A proposal about
climate change

To the Editor:

If you’re like me, you’re enjoying watching the Winter Olympics. Its amazing and inspirational to watch elite athletes from around the world giving it their all. And it has been fun for me to watch it with my kids who recently started competing in nordic events themselves.

There is a twinge of sorrow for me though, thinking that perhaps in my kid’s lifetimes some of these Olympic events may be endangered due to lack of snow. Nordic athletes are already feeling the pinch. Many venues in Europe that used to rely on natural snow, now must rely on man-made snow.

Whether the winter we are experiencing here in Tahoe is in any way the result of global warming is up for debate, but the trends in higher snow levels in the last few years are undeniable.

So what can we do? Thankfully, there is an answer. There are organizations advocating for a carbon fee and dividend plan whereby a fee is placed on sources of carbon at their source (be it a well head, a coal mine, etc ...).

All revenue collected would then be returned to citizens in the form of dividend checks. The beauty to this solution is that it has the power to achieve zero carbon emissions without imposing burdensome regulations, and in this way stands the best chance of getting bipartisan support which is essential to building a lasting solution.

Two effective organizations advocating for this policy are Citizens Climate Lobby and Climate Leadership Council. Please visit their websites and educate yourself about this very important and increasingly popular policy proposal. If the United States can implement this policy in the next 10 years, we will stave off the worst effects of climate change and save the Winter Olympics for future generations.

Matt Tucker


The Feinstein fiasco

To the Editor:

The senator is proposing legislation costing billions to remove dead trees from the forest.

I have one question: Why weren’t these trees removed when they were green and worth millions?

Seems kind if backwards to me.

I hope she clarifies whether you can cut a tree over 21 inches in diameter when it’s dead, because you can’t cut it when it’s green.

She talks of better forest management. What about removing the same amount it produces each year?

Gee, this would keep the mills running and reduce our dependence on Canada for lumber.

In past years, each district on the Stanislaus had a timber management officer and support staff, as well as the same in the forest supervisor’s office.

Now we have people counting 50-year-old PBR cans and spotted owl hooters, walking the forest, hooting.

For this we have the environmentalists to thank.

Tom Gookin