Re: Potential Ally in preserving access to Bay

From: Ed Scott (edscott@best.com-DeleteThis)
Date: Tue Mar 16 1999 - 09:38:32 PST 

Received: from opus.hpl.hp.com by jr.hpl.hp.com with ESMTP (1.37.109.24/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA121996423; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 09:47:16 -0800
Return-Path: <edscott@shell9.ba.best.com-DeleteThis>
Received: from hplms26.hpl.hp.com by opus.hpl.hp.com with ESMTP (1.37.109.24/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA188646413; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 09:46:53 -0800
Received: from mail-out2.apple.com (mail-out2.apple.com [17.254.0.51]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.9.1a/HPL-PA Relay) with ESMTP id JAA27607 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 09:46:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailgate1.apple.com (A17-128-100-225.apple.com [17.128.100.225]) by mail-out2.apple.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA22744 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 09:36:41 -0800
Received: from scv1.apple.com (scv1.apple.com) by mailgate1.apple.com (mailgate1.apple.com- SMTPRS 2.0.15) with ESMTP id <B0005681025@mailgate1.apple.com-DeleteThis> for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 09:36:37 -0800
Received: from [17.197.20.103] (scoted2.apple.com [17.197.20.103]) by scv1.apple.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA12540 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 09:36:33 -0800
Message-Id: <199903161736.JAA12540@scv1.apple.com-DeleteThis>
Subject: Re: Potential Ally in preserving access to Bay
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 09:38:32 -0800
X-Sender: edscott@shell9.ba.best.com-DeleteThis
X-Mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, January 22, 1998
From: Ed Scott <edscott@best.com-DeleteThis>
To: "Wind Talk" <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

>By implementing conservation projects that both provide public access and
>protect the bay's natural lands, TPL's new San Francisco Bay Waterfront
>Program will protect remaining wetlands and tidelands habitat, 95 percent
>of which has already been lost to development; help people make a
>connection to their natural environment; and foster a desire among
>residents to further
>preserve and enhance the bay shoreline.

Thanks for the reference. Isn't there a conflict between access for
windsurfing and preserving wetlands/tidelands habitats? Unfortunately,
this is an issue that we, as windsurfers, will have to grapple with at
some point in time. If we don't, we risk losing lots more access as the
competing pressures between access, environment and development play out.
 Witness the Third Ave. and Crissy Field situations, where launches,
rigging areas and parking have been lost to wetland restoration. The
Airport expansion poses similar problems. We may have to get into a
dialog with environmental groups to coordinate our efforts and not work
at cross purposes since money interests will be on the other side.

-Ed

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 10 2001 - 02:35:09 PST