Letters 3/1/07

Feb. 28, 2007

No problem on Torch
I just read the article “A Lake of Trouble” in your Feb. 15-21 issue.
I have a completely different perspective from my many trips out to this sandbar over the years. I have been pleasantly surprised by the lack of the sort of behavior that was reported in this article. When I have been there I have made many comments to friends that have gone with me, about how generally well behaved the people are that are out there. I know that I am not witness to all that goes on, but from my vantage point (I always try to anchor my boat in the middle of the main part of the sandbar), I have not seen any of the instances as described.
I am closing in on 50 years old and am getting more and more conservative by the year and have no reason to defend any bad behavior if I had observed it.
It may be that there are some hidden agendas involved in planting some exaggerated or even completely false stories.

Kevin Townsend • Gaylord

Need more enforcement
Thank you to Anne Stanton for preparing a balanced journalistic piece (re: “Lake of Trouble”).
The Kalkaska County Prosecutor’s office chose not to pursue sexual assault charges last summer, yet seems to feel that some of the residents around Torch Lake might be overly sensitive to annoying behavior on the part of lake visitors, and that some residents would just like to keep the lake to themselves. But, the county prosecutor was also quoted to say: “I will bet, by the end of the day of a busy Saturday, the water in the knee-deep water is not safe. You could probably get the area restricted with a health department ruling rather than on the basis of morality.”
Here is an alternative perspective.I don’t know of a single reasonable Torch Lake property owner, myself included, who wants to “...keep Torch Lake to themselves.” That is neither a realistic or reasonable position. I do know a large number of property owners, myself included, who would like to see the State (DNR and DEQ) and local law enforcement agencies become measurably more proactive and effective, on a consistent and relevant basis, in bringing the current, much talked about Torch Lake situation under control. This seems to me to be a reasonable position.
Frankly, it appears these agencies are currently more reactive (perhaps dismissive?) and ineffective than they are proactive and effective. Suggesting that college students earn academic credit to collect and provide water samples to the health department; the absolutely astonishing unwillingness to prosecute the sexual assault mentioned in the piece; and the violence that, according to the county prosecutor, had been brewing all day between occupants of two boats (where was law enforcement all day?) seems to suggest that appropriate law enforcement agencies may have a greater interest in avoiding and/or deflecting responsibility, than in taking proactive and effective corrective action. Perhaps if somebody was to trespass on their property; deposit waste and filth on their property; relieve themselves in their front yard; and heaven forbid, rip the bathing suit top off of one of their female family members and pin her to a wall; and then be threatened with bodily harm when they asked the
offenders to cease, desist, and leave, they just might adopt a somewhat more proactive approach.
For crying out loud; not only did a
sexual assault occur, but somebody nearly bled to death out on the sandbar last year, and both incidents were the direct result of this ongoing, escalating, and out of control situation!
There is a performance evaluation adage that says, “Do not confuse effort with effectiveness.” Right now, I don’t see much of either from state and local governmental agencies. And the longer they wait to act, the more difficult the resolution.

Jack Graham • Rapid City
Idle observations
Gary Klinga: I read your letter this morning at coffee (“American Idle,” 2/22). I couldn’t wait to get home to reply to you, so I am pulling over into a parking lot and writing as my car idles so I can keep warm.
I see a lot of people following your advice each morning. They are the ones driving while peeking through the four-by-seven inch hole scraped on the inside of the frosted windshield, along with snow six inches thick on the back window. How silly.
I will concede that excessive idling is unnecessary. Idling at a low RPM is important prior to full capacity. One can walk through any auto salvage yard and see dozens of trashed motor homes. They may be beat up and worn out. Most have their engines removed or junked. But their generators have either been resold or are still in them and run fine. These engines are made to start and idle only, or a least at low RPM’s.
No race car in the world would be taken out and driven full force without bringing the temperature up to race-ready heat. No airplane takes off without the proper warm-up.
Even man needs to warm up before a long run or competing in a sporting event.
Cement mixers have an engine for moving the mixer to a work site. They have another engine for turning the drum. That engine runs at a constant idle. There are countless types of gasoline engines that are made to run at a constant low RPM while running equipment.
I would concede that idling the engine beyond the warm-up period in an automobile is a bad idea. Once the car is warm and the frost is melted off the windows, it should be driven.
Your reference to global warming is another issue. What or who contributes to it is unknown, but it has little to do with me driving with a frost-free windshield.
What caused the earth warm-up after the ‘first’ Ice Age? Certainly, engines, cars, man, or anything man-made had nothing to do with it. If the earth IS warming due to man this time, maybe it’s people like Mr. Gore, using thousands of gallons each week of jet fuel to fly around the country promoting his theory.

Dave Looman • Alden