backups
Hello,
We are residents of South Lake Tahoe, CA and request your attention to a serious matter
regarding the California State Parks and Recreation, Sierra District’s proposal to exchange
land in Washoe Meadows State Park to Lake Valley State Recreation Area under the premise
of restoring a reach of the Upper Truckee River to relocate portions of the Lake Tahoe Golf
Course onto lands within Washoe Meadows State Park. This is a multi-jurisdictional proposal
and there are numerous CEQA and Federal National Environmental Policy Act violations with
this proposal.
The link to the most recent Notice of Availability is below and the proposal is found under El
Dorado County:
http://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=981
Our comments, which we submitted today to utproject@parks.ca.gov, are below. Your
attention to bring forth right action is greatly appreciated.
Thank you,
Lori and David Allessio
To whom it may concern,
I live in the Washoe meadows area and strongly disagree with the State's plan to expand the golf course.
I hike and bike ride in the area and am disgusted with the idea of it being ruined by expanding the golf
course. Further more...google Malcom Gladwell's podcast on golf courses. It shows the very small
percentage of the public that uses golf courses compared to those who recreate in a public park setting. I
guess this is a "follow the money" situation huh? You shoud be ashamed!!!
The reasons are simple:
1. The project will result in a downgrade on protections for acres of Parks’ land
and will deforest many acres of open space to build golf holes where none exist
now. The fragmentation of the park land will impact hundreds of adjacent acres
of the park, dividing contiguous open space into chopped up habitat areas
instead of a continuous ecosystem.
2. Loss of Parks land and open space will negatively affect efforts to restore
wetlands and protect wildlife.
3. The existing 18 hole golf course can and should be redesigned within its current
SRA footprint to be compatible with wetlands restoration work.
4. Golf revenue is not necessary to fund important state restoration projects. State
Parks revenue could be improved with a more innovative golf course design and
with additional revenue sources from other recreational activities and events.
Sincerely,
Jill Berg
Dear Parks Commission Chair:
I’m writing in support of proposed Project Alternative 2B for the restoration of the Upper
Truckee River along the Lake Tahoe Golf Course (LTGC) reach. As you probably know, the
Upper Truckee is an important environmental asset and is used by residents and visitors for
outdoor recreation. I seek a solution to implement a beneficial use of this valuable natural
resource. Here are some reasons I support Alternative 2B. Alternative 2B is the only
alternative that is a true compromise in that it:
Fully restores the Upper Truckee River along the golf course reach;
Increases public access and the size of Washoe Meadows State Park, with a designated
trailhead into the park, new hiking and biking trails along the restored river, including
an ADA-accessible trail, and more access to the river for fishermen and kayakers;
Maintains a critical $600,000 revenue stream for CA State Parks that allows other state
parks in our area that operate at a deficit to remain open, such as D.L. Bliss and Emerald
Bay State Parks; and
Supports our local economy by up to $6 million annually, by keeping LTGC a
regulation-sized golf course that averages 30,000 rounds of golf per year, 2/3rds of
which are out-of-town tourists that stay and play in Tahoe.
I am asking you to please approve proposed Project Alternative 2B. It is good for our
community, for the Upper Truckee River, for golf and outdoor recreation, and for Lake
Tahoe. Thank you for considering my views as part of your decision-making process.
Sincerely,
Michael H. Bradford
C. E. O.
Lakeside Inn and Casino
Stateline, NV 89448
Chair, California State Park & Recreation Commission
P.O. Box 942896
Sacramento, CA 94296-0001
CA State Parks and Recreation Commission
RE: Upper Truckee River Restoration & Golf Course Reconfiguration Proposed Project 2B Comment
Dear Parks Commission Chair:
I support the responsible stewardship of our public land. In my view, Alternative 2B should be implemented
for the following reasons:
I) It will restore and stabilize the Upper Truckee River, improve wildlife habitats, and decrease the
amount.of sediment flowing into Lake Tahoe;
2) It maintains and improves an outstanding regulation-sized 18-hole public golf course;
3) It will retain an important piece of our community's economic base, bring in tourist dollars, and
keep local jobs;
4) It will lead to improved public access and outdoor recreation in Washoe Meadows State Park.
I am asking you to please approve proposed Project Alternative 2B. It is good for our community, for the
Upper Truckee River, for golf and outdoor recreation, and for Lake Tahoe. Thank you for considering my
views as part of your decision-making process.
Sincerely,
Misha Case
Greetings,
I support the efforts of the Washoe Meadows community and the Sierra Club and the Center
for Biological Diversity in their efforts to oppose the deal between the California State Parks
and The American Golf Corporation to link the restoration of the Upper Truckee River with
expanding golf course holes into open space.
The reasons are simple:
The project will result in a downgrade on protections for acres of Parks’ land and will
deforest many acres of open space to build golf holes where none exist now. The
fragmentation of the park land will impact hundreds of adjacent acres of the park,
dividing contiguous open space into chopped up habitat areas instead of a continuous
ecosystem.
1. Loss of Parks land and open space will negatively affect efforts to restore
wetlands and protect wildlife.
2. The existing 18 hole golf course can and should be redesigned within its
current SRA footprint to be compatible with wetlands restoration work.
3. Golf revenue is not necessary to fund important state restoration projects.
State Parks revenue could be improved with a more innovative golf course
design and with additional revenue sources from other recreational activities
and events.
Golf can coexist with a more scientifically and ecologically sound plan to restore
wetlands around the Upper Truckee. In order for that to happen, State Parks and
American Golf have to look beyond their self interests and truly consider what’s best
for the public and the land.
Bottom Line: The decline of what’s left of Tahoe’s pristine lake and surroundings will
accelerate if we set precedents that allow even the smallest amounts of Parks space
to be reduced and open space to be deforested.
As a golfer, who has played the course many times, I see no reason to alter the
existing course. It is fine the way it is. That said their need to bee work to shore up the
banks of the river by increasing vegetation on the banks.
Susan Chandler
Hello,
Please see the attached document with Audubon International’s comments regarding the Upper
Truckee River Restoration & Golf Course Reconfiguration proposed Project 2B.
Thank you,
Allie
Dear Parks Commission Chair:
July, 30, 2018
I am writing in regards to the proposed Upper Truckee River Restoration Project on State
Parks Land in South Lake Tahoe. I wanted to express support for a responsible
compromise that allows for protection of our public lands and quality recreation while
contributing to the economic vitality of our community.
I ask that you support Alternative 2B as you are likely well aware of the benefits it affords.
It will:
· Restore and stabilize the Upper Truckee River
· Improve wildlife habitat and native vegetation
· Decrease the amount of sediment flowing into Lake Tahoe
· Lead to improved public access and outdoor recreation in Washoe Meadows
State Park.
As a long-time resident I believe implementing this project is way past due. Multiple years
of litigation has allowed for the continued contribution of sediment to Lake Tahoe which has
likely contributed to the recent 9 ½ feet of clarity loss. It has also bolstered opposition
opinions which have rarely been based in science. Truly, at this point there has been ample
opportunity for public input, and the science points to the need for restoration.
South Lake Tahoe also greatly benefits from multiple forms of recreation and economic
interests. With the millions of visitors each year, I find it unreasonable for certain groups to
favor or bless one type of recreational opportunity over another as they all contribute to an
active lifestyle that affords health and happiness in our community.
The leaders in our community have praised the importance of supporting economic
sustainability, recreational opportunities, and environmental protection; the Lake Tahoe
Golf Course has a long-standing tradition of achieving just that. The facility has provided a
wealth of services to our community and its visitor’s; attaining Audubon status is just one
example of their achievements. Providing after school and family activities, venues for
weddings, special events, and interpretive programs make the Lake Tahoe Golf Course a
valued public facility.
In closing, I am asking you to please approve proposed Project Alternative 2B. It is good
for our community, for the Upper Truckee River, for golf and outdoor recreation, and for
Lake Tahoe. Thank you for your consideration and expertise,
respectfully,
Kim Gorman
Save our parks! I work with the State Parks Sierra district in Lake Tahoe and I see destruction
everyday from the tourist! It needs to stop
Dear Secretary Laird,
I am a resident of South Lake Tahoe and live directly adjacent to the Washoe Meadows State Park Area/SRA, specifically on Sawmill Road, bordering the Upper Truckee River and the 10th green of the Lake Tahoe Golf Course. I am writing to tell you that I support a plan for the restoration of the wetlands and the preservation of the current open space in the park and recreation area and do not support the plan which calls for moving the golf course to the other side of the river. This plan would mean bulldozing and constructing a golf course in open space that should be left alone. The construction of a new golf course on the other side of the river will only increase the sediment load to the Lake as well as destroy open space that would be accessible (as it is now) to everyone, not just paying golfers. I support only a plan that will preserve ALL of the open space in the State Park; this is the only way that the current erosion and sediment load deposited in the Lake every Spring due to channelization through the golf course will be abated. Removal of the golf course, at least in part, is a sacrifice that should be made to help preserve Lake clarity. I hope you will support a plan that will actually help to preserve the clarity of the Lake, as well as preserve our valuable wetlands which promote that clarity.
Thank you,
Antonia Hall
Dear Parks Commission Chair:
I support the responsible stewardship of our public land. In my view, Alternative 2B should be
implemented for the following reasons:
1) It will restore and stabilize the Upper Truckee River, improve wildlife habitats, and decrease
the amount of sediment flowing into Lake Tahoe;
2) It maintains and improves an outstanding regulation-sized 18-hole public golf course;
3) It will retain an important piece of our community’s economic base, bring in tourist dollars,
and keep local jobs;
4) It will lead to improved public access and outdoor recreation in Washoe Meadows State
Park.
I am asking you to please approve proposed Project Alternative 2B. It is good for our community, for
the Upper Truckee River, for golf and outdoor recreation, and for Lake Tahoe. Thank you for
considering my views as part of your decision-making process.
Cheers,
Steven Hemphill
Sierra at Tahoe
Director of Marketing and Sales
Dear Park Commissioner:
Please preserve all the land in Washoe Meadows State Park. Please plan to preserve, protect
and enhance the open space and wetlands surrounding Lake Tahoe.
Concerned citizen,
Marcie Jensen
To the California State Park & Recreation Commission
The current proposal to relocate part of the existing Lake Tahoe golf course into existing Washoe Meadow State park is short sighted and based on outdated economic interests and views.
The proposed plan is not in the best interest of the general public. The Commission should promote a plan that preserves the existing protected ecosystems in Washoe Meadows for current
and future generations while increasing the public usabiity of park lands, reducing required public funding and increasing future revenues for the Park system. For example, such objectives
can be achieved by redesigning existing 18 hole golf course into a full length 12 hole golf course which is the future growth direction of golf. This is supported by studies such as the one
enclosed in this email and by the lack of growth in participation and revenues across the country and the world for 18 hole golf courses.
In short, the Commission should provide an alternative proposal that address all aspects of the issue including future trends and reject the current proposal that does significant damage to
the Washoe Meadow ecosystem.
Prakash Kasiraj
I live in the neighborhood near the Lake Tahoe Golf Course. I strongly oppose the plan Alt 2B. The 5 holes of the golf course should not be moved into pristine park land. There is strong
opposition to these plans - isn't it time you start listening? Pristine park land is valuable to our environment, wildlife and the people who get out to walk and hike. The intent of parks is to
protect - how can you possibly in good conscience remove or reduce a park? You should keep the golf course where it is and not expand into the park. Reduce the number of holes in the
golf course or reduce the fairway size. Keep the golf course in the current footprint.
Parks are where everyone can enjoy nature. Golf courses are used by people with upper
income. Parks should not be taken away from the common people.
Stop listening to special interests and start listening to the community.
Concerned taxpayer.
I strongly oppose deal B/T Cali State Parks & American Golf for restoration of Upper Truckee River W/
EXPANDING golf course holes into open space of the State Park
To whom it may concern ,
I am Gary Mendel, in tahoe and in christmas valley since 1985 . I am concerned about river project and I see no sign of concern for what the project will do to the golf course . My renter, a hydrologist, worked on the river project by the airport . This project will take the depth of the river, probably about 9 to 12 feet deep now, just guessing, around hole no 6 and bring it up to 3 feet deep so it will overflow in its intentional design .
For anyone who does not see a problem with this is just not paying attention . This river rages
in the spring . This water will of course breach the banks and flood the golf course holes 6 ,7
,8 ,9 and probably 13 now exsisting . The water will tear apart this course as it overflows river
banks and finds its most direct route back to river .
This will damage course every year and I do not see it possible to bring back playing
conditions untill late summer if at all . The damage will be significant enough with sand mud and debris finding its own path . This project is run by those who do not see this coming ? I think they just want to get there river right at the any cost . The ignorance of taking away the
best course layout i have ever played is rediculous when you should just shore up the walls
and leave this precious golf course alone . I know its to late , but needs to be said and thought
about how this will kill the golf course for ever . Ignorance and agendas win again over
common sense !
Are there answers for spring runoff and golf course destruction ?
Good luck ,
Gary mendel.
Dear Parks Commission Chair:
As a frequent visitor to South Lake Tahoe, I have enjoyed the clarity of the lake and have hiked many
trails around the lake over the past 20 years. As a geologist and science teacher, I find South Lake
Tahoe my ideal playground. I support the responsible stewardship of our public land. In my view,
Alternative 2B should be implemented for the following reasons:
1) It will restore and stabilize the Upper Truckee River, improve wildlife habitats, and decrease the
amount of sediment flowing into Lake Tahoe; increased biodiversity to the watershed and decreased
sediment loads to the lake will enhance the experience of locals and tourists. People travel from
around the world to experience the low turbidity of Lake Tahoe.
2) It maintains and improves an outstanding regulation-sized 18-hole public golf course.
Proposed changes to the golf course would increase the riparian zone along the river and thereby
reduce the amount of sediment from erosion entering the Truckee River and ultimately, Lake Tahoe.
3) It will retain an important piece of our community’s economic base, bring in tourist dollars, and
keep local jobs. I keep returning to South Lake Tahoe because of the great variety of activities that it
offers. And, while there, I spend money.
4) It will lead to improved public access and outdoor recreation in Washoe Meadows State Park.
Many families take their children to enjoy the outdoor recreational and educational opportunities
afforded by the parks around Lake Tahoe. Alternative 2B would provide a high meadow wetland
ecosystem for many to explore and enjoy.
I am asking you to please approve proposed Project Alternative 2B. It is good for the community, for
the Upper Truckee River, for golf and outdoor recreation, and for Lake Tahoe. Thank you for
considering my views as part of your decision-making process.
Sincerely,
Suzanne Miller
State Parks,
I am opposed to expanding the Lake Tahoe Golf Course into Washoe Meadows State Park. The park should
remain free of commercial activity and remain a place to walk, hike, contemplate nature and for the natural
world to exist away from development. I agree with the reasoning of the Washoe Meadows Community when
they say:
The Washoe Meadows Community, along with the Sierra Club and Center for Biological Diversity,
strongly opposes the deal between California State Parks and American Golf Corporation to link
restoration of the Upper Truckee River with expanding golf course holes into open space.
The reasons are simple:
1. The project will result in a downgrade on protections for acres of Parks ' land and will deforest many
acres of open space to build golf holes where none exist now. The fragmentation of the park land will
impact hundreds of adjacent acres of the park, dividing contiguous open space into chopped up habitat
areas instead of a continuous ecosystem.
2. Loss of Parks land and open space will negatively affect efforts to restore wetlands and protect wildlife.
3. The existing 18 hole golf course can and should be redesigned within its current SRA footprint to be
compatible with wetlands restoration work.
4. Golf revenue is not necessary to fund important state restoration projects. State Parks revenue could be
improved with a more innovative golf course design and with additional revenue sources from other
recreational activities and events.
This proposal benefits the proponents at the expense of the people and their surroundings. State
Parks wants to take political credit for an environmental project as part of its effort to repair its image
after years of mismanagement. American Golf wants to guarantee higher profits with taxpayer
subsidies for their expanded golf course in order to remain as the course operator.
1
Part of the State Parks rational in requesting this development is that the Truckee River needs to be
re-aligned and separated from the golf course. I agree with the citizens and scientists who believe
that the environmental disturbance to the Truckee River by realigning it will be greater than the
alternative of leaving it as it is. It seems to me that California State Parks has money to spend and
they want nothing, not public comments, not reason, and not the sanctity of the natural environment
to come between their spending that money and their goal of "supposedly protecting the
environment." I say leave it as it is, save the money of realigning the river and moving the golf
course, do mitigation on the existing river where and when absolutely needed, with the least impact
on and disturbance of the river.
State Park and Recreation Commissioners,
I am writing to oppose the State Park's plan to expand the golf course into Washoe Meadows State Park. I have been a bordering neighbor to Washoe Meadows S.P. since 1980, before the park existed as a State Park. I am also a member of the Washoe Meadows Community and support their findings that the State Park's Preferred Alternative 2B is flawed and will be detrimental to the park, to the users and to the State.
I have attached two documents which you may have seen: the July 30, 2018 comments from the Washoe Meadows Community and the July 30 comments from their attorney. Please pay close attention to these documents when you make your decision to accept or reject alternative 2B. They show the lack of completeness of the process and detriments of the project. The park and the people of California deserve better. You are the ones who are representing us in regards to projects in our State Parks. You are the ones who must determine a good project from a bad one.
My preferred alternative is 3: Restore the river using much less destructive and costly means, build a modified 18 hole golf course in the footprint of the existing golf course on the East side of the river, and leave Washoe Meadows State Park alone. Two independent golf course designers have certified that this is possible, but that analysis is not part of the choices before you on Friday. That is a shame because it's the best alternative. You should follow the recommendations of the Washoe Meadows Community and their attorney in the attached documents and postpone accepting the flawed and costly alternative as proposed by the State Parks. As some would say, "What's the rush?" We have waited this long, let's get it right.
Sincerely,
Jeff Miner
Dear Parks Commission Chair:
I support the responsible stewardship of our public land. In my view, Alternative 2B should
be implemented for the following reasons:
1) It will restore and stabilize the Upper Truckee River, improve wildlife habitats,
and decrease the amount of sediment flowing into Lake Tahoe;
2) It maintains and improves an outstanding regulation-sized 18-hole public golf
course;
3) It will retain an important piece of our community’s economic base, bring in
tourist dollars, and keep local jobs;
4) It will lead to improved public access and outdoor recreation in Washoe
Meadows State Park.
I am asking you to please approve proposed Project Alternative 2B. It is good for our
community, for the Upper Truckee River, for golf and outdoor recreation, and for Lake
Tahoe. Thank you for considering my views as part of your decision-making process.
Sincerely,
Tracie Moultrup
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the preferred alternative 2B golf course
reconfiguration project in Washoe Meadows State Park. This ill-conceived project is in
direct opposition to the mission statement of State Parks which is "To provide for the
health, inspiration and education of the people of California by helping to preserve the
state's extraordinary biological diversity, protecting its most valued natural and cultural
resources, and creating opportunities for high-quality outdoor recreation." Reconfiguring
a golf course that will encroach onto State Park land does not help to preserve or
protect resources. And It certainly doesn't create opportunities for high-quality outdoor
recreation.
Washoe Meadows State Park still does. not have a general plan. My understanding is
that a State Park cannot be modified without a general plan. Swapping State Park land
with State Recreation land in order to change the park boundaries, building a bridge,
cutting trees, building access roads, moving tons of dirt, and developing golf holes is
therefore illegal.
Alternative 2B is flawed because it holds river restoration hostage to golf course
development. These two issues should be separated. State Park land is meant to be
protected for public use, not to be developed. State Parks should not partner with golf
courses or any other corporate interests. Development in a State Park is not in the best
interest of the people of California. Furthermore, preservation of Washoe Meadows
State Park should be part of the equation, as per State Parks mission.
Many of the TRPA thresholds such as Scenic Resources, Wildlife, Noise, and
Recreation will be negatively impacted by Alternative 2B. The park experience will be
diminished for park users who will hear noise from lawn mowers, sprinklers, golf carts
and the smack of a golf ball. With the new golf holes bordering the river on both sides
for over a mile, wild life corridors will be fragmented and park users will lose their
access to the river.
In conclusion, since the current EIR does not have a reasonable set of alternatives, I
support a yet to be defined alternative which has less ecological risk and project cost or
Alternative 3 which will still restore the river, have minimal impact on the Park, pose less
risk to sensitive lands within the Park, and is less costly. I concur with Washoe
Meadows Community that a creative solution can be defined that achieves the goals of
all constituents of the public and golfing community.
Sincerely,
Krissi Russell
Hello, my name is Kim Stoker. I am a long-time resident of South Lake Tahoe, and a
user of the beautiful Washoe Meadows State Park.
I'm writing today because I OPPOSE Alternative 2b.
Here are a few of my reasons:
First and foremost, without any other reason at all, this State Park land classification
should NOT be downgraded. It opens the door to further development. After the golf
Couse, what next?
The Old Quarry land took years to rehabilitate, and now it's ok to bulldoze it and build
a golf course? No, I do not agree.
I understand and can see the need for the Hole 6 bridge area to be reconfigured,
however, why can't some meanders be made prior to where the river reaches Hole 6
bridge? There are plenty of areas that we could look into putting in meanders without
splitting Washoe Meadows State Park in half, and destroying forested area with
frequently used trails.
Why can't the banks after the Hole 6 bridge be lined with rock as they are prior to
reaching the bridge?
The amount of land taken by the moving of the golf course to the Old Quarry is larger
than the amount of land gained by Sawmill Rd.
Right now, El Dorado County is paying people to take out their lawns because of the
drought, yet we're talking about expanding the Golf Course land?
These are a few of the valid concerns I have.
I sincerely hope there will be more discussions, with a compromise going forward.
Those of us who use the park for hiking, biking, horseback riding, cross country
skiing, running and recreation are very concerned, and I will be present for any
dialogue in the future.
Sincerely,
Kim Stoker
To: Parks Commission Chair Myrian Solis Coronel
I strongly oppose the preferred alternative 2B golf course reconfiguration project in
Washoe Meadows State Park. State Parks needs to do its job, outlined in its mission
statement, which is “To provide for the health, inspiration and education of the people
of California by helping to preserve the state's extraordinary biological diversity,
protecting its most valued natural and cultural resources, and creating opportunities
for high-quality outdoor recreation.” Golf course development within State Park
boundaries does not help to preserve or protect resources.
Alternative 2B holds river restoration hostage to golf course development. These two
issues should be separated. State Park land is meant to be protected for public use,
not developed. State Parks has no business partnering with golf courses or any other
corporate interests. Preservation of Washoe Meadows State Park should be part of
the equation, as per State Parks mission.
TRPA thresholds such as Scenic Resources, Wildlife, Noise, and Recreation will be
negatively impacted by Alternative 2B. The park experience will be diminished for
park users who will hear noise from lawn mowers, sprinklers, golf carts and the
smack of a golf ball. With the new golf holes bordering the river on both sides for over
a mile, wild life corridors will be fragmented and park users will lose their access to
the river.
Washoe Meadows State Park still does not even have a general plan. A State Park
should not be modified without a general plan. Swapping State Park land with State
Recreation land, changing park boundaries, building a bridge, cutting trees, building
access roads, moving tons of dirt, and developing golf holes is therefore illegal.
The current EIR does not have a reasonable set of alternatives, I support a yet to be
defined alternative which has less ecological risk and project cost or Alternative 3
which will still restore the river, have minimal impact on the Park, pose less risk to
sensitive lands within the Park, and be less costly. I concur with Washoe Meadows
Community that a creative solution can be defined that achieves the goals of all
constituents of the public and golfing community.
Sincerely,
Krissi Russell
Dear California State Park & Recreation Commission,
Over ten years ago, I lead a LTCC field class from the headwaters of the Upper
Truckee River through the Tahoe Basin to our water’s final resting place in Pyramid Lake. We
stopped at a variety of places to chart the water’s path and talk about issues (good and bad).
One of those places was a place I still refer to as “California’s Worst State Park”, Washoe
Meadows. OK, it’s really pretty nice, but worst in the sense that it is one of the top sediment
contributors to Lake Tahoe and it is home to some highly degraded forest, meadow, and
riparian habitat. And for a park, it has no visitor center, no informational kiosks, zero public
parking, poor signage, and incredibly limited access…that is unless you live next to it or you
golf…in which case the park is actually pretty cool. But the park could be better…for those
who golf and for those that don’t. I chose to stop there for our field class because a river
restoration planning effort was underway. The main goal: reducing bank erosion, raising the
groundwater, and enhancing habitat. That was over ten years ago (yes, things move slow in
Tahoe).
As a young idealistic college student, getting my degree in Hydrology, I would have
been a strong advocate for returning things to the way they had been prior to human
disturbance. I’m smarter than that now, and I realize that there are social and economic factors
that need to be considered in addition to improving the environment. With one of the project
goals being habitat enhancement, it is important to recognize that we too, are now a permanent
part of the habitat. It is important to honor the many ways that humans enjoy the land. Right
now, the park is enjoyed by golfers, and those that live along the park’s perimeter who take
their dog there to poop. OK, maybe I’m annoyed that I don’t golf and my dog and I don’t get
to enjoy these same benefits, but I’m pretty sure that when this land was purchased by the state
there were some other priorities. I’m also smart enough to realize that environmental
restoration is expensive. So are recreational bridges and trails. And of course there are people
who actually like golf. The golf course is also valuable in that it is one of the largest revenue
generators for the State Park system, helping to subsidize some of the other State Parks in the
area (like Emerald Bay). Hmm…I think an ecology instructor of mine told me that everything
is connected…perhaps there is a solution here.
I could have bored you with the science behind river restoration, but the lesson plan
has changed, and my message needs to be more clear. Doing nothing solves nothing. This
river is still eroding away into Lake Tahoe remember. Being unreasonable has the same effect.
There is benefit however, in finding a restoration alternative we can afford to live with.
Through the preferred restoration alternative (2b), the golf course gets downsized and
relocated out of environmentally sensitive zones, but it gets some eco-upgrades and maintains
some high quality play. Some poor quality forest is sacrificed for high value meadowlands but,
the river is realigned, stream habitat improves, and Lake Tahoe is saved. And for the rest of
us? Trails are enhanced, we get to cross over the river without being beaned by a golf ball, and
the park becomes more accessible. If this is the way it goes, I’ll even consider taking the park
off my “worst in the state list”. Let’s just hope it doesn’t take another ten years.
Thank you for your consideration,
Scott Valentine
Earth Science Department
Lake Tahoe Community College
We are writing in regard to the Upper Truckee River Restoration and Golf Course
Reconfiguration Project P AAEA Preferred Alternative 2B. Although the reduction from
nine holes to five holes on the west side of the river is an improvement it still is not
acceptable. It appears that the California Department of Parks and Recreation is
determined to pursue this project with a focus on maintaining the profitability of the golf
course while violating the stated mission of the state park system.
The California Department of Parks and Recreation states as its mission, "To provide for
the health, inspiration and education of the people of California by helping to preserve
the state's extraordinary biological diversity, protecting its most valued natural and
cultural resources and creating opportunities for high-quality outdoor recreation". While
it is important to reduce the sediment flow into Lalrn Tahoe, the project proposal does so
by destroying other valuable resources in Washoe State Park. The destruction of the pine
forests alone for five golf holes will have a significant impact on the habitat of the
wildlife and threaten plant and animal species. The plan for re-vegetation of the former
holes on the course is inadequate and will not replace the forest.
In addition, the process of creating these holes on the west side of the river will also have
a devastating impas;t on the remaining plant and animal species and the existing wetlands.
The project indicates on page 3-2 that in 2010, Kendra Sikes, a vegetation ecologist spent
four weeks studying the proposed area of which the department has based much of their
information for the proposal to move forward. Yet, Charles Goldman, a retired professor
from the UC Davis Department of Environmental Science has studied the Washoe
Meadows area since the early 1970's. In a Sacramento Bee article (8-10-14), he states,
" ... the State Parks lacks detailed mapping and awareness of the park's underground
hydrology." He further states, "The extensive construction, excavation and expected
irrigation demands could destroy the fragile wetlands t11at enhance air and water quality."
We are golfers and are not opposed to the golf course. We are opposed to the changes at
the cost of losing forests, and impacting habitat and plant species. We would much rather
continue to use the course with a reduced footprint on the current location. As golfers, we
would no longer play the course or pay the proposed 5% fee increase and quite frankly do
not like the links style caused by the proposed change. Plus the proposed large restroom
facility on the west side of the river only further impacts the natural setting of Washoe
State Park.
The cost of this project must be enormous and we feel that the restoration of the river can
be done at a lesser cost if the holes were not moved to the west side of the river. It is
difficult to consider voting for additional funding for the state parks system (which we
have always done) when projects of this nature are being proposed by the state parks
system.
We are homeowners on Delaware St. and needless to say, we are opposed to the
Preferred Alternative 2B. In closing, we would like to reference the statement on the
California Department of Parks and Recreation website home page, "Together, state park
system lands protect and preserve an tmparalleled collection of culturally and
environmentally sensitive structures and habitats, threatened plant and animal
species, ancient Native American sites, historic structures and artifacts ... the best of
California's natural and cultural history."
We can only hope that the above statement and the Mission Statement are considered
when moving forward with this project.
Sincerely,
Nancy Veilleux
Charles Veilleux
California State Park & Recreation Commission
P.O. Box 942896
Sacramento, CA 94296-0001
Attn: Brie Grossman, Assistant to the Commission
Bri e.Grossman({u,parks.ca.go\
Comments regarding the "Upper Truckee River Restoration Project Proposal- Golf
Course P AAEA"
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Preferred Alternative and Additional
Environmental Analysis for the proposed Upper Truckee River Restoration and Golf Course
Reconfiguration at the Lake Valley Recreation Area and Washoe Meadows State Park.
Summary
• The project would result in a significant loss of protections for acres of dedicated state
parkland and would deforest many acres of park open space in order to build new golf
holes where none exist now. The fragmentation of the park land would impact hundreds
of adjacent acres of the park, dividing contiguous open space into chopped up segmented
habitat areas instead of the existing continuous ecosystem.
• Loss of dedicated state parkland and open space would negatively ongoing affect efforts
to restore wetlands and protect wildlife.
• The existing golf course can and should be redesigned and reconfigured within its current
SRA footprint to be compatible with river and wetlands restoration work.
• Golf revenue is not necessary to fund imp01iant state restoration projects. State
Parks revenue could be improved with a more innovative golf course design and with
additional revenue sources from other non-golf related recreational activities and events.
My family have been visiting old friends in South Lake Tahoe for more than fifty years. We have
spent many happy days exploring and hiking in Washoe Meadows State Park with our friends
and note that the park and the nearby private golf course have enjoyed peaceful coexistence for
decades.
1
We have scanned the state parks department staffs recommendations regarding the proposed
Upper Trnckee River Restoration Project, we believe that the core goals of that project can be
achieved without extending the golf course into the existing state park.
This important project can achieve a very critical goal-- restoring the Upper Trnckee River as
much as possible to increase floodplain areas, enhance water quality, raise groundwater
elevations, and improve riparian habitats. However, these comments emphasize that 1) how the
river is restored and 2) in what manner the golf course is reconstrncted will determine what
impacts, if any, are imposed on an equally key component-will have quite different impacts on
a third and equally important, yet unstated goal: preservation of the wild state park.
Haviog reviewed the documents, me and my family oppose proposed Alternative 2B and urge that feasible
new alternatives be developed and evaluated with the goal of redesigning the project to minimize impacts
on the Park.
Department staffs project conceptualization (reflected in the title) reflects a lack of
acknowledgement of all three important goals and dimensions valued by multiple communities.
This is a fundamental flaw that has rnn through all the documents and processes since initial
project inception almost two decades ago. Solutions that work for all sides can't be identified or
implemented until the goal of preservation/minimal impact on the state park is explicitly placed
on equal footing with the two project goals reflected in the project P AAEA title.
As currently conceptualized, this project has only two elements: river restoration and golf course
reconfiguration. These should be separated and an equally important third goal - preservation of
Washoe Meadows State Park-- should be added.
We support the goal of river restoration. A healthy, naturally functioning Upper Trnckee River would
be good for Washoe Meadows State Park, good for the golf course and, if done effectively, good for
the clarity of Lalce Tahoe.
River restoration may require minor changes to the layout of the golf course because it currently
encroaches into the river flood plain. The Lake Valley State Recreation Area (where the golf course is sited)
had an approved general plan, as well as a river management plan. All parties supported those plans as
written before they were illegally changed by parks department staff. They call for river restoration and
reduction in the footprint of the golf course. State Parks should implement those plans instead of trying to
find new ways to expand the golf course into dedicated California state parkland.
Alternative 2B is inconsistent with State Parks mission, regulations and California state
statutes and case law. Alternative 2B doesn't comport with the mission of State Parks, the settlement
agreement and the original statute leading to the acquisition, creation and dedication ofW ashoe Meadows·
State Park. the dedicated purpose of the Park, and regulations that preclude the permanent
commitment of the resources of a state park unit without a general plan.
Washoe Meadows State Park does not have a general plan. Under state regulations, it is impermissible
to permanently commit the resources of a state park unit without a general plan. Changing the park
boundaries through a land swap, building golf course holes and a bridge would illegally commit
resources of the Park.
A general plan for the park must be completed before any proposal to relocate golf holes or any other
use of the park. Because of this, proceeding with Alternative 2B will delay restoration or the river.
Alternative 3 can be pursued for the most expeditious river restoration and the best opportunity to
contribute to achievement of thresholds for which the TRPA is responsible. After a general planning
2
process for the park occurs, if the results embrace an expanded golf course, it might then proceed
legally.
As described in the EIR, Alternative 5,fitll river restoration with golf course removal and meadow
restoration, would contribute most toward meeting thresholds. From our perspective, the next
greatest contribution would emerge from full river restoration with golf area on the east side of
the river reconfigured to fit onto state recreational area parcels, not in the state park.
Please acknowledge the receipt of these comments and let us know how you propose to respond
to them.
Thank you,
Donald Wood
I am writing to express my oppc;>sition to the expansion by State Parks of Lake Tahoe golf course
across the Upper Truckee River into the wildlife corridor of Washoe Meadows State Park in the
Lake Tahoe Basin. .
This is utter foolishness. Why isn't there any concern about destroying 1600 trees and a
peaceful place for our abundant, diversified wildlife? Even if they go ahead with their plans,
they will have to restore the river. Why not leave the golf course where it is now while restoring
the river? Their expansion includes leaving the biggest source of erosion, the 61h hole, right
where it is. This must mean they are expecting to mitigate the problem without changing that
golf hole, so why can't they work to restore the river with the other golf holes in place?
This project proposed by State Parks will cost ~ colossal amount of money. It will take a number
of years.to complete. and more years forthe disturb.ad area to recover from heavy construction.
To what end? Will there really be less sediment being transported by the river into Lake Tahoe?
I am not convinced. For a lot less money and disturbance, they could work with the layout as it
is to reduce any notable erosion.
In the end, one golf course will be exchanged for another golf course. State Parks will not be
able to make any more money off of it than they do now. The altered course will not be as
pretty or as much fun to play, because they are taking out all but one river crossing.
Please do not allow State parks to go ahead with this plan. Do not allow them to change the
designation of.a.wild area into on~ that .cao be developed ..
Respectfully,
Liana Zambresky.
Dear Commissioners,
I am unable to attend the October 19 meeting in person so I thought I would write you to help support the current plan for the restoration project. I have been involved since the very beginning when the workshop was held in the clubhouse at the golf course. I use the golf course and the meadow area. I have a group of highschool friends that a meet up in South Lake Tahoe every year at my house and they all look forward to and really enjoy golfing at Lake Tahoe GC. We also ride mountain bikes and sometimes pass through the meadow area. I am in support of the realignment of the golf holes to away from the river and the improvements planned. I don’t think we would use the golf course if it was shortened. I think the river needs to be restored. The clarity of the lake is very important to so many people all around Tahoe. We have been through the whole process of determining what plan is best for all parties. I hope you will approve this plan and get them going to fix the river so we don’t have more springs when the river washes the sediment into the lake. When I had a seasons pass at the golf course there was a good relationship between the golfers and the people who lived nearby and I think that would continue on the other side of the river. The plan to make a way for the non-golfing public to get through the course and use the rest of the property is good for everyone who uses the park.
Thanks for you time.
Jim Morocco
Dear Friends at State Parks:
I live on the Upper Truckee River next to the Lake Tahoe Golf Course, and have been a
South Lake Tahoe resident for over 50 years. I want to express my opinion that moving
part of the golf course to the hitherto “unused” portion of the Washoe Meadows State
Park will be a loss of valuable open space that should be preserved as riparian habitat,
accessible to the entire community and not just golfers. The relocation of the golf
course, west of the Upper Truckee River will severely impact the existing wildlife
corridor. The golf course has had a negative impact on the watershed since it was
constructed in the 1960’s. Efforts to control the river channel to protect the golf course
have been a disaster. Erosion of the river banks and stream bed have allowed vast
amounts of sediment to reach Lake Tahoe damaging its water quality.
If State Parks is intent on preserving Lake Tahoe, it should support Alternative 5 in the
2010 EIS which will restore the river ecosystem and decommission the golf course.
Preserving the river ecosystem means the discontinued use of pesticide, rodenticides,
and herbicides currently used on the course and which drain into the river effecting the
purity of Lake Tahoe and private well-water. Depletion of ground and river water to
sprinkler the lawn are harmful agricultural practices; plant and specie monoculture harm
fish and wildlife. Building (transferring) a part of the golf course would be destroying
the current open space will result in a net loss, achieving nothing for the environment
or preservation of the river and lake waters. It will in fact hinder and prevent a
comprehensive plan to restore the watershed. The environmental impact of developing
the course on the other side of the river will be substantial; increased erosion and
destruction of natural riparian habitat will occur, to name just two detrimental effects.
Fire danger around Washoe meadow is at dangerous levels because of excess fuel,
ladder fuel and over grown forest surrounding the golf course. There is an increased
likely hood of an accidental fire caused by human activity when smoking, drinking, pot
smoking, and battery operated cart are present. Little has been done in the SRA to
alleviate the fire danger on the golf course. Thickets of brush and deadfall are within
feet of playing surfaces. Under the wrong conditions a wildfire started could impact
hundreds of residential structures (homes). We all remember the Angora Fire.
Another detrimental effect of development on open space will be for wildlife. Animal
migration and travel patterns will be disrupted and force animals into smaller and
smaller passages to wild space in the Twin Peaks area among others. This will result in
more human/animal dangerous encounters. Our animal population is under stress and
many animals are orphaned, injured and killed on our roads. Restricting animal
movement will exacerbate the problem.
The plan to move the golf course represents a loss of open and natural space. If
preservation of the clarity of Lake Tahoe is the goal (which it should be), then building
another piece of the golf course is not the way to achieve that goal. It is a loss for the
environment and the community. Please consider total restoration of the Upper Truckee
and Angora Creeks riparian ecosystem and the total decommissioning of the Lake
Tahoe Golf Course so that the area may be preserved in its natural state and so that
everyone wins as well as our beautiful Lake, the river environment and habitat.
It is high time our state and local government agencies reverse the damage done to the
Upper Truckee watershed by putting the environment first.
The State Parks should have the primary goal to protect our environment, while
recreation opportunities are important they should be second to the protection of our
natural spaces. Washoe Meadows State Park Golf Course is not accessible to the
majority unless one is wealthy enough to play golf there. Currently the SRA serves
golfers and excludes all others. It is very expensive. Many locals and tourists can not
afford to golf or would chose to, and prefer having more low cost recreation options.The
SRA should expand use to include skiing, hiking, biking, fishing and birding. Handicap
access should be provided to expand participation. Golf’s popularity is decreasing.
Taxpayers should not be required to support an elitist sport that excludes the majority
catering to the wealthy and well-healed. Free or low cost recreation opportunities are in
short supply in the Tahoe Basin. I want to see the park open to all uses if the uses do
not hurt the environment. Golf courses are monocultures using pesticides, fertilizers and
management techniques that are harmful to the environment. Irrigation using ground
water and from the river have a negative impact on water quality is. The golf course
was a big mistake when built. Let roll back some of the damage done to our watershed
by removing the golf course and restoring the historical river meanders and flood plain.
Please don’t develop a golf course in the State Park area behind Amackers Ranch and
west of the river, it’s a bad idea. Thank you.
Thomas Yant
We are writing to express our disapproval of the proposed take over of Washoe Meadows State Park area for a links style golf course. The plan to move golf holes into the meadow area is ill-conceived, disrupting existing use of trails for equestrians, hikers, bikers, and wildlife. We do not believe the claims that rerouting the Truckee River into a flood pain serves the stated purpose of reducing sediment flow into the lake. The process alone to “restore” the meandering of the riverbed will dump Increased sediment into the lake in the short term without guarantee of future benefit.
Therefore, we support no rerouting of the riverbed and no moving of the golf course to the other side of the river in the Washoe Meadows State Park.
Sincerely,
Jan and Chris Lynds
Dear California State Park Rec Commission Members,
RE: Support of the Upper Truckee River Restoration Project Alternative 2B
I moved to South Lake Tahoe after graduating from Oklahoma State University following my college friends that were recruited by Harrahs Club in 1973. My first job was in the rental shop at Heavenly Valley, then as a waiter at The Top of the Tram that summer.
My passions back then as a 22 year old were snow skiing, golf, catamaran sailing, softball, and hiking. Now at 67, I’m doing the same . . . boating with a motor, skiing on fat skies, playing golf with a pull cart which is a hike of about six miles.
After the implementation of the Meyers Community Plan in 1992 which I was a team member, I developed Meyers Station which currently has Cal Fire, Lake Valley Fire, a Mexican restaurant, a coffee shop, and Century 21 as tenants.
Tahoe Golf down the street is a vital piece of our Meyers community in terms of many hundreds of happy local golfers, tourists that come to our town to play, and raising our kids to learn about a game where you call rules infractions on yourself. I told my two sons when they were in the Jr golf program at Tahoe Golf to watch the behavior of golfers in their foursome. Players that cheat on the rules in golf, often cheat in life. Golfers that are polite, follow the rules of golf, and know how to control their temper are the people that you want to have as friends, partners in business and partners in life. My father passed this unwritten law down to me when I caddied for him as a 12 year old in Tulsa.
It upsets me when I see a handful of angry residents who attend our public meetings on the future plans on the holes that should be relocated. Maybe they don’t really know the game of golf and it’s unique life benefits of the game. There are so many quiet happy locals that love the golf course that don’t attend the meetings because they really don’t enjoy the contentious atmosphere of the few loud angry retired neighbors.
I am also writing for them. . . locals that enjoy the great outdoors around the golf course vicinity riding their bikes, running on the bike trails and along the river, and drinking coffee and beer at Meyers Station that don’t attend the meetings.
I feel that alternative 2B will be the best direction for the high level of the game and good for our Tahoe Paradise/Meyers golfing community.
All the best,
Carl Fair
To: all State Park Commissioners and Commissioner Chairs
Most Respectfully,
Please do not allow the reallocation of Washoe State Park land in South Lake Tahoe and destruction of thousands of Washoe State Park trees and raw forest land destroyed to extend a golf course that serves only one type of public person - a golfer. Right now this Washoe State Park land is enjoyed by multiple users - hikers, strollers, bikers, swimmers, horseback riders, naturalists, bird watchers, fishermen, dog walkers, etc..
--Washoe State Park is a quiet and peaceful State Park which will be ruined if this golf course extension is allowed.
—Robs access to the Truckee River by other Tahoe State Park users.
--It is foolish to believe this is the best thing for Washoe State Park and the Truckee River. Please do not be manipulated by the attempeted ‘spin’ that is being placed on this plan to persuade you to agree with it.
--Reallocating this Washoe State Park land also sets a terrible precedent and could make it easier for other California state Parks to be destroyed.
—Millions of State Park funds would be wasted.
I am amazed that this plan would even be logically and financially considered
Thank you for all consideration to HALT this destructive plan to reallocate land and destroy Washoe State Park land and in doing so would set a bad precedent for future Park land destruction and removal while wasting State Park funds.
Sincerely,
Kristen T. Lincoln
Dear Commissioner's, I do not support the River Restoration Project. The River is a dynamic force and erosion is a natural result. I have seen that River's Journey for over 40 years as I play golf there every season with the Men's club. With some Attention to erosion curve's in the Rivers Course, the River itself, the Golf Course and Lake Tahoe will be healthy and fine without Major and Severe alterations needed.
Sincerely, John
Hello State Parks!
In the past, I have been supportive of full river restoration with a full 18-hole golf course as I saw that was a win-win-win for Tahoe restoration, State Parks, and recreation. I even wrote an opinion piece in the Mountain News in support.
Now, I am just very frustrated. This process has taken so long and comments from abutters have not been adequately addressed. That is obvious to me with the recent proposal by State Parks.
I have reviewed every comment, and it is apparent to me that we can do better with the golf course. I suggest giving the abutters some of what they want, and that is a reduced sized golf course that could still be 18-holes, but with a smaller footprint than proposed.
For me: Goal #1 is full restoration. Goal #2 is State Parks budget and recreation. Disappointed to see needed restoration sit on the shelf for so long and have this proposal be the preferred option at this point.
Thank you for your hard work on this project and consideration of these comments,
Ben
Dear Commissioners,
The California Alpine Club (CAC) endorses revised Alternative 2B for the Upper Truckee River Restoration and Golf Course Reconfiguration Project.
CAC has a member lodge on nearby Echo Summit and is very familiar with the area. CAC appreciates the need for more and better hiker access to Washoe Meadows State Park, decreasing erosion on this stretch of the Upper Truckee River and improving the floodplain function to restore riparian habitat. CAC believes revised Alternative 2B to be the best plan to achieve these goals.
CAC has been following and commenting on this proposal over the last several years. CAC supports Alt 2B as the best alternative.
Sincerely ,
Ann Meneguzzi, Vice President
California Alpine Club (CAC)
Thank you for accepting my comments in support of the Upper Truckee River Restoration and Golf Course Reconfiguration Project.
My name is Andy Chapman and I have lived in the South Lake Tahoe area for over 25 years. We have raised our three children (now ages 22, 19 and 16) here on the south shore and have ingrained in them a sense of pride in their home town that they will surely take with them as the venture out in the world. One of those values is the respect for nature and the access to nature that we all enjoy in the Lake Tahoe Basin. As I sit back and think about the proposed changes to the Upper Truckee River through the Upper Truckee River Restoration Project, I firmly believe that Alternative 2B will bring about the best results for the things I care about: our local community, economy, environment, nature and access. As far as the benefits of the proposed Alternative 2B to the community, here are some of the reasons I see that it will be best for our community:
--keeps jobs: Many people depend on the golf course to make their living. I read that over 75 jobs come out of the golf course. If we lose the golf course, it would be very challenging for these people to find jobs in this economy.
--keeps other State Parks in the basin open. My family and I enjoy going to Bliss and Emerald Bay State parks with our friends and the operations of this facility assist in that access.
--is an affordable option for golfers in the area who would like to play a champion level 18-hole course (vs. paying high fees at Edgewood or a non-regulation shorter course)
--the golf course supports our local fundraising efforts for non-profits and the South Tahoe High School golf team. In addition, our children along with countless other student-athletes, have had the unique opportunity to utilize the recreational aspects of the Lake Tahoe Golf Course while representing our region as our young ambassadors.
-- it allows for more recreational access (not to just a small group of nearby neighbors) and with golf moved away from the river, we can enjoy fishing, kayaking, and hiking along the river with no golf balls zinging around
--more than a mile of access would increase to the river and the recreational connectivity to the broader area would be a great improvement (to include ADA access, new bridges, and restrooms)
Here is why I think Alternative 2B is the best option for our local economy and environment:
--it maximizes the restoration benefits to the river while maintaining the economic engine of the area—the golf course. This is a Win-Win for our town.
--it's a better long-term solution to the river erosion issue than other alternatives, and will have a positive dramatic impact on lowering the run-off of sediment getting into Lake Tahoe
--I also like 2B because it adds a buffer between the river and the golf course.
--it actually expands the Washoe Meadows State Park while decreasing the golf turf by 15%
--ensures we keep the Audubon award winning golf course that is a leading example of how golf courses intertwine positively with the environment
To me, the obvious alternative is number 2B. I hope you will consider my support for this project.
Thank you,
Andy Chapman
Attention Lisa Mangat
A meeting about Washoe State Park as far from the park as you can get and still be in California. At 9:30am! Clearly you do not want those who use the park to attend!
It is clear that the support for this whole project revolves around money not lake clarity. There is another proposal, Alternative 4, that also protects lake clarity and allows the golf course to exist without encroaching on the natural area of the park. Parks are for people, not profit! This area was created to protect the natural environment including one of the few remaining fens! Let’s continue to respect the land and those of us who utilize it, rather than promote a moneymaking alternative that few will reap the benefits of.
League to Save Lake Tahoe, you should be ashamed to support this proposal!
Please protect our park by defeating ALT2B.
I am a 40 year resident of South Lake Tahoe, a member of Tahoe Keepers and a user of Washoe State Park. I think it is telling that yet another meeting to decide to destroy the park for profit is being held as far from the park as possible and still be in California. Not only is it removed from the locale, but it is early in the day and with road work will require a huge effort to attend, only to observe groups supposedly supporting the environment support profit.
I support an alternative that will allow for restoration of the river while preserving the natural park environs. I understand there is a new proposal that will accomplish this and also renovate the golf course.
I encourage the state park commission to adopt this proposal.