Six months ago San Francisco Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, concerned with a threatened lawsuit over endangered species at Sharp Park Golf Course and with the City's financial responsibility for the course, sponsored legislation that directed the Recreation and Parks Department to develop a plan to restore the habitat of the California red-legged frog and the San Francisco garter snake at Sharp Park and determine the fate of the venerable old course. Rec and Parks assembled a blue-ribbon research team, including recognized experts in engineering, biology, geology, hydrology, finance, landscape architecture and golf course design. They also consulted with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the California Department of Fish and Game, the City of Pacifica, San Mateo County and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. They took the time necessary to closely study every aspect of the problem. The team produced an exhaustive, extensive report running to some 70 pages with the relevant maps and graphs. They reached clear, unbiased conclusions and proposed practical, sensible and affordable recommendations. On Nov.6, Phil Ginsburg, head of Rec and Parks, presented the report to the Board of Supervisors, who must still vote on it, and released it to the public.

Although we expected the report to recommend keeping the golf course — there had been favorable newspaper columns and widespread support — it was a relief to see it in black and white.  "Based on the totality of the research and conclusions provided in this study and the input we received from our local, state and federal stakeholders, we recommend that the City pursue a course which restores Laguna Salada — the most critical habitat for our protected species —while preserving golf at Sharp Park, a very popular and long standing recreational use. Based on the estimates provided in the report, this is also the most cost effective recommendation."

The report goes on to detail the renovation of the course, moving one hole and altering others, restoration work on the lagoon, improving drainage and the like. With these modifications, and routine monitoring of maintenance operations, the report concludes that the protected species "can thrive at Sharp Park." It looked like the classic win-win situation. San Francisco is to be congratulated on a job well done.

But the report was not welcomed in the environmental community, or that particular branch of the community affiliated with the Center For Biological Diversity, or the Restore Sharp Park group, or their latest incarnation, Wild Equity. They believe the golf course was a mistake from the very beginning, a crime against nature, San Francisco's "great act of hubris." They maintain now that the only viable solution is to have the entire area designated a wetlands biological preserve, with no golf course. I wondered why they would not accept a compromise that would, first and foremost, protect the endangered species, and, secondly, permit the golf course to continue operating. Was not their greatest concern, their legal and moral obligation, protecting the frogs and snakes? Why denounce a plan that was designed to do just that?

One objection they've had all along, and continue to raise, is the question of the course's financial condition. This topic has probably accounted for more claims and counter-claims, more smoke and noise, than any other aspect of the discussion. It's now a moot point. All parties to the Rec & Park plan, city, county and federal, recognize the need to share costs and liabilities. Mayor Lancelle has stepped forward and is ably representing the interests of Pacifica. Congresswoman Jackie Speier is committed to the plan at the federal level. Relieving the City of San Francisco of sole responsibility for Sharp Park should ease the concerns expressed by Mr. Mirkarimi. Personally, I always thought that, on its own, Sharp Park could make money. But like I said, it's a moot point.

Brent Plater, spokesman for the environmental groups, raises other objections that could be collectively expressed by his exhortation "We can do better!," to which I respond "Better for who?" Mr. Plater has consistently portrayed golfers as an elite, aloof pampered minority. Obviously, he has not spent much time in the Sharp Park clubhouse. Does Butch Larroche look pampered? We've also been told that golf requires too much space, too much resource, for the number of people that benefit from it. Well, there were over 54,000 rounds of golf played at Sharp Park last year. Do you think there were 54,000 people at Mori Point? This area has hundreds of miles of hiking and biking trails over some of the most breathtaking landscape in the world. We have one affordable 18-hole golf course. Next time Mr Plater says "We can do better," tell him "No thanks, we're doing just fine."

Mr. Plater has also expressed concern for the viability of Sharp Park in the face of Global Worming and raising sea levels. A few hundred years from now, we've been warned, the coastal barriers and wetlands could be overwhelmed by ocean waves and the frogs and snakes would be forced to seek higher ground. Ground occupied by the golf course. So he wants to close the course now.

I say, let's wait 50, 100 years, see what the weather's like. But really, if my great-great-great grandchildren are kayaking down Montgomery Street in San Francisco, they'll have bigger problems than the frogs at Sharp Park.

Restore Sharp Park is, in my opinion, pure and simple, a land-grab that would disenfranchise thousands of blue-collar golfers, subject sensitive habitat to damage by wandering hikers, littering picnickers and over-night campers, encourage a proliferation of rats, skunks, raccoons and, more seriously, disease-carrying ticks and mosquitoes, endanger nearby communities with doubtful, unproven flood control measures and, last but not least, drag down property values.

To sacrifice a well-loved and much-played golf course, a living part of our community for the past 77 years, for some dubious, unnecessary, pie-in-the-sky vision of boardwalks and eco-tourists is more than folly. It is, to use Mr. Plater's word, hubris.
 
And the fact is, we don't need such grandiose schemes to save the threatened wildlife at Sharp Park while continuing to enjoy our golf course.

Thanks to San Francisco Rec & Park, the talented team they assembled, state and federal wildlife agencies, and elected officials at every level, we've got a plan.

Paul Slavin is a golfer and a resident of Fairway Park