If Terry Emmert follows through on his threat to interrupt the Springwater Trail at the Eastmoreland Racquet Club ["Losing Out Connection," WW, Aug. 11, 2004], his Sellwood neighbors will lose one of their few remaining connections to the outside world. With the Bybee Bridge out of commission and TriMet buses barred from the Sellwood Bridge, non-driving folks like myself are apt to forget that there's a land beyond antiques and taverns. His apparent determination to fence me in is hardly neighborly. It may also prove to be bad business.

As the owner of a local housing development, Emmert ought to understand the Springwater Trail's addition to Sellwood's allure. His decision to fence off the hand that feeds him seems disingenuous to say the least. If I wanted to live in a gated community, I wouldn't have dropped anchor in Sellwood. I love my neighborhood; I just need to get out every once in a while. Please, Mr. Emmert, don't fence me in.

Matthew Hein
Southeast Spokane Street

BIKES, NOT BLOCKADES

We at the Bicycle Transportation Alliance are dismayed that an important connecting route to the Springwater Corridor is being closed by a private property owner ("Losing Our Connection," WW, Aug. 11, 2004). More and more Portlanders are biking for fun, exercise and transportation. In fact, local cyclists tell us that the Springwater Corridor is hands-down their favorite place to ride a bike in Portland. That's especially true now that the Esplanade and the OMSI/Sellwood trail have given residents access to the east bank of the Willamette River.

Improvements already in progress will extend the Springwater Corridor west across McLoughlin Boulevard. However, severing access to the trail hurts all of us. It's especially bad for children and families, who might not be comfortable taking the proposed on-road detour. I urge city staff and the property owner to find a better solution than closing the path.

Jessica Roberts
Metro-area Advocate, Bicycle Transportation Alliance

UNAMERICAN APPAREL?

In last week's Murmurs column, you mentioned the arrival of American Apparel, which you labeled a "guiltless" brand. The sweatshop-free moniker may be deserved, but the company is not completely pro-labor. The Comment column of the July issue of The Nation reported that when workers at American Apparel attempted to unionize last year, the company initiated such a vicious intimidation campaign that the National Labor Relations Board forced it to sign an agreement to refrain from future anti-union practices.

One can hope that the success of the company will allow it to live up to the "guiltless" reputation in the future, by promoting the labor rights of the very workers that drive its business.

Ed Reed
Southwest 14th Avenue