To the Editor:

Re: "The meaning of art in 2018," The Nugget, November 7, page 14

This article is one of the finest summaries I have ever read. If only everyone in this country could see, feel, and express as Chris Morin does, we would have a society to be proud of.

Thank you, Nugget News.

Jerold Chapman

•••

To the Editor,

I attended the Sisters Christmas parade on Saturday. I was surprised that there was no music. No marching band, no cheerleaders or dance team, and no sports teams representing our Sisters Outlaws.

It was a noticeable missing.

Angelena Bosco

••••

To the Editor:

Regarding the Jim Anderson article on the unusual "four-eared" rabbit published November 2 issue of The Nugget, more information and clarification is needed on my part. Perhaps I was too brief in my description; I am providing a more detailed accounting of my experience with "Wabbit."

I did have one opportunity to get closer than 10 feet as Wabbit had hopped into nearby lilac bushes to "hide." The shrubs have no foliage lower on the trunk which allowed me to get within three feet and was able to look down. I could see that the larger ears, although having an abnormal deformity, were in fact the "real ears" as I could see the ear canals. The two smaller "ears" in front of the ear canals were no more than ear-like growths resembling a smaller ear thereby giving the appearance of four ears.

I do not have the technological ability to alter photos. I do not, nor have I ever huffed mushrooms or any other substance to induce hallucinations. I also have no experience in Lagamorphology. I do have two other family members having witnessed this rabbit. One can go online and see other photos of this anomaly, one in particular located in Ontario, Canada, state park in the wild. I would suggest that this animal had a very slim chance of encountering "Edward Scissor Hands" or any other mechanical device that would surgically alter the ears.

I would encourage any input from individuals that actually have experience with the study of rabbits that may be able to offer a rational explanation of this phenomenon. Would be great to hear from them.

Richard Skupa

Camp Sherman

••

To the Editor:

Simple fact: if you don't remove the excess and fallen trees from the forest, they will eventually burn.

It amazes me that the Kate Williams article never mentions harvesting the replenishable trees as a part of fire prevention or forest management. We are currently spending an enormous amount of money to fight forest fires, when the forest could pay for itself if it were properly managed.

Harvesting the replenishable trees and thinning the forest would have numerous benefits. Oregon could become one of the wealthiest states in the nation. More lumber means more high-paying jobs, less unemployment, more taxes for our schools and other government agencies which could lower taxes on Oregon residents, there would be fewer fires, it would make it easier to do the few necessary controlled burns, the air would be so much cleaner, fewer homes would be burned, fewer people would be in danger of being burned alive...

If carbon in the atmosphere is causing global warming/climate change, why are we dumping millions of tons of carbon and other pollutants into the atmosphere by burning up a valuable resource? It is time to change repressive laws and rules promulgated by misguided "environmentalists" and let the forest be a financial, lifestyle, and recreational benefit to all Oregonians.

John Miller