Kate S.

Mr. Schnair
English 2
5-14-17
Research Journal

Background information paragraph:

Dee Seligman is an environmental activist who lives and works in San

Francisco, California. A retired English teacher, she recently served as the interim
president of the San Francisco Forest Alliance and still helps them in their social
justice cause. The Alliance is a volunteer organization that campaigns for local
environmental rights through a mix of advocacy and legal action. They focus on a
number of issues that affect the citys parks, including: Shrinking access to the
natural areas, equal quality in neighborhood parks, the use of toxic herbicides, and
deforestation. In particular, SF Forest Alliance has been fighting against the San
Francisco Recreation and Park Departments Natural Areas Plan. The plan, which
would be instituted in San Franciscos thirty two natural areas, primarily involves the
removal of invasive plants and/or trees, as well as the spraying of toxic pesticides so
that native habitats can be protected and restored. Strongly against the plans use
of herbicides and loss of trees, both Seligman and the SF Forest Alliance have taken
a number of steps to prevent it, going beyond simply spreading awareness.
Recently, the SF Forest Alliance even filed an appeal case against the Natural Areas
Plans Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that was heard by the Board of
Supervisors on February 28th, 2017. Although their appeal lost, it served as a
pertinent reminder that local environmental rights should be, and will be fought for
by Seligman and the Alliance no matter the occasion.

Interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDRfE-diHqY

Summary Paragraph:
In this interview, former mayor of San Francisco Willie Brown discusses his
opinion on the Natural Areas Project. Originally aired on what was then KQKE, the
interview is a part of the morning talk show Will and Willie, in which a random
political question from a listener is selected to be discussed. In this case, the topic
posed had to do with the then recently approved Natural Areas Project, and how it is
slated to cut down some 20,000 trees because, they arent native to early San
Francisco. Although aired sometime in 2006, the prefacing information stated
about the Natural Areas Project is still relevant, particularly in regards to how any
tree under 15ft can be cut at will, and how trees are significant stores of carbon.
When asked what he would do about the plan, Willie responds vehemently,
immediately stating that he would, terminate every single solitary person
connected to my administration who would advocate cutting down any of the trees
in this city. He goes on to define his personal position against the plan further, and
begins to talk about the Natural Areas Plans call for the naturalization of San
Franciscos urban environments, and how he believes that idea, ludicrous. There
is no such thing as trying to ensure that only the native plant species remain
afloat he says. Who is to say what the real native plants are? Brown then goes
on to state that hes seen maps and photographs of San Francisco prior to 1849,
and that they were barren of any sort of forestry. Brown concludes that were he in
charge, he would tell his staff to cease and desist on the implementation of the
Natural Areas Plan, or else he would fire them.

How This Relates to Interviewee:

This interview relates to Dee Seligman and the San Francisco Forest Alliance
in a number of ways. Firstly, it concerns the San Francisco Recreation and Park
Departments Natural Areas plan, which is one of the primary targets that the SF
Forest Alliance fights against. Secondly, Willie Brown provides an excellent
description of some of the reasons as to why they oppose this measure. As the
interview mentioned, cutting down close to 20,000 trees is a ludicrous figure,
especially in a time when global warming is coming to a head. Not only that, but
Browns reasonings on native plants are accurate. Dee Seligman has talked at
length before about how in reality, San Francisco has no native trees. The question
of what is native in San Francisco, and what is not is one that the San Francisco
Forest Alliance has challenged regularly as an argument against the Natural Areas
Plan. In addition, the idea of who gets to decide which plants, if any, are technically
native has been a source of debate in the entire subject, and the question pertains
to further people than just Seligman and her organization.

Second Source: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/SF-plan-for-natural-areas-

likely-to-draw-fire-10796914.php

Summary Paragraph:
The article SF plan for natural areas likely to draw fire by Lizzie Johnson
summarizes the issues and opinions surrounding the Natural Areas Project. The
Natural Areas Project, originally pitched in 2006, is a plan created by San Franciscos
Recreation and Parks Department to provide, outline maintenance and capital
improvement to the citys natural areas. The plan largely features the reduction of
off-leash dog areas in fragile environments, a reconfiguration of the Sharp Park Golf
Course, and the removal of some 18,000 trees over its twenty year duration.
Written prior to a 2016 hearing by the Recreation and Parks Commission as well as
the Planning Commission to confirm the same Natural Areas plan, Johnsons article
accurately and swiftly introduces some of the various views on the contested
proposal. On the one side, Johnson covers those in favor, some of whom believe
that the adoption of the plan would, support delicate ecosystems and endangered
animals within the park system. Not only that, but according to officials, many of
the trees set to be cut down were already unhealthy, and were causing harm to the
plants growing near them, particularly the eucalyptus whose oils would create a
monoculture. At this point, Johnson also highlights the opposition to the Natural
Areas Plan, touching upon the dissent aroused by the plans intents of deforestation
and toxic herbicide usage. She then quotes Nadine Weil, who started a petition that
gained over 5,500 signatures to save the trees on Mount Davidson. As stated by
Weil, many believe that the plan goes too far by subjecting so many trees in 32
areas and parks to deforestation and habitat conversion into scrub and grasslands.
All in all, Johnsons article provides a concise explanation of what the Natural Areas
Project is, and why it has become such a debated plan.

How This Relates to Interviewee:

As mentioned, this article chronicles some basic details of the Natural Areas
Plan and various viewpoints regarding it. Dee Seligman and the organization she
helps, the San Francisco Forest Alliance, have been opposing this plan for years.
Johnsons work does a good job at conveying what precisely the Natural Areas Plan
is in the first place, and it provides a clear baseline of the project. Knowing this is
essential to understanding what the San Francisco Forest Alliance and by
extension, Seligman advocate for in the first place, not to mention the core beliefs
that the organization holds about the San Franciscan environment. Johnson
addresses this too in her article. Although there is slightly more focus placed upon
why the Natural Areas Plan is beneficial to the citys parks, the points listed as to
why it is disliked correspond precisely to the stance that Seligman and the Forest
Alliance take on the issue.
Works Cited:

Johnson, Lizzie. "SF plan for natural areas likely to draw fire." SF Gate. San Francisco
Chronicle, 14 Dec. 2016. Web. 3 Mar. 2017.
<http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/SF-plan-for-natural-areas-likely-to-draw-fire-
10796914.php >.

Oceanbeachdog. "Willie Brown on NAP." YouTube. YouTube, 10 Oct. 2011. Web. 08

Mar. 2017. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDRfE-diHqY>.