14
2 Historical Annotations
plan was generated to fill 60 % of the remaining Bay and create a narrow shipping channel
until the year 2020. At that time three women started a campaign against these plans and
in 1965 the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) was established
which was charged to prepare a plan for long-term use of the San Francisco Bay.
A variety of factors led to the decline of the Bay area and the degradation of tidal
marshes such as building upstream dams and diversions (Mount, 1995). Further impacts
were results of hydraulic gold mining which showed negative effects on anadromous fish
populations or of industrial and agricultural activities such as the disposal of trace elements
or pesticides.
The San Francisco Bay Plan was completed in 1968 and sent to the California Legislative and the Governor in 1969. After finalizing the studies and, there upon, the Bay
Plan the BCDC was designated as responsible agency for maintaining and carrying out the
provisions of the law and the Bay Plan.
The following compilation on the San Francisco Bay Plan is based on the report “San
Francisco Bay Plan by the San Francisco Conservation and Development Commission”
(BCDC) reprinted in 2012 (BCDC, 1969). Here, a short description of the important items
of the Bay Plan will be given; further and detailed information can be found at specific
websites.
1 Due to the fact that the Bay Plan was developed on the (urgent) issue of Bay
filling the major conclusion and policies are touching these points (see BCDC, 1969):
The Bay The Bay is a single body of water, and a Bay Plan can be effectively carried out
only on a regional basis.
Uses of the Bay The most important uses of the Bay are those providing substantial
public benefits and treating the Bay as a body of water, not as real estate.
Uses of the Shoreline All desirable higher priority uses of the Bay and shoreline can
be fully accommodated without substantial Bay filling and without loss of large natural
resource areas. But shoreline areas suitable for priority uses – ports, water-related industry,
airports, wildlife refuges and water-related recreation – exist only in limited amount and
should be reserved for these purposes.
To enable economic and societal development around the Bay one conclusion touches
the point of justifying Bay fill: “Some Bay filling may be justified for purposes providing
substantial public benefits if these same benefits could not be achieved equally well enough
without filling.” The explanation of justifiable Bay fills encompass six items such as ports,
routes, airports and recreational features. Thereafter, the effects of filling the Bay regarding
the previously mentioned items are described. So, these items have to be considered as
minimum requirements in the application of planned Bay filling. The Commission already
acknowledged that the pressure to fill the Bay might increase over time. However, the
main conclusion concerning the pressure is that the Bay is vulnerable to filling and diking
because of the historical development. Approximately 40 % of the Bay was lost due to
1 For example, www.bcdc.ca.gov
2 Historical Annotations
plan was generated to fill 60 % of the remaining Bay and create a narrow shipping channel
until the year 2020. At that time three women started a campaign against these plans and
in 1965 the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) was established
which was charged to prepare a plan for long-term use of the San Francisco Bay.
A variety of factors led to the decline of the Bay area and the degradation of tidal
marshes such as building upstream dams and diversions (Mount, 1995). Further impacts
were results of hydraulic gold mining which showed negative effects on anadromous fish
populations or of industrial and agricultural activities such as the disposal of trace elements
or pesticides.
The San Francisco Bay Plan was completed in 1968 and sent to the California Legislative and the Governor in 1969. After finalizing the studies and, there upon, the Bay
Plan the BCDC was designated as responsible agency for maintaining and carrying out the
provisions of the law and the Bay Plan.
The following compilation on the San Francisco Bay Plan is based on the report “San
Francisco Bay Plan by the San Francisco Conservation and Development Commission”
(BCDC) reprinted in 2012 (BCDC, 1969). Here, a short description of the important items
of the Bay Plan will be given; further and detailed information can be found at specific
websites.
1 Due to the fact that the Bay Plan was developed on the (urgent) issue of Bay
filling the major conclusion and policies are touching these points (see BCDC, 1969):
The Bay The Bay is a single body of water, and a Bay Plan can be effectively carried out
only on a regional basis.
Uses of the Bay The most important uses of the Bay are those providing substantial
public benefits and treating the Bay as a body of water, not as real estate.
Uses of the Shoreline All desirable higher priority uses of the Bay and shoreline can
be fully accommodated without substantial Bay filling and without loss of large natural
resource areas. But shoreline areas suitable for priority uses – ports, water-related industry,
airports, wildlife refuges and water-related recreation – exist only in limited amount and
should be reserved for these purposes.
To enable economic and societal development around the Bay one conclusion touches
the point of justifying Bay fill: “Some Bay filling may be justified for purposes providing
substantial public benefits if these same benefits could not be achieved equally well enough
without filling.” The explanation of justifiable Bay fills encompass six items such as ports,
routes, airports and recreational features. Thereafter, the effects of filling the Bay regarding
the previously mentioned items are described. So, these items have to be considered as
minimum requirements in the application of planned Bay filling. The Commission already
acknowledged that the pressure to fill the Bay might increase over time. However, the
main conclusion concerning the pressure is that the Bay is vulnerable to filling and diking
because of the historical development. Approximately 40 % of the Bay was lost due to
1 For example, www.bcdc.ca.gov