Seeing Steelhead trout and Chinook salmon returning to our creeks and tributaries is a wonderful sight indeed. In the early 70’s when I first began a career as a Psych Tech at Sonoma State Hospital (SDC) I remember taking a few of our residents down behind the Butler building along Sonoma Creek to watch for an occasional Steelhead work its way up the small fish ladder that the State had installed. If you were patient you might see two or three Steelheads within an hour’s time. As the years passed I stopped seeing the fish. Even after the fish ladder was removed I never again saw any sign of spawning Steelies. And now with news of our local fisheries making a comeback I can’t bare to think of what will happen if and when the State moves forward with Rogal’s Eldridge Renewal plan. What will happen to these tributaries – Mill creek; Asbury creek; Stewart creek? Obviously the State and the County don’t care enough to give it much thought. Putting in a thousand homes, a luxury hotel, tens of thousands sq.ft of commercial space, right in the middle of an Historic District and at the base of Jack London State Park is way more important to them. What are they thinking? Where’s Sonoma Land Trust and Sonoma Ecology Center through all of this?
— Gregg Montgomery
Glad To See the Salmon Return, But…
More from Letters to the EditorMore posts in Letters to the Editor »
Good question, Gregg! Thanks for sharing your wonderful history at SDC.
May goodness prevail!
You are 💯 % correct… thank you for the read!
The water and the wildlife on Sonoma Mountain,where the former Sonoma Developmental Center was situated and served the needs and cared for that population, is a public resource and a public trust. It should never have become a commodity for market-rate housing, a hotel/resort playground for the monied class, and along with numerous other commercial enterprises, which in effect will create a new town in the heart of Sonoma Valley. This whole plan was cooked up and dished out by the state’s Department of General Services, with the aid and compliance of Sonoma County’s Board of Supervisors and former county politicians on their way toward State Assembly and Senatorial positions. The only entities that stand to gain from this deal, predicated on taking the public’s resources, its two freshwater sources and wildlife corridor comprising a sustainable ecosystem, are a State agency that deals in land for sale to the highest bidder, a cadre of so-called developers building high-end housing, and more feather-merchants peddling more unnecessary goods and services already available a few miles away, in the never-ending compulsion for acquisition in a search for an elusive happiness that is never forthcoming. Read the Public Resources Doctrine, State of California law, and learn why the State does not own this land or its resources. These are in trust to the people of California and of particular significance to the people of the Sonoma Valley to preserve and conserve for the good of all.
One correction to my letter (above):
The State of CA does own the SDC land, but I maintain does not own its water resources or its wildlife, per the CA Public Resources Doctrine.
Thank you Gregg and Will for the lessons of history paired with a look to the future if the usual suspects prevail. I would like to add to the discussion the very real concerns that those living here have when it comes to evacuation needs – and how said concerns have been ignored by state and county overlords. While the politicians speak of the need for more housing, they continue to rob communities of that essential resource – because vacation rental revenue is just too enticing. Sonoma County now has an online map (sonomacounty.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=12e72df6ffbf4f56946ff9986b1bb515) depicting just how massively the small communities in the Sonoma Valley (and elsewhere in the county) have been decimated by this outrageous program. Yes, we do need to replenish our housing stock, and the SDC property is an optimal location for doing so – within reason and in a manner that actually provides what is needed (low-income housing, special needs units, agricultural worker housing, and the like). The Glen Ellen Historical Society is among those fighting for a sustainable balance between the quality and quantity of life we might reasonably be able to gift the future through a less greed-driven planning process for SDC. Stay tuned, it’s going to be a bumpy ride!
Deborah and Will have really fine-tuned the realities that plague our community’s wishes for a common sense vision for housing, environmental protections and historic preservation. Deborah is right-on when she speaks about being robbed of essential resources and being ignored by the state and county by their greed-driven plan. The plight of our fisheries is just one of the many issues that our community has been fighting for. This is a battle that has been waged for nearly 8 years now. At every step of the way we have been ignored by the powers that be. I think that Mr. Shonbrun has touched on a very important, and possibly forgotten statute that proclaims that public lands have certain rights available to “the public”. Having done a little research on the Public Trust Doctrine it seems that, though the State owns the SDC property they are only the “trustees” of these public lands. I’m looking forward to learning more about this Public Trust Doctrine. I’m a bit fatigued by this on-going battle with the county and state but I’m not about to give up. The PTD looks to be a good way forward. I encourage others to check this out too.
All praise to words from old friend Deborah and for weighing in on this conversation. Ho!