fb pixel

Log In

Reset Password

Letters, Feb. 25

Don’t cover the water

Regarding the Ashland Water Department’s plan to pipe the 2-mile stretch of open water (estimated cost: $4 million), I will attempt to raise the project team’s awareness on behalf of the wildlife that frequents our treasured canal.

This riparian trail and the wildlife are, for many, the reason we love Ashland. How fortunate to live surrounded by wildlife and large trees! If the project moves forward, the project team has identified 286 trees for removal, many established Douglas fir and ponderosa pine.

Have you ever experienced the canal at dawn or dusk and spied a mother bear and her cubs playing in the Ashland canal? Or, imagine being on a sun-dappled trail witnessing three evening grosbeaks drinking water in unison. Or coming upon a doe lying peacefully in the cool water. Or watching western screech owl parents teach their juvenile owlets how to hunt in a riparian setting. Truly awe-inspiring!

The water project team called wildlife “an attractive nuisance,” and said the wildlife will just seek other water sources elsewhere.

Why the grim attitude toward wildlife? How much is this riparian treasure worth? It’s priceless! Let’s celebrate what makes Ashland unique — don’t cover the water!

Leigh Hood


Nothing wrong with dog obit

In my own personal opinion, I found nothing appalling about writing an obit for a beloved pet. To some of us, our fur babies are our whole lives. Our best friends, our companions, our soulmates.

This dog was so obviously loved, and very deserving of an obit. The family is grieving for their baby, just like people grieve for humans. I have known people that have grieved more for a pet than a human. It’s not for anyone to judge how people grieve. It was a beautifully written obit for a very loved fur baby. And to the family, I am very sorry for your pain, I have been there many times. You feel raw and broken.

Sharyn “Jinx” Arthur

Gold Hill

Repugnant attitudes

Regarding the results of the diversity poll on marriage prejudices (Feb. 22), most of the items cited as objectionable in a child’s choice of spouse are somewhat narrowly defined: sexual orientation, religious preference, gender identity, race.

Political party affiliation covers a much broader range of opinions on such things as the economy, national defense, social and domestic policy. That results in concerns/prejudices regarding party affiliation being potentially a far more nuanced response.

Speaking personally, today’s incarnation of the GOP seems to bundle a set of attitudes that most Democrats find repugnant, the most concerning in a child’s spouse being the lack of empathy for people unlike themselves and experiences unlike their own.

Gini Armstrong


Webletters Graphic.jpg