Stretching over 4,000 acres, Griffith Park serves as a natural oasis in a park-deprived city.
Offering attractions such as the Los Angeles Zoo and the Griffith Observatory, the park not only holds a big part of Los Angeles’ history, but is also an escape from urban life.
After fires blazed through this natural gem on May 8, the city revealed a $50 million restoration plan that is designed to minimize the threat of future landslides and erosion through reseeding and replanting of the hillsides in the park.
But by instantly moving to replant the burned landscape, city officials are just working against nature and potentially facilitating more fires.
Both Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa agreed that Los Angeles must take immediate action to renovate the burned park.
According to the Los Angeles Times, scientists argue that the plan will be an expensive and futile effort, introducing invasive and nonnative plant species to the park, which would drown out the natural plant life, such as bush mallow, in the region.
Richard W. Halsey, director of the California Chaparral Institute, explained to the Los Angeles Times how the scientific community strongly opposed reseeding and replanting as a postfire solution for Griffith Park, as this approach would stunt the land’s natural regrowth cycle.
Typically, postfire land management techniques include spreading grass seed by aircraft over the burned areas in order to hold soil in place and thereby minimize erosion.
However, these seeded grasses will pose as an invasive species that could drive out Los Angeles’ native chaparral. Furthermore, grass seed is usually spread before upcoming rainy seasons to protect against mud-slide threats. But since the summer months are fast approaching, the dry grass will only increase danger by posing as a fire hazard.
Some feel that the fire was a blessing in disguise, as it helped to fertilize the soil and removed all the flammable, alien shrubbery from the area.
“The fire did what no one could afford to do in this environment, to just be clearing the fire hazard, the invasive species, the buildup of fuel,” said Andy Lipkis, founder of the nonprofit TreePeople, to the Los Angeles Times.
Although mud slides and erosion create a big safety concern for city officials, it’s in their best economic and environmental interests that Griffith Park be allowed to renew its plant life on its own terms.
Of course, minimal reconstruction should be allowed to reduce the risk of immediate landslide hazards to homes and residents in the surrounding areas.
But jumping into a full-scale reseeding project will take away Griffith Park’s ecological potential and could weaken the values that founder Col. Griffith J. Griffith stood for ““ to create “a place of recreation and rest … a resort” for the L.A. community.
And this resort created a modern-day Eden for many Angelenos. For students, in particular, Griffith Park may not be the most obvious L.A. attraction, but it gives them a chance to get back in touch with nature.
“There aren’t many places in L.A. where you can go for a hike, or just simply get away from all the traffic and smog of the city,” said Rob Kadivar, a first-year biology student and L.A. native.
More importantly, the park represents an anomaly in the urban L.A. setting and provides a good amount of green space for some of the city’s lower-income regions ““ a fact that could help reduce some of Los Angeles’ most pressing environmental justice issues.
“A lot of people living in L.A. don’t have a decent park near their homes to play sports or get fresh air. Griffith Park provides a weekend getaway for them,” said Olga Nikulina, a first-year civil engineering student and L.A. native.
If officials choose to alter one of the last remaining urban-wildlife preserves, then Los Angeles will lose more than just natural plant life; it will lose a little bit of green space that holds immense prospects for the environmental future of our city.
E-mail Chung at lchung@media.ucla.edu. Send general comments to viewpoint@media.ucla.edu.