In the midst of an ice age
The recent record-breaking snow storm that deposited two feet of snow in the mid-Atlantic region and created multiple problems for the Department of Transportation and residents of the region is already history. But consider this: on Feb. 18, 1716, and continuing for four days, a coastal storm buried Scarborough, Maine, with 15 feet of snow on flat fields and up to 20 feet in hollows, burying the town. All communication ceased between houses and farms. When the snow melted in the spring, many sheep and cows, buried under the snow in the woods and pastures, were found frozen to death and still standing upright.
This blizzard was widespread and is well recorded in the book “ Scarborough Becomes a Town” by Dorothy Shaw Libby and published by the Bond Wheelwright Co. in 1955. But it was not unusual then to have coastal storms deposit six or seven feet of snow. All of this was during the ” Little Ice Age,” which occurred between 1300 and 1850, when the average temperature across the Northern Hemisphere was less than 1 degree Centigrade relative to 20th-century levels. Under certain circumstances, it could happen again, considering that we still are in the major “Ice Age” that started about 2.5 million years ago, albeit, in one of the several warm, interglacial times.
Harold W. Borns Jr.
Orono
Park part of Maine brand
Standing at the deli, awaiting my Pineland Farms cheddar, I was reminded of Maine’s comparative advantages and how we can further capitalize on some of them. Pineland Farms cheddar is made in Maine and is fittingly exceptional. Continued promotion of our internationally well-regarded Maine brand means investment, foresight and leadership.
I’m grateful to have thoughtful senators like Angus King and Susan Collins who make an effort to hear all of their constituents. Knowing this, I’d like to add my voice to the dialogue about the proposed national park and national recreation area east of Baxter State Park. I am joining the vast majority and putting my Mainer stamp of approval on the area currently being proposed as meeting the standard of our carefully stewarded brand.
Back in October, I had the pleasure of visiting the land that is now being considered for a national park or monument. A friend and I drove up past Shin Pond to near Grand Lake Matagamon, past some megalithic outcrops, and then biked an old tote road through magnificent old growth forest alongside the Penobscot’s lovely East Branch. The wildlife signs abounded — birds, beaver, moose, deer and bear. It made for an unforgettable ride that was magnificently photogenic at every turn.
I went because it was part of Maine. I’ll return, along with thousands, because it is worthy of a national park. I urge the senators to embrace the opportunity to bring the North Woods to the attention of the world.
Jennifer Curtis
Augusta
GMO labels can’t hurt
I like food of all kinds. I don’t look for organic, gluten free, or GMO free. There are proponents for every diet and some of their reasons are valid.
GMO labels are a good thing. I’m sure I’m eating genetically modified ingredients all the time. Hybridizing flora and fauna has been going on for centuries. Doing it in a lab is just more controllable than in a field, a barn, or a kennel.
Like the food pyramid, a GMO label is just another point of reference. It will inform the consumer if he or she is at all interested. The manufacturers will most likely re-design their labels in the near future, and, most importantly, it will quiet the boisterous, until the next thing comes around.
Ed Barrood
Orrington
Provider of last resort
I live in Roque Bluffs, in an area where the only availability for any phone and computer service is my landline. Many others here and in the wide surrounding area have the same challenge.
We must, as Carol MacDougall said in her Jan. 27 BDN letter to the editor, have FairPoint Communications continue its obligation to be the provider of last resort for landline phone support. The deregulation must not be allowed to happen. We have no choice.
Hope Pratt
Roque Bluffs
Food a fundamental right
The Legislature’s Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry Committee on Feb. 4 will work on LD 783, a proposed constitutional amendment defining a right to food. It is necessary not only to protect the nourished, but our farms as well.
Contemporary food production has become a distant, complex and not-fully-accountable corporate enterprise. As many families have become increasingly knowledgeable about where their food is coming from and what kind of food the current system generates, their commitment to nutrient-dense food from ecologically sound farms has deepened.
At the same time, it is also true that too many families have little idea on these matters. They don’t know where food comes from, how it is processed, how it is protected (or not), and why, and, furthermore, what role their own senses, understandings, and trust play in making their food choices. Further, giant food corporations are regulated by agencies seeking to deny our right or authority to the fundamental choices governing what we let pass our lips for nourishment.
Adding an enabling right to food to the existing right to life and liberty would cloak our individual food choices in fundamental law. It would safeguard us against the actions of misguided corporations and government agencies seeking to keep us ill-informed about what we’re eating or against absurd claims, such as the Food and Drug Administration made in 2010, that people have no “fundamental right to their own bodily and physical health… because [consumers] do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish.”
Call the committee at 287-1312 and register support for this bill.
June Sendrowski
Brooklin
No March for Life coverage
The annual March for Life took place on Jan. 22 in Washington, D.C. In spite of the ominous weather, tens of thousands of people of all ages demonstrated there in support of the unborn.
The next day, the BDN carried no picture or article describing the thousands of enthusiastic pro-life supporters. Instead, the newspaper showed a picture that focused attention on the relative handful of pro-abortion counter-demonstrators.
Why not feature a photo of the large number of pro-life supporters who represented the purpose of the gathering in the first place? It appears to be yet another example of typical media bias.
Thomas Beale
Bangor