February 25

Library book opens door for comforting
While Husky dog walking around town, I’ve met so many nice folks who have dogs or cats, or maybe some of both. Each pet is special, for sure.
Recently, I found a book at the Medford Library about resident cats in a nursing home in Providence, Rhode Island. There is at least one ordinary cat on each floor of the Steere Nursing home, but one stands out for his extraordinary gift.
The book is “Making Rounds with Oscar,” by Dr. David Dosa, who works with the residents at Steere, many with Alzheimer’s disease. He tries to understand Oscar the cat’s gift — seems like he knows when a patient’s time is near.
Ordinarily, Oscar will walk around to each room, but stay only a few minutes, before moving on. But as Dr. Dosa reports, Oscar will occasionally climb up into the bed and remain with a person until he or she passes away.
The author at first remains skeptical as the head nurse tells him about Oscar. But then he sees the pattern continue, and decides to do more research. This includes talking with family members who have been with their loved ones in a room, along with Oscar, keeping a vigil.
I was a little surprised each family member contacted seemed quite positive about having Oscar there for the final hours. For example, he spoke with Kathy, the daughter of a patient who had recently died, with Oscar in attendance.
“Were you OK with Oscar being here at the end?”
Kathy said she thought of Oscar as her angel. “He was here for my mother and, here for me, too.” She said she felt a little less alone with Oscar at her side.
Dr. Dosa offers a possible reason for Oscar’s ability at the end of the book, but I don’t want to give that away. He does say that Oscar is clearly part of a hard-working medical team, and provides critical companionship during the final hours.
The real benefit of the book, to me, was not only Oscar and his insights, but also just learning more about the patients and caregivers at the home. Oscar and the other cats help out, but still there are relatives who have a hard time bringing a loved one to the home.
My mother Helen passed away from Alzheimer’s in a Milwaukee nursing home a few years back. We tried to get a resident dog or cat there, since mom always liked having pets around. But no luck.
So it was comforting reading about the home in Rhode Island, with its resident cats, including Oscar. I’m sure each cat continues to bring some warmth and sunshine to the patients.
— Earl Finkler, Medford

Let your voice be heard for livestock rules
A landscape of family farms is settled, balanced and stable, and generally sustainable. But it's difficult to find a government that thinks that way. Maybe the family farming landscape just doesn't offer enough opportunity for the rich, the powerful and the greedy.
Industrialized agriculture collapses rural economies. The farming industry can change its ways and clean up its act, but it takes mounting public pressure to show we're not all just passive consumers after all, couch potatoes living only for pre-packaged gratification, for cheap food.
It is difficult to put a value on non-market goods. How do we value, for example, birds singing on a summer's day, or a landscape with hedgerows and trees, or a watershed producing clean water? Or a nighttime sky sparkling with a shining moon and stars or a breath of air not filled with ammonia, hydrogen sulfide and the dust from a concentration of livestock.
It is difficult to legislate for technologies that do not yet exist. It is difficult to legislate against industries that are necessary for life.
It is even more difficult to change the rules created by special interest groups and their powerful lobbyists. We can start by asking for changes in the livestock rules that were created by big government kicking local control aside. Do so at a listening session in Wausau, Wednesday, March 3, Marathon County UW-Extension, 212 River Dr., 3:30 p.m. to 7 p.m. Comment by e-mail or by letter to the Department of Agriculture.
— Betty Miskulin, Town of Little Black

Makes case for term limits for Congress to end the insanity
I had taken the opportunity to attend the listening session held at the Medford High School in the Red-White Room on February 19 featuring Senator Russ Feingold. It was a very informational meeting in that Mr. Feingold thinks that term limits only should be in place for the office of the president of the United States. While I agree on the limit on the office of the president, I also think that it is high time to consider term limits on all elected officials.
The reason for my views on this point are because most incumbents in both houses have been there for over two terms, some well over. They happen to think that they can make a career serving in their perspective offices a life-long vocation. That clearly was not the intent of the founding fathers.
I believe the intent, as I understand it, was to govern for a short period of time and then return to the community from which one came. One was expected to return back to the "common" life, and thereby live by the laws that were enacted.
Too many incumbents seem to have forgotten that part of the equation. Because of special interest groups and lobbyists, they seem to have an unlimited supply of funds. To his credit, Mr. Feingold and Senator McCain (R) Arizona, co-authored a campaign finance reform bill to limit the amount of money each contributor could contribute to a specific campaign. It was signed into law on March 27, 2002. It was intended to bolster the Federal Election Commission already in force since 1975.
Unfortunately that bill was altered by the Supreme Court on January 21 to allow corporations to spend whatever they want to during a campaign up to an election on television ads, newspapers or any other mode of advertising.
That being said, I believe it was Mr. Feingold who ran on the promise of "relying on Wisconsin citizens for most of my contributions." I would submit to you that Mr. Feingold has probably more contributions coming in from the afore mentioned lobbyists and special interest groups than we know. Certainly more than from the citizens of Wisconsin.
I had the opportunity of asking the senator why he was so against term limits and got the standard answer — in essence, he can be removed by the vote. In other words, he isn't likely to voluntarily leave office until he is voted out. Term limits, as you can see, are not a top priority with him and never were. While that is certainly the case now, there has to be an underlying reason why he feels this way. You don't suppose it would be the fact that the man has been in the Senate for 17 or so years, do you? Or that he is in one way or another indebted to those who partially funded his campaigns all these years.
Sorry, but that just isn't good enough. While he has a fairly good voting record for the country — as well as Wisconsin — and should be commended for his work, he still needs to leave office and return to the "common" world. He too has to assume some of the blame for this current state the country finds itself in.
He spoke about partisanship on the hill and then painted his colleagues across the aisle as confrontational when it came to debating and voting on bills that could become law. While that in itself is not a bad thing, the fact currently is the Democratic party has a clear majority in the House and the Senate and does not need one Republican vote to pass legislation.
This problem isn't limited to just the Democrats. It permeates the Republican party as well. It is disheartening, almost downright depressing, that this great nation has fallen to such a state. What the American people need is real reform, not just lip service and empty promises of change.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. It is up to us, the voters who place these people in office to do our bidding, not those of a special interest group.
In my opinion, if eight years (two terms) are good enough for a sitting president, 12 years (two terms) should be all allowed for a sitting senator and six years (three terms) should be all for a sitting congressperson.
The American people are clearly fed up with business as usual. The only way to change the current mess we find ourselves in is to "purge" the current occupants of Washington D.C. and then enact real change by enacting term limits.
— Gene Moser, Medford

Rep. Obey’s long tenure brings maturity and sense of resolve
Last week I happened to pick up a copy of an area paper near Hayward in which Mr. Duffy was characterizing the stimulus and Dave Obey's involvement with it as a failure. On the same page was an article by the area housing director praising the stimulus for saving jobs on the LCO reservation and allowing more low income homes to be built. Who has it right? Just days before, I got my first robocall from a Mr. Mielke criticizing Dave for everything with the possible exception of H1N1.
And so the season begins fueled by anger, disillusionment, and discontent to the degree that the two gentlemen vying for the Republican nomination feel this is their year.
Let's take a deep breath, step back and truly assess what Dave Obey has meant to northwestern Wisconsin. In the spirit of disclosure, I am a Democrat who votes for who I think is the best person, hence I have tick marked the ballot numerous times for a Republican candidate in local and federal elections. I am not a "bleeding heart liberal" (whatever that is), but rather a retired Army officer with service in Vietnam with the 1st Division, a retired faculty member from WITC in Rice Lake who has had the privilege of teaching many of your sons and daughters for the past 15 years.
I have also had the privilege of knowing, working with, and arguing with Congressman Obey for over 30 years. He is one of the most respected members of Congress in a time when that commodity is woefully lacking. His impact upon this region is profound. Do you drive on Hwy 29? Do you drive on Hwy 53? Do you use the veterans clinics in either Hayward or Rice Lake? Did you gain employment from having been trained at one of the district’s technical colleges in which their facilities are state of the art? Do you get dental treatment at one of the district clinics? Is a family member at an assisted living or nursing home that meets their needs? Are you a veteran or know a veteran using the new GI Bill? Do you work for a defense related firm in the area? The list could be much longer but the point is made that he has been a tireless public servant with impeccable ethical standards always ready to fight for this district and for this country.
His tenure in office is an issue for some. To me it is one of his strongest points as he brings a maturity and a sense of resolve to the job everyday and has earned the senior leadership positions he currently has. Mr. Dave Obey has earned my continuing support in any way I can and all I would ask is that you truly take the time to measure who he is, what he has done, the positive impact he has and will have on this district and country, and decide from there.
— Kerm Morgan, Ladysmith

Farmer objects to Star News opinion regarding large dairy
We are writing to express our disappointment in The Star News’ editorial endorsing Taylor County’s decision to essentially kick in the door for North Breeze Dairy in the Town of Little Black.
Our first objection to the editorial was the underlying idea that citizens of Little Black were asking for a special regulation to be passed or changed. The compromise, in the interest of North Breeze Dairy does just the opposite and favors outside investors over the democratic will of local people.
The most offensive part of the editorial was its accusation that the local people of the township and surrounding area who oppose the location of the dairy are acting out of emotion. Stating this seems to represent the idea that North Breeze Dairy and their out of town lawyers are somehow acting in the best interests of the local area based on something other than emotion and that the citizens of Little Black don’t know what is best for themselves. For fear of being too emotional let us examine some peer reviewed scientific data and logical reasons to oppose factory farming and in the process shed some light on the feelings many local people have.
Factory farms represent a distinct threat to the environment and human health due to the concentrations of manure they accumulate in one spot. In a study in the American Journal of Agricultural Economics researcher Stacy Sneeringer explains that, living near CAFOs "significantly" raises infant-mortality rates. A 100 percent increase in livestock production, during expansion of farms, in a county is associated with a 7.4 percent increase in infant mortality due to ammonia concentrations in the air. A single factory farm has the ability to negatively affect whole regions, as was the case when manure spilled from a ruptured tank on a 3,000-head dairy farm in upstate New York in August 2005. Three million gallons of cow manure poured into the Black River, polluting an area one-fourth the size of the Exxon Valdez spill. The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation cited the farm for numerous environmental and permit violations, and estimated that this spill killed around 200,000 to 250,000 fish. The concentrations of manure should be cause for concern for anyone but especially for the people of Taylor County whose karst topography will be uniquely tested and threatened with siting of a factory farm.
Beyond environmental and health concerns, to move from an economy based on family farming to one based on factory farming is simply bad for the community. A Michigan study demonstrated that small hog farms proportionately spend almost 50 percent more at local businesses than large farms do. The more outrageous thing is that not only will North Breeze not buy anything locally the factory farm is not even owned locally.
How else will the community fare? Here are some insights. More than half a century ago, the UC Professor Goldschmidt compared two rural California communities where the structure and size of farms were different, but where total value of farm production was almost identical. In the town where farms were larger and industrialized (with a higher proportion of absentee ownership and employing a higher proportion of farm workers per unit of output) there was greater separation of social classes, i.e. greater social inequality. More decisions about local affairs were made outside the community. This contrasted with the other community where farms were smaller, more likely to be owner operated, and utilized the labor of the operating family with some hired labor. This community had a richer civic and social fabric: residents of all social classes were more involved in community affairs, more community organizations served people of both middle and working class background, and there were more local businesses and more retail activity because more agricultural and consumer purchases were made locally and more income was in the hands of the classes with a greater propensity to spend. According to sociologist Dean Macannell, “Everyone who has done careful research on farm size, residency of agricultural landowners, and social conditions in the rural community finds the same relationship: as farm size and absentee ownership increase, social conditions in the local community deteriorate.”
The claim that factory farms will create jobs is dubious at best. A study by the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment concluded, ''Communities that are surrounded by farms that are larger than can be operated by a family have a bimodal income distribution with a few wealthy elites, a majority of poor laborers and virtually no middle class.'' Due to a push by the industry to concentrate, 4,000 cows owned by a group of outside investors in one place will simply displace 80 farmers with 50 cows in another place and in the process eliminate the broad based and independent decision making of economic democracy.
What is better for the local economy and the economic order of society as a whole; one factory farmer controlling 3,000 cows and employing low-wage highly exploitable labor often denied the rights and dignity of citizenship or 50 families controlling 60 cows each on farms of their own? What is better for our 4-H chapter, the FFA, our small town businesses and cooperatives, our fairs, local celebrations and culture, and the small rural communities that we live in? The siting of this or any factory farm is at best a low road economic decision, at worst the exploitation of our natural resources and the destruction of our rural communities. I don’t understand at all how this is, according to The Star News “maximum long term protection.”
To say that people oppose a factory farm out of emotion seems to deny the fact that feelings are tied not only to the beauty and history of their homes, but also to their future property values and personal health. CAFOs drop housing values not only because of the associated smells but their abilities to destroy water and air quality. CAFOs cost townships huge amounts of money through their overuse and unequal use of roads and public infrastructure. And CAFOS concentrate wealth in the hands of a few and pay immigrant workers wages that local people would be unwilling to take. Choosing to support large farms is a decision to support one form of agriculture which competes with and ultimately displaces smaller farms. While it is emotional to be attached to a certain idea of the rural landscape, the emotional response is rooted in science and economics. We have an emotional response to the idea that my children and future grandchildren will be less healthy or worse off because of the location of a factory farm. We have an emotional response to the idea that my water will be undrinkable, and I have an emotional response to the idea that local representatives favor any form of business, no matter how economically and ecologically risky, over local democracy and local concerns.
— Kat Becker and Tony Schultz, owners of Stoney Acres Farm, Athens

Asks why Westboro Fire Department doesn’t file state reports
It would be of value to your readers, I believe, to know that when our family's farm home in Westboro, WI, burned mysteriously to the ground on 1-16-06, MLK Jr. Day, the fire department of Westboro arrived first but had to wait for the fire department of Rib Lake to arrive because Westboro had no water to put on the fire.
A year or so later, still shellshocked and wanting to understand how it came to be that we were burned down, I requested the fire report of 1-16-06 at N8963 Zimmerman Rd. from the Taylor County Law Enforcement and received it. The fine print on the report relayed that it was issued by the State of Wisconsin Department of Commerce. Reading the Wisconsin Statutes pertaining to the Dept. of Commerce's Fire and Safety Rules, I learned that, although not yet an absolute crime NOT to report fires of citizen's homes to the state, it is required. Moreover, for any fire department in Wisconsin who does comply in reporting and filing the fires of their district to the state, that fire department becomes eligible for federal grant money to use for obtaining better fire fighting equipment, etc.
I called the Wisconsin Department of Commerce Fire and Safety division and was told that our fire was never reported to the state. They didn't know we, nor our farmhouse, ever existed. We did. We lived at N8963 Zimmerman Rd., Westboro, WI.
In the words of the Department of Commerce's agent, the fact that I possessed the copy of the fire report shortened form from our local police whilst his agency had never received notice of it for filing was "really strange, considering if Westboro Fire Department had bothered to file it, they would have gotten money for their department to buy needed supplies," that year.
To give Westboro Fire Department its due credit, this act does not appear particularly biased signifying viciousness against just us, the Murphys. If the Department of Commerce's employee had it right, Westboro has never filed with the state that there's ever been a fire of a home in Westboro, which might just explain why the Westboro Fire Department arrived ASAP first - but with no water.
P.S. Could we get some adequate up to code minimum heat for Taylor County jail inmates please?
— Suzanne Murphy, Spirit