I’m a thousand times more sympathetic than most to the need to keep a tight control on access to high fire areas during Santa Ana season. I live in a Topanga side canyon that hasn’t caught fire in 30 years. And one thing that’s a given about Southern California’s high chaparral-covered hills: eventually they burn. Thus I’m all for slamming down state and county park access during the worst Red Flag times. I do not want some fool who decides to sneak a cigarette while hiking to be able to incinerate my neighborhood.
By the same token, I figure it’s understandable that, after these last two go-rounds with Santa Ana-driven fires, the Malibu City Council would be a teensy bit jittery about allowing any overnight camping in the nearby public parks—particularly when it appears that the most recent Corral fire may have been set by drunk and stupid campers, albeit not legal ones.
But according to several accounts like this from the Malibu Surfside News, and this press release from The City Project, the proposal that will come up for discussion and possibly a vote today at the Malibu City Council meeting, will restrict public access to various pieces of public parkland in a way that seems neither appropriate nor legal.
Here’s some of what the City Project press release says:
The Malibu City Council …..will consider a local coastal program amendment and corollary amendments to the general plan that would prohibit all overnight camping in Malibu parks, and would eliminate public access to Ramirez Canyon Park. The public and Native Americans with ancestral ties to the area would be prohibited from access to public lands.
Both the Mountains Recreation & Conservation Authority and the City Project folks also note that, although the post fire concern is valid, overnight “cold” camping (no fires) in designated spots during non-Santa Ana months, should be permitted, and Malibu’s proposed restrictions have less to do with safety and more to do with NIMBY-driven urges to keep out the riff raff (read non-Malibu residents):
Malibu cynically seeks to invoke the recent fires as a justification for limiting public access. Since records have been kept in 1910, not a single wildfire can be traced to a developed campground. The Malibu Parks Public Access Enhancement Plan will actually decrease fire danger in the canyons.Malibu would not exist but for taxpayers paying for public roads and police and fire protection. Malibu is not above state and federal laws.
Well, yeah.
Generally, like in government, churches, schools, etc., once “some” say that all people and ideas are equal and then take over, rather than improving anything or anyone, they throw open access and destroy the institutions. Eveyone then is equal and the playing field becomes equal–at the bottom level.
With that line of thought, I say that all the land around there should be wiped out in a contolled burn so that no vegetation is left and eveyone can be equally dissatisfied. If everyone can’t be happy, then no one should be happy.
– – –
Okay, now that I’ve said that and made a point about the destruction of important areas of society to make people equal, I’ll tell you what I really believe–on this issue.
I despise eltists saying that parks should be closed to anyone but them.
These people actually are usually the same ones who think that they have a right to take over major institutions. Yes they are, whether you want to admit it or not. They are the elitist, we-know-better-than-you, we-have-to-save-the-world, limousine liberals. They are the Al Gore’s who want everyone to stop polluting, while they fly around in their jets and heat and cool massive homes. It’s okay for them–not you.
I saw the same thing, but for different reasons, when a new road was proposed through the Smokey Mountains. The one existing highway was clogged with tourists, and the snobby environmentalists and back-packers (I was a back-packer, but not snobby) opposed the road and started convincing stupid, gullible people to “Save Our Smokies” or SOS. The new road would not be an eye-sore and would allow more of the people who paid for the park with their taxes to see it. But, conservation was a popular theme and people fell for it.
Of course, that meant that invalids and people with young kids were not welcome, in addition to the many others who could not hike the trails but would like to see the sights.
Keep the parks, the trails, the camp sites, and access open. There are better ways to protect public parks rather than closing them, which no longer make them public.
But, keep out drunk illegals with matches and send them home.
Thta’s funny. I read the newspaper article and do not see anything about restrincting public access. I see residents saying “no camping in fireprone canyons.”
You cannot paint all of Malibu with your unfair tar.
Many, many Malibu residents are in favor of public access ao ALL parks and beaches.
The story here is much more subtle than you report:
Little facts that — had you reported them — would have gotten in the way of your thesis that ALL of malibu is big bad and elitist.
Things like: access to the public lands would not be restricted by Malibu’s plan one bit.
Or: Access to Ramirez Canyon parklands would be significantly increased under the city’s plan than the court-ordered restrictions that currently exist.
“Cold” camping has already been endorsed by the Malibu City Council, which has also voted to allow such recreation at the city’s largest park — a type of recreation that doubtless very few Malibu residents will ever use.
Uninformed invective like yours is just so much hot air. How do you know Al Gore would take a position against camping,as you infer?
Why not just close the parks and access roads during red-flag warning days? There are many roads and canyons in the Angeles, San Gabriel and San Bernardino national forests which are closed to everybody during red-flag days. Of course you should not allow any kind of access to forests, during red-flag days. Even a car’s catalytic converter can start a fire by going over some dry grass.
Don’t be silly La Resident. Your proposal would still allow “undesirables” (i.e. anyone not able to plunk down a few million for a shack at the beach or go to Pepperdine) to enjoy Malibu. Look at the war that David Geffen waged to keep the hoi polloi off “His” beach. No, this is to be expected – but watch them go to Arnie and others to get state tax funds to rebuild.
Malibu Resident,
Hey, the City Project folks are among the most knowledgable people regarding parks issues in LA County, AND they’re a bunch of activist lawyers who do bother to read the fine print.
The Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority, which I also cited as being upset, is a local government public entity that works with the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, which is a state agency established by the California State Legislature.
But, hey, why believe them?
Of course it’s more complicated than a five-hundred word post will express, and there are plenty of Malibu residents who feel differently. Otherwise there wouldn’t be a discussion.
Your contribution to the discussion is very welcome, but you might want to read the other links—the MRCA fact sheet— a little more carefully.
(Also, who said anything about Al Gore???)
I said something about Al Gore. I couldn’t think of anything to say about Hillary Clinton at the moment.
What was that, the MRCA is concerned about the latest NIE report from the NIC about WMD in Malibu and Iraq. IMHO and that of my BFF, we are using to many acronyms.(LOL)
Hey, LA Res, I spelled it out the first time. Watcha want from me???
I thought the LAPD was the worst on the local acronym front because they inevitably try to get clever about it. (CRASH—Community Resources Against Street Hoodlums– formerly named TRASH, Total Resources Against Street Hoodlums. And then there’s Senior Lead Officers, the community police folks that the rest of the department refers to as SLOs.)
But that’s before I started reporting on education. Local education policy people speak almost entirely in acronyms (NCLB, CAHSEE, IEP, PI5, AYP, ADA and on and on) and look at you blankly when you’re slow on the uptake. I now can acronym along with them (that’s “acronym,” the verb, thank you very much), and so I feel far, far cooler and infinitely more empowered as a person.
As a continued refresher for showing wisdom and discernment, remember the post titled “Huckabee: the Sequel” and the related comments? Check this:
CBS ‘Early Show’ Builds Huckabee Up to Tear Him Down
We now return you to the regularly scheduled post.
Oh gawd…”it’s all the media’s fault.”
Right-wingers are the biggest whiners and evaders of taking any responsibility for anything ever (not to mention pants wetters – “Save me from Ahmadinedjad, Daddy!”) Grow the F… up !
Amazing! Absolutely amazing! Radical left-wingers will not discuss anything from the right until absolute proof is given of every position and every minor mistake is addressed, but they give a free pass to the liberal media for major mistakes in reporting–as long as the mistakes hurt conservatives.
And, to make it more interesting, they are the champions of the “Nanny State,” but turn around and attack conservatives for wanting the one thing that government is supposed to do, which is provide for a common defense.
What a bunch of hypocritical losers.
No its Clinton’s fault