On March 25th, some of us from SSA, the CRSP Advisory Committee, the
Sierra Club, the Audubon Society, the California Native Plant Society,
The Wildlands Project, a Santa Cruz activist, and aides representing
Assemblyman Fred Keeley and Senator Bruce McPearson met with Dave
Vincent, State Parks District Superintendent, who has ultimate
responsibility for Castle Rock State Park.
On the Agenda were concerns about the Declaration of Purpose for the
Park, the need for an alternative to the "preferred" plan to develop
Partridge Farm for day use, camping, and Park headquarters, and
questions about the guidelines for developing the Park (the Limits of
Acceptable Change, or LAC’s).
THE DECLARATION OF PURPOSE:
We have been successful in getting some protective language included
but State Parks still insists on deleting from the existing Purpose the
language that says State Parks is to manage the park resources "...in
such a way as to maintain them in a near-wilderness state..." Dave
Vincent also rejected alternative language "prioritizing protection
over usage". He defended the Draft, saying it was adequate, that it was
"balanced". This statement was typical of Dave: ambiguous and
noncommittal. Many pointed out that the Purpose is the document that
will be referred to by future Administrators, and needs to be a clear
and unambiguous statement of protection. Dave said he will pass on the
suggestions to the Planning Team.
ALTERNATIVE PLAN:
There seems to be consensus that the General Plan needs (legally) an
Alternative Plan. Some have said that the General Plan needs at least
two alternatives to the "preferred" plan: One a "lower impact" plan and
another "do nothing" plan. After hearing speculation from Dave Vincent
that implementation of the Partridge Plan could take 10 to 15 years
(while studies are planned, funded, and implemented,) the importance of
(a viable) Alternative Plan become even more important, especially as
we realize how difficult it is to amend a General Plan.
I offered a general outline for an Alternative Plan which attempts
to address two primary issues: Loss of natural resources on Castle Rock
Ridge, and Parking:
- KEEP TOTAL USAGE (PARKING) AT CURRENT LEVELS, at least until
adequate staffing can be provided to manage an increased visitation.
- CONTROL ALL PARKING: Maintain the existing lot: 50-60 cars. Close
Highways 9 and 35 to all parking except in a few designated areas. A
parking area must be determined to be safe to both park visitors and
motorists alike and provide access to trails without compromising the
ecological health of the Park and the region. Any parking plan must
acknowledge the capacity and limitations of the local infrastructure,
and be subject to fee collection. There are several areas that might
meet these criteria.
LIMITS OF ACCEPTABLE CHANGE (LAC):
Key questions are: Who will set the Limits? How will Acceptable Limits
be determined? And will there be a forum for public overview, input and
involvement? Dave agreed that this will be a "public process", and that
it will be "science driven". Certainly this "commitment", its meaning
and its interpretation, must be carefully monitored by all of those
effected by Park development.
As the meeting ended, I suggested that we work toward a position
that articulates the needs and interests of the Park, its neighbors and
the Park visitors. I offered to maintain a email communication to help
support a dialogue on the issues. If you want to be on the email list,
send me your address, name, phone #, etc. Let me know what you think.
Time is of the essence as State Parks move toward final drafts of the
general plan.
Bruce Bettencourt, Friends of Castle Rock State Park
BABETTENCO@AOL.COM
(408) 354-5661
