Kamala Harris will act to combat climate change

The author of the Open Forum letter “Goodbye, tribe, I’m voting for Trump” (9/17/2024) raises some worthwhile points. If health is truly the author’s primary concern, then the writer’s consideration should expand to our planet’s environment (also mentioned). Since Trump has promised to “Drill, baby, drill!” on multiple occasions, the health effects of continued global warming (claimed by Trump to be a Chinese hoax) are also important. Specifically, more people die nationally and globally from hot weather than from any other weather phenomenon. Tropical diseases, carried by mosquitoes, are spreading further from the equator, also due to global warming. For the sake of our children and grandchildren, Trump needs to be defeated. While imperfect, at least the Democrats have acted to combat global warming via the (misnomer) Inflation Reduction Act. I’m not voting with a “tribe.” I’m voting for Harris-Walz because only they take global warming seriously and will act to combat it.

— Ronald L. Small, Boulder

Prop 127 would undermine state’s wildlife experts

I am writing today in opposition to Proposition 127, which would ban the hunting of mountain lions and bobcats in the state of Colorado.

As a truck driver who hauls loads from rural areas to the Front Range daily, I witness firsthand the urban-rural divide in our state. This divide stems from a lack of understanding between those who live in vastly different environments. This November, voters will have the opportunity to make a decision that could significantly impact residents in some of Colorado’s more wild spaces.

I urge Coloradans to consider more than just how this proposition impacts their own lives, but also how it will affect their neighbors in rural communities. These communities are made up of hardworking individuals from diverse backgrounds, often putting in long hours in challenging conditions just to sustain their livelihoods. This proposition would add to the many factors already influencing their way of life.

Contrary to what proponents will tell you, Proposition 127 ignores Colorado’s time-proven wildlife management system. This system is rooted in science and validated by the data collected by hundreds of biologists at Colorado Parks and Wildlife. Let’s put the facts first this November and keep Colorado wild.

A “no” vote on Proposition 127 doesn’t mean that we must continue hunting these cats, it only leaves that decision in the hands of the experts. Voting “yes” would undermine these experts and the science that they use to make well-informed decisions about our wildlife. Please take the time to educate yourself by taking advantage of the resources on wildlifedeservebetter.com or directly on the Colorado Parks and Wildlife website.

— Brody Baker, Loveland

Your choice of role models

Our younger children tend to look up to leaders. Do we really want to elevate politicians such as Donald Trump and Lauren Boebert to the level where many of the next generation tend to emulate them?

— Gene Stout, Loveland

Here is how to fix Iris Avenue once and for all

Iris Avenue Plan X: My wife and I have lived one block from Iris for 57 years. I cycle and have no trouble avoiding Iris. Our solution to the “problem”: 1. Fix potholes, 2. re-paint lines, 3. re-pave it, 4. done! Use the money saved to improve other streets, not screwing them up with bollards.

— Doug Williams, Boulder

Correction:

The Sunday, Sept. 22 editorial, “Three amendments can bring equity and ethics to Colorado,” inaccurately described the nature of Amendment H. A “yes” vote on Amendment H would create an independent adjudicative board to conduct formal proceedings and hear appeals of the Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline’s orders imposing informal sanctions.

Amendment H would not replace the Commission on Judicial Discipline.