Visitor willing to help pay for wear-and-tear on island
I have followed the discussion in your paper concerning the impact of tourism on the island.
I have to agree with those who point out that tourism causes wear-and-tear on island infrastructure and services, just as permanent residents do.
My wife and I have been a part of that problem for the past 10 years, coming over every year for a month of respite from the rest of the world in your slice of paradise.
I believe it is only fair that those of us who are not permanent residents contribute their fair share to the maintenance and upkeep of infrastructure, and to support services which we utilize or may utilize.
I read in TGI that at any one time there are about 70,000 permanent residents and 20,000 visitors on Kauai. Using simple math, that tells me visitors should pay 22 percent of the costs of infrastructure and services they utilize, with that revenue staying in the County of Kauai.
Seems high, but if the numbers previously reported are correct, this would potentially represent the proportion of wear-and-tear and use of services tourism should be held accountable for. I — for one — would support this as only fair.
Thomas Knapp, AIA Architect, San Francisco
GMO crops are good for mankind
I am a retired aerospace engineer/physicist and I applaud Allan Parachini’s commentary in the Sunday paper (TGI, Feb. 25). I agree with Allan 100 percent — seek the facts — show me the data.
My engineering firm for 11 years directly supported NASA and the Shuttle program and after the Columbia disaster all we concentrated on was seeking the truth. Let’s all seek the truth here — not panic gossip. I have been continually amazed over the years at Kauai’s phobia on anything outside. Its xenophobia the likes that the Nazi would be proud of.
To feed ourselves and the world, humans had to get smarter — as Dr. Paul MacCready once said, “…doing more with less is an essential feature of a world that works…”
Paul loved this island as all the Helios tests were done out of Barking Sands. Doing more with less means applying science to food. Compared with some highly toxic, known carcinogenic pesticides, there is nothing wrong with GMO food supplies.
Do we fear giraffes because they genetically altered to long necks, so they could reach their food supply way back when? Do we fear whales because they genetically altered their feet into flippers when they went into the sea’s millions of years ago?
Do we fear vaccines because they alter our immune system to resist disease? Do we fear immuno-oncology for cancer treatment because it is a dramatic paradigm change in the fight against cancer ?
GMO crops are simply good for humankind because they improve on the good and remove the bad traits, giving mankind a higher quality of life on this planet.
W. Craig Willan, Kilauea