They Skipped the Science!
Federal law requires environmental studies before major changes. The Park Service skipped this step. Here's how to demand they do it right.
📋 What Is an Environmental Impact Statement?
Before the government does something that could affect the environment, they HAVE to study what might happen. This is called an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). It's like a doctor running tests before surgery. When big changes happen, they need a NEW study called a "Supplemental EIS." The Park Service skipped this step—and that's against the law!
⚖️ The Law They Broke: NEPA
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is one of America's most important environmental laws. It says agencies must study the environmental impacts BEFORE they make big decisions.
The law is clear: When an agency makes "substantial changes" to a plan, they must do a NEW environmental study.
Going from "keep the ranchers" to "remove the ranchers" is the definition of a substantial change!
🎭 The Bait and Switch
✅ 2021 PLAN (What They Studied)
- 📜 20-year leases for ranchers
- 🐄 Keep all 14 ranching operations
- 💧 Best Management Practices
- 👨👩👧👦 Workers keep their homes
- 🌾 Continued pastoral zone
❌ 2025 PLAN (What They're Doing)
- 🚫 No more leases
- ❌ Remove 12 of 14 ranches
- 🌿 Abandon management practices
- 🏚️ Evict 90+ families
- 🗺️ Convert to "Scenic Landscape"
The 2021 study said ranching was GOOD for the land. Now they're doing the OPPOSITE—without a new study!
🐄 What Really Happened
In 2021, the Park Service did a proper environmental study. They looked at different options and chose "Alternative B"—keep the ranchers with 20-year leases. The public got to comment. Scientists got to review it. Everything was done by the book.
But in January 2025, they suddenly announced a completely different plan—remove 12 of 14 ranching families! This is basically "Alternative A" (no ranching), which was studied and REJECTED through the public process.
They can't just swap one plan for another without doing a new study. That's called "arbitrary and capricious" decision-making—and it's illegal.
🆕 New Information They Must Study
🔥 Wildfire Risk
California has seen unprecedented wildfires since 2021. Grazing reduces fuel loads. Removing cattle means more fire danger. This wasn't fully analyzed!
🌿 Invasive Species
TNC is now hiring cattle contractors to fight invasive plants! This proves grazing is NEEDED—and creates new impacts that weren't studied.
🏠 Housing & Community
Displacing 90+ residents and workers was NEVER analyzed in the 2021 study because they assumed ranching would continue!
🤔 The Ultimate Irony
Here's the proof that they need a new study:
The Nature Conservancy is now looking for cattle contractors!
(Point Reyes Light, December 2025)
They paid $30 million to remove ranchers... then admitted they need cows to manage invasive species! Even TNC's own materials say "livestock are currently the most practical option" for managing the grasslands.
If they're bringing cows back anyway, why kick out the families who were already taking care of them?
👷 The 90 Families Never Studied
The 2021 environmental study assumed ranching would continue. So it NEVER analyzed what would happen to the workers and their families if ranching stopped.
(Never Studied!)
Worker Impacts
On New Plan
NEPA requires studying impacts on communities. Evicting 90 families is a HUGE impact that was never analyzed!
📢 What to Demand in Your Letter
Stop Everything
Suspend the 2025 decision until they comply with NEPA
New Study
Prepare a Supplemental EIS analyzing the REAL impacts
Public Comment
Give the public 90 days to comment on the new study
Public Hearings
Hold hearings in West Marin where people can speak
📄 Sample Letter Demanding a Supplemental EIS
333 Bush Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94104
CC: Chair, Council on Environmental Quality
730 Jackson Place NW, Washington, DC 20503
FROM: [Your Name]
DATE: [Today's Date]
Dear Regional Director and CEQ Chair:
I am writing to demand that the National Park Service prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the January 2025 Revised Record of Decision affecting Point Reyes National Seashore.
The 2021 EIS analyzed "Alternative B" with 20-year leases. The 2025 decision implements the OPPOSITE—removing 12 of 14 ranches. This is a "substantial change" requiring a new study.
• Fire Risk: California's unprecedented wildfires since 2021
• Invasive Species: TNC now seeking cattle contractors to manage invasive plants
• Community Impacts: Displacement of 90+ residents never analyzed
I demand that NPS: (1) Suspend implementation pending NEPA compliance; (2) Prepare a Supplemental EIS; (3) Provide a 90-day public comment period; (4) Hold public hearings in West Marin.
Please respond within 30 days.
Respectfully,
[Your Name]
cc: House Natural Resources Committee, Your Senators, Your Representative
📝 How to Submit Your Demand
Write the Letter
Use the template above. Personalize with your own experiences at Point Reyes.
Send Two Ways
Email AND certified mail. This creates a paper trail they can't ignore.
Copy Key People
Send copies to the Natural Resources Committee and your representatives.
Keep Records
Save everything! This becomes part of the "administrative record" for lawsuits.
🌿 6 Environmental Myths That Got Us Here
The groups pushing out the ranchers claim they're "saving nature." Here's the truth they should have studied:
📞 Where to Send Your Demand
NPS Pacific West Region
333 Bush Street, Suite 500
San Francisco, CA 94104
Council on Environmental Quality
730 Jackson Place NW
Washington, DC 20503
House Natural Resources
naturalresources.house.gov
Send them a copy!
🌿 Make Them Do the Science!
The Park Service broke the law when they skipped the environmental study. Your letter creates an official record of their failure. If enough people demand a Supplemental EIS, the pressure becomes impossible to ignore. Stand up for proper science. Stand up for 90 families. Demand the study!
Gregory Burgess for Congress
No Party Preference • California's 2nd Congressional District