Letters to the Editor for Jan. 6 2010

Forest good for more than storing carbon

I appreciated a little carbon credit common sense (for a change) in the Herald’s New Year’s Day editorial, “What’s a tree worth?” The fervor over saving trees in order to store carbon has generated more hot air than fresh air, I’m afraid. The idea of preserving forests for the singular purpose of storing carbon ignores the wide range of “goods and services” that we depend on our forests to provide.

Federal forest managers in the Pacific Northwest have spent the past two decades experimenting with singular purpose forestry in an effort to save the northern spotted owl. We can’t afford another such failure. The path to sustainable forests has to start with a recognition of all the economic, social and environmental benefits we depend on those forests to provide, both now and into the future.

Gary Springer

Corvallis

Send a message to legislators

Many people are projecting doom and gloom if Measures 66 and 67 do not pass. These proposed tax increases will raise $727 million for our state budget and are aimed directly at businesses in Oregon. The Democrats who control the Oregon Legislature have pushed the business community into the unwarranted role of the bad guy.

According to the Voters’ Pamphlet, people who are in private business are rich, uncaring and we take our money home every night and hoard it. The supporters of the tax measures have done a very good job letting the majority of Oregonians know that this tax will not affect them – only the lucky few rich Oregonians who are not paying their “fair share.”

However you choose to label people in private business, please remember their most important title may be that of “employer.” Many businesses are doing all they can to stay in business during one of  the worst recessions in American history. Do you think that targeting these businesses with increased taxes will allow them to create more jobs, increase their charitable contributions and maintain the living standards of their current employees?

The Democrats have let it be known that failure of these tax increases will cause severe cuts in education, health care and social services. They never mention the state’s overstaffed and overbudgeted departments. Look at the published budget data for the state at http://www.oregon.gov/DAS/BAM/GRB0911intro.shtml. In these tough economic times, why is the state proposing a $6.1 billion increase in spending and an additional 1,597 new employees?

Send a message to our legislators that when they go back to Salem in February, they need to re-evaluate how they spend our tax dollars. It is time for them to make sound fiscal decisions, in the best interests of all Oregonians, not just their own special interests.

A No vote on Measures 66 and 67 will send that message, loud and clear.

Sam Byrnes

Pilot Rock