|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Cows in parks
Livermore Area Recreation and Park District has begun a pilot program of grazing cattle on parkland, which has been done before.
Shortly after graduating from Granada High School, I was running in Sycamore Grove on Winery Loop trail, and I ascended the steep, steep, steep hill up to the Wagon Loop Trail and was surprised by a herd of cattle. More to the point, I was astounded by their smell. It was an onslaught of stink that drove me back down the hill.
At the base, I felt embarrassed. I wanted to run the high hills. To have fled from a few cows, how stinky could they be? So with great perseverance I ran back up the hill, faced the cows, smelled them, then retreated again, defeated by stink.
If cattle were only smelly, if they only worsened the park experience for me and everyone who got close, that would be one thing, but those cow farts are methane, which is 28 times more dangerous a greenhouse gas than CO2.
So grazing cattle to reduce wildfire hazards is shortsighted, because cows make wildfires worse and worse.
I understand that Livermore has a cowboy tradition, and cattle may appeal to some, but as traditions go, it was brief, colonial and unsustainable. I prefer the longstanding California tradition of controlled burns that Native Americans used to reduce wildfire hazards for millennia.
Or grazing goats, or anything else than cows and their methane farts.
– Alan Marling
BART parking lot
In reading the article about the Pleasanton BART parking lot, I fail to understand why our government officials have authorized the spending of limited tax dollars on potential development of an existing BART parking lot without having a firm understanding of the current usage of the lot and how any proposed development would alter the traffic and parking issues of the area.
I would have expected that the issue of proposed parking and traffic would have been addressed as part of the “early design proposals” that were made available for review by the Pleasanton Planning Commission. However, it appears that such concerns still have not been addressed.
I would like to know how much we have spent so far on this project.
– Paul Luce
Rebuttal to the rebuttal
The argument that last week’s comparison of political philosophers relied on a “false equivalence” is itself mistaken. There is no false equivalence between the systems being discussed — they are not being conflated as similar, but cited precisely because they represent opposite poles in the political spectrum: authoritarian rule versus democratic governance.
Contrast is not equivalence.
The letter also overlooks an important historical point: the United States Constitution did not arise in philosophical isolation. It was deeply influenced by the Roman historian Polybius, whose analysis of the Roman Republic — particularly its mixed constitution and balance of powers — directly informed James Madison’s thinking.
But political philosophy did not end with the Founders, nor with Machiavelli or Plato. More recent thinkers such as Karl Popper advanced the discussion significantly. Popper argued that the aim of politics is not to design a perfect society but to prevent tyranny in all its forms.
He championed individual rights, defended liberal democracy, and warned against any sweeping ideological blueprint for society. His solution was “piecemeal social engineering” — gradual, practical reforms rather than grand totalizing schemes.
This approach is not only compatible with the American system; it is essential to its ongoing health. Just as unchecked government power leads to tyranny, so too does unfettered capitalism. Piecemeal socialism — targeted public programs that protect citizens from exploitation, instability, or destitution — is not a threat to democracy but one of its safeguards.
Tyranny is not avoided by freezing political thought in the 18th century, nor by dismissing comparisons across history — but by learning from them.
– John Williams



