HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/17/2017 Item 10, Krejsa
Christian, Kevin
From:Richard J. Krejsa <rkrejsa@calpoly.edu>
Sent:Monday, October
To:Harmon, Heidi; Pease, Andy; Gomez, Aaron; cchristian@slocity.org; Rivoire, Dan; E-
mail Council Website
Cc:Hill, Robert
Subject:RJK Comments on Item #10, City Council Meeting on 17 October 2017
Attachments:Some Thoughts on Mountains.docx
To the Mayor and City Council,
I wrote this Commentary (above) to commemorate the illegal scarring of Cerro San Luis by road-building crews
of Alex Madonna Construction Co. on the 4th of July weekend, 1975. Within 3 days, this so-called agricultural
road-building project was accomplished without SLO County permit. These illegal actions were the first major
wounds in the "skin" of San Luis Mountain and they became the surfaces upon which our major hiking trails
were constructed. Those primitive fast-built roads, however, were built over arroyos without the installation
of proper conduits and this has resulted in erosion problems and at least one major post-storm wash-
out failure on the Foothill side of the mountain. Had this event occurred on only one arroyo toward the NE,
the slide would have taken out the much of the neighborhood along La Entrada Ave!
Those fast-cut roads also have caused erosional effects that continue to this day. They also formed the basis
upon which modern mountain bike enthusiasts began constructing authorized and unauthorized trails in the
open space of Cerro San Luis.
In my "long-term" activist/public official/citizen/taxpayer view of SLO City government actions (48 years now
and counting...), I would contend that the City mountain bike trails building program, sponsored by the Parks
& Recreation Department, is causing significant wounds in the "skin" of Cerro San Luis. Furthermore, the
current night-hiking proposal, in my view, will constitute a continuous irritant to the already wounded living
skin of this mountain. Once allowed to grow, it will surely become another major wound.
That is one of the many reasons that I oppose not only night hiking and biking, but also the entire concept of
building more mountain biking trails in other Open Space Reserves within the City of San Luis Obispo.
I have credentials for supporting my opposition not only to night hiking and biking but for the whole idea of
allowing mountain bikes on city open space trails. Mountain biking can in no way or fashion be considered to
be "passive" recreation. Just look at some of the videos appearing on the Internet concerning mountain
biking, featuring (the incorrectly named) "Mt. Madonna" and "The Irish Hills".
In 1995-96, I served on the SelectionCommittee that announced, and selected for, the position of Natural
Resource Manager and also, some 5 years later, for the position of City Biologist. The whole concept of linking
the Natural Resource Manager with Open Space was based on the concept that Open Space was for
"the Creatures"! On the other hand, the Parks & Recreation Department was for people, our citizens. For the
entire time since that original hiring, that is why the Natural Resource Manager and staff was placed in the
City's Administrative Department: to keep it independent of the Parks and Recreation Department. To this
extent, I also oppose the fact that mountain bike trails should not be located in our Open Space Natural
Reserves. And, yet, they are being built, and also promoted there, by the Parks & Recreation Department.
1
As one of few original "environmental" activists still alive in this City, I feel it is my duty to call attention to
projects that do not meet the stated goals of a majority of City residents, or of General Plan, Land Use
Element, and EQTF goals. I began doing this in 1969 and, I guess, I'll probably continue doing this al long as I
am physically able. Below are some guideposts I have followed and supported over many years.
"The Majority of San Luis Obispo residents value the city's natural beauty, clean air, and open spaces as
the city's greatest strengths, and as the most important aspects of it highest quality of life."
--General Plan Residents' Opinion Survey, May 1988--
"We have the right to determine your community's destiny based on our community values...we direct our
elected representatives and civic employees \[e.g., Natural Resource Manager, City Biologist, and Parks &
Recreation Department administrative officials and employees\] to preserve our community's natural
environment and control excessive growth detrimental to the long-term sustainability of the community."
--General Plan Land Use Element Preamble and Vision, August 1994--
"It is the policy of the City to protect its unique natural resources and systems by including their
considerations and needs... and giving those considerations and needs a planning priority co-equal with that
accorded other community needs. Under this policy, the City will make provisions for the continued existence
of its natural resources within the community. The term "community" thus indicates not only the urbanized
human community, dominated by urban land development and technological systems, but also a natural
community rich in biological and geological diversity, as well as a pre-urban human community with a strong
agricultural base."
--Land Use Element program 6.0.4--
"Protect, sustain, and where it has been degraded, enhance wildlife habitat on land surrounding the city, at
Laguna Lake, along creeks and other wetlands, and on open hills and ridges within the City, so that diverse,
native plants, fish and animals (i.e., wildlife) can continue to live within the area."
--Land Use Element Goal # 3--
The concept of mountain biking in open spaces also does not meet goals of the Environmental Quality Task
Force (EQTF) which were approved by the City Council, and on which I proudly served in 1994 and 1995:
"Clean air, abundant native plants and wildlife, open spaces, and unique land forms---these are the natural
beauty of San Luis Obispo. Our community's remaining natural assets are becoming increasingly rare in
California. They can be lost through ignorance, inattention, or conscious political action. Once lost, they can
never be replaced." {Please, Mayor & Council members, do not cause the loss of one of our rare opens spaces
through "conscious political action". This mountain biking group is owed much credit for helping the City build
its trail system. But, I believe mountain biking is not passive recreation and, furthermore, is against too many of
our City's Planning Document Goals and Visions. Therefore, I cannot support the Night Hiking and Biking pilot plan.
"Throughout our work, we found two themes always present. One theme is that a healthy, diverse natural
environment has value in itself. Non-human life has intrinsic value which, unless useful as a commodity, is not
generally recognized by our economic system."
"The second theme is the attachment we humans have for the place where we live and the others who live
here. We speak to protecting the environment not just for its intrinsic value, but to the kind of place we
want to live. Looked at another way, our whole natural landscape is an historic treasure which is fast
disappearing."
2
--EQTF Final Report: Introduction, February 1995--
"Our progress in becoming more sustainable cannot be measured only in terms of written goals statements,
or even by how many acres of open space we have acquired. We need to be able to measure progress in
terms such as how much erosion has been stopped, how many existing wildlife corridors and habitats have
been maintained, and how many species saved."
--EQTF Commitment to Goals, Final Report 3 February 1995--
The Agenda Package for this Pilot Study item is full of many errors and assumptions. I am just seven weeks
out of active surgery and, although I have read the entire document, it would take me at least another week
or two to write up all those parts of the agenda package that are unsupported by any kind of research data.
For now, I'll go with the collective reasoning of many of the City's planning documents (General Plan, LUE,
Opens Space Element, and EQTF documents) already codified in SLO City documents. I'll go with proven plans
and history.
Respectfully submitted,
Richard J. Krejsa, PhD
3
Some Thoughts on Mountains, Monuments,
and Money (Green Frog Skins) [1st Published 9 October 1975]
[Aboard AMTRAK after reading: “Lame Deer--Seeker of Visions”, by John (Fire) Lame Deer & Richard Erdoes]
The ‘M’ on Cerro San Luis can stand
for Mission, Madonna Inn or even Mount
Rushmore. All are the result of conquest:
symbols of how enough power, influence,
or money, can translate our natural
resources into technological wonders
where people, mostly white, can come to
worship; come to praise; to give glory; to
give thanks that men can build (trails or)
monuments. Can build a letter ‘M’, build
a restaurant, or carve four Presidential
faces out of the skin of the Earth.
That all may see, look up to, or down
from, without seeing the pile of rubble at
the base, or the spoil which flows down
the sides like giant tears. Without seeing
the life that has been crushed out of the
trees, the brush, and the wildflowers.
Without missing or even realizing that a
spirit has been smothered here by the
blade of the bulldozer (or bike tire), just
as the spirit of the Black Hills was
perverted by Borglum’s jack-hammer.
What will (our) tourists see as they
look up to that pinnacle? Will they see the
fear of the hillside residents as winter
rains threaten to fill the arroyos and their
home with sacred soil from the scarred
mantle? Will they see the cost to the
taxpayers as recently rebuilt conduits will
have to be enlarged to accommodate the
swollen waters of Old Garden Creek?
Will they envision the eventual death of
Laguna Lake by siltation? Will they
understand the worry of the untold
parents whose children use to climb the
mountain freely . . . with poison oak,
rather than a (spoked wheel), the only
threat to their safety?
Will the tourists, who are privileged
to enjoy the view, ever know how the first
sight of carving up the mountain divided
the community and its leaders into
camps? The tourist may never know that
the scars they see (if they see them at all)
are but a small reflection of the scars that
are borne in the hearts and minds of the
people of San Luis Obispo.
To the Sioux and the Santee, and to
other Native Americans, only the top of
Mt. Rushmore is still sacred. It is the only
place where they aren’t forced to look at
those giant faces; the only place where
one isn’t reminded of those monumental
paperweights, tourist curios for those who
come to gawk at all the power represent-
ed there.
And what of San Luis Mountain? Can
it escape a similar fate? Will not all the
picture postcards tell of the enormous
technology that was brought to bear in
order to tame this wild mountain: energy
used, petroleum expended . . . to carve the
“fire roads” (and mountain bike trails) to
“enhance the environment” so that all
may see what one man (or one group) can
do if he (they) sets his (their) mind to it.
So that visitors (local or invited here via
Internet video, or courtesy of SLO Parks
& Recreation Department) may better
view from the summit: the majesty (and
biking trails) of the Irish Hills, with their
transmission lines from Diablo; Cuesta
Ridge, with its perpetual reminder of U.S.
Forest Service power; and the City of San
Luis Obispo, planned but yet unplanned,
being shaped more by the forces of the
market than by the will of the majority.
Will not the red men, who chance to
see it, laugh silently to themselves? And,
perhaps, even weep for us as we come to
realize that our sacred mountain, like
theirs, is scarred forever in the name of
protection . . . in the name of (local and
distant mountain bike riding enthusiasts)
. . . in the name of the Madonna Inn . . .
in the name of the green frog skin?
R.J. Krejsa, 30 August 1975 (plus
parts revised/added, 16 October 2017)