California forum letters: Bee readers take on Facebook, animal cruelty, Supreme Court
Animal cruelty
“‘Bacongate’ awaits California in the new year. But state leaders still have time to act,” (sacbee.com, Oct. 20)
It’s despicable the way some in the pork industry are trying to keep to business as usual when it comes to confining mother pigs in barren cages where they can barely move. In 2018, by a landslide vote, California voters passed Proposition 12, which bans the caging of mother pigs in crates so small the pigs can’t turn around. That was three years ago. Pork producers had plenty of time to comply.
But rather than start complying with reasonable mandates, some in the pork industry have tried repeatedly to get Prop. 12 overturned. Their efforts have failed repeatedly. The pork industry should get with the times and stop fighting to be able to cage intelligent, feeling animals.
Parvati Ryan
Rocklin
Priorities
“The ‘bomb cyclone’ hits. Rain drenches Sacramento, prompting fears of floods, mudslides,” (sacbee.com, Oct. 25)
Fires and flash floods are now normal in this state. While mankind can’t control the weather, we can mitigate the impact. But Sacramento and Gov. Gavin Newsom have taken their eyes off the ball. As the governor decries a water shortage, just think of the water that would have been captured during this latest storm had dams been built instead of misguided spending allocated to dubious progressive programs. If forests were properly managed, instead of manically pursuing green energy, perhaps fire devastation and landslides would be far less. Keep your eyes on the ball for critical infrastructure supporting all, not just a few, citizens.
J.S. Anderson
La Mesa
Facebook distrust
“Facebook claims it wants to be a good corporate citizen. Its conduct says otherwise,” (sacbee.com, Oct. 25)
This editorial struck me as naïve. No company can publicly discuss legal and regulatory issues for publication without proper legal context. No doubt Facebook can get better at policing users of its platform, but it’s a difficult subject given First Amendment rights. The last sentence of your editorial states you do not trust Facebook as a company. I assume this means The Bee will close its Facebook account? The Bee seems to be a reputable company that would not do business with companies it does not trust. To do otherwise would be hypocritical.
John Edwards
Fairfield
Forester’s response
“Rogue environmentalists put Californians in harm’s way by blocking forest thinning projects,” (sacbee.com, Oct. 21)
I’m a forester who participated in the overzealous timber harvesting in the Sierras decades ago. Current practices are aimed at restoring balance to these ecosystems while also helping to reduce the likelihood of large, destructive wildfires, as The Bee and other news media outlets have reported. However, members of the news media ought to ask themselves why the “rogue environmentalists” have been given so much prominence in news articles over the last few years, and why views that are so far outside mainstream science and practice have been accepted by apparently credulous reporters and editors.
Steve Wilent
Rhododendron, Ore.
Conflict of interest
“‘Self-serving garbage.’ Wildfire experts escalate fight over saving California forests,” (sacbee.com, Oct. 17)
The U.S. Forest service is under the Department of Agriculture, which considers forests a crop to harvest, like corn or apples. Its budget relies on selling trees for part of its funding, which creates a conflict of interest. This is why the Forest Servicepromotes commercial logging and uses euphemisms like “fuel reduction,” “thinning” and “forest health.”
Criticism of this policy is not “self-serving garbage,” as the headline implies. Financial considerations intercept sound forest policies, and readers never gain an accurate understanding of why vast policy differences exist.
Frederick Krueger
Santa Rosa
Slippery slope
“The Supreme Court is about to decide whether states can blatantly ignore the Constitution,” (sacbee.com, Oct. 27)
The Texas abortion law, outlawing abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy, is patently unconstitutional under Roe v. Wade. Texas’ attempt to prevent review by allowing private citizens to enforce it with a civil action is a slippery slope.
California could ban possession, sale, ownership and use of any firearm. It could authorize any person to enforce the law through a civil action with minimum damages of $10,000. Any private person could sue someone for having a gun in the car, in the home or at a shooting range. Unconstitutional under present court rulings? Almost certainly so. But if the Texas law works because of a lack of state action, why wouldn’t such a law work in California?
William J. Schmidt
Wilton
Embarrassment
“Sacramento County Supervisor Sue Frost wants to investigate the CDC. She’s beyond satire,” (sacbee.com, Oct. 22)
Sue Frost is an embarrassment to the entire county with her nakedly partisan embrace of wacky conspiracy theories. Her lack of intelligent cooperation during a global pandemic reflects on us all so much that Supervisor Phil Serna felt the need to make a statement that the board does embrace science.
For Frost to question the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention because she’s just not convinced about their research provokes instant eye-rolling incredulity in any reasonable person. She represents the fringe; meanwhile, rational Sacramento County has to endure her relentless sabotage along the way to getting the pandemic under control. She should be recalled from her chair and supervisor position.
Theresa Lown
Sacramento