Friday, February 10, 2006
The "cake" is building residences - some of them quite substantial - on the same property where owners earn a living. A clever way to get double use from one piece of land, but it has resulted in a mix of industrial uses with a "neighbourhood." So it is with some amusement that we hear of an industrial park dweller complaining that the city is using his neighbourhood as... an industrial park.
In this case, the city has designated one of its lots as a dumping ground for snow.
The city has created its own contradiction here. If it had insisted on no residential components to the industrial park from the beginning this wouldn't be an issue. But the city allowed "caretaker" residences, which became a loophole for wholesale residential development, never mind how ugly the mix. The city should stop this as soon as possible, but the precedents may make this too late.
As for the snow dump, it should be environmentally monitored and snowfenced off, not for the sake of house owners next door, but for the sake of the environment in general.
A contingency fund is supposed to be for emergencies. Not for responding to veiled threats or funding council's pet projects.
Councillors should consider that when they sit down to vote on whether or not to give the Yellowknife International Air Show an additional $15,000 this year.
While it's great to see the Snowbirds and other aerobatic demonstrations and ground displays, we have to wonder what value the afternoon-long event brings to the community compared to the other causes on the city's funding list.
These homegrown Yellowknife organizations do not enjoy a $13 billion budget as does the Canadian Armed Forces.
It's certainly a great recruitment tool for the Armed Forces, but it won't bring tourists from Edmonton or Calgary to Yellowknife. They come to see the North and Northerners.
So council should vote against spending a good chunk of its $100,000 contingency fund on the air show, because it's not an emergency. Last year, council very pointedly turned down spending contingency cash to help support Citizens on Patrol.
As well, Mayor Gord Van Tighem should be careful in how his role in this matter is being perceived.
He's a member of the air show's organizing committee. In 2005, Caribou Carnival received an extra $25,000 - it was organized by his wife last year. He's in danger of having people think that the best way to get a city grant is to have the mayor or a family member on their committee.
Editorial Comment
Darrell Greer
Kivalliq News
If I had a dollar for every time during the past five years someone told me there are too many rules being enforced in Northern hockey, I would be a lot closer to retirement than I am now.
The popular opinion of those expressing such views is that the rules are taking all the fun out of hockey and, this is the North, nobody really gets hurt playing here.
I wonder if Bryan Fotheringham felt he was really hurt earlier this month while waiting to be medevaced to Winnipeg for surgery on the busted ankle he sustained in a Rankin rec league game?
As with the majority of hockey mishaps, the injury resulted from an accident when a teammate fell on him in the crease area.
The point to be made in justifying the rules is twofold.
First, people do get hurt playing hockey.
Rules are in place to protect players as much as possible from sustaining a serious injury.
That's why it's mandatory for minor hockey players to wear approved helmets, neck guards and full-facial protection.
Nobody's trying to be mean and keep kids, especially kids from less-fortunate families, from playing the game because they can't afford the necessary equipment.
Hockey organizers are simply doing what they can to help prevent injury.
It's the nature of the beast for the enforcement of these rules to almost always fall on the shoulders of the on-ice officials.
The second reason we have so many rules is that we live in a world run by lawyers.
Hockey is no different than most everything these days in that a potential lawsuit always lurks close by.
Most sports fans have little knowledge of the insurance and legal issues dealt with on the administrational side of the games.
Even executive board members, who may never take an active part in the playing of the game, are insured against lawsuits surrounding official policies.
Most hockey fans have heard of the southern lawsuits launched by parents of young players who felt their child was treated unfairly when they didn't make the big team of their area.
Of even greater concern is guarding players and officials from loss of insurance when injury does occur.
All it takes is for one unregistered player to be on the ice and everyone's coverage is null and void.
The same applies to the wearing of uncertified or altered equipment.
A player sustaining a head injury, for example, who was not wearing a properly certified helmet, would receive nothing more than a rejection letter from the insurance company involved.
There will always be issues surrounding sports that people will disagree with.
But, when it comes to the rules surrounding the safety and well-being of players and officials, the rules are in place to protect, not deny.
The denying part happens when the rules are not enforced and an individual is left to suffer alone.
Editorial Comment
Jason Unrau
Inuvik Drum
On Valentine's Day, the Joint Review Panel (JRP) hearings on the Mackenzie Gas Project kick off in Inuvik, but don't expect a lot of love going around.
Different from the National Energy Board hearings, the JRP will hear evidence about the socio-economic and environmental impacts of the proposed pipeline.
Understandably, there are many concerns about the pipeline with respect to both the environment and what effects the influx of workers and more cash will have on the North, which is already trying to deal with its fair share of social ills.
Ask somebody on the street their opinion about the pipeline and the reaction is usually mixed.
Most seem to understand that more jobs and a bustling economy will come and that it's a good thing. However, most of these people maintain valid concerns about wildlife and people. And this is what makes the JRP so important.
With half a billion federal dollars earmarked for dealing with socio-economic impacts of the pipeline, it would be prudent to have an idea where to channel this funding in the event that the project gets the go-ahead.
Ever notice that many of those - people and organizations - dead-set against the pipeline have little or nothing to gain regardless of whether or not the project happens? The irony here is that while their reasoning is caged in some kind of environmental or social altruism, they don't seem to care that others could lose out on jobs and educational opportunities if the entire thing were scrapped.
It's a very similar mentality to those protesting something like the seal hunt. Of course these creatures are cute and furry and nobody wants to see one clubbed over the head, but it's the person at the other end of the club whose livelihood could be at stake because some television celebrity can't handle the brutal realities.
So it's good to keep in mind that if the pipeline gets scuttled, the Sierra Club or Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society won't turn up the next day with offers of employment.
It was such a pleasure to meet with the teenager featured in the Coffee Break (page 2) this week and hear how his time spent in corrections helped change his outlook on life and put him on a path towards achieving his goals. Now that's taking some responsibility. I wish him all the best.
There's so much potential in the young people of Inuvik and it's disheartening to witness kids wasting theirs by not attending school and/or getting into trouble with the law.
Editorial Comment
Roxanna Thompson
Deh Cho Drum
As you read this paper, do you know where your dog is?
If you don't own a dog you can rest easy, but those who do should hopefully be able to immediately pin-point the location of their pet.
Long-standing concerns about potentially dangerous roaming dogs were voiced this week by residents in Wild Rose Acres in Fort Simpson.
While there is probably no need to panic about Cujo-like packs of canines causing havoc and striking terror into the hearts of the multitudes, there is a faint warning bell that should be listened to.
Dogs may be man's best friend, but situations happen regularly where dogs turn on humans.
No one ever wants to assume the worst about their own pet. It's hard to contemplate a canine who's considered a member of the family doing something violent, but it can happen. And it's not just the so called "dangerous breeds" that need to be watched.
Like a young child, if left to their own devices, even the best of dogs can get into mischief.
There's also something to be said about peer pressure.
The confidence of a dominant dog might give courage to an otherwise timid pet.
The simple fact is dogs should not be given the chance to cause an accident.
It's hard to say what could set an animal off. Even after 10,000 to 14,000 years of domestication, dogs still possess some of their original primal urges.
Basic precautions should be taken to ensure that the Deh Cho Drum never has to contain a report about a serious dog attack.
The onus is on pet owners to create a system that works for them, so their dog can have a measure of freedom and fresh air while still being controlled. This could involve a leash, a fenced-in yard, or even staying with the dog while it's outside.
The responsibility shouldn't be left to bylaw officers who are often only alerted after something has gone wrong.
Keeping a close eye on a dog's location is important for the animal's safety as much as that of humans. It's hard to protect a pet from accidents with vehicles or other animals if you don't know where they are.
Even if a dog is unlikely to be aggressive, owners need to be sensitive to the fact that dogs make some people nervous.
Others simply don't like dogs. Even dog lovers are generally cautious when meeting an unfamiliar canine.
A bit of time and planning is all it would take to ensure that man's best friends keep their titles.