Being a proponent of land conservation can be frustrating. Learning the “processes”, the rules of the game, and all the players can be daunting. Garnering community support and convincing decision makers can be darn near impossible. The competition for land acquisition grants can be fierce. Developers and holders of large properties aren’t all too pleased with us either. Timid and politically sensitive wildlife agencies are often no help at all.

Moreover, each City and community group takes a narrow, parochial view. Regional planning is nonexistent.

There will always be a tension between economic interests and the need to preserve open space and wildlife habitat. But underlying this tension are State agencies with antagonistic missions and purposes.

Look at a high-level organization chart of our State government, and you’ll see 112 boxes not counting the most important box – The People of California.

It’s enough to make your head swim. One box promotes the construction of new homes. Other boxes seek the conservation of watershed, water quality, the Bay-Delta, and the character of our coast. Yet another box expands roadways and builds new highways.

Fish and Game is the guardian of our rapidly vanishing wildlife and advocates for habitat protection. At the same time, the Department of Conservation protects mineral resources for the purpose of extraction.

It’s pretty easy to see just how muddled and contradictory all of this is. A psychologist might diagnose the State with Multiple Personality Disorder. Most certainly, it would take the Wisdom of Solomon to balance all of these competing interests.

Being a public servant myself, I know all too well that we (and our political leaders) can’t always live up to the high standards set by Solomon. Besides, we are driven by the narrow focus of our own departments or agencies. Little thought is given to cross-boundary issues and objectives.

Our neighbors in Claremont are running headlong into this problem. Vulcan Mining would like to establish a mining operation in their community – in an area Claremont’s General Plan identifies as ‘Open Space’.

The State Mining and Geology Board designates this same area ‘regionally significant’ for the purpose of extracting rock and producing gravel. Not surprisingly, the San Antonio Wash has lots of rock that can be crushed into gravel.

In direct conflict, the Department of Fish and Game has categorized this same piece of earth as one of the most threatened in California. There are only three such pieces of earth in Los Angeles County, six in total (the other three in San Bernardino County). Numerous rare plants and animals rely on these endangered habitats.

The answer seems pretty clear to me, but then again, I’m not Solomon: species loss is a very big problem in California; extracting and crushing rock not so much.

The Claremont City Council is faced with a very sticky wicket. On one side they are facing a powerful economic interest potentially allied with the powerful State Mining and Geology Board, not known for their sensitivity to wild places, plants, and animals.

On the other side, the City must respond to justifiable community uproar that is bolstered by County and State designations attributing vital ecological significance to their ‘Open Space’.

The problem faced by Claremont is not uncommon. Cities and municipalities are often tugged in different directions. More houses, more roads, more open spaces.

What generally results is a ‘kluge’, because decision makers lack the will and imagination to do otherwise. Then again, cities often go with the flow because that’s the way they want it.

Then there’s the communication gap. City planners, developers, business owners, lawyers, community activists each have their own speak. The term “environment” means one thing to a city planner and something entirely different to an environmentalist like me. Miscues are frequent and predictable. Ideologically driven individuals just compound the issue by putting up walls and turning a blind eye to the facts. And, of course, money always trumps everything else.

I don’t blame people for giving up. It’s all pretty discouraging. Again, I don’t have the answers but I do believe the solution lies with people who are at least willing to try. Just maybe once and awhile we can make an incremental change or contribution. People need to speak out, articulate what they think is right, and organize.

In the words of Margaret Mead, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed it’s the only thing that ever has.”

Copyright © 2008 Frank Schiavone

Frank Schiavone
fschiavone@verizon.net