HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/16/2021 Item 12, Cooper (2)
Wilbanks, Megan
From:Allan Cooper <
To:Hill, Robert; E-mail Council Website; Harmon, Heidi; Pease, Andy; Christianson, Carlyn;
Marx, Jan; Stewart, Erica A
Subject:Pilot Program For Winter Open Space Hours Of Use
Attachments:501_13_18...nightbiking.pdf
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.
To:
Robert Hill, SLO City Council
Re:
Pilot Program For Winter Open Space Hours Of Use
From:
Allan Cooper, San Luis Obispo
Date:
March 15, 2021
Dear Bob -
Thank you for drawing my attention to the “Council Reading File”. This was easy to miss
because there was no reference to the Terre Verde Environmental Consultant’s final 6-
page report in this list of attachments. As an assist to the public, I would recommend
that these attachments be included in the main text of the staff report. I have now read
over the reports included in this attachment dating back to 2017.
Before the public had access to these reports you made your own recommendations
back in January 2018. You stated the following: “Generally speaking, the time of year
that most species are breeding, nesting, and rearing is from February through early
September. A range of seasons for some of the species known to or expected to occur
are listed below.”
The hours of extended use (November 4 - March 11) encroach into the breeding, nesting
and rearing periods of the Gray fox, the white-tailed kite, the red-shouldered hawk and
the Western screech owl which begins in February and two species of bats (October -
February), the mule deer (January - April), and the barn owl (January - November).
What you were implying is that these extended hours should ideally begin November 4th
and end February 1st, not March 11th (see my letter below dating back to January 16,
2018). But the Council ignored your advice.
1
Presently we have some new information from Terre Verde to the effect that: “Large and
medium sized mammals, black-tailed deer and bobcat were detected only during the
February 16th survey when recreational use was low.” Again, terminating the program
on February 1st would address this finding.
But the overall message you and the City’s consultant have been providing the Council
has not changed over the past three years. In October 2017, the staff report stated the
following: “It is likely that some level of indirect impact will occur, however the extent
and severity of those potential impacts (to flora and fauna) remain unknown”.
Now we have the so-called April 16, 2019 six-page-long final report from Terre Verde
Environmental Consulting. Appearing on page six their conclusion is as follows: “As
such, it is likely that nighttime use will have an effect on wildlife occurring on the
Reserve, but the extent and severity of that effect is unknown.” Doesn’t this sound
familiar? Terre Verde’s excuse is as follows: “A true inventory of species would require a
long-term survey and monitoring effort occurring over multiple seasons and conditions
to thoroughly understand and document wildlife usage of the Reserve.” Isn’t three years
of surveying the Reserve long enough?
For lack of any guidance from Terre Verde, why can’t we rely on other peer-reviewed
scientific reports indicating that mountain bike activity is indeed harmful to wildlife (see
below). Bear in mind, these reports address day-time mountain biking. Night-time
mountain biking can only do more harm to our wildlife community. Thanks for listening!
- Allan
For those Council members seeking further scientific proof that mountain bike activity on
Cerro San Luis will be harmful to wildlife, then please refer to Audrey Taylor’s & Richard
Knight’s ”Wildlife Responses to Recreation and Associated Visitor Perceptions”, Jason
Lathrop’s “Ecological Impacts of Mountain Biking: A Critical Literature Review” 2003,
M.J. Vandeman’s “The Impacts of Mountain Biking on Amphibians and Reptiles” 2005,
Haiganoush Preisler’s “Statistical Methods for Analyzing Responses of Wildlife to Human
Disturbance” 2006, Shalene George’s and Kevin Crooks’ “Recreation and Large Mammal
Activity in an Urban Nature Reserve” 2006, and George Shalene’s, Kevin Crooks’ and
Leslie Naylor’s “Behavioral Responses of North American Elk to Recreational Activity”
2009.
2
To: SLO City Council, Derrick Johnson and Robert Hill
Re: Pilot Program For Winter Open Space Hours Of Use
From: Allan Cooper, San Luis Obispo
Date: January 16, 2018
Honorable Mayor and Council Members, my name is Allan Cooper
and I reside in San Luis Obispo.
If you decide against abandoning this pilot program in the face of
overwhelming pubic opposition then, at the very least, you should
make drastic changes to it. Or better yet you should continue this
agenda item until additional information is obtained. For example:
1)CEQA does not require formal responses to comments on an
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, only that the lead
agency consider the comments received [CEQA §15074(b)].
Nevertheless, responses to the comments would provide a more
complete environmental record and these responses would
definitely help you in making your decision tonight.
2)Your Natural Resources Manager who, unlike Shelly Stanwyck,
has sole authority over SLO’s Natural Resources Protection
Program, has stated: “Efforts to reduce use during the breeding,
nesting, and rearing periods over the year will lessen potential
impacts to wildlife.” At the very least, you should consider 1
confining the hours of extended use to November 4th through
February 1st as the breeding season for four of the eight locally
endangered species present on this mountain, three of which are
nocturnal, begin in February…not March. This is not even
mentioning four other nocturnal species present on the mountain
whose breeding season completely overlaps the Winter months,
in other words between November & February, between October
& February and between January & April.
For those Council members seeking further scientific proof that mountain bike activity on 1
Cerro San Luis will be harmful to wildlife, then please refer to Audrey Taylor’s & Richard
Knight’s ”Wildlife Responses to Recreation and Associated Visitor Perceptions”, Jason
Lathrop’s “Ecological Impacts of Mountain Biking: A Critical Literature Review” 2003, M.J.
Vandeman’s “The Impacts of Mountain Biking on Amphibians and Reptiles” 2005, Haiganoush
Preisler’s “Statistical Methods for Analyzing Responses of Wildlife to Human Disturbance”
2006, Shalene George’s and Kevin Crooks’ “Recreation and Large Mammal Activity in an Urban
Nature Reserve” 2006, and George Shalene’s, Kevin Crooks’ and Leslie Naylor’s “Behavioral
Responses of North American Elk to Recreational Activity” 2009.
of 1 6
3)Even if you decide to ignore this recommendation of your Natural
Resources Manager consider this:
4)As Council members you are sworn to protect the health and
safety of your citizens. Your favored Broad St. Bike Blvd. proposal
is predicated on assuring cyclist safety even at the expense of
removing over 70 on-street parking spaces. But paradoxically, by
approving more night time mountain biking, you’re throwing
cyclist safety into the winds. Based on published case controlled
studies of mountain biking injuries, injuries due to inattention and
poor visibility, increase at night. You also need to assure the
safety of night hikers. Trail etiquette requires cyclists to stop and
step to the side of the trail as soon as a hiker is approaching. How
could this etiquette, designed to protect the safety of hikers,
possibly be enforced if locally and elsewhere, competitive,
nighttime mountain biking has become an extreme sport? I am
urging you to remove the mountain bikers from this pilot program
because this is comparable to allowing pedestrians to shortcut
through an active skate board park.
5)And finally, you need to revisit the internet-based permitting and
enforcement system staff has described for you as the City is
relying on only seven rangers to administer this while, at the
same time, these seven rangers are also responsible for
overseeing 3,700 acres of open space lands, for engaging with
hundreds of visitors per week and constantly educating the public
about rules, wildlife plants, trails and more. Thank you!
The following is my more detailed response to several quotes (in bold
type) taken from your staff report followed by my concerns related
to these quotes.
“The pilot program, therefore, would be implemented under
the Parks and Recreation Director’s existing authority to
approve additional hours of use pursuant to 12.22.050(B).”
“As discussed in the Project Description, the City’s Open
Space Ordinance allows for the Parks Director to approve
hours of use.”
This is, in fact, incorrect. According to Chapter 12.22 “Open
Space Regulation”, the Parks & Recreation Department
of 2 6
Director has the authority to close open space lands within the
current permitted hours of use. There is no mention here of
granting the Director authority to approve additional hours of
use. (See below)
“C. Authority to Close. Any section or part of the city’s open space lands may be
declared closed to the public by the (Parks & Recreation) director at any time and
for any interval of time, either temporarily or at regular and stated intervals (daily
or otherwise), and either entirely or merely to certain uses, as the director finds
reasonably necessary.” http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/SanLuisObispo/html/
SanLuisObispo12/SanLuisObispo1222.html#12.22.050
“Trail Etiquette and Safety” - Cyclists
Yield to hikers and runner. Stop and step to the side of the
trail as soon as you see another user approaching. Riding up
to them makes them think you are not going to stop.”
This was obviously written for daytime use involving
recreational bikers and hikers. However, competitive nighttime
mountain biking has become increasingly popular. According to
data compiled by the National Institute of Health, downhill
mountain biking (DMB) can be considered an extreme sport
conveying a high risk of serious injury (see: https://
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23329619). In the final
analysis, mountain biking at night is not only hazardous to
wildlife but it is also extremely hazardous to both bikers and
hikers.
“City staff shall develop an internet-based permitting system
in order to ensure that evening use (from one hour after
sunset until 8:30 PM) during the pilot program period is kept
at or below existing average daily baseline use of 65
individuals.” “Individuals will be required to have evidence
that they have the required permit in their possession.
Individuals that are stopped by Ranger personnel and do not
possess a permit will be subject to citation under municipal
code section 12.22.050(B).”
How is this possible? Seven City Rangers presently maintain
approximately 3,700 acres of open space lands comprised of
of 3 6
15 properties held in open space, natural reserve, ecological
reserve, or agricultural reserve status. Rangers engage with
hundreds of visitors a week and are constantly educating the
public about rules, wildlife plants, trail and more. And yet they
are meant to stop individuals on Cerro San Luis who do not
possess a permit?
“City Administration’s Natural Resources Manager, Bob Hill,
concurs with this report.”
This is not exactly true. Robert Hill, SLO’s Natural Resources
Manager, has overall responsibility for the Natural Resources
Protection Program and he stated the following: “Efforts to
reduce use during the breeding, nesting, and rearing periods
of a year will lessen potential impacts to wildlife.”
He goes on to say: “Generally speaking, the time of year that
most species are breeding, nesting, and rearing is from
February through early September. A range of seasons for
some of the species known to or expected to occur are listed
below.”
The hours of extended use (November 4 - March 11) encroach
into the breeding, nesting and rearing periods of the Gray fox,
the white-tailed kite, the red-shouldered hawk and the
Western screech owl which begins in February and two species
of bats (October - February), the mule deer (January - April),
and the barn owl (January-November).
What Mr. Hill appears to be implying is that these extended
hours ideally begin November 4th and end February 1st, not
March 11th.
What is more concerning is that you will be making a decision
tonight based on an Initial Study without having access to the
public comments (including any responses to these
comments) which were submitted to the City up through
January 16, 2018.
Thank you for listening!
of 4 6
_______________________________________________
Dear Council Members -
In twenty minutes I came upon much scientific literature (see below)
testifying to the fact that mountain biking (and in some cases hiking)
does indeed harm wildlife. Most of this literature focuses on daytime
use. Nighttime use, particularly with regard to the many nocturnal
species residing on Cerro San Luis has to be even more deleterious.
- Allan
Impacts from mountain biking can be classified broadly into two
categories: (i) habitat change (trampling and erosion); and (ii) flight
and behavior change (Lathrop, 2003). Some literature also suggests
that cycling can cause wildlife mortality.
Thiel et al. (2008) as discussed above, discovered that Capercaillie (or
wood grouse) abandoned otherwise ideal habitat that was located
in areas adjacent to busy ski trails. Preisler et al. (2006) studied the
response of elk (Cervus elaphus L.) to all-terrain vehicle use in a
controlled-access area, and found that once displaced from an area by
human activity, they habitually avoided those areas regardless of the
attractiveness of the habitat within the zone of human influence.
A 2015 article from JSTOR features a line of scientific studies and
reports aimed at investigating the impact non-consumptive activities
like hiking, biking and bird-watching have on our nation's wildlife - and
the results are less than Disney-esque. One of the studies, titled
Wildlife Responses to Recreation and Associated Visitor Perceptions
found that even perceived "passive" recreation as described above
can startle or disturb wildlife, forcing animals to burn energy
reserves or experience stress.
While mountain biking literature focuses mainly on erosion and
trampling of vegetation, some studies consider the behavioral impacts
of mountain biking on species such
as pronghorn antelope (Antilocapra americana) and mule deer
(Odocoileus hemionus) (Taylor and Knight, 2003), North American elk
(Cervus elaphus) (Naylor, Wisdom and Anthony, 2009), and mule deer,
bobcat (Lynx rufus) and coyote (Canis latrans) (George and Crooks,
2006). These studies are generally comparative, and show that
of 5 6
mountain biking does disturb wildlife, in that it causes individuals
to use habitat differently. They do not identify any long-term negative
impacts associated with this, however
The opposite conduct in wildlife - avoidance behavior - can be equally
problematic. Avoidance behavior is generally an innate response that is
magnified by visitor behaviors perceived as threatening, such as loud
sounds, off-trail travel, travel in the direction of wildlife, and sudden
movements. When animals flee from disturbance by trail users, they
often expend precious energy, which is particularly dangerous for
them in winter months when food is scarce. When animals move
away from a disturbance, they leave preferred or prime habitat and
move, either permanently or temporarily, to secondary habitat that
may not meet their needs for food, water, or cover.
A 2008 study presented by colleagues from the Wildlife Conservation
Society discovered declines in bobcats, coyotes and other meso-
carnivores in protected areas of California that allowed hiking - a night
and day comparison to similar areas that prohibited these activities.
of 6 6