The Point Reyes National Seashore (Seashore) finalized their controversial General Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) on September 13, 2021 with the filing of the Record of Decision (ROD). The ROD included some changes to the Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS) that was posted for public review in September 2020 and includes modifications to some areas of the Final EIS regarding lease length, ranch operating agreements, diversification, elk management, silage production, and succession.
EAC’s Review
Following the release of the ROD, we took the time we needed to read through the plan, speak with representatives at the Seashore to better understand what changed and how that may or may not improve the overall management of ranching operations in the Seashore, and talk with our fellow conservation and environmental advocates who are also engaged on this item.
Despite the National Park Service (NPS) making some modifications to the Final EIS, we are disappointed with the outcome as the GMPA process has been fundamentally flawed by focusing first on preservation of commercial ranching operations and only secondarily on the protection of park resources (natural, cultural, and historic).
The GMPA process determines the next two decades of management of the Seashore and it is critical that accountability and transparency are built into the final plans to provide a clear framework for future management decisions for those who remain privileged to hold commercial leases within the Seashore.
Since the filing of the ROD, we have created a lengthy evaluation and comparison of what has changed since NPS selected Final EIS Alternative B last year as a factual resource for our membership community. (Warning! A lengthy review below!) We developed this resource to break down some of the environmental concepts and complexities of the plan for our community. As the implementation of the GMPA moves forward, you can count on EAC to be engaged in the process to ensure accountability, transparency, and delivery of the promises that NPS has made to the public.
What’s Changed Since the Final EIS
We have a new federal administration and new leadership at the Department of the Interior.
Public approval for the GMPA is extremely low due to the negative impacts that ranching has on water quality, habitat, and the lethal management of the Tule Elk populations.
The McClure Dairy operation closed and converted to heifer production, citing the drought as the primary reason. This removes 650 dairy animals and 552 acres of silage production from the Seashore.
NPS signed a partnership agreement on August 9, 2021 with the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria (FIGR) to facilitate a government-to-government partnership to collaborate and consult in cultural and natural resources management, land use management, archaeological research, interpretation and educational projects, and actions to support compliance with federal laws and policies.
NPS had to obtain federal consistency determinations from federal and state agencies on the Final EIS. Most notably, NPS received conditional concurrence from the California Coastal Commission (Commission) by a slim margin. In that process, NPS agreed to additional conditions: to provide additional public transparency with annual reports to the Commission; establish specific metrics and responsibility to track work and investments being made over time to improve water quality; develop a water quality protection plan and bring it to the Commission for public input; and return in five years to a public Commission meeting with a progress report. Read more about the Commission hearing here and EAC, NPCA, and Save Our Seashore’s advocacy at this hearing pushing for accountability and transparency in this process.
Several lease violations were discovered in the weeks leading up to the release of the ROD, including: a rancher using a bulldozer in riparian habitat and depositing sediment into a creek and the discovery of an illegal dump site that is being examined as a hazardous waste site. These lease violations add to the lengthy list of recent violations including: dead cattle in Drakes Estero due to mismanagement; adding 60 pigs to a dairy operation; growing barley in a silage pasture; and others. These lease violations have harmed public confidence in the enforcement of leases by the Seashore which we think should be remedied as soon as possible.
The confluence of these factors resulted in some shifts in the ROD that in many ways altered the NPS perspective on where, how, and who is eligible for ranching in the Seashore.
What’s in the ROD Compared to the Final EIS
We have highlighted some key points of what is in the ROD compared with the September 2020 Final EIS.
Ranch Lease/Permits:
The Final EIS authorized issuing leases/permits with up to 20-year terms for multi-generational ranching operations on approximately 26,100 acres. Each lease/permit would require the rancher to enter into a Ranch Operating Agreement that would identify ranch-specific operational details and requirements.
The ROD modified the lease/permit determination process, noting now that leases will be issued with up to 20-year terms for ranchers who agree to undertake required actions to continue multi-generational ranching operations. The term of each lease/permit will be determined on a case-by-case basis, depending on the investments to be implemented in the Ranch Operating Agreement.
Additionally, the ROD places new conditions on dairy operations increasing accountability In the initial Ranch Operating Agreement there will be an evaluation of current infrastructure conditions and requirements for dairies to modernize Manure and Nutrient Management infrastructure and practices. If a dairy is unable to commit resources to meet the requirements, the dairy operation will cease in two-years and the number of dairies authorized in the park will be reduced. Dairy operations will be able to convert to beef operations in lieu of ceasing operations.
Our Take: The new language in the ROD indicates that ranchers must step into new requirements and undertake operational changes to meet Regional Water Quality Control Board and Coastal Commission requirements in order to protect water quality to be eligible for a lease. Dairies will need to implement new practices and if those investments are not being implemented, the lease may be forfeited or the dairy may convert to a beef operation.
We have continued to advocate that 20-year leases should not be flatly issued to each operation and should be based on past and current performance standards, protection of park resources, and adherence to lease conditions. We are pleased to see additional measures that should increase accountability. Ranches with a history of operational impacts to the natural environment and issues of past performance and lease compliance should have their leases revoked. Unless we have confidence in the leasing eligibility review process, we are very concerned that leases will be issued to operators with a history of lease violations, habitat degradation, and water quality issues.
Ranch Operating Agreements (ROAs):
The final EIS introduced annual Ranch Operating Agreements (ROAs) that NPS and ranch operators would review and agree to prior to a lease being issued. These ROAs would contain ranch-specific operational details and requirements and mapping of allowable operations within each ranch.
The ROD now mandates operating conditions for beef and dairy operations. The initial ROA would identify infrastructure and investment commitments for operators in order to accelerate practices that protect natural resources and water quality. The ROAs would also assign responsibility (who is responsible for doing what) and specific metrics that will be measured annually.
New conditions incorporated into the ROAs include:
Ranchers modifying cattle feeding strategies to reduce conflict with the elk;
NPS and ranchers identify and implement maintenance on stock ponds to support California Red-Legged Frog habitat;
NPS and ranchers monitor and maintain riparian fencing; ranchers would be required to meet the residual dry matter (RDM) requirements of 1,200 pounds/acre and adjust animal units based on the amount of available forage;
Ranchers would need to implement raven management measures to protect of snowy plovers;
NPS and ranchers would evaluate conditions and measures and establish timelines to address deferred maintenance.
Dairies: must evaluate infrastructure and identify additional measures to modernize manure management with the caveat, if investments are not made in two years the dairy must cease operation.
Beef: must identify priority management actions to restrict cattle from sensitive riparian, freshwater wetlands, and estuarine habitats to mitigate water quality impacts and agree to a schedule for implementation.
Our Take: The ROAs are really where the rubber hits the road in this entire process. The initial ROAs will set the conditions and standards for management of the ranching operations into the future. The ROAs should include specific conditions and metrics based on the feedback from the California Coastal Commission and Regional Water Board to improve water quality and protect natural resources in the Seashore. The ROAs are no longer focused solely on ranch-by-ranch operations but must factor impact to the entire watershed. Water Quality strategies must be presented to the Coastal Commission in April 2022 and that process will determine performance standards in the ROAs.
Since 2014 when this plan was first being discussed under the Ranch Management Plan, and something EAC advocated for at the April 2021 Coastal Commission hearing, is to ensure the specific assignment of responsibility and metrics to ensure accountability and transparency. We continue to have concerns with the transparency of the ROAs, since these are foundational agreements that set the tone and practices into the future. We would like these documents to be made publicly available to build public trust in the implementation of the GMPA and to better understand what is being factored into the initial agreements since subsequent ROAs will be based on this foundation .
Silage/Forage Production:
The Final EIS authorized more than 1,000 acres of silage production.
The ROD only authorized 163 acres of silage production, with more than 500 acres immediately removed with the closure of the McClure Dairy operation. The remaining 300 acres will be phased out of silage production over the next two-three years.
Our Take: This is an important shift, as silage production has clear and obvious negative environmental and species impacts. The remaining 163 acres must have environmental mitigations, to reduce harm to species, implemented along with siting the remaining acreage in less vulnerable areas. We understand that the phaseout timeline will include mitigation plans to reduce negative impacts to the environment by phasing out silage production over time and under monitoring from NPS.
Water Quality:
The Final EIS outlined the cumulative impacts on water quality from ranching activities in the planning area indicating that all of the proposed alternatives would negatively affect water quality and quantity in the planning area and vicinity including changes in pollutant loading (i.e. pathogens, nutrients, sediment, and other pollutants), flow patterns, infiltration, and changes in the amount of water used. The language in the Final EIS was unclear how the Seashore would improve water quality, who was responsible, how it would be implemented, what standards would be used, etc.
During the Coastal Commission consistency determination process in April 2021, EAC and partners strongly advocated for increased transparency, accountability, and enforcement to improve water quality. If ranching was going to continue in the Seashore, there needed to be clearly defined timelines, accountability, and public review to ensure the long-term goals were being met. We can’t wait 10 years from now only to find out nothing was being done.
The ROD reflects these new levels of standards from the Coastal Commission process with the requirement of a Water Quality Strategy for all lands in the planning area with the goal to create a park-wide standard based on the watershed requirements for Tomales Bay. The ROAs will identify practices to meet these heightened standards and provide a framework for implementation timetables and monitoring requirements that includes: water quality improvement practices, maintenance of stock ponds that are documented as California red-legged frog habitat, maintenance of riparian fencing, modernization of Manure Management practices consistent with EPA, state and regional Water Board requirements.
Our Take: The implementation of new operational and management strategies is significant. The Final EIS failed to provide a basic implementation framework, but that has been improved in the ROD. Additionally, the park-wide standard for water quality is also a step in the right direction. However, there are still several unknown factors.
First, the Water Quality Strategy is required to return to the Coastal Commission for public review prior to any ROAs or lease/permits are signed in April 2022. The timeline on this is unclear and needs to be made publicly available. Second, the ROAs are negotiated without any public involvement or oversight. The ROAs set the framework for how operations will be managed over time with an annual review process. It is important that the right set of standards are being prioritized in the initial ROAs but the public will not know what is included in those documents. Third, we remain unclear on enforcement of water quality standards and consequences of not meeting the goals. Will lease/permit holders be held accountable for failures? If standards are not met, will NPS reduce animal units on allotments to protect water quality? What are the priority areas to be addressed in the first years of implementation?
Succession:
The Succession Policy is a separate policy document from the GMPA process. While the GMPA refers to the Succession Policy in several areas, the Policy was not eligible for consideration in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), although it has been included in the Federal Register along the way. The Succession Policy defines the process of what happens when a ranch lease/permit expires either due to voluntary discontinuation of ranching or the violation of lease/permit conditions. Following those determinations, NPS will consider what happens next on that allotment.
The Draft EIS (released in 2019) expanded ranching access in the Seashore by providing for competitive open bidding for leases and allows ranching operations from outside of the to bid to operate in the Seashore.
The Final EIS removed the allowance of open bidding to operations outside the Seashore, but inserted a new allowance for eligible Seashore ranch workers to apply for leases.
The ROD modified the policy further, and now includes language that specifies the process that NPS will undertake to include the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria and long-term ranch workers to the list of eligible parties to apply for ranching lease/permits.
Our Take: This is one of the most important issues for EAC, as expanding the eligibility for ranching leases/permits in the Seashore. EAC continues to maintain our understanding of the original intentions of the lease back to commercial operations is that eventually, ranching operations will phase out when operators elect to no longer ranch or a lease is revoked. When that happens, that allotment should be assessed by NPS and decisions made with adaptive conservation management activities and not replaced with another commercial ranching operation.
Diversification:
The Final EIS authorized a suite of diversification activities that allow new types of ranching and business opportunities for ranch operators that included: 500 chickens per ranch, up to 50 sheep and 66 goats, up to 2.5 acres of row crops, and allowance for farm stays and ranch tours.
The ROD adjusted diversification, removing allowance of chickens and row crops without a further review process, and placed limitations on farm stays to just two guest rooms and that farm stays must meet requirements as actual farm stays and not overnight hotel accommodations. Ranchers may apply for other types of diversified uses beyond beef and dairy operations, but those will be subject to an environmental analysis.
Our Take: Diversification is not off the table, as other options remain as possibilities but will require a separate evaluation process. For example, a rancher may draft a proposal to diversify operations that will need to be reviewed and approved by the Seashore. Another way to think about this is that other operations are not authorized right now, but unfortunately still remain a possibility later, which could be problematic environmentally.
Elk Management:
The Final EIS divided the tule elk herds into three areas: 1) the Drakes Beach Herd, 2) Limantour Herd, and 3) excluded the herd behind the fence at Pierce Point as outside of the planning area.
The plan would not allow any new tule elk herds to establish in areas under ranching lease/permits.
The Drakes Beach Herd would be actively managed by NPS at a total population threshold of 120 individuals and lethally remove individuals annually to maintain that number. NPS would also implement hazing to reduce conflicts with ranching operations.
The Limantour herd would be managed based on the concept of not allowing new herds to establish in the planning area and with hazing and potential for lethal removal of female groups.
The ROD modified the management strategies for the tule elk and now includes additional coordination and partnerships for oversight and management with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and FIGR.
There is potential for new herds to establish in new distinct areas.
The Drakes Beach Herd population threshold was increased from 120 individuals to 140 and the core area of 580 acres will be removed from a grazing lease/permit to expand elk habitat. NPS will actively manage areas to reduce invasive species, that includes mowing and brush removal to encourage elk to forage in the Scenic Landscape zone. Ranchers also operating in areas where elk frequent must adjust their feeding operations to reduce conflict with the elk.
The Limantour Herd will be monitored closely, female groups will be discouraged from occupying ranch areas next to the Phillip Burton Wilderness area. Management will include aggressive hazing and the potential for lethal removal of individual elk. If these methods fail, new herds will be allowed to occupy areas in the ranchland zone. No population management threshold has been established.
Our Take: EAC does not agree with the baseline in the GMPA to manage the elk population based on forage availability and conflicts with ranching operations. We remain strongly opposed to this plan to lethally remove elk from the Seashore and would like to see the Seashore develop a comprehensive elk management plan that includes holistic management strategies for all of the elk, including the Pierce Point Herd that is behind the elk fence.
Next Steps
We are continuing our conversations with NPS and environmental partners on the details of this plan. We will continue to advocate for coastal resource protection in the Seashore, accountability, transparency, and monitoring as these plans are implemented.
