Letters

Your story, “U.F. nonprofit sees cats through their nine lives,” was inspirational to those of us who care about the welfare of cats (and other animals).

Furthermore, it spotlighted an important truth about the abdication of the responsibility of our veterinary industry for humane stewardship of cats. I have studied the astonishing widespread cruelty to cats inflicted by veterinarians and others in our country — namely docking of healthy feline toes at or just before the first joint (popularly called “declawing”).

How telling it is that the founder of Purrfect Feline Friends of Cream Ridge, Kathy Pacak, “rescues many declawed cats from shelters.” This tells us that declawing does not translate into a home for a cat (let alone a “loving” home). It also tells us that declawing does not translate into a cat’s life being saved.

Members of our mainstream veterinary industry repeatedly posture the invalid, self-serving, assertions that declawing gives cats a home and saves cats’ lives. However, what this cruel mutilation, dismemberment, crippling of healthy, dexterous uniquely feline paws does do, as can be verified, is increase veterinary cash flow of up to $450 per crippling. It takes about 11 minutes to cripple a cat by declawing or by the somewhat less popular crippling, equally inhumane procedure of tendonectomy.

The truth uncovered in Jane Meggitt’s interesting piece is continually being verified by my colleagues who work in animal shelters. Added to the high rate of relinquishment of declawed cats is the high frequency of litter box problems, aggression, and/or lethargy that arises after the cruel paw mutilation.

Here’s hoping that your story will serve to chip away at the seemingly insurmountable denial and dysfunction in our mainstream feline and small animal veterinary industry.

Harriet Baker

author of “The Shocking Truth About Declawing Cats”

The Cat Catalyst Inc.

Quincy, Mass.

Resident says campaign ad is ‘outrageous’

If I had any doubt that Steve Sico and Ray Dilfanian were the only two candidates that could make a difference for Millstone, the outrageous ad ran by [Frank] Cotter and [William] Nurko last week removed that doubt.

Who do they think they’re kidding? Cotter has the audacity to claim that Ray Dilfanian and Steve Sico were “hand-picked by those in power.” Let’s look at the facts. Ray, who is back from a second tour of duty in Iraq, and Steve, a successful solo practitioner, were selected by the voters in the June primary when they received three times the votes Nurko received and 17 times the votes [Chet] Halka garnered. Why do Cotter and Nurko resent the voters being in power?

Funny thing, Frank Cotter was not in the primary race and was hand-picked by the county party bosses just a few weeks ago, without ever receiving one vote from a Millstone resident. Frank, in my opinion, is somewhat known as a darling of special interest and large developers. Does he think developers and special interests should run the town and not the voters who chose Steve Sico and Ray Dilfanian.

I believe Cotter and Nurko have shown utter contempt for the residents for years now. I have seen them side on many issues with campaign contributors and large land owners, despite what other residents wanted.

In 2003, Nurko, with Cotter’s support, stripped away the property rights of hundreds of small land owners with less that 20 acres by voting to give a dozen large land owners extra bonus lots. I have also seen them fight against charging their campaign contributors, big developers and land speculators, their fair share of impact costs for the basins, COAH [Council on Affordable Housing] fees, schools and open space created by development. I think that they think that you and I, the resident taxpayers, should take the full tax hit for the impact of big development.

Sico and Dilfanian will fight to keep you, the people, in power and to make developers pay their fair share of impact costs from their fat profits so taxpayers don’t take the hit. Nurko’s voting record and Cotter’s public comments have clearly demonstrated that they oppose shifting hundreds of thousands of dollars of cost from the taxpayers to the developers.

Nurko and Cotter’s record, history and rhetoric make it clear that their first order of business would be to shift those costs back to you if they ever get power back.

Dilfanian and Sico will represent you, the residents, and push for more clean ratables and positive reform. They will make sure you remain the people in power.

Mike Kuczinski

Millstone

Roosevelt resident asks, Who’s paying for lawsuit?

Dolores Chasan, Virginia Edwards, Jill Joyce and Jeff Ellentuck, once again you seem to be withholding important information from the borough.

Who is paying for this lawsuit you instituted? I don’t remember signing a petition allowing my tax dollars to be spent in such a manner. I know it wasn’t put to a vote. Yet, here you are making decisions for the borough without its permission. Are you and your committee footing the bill?

The Mayor and Borough Clerk are public employees. As such, they are covered under insurance through the borough. Part of our taxes pay for this. I feel if you need to satisfy your own selfish needs, through this lawsuit, then I strongly feel you should be the ones to pay out of your own pockets.

Reenah Petrics

Roosevelt

Readers urged to speak out against Arctic drilling

This is not another eco-extremist tirade condemning the consumers of oil nationwide. It is simply a fair, levelheaded assessment of fact: drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve does not only pose a serious threat to an incredibly fragile and unique ecosystem, it is a proposal that threatens the best interests of Americans across the country.

Opening up the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve to drilling will not lower gas prices. The U.S. consumes roughly 7.5 billion barrels of oil annually. The 1999 U.S. Geological Survey determined that there are only 3.2 billion barrels of economically recoverable oil available underground, less than half of the country’s yearly demand. This proposed drilling would increase global oil reserves by .7 percent, far too little to lower worldwide oil prices.

Furthermore, the newly drilled oil would not be available for at least 10 years. In that time, if the average fuel efficiency of cars and trucks in America was improved by 2 percent each year, more than twice the amount of available oil would have been saved before we even saw the first barrel that came from the new operations on the reserve’s coastal plains.

Environmentalists fervently call attention to the threats the Alaskan ecosystem will face, but even if we disregard the interests of native populations (humans and animals alike, which will inevitably be compromised), one must realize that the passing of the Budget Reconciliation Bill (which will open up funding for the proposal) would be a counter-intuitive move for our progressive, trend-setting nation. The world has its eyes on America, and drilling for oil in Alaska is not going to solve the impending global energy crisis.

I urge New Jersey residents to contact their representatives to remind them of the potentially disastrous implications associated with support for the bill.

James Thomas

Princeton

Millstone voters urged to seek balance on committee

It was with an extreme level of disgust that I read the letter from Millstone’s Mayor Elias Abilheira in the Oct. 6 issue of the Examiner. It appears that the use of the word “corruption” in the Democrat’s campaign may have struck too close to home for the mayor. Why else would he so viciously attack Committeeman [William] Nurko and his running mate Frank Cotter, even referring to Mr. Nurko as “incompetent”? I can only assume that this is part of his continuing effort to deflect attention from his highly questionable actions on May 25, 2005.

I am referring to his appearance in front of the Board of Adjustment, a board he had a hand in appointing. His actions there are highly suspect.

For example, according to an Examiner article on June 2, the mayor stated: “I represent a builder with respect to a contract to purchase Ms. LaBarbera’s lot”.

The non-conforming lot ultimately received several variances from the board.

According to another statement in the article, Mayor Abilheira said, “The idea that there was a conflict is absurd.”

Absurd? Really? It is quite clear to me that the mayor’s actions were not only a conflict of interest but unethical as well. And now he has the audacity to try to camouflage his actions by stating that his appointees voted “no” on the variance requests. How insulting!

The question the mayor continues to avoid is, “Why did you appear before a township board, a board you helped appoint, when your client would directly benefit from their decision?”

In his Oct. 6 letter to the Examiner, Abilheira states “Nurko, and now Cotter, are avoiding like the plague their record, their history and the truth.” But who is really avoiding their record, their history and the truth here? This is just another example of Elias Abilheira’s “do as I say and not as I do” attitude. However, unfortunately for him, his record and the truth of his irresponsible actions are now part of the published record.

In my opinion, his self-serving, self-promoting behavior has become a constant source of embarrassment for our town, and his reprehensible conduct may well be actionable on any number of other legal and ethical levels.

With the November elections quickly approaching, we must not allow the current majority in town to expand their grip on how our town is run. We must seek balance on our committee and ensure that the mayor and his group of hopelessly misguided individuals endstop their pattern of atrocious, corrupt, embarrassing behavior that has become all too common lately.

Because this must end, I, as a Republican, will not cast a vote for Steve Sico or Ramin Dilfanian, the Republican candidates. Our town cannot afford to elect any more committee people from the same troupe as the current majority.

In closing, Mr. Mayor, to use your own historical example, if we were in 1844 (the year our town was founded), we would know the truth, but instead of tar and feathers you would just be run out of town. With this in mind and in light of your past actions, if you actually had the best interests of Millstone in mind you would resign.

Tom Ridgway

Millstone