Wolves are killers

Re "Will cry of the wolf return?" (Page A1, Dec. 11): While the article has important information, it fails to address some key points. The wolf has no natural predator, so it can be controlled only by means of the Department of Fish and Game. It is well known that the Canadian wolf that was introduced is a killing machine. The wolves will kill more elk or deer than they will consume.

I understand that people view the reintroduction of the wolf as positive; however, I disagree that elk and deer herds have not been affected. At the reported wolf numbers, how could the herds not be affected?

While elk hunting in Idaho in October, I spotted four wolves and one elk calf my entire trip. This is highly unusual for the areas that I would normally hunt. Because Idaho recognizes the problem, the Idaho Fish and Game now allows a wolf hunt. Good choice.

– Brent West, Folsom

Uphold wildlife protections

Thank you for the wonderful article about what could be the first wolf seen in California in 90 years. While The Bee reported about a lone wolf, your readers need to know that Congress is proposing provisions that will seriously weaken the law that protects all endangered species: the Endangered Species Act.

Specifically, Congress is considering provisions that will: Prevent (unscientifically) protections for imperiled species now awaiting endangered status; stop the monitoring and regulation of pesticides in endangered species habitats; cut critical funding for the Mexican gray wolf program; and radically (and unfairly) cut funding for the federal agencies that steward endangered species.

I urge the California congressional delegation, especially Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, to oppose these cuts and provisions and to champion a clean budget bill bereft of any harm to wildlife and their habitats.

– Janet Hoben, Burbank

Welcome back, wolves

Wolves were in California long before humans were. We took over their territory and obliterated them. Now they may make a comeback, and panic is setting in. Wolves do not attack humans unprovoked. More livestock is killed by non-wolf predator animals than by wolves.

There are programs in place to pay ranchers for livestock killed by wolves. There is no evidence that wolves in California will decrease ungulate populations – as pointed out in the article. Instead of unfounded panic, let's welcome these majestic animals back.

– Chris Cummings, Sacramento

Cry of the lone wolf

In 1963, a good friend of mine, 75-year-old rancher Harvey Moore of Fresno, took me on a horseback trip to his favorite fishing spot, 12 miles from Shaver Lake, so remote we saw no sign of people for days. At 3 a.m., on a full-moon night, I was wakened by a howl from across the creek. I asked Harvey, "What the heck is that?" He said, "That's my friend, a gray wolf. Serenades me every time I'm up here."

I said, "The experts say there are no more wolves in California." He replied, "There's one."

– Don Lawson, Citrus Heights

CSU exec raises were bad call

Re "The real problem at CSU? Drastic budget cuts" (Another View, Forum, Dec. 11): Three California State University trustees explain that budget cuts to higher education are the fundamental problem. That is true, but when they increase executive compensation during a budget crisis, the public perceives that higher education has money to throw around, making it that much easier for the Legislature to cut much more from the CSU budget. How many millions will executive salary increases cost students, to replace the resulting diminished state allocation?

By arguing that executives haven't had an increase in years, they imply that administrative salaries must inexorably increase, regardless of the circumstances in the state. This adds to the perception that higher education spending is out of control.

Even if they were right about executive salary increases, they are wrong to do it, because of the long-term damage it does to funding for the institution. Unfortunately, they have apparently decided that this is the hill on which the CSU might die.

– Scott Farrand, Carmichael,

professor of mathematics, CSU Sacramento

CSU trustees' crocodile tears

I was disgusted with the disingenuous commentary by three CSU trustees decrying the budget cuts suffered by the CSU system.

Where was their lamentation between 2004 and 2009 when Chancellor Charles Reed accepted budget cuts and made a budget compact with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger? I have personally spoken to members of the Legislature to urge them to restore the budget of the CSU every year since 2003. One honest assemblyman asked me, "Where is your chancellor? Why isn't he here asking for more funding? He says the system can get by with less."

The concerns of Trustees Peter Mehas, Carol Chandler and Bill Hauk are as sincere as the tears of the crocodile.

– Winston C. Lancaster, Sacramento,

associate professor of biological sciences, CSU Sacramento

Electric cars are 'care-free'

Re "Electric cars, special care" (Business; Dec. 11): I take exception to the article on electric cars, implying that consumers should be careful when purchasing one.

I have had an electric car since 2000: first the GM EV1, then a Toyota RAV4 EV. They have been "care-free" from the moment I bought them. For one four-year stretch, I even skipped the annual maintenance checks. My charging costs are about $25 a month; every two years or so, I buy new tires. That's it.

Therefore the idea that electric cars somehow require extra "care" and one should be cautious about purchasing an electric car is ludicrous.

And by the way, those Chevy Volt batteries that "caught on fire"? They got hot and melted, because the NHTSA technicians deliberately did not follow Chevy's battery handling protocols. In other words, they were careless and blamed it on the car.

– Ernest Kimme, Vacaville

Rail claims are way out there

Re "Has the time come to derail high-speed rail? No way" (Editorials, Dec. 11): The High-Speed Rail Authority has put out some claims that are a real stretch of the imagination. Their conservative claim of 90 million riders annually breaks down to 250,000 per day, or approximately 500 trains per day, which would be impossible. They also claim that high-speed rail would eliminate the need for any spending on highways, which is also ridiculous. Highways have a much higher capacity than rail does and link every city and town in California.

Also, their claim that it would be self-supporting is a figment of its imagination – the system would require billions a year to operate and maintain. If the authority set the price of tickets to cover expenses, only millionaires would be able to afford them.

– William Palazzini, Granite Bay

LETTERS |

Scandal in mental health care

Re "A woman is killed, a cause is born" (Forum, Dec. 11):

Bravo, Mr. Morain! Your magnificent story honored the very beautiful Laura Wilcox and her family with grace and journalistic professionalism. A truly class piece of work.

Thank you for informing us of this critical local governmental mental health care scandal.

Hopefully, your work will shed the daylight necessary for change in the system responsible for handling people who are incapable of handling themselves.

– Jim Landis, Orangevale

Mental illness needs spotlight

Understanding and dealing with mental illness are subjects on which our society lags behind. Dan Morain provides much needed illumination.

– Francine Moskovitz, Sacramento

'Rights' may prevent help

Dan Morain's article about the shooting death of Laura Wilcox is very important and discusses the rights of the mentally disturbed, a discussion which has been ongoing for years.

Recently my son was stopped by police in Central California for noise disturbance. He was taken to the local mental health center, where he was considered not a threat to self or others, as rigidly defined. This week he took his own life.

"Rights" of the mentally ill and lack of adequate funding are a sad problem for all of us.

– Ernest W. Dahl, Sacramento

Unprofitable cases avoided

The death of Laura Wilcox is tragic, enough to make strangers cry. The article by Dan Morain illustrates the difficulty of getting medical help for people who have lost their power of reason. Because of the numbers involved, there is no acceptable system solution.

The fault lay with those who support an individual's right to any unreasonable behavior unless a crime is committed, and a medical industry with the need to make a profit. Under the present medical model, aggressive treatment of the mentally incapacitated is unprofitable and would even bankrupt the health system.

Patient confidentiality, as a defense, is used to avoid this expense. Until there is recognition of the enormity of this issue, and until the need for change in law and medical practice is made – there are no answers, only acceptance that that is the way it is.

– Leo Farr, Sacramento

ON FACEBOOK

Last Sunday's Conversation asked the question, "Have laws to protect the severely mentally ill compromised our safety and theirs?" Here are some responses:

From Facebook

We need more community-based services for the mentally ill and outreach. Yes, the mentally ill should have rights, but families and the community are at risk when the mentally ill go off their meds. Many families try to help their loved ones, but when the loved ones go off their meds until they become dangerous to themselves or others nothing can be done – and then it's sometimes too late. It places an unfair burden on law enforcement to try to deal with the mentally ill. I saw it over and over when working.

– Donna Fields

It is really the significant shortage of community treatment services for the mentally ill that compromises safety. The laws to protect client rights are the foundation for protecting those individuals and provide service providers guidelines for ethical treatment. There is always a balance between client rights and treatment. Client rights, though, offer little if we do not have adequate service choices available in the community.

– Diane Lucas

To connect with us on Facebook, go to:

www.facebook.com/sacramentobee

www.facebook.com/sacbeeeditboard

© Copyright The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved.

WRITE US A LETTER

Include: Name, mailing address and phone number.

Length: 150 words or less.

BEST WAY TO SUBMIT

Online form: www.sacbee.com/sendletter

E-mail: letters@sacbee.com Other: Letters, P.O. Box 15779, Sacramento, CA 95852

• Read more articles by