[ACT] Non-native trees in Hahamongna getting in the way...

[Meb787 at aol.com]

Friends, 
The issue of tree removal in Hahamongna is an  important one so I am 
forwarding an email posted on the Arroyo Seco News list  from Tim Brick to Tim 
Wendler, Chair of the HWPAC.  The 32 trees slated for removal in the  potential 
roadway corridor on the Annex are only the tip of the iceberg.  THERE ARE 
OVER 300 TREES PROPOSED TO BE  REMOVED FROM THE PARK under the Master Plan so 
this is an issue all of us who  care about the park should be considering. 
To begin specifically with the 32 trees in the way  of a potential road, 
interestingly enough, these are the only non-natives on  the Annex which are 
slated for removal.   If the concern was really habitat  restoration, wouldn’
t all the non-natives on the Annex be called out for  removal? 
There is also a distinction which is not being made  between landscaped 
areas and natural restoration areas within the Arroyo.  The potential roadway 
corridor on the  Annex is a landscaped area with trees which were planted to 
shade the  trail.  The Arroyo Seco Design  Guidelines clearly differentiate 
habitat restoration areas from landscaped areas  such as those around 
buildings.  If you know the Annex area, you know that the proposed corridor is  
located between the LA County Fire Camp and Rose Bowl Riders, both landscaped  
areas for decades.  The Arroyo  Seco Design Guidelines do not call for 
ripping out established plantings in  landscaped areas rather they make 
suggestions as to what should be planted when  new plantings are desired. 
The real elephant in the room is the almost 200  trees, mostly willows, 
which are scheduled to be removed for the water  conservation projects in 
Hahamongna.  Few of us question the need for these projects – the real question 
is how  can the increased ground water recharge be done with the least impact 
upon the  environment of the park.  There are  questions which Tim Brick 
and the Arroyo Seco Foundation are well suited to  answer since they, not the 
City of Pasadena, are listed as the implementing  Agency/Organization for 
the water projects specified in the Hahamongna Master  Plan.  The Los Angeles 
Integrated  Regional Water Management Plan lists the following:  Hahamongna 
Basin Multi-use project,  Hahamongna PWP Surface Water Treatment Plant, 
Hahamongna Storm Drain Outlet  BMPs, Hahamongna streamcourse widening, 
Hahamongna Water Conservation Pool,  Hahamongna West Side GW recharge basins.  (For 
more info on these, go to _http://ladpw.org/lawaterplan_ 
(http://ladpw.org/lawaterplan) .)  
This is a new direction for the Arroyo Seco  Foundation from its earlier 
position.  The Arroyo Seco Watershed Restoration Feasibility Study called for  
replacing the proposed recharge basins with recharge in the natural 
streambed  and flood plain.  The study also  called for the design of low flow 
channels and the development of a monitoring  and credit program with the 
Raymond Basin Management Board. (p.IV-19)  The Arroyo Seco Watershed Management  & 
Restoration Plan expressed concern about the water infrastructure projects  
in Hahamongna which “could prevent the restoration of high quality aquatic  
habitat, and also could result in the removal of southern willow scrub 
habitat  at the south end of the Park.” (p.66) 
The HWPAC’s position on non-native trees may impact  these water 
infrastructure projects in the future which is a much thornier issue  than the trees 
on the Annex whose only real sin is to be in the way of a future  roadway! 
Mary B. 
Tim Brick’s email below: 
Tim:  


I strongly urge you and the Advisory Committee to  reconsider the position 
"That every effort be made to minimize tree removal in  the Annex area 
(including nonnatives due to the loss of habitat in the Station  Fire)."    


This approach is silly  and counterproductive to the pivotal goal of 
improving habitat in Hahamongna.  Habitat and the removal of nonnative trees are 
particularly important in  Hahamongna because this is one of the most 
environmentally important and  sensitive areas in our region with some very special 
ecological zones, including  the stream zone, the wetlands/marsh habitat, 
the rare alluvial scrub habitat and  the spectacular oak grove.


The Station Fire  rationale for not removing non-native trees, 
fundamentally flawed anywhere, does  not apply at all to the Hahamongna Annex because no 
trees there were burnt.  It's not like significant or even any tree cover 
was lost  there.


I know people loves  trees deeply, but in an environmentally sensitive 
area, habitat considerations  are most important.   The Arroyo Seco Foundation 
had to fight that  battle for the Central Arroyo Stream Restoration and other 
restoration projects.  There are always people who want to protect every 
tree everywhere, but in  such a precious area habitat and science should 
determine the plan. Habitat  provides the home for the terrestrial and aquatic 
species, the birds, bugs,  wildlife and fish that we want to bring back to the 
area.


Pasadena should develop  a science-based habitat restoration plan that 
inevitably will include the  removal of exotic, non-native trees, and 
Arroyo-lovers should support efforts to  implement that plan. 


Tim  Brick



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.fourpalms.org/pipermail/act/attachments/20091017/e23b9c3f/attachment.html