Ventura County: OIL Fruit, Commune, 

and Commute 

Final Report 

U.S. Department o 

the Interior 

Minerals Management Service 

Pacific ocs Region 

Pacific Outer Continental Shelf Region 

OCS Study 

MMS 96-0035 
Pacific Outer Continental Shelf Region 

OCS Study 

MMS 96-0035 

Ventura County: Oil, Fruit, Commune, 

and Commute 

Final Report 

Edited by: 

Krista Paulsen, Marine Science Institute, UCSB 

Harvey Molotch, Marine Science Institute, UCSB 

William Freudenburg, Department of Rural Sociology, 

University of Wisconsin 

Madison, WI 53706 

Research Assistants and Associated Authors 

Leonard Nevarez, Jane Ward,Hugh Louch, 

Sally Knight, Dawnel Moreno, Judith Taylor 

Submitted by: 

Ocean and Coastal Policy Center 

Marine Science Institute 

University of Santa Barbara 

Santa Barbara, CA 93106 

For: 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Minerals Management Service 

Pacific OCS Region 

770 Paseo Camarillo 

Camarillo, CA 93010 

Under Contract No. 14-35-0001-30663 

Minerals Management Service 

Pacific OCS Region 

July 19 
DISCLAIMER 

This report has been reviewed by the Pacific Outer Continental Shelf Region, Minerals 

Management Service, U.S. Department of the Interior and approved for publication. The 

opinions, findings, conclusions 

or 

recommendations expressed in this report are those of the 

authors, and do not necesarily reflect the views of the Minerals Management Service. Mention of 

trade 

names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for 

use. 

This report has not been edited for conformity with Minerals Management Service editorial 

standards. 
CONTENTS 

Acknowledgments 

iv 

Summary v 

Introduction 

1 

Geographical Orientation 

3 

L Before the Americans and Before World War I 5 

Early settiment 6 

Ventura and the coastal communities 8 

Oil in the back country: The Ojai and Santa Clara River Valleys 13 

Ojai: A place for the spirit-minded 19 

II. Between the Wars (1914-1945) 22 

Ventura and the Ventura Avenue oil field 23 

ifi. The California Post-War Boom (1945-1968) 34 

The oil patch 

as permanent fixture 36 

Offshore oil takes root 41 

Back country Oil: The valleys go 

their own ways 46 

Conejo and Simi Valleys: The suburban era 

48 

IV. The Environmental Era (1969-Present) 50 

Part A: Demographic Changes and Community Differentiation 50 

The coastal communities 59 

Coastal tourism 63 

The Ojai and Santa Clara River Valleys 66 

The new suburban cities 73 

Ventura County media 78 

Voluntary organizations 79 

Part B: Ventura County's Contemporary History 84 

Offshore oil, the spill, and 

response 

in Ventura and Oxnard 84 

Ventura County in the world oil market 95 

Back country oil revisited 99 

Petrochem USA: A 

case of environmentalism 

and market dynamics 100 

Environmental targets in Ventura County 102 

Remediation and abandonment 106 

Oil's current impact and influence 108 

Conclusion: Factors Influencing Ventura County Development 109 

Oil 

as first mover 

109 
Compatible industries: Agriculture and oil work together 110 

Land ownership: Persistence of large holdings 110 

Geography: Far and near 110 

The political climate: weak environmentalism 111 

Prospects for the future 111 

Appendix A: Ventura County Timeline 113 

Appendix B: Federal O.C.S. Lease Sale Hearings: A case 

study 127 

References i 

List of those consulted or 

interviewed 140 

LIST OF MAPS 

Map 1. Ventura County map 4 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 1. County sociodemographic characteristics, 1890-1920 5 

Table 2. County socioeconomic characteristics, 1910-1940,. 22 

Table 3. Growth in the communities, 1910-1930 23 

Table 4. Assessed value of oil properties before World War II 30 

Table 5. County sociodemographic characteristics, 1940-1970 34 

Table 6. County non-agricultural employment by occupation, 19404970 34 

Table 7. Assessed value of oil properties, 

World War II through 1953 36 

Table 8. Growth in the communities 

- Camarillo 45 

Table 9. Growth in the communities 

- 

the east county 48 

Table 10. County sociodemographic charaderistics, 1960-1990 52 

Table 11. County employment by occupation, 1960-1990 53 

Table 12. Ventura county employment by industry, 1970-1990 54 

Table 13. Property taxes on developed oil and gas mineral rights 55 

Table 14. Military employment and expenditures 58 

Table 15. Percentage of labor force employed by government 60 

Table 16. Number of residents employed in petroleum and mining 61 

Table 17. Percentage of labor force employed in tourism 64 

Table 18. Percentage of labor force employed in education 69 

Table 19. Unemployment rates 72 

Table 20. Median income per household 74 

Table 21. Percentage of adults 25+ with four-year degree 74 

Table 22. Median one-way commute times 75 

Table 23. Votes on 

the 1972 Coastal Zone Conservation Act 89 

11 
Table 24. Participants in Lease Sale 68 Draft E.I.S. hearing 91 

Table 25. Pro- and Anti- O.C.S. comments represented in 

coverage of Lease Sale 68 92 

Table 26. Ventura County payroll from northern Santa Barbara 

Channel O.C.S. platforms and onshore support projects 

.... 

96 

Table 27. Proportions of comments and themes regarding Lease 

Sales 53 and 68 in Ventura County 132 

LIST OF CHARTS 

Chart 1. Ventura County oil production, 1920-1970 26 

Chart 2. Ventura County oil production, 1950-1990 37 

Chart 3. The offshore 

era: Ventura County onshore 

and regional offshore production 44 

Chart 4. Ventura County community populations, 1960-1990 51 

Chart 5. The Extract/intact Ratio: Ventura County compared 

to state and region 56 

Chart 6. Ventura County oil and gas payroll, 1969-1989 57 

Chart 7. Populations of the Ojai Valley communities, 1960-1990 71 

Chart 8. Organizational density of tn-counties 81 

Chart 9. Arts and cultural organizations in tn-county communities 82 

Chart 10. Health and human services organizations 

in tn-county communities 83 

Chart 11. The first 10 days of the oil spill, news coverage 

in Ventura and Santa Barbara 86 

LIST OF PHOTOS 

Photo 1. Ventura Wharf circa 1900 10 

Photo 2. Adams Canyon oil field, 1890 10 

Photo 3. Ventura Avenue oil field, 1940s 25 

Photo 4. Early offshore development at the Rincon 25 

Photo 5. Oxnard's rapid growth 62 

Photo 6. The city of Ventura today 62 

Photo 7. Ojai's historic downtown 68 

Photo 8. Residential development in Thousand Oaks 68 

111 
Acknowledgments 

This study would not have been possible without the generous contributions of 

many persons, particularly the many who allowed us to interview them or 

provided us with information (they 

are 

listed at the end of this report). We also 

acknowledge the continuous support from our associated faculty researchers at the 

University of California, Santa Barbara: 

Otis Graham, Professor of History 

Elvin Hatch, Professor of Anthropology 

Randolph Bergstrom, Associate Professor of History 

We were well served by careful advice provided by members of our Quality Review 

Board: 

Howard Becker, Professor of Sociology, University of Washington, Seattle; 

Arthur McEvoy, Professor of Law and History, University of Wisconsin, 

Madison; 

Roy Rappaport, Professor of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 

Otis Graham and Ventura County historian Judith Triem read a prior drafts of this 

report, providing many detailed comments and directing us 

to helpful 

sources. 

James Limas earlier research on offshore oil development provided us with a 

wealth of information. Darwin Sainz was especially generous with his time and 

extensive knowledge of North County life. Charles Johnson, librarian at the 

Ventura County Museum of History and Art, was most helpful in directing us 

toward important historical documents. 

John Woolley and Eric Smith, faculty colleagues at the University of California, 

Santa Barbara, provided useful advice 

as did colleagues at the Applied Population 

Research Laboratory, University of Wisconsin; the Wisconsin State Historical 

Society; and the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research at the 

University of Michigan. 

Excellent research assistance was provided at the University of Wisconsin by Jessica 

Goldberger (who was especially dedicated), 

as well 

as by James Elliott, James 

Gonzales, Steven Martin, Tarique Niazi, Michael Spittel, and Rolando Sosa. At the 

University of California, Santa Barbara, we are 

indebted to the research assistance 

provided by Thomas Beamish, Elisabeth Jordan, Jeff Olin, John Rodgers, Jacqueline 

Romo, and Beverly Schwartzberg. 

iv 
ACCESS NUMBER 30663 

STUDY TITLE: "Social, Economic, and Historic Characterization of San Luis Obispo, 

Santa Barbara, and Ventura Counties." 

REPORT TITLE: "Ventura County: Oil, Fruit, Commune and Commute." 

CONTRACT NUMBER(S): IVIMS 14-35-0001-30663. 

SPONSORING REGION: Pacific 

APPLICABLE PLANNING AREA(S): Southern California 

FISCAL YEAR(S) OF PROJECT FUNDING: 1994, 1995, 1996. 

COMPLETION DAlE OF REPORT: October 1, 1996 

COST(S): FY 1: $ 175,906; FY 2: $112,286; FY3: $ 127,018; 

CTJMULAT[VE PROJECT COST: $415,210. 

PROJECT MANAGER(S): H. Molotch 

AFFIIJATION: Ocean and Coastal Policy Center, Marine Science Institute, University 

of California, Santa Barbara. 

ADDRESS: University of California, Santa Barbara, California 93106 

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS: H. Molotch (P1), W. Freudenburg (Co-PI). 

KEY WORDS: Ventura; Southern Cailfornia; oil development; socioeconomics; local 

history; place character; voluntary associations; tourism; Ojai; Oxnard; Thousand Oaks; 

freeway; Unocal; environmentalism; media. 

BACKGROUND: MMS requested 

a historic analysis of three California Coastal counties 

in terms of how their individual "character" evolved over 

the generations in relation 

to 

the oil industry. This report on Ventura County is one of three volumes produced in 

response; 

the other 

two reports consist of one pertaining to Santa Barbara County 

("Santa Barbara County: Two Paths") and one pertaining to San Lriis Obispo County 

("San Luis Obispo County: A Major Switching"). There is also 

a data base on diskette 

simultaneously provided which contains a large assemblage of socioeconomic data on 

each county and its constituent cities. Drafts of scholarly papers are also being provided 

(see Study Products below). 

V 
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this report are: 

(1) Explain how the county and 

its major communities 

came 

to have particular economic and cultural 

configurations making them more or 

less accepting of oil development, OCS 

development in particular; (2) Analyze the way different factors (e.g. 

migration, industrial development, political change) intersected with one 

another over 

time; (3) Indicate how these factors differed from one 

local 

community to another; (4) Provide a Timeline of important local events, 

including those involving the oil industry; (5) Display both quantitative and 

qualitative indicators of the evidence for the conclusions reached (6) Provide 

a data base on diskette (supplied separately) that contains the data base upon 

which this analysis was based and which can be used for future EW/ EISs and 

other analytic exercises. 

DESCRIPTION: We used 

a multi-method strategy. We carried out 70 

interviews with local officials, industry personnel, community leaders, and 

other strategic persons to construct past events and develop leads to 

appropriate documents and data sets. Census and other data sources were 

used to describe, over 

time, changes in population size, educational 

attainment, economic base and related variables. A variety of data sources was 

used to chart changes in oil production, oil employment, as well 

as tax 

income from the industry. Systematic analysis was undertaken of 

participation in environmental hearings and the kinds of issues raised by 

different groups. Systematic investigation was also made of local print media 

content vis a vis the oil industry at different time points. We also analyzed 

the nature of local community organizations, developing indicators of their 

density of development, resource base, and modes of networking. We charted 

public votes on environmental and oil-related issues. Still other indicators, 

quantitative and qualitative, were created as a means to understand the types 

of orientations and. resources 

that had evolved in the county. 

The analytic strategy was to contrast parts of the county in terms of how the 

coming of oil and its variations in form and volume over 

time intersected 

with particular types of evolving social and economic conditions in place. In 

this way we can understand why specific communities responded to oil in the 

way 

that they did. 

SIGNIFICANT CONCLUSIONS: Ventura County has been, for the most part, 

supportive of the oil industry both onshore and off. A key explanatory factor 

is the industry's long history in Ventura County, with first oil prospecting 

beginning in the 1850s. Most Ventura County residents came to a county 

already economically and environmentally impacted by oil. In addition, the 

oil industry was, 

through the 1950s, the county's single largest taxpayer and 

a 

similarly large employer. In the 1960s, new 

residents migrated into Ventura 

County as 

the east county became 

a 

suburb of Los Angeles and military 

employment (including contracting) at county bases flourished. These new 

residents are 

less familiar with the history of oil in Ventura County and may 

vi 
view oil operations as a 

threat to air quality and their suburban way of life. 

Although environmentalism is relatively weak in Ventura County, 

increasing environmental sentiments as well as state and federal regulations 

(e.g. the Clean Air Act) are moving the county away from its historically 

accommodating stance toward oil. 

STUDY RESULTS: Ventura County has historically been amenable to oil 

development, although demographic and economic changes in its 

constituent communities may be shifting attitudes and orientations. 

The cities of Ventura, Santa Paula, Fillmore, and 

-- 

to a 

lesser extent 

-- Oxnard 

grew up around oil. Oil prospectors were among 

the first white settlers in 

these 

areas, and oil wells already dotted the landscape when larger migrations 

began following the Civil War. Area ranchers and farmers frequently had oil 

wells on their property, often in areas too steep for cultivation. Oil thus 

proved compatible with agriculture, the other major contributor to Ventura 

Countys economy 

through World War II. Although the city of Ojai became 

a 

nationally known tourist destination, even 

this seemingly incompatible 

industry easily coexisted with oil 

as Ojai Valley wells were drilled in canyons, 

generally out of sight. 

World War II brought 

a military boom economy to Ventura County as naval 

bases were established at Port Huenerne and Point Mugu. The bases attracted 

new populations to the 

area and became even 

larger employers than the oil 

industry. As Southern California became a center of military contracting and 

defense engineering, the high-technology and aerospace firms of Los Angeles 

and the San Fernando Valley also attracted thousands of new workers. Some 

aerospace and technology firms located in eastern Ventura County (in the 

newer communities of Thousand Oaks, Simi Valley and Camarillo), and 

thousands of those employed in Los Angeles County settled in the Ventura 

County suburbs. The communities of the east county have grown such that 

their populations rival the older settlements of Ventura and the Santa Clara 

River Valley. These voters in the east can now 

swing the direction of countywide votes. 

Through the 1980s, Ventura county and community leaders welcomed the 

prospect of increased drilling in the Santa Barbara Charmel, although some 

local environmentalists pushed for mitigations on proposed projects. The 

density and 

resource base of local environmental organizations, as with civic 

organizations in general, is lower in the city of Ventura and the county 

overall, compared to neighboring counties to the north. Our studies of civic 

participation at oil-related hearings indicates only modest levels of local 

citizen input. Again comapred to the two neighboring counties to the north, 

vii 
Ventura media have been historically positive toward the oil industry's role 

in the locality. 

Ventura County oil support firms service offshore operations throughout the 

Channel, and the economic impacts of regional offshore development is 

recognized by local business and government leaders. Protests in neighboring 

areas 

(especially Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties) have slowed 

the pace of Channel oil development and mediated positive economic 

impacts for Ventura County. Combined with fluctuations in the world price 

of oil and declining onshore reserves, 

the resulting overall slowdown has 

contributed more to oil's decreasing prominence in Ventura County than any 

internal local resistance. 

STUDY PRODUCT(S): "San Luis Obispo County: A Major Switching"; "Santa 

Barbara County: Two Paths"; "Ventura County: Oil, Fruit, Commune and 

Commute"; Freudenburg, William R., James Elliott, Jessica Goldberger, and 

Steven Martin. 1996. "Attitudes toward Environmental Preservation at the 

Community Level: A Comparison of Qualitative and Quantitative 

Approaches"; Paulsen, Krista, 1996. "Local Response to Offshore Leasing 

Proposals: How Media Enhance Participation"; Freudenburg, William and 

Jessica Goldberger, and Michael Spittel, "County-Level Database and PlaceLevel Database" (Set of three Diskettes). 

viii 
The purpose of this document is to 

indicate how the distinctive qualities of 

Ventura County evolved in relation to the oil industry and explain how the 

county's settlement pattern and cultural traditions, economy and politics, responded 

to the coming of petroleum 

- 

thus shaping that industry's development within its 

borders. This means understanding the htcharacteru of this place 

as 

it has evolved 

over 

time, including distinctions among 

the towns and cities within it. 

We lay out our findings and observations in roughly chronological order. 

Our observations and conclusions rest on approximately 70 interviews, as well 

as 

extensive use of historic archives, government documents, media reports, and 

previous studies. Whenever feasible, we checked information against more 

than 

one source and tried to assemble reliable indicators, including quantitative ones, of 

trends and patterns we set forth. Each section contains by way of introduction 

relevant demographic data for the periods under discussion. The report ends with 

an assessment of the factors influencing Ventura County's relationship to the oil 

industry, and their implications for the county's future. 

* 

In the last century and a half, what is now Ventura County has been 

transformed from a 

largely wild and unsettled section of American frontier to a 

prosperous and populous Southern California county. This is the story of that 

transformation told through the development of oil 

- 

the industry largely 

responsible for the county's initial Anglo settlement and eventual industrialization. 

Oil was, with agriculture, one of Ventura County's first industries, now almost 140 

years old; oil production as well 

as general public support for the industry both 

onshore and off continue today. Given oil's historic importance in the county, the 

continuous backing by local government and residents may come as no 

surprise. 

However, in nearby Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties, where the oil 

industry has also operated for over 100 years, oil - 

especially offshore drilling 

- 

is 

met with organized and effective resistance. Citing potential conflicts between 

offshore drilling and the northern counties' heavily tourist and retirement based 

economies, as well 

as 

local environmental and aesthetic concerns, residents in Santa 

Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties have generated cultural and regulatory 

climates that inhibit or closely monitor oil operations. In the tn-county area, at 

least, Ventura County's general acceptance of oil is exceptional. 

The oil industry's early presence 

is, however, only one component of this 

story. In this report we examine several factors which have shaped the county as a 

whole 

as well as making each of the county's communities unique. These factors 

are 

geographical (e.g. whereas Ventura was, during its early years, 

isolated from 

eastern and even northern California markets, today Ventura County finds itself 

becoming a bedroom community for the ever-expanding Los Angeles metropolis), 

e co ii Urn 

i 

c 

(e.g. the oil industry was, for many years, a 

leading employer and among 

the largest contributors to Ventura County's tax rolls), institutional (e.g. the original 

pattern of land ownership, through large land grants, resulted in the persistence of 

1 
exceptionally large tracts held by single owners 

through the 1950s), and political (e.g. 

environmental organizing is limited and extremely localized; national 

environmental policies like the Clean Air Act 

are 

responsible for recent moves to 

curb major polluters). These factors are rooted in the county's history and continue 

to shape it; they interact with each other and inform local responses to events both 

inside and outside the county's borders. 

As we will show, through the First World War Ventura County struggled to 

overcome geographical isolation and find markets for its two main exports - 

agricultural products and oil. Throughout the Spanish and Mexican periods (the 

mid-1700s through 1848), Santa Barbara was 

the regional center of 

commerce; 

Ventura county was mainly 

a ranching area, with few settlements and fewer than 

twenty acres under cultivation (Reith 1963: 85). When American settlers lured west 

by the discovery of gold in northern California found oil instead, their early 

attempts at refining and marketing petroleum products were foiled by 

transportation difficulties. The arrival of the Southern Pacific railroad in 1887 

allowed the infant citrus and oil industries to prosper. 

Oil was first discovered in the canyons of the Ojai and Santa Clara River 

Valleys in the late 1850s (Fry 1983: 17; Welty and Taylor 1958: 21); with the successful 

development of the Ventura Avenue oil field following World War I, the adjacent 

city of Ventura became the county's center for oil production and oil field services. 

The industry's prominence continued through World War II, when 

a 

second 

economic boom, based on 

the defense and 

aerospace 

industries (including the 

construction of two major naval bases in Ventura County), brought new wealth and 

new populations to California. The historical population centers of Ventura County 

were already growing due to the oil industry, which reached peak production in 

1954. As offshore drilling advanced through the 1950s, operations throughout the 

Santa Barbara Channel utilized Ventura County support industries whose 

continuing strength cushioned the eventual decline in the county's onshore 

production. Perhaps the most important development in this 

era, however, was 

the 

construction of U.S. 101 (the main freeway connecting Los Angeles to Ventura 

County and Santa Barbara) in the early 1960s. It was 

the 101 freeway that definitively 

ended Ventura County's isolation; the freeway opened the still agricultural East 

County to suburban development, separated the city of Ventura from its beach front, 

and paved over much of the north county coast's beaches. 

The Santa Barbara Oil Spill of 1969, 

a watershed moment in national 

environmental 

awareness, is often cited as 

the impetus for the environmental 

legislation of the 1970s (including the National Environmental Policy Act and the 

Clean Air Act). Ventura County's then 100-year old oil industry was now subject to 

environmentally motivated operating restrictions, and locals were becoming more 

aware of oil's detrimental impacts. As environmental activism in the county (and 

in Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties, to the north) increased through the 

1980s, international oil markets collapsed; these two factors together resulted in the 

closure of inefficient operations and 

a slowing of new exploration 

- 

including 

2 
offshore exploration. While new 

industries, including tourism, manufacturing, 

and high technology research have 

come to rival oil and agriculture in the county's 

economy, oil's influence remains apparent in both the landscape of the county and 

the memories of its leaders. County elected officials remain generally supportive, 

but oil operations do meet resistance from regional environmental interests and 

local regulatory agencies. 

The history of Ventura's changing 

economy 

is described in further detail 

below, with an emphasis not only on oil's role in determining early settlement and 

driving local economies, but on how the various communities of Ventura County 

came to be the way 

they 

are. Basic statistical information on 

the county's economy 

and demographics is provided for each 

era, with a more detailed demographic 

analysis for each locality induded in 

a 

final section covering the last 25 years, what 

we have termed "The Environmental Era." 

Geographical Orientation 

Ventura County lies between Santa Barbara and Los Angeles Counties to the 

west and east, respectively, with Kern County to the north (see map). To the 

south! southwest lies nearly 40 miles of Pacific coast, which varies from wide sand 

beaches at Ventura and Oxnard to high cliffs with rocky breakwaters at the northern 

and southern borders of the county. With an area of 1,843 square miles, Ventura is a 

mid-sized county by California standards (ranking 26th of 58 counties). The 

northern half of the county consists of steep hifis covered with chaparral and scrub 

pines, and is now 

included in the Los Padres National Forest (Project Development 

Company 1992: 4). Many of these back country mountains contain the geological 

IO11E4L1OILS iLeLescuy LU LIdjJ VU - ULL1UUUL LILC UIIIILIL tV1)IL J1 11.'iLL1I 

Mountain and Ventura Avenue. 

Because of this rugged terrain in the north, settlement is concentrated in the 

southern half of the county where the valleys of the Ventura and Santa Clara 

Rivers, a narrow coastal shelf, and the broad Oxnard plain provided flat, fertile 

ground for early settlements, including permanent villages established by the 

Chumash Indians. The Ventura River basin, which forms the Ojai Valley at its 

northern extreme, runs from north to south through the Santa Ynez Mountains. 

The Valley's southern end opens into 

a broad plain now known 

as 

the Ventura 

Avenue area; 

the Ventura River empties into the Pacific just west of the city of 

Ventura's historic downtown. 

The Santa Clara River is much longer, having its headwaters in Los Angeles 

County to the east. Flowing between the Santa Susana Mountains on 

the south and 

the Santa Ynez range on 

the north, the Santa Clara River drains 

an area roughly the 

size of Delaware (Bottorff 1995: 5). Within Ventura County, the river is fed by two 

main tributaries, Sespe and Piru creeks. Together these waterways create a narrow 

valley that 

runs west! southwest for 35 miles before opening onto the wide Oxnard 

3 
Santa Barbara County Ventura County Map o Ojal River Ventura Ventura - US io I,Oxnard Paula Santa .- - Port Hueneme Los Angeles County Camarill Moorpark Cr Fillmore Piru Thousand - Oaks Sinil 0 Valley N 10 Miles Approximate Scale
Plain. Containing some of the finest agricultural land in the state, the Oxnard Plain 

was created by the Santa Clara's shifting course. This plain is also the widest 

area of 

flat coastal land in Ventura County; for much of the coastline, the coastal shelf is 

extremely narrow as 

foothills 

run 

right up to the 

sea. This is the case in the Rincon 

area of the northern county, and in the Santa Susana foothills at the south. 

South of the Santa Clara River Valley, rugged mountains separate the historic 

settlements of the northern and western county from newer settlements in the east. 

The Simi and Conejo Valleys make up what is commonly referred to as 

the "east 

county," 

a geographical region proximate to Los Angeles and the San Fernando 

Valley. This proximity to Los Angeles's increasing sprawl led to the area's growth 

as 

a bedroom community. The Conejo Grade between contemporary Thousand Oaks 

and the Oxnard Plain thus not only separates the county geographically, it marks 

a 

shift in local orientations 

- 

either toward Ventura and the coast, or 

toward Los 

Angeles and the San Fernando Valley. 

I. Before the Americans and Before World War I 

Table 1: County socio demographic characteristics, 1890-1920 

Source: U.S. Census. 

* Indicates data not available 

Most Anglo settlement took hold in Ventura county between California's 

statehood in 1850 and the end of World War I; in many cases, 

the settlers of this 

early era set the pattern for the various communities' future development. These 

early settlers were 

farmers, oil prospectors, and health seekers, and many of the 

economic endeavors established during these early years have persisted into the 

present 

- 

either through the establishment of physical improvements which would 

determine future economic paths, or 

through the attraction of distinct populations 

whose culture and values would preclude or encourage particular types of 

developmenL 

1 In 1890, Mexicans were counted as nonwhite. In 1900-1920, only Blacks, Asians and American Indians 

were counted as nonwhite. 

5 

1890 1900 1910 1920 

Total Population 10,071 14,367 18,347 28,724 

Percent Foreign Born 18.48 17.12 * * 

Percent Nonwhite' 20.21 3.77 6.62 3.37 

Percent Male 58.40 56.98 57.88 52.80 

Household Size 4.61 4.10 4.30 4.12 
While detailed statistical information on 

the occupations of Ventura County 

residents is not available for this early period, measures of the importance of 

agriculture in the county are available. For example, the ratio of county residents to 

the number of farms remained low throughout this era, with 13.8 residents to every 

farm in 1890 and 18.62 residents to every farm in 1920. This ratio is notably lower 

than that seen 

in California as a whole 

- 

22.8 residents per farm in 1890 and 29.1 in 

1920 

- 

showing that Ventura county's economy was more dependent on 

agriculture 

than the state's. The average farm size in Ventura county during this era dropped 

from 425 acres in 1890 to 249.4 acres 

in 1920, probably due to the shift from grazing to 

more 

intensive agriculture (especially citrus) following the turn of the century 

(U.S. 

Census). 

Early settlement 

The chain of events determining Ventura County's present character began 

long before the Yankees arrived. The Chumash tribe had inhabited what is now 

Ventura County for several thousand years before Spanish explorers chronicled 

their presence. The area's abundant fish, moderate climate, and adequate fresh 

water supply attracted the Chumash, who established permanent village sites in the 

area now 

covered by the city of Ventura. It was because of the Chumash's prosperity 

in the area 

that Spanish missionaries chose a site just below the mouth of the 

Ventura River to establish the Mission San Buenaventura in 1782. The mission 

proved to be a 

successful agricultural operation for its first 50 years despite the 

declining Chumash population; at the time mission lands were privatized in 1833, 

only 626 Chumash remained 

- 

half the number at the mission only 20 years 

earlier.2 

The Mexican Congress' Secularization Act of 1833 granted large tracts of what had 

been the mission hinterland to Mexican citizens. Even those lands closest to the 

mission were privatized, as 

the dwindling native population (halved again in the 

decade following secularization) weakened the missionaries' argument that these 

lands must be maintained in trust for the Chumash. The twenty tracts granted 

between 1833 and 1846 averaged 25,000 acres;3 these ranchos remained largely intact 

when the first Yankee settlers arrived in the mid-nineteenth century (Reith). 

2Th1s decline reflects an overall depletion of the Chumash population on 

the central California coast, 

mainly due to disease and disruption of traditional ways of life. 

3Through the 1950s, maps of Ventura County often included the outlines of these ranchos, and oil fields 

were 

commonly referred to by the ranchos beneath which they were 

found. Land grants and 

contemporary names of locations are as 

follows: Calleguas (Camarillo), Canada de San Miguelito 

(north of Ventura proper), Canada Largo o Verde (Casitas Springs), El Conejo (Thousand Oaks), El 

Rincon (Rincon), El Rio de Santa Clara o la Colonia (Oxnard Plain), Ex-Mission San Buenaventura 

(Ventura and eastward into foothills), Guadalasca (Point Mugu and eastward), Las Posas (Somis), 

Mission San Buenaventura (36 acres in Ventura proper), Ojai (Ojal Valley), San Francisco 

(Piru/CamuloS), San Miguel (East Ventura! Oxnard), Santa Ana (upper Ventura River to Meiner's 

Oaks), Santa Clara del Norte (El Rio), Santa Paula y Saticoy (Santa Paula), Sespe (Fillmore, 

Bardsdale), Simi (Simi Valley), Temescal (north of Piru, mostly Los Angeles County), Tico Lot (20 acres 

6 
Mexican ranchers of this period typically raised cattle for hides and tallow.4 

Dependent on 

favorable climate conditions to maintain feed for their stocks, the 

ranchers were vulnerable to droughts and floods; if cattle were 

slaughtered too 

quickly or died off during poor weather (as was common 

throughout this era), 

leather prices at glutted eastern markets plummeted, leaving the ranchers cash poor. 

The Mexican ranchers' situation was further complicated in 1848, when California 

became an American territory. United States law required proof of title to establish 

land ownership, and the sometimes imprecise Mexican descriptions of boundaries 

and acreage opened their holdings to title disputes; confirming a 

title required 

formal legal assistance, which strained the rancheros' finances and often left them 

in debt to Anglo creditors (Reith 1963: 87; Almaguer 1994). The bias of American 

land agents toward white settlers further threatened the Mexicans' now 

tentative 

hold on their ranchos. Through assertions of ownership or cash exchange, settlers 

from the eastern U.S. were able to purchase most of contemporary Ventura County 

in large tracts. The change in land ownership also meant a change in status for 

Mexicans in Ventura County; whereas the Mexican landholders of the rancho era 

had been wealthy and self-sufficient, their descendants, without land and wealth, 

became dependent on Anglo landowners for jobs (usually as ranch or field hands, 

and later in citrus packing houses) (Menchaca 1995). By the turn of the century, 

Mexicans (whether born in the county or more recent immigrants) had become the 

principal source of farm labor in Ventura County (Almaguer 1994: 72). 

During this period of Americanization (c. 1850), Ventura County (then 

actually part of Santa Barbara County5) was a 

sparsely populated region. Settlement 

centered around the city of Ventura and the mission, site of about "70 or 80 houses" 

(Reith 1963: 90-91), with a more 

scattered population living on outlying ranchos. 

The county's population was mainly Hispanic at this time. Nine "Americans" 

(Anglos) lived in the city of Ventura in 1858, 21 in 1862 (Reith 1963: 90-91), and early 

oil prospectors who came to the county soon after Americanization found few white 

settlers in the existing communities (Hutchinson 1965). Chinese and Japanese 

immigrants also settled in the region from the 1850s through the early 1900s. 

Brought to the U.S. by labor contractors to work in mines and on 

railroads, many of 

these immigrants had not intended to stay in the area, planning instead to save 

their earnings and return to Asia. By 1900, however, relatively permanent Japanese 

and Chinese communities developed in Ventura and Oxnard, with some 

settlers in 

the Santa Clara River and Ojai Valleys. Chinese immigrants tended to work as 

laborers, domestics, launderers, and fishermen or produce farmers, while Japanese 

worked mainly as farm laborers (Fukuyama 1994; Jennings 1984). 

near Mission San Buenaventura) (Robinson 1979: 20-21, 43-48). 

Transportation difficulties made beef a 

less viable use of cattle. While some cattle were driven to San 

Francisco following its gold rush boom, hides remained the principal commodity throughout most of the 

rancho era. 

In 1873 the State Assembly voted to split Santa Barbara County in two, creating the boundaries of the 

current counties (Hutchinson 1965: 211). 

7 
The first rush of Anglo settlement occurred in the 1860s, as farmers, 

speculators and oil seekers emigrated from the east. In many cases, the settlement 

and economic developments of this early period determined the trajectories the 

communities have followed through the late twentieth century; the following 

section details those developments in the coastal communities of Ventura and 

Oxnard, the Santa Clara River Valley, and the Ojai Valley. While the East County 

(including the present communities of Moorpark, Simi Valley, and Thousand Oaks) 

are discussed in later sections of this document, their role in the county's early 

history is quite limited. Throughout the nineteenth century, the Simi and Conejo 

Valleys were used exclusively for cattle and sheep ranching and dry farming (wheat, 

barley, hay, walnuts and later apricots), extensive enterprises that precluded 

even 

the limited degree urban development seen 

in the west county (Bidwell 1989: 24). 6 

Ventura7 and the coastal communities 

Although oil brought 

some of Ventura County's earliest Anglo settlers, the 

young 

industry's influence on 

the ciiij of Ventura was minimal through the 

nineteenth century. While early oil prospectors depended on 

the city as a port and a 

center of trade and commerce, oil drilling was generally centered in the back country 

canyons of the Santa Clara and Ojai Valleys until World War I. These early 

operations are described below (see "C1 in the badc countnj: The Ojai and Santa Clam River 

Vallejs"). 

Through the mid-1860s, the city of Ventura remained merely 

a 

small 

settlement, as 

local cattle ranching provided for limited trade and early settlers were 

dispersed through the Santa Clara and Ojai Valleys. Though lacking a wharf, the 

city of Ventura already served 

as a port, and cargoes of eastern manufactured goods 

were 

loaded off ships anchored in the bay using smaller boats. This type of trade was 

limited, however, as 

the county's meager exports (mainly hides) were collected only 

over 

long periods of time (Reith 1963: 88-89). 

One factor limiting the development of intensive agriculture in Ventura 

County (and the city of Ventura's subsequent urbanization) was 

the persistence of 

large ranchos 

- Mexican landowners had been reluctant to subdivide or 

sell off their 

properties until forced to do so (see above), when grazing operations ceased to be 

viable. The development of Ventura as a 

commercial center would depend upon 

changes in both the patterns of agiicultural production and the politics of Santa 

6 Maps of Ventura county from the 1870s and 1880s note no 

settlements between Springvffle (near present 

Camarillo) and Calabasas; one Conejo Valley rancher's address was 

listed as "25 miles east of 

Hueneme" (Bidwell 1989: 32). 

7 

name Ventura is an abbreviated version of San Buenaventura, the name given to the mission 

founded there in 1782. "San Buenaventura" was too long to fit 

on 

railroad timetables, however, and the 

name was shortened to "Ventura" with the coming of the Southern Pacific in 1887 (Reith 1963: 11344), 

8 
Barbara County (which, until 1873, included what is now 

the county of Ventura); 

these changes took place throughout the late 1860s and early 1870s. 

As the Civil War ended in the eastern states, American settlers came west in 

search of land. The introduction of 

a population of experienced farmers coincided 

with the AmericarLizatiOn of Ventura County land ownership; the result was a 

shift 

from large ranchos used for grazing cattle or sheep to small (100-200 acre) farms 

dedicated to more 

intensive agriculture (including beans, grain, and eventually 

citrus). 8 Despite the increased agricultural production in its hinterland, however, 

the city of Ventura remained relatively undeveloped while county tax funds flowed 

to Santa Barbara. Instead, the town of Hueneme, twelve miles to the south, became 

the center of regional trade and commerce. The Santa Barbara County Board of 

Supervisors had incorporated the Hueneme Wharf and Lighter Company in 1871 

(contemporary Ventura county was still 

a part of Santa Barbara county), hoping to 

exploit the natural deep water anchorage. The company 

then began construction of 

a pier which, upon 

its completion later that year, would claim to be the only "true 

wharf" between Santa Cruz and San Pedro (Hutchinson 1965: 186). 

The city of Ventura constructed 

a wharf at the same 

time, but lack of a 

reliable 

bridge over 

the Santa Clara River limited Ventura's hinterland to the north bank of 

the river. Land in the area north of the Santa Clara was 

thoroughly subdivided, 

with irrigated farms growing a wide variety of crops; shipments from the port of 

Ventura thus contained a variety of produce 

as well 

as oil from developing Santa 

Clara River Valley fields (see Photo 1) Agricultural products from the south bank 

of the Santa Clara, mainly non-irrigated 

crops 

such as beans and grain, were 

shipped 

through Hueneme. Because of its more 

intensive agriculture and diverse economy, 

Ventura boasted a 

larger population than Hueneme. When the California State 

legislature divided Santa Barbara County in 1873, creating the present county of 

Ventura, 

locals voted the city of Ventura to be the new county seat (Reith 1963: 

104).b0 

Like most of Ventura County, the city of Ventura had no access to rail 

transportation until 1887. Earlier Southern Pacific lines utilized routes through the 

San Joaquin valley (1867), and Los Angeles became the terminus for Southern 

Pacific's east/ west route 

through the Mojave (1876). Stage coaches provided 

access 

to these rail lines using well-developed roads through the Santa Clara River Valley 

(Reith 1963: 105-108). While Ventura's modest commercial development before the 

railroad (flour and 

saw mills, 

a 

local Wells Fargo office, four hotels, 

a newspaper, 

furniture and carriage factories and 

a machine shop), the coming of the Southern 

8By 1879, 75,000 acres of Ventura County land was dedicated to crops; 68,000 of these acres were in 

barley 

or other grains (Reith 1%3: 106). 

9Hardison and Stewart, founders of what would be the Union Oil Company, moved oil from the Santa 

Clara River Valley to Ventura via a gravity pipeline, built in 1886 (see below). 

10 received 238 votes, Saticoy 156 votes, and Hueneme 214 votes (Hutchinson 1965: 211). 

9 
10 

Photo 1: Ventura wharf circa 1900. Constructed in the 1870s, Ventura's wharf was used for 

shipping agricultural goods as well as oil produced in the Santa Clara River Valley and 

Ventura Avenue fields. Early on the wharf set a precedent for industrial uses of the coast. 

Reprinted from Murphy (1979). 

Photo 2 Adams Canyon oil field, 1890. Drilled by Union Oil in 1888, Adams Canyon was 

the 

company's first major success and produced 800 to 900 barrels per day. Many of Ventura County's 

early wells were 

located in canyons, 

thus remaining out of sight of many 

residents and on 

land 

not suitable for agriculture. Reprinted from Franks and Lambert (1985). 
Pacific's Santa Clara River Valley line, running from Newhall (in northwest Los 

Angeles County) west to the ocean at Ventura, 

intensified growth here just as 

it did 

in the communities of Santa Paula and Fillmore (see below). A building boom 

began as new 

settlers arrived 

even before the railroad's completion; new streets 

were platted, and sidewalks and sewers 

installed. Most commercial development 

centered around the city's downtown district (east Main and Santa Clara streets, 

between Chestnut and Figueroa), while homes and small farms dotted the Ventura 

Avenue section of the lower Ventura River Valley (Reith 1963: 113). It would be 

another thirty years, however, before oil was discovered on Ventura Avenue (the 

impetus for Ventura's next major growth spurt). 

As the twentieth century approached, sugar beets were becoming a major crop 

on 

the coastal plain south of Ventura, across 

the Santa Clara River (see map). In 

1897, following passage of the Dingley Tariff Act (which imposed a tax on 

imported 

sugar), 

a group of 

area farmers petitioned the Oxnard brothers, recognized 

as 

leaders 

in sugar beet processing, to build 

a plant in Ventura County. The Oxnard brothers 

agreed; and initially sought 

a site in the city of Ventura. An area 

in east Ventura 

(near the Santa Clara River and current 126 freeway) was amenable to both city 

officials and the Oxnard brothers, but no 

land in this area was for sale (Reith 1963: 

120). 

Instead, the sugar beet refinery was built for two million dollars on 

the empty 

site of 

a town that would later bear the Oxinard brothers' name. Completed in 1899, 

the project initiated rapid urban development in what had been a 

largely 

agricultural area; buildings were quickly moved in from nearby settlements at El Rio 

and Hueneme. To meet the new 

labor demand approximately 1,000 Japanese 

workers were housed in tent cities near 

the beet fields (Fukuyama 1994: 34). 

Immediately following the plant's construction, the Southern Pacific Railroad 

completed 

a spur 

line to Oxnard. The new 

town would 

soon eclipse Hueneme as 

Ventura County's agricultural transportation hub and 

as 

the center of commerce 

south of the Santa Clara River. By 1902, Henry T. Oxnard claimed that 'The 

sugar 

beet investment in Southern California amounts to upwards of $6,000,000, and we 

pay for labor, beets, lime rock and freight, all of which dispenses in this part of the 

state about $4,000,000 annually" (quoted in Almaguer 1994: 98). The city of Oxnard 

was 

incorporated the following year, with 

a population of 2,200; jobs provided by the 

sugar beet refinery ranged from 50 in the off 

season 

to 700 at harvest (Triem 1985: 98- 

100). Farmers were able to rotate sugar beets with lima beans and barley, the area's 

former agricultural staples. The practice of growing several crops a year would 

make the Oxnard plain an especially productive agricultural region throughout the 

twentieth century. 

The city of Ventura remained an agricultural and business center through the 

First World War. In 1903 Ventura's City Beautiful league formed, undertaking 

projects including street paving and tree planting (Triem 1985: 105). Local 

philanthropist E. P. Foster donated an oceanside parcel of land to be used 

as 

the 

County fairgrounds, and the site was 

landscaped to resemble San Francisco's Golden 

11 
Gate park, with palms and sculptured sandstone. Olives, grapes, walnuts, and 

especially lemons flourished on 

the hillsides. As the need for cooperative 

marketing and innovative packing techniques became more apparent (produce was 

eventually shipped east via refrigerated freight cars), Ventura became one of many 

lemon packing and processing centers throughout the county (Reith 1963: 119). 

However, the Santa Clara line providing Ventura's main rail 

access also limited the 

city's potential as an agricultural packing center. Citrus groves dotted the length of 

the rail line, and packing of Santa Clara River Valley produce at Santa Paula or 

Fillmore was more economical as all crops eventually moved east to the main line 

at Newhall. 

Through World War I, Ventura's oil and gas production industry remained 

negligible. In 1903, 

a 

local utility company drified nine wells in the Ventura River 

bed, which produced gas for domestic use 

in Ventura and Santa Paula. Although 

the project yielded 10,000 to 15,000 cubic feet of gas per day, the endeavor was shortlived due to water intrusion in the wells (Reith 1963: 132; Beaton 1957: 108, 

footnote). Oil transport, however, was proving to be 

a 

lucrative endeavor. The port 

at Ventura was nearest to the Santa Clara River Valley oil fields (and later the 

Ventura Avenue oil fields), making it a practical loading point for the increasing 

amounts of crude oil produced in the region. Ships easily loaded oil via pipelines, 

but the lack of protection at the pier, and debris deposited by winter storms, made 

docking difficult and hampered the shipment of solid cargo. Due to something of 

a 

"catch 22," the city of Ventura had difficulty securing funding to improve the 

facility. in 1915 the Army Corps of Engineers recommended. building 

a 

jetty to 

protect the harbor from sand deposited by the Ventura River, as 

the Ventura port 

was preferable to Hueneme for "shipping oil by gravity pipeline" from the fields to 

tankers. The recommendation was 

rejected, however, due to what was 

then a 

low 

level of port traffic (Reith 1963: 124-25). 

To the north of Ventura, the Rincon Coast settlements of Mussel Shoals, 

Seacliff and La Conchita took root in the 1890s. In the late 1890s, Southern Pacific 

railroad workers established 

a camp north of Ventura near present day La Conchita. 

When the railroad was completed in 1907, oil workers replaced the railroad men, 

but the town remained little more 

than 

a 

labor camp, with accompanying saloons 

and brothels. The area's temperamental geology became apparent as soon as 

the 

railroad was completed; mud slides killed between four and six men 

in 1907 (a 

foreshadowing of the slides which destroyed several homes at La Conchita in 1995) 

(&2nfrl Barbara News-Press, March 19, 1995). Nevertheless, permanent settlements 

would take hold in this 

area during the 1920s oil boom. 

12 
Oil in the back country: The Ojai and Santa Clara River Valleys 

California oil development began near 

the current Los Angeles-Ventura 

County line in 1855, when General Andreas Pico began distilling oil found at seeps 

near Newhall in Los Angeles County. Ventura County was also home to early oil 

development; some prior to the first Pennsylvania wells of 1859. One of the 

county's first commercial developments of petroleum resources ended in 1861, 

when George Shoobridge Gilbert's Ojai Valley refinery burned. An explosion 

following rebuilding drove Gilbert to Ventura, where he became a merchant (Fry 

1983: 17). Three years 

later, in 1864, Captain James H. White (of E. Conway and 

Company) gained title to 78,000 acres of Rancho Ex-Mission and surrounding land, 

including Sulphur Mountain.11 White reportedly refined oil found in the area to 

yield 38 percent ifiuminating oil and 48 percent lubricating oil (Franks and Lambert 

1985: 5). While this should secure his place as one of Ventura County's true oil 

pioneers he is for some reason 

exduded from most histories of the region. Leland 

and Josiah Stanford (of railroad, mining and University fame) are 

regularly 

acknowledged, however, as 

initial developers of Sulphur Mountain. As early as 

1866 they tunneled into the mountain at an angle which would allow the oil to flow 

out using only gravity. Forty-five tunnels produced up to sixty barrels each per day, 

most used for lubricating oils (Franks and Lambert 1985: 40). 

Exploration of the Ojai and Santa Clara River Valleys exploded in 1864 when 

Yale professor Benjamin Sihiman wrote to his Pennsylvania associate T. A. Scott 

that seeps 

in Rancho Ojai likely meant a "river of oil" lay beneath the surface. In 

their history of the Union Oil Company (founded in Ventura County some 20 years 

after this initial communication), Welty and Taylor (1958) credit this letter with 

starting a major rush for land and oil in Ventura County. Scott was a 

railroad 

executive who, like many of Ventura County's original oil prospectors, had taken 

part in the original Titusville, Pennsylvania oil boom. Unlike most, however, Scott 

had profited from the boom through both oil and railroad interests. He responded 

to Siliman's claim by organizing 

a 

syndicate of investors who purchased 277,000 

acres of California land (including eight Ventura County ranchos, as well 

as 

property in Los Angeles and Humboldt counties).'2 Scott sent his nephew, Thomas 

R. Bard, and Titusville veteran J. A. Beardsley to Ventura to seek the reported river 

of oil. Arriving in 1865, Bard began exploration of the Ojai Valley 

- an endeavor 

that would prove 

relatively fruitless as costs of exploration far outweighed the value 

of the few meagerly producing wells (Welty and Taylor 1958: 22-24). Even Bard's 

most successful well, Ojai No. 6 in the upper Ojai Valley, produced only 15 to 20 

barrels per day 

- not enough to secure Scott's interest in the endeavor. Scott ordered 

11 Sulphur Mountain is directly south of Ojai. 

12Scott's purchase played an 

important role in shifting Ventura County land from Mexican to Yankee 

ownership. One historian argues 

that Scott and his agents often coerced Mexican Rancheros into selling 

their property and often paid less than fair prices. Following this purchase Mexicans quickly lost their 

affluence and their political influence in the county. By 1868, only six of the 48 owners of Ventura 

County tracts larger than 500 

acres had Spanish surnames 

(Aimaguer 1994: 82-86). 

13 
drilling halted in 1867, and Bard remained on as a 

land broker, possibly his most 

influential role in shaping the county's history (Fry 1983: 20). 

By this time, oil prospectors were no 

longer the only Yankees in the area. 

While the Pennsylvanians drilled in Rancho Ojai, horticulturist George G. Briggs 

purchased Rancho Santa Paula 

y Saticoy (near present day Santa Paula) in the 

interest of establishing a fruit orchard and temperance colony. Although the Santa 

Clara River Valley typically has an 

ideal climate for fruit and nut trees, the drought 

of 1863-64 stunted Briggs' young trees and he subdivided the property in 1867 (Jriem 

1985: 70). Later endeavors in citrus farming would prove highly successful in the 

Santa Clara River Valley, as did oil exploration. By 1868, school districts were 

established in both the Ojai and Santa Clara River Valleys (in the towns of Ojai, 

then called "Nordhoff," and Santa Paula, respectively); these were 

the first districts 

in the county outside Ventura proper (Hutchinson 1965: 150). In 1873, Nathan 

Blanchard arid Elisha Bradley purchased what would be the town site for Santa 

Paula (2700 acres). By 1879, Santa Paula was 

the second largest town in Ventura 

County with 

a population of 250 (Them 1985: 70-72). 

Wildcatting continued in the Ventura county region despite early 

disappointments. Around 1876, Pennsylvanian D. C. Scofield struck 

a 

rich find at 

Pico Canyon, near Newhall (in the Santa Clara River Valley, just across 

the Los 

Angeles County line), which re-invigorated exploration in nearby Ventura County. 

Scofield built the first pipeline on 

the Pacific coast in 1879, from his Pico Canyon 

find to a refinery at Newhall five miles 

away 

(We!ty and Taylor 1958: 26-7). 

Encouraged by these successes, another Pennsylvanian, I. E. Blake, offered long-time 

Titusville operator Lyman Stewart all the land he could drill on Blakes leases, 

which stretched from Newhall to Santa Barbara. Stewart accepted this offer and 

arrived in Newhall with partner Wallace L. Hardison. The pair (with the assistance 

of Thomas R. Bard, by then "the richest man 

in Ventura County") would eventually 

incorporate their operation as 

the Union Oil Company (known as Unocal after 1985) 

(Welty and Taylor 1958: 17-18, 41). 

Hardison and Stewart had mixed results with wells drified in Pico, Adams, 

and Tapo Canyons13 in their first years of operation. Although many of these early 

wells were 

successful producers, Stewart's insistence on acquiring more and more 

land kept the company in lean financial straits, even as production soared from 

2,661 barrels in 1884 to 87,785 barrels in 1887 (Welty and Taylor 1958: 235). This lack 

of operating capital led to inventiveness, however. Frustrated with rail rates that 

made shipment to the lucrative San Francisco market unprofitable, Hardison and 

Stewart constructed a four inch pipeline from Newhall to Ventura in 1886 and 

shipped their oil north by steamer. This ship, the Wallace L. Hardison, was 

the first 

oil tanker built 

on 

the Pacific Coast (Weliy and Taylor 1958: 2, 38). The tanker 

burned in 1889 at the Ventura Pier after a crewman attempted to check the oil level 

13 Adams Canyon is in the Santa Clara River Valley, approximately three miles west of Santa Paula; 

Tapo Canyon is in the hills just north of present-day Simi Valley. 

14 
in the hold using a 

lantern (Franks and Lambert: 28). To avoid using costly coal to 

fire steam drilling rigs, Stewart had his mechanics design the first ever nozzle and 

burner unit that could burn oil instead of kerosene 

- a development that changed 

the drilling industry and ttdoubled the potential market for California petroleum't 

(Welty and Taylor 1958: 37-38). 

When Hardison and Stewart moved their operation from Newhall to Santa 

Paula in 1886, they found a 

typical oil boom town. Santa Paula at this time boasted 

one 

saloon for every seven 

families, 

a fact that devout Presbyterian Lyman Stewart 

abhorred and sought to change. As they began to profit from their oil operations, 

Hardison and Stewart regularly donated money 

for town improvements as well 

as 

traveling musicians, speakers and other cultural events. The two also engaged in a 

friendly rivalry over who could donate more to their respective church for 

amenities such as 

stained glass windows (Welty and Taylor 1958: 40-43). 

Through much of this era, Ventura County was cut off from the new 

Southern Pacific Railroad line which joined Los Angeles and San Francisco via the 

San Joaquin Valley (Hutchinson 1965: 202); however, the 1887 completion of 

a new 

Southern Pacific line through the valley to Ventura, would permanently alter the 

region's economy. For instance, early Santa Clara River Valley settlers had 

experimented with citrus farming during the early 1880s, but the inaccessibility of 

rail transportation led them to rely on 

less perishable crops 

(specifically wool, honey, 

and grains). Rail transportation made citrus farming economically viable, and both 

oranges and lemons flourished in the valley's near perfect climate.14 Lima beans, 

walnuts, and apricots also became more viable with the introduction of rail 

transport. 

In addition, the railroad shaped the pattern of Valley settlement by 

determining which tOWTiS would develop as centers of agricultural packing. 

Fillmore, located midway between Santa Paula and Piru, originated 

as a 

rail stop and 

later became a packing and transport center. Rather than establishing a central Santa 

Clara rail stop in the existing communities of Bardsdale, Sespe or Cienega,15 the 

Southern Pacific instead purchased land between the three from the Sespe Land and 

Water Company, naming the stop and the new town Fillmore after a Southern 

Pacific executive. 

The city of Santa Paula also flourished with the coming of the railroad, 

as 

it 

was now connected to both Los Angeles and San Francisco. This proved a boon for 

Santa Paula's Hardison and Stewart Oil Company, which built its first refinery in 

Santa Paula in 1887. The refinery transformed 14,000 barrels a day of crude oil into 

14 Oranges became a major crop 

in the Ojai Valley as well, where they were 

commercially produced 

as 

early as 1880. In 1911 Ojai boasted production of enough oranges to feed every man, woman and child in 

the U.S. (Fry 1983: 211). How many oranges this meant per capita is left to the imagination. 

15 While l3ardsdale still exists as a suburb of Fillmore, Cienega and Sespe are no 

longer on 

the map. 

15 
grease, asphalt, lubricants and illuminating oil before it dosed in 1895.16 The 

following year Hardison and Stewart brought in California's most successful well to 

date, Adams Canyon Number One, which produced 800 to 900 barrels 

a day near 

Santa Paula (see Photo 2) (Welty and Taylor 1958: 235). By the close of 1888, 

Hardison and Stewart's holdings included "90 miles of pipeline connecting the 

various oil tanks of the county" plus 60 miles of telephone wires, 52 oil tank cars, 

and 

a steam ship with capacity of 6,500 barrels that loaded its cargo at Hueneme 

(Welty and Taylor 1958: 46). On October 17, 1890, the Sespe, Torrey Canyon, and 

Hardison and Stewart oil companies 

incorporated 

as 

the Union Oil Company of 

California, with Thomas Bard as president. The company built its headquarters in 

Santa Paula, and the original brick office on Main Street today serves as 

the Santa 

Paula Union Oil Museum.. The company 

continued to grow 

through the 1890s, and 

by 1892, vice president Lyman Stewart was acquiring so much land that Union hired 

an assistant for the county recorder to keep complete account of the transactions 

(Welty and Taylor 1958: 60).' 

Santa Paula's population tripled in the 1880s, its growth fueled by oil and 

citrus production (Union Oil Museum, Santa Paula). Although much of the city's 

downtown is currently in relative disrepair, the elaborate Victorian architecture of 

downtown homes and businesses remains as a 

reminder of the city's past wealth. 

At the turn of the century, agriculture and oil vied for status as 

the city's largest 

industry. Agriculture gained some prominence in the early 1900s as overproduction 

from fields in the city of Los Angeles caused several Ventura County wells to be 

shut down, and Los Angeles became the new center of Pacific Coast oil production. 

The status of agriculture and oil would be inverted again in 1916, however, when 

significant strikes at South Mountain initiated 

a ten year boom (Triem 1985: 109). 

In 1900, the Union Oil Company moved its headquarters from Santa Paula to 

Los Angeles. The Union Tool Company, a 

local subsidiary developed to provide oil 

field tools to Union at wholesale (as well 

as designing tools for situations specific to 

Union's operations), followed the corporate office south in 1901 (Welty and Taylor 

1958: 89). Nevertheless, several similarly sized but shorter lived companies 

remained. Santa Paula nearly doubled its population between 1900 and 1910 (from 

1,324 to 2,216), as oil exploration and production by Union and other companies 

continued after Union's corporate departure, and 

as 

the young citrus industry 

continued 

to grow. 

The community of Fillmore had its first major oil boom in 1911, when the 

Montebello Oil Company made a major find four miles south of town. Oil changed 

the face of this tiny agricultural town, as 

several citrus orchards were 

subdivided to 

provide housing for oil field workers, and Central Avenue's wooden storefronts 

16The plant burned in 1896, after which time owner Union oil relied on its refinery at Oleum 

(Northeast San Francisco Bay) to pick up the slack. Another small refinery would be built at Santa 

Paula in 1912. 

17 was also rapidly acquiring land in Kern and Santa Barbara counties. 

16 
were 

replaced with the unique sandstone and brick buildings that stand there 

today.18 A 1911 promotional edition of the Fillmore Herald claimed that Fillmore was 

"in the center of the Ventura County oil industry"; forty-seven rigs were 

said to be 

producing the lightest oil in the state (Fillmore Hew-id 1911). Fillmore's Ventura 

Refinery opened five years 

later, employing 150 persons. One of the largest 

industrial developments in Ventura County at the time, the refinery operated 

twenty-four hours a day (Buckler 1982: 7). The town boasted hotels, banks, and 

an 

opera house and claimed to have the "largest lemon orchards in the world" (Fillmore 

Herald 1911). In a case of "cross-valley rivalry," the Santa Paula Chmnide claimed only 

two years 

later that Santa Paula had the "largest" acreage 

in lemons (Triem 1985: 

109). 

In this early era, oil and citrus easily coexisted in the Santa Clara River Valley 

(as they do today), and their development occasionally benefited the same parties: 

citrus farmers received royalties from wells drilled on 

their land'9 (often in areas too 

steep to farm), and oil developers occasionally took up citrus farming 

- 

sometimes 

with great success. In 1891, Union Oil vice president Wallace Hardison entered into 

a partnership with agriculturist Nathan Blanchard, purchasing 413 

acres 

to be 

planted in citrus. The pair 

incorporated their operation as 

the Limoneira Company, 

parent company of what was to become the nation's great citrus marketing giant, 

Sunkist. 

Blanchard and Hardison made several contributions to the Santa Clara River 

Valley's industrial infrastructure In 1891, they organized the Santa Paula Water 

Works to serve 

the town; two years 

later they organized the Thermal Belt Water 

Company to serve 

the Limoneira Ranch. Their first Theiiiial Belt pipeline was 

laid 

in 1893, the same year 18,644 lemon trees were planted on Limoneira property. 

When Hardison's nephew Charles Teague became director in 1899, the company 

had over 50,000 frees. By 1911, Limoneija was 

large enough to warrant a Southern 

Pacific rail 

spur, and in 1917 the company built the first private insectary in 

California, used to grow 

beneficial insects (Triem 1991: 2-3). The political power of 

the citrus growers, 

including members of the Teague and Hardison families, reached 

beyond their ranches. Through the Thermal Belt Company and related water 

endeavors (including the Santa Paula Water Works), citrus farmers controlled local 

utilities, and sat on 

the boards of Valley banks (Almaguer 1994: 96). In addition, 

from the 1870s to 1964 citrus growers 

(and not 

leaders of the less 

locally-grounded oil 

industry) also dominated the Santa Paula city council (Menchaca 1995: 109). 

18 Although the facades of several Central Avenue buildings were 

severely damaged in the 1994 

Nortluidge earthquake, the city had already approved 

a 

redevelopment plan that would assure any 

improvements were 

in keeping with the town's existing visual character. 

19 Much of 

a citrus farmer's investment is in labor i.e., the maintenance of trees. These are high costs 

which remain constant regardless of yield. This increases the risk of citrus production as 

low yields per 

acre 

(caused by small fruit) carry 

the same costs as high yields, without returning the investment. 

Because marginal produdion is unprofitable the citrus industry has a high failure rate (Teague: 68). 

Oil royalties cushion investments in this risky endeavor. 

17 
Teague and the Limoneira Company pioneered the California Fruit Growers 

Exchange, the first such exchange to provide farmers an alternative to marketing 

through commodity speculators. The Exchange pooled citrus fruits from growers 

throughout the Santa Clara River Valley region (and eventually the state), graded 

and packed the fruit, then marketed it collectively under its "Sunkist" brand. 

Initiated in 1907, "Sunkist" was 

the first name brand to be nationally advertised by 

a 

fruit exchange; Sunkist's orange 

juice advertising campaign of 1916 dramatically 

increased the national market for oranges (Teague 1944: 86-87). The resulting 

increase in both production and consumption made Ventura county's growing 

citrus industry all the more 

lucrative. The Limoneira story also illustrates how one 

industry might attract the "human capital" that in turnbenefits others. In this case, 

oil attracted Hardison, the Pennsylvanian, who brought not only his understanding 

of business and marketing, but his family. Hardison and nephew Teague in turn 

applied their knowledge to the infant citrus industry. 

It is important to note here that while both agriculture and oil contributed 

great wealth to the communities of the Santa Clara River Valley, this wealth was 

not equally shared throughout the population. The Mexican population of the 

Valley, whether descended from the original Mexican settlers or born in Mexico2° 

were 

subjected to political disenfranchisement, social segregation, and labor 

discrimination throughout this era 

(and indeed into the 1960s and 1970s). Mexican 

and Anglo residents in Santa Paula lived in segregated neighborhoods attended 

segregated churches, and their children attended segregated schools habitually short 

on space and resources. Mexicans, who had at one 

time owned the Valley in its 

entirety, were 

largely prohibited from owning property during this era, and 

a 

substantial Mexican middle class did not develop until after World War II. 

Mexicans were excluded from lucrative oil industry jobs and instead worked on area 

citrus ranches, often living in company housing. This high degree of forced 

dependence on 

the citrus industry, combined with 

a 

lack of support by national 

labor organizations left area Mexicans without the resources to successfully change 

their economic or political status (Menchaca 1995: Chapters 14).21 

The intensive agricultural development seen 

in the Santa Clara River Valley 

was hampered in the East County (the Simi and Conejo Valleys) by limited water 

supplies. Santa Clara River Valley oil exploration did extend into this region, 

however, stretching south over 

the mountains and into Simi Valley. Locals 

referred to one canyon north of Santa Susana (at the eastern edge of Simi Valley) 

as 

Oil Canyon, because of its numerous oil seeps. Development around these seeps 

began in 1900, when the Simi Oil Company's discovery well yielded little oil but 

encouraged development in the area. Nearby Tapo Canyon, on Simi Valley's 

20 Valley received a major influx of Mexican immigrants from 1910-1924, largely those fleeing 

unrest caused by the Mexican Revolution (Menchaca 1995). 

21 Japanese immigrants also settled in the Santa Clara River Valley, induding several hundred 

working at the Limoneira Ranch. Like all Japanese in Ventura County, these workers were 

interned 

during World War II, and none 

returned to the Umoneira Company (Yamamoto 1994:45). 

18 
northern rim, did contain significant oil deposits which were developed 

as early as 

1912. Development continued into the 1920s, when fifty wells had been drilled in 

Tapo Canyon (Franks and Lambert 1985: 43). Speculators gambled that oil 

development would lure new 

settlers, just as it had in the Santa Clara River Valley. 

Advertisements for plots in Simi Valley's Patterson Ranch bragged of "oil wells 

within 

a 

few rods of subdivided tracts" (Cameron 1963: 68). Simi Valley, however, 

never became the oil town that Santa Paula or even Fillmore was; one reason might 

be its proximity to these existing oil centers. The mountains between the Simi and 

Santa Clara River Valleys are accessible from either valley, and oil operations 

remained based in Fillmore and Santa Paula. Large-scale settlement of the east 

county would occur only much later - as a 

result of Los Angeles' increasing 

suburban development. 

Ojai: A place for the spirit-minded 

Through the first decades of the twentieth century, Santa Paula and Fillmore 

remained industrial and commercial centers, but unlike many southern California 

communities, they were 

relatively unaffected by an early tourism boom. These 

were working-class "company towns," with 

a great deal of ranch- or companyowned worker housing. While Santa Paula boasted the Sulphur Mountain Springs 

resort (developed in Santa Paula Canyon around 1890), and had its own resort 

quality hotel in 1911, this is probably more a 

reflection of the city's flourishing 

economy 

than its status as a resort destination. Santa Paula's Glen Tavern Inn, built 

in 1911, boasted hot and cold running water in every room and was 

considered quite 

luxurious for the time; it has been preserved close to its original condition (Santa 

Paula Oil Museum; Glen Tavern Inn brochure). Santa Paula, however, never 

received the acclaim as a resort destination conferred on 

its neighbor to the north, 

Ojai. Despite its smaller size, Ojai by this same 

time had at least four resorts near 

town, plus Wheeler and Matilija hot springs resorts in outlying canyons; many of 

these resorts had been in service since the 1880s (Fry 1983). One reason for Ojai's 

success 

in the resort industry might be its failure with oil; without land dedicated to 

oil processing facilities and without the economic benefits of oil production, the Ojai 

Valley was willing and able to trade on 

its looks. 

The Ojai Valley is similar to the Santa Clara River Valley in its climate and 

scenery, but its development took 

a decidedly different turn. The oil production and 

large-scale agriculture found in the Santa Clara River Valley never materialized in 

Ojai. Instead, the valley became known as a resort and attracted both tourists and 

wealthy part-time residents fleeing eastern winters. Like Santa Barbara to the north, 

Ojai was 

sold to easterners 

through advertisements and magazine articles 

as a 

While Santa Paulas first telephone connected Union Oil Vice President Wallace Hardisons home 

and the Adams Canyon oil fields, Ojais first phone was 

installed in 1892 to conned the Gaily Cottages, 

a resort, with the town livery stable (Santa Paula Union Oil Museum; Fry 1983). 

19 
health resort. This promotion began 

as early as 1872, when Lorenzo Dow Roberts 

found in the bucolic Ojai Valley an 

ideal climate for curing his chronic bronchitis; 

upon his return to health1 Roberts promoted Ojai to fellow easterners and 

subdivided 

a section of his 50-acre farm with the intent of giving away every 

second 

lot (Fry 1983: 24-25). The following year, 

the Ventura Signal 

ran 

several articles in 

praise of Ojai, claiming that due to its climate, abundance of timber, and proximity 

to sea ports, Ojai "would make an excellent sanitorium" (quoted in Fry 1983: 25). 

The LosAngeles Times spoke of Ojai in less pragmatic terms, claiming in 1878 that the 

valley is "the magnetic center of the earth," where "spirit-minded people come to 

reach the God centers in themselves" (quoted in Fry 1983: 243). The first large-scale 

subdivision of land in all of Ventura county was 

initiated 

as Ventura businessman 

Royes Gaylord Surdham mailed brochures to eastern doctors, encouraging them to 

send their incurable patients to Ojai. Surdham also offered land to anyone wiffing 

to build 

a hotel on 

the site, and Abram Blumberg took him up on 

this offer: Ojai's 

first hotel opened on April 11, 1874 (Fry 1983: 25). The same year William S. McKee 

built the Oak Glen Cottages, later called McKee's Health Resort. Like many of Ojai's 

founding settlers, McKee was 

seriously iii when he settled in the area and used tales 

of his own recovery experience to promote his business (Fry 1983: 81-82). 

cai's slow steady land sales of the 1870s mushroomed in the 1880s. 

Following Pennsylvania oil man T. A. Scott's death in 1881, Thomas Bard was 

forced to sell most of Scott's holdings (originally acquired for their oil potential), 

which induded a large part of Rancho Ojai. Bard advertised lots in the Ventura Signal 

at one to twenty dollars per acre (Fry 1983: 21); speculation soon 

led to a 

land boom, 

and by 1887, land values had increased six-fold. A new cohort of settlers arrived 

who could afford to buy at these inflated prices, and elaborate Victorian houses 

began to mix with the existing adobes and frame houses. Ojai historian Patricia Fry 

claims that before 1887, the influence of wealthy settlers and developers was 

balanced by 

a population of working class farmers (who publicly decried the effects 

of the boom). After this time, she claims, the "new ideas" of wealthier settlers, 

including greater cultural sophistication and exclusionary social practices, were 

unavoidable (Fry 1983: 106). 

Following this land boom, Ojai continued to attract both the wealthy and the 

sickly. In 1889, Sherman Day Thacher, with brothers Edward and George, emigrated 

to Ojai, hoping that the climate would restore George's failing health. George died 

soon after their arrival, but Edward became a 

successful citrus farmer and Sherman 

used his Yale degree to gain work as a tutor. By 1891, Sherman Thacher was 

advertising his services as a 

teacher and accepted 11 students; that year 

the young 

Thacher School conducted its classes in a set of shacks. Following 

a 

fire in 1895, 

Thacher rebuilt the school in a more permanent setting, constructing a predecessor 

to the current elite preparatory school. Thacher was 

the first such school in a 

community that would later become known for its concentration of both prestigious 

and progressive private schools, and is included on William Domhoff's short list of 

"ruling class" preparatory academies in Who Rules Am thai? (1967). 

20 
Throughout these early years, Thacher took an active role in community 

organizing and development: in 1891 he led a drive to secure private funding for 

a 

spur 

line of the Southern Pacific to Ojai (collecting $3,250, one sixth of the amount 

needed, but enough to begin construction), and in 1893 he donated the majority of 

funds necessary to build 

a public library. Thacher was also 

a main initiator of the 

Ojai Club, the first governing body of the as yet unincorporated town, stifi under the 

jurisdiction of the Ventura County Board of Supervisors. The Ojai Club was 

envisioned by Thacher 

as an "improvement dub," which would raise money 

for 

sidewalks and a town hail by organizing lectures and entertainment events (Fry 

1983: 127). The Ojai Club also provides an early example of the town's interest in 

self-determination, especially in the interest of community development and 

preservation. 

Edward Drummond Libbey (of Libbey-Owens-Ford Glass fame) first visited 

the Ojai Valley in 1908. Libbey originally lodged at the exclusive Foothills Hotel, 

a 

resort that required guests to provide references and turned 

away 

those not up to 

snuff (Fry 1983: 84-85). Libbey was soon dividing his time almost equally between 

Toledo, Ohio, and 

a winter home in Ojai, taking an active role in fostering the 

town's scenic potential. Although Ojai already boasted buildings by nationally 

known architects (including Julia Morgan, architect of Hearst Castle and other major 

structures), the Ojai Avenue business district lacked 

any unity of design. At a 1914 

town meeting, Libbey proposed refurbishing Ojai Avenue with 

a Spanish-style 

arcade, and the plan was greeted enthusiastically by local merchants who agreed to 

pay $10 per frontage foot for the project, with Libbey making up 

the remainder. 

Libbey commissioned San Diego architect Richard Requa to design the structure 

which stifi stands as 

the towns landmark. Construction commenced in 1916, and 

although several buildings were eventually demolished to make way for the 

structure, oak trees were carefully left undamaged (Fry 1983: 169-170). 24 

Although Libbey's benefaction was outstanding, he is by no means 

the only 

"outsider" to take such 

an interest in the town. In 1902, the parents of 

a Thacher 

student donated 

a clubhouse to the 

town following their son's death from 

rheumatic fever. The family originally intended 

to make 

a donation to the school, 

but Sherman Thacher refused, daiming "our boys have too much already." In 1917, 

winter visitor Charles Pratt donated $16,000 for a manual training and domestic 

sciences building to annex Ojais Nordhoff High School. The 

same year 

the Ojai 

Civic Organization was 

founded for the sole purpose of accepting gifts to the town of 

land or 

funds for improvements (Fry 1983: 136, 64, 71). The result of these efforts is a 

town whose physical plant, most notably its architecture, belies its small size and 

provincial location. The effect of this culturally rich hardware has been two-fold. 

23 railroad connecting Ojal and Ventura was completed in 1898. The initial depot provided only a 

ticketing window and passenger waiting area, however. As an 

afterthought, 

a 

freight warehouse was 

added in 1899; passengers were dearly intended to be the primary cargo 

(Fry 1983: 124). 

24This desire to preserve trees persists even 

today. Mayor Joe DeVito commented in 1994 that "Ojai is 

really concerned about trees." 

21 
Tourists and residents attracted to Ojai 

are 

those who appreciate physical beauty and 

an aesthetic that appeals to connoisseurs of art and architecture who are, for the 

most part, well-educated. Secondly, residents and local businesses are motivated to 

preserve 

this feature that attrads visitors, and which indeed may have attracted 

them as well. The result is a town very conscious of its physical appearance, 

that 

has, historically, gone to great lengths to preserve existing structures as well as 

carefully controlling new construction. 

II. Between the Wars (1914-1945) 

Table 2: County 

socioeconomic characteristics, 1910-1940 

Source: US. Census. 

* Indicates data not available 

The period between World Wars I and II was one of unprecedented growth in 

Ventura County, largely due to increasing oil development. The ratio of county 

residents to the number of farms reflects this diversification of county industries: in 

1920, Ventura County had 18.62 residents for every county farm; by 1940, this figure 

had grown to 34.83. This rise also reflects the increasing importance of intensive 

agriculture 

- 

citrus, and later, row crops - 

requiring more 

labor than grazing 

operations or 

the farming of beans and grain. On the Oxnard Plain, and in the Santa 

Clara River Valley, much of the additional labor required by these crops was 

provided by immigrants, both Japanese and Mexican. While Japanese laborers had 

lived in the Oxnard area since the turn of the century, the era between the wars was 

a period of increasing stabilization for these inniigrants as 

they started businesses 

and raised families. U.S. law denied first-generation Japanese immigrants 

citizenship, and thus prevented them from owning land26 (their children would be 

In 1910, 1920 and 1940, only Blacks, Asians and American Indians counted as 

"nonwhite." In 1930, 

Mexicans were also induded in the "nonwhite" category. 

26 The California Legislature passed alien land laws in 1913 and 1920 that restricted Japanese 

22 

1910 1920 1930 1940 

Total Population 

18,347 

* 

28,724 

* 

54,976 

8.0 

69,685 

12.77 

Percent Foreign Born 

Percent Nonwhite25 6.62 3.37 27.12 1.87 

Percent Male 

57.88 52.80 52.62 

* 

51.59 

Household Size 

4.30 

* 

* 

4.12 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

335 

8.6 

Median 

95 

School Years, Adult Males 25+ 

Median School Years, Adult Females 25+ 

* * 6.5 

Pcent Unemployed 
granted dual citizenship); nevertheless, many Japanese immigrants leased land, or 

purchased it with the aid of friends or relatives, and made significant contributions 

to Oxnard's growing agricultural industry. The Japanese population of Ventura 

county would fall by almost half following World War II (from 672 in 1940 to 362 in 

1950, according to the U.S. Census), as many of the families interned in wartime 

"Relocation Camps" elected not to return to the area. In many cases, 

these families 

had little incentive to return 

- 

their property was often stolen, their land sold off, 

and their homes burned (Fukuyama 1994; Yamamoto 1986). 

As Table 3 shows, the populations of Santa Paula and Fillmore nearly 

doubled between 1920 and 1930, due largely to the booming citrus industry, and 

development of the South Mountain and Montebello oil fields (Triem 1985: 121). 

The population of Ventura grew even more 

rapidly following development of the 

Ventura Avenue oil field. This was 

the great period for the city of Ventura's 

emergence as 

the center of the county's petroleum industry. 

Table 3: Growth in the communities 1920-1930 

Source: US. Census 

Ventura and the Ventura Avenue oil field 

Gas 

seeps 

in the Ventura AVCrLUC area had been noticed by locals since the 

1890s, but the only commercial development prior to World War I was 

the ill-fated 

natural gas project of 1903 (see above). Development of oil in this field began in 

1915, by Avenue native Ralph Lloyd. Lloyd, who grew up on a 

ranch in the 

area, 

noted the strength of the gas seeps as a boy when he 

saw one 

ignited by 

a 

lightning 

storm. He later studied geology at the University of California, Berkeley, and 

returned to Ventura Avenue to map 

the seeps and lease (with partner John Dabney) 

all the surrounding land he regarded 

as potentially oil-rich. Operating as State 

Consolidated Oil Company, Lloyd and Dabney brought in their first well, Lloyd 

Number One, in May of 1916. Although the pair struck oil, high pressure natural 

gas and salt water caused tremendous technical difficulties that limited the 

commercial viability of the first wells drilled in the area (Franks and Lambert 1985). 

The Avenue field was developed by a handful of primary operators: Shell Oil 

claimed 45 percent of production, and Tidewater Associated Oil Company 40 percent 

immigrants from owning land or leasing for a period over three years. 

In 1924, the US Congress halted 

all further Japanese immigration with the Alien Exdusion Act. These restrictions were 

repealed only 

in the 1950s (Fukuyama 1994: 21). 

23 

1920 Population 1930 Population % Increase 

Fillmore 1,597 2,893 81% 

Santa Paula 3,967 7,452 88% 

Ventura 4,342 11,603 167% 
(Tidewater Associated was later bought by Getty Oil, and Getty was eventually 

purchased by Texaco, whose Avenue interests were purchased by Shell's 

CaiResources group in 1996). Because the land was mainly agricultural and had not 

been subdivided into small parcels or town lots, a few operators were able to control 

development and prevent a 

scramble for leases (Beaton 1957: 190). Shell Oil 

acquired 13,000 acres of land along the Avenue in 1916 and began drilling their first 

well on 

the Taylor ranch the same year (Triem 1985: 119). After having spent two 

and 

a half million dollars on more and less successful experimental techniques, in 

1922 Shell brought in Gosnell Number Three, credited 

as 

the field's "discovery 

well," 

as 

it was 

the first well to produce in potentially commercial quantities (Beaton 

1957: 111, 189). Production was slow, however, until the advent of technology 

capable of drilling in high-pressure gas 

fields. In the mid-1920s, the increased use of 

rotary drilling rigs and the development of heavier drilling muds made Avenue 

drilling more 

feasible (Beaton 1957: 112). While these technologies were not 

developed for the Ventura Avenue field, their specific applications were designed 

for this field. Use of 

new 

the technologies to tame high pressure fields became 

something of 

an export industry, 

as Ventura Avenue operators used these methods 

to tap fields with similarly high gas pressure e1sewhere27 

By the mid-1920s, Shell and Associated were producing more oil with deeper 

wells 

- 

Lloyd Number 9A yielded 4,870 barrels 

a day at 5,150 feet (Reith 1963: 136-37). 

Production reached approximately 21,000 barrels a day by 1926, with Shell and 

Tidewater Associated responsible for three-fourths of the total (See Photo 3) (Triem 

1985: 119). Production from the Ventura Avenue field dominated the already oilrich county, rivaling that of fields in Kern County, south Los Angeles, and 

Texas! Oklahoma. By 1950, the Avenue field ranked twelfth nationally in total 

production, with 

a cumulative output of 376,787,000 barrels to date (Franks and 

Lambert 1985: 45). The field also proved exceptionally durable; through secondary 

recovery and ever-deeper drilling, the field maintained an output of over 

five 

miffion barrels annually from 1930 to 1993 (California Division of Oil and Gas). 

Chart 1 shows the Avenue Field's production, compared to that of other Ventura 

County fields, from 1920-1970. 

27 Ventura Avenue was, however, the site of 

one of the first fully electric drilling rigs in California. 

Mountainous terrain made construction of a 

road to one Shell lease prohibitively expensive, so an aerial 

tram was used to transport drilling equipment to the drill site. Because the tram would not support the 

boilers commonly used to power drilling rigs, electricity was used instead (Rintoul 1976: 142443) 

24 
Photo 3: Ventura Avenue oil field, 1940s. Ventura Avenue would prove to be one of the largest 

and most durable oil fields in the country. Shell (whose operations are shown here) developed 

approximately half the field. Reprinted from Franks arid Lambert (1985). 

Photo 4: Early offshore development at the Rincon. Through the 1950s, drilling from piers was 

the most common means of extracting offshore oil. General Petroleum used these piers in their 

Rincon operations in the 1930s; Richfield would later build an artificial island to tap nearby 

reserves. Reprinted from Franks and Lambert (1985). 

25 
20,000,000 25,000,000 30,000,000 35,000,000 10,000,000 5,000,0001920 Chart 1: Ventura County Oil Production, 1920-1970 (Selected Fields)RinCAtlfl * - *- _,* J,t4UUIE%fltø4 'Pt 7PII IIiIIW' P11*0* L. 101011 StlP1t1P*1S,t110*Wblblbl*lbbl*** '*I'' %-.0 *1 ttfV. ,*.rn, 't rA i 2 I ItWt J*fl't15 sirn fl5.A I aanlLnt rsItnI fl vsIrc1 *IIIPI P10! P OP - P I00 " - - 1970 Ojai Sespe Shiells Canyon D South Mountain II Toney Canyon U San Miguelito 0 Rincon fl Ventura Avenue Source: California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil and Gas. Annual Reports of State Oil and Gas Supervisor 1960 1950 1930 1940
While the development of the Avenue field boosted the city of Ventura's 

population and economy, 

the oil patch also brought boom town problems to a city 

whose industrial base until this time consisted mainly of agriculture and trade. The 

city was now 

faced with 

an unprecedented industrial development 

- one 

that was 

necessarily linked to a particular piece of land. Although Ventura Avenue was 

just 

north of downtown1 the oil patch was an 

unincorporated area and the city could 

neither coiled taxes nor control the direction of its development. Inexpensive 

homes, machine shops, and poker 

rooms dotted the city's western edge, and 

"rough" oil industry occupants kept "better" developments from moving in. 

Avenue landowners had no 

incentive to allow annexation, as basic services were 

already provided by either private utilities or 

the oil companies themselves. This 

blight to the west, combined with the geographical constraints of mountains and 

sea, would contribute to Ventura's eventual growth toward the east in the 1940s 

(Reith 1963). 

A second mixed blessing was 

the use of Ventura's harbor for exporting oil. 

Oil from the Avenue, which runs perpendicular to the ocean, as well 

as oil from the 

Santa Clara River Valley fields, was 

loaded onto tankers at Ventura using the first 

ever 

submerged pipeline. This practice became so common 

that when the wharf 

there was damaged by 

a storm in 1926, it was already obsolete for this purpose 

(Reith 

1963: 125).28 The same 

tankers polluted the harbor, however, as 

they emptied oily 

ballast water into the ocean. Oil eventually became so common on Ventura beaches 

that cleanup efforts following the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill reportedly left the 

beach cleaner than before the accident soiled these shores. While this may be an 

exaggerated claim, the possibility of beach pollution seems more 

than likely given 

the proximity of the tanker loading stations to local beaches. 

Development of the Avenue field brought more 

than industrialization to 

Ventura. The VentuiuCoufltYSklr, the leading paper in most Ventura County 

communities even 

today, was 

founded by editor Roy Pinkerton who gambled on 

the 

economic potential of the Avenue field. In 1925 Pinkerton, an editor with ScrippsMcRae newspapers, visited Ventura with the intent of buying the Ventura Thst; then 

the dominant local paper. After a deal to buy the Post fell through, Pinkerton1 

captivated by the growth potential he saw 

in the Avenue oil fields, found himself 

nevertheless interested in the Ventura market. He consulted with petroleum 

geologists (not bankers or advertisers, as was usual for someone attempting to found 

a newspaper) in an effort to understand the field's reserves and the financial 

implications for the city. Encouraged by these meetings, and by discussions with 

Sanlu Batham MorningPress publishers Charles and Thomas Storke, Pinkerton founded 

an 

independent newspaper in the community he claims to have fallen "in love' 

with during this visit (Pinkerton 1962: 5-7). The Slur introduced several modern 

innovations to news reporting in Ventura County: the new paper was 

the first in 

2Ventura's wharf remained in industrial use 

through the 1930s, when agricultural shipping began to 

rely mainly on 

trucks and railroads. Following World War II, tourists and locals used the pier for 

fishing and recreation. 

27 
the city to publish UPI dispatches (beginning in 1925) 

- 

it was even 

the first to print 

national or 

international news. The upstart Slur proved so 

successful that Pinkerton 

and his partners were able to buy out the Post by August, 1926 (Pinkerton 1962: 12-20). 

The Ventura oil boom of the 1920s was not confined to Ventura Avenue 

alone; geologists looked to the Rincon area, 

located near 

the Santa Barbara-Ventura 

County line, 

as an extension of the increasingly productive field. The Rincon field, 

north and west of Ventura Avenue, was 

initially explored in 1923, when Associated 

Oil company drilled to 5,215 feet 

- 

stopping only 500 feet short of productive oil 

sands. Four years 

later, the Pan American Petroleum Company drified the first 

successful well in-the area. Other operators in the 

area 

included-General Petroleum, 

Italo-American, Wilshire Oil Company, and Petroleum Exploration Company 

(owned by Edward Doheny) (Ventura Free Press, June 7, 1928). By June of 1928, the 17 

wells of the Rincon field were producing 4,000 barrels per day (Ventura Free Press, June 

28, 1928). In 1931, the world's deepest well to date, Chanslor-Canfield Midway Oil's 

(CCMO, later Santa Fe Energy Company) Hobson Number A-2 was completed at the 

Rincon at 9,702 feet, produdng 270,000 barrels in its first ten years at a 

slightly 

shallower depth (Franks and Lambert 1985: 48). The CCMO operation eventually 

employed 200 men and boasted 102 wells on its Rincon lease (McHenry 1950). 

Offshore drilling at Rincon began long before the offshore boom of the early 

1950s. While wells abutting the coast had been drified by 1928, drilling from piers 

and "steel islands" 

- 

the predecessors to modem platforms 

- 

began around 1930 (see 

Photo 4) (Kailman 1984: 37). Standard Oil was drilling from piers at Rincon by 1938, 

as well as from freestanding platforms (Franks and Lambert 1985: 65). General 

Petroleum was a major offshore operator in these early years, and their oil 

installations were not always welcomed by Rincon residents. Attempting to cross a 

local ranch with their oil pipeline, General Petroleum employees found themselves 

faced with armed cowboys demanding an agreement to provide right of way 

compensation to the Hobson family, owners of the pipeline route. The Hobsons 

won out, and received royalties for several decades (Kaliman 1984: 36-38). 

The Rincon area was first subdivided into leased home sites in 1917. Most 

residents were Santa Paulans seeking summer cottages, and the area was 

occasionally referred to as "Little Santa Paula." In the 1920s, Chanslor-Western Oil 

Company moved existing structures from its oil properties at Mussel Shoals to lots 

south of current La Conchita, where the company rented houses to employees for 

five dollars a month. South of the Rincon proper, 

the community of La Conchita 

del Mar was originally subdivided in 1923, by former Ventura County Surveyor 

Milton Ramelli. Ramelli sold lots for $200-$495, which included the property's 

mineral rights, in the hopes that oil finds at nearby Seadliff might lure investors. 

Oil was never 

found in La Conchita, and the lots were developed mainly 

as summer 

cottages. 29 More permanent settlements were prevented by the lack of utilities in 

29 A General Petroleum well was drilled three-eighths mile from La Conchita, which boosted property 

values in the area somewhat (Ventura Free Press, June 28, 1928). 

28 
the 

area; drinking water was unavailable to homes until the Casitas Dam was 

completed in 1954. Transportation was another stumbling block: the Southern 

Pacific passed through without stopping, and what is now a 

four-lane freeway was 

merely 

a wooden 

causeway along the beach (Ventura Star-Free Press,December 14, 1983: 

Vista Magazine Section; Ventura Star-Free Press Profile '79Mazine; S;infrz Bathain News-Press, 

March 19, 1995). While oil speculation along the Rincon did increase property 

values in the La Conchita area during the 1920s, once 

the lack of oil on town lots 

became an established fact, lot prices fell to as 

low as fifteen dollars (Ventura Star-Free 

Thss,December 14, 1983: Vista Magazine Section). 

During these early years, as oil companies built worker housing and 

developers bragged of home sites complete with mineral rights, the Rincon area 

became established 

as a place where oil and beach-side living easily coexisted. The 

following 1927 ad for lots in seaside La Conchita makes this abundantly dear: 

La Conchita Units: Each unit consists of 

a full acre. $1,000 per unit. One half 

of oil rights. La Conchita units are held under community oil lease for 

$10,000 cash bonus and 

a one-sixth royalty. The community lease provides 

that if oil is discovered on any of the 38 units that the owner of each unit 

receives 1/38 of one half of all the oil! The means 

that oil does not have to be 

found on the acre-unit you own 

in order for you to participate in possible oil 

earnings. BUY AT ONCE! (Ventura Free Press, December 13, 1927) 

The advertisement goes on to note that adjacent property is currently under lease to 

Shell Oil, then 

a major Ventura Avenue developer. Ads in other papers of the 

era 

invited diners and dancers to enjoy the beach-side inn featuring a glass-enclosed 

ballroom over 

the water and boasting guests including current Hollywood film 

stars. 

While the regional economic growth associated with the Avenue find is 

clear, accounts vary as to how the effects of the 1929 depression may have limited 

the field's development. Ventura County Star editor Roy Pinkerton claims that oil 

activity persisted through 1929, and the effects of the depression were first felt in 

1930 (Pinkerton 1962: 35). This buffering of the depression's effect may be due to 

Shell Oil, one of two major Ventura Avenue operators; the company 

entered the 

depression strong and carried on business as usual through 1929 and into 1930. The 

following two years, however, brought unprecedented belt-tightening to its 

California operation, and the troublesome Ventura Avenue field might have been 

cut back early on (Beaton 1957: 364-365). To the contrary, geographer Gertrude Reith 

claims that most exploratory drilling was halted in 1929 due to the depression, and 

that the slowdown in development reduced property values by up to 60 percent in 

the city of Ventura (Reith 1963: 144). County assessors' figures seem to support 

Pinkerton's claim; assessed valuations of Ventura County oil fields declined slowly 

in the first years of the depression, taking a steeper fall in the later years: 

29 
Table 4: Assessed value of oil Properties before World War II (in dollars) 

Source: VthauSk&eePrs, "Oil Progress Week" Special Section, October 14, 1953 

Assessed values increased 

every year 

following 1938, by one to two miffion dollars 

per year, until 

a 

larger jump at the onset of World War II. Still, economic activity 

clearly did not cease altogether during the depression; one noteworthy example is 

Ventura Tool Company (later VETCO), one of Ventura's largest oil field support 

companies, founded by Fritz Huntsinger in 1930 çTriem 1985: 119). Exploration of 

areas surrounding the Ventura Avenue field also proceeded throughout the 1930s. 

Growth in the Oxnard I Port Hueneme area presaged what would come to be, 

with oil and agriculture, a major node in the Ventura County economy. 

Infrastructural changes that attracted the military to the county during World War H 

actually began ten years prior with efforts to create an 

improved deep water harbor 

at Hueneme in the late 1930s. The site for the new harbor was donated by Richard 

Bard, son of early oil prospector and land agent Thomas Bard (see above). Although 

port developers originally applied for federal Public Works Administration funds, 

these funds did not materialize and 

a port district was created to raise the necessary 

capital through bonds. The original harbor district, including Oxnard, the Conejo 

Valley, Camarillo, the City of Port Hueneme, and the Ventura County coastline, was 

organized to include the broadest possible tax base; an ensuing bond measure 

raised 

$1,750,000. Contractors 

immediately began dredging four million cubic yards of dirt 

from the central basin and hauling rock from Catalina Island for the 1,600- and 900- 

foot jetties. Other improvements included a fish cannery and kelp processing site. 

The port was 

completed in July 1940, just two years after the project began. In 

another two years, however, the port would be surrendered to the U.S. Navy 

through the end of World War II for use as 

the U.S. Naval Construction Battalion 

Center. Hueneme was 

the busiest port in the U.S. during the war, shipping out 

twenty million tons of supplies from 1942 through 1945 (Ventura County Historical 

Society 1972: 47; Triem 1985). 

The Port Hueneme military installation was one of two 

inirastructural 

developments that literally paved the way for Ventura County development 

following World War II. The second improvement consisted of new highway 

linkages with Los Angeles: the coast route (Highway 1), from Malibu to Oxnard, was 

30 

Year Ending: Countywide Assessed Valuation: 

1930 

$30,611,910 

1931 

27,367,370 

1932 

26,056,097 

1933 

17,191,549 

1934 

13,744,924 

1935 

15,563,256 

1936 

...14,527,945 

1937 

16,795,940 

1938 

19,125,210 
completed in 1922, and the Camarillo Grade (on Highway 101), linking Camarillo 

and the Conejo Valley (see map), was 

completed in 1937 (Triem 1985: 122). The new 

highways created the physical linkages with Los Angeles necessary for the rapid 

suburbarnzation of the 1950s, and World War II era military installations on 

the 

south county coast would bring more new 

residents to the area 

than even 

the 

Ventura Avenue oil boom. 

The discovery of oil on Ventura Avenue and the adjacent coastal oil field 

radically changed the city and county of Ventura 

- 

both physically and economically. 

By comparison1 the Santa Clara River Valley communities of Santa Paula and 

Fillmore continued on 

the trajectory they had taken before the war: oil and citrus 

persisted in their dominance of the local economy, and population growth, while 

still strong between 1920 and 1930, leveled off somewhat in the following years 

(Santa Paula grew by 21 percent between 1930 and 1940, Fillmore by 19 percent). Oil 

fields originally drilled by Hardison and Stewart in the late 1880s continued to 

produce through the 1930s, and the Santa Paula field supported 100 wells by 1939 

(with a cumulative production of 1.2 million barrels). To the east, the Colima Oil 

Company continued exploring the Sespe field, and their second well produced 500 

barrels 

a day. By 1940, the field supported 17 flowing wells, and cumulative 

production exceeded 3 miffion barrels of heavy crude (Franks and Lambert 1985: 41). 

The Sespe and South Mountain fields, located in the hills above Santa Paula and 

Fillmore had 

some of the highest yields in the county during the early part of the 

twentieth century. Nevertheless, as Chart 1 shows, these fields were dwarfed by the 

production on Ventura Avenue. 

The most important event in the Santa Clara River Valley during this era - a 

tragic one - was not related 

to oil, but to water. The Saint Francis Dam (constructed 

by the city of Los Angeles for water storage and hydroelect.ric power) on San 

Francisquito Creek, a minor tributary of the upper Santa Clara River, collapsed on 

March 12, 1928, kffling over four hundred people in the Santa Clara River Valley. 

The flood released by the dam collapse washed through Fillmore and Santa Paula 

along its 65 mile journey to the ocean (Teague 1944: 185; Hey 1984). Several homes 

in the lower portion of Santa Paula were 

lost, and scores of workmen camped in the 

lower part of the valley were killed. Most damage from the flood occurred along the 

Los Angeles-Ventura County line, however, as 

the communities of Fillmore, 

Bardsdale, and Piru were at elevations above the water level (Triem 1985: 127-8). 

Ventura county Star editor Roy Pinkerton recalled that coverage of the disaster was "a 

live serial" for two years after the event, and the biggest single story of his nearly 40 

year tenure (Pinkerton 1962: 33). Altogether, 1,240 homes were 

lost and 7,900 acres 

of land flooded (Jeague 1944: 185).° Damage to the land varied from debris 

30 survey of damage to Santa Gara River Valley crops gives a picture of both the agricultural use of 

the valley and the enormity of the disaster. Acreage flooded is as 

follows: "1,554 acres citrus, 367 acres 

walnuts, 287 acres apricots, 1,287 acres beets, bean and hay land, 675 acres alfalfa, 505 acres vegetables, 

2,915 acres pasture land, 17 acres grapes, and 293 acres vacant land could be used for vegetables" (Teague 

1944: 189). 

31 
deposited in orchards, t1j some cases 

ten to fifteen feet high1t' to "land being 

completely washed away," to heavy deposits of sand and silt (Teague 1944: 191). 

Like the Santa Clara River Valley, the Ojai valley continued on a 

trajectory set 

about in the early twentieth century. The trajectory itself, however, was 

radically 

different from that of the Santa Clara as 

throughout the 1920s, the Ojai Valley 

intensified the incorporation of aesthetics into its economy. The Ojal Garden Club, 

founded in 1926, claimed, "Ojai is beautiful and we are going to work to make it still 

more 

beautiful," 

a claim echoed by town elites. In 1923 Edward Libbey purchased 360 

acres of oaks rather than see 

them cut down; the same year, 

the Ojai Valley Inn and 

Country Club was completed, commissioned by Libbey 

as a gift to the community 

(architect Wallace Neff of Pasadena received 

a certificate of honor from the 

California Architectural Board for its design). The Country Club served elite 

families of the area 

through the early years of the depression, but was closed in 1932 

and utili7ed by the military in the early 1940s. The Ojai Valley Jim reopened 

as a 

resort in 1947 and continues in this use 

today (Fry 1983). 

in 1924, theosophist Albert P. Warrington moved his Krotona spiritual center 

from Hollywood (where he felt crowded by the growing motion picture industry) to 

Ojal, 

a place he thought was "impregnated with occult and psychic influences" 

(quoted in Fry 1983: 245). The theosophical Order of the Star of the East followed 

Warrington in 1928, and the Order's spiritual leader, Jiddu Krishnamurti, purchased 

220 acres adjoining Krotona. Although Krishnamurti disbanded the Order in 1929, 

he and many 

followers stayed on 

in the Ojal Valley. Annie Besant, a former 

president of the World Theosophical Society, began teaching lessons in private 

homes in 1927 and founded the current Happy Valley School in 1946 (Fry 1983: 66). 

Happy Valley joined the Thacher School and Villanova Preparatory Academy 

(founded by Augustinian fathers in 1924) as one of the Valley's growing number of 

elite private schools (Fry 1983: 66). 

The creative arts also gained a 

stronghold in Ojai during this era. Ojala, 

a 

religious artists' colony, was 

founded by Rick and Eugenia Everett in 1929. Seven 

years 

later, Dr. Charles Butler solicited donations for an art center which could 

house local music and dance talent. Ground was broken in 1939 after eastern parttime residents pledged $6,000, and locals pledged an equal amount. A conflict over 

use of the new center arose 

the following year as 

professionally trained actors 

attempted to use 

the Ojai Community Art Center for their regular performances. 

The conflict was resolved as 

the professional actors moved to an old school house in 

the Upper Ojai Valley, later called the High Valley Theater, leaving the Community 

Art Center as a resource 

for local talent (Fry 1983). 

While the east county (Moorpark, Simi Valley and Thousand Oaks) remained 

largely agricultural through the Second World War, small precursors to the 

subdivisions that would 

come 

to dominate the area began developing in the 1920s 

and 1930s. The community of Thousand Oaks, today connected to the expanding 

Los Angeles metropolis, was 

founded in 1922 

as 

the Newbury ranch was 

subdivided 

32 
and sold in three parcels. Dr. Homer Hansen purchased one of these parcels and 

divided the land further into town lots selling for 

as 

little 

as ten dollars. A Conejo 

Valley schoolboy won 

the contest Hansen sponsored to name 

the new town with 

his entry 

'Thousand Oaks" (Bidwell 1989: 37). The building ordinances that still 

distinguish the Conejo Valley also began during this era. The first such regulations 

were developed at the Mattheissen Lake tracts in 1925 (the lake was created by 

a dam 

in 1905; it was 

later renamed Lake Sherwood). Developer F. W. Mattheissen 

required that builders submit plans to an "art jury" to 

insure the conservation of natural beauty and to so direct both building and 

planting that the entire project may harmonize, and to discourage the 

construction of discordant or 

incongruous units. These wise provisions are 

for the purpose of preserving the witchery and charm of the most beautiful 

spot in Southern California (quoted in Bidwell 1989: 39). 

It was 

the area's persistent wild character, however, that attracted Louis 

Goebel, formerly 

a zoo keeper at Universal Studios. Goebel started his "Lion Farm" 

in the Conejo valley following Universal's closure of their in-house zoo 

in 1922. 

The Lion Farm, later known as Jungle Land, provided animals to Hollywood 

studios; in 

a 

few years 

it became a 

tourist attraction in its own right and attracted 

additional commercial development in the Thousand Oaks area. The first phone 

installed in the Conejo Valley was at the Lion Farm, in 1926 (Bidwell 1989). 

The only oil activity recorded in the Conejo Valley was newspaper magnate 

William Randolph Hearst's 1925 purchase of 30,000 acres near Westlake, following 

on 

the strength of recent Ventura Avenue finds. Exploration proved disappointing, 

however, and Hearst sold the property at a 

loss in 1943, just before the Conejo Valley 

land boom of the 1950s (Bidwell 1989: 38-42). 

33 
iii. The California Post-War Boom (1945-1968) 

Table 5: County sociodemographic characteristics, 1940-1970 

Source: U.S. Census. 

* Indicates data not available 

Table 6: County employment by occupation, 19404970 

Source: US. Census 

The period following World War II was a 

time of unprecedented growth in 

California, and Ventura County proved no exception to this trend (see Table 5). 

Growth in the county outpaced the rate of growth seen 

in the state as a whole: while 

California's population increased by 188 percent from 1940 to 1970, Ventura 

County's population increased by 440 percent during this same period. The 

economy also shifted radically, with growth particularly strong in professional and 

31 Includes blacks, Asians, and Native Americans. 

34 

1940 1950 1960 1970 

Professional, Technical 1,723 3,739 9,410 24,813 

Proprietors, Managers, Officials 1,916 3,499 5,286 12,321 

Clerical and Sales 2,556 6,570 12,497 30,812 

Craftsmen and Foremen 2,232 5,852 9,496 18,178 

Service 2,414 4,465 6,625 15,767 

Farm Managers, Laborers, Foremen 6,690 7,252 8,781 6,756 

Laborers (except farm), Operatives 5,623 9,117 12,507 23,254 

Occupation Not Reported 267 564 3,249 0 

TOTAL EMPLOYED 23,421 41,058 67,851 131,901 

1940 1950 1960 1970 

Total Population 69,685 114,647 199,138 376,430 

Percent Foreign Born 12.77 * 8.24 7.2 

Percent Nonwhite3' 1.87 2.57 3.3 4.0 

Percent Male 51.59 51.08 51.56 49.67 

Household Size 3.35 3.24 3.33 3.43 

Median School Years, Adult Males 25+ 8.6 10.1 11.2 12.5 

Median School Years, Adult Females 25+ 9.5 11.3 11.9 12.4 

Percent Unemployed 6.5 7.2 4.9 5.7 
clerical positions. Jobs in the professions (e.g. medical, legal, engineering) grew even 

faster in Ventura County than they did in the state as a whole. In 1970, 18.8 percent 

of Ventura Counts labor force was employed in the professions, versus only 17.4 

percent for the state; Ventura County had lagged behind the state in professional 

employment only 30 years earlier (7.4 percent and 9.6 percent, respectively). The 

relative importance of agriculture in the county declined radically during this 

era: 

farm employment, as a percentage of total employment, fell from 28.6 percent in 

1940 to 12,9 percent in 1960, and only 5.1 percent in 1970; Ventura County had 34.83 

residents per county farm in 1940 (compared to 44.5 statewide), but by 1970 this 

figure had exploded to 224.2 residents for every county farm. In short, while 

Ventura County entered this 

era heavily dependent on agriculture, by 1970 the 

county had gained a high proportion of residents who were 

less dependent on 

this 

industry. 

Ventura County's large Latino population was also able to participate in this 

shift 

away from agricultural employment. Mexican-American soldiers returning 

from World War II were eligible for college scholarships and small business loans 

under the G. I. Bill of Fights, and many 

throughout Ventura County took advantage 

of this opportunity. In Santa Paula, where Latinos had worked almost exclusively 

in citrus and other agriculture, Mexican-Americans used this opportunity to open 

cafes, boarding houses, grocery stores and repair shops. An increasing Mexican 

market in the 

area, 

largely due to the importation of farm laborers from Mexico, 

supported Mexican-Americans' move 

into the service sector. The bracero program 

(Agricultural Labor Law No. 45, enacted in 1942), 

a response to labor unrest in 

California (Mexican farm workers attempted to strike in 1917, 1937, and 1941, each 

time unsuccessfully) and wartime labor shortages, allowed Mexican nationals to 

work in the U.S. on six month contracts. These contracts could then be extended, 

pending satisfactory work evaluations. By its termination in 1964, the bracero 

program had brought thousands of Mexican nationals into Ventura County 

(Menchaca 1994: Chapters 4 and 5). Thus while Latinos born in the U.S. moved 

away from farm labor following World War II, their labor was replaced by 

a new 

population once again vulnerable to exploitation in the County's citrus orchards 

and vegetable fields. 

Ventura County's economic shift 

away from agriculture was accompanied by 

a shift in patterns of settlement. The cities of Ventura and Oxnard dominated the 

county through the 1950s, bolstered by the still-productive Ventura Avenue oil field 

and increased employment at military installations on 

the county's southern coast 

(over 30,000 military and civilian employees worked at the bases 

- see below). 

Military employees soon spilled over into the rapidly growing Camarfflo 

area. 

Following completion of new freeways to the San Fernando Valley, settlements in 

the L.A.-proximate east county flourished in the 1960s. Largely dependent on 

the 

aerospace and defense industries of Los Angeles and the San Fernando Valley, the 

communities of Simi Valley and Thousand Oaks became major residential cities 

during this 

era. 

35 
World War II brought 

an 

unprecedented increase in the value of Ventura 

County's terrestrial oil industry; production on Ventura Avenue continued to 

increase through 1954, after which time it entered a slow decline. Development of 

the San Miguelito and Rincon-Padre fields northwest of Ventura also skyrocketed 

during this 

era, and operators began planning for the expansion of offshore 

operations. The move offshore necessitated new drilling technologies and new 

regulatory apparatuses for managing oil operations in the tidelands and outer 

continental shelf. The following sections chronicle the move offshore 

as 

experienced by Ventura county oil operators, and describe the transformation of 

county communities during this 

era of rapid growth and change. 

Table 7: Assessed value of oil properties, World War II through 1953 (in dollars) 

Source: Ven!uzuSWFtrePrs, "Oil Progress Week Special Section, October 14, 1953 

The oil patch 

as permanent fixture 

The geological formations of the Ventura Avenue area, unlike many fields, 

provided 

a durable source of petroleum. New techniques continually made deeper 

discoveries possible, and the relative permanence of production on 

the Avenue and 

in neighboring fields had pronounced effects on 

the city of Ventura. Through 

revamped exploration efforts and secondary recovery, Avenue oil production 

increased throughout the mid-1950s (Reith 1963). In 1955, responding to the 

previous year's decline in Avenue production, Shell Oil began experimenting with 

water flooding (injecting water into oil wells 

to raise the level of remaining oil) 

as a 

means of recovering more oil. A pilot program began testing in 1956, and 

a 

larger 

scale installation was 

in place by 1963; consequently, production began to increase by 

1966, reaching 10,000 barrels per day in 1968 and 16,000 barrels per day in 1971 (Paul 

1971: Bi). Chart 2 depicts Avenue production from 1950 to 1990, relative to other 

Ventura County oil fields. 

36 

Year Ending: Countywide Assessed Valuation: 

1941 

$23,496,421 

1942 

24,423,823 

1943 

35,358,980 

1944 

43,625,490 

1945 

49,597,580 

1946 

54,915,610 

1947 

64,905,340 

1948 

88,500,070 

1949 

121,404,850 

1950 

1'1,510,280 

1951 

138,529,930 

1952 

155,200,060 

1953 

164,509,700 
25,000,00 30000, 35,000,000 15,000,000 20,000, 10,000,000 5,000,000 Chart 2: Ventura County Oil Production, 1950-1990 (Selected Fields) -- 01950 1960 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 Ojai Sespe Shiells Canyon 0 South Mountain I Torrey Canyon 0 Rincon 0 San Miguelito D Ventura Avenue Source: California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil and Gas. Annual Reports of State Oil and Gas Supervisor
The Avenue, like many Ventura County fields, contained several layers of oil 

producing strata which became accessible as drilling technology improved. Just as 

the high gas pressure encountered in the field's initial exploration necessitated 

customized applications of new 

technology, conditions in the Avenue field 

continued to demand technological innovations: the electric collapsible rig was 

developed on 

the Avenue in 1947, and soundproof rigs, although not developed 

specifically for the Avenue, were 

installed in 1954 (Ventura Slur-Free Press,December 30, 

1947: 2 and July 8, 1954: 1). In 1952, tons of earth were moved 

to protect Avenue 

pipelines and well casings from impending landslides; holes dug around casings to 

protect the pipes from lateral earth movement curtailed production on 57 rigs 

(Ventura Slur-Free Press, March 19, 1952: 1). Technical innovations in the field added to 

the Avenue area's fate as an 

industrial 

zone as firms established an array of 

machine shops, supply centers, and other enterprises to facilitate Avenue oil 

production (as well 

as oil and gas extraction elsewhere in the county 

- 

and the 

world). 

The Avenue field's durability came to be recognized 

as unique by oil workers 

of this 

era. 

In 1950, General Petroleum superintendent Alex McLean noted that the 

field's longevity made it more attractive to his employees because they felt confident 

settling in the area. Assured that the field would produce for "not just decades, but 

generations to come," about 75 percent of General's employees bought homes in the 

area, and "almost all [were] active in one or two community groups." McLean also 

noted that part of the area's attraction was 

its receptiveness to the oil industry: "Lots 

of towns don't understand oil men and oil operations. Vertura folks like us and, I 

believe, appreciate us" (Ventura Star-Free Press, Oil Progress Week Special Section, 

October 18, 1950). The apparent permanence of the oil industry in Ventura may 

have contributed to residents' positive vision of the oil industry and its employees, 

just as 

this same 

feature confributed to oil employees' enthusiasm about the town. 

During this era, Ventura became something of 

a company town, or, more 

accurately, 

a 

single-industry town. While agriculture remained an 

important facet 

of the local 

economy - walnut orchards and bean fields ringed the city throughout 

this 

era - 

the oil industry's economic influence was pervasive. One resident from 

this time, whose father worked in the oil industry, recalled that, 

In grammar School and high school, all my friends, their fathers worked for 

an oil company or a service company, or 

if they were in business they 

depended on 

the oil business or 

the oil families for their livelihood. 

The oil industry also made economic contributions outside of its payroll. Taxes 

assessed on oil company property and facilities meant high quality schools and 

recreation facilities, and Shell Oil sponsored local concerts by the Los Angeles 

Philharmonic Orchestra. Together these factors 

- 

high tax and payroll figures, plus 

philanthropic contributions 

- gave 

the oil industry 

a high proffle in what was still a 

relatively small community (1950 population 16,534). Oil dollars generated not only 

economic ripples, but created, in effect, what we term a "social multiplier," 

38 
analogous to an economic multiplier in the sense 

that the impacts of 

an 

industry 

radiate out from those who work in it toward 

a wider circle of those with less direct 

interests. This social multiplier is always at work 

as a potential force that creates an 

interest in maintaming a particular economic function. Some people may make no 

money 

themselves from a given sector but have sympathy for it because of their 

relations with people who do. While dearly not "everyone" worked in the oil 

industry, community members apparently sensed that all boats would rise or 

fail on 

this tide (this became all too apparent when 

a 1948 industry-wide strike in Ventura 

crippled local oil operations as well as 

the local economy). 

Avenue oil industry operations were not 

limited 

to oil drffling and oil well 

support industries. Both Shell and Tidewater Associated (also known as Associated) 

had natural gas processing plants on 

the Avenue, and these expanded 

as energy 

demand increased in the 1940s and 1950s. The Associated plant was 

acquired from 

Standard Oil in 1941. Under Standard's ownership, the plant produced fifty million 

cubic feet per day of natural gas from the Avenue field; by 1952 production had 

increased to 75 million cubic feet per day, plus gasoline, propane, butane and isobutane. The gas plant employed 75 people, about 12 percent of Associated's 660 

person Ventura County work force; total Associated payroll for 1952 was estimated 

at three million dollars (Ventura Slur-Free Press,Oil Progress Week Special Section, 

October 17, 1952). Shell Oil's operations also underwent upgrades around this time: 

a natural 

gas absorption plant, founded on Ventura Avenue in 1926, was upgraded 

in 1949 (the plant separated "wet" and "dry" gasses from Ventura Avenue's gas-rich 

field, producing both "dry" natural gas, supplied to local utifity companies, and 

propane - 

the demand for which increased sharply following World War II) (Ventura 

Slur-Free P)ss,Oil Progress Week Special Section, October 19, 1949). Shell's Ventura 

Avenue anhydrous ammonia plant was constructed in 1953, immediately becoming 

Ventura County's largest industrial plant. The facility transformed hydrogen from 

the field's natural gas 

into 

a 

synthetic ammonia used in fertilizers (Ventura Star-Free 

Ress,Oil Progress Week Special Section, October 13, 1954). 

By the mid-1950s, the city of Ventura had been permanently impacted by the 

oil industry economically, socially, and geographically. In the 1940s, oil 

development on Ventura Avenue precluded 

a northward expansion of the 

downtown commercial area, resulting in the city's "move" east. The shoddy 

housing, machine shops and staging areas 

that dotted the Avenue in the 1920s 

proliferated in the 1940s, and the central business district found itself "hemmed in 

by blight on 

the west, hills on the north [and] the sea on 

the south" (Reith 1963: 148). 

A new Sears store at the Santa Paula highway (state highway 126) 

in East Ventura 

became the catalyst for retail development outside the traditional city center, 

effectively splitting Ventura' s shopping district into two discrete units and shifting 

commercial and residential development away 

from the beach. The subsequent 

32 Shell ammonia plant would later be sold to U.S.A. Petroleum, Inc. See 'Petrochem 

- A case of 

environmentalism and market dynamics," below. 

33Because of this move east and the resulting annexation and development of farms and orchards, the 

39 
lack of investment in the city's historic downtown and beach district then resulted 

in low property values and a diminished emphasis on 

the city's coastal resources. 

These became important factors when, in the early 1950s, the city of Ventura (like 

other communities in the county) began negotiations over 

the location and 

placement of 

a new wider 101 freeway. 

The old 101 route led directly through downtown Ventura, causing 

congestion 

so severe 

that 

a 

three mile drive took up to 45 minutes. As upland 

areas 

of the narrow coastal plain were already built up, and 

a route to the north would 

mean building over steep hills, "after many hearings 

a route was 

selected that 

would disturb the city 

as 

little 

as possible," 

a route midway between downtown and 

the beach. This route disturbed commerce 

little 

as 

the main shopping area 

in 

Ventura has already moved east, and land south of downtown was either vacant or 

contained deteriorating housing and low-rent commercial structures (Reith 1963: 

185). The latter area was generally occupied by low-income and Hispanic residents, a 

pattern encouraged by the adjacent industrial land uses 

related to oil development. 

As the city was also engaged in the construction of low income housing at this time, 

replacing substandard units with new housing, units displaced by the freeway 

facilitated what one housing official referred to as "slum clearance" (Ventura Star-Free 

Press, January 16, 1958: Bi). A 1957 Ventura Star-Free Press editorial congratulated the 

city for negotiating a depressed freeway route preserving views of the ocean from 

the county courthouse (now Ventura's city hail) above downtown (Ventura Star-Free 

Press,August 20, 1957) Nevertheless, the new deisgn obscured views of the city from 

the freeway, and what might have been valuable coastal property was covered in 

concrete, leaving pedestrian or auto access to the beach limited 

to a few awkwardly 

configured over- and under-passes. 

Haphazard development and 

a 

lack of 

any coherent zoning persisted in 

North Ventura and the Ventura Avenue area 

through the 1960s. Seeking to 

remedy this situation, in 1967 the Ventura County Board of Supervisors and the 

City of Ventura embarked on a 

joint assessment of the Ventura Avenue Area, 

creating a General Plan for this area 

that is part city, part county. One physical 

condition planners found contributing to the Avenue's disagreeable environment 

was 

the "intermingling of what 

are, 

inherently, incompatible land uses," such as 

residential units adjacent to industrial plants or staging areas. The study found that 

while the oil industry installations were 

still the dominant land use, oil employed 

only seven percent of Avenue residents.M This confirms the recollections of one 

Ventura resident during this era, who recalled that most oil field workers lived in 

East Ventura, not on 

the Avenue, from the 1940s onward. The scarcity of oil 

industry employment was one reason cited for the area's relative poverty (21.7 

percent of families had incomes under $3,500 at the time of the study) and 

City of Ventura doubled its geographical area between 1947 and 1962 (Reith 1963: 150). 

34 study noted that while the employment effects on Avenue residents of current offshore 

exploration could not be foretold, "some persons unemployed because of a 

layoff could obtain 

employment" in offshore operations (Ventura Avenue Area General Plan: 2). 

40 
substandard housing (an exterior study of the area 

found twenty percent of housing 

units to be substandard based on 

the Uniform Housing Code) (Ventura County and 

City of Ventura: 4-8). 

The problems outlined in the Ventura Avenue Area General Plan can be 

seen as 

resulting from the area's initial oil-dependent development. The land use 

patterns of the 1920s boom 

- 

inexpensive housing commingled with industrial 

development 

- were still in place in the 1960s, while oil was 

in something of 

a 

decline. The heavy manufacturing plants that accompanied the oil industry invited 

similarly land-extensive commercial 

or 

industrial development, including storage 

yards and auto wrecking facilities. The low residential land values in the area 

invited more of the 

same; 

specifically, 

a number of trailer home parks built on 

the 

Ventura River's flood plain. The result was a 

land use policy that satisfied neither 

residents nor planners, requiring a 

joint effort and expenditure by the city and 

county of Ventura to right the situation. The emphasis of the General Plan was to 

provide some coherence to land use 

in the 

area, 

including consolidating shopping, 

residential, and industrial areas. The Planners argued that "Not one of the uses, 

operating in proper 

locations and with adequate development standards, would 

cause deleterious effects on adjoining uses," thus avoiding placing blame on the oil 

industry for a negative impact on 

the Avenue as a 

residential 

area. The oil industry 

had not, however, allowed incorporation of their land into the city, nor 

imposed 

their own restrictions on 

its development, either of which might have ameliorated 

this situation. 

Offshore oil takes root 

The oil industry in Ventura County increased its emphasis on offshore 

exploration and production throughout the early 1950s. The Ventura Star-Free Press' 

annual "Oil Progress Week" edition on October 12, 1955 heralded the beginning of 

the offshore era with the headline: "Strange Armada May One Day Invade Waters 

off Ventura County Shores in Search of Deep Oil." This indeed proved correct as 

increased exploration, new driffing techniques, and a 

settlement to the longstanding debate over who owned submerged lands and their minerals materialized 

during this 

era. 

Seismic exploration along the Ventura County coast became common in the 

late 1940s 

as offshore technology developed. Seeking sifil further reaches of the 

geological formation that created the Ventura Avenue field, oil companies explored 

waters off the Rincon area. In 1949, one blast illegally discharged near 

the water's 

surface killed an estimated 50,000 fish, resulting in a protest by Santa Barbara and 

Ventura County fishermen to state Fish and Game commissioners. Oxnard 

Commissioner Edwin L. Carty took their protests to Governor Earl Warren, noting 

that the practice killed "too many fish" and that areas under investigation were 

already sufficiently mapped (Ventura Star-Free Press, July 9, 1949: 1). Newspaper 

treatments of this type of conflict had varying emphases in the Santa Barbara 

41 
Channel region. Protests against seismic exploration and other offshore drilling 

issues were common 

in Santa Barbara and Montecito during this era and received 

thorough and supportive coverage 

in the Eankz Bczrbani News-Press. In contrast, the 

protests by these fishermen were covered almost incidentally by the Skir-Free Press; the 

emphasis of news stories around this issue was 

the status of the permits, not the 

organization of anti-oil opposition. 

In 1954, California law still required that tidelands drilling be conducted from 

bases constructed of "nattral materials" or piers,35 

a condition that prohibited use of 

the steel 'Texas Tower" platforms then becoming common 

in the Gulf of Mexico. 

Richfield Oil purchased 

a 1,175 acre tract off the Ventura County coast that year and 

in February 1957 began construction of its Rincon Drilling Island. The island was 

designed to provide a one acre sand and dirt work 

area, 

surrounded by 

a concrete 

breakwater that brought the total surface area to three acres 

(400,000 tons of rock and 

dirt used in the island's base came 

from 

a quarry five miles inland, in Rincon 

Canyon). Richfield spudded its first well in September 1958, using 

a 

collapsible rig 

that could be removed upon 

the well's completion to reduce the area's industrial 

appearance. Similarly, palm trees were planted on 

the island's perimeter, to 

disguise its purpose. Production from the island's wells eventually reached 2,000 

barrels 

a day (Ventun2 Star.Free R-ess,February 13, 1965). 

The technological innovations that allowed for increased offshore operations 

were 

accompanied by new state and federal legislation to designate ownership of 

submerged lands. The federal Submerged Lands Act of 1953 gave states the right to 

tidelands within three miles of shore, with the federal government to control 

leasing and development beyond that point. California's Shell-Cunningham 

Tidelands Act, passed in 1955, declared state tidelands from San Luis Obispo County 

south to Orange County's Newport Beach open 

for offshore oil leasing. One 

exception was 

the area directly offshore from the city of Santa Barbara, where an oilfree sanctuary was designated from the University of California, Santa Barbara's 

Goleta campus east to Summerland Bay. Santa Barbara residents actively lobbied for 

their offshore sanctuary during negotiations over 

the act (with the support of the 

local newspaper); residents of Ventura County, as well 

as county and city 

governments, were generally absent from these deliberations. One exception to 

Ventura county's silence was 

the city of Oxnard. City representatives attended the 

hearings, and City Attorney Joseph Goss asked the committee to "take into 

consideration the opinions of other communities along the coast [besides Santa 

Barbara], including adequate protection for the new, smaller communities who 

have not yet had time to develop their beach front" (Sosna 1954: A1-A2).36 It is clear 

from this statement that even during the continuing oil boom of the 1950s, Oxnard 

Offshore drilling to this point had been confined to piers, utilized at the Rincon field since the 1930s 

(Kailman 1984: 37). 

36 The City of Santa Barbara daimed its seven million dollar investment in beach front development 

would be at risk if offshore drilling occurred within the city limits. While Oxnard could not cite the 

same 

figures, its saw 

its position as similar (Ventura Star-Free Press, August 27, 1954). 

42 
was 

turning 

some attention toward tourism and recognized offshore development 

as a possible threatY 

The development of offshore reserves 

coincided with the decline of the 

Ventura County terrestrial oil industry,38 buffering the local 

economy against either 

a boom or recession. Chart 3 depicts cumulative production figures for Ventura 

County's onshore production and Santa Barbara Channel offshore production. 

Santa Barbara's state tidelands production figures are 

included here because Ventura 

County provided personnel and services to offshore operations throughout the 

region; the economic impact of offshore oil was not limited 

to the county whose 

shore it abutted.39 Beginning in 1957, the first year for which offshore production 

statistics are available, tidelands oil only slightly buffered the decline in Ventura 

County's onshore industry. It was not until the 1970s that Outer Continental Shelf 

(OCS) development in federal waters returned regional oil production to levels 

above those seen 

in Ventura County during the mid-1950s. 

Although the City of Oxnard expressed hesitation regarding offshore drilling, 

the Oxnard plain 

saw 

its share of terrestrial oil development during this period. in 

1947 Standard Oil made a major find on a section of the plain owned by the McGrath 

family, but the initial rig was destroyed by fire. A second rig was 

then blown out by 

high pressure mud, and Standard stationed guards around the operation's 

perimeter, fearing encroachment on what might be a major find. The city of 

Ventura even considered leasing its money-losing municipal golf 

course, 

in the 

Oxnard area (on land adjoining the Standard operation), for oii development 

(Ventura SIarFree Press,April 16, 1947: 2). A second blowout occurred seven years 

later, 

as Standard's Maclimes Number Two blew in the middle of the night, spewing 

approximately 2,500 barrels 

a day into the surrounding bean fields. Although the 

well reportedly released "millions of cubic feet of natural gas," this well did not 

catch fire. Coverage of the event in the Ventura S/ar-Free Press focused on 

the 

unfortunate loss of natural gas pressure due to the blowout, not on 

the despoliation 

of either 

crops or 

the natural environment. Oil beat reporter Joe Paul Jr. noted that 

"oil men were sickened by the heavy loss of oil and the bleeding off of the vital gas 

pressure" (Paul 1954a; 1954b). 

Just as it had during the conflict over seismic exploration in 1949, the Ventura Star-Free Press relied 

on oil industry sources in covering these negotiations quite in contrast to the Santa Barbara paper's 

reliance on 

local officials for commentary. Media's reliance on business and government spokespersons is 

not unusual (see Sigal 1986), in contrast, Santa Barbaras daily newspaper utilized several citizen 

groups as sources 

in its coverage of these hearings. 

major Ventura County drilling firms folded in 1964: Rocky Mountain Drilling, and Drilling and 

Exploration Company, which continued to conduct business in the Middle East (Ventura Star-Free Press, 

September 14, 1964). 

For example, even 

though most platforms in this initial boom were off Santa Barbara County's 

coastline, Port Hueneme functioned 

as 

the primary staging area and transport point for offshore crews 

and equipment. One source at the Port estimated that at i height, the offshore oil industry accounted 

for almost all of the Port Hueneme's business. 

43 
-4'I.) 00 0 '-4\0 Chart 3: The Offshore Era Ventura County Onshore and Regional Offshore Production -40" '0 00 -40NC -40\ N '-40" N0 -4N00 -40\ 000 --4000 -400 -4000\0 '-4C" CO00 0C" C 0 Ventura County Onshore Oil Ventura County State Tidelands Oil Santa Barbara County State Tidelands Oil 0 Santa Barbara Channel OCS Oil Sources: California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil and Gas; Annual Reports of the Oil and Gas Supervisor. Minerals Managment Service, Estimated Oil And Gas Reserves, Pacific OCS (MMS 94-0008)
Oil was only one economic boon to the Oxnard Plain. The establishment of 

military installations at Port Hueneme (1942) and Point Mugu (1946), as well as 

the 

Oxnard Air Force Base (1952), brought unprecedented growth to the area. Port 

Hueneme and the surrounding land were 

appropriated by the U.S. Navy in 1942 for 

development of the Naval Advanced Base Depot, later known as 

the Construction 

Battalion Center. The base served as a staging area 

for construction materials and as 

a 

training center for Navy Seabees. Approximately 10,000 civilians and 21,000 

military personnel were 

employed at the base, and new housing tracts were built in 

Oxnard and Hueneme to accommodate the influx of personnel (Triem 1985: 134-36). 

The U.S. Navy acquired Point Mugu in 1946 for its Naval Air Missile Test Center, 

now 

the Pacific Missile Test Center. The acquisition was not without opposition, 

however, as 

local ranchers expressed concerns about safety and possible threats to 

nearby communities. Nevertheless, the first missile was 

launched in 1947 (Triem 

1985: 136). 

The military boom of the 1950s spified east from Oxnard to nearby Camarillo. 

While it continued to be 

a 

farming community (and continues to be even now, 

albeit to a 

lesser extent), Camarillo experienced the 

same 

trend toward 

industrialization and intensified residential development seen 

in the coastal 

communities. 

Table 8: Growth in the communities 

- Camarillo 

Camarilo 

Source: US. Census 

1960 Populafion 1970 Population % inaease 

19,219 715% 

2,359 

Prior to 1960, agriculture (including warehouses, packing houses, and food 

processing plants) dominated the local economy. Camanilo was home to the 

Ventura County Walnut Growers' Association warehouse, a citrus processing plant, 

and the California Confection Company. In 1963, 3M (Minnesota Mining and 

Manufacturing) opened its plant in Camarilo, the first national manufacturing firm 

to locate in the area. Playtex and Clairol have since followed, and current industrial 

production includes fiberboard cartons, business forms, precision machinery, 

aerospace metals, chemicals, agricultural equipment, and power 

supplies (White 

1979: 77). The Oxnard 

area military bases were another vital facet of Carnanillo's 

economy; 

in 1960, 29.47 percent of the Camarillo labor force was employed by 

governments and 21.62 percent in 1970 (these figures include local government 

employment as well, but the military employment clearly contributes to this high 

figure) (U.S. Census). 

40 1950 population data was not available, as Camarillo's population was under 1,000 at this time. 

45 
During the 1950s, the Camarilo Chamber of Commerce (the local governing 

body prior to incorporation in 1964) had encouraged the California Department of 

Highways 

to shift the 101 freeway from its proposed course, 

south of the city, to the 

present Conejo grade route directly through Camarillo. Convinced that 

a position 

on 

the freeway would attract new 

residents, the Chamber of Commerce considered 

the Highway Department's agreement to the new route a major victory. In the 

1970s, however, city leaders became dissatisfied with the bifurcation of Camarillo by 

the 101 and asked the department of transportation to move 

the freeway south, to 

the original route proposed twenty years earlier. The Department of Highways 

declined (Triem 1985: 137-138). 

Back country oil: The valleys go 

their own ways 

Petroleum development was an 

important part of both the Santa Clara River 

and Ojai Valley landscapes and economies throughout this 

era, albeit in distinctive 

ways. The Ojal valley, known mainly for its scenic beauty and numerous resorts, 

has 

a complicated relationship with the oil industry. The rugged Upper Valley4' was 

the site of 

some of Ventura County's earliest oil exploration; the Lion Mountain 

field, two miles south of Ojai, was 

initially developed in the 1860s and successfully 

drilled again by Humble, as well as 

independent operators, beginning in 1948. 

Generally obscured from view from the Ojai 

area of resort fame, these Upper Valley 

wells quietly produced through the 1950s, and exploration continued as drilling 

techniques improved. Even a blowout at the independent W. R. Oil Company's 

Bailey Number Four on October 24 1956, spouting one million cubic feet of gas 

mixed with oil, water, and drilling mud, was regarded 

as good news - 

and front-page 

news - at least in Ventura (Ventura Star-Free Press, October 24, 1956: Al). 

Oil drilling in the lower valley however, has been met with local resistance. 

One Ojai historian daims that in the early 1950s, 

an exploratory rig (Carty Number 

One, located near 

the Maricopa highway at Route 33, in the lower Ojai Valley) 

angered several residents who objected to the noise and unsightliness. The well 

produced only salt water, however, thus ending the conflict (Fry 1983: 204). During 

this 

same era, an Ojai resident complained to Star-Free Press editor Roy Pinkerton 

about despoliation of his view, claiming that Pinkerton and the Star-Free Press' 

support of the oil industry were directly 

to blame for 

a "badly scarred mountain," 

created by hillside drilling A second theme in this letter is the Ventura County 

Planning Department's insensitivity to residents of Ojai and their wishes; the 

author accused the Planning Commission of "pass[ing] their will upon us" unjustly, 

as "nine out of 

ten people in Ojai are not in commercial business here and do not 

41 designations "upper" and "lower" are commonly used to denote the east and west ends of the 

valley, respectively. 

42 Production from the Ojai Valley, 1953: Weldon Canyon (east of Oak View), 112 barrels per day; Ojai 

Group, 699 barrels per day. 

46 
want it here near 

their homes" (Snyder 1951). This comment stands in sharp 

contrast to the attitudes of Ventura County developers who, in the course of selling 

tracts at La Conchita and Simi Valley, bragged about the proximity of oil operations 

to home sites. While this contrast could be seen as marking the passing of 

an era 

when residences and industry easily mixed, we see 

this 

as another refledion of 

Ojai's interest in aesthetic preservation. Today even proactive Ojai 

environmentalists acknowledge that oil operations kept out of sight 

are easily kept 

out of locals' minds; it could easily be the 

case 

that the two instances described above 

violated this essential consideration, thus bringing about public scrutiny. 

In the Santa Clara River Valley, existing wells continued 

to produce oil 

through the 1940s and 1950s, but processing facilities began to leave the area. 

While the valley had been home to some of the earliest commercial refineries, these 

were 

relatively primitive and isolated. By comparison, the Ventura Avenue area 

was proximate to marine terminals and an abundance of flat land where processing 

and service facilities were constructed, and boomed at a time when technology was 

advancing rapidly. Oil could be profitably refined near Avenue drill sites or 

tankered to Los Angeles, which had by this time become 

a center of oil refining. The 

Texaco refinery at Fillmore (originally called the Ventura Refining Company) 

processed Santa Clara River Valley crude from 1915, to 1950. Oil once processed 

locally would 

now be piped to facilities at Torrance, and Texaco offered the plant's 

thirty or so employees jobs in the Los Angeles basin (Ventura Slat-Free 1'ess, March 10, 

1950: 1). The plant itself has been removed, and the site is undergoing soil 

remediation, water treatment, and well monitoring following its classification as a 

Superfund site. This sometimes alarming designation seems of relatively little 

interest to area residents; while the city's mayor expressed some concern 

that Texaco 

should not "make [itsi profit on us and go away and leave us with the problem," she 

recalled little public outcry or organization around the issue. A Pacific Coast 

Pipeline pumping station (transporting oil from Ventura to Newhall) now occupies 

the area. 

The tendency of oil companies to consolidate refining facilities is also 

demonstrated by Union Oil's development of the ridge between the Santa Clara arid 

Simi valleys; new discoveries in this area meant new pipelines, not new refineries. 

The years 1952 and 1953 brought increased exploration of the Tapo Canyon, 

Oakridge, and Torrey Canyon44 fields, on 

the Simi Valley side of Big Mountain. By 

The South Mountain field near Fillmore continued to produce through the 1940s and into the 1950s as 

a Texaco operation (Franks and Lambert 1985: 71). Between 1952 and 1953, average daily production 

increased from 7,613 barrels to 12342 (Ventura Star-Free Press, October 14, 1953). Because of the area's 

steep terrain, Texaco and other companies (including Shell and Fairfield) utilized drilling "islands," 

level slabs of concrete notched into steep hifisides from which several wells could be directionally 

drilled. In 1949 Texaco had six islands in the South Mountain field, each with three to five wells 

- 

accounting for abouLaiourthofthe_company'si4O wells in the area 

(Ventura Star-Free Press, October 

19, 1949). 

The Union Oil company commonly named its tankers after productive fields, including the Torrey 

Canyon field. The tanker Torrey Canyon 

ran aground in the spring of 1967, spilling 30,000,000 gallons of 

47 
1953 these fields were producing sufficiently for Union Oil to build a five million 

dollar, sixty-five mile pipeline to Los Angeles refineries, capable of transporting 

50,000 barrels 

a day (Welty and Taylor 1958: 1958: 245). The Torrey Canyon and 

Oakridge fields 

are 

located on Union's extensive fee property in the area - 

land on 

which the oil company has purchased the mineral rights in perpetuity, and does not 

pay a royalty based on productioii Additional land was and still is owned by Union 

outright, making Union one of the largest landholders in the Sirni Valley 

area. It is 

the role of landholder that Union (known as Unocal after 1985) is best known for 

today in Simi Valley; perhaps because oil was, from the outset, piped south for 

refining, and Simi Valley never became a center of oil processing. 

Conejo and Sirni Valleys: The suburban era 

The biggest changes in eastern Ventura County during this post-World War II 

era were not the result of changes in oil or agriculture but of the great Southern 

California population boom fueled by aerospace and defense contracting. Like the 

rest of Southern California, Ventura County experienced tremendous population 

growth during the 1950s and 1960s. New freeways meant that travel between Los 

Angeles and the Central Coast became quick and easy enough to make 

areas of 

Ventura County viable bedroom communities for the aerospace 

industries of Los 

Angeles and the San Fernando Valley. New roads, the importation of Los Angeles 

metropolitan water, and the subdivision of previously rural areas drastically 

changed the population distribution and infrastructure of Ventura County. 

Table 9: Growth in the communities 

- 

the east county 

48 

The Conejo Valley's connection to Los Angeles precedes 

even Louis Goebel's 

decision to move his Lion Farm there from the Universal Studio lot in 1926; Los 

Angeles developers Edwin and Harold Janss (whose developments included Yorba 

Linda and the Boyle Heights neighborhood of Los Angeles) had purchased 10,000 

a.iS of the Conejo Valley in 1893. The brothers focused their development efforts 

on Los Angeles for over sixty years, while the Conejo property remained 

a working 

farm. Following the 1955 completion of the Coriejo segment of the 101 freeway, the 

crude oil and polluting beaches in England and France. Ironically, this spill provided many lessons for 

the Santa Barbara spill at Union's Platform A two years 

later, especially regarding the hazards of 

using chemical dispersants (Easton 1972: 40). 

1950 Population 1970 Population % Increase 

Moorpark 1,146 3,380 195% 

Thousand Oaks 1,243 36,334 2,823% 

Simi Valley 2,107 56,464 2,579% 

Source: US. Census 
Janss brothers began the subdivision and development of land near Thousand Oaks, 

then a town of just over 1,200 people (Bidwell 1989: 34-42; 1950 census). The 

developers attracted 

a number of corporate employers to their land, including 

Northrop, Packard Bell, Westinghouse and the North American Aviation Science 

Center (Triem 1985: 139). The first subdivisions, selling in 1956, were marketed 

exclusively to aerospace and electronics professionals. A Janss brochure describes 

one development as "a super community. 

. . 

for the superior new worker of the age 

of electronics.'t A company press agent explained, "Its concept is slightly snobbish: 

deliberately planned to appeal to highly trained, highly selective, highly paid 

people" (quoted in Bidwell 1989: 42). 

As housing construction increased, water shortages became chronic; 

groundwater was overdrafted and water rationing followed the intermittent loss of 

water to several homes in 1959. A ballot measure proposing that Thousand Oaks 

join the Los Angeles Municipal Water District passed overwhelmingly (93 percent) 

in 1960, and Colorado River water arrived three years 

later (Bidwell 1989: 48). 

Despite this new water source, however, a dam on Sespe Creek was proposed in the 

early 1960s. As the dam proposal included creation of 

a 

road through the Sespe 

Condor Refuge (located north of Fillmore, in the Los Padres National Forest), the 

plan was vehemently opposed by conservationists, including activists from the 

Audubon Society. Information gathered by San Luis Obispo county 

environmentalist Ian McMillan (see San Luis Obispo County Report) helped to 

counter dam supporters' criticisms of the sanctuary (specifically, that it was 

ineffective for condor conservation, and that captivity offered the birds better 

chances of survival). The environmentalists won out over claims by a coalition of 

construction, recreation and real estate interests that had supported the dam project, 

and the $100,000,000 bond issue necessary for the project was defeated (McMilan 

1968: 158-161). McMillan also credits the Sespe Creek controversy with increasing 

public 

awareness about the endangered raptors: 

One of the main effects of our arguments was a surprising increase in popular 

ecological understanding. 

. 

.an unforeseen swell of public opinion appeared 

in support of our position on how and why the condor should be protected 

(McMilan 1968: 161). 

Thousand Oaks incorporated in 1964, later annexing the communities of 

Newbury Park and the Ventura County portion of Westlake Village (Project 

Development Company 1992: 7). Three years after incorporation, "more then half 

the houses under construction in Ventura County were being built in the Conejo 

Valley" (Bidwell 1989: 57). 

In 1968, Camarillo's Calleguas Municipal Water District also began receiving Colorado and Feather 

fUver water through the Los Angeles Municipal Water District, to supplement existing local ground 

water supplies (White 1979: 78-79). 

49 
Simi Valley 

saw a similar boom in housing construction slightly later, during 

the 1960s (see Table 9; Growth in the communities 

- 

the east county). Compared to 

Thousand Oaks, development was 

less coherently planned and lacked an explicit 

emphasis on attracting aerospace and electronics engineers. Instead, the city 

provided inexpensive tract homes to workers from the San Fernando Valley and 

Ventura County, sometimes at the expense of other services. When the city of Simi 

Valley incorporated in 1969, few retail or commercial services were available, and 

most residents stifi shopped in nearby Moorpark. Moorpark had been the area's 

commercial center prior to the suburban boom; the city's own 

residential explosion 

would not occur until the 1980s. 

The rapid suburbanization of the east county area 

signals the emerging 

integration of the county's overall economy 

into the Los Angeles metropolis. This 

growth was to overwhelm any previous phase of development, and would indeed 

come to challenge the county's identity as a region independent of the everexpanding L.A. metropolis. 

IV. The Environmental Era (1969-Present) 

We now turn to the last phase of Ventura County's history, with our 

attention increasingly on 

the modern developments that have given the county its 

current social and economic configuration. We first describe the demographic and 

infrastructural features of the constituent towns and cities. We focus 

as well on 

local media and inventory the local civic organizational structures, particularly the 

non-profit "voluntary organizations." Finally, we chronicle developments in oil, 

both onshore and offshore, including reactions to the 1969 Santa Barbara Channel 

oil spill 

- 

frequently viewed 

as 

the beginning of the contemporary environmental 

era. 

Part A: Demographic Changes and Communitij Differentiation 

Since 1970, Ventura county has experienced growth unprecedented since 

World War II brought 

a military boom economy to the coastal communities of 

Ventura, Oxnard, and Port Hueneme, While all Ventura County communities saw 

their populations increase following 1970, growth has been especially intense in the 

east county communities of Moorpark, Simi Valley, and Thousand Oaks. Oxnard 

and Camarillo 

saw 

similar growth spurts, although not as dramatic, while the Ojai 

and Santa Clara River Valleys remained comparatively stable. Below, Table 10 

Since 1970 (the earliest year 

for which Sinii Valley figures are available), housing prices in Simi 

Valley have been 20 percent lower than those of Thousand Oaks. 

50 
shows the changing demographic make-up of Ventura County as a whole, and 

Chart 4 depicts population growth in the major cities of Ventura County. 

Table 10: County sociodemographic characteristics, 1960-1990 

Source: US. Census 

* Indicates data not available 

Since its initial non-native settlement, Ventura county has provided 

an 

example of racial stratification in that minority-dominated occupations have been 

generally low-wage occupations, and towns with more ethnic diversity are 

typically 

less affluent. Many people of color have achieved economic and social success 

in 

the county 

- e.g. 

in Oxnard, Japanese Americans and Mexican Americans have held 

the mayor's office for decades (Fukuyama 1994: 29), and in Camarilo, the Camarillo 

family maintained their ranch well into the twentieth century and actively 

participated in development of the current city (White 1979). Still, most Hispanics 

(the largest minority group 

in the county) live in working class towns, and many 

hold jobs in what remain low-wage industries. In cities highly dependent on 

agriculture (including food processing and packing) and manufacturing we find 

a 

high Hispanic populations. Hispanics make up at least half of the populations of 

Oxnard, El Rio, Fillmore, Piru, and Santa Paula. In the east county and the city of 

Ventura, economically dominated by middle-class professionals (often commuters), 

we find a more ethnically homogeneous population, typically 70 to 80 percent 

"Non-Hispanic Whites."48 

51 

g Including Blacks, Asians, and American Indians. 

48Asians, the second largest minority group in the county, make up 6.8 and 8.6 percent of the populations 

of Fort Hueneme and Oxnard, respectively. In Simi Valley and ThousandOakAsiansmakeup55 and 

4.8 percent of the population. These four communities represent the highest concentrations of Asians in 

the county, and their economic differences make it difficult to draw conclusions about the economic 

status of this group. 

1960 1970 1980 1990 

Total Population 199,138 376,430 529,174 669,016 

Percent Foreign Born 8.24 7.2 12.67 17.04 

Percent Nonwhite 3.3 4.0 19.56 20.1 

Percent Male 51.56 49.67 49.77 50.45 

Household Size 3.33 3.43 3.0 3.02 

Median School Years, Adult Males 25+ 11.2 12.5 12.8 * 

Median School Years, Adult Females 25+ 11.9 12.4 12.8 * 

Percent Unemplo ed 4.9 5.7 5.3 4.7 
140,000-- 160,000------- - - 100,000- 120,000 20,000-- - 40,000 - 60,000 - 80,000 - 0 Source: U. S. Census Oxnard Thousand Simi Oaks Valley Chart 4: Ventura County Community Populations, 1960-1990 Ventura Caniarillo Moorpark Paula Santa Port Hueneme Fillmore Ojai C N0 000
Table 11: County employment by occupation, 1960-1990 

Source: US. Census 

Table 11 shows the changing economy of Ventura County during this 

era. 

The employment picture that 

emerges here is an 

increase in middle-class 

occupations (the professions, proprietors, mangers and officials, clerical and sales), 

accompanied by a decrease in the relative number of non-agricultural laborers. This 

pattern closely matched that 

seen in the state of California as a whole, where whitecollar occupations also increased in their relative importance. One important 

difference between Ventura County and the state, however, is the relative 

importance of agriculturally-based occupations (including managers and foremen, 

as well as 

laborers). Although the percentage of Ventura County residents 

employed in agriculture fell by over half from 1960 to 1970 (remaining relatively 

stable at around 5 percent through the 1970s, '80s and '90s), agriculture nevertheless 

played 

a greater role in Ventura County's employment mix than it did statewide (4.7 

percent in Ventura County versus 2.7 percent in California for 1990). 

On the following page, Table 12 provides 

a second view of Ventura County 

employment and the relative importance of each industrial sector. While the above 

U.S. Census data show what occupations are held by Ventura County residents, 

Table 12 uses data collected by the Regional Economic Information Service to show 

the jobs actually located in Ventura County. Comparing this information provides 

a picture of just what kinds of jobs 

are 

located in Ventura County versus what kinds 

of jobs 

are available only by commuting (usually 

to Los Angeles or 

the San 

Fernando Valley). Note the relative importance of service and retail employment 

by 1990; these figures suggest that while marty Ventura County residents work in the 

professions, many of these jobs lie outside the county's borders. Jobs created inside 

the county appear to be in those sectors that support the expanding bedroom 

communities of the East County. 

53 

1960 1970 1980 1990 

Professional, Technical 9410 24,813 38,668 62,334 

Proprietors, Managers, Officials 5,286 12,321 28,517 49,202 

Clerical and Sales 12,497 30,812 62,821 94,278 

Craftsmen and Foremen 9,496 18,178 31,239 39,379 

Service 6,625 15,767 29,025 37,637 

Farm Managers, Laborers, Foremen 8,781 6,756 14,257 15,908 

Laborers (except farm), Operatives 12,507 23,254 30,954 38,034 

Occupation Not Reported 3,249 0 0 0 

TOTAL EMPLOYED 67,851 131,901 235,481 336,772 
Table 12: Ventura County Employment by Industry, 1970-1990 Source: Regional Economic Information Service Year hI IbC j lis h -w H h - U 1970 134,567 11,268 3,175 1,938 5,684 14,065 4,516 4,299 21,873 9,223 21,792 10,482 9,379 16,873 8% 2% 1% 4% 10% 3% 3% 16% 7% 16% 8% 7% 13% 1975 170,741 14,897 6,358 2,126 5,751 17,479 4,933 6,422 25,610 12,605 30,888 10,996 8,735 23,941 9% 4% 1% 3% 10% 3% 4% 15% 7% 18% 6% 5% 14% 1980 219,778 11,907 7,414 3,007 10,955 24,932 7,392 8,035 35,297 18,682 46,462 10,338 8,386 26,971 5% 3% 1% 5% 11% 3% 4%, 16% 9% 21% 5% 4% 12% 1985 261,866 8,716 8,125 4,118 13,988 29,735 9,209 9,195 47,169 20,288 64,797 11,054 8,912 26,560 3% 3% 7% 5% 11% 4% 4% 18% 8% 25% 4% 3% 10% 1990 331,203 10,597 9,897 3,011 23,020 35,568 13,392 13,313 54,832 24,947 91,662 12,568 8,110 30,286 3% 3% 1% 7% 11% 4% 4% 17% 8% 28% 4% 2% 9%
Also of note here is the consistent role of government employment. 

Although federal military and civilian jobs make up a smaller and smaller 

percentage of total county employment (15 percent of total employment in 1970 

versus 6 percent of total employment in 1990), 

as we will describe in more detail 

below, the military also makes 

a significant contribution to the county's economy 

through contracting and expenditures. State and local government employment 

grew in the actual number of positions, but its relative importance in the 

economy 

diminished (13 percent of county employment in 1970 versus 9 percent in 1990). 

Our data provide several indicators of oil's declining impact on Ventura 

County employment 

as well as county tax revenues. Chart 5 shows the 

"Extract/Intact Ratio," or 

the relative importance of mining, chemical and allied, 

and petroleum jobs to the number of jobs generated in the tourism industry. Here it 

is apparent that by 1970, tourism had become more 

important to Ventura County 

than the extractive industries 

- an 

inversion of their status in 1940. While the 

actual numbers of mining jobs (the category includes petroleum extraction, plus 

other extractive enterprises including sand and gravel) rose from 1,938 in 1970 to 

4,118 in 1985 and settled at 3,011 in 1990, even at its peak this category accounted for 

only 2 percent of total employment. Chart 6 (Ventura County Oil Industry Payroll) 

and Table 13 (Property taxes on developed oil and gas mineral rights) show that the 

economic impact of the oil industry, in both countywide payroll and contributions 

to county property tax rolls, followed a 

similar 

curve (peaking in 1985) and generally 

diminished thereafter çbeiow we will describe in more detail the role of world oil 

prices in setting this pattern). 

Table 13: Property taxes on developed oil and gas mineral rights 

55 

Source: California Board of Equalization 

Year Tax Contribution 

1977 $7,598,785 

1980 $8,330,769 

1985 $13,384,953 

1990 $10,725,033 

1995 $4,307,660 
100.00% 120.00% 140.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 0.00%1 Source: U. establishm The Extrac ng70 Chart 5: The Extractilntact Ratio Ventura County Compared to State and Region : 940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 - -X - Ventura 0 19 lodg 4 Santa Barbara San Luis Obispo State Ave. ?nts -- a proxy for the tourism industry. :/Intact Ratio compares the numbers of jobs in mining, chemical/allied, and petroleum to jobs generated by eating, drinking and . Census
$100,000 $120,000 $140,000 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000$0 Chart 6: Ventura County Oil and Gas Payroll, 1969-1989 (In Thousands of Dollars) I I I I I I I I I I I I I 00 Q 00 f- S N N N N S N N N 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 cj\ O\ O' O\ O C\ C\ 0\ a a C\ C Q O c c c O' Q ,- - - - - - ,- - _4 - ,-4 - - - ,-4 - - - - - Source: Regional Economic Information Service Earnings are shown in constant (1982) dollars.
By 1995, oil and gas properties held by major oil companies49 in Ventura County 

were assessed at $379 million, compared 

to total property assessment countywide. 

These oil and gas properties accounted for 0.86 percent of the county's $43 billion 

worth 

- a steep decline from earlier times, when oil accounted for up to 55 percent 

of the county's property assessments (Ventura Slur-Free Fss, Oil Progress Week Special 

Section, October 17, 1952). 

While oil, agriculture, and the military appear to be diminishing 

as 

the 

county's leading industries, this conclusion neglects certain related elements of each 

sector which have actually grown. For instance, the sector of "agricultural services" 

has steadily grown in absolute numbers of jobs, while farm work tends to fluctuate. 

Similarly, while military employment currently makes up only 2 percent of total 

county employment, military installations also employ significant numbers of 

contract employees whose connection to the military is obscured by their actual 

employers' non-military (and non-government) status. For instance, Point Mugu 

Naval Air Warfare Center retains 3,100 contract employees who 

are 

technically 

employed at companies such 

as Grumman and Delco. Table 14 contains 

employment and expenditure data for Ventura County's two largest military 

installations: 

Table 14: 

: Military employment and expenditures 

Military Employees 

Civilian Employees 

Contract Employees 

Local Purchases 

Local Contracts over 25K 

Source: U.S. Navy 

To gain a better understanding of how these economic and demographic 

factors have helped 

to shape each of the cities of Ventura County, we have divided 

the county communities into three categories with somewhat 

common profiles and 

histories. We will first discuss the Coastal communities of Ventura, Oxnard, and 

.I_L 

. 

jL ,..l..... L-.& 

run. nueiteiiLe, wuicit 1E1Vt III LUHLIILUIL IUJL U1Lt men eoiapiu FIUAUIULY LFUL 

their dependence on agricultural and military employment. Second, we focus on 

the historical valley settlements of Ojai, Santa Paula, Fillmore, and Piru, and finally 

Port Hueneme Naval 

Construction Battalion 

Center 

4,067 

4,562 

684 

$63,077,000 

$102,634,000 

Point Mugu Naval Air 

Warfare Center 

4,992 

(combined military 

and civilian) 

3,100 

$7,601,740 

$150,470,565 

49Major" oil companies indude Arco, Chevron, Conoco, Exxon. Fortune, Mobil, Oryx, Santa Fe Energy, 

Seneca, Shell, Signal Hill (PP), Texaco, Union, and Vintage Petroleum. 

58 
the 

newer 

suburban cities of Simi Valley, Thousand Oaks, Camarillo, and 

Moorpark. These categories 

are meant to suggest the similarities between certain 

communities and simplify 

an analysis of their socioeconomic character 

- 

they 

are 

not meant to represent hard and fast divisions within the county. It is instead our 

hope that by showing the kinds of people living in each type of community, and the 

social and economic 

concerns of those people, we might anticipate how each type of 

place would respond to offshore oil development. 

The Coastal Communities 

Ventura, Oxnard, and Port Hueneme share 

a common 

location on the coastal 

plain, their history of long-term industrial development (in both oil and 

agricultural processing) and, more recently, their proximity to active military bases.5° 

Local, state, and federal government employment provides 

a 

steady, non-cyclical 

source of income. The Ventura County Government Center (located in the newer, 

eastern area of the city of Ventura) provides local jobs in county administration, and 

the Naval Construction Battalion Center at Port Hueneme and the Naval Air 

Warfare Center at Point Mugu together employ nearly 20,000 military, civifian, and 

contract personnel. The multiplier effect from base personnel expenditures is wellunderstood by locals, who have become especially sensitive to the current trend of 

military downsizing and base closures. While the Point Mugu and Port Hueneme 

military operations appear protected at this time, locals closely monitor the situation 

and 

any change in the bases status is front page news. 

50While located inland, in the Las Posas Valley (between Oxnard and Thousand Oaks), Camarillo 

shares with the coastal communities its dependence on the military economy of Point Mugu and Port 

Hueneme, as well as a historic dependence on agriculture. Camarillo also shares many characteristics 

with the suburban cities of the east county - induding its rapid growth during the 1960s (see Table 8), 

its affluence (see Table 20), and its attractiveness to Los Angeles refugees. For this 

reason, Camarillo is 

included in the section on 'New Suburban Cities." 

The community of Oak View shares 

a common economic and demographic profile with these 

coastal dliesEocated-at-the-southernend-of-thejai--V-alley1Gak-View-is-only-a-10--minute-drive-from 

the city of Ventura and is even closer to the Ventura Avenue oil operations. For these 

reasons it might 

be appropriate to indude it with the coastal communities, as its economy seems more parallel to 

Ventura and Oxnard than to Ojai 

proper. 

59 
Table 15: Percentage of labor force employed by government 

(Coastal Communities shown in italics) 

The construction of military bases meant rapid development and 

unprecedented economic growth, the pace of which declined after World War II 

- 

both Oxnard and Port Hueneme had unemployment rates over 10 percent in 1950. 

While Ventura was protected from this post-war bust by its still thriving petroleum 

industry, oil production eventually declined to the point that ordy significant new 

finds would be able to prevent layoffs and downsizing. The oil shocks of the early 

1970s meant increases in world oil prices and increased production and revenues in 

Ventura, as 

the high-sulfur crude became more lucrative. Exploration was 

stepped 

up, and existing wells became more valuable. Note in Table 16 (Number Residents 

employed in Petroleum and Mining) how almost every community reporting 

figures for 1970 showed 

an 

increase between 1970 and 1980 

- a 

time of increasing oil 

prices. Employment between 1980 and 1990 fell off again in most communities 

following the oil glut and subsequent price collapse of the mid-1980s (a trend also 

reflected in countywide payroll figures 

- see Chart 6). 

60 

1970 1980 1990 

Camarillo 29.60 21.64 16.49 

El Rio 21.33 17.50 12.07 

Fillmore 13.92 15.67 14.73 

Meiners Oaks! Mira Monte 17.61 17.02 13.38 

Moorpark 12.5 10.54 9.36 

Oak View 21.1 20.02 19.01 

Ojai 20.41 16.44 14.67 

Oxnard 24.99 18.5 17.05 

Port Hueneme 19.98 17.41 17.72 

Santa Paula 15.55 14.0 11.52 

Simi Valley 14.02 12.83 10.4 

Thousand Oaks 13.49 10.86 9.55 

Ventura 24.42 21.23 18.03 

Source: US. Census 
Table 16: Number of residents employed in petroleum and mining 

Source: US. Census. 

* Indicates data not available 

The prominence of agriculture in the Ventura County 

economy means 

that 

for many workers, employment is cyclical within the year, as well 

as vaiying from 

year to year, depending on crop yields and market conditions. While agricultural 

workers may not necessarily consider themselves "unemployed" between work 

seasons, 

the amount of wages generated through agriculture impacts other local 

businesses, and may alter perceptions of local economic health. Agricultural 

employment in the count typically peaks in April. In April 1990 agriculture 

provided 22,500 jobs countywide; during the 

same year's lull, however, agricultural 

employment dropped to 12,000 (Project Development Co.: 22). 

Strawberries, the second most profitable 

crop 

in the county (behind citrus), 

are 

grown almost exclusively on 

the Oxnard Plain. The city of Oxnard celebrates this 

crop with an annual strawberry festival drawing 70,000 to 80,000 people from around 

California and the U.S. Nevertheless, land on 

the Oxnard Plain 

once yielding up to 

three crops a year is increasingly being developed for residential and commercial 

use. Oxnard now appears something like 

a checkerboard, with housing 

tracts, 

commercial outlets, and manufacturing plants mixed with farmland 

- some of 

which is used as a buffer between industrial and residential 

areas (see Photo 5). The 

disappearance of farmland is not confined to Oxnard, however. During the 1980s, 

Ventura County lost 800 to 1,000 acres of agricultural land each year to residential 

61 

51 Much of the oil employment in Thousand Oaks might be attributable to the Exxon Corporate 

headquarters located there from 1981 to 1993. 

1970 1980 1990 

Camarillo 10 111 130 

El Rio * 14 38 

Fillmore * 134 61 

Meiner's Oaks! Mira Monte * 118 112 

Moorpark 17 24 

Oak View * 141 68 

Ojai * 103 41 

Oxnard 114 406 332 

Piru * * * 

Port Hueneme 33 27 62 

Santa Paula 179 196 217 

Simi Valley 26 63 83 

Thousand Oaks5' 53 160 179 

Ventura 899 1312 965 
Photo 5: Oxnard's rapid growth. Oxnard is among the fastest growing communities in Ventura 

County, and agricultural land is increasingly used for new 

residential, commercial and 

industrial development. Photo provided by Oxnard Chamber of Commerce. 

Photo6:ThecityofVenturatoday. Thisview from City-Haiicieariy--shows-Venturas 

proximity to the 

ocean. Note how the freeway (center, at right) splits the city center from the 

beach, hindering pedestrian 

access. Photo by Leonard Nevarez. 

62 
and commercial development. 52 While 

some of this acreage was 

replaced by 

increasing agricultural use of hillside land, the county is quickly "running out of 

hillsides" (Fujii and Whitmore 1989: Dl, D3). 

Coastal tourism 

These communities have always had the Pacific Coast available 

as both 

an 

industrial and 

a 

recreational 

resource. While the Port of Huerieme has loaded cargo 

for nearly 

a hundred years, and the loading of oil from submerged pipelines at 

Ventura has taken place for almost as 

long, large-scale recreational development of 

coastal resources has taken place only more recently. In some cases, 

the possibility of 

coastal recreation is now nearly impossible, as freeways, military installations, and 

an 

industrial infrastructure dominate much of the Ventura County shore. Thus 

despite this potential recreational resource, 

tourism employment in the Coastal 

Communities (measured in this study by employment in eating and drinking 

establishments, recreation, and entertainment) lags behind both the historical 

tourist destination of Ojal and the bedroom communities of the east county (see 

Table 17, Percentage of Labor Force Employed in Tourism).53 

52As of 1990, 27.4 percent of Ventura County land was used for agriculture (2120 farms), and nearly 

one 

third of this land was under irrigation (Project Development Co.: 22). 

While the east county is not a 

tourist destination per se, both Slim Valley and Thousand Oaks show 

a 

larger percentage of residents employed in tourism than Ventura. One explanation for thi&niighLhe 

the relatively high numbers of eating and drinking establishments (a key element of 

our 

tourism 

measure) in these affluent bedroom communities. What is measured here as "tourism" might also be 

thought of as service sector employment. 

63 
Table 17: Percentage of labor force employed in tourism 

* Indicates data not available 

The Rincon area of the Ventura County coast, roughly between the city of 

Ventura and the Santa Barbara County line, is an extremely narrow coastal shelf 

dominated by the 101 freeway. Much of the beach along this 

area was filled for 

construction of this freeway and its predecessor, Highway 1 (the old coast road, 

running parallel to 101 for several miles in this area), leaving little 

room for 

recreational development. In La Conchita, the northernmost beach settlement in 

Ventura County, the beach is only accessible via 

a high-risk dash across 

the four lane 

freeway or a crawl through 

a 

four foot storm drain. Three county and state parks 

(Faria, Hobson, and Emma Wood), located between La Conchita and Ventura, 

provide overnight camping and day use facifities, but, as is also the 

case to the north, 

the beach has largely been filled over 

leaving 

a very narrow strip of sand and 

a 

rocky 

breakwater. At high tide, swimming, or even walking on much of the beach is 

risky, if not impossible. Recreational expansion is encumbered by not only the high 

amount of land dedicated to highways and the Southern Pacific Railroad but oil 

installations upland of the highway (the San Miguelito and Rincon fields 

- see 

history, above). In 

some cases, oil and the highway may have worked together 

to 

fill over the beach. According to Ventura County environmentalists, a popular surf 

point on 

the Rincon was filled over as 

the freeway b\rpassed an onshore processing 

facility (Patagonia, Inc. 1993: 7). 

Beach 

areas 

in the city of Ventura have also been given over to extensive uses 

outside of outdoor recreation. These include residences and industrial 

developments (including Texaco's oil storage facilities), as well as 

recreational 

facilities that according to some fail to maximize the waterfront's potential. At the 

64 

1970 1980 1990 

Camarillo 3.87 5.23 5.51 

ElRio * * 3.22 

Fillmore * * 5.05 

Meiner's Oaks! Mira Monte * 734 7.29 

Moorpark * 3.44 5.40 

Oak View * 4.67 2.95 

Ojai * 7.71 9.74 

Oxnard 3.84 4.27 5.27 

Port Hueneme 3.61 4.88 4.81 

Santa Paula 3.79 4.65 3.54 

Simi Valley 4.00 5.62 5.80 

Thousand Oaks 4.66 6.3 6.35 

Ventura 5.74 6.0 5.76 

Source: U.S. Census. 
Ventura County Fairgrounds, what once was a vast seaside park was gradually 

paved over to increase space 

for parking and permanent structures. Much of this 

area is unused outside of the week of the fair. A multiple-use harbor, built near 

the 

mouth of the Santa Clara River, is susceptible to damage from floods, and its 

entrance is considered unsafe in stormy conditions (Price 1990). This mixed use of 

coastal property is, to some extent, a problem for Ventura's tourist economy. 

According to the city's Director of Tourism, 

What people tend to do is they 

see ocean 

front property devoted to oil tanks, 

or, in some cases, people see 

the ocean 

front 

- part of-the ocean 

front property 

- 

devoted to a 

fairgrounds. And they think, "Wouldn't that make a great 

visitor serving location." 

.. 

[A] few people have said wouldn't it be nice, for 

example, to move 

the fairgrounds to the country and then do something with 

the fairgrounds property. Or I would imagine it would be the 

same 

thing if 

people actually had 

an option to do something different with the land that's 

devoted to oil tanks. 

At this time, Texaco's oil storage tanks at the former marine transit site have been 

dismantled and removed. Water storage tanks remain, and the property is for sale. 

Ventura's government is currently trying to draw residents and tourists alike 

to its beach and to re-incorporate the beach and pier to Ventura's recently 

redeveloped downtown area. Some amenities along the waterfront, including the 

promenade, were paid for by the oil companies themselves. While San 

Buenaventura State Beach (the city's sandy portion of beach south of the Ventura 

Pier) is so crowded on summer weekends that some users are 

turned away 

from 

public parking lots, tourism during the school season, when families with children 

are 

less likely to travel, remains sparse. 

Twenty percent of Ventura's $1.8 million in hotel bed taxes are channeled 

into visitor services and recruitment, including a Visitor Information Center and 

marketing to independent and group tourists. The city is thought by tourism 

officials to lack 

a clearly defined image, however, compounded by both 

infrastructural difficulties and competition with the historic tourist destination of 

Santa Barbara thirty miles northwest. The 1950s choice of 

a sunken freeway design 

for U.S. 101, which would allow ocean views from city hail and Main Street, is now 

seen as emphasizing views of the city's industrial 

areas, an obstacle to attracting 

tourists. While many 

infrastructural features have become "invisible" to residents, 

they remain visible, and potentially repulsive, to tourists (see Photo 6). Ironically, 

thos& things which have become more visible 

to residents through city outreach 

the redevelopment of Main Street with decorative paving stones and flags, Ventura 

Harbor with its restaurants, shops, and Channel Islands National Park Visitor 

Center (dedicatedird98O) 

- are 

largely invisible 

to those passing through on U.S. 

101. One tourism official complained that Ventura "doesn't show well from the 

freeway." The perceived importance of a growing tourist economy makes Ventura 

leaders eager to avoid 

any future use of coastal land for non-tourist purposes. 

65 
The city of Oxnard shares 

a 

similar predicament of heavily mixed industrial 

and recreational uses at the oceanfront. The Channel Islands Harbor, constructed in 

the 1960s, is located just south of Ventura's multiple use harbor and provides 

moorage 

for fishing 

as well as pleasure vessels. The harbor has become a center for 

Oxnard's growing tourist industry and is now surrounded by shops, restaurants and 

hotels that play on nautical themes. While the harbor and adjacent Harbor 

Boulevard abut 

a white sand beach, access to the beach is hampered by tightly packed 

beach-front homes and condominiums on one end, and heavy industrial 

installations (including Southern California Edison's Mandalay Beach Power Plant 

and Unocal's Mandalay Beach oil processing facility) on 

the other. Naval 

installations at Point Mugu occupy 

the beach south of the city. 

Even those areas of beach left relatively undeveloped were 

inaccessible to the 

public through the 1970s. A state beach provided camping and picnicking facilities 

several miles north of the harbor, but many populated 

areas were without a nearby 

public beach. Residents attracted by the harbor area's coastal amenities (including 

reasonably priced homes with private boat slips on harbor canals) were frustrated by 

the limited beach access. Efforts to secure a state purchase of open coastal 

areas were 

hampered by conflict with real estate developers. For example, one 

local resident's 

petition to add 

a 114-acre parcel of the undeveloped Mandalay Beach 

area to the 

State Park system conflicted with 

a hotel developer's concurrent and competing bid 

on 

the 

same parcel. The private Mandalay Beach Colony and Resort now shares 

the parcel with Oxnard State Beach, administered by the City of Oxnard. 

This fight for the beach park had 

an unintended 

consequence, however, as 

formerly non-political Oxnard locals forged alliances with state lawmakers and 

regional environmental experts. One local activist called on 

the nearby 

resources of 

a University of California, Santa Barbara, oceanographer who then investigated 

local rates of beach erosion. These alliances have outlasted this specific struggle and 

contributed to a budding environmental network on 

the south county coast. 

The Ojai and Santa Clara River Valleys 

Growth in the historical settlements of Fillmore, Santa Paula, Piru and the 

Ojai Valley56 has been more 

limited than that 

seen in other parts of the county 

(including Oxnard, Thousand Oaks, and Simi Valley). One explanation is the 

Valleys' geographical containment; the Santa Clara River and Ojai Valleys 

are 

This parcel was held by the McGrath family, one of Oxnard's original large-scale farming families. 

At one point the McGraths owned 5,000 acres of farmland on the Oxnard plain, including four miles of 

beach front (Bodle 1979: 138). 

Because of Piru's small population (1,157 in 1990) much of the data available for other cities (e.g. 

types of employment, commute times) 

are not available from the U. S. Census. 

56 Including Ojai, Oak View, and Meiner's Oaks-Mlra Monte. 

66 
relatively narrow river bottoms surrounded by steep hills, unlike the much broader 

Simi and Conejo Valleys An equally likely factor, however, is isolation 

- Highways 

33 and 126 remain two-lane roads with stop lights through much of these areas, 

although this may soon end in the Santa Clara River Valley. In the Ojai valley, 

citizens and civic leaders have actively opposed development, including the 

development of 

area highways. 

Ojai's heritage attracts both businesses and residents who value, and invest 

in, the town's natural and architectural beauty (see Photo 7). One leading business 

here is tourism: as Table 15 shows (see previous section, The Coastal Comm unities) 

Ojai leads the county in the relative importance of tourism employment, and the 

city currently receives $800,000, or 13 percent of its six million dollar annual budget, 

through 

a bed tax. 

Preserving Ojal's "small town feel" is 

a priority for city government as well 

as 

local activists. In a 1994 city-sponsored attitude 

survey, Ojai residents ranked this 

as 

a high priority. Tourism itself is 

seen as a 

threat 

to this goal by 

some 

locals, but 

others welcome tourism as a relatively clean and stable economic base. For 

example, the Ojai Valley Inn is one of the city's largest employers, second only to the 

public school district. Ambivalence toward the tourist 

economy means 

that while 

public funds are "creatively" generated to protect tourist attractions, care is taken to 

prevent tourism from overwhelming the city's economy and infrastructure 

(including parking, local parks, etc.). 

As Table 18 shows, education is another major employment source in 

With its beauty and milieu, the Valley has attracted several private schools. 

67 

57 In the late 1980s a report suggesting the Ojai Arcade was seismically unsafe was aggressively 

respondëdto. Approxmiately$1 million w pent im-provernents-$6OO,OOOIrom-business owners, 

the remainder from bonds. One informant saw this as evidence of C)jai's difference from other tourist 

communities, such 

as Santa Cruz, where business resisted investment and in the end was destroyed by a 

natural disaster. 
Photo 7: Ojai's historic downtown Thousands of visitors are allidcted to Ojai each year by its 

natural and architectural beauty. While surrounding mountains were home to some of Ventura 

County's first oil exploration, oil wells are generally invisible from the town of Ojai. Photo by 

Krista Paulsen. 

Photo 8: Residential development in Thousand Oaks. The communities of Simi Valley and 

Thousand Oaks grew rapidly in the 1950s and 1960s. Many residents in these communities work 

in Los Angeles 

or 

the San Fernando Valley and came to the area seeking affordable housing, 

cleaner air, and lower crime rates. Reprinted from Bidwell (1989). 

68 
Table 18: Percentage of labor force employed in education 

(Ojai Valley towns are in Italics) 

Ojai's adults also have 

a high level of educational attainment, with 26.7 percent of 

those over age 25 holding four-year degrees (see Table 21, in the following section). 

This may be due in part to the presence of 

so many 

teachers in 

a 

small town. While 

large in nurnbr, the schools do not appear 

to play a significant role in civic or 

political life, at least according to several of our 

informants who thought faculty 

"keep to themselves." Ojai's distinctive environmentalism and spirituality exists 

independent of the prep school presence. 

With 

a 

traditionally solvent city budget (a $1.6 million surplus in 1994), Ojai 

is insulated from developers' claims that their projects are needed to fund city 

services; unlike communities in the east county, the city of Ojal does not actively 

recruit new businesses. Instead new businesses 

are more passively "welcomed," and 

the city has allowed development of one business! industrial park. Many residents 

work outside the city or 

in aesthetically dependent businesses such as tourism or 

the 

arts and 

are not interested in attracting economic growth. While Ojai is often 

referred to by residents 

as a "bedroom community," it is not a daily commuter 

community, like the east county cities (Ojai is 90 minutes from Los Angeles by car). 

Occupations noted 

among 

those who commute to Los Angeles include airline pilots 

as well as film stars and producers 

- 

professions where work is commonly several 

days or weeks "on" with 

a substantial block of time off. Some specialized oil 

industry employees who travel internationally also make their homes in Ojai. The 

presenceoLsiichhigh-income "commuters" provides 

an 

incentive 

- 

and 

a resource 

- 

- 

for preserving Ojai's small town character, as 

these residents have chosen the 

area 

deliberately 

as an alternative to Los Angeles and often join movements opposing 

local environmental threats. 

69 

1970 1980 1990 

Camarillo 8.48 7.52 6.66 

El Rio 4.88 4.86 5.02 

Fillmore 8.28 9.30 6.42 

Meiner's Oaks/Mira Monte 10.74 6.01 7.77 

Moorpark 7.50 4.89 4.34 

Oak View 6.26 7.88 7.5 

Ojai 11.49 9.47 12.88 

Oxnard 5.94 3.39 4.63 

Port Hueneme 3.26 4.48 4.06 

Santa Paula 5.68 4.49 5.52 

Simi Valley 7.61 4.75 5.75 

Thousand Oaks 10.44 5.15 7.31 

Ventura 8.32 8.49 7.22 

Source: U.S. Census 
Because much of the Ojai Valley is unincorporated, the city of Ojai and its 

slow-growth establishment 

are unable to control development in the neighboring 

communities of Meiner's Oaks, Mira Monte, and Oak View, which have indeed 

grown more rapidly (see Chart 7: Population of Ojai Valley). Businesses that are 

prohibited in Ojai proper can set up 

shop nearby. Recent examples include fast food 

restaurants with drive-through windows (which Ojal prohibits) now 

lining 

Highway 33, and 

a Payless drug store opened outside of town to bypass Ojai's 

inhospitability. According 

to one 

informant: 

They had 150 people that came out to a public meeting and said, "We don't 

want a Payless there." They've 

even 

formed an organization called Citizens 

Against Chain Stores... So what Payless did, they went into the Mira Monte 

area, 

they got a market to move out, and they're going to take it over. Well, 

all of 

a sudden1 we're losing some sales tax. It's going into the 

unincorporated 

area. We're going to have the effects of that air quality 

because of the traffic going in and out of there, and we feel like we should 

have something to say about what goes 

into the valley. 

To solve the problem, 

some qai leaders have proposed 

a "valley-wide city' but 

have met opposition from other communities fearing Ojai's regulations. 

While the Santa Clara River58 and Ojai Valleys 

are geographically similar, 

their distinct economies 

- 

tourism in Ojai, oil and agriculture in the Santa Clara 

- 

have led to different populations and infrastructures. The distinctions 

are familiar 

to residents and civic leaders. Ojai Mayor Joe De Vito noted Santa Paula's desire for 

intensive retail development, while Fillmore Mayor Linda Brewster noted 

economic, demographic, and cultural differences between Ojai and her own town: 

I think that people that live in Ojai 

are more 

into the arts. 

. . 

It's 

an older 

generation. You don't think of it as young 

families. Here we're families, 

we're people in agriculture, where you don't think of Ojai as 

that. You think 

of [Ojail more as a 

tourist place. Somebody that has money 

lives up there. A 

lot of actors and actresses. 

. . 

A lot of people that have environmental issues, 

that are vocal, 

are all up 

there. We just have down-to-earth, everyday 

working people that live here. 

Demographic data bear out Brewster's observations. Seventy-eight percent of 

Ojai residents live in families, compared to 86 to 88 percent of Fillmore/Santa Paula 

residents, The median 

age of Ojai residents is at least nine years older than Santa 

Clara River Valley residents, and 1990 median house values in Fillmore and Santa 

Paula were 78.5-84.2 percent of the median value of Ojai homes. Ojai also has two to 

three times the proportion of college graduates per capita and nearly twice as much 

58The Santa Clara River Valley indudes the communities ofrom east to westiPiru, Fillmore, and 

Santa Paula. Older settlements in the valley have been largely subsumed by the dominant cities: 

Saticoy is now essentially 

a section of eastern Ventura, while ardsdale is adjacent to contemporary 

Fillmore. 

70 
Chart 7: Populations of the Ojai Valley Communities, 1960-1990 1960 1970 1980 D Ojai 0 Meiner's Oaks I Miramonte 0 Oak View 1990
tourism employment. While Ojai residents are not wealthier than Fillmore 

residents in terms of household incomes, their peraiifrz incomes 

are much higher, 

due to smaller household sizes in Ojai ($17,478 for Ojai, compared 

to Fillmore's 

$10,674). Ojai also has 

a higher percentage of retirees, whose incomes may be low 

but whose accumulated wealth gives them 

a different class status. Long-term 

commuters in the two areas also differ; commuters in Ojai may have Hollywoodrelated jobs, while those in Fillmore work as Los Angeles police officers or 

firefighters, 

or on offshore oil rigs. Unemployment rates in the Santa Clara River 

Valley 

are currently 

among 

the highest in Ventura County (see Table 19). 

Table 19: Unemployment rates 

(Santa Clara River Valley Towns are in Italics) 

Source: U.S. Census 

Tourism is one area where Fillmore and Santa Paula 

are attempting to 

expand. The Santa Clara River Valley is regularly used 

as a movie set 

- Santa 

Paula's airport (known for its large collection of antique and unusual planes), the 

brownstones of Fillmore's Central Avenue, and the orchards between provide rural 

and small-town settings for Los Angeles studios. The historic downtown cores of 

both communities remain largely intact and 

are celebrated through walking tours or 

weekend tourist train excursions.59 But just as Ventura struggles in the shadow of 

72 

Northridge earthquake. Several months before the quake, however, the city had approved 

"downtown specific guidelines," with the aim of preserving the town's unique character. Rather than 

fast-tracking repairs or 

rebuilding, the City of Fillmore housed merchants in temporary shelters in the 

town square, and the pre-quake guidelines remain in effect. 

1970 1980 1990 

Camarillo 4.6 3.4 3.8 

El Rio 7.8 6.9 9.3 

Fillmore 5.0 3.9 6.6 

Meiner's Oaks/Mira Monte 6.7 7.1 3d 

Moorpark 7.6 7.7 3.6 

Oak View 6.3 6.0 5.8 

Ojai 5.9 6.0 2.5 

Oxnard 6.2 8.0 6.8 

Piru * 5.3 

Port Hueneme 5.5 8.8 6.0 

Santa Paula 7.2 5.7 7.7 

Simi Valley 6.8 4.7 4.1 

Thousand Oaks 5.3 4.0 4.0 

Ventura 4.6 4.8 3.7 
Santa Barbara's historic tourist appeal, the Santa Clara River Valley is 

overshadowed by nearby Ojal; the communities of Fillmore and Santa Paula lack a 

clear image to draw tourists. 

The New Suburban Cities 

The 1970s 

saw a substantial population increase in the east county, as 

the Los 

Angeles sprawl moved north toward the relatively new cities of Camarillo, Simi 

Valley, Moorpark and Thousand Oaks. With the exception of Camariflo, these cities 

share a location east of the Conejo Grade, a geographical feature that separates the 

east county from the historical settlements of the Pacific Coast and Santa Clara River 

arid Ojai Valleys not only geographically but also in the public imagination. With 

rapid population growth in the 1960s and 1970s, a high percentage of residents living 

in families, and relative affluence, the east county has challenged county officials to 

expand and relocate 

some services (including courts) to serve 

its growing 

population (see Photo 8). 

The east county is, by design, the most affluent area of Ventura County (see 

"The First Subdiv isions," above). Planned in the 1950s and 1960s as bedroom 

communities for the growing aerospace 

industry of Los Angeles and the San 

Fernando Valley, their residents 

are 

indeed 

among 

the most well-paid and welleducated in Ventura County (see Tables 20 and 21, below). These cities continue 

their role 

as bedroom communities (a 1989 Spectra Inc. study of growth in Ventura 

county estimated that approximately 70 percent of Simi Valley, Thousand Oaks and 

Moorpark workers commuted to Los Angeles County, as did 40 percent of Camarilo 

workers) but have attracted 

some companies to the area. Like the companies that 

provided jobs for the east county's original residents, these largely high-tech 

companies (including manufacturing and research firms in communications, 

micro-processors, biotechnology and aerospace) play a major role in Ventura 

County's shift from extractive to "cleaner" industries. High-tech companies tend to 

to "leapfrog" away from the high land and labor costs of Los Angeles, resulting in a 

high concentration of high tech firms in Ventura county since the 1980s (mainly 

clustered along the 101 and 118 freeway corridors). As Ventura county high-tech 

firms are generally smaller and more 

flexible than their Los Angeles counterparts, 

and less dependent on defense contracting, they should remain an 

important 

element of the County's 

economy and continue to attract 

a highly paid and highly 

educated workforce (Scoff forthcoming).6° 

In the first six months of 1996, the cities of Santa Paula and Fillmore have worked toward 

developing the "Heritage Trail" plan, featuring rides on the vintage railroad cars 

through the 

orchards and communities. This plan also indudes provisions for improvements töiocal depots and 

adjacent 

areas. 

60 Importantly, not all high-technology jobs 

are professional positions; these companies often maintain 

two-tiered workforces, with many 

lower-paying manufacturing jobs held by Latinos and other 

73 
Table 21: Percentage of adults 25+ with four-year degree 

(East County Communifies are in Italics) 

Source: US. Census 

immigrants (Scott, forthcoming). 

Table 20: Median income per household 

(East County Communities are 

in Italics) 

74 

1970 1980 1990 

Caniarillo 17.4 37.2 27.2 

El Rio 2.9 6.5 8.2 

Fillmore 10 8 8.6 

Meiner's Oaks/Mira Monte 9.6 16.0 21.4 

Moorpark 7.9 5 28.4 

Oak View 6.1 7.4 15.6 

Ojai 19.7 22 26.7 

Oxnard 9.1 10.8 13 

Port Hueneme 7.9 12.3 15.9 

Santa Paula 8.6 8.6 9.9 

Simi Valley 8.9 14.1 21.1 

ThninnrI ()nk 212 2.9.6 35 

Ventura 15.1 20.5 24.6 

1980 1990 

Ca inarillo $25,915 $48,219 

E1IRIo 20,365 35,991 

Fillmore 16,590 33,482 

Memer's Oaks! Mira Monte 16,976 34,610 

Moor park 18,119 60,368 

Oak View 19,912 45,234 

Ojai 17,727 33,247 

Oxnard 17,633 37,174 

Piru * 27,000 

Port Hueneme 18,678 33,554 

Santa Paula 18,561 31,605 

Simi Valley 26,554 53,967 

Thousand Oaks 29,835 56,856 

Ventura 18,791 40,307 

Source: US. Census 
The commute connection to L.A. is clear. Although the 1994 Conejo Valley6' 

Attitude Survey, sponsored by the city of ThoUsand Oaks, reported that while half of 

all residents were "very satisfied" or 

"generally satisfied" with Conejo Valley 

as a 

place to work, an additional 45 percent of residents did not work in the area 

(including retirees) (City of Thousand Oaks: 1) Like nearby Moorpark and Simi 

Valley, Thousand Oaks has one of the highest median one-way commute times in 

Ventura County (see Table 22 for commute data). 

Table 22: Median one-way commute times 

(East County Communities are in ftalics) 

Nevertheless, comparisons to Los Angeles are a source of local ambivalence. 

According to a Thousand Oaks city council member: 

The biggest 

curse you can utter in Thousand Oaks, at least to most people, is 

to say, "It's becoming another San Fernando Valley." If there is anything this 

city does not want to do or be, it's the San Fernando Valley. It is truly a curse. 

We really do feel ourselves very 

strongly in line with the rest of Ventura 

County and with Santa Barbara County.. 

. 

Sure, we're not the 

same as Santa 

Barbara; we're not the 

same as San Luis Obispo. We're not, but we would 

rather be more that way and would like 

to preserve 

that kind of image and 

61The Conejo Valley is the larger geographical 

space around Thousand Oaks. The two terms are often 

used interchangeably, and the "Conejo Valley Attitude Survey" is 

an 

instrument designed by the City 

of Thousand Oaks 

to gauge community needs and priorities. 

75 

1980 1990 

Camarillo 23.8 20.8 

El Rio 19 21.2 

Fillmore 21.1 25 

Meiner's Oaks/Mira Monte 24.4 24.4 

Moorpark 22.1 28.3 

Oak View 27.3 25.3 

Ojai 22.3 22.2 

Oxnard 19.7 21.2 

Piru * 

Port Hueneme 16.5 20.4 

Santa Paula 21.5 22.9 

Si1ni Valley 31.6 32.2 

Thousand Oaks 27 26.9 

Ventura 18 20.4 

Source: US. Census 
those kinds of standards and 

concerns rather than the very commercialized 

Valley. 

To protect itself from "becoming like L.A.," the city of Thousand Oaks has imposed 

growth controls, open space requirements, restrictions on hillside construction, and 

signage and height ordinances for commercial development 

Despite these environmental controls, the city of Thousand Oaks does 

actively recruit business, especially high technology and biotechnology industries. 

These businesses appeal to the city's desire to promote land intensive "dean 

industry" and attract highly educated, high-salaried employees like those already 

living in the 

area. Amgen, a 

local biotech corporation, is exemplary of the 

type of 

business Thousand Oaks wants to attract and retain. Founded in the city in 1981, 

this Fortune 500 

company has grown 

large enough to dominate one 

local industrial 

park, and recently required 

a new headquarters (Amgen Inc. employed 2,885 in 1996, 

making it the largest Thousand Oaks employer). Negotiation over this construction 

project illustrates the city's 

concern with both land use controls and maintaining a 

high-tech industrial base. Mayor Judy Lazar said of the new Amgen 

campus: 

That required us again to look at our planning standards, and so we made 

some changes to them for certain industrial areas. Where they are not visible 

from the major roadways, where there were sufficient setbacks, we are now 

allowing additional heights within those 

areas. Amgen came 

through with 

some very 

innovative policy possibilities for planning their parking, 

encouraging walking, virtually banning use of 

cars on 

their 

campus, so 

their 

employees come in, they park generally in 

a parking structure, and all of the 

buildings 

are close enough together so 

they 

can walk 

to all of these buildings, 

or 

they bike. It's kind of like what 

you see up 

in the Silicon Valley 

area, some 

really different types of planning. 

The changes Lazar speaks of include variances to the city's 35-foot building height 

limit, 

a concession also made 

to Exxon to accommodate 

a 

regional corporate office in 

the 1980s (see below). 

The effort to be different than L.A., yet the close dependence upon it, is 

revealed by the Simi Valley mayor's strategy for attracting new 

industries, in his 

term, "out" from L.A., just 

as many residents speak of moving "out" of the same 

area. Recent corporate recruits include Countrywide Mortgage, Whittaker 

Electronics, Farmers Insurance, and Bugle Boy apparel. Nevertheless, 

approximately 60 percent of Simi Valley residents still work in the San Fernando 

Valley, and look to the L. A. area for 

cues about their economic future, rather than 

looking north, 

say, to Ventura's economic health. One informant even suspected 

that, "There's 

a 

lot of people [in Simi Valleyj who probably don't know they're in 

Ventura County.". 

Most residents in these 

young communities have no memory of the oil 

development in the surrounding hills that predated the residential booms of the 

76 
1960s. Although Unocal continues to operate wells in Tapo and Torrey Canyons, 

directly north of Simi Valley, the company is best known in the 

area 

through its 

land management subsidiary, Moreland Development. Unocal is a major 

landholder in Simi Valley due 

to acquisitions made in search of oil; today Moreland 

Development is selling these properties or developing them to suit local demand. 

The city's relationship with Moreland 

seems genial. 

One minor frustration with the oil industry occurred in the 1990s, when 

a 

pipeline was proposed through the region. Potentially impacted by one of the 

alternative routes proposed, the city the city of Situ Valley voiced preference for the 

developers' original route to avoid local impacts. Concerns about the project 

centered mostly 

on 

logistical issues of disruption, not on any principle of opposition 

to oil or environmental 

concern: 

We believed, frankly, that bringing 

a major pipeline through a 

large 

population center was not a very good idea, 

even 

just from the standpoint of 

the difficulty in locating it and getting it through town. 

. . Where 

are you 

going to put it, how 

are you going to bring it through, how many streets are 

you going to have to dig up to put it in 

- 

those were all major problems. In 

addition to the fact that there's not a lot of risk, but there's still 

some risk 

obviously to having 

a major pipeline. 

Because Simi Valley was not the preferred alternative for the pipeline route, the city 

never had to seriously face its construction. 

One circumstance under which oil would probably be opposed is if it were 

thought 

to threaten air quality standards. Ventura County is 

a non-attainment area 

per EPA standards (Ventura County Air Pollution Control District: 1), although its 

air quality is seen as superior to that further south. Many east county residents fled 

the pollution of Los Angeles and the San Fernando Valley, and 

as a consequence 

these residents have 

a stake in protecting the environment that attracted them. 

According to the 1994 Conejo Valley Attitude Survey, 92.5 percent of Thousand 

Oaks residents said preserving clean air was "very important," 6.6 percent said this 

was "somewhat important." In previous surveys, between 96.1 percent and 97.5 

percent of residents stated that this was "very important," making clean air 

consistently the highest priority among Conejo Valley amenities deserving 

preservation (City of Thousand Oaks: 16). 62 

Simi Valley has simijar 

concerns about air quality, demonstrated by their 

opposition to a proposed Southern California Edison-San Diego Gas and Electric 

merger. The merger, which would shift power generation from San Diego to 

existing Oxnard facilities, was seen as contributing to east county air pollution: 

62 Other local amenities consistently ranked 

as "very important" to preserve include natural hills, 

mountains and ridge lines, public 

open space, and a "semi-rural feeling" (City of Thousand Oaks: 16). 

77 
. 

they said they had spare capacity there and they could just generate all this 

much more electricity [at Oxnard}. We said well that's very nice, but you're 

not going to increase the level of 

smog, 

in fact you're going to continue to 

decrease it. 

. . 

along with 

a 

lot of other cities, I think we took 

a very strong, 

aggressive stance against that merger. 

While Simi Valley Mayor Greg Stratton claimed that offshore oil drilling is not 

perceived by his community as the threat 

to air quality that the Oxnard generating 

plants 

are, new offshore proposals might nevertheless 

come under scrutiny (aided, 

no doubt, by countywide agencies charged with maintaining air quality standards). 

Ventura County Media 

Ventura County residents get their news about local affairs, including 

development and environmental issues, from 

a changing array of media. The 

county has become 

a highly competitive newspaper market. The LosAngeles Times 

introduced a Ventura County edition in 1990 that ceased publication in 1995. 

During the interim, the added competition was enough to put several of the 

county's older dailies out of business (between 1993 and 1995, the Qxnard Press-Courier, 

Cam arillo fl2ily News and the &inhz Paula Cizronide all closed). Although the Ventum 

County Star (formerly the Slur-Free Press) has attempted to cover news 

from these 

communities, many smaller 

towns are 

left without 

a 

local daily. The Los Angeles 

Times retains significant 

coverage of the Ventura County market, however, and 

continues to publish 

a weekly supplement targeted to this region. 

The Ventura County Slur (a Scripps-Howard paper) currently circulates five 

editions, tailored to the towns of Simi Valley, Thousand Oaks, Moorpark, Oxnard, 

and Ventura. The Slur is the dominant 

paper 

in the West County communities; "we 

own 

this market," 

says one editor, The paper's priorities are 

local government, 

education, and some community events. A big story can challenge the paper's 

scarce resources, as when, for example, Point Mugu was 

included 

on 

the federal 

government's list of possible base closures. Half the staff was pulled from their 

regular beats to cover the story. Coverage of the smaller communities (Fillmore, 

Ojai, Piru and Santa Paula) is one of the first things to go when 

resources are 

stretched; 

one reporter is assigned to cover all these communities and must also fifi 

in on other beats when shortages 

are caused by vacations or breaking news. 

Issues cited by Venftirn County Star reporters as important to cover 

included 

1U1IU11L LI). JIJIILE all'..). 1il LL9JCII LilLtlIt1 CLAJI[UIIUL UV1U}/lIltlLt CULL). W '.JUL UICC 

the environment. While oil was vigorously covered by the Slur-Free Press through 

the 1950s and 1960s,63 

coverage of oil has fallen off more recently, as has other 

63The Ventura Star-Free Press printed an annual "Oil Progress Week" edition in the 1950s, which 

provided 

a clearinghouse of information on the local industiy as well as international trends. Oil 

Progress Week was a national industry recognition event, observed in the second or third week of 

78 
business 

coverage. As it is, negative stories about oil make the news; 

local spills, 

and the contentious issue of tankering oil through the Santa Barbara Channel, are 

covered regularly, but the periodic updates on the industry's exploration and 

production progress that were common in the 1950s and 1960s 

are no more. 

Ventura County also supports several smaller papers, especially in the Santa 

Clara and Ojai Valleys, where the Slur's 

coverage 

is not as thorough. These indude 

the Ofrii ValleyNezvs, the Fillmore Herald, and the Santa Paula Tim 

es, most of which 

publish only one or two days each week. These papers generally 

cover city issues, as 

well 

as 

the local 

consequences of county-wide decisions or events; they also provide 

the only forum for local sports and cultural events. 

One paper that actively watches oil and environmental issues is the Ojai Voice, 

a bi-weekly alternative newspaper produced in Oak View. Because the Voice is 

largely reader-produced (the 

paper employs no 

journalists 

- one 

full-time staff 

person handles most of the advertising, editorial and graphics work), it often serves 

as a platform for local activist groups. The Voice was especially forceful in opposing 

a 1.989 landfill proposal (described below); the 

paper devoted several 

covers to the 

issue and included "coupons" for readers 

to cut out and send to County Supervisors 

to show their opposition 

- 

about 1,200 

are said to have done so. Defining its 

circulation 

area as 

the "Ventura River Bio-Region," the Voice also addresses 

controversies outside the Ojai Valley. Issues reported on by readers include 

malathion spraying in other parts of the county, and statewide ballot initiatives, 

as 

well 

as arts and entertainment events. 

Voluntarj Organizations 

One distinguishing factor 

among communities is the number of non-profit or 

"voluntary" organizations they support. While the emphases of these 

organizations vary widely 

- 

from arts and cultural organizations to health and 

human services to environmental 

concerns - 

their social functions 

are 

similar. 

These groups reflect and reinforce the social and organizational networks that 

supplant official agencies and business groups both 

as a part of local governance and 

in responding 

to potential community impacts 

- 

including oil developments. In 

the case of environmental organizations this is relatively explicit; other 

organizations may not be geared specifically toward environmental threats, but 

nevertheless familiarize locals with organizational 

or activist tactics and may 

provide institutional links to government agencies. Non-profit organizations also 

tend 

to be linked to one another through the people they share on 

their boards and 

the programs they 

co-sponsor. 

To better understand the relative importance of voluntary orgamzations 

in 

Ventura County and its communities, and to understand how this county compares 

October. 

79 
to Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties, we determined the number and 

wealth of non-profits on a per capita basis using published human resource 

directories for each of the tricounties.M This gives us 

the arinizaiio nal densities for 

private non-profit and voluntary organizations. We calculated the number of 

voluntary organizations, as reported in countywide directories, 

as well as 

the 

revenues and assets of these organizations (a measure of their "wealth").65 These 

figures were then divided by the county or community's population, thus providing 

a measure of organizational "density." 

The tn-counties were 

shown not only to vary greatly in the number and 

relative wealth of their private voluntary organizations, but communities within 

the three counties showed wide variation as well. When compared to Santa Barbara 

and San Luis Obispo counties, Ventura County's private voluntary organizations 

are fewer in number (per capita), have fewer assets, and take in less 

revenue. 

64The actual directories used 

are: in Ventura, Blue Book. The 1995 Directory of Health and Human 

Services throughout Ventura County, published by Helpline, a non-profit organization under the 

umbrella of Interface Children, Family Services; in Santa Barbara, The Community Resources 

Information Services (CRIS) Directory for 1995, published by the Family Service Agency of Santa 

Barbara; and in San Luis Obispo, the 1994-95 Human Services and Support Groups Directory, published 

by Hotline. 

65Piivate voluntary or non-profit organizations include branches of national organizations (i.e. 

American Lung Association) as well 

as 

local organizations (i.e. local, private health outreach 

organizations.) Revenues and assets are 

for private, non-profit organizations with assets over $25,000 

are listed in the Yearbook of California Charitable Organizations 

- 

the primary source for the 

finandalinformation analyzed in this report. Revenue refers to the "total of all contributions 

(support), program service 

revenues 

(subscription fees, counseling fees, etc.) and other 

revenue (interest, 

rents, gain or loss on sales, etc.) received by the organization;" assets refer to the "dollar value of an 

organization's assets induding cash, accounts receivable, savings, loans due, inventories, investments, 

land, buildings, and equipment." 

80 
$1,000 

$900 

$800 

$700 

$600 

$500 

$400 

$300 

$200 

$100 

$0 

Chart 8: Organizational density of tn-counties 

D Total Revenue Total Assets e Number of Organizations 

I 

Source: Data collected by authors, see footnote 64 

We singled out Ventura and Ojai for closer investigation, looking not only at 

organizations generally, but at the types of organizations found in each community; 

specifically, arts and cultural organizations versus health and human services 

organizations. This level of specificity seeks to answer claims that communities rich 

in one type of organization will be poor in others, 

e.g. 

that 

a community rich in arts 

organizations would neglect human service organizations (see Wolpert 1988). We 

found that in the communities of the fri-counties, this is not the case; communities 

with 

a high density of voluntary organizations in one sector are dense 

across 

the 

board. 

18 

16 

14 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

81 

: 

Ventura Santa Barbara San Luis 

cbispo 
S 

U 

0 

n 

Chart 9 Arts and cultural organizations in 

tn-county communities 

$40010 

$35WJ0 

$3O00 

$250.00 

$2000 

$150.00 

$100.00 

saoo 

S 

I S 

Source: Data collected by authors, see footnote 64 

This comparison revealed that true to its history 

as a cultural center, Ojai has 

a high density of artistic and cultural organizations that are relatively wealthy (Ojai 

is second only 

to the city of Santa Barbara in this regard). Ventura, however, has 

relatively few arts or cultural organizations (one organization per 10,000 persons), 

and the wealth of these organizations is far below that of Ojai's. It should be noted 

here, however, that while Ventura's cultural organizations pale in comparison to 

Ojai's, the city of Ventura may not be far from 

a national average in this regard. The 

cities of Santa Maria and Paso Robles were also examined in connection with work 

reported elsewhere, and their densities were both lower than Ventura's. The town 

of Ojai does not fare less well than other 

areas in health and human services 

organizations, it actually fares somewhat better: Ojai has four organizations per 

10,000 persons versus three per 10,000 in the city of Ventura. Again, Ojai's 

organizations lead in both assets and 

revenues. 

82 

U Revenues 1] Assets Organizations 

45 

3.5 

x 

3 

2.5 U 

0 

1.5 

1 

05 

0 

Ventura Ojal Santa Santa San Paso 

Barbara Maria Luis Rubies 

Obispo 
Chart 10: Health and human services organizations in 

tn-county communities 

600 

400 

200 

Source: Data collected by authors, 

see 

footnote 64 

One partial explanation for these disparities might lie in Cjai's small size 

(1990 population: 7,613). The presence of one or two well-endowed organizations 

could easily increase the overall appearance of organizational wealth, and the use of 

10,000 person increments 

to compare the numbers of organizations may appear to 

inflate the real number of organizations in this tiny town. Nevertheless, the impact 

of organizational density 

- 

increased citizen 

response and activism 

- 

is evident in 

Ojai. As noted above, citizens rapidly responded to the perceived threat of 

a chain 

store in their community, as well as the fear of seismic instabffity in their historic 

downtown shopping district. Citizen groups also readily coalesce around 

environmental threats, including the proposed dump at Weldon Canyon and the 

expansion of 

a Ventura Avenue refinery (described below). 

Reviues D Assets e Org anizations 

83 

4 ci) 

0 

_3 CU 

1 

0 

CU 

CU 

U 

1400 

(_ ,, 

' 

x 

CU 

U 

aj 

1200 8 

6 

- ' 

1000 

800 

Ventura Ojai Santa Santa San Luis Paso 

Barbara Maria aispo Robles 
Part B: Ventura County's Contemporary History 

Offshore oil: Environmental and economic impacts in Ventura and Oxnard 

The majority of offshore development in the Santa Barbara Channel occurs 

from the Ventura-Santa Barbara County line west toward Point Conception. While 

platforms in federal waters are not legally inside 

any particular county, 15 of 19 

federal platforms lie doser to Santa Barbara County than Ventura County. Only 

four federal platforms sit in waters off Ventura County's coast, and only 

two of these 

are 

serviced by Ventura County processing plants. Platform Gina is approximately 

nine miles due west of Oxnard, and Platform Gilda is approximately four miles west 

of Port Hueneme; oil from these platforms is processed at lJnocal's Mandaly Beach 

facility in Oxnard. While platforms Grace and Gail 

are in the same area, oil from 

these platforms is piped north to Carpinteria for processing. Conversely, several 

platforms off Santa Barbara County pipe their oil into Rincon facilities for 

processing: Unocal's platforms Henry, Hilihouse, A, B, and C lie due south of 

Summerland and pipe their oil to processing facilities at the Rincon. 

The proximity of "Santa Barbara' platforms 

to Ventura County generates 

multiple economic impacts. Perhaps the most straightforward contribution is the 

property tax returned to Ventura county by its onshore processing facifities 

- 

estimated at $82,684 in 1996. In addition, 

some of the most sophisticated oil support 

industries in the Channel region developed along Ventura Avenue, thanks to 

Ventura's long history of oil development (including early tidelands development). 

These businesses 

serve 

the offshore industry throughout the Channel. The Port of 

Hueneme has also been 

a primary service port for drilling and supply vessels since 

the offshore boom began in the 1960s, Drilling in state waters (from, for example, 

the artificial island at the Rincon) also generates some 

income for the County as 

operations adjacent 

to parkiands contribute 

a 1 percent royalty for park 

maintenance; this contribution has varied recently, falling from $10,581 in 1991-92 to 

$3,942 in 1994-95. 

Offshore drilling also creates environmental impacts in Ventura County. As 

we will describe below, oil from offshore spills such 

as 

the 

one 

in 1969 tend to flow 

southward and may contaminate Ventura County beaches. Emissions from 

offshore platforms create a second impact: county air quality officials, 

as well as 

environmental activists, have documented the contribution of offshore emissions 

to local pollution levels and have in 

some cases successfully acted to reduce these 

J11L1,,i'J1E. 

The 1969 Santa Barbara Channel oil spill is widely regarded 

as having started 

tlie--mode-rn-en-v-ironmemtai-movement--and-certajJy--rajsed--awarenessbout-the--- 

hazards of offshore drilling. The January 28, 1969, blowout at oil Union's Platform 

A, just north of the Santa Barbara County line, spilled twenty-one thousand gallons 

a day of crude oil from 

a fissure beneath the 

sea for ten days before being brought 

84 
under control. While efforts 

to plug the leak with cement succeeded in halting the 

bulk of the flow, approximately 5 to 10 barrels 

per day continued seeping out of the 

well for the remainder of the year arid 

some time thereafter. Before the oil came 

ashore in Santa Barbara, the first beaches to be coated were 

those along the Rincon 

in the northwestern part of Ventura County. On February 5th and 6th, 

some oil 

broke through precautionary log booms installed at Ventura Harbor (the Ventura 

Keys, 

a separate marina, then built a $7,000 earth dam in 

response 

to the threat). 

Local boat 

owners 

suffered losses 

as oil clogged marine engines and damaged hulls, 

and oil was found on beaches 

as far south as 

the Ventura-Los Angeles county line. 

The beaches of Santa Barbara's South Coast were also, and famously, covered with 

oil. But compared 

to Santa Barbara, Ventura County's newspaper coverage of the 

event and local (city and county) governmental response was restrained. The event 

was 

treated 

as an unfortunate accident but not 

a reason for strong disciplinary 

action1 either against the industry or against the federal government. Again, the 

contrast with Santa Barbara was strong; there the spill was called 

a result of 

government insensitivity and industry greed. It marked the beginning of an 

increased local environmental consciousness reflected in grass-roots action as well 

as future planning decisions. 

While the Ventura Star-Fire Press did dispatch 

a reporter to cover 

the spill first 

hand (the San Luis Cbispo Telegram -Tribune relied on wire 

coverage of this relatively 

proximate event), its news coverage of the spill was restrained compared to the 

effort 

seen 

in neighboring Santa Barbara. We counted the number of news stories, 

editorials, and letters 

to the editor in the Ventura SlarE'ree Press and compared them 

with the numbers in the Santa Prnfrim News-Press 

- Chart 11 shows our results.66 Even 

when the slick equally threatened beaches in both counties, the Santa Bathzni NewsPress provided 

over 

twice 

as much coverage of the spill compared to the Ventura StarFree Press. When the Ventura paper did provide more 

than one article on the spill, 

the additional 

coverage was usually gleaned from the wire services, often bearing 

a 

Santa Barbara dateline. 

The Star-Free Press emphasized both Union's efforts to right the situation and 

the technical (rather than political) 

causes of the accident. A comparison of the 

headlines used by The Star-Free Press arid News-Press reveals that while the News-Press 

named Union Oil only 

as a news source, the Star-Free Press made Union both the 

subject and object at the center of the repair operation with phrases like "Union 

Company Seeks to Stem Leak in Sea," "Union plans do or die attempt to stop oil," 

and "Battle to Halt Oil Flow Ends; Union Abandons Well Site" (Ventura Star-Free Press, 

January 30, 1969: Al; February 6, 1969: Al; February 8, 1969: Al). Headlines in Santa 

Barbara framed the oil slick itself 

as 

the primary actor, and emphasized political or 

regulatory 

responses: "Oil Mess Reaches Carpinteria Shore," "Voluntary Oil 

Drilling Halt Will Be Requested Hickel," "Leak Still Flowing 

- Channel Oil 

66 News scores were 

tabulated 

as 

follows: Front 

page 

lead stoly 

= 3 points; front page of local or main 

section 2 points; other stories 

= 

1 point. Editorial 2 points; letters 

to the editor, syndicated 

commentary, and editorial cartoons 

= 

1 point. 

85 
Chart 11: The First 10 Days of the Oil Spill, News Coverage in Ventura and Santa Barbara Source: Data collected by authors from Santa Barbara News-Press and Ventura Star-Free Press 01/29/69 01/30/69 01/31/69 02/1/69 02/2/69 02/3/69 2/4I69 02/5/69 2/6I69 2/7/69 Santa & Letters Editorials Barbara - & Letters Editorials Ventura - Ventura - Santa Articles Articles Barbara -

Operations Are Ordered Shut Down" (&2niu Batham News-Press, January 31, 1969: Al; 

February 4, 1969: Al; February 7, 1969: Al). Similarly, the content of the Ventunz SlurFree Press' news articles emphasized the efforts of both Union and local 

harbormasters 

to halt the flow of oil and to minimize damage to Ventura County 

boats and coastal 

resources. 

An editorial in 

response to the spill identified its damage as 

twofold: 

The first damage is that which has been done to physical properties, to the 

wildlife and to the ecological balance in the 

area and the recreational facilities 

of the shoreline, not to mention the injury to the community's 

sense of 

esthetics... Considerable damage has also been done to the image of the oil 

industry and to the belief that oil 

can be extracted from beneath the ocean 

without accidents and pollution. Within the industry, Union Oil likely is 

regarded 

as 

the goose which cracked the golden 

egg (Ventura Slur-Free Press, 

February 5, 1%9: ElO). 

The author goes on to shift the bulk of the blame for the accident from Union, 

characterized 

as acting within the law, 

to the state of offshore regulation generally. 

Thus the paper implicitly exonerates Ventura County native Union Oil while 

caffing for increased regulation of OCS operations. This is the only editorial printed 

by the Slur-Free Press regarding the spill during the first eleven days of coverage.67 

Only four letters to the editor were printed, compared to 54 letters printed in the 

Sanla Bathara News-Press during the 

same period. 

The county's second largest paper at this time, the Oxnard Press-Courier, took 

a 

stronger stance against the oil industry in its editorials and reflected in its coverage 

concerns with the harbors and beaches seen even 

then 

as vital to Oxnard's 

economy. 

The Channel Islands harbormaster was one of the most extensively quoted 

sources 

regarding the status of the slick, and almost 

every article on 

the spill includes a 

report on 

the harbor. 

Like the Ventura Slur-Free Press, the Press-Courier emphasized local preparedness 

and clean-up efforts in its coverage. A serious change in tone occurred, however, 

after oil invaded the Santa Barbara Harbor on February 5th, damaging hundreds of 

boats and creating 

a severe fire hazard. Coverage of the slick from this point on 

takes a more acrimonious and alarmist 

tone; one Oxnard journalist reported the 

slick was "two-thirds the size of Rhode Island," and "boiling into the 

sea 

unchecked" (Oxnard Press-Courier, February 5, 1969: 1). The following day's coverage 

included 

a plea by the Oxnard Harbor District president that citizens join him in 

sending telegrams to President Nixon asking the federal government to "stop the oil 

and clean up the oil coated beaches," citing danger to Oxnard's sport fishing industry 

67 editors did acknowledge the spill again, on February 8, 1%9, in the weekly "Pa Ventura" 

comment column. This column consists of comments in brief, addressed to various political figures and 

segments of the community, and has 

a generally humorous or ironic tone (Ventura Star-Free Press, 

Q 1QQ. fl tA\ 

taif U, 1. 'u '. 

87 
as well 

as small craft and deep harbor operations (Onard Press-Co urier, February 6, 

1969: 1). Whether this change in tone resulted from 

an 

increased 

awareness of the 

slick's destructive potential 

or merely reflected the perspective of a different reporter 

(the initial articles carried reporter Rick Nielsen's byline; later articles carried no 

byline at all) is difficult 

to say. 

Nevertheless, this change in the 

tone of the coverage parallels 

a 

shift in the 

Oxnard paper's editorial position. An early editorial ("Side Benefit of Oil Slick," 

Cnard Press-Courier, January 31, 1969: 4), while referring to the slick 

as a "mess," uses 

the accident 

to argue 

for citizen support of Representative Charles Teague's (ROjai) 

Ocean Pollution Bifi. The spill is 

seen as serendipitous in that it would bring the 

issue of water pollution 

to the top of new Interior Secretary Walter Hickel's agenda. 

Following the slick's invasion of the Santa Barbara harbor, however, the PressCourier's editorial writers 

can find no silver lining, calling for a complete ban on 

offshore operations pending reassessment of both OCS regulations and oil industry 

technology. The editors once again encourage swift implementation of the Teague 

bill, claiming that without 

a "secure guarantee against a repetition of the pollution 

and destruction of wildlife and property along our coastline, then 

a permanent halt 

to all offshore oil activity in this 

area cannot be ruled out" (Oxnard Press-Courier, 

February 7, 1969: 4). 

Congressman Charles M. Teague Jr. (R-Ojai) of the Limoneira citrus (Sunkist) 

family represented Ventura County and the South Coast section of Santa Barbara 

County at the time of the spifi. 68 He actively lobbied for 

a moratorium on Channel 

drilling in the wake of the spifi; the urgent demands of his Santa Barbara county 

constituents evidently outweighing the official pro-oil position taken by the 

government of Ventura County at this time (which did not join Santa Barbara 

officials in requesting 

a moratorium on new driffing). On February 4, Teague asked 

Secretary of Interior Walter Hickel for 

a permanent ban on all Channel oil drilling, 

arguing that 

revenues from offshore leases could not offset the risks to "one of the 

most beautiful coastlines in the world" (quoted in Thomas 1969: Al). Although 

neither the county nor 

the city of Ventura showed 

any official support for the 

proposed moratorium (unlike the city and county of Santa Barbara), 

an 

informal 

poii conducted by the Slur-Free Press claimed that persons polled in downtown 

Ventura generally supported the ban (seven for it, three against, and one 

undecided), many of them citing among their reasons a trust in Charles Teague 

Those opposed to the ban all cited economic 

reasons and noted the accidental nature 

of the spill (Ventuiu Star-Free Press, February 8, 1969: A3). 

A first test of county policy following the spifi came, in 1969, with Sun Oil's 

effort to construct a processing and storage facility at La Conchita, north of the city of 

Ventura. This facility would have processed oil from 

a proposed offshore platform 

681n 1990, congressional redistricting divided Ventura and Santa Barbara counties for the most part, 

although parts of Carpinteria (in southeastern Santa Barbara County) remain in District 23 Teague's 

former District. 

88 
on 

lease tract 401. While the facility would have added approximately $41,000 

a year 

(1969 dollars) to Ventura County's tax rolls over a twenty year period, residents of 

seaside La Conchita protested the addition of still another oil project in their small 

settlement (two years earlier, Phillips Petroleum had installed 

a processing facility 

nearby). La Conchita residents challenged the rezoning request, even 

though many 

area residents worked in the oil industry. County supervisors turned Sun Oil down1 

three to two, claiming that both Sun Oil and earlier installations by Phillips and 

Mobil violated 

a prior policy agreed upon by county officials and industry governing 

land use in the 

area (Smith 1969; Santa Barbara News-Press, June 25, 1969: A4). It is clear 

that besides Ojai, the coastal 

areas have reservations about the oil industry. 

A second indication of sentiment in Ventura County after the oil spill was 

the 1972 public vote on the establishment of the Coastal Commission. The 

statewide referendum, in addition to increasing regulation of coastal development, 

asked voters to recognize the coastal 

zone as a "delicately balanced ecosystem." 

Support for the initiative indicates environmental 

awareness and a willingness to 

increase state and local regulatory power to preserve coastal 

resources. Ventura 

County voted in favor of the Coastal Act by the barest majority (a more solid state 

win made it law). Santa Barbara County voters supported it by 

a 62 percent majority. 

As Table 23 shows, however, support for the initiative varied in the Ventura 

County communities, failing to gain a majority in most. Only Ojai, Simi Valley, 

and Thousand Oaks favored the measure, and the city of Ventura was almost 

evenly split, just four votes short. 

Table 23: Votes 

on 

the 1972 Coastal Zone Conservation Act 

Source: Ventura County Elections Division 

this pattern supports our other evidence on public orientations toward oil 

and the environment among these communities. In Ojai, where locals have prized 

aesthetic resources and controlled growth for nearly 100 years, support for the act 

was relatively high at over 54 percent. Support was highest in Thousand Oaks, 

a 

89 

Yes No 

Camarillo 47.82% 52.18% 

Fillmore 43.14% 56.86% 

Ojai 54.07% 45.93% 

Oxnard 45.30% 54.70% 

Port Hueneme 43.14% 56.86% 

Santa Paula 40.04% 59.96% 

Simi Valley 51.58% 48.42% 

Thousand Oaks 59.67% 40.33% 

Ventura 49.99% 50.01% 

Total, unincorporated 

areas 50.39% 49.61% 

Total, County 50.47% 49.53% 
suburban tract city but one which has imposed strict growth controls and other 

environmental measures. Somewhat more surprisingly, the suburban 

tract town of 

Simi Valley, 

a city more 

lax in its approach 

to development, also supported the 

Coastal Conservation Act 

- 

implying that the "new" Ventura county of Los Angeles 

escapees 

in the eastern towns has 

a more strongly environmentalist tilt on ocean 

issues than most of the "old" Ventura. Support was 

lowest in the oil-oriented Santa 

Clara River Valley, 

as well 

as 

in coastal communities of Oxnard and Port Hueneme. 

Resistance to the act in these communities may reflect 

a 

fear of increased regulation 

along the Oxnard Plain (agricultural 

areas contiguous with the coast were to be 

included in the Coastal Zone, thus limiting development), 

as well as concerns 

that 

coastal regulation would curtail development of offshore 

reserves. 

Another indication of public attitudes toward oil development 

can be gleaned 

from reactions at hearings held for public input regarding proposed offshore oil 

projects. In 1981, the Department of Interior proposed Lease Sale 68 on California's 

central coast as part of its area-wide leasing program. The sale included tracts off the 

Santa Barbara, Ventura, and Los Angeles County coasts, ranging from Long Beach 

north through the Santa Maria Basin. Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) 

were prepared for the lease sale, and public hearings were held regarding the draft 

versions of these statements, per the National Environmental Policy Act. As one 

element of 

our 

larger study, we examined comments made to the Bureau of Land 

Management (the 

agency overseeing the lease sales) in the context of these hearings 

and the local media 

coverage of these hearings. We coded every 

line of comment 

as 

to its topical content (e.g. references 

to air quality, endangered species, critiques of 

the hearing! EIS process 

itself) and characterized participants vis a vis their support 

for or opposition to the proposed lease sale (for a more 

thorough description of 

methods, 

see Appendix 2). 

Despite the inclusion of tracts off the Ventura County Coast and the economic 

link between non-local platforms and Ventura county support industries, few 

Ventura residents participated in the hearing process. The location of the hearing 

was Santa Barbara, which may have discouraged 

some Ventura County residents 

from attending,69 but letters 

to the Bureau of Land Management were also 

considered in the EIS process, a fact publicized by local papers ( Ventum Slzzr-Free Press, 

July 31, 1981: A8). The following table shows the levels of participation of Ventura 

Count locals 

versus 

those from Santa Barbara County, including in-person 

testimony and letters: 

Santa Barbara is 27 miles north of the city of Ventura, approximately 

a 30 minute drive on U.S. 101. 

90 
Type of Participant 

Government Agencies 

Local Oil Industry Representatives 4 7 

Representatives of Other 

Organizations70 3 21 

Members of the General Public 4 15 

Table 24: Participants in Lease Sale 68 Draft EIS hearing 

Source: Bureau of Land Management 1981 

Of the four letters received from Ventura county entities regarding the lease sale, 

two were from local governments, one was from a 

technical consulting 

agency, and 

only one was from 

a private citizen (Bureau of Land Management 1981). 

The majority of Ventura County locals who participated in the hearings (in 

person or by letter) were 

in favor of the project. Among the pro-OCS participants, 

many represented either oil companies or oil support firms 

- 

including VETCO 

Offshore, with three representatives present, and the Union of Operating Engineers. 

Most cited the safety of contemporary drilling technologies, the need for national 

energy 

independence, 

as well as possible positive impacts to Ventura County's 

economy. The 

two anti-OCS participants represented themselves 

- one a 

"housewife in Ventura," the second 

a man from Mussel Shoals (a small community 

on 

the Rincon). 

Interestingly, no government officials from Ventura county testified in 

person. When a comparable hearing was held in San Luis Obispo the previous year, 

both San Luis Obispo county officials and representatives of coastal cities testified 

en 

masse, expressing their concerns about potential detrimental impacts to local tourist 

economies, increasing burdens on infrastructure, and the deterioration of air quality 

(Bureau of Land Management 1980). In the Lease Sale 68 hearings, however, the 

two government entities that did respond 

- 

the County of Ventura and the City of 

Oxnard 

- 

did 

so via letter. 

Concerns expressed by the City of Oxnard were two-fold: first, the city cited 

sections of the EIS that estimated impacts on 

local infrastructure, and asked what 

funds would mitigate these impacts; second, the city cited the Draft EIS's 

acknowledgment of potential spills and resulting hazards to 'twateroriented 

recreation." This second 

concern motivated the city's request that the lease sale be 

Ventura County Santa Barbara County 

2 8 

91 

70Non-industry organizations represented were Ventura County Economic Development Association, 

Ventura County Taxpayers Association, and the Greater Ventura Chamber of Commerce. The Santa 

Barbara organizations present were mainly environmental groups. 

Total 13 51 
modified, 

to "reduce potential conflicts with the Channel Islands National Marine 

Sanctuary" (City of Oxnard, in Bureau of Land Management 1981). 

The County of Ventura largely echoed Oxnard's concerns about local 

infrastructure and the Channel Islands Sanctuary, adding to this questions from the 

Ventura County Air Pollution Control District regarding the 

adequacy of the cumulative impact analysis, adequacy of the reactive 

pollutant modeling, lack of 

a cumulative emission inventory for 

sources 

in 

the Santa Barbara Channel and differences between the Lease Sale 48 FEIS and 

the subject DEIS in terms of 

resource estimates (County of Ventura, in Bureau 

of Land Management 1981)71 

These statements were made in the form of letters and did not receive the 

type of media 

coverage granted to statements made during the hearings themselves. 

The absence of local officials at the hearing may have reduced the newsworthiness 

of the hearing in these communities and therefore reduced the amount of 

information available to locals regarding offshore leasing generally. Other 

communities (those in Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties) provided 

much more 

thorough 

coverage of the hearings as 

local lawmakers' participation 

attracted significant media attention. 

Nevertheless, news coverage amplified anti-oil sentiments; while the anti-oil 

views expressed at the hearing were 

in the minority, they accounted for 

a majority 

of media 

coverage. Participants at the Lease Sale 68 hearing were, by our measures, 

split in their orientations toward the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

and the prospect of offshore drilling more generally. Of 74 (total) speakers at the 

Santa Barbara hearing, we coded 65 percent as supporting oil; we coded 34 percent as 

opposed, with one speaker (approximately 1 percent) coded 

as neutral. But in their 

coverage, both the Venlurn Slur-Free Press and the Omard Press-Courier emphasized the 

arguments made against the Draft ETS and! 

or OCS development, albeit to different 

degrees (see Table 25). 

Table 25: Pro- and anti- OCS comments represented in 

coverage of Lease Sale 

68 

Source: Data collected by authors from Ventunz Stai-Free Press and GovrdPrrss-Cozrier, July 21, 1981 through 

August 5, 1981. 

71 Air quality issues are a major point of contention when oil projects are proposed onshore 

or 

off, 

even in 

largely pro-oil Ventura County. The Ventura County Air Pollution Control District would later 

prove 

to be a major player in the permitting of Platforms Gail, Gina, and Gilda. 

92 

Pro-Oil Anti-Oil Neutral Lines Coded 

Ventura Slur-Free Press 38% 43% 19% 225 

Oxnard Press-Courier 19% 81% 0% 72 
One explanation for the amplification of the anti-OCS arguments is the 

credibility and legitimacy of their 

sources; elected officials representing generally 

anti-oil Santa Barbara, 

as well as portions of Ventura County, denounced the lease 

sale. Prior studies (see Sigal 1986) confirm that elected officials are used 

as sources 

and receive 

coverage much more 

than any other group, a pattern apparent in this 

case. Speaking specifically on behalf of the "citizens of Santa Barbara," State 

Assemblyman Gary Hart vehemently criticized the Department of Interior, accusing 

the agency of only a perfunctory consideration of public 

concerns, despite the intent 

of the National Environmental Policy Act to include public input in decision 

making processes: 

{ Citizens] have read voluminous environmental documents, made specific 

comments, have attempted in an 

intelligent and objective manner to respond 

to the call for public participation. Yet their comments have characteristically 

received scant attention in Interior's final decisions. Somewhere between 

public input and federal output the public participation process has become 

a 

sham (in Bureau of Land Management 1981: Santa Barbara Public Hearing 

Transcript, p. 23-24). 

This "sham" remark was strongly featured in headlines. 

State Senator Robert Lagomarsino (R-Ojai) also commented on 

the tracts' 

proximity to Channel Islands National Park, asking that tracts within the drilling 

sanctuary be eliminated72 Because Hart and Lagomarsino both represented Santa 

Barbara, where offshore oil development has, historically, been one 

issue that 

crosses 

traditional liberal-conservative political boundaries and makes or breaks 

political 

careers, 

these representatives saw not only the importance of participating 

in the hearing but of showing their opposition to the proposal. The "habitual" 

newsworthiness of elected officials (Molotch and Lester 1974) ensured that these 

views made the news, despite the actual pro-oil balance in the hearing and in the 

context of a county supportive of the oil industry. 

While the city of Ventura did not express explicit support for offshore drilling 

during the Lease Sale 68 process, 

the city did make such an effort 

two years 

later, in 

1983, when then-Senator Pete Wilson proposed 

a ten year moratorium on OCS 

leasing (Senate Bill 1103). The cities of Fillmore, Santa Paula, Port Hueneme and 

Ventura (as well as 

the Ventura Chamber of Commerce, the Ventura Economic 

Development Council, and the Constituency for Public Awareness, headquartered 

in Camarillo) made formal declarations of their opposition to Senate Bill 1103 by 

adopting resolutions against offshore drilling moratoria in grneral.73 Themes echoed 

72 Channel Islands Marine Sanctuary is a three mile wide 

zone surrounding the Islands, where oil 

drilling_had been prohibited. The Sanctuary, established in 1980, begins at the limit of statecontrolled waters (three miles offshore from the islands) and continues for an additional three miles. 

Thus through state and federal measures, a zone six-miles wide had been established to protect the 

islands (induding Channel Islands National Park) from proximate oil development. 

73Ventura city councilman James Monahan received thanks for his opposition to the offshore 

93 
in these nearly identical resolutions included Ventura County's status as 

the state's 

fourth largest oil producer, the reliance of locals on 

jobs either in the oil industry or 

oil support services, and the existence of sufficient federal regulations 

to "preserve 

and enhance the environmental quality of the Outer Continental Shelf' (City of 

Santa Paula: 1). 

The city of Ventura continued its support for offshore development during 

negotiations over Chevron's proposed Platform Gail, in 1986. One of the few OCS 

platforms off the Ventura County shoreline, Gail was wholeheartedly supported by 

the City of Ventura despite the then-Lieutenant Governor's urgings that local 

governments support a drilling moratorium in the interest of increasing 

California's bargaining power with the Department of Interior (McCarthy 1986). in 

the city's view, however, the Chevron project provided sufficient measures "to 

mitigate the effects of the Platform 

- 

particularly with regards to the Channel Islands 

National Park" (Monahan, 1986). The City of Ventura found Chevron's air quality 

mitigations sufficient and noted in 

a 

letter of support for the project the potential 

employment opportunities available 

to Ventura County residents during the 

project's 32-year life (Monahan, 1986). 

In both of these examples, the city of Ventura and a number of others in the 

county supported offshore drilling 

even as 

the state of California was working to 

slow down the 

pace of OCS exploration and development. This degree of local 

government support is evidenced nowhere else on 

the Tn-county coast. Unlike the 

coastal communities of San Luis Obispo County, whose residents voted against the 

onshore processing facilities that necessarily 

accompany OCS development, or 

the 

city of Santa Barbara which regularly 

expresses its opposition to offshore drilling, the 

cities of Port Hueneme and Ventura 

are 

remarkable for being the only coastal cities 

in the Tn-counties (or indeed anywhere north of L.A.) to endorse OCS 

development. 

Despite this widespread support, however, local regulatory agencies and 

environmental activists have secured mitigations on proximate OCS projects. 

Platforms Gina and Gilda were the first platforms 

to be located not only off the coast 

of Ventura County but to process their oil in the county as well. These platforms 

were also the first 

two platforms proposed by Union Oil (by then Unocal) following 

the 1969 oil spifi 

- a coincidence that according 

to one 

informant may have 

increased Unocal's willingness 

to satisfy local regulators. Company officials 

responded 

to the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) and 

pressure from environmentalists, including the Oxnard League of Women Voters, 

by agreeing to substitute electric 

power 

for diesel 

on 

the platforms to reduce 

moratorium not only from oil companies and oil support services in Ventura, Fillmore and Santa Paula 

but from 

one oil support company as 

far 

away as Houston, Texas (Kott 1983). 

94 
emissions.74 Union complied, and these first 

ever fully electrified platforms in the 

Channel generate almost 

no emissions at the site. 

In addition to supporting the electrification of the platforms, the League of 

Women Voters expressed 

concerns for both the safety and the aesthetics of the 

onshore facility 

tc be built at Mandalay Beach, asking that it be set back behind 

existing sand dunes to reduce possible damage by 

a storm surge or 

tsunami. 

Consolidation of pipelines coming in to the processing facility was successfully 

urged. Finally, the platform operators donated funds for 

a hostel and small 

museum at a park near 

the separation facility. 

The Ventura County APCD was less successful in negotiations with Chevron 

over Platform Gail, in 1986. Although the platform was considered to be in Santa 

Barbara County's jurisdiction (if any county's jurisdiction 

- 

the platform sits in 

federal waters),75 the Ventura County APCD took 

an active role because its 

emissions impact the coastal communities as well 

as 

the Ojai Valley. Chevron 

claimed that 

as 

it was built, the platform could not accommodate either the elettric 

power or 

the low-emission turbines recommended by the APCD. The parties finally 

compromised 

on a moderately low-emission turbine, and Chevron allows regular 

inspections by Ventura APCD officials despite Ventura's lack of jurisdictional 

power. Ventura air quality officials (who are, according to one official, even more 

savvy 

than Santa Barbara's) have learned not that emissions do not respect 

jurisdictional boundaries, but that potential pollution 

sources must be identified 

early in the project's design process. 

Ventura County in the world oil market 

The 1970s and 1980s not only 

saw oil move offshore, the era was marked by 

an unprecedented increase in the volatility of world oil markets. The OPEC 

embargo of the 1970s drove oil prices to previously unseen heights, and the price of 

oil remained relatively high into the early 1980s 

- making the relatively expensive 

prospect of offshore drilling in the Santa Barbara Channel appear promising. 

Environmental Impact Reports for Channel drilling projects anticipated tens of 

thousands of new employees (and their families), most employed during the laborintensive construction phase; with Port Hueneme acting as 

the main service center 

for offshore support vessels, Ventura County anticipated a major boom. 

As local governments have 

no 

jurisdiction over drilling projects in federal 

Vv4te1, luLal ciah 

taLeu uLe questluii 

ILUW ethe uut1atIuIL tiE,;1.1 Wuulu 

74OnmosLplatfoms,indudnthoseofLthaSantaBarbaraoasenergyfor_drillingand other 

operations is generated by turbines 

on 

the platform itself. It is this generation which makes the 

platforms point-sources for air pollution. 

75 Plitfnrrn (i1 ic hniiI 14. milpc cmfh ,1 C ninIpri ntl tpn mi1,c wpcf nf (Th'nird 

95 
offset the impact of this new population. The SocioEconomic Monitoring Program 

(SEMP), a condition of Chevron's Point Arguello project permit with Santa Barbara 

County, provided 

a means to monitor the population impacts of new offshore 

developments. The strategy behind SEMP was 

twofold: first, by monitoring the 

actual number of new employees entering a 

locale (e.g. a school district, fire district, 

or municipality), the oil companies could avoid paying mitigations based on 

possibly inaccurate projected impacts; second, by tracking the employeest residences, 

mitigation payments could be distributed to the home communities, regardless of 

where the employee worked (often 

some distance away). This second facet of SEMP 

is especially important in Ventura County, where offshore employees often reside 

even 

though their work may be based in Santa Barbara County. For example, in 

1986, SEMP's first year, Chevron/Texaco's Point Arguello project, All American 

Pipeline, Gaviota Marine Terminal, and Exxon's Santa Ynez Unit! Las Flores 

Canyon Processing Facility 

- 

all located in Santa Barbara County 

- 

brought 1,300 new 

residents to Ventura County. By 1990, the 

same projects had brought 

a 

total of 4,425 

new residents to the county (Molotch and Woolley 1994: 102). Table 26 details the 

Ventura County payrolls of projects participating in SEMP monitoring. Most of 

these employees worked in oil or gas plant construction and operation, platform 

operations, or permitting. 

Table 26: Ventura County payroll from northern Santa Barbara Channel OCS 

platforms and onshore support projects 

Source: Molotch and Woolley 1994, Table 4; data prepared by Molotch and Woolley using SEMI' 

monitoring reports and SEMI' mitigation payment spreadsheets. 

These population impacts are significant and resulted in $1.2 million in 

company mitigation payments to Ventura County service providers (including the 

city and county of Ventura, the city of Oxnard, Oxnard Union High School, and the 

Oxnard Elementary School District 

- see Molotch and Woolley 1994 for 

a detailed 

account of mitigation payments).76 Still, even the total actual fri-county population 

impact from the Chevron/Texaco and Exxon projects 

- 

11,099 

- 

does not begin to 

approach the over 40,000 new migrants predicted during the offshore projects' 

planning stages (Molotch and Woolley 1994: 3). This discrepancy reflects the 

76 mitigation payments are the main compensation Ventura County service providers receive for 

impacts generatecLby the Santa_Ynez Unit and Point Arguello Projects, as, unlike Santa Barbara County, 

Ventura County collects limited property tax revenues 

for the onshore components of these installations 

(e.g. from pipelines, and from local service companies). SEMI' accounts for the possibility of claims for 

generic impacts on public services in its Ventura County component (VCSEMP) (see Molotch and 

Woolley 1994: 30). 

96 

1986 $3,191,162 

1987 $5,370,725 

1988 $6,688,845 

1989 $7,138,857 

1990 $4,801,907 
difficulties of estimating population impacts as well 

as changes in the economic 

prospects of offshore drilling generally. Low oil prices, the poor quality of Santa 

Barbara Channel crude, and the opposition to offshore development expressed by 

residents in Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties all slowed the pace of 

Channel drilling. These largely non-local factors in ttrn curtailed offshore drilling's 

economic and growth impacts in Ventura County. 

In anticipation of 

a 

lucrative offshore oil industry, several major oil 

companies undertook corporate expansions or 

relocations in Ventura County in the 

early 1980s. Exxon was the first to undertake a major building project in 1981, with 

its new western regional headquarters in Thousand Oaks. The city planning 

commission voted four to one to waive the city's 35-foot height limitation to allow 

the five-story, 70-foot structure which would bring approximately 150 employees to 

the 

area 

( Ventum Star-Free Press, October 29, 1981). Chevron followed two years 

later, 

proposing to move 

its Southern California production headquarters to Ventura 

from Orange County. The new facility would relocate 50 employees in the Ventura 

area. One incentive for Chevron's move was 

its expenditure of between $600,000 

and $700,000 per day on drilling vessels based in Port Hueneme (Bates 1983). Local 

support industries enjoyed the boom 

as well; VETCO Offshore, originally Ventura 

Tool Company, reached its zenith in 1982, employing 1,300 and building 

a new 

Ventura Avenue facility (Venium Slur-Free Press, November 18, 1986). 

Within two years of this building boom, the price of oil started to fall and by 

1986 plummeted to a record post-embargo low; by spring of that year, 

the price of 

some grades of crude fell from $30 a barrel to $13. The Ventum Star-Free Press covered 

the price drop 

as a major threat to the County's economy, as 

indeed it proved to be. 

Ventura Avenue businesses 

- 

from oil support firms to donut shops and 

pharmacies 

- saw sales fall off ten to 15 percent or more. The number of oil drilling 

rigs operating in the county was halved; Mobil Oil alone closed 83 onshore wells in 

the Rincon Field. By fall of 1986, one of Ventura's most successful oil support 

businesses, Vetco-Gray, Inc. (originally Ventura Tool Company, then VETCO 

Offshore) was shut down by new parent company Hughes Tool. By this time only 

360 employees remained, and only 35 would stay on to sell and service remaining 

oil field equipment as Ventura Tool Company (Ventura Star-Free Press, November 18, 

1986; June 19, 1987; Fujii and Whitmore, 1989: Dl, D3).78 

Oil prices rebounded somewhat towards the close of the decade. At the onset 

of the Gulf War, world oil prices leapt from $21.50 

a barrel to nearly $33.00, and 

Yet 

even as Chevron and others profited from increased offshore production, the decline in terrestrial 

reserves motivated Shell Oil, whose local holdings were concentrated in the Ventura Avenue area, to 

consolidate its California operations in Bakersfield. The 1982 closure of Shell's Ventura office would 

1982). 

78 World War II through the 1960s, VETCO manufactured 

aerospace 

tools for both the cold war 

,wo-rm 

97 
some operators resumed production on wells shut-in in the 1980s. Nevertheless, 

major oil operators began abandoning their Ventura headquarters as 

fast 

as 

they had 

built them. Texaco was 

the fist 

to pull out, in 1990, despite having built one new 

office in 1989 and renovating another. The 

company elected to consolidate its 

production division in Denver, transferring 145 positions out of Ventura County. 

Another 170 would remain, however, 

some 

in 

a new Ventura field office under 

construction at the time of the reorganization. Coverage of the layoffs emphasized 

Texaco's difficulties completing their share of the Point Arguello offshore project 

due to a dispute with Santa Barbara County over 

tankering of oil produced offshore 

(Platform Harvest was already constructed by this time, but the taitkering dispute 

had prevented 

any driiiing) A 

company 

spokeswoman denied that this was a 

major factor, however (Moraga 1990: A1-A6) At the same 

time, Chevron was 

scaling back operations and decided not to occupy a new Oxnard office building. 

Chevron consolidated in Bakersfield in 1993, leaving 

a half-built office building in 

Ventura and laying off or 

transferring 200 employees (Simon 1993: B1-B5). 

Exxon also reduced its Ventura County work force in the early 1990s, from a 

1980s peak of 400 employees to 150 by 1993. This reorganization eventually led the 

company to close its new Thousand Oaks headquarters, built just twelve years 

earlier. Some employees transferred to Santa Barbara production facifities, and a 

few support staff remained in the Thousand Oaks 

area. Exxon's departure came at 

an especially bad time for the Conejo Valley: Northrup had already abandoned its 

Newbury Park facility, where city lobbying efforts to lure new tenants were 

unsuccessful 

as of 1993, and the fotijier city hail had been seeking a new tenant for 

five years. Office vacancy rates in Ventura County 

as a whole were at 20 percent, 

and 37 percent of those vacant offices were 

in Thousand Oaks (Simon 1993: Bi). 

In order to survive the instabilities of the offshore drilling industry, some 

Ventura County oil support firms, like similar firms in Santa Barbara County, either 

diversified or branched their operations to include non-Channel activities. One 

firm that branched its operations was Port Hueneme Marine Supply Company, 

which originally supplied and serviced offshore oil vessels. By the late 1980s and 

early 1990s, the company was conducting oil spill simulation exercises to determine 

what equipment might be needed in future emergencies. In 1989, they supplied oil 

spill clean-up equipment for the Exxon Valdez and Huntington Beach (1990) oil 

spills. Several other Ventura county companies have strategically diversified their 

operations, often entering the 

areas of environmental monitoring, waste recycling 

and remediation, and technological consulting. One such firm is Measurement and 

Control Engineering, Inc. This company's expansion into emission testing and sales 

or rental of monitoring equipment came from 

a conscious effort to avoid the cyclical 

nature of the oil industry. While not all firms have chosen this means of surviving 

the volatile industry conditions created by both world oil prices and 

en-v-i-ronmentalist--opposi-t-ion--to--Channe-l--de--viopmt-,-mall-Y---firmS--hae--&r0-Wfl 

and increased in value using this strategy (Molotch, Freudenburg, and Jon 

forthcoming). While it is difficult 

to predict how these firms' decreasing 

dependence on local oil extraction might effect local sentiments regarding Channel 

98 
oil development, these firms 

are part of an 

important trend toward cleaner, high 

technology industries that is changing the make-up of Ventura County's economy. 

Back country oil revisited 

While canyons surrounding the Ojai and Santa Clara River Valleys were 

home to Ventura County's first oil operations, new neighbors and new attitudes 

toward the environment have changed the way oil operates, even 

in this relatively 

sparsely populated section of the county. Conflicts over road use, wildlife habitats, 

and the visual appearance of oil installations reached unprecedented levels in the 

1980s as government agencies, activist groups, and private citizens sought to control 

an 

industry whose access to much of this land predated 

even very basic land use 

regulations. 

Throughout the late 1970s, the county of Ventura struggled for authority over 

oil drilling in Los Padres National Forest, which 

covers about one half of Ventura 

County (as well 

as parts of Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties). Because 

this land is included in the national forest, much of Ventura County's back country 

falls under the jurisdiction of the Department of Interior, leaving the county no 

power to control how these operations proceed. The county sought to change this in 

1974, when the Interior Department leased 120 acres within the national forest for 

exploratory oil drilling. This lease allowed Gulf Oil to drill just inside the forest 

boundary. Ventura County filed suit to stop the drilling on 

the grounds that Gulf 

had not obtained a special use permit from the county. The 

case ended up in the 

U.S. Supreme Court in 1980, with the court backing Gulf. This decision effectively 

opened half of Ventura County to oil drilling at the federal government's 

discretion, also setting precedent 

a for control of federal land elsewhere in the 

country (Bates 1980: Al). 

In 

areas where the county did have jurisdiction, citizen groups pressured the 

county throughout the 1980s to increase regulation on 

the oil industry which, in 

many cases, meant updating antiquated permits that allowed oil companies 

unmitigated use of both privately held land and public roads. As early as 1980, Argo 

Petroleum met resistance from Ojai Valley residents who charged, at a day-long 

hearing, that truck traffic to and from the Argo drill site would threaten the only 

access to their homes, that oil drilling should be subject to the 

same controls as other 

land development, and that the project's environmental impact statement was 

inadequate. The Ventura County Planning Commission approved Argo's permit, 

however, with only 

a commissioner from Ojai dissenting (Ventura Star-Free Press, 

March 21 1980: Dl). In 

a second Ojal incident, 

an 

independent operator found after 

drilling 

a well above the Ojai Valley that although in compliance with the site's 

1949 permit, his actions were out of compliance with current regulations. Ojai 

Valley residents objected to his leveling a drilling pad by bulldozing earth over 

the 

side of the mountain and building a rig that "could be 

seen from all over Ojai." 

Responding 

to citizen complaints, Ventura County supervisors "modernized" the 

99 
permit, requiring the developer 

to landscape the scarred hillside and keep 

any 

future drilling operations in compliance with current regulations (Ven turn Star-Free 

Press, December 14, 1984). 

Wildlife activists provided 

a second element of oil opposition during this 

era, 

when oil developers requested permission to drill in the Hopper Mountain 

National Wildlife Refuge. Unlike the neighboring Sespe Condor Sanctuary (located 

in the mountains north of Fillmore), the Hopper Mountain Refuge is available for 

oil drilling and contains known hydrocarbon 

reserves. In 1981, a Santa Barbara oil 

developer was granted permission to drill twenty-six wells in the refuge, raising 

concerns of adverse effects 

to the nearby condor sanctuary. In the end, protests from 

the National Audubon Society, the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the 

California Department of Fish and Game resulted in new conditions attached to the 

permit to protect the condors (Ventum Star-Free Press, June 12, 1981: All).79 

New uses of privately held back country land provided 

a 

third source of 

conflict. Saint Thomas Aquinas College, a small Catholic college founded in the 

early 1980s north of Santa Paula, contested oil drilling on nearby lands in March 

1985. The college sought assistance from Santa Barbara's Environmental Defense 

Center, 

a non-profit environmental law firm, to contest an Argo petroleum drilling 

operation that they feared would increase traffic, contaminate groundwater, and 

damage Santa Paula Creek (Santa Paula Clzronide, March 8, 1985). The county of 

Ventura responded by imposing several restrictions on Argo's permit, including 

prohibiting use of the road bordering the college except in emergencies, 

as well as 

requiring that Argo landscape the drifi site and construct a hiking trail through 

Santa Paula Canyon (qai ValleyNews, March 31, 1985). 

While none of these protests prevented oil development in Ventura 

Countys back country, most complainants were successful in securing mitigations. 

These 

cases also illustrate that by the mid-1980s, citizen protest against oil 

development was a regular occurrence in Ventura County with diverse origins. In 

the 1800s, back country residents had come to this area to be near 

the oil industry; in 

this century, however, residents 

appear to come despite the oil industry (or, in 

some 

cases, without knowledge of oil's legacy in the region). While compromises 

are 

still 

reached which allow the industry to operate, oil is no longer allowed to dominate 

the landscape and infrastructure in the way it once did. 

Petrochem U.S.A.: A 

case of environmentalism and market dynamics 

The rise in environmental consciousness 

seen 

in the 1980s coincided with the 

decline in oil prices, making it sometimes hard to attribute local outcomes to one 

cause or another. Afihe 

same tithrVentura County groups were increasing 

100 

79Conthlions induded cessation of drilling activities from April through November (the condor mating 

season), as well as restrictions or human access to the 

area and on drilling practices. 
their awareness of oil, the declining oil prices of the 1980s made Ventura County's 

heavy, sulfur-rich crude less and less profitable to refine and market. While 

some 

operations opted to modernize their facilities (some built almost 50 years prior), 

others downsized their operations or 

folded completely. Several major oil 

companies sold off their depredating Ventura County properties. 

One story that illustrates this confluence of factors is that of Petrochem 

U.S.A., a Ventura Avenue refinery originally built in the 1950s by Shell Oil 

as a 

fertilizer plant. Petrochem, owned by U.S.A. Petroleum Corporation of Santa 

Monica, was set to embark on a 100 million dollar modernization program 

in the 

early 1980s. The refinery had been converting Ventura Avenue oil into fuel oil for 

ships, 

a 

relatively unprofitable product. The plant remained in operation largely 

through federal government subsidies to small refineries (estimated by one source 

at several thousand dollars per day). When these subsidies were 

scheduled to end 

in the late 1970s, company officials aimed to expand their production of gasoline and 

diesel oil. This proposal required 

a new cracking plant 

- which necessitated the 

plant expansion. 

Even before this proposed expansion, the Petrochem refinery was 

regarded by 

many residents of both the Ventura Avenue area and the Ojai Valley 

as a public 

nuisance. Avenue residents feared explosions and gas 

leaks, and the latter were not 

uncommon at the plant. A nearby school kept buckets of damp 

rags available on 

the 

playground for children to cover 

their noses and mouths with in the event of a gas 

release. The problems created for Ojai Valley residents stemmed largely from 

everyday emissions; nitrous oxides, reactive organic compounds, sulfur dioxide, and 

particulates were 

regularly released from the plant and easily followed the 

prevailing winds north into the Ojai Valley (the Ojai Valley naturally collects 

pollutants, and ranks 

among 

the poorest in the county in air quality). Petrochem 

was one of Ventura County's largest polluters, permitted to emit 129 tons of 

hydrocarbon pollutants and 122 tons of other pollutants. Some Ojai residents 

complained of daily asthma attacks, and 

a number were hospitalized for respiratory 

problems. In addition, the plant's rusted appearance did little to inspire community 

confidence in its safety (Ventura Slur-Free Press, November 19, 1984). 

Citizens to Preserve the Ojai (CPO), 

a grassroots environmental group 

dedicated to issues seen as 

threats to the Ojai Valley, filed suit against Petrochem 

based on 

the EIS submitted for the proposed plant expansion. While the plant was 

already recognized 

as a nuisance prior to any expansion, the intent of the suit was 

not to close the plant but, in the words of CPO chair Stan Greene, "to prevent their 

expansion and the creation of additional pollution.' Toward this end CPO enlisted 

legal help from Santa Barbara's Environmental Defense Center (EDC), a non-profit 

environmental law firm familiar with both the oil industry and the National 

Environmental Policy AcL(NEPA). 

The suit aimed to appeal the Ventura County Board of Supervisors' approval 

of the planned expansion by contesting the EIS. Greene recalled that several 

101 
attorneys in both Ventura and Santa Barbara were pessimistic about this prospect. 

One EDC lawyer volunteered, however, bringing with him the knowledge gained 

through Santa Barbara's long history of oil-related conflicts. The suit rested on 

the 

contention that the EIS neglected to provide 

a cumulative air quality assessment, 

one 

that would take into account emissions from offshore drilling. The EDC was 

successful, and in 1984 

an appellate judge ordered that Petrochem revise the EIS to 

include these figures and re-apply for 

a permit. 

The legal fight had lasted approximately three years, during which time 

Petrochem had delayed borrowing the funds needed to begin its expansion 

(estimated at $100,000,000). At the 

same 

time, the price of oil was falling from its 

highs of the 1970s. The combination of market factors, environmentalist 

opposition, and the imminent end of federal subsidies led parent company U.S.A. 

Petroleum Corporation to close the Ventura Avenue facility permanently in 

November, 1984. The plant closure meant layoffs for eighty workers (Petrochem 

reported 

an. annual payroll of $2.5 million) and loss of the operation's $350,000 

contribution to county tax rolls (Ventura Star-Free Press, November 17 and 21, 1984). 

Environmental targets in Ventura County 

Ventura County is home to what 

some of our 

informants have characterized 

as "targeted environmentalism"; that is, environmental 

response 

tends 

to be 

centered around specific issues or 

threats, utilizing ad-hoc organizing as well 

as 

established environmental organizations (e.g. Citizens to Preserve the Ojai, the 

Ventura County Environmental Coalition, and Santa Barbara's Environmental 

Defense Center). While these targets often include oil installations like those 

described above, the targets 

are 

just as often (perhaps 

even more often) not oilrelated. While the examples detailed below do not provide 

an exhaustive account 

of environmentalist response in Ventura County, we hope they will provide 

some 

illustration of how Ventura County's environmental activists respond to perceived 

threats, and how these responses reflect locals' 

concerns about the county's 

environment. 

Growth and urban development 

are issues of great concern to residents of 

Ventura County. This 

concern has many manifestations, ranging from architectural 

and open space regulations in Ojai and Thousand Oaks to environmentalist 

responses to specific projects. Here we will briefly describe three such 

responses - a 

proposed California State University Campus in Ventura, a proposal to develop 

wetlands south of Oxnard, and a 

landfill slated for development in an Ojai Valley 

canyon. 

In 1986, governor George Deulcmejian budgeted $19 million dollars for the 

purchase of two new California State University Campus sites 

- one 

in San Diego 

102 
County, the other in Ventura County.80 While the Ventura effort originally 

centered on a site near Ventura Harbor, failed negotiations there sent the search 

committee looking for another site 

- 

this time at Taylor Ranch 

a 

largely 

undeveloped parcel just across the Ventura River from the city of Ventura. Then 

home to 300 cattle and 400 oil wells (7,500 

acres of the ranch were 

leased to Shell and 

Conoco as of 1987), Taylor Ranch could provide the undeveloped 

acreage necessary 

for 

a college campus (Saillant 1990a; Katz 1987). Site negotiations did not go 

smoothly: in 1988, owner Cynthia Wood reneged on an original agreement to sell 

550 

acres of the ranch, citing 

among other reasons possible conflicts with Shell Oil's 

operations (Reem 1988), initiating a move by state officials to condemn the property 

(Katz 1988). 

Perhaps more important for the site's final fate was 

local environmentalists' 

opposition to the proposed campus, a sentiment that emerged 

as negotiations 

dragged on. Whereas many communities welcome colleges and universities for 

their potential to encourage 

"clean development" (Santa Barbara's University of 

California 

campus was supported by local boosters for just this reason), 

environmentalists including the Ventura County Environmental Coalition, 

Friends of the Ventura River, and the Patagonia corporation (an environmentallyconscious outdoor clothing manufacturer headquartered in Ventura) opposed the 

university because of the relatively pristine quality of the Taylor Ranch site. 

Patagonia's reasons 

for entering the fight 

are summarized in 

a company brochure 

on its environmentalist mission: 

Our property lies 

a stone's throw from the river that puts a stop to L.A.; 

beyond the [Ventura] river rugged, mustard-colored hills meet the 

sea along a 

stretch of coast called the Rincon. This twelve-mile strip of land has beach 

houses, 

a freeway, railroad tracks, oil and strawberry fields, but no shopping 

mails, tract homes, or auto dealerships (Patagonia, Inc. 1993). 

Company leaders, as well as local environmentalists and housing advocates, feared 

that 

a university on 

this site would open up 

the west bank of the Ventura River to 

development, 

as well as driving up housing prices in the Ventura Avenue area 

(one of the few affordably priced areas in Ventura's increasingly expensive housing 

market). Patagonia donated funds, office 

space, phones, and employee time to the 

fight and supported 

a 

lawsuit by Santa Barbara's Environmental Defense Center that 

challenged the site's initial Environmental Impact Statement and slowed the siting 

process 

(Patagonia Inc. 1993; Saillant 1990b). 

The company's role in this controversy became controversial in itself; 

supporters of the Taylor Ranch site complained that Patagonia's contributions 

SO At this time Ventura County was without 

a 

four-year public college, as it continues to be today. 

Currently the only four-year facility in the county is California Lutheran University, a private college 

founded in 1961 

in Thousand Oaks. Community colleges are 

located in Moorpark, Oxnard, and Ventura. 

The university center in Ventura also offers extension classes through California State University, 

Northridge and the University of California, Santa Barbara. 

103 
unfairly influenced the debate (Sailant 1990b). Whether or not the company's 

influence was "fair," they certainly aided opposition to the university site. 

Community resistance however, eventually cooled state officials' enthusiasm for 

the Taylor Ranch proposal. Citing a divided community and city council, fears of a 

lengthy court baffle, and the 

expense of obtaining freeway access, 

the California State 

University trustees officially retreated from the Taylor Ranch proposal in 1990 

(Miller 1990; Los Angeles Times 1990), 

Our second growth-related example 

concerns 

the development of coastal 

wetlands south of Oxnard. While the city of Oxnard has generally embraced 

development (Oxnard has some of the tallest buildings in Ventura county - 

the only 

buildings approaching "skyscrapers" in the 

area - 

and big box stores dot the 101 

freeway on what was once prime agricultural land), 

area 

residents concerned about 

development in 

a biologically rich coastal 

area 

formed the Ormond Beach Observers 

in 1987, 

to literally "observe" a coastal wetland in South Oxnard,81 The impetus for 

their observation was an Orange County developer's proposal to build residential 

housing in a contested wetland area, historically used 

as a buffer around existing 

light industrial operations. While the development company spent considerable 

time and money 

lobbying 

area residents about the potential positive economic 

impacts of the housing development, the Oruiond Beach Observers sought to 

"watchdog" the development process and document the condition of the existing 

habitat (including gathering evidence for the area's legal status as wetland). The 

Observers also gathered opponents of the proposed land uses 

together to testify at 

relevant hearings and educated locals about possible alternatives to increased 

residential development. 

A key impact of the Ormond Beach Observers has been their role in 

representing the local environmental community to the Ormond Beach Task Force, 

an 80-member group of area stakeholders, including the U. S. Navy, the Port of 

Hueneme, Southern California Edison (operator of 

a power plant near 

the site), the 

City of Oxnard, state and federal wildlife agencies, the Coastal Conservancy, the 

developer, and others. Rather than oppose development outright, the strategy of 

Ormond Beach Observers representative Jean Harris has been to encourage 

intensive commercial development along Hueneme Road, specifically the 

establishment of businesses associated with the Port. This strategy is two-fold: first, 

it addresses the 

concern for economic revitalization in South Oxnard, 

a 

local 

concern 

the residential developer has played upon; 

second, dense commercial 

development will leave more of this sensitive 

area 

in its natural, or near natural, 

state. While the 33-acre parcel currently under deliberation is zoned residential in 

the city's general plan, the County Economic Development Association (V.C.E.D.A.) 

has encouraged finding 

a purchaser of the land who would bring in additional jobs 

and business to the 

area. As Harris has "a background in compromise," this accord 

8tThe 

group represents individuals as well 

as organizations (induding the Sierra Club, Ventura County 

Environmental Coalition, the Oxnard League of Women Voters, Oxnard Beautiful, and the Surfrider 

Foundation). 

104 
between economic and environmental voices is seen as a major accomplishment. 

Whether all of the environmental organizations represented by the Ormond Beach 

Observers will agree remains to be 

seen. 

Our third example concerns two issues of growing local as well 

as national 

salience 

- 

solid waste disposal and air quality. During this same era, 

the mid498Os, 

the existing landfills in western Ventura County were rapidly reaching capacity, 

necessitating 

a new solid waste facility. Thirty potential sites were evaluated, but 

Weldon Canyon 

- 

just off the lower Ojai valley and accessible only via highway 

33 became the county's preferred site. As siting deliberations took place, however, 

a private solid waste firm obtained 

a 

lease option for the location in Weldon 

Canyon, thus eliminating the possibility of a publicly managed waste facility. The 

dump proposed by this 

company would have to be large enough to be commercially 

profitable, which would mean 

importing trash along 

a highway in the "breathing 

tube" of the Ojai Valley airshed. By one estimate, the dump would attract 600 trucks 

a day, approximating the air quality impact of 10,000 new homes. 

Environmental groups including Citizens to Preserve the Ojai (CPO) formed 

a broad coalition to fight the Weldon Canyon dump.. The Ojai Voice (the local 

alternative paper) dedicated several cover stories to the issue, and local celebrity 

resident Larry Hagman (Dallas' J. R. Ewing) hosted a $500 

a plate dinner to finance 

the cause. Activists worked with local theatrical talent to organize 

a 

rally attended 

by 3,000 people (about 13 percent of the Ojai Valley's population). CPO activist Stan 

Greene went so 

far 

as 

to run for County supervisor, "not because I thought I would 

win, but because I wanted to get a platform to talk about the garbage dump." The 

combined effect of these strategies was successful; Ojal's Supervisor Maggie 

Erickson, the swing vote in determining the dump's approval, eventually voted it 

down. The fight is not over, however, as Solid Waste Management continues to 

push local ballot measures 

that might circumvent the Board of Supervisors and 

approve a dump at Weld on Canyon. 

Although these three 

cases of environmental organizing are only 

a 

sample of 

environmentalist activity in Ventura County, they provide insight into the ways 

in 

which environmentalists organize. Each of these groups 

tends to act locally: 

Patagoma opposed development "a stone's throw" away, 

the Ormond Beach 

Observers are generally residents of the Ormond Beach or greater Oxnard areas, and 

Citizens to Preserve the Ojai focus their energies on perceived threats to their home, 

the Oai Valley. Nevertheless, in each of the three cases, coalition building between 

local, regional (especially Santa Barbara), and national environmental groups and 

regulatory bodies have increased the potential efficacy of even 

the most locallyoriented activists. 

Several informants from Ventura County's emviranniental organizations 

agreed that increasing national 

awareness of the environment has influenced 

Ventura County locals. These same 

informants noted that the increasing 

suburbanization of the east county may 

increase environmentalist sympathies, 

as 

105 
suburban residents strive to protect the quality of life that attracted them. While 

environmentalism in Ventura County lacks the institutionalized status seen in 

Santa Barbara or San Luis Obispo Counties (see corresponding reports), perceived 

environmental threats 

are addressed by both organized and ad hoc groups who, in 

various ways, have influenced what 

are often characterized 

as pro-development 

local governments. 

Remediation and Abandonment 

In the environmental 

era, oil operators 

- 

responding 

to public sentiments 

and their own self-consciousness about the appearance of their installations 

- 

attempted to lessen the visual impact of refineries and storage facilities. As early 

as 

1971, Ventura Avenue oil companies began efforts at beautifying their operations; 

Shell planted 800 trees between highway 33 (the road from Ventura to Ojai) and its 

processing plant. New field equipment installed 

as part of this landscaping and 

modernization effort was painted "autunrn gold and 

cypress green"; abandoned 

wells were sealed off according to the State Division of Oil and Gas standards, and 

sumps were scraped, re-ifiled, and planted (Paul 1971: Bi). This was something of 

a. 

new attitude. A 1953 "Oil Progress Week' edition of the Ventura Slur-Free Press had 

characterized abandoned oil field equipment as 

'landmarks of the pioneering days 

which launched the county's major industry" (Ventura Slur-Free Press, Oil Progress 

Week Special Section, October 14 1953). 

But oil seeping from abandoned wells caused major environmental hazards 

in the 1970s and 1980s. Above Fillmore, oil from an abandoned MRG Oil Company 

well began spilling into Sespe Creek in the 1970s. Located on rugged Forest Service 

land (the parcel was purchased by the Audubon Society and donated to the Forest 

Service in an effort to eliminate privately held lands within the Condor Sanctuary), 

clean-up efforts were hampered by the lack of road 

access to the area. The seep was 

eventually repaired when bulldozing equipment, cement, and work 

crews were 

airlifted to the site through 

a 

joint effort by the Forest Service and the California 

Division of Forestry in October 1985 (Ventura Slur-Free Press, April 7 1985; December 7 

1985). 

Abandonment is still 

a major concern for Ventura County planners. 

According to one planner, the following is 

a 

typical (albeit pessimistic) 

abandonment scenario: A major operator (e.g. Shell, Texaco) sells its wells to 

smaller operators as production decreases These smaller operations hold the wells 

until production falls below their own lower standards, eventually selling them to 

an 

individual or a limited partnership. This last operator will hold the well until 

the operation goes bank upt,4husducking financial responsibility fotproper 

abandonment. The cost of returning the well site to its natural state then falls to 

county taxpayers. While abandonment is not currently 

a major problem (most 

existing wells 

are still producing, albeit at marginal levels), one planner noted 

a 

statewide "push" is on for omnibus legislation to establish who pays 

this final cost. 

106 
The early 1990s 

saw 

several new spills in Ventura County 

- mainly due to 

pipeline failures. In January 1993, 370,000 gallons of condensate or 

liquefied 

petroleum spilled from 

a pipeline near 

the Ventura River (Ventura Avenue). 

Although the condensate contained two known carcinogens 

- benzene and toluene 

* 

- 

authorities found no evidence of damage to wildlife or contamination of the city's 

water supply. In March 1994, 28 California Department of Fish and Game officials 

searched Texaco's Ventura Avenue office looking for evidence that would link 

Texaco to the spifi. The spill itself angered local residents, who were also put off by 

state officials' unwillingness to disclose the spill when initially discovered in 1993; 

a 

second source of resentment was Texaco's unwillingness to claim responsibility for 

the spill despite what was regarded 

as strong evidence of culpability. The 1994 Fish 

and Game raid of Texaco's offices yielded 

company 

records hoping to implicate 

Texaco and recover some of the estimated multi-million dollar clean-up costs 

(Saillant and Fields 1994; Kelly and Hadly 1994). 

A second spifi occurred Christmas morning, 1993, as 84,000 gallons of crude 

leaked from 

a Bush Petroleum pipeline, fouling McGrath Lake and McGrath State 

Beach, north of Oxnard. Close to 200 clean-up workers, including state Fish and 

Game employees, dean-up professionals hired by the pipeline operator, and 

volunteers worked to save birds and other wildlife in what is considered an 

environmentally sensitive area. Clean-up workers eventually recovered 133 dead 

birds from the lake and eight miles of soiled coastline (Santa Barbam News-Press, 

January 1, 1994). Bush employees had no means of recognizing a sudden loss of 

pipeline pressure - one reason 

the spill took almost three hours to trace after it was 

first spotted by Minerals Management Service officials. This fact, along with the 

company's unwillingness to provide 

an accurate estimate of the pipe's condition or 

the amount of oil lost in the spill, raised public alarm about not only this spifi but 

the state of similar pipelines and officials' ability to respond. 

Oil pipeline management provides 

a major challenge to Ventura County 

planners, 

as 

the status and 

even 

the location of many pipelines remains somewhat 

mysterious. The California Pipeline Safety Act, legislation introduced by State 

Assemblyman Jack O'Connell following the McGrath spill, was to be one means of 

compiling this information. The legislation called for an 

inventory of pipelines 

located outside specific oil leases; pipelines within leases 

are exempt from this 

inventory. This inventory was 

intended to examine pipeline pressure, temperature, 

condition and ownership, 

as well 

as regular maintenance received and maintenance 

required. According to one Ventura County planner, the 

survey has been 

"surprisingly disappointing" in generating data regarding pipeline location and the 

relative risks of various types of pipelines, 

as 

the sample size was not adequate to 

accurately estimate what risks 

are associated with each type of pipeline. 

107 
Oil's current impact and influence 

Petroleum remains the 

among 

largest property tax revenue sources for 

Ventura County, annually vying with agriculture for top honors (oil's tax 

contribution to the county was approximately $4,722,406 in 1995-96, with agriculture 

close behind at $4,455,058). The industry still has strong influence, especially in 

regard to regulation of Ventura County's numerous and in 

some cases deteriorating 

pipelines. A proposal from the Office of Oil Enforcement (part of the Ventura 

County Planning Department) to investigate the spills of the early 1990s and seek 

possible preventative measures was declined by the Ventura County Board of 

Supervisors in 1995. One informant characterized the board's rationale 

as, "Oil and 

gas have been very, very good to us." 

Nevertheless, oil is part of an increasingly diverse county economy. Fifteen 

years ago, offshore oil support vessels made up almost all of the Port of Hueneme's 

business; in the past decade offshore support has declined to about 10 percent of the 

Port's income. As offshore development began to decline, the Port made 

a 

deliberate effort to diversify, including expansion of international trade. The City of 

Port Hueneme, which is independent from the port itself, is currently experiencing 

an 

influx of retirees and others in search of inexpensive beach-side living. This new 

population is more involved in environmental 

concerns, pushing the city to 

preserve 

the ocean views through the use of wide setbacks with beach development. 

Along Ventura Avenue, new businesses 

are replacing the oil support 

industries that once dotted the 

area; 

these include the corporate headquarters for 

Kinko's Copies (employing 315), and Lost Arrow Corporation! Patagoma Inc. 

(employing 300). These companies not only replace oil industry employment with 

non-extractive jobs; they may, as 

is the 

case with Patagonia, contribute to local 

environmental 

causes (see above). 

And while county government appears to still honor oil, some regulatory 

questions are now out of local governments' hands. Air quality, for instance, must 

meet federal standards to prevent penalties to the county-wide district. Ventura 

County's status as a non-attainment area motivates reduction in emissions from all 

point-source polluters, including the oil industry. Thus despite the county's 

relative leniency toward oil, local regulatory agencies have 

an 

incentive to see 

that 

oil works in environmentally sensitive ways. 

108 
Conclusion: Factors Influencing Ventura County Development 

Oil 

as First Mover 

Oil was one of Ventura County's first industries and played 

a strong role in 

shaping the county's infrastructure, sociodemographics, and political climate. Oil's 

pedigree has lent it legitimacy through its contributions for public works and its 

status, for many years, as 

the area's top industrial employer. The persistence of oil 

workers in the community confers a type of informal familiarity and respect. The 

town elders 

are, 

in many cases, oil folk. 

Because oil prospectors were among the original Yankee settlers, those who 

came after found a 

landscape already doffed with oil wells and criss-crossed by 

pipelines. Early towns serviced the nearby oil patches of the Santa Clara River 

Valley, and oil companies built much of the county's original infrastructure. The 

land was never "virgin" to most people's 

eyes, as oil drilling regions were well 

demarcated before current residents arrived, and oil companies owned vast acreage 

in mineral rights beneath many landowners' properties. Some new property 

owners, unaware of oil's legacy in the Ventura County back country, are surprised 

(sometimes unpleasantly) to find oil companies have the right to drill under their 

property. 

Other types of land uses have had to accommodate to oil's presence rather 

than the other way around. Oil fields attracted not only supply companies and 

refineries, but inexpensive housing and taverns. These land uses persisted even as 

the oil declined, leaving economically depressed and poorly planned 

areas in need 

of city or county attention. In the city of Ventura, degradation at Ventura Avenue 

led new retail businesses to leapfrog into East Ventura; investments in 

a new retail 

area 

induced disinvestment in the existing downtown. 

Similarly, because the oil industry's interest in the ocean front was as a utility 

port, the uses nearby were not amenable for tourism. When a site was needed for 

the 101 freeway through town, the beach-front land suggested itself 

- 

for one reason 

because it was flat, but for another because its uses made it relatively cheap to 

acquire and its residents (many low-income Mexican Americans) were less able to 

resist than those living in more affluent parts of 

town. In this way, the freeway and 

related beach-area infrastructure inhibits tourism and other beach-oriented 

development. 

A final effect of oil having 

come first, or at least early, is the continuing 

exemption of old physical plant and machinery from contemporary environmental 

standards. This gives "old oil" 

an enduring impact on 

the 

area, 

including the 

creation of 

some resentment toward the industry 

among 

those who 

came 

later. 

109 
Compatible Industries: Agriculture and oil work together 

The only other early industry of significance in the county was agriculture. 

With the exception of the Ventura Avenue field, oil in Ventura county has been 

found mainly in canyons and hillsides; land where farming would be unfeasible. 

The families who owned farms displaced by development of the Avenue oil field 

still receive royalties; 

some descendants have become quite wealthy. Although 

some tensions have developed between citrus farmers and oil operators, for the 

most part these conflicts have been resolved through changes in the oil industry's 

operations and! or financial compensation for damage. Unlike much 

environmental litigation, these 

cases do not generate the ideological heat 

seen in 

places like Santa Barbara. 

Land Ozvnership: Persistence of large holdings 

Even though most of the Mexican landholders lost their ranchos 

soon after 

Americanization, many of these tracts were sold in their entirety 

- 

in 

some cases 

even growing larger over time. Arrangements with very few parties were 

thus 

necessary to gain access for unfettered oil exploration; this was 

the 

case on Ventura 

Avenue, where large holdings prevented the scramble seen in other oil regions for 

"town lot" sized leases. The largest single parcel of Ventura County land was 

actually owned by 

an oil prospecting firm. While subdivided 

over 

the years, parcels 

remained big, 

as much as several thousand 

acres through the mid-twentieth 

century.82 These large holdings would become the basis of suburban tract 

communities during the coming boom 

- homogenous suburban cities lacking 

downtowns or a sense of tradition or cohesiveness. 

Geography: Far and 

near 

Ventura County's history has been 

a struggle for linkages with the rest of the 

world; 

even as oil came in, limited 

access to markets inhibited other development 

from following. The struggle for 

a reliable coastal route took the form of 

a wooden 

causeway, followed by 

a 

two-lane highway and finally the current four-lane freeway 

along the land that is sometimes 

a very narrow 

shelf between steep hills and the 

ocean. The beaches of northwest Ventura County were 

largely ifiled 

over to provide 

stable roadbeds, and tourists 

are now forced 

to wait for low tides 

to see what remains 

of 

a once sandy beach. The 101 freeway through Ventura proper had 

a 

similar effect, 

but here it was the beach-side neighborhood rather than the beach itself that was 

paved over. Anxious to alleviate the traffic congestion caused by the original 

82 Examples mdude the McGrath holdings 

on 

the Oxnard plain (5,000 acres) (Bodle 1979: 138), the Janss 

ranch in the Conejo Valley (10,000 acres) (Bidwell 1989: 35) and Rancho Camarillo (10,000 acres) 

(White 1979: 64). 

110 
highway route through downtown, planners agreed to a new freeway route which 

created 

a canyon between the historic downtown business district and the beach. As 

a result, the city of Ventura is easy to drive through, and many tourists do just that. 

The 

same freeway construction 

spree 

that left northwest Ventura County 

without 

easy beach access brought the formerly isolated eastern section of the county 

closer 

to Los Angeles. The result was the suburban tract-home boom of the 1950s1970s that gives almost half the county an 

identity of 

a Los Angeles suburb, rather 

than 

a central California county. New citizens bring to their 

new county a zeal for 

good air and low crime (the 

reason they "escaped" from L.A.) but do not step into a 

very well-developed structure of civic organizations. 

The Political Climate: Weak environnen talisin 

Compared to the 

two counties to the North, Ventura County fosters 

a 

low 

level of environmental activism, in part due 

to traditional dependence on oil, in 

part due to conditions that have not created 

- with the exception of small Ojai 

- a 

very strong basis for robust challenges to industry. But this too may be changing 

as 

suburbanites protect their good life and 

as 

the oil industry keeps decreasing 

as a 

proportion of local employment and 

as a civic presence in other realms. 

Prospects for the Future 

Oil is no longer the industrial giant that it once was in Ventura County. 

While 

a rise in oil prices could provide the incentive needed to drill 

new wells or 

invest in secondary 

recovery operations at older ones, even a rejuvenated oil 

industry could not dominate the county the way oil once did. Several factors 

underlie this assumption: the continuing diversification of Ventura County's 

economy, a shift in Ventura county's population 

as natives are replaced by more 

and more "urban refugees" from nearby Los Angeles, and the 

emergence of 

an 

environmental consciousness among county residents. 

As discussed above, Ventura County's 

economy has greatly diversified since 

oiFs reign in the 1940s and 1950s. High technology firms 

are a leader in this change, 

as research and development 

as well 

as manufacturing firms "leapfrog" into 

Ventura County from Los Angeles and the San Fernando Valley. While 

some of 

these firms depend on defense or aerospace contracting (often working in tandem 

with the Naval bases at Point Mugu and Port Hueneme), many operate 

independently of military contracting and 

are 

therefore relatively stable. Civic 

leaders-throughout--the--connty, and especially in the eastern communities of Simi 

Valley and Thousand Oaks, expressed 

a desire to attract such industries, 

as well as 

corporate headquarters. As these corporations and their employees continue to 

emigrate from Los Angeles County, their relative significance in Ventura County's 

111 
economy wifi increase 

as oil's decreases. We expect that the development of coastal 

tourism will have 

a similar effect, although this industry's weight in Ventura 

County will not likely approach that 

seen in Santa Barbara, or even San Luis Obispo 

County. 

Importantly, many relocating firms 

are attracted to Ventura Cowity by those 

amenities 

seen as 

lacking in Los Angeles 

- most notably clean air, open space, and 

low crime rates. Even in those 

areas 

less successful in attracting new businesses (e.g. 

Fillmore, Santa Paula), increasing suburban development means that those 

residents who remember oil's contribution to Ventura County are gradually being 

replaced by those seeking 

an alternative to Los Angeles. While these new residents 

may not appear environmentaYst by the standards of San Luis Obispo or Santa 

Barbara Counties, civic leaders in these suburban 

areas indicated to us 

the 

importance of maintaining these amenities that have attracted many residents 

over 

the past 30 years (recall that Thousand Oaks and Simi Valley both supported the 

1972 Coastal Act, as well 

as ballot measures for open space and parkiands). 

Some residents and 

some area firms have expressed 

a willingness to take 

activist positions against county development, including oil. County government 

has proven responsive to citizen complaints (recall the permit modifications 

required of back country oil operators) and has shown 

a willingness to comply with 

state and federal environmental regulations. However, neither Ventura County 

residents nor county level government have sought proactive measures to increase 

regulation of the oil industry such 

as 

those 

seen further north. The regulations 

implemented in Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties have not only slowed 

the pace of Channel drilling (thus stuffing potential economic gains by those 

Ventura County support companies still dependent on offshore development), the 

organizations behind these measures have influenced Ventura County activists. 

These activists might call on Santa Barbara's environmentalist network if 

new 

drilling projects were proposed off Ventura County's shore. 

Rather than being 

a county that oil could depend upon, Ventura County has 

been gaining 

a mix of 

uses and orientations more typical of coastal 

areas in the state 

as a whole. While not headed to be 

a bastion of 

new age environmentalism, it will 

likely become "normalized" by California coastal standards. Faced with the prospect 

of additional offshore development, we would expect Ventura's voters to act like 

the state's other coastal regions. 

112 
Community event 

Oil industry/development event 

[Italics indicate non-local event] 

Appendix A: 

Ventura County Timeline 

(Digits following 

year indicate month of event.) 

1782.03: Mission San Buenaventura founded (Reith 1963: 12). 

1848: Mexican American War ends, California becomes US territory. 

Simultaneous discovery of gold in Northern California stimulates westward 

migration (Reith 1963: 83-4). 

1856: San Buenaventura described by visitor Henry Miller 

as "quite 

a village of 

70 or 80 houses." Anglo population of 

town is 9 in 1858, 21 in 1862 

(Reith 1963: 90-1). 

1861: George Shoobridge Gilbert builds first petroleum refinery in 

California at east boundary of Rancho Santa Ana (land leased fro 

Juan Camarillo) 

to manufacture lubricating oil and kerosene. 

Refinery is destroyed by fire May 2, 1861. A second explosion later 

drives Gilbert out of petroleum business; he becomes 

a merchant in 

Ventura (Fry 1983: 17). 

1862: Rancho Santa Paula Y Saticov purchased by horticulturist George G. Briggs 

to found fruit orchard and temperance colony. Subdivided in 1867 after fruit 

trees are stunted by 1863-64 drought; tracts average 150 

acres (Triem 1985: 70). 

1866: City of San Buenaventura is incorporated (Reith 1963: 92). 

1867: Thomas Bard's well number 6 in upper Ojai Valley yields 15 

to 20 barrels 

per day of good quality oil, but financial strain on 

company leads T. A. Scott to order drilling halt (Fry 1983: 20). 

1871: Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors incorporates Hueneme Wharf 

and Lighter Company, begins construction of 

a pier at Hueneme. Upon 

completion later that 

year, Hueneme is first 'true wharf" on California Coast 

between Santa Cruz and San Pedro (Hutchinson 1965: 186). 

1872: Nathan W. Blanchard and Elisha L. Bradley purchase 2,700 

acres of Rancho 

Santa Paula Y Saticoy; pair plans town of Santa Paula in 1873 and formally record 

plot in 1875 (Triem 1985: 70). 
Community event 

Oil industry/development event 

[Italics indictzte non-local event I 

1873.01: State Assembly bill divides Santa Barbara County, making the southern 

half what is now Ventura County. Nominations for County seat include 

Ventura (238 votes), Saticoy (156 votes) and Hueneme (214 votes); major rift was 

developing between communities north and south of the Santa Clara River 

(Hutchinson 1965: 211, 225). 

1874: First large scale subdivision and promotion effort in Ventura County is 

Royes Gaylord Surdham's promotion of Ojai. Surdham mails brochures to 

Eastern doctors encouraging them 

to send incurable patients to Ojai, advertises 

that he will donate land to someone willing to build 

a hotel. Abram Blumberg 

opens hotel on donated site April 11, 1874 (Fry 1983: 25). 

1874: Newbury Park is settled, named for early settler John Newbury (originally 

of Santa Barbara) who made his home there until great drought of 1879-77 forced 

family into bankruptcy. Post office attached to Newbury Park name is moved 

around the Conejo Valley until 1908 when it finds permanent site in 

contemporary Newbury Park (Triem 1985: 114). 

1875.11: First edition of Ventura Free Press (Hutchinson 1965: 181). 

1876: Juan Camarillo purchases 10,000 

acre Rancho Calleguas, eventually 

establishes successful vegetable, citrus and walnut production (Project 

Development Co.: 5). 

1881: T. A. Scott's death means 

that agent Thomas Bard must subdivide and sell 

Scott's land holdings, including Rancho Ojai; lots 

are advertised in Ventura Signal 

at $1-20 per acre 

(Fry 1983: 21). 

1883: Wallace Hardison and Lvmon Stewart (founders of Union 

Oil Company) drill first well in Pico Canyon, east Ventura County. 

Well is abandoned when drilling tools 

are 

lost (Triem 1985: 214). 

1886: Union Oil constructs four inch oil pipeline from Newhall to 

Ventura, where product is shipped to San Francisco (Reith 1963: 

131). 

1887: First land boom in Ojai Valley marks transition between 

a 

time of resident 

farmers and 

a new era of wealthy investors and speculators who bring 'new 

ideas' to the 

area (Fry 1983: 106). 

1887: Southern Pacific Railroad arrives at San Buenaventura via Nevhall and 

Santa Clara River valley, including Santa Paula and Fillmore. The name San 

Buenaventura is too long to fit on railroad timetables and is shortened to 

Ventura, which is the 

common name 

(although not the legal name) of the 

present city (Reith 1963: 113-4). 

114 
Community event 

Oil industry/development event 

[Italics indicate non-local event] 

1887: Thomas Bard brings in Los Angeles investors to form Simi Land and 

Water Company; hotel is built 

on knoll at East end of Simi Valley to attract 

potential buyers. Two to three dozen settlers 

are attracted to area 

(farming 

mainly barley), but few stay (Triem 1985: 90-91). 

1887: Union Oil refinery opens in Santa Paula with 14,000 barrel per 

day capacity; products include asphalt, grease, 

lubricants and 

illuminating oils (Triem 1985: 214). 

1888: Hardison and Stewart drill California's first big producer," 

Adams Canyon Number 16 (near Santa Paula) (Triem 1985: 214). 

1889: Sherman Day Thatcher moves to Ojai Valley with brothers Edward and 

George, in hopes that the climate will cure George's ill health. Sherman, 

a Yale 

graduate, earns money 

tutoring local boys (Fry 1983: 67-68). 

1890.10: Union Oil incorporates; Hardison, Stewart and Bard are 

officers. Bard retires in 1900 after election to US Senate (Triem 

1985: 215). 

1890: Santa Paula population triples; oil and citrus are main industries (the 

Limoneira Company is the main citrus grower and processor) (Union Oil 

Museum, Santa Paula). 

1891: Sherman Thatcher leads drive to secure private funding for a spur 

line of 

the railroad to Ojai. Thirteen men pledge 

a 

total of 53,250, one 

sixth of the 

necessary funds (Fry 1983: 124). 

1892: First telephone in Ojai connects livery stable and Gaily Cottages (Fry 1983: 

146). 

1892: Ojai Asphalt Company exports twenty tons of paving 

material. Its mine was 

later closed due to financial difficulties (Fry 

1983: 205). 

1892: First recorded oil spill occurs when Union Oil's Adams field 

sends 1,500 barrels per day into Ventura County's Santa Clara River 

and the ocean (Johnson and Nye 1979: 191). 

1893: Sherman Day Thatcher provides majority of funding for first Ojai public 

library, with condition that the library be named for his deceased brother, George. 

Additional funding provided by members of the Congregational Church, as well 

as 

in-kind donations (Fry 1983: 120). 

1893: Students at Thatcher invite all corners to first Ojai Tennis tournament, 

held at Thatcher School. Contest is later formalized in 1899 when multiple 

divisions 

are organized (Fry 1983: 249-251). 

115 
Community event 

Oil industry/development event 

[Italics indicate non-local event] 

1895: Fire destroys shacks that comprised Thatcher School; Thatcher decides to 

build more permanent structures (Fry 1983: 68). 

1895: Forty-seven producing wells in Ventura County (Reith 

1963: 131-2). 

1895 (c.): First telephone installed in Santa Paula connects Union 

Oil founder William Hardison's home to the Adams Canyon oil 

fields (Union Oil Museum, Santa Paula). 

1898: Oxnard brothers build 

sugar refinery at Oxnard following success of local 

sugar beet production. Southern Pacific Railroad arrives in Oxnard that year, 

making Oxnard, not Hueneme, the center of agricultural transportation in 

Ventura County Triem 1985: 94, 101). 

1900: Citrus eclipses oil 

as main industry in Santa Paula until big 

strike at South Mountain in 1916 initiates 

a new 10 year boom 

(Triem 1985: 109). 

1900: Moorpark (named for the Moorpark apricot) is platted on subdivided ranch 

belonging to Simi Land and Water Company chief Robert Poindexter; Southern 

Pacific Milling Company, grain warehouses, and beet dumps 

are established by 

1904, newspaper by 1910 (Triem 1985: 112). 

1900: Union Oil moves headquarters to Los Angeles (Union Oil 

Museum, Santa Paula). 

1903: City of Oxnard is incorporated; population is 2,200. Jobs at the sugar 

refinery valy from 50 in off 

season to 700 at peak (Triem 1985: 98-100). 

1903: Coalition of Mexican and Japanese farm laborers strike on Oxnard Plain, 

demanding higher wages. This unique multi-ethnic alliance won 

increased 

control over agricultural labor contracting (Almaguer 1994: Chapter 7). 

1903: Founding of Ojai Citizens League and their vigilance group, 

the 

Committee of 15 

- 

charged with law enforcement and promotion of good 

citizenship. In 1904 the committee organize the planting of pepper trees along 

Ojai Avenue, most of which still stand (Fry 1983: 128-9). 

1903: Ventura's City Beautiful League is formed. Projects include tree planting 

and street paving Triem 1985: 105). 

o 1903: Nine wells drilled in Ventura River bed to supply Ventura 

and Sant-a Paula with natural gas for domestic use. Project yield-s 

10,000-15,000 cubic feet per day but is short-lived (Reith 1963: 132). 

1903: Over 100 railroad 

cars 

leave Ojai filled with oranges; over 500 cars full by 

1950 (Fry 1983: 211-212). 

116 
Community event 

Oil industry/development event 

[Italics indicate non-local eventl 

1903-9: Two hundred producing wells in Ventura County; total 

production of 30,000 barrels per day (Reith 1963: 132). 

1904: Coast Railroad established through Simi Valley Triem 1985: 90). 

1910: Camarillo (originally Pleasant Valley) is platted with Southern Pacific 

depot at its center, as well 

as walnut and bean warehouses (Triem 1985: 113). 

1910: Gaston Melies locates Star Film Stock Company in Santa Paula; most 

famous film made in 3-year endeavor is The Ghost of Sulphur Mountain" 

Triem 1985: 109). 

1911: Patterson Ranch is subdivided in Simi Valley (five to 15 acre parcels). Well 

water allowed for citrus and walnut orchards; two more subdivisions soon 

follow (in 1918 and 1920). Simi Valley citizens travel to Moorpark or Oxnard, 

however for banking and shopping (Triem 1985: 111). 

1911: dontebello Oil Company's find south of Santa Clara river 

marks beginning of boom which changes face of Fillmore; many 

citrus orchards are subdivided to make home lots for oil industry 

workers. Central Avenue's wooden buildings 

are replaced with 

stone and brick buildings, including homes of Fillmore State Bank 

in 1906 and 

a Masonic Temple in 1919 (Triem 1985: 110). 

1914.04: Glass magnate arid part-time Ojai resident Edward Libbey announces 

improvement plans at town meeting of 87 men. Ideas are enthusiastically 

received, and Libbey hires San Diego architect Richard S. Requa, who designs 

Spanish-style arcade to re-vamp Ojai's downtown shopping district. Merchants 

pledge $10 per 

frontage foot 

to project, and Libbev assumes any additional 

financial responsibility. Construction project requires removal of several 

buildings, but oak trees are carefully left intact (Fry 1983: 169-170). 

1914: Electricity from San Fernando Valley supplies Simi Valley and Moorpark 

(Triem 1985: 141). 

1914: Fillmore is incorporated (named for Southern Pacific executive J. P. 

Fillmore) (Triem 1985: 81). 

1915: Army Corps of Engineers recommends building 

a 

jetty to protect the 

Ventura harbor from sand deposited by the Ventura River. The report cites the 

advantages of the Ventura port (over Hueneme) for shipping oil by gravity 

pipeline" from the Santa Clara River Valley fields to tankers. The 

recommendation is rejected due to what was then a 

low level of port traffic 

(Reith 1963: 124-5). 

1916: Shell Oil Co. acquires 13,000 acres of Lloyd lease and drills first 

well on Taylor Ranch Triem 1985: 119). 

117 
Community event 

Oil industry/development event 

[Italics indicate non-local event] 

1917.03: Ojai's name is officially changed to "Ojai" from Nordhoff (after Charles 

Nordhoff, whose writings about the beauty of Southern California enticed early 

setfiers) (Fry 1983: 176). 

1918: 9..infrzPaulafl2ilyQironide claims Santa Paula to have largest 

acreage 

in 

lemons; major lemon groves 

from 170-868 acres are enormous compared 

to 

average California farm size of 15 acres (Triem 1985: 109). 

1919.01: Ventura Refinery Company operating at full capacity in 

Fillmore (Triem 1985: 110). 

1919: Shell's Gosnell Number 1 comes 

in at 1200 barrels per day 

- 

first big Avenue producer (I'riem 1985: 119). 

1920s: Oil is loaded to tankers at Ventura by submerged pipeline. 

This practice was so common 

that when the wharf was destroyed by 

a storm in 1926, it was already obsolete (Reith 1963: 125). 

1920s: Rapid development of tract homes in western part of Ventura, near 

Avenue. Machine shops and other support facilities begin to replace Avenue 

farms and packing houses. The Avenue 

area 

is not incorporated, and city of 

Ventura has no ability to tax oil field or to control ensuing development. As 

gambling is permitted in unincorporated 

areas, poker 

rooms are common; 

low 

income groups come to dominate West Ventura 

as better homes and 

developments are kept 

away by "rough" oil industry occupants (Reith 1963: 139- 

40). 

o 1920s: Subdivision of old Newbury Ranch into Greenwich Village and 

Thousand Oaks (name is suggested by 

a 

local schoolboy in a contest sponsored by 

Los Angeles Developers). Greenwich Village name eventually dropped. 

Development is slowed by depression, 

as well as unstable water supply (Triern 

1985: 115). 

1923: Ojai Valley Inn and Country Club, commissioned by Edward Libbey 

as a 

"gift" 

to the community, is completed. Architect Wallace Neff of Pasadena 

receives a certificate of honor from the California Architectural Board for his 

design. The club served wealthy families of the 

area 

through the depression, but 

was closed in 1932 and utilized by the military in 1942, reopening in 1947 to 

become a resort (Fry 1983: 90-91). 

1924: Theosophist Albert P. Warrington moves his Krotona center from 

Hollywood (where the burgeoning motion picture industry was crowding him) 

to Ojai, 

a place he felt was "impregnated with occult and ps-vchic influencec' 

(quoted in Fry 1983: 245). 

118 
Community event 

Oil industry/development event 

[italics indicate non-local event] 

1925: Lloyd Number 9A, drified to 5,150 feet, yields 4,870 barrels per 

day, the first big Avenue find. Most Avenue development at this 

time is by Shell Oil (45%) and Tidewater Associated (40%); a 

small 

number of developers means 

fairly orderly exploration and 

development (Reith 1963: 136-7). 

1926: Associated Oil and Shell Oil each produce 15,000 barrels per 

day at Avenue sites; General Petroleum produces 6,000 barrels per 

day (Triem 1985: 119). 

1929: Depression slows exploratory drilling; Ventura area property 

values fall 

as much 

as 60% compared to earlier boom days (Reith 

1963: 144). 

1929: Opening of Pacific Coast Highway provides coastal access between Oxnard 

and Los Angeles Triem 1985: 122). 

1930: Fritz Huntsinger founds Ventura Tool Company (later 

VETCO) Triem 1985: 119). 

1937: Ojai is used 

as Shangri-La in Ronald Coleman's LostHorizon (Fr 1983: 249). 

1940.06: Deep water port at Hueneme is completed; project is undertaken with 

private funds on 

land donated by Thomas Bard. A fish cannery and kelp 

processing plant also occupy 

the site (Triem 1985: 134). 

1942: Port Hueneme and surrounding land 

are appropriated by US Navy for 

development of Naval Advanced Base Depot (later known as 

the Construction 

Battalion Center). Base was staging area for construction materials and training 

center for Seabees. 10,000 civilians and 21,000 military personnel were employed, 

and new subdivisions developed in Oxnard and Hueneme to accommodate 

influx (Triem 1985: 134-36). 

1946: US Navy acquires Point Mugu for Naval Air Missile Test Center (now 

Pacific Missile Test Center) despite resistance from local ranchers who feared 

effects on their land and expressed 

concern about safety of nearby communities. 

First missile launched in 1947 (Triem 1985: 136). 

1947: First electric collapsible rig is developed on Ventura Avenue. 

New rig 

can be picked up and moved to a new 

location, reducing 

the cost of exploration (Paul 1947). 

1947: Sears store at Highway 126 in Ventura is catalyst for development of new 

shopping district in East Ventura; city 

area nearly doubles between f947 and '11962 

(Reith 1963: 150). 

119 
Community event 

Oil industry/development event 

[Italics indicate non-local event 

I 

1947: Standard oil makes major find on Oxnard Plain, but fire 

destroys rig. Rebuilt derrick is blown out by high pressure mud, and 

Standard stations guards around perimeter of operation fearing 

encroachment on what may be 

a major find. City of Ventura 

considers leasing its money-losing municipal golf 

course to 

Standard, 

as 

the land abuts the new find (Ventura Free-Press, 

April 7, 1947: 3 and April 16, 1947: 2). 

1948: Matilija Dam is completed, designed to supply Ojai Valley. Darn is found 

unsafe in 1965 and notched to reduce capacity (Triem 1985: 140). 

1949: Automobile traffic replaces most use of Ventura River and Ojai Valley 

Railroad; train remains in service only during orange harvest (last trip in 1955). 

1969 flood necessitates removal of remaining tracks (Fry 1983: 126). 

1949: Seismic exploration off Ventura County coast is curbed due to 

negative impact on fishing (Ventura Free-Press, July 9, 1949: 1). 

1950: Population of Conejo Valley at 3,000; 1970 population is 35,000; Simi Valley 

at 5,000 in 1950 and 59,832 in 1970 (Triem 1985: 139). 

1950s: Exploratory rig on Maricopa highway 

angers 

lower Ojai 

Valley residents, who object to noise and unsightliness. Well 

produced only salt water (Fry 1983: 204). 

1950s: City of Camariio advocates the building of new 101 freeway through 

downtown, hoping 

to attract new residents to the community; although 

CalTrans advocated building highway 

to the South, Conejo Grade route is 

chosen alter 

a push by victory for the Camarillo Chamber of Commerce. 

Dissatisfied with the bifurcation of their city, Camarillo residents attempted 

(unsuccessfully) in the 1970s to have the freeway relocated to the South 

(I'riern 1985: 137-38). 

1951: Texaco refinery at Fillmore closes after 36 years of operation; 

production is transferred 

to Torrance where Ventura County oil is 

already shipped by pipeline. Most of the thirty employees accept 

Texaco's offer of jobs in Los Angeles 

area 

refineries (Ventwn FreePress, March 10, 1951). 

1952: Oxnard Air Force Base is established at Carnarillo Triem 1985: 136). 

1954: Casitas Dam is built 

as 

joint project of Bureau of Reclamation and Ventura 

River Municipal Water District (Triem 1985: 140). 

1954: First sound-proof derrick installed in Ventura County 

(Ventum Free-Press, July 8, 1954: 1). 

120 
Community event 

Oil industry/development event 

[Italics indicate non-local event] 

1954.03: Mclnnes well Number 2 on Oxnard plain blows out in 

middle of the night, spewing uncontrollably 

- 

approximately 2,500 

barrels 

a day. Well is brought under control the following day 

(Ventum Free-Press, June 30-July 1, 1954: 1). 

1954: Production from Avenue wells peaks, declining each 

following year (Reith 1963). 

1955: State legislature 

passes 

the Shell-Cunningham Tidelands Act, 

which clarifies state tidelands development and leasing by 

granting tidelands authority to State Lands Commission, 

creating the development-free Santa Barbara Oil Sanctuary 

(adjacent to the Santa Barbara urban/suburban 

area, extending from 

Coal Oil Point to Summerland Bay), and (3) authorizing 

development elsewhere 

on 

the Channel with one new 

requirement: 

a 200-diry waiting period between application for 

drilling rights and granting of rights (Lima 1994; Johnson and Ne 

1979: 194). 

1955: After development of 101 freeway, Conejo Valley landholder Janss Valley 

Corporation begins master plan for community of Thousand Oaks. Janss lures 

Northrop, Packard Bell, Westinghouse, and the North American Aviation 

Science Center to the Conejo Valley/Thousand Oaks Triern 1985: 115, 139). 

1956: Ojai Architectural Board of Review is established; of five members, one 

must be 

a 

trained architect, and one must be 

a 

licensed contractor. Charges 

include reviewing size, style and color of new construction in accordance with 

city's "unique character' (Fry 1983: 236-7). 

1958: Landslide on Ventura Avenue causes upwards of $1 million in 

damage ( Ventuin Star-Free Press, April 7, 1958). 

* 1957: Amendments to Shell-Cunningham Tidelands Act create sliding 

royalties scale which is decried 

as exorbitant by many oil industry firms. 

State tidelands leasing is suspended for 

one year until amendments 

are 

approved (Welty and Taylor, 229; Lima 1994). 

' 1959: Southern California Edison completes Mandalay Steam plant at Oxnard 

(Triem 1985: 141). 

1960s: Los Angeles Metropolitan Water District agrees to provide water to Simi, 

Conejo and Las Posas Valleys Triem 1985: 139). 

1964: City of Camarillo incorporates (Project Development Co.: 5). 

1964: City of Thousand Oaks incorporates, later annexing Newbury Park and the 

Ventura County portion of Westlake Village (Project Development Co.: 7). 

121 
Community event 

Oil industry/development event 

[Italics indicate non-local event] 

1964: Rocky Mountain Drilling and Drilling and Exploration fold; 

both 

are major Ventura County employers. Drilling and 

Exploration to continue operation in the Middle East (Ventura FreePress, September 14, 1964). 

1966: Completion of Simi Valley-San Fernando Freeway over Santa Susana Pass; 

Highway 118 (Los Angeles to Simi) would not be completed until the 1980s 

(]i'riem 1985: 139). 

1966.12: Federal leasing in Channel begins with the sale to Phillips 

Petroleum of Drainage Tract OCS P-0166 in the Carpinteria Field. 

Phillips Platform Hogan, the first offshore platform in federal OCS 

waters in the Santa Barbara Channel, is installed the next year, 

piping its oil 

to La Conchita for processing (Lima 1994: 244; Johnson 

and Nye 1979: 197). 

1968.08: Army Corps of Engineers approves Unocal permit to 

construct Platform A over Santa Barbara protests concerning the 

lack of 

a public hearing. The platform is installed later that year, 

along with Platforms B and Houchin. Although located near 

Summerland, Platforms A and B pipe their oil to Unocal's Rincon 

facility, in Ventura County, for processing (Johnson and Nye 1979: 

198; Sollen, forthcoming: Appendix B). 

1969: \Jentura county beaches 

are covered with oil after Union 

blowout in Santa Barbara Channel; Ventura County Environmental 

Coalition is founded in 1970 in response (Triem 1985: 141). 

1969.06: In 

a 3-2 vote, Ventura County supervisors reject 

a proposed 

Sun Oil processing facility at La Conchita. The facility would have 

been the third in 

a 

small section of northern Ventura County coast 

(Sarthi Barbara News-Press, June 25, 1969: A4). 

1970: A wave of environmental legislation is enacted in the wake 

of the Santa Barbara Channel oil spill. The National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and (by November) California 

Environmental Qualiiij Act (CEQA) become law, requiring 

Environmental Impact Statements and Environmental Impact 

Reports, respectively, prior to approval of development projects. In 

July, President Nixon establishes the Environmental Protection 

Agency and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration. The Federal Wtiter Quality Act and Clean Air Act 

are also enacted in. the same year 

(Johnson and Nyc 1979: 229; 

Easton 1972: 236). 

122 
Community event 

Oil industry/development event 

[Italics indicate non-local event I 

1971: Ventura Avenue oil companies begin efforts at beautifying 

their operations; Shell plants 800 trees between highway 33 (the 

road from Ventura to Ojai) and its processing plant. Field 

equipment is painted "autumn gold and 

cypress green"; abandoned 

wells 

are 

sealed off, and 

sumps are scraped, re-filled, and planted. 

(Paul 1971). 

1971.01: California's State Lands Commission lifts ban on new 

development in state tidelands (Johnson and Nyc 1979: 216). 

1972: Southern California Edison completes Ormond Beach plant between Point 

Mugu and Oxnard Triem 1985: 141). 

1972: Ventura County voters narrowly approve California Coastal Act, creating 

the California Coastal Commission. Support is strongest in Ojai and the newer 

suburbs, including Thousand Oaks and Simi Valley (Ventura County Elections 

Division). The California Coastal Commission now enters the state tidelands 

offshore development issue and ends State lands Commission-oil industry 

domination. The Federal Coastal Zone Management Act and Clean Water Act 

are also enacted in the 

same year (Johnson and Nye 1979: 217-18). 

1973: First Energy Crisis begins. Oil shortage due 

to OPEC embargo 

leads to a drive for greater American 

energy 

self-reliance and 

independence through new energy sources and conservation 

(Lima 1994). 

0 1977.12.21: Chevron applies for permit to build subsea pipelines 

from proposed Platform Grace (in federal waters, 12 miles west of 

Oxnard) 

to operating Platform Hope (in state waters) and expand its 

Carpinteria operations (Graves and Simon 1980: 319). 

1978: Ventura County Government Center is dedicated in East Ventura 

(Triem 1985: 140). 

1978.08: Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act amendments are passed 

by US Congress, requiring OCS developers to meet county air 

emission standards (Graves and Simon 1980: 72). 

1979: Federal Lease Sale 48 offers 148 OCS tracts from Point 

Conception to Mexico border. Results in 9 active leases covering 

23,040 

acres and two offshore platforms (Harvest and Hermosa) 

erected in the next 6 years (Sollen, forthcoming, Appendix B). 

123 
Community event 

Oil industry/development event 

[Italics indicate non-local eventl 

1979.03: At Chevron Santa Clara Unit hearing, Chumash and 

Candeleria Indian representatives 

express concerns about 

Carpinteria-to-Rincon pipelines impacts on 4 archaeological sites. 

Chevron 

agrees to restore sites after excavation (Graves and Simon 

1980: 330). 

1979.07: Get Oil Out! (GOO) lawsuit to prohibit construction of 

Platform Grace, which had threatened Chevron's Santa Clara Unit 

plans, is defeated in federal court (Graves and Simon 1980: 333). 

1979.09: Santa Barbara County Planning Commission approves 

Chevron's expanded Santa Clara Unit project, due west of Oxnard, 

bringing 2 year Effi/permitting process to end (Graves and Simon 

1980: 334). 

1979: Platforms Grace (Chevron) and Henry (Sun Oil) 

are 

installed 

in Santa Clara Unit and Carpinteria Field, respectively, of the Santa 

Barbara Channel (Sollen, forthcoming: Appendix B). 

1980: Unocal's Platforms Gilda and Gina 

are 

installed off Ventura 

County in the Hueneme and Santa Clara fields, respectively. These 

are 

the first 

ever fully electrified platforms installed in the Channel, 

a change requested by the Ventura County Air Pollution Control 

District (Sollen, forthcoming: Appendix B). 

1980.03: US Supreme Court decision allows Gulf Oil to drill in Los 

Padres National Forest without securing permits through Ventura 

County; decision sets precedent for drilling in national forests 

throughout the country (Ventura Star-Free Press, March 31, 1980). 

1981: Federal Lease Sale 68 offers 140 OCS tracts from Point 

Conception to the Mexico border. Results in 4 active leases covering 

15,860 acres (oil companies bid $117.9 million for 35 OCS lease 

tracts). Public hearings held in Santa Barbara attract few Ventura 

County participants; most of those in attendance represent oil or oil 

support companies (Bureau of Land Management; Sollen, 

forthcoming: Appendix A). 

1983: Cities of Santa Paula, Fillmore, Port Hueneme and Ventura 

formally 

oppose Senator Pete Wilson's proposed moratorium on 

OCS leasing off California's coast (S. 1103), and OCS moratoria in 

general. Resolutions stress the importance of oil industry 

employment in the local 

economy, and adequacy of existing 

environmental regulations (Monahan; City of Santa Paula). 

124 
Community event 

Oil industry/development event 

[Italics indicate non-local event] 

1984: Federal Lease Sale 80 offers 657 OCS tracts from Point 

Conception to the Mexico border. Results in 1 active lease covering 

456 

acres (Sollen, forthcoming: Appendix A). 

1984: USA Petroleum Corporation (Petrochern) permanently closes 

its Ventura Avenue refinery following an environmentalist 

lawsuit challenging the plant's proposed expansion. The plant 

closure means layoffs for eighty workers (Petrochem reported and 

annual payroll of $2.5 million) and loss of the operations $350,000 

annual contribution to county tax rolls (Ventura Star-Free &e&, 

November 17, 1984). 

1986: California Coastal Commission denies Chevron's proposed 

Platform Gail in September but finally approves 

the project in 

December. Against the urgings of Lieutenant Governor Leo 

McCarthy, the city of Ventura supports the project, anticipating 

employment opportunities for locals (Monahan 1986). 

1986: Falling world oil prices mean downsizing or closure of 

Ventura County support companies, including VETCO, who laid off 

325 employees (Ventunz Slur-Free Press, November 18, 1986). 

1987: Chevron's Platform Gail is installed in the Sockeye field off 

Ventura County (Sollen, forthcoming: Appendix A). 

1987: Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties 

sue California Coastal 

Commission over approval of Platform Julius off northern Santa. 

Barbara County. Counties charge that Coastal Commission met 

without public knowledge, negating due process provisions (Dalton 

1987). Suit does little to slow permitting process, but platform is 

never 

installed. 

1990: Texaco closes Ventura production office, consolidating 

operations in Denver; 145 employees transfer, 170 remain in local 

field office (Ventura Star-Free Press, August 17, 1990). 

1992.05: Department of Interior 

announces 

that Channel OCS Lease 

Sales 

are to be shelved for 5 years (Parker 1992). 

1992.07: Chevron pleads guilty to having dumped oil and other 

toxic materials near Platform Grace, off the Ventura County coast, 

from 1982 through 1987. The S6.5 million paid by Chevron in 

cnmrnal penalties mak1his the third largest fine to date forfederal 

environmental violations (Soble 1992: Bi, B6). 

125 
o Community event 

Oil industiy/development event 

[Italics indicate nan-local eventl 

1993: Chevron consolidates operations in Bakersfield, laying off or 

transferring 200 Ventura employees; Exxon closes its Thousand 

Oaks corporate headquarters the 

same year (Simon 1993: Bi, B5). 

1993: Mobil 

announces 

its plans to abandon oil piers near the Santa 

Barbara-Ventura County line. 

1993.04: An estimated 420 to 840 gallons of oil leak from Conoco 

transfer lines into the 

sea near Solimar, a beach colony in northern 

Ventura County (Meyers 1993: B1, B5). 

1993.12: 84,000 gallons of crude leaks from 

a Bush Petroleum 

pipeline, fouling McGrath Lake and McGrath State Beach, north of 

Oxnard 

- an environmentally sensitive 

area. Close to 200 clean-up 

workers, including state Fish and Game employees, clean-up 

professionals hired by the pipeline operator, and volunteers work to 

save birds and other wildlife. (Mosk 1993). 

1993.01: 370,000 gallons of condensate or 

liquefied petroleum spill 

from 

a Texaco pipeline in School Canyon, near 

the Ventura River 

(Ventura Avenue) (Johnson 1994). 

1994.03: Twenty-eight California Department of Fish and Game 

officials search Texaco's Ventura Avenue office looking for 

evidence that would link Texaco to the January, 1993 spill (Saillant 

and Fields 1994). 

1996.03: Texaco announces sale of its oil and gas Ventura Avenue 

properties to CalResources, Inc. 

126 
Appendix 13: 

Federal OCS Lease Sales 53 and 68 hearings 

-- a case study 

This section describes our in-depth 

case study of two federal OCS lease sale 

hearings 

- 

for Lease Sale 53 (in San Luis Obispo on June 27, 1980) and Lease Sale 68 

(in Santa Barbara on July 28-29, 1981) 

- 

including the public comments received 

there and newspaper coverage, to measure 

the content and pervasiveness of 

attitudes in the county concerning offshore drilling and the oil industry. 

Quantitative and content analyses of the draft EISs, the hearing transcripts, and 

additional written statements concerning the draft EISs and lease sales in general 

provide 

a useful way to measure and compare 

the sentiments of various groups in 

the county, at one point in time, towards offshore oil drilling (Gundry and 

Heberlein 1984). Additionally, this 

case study examines newspaper coverage of the 

hearing to indicate how the printed media depicts and influences the county's 

sentiments. The 

case study looks at: the draft EIS documents, who commented in 

the county (e.g. government units, spokespersons from environmentalist groups, 

oil industry organizations, or other associations, the general public), whether their 

statements were generally supportive or opposed/critical of the draft EIS and the 

proposed lease sale (and the home community of each type of conimentor), which 

themes or substantive 

concerns 

they addressed, and how two county newspapers 

covered the hearings and the lease sale in general. The findings reported here are 

culled from our larger comparative 

case study of equivalent "local" OCS Lease Sale 

hearings in San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties; where relevant, 

comparisons will be made to those two counties. 

We looked for and coded six categories or themes in this 

case study 

- 

environment, air quality, way of life, national 

energy needs, physical infrastructure, 

and economic base 

- as 

they were addressed in hearing transcripts and written 

83 San Luis Obispo's equivalent "local" hearing was 

the 1980 draft EIS hearing for federal OCS Lease 

Sale 53, held in San Luis Obispo 

on June 27, 1980. Santa Barbara County's equivalent "local" hearing 

was the same 1981 draft ETS hearings for federal OCS Lease Sale 68 discussed in this Appendix; this 

hearing, located in Santa Barbara, provided the closest forum for Ventura County residents and 

officials to comment on offshore leasing. The Lease Sale 53 and 68 hearings were chosen for 

comparative analysis because of their similar stage in the administrative process 

(public review of 

first draft EIS for the initial federal proposal of OCS tract leasing) and their roughly concurrent time 

period (1980-81, which was the first federal offering of new OCS tracts since the 1969 Santa Barbara 

Channel spill). For a more detailed discussion on the hearings, public comments, and media coverage of 

the lease sales in San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties, see our respective reports on those 

counties. 

Environment includes almost every concern for offshore oil drilling's impact on the physical 

environment: endangered species, other plant and animal species, water quality, and sensitive 

environments. Statements predicting probabilities of impact upon 

the environment (e.g. oil spill 

models, drilling cut analyses) were coded under this category, as were statements about indirect 

environmental threats (e.g. seismic fault mapping, concerns for the 

use of oil tankers, fear that oil 

127 
statements (quantitatively measured 

as 

lines of text). Freudenburg and Gramling 

(1994) used these categories in 

a comparable quantitative study of public 

responses to 

offshore oil drilling A seventh category, Legitimacy/procedure, represents this 

case 

study's addition to this line of research. Critical comments on the inadequacy and 

undemocratic nature of the environmental impact analysis process and what 

opponents perceived 

as 

the larger intentions of the Bureau of Land Managment 

(BLM), the oil industry, the Department of Interior, and 

even 

the U.S. government 

emerged 

as a robust theme in our 

tn-counties research. This theme's significance 

here suggested that such claims should not be subsumed into the more concrete 

categories, as they had in prior research. 

The Lease Sale draft EIS: In addition to providing scientific estimates of 

potential impacts on 

the local environment, air quality, economic base, 

infrastructure, and way of life, the draft EIS serves another important yet less visible 

function. Specifically, it lays the ground for future comment by various groups 

(government units, the oil industry, environmental organizations, the public, etc.) 

not only through the scientific evidence it presents but in what it neglects or fails to 

say. In the latter regard, two themes 

are 

largely absent from both lease sale draft 

EISs; we discuss them here to frame our subsequent analysis of the hearing, 

comments, and newspaper coverage. First, national 

energy needs, as a brief section 

at the beginning of the document indicates, provided the rationale for the entire 

lease sale. While this theme's treatment in the draft EISs was so terse that it literally 

approached zero percent of both documents, national 

energy needs proved to be an 

immensely provocative subject for both supporters and opponents of the lease sales, 

many of whom devote a significant proportion of their comments to this very 

issue. 

Second, 

a substantive discussion of legitimacy/procedural themes is absent in both 

draft EISs. This is perhaps predictable; 

as a 

technical document, the draft EISs tended 

to either reduce this theme to strictly technical issues or refer the commentor to its 

lengthy citations of laws and provisions which address the responsibilities of the 

might contaminate the cooling systems of the Diablo Canyon nuclear reactor). Finally, sentiments 

considered "biocentric" 

or generally environmentalist were coded under this category. Air quality 

includes statements concerning air quality, its measurement, and the impact offshore oil drilling could 

have upon air quality. Way of life includes concerns for offshore oil drilling's impact upon social and 

sentimental facets of the "quality of life" in the affected communities: the "character" of a community, 

aesthetics (i.e. visual impairment of the coastline by offshore platforms), recreational uses of the coast 

and other impacted 

areas, 

residents' health and well-being, etc. The unity of categories that are 

typically implied when people state "I moved here to breathe clean air..." or "the beauty of this region 

is appreciated by both tourists and local residents..." 

- 

that is, when people recognize the connectedness 

of specific concerns 

for impacts upon their residence and measure them in personal terms 

- 

is coded here 

as way of life. National energy needs includes statements about the political and policy-oriented goals 

for offshore oil development which presumably 

are 

the 

reasons 

the Lease Sales are being proposed: to 

reduce the need for imported oil, to protect national security, to fuel the growth of the national 

economy, etciThfrastructure includes statements about impacts upon public services and facilities as 

provided by local governments, housing, schools, land 

use, planning, ports, highways, and local roads. 

Economic base includes concerns about local economies, employment, and 

revenues resulting from 

offshore oil drilling. Comments about the potential impacts and benefits of drilling upon commercial 

fishing and tourism, two major industries for much of the tn-county area, are coded here. 

128 
BLM and the rights of the public in the EIS process. However, as witnessed in the 

subsequent comments and newspaper coverage, 

legitimacy I procedural questions 

proved to be 

a very salient theme which framed not only public response to the 

draft EISs and the lease sales but, increasingly, public attitudes towards the oil 

industry and offshore oil drilling in general. 

Who commented: In letters and oral statements, 2 Ventura County parties 

used the Lease Sale 53 draft EIS comment period, and 1.3 Ventura County parties 

used the Lease Sale 68 draft EIS comment period, 

as an occasion to express 

their 

sentiments on 

the document, the lease sales, and the general prospect of offshore oil 

drilling in the county, for 

a 

total of 15 county commentors. Of these 15 Ventura 

County participants, six represented local oil interests, three represented other 

organizations, two represented local government entities, three spoke or wrote on 

their own behalf 

as unaffiliated county residents (i.e. the public), and 

one made 

a 

factual correction to the draft EIS document as a representative of his consulting 

flint Here it should be noted that, 

among 

the equivalent "1ocal lease sale hearings 

in the tn-counties, Ventura County brought forth the fewest commentors of 

any 

county in the comparative fri-county case study. 

Supportive/opposed: Of these 15 commentors, 10 (or 66 percent) expressed 

support of the lease sale and/or criticisms of the draft EIS, two (or 14 percent) 

expressed opposition to the lease sale and/or the draft EISJ and three (or 20 percent) 

gave a 

'neutral" statement. Ventura County commentors were 

the most 

supportive of the offshore leasing proposal and its draft EIS. Among equivalent 

lease sale hearings the tn-counties, Santa Barbara County was 

the most evenly split 

in its attitudes toward the lease sale: of 57 Santa Barbara commentors, 29 (or 51 

percent) expressed opposition to the lease sale and/or criticisms of the draft EIS, 28 

(or 49 percent) expressed support of the lease sale and! or 

the draft EIS, and no one 

gave a 

'neutral" statement. By comparison, of 128 commentors in San Luis Obispo 

County, 92 percent were opposed / critical, six percent were supportive, and 

two 

percent were neutral. 

Themes of comments: Our analysis here focuses most prominently on 

the 

Lease Sale 68 hearing, where the volume of Ventura County comments was 

greatest. Both of the Ventura County speakers opposing the sale represented 

themselves, and claimed 

no organizational affiliation. These members of the public 

emphasized legitimacy / procedural 

concerns 

(38 percent), the environment (39 

percent) and perceived threats to their way of life (22 percent). No other Ventura 

The Ventura County organizations represented were: Ventura County Economic Development 

Association, Ventura County Taxpayers Association, and Ventura County Chamber of Commerce. 

In equivalent hearings, San Luis Obispo County was represented by 128 commentors, in which 15 

represented local or coun gov-ernment-agenctesTl represented 

ut ndutry organization, 11 

represented other organizations, and 101 represented themselves (i.e. the public). Santa Barbara 

County was represented by 57 commentors, in which 11 represented local or county government agencies, 

seven 

represented oil industry organizations, 24 represented other organizations, and 15 represented 

themselves (i.e. the public). 

129 
County commentors touched legitimacy / procedural themes, 

as 

these themes were 

used most often to contest the validity or necessity of the sale. Speakers in favor of 

the sale used other themes to explain its validity and necessity, especially national 

energy needs. One unaffihiated citizen wrote a 

letter in support of the sale, using 

oil's environmental benevolence relative to nuclear power to argue for increased 

offshore development. 

Only two commentors from Ventura County represented government 

entities: the City of Oxnard and the County of Ventura. These government entities 

emphasized air quality 

concerns 

(55 percent), 

as well as 

impacts on 

the local 

infrastructure (36 percent) and the 

economy (six percent). The County of Ventura 

acknowledged the importance of offshore drilling to the local economy, but asked 

for the deletion of tracts in the Channel Islands Marine Sanctuary and questioned 

the air quality models used in the draft EIS. The city of Oxnard expressed 

concerns 

about the effects of offshore drilling on its tourism industry, but couched these 

comments in what we coded 

as neutral language. 

Organized groups commenting on the lease sale unanimously supported the 

proposal/draft EIS. Unlike Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties, where 

organizations represented 

a range of interests 

- 

from industry associations to 'good 

government' groups (e.g. the League of Women Voters) to groups 

solely dedicated 

to environmental 

concerns (e.g. local chapters of the Sierra Club) 

- Ventura County 

organizations tended to represent the oil industry (including representatives of 

individual firms), 

as well as economic development interests (e.g. the Ventura 

County Economic Development Association, the Ventura Chamber of Commerce, 

and the Ventura County Taxpayers' Association). Still, petroleum industry groups 

emphasized the environment more 

than 

any other type of commentor (65 percent). 

The thrust of these "environmental" comments was 

the lack of risk posed to the 

environment by offshore drilling, including statements on how drilling 

technologies had improved since the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill. These speakers 

also emphasized the importance of offshore reserves for bolstering domestic 

energy 

supplies (national 

energy needs comments ranked second, at 30 percent). Not 

surprisingly, the economic development groups emphasized positive effects for the 

local 

economy 

(65 percent), using national energy needs to argue for the sale's 

necessity (23 percent). 

\Jews paper coverage: The case study looked at the amount and content of 

coverage by the Venturn Siw-Free Press and the Oxnard Press-Courier 

as as it appeared in 

news articles, editorials, and letters to the editor published in 

a ten day period 

around the hearings (from two days before to seven days after). An important note: 

while many papers covered both hearings, much of our descriptions of newspaper 

behavior is based upon the hearing closest to the newspapers home, where 

Unaffiliated citizens from other counties, most notably San Luis Obispo, used the national energy 

needs theme to argue against offshore leasing by claiming that research into renewable sources would 

prove a wiser energy strategy. 

13 
coverage is likely to be heaviest (i.e. Lease Sale 68 for the Star-Free-Press and PressCourier). Our first finding was 

that the depth of 

coverage provided by the Star-Free 

Press and Press-Courier varied greatly. The Slur-Free Press (Ventura County's major daily 

newspaper) devoted 423 column lines of 

coverage to Lease Sale 68, while the Oxnard 

Press-Courier (also 

a daily paper) provided only 139. By comparison, the Santa Batham 

News-Press devoted 334 column lines to the Lease Sale 68 hearings, and the Santa 

Maria Times failed to cover the hearing at all. In 1980, the Five Cities Tim es-PressRewrder devoted 546 column lines of 

text, and the San Luis Chispo Telenvn -Tribune 

devoted 443 column lines to "their" lease sale hearing. 

In regards to the content of coverage (in news articles as well 

as editorials and 

letters), the Ventum Slur-Free Press devoted approximately 43 percent of its Lease Sale 68 

coverage to the comments of offshore driffing opponents, 38 percent to supportive 

comments, and about 19 percent to neutral remarks. Compared with the fact that 65 

percent of the Lease Sale 68 speakers (including oil industry and other non-county 

speakers) spoke in support of the lease sale, the Ventuni Slur Free-Press 

came 

the closest 

of 

any fri-county paper to representing the actual balance of the hearing. In contrast, 

only 19 percent of the Oxnard Press-Courier's 

coverage 

reflected pro-oil views, with 81 

percent of 

coverage reflecting anti-oil comments. Both papers amplified the 

importance of legitimacy I procedure 

concerns, dedicating 42 percent (Oxnard) and 40 

percent (Ventura) of their 

coverage to comments on 

this theme. This 

phenomenon, also 

seen in other tn-county papers' coverage of the Lease Sale 68 

hearing, is largely explained by the prominence given to comments by State 

Assemblyman Gary Hart. Hart claimed that the BLM had neglected citizen 

comments in the draft EIS, and that the public participation element of the leasing 

process had become a "sham." The attention given to Hart's comments reflects not 

only the vehemence of his remarks, but conforms to a documented pattern of 

news 

reporting, the "habitual access" of government representatives and other privileged 

newsmakers to newspapers. 

Conclusion: Table 27 shows the proportions of comments devoted to 

environment (Env), air quality (AQ), way of life (WOL), legitimacy/procedure (LIP), 

national 

energy needs (NEN), infrastructure (Inf), and economic base (EcB) themes 

in the Lease Sales 53 and 68 draft EISs; the oral statements of all speakers at the 

"local" draft EIS hearings in Santa Barbara; the oral and written statements of all 

Ventura County commentors about the lease sales and their respective draft EISs; 

and the 

coverage of the Ventura Star-Free Press and Ornard Press-Co urier regarding both 

hearings. 

1-' 

13 
Table 27: Proportions of comments and themes regarding Lease Sales 53 and 68 in 

Ventura County (lines of 

text from documents and transcripts) 

Source: BLM, Final EIS,Propcsed 1981 Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Lease Sale, Offshore 

Central and Northern California: OCS Sale No, 53; BLM, Final ETS, Proposed 1982 Outer Continental 

Shelf Oil and Gas Lease Sale, Offshore Central and Northern California: OCS Sale No. 68; BLM, 

Public I-leering on Draft Environmental Statement for Proposed Outer Continental Shelf Lease Sale No. 

53, Central and Northern California: San Luis Obispo, California, June 27, 1980; BLM, Public Hearing on 

Draft Environmental Statement for Proposed Outer Continental Shelf Lease Sale No. 68: Santa 

Barbara, California, July 23-29, 1981; letters from Santa Barbara County regarding Lease Sale 68, held 

at M.M.S. library, Camarillo, California; Ventura Star-Free Press, 6/25-7/5/80 and 7/26-8/4/81; 

Oxnard Press-Courier, 6/25-7/5/80 and 7/26-8/4/81. 

Ventura County 

concerns emphasized the environment, air quality, and 

national 

energy needs. While the salience of environmental 

concerns for Ventura 

County commentors did not closely reflect the amount of attention this theme 

received in the draft ETS documents, this figure approximates the importance of 

environment to commentors in San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties (35 

and 45 percent, respectively). A key difference in Ventura County, however, is the 

ends 

to which environmental themes were argued: here scientific data about the 

effects of offshore drilling on the natural environment were used 

to argue 

fo 

r oil 

development, not against it. In the other two counties, comments coded 

as 

A methodological qualification: Strictly speaking, the final EIS for Lease Sale 68 was the product of 

public 

responses to two previous versions of the ETS, and so the documents coded in this case study were 

published at the end of the EIS/public comments/media coverage sequence investigated in the 

comparative tn-county study. While there is 

room for some speculation that the final EIS might have 

produced fewer questions of legitimacy and procedure from the public than its draft versions in fact 

produced, there 

are two reasons why we feel coding the final FISs was justified. First, we did not code 

the public comments sections of the final versions, and 

so what remained was structurally the 

same 

docurnentas-thedraftversions. Second, the final versions of the Lease Sles 68 reached the 

same 

conclusions of negligible environmental impact and showed the same naiveté about the social impact of 

the EIS 

process 

itself which resulted in the public outcry in the first place. That is, despite their 

modifications in substance, the final EIS was essentially the same document used to reach the 

same 

conclusions 

as 

the draft EIS was. 

132 

Env AQ WOL L/P NEN Inf EcB 

Lease Sale 68 and 60% 5% 9% 0% 0% 9% 17% 

Lease Sale 53 draft EISs [13110] [1157] [1997] [0] [31] [1874] [3614] 

Lease Sale 68 hearing 55% 3% 4% 11% 16% 3% 8% 

[2576] [120] [205] [494] [766] [135] [381] 

County commentors 39% 15% 5% 8% 15% 9% 9% 

[382] [147] [53] [85] [153] [95] [931 

Ventura Star-Free Press 34% 0% 0% 40% 16% 0% 10% 

[76] [1] [911 [36] [0] [22] 

Oxnard Press-Courier 23% 7% 15% 31% 0% 7% 17% 

[22] [7] [14] [30] [0] [7] [16] 
environmentally related were raised by oil opponents almost twice as often 

as 

they 

were raised by oil supporters. One explanation for this is the higher degree of 

environmental sophistication in both Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties. 

Activists in these counties 

- 

especially Santa Barbara 

- 

have developed 

a 

facility 

with the language of environmental review that allows them to critique claims 

made in the lease sale draft EIS documents. In Ventura County, anti-oil 

commentors relied on relatively unsophisticated claims about oils environmental 

impacts (unlike project supporters, who spoke of pollutants in terms of "parts per 

million"), 

as well as noting perceived threats to their way of life and questioning the 

legitimacy of the leasing process.59 

In addition to showing the uses made of environmental discourses in 

Ventura, this 

case study shed some 

light on the pattern of organizing in this 

traditionally pro-oil county. While Santa Barbara has its share of oil industry 

associations and oil support firms, the presence of such organizations is countered 

by 

a 

sophisticated network of environmental activists, and a well-informed and 

environmentally sympathetic citizenry. This is clearly not the 

case in Ventura 

County, as oil support firms, professional organizations, and pro-oil economic 

development groups dominated the county's presence at the "local" Lease Sale 68 

draft EIS hearing. This was 

the 

case despite a plea by Ventura Slur-Free Press editors that 

citizens attend the hearing regardless of their orientation on 

the oil leasing issue 

(Ventura Slur-Free Press, July 26, 1981: B14). While the one-sided organizational 

turnout at the hearing may simply reflect Ventura County's lack of organizational 

density (see "Voluntary Organizations," above), the lack of participation by the 

general public may reflect not only general support for the oil industry, but the 

county's limited experience with environmental activism in general (at least in the 

early 1980s). 

County air quality professionals 

- who did make sophisticated comments on 

the draft EIS 

- 

tended 

to do 

so in value-neutral technical terms. 

I 

133 
References 

Aimaguer, Tomãs. 1994. Racial Fault Lines: The Historical Origins of White 

Supremacy in California. Berkeley: University of Claifornia Press. 

Bates, Jim. 1980. "Gulf Wins Upper Ojai Drilling Case." Ventura Star-Free Press, 

March 31, pg. Al. 

Bates, Jim. 1983. "Ventura to Be Hub of Ventura Drilling Efforts." Ventura StarFree Press, April 30, pp. Al, A2. 

Beaton, Kendall. 1957. Enterprise in Oil: A History of Shell in the United States. 

New York: Appelton-Century-Crofts, Inc. 

Bidwell, Carol A. 1989. The Conejo Valley: Old and New Frontiers, An Illustrated 

His tory. Chatsworth: Windsor Publications. 

Bodle, Yvonne C. 1979. "The McGrath Story," Pp. 123-147 in A Comprehensive 

Story of Ventura County, California, edited by Arnold L. Murphy. Oxnard: M 

& N Printing. 

Bottorff, Ron. 1995. "What Future for the Santa Clara River?" Linkages, Newsletter 

of the Institute for Ecological Health, Ni (Fall). 

Buckler, Arthur. 1982. "Oil." Ventura County Star-Free Press, November 21, "Vista" 

Magazine Section, pp. 6, 7. 

Bureau of Land Managment. 1981. 1982 Outer Continental Shelf Oil And Gas Lease 

Sale Offshore Southern California, OCS Sale No. 68: Final Environmental 

Impact Statement. Los Angeles. 

California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil and Gas. 1920-1993. 

Annual Reports of the State Oil and Gas Supervisor. Sacramento, CA: 

California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil and Gas. 

Cameron, Janet D. 1963. Siini Grows Up. Ventura County: Anderson, Richards and 

Simon, Printers. 

Dalton, Keith. 1987. "Suit Filed Over flatform Julius Action." Santa Barbara NewsPress, March 18. pp. Bi, B3. 

Easton, Robert. 1972. Black Tide: The Santa Barbara Oil Spill and its Consequences. 

New York: Delacorte Press. 

Fillmore Herald, Industrial and Home Edition. Special Section, September 1911. 

Fillmore, CA. 

I 

1J 
Franks, Kenny A. and Paul F. Lambert. 1985. Early California Oil; A Pictographic 

History, 1865-1940. College Station: Texas A & M University Press. 

Freeman, Vernon M. 1968. People-Land-Water: Santa Clara Valley and Oxnard 

Plain, Ventura County, California. Los Angeles: Lorrin L. Morrison. 

Fry, Patricia L. 1983. The Ojai Valley: An Illustrated History. Ojai: Matilija Press. 

Fujii, Reed and Steve Whitmore. 1989. "A Tough Decade for Ag, Oil: Urban 

Growth, Falling Prices Squeezed County." Ventura Star-Free Press, December 

31, pp. Dl, D3. 

Fukuyarna, Yoshio. 1994. The Japanese in Oxnard California, 1898-1945.' Ventura 

County Historical Society Quarterly, 39(4) / 40(1): 3-32. 

Graves, Gregory R. and Sally L. Simon, eds. 1980. A History of Environmental 

Review in Santa Barbara County, California. Public Historical Studies 

Monograph No. 4. Santa Barbara, CA: Graduate Program in Public Historical 

Studies, University of California, Santa Barbara. 

1-lavens, Patricia C. 1979. "Simi Valley from Many Sources." Pp. 199-240 in A 

Comprehensive Story of Ventura County, California, edited by Arnold L. 

Murphy. Oxnard: M & N Printing. 

Henderson, Mary Alice Orcuft. 1986. Glancing Through the Headlines: Santa Paula 

Chronicle. Santa Paula: Santa Paula Historical Society. 

Hey, Clifford E. 1984. 'The Saint Francis Dam Disaster of March 12-13, 1928." 

Ventura County Historical Society Quarterly, 22(2) (Winter). 

Houston, Neil T. and William Bredo. 1955. An Economic Study of the Ventura 

River Municipal Water District. Stanford, CA: Stanford Research Institute. 

Hutchinson, W. H. 1965. Oil, Land and Politics: The California Career of Thomas 

Robert Bard, Volume 1. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. 

Jennings, Margaret. 1984. "The Chinese in Ventura County." Ventura County 

Historical Society Quarterly, 29(3): 3-31. 

Johnson, Brett. 1994. "Environmental Time Bomb? Underground Pipelines Pose 

Unknown Danger." Ventura Star-Free Press, March 20, pp. Al, A9. 

Johnson, G. Wesley and Ronald Nye, eds. 1979. Environmental Hazards and 

Conimirnth Response The S ttaBiirbiraE tperience Publicj-Iiatorical 

Studies Monograph No. 2. Santa Barbara, CA: Graduate Program in Public 

Historical Studies, University of California, Santa Barbara. 
Kailman, Robert E. and Eugene D. Wheeler. 1984. Coastal Crude in 

a Sea of 

Conflict. San Luis Obispo: Blake Printery and Publishing Co. 

Katz, Jesse. 1987. 'tA Perfect Site? Scenic Expanse of Taylor Ranch Emerges 

as a 

Favorite for Gal State Academic Center." Los Angeles Times, Ventura County 

Edition. November 19, pp. 1, 6. 

Katz, Jesse. 1988. "State May Move to Condemn Ranch Site for New Campus.t Los 

Angeles Times, Ventura County Edition. June 30, pp. 1 3. 

Kelley, Daryl and Scott Hadly. 1994. "Texaco Under Investigation on Spill." Los 

Angeles Times, Ventura County Edition. March 18, 1994, pp. B1, B4. 

Kott, Gary L. 1983. Letter to Ventura City Councilman James Monahan. July 6. 

Lima, James T. 1994. "The Politics Of Offshore Energy Development." Ph.D. 

dissertation, Department of Political Science, University of California, Santa 

Barbara. 

McCarthy, Leo. 1986. Letter to San Buenaventura Deputy Mayor James Monahan, 

July 21. 

McHenry, Jack. 1950. "CCMO Lease Has 102 Wells: 200 Employed by Company ii 

Rincon." Ventura Star-Free Press, Oil progress Week Special Section, 

October 18. 

McKinney, Robert. 1994. Interview with Leonard Nevarez and Krista Paulsen, 

November 11, Ojai CA. 

McMillan, Ian. 1968. Alan and the California Condor. New York: Dutton. 

Menchaca, Martha. 1995. The Mexican Outsiders: A Community History of 

Marginalizaiton and Discrimination in California. Austin: University of 

Texas Press. 

Meyers, Jeff. 1993. "Crude Awakening." Los Angeles Times, Ventura County 

Edition. April 7, pp. B-i, B-S. 

Miller, Joanna. "CSU Officially Retreats from Taylor Ranch." Los Angeles Times, 

Ventura County Edition. June 19, pp. B-i, B-4. 

Molotch, Harvey L. and Marilyn Lester. "News As Purposive Behavior: On the 

Strategic Use of Routine Events, Accidents, and Scandals." American 

Socici1ogicalReiiiew29: 101.-i 12 

Molotch, Harvey L. and Joftn Woolley. 1994. "Evaluation of Current Programs to 

Identify and Mitigate Socioeconomic Impacts in the Santa Barbara Channel: 

An Analysis of SEMP. Final Report, Project 20, Minerals Managment 

136 
Service. Santa Barbara: Ocean and Coastal Policy Center, University of 

California. 

Molotch, Harvey L., William Freudenburg and Ten Jon. Forthcoming. "Growing 

Firms in Declining Fields: Unanticipated Impacts of Oil Development." 

Society and Natural Resources. 

Monahan, James L. 1986. Letter to California Coastal Commission Chair Michael 

Wornum, August 5. 

Moraga, Frank. 1990. "Texaco Bails out of Ventura Office: Company Taking Away 

145 Jobs." Ventura Star-Free Press, August 17, pp. Al, A6. 

Mosk, Matthew. 1993. "Crews Work to Clean Up Oil Spill at Marshland." Los 

Angeles Times, December 27, pp. A3, A20. 

National Center for Charitable Statistics. 1989. Yearbook of California Charitable 

Organizations. 

Patagonia, Incorporated. 1993. "Work in Progress: A Survey of Patagonia's 

Environmental Activity.' Ventura, CA. 

Paul, Joe Jr. 1947. "Heres Looking at Ventura County.' Ventura Star-Free Press, 

December 30, pg. 2. 

Paul, Joe Jr. 1954a. "New Oxnard Area well Blows Out of Control During Night." 

Ventura Star-Free Press. June 30, pg. Ai. 

Paul, Joe Jr. 1954b. "Runaway Wildcat Well Tamed by Tons of Heavy Drilling 

Mud." Ventura Star-Free Press. July 1, pg. Al. 

Paul, Joe Jr. 1971. "Avenue Field's 'Oil Patch' Becoming Park of New Era." Ventura 

Star-Free Press 

, 

December 29, pg BI. 

Pinkerton, Roy. 1962. The County Star: My Buena Ventura. Ventura, CA. 

Price, Charles D. 1990. 'Take-it-or-leave-it Deals Have Shaped Ventura." Ventura 

County Star-Free Press, February 11, pg. B15. 

Project Development Company. 1992. Ventura County Indi.istri Guide 

. 

Simi 

Valley. 

Reern, Craig. 1988. "Overtures to Taylor Ranch Spurned.' Ventura Star-Free Press. 

June 29. 

Reith, Gertrude M. 1963. 'Ventura: Life Story of 

a City." Ph.D. dissertation, 

Department of Geography, Clark University, Worcester MA. 

137 
Rintoul, William. 1976. Spudding In: Recollections of Pioneer Days in the 

California Oil Fields. San Francisco: California Historical Society. 

Robinson, W. W. 1979. "The Story of Ventura County," in Murphy, Arnold L., ed. 

A Comprehensive Story of Ventura County, California. Oxnard: M & N 

Printing. 

Saillant, Kay. 1990a. "San Marcos Site in Striking Contrast to Ventura. Ventura 

Star-Free Press. January 28, pg. A9. 

1990b. "CSU Backers Frustrated: Taylor Ranch Fighting Battle of 

Checkbooks. Ventura Star-Free Press. January 28, pp. Al, A8. 

Saillant, Kay and Julie Fields. 1994. 'Texaco Says it Never Concealed Massive '93 

Spill." Los Angeles Times, Ventura County Edition. March 25, pp. Bi, B6. 

Santa Paula, City of. 1983. Resolution Number 3270: A Resolution of the City 

Council of the City of Santa Paula Relating to the Leasing and Development 

of the Outer Continental Shelf. July 18. 

Scott, Allen J. Forthcoming. "Vulcan Redux: High Technology Industrial 

Development in the San Fernando Valley and Ventura County." In Los 

Angeles: The Metropolis, edited by Allen J. Scott and Edward Soja. 

Sigal, Leon V. 1986. "Who? Sources make the News." In Reading the News, edited 

by Robert Karl Manhoff and Michael Schudson. New York: Pantheon. 

Simon, Stephanie. 1993. "Exxon Plans to Close its County Operation." Los Angeles 

Times, April 6, pp. BI, B5. 

Smith, Wally. 1969. "Sun Oil Salt Plant Faces County Showdown Tuesday." 

Ventura Star-Free Press. June 22, pg. B7. 

Snyder, R. C. 1951. "Oil Well Scar" (letter to the editor). Ventura Star-Free Press. 

March 10. 

Soble, Ron. 1992 "Chevron Pays $6.5 Million for Pollution." Los Angeles Times, 

Ventura County Edition, July 21, pp. BI, B6. 

Sollen, Robert. Forthcoming. An Ocean of Oil. 

Sosna, Marvin. 1954. "Santa Barbarans and Oil Men Reach Tidelands 

Understanding." Ventura Star-Free Press. August 28, pp. Al, A2. 

Spectra, Incorporated. 1989. A Report on Growth and Its Effi'ct 

on 

the Quality of Life 

in Ventura. Santa Barbara. 

138 
Teague, Charles. 1944. Fifty Years A Rancher: The recollections of half 

a century 

devoted to the citrus and walnut industries of California and to frrthering 

the cooperative movement in agriculture. Santa Paula: California Fruit 

Growers Exchange. 

Thomas, Jerry. 1969. 'Oil Slick Hits Ventura City Beaches, Marina: league 

Demands Permanent Halt to All Drilling." Ventura Star-Free Press, February 

5, pp. Al, A5. 

Thousand Oaks, City of. 1994. Conejo Valley Attitude Survey. Thousand Oaks. 

Tn-County SocioEconomic Monitoring and Mitigation Program. 1992. 1990 

Estimates and Forecasts for Ventura County. Ventura: Ventura County 

Resource Managment Agency. 

Tn-County SocioEconomic Monitoring and Mitigation Program. 1995. 1993 

Estimates and Forecasts for Ventura County. Ventura: Ventura County 

Resource Managment Agency. 

Triern, Judith P. 1985. Ventura County: Land of Good Fortune. Northridge: 

Windsor Publications, Inc. 

1991. The Limoneira Company: 100 Years of Growing (Brochure). The 

Limoneira Company. 

Ventura County Air Pollution Control District. 1993. The Air Apparent: Cleaning 

Ventura County Skies (Brochure). Ventura. 

Ventura County and City of Ventura. 1968. Ventura Avenue Area General Plan. 

Ventura, CA. 

Welty, Early M. and Frank J. Taylor. 1958. The Black Bonanza (Second Revised 

Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company. 

White, David. 1979. "Greater Camarillo, Then and Now." Pp. 52-117 in A 

Comprehensive Story of Ventura County, California, edited by Arnold L 

Murphy. Oxnard: M & N Printing. 

Wolpert, Julian. 1988. "The Geography of Generosity: Metropolitan Disparities in 

Donations and Support for Amenities." Annals of the Association of 

American Geographers, 78 (4): 665-679. 

Yamarnoto, Helen. 1994 (1986). "An Interview With Helen Yarnamoto." (Interview 

by-Many--Johnston). Ventura Co 

ii nt-ij Historical Sociy Q uiarterLy, 

39(4) / 40(1): 33-76. 

1-.' 

13 
List of those consulted or 

interviewed 

(Partial list) 

P&sons 

are 

listed according to the county with which they 

are most knowlegable (usually the county 

where they live 

or work). Many informants, however, provided useful information 

on other 

communities 

or counties with which they were 

familiar. 

Ventura County: 

Jeff Attebury, Unocal 

Lee Bafalon, Attorney, Chevron. 

Pat Baggerly, Environmental Activist 

Russ Baggerly, Aide to County Supervisor. 

Doris Black, Civic Volunteer. 

Phil Blackburn, Staff, Texaco 

Linda Brewster, Mayor, Fillmore. 

Mark Capelli, Staff, California Coastal Commission 

Steve Chawkins, Columnist, Ventura Star. 

Bill Clawson, Tourism Bureau, Ventura. 

Terry Covington, California Coastal Operators Group (CCOG). 

Joseph DeVito, Mayor, Ojai. 

Glenna Deane Dovey, Oxnard League of Women Voters 

David Eaton, Former County Supervisor. 

Don Gluyas, Unocal. 

Stan Greene, Citizens to Preserve the Ojai 

Dorothy Haaze, Fillmore Historical Society 

Edward Hall, Petroleum Geologist, Unocal. 

Jean Harris, Ormond Beach Task Force 

Charles Johnson, Ventura County Historical Society 

Gene Kjellberg, County Planner 

Barbara Kornylo, Staff, Texaco 

Ed Laughman County Assessor's Office. 

Judy Lazar, City Council member, Thousand Oaks. 

Cynthia Leake, Civic volunteer, Ventura. 

Bernard Leavitt, Civic volunteer, Ventura. 

Isabel Leavitt, Civic volunteer, Ventura 

Greg Mansfield, Reporter, Ventura Star 

Lou Mazarrio, Staff, County Planning (oil division). 

Robert McKinney, City Council, Ojai. 

John McWherter, Former Ventura City Council member 

Spence Mitchell, Petroleum Geologist 

Jim Monahan, Oil supply 

company owner, Former Ventura City Council member. 

Neil Moyer, Texaco, Former member, County Air Pollution Control District. 

Jeff SanMarchi, Editor, The Voice (Ojai/ Ventura independent newspaper) 

John Sterling, Staff, Patagonia Incorporated 

Greg Stratton, Mayor, Simi Valley 

140 
Burton Swope, City Editor, Ventura Star 

Paul Tebble, Staff, Patagoma Incorporated. 

John Thompson, Oil industry businessman (compressor repair) 

Judith Triem, Historian, Ventura County. 

Richard Warchol, Reporter, Ventura Star. 

Dorifi Wright, California Coastal Commissioner (Pt. Hueneme). 

Santa Barbara County: 

Robert Almy, Former Manager, County Resource Management 

Douglas Anthony, County Energy Division 

Dorothy Benford, Santa Maria Historical Museum 

Barney Brantingham, Columnist, Santa Barbara News-Press. 

Ross Brunetti, Engineer, C41ifornia Division of Oil and Gas. 

Melinda Burns, Reporter, Santa Barbara News-Press. 

Andy Caidwell, Director, Coalition of Labor, Agriculture and Business (COLAB) 

Richard Chenoweth, Santa Maria Historical Museum 

Larry Crandell, Real estate developer, civic volunteer. 

Kevin Drude, County Energy Division 

Fred Eissler, Scenic Shoreline Preservation Conference 

Scott Ernathius, Geologist, Mobil Corporation. 

Michael D. Fox, Former Attorney, Environmental Defense Center. 

Carla Friske, Office of State Senator, Jack O'Connell. 

David Gebhard, Professor Architectural History (late), UCSB 

Jean Holmes, League of Women Voters. 

George Hobbs, Former Mayor, Santa Maria. 

Olga Howard, Santa Maria Citizens Planning Association 

Joyce Howerton, Mayor, City of Lompoc 

Barbara Hutchins, Office of Planning and Development, Santa Maria 

Robert Kailman, Former MMS official, Former County Supervisor 

Joan Kerns, President, Get Oil Out. 

Robert Klausner, businessman, civic volunteer. 

Linda Krop, Attorney, Environmenal Defense Center. 

Stephan B. Logan, Building Contractor, Board of Directors, South Coast Congregate 

Care. 

Sheila Lodge, Former Mayor, Santa Barbara 

Morton Maizlish, President, Board of Realtors. 

Mark McGinnes, Lawyer, UCSB Lecturer, Environmental Studies. 

Michael McGinnis, Dames and Moore 

Stephan L. Miles, Attorney. 

Paul Mills, Former Director, Santa Barbara Museum of Art. 

Toni Miyoshi, Former county supervisor, City Council Member, Santa Maria 

Donald Olson, City Planner, Santa Barbara 

Luis Perez, County Energy Division 

Michael Powers, Deputy Director, Santa Barbara County Association of 

Governments. 

141 
Gail Rappaport, Attorney, Former Board member, Center Stage Theatre. 

Albert Reynolds, Former Director, County Office of Environmental Quality. 

Lesley Ridley-Tree, Director, Santa Barbara Museum of Art, philanthropist 

Jim Ryerson Former Official, County Air Pollution Control District 

Darwin Sainz, Unocal official, rancher.. 

Francis Sarguis, Attorney, Former President, Get Oil Out. 

Patricia Schewczyk, Santa Barbara League of Women Voters 

Mark Schniepp, UCSB Economic Forecast Project. 

Robert Sollen, Former environmental reporter, Santa Barbara News-Press 

John Stahl, Official, Molino Oil Corporation. 

Robert Campbell-Taylor, County Assessor's Office 

Alexander Velto, Realtor (late). 

Gaye Warren, Western States Petroleum Assocation (WSPA) 

Glenn Wharton, businessman, Board of Directors, Fund for Santa Barbara. 

Nick Welsh, News Editor, Santa Barbara Independent. 

San Luis Obispo County: 

Joseph Amanzio, Professor of Architecture, Cal Poly 

Patricia Beck, County Planner 

Phyllis Beggs, Finance Director, Pismo Beach 

Richard Boyle, Official, Unocal. 

George Brand, Former Editor, San Luis Obispo Telegram-Tribune 

James Bray, Official, Unocal 

Jerry Bunin, county reporter, San Luis Obi 

spa Telegram-Tribune 

Ellen Carroll, County Environmental Coordinator 

Allan Cooper, Professor and Director, Architecture, Cal Poly 

Ken Curtis, City Planner, Pismo Beach. 

Sheree Davis, Director of Governmental Affairs, SLO Chamber of Commerce 

Bill Dejarnette, President, Grover City Chamber of Commerce. 

Evelyn Delany, County Supervisor 

Jerry Diefenderfer, Former County Supervisor, Rancher, Paso Robles 

John Euphrat, County Planner, Energy Division. 

Janet Farris, Local Historian, Avila Beach. 

Nicholas Ferravanti, Businessman, Activist, Paso Robles 

David Garth, Executive Director, SLO Chamber of Commerce 

Brian Haley, Department of Anthropology, UCSanta Barbara 

Walter Harris, Associate Director of admissions, Cal Poly 

Ampie Hayberg, County Auditor's Office 

Mike Hodgson, Editor, Five Cities Times-Press-Recorder. 

Jean Hubbard, South County Historical Society 

DanieLKrieger, Professor ol_History, Cal Poly, President, County Historical Society 

Bonnie Krupp, Institutional Studies Office, Cal Poly 

Kurt Kupper, Former County Supervisor, Director, ECOSLO. 

Sam Leonard, County Assessor's Office 

Dorine Liberto-Blanck, City Planner, Arroyo Grande. 

142 
Howard Mankins, Former County Supervisor, Former Mayor of Arroyo Grande, 

rancher 

Ken McCall, Reporter, San Luis Obispo Telegram-Tribune. 

Carolyn Moffett, Port San Luis Harbor District. 

Robert Nimmo, Former State Assemblyman, former State Senator, Atascadero. 

Gerard Parsons, Former Commissioner, Pt. San Luis Harbor 

David Ryal, Director, Pismo Beach Chamber of Commerce 

Kenneth Schwartz, Former Mayor of SLO, Professor of Architecture, Cal Poly 

Sandy Sidah, Records & Information Office, Cal Poly 

Sandy Silver, civic activist, Mothers For Peace. 

Ernest Smith, Rancher, Smith Drilling, Paso Robles,. 

Marcia Stillman, County Assessor's Office 

Michael Stover, Editor, San Luis Obispo Telegram-Tribune. 

Thomas Sullivan, City Planner, Grover City. 

William Weldon, Unocal 

Non-local Informants: 

Svein Andersen, Professor of Business, Oslo University (Norway) 

David Brown, State lands Commission 

Gray Brechin, Dept of Geography, UC Berkeley. 

Faye Cox, Staff, Texaco 

Avery Guest, Population Reseach Center, lJniverity of Washington, Seattle. 

Dan Haifley, Former Director, Save Our Shores 

Brenda Hearing, Carnegie Foundation Library (Columbia University) 

Susan Hershberger, Shell 

Paul Langland, ARCO 

Paul Leonard, Deputy Assistant Secretary, US Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, Washington DC. 

Shaun-Michael Morse, Wells Fargo Bank, San Francisco 

William Tanner, Exxon 

143 
O6JJFORNLA 

SEA GRANT 

CALIFORNIA SEA GRANT COLLEGE SYSTEM 

UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA 

9500 GILMAN DRIVE DEPT 0232 

LA JOLLA CA 92093-0232 

PHONE: (619) 534-1111 

FAX: (619) 534-2231 

JAMES J. SUWVAN 

Director 

Please Post 

CALIFORNIA SEA GRANT STATE FELLOW PROGRAM 

California Sea Grant's State Fellow Program provides a unique educational opportunity for graduate 

students who are interested both in marine 

resources and in the policy decisions affecting those resources. 

The program matches highly motivated and qualified graduate students with zhostsJ7 in the California State 

Legislature or in State agencies for a 9-month paid fellowship in Sacramento. in the past, Sea Grant Fellows 

have been assigned to the California Legislature's Joint Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture, the 

Senate Natural Resources and Wildlife Committee, the Pacific Fisheries Legislative Task Force, and the 

California Coastal Commission, 

among others. 

Selection of finalists is made by the California Sea Grant College, and assignments in Sacramento are 

decided in consultation with potential fellowship "hosts." The fellowship frequently begins in Januaiy, to 

coincide with the legislative cycle, but other schedules can be arranged. 

Qualifications: 

- 

1 Applicants must be registered graduate students in a marine-related field at a California university 

at the time of application. (They may, however, finish their degrees before beginning the fellows 

program.) 

2. Each applicant should demonstrate interest in both marine science and public policy. 

To Apply: 

A complete application consists of: 

An educational and employment vita (resume). 

Letters of endorsement from major professors. (Additional letters are optional.) 

A one-page letter of interest explaining how the fellowship experience would support long-term 

educational and career goals. 

For additional information about the State Fellow program (or the Dean John A. Knauss National Sea 

Grant Fellowship, which matches graduate students with federal "hosts" in Washington, D.C.), please call 

California Sea Grant at (619) 534 4442 or write to us at the address given below. 

State EeltowProgmm 

California Sea Grant College System 

Unersity of California 

9500 Gilman Drive 

La Jolla, CA 92093-0232 

ForFurtherinfonnation, Contact RosemarArnidei, Assistant Director for External Re/a lions 

The California Sea Grant College System is a statewide, muMuniversity program of manne research, extension services, and education activities 

administered by the- University of California. It is headquartered at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California. San Diego.- 
The Department of the Interior Mission 

As the Nation's principal conservation agency, 

the Department of the Interior has responsibility 

for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering 

sound use of our 

land and water resources; protecting our 

fish, wildlife, and biological diversity; 

preserving the environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places; 

and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The Department assesses our 

energy and mineral resources and works to ensure that their development is in the best interests 

of all our people by encouraging stewardship and citizen participation in their care. The 

Department also has a major responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for 

people who live in island territories under U.S. administration. 

The Minerals Management Service Mission 

As 

a bureau of the Department of the Interior, the Minerals Management Service's (MMS) primary 

responsibilities are to manage 

the mineral 

resources 

located on the Nation's Outer Continental 

Shelf IOCS), collect revenue from the Federal OCS and onshore Federal and Indian lands, and 

distribute those 

revenues. 

Moreover, in working to meet its responsibilities, the Offshore Minerals Management Program 

administers the OCS competitive leasing program and oversees 

the safe and environmentally sound 

exploration and production of our Nation's offshore natural gas, oil and other mineral 

resources. 

The MMS Royalty Management Program meets 

its responsibilities by ensuring the efficient, timely 

and accurate collection and disbursement of revenue 

from mineral leasing and production due to 

Indian tribes and allottees, States and the U.S. Treasury. 

The MMS strives to fulfill its responsibilities through the general guiding principles of: (1) being 

responsive to the public's concerns and interests by maintaining 

a dialogue with all potentially 

affected parties and (2) carrying out its programs with an emphasis on working to enhance the 

quality of life for all Americans by lending MMS assistance and expertise to economic development 

and environmental protection.