Two proposals for development of Adams Canyon are currently working their way through separate approval processes.

One plan now undergoing county environmental review would divide the canyon into 34 large lots varying from 40 to 160 acres. This proposal appears primarily to be a scare tactic by some of the property owners.

Another is Measure A7, which will go before Santa Paula voters May 8 and would extend Santa Paula's city urban restriction boundary to include Adams Canyon, with future development plans left mostly undefined.

From the perspective of one concerned about protecting Ventura County's most valuable wildlife habitats, neither proposal should go forward. The infrastructure needed for the county proposal would badly fragment and degrade the canyon, and, in fact, has little chance of county approval.

Voters have no solid information or environmental review concerning what would be built if the canyon is eventually annexed to the city and should insist on a much better definition of planned development before approving the CURB adjustment. There are, of course, many issues needing analysis here, including water supply.

Adams Canyon, or at least the upper two-thirds of it, contains exceptional wildlife habitat and should not be allowed to fall victim to the wrong type of development. The California Department of Fish and Game, in describing the value of the canyon, has written, "Though several of the parcels closest to Foothill Road have been degraded by agricultural practices and might be suited to a carefully planned development project that minimizes California Environmental Quality Act impacts, the bulk of the lots to the rear of the property (close to 1,000 acres) are not suitable for development without severely diminishing the biological values."

A much better outcome for this ecologically valuable canyon is surely possible and is within the capacity of our region to carry out, perhaps through an approach similar to that being employed by the Ventura Hillsides Conservancy. If we can manage this, at least for the most biologically valuable parts of the canyon, future generations of Ventura County citizens will surely thank us.

Is there anyone in the county who really believes we will end up 50 or 100 years from now with too much protected habitat? One only has to look at the pressures for development throughout Southern California to see the improbability of such a scenario. Let's think outside the box and design a future for Adams Canyon that proves we care about our natural treasures.

— Ron Bottorff, of Newbury Park, is chairman of Friends of the Santa Clara River.