Support the Wildlife Bill
I value living in Oregon for the breathtaking array of wildlife –from whales, puffins and oystercatchers on the coast to the elusive Sierra Nevada red foxes of the Cascades, and the great gray owls I’ve witnessed in forests near Sunriver. HB 4134–the 1.25% for wildlife bill — is critical to pass in this short legislative session. The wildlife I listed are a handful of 300 species in Oregon at high risk of vanishing without immediate action. The state list grows higher every year. Adding 1.25% to Oregon’s third-lowest lodging tax in the nation makes sense. Instead of just promoting wildlife through tourism, Oregon will be giving back. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife is ready to go with a State Wildlife Action Plan awaiting funding. The bill also includes key provisions for adding wildlife crossings, improving coexistence with wolves, supporting wildlife rehabilitation facilities like ThinkWild, detecting and removing harmful invasive species, and for an Oregon Conservation Corps to help reduce wildfire risk in and near communities.
Wouldn’t you be willing to help wildlife and Oregon’s quality of life for the price of a cup of coffee? That’s how small 1.25% is! Time is short. HB 4124 has the support of hunters, anglers, ranchers, birders, wildlife supporters, and most of all, the students I was fortunate to witness in action at the wildlife lobby day Feb. 11. This is their future. Let’s do this for the children.
—Marina Richie
Bend’s proposed natural gas appliance fee
I am a retired professor from Cal Poly San Luis Obipso, CA. I taught air quality and environmental science in the Civil and Environmental Engineering Dept. I now live in Bend in the Larkspur neighborhood. For the record, we have recently retrofitted our 1989 house with an electric heat pump HVAC, and electric heat pump water heater system. Both systems will pay for themselves within 3 – 5 years (depending on changes in electricity prices).
I have looked at the City of Bends formula for the proposed natural gas appliance fee. It only considers carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from combustion. This is part of the concern with gas appliances, but not all. Recent studies showed that all natural gas appliances leak methane. Methane is about 80 times more potent than CO2, although it has a shorter half life in the atmosphere.
Key Findings on Methane Leaks from Appliances per Stanford and others (e.g. UC Davis):
Total Impact: Residential gas stoves release 30,000 tons of methane annually in the U.S.
Leakage Rate: About 1% of total gas consumed by stoves leaks unburned, which is higher than previously estimated.
When Leaks Occur: The majority of leaks (over 75%) happen when the stove is not in use, attributed to issues like loose fittings or permeation.
Water Heaters: Natural gas water heaters also contribute significant, though less frequently measured, methane leakage, with one study suggesting they leak around 91,000 tons annually in the U.S.
This leakage has a climate impact comparable to the annual CO2 tailpipe emissions of 500,000 gasoline-powered cars.
Because methane is a highly potent greenhouse gas—more than 80 times more potent than CO2 over a 20-year period—these leaks represent a significant, overlooked source of climate-warming pollution. I believe the Bend ordinance should include methane leaks in the calculations of emissions for gas-fired appliances and cook tops.
—David Morrow
Loyalty agreements
A “Loyalty Agreement” in my opinion borders on an ethical violation. Loyalty driven politics can lead to the favoring of one candidate over another and that in my opinion is putting a finger on the scale. It fosters cronyism and favoritism, which I’m personally against. In Redmond, we addressed cronyism, favoritism and nepotism by letting the voters decide if they wanted it or not and the voters voted against it. That’s democracy. A loyalty agreement of any kind prioritizes personal allegiance to some person or group. It makes candidates feel pressured into agreeing to sign it knowing that if they choose not to they would be “ostracized” in some way. That is not Democracy, but instead a form of Autocracy and for those unfamiliar with that term it’s when an individual or small group has/flexes absolute power over something. We are presently experiencing that at a national level, and we do not and should not allow it to leak into our local elections. We must work together to ensure our processes are fair and equal for all.
—Clifford B. Evelyn Sr.
Defend the Endangerment Finding
I strongly oppose any repeal of the Endangerment Finding under the Clean Air Act.
The Endangerment Finding is not a political preference; it is a scientific determination based on extensive evidence that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare. Repealing it would not invalidate the science. It will simply strip the federal government of one of its most important tools for protecting Americans.
Climate change is already harming communities across this country. It is increasing wildfire intensity, worsening air quality, driving extreme heat, destabilizing insurance markets, and straining public infrastructure. These impacts are measurable, costly, and borne disproportionately by children, seniors, rural communities, and low-income families. Ignoring this reality does not reduce risk, it transfers risk to the public.
The Clean Air Act exists precisely for situations like this: when pollution demonstrably threatens human health. Greenhouse gases meet that statutory standard. The Endangerment Finding has been rigorously reviewed and repeatedly upheld. Repealing it will undermine scientific integrity, create regulatory chaos, weaken business certainty, and erode public trust in federal institutions.
Regulatory retreat is not a strategy. It is abdication. American communities and businesses need durable, science-based policy signals to plan investments, protect public health, and compete in a rapidly evolving global energy economy.
Future generations will live with the consequences of this decision. I urge you to uphold the Endangerment Finding and maintain the Clean Air Act’s mandate to protect the health and welfare of the American people.
—Kathryn Patrick
Letter of the Week
Kathryn, as letter of the week, you can stop by the Source office at NW Georgia & Bond to pick up a gift card to Palate coffee. —Managing Editor, Nic Moye
This article appears in the Source February 26, 2026.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
I agree with Marina Ritchie (and all of the organizations noted in her letter to the editor above) on supporting the effort to send letters, email and calls to our reps in Salem on voting YES on HB 4134 – the 1.25% wildlife bill- adding to Oregon’s lodging tax, the third lowest in the nation. This is for the wildlife in our beautiful State and for the future of our children’s children’s children!
Clifford is completely correct!
A “Loyalty Agreement” is an ethical violation.
A violation of trust.
Dem candidates who sign one disqualify themselves,
in my opinion,
from the public office they seek.
I am in total agreement with Councilor Evelyn’s thoughts.
One pretext given by Deschutes Dems (I am a registered Democrat) for pressuring candidates to drop out of a race is their fear of vote splitting. In the County Commissioner race for Position 3 in the May 19 primary, having two Democrats on the ballot actually helps them.
In this election only the candidate with 50% plus one wins. If no candidate gets a majority, then the two top vote-getters go to a runoff in the November general election. With only one Democrat on the ballot, Republican-supported Lauren Connally (with her formidable background) would definitely be a threat to gain the majority and win that election outright .
However, with TWO Dems in the running (namely Sabbadini and Page)–each representing a major wing of the party–more centrist and progressive voters would be inspired to turn out, because they would actually have a choice. And their total vote percentage would likely be enough to deny Connally a majority and outright victory.
As a result, the Nov. 3 election for Position 3 would turn into a contest between Connally and either Sabbatini or Page.
Deschutes County Democrats’ flawed endorsement process and loyalty oath requirement denies voters the ballot choices they desire. Without a choice of candidates, party interest dwindles, voter turnout plummets, and the Dems’ prospects diminish.
Vote “NO” on redistricting in November. It is not needed and a form of gerrymandering.