Letters submitted by BDN readers are verified by BDN Opinion Page staff. Send your letters to letters@bangordailynews.com.

Working together with purpose not despair

In response to Anna Siegel’s Sept. 14 column in the Bangor Daily News: We don’t need reports to remind us that in the past 200 years human beings have changed the climate; we see the results every day. This might be a time for despair if despair could help.

When I was 19, I read “Silent Spring” by Rachel Carson. I learned ospreys and eagles fished in Maine’s harbors and lakes, where I saw none. Later, from “Sea of Slaughter” by Farley Mowat I learned my ancestors had obliterated populations of birds and animals along the east coast, and then from “The Mortal Sea” by W. Jeffrey Bolster, I learned schools of pogey 40 miles long once swam through coastal waters, as did vast numbers of cod and shrimp. I too felt angry at the careless destruction by people who came before me, and realized what I thought was normal was already a decimation of what had been.

Siegel and I come from different generations, but unite in wanting to be better stewards of what we’ve inherited. I find hope in that, not despair, and examples. Since DDT was banned, I often see eagles and osprey. There is so much we need to change quickly that the enormity of that responsibility brings despair, but that is not enough. “What destruction am I blessed by?” wrote poet A.R. Ammons. Severe storms, wildfires — the signs of destruction increase. The blessing is that more people begin to see them and understand we must work together for change with purpose not despair.

Barbara Kent Lawrence

Camden

Rat infestation is news to me

I’ve only heard recently of an alleged infestation of rats in the town of Milford. Imagine my dismay by having found out that a previously scheduled showing of our home through Real Estate had been cancelled because of the “rat epidemic.” Good Lord, first be aware of climate warming, and now watch out for the rats in Milford.

If I sound somewhat dumbfounded, please be assured that I am! My biggest grief is the article in the BDN. The hyperbole defied sensible thought! I can honestly say we have to endure enough sensationalism through the political news centers.

Alson Nedik

Milford

Questions about Question 1 wording

I am writing in regards to Question 1 on the ballot facing voters this year.

I quote, “Do you want to ban the construction of high-impact electric transmission lines in the Upper Kennebec Region and to require the Legislature to approve all other such projects anywhere in Maine, both retroactively to 2020, and to require the Legislature, retroactively to 2014, to approve by a two-thirds vote such projects using public land?”

The key word in the question is the word “and.” That one word changes the meaning of the whole question. If a person is in favor of part of this question and against the other issue listed, how are they to cast an informed vote, seeing there are two issues discussed in the same sentence? I would like to hear the reasoning behind the creation of this question that the Secretary of State thought is best to put two separate issues in one question.

I urge people to contact the Secretary of State to get a clarification and a reason as to why they put two separate issues together in one question when it would have been better understood to separate each issue. Let each issue stand on its own merits and be more clear to the voters here in Maine.

Bob Roemmich

Bangor