|
A National Seashore is one of a dozen categories of National
Park. The designation, in itself, will not prevent development
and involuntary condemnation will not be used to acquire land.
A National Seashore designation would establish sufficient
public interest to justify using public and private funds to
acquire land and easements. As a result, private landowners
would find a ready market for their land, when and if they
wish to sell it.
A National Seashore would protect the coastal environment
and wildlife habitats of the Santa Barbara County Coast.
It would increase recreational opportunities and beach access
for County residents and visitors alike.
Early in its formative stages, the Conservancy adopted a goal
of obtaining a national protective designation such as a national
seashore for the Gaviota Coast. In pursuit of this goal, the
Conservancy solicited the involvement of NPS and encouraged
the support of local, state and federal legislators. In addition,
the Conservancy raised cost-sharing funds in the amount of
$75,000 to help facilitate the study, and through a partnership
with the Sierra Club, created enormous local support for an
NPS study. In response to this local effort, in their preliminary
assessment of the Gaviota Coast, the NPS selected the Gaviota
Coast as one of their “new area studies” in their 2000 budget.
In April of 2003, the Park Service published their draft
Feasibility Study and Environmental Assessment of the Gaviota
Coast (see link at the bottom of this page).
The Study found that the natural and cultural resources of
the area are “nationally
significant” and “suitable for
inclusion” in the National Park System. However, the Study
concluded that the area is “not a feasible addition” to the
National Park Service, because:
1) “Land sufficient for the
establishment of a national park unit does not appear to be
available to the NPS”; 2) “It is unlikely,
due to strong opposition expressed by study area landowners,
that efficient park development and management could occur”;
and 3) within the context of the
commitments of the President, Secretary of the Interior, and
Director of the NPS to address other national financial priorities,
the NPS is not able to undertake new land acquisition and management
responsibilities of this potential cost and magnitude.” (See
page 74 of the Study.)
While the Conservancy disagrees with the conclusions of the
feasibility analysis, because more than 5,000 acres of high
priority properties are currently for sale, and not all landowners
oppose a federal designation, it recognizes that current federal
priorities preclude a National Park Service designation at
this time.
The conclusions of the feasibility analysis reduced the alternatives
analysis to:
- “Continuation of Current Programs and Policies.” This is
the “no action” alternative for this Study, and assumes that
current programs, policies, conditions and trends would continue.
- “Enhanced Local and State Management.” This alternative
provides a menu of programs and tools that could be pursued
by the local community. (See
page 84 of the Study.)
The Conservancy strongly supports Alternative 2, which is
identified in the Study as the environmentally preferred alternative. “The
NPS will identify a preferred alternative in the final EA (environmental
assessment) after analyzing public and agency responses to
the draft alternatives.” (See
page 165 of the Study.)
NPS
FEASIBILITY STUDY
BUSH ADMINISTRATION
TURNS ITS BACK
ON THE GAVIOTA COAST!
|
| Back | | Next |
|