DOCSLIB.ORG

2010 Annual Report Marin Conservation League Actions & Accomplishments

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2010 Annual Report Marin Conservation League Actions & Accomplishments Marin Conservation League Annual Report 2010 The mission of the Marin Conservation League is to preserve, protect and enhance the natural assets of Marin County Marin Conservation League Director’s Letter and Financial Statement The Marin Statement of Activities Conservation January 1 to December 31, 2010 (Prepared from MCL Records) League is pleased to submit the 2010 Unrestricted Temp. Restricted Board Restricted Total Annual Report2010 to SUPPORT AND REVENUE (Operations) (Projects/Dedict'd) (Legacy of the Land) you, our members Support and supporters, Membership $ 74,303 $ - $ - $ 74,303 to highlight Contributions $ 60,607 $ 26,260 $ 25,000 $ 111,867 the League’s Special Events & Miscellaneous $ 17,966 $ - $ - $ 17,966 actions and Total Support $ 152,876 $ 26,260 $ 25,150 $ 204,136 accomplishments Revenue of the past year. As you read through Interest & Dividend Income $ 7,517 $ 26,290 $ 33,807 the wide array of issues addressed Sales/Disposal of Inventory less costs $ (3,496) $ (3,496) during the year, keep in mind that Miscellaneous Income $ 17 $ 17 Total Revenue $ 4,038 $ 26,290 $ 30,328 every action—each letter, each comment, each public testimony— Transfers was preceded by research, analysis, Transfer: LOL to Operations $ 61,639 $ (61,639) field trips, and endless meetings. Our Transfer Operations to LOL $ (150) $ 150 president throughout 2010, Nona Net Assets Released from Restrictions $ 27,298 $ (27,298) Dennis, was the spark plug that kept Total Transfers $ 88,787 $ (27,298) $ (61,489) the presence of the League alive Total Support, Revenue & Transfers $ 245,701 $ (1,038) $ (10,199) $ 234,464 not just in Marin, but beyond. But it takes the efforts of many to keep EXPENSES Program Services $ 180,742 $ 180,742 the League relevant and effective Management & General $ 32,676 $ 32,676 as governmental budget cuts Fundraising $ 30,270 $ 30,270 take their toll on agency staff and Total Expenses $ 243,688 $ - $ - $ 243,688 other resources that contribute to Results from operations $ 2,013 $ (1,038) $ (10,199) $ (9,224) environmental and land use decisions. In 2010, the League’s committee Investment Gain, Realized & Unrealized $ 29,943 $ - $ 145,115 $ 175,058 structure continued to provide the Change in Equity $ 31,956 $ (1,038) $ 134,916 $ 165,834 groundwork of group discussion Total Equity, Start of 2010 $ 288,123 $ 70,675 $ 1,189,261 $ 1,548,059 and analysis. The Land Use and Transportation Committee, Parks Total Equity, Year End 2010 $ 320,079 $ 69,637 $ 1,324,177 $ 1,713,893 and Open Space Committee, Water his statement summarizes MCL’s financial results for the Committee, Climate Action Committee INCOME 2010 calendar year for each of the funds maintained by (initiated in 2010), and the North T MCL and for the organization as a whole. The figures are Marin Unit also offer opportunities for member participation and input. taken from MCL’s books and records and are unaudited. In spite of several years of economic The financial data are organized into three classes: The Unrestricted (Operations) Fund includes the in- uncertainties, MCL’s financial MEMBERSHIP 30.2% come and expense whihc supports MCL’s environ- condition in 2010 year was solid CONTRIBUTIONS 24.7% and healthy. The major part of mental advocacy programs. The Temporarily Restrict- SPECIAL EVENTS 7.4% our community action continues ed class records MCL’s management of more than to be undertaken by volunteers. seven separate funds that are dedicated to specific REVENUE 1.6% Your financial support is critical to projects or uses. The Board Restricted class records the TRANSFERS 36.1% keeping the organization functioning, income and expenditures of the Legacy of the Land, MCL’s EXPENSES however, and we appreciate the endowment fund. The income from this fund provides on- ongoing contributions of you, our going support for MCL’s advocacy programs. members and supporters. Please In 2010, MCL’s results were favorably affected by improv- know that, with your support MCL will ing investment values. Applicable accounting rules require continue to serve the environment MCL to adjust the value of its investments on its books to of Marin on your behalf and on the market at year-end. For 2010, there was an increase in the behalf of future generations. PROGRAM SERVICES 74.2% value of MCL’s investment assets which was recorded as income. MANAGEMENT SERVICES 13.4% Susan Stompe, President Thank you for your support of MCL’s environmental work FUNDRAISING 12.4% in 2010! 2 Marin Conservation League 2010 Annual Report Marin Conservation League Actions & Accomplishments January Sent a letter to Marin Magazine criticizing mountain bike ads that promoted illegal and en- Tracking State Environmental Opposed Governor Schwarzenegger’s budget vironmentally destructive riding behaviors. Issues in an Election Year proposal to fund California State Parks with royalties from new offshore oil operations in the Urged County Supervisors and MMWD Board of In the 2010 election year, MCL turned Santa Barbara Channel. Directors to continue their long-standing2010 support its attention to several statewide issues that posed either environmental op- Recommended to the Sonoma Marin Area Rail of Marin Clean Energy as the County’s best portunity or threat. Proposition 21 was Authority that their 40-year Long Range Right- chance to meet its State-mandated greenhouse an opportunity to protect State Parks of-Way Preservation Policy, which contemplates gas reduction target. from the vagaries of the State’s budget future development of Port of Sonoma ferry February process by placing a surcharge of $18 on terminal and service, acknowledge the significant Testified before Marin County Board of Supervi- personal vehicle registrations to create ecological and economic constraints on that site. sors and Parks and Open Space Commission that a reliable revenue stream. In exchange, Advised the Board of Supervisors to accept the the proposed “680 Trail” should not be consid- California drivers would receive free Final Draft of the San Geronimo Valley Salmon ered an “approved” project or funded from the day-use to any state park. MCL volun- Enhancement Plan (SEP) and authorize funds County’s Trail Legacy Fund in the absence of envi- teers petitioned to qualify the measure to implement recommendations to protect native ronmental review. for the ballot, and actively campaigned riparian vegetation in an ordinance. Submitted comments to the Golden Gate Nation- for its passage, but it was ultimately al Recreation Area on the proposed Equestrian rejected by voters. Protecting Open Space Preserves Plan for Marin Headlands, recommending best Fortunately, voters also rejected Prop Parks and open space in Marin contin- management practices and other policies to pro- 23, which would have set back the ued to be an MCL focus in 2010. In 1972 tect streams and wetlands along equestrian trails State’s goals for greenhouse gas emis- MCL was a key player in establishing the and ensure seasonal trail closures as necessary. sion reduction (AB 32). MCL opposed Marin County Open Space District, so it Strongly opposed attempts by the Governor and this proposition as it did Prop 16, a is understandable that we would take a the legislature to exempt 25 selected projects measure that would have killed further deep interest in the District’s planning over each of the next five years from protections attempts to establish local clean energy processes. The Vegetation Management under CEQA. authorities such as Marin Clean Energy. 2010 was also the 40th anniversary of the Plan was underway in 2009, but late Placed two benches on Angel Island State Park State’s landmark California Environmen- that year, long-standing controversies honoring MCL’s co-founders, funded by both the tal Quality Act (CEQA). MCL commemo- over expanding trail access for mountain Supervisors’ County Community Services Pro- rated that event at its Annual Dinner bikes came to a head. In early 2010, the gram and MCL Board members. Board of Directors (aka Supervisors), and worked with other organizations to initiated two projects to address the March ward off legislative attempts to exempt issue: a new multi-use “680 Trail” above In association with North Bay Leadership Council many major projects in future years from Sleepy Hollow to connect Loma Alta and and Dominican University, held a Business-Envi- judicial protections under CEQA. Terra Linda Open Space Preserves, and a ronment Breakfast featuring attorney Ed Queve- technical bike park at Stafford Lake. The do on the topic “Beyond Greenwash: Authen- be subject to a supplemental EIR that analyzes 680 trail, which crosses biologically pris- tic Sustainable Business Practices.” changes in the project and environmental condi- tions since the prior EIR was certified in 1996. tine habitat and geologically sensitive Notified the Community Development Agency terrain, proved to be environmentally that the Grady Ranch Precise Development Plan Joined with Save the Bay and hundreds of others complex. MCL spent considerable time application by Skywalker Properties, Ltd., should in opposing the massive urban development pro- walking proposed alignments, recom- posed by Cargill Inc, and DMB on the Saltworks mending alternatives, studying consul- site in Redwood City. Founders’ benches on Angel Island tant reports, and critiquing the Negative April Declaration before the project was fi- nally approved. Planning for the Stafford Commemorated the 40th Lake bike park got underway late in 2010 Anniversary of CEQA and MCL will track the design process. by featuring Clem Shute, The District also initiated a comprehen- environmental and land sive Roads and Trails Management Plan use attorney and early de- with public workshops in late 2010. That, fender of CEQA in 1970, as too, continues to occupy MCL attention. keynote speaker at MCL’s MCL remains dedicated to the primary Annual Dinner, and Coun- goal of protecting the natural resources ty Environmental Coordi- in Marin’s parks and open spaces while nator Tim Haddad in the finding ways to accommodate environ- MCL Newsletter.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Section 3.4 Biological Resources 3.4- Biological Resources
    SECTION 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4- BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES This section discusses the existing sensitive biological resources of the San Francisco Bay Estuary (the Estuary) that could be affected by project-related construction and locally increased levels of boating use, identifies potential impacts to those resources, and recommends mitigation strategies to reduce or eliminate those impacts. The Initial Study for this project identified potentially significant impacts on shorebirds and rafting waterbirds, marine mammals (harbor seals), and wetlands habitats and species. The potential for spread of invasive species also was identified as a possible impact. 3.4.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SETTING HABITATS WITHIN AND AROUND SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY The vegetation and wildlife of bayland environments varies among geographic subregions in the bay (Figure 3.4-1), and also with the predominant land uses: urban (commercial, residential, industrial/port), urban/wildland interface, rural, and agricultural. For the purposes of discussion of biological resources, the Estuary is divided into Suisun Bay, San Pablo Bay, Central San Francisco Bay, and South San Francisco Bay (See Figure 3.4-2). The general landscape structure of the Estuary’s vegetation and habitats within the geographic scope of the WT is described below. URBAN SHORELINES Urban shorelines in the San Francisco Estuary are generally formed by artificial fill and structures armored with revetments, seawalls, rip-rap, pilings, and other structures. Waterways and embayments adjacent to urban shores are often dredged. With some important exceptions, tidal wetland vegetation and habitats adjacent to urban shores are often formed on steep slopes, and are relatively recently formed (historic infilled sediment) in narrow strips.
    [Show full text]
  • Goga Wrfr.Pdf
    The National Park Service Water Resources Division is responsible for providing water resources management policy and guidelines, planning, technical assistance, training, and operational support to units of the National Park System. Program areas include water rights, water resources planning, regulatory guidance and review, hydrology, water quality, watershed management, watershed studies, and aquatic ecology. Technical Reports The National Park Service disseminates the results of biological, physical, and social research through the Natural Resources Technical Report Series. Natural resources inventories and monitoring activities, scientific literature reviews, bibliographies, and proceedings of technical workshops and conferences are also disseminated through this series. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the National Park Service. Copies of this report are available from the following: National Park Service (970) 225-3500 Water Resources Division 1201 Oak Ridge Drive, Suite 250 Fort Collins, CO 80525 National Park Service (303) 969-2130 Technical Information Center Denver Service Center P.O. Box 25287 Denver, CO 80225-0287 Cover photos: Top: Golden Gate Bridge, Don Weeks Middle: Rodeo Lagoon, Joel Wagner Bottom: Crissy Field, Joel Wagner ii CONTENTS Contents, iii List of Figures, iv Executive Summary, 1 Introduction, 7 Water Resources Planning, 9 Location and Demography, 11 Description of Natural Resources, 12 Climate, 12 Physiography, 12 Geology, 13 Soils, 13
    [Show full text]
  • Initial Study/Environmental Assessment: Kent Island Restoration at Bolinas Lagoon
    DRAFT INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: KENT ISLAND RESTORATION AT BOLINAS LAGOON Marin County Open Space District and US Army Corps of Engineers San Francisco District August 2012 DRAFT INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: KENT ISLAND RESTORATION AT BOLINAS LAGOON PREPARED FOR Marin County Open Space District Marin County Civic Center 3501 Civic Center Drive, Room 260 San Rafael, CA 94903 (415) 499-6387 and US Army Corps of Engineers San Francisco District 1455 Market St San Francisco, CA 94103 (415) 503-6703 PREPARED BY Carmen Ecological Consulting Grassetti Environmental Consulting Peter R. Baye, Coastal Ecologist, Botanist August 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................1 1.1 Purpose of this Document ............................................................................................................1 1.2 Document Structure ..............................................................................................................1 2.0 PROPOSED PROJECT AND ALTERNATIVES .......................................................................3 2.1 Introduction ..............................................................................................................3 2.2 Environmental Setting ..............................................................................................................3 2.3 Purpose and Need ..............................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • 50K Course Guide
    50K COURSE GUIDE IMPORTANT UPDATES (11/02/2017) • NEW COURSE MODIFICATION - Old Inn to Muir Beach • New 2017 Start & Finish Locations • On-Course Nutrition Information • UPDATED Crew and spectator information RACE DAY CHECKLIST PRE-RACE PREPARATION • Review the shuttle and parking information on the website and make a plan for your transportation to the start area. Allow extra time if you are required or planning to take a shuttle. • Locate crew- and spectator-accessible Aid Stations on the course map and inform your family/friends where they can see you on-course. Review the crew and spectator information section of this guide for crew rules and transportation options. • If your distance allows, make a plan with your pacer to meet you at a designated pacer aid station. Review the pacer information section of this guide for pacer rules and transportation options. • Locate the designated drop bag aid stations and prepare a gear bag for the specific drop bag location(s). Review the drop bag information section of this guide for more information regarding on-course drop bag processes and policies. • Pick up your bib and timing device at a designated packet pickup location. • Attend the Pre-Race Panel Discussion for last-minute questions and advice from TNF Athletes and the Race Director. • Check the weather forecast and plan clothing and extra supplies accordingly for both you and your friends/family attending the race and Finish Festival. It is typically colder at the Start/Finish area than it is in the city. • Make sure to have a hydration and fuel plan in place to ensure you are properly nourished throughout your race.
    [Show full text]
  • San Francisco Bay Joint Venture
    The San Francisco Bay Joint Venture Management Board Bay Area Audubon Council Bay Area Open Space Council Bay Conservation and Development Commission The Bay Institute The San Francisco Bay Joint Venture Bay Planning Coalition California State Coastal Conservancy Celebrating years of partnerships protecting wetlands and wildlife California Department of Fish and Game California Resources Agency 15 Citizens Committee to Complete the Refuge Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control District Ducks Unlimited National Audubon Society National Fish and Wildlife Foundation NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service Natural Resources Conservation Service Pacific Gas and Electric Company PRBO Conservation Science SF Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Estuary Partnership Save the Bay Sierra Club U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Geological Survey Wildlife Conservation Board 735B Center Boulevard, Fairfax, CA 94930 415-259-0334 www.sfbayjv.org www.yourwetlands.org The San Francisco Bay Area is breathtaking! As Chair of the San Francisco Bay Joint Venture, I would like to personally thank our partners It’s no wonder so many of us live here – 7.15 million of us, according to the 2010 census. Each one of us has our for their ongoing support of our critical mission and goals in honor of our 15 year anniversary. own mental image of “the Bay Area.” For some it may be the place where the Pacific Ocean flows beneath the This retrospective is a testament to the significant achievements we’ve made together. I look Golden Gate Bridge, for others it might be somewhere along the East Bay Regional Parks shoreline, or from one forward to the next 15 years of even bigger wins for wetland habitat.
    [Show full text]
  • Toll Roads in the United States: History and Current Policy
    TOLL FACILITIES IN THE UNITED STATES Bridges - Roads - Tunnels - Ferries August 2009 Publication No: FHWA-PL-09-00021 Internet: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/tollpage.htm Toll Roads in the United States: History and Current Policy History The early settlers who came to America found a land of dense wilderness, interlaced with creeks, rivers, and streams. Within this wilderness was an extensive network of trails, many of which were created by the migration of the buffalo and used by the Native American Indians as hunting and trading routes. These primitive trails were at first crooked and narrow. Over time, the trails were widened, straightened and improved by settlers for use by horse and wagons. These became some of the first roads in the new land. After the American Revolution, the National Government began to realize the importance of westward expansion and trade in the development of the new Nation. As a result, an era of road building began. This period was marked by the development of turnpike companies, our earliest toll roads in the United States. In 1792, the first turnpike was chartered and became known as the Philadelphia and Lancaster Turnpike in Pennsylvania. It was the first road in America covered with a layer of crushed stone. The boom in turnpike construction began, resulting in the incorporation of more than 50 turnpike companies in Connecticut, 67 in New York, and others in Massachusetts and around the country. A notable turnpike, the Boston-Newburyport Turnpike, was 32 miles long and cost approximately $12,500 per mile to construct. As the Nation grew, so did the need for improved roads.
    [Show full text]
  • San Francisco Bay Plan
    San Francisco Bay Plan San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission In memory of Senator J. Eugene McAteer, a leader in efforts to plan for the conservation of San Francisco Bay and the development of its shoreline. Photo Credits: Michael Bry: Inside front cover, facing Part I, facing Part II Richard Persoff: Facing Part III Rondal Partridge: Facing Part V, Inside back cover Mike Schweizer: Page 34 Port of Oakland: Page 11 Port of San Francisco: Page 68 Commission Staff: Facing Part IV, Page 59 Map Source: Tidal features, salt ponds, and other diked areas, derived from the EcoAtlas Version 1.0bc, 1996, San Francisco Estuary Institute. STATE OF CALIFORNIA GRAY DAVIS, Governor SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION 50 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 2600 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111 PHONE: (415) 352-3600 January 2008 To the Citizens of the San Francisco Bay Region and Friends of San Francisco Bay Everywhere: The San Francisco Bay Plan was completed and adopted by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission in 1968 and submitted to the California Legislature and Governor in January 1969. The Bay Plan was prepared by the Commission over a three-year period pursuant to the McAteer-Petris Act of 1965 which established the Commission as a temporary agency to prepare an enforceable plan to guide the future protection and use of San Francisco Bay and its shoreline. In 1969, the Legislature acted upon the Commission’s recommendations in the Bay Plan and revised the McAteer-Petris Act by designating the Commission as the agency responsible for maintaining and carrying out the provisions of the Act and the Bay Plan for the protection of the Bay and its great natural resources and the development of the Bay and shore- line to their highest potential with a minimum of Bay fill.
    [Show full text]
  • Changes in Abundance and Distribution of Nesting Double-Crested Cormorants Phalacrocorax Auritus in the San Francisco Bay Area, 1975–2017
    Rauzon et al.: Changes in nesting Double-Crested Cormorants in San Francisco Bay area 127 CHANGES IN ABUNDANCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF NESTING DOUBLE-CRESTED CORMORANTS PHALACROCORAX AURITUS IN THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA, 1975–2017 MARK J. RAUZON1*, MEREDITH L. ELLIOTT2, PHILLIP J. CAPITOLO3, L. MAX TARJAN4, GERARD J. McCHESNEY5, JOHN P. KELLY6 & HARRY R. CARTER7† 1Laney College, Geography Department, 900 Fallon Street, Oakland, CA 94607, USA *([email protected]) 2Point Blue Conservation Science, 3820 Cypress Drive, #11, Petaluma, CA 94954, USA 3Institute of Marine Sciences, University of California Santa Cruz, 115 McAllister Way, Santa Cruz, CA 95060, USA 4San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory, 524 Valley Way, Milpitas, CA 95035, USA 5US Fish and Wildlife Service, San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge Complex, 1 Marshlands Road, Fremont, CA 94555, USA 6Audubon Canyon Ranch, Cypress Grove Research Center, P.O. Box 808, Marshall, CA 94940, USA 7Humboldt State University, Department of Wildlife, 1 Harpst Street, Arcata, CA 95521, USA †Deceased Received 19 October 2018, accepted 13 February 2019 ABSTRACT RAUZON, M.J., ELLIOTT, M.L., CAPITOLO, P.J., TARJAN, L.M., McCHESNEY, G.J., KELLY, J.P. & CARTER, H.R. 2019. Changes in abundance and distribution of nesting Double-crested Cormorants Phalacrocorax auritus in the San Francisco Bay area, 1975–2017. Marine Ornithology 47: 127–138. In the San Francisco Bay area, California, the Double-crested Cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus population has recovered from significant declines to reach breeding population sizes comparable to those from the late 19th century, when only one colony offshore at the South Farallon Islands (SFI) was known.
    [Show full text]
  • 2008 ANNUAL REPORT the Mission of the Marin Conservation League Is to Preserve, Protect and Enhance the Natural Assets of Marin County
    Protecting Marin Since 1934 2008 ANNUAL REPORT The mission of the Marin Conservation League is to preserve, protect and enhance the natural assets of Marin County. MARIN CONSERVATION LEAGUE Dear Friends: BOARD OF DIRECTORS Offi cers Nona Dennis, Mill Valley, President It is my pleasure, on behalf of the Marin Conservation League Board of Daniel Sonnet, San Rafael, Directors, to report the League’s activities in 2008. You – the members First Vice President and supporters of MCL – are the foundation of this organization, and Roger Roberts, San Rafael we honor and thank you! Without your support, our accomplishments Second Vice President would not be possible. Larry Smith, Nicasio, Secretary Kenneth Drexler, Fairfax, Treasurer Directors This year was the League’s 74th year – an opportunity to review MCL’s Peter Asmus, Stinson Beach legacy and begin planning for our 75th anniversary. The most powerful lesson to emerge Betsy Bikle, Mill Valley from this legacy is that although decades have passed since MCL’s founding, the land Priscilla Bull, Kentfi eld protection tools, tactics, and strategies that were championed by the League’s founders are Joe Bunker, San Anselmo timeless – as relevant in 2008 as they were in 1934! The Action Calendar on pages 6 and 7 Carson Cox, Mill Valley provides abundant evidence of this truism. Bruce Fullerton, Mill Valley Jana Haehl, Corte Madera 2008 began with little warning of the economic diffi culties it would present. Now as Brannon Ketcham, Fairfax 2008 has turned into 2009, it is clear that economic downturn is having an impact on Marge Macris, Mill Valley environmental projects around the State.
    [Show full text]
  • Marin Conservation League Walk Into
    This park receives supportMarin in part Conservation from a nonprofit League organization. For further information, contact: Marin State Park Association WalkP.O. Box 223, Into Inverness, (Conservation) CA 94937 History #11 China Camp State Park Saturday, May 5, 2012 Marin Conservation League 1623–A Fifth Avenue, San Rafael, CA 94901 415.485.6257 marinconservationleague.org Marin Conservation League was founded in 1934 to preserve, protect and enhance the natural assets of Marin County. Marin Conservation League Walk Into (Conservation) History # 11 CHINA CAMP STATE PARK MAY 5, 2012 – 9:30 to 1:00 Today’s Walk As early as 1957, a state report Walk Leaders: had recognized that “this area Our walk begins at the north kiosk Yvonne Brown, Friends of China Camp (should) be included in the State entrance to the Park and parking Park System to meet existing and lot for Back Ranch Meadows Louise Kanter Lipsey, Community Activist future pubic needs.” That report camping area. We will follow the Kathy Cuneo, Ph. D., Botanist suggested a park of 2,700 acres, Shoreline Trail that ascends slightly Nona Dennis, Marin Conservation League with 6 miles of shoreline on San and then follows the contour in Rafael and San Pablo Bays. In and out of the wooded canyons of 1970, the Association of Bay Area San Pedro Ridge, crosses the Back how to help the Friends of China into public ownership only with a governments (ABAG) proposed Ranch Fire Road, and loops back Camp keep the Park open against huge collaborative citizen effort a greenbelt plan that called for to the south side of parking area.
    [Show full text]
  • MARTIN GRIFFIN an Oral History Interview Conducted by Debra Schwartz in 2015
    Mill Valley Oral History Program A collaboration between the Mill Valley Historical Society and the Mill Valley Public Library MARTIN GRIFFIN An Oral History Interview Conducted by Debra Schwartz in 2015 © 2015 by the Mill Valley Public Library TITLE: Oral History of Martin Griffin INTERVIEWER: Debra Schwartz DESCRIPTION: Transcript, 37 pages INTERVIEW DATE: October 20th, 2015 In this oral history, physician, naturalist, champion of open spaces and bane of developers Martin Griffin recounts with warmth and humor his long and extraordinarily active life. Born in Ogden, Utah, in 1920 to nature-loving parents, Martin moved with his family to Portland, Oregon, when the Great Depression hit, and then down to Los Angeles and finally up to Oakland, where he attended elementary school through high school. Martin recalls some early experiences that shaped his love for the environment, including his involvement with the Boy Scouts, where he met the graduate student entomologist Brighton C. “Bugs” Cain, who profoundly inspired him. It was also as a boy that Martin came over to Mill Valley for the first time, making his way by ferry and train, to go hiking on Mt. Tamalpais. He conjures the beautiful vision he had from the ridge that day of white birds down on Bolinas Lagoon, a vision which made such a powerful impression on him and would, years later, feed the flames of his conservationist passion. Martin recounts being involved in ROTC while an undergraduate at U.C. Berkeley, later attending medical school at Stanford, where he got married, and moving over to Marin to begin his medical practice.
    [Show full text]
  • Smscindexpp266-273.Pdf
    INDEX References to illustrations are printed in italics. Ablin, Debbie, 42,92, 258 Azevedo, Margaret, 129 Bolinas-Stinson Beach Master Plan, Adelman, Brenda, 220, 222, 251, 260 34 Aggregate, 243-245, 257 Bagley, Bill, 120 Bolling, David, 224,260 Aggregate Resources Management Bahia Baulinas, 61 Bostick, Benton, 20, 22 (ARM) Plan, 205-206, 256, 257 Ballard, Allan, 87 Bostick, Dr. Warren, 20, 22 Agricultural and Aquifer Baptiste, Arnold, 107 Bouverie Audubon Preserve, xix, Preservation Zone, 205 Barbour, Nancy, 42, 92, 258 152, 153,155-159,258-259 Ah Pah Dam, 163 Barfield, Tom, 63 Bouverie, David, xix, 157, 159,254 Alexander Valley Reach, 236 Bay Conservation and Development Boxer, Senator Barbara, 93, 127,139 Alexander, Meg, 225,260 Commission, 18 Boyd, Rhoda, 67 Allen, Howard B„ 76,93,115,258-259 Beeby, David, 244 Brandt-Hawley, Susan, 208-209, 260 American River, 6 Behr, Peter, 66, 71, 89,97, 107, 128- Bransom-Cooke, Admiral, 65, 67 Anderson, Bruce, 200 129, 132,142,162,171, 191, Brower, David, 113 Angel Island, 12, 27 239,251 Brown, Governor Jerry, 168 Anton, John, 140 biography, 129,169 Brown, Governor Pat, xii, 33 Aquifers, importance of, 162-163 “Belling the cat”, 113,114, 205,207, Brown, Wishard, 148 See also Middle Reach; Sonoma- 209 Burge, Bob, 86 Marin Aquifer Benoist, Jay, 217 Army Corps of Engineers, 143,170, Benthos, 99 Cain, Brighton “Bugs,” 6 , 32,42 218 Bianchi, Al, 120 Cale, Mike, 192 and Bolinas Lagoon, 59, 81 Big Sulfur Creek, 152, 153 California Coastal Act of 1976, xiii, and Coyote Dam, 18, 33, 187 Bird research, 74-75 255 and Warm Springs Dam, 140, 188 Birds.
    [Show full text]