OCR Interpretation

The East Hampton Star. (East Hampton, N.Y.) 1885-current, December 29, 1977, Image 12

Image and text provided by East Hampton Library

Persistent link: http://nyshistoricnewspapers.org/lccn/sn83030960/1977-12-29/ed-1/seq-12/

Thumbnail for 12
II—TWO THE EAST HAMPTON STAR, EAST HAMPTON, N.Y., DECEMBER 29, 1977 • to the Editor Bah! Humbug! Wayne, N. J. December 20,1977 Mr. Everett Rattray Editor East Hampton Star Dear Mr. Rattray, As a new part time resident of East Hampton and subscriber to your paper may I compliment you on publishing a lively and informative newspaper. I cannot resist commenting on Mr. Goldowsky’s column in the Dec. 15 issue. I congratulate him for his creative suggestions on home made Christmas gifts. He seems perturbed, perhaps an­ noyed, by the emphasis of the Christ­ mas holiday rather than other un­ named holidays that occur at this time of the year; and implies that Christ­ mas’s significant meaning to our so­ ciety is its commercial aspects. Surely he is aware that most Christians and many non-Christians look upon the birth of Christ (exact date not historically determined) as the most significant event in the last 2000 years. In spite of the commercial exterior painted by Mr. Goldowsky’s article, the true joy for most people is the renewal of our higher human instincts of goodwill towards men and charity to our less fortunate brethren. Bah! Humbug, Mr. Goldowsky; let’s get with the spirit and true meaning of the season. Very Truly, EDWARD M. DONOVAN Free Firewood East Hampton December 19,1977 Editor, East Hampton Star Dear Sir: Cut firewood in bundles of 30 pieces per vehicle will be available to resi­ dents at the Town of East Hampton Landfill Site at Bull Path starting on Wednesday, Dec. 28. Under the supervision of the Landfill personnel on duty and when a supply of clean burnable wood exists, this policy shall continue on Wednesdays only. In addition, residents may cut and remove themselves wood that is stock­ piled in designated areas at this site. Under the direction of landfill em­ ployes, and again when supplies are available. The labor personnel for this program of attempting to provide wood for home heating purposes is part of a special project “Recycling” through the Comprehensive Employment Training Act. Very truly yours, LARRY CANTWELL Councilman Nowhere To Fish The Bronx Dear Editor of the East Hampton Star, I can’t wait each week for your great paper to come. I love your fishing column written by Susan Pollack. She knows her fish. I have been going to Montauk since 1948. I go for six weeks in summer. What I want to know is where all tax money goes when a person rents a cottage. Why can’t Montauk build a few piers on bay side and, just like Jones Beach, charge a fee and have a NOTICE OF ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION SUBJECT TO PERMISSIVE REFERENDUM Notice is hereby given that the Board of Trustees of the Incorporated Village of East Hampton, New York, at a Special Meeting thereof held on the 13th day of December, 1977, duly adopted a resolution, subject to a permissive referendum an abstract of which resolution is as follows: Whether the Village should issue serial bonds in the total amount of $185,000.00 with a maturity date of 20 years from the date of issue to finance the construction of a Highway Garage at Accabonac Highway and Jenny’s Path, in the Town of East Hampton. Dated: December 13,1977 By Order of the Board of Trustees Inc. Village of East Hampton DONALD M. HALSEY Clerk-Treasurer comfort station. Montauk is a joke if you want to fish. We have Town dock loaded with trawlers and can’t even drop line. Everybody can’t go on a boat. Nobody thinks about young families with young children. In years to come they will be future fishermen. If you know of a pier for fishing between Sag Harbor and Montauk please let me know. Yours truly, THOMAS J. RYAN P.S. Just what is whitebait? Is it a smelt or a large spearing? Thank you. Boston Tea Party East Hampton December 24,1977 Editor, The Star: The “law” is a fragile concept. It requires that the vast majority of citizenry obey in order for it to function. Nowhere is this more evident than in the cavalier way our judicial system works. It persists in social experiments on the law abiding by releasing killers and rapists to prey again. There is little fear of apprehension or real punishment. It is the hope and prayer of the constabulary, the courts and government that the great major­ ity continue to obey. James Madison in Federalist paper Number 46 spoke of Americans defend­ ing their rights against arbitrary power and Federal law: “Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity to the long train of insidious measures . . .” Madison was concerned with too powerful a Federal government. Today we must also concern ourselves with too powerful a State government. The Long Island State Park and Recreation Commission chaired by Daniel T. Sweeney and managed by John G. Sheridan have taken 1,364 acres from the Nature Conservancy and stamped their brand of “law” on its use. This includes “No Fishing,” “No Swimming,” “No Seining,” “No Fires,” “No Vehicles,” “No Hunting,” “No Trespassing,” and no thought of the traditional access enjoyed by commer­ cial fishermen for 350 years! Adding salt to the wound is State Senator Bernard Smith, whose bill S5704 would give such broad powers of rule-making to the Commissioner of Environmental Conservation that it virtually assures the destruction of fishing rights. If these autocrats persist in their attempts to erode our heritage and despoil our rights, let them prepare for a modern-day Boston Tea Party that will make the original look like a church social. Long Island State Park Commission orders sand dumped across access points. Who is to prevent this same sand being dumped on the Commis­ sion’s office? Are these law-makers prepared to engage the wrath of those who will no longer abide the “Law?” Are there enough peace officers, State Troopers or National Guard to ensure that they may promulgate their encroachments unabated? Do they suppose that the “law” which they use as a weapon to destroy our heritage will be respected by free people that intend to live out their destiny according to legitimate time honored traditions? Join us on Jan. 9th, 7:30 P.M. at the East Hampton High School on Long Lane, East Hampton for a public meeting to discuss your rights. Sincerely, GERALD PREISER Clamshell Tower The Mountaintop Circa The Baymen Editor, The Star Dear Brother: The East Hampton Town Baymen’s Association was organized, in 1957, by a number of baymen of Republican proclivities in politics and is essentially a political organization, Republican to the backbone and there is no getting away from this or any desire to get away from it. A question has arisen: What manner of men may these baymen be? Although the baymen give way to the cup which inebriates, they are not drunkards. The are “convivialists,” as they call themselves, but whether convivialists or bon vivants, there is no doubt that, in due time, their fondness for looking on “the wine when it is red” will lower their standing in the social scale, wreck their love life, and slacken their brain activity. That the baymen are tightwads there is no question. Once a fellow in need walked in a Baymen’s meeting and solicited a dime, saying he had tramped the streets in search of work until he was played out. The Baymen gave him the ten cents. Contrary to the general belief, a bayman is not a great lover; for when the rain descends incessantly and the shades are down and his paramour sings the deathless song of “Matinee,” his eyes are closing in slumber. To the baymen, the Republican Party owes much, so much so that as an act of gratitude, the Republican Party will erect a tower of 236 feet in height as a memorial. The tower to be constructed of clamshells and, of course, mortar, which will be enriched with a cornice and entablature supported with carya­ tides standing on pedestals. In the spring of 1978, Perry Duryea, himself, will lay the cornerstone, with the usual ceremonies and amid much speechmaking and rejoicing. The Lone Defender ALEX F. DZIEMAN Private Grounds New Preston, Conn. December 21, 1977 Editor, East Hampton Star Dear Sir: You published a letter from me penned while visiting East Hampton last summer. It tried to add a measure of perspective to the controversy then raging over a proposal from a Dr. R. Valenti to construct a fish hatchery on Gardiner’s Bay. That letter enraged Mr. Albert Leo and incited him to literary heights above his head. Mr. Leo was particularly distressed by my conclusion that baymen in Long Island Towns rely on some form of welfare for part of their annual support. Per Mr. Leo, that’s not the case in East Hampton. His statements notwithstanding, I wonder how many members of the East Hampton Bay- men’s Association are drawing unem­ ployment benefits this winter. You published a second letter of mine in August. The key point made therein is that Long Island Towns will never enjoy any save a minor fraction of shellfish aquaculture’s potential until they lease some of the bottom now public to private operators; that aqua­ culture on public bottom is and will remain a tax-subsidized farce; a glori­ fied Easter egg hunt. I see by a scrap of the Star I chanced upon in a Virginia packing house that the brawl over aquaculture still rages in your Town. Shortly after leaving the packing A F ull Cord G. M. Sheridan Deputy Commissioner, Suffolk Department of Consumer Affairs If you have a fireplace, you know what a pleasure a log fire can be on a cold winter’s night. You also know what a headache buying firewood can be. The terms are confusing — “face cord,” “stack,” “cordwood” — it can be very difficult to know exactly what you’re getting. It’s even harder to know if you’re getting what you paid for. A new law that takes effect on February 7 will make buying firewood much simpler and easier to understand. Firewood will only be sold one way — by the cord or a fractional part of a cord. A cord is the amount of wood contained in a space of 128 cubic feet — roughly a stack eight feet long by four feet wide by four feet high. The wood must be stacked in a line or row with the pieces parallel to each other. That will be the only measure allowed — no more “stacks” or “face cords.” You won’t even be able to buy it by the piece or bundle — just cords — half cords — quarter cords — that’s it. The term “cordwood” never did mean anything. A cord is a unit of measure — not a kind of tree. Consumers may think that when this law goes into effect, the price of wood has suddenly doubled. A cord will probably cost around $120. That’s really what it costs now. Cords of wood maybe currently advertised at $60, but what’s delivered is probably not a cord. It’s more than likely an eight foot stack. Instead of being four feet wide it’s probably one log length wide — about 16”—approximately one third of a cord. Using one unit of measure means that consumers will be able to shop around for the best price. It’s impos­ sible now to compare a stack to a face cord. Making sure you get what you pay for will be easier, too. All you’ll have to do is measure the stack; get a detailed receipt. If you have any questions about this new law, please call the Department of Con­ sumer Affairs. We want to make sure that you get what you pay for. A Better Way East Hampton December 23,1977 Everett Rattray The Star Dear Mr. Rattray: Rather than talking about pedestrian malls, demolishing historic houses for parking lots, and using one of the most beautiful properties in the Village for a police station, Post Office, Village Hall, etc., with the concomitant traffic congestion, why doesn’t the Village Board have the Reutershan parking lot drained so that dozens of parking places aren’t lost every time there’s a heavy rain? And wasn’t there a better way to spend $40,272 of taxpayers’ money than to employ a Philadelphia con­ sultant and his planning firm to tell us how to turn our Village into something else? Merry Christmas! Sincerely, HELEN HULL JACOBS Movie Time East Hampton December 27,1977 Editor, East Hampton Star Dear Sir: Have you ever tried to find out the starting time of a movie you’d like to see at the East Hampton Cinema One or Two or Three? There’s just got to be a better way. If you’re lucky enough to be near the theater ahead of time, you can find the performance schedule posted at the box office. Otherwise, you might play it by ear: just show up around seven or nine when you figure a show ought to be starting. More often than not you find that you’ve guessed wrong. Don’t bother looking in your own newspaper. United Artists advertise what movies are play­ ing this week but not when. And if you try telephoning the box office at any plausible hour of the day, you are MANAGEMENT OF PUBLIC OYSTER GROUNDS Licenses and Gears All oyster grounds within the Baylor Survey have been designated public grounds, from which any citizen of Virginia who pays a license fee of $5,25 * may remove oysters in season by hand or with ordinary tongs. A license for operating patent tongs costs $15.75*, and such tongs may be used on public rocks only in designated areas and depths as prescribed by law. Hand dredges and scrapes may be used legally on designated rocks in Chesapeake Bay and Tangier Sound when they are specifically au­ thorized by the Commission of Marine Resources, but otherwise these may not be used on public rocks. Relationship Between Public and Private Production of Oysters The public rocks (210,000 acres) arc the best bottoms in the state for growing oysters. These may not be leased to individuals or corpora­ tions for cultivation. They supply most of the seed oysters required by private planters, but public grounds are not as productive of market oysters as are those privately managed. Through private enterprise,^ planters have made sub-marginal oyster grounds more productive than! public grounds. The relative production and value of market oysters on J public and private grounds from 1956 through 1966 is presented in I the table below. Reductions in production of oysters in recent years Virginia Oyster Production 1956-66 ^ P u b l i c g r o u n d s (2 1 0 , 0 0 0 a c r e s ) 4 V.,0<1 P r i v a t e g r o u n d s (1 3 4 , 4 9 2 a c r e s ) y e a r B u s h e l s * * V a l u e B u s h e l s V a l u e 1956 924,832 $1,980,822 3,653,467 $ 7,920,035 1957 742,762 1,668,321 3,725,382 8,178,548 1958 960,372 2,622,158 4,735,041 11,504,264 1959 972,446 2,480.123 4,231,717 10,894.175 1960 904,799 2.841,400 2,755,032 8,041,546 1961 734,873 2,646,523 3,180,120 1 1,285,584 1962 337,662 1,184,104 2,476,915 8,589,765 1963 459.823 1,557.906 2.039,346 6,552.283 1964 729,778 2,411.099 2,550,398 7,933,985 1965 1.035,736 3,499,884 1,354,733 6,791,369 1966*** 963.1011— 3,159,169 1,087,320 3,334,813 * A ll lic e n s e f & U S E s t a b l i s h e d b y la w a n d \ m a / ^ t h a J g e d by th e G e n e r a l house, I chanced across a publication of the Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences, “Let’s Be Oyster Farmers.” Enclosed is a photostat of page 23 showing a table of oyster production from public and private grounds for the 11-year span 1956-66. The key sentence in the text above the table reads, “Through private enterprise, planters have made sub­ marginal oyster grounds more produc­ tive than public grounds.” Virginia had total oyster bottom of 344,492 acres during this period with only 39 per cent being private grounds. Yet these private grounds produced 31.8 million bushels during these 11 years while the public bottom yielded only 8.8 million bushels. And on a per-acre basis, the private grounds were 5.7 times as productive. These numbers will doubtless re­ mind some readers of the productivity of Russia’s state farm collectives vs. the productivity of private, peasant plots. Sincerely, R. R. RICHARDSON virtually guaranteed a busy signal. For reasons best known to UA’s accountants, all three of their East Hampton houses must share a single trunk line. If you can ever get through to it (best bet: before breakfast) you are treated to a 70-second recording of everything anybody might want to know about all three movies—when all you want to know is what time one movie goes on. No wonder 324-0448 is perpetually tied up. Some rudimentary solutions: One, extend the 324-0448 number to several trunk lines. Two, do as the Internal Revenue Service does—keep one num­ ber but put incoming callers on automatic wait list with some tinkling cocktail piano to pacify them. Three, assign separate phone numbers to each of the three cinemas. Four, include a full list of performance times in the weekly UA ad in all local papers. Five—your own suggestion? How much would any of this cost UA? The question, of course, is how much less would it cost than the money they’re losing every week from movie­ goers who’d rather switch plans than fight their telephone system? Sincerely yours, SUSAN M. SEIDMAN Adult Responsibility New York December 22,1977 Everett T. Rattray The East Hampton Star Dear Mr. Rattray, Guild Hall's Saturday evening pro­ grams of film classics has been a boon to the community, especially in the winter when entertainment is limited essentially to indoor activities. I was especially looking forward to seeing “David Copperfield” and found it to be a splendid film and a most rewarding experience. What struck me however, as a bleak commentary of our times was that Guild Hall was only half-filled and then primarily by adults. Where were the children of our community? Didn’t the English teachers of our local grade and high schools urge them to see this masterpiece? What about the parents? Where was their sense of responsi­ bility? When movie houses are packed for such low common denominator films as “One-On-One,” “Flesh Gordon,” and “Young Dracula,\ there is something drastically wrong with our society which seems to reflect a failure in adult responsibility to provide the younger generation with proper guidance to what is best. Sincerely yours, ROBERT ELKON Hour In The Kennel East Hampton December 26,1977 Everett Rattray The Star Dear Everett, A few weeks ago I spent an hour in the kennel section of the East Hampton Animal Hospital where I’d gone to see a dog up for adoption through the Animal Rescue Fund. (Most of the cats and dogs in the cages were there under the aegis of ARF). In many respects the hour was extraordinary — for me. I listened to Helena Curtis and Sony Schotland (two of ARF’s most consistently active volunteers. Sony is also a former president) and Florence Recktenwald (diligent volunteer too) discuss each animal there. It was not enough that they check on their physical well-being. Or that they were trying to find homes for each. They gave their time and their attention too to the total well-being of each animal. High on the list was maintaining each animal’s own sense of dignity and worth. And to achieve that end, it meant they would (or they might) have to extend themselves even further. For example . . . I’ll take home this cat so she can get accustomed to living with people . . . let’s give this old dog more time. He still has a lot of love to give . . . I think this dog had better stay here. He is too terrified to send to the kennels. We can work with him here . . . That dog is very depressed. We’ll have to pay more individual attention to him . . . If you take this dog and I take that one, then we can bring in so-and-so who’s so desperate on the waiting list . . . what about this timid cat . . . etc. etc. etc. It cannot be easy to be active in ARF. It is easiest to give a donation. It is easier to just adopt a dog and go home than have to face the daily involvement with its attendant problems, unpleas­ ant tasks and heartaches. (There are many of all three). ARF needs more active volunteers. Very few are doing everything — as usual. Their task could be made easier somewhat if we were to educate ourselves and our young on the responsibilities and the privilege of owning an animal and on the respect that we should accord any animal whom we pass on the street or know for a minute. So often it seems that a chance to be cruel is easier to pursue than one to be warm (or even indifferent). We know ARF is here. We know it is active — but we don’t know to what extent or by whom. And I personally would like to acknowledge my deep respect for Helena and Sony and Florence in their work. It is truly more than just volunteer work and I believe we are all indebted to them partic­ ularly and to ARF for taking on other people’s irresponsibilities and abandon­ ments which become the Town’s prob­ lem otherwise. Cordially, NANCY HYDEN WOODWARD P.S. ARF’s powers of persuasion are such that one can walk in looking for a small, active young dog of any colour and leave with an 11-year-old with a limp and a decided penchant for cookies in the morning, cookies at night and a “whose food can I eat now?” attitude in general! 16-2

xml | txt