ECOLOGIAL RESTORATION
ER
AT CEDAR LAKE POINT BEACH (AND BEYOND)
This whole process of being in the woods clearing Buckthorn for the past few years to now being actively engaged with trying to learn and do my best to offer constructive feedback to the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Cedar-Isles Plan really has taken me down rabbit holes. There's a lot of conflict of thoughts, perspectives, and actions. Are we going to plan parks that are egocentric, built for people who see natural areas as something utilitarian, something we dominate and use? Or do we plan with an ecocentric mindset, where we see ourselves as a member of nature where we're taking care of one another? More and more research is getting published that seems to state the what we've long believed, that humans' time in and with nature is healthy for us. But there still seems to be misunderstanding of what being in and with nature really is. An issue at debate in the Cedar-Isles Plan illustrates this foggy mindset. On page 132, planners drew a dotted line through East Cedar Woods. This is right through where in 1997, the Park Board's Plan envisioned a natural area in 20 years. The Year 1997 + 20 Years = Year 2017's Vision And, the 1997 Plan illustrated how a spiral of trees were being planted and maintained, mostly by volunteers of the Cedar Lake Park Association, where it was said, "Our vision for Cedar Lake Park is to restore the lands and waters and create a new Community with Nature through which we can transform ourselves, our city, and our society. Our Goal for Cedar Lake Park is to bring people and nature together in harmonious community... a goal symbolized by the spiral. " Wait. I think I just went down a rabbit hole. That one was about remembering history. So in addition to historical plans for the area that are not being honored in the present plan, what I meant to discuss was, how do we differentiate the different values of natural areas? Much of what I've thought about in trying to protect nature has been either to protect nature for its ecological-centered philosophy. For me, an ecological versus egological mindset sets very well for me. But even for those who believe that man is above nature, there's a choice of how we use natural areas. Some refer to preference a for "silent sports". But where is the line between "play" and "recreation" (aka: re-creation)? So much of today's recreation lacks play, and is instead structured and focused, even when experienced in natural areas. It would be hard to demonstrate that time spent in structured sports fully taps the benefits natural areas actually offers. This week, I happened upon an article, The Difference Between 'Hard and 'Soft' Fascination, and Why It Matters by Markham Heid that brought perspective and clarification to this mind-buster. It offers a sound rationale of why we should continue to protect the natural area in the East Cedar Woods and an argument to prohibit biking in the area including a soft-surface two-way bike path that rips through the area's heart. The article explains "one type depletes your attention (and maybe your health), while the other restores it." There is a literal "cost" to paying attention. Most of our waking over-stimulated moments of the day are bombarded with demands for us to pay attention. Even our over-programmed sports and recreations might be an escape from the day, but they leave little for the brain to randomly roam and daydream. Spending too much time paying attention without time for restorations has costs; emotional stress, depression, and damage to our health. Even when we give our brains a short break, we are helping to restore ourselves. “Simple elements in nature, such as wind blowing through leaves or ripples of water traveling across a pond, are classic examples of soft fascination. “These leave you with plenty of space for reflection.” But why not protect natural areas like East Cedar Woods, not just for the trees, birds, critters and whole ecosystem, but also for ourselves, as a place to mindlessly meander through the woods, regenerating our minds, hearts and souls in this wonderful natural area that's been planned and continued to be restored for the past many many years.
1 Comment
I was raised to not complain. "Be thankful for what you've got. There are people starving in Africa." was the common response I sternly received as a kid if I questioned anything that seemed wrong. It left me without a voice to express myself for a long time. I found myself focused on trying to define problems in an objective way. My graduate degree in Social Work specialized in research. As such, I managed plenty of "Needs Assessment" projects in those early days. But my desire to find ways to activate what was quantified was unfulfilled, so I also included planning as a specialty area in the MSW. But social work research and planning seemed to go only so far, so I added a graduate degree in City and Regional Planning, where my college's program was much heavy on economics, and my work for years were in market studies for neighborhoods, cities, regions, and states. But if I could only count the number of times that the "objective" market studies I helped author recommended one direction, only to followed up in the political interests to go another direction. So I've tuned to storytelling. So if a picture tells a thousand words, and if I can edit down what I write to let some photo do much of the heavy lifting. All of these photos were created yesterday on a short walk around part of Cedar Lake. They disparingly reflect a state of disrepair, and dangerous neglect. An un-emptied trash can full of dog waste; the public is doing their part to pick up after themselves, but the Park Board is not. A severely decayed landscaped stairway with rotten timers and exposed nails. Rotted fence posts without the original chain fencing that was put there I believe to keep cars that slide off the road downtime steep bank from going into the lake. None of these maintenance or need of repair items or issues were mentioned in the MPRB draft of the Cedar-Isles Plan. When the public raised these concerns, they were told that's not a part of planning. That's another department. Another budget. Another management silo. This morning before sunrise, I created this image. Darned iPhones add light where there barely is any. What it doesn't show are any streetlights. Everywhere else along Cedar Lake Parkway has streetlights working. There are light posts in this area, but for some reason, the lights have not been working, for several weeks now. Nothing to see here. The Cedar-Isles Plan is written to look at shiny new things before it takes care of what we've got. What have we got? We've got nature. But the voice of nature is fainter and its breadth shallower as we neglect the threat of Buckthorn and invasive species that are literally choking the life out of trees, plants, wildlife, and biodiversity. And we've got stuff that needs to be repaired, replaced, and cared for. The public repeated many times (sometimes "loudly" as the park plan states) in public feedback sessions and mechanisms that the two priorities of the plan should be "take care of the environment, and take care of what we've got." But did the planners listen? Or do they believe they know better?
In response to sending out the last blog post, I received an email from a community member who said, "I gave the natural areas and water quality as my highest priority topic, multiple times and in person one time for the Cedar-Isles Plan. Over the year when I'd get updates it seemed like the process would get hijacked by special interest (biking mainly) and new plans would be presented with things that had not been previously presented. . . . Unfortunately I got worn out and felt like even when I tried giving feedback it was not given the same weight as other if it didn't match what the planners wanted to hear." I don't want to or like trash talking. "No bitch without a pitch" was a saying I learned at some point in my life. And I genuinely believe most people are good and well intended. But it seems important to take note that the planning process that resulted in this plan possesses implicit biases:
Lacking a strategic approach or framework onto which planners could objectively hang all of the needs, wants, and desires of the public, bias carried forward design solutions that were within the frame of planners' comfort; what they have learned and performed in the past. My understanding is that the planners on staff have limited experience, knowledge and perhaps interest in the natural environment. I learned that after the project started and issues of the natural environment were repeatedly raised, that the Park Board actually needed to add a couple hundred thousand dollars to the planning process to bring in an ecologically qualified consultant. And the planning process, by design, is designed to chase project funding dollars. I have also heard feedback about the idea to establish a hierarchy of needs and priorities to not be a part of past plans. That new idea might be uncomfortable. But let's be clear. Nature is not being adequately represented in the plan, no matter how many are trying to voice this urgent need. And we're just going to end up with a plan that chases special interests and funding. Please don't pass up this last chance to make it known your wishes. Complete the MPRB's draft Cedar Isles Plan survey, and if you're up to it, contact your Park Board Commissioner. For me, I'm providing my feedback in general and specific to details, and as productively and positively as possible. No trash talk there. "You attract more flies with honey and with vinegar." Thanks to MPRB Natural Resources staff, we got to get some of the brush and root masses burned almost two weeks ago. I tried the best I could to advocate for a public event so we could enjoy seeing the waste transform from Buck to Dust, but my forestry friends tamped down that flame and said something reasonable like, let's just keep this chill until after we're done. Safer. I agreed, but must admit as witnessing it, I was singing to myself, "Burn baby burn/Buckthorn inferno/ Burn baby burn." The main purpose of burning was to address the volume of cuttings that the natural resources staff acknowledged was well well beyond what the area needed in terms of creating a supportive protective habitat for critters. But more importantly, it was really the only way we could get rid of root masses. Root masses are more than root balls when they are attached to Buckthorn tree trunks that measure more than 2 - 3" in diameter. We burned some. There's still much more hidden behind fencing made of Buckthorn limbs. sThe brush pile took little effort to light, having some of the trimmings being more than a couple year since originally cut from trees measuring 20 to 30 feet tall. It's hard for me to hear planners refer to thick Buckthorn groves as "understory". At some point after they kill the native trees, the "under-story" becomes the "over-story." And eventually, it's become "the-story" when it decimates the habitat and blocks the growth of other plants, and wildlife habitats. After the burn, all that remained was a pile of dust, ashes mixed in with the snow. It's like those nasties never existed. But one thing I've learned. Humans brought Buckthorn to our parks. Humans must remove it. Our natural resource staff is becoming resourceful to help volunteers to restore natural areas. One of the staff members was encouraging, saying he had some new seeding monies set aside for this area for the coming season. Awesome. To this point, all the new seedings and plantings has been from private money raised by the Cedar Lake Park Association. In my involvement reviewing the Cedar-Isles Plan, its been truly upsetting to read any sense of urgency expressed by planners to address our most immediate and urgent needs to restore natural areas. I shared this concern with one of the natural resources field staff members as we watched the fire burn. He enthusiastically reminded me that his was a new position. I replied, "Great! But we need something like 20 more of you!" This emerges reaches far far beyond this little peninsula. With only a few exceptions, Buckthorn can be found in virtually every other wooded parkland in Minneapolis, and beyond. While this silent crisis expands, the Cedar-Isles Plan continues to ring a Park Board passive tone when referencing natural areas management. They act like volunteers are going to take care of it.
No! Before designing and building new things, acknowledge the existing threat. Ring the alarm. If we continue to ignore the predatory cancerous affect of Buckthorn, our native species and ecological habitats will soon become nothing but dust. Trees are falling in our park forest. Are we around to hear it? The final draft of the Cedar-Isles Plan is now in the last stage of public feedback. Chapter 3 is 28 pages long, describing the nearly three-year process of community engagement. I attended several of the public meetings and served on the Citizen's Advisory Committee's Land Management Subcomittee where we authored and submitted the Natural Resources content in section 5.3 Project-wide Guidance (pages 113-119 in the draft Plan). This guidance was submitted in tandem with Water Quality Subcommittee content (pages 108-112). Along with this content, the public repeatedly voiced concerns about the declining health of our natural environments, diminishing biodiversity, suffering and loss of native trees and wildlife, and the decimation caused by too many years of park board neglect and mismanagement. It was like the park board forgot about its central mission, to protect the natural resources. When the last draft of the Cedar-Isles was published for final public comment, I scoured the more than 200 pages of the report to find where the Plan addressed what was repeated stated as priorities. First, protect the natural environment which includes both water quality and natural land areas, and second, fix what we've got before adding more developments. I was disappointed. Not only did the plan fail to clearly establish priorities based on a strategy as a part of its guidance, it didn't even acknowledge and describe problems and urgent threats. It lays out on a flat plane, a virtual anthology of capital improvement wishes, and then some more that at least I never saw in previous plans for public review. I realize I'm guilty of possessing a relatively zeroed in focus on what seems like an obvious need to set priorities based on the past years working to remove Buckthorn from Cedar Lake Point Beach. The problem and the threat is staring us in the face. The falling trees are talking to us. Will we listen? The first step is to acknowledge the problem. There is little in this Plan that says it is hearing the voices who are saying we have a critical problem. The draft Plan does little to call out the critical and urgent issue that invasive species are destroying our natural areas. It strays away from dangerous language, so far as to label unmanaged, neglected areas as "wildness." Labeling unkept, unmanaged, and areas that are being lost to the infestation of Buckthorn and other invasives as "wildness" sounds like a message spin. To those insensitive or unaware of the threat, it's like referring to the fox in the hen house as "cute". As written in the final draft of the Cedar-Isles Plan, those priorities are not clearly stated in the vision section, and they are vaguely decipherable in the Implementation section. Lacking a sense of alarm that natural areas are suffering and dying, nor a strategic framework that explicitly positions natural areas as the foundation of our park system, projects that follow in implementation will be scheduled not based on priority of need, but more likely determined by funding availability and/or political will. The second step is for the Park Board to assume its role to protect nature For too long, the Park Board has been passive in addressing the needs of nature. In this Plan, the impact of volunteers is noted and appreciated. But in some cases, the Plan suggests areas are being cared for by volunteers, when in reality they are not. The problem is too big. It is expanding too fast. We are loosing the battle. The Park Board needs to both assume a stronger leadership role and dedication of resources and help support a volunteers corps that is already doing a lot. Join the voice that speaks for nature: Endorse the Proposed Amendment Lacking a resounding voice that speaks of these issues in the draft of the Cedar-Isles Plan, a small group of volunteers, mostly those who are doing the work of restoring natural areas throughout the city, have been working fast and furiously to draft a proposed amendment to the planning document. We are asking for you to consider supporting this amendment during this short period that closes March 10th, 2023. It reads as follows: Proposed Amendment to Chapter 5, Project Guidance, section 5.3, to be added after page 138 in the draft Plan Prioritization Guidance Previous pages in this section contain guidance for understanding and implementing various types of potential enhancements to the project area, including water quality, natural resources, access and circulation, accessibility, safety, interpretation, historical and cultural resources, and programming and amenities. Each of these various aspects of park management can contribute to a richer and more inclusive and satisfying experience for diverse park visitors. This section explains how these potentially competing choices and recommendations will be prioritized to ensure success in achieving the Plan’s vision based on community input and in alignment with the Park Board’s central mission to permanently preserve, protect, maintain, improve, and enhance our natural resources for current and future generations of people, plants and wildlife. Guidance for prioritizing recommendations is essential to a realistic and workable plan. Effective plans offer a strategic analysis and framework in which existing and future needs, wants and desires can be evaluated and addressed. Without an explicit hierarchy of needs and priorities, implementation options will mistakenly appear as of equal value and importance, resulting in arbitrary decisions about what’s most important, based on temporal and/or political considerations such as availability of funding and or the most visible or well-connected advocates. A strategic approach prioritizes recommendations in order to best achieve the overall vision and goals. Climate Change Looms Scientific research and direct observation and experience show that climate change and declining biodiversity are dramatically affecting and threatening the health and survival of our parks, our city, and life on our planet. Our “Parks for All” Comprehensive Plan acknowledges that the global climate crisis looms over everything: “Climate change is a defining challenge for both current and future generations. …The Minneapolis Park System will have to deal with a myriad of impacts ranging from public health to invasive species as greenhouse gases continue to build in our atmosphere. This severity of climate change in both depth and breadth of impacts will touch every person in Minneapolis and every aspect of MPRB operations, from recreation offerings to basic infrastructure maintenance.” Our Ecological Systems Plan also recognizes the ecological changes happening as a result of intensifying global climate change. “In view of these changes, the work that MPRB does through planning and implementation to protect water, air, land, and life in the parks will help to sustain park resources for generations to come.” Our Natural Areas Plan advises us to “bring an ecosystem perspective into all land and water management” that will replicate the ecological structures and processes that enable ecosystems to adapt to changing conditions. Natural Resources Sustain Our Park System Healthy natural resources sustain ecosystems that make possible the array of physical, social, emotional and spiritual benefits visitors enjoy and expect, including all forms of recreation in these parks. Toward fulfillment of our mission and plans, and in the context of the deepening crises of climate change and declining biodiversity, the Cedar-Isles Plan will prioritize park improvements based on the most urgent and universal imperative: to protect our natural resources in order to sustain ecological function and biodiversity. Repeatedly and throughout this planning process, in forums and feedback, the public expressed the need to protect our natural resources first and foremost, including the lakes and the land. The Community Advisory Committee unanimously concluded that the most important topic to address in this Plan is water quality. The Plan’s vision, established by consensus after extensive community engagement and discussion, confirms the necessity to prioritize the ecosystem: “Lake of the Isles and Cedar Lake, as part of the Minneapolis Chain of Lakes Regional Park, contribute to a vital, urban natural ecosystem with unique experiences that protect, connect, and sustain people, wildlife, and natural resources, while maintaining the health of the lakes.” Prioritizing water quality and a healthy natural ecosystem aligns with the guidance described in this plan’s Section 2.2 Indigenous Legacy, that historical and cultural landscapes are to shape philosophical and incremental design concepts (page 17): “In the beginning, the water—Mni—was pure, part of the land, and therefore part of the people. It was the first medicine given to our people because water keeps everything alive. Water that comes from within the earth is pure and as such is considered wakan or sacred.” Prioritizing Natural Resources as the Foundation The Cedar-Isles Plan’s top priority is to protect the health and sustainability of natural resources in the project area (lakes, shorelines and surrounding lands, and wildlife) for current and future generations. Establishing this priority does not change the recommendations in Chapter 5, but rather provides a framework in which to evaluate and prioritize those recommendations in order to best achieve the overall vision and goals consistent with the Park Board’s mission. Consistent with the Park Board’s mission and with community engagement and CAC decisions during this planning process, we will evaluate and implement recommendations in this plan based on this priority.
What you can do: Please complete the survey at this link now. 1) For question 1: Choose “Project Area as a Whole." 2) For question 2: Choose “Multiple or Other Topics.” 3) For question 3: Enter a comment urging an amendment to the draft Plan to prioritize the health of our natural resources first and foremost. Some key talking points you can make (preferably in your own words):
4) For question 4: Enter additional comments that you want to make. For example, please comment that the proposed bike path in the Cedar Woods should be removed from the plan. For numerous reasons, the best use of this woods is for nature-based recreation undisturbed by active sports such as mountain biking:
Also, see page 10 in Hill & Lake Press article about this.
How many times have we heard in a song, read in a book, or seen in a photo, the idea that wintertime is a time of quiet, rest, or solitude? There's a sense that wintertime is when we're supposed to hunker down, become less mobile, conserve ourselves for survival. But I've learned that sowing seeds in the winter doesn't mean that they are hibernating like a grizzly bear whose heart beat drops to about 8 to 10 beats per minute. Seeds in the winter are actually active, preparing themselves for spring germination.
It's like that with ecological restoration too. There are things happening during these coldest days and nights of winter that will bear fruits at harvest time. There are two areas of work being done now that will affect Cedar Lake Park and beyond. Outside, we've got scheduled a licensed, official burn of Buckthorn brush in the ready. Working with the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board (MPRB) Natural Resources team, we've coordinated the burning of stacks and stacks of brush, tree tops, branches, and root masses. I sure love a good fire, and what joy it will be to see Buckthorn as the fuel for the flames, transforming these noxious invasives to a pile of dust. For safety reasons, I can't be specific or public about when the burn will happen, but will be happy to post some photos after that takes place. It will be great to clear several junky looking piles from our site. The second area of work on these cold days is happening in the warm indoors, most often at my desk but with a window facing a great southwestern exposure where I get so absorbed that it feels like the sun passes across the sky as fast as a bird. That work is reviewing and preparing response to the MPRB Cedar-Isles Plan (formerly known as "Cedar Isles Master Plan"). It's a general plan that scopes out "how the parkland within the project area is operated, maintained, and improved for the next 20 to 30 years. It includes plans for all facilities, including the roadway along the lakes." We are within the 45-day final public review period. If you are interested, here is a where you can submit your thoughts which also includes a link to the draft Plan. It was an extensive two-plus year process, of which I attended several public meetings in the second year. I kept reading and reading the details of the plan. There's really a lot in the plan. But something kept tugging at me. An uneasiness. I knew so much time and effort had gone into this, but as one of many volunteers who puts a lot of practice time into ecological restoration, I couldn't help but step back and prepare some overall thoughts and concerns about what the final draft of the Plan said, and just importantly what it did not say. These are mostly more high level strategic thoughts about frameworks and constructs that may be helpful for tactical decisions today and beyond. I'm still working on feedback on some of the plan's detailed designs. But frankly, some of those detail design issues are lacking adequate context and strategy. I'll share those thoughts in posts on this blog in short order. But I'm still fleshing things out. So this is just a head's up. Additionally, I received a notice from the MPRB about my need to submit next year's application to become Park Steward. So that will give me some more time to think through activities to plan to continue restoring Cedar Lake Point Beach's ecology. I'm trying to be more community building and inviting for others to join in. But honestly, part of the joy of this volunteer work is just in the doing. Not the planning. Not the scheduling. Not the coordinating. Just the doing; when the weather is right, when my time is free, and when I'm drawn to the joy of being in the woods interacting with nature. That is not to say I wouldn't enjoy others company, or that other are not welcome to do some of that too. So please reach out to me specifically if you want to get your hands dirty too! Thanks for reading. Comments welcome. Thanks, Steve |
Archives
March 2024
AuthorI'm Steve Kotvis, volunteer Park Steward for the Minneapolis Cedar Lake Point Beach peninsula who has a newfound love of restoring this natural area and more. I'm learning as I go, and enjoy sharing that with those who have an interest. I'm also a photographer, so the photos in this blog are mine unless otherwise labeled. |