January 21, 2004

Dear Sir,

In response to Dr. Ware-Cieters' letter of January 18, I must admit to being confused. As far as I was able to discern from previous correspondence, the discussion had revolved around the problems of pigeons roosting in Longtail nests and the havoc that feral cats and chickens wreak on our native species.

It was interesting, therefore, to read a letter which attempted a response to the critics by claiming that just because we were once a farming community, these species now "have a function", to criticise the scientific methods of others, and finally to plead for praise for her own works.

Firstly, I think that anyone would agree that our agricultural history is no excuse for not preserving our environment now, nor a scientifically robust argument for feral cats and chickens having a function in our fragile environment. Of the four major factors Dr. Ware-Cieters cites as causing the loss of biodiversity, surely the control and attempted eradication of invasive species where possible is by far and away the most attainable goal that a progressive and wealthy nation such as Bermuda can strive towards.

Secondly, Dr. Ware-Cieters calls into question the foundation of the Bermuda Biodiversity Project (BBP). However, she gives her justification for this that veterinarians are "the only group of professionals... which is licensed to use prescription pharmaceuticals and anaesthetics, and to perform surgical and medical intervention". I fail to see how this can possibly be an argument for saying the BBP is unsound.

Of course, questioning the integrity and objectivity of a group of "ambitious undergraduates and initialled graduates" makes for easy target practice, but in my nine years of undergraduate study and a fair number of research projects undertaken both in Bermuda and in the UK, I have failed ever to find that research pays anyone well enough to eat healthily, much less to induce me to slant my research findings to suit "those whose interests are at stake".

All Bermudians are grateful to any veterinarians who care enough about our environment to sterilise feral animals, and to educate owners about the importance of sterilising their own animals, and we greatly appreciate the effect this has in conserving our environment. However, it turns my stomach to see someone use past good works as an excuse to lash out at others. The works Dr. Ware-Cieters mentioned in her letter (free sterilisations, buying undeveloped land) have been undertaken entirely of her own free will, and charitable acts, by definition, should not be done so that any individual or group can then demand respect, praise or gratitude.

Levelling accusations of people hiding behind a "pseudo-scientific smokescreen" while making arguments for the continued presence of feral animals that a school child with the most basic concepts of scientific rigour can see through seems a wholly inappropriate way to garner praise and admiration from the community at large.

Maybe Dr. Ware-Cieters could channel her frustration and use her expertise at the same time by volunteering to help the BBP in any way she can to facilitate rigorous scientific method to test her theories of the function of feral cats, chickens and pigeons in our environment. We all look forward to hearing the results.

Sound conclusion?

January 22, 2004

Dear Sir,

This letter is in response to the letter written by Dr. A. M. Ware-Cieters dated January 18, 2004.

I would be very interested to see the sound mathematical equation you devised to come to the conclusion that "half or more of Bermuda will be submerged by the end of the century", especially since the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has calculated that it will rise by approximately 50 centimetres by then. A rise by this amount will undoubtedly cause detriment to coastal environments and there is more than good reason to be alarmed. However, given the fact that most of Bermuda is higher than 50cm above current sea level I deduce from your prediction that this body of scientists must be wrong. We should tell them straight away!

I'm more than shocked to read your scientific prediction. It looks as though it won't be just the pigeons standing on the roofs of our houses by the end of the century.

I am in awe of you Dr. Ware-Cieters. You are so clever and know better than the best conservation scientists on the island and even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Have a safe flight...

January 24, 2004

Dear Sir,

In response to 'Still Wanting To Get Outta Here', all I can say is I pray that wherever you choose to go, may you have a safe flight.

However, in your response, you mentioned it's better to see your enemy. You're right. However, Satan can't be seen yet, he's everyone's enemy except for those who choose to go against the Ten Commandments.

And the worst part, he's a far greater threat than any wicked person worldwide since he's the puppet master and those who follow him are his puppets.

Driving home a point

January 20, 2004

Dear Sir,

I heard on the news last night (January 20) that Government is considering banning the use of cellular phones in vehicles, and I'm certainly in favour of that idea.

I think it would be okay to use hands-free cellphones, but I had to laugh at the comment from Dr. Joseph Froncioni that it's not the "hands" aspect of the phones that causes the problem, it's the amount of "brain" that one uses concentrating on the phone call.

Yeah, right: In that case, an awful lot of drivers out there shouldn't be using cellphones at all! To me, using a hands-free cellphone is like having a conversation with someone else in the car, and there's no way they're ever going to ban that!

I have, however, been quite annoyed by the increasing number of drivers I've seen with one hand valiantly trying to turn the steering wheel on corners, while the other hand holds the cellphone rigidly to the ear. I think the motto here has to be "Hands-free, okay: cell phones, no way!"

Ugly, smelly sight

January 24, 2004

Dear Sir,

The beautiful beaches here are a trademark of Bermuda, and I think everybody including horses and dogs should be able to enjoy them.

But walking on the trails of Warwick Long Bay you usually have to be careful not to step on horse droppings left behind, and ignored by the owners of the horses who walk the trails and beaches all the time.

Can't this problem be solved with a simple horse diaper bag, like the ones the horses in Hamilton use? Or a shovel and bucket for the owners of the horses to use? I will be happy to give a donation for diaper bags, so I, Bermudians and tourists can walk on Warwick Long Bay without having to jump overs... all the time. It is an ugly and smelly sight, and I it takes months for it to disappear.

If the horse owners would like a donation from me they can contact me on 535-7897.

House buyers beware

January 21, 2004

Dear Sir,

Stephen Males in 'Legally Speaking' in on January 20 discusses the pitfalls when purchasing freehold property. As he rightly points out, the prevailing rule is buyer beware!

However, he misses one significant trap, and one that can cause a great deal of permanent grief if entered into without a full understanding of the consequences for the often starry eyed purchaser, and later his heirs and assigns.

That is the relatively recent pitfall that a traditional Bermuda house may be "listed", in other words designated as a building of "historic" or architectural interest. A group of people, now called the Historic Buildings Advisory Committee, have determined that in their opinion some people's houses must be preserved for the edification and enjoyment of the neighbours and the public.

No financial support or alleviation of land tax has been provided to the households thus imposed upon, only a short-term loan facility for approved repairs but note, not improvements. In other words if one of these houses was yours, you could go on borrowing money to re-putty and repaint the old windows every year or so, but you would not be allowed to upgrade them with modern noise abating windows that are virtually maintenance free.

Your neighbour next door can do it, all the while adding to the value of his house, but you are not allowed. You go on borrowing and paying for repairs, and he does not, and yet your old house is supposed to be for his enjoyment and edification. Even though you may think this is grossly unfair, it is nevertheless the way it is. So, in short, under Mr. Males' edict, beware, you should avoid listed houses like the plague.

As pointed out, this pitfall negatively affects the asset value of your house ? because most people do not want houses that have encumbrances that prevent reasonable improvements and changes available to your neighbours. Also, most people will not willingly (unless they are already stuck with one of these places) get involved with esoteric out of touch committees inclined to decisions that take little account of the real needs of modern day people that the decisions impact.

Lastly, when the time comes for the home to be inherited by your descendants, they will be faced by the same problems all over again. The advice here is that if you own a listed house, apply to have it de-listed. If that fails sell it at the best price you can get. If you see a listed house you would like to buy, get it de-listed or save yourself a lot of grief by looking elsewhere. On no account build a traditional house that might get listed sometime in the future.

Mr. Butler's true talent

January 23, 2004

Dear Sir,

Over the years, the lively and loquacious Dale Butler has not been afraid to show his faults.

It has earned him a reputation for honesty, but he has provided his critics with their ammunition for his entire political life. Many of these critics hide their own flaws well and those flaws appear with horrible clarity when they attempt to fulfil their political posts.

I am sorry Mr. Butler turned down the Education Ministry. He is not a perfect political operative but there is apparently only one Paula Cox; and even she did not define the kind of vision for education that that department desperately needs.

I am sure he does a good job in Community Affairs, but he has a passion for people and for education that is very rare in either party. He has the social talent to create consensus; a talent so lacking and ignored in the UBP during their tenure.

Education, for both parties, is mostly the monster in the cellar that has to be fed a Minister, every now and then, to keep the public convinced that the monster is being responsibly fed. It has been that way for 30 years. It requires a committed individual and a patient government to tame the monster. With Mr. Butler out of the picture I don't see how that will come about.

Here (and in the United States), public education is not a priority for the voting public. This is ironic because no other area of political life affects Bermuda's future so dramatically. The only resources we have, on this oceanic anomaly, are brains and sunshine. Unless we are all flowers we are going to have to develop the brains resource very seriously and very deliberately.