Letters to the editor (9/23/09)

It is long past the time for members of Congress who are concerned about a government takeover of health coverage as a reason for opposing responsible health care reform to walk the talk.

These members should immediately and permanently give up their government-provided health coverage provided each member of Congress, along with any Medicare, VA or entitlements from past government service at the state or local level.

I also respectfully suggest that, pending final legislative resolution of the health coverage issues, all members of Congress and their staffs pay for medical expenses for themselves and their families out of their own pockets.

Finally, I expect that any members who vote "no" not avail themselves of federal, state or local government-supported health coverage.

-- Jules Tileston

Anchorage

Support lesser-known treasures

Your editorial on Alaska's state parks was right on the mark (Sept. 8). However, you left out another 3.1 million acres of our incredibly diverse and heavily utilized state game refuges, wildlife sanctuaries and critical habitat areas. Spectacular in scope, beauty and bounty, they offer tremendous year-round recreational opportunities.

The Alaska Department of Fish and Game is mandated to provide sustainable fish and wildlife management of these lesser-known treasures for all, as well as to monitor and protect them from abuse. This is no small task in a state that has demonstrated little political will to provide fair and equitable funding to carry out such mandates.

A perfect example is the paltry $15,000-per-year budget to manage 25 of these designated management areas, many of which are easily accessible and heavily used, on the Southcentral road system. These too have suffered the same abuses as our road-accessible state parks and are at least deserving of such basic investment as restrooms. What's needed is an administration finally receptive to a long-neglected, crumbling infrastructure.

-- Kris Abshire, president

Alaskans for Palmer Hay Flats State Game Refuge Inc.

Wasilla

Local doctors spurned ill woman

Mom came to Anchorage to spend the winter with her daughter and granddaughter. She became ill and, away from her doctor, had to visit the emergency room for care.

The emergency physician found an "anomaly" in her EKG and recommended seeing a doctor. She called doctor after doctor in an effort to make an appointment but was told repeatedly that the doctor was not taking any more Medicare patients.

She patiently explained each time that she had private insurance as well as Medicare and that this would mean that her insurance would cover the fee amount that Medicare would not. But to no avail. The emergency room became her only source of medical care.

We sent her home to Oregon in May, but it was too late. Once again, she was rushed to the emergency room. This time, even with emergency care and an emergency angioplasty, she died.

It appears that here in Anchorage "the bottom line" is more important to some than the Hippocratic Oath. I can't help but wonder what would be if she had not visited here.

-- Jennifer S. Wadsworth

Anchorage

Predator/prey management benefits hunters from here and Outside

The attempt by anti-hunters to derail predator/prey management because of its "benefits to trophy hunters" is based on a shallow reason at best ("Herds gaining in areas of predator control," Daily News, Sept. 13).

Alaska's trade in big-game adventures is over a century old. North America's most famous first naturalists came to Alaska on the Harriman Alaska Expedition in 1899 on a guided Kodiak brown bear hunt. You can't find another more sustainable industry in Alaska with as much longevity.

If the antis define "trophy hunters" as all nonresidents, that only adds up to between 10,000 and 15,000 annually over the last 40 years. That's a small portion of the 100,000 licensed hunters in the state each year.

Alaska hunters and nonresident hunters will benefit from predator/prey management; why not trophy hunters too? Trophy hunters still have the same laws regarding wanton waste of game meat. They have to eat it or give it to someone in good enough condition for them to eat.

Nonresident hunters supply 80 percent of the funding to operate the entire Division of Wildlife Conservation. Money spent on game management is a good return for Alaska residents who choose to gather a wild food harvest for their family and friends each year. Non-hunters don't pay for predator/prey management.

Trophy hunters spend a considerable amount of money in Alaska on both services and goods. No other sector of the tourist industry can boast as much money spent in state per visitor.

Besides that, many Alaskans receive edible meat from game harvested by trophy hunters. In hard economic times a locally grown food source would only increase in value. Alaskans may all appreciate having a moose steak in the not-too-distant future.

A number of multiple-generation Alaska families have made guide/outfitting the mainstay of their livelihood for decades. Anti-hunting advocates are way off base attacking "trophy hunters" in their attempt to disrupt active predator/prey management in Alaska.

-- Rod Arno

Alaska Outdoor Council

Anchorage