Blogging Bayport Alameda

March 17, 2014

40 year old version

Filed under: Alameda, Development, Public Resources, Transportation — Lauren Do @ 6:07 am

In the lead up to the City Council vote to create a cycle track on Shoreline, opponents to the track (or proponents of parking) made it seem like this was some decision that was made on the fly.  As though the City was looking for some place to put a cycle track and decided overnight that Shoreline would be the perfect place to do it.  Turns out the idea for a dedicated “cycle track” of sorts had been proposed waaaayyyy back in 1974.

Here’s the awesome cover for the 1974 bicycle master plan:



And here’s the relevant section from the plan:



It only took 40 years to accomplish, but well done 1974 Bicycle Task Force members, for being well ahead of your time.



  1. When we were working on the 1978-79 Bicycle Master Plan, everyone involved said it was Alameda’s first-ever bike plan.
    Where can we see a copy of this 1974 plan?

    The cycle track and the related improvements–and there are many–will make Shore Line Drive a safer roadway overall by reducing the automobile travel speeds, providing dedicated turn lanes for local residents, and adding and improving crosswalks. It will take pressure off of the now-substandard multi-use path that, at 8 feet in width, is unsafe for all the different types of uses it now sees. (CalTrans now has a 12 foot minimum width for such paths, and 15 feet is what we would ask for if a new path were to be installed there now.)

    Comment by Jon Spangler — March 17, 2014 @ 8:10 am

  2. I only have a second hand copy with someone’s notes in it, so not shareable. But I imagine the City Clerk’s office can find a copy.

    Comment by Lauren Do — March 17, 2014 @ 8:12 am

  3. Yep! And as I recall, when the beach renovation (attempt to hold onto the sand, etc.) was done, we were told that after time for compaction, and plantings were more mature, the pedestrian walkway along Shoreline would be raised up to the top of the new hillock so people could enjoy the views while walking, and the bike path would go where the sidewalk is. People finally stopped “asking When? Now?” after about 10 years.

    I still think the ped path on top is a great idea. Seaside has one along the bluff next to the highway into Monterey that we used as an example of the kind of thing that could be done. The only thing that actually was done was planting wild flower seeds. Then we were told even that was too expensive, hard to maintain, etc., etc. It’s a shame the PTB’s can’t see a way to let us see the view there. Those of us who were around in the 70s didn’t expect or intend building a Berlinesque wall, the vision was undulating mound of small shrubs, plants and wild flowers, people walking on top, bikes below, cars below that. I remember seeing the artist’s renderings – quite nice, but not what EBRP/COA ever did.

    Comment by Li_ — March 17, 2014 @ 8:50 am

  4. I don’t think you understand: in Alameda, a mere 40 years between first discussion and actually implementation IS considered the equivalent of a headlong rush.

    Comment by Jack Mingo — March 17, 2014 @ 9:09 am

  5. #3: I like the idea of a ped path atop the sand berm. This is a win-win concept if the existing ped path was converted to a bike path.

    Comment by Basel — March 17, 2014 @ 9:41 am

  6. I think it was in the wet seventies that tides overflowed the Grand/Shoreline intersection and washed all the beach sand back into the bay. Half the city traveled out to see the beach devastation. Second biggest excitement in the seventies…the first was the A7 unexpectedly dropping in on Central Ave. I figure by the time the city gets their latest bright idea functional, the tides will decide it’s high time to revisit.

    Comment by Jack R — March 17, 2014 @ 9:46 am

  7. @Jon Spangler
    It looks like UC Berkeley’s got a copy:

    Comment by Alexis — March 17, 2014 @ 3:01 pm

  8. Amazing. Forty years later and there’s still no need.

    It wouldn’t do any good to cut a pedestrian path on top of the dunes. During the sand replacement project, the park district thought it would be wise to build a mile long housing pad along a riverbank. The beach is now flat and featureless with a sharp 3 foot embankment along the shore. I’m 30 feet up and I can’t see the water along the shore except at low tide. Must be for sea level rise.

    Comment by Lavage10 — March 17, 2014 @ 7:19 pm

  9. It’s a trend becoming more and more popular. I mentioned Palo Alto in Lauren’s previous post, here’s a couple more cities removing parking to make way for bike lanes:

    The City of Sunnyvale:
    The Sunnyvale City Council approved a plan to remove street parking and replace that with bike lanes on El Camino Real (ECR) between Sunnyvale Avenue and Remington Drive during their meeting on July 23, 2013.

    The City of Menlo Park:
    The commissioners voted 6-0 on Nov.13 to recommend that the City Council eliminate the parking as city staff suggested to make bike travel safer on the street

    Also looks like Berkeley is moving in this direction as well.

    Comment by Karen Bey — March 18, 2014 @ 8:04 am

  10. Berkeley has a network of Bike Boulevards

    Comment by frank — March 18, 2014 @ 8:36 am

  11. Comparing Sunnyvale bike lanes on El Camino Real (ECR) between Sunnyvale Avenue and Remington Drive to Shoreline is a joke.

    “Staff evaluated on- and off-street parking demand. Parking demand is very low
    on the roadway. Weekday and weekend surveys taken in morning, afternoon,
    and evening time periods found very little to no parking demand on the street
    in the study area. Available on-street parking supply is approximately 134
    spaces. Peak on-street parking demand was one (1) vehicle. ”

    Excess off-street parking supply was noted for all land uses in the proposed
    study area. There are 3,337 off-street parking spaces in the study area.
    Average weekday occupancy observed was 32%, with one facility, the Safeway
    shopping center, realizing a peak of 76% occupancy in the weekday evening.
    Average weekend off-street parking occupancy observed was 38%, with peak
    occupancy of 63% during the weekend mid-day.

    Comment by Sunnyvale vs Shoreline — March 18, 2014 @ 9:09 am

  12. Laugh all you want, but this is a growing trend, and I’m happy to see Alameda moving in this direction.

    Comment by Karen Bey — March 18, 2014 @ 9:20 am

  13. I am generally in favor of increased bike lanes but have mixed feeling about this project. I walk from my house near Park St. to Crab Cove Visitors Center and back every day. During the week I start at 5:30 AM but on Sundays I walk with my wife starting out at 9:45 AM. The existing mixed use path is underutilized. All of the years I have done this I have never had a problem. I think a significant issue for the residents along this route is the decrease in night time parking spaces from 343 to 47. I counted cars parked on each side at 5:30 AM. On the land side of Shoreline between the Post Office and Westline there were 122 cars. On the bay side there were 78. The majority were clustered between the P.O. and Grand St. where the 24 hour zone will be located.

    I wonder if anyone has considered the impact on Otis Drive if and when these changes take affect. Will people who traditionally use Shoreline divert to Otis? I think Otis is the most dangerous Street in Alameda to cross already. Also there is an elementary school right there.

    There is also the Alameda Point EIR which seems to imply that there will be more ‘crosstown traffic’ as a result.

    Comment by frank — March 18, 2014 @ 10:33 am

  14. 13: Regardless of what happens on Shore Line–and I am a big fan of making Shore Line safer and more accessible for all travelers with this project–Otis Drive needs a “road diet” to slow the traffic and make it safer.

    Since parking–anywhere, at any time–in Alameda is relatively a piece of cake compared to San Francisco, I am not too concerned about the drop in overnight parking spaces. Alamedans, like everyone else in California and the USA, drive too much and we own too many cars. This wastefulness will end soon because of several global trends, at which point there should be a nice balance for residents and visitors alike along Shore Line Drive.

    Comment by Jon Spangler — March 19, 2014 @ 8:37 am

  15. I composed most of this comment last night before 14. was up. Jon, a “road diet”? Yeah the world needs fewer autos on the road, but I don’t think we need to achieve that by somehow making roads more difficult to use. We need to educate and enforce. Speeding on Otis is epidemic. I jay walk regularly day and night and once in a while vehicle acceleration screws up my timing and I have to pick up the pace. But I was on Grand and Lincoln this week and saw one of the those new police SUVs barreling toward the station at 45 mph. Didn’t look like emergency response.

    13. Frank, I’ve thought about traffic on Shoreline a lot. I am anxious to see just how this track does work out, i.e. not 1000% on board.

    I can’t figure why most people would use Shoreline if they don’t live on Shoreline, unless they are going to the post office or the beach itself. West bound you don’t save time or avoid much traffic by jogging over from Otis if you are coming from Doolittle, headed to Eighth Street and beyond. Coming in off the tube and heading south and east I can see how folks might end up at Shoreline, but if you are driving strategically from one point to another, Shoreline still seems to be out of the way for most other destinations. I wonder what the traffic loads actually are and what the trips are for. Parking is parking. I appreciate that you actually counted them all.

    You are an early bird. I often bike around on weekends and marvel at how few folks can be out and about on all our the trails, but Shoreline ped trail from Broadway to Crown Beach can be really crowded and hectic weekend midday and afternoons. On a sunny day with beach activity folks running to and from beach to the cross walks can be a complete hazard and I actually don’t see that new bike track will slow them down much. It may even challenge those peds in terms of looking both ways for two sets of lanes, and I wonder if they will end up standing in the new track waiting for cars to pass or yield.

    I choose that path for leisurely biking, but yield to almost everybody in both speed and right of way. Once while walking on Shoreline path I had a bike roaring at me which tried to pass between my wife and I and a couple who we were just over taking who were walking (improperly) to the far left. I was aggressive in holding my ground and brought the guy to a dead halt. Being my usual cheery self I may have muttered something like “Slow the f- down, man.”

    side note for bikes on mixed use of trails: I’ve got a kid’s ka-ching-ka-ching bell on my bike because I can modulate it better and I have a theory that if I use it well it is less alarming and people don’t get startled as much. A lot of bike folks are adamant about vocal warning, but it can be unnerving if you are lost in your own thoughts or exercise regime and at ten feet and closing a confident bike riders calls out “on your left!” This happens to me even on the street when I’m also on a bike. I have noticed a sort of delay in my own audio processing of things verbal, like I have a short moment where I’m startled and am asking myself who, what, huh? before I’m able to integrate what I’ve heard as the bike inevitably zooms past. more grumbling under breath from me. Recognition of a bell is clear and immediate.

    Comment by MI — March 19, 2014 @ 9:26 am

  16. 14) Who the hell are you to decide how much one drives is too much or who owns too many cars? The car ownership global trend you speak of is a product of your own myopia and your climate parasites’ wishful thinking. While car ownership may be slightly down in the US, it’s soaring globally.

    Comment by Jack R — March 19, 2014 @ 9:38 am

  17. This scientist (and hundreds of others) has some interesting ideas on where the future is headed. His new book is a fascinating read and he estimates the optimal population for the world is about 2 billion. It currently stands at 7 billion- 5 billion in less thant 125 years. He directly attributes fossil fuel consumption as one of the biggest problems and the one that will destroy help much of the human race. I figure every little bit that can be done helps to save us.
    His recent interview on Bill Maher would be an eye-opener for anyone who has not read his book.

    Comment by librarycat — March 19, 2014 @ 10:32 am

  18. 17)
    You wrote, “He directly attributes fossil fuel consumption as one of the biggest problems and the one that will destroy help much of the human race.”
    I assume, librarycat, you meant “help destroy” instead of “destroy help”. But maybe not since according to your fascinating source the human population is already 5 Mill plus in excess of his ideal so that means burning more and more fossil fuels is good because it will bring the population down to the ideal number. So if you agree with your fascinating source crank out some more fossil fuel C02…every little bit helps..

    Comment by Jack R — March 19, 2014 @ 12:32 pm

  19. I win the bet!!! I said to my friend that you would nit pick the typing error rather than read the book itself or perhaps some other reviews and articles and offer a good defense of the “more is better-everyone is doing it , why shouldn’t we? ” idea that you are proposing. It was an interesting read and I did not agree with all of it but I still read it. I have another bet on your reply Jack so make it good (ie very very snarky and cranky), baby needs new shoes.

    Comment by librarycat — March 19, 2014 @ 12:49 pm

  20. “I can’t figure why most people would use Shoreline if they don’t live on Shoreline”. For starters, the best thing about Alameda is the beach sunsets. Many folks go there just to watch them. I drive Shoreline every chance I get, because the scenery sure beats Otis. Some of us are just more romantic than pragmatic, I guess.

    Comment by vigi — March 19, 2014 @ 12:59 pm

  21. 20. Sure, but most people who are speeding are all about getting where they are going, not smelling the roses. I walk and bike to Southshore for the latter.

    Comment by MI — March 19, 2014 @ 2:09 pm

  22. 16. “climate parasite”, WTF does that mean? baby need a new diaper ?

    17. I saw the interview and get it, but as Weisman alluded at the outset of the interview, I have a problem with hyper focus on population, and Malthusian hysteria in general. Sure, we are at least approaching the carrying capacity of the planet for a number of reasons, if carbon in the atmosphere hasn’t already breached that threshold, but the focus on population can be a bit of a rabbit hole. Hard to directly legislate birth rates and you can quickly drift into eugenics, sterilizations etc. We’ve been there. The effect of good education on birth rates is really interesting as Weisman also notes. Here’s another review:

    Kolbert is interviewed about her own new book on extinction:

    Comment by MI — March 19, 2014 @ 2:34 pm

  23. 19)
    Why would I offer a “good defense” of the “more is better-everyone is doing it , why shouldn’t we?”? I don’t tell people how to run their lives. I think Weisman has it wrong, I believe humans will die out in a couple centuries because of fertility rates hovering in the -2 region in most developed countries.

    Climate change is a fact of nature. A climate parasite are opportunistic frauds who preyed on superstition and natural disasters respectively to separate honest people from their money. These are climate parasites:

    Comment by Jack R — March 19, 2014 @ 5:59 pm

  24. Whatever Fox sayeth, let no man put asunder

    Comment by The Gospel According to Bill O'Reilly 1:1 — March 19, 2014 @ 6:04 pm

  25. Maher or O’Reilly two counterfeit bills.

    Comment by Jack R — March 19, 2014 @ 7:11 pm

  26. #24 truer words never spoken, Let’s face it- the massive intellect of Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly and their fossil fuel overlords (who of course never travel in limos or eat caviar) would certainly never be waylaid by actual facts or other possible theories.

    #23 Since you did not read Weisman’s book- you cannot disagree with him. You can only disagree with what you think that he said. It appears that you may even agree with him. There needs to be less people and since we don’t do anything to slow down the climate change that we are helping to speed up- ah well. you are correct – our grandkids don’t need to live in a good world. You’ll be dead- you won’t care. As to declining birth rates doing mankind in – rest assured- it is just the birth rate of certain types of people that are declining.

    #23 you are correct= even Weisman is obviously uncomfortable with anything that smacks of “culling” or legislating birth rates as anyone should be. There are better ways to reduce rates as he details. I admit his numbers on birth rates in places like Iran were unexpected. His recommendations on education and access to birth control were not a surprise however. It was a good read overall with a lot of interesting stories and facts.
    Kolbert’s book is next up. got to finish “empty mansions” first. Jack would like that book- it is about crazy old white people with too much money and too little sense who don’t care about the world at all.

    Comment by librarycat — March 19, 2014 @ 7:33 pm

  27. I do not waste my time reading contemporary political books and as a librarycat with few mice to chase why do waste your time on books of drivel. I suggest you search through Dewey 900 series to better hone your sense of why we’ve become what we are.

    Comment by Jack R — March 19, 2014 @ 8:16 pm

  28. Please, share your wisdom. Just what have we become and why?

    Comment by Supplicants R Us — March 19, 2014 @ 8:45 pm

  29. Look in the mirror ass hole.

    Comment by Jack R — March 19, 2014 @ 8:51 pm

  30. You’ll find my book in the 158 section. Give it a try…

    Comment by Dale Carnegie — March 20, 2014 @ 7:32 am

  31. librarycat: we baby boomers [aka crazy old white people] grew up with Paul Erhlich, & watched his forecasts not come true in the timeline he provided. Crazy old white people, yeah, we are really the problem.. [the site below has some great cartoons, but I didn’t know how to transfer them here…]

    Population Bomb

    Nigeria Tested by Rapid Rise in Population

    LAGOS, Nigeria — In a quarter-century, at the rate Nigeria is growing, 300 million people — a population about as big as that of the present-day United States — will live in a country roughly the size of Arizona, New Mexico and Nevada. In this commercial hub, where the area’s population has by some estimates nearly doubled over 15 years to 21 million, living standards for many are falling.

    A Market in Lagos, Nigeria

    Lifelong residents like Peju Taofika and her three granddaughters inhabit a room in a typical apartment block known as a “Face Me, Face You” because whole families squeeze into 7-by-11-foot rooms along a narrow corridor. Up to 50 people share a kitchen, toilet and sink — though the pipes in the neighborhood often no longer carry water.

    At Alapere Primary School, more than 100 students cram into most classrooms, two to a desk.

    As graduates pour out of high schools and universities, Nigeria’s unemployment rate is nearly 50 percent for people in urban areas ages 15 to 24 — driving crime and discontent.

    The growing upper-middle class also feels the squeeze, as commutes from even nearby suburbs can run two to three hours.

    Last October, the United Nations announced the global population had breached seven billion and would expand rapidly for decades, taxing natural resources if countries cannot better manage the growth.

    Nearly all of the increase is in sub-Saharan Africa, where the population rise far outstrips economic expansion. Of the roughly 20 countries where women average more than five children, almost all are in the region.

    Elsewhere in the developing world, in Asia and Latin America, fertility rates have fallen sharply in recent generations and now resemble those in the United States — just above two children per woman. That transformation was driven in each country by a mix of educational and employment opportunities for women, access to contraception, urbanization and an evolving middle class. Whether similar forces will defuse the population bomb in sub-Sarahan Africa is unclear.

    “The pace of growth in Africa is unlike anything else ever in history and a critical problem,” said Joel E. Cohen, a professor of population at Rockefeller University in New York City. “What is effective in the context of these countries may not be what worked in Latin America or Kerala or Bangladesh.”

    Across sub-Saharan Africa, alarmed governments have begun to act, often reversing longstanding policies that encouraged or accepted large families. Nigeria made contraceptives free last year, and officials are promoting smaller families as a key to economic salvation, holding up the financial gains in nations like Thailand as inspiration.

    Nigeria, already the world’s sixth most populous nation with 167 million people, is a crucial test case, since its success or failure at bringing down birthrates will have outsize influence on the world’s population. If this large nation rich with oil cannot control its growth, what hope is there for the many smaller, poorer countries?

    “Population is key,” said Peter Ogunjuyigbe, a demographer at Obafemi Awolowo University in the small central city of Ile-Ife. “If you don’t take care of population, schools can’t cope, hospitals can’t cope, there’s not enough housing — there’s nothing you can do to have economic development.”

    The Nigerian government is rapidly building infrastructure but cannot keep up, and some experts worry that it, and other African nations, will not act forcefully enough to rein in population growth. For two decades, the Nigerian government has recommended that families limit themselves to four children, with little effect.

    Although he acknowledged that more countries were trying to control population, Parfait M. Eloundou-Enyegue, a professor of development sociology at Cornell University, said, “Many countries only get religion when faced with food riots or being told they have the highest fertility rate in the world or start worrying about political unrest.”

    In Nigeria, experts say, the swelling ranks of unemployed youths with little hope have fed the growth of the radical Islamist group Boko Haram, which hasbombed or burned more than a dozen churches and schools this year.

    Internationally, the African population boom means more illegal immigration, already at a high, according to Frontex, the European border agency. There are up to 400,000 undocumented Africans in the United States.

    Nigeria, like many sub-Saharan African countries, has experienced a slight decline in average fertility rates, to about 5.5 last year from 6.8 in 1975. But this level of fertility, combined with an extremely young population, still puts such countries on a steep and disastrous growth curve. Half of Nigerian women are under 19, just entering their peak childbearing years.

    Women Left Behind

    Statistics are stunning. Sub-Saharan Africa, which now accounts for 12 percent of the world’s population, will account for more than a third by 2100, by many projections.

    Because Africa was for centuries agriculturally based and sparsely populated, it made sense for leaders to promote high fertility rates. Family planning, introduced in the 1970s by groups like Usaid, was initially regarded as foreign, and later on, money and attention were diverted from family planning to Africa’s AIDS crisis.

    “Women in sub-Saharan Africa were left behind,” said Jean-Pierre Guengant, director of research at the Research Institute for Development, in Paris. The drastic transition from high to low birthrates that took place in poor countries in Asia, Latin America and North Africa has yet to happen here.

    That transition often brings substantial economic benefits, said Eduard Bos, a population specialist at the World Bank. As the last large population group reaches working age, the number of adults in the labor force is high relative to more dependent groups — the young and the elderly — for a time. If managed well, that creates capital that can be used to improve health and education and to develop new industries.

    And that has happened elsewhere. Per-capita gross domestic product in Latin America, Asia and North Africa increased between three and six times as population was brought under control, Dr. Guengant said. During that same period it has increased only marginally in many African countries, despite robust general economic growth.

    In Nigeria, policymakers are studying how to foster the transition, and its attendant financial benefits, here. In the ramshackle towns of the Oriade area near Ile-Ife, where streets are lined with stalls selling prepaid cellphone cards and food like pounded yam, Dr. Ogunjuyigbe’s team goes door to door studying attitudes toward family size and how it affects health and wealth. Many young adults, particularly educated women, now want two to four children. But the preferences of men, particularly older men, have been slower to change — crucial in a patriarchal culture where polygamy is widespread.

    At his concrete home in the town of Ipetumodu, Abel Olanyi, 35, a laborer, said he has four children and wants two more. “The number you have depends on your strength and capacity,” he said, his wife sitting silently by his side.

    Large families signal prosperity and importance in African cultures; some cultures let women attend village meetings only after they have had their 11th child. And a history of high infant mortality, since improved thanks to interventions like vaccination, makes families reluctant to have fewer children.

    Muriana Taiwo, 45, explained that it was “God’s will” for him to have 12 children by his three wives, calling each child a “blessing” because so many of his own siblings had died.

    In a deeply religious country where many Roman Catholics and Muslims oppose contraception, politicians and doctors broach the topic gingerly, and change is slow. Posters promote “birth spacing,” not “birth control.” Supplies of contraceptives are often erratic.

    Cultural Factors

    In Asian countries, women’s contraceptive use skyrocketed from less than 20 percent to 60 to 80 percent in decades. In Latin America, requiring girls to finish high school correlated with a sharp drop in birthrates.

    But contraceptive use is rising only a fraction of a percent annually — in many sub-Saharan African nations, it is under 20 percent — and, in surveys, even well-educated women in the region often want four to six children.

    “At this pace it will take 100-plus years to arrive at a point where fertility is controlled,” Dr. Guengant said.

    There are also regional differences. The average number of children per woman in the wealthier south of Nigeria has decreased slightly in the last five years, but increased to 7.3 in the predominantly Muslim north, where women often cannot go to a family planning clinic unless accompanied by a man.

    The United Nations estimates that the global population will stabilize at 10 billion in 2100, assuming that declining birthrates will eventually yield a global average of 2.1 children per woman. At a rate of even 2.6, Dr. Guengant said, the number becomes 16 billion.

    There are signs that the shifting economics and lifestyles of middle-class Africans may help turn the tide, Dr. Ogunjuyigbe said. As Nigeria urbanizes, children’s help is not needed in fields; the extended families have broken down. “Children were seen as a kind of insurance for the future; now they are a liability for life,” he said.

    Waiting in a women’s health clinic, Ayoola Adeeyo, 42, said she wanted her four children, ages 6 to 17, to attend university, and did not want more children.

    “People used to want 6 or 7 or even 12, but nobody can do that now. It’s the economics,” said Ms. Adeeyo, elegant in a flowing green dress and matching head wrap. “It costs a lot to raise a child.”

    Dr. Eloundou-Enyegue worries that Africa’s modestly declining birthrates reflect relatively rich, educated people reducing to invest in raising “quality” children, while poor people continue to have many offspring, strengthening divisions between haves and have-nots. “When you have a system with a large degree of corruption and inequality, it’s hard not to be playing the lottery because it increases the chances that one child will succeed,” he said.

    In Nigeria’s desperately poor neighbor, Niger, women have on average more than seven children, and men consider their ideal to be more than 12. But with land divided among so many sons, the size of a typical family plot has fallen by more than a third since 2005, meaning there is little long-term hope for feeding children, said Amadou Sayo, of the aid group CARE. Blame it all on the Crazy Old Rich White People…

    Comment by vigi — March 20, 2014 @ 9:51 am

  32. Jack your wasting your time…..Dealing with the mindset of Librarycat aka MI and all of his circle jerks…

    Comment by Public Service Announcement — March 20, 2014 @ 11:53 am

  33. For the record, I am crazy old white people also- just not one who thinks “why try and do a little something in the world- no one else is- let it all crash and burn, that will keep those darn kids off my lawn” which seems to be Jack’s stance and also is not true. Also don’t think that unless I read a book I should completely discount it (unless it is written by Ann Coulter) which seems to be case for a lot of people.

    Vigi : Your article seems to support Weisman’s information that world may be heading for massive population reduction through catastrophe and discount Jack’s that declining birth rates already damn mankind to extinction. As I said- not all rates are declining- just some people’s rates are going down. I suppose some people don’t think that African people are real people?

    Actually Erhlich may still be correct – time will tell. Just because a prediction has not come through yet- does not mean it will not come true. I don’t have enough fingers to count the number of disasters and deaths caused by things that could never ever happen and yet did finally- think Titanic on a planetary scale.
    But no matter- I’ll be dead (I hope like heck) so no need to be concerned or even attempt minimal actions on my part.
    Vigi- thanks for the info- very interesting stuff. I do sometimes drive down SouthShore just to see the ocean also. It is so very pretty but I disagree that it is the best thing about Alameda- this is a terrific place to live for a lot of reasons.

    #32- your role as minion is fitting you well although I might suggest that the hat is a little too tight.

    Comment by librarycat — March 20, 2014 @ 12:31 pm

  34. I’ll be portraying JR in the Bayport movie

    Comment by Ted Knight — March 20, 2014 @ 1:31 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Create a free website or blog at