Opinion » Letters to the Editor

Letters to the Editor for the week of March 22nd, 2012

Our orthopaedic future is in good hands


The fact that Dr. McConkey is retiring is wonderful news for him and his family but not the dire news for Whistler residents your recent article by John French described (Pique, March 15, 2012). Dr. Alexandra Brooks-Hill has worked under Dr. McConkey for more than five years and is now well established here in Whistler. She is a fine orthopaedic surgeon very capable of filling the big shoes now at the gate. She is young, well trained, much admired by her colleagues and has established her practice here in our town. We are fortunate to have her here in Whistler. There is obviously an urgent need for a succession plan and I hope Dr. Brooks-Hill plays a major role in whatever the powers to be come up with.

Perhaps you should also know that she was literally raised here in Whistler, is now married to a Blackcomb pro patroller, built a home in Whistler and last summer had a baby. Now that's commitment. The fact that she is on maternity leave is hardly important in the overall scheme of things. Dr. Brooks-Hill recruited Dr. Sally Clark to cover her practice for this period and Dr. Clark has proven to be an excellent replacement for this short assignment. I wonder if the writer would have even brought this issue up if Dr. Brooks-Hill were a male taking paternity leave rather than female.

Five years ago my wife fell down Jersey Cream Wall and tore her ACL. She will ski 65 days this year only because of the surgery performed by Dr. Brooks-Hill. We will be forever grateful. This town should be thankful she has decided to practice medicine here and live here. Dr. McConkey's long-time service to Whistler has to be greatly admired and even celebrated by a grateful community.

Now is the time for future planning and funding to assure excellent orthopaedic services continue to be available to Whistlerites and Whistler guests.

David and Maryl Appleton


Fanning the fumes

Let me get this straight because seeing it in writing may make more sense to me.

There was an asphalt plant operating quietly in the Cheakamus area producing the asphalt our entire town, including the Valley Trail, is paved with. Then one day the town decides to build affordable housing for some of its residents, and a lucky few were allowed to purchase them with full knowledge of the plant's existence, so much so that it is even highlighted in bold on their purchase contracts.

Then council tells would be residents it will force the plant to move. It's decided in court the plant has not done anything wrong and doesn't have to move, and then the whole town is on the hook for the legal bills. Finally, the plant owner has to open up the newspaper every week and be vilified for continuing to operate his successful business as he has done for years, and now people are suggesting running him out of town?