Why are soccer fields sacrosanct?

[TimCallahan]

This morning, I found a petition in my e-mail to save an organic farm from being bulldozed to make way for soccer fields. This struck a chord in me because the city council of Pasadena, California, near where I live, wants to bulldoze and grade a natural area in Hahamongna Park to create three soccer fields where there is now a seasonal lake. To leave the natural area as is, an area where urban kids can easily get to that has a natural habitat, including frogs and tadpoles in the spring, costs nothing.

To create the three new soccer fields would require not only bulldozing and grading, but hauling in sediment to build up the areas to avoid flooding (remember the seasonal lake). However, this is only the beginning of the costs, fiscal and environmental. Not only will non-native grass have to be planted and regularly watered, insecticides will have to be sprayed in the area, along with herbicides to discourage weeds, and rodent poisons to keep out the gophers. Since the fields would be set up to be used at night as well as day, street lighting would also have to be installed, as well as paved parking areas. You can, effectively, kiss any wildlife in the area good-bye. Whatever isn't killed by toxins will be driven out. by the excess traffic, noise and nighttime lighting. Also, all this expense would be incurred by a city in a cash-strapped state.

At a public meeting held by the city council on the subject one of those supporting the building of soccer fields in the area was a weepy lady (the Pasadena city council specializes in bringing in weepy ladies to support its machinations) who, in a voice near to tears, bemoaned the fact that, "We're running out of soccer fields!" Well, yeah, lady, given that Southern California, like any other region, is finite, and given the relentless promotion of the sport by the American Soccer Association, you are running out of soccer fields and will do so whether these three are built or not.

It seems that the spin that was put on this push for the three soccer fields was that, if you oppose more soccer fields, you're an antisocial s.o.b., who's shortchanging our children. Given the comments made at that meeting, most of those in attendance were in that antisocial group. As readers can probably guess, Im dead set against the soccer fields. So, I was wondering:when and why did soccer fields become sacrosanct?

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I'd say bulldoze the "organic" farm and put the fields there. I believe that's option B, if I followed the story correctly.

 

[TimCallahan]

I'd say bulldoze the "organic" farm and put the fields there. I believe that's option B, if I followed the story correctly.

And your reasoning for this opinion is? Also, does this go for Hahamongna as well?

 

[Spindrift]

This morning, I found a petition in my e-mail to save an organic farm from being bulldozed to make way for soccer fields. This struck a chord in me because the city council of Pasadena, California, near where I live, wants to bulldoze and grade a natural area in Hahamongna Park to create three soccer fields where there is now a seasonal lake. To leave the natural area as is, an area where urban kids can easily get to that has a natural habitat, including frogs and tadpoles in the spring, costs nothing.

To create the three new soccer fields would require not only bulldozing and grading, but hauling in sediment to build up the areas to avoid flooding (remember the seasonal lake). However, this is only the beginning of the costs, fiscal and environmental. Not only will non-native grass have to be planted and regularly watered, insecticides will have to be sprayed in the area, along with herbicides to discourage weeds, and rodent poisons to keep out the gophers. Since the fields would be set up to be used at night as well as day, street lighting would also have to be installed, as well as paved parking areas. You can, effectively, kiss any wildlife in the area good-bye. Whatever isn't killed by toxins will be driven out. by the excess traffic, noise and nighttime lighting. Also, all this expense would be incurred by a city in a cash-strapped state.

At a public meeting held by the city council on the subject one of those supporting the building of soccer fields in the area was a weepy lady (the Pasadena city council specializes in bringing in weepy ladies to support its machinations) who, in a voice near to tears, bemoaned the fact that, "We're running out of soccer fields!" Well, yeah, lady, given that Southern California, like any other region, is finite, and given the relentless promotion of the sport by the American Soccer Association, you are running out of soccer fields and will do so whether these three are built or not.

It seems that the spin that was put on this push for the three soccer fields was that, if you oppose more soccer fields, you're an antisocial s.o.b., who's shortchanging our children. Given the comments made at that meeting, most of those in attendance were in that antisocial group. As readers can probably guess, Im dead set against the soccer fields. So, I was wondering:when and why did soccer fields become sacrosanct?

I would ask a few questions:
Is this the only place they can put the fields and/or the most convenient?
Are there any conservation easements on the land which building the fields would violate?
Is there any other place they could put the fields?

In my town they tried to put a baseball field on open space land. It was fought successfully.

BTW: I'm pro-sports fields, but I don't think a sports field is necessarily a better use that anything else.

 

[Quietus]

It doesn't sound like soccer fields are sacrosanct, more like someone would benefit from the development and needs to push it.

Its pretty damn tough here to get permission to develop on a wetland, seasonal or otherwise. Is it the same in California? Might explain the hardsell via the weepy (old?) lady...

No idea what wildlife may be found there... House Mice and Rock Doves also constitute "wildlife...'

 

[pgwenthold]

Why can't the kids just play soccer in the street?

 

[TimCallahan]

It doesn't sound like soccer fields are sacrosanct, more like someone would benefit from the development and needs to push it.

Its pretty damn tough here to get permission to develop on a wetland, seasonal or otherwise. Is it the same in California? Might explain the hardsell via the weepy (old?) lady...

No idea what wildlife may be found there... House Mice and Rock Doves also constitute "wildlife...'

The wildlife consists of a considerable variety of birds, frogs, toads and tadpoles (in season), as well as raccoons skunks opossums and deer. The plant life includes willows, cottonwoods, sycamores and, most importantly California valley live-oaks. Here is a video on the place.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

And your reasoning for this opinion is? Also, does this go for Hahamongna as well?

Sounds like a lot less work, given that farms are generally flat already. Plus it will make hippies cry.

 

[TimCallahan]

Why can't the kids just play soccer in the street?

Possibly, your question is meant as sarcasm. I'm not against soccer fields per se. However, there's a lot less accessible wild areas than there are soccer fields.

 

[Quietus]

The wildlife consists of a considerable variety of birds, frogs, toads and tadpoles (in season), as well as raccoons skunks opossums and deer. The plant life includes willows, cottonwoods, sycamores and, most importantly California valley live-oaks. Here is a video on the place.

Would the live-oak be this one? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valley_Oak

Endemic animals and plants tend to get in the way of development...

 

[theprestige]

Enh. People get emotionally attached to different things. I know a guy who sometimes seems to believe his entire raison d'etre is tightly bound to whether or not California puts in a high-speed rail line...

Anyway, what happened at the meeting? Did you get to talk to the people who had such strong feelings for soccer fields? Did you get to express your own feelings on the matter?

Why are soccer fields profane, to you?

 

[TimCallahan]

Sounds like a lot less work, given that farms are generally flat already. Plus it will make hippies cry.

Ah, I see. So, if I advocate leaving a natural area alone rather than spending a lot of money to make it over into soccer fields, pavement and street lighting, when our state is so cash strapped that it's plundering motorists with excessive traffic fines, that makes me a hippie? Try reason rather than sarcasm next time.

 

[TimCallahan]

Enh. People get emotionally attached to different things. I know a guy who sometimes seems to believe his entire raison d'etre is tightly bound to whether or not California puts in a high-speed rail line...

Anyway, what happened at the meeting? Did you get to talk to the people who had such strong feelings for soccer fields? Did you get to express your own feelings on the matter?

Why are soccer fields profane, to you?

The meeting was largely inconclusive. However, most of the speakers there, myself included, opposed the city's plan. For the most part, I think these meetings are inconsequential, just window dressing to make people think their opinion counts. The city council doesn't listen to anyone opposed to what they've already made up their minds to do. Legal action usually works better. I think our state and local governments' budgetary woes will hold off the city for a time.

While I'm not fond of team sports, I'm not necessarily against soccer fields. I just don't see any reason to build them - at great expense, I might add - in the midst of a wild area where the city wants these.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Ah, I see. So, if I advocate leaving a natural area alone rather than spending a lot of money to make it over into soccer fields, pavement and street lighting, when our state is so cash strapped that it's plundering motorists with excessive traffic fines, that makes me a hippie? Try reason rather than sarcasm next time.

No. And no. In this case sarcasm is reason.

 

[TimCallahan]

Would the live-oak be this one? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valley_Oak

Endemic animals and plants tend to get in the way of development...

Close, but that's Quercus lobata. It's more like this, Quercus agrifolia.

The whole point of this park is to be n area that doesn't get developed.

 

[TimCallahan]

No. And no. In this case sarcasm is reason.

Are you talking about the organic farm or Hahamongna? If it's the latter, please explain.

If it's the former, we may not have that much of a quarrel. The e-mail I found today mainly got me thinking about the the Pasadena city council's plan.

 

[fuelair]

Why can't the kids just play soccer in the street?

Why can't they just play it in Europe and leave American kids to play American sports: Football, Baseball, Basketball, Mumblety-Peg, CornHolejaw-dropp ) and the like.

It's just what them furriners want - have us wreck our beautiful lands to muck about with their evil furriner games... Dammit get offa my lawn you pesky kids!!!

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Are you talking about the organic farm or Hahamongna? If it's the latter, please explain.

If it's the former, we may not have that much of a quarrel. The e-mail I found today mainly got me thinking about the the Pasadena city council's plan.

The "organic" farm.

 

[lopeyschools]

People get passionate about sports. I'm not surprised old ladies (notorious for having excess free time to care about inconsquential things) are in tears about a soccer pitch.

 

[TimCallahan]

People get passionate about sports. I'm not surprised old ladies (notorious for having excess free time to care about inconsquential things) are in tears about a soccer pitch.

Actually, she was a middle-aged lady, and the meeting was at night. Previously, the Pasadena city council had a public meeting on their plan to cut down mature Indian ficus shade trees on Colorado Blvd. because they had a plan to replace them with alternating ginkos and Mexican fan palms. When, at a public meeting, most participants said it was a stupid idea to cut down well established shade trees, the council failed to come to any conclusion. Then they held another meeting, which the misrepresented as being on "tree planting." At that meeting they brought in a bunch of people to support their position - including a weepy lady who said she was afraid every time she went out of her shop at night because the dense foliage of the shade trees made it so dark. Yeah, lady, it gets dark at night. That's why cities have street lighting.

The upshot of this was that they cut down the mature shade trees so they could put forward their plan. Now, that section of Colorado Blvd. is hot and shadeless. Most of the ginkos are not doing well, and it will be decades before there's decent shade there again.