Tree-huggers in crisis 

Bike paths, steelhead salmon, wind energy—oh my! Eco-warriors have a lot on their minds these days. For starters, the Bob Jones Trail has a new theme song: The Talking Heads' "Road to Nowhere," because thanks to two members of the SLO County Board of Supervisors, the protected bike path from SLO to Avila Beach will not be completed as planned.

click to enlarge

On the agenda at the last meeting was a vote to use eminent domain to seize the slivers of land needed to complete the trail from intransigent landowners like Ray Bunnell, who has refused the county's offer of $207,500 for a 1.2-acre easement of his 146-acre ranch along Highway 101.

The vote required a 4/5ths majority to use eminent domain, and the vote was 3-1 with Debbie Arnold voting no and John Peschong abstaining because he accepted campaign donations totaling $1,750 from Bunnell. OK, Debbie. I get it. You're a never-eminent-domainer.

"Any other project, I'd be saying the same thing: The use of eminent domain to me violates the property rights pillar element that I just won't be interested in supporting," she said at the Aug. 20 meeting.

I'm sure some people will admire your principles, Deb, but if everyone was as obstinate about eminent domain as you, we wouldn't have the Hoover Dam, Central Park in New York, or the Dallas Cowboys' AT&T Stadium—all created via eminent domain. I mean, holy crap, even in deep-red Texas politicians understand the importance of making a decision that will benefit the greatest number of people. So, you suck, Debbie. But John, you're either greedy, chickenshit, or Zen-master-level conniving to have gotten out of having to vote on this decision.

Peschong had to know this would eventually come to a vote before the board he sits on, but he took Bunnell's last $500 donation on Sept. 27, 2023, just under a year ago, creating a legally defined conflict of interest. If he'd taken the money five weeks earlier on Aug. 19, 2023, he could have voted, and if he voted yes (a big "if," I know), I could have been riding my Schwinn beach cruiser to Mr. Rick's and the county wouldn't have to scramble to figure out how to spend an $18.25 million grant from the California Transportation Commission's Active Transportation Program by February of 2025.

"Mr. Bunnell is none of our constituents. He's not even living here," 3rd District Supervisor Dawn Ortiz-Legg claimed. "If there was another alternative, we would be doing it. This was wasted, when we could have been straight through on this thing, taken the $18 million and just get it done. But no, we didn't. I think we've killed this thing over and over again."

Boo-hoo, BOS! Boo-hoo!

You know who else is crying? South-Central California Coast [SCCC] steelhead trout, who really want to get upstream for some sexy time. Four environmental organizations—San Luis Obispo Coastkeeper, Los Padres ForestWatch, California Coastkeeper Alliance, and The Ecological Rights Foundation—filed a lawsuit against the county on Aug. 13 about its management of Lopez Dam, which they argue is blocking the trout from high-quality spawning grounds above the dam. The suit also alleges several endangered species in the Arroyo Grande Creek watershed are in jeopardy because of the way the county manages Lopez Dam.

What about the California red-legged frog populations, the tidewater goby, and the Bell's vireo, SLO County? For shame!

The county shared a 10-page response to the suit that claims steelhead numbers were artificially inflated in Arroyo Grande Creek by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife as early as the 1940s, decades before the dam was built in 1969.

"Steelhead numbers in Arroyo Grande Creek saw a sharp decline, eventually reaching an estimate of zero in 1960," the response reads. "This history demonstrates that the [SCCC] steelhead's population dynamics are affected by a combination of natural and anthropogenic processes that predate the project by a number of decades."

So "not it," tree-huggers! Suck it, fishies! Find somewhere else to lay your eggs.

Speaking of fishies sucking it, at the Aug. 27 Port San Luis Harbor District meeting about the possibility of using the port as a hub for offshore wind energy generation, Grover Beach resident Brenda Auer gave the Harbor Commissioners a lesson in fish behavior:

"Out where they want to put these wind farms is where my albacore went, and I love my tuna. This is not a good thing, to take my wonderful little port and change it forever so it will never come back," she argued. "It's my happy place being on that ocean and the things I've seen; you're going to destroy a lot of it. I want you to go to the fish store if you don't have a fish and tap on the glass. Fish feel that. They feel the vibrations. When you put those electrical charges and the constant wind turbines going, it affects our fishing."

That totally blows, amirite? But wind energy is great, right? Right? This topic seems to be tying environmentalists and other stakeholders into knots.

Supervisor Dawn Ortiz-Legg came to the Harbor Commissioners' defense, explaining that change can be hard but also positive. She was met with boos. Boo-hoo. Δ

The Shredder is hugging a tree as you read this. Tell us to "get a room" at [email protected].