DOCSLIB.ORG

California Coastal Commission Cd-0006-20

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
California Coastal Commission Cd-0006-20 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.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Environmental Assessment/Assessment of Effect ___
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Cape Hatteras National Seashore Environmental Assessment/Assessment of Effect ___ Review and Adjustment of Wildlife Protection Buffers April 2015 1 Department of the Interior National Park Service Environmental Assessment: Review and Adjustment of Wildlife Protection Buffers Cape Hatteras National Seashore North Carolina April 2015 Summary The National Park Service (NPS) proposes to modify wildlife protection buffers established under the Cape Hatteras National Seashore Final Off-Road Vehicle Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement of 2010 (ORV FEIS). This proposed action results from a review of the buffers, as mandated by Section 3057 of the Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2015, Public Law 113-291 (2014 Act). The 2014 Act directs the NPS “to ensure that the buffers are of the shortest duration and cover the smallest area necessary to protect a species, as determined in accordance with peer-reviewed scientific data.” This environmental assessment (EA) deals solely with review and modification, as appropriate, of wildlife protection buffers and the designation of pedestrian and vehicle corridors around buffers. All other aspects of the ORV FEIS remain unchanged. This EA analyzes potential impacts to the human environment resulting from two alternative courses of action. These alternatives are: alternative A (no action, i.e., continue current management under the ORV FEIS), and alternative B (modify buffers and provide additional access corridors) (the NPS preferred alternative). As more fully described in the EA, the proposed modifications to buffers and corridors in alternative B are as follows: For American oystercatcher: There would be an ORV corridor at the waterline during nesting, but only when (a) no alternate route is available, and (b) the nest is at least 25 meters from the vehicle corridor.
    [Show full text]
  • Seashore Pocket Guide
    . y a B e e L d n a n i t r a M e b m o C , h t u o m n y L ) e v o b a ( . e m i t m e h t e v i g u o y f i e c i v e r c n e d d i h a m o r f t u o . a n i l l a r o c d n a e s l u d s a h c u s s d e e w a e s b a r C e l b i d E k u . v o g . k r a p l a n o i t a n - r o o m x e . w w w e r a t s a o c s ’ r o o m x E n o e f i l d l i w e r o h s a e s k c a b e v o m n e t f o l l i w s b a r c d n a h s i F . l l i t s y r e v g n i p e e k d e r r e v o c s i d n a c u o y s l o o p k c o r r o f k o o l o t s e c a l p e t i r u o v a f r u o f o e m o S , g n i h c t a w e m i t d n e p S .
    [Show full text]
  • Seashore Wildlife and Tides Education and Learning Pack
    Seashore Wildlife and Tides Education and Learning Pack 0 Key Terms Seashore Wildlife Tides East Beach West Beach Shingle Sand Dunes Marram Grass Site of Special Scientific Interest Maritime and Coastal Agency Learning Objectives To compare the differences between East Beach and West Beach To understand which animals live on the Beaches To understand why West Beach is a Local Nature Reserve To understand why we have to respect the tide To compare different habitats, and what we find in each of them. 1 Seashore and Wildlife Littlehampton is lucky enough to have two different beaches, East and West Beach. Pebbles dominate the landscape when the tide is in but a large se bed, called ‘Winkle Island’, is exposed at low tide, along with long sand flats. Groynes on both beaches help the flow of the sea to try to detract the longshore drift from creating too much sand at the river mouth. The beaches are award-winning, with East Beach being awarded the 2015 Blue Flag and Seaside Award. East Beach East Beach is a lot busier in the holidays with tourists from all over the country visiting the seaside on day trips. East beach is mainly for tourists with cafes, adventure golf courses and train rides along the promenade operate in the summer months. East Beach is also home to the East Beach Cafe, designed by Heatherwick Studios. Britain’s longest bench can also be found along East Beach Promenade. It runs for 324 metres along the seafront and is made East Beach and Cafe, Littlehampton from reclaimed tropical hardwood slats from coastal groynes and landfill.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology at Point Reyes National Seashore and Vicinity, California: a Guide to San Andreas Fault Zone and the Point Reyes Peninsula
    Geology at Point Reyes National Seashore and Vicinity, California: A Guide to San Andreas Fault Zone and the Point Reyes Peninsula Trip highlights: San Andreas Fault, San Gregorio Fault, Point Reyes, Olema Valley, Tomales Bay, Bolinas Lagoon, Drakes Bay, Salinian granitic rocks, Franciscan Complex, Tertiary sedimentary rocks, headlands, sea cliffs, beaches, coastal dunes, Kehoe Beach, Duxbury Reef, coastal prairie and maritime scrublands Point Reyes National Seashore is an ideal destination for field trips to examine the geology and natural history of the San Andreas Fault Zone and the North Coast of California. The San Andreas Fault Zone crosses the Point Reyes Peninsula between Bolinas Lagoon in the south and Tomales Bay in the north. The map below shows 13 selected field trip destinations where the bedrock, geologic structures, and landscape features can be examined. Geologic stops highlight the significance of the San Andreas and San Gregorio faults in the geologic history of the Point Reyes Peninsula. Historical information about the peninsula is also presented, including descriptions of the aftermath of the Great San Francisco Earthquake of 1906. Figure 9-1. Map of the Point Reyes National Seashore area. Numbered stops include: 1) Visitor Center and Earthquake Trail, 2) Tomales Bay Trail, 3) Point Reyes Lighthouse, 4) Chimney Rock area, 5) Drakes Beach, 6) Tomales Bay State Park, 7) Kehoe Beach, 8) McClures Beach, 9) Mount Vision on Inverness Ridge, 10) Limantour Beach, 11) Olema Valley, 12) Palomarin Beach, 13) Duxbury Reef 14) Bolinas Lagoon/Stinson Beach area. Features include: Point Reyes (PR), Tomales Bay (TB), Drakes Estero (DE), Bolinas Lagoon (BL), Point Reyes Station (PRS), San Rafael (SR), and San Francisco (SF), Lucas Valley Road (LVR), and Sir Francis Drake Boulevard (SFDB).
    [Show full text]
  • Gulf Islands PWC Environmental Assesment
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Gulf Islands National Seashore Florida/Mississippi GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE Personal Watercraft Use Environmental Assessment Printed on recycled paper National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Gulf Islands National Seashore Florida/Mississippi GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE Personal Watercraft Use Environmental Assessment March 2004 SUMMARY Gulf Islands National Seashore was established in 1971, “In order to preserve for public use and enjoyment certain areas possessing outstanding natural, historic and recreational values…” The seashore stretches approximately 160 miles from Cat Island in Mississippi to the eastern tip of Santa Rosa Island in Florida. There are snowy-white beaches, sparkling blue waters, fertile coastal marshes, and dense maritime forests. Visitors can explore 19th century forts, enjoy shaded picnic areas, hike on winding nature trails, and camp in comfortable campgrounds. In addition, Horn and Petit Bois islands located in Mississippi are federally designated wilderness areas. Nature, history, and recreational opportunities abound in this national treasure. All areas of Gulf Islands National Seashore in the Florida District and the Davis Bayou area in the Mississippi District are reachable from Interstate 10. The Mississippi District barrier islands are only accessible by boat. The purpose of and the need for taking action is to evaluate a range of alternatives and strategies for managing personal watercraft (PWC) use at Gulf Islands National Seashore to ensure the protection of park resources and values while offering recreational opportunities as provided for in the national seashore’s enabling legislation, purpose, mission, and goals. Upon completion of this process, in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the National Park Service (NPS) may either take action to adopt special regulations to manage PWC use, or it may not reinstate PWC use at this park unit.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Biological Research at Lundy
    Irving, RA, Schofield, AJ and Webster, CJ. Island Studies (1997). Bideford: Lundy Field Society Marine Biological Research at Lundy summarised in Tregelles ( 193 7) and are incorporated into the fljracombejauna andjlora (Tregelles, Palmer & Brokenshire 1946) and the Flora of Devon (Anonymous Keith Hiscock 1952). The first systematic studies of marine ecology at Lundy were undertaken by Professor L.A. Harvey and Mrs C.C. Harvey together with students of Exeter Introduction University in the late 1940s and early 1950s The earliest recorded marine biological studies near to (Anonymous 1949, Harvey 1951, Harvey 1952). These Lundy are noted in the work of Forbes (1851) who took studies again emphasised the richness of the slate dredge samples off the east coast of the island in 1848. shores especially when compared to the relatively The first descriptions of the seashore wildlife on Lundy impoverished fauna on the granite shores. A later are those published in 1853 by the foremost Victorian study (Hawkins & Hiscock 1983) suggested that marine naturalist and writer, P.H. Gosse, in the Home impoverishment in intertidal mollusc species was Friend (reproduced later in Gosse 1865). However, his due to the isolation of Lundy from mainland sources of descriptions are unenthusiastic, reveal nothing unusu­ larvae. al and draw attention to the very few species found on When marine biologists started to use diving the granite shores. There are further brief references to equipment to explore underwater around Lundy at Lundy in the literature of other Victorian naturalists. the end of the 1960s, they discovered rich and diverse Tugwell ( 1856) found the shores rich collecting communities and many rare species leading to a wide grounds and cites the success of a collecting party who range of studies being undertaken, both underwater (with the help of "an able-bodied man with a crowbar") and on the shore, in the 1970s and early 1980s.
    [Show full text]
  • Where the Land Is Greener Case Studies and Analysis of Soil and Water Conservation Initiatives Worldwide
    where the land is greener case studies and analysis of soil and water conservation initiatives worldwide World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies land users leading the way in making the land greener rz_layout_part1_wocat_2007.qxd 9.11.2006 8:05 Uhr Seite I where the land is greener case studies and analysis of soil and water conservation initiatives worldwide rz_layout_part1_wocat_2007.qxd 9.11.2006 8:05 Uhr Seite II This book is dedicated to those women and men who take good care of the land – whose individual and collective efforts go, so often, unacknowledged. WOCAT where the land is greener rz_layout_part1_wocat_2007.qxd 9.11.2006 8:05 Uhr Seite III where the land is greener case studies and analysis of soil and water conservation initiatives worldwide Editors Hanspeter Liniger and William Critchley Associate editors Mats Gurtner Gudrun Schwilch Rima Mekdaschi Studer WOCAT – World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies WOCAT 2007 rz_layout_part1_wocat_2007.qxd 13.11.2006 17:21 Uhr Seite IV Co-published by CTA, FAO, UNEP and CDE on behalf of the World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies (WOCAT) Financed by Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC), Bern United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Nairobi Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), Rome Danish International Development Assistance (DANIDA), Copenhagen Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture, Basel Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation ACP-EU (CTA), Wageningen Editors Hanspeter Liniger and William Critchley Associate editors Mats Gurtner, Gudrun Schwilch and Rima Mekdaschi Studer Technical drawings Mats Gurtner Charts and maps Gudrun Schwilch and Simone Kummer Language editing William Critchley and Theodore Wachs Layout Urs Amiet Printed by Stämpfli AG, Bern Citation WOCAT 2007: where the land is greener – case studies and analysis of soil and water conservation initiatives worldwide.
    [Show full text]
  • Nov 16, 2020 Issue 6
    MONDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2020 / VOLUME 147, ISSUE 6 Campus Times SERVING THE UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER COMMUNITY SINCE 1873 / campustimes.org Students Occupy Frigid DPS Lot, Mangelsdorf and Reslife Heads Talks Winter DPS Chief Promise Discussion Stay, Spring Semester By Hailie Higgins EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Students looking to stay on campus over the extra long winter break will be able to snag a room free of charge if they already have a housing contract for the school year. Unlike previous years, River Campus stu- dents will not be relocated, and will remain in their regular dorms for either a short-term or long-term stay, according to the Residential Life website. The former is from Nov. 25 un- til Dec. 19 (last day of finals), and the second from Nov. 25 to Jan. 22. Students looking to stay could register us- ing an online survey that closed today. Any student who has not yet reached out, or who wants to stay past Dec. 19 but doesn’t have a spring contract, should contact winterstay- [email protected]. Students looking to stay from November to January will have a mandatory $895 dining fee. This is their only fee. Short-term students do not have a mandatory plan. HENRY LITSYKY / PHOTO EDITOR “We wanted to make sure that Students hang the first banner on Rush Rhees Library promptly at 1:00. there’s enough people to make a [dining plan] viable.” By Henry Litsky Matter flag repeatedly passing the lot. By the PHOTO EDITOR time that confrontation de-escalated, Fischer “We wanted to make sure that there’s enough had arrived.
    [Show full text]
  • A Study of the Song Lyrics of the Swedish Power Metal Band Falconer
    Language use in metal song lyrics: A study of the song lyrics of the Swedish power metal band Falconer Linn Olsson C-Level Essay Department of Languages and Literatures Göteborgs Universitet Spring term 2010 Supervisor: Pia Köhlmyr Picture from www.falconermusic.com 2 Abstract Title: Language use in metal song lyrics: A study of the song lyrics of the Swedish power metal band Falconer. Author: Linn Olsson Term and year: Spring term 2010 Institution: University of Gothenburg, Department of Languages and Literatures/English Supervisor: Pia Köhlmyr Purpose: The purpose of this essay is to investigate the different linguistic aspects of a certain subgenre of metal music, power metal, to get a general picture of the language use in metal song lyrics. Method: A qualitative study with song lyrics as empirical data. Material: Song lyrics from one selected band were analysed. Keywords: Metal music, power metal, Falconer, musicology, song lyric analysis. Summary/Main results: This investigation shows that the lyrics of power metal can deal with a wide range of topics; from love, freedom and oppression to grief, greed and poverty. The level of language is high, without many mistakes and with proficient use of different literary devices such as rhymes and metaphors. 3 Table of contents Abstract………………………………...................................................................... 2 1. Introduction………………………………............................................................ 4 1.1 Background ……………………..................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Educator Resources MARINE LIFE
    Educator resources MARINE LIFE This package has been designed to give a brief introduction to the most common species you are likely to find in the rockpools of Yorkshire and other rocky shores of the UK. For your use we have attached some related further topics to allow for you to expand on any specific areas or to help tailor any learning or activities to the aptitude of the student. We have also included suggested subjects which can be linked to this topic. Topics within the key stages which relate to this topic: Key stage 1/2 Year 1 Animals, including humans - Identify and name a variety of common animals including fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals - Identify and name a variety of common animals that are carnivores, herbivores and omnivores - describe and compare the structure of a variety of common animals (fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals, including pets) Everyday materials - Identify and name a variety of everyday materials, including wood, plastic, glass, metal, water, and rock Year 2 Living things and their habitat - Identify that most living things live in habitats to which they are suited and describe how different habitats provide for the basic needs of different kinds of animals and plants, and how they depend on each other - Identify and name a variety of plants and animals in their habitats, including microhabitats - Describe how animals obtain their food from plants and other animals, using the idea of a simple food chain, and identify and name different sources of food Animals, including humans
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to Best Practice for Watching Marine Wildlife a Guide to Best Practice for 1 Watching Marine Wildlife
    SMWWC Scottish Marine Wildlife Watching Code A Guide to Best Practice for Watching Marine Wildlife A Guide to Best Practice for 1 Watching Marine Wildlife Contents Introduction . 2 What is disturbance? . 4 Best practice guidance for: – Whales, dolphins and porpoises . 6 – Basking sharks . 16 – Seals . 24 – Birds . 32 – Otters . 42 – Turtles . 50 Dealing with cumulative impacts . 54 Annex 1: Reporting and recording . 58 Annex 2: Other more specialist codes . 62 Annex 3: Further reading . 66 Acknowledgements . 68 C O N T E N T S SMWWC Scottish Marine Wildlife Watching Code 2 3 INTRODUCTION The Scottish Marine Wildlife Watching Code is designed to be The Scottish Marine Wildlife Watching Code deals mainly with simple and concise, and easily understood by anyone who may wish minimising disturbance from individual encounters. There will to watch marine wildlife. In practice, avoiding disturbance of marine inevitably be times and places where the number of encounters with wildlife is far from simple for example, what may be disturbing to an wildlife increases to the point where the longer term well-being and otter in the water may not be disturbing to a seal hauled out on the survival of animals is compromised. We need mechanisms to deal rocks. Some basic knowledge and understanding of different species with this. This Guide therefore also includes a section which provides groups is useful. This Guide seeks to address this need while at the information on Dealing with cumulative impacts through the same time offering more detailed advice on best practice for development of local wildlife management initiatives and improved watching marine wildlife.
    [Show full text]
  • Download This Issue
    REGIONAL2020/2021 winter special 30 44 DAYS OF WAR IN 44 ACTS POSTCAUCASUS 04 ARTSAKH HISTORY: From Ancient Times to the First Republic of 1918 14 IMPOSED PEACE AND UNLEASHED WAR: The Prehistory and History of the First Karabakh War 34 PARADISE LOST: Armenian Historical Heritage Left Under Azerbaijan 60 BURN AND LEAVE: THE WAR THAT Refugees Leaving Their Homes Once Again TORN US APART Gyumri Ceramics Revival of Armenian ceramics in the 21st century The Family Care Foundation and the Muscari Association are working together to improve the life conditions in Armenia. Their activities are concentred especially in Gyumri, which has an invaluable historical, patrimonial and cultural wealth. After the earthquake of 1988, which caused the death of tens of thousands of inhabitants, this city tries to get up and regain its once undeniable radiance. Following this tragic event, the Family Care Foundation was created by the will of implementing projects for the economic and cultural development of Armenia in the fields of tourism, art, handicraft and restoration of traditional values with a strong ethical requirement. Regarding Muscari, created in 2016, its purpose is to valorise Armenian culture and French-Armenian exchanges. It works for education in France and Armenia and it promotes a better knowledge of peoples, cultures and languages. This complementarity gives life to projects such as the ceramics workshop in Gyumri, which allows currently many families to live with dignity, thanks to arts and crafts inspired by among others Armenian potters from Kütahya in the former Ottoman Empire, the golden age of their activity being in the 18th century.
    [Show full text]