It occurred to me that it may be ironic for the mayor to express concerns about willow trees impeding the creek flow, but not mention the dead body found in the creek the day before. I imagine a body would interfere with flow as well. Worth A Dam’s trees were subjected to gravest scrutiny, but the body of a woman was left long enough to decompose. It seems in heartless poor taste to even mention the disparity, but it can’t be ignored. The city’s has minimal interest in the creek: I noticed this when I was thinking of the planting and realized there were no gates to get onto the banks. I understand the city wants to keep people out, but a locked gate is really just like a fence that sometimes opens. They could have planned ahead.
Jake Jacobsen of Snohomish County in Washington is the Watershed Steward for his region and has been helpful to us with all sorts of questions. He knows the creeks inside and out, and helps property owners with riparian and beaver management. Steward positions are under the public works department, and the county pays him to know the waterways.
What would it be like if Martinez had an Alhambra Creek Steward?
A steward could walk the creek regularly and notice anomalies in the stream bed. They could map the location of trees and let staff know if any is a problem. They could find the baby alligator a boy just told Moses he released because he couldn’t keep him anymore as a pet. They could notice where homeless encampents were located, and figure out which houses were dumping christmas trees into the water. They could identify and remove invasive species like the Arundo growing on the lodge. They could test BMI and water quality to find any healthy or unhealthy sections of the river, and they could spot the occasional dead body.
The concern that our trees, planted on the bank in accord with the city plan and in cooperation with the city engineer will impede flow, is pure theatrics. Exaggerated attention is directed to the beaver portion of the creek, and people who never glanced in its direction before are watching with hawk’s eyes to find proof that the beavers are bad news. The kindest interpretation of this is that people see things in a new way when they are alarmed. There are several less charitable explanations.
An example: At my old office I had birdfeeders and a number of feathered visitors. Goldfinches, white and red breasted nuthatches, and downy woodpeckers to name a few. My downstairs neighbor complained about seed husks so we would sweep his porch every week to keep it tidy. During one such sweeping event, the crabby old accountant watched with folded arms and said, “What about all the green stuff. Get that too.”
The “green stuff” in question was pollen from the hundreds of digger pines in the area and had been on his porch every spring for as long as he had been there, but of course he had never seen it before because he had never looked with this particular set of eyes.
These are the type of eyes directed to downtown’s portion of Alhambra Creek right now. Every piece of trash is noticed, every newly planted tree is a possible hazard. This exaggerate concern could be used to fuel major improvements and developments. There could be pipe weed to attract butterflies and wildflowers to brighten the waterway and benches to stop and appreciate the habitat. There could be a creek walk and signs to direct visitors to different features, like the kingfisher nest recently noticed at the primary dam.
But there won’t be. The only opportunity being seized here is the opportunity to disparage the beavers and the people who advocate for them.
Martinez does not “steward” its watershed: it exploits it.
