Why Sea Ranch Matters Now (2019)
The Sea Ranch Non-Human Residents Project
Sponsored by The Center for U.S. Rural Cultures Studies, “The Sea Ranch Nonhuman Residents Project” is a step in a rehabilitation process aimed at reanimating “Live Lightly on the Land.” This remarkably relevant sustainability ethic is woven throughout TSRA literature, but has been functionally abandoned in current landscape management practices approved by The Sea Ranch Association. This project is an opportunity to reintroduce management practices that avoid unnecessary destruction of nonhuman habitat.
The place humans call “The Sea Ranch” is a fragile, diverse, interdependent biological complex: this place is the other animals, the grasses, the trees; all the flora and fauna are one fabric. What human SR residents call “wildlife” are other animals who’ve done their best to adapt to human animals here for decades. To call them “wildlife” is an easy way to abstract them, to make it seem like they aren’t individual beings, in families, who are trying to survive in an unnecessarily hostile human-controlled environment.
Sea Ranch “wildlife” are beings without power or a voice in human processes that stress, maim, and kill them. No value is attributed to the quail or deer or any other-than-human animal, and no consideration of them is part of development, design, or building of human habitat. TSRA’s relationship with other animals here is the very definition of authoritarianism: the policy and practices steal power from other animals to find food, shelter, and safety by destroying the natural environment’s resources.
Authoritarian tendencies have no place in a struggling democracy. Democracies require healthy social soil, which is created in relations between humans and between humans and other beings. In a democratic culture, relational power sharing is fundamental, and it creates the conditions for the possibility of including all humans and all other beings in consideration.
Without a mindful, devoted personal power-sharing practice, everyday authoritarianism invades and spreads, killing any remaining native democratic processes. Power-stealing patterns quietly poison the social soil in which democracies grow. Our democracy dies without our individual power sharing practices. With them, we create a new world.
“The Sea Ranch Nonhuman Residents Project” is a chance for the humans of The Sea Ranch to challenge the stereotype that “all old white people are authoritarian.” In this time — when state-level authoritarianism surrounds us — and in this place, in California, it is imperative we are relationally democratic. It is our responsibility as U.S. citizens to share power. No social, economic, religious, or academic status relieves any of us of that responsibility. No age reached. No experience level. No exceptions.
When we encounter relational power-stealing, we must speak up, reframe the relation to share power, and provide a democratic alternative. “The Sea Ranch Nonhuman Residents Project” is an effort to demonstrate, model, and document those steps.
The Sea Ranch “Utopian” Narrative
Before 2019, the articles describing Sea Ranch included a range of topics: landscape architecture, architectural design, Sea Ranch “ideas,” and Sea Ranch “celebrity” architects.
2019 articles are self-referential and all emphasize architectural design and individual architects in order to establish a legacy narrative. Each article also draws on Sea Ranch “ideals,” but only as inference. No 2019 Sea Ranch article narrates beyond architecture. Landscape management practices that enable humans to “Live Lightly on the Land” in Sea Ranch have been abandoned, while the “utopian” narrative distracts from the need for a functional, sustainable landscape management policy.
The Sea Ranch “utopian” narrative also includes its justification for destruction of habitat. As reported in the New York Times, Lisa Dundee, an architect and longtime director of the Sea Ranch Association’s powerful Department of Design, Compliance and Environmental Management, demonstrates how fear is driving TSRA landscape policies: “With Northern California — well, actually all of California — burning up, we’ve really had to challenge ourselves to find alternatives to our traditions.” (Ms. Dundee flashed a picture of a fire in Napa on her screen to the journalist while asserting, in Sea Ranch, that the whole state is on fire.) The “fear of fire” narrative trickles down from Dundee-TSRA, infecting other residents, and leaving the path clear to cut.
The preservationist tradition — “Living Lightly on the Land” — is the tradition being annihilated alongside the other animals’ habitats. The Center’s documentation demonstrates that the majority of cutting decisions are for human architectural enhancement and views, not fire safety. Dundee-TSRA appear to use fire safety as a cover for unprecedented cutting and clearing in 2019.
The lack of any policy at the Sea Ranch devoted to protecting nonhuman animals and other beings (including monarch butterflies) leaves in place the current and on-going unnecessary destruction of nonhuman habitat. Without devoted attention, human architecture will always trump other animals’ homes here, even if the humans only visit occasionally forcing all the other animals to adapt constantly to the human-controlled environment.
The Sea Ranch Needs a Sustainability Study
15 years ago, the SR “Vision Interpretive Program Committee” produced a document entitled, “The Sea Ranch: Concept and Covenant.” In their words, the purpose of the committee was to “undertake an educational program to discuss the [SR] concept and the responsibility of members to uphold it.” In this current TSR sales literature (the document is called “VIP Booklet” and offered to potential buyers), the committee attempts to demonstrate an effort to move Sea Ranch away from its “creeping suburbanism.”
At the time, the committee determined the causes of Sea Ranch degradation were “recent demographic changes.” In other words, the new people were the problem, according to this TSRA committee. Currently, however, demographics are not the driving force behind the considerable pressure on SR Nonhuman Residents. The Sea Ranch Association’s landscape management policies and practices are now destroying The Sea Ranch, while they drive out, stress, maim, and kill the nonhuman animals here.
As this committee’s literature points out, “the concept of ‘living lightly on the land’ starts with respect for nature.” It also understands that human habitat at The Sea Ranch is IN nonhuman habitat, not next to it. The other animals’ homes and shelter do not surround SR human habitat. SR humans have moved into other animals’ spaces, and the respect inherent in “Live Lightly on the Land” protects the homes and shelter of SR Nonhuman Residents who live next to human residents here.
The current Sea Ranch design review steps include no consideration of SR Nonhuman Residents:
- PRELIMINARY SITE REVIEW — This first step gives the
owner a chance to explore the unique qualities of
his or her site with a member of the design review
staff. Taking advantage of the preliminary site
review as early as possible can avoid costly plan
changes later in the design process.
2. CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW — At this stage,
the owner submits to the Design Committee a
general idea of the overall concept, including the
house’s floor plan and elevations, its siting on the
property and its relationship to nearby natural
features and other houses.
3. PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW — The owner
then submits the preliminary design plan — a
comprehensive architectural plan which indicates
all major aspects of the building design and use of
the site. Neighbors are given the chance to review
and comment as part of the process.
4. FINAL DESIGN REVIEW — The final step in the
approval process consists of all the construction
documents required by Sonoma County. This
submittal must also address any conditions that
were part of the Design Committee approval of
the Preliminary Design Review.
As reported in the New York Times, Lisa Dundee, an architect and longtime director of the Sea Ranch Association’s powerful Department of Design, Compliance and Environmental Management, demonstrated how fear is driving TSRA landscape policies: “With Northern California — well, actually all of California — burning up, we’ve really had to challenge ourselves to find alternatives to our traditions.” The preservationist tradition — “Living Lightly on the Land” — is the tradition being annihilated alongside the other animals’ habitats. (The Center’s documentation demonstrates that the majority of cutting decisions are for human architectural enhancement and views, not fire safety.)
From the same sales document: “An early Sea Rancher said, ‘When I first moved to The Sea Ranch I asked this question and I continue to ask it: What is the least impact I need to make on the land? When I first saw The Sea Ranch, I knew others had also asked this.’ If you are asking the same question, Sea Ranch is for you.” The Sea Ranch Association architectural design and landscape management policies and practices contradict this narrative.
Without a vested interest in the safety and lives of SR Nonhuman Residents — one at least as powerful as the SR fascination with human architectural design — the other-than-human animals will always be in the way of human habitat here.
There is no reason why The Sea Ranch can’t become what it claims to be in its literature: a place where humans “Live Lightly on the Land.” TSRA policies and practices can make that happen, just like they’re creating the pressure on SR Nonhuman Residents now.
The Sea Ranch needs a sustainability study, conducted in collaboration with non-Sea Ranch “wildlife” experts who are not distracted by the SR human architectural club. The study should determine: (1) The starting place: What is the current condition of SR Nonhuman Residents and their habitat? (2) What impacts do current TSRA grass cutting, pesticides, and tree removal policies and practices have on nonhuman residents and their habitat? (3) What changes to TSRA landscape management policies and practices would protect the homes, safety, and lives of SR Nonhuman Residents? (4) How might “Live Lightly on the Land” be reclaimed in the name of all SR residents?
Sustainable Landscape Policies Needed
Currently, only two restrictions on landscape alterations exist in The Sea Ranch: no perimeter fences and no non-native plants outside fenced courtyards. Human Sea Ranch residents are free to cut, spray, and clear as they see fit.
Policies and practices that protect nonhuman residents’ habitat do not exist at The Sea Ranch, except as they are inferred by “Live Lightly on the Land.” And that ethic has been functionally abandoned in practice by TSRA. No policy or practice protects SR Nonhuman Residents from human residents destroying their home, shelter, and safety.
The Sea Ranch Association requires a landscape policy (or set of policies) specifically dedicated to protecting its SR nonhuman neighbors. Without those policies, the other animals are at the mercy of human practices here that drive them out, stress them, maim them, and kill them.
No need to harken back to Lawrence Halprin: currently available and effective sustainability practices, with practitioners right here in the San Francisco Bay Area, provide plenty of guidance in protecting other animals’ habitat. TSRA landscape policy needs to be updated to include sustainable practices that respect SR Nonhuman Residents.
Most human animals live in habitat that displaced other animals. That is not reason to stop monitoring and changing human processes whose momentum continue to unnecessarily destroy nonhuman neighbors’ homes. Decisions about tree removal, herbicides and pesticides, grass cutting, and human architectural design need to reflect careful consideration of their impact on other animals who live in Sea Ranch
TSRA Tree Removal Process Needs Review
The removal of a tree from Sea Ranch destroys hard structure habitat for other animals. More than this, the removal of a tree impacts the entire ecosystem, and both the decision process and removal practice need to reflect that importance.
Currently, TSRA tree removal processes are opaque, and that lack of transparency steals power from those who would understand, contribute to, and participate in the decision-making process. Additionally, the details of the on-the-ground decisions and practice of actual clearing, cutting, and removing are not accessible to SR residents.
Development of democratic processes ought to include these questions:
- What is the process for deciding a tree or trees are cleared, removed, and/or cut? What does the process look like? Who is involved? How are SR residents included in the process?
- What does the on-the-ground decision-making process look like? What oversight measures are in place? Who is ultimately responsible for how cutting happens on the ground?
- Does the policy-level decision-making process include consideration of nonhuman residents? How, specifically?
- Is the decision-making process different in different areas of TSR? If so, why?
- Who stands to profit when trees are cut, removed, cleared? Who profited from the most recent cutting, removing, and clearing? How was the decision to use the tree companies reached? Who was involved? What did that process look like?
- What non-Sea Ranch wildlife experts are included in the process of deciding to cut, clear, or remove a tree?
Monarch Butterfly Habitat Needs Protection
According to Samantha Marcum, monarch butterfly conservation coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Pacific Southwest Region, 4.5 million butterflies have disappeared on the West coast since 1980. That is a 99%
decline of the monarch butterfly population. Monarchs will abandon a site if the habitat is no longer suitable. The significant, currently ongoing hard and soft structure habitat cutting at The Sea Ranch is decimating potential monarch butterfly habitat sites.
Monterey Cypress (along with Monterey Pine and Eucalyptus) are where the monarchs shelter and live. The Sea Ranch Association has approved extensive hard structure habitat cutting for “fire safety” this year even though — as the Center’s documentation shows — aesthetics and views actually drive much of the nonhuman habitat destruction, not safety issues.
(Sea Ranch residents have responded to inquiries by referring either to the Doug Fir or Pine mold “problems,” and each has used similar language to refer to these “issues.” Another mentioned she thought the cutting had to do with poison oak. Another pointed out that cutting for views has been happening at Sea Ranch since the beginning. None appear to understand what is happening on the ground in terms of tree cutting and clearing. Each was informed exclusively by The Sea Ranch Association.)
Currently, no Sea Ranch Association policies exist devoted to protecting monarch butterfly habitat in The Sea Ranch. Only two restrictions on landscape alterations apply to private property in The Sea Ranch: no perimeter fences and no non-native plants outside fenced courtyards. Human Sea Ranch residents are free to cut, spray, and clear as they see fit. The nonhuman beings are paying the price for that lack of regulation.
Before implementing any policy changes, The Sea Ranch Association ought to invite the U.S. Fish & Wildlife folks to assess Sea Ranch and discuss restoration of potential monarch butterfly habitat sites. Policy changes after understanding current conditions ensure the method (the rules) are connected to the on-the-ground actual conditions.
The Sea Ranch Association, then, needs to implement regulations devoted to protecting monarch butterfly habitat at The Sea Ranch. Additionally, TSRA needs to seriously consider revising its restrictions on planting outside fenced courtyards to include plants that will welcome and support monarch butterfly populations along this part of the West coast.
Ultimately, Sea Ranch “owners” are responsible for caring for this San Francisco Bay Area resource, but neglect, ignorance, and indifference are allowing just a few to make the decisions that are devastating this fragile place. That can change.
Who to Contact to Express Concern
According to Sonoma Magazine online, “Lisa Dundee, an architect who heads up the all-powerful committee that controls every detail of Sea Ranch design” is the primary person approving design, development, and tree cutting decisions. Ms. Dundee is also the president of Gualala’s Humane Society. [Ms. Dundee was notified on January 26, 2019 of the ongoing research at The Sea Ranch. Additionally, a formal complaint against Ms. Dundee is being prepared for submission to the National offices of The Humane Society.]
Ms. Dundee can be reached at:
Compliance & Environmental Management
Phone: 707–785–2316 • Tuesday — Friday 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. ldundee@tsra.org
Susan Clark, author of much of The Sea Ranch narrative published on TSRA’s website, is also President of The Sea Ranch Foundation. She can be reached at:
The Sea Ranch Foundation
P.O. Box 98
The Sea Ranch, CA 95497
phone: (707) 785 2989
email: gwr@mcn.org
THE SEA RANCH ASSOCIATION
Administrative Offices • 975 Annapolis Road • The Sea Ranch
General Information and Member Services Phone: 707–785–2444
Email: info@tsra.org
222 • Facilities Reservations Member Services
226 • Member Assessments Haidi Calkins
227 • Finance & Human Resources Director Ellen Buechner
232 • Facilities & Resources Director John Prescott
233 • Safety & Security Services Director Chris Howard
234 • Information Technology Director Sara Windsor
236 • Administration & Management Servic
2019- Sea Ranch narrative sales pieces:
Sea Ranch Architecture gets an upgrade — no section or discussion of current land or landscape management practices: https://www.pressdemocrat.com/lifestyle/9697675-181/sonoma-countys-sea-ranch-hailed?sba=AAS
Sea Ranch Legacy, Utopia, Architecture — no section or discussion of current land or landscape management practices: https://www.dwell.com/article/sea-ranch-architecture-7f30ea15
Sea Ranch Modernist Utopia, Architecture — no section or discussion of current land or landscape management practices: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/11/arts/design/sea-ranch-california.html
SFMOMA promo piece — mentions “Environment” in the title, but no section or discussion of current land or landscape management practices: https://www.sfmoma.org/press/release/the-sea-ranch/
Dezeen SFMOMA piece (scroll down to find Eleanor Gibson’s piece). Although the words “environment” and “landscape” appear in the article, no description or discussion of current landscape practices is offered.
Curbed Sea Ranch Oral History, Pt. 1 piece quotes Larry Halprin within a “utopian” narrative history, thereby effectively characterizing his “Live Lightly on the Land” ethic as currently “naive.” No mention of current TSRA landscape management policies or practices in this carefully crafted “complete” history. https://www.curbed.com/2019/2/20/18231590/sea-ranch-northern-california-sonoma-county-coast-history
Curbed Sea Ranch Oral History, Pt. 2 piece quotes Mary Griffin and Lisa Dundee grappling with how to save the human architecture from fire. Missing is any discussion or consideration of a sustainable landscape policy that protects both human and nonhuman habitat in this carefully crafted “complete” history. https://www.curbed.com/2019/2/21/18232116/sea-ranch-coastal-commission-oral-history-legacy
Sea Ranch VIP sales narrative (PDF): http://www.tsra.org/photos/VIPBooklet.pdf
The Sea Ranch Association website narrative — landscape management declared and inferred as “Live Lightly on the Land”: https://www.tsra.org/news.php?viewStory=1790
As The Sea Ranch wiki narrates it, no landscape policies exist beyond no non-native plants and no planting outside fenced courtyards. An incomplete description of grasses management only mentions sheep. Sea Ranch “owners” are free to cut and spray as they see fit. “Larry Halprin” listed under landscape — no further information is provided. (Hard, non-democratic firewall patrolled by Dundee-TSRA. Even with citations and documentation, attempts to add to an incomplete Wiki account — from a current resident of Sea Ranch — was declared “malicious.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Ranch,_California
Pre-2019 narrative
Utopia Rules at Sea Ranch, NYT 2015: One journalist’s experience at the Lodge. No mention of landscape architectural practices
Landscape Architecture Magazine piece that only quotes TSRA literature without any focus, description, or mention of actual landscape architecture or management policies or practices.
Ostensibly about landscape architecture and design, the blog post mentions nothing about those actual policies or practices; simply invokes Halprin.
Curbed article about specific Sea Ranch house. No utopia narrative; no mention of landscape management policies or practices. https://www.curbed.com/2018/4/9/17192240/sea-ranch-california-home-tour-framestudio
All of The Sea Ranch Association rules. All related to architecture, building, maintenance. etc. No articulation of a functional, sustainable landscape management policy or practice. http://www.tsra.org/photos/TSRA_Rules.pdf
