Sorry.  Understood.  I think it was the "not so pretty surroundings" line that threw me off as it is actually surrounded by, well.... my neighborhood.  I've never counted the cars but I suppose you are right statistically speaking.  People do use it to short cut from Highland to Green.  But it is also packed all the time with people seeking recreational fun and, unfortunately, would be even moreso if not for unwarranted fears (from others) that some family reunion is going to jump you.  I know some people who drive all the way out to Chagrin Reservation because they don't like the "surroundings".... unfortunate.

^I couldn't agree more.  I've gone to Euclid Creek since I was a kid, and have always enjoyed myself.  It seems as if the same old negative perceptions which follow African Americans wherever they are, are still in effect to this day.  I'm personally SICK of it, but that's another discussion. 

 

Not to turn this into a whole other issue( as someone else actually did above...and not me), but perhaps before dealing a race card on someone on this forum you don't even know (which is just as prejudiced/inappropriate in its own right) it may be important to look deeper and ask why such perceptions, if any have come to manifest, true or not.  The original post that attracted those replies said NOTHING to warrant dealing a race card, and before anyone even goes there..neither did mine! Lighten up people...quit with the hyper sensitivity. 

 

Anyway, I just wanted to bring up the concern that I am noticing an increased amount of litter in our parks in the last few years. Everytime I walk through them I make a point to bring a small bag to try and pick up as much as I can. I hope others will chose to do the same. Some who disrespect these parks like this don't deserve them until they learn better. Those who do respect them for all they are....big thanks and appreciation goes to you. We cannot afford to lose these invaluable places because of careless fools. 

I always pick up litter when we're hiking in the park.  I bring 2 plastic bags, 1 so I can put it around my hand so I'm not handling the garbage directly.

^^E.C.- I was speaking on the overall "perception" of African Americans (I myself am bi-racial), along with the changing "perception" of Euclid with the continued influx of African Americans into the city.  I wasn't dealing the race card on anyone, and wouldn't expect to have to do so on this forum.  I also wasn't being hyper-sensitive- I lived in Euclid for 20 years, and know the mindset of the local public very well.  What Hts44121 was saying is indeed true, and lives on strong in Euclid and other inner-ring suburbs currently experiencing white-flight in the 21st century. 

 

Back to our regularly scheduled program...

 

It will be interesting to see what positive changes come from the addition of Zimmerman will bring. 

Dead on Oldman.  I was also speaking more towards a general perception and apologized if I wrongly sensed that perception in the original post.  EC's just being EC.  Don't take it personally.  Just be glad he didn't throw in any "Oncler" accusations on top of what he said.... well, I guess he did  :-D

 

And to clarify... the Euclid Creek Reservation is "surrounded" by residential neighborhoods in South Euclid, Euclid and Richmond Hts with very little or no industry.  There is a small sliver of Euclid to the north that is a mix of industry and residential before entering Cleveland (Colllinwood) on 185.

 

For those who like outdoor workouts, I really like and recommend the reservation because of the slope.  It is about 3.5 - 4 miles long and pretty much all downhill going north.  I can warm up on my way from my house to the southern entrance, work up a sweat without overexerting myself on the way down, and then really bust my chops to finish out the workout by either heading back up the slope or going up either Grand Blvd or Highland.  Along the path, they have pull-up / push-up bars, tires, etc. to mix in some strength training.  There are also some dirt trails (but no bikes allowed) on either side of the path and a couple really nice picnic areas... which are so popular that sometimes you can't find an open grille.

I'm voting "no" on Issue 80.  I'm sure this thing is going to pass in a landslide regardless, and normally I support such initiatives myself, but I'm still very bitter about the whole Oakwood debacle and the Metroparks' refusal to step in and save that land.  Now I get to drive by a Walmart two or three times a week instead of what could have been a beautiful park.  As someone living in an inner-ring suburb, it bothers me that this organization maintains parks so far away from the core of the city and even parks in other counties (while residents in those counties don't pay a dime for them) and chose to do nothing to help people in my neighborhood out.

Don't vote out of spite

As the old saying goes, all politics are local.

Don't vote out of spite

 

I think my vote is partially out of spite; the other part (a not insignificant part, no less) is based on my frustration with the decisions being made by the organization.  And yes I'm aware that they have made some investments in areas closer to the city core, but I still don't think it's serving all constituents, particularly when it's running parks in places like Willoughby Hills and Hinckley.

 

In a lot of ways, residents of large portions of Beachwood, Cleveland Heights, and South Euclid, all of University Heights and Shaker Heights would be better off not paying into the MetroParks, instead keeping this money to fund parks in their own respective communities.  Each of these cities already has or will have their own "park system," imagine what they could do with even more money.  Not to harp on this, but perhaps Cleveland Heights and South Euclid could have pooled this saved money to pay for preservation of Oakwood.

 

Parks are assets to communities and a positive contribution to quality of life.  I support that completely, which is why I'm still upset about Oakwood which is within walking distance of my residence.  What I don't support is the conflation of politics with conservation, and the MetroParks have failed to keep their nose clean in that regard.

 

The bottom line is that as an inner-ring eastern suburban resident, I just don't see this organization as serving my interests at all.  Before Oakwood, I was happy to support them even though I rarely used their parks.  Now I'm just really questioning what benefit they bring to my neighborhood and the surrounding communities.  We're essentially subsidizing recreation areas for outer-ring residents.

Metroparks tends to focus on the river valleys, lakefront, and other unique natural assets- thus Hinckley.  I'm not sure what made Oakwood particularly compelling from a regional park standpoint.  It seems more "City Park" to me.

 

I'd be curious to know how non-Cuyahoga County Metroparks Reservations are paid for, I doubt that it is as simple as you seem to think.

Hinckley has it's own Metroparks levy. No idea if it covers all costs associated, or not.

Metroparks tends to focus on the river valleys, lakefront, and other unique natural assets- thus Hinckley.  I'm not sure what made Oakwood particularly compelling from a regional park standpoint.  It seems more "City Park" to me.

 

I'd be curious to know how non-Cuyahoga County Metroparks Reservations are paid for, I doubt that it is as simple as you seem to think.

 

Point taken, but the MetroParks have gotten involved in taking over former golf courses that really don't fit that unique natural assets description.  I don't see much difference between Oakwood and Acacia or even Mankiki.  I mean, I'm not at all upset that they got involved with Acacia because I didn't want to see more retail at that intersection, but I just don't see the difference...except in who may have been pulling the strings behind the scenes in both cases.

Wasn't Acacia gifted to the Metroparks by that NY fund?

 

Don't vote out of spite

 

I think my vote is partially out of spite; the other part (a not insignificant part, no less) is based on my frustration with the decisions being made by the organization.  And yes I'm aware that they have made some investments in areas closer to the city core, but I still don't think it's serving all constituents, particularly when it's running parks in places like Willoughby Hills and Hinckley.

 

In a lot of ways, residents of large portions of Beachwood, Cleveland Heights, and South Euclid, all of University Heights and Shaker Heights would be better off not paying into the MetroParks, instead keeping this money to fund parks in their own respective communities.  Each of these cities already has or will have their own "park system," imagine what they could do with even more money.  Not to harp on this, but perhaps Cleveland Heights and South Euclid could have pooled this saved money to pay for preservation of Oakwood.

 

Parks are assets to communities and a positive contribution to quality of life.  I support that completely, which is why I'm still upset about Oakwood which is within walking distance of my residence.  What I don't support is the conflation of politics with conservation, and the MetroParks have failed to keep their nose clean in that regard.

 

The bottom line is that as an inner-ring eastern suburban resident, I just don't see this organization as serving my interests at all.  Before Oakwood, I was happy to support them even though I rarely used their parks.  Now I'm just really questioning what benefit they bring to my neighborhood and the surrounding communities.  We're essentially subsidizing recreation areas for outer-ring residents.

 

South Euclid has a very nice metropark largely within its borders.  It and Lyndhurst also have a plethora of recently made parkland (Bolton, Anderson, Lowden) which has yet to be built out after the demolition of several old elementary schools.  Beachwood now has one which abuts its northern border (Acacia).

 

I would suggest focusing on the Metroparks' actions, not their non-actions.  There were a lot of forces at play in the Oakwood deal.  Absent a land conservation fund coming in and buying the land (as what happened with Acacia), I doubt the Metroparks had the available resources to make the most competitive bid.

And lets not forget its only been the South Euclid part of Oakwood thats been developed...

Wasn't Acacia gifted to the Metroparks by that NY fund?

 

The Conservation Fund, located in Arlington, Virgnia.  I have my own questions about their involvement in Acacia (and not Oakwood), but regardless the argument seems to be shifting a bit here.  You were saying that Oakwood doesn't fit the type of property that the MetroParks usually looks to acquire/operate; my response to that was that Acacia is similar in that regard in breaking that mold.

 

South Euclid has a very nice metropark largely within its borders.  It and Lyndhurst also have a plethora of recently made parkland (Bolton, Anderson, Lowden) which has yet to be built out after the demolition of several old elementary schools.  Beachwood now has one which abuts its northern border (Acacia).

 

First off from looking at Google Maps with an overlay of the South Euclid borders, only about 30-35% of Euclid Creek is within the boundaries of South Euclid.  That's nitpicking, but the reality is that Euclid Creek is most easily accessible to residents of northern South Euclid.  Likewise, Acacia is most easily accessible to residents of northern Beachwood...and not without traversing the incredibly busy area around Beachwood Place, first, though.  If you're a resident of central or southern Beachwood, the fact that Acacia is now a MetroPark may not be as big a deal.

 

Second off, it's not about the amount of parkland within South Euclid or Lyndhurst (or Cleveland Heights, Shaker Heights, or University Heights).  It's about who is paying for these parks.  Residents of Cleveland Heights and Shaker Heights have access to a number of very nice city-run parks, but the residents pay for these parks themselves.  People from Rocky River, or Fairview Park, or Bedford, or Mayfield Village are not sending funds to Cleveland Heights or Shaker Heights to pay for parks in these cities, the reverse, however, is true.

 

I would suggest focusing on the Metroparks' actions, not their non-actions.  There were a lot of forces at play in the Oakwood deal.  Absent a land conservation fund coming in and buying the land (as what happened with Acacia), I doubt the Metroparks had the available resources to make the most competitive bid.

 

Although I think there is some sketchiness in how the MetroParks chooses to acquire and operate properties and in some of the developers with which they're choosing to associate, and although I think there is a problem when an organization that takes money from an entire region only benefits certain parts of that region, we can look at their actions, too.  They operate more than a half dozen golf courses.  Golf courses are a huge drain on the environment and they, themselves, only serve a small and specific portion of the populous.  I think it's right to question whether more funding should be provided when a big chunk of it goes to pay for an expensive and wasteful recreation activity.  I realize that it's not free to golf on these courses, but I also know that these courses don't break even, either.

 

As a region, I see the MetroParks as an asset.  However as a divided region with as much NIMBYism and concern about maintaining the walls that keep us separate from one another, I just believe that the MetroParks have evolved into another vehicle by which many inner-ring residents are getting fleeced to convenience outer-ring residents.  It may come off as being petty, but I see it more as a matter of survival.  Many outer-ring communities have devised schemes for keeping as much of their resources in their borders as possible when it comes to other matters (like education, public safety, etc.), but they seem to have no problem taking money from other communities for things like parks and preservation.  I just think that inner-ring residents need to be more aware of what is happening and stop blindly supporting this system because it may not be to our net benefit when that money could stay here and support parks in our communities.

And lets not forget its only been the South Euclid part of Oakwood thats been developed...

 

With all due respect, I don't see your point.  The damage is already done to those of us living in this community: Traffic along Warrensville Center has worsened and although I'm not sure what's going to happen to the other portion of Oakwood, the potential it had as part of something larger is now pretty much gone.  All to convenience a large, shady retailer that already had a store located around the corner.

As a region, I see the MetroParks as an asset.  However as a divided region with as much NIMBYism and concern about maintaining the walls that keep us separate from one another, I just believe that the MetroParks have evolved into another vehicle by which many inner-ring residents are getting fleeced to convenience outer-ring residents.  It may come off as being petty, but I see it more as a matter of survival.  Many outer-ring communities have devised schemes for keeping as much of their resources in their borders as possible when it comes to other matters (like education, public safety, etc.), but they seem to have no problem taking money from other communities for things like parks and preservation.  I just think that inner-ring residents need to be more aware of what is happening and stop blindly supporting this system because it may not be to our net benefit when that money could stay here and support parks in our communities.

 

That may be the view from the Cedar Road corridor, but I don't think Lakewood, West Park, Brooklyn, Parma, Newburgh Heights, Cuyahoga Heights, Garfield Heights, etc. would necessarily agree. 

As a region, I see the MetroParks as an asset.  However as a divided region with as much NIMBYism and concern about maintaining the walls that keep us separate from one another, I just believe that the MetroParks have evolved into another vehicle by which many inner-ring residents are getting fleeced to convenience outer-ring residents.  It may come off as being petty, but I see it more as a matter of survival.  Many outer-ring communities have devised schemes for keeping as much of their resources in their borders as possible when it comes to other matters (like education, public safety, etc.), but they seem to have no problem taking money from other communities for things like parks and preservation.  I just think that inner-ring residents need to be more aware of what is happening and stop blindly supporting this system because it may not be to our net benefit when that money could stay here and support parks in our communities.

 

That may be the view from the Cedar Road corridor, but I don't think Lakewood, West Park, Brooklyn, Parma, Newburgh Heights, Cuyahoga Heights, Garfield Heights, etc. would necessarily agree. 

 

You're right, I can't claim to speak for all inner-ring residents.  In that regard we probably have more in common with other areas where regional park coverage is spotty, particularly large parts of Cleveland and maybe even parts of the Parma area.  I realize that the county can't be one gigantic park, but I just don't agree with some of the decision-making and I think my community (and actually many others, as well) would be better off not participating.

And lets not forget its only been the South Euclid part of Oakwood thats been developed...

 

With all due respect, I don't see your point.  The damage is already done to those of us living in this community: Traffic along Warrensville Center has worsened and although I'm not sure what's going to happen to the other portion of Oakwood, the potential it had as part of something larger is now pretty much gone.  All to convenience a large, shady retailer that already had a store located around the corner.

 

I guess I really have two points to that. First, theres still hope for designated parkland, although as you say, not as large, and the main damage is done. Second, that the destruction of Oakwood has as much to due with the city of South Euclid and their new found fervor for suburban big box development as it does with the lack of the Metroparks stepping in.

You're right, I can't claim to speak for all inner-ring residents.  In that regard we probably have more in common with other areas where regional park coverage is spotty, particularly large parts of Cleveland and maybe even parts of the Parma area.  I realize that the county can't be one gigantic park, but I just don't agree with some of the decision-making and I think my community (and actually many others, as well) would be better off not participating.

 

Yeah, my point was that a lot of the inner ring is actually quite well-served by the Metroparks, especially on the West and South sides.  I can certainly understand feeling frustrated with the system's decision-making, but just because you don't have a county-run park in your individual community doesn't mean that they don't add value.  You're just as eligible for free admission to the zoo on Mondays as any other county resident, for example, and you're not really a far drive from several parks.  I guess I see it the same way as the health and human services levy- I haven't ever benefited from any of the programs it funds, but they're good for the overall community, and if I needed them, they'd be there.

 

As an aside, I think the reason there isn't much Metropark activity in the hilltop communities is largely historic/geographical.  Most of the parks are centered around rivers and river valleys, and the Heights clearly don't have much in the way of that because they're on high ground.  That's changing (see the lakefront parks), but there isn't much open land to conserve in those areas anymore.

First off from looking at Google Maps with an overlay of the South Euclid borders, only about 30-35% of Euclid Creek is within the boundaries of South Euclid.  That's nitpicking, but the reality is that Euclid Creek is most easily accessible to residents of northern South Euclid.  Likewise, Acacia is most easily accessible to residents of northern Beachwood...and not without traversing the incredibly busy area around Beachwood Place, first, though.  If you're a resident of central or southern Beachwood, the fact that Acacia is now a MetroPark may not be as big a deal.

 

Speaking of nitpicking..... ;)

 

But since we are at it, the Euclid Creek cuts in right about in the middle of South Euclid.  It is just as easily accessible from the southern parts as it is the northern half.

The Metroparks levy was passed -- easily!

 

Cleveland Metroparks

978 of 1,047 precincts

Tax increase, expenses

 

Yes  166,119 No  72,437

 

Yeah I knew it would and for the region as a whole it's for the best despite my personal feelings on its service to my particular area.

http://www.clevelandmetroparks.com/Main/EventsProgramsCalendar/Edgewater-LIVE-3829.aspx

 

Awesome.  Finally starting to use this space to its potential.  And just to give credit where credit is due, the Metroparks did not come up with this.  "Friends of Edgewater", a grassoots group for the past 10 years pushed for this when the state owned this space and are finally having their visions realized.  Hope to see everyone down there this summer on Thrusday nights!!

Green Light

 

After taking over 455 acres of neglected lakefront last year, Cleveland Metroparks CEO Brian Zimmerman has moved quickly to clean the beaches, make them safer and add amenities. Now he's looking to connect them with the rest of the Emerald Necklace.

Jillian Kramer

 

Brian Zimmerman jiggles a joystick in the cabin of the green-and-yellow John Deere, raising the tractor's empty forearm and bucket.

 

From his glass-enclosed perch near Edgewater Beach's lakeside pavilion, an expanse of nubuck-colored sand stretches 5,000 feet, unblemished by driftwood, debris or soiled diapers.

 

The Cleveland Metroparks CEO would like to take the 100-horsepower big-boy toy out for a spin on this late April afternoon. "Having grown up on a farm, machinery has a special place in my heart," Zimmerman explains.

 

But even on this 52-degree day, there are too many people enjoying the beach for a joyride. That may have been tough to say just 12 months ago, before the Metroparks assumed stewardship for 14 miles of shoreline and 455 acres of lakefront real estate — Villa Angela, Wildwood, Euclid Beach, northern Gordon and Edgewater parks and the East 55th Street Marina. At 151 acres, Edgewater Park is the single largest parcel — and undeniably, had been the most neglected.

 

A cash-strapped Cleveland handed off control of the West Side park and its siblings to the state in 1978. Each park has been in steady decline since the days of Bob Taft. At Edgewater Park, all of the bathhouse's showers leaked, but none of them worked. Doors to stalls didn't lock. Picnic tables rotted on grass suffocated by 2 feet of sand.

 

 

 

More at: http://www.clevelandmagazine.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=E73ABD6180B44874871A91F6BA5C249C&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=1578600D80804596A222593669321019&tier=4&id=46E6935FF2364D1487114937D02122AD

 

[email protected]

 

Thanks for posting that article Firenze98.  I am super excited for what is to come with regards to the lakefront in the next 5-10 years.  The immediate impacts of the MetroParks are already showing.

We were at Villa Angela/Wildwood this week as my brother and sister in law had her granddaughter.  To say I'm impressed with what they've done with it would be an understatement.  I even let Ardyn play on the beach without being too nervous. 

 

$14 million in improvements coming to CLE lakefront

Cleveland Metroparks outlines plans

Homa Bash

5:41 PM, Dec 9, 2014

 

CLEVELAND - Major improvements coming to six parks along Lake Erie as Cleveland Metroparks outlined how it will spend $14 million in capital.

 

The first project will be a 165-foot pedestrian bridge over Euclid Creek, joining Wildwood and Villa Angela. It will result in the connection of about a quarter-mile long trail.

 

Construction will begin in January and is expected to end by the start of summer, said Sean McDermott, chief planning officer at Cleveland Metroparks.

 

MORE:

http://www.newsnet5.com/news/local-news/cleveland-metro/14-million-in-improvements-coming-to-cle-lakefront

So Freighter Friday is a thing?

 

Share The River ‏@ShareTheRiver  31m31 minutes ago

What's the one thing that's guaranteed to get @clevemetroparks #MerwinsWharf crowd on their feet? #FreighterFriday

 

 

 

Rocky River Reservation's new Fort Hill Steps offer commanding view (photos)

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2016/10/rocky_river_reservations_new_fort_hill.html

Cleveland Metroparks has no reservations about great architecture (photos)

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2016/11/cleveland_metroparks_has_no_re.html

Cleveland Metroparks gets $4 million grant to buy land

By The Associated Press

POSTED: 02/19/18, 12:00 PM EST | UPDATED: 16 HRS AGO 0

 

CLEVELAND >> The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency has awarded Cleveland Metroparks $4.15 million to purchase 73 acres of land including wetlands and streams.

 

The property is in the village of Bentleyville in Northeast Ohio.

 

Brian Zimmerman is the Cleveland Metroparks CEO. He says preserving the land will help protect valuable ecosystems and prevent future development while providing residents more access to nature.

 

MORE:

http://www.news-herald.com/general-news/20180219/cleveland-metroparks-gets-4-million-grant-to-buy-land

More reclamation/ expansion:

 

Cleveland Metroparks leaders hope to replace greens with greenery at new Astorhurst Park

By Grant Segall, The Plain Dealer | Posted August 25, 2018 at 07:00 AM

 

WALTON HILLS, Ohio—Wildflowers are rising in the sand traps at the former Astorhurst Country Club.

 

The Cleveland Metroparks quietly reopened the Walton Hills site in May as Astorhurst Park, a 127-acre extension of Bedford Reservation bordering the Cuyahoga Valley National Park. Now the flowers are spreading, the grass is thickening and the links are starting to turn into parklands.

 

https://www.cleveland.com/expo/news/erry-2018/08/103ae063f98125/cleveland-metroparks-leaders-h.html

More reclamation/ expansion:

 

Cleveland Metroparks leaders hope to replace greens with greenery at new Astorhurst Park

By Grant Segall, The Plain Dealer | Posted August 25, 2018 at 07:00 AM

 

WALTON HILLS, Ohio—Wildflowers are rising in the sand traps at the former Astorhurst Country Club.

 

The Cleveland Metroparks quietly reopened the Walton Hills site in May as Astorhurst Park, a 127-acre extension of Bedford Reservation bordering the Cuyahoga Valley National Park. Now the flowers are spreading, the grass is thickening and the links are starting to turn into parklands.

 

https://www.cleveland.com/expo/news/erry-2018/08/103ae063f98125/cleveland-metroparks-leaders-h.html

 

They weren't going to keep it as a golf course, not with Shawnee Hills right there.

 

But BR is really underutilized and part of the reason is parking.  It used to be commonplace for people to park on the lawns roadside.  They've banned that, but didn't build any new lots.  And in the Cleveland-Akron metro "borderlands", that matters a lot.

 

It's designed for the people they want, not the people they have.

Lookout Ridge among new, improved trails to explore in Cleveland Metroparks

By Grant Segall, The Plain Dealer | Posted on February 17, 2019 4:55 AM | Updated February 17, 2019 4:55 AM

 

PARMA, Ohio—Even in a freeze, the Cleveland Metroparks keep laying out trails.

The other day, two workers were driving poles into a snowy peak to top West Creek Reservation’s new Lookout Ridge Trail with an observation deck for a wide view of downtown Cleveland.

The 102-year-old Cleveland Metroparks system has added about 26 miles of trails with natural surfaces since 2012 and replaced another six miles. Since 2016, crews have also given those trails more than 1,500 feet of boardwalks, footbridges and decks. 

 

cleveland.com

One of the crown jewels of the emerald necklace with many old gnarly trees: https://www.oldgrowthforest.net/a-b-williams-memorial-woods---north-ch

Edited July 8, 20195 yr by shack
add photo

19 minutes ago, Terdolph said:

I wish that they would complete the Emerald Necklace through Hunting Valley. 

This would be a regional draw, especially for cyclists.

 

I agree! The wildlife don't know the difference whether its public or private land. Its still a continuous green space even though its not entirely accessible to all. in some ways its more protected in terms of wear and tear. There should be some kind of path or bike lane near the road linking the parks.

Here's a photo of the tallest known  tree in Cuyahoga County that resides somewhere within the Cleveland Metroparks in a secret location for its own protection. I didn't discover this tuliptree but I measured it last year to a height of 162' . Its one of only thirteen known 160' plus trees in the entire state. Six are in Summit County Metroparks , one is in Mohican State Park, and the other five are in the Hocking Hill / Zaleski region where the tallest tops out at just over 170". Its the only "niche" of inside information I have to offer in this forum.

Edited July 9, 20195 yr by shack
correction: thirteen rather than dozen

44 minutes ago, Terdolph said:

I would like to see NPS/Metroparks return the lodgepole pines to "pinery narrows".  That would be something to see and would return a little bit of the early Ice Age feel to the area.

The hemlocks have a nice Ice Age feel to them. South Chagrin is a good place to see them although not very tall. North Chagrin is good also. They top out around 130 in the area. 

Love hemlocks. Reminds me of the Candian Bush.

15 hours ago, shack said:

I agree! The wildlife don't know the difference whether its public or private land. Its still a continuous green space even though its not entirely accessible to all. in some ways its more protected in terms of wear and tear. There should be some kind of path or bike lane near the road linking the parks.

 

16 hours ago, Terdolph said:

I wish that they would complete the Emerald Necklace through Hunting Valley. 

This would be a regional draw, especially for cyclists.

 

 

The Western Reserve Land Conservancy owns a good chunk of land in Hunting Valley. Its around 300 acres. The village itself owns over 100 acres. The village also has agreements with a bunch of owners under a conservation easement. I'm not sure how you could group them into one entity but I agree with you. At least the village has been proactive in protecting the lands in the area. 

1 hour ago, Mwd711 said:

 

 

The Western Reserve Land Conservancy owns a good chunk of land in Hunting Valley. Its around 300 acres. The village itself owns over 100 acres. The village also has agreements with a bunch of owners under a conservation easement. I'm not sure how you could group them into one entity but I agree with you. At least the village has been proactive in protecting the lands in the area. 

The most important thing is that the habitat is protected. Whether or not its private or public land is less of a concern to me or the wildlife for that matter.

When one includes the "pendant" (Cuyahoga Valley National Park), plus the attached Summit County Metroparks adjacent to it, the so called Emerald Necklace becomes an elaborate thing of beauty fit for a Queen!

22 hours ago, Mwd711 said:

 

 

The Western Reserve Land Conservancy owns a good chunk of land in Hunting Valley. Its around 300 acres. The village itself owns over 100 acres. The village also has agreements with a bunch of owners under a conservation easement. I'm not sure how you could group them into one entity but I agree with you. At least the village has been proactive in protecting the lands in the area. 

Some of these wealthy land owners will end up donating their property to the park as has been done in the past. 

18 hours ago, Terdolph said:

Having the public able to see and experience these things is important to securing ongoing funding to acquire and maintain these areas.

Urban parks do a much better job in rooting out invasive species because the big city can provide an army of volunteers that a large rural park in the middle of no where can't.

On 7/9/2019 at 8:26 AM, viscomi said:

Love hemlocks. Reminds me of the Candian Bush.

Ohio was a lot like the Canadian bush after the glaciers receded and the region was much cooler than it is now. Hemlocks were much more common back then and are being phased out due to climate change and a parasite called the Hemlock woolly adelgid (HWA). The hemlocks that do reside here live in the cool micro climates of deep ravines and steep cliffs.  The best example in Ohio are in Ash Cave or Old Mans Cave of Hocking Hills State Park. Some are 150 to 155ft tall! Most people overlook them because they are distracted by the spectacular scenery.

Here's an impressive  sycamore that's I've  documented at over 140 ft with a 13 ft girth. The tallest known in the state resides nearby within  the CVNP at 155' but is much skinnier at 9 ft circumference. One of many hidden "jewels" buried within our Emerald Neckless.

Edited July 10, 20195 yr by shack

On 7/8/2019 at 8:28 PM, Terdolph said:

I would like to see NPS/Metroparks return the lodgepole pines to "pinery narrows".  That would be something to see and would return a little bit of the early Ice Age feel to the area.

There are quite a few white pine  as well as red pine plantations that were planted during the Great Depression by the Civilian Conservation Corps in the area. I'm surprised by the lodgepole  pine considering its more of a western species. But there's also some Norway spruce here also, quite common actually.

Cleveland Metroparks working to create Lake Erie Water Trail across Cuyahoga coast

https://www.cleveland.com/news/2019/08/cleveland-metroparks-working-to-create-lake-erie-water-trail-across-cuyahoga-coast.html

Much of these repairs will be on Rocky River Reservation property:

 

ODOT announces $3.35 million project to fix eroding slopes in Rocky River, Lakewood, Fairview Park and Cleveland

Updated 6:22 AM;Today 6:11 AM

By John Benson, special to cleveland.com

 

LAKEWOOD, Ohio -- Eroding slopes along the Rocky River are forcing the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) to take action underneath I-90, I-480 and Lorain Road in Rocky River, Lakewood, Fairview Park and Cleveland. The estimated $3.35 million project is tentatively scheduled to start in the spring.

 

Because areas of the Rocky River Reservation have been enhanced through the Land & Water Conservation Fund Program, public input is required before the park property can be utilized to perform the slope repairs.

 

“We are asking for comments to be submitted for the project,” Kovacs said.

 

https://www.cleveland.com/community/2019/11/odot-announces-335-million-project-to-fix-eroding-slopes-in-rocky-river-lakewood-fairview-park-and-cleveland.html