Readers Write (Feb. 25): Photo cop, wolf hunting, snowmobiles and more.

  • Updated: February 25, 2013 - 12:09 PM

It seems a bit premature to suspend the wolf hunting and trapping season.


Photo: file, Tribune Media Services

CameraStar Tribune photo galleries

Cameraview larger


Why so hard to demand red-light enforcement?

I am stunned, yet again, at the political obstacles put forth to halt the installation, upgrade and implementation of “photo cops” in Minnesota. There is indisputable data supporting their use in both reducing red-light-running violations and, thereby, traffic injuries and deaths.

In eight months in Minneapolis, more than 15,000 tickets were issued for running red lights. That statistic should be chilling to every driver. Each one of those could have resulted in a broadside collision, the collision that puts driver and passenger at their most vulnerable for serious injury or death.

No doubt police unions speak out against a technology that may result in staff reductions. We personally experienced that the red-light technology is accurate in both its timing and its photos. It makes the driver responsible. What a concept.

Vicki Roberts, Eden Prairie

* * *


Give it time before drawing conclusions

It seems a bit premature to suspend the wolf hunting and trapping season, as proposed in a bill sponsored by state Sen. Chris Eaton, DFL-Brooklyn Center. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources goal of a sustainable wolf population was carefully drawn to assure a strong wolf population and presence in our woods.

We have some of the world’s most-renowned wolf experts monitoring our wolves. Unlike the moose, a truly endangered state animal, the wolf is fairly prolific and likely able to sustain its population.

My understanding is that much is being learned this year about the condition of the species through study of the taken wolves. I think we should be patient and study the effects before rushing to eliminate the trapping and hunting season.

Pete Boelter, North Branch

* * *


Dispute over park use hinges on definitions

For starters, I’m hardly an authority on the English language. However, even with my simple 12th-grade education, I noticed some troubling issues in the article regarding metro-area parks (“ ‘I can’t walk in the woods?’” Feb. 21).

Snowmobiles were described as “big” and “huge” machines which were “roaring,” “ripping” or “churning” through “delicate” habitat. Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t those type of words usually associated with opinion?

Yes, I know there is no bias in the media; that is merely conservative paranoia. Where I’m struggling here is that from an objective-minded approach, a reader might get the impression that this story is intended to convince him or her of something. What it is, I don’t know.

Shawn Rieschl, Proctor, Minn.

• • •

What a sad day when citizens are not allowed to walk on nature trails. It was my understanding that our parks were set up to be places where people can enjoy the natural environment, something that is a bit difficult while roaring through on a fossil-fuel-consuming machine with a plastic bucket on your head.

It sounds as if there is also a lot of abuse of the trail system by some riders, which seems to be the case in a lot of places. Were I running the park system, my first priority would be to focus on the “natural” part of the parks.

  • get related content delivered to your inbox

  • manage my email subscriptions


  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters