STATE OF CALIFORNIA - NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, GOVERNOR CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION 455 MARKET STREET, SUITE 300 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105-2219 FAX (415) 904-5200 TDD (415) 904-5400 Th3a CD-0006-20 (National Park Service) April 22, 2021 CORRESPONDENCE (received as of March 26, 2021) Individual Members of the Public Part I CD-0006-20 (NPS) CORRESPONDENCE - INDIVIDUALS PART I - pg 2 This item is a form letter sent to the [email protected] inbox from 12,360 separate contacts: Reject the Conditional Compliance to Point Reyes GLMPA Dear Executive Director John Ainsworth, As someone who is concerned about wild animals and wildlands, and one of over 250,000 In Defense of Animals supporters, I urge you to vote against the staff-recommended conditional compliance to the Point Reyes General Land Management Plan Amendment (GLMPA), and object to the National Park Service’s consistency determination, which is not consistent with the California Coastal Management Plan. The CCC received over 20,000 comments opposing the park's plan to continue ranching leases within the national park. We applaud the Commission for postponing the public hearing, which will allow enough time to adequately review and analyze comments with scientific and technical data. The staff report focused on water quality, yet the last tests were documented in 2013. In Defense of Animals recently performed professional scientific water quality tests from key collection points at Point Reyes National Seashore. Now the Commission has ample opportunity to review these new findings. The report also did not address other spillover effects from the Point Reyes GLMPA, including air quality and climate impacts from grazing cows, water quantity, and the loss of coastal public access. Please vote against the conditional compliance to protect our waterways and the Pacific Ocean from harmful spillover impacts. Thank you for your consideration of this important and timely matter. CD-0006-20 (NPS) CORRESPONDENCE - INDIVIDUALS PART I - pg 3 This item is a form letter sent to the [email protected] inbox from 10,869 separate contacts: Further Inquiry Needed Before Signing Away Point Reyes National Seashore Dear Executive Director John Ainsworth, On behalf of In Defense of Animals, an animal protection organization with over 250,000 supporters, I oppose the National Park Service’s final General Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) for the Point Reyes National Seashore. Before moving forward with Alternative B, which will ruin the Seashore with continued and expanded cattle grazing and the growth of other private, for-profit businesses at taxpayer expense, I urge you to pursue further inquiry, including long overdue water quality tests and a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) on drought and wildfires. Tourism is the primary source of income at the Seashore. Cattle are the Seashore’s primary source of greenhouse gases which contribute to climate change. Private ranching at the Seashore has resulted in overgrazing, water pollution, invasive weeds, and the reduction of native species, including those protected under the Endangered Species Act. Water quality degradation occurs from ranching practices like spreading liquid manure on fields, which increase human health risks, kill native fish, and pollute waterways. I implore you to conduct a Federal Consistency Review to address the lack of water quality testing, known environmental degradation, and impacts on migratory birds and endangered species at the Seashore. A SEIS on the GMPA concerning the Woodward Fire would determine new impacts on free- roaming elk. The impacts of ranchers growing crops and raising sheep, goats, pigs, turkeys or chickens, which increase conflicts with wild animals, must also be assessed. I also urge you to investigate the mass die-off of Tule elk who are fenced into a “preserve” — which is in violation of the Organic Act 1916 — without any perennial stream to serve fresh water. Please act urgently to ensure the NPS upholds its duty before any more of these rare native animals die. Alternative B must not be finalized until all these steps above are taken, and the public’s concern for the future of this natural treasure and the wild animals who call it home is acknowledged. Thank you for your consideration of this pressing matter, I look forward to your response. CD-0006-20 (NPS) CORRESPONDENCE - INDIVIDUALS PART I - pg 4 This item is a form letter sent to the [email protected] inbox from 9,514 separate contacts: Please stop NPS from killing tule elk Executive Director John Ainsworth, I am writing to express my disapproval of plans to kill the native, free-roaming tule elk of Point Reyes National Seashore as outlined in Plan B of the environmental impact statement for the General Management Plan Amendment. Up until a few decades ago, tule elk were thought to be extinct as a result of unfettered commercial hunting and displacement by cattle. Many California residents and groups— including the National Park Service and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service—spent decades working to re-establish a free-ranging herd on the National Seashore. Tule elk symbolize the conservation of native species and ecosystem processes, one of the primary missions of the National Park Service. The National Park Service should support actions to improve the ecological health and integrity of the landscape—which includes free- roaming tule elk herds—without killing elk. Can you help stop this strategy by urging further inquiry, such as water quality tests and a supplemental environmental impact report on drought and wildfires, before the National Park Service signs this disastrous plan? Thank you for your time. CD-0006-20 (NPS) CORRESPONDENCE - INDIVIDUALS PART I - pg 5 This item is a form letter sent to the [email protected] inbox from 7,956 separate contacts: Manage Point Reyes for Wildlife — Choose Alternative F I strongly object to the National Park Service's adoption of Alternative B for the General Management Plan amendment for Point Reyes National Seashore. I oppose the killing of native wildlife and the designation of commercial agriculture as the park's main use. Alternative B elevates private profits and entitlements while conflicting with the Park Service's mandate to preserve the natural environment for public benefit. I'm asking you to do everything in your power to stop this plan. The native tule elk are an iconic part of the natural landscape at Point Reyes and are the only tule elk herds within the national park system. There's no ecological justification or valid management reason for harassing, fencing or shooting elk in the park. Commercial lease holders on our public lands shouldn't be dictating policies that persecute the park's wildlife. Alternative B doesn't manage commercial ranching leases to accommodate elk or other native wildlife, nor does it adequately manage cattle grazing to protect coastal ecosystems, wildlife habitat, water quality, soil and native vegetation. Instead it sets a horrible precedent by expanding private agricultural uses on our parklands, allowing row crops and introducing sheep, goats, pigs and chickens, which will inevitably create more conflicts with other wildlife in the park. I urge the Park Service to reject Alternative B and instead approve Alternative F, which would phase out cattle ranching, expand recreation opportunities, and allow the elk to roam free throughout the national park. Alternative F is the only option that prioritizes the outstanding natural values of Point Reyes National Seashore for the public benefit. CD-0006-20 (NPS) CORRESPONDENCE - INDIVIDUALS PART I - pg 6 This item is a form letter sent to the [email protected] inbox from 3,734 separate contacts: NPS GMPA Consistency Determination Commissioners, I am writing to ask you to please find the NPS Consistency Determination for the General Management Plan Amendment/Final Environmental Impact Statement (GMPA/EIS) for Point Reyes National Seashore and the north district of Golden Gate National Recreation Area not consistent with the California Coastal Management Program. This plan is not consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the California Coastal Management Plan for many reasons. It would allow significantly new development, uses and activities on national parkland which would irreversibly and negatively impact the nearby coastal zone resources and public enjoyment of the coastal zone. For example, the expanded and new agricultural uses and intensity would heighten the already troubling impacts to water quality in nearby streams, further threatening endangered salmonids in the area. This plan would also treat native tule elk as problem animals to be killed or hazed, while authorizing additional and expanded agriculture uses which are certain to cause further conflicts between ranching operations and native wildlife. Native tule elk were brought back from the brink of extinction and Point Reyes National Seashore is the only national park where tule elk are found. The public, including myself, would be devastated at the thought of intentionally killing these majestic creatures. This in no way conforms with your mandate of protecting our recreational opportunities and public enjoyment of the coastal zone. For all these reasons, I urge you to find the GMPA/EIS not consistent with the California Coastal Management Program. Thank you for your consideration. CD-0006-20 (NPS) CORRESPONDENCE - INDIVIDUALS PART I - pg 7 This item is a form letter sent to the [email protected] inbox from 48 separate contacts: Please Vote Against Conditional Compliance Hi California Coastal Commission, I am writing to ask you to vote AGAINST the staff-recommended conditional compliance to the Point Reyes General Land Management Plan Amendment (GLMPA), and instead object to the National Park Service consistency determination, as it is not consistent with the California Coastal Management Plan. The vote on the conditional compliance is scheduled for January 14th. That is just a few weeks after the staff report came out.