Ranchers, environmentalists, elected officials and others didn’t arrive at a grand consensus during a pair of meetings focused on the seashore’s forthcoming ranch management plan last week, but they did get a chance to congregate in small groups and trade perspectives on a park they are all zealous about protecting: some deeply focused on preserving agriculture, others committed to resource protection, most—though not everyone—hoping the two can work in
harmony.

Point Reyes National Seashore Superintendent Cicely Muldoon encouraged “deep dialogue.” Her staff said the purpose of the gatherings was to try to understand, if not agree with, different points of view. 

“It is your role tonight to put yourselves in our shoes,” said Dave Press, a wildlife ecologist.

Staff prepped packed rooms at the Dance Palace Community Center on Thursday and Friday with presentations on elk, pasture management, diversification and succession planning, outlining new practices and policies the park is considering allowing, or allowing on a broader basis. 

That information guided attendees as they organized themselves into discussion groups to provide more input to the seashore’s Comprehensive Ranching Management Plan, which will guide ranching in the seashore for the foreseeable future. (The National Park Service had reopened public comment on the plan and its environmental assessment for one week—ending today—allowing input beyond this summer’s six-week scoping period.)

Succession and ranch practices

The seashore does not have an official process for making decisions about succession, one of three topics covered during the first of last week’s meetings, along with pasture management and
diversification. 

In some cases in the past, portions of pasture have been passed on to neighbors; this happened after Vivian Horick passed away in the 1990s and left D Ranch without a clear heir.

There are a variety of ways the park could tackle succession in the future: offering leases to neighbors, family members or ranch employees, or putting the lease out to bid to them or even to the public. (A bidding process would be based on conservation and grazing-focused management, not on price, explained Devi Rao, the seashore’s rangeland management specialist.)

In his comments in one of the breakout discussion groups that followed the formal presentations, Ken Drexler, the vice president of the Environmental Action Committee of West Marin and a board member of the Marin Conservation League, noted that every ranch that disappears makes it more difficult for others to survive. “There should be a predisposition that [the park] continue ranching in some form on the land. They don’t have to, but they should,” he said.

Jenefer Merrill, an Inverness resident, said before the federal government purchased the seashore, employees often took over ranches; they should once again be “highly considered” when the park seeks new leaseholders, she said.

Another attendee, Ralph Evans, of Berkeley, felt the park should not be obligated to offer a lease to anyone. Others suggested that leaseholders provide input on their successors. 

Rancher Merv McDonald added his two cents: “Sometimes you need a doctor, sometimes you need a lawyer, sometimes you need a preacher. But three times a day, you need a farmer,” he said, a comment that generated a round of chuckles and applause. 

Everyone generally agreed there needed to be a policy—though it was also noted that the park might want to reserve some flexibility in selecting new stewards. 

Another topic discussed that afternoon, pasture management, includes everything from brush and weed control, soil preparation, seeding grasses and spreading manure to permanent and temporary fencing.

To control weeds, for instance, ranchers are currently allowed to mow. But under the new plan the park might consider opening up the tool kit to include controlled burns, herbicide use and chickens. The ranch plan could also grant greater allowances for using compost or chickens to add nutrients to the soil.

One discussion group emphasized the important role of no-till practices, native grasses and rotational grazing. Herbicides, another group noted, might be a mostly moot point, given organic certification requirements. (All the dairies in the seashore are organic.) A few suggested the park allow increased capacities for stock ponds, which could help store more water during dry periods and perhaps benefit wildlife, too.

Diversification, another major part of the forthcoming plan, encompasses both new types of food production—chickens, pigs, sheep, bees, row crops—and visitor services like bed and breakfasts, farm stands or tours. Ranchers have called diversification “extremely important” in the current planning process because it provides a way to “adapt to factors outside their control, like how much forage is produced in a year,” Ms. Rao said.

The seashore is considering limiting some diversified practices to the “ranch core,” or areas of intense use around barns, houses and other structures. Dairy processing or farm stands would likely be limited to the core, while other types of practices might need to be sited further afield.

Attendees noted the importance of historic practices, and of balancing any new practices with natural resource protection. Stacy Carlsen, the county’s agricultural commissioner, emphasized that diverse practices are part of the history of many seashore ranches. But others feared environmental impacts from diversified operations, or opposed the concept altogether. 

One participant felt comfortable with the idea of farm stays and tours; chickens, on the other hand, could draw coyotes and create more conflict between wildlife and domesticated animals, he said.

Tule elk

On Friday evening, Mr. Press presented data on tule elk in the pastoral zone and offered two ways of dealing with the problem: managing them within the pastoral zone or prohibiting them from ranches.

Of the two herds roaming the pastoral zone, the Drakes Beach herd—which grazes on A, B, C, D and E Ranches—includes 95 elk. Another contingent of about 30 spends time on Home Ranch, near Drakes Estero, and five to seven have recently wandered further, onto the Evans Ranch.

Over the past year, Mr. Press has consulted with ranchers, academics, other national parks that manage elk and the state Department of Fish and Wildlife. He said the draft plan, set for release this summer, will include two concepts, along with the required no-action alternative: prohibiting elk in the pastoral zone or managing them within ranch lands. It’s possible there could also be multiple alternatives for both options.

If the elk are managed, there could be a “pre-decided population level” or a specific geographic range they are limited to, or both. Management methods could include contraception, translocation, culling, fencing and habitat enhancement.

Contraception is complicated, Mr. Press said, requiring tagging and tracking so that booster shots can be administered. Because the animals would eventually “wise up” to dart guns, over time the park would likely need to use helicopters to net the animals in order to deliver the birth control. 

Contraception also causes females to remain in heat for longer periods, potentially spurring longer rutting seasons that could impact the “overall fitness of male tule elk…who are continuing to try to impregnate females and fight off other bulls for dominance in the herd,” Mr. Press said.

Contraception also wouldn’t significantly reduce herd sizes for another five to 10 years.

Many attendees later seemed to agree on ruling out contraception. 

Another possibility is relocating elk, a solution endorsed by the Point Reyes Seashore Ranchers Association that would require the park to move them within the park or find another preserve willing to take them. Johne’s disease, a bacterial infection that invades the intestines, complicates the latter option. Though seashore elk are the only known carriers in the state, bimonthly tests of the two pastoral herds since May have not found any carriers; if that trend continues, Fish and Wildlife might eventually allow the park to move some elk out of Point Reyes.

Elk could also be trucked from the ranches back to the Limantour wilderness, though adults might return. Younger animals could be more amenable, however; early next year, a few will be moved to the wilderness as an experiment.

Lethal removal is also an option. Teddy Roosevelt National Park, in North Dakota, holds a lottery for hunting tags and Grand Teton National Park, in Wyoming, has a hunting season. Not only does hunting reduce herd sizes, but elk might eventually avoid the areas where it takes place, Mr. Press said.

Fencing is yet another option. Though Mr. Press described a possible fence along the border of the pastoral zone and the Limantour wilderness, he believed elk would eventually move around it. He also said a significant amount of vegetation would have to be removed to make space for the fence and create a path to access it for maintenance.

There were a few points of wide (though not universal) agreement on Friday, aside from the opposition to contraception. Many people called for habitat enhancement to create more forage for the elk—habitat could be enhanced in the pastoral zone or in certain non-wilderness corridors around Limantour—along with a concrete plan that the park will truly stick to. 

Ed Loosli, who was in a group that included some ranchers, argued that the elk should not be managed at all. “My feeling is the elk are telling us where they like to be, and the park’s mission is to protect and preserve natural resources. That’s their ultimate assignment,” he said.

The ranchers asked Mr. Loosli if he understood their position. “Everything I’ve told you, does it at least make sense to you?” one asked.

“I don’t blame you one bit,” said Mr. Loosli, who did not change his mind. 

Other groups had similar conversations, with different sides unable to sway each other.

“This group was very conflicted,” one woman told the crowd. “Some know the elk are endangered and some know the ranches are endangered, and some didn’t agree with any of the above.”

But everyone remained respectful: offering apologies after interruptions, trying to draw out minority group opinions and working to understand the other side of the dilemma—even if they believed their minds were mostly made up.

Before everyone dispersed Friday night, Ms. Muldoon recognized the diversity of opinion, but said she believed the seashore would find a viable way to promote both ranching and natural resources. She referenced Cuyahoga Valley National Park, in Ohio, as an example of a unit that facilitates agriculture. “We think we can show the way… We think we can do it better than they do,” she said.