Letters to the editor

Volume One, Issue 15, January 5 - 11, 2007

Inspired down in Texas

To The Editor:
Re “Staying positive while living with H.I.V./AIDS for 15 years” (news article, Dec. 6):

I was fortunate to have read the above-referenced article by Lawrence Lerner regarding the lifestyle and positive attitude of my nephew, Kevin Beauchamp. Kevin has been an inspiration to his family members and friends. When Kevin first became aware of his H.I.V./ AIDS, times were difficult for him. He has, as the article so eloquently describes, come to an understanding of the positive side of life and carries that wonderful attitude throughout his dealings with everyone.

Kevin’s father, Jim, and I were raised in southeast Texas. No one was openly gay and the subject was never discussed. Kevin was raised in Houston, not exactly a bastion of liberalism. To our knowledge, no one in our family had ever been gay and it was an eye-opener for us all when Kevin disclosed this.

During this time, while practicing law, I undertook a case that no one else wanted: After giving birth to a healthy boy, a young mother suffered postpartum bleeding and returned to the hospital for several transfusions; over the next years she began to feel the effects of the tainted transfusions and by the time her diagnosis of AIDS was given, it was apparent she did not have much longer to live. I well remember other attorneys who were afraid even to enter her home for an interview. Her deposition will live with me for the rest of my life because of her demeanor and courage.

After this, Kevin’s partner died and Kevin then learned he was H.I.V. positive.

The article is silent on one overwhelming aspect. Kevin has always been supported by a loving and understanding family, including his mother and his father, whom he unexpectedly lost in 2005. The acceptance of Kevin and Howard, his current partner, by a bunch of “redneck” Texans is something I am personally very proud of, as I have friends who have been unable to understand and deal with these issues in their families. Some of us “good old boys” do think and change, or at least we try.

I love you Kevin — from Uncle Ben!

Ben Beauchamp

Ground the Bird Lady

To The Editor:
Re “Rain or shine, Chelsea Bird Lady tends to her flock” (news article, Dec. 29):

It was extremely irresponsible and misguided of you to publish a positive article about the Chelsea woman who feeds pigeons. She is actually feeding rats, who eat much of the food the pigeons miss.

Pigeons spread diseases. They cause allergies. Their droppings have acid that erodes the beautiful brownstone buildings lining Chelsea streets.

Feeding pigeons causes them to breed in artificially large numbers. Their population skyrockets to unsustainable numbers.

According to a recent article in The New York Times: “A pigeon dispenses about 25 pounds of excrement a year. Often this gunk must be blasted off hard-to-reach places using boom lifts and steam hoses. Pigeon-related damage in America has been estimated to cost $1.1 billion a year.”

The man who has done the most research on pigeon feeders, also quoted in The Times, is brutally honest:

“‘Most of the pigeon feeders are in some way crazy,’ he said, summarizing, rather informally, a psychological study he helped write on the subject. ‘It is impossible to influence these people. The most relentless have no family and few interpersonal relationships. They adopt pigeons as surrogate children.’”

We don’t need thousands of pounds of damaging, diseased bird poop in Chelsea. We don’t need anymore crazy “Bird Ladies.” Please try to be more responsible with your future reporting.

Nicole Feist

Don’t blame the pigeons

To The Editor:
Re “Rain or Shine, Chelsea Bird Lady tends to her flock” (news article, Dec. 29):

Lawrence Lerner’s well-written feature about the Chelsea Bird Lady brings together the many various issues New Yorkers have about caring for and feeding pigeons. Let me start by first commending the Bird Lady’s good intentions. The city’s pigeons are routinely ridiculed and persecuted, and even poached and sold to rural gun clubs, where they are slaughtered by the thousands for live target practice.

It’s a strange fate for a bird that has been beloved by humanity for its gentle and loyal nature for the better part of 10,000 years. The Bird Lady is correct when she says that a million pigeons served in the two world wars and saved thousands of soldiers’ lives by delivering critical messages. This is a role, among others, that they have performed since the time of the ancient Egyptians, and, in many parts of the world, still do. It’s hard to imagine that the run-of-the-mill park-bench pigeon is related to war heroes, but it is. You might also be surprised to learn that the Queen of England is a pigeon fancier, as was Charles Darwin, Julius Reuters, Baron Rothschild and Iron Mike Tyson, too.

The Bird Lady is also correct when she states that pigeons are not disease-infested vermin. They carry no more diseases than you or I, and are highly resistant (if not immune) to avian flu and West Nile virus. But their droppings do accumulate and that’s neither a particularly healthy nor pretty sight. The problem with pigeons is not the bird — it’s a wonderful creature — it’s the number of them. And that’s where the Bird Lady is perhaps making a mistake.

Overfeeding of pigeons leads to overbreeding and overpopulation. It’s not a healthy state for the birds or us. I would encourage the Bird Lady to enjoy her winged friends and perhaps throw them a splash of birdseed — but no more. The reason the humane pigeon-control program in Europe works so well is that it discourages citizens from feeding pigeons except in designated areas where the birds’ eggs can be culled each week.

The Bird Lady and hard-working rehabbers, such as Rita McMahon, are certainly right about one thing: We need to learn to respect and coexist peacefully with the city’s animals. Wildlife can be inconvenient, but it can also animate our lives in unexpected and delightful ways.

But please don’t overfeed the pigeons. And consider lobbying the city to adopt the humane and effective form of pigeon control practiced throughout much of Europe.

Andrew D. Blechman
Blechman is the author of “Pigeons — The Fascinating Saga of the World’s Most Revered and Reviled Bird”

Punk and London geography

To The Editor:
“Before Oi! there was Oy! Punk’s Jewish Roots” (news article, Dec. 29):

I loved Bonnie Rosenstock’s article on Jews in music, since it mentioned a lot of my musical heroes. But, since I live in London, can I just put one thing in perspective about its geography? Islington is in the N1 area of London, is pretty exclusive and has been for the last 40 years or so. Tony Blair has or had a house there and it’s home to many actors and people in the media; it boasts cafes, bookstores, designer couples with designer babies and some great pubs.

The real East End of London is around the areas of Whitechapel, Bethnal Green and Hackney. Being a descendant of Sephardic Jews who settled in that area, I’m fascinated by the cultural changes that have taken place in those areas and how each immigrating group left its mark. The crime for which these parts were so notorious in the ’50s and ’60s — the Kray brothers and other gangs — is not just relegated to these places but is now part of the big city as a whole. Islington and crime were never synonymous, as were Hackney and crime, for example.
If in doubt, ask Lenny Kaye what he thinks. He’s a big fan of the soap “Eastenders.”

Barbara Lee-Jones

Pier 40 works well now

To The Editor:
Re “ ‘People’s Pier’ vs. Performing Arts Center for Pier 40” (news article, Dec. 29):

There may be no better example of “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” than Pier 40, object of a multitude of schemes to make it much, much better than it is. But what is it, exactly, that needs to be improved? The huge center courtyard, so long an underused truck-parking facility, is now a green, well-lit athletic field, where kids and young adults come from all over the city to play soccer and softball from morning to night. The nicely run parking operation generates, it’s said, $5 million annually for the park — most of it, I’ll wager, from the vehicles owned by city residents, like me, who don’t have much choice anymore about where to put their cars now that developers have done away with so many parking lots hereabouts and on-street parking has become unfeasible. It’s easy enough to say that cars don’t belong in Manhattan; but what are we car owners supposed to do on weekends when we need to get to our retreats far away from tourists and shoppers? Take a taxi? Hire a limo? Move to the suburbs? Forget it!

Gene Epstein

Pier plans raise concerns

To The Editor:
Re “ ‘People’s Pier’ vs. Performing Arts Center for Pier 40” (news article, Dec. 29):

This article raises serious concerns.

Before developers submitted current proposals for Pier 40, the Hudson River Park Trust commissioned a study for uses on the pier, and presented it to the Waterfront Committee of Community Board 2. According to the Trust, this was because there was potential for the community to develop a park concept for the pier, rather than again having developers decide what the park should be.

In September 1990, C.B. 2 passed a resolution to insure that open space of Pier 40 would be devoted to park use. An investigation considered sharing active recreational facilities with schools that are required to pay for using parks. This could expand such uses, which would be limited to school and working hours.

We now have two pier proposals, both with restricted potential for the park.

One would be an entertainment area, including space for ball fields. Vehicles arriving day and night for 2.7 million annual visitors would multiply conflicts with pedestrians and bikers, and there would be inadequate parking.

The second plan could take advantage of school use. But half of the existing roof would be covered with additional buildings, at least doubling the current height. This, after many in the community spent years advocating removal of all buildings from the pier deck. Quiet recreational space is limited. Time conflicts between paid and free public use of active recreational facilities suggest serious problems.

In keeping with the Trust’s intention, a community concept could devote the entire roof and courtyard to active/quiet recreation, plus year-round indoor options. Parking and other pier-supporting uses would also be inside.

This community concept would fulfill requirements of the project’s environmental impact statement, which include protection of historic resources. The E.I.S. states that the waterfront’s incredible maritime heritage is to be emphasized. This is something that C.B. 2 has consistently stressed. The heritage of well over 100 million Americans can be traced to immigrants who arrived along this waterfront corridor. Preservation requirements are critical to allow for federal funding of the park.

Bill Hine and Robert Smith
Hine and Smith are members, Save the Piers