- Read a detailed commentary:
- Overview
Introduction
Water Resources
Recreational Use
Natural Resource & Education
Friends of Lake Merced is disappointed with the result of the year-long planning activity coordinated by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC), and contributed to by the Recreation and Parks Department (R&PD). An extensive response to this draft document is available, and has been submitted to the PUC (See our web site at www.lakemerced.org). These are the highlights of our response, and the actions that we think are needed now:
Water Resources Program:
1. Lake Merced is a Lake, not a reservoir. As such it should be returned to a self-sustaining condition. Infusions of Hetch Hetchy water should be considered only as short-term, emergency actions, not as a long-term solution. Consequently, no “Import/Export Water Infrastructure” (WRS-1.6) should be needed.
2. The Geo/Resource Consultants report (1993) suggested a Lake depth of 26’ as a “preliminary” recommendation. At the same time a number of issues were raised that need to be reviewed before a final target is established. Included in this list is the question of adequate depth to maintain a healthy fish stock (e.g., will the Lake stratify to restore oxygen levels), and a transition plan to protect habitat while the Lake level rises. None of these issues are addressed in the Draft Plan.
3. Evaluation of alternatives for increasing the Lake level cannot wait for two years, but must be a component of the Westside Basin Groundwater Management Plan (WRS-1.4).
4. We don’t need another plan before we start to take actions to protect the aquifer (WRS-2.1). Implement PUC resolution No. 95-0082, enabling the golf courses to use tertiary reclaimed water, now (WRS-2.7). Implement an aquifer relief program with Daly City now (WRS-2.3). Stop any program to increase withdrawal from the aquifer until a program to protect Lake Merced is in place (San Francisco Master Groundwater Management Plan).
5. Water quality is a critical issue. We don’t need another
study to “investigate fish conditions.”
(WRS-3.5) We know they are bad. We need a program to improve
fish conditions, now.
Recreational Use Program:
1. The Recreational Use Program is actually a ranking of projects eligible for funding from a special bond issue passed ten years ago. Of the seven projects ranked 1/10, there appears to be funding available for just two (See Appendix K). No provision is made for custodial support that will be required to maintain permanent restrooms to be built. Friends of Lake Merced, and others as well, have repeatedly requested that capital improvements be deferred until adequate maintenance support can be provided.
2. Other than this ranked list of projects, no attempt has been made to establish a budget for continuing operations, to indicate income and disposition of resources provided through concessionaire leases, to account for activity at Harding Park Golf Course or to integrate that activity into a general resource management program, to improve maintenance (the lack of which is acknowledged in the first paragraph of the Draft Plan to be a major factor leading to the demise of Lake Merced); in short, there is no management plan for recreational uses at all.
3. Such a plan is needed. We suggest that in addition to the issues just raised the following actions be taken:
- a) The number one priority must be on public health.
Restroom facilities are completely inadequate, with the obvious consequences.
The plan should reflect this priority, in the body of the plan and not
in appendices. A detailed timetable should be indicated for their
construction, and specific provision made for their maintenance.