A cry for help?

August 4, 2003

Dear Sir,

It sounds as if Alex Scott's "Call for Unity" is more like a cry for help. If he does get any helpful advice from the UBP which results in making the PLP look good, the hard-line PLP supporters will give all the credit to Alex Scott.

While on the subject of the PLP, are they going to forget the senior citizens again during their second term?

M.W.

Warwick

Let's pull together

July 25, 2003

Dear Sir,

The PLP won yesterday. Now is time for all good voters to demand aid from their party.

Of all the pre-election rhetoric, two of wisdom:

The UBP's call for inclusiveness and reaching across the political divide regardless of insistence on the Westminster adversarial system and style. Conversely, Westminster cannot tell us voters what to think, need and demand.

Also, the lady who on the Talk Show stated that constituents must put forward their thoughts, needs and demands directly to the incumbent party. Agreed, and I say, not by marches but by talk shows, letters to the Editor and attendance at Parliamentary sessions when notes can be handed in to the Clerk.

Perhaps we, as an alliance of voters should do as I did for my school, have coloured satin ribbons printed with a voters alliance name printed to wear across breast and shoulder at appropriate times.

For the Party, I am reiterating what I have said many times, that I am convinced that when Sir John Cox was a boy, he was sweeping out the ground floor where the cash register was, learning things from the ground up. I have been told that the Gibbons brothers were not placed in seats up front to start but at the ground level warehouse.

The Government needs to learn and heed from those who climbed the financial business ladder from ground level as a firm and wise foundation to success. Voters' alliances must make suggestions, requests and demands.

Demand one: Mend fences and strengthen ties with the USA pronto. They are our closest air and sea neighbours, trading partners and more and more vital tourist source and one we should be able to turn to in any emergency.

Incidentally, when there were three political parties, I was invited by all three to run for one of them. I turned all down, wisely. However, I am now running as a voter for all two. I am now reclaiming my maiden name of Cecile Norma Musson, widow Smith, for my publications but must sign as below.

CECILE MUSSON SMITH

Devonshire

Dog ban driven by fear

July 19, 2003

Dear Sir,

As I write this letter, I am shocked and infuriated by the dog ban being imposed by Environment Minister, Mr. Dennis Lister. This ban is unfair and was made without proper investigation or consideration for responsible dog owners across the Island, despite the claims of the Minister to the contrary.

Any intelligent person with real knowledge of dogs will tell you that there is no such thing as a bad breed, only bad owners; why should responsible owners be made to suffer? Doesn't Mr. Lister realise that the irresponsible dog owners, who mistreat their dogs, who fail to train them properly, who fight their dogs, encourage aggressive behaviour, and who fail to secure them are the ones who don't abide by the law, anyway?

Mr. Lister has never met my dog, a well-socialised American Staffordshire Terrier who has never bitten anyone or been in any sort of fight. The most damage he has done, is to smother someone with love and affection in the form of slobber. He literally cries and whimpers when I take him to the vet and he is not allowed to play with other dogs. Ask the people at Endsmeet and they'll tell you what a wonderful temperament he has.

Shiloh is a loveable and playful dog with a world of personality. He is also an excellent guard dog who makes the whole family feel secure. With the way things are headed on this Island with crime and drugs, my family and I feel safe with him around. But you're telling me I won't be allowed to own such a beautiful and obedient dog in the future, Mr. Lister, because he's `potentially dangerous'? (after all, by banning importation and breeding of his and other breeds, dogs like Shiloh will sooner or later be non-existent, as their bloodlines will be cut off).

Aren't all animals potentially dangerous? Aren't people also `potentially dangerous'? So I suppose now that we will soon be locking up members of the public who are deemed `potentially dangerous' too? Should `potentially dangerous' people be forced to leave their houses in handcuffs, in case they do something dangerous? That will eliminate crime, right? Or, as in this case, should family members of one bad member of the public be sterilised, so none of them can reproduce? After all, that will solve the problem, right?

That is what this law would accomplish for the breeds in question; their bloodlines will be wiped out over time, since their owners will never be allowed to breed them.

This move seems to be motivated by fear and I question the intelligence of those who support it. It's just another example of a hasty decision made by Government with no real foresight. Instead of taking less extreme measures to crack down on the offenders, Mr. Lister has punished all dog owners for the sins of a few. Rather than taking a sensible step to help sort out this problem, or hiring another animal control officer to deal with the current problems of dog fighting and aggressive dogs, we've now put a law into effect that not only discriminates against responsible dog owners, but has also made the job of the animal control officer all that much more difficult.

You know, you can solve a headache by cutting off the head, but does that really make sense? And won't you just be left with a bigger mess than what you started with? This is just an example of how this government seems to work; act now, investigate later. Dogs owners in Bermuda should not, and will not stand for this ban.

AARON MEDEIROS

Hamilton Parish

We are all responsible

June 30, 2003

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your kind comments (Royal Gazette editorial, June 27, 2003) regarding the recently completed Railway Trail foreshore link at Shelly Bay.

Your editorial highlights both the valuable recreational resource the Trail is and some of the challenges that it presents us with.

Since taking responsibility for the Trail just over two years ago our Department has carried out a comprehensive survey of the entire trail, highlighting potential development works along its length. Many of these works involve improving access and surfacing after many years of the Trail receiving little attention and a number of these have already been completed. Others are more ambitious, involving bridging, reclaiming disused sections, interpretative and directional signage throughout its length etc. The project is certainly a work in progress and our goal is to maximise the potential and promote the Railway Trail for passive recreational use by both residents and visitors alike.

The first half of your editorial highlights another of our Department's challenges. Litter and misuse are perhaps the single biggest problems for our Parks maintenance staff. We have approximately 120 staff responsible for the maintenance of in excess of 2,000 acres of parks, beaches, botanical gardens, schools and other government lands. With an ever decreasing supply of open space, the burden of the public's desire to take advantage of our island's natural beauty is falling more and more on our National Parks. This is never more obvious than on a fine holiday weekend such as the Queen's Birthday weekend.

With our current resources, it is hard to meet the demand placed on our parks system under normal circumstances. When our crews are faced with parks strewn with litter or toilets, fences or structures vandalised, their workload is vastly increased. As a result of having to react to this additional unnecessary work, our crews have less and less time to spend on maintenance, development or improvement projects, clean up of flotsam and jetsam on the beaches or any number of other projects on our "to do" list.

Unfortunately, human nature being how it is, we receive much more negative comment for not being able to keep up with a workload which is unfairly burdened by such misuse than we receive for our positive achievements. Those most affected by this steady stream of complaint are our hard working maintenance crews. They deserve every credit for working as hard as they do maintaining their areas of responsibility as well as they do, island wide.

It is very kind of Mr. Bruce Brown to offer the assistance of his foundation in helping to clean Shelly Bay. It is a great shame that this offer comes from a visitor to the Island when there are so many in Bermuda who do not appreciate the natural beauty that surrounds us and a growing number who seem intent on mistreating our public parks and the Trail with no regard for their neighbours or the hardworking Parks Department crews who are expected to clear up the mess they leave behind. It is unfair for us as a society to place the burden of litter and trash clean up almost completely on agencies such as Mr. Brown's, Keep Bermuda Beautiful, the many groups that sponsor Parks and other areas or the Department of Parks.

Every park user holds the responsibility to dispose of their litter and use the parks correctly. I wholeheartedly agree with you, we all share this responsibility and none of us should minimise how important it is to our community to keep the island litter free. I encourage all of us to do our part in keeping this island beautiful.

MARTIN BROWN

Senior Superintendent

Parks Department