Environmental groups disappoint on bridge

Until HB4029, I have supported Oregon Wild, Coalition for the Deschutes and Sierra Club. I am baffled by these environmental groups and others supporting HB4029, which would block a pedestrian bridge crossing the Deschutes River to popular destinations such as Rimrock trailhead and others in Deschutes National Forest.

A pedestrian bridge is the smart alternative to driving to the National Forest from the east, encouraging more people to walk or ride. This is healthy and reduces carbon emissions. Walking and bicycling emit significantly less carbon vs. the average car (0.075 pound per mile vs. 1 pound per mile).

Statements from Oregon Wild and others including phrases like “slippery slope,” “no justification for further trails,” and “threats to wildlife” deliver ridiculous false narratives. The slippery slope has already happened, folks! The surrounding area is lined with visually prominent houses. Under construction just north is a development abutting the Deschutes, scarring the landscape much more than a small bridge and trail. This is more likely to present significant threats to wildlife and the river, yet nobody is arguing against that.

These groups are wasting valuable resources. They should be fighting to protect sage grouse habitat and consistent river flow or preserving Oregon’s national monuments. Instead, they argue for people to drive instead of biking or walking, pitting imaginary “wildness” against the health of Bend’s citizens and climate change. Astonishing and sad.

I have lost all respect for these environmental groups, none of which will ever see a dime from my bank account again.

Kelly Vonruden

Bend

What’s in it for Buehler?

I was excited about a potential campaign between Knute Buehler and Kate Brown. In my few interactions with Buehler, I found him intelligent, thoughtful and dedicated. I looked forward to real debates between Buehler and Brown that could generate innovative solutions to the problems we face as Oregonians.

Unfortunately, along came a bridge. The battle against the proposed footbridge over the Deschutes River is a symbol of the current Republican ethos: “What’s in it for me?” Buehler’s opposition to the bridge was clearly based on cronyism, (Sunriver Republican Rep. Gene) “Whisnant’s retirement gift,” and financial benefits from wealthy campaign donors who live in the area. The new Republican ethos is a significant flaw and may be a fatal flaw for Buehler’s campaign. No matter what he proposes I will second guess his motivation. What’s in it for Buehler?

Kevin Barclay

Bend

Teach your children

“Trump talk can corrupt children.” I find it hard to believe the author of this comment truly believes it. You are assuming that all the parents of these children are “good and role models.” I have heard and seen worse language and situations on so-called “family shows.” As a parent you should teach your children the difference between right and wrong.

It is easy to blame others rather than do your job as a parent. If you want your child to live in a bubble, try home schooling. I suggest to you, don’t let your children walk in public places as so many young people drop profanity as it is part of their everyday vocabulary. Unfortunately, life is not all unicorns and flowers. Monitor what they watch and do.

Dan Munoz

Bend

No such thing as ‘illegal immigrant’

There is no such thing as an ”illegal immigrant.”

If someone is an immigrant, they are being welcomed and included into the country to eventually become a citizen. If someone is here illegally, none of the above applies; in fact they are law violators. Consequently the term “illegal immigrant” has no rational meaning.

So why then are people here illegally not specifically excluded when articles and opinions are published in The Bulletin? The reason is simple; the authors intend to show that anyone who disagrees with these articles is an anti-immigrant. I am very much in favor of rational legal immigration but completely opposed to the idea of illegals being considered immigrants. Obviously The Bulletin cannot edit external publications; but maybe just an editor’s note could be attached to the article.

Jay Feinstein

Bend