Way of Life
Editor: Apropos Gary Bunker's letter to the editor (Sept. 12) in which he advocates drilling for oil in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and other sensitive areas, I would like to point out that oil is a nonrenewable resource; when it's gone, it's gone. It would be far better to use the time, effort and money to research other cleaner and renewable sources of energy, such as solar power.
In addition, Mr. Bunker questions whether the lives of Alaskan caribou are more important then lives of the military personnel in the Persian Gulf. Does he think it is more ethical to expend these same lives in order to preserve ''the American way of life,'' in other words, oil?
Dorothy W. Cronin.
Editor: Thank you for Alice Steinbach! Long may she live and write of train trips and grown children and friendships and inner voices and letter-writing and everything else that makes life worth living.
Marion J. Pokrass.
Out of the Woods
Editor: In his Sept. 20 letter, former Baltimore City watershed forester Wolodymyr C. Sushko called for ''management of mature forests'' by selectively cutting ''trees which have stopped growing long ago'' as a means of allowing newer ones to grow and thus providing more timber to cut.
Unfortunately, what Mr. Sushko and other forest managers fail to realize is that old trees which have stopped growing, and dying trees, and rotting trees are essential ecological tools in nature's management of life -- life for plants, insects, animals, and humans as well.
This notion that we can ''manage'' natural resources by feeding the timber and mining industries a little at a time is naive at best, and public officials who promote this folly are largely responsible for the destruction of the earth which has taken place to serve special interests in the name of public good.
It's time for laws which prohibit business and government from cutting any tree they did not plant. It's time to get timber harvesters and forest managers out of our forests!
Non-Smokers and Politicians
Editor: Your Sept. 10 issue had a letter entitled ''Smoking Ban'' by Shelley D. Mogus, which really hit the issue squarely in its political pants. Those who are in the position of serving the public, should.
The people outnumber the members of the Tobacco Institute, and we should keep that in mind. Maybe we should put it to a vote, take the decision to the people.
Would a smoker want to inhale smoke from an incinerator? Why should we have to be burdened with special areas in restaurants? Have you ever had a piece of pie that smells/tastes of nicotine? Yumm!
Smoke is a smell that drifts into all areas unless restaurant owners want to build special rooms/walls. Airlines realize the utter impossibility of containing this ''fragrance'' and have yielded to common sense. Food areas should definitely not allow this!
Come on, you ''servants of the people,'' get into gear!
Charlotte J. Mansur.
Editor: Whenever I see Garland Thompson's name on or near the editorial section, I know that a thought-provoking article will follow. Not so in the "Lessons for Losers" (The Sun, Sept. 13).
Speaking of feuds and things that are rotten, what on earth possessed him to describe Selima Siler Marriott as "a Morgan State University aide with a standing hankering for elective office"? She is a Morgan State professor and administrator. By describing a hard-working community leader of such positive persistence in flippant terms, no good lessons are being imparted.
Negative words and actions are often the stuff of which feuds are made. I could characterize the writer's words regarding Ms. Marriott as sexist and mean-spirited, but to do so would only add fuel to the fires of feuding.
Harriet M. Griffin.
Editor: Michael Olesker's column, "Donald Schaefer: great public undecider on abortion," Sept. 13, so appalled me that I can hardly believe what I read.
I knew for the most part that our governor was out of touch with reality, but my goodness, I didn't realize he was a chauvinist, too.
Mr. Schaefer says, ''The press spends more time worrying about my abortion position than the public does.'' Excuse me, Mr. Schaefer, but I spend a great deal of time worrying about what all elected and appointed (i.e., Supreme Court) officials think about abortion.
When a woman radio reporter again said to the governor ''. . . this is a serious issue. Don't you think women need to know how you feel about it?'' the governor, with a dismissive wave of his hand, said "Listen little girl, you're not gonna trap me like that."
Obviously, if the governor calls a woman reporter ''little girl,'' he certainly doesn't think much of women or the issues with which we are concerned. By the way, I did not vote for Mr. Schaefer.
Diane C. Meilinggaard.