Most Popular

  • The Principal Matter
    Teachers said Principal Gil Cho was dictatorial. Students said he manhandled them. The school district said he was doing a good job.
  • He's No Angel
    They once called him a savior who helped people in need. Today, Edwin Parada is accused of taking money from Latinos unfamiliar with real estate laws.
  • Nonconformity Still Reigns!
    The top eccentrics of San Francisco, and that's saying something.
  • A Time to Kill
    The SPCA is struggling to finance a new hospital, and one way to save money is to speed up euthanasia.
  • State of the Cart
    Join us as we map the street food scene and find out why there aren't more vendors in this most food-involved and temperate of cities.

Recent Articles

Recent Articles by Joe Eskenazi

National Features >

  • Houston Press

    A Dirty Picture

    What mainstream publishers don't want you to know about door-to-door magazine sales.

    By Craig Malisow

  • Riverfront Times

    Welcome to Cougar Heaven

    When these huntresses on are on the prowl, the prey very much wants to be caught.

    By Unreal

  • Broward-Palm Beach New Times

    Sweet Deal

    How rumored McCain veep choice Charlie Crist wants to bail out Big Sugar.

    By Bob Norman

  • SF Weekly

    All-American Girls

    Are Asian women getting their jawbones cut to look whiter?

    By Lauren Smiley

An Inconvenient Plant

Continued from page 2

Published on April 16, 2008

While the sand now sits in the shadow of the abandoned Public Health Service Hospital, a diminutive sign informs those navigating this isolated quadrant of the Presidio that the gargantuan pile is slated to fill a trio of dune restoration sites by 2010. The sign's fluorescent tangerine text also beseeches passersby to stay off the dune — which is, naturally, pockmarked by countless footprints.

While the Presidio's original restoration plan for the Raven's manzanita and other native species called for the removal of 3,800 trees, the version it adopted in 2003 ostensibly goes easier on the chainsaws. And yet the tally of condemned trees is nowhere to be found within the 322 pages of the innocuously titled Recovery Plan for Coastal Plants of the Northern San Francisco Peninsula. Five years after enacting the plan, Presidio officials still aren't sure how many trees will stay and how many will go.

The Presidio is jointly run by both the National Park Service and the Presidio Trust, which means getting answers can be more than a little tedious. National Park Service officials claimed to have no idea how many trees they'll cut. Mark Frey, a Trust ecologist, estimates that perhaps 1,000 or more will be removed from Trust land over the next 30 years. Eyeballing a map, Terri Thomas, the Trust's director of park resources, states that the majority of trees to be cut are on Park Service land — meaning at least 2,000 (and perhaps many more) will go. Most of those trees, Thomas claims, would have died anyway in the coming decades.

The dune restoration plan's methodical pace is difficult to observe in real time, but a few dozen trees here and there add up over the years. The Trust has been removing around 100 trees a year for much of this decade; in 2008 alone, a minimum of 85 trees are scheduled to be felled. NPS spokesman Rich Weideman adds that the parks service's 2010 budgetary request from the federal government will include significant expenditures for tree removal.

That has neighborhood and tree activists grumbling. The notion of removing thousands of trees to provide sunlight for endangered bushes and grasses is as welcome to Presidio neighborhood groups as a family of sand dunes moving in next door.

"I find the nativism movement particularly disturbing, in large part because of its origins in Nazi Germany," wrote local native plant movement critic Steve Sayad in an e-mail. In a recent online debate with a plant aficionado, Sayad referred to native plant restoration as a "racist and sexist cult" befitting a "Green Nazi." Several other public critics of tree removal in the Presidio agreed that local native plant enthusiasts' ethos was derived from Nazism.

"Nazis, yeah. That's a term I've heard since day one," says Peter Brastow, a genial, red-bearded man who looks as if he strolled off a container of Ben & Jerry's ice cream. Now the executive director of the nonprofit Nature in the City, he was Chassé's predecessor at the Presidio, maintaining the Raven's manzanita site for more than a decade. "Nazi and fascist — yeah, I hear those terms a lot."

For the record, the Nazis were indeed enthusiasts of native plant gardens, and did extol the superiority of German plants. However, they actively sought to "Germanize" the landscapes of neighboring countries — the very opposite of the native plant movement's goal. Also, they killed people.

Certainly, not every critic of native plant restoration will quote the Nuremberg Laws. Yet the neighborhood and tree activists contacted for this story all described the Presidio's plan as an environmental misstep. "Removing trees of any species is pretty questionable these days in terms of global warming," said Isabel Wade, a founder of Friends of the Urban Forest and executive director of the Neighborhood Parks Council. Added Bill Henslin, cofounder of the antidevelopment group Friends of the Presidio National Park, "So many great old trees, which are good for the environment, are being sacrificed for some arbitrary aesthetic and historical goal."

These arguments are scientifically questionable. A 2002 study undertaken jointly by Colorado State University and the U.S. Department of Agriculture claimed that some grasses can store nearly twice the carbon that forests can. And a 2006 report by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory demonstrated that planting trees outside the world's tropical zones actually raises global temperatures. Installing forested tracts over former grasslands — as Jones did 120 years ago in the Presidio — is especially troublesome: Dark forest canopies absorb sunlight, whereas shrubs and grassland reflect it.

But while scientific arguments can be disproved, emotional ones cannot.

"I'm assuming that an environmental argument has more validity than someone's aesthetic preferences," says Mary McAllister, a former member of the city's Park, Recreation and Open Space Advisory Committee and a public critic of native plant restoration. "But if it's aesthetics you want, I'll tell you that as far as I'm concerned, a forested and landscaped park is a more beautiful place than dune scrub and grassland, which is native to San Francisco."

As McAllister's view indicates, the fact trees didn't grow in this area naturally is of little concern to their advocates.

Show All« Previous Page   1   2   3   4   5   Next Page »

SF Weekly Insiders

  • Local food, music and news blasts
  • Free Stuff
Backpage.com