{"id":293,"date":"2025-03-10T10:30:44","date_gmt":"2025-03-10T11:30:44","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ezcpv.com\/?p=293"},"modified":"2025-03-20T11:37:06","modified_gmt":"2025-03-20T11:37:06","slug":"letters-helen-richardson-captured-the-sad-end-of-chico-basin-ranch","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/ezcpv.com\/index.php\/2025\/03\/10\/letters-helen-richardson-captured-the-sad-end-of-chico-basin-ranch\/","title":{"rendered":"Letters: Helen Richardson captured the sad end of Chico Basin Ranch"},"content":{"rendered":"

Helen Richardson is a Colorado Treasure<\/h4>\n

Re: “End of an era<\/a>,” March 2 news story<\/p>\n

Many thanks to The Denver Post and Helen Richardson for the article on the Phillips family’s departure from Chico Basin. I and countless other birders have visited Chico Basin over the years to explore this wonderful natural area, an experience made possible by Duke Phillips and his family.<\/p>\n

Many of us wrote to the State Land Board in support of his continued tenure of the property when the lease was up for renewal, but in the end, a competing bid won out, discounting 25 years of exemplary management. Shame on the State Land Board!<\/p>\n

Best of luck to the Phillips family in Wyoming.<\/p>\n

C. Greenman,\u00a0Lakewood<\/em><\/p>\n

I\u2019ve been a Denver Post subscriber for 39 years. For 32 of those years, Helen Richardson has been masterfully telling stories with her camera. Her photo essay of the ranching family leaving Chico Basin Ranch was special. Brava to Helen, and to The Post for making space for it.<\/p>\n

Laura Rosseisen, Wheat Ridge<\/em><\/p>\n

Trump is right. AP is not as trustworthy as we think it is.<\/h4>\n

Re: “Witness for America<\/a>,” March 2 commentary<\/p>\n

Megan Schrader takes umbrage with the Trump administration’s restrictions on the Associated Press, citing its history of bearing witness to major news stories. But it still maintains its credentials, with limitations only on the traveling press pool and smaller events.<\/p>\n

The AP’s executive editor, Julie Pace, claims, “Limiting our access to the Oval Office based on the content of AP’s speech not only severely impedes the public’s access to independent news, it plainly violates the First Amendment.” That’s laughable as it does neither. The Post suffers no shortage of copy or coverage regarding the White House despite AP’s restricted access.<\/p>\n

Were the information in the commentary the only evidence of the AP’s worthiness to be granted the privilege of unfettered access to the president, I’d side with the AP. But it isn’t and I don’t.<\/p>\n

The Gulf of America kerfuffle was merely a pukish attention-getter. The crux of Trump’s beef, I believe, is the perceived bias in everyday reporting. As an example, on page 14 of last Sunday’s Post, there’s a story with an AP byline on Trump’s first six weeks in office. \u00a0“…Trump has embarked on a dizzying teardown of the federal government… in an attempt to increase his own authority.<\/em>” That’s opinion, not fact. It could have just as easily read “to fulfill his campaign promise to his voters.” Who, what, when, and where would’ve sufficed? Why? is merely conjecture.<\/p>\n