THE ZEPHYR/OCTOBER-NOVEMBER 2004 FEEDBACK (Continued) NOT HAPPY WITH THAT Dear Jim, REPUBLICAN As a Jeffersonian Democrat, I would like to think that intellectuals have as much right to be IN THE ZEPHYR Nothing raises my hackles more effectively than contemporary Republicans claiming moral high ground with Orwellian new-speak and specious arguments based on fallacious assumptions. Not only is it insulting to both Republicans and Democrats alike, it fosters a continuing climate of polarization, philosophical alienation and apathy. Imagine my surprise to see such a diatribe in the Canyon Country Zephyr ("Some Words About MAHBU and the Pursuit of a Western Restoration" by Rick Cantrell, Aug-Sep 04). Ric Cantrell, member of the Executive Committee of the Salt Lake County Republican Party, concludes quite accurately that in the current political battle over the environment _ “both sides are partially right." But the arguments he uses along the way must be answered point for point, lest they become true by repetition and lack of challenge. First of all, he addresses the readership of the Zephyr as "rabble...who can't leave well enough alone”. Ric thinks he's being folksy, cute and funny. Thanks a lot Ric. I'm insulted already and I've only read eleven words. Ric says that the ranching side of his family "tends to vote Republican because (they) value independence, strong families, local rule and less government." Does this mean that Democrats value ; back in the 19th century. Don't you think displaced native Americans might have their own opinion about appropriate use and abuse of the resource Ric wants to govern all by himself? Ric is right when he identifies an impasse between exploitation and regulation and I like his metaphor about trying to climb out of the slot canyon. Why must he ruin a beautiful thought by following it up with his wish that there "continues to be a genuine home for oldstyle Americans in the Grand Old Party." What the heck is an “old style American"? Ric seems to think it has something to do with pick-up trucks and fixing things with haywire. dependence, broken families, federal hegemony and huge government? No. It only means that Ric would like you to believe that to be the case. On a point by point basis, what does "independence" mean? Perhaps to Ric's ranching cousins it means huge federal hand-outs with no strings attached. Sorry guy, there's no free lunch when it comes to handouts that originate with my tax payments. Does "Independence" mean that as a society we don't need to reach out to help the underprivileged, the needy, the ill and the homeless? Does it mean we just tell AIDS victims to buzz off? Believe me when I tell you that we all believe, whether in part or in full, in the American myth of rugged self-reliance. Nobody wants to have to ask for help. But sometimes people need a hand. The next time a tornado rips up your cousins’ ranch, see if they don't apply for state or federal disaster relief. What does support for "strong families" mean? Don't Democrats honor their mothers and fathers and love their chlldren? Do Democrats get divorced more often than Republicans? Why is it that when Republicans are caught in sex scandals the media says "boys will be boys”, but when Democrats indulge it's cause for impeachment trials? Assuming that Democrats don't believe in "strong families" or family values is insulting. Can you say "hypocrites will be hypocrites"? What does “local rule" mean? It used to mean "state's rights.” Ric would like you to believe that this is a Republican value, but today's Grand Old Party only appears to believe if it serves their purpose. Take the so-called election of George W. Bush for instance. If the GOP truly believed in local rule and state's rights, they would not have invoked the federal Supreme Court against that of the State of Florida to appoint a president. One suspects that for Cantrell's Republicans, "local rule" means more federal handouts withno strings attached. And just what does "less government" mean? More handouts with no strings attached? Even conservative columnist William Safire agrees that Republican Party (less government) are in philosophical the libertarian urges of the conflict with its moralizing crusades (no women's right to choose, teaching creationism in schools, no sex-education for young people, drug wars, and turning the United States into a Christian, not a secular, nation). As far as the size of government is concerned, we would all do well to recall that the Clinton administration balanced the federal budget. The Reagan and Bush administrations only put the nation into crippling deficit and debt. Ric “cringes whenever soft-handed folk in expensive clothing talk about severely impacting an ecological community, the inherent value of which they barely perceive." Ric _ only perpetuates a prejudicial stereotype against educated people whose hands are not roughened by hard outdoor labor. He doesn't like the way they dress, either. He doesn't like the fact that they are "typically from out of state, or out of country" and accuses them of having one goal, to "make money fast". Ric reveals himself to be a typical stereotype as well: the anti-intellectual. I can understand why he cringes. I work ata university and I deal with academic arrogance and attitude all the time. But still, arrogant though they may be, the professors have spent a lot of time and energy studying their fields to the exclusion of almost everything else in life. When scientists speak about ecology, they know more about an American as any Cantrell Redneck. Iam myself a kind of intellectual, but I have painted my own house, dug fence-post holes and fixed things with wire. I am insulted by the thought that I cannot be a real man unless I am an ignorant hayseed. Now Ric really gets me started when he claims that "historic quarrels have so gerrymandered and polarized issues that a lot of good people find themselves wondering which side, if any, to join." The gerrymandering and polarizing is the direct result of all the right-wing clap-trap that today's Grand Old Party has been spewing since Reagan was in office. While liberals try to find middle ground and compromise, the conservative rightwing has hi-jacked the Republican Party and madea mockery out of cooperative government. Ric would like you to believe that he is a regular, folksy guy who sees through all the clap-trap and if we'd just let him and his boys run things, everything would work out fine. But until he can see through his fallacious assumptions and transparent arguments, he will only be a voice perpetuating the lamentable state of things to which he is a contributor. Sincerely, . Evan Cantor Boulder, CO Editor's Note: I agree with many of your complaints Evan, but my god, man, your rebuttal is twice as long as Ric’s Pointblank essay. Id like to propose, right now, a series of debates between the two of you, in future issues of the Z, but with a word limit of 1000 words each....what do you say, gentlemen? ??......JS DEFENDS im, CONTROL As a ranger for the Maze district of Canyonlands National park for the years 1994-2003, I spent much of my time in the Horseshoe Canyon NPS unit. One of my duties was to pull or to cut and Garlon any tamarisk found. For the first few years I did pull many seedlings. However, a few years ago conditions were just right to allow a bumper crop of native cottonwood and willow seedlings to establish. Since then this crop has grown into healthy dense thickets of twelve to fifteen foot tall trees. For the past few years I have not seen a single tamarisk seedling in the Horseshow Canyon NPS unit, despite careful searching. Occasionally a larger, older tamarisk is found that has survived years in a hidden spot but apparently seedlings cannot compete in the dense thickets of natives. This experience indicates that tamarisk eradication, at least in limited areas, is not hopeless and does not require a “commitment forever...for Eternity,” as you stated. In areas where livestock grazing is excluded (as is the case in this part of Horseshoe Canyon), once natives are well-established, it seems that tamarisk cannot seed. While such conditions may not exist in many of the tamarisk-infested areas of the West, it is heartening to us “tamariskpluckers” that such an outcome is possible. Sincerely, Barbara Zinn Green River, UT Editor's Note: While Ms. Zinn’s report offers some encouragement for the removal of tamarisk in limited areas, I don’t believe that being tamarisk-free for five years indicates a victory over the Dreaded Exotic. If nvy recollections are correct, tamarisk continues to grow unabated both upstream and down from the NPS unit, just a few miles away. As my article stated. Each of those mature tamarisk trees produces 100,000 wind-borne seeds. If Zinn's optimism is justified, it suggests that the NPS could now abandon its tamarisk control efforts in Horsehoe Canyon, return in 50 or 100 years, and still find the canyon free of tamarisk...I'm not THAT optimistic.still believe tamarisk control is Forever....JS it than you or I, or Ric Cantrell for that matter. Ric's blood “heats up when an urban bureaucrat tells Grandad the best way to run his cows and asks "What gives them the right?" What gives the bureaucrat the right is the fact that they are advising about use on public land, land that belongs to you and me and every American. Just because Grandad did something one way in the 19th century doesn't mean that that is right in the 21st. For that matter, Grandad might have been on the wrong track DOLORES CONTEMPORARY OFFERS TWO SHOWS: "REFLECTING ON 7 HE OTHER” UNTIL OCTOBER 34 "WEAVERS: THEIR TEXTILES & THEIR PORTRAITS” NOVEMBER 1 TO DECEMBER 31 = TAMARISK PAGE 30 JOIN THE BACKBONE... For $99.99 a year, you can become a member of The Zephyr Backbone. Take a look at page 26 ...1f you'd like to help keep this very independent, locally-owned publication alive, please consider signing up... THANKS. DOLORES CONTEMPORARY 6TH & RAILROAD AVE. DOLOKES, COLORADO 81323 OPEN FRIDAY & SATURDAY MAM TO SPM