It is with dismay that Defense of Place takes note of the potential betrayal of the essence of the Ballona Wetlands in Southern California with the intrusion of concrete and steel onto a landscape set aside for marshland restoration. The betrayal is that of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, which seems to be willing to enter into a $50 million project with the Annenberg Foundation to develop on lands that were rescued a decade ago through a $139 million bond measure in partnership with the Trust for Public Land.

Defense of Place is stunned at the boldness with which the Annenberg Foundation again is seeking to buy access to lands held in the Public Trust for a project that ultimately has nothing to do with the true nature of the Ballona Wetlands and its wildlife habitat. The image of a 46,000-square-foot interpretive center within the protected wetlands ecosystem is perplexing enough, but the inclusion of a planned domestic animal adoption and care program strains credulity. However, it appears that the detemination of the Annenberg Foundation to build such a center on public land will not ebb, even after their withdrawing the (seemingly) same project proposal for Lower Point Vicente Park in Rancho Palos Verdes in 2011. In that case, courageous federal and state park officials held fast to the deeds protecting the parkland. It is disheartening that the Fish and Wildlife would not display such valor, but would barter away parcels of the Ballona Wetlands and flout their mission to sustain a natural resource in their care.

Defense of Place works to sustain parklands and open spaces nationwide whose protective deeds are contravened for development or predatory changes in use. The settings and purposes vary, but inevitably the explanations for the breaches in protection carry coded words meant to mollify citizens when their public asset is bartered away. For instance, “Interpretive Centers” have become the Orwellian substitute for office buildings and administrative headquarters, and PowerPoint diagrams of facility footprints artfully mask the reality of the infrastructure and peripheral impacts. In addition, the guardians of protected lands regularly excuse the land surrender with the familiar, “It is already degraded.”

However, the spins and explanations are increasingly being met with skepticism – and government agencies, municipalities and institutions are finding it harder and harder to work under the radar – due to the courage and diligence of individuals and groups working to defend irreplaceable places.

With the declaration that Drakes Estero at Point Reyes National Seashore in California is one of the crown jewels of our nation, U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar issued his decision on November 29that the lease of a commercial oyster farm along the Seashore will not be renewed, that current operations must cease, and the property cleared within 90 days. The announcement fulfills a Congressional directive dating from 1976 that the commercial lease would end in 2012, allowing the Estero to be restored as the last pristine marine wilderness on the West Coast. The recovery of the Estero will enrich the environmental and ecological significance of Point Reyes National Seashore and its span of more than 80 miles of California coastline. The multi-year campaign to save the Estero set the National Park Service and environmentalists including Resource Renewal Institute founder and head Huey Johnson against influential and well-funded politicians and commercial interests. In a message posted immediately after the Department of the Interior posted the decision, Mr. Johnson spoke not only for the environmental community but all in the nation who rely on state and federal agencies to protect lands held in the public trust. Defense of Place also applauds Secretary Salazar for the courage of his decision in the face of powerful voices, for his regard for Congressional original intent, and for his certitude when he said: Today we are fulfilling the vision to protect this special place for generations to come.

By Elizabeth Baker

Vice President, Resource Renewal Institute

Measure A1 asks us to consider what is more valuable in the long run: wild animals or captive animals?

Perhaps most important, Measure A1 suggests that walking at dusk across oak-studded hillsides where we can hear owls, see foxes and study native plants is the same as paying to see an artificial exhibition featuring those same wild creatures in captivity.

The Oakland Zoo wants to grab a large chunk of Knowland Park , a place full of rare, native California plants and animals in order to develop it with unlimited buildings and infrastructure. Knowland Park was deeded to Oakland from the state in 1975 on the condition that it always remain a public park, but the zoo’s plans will result in the public’s having to pay to see exhibitions featuring wild animals behind bars.

To cover this patently absurd zoo-expansion plan, Measure A1′s proponents argue it is about humane animal care and educational programs at the Oakland Zoo. But don’t be fooled.

East Bay property-owners are being asked to tax themselves for an exhibit to teach children about what California was like in its natural, undisturbed state at the same time as it destroys some of the last, best examples of native plant and wildlife habitat in the East Bay hills.

Measure A1 will impose a 25-year, irrevocable parcel tax that can be used to fund the Oakland Zoo’s planned multimillion-dollar expansion project and future expansions into the 500-acre Knowland Park. Knowland Park is so botanically rich it is listed as a Priority Protection Area by the East Bay Chapter of the California Native Plant Society. The land supports two rare plant communities and a wide variety of native wildlife, including mountain lions and the threatened Alameda Whipsnake.

Resource Renewal Institute and our Defense of Place project work on diverse conservation issues to protect public resources in perpetuity. We fight with volunteer passion to keep our irreplaceable inheritance of wild places, especially urban parks that are wild and open to the public. We the American public, the owners of public parks, inherit both the opportunity to interact directly with nature and the civic responsibility to pass them on to the next generation. When protected lands are bulldozed to make way for golf courses, theme parks and, yes, zoos, democracy itself is bruised.

A growing number of institutions and municipalities violate deeds of trust in order to sell and/or develop public parklands. But in November, citizens can slow this trend by voting NO on Alameda County Ballot Measure A1, a measure that we found so deceptive that Resource Renewal signed the ballot argument against it.

The zoo is a strong and wonderful part of Oakland. But it is getting desperate. It plans to spend a million dollars on its campaign; according to an East Bay Express article (Oct. 18, 2012), the Zoo has broken multiple laws in its zeal to grab both public money, public land and public goodwill; and it refuses to propose an expansion plan that can easily earn broad support.

Destroying wildlife habitat in order to tell a story about protecting it just doesn’t make sense.

I hope Alameda County voters will stand with their own strong environmental traditions and preserve the East Bay’s natural heritage by voting NO on Measure A1.

RRI Environmental Elder, Dr. Ruth Malone, spoke on KQED Forum on Oct 22, 2012 against Alameda County, CA ballot measure A1 by the Oakland Zoo that could support expansion into Knowland Park in Oakland. Defense of Place has been assisting the Save Knowland Park coalition.

http://www.kqed.org/a/forum/R201210220930