A ban is a ban, so let’s get it done for the bobcats
Californians, and perhaps South County residents in particular, should be aware of all the clawing going on in bobcat politics, and speak up before as many as 1,200 more are trapped for their beautiful, spotted pelts—most sold in China and Russia.South County is home to one of the state’s premiere bobcat rescue groups, the Wildlife Education and Rehabilitation Center (W.E.R.C.) in Morgan Hill founded by Sue Howell decades ago.Over the years, its volunteers have pioneered methods of caring for injured, sick and orphaned bobcats—such as teams of human surrogate mothers dressed in full-body bobcat costumes.At W.E.R.C., they know the bobcat’s importance in keeping nature’s balance. The animal feeds mostly on rodents, including ground squirrels that wreak havoc on farm and pasture lands.When the California Department of Fish & Wildlife (DFW) needed a protocol to instruct rescue groups statewide in bobcat care, it turned to W.E.R.C. In January 2003, that protocol, titled Procedures for Bobcat Rehabilitation, was ready and adopted. Its pages are filled with instruction in bobcat health care, bobcat diet, the orphaned bobcat and bobcat restraint. It has the voice of experience, dedication and compassion.Along with like-minded Californians, the folks at W.E.R.C. delighted on August 5 when the California Fish & Game Commission voted to ban the trapping of bobcats for their fur. More than 55,000 Californians had signed petitions or written letters in support of the ban.It seemed the commission was finally in step with what’s going on around the globe: people are in increasing numbers demanding a halt to killing wildlife for no reason other than sport or pelts or trophies.So, on Aug. 5, everyone believed the ban was a done deal. It was not.Citing bureaucratic requirements, the DFW, which carries out commission rulings, stunned animal welfare groups when it announced the ban couldn’t start until November 2016.That means during the coming trapping season, Nov. 25–Jan. 31, upwards of 1,200 bobcats will be trapped and killed and their pelts ripped from their flesh. And for what?When the ban was announced, Nicole Paquette, vice president of wildlife protection for The Humane Society of the United States said this:“In the wake of the tragic death of Cecil the lion, the public has never been more aware that killing an animal for its pelt is no worse than for a head and hide to decorate a trophy room. This decision is a much-needed step in the right direction . . . to protect California’s bobcats from this cruel and unnecessary practice.”So why, now, does the DFW seem intent on allowing one more killing season? Perhaps because of pressure from the hunting and trapping industries?The ban was enacted and so it’s in force, right? The question is up in the air and animal rights folk are asking the public to respond by writing to the DFW to demand that the ban go into effect immediately, as everyone expected.In a Letter to the Editor of the Dispatch, Eric Mills of Action for Animals in Oakland said allowing one more season of trapping is “not acceptable!”We agree. It’s bad enough that California still allows the hunting of bobcats. It’s far worse, and pointless slaughter, to allow another season of trapping when the ban has been ordered.If you have an opinion, you can write to Chuck Bonham, DFW director, c/o Resources Building, 1416 Ninth St., Sacramento CA 95814, or email [email protected], or phone him at (916) 445-0411.
Hire an interim GHS principal
I just celebrated my 10th Fourth of July in Gilroy with my family, friends and neighbors. My first Independence Day in Gilroy was a little different. At that time, my three children were babies who were both fascinated and terrified by the fireworks display at Gilroy High School. Now they are more intent on arguing over who gets first use of the lighter to set off the fireworks in front of our driveway.
Letter: Rule of law will prevail
This letter is dedicated to anyone reading my thinking aloud tirade.
I have been a hardheaded Harry S. Truman Democrat since I was a first-year student at Gilroy High!
However, I have had the privilege of working on election campaigns and being a staff member for...
What should the annual compensation level – pay and benefits – be for the president of Gavilan College?
• Certainly not higher than $200k. At that, this would be very generous. • $150,000 – he does a great job and that is a great compensation! • At the level of enrollment, he should be receiving close to $150,000 and perhaps some performance-based bonuses. • $150,000 or commensurate with community college president salaries and benefits of comparably sized institutions. • The compensation level should be tied to the rate-of-pay of the rest of the employees. One formula could be 10% more than the highest paid employee. Another might be no more than 75% more than the lowest paid full-time employee. After applying some formula, the board needs to look at enrollment, budget, accomplishment of goals, customer (student and taxpayer) satisfaction, and faculty assessment. What we know for sure is that the current compensation is way out of line. • $250,000. He’s already at that level, or pretty close. It would be insulting to reduce his salary. Future salary increases need to be thoughtfully considered, though, based on Gavilan’s revenue, cuts to services, public opinion and salary comparisons of all Gavilan staff. It seems that top level staff receive hefty compensation packages while rest of personnel receive no raises or salary cuts to bear the burden. • Somewhere about $165k seems fair. • Our Gavilan College President has a payment contract as of last year. I have no idea what a president of a JC should be paid, but I’m guessing the amount can exceed $250,000 since his total amount when the payment contract is completed will be $276,000. • $200,000 is fair and reasonable • A very reasonable salary and benefit package should be $150,000. Then, attach an aggressive bonus plan of up to 25% of the package that rewards recipent based on Steve’s production. Part of incentive plan must be related to how the student and taxpayer benefits from his leadership. Our elected officials have gotten way off course by chasing a false philosophy in which it is believed that to get great public sector managers, you must pay them private sector wages. Higher salaries can be justified and sustained only when they are tied to financial risk. If public sector managers want higher salaries they can find them in the private sector. • “Researcher John Curtis said that, according to a recent survey conducted by his organization, the compensation of public community-college presidents range from $81,000 to $390,000, not including extra benefits for housing and car expenses. The size of the salary is influenced by the size of the school, its location and the number of its students and employees.” Given this information, I think Kinsella's salary is too much for the size of the Gavilan student body. His salary today makes sense in a school that serves over 35,000 students at least – Gavilan has less than 6,000 students. The Trustees depend on him and his expertise, but competition for jobs is healthy and should be practiced for Gavilan’s presidency in the future, given that student fees are increasing and more students are relying on financial aid to finish their schooling … $150,000 to $200,000 is more reasonable.
Tariffs good for garlic
If you were to open the Wall Street Journal, New York Times or really any paper of record, you would be bombarded by countless stories about the current US-China trade war and the devastating effects on American farmers. Tale after tale of soybeans going...












