Keep DST, but make it a shorter span
Re: “Standard or daylight saving time? Let voters decide,” April 3 commentary
Adjusting to the time change isn’t so much about the lost and gained hour of sleep on the dates that the clocks are moved as it is about acclimating to the lost hour of morning light in the spring and the lost hour of evening light in the fall. This is frustrating to some and unhealthy for others. While the obvious solution would be to no longer make the change, agreeing to which time to stay on might be easier said than done — even with a vote. There are as many pros as cons for both times.
Enter a compromise. If we wait until late April to go on daylight saving time ( DST), the shock won’t be as bad. By then we’ve naturally gained enough morning light to avoid another full hour of darkness. It’s the same thing if we go off DST in early October. There will still be enough evening light that we won’t plunge into total darkness.
I’m old enough to remember Colorado using all of these scenarios ( including no change at all). The shorter duration of DST was the best.
Pat Scott, Denver
After reading Krista Kafer’s opinion, I believe we need a third option, not just daylight saving or standard time year- round.
I remember back in the 1970s, daylight saving time ( DST) didn’t start till last Sunday in April and there was little complaint about waking up in the dark like there is now with the change in early
March.
I think many people enjoy the late sunsets in summer with DST, and very few people would like the sunrise so delayed. Hopefully our leaders and voters will get us back to an April start date for DST.
Charles Rau, Fraser