Defense of Point Reyes ranches missed big picture

In her recent Marin Voice in defense of ranches for Point Reyes National Seashore (“Attacks on Point Reyes decision ignore benefits of ranches,” Dec. 20”), Judy Teichman criticizes the lawsuit “that led to preparation of a full environmental impact statement.”

That statement is puzzling. Preparation of an environmental impact statement should be standard practice to assess environmental risks of proposed actions. From my perspective, the lawsuit did nothing more than remind the National Park Service of this responsibility. Actually, we should all be grateful since it spurred the National Park Service to conduct longneglected analyses and make these available to both agency leaders and the public.

For example, Point Reyes officials had not evaluated the impact of ranching on water quality until the public raised the issue in comments on the draft impact statement. This resulted in an appendix in the final statement documenting very high concentrations of bacteria which are a risk to human health.

Because this information was not provided in the draft impact statement, the public had no opportunity to comment or react to it. Hopefully, park officials will accept their responsibility and eliminate the discharge of cattle feces to Point Reyes streams and estuaries.

As for Teichman’s comment about using science — park officials did employ “sound science.” By their own analysis, the selected alternative to extend ranching would continue to degrade not only water but also air and soil quality. Furthermore, the presence of ranches prevents most visitors from fully enjoying sweeping vistas of the Pacific Ocean that are only accessible by navigating barbed wire and electric fences that surround 30% of the park that is leased to beef and dairy operators.

Visitors to Point Reyes are an enormous boon to the local economy — we should encourage more of them to visit what Teichman correctly calls “our beloved park.”

— Elizabeth Dodge, Berkeley