The letter to the Editor, "For People, Not Animals" (Times Valley Edition Letters, Feb. 14), while cute, is full of errors and inconsistencies.
First, the writer referred to the tiny church, then in the next paragraph described it as a "600-seat church" This is not tiny.
We were told by the church originally that it would be a 200-member, small community church. This blows the intolerance argument.
But just because we are tolerant doesn't mean we want someone to bulldoze this four-acre ranch that has historical meaning for us, together with its 170 trees and substitute three acres of cement. And speaking of intolerance, why should this church be "exclusively Middle Eastern" as the writer says. Haven't churches traditionally accepted everyone?
The writer of the letter was not well-informed regarding the central argument of the proponents of monument status for the ranch. This ranch is historically significant because it is the last intact ranch in this area exemplifying that golden Western era of Northridge in the 1930s and '40s, which began the development of the north Valley.
The cattle production issue arose at the suggestion of the commission. It was thought that it would be historically significant if it could be shown that the Herefords bred at this ranch contributed to a significant genetic improvement in American Hereford stock. It was not practical for us to try to pursue this, and it has never been our reason for believing that the ranch deserves to be saved.
ANNE HEIDSIEK, Northridge