Anonymous
By Doug Kern, Executive Director of the Gaviota Coast Conservancy
The California Coastal Commission will hold a workshop on the DRAFT Hollister Ranch Coastal Access Program in a virtual meeting on the morning of Thursday, October 14, 2021. This program was developed by State agencies/commissions and stakeholders under legislation authored by State Senator Monique Limón.
The creation of the Coastal Trail along the entire length of the California coastline is an important objective of the Coastal Commission. Locally, the issue of public access to Hollister Ranch has been festering for many decades. In 1982 the California Coastal Commission produced the Hollister Ranch Access Plan which outlined the general location of the California Coastal Trail and specific beach access points through the 8.5 miles of Hollister Ranch coastline. The County of Santa Barbara, in its 1982 Local Coastal Plan, placed the coastal trail through Hollister Ranch on the beach or proximate to it, a location that was also aspired to in the Santa Barbara County’s 2016 Gaviota Coast Plan. Fast forward almost 40 years and none of this trail has been realized due to the persistent, aggressive opposition of the Hollister Ranch Owners’ Association to public access.
The Draft Hollister Ranch Draft Coastal Access Plan proposes a phased, managed access program that begins with planning, progresses to a maximum of 100 people a day for several years when the impacts and mitigations of the visitations are carefully monitored, and ultimately, over a number of years, could expand, but never beyond 500 people a day. Such an expansion needs to carefully assess the impacts to coastal and cultural resources.
Unfettered and unlimited public access has never been proposed for the Ranch. Trail advocates respect the relatively unspoiled character of the Ranch Coastline and the private property rights of the landowners. However, there is a public sentiment, expressed by both the State and the County of Santa Barbara, to provide appropriate and respectful access to Hollister Ranch. Indeed, the right of citizens to access the shoreline is enshrined in the California State Constitution.
You can download the DRAFT Hollister Ranch Coastal Access Program here: https://documents.coastal.ca.gov/reports/2021/10/Th4/Th4-10-2021report.pdf
The California Coastal Commission invites public comments at the virtual meeting on Thursday, October 14, beginning between 9:30 – 10:00.
Submit Written Comments: Your comments are read by Commissioners and are influential.
Best to submit written comments by email to Hollister@coastal.ca.gov.
You can also submit materials by regular mail to the Coastal Commission at 725 Front Street, Suite 300, Santa Cruz, CA 95060. All mail received by 5 pm on Friday, October 8 will be distributed to the Commission. Any mailed materials received after this time will be placed in the file but will not be distributed to the Commission.
Speaker Instructions:
If you wish to speak to the Coastal Commission, you must fill out a speaker slip no later than 8:30 AM on Thursday, October 14 (speaker slips may be submitted the day before, which will streamline this process). We recommend signing up now for your opportunity to speak.
Please keep in mind that your time to speak will be limited, generally from 2 to 3 minutes, as determined by the Chair of the Coastal Commission. If you wish to show a 2-to-3 minute visual presentation that does not exceed 25 MB in size, it must be submitted by 5 PM Wednesday, October 13. Detailed instructions are located here:
https://documents.coastal.ca.gov/assets/virtual-hearing/FINAL_VIRTUAL%20_HEARING_PROCEDURES.pdf
There is nothing in the State constitution against having private access to public land, there is also no constitutional violation in having public beaches (they are all public) that are only accessible via the water or via the beach at lower tides. The state could use their constitutional powers via eminent domain as indicated in the access plan, but that would be a horrendous waste of resources that would be much better spent elsewhere facilitating equitable access to CA coast, like improving existing facilities/access points, making them more accessible, even fixing the boat hoist at Gaviota State Park that historically provided easy access to the entire stretch of Hollister coast and far beyond.
I agree with keeping it closed to minimize impact, though the owners have been trashing those beaches for the last forty years by driving all over them.
However, they’ve changed that, mostly because they saw which way the wind was blowing and late in the game decided to get on the right side of environmental protection, so, yeah, good on them.
Beyond that, “quiet unassuming types” and “it’s not illegal to access the beach.”
I’m sorry, that’s laughable. HR owners have been threatening and harassing people who even dare to legally boat in and surf “their” waves. They’ve destroyed peoples’ belongings (surfboards), threatened to cut anchor lines, and basically done everything possible to keep US Citizens from legally enjoying OUR resources. So, yeah, I want to see that area protected, but gotta be honest, part of me feels like, F them.
And, yeah, I’ve boated in many times to HR and points West.
AlexBlue: Consider not going to HR if you think it’s such a bad idea. Certainly keep the smug “I am better than you” attitude away from the place. I’m guessing you are okay with ruining the vibe. Maybe keep the Leadbetter/Hendry’s attitude to yourself if you want the hoards to trash and ruin HR. Juss sayin’….
Ruining the “vibe”? LOL. You’ve never been there, I have. Many times. My vibe is pure aloha in the water, I am all about sharing and looking out for my fellow water people. I’m not about harassing and threatening people and destroying private property which the HR owners have been doing for years (uh, Gaviota Hoist being vandalized multiple times? Anyone? Anyone?)
Here’s another question you’ll never answer, I know you love that, exactly what is the “Leadbetter/Hendry’s” vibe?
“Never over 500 people a day.” In the near future we can expect to read articles like “Volunteers Remove 3300 lbs if trash from Hollister Ranch beaches” … “Illegal Campers burn X number of acres at HR” … “Dolphin chokes on diaper at HR” … “Used Needles found …” HR is going to be forever changed in a bad way….just like Red Rock.
I agree with BABYCAKES 100% right- on…. I could add a few more things to their list …. like vandals stealing property, Graffiti , the noise, loss of privacy, loss of value to their house / property,
I just don’t understand, why they want access to that area….. aren’t there plenty of OPEN beaches for them to access????
This is a bad idea from a 100 different angles.
I guess I don’t see that as a given. With only 100 people a day (max 500), it can relatively easily be addressed with permits and reservations, much like some of our National parks or areas along the Pacific Crest Trail. (I too think 500 is excessive.) Registration and identification should cut down on the scofflaws, because they know where to find you.
HR is amazing. I have been there a couple of times (a friend of mine used to work on a ranch there). I can see the desire to keep it unspoiled, but a minimal number of daily permits can manage that.
Of course, the state is going to pave the road, install a new 2 lane bridge. Put signals and stop signs and maintain all of it,also they will pick up all the trash and dirty diapers and plastic.
I feel similarly about the Channel Islands. I’m glad a huge part of them is basically totally off limits to the public. We do enjoy camping and visiting there, but I hope they remain extremely restricted for eternity. It’s one of the only places I have been in the 21st century where I truly felt like I was stepping back in time and could be alone. It’s precious and beautiful.
Not sure if anyone here has seen the fantastic documentary on our Islands called West of the West. It is available on Amazon Prime. In it, there is a part where someone says “if you love it, don’t go there.” That really struck me when I first saw the doc (maybe 5 years ago) and hit me again when I recently rewatched it now that it’s on Prime. In the span on a few years, my entire stance on visiting “nature” has changed. Our National Parks are overrun (read any article about how out of control visits to Yellowstone were this summer), and there are so few places left where wilderness can truly be wild.
HR is far from “truly wild.” Let’s face it, it’s got cattle and people do live and visit there. But it’s a lot d*mn closer to what nature intended than our other beaches. Nature needs a place to be wild and left alone. Even the peaceful presence of quiet people are enough to disturb numerous wild species natural activities, including breeding.
The right for citizens to be able to access all of California’s coast was a noble idea with good intentions, but it has outlived its usefulness and is a policy that desperately needs to be reassessed in the face of ever increasing encroachment into wild habitat. It no longer seems “progressive,” and rather comes across as downright un-environmental.
California’s public coast is the best idea the state has ever had. Access is fundamental to that.
If you’re in doubt, go visit places that don’t have strong protections for public use and public access routes to beaches. That’s the real tragedy of the commons… thousands of miles of unused or underused natural beauty, open only to those on multi-million dollar properties.
Time to audit the mission, successes and failures of the Calif Coastal Commission. So often voters pass ballot initiatives that sound like a good idea; but the goals quickly get lost in bureaucracy, high-handed conduct, growing costs and unintended mission creep. While money and power continue to pour in with little or no accountability into these types of quasi-independent operations and political appointment sink holes. Significant numbers of coastal access corridors were established, appropriate protections put in place and the material over-development of coastal California has been halted – all good. But after a few decades it is time to claim mission accomplished before the CCC devolves, into insidious and self-protective mission creep. Sunset provisions, along with full range public auditing need to be part of all state ballot initiatives. Most “good ideas” like this have a limited lifespan before inertia and inside politics take over and they become failed politicians safe harbors. Kudo’s to the CCC which at the time was badly needed and the people rose up and demanded coastal protections. Now they look like an agency in search of cause and borderline petty and punitive carrying out smoother social agenda well beyond the initial intent.
The plan is terrible. I hope everyone locally attends the meeting and voices opposition. If not, please submit a comment by email to the state, telling them to stop the plan.
They are proposing a major costal development project, with no money and no property rights…and NO ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW.
It’s crazy, literally. On the same level of crazy: the Gaviota Conservancy actually supports the plan of destruction. What a self-serving joke of an organization it is.
The coast is public and access is available, even at Hollister Ranch. Why does every stretch of coast need a paved access road with parking and bathroom facilities?
This is a BAD idea. Turning this into a State Park will ruin the coastal areas. Whether it’s 100 or 500 allowed in , there are not enough park rangers to insure that this coastal gem stays pristine. As someone else said, it will create a Disneyland of some of our last wild coast. The limited access to this point is what has kept HR beautiful. Adding public access and “facilities” will be something that we will regret 10 years down the line when this coastal area looks more like an overcrowded over-developed So Cal beach area. How did this proposal get passed in the first place ? We should re-think why we elected those people…..
I’m not a surfer or a rancher or owner of anything in that area, but it’s clear to me that if there is public access, the public will come, and my experience is that the area will be seriously degraded. What’s the point of opening the last bit of relatiely pristine coastal area to that? Politicians and what’s yours is mine racers to the lowest common denominator: Let it be!
Go to Point Sal. You will not see more than a couple people most days and on some days, not a soul… its been open to the public for decades. Does opening up to the public always bring in a lot of people? Maybe, but then again most people are fat, lazy and not willing to do the work.
HR’s battle is about surfing. The (my daddy’s really rich) local boys are the real problem up there. They grew up entitled and empowered and took that “locals only” vibe way too far… The entire defense against opening up the Ranch is to keep the waves exclusive. It has nothing to do with the views or the land. Both of which are easily compared to the other open spaces that are both accessible and nearby.
100 people a day at 4 to 6 beaches is 25 to 16.5 people per beach. The people likely to make the effort to shuttle into one of those beaches are not the type to trash them once they get there. The rich people will still have almost exclusive access to their beaches and be able to drive their SUV’s on the beach at the end of the day. Maybe their service people will actually be able to visit one of the beaches?
Yeah, Chicken Littles, the sky is NOT falling.