Trading the natural beauty of Manadas Creek for "luxury" development projects

By Daniel Muñoa

The Green Space Ordinance is an absolute necessity if the few remaining stream corridors in Laredo are to be conserved. New development occurring northwest of the McPherson-Shiloh intersection immediately left of the McPherson Road Bridge is what many progressive cities would consider a prime example of poor land management practice and bad environmental policy. The cleared land is to be used to construct a strip mall and a 100-unit luxury apartment complex which will be called Tuscany Commercial Center and Tuscany Luxury Apartments. The development group in charge is TLA Ltd., headed by architect Willy Cavazos. Libcon, Inc., is the contractor and Eddie Gutierrez of Howland Surveying is the engineer, according to the city's Environmental Services Department.

As soon as you pass the Shiloh intersection heading north on McPherson, there is a sudden drop in elevation. Shortly thereafter, you enter the floodplain of a third order stream that happens to be the main artery of Manadas Creek. You can't miss this area. Standing on the McPherson Road Bridge, you can see quite vividly how the naturally occurring tree line 30 feet high and greater in some areas was abruptly and grotesquely interrupted with the latest raping of the earth. In South Texas you don't find trees of this height growing naturally without a consistent flow of water. Experience the rich, riparian biodiversity for yourself by simply pulling over on the McPherson Road Bridge and cross the southbound traffic lane. Follow the cleared land to where it borders with the existing vegetation. There, you will see a flowing stream with several species of fish living in it and a diverse array of native shrubs and trees! I know this because I was one of the concerned environmentalists who showed up on the afternoon of Sunday, January 4, to express our point of view on the ravaging of riparian habitat for new development.

The afternoon was warm, with temperatures in the mid-80s, and as I stared at the fish in the beautiful natural meander of Manadas Creek, I wondered how much cooler it would be standing in this very spot had the trees not been ruthlessly knocked over and torn from the earth. To test my hypothesis, I simply walked past the area of development and immersed myself in the native flora left untouched. I was immediately aware that it was six to eight degrees cooler. Huge trees capable of consuming hundreds if not thousands of gallons of water on a warm, sunny day were knocked over and pushed aside for what appears to be the initial stages of channelization with concrete, an impermeable agent to water. Concrete does an excellent job of adding a greater amount of storm water run-off to the existing creek with higher rates of speed to flow through the altered area. This will spell disaster for whomever lives near the floodplain downstream of the disturbed region. This area in general is already plagued with flooding issues because of past poor land management practices. I can't think of anyone better than Diana Juarez to speak to this issue. Her sad tales of flooding as a direct result of poor development continues to plague her to this day. Ask her what she thinks about concreted culverts and cleared waterways and you'll get an earful. At one time, her home was inundated with storm water rising over four feet in height, an event that caused extensive damage. She has photos and video documentation of floods. You can contact her for confirmation via e-mail at ttsdiana@yahoo.com. I'm certain she'll be more than happy to e-mail you pics and video clips.

Both architect Cavazos and city engineer Luis Perez-García were quoted in the Laredo Morning Times on Tuesday, January 6, 2004 stating that channeling the creek is one sure way of preventing floods downstream. Cavazos further stated that the creek would probably have to be channeled all the way to the Río Grande in order to alleviate the flooding issue. I beg to differ and would gladly supply ample sources of peer-reviewed scientific literature arguing to the contrary. Granted, I'm not an engineer, but I do have two Bachelor of Science degrees, one in biology and the other in chemistry. Some of the courses that I took directly involving a deeper understanding of our environment are Ecology, Environmental Chemistry, and Environmental Toxicology. In addition, I have read considerable amounts of literature that argue in contrast to what these two gentlemen have stated as a practical means of flood control and land management for the 21st century.

An excellent example as to why the use of concrete needs to be avoided is its role in the Heat Island Effect. It is an accepted phenomenon that plagues many cities all across the world, like Laredo, that have stripped significant amounts of vegetation away and replaced it with impermeable, heat absorbing man-made materials, such as concrete. This has resulted in city air temperatures being five to ten degrees warmer than the surrounding country air, undoubtedly adding stress to our infrastructure and placing a greater demand on air conditioners to keep things cool. This places greater demand for electricity, sometimes more than what is available. Recently, we have seen in the news how cities world-wide experienced brown outs and black outs as a result of electrical demand surpassing the supply at hand due to increased city air temperatures. Our health is at risk as well. A summer doesn't go by without hearing about heat stroke-induced deaths occurring in large urban areas where city air temperatures have hit 115 to 120 degrees Fahrenheit. Atlanta, Georgia was the site of an experimental project during the 1990s after local meteorologists and scientists realized that there had been a steady, gradual increase in city air temperatures for the last 20 years. Hypothesizing with the Heat Island Effect, they began re-introducing trees, shrubs, and other forms of vegetation throughout the city where riparian habitats or green corridors once existed. Their intentions were to lower Atlanta's daily city air temperature. After several years of tree planting, gathering data with thermal imagery, and countless hours of observation, Atlanta's city air temperature fell several degrees and is projected to drop more as the re-vegetated areas grow. Access the Weather Channel online to learn more about the project. Let us learn from other people's mistakes and conserve our green space. It's much better to prevent than to destroy and then try to find a last minute cure for the damage done to the environment. Launch a search on www.google.com and you'll get links to EPA's website that has extensive information and data regarding the Heat Island Effect.

There are many other known and accepted negative impacts exhibited from stripping creeks and waterways to be replaced with concrete channeling. For instance, there is ample evidence to suggest that concreted culverts act as direct infusions of household pesticides, insecticides, fertilizers, and other man-made chemicals that run off the driveways and lawns of our homes into street gutters and consequently, into the creeks that drain into the Río Grande. This is referred to in general as non-point sources of pollution that have played a significant role in the degradation of the Río Grande. It is no wonder that the Río Grande is one of the ten most polluted rivers in the United States. At this point, there is still a chance that not all of these harmful substances make it to the Río Grande if and only if creeks that feed into the river are left undisturbed. Undisturbed creeks, especially those with considerable vegetative growth, are capable of sequestering (retaining) many synthesized chemicals because they contain proteins in their root systems that are capable of bonding permanently with many man-made chemicals found in creek water. This considerably reduces the amount of toxins introduced into the Río Grande. In addition, there have been many strains of healthy, non-pathogenic bacteria isolated from riparian habitats that are capable of using a variety of man-made chemicals as a source of food, thereby aiding in the reduction of harmful substances that are deposited into the river. This is no joke. The EPA has spent millions in successful bioremediation projects in which bacteria isolated from the environment, not created by man, are mass-produced and then introduced into a chemical spill site for detoxification purposes. Do a search for the Super Fund Project by the EPA to learn more.

There are many other examples worth noting that favor a buffered stream corridor as opposed to unabated land stripping and channelization, but I am limited to space here. I encourage you to go online to www.google.com and key in the search phrase "Protecting Stream and River Corridors." The first or second hit should be a link to an article in pdf format entitled "Protecting Stream and River Corridors: Creating Effective Local Riparian Buffer Ordinances." The article is co-authored by scientists and politicians alike from the State of Georgia with the intent of establishing, according to the foreword of the article, "a set of buffer-width guidelines that are based upon one of the most comprehensive scientific reviews conducted to date . . . to present objective and systematic research on complex policy problems and issues . . . for elected officials who are considering establishing or improving their riparian buffer ordinances, along with planning and zoning officials who will implement and enforce such ordinances. Property owners, developers, and other citizens may also find the contents informative." This is by far the best article I have read that really addresses the need for conservation of stream and river corridors in detail and discusses many of the issues that are currently being debated about the Green Space Ordinance in the Planning and Zoning Commission. The conclusions presented in the article are based on sound scientific evidence gathered from over 100 peer-reviewed sources of scientific literature listed at the end of the article, some of which I have read for further inquiry. All of the authors indicate an urgent need for conservation as a means of maintaining a sustainable habitat for human existence on this planet to continue.

If you strip the riparian habitat away -- as our city leaders have allowed developers to do repeatedly along Manadas Creek -- you strip away a natural filtration system that took millions of years in the making that has a very important role in maintaining a healthy, thriving biosphere. If we don't stop and take the time to save the remaining riparian habitats from destruction, soon there will be nothing left to save.

So, what could have been done to avoid the unnecessary destruction on Manadas Creek? To begin with, it's a pity the Environmental Services Department requested only 140 feet of channel width to accommodate storm water run-off for the main artery of Manadas Creek. I totally understand their predicament, however, because they are in a very tough position of trying to find common ground between developers and environmentalists. The directive to lean in favor of developers comes from City Council and from city management.

Judging from the size of the stream -- third order, which means that two first order streams have joined to form a second order stream which in turn joined with another second order stream somewhere upstream of the McPherson Road Bridge -- a buffer of 70 to 100 feet on either side of the high water mark would have been much more adequate. However, this requires that more land be given to the city; 220 feet if not a little more of channel width. That would have at least saved the magnificent tree line that was so abruptly interrupted with the development. Large trees are crucial to the natural filtration process that takes place in riparian zones of this type. The issue of land taking is one of the hot debates with the proposed Green Space Ordinance -- how much land should be incorporated into buffers for creeks, which I feel, based on literature review, should include ephemeral first order streams and higher (larger) ordered streams. The information is out there and I would be happy to answer anyone's questions via e-mail at danzig@munoa.net.

Our generation and the next generation of humanity face a daunting task -- do we wake up and accept that human occupation of Planet Earth has had many negative impacts and that we need to start taking measures to curtail global warming, environmental degradation, land stripping, and begin a switch from fossil fuels to cleaner sources of energy, etc., or do we simply continue thinking of the short term? Of how much profit can be made from developing as much land as possible, ignoring the grave consequences that stripping the earth dry will have for our children's children and their children? If you care for the environment, call your city council members and appointed members of Planning and Zoning. Express your concerns for our environment. The voices of many can make a difference. If current elected officials aren't interested in supporting the ordinance, let's vote them out of office and put people in who can.

Don't stop asking:

1. What would it have cost the developers to leave the old growth tree line within the buffer?

2. Was council member Joe Valdez trying to say something to protect the buffer but we couldn't hear him over the din of the dozer?

3. When will city management understand that raping the riparian habitat of Manadas Creek to bend to the will of developers is an environmental debacle of the same magnitude as ripping the heart out of the old growth palm grove on the banks of the Río Grande?