I am writing to express my concern about recent discussions regarding the possible return of fishpots to our waters. There are many reasons not to tamper with the status quo and there is genuine concern in the community that views contrary to Mr. Danny Farias may not receive due consideration. Mr.

Farias, who is the chairman of the Marine Resources Board, has publicly stated that he would vote for the return of fishpots.

It is ironic that Mr. Farias, who claims to speak on behalf of the fishermen, would support a method of fishing that will ultimately destroy this traditional way of life. We need to look at the rest of the world to understand how overly efficient fishing methods have affected entire coastal communities. Once thriving fishing towns from New England to the Canadian Maritimes now have harbours full of idle fishing fleets. The cod and haddock of the Grand Banks have been wiped out by the deadly combination of powerful technology and short term greed. The same can be said of the islands to our south where fishpots have literally wiped out much of their marine life, including some cases the coral reefs. Jamaica is a prime example where unchecked harvesting of reef grazers like parrotfish has allowed the reefs to actually be smothered by algae. Jamaica is presently experimenting with an expensive reef regeneration programme.

Fishpots are an incredibly efficient fishing technology when combined with modern boats equipped with powerful hydraulic winch systems. They are quite similar to drift nets as they catch and kill indiscriminately, 24 hours a day.

Driftnets have been banned around the world and many maritime nations have now banned fishpots. The potential for fishpots to destroy what is left of our local fishery is very real.

We must recall our own recent history to avoid making the same mistakes.

During the fishpot heyday of the seventies and eighties, many of the large grouper species that dominated the local fishery for generations were rendered commercially extinct. To make matters worse, the void in the market was filled with parrotfish and other herbivorous species. Not only was this threatening the very health of the reefs protecting our island but also one of our economic pillars, tourism. Many tourists on diving vacations as well as tour boat operators began to complain of the lack of fish on the reef. Fortunately in the last few years since the ban, reef dwellers like parrotfish appear to be making a slow comeback. The sad fact however is that most of the grouper species remain extremely rare. I fear that if fishtraps are returned there will be no hope of a recovery of this one vital resource. The temptation to exceed allotments combined with the ability to hide illegal gear thanks to GPS technology would make any control of a fishtrap fishery virtually impossible.

In conclusion we can only hope that common sense prevails over the selfish interests of a few short-sighted fishermen. We must remember that we all have a duty to preserve our environment for the use and enjoyment of future generations of Bermudians.

MANGROVEROOT City of Hamilton Remarks misinterpreted April 18, 1999 Dear Sir, I have just returned home to find that my address to Hamilton Lions was totally misunderstood by a few people, notably Mr. Edness and Ms Ferguson.

I find it ironic that I told the print and broadcast media not to waste time covering my speech because I was not going to say anything new -- nor did I.

I believe that Mr. Edness intentionally misinterpreted my remarks. He may well have been angered by my lament at the decline of the broadcast news media -- a decline over which he presided at ZBM.

Ms Ferguson even accused me, libelously I thought, of "acts of elimination''.

None of that has ever happened, nor was it my intent, nor was it what I said.

Perhaps I phrased it badly but what I said was that politicians who fight with the media appear thin-skinned, self-serving and acrimonious. The Bermudian public does not like that. I cited three past examples only and no "others'' as Ms Ferguson wrote.

I believe that the same thing could happen to the new Premier if she persists in avoiding the media. No politician in the free world dares do that.

I was analysing a situation and, as far as I intended, there was no threat, no power trip, no making people suffer etc, etc.

I seldom answer critics who have an agenda and I do so now only because I do not want silence to be taken for any kind of agreement.

DAVID L. WHITE Paget Fair play needed April 14, 1999 Dear Sir, I am here on holiday from London and have read with interest your columns on the subject of full British citizenship for the few remaining residents of British Overseas Dependent Territories which of course includes Bermuda.

The British Government is to be applauded for, at last, addressing this issue including the hitherto qualified and restrictive passports these people have been obliged to accept through no fault of their own. There is no longer any reason for these measures.

On the other hand, and I hope I am wrong about this, it looks as though the right to full citizenship is in some way being qualified. The use of words such as `offer' and `in return for' suggest that there is, as yet, some sort of deal to be done.

Surely the people of these territories are entitled to expect the same rights and privileges as citizens of the UK (and the Falkland Islands and Gibraltar for that matter). There should be no half measurers, otherwise they could well feel that their human rights are not being upheld as they should be.

Furthermore, the majority of these people are what the British Government euphemistically describe as `ethnic minority'. Heaven forbid that they should get the impression of being treated differently. They are Britain's friends and Britain's people.

Changes in local laws relating to financial regulation, homosexuality, death penalty etc. are a separate matter and are for governments to resolve by fair and understanding negotiation and not at the expense of individual rights. And hopefully, these changes can be achieved without the British Government resorting to such autocratic and draconian measures as `Orders in Council'.

The curtain is coming down on the British Empire. Its people have rightly established a much admired reputation for fair play and honour. It would be a shame if these were somehow compromised in this final act.

MARIE ANNE SOPHIE SAYER London, England Solving hotel problems February 22, 1999 Dear Sir, My many years in our Hotel Industry has led me to the conclusion that the only real solution to Bermuda's Hotel problems is for management and unions to work together as partners to bring about change. It can only happen through changes in the contractual language and economics which would reduce the distrust and poor morale. For example one of our Hotels, without consulting with the union, stopped serving breakfast to hotel employees which had been negotiated into the agreement over 30 years ago. I do not believe that hotel owners and managers have a willingness to change, while it has been my experience that most labour leaders are willing to work for positive change if they trust the hotel owners' and managers' intentions. Hotel management must be prepared to show that they are willing to be a strong advocate to building employee morale and changing the labour management culture in our hotels.

Most of our present hotel managers maintain the status quo which is a formula for further deterioration in employees' morale. General managers could play pivotal roles in leading the changes in labour management relations in Bermuda in order to change the power-bargaining which now exists.

RAYMOND RUSSELL SR.

Pembroke When to join the EU April 13, 1999 Dear Sir, After Bermuda goes Independent it can decide as an Independent country, what it would like to do, like any other Independent country. And if Bermuda as an Independent country, like the U.K., like France, like Germany decided it wanted to join the European Union, we would do so as an Independent country, just as they are Independent. That is the only fair, common sense and acceptable union that Bermuda can have with the European Union. As a satellite of Britain, is totally unacceptable! DR. CLARK GODWIN City of Hamilton Concerned about towers April 14, 1999 Dear Sir, With regard to Radio Frequency radiation from towers: As briefly as possible, I have followed up on the inference by Adam Gauntlett that the EPA is very happy with the FCC standards. As has been pointed out, the EPA statement which he quoted was several years out of date. The reason that Mr. Gauntlett did not bother to get the latest EPA position may be evident from the following.

There are two aspects of EMF in the Radio Frequency range. There are the thermal health effects which occur at relatively high power densities and there are the more debatable non-thermal effects which occur at very low power densities and which will be experienced close to transmitting towers of all kinds, particularly short ones.

No one is in any doubt about the thermal effects. Months ago, the concerns over non thermal effects were put on record by CARE. The EPA has confirmed to me, this week, that the FCC guidelines do not address non-thermal effects which are those at the centre of a huge international debate. The EPA admitted to me that relatively few studies have been done on non-thermal effects and some, albeit the minority, of these studies had shown potential adverse impact on health.

In a 1990 report the EPA itself confirmed that a few studies had uncovered a statistically significant link between EMF and cancer. The report also stated that EMF in the higher frequency range (RF) might be expected to have even more effect.

CARE remains right on track. Their concerns are shared by many authorities and communities including the European Parliament.

INCREASINGLY CONCERNED City of Hamilton