The Rivers Wild

Mono Supes not overjoyed with Yosemite river plans

Yosemite National Park wants to position the Tuolomne and Merced rivers for Wild and Scenic River designation, as prescribed by the terms of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (WSRA). But are the plans for changes to the park going too far, potentially alienating scores of visitors?

Some Mono County Supervisors think that might be the case, and voiced their concerns during Tuesday’s regular meeting in Mammoth Lakes. The discussion came in advance of a National Parks Service public workshop, scheduled for Saturday from 9 a.m. to 12 noon in the Mammoth Town Council Chambers, Minaret Mall, Suite Z. Plans for the park include some upgrades and improvements, but others include cancelling programs and amenities, which the Board found questionable, in light of Yosemite’s statement that, despite some key cuts, it intends to maintain its current 19,000 visitors per day usage level.

The draft plans address requirements in the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (WSRA), which regulates management of a designated river, following planning processes required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and other legal mandates governing NPS decision-making. The NPS said it is considering what “long-term, comprehensive guidance will best protect and enhance” the rivers.

According to a presentation by County Economic Development Director Dan Lyster, some of the changes proposed in the Tuolomne Preferred Alternative include Improvements to the campground, retaining the lodge, Wilderness Center, store and grill. But cuts include eliminating roadside parking adjacent to the meadow, permanent removal of the gas station and elimination of horseback day rides from Tuolumne Pack Station.

Changes proposed in the Merced Preferred Alternative include restoration of 203 acres of meadow and riparian habitat, improvements to Yosemite Valley traffic patterns and congested areas, increased campground capacity by 37% (161 sites), and hotel lodging by 8 units, and improved pedestrian access to specific attractions, such as the underpass walkway to Yosemite Falls.

But all Merced alternatives, including Preferred Alternative 5, eliminate horseback day rides in the park, bike rentals (that’s right, BYOB … bring your own bike), raft rentals, the Ahwahnee swimming pool and tennis courts, the Yosemite Lodge swimming pool and the Curry Village swimming pool and ice rink.

Horses are planned to be moved out of the Yosemite Valley, but the stables are reportedly to be retained for private horses.

Lyster added the plans have met with legal challenges. He indicated that the NPS is moving forward with the process in an effort to “combat” those challenges. For example, this is the third management plan prepared for the Merced River. In 2009, the NPS settled a long-running lawsuit challenging the adequacy of the two prior versions of the Merced River Plan (prepared in 2000 and 2005). The need for the Merced River Plan & Draft Environmental Impact Statement also derives from the 2009 Settlement Agreement, under which the NPS agreed to complete a new comprehensive management plan for the Merced Wild and Scenic River.

Visitors to Yosemite Valley have until now participated in a wide diversity of activities, including sightseeing, scenic driving, day hiking, wildlife viewing, picnicking, floating, creative arts, camping, lodging, bicycling, nature study, rock climbing and ranger-led programs. Most of the activities have been determined to be river-related and contributing to this Outstanding River Values (notable exceptions being lodging and many of the commercial services in the Valley).

As noted in Lyster’s report, the most recent survey of visitor satisfaction, conducted in 2005, found that, with roughly 4.5 million visitors annually, more than half of all visitors were experiencing “crowding.” The Merced River Plan proposes implementing a user-capacity program that either reduces visitor use or increases the facilities necessary to support use without adversely affecting either resource values or the visitor experience.

A major component of all the plan alternatives is decreasing traffic congestion through roadway, parking, and transit improvements; reducing congestion at popular attractions by dispersing use to appropriately designed destinations; and removing unnecessary services and facilities, including many of the commercial services currently provided in the Valley.

There are ramifications, Lyster acknowledged, but in his opinion the healthier the Yosemite economy is, the healthier Mono’s economy is. The flipside to some of the cuts is that, eliminating pack trip services in Yosemite could help pack stations locally, though some of local stations make trips into Yosemite, so it’s hard to say how that could affect those vendors.

Supervisor Fred Stump was not impressed. “It seems to me the [NPS] is trying to limit the type of people who would be allowed to enjoy the park,” he opined. “I’m awestruck by the giant leap backwards. I understand the need to restore a river, but the point of having parks is for people to enjoy them. If you have to be physically fit and can only hike into them, there is a whole segment of the population that would be prohibited from enjoying them. I’m stunned.

“I don’t see the gain if people have to bring in bikes and their own livestock to the park,” he continued. “If you want to encourage more traffic congestion, just add trailers to it. The contradiction is they want to do this, but still entertain 19,000 plus visitors a day, even though you’re going to slash what’s available.”

Board Chair Byng Hunt said he sees a disconnect between Yosemite’s goals for the rivers’ Wild and Scenic designation and the cuts made to staple items, such as the concessionaires and horseback riding, which he thinks have become park traditions.

“You don’t want to know what I think,” Supervisor Tim Fesko told fellow Supervisor Larry Johnston, who said he plans to attend that meeting, Fesko, did however, go on to say, “You can tell them how asinine it is for me.”

The draft Tuolumne River Plan and draft Merced River Plan are open for a legal Public Review and Comment process until March 18 and April 18, respectively. Community Development Director Scott Burns said the County is reviewing the plans and how they jibe (or not) with Board policy. Lyster said the Mono County Tourism Commission will meet again in March, and expects that the County would have more of an official position following their deliberations.

Mid-year review

In other Board of Supervisors activity, on Tuesday, Acting County Finance Director Roberta Reed presented the County’s mid-year budget review. Expenditures, she said, are on track, and the County hasn’t gone over-budget significantly in any area. There are, she added, a few areas to make some adjustments, in items such as salary payoffs of leaving employees. The bulk of the corrections fall in salaries, though there are also some savings due to realignment of line items in various departments.

And the County is expected to meet tax revenue projections, another bit of good news. Any shortfalls in certain revenue streams would be offset by excess Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) revenue, which is being returned to the County. As Reed noted, schools can only use so much of the money, and the rest of the revenue, garnered from property tax shifts, is put back into the budget for special districts and other uses.

The review also went on to say that the residential market in Mammoth Lakes seems to be stabilizing. Some properties are seeing small increases in property value, though declines in value are still the norm in the North County, at least for the time being.

 

The Board also mulled a few expenditures, including some on Public Works, such as replacing a dump truck, which Supervisor Fred Stump championed. “Defer to the next budget year, and we’ll have lost the opportunity to get this done this year,” he urged. “We could see a dire impact to County services if we don’t move forward. Public Works was told to take it out for their budget, he added, but was adamant that some action be taken this fiscal year on the dump truck, and other PW items.

“I share your concerns, but I’m not sure it’s something we need to do right away,” Board Chair Byng Hunt said. “We need to know where we’re at before we start spending money.” Supervisor Tim Fesko said he’d like to go over a list of all equipment that’s not California Air Resources Board (CARB) emissions compliant, to outline a plan for equipment replacement. State CARB mandates require replacement with low or zero emissions vehicles by 2020.

The dump truck expenditure was held for the time being, but Hunt agreed Stump has a valid point, in that replacement should happen sooner rather than later, and that the dump truck would be brought up again in April. Public Works Director Jeff Walters said he’s preparing a list for a workshop with the Board during it’s April 9 meeting.

Meanwhile, the Board approved a new lawnmower purchase, reimbursement of $18,000 back to the Road Fund to square up an employee settlement not anticipated in the budget, and some Road Shop door fixes that are safety concerns. A forklift replacement was deferred, though Walters said it’s an issue, since it’s relied on for a lot of work. It could come back as an emergency item in the three-month interim, if needed.

And a plan to use $80,000 in demolition funding to raze the Old Sheriff’s Department Substation has been on the drawing boards for three years, but since the money was never actually put in the CIP fund, the Board opted to drop it from the budget for the foreseeable future, viewing it as a non-essential expenditure for the time being.

 

Contracts for legal publishing recently expired for both The Sheet and the Fifty Center, prompting Mono Supervisors to ask for new proposals for legal publication services from both papers. Supervisor Byng Hunt said he thinks the County might need both papers to have as broad a reach as possible, claiming the two have somewhat different readerships. There was also the issue of exposure in remote areas, in particular Benton and Chalfant, which The Sheet has always covered and the Fifty now claims to cover.

Supervisor Larry Johnston advocated a compromise, suggesting alternating publications. “I realize that legals are part of their income stream,” he said, “but we’re spending more money than the County needs to for legal work. If we go out to bid, one paper is going to lose.”

Supervisor Tim Fesko pitched the idea of renegotiating new contracts with both papers, but at a much lower rate to save 30-40%. But Interim County Administrative Officer Lynda Salcido said that with both papers still getting contracts, she didn’t see the motivation for either to renegotiate at lower rates.

Supervisor Fred Stump pointed out that one is free, the other isn’t, and added that the Fifty hadn’t been distributing to all areas of the county, which has been corrected, but that The Sheet has been compliant. Supervisor Tim Alpers agreed with Hunt, there are different readerships. “Stay with both papers and get 30-40%, saving money on the contracts,” he echoed. “If that doesn’t work, then we go with the cheapest one.” Request for proposals will be forthcoming to both publications, after which the Board will decide on a course of action, one of which is to select one or the other.