‘Saving Lake Tahoe’ not the easiest read
By Kathryn Reed
Sometimes I read a book and I’m left wondering who the author thought was going to read it.
Such was the case with “Saving Lake Tahoe: An Environmental History of a National Treasure” by Michael J. Makley.
Usually history and environmental books can captivate me. This, in some ways, felt like reading a regurgitation of facts, at times like a textbook.
For people who have lived the story, I can’t see them wanting to read this because that’s how I felt about the last half the book. I want to read something I don’t already know so I can learn.
And for those who don’t know this aspect of Tahoe’s past, I think they would likely become overwhelmed with all the facts.
I know the book was not completely factual because I found errors. When this happens in a book I am then left questioning what else is not accurate.
For instance, Makley said the day the Angora Fire started in June 2007 there was a controlled burn. This is completely wrong. There were no controlled burns that day on the South Shore because it was a “red flag” day.
He also said the area was reseeded via hydromulch. Hydromulching did occur to stabilize the soil. Seeds and fertilizer were not part of the mix.
Then Makley references Lake Tahoe News for a May 2009 article. LTN didn’t launch until September of that year.
Where were the editors and fact checkers at the University of Nevada Press? Yes, authors get things wrong. But they should not be the last line of defense.
Makley would have been better served to have taken on a narrower topic and developed it in more detail.
It was a bit alarming to read how much development was proposed and how what is here got approved. It’s easy to see why environmental groups don’t trust local governments to protect the environment, which includes the lake.
Part of the book was like reading a history of the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency. With that in mind, you know Makley could write many sequels. And the agency’s history is interesting. It’s certainly tied to the philosophy of the two states.
The book showed how the dispute between California and Nevada has been going on for what seems like forever – at least to the early 1900s as documented by Makley. It has been an unstable relationship for most of that time.
One can only wonder what the Lake Tahoe Basin would be like today had the scientists had a louder voice.
“The scientists’ recommendations conflicted with pressure to continue economic growth, stemming from gambling, real estate, and recreation. This emphasized the fact that the State of California, as represented by the restructured CTRPA, tended to back the scientists, while local governments and the State of Nevada generally supported the economic interests,” Makley wrote.
Plus, it was in the 1980s that scientists said fine sediment is a problem for lake clarity. More than 30 years later and we still haven’t fixed that issue.
The sad part is that history just seems to keep repeating itself. And this includes the fact that those with money can save or destroy Lake Tahoe – with an acknowledgement that “save” and “destroy” are defined differently by people. I do have new respect for William Hewlett – of Hewlett-Packard fame — after reading the book.
I found the book fascinating. While I an usually not a big fan of books with an excess of superfluous detail I felt that the detail in this book was necessary to capture the history. It was obvious that Mr. Makely had to compress a huge amount of information into a very readable format. I came away with a deep appreciation for the struggles to protect Lake Tahoe and a surprising respect for the TRPA. While the TRPA is very easy to criticize and condemn and far from perfect, the economic and political forces against them, particnularly in the early years was massive. I found it all the more interesting as this is my home, my history and I had a slight knowledge of some of the players.
Tahoe has been a test bed, a petri dish if you will, for experiments like Best Management Practices with no proven scientific evidence that they work. I am happy to dig French drains for runoff from my roof, happy to complete defensible space, but where is the proof that individual as well as Area-wide BMPs actually do what they are supposed. Fine sediments are still entering the lake from street cleaning and cars in general. Getting people, especially tourists, out of their cars is a monumental effort.
Cautious, just check the large cement vault BMP on Ski Run and Paradise Ave sometime in fall. Or better actually get some rubber boots and get in it and you will experience first hand the large amount of sediment that will sit on the floor of that vault. And the city actually cleaned it completely out late last fall, so you’ll be seeing one season of build up of fine sediment.
I do remember it being widely reported that the 911 operator told several callers that there was a controlled burn that day, and to ignore the smoke. Of course, that operator was in Truckee!