IN A WORLD AS TECHNOLOGICALLY progressive as our own, it has become increasingly difficult to incorporate nature, in its most raw and pure form, into our daily lives. Sure, we interact with natural products such as the lumber that provides us with shelter or the wealth of vegetation that the Central Valley is prized and celebrated for, but how often do we find ourselves magically lost amongst a pure and natural world, unharmed by the hands of man?
My fondest memories as a child consist of long and grueling car rides with my family to locations of natural splendor where I could be sure that, at least for one day, my imaginative faculties could take the reign of my psyche and I could climb rocks, trees, hike and explore just as children had done hundreds of years before me.
As loyal Californians, our family would visit many of the truly special state parks and beaches that this great state has to offer. We would fish at Malibu Creek, “catch wavesâ€Â at Santa Monica beach, view a truly amazing celebration of natural color and growth at the Antelope Valley California Poppy Reserve, or simply explore in the Verdugo Mountains.
Visiting these parks, among many others we saw, was a recipe for a well-enriched child upbringing.
Recently, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger released his proposal for the state’s new fiscal budget. In efforts to solve California’s serious budget problems, he has proposed the closing of 48 state parks and the reduction of lifeguard staffing at 16 state beaches. While devastated to hear of such a harmful cutback for Californians, I was interested to learn more about how this preposterous budgetary measure could affect the state’s population. In search for an expert opinion, I turned to Huell Howser, host of a variety of educational travel shows including “California’s Gold.â€Â
Howser, who happens to be just as nice in person as he is on his show, was kind enough to grant me a telephone interview to discuss the governor̢۪s park closure proposal.
Initially, I was interested to learn of Howser̢۪s opinion of the California state park system. He explained:
“The parks are one of the few things in California that are available to everyone. You don’t have to be rich or privileged to visit a state park. With growing urbanization, crowded freeways, and ongoing development, parks give Californians somewhere to get away from it all.â€Â
As a child, I can say that I took advantage of this. In one̢۪s developmental years, nature is not temporary. It will always be there to fulfill your recreational needs. In this sense, state parks become increasingly more valuable with life experience while the individual witnesses dirt roads transforming into concrete slabs and concrete slabs being utilized as a foundation for yet another Starbucks. With these rapid transformations in mind, one ponders the role that preserved natural state parks play in our society. Can we afford to close down that which reminds us of what this world was like before we dumped cement on top of it?
In concurrence, Huell and I began discussing the state budget to which he explained:
“We need a long term, better way to finance state parks so they are not at the mercy of the fiscal budget … parks contribute to the economy. To keep parks open, there first must be a commitment to keeping parks open.â€Â
Howser’s opinion regarding this budget proposal was insightful. California state parks will always be considered for closure if we “limp inâ€Â to keeping them open every year. Without a strong financial foundation and real intent, the parks will always be waiting in line for the chopping block at the years end.
Many speculate that the governor proposes to close parks because he wishes to avoid making cut-backs in education. If this is indeed the case, than his proposal will do just that. Our California state parks system is our most interactive educational tool. Many youths and adults alike can learn a great deal about California rich history, culture, and the environment as I had the opportunity to do myself with my family. When more of the population is educated about our state history and the environment, our communities that stretch to all borders, becomes smaller and more intimate. In this way, the parks system brings cohesiveness and solidarity to California, characteristics that would be very beneficial.
While what was once natural might always inevitably transform into “consumer free-for-alls,â€Â I know that I will always have the memories of fresh air, running streams, magnificent rock structures and deep, healthy forests to find simplicity and tranquility. My only hope is that our future provides the same opportunities to youth and adults all throughout California.
In the words of Howser, “the state parks are the prime jewels of California.â€Â That being said, show your support of our parks system by visiting the many park locations here in the beautiful central valley.
If you feel strongly against Governor Schwarzenegger̢۪s budget proposal to close down 48 of our California state parks, then feel free to visit the California Park & Recreation Society Web site. You will find more information regarding this proposal as well as some recommendations of how you might go about fighting it.
Tim • Feb 8, 2008 at 5:09 pm
I think that this being an editorial allows for space in just bringing up the passion that is missed and dearly needed in todays society. I myself wonder what would be the answer to this, but usually answers are not so easy to come up with. One has to take into account, such as cost, who is responsible for bringing a solution, and so on. It will be interesting to see how this pans out, because I do not believe that we will close our national parks, as they are a treasure. I do wonder if we will bring in privateers to cover cost, by commercializing and selling the names of these places, which would in and of itself ruin a sense of the majesty, but would be a compromise that would protect the land. I’m not saying I’m in favor of this, but we will have to see who leads the charge, and can actually do something about saving our parks.
Tim • Feb 9, 2008 at 12:09 am
I think that this being an editorial allows for space in just bringing up the passion that is missed and dearly needed in todays society. I myself wonder what would be the answer to this, but usually answers are not so easy to come up with. One has to take into account, such as cost, who is responsible for bringing a solution, and so on. It will be interesting to see how this pans out, because I do not believe that we will close our national parks, as they are a treasure. I do wonder if we will bring in privateers to cover cost, by commercializing and selling the names of these places, which would in and of itself ruin a sense of the majesty, but would be a compromise that would protect the land. I’m not saying I’m in favor of this, but we will have to see who leads the charge, and can actually do something about saving our parks.
gm • Feb 8, 2008 at 9:33 am
I certainly agree with you about closing the State Parks. It would be tragic if we were to lose so many of these special places. but what is missing is some concrete proposal for protecting them. Howser suggests that we need a long term better way to finance the park system like….. what? It sounds hard to argue with but you didn’t flesh out what we are talking about. Is it some type of public/private foundation that operates outside of government? How much money are we talking about? It doesn’t say in your article (The answer is 9 million). I respect and share your passion for the parks but we as citizens need to start making choices about what the government should provide for. If the parks are important and worth keeping, and I believe they are, then instead of simply saying it is unfair to close them, we need to say that we are wiling to accept less elsewhere.
gm • Feb 8, 2008 at 4:33 pm
I certainly agree with you about closing the State Parks. It would be tragic if we were to lose so many of these special places. but what is missing is some concrete proposal for protecting them. Howser suggests that we need a long term better way to finance the park system like….. what? It sounds hard to argue with but you didn’t flesh out what we are talking about. Is it some type of public/private foundation that operates outside of government? How much money are we talking about? It doesn’t say in your article (The answer is 9 million). I respect and share your passion for the parks but we as citizens need to start making choices about what the government should provide for. If the parks are important and worth keeping, and I believe they are, then instead of simply saying it is unfair to close them, we need to say that we are wiling to accept less elsewhere.