|3030 Loyola Drive (in Mace Ranch, duh)|
|5 Acres and growing|
|See the City of Davis parks page|
|covered picnic area|
|Area may be subject to advanced registration - call City of Davis Community Services Department at (530) 757-5626 for information|
Mace Ranch Park used to be an open area full of wild vegetation, animal life, and some concrete paths. The city bulldozed a large part of the wild area (leaving some of the older oak trees, which are now set off in fenced/walled areas), added grass, small trees, a picnic area, and multiple baseball and other sporting fields. There is still a fenced in wildlife area that almost always contains burrowing owls and a lot of wild rabbits (and occasionally sheep and goats in the spring time). There is a multitude of paths in the area, some which ring the wildlife area. The area has become a popular place for walkers, joggers, and lacrosse and baseball players. There is a basketball court, a set of bathrooms, and a set of swings and a playset for the kiddies. The picnic area is roofed, has multiple tables, a BBQ, a drinking fountain, and a water spigot. There is also a council circle — in the middle of the circle, a sign was recently added stating that no fires are allowed here (ironically, it sits in a pile of ash). Around the Mace Ranch Community Park Habitat Area is a a set of community created tiles.
The earthen spiral pictured below is called "Evidence of Life." It is a solar calendar, commissioned by the City of Davis in 2006. From the point of view of the stone at the center, the peripheral stones mark the direction to look for sunrises and sunsets on the first day of each season: spring equinox, summer solstice, fall equinox and winter solstice. The three stones on the east side of the solar calendar mark sunrises, while the three on the west side mark sunsets. (More info can be found here),
There is a memorial to Nicole Carole Albertson near the play area.
Also see Parks for info on other local parks
The park is essentially now complete. The basketball hoops were put up on July 23, and the fields are nearly ready for a rousing game of soccer. As someone who was against any habitat being left for the owls, i must say that it is rather nice to have the multiple acre wildland area. Though as anyone who has read the EIR understands, the owls are a transient species and will be gone in a few years, even if the entire parcel was left vacant. But we will have some nice rabbits to watch.
Also for the record, the city did not suddently decide to convert open space to park space. This was designated as sports park 20 years ago when Mace Ranch was designed. If we wanted the land to be open space the battle should have occured then - BrianSolecki
2006-05-01 19:42:03 Tell that to the owls, BrianSolecki —EmyFargey
2006-05-01 20:44:05 A point of order, please... I also would prefer owls to the structures, but I'm uncomfortable about the lack of neutral point of view in the article. I think it would be better to create a neutral article then follow up with your personal opinions in a comment. —GrumpyoldGeek
I agree with BrianSolecki that it is pretty much semantic now, but I think there are other reasons besides compassion for owls to not put in lawns at this park. In my opinion, if the city would put in more landscaping native to this climate instead of lawns and sports facilities, much expense could be saved besides other benefits. I don't think it really matters if the owls go extinct, it is known fairly certainly that planetary biodiversity has large variations on a regular basis. I think more important than that and sports is for the city government to operate in an economically sustainable way. It is also useful to think of natural resource conservation in terms of economic sustainability instead of as something intrinsically good. See Measure G. -NickSchmalenberger
No need for a neutral point of view, but a little balance to the bias is a good idea. NPOV doesn't allow for things like reviews or blunt commentary (which is why Wikipedia is NPOV, and DavisWiki isn't). Unbalanced bias isn't a good thing either. I like the term "Cumulative POV": the different bias (and opinions) of all the editors eventually removes the barbs, but not the points. Put in a point about the owls, make a counter point, and be done. Anger over the conversion of a wilderness area to a groomed park (or enjoying the new facilities of the park) is part of the community and certainly should be part of the entry. — jw
2006-05-02 11:14:46 I rewrote the main section last night because it contained little useful information about the features of the park itself. I concur with the person who said the top part of the article should be fact, and opinions should be left to the comments (or perhaps a subsection of the main section if there's enough anger to warrant it). Myself, I have mixed feelings on the park. I'm not particularily happy that they put a park here because I value natural land to a degree, but on the other hand, I use it regularily, like that I can view the burrowing owls, bunnies (before they were hidden by the brush), and occasional snake, and I feel they did a pretty good job overall in making the area attractive. Given that the park is at the intersection of several greenbelts, it gets a lot of use. —AlexPomeranz
2008-08-12 22:45:06 There is shade on the play structures for the kids as well as shaded picnic tables and grass. —NaomiKalman