Page 2 of 14
Posted on July 24 at 10:09 a.m.
Not sure why I have chosen today to insert myself in our comments section, but this is a complicated issue with no perfect answers. Keeping comments to known facts and straying from personal attacks would help out this process and, in the end, the future of Goleta Beach, though I know that's not the preferred anonymous or even public tactics.
Along those lines, BeachFan is not entirely correct in the assessment of what would happen to the beach if the ocean was just left to go wild on it.
From page two of the executive summary of the DEIR:
"Historically, it appears that this sandspit beach has fluctuated in width, with long periods of a wide beach created by sand accretion, punctuated by periods of a narrower beach caused by erosion. In this way, the dynamic nature of Goleta Beach differs from a typical blufftop or shoreline location where coastal erosion proceeds gradually and somewhat inexorably landward. At Goleta Beach, while the shoreline has been shown to fluctuate within a “coastal process zone” between a verywide beach and erosion to a historic back beach, the sandspit appears to have remained in generally the same area and configuration over time. "
Translation: the beach has always been there, as far as anyone can tell.
On Public Weighs In On Goleta Beach
Posted on July 24 at 9:51 a.m.
That is not how the government or most of modern society sees it.
Indeed, if we were to force every ethnicity to be 100 percent pure, then we wouldn't allow anyone of mixed backgrounds --- which would be much if not most of America and quite a bit of the entire world --- to celebrate their shared heritages. That would mean far fewer Irish or Italian or Mexican or African-American or Greek or Jewish festivals/clubs, and we'd be checking blood at the door each time.
Granted, those of federally recognized Chumash heritage are recently experiencing an influx of cash, but dismissing them all because of mixed bloodlines is clearly not a rationally or historically defendable argument. It's also a very simplistic way of viewing a very complicated world.
On Chumash Renaissance Press Release 7/23
Posted on July 24 at 8:41 a.m.
If you are trying to claim that there are no descendants remaining with any "Chumash" blood or ancestral claims left, that is patently false. Historians, anthropologists, and geneticists would all dispute such an argument with facts and data. That said, there is clearly a lot of dispute related to who is and who is not Chumash and how each group is treated by the federal government. It is a very complicated issue steeped in history, politics, and, quite frankly, a little bit of good or bad timing depending on which group you are part of. But to say that there are no Chumash left is ludicrous.
Posted on July 24 at 8:20 a.m.
That's actually false. Ed Easton spoke in favor of alternative 2, not the study's proposed managed retreat plan. However, he understands that the idea of managed retreat is more of a reality than a choice. The decision to be made, as he has expressed repeatedly and rather eloquently, is "how do we save as much of the park as possible for as long a possible?"And here's a link to the documents, findable by googling Goleta Beach EIR: http://www.sbcountyplanning.org/proje...
Posted on July 24 at 8:14 a.m.
This is a press release, not an Independent story.
Posted on July 10 at 6:49 p.m.
I checked with the Biltmore before writing the article and they said it was thyroid. Although thymus can also be classified as sweetbreads. Perhaps we are all confused from too much organ.
On Sweetbreads @ Biltmore
Posted on April 15 at 2:48 p.m.
Thanks for the quality feedback! I'm proud and honored to say that most people disagree. Consider my previous comments reviewed and accepted.
On Wine 101: The Buds Are Breaking
Posted on April 15 at 11:45 a.m.
Oldtimer, the only nerve you hit is that you have taken a bizarre and admittedly annoying obsession in attacking my otherwise relatively respected work from behind an highly uninformed and anonymous veil.
It's cowardly, and easy fun to occasionally defend myself against such shallow advances. I don't always agree with Bill, clearly, but he has the guts to use his name, for which he commands a much greater deal of respect from myself and everyone else who reads our website.
As to your request related to drunk drivers, I actually covered all that in a previous story here: http://www.independent.com/news/2013/... in which I cite a study that concludes: “There has been no significant upward trend in collisions in Santa Ynez.”
So if you disagree with the facts, that's fine, but understand that just saying the same thing over and over again doesn't make it true.
Posted on April 14 at 9:52 a.m.
Also, if this is not of interest to you or others, may I direct you to my page of Indy articles, where in the last week or so you may have read my other stories about dinosaur puppets, nonprofit filmmaking, coastal agency fining resort for archaeological damages, vintners fighting over boundaries, sea otter lawsuits, lead as poison, old town goleta, entering the burial crypt of the mission, funk zone politics, and much much more. If you can't find anything interesting in there, well, I can't help you much. http://www.independent.com/staff/matt...
Posted on April 14 at 9:45 a.m.
I'm sorry you're not interested in our region's most vibrant and economically important industry. It drives tourism and the restaurant sectors, employs thousands of people of all ages, classes, and ethnicities, and is one of humankind's oldest and most civiization-changing practices. And just to stave off the teetotaling comments to come, while alcohol abuse is a problem for some that should be acknowledged and treated accordingly, many millions more enjoy fine wine (and beer and liquor, etc) in thoroughly responsible ways. For such an old timer, you really need to grow up!