I read with interest the Oct. 3 article “Hut and trail group adapts to concerns about wildlife” by Deirdre Fleming.

David Herring, executive director of Maine Huts & Trails, said that it was the group’s “ethical obligation” to move the original hut out of the Grand Falls deeryard. I find this quote to be disingenuous at best.

Larry Warren the founder of Huts and Trails, fought tooth and nail to have the hut built in the deeryard and only at the very end of the LURC commenting period in early 2008 did he contact LURC and withdraw the Grand Falls Hut part from DP4764, a joint application for the construction of the Flagstaff and Grand Falls huts.

Huts & Trails was told repeatedly by current and retired IF&W wildlife biologists and others long before the permit application was submitted that the proposed hut and trail would be in a significant deer wintering area. Their defense was that the hut would be several feet outside the line on the deeryard zoning map and therefore the deeryard was a nonissue.

In my opinion, it was not an “ethical obligation” that forced Huts & Trails to leave the deeryard site but negative publicity, two timely and informative newspaper stories and numerous comments to LURC against this travesty.

Huts & Trails did move the hut but got to keep the trail in the deer yard and along the berm of the Dead River below Long Falls Dam.

It’s past time for IF&W and LURC to get off their collective duffs and establish and adopt standards for future non-motorized trails that will protect significant riparian areas, wildlife corridors and critical habitats.

Norman Kalloch

Carrying Place Town Township

 

Sunday hunting ban unfair to busy sportsmen

 

With hunting season right around the corner I wanted to bring up a law that has annoyed me ever since I started hunting at age 10. What’s with “No Hunting” on Sundays? It seems very irrelevant now that there are bag limits. The threat of overharvesting is not a problem anymore and actually in some places deer are too abundant and need more hunting pressure.

People are so busy with their 9-5 jobs that time in the woods is cut short because they only have one day a week to hunt. With such a short season and shorter days it makes it hard to be successful. Opening up Sunday would allow that extra time in the field.

Most of the time deer hunting is a waiting game and being in the right spot at the right time. If you ask any hunter does he support hunting on Sunday the likely response would be “Heck, yes.”

Patrick Wolfe

Phippsburg

 

Collins collects praise for taking on divisiveness

 

Thank you for the brave and insightful article (“Divisiveness poisons our politics”) by Sen. Susan Collins on your Oct. 10 Insight cover page.

Susan Collins is a voice of reason in the wilderness that our national political scene has become. In my 70-plus years I have not witnessed such hateful political and personal bias except possibly during the McCarthy hearings in the 1950s. But this is worse – the outcome of this particular election will affect our country for generations to come.

Where are Collins’ fellow Republicans and renegade Democrats in this debate? Filled with concern for their own political butts, I would guess.

Sally MacVane

Port Clyde

 

I was very pleased that you ran Sen. Susan Collins’ essay on divisiveness in politics in the Sunday Telegram. I urge all of your readers to read it.

The “bitter divisiveness and excessive partisanship now found in the Senate” that she discussed are indeed the reasons that the “American people are so angry” with our elected officials. The senator hit the nail on the head in her discussion on how the lack of civility in government contributes to this malaise.

Her reference of the House Republican who yelled, “You lie,” to President Obama during a speech to Congress, and to the Democratic congressman who called the alternative Republican health care plan the “Die Quickly Plan” are comments that I recalled resonating with me coming from politicians who put their party above their country.

I applaud the senator for telling us that to achieve civility in government, “we need to get passionate about electing legislators who not only work hard, but work together.”

I therefore ask the senator, in light of the comment from gubernatorial candidate Paul LePage in which he said he would tell the president of the United States to “go to hell,” will she back up her statement and vote for a candidate who can exemplify civility?

Harry Nelson

North Yarmouth

 

Mainers show their hands on Oxford casino debate

 

Paul Currier’s diatribe accusing Oxford casino opponents with “sabotaging the public will” and “overthrowing the majority” while equating the position with that of the tea party (“Casino opponents hide size with volume,” Oct. 2) is not only disingenuous – it is absurd.

Currier apparently is unaware that the state electorate has repetitively and definitively rejected casino gambling with good reasons, many of which persist in the current bill, all to economically favor casino investors. The many negative effects of casinos on local communities are apparently inconvenient truths to understandably be ignored by proponents.

It is incredible to believe that a small group of local investors with no gaming industry experience can succeed where international gaming corporations are failing. Massive layoffs of casino workers occur in Las Vegas, Atlantic City and elsewhere while gaming corporations abandon casino construction projects, taking multibillion-dollar losses.

Plentiful full-time jobs with benefits for locals? Millions of new-found dollars for local and state coffers? Don’t bet on it.

Joseph R. Wax

Oxford

 

I contend that for the tourists who come to Maine for its coastal beauty, its beaches and its wilderness, a casino in Oxford will be practically invisible. Oxford, Maine, isn’t on their itinerary and most won’t care if you can’t get there from here. The traffic and the money that flows into Oxford will be there for the casino. The location is, in my opinion, pure genius.

Albert Cloutier

Portland

 

The Oxford casino should not be considered. I lived in New Jersey for many years and the Atlantic City casinos did not improve the way of life in the town. In fact the gap between rich and poor has never been wider.

The casinos bring in their people and if you don’t have skills, then you aren’t needed. The taxes on the casinos may help the town, but hourly workers are only needed for menial jobs.

Marcia F. Deal

Kittery

 

On Nov. 2, I’ll vote to bring a four-season resort casino to western Maine for entertainment, jobs, money for public education, and because I believe in the people who’ll run it.

My opinion about gaming is pragmatic. It’s entertainment for which responsible adults should have the ability to spend their own money. A couple of years ago, I traveled to Connecticut for an excellent Stevie Wonder concert, phenomenal dinner and fun overnight with friends. I’d much prefer to do it in Oxford County.

My college-educated children are not alone in choosing to leave Maine to build their careers. Our state needs good-paying jobs, and the casino will provide 2,700 with benefits. A majority of “yes” votes on Question 1 will generate at least $60 million every year for Maine with more than half dedicated to funding public education.

Ethical, successful Maine business people will run the casino. I’ve known Steve Barber, Black Bear Entertainment’s president, since we attended Cheverus High School, class of 1973. He later became President of Barber Foods.

Local entertainment, good-paying jobs, money for education, and trustworthy leaders make a “yes” vote on Question 1 the smart vote.

Raymond Veroneau

Scarborough