Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

    • All
    • Today
    • Last 7 Days
    • Last 30 Days
    • Select a Date Range

Comment Archives: stories: Opinion: Editorial

Re: “Finally, someone calls the bridge ban effort what it is

Good points TimB. As an avid cyclist and dweller of the SW, I would like to see the bridge. I would definitely start more rides from home if the bridge did exist. However, I'd have to agree that utilizing the commute option from Sunriver is a weak element to base an argument on.

I remember the opposition to the Healy bridge being pretty strong as well, but imagine life in Bend without it? I wish Bend's growth would stop, but that's not reality. There will be a bridge eventually, maybe not this go round, but growth will necessitate it ultimately.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Jeff_Jeff_Jeff on 02/16/2018 at 4:49 PM

Re: “Finally, someone calls the bridge ban effort what it is

Sadly, the Source is emulating the Bulletin in its personal attacks on legislators and joins the Bulletin by publishing half-truthy editorials and being on the wrong side of this issue. You should acknowledge that Whisnant had good intentions when he introduced his bill in last session, hoping for a rate environmental win. His bill passed the House unanimously, but died in a Senate Committee. As in the current session, everything is totally transparent. The only "intrigue and hypocrisy" is due to BPRD and the Bulletin's disingenuous campaigns against the legislation.
Had you done your homework, you would know that this section of the river is protected by State and Federal legislation (1987-88), Oregon Administrative Rules, and a Management Plan signed by 16 local (including BPRD!), state and federal agencies.
Even if BPRD and a group of locals want a bridge, they can't overturn all these laws and rules--they just can't. The Deschutes belongs to all Oregonians
and all citizens of the US. Lots of other options for completing trails to Sunriver don't have a bridge. Let's get to it.

3 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by JimC on 02/16/2018 at 2:56 PM

Re: “Finally, someone calls the bridge ban effort what it is

I would like to give Gene Whisnant a slap on the back myself. His bridge ban in 2017 was passed unanimously by the Legislature, including our local representatives . It was a clear reassertion of state authority. Just because you can pervert property tax laws to convert a wildlife refuge into subdivisions doesn't mean you can say the elk are gone, let's bulldoze the river too. As a tourist destination, the rest of the state has a legitimate interest in maintaining the protected areas for the rest of Oregon's citizens.
Your apparent hypocrisy of using a transportation argument to destroy a sensitive, irreplaceable habitat and saying it would be good for the environment completely looses sight of the concept of wild and scenic.
If you seriously want a trail from Bend to Sunriver for commuting, there is a gravel roadbed of the old 97. It goes from Knott road up to Lava Butte. It is smooth and straight with no traffic or sensitive riparian areas. There is a paved trail from the Lavalands visitor center to Sunriver. It would make an excellent route.
The proposed river bridge and trail have nothing to do with commuting, however. It's a lame, last ditch argument to save a bad idea. It is planned as a tourist event attraction. Marathons, bike races and commercial outfitters are lined up to help destroy 20 river miles of protected habitat from Bend to Sunriver. Bend Parks should not be allowed to distort the law, the truth, and your credibility to achieve this.

4 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by TimB on 02/16/2018 at 9:36 AM

Re: “Vote Yes on Measure 101

If a program cannot live on its own then it probably needs to be eliminated. This left over Obama BS is not the individual Oregonians fault it's the incompetent leaders in Salem. If they want to find these programs and they liquidate all of their assets refused to take their pay and give it all to the state to give to the bottom feeders and malcontents.

Posted by Robert Robertson on 01/23/2018 at 7:00 PM

Re: “Pumping Your Own Gas: We Will Persevere.

Have ya'll actually been out to rural Oregon recently? Lots of these little towns don't have working gas stations anywhere near them because traffic is too low to cover the expenses. If you live in rural Oregon this law might actually be the difference between having a working gas station or not. Not having a gas station is a much bigger negative impact on a small rural economy than having a gas station where you pump the gas yourself. There is a reason why this bill passed with virtually no opposition folks. Pumping your own gas is pretty basic and in this case isn't threatening anybody's job.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by ThinkAboutIt on 01/16/2018 at 5:54 PM

Re: “You, too, play a role in winter snow removal

Everyone needs to assist in snow removal services. You can definitely call for professionals for snow removal. As soon as it snows you can call for assistance and get snow removed from your walkways and front yard.

Posted by Charles Brown on 01/12/2018 at 3:54 AM

Re: “Pumping Your Own Gas: We Will Persevere.

And don't forget those sanitary wipes while you enjoy pumping that fuel for yourself - remember it's flu season and you never know who touched that pump before you!

2 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Yuck! on 01/11/2018 at 12:04 AM

Re: “BLM pick is wrong direction for agency…

This is just in keeping with the goal.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Susan Jean Zimmerman on 12/01/2017 at 6:31 PM

Re: “GUEST EDITORIAL: Pursuing a better future for the Deschutes River

Actually we can have plenty of wildlife without isolating the humans from the water's edge. Here is some testimony I gave to the Parks Board:

I wanted to give the board some input on the subject of our parks and wildlife. As part of my comments, Ive brought you all a copy of my 2017 Residents of the River Calendar. All the pictures in the calendar were taken recently, from our 50 foot lot. You will find pictures of eagles and osprey, beavers and otter, ducks and geese, deer, and a fine lizard. Missing from this years calendar, but also common are muskrats, raccoons, mink, turtles, rising fish and all sorts of birds. We are indeed lucky to have all this wildlife in downtown Bend. A friend who lives directly across from Columbia Park told me I rafted 450 miles of wilderness river last year, and have seen more wildlife at my house than all those trips.
If you look at the July photos, youll see that they all coexist with another form of wildlife, the humans. On the section of river from which I took these photos, there is a house every 50 feet, with a yards, docks, and dogs at the waters edge. On any summer day thousands of visiting people and dogs will be paddling, swimming and floating the river. The wildlife get along with the people pretty well. All you need to ensure abundant wildlife is that you dont kill them, and leave some habitat. Habitat can come in many forms. Many of us know that a flower bed full of tulip bulbs can be prime deer habitat, and I can tell you from experience that bridge abutments form prime fish habitat.
How do I see this as relating to park policies? My basic point is we can to a large degree have our cake and eat it too.
I support your attempts to build additional bridges along the river. A recent letter in the Bulletin expressed concerns that bridge construction would run off wildlife. My camera disagrees.
I also support maintaining the Mirror Pond Dam. While we all agree large dams can have negative environmental effects, most people also realize that small dam, such as a beaver dam, creates diversity of habitat and benefits the wildlife. Most of the wildlife I see at home, be it otters diving for crawdads, or beaver cruising in and out of their decades old lodge, are in areas which would be left dry if the dam were removed. The dam provides a scenic area with upstream and downstream recreation for thousands of human residents, and for the wildlife, it is closer to a beaver pond than a Bonneville project.
I am concerned, however, about some of the plans impede access to the rivers edge at Drake Park, and to limit access to the new land we have purchased at Riley Ranch. Certainly, the bank at Drake park could use some maintenance, but please dont exclude the humans from the edge of the river. The wildlife does not mind sharing it. I have serious concerns about the plans for Riley Ranch. Oregon has ample wilderness areas, but we never have enough parkland near town. Please dont use wildlife as justification for excluding water access, dog walking, and group activities from our new park. We have proof right here downtown that they can coexist very well.

Posted by Doug on 12/01/2017 at 6:55 AM

Re: “You, too, play a role in winter snow removal

No salt. Salt is not beneficial to the environment. Salt increases maintenance and decay on automobiles and roads.

4 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Bob Kuehn on 10/30/2017 at 9:50 AM

Re: “Have a grievance with your government?

The water project was rushed through to completion in 2012-2013 without proper consideration of all options--including the so-called "short pipe" option that would have been immeasurably kinder to the creek and watershed and would have cost far less. What we got, instead, was a ludicrous project that takes water out of the creek and runs it through miles of adjacent pipe. Why? To create hydroelectric capacity in an era when tax credits for such projects had already evaporated. Public outrage over the budgetary and environmental costs of this water project and the manipulative process that crammed it down our throats led to an almost complete replacement of the old guard on the Bend City Council.

Posted by fosterfell on 10/27/2017 at 2:04 PM

Re: “Have a grievance with your government?

Hey Permission -- We do realize that they're disparate and perhaps apples to oranges, and yet they both were topics of conversation this week in Bend, so that's where they came together for us. As for the specific demand of NFL players, Kaepernick's is to end police brutality against people of color, and specifically for police to end the profiling and subsequent needless killing of black men. Rosa Parks' was clear too -- to allow equal treatment under the law. Occupy struggled to find its specific demand, and that is perhaps why it didn't last. But thanks for your perspective!

Posted by Nicole Vulcan on 10/23/2017 at 3:29 PM

Re: “Have a grievance with your government?

I'm with Riversong on this one and get the feeling your perspective is somewhat of a double standard. For instance what is the "specific demand" associated with some NFL players kneeling during the national anthem? Or what was the specific demand of the Occupy Wall Street movement? Or should Rosa Parks have been appeased if simply given a bus seat? Has the civil rights movement always been about such specific things?

I too attended one of the "No Man's Land" screenings as well as you. I find it surprising that the Source editorial equates two such wildly disparate methods of protest as the Malhuer Occupation and LandWatch's legal proceedings against the City of Bend over water system piping. Whatever one's opinion about the Bundy led protest (and I use the term "led" loosely since I agree the situation certainly lacked a critical focus) a comparison such as the one made in this Source editorial is completely apples to oranges.

Posted by Permission To Speak Freely? on 10/21/2017 at 12:29 AM

Re: “Have a grievance with your government?

Hey Riversong -- While we do agree that protest can work, it's usually accompanied by a demand, which yes, can be a demand that an unjust law be changed. Without a specific demand for redress, which we'd argue the Bundy clan didn't have, not much can get done. So there's the need not just for an action, but for a demand that addresses the problem.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Nicole Vulcan on 10/20/2017 at 4:23 PM

Re: “Have a grievance with your government?

This editorial writer is correct that the anarchic (and some would argue, treasonous) actions of the Bundy Gang were far more costly (and almost completely ineffective) than the lawsuit.

But the writer is historically and morally wrong that " only through the rule of law will we be able to protect"our natural rights.

Most significant social change in the United States (and elsewhere) has come from popular protest and civil disobediance - acting, when necessary, outside the law or in active opposition to the law, when the law is either unjust in itself or an obstacle to constructive social change.

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Riversong on 10/19/2017 at 8:55 AM

Re: “State of Emergency: The prospect of a failed real estate transaction, #inBend

How about HOA's that abuse their rules and power to force people out of their or into unreasonable debt? $750 first offence parking tickets? REALLY?! Should be illegal.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Diana Hardt on 10/09/2017 at 1:11 PM

Re: “We've hit peak "us vs. them" ire. Is this who we want to be?

For me, its not an issue of wanting tourism or even people wanting to move into the community. It is the way tourism and growth have been handled. You have pushing for tourism and growth, but nobody is dealing with the infrastructure to handle it. Months were spent on sidewalk repair, but nothing to deal with the traffic and bottlenecks. We now have people living on the street because there isn't affordable housing, yet developers are building new hotels. If we want to cool off some of the anti tourism tempers out there, fix the problems that it creates.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by mfaccone on 09/08/2017 at 3:42 PM

Re: “An elected mayor can provide cultural and ethical leadership.

So the gist of this suggests that you would like the city Mayor to operate independently of the other members of the City Council so that the Mayor can spend time on issues not directly relevant to their council duties and also speak for the citizens without consulting them.

Frankly I do not find that reasoning to be sound justification. Consider for a moment that we could someday have a Mayor similar to President Trump. Would you be so enthusiastic in handing that person the same latitudes?

Posted by RC Johnson on 09/01/2017 at 10:20 AM

Re: “We've hit peak "us vs. them" ire. Is this who we want to be?

My wife is from Bend and after living in Alaska and California she convinced me to move back here with her. I have been called a terrorist and one of the worst people alive by native Oregonians. I saw a sticker on a truck yesterday that said " Fuck Off, We're Full". It's hard for someone contributing to the economy in the area to face ridicule like that.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Josh 1 on 08/13/2017 at 12:24 AM

Re: “Bad Timing

Let's stop this cruel mistreatment of our neighbors--all the more troubling because public funds pay for it.

The solution stares us in the face. Below, from The Guardian (7/9/15).

"Just as the answer to hunger is food, the answer to homelessness is homes.

It costs more to keep people on the streets than it does to house them and provide any support services they may need. People who live on the streets dont get preventative medical care. They wait for a medical crisis and then go to a local emergency department, where care is most expensive. The rest of us pay for that healthcare at a premium. People who are homeless spend more time in the hospital, and more time in jail. All this costs public funds. Studies from New York to California show that permanent supportive housing costs less in the long run."

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by fosterfell on 08/01/2017 at 9:21 AM

Top Viewed Stories

Join Our Newsletter

© 2018 LAY IT OUT INC | 704 NW GEORGIA, BEND, OREGON 97703  |   Privacy Policy

Website powered by Foundation