between golfers, the City of San Francisco and environmentalists has made it into the national press again.
Wall Street Journal writer Bobby White recently overviewed the allegations by environmental groups that golf course activities are killing threatened and endangered species, the response by the city and golfers and the progression of the subsequent lawsuit filed last March.
Recently, the legal case by Federal Judge Susan Illston until October.
What is your current impression of the controversy and lawsuit surrounding the 80-year-old golf course? Tell us in the comments.
To read more of our coverage of the issue, head to our topic page.
"Bobby, why no interviews or quotes from local golfers at Sharp Park? This seems to be a very one sided article about sharp park and very unfair. Did you even come to the course? Maybe some more background from golfers would have been a better way to go. Sharp park is not a course in disrepair as you state. The course has never been in better shape and rounds played continue to rise. It looks as if most of your info on the course came from Miller and Plater which in very unfair and more importantly not true. " As any golfer that plays Sharp's regularly can tell you, the course is in awesome shape right now and the summer months will continue to make it even better.
- Jeff Miller
In fact, Sharp Park Golf Course is NOT harming ANY animal species. Not surprisingly, Enviro-Lunatics HATE and DESPISE the Game of Golf. Anti-Golf Organizations have TERRORIZED the City of San Francisco for years over the future of Sharp Park Golf Course. Anti-Golf Terrorism Will NEVER End Unless the Golf Industry STRIKES BACK ! The Golf Industry Should Tell Anti-Golf Activists to Get OFF Our grASS and Roast In Hell. For more information, please go to the following web-pages ... GOLF - SHARP PARK GOLF COURSE ( Web-Page ) http://wp.me/P1jq40-2dz GOLF - THE LOOMING GOLF INDUSTRY SHIPWRECK - NO LONGER A HOPEFUL FUTURE ( Web-Page ) http://wp.me/P1jq40-1N1 GOLF - GO BROWN - ANTI-COSMETIC GOLF MAINTENANCE ( Web-Page ) http://wp.me/P1jq40-2bv U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL TERRORISM - STATE PRE-EMPTION ( Web-Page ) http://wp.me/P1jq40-2hW VICTORIES AGAINST TERRORISTS ! ( Web-Page ) http://wp.me/P1jq40-1JO WILLIAM H. GATHERCOLE AND NORAH G NORAHG is the National Organization Responding Against HUJE that seek to harm the Green space industry. THE PESTICIDE TRUTHS WEB-SITE http://pesticidetruths.com/ THE COMPLETE LIBRARY OF REPORTS & REFERENCES http://wp.me/P1jq40-2rr
While you seem to be playing the role of psychologist, in an attempt to be an honest environmentalist, would you please confirm for the participants in this forum the following: 1. Please affirm the claim on the CBD website that over 1.6 million acres in 28 Calif. counties has been designated by USFWS as "critical habitat" for the Calif. Red Legged Frog. (ref: http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2010/california-red-legged-frog-03-16-2010.html ) 2. Please point us to the Federal Register listing where Sharp Park has been designated by US Fish and Wildlife Service as "critical habitat" for the Californa Red Legged Frog and the San Francisco Garter Snake. If you are unable to do so then please acknowledge for the reader the significance of this omission, i.e., USFWS has determined that what happens to the RLF and SFGS at Sharp Park will not affect the survival of the species. 3. Please explain to us your justification for the tactics utilized by the CBD in the Chilton Ranch situation where the CBD was sued by rancher Jim Chilton. Mr. Chilton was awarded a $600,000.00 judgment against CBD which was upheld on appeal. (ref: http://www.bobandbobnm.com/article.php?story=centerforbiological ) 4. How much money does CBD typically collect in legal fees on nuisance lawsuits like Sharp Park? Please confirm for the reader that inevitably the taxpayer is responsible for these fees. Thanks in advance for your response.
As for your wise use talking points attempting to slander CBD, not worthy of a response.
Still waiting for you to point the readers to the Federal Register listing where Sharp Park has been designated by US Fish and Wildlife Service as "critical habitat" for the Californa Red Legged Frog and the San Francisco Garter Snake. Still waiting... Jeff Miller says, "As for your wise use talking points attempting to slander CBD, not worthy of a response" Although I don't subscribe to the CBD, Brent Plater, Jeff Miller, et al Academy of the Advanced Usage of Talking Points in the Media, I truly appreciate your acknowledgment that my usage was "wise". Now as to your "slander" claim: since CBD has absolutely no shortage of cash chasing attorneys on their payroll with nothing else to do, and since CBD has NEVER been shy about litigation, I am confident that had I said anything even remotely slanderous (i.e., untrue) about CBD, the Chilton Ranch litigation, USFWS critical habitat designations, or anything else for that matter, that you and CBD would say "lawsuit" faster than an SFGS swallows a RLF. BTW, still waiting....
The real problem at SP is one of will. The current custodian of SP, i.e., SFRPD, is busy promoting its Natural Areas Program and has an inherent conflict of objectives. The current NAP Director, Lisa Wayne, does not believe in recreation and believes all parks and open space recreation areas should be turned into native plant and wildlife museums. This, of course, is what Miller, Plater, Bhatman, and their extreme environmental donor enclave also want. They could care less if people and their children have obesity issues or heart attacks because if they had their way, causal health issues due to lack of physical activities would thin the human herd. To paraphrase Shakespeare, "First, get rid of the extreme environmental lawyers. Second, get rid of Lisa Wayne and NAP".
http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2012/settlement-fees-06-14-2012.html