Feb. 2008 Santa RM Lucian - Sierra Club · Susan Goodkin in Ventura. Susan wrote the text of the successful SOAR initiative in Ventura County. She recommended that I talk to Rachel

Santa Lucian • Feb. 2008 RM

The official newsletter of the Santa Lucia Chapter of the Sierra Club • San Luis Obispo County, California

I n s i d eI n s i d eI n s i d eI n s i d eI n s i d eMeet a water visionary 2

Break laws, make money 4

Letters: Desal dilemma 5

This changes everything 6

Diablo ‘68: Born in fire 8

SC Board endorsements 10

Classifieds 11

Outings 12

Please recycle

This newsletter printed on100% post-consumer recycled paper with

soy-based inks

February 2008Volume 45 No. 2

Santa LucianSanta Lucia Chapter of the Sierra ClubP. O. Box 15755San Luis Obispo, CA 93406

NONPROFIT ORG.U.S. POSTAGE

PAIDPERMIT NO. 84

SAN LUIS OBISPOCA 93401

Protecting andPreserving theCentral Coast

SantaLucian

General Meeting

7 p.m., Feb. 22,St. Stephens EpiscopalChurch, SLO:

It Takes a Creek

Hear from the peopleworking to save our localstreams and watershedsand find out what youcan do.

- see page 2

Why We Sue

Hard rain: The Cayucos Viewshed deserves better than what it got from the Board of Supervisors.

- 40 Years on the SLO Coast -Santa Lucia Chapter

1968-2008

For theCayucosViewshedSierra Club sues to fix flawed CayucosViewshed ordinance. Action wouldforce review of environmental impactsof controversial measure.

The Santa Lucia Chapter of the SierraClub filed suit against the County of SanLuis Obispo on January 17. We arechallenging the Cayucos Viewshedordinance as approved by SupervisorsOvitt, Achadjian and Lenthall in one ofthe most controversial actions taken bythe County Board of Supervisors lastyear. “Projects permitted and built underthis ordinance would significantlydegrade scenic public views in one ofthis county’s signature landscapes,” saidKaren Merriam, Chair of the SierraClub’s Santa Lucia Chapter. “The SierraClub cannot stand by and allow such anact of destruction to take place. Onbehalf of this irreplaceable landscapeand the hundreds of citizens who askedthe supervisors to honor a soundplanning process and the broad publicopposition to narrow private interests,the Sierra Club must take this boldaction to fix the problem the boardcreated.” The board majority was widelycriticized for passing the ordinance asdrafted by a private property rightsgroup and ignoring more protectivedrafts prepared by county planners andunanimously approved by the supervi-sors’ appointees on the County PlanningCommission. Planning staff had foundthat the “prominent ridgeline” standarddeveloped by Protect our PropertyRights (POPR) was flawed and un-usable. The board of supervisors ignoredthis fundamental flaw, agreed to reducethe area recommended by the PlanningCommission by more than nine-tenthsand add multiple exemptions for landowners and future land speculatorswishing to build homes on ridgelines. The Sierra Club’s lawsuit is designedto protect the viewshed from inappro-priate development and safeguardenvironmental resources in the areaby keeping current standards in placeand preventing any projects from goingforward under the new ordinance; stopthe precedent-setting nature of theordinance from weakening otherviewshed protection policies elsewherein the county by requiring a fullEnvironmental Impact Report (EIR)with a complete alternatives analysis;

highlight the county’s consistent abuseof state law through the inappropriateuse of “Negative Declarations” claimingno environmental impacts, and put anend to that abuse. An EIR wouldrequire that the county put mitigationsin place for any identified impacts to theenvironment resulting from the broad

loopholes in the ord-inance. (Example:Under the ordinance, a home on a2,600-foot long ridgeline would have tobe longer than a football field to triggerminimal screening requirements.) The board plowed the process underand consigned 47,000 acres of near

A Watershed Win

The record overflow crowd at the Jan. 17 LAFCO meeting.

continued on page 3

continued on page 10

It was January 19,2006. My wifeJeanne and I were atthe Avila Club and Ipicked up a copy ofthe Tribune. Thetop story of the localsection said: “PismoCouncil OKsHousing Plan.”

by Jeffrey E. Auerbach, Ph.D., MCC

On January 17, South County residentssucceeded in turning back Los Robles

del Mar, an unsustainable proposedhousing development and annexation

that had beenheading for inevi-table approval forover ten years. Thisis the story of theirextraordinary grass-roots victory.

2 Santa Lucian • Feb. 2008

Change of Address? Mail changes to:

Sierra Club National Headquarters85 Second Street, 2nd FloorSan Francisco, CA 94105-3441

or e-mail:[email protected]

Visit us onthe Web!

w w ww w ww w ww w ww w w. s a n t a l u c i a .. s a n t a l u c i a .. s a n t a l u c i a .. s a n t a l u c i a .. s a n t a l u c i a .s i e r r a c l u b . o r gs i e r r a c l u b . o r gs i e r r a c l u b . o r gs i e r r a c l u b . o r gs i e r r a c l u b . o r g

Outings, events, and more!

2500

Jack MorrowWater that Works

General MeetingSSSSSanananananttttta a a a a LLLLLuuuuuccccciiiiiananananan

EDITOR/LAYOUTKaren MerriamCleve NashJack McCurdyEDITORIAL BOARD

The Santa Lucian is published 10 times ayear. Articles, environmental informationand letters to the editor are welcome. Thedeadline for each issue is the 11th of theprior month.

send to:Editor, Santa Lucianc/o Santa Lucia Chapter, Sierra ClubP.O. Box 15755San Luis Obispo, CA [email protected]

Santa Lucia Chapter

2007 Executive CommitteeKaren Merriam CHAIRJack Morrow

Cal French MEMBERJohn Ashbaugh MEMBERSteven MarxTREASURER

Cleve Nash MEMBER [email protected]

Judith Bernstein MEMBER

Cal French COUNCIL OF CLUB LEADERS

Committee ChairsPolitical Chuck TribbeyConservation Sue Harvey [email protected] Cal FrenchActing Program Chair Letty French [email protected] Andy GreensfelderNuclear Power Task Force Rochelle BeckerDesal Task Force Jack Morrow

Other Leaders

Open SpaceGary Felsman 805-473-3694Calendar SalesBonnie Walters 805-543-7051Chapter HistoryJohn Ashbaugh 805-541-6430

ActivitiesOutingsGary Felsman 805-473-3694Canoe/Kayak open

Webmaster Monica Tarzier [email protected]

General InformationSanta Lucia ChapterP.O. Box 15755San Luis Obispo, CA 93406

Chapter DirectorAndrew [email protected]

Office hours Monday-Friday,11 a.m.- 5 p.m., 547-B MarshStreet, San Luis Obispo

The Executive Committee meetsthe fourth Tuesday of everymonth at 3:30 p.m. at thechapter office, located at 547-BMarsh St., San Luis Obispo. Allmembers are welcome to attend.

[email protected]

[email protected]

Andrew Christie

[email protected]

VICE CHAIR [email protected]

Printed by University Graphic Systems

[email protected]

[email protected]

If you hear only one internationalwastewater treatment visionary thisyear...

WWWWWhahahahahat’t’t’t’t’s In s In s In s In s In YYYYYour Crour Crour Crour Crour Creek?eek?eek?eek?eek?Quite a lot that you may not want!Get the big-picture of watershedmanagement from the experts andhear the first-hand experience ofthe struggle to clean up NipomoCreek from some determined localresidents.Find out what’s gettinginto your own beloved local water-way.

7 p.m., Friday, February 22St. Stephens Episcopal Church1334 Nipomo St., San Luis Obispo- Pismo Street entrance parking lot off Pismo.

SLO Green Build,the San Luis BayChapter of theSurfrider Founda-tion and the SantaLucia Chapter ofthe Sierra Club areworking togetherwith governmentagencies to educatethe community onemerging technolo-gies that will aid insustainable devel-opment and greenbuilding. The first phase of the cam-paign will focus on technologies thathelp conserve water — just in time tohelp out areas such as the Nipomomesa, Los Osos and Cambria, which arerated at critical Level III water severity. The education campaign will kick offFeb. 6th and 7th with keynote speakerJonathan Todd of Todd Ecological De-sign, Inc., an award-winning water andnatural resources planning firm. ToddEcological (www.toddecological.com)has been featured in CNN Internationaland Audubon magazine as an ecologicalvisionary of the 21st century, providingcomprehensive construction, design,consulting, and facility operations ser-vices to public and private clients forcost-effective aesthetic solutions towastewater, storm water, aquatic envi-ronment management, and bio-solidsconversion. At each of two events, Todd will ad-dress appropriate technology in SanLuis Obispo county, including the LosOsos wastewater treatment project. The events will feature a display oftechnologies such as composting toilets,gray water systems, dual flush toiletsand much more. There will be refresh-ments, food and music. We will raffle offseveral prizes including a dual flushtoilet, surfboard, and an overnight stayat TreeBones Resort in Big Sur.

Schedule of Events:

- 2/6/08, Morning site tour of LosOsos to develop a Todd EcologicalProject Proposal for submittal to SLOCounty’s Los Osos Waste Water Treat-ment Project. Tour by Chuck Cesena,director of LOCSD.- 1 pm: Meeting w/ SLO County LosOsos Project Team @ SLO Gov’t Center

- Afternoon Meetings with RegionalWater Board and local municipalities. Public Presentations & SustainabilitySocials February 6th, Wed; 6 - 9 p.m. @ SLOBotanical Garden ($20 suggested dona-tion) New education & convention facil-ity (www.slobg.org), (El Chorro Re-gional Park, across Hwy 1 from CuestaCollege. February 7th, Thurs; 6 - 10 p.m.: LOSOSOS @ South Bay Community Center (2180 Palisades Ave., behind the skatepark.)

At both events: ~ Music by the Cuesta Jazz Ensemble ~ American Flatbread Pizza, CayucosBrewing Company Beer, Wine, SweetEarth Organic Chocolate, and Raffle byDonation (All funds raised will assistsustainability efforts within SLOCounty.)

Appropriate technology defined:“Technology appropriate to sustain asociety of finite resources at a humanscale,” utilizing triple bottom line ac-counting- economy, ecology and socialequity. - Design For Life, Sim Van der Ryn,(California State Architect 1970 - 1980)

Statement from the State of Cali-fornia Office of AppropriateTechnology:“The use of appropriate technology canhelp make possible energy optimization,water conservation and affordable hous-ing.”

Santa Lucian • Feb. 2008 RM3

“The City Council approved theproposal Nov. 16, 2004, on the conditionthat the developers could prove waterfrom two city wells – which haven’tbeen used in 10 years – is treatable. Thedevelopers couldn’t. Instead, theyshowed that three wells on the LosRobles property contain enoughtreatable water to serve the develop-ment.” I looked at my wife and said, “Wait aminute, we live right near there, theymust be talking about pumping thewater from under our neighborhood’shomes – that’s where we get our waterfrom. They might pump so much thatall our wells could go dry.” Jeanne looked worried. I had ahectic work schedule coming up and Isaid to her, “Maybe you could call thecounty and find out more about this?” We were both so busy we neverseemed to get around to it. Finally shegave the county a call and found outthat the Local Agency FormationCommission knew about the City ofPismo Beach’s plans because PismoBeach was trying to annex the LRDMparcel. Jeanne ended up talking to DavidChurch at LAFCO, one of the county’smost diligent public servants. Heprovided us with some initial docu-ments on the proposed annexation,especially related to the source of waterfor the 312-residence development. Itturned out there was no environmental

impact report done on the impact ofpumping or the developer transferringthe title of the three wells to the City ofPismo Beach or the City’s plan to pumpthem for “for unlimited use.” Neighbors got involved big time. We

formed a non-profit organization, TheOak Park Community Group, and askedfor donations so we could retain anattorney. The most active of us becameour Board of Directors. We created awebsite and had a fund-raising drive –all done by incredible volunteers whogave countless hours. I called my friends David Gold andSusan Goodkin in Ventura. Susanwrote the text of the successful SOARinitiative in Ventura County. Sherecommended that I talk to RachelHooper, considered one of the bestCEQA attorneys in the state, at Shute,Mihaly and Weinberger LLP in SanFrancisco. Rachel began helping us andbrought in her associate, AttorneyGabriel Ross. With Rachel and Gabe’s legal

Watershed Wincontinued from page 3

assistance we were able to demand aSupplemental EIR to study the impactof the proposed pumping of these bigwells by the City of Pismo Beach on theneighbors’ water supply and also on thewetlands across the street from the

project on Oak Park Boulevard. Our group hired hydrologistDerrick Williams, and his re-port said the pumping of thewells might dry out the wet-lands. I had been a PoliticalChair for the Los Padres Chap-ter of the Sierra Club, so Istarted calling Andrew Christieat the Santa Lucia Chapter forhelp and advice. (See “Pismo’s

What was accomplished today isunprecedented in our County, and alandmark decision that will aid ourposition on future land use matters formany years.

- John Schwind, OPCG Board Member

Spared: The Oak Park Basin’s Meadow Creek wetlands..

Bring Backthe CoastDaylightTrain!

In the fall of 2007, after attending theChico State Sustainability Conference,

Would you take the train from SLO toSan Francisco if there was one?And if it was easy, fast, and on time?And if it cost around $40? Then youneed to get behind the Coast DaylightProject, restoring daily train servicebetween L.A. and S.F. for the first timein 35 years. This was the gist of the Rail Passen-ger Association of California meetingheld at the SLO public library on Janu-ary 19, led by RailPAC President PaulDyson. The Sierra Club is all about masstransit alternatives to car and airtravel, easing traffic congestion andputting a significant dent in globalwarming emissions via increased railtravel...so let’s all get on board thistrain! For the state to allocate the funds todo it right (planners are keenly awareof the on-time and ease of use require-

ments) and start service by 2011, thelegislature needs to start feeling thepush now from residents of communi-ties along the route. Contact Assembly-member Sam Blakeslee (549-3381) andSenator Abel Maldonado (549-3784) andtell them you support the allocation of$25 million in Proposition 1B funds bythe California Transportation Commis-sion to establish the Coast Daylightroute. RailPAC welcomes queries and assis-tance. E-mail [email protected]

Jorge Montezuma (left) and Ben Eckold (right) confer with Sierra ClubCalifornia Energy Committee co-chair Ken Smokoska on the establishmentof the Cal Poly Sierra Student Coalition chapter.

Sierra Student Coalition Coming to Cal Poly

members of the Empower PolyCoalition (EPC)decided to establisha Cal Poly chapter ofthe Sierra Club’snational studentcoalition. The Sierra Stu-dent Coalition is thenation’s largeststudent-led environ-mental group, withover 250 affiliatedgroups at schoolsaround the country. EPC membersBen Eckold, a sus-tainable businessmajor, and JorgeMontezuma, anenvironmentalengineering major,decided it was time

What a Meeting That Was

Public comments proceeded for overfour hours, with most people speakingagainst LRDM. Several members of OPCG relatedanecdotes about how they have had toredrill wells during the past two years,and how the quality of water from thosewells had suffered. Several people talkedabout the use of their land for agricul-ture, with many acres planted grapesand olive trees. They related how lossof water would cause them severe eco-nomic as well as aesthetic losses. Thecommentary also highlighted that theSEIR had severely underestimated the

Water Trap,” April 2006 Santa Lucian.) Then Harry Goodnight from the OakPark Homeowners Association gotinvolved and joined the Santa LuciaChapter’s Conservation Committee. TheSierra Club joined us in our letter-writing efforts. We were on the Dave Congalton radioshow twice and Jeanne organized a“March for Awareness” – a two-milewalk of 60 people carrying signs thatwas featured on two TV stations. We had countless meetings, ex-changed thousands of emails, and thenon January 17, 2008, we won: a 6-1 voteat LAFCO against the Los Robles delMar annexation!

expected use of the parcels adjacent tothe project in several ways:· There are 742 parcels in the Oak Parkbasin, not all of which are developed,but will be developed in the comingyears.· Given the number of parcels and theexpected new dwellings that that will bebuilt, the water usage of these parcelswas severely underestimated.· Many of the parcels contain someaspect of agricultural usage, which haswater requirements far beyond those ofresidential uses.· Should the aquifer be put in over-draft, the only recourse would be to sueSLO County, Pismo Beach, and ArroyoGrande. In the meantime, propertyvalues would plummet and peoplemight have to abandon their homes. Environmental impacts on wetlandsand riparian areas in Oak Park Canyonwere discounted in the SEIR, when infact there were documented cases ofimpacts on wetlands and oaks due to thedrought, without LRDM pumping. The denial of annexation was “with-out prejudice,” meaning that Pismodoes not need to wait a full 12 monthsto resubmit the application for annex-ation, should they be able to identify asource of water for LRDM. It ain’t overtil the fat lady sings!

Harry Goodnight on the Jan. 17 LAFCO Los Robles del Mar annexation hearing

to integrate more students into theenvironmental movement by offering analternative path within the studentcommunity to train, empower, and or-ganize youth to run effective environ-mental campaigns that result in tan-gible victories and leadership develop-ment. To accomplish this, they have been

“Be the Change ‘08,” which will be heldat the Cal Poly campus on April 26th. Once it receives its campus charter,The Cal Poly Sierra Student Coalitionhopes to facilitate the connectionbetween Cal Poly students and the SantaLucia Chapter of the Sierra Club. For more information, [email protected]

working with Empower Poly to helpdevelop the second annual studentsustainability leadership conference,


Gaming the System

Nuclear Task Force Report, Winter 2007

By Sue Harvey

Should someone who gets caught vio-lating our county codes by undertakingcommercial development without apermit, falsely claiming the work is foragricultural activities and thereforeexempt from permit requirements, get

off without a fine? What if the projecthe is pursuing not onlylacked proper permits,but was clearly notallowable under thepolicies of our county’sGeneral Plan? Shouldthe violator be exoner-ated and allowed to

profit from those activities? Does it make sense for the County toissue an “after the fact” permit to legal-ize something that would not beapprovable on an undisturbed site? These are the ques-tions that County Plan-ning Commissionersconsidered last Julywhen they grappledwith and tentativelyapproved, on a 3-2vote, several new cellphone antennas on agruesomely decapitatedmountaintop on Highway 41 West. The property owner told neighbors hewas grading a road to a hilltop homes-ite, and bulldozing a large berm as partof his building pad. The highly visiblesite, now a bald plateau, is geologicallyunstable. The road is steep, narrow, andnot built to CDF standards. When dubi-ous neighbors contacted County Code

enforcement, theowner told the countythat the developmentwas for an agriculturalbarn, and was there-fore exempt frompermit requirements. There was just one problem. Theproperty owner is not a farmer. He is aconsultant for the cell phone industrywho lives in Southern California , andwho knew that Nextel was seeking addi-tional service opportunities along thatstretch of Highway 41 when he bought

the property. Whencounty staff visitedthe site, instead of abarn they found a se-ries of dummy cellantennas on the “build-ing pad” and an over-sized electrical panel.Claiming that his grad-ing activities were un-

dertaken in the name of agriculture isan insult to this county’s farmers andranchers who utilize this exemption forlegitimate ag pur-poses. The gentleman hasa contract withSprint/Nextel to pro-vide cell phone ser-vice on the site. Notsurprisingly, he doesnot have a contractfor any agriculturalproducts. While the value of the cellService contract was not disclosed, asimilar arrangement with Nextel in

Cambria would havenetted that land owner$50,000 per year. So bya conservative esti-mate, the Highway 41site will generate atleast $5,000 per month-- more if other cellproviders add on, which they are certainto do. The County’s general plan poli-cies discourage new cell sites where “co-location” with existing towers or otherstructures, such as power poles, areavailable. In fact, approval of a new siteis the last of five options spelled out inorder of preference in Section 22.30.180Of the County’s Land Use Ordinance. So, are there other options forNextel’s cell towers in that area? You betthere are. Nextel’s representative toldthe Planning Commission that threeother existing sites in the area, whilenot optimal, wouldprovide adequate cover-age for its customers.According to Countystaff, the permits forthose facilities requirethe operators to makethe antennas availableto other cell serviceproviders. So logic andreason would dictate that local decision-makers would deny the permit, requirethe violator to restore the site, impose afine to cover the costs of processing thecase, and urge Nextel to work on a co-location agreement with an existingoperator. Inexplicably, the Planning Commis-sion voted to issue the permit, in viola-tion of Title 22, thereby allowing theviolator to get off virtually scot-free andlook forward to a handsome profit and asteady income as a result of his actions.

TAKE ACTION

This will come back to the PlanningCommission in February. Watch for theagenda — www.slocounty.ca.gov/plan-ning/meetingcalendar.htm — and comeout to that meeting at the SLO CountyGovernment Center to remind the Com-mission of all of the above!

There are some towering questions on Highway 41

There is another problem with the High-way 41 Nextel cell towers boondoggle:When developers are allowed to exploitexemptions that were designed to givefarmers and ranchers relief from countyregulations, they risk ruining the systemfor genuine agriculturalists. Gradingroads, drilling wells, cutting down treesand clearing building pads are all activi-ties that typically require permits, publicnotice and environmental review. But ifthese are being done to support agricul-tural activities, no review is needed. The problem is, all a developer has todo is put on a cowboy hat, look a countycode enforcement officer in the eye andsay “It’s for my ag operation” and allpossibility of fines and restoration ordersmagically evaporates. Given the scale and frequency ofabuse (wells and roads on SantaMargarita Ranch, the airstrip on the La

Abuse of Agricultural Exemptions Will Hurt Farmers

Panza Ranch, the hilltop homesites,wells and roads in the Pierson/KelegianRanch on Highway 58, wholesaleclearcutting of oak woodlands on theBonheim Ranch, and the infamous“Cayucos Castle,” aka Lavender farm,to name a few), it is time for theCounty to rein in the bad actors. One obvious solution is to require a“rancher” to come in to the CountyPlanning Department and actually ap-ply for the exemption. They could berequired to show that they have a legiti-mate agricultural-based need for thedevelopment, and that it fits within theparameters of the exemptions. It is unfortunate that real ranchersand farmers should have to suffer forthe unscrupulous activities of develop-ers. But allowing such abuse to con-tinue is even worse.

Nov 29-Dec 3:It was my honor as the west-of-the-Mississippi member of the Sierra Club’sRadiation Committee to join theCommittee’s (and the Club’s) first na-tionwide forum on the cradle-to-gravepitfalls of nuclear power. Sitting in rocking chairs atop a beau-tiful mountain overlooking a Tennesseevalley of fall colors, Sierra Club womencame together to seek solutions. Whatis the solution to the mounting stock-piles of high-level radioactive waste nearour nation’s waterways and oceans?How can we stop the steam-rollingnuclear industry lobbying for our taxdollars to fund their deadly generation

facilities? And how can we prevent theproliferation of nuclear materials whichcould devastate our communities, ourstates, the world in which we live? These were women determined tounite and educate others to speak outand stand up to protect our childrenand grandchildren. These were womenwho had given up high-paying jobs,spent days, weeks, months, years anddecades determined to find a path thatwould bring more than a “Sophie’sChoice” for our electric generationneeds. And these were women bothproud and grateful to be working withthe Sierra Club to create a legacy of

truly independent, economic, renew-able, sustainable and non-nuclear en-ergy future.

Nov. 29:Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility out-reach coordinator David Weisman drovesix hours from San Luis Obispo to LonePine, California, to attend the one andonly hearing on the Yucca MountainEnvironmental Impact Statement heldin the state of California. Of the 50 or sopeople in attendance, David was theonly Californian not a resident of InyoCounty to attend, with the exception ofa representative of the Attorney General

and a reporter from the L.A. Times.There was an important bit of informa-tion awaiting Mr. Weisman: Carefulexamination of the Dept. of Energydisplays of their newest maps for trans-port routes to Yucca revealed that theradioactive waste casks from DiabloCanyon, rather than being barged downthe coast to Pt. Hueneme, would betraveling on oversize and overweighttrucks on local SLO roads through Avilato the rail station and then shippedsouth through our county and SantaBarbara on the coast rail line. This clearly puts the burden for emer-gency preparedness, infrastructure im-provements and logistics on our county.David asked the DOE officials for an-swers on the costs of training emer-gency responders, paying for improve-ments and other transport-relatedquestions not only on behalf of SLO, butSan Bernardino, Riverside and Imperial,which will also be seeing the waste fromArizona, Texas and Louisiana passingthrough. David also asked the DOE why theydidn’t hold public hearings in theseimpacted areas and quizzed them ontheir lack of communication withCalifornia’s state legislators. He thenbrought these issues to SLO CountySupervisors at their next meeting, andalso to the attention of the Tribune,which ran a cover story the followingSunday (www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/story/215100.html).

Dec 10:David Weisman and I attended stateSenator Kehoe’s hearing on the statusof nuclear power in California. Econo-mist Jim Harding gave testimony on theoverly optimistic predictions of thenuclear industry in its pursuit of newreactors. But it was Carl Zichella,Sierra Club’s regional director for Ha-waii, Nevada and California, whobrought down the ire of AssemblymanChuck DeVore. Carl quoted fromformer Vice-President Al Gore (“I doubtif [nuclear plants] will play a significantrole in most countries as a new sourceof electricity…”) and stressed increas-ing economic risks, the long time lag ingetting nuclear reactors on line, andissues of waste and proliferation. As-semblyman DeVore, whose bill to over-turn California’s nuclear safety lawsdied in committee last Spring and whorecently withdrew his ballot initiative todo the same, was so incensed and ag-gressive in his challenges to Carl’spoints that Senator Kehoe had to cutthe Assemblyman off at the micro-phone. The next day, Mr. DeVore blogged:“Wholly unconvincing in his testimonywas Carl Zichella, the Regional FieldDirector of the Sierra Club. Perhaps itwas my 13 years in the aerospace indus-try or my 24 years as a military intelli-gence officer, but using a large numberof scary sounding adjectives does notmake up for an utter lack of data.” Mr.DeVore appears to persist in his beliefthat personally attacking those he dis-agrees with will be productive.

Dec 12:The California Energy Commission heldits first workshop on the scope of itscradle-to-grave cost benefit and riskanalysis of the state’s dependence onnuclear power. I presented the contrac-tors with a list of additions to the scope,as did the Santa Lucia Chapter. TheAlliance for Nuclear Responsibility willfile comments, posted at www.a4nr.org,along with comments to the NuclearRegulatory Commission on impacts ofair attacks.

By Rochelle Becker Chair, Nuclear Power Task Force


Taking Issue“If it’s fresh and local, is it always greener?” by Andrew Martin, New York Times, printed inThe Tribune, Dec. 9, 2007.

problematic environmental coverage & commentary in our local media

Summary: Buying local may not be a sound policy, global-warming wise, as UC Davisresearchers have found that small quantities of food transported a short distance may result inmore per capita carbon emissions than large quantities of food shipped over long distances.

They’re here, they’re gorgeous, you have tohave one for your desk, one for your wall, and

a great many more for friends and family!When you buy direct from the Chapter, you

support our conservation work inSan Luis Obispo County!

wall calendar: $12.50 $6.25desk calendar: $13.50 $6.75

To order, call 543-7051

2008 Sierra Club Calendars

Tweezering out the energyefficiency of semi vs. pickuptruck per unit shipped andignoring every other factorinvolved (which the reserach-ers in question, in fact, did not)

is a way to thread the needle to produce the desired conclusion. Food being trans-ported 1,500-plus miles is likely coming from 10,000-acre monocrop corporatefarms that produce less agricultural output per unit and are less efficient than smallfarms, consume massive amounts of fossil fuel, destroy biodiversity, and dump mil-lions of tons of fertilizer and pesticides into rivers and streams. If either of thosestrawberry shipments were organic, they didn’t involve the use of synthetic ni-trogen fertilizers, which release nitrous oxides, a greenhouse gas far more po-tent than CO2, or requie the 2,200 pounds of coal that must be burned to pro-duce 5.5 pounds of synthetic fertilizer. The researchers’ best conclusion at themoment: “Different types of crops, grown in different locations, with differentproduction methods, and displacing different land uses, will inevitably lead todifferent rates of green house gas emissions as well as carbon sequestration.”

5

send to: [email protected], orP.O. Box 15755, San Luis Obispo, CA 93406. Letters may be edited for space.

LettersYour article on desal projects on theCentral Coast, “Where’s the Water?”(Nov./Dec. Santa Lucian) didn’t addressthe effects of global warming on thewater supply (and therefore the viabilityof desal). Since your recommendationwas to conserve the available water,there must be enough water to con-serve. I was hoping for a discussion ofrainfall predictions based on globalwarming that – from what I read – ismaking the West drier and hotter. Whatconcerns me is that this combinationcould rule out conservation. Gamblingthat there will be sufficient rainfallwithout the science to back it up couldbe catastrophic for Cambria. If the wellsdry up, Cambrians would end up relyingon water tankers or other emergencymeans. That would wipe out tourismand property values and probably thecommunity. Then there’s the fire haz-ard. Without full water storage tanks,anything but a small and easily con-tained fire would be disastrous. (Accord-ing to Cambria fire chief, Bob Putney,fires must be knocked down in the firsthour, so out of town help and boratebombers are not an alternative.) I assume you have discussed thesescenarios and measured the globalwarming impact on the use of desalin-ization, but that analysis did not showup in the article. (I also assume youdidn’t start with a default position thatdesal is bad and only used data thatsupported your case) desal certainly hasdrawbacks, but we need to reevaluateour beliefs as the world changes. The elephant in the room in any desaldiscussion is global warming. Not talk-ing about it makes any analysis or con-clusions about desal suspect.

Bill Lakin20+ year Sierra Club Member

Cambria

As “Where’s the Water?” concluded:“With global climate change affectingweather patterns [and] sea level rise

posing risks to coastal infrastructurefacilities…the time is now to start plan-ning much more intelligently for ourfuture water security.” That meansgetting away from the notion that weneed to keep doing exactly what we’redoing, the way we’re doing it, so weneed x more [oil, gas, electricity, water]to keep doing it. As mentioned in boththe article and the much longer publicmeeting it summarized – viewable atwww.slo-span.org — such planningwould include potentially reclaiming30% of wastewater through graywatersystems and community treatmentfacilities that can also recharge thegroundwater basin, improving irriga-tion efficiency, and a reevaluation ofland use planning. The effects of global warming –which will actually result in more rainin some locations — are indeed a con-cern in any estimation of future wateravailability and needs. But desalinationplants are not exempt from that con-cern. The rising sea levels and projectedincrease in frequency and intensity ofextreme storms that are part of thepicture of global climate change arebad news for coastal desal facilities andtheir vulnerable intake and outfallstructures. No California desal plant inoperation or on the drawing boardsincludes any adaptive measures to in-corporate the effects of climate changeinto its design. Additionally, becausedesalination is the most energy-inten-sive water source, operation of desalplants represents a significant increasein fossil-fuel consumption and green-house gas emissions. It’s clear that justthrowing desal plants at the problem isnot the answer. Cambria’s residentswould do well to bring pressure to bearon their Community Services District,which, having tried and failed with abotched desal project, should now turnto the kind of comprehensive reclama-tion measures and intelligent planningoutlined in “Where’s the Water?”

50 PERCENT OFF!!!!

What the researchersactually found, per aliterature review, was that“local food systems inIowa based on smalltrucks carrying food tofarmers markets and localinstitutions feasiblyconsume two to fourtimes as much fuel as aregional food system using larger semitrailers and mid-sized trucks,” but that boththose scales of transport “are estimated to use from only one-tenth to a quarter of thefuel consumed by the conventional, long-distance distribution system to distributethe same quantity of food.”

An Iowa State University study found thatmost produce travels about 1,500 milesbefore it arrives in Iowa homes. But as thestrawberry story suggests, some of it createshigher amounts of greenhouse gasses thanothers.

If mass producers of strawberries ship their productto Chicago by truck, the fuel cost of transportingeach carton of strawberries is relatively small...but ifa farmer sells his strawberries at local farmers’markets in California, he ferries a much smalleramount by pickup truck to each individual market.Which one is better for the environment?

“Taking Issue” fans will recall our dissections of “Antibiotic-freefoods are not necessarily safer, study says” (September 2006) and“Organic food may not be the best,” (March 2007). Behold thetrifecta and the dropping of the other shoe: Not only do “studies”say industrially grown, antibiotic-laden foods are a-okay, but nowit’s possible to conclude -- if you really want to -- that if you eatlocally grown food you may be contributing to global warming!But not really.

Upshot:


A Very Big DealIn the first week of 2008, the game changed for local energy issues

January 9: Tam Hunt of Santa Barbara’s Community Environmental Council (left) testifies on behalf of a regional Community Choice Aggregation planbefore the SLO Council of Governments.

by Karen MerriamChapter Chair

It may have seemed that not much ofimportance happened in San LuisObispo County the week of January 7 —the Atascadero P.D. refused to give afired officer his job back, Lucia MarUnified sought to add a culinary acad-emy, Ventura bested the Cuesta Cougars86-69 — but two momentous, little-noticed events that transpired in localgovernment meetings, will, I predict, berecalled years from now as flashpointsfor historic changes that made all thedifference between a good quality of lifeand an unlivable one for every residentof the central coast. The first occurred on January 8 at themeeting of the San Luis Obispo CityCouncil. The Council moved to adoptitem C-4 on their consent agenda, theplace where one puts agenda items sonon-controversial they don’t even re-quire discussion or a separate vote: “C4.DATA NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR AGREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS IN-VENTORY FOR THE CITY OF SAN LUISOBISPO.” It was on February 8, 2006,that the Sierra Club first brought thispolicy suggestion to the city planningcommission, which promptly agreed toadd it to the update of San Luis Obispo’sConservation and Open Space Element,where it became Energy Policy 4.30.18. In the two years between then andnow, we worked with our friends on thecity council to turn that policy intoreality. Now that it is, SLO can figureout how much carbon it’s putting intothe atmosphere and how much it needsto cut, implement programs, policiesand technologies to hit those targets,

and monitor progress. The inevitableresult will be the encouragement ofenergy efficiency, conservation, andlocal industry based on green power.The fight to curb climate change in ourneck of the woods truly starts here. The second historic event of the weekoccurred the next day and three blockseast of SLO City Hall, at the CountyGovernment Center, when the opportu-nity to create a feasibility study for

Community Choice Aggregation (CCA)appeared before the SLO Council ofGovernments (SLOCOG). CCA is a statelaw that gives communities the abilityto buy clean, alternative energy frommultiple providers and realize, on aver-age, savings of 25 percent over whatthey pay to investor-owned utilities.Community Choice is the road map andbullet train to a cleaner, healthier,wealthier future for this county.

It wasn’t the first time the assembledmayors and county supervisors hadheard about this. In workshop androundtable discussions at the RegionalEnergy Planning Conference at Cal Polylast August, they indicated a stronginterest in pursuing CCA as a tool forenergy planning. Some had heard aboutit at the October 2006 Smart EnergySolutions Summit, where Sierra Club

continued on page 7

Despite compelling evidence, the Cali-fornia Coastal Commission has takenno action to improve or downsize aproposed project to dramatically ex-pand the Long Marine Lab campus onfragile Terrace Point, which is owned bythe University of California, Santa Cruz.UCSC seeks to expand the campus with600,000 square feet of new develop-ment, an expansion that threatens todestroy some of the last of California’sprecious coastal wetlands. Instead, theCommission embraced UCSC’s claimthat the environmental destruction was“worth it” since UCSC intends to edu-cate future “ocean scientists” who will,hopefully, help to save degraded coastsand oceans somewhere else. Thus, the Coastal Commission notonly allowed acres of new buildings ontop of known wetlands, but allowedpatently non-coastal development suchas large meeting halls, dining facilities,sports courts and housing by their deci-sion. The vote appears to establish newprecedent undermining California wet-lands law, allowing special accomo-dations for state university develop-ments that would not ordinarily beextended to private developers. In the end, Commissioners DavePotter, Steve Blank, Ben Hueso, Bonnie

Neely, Patrick Kruer, William Burke andKhatchik Achadjian all supported wet-lands destruction and large scale urbandevelopment on Terrace Point. OnlyCommissioners Sara Wan, Mary Shall-enberger, Mike Reilly and Suja Lowen-thal tried to improve the project orprotect the resources it would affect,and their efforts were rejected by the

majority of the Commission. While this news is not encouraging,now is not the time for us to give up orback away from what is a very pro-devel-opment-minded Coastal Commission. Iam convinced that the only way to saveour coast in 2008 is to intensify ourefforts, and to redouble our commit-ment to shine a bright light of public

Another Wetlands LossMark Massara, Director, Sierra Club Coastal Programs

Why Wetlands?By Bill Denneen

Wetlands include estuaries, swamps,bogs, vernal pools, riparian corridors,marshland, creeks and sloughs. Califor-nia has the dubious honor of having lostmore than 90% of its historic wetlands,the largest percentage of any state inour nation. Prior to the arrival of ourcivilization, the U.S. had 5 million acresof wetlands. Only a half million remain.This is horrendous. Local example of wetlands are west& south of Guadalupe, Cienega Valley,Oso Flaco Valley, and Black Lake Can-yon. The situation gets even worse as webecome “Losangelified” and former

wetlands start growing houses such asat “Point Sal Dunes.” Just the name isan insult to sacred Point Sal and theunique Nipomo Dunes. The Cienega Valley is the peneplain(floodplain) of Arroyo Grande Creek.The Chumash utilized this swamp as avery productive food source for 10,000years while they lived on adjacenthighlands. Our aggressive civilizationcomes in, drains the swamp, dikes theriver and puts in intensive agriculture.Cienega Valley has been very productiveag land for the past few decades but isheading toward inevitable disaster.

scrutiny on developer-cozy relations onthe Commission. We must convince theCommission and their appointing au-thorities in Sacramento that the publicdemands they protect our last fragilecoastal resources, and will hold themaccountable for their decisions. I’mconfident that we’ll succeed, but only ifwe continue to work together.

Wetlands are sacred to biologistsbecause they provide critical feeding,breeding and spawning grounds for one-third of our endangered plants and ani-mals, and myriad waterfowl, migratorysongbirds, and other wildlife. Wetlandsrecharge ground water supplies, controlfloods, purify water that flows throughthem and are the nurseries for the fishof the seas (e.g. steelhead trout). Wet-lands are vital to the economic andenvironmental health of our nation, yetthey are being lost at the alarming rateof 300,000 acres per year. Our culture has not been kind to


January 8: Santa Lucia Chapter Chair Karen Merriam (right) thanks the San Luis Obispo City Council for implementing the greenhouse gas emissionsmonitoring program that was placed into the city’s Energy Element at our urging.

California Energy Committee memberPaul Fenn, author of California’s CCAlaw, explained the concept of CCA toSLO. Both events were created by thelocal Strategic Energy Alliance forChange (SEA Change), which SierraClub co-founded two years ago. SLOCOG clearly got the picture anddirected staff to get more informationon the cost of the study and staff timerequirements and report back at a fu-ture meeting. That meeting is tenta-

tively scheduled for April, when SLO-COG will vote on whether or not tomove ahead with regional CommunityChoice Aggregation. So the official history-making meet-ing is yet to come. But the January 9meeting of SLOCOG was the first timeCCA came before a local governing bodyfor official action, and the results wereencouraging. Neither of the historic events of Janu-ary 8 and 9 “just happened.” Encourage-

ment is often needed to make historyhappen. But for our community, thefuture began that week.

TAKE ACTION

attending the SLOCOG meeting whenCommunity Choice again comes beforethat body. Let them know that this mustbe done and we can’t wait any longer.It’s our future, and the future is now.

Very Big Dealcontinued from page 6

this resource. We have dredged, diked,bulldozed, channelized, diverted, siltedin and contaminated this pristine re-source in the name of “progress.” A fewyears ago there was a big tractor paradein Santa Maria. The parade ended at theCounty Government Center. Over 200tractors and farmers gathered to protestregulations designed to protect wet-lands; there was one lone demonstratorfor wetlands protection (me). When I

carried my sign: “Save Our Creeks” onefarmer yelled out: “save our geeks”which got a big laugh (even from me).The farmers invited me to their excel-lent SM-style BBQ which I appreciated. I have watched with great pain theslow inexorable destruction of OsoFlaco Creek. State Parks have beendoing a fine job taking care of Oso FlacoLake itself while at the same timeignoring the drainage into the lake. I

first saw this riparian corridor in the1960’s. I wish I had taken pictures. Ithad high bio-diversity, giant willows andcottonwoods, songbirds, watercress,Yerba Manza, duckweed, Azolla, rushes,bulrushes, muskrats, black shoulderedkites, raptors, cattails, all kinds of in-sects, amphibians, garter snakes, pondturtles and horsetails. Clear waterflowed in the creek. I always stoppedhere with my biology classes on our way

to the Dunes. Now it is a channel-ized, sterile, very silted ditch. It israpidly filling in Oso Flaco Lake.Agriculture has expanded so that allthat is left of this once rich ripariancorridor is an ugly ditch. This painsa biologist. Riparian areas provide wildlifehabitat, protect adjacent areas fromflooding, filter our drinking water,and clean polluted water. Wetlandsoils and plants absorb heavy metals,pesticides, and other toxins, prevent-ing them from washing downstreamor migrating to groundwater.Through various processes not yetfully understood, they can immobi-lize or transform many toxic sub-stances, removing them from thefood chain. The importance of wet-lands may not be readily apparentuntil after they are destroyed.

Why Wetlands?continued from page 6

one year later...

By Teddy Llovet

Since January 2007, I have held 23demonstration-talks in SLO county onthe benefits of energy-saving compactfluorescent light bulbs -- CFLs. I chris-tened the program “Bulbs AcrossAmerica,” inspired by the words thatflicker across the screen at the end ofAn Inconvenient Truth: “If you pray,move your feet.” Those words havebecome my mantra. I’ve given out freeCFLs, compliments ofPG&E and Miner’sAce Hardware,and demon-strated a vari-ety of CFLs atsenior com-munities,clubs, schools,CongregationBeth David, Re-tired Teachers Assn.,Earth Day and the Step-It-Up Rally inSLO. Last May, we did a “Kids TeachingKids” program for after-school kids K-3and 4-6 on energy and the environ-ment, teaming a high school studentwith a Cal Poly research graduate aspresenters. In August, I hosted a two-day ongoing CFL demonstration andgave free CFLs to every attendee. Ifevery house in America replaced onestandard light bulb with an energy-saving one, we could save enough en-ergy to close down two power plants orlight more than 2.5 million homes forone year, or prevent pollution equal toone million cars on the road. Bulbs Across America is about savingenergy, saving money, offering globalwarming solutions and hope. It’s aboutenergy-saving light bulbs and support-ing our planet one bulb at a time.Training guides for hosting a demo-talkhave been circulating and are availableto those who want to be Light Leadersfor their school, club or group. Whenwe bring awareness and information toothers, we are becoming part of thesolution in addressing climate change.Contact [email protected] foreasy-to-follow support materials. I’ve learned a lot this year. Buildingsare responsible for almost half (48%) ofall carbon emissions annually. Architec-ture 2030 (architecture2030.org) isasking the global building communityto adopt targets for greenhouse gasreduction of 50% by 2012 and to becarbon-neutral by 2030. In 2007, SantaBarbara became the first city in thenation to adopt the 2030 Challenge.Take a look at the lighting in the build-ings you enter and tell people thereabout energy-saving light bulbs. Someone asked me, “I’ve alreadychanged to compact fluorescents.What’s the next step?” My answer is:increased personal action. If you’vemade the change, talk about it to oth-ers. Host a demo for a group or schoolproject. Write an article for a paper.Help others make the change andchange the future of our planet. Bulbs Across America will offer ademo-class April 9, 2008 through CalPoly’s Osher Lifelong Learning Pro-gram. Expect a variety light show withinformation fliers and free CFLs. Aspecial feature will be a meter lamp forwattage comparison between a standardlight bulb and an energy-saving com-pact fluorescent. [email protected] to schedule afuture event.

BulbsAcrossAmerica


from Chapter reports

“The cooperation demonstrated betweenthe Club and PG&E was a milestone inthe progress of conservation.”

- Ansel Adams

“My thesis is that compromise is oftennecessary, but that it ought not origi-nate with the Sierra Club.”

- David Brower

In the late 1950s, Americans werelargely naive about the risks of nuclearpower; “conservation” and “energy effi-ciency” were words from an alien vo-cabulary, federal subsidies were pouringinto commercial nuclear power, and thesolar and wind power industries did notexist. The Pacific Gas and Electric Com-pany, giddy with visions of Our Friendthe Atom and all the power that wouldbe needed in near limitless quantities toserve the rampant growth of the GoldenState, all “too cheap to meter,” envi-sioned a future in which a chain ofatomic reactors marched up and downthe coast of California. Their first try – Bodega Head – im-mediately ran into opposition that tri-umphed quickly when a branch of theSan Andreas fault was discovered to rununderneath the proposed plant site.Their second attempt was the Nipomo-Oceano Dunes complex, some of therarest and most fragile wildlife habitatin North America. Local opposition wasled by the Sierra Club — then repre-sented locally by the Los Padres Chap-ter, covering SLO, Santa Barbara andVentura counties. PG&E had smartened up sinceBodega. They came into the communitywith a menu of site locations instead ofa single site, immediately shifting thequestion from “Shall we put a nuclearpower plant in your community?” to“Where in your community should weput our nuclear power plant?” And theystarted assiduously courting their likelyfoes. Local Sierra Club leader KathleenGoddard Jones and national club direc-tors Dick Leonard and William Siri metwith PG&E executives. Siri, formerly ofthe Lawrence Livermore National Labo-ratory and a booster of nuclear power,was particularly involved in the dealthat was cut: Move the plant’s locationfrom the dunes to out-of the-way, hard-to-get-to Diablo Cove, a place with nopublic constituency, and transfer theDunes property to State Parks. In May 1966, the Club affirmed aspolicy that Diablo Canyon was “a satis-factory alternate site…provided thatmarine resources will not be adverselyaffected….”. There was one problem: The Club’sboard of directors voted sight unseen tosacrifice Diablo Canyon, on the falserepresentation that it was a “treelessslot” of no environmental significance,and without any vote from the localSierra Club chapter, which would bedirectly affected by the decision.

The Good FightBy June 1966, Jones had learned moreabout the Diablo Canyon area and “de-veloped misgivings about Diablo Can-yon as a location for an industrial instal-lation.” She wrote to Siri, “I have erred

in judgment” on the deal to trade DiabloCanyon for the Nipomo Dunes. The Board of Directors broke intotwo factions. Club directors FrederickEissler and Martin Litton, with execu-tive director David Brower, challengedthe board vote. Dr. Robert Hoover, a SanLuis Obispo biologist and local SierraClub leader in SLO, pointed out to Clubpresident George Marshall that theboard’s choice to make such a decisionwithout formal input from the localchapter was unacceptable. Dr. Hoovertold Marshall that “the Directors havethe duty to consider the interests of themembers who elected them before mak-ing any public pronouncements.”Marshall told Hoover he was being“emotional.” The Los Padres Chapter passed aresolution pointedly noting the need forthe national organization to consultwith chapters affected by the Club’sdecisions and condemning the sacrificeof Diablo Canyon. Then, under pressurefrom Marshall, the Los Padres Chapterrescinded its resolution and urged in-stead “that the Club membership sus-tain the previous decision of the Boardof Directors with respect to the DiabloCanyon issue.” The board ignored a report from itsown subcommittee on the biologicalvalues of Diablo Canyon, which found it“remarkably worthy of preservation.”The 1959 Pacific Coast Recreation Sur-vey of the National Park Service hadconcluded “This large, unspoiled areapossesses excellent seashore values andshould be acquired for public recreationand conservation of its natural re-sources.” The board closed ranks andaffirmed its previous action, scorningthe science rather than changing thepolicy. In 1967, Eissler, Litton and Browersucceeded in petitioning to get a refer-endum on the board’s Diablo decisionplaced before the entire membership ofthe Sierra Club for a vote. Siri was joined by legendary boardmember Ansel Adams in outraged oppo-sition to the Diablo dissidents. Theywarned members that the NipomoDunes would be forfeit if the board’sdecision were repudiated, and that sucha vote would “reflect on the credibilityof the Sierra Club as a responsible orga-nization.” Siri and Adams, in their bal-lot argument, assured members that“the State…has approved constructionof the plant at this site with guaranteesof marine life protection.” They frettedthat “during the past year the Club hasbeen compelled to devote a wholly dis-proportionate part of its time and en-ergy to this issue,” and urged “your votesupporting the Club’s decision will helppreserve the Nipomo-Santa MariaDunes. It will also preserve the respectand integrity of the Club and permit usto turn our full attention to the mainstream of conservation problems.” For their part, Brower, Eissler, Littonet al pointed out that the board hadconsidered no alternatives nor heardindependent testimony as to the poten-tial environmental damage done by theconstruction and operation of a nuclearpower plant in Diablo Canyon. They also disputed “the contentionthat an either-or situation exists in

which either the dunes or Diablo Can-yon can be saved, but in which neithercan be saved without the sacrifice of theother” and noted, prophetically, “thatPG&E is not the only threat to thedunes [and] that even PG&E’s fullestcooperation would not ensure the safetyof the dunes;” that “abundant marinelife in the Diablo Canyon area will beadversely affected…by the intake ofcooling water from the sea and its dis-charge at a high temperature;” and that“the club attained national prominenceand gained at least half its currentmembers because it projected an imageof resolute adherence to principle; if wenow adopt the posture of an opportunis-tic trader, we must expect not only tolose support, but to lose respect also.” The April 1967 referendum failed by amargin of 2 to 1. PG&E broke ground inDiablo Canyon in June 1968. Led by Dr.Hoover, two years after his clash withclub president Marshall, the Santa LuciaGroup of the Los Padres Chapter brokewith the Chapter over its cave-in topressure from the national board and itsendorsement of the Diablo Canyon deal.We secured a charter from the nationalorganization and founded our ownChapter to oversee environmental is-sues in San Luis Obispo County. In the 1969 board elections, onemore petition to reopen the Diablo Can-yon issue was brought to the ballot bydissident board members. It lost by amargin of 3 to 1. David Brower resignedas executive director on May 3, 1969. Local Sierra Club members, mostnotably Frederick Eissler and HaroldMiossi, along with UCSB environmentalhistorian Roderick Nash, teamed up inthe Scenic Shoreline Preservation Con-ference, fighting the Diablo plant athearings of the Nuclear RegulatoryCommission and the California PublicUtilities Commission. In 1973, Eisslerspoke to the Mothers for Peace aboutintervening in the plant’s operatinglicense proceedings and gave them in-formation on how to do so. The Moth-ers contacted John Forster, a student atCal Poly at the time and head of EcologyAction, and encouraged him to do like-wise. It could be said that Diablo Canyonwas the way the 60s happened in theSierra Club. It was the issue that rippedthe social fabric of the organization,sharply defined internal fissures andopposing values, and pitted a conserva-tive majority, furious at being chal-lenged and intent on maintaining order,against a cadre of uncompromisingidealists who refused to be silent in theface of environmental injustice.

AftermathIn the years since, the arguments thatwere mounted in favor of constructionof Diablo have fallen like autumn leaves,and the warnings of opponents havecrystallized into hard reality:

Per-capita energy use in Californiahas been flat for thirty years. The per-centage of the state’s energy producedby the Diablo Canyon plant could havebeen supplanted by conservation alone(and, during the energy crisis, actuallywas) and more than replaced by conser-vation, efficiency and renewables. The

billions of dollars that have been pouredinto the Diablo Canyon plant in costoverruns, emergency retrofits, replace-ment of major components due to unex-pected premature failure, etc., couldhave gone into energy efficiency andalternative energy research.

Five years after the final 1969 attemptto get the Club to reverse course, theboard of directors approved a new SierraClub policy on nuclear power: We “op-pose the licensing, construction andoperation of new nuclear reactors” dueto issues of safety, waste disposal andproliferation, and “pending develop-ment of adequate national and globalpolicies to curb energy over-use andunnecessary economic growth.” In1966-69, these issues had barely comeup on either side of the Diablo Canyondebate. By 1974, things had changed.

Three years after the Sierra Club’slast Diablo referendum, the people ofCalifornia voted the Coastal Commis-sion into existence. Under the terms ofprotection it afforded the coast and itsrequirements for public access underthe Coastal Act, Diablo Canyon couldnever have been permitted and built.But because it was built, and becausethe federal Nuclear Regulatory Commis-sion assumed virtually all regulatoryauthority over it, the County, theCoastal Commission and activist law-suits have been able to extract onlysmall, grudging concessions fromPG&E when it has undertaken a life-extending modification of the plant orexpansion of its footprint to accommo-date the plant’s unexpected role as along-term storage site for nuclearwaste. The Pecho Coast will remainlargely off-limits during the lifetimes ofmost of the people reading this, whowill be long gone by the time the plantshuts down and public access to ourcoast is (partially) restored.

The Club’s approval of Diablo Canyonas a site for the nuclear plant “providedthat marine resources will not be ad-versely affected” proved the folly of reli-ance on the future conditional, an ap-proval that could not be revoked if thecondition failed to fulfill its conditionalpromise — as was pointed out at thetime by Brower, Eissler et al. The boardof directors hadn’t thought throughhow the condition on which everythingdepended would work, and it didn’t. Thespectacular devastation wrought on themarine environment by the Diablo Can-yon plant is now a matter of historicalrecord. In 2006, the California CoastalCommission noted that Diablo’s coolingsystem decimates up to 160 acres ofkelp habitat, causes “continuous majorreductions in species and populationswithin the Cove...an almost completeloss of some fish and algae species” and“a substantial decline in black abalone.”The estimated number of organismskilled by the cooling system is equiva-lent to that which would be produced in210 to 500 acres of reef and “representsa substantial loss to the local and re-gional offshore environment.”

Fans of terrible ironies will note thefate the Oceano Dunes met after we

Forty Years AfterIn 1968, San Luis Obispo was ground zero for the most contentious conservation battle and internal struggle in the Sierra Club’shistory and the Santa Lucia Chapter was born in nuclear fire. What did we learn, and what lessons have we yet to grasp?


saved them from the power plant andenabled their transfer to State Parks:The state promptly declared the dunes aVehicle Recreation Park, the only placein California where you can legally driveon the beach, and the coastal duneequivalent of Yosemite quickly came toresemble downtown L.A. at rush hour,minus the blacktop. As with PG&E onthe Pecho Coast, the Sierra Club hashad to fight the state Off Highway Ve-hicles division and the off-road lobbyever since for every inch of dunes thatwe’ve managed to reclaim as habitat forendangered and threatened species.

In addition to consigning local resi-dents to a long future of stockpilediodine pills, siren tests and that specialmoment of held breath and spikingadrenalin every time the ground shakes,perhaps the most serious long-termconsequence of our Diablo compromisewas its deliverance of San Luis Obispointo the iron grip of the state’s largestprivately owned utility. As the home ofits most expensive asset, SLO county isnow of special interest to PG&E. As thelargest private employer in the county, agenerous donor to charities and a dis-penser of public largesse, the utility isable to summon at will labor unions,the Farm Bureau, Cattlemen’s Associa-tion and sundry chambers of commerceto any public meeting anywhere in thestate where it requires a show of sup-port for a development permit, a ratehike, or an extension of the Diablo Can-yon Nuclear Power Plant’s lease on life. And the utility will use every ounce ofthe political capital it has purchased inSan Luis Obispo when the time comesfor PG&E to fight implementation ofthe Community Choice Act – the statelaw that allows counties and regions topool their energy purchasing power,break with the utility, buy green energyand support local power start-ups (see“A Very Big Deal,” page 6, and “WhoseChoice is It Anyway?,” September 2007Santa Lucian). PG&E is fighting toothand nail against such plans in Fresnoand San Francisco; when that fightcomes here, it promises to be an uphillbattle due to PG&E’s beach head inlocal politics, established four decadesago at Diablo Cove.

Hard LessonsForty years ago, the Sierra Club learnedsome large lessons the hard way. Gen-erational turnover being what it is, andbig, hard lessons being what they are, itwould be more accurate to say that weremain in the process of learning them. Lesson One: “Compromise is oftennecessary, but it ought not originatewith the Sierra Club.” Giving up DiabloCove to save the Nipomo-Oceano Duneswas a matter of sacrificing Peter to savePaul. We accepted PG&E’s premise of“we must have more power” instead ofstanding for the simple truth that put-ting another power plant anywhere onthe California coast was environmen-tally unacceptable. Lesson Two: “Fix the mistake,” not“stay the course.” Throughout 1966-69,the whole focus for the defenders of theDiablo deal was the credibility of theSierra Club: Repudiating the deal withPG&E would cause the Club to loseface, we would not be taken seriously,etc. Whether the deal was a good orworkable deal and what we would be

sacrificing by allow-ing the plant’s con-struction wereclearly secondaryconsiderations – ifthat – for the Siri/Adams contingent.In the years since,this philosophy hasbeen the hallmark ofwhat became knownas the “old guard” inthe Sierra Club.Diablo Canyon re-vealed the first seis-mic division andculture clash be-tween the old guardand proponents of anew environmentalethic that was firstcoming into bloomforty years ago. Thiswas the historical

moment when the utilitarian conserva-tion ethic of Teddy Roosevelt and ForestService chief Gifford Pinchot – that weshould conserve such land and animalsas we deem useful to us and exploitablefor our prosperity – came up against theorganic/holistic view of nature champi-oned by David Brower, first formed byJohn Muir and given modern voice byforest manager Aldo Leopold in 1949when he wrote the manifesto of theenvironmental movement, A SandCounty Almanac, and exhorted his stu-dents to “think like a mountain.” Lesson Three: Democracy is ourstrength. Any other national environ-mental organization would have handeddown its decision on Diablo Canyon in1966 and that would have been that.Later, via a direct mail piece or theirmagazine, the membership would havebeen told in glowing terms how theorganization had saved the Nipomo-Oceano Dunes complex. Some angryletters and resignations might haveensued. In our case, the three-year fightto reverse the decision of the board ofdirectors was possible only because theSierra Club is set up as a democraticinstitution, wherein the board is electedby the membership; resolutions can bedrafted and submitted by chapters; re-gional and national conservation com-mittees communicate the will of themembership to the board; and policiesare created on that basis. The ability todissent was unable to turn the tide onDiablo, but in later years it has madethe difference, as when grassroots Clubactivists repeatedly drove forward apolicy of “zero cut” on public lands –not a policy endorsing a reduction or asmaller percentage of logging on pub-licly owned land, but a halt to the prac-tice — ultimately succeeding over thefierce objections and politicking of theold guard, whose arguments against thepolicy had a familiar ring: It wouldcause the Club to lose face, we wouldnot be taken seriously, etc. Why did the dissenters fail to movethe Club’s membership on Diablo Can-yon? It is probably not a coincidencethat Sierra Club leadership won everyballot initiative on Diablo by appealingto reputation, stability, and traditionwhile a bad war in Southeast Asia was

Cedric Wright, Sierra Club Archives

phot

os re

prod

uced

fro

m s

ierr

aclu

b.or

g ©

200

8 Si

erra

Clu

b A

ll R

ight

s Re

serv

ed

David Brower Family Estate

David Brower Ansel Adams

continued on page 10


getting worse, protests were shuttingdown American universities and politi-cal assassinations wracked the nation.Not questioning the decision of theboard was the paramount considerationthey put forward, and the point onwhich they prevailed. This remained thecase despite the fact that, a few monthsafter their original Diablo Canyon deci-sion, the board ratified a Club resolu-tion calling for a moratorium on theconstruction of power plants sited onscenic coasts. Rather than admit theyhad made a mistake in the Diablo deci-sion, the board grandfathered theDiablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant intothe moratorium resolution, citing it asthe one exception to our coastal powerplant policy.

The Past is PresentUltimately, the lesson for the SierraClub from Diablo Canyon 1966-69 mayhave been the perils of acceptance of thestatus quo. We lost the battle the mo-ment we accepted PG&E’s framing ofthe issue: Where on the coast should weput the nuclear power plant? In the present day, the fight over en-ergy corridors — the insistence thatlarge swaths must be cut out of nationalparks and other public lands to accom-modate the transmission lines needed tocarry clean (or dirty) power across longdistances from central power plants —features much the same premise thatPG&E set up for Diablo Canyon in 1966:We have an ever-expanding thirst forelectricity that can only be met by thislarge, environmentally ruinous energyproject, and not by conservation, en-ergy efficiency, and decentralizedpower. “It would appear,” writes Ed Main-land, co-chair of Sierra Club California’sEnergy-Climate Committee, “that thechallenge of our age is no longer toawaken acceptance of renewable powerin the breasts of the masses, but to keepdeep-pocketed energy interests andtheir regulatory allies from exploitingthat awakening and gulling officialdominto ill-conceived but lucrative green-scamming sidetracks that will slowdown progress toward authentic sus-tainability, local self-reliance, economiclocalization, energy redundancy andreal resource efficiency.” Mainlandnotes that Amory Lovins’ classic BrittlePower made the case for localized anddistributed power in 1982 and asks whysome in the Sierra Club seem to belining up behind the opposite philoso-phy. “Have we really given up onsmaller, more agile, more ‘intelligent’,more local and more redundant andmore efficient networks and grids andon eventually dispensing with currentold-fashioned grid arrangements en-tirely? Is all the thinking and researchof Lovins and others in the last 40 yearsgoing to be junked in a clumsy stam-pede to stuff the deserts, parks and wild

areas with new transmission corridorsand new mega-projects and expansive,land-intensive ‘energy farms’ when, ifwe merely meet the already acceptedefficiency and conservation targets ofCalifornia, many or most of them won’tbe needed? Whatever happened to theCalifornia Energy Commission’s ‘load-ing order?’ Whatever happened to CEC’sfinding that there are 5 billion squarefeet of existing commercial-buildingrooftops in California suitable for PVpower cells?” Philosophically, the Sierra Club ofT. Roosevelt and Gifford Pinchot mayhave largely evolved into the SierraClub of Aldo Leopold and David Brower,but the dynamic revealed and shaped bythe Diablo Canyon fight has remainedessentially the same: A senior leadershipof traditional conservationists who, inthe main, believe in pragmatic trade-offs and are disinclined to rock the boat,forced to deal with a broad swath ofgrassroots activists who are often moreinclined to change the system thanaccommodate it. The resulting dynamicis not possible in any other large envi-ronmental organization in the UnitedStates, all of which proceed by fiat oftheir CEO’s and executive boards. Onlythe Sierra Club proceeds by referendumand a vote of the membership, and –post Diablo — acknowledges that policyon local issues should be set by the localSierra Club chapters, whose membersstand in the place where they live. The inheritors of the philosophies ofDavid Brower and Ansel Adams dwell in

40 Yearscontinued from page 9

Thank you, Sierra Club! I like clean energy, clean water, clean air and the Cayucos Viewshed! Please put 100% of mytax-deductible donation to work making sure we secure these for the future in San Luis Obispo!

$100 $200 $500 $1000 $______

Make your check out exactly to: Sierra Club Foundation SLO Land Preservation Fund

and mail to:Sierra ClubP.O. Box 15755San Luis Obispo, CA 93406

$50

In the four years that I have had theprivilege of putting together the SantaLucian for our members every month, Ithink the story I have been proudest toprint is “Why We Sue.” As a member, this is the kind of thingI can point to and say “This is why Ijoined the Sierra Club. This is why theSierra Club is needed.” As the Cayucos Viewshed fightdragged on, the Santa Lucia Chapter,like many other members of the public,wrote and testified in an effort to per-suade a majority of County Supervisorsto do the right thing. Our efforts were in vain. The publicprocess was a travesty, but it was anilluminating travesty: Supervisors Ovitt,Achadjian and Lenthall showed how farthey are willing to go in order to sacri-fice environmental protections in thename of free-lance privatized land useplanning. In their haste to run anerrand for the real estate lobby, they ranover the California EnvironmentalQuality Act. When something like that happens,someone needs to step up and say “Holdit.” So we did. The Sierra Club can’t fight every-thing. We can’t save everything. Ourability to challenge bad planning and

bad projects dependsentirely on theinvolvement and supportof our members. As ademocratically runorganization, we proceedon the votes of electedChapter leaders – thosemembers who step upand give of their time indeliberating on theenvironmental issuesthat come before the Chapter. Wedepend on all of our members, and thegeneral public, to step up and supportthe cost of our actions taken in thepublic interest. The Chapter has limited resources,and lawsuits and conservation cam-paigns are not cheap. The nationalorganization does not fund litigation bylocal Sierra Club chapters. When I saythe Chapter stepped up on this issue, Imean they took a very big and verybrave step, fully aware of the conditionof the economy, with faith that thenecessary support for this action wouldbe there. So please direct your attention tothe most important item you’ll see inthe Santa Lucian this year: The coupondirectly below. Several hundred peopleWhy We Sue

continued from page 1

pristine land to future development freeof any planning standards worth thepaper they’re written on. The County’sclaim that this ordinance will have noenvironmental impacts has no basis infact. A court-mandated full Environ-mental Impact Report will make it clearthat the “standards” in this privatelydrafted ordinance are weaker than theminimal regulations that were in placebefore, and additional measures will berequired to protect the CayucosViewshed from the Cayucos Viewshedordinance.

A Note from the Editor

publicly testified on behalf of meaning-ful protection for the Cayucos viewshedover the last several years. Many moreconcurred; many felt helpless in theface of an obviously stacked deck. Ifyou’re one of those folks, you shouldwrite a check to the utmost of your tax-deductible ability and mail it in. If youknow some of those folks who are notSierra Club members, you need to showthis to them and let them know justhow important this is. Only this liti-gation can save the Cayucos Viewshed.If the viewshed is to be saved, thislitigation must be able to go forward. Thank you for your support.

Andrew ChristieEditor, Santa Lucian

The Santa Lucia Chapter of the Sierra Clubrecommends a vote for:

Lane Boldman Jeremy Doochin Jim Dougherty Larry Fahn Jerry Sutherland

Election for Sierra Club Boardof Directors Now UnderwayThose eligible to vote in the national Sierra Club election will receive in the mail (orby Internet if you chose the electronic delivery option) your national Sierra Clubballot. Visit the Club’s election website: www.sierraclub.org/bod/2008election forlinks to additional information about candidates, and their views on a variety ofissues facing the Club and the environment.

their fathers’ house. That house wasbuilt on the rim of Diablo Canyon, andcontains within its walls the struggle,the soul and the fate of the environmen-tal movement.

The SLO Mothers for Peace and JohnAshbaugh of the Santa Lucia ChapterExecutive Committee assisted in thewriting of this story. Many of the detailsof the Sierra Club’s struggle over DiabloCanyon in the period 1966-69 are drawnfrom the account in Conservation Fall-out: Nuclear Protest at Diablo Canyon,by John Wills (University of Nevada,2006).

Because funds from the SLOLand Preservation Fund godirectly to the Santa LuciaChapter’s public interestlitigation and conservationcampaigns, your donation to the Fund is tax-deductible.

name

address

city, sate, zip

The Cayucos Viewshed does not havetime to wait for a hoped-for environ-mentally enlightened majority on theCounty Board of Supervisors. Becausethe need is urgent, the Sierra Club hastaken action. Now we must rely onyour support.


ClassifiedsNext issue deadline is February 12.To get a rate sheet or submit your adand payment, contact:Sierra Club - Santa Lucia ChapterP.O. Box 15755San Luis Obispo, CA [email protected]

Local Government Meetings

City of SLO--1st & 3rd Tues., 7:00 p.m.;781-7103

Arroyo Grande--2nd and 4th Tues., 7:00p.m.; 473-5404

Atascadero--2nd & 4th Tues.;466-8099

Cambria CSD -- 4th Thurs.;927-6223

Grover Beach--1st & 3rd Mon., 6:30p.m.; 473-4567

Grover Beach Planning Commission--2nd Tues.

Morro Bay--2nd & 4th Mon.

Paso Robles--1st & 3rd Tues., 7:00p.m.; 237-3888

Pismo Beach--1st Tues., 5:30 p.m.; 773-4657

Los Osos CSD board-- 1st Tues. & 2ndMon., varies

California Coastal Commission-- 3rdTues., varies

SLO County Board of Supervisors--every Tues.; 781-5450

SLO Council of Governments;781-4219

SLOCOG Citizens Advisory Committee--1st Wed. every other month, 6:00 p.m.

SLOCOG Board--1st Wed. every othermonth, 8:30 a.m.

7 11

Gulliver’s Travel605 Santa Rosa St., San Luis Obispo

CA 93420805-541-4141

www.slogull.comCST # 20-10100-10

541-22716 [email protected]

The California Climate Champions Program

Deadline to apply: February 11, 2008Could you be one of California’s first-ever young ClimateChampions? Could you help spread the word aboutclimate change in your school or community, or evenacross the State and beyond?

Enter a competition where you will have a chance tobecome one of 20 Climate Champions for California. As achampion, you’ll get to participate in a range of activities,including a “climate camp,” where you will learn moreabout the issue and plan activities for your time “in office.”You might also get to take part in meetings in U.K. andJapan with other champions from around the world!

The California Climate Champions program, sponsoredby the California Air Resources Board (www.arb.ca.gov)and the British Council (www.britishcouncil.org/usa), isone of a number of similar initiatives established in manycountries around the world.

For further information on the California Climate Champi-ons contact Annalisa Schilla at [email protected] or(916) 322-8514.

Saturday, February 16, 2008, 11:00 to 1:00, Los Verdes Community Room, SLO. Want to learn how easy it is to cook by the sun? And experience how it feels to use clean, free en-ergy? Phyllis Davies and Rosemary Wilvert will demonstrate the versatility, economy, and taste ap-peal of solar cooking, followed by samples from among the vegetables, meats, breads, cakes, cookiesand other foods they have solar-cooked for their families for many years. $10 donation, to benefit the Sierra Club and cover costs. For reservations and directions to theCommunity Room at Los Verdes Estates Park II, please phone 544-8365. Carpooling is appreciated!

Solar Cooking Solar Cooking Solar Cooking Solar Cooking Solar Cooking WWWWWorororororkshopkshopkshopkshopkshop


Photo by Joaquin Palting

Outings and Activities Calendar

Hiking Classifications:

Distance: 1 = 0-2 mi., 2 = 3-5 mi.,3 = 6-9 mi., 4 =10-12 mi.,5 = 12 mi. or more.

Elevation Gain: A = 500',B = 1000', C = 1500', D = 2000',E = 2500', F = 3000' or more.

All of our hikes andactivities are open to all Clubmembers and the generalpublic. If you have anysuggestions for hikes oroutdoor activities, questionsabout the Chapter’s outingpolicies or would like to be anoutings leader, call OutingsLeader Gary Felsman (473-3694). For information on aspecific outing, please contactthe outing leader. OutingsLeaders please get your outingsor events in by the 1st for thenext month’s outings.

This is a partial listing ofOutings offered by our chapter.

Please check the web pagewww.santalucia.sierraclub.orgfor the most up-to-date listing

of activities.

Looking for a real wilderness vacation?Come rent Canyon Creek Lodge.In the mountains near Smithers, British Columbia. Designedfor groups and families. Easily accessible by air, road or rail,

yet located in a true wilderness setting. Canoe, kayak, raft, bike, hike, fish, ski, or viewthe abundant wildlife. The Lodge accommodates up to 10 with 5 bedrooms and 2.5baths. It’s like your own private wilderness area, but with all the comforts of home. Alsogreat for retreats, seminars, courses or club outings. We can connect you to local outfit-ters, guides or instructors. Visit www.canyoncreekbritishcolumbia.com, [email protected] or call 250-847-4349 (Roger McColm). Mentionthis ad and 5% of your rental goes to the Santa Lucia Chapter.

February 9-11, 3 islands ($475)April 4-7; May 2-5; July 18-21;4 islands ($775)August 23-27; September 13-17;5 islands ($925)

Explore the wild, windswept is-lands of Channel Island NationalPark. In spring the islands areablaze with wildflowers. In sum-mer, the pristine waters of the Ma-rine Sanctuary entice swimmers,snorkelers and kayakers. All yearlong, enjoy unusual plants andflowers, seals and frolicking sealions, sea and land birds.All cruises depart from Santa Bar-bara aboard the 68’ twin dieselTurth. Fee includes an assignedbunk, all meals, snacks, beverages,plus the services of a ranger/natu-ralist who will travel with us to leadhikes on each island and point outinteresting features. To make a reservation mail a $100check, payable to Sierra Club, to leader:Joan Jones Holtz, 11826 The Wye St.,

Island Hopping in Channel Islands National ParkSix Sierra Club California Fundraising Cruises Scheduled for 2008

El Monte, CA 91732. Contact leader formore information (626-443-0706;[email protected])

Sat.-Sun., Feb 2-3, MeccaHills Carcamp: Join us as we explorethe Mecca Hills Wilderness Area eastof Indio, CA. While ATVs roar throughthe Algodones dunes to the south, wewill walk quietly through the gravelwashes and rocky hills to several well-known and spectacular sites. Satur-day we visit Hidden Springs and theGrottos, and Sunday we will explorePainted Canyon. Carcamping willinclude the civilized amenities,potluck supper and campfire Satur-day night. Limit 12 participants. Ldr:Craig Deutsche,[email protected], (310-477-6670). CNRCC Desert Committee

Sunday, February 3rd, 8:00am. Montana de Oro Work Party.Come help California State Parks andthe CCCMB. Maintain trails inMontana de Oro State Park. Meet atthe Spooners Cover Visitor Center,MDO SP

FEB., 3, 0930, SUN.,SUSTAINABLE LIVING. Tour myfarm to see photovoltaic’s, windmill,clothesline, solar panels, compost,orchard, garden, goats, pig, heatsource, & waterless toilet. Meet at1040 Cielo Ln (off Primavera,offOrahard) in Nipomo., friendly dogswelcome. Confirm or questions [email protected]

Sat., Feb. 9. 8:00 a.m.Cruikshank Trail to Buckeye Trail toAlder Creek Camp. Join the leader onthis mid-winter hike to Alder Camp.This is an 11 mile hike with about2700 ft. of elevation gain. We hike

from Highway 1 to Upper CruikshankCamp. From there we will walk downto Villa Camp after crossing VillaCreek. We will then ascend a ridgeand follow the trail into Alder CreekCanyon. There are great views of thecoastline from the ridge. There is apossibility of poison oak and ticks.Bring lunch or snacks, water, anddress for the weather. Meet at theWashburn day use area just north ofCambria. There will be a refuelingstop at the Main St Grill in Cambriafollowing the hike. For info callChuck @ 441-7597.

FEB. 10, 0930, SUN.,BIKE NIPOMO. Meet at NipomoLibrary to tour Native Garden, newbike-trail, Creekside, Dana Adobe etc.Kids welcome (no dogs) Confirm orinformation a few days before at<[email protected]> or 929-3547.

Sat.-Mon., February 16-18,Southern Nevada Wilderness Service: Join Vicky Hoover on what’s be-come an annual event, helping theBLM’s Ely office take care of beautifulnew desert wilderness areas in Lin-coln County, northeast of Las Vegas.This scenic jaunt is to be in theDelamar, Meadow Valley or MormonMts. working on off-road vehicledamage restoration, wildernesscleanup or hand seeding for vegeta-tion. Central commissary. ContactVicky at [email protected] (415)977-5527 CNRCC Wilder-ness Committee.

FEB. 17, 0930, SUN.,.BIKE WOODLANDS A bicycle tourof the “instant city’ with many stops.Meet at junction of Willow Rd. &Albert Way. Must wear helmet. Withbikes we can go on golf cart trails.Confirm or information a few daysbefore at <[email protected]> or929-3547.

Sat.-Sun., March 1-2, GrassValley Wilderness Backpack: Thiswill be an easy to moderate journey toexplore a little known area with MartyDickes, wilderness resource specialistwith the Ridgecrest office of the BLM.We will monitor ORV impacts, butour reward will be the washes, lowhills, and open grassland views inearly spring. At these low elevationsin the Mojave, wildflowers arepossible, and rain is unlikely. Carry allwater. Limit 12. Leader: CraigDeutsche, (310-477-6670),[email protected]. CNRCCDesert Committee

Sat.-Sun., March 15-16,Ghost Town Extravaganza: Comewith us to this spectacular desertlandscape near Death Valley toexplore the ruins of California’scolorful past. Camp at the historicghost town of Ballarat (flush toilets &hot showers). On Sat., do a verychallenging hike to ghost town

Lookout City with expert Hal Fowlerwho will regale us with tales of thiswild west town. Later we’ll return tocamp for Happy Hour, a potluck feastand campfire. On Sun, a quick visit tothe infamous Riley town site beforeheading home. Group size strictlylimited. Send $8 per person (SierraClub), 2 sase, H&W phones, email,rideshare info to Ldr: Lygeia Gerard,P.O. Box 294726, Phelan, CA 92329,(760) 868-2179. Co-ldr: Don Peterson(760) 375-8599 CNRCC/DesertCommittee

Wed., March 19th, 26th 5:30p.m. Informal Hikes Return. Seewebsite, or e-mail Gary Felsman fordetails. E-mail is located on theWebsite.

WMI WILDERNESS FIRST AID AND WILDERNESS FIRST RESPONDERRECERTIFICATION COURSESponsored by the Wilderness Medicine Institute of NOLS and ASI Poly Escapes

DATES: February 23-24COST: Students: $125 Tuition Only Non-Students: $185 Tuition OnlyLOCATION: Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo University Union, #220PHONE: Poly Escapes, 756-1287EMAIL: [email protected]: www.asi.calpoly.edu/poly_escapes_trips/get_active

Fast paced and hands-on, this two- orthree-day course covers a wide range ofwilderness medicine topics for people whotravel in the outdoors. WMI’s curriculumis unique and includes many advancedtopics that other programs leave out suchas dislocation reduction, focused spinalassessment and epinephrine administra-tion. In just two days, you’ll gain theknowledge, skills and ability to make

sound decisions in emergency situations.This course is ideal for trip leaders, campstaff, outdoor enthusiasts and individualsin remote locations. WMI’s course is pre-approved by the American Camping Asso-ciation, the United States Forest Service,and other governmental agencies. Thiscourse does not include CPR. Call forWFR recertification requirements.

Documents

Feb. 2008 Santa RM Lucian - Sierra Club · Susan Goodkin in Ventura. Susan wrote the text of the successful SOAR initiative in Ventura County. She recommended that I talk to Rachel