Big Game Law
Dear Editor: You can’t shoot any big game in the state of Alaska within one-quarter mile of any state highway. This is a safety precaution to prevent injury to person or property traveling on those highways. As an experienced hunter I was unaware of this law and have never violated this law even to this date. I recently had a friend that did this and was charged with unlawful taking of big game within one-quarter mile of a state highway. Since I was present during this offense I was instructed to inform the public of this state law.
Brandon Finn, Sitka
Rugby
Dear Editor: Now that we don’t have to worry about the Super Bowl anymore, does anybody in this town speak “Rugby”? Or want to learn how?
This is a heads-up about an unfolding plot to bring rugby (aka, “The Game They Play In Heaven”) to Sitka and, indeed, to SouthEast Alaska.
In a couple of weeks, the barely-nascent SouthEast Alaska Rugby Federation (or SEARF) will hold a series of informational gatherings around town to introduce Rugby to Sitka, and to determine if enough folks in this town want to see Rugby here enough to actually make it actually happen. And, by this point, some of you, no doubt, are asking yourself: “And what, exactly, is rugby?”
Rugby (or “Rugby Football”) is the evolutionary (albeit obviously intelligently-designed), transitional “missing link” between what the rest of the world calls “Football” (and what Americans call “Soccer”), and what is globally referred to as “American Football.” Created in England almost two centuries ago at a place fittingly called Rugby School, it all started when a football (ie, “soccer”) player decided that he was bored with just being able to kick or head the ball, and chose to pick it up and run with it instead. At which point, a player on the opposing team decided that if that guy could just pick the ball up and run with it just like that, well, then, he could just tackle that guy running with the ball; which he did, stripping it away from him, and running off toward the other goal with it in the opposite direction. And thus was born “Rugby.” Or so the Mythos would inform us.
Of further note to Sitkans and Southeast Alaskans is that Rugby is also the direct, and immediate progenitor of another American and now global sports phenomenon: basketball. When Dr. Naismith nailed that peach basket up on the gymnasium wall that night, he was creating a game that was, primarily, to be a way for his Rugby players to stay in shape during the brutally harsh New England winters between the fall and spring rugby seasons. Or, again and so, as the Mythos continues.
A young but wise, old UCal-Berkeley Rugby Crone (and former #2 Hooker [which is a numbered position in Rugby, and not a statement about social status]) was to once describe The Game like this: “Rugby is a game that, bottom-line, is American Football played without head and body armor, without blocking, without huddles, without timeouts, without free-substitutions for anything but the most serious injuries, without forward passes, and, maybe most importantly, with only one on-field official.” Noting a further distinction between Rugby and American Football, she described the latter as “that which not a few Rugby players and fans, world-wide (especially in America), frankly regard, and openly refer to, as a game for Wimps.”
In any event, Rugby is today a game that is played throughout the world: by girls and boys of all ages, and young and old women and men of even more ages (separately and co-ed). There are wheelchair, flag, and limited- and full-contact versions of the game. This summer in Rio de Janeiro, Rugby will return as a women’s and men’s sport to the Olympics for the first time in almost a century; the last Men’s Gold Medal being won by Team USA, back in the ’20s. Also, the United States was one of only 20 countries whose men’s national team qualified for the recent world professional championship, last fall’s Rugby World Cup, held in England.
And, of most particular note to potential SEARFers, Rugby is played in Alaska. The Anchorage-based Alaska Rugby Union umbrellas a veritable flock of youth, co-ed touch, women’s and men’s programs, not only in Anchorage, but in Fairbanks and Turnagin, over on the Kenai Peninsula, up in the Matanuska-Susitna Valley, and elsewhere. Plus they have built arguably the finest world-class Rugby playing field and clubhouse facility north of latitude 50 on the planet.
Are you with us so far? If so, then watch this space for announcements for those public gatherings, to be held in a couple of weeks, to learn more about Rugby; and particularly, to determine if sufficient folk in this town would be interested in starting up Rugby here in Sitka.
We at SEARF have every reason to believe that Sitka is a prime candidate for a local Rugby program, let alone to serve as the seed-bed and hub for bringing the game to the entire Southeast. We believe this for a number of reasons, including but not limited to: Rugby is totally cheaper and thus significantly safer than football; Sitka is a great sports town; we have the nucleus of a potentially-superb Women’s Program in our Roller Derby phenomenon; and, finally, Rugby is a great way to stay in shape for basketball season.
We’ll elaborate on all this and more at the info gatherings. There’ll be a video introducing and explaining Rugby; other videos showing kids, youth, and female and male adult amateurs playing the game; and some highlites from a World Cup game or two, showing how (at least men) professionals play the game, even before they go to Heaven.
And, most of all, it will be an attempt to see if anyone’s interested in seeing if Rugby has a future in Sitka. Hope to be seein’ ya then. Please contact us with questions. And particularly, if you’d like to be in on the ground floor of the plot, and be put on an e-mail list to receive updates and other info from SEARF.
SEARF’s Up!
Sam Dealy, Dustin Evans
and Jeff Moebus,
SouthEast Alaska Rugby Federation (SEARF) / Sitka
searf.sitka@gmail.com
Marijuana Industry
Dear Editor: I have thought long and hard about whether to write and express my concerns regarding allowing marijuana to be more accessible in our community, and have decided that to do nothing would, in fact, be implicitly supporting marijuana use.
Although I have no moral objections to people using marijuana, I do have major concerns as a certified substance use and abuse prevention specialist and an alcohol and other drug abuse counselor, especially when it comes to having greater accessibility to the drug by youths.
From a prevention point of view, greater accessibility to any substance means greater use by the general population AND youths. This means youths use will go up even with all due caution when setting up systems of distribution. Furthermore, unintentional use will also go up. In a recent study done by Ohio’s Nationwide Children’s Hospital researchers and published online in Clinical Pediatrics, researchers found that the rate of marijuana exposure among children 5 years of age and younger rose 147.5 percent from 2006 through 2013 across the United States. The rate increased almost 610 percent during the same period in states that legalized marijuana for medical use before 2000.
According to the local results of the 2015 Youth Risk Behavior Survey, youth perception of risk and harm related to marijuana use has decreased significantly as has peer and parental disapproval. All this points to increased use by youths. Even having the discussion of legalizing marijuana let alone planning for its distribution in our community contributes to these false beliefs and eroding of peer and parental disapproval. This all increases the risk factors and will no doubt increase youth use of the substance.
From a pure economic point of view, legalizing and promoting another health eroding substance does not make sense. Even with taxing marijuana, the associated costs for monitoring, testing, policing and other regulatory oversight costs will cost us taxpayers additional money. At a time when there are huge budgetary concerns and the possibility of increased taxes, I see no sense in adding more onto the taxpayer’s shoulders. If one considers the other health- related costs associated with marijuana such as cancers and other health problems, treatment for addiction, loss of productivity, not to mention additional law enforcement and judiciary costs, there would be a huge net loss.
If we take alcohol for example, CDC (Center for Disease Control) researchers found that excessive drinking cost the U.S. $249.0 billion in 2010. By comparison, the Tax Policy Center estimates that state and local taxes on alcoholic beverages brought in about $6 billion in revenue nationwide in 2010. Government (i.e. us taxpayers) paid for $100.7 billion (40.4 percent) of these costs while additional costs related to insurance premiums and other health care costs were borne directly by us. Binge drinking accounted for $191.1 billion (76.7 percent) of costs; underage drinking $24.3 billion (9.7 percent) of costs; and drinking while pregnant $5.5 billion (2.2 percent) of costs. The median cost per state was $3.5 billion. Binge drinking was responsible for >70 percent of these costs in all states, and >40 percent of the binge drinking–related costs were paid by government.
If we look at tobacco taxes versus overall costs to society, we find a similar result. I can’t imagine that results for marijuana would be any different regardless of the “promises” of the pro-marijuana group.
There will be some that will make a great amount of money from this endeavor; unfortunately, the majority of us will end up paying.
I, among many other members of our community, would not be very happy to pay more taxes to support an industry that will only cost us more money to regulate and respond to the many health and legal concerns that go along with it, not to mention the community disorganization that will occur.
There are too many unknowns that need to be answered before any decisions are made for our community regarding marijuana. I urge everyone to take great care and time in deciding the role marijuana will play in our community.
I for one do not support any type of marijuana industry in our community and would encourage other citizens to voice their opinion not only on whether or not marijuana should be allowed in our community (although I believe that decision has already been made), but how the distribution should look and the protections built into the process, codes and policies for our citizens, especially children and youths.
Loyd Platson, Sitka
