In Response to, Connecting the Disconnect. (2/1)
MORE STORIES LIKE THIS. We need to shed more light on the stories that aren’t pretty or comfortable or cater to tourists. Our citizens give the flavor and spice that is Bend. Thank you for doing on the ground journalism with stories like this.
— Allison Murphy via bendsource.com
I love bringing the reality to light. I’m a single mom of four, currently living in a friend’s art studio with my kids. I am on waitlists since April. For one income, households in Bend have become unaffordable. Most one bedroom apartments are $1,100. Then you need to make three times rent, then add first last and deposit…it’s hopeless.
— Somey_is_now via bendsource.com
Has grown children and grandchildren….and no place to live? I’d be damned if I let one of my family live on the streets…something other than rent being high is messed up here.
— Nicole Jackson, via bendsource.com
Cougar Operation in La pine.
For the next phase of its public safety operation in La Pine, I would suggest that Deschutes County Sheriff’s arrest the members of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) Commission who make decisions that result in cougar-human conflicts.
All joking aside, I do not dismiss for a moment the sorrow of the people of La Pine whose pets were killed or disparage the efforts of law enforcement to protect them.
But, emerging evidence indicates that the type of indiscriminate hunting of Puma concolor sanctioned by ODFW actually increases complaints and depredations of pets and livestock.
Research suggests that human hunting pressure disrupts cougar populations by targeting the dominant “trophy” males that lend stability to social groups. The chaos that follows forces male juveniles to scatter into human conflict zones.
On the new community Facebook page, Facts About Cougars, read abstracts from several recent research articles. Learn how to oppose new legislation proposed in Salem that would reintroduce hound hunting of cougars. Urge Rep. Buehler and Sen. Knopp to vote against bills H217, H2589, S371, and S458.
— Foster Fell
Closing of Women’s Clinic – Zero Midwife Options
A year and a half ago my wife and I, like many others, went through the painful process of a miscarriage. While the doctor we worked with was kind and knowledgeable we felt as though we were on a conveyer belt and part of a large and already very taxed system. When the miscarriage occurred on a Friday evening we proceeded to have a lonely, long, and scary weekend. I hope to share our story as a way to highlight a hole that is opening up in our town’s healthcare system.
We were lucky enough to get pregnant again and once we found out we were pregnant we chose to switch to the St. Charles Center for Women’s Health where we could work with a team of midwives. We have always been drawn to working with midwives but also felt more comfortable having a hospital birth. Immediately we noticed that our care was incredibly relationship-based and holistic. Our appointments were long in length, focused on all of our well-being, and we consistently felt empowered to make the best decisions for our family. The care we received felt congruent with the warmth and care that we so often find throughout our wonderful Bend community. This was exemplified when we met with Jessica Nelson, CNM after our due date. We were anxious and concerned about what would happen since our boy had not yet arrived and worried about being pressured into an induction. Instead Jessica was incredibly comforting as she normalized the process and explained the risks and benefits of various approaches. She spent an incredible amount of time with us and we left the appointment feeling empowered and cared for.
As our due date neared we were nervous that we might not get to work with a midwife as the schedules have been reduced and many of the doctors do not want midwives as part of their team. Luckily our baby boy was born at the Birthing Center at St Charles with the incredible support of the team of nurses and the guidance and calming presence of Certified Nurse Midwife, Hannah Renzi. Luckily my wife went into labor when Hannah was on call and she proceeded to spend many hours helping my wife through a painful labor and encouraging her to breathe when the baby’s heart rate dropped. While others may have jumped to medical intervention, Hannah used her trusting relationship she had built with my wife over the past nine months to coach her through how best to help our boy’s heart rate recovering. Our boy was born healthy and we cannot express how grateful we are to the nurses and especially Hannah Renzi.
We had a wonderful experience and felt that we had professionals who were focused on a holistic, relational approach. The loss of St. Charles Center for Women’s Health in Bend means that parents will not be able to work with a midwife as the attending if they choose to utilize the Birthing Center and that there will only be one clinic in town. I am writing this letter because I am concerned about a glaring hole in our local system that is soon to exist.
I feel an incredible sadness for my neighbors and friends who will not have the option we had to work with Jessica Nelson or Hannah Renzi as midwives here in Bend. As Bend grows we need more options not fewer. We also need more medical professionals focused on building meaningful relationships and empowering each of us to take control of our holistic health. I hope that my sharing of our story helps others take action.
— Sean Roberts
In Response to, Attack of La Sexism (El Nina Cover 1/26)
Your cover graphic of Volume 21, January 26, 2017 is offensive. At a time when women’s rights are under intense attack from powerful people, do we really need our local, supposedly progressive weekly newspaper to use cover graphics that objectify women? Although loosely tied to a story about the El Nino weather pattern, it appears to have been used, as these types of pictures generally are, to increase circulation. At a time when our rights to control our reproductive fate is under severe threat, when women still make less money for the same work as their male counterparts, when sex trafficking is on the rise, when we have a president who denigrates women and openly belittles them and judges them by how they look, do we need The Source to present this type of female objectification to all of the young girls and women in our community? If a woman chooses to present HERSELF in this manner, that is her choice and power. However, your use of the graphic is exploitive. If it were known to increase circulation, would you put a graphic of someone in blackface on the cover, circa 1938?
How about an article about all of the hard working, strong, fabulous women in the region? From our city attorney, to the many women physicians, to the women who help us at the grocery store, to the women teaching our children, to the single moms and working moms who are struggling to get by, to the women who help all over town in organizations such as Neighbor Impact, Bethlehem Inn and Planned Parenthood; there are many to choose from. Those are the stories and graphics the young women of our community need to see on the front page of your paper, not some throw back sexist graphic from 1958. We deserve your respect, your thoughtfulness, and to get out from under objectification, exploitation, sexual assault and harassment, and men in Washington, D.C making decisions about what type of birth control to which we have access. Yes, it is all linked. Don’t make us come down there to picket you with our pussy hats on!
You get the boot.
— Alison Lynch-Miller, MD
LETTER OF THE WEEK
Alison gets the letter of the week for a number of reasons. #1: Because thoughtful dialogue among people of opposing views needs to happen more often. #2: Because we agree with paragraph two, calling for highlighting the great work of local women. All of the orgs mentioned have been given ink here at least once in the past year, and will again. While we maintain that our La Niña cover portrayed a woman of strength and spectral power (who, yes, gasp! is wearing a bikini—is that better or worse than a burqa?!), Alison and I did have a meaningful conversation about how the various generations of feminist movements may or may not agree with our take—and we are OK with that.
—Respectfully signed, your single mom, working mom, woman editor.
This article appears in Feb 8-15, 2017.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
This is a wake up call. The developers are on the march again, threatening the quality of life for quiet neighborhoods in south Bend, and wildlife along the river.
Their point man, Bend Parks & Rec, has asked for rule changes from the state to build a bridge across the river at the southern edge of the UGB. Sounds innocent enough, eh?
BPRD is motivated by the system development charges they receive. So development companies fill their coffers and influence the management. Its a stinky arrangement that puts your local government in a murky conflict of interest with its taxpayers. Welcome to Bend.
But your neighbors have been working for years to keep tourist facilities out of south Bend. They have forced BPRD into public hearings lay their cards on the publics table and stop their underhanded efforts to undermine state protections. Now we need your help to show up at these meetings to preserve the character of your neighborhoods and the river.
The rule changes involve the mile of river from the UGB to the COID intake. BPRD wants to connect the Deschutes River Trail from River Rim Park to a bridge crossing at Buck Canyon and tie into west bank trails to Sunriver. Under State law, no new bridges are allowed on the scenic waterway, period.
Another major change proposed is the limit of 150 participants in organized events on the river. Stakeholders such as Central Oregon Trail Alliance and Central Oregon Runners Club need those changes so they can book thousands of participants for their events.
Current rules also prohibit adding fishing guide service for this section of the River. Stake holders Sunriver Anglers, Central Oregon Flyfishers, Ouzel outfitters, Sun Country Tours and Wanderlust tours would all like to see those protections drop.
So whats wrong with lots of people on the river trail? First, its not anywhere near the river. It winds through two miles of quiet working class neighborhoods off Brookswood Blvd. BPRD needs the rule change so the developers of the final section of Elk Meadow can build million dollar homes. Trail building rules prohibit construction unless a demonstrated need is presented. Under special use restrictions, it can only be built to control demonstrated needs and not to expand them. Since most of the trail will be sited away from the river, rule changes will mostly affect the area near the crossing.
You see, the bridge site is also the only ford across the river for elk to access their calving grounds on the East side in early Spring. Their migration corridor and vital crossing above Meadow Camp has been under assault since the 1980s. First, the Forest Service sited Widgi Creek without any public hearings. Then the Elk crossing sign was cut down and never replaced. Then a whole herd of elk were slaughtered near Meadow Camp and just left. In the 1990s, half the Elk Meadow game refuge was converted to homes simply by paying the difference in back taxes. Now theyre after the last bit.
While opposition to save Elk Meadow was well organized, the only change we forced was preventing time-share condos from overlooking the elementary school. The hearings officer agreed tourist facilities were not appropriate for the neighborhood. A store was built instead.
Now the last half of the refuge is going under the bulldozer. BPRD needs a clear shot at the bridge so planning for another section of trail can be platted through the new neighborhoods. No, it cant be near the scenic river, thats for million dollar homes, not trails, Silly.
While it may seem like an innocent rule change, the enormous implications of completing a trail from Bend to Sunriver cannot be overstated. A Bend to Sunriver marathon or bike race would spill thousands of participants and spectators from an urban trail into a wild and scenic section of river, destroying habitat and the delicate riparian ecosystem. A constant flow of outfitter traffic and events will ruin any sense of quietude that the river would otherwise offer. While the DRT is an aspiration of many developers, it will spell disaster as industrial strength tourism ruins another section of your river and chases away the wildlife.
Show up at the meetings. Go to all of them. An independent contractor is holding these meetings to make recommendations to the state for rule changes. We need to be loud, clear, and numerous to make our voice heard over all that money.
If you think that the quiet, south end of Bend looks different than the rest by accident, think again. It is decades of efforts by working class families that have prevented commercial developments from intruding into our neighborhoods. You can make a difference.
The meetings are 6:30 to 8PM, Thursday Feb 16 at Cascade Middle School, Friday, Feb 17 at Elk Meadow School., and Thursday, Feb 23 at Pine Ridge Elementary. Thank You.TimB
Alison Lynch-Miller, MD, writes as follows in response to the cover on the 1/26 issue of the Source: “At a time when our rights to control our reproductive fate is under severe threat, when women still make less money for the same work as their male counterparts, when sex trafficking is on the rise, when we have a president who denigrates women and openly belittles them and judges them by how they look, do we need The Source to present this type of female objectification to all of the young girls and women in our community?” Let me address these
issues one by one.
1. Where are women’s rights to control their reproductive fate under severe attack? Certainly
not in Oregon or CA or WA. Last I heard, there were some noises being made in this regard
in TX and SD, but none here. As we know, women’s reproductive rights is a cover term for abortion on demand. It seems that Dr. Miller favors abortion on demand, but I bet she opposes capital punishment. Both are state-approved forms of murder. I think Dr. Lynch-Miller needs to do some thinking about the moral and ethical aspects of abortion on demand.
2. Women still make less money that men for the same work? Assuming this is true – and it’s a huge assumption – then there’s a good reason for it: women settle for less money for the same job as a man. No corporation of any size will knowingly pay women less than men for similar work – the legal liabilities for so doing are daunting. I grant there may be pay discrepancies in certain professional fields which are not subject to government regulation. The way to eliminate these discrepancies is bargain hard for the salary you want.
3. Sex trafficking is on the rise? It may be so, but what would the good Doctor have the authorities do about it? There are many laws on the books outlawing such things, but said laws do not obviously have the desired effect. Perhaps we need more laws and heavier punishments – that surely will stop sex trafficking.
4. A president who denigrates and belittles women? President Trump has appointed 3 women as cabinet officers and the US Ambassador to the UN is a woman. There are also plenty of women on the president’s staff. His election campaign manager was also a woman.
Doctor Lynch-Miller needs to stop slinging loosely founded or unfounded accusations. The points she attempts to make are simply Democratic Party talking points whose sole function is to keep the faithful in a state of frenzy. As a nation, we face many problems that require serious thought and consideration and, finally, action. The ones listed by the good Doctor are not in
that group.