processes and quantum biowave genetic functions, leading inevitably to unpredictable cellular reactions. More than 95% of DNA has unknown functions. The widespread use of viruses in these processes opens a door wherein they may recombine, creating dangerous new strains. Research indicates that ingested virus genes may be taken in by body cells and remain in organs. The hazards go on and on as the money pours in. The biotech companies are aware of this and hide their sponsored studies as "business secrets." When rapid onset symptoms are manifest, as they were in the pet food crisis of 2007, industry-linked universities can do chemical studies to pin the blame on a convenient patsy like melamine, without resort to or even mention of tests for the presence of GM ingredients which might produce the kidney crystallizations found by the university researchers at Guelph (where Monsanto bases its Canadian headquarters) and Cornell (which co-holds GM patents with Monsanto). With so many billions at stake, it’s easier to blame cyanic acid in combination with other natural byproducts of melamine (because they will be present if melamine is present( than it is to check for transgenic proteins or enzymes which will not show up in mere chemical tests. When the leading genetic authority Arpad Pusztai reported dire results in animal studies with genetically modified potatoes at the Rowett Research Institute of Aberdeen, Scotland in 1995, the designated patsy was Concanavalin A, a lectin which Dr. Pusztai did not use but was slyly and misleadingly inserted into the debate as political channels from the White House, through Britain’s Prime Minister Blair, exerted the pressure to silence the scientist’s protestations. An internal Monsanto report at that time by Stan Greenberg (spouse of HR 875 chief sponsor Rosa DeLauro) assessing the negative impact on public opinion from events stirred up by the case is quoted the "Attack of the Killer Potatoes" chapter of Rampton and Stauber’s 2001 book Trust Us, We’re Experts!
If, as claimed, bills like HR 875 are designed to address food safety, why isn’t the issue of crops modified using transgenic vectors like Salmonella typhimunium, Shiga toxin 2e (Stx2e) and Escherichia Coli a focus of these bills? Why does the FDA continue to ignore its own scientists? Why are government agencies like the USDA and FDA permitted to co-own patents with biotech companies? If, as claimed by HR875's supporters, it is not designed to serve an agenda suited to the agri-industrial giants who contribute weightily to the political war chests of incumbents like Rep. DeLauro, then what exactly is the problem with amending its language to explicitly exempt small farms, gardeners and the like from its clutches? The first complaint of critics is that the bill avoids being scale appropriate. That’s easily fixable. Also, the Annenberg column finds "hysteria" in concerns about DeLaurio’s husband’s past dealings with the Monsanto corporation but if, as claimed, the bill was not authored by industry insiders, why not just reveal the names of the proud experts who crafted it and put a swift end to such speculation?
There is much more to say which space will not permit but I would urge Congressman Hinchey, a co-sponsor of HR 875 whose previous and continuing efforts at reform of the FDA’s "revolving door" atrocities of regulation by industry instruction and blatant corruption have been admirable, to follow the example of Representative Chelle Pingree of Maine who, identifying herself as a small organic gardener, has withdrawn her co-sponsorship due to the bill’s potential impact on small farmers. Representative Hinchey sits on the Agricultural Appropriations Committee which DeLauro chairs but surely there are issues here which transcend routine political quid pro quo.
If there are a few who have worked themselves into a lather approaching hysteria over these bills, it may be understandable. They are more than subtly geared to benefit the largest food firms, CAFOs (Confined Animal Feeding Operations) and the associated interests who make no secret of their desire to destroy their comparatively small competitors. In turn, the diminutive opposition most threatened by the laws are protesting that it is the factory farm systems of the big guys that create the vast majority of the current problems with food safety. These aren’t all hysterical individuals worked up over trifles. If you take the time to look closely, you’ll find that this legislative onslaught IS a big deal with far-reaching implications for the future and there is real substance to far too many of their objections.
Gary Alexander
West Shokan, NY

Dear Editor,
Many problems in our society will be solved when young men are willing to become good fathers. Of course, they can do this only if they have an example to follow. As fathers, we need to be the strongest role models for children, especially for our sons.
I loved my father. He had a tremendous sense of humor, but he also was strict and set boundaries which I didn't always appreciate at the time. I always knew he loved me. Once when I was eight or nine, I angered him so much that he threatened to punish me. I looked up at him and, before I knew what I was doing, blurted out, "Papa, I'm really sorry. Do what you have to do-but I know you still love me." To my astonishment, he leaned down, put his arms around me and said with a tenderness that came from the bottom of his heart: "Christoph, I forgive you."
Like many fathers today, my father's work sometimes kept him away from home for long stretches. I remember as a five-year-old, if I refused to obey, all my mother needed to do was to show me his picture. "Your Papa wouldn't like it," she'd tell me, and I'd give in.
I felt very secure just being with my father. As a small boy I decided I wanted to be like him when I grew up. This relationship held me through hard times, even after his death. Now I want to pass this on to my children, grandchildren, and to all of you.
Fathers, if you love your wife and if you love your children, give them your time. Spending time together will give your family inner and emotional security. This is much more important than financial security. The Chilean poet Gabriela Mistral writes, "Many things can wait. Children cannot... To them we cannot say 'tomorrow.' Their name is today."
The love we show our children by giving them our time and attention can hold them in good stead even years down the road. As Dostoevsky reminds us in The Brothers Karamazov, "You must know that there is nothing higher and stronger and more wholesome for life in the future than some good memory, especially a memory of childhood, of home...For if a man has only one good memory left in his heart, even that may keep him from evil."
To be a father is to fulfill a noble vocation. But fatherhood is not for everyone: it is not for cowards or for those who are unsure of themselves. Once we become fathers, we remain fathers until we die. A true father must be a leader-a captain who guides his family's ship through perilous waters to safe shores, a general who rallies his troops to take on the daily battles.
On the other hand, a father should also model love and compassion. Jesus was not afraid to compare himself to a hen gathering her chicks. He also wept. These qualities belong to true manhood, and a true father will seek to embody them.
Finally, I believe even the best intentioned fathers will not be able to fulfill their task without finding a firm faith in God. When they do, our families and the entire country will be strengthened, because strong families form the backbone of our nation.
Johann Christoph Arnold
Rifton, NY