|
|
|
Charlie LeDuff of the New York Times tries to kayak the Los Angeles River and gets past downtown, only to be "discovered and expelled before reaching the ocean."
The river is where shopping carts go to die. It collects dead animals along its banks. It accumulates light bulbs, motors, couches and other effluence of affluence. The Los Angeles County Department of Watershed Management says it is also full of invisible detritus: ammonia, a number of metals, petroleum, coliform, chlorpyrifos as well as other pesticides and volatile organics. The water makes one itch in odd places...(skipped)
It is a dreary paddle down river. Miles of graffiti. Kids drinking malt liquor. Men waving from the weeds.
It had been a few years, I think, since the last journalist tried that story. Now Charlie has it out of his system. In his 1995 book Sagebrush and Cappucino: Confessions of an L.A. Naturalist, I thought David Wicinas found a more creative device. In one chapter he hiked Sepulveda Pass over land - staying off streets, keeping to the canyons and yards. In a later chapter he slogged down Topanga Canyon creek to the ocean and came across a few, uh, interesting things you don't see from the road.
A while back an LAT reporter walked Sunset from downtown to the sea. I believe it's also possible to hike along the ridge of the Santa Monica "Mountains" from Ventura County to Griffith Park, although there might be spots of private land along the way. An easy way to get from Hollywood to the Valley (or at least Mulholland) is through Runyon Canyon Park.
This guy has some trip reports some might find of interest: http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~rbell/index.html
These guys skied in the morning, biked the San Gabriel river to the sea, and surfboarded in the ocean: http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~mark/outdoors/other/mtnsea/mtnsea.html
Here's an article on the LA River from the Cappuccino guy: http://www.calacademy.org/calwild/winter98/river.htm
I'd suggest anyone who's interested in the LA River should visit San Antonio. In parts their river looks like LA's in that it has concrete walls. However, there are a few differences. Such as the greenery and housing right next to the river rather than being separated from it by a fence. And, minus the LAR's omnipresent graffitti and trash. I saw a few people in S.A.'s poorer area spontaneously picking up trash. Downtown the river walk is a bit too commercial, but that's necessary I guess.
Posted by: Lonewacko: I'm Still Blogging Across America at December 8, 2003 10:45 AMThe 1999 Steve Chapple LA Weekly story is here:
http://www.laweekly.com/ink/printme.php?eid=4314
with a followup letter from FOLAR here:
http://www.laweekly.com/ink/99/18/letters.php
Almost 500 American dead in Iraq and the NYT fills space with pieces of fluff like this.
Makes one wonder what they put on the same page in 1965.
Posted by: Brad Smith at December 9, 2003 12:36 PMThe LA Weekly story was engaging regarding the kayaking bits. The NYT story is not with its use of the third person. Personally, this blogger finds references to "a reporter" stupid. Everyone knows who the "reporter" referred to is, why not just write it in the first person and make it entertaining.
As for it being "fluff," the subject of the L.A. River is hardly fluff. It's part of L.A.'s "long" history and - in this reporter's view - a metaphor for L.A. and other southwest cities. And, it's also a vastly misused public resource. Even a small town like Carlsbad NM treats their river better and makes better use of it. C'mon, they've only got 20,000 people there, and they manage to put on a Christmas light show with boat tours.
L.A. is 200 times larger and vastly richer in "talent" and money, yet all they/we have is a flowing toxic waste dump. If it were finally made into something worthwhile that would have a positive effect on millions of people. While the article might be "fluff," the subject of renovating the river isn't.
[goes to the edge of the ring and tags the people from FOLAR]
Posted by: Lonewacko: Blogging from an undisclosed location in Arizona at December 9, 2003 07:12 PM
Oh, I agree about the signiifcance of the river to Angelenos, LW ... I've lived beside it.
But the NYT surely could use the space and/or time to a better end ... a better story on the river would be one possibility, I suppose, although I don't see that as being of tremendous interest to residents of NYC, etc.
Like I said, Mr. LeDuff's work - on this subject, at least - is fluff, and pretty pointless fluff at that.
Posted by: Brad Smith at December 10, 2003 03:02 PM
of LA Observed
When Steve Chapple kayaked the river for his 1999 LA Weekly story, he made it to the sea. The writer and his FOLAR guide Denis Schure were stopped then released by an LAPD chopper and five officers in squad cars: "We had a permit, of sorts, the numbers of which Denis had splayed in black letters...so that anyone looking down from a police helicopter could read it: "E.I.D.C. PERMIT," EIDC standing for Entertainment Industry Development Corp. The only easy permit to acquire in a county of bureaucrats is the permit to film."
Posted by: Marjorie Sa'adah at December 8, 2003 09:07 AM