Environment

Environment

Environmental:

Eucalyptus trees inhibit the growth of brush and grass underneath them. Clear cutting these trees will now encourage new brush and grass to grow behind our homes and the now leveled trees will sprout vigorously to create a significantly higher fire danger!

Inexplicably, dry brush, 3′ high rye grass and thousands of dead and diseased trees, which actually can burn, are being left untouched!

City officials say they will poison ALL the stumps with a herbicide that will prevent growth. First of all, that will be a huge effort and we are skeptical that it will be done, but in the event the City does apply herbicide to these stumps, will that present a health risk to the nearby residents and potentially poison the runoff?

Continuing to eliminate these trees per the current interpretation of the regulations (which has changed dramatically over the past few weeks), will alter the beauty of our scenic community, and as a result reduce the value of our homes.

Many of the trees were planted and irrigated by the City of San Diego per the Scripps Miramar Ranch Community Plan in August 1978. The current destruction of mature Eucalyptus trees is in clear violation of very specific language in that Community Plan.

The trees are needed for removal of the excess CO2 that the traffic causes on Pomerado Rd. Without them, there will be a decrease in air quality. One tree removes tons of CO2 from the air each year.

Removing trees will impact the habitats of numerous birds and hawks. In addition, a food source for hummingbirds and bees will be lost.

And critically, the tree canopy that the City is now trying to destroy by new interpretation of existing Code, runs completely contrary to efforts to save precious water in our arid corner of the country. There is no question that tree canopy conserves water!

Economic:

The huge sums of money ($6.26 million!) being directed toward this effort are being misdirected and misused to achieve an underlying goal of removing non-native Eucalyptus trees; which is neither in the interests of fire prevention or the general interest of the Community of Scripps Ranch.

This misdirection of millions of dollars from the General Fund ($3.9 million of the $6.26 million) is unconscionable in light of the City’s fragile (disastrous?) financial condition. How could anyone in the City Government defend such an action?