Letters to the Editor

A College for the Environment

UW takes next step

Editor, The Times:

If we aspire to global relevance, prominence and a university for the 21st century, we must have a College of the Environment ["UW plan sparks dissent," Times, Local News, June 8]. Unlike any current college, this college will cross disciplinary boundaries to deal with real-world issues. When we are bold in our thinking and organization, we will inevitably encounter resistance from those most interested in maintaining their own comfortable places within the existing structure. We applaud the work that has made the UW outstanding, but we do not dare rest on these accomplishments.

Now is the time for breakthrough thinking and bold steps. In this time of resource scarcity, colleges with narrow educational and research foci are increasingly unable to tackle synthetic environmental issues. Our legislators need to understand that reorganizing colleges provide a better educational experience, solutions that are based on interdisciplinary research, save money, attract resources, and foster applications of solutions to pressing environmental problems in Washington state. By eliminating duplication of effort and educating society about environmental problems, we all benefit.

The university has a small Program on the Environment and professional schools that have a few undergraduates. Boutique education is costly and, unfortunately, our current dispersed model is insufficient to meet the environmental challenges we face. Nick Perry's article underscored the challenges that President Mark Emmert and Provost Phyllis Wise face.

Change is never easy, but we need to reallocate limited resources by reducing the number of colleges and directing our efforts to educating students to be critical thinkers who can work within and among disciplines to find solutions to our growing environmental problems. If the University of Washington misses this opportunity to create a College of the Environment, we will handicap a world-class university and leave it in the 20th century.

— P. Dee Boersma, Ph.D, Wadsworth Endowed Chair in Conservation Science, University of Washington Department of Biology

Speaking of green

Some local warming

It continues to amaze me that people think global warming is about the whole Earth being hot. It is about the melting that is causing drastic climate and weather changes, which we are seeing here as well as elsewhere, and sometimes it means it is colder and wetter, which we are also seeing here.

Try reading up on what Al Gore really is saying about drastic weather change and global weather and environmental conditions. Maybe you will get it.

— Lucy Oaks, Redmond

Packing heat?

Post-Folklife gun ban myopic

Why does it seem that legislation is always going after those who are law-abiding when firearms are concerned? In my opinion, Mayor Greg Nickels' ban on concealed-carry permits at festivals is nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction to avoid a lawsuit ["Nickels said to plan festival weapons ban," Local News, June 7].

If he is going to do a ban just on festivals, that is a waste of perfectly good, shortsighted legislation. Why not go for a ban at all types of events?

Because these events have just as much likelihood of having a shooting as a festival does, right? Oh, wait, that would be dangerously close to violating the Second Amendment and the purpose of having a concealed-carry permit (CCP) in the first place.

The purpose of a CCP is to defend oneself, or others, from imminent danger. The ban is going to negatively affect those who are law-abiding, just like similar firearms laws. All it will do is empower those who don't abide by the law.

They will be the ones carrying weapons at festivals or anyplace else CCP's are banned. England has experienced a 40 percent increase in gun crimes since firearms were "banned" in their country. Why? Because the bad guys know that they don't have to worry about being shot by those they commit crimes against!

Instead of the mayor and the city taking on what could easily be seen as a federal matter, why not have the state rethink its process for attaining a CCP? All that is needed now is to pay a fee, get fingerprinted and have the FBI and State Patrol do a background check.

It's not the responsible CCP holders' fault that this incident occurred. Why punish us? It is the state's fault that the measures taken to ensure qualification for a CCP are inadequate. A state-run training course should be mandatory for those who wish to carry a concealed weapon. There is a state-run course for hunters, why not for a CCP?

This is a better way to address the problem as opposed to a knee-jerk reaction that will do nothing more than placate those who want to ban firearms, just because they fail to understand that it isn't those who are responsible who are at fault, but those who disregard the law.

— Chris Mettler, Sammamish

Firearms not the issue

Following the shooting incident at Folklife, Mayor Greg Nickels may propose a completely illogical and likely illegal solution: to ban concealed weapons at public events. Never mind the fact that based on published reports, the shooting suspect should not have been allowed to purchase a firearm, let alone obtain a concealed-weapon permit ["Suspect shouldn't have had permit," Local News, May 28].

Clinton Chad Grainger, the alleged shooter, is reported to be enrolled in treatment associated with heroin dependency. Justice will be served for Grainger. Thousands in our state quietly carry firearms every day out of the public eye. Many of those who carry them go through advanced training in firearms handling and use at their own expense. The shooting incident at Folklife was near tragic for the victims.

Those I know who carry concealed weapons are outraged by this incident. But for heaven's sake, leave innocent concealed-weapon carriers alone. They threaten no one.

— John Blatchford, Mountlake Terrace

Gas gouge

High prices hurt families

I postponed filling my tank until after Memorial Day weekend in hopes the cost would drop. No such luck. I just paid $4.25 a gallon! I'm also having to heat my home in June. When will the Washington Legislature enact a cap on the prices of gasoline and heating fuel? They can do it! Make the wealthy, fat-cat energy companies suffer from the higher costs, not working people. Last year alone, ExxonMobil made $40 billion in profits — the largest single-year profit ever made by a U.S. company.

As our gas prices rose in the past eight years from $1.47 a gallon to the present public gouging, the top five oil companies made $525 billion in profits and big-oil executives are raking it in.

While all this is going on, working families are struggling with stagnant wages, soaring health-care costs, home foreclosures and disappearing jobs. Even $2 or $3 a gallon looks good from here.

Gov. Christine Gregoire could roll back the price and keep it capped during this economic emergency.

— Henry Noble, Seattle