Looman's op-ed 'absurd'

As a longtime Bay Guardian reader, I was disappointed by David Looman's opinion piece "Behind the Park Battles" (5/21/03).

Even by the broadest of definitions, thinning eucalyptus saplings or cutting down two or three eucalyptuses cannot be considered clear-cutting.

Where are there plans to ban public access to "hundreds of acres" of public lands? Do you or anyone at the Bay Guardian honestly think that the Recreation and Park Department is going to ban public access to its largest natural areas (Lake Merced, Glen Canyon, Twin Peaks, etc.)? That's totally absurd.

I found the biodiversity advocates-as-gentrifiers argument manipulative and insulting. Insulting because as a Bay Guardian reader, and as someone who's never made more than 35K a year, the gentrification issue is of particular concern to me. Looman plays the class card, the race card, and the gentrification card. His piece was well done. Too bad it wasn't true.

Tom Annese
San Francisco

Dogs vs. biodiversity

As an environmentalist who cares for and fights to protect all life equally, I was deeply offended by David Looman's opinion column.

Looman claims that only rich, passive users want to protect plants and animals and preserve open space. This is the same nonsense we had to put up with from anti-environmentalists when I was an Earth Firster in the mid '80s. I and all of the other radical environmentalists that I have worked with are of average or below-average income, yet we strongly support preservation of native plants and animals for their own sake, not for our own purposes or for the pleasures of the rich. While I understand that rich people generally just want to preserve their nice views and don't really care about anything except their wealth, there are actually very good reasons, both moral and ecological, for treating all life equally.

Looman attacks removal of nonnative eucalyptus trees, which poison the ground so that native plants cannot grow. I have never heard of an environmentalist who is unaware of the need for biodiversity. Eucalyptus trees do not belong outside of Australia, period, and they are destroying our native plants and thus doing harm to the biodiversity of the planet. They should all be removed and replaced with native plants, which in the case of San Francisco would be grasses. Those who want trees should go live somewhere where they are native.

Looman disparages the best thing that the Recreation and Park Department has ever done, which was its Natural Areas Plan. Among other things, this plan would have stopped the harm caused by dogs, which dig up grasses and chase, harass, and kill native wildlife, by prohibiting them from natural areas in our city parks. Dogs are not natural animals (they were bred by humans), and they are very harmful to wildlife and ecosystems.

Jeff Hoffman
San Francisco

Restoring natural areas

As an employee of the Haight Ashbury Neighborhood Council Recycling Center and a volunteer with the Natural Areas Program, I wish to respond to David Looman's opinion piece. His assertion that the Recreation and Park Department has attempted to displace the Recycling Center is not true. His assertion that the Recreation and Park Department's Natural Areas Program "would ban public access to hundreds of acres of parkland" is also untrue.

General manager Elizabeth Goldstein and her staff recommended a five-year lease for the Recycling Center at its present location, but members of the Rec and Park Commission wanted more information and at the present time the Recycling Center continues to operate everyday. The Recycling Center, with technical support from NAP, has planted a large native plant garden and is propagating thousands of San Francisco native plants that are available for habitat restoration projects or private gardens.

With the help of thousands of volunteers, NAP is restoring San Francisco's surviving wildlife habitats. Twin Peaks, Lake Merced, Corona Heights, Mt. Davidson, Glen Canyon, Bayview Hill, McLaren Park, Bernal Hilltop, and 22 other sites contain flora and fauna that have been here for millions of years.

Greg Gaar
San Francisco

Voodoo Lounge lives

We wanted to thank you for printing Josh Wilson's article "Music with a Mission" (5/21/03). It's refreshing to see a media outlet focus on the history and present state of the Mission music scene. However, we were a little disappointed to see that a thriving and relevant club was completely overlooked. There was no mention at all of the Voodoo Lounge. With its 25th Street and Mission address, there's no question it sits well within what Wilson labeled the "shifting" boundaries of the Mission District.

All through the so-called boom years, local bands showcased their talents on the Voodoo stage and continue to do so today. You can see some of the best live acts in the city nearly any night of the week. As the new booking management (KNAP Productions), we are continually working to improve on an already great venue and promote new growth in the San Francisco music scene.