Topanga State Park Planning Workshop Postponed – Meanwhile, Speak Up at May 13 Meeting

May 6, 2010 - By Ben Allanoff

What do you want for Topanga State Park?

The California Department of Parks and Recreation (CDPR) is formulating a new General Plan for Topanga State Park, including Lower Topanga. The Plan is intended to guide the development of the entire park for the foreseeable future.

A CDPR Public workshop, originally scheduled for May 11 in Temescal Canyon Gateway Park (see “Topanga State Park General Plan Public Meeting...,” Messenger, Vol 34, No. 7, (April 8, 2010)), has been postponed until early summer, either June or July.

As part of the process of creating the plan, State Parks is required to solicit and consider the input of local stakeholders. Especially because our community is so closely connected to the Park, we Topangans have the right and responsibility to give our input. Although it is not guaranteed, it is possible that our input will be incorporated into the plan, and that the plan will be adhered to once it is finalized. At the very least, it is essential that we put our ideas and concerns on the record.

To gather community input and to try to establish as much consensus as possible, the Topanga Creek Watershed Committee is hosting a public meeting at the Community House on Thursday May 13, at 6 p.m. in the Penny Room. Please come to this meeting and make your voice heard.

What do you want to see in the park, and why? What do you not want to see, and why? Some things to think about:

• Fire safety

• Herbicides

• Invasive plants

• Current and potential structures and trails

• What to do in Lower Topanga

• Equestrian activity/mountain bikes

• Current/future restaurants and shops at PCH and Topanga

Please check the Department’s websites for information regarding the General Plan workshop: www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=25956 and www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=983. The department will also send notifications to interested parties and organizations when a final date has been determined.

Native Garden Planting at Community House Set for Sunday, February 28

February 11, 2010 - By Ben Allanoff, Chair Topanga Creek Watershed Com

On Sunday February 28 at noon the Topanga Creek Watershed Committee is hosting another planting day, open to anyone who wants to get dirty putting Chapparal Currant, Lemonadeberry, Hollyleaf Cherry and other species into the ground. The sixty or so Santa Monica Mountain native plants at the Topanga Community House Native Garden (Hummingbird Sage, Sugar Bush, Elderberry, California Blackberry and California Wild Rose) are in the midst of their second winter and are well established and thriving.

This is a great opportunity to get a little exercise, have fun with old friends and meet new ones, give back to the Community House and the local ecosystem, and learn about planting and plants while you are at it. Everyone is welcome and students can qualify for community service credits. Volunteers should bring work gloves and water to drink, and be prepared to stay 2-3 hours. Some tools will be provided, but definitely bring a shovel or hand spade if you have one.

For folks interested in protecting the natural environment of Topanga Canyon, sustainability, “going green” and related topics, this event will also be an opportunity to connect and collaborate with neighbors who share your interests and values. The purpose of the Watershed Committee is to protect and improve the health and well being of all the life in this amazing Canyon and we welcome input and participation from experts to neophytes and everyone in between.

Participation is limited and an RSVP to ben@ecologizeLA.com or (310) 455-4156 is highly recommended to save your spot and for us to let you know if there are any changes to the plan.

OFG Planting at Community House Native Garden

January 28, 2010 - By Ben Alanoff

Next time you visit the Topanga Community House you might want to check out the long hillside between the playground and the ballfield, if you haven’t really looked at it recently. The Native Plant Garden growing there was launched about a year ago as a joint project of the Earth Day Committee, the Watershed Committee, and the Community Club, with volunteer help from throughout the community, and last summer beautiful signs identifying many species, lovingly hand painted by kids in Marlene Frantz’ art class, were added. The 60 or so Santa Monica Mountain natives, like Hummingbird Sage, Sugar Bush, Elderberry, California Blackberry, and California Wild Rose, are in the midst of their second winter and most are well-established and thriving.

On Sunday February 28 at noon the Watershed Committee is hosting another planting day, open to anyone who wants to get dirty putting Chapparal Currant, Lemonadeberry, Hollyleaf Cherry, and other species into the ground. This is a great opportunity to get a little exercise, have fun with old and new friends, give back to the Community House and the local ecosystem, and learn a bit about planting and plants while you are at it, if you are so inclined. Everyone is welcome,

including students who need credit for community service. Volunteers should bring work gloves and water to drink and be prepared to stay 2-3 hours. Some tools will be provided, but definitely bring a shovel or hand spade if you have one. Participation is limited and an RSVP to Ben@EcologizeLA.com is very highly recommended to save your spot (participation is limited,) and also so we can let you know if there any changes to the plan.

For folks interested in protecting the natural environment of Topanga Canyon, sustainability, “going green,” and related topics, this event will also be a great opportunity to connect and collaborate with neighbors who share your interests and values. The purpose of the Watershed Committee is to protect and improve the health and well-being of all of the life of this amazing Canyon, and we welcome input and participation from everyone, from experts to neophytes and everyone in between. For questions, please use the email address above or call (310) 455-4156.

Free Ocean Friendly Gardening Workshop, November 21

November 19, 2009 - By Ben Allanoff

Be a part of the solution, not the pollution.

There will be a free public workshop about Ocean Friendly Gardening on Saturday, November 21, at the Institute of Courage. Yes, it really is completely free, because the Topanga Creek Watershed Committee (TCWC), the Surfrider Foundation, the Green Gardens Group (G3LA), and the West Basin Municipal Water District—the groups behind the event—all really, really want everyone to know how to create and keep beautiful, healthy gardens without using fertilizer, weed-killers, or any other foreign substances that inescapably find their way from our gardens and yards into the creeks and ocean.

These alien substances do untold harm to the life in our watershed and ocean, from atomic and microbial levels up to the top of the food chain. Learn how to garden the smart, safe, healthy, ocean-friendly way!

The class will include tips on:

• Conservation: How to use water more efficiently in your garden; eliminate the use of fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides; and eliminate the need for gas-powered machinery through the use of native and climate-adapted plants, a real money-saver as well.

• Permeability: How to utilize materials for driveways, walkways and patios that allow surface water to percolate into the soil and replenish local aquifers, instead of washing pollutants into the creeks and ocean.

• Retention: How to use water-holding mechanisms, such as rain gardens, rain barrels, rain chains, bio-swales, creek beds and dry wells — easy ways to turn rainwater from a pollution source into nourishment for plants!

Attendees will learn from landscape pros, receive free tools and get information on incentive programs. A delicious breakfast and light lunch will also be provided. The program will run from 9 a.m. sharp to 12 p.m. on Saturday, November 21, at the Institute of Courage, 1135 N. Topanga Canyon Blvd. (next to Froggy’s). Space is limited. Register today by calling (310) 371-7222, ext. 200 or going to www.sbesc.com (“workshops”).

To contact the Topanga Creek Watershed Committee, call (310) 455 4156. For more information, visit oceanfriendlygardens.blogspot.com.

Tour and Tips for Gardening with Native Plants

June 18, 2009 -

On Saturday June 27 at 3:30 p.m. the Topanga Creek Watershed Committee will host an educational event for folks interested in gardening and the plants that naturally occur in our area.

This first-ever event begins with an approximately one hour hike in Topanga State Park lead by Resource Conservation District Biologist Steve Williams. Williams will guide participants along the Musch Trail, which begins at Trippet Ranch and passes through riparian, oak woodland, and chaparral plant communities.

After observing how various native plants thrive in their respective habitats the group will drive to the Topanga Community House to see how many of these same species are getting along in the new community garden there, located between the ball field and the Community House. The TCC native garden was planned and planted last fall by the Watershed Committee and the Earth Day Committee, using proceeds from Earth Day 2008. Ben Allanoff of the TCWC will give a tour of the garden and talk about its creation and maintenance. The garden provides slope stabilization as well as habitat and food for native birds, animals, and insects, without the use of excessive amounts of water or any imported chemicals or fertilizers. In addition to being a beautiful and useful addition to the Community House grounds, the TCC native garden is intended to be a demonstration garden, showing local homeowners how to create beautiful landscapes around their homes without creating the negative impacts associated with chemical- and fertilizer-dependent “traditional” lawns and gardens. (As always, the TCWC reminds us that everything we bring into the Canyon ends up in the creek and the ocean, and in the living things that reside there.)

Co-sponsoring this event with the TCWC is the Green Gardens Group (G3), a collection of landscape designers who promote the use of gardening practices that nourish rather than damage the earth and living things. At the TCC the G3 experts will share their knowledge and experience in landscape design and gardening.

This is an opportunity to enjoy our beautiful canyon, and to learn how to better appreciate, preserve, and protect it. If this sounds interesting to you, you can e-mail your questions to Allanoff@verizon.net or just show up at the Musch trailhead at Trippet Ranch on June 27 at 3:30 p.m., ready to have a good time.

Greywater Without Guilt

March 26, 2009 - By David Shapiro

On Feb 18, the Community House was flooded with questions from a packed gathering of Topanga residents anxious to learn about the latest developments in greywater techniques, regulations, and environmental impact. Ben Allanoff, chairman of the Topanga Creek Watershed Committee, had arranged for Laura Allen from Greywater Guerrillas to bring her presentation to our community. The subject of greywater is far more nuanced than may appear. It is a natural springboard for exploring many of the ancillary issues surrounding water usage—septic, catchment, composting toilets, and, of course, conservation. Greywater is a resource for saving money, watering gardens, replenishing the aquifer, prolonging the life of your septic system, adding beauty and nutrients to your garden, and more. Plus, it's much simpler to use than you might think—no filter required.

Everyone of the more than 100 people seemed to already disperse greywater in various levels of  (non)sophistication on their properties. Laura showed how we can make lush, verdant oases with that effulgent. There are nifty new PVC splitters that allow many individual plants/areas to be nourished instead of creating a smelly bog in one place. Valves (that you won't find in the box stores) direct the not-really-wastewater to desired locations.  Laura offered solutions for slopes, flats, and everything between. We now have no excuses for not utilizing the nutrient-rich greywater that can create vibrant splashes of color in your landscaping scene, nourish your vegetable garden and fruit trees, attract all species of wildlife and birds, reduce tinder for fire, and, importantly, lengthen the life of existing septic systems.

Maintaining a healthy biosphere that transforms pathogens before they “greet the creek” is an essential duty of every property owner (horseowners included). Keeping a viable septic system is not only environmentally responsible, but financially friendly. Dick Sherman of Topanga Underground, Inc., forewarned everyone of the stringent regulations, already passed by the legislature (AB885), and coming to a septic field/pit near you ... soon. Though broadsided by the economic crisis, people can still prepare for the water crisis: the price of water will continue to rise no matter how much rain falls in our beloved canyon.

In addition to promoting water conservation, the Watershed Committee also promotes the use of products that are less harmful to the environment. For example, they showed Quintox, a benign Vitamin D bait which kills (dehydrates) gophers/rats/mice instead of the commonly used strychnine which persists in the dead animal. We were told that the number one cause of death among  predator mammals in the Santa Monica Mountains is secondary poisoning because they are eating toxic carcasses. Visit www.greywaterguerrillas.com and TopangaCreekWatershedCommittee.org  Web sites and learn how you can greywater without guilt and support a healthy biosphere in Topanga.

First 5 LA Ignores Requests for Transparency in County Fluoridation Grants

March 27, 2008 - by lee Michaelson

A request by Coastal Citizens for Safe Drinking Water, a coalition of 15 local groups, to be heard on First 5 LA’s March 13 agenda has gone unanswered with the date for the First 5 LA meeting now past and the date for fluoridation contracts to be issued growing near, the group charged in a press release. The group sought the agenda time to propose a requirement that any grants of funding to water districts in Los Angeles County for purposes of fluoridation include requirements for accountability and transparency from manufacturers of the chemicals actually used in the process. The group specifically urged that manufacturers of hydrofluorosilicic acid used to fluoridate community water supplies be required to provide the County with copies of all documentation and test reports submitted to the National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) to earn certification of their product, as a condition of County funding.

On a brighter note, Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, former Chair of First 5 LA, added his personal endorsement to the citizen groups’ request in a letter dated March 7.

Late last year, amidst the uproar of citizens in Southern California learning that they were about to begin receiving water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) containing hydrofluorosilicic acid, a toxic and highly corrosive by-product of the fertilizer manufacturing industry, the County’s First 5 LA Commission, then under Yaroslavsky’s chairmanship, announced its decision to award $20 million in grants to fund fluoridation projects in water districts throughout Los Angeles County. The County’s First 5 LA Commission is the recipient and distributor of the 50-cent per pack tobacco tax collected in the County; its mission is to benefit children five years of age and younger.

The First 5 grants would enable those water districts in the County who do not receive their water from MWD to follow suit in fluoridating their public water supplies. Indeed, First 5’s “gift” of funds would trigger a state requirement to fluoridate a number of municipal water districts that until now have chosen to forgo fluoridation.

Coastal Citizens for Safe Drinking Water vocally opposed the First 5 grant, as well as the fluoridation of Topanga and Malibu water by MWD. The group, pointing to a number of recent scientific studies, believes that the hydrofluorosilicic acid used to fluoridate is toxic and potentially carcinogenic, and is particularly concerned that neither MWD nor any of the proponents of fluoridation can point to a single long-term, peer-reviewed toxicological study demonstrating the safety and efficacy of the chemical. The production of hydrofluorosilic acid, which comes from the smokestacks of the phosphate fertilizer industry, is unregulated by any federal agency; chemically, the acid is different from the calcium and sodium fluorides used in toothpaste and dental sealants which are produced under pharmaceutical conditions and regulated by the federal Food and Drug Administration. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has conceded there are no toxicological studies on the health and behavioral effects from continued use of the chemical, safe drinking water activists contend. Indeed, Ed Dymally, a spokesman for MWD, admitted to the Messenger that no such study exists, but maintained that he is not required to have one, but can rely instead on the manufacturers’ representations concerning the certification of their products by NSF, a manufacturing trade association, as safe and effective.

Safe drinking water activists counter that a long-term toxicological study of safety is a minimum prerequisite for bona fide certification of the chemical as compliant with American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/NSF Standard 60, as required under California law before the product can be added to public drinking water. Without proof of such studies, they consider NSF certification a sham.

Though Coastal Citizens would like to see fluoridation halted outright, it believes that its current request is a modest and reasonable interim step, one that should be acceptable to fluoridation proponents and opponents alike: Require a statement of accountability for safety and effectiveness from the manufacturer; produce the toxicological studies on the chronic health effects of the actual substance being used to fluoridate; and make the manufacturer’s documents that were submitted to meet State-adopted standards accessible to the public, they demand.

The question of just who is safeguarding the purity of public drinking water—and how well they are performing that function—drew heightened attention earlier this month when the Associated Press (AP) released the results of a study documenting the presence of multiple pharmaceuticals—including, but not limited to, antibiotics, anti-convulsants, mood stabilizers and sex hormones—in the public drinking supplies of at least 41 million Americans. The 51 communities in which pharmaceutical contamination of the water supply was documented specifically included both Northern and Southern California, according to the report released March 9.

“To be sure, the concentrations of these pharmaceuticals are tiny, measured in quantities of parts per billion or trillion, far below the levels of a medical dose. Also, utilities insist their water is safe,” wrote Jeff Donn, Martha Mendoza and Justin Pritchard in an article in the Mercury News

, reporting the results of the AP’s five-month probe. “But the presence of so many prescription drugs—and over-the-counter medicines like acetaminophen and ibuprofen—in so much of our drinking water is heightening worries among scientists of long-term consequences to human health.” Moreover, the article continued, “Water providers rarely disclose results of prescription screenings, unless pressed, the AP found. For example, the head of a group representing major California suppliers said the public ‘doesn’t know how to interpret the information’ and might be unduly alarmed.”

The same resistance to public disclosure prevails in the fluoridation arena where manufacturers and water suppliers want consumers to be content with blanket assertions that the process “has been proven safe and effective for more than 50 years.” Yet when pressed for the scientific proof of these assertions, the answers are not forthcoming. Compare, for example, the fanfare with which MWD touted its recent selection as the world’s “best tasting” public water, with the dearth of substantive information (as opposed to generic assurances) that has greeted the pharmaceutical contamination studies or requests to revisit the safety of fluoridation chemicals in light of recent scientific studies.

The problem of transparency and accountability came to a head earlier this year when Yaroslavsky, responding to complaints from the Coastal Citizens group, asked County Counsel to obtain copies of the documents relied on by NSF in issuing the safety certifications for the fluorosilicic acid products being used in Topanga-Malibu water supplies. NSF refused to comply, stating that the documents remained the property of the manufacturers and were not subject to public disclosure.

Basically, that left not only private citizens but also public water officials (in his capacity as a County Supervisor, Yaroslavsky is responsible for the purity of the water delivered by Local Water District 29, which serves Topanga and Malibu) completely in the dark. In a classic case of the proverbial fox being left to guard the henhouse, ever since the EPA abdicated its role of regulating water additives in the late 1970s, NSF, a private trade association of the chemical manufacturing industry, has assumed the role of certifying the safety and efficacy of such products, including fluorosilicic acids, certifications for which NSF charges the manufacturers hefty fees. (The EPA relinquished its regulatory function with respect to water additives after the union representing scientists and other professionals working for the EPA publicly challenged the safety of fluoridation at the levels specified by the agency, leading in turn to a lawsuit and Congressional hearings on the matter.)

Once Yaroslavsky became aware of the situation, he backed the safe drinking water advocates’ demand for public access to the documents on which NSF relies in support of its certifications, and sent a letter to MWD requesting that they make the manufacturer’s disclosure of those documents and test results a condition of any future fluoridation contracts. This submission, in turn, would render the documents subject to the California Public Records Act, said Yaroslavsky.

In his March 7 response to the Coastal Citizens group, Yaroslavsky forwarded MWD’s reply. After a long paragraph reciting the testing and certification process that MWD is required to comply with under state and federal regulations—a paragraph that seems to miss the point that it is precisely proof of NSF’s compliance with those regulations in issuing certifications, rather than the certifications themselves, that the public wishes to see—MWD’s General Manager Jeffrey Kightlinger concludes, “In all cases, FSA (fluorosilicic acid) shall be certified at the point of use at Metropolitan’s facilities. We will consider your request regarding certification testing documentation in future contracts.”

Yaroslavsky’s transmittal letter cites a number of opportunities for MWD to adopt a disclosure requirement in the near future. MWD’s current contracts for hydrofluorosilic acid began on September 30, 2007, and are effective for one year, with three possible one-year extensions. “The MWD will begin evaluating whether or not to extend the contracts beginning in June of each year. It will be possible in each year to add the requirement for production of documents to the contracts, if both MWD and the contractor agree,” Yaroslavsky wrote to Coastal Citizens, adding, “In any event, MWD will begin a search for new contractors in spring of 2011 and could insert this requirement into the bid specifications at that time.” Kightlinger’s letter did not mention any of these possibilities to amend the contracts to require disclosure, which led spokespeople for the Coastal Citizens group to characterize his position as “more stonewalling.”

“Regardless if you are for fluoridation, or against fluoridation,” stated Ben Allanoff, chair of the Topanga Creek Watershed Committee, one of the 15 local groups that joined to form Coastal Citizens for Safe Drinking Water, “the fact that there are continual roadblocks to providing a statement of accountability, and to producing the actual documents that can prove that the manufacturers have conformed to the standards required by California law, has to be worrisome to everyone who drinks this water.”

“The Chair of MWD has only stated that he would ‘consider’ [Yaroslavsky’s] request [to mandate disclosure],” Allanoff added. “Meanwhile we are all drinking and bathing in fluoridated water that no agency or other entity will guarantee as safe.”

In addition to pressing MWD to adopt a disclosure requirement, Coastal Citizens asked Yaroslavsky to implement a similar policy as a condition of County grants and contracts for fluoridation, and in particular, of the $20 million in grants already earmarked by First 5 for fluoridation. The coalition also sent a request to the First 5 board on January 27, asking to be placed on the agenda to discuss the proposed requirement. Though addressed to the First 5 board as a whole, the letter was mistakenly directed to Yaroslavsky as chair of First 5. In fact, that position had in the interim rotated to Supervisor Yvonne Braithwaite Burke along with the chair of the L.A. County Board of Supervisors. The citizens’ group reiterated its request in a second letter addressed to Burke and the entire First 5 board on March 1, 2008, requesting the specific agenda date of March 13. But Coastal Citizens say their request was never answered, despite numerous attempts by the coalition to secure a date to appear.

Yaroslavsky, who no longer serves on the First 5 board, but who gets to appoint a representative of his County district to the board, said in his March 7 letter to Coastal Citizens that he had forwarded the group’s request to Supervisor Burke. In an attached letter, also dated March 7, addressed to Burke, Yaroslavsky added his own endorsement of the Coastal Citizens proposal, writing, “I believe it would be appropriate for First Five L.A. to adopt the same (disclosure) approach in its fluoridation grant program.” Citing the timetable of the bid process for the grants, Yaroslavsky continued, “Given this timing it should be possible to require grantees to ensure that their suppliers of fluorosilicic acid submit copies of all documents submitted to NSF to earn certification, as well as copies of their latest NSF fluorosilicic acid test reports, so that they can be made available for public review. I hope you will consider this request and add this requirement to your fluoridation grant program. By doing so you will ensure that the public has the greatest opportunity to be informed about the purity of the fluoridation product.”

Coastal Citizens considers Yaroslavsky’s endorsement of their proposal another victory in their incremental effort to obtain disclosure and accountability on the introduction of toxic chemicals into the public drinking supply. However, the news, which they first learned from Yaroslavsky’s letter, that the process of requests for proposals (RFP) to grant funds is already ongoing, with decisions looming on the near horizon, without the group being given an opportunity to be heard, has members of the local coalition fuming.

“I don’t see how this passes anyone’s smell test,” said Bob Jason, an attorney and another spokesman for Coastal Citizens for Safe Drinking Water.

Citizens to Zev: Halt Fluoride

October 4, 2007 -

OPEN LETTER TO SUPERVISOR YAROSLAVSKY

Dear Zev,

The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California announced that they are going to fluoridate our drinking water starting October 7, 2007.

To date, no manufacturer of the actual hydrofluosilicic acid to be used has stated that their specific product is effective at reducing tooth decay when swallowed, or safe for all infants, children and the elderly.

All water suppliers in the chain of delivery have a duty to perform due diligence and to act to correct all misrepresentations, omissions, and unlawful practices.

Regardless of your support of the public policy of fluoridation, it is your duty as LA County Board Member on the Board of Directors of District 29 to require compliance with all laws to assure safety of the substance to be added to our water supply.

Thus we are demanding that you deliver, for the public to view, the actual dated product-review documents submitted by the manufacturer of the hydrofluosilicic acid to earn certification as California law requires.

Fluoridation is intended to medicate humans, not to treat water for bacteria as chlorination does. The process of adding hydrofluosilicic acid carries contaminants such as arsenic, lead, and other carcinogenic and mutagenic substances to our water supply. We don't think any substance should be added to our drinking water for the purpose of treating us without our permission unless the substance has been approved by competent authority for claims of safety and effectiveness.

With many substantive studies supporting the ineffectiveness and dangers of fluoridation, it places even more stress on our local water districts, as they must assume liability because MWD has indemnified Public Health and fluoride promoters against all health claims.

It may interest you to know that the American Dental Association has denied in court that they are accountable for representations of safety, and omissions of material fact, for information they provide to the public. Yet, they wish us to heed their endorsement. In the Congressional investigation on fluoride from 1998 to 2000, the U.S. EPA reported that ten years earlier it had given up all oversight responsibility for water additives in favor of quote, "industry self regulation."

The public deserves more than rhetoric. Where is the study on long term effects of the actual hydrofluosilicic acid substance added to our water?

Given the controversy, this requested documentation should be readily available. Until proof can be provided, we are demanding a halt to the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid to our water supply.

Sincerely yours,

Roger Pugliese, Chairman, Topanga Association for a Scenic Community; Ben Allanoff, Chairman, Topanga Creek Watershed Committee; Rabyn Blake, Founder, Santa Monica Mountains Coalition for Alternatives to Toxics SCAT; Valerie Sklarevsky, Women Of The World WOW; Andrew Beath, Executive Director, Earthways Foundation; Craig Houx, Organizer - Citizens For Safe Drinking Water; Mary Wright, Wright Way Organic Resource Center; Julie Levine, Topanga Peace Alliance; Sherry Jason, City Hearts, Topanga Nutcracker Consortium; Bert Gleicher, Gleicher and Associates; Linda Hinrichs, Children's Corner; Bonnie Gleicher, Merlin High School; Jessamyn Sheldon, Teens for a Healthy Future

ASC, Topanga Watershed Committee Oppose Permit for Berm Removal

August 23, 2007 -

The following are excepts from Aug. 5 letter from Topanga Association For a Scenic Community and Topanga Watershed Committee letter to the California Coastal Commission opposing California Department of Parks and Recreation's Resource Conservation District-backed plan for a berm removal in lower Topanga State Park. It has, of necessity, been edited for space, but can be found in its entirety online at http://documents.coastal.ca.gov/reports/ 2007/8/W14e-8-2007.pdf, together with the Coastal Commission's 56-page staff report and recommendations in favor of the project.




The Topanga Association for a Scenic Community (TASC) and the Topanga Creek Watershed Committee have joined together in opposing a Coastal Commission permit for the proposed Rodeo Grounds Berm Removal Project. This extensive excavation proposal for Lower Topanga State Park raises significant concerns, including health and safety hazards, and was not intended to be undertaken until a general plan for this vast 1,659-acre addition to Topanga State Park was completed. Indeed, this project is specifically rejected in the Interim Management Plan for Lower Topanga.

No project of anything close to this scale was authorized in the Interim Plan. To ignore prohibitions against a project of this size is to knowingly make a travesty of the public-input process and to demonstrate bad faith on the part of several cooperating state agencies. It would bypass the spirit of prudent planning, in favor of chasing funding wherever it may lead; deliberately cut the public out of the process, and betray State Parks' prior commitments.

In the Interim Plan's executive summary, the plan itself is described as "full public disclosure of the Department's proposed actions." It goes on to assure the public that only "a number of small projects" and "data recovery to assist in subsequent planning efforts" would be undertaken.

Under no circumstances could the proposed berm removal be considered a "small project." The primary goal of the Interim Plan is "stabilizing the environment." Nowhere does restoration of the streambed or lagoon, or any phase of it, occur as an action item. In fact, removal of the berm is among alternatives considered, and subsequently rejected in the final plan.

What we see here are the parochial interests of grant-paid agency staffers (however well-intentioned) driving the process and skewing broader public priorities to fit their particular specialties. Leadership at State Parks and here at the Coastal Commission should not abdicate their roles in protecting the public's right to participate in a comprehensive future plan for Lower Topanga, one that balances resource protection with public access, public safety, protection of historical resources, visitor services and even the creative reuse of some existing structures, which give the area a unique character.

Loss of the berm road eliminates an existing trail into the park, and could make a broad area of property much more hazardous during heavy rains, when flooding often occurs. Currently, there is no trail-use plan for the area and access into the property is essentially unrestricted. One entrance leads directly into this area. A general plan could coordinate a public-use plan to accommodate restoration work.

There are also numerous hazards that the current proposal itself presents that should have been addressed in an EIR. Unearthing 19,000 cubic yards of fill dirt, two-thirds of it identified as hazardous material, represents a danger to humans, air quality, the stream, and coastal waters - particularly if there is rain during the project. Since the park does not provide controlled access, there is no way to ensure people will be exposed to these airborne contaminants, including lead dust.

Caltrans called it "a very extensive earth haul" and offered cautions about the dangers of trucks piling up at the intersection of Topanga Canyon Boulevard and PCH. (The intersection is also a public school bus stop and an MTA bus stop.) The project calls for 1,000 trucks making a wide circuit through sensitive habitat areas, establishing a continuous road where none currently exists. This will mean 2,000 separate truck turns into and out of the Lower Topanga property at a blind curve.

Wildlife surveys involving birds apparently have not been completed and only generic bird lists are offered in the proposal. There is no mention of Nighthawks, which are present there, and, with their preference for perching on the dirt roads, would be especially impacted by truck traffic and herbicide use. This close relative to the Whip- poor-will is beginning to show up on lists of birds in decline. Audubon lists them as significantly declining in Arizona, and the Corneil Lab of Ornithology says populations are decreasing dramatically in some areas. This is one place in Topanga where they have been observed regularly. It would be a shame to allow protection of relatively few steelhead to facilitate the decline of other species.

We are also concerned about the status of previous State Parks commitments regarding mature tree removals and herbicide use. These commitments, made at a hearing before the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission, include confining removal of non-native mature trees to the berm area itself and not the surrounding 10 acres. This would save about 100 trees out of 136 trees originally to be cut down, and would better comply with restrictions in the Interim Plan. Similarly, it is our recollection that herbicides would not be used on this project. Months after that hearing, we were informed by RCD staff that the application for funding had been pulled. Its resurrection has come as a surprise.

Controversy over the difference between damaging invasive species such as arundo donax and merely atypical plants and tree species should be addressed in a general planning forum. Issues of aesthetics, as well as unacknowledged environmental impacts of wholesale eradication, are reasonable public concerns and were appropriately deferred in the Interim Plan for a more full consideration in a general plan.

If this project goes forward, the public role in park planning becomes nothing but a perfunctory sham. We are told this plan is State Parks' top priority now, but that it will be summer 2008 before a public process is begun. These kinds of delays should not be rewarded by allowing a massive project like this to go forward with no public involvement.

Habitat protection and preservation will certainly be common goals in a general plan, but the methods, timing and overall scale of restoration strategies are reasonable subjects for public discussion. To date, there has been no State Parks public planning forum for consideration of this proposal.

We urge you to reject this irresponsible piecemeal project that far exceeds the work authorized in the Lower Topanga Interim Plan. Don't let our resource protection agencies take on the failings we've seen in public works departments and the Army Corps of Engineers, where the bias is always in favor of doing projects. If they do so, much money will be wasted, their popularity and goodwill will quickly erode - and important future resource-protection efforts will be sacrificed as a result. Many local residents and commuters, unprepared for this project, are likely to be shocked by what they see if it should go forward. It would look like a massive grading operation; with disappearing tall trees that have defined the viewshed of Lower Topanga for many years. Lower Topanga is too complex and too promising a park to rush ahead with no overall plan. Let the people have a voice.

Sincerely,

Roger Pugliese, Chair, Topanga Association for a Scenic Community (TASC)

Ben Allanoff, Acting Chair, Topanga Creek Watershed Committee

Serpentine Streams and "Hungry Water"

May 31, 2007 - By Steve Williams

On May 16, from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. at the Community House, the Topanga Creek Watershed Committee (TCWC) presented "Stream Banks and Stream Reinforcement." Using slides and case studies, Restoration Ecologist R.C. Brody, and Casey Burns, Biologist from the National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), presented an informative talk on stream dynamics, regulatory issues surrounding encroachment into stream courses and environmental alternatives to hard-armoring stream banks ("bioengineering").

Brody began the presentation with a discussion about how streams function, including their natural "desire" to form a serpentine series of curves, rather than just flow in a straight line. Certain conditions, often man-made, can cause a stream to be especially erosive, known as "hungry water."

Casey presented the second part of the presentation, which focused on traditional stream-bank armoring versus bioengineering. Old-school stream-bank protection, familiar to many streamside Topanga residents, uses materials like concrete, rock rip-rap, cinderblock bricks and stone-filled gabions to protect the bank from erosion. Often, these materials become undermined and fail; they can also accelerate erosion downstream and upstream. In contrast, bioengineering uses materials such as living plants, often willows, to stabilize the bank. When installed properly, willow stakes, brush-bars and willow mats are stronger and longer-lasting than hard materials.

A lively group of Topangans attended, who had many questions for the presenters. Casey Burns is now stationed two days a week at the Resource Conservation District office in Malibu, and is available for free advice on stream- bank repair. Stay tuned for the next presentation by the TCWC.

For more information contact Casey Burns, Biologist, NRCS at (805) 386-4489; R.C. Brody, Restoration Ecologist, Impact Sciences at (805) 437-1900 or visit the websites, http://www.nrcs.usda.gov or http://www.trcr.bc.ca/docs/2002-polster.pdf.

Topanga Earth Day Festival Offers Two Days of Eco-Awareness and Environmental Solutions

May 3, 2007 - By D. Megan Healey

Topanga’s eighth annual Earth Day Festival, held at the Topanga Community House on Saturday and Sunday, April 21 and 22, attracted more than 50 exhibitors and thousands of attendees, for two days of speakers, workshops, music and other activities, all designed to raise awareness about the challenges facing the planet’s environment today, and perhaps more importantly, the many solutions currently available to those who care enough to make a change. With this year’s theme, “Please Try This at Home,” the festival focused on the power of individual consumers and members of a community to make positive changes both locally and globally.

Not even Sunday’s much needed rain could dampen the crowd’s enthusiasm, according to local realtor Bill Bowling who serves on Topanga’s Watershed Committee. “I think it was a real success,” said Bowling of the festival. “Even with the rain, people really enjoyed themselves and gained a lot of awareness.” Bowling estimated the crowd over the course of the two days at “a few thousand.”

“I think Earth Day should be every day,” said 11-year-old Kansas Bowling, a bass player and back-up singer in the band, The Nutty Nut Nerds, which performed on the main stage Saturday. Ten-year-olds Maya Bon, Emily Goldman, and Max Landau joined Kansas on keyboard, drums, and guitar, respectively, while Kansas’s eight-year old sister Parker served as the well-received group’s official dancer.

Topanga Earth Day’s producer, Stephanie Lallouz, agrees with young Kansas. “Because every day is Earth Day, every day should be a celebration,” she says. That’s why this year’s Earth Day Festival, for the first time in Topanga, was spread over two days,” Lallouz added. “Hopefully next year it will be three days and then the year after that four days, and so on and so on,” she said. “And I’m praying that the next generations will carry this on and inherit this tradition so that one day we can all truly say that every day is Earth Day.”

Exhibitors—from organic food venders and clothing designers, to sustainable housing companies to non-profit organizations raising funds for global causes—helped demonstrate to attendees how they could celebrate and appreciate the Earth every day.

“You just can’t rely on the government to protect our environment,” said two-year Topanga resident Shaun Peterson who spent the day organizing and gathering members for a new Topanga biodiesel co-op. “You have to take it into your own hands. I think the biggest threat to the environment right now is people thinking, ‘Why should I even bother?’… The truth is, one person can make a difference.”

The Festival began on Saturday with a Topanga Creek Clean Up, coordinated by the Topanga Creek Stream team through the Resource Conservation District of the Santa Monica Mountains (RCD). Some 70 volunteers showed up to pitch in on the Clean-up in which Topangans were joined by the Temescal Canyon Association and the Sierra Club Trail Council, according to Rosi Dagit. Dagit said the group hauled away several big-bed trucks with loads of trash collected by day laborers, filling dumpsters paid for by the California Parks Foundation.

The Clean-up has historically yielded some curious “treasures” discarded in the Creek, ranging from old cars abandoned intact to mattresses and box springs. This year was no different. The prize for this year’s most unusual Creek recovery goes to a set of 50-pound lead weights, said Dagit. “Some guy had carried them quite a ways up the hill. And the solar panels and computer monitors that he rigged up were actually fairly impressive, “she laughed.

The Clean-up was followed by a yoga class taught by local yogini Michelle Broussard. Next, a peace flag which read “Walk Across the World,” and included signatures from Tibetan monks and renowned primatologist Jane Goodall, among others, led attendees in a peace walk through sand-drawn hearts on the grass of the baseball field.

As the day progressed, the main stage featured musical acts such as Leon Mobley and Da Lion, as well as speeches from members of the Topanga Peace Alliance and more than 15 other groups.

Proceeds from the festival were donated to two causes—one local, and one global—reflecting the wide range of challenges facing the Earth today. After a vote, the Topanga Earth Day Organizing Committee (TEDOC), decided to donate proceeds to the benefit of the Topanga Watershed Committee, and Jewish World Watch, which, with the Save Darfur Coalition, provides solar cookers to different families that are in refugee camps in and around Darfur.

Ben Allanoff of the Topanga Watershed Committee praised the festival as “outstanding” and promised that his group would use the proceeds for a variety of projects in the Canyon that have “one thing in common: preserving and enhancing the health and well-being of this fabulous eco-system through education and meaningful action.”

Karine Tchakerian, member of Save Darfur Greater Los Angeles and also a member of TEDOC, likewise said her group hopes to “educate people and through education stimulate action.”

“We’re just trying to keep Africa in the front of our minds. When people ask me what they can do, I say just talk about it,” Tchakerian added. “I think that once people know and are educated they act. I don’t think people have cold hearts when they know about something and they’re not going to let it keep on happening.”

There were no small causes at Topanga’s Earth Day Festival. “I would come anyway, so I might as well have a table,” said Topanga resident Lynn Dougherty of Topanga Greens. Her micro-farm/nursery, which was certified organic just this year, specializes in heirloom tomatoes and herbs. She spent the day discussing the value of growing our own food. Dougherty hopes to “reduce our carbon foot-print” by encouraging people to eat food grown locally. “Even if it’s just to have one tomato plant on your balcony, it’s so important,” she said. “I think it makes people feel more connected to where they live, and it’s fun!” Dougherty and others reinforced that theme, and added to the Earth Day festivities, by hosting a “100-mile dinner” at the nursery, a potluck in which the 50-plus participants each contributed a dish grown, raised, or caught within a 100-mile radius of their homes.

Art held a large and important presence at the festival. epOxybOx, a fine art gallery in Venice devoted to the greening of fine art, created a gallery out of the Topanga Community House’s auditorium. epOxybOx’s curator, Deborah Guyer Greene explained that art is an important part of understanding many of today’s challenges. “The difference between regular fine art and the greening of fine art is that it’s a statement about where we’re heading as a culture,” she said. “It’s a reminder of our need to green.”

Their exhibit contained art inspired by or reclaimed from natural, found materials, including the work of Venice artist Carolyn Mendoza. Mendoza’s goal is to “not only express an idea but to visually heal people,” she said. One of her sculptures, entitled, “Transmission,” depicts a car exhaust pipe ejecting reeds instead of exhaust fumes. “With art you can visually stimulate somebody and have them become conscious of what is possible,” she said. “You see a piece in which a muffler is flushing out nature. That represents the idea that the artificial, material world can actually be one with nature. They can coexist. By looking at it everyday you’re conscious of this idea when going out in the world as well.”

Through art, music, food, and entertainment, attendees of the Topanga Earth Day Festival had the opportunity to have fun while learning important lessons about how to be more mindful consumers, how to contribute to their communities and how to address the challenges facing the Earth today. “We are hosted by the earth,” summed up festival producer Lallouz. “We are the occasion of Earth, so we’re guests here and we’ve got to treat our hostess with love and kindness and gratitude.”

Watershed Committee Hosts Global Warming Update

April 5, 2007 - By Michelle Acker

An enthusiastic crowd of Topangans streamed into the Topanga Community House on Wednesday evening, March 21, to the strains of guitar music played by Gos. They were there to learn more about a subject to which too many have turned a deaf ear—the devastating effects of global warming on the future of the planet and the steps we must take to head off the damage.

After thanking Diana Lee and Lauren Bon, who provided beautiful large-scale posters for the event on a pro bono basis, Richard Brody, education outreach chair of the Topanga Watershed Committee that sponsored the program, introduced the evening’s presenter, Mike Ferry. Ferry is a firefighter and amateur scientist who helped to design the implementation plan to convert all firefighting engines in San Francisco to biodiesel. In light of the success of that program, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsome has asked Ferry to help create an implementation plan to switch all city vehicles to biofuels by the end of this year.

Ferry has been specially trained by Al Gore’s Climate Project to give live presentations of the Power Point presentation that forms the basis for the Academy Award-winning documentary on global warming, “An Inconvenient Truth.” While Ferry’s presentation did not include all of the data addressed in the movie, he was able to offer updates to some of the information. The live presentation also offers a more interactive approach with an opportunity for audience questions and discussion.

Although by-and-large nonpartisan in approach, the slide show began with the reminder of George H.W. Bush’s 1988 campaign promises to tackle global warming: “Those who think we are powerless to do anything about the greenhouse effect forget about the White House effect.” Ferry then moved on to a slide purporting to show what progress the United States has made since 1988 in addressing the problem; it was blank.

Ferry pointed to an alarm sounded by scientist James Hansen two years ago, warning that we then had only 10 years to act (not to decide whether to act, but to act) in order to head off the irreversible and devastating effects to the earth’s atmosphere and climate.

The presentation moved on to an exploration of some of the science of the causes of global warming, peppering what might have been a bone-dry series of charts and graphs, with helpful down-to-earth analogies. In describing the fragility of the earth’s seven-mile atmosphere, for example, he compared it to the relative thinness of the skin of an apple.

Much of the presentation was focused on evidence of the existence and rate of global warming. For example, Ferry showed photos of the 12,000-year-old tropical glacier on Mt. Kilimanjaro disappearing over the course of the last few decades due to global warming—literally melting away. Showing photos of the vanishing glaciers, he noted Al Gore’s standard quip to audiences that Glacier National Park will have to be renamed in 20-30 years if the glaciers recede at the rate they are melting today. Both wildlife and commerce in the Arctic are suffering. Polar bears are at risk because of melting ice. Slides showed examples of global warming in Alaska—major roads collapsing and houses and apartment houses tilting because the permafrost is melting underneath.

Pictures of the ancient ice shelves in the Antarctic and Greenland breaking away and dissolving, though familiar to those who had seen the movie, remained stupefying. If the western Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets melt, scientists predict it will raise world oceans by 20 feet, wiping out many coastal communities. Slides, again from the movie, highlighting the effect, showing major portions of population centers in San Francisco, Manhattan, Calcutta, and Shanghai all underwater. Ferry pointed out that the Dutch government takes the problem so seriously that it is encouraging its citizens to adopt floating housing.

Ferry went on to explain the seeming contradiction of how global warming is simultaneously responsible for increased storm activity, such as Hurricane Katrina, in some parts of the globe, while causing extensive drought elsewhere. It is all part of an overall global climate picture, he said.

Ferry next documented the cause of global warming—extraordinary increases in carbon dioxide emissions over the last two centuries. Tests on ice core samples have shown that for 650,000 years the earth’s CO2 conditions have not changed that much, never going above 300 parts per million. Now, CO2 makes up nearly 400 p.p.m. of the earth’s atmosphere, said Ferry, and if consumption of fossil fuels continues at its current pace, is predicted to reach 600 p.p.m. in the next 45 years. He also documented the historic links between peaks and valleys in atmospheric CO2 with periods of warming and glaciation.

Where do the excessive carbon dioxide emissions come from? Primarily from burning of fossil fuels—oil, coal and natural gas—used to make energy, said Ferry. For some, the national economy is measured by energy produced and expended.

Ferry spent a good deal of time demonstrating that scientists have predicted global warming since at least 1949 and that there is near unanimity on the subject among scientific articles in peer-reviewed journals. He maintained that those commercial and political interests who wish to discourage the kinds of change that would be needed to combat the trend have undertaken a concerted effort to create the misimpression in the popular media that there is scientific controversy on the point, comparing the campaign of disinformation to that of the tobacco companies.

What can we do? Ferry acknowledged that reversing the trend would be costly, but contended that both care for the environment and a healthy economy could co-exist. The cost of reversing global warming is equivalent to what the United States has spent on the war in Iraq, said Ferry. He also pointed out that there are even higher economic costs to doing nothing. Economists say the choice is between investing a relatively low percentage of gross national product now or losing a lot more later.

Mr. Ferry covered alternatives we have such as renewable energy and industries such as wind energy and solar power. He also urged an increase in auto efficiency, pointing out that U.S. standards are among the worst in the world on this score.

He also discussed the failure of the United States—alone with Australia among the world’s nations—to sign and ratify the Kyoto Treaty, an agreement to decrease carbon emissions globally.

Suggestions for personal action including educating yourself and others, making connections, staying current, consuming less energy and consuming locally grown produce. Ferry also recommended organic foods, which do not require the use of fertilizers made with natural gas.

There was a lively after-discussion as to how to better convince the unpersuaded. Disappointingly, Ferry had no specific information about how global warming would likely effect the Topanga—or even the greater Los Angeles—area, but various participants offered their own conjectures. (One said the sea walls at Topanga Beach are only 10 feet above sea level.) Another participant suggested connecting with two groups she said have tremendous clout via the Internet—Physicians for Social Responsibility and the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Topanga Environmental Workshops

March 23, 2006 - By Matt Horns

On March 25, The Topanga Creek Watershed Committee is launching a new program, a series of workshops designed to provide education about Topanga Canyon’s natural environment. Everyone is invited to attend, and anyone who has information to share is welcome to direct a workshop of their own.

I will kick off the program with a tour of my Geology Masters Thesis project area. I’m studying three landslides along Topanga Creek and their influences on aquatic habitats, focusing on habitat conditions for steelhead trout. The project will investigate how the landslides affect pools, gravel beds, instream cover, water turbidity, sedimentation and canopy. Landslides typically cause damage to habitat by delivering excess amounts of sediment into the stream channel that buries spawning gravel and fills pools, but they might also have positive effects.

Past research on landslides has focused mainly on negative environmental effects, but my project will document both positive and negative effects from these specific landslides. Potential positive effects include creating boulder-scour pools and dam-pools that provide instream cover and act as sediment traps, and delivering gravel to the stream that provides spawning habitat.

This first event will be held on Saturday, March 25 from 10 a.m. to noon. We will meet at the site where the “Green House” was removed from the stream bank along Topanga Canyon Boulevard, approximately 1.5 miles upstream from the coast.

On a topo map, the wide spaces between contour lines on the slope just west of the site represent a large mid-slope bench. This bench was created by a deep-seated landslide that occurred around a thousand years ago, when a large section of the mountain slumped downslope. The toe of that ancient slide has been undercut by stream erosion. The landslides we see along the stream are sections of this old landslide deposit that are de-stabilized by stream undercutting.

Much of the tour will take place along the roadside where terrain is gentle and access is easy. We will spend some time across the creek on the slide deposit. If you want to cross the creek with us, be prepared to negotiate rough terrain and expect to get wet and muddy. I will present lots of information about landslides that have had a major role in producing Topanga’s topography. Because of traffic hazards along the road, the rough terrain, and other potential dangers, this tour is not suitable for children. If you have kids interested in this kind of thing, you can take the information you gain here and share it with them in a safer environment.

People have expressed interest in conducting other events on subjects including Topanga’s wild mushrooms and local soil erosion problems. I’m hoping someone would also like to lead a bird-watching event and a tour of Topanga’s native plants. If you would like to conduct a tour on these or any other subject, let me know and we’ll schedule a time for you. Call me at 310-453-8504, or email me at mhorns_1@hotmail.com.

I believe this program is a good way for us TCWC folks to get to know our watershed better and to get our community more aware of Topanga’s natural wonders. All help and support will be appreciated.

Watershed Committee Meeting Feb. 11

February 9, 2006 - By Matt Horns, Topanga Creek Watershed Committee

Water quality in Topanga Creek is an urgent issue for Topanga Canyon residents, visitors to Topanga Beach, and our ecosystem. Once again, this will be the primary topic at the Topanga Creek Watershed Committee’s next meeting scheduled for Saturday, February 11, from 10 a.m. to noon at a place to be determined.

Keeping the creek clean is important for two reasons. For one, pollution and bacteria can be harmful to plants and animals that inhabit Topanga Creek and marine waters that it flows into.

The other reason we want to keep the creek clean is that preventing pollution is much easier and more economical that cleaning up pollution after it gets into our environment. Controlling pollution is a difficult and expensive task. Much of the cost for this effort will be borne by Topanga residents, but if we allow the creek to become badly polluted the price tag for cleaning it up will be astronomical.

Rapid urban and suburban development creates pollution problems that are often subtle and decentralized, making them difficult to detect and ever harder to solve. Polluted runoff from urban areas is increasing at a rate that in many places overwhelms environmental advances.

Let’s consider our local pollution problems in a global context. Of course, our situation is not universal around the planet. Some places are roughly on a par with us, like Australia and Canada. China, however, probably the biggest water polluter on earth, is 50 years behind us and is only now beginning to face horrendous pollution from industry and agriculture. Eastern Europeans, faced with a wake-up call we know as Chernobyl, are a not quite as far behind as China.

Western European nations have been confronted with problems of urbanization for a long time. They have learned from their experiences and in many cases are ahead of the U.S. in grappling with pollution problems. They still, however, have a long way to go. Just last week the Los Angeles Times reported the discovery of pharmaceuticals in our drinking water. Western Europe discovered decades ago that hormones derived from birth-control pills found their way through sewage treatment plants and permeated river water. Several species of fish in the rivers are unable to reproduce as a result. No solution has yet been found for this problem.

Central and South America are a mixed bag, with some of the most pristine areas on earth juxtaposed with centers of urban and industrial squalor. In Africa, most people are so desperately poor that simple survival takes precedence over environmental problems.

Our survival is totally dependent on clean water. The benefits of clean lakes and streams are well-known. Less well-known is the fact that marine algae produces most of the atmospheric oxygen crucial to all animal life on the planet, and that algae can tolerate only so much toxic pollution.

California is a world leader in pollution control, largely thanks to forward-looking citizens who want to live in a healthy environment and are willing to commit their personal lives to that goal. The Topanga Creek Watershed Committee (TCWC) is one of a multitude of local environmentally-oriented neighborhood groups who work daily to protect our home, our planet, for future generations.

Government agencies charged with cleaning up water pollution can only do so much. Their policies and regulations are often very costly to citizens while doing little to solve any problems. The TCWC is a truly grass-roots organization, and at the same time is well-connected with other neighborhood groups and government agencies. This gives us a unique ability to network with citizens and public agencies, who can help find real solutions to problems and spread the word about them throughout the community.

Please join us at our next meeting help us keep our creek and our planet clean and healthy. This month we will present ideas on how to prevent water pollution from residential septic tank.

The next TCWC meeting will be held on Saturday, February 11, from 10 a.m. to noon at a place to be determined.

For more information, contact Matt at (310) 453-8504 or e-mail mhorns_1@hotmail.com.

People Power…Not Poison!

December 15, 2005 - By David Totheroh

Dear Editor,

Before leaving the Canyon to celebrate Thanksgiving with my family, I had the pleasure of touring some of the arundo removal sites in Lower Topanga with project director Jon Earl and new Watershed Committee chair Matt Horns. I use the word ‘pleasure’ very purposefully. Although I have missed only a few of the monthly projects held over the last two-and-a-half years when work took me out of town, my efforts have been limited to the lower Rodeo Grounds sites we were allowed to work on by State Parks. With the exception of the first few sessions, I have not visited the upper Brookside sites where I knew others were continuing to work. The successes in those areas are nothing short of spectacular, especially given the ‘accepted wisdom’ of ‘experts’ who continually said it couldn’t happen.

Our success further downstream has been a bit more limited, for reasons ranging from what I see as near-overt sabotage by State Parks, to unavoidable setbacks due to weather. But even within those limits, and the admitted disappointment of early regrowth through the first growing season, the progress is very promising.

And the project gained even more meaning and importance when, upon returning from vacation, I read the front page feature story in the Sunday Los Angeles Times (available online) reporting that “[s]cientists have amassed evidence that long-term exposure to toxic agents, especially pesticides” can be a “trigger for Parkinson’s,” a debilitating neurological disease in humans. It is true that paraquat—the one toxin specifically identified in the story—is a different class than the glyphosate proposed to be used on the arundo here. But it is important to note that it is “a combination of many environmental chemicals” that seems to have the greatest negative neurological impact. And it is also important to remember that at the time—the 1960s—the chemical industry was offering up the same ‘safe’ evaluations of paraquat that we now hear about glyphosate.

Imagine my disappointment when I learned in the Messenger (“Fate of Arundo Project in Doubt,” Vol. 29 No. 24, December 1-14, 2005) that Suzanne Goode, identified as “Senior Ecologist for State Parks,” was quoted as saying about the project technically under her supervision “...I don’t think it can succeed, and I don’t think it’s succeeded to this point” in spite of the fact that “she confessed she hadn’t visited the arundo sites for six months.”

Especially in light of the Times story identifying weedkillers as a trigger to neurological disease, it would be irresponsible for State Parks to let the efforts of so many volunteers involved in the experimental non-toxic arundo removal project go for naught at exactly the time when it is starting to really pay off. And it would be unconscionable to fail to find ongoing ways to support and expand the promise of success by non-toxic means being won by that same unpaid volunteer labor pool. We simply cannot afford to keep dumping more of this stuff into our environment, especially when alternatives are now proving their effectiveness.

Fate of Arundo Project in Doubt

December 1, 2005 - By Dan Mazur

The volunteer turnout for last month’s arundo-cutting on State Park land in Lower Topanga was the best it’s been in a while. More than 20 people showed up that day to re-cut the new sprouts of arundo donax. While the volunteers could look with satisfaction at the apparent retreat of the invasive weed in the areas that have been cut for the last 20 months, there was a note of frustration and sadness to the day’s labors as well—because the grant that was paying a State Parks employee to supervise the volunteers has run out, leaving the project in limbo.

Will State Parks allow this effort—hard-fought-for by Topanga anti-herbicide activists— to continue? Is the experiment to control arundo without the use of chemical herbicides working?

As of late October, Suzanne Goode, Senior Ecologist for State Parks, votes ‘no,’ though she confessed to not having visited the arundo sites for six months.

“I’m not interested in paying someone to supervise them, since I don’t think it can succeed, and I don’t think it’s succeeded to this point,” she said.

Jon Earl, whose organization Rhapsody in Green has been central to the volunteer effort, has a very different perspective. He acknowledges that the arundo is still re-sprouting at some of the sites that have been hand-cut, but argues that the apparent death of other arundo patches indicates the method can—and has—worked.

“They would only consider it a victory if everything is dead,” Earl said, referring to State Parks’ negative attitude toward the project. “I admit everything isn’t dead, but the stuff that we cut legitimately for two years is dead.”

As for continuing the project without paid supervision, Goode is skeptical, although she says that would not be without precedent.

“There are places where the same volunteers have shown up year after year and don’t require a paid supervisor,” she says, “but I don’t have that level of comfort in this case.”

This disconnect between the park agencies officials and anti-herbicide activists has characterized the history of the arundo removal project, which was introduced to the Topanga community back in 2001, shortly after State Parks purchased the land that begins at the corner of Topanga Canyon Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway.

Most Topangans seem to accept the premise that the hardy, bamboo-like arundo chokes off stream flow and drives out native plant species. But a sizeable, and vocal, segment of the community took great exception to the planned use of the herbicide glyphosate to combat the weed, though State Parks and its partner in the project, the Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority (MRCA), claimed that the chemical posed no health or environmental threat.

Jon Earl and Ellen Petty—environmental teachers at Calmont School and founders of Rhapsody in Green, an anti-invasive, anti-herbicide volunteer organization—argued that there was an another way. Earl and Petty had led a class of fifth graders at Calmont in repeated hand-cuttings of a stand of arundo stalks on school property. By regularly forcing the arundo to expend energy for re-growth, said Earl and Petty, the plants’ ability to replace nutrients was ultimately exhausted. The Calmont patch had been defeated, they said, and they were eager to try the method on the larger battlefield at Lower Topanga.

After several heated meetings between community members and Parks and MRCA officials, the agencies agreed in late 2003 to hold off on any herbicide applications for at least a year. During that time, volunteers could go to work, and try to prove that the manual method was effective.

At first, 25 to 30 volunteers showed up regularly for the monthly or bi-weekly two-hour cutting sessions. Over the past two years, however, the numbers have slipped to an average of 10 to 12. Still, several patches that were once heavily overgrown with tall arundo stalks have been cut and re-cut fairly consistently over that time.

To the naked eye, it certainly appears that the method has worked—in the patches where the effort has been consistent, the arundo has been reduced to a few scattered stalks, or less.

On November 22, Earl toured the arundo sites along with Matt Horns, the new coordinator of the Topanga Watershed Committee, to demonstrate this apparent success. Earl emphasized several patches in the Brookside area of Lower Topanga, where, despite proximity to the creek as a water supply, the arundo shows no sign of life.

“It’s definitely rotting,” Horns said, breaking off one of the dry stumps that had been cut over the last two years. “Everything above the ground is definitely dead.”

David Totheroh, one of the regular volunteers, pointed out that success against the resilient arundo plants has only become apparent in recent months. The key, he said, was to keep cutting the stalks through two of its growing cycles, which will take a year-and-a-half at least.

“If you came out for a year and a couple of months,” Totheroh said, “you’d say ‘what am I doing here?’ But you put in a few more months and it starts to go.”

“I’m highly impressed and surprised,” Horns said, after visiting sites where the arundo is apparently defeated, as well as those where it’s been greatly diminished. Horns remembered the dense forests of huge stands that had been here before the project began.

“It seemed like a total lost cause to start with.”

Those who oppose herbicide use can take credit for a temporary victory at least—with the grant that would have funded glyphosate use against arundo at Lower Topanga having expired, the agencies have no specific plans, or budget, to begin spraying there. But Goode hasn’t wavered in her belief that herbicide use is the only way to effectively combat the spread of arundo. She says that the Parks Department has by no means ruled out herbicides in Lower Topanga in the future, but for now has other priorities in their restoration of the area.

“Our department’s focus now is on getting the structures out,” she says, referring to the homes that have been vacated by the relocated Lower Topanga community. “And on working with the RCD [Resource Conservation District] to get funding to remove the berm that has deflected the creek flow for all these years.”

Earl maintains that the partial success he and the volunteers have achieved could be expanded with more time and knowledge, such as the ideal timing for repeated re-cutting.

“I’m very confident that as we understand more about it we could change our timing and defeat the other sites that have done better. There’s only so much that we know. But there are certain sites that are dying, and the so-called experts said you couldn’t kill it by hand-cutting—so the experts don’t know either.”

Discussions are taking place among the dedicated arundo-cutting volunteers and anti-herbicide Topangans as to how to keep their efforts going. An admitted weak point of the project has been a lack of consistent documentation of the effects of the re-cutting. Photographs of the sites at various points in the process are being compiled.

Another weakness has been the dwindling number of volunteers. But here, too, Earl points to the bright side—the turnout may not have been overwhelming, but a core group has come out consistently, month after month to work the arundo fields.

“This group came out 29 times in a row—the community did—they’re there for the long haul. And arundo isn’t the only problem down there. Who’s going to get the Cape Ivy, who’s going to get the fennel?” Earl asks, referring to other non-native invasives. “Are they going to have to keep getting grants? These are the people who would do it—the community, doing it for free.”

So what might it take to continue this approach? Goode, while not overly encouraging, gives a clear answer.

“People would have to approach us with some kind of plan,” she says, admitting that an unpaid volunteer coordinator isn’t out of the question. “It’s possible. It depends on who that is. The project is winding down and I’m not that enthusiastic about it.”

Matt Horns says that he doesn’t consider use of glyphosate in Lower Topanga the biggest threat to the Topanga watershed, but he sees value in volunteer efforts. In particular, he sees the community’s involvement and commitment as an opportunity for increasing environmental education and awareness of watershed issues.

“It’s a very valuable project,” Horns said.

SIGNS, BUT NO SIGNIFICANCE

Ironically, last month also saw the appearance of two new signs along Topanga Canyon Boulevard “announcing” the arundo project. Local residents and arundo-cutting volunteers were confused and worried—was this a signal that the herbicide spraying was about to begin? No, explains Suzanne Goode. These signs were a requirement of the original grant obtained by the MRCA several years ago.

“It just took us a while,” Goode says. “There is no significance to it, we’re just late getting them up.”