Analyzing an Argument
BIO 112
Item for Analysis #3
Introduction to Ecology, Summer 2015 (McDill)
Yolo County Farm Bureau opposes designation of Berryessa
Snow Mountain National Conservation Area.
Letter to the editor, Woodland Record
Source: http://woodlandrecord.com/letter-yolo-county-farm-bureau-opposesdistrict-supervisors-berryessa-s-p3062-1.htm
February 7, 2013
RE: H.R. 5545 - OPPOSE
Dear Duane [Chamberlain, chair, Yolo County Board of Supervisors];
The Yolo County Farm Bureau sincerely urges the Yolo County Board of
Supervisors to not support H.R. 5545, which would create the Berryessa Snow
Mountain National Conservation Area. Our opposition to this effort has been welldocumented over the years. This legislation has been continuously driven by one
conservation organization, Tuleyome, over the objections of potentially affected
private land owners, agricultural organizations, rural governments, and
recreational business owners.
The public hearings that were held prior to the introduction of this bill appeared to
have been organized and promoted by Tuleyome, which leads us to question the
impartiality of the entire process. Some local jurisdictions already voted to
approve the legislation, even before actual language was introduced. This onesided agenda has clearly been on a fast-track.
Tuleyome lobbied for a more restrictive proposal several years ago, focusing on
federal Wilderness designation. Their effort was unsuccessful, largely because of
Congressman Thompson's willingness to listen to the concerns of potentially
impacted stakeholders. This bill is promoting the same agenda, just through a
different mechanism. The approach by Tuleyome seems to reject Yolo County's
model tradition of promoting conservation through partnerships between public
and private entities.
H.R. 5545 accomplishes little of merit, other than placing an additional layer of
regulation over the affected area. The current area of 319,000 acres is an
unwieldy patchwork of government-owned real estate, and it is highly unlikely
that this legislation will facilitate easier management or coordination of
overburdened agencies. We understand that private lands have included in the
designation area, dispels the argument that the legislation only encompasses
government parcels. The concept that an NCA designation will increase the
visibility of the region in order to deal with an increasing population also seems
contradictory. How will encouraging more people to visit the area result iQ less
Analyzing an Argument
BIO 112
Item for Analysis #3
Introduction to Ecology, Summer 2015 (McDill)
impact to sensitive areas? An NCA designation cannot guarantee that there will
be additional resources to deal with these human impacts.
The proposed boundary lines of the conservation area have shifted substantially,
after northern counties voiced their opposition. If Tuleyome really wanted a
blanket conservation approach, why wasn't the east side of the Capay Valley
included in the proposal? Perhaps it's simply easier to override the concerns of
private landowners than it is the Wintun Tribe. One extremely troubling aspect of
H.R. 5545 is that the final map of the actual boundary lines won't even be
submitted until two years after its passage.
One of our greatest concerns is the advisory council that this legislation will
create. Most of the appointees are from individual counties' supervisorial boards,
and the four citizen appointments fall under the discretion of the Secretary of the
Interior, a highly partisan cabinet member. These meetings will likely be held
during normal business hours, as is the case with the Blue Ridge Berryessa
Natural Conservation Area Partnership, making it cumbersome for anyone but
paid government employees or environmental activists to attend. The large
geographical area, combined with the frequent turnover of government officials
may also prohibit consistent participation on the council. Furthermore, since the
advisory council cannot supersede the authority (we hope) of local, state, and
federal government jurisdictions, the reason for its existence seems pointless.
In a letter sent to Farm Bureau, dated March 20, 2009, Tuleyome referenced its
involvement in the stakeholder committee of the BLM Bear Creek Unit (formerly
Payne Ranch). Specifically, they touted their partnership with a highly respected
rancher on using grazing to manage invasive species. Our understanding is that
the grazing requirements they imposed became so restrictive, that the rancher
was ultimately forced to abandon his lease. Is this the kind of "partnership" that
will take place on other BLM grazing allotments, once Tuleyome has their
sympathizers secured on the advisory council? We believe the advisory council
is the primary motivation behind Tuleyome's effort to create the designation, and
their ultimate goal is to have greater control over how these federal lands are
managed.
The question of seeking compromise on this legislation is [moot]. How do you
compromise on something you adamantly oppose? Our members do not desire
this designation in any shape or form, and we encourage you to reconsider the
introduction of this bill. Barring that reconsideration, we will vigorously oppose all
efforts to pass it.
Sincerely,
Eric Paulsen
President, Yolo County Farm Bureau –
Analyzing an Argument
BIO 112
Item for Analysis #3
Introduction to Ecology, Summer 2015 (McDill)
Editor's note: See the Snow Mountain Staff Report prepared by Don Saylor,
Yolo County Supervisor, District 2, who wrote a letter to all members of the board
stating, "I recommend that we adopt the attached resolution in support of
designation of 319,300 acres of Federal land and interests in Federal land within
Napa, Lake, Mendocino and Yolo Counties as the Berryessa Snow Mountain
National Conservation Area, as depicted on the attached map." See map above.