ojai news at The Ojai Post :: blog, newspaper, events in Ojai, California

A bit late for our area, unless we rally to have manual removal instead of a second dose. I noticed it was already growing back in the stands they removed in Matilija Canyon.
However, I was involved with some manual removal and it is labor intensive. Big time. We used an air knife, use by arborists for tree removal, which was an interesting experiment. Super charged compressed air, amazing dust storm, reveals the rhizome and then you can pull it out. Some of those rhizomes are the size of a Volkswagon Beetle. Huge. Very difficult to manually remove.

It's an interesting plant. Someone told me it grows in Siberia and they use it for many applications. Building, food and when boiled I guess it has DMT in it and they make a mild intoxicant. I ahven't verified that info. though.

I am really thankful that you posted this Millineum.
I drove to the Trailhead located in Matilija canyon 2 days ago and I felt like I was driving in to a war zone. Men walking around with these crazy backpacks on their backs filled with narly chemicals and only a simple dusk mask over their mouth to protect them from the chemicals.....When I moved here I thought this place would be more on it than this! It is disgraceful....

Arundo is an ideal biofuel (8,000 BTU’s/lb) that produces methanol from gas diffusion as a bi-product in manufacturing cellulose. The option to gasify this product is to produce independently a valuable energy product.It is possible to utilize new high efficiency gasification systems to convert Arundo into a multitude of different energy sources, such as syngas, standard steam turbine electrical generation, ethanol and bio-diesel.

Arundo is an ideal biofuel (8,000 BTU’s/lb)

Perhaps, but here's at least one rub: when you create a market for anything, the financial backers and the beneficiaries never seem to want to let that market die a natural death when the time comes.

Stop the poisoning of the Matilija Watershed!

Arundo Donax (a bamboo-like reed) is a native of the Mediterranean region, through the Middle East and India. The Ventura County Watershed Protection District has poisoned the watershed with glyphosate in order to kill off the Arundo, because it is a non-native invasive species.

The term "collateral damage" is used by the county biologist, in referring to negative impacts on "non-targeted" plants, insects, and animals in the area. Are we in a war zone? The most recent data (1998) from California’s Department of Pesticide Regulation finds that glyphosate ranks first among herbicides as the highest causes of pesticide-induced illness or injury to people in California. Glyphosate is tied to acute human health effects and linked to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Mati Waiya, a native of Ventura County and a Chumash ceremonial leader, is in support of our efforts to bring about public awareness and to stop Ventura County from poisoning the Matilija watershed. Mati Waiya is also founder and Executive Director of the Wishtoyo Foundation/Ventura Coastkeeper. Since the County is concerned about "non-native" eradication, perhaps the native people of this land, the Chumash should be consulted.

If you in support of stopping the County from poisoning the watershed, please sign the petition. For more info, please send e-mail to: protectmatilija-at-gmail.com

Stop the poisoning of the Matilija Watershed!

We, the undersigned, do hereby petition Ventura County to stop the spraying of herbicide into the Matilija Watershed. We ask that the Ventura County Watershed Protection District protect the watershed. We were not informed about the serious negative health impacts that glyphosate has on humans as well as “non-targeted” animals and plants. We are not in a war zone.

We petition Ventura County to work towards making our county a herbicide/pesticide free zone.

~~

Ms. Pagaling,

Thank you for your email.

Nile Fiber agrees with your assertion that a more
environmentally friendly solution is needed in the
removal of Arundo. California is a leader in
environmental issues and can again provide a major
role leading the country in dealing with this and
other related "true" green solutions.

At Nile Fiber, we would like to see the removal and
disposal of Arundo play a part in helping the
environment instead of the current methods.

Nile Fiber has spent considerable time and resources
in the research and development of Arundo uses for
pulp, paper, and composite board panels that are
superior to other materials i.e. wood, bamboo, kenaf,
etc. We have enlisted 4 U.S. Universities and have
garnered international assistance in these studies.

We have a major roll-out planned for 2008 regarding
these products produced from Arundo.

In addition, two of our executives have embarked on
the utilization of Arundo in the biofuels alternative
energy sector.

We appreciate any opportunity to discuss our endeavors
to find better "green" alternative solutions.

Respectfully,
Nile Fiber

Sounds like somebody's making a good living off of the "studies", I doubt we will ever see anything practical come from it. Why not issue "harvest permits" to individuals so that people who work with their hands and live in the real world can find ways to use the Arundo material for some useful purpose or make bio fuel from it. Entrepeneures are the ones who will ultimatly make a difference. If it worked out to be extremely profitable it could be removed from the river bottom and relocated a farming area.

If it worked out to be extremely profitable it could be removed from the river bottom and relocated a farming area.

I think this is how it wound up becoming a problem here in the first place, isn't it?

I agree, however, that we should not be using Roundup or Rodeo to kill the Arundo. Whereas glyphosphate is not considered to be toxic according to what I've read, the various "inert ingredients" are. Monsanto is allowed to refer to the much more toxic ingredients in their popular plant killers as inert because these ingredients are not classified as herbicides. That is, they are inert insofar as their activity in the stated purpose of the product. They are carriers and preservatives, and they are proprietary in nature and therefore allowed to be classified as secret ingredients, much as the melange of herbs and ground seeds in food products can be legally referred to as nothing more than "spices". (This word trickery is completely legal and common in products ranging from pharmaceuticals to animal food to household cleaning products to makeup.)

At the very, very least, it seems to me to be completely insane to be using anywhere near the Ventura River a product known to be toxic to fish and other aquatic life while we are also trying to re-establish the Steelhead Trout.

Round up, glyphosphate is a very safe product and the inert ingrediants are, well inert and will not cause any harm to fish or people if used properly. I'm sure one can find crap on the internet to the contrary but these are extremists that are against everything.

The plant was not brought here for any economic purpose I think it probably hitch hiked here some how. In any event why not use the plants in the river bottom as bio fuel until they're all gone

The plant was not brought here for any economic purpose I think it probably hitch hiked here some how.

A little Googling found evidence to the contrary.

The following paragraphs are from:
http://www.oboe.org/donax.htm

It is generally known that Arundo donax was brought to California in the 1890's by French immigrants to be used on ranches here as wind breaks. This can be substantiated by the fact that a great amount that I found was growing on small ranches serving this same purpose today.

There is a second theory that an employee of Rico Reed Company which uses some California cane for commercial purposes, in the 1940's planted starters in washes and gullies all over the San Fernando Valley to replenish the European shortage at that time due to the bombing of French cane fields during W.W.II. These were either forgotten or were torn up and replaced by cement aqueducts in the early 1960's.

here is a brown Black Bear which walked up from the RiverBottom in Meiners Oaks two days ago to voice her concern for the poisoned watershed:

http://www.venturacountystar.com/photos/2008/may/07/38597

clearly the solution to environmental and economic degradation of the Ojai Valley is NOT increasing the degradation, poisoning the people, the fish, the frogs, the ladybugs, the shrubs and flowers and trees ... the waterways and soil and backyards ...

and not giving our tax dollars to Monsanto and the corporates when there are no end of people in the Valley who ENJOY working in nature, and DESIRE extra cash, and LOVE our sacred wildlife and chaparral forests.

how do we measure the greening of our valley, compare the desertification of her? this is a subject every child and adult Valley-wide can input ton.

when we reduce and eliminate the use of poisons. when we reduce the expenditures of energy. when we reduce the waste. when we reduce the number and size of the vehicles and traffic. when we reduce the air pollution, and sound pollution. when we BRING BACK waterways, parks, woodlands, wetlands ... and reduce the size and number of parking lots, and asphalt roads.

when we grow gardens in our front and backyards, and have community gardens ... organic, Monsanto-free ... and our dollars stay in the valley ... and our children are cancer- and diabetes- and arthritis- and heart-disease- and otherwise consumer-disease-free.

that is why we have organizations like Ojai Trees 'sprouting' up, and the Green Coalition, and the Bicycle Recyleries, and Organic Farms ....

because love, consciousness, knows itself. knows divine nature, the 'Chumash Harmonies' we have taken for granted, gifts of Goddess Moon ... this 'Awha'y Valley womb ...

An interesting fact. ------ Arundo Donax is the prefered material of bag pipe players around the world to make their reeds from. I have watched a good friend, a bag pipe player, cut down dozens of arundo plants in search of the "perfect piece." Maybe we could bring over a few hundred Scots pipers to remove the arundo.

Seriously though, the idea of using poison to facilitate what is meant to be an environmental restoration project, does seem a bit counter intuitive. (and stupid)

The money could be much better spent on hand removal. Their are people out there who need the money and aren't afraid of hard work.

W D Moore

If there were an economic benifit to removing and using the Arundo then it's removal would progress. You're not going to get workers "who desire extra cash" to do this work. And where is the "extra cash" coming from? Some government grant? paid by me? Make it work on a local level and make it pay for it's self or this is all BS.

in south africa i observed arundo removal without chemicals. the arundo by slowing down the water flow creats its own alluvial soil; a meter or so square is dug down to reveal the rizhome/root system..appearing rube goldberg like..a cable is then wrapped around the roots and using a come along or a winch the arundo is zipped out by its roots. after some initial zipping large underground rizhome networks become exposed and it get easier. the problem with the current contract for matilija cyn is that there is a stipulation that the soil not be disturbed..ostensibly to protect the riparian area..however it is clear that there are hugh areas of arundo only with absolutly no riparian to protect. the folks overseeing the contract should be urged to amend the protocals to include zipping. while the herbacides will still be used far less will be called for..mcg

the only organism that needs to be eradicated is the cancer GenModSanto, AltGene MadSanto.

as to the RedChem and GreenChem now being all over the running waterways of the misnamed Ventura RiverBottom ... and on the homes adjacent -- being pumped into the Lake Casitas Drinking Water reservoir -- causing human cancer deaths -- killing thousands of amphibians, turtles and other animals NOW --

note that the LYING PROPAGANDA the County used to justify their fraudulent and murderous campaign againt the WaterSheds was that there would be NO spraying in the waterways, or on or near the homes, and that ALL spraying would ONLY be after the Cane Grass had been cut back completely, and new green growth come up ... so that ONLY new green growth would be sprayed, being ten times more effective.

their CURRENT CAMPAIGN of wanton spraying not only requires ten times MORE MODSANTO CANCER in the short term, it also means they have to keep coming back FOREVER ... spraying their CANCER every year!

everyone we have spoken with has been shocked to hear what we witnessed in the FLOWING Ventura River last week! not to mention the, now unbreathable, Matilija Canyon!!

people are speaking out ... against the Cancer and Chemical Campaign AGAINST the Ojai Valley People and Her Wildlife and Water and Forests now being waged by the County spraying campaigns on ALL the roads, on the Bicycle Trail, on the Schools and elsewhere ... as well as in Matilija Canyon and the Ventura River (and our Lake Casitas drinking water!)

their Cancer and Chemical Campaign AGAINST this Sacred Valley is also being waged by the Citrus Ranchers in the East End, and the Ojai Valley Inn on its VERY toxic golf course ... so it is reported ... and by Soule Park and businesses and farmers throughout the Valley.

the time is ripe to tackle the whole of the Campaign against the Ojai Valley ... and the currently highly visible campaigns against the Ventura River and Matilija Creek will give us much more inertia and support than is necessary.

to end all the CANCER-SPRAYING on every road in the Valley, on lands leading to EVERY creek, on the Schools, and on the walking and bicycling trails which the mothers and children use every day.

time the Ojai Valley left the mafiaosa County-Cancer calling itself Ventura. time we incorporated ourself as loving and green and sustainable and self-determined ... and, perhaps also, launched a billion dollar class-action lawsuit against Ventura County and the current Board of Supervisors, against EACH individual, for intentional corruption and ecocide and murder.

Monsanto is actually helping feed millions of children world wide, How many people have YOU feed Mr. AntiSanto ?

Anonymous, with all due respect, please do not believe everything you are being forcefed. To say that Monsanto is a saviour to the millions of poverty stricken children worldwide is, to me, on the same level as saying that SC Johnson & Co is doing a great job of helping to save the environment. I know they make a persuasive commercial saying this is so, but come on....

It is actually very proveable.

Fair enough, Anon.

Can you provide back-up for such proof? Most of what I have read (including accounts of those working within the corporation) indicates that such claims are merely P.R. grandstanding gimmicks and tactics aimed at watering down the very real harm they are doing. "Greenwashing" and "Poor-washing" is so pervasive these days, it makes me ill just thinking about the hypocrisy.

But I am open to hearing your side of the argument. I think it's a healthy debate to have.

I'm most definitely a morning person, so until tomorrow morning - good night!

Gangland Monsanto's worldwide ecocide campaign has dramatically REDUCED the global crops, their biodiversity, and the number of farms and farmers. Their only mission has been to replace healthy and local food in people's diets, with petrochemical poisons.

There has never been a shortage of food on the Earth ... only an intended and dramatic surplus of war, including using starvation as a mechanism of war ... the corporate campaign of cultural racism and industrial servitude.

Before modern farming one farmer could only feed 10 people, that has now increased to 50 and greater, with the effect of letting more people do things other than farming ( like wasting their time blogging). With the advent of the synthetically make fertilizers we can now raise more food on less ground, perserving more forest areas. The man made fertilizers are made by pulling nitrogen from the air, the plants don't know the difference because there is no difference.

Nitro man is the mouthpiece for the corporate death machine. his Corporate State only kills the soil (and the farmhands) ... eliminating living farmlands ... and kills the remaining lands where the mining and industry takes place ... and has not created "more forest areas" but rather has eradicated 95 percent of the worlds forests ... an eradication program which is INCREASING every year, including this year.

Thank you, Nitro Death Man, for making clear to every woman and child and man in the Ojai Valley what your intention is!

We clearly understand your same intentions towards our remaining wetlands and watersheds, and wildlife, in the Ojai Valley!

Dirt Farmer is a retro-civlization posie sniffer who hasn't grown food for anyone, let alone himself, or run a business that produces anything of value for his fellow citizens. He rides his bike to his weeding job because he doesn't like to use round up but his farmer employer can't pay him very much because he can't pull the weeds fast enough. To grow more food Dirt Farmer's friends have to chop down our Chaparral to grow enough food to feed the population, since they don't use enough nitrogen in their fertilizer their crops do not produce a good yield , so they need more land still to feed everyone. He doesn't want to hurt the cute ground squirrels so he shares some of the crop with them as well.

Hi everyone! I just moved to Ashland, OR, and I really love it! Folks are much more conscious up here! Crop spraying is against the law here and public nudity is legal. Where in Ojai and Ventura, spraying is legal and law enforced, and pasties are Prohibited (that's how those corrupt cops treated me). I love the Ojai Valley, but the dark force is taking over there. I love you all and I hope that all the Earth Keepers move out of "smog Dodge" and join progressive communities where positive change is the main attraction. Look, either a community cares or they don't. There has been enough research. It is time to move to greener pastures where the community is not divided against itself. How much change can any of you really create if 50% of the community is always voting against you? And the ones in charge of your area are corrupt? I love Mother Earth and I have a deep connection with her. She is my Mother, first and foremost. I never give up, but I do listen to reason and Mother Earth told me to Leave Ojai. If not for you, then for your children's sake. "They", the powers that be, are poisoning your children's wellspring of life for profit. So, mommmy and daddy, what are you doing to change things? Power to the Peaceful. Please check out the EmotoProject.org. Genuinely, Jennifer Moss
EarthFriendJen.

truly Jen, only the PEACE 'becomes' us ...

the humble, deep Earth-rooted, whole global cultural village connected, women-and-children-enabling, indigenous sacred ways learning ...

of loving respect ...

I have read the articles and comments. I totally agree that the spraying of toxic pesticides has got to stop. The City or County even sprays the edge of my property without permission, because it borders on the street. It is beyond belief that in the year 2008 our City/County/State decision makers do not fully comprehend that everything is connected. Every year the County sprays the reservoir area at the top of Canada (as another example), poisoning the soil, the insects, the frogs, the birds...and still the "weeds" grow back... Have they never heard of "Silent Spring?"

I meant to say "the spraying of toxic pesticides and herbicides..."

They are only spraying herbicides to keep the weeds back from the road to prevent fire danger and to keep the road from getting weeds in the cracks which eventually destroys the road and makes it so the have to replace the ashalt more often. They do not spray insecticides except for areas that might have mosquitos but it's pretty dry now so I don't think they are spraying for mosquitos.

as anonymous says, they are spraying to kill.

to kill the plants, the birds, the amphibians, the watershed, the Ojai Valley, all Women and Children AND Men ...

and give money and power to the Fire guilds, Forest guilds, Automotive guilds, Industry guilds, government guilds ...

to spread their cancer, ad mortem ...

No SuperArundoMan, they're just killing the weeds. Like you would kill a cancer, like the one infecting your brain.

#30 - you are not playing with a full deck - no Jokers, hearts or diamonds - just clubs and spades. Not enough for this thread. Game over.

Below is a very disturbing article about ground water being contaminated by glyphosate in Denmark. We must stop the spraying here before it contaminates our drinking water!

Daily News Archive

Denmark Restricts Water-Contaminating Herbicide

(Beyond Pesticides, September 23, 2003)

Denmark placed unprecedented restrictions on the herbicide glyphosate, the active ingredient in RoundUp, as of September 15, 2003. The government action resulted from testing which showed the presence of the toxic chemical in Denmark's groundwater, where most of the country's drinking water comes from. The Denmark and Greenland Geological Research Institution (DGGRI) had found glyphosate sieving down through soil after applications, where it polluted groundwater at a rate of five times more than the level allowed for drinking water.

"When we spray glyphosate on the fields by the rules, it has been shown that it is washed down into the upper groundwater with a concentration of 0.54 micrograms per litre. This is very surprising, because we had previously believed that bacteria in the soil broke down the glyphosate before it reached the ground water," says DGGRI. Glyphosate had also been found earlier in wells in Roskilde and Storstroms regions as well as the Copenhagen district council area. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) acknowledges that the material does have the potential to contaminate surface waters. If glyphosate reaches surface water, it is not broken down readily by water or sunlight. The half-life of glyphosate in pond water ranges from 70 to 84 days.

When the chemical was first detected in Denmark's groundwater, Professor Mogens Henze, head of the Institute for Environment and Resources at Denmark's Technical University, responded by stating, "The results show that glyphosate is polluting our drinking water. And unfortunately we have only seen the tip of the iceberg, because glyphosate and many other spray chemicals are on their way through the soil at this point in time. Politicians need to look at agriculture in relation to clean drinking water and decide what it is they are going to do."

The new restrictions specifically ban spraying of glyphosate on sites "where leaching is extensive because of heavy rain." There are a number of exceptions to the restrictions, which are subject to revision after an interim consultation period. Still, Monsanto, Syngenta and other manufacturers of the chemical issued complaints that the restrictions are "unacceptable" for the producers or Danish farmers.

Statistics from the Environment Ministry show that glyphosate use has doubled in Denmark in the last five years. In 2001, 800 tons were used, which made up a quarter of farmers' total use of pesticides. Use of the herbicide is also widespread in the U.S. According to EPA's most recent data on pesticide usage, glyphosate was the seventh most widely used active ingredient in agriculture, with 34 to 38 million pounds used in 1997. In 1995/96, glyphosate ranked as the second most used active ingredient in non-agricultural settings, with five to seven million pounds used in the home and garden and nine to twelve million pounds used in commercial settings.

Although glyphosate use is widespread, there are many concerns regarding its health effects. In fact, the most recent data (1998) from California's Department of Pesticide Regulation finds that glyphosate ranks first among herbicides as the highest causes of pesticide-induced illness or injury to people in California. Symptoms following exposure to glyphosate formulations include: swollen eyes, face and joints; facial numbness; burning and/or itching skin; blisters; rapid heart rate; elevated blood pressure; chest pains, congestion; coughing; headache; and nausea. It is also linked to chronic health effects. A 1999 study, A Case-Control Study of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma and Exposure to Pesticides, (American Cancer Society, 1999), found that people exposed to glyphosate are 2.7 times more likely to contract non-Hodgkin Lymphoma.

For more information on glyphosate, see Beyond Pesticides' Glyphosate ChemWATCH fact sheet. Read about glyphosate's connection to toxic fungi growth in the August 29, 2003 edition of Daily News.

701 E Street SE #200, Washington DC 20003 • phone 202-543-5450 • fax 202-543-4791 • info@beyondpesticides.org

FACTS: Allegations that herbicides like glyphosate pose realistic safety threats to humans and animals are simply false, as can be ascertained by anybody who takes the time to consult the review documents prepared by government safety regulatory agencies or the toxicological literature. These compounds target cellular receptors and metabolic pathways unique to plants that are absent from animals. They have received the strongest findings of safety from regulatory agencies and none of the negative consequences alleged by activists for human health are confirmed from their use. Even the group Environmental Defense, rates glyphosate as among the least hazardous of the chemicals included in its extensive database (http://www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/).

kia ora, Patty!

blessings from the Maori, of Aotearoa.

as you bless our whole world.

and also to all those in our sacred Valley home,
who reside in consciousness, reside in loving respect.

for the unhappy and the sick -- who do not see, do not feel, cannot yet know -- we can continue to refine and expand our joy, our gentility, that they may one day understand. [and at the very least be the beneficiaries of a loving green living, LIFE-FULL, Valley again.]

it seems an organizational meeting to end the Ojai Valley ChemSpraying is being planned for next week.

also an Ojai Valley permaculture guild has been formed ... of those again with love overflowing ... and thus for those who have gardens and fruit trees, or are ready to nurture them at their homes or residences, and in community gardens, or for/with their neighbors ... well, again the heart of Goddess Moon is rejoicing, singing, bringing us all back to Her growing (and much whole-sum knowing).

arohanui, enfolding love.

By the way you are drinking more that this in arsnec (0.54 micrograms per litre) than you would be of round up

This letter was written by Dr. Bernhoft, an environmental health specialist in Ojai.

September 27, 2007

Supervisor Steve Bennett, L-1900
800 S. Victoria Ave.
Ventura, CA, 93009

RE: Arundo eradication

Dear Supervisor Bennett:

I am writing to express my medical concern about the plan to eradicate arundo with glyphosate. I am a UCSF-trained liver and pancreatic surgeon (formerly on the clinical staff of the University of Washington) who became ill from operating room chemicals and retrained over the past four years in environmental medicine, which specializes in clinical toxicology – the medical effects (which are considerable) of exposures to herbicides, pesticides, molds and heavy metals like lead.

I am enclosing some background material to bring you up to speed on medical concerns.

To strike to the bottom line, I am horrified, both personally and for my patients, at the county’s plan to spray glyphosate throughout the Matilija watershed. There is a large number of people (including myself) who lack the liver enzymes necessary to process substances like glyphosate effectively, and exposures will inevitably occur. There will be “collateral damage” through the air, from drift, and through the water. (There will probably also be significant exposures to the work crews applying the stuff to the plants.) As you will see in the background materials, glyphosate is water soluble, according to NIOSH, and also clings to soil particles in water, both of which will transport it from the arundo directly into people’s kitchen taps. Not a desirable prospect.

The Human Genome Project has made it clear over the past ten years that there are many genetic abnormalities affecting individuals’ ability to clear environmental toxins. Some authorities state that up to 85% of all chronic illness results from a cacophony between toxic exposures and genetic inability to process said exposures.

My patients (and I) don’t need more toxins to process.

If I may point out a few highlights of the enclosed materials, the Wikipedia piece on Roundup is reasonably balanced, I think. They cite two occasions in which the EPA caught Monsanto scientists falsifying data (with references). Neither encouraging, nor surprising, given Monsanto’s past record of denial and obfuscation.

Monsanto’s allegation that glyphosate is harmless is not consistent with its increasing popularity as a means of suicide. (References in several of the enclosed reports.)

Several reports are cited of endocrine disruption, in this article and the others, including adverse effects on aromatase – an enzyme which in men involves conversion of testosterone to estrogen. (As a man, I don’t like the sound of that…..)

Like most herbicides, not much is known about long-term toxicity of glyphosate. There is clear linkage to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, which is referenced in several of the articles I am sending. There are also grounds for concern about possible adverse neurological impacts, based on its chemical structure. (I included a brief blurb on glycine, its parent compound, which plays a central role in many human metabolic activities.)

Most telling, perhaps, of the supporting materials is the comment on the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health Chemical Safety Cards which says “Do NOT let this chemical enter the environment.” (Their emphasis.) That’s NIOSH speaking, not the Sierra Club. And spraying it over the entire watershed is about as generous an entry into the environment as I can imagine, short of spraying it out of helicopters on our cities.

NIOSH also mentions at the very bottom that “sodium, potassium and amine salts” of glyphosate are “readily soluble in water.” (1.2 grams per 100 ml of water at 25 degrees Celsius – which is quite a lot.)

Each of the other documents, chemicalWatchFactsheet, PANNA’s short monograph on glyphosate, and the excerpts from the bible of toxicology, Casarett & Doull’s, outline specific problems.

I encourage you to revisit this issue. I applaud the goal, eradicating the non-native vegetation and restoring the stream, but I worry greatly about its impact on the “non-native” human population, including my patients and myself.

Thank you for your time and interest.

Sincerely,

Robin A Bernhoft, MD

yes ... as ALL the dialogs reveal ... it is always about violence and servitude ... from the Corporate State ... managed by the County and State and Fed ...

violence against women, violence against children, violence against the poor, violence against the indigenous, violence against culture, violence against the GrandMothers, the Elders ...

violence against forest and fauna ... against all our sibling relations.

this is all the sick patriarchy can accomplish ... violence ...

all they are capable of.

that is why we must set examples of refinement, of diversity, of whole-sum-ness, of gentility, connectedness ...

aka loving respect for ALL our beloved relations.

Thank you, Patty, for posting the above letters. (Comments #32 and #36)

Do you know if Dr. Bernhoft received a reply to his letter to Supervisor Steve Bennett? (The letter is dated September 27, 2007.

It would be most interesting if you could post the County's response.

This is something that NIOSH was probably responsible for.

But ordinary citizens seeking to join cleanup crews, however, were left frustrated.

Hundreds of would-be oil spill cleanup volunteers who wanted to do something were told on Saturday in San Francisco to go home and do nothing.

Spilled oil is just too dangerous for ordinary citizens to clean up, the experts said.

The word came at an "informational session" for would-be volunteers at Bill Graham Civic Auditorium sponsored by the state Department of Fish and Game.

"Don't go to the beach, don't pick up tar balls, don't touch wildlife," said Yvonne Addassi, a wildlife director for the department. "We don't want you to be in contact with the oil. It's a hazardous substance."

Scores of public-minded citizens who had shown up for the meeting - many wearing old clothes and gloves and ready for a messy day of hard work on the beach - were clearly confounded. The official announcement of the meeting said officials would tell "how the public can get trained."

But Addassi said there was really nothing an average citizen could do at the beach except get in the way or get harmed.

"We appreciate your passion," Addassi said. "We know you're trying to do the right thing. But if you want to help, please stay away from the beach."

One man stood up and told the crowd that he had already gathered about 20 pounds of oily beach goop over the past few days and wanted to know what to do with it.

That's part of the problem, Addassi replied. The goop can't be tossed in the trash. It must be disposed of in special toxic waste dumps.

"Just send it back to the ship!" someone hollered from the back of the hall.

At the volunteer meeting, everyone at the gathering was given an official-looking state volunteer application to fill out, complete with a loyalty oath. The fish and game people said volunteers might be contacted later, for non-hazardous duties.

"It's frustrating" said Ryan Gross of San Francisco. "I want to help, I don't want to sit home and do nothing. But that's what they told us to do."

Addassi assured the crowd that dozens of official beach cleaners were at work around the Bay Area, but many people at the meeting reported going to oily beaches and seeing little or no official cleanup taking place.

Some of the people at the meeting said they had already tried to do their own, unofficial cleanups and been ordered off the beaches by cops and threatened with citations or worse.
>>>

What a joke, sticky tar a "hazardous substance" You have to be trained to pick it up. You would be at more risk changing your baby's diaper that helping to clean up an oil spill. But of course all of their haz mat buddies wouldn't be getting their $50/hr pay checks to pick up tar, they don' need those pesky volunteers around.

As usual, there is no simple solution to the arundo problem. Yes, there are potential uses as a biofuel, building material, herbal medicine, etc., but, economic viability issues aside, harvesting it does not eradicate it. That can be done manually but, as others have observed, it is very labor intensive even with the latest equipment because the extensive rhizome systems must be removed.

In any case, it's time for our valley to take the lead in promoting nontoxic agriculture and land management. I'd like to see our local legislators take the simple step of making a commitment to a goal of a nontoxic Ojai valley and state their intention to encourage research and experimentation into nontoxic agricultural practices. I don't see how that could cause any harm or endanger anyone's livelihood or food supply.

kia ora, Lanny,

for the thought, the words, the singing ...

of nontoxic agriculture, water-culture, permaculture!

I think most of us are not hardwired to a specific genepool which will BECOME the new green Ojai Valley ... not likely we will bring back the Woolly Mammoths and Sabertooth Cats ... but likely we will agree on Oaks, Turtles, Frogs, Bear, Raccoons, a wide variety of birdlife ... and as much of the 'Chaparral' which can be preserved.

Cane grass is wonderful, I use it, but I think property owners should have the right to remove it ... and the community keep it in control in the wetlands. Ditto all the other garden flowers and trees and shrubs.

The Pepper Trees I love, and are a central part of the Goddess Moon legacy ... so too, for me, Eucalypts in moderation.

The Whole Vision of the WHOLE VALLEY GREEN FOREST and WETLANDS will be a continuing, and continuingly-updated, song of the collective 'Entire-Tree' of our Ojai Gardeners, Outdoor lovers, permaculturists, farmers, everyone.

And it will be beautiful beyond measure, and sung worldwide, and nurturing to each of us Children of Valley Moon ... from the age of 1 year to 100 year ...

and for the children just days in the womb, safe finally from the abortant chemsprays on the bicycle trail, the roadways, the wetlands and parks and schools ...

It's very interesting reading the debate issues and watching them devolve into personal attacks. That always goes nowhere and simply serves to separate us and destroys communication.
I first did research on pesticides in the early 70's, mainly DDT and other organophosphates which were still in use at the time. There was no doubting the damage that occurred from its massive use in the 20 years following WW2.
The pesticide industry really began in earnest following the second world war. The military and contractors had been developing toxic nerve agents to be used as a last resort or in response if Germany used them. Fortunately, this never happened, so at the end of the war there were vast stockpiles of these agents which were largely phosphate based. Much of it was dumped into the ocean, and it is my understanding that quite a bit was dumped off of Southern CA. Likely still drums of it off our coast. The chemical industry began to research new uses and found it to be effective against insects and sometimes in new formulations, weeds. Thus began the pesticide industry we have today. At first they seemed remarkable. Farmers began to feel less victimized by large insect attacks such as locusts. Yields increased dramatically and the "Green Revolution" was born. I won't go into that, if you like you can read all about it.
Anyway it took years and many studies and Rachel Carson's book "Silent Spring" to make the public aware of the dangers, and the terrible effects on the ecosystem.
Since then, many chemicals have been banned, others use have been curtailed. This is especially true in CA.
In my opinion we still use far too many toxins. Farming lobbies are very powerful in our state and pressure legislators not to ban products they deem necessary. I sincerely hope that this changes in the future.
Glyphosate as developed by Monsanto, was one of the first real alternatives to much more toxic herbicides. The company made billions on this product. Since the patent ran out, several companies now manufacture it.
As was to be expected, the product is used far too much, being applied as a matter of course to fields and landscape. of even more concern is the development of "Roundup Ready" genetically altered crops that are not effected by Glyphosate. This allows farmers to apply massive amounts of the product to fields without concern for it damaging their crops. Combined with the "terminator gene", that produces non viable seed, requiring re-purchase annually it is overwhelming agriculture. Something like 90% of soy is now genetically modified to accept roundup and be sterile. I believe this is a much more insidious problem.
As far as the spraying in the canyon goes, I'm definitely not thrilled with it. At the same time I believe there is no reasonable alternative to it if the Arundo is to be removed and the watershed restored. Manual removal has been mentioned quite a few times on this site, but realistically, it won't work. It would entail massive disturbance of the creek bed destroying millions of critters and likely be impossible to remove it all. The creek would truly look like a war zone.
The stuff is tough. Years ago I took on about a half acre of it in my backyard. It was so thick one could barely push a closed fist through it. I'm an organic gardener and orchardist, so dosing it with massive amount of toxins was out of the question. I hired a machine called a "rotary axe" to come in. This is basically a 6ft. rotary mower mounted on an arm on a large tractor. It has a 100lb. blade. It did chop up the stand well, though it broke the blade when the operator first went at it. he said he had never seen tougher stuff. Following the cane removal, I rented a tractor with a gannon. The teeth did a good job of popping the roots out of the ground as they are not normally more than a foot or so down. I did this for 2 years removing about 90% of the rhizomes followed by 2 years of hand digging what was left. The hand dig was a hard go, and I should state that this was in deep silt which made it easier. In rocky areas digging was far too difficult. I used old pool covers over a patch to block the sunlight. This took 2 years to kill the main body and it still popped up around the edges. I used very cautious applications of glyphosate on remote rocky areas to see if it would work. I had mixed success. It killed it off in one area, but it returned in another a couple of years later. Like I said, the stuff is tough.
Now we have the present situation. They have sprayed or painted the remaining patches. It has returned 3 times so far, a little less vibrant each time. I plan on keeping it cut back from now on, and I'll try to finish it off myself with the sunlight blocking technique, so no more spraying will be required.
As far as the toxicity goes, it is a chemical. Any product, even natural ones like pyrethrum (from chrysanthemums) or rotenone (from the locust tree family) are highly toxic. (By the way rotenone is in jicama). That's why I only use pepper, garlic, etc. in my garden.
The deal is: What is the SCIENCE? Like I said, I don't like the stuff, however I'm interested in the truth, whatever that reveals. Hysterical declarations of massive dieoff in the watershed, as far as I know, have no basis in fact. If it is happening, I'm unaware of it. I'm not saying it's not, but I haven't seen any evidence. Again the truth is the only thing that really matters here. No doubt, some organisms will be effected to some degree.
If one carefully reads the science, the inerts in Roundup are many times more toxic than glyphosate. Aquamaster, which is in use in the canyon is solely glyphosate.
A few of my neighbors have had some symptoms; headache, muscle aches and shortness of breath. These have occurred mostly in the lower canyon where the massive spraying has taken place. Not good or acceptable, but I hope it's temporary.
Perhaps some testing is in order to see if there has been discernable damage.
In nearly every study that I've read, health problems have occurred in the people doing the application as they are exposed to large amounts over time. Direct skin exposure seems to be the most dangerous.
Like treating cancer, sometimes the cure is a poison. If we wish to see this area restored, native plants occupy the canyon as they should, and if we wish to see steelhead return to the headwaters, the Arundo has to go. Sometimes we just have to "bite the bullet" and put up with a bad situation to make things better. I don't like it, but I get it.
I've been an environmentalist since it was called "the ecology movement", more than 35 years. I've sat-in, marched, occupied, written, protested, monkeywrenched, and a few other things that I'll not state. I've been a vehement take no prisoners activist when I was younger. Now I find as many old time enviropeople do, that constructive engagement is far more productive. I teach permaculture, cob, sustainable living and design, etc. and try to walk my talk, for better or worse.
I wish that there were a better and safer way to accomplish the ends here, I just don't see it.
To all of you who rant and rave at the spraying, hell yeah! Keep them honest, but don't forget to seek the truth.........B

not at all, Bob,

we are NOT here to carry out the toxic warfare of the government, against the flora and fauna and people of the Matilija Canyon, nor the Ventura River Bottom, nor all of Goddess Moon. [nor against the Middle East, Africa, Latin America, Asia, Polynesia, the Rainforests, the Oceans, our atmosphere, Mother Earth.]

no matter what their covert 'science' propaganda. that is not science, that is Wall Street.

we are not here to promulgate their counterintelligence, we are here to find the sacred harmonies of nature and our Valley. zero, no correspondence, with the Washington DC and Corporate disinfo.

we are here to learn and speak the language of all our relations, all our cultures, all our ancestors ... not all the Monsanto Monster lab dictionaries.

if, and only if, and only if they are capable ... then and only then will the people of Matilija Canyon ... not the gangsters in Ventura ... carry out a loving and respectful and HEALTHY campaign of removal of Canegrass, or Periwinkle, Star Thistle, StinkWeed etc.

a Green economy is an economy built around nurturing our health, ending the violence against each other and the SACRED WOMB OF NATURE WHO FEEDS AND GROWS US. those of us who DO go out with machete in hand, and cut the cane grass -- or who work in the Valley vegetable gardens and orchards -- or ride our bicycles, or clear our mountain trails -- know the difference between the smile and joy and sweat of being and working in nature -- in loving her -- and the poison-pain death-ritual, which is the corporate campaign of servitude to the petrochemical cancer machine -- killing her.

their poison chemicals, and poison agenda, will NOT return the eco-diversity of Canyon or Valley ... only truncate it.

it is not complex, the truth.

only the machinations of ignorance and servitude, is that [boring!] endlessly-repeated shallowest news-speak ...

It's a lovely thought Millennium, but I have to respectfully disagree. As I stated, anyone who has ever removed any quantity of Arundo soon realizes that it is extraordinarily difficult. All the machetes in the world simply would not be effective in removal. Yes, the cane itself could be cut and removed, however the rhizomes would not be and the top growth would return in weeks. The rhizomes grow under and between rocks and boulders which would mean every one would have to be dislodged to dig the roots out. Think of all the creatures that would be destroyed by that action. Every step we take on damp earth crushes living beings. In fact, every disruption of the soil destroys thousands if not millions of organisms. Turning the soil for a garden massively disrupts the soil biota, which inhabit specific strata in the ground, and takes weeks or months to fully recover. Pulling a "weed" destroys root zone inhabiting microorganisms, many specific to particular plants.
Human activity has always been destructive to nature, with very few exceptions. From the Australian Aborigines who burned over much of the continent, to cave dwellers that hunted prey to extinction, to virtually all early civilizations who exhausted their soils and therefore had to conquer new lands for new and fertile earth. Virtually all ancient wars were, in large part, about soil. A wonderful book; "Dirt, The Ecstatic Skin Of The Earth", explores this in some detail.
We need to encourage a new relationship with Nature, no doubt about it. We are about to find out in the coming years the practical meaning of the law; for every action, there in an equal and opposite reaction, in regard to our assault on the Earth for the past hundreds of years and especially the past fifty.
I, and most residents of the canyon were not the force behind the Arundo removal. I think most of us were OK with it being here. I've used it for many things over the years.
However, once the decision was made, I don't see any other realistic way it could be accomplished.
It's necessary to object to actions that we see as destructive, however if we don't offer realistic and workable alternatives, we become irrelevant. That's the point we missed in the 60's and 70's. We objected to all the bad, but offered very few alternatives. There was a belief that the world would change by our sheer will alone. It just doesn't happen that way, lovely poetic thoughts notwithstanding. I hope we've learned from that mistake.
Monsanto is at the top of my list for evil companies, for many reasons. They, along with a handful of other giant agribusinesses have been waging an all out campaign to totally control the worlds food supply for the past 30 years, with a great deal of success. That soyburger that we just ate and feel great about, likely sent money to the coffers of Monsanto, ADM, or one of the other giants.
You seem to have a distaste for science. I find, after a lifetime of the study that my relationship and awe are only increased the more I understand how things work.
I find it somewhat typical of the movement to disregard any scientific findings that they don't like, as "corporate propaganda", no matter how independently arrived at. This is the same as the conservative view that any scientific study that my upset business as usual, can't be true. No difference whatsoever.
As I stated in my earlier post, what's important is to seek the truth
Again, if truth ain't the goal, it's simply B.S.

Bob,
Well said...

Bob, thanks for your sharing! i'm learning from you...

NIOSH: Dr. Rikki Ott seems to think that oil is indeed a very hazardous substance...one which blocks the normal functioning of just about any cell in any body. i heard her speak recently in Ventura...very compelling!

thanks Bob,

for waking up our neighbors to Arundo.

I have been a scientist all my life, so I know the difference between true science (knowledge), and Petrochemical industry bs, your phrase.

the people and plants and animals who are the victims of the chemspraying -- Valley-wide -- are whom I am representing.

all our sacred relations.

and we don't care what decision the county-goons came to, we do not support their campaign of poisoning our Valley, plants, animals and people.

the issue is not Arundo, that is just the corporate excuse for the river poisonings ... they have other public excuses (propaganda) for the bike/pedestrian trail poisoning, the roadway poisoning, the schools poisoning, etc.

for people of any love, respect, integrity ... a Valley going Green ... there is no more excuses for the war against Earth and Humanity.

there is Wall Street and Media bs, again, but not ethics.

Millennium Twain

father of the US/International Space Station Program,
designer of the X49 Series of Scramjet Spaceplanes,
publisher of the Structure of the Atomic Nucleus

Bob,

I love how you promote science as the ultimate good but skip the science that doesn't work for you. :)

Anyone who would like to discover the astonishingly toxic effects of glyphosate can go here:

http://www.mindfully.org/Pesticide/Roundup-Glyphosate-Factsheet-Cox.htm

It takes 25 pages to list all of the toxic effects -- and key scientific studies documenting the toxic effects -- of glyphosate.

One of several hundred heart-warming facts in that article:

"The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has identified 74 endangered plant species that it believes could be jeopardized by glyphosate. This list is based on the use of glyphosate on 9 crops, and does not include over 50 other uses."

I've cut Arundo, I've removed Arundo plants in their entirety from the roots. I've done it day after day, in hot weather, in a cloud of gnats. Just me and a machete and a shovel. It's hard work, it takes time, but it's possible and it doesn't poison our planet for years to come.

Would manual removal of Arundo disturb creek ecosystems more than the yearly valley flood? Of course not.

Bob, you say yourself that the poison glyphosate didn't even work on your Arundo: "They have sprayed or painted the remaining patches. It has returned 3 times so far, a little less vibrant each time."

Less vibrant? That's all you got for poisoning the ecosystem? So now you have less-vibrant but still alive Arundo AND poison on your property. Hmm.

Meanwhile, your kids and your pets and the neighbors kids and their pets are running around picking up the poison. Not to mention the wildlife.

Of course, as you say, you used the poison in a "remote area." So your kids are okay, maybe, but the animals and plants around the poisoned Arundo are suffering. And every time it rains, some of that poison gets taken downstream or leaches into precious groundwater. Nothing is "remote" in nature.

To recap: Arundo is sedentary. It is helpless before a digging bar and a shovel and the desire to have it be gone.

If it is a choice between using deadly poison to remove Arundo and using hard work, perhaps we should let the poison gather dust in Monsanto's factory.

Sincerely,
Jock Doubleday

Never one to underestimate the role of irony in my life, this is a real kick in the pants.
I've spent the greater part of my life encouraging people to become aware of the effects of our culture on nature, and to understand natural systems and how impacting one small area is compounded in the entire system. How every aspect of the way we live reverberates in it's impact on natural systems.
Therein lies the rub; that it may be interpreted as if I'm somehow promoting Roundup or glyphosate. Let's be clear here, I'm not. It is the most over used pesticide since DDT.
By the way on the subject of DDT, when I was a kid we had a cherry tree in the back yard. It was hollowed out by ants who used to love the cherries. This was at a time when there was no information available about the toxicity of pesticides, and everyone used them on everything. We just didn't know that they were dangerous. Well, we had a large can of DDT out in our shed and I used to fill a trombone sprayer and spray the heck out of that tree with the powder. I used to be covered in the stuff and wore no mask or protective gear. I had to literally dust myself off after I used it and breathed in large amounts. I'm not happy about that and don't know if there were any toxic effects from it but I did have several odd childhood illnesses. With luck, it has been metabolized out of my body and no longer resides in fat cells.
This was one of the reasons that I did research on pesticides later in my life.
Back to the matter at hand.
Let me address the responses to my comments:
Millennium, I respect your credentials greatly, however, it doesn't appear that you are a biologist. I have at least some understanding of biological systems, but I know virtually nothing of the physics of solid rocket propellants, so I don't attempt to speak with any authority on the subject. You're a scientist so you do know how to read a study.
I think that most people read one they don't bother with the ENTIRE study, they just read the conclusions. Boring as it may be, I always attempt to read one in it's entirety, holding these questions foremost in mind: What were the doses? Over what period? How was it administered? How conclusive were the results. I also attempt to find who funded the study as this usually effects the conclusion. Chem. company studies always have to be taken with a very large grain of salt, and I always assign greater value to independently done testing.
Jock, have you actually read the study that you refer to?
First, one HAS to separate the studies that use roundup or it's equivalent that contain inerts. There is no question that these chemicals are much more toxic than glyphosate. Also there is a synergistic effect of the combination which increases the toxicity of the compound, therefore makes those studies much less relevant, if not entirely irrelevant.
Second, carefully read the amounts that were given. Most were a minimum of 1000mg./kg. of body weight. That would be the equivalent of a 120lb. person drinking or taking by intravenous, (depending on the protocol), more than two ounces daily for months. Very large dosages.
Also, it appears, at least in some of the studies that rats were much more susceptible to the substance in lower doses than mice, who knows why.
Third, time. These were massive amounts given over comparatively long periods.
Fourth, different studies arrived at different conclusions.
Let me give this some perspective. Most folks don't realize that one can kill oneself by drinking too much water over a short period, something like a gallon ingested in less than an hour. It causes a drop in serum sodium levels in the blood and tissues upsets the sodium/electrolyte balance which usually causes the brain to swell resultig in death. In some circumstances the imbalance causes irregular heartbeat resulting in a heart attack.
So in a study it would be written something like: test subjects received 67ml/kg of H2O over a period of 72 minutes, resulting an LD/50 (lethal dose in 50% of subjects) from serum toxicity. It appeared to effect the Central nervous system with coinciding cardiovascular damage.
Do we therefore conclude that H2O is toxic?
If it weren't water it would appear so.
Let's be clear here, glyphosate kills plants. It's a toxin. That's why it was created. Unlike most herbicides it doesn't actually poison the plant, it interferes with chemical processes and pathways which result in the plant's self destruction by it's attempt to grow.
The question is; to what degree is it dangerous to mammals, and how long does it last?
Jock, I definitely don't promote science as the ultimate good. Quite the contrary. I also make it a point to read ALL the science, even, maybe especially, when the conclusions differ from what I'd like them to be. That's how one arrives at an informed and intelligent conclusion. I do promote science as the only way to understand scientific processes, whether they are biological, chemical, or toxicological. What would you suggest as an alternative?
Also I stated that I had MIXED results with the glyphosate. It worked in some areas and less in others. If I would have followed it up with another application, it likely would have finished it off. I chose not to. In the present canyon spraying they planned on several applications over a five year period so they knew it wasn't going to kill it outright. I also have an understanding of how it is broken down in the soil so I'm pretty confident that due to the soil temp and level of microbial activity present that it likely already is neutralized in my application. On that note, virtually every (but not all) study wherein it has persisted in the soil or water, occurred in cold climates where there is much less biological soil activity to deactivate it.
Alright enough of all this. I need to get into the garden and plant my raspberries, as I'm already late for the season.
By the way, other than my experimentation, when necessary, I only use a strong vinegar solution on weeds, which unfortunately does kill soil organisms including worms. Generally I pull weeds as needed, but since I understand their relationship with the particular microclimate and soil structure they chose to grow in, I generally leave them alone. Actually I'm quite fond of most of them. My property teams with life everywhere, including those spots. As a matter of fact that's the first thing visitors usually comment on, the beauty of the wild land and the abundance of life.
You say that the Arundo can be dug up successfully. That's true only under the right circumstance. Let me be clear, it would be realistically impossible to do in the river bottom. It grows UNDER massive boulders and in between. Each one would have to be dislodged to get at the rhizomes, some of these rocks a ton or more. That would mean moving hundreds of thousands of rocks and boulders totally upsetting the micro ecosystems that occur around and under them, destroying millions of eggs, larva, and adult organisms, from microbes to frogs and fish. Also, every rock moved would release a cloud of silt into the stream, destabilize the stream bed and cause many times more destruction than the winter rains.
OK, so here's my bitch: The canyon spraying has been well known about and planned for well over a year, maybe two or more. The information was readily available to anyone who had the desire to know. Where were all these voices then? That would have been the appropriate time to address the problem. We in the environmental movement have a bad habit of flipping out after the fact, when it's too late to do anything. I'm as guilty as anyone of this trait. We bitch and moan and say "isn't it terrible", but we rarely monitor the goings on in our bioregion and take action. This might have been able to be stopped at it's inception if people would turn off CSI, get their ass off the yoga mat, and get involved. It's our world!
At this stage of the game it can still be attempted but without real evidence of a problem it's unlikely to be stopped. I would suggest that if one REALLY wants to do something, they can. As I understand it, the spraying is being monitored by the county, state, and feds. There is constant testing being done. That information should be publicly available. Call the agencies and ask for the test results. Has there been any die offs of fish, frogs, or mammals? What about invertebrates such as insects? Native plants? Is there monitoring of the water, creek, lake, and Casitas. Most agencies don't monitor water as it's believed that the chemical doesn't effect water quality. Insist on it. How about the workers? Public health should have documented any health problems.
Call our supervisors and let them know that their position on environmental quality is foremost in your decisions on who to vote for and again, insist that all testing be made public, perhaps published in the paper, or at least freely available. Insist, insist, insist. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.
Finally two last things. Can we please, pretty please, get out of the victim mentality. I'm so tired of it. I once heard a wise man say " there are no victims, just volunteers." True, no. Every time we see things that effect our lives in negative ways and do nothing, we make a statement: "do your worst, we 'll piss and moan afterwards, but we'll never really do anything". Hand wringing and whining about how powerless we are is a self sustaining state. If we wait for authorities to empower us we'll be waiting a long time, like forever. Empowerment is something that can only be achieved by the conscious actions of the politically informed and determined.
Lastly, I'm really tired of reading and hearing phrases like "county goons", and "corporate shills", etc. I try not to use that thinking or speech (with the possible exception of some corporate execs and politicians). I find it only serves to divide us, cuts off dialog, and is counter productive. These are people just like you and me. They and their children drink the same water, breathe the same air, love their families, and want to thrive, just like we do. Let's engage them rather than playing some childish name calling game like some gotcha last, so there, game. It's dumb.
We can speak of gods and goddesses, sacred relations or some other ephemeral imagery, but do we truly hold those beliefs when we harbor so much hatred and vitriol for our neighbors? I think not. We can be better than that.
peace to all, Bob

Position well stated Bob!

The Post very much needs to include Bob of Matillija to it’s list of authors. He adds much needed credibility...

Thank you Bob --and everyone else too-- for your comments. I so appreciate when someone takes the time to speak (write) clearly. Somehow we all need to work together for the greater good.

Bob,
Thanks for that offering. It was a very intelligent and thoughtful post. When I read opinion pieces, no matter how well formed, that are littered with name calling, I tend to just dismiss the article and move on. I am sure that I am guilty of it myself, given the right issue, but I appreciate your request that we all try to avoid it.
Peace to you, as well.

I love you, Bob in Matillija!

Good perspective Bob, I hope you do not become vilified for your thoughful views.

Brian, i am pleased to see you looking up to Bob. You see, even though Bob's view point with regards to the use of glyphosate received some strong reactionary sentiment - Bob remained calm and compassionate with his responses because he does not forget the plot. Bob realizes that kindness and compassion are more important than being alpha, calling someone names or using lazy all encompassing labels which do nothing except create dissonant waves. Hopefully, you may learn to emulate Bob's relaxed candor and respect for others.

yes evan, being compassionate is the most important thing imaginable.

"True happiness is the result of having love and compassion for all sentient beings." - The Dalai Lama

"being compassionate is the most important thing imaginable"

ah yes, brian my brother, you have stumbled on to the most essential truth.

may your heart be good

We love these comments! It's so nice when humans are kind to each other. It makes our mom laugh and feed us strawberries from Farmer's Market...

Brian, i have a vague discomfort centered around the notion that you may be using sarcasm. at any rate, "bobbing for apples" was not me, although i admire the clarity and eloquence. also, "bobbing" did not say that being compassionate was "the most important thing imaginable" (your words)...simply that it is "more important than" some other ways of communicating.

i hope there's some clarity to be found in these words.

We love you Evan'!! Are you buddhist??

I'd like to thank you all for the kind thoughts. To be sure, I'm just as capable as anyone of allowing my emotions to devolve my thinking and speech into a personal attack. I've spent many years teaching myself to not get sucked into that dynamic, as it's always non productive. I figure anytime that I do allow anger at the person, rather than objection to the idea or position, come to the fore, I've already lost the debate. I really don't like what that does to me, intellectually, physically, emotionally, spiritually.
When I look at our present state, I believe what's sorely needed is intelligent debate on all subjects. For that to occur, we require at least two qualities; the ability to project the ramifications of our positions, both positive and negative. We also need to embrace an open mind, and by so doing, nurture the ability to really ponder the ideas of others and when appropriate say, "you know, I never really looked at that perspective, maybe I was wrong about that". In other words, critical thinking. That seems to be sorely lacking in dialog these days.
It's great that we have passionate ideas and of course we want to defend our positions, but we must recognize that other people might also have valid ideas that differ from ours. Nothing I like more than a good debate, when people bring passion and intellect to the fore.
I rarely encounter that these days. We're saddled with politicians who are more interested in dogma than truth, and demonize anyone who raises a voice in objection. This occurs everywhere now, in all aspects of discussion, from politics to religion to the environment. Where do we go to hear all sides of an argument, intelligently discussed. We used to get it, to some degree on TV, but with a few exceptions that's long gone. One real shining example of what we need more of, is Bill Moyers show on public television on Friday nights. Moyers, though certainly a liberal, makes it a point include brilliant thinkers from all sides of an issue, and often includes people with no apparent position, who bring insight to the dynamic of an issue. Great stuff. It actually promotes thinking. CSPAN also is terrific for a view into what's really going on. Unfortunately much of the best stuff is on the air there in the wee hours.
TV news is presently in a sad state. The average news story is under 22 seconds. That couple with the dilution of news with the personality parade of popular culture that takes up valuable time in the meager half hour we get to cover all the events on the planet. It's really quite a sad state of affairs. How can we possibly fulfill our obligation in a democracy to be an informed populace? Newspapers are pretty good, but now with budget cuts and staff being reduced, they along with networks, are relying more and more on centralized sources of information. Not good.
The internet holds great promise, however it suffers from the opposite situation; there is so much info flying around out there that it's difficult to discern what has value or is even true. There are loads of stories out there, presented as fact that are total B.S. If we don't have any way of discerning what's true or not, again, how do we draw intelligent conclusions. I'm sure there are some people willing to spend the time sorting through it all, and I salute them, however I think for many of us we just don't have the time or energy. We're a busy lot these days.
I remember quite a few years ago there was a program on the tube (PBS) wherein John Kenneth Galbraith and William F. Buckley would debate IDEAS. The ultimate brilliant conservative and coinciding liberal going at it, on all the crucial ideas of the time. Brilliant stuff!
Back to this venue. One of the things I love most about California is the incredible variety of ideas and the fact that often, people actually DO the the things that they believe in. Having been brought up in New England, I was exposed to a world of ideas, likely due to the presence of so many terrific schools in a small geographical area, but it seemed like nobody actually acted on those ideas, sort of intellectual masturbation.
Here it is very different. It doesn't matter if one has a new idea for a business, or wants to walk around with tinfoil on their head to keep the aliens from reading their thoughts, there's a constituency. Back east when someone has a new idea, they are likely to run into "yeah, but that won't really work because of blah, blah, blah". Here I find people are very open to a new idea and one is more likely to encounter "hey that's a pretty neat idea, how about this too". Very different, and one of the reasons that for the past 20 years, whenever I travel I always feel relieved when I see the sign "Welcome to California". Sanctuary.
That's why we're often seen by the rest of the country as the place where all the crazies live, and so we are, but within that craziness there often lies brilliance. We're less constrained by 200 year old cultural mores and folkways.
I think Ojai exhibits the best of this quality. It's easy to wish to live in a place where "everybody thinks like me and we could get so much done and life would be beautiful and great." I'm not so sure about that. While it certainly is an attractive idea, and may work on a small scale, I believe those situations only lead to intellectual inbreeding, and we all know what inbreeding leads to.
I love the fact that here we have old school conservatives, a position that I think may be illustrated by many of the ranchers in the area, and also the most far out progressives who are pretty visible. Within this context we all generally seem to coexist quite well.
A very wise man, Scott Nearing, at the age of 92, who along with his wife Helen wrote "Living The Good Life" and several more books and were largely responsible for the "Back to the Land" movement of the sixties and seventies, once said to me; "Don't define yourself as either liberal or conservative because by doing so, you, by definition, have already limited your capability to find the truth in the matter. You'll look at every issue only within the context of how it fits into your preconceived ideas. Rather, be a radical, as they are the only people that inhe