Proposed Minonk nature trail revisited

October 01, 2007

First, a year ago Section Six, in which the nature trail would be located, was being considered as a site for a raceway. Since then the development agreement with the raceway promoters has expired which means that the land in Section Six is now available for other development purposes. This means that the City can negotiate directly with the owners of Section Six, Waste Management, to obtain the land that would be used as the nature trail.

Secondly, Waste Management has indicated that they are willing to let the City run some of its storm water into Section Six in an effort to relieve the flooding of sewer lines in many parts of the city. The logical place to run the storm water is along or under the nature trail out to a pond that is located at the end of the trail. Therefore, purchasing the land would serve the purpose of getting rid of city storm water.

While the whole of Section Six is being marketed to potential developers, there is no commercial marketability for the scrub land leading up to the Jumbo nor is there any commercial marketability for the Jumbo. But the land would make a great recreational area for the citizens of Minonk not only because of the nature trail but also because of the Jumbo itself. From the top of the Jumbo you can see 20 miles away and there is a superb vista of Minonk.

It seems to me that the City should be able to obtain the land at a very reasonable price since the land is of no use to Waste Management or any potential developer. I am certain that the citizens of Minonk would be willing to volunteer to help develop the land into a nature trail. All that needs to be done initially is to clear a path out the Jumbo and remove some of the brush and growth in and around the pond. In response to a comment received on this web site that was concerned over the use of the dump or landfill next to the Jumbo, Waste Management cannot legally sell the land containing the landfill as it is required by EPA law to be monitored and maintained by Waste Management. The landfill itself would not be part of the recreational area.

While Toluca was able to save its Jumbo and develop it into a recreational area for its residents and make it a drawing card for visitors, Minonk allowed the old Jumbo at the end of Oak Street to be stripped away and used as fill for the I-39 overpass. Now we have a second chance to maintain one of our legacies by developing the area around the new Jumbo north of Minonk. I urge the City to consider this possibility with the owners of Section Six.

Followup to crop dusting editorial

My veterinarian told me that it is possible that the spray from crop dusting could cause health problems in older animals and eventually lead to their premature death. He also said that he felt the high incidence of cancer was due to the increase use of chemicals in our fields. I can accept the death of my animals to old age but I will have a harder time accepting their death if it can be shown that it was hastened by the use of chemicals in our fields. The least that crop dusters and farmers can do is to alert residents ahead ot time so we can take our pets and get the heck out of town.

Web site comments

Finally, when you submit a comment, please try to be civil. The worse your grammar, the worse your spelling, the more you rant, the less viewers will respect or believe your comments.

To reply to this editorial please send your comments to Your letter will be published in the email section. Viewers are welcome to submit a guest editorial.

To Lisa: I really meant it as a joke although I can see now where someone could assume otherwise. I don't mind making fun of myself. I learned a long time ago not to take yourself too seriously.

Just a questtion Dave, was your last statement "I guess I was too emotional when I wrote that" used to be a humorous or mean spirited response to Here We Go Yet Again? When you don't hear how the tone was meant in comments you don't know for sure how it was intended.

To Grammarian: Ouch! You got me there. I am embarrassed. I guess I was too emotional when I wrote that.

To Here We Go: Is it not possible to be objective and emotional at the same time? We are not scientist. We are human beings with real fears. The negative blood tests indicates that the cat did not have other causes of death, therefore something else was the cause. It could have been old age or it could have been due to the spray zapping the nervous system which will not show up in a blood test. We will never know the answer but the negative blood test does not not discredit my premise.

Dave, your last sentence said, "The worst your grammar, the worst your spelling, the more you rant, the less viewers will respect or believe your comments." You should have said "worse" instead of "worst."

Dave, first, sorry for the loss of your cats. You said, "Most of the responses to the editorial on crop dusting agreed that crop dusting poses a hazard to those of us living in an agricultural area." Most of them? I challenge your statement. Regardless, what do such responses prove when came from a position of emotion rather than objectivity? Your elderly cats' deaths came sooner after Minonk's mosquito insecticide application, but you didn't mention that - again. The fact that one cat had a negative blood test two months after the "crop dusting" does more to discredit than support your premise. You should have had an autopsy performed if you wanted to make a convincing case.

Well, I disagree with you. I feel that if the current administration gives the go-ahead for the project, then it's better to have an organized plan of action first, instead of having a "wait-and-see" mentality. I'm not suggesting that the community be held "hostage" to potential vandalism, nor am I suggesting that your idea be ignored; I'm merely bringing up a point that vandalism has happened in the past, such as when the trees in town were maimed (these weren't buildings). I do feel that while the idea is in the planning stages it is smart to address security because it is more important to be proactive instead of reactive when dealing with vandalism. Addressing all issues from the start and having a plan of action in place is simply "being prepared," and would save major headaches down the road. That being said, I welcome (and would utilize) development in that area!

Reply to Chris: There would be no buildings to damage. The level of security would have to determined when the trail becomes a reality. However, I don't think a community should be held hostage to potential vandalism, else nothing would happen.

I'm not slamming your idea Dave, as I've seen nature trails in other communities that are quite wonderful;I'm sure there are many grants available to aid the city in developing this,but the idea of one in our community brings up some safety questions in my mind. First, given the level of vandalism that occurs in town already, do you have a realistic suggestion on how the area should be policed?(would there be a road built for squad cars?)Secondly, would this trail be closed at dusk, and how would this be enforced? I ask because I sure would hate to see hard work be destroyed or become the new hangout for troublemakers.

To Garbage dumb: Perhaps you didn't notice that the editorial indicated that the landfill will not be part of the nature trail.

To Free Speech: Every resposible media outlet puts limits on what they print to protect the integrity of the media. Free speech is putting your name behind your comments. Submitting anonymous comments that slander others is not free speech, it is taking cheap shots. I will not be a part of it and I will not be losing any money if you decide to withhold your comments.

I think making a recreational area out near the jumbo would be great, I lived in Minonk years ago and when my families came to visit, we always had to take a peek at the jumbo located right there on the edge of town. Part of Minonk's history.. a great place to plant wildflowers and a bird sanctuary would be neat too.. I hope some volunteer's take on this worthy project. Great idea Dave!

Why would you want to make a nature trail on top of a garbage dump, plus of all the waste that was supposedly dump down the mine shaft why would the city want that risk if the EPA ever comes back and fines the owner of the land.

In my own opinion why would you put the comment box out here and then put parameters around what people say or type. Basically you will only submit comments based on what you as editor of the site wants to see. Just get rid of comments section.