Umphrey: Rules don't define 'refuge'
Thursday, July 14, 2005
To the editor:
First dogs are banned, even quiet well behaved pooches on a leash, and now joggers are to be eliminated because they disturb the wildlife.
Excuse me? Wouldn't fishing rods and lines whipping through the air disturb nesting and flying birds more than joggers? If they don't like the movements of joggers the quick flick of the lines would certainly bother them. As to hunting, guns will certainly lift the birds off the marsh. And bow and arrow hunting? What part of the word, "refuge" does the Massachusetts Wildlife Refuge Complex not understand? Webster's New World Dictionary defines the term as "a place of safety; shelter; safe retreat." Being hunted and killed certainly doesn't seem like being sheltered or safe. The Great Meadows Wildlife Refuge doesn't appear to have its priorities straight.
Furthermore, I resent being asked to pay money to walk in Great Meadows. I do not believe that was the intent of Samuel Hoar when he presented the land to the government, for the enjoyment of the citizens and the protection and refuge for the wildlife population. I moved to Concord 32 years ago in part for its open land, natural beauty and the ability to walk through these rural spaces. Good grief, what would Henry David Thoreau have to say about this?
Anne Umphrey
Old Bedford Road | |
|
