Readers Write: Conservation, finding common ground

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

I was very saddened to read about the potential closing of Mississippi National River and Recreation Area offices as a cost-cutting measure (“Mississippi River recreation area, visitor center leases targeted,” front page, March 6). Ironically, the park was established as a type of national park that would save costs by working with partner organizations.

I was a national park ranger with the park for 12 years. My primary duty was to develop and present formal education programs about the science, history and culture of the Mississippi River. I personally worked with more than 31,000 students in programs taking place at the river’s shores or while traveling on the river in paddle boats or canoes. For many it was their first national park experience and first time on a river. The excitement as students saw their first eagle or a river otter was matched only by their curiosity as they learned about the geology, history, and culture of the Mississippi River. Dream job? You bet!

About three or four years into my time with the park I became its volunteer manager. I worked with dozens of other organizations, our park’s partners, to engage over 63,000 volunteers. The volunteers contributed over 250,000 hours of time. Multiply that by Minnesota’s minimum wage of $11.13/hour and that’s more than $2.7 million donated! The volunteers helped with the education programs, paddled canoes, assisted biotechs with research and restored habitat through the 72 miles of the park. The park even won an award for having the best national park volunteer program in the country!

These are just numbers I was able to pull together from my annual performance reviews as a single ranger. The park has always had a small staff, but it works with our partners to multiply the work we each do. Together we can do more than our organizations can do alone. That sounds like efficiency to me! I encourage readers who appreciate national parks to contact their representatives and ask that the decision to close Mississippi National Recreation Area offices be reversed.

Kathy Swenson, Minneapolis

•••

Thank you to Greg Stanley for pointing out that, even though claims of conflicts between livestock and wolves were elevated last year, wolves actually cause very few problems on Minnesota farms. Indeed, less than 1% of Minnesota farms experience issues (“Reports up of wolf attacks on livestock,” March 1).

Some members of the public may rely on this article to call for delisting wolves under the Endangered Species Act, but that would be using a shotgun to address a problem that can be resolved with a scalpel. Specifically, Minnesota is correctly taking proactive measures to avoid conflicts in the first place by supporting effective, nonlethal solutions at farms that are in wolf country. Further, farmers that experience issues already have a remedy because federal agents can kill wolves in response to conflicts. And kill them they do. As reported, last year 238 wolves were killed in response to the confirmed loss of 136 domesticated animals — nearly two wolves for every loss.

Some state lawmakers may use this article to push for a mandatory wolf trophy hunting and trapping season. Lawmakers have already introduced four bills this session to do just that, even though most Minnesotans value wolves. Hunting and trapping seasons are inherently cruel, biologically devastating and promote wasteful trophy hunting over sustenance hunting. Perhaps most importantly, studies show that trophy hunts can make conflicts worse. Randomly killing wolves creates social chaos within the wolf population that can lead to young, inexperienced wolves turning to livestock as easy meals.

Minnesota should continue to focus on effective, nonlethal solutions that can prevent conflicts. A wolf hunt in Minnesota would simply be trophy hunting dressed up as wildlife management. I urge readers to contact their state lawmakers and ask them to vote no on SF 243, SF 632, HF 649 and HF 782.

Steven Pope, St. Paul

I’m frustrated with the extremes in our politics because I truly believe that most Americans actually agree on more than we think. Government overreach, corruption and the failure of both parties to truly serve the people are real concerns for me. I consider myself a moderate, and I find myself deeply unsatisfied with our political choices. As a mediator — both by trade and at heart — I care about how we get to solutions, not just the end goal. I can’t support a path that tramples on the dignity and rights of those who can’t speak for themselves. And I also can’t look past the fact that we now have a convicted felon found liable for sexual abuse in the White House. As a woman, that reality is something I simply cannot reconcile.

I appreciate that many of us — outside of the political arenas — can have these conversations and still respect that we both feel strongly about our beliefs. That’s something I wish more of our leaders understood. Instead, I see Republican lawmakers now ducking town halls, avoiding their own constituents because they’re facing backlash over the cuts they’re making through Elon Musk’s DOGE. If they truly believed their policies were right, they should be able to defend them.

And I can’t ignore the bigger picture: Once again, we’re seeing massive tax cuts for the wealthy at the expense of programs that actually help people: Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, VA benefits. On top of that, we’re now seeing cuts to the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), a move that directly harms some of the most vulnerable people — children and families fleeing war, persecution and violence. The ORR provides critical resources, including housing, medical care and legal assistance, yet its funding is being slashed in favor of corporate tax breaks. This isn’t fiscal responsibility — it’s turning our backs on those in desperate need.

What frustrates me the most is that this kind of governance — on both sides — ignores what most Americans actually want: economic stability, government accountability and policies that work for the common good. Yet instead of practical solutions, we’re stuck in a cycle of performative politics and power plays. How do we move past this? How do we get leaders who actually represent the broad middle, instead of catering to the loudest extremes?

Jane White Schneeweis, Mahtomedi

•••

I hugged a Trumper today, and I liked it.

I’d never seen her before at our local food shelf, where we were both volunteering. But there she was — all friendly, helpful and kind — bagging and stocking and helping shoppers fill their carts. Bright eyes, willing spirit. A revelation. To me, at least.

She revealed herself to me privately after hearing a vocal anti-Trump volunteer tell me that she worked at the food shelf to help counteract the injustices and hardships imposed by this new administration. And because her uncle was a Trumper, she’d had to sever that tie. Several of us listened, nodded, then went about our work.

A little later, the other woman approached me. “I’m the kind of person you were all talking about,” she said. “I’m a Trumper.”

Gulp.

I managed to mumble something about the things we surely had in common — like loving our children and families. That’s all I could come up with in that fraught moment. After collecting myself, I knew I had to acknowledge her courage in speaking up. So when she finished her shift, I approached her and thanked her for helping. But I was still so tongue-tied, all I could I say was, “good for you, good for you.”

She probably thought I was expressing surprise that a Trump supporter could be such a kind and caring volunteer. I didn’t mean it that way. But if I’m honest, there might be a kernel of truth in that too.

Then she opened her arms to me. We hugged. It was a good hug. A hug that will stay with me for a very long time.

We can’t let our leaders continue to cultivate hate and distrust between neighbors, friends and family. We can’t allow ourselves to sever meaningful ties either. We have to find ways to come together in our communities for the good of us all. It won’t be easy. And I need to get out of my big blue bubble more often. That won’t be easy either.

Deborah Malmo, Plymouth