Shepherd
03-10-2011, 02:46 AM
The following letter to the editor was published in this week's Sonoma West. Another letter on this matter, more critical of the 3-2 City Council to restrict blowers, and a reference to it in the editorial was also published. If you have any comments, please send them to [email protected].
So far, daily Press Democrat has had at least four letters critical of the City Council, and none in support of blower restrictions. They have distorted the issue, published two editorials favoring the highly-polluting blowers, and not yet published any of the at least three letters and op/eds submitted favoring some form of restriction. Please express your opinions. Letters to the PD should go to [email protected]. For the PD they should be under 200 words and for SW under 300 words.
Thanks,
Shepherd
Prefers restriction to ban
Editor: The following words in last week’s article by editor David Abbott on leaf blowers are accurate: “Shepherd Bliss … said he wasn’t in favor of an all out ban.” I do oppose high-powered, gas-operated blowers, because of their severe damage to the air, plants, beneficial insects, bees, other animals, the soil, those who use them, and other humans. Advertising by Echo brags that their blowers fire at over 200 miles an hour, which is especially dangerous to innocent people just passing by.
There are appropriate, limited uses for blowers, especially by good neighbors, who use them seldom and when necessary, such as dealing with our wonderful local oaks. They can also be helpful for cleaning rain gutters, roofs, and some hard surfaces.
However, I have seen too many men using them inappropriately chasing a single leaf into a neighbor’s yard. They may be protected by goggles, earmuffs, hats, boots, and protective clothing. Innocent bystanders, especially children, elders, pets, and cars, are at risk. Health concerns should prevail over convenience for caring people.
I do not favor limiting the use of other garden tools, such as chainsaws and lawnmowers. Americans have wonderful rights. People fortunately no longer have the “right” to blow second-hand smoke into our faces, thus triggering asthma attacks. Nor should they have the right to blow toxins into our lungs or shrill, high-pitched, loud noises into our ears.
With rights come responsibilities. Any ordinance should be complaint-driven. So a good neighbor would not be likely to receive complaints. Without this protection, some people would not feel comfortable asking someone to stop invading their homes with air and noise pollution. The air is our commons and we must protect it. Many work at home and care for children, parents, and the sick, who benefit from peacefulness to recover and play.
In Santa Barbara and elsewhere there has been a “business boost” for landscapers who voluntarily accept restrictions. In our small green town, that is what would happen. It would certainly help our many small home-based businesses
The real losers of regulations are multi-national corporations and giant oil companies who supply the fuel for the blowers’ two-stroke engines, which are far more polluting than cars. Local businesses will benefit by restrictions that would level the field and open up more jobs for workers to rake and broom.
Shepherd Bliss, Sebastopol
So far, daily Press Democrat has had at least four letters critical of the City Council, and none in support of blower restrictions. They have distorted the issue, published two editorials favoring the highly-polluting blowers, and not yet published any of the at least three letters and op/eds submitted favoring some form of restriction. Please express your opinions. Letters to the PD should go to [email protected]. For the PD they should be under 200 words and for SW under 300 words.
Thanks,
Shepherd
Prefers restriction to ban
Editor: The following words in last week’s article by editor David Abbott on leaf blowers are accurate: “Shepherd Bliss … said he wasn’t in favor of an all out ban.” I do oppose high-powered, gas-operated blowers, because of their severe damage to the air, plants, beneficial insects, bees, other animals, the soil, those who use them, and other humans. Advertising by Echo brags that their blowers fire at over 200 miles an hour, which is especially dangerous to innocent people just passing by.
There are appropriate, limited uses for blowers, especially by good neighbors, who use them seldom and when necessary, such as dealing with our wonderful local oaks. They can also be helpful for cleaning rain gutters, roofs, and some hard surfaces.
However, I have seen too many men using them inappropriately chasing a single leaf into a neighbor’s yard. They may be protected by goggles, earmuffs, hats, boots, and protective clothing. Innocent bystanders, especially children, elders, pets, and cars, are at risk. Health concerns should prevail over convenience for caring people.
I do not favor limiting the use of other garden tools, such as chainsaws and lawnmowers. Americans have wonderful rights. People fortunately no longer have the “right” to blow second-hand smoke into our faces, thus triggering asthma attacks. Nor should they have the right to blow toxins into our lungs or shrill, high-pitched, loud noises into our ears.
With rights come responsibilities. Any ordinance should be complaint-driven. So a good neighbor would not be likely to receive complaints. Without this protection, some people would not feel comfortable asking someone to stop invading their homes with air and noise pollution. The air is our commons and we must protect it. Many work at home and care for children, parents, and the sick, who benefit from peacefulness to recover and play.
In Santa Barbara and elsewhere there has been a “business boost” for landscapers who voluntarily accept restrictions. In our small green town, that is what would happen. It would certainly help our many small home-based businesses
The real losers of regulations are multi-national corporations and giant oil companies who supply the fuel for the blowers’ two-stroke engines, which are far more polluting than cars. Local businesses will benefit by restrictions that would level the field and open up more jobs for workers to rake and broom.
Shepherd Bliss, Sebastopol