Smokers’ rights HEN WILL smokers be given their rights? Since the City of Vancouver instituted its no-smoking-in-the-workplace bylaw Dec. 1, it will be only a matter of time before non-smoking radicals will rally to ban smoking in our own North Shore workplaces. Everybody knows that smoking is not good for you. Most people agree that second-hand smoke is a health hazard. And nobody wants to pay increasing health care premiums to treat diseases directly or indirectly caused by tobacco smoking. Yet smoking by 25-30% of the population persists. Non-smokers’ rights have been well documented. They have fought long and hard to protect their health from somebody eise’s toxic fumes. In response, res- taurants have created non-smoking sections, places of public business have banned smoking. Recently, Air Canada instituted non-smoking flights. It's about time — non-smokers have rights. Unfortunately, the non-smokers’ crusading zeal — in the form of the Vancouver bylaw and similar private business policies — has gone too far. When was it written into law that the smokers’ 25-30% have no rights? Certainly they have no right to force their cigs- rette smoke into somebody else’s air space. Never- theless, if they choose to smoke, they should be able to smoke. Blanket elimination of a smoker’s right to partake in the practice is surely barbaric. Non-smokers have made their point. ‘Legislated prohibition is the result. The civilized solution lies in compromise...like enormous air purifiers on every desk. EVIDENCE ‘CURCUMSTANTIAL’ Reader siams for Icela. . ‘WEDNESDAY . FRIDAY 1139 Lonsdale Ave. North Vancouver, B.C. V7M 2H4 SUNDAY 57,656 taveraqe Wednesday Friday & Sunday) if deg Tats oad activities Dear Editor: I am near dying from curiosity to learn how many North Vancouver residents (who have in the past) will continue to financially support British Columbia’s most current vigilante-like terrorist group. Mr. Paul Watson, the obvious dictatorial leader of Vancouver's Sea Shepherd, will, of course, self- righteously cry foul for comparing him and his politi- cal pressure environmental protection group to the foregoing; apples and oranges is what J predict he will say. Let’s take a look at that. Question — Who gave Mr. Watson and Sea Shep- herd the legal authority to act as judge, jury and ex- ecutioner on their allegations that Iceland is acting il- legally by their state-sanctioned taking and scientific study of whales? Paul Watson claims that Iceland is illegally hunting whales and selling carcass parts to Japan. Watson claims that the International Whaling Commission’s moratorium on whaling (which he claims has a ‘loophole’ for scientific study of whales) includes no prosecuting authority for alleged violations of that in- ternational agreement. Now we have the guts of Watson's incredible ra- tionale for his self-appointment as policeman, pro- secutor, judge, jury and executioner of his claims against a sovereign free state. I ask North Vancouver contributors to Sea Shep- herd to compare Watson’s unilateral claims and ac- tions to witch hunting and persecution, untried horse-thief hanging, mindless book burning and ra- tionalizing arguments against the death penalty. Simply put, Watson and Iceland have a different perspective of Iceland’s whaling activities, the public evidence against Iceland is circumstantial, they philo- sophically differ on the legality and viability of whale hunting and Watson has generated his own rationale and justification of a crime for which he claims freedom from prosecution and possible payment. Mr. Watson has dared the entire world to challenge and hold him accountable. Well, 1 dare Mr. Paul Watson of Sea Shepherd to present himself to Iceland’s democratic government and independent judiciary for adjudication of his allegations and ac- tions. Mr. Paul Watson and Sea Shepherd have all the commonalities required to directly compare them to history’s other self-righteous, self-appointed terrorist hypocrites. They too are rationalizing cowards. So much for the man and the organization some North Vancouver residents financially support. L. Greg Richmond North Vancouver Hunter’s Apathy leads response informed Dear Editor: To those who cherish free to anarchy Even the apathetic, denied free speech unless totally speech the Zundel and Keegstra cases are red light warnings. Why do you think Zundel wore convict’s clothes with Think emblazoned on his cap at the appeal hearings? It was no: for the sake of comedy or theatrics as the liberal newspa- pers would have you believe. Dear Editor: It was fortunate that your paper had the benefit of Bob Hunter’s informed and intelligent response to Paul Watson’s recent activities, as opposed to the simplistic but socially safe tone of your editorial on the subject. ian Rowles West Vancouver monitored and oppressed, will eventually turn on those trying to muzzle their mouths. To be apathetic while free speech is being destroyed is to invite anarchy down the road. Barry Wray Vancouver Publisher: Editor-in-Chief Managing Editor Advertising Director Peter Speck Display Advertising 980-0511 . Noel Wright Classitied Advertising 986-6222 Newsroom 935-2131 . Distdbution 986-1337 Barrett Fisher Subscriptions 986-1337 . Linda Stewart North Shore News, founded. 14,4 4% 40 independent svuttan newspaper and quathed under Schedule IF Paragraph I of the Al pablened Say Prday ared Sunday by Norn Shoe Free Press Lid and dstirbuled fo every Boor on shes Sand Ola AON Humber WAS Substnphons Norn and West Vancouert $25 per year Mauing rates, on tenguast Sua ate ARICUIn tril ae CANO! aCCEpt responsdality for unscdicded Malenal mcludkng Manuscripts TEL ANGT be Aceonpateed by a stamped addiessed envelope on"s aoa Entire contents © 1986 North Shore Free Press Ltd. All nights reserved. WATSON’S CONVICTION ADMIRABLE, Dear Editor: Wildlife conservation is a problem we have been trying to solve over the years that doesn’t seem to have an answer. There are valid points of view from both sides. : No one wants to see any wildlife exterminated. I have to admire Paul Watson and his group for the way they have stuck their necks out to back up their convictions. Concerning whales: These giant mammals consume enormous amounts of food whether it be fish, plankton or some other food from the sea. Half of the world depends almost entirely.on a diet of fish or seafood of some description. If the whale population were allowed to increase without being thinned out every five years or so, within a period of a few years, fishing for a living would be question of survival for millions of eople. P When we make universal Jaws prohibiting whaling, they should be en- forced with severe penalties to the countries violating them who, in turn, will prosecute the company responsible. Fish and seafood are more im- portant to humanity than whales. Concerning seals: Again, if they were allowed to breed unhampered, the fish supply in their hunting area would soon diminish. I have no objec- tion to people making a living seal hunting as long as it is done humanely and instantly. Concerning wolves: You can’t blame a farmer or rancher for getting mad when he comes out in the morning and finds 20 of his sheep or six of his cattle slaughtered. When the wolf population gets to a point where there is a shortage of their natural prey, they come down and kill domestic animals. I think a system could be worked out whereby a bounty could be paid for each wolf killed. If the government allowed tanneries in the wolf- infested areas to pay hunters $10 for each wolf hide they received from the hunter, they would keep the hide and sell it and be reimbursed the $10 by the government. The wolves must be shot, no traps or poison. Quotas could be set up with the tanneries and, when it is reached, no more hun- ting until the next open season. Concerning pollution: This is something we have to speed up our effort to contro! on land, sea and in the air, before it, too, gets to the point of no return. This also reflects on the world food supply. J.H. Caoley West Vancouver