Comments by Gone Coastal
July 18, 2005
Twinsdad, No, this guy should not have taken the camera. Yes, Barb is well within her rights to do what she did. I'm just saying the battle is over, so why get in the face of a laborer cutting down trees? Your gripe is not with him, he has nothing to do with the decisions that have been made. So Barb acts within her rights and said and did what she did, and got a bad reaction. That’s life! You know sometimes that is going to happen, pick your battles and your adversaries. Barb was within her rights,…
July 18, 2005
All this hand ringing over what amounts to a runoff ditch and the plants that grow around it is simple amazing. Equally amazing is the extrapolation of terms like “perennial streams” and “riparian wetland habitat” to somehow make them applicable to a runoff ditch, oh excuse me I should say “ephemeral stream”. The bottom line for me is that the governmental bodies we have in place to control growth, have determined that this “ephemeral stream” does not qualify for protected status…
July 15, 2005
Sorry Steve, Barb's mad at me.
Barb, After reading the policies you quoted, I don't see how you think they apply to an ephemeral stream. In LCP policy 8.6 (a) it refers to "perennial streams". Perennial: Lasting or active through the year or through many years.
You know environmentalists can be thugs too.
Two words: Chill, Pill
July 15, 2005
The owner(s) of this property apparently have the necessary approvals to move ahead with their development, so why harass them? As you state, this land “isn’t recognized as a coastal resource by the Coastal Commission”. I think your issue is with the Coastal Commission, not with the land owner(s) or the poor guys trying to earn a buck. I think this story can also be viewed as harassment of some working class guys who were simply trying to do their job, by an over zealous zero growth advocate/environmentalist.…