What you're basically saying is "I'm in, its perfect now, any bigger would be criminal, no more growth.".

..that's easy to say when you already had your shot at it.

But what about the generation behind you, that hasn't had it's chance, and there won't be enough room for them? The population has grown, the demand for UC admission has never been higher. Your stance strikes me as short sighted and selfish. What about your younger brother or sister?

What about your brown brothers and sisters who are trying to attend as the first generation in their family?....over 40% of this years UCSC class is just that; first in family to have the opportunity.

Saving trees is an easy decision; a virtual no-brainer, a slam dunk. But making a reasoned decision between trees vs. an opportunity for those behind you is a lot harder. I challenge you to consider that reality.

And hey, if you really want to show your commitment to saving the trees? Transfer to UC Davis or Merced, and open up a spot for one of the less fortunate than you who needs a spot. Now THAT would show your commitment . But that's not going to happen, is it?


Replies welcome...but I notice that nobody seems to want to address these hard issues. Much easier to have campfires in the forest where you decry growth, and congratulate yourself for protecting a forest when you already got the gold ticket to inhabit it.

In this article, community members have answers to the issues you bring up:

Protection of Natural Habitat Concerns Those at "Water, Desal and the UCSC Expansion" Talk
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/05/19/18713811.php

....and also in a variety of the comments made by the public at the last LAFCO meeting, which can be read here:
http://santacruzlafco.org/pages/agenda/20120404materials/March%207%202012%20Minutes%20Draft.pdf

Rick Longinetti of Santa Cruz Desal Alternatives suggests that new UC campuses be built in areas whose natural resources aren't as tapped out as those in the Santa Cruz area are.

Rick's presentation showed me that really this protest has nothing to do with saving the forest; it has to do with stopping growth and stopping a desal plant. The trees are a pretty and easy icon to sell people on the issue.

"Save the forest!". Well of course, who doesn't want to save the forest? And isn't that a lot easier a pablum to digest than the real issue? And isn't "the University should just build somewhere else" easy to say when one is already in it and getting their great education in an outstanding environment? Yes, it is. And that's my point.

People who really want to save this forest could show their commitment by transferring to Merced. But they aren't going to. That commitment would cost a price. Easier to tell others to do it while they enjoy all the perks of UCSC and feel p.c. while doing so by fighting growth and telling all those behind them that there is no place/space for them here. Selfish is what I call it.

Rick's presentation also told me that :

-The University consumes less water per person than the S.C. community does.

-The Santa Cruz community has grown in population by over 30K in the past 2 decades. The campus, 5k. But the campus is the main culprit and main drive to get the Desal plant?

-Rick agrees "the university is an exemplary customer" and how you'd want everyone to use water.

-Rick notes the campus has cut back water use by 25% per person in the past 10 years, while the city hasn't cut by even 10%.

-Rick states the campus uses 10% of the cities water. I note that the campus represents close to 25% of the city population. (15K on the hill, 60K city population.).

......and all this equates to Save the Forest? I disagree. To me, it adds up to make the city stop wasting water, and show your committment by moving out if you really want to walk the walk. Keep Education Accessible To All. Build More UCSC!!

"People who really want to save this forest could show their commitment by transferring to Merced."

This of course, is not true. UCSC does not set its enrollment this way. If a current student transfers this year, another person will take their place during the next academic year.

"Rick's presentation showed me that really this protest has nothing to do with saving the forest; it has to do with stopping growth and stopping a desal plant."

I'd say the number of people who are actively working to protect the forest, to protect natural habitat, equals those who oppose the desal plant. They have similar interests, and the groups are distinct and separate from each other, but they see the value in working together on an issue like this.

"The University consumes less water per person than the S.C. community does."

Rick Longinetti openly praises the university for its water conservation efforts, but he points out that Santa Cruz just doesn't have enough water to supply UCSC's unlimited growth, which occurs at a higher rate than the city's.

"The Santa Cruz community has grown in population by over 30K in the past 2 decades. The campus, 5k. But the campus is the main culprit and main drive to get the Desal plant?"

UCSC enrollment has increased by 5k in the last TEN years, not the last two decades, and your's is a misleading way to present population statistics. Comparing the statistics between the year 1970 and today shows that the population of Santa Cruz has increased from 30K to 60k people, and enrollment at UCSC has increased from 3,000 to 16,000.

(see: http://planning.ucsc.edu/irps/historicalData/HeadcountEnrollmentHistory.pdf)

Please read, sign, and share this petition:

Halt Plans to Develop Upper Campus
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/433/941/375/teach-the-forest/