|
|
 |
Dr. DoomTo the Editor,Your article on Dr. Richard Carmona was absolutely great ("Oh, No, We're Gonna Get Sued," Tucson Weekly, March 28). This egotist has used his heavy hand on too many good people. Keep up the great reporting. --Jerry Stombaugh
Up The CreekTo the Editor,Regarding Jeff Smith's "The Name Of The Game" (Tucson Weekly, May 14): No I am not a natural-fiber wearer, elitist and wealthy. I don't wear sensible shoes and don't drive a Volvo. I wear Mervyn's T-shirts, shoes and shorts. I work as a mere school teacher, so therefore I couldn't possibly be an elitist.
We used to spend a lot of time when I was younger hanging out in and around Arivaca. We picnicked during family gatherings over by where the road crosses the creek west of town. That land is now fenced off by the reputed evil empire--the BLM and its puppet the Nature Conservancy. It's true you can't just drive your truck up the creek, get out, drink a few beers and piss on the ground like the old days, but I say GOOD, GODAMMIT!!! The last time I did that a few years before the BLM took over I saw some real bad shit going down there. The creek was getting totally fucked up by people like me. People were driving their trucks around everywhere making it a sport to see who could scale the sides of the creek and fucking up the natural lay of the land. They were throwing their Budweiser cans and cartons everywhere. Dirty diapers were dotting the landscape along with used paper plates, napkins, soda cans, Cheez Whiz containers, Oreo cookie wrappers and empty Fritos packages. Junior had the portable stereo going full blast. I'd say the general peace and serenity was pretty much fucked in the ass. I felt really bad at that time because of all the stories my dad told me of how he spent his innocent youth at the water's edge alone for hours at a time watching the frogs jump in and out of the creek at his feet. He didn't go there to party; he lived there and the land was sacred to him. He witnessed its magic without the sounds of assholes around pissing and driving on everything. So now if you want to visit the place you have to park away from the creek, get out of your car and walk around without your Bud in hand. Nobody is chugging beers and generally fucking with everything except for the cows on the other side of the fence--but that's another story. --Carlos Encinas
Regarding Jeff Smith's "The Name Of The Game" (Tucson Weekly, May 14): It's too bad you folks can't afford to hire any real journalists. By that, I mean people who will actually check out a story before they begin writing. Of course, based on the few times I've read the drivel dispensed by Smith, I expect nothing different from what I found in his last diatribe. There are a few inaccuracies in his column. I hope you will allow me to correct them. I will refrain from using his rolling prose, too. (I mean, how can one compete with "monster," "Soup Nazi" and "900-pound gorilla"?) Let's begin with how The Nature Conservancy (TNC) got the Patagonia/Sonoita Creek Preserve in the first place. TNC bought the original 312 acres from a title company in 1966. Mrs. Lucia Nash, owner of the Circle Z Guest Ranch, donated a 40-acre parcel contiguous to TNC's property about four years ago. But, she did not donate the original preserve property, as the article states. TNC acquired more land, of course. In early 1997, just over 400 acres to the north and east of the original property were bought. And in late 1997, TNC bought 160 acres of what used to be the Red Mountain Ranch, and then promptly sold 60 acres to the Native Seeds/SEARCH folks. I wouldn't call this surrounding the town. I can't help but wonder to whom Smith has been speaking to come up with the concept that TNC threatens to control virtually all the water rights. There are a few inaccuracies in that part of the article, too. The "sites all over the watershed" to which he referred in regard to monitoring was actually one site--still there--on Circle Z property near where the creek enters Lake Patagonia. TNC has been working closely with ADWR throughout this whole process. Both Jeffrey Cooper and Ed Wilk (Preserve Manager and Assistant) were trained by ADWR in the proper methods to conduct in-stream flow measurements. I believe the original training was held in '92, with a refresher in '96. And they are not operating in a vacuum, conducting furtive measurements by the light of the moon and then callously bamboozling a pitiable state agency. At an open meeting held in Patagonia in early December 1997, TNC, ADWR and representatives of the Patagonia Town Council agreed that ADWR would conduct independent measurements of in-stream flow to confirm or refute the data gathered by Jeffrey and Ed. Interested parties were invited to observe. Surprise, surprise: guess whose data was good. TNC has a draft Memorandum of Understanding, which the Patagonia Town Council has had for better than a year, which spells out who will have seniority in water rights. Surprise, surprise: TNC has deliberately subordinated itself to the Town of Patagonia. To wit, TNC not only acknowledges Patagonia's current water rights, they have gone on record as explicitly acknowledging that they will support claims totaling three times that amount to provide for future growth (figures being provided by the Town of Patagonia). All in all, it's too bad Smith didn't practice a little journalism before he began pounding the keyboard. And it's definitely too bad he didn't seek out a more accurate source for his information. I guess it's true what they say about some families being better off if their ancestors had bred for brains rather than shoe size. --Pete Workizer
Do columnists have job descriptions? I guess not, but if they did, Jeff Smith's would have to read "write the most inflammatory, biased misinformation you can come up with, and be sure to include as much scatology and obscenity as you can throw in." Of course, an opinion column is just that--opinion. And that's fine if it's dished out as opinion. Now, if Jeff were to write that Hitler wasn't such a bad guy after all, and maybe we should revise our thinking about Mussolini, we'd all chuckle and shrug and say, "Oh, that Jeff. What a card!" But he goes too far in "The Name Of The Game" (Tucson Weekly, May 14).
I guess I mistakenly thought that Jeff was an independent thinker, but I see I was wrong. This stuff is straight off the sidewalks of Patagonia, and I don't mean the kind we shovel up and put on our gardens. Jeff has a word for that--I forget what it is--and uses it liberally throughout all his writings. I've always wanted to challenge him to write an intelligent column without using one single "four-letter word." But that's another subject. --Sally Greenleaf
After reading the latest issue, I had to conclude that it was too bad The Nature Conservancy didn't own Coronado Ridge Wash and that it would be better if the town of Patagonia owned the Sonoita Creek Preserve. Is there no sense of paradox at your publication? Is there no sense to Jeffy Smith? I suspect that Jeff forgot his Haldol this week and that next time, he'd side with The Nature Conservancy if it was working anywhere except his hypocritical backyard. --Ward Dow
Meanwhile, Back In The BeltwayTo the Editor,While we fight our local battles over the endangered pygmy owl, Congress threatens to change the rules of the game by weakening the Endangered Species Act. Senator Kempthorne (R-Ind.) is trying to push legislation through Congress that will put development interests ahead of endangered plants and animals--in the Southwest and across the nation. If we don't look up occasionally from our local concerns, the Feds will pull the rug out from under us when we're not looking. --Andrew Jones
Wash And WearTo the Editor,I enjoyed David Devine's thoughtful, well-written and depressing article "Wash Away" (Tucson Weekly, May 14), about the destruction of yet another natural area in Tucson. It is a travesty that developers get the zoning permits that they want, and then the land sits unused/undeveloped for years. By the time they get around to actually building on it, the area has perhaps changed radically, and that same permit would not be issued today. The public should not get stuck with whatever was approved in the past despite more recent changes in zoning regulations. To me, it would make more sense if a developer were issued the permit for a very definite, restricted amount of time, i.e. two years. If, at the end of that period, development hadn't yet begun, the developer would lose the permit, and would have to go through the zoning process again. I'm tired of seeing prime property bought and locked into future, unavoidable destruction, while the developer waits until the property value increases, and the public is denied any voice in a major decision that may have occurred years ago. --Felicia S. May
Neighborhood BulliesTo the Editor.As a neighborhood association president I would like to reply to Bonnie Engelbrecht's letter "Crossing The Fineline" (Tucson Weekly, May 14): It seems that Engelbrecht is using a letter to the editor to attack a neighborhood association because she has temporarily lost a livelihood. While it's understandable that she's upset about the situation, I would hope that she will consider the problems with trying to improve a neighborhood association. Basically, when the issue of supporting the transfer of the liquor license for the Fineline came to a vote in front of the Balboa Heights Neighborhood Association, the question became quite simple: How will allowing this transfer improve the neighborhood? The simple answer is that with the traffic congestion, noise and problems involved with bringing the Fineline to the proposed new home, there was no improvement to the neighborhood to be made. It wasn't personal, it wasn't an attack against outsiders, and it wasn't a religious issue. To make claims and to smear people won't change the established fact that a bar the size of which was envisioned does not enhance anyplace or anyone but the owner of the bar. No neighborhood wants these bars, and all neighborhoods will fight them. And no neighborhood association would vote for one because then they would be at risk of being sued for allowing the establishment of that bar. It's not fascism, it's self-preservation. As someone who has had people injured and killed in my neighborhood by flying bullets due to the popularity of such bars and the problems they cause, I support the decision made by the Balboa Heights Neighborhood Association. I would hope that Engelbrecht realizes this is not Kansas anymore, that technology and consumerism has brought us a society of young people who know about and have access to more automatic weapons than any generation before. What may have been possible even 10 years ago is not possible now. To rail out at supposed enemies only guarantees that in the future, if she needs allies on the City Council or in a neighborhood association, she will not have them. The truth is out there all right. And that truth is that proposed location was the wrong place at the wrong time. I'm sure Ms. Engelbrecht knows and follows the liquor laws. I'm sure that she's a conscientious employee and does her job well. Unfortunately for Ms. Engelbrecht, the era for this type of bar anywhere near a residential area is over. It could have been worse. She could have lost her job because of a lawsuit brought by a dead or injured victim. --Matthew Somers
President
Concrete ThinkingTo the Editor,Regarding Margaret Regan's "New Look" (Tucson Weekly, April 23): I recently had the opportunity to visit the newly remodeled Tucson Museum of Art complex across from the City of Tucson's administrative building on West Alameda. Adjoining and just to the north of the museum site lies the area known as El Presidio Historic District, where an integral part of Tucson's history began. One would think that the landscaped portion of the museum, called the sculpture garden, would have recognized and respected the history and culture of this site. Entering the site from the north one is greeted by two cinder-block masonry walls that would fit very well as bathroom walls at the beach. Why weren't local materials used that would have better reflected a regional and cultural gateway between the Presidio and the museum? We live in an arid and at times hot region. Why would the site be predominately covered with concrete and patio pavers? In front of City Hall there is a landscaped area, named Sunset Park, that does reflect the climatic region we live in. Their use of materials other than expanses of concrete mirrors a reality and sensitivity to the desert environment. Why wasn't this type of landscaping continued across Alameda to provide a sense of continuity? What we have is a site that has been landscaped for "Anytown, USA." What we don't have is a site that reflects any historical, cultural, or geographical expression of Tucson or the Sonoran desert. --John Weeks
Critical MassTo the Editor."Critics" are terribly, terribly snooty and if you don't make them feel really art-smart or if you're not oppressed (gay, underprivileged, minority, etc.) they ignore you or trash you. And then, claiming to be all high and mighty they hand "innovation" kudos to totally unoriginal hack garbage if/when it makes them feel politically correct or compassionate or smart or "artistic" to do so. Not all but most critics would appear to be (or become shortly after getting a job as a critic) idiots who overestimate the importance of their work--music critics seem to be the worst. I'm no expert, but I think Lisa Weeks' coverage of Leanne Savage was great and can only help her. It sure made me want to see her over and over again! Besides, people like to see megalomaniacal performers--they want somebody who says they're the best. Ask Michael Flatley, rich famous Riverdance and Lord of the Dance star who is the best dancer in the world and he'll tell you it's him. He grosses millions. Plus, thank goodness Leanne is such a shameless promoter--the humble artists don't get noticed. So Lisa, enjoy your job at The Weekly in the one-horse town of Tucson. And Leanne Savage, look past the TAMMIES and onto the Grammy's. --S.V. Roppatte
Big Splash!To the Editor.The Tucson Regional Water Council (TRWC) thanks you for the publicity in the page-two advertisement (Tucson Weekly, May 7). This ad is a real boon to our membership rolls, which number in the hundreds and represent diverse interests. Unlike CAWS, TRWC individual contributions are limited so that no one member has undue influence. Additionally, TRWC has noted that a paid ad appears each week inside the front page of Tucson Weekly. There is no disclaimer indicating who pays for this ad. Don't your readers deserve the right to know who the advertiser is, or is that just too "tricky?" --Carol W. West
Executive Director
Locked And LoadedTo the Editor,Thank you for Chris Limberis' article, "The Death Penalty" (May 14). It is a skillfully written display of Arizona's punitive attitude. We have the right, in my opinion, to protect ourselves from criminal behavior; but we don't have the right to build a hell with our tax dollars and condemn impoverished, mentally ill, drug addicted siblings to an existence there. Who knows? Perhaps Rene Colores' death was a merciful escape from his tormentors. The majority of Arizonans has become a collective bad guy. --Gretchen Nielsen
Beastly ReviewTo the Editor:I have a couple of complaints about the review of my book, Sleeping with Random Beasts ("Feminist Theorizing," Tucson Weekly, May 14). First off, how unfortunate for me that Mari Wadsworth chose that moment to vent her diatribe regarding the current glut of personal exposés on the market, a fair number of which are apparently ending up on her desk. I feel for her, but wish she would have talked more about my book and less about the genre, which I agree is somewhat pathetic. And brings us to my second complaint. Random Beasts is a first novel and I suppose more autobiographical than it should be, but I really have to say something here. This is still a novel. The damn thing is fiction. Yes, there are similarities, at least in the foundation of it. But really. I hardly know where to begin with the rest. Perhaps Wadsworth's exposure to tell-all tales is getting to her. I didn't put nearly as much of myself in there as she put in for me. Not even a fraction. She is "sympathetically concerned" about how much of the tale is autobiographical and I can't reassure her totally, but maybe she would rest easier knowing that the story is made up. Hence the category "fiction." If she wants real details about my sexual, emotional, and intellectual escapades, perhaps I'll write an autobiography one day and she can review that, instead. In the meantime, if there is something about my decision to write in the first person that offends Wadsworth, that is a legitimate complaint and, frankly, I wouldn't do it again either. For her to call the book trite and boring is also legitimate, although I can't agree (and have yet to find anyone else use the word "boring" to describe this novel). But--and this is really my point--Wadsworth calling Sleeping with Random Beasts a "bone house for someone too obscure to publish their own autobiography" is not just negative criticism, it's actually bad criticism. I can't say I appreciate it. Nonetheless, thank you for reviewing the book. I enjoy your publication immensely and will continue to do so even after being blistered by your critic. --Karin E. Goodwin We Want Letters! Thrilled by our brilliant insights? Sick of our mean-spirited attacks? Need to make something perfectly clear? Write: tucsonweekly@tucsonweekly.com
|
 |
Home | Currents | City Week | Music | Review | Books | Cinema | Back Page | Archives
|
 |
© 1995-97 Tucson Weekly . Info Booth |
|
I drive a Ford truck. My family comes from around Arivaca. My
dad was a cowboy around there until WWII. My grandfather built
the tanque just east of town with a mule and a plow. Cousins of
mine are, or were, fairly well known in those parts before the
general influx of so many new residents.
Regarding the water controversy between the Town of Patagonia
and The Nature Conservancy, he writes as if he knows what he's
talking about, yet he called neither the TNC preserve manager
nor the TNC office in Tucson to get their side of the story. He
may have a couple of facts right, but darn few, and this is an
extremely complicated issue. What he is spouting is poisonous
bile which originates from a couple of bitter, biased individuals
in Patagonia whose sole goal in life seems to be the destruction
of The Nature Conservancy and other environmental organizations
in the vicinity.