IN HIS ATTACK on the Recreation and Park Department's Natural Areas Program (see Opinion, 5/21/03), not only does David Looman completely misrepresent NAP's activities and purpose, he also attempts to divide park users into different camps and to pit one against the other, at a time when San Franciscans should be working together to determine how our parks and open spaces can best serve the needs of all citizens.

It may be true that if you repeat something often enough, no matter how outrageous, people will believe it. But no matter how many times it's repeated, it still won't be true that NAP clear-cuts eucalyptus trees, plants poison oak, and is plotting to return the entire western half of the city to sand dunes. It's also in no way true that NAP plans to "ban public access to hundreds of acres of park land."

In some cases, NAP has roped off badly eroded areas or built brush structures to discourage people from scrambling off-trail on steep slopes. Newly planted areas may also be roped off to allow the plants to get established. But NAP has also increased access to many natural areas by building and maintaining trails, controlling erosion, and removing undergrowth.

There's plenty of information available about NAP and its mission. NAP's nine gardeners tend and restore small patches of native habitat throughout the city, involving thousands of volunteers and teaching kids and adults about the natural ecosystems that once flourished here. Natural areas are a tremendous educational tool, especially for urban kids who may have few chances to experience nature. Everyone is welcome to come out for a day and see what NAP is about by participating in a work party; you can even bring your dog. For more information, call Suzanna Buehl at (415) 753-7268.

Why try to save these remnants? Biodiversity loss is, according to most scientists, one of the most critical issues facing our planet. It's estimated that we're losing more than 100 species worldwide every day. And not all of them are in the rainforest: Did you know that the endangered Mission blue butterfly still survives on Twin Peaks? The city's natural life hasn't been paved into oblivion – yet. Great horned owls live on Bayview Hill and in Glen Park; wildflowers bloom on hillsides each spring; Lake Merced supports 50 species of nesting birds; there are oaks and willows and bees and salamanders – a miniature cornucopia of plants and critters hanging on in tiny fragments of our city. Wouldn't you like them to be here for your grandchildren, too? It's not just up to people who live in rainforests to save the earth's remaining species. Biodiversity, like so many things, begins at home.

There's a lot of pressure on San Francisco's parks and open spaces, as the battle over dog policy has made clear. As founder of the Dog PAC, Looman would like to draw others into that battle by casting it as an issue of humans vs. plants. It's not, or at least it shouldn't be.

Our parks must accommodate multiple uses, and no one of them – whether natural area preservation or walking dogs off-leash – should take precedence over the rest. But that isn't what NAP is about: It doesn't take away playing fields from kids, and it doesn't ban humans and dogs. It's not about trying to seal nature off behind a wall; one of its main goals is to break down walls between urban dwellers and nature. What it's all about – and surely this isn't too much to ask – is saving a little room in San Francisco for the plants and animals that were here long before the city itself.