To the editor:

This is in regard to Mark Hirschey’s May 16 letter that stated that the attempts of Commissioners Rundle, Highberger and Schauner to save the Baker Wetlands from the South Lawrence Trafficway were the workings of “greedy machine politics.”

Please inform us all of how these gentlemen are making money by protecting this ecosystem. Is there a powerful butterfly lobbyist making the rounds?

I’m sorry, but Mark’s letter was nothing short of being horribly vapid and, worse yet, disrespectful by use of fabrication. I’m not a naive tree-hugger. I understand the need for the SLT. But let’s actually put it someplace reasonable for urban growth. Placing the SLT south of the river not only protects the immediate ecosystem of a treasured – yes, treasured – environment in addition to respecting the very logical concerns of Haskell Indian Nations University and the heritage of the people committed to that land.

If you are unsure about your own thoughts on the Baker Wetlands, I implore you to explore your own backyard. It’s a wonderful treat that if taken away cannot be replicated for our enjoyment or for the thousands of species who depend on it. Please just think about the common sense of using 32nd Street. Development is already at its north side. By the time a 32nd Street SLT would be completed, it would be in town and would not be around town. Forty-second Street is the only logical option.

Michael Stoecker,

Lawrence