How 'green' is a valley that doesn't protect all species? |

How ‘green’ is a valley…

Dated: 19 Nov 2008

Posted by admin

How ‘green’ is a valley that doesn’t protect all species?

By Frank Schiavone

A new wave of “greenness” is washing over our valley. Politicians are talking up something called the “Green Valley Initiative.” My city, Rancho Cucamonga, is the latest convert. It wants to be a leader. Our City Council has voted to include green initiatives in our General Plan update.

Commendable, but the rub is what does this all mean? What exactly is sustainable development and what are green programs? The internationally recognized definition of sustainability is that it “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” This (Brundtland Commission) definition implicitly argues for the rights of future generations to raw materials and vital ecosystem services and that these inherent rights be taken into account in decision-making. Criteria common to sound sustainability programs are:

1. Deals transparently and systemically with risk, uncertainty and irreversibility;

2. Ensures appropriate valuation, appreciation and restoration of nature;

3. Integrates environmental, social, human and economic goals in policies and activities;

4. Provides equal opportunity and community participation;

5. Conserves biodiversity and ecological integrity;

6. Ensures inter-generational equity;

7. Recognizes the global integration of localities.

Encouraging recycling, using technologies that save energy, developing programs that reduce waste, and minimizing hazardous substances are all commendable objectives. But such efforts lack a very important component - protecting natural communities and biodiversity.

Serious “green” sustainability models do exist and should be studied. I can think of two, one in the public sector and one in the private.

The city of San Luis Obispo instituted a Natural Resource Protection Program (http://www.ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us/naturalresources/) in 1995 and has achieved phenomenal success with just two staff members - a biologist and administrative assistant. San Luis Obispo actively promotes collaborative efforts to save its open space and natural resources and works with local interest groups and federal and state agencies to obtain grants to finance the work they are doing.

The program’s primary purpose is to protect the city’s natural heritage, but it is also used as a vehicle to educate the public, city staff and decision-makers about the environmental issues facing their city and the richness of their natural surroundings. They have preserved hundreds of acres and initiated several habitat restoration projects. The program has attracted millions of dollars in grants, demonstrates San Luis’ commitment to preserving open space, and is a technical resource.

Xanterra, the company that operates the lodges and guest facilities at many of our major national parks, has a formal environmental management system, sets clear policies, has a fully staffed environmental team with environmental managers, and uses well-defined metrics to measure how well they are doing. The company has received numerous awards and supports advocacy groups that protect our national parks. For more information, go to http://www.xanterra.com/.

But even these exemplary programs do not dare to imagine nature as it once was and are prisoner to lowered expectations and baselines.

At one time, our planet teemed with wildlife. Today, an impoverished natural world serves as our current frame of reference. An increasing number of conservation scientists are saying that species (even those deemed recovered) have a long way to go to reach previous levels of abundance. Our lost memories have come to be known as the “shifting baseline syndrome.”

Coined in 1995 by fishery scientist Daniel Paul, the term denotes a ratcheting decay of nature, perpetuated by our own diminishing expectations. Such sliding standards have us marvel when we see a single horned lizard on a hike through the sage or a doe and her fawn passing through our backyards. The richness and fullness of our region’s biological diversity seems to be gone from our collective consciousness.

The results are insidious. The youngest among us - those who are the ones most likely to set things straight - may aim too low because they do not fully appreciate what was lost.

Fortunately, there is a growing awareness that wildlife is in serious trouble. Sentiment that the Earth’s resources are endless is also slowly dying. Even decision-makers are reluctantly recognizing that nature, although resilient, is not indestructible.

We must take concrete and measurable steps to conserve and manage what is left of our natural environment for future generations. We must rein in urban sprawl; end the senseless destruction of our watershed and wildlife; work to make our communities more livable, and avoid irreversible impacts. And yes, just maybe, we can dream bigger dreams. With determination and some foresight, just possibly, we can change course and allow nature in some places to achieve its full measure.

We know with relative certainty the historical ranges of our area-dependent species and have a fairly clear picture of nature as it once was, and in places could still be. We must not allow shifting baselines and narrowly crafted (sustainability) programs to foreclose a world of possibilities.

Frank Schiavone is a resident of Rancho Cucamonga.
Write him at fschiavone@verizon.net