Featured News Opinion

San Luis Obispo City Council puts profits above habitat

Let’s stop wasting our votes
January 11, 2019

Richard Schmidt

OPINION by RICHARD SCHMIDT

Terracide. Land killing. Earth homicide. Solely probably the most oblivious would deny that’s the crime we’re committing.

To listen to our SLO City Council – all self-proclaimed environmentalists — inform this story, environmentalism’s all about greenhouse gases and local weather change they usually’re going to cease that in its tracks! All by themselves. Regardless of that final yr U.S. carbon emissions went up, not down.

But there’s a lot extra – terracides the council truly has the facility to cease, however which as an alternative they promote and allow to occur at an alarmingly accelerated tempo.

Proper at vacation time, two bulletins, timed so few would observe them, spotlighted the town’s ongoing terracide.

The primary was the Tribune’s puff piece – do they do information over there anymore or is all of it simply PR? – that work is about to start on the “San Luis Ranch” land bloodbath.

I name it that as a result of that’s what it’s. One of the best topsoil on the planet, a 12-month rising local weather, and even in a drought-inflicted world an plentiful supply of irrigation water from a shallow aquifer that refills even in low-rain years. Preserved, this prime farmland might feed a big a part of the town’s individuals in perpetuity.

In some elements of the world nations go to warfare over management of such valuable soil. Right here we kill it as a result of “we need housing!” – though a lot of the “ranch” will probably be retail and workplace and parking tons, which we certainly don’t want – and since the town favors pursuit of builders’ revenue over earth sustainability.

There’s little of this high quality of food-producing soil left on the earth, so why are we nonchalant about murdering it?

Right here’s how this land homicide unfolds. Uncooked land is comparatively unstable and incapable of supporting buildings and streets. So it’s mechanically compacted, made onerous and tight. At that time, it’s agriculturally as productive as pavement. Its productiveness has been murdered.

This land floods, so buildings have to be raised above 100-year flood degree, on the idea nature is aware of to not exceed that magnitude flood. Buildings could possibly be on stilts or tall foundations, however the chosen technique is to bury the native topsoil underneath a number of ft of fill. Sometimes, this typically inert fill is imported, piled atop native topsoil and compacted, thus destroying any risk of future fertility if by means of some miracle improvement have been sometime eliminated and compaction undone. That is terracide eternally, and that kind of terracide has just lately taken place atop equally positive soil on Tank Farm, subsequent to Farm Provide, additionally courtesy of our metropolis’s allowing it.

At “San Luis Ranch,” there’s a extra grasping and full technique of terracide.

“San Luis Ranch” should depart a strip of “ag preserve” alongside the freeway, as required by the town’s Basic Plan. The Tribune’s fairly image of the event exhibits seemingly countless inexperienced fields within the foreground with some buildings within the background. The developer’s PR waxes poetic about natural farm-to-table viands for “ranch” residents, however that’s mere propaganda because the farmland can be owned by the town, which can decide its use – AFTER the developer removes many ft of topsoil from the “farmland” he’s leaving to the town to offer low cost fill on the land he’s cashing in on.

This was laid out earlier than the SLO City Council at its approval listening to, and never a peep of objection from any of them.

What’s going to be left in that gap after prime soil is eliminated? Will there nonetheless be farmable soil? No one requested.

Is it potential this “ag preserve” might be unfit for agriculture, natural or in any other case? I don’t know, however neither does the town. What we do know is it won’t have the fantastic topsoil we see there as we speak, the token preservation of which is the idea for requiring the protect.

Additional, it’s arduous to think about farming in a gap which will fill with water many months of the yr. Not solely does a pool of water imply no farming whereas water’s there, intermittent standing water modifications the character of soil for the more severe.

So terracide is overtaking the complete 130-acre parcel about half of which was to be “preserved.”

Our council has the facility to protect our final remnants of one of the best farmland on the earth, for the good thing about future generations, however they don’t. How can they declare to be environmentalists in the event that they don’t get – and care about — this easy reality?

The second vacation announcement was from the town itself. It said work was to start the day after Christmas on clear-cutting a whole lot of historic eucalyptus timber from “San Luis Ranch.” The announcement referred the general public’s inquiries to a employees member who had no concept the place the announcement had originated. So, this tree bloodbath, one other sort of terracide, is underway.

The breezy tone of the tree announcement is typical of the town’s terracider disinformation. “90% of the trees being removed are non-native species and the replacement trees will be native to the region,” we’re knowledgeable. This matches with the notions of armchair enviros that eucalyptus are evil exotics, that eradicating and changing them with nursery-grown “natives,” possible with non-local “native” genes, is all the time a great factor.

Which ignores vital information about these specific timber, probably the most telling of which is that they supply – via their peak and density – arguably the central coast’s most vital heron rookery. Additionally they present wintering grounds for threatened Monarch butterflies, who’re the topic of a lot concern about extinction and whose California numbers this yr have tumbled 86% under final yr’s perilously low inhabitants to shut to extinction. And the eucs are a serious buzzard roost, these carrion birds doing us main service by cleansing up messes which may go epidemic with out their assist.

Minimize all these timber, and different species endure. An essential secure and sophisticated organic system is immediately destroyed. Endlessly.

This too is a type of terracide. We aren’t alone on this earth, and harming our earthly companions means we unfold distress, demise and destruction amongst our earth-sharers for our personal egocentric comfort. We alone amongst species have such consciousness in addition to the brains to determine methods to keep away from hurt to the remainder of creation.

However in SLO we don’t. The town’s angle is habitat doesn’t matter if it stands in the best way of revenue, pleasure or comfort. “We don’t care,” may nicely be their motto.

This council has presided over many instances of “we don’t care.” At 71 Palomar, the town’s incompetent environmental evaluation of impacts from clearcutting a spectacular city forest alleged solely doves and sparrows lived in its timber. A half hour sidewalk survey by a neighbor discovered 21 species of songbirds, with the chance that was a serious undercount, plus hawk and owl nests and a buzzard roost. Confronted with this proof the town admitted their evaluation was defective, and promised to redo it. They didn’t, and by no means did a hen rely previous to slicing greater than 50 fantastic city timber. As an alternative, they doubled down on the adequacy of their unique incompetent documentation.

Since in each these examples large tree chopping was a improvement choice, not a improvement necessity, why does the town select terracide moderately than precaution and respect for nature?

The town apparently can’t assume straight even about issues it claims it stands for strongly, like decreasing greenhouse gases within the environment. There are two methods of doing that. One is decreasing emissions going into the environment, the opposite is sequestering carbon from the environment. Timber are excellent on the latter, and previous timber have a variety of carbon sequestered in them which is emitted into the environment when a tree is reduce and disposed of. But the town is hellbent on permitting slaughter of tons of upon lots of of previous timber, not simply in these two examples, however by basic coverage all through city. As for mitigating the town’s personal emissions by way of reforestation, a confirmed sequestration method, they’ve by no means even tried regardless of that being proposed so long as 30 years in the past.

Then – for an additional instance of the town’s “not getting” species oppression — there’s the night-hiking/biking fiasco. It began when some individuals from Santa Maria complained they couldn’t hike/bike in our pure reserves after darkish. They couldn’t do this for good cause: pure reserves, a.okay.a. “open space,” are usually not parks. They’re pure area owned by we, the individuals of SLO, not by out-of-towners or special-interest recreation teams, and by metropolis regulation, objective, and long-established coverage are close by locations the place nature is given area to be itself, to profit the crops and creatures native to the land and buffer them from human intrusion. “Passive recreation” like mountaineering is permitted solely to the extent it doesn’t intrude with pure processes and reserve inhabitants.

It’s well-known many creatures come out at nightfall and shortly after, and that these hours are important for his or her well-being, feeding, mating, and survival. Thus the ban on after-dark human presence in pure reserves, which is backed up by strong science. Till our present “enviro” council did a 180 and put damaging recreation forward of environmental safety.

Our present council opened San Luis Mountain Pure Reserve to winter night time mountaineering/biking regardless of each the regulation and the rationale for closure’s being made clear to them. The mayor waxed poetic about “listening to the people” whereas turning a deaf ear to half of them and overturning many years of excellent environmental follow, and self-styled enviro Aaron Gomez angrily demanded these towards night time use present him with all of the peer-reviewed scientific research supporting their place earlier than he would contemplate their “opinions” – regardless of having no such proof to help his personal opinion, which favored night time use.

One council member informed me permitting night time use was a matter of “social justice.” I’d all the time thought social justice referred to issues like doing proper by poor communities being poisoned by close by industrial air pollution, however in SLO it apparently describes relieving the oppression of privileged prosperous younger white individuals who can’t mountain bike wherever they need at night time.

So the council turned one in every of our key pure reserves into an after-dark Disneyland for a couple of self-centered “wreckCreationists,” and confirmed indifference to the well-being of species aside from ourselves.

A lot consideration is concentrated in enviro circles on extinctions – a type of terracide – probably coming from future local weather change, but a lot much less is concentrated on these we’re inflicting with our inconsiderate but avoidable actions. Why can we fear extra about issues we’re almost powerless to regulate, like international warming, than about issues simply inside our grasp, like defending native productiveness and habitats? Is it as a result of we’re such a egocentric species we can’t face denial of needs once they impinge upon the mere survival of others, together with our personal progeny?

What’s the level of tackling terracide resulting from local weather change if we concurrently commit terracides that would go away a climate-stable earth uninhabitable and too depleted to help future generations? I’d just like the City Council to ponder that and provide you with an evidence for its anti-environmentalism, or bear a change of coronary heart to cope with terracides beneath their direct management.

Humankind’s destruction of the earth that we rely upon has been happening for eons, however our technique of destruction at present have turn out to be so highly effective, and so pervasively engaged in, that we face a completely totally different degree of urgency to reassert management.

Lengthy, way back, George Perkins Marsh described such exercise as “breaking up the floor and wainscoting and doors and window frames of our dwelling, for fuel to warm our bodies and seethe our pottage.”

Marsh described as soon as lush and prolific previous world lands laid waste by human motion – for instance, deforestation resulting in erosion, flooding, desertification of productive land – however might by no means have imagined the size of routine terracide at this time, like our removing of hundreds of sq. miles of mountain tops, filling of adjoining valleys, toxification of soil and water, all to extract a little bit of coal to heat our pottage.

Nor might he have imagined the routine and deliberate destruction of our most fertile and fecund topsoils similar to we in SLO undertake every day within the identify of “economic development.”

The way forward for the earth is actually in our arms, and this isn’t within the abstraction of local weather change – it’s within the preservation of the bodily earth, its fertile present of feeding us, its provision of different types of life for our profit, pleasure and to take care of pure stability, and our recognition that their well-being underwrites our personal. Marsh pointed the best way to understanding the relatedness of issues in nature, however it was Barry Commoner in our personal time who put it most clearly: in nature all the things is said to the whole lot else. Make a multitude in a single place, and it reverberates in by way of the biosphere.

If we pursue solely a battle with greenhouse gases and let the remainder of earth slip away, we’ll deserve the human extinction that certainly follows.

Politically, this struggle should start with educated consciousness amongst our elected and employed public officers, with greater than rhetorical genuflection­­­ to a posh ecological environmentalism, and with the reincorporation of the phrase “no” into their decision-making vocabulary. Persevering with on our current course merely isn’t an choice – until our precise aim is terracide. I don’t assume they’ve ever put that to a well-liked vote, however I’ll wager in the event that they did, they’d get an enormous slap-down.

Architect Richard Schmidt, referred to as by the SLO Chamber of Commerce “the most radical environmentalist in the world,” thinks the SLO metropolis council and their employees have lots to study.

window.fbAsyncInit = perform()
FB.init(appId: ‘208566659035’, standing: true, cookie: true,
xfbml: true);
;
(perform()
var e = doc.createElement(‘script’); e.async = true;
e.src = doc.location.protocol +
‘//join.fb.internet/en_US/all.js’;
doc.getElementById(‘fb-root’).appendChild(e);
());