Letters to the Editor

Sportsmen need representation

The California Fish and Game Commission banned use of lead ammunition for hunting throughout California in an effort to save California condors. The birds were almost extinct due to lead poisoning, according to environmentalists.
The California Fish and Game Commission banned use of lead ammunition for hunting throughout California in an effort to save California condors. The birds were almost extinct due to lead poisoning, according to environmentalists. The Associated Press

Sportsmen need representation

Re “State’s hunters fear fading voice” (Insight, Feb. 4): Unfortunately the battle over hunting and fishing regulation was a losing cause long before Jim Kellogg’s resignation.

Sportsmen lost this battle when we failed to adapt to a changing political climate. Wildlife populations and regulations are no longer set using sound science from agency biologists and conservationists. Instead, they are being largely directed by politics and political interests who lobby with much more money.

Sadly, the voices currently at the forefront of the opposition to traditional conservation and hunting do very little if any actual conservation. The litigation mills do not fund the causes they claim to be so passionate about.

As hunters and anglers, we need and deserve to have our voices heard. We have invested in these issues more than any voices at the table. Cut us out and you risk all of the good that has been done being lost.

Sean McKenna, Placerville

Choose candidates through reasoning

Re “Steinem, Albright scold young women backing Sanders” (Insight, Feb. 8): Women are wrestling with a difficult question: whether they have an obligation to get behind someone who is closer than anyone has ever been to becoming the first female president.

As a feminist of feminist parents, there is nothing more difficult than hearing Madeleine Albright’s comments on our obligations as women. And as for the Gloria Steinem I knew, she would have had sound, solid reasons for supporting her candidate. I understand her tongue-in-cheek reference to hell, but Albright seems willing to regard women as poor decision-makers who can’t possibly make up their minds about a candidate without her silly threats.

As women we can be really proud of the advances made by our elders that make Hillary Clinton’s candidacy possible. But, through debates, education, observation and questioning, that is what will make the nominee, and that is how today’s women will decide whom to vote for.

Kathleen Stricklin,

Sacramento

Why bash young women?

I can’t sit silent while self-proclaimed feminists bash our younger generation for exercising their right to vote and to express their opinion.

I’m 50, and I’m nonpartisan. I believe nothing will change as long as people vote party lines.

It infuriated me to hear the comments of these two women, saying ridiculous things like “there’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other.” Really?

To say we should vote for a woman just because there has never been a woman president is just foolish. Vote for the best person regardless of race or gender, based on their values, record and what they will do for America.

Teresa Rodriquez,

Sacramento

EXTRA LETTERS ONLINE

Find them at:

sacbee.com/letters-to-the-editor

HOW TO SUBMIT

Online form (preferred):

www.sacbee.com/submit-letter

Other: Letters, P.O. Box 15779,

Sacramento, CA 95852

150-word limit. Include name, address and phone number. Letters may be edited for clarity, brevity and content.

  Comments