HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2015 0617 CCSA REG ITEM 09C ITEM 9.C.
OF MOORPARK,CALIFORNIA
City Council Meeting
of 6'l7-ao�s
ACTION: 6 / 8.v 4./'wfi
MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL a
AGENDA REPORT k--7--h_
8Y:_--=r—h
TO: Honorable City Council
FROM: Roseann Mikos, Ph.D., Councilmember
BY: Jessica Sandifer, Senior Management Anal 11/1
DATE: June 8, 2015 (CC Meeting of 06/17/15) p
SUBJECT: Consider Support Letter for Alternative D of the Rim of the Valley
Draft Special Resource Study and Environmental Assessment
BACKGROUND
The Rim of the Valley Corridor is described as the area generally including the
mountains encircling the San Fernando, La Crescenta, Santa Clarita, Simi and Conejo
Valleys. The Consolidated Natural Resources Act of 2008 ("Act") directed the National
Park Service (NPS) to evaluate 1) the suitability and feasibility of designating all or a
portion of the Rim of the Valley Corridor as a unit of the Santa Monica Mountains
National Recreation Area (SMMNRA); and 2) the methods and means for the protection
and interpretation of this corridor by the National Park Service, other federal, state or
local government entities or private or non-governmental organizations. The Rim of the
Valley Draft Special Resource Study and Environmental Assessment ("Draft Study") is
the result of the work directed by the Act. The NPS released the Draft Study for public
comment in April 2015.
The Draft Study area covers approximately 650,000 acres in Southern California. It
includes 153,000 acres in the SMMNRA and approximately 180,000 acres of land
managed by the U.S. Forest Service. Numerous agencies and conservation
organizations manage lands within the study area which includes large natural areas,
suburban communities, farms and ranches, highly urbanized areas, freeways and public
infrastructure. However, 85% of the land in the study area is undeveloped. Happy Camp
Canyon Regional Park is included within the study area.
Currently the NPS is soliciting comments from the various stakeholders on the Draft
Study and which Alternative is preferred. Comments are due back to the NPS by June
30, 2015. I am requesting approval of a letter of support for Alternative D of the Rim of
the Valley Draft Special Resource Study and Environmental Assessment, as discussed
below.
170
Honorable City Council
June 17, 2015
Page 2
DISCUSSION
The Study determined that the most feasible option to meet the goals of the Act, was to
make an adjustment to the boundary of the SMMNRA and use the collaborative
partnership-based management model used by the SMMNRA. Broadening the
boundary allows the NPS to expand its cooperative management agreements with
California State Parks, the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy and the Mountains
and Recreation Conservation Authority. Due to the complexity of ownership and
management, high cost of land and other factors, having multiple agencies working in
partnership has been necessary to leverage adequate resources for land protection.
Inclusion of the lands of the Rim of the Valley Corridor in to the SMMNRA would
contribute to protection of significant resources related to the purposes of the SMMNRA
and expand opportunities for public enjoyment at the SMMNRA.
After determining that the expansion of the SMMNRA boundary was the most feasible
option, the study outlined four alternatives for determining the expansion boundaries of
the SMMNRA. These four alternatives were:
• Alternative A — Continuation of Current Management (No Action): serves as a
baseline for evaluating the action alternatives
• Alternative B — Cooperative Conservation Partnership: Fosters cooperative
planning and funding tools for the NPS, partner agencies, and landowners in the
Rim of the Valley Corridor and key habitat linkages to the Los Padres and
Angeles National Forests but would not add any additional area to the SMMNRA.
• Alternative C — Rim of the Valley Boundary Adjustment (NPS Preferred
Alternative): a boundary adjustment that would add approximately 173,000 acres
to the recreation area and would provide more parks and protect habitat linkages
with an emphasis on creating more recreational opportunities near urban areas
• Alternative D — Regional Rim of the Valley Boundary Adjustment and
Cooperative Conservation Areas — a boundary adjustment that adds 313,000
acres, which includes Happy Camp Canyon Park and most of the areas within
the Rim of the Valley Corridor (excluding those areas managed by the U.S.
Forest Service) to the SMMNRA. Also includes cooperative conservation areas
to protect key habitat linkages between the Rim of the Valley Corridor Study area
and the Los Padres and Angeles National Forests.
Currently, the Draft Study names Alternative C as the preferred alternative, which
provides for a boundary adjustment of the SMMNRA to include the Los Angeles River
Corridor and surrounds the San Fernando and La Crescenta Valleys along with urban
connections along the Arroyo Seco to the Verdugos.
While Alternative C would provide improvements within the SMMNRA and the Rim of
the Valley Corridor, the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy ("Conservancy") feels
that selection of Alternative D is a better option for the study area. I concur with the
Conservancy's selection. The Conservancy noted that Alternative C leaves out critical
identified habitat linkages in the western Santa Susanas, the Simi Hills, and Conejo
171
Honorable City Council
June 17, 2015
Page 3
Valley to Calleguas Creek. In contrast, Alternative D does include these
aforementioned important areas as well as:
• Including Cooperative Conservation Areas, outside the boundary adjustment,
between the Angeles and Los Padres National Forests to promote wildlife
movement corridors and biodiversity between the mountain ranges and also
creating connections between the two segments of the Angeles National Forest
via the Pacific Crest Trail and the Upper Santa Clara River
• Providing north-south linkages across the Santa Clara River between the Santa
Susana Mountains and Los Padres National Forest, as identified in the South
Coast Wildlands Missing Linkages Study. Pushing the boundary adjustment west
and northerly to Happy Camp Canyon will help NPS, private land owners and
other agencies in ensuring the continued viability of wildlife movement corridors
between the Santa Monica Mountains and the other ranges, and the Los Padres
National Forest
• Creating opportunities in the Calleguas Creek Watershed (the watershed in
which the City of Moorpark is located; and, one of the primary watersheds in
Ventura County) for watershed protection, wildlife movement, trail and
recreational access that links existing local, state, and federal parklands.
Alternative D most fully incorporates the optimal plan for long-term natural resource
resiliency, and recreational opportunities for public access to natural area parklands
from urban neighborhoods.
It is important to note that adjustment of the SMMNRA boundary area will generally
have no effect on land use authority or land ownership on privately owned lands.
Inclusion in the boundary allows the NPS to direct land management, provide funding
and authority for land acquisition from willing sellers, provide funding and authority for
capital improvements such as trails, roads, and other facilities to support public
enjoyment, and provide funding for inventory and monitoring programs. The NPS can
only do these things within the boundary of a park or national recreation area. However,
the Secretary of the Interior does have broad authority to establish regulations on
certain activities, regardless of ownership. These generally include regulation of mineral
extraction, oil and gas rights and new and existing solid waste disposal sites.
At the Conservancy's meeting on June 1, the NPS Representative indicated that the
communities affected by the proposed boundary adjustment should show their support
for the adjustment. The Conejo Recreation and Park District (CRPD) voted to support
Alternative D at their June 4, 2015 meeting. The City of Thousand Oaks is taking up the
item at their June 23 meeting and is expected to also support Alternative D. The Board
of Supervisors will also be taking up the item at their June 16 meeting and is
recommending support of Alternative D. The City of Simi Valley and the Rancho Simi
Recreation and Park District have yet to take a position on this item as of the writing of
this report.
172
Honorable City Council
June 17, 2015
Page 4
As a community affected by the boundary adjustment in Alternative D, I am requesting
that the City of Moorpark send a letter of support for and recommending Alternative D to
the NPS.
FISCAL IMPACT
No fiscal impact.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Approve support of Alternative D and direct that a letter be sent to the National Park
Service in the form attached to the report.
Attachments:
1. Comment Letter to NPS
2. Executive Summary - Rim of the Valley Corridor Special Resource Study
3. Map —Alternative C
4. Map - Alternative D
•
173
ATTACHMENT 1
Ma
CITY OF MOORPARK
oo-/Isi `1��m 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark,California 93021 I Phone(805)517-6200 I Fax(805)532-2205
97
garpp
June 18, 2015
Ms. Anne Dove, Project Manager
National Park Service
Rim of the Valley Corridor Special Resource Study
570 West Avenue 26, Suite 175
Los Angeles, California 90065
RE: Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study
and Environmental Assessment— Comments
Dear Ms. Dove:
The City of Moorpark would like to take this opportunity to provide comments on the National
Park Service (NPS) Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study and
Environmental Assessment. The City of Moorpark is statutorily a part of the Santa Monica
Mountains Conservancy Advisory Committee and has been following the Rim of the Valley
Study with great interest since it began. Moorpark is located largely adjacent to the west
boundary line of the Rim of the Valley study area, with a portion of the northeastern corner of
the City inside the study area. Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park (HCCRP) abuts portions of
the northern and eastern limits of the City and is included within the NPS study area.
Additionally, more than 4000 acres situated between HCCRP and the northern city limit line is
also in the study area. This area represents a large part of the City's "Area of Interest," as
defined by the County of Ventura's Guidelines for Orderly Development.
Currently, the Draft Study names Alternative C as the preferred alternative, which provides for
a boundary adjustment of the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area (SMMNRA)
to include the Los Angeles River Corridor and surrounds the San Fernando and La Crescenta
Valleys along with urban connections along the Arroyo Seco to the Verdugos.
While the City is appreciative of the improvements that selection of Alternative C would have
upon the SMMNRA and the Rim of the Valley Corridor, the City supports selection of
Alternative D. The City feels that Alternative C leaves out critical identified habitat linkages in
the western Santa Susanas, the Simi Hills, and Conejo Valley to Calleguas Creek.
In contrast, Alternative D does include these aforementioned important areas as well as:
• Including Cooperative Conservation Areas, outside the boundary adjustment,
between the Angeles and Los Padres National Forests to promote wildlife
movement corridors and biodiversity between the mountain ranges and also
174
JANICE S.PARVIN ROSEANN MIKOS,Ph.D. KEITH F.MILLHOUSE DAVID POLLOCK MARK VAN DAM
Mayor Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember
Rim of the Valley Study Comments
June 18, 2015
Page 2
creating connections between the two segments of the Angeles National Forest
via the Pacific Crest Trail and the Upper Santa Clara River
• Providing north-south linkages across the Santa Clara River between the Santa
Susana Mountains and Los Padres National Forest, as identified in the South
Coast Wildlands Missing Linkages Study. Pushing the boundary adjustment west
and northerly to Happy Camp Canyon will help NPS, private land owners and
other agencies in ensuring the continued viability of wildlife movement corridors
between the Santa Monica Mountains and the other ranges, and the Los Padres
National Forest
• Creating opportunities in the Calleguas Creek Watershed (the watershed in
which the City of Moorpark is located; and, one of the primary watersheds in
Ventura County) for watershed protection, wildlife movement, trail and
recreational access that links existing local, state, and federal parklands.
For these reasons, the City of Moorpark supports and hereby recommends Alternative D as it
incorporates the optimal plan for long-term natural resource resiliency, and recreational
opportunities for public access to natural area parklands from urban neighborhoods.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Janice Parvin
Mayor
175
ATTACHMENT 2
National Park Service
Rim of the Valley Corridor Special Resource Study �:
U.S.Department of the Interior "
Rim of the Valley Corridor Special Resource Study
Newsletter#4• Spring 2015
•
.I +4. ,A✓�•
Oat Mountain area in the Santa Susana Mountains. Photo:Steve Matsuda.
Draft Special Resource Study & Environmental See Page 2 for
Public AA .
Assessment Report Available for Review Schedule►ng
P .ar friends About the National Park Service
The National Park Service preserves
It is with great pleasure that the National Park Service(NPS) offers the Rim of unimpaired the natural and cultural
the Valley Draft Special Resource Study and Environmental Assessment to you resources and values of the national
park system for the enjoyment,
for review and comment.This newsletter contains the executive summary of education,and inspiration of this and
the draft study report and information about how to submit comments and future generations.The NPS cooperates
with partners to extend the benefits
participate in public meetings to learn more about the draft study report. of natural and cultural resource
conservation and outdoor recreation
The NPS initiated this special resource study in 2010 and published preliminary throughout this country and the world.
management alternatives in late 2012.This study report reflects your initial
involvement and input into the planning process.The study alternatives and Newsletter Contents
their concepts reflect your concerns and ideas. How to Obtain a Copy
of the Draft Report 2
The full draft report is posted on the study website at:http://www.nps.gov/ How to Provide Comments 2
pwro/rimofthevalley,and limited printed copies are available from the National Public Meeting Schedule 2
Park Service.There will be several opportunities for providing comments, Abstract 3
including public meetings in Spring 2015 (please see page 2 for schedule).
Executive Summary 4
Comments on the draft study report must be submitted by June 30,2015.Your Background and Study Process 4
continued involvement will assist the National Park Service in finalizing this Legislative and Policy Direction 4
report,and in determining the final study recommendations.The final outcome Study Area 5
of the study will be the transmittal of the final report from the Secretary of the Public Involvement 6
Interior to Congress,along with the Secretary's recommendations for the area. Study Findings 6
Alternatives 10
— NF;5 Study Team Environmental Assessment 26
Next Steps 27
Rim of the Valley Corridor Special Resource Study • Newsletter#4 • Spring 2015 1 7 6
How to Obtain a Copy of the Draft Report
9 The draft study report is posted on the project website at:
National Park Service
U.S.Department of the Interior http://www.nps.gov/pwro/rimofthevalley
If you requested a printed copy, it will be mailed to you. If you did not request a copy of the
report and would like to receive one, limited copies of the printed report will be available. You
Rim of the Valley Corridor may contact us by mail or e-mail.
Special Resource Study
How to Provide Comments
Contacts There will be several opportunities to share your thoughts and ideas, and your comments are
Anne Dove
Project Manager important to us. You can mail or e-mail us your written comments(see addresses to the left),
(323)441-9307 attend one of the public meetings listed below,or submit your comments electronically by
following the link on the study website(above).Comments will be accepted through June 30,
Margie Steigerwald 2015.
Outdoor Recreation Planner
(805)370-2373
Mailing Address
National Park Service
570 W.Avenue 26,#175
Los Angeles,CA 90065
•
E-mail
pwr_rimoftheval leyen ps.gov
Website
http://www.nps.gov/pwro/rimofthevalley _
Boney Mountain in SMMNRA. Photo: NPS
Public Meeting Schedule
The NPS will host a series of public meetings throughout the study Thousand Oaks
area in Spring 2015 in order to present the draft study report, Wednesday, May 6, 2015 • 7 pm-9 pm
answer questions,and accept comments. In addition,at least one Conejo Recreation and Parks District-Community Room
virtual meeting will be conducted via the Internet. Please visit our 403 West Hillcrest Drive
website for more information. Thousand Oaks, CA 91360
To receive up-to-date information about public meetings, please join Chatsworth
our e-mail list by visiting:www.nps.gov/pwro/rimofthevalley Thursday, May 21, 2015•7 pm -9 pm
Mason Recreation Center
Virtual(Online) Public Meeting 10500 Mason Avenue
Tuesday,April 21, 2015• 12:30 pm-2:00 pm Chatsworth, CA 91311
Please visit our website for more details.
Downtown Los Angeles*
La Crescenta Tuesday,June 2, 2015•3 pm- 5 pm Habra un traductor
Monday, May 4, 2015•7 pm-9 pm El Pueblo de Los Angeles Historical Monument d'Sponib/e para a
La Crescenta Public Library—Community Room Hellman/Quon Buildingreunion s7a
publico.
2809 Foothill Boulevard 130 Paseo de la Plaza
La Crescenta, CA 91214 Los Angeles, CA 90012
Newhall *Note:This meeting location is convenient to public transit and
Tuesday, May 5, 2015•7 pm-9 pm is near Los Angeles Union Station. Paid parking is also available.
William S. Hart Regional Park-Hart Hall Please visit the website for El Pueblo de Los Angeles Historical
24151 Newhall Avenue Monument for more information: http://elpueblo.lacity.org/
Newhall, CA 91321
Our practice is to make comments,including names, home addresses, home phone numbers,and email addresses of respondents,available for public review.
Individual respondents may request that we withhold their names and/or home addresses,etc.,but if you wish us to consider withholding this information
you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comments.In addition,you must present a rationale for withholding this information.This rationale
must demonstrate that disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.Unsupported assertions will not meet this burden.In the absence
of exceptional,documentable circumstances,this information will be released.We will always make submissions from organizations or businesses,and from
individuals identifying themselves as representatives of or officials of organizations or businesses,available for public inspection in their entirety.
2 Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter 114 • Spring 201 S 1 7 7
Abstract
Rim of the Valley Corridor
Draft Special Resource Study and Environmental Assessment
Purpose and Need
The Consolidated Natural Resources Act of 2008(EL.no-229,May 2008)directed the NPS to evaluate: (i)the suitability and
feasibility of designating all or a portion of the area known as the Rim of the Valley Corridor as a unit of Santa Monica Moun-
tains National Recreation Area(SMMNRA);and(2)the methods and means for the protection and interpretation of this corri-
dor by the National Park Service,other federal,state,or local government entities or private or non-governmental organizations.
The Rim of the Valley Corridor is described in legislation as the area generally including the mountains encircling the San Fer-
nando,La Crescents,Santa Clarita,Simi,and Conejo Valleys in southern California.
Study Area
The study area covers approximately 650,000 acres in the southern California region.It includes SMMNRA(approximately
153,00o acres)and approximately 18o,000 acres of lands managed by the U.S.Forest Service(the Angeles National Forest and the
recently established San Gabriel Mountains National Monument).Numerous agencies and conservation organizations manage
lands within the study area.Over 5 million people live in the study area,another 13 million live in surrounding communities with-
in the greater Los Angeles metropolitan area.Land use is diverse and includes large natural areas,suburban communities,farms
and ranches,highly urbanized areas,freeways,and an array of public infrastructure.However,the vast majority of lands(84%)
are undeveloped.
Study Findings
The Rim of the Valley Corridor study area contains nationally significant resources.The topographically and geographically com-
plex study area encompasses a mosaic of natural communities that span coastal and montane ecosystems and support high levels
of biodiversity.More than io,000 years of human habitation are represented in the cultural resources found within the study area.
The area also contains significant resources,not currently represented in the national park system,which offer new opportunities
for scientific research,interpretation,and education and are therefore suitable for inclusion in the national park system.
The creation of a new national park unit is not feasible,when compared to the resource management and operational efficiencies
afforded by including additional areas in SMMNRA. Many of the significant resources within the study area augment the na-
tional significance of SMMNRA and provide habitat connectivity essential for long-term preservation of the significant resources
within the Santa Monica Mountains,thus warranting physical connection to SMMNRA and/or a seamless,collaborative manage-
ment approach.
An adjustment to the boundary of SMMNRA is feasible using the collaborative partnership-based management model exempli-
fied by SMMNRA,which respects the complex mix of existing land use,ownership,and regulatory authorities.Inclusion of lands
of the Rim of the Valley Corridor in SMMNRA would contribute to protection of significant resources related to the purpose of
the national recreation area and expand opportunities for public enjoyment at SMMNRA.
Alternatives Evaluated
The study evaluates a range of opportunities to cooperatively manage the significant resources of the study area:
- Alternative A:Continuation of Current Management(No Action),serves as a baseline for evaluating the action alternatives;
• Alternative B:Cooperative Conservation Partnership would foster cooperative planning and funding tools for the NPS,part-
ner agencies and landowners in the Rim of the Valley Corridor and key habitat linkages to the Los Padres and Angeles na-
tional forests(no new areas would be added to SMMNRA);
• Alternative C:Rim of the Valley Boundary Adjustment(Preferred Alternative),a SMMNRA boundary adjustment(approxi-
mately 173,000-acre addition)that would provide more parks and protect habitat linkages,with an emphasis on creating
more recreational opportunities near urban areas;and
• Alternative D:Regional Rim of the Valley Boundary Adjustment and Cooperative Conservation Areas,a SMMNRA boundary
adjustment(approximately 313,00o acre addition)with an emphasis on protecting regional wildlife corridors,would add
most areas within Rim of the Valley Corridor(excluding U.S.Forest Service managed areas)to SMMNRA.Cooperative con-
servation approaches would also be recommended for key habitat linkages between the Rim of the Valley Corridor study
area and the Los Padres and Angeles national forests.
Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter#4 • Spring 201-5738
Executive Summary
Background and Study Process zations to protect the region's wildlife corridors and provide
close-to-home recreational opportunities.
The Consolidated Natural Resources Act of 2008(P.L.110-229,
May 2008)authorized the National Park Service(NPS): In the interest of efficiency and consistency,this study has ad-
opted the analysis and final recommendations of the San Ga-
"to conduct a special resource study of the area known as brie!'Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study for these
the Rim of the Valley Corridor,generally including the areas.Those findings are restated throughout the document
mountains encircling the San Fernando,La Crescenta, where appropriate.
Santa Clarita,Simi,and Conejo Valleys in southern Cali-
fornia to determine:
Legislative and Policy Direction
(0)the suitability and feasibility of designating all or a por-
tion of the corridor as a unit of Santa Monica Mountains New National Park Unit
National Recreation Area(SMMNRA);and In evaluating whether the study area is eligible for designation
as a new unit of the national park system,the study follows
(2)the methods and means for the protection and inter- the process established by the National Park System New Area
pretation of this corridor by the NPS,other federal,state, Studies Act(PL.105-391,16 U.S.C.Sec.la-5)and addresses the
or local government entities or private or non-profit orga- criteria for new areas outlined in NPS Management Policies
nizations." 2006.
To achieve objective(1),this study analyzes whether any por- According to NPS management policies,a proposed addition
tion of the Rim of the Valley Corridor study area is eligible to to the national park system will receive a favorable recommen-
be designated as a unit of the national park system or added
dation from the NPS only if it meets all of the following four
to the existing park unit of Santa Monica Mountains National criteria for inclusion:
Recreation Area(SMMNRA). To achieve objective(2),the
study analyzes the methods and means for protecting and in-
•
it possesses nationally significant natural or cultural re-
terpreting the natural and cultural resources of the study area sources;
•
by the National Park Service,other federal,state,and local it is a suitable addition to the system;
•
government entities or private and non-profit organizations. it is a feasible addition to the system;and
• it requires direct NPS management,instead of alterna-
The purpose of a special resource study is to provide informa- five protection by other public agencies or the private
tion to aid Congress,the U.S.Department of the Interior and sector.
the NPS in determining whether there are feasible and appro-
These criteria are designed to ensure that the national park
priate roles for the NPS within the study area.
system includes only the most outstanding examples of the
Relationship to the San Gabriel Watershed and nation's natural and cultural resources,while recognizing that
Mountains Special Resource Study there are other management alternatives for preserving the
The NPS completed the San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains nation's outstanding resources.Alternatives for NPS manage-
Special Resource Study in April 2013.The study area covered ap- ment are developed for areas that meet all four of the criteria
proximately 700,000 acres of land in the greater Los Angeles for inclusion.
metropolitan area.A portion of the area evaluated in the San
Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study,the Addition to Santa Monica Mountains National
western San Gabriel Mountains and portions of the Upper Recreation Area (Boundary Adjustment)
Santa Clara River,is also included in the Rim of the Valley Cor- The determination of whether any part of the study area quali-
ridor study area. fies as an addition(or boundary adjustment)to Santa Monica
Mountains National Recreation Area(SMMNRA)to carry out
The study recommended:i) designation of a San Gabriel Unit the purpose of the national recreation area is based on criteria
of SMMNRA(5o,000 acres)that would include areas of the for boundary adjustments as described in NPS Management
San Gabriel and Rio Hondo river corridors and the Puente- Policies 200,5(Section 3.5).Areas acceptable for addition to an
Chino Hills;2)additional federal recognition,tools,and sup- existing park boundary(in this case SMMNRA)must:
port for the Angeles National Forest;3)collaboration between
•
the USFS and the NPS to protect the significant resources of protect significant resources and values,or enhance
the San Gabriel mountains and watershed;and q)NPS techni-
opportunities for public enjoyment related to park pur-
cal assistance to interested communities,agencies,and organi- poses
• address operational and management issues,such as
179
4 Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter#4 • Spring 2015 ,
� :
1._i Study Area ' ,n+:.toter
Santa Monica Mountains y` Angeles
0 National Recreation Area ' i�1, National Forest --- r 2- p.olmu:uc
Los Padres i1-7 is m' , I_� • mem*
l .�
, T,,, National Forest -'r_; • 4,7 ,-- r duke e __ --
V.a - �_.�' I f •
♦ .AstonI
_ -1 %' Santa r FIr-' -,, _-.l i `'
rlu.rorr :rel Clams fill
1 \ .� :A_ .r- is
Angeles +
e National Forest �•s
9�onaventuri ! Moorpark- Simi Valley i i .. lii . '�+„'�
' w✓..r IG7 xa.: t.
Camarillo' -.a h_ a� + +
Thousand �� 4, ..,1, ^"+ `.
I Los *La Canada
Oxnard IIS - 4 Oaks �-�—�- +'
Angeles Burbank Ft.-frith—dire
�•- N::er4an �.0� Hidden f•• `Glendle 3isrra Madre A
. P° e ! ''' " - .Agoura • • Hills ��_ Monrovia
I Westlake HillsVoilabasasr THah^� , _ t� t L� Pasadena r:_nbary
"iiia e. 1" --• --- `d SoUth' _ Arcadia
TQw"P `!twos( 1-r,: 7, Pisadena
-dale
,' Santa Monica Mountains tomd . caarc,
National'Recreation Area •'" ���� Covina
€11 i p,aerOrs nest
Beverly
■a alt•^
Malibu:_. aaa+ �. Covma
�„'� -Park'y Q lfoioEo
• N'ttlti �f`�'-.Park•_' ".--s'-",.....-,:-- LYPelenle
..0
nla iiitMN a Commerce•�Montebello tn .
0 5 10 cccre sale System NAD 14B3 uiu Zane 11N - • it Vernon - '1.9elr Plcft,w*a �
Miles The NPS makes na inerably.express cr enpkb. Bac;
(*Wee la me.F-.uf.ry or ccatem at II map 34401'34401' Gauans
reLa FlaGfa
In glewOod r (late Sanaa Frt Heights
B Segundo LVOwood springs
the need for access or the need for boundaries to cor- Environmental Compliance
respond to logical delineations such as topographic or The National Park System New Area Studies Act requires that
other natural features or roads;or special resource studies be prepared in compliance with the
• otherwise protect park resources that are critical to ful- National Environmental Policy Act(NEPA).The NPS deter-
filling park purposes mined that an environmental assessment(EA)is a sufficient
level of environmental analysis for this study.This study corn-
All recommendations for boundary changes must also meet the plies with the National Historic Preservation Act,Section to6
following two criteria: and no requirements.Section io6 requires federal agencies to
take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic
• the added lands will be feasible to administer consider- properties.The Section 106 process is being coordinated with
ing their size,configuration,and ownership;costs;the the National Environmental Policy Act process for this special
views of and impacts on local communities and sur- resource study. No significant impacts or effects are anticipated
rounding jurisdictions;and other factors such as the from the findings and recommendations of this study.
presence of hazardous substances or exotic species.
• other alternatives for management and resource protec-
tion are not adequate. Study Area
The study area covers more than i,000 square miles(650,000
A new unit of the national park system or park boundary ex- acres)in two counties in the greater Los Angeles metropoli-
pansion requires Congressional action. tan region of California.It is surrounded by some of the most
densely populated and diverse areas of the United States.
Fire Management Documentation Spanning both Los Angeles and Ventura counties,the study
The study legislation also requires the Secretary of the Interior area includes portions of the Santa Monica Mountains,Conejo
to document the process used to develop the SMMNRA Fire Mountain-Las Posas Hills,Simi Hills,Santa Susana Mountains,
Management Plan and all activity conducted pursuant to the Upper Santa Clara River,the Verdugo Mountains-San Rafael
plan designed to protect lives and property from wildfire.This Hills,the Los Angeles River and Arroyo Seco corridors,and
documentation is included in the draft study report. the San Gabriel Mountains. As a whole,the study area is ap-
proximately 5o%privately owned lands and 5o%public lands.1.Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter#4 • Spring 2015 8 0
5
Portions of at least 3o communities are located in the study In September and October zo1o,the NPS hosted nine public
area,with approximately 5.1 million residents. meetings within the study area(Chatsworth,Los Angeles,
Santa Clarita,Thousand Oaks,Calabasas,Tujunga,Altadena,
The majority of the lands in the study area(approximately and Sylmar).In all,more than 400 people participated in the
84%)are undeveloped open space or areas protected for con- public workshops.The NPS received more than z,000 corn-
servation and recreation purposes.Federally protected areas ment letters and emails from federal and state agencies,cities,
within the study area include SMMNRA,a unit of the national organizations,and community members regarding the scope of
park system,the Angeles National Forest,and the San Gabriel the study.The NPS shared a summary of the public comments
Mountains National Monument.These federally-protected ar- in Newsletter#2 during summer lou.
eas comprise a little over one-half of the study area lands. The
study area also contains highly developed urban areas which Preliminary Findings and Alternative Concepts
are primarily located along the Los Angeles River and Arroyo NPS published preliminary findings and alternative concepts
Seco corridors and along some hillsides that are adjacent to the in Newsletter#3,which was distributed in October 2012,and
urbanized valleys/population centers. accepted public comments on these ideas through January
2013.Although some of the natural and cultural resources
Of the 650,000 acre-study area,approximately one-quarter in the study area met the significance and suitability criteria
(approximately 153,00o acres)is within the existing bound- for new park areas,the NPS preliminarily determined that a
ary of SMMNRA.SMMNRA protects the largest expanse of boundary expansion of SMMNRA would be less costly and
mainland Mediterranean ecosystem in the national park sys- more efficient than establishment of a new stand-alone park
tem.No other national park features such a diverse assemblage area. During this period the NPS hosted seven public meet-
of natural,cultural,scenic,and recreational resources within ings(Thousand Oaks,Santa Clarita,Glendale,Chatsworth,
easy reach of a population of more than 18 million.For over 3o Encino,Moorpark and Pasadena)and two on-line forums in
years,the NPS has managed SMMNRA through a unique part- November and December 2012.A total of 125 people partici-
nership in which the federal government works collaboratively pated in meetings and more than 5,000 written comments were
with state,and local park agencies and private landowners to received.
protect the natural and cultural resources of the area.Within
SMMNRA,the NPS directly owns and manages over 23,000 Draft Report Publication, Review and Transmittal
acres,or 15%of the 153,000 acres within the national recre- of Final Study Findings
ation area boundary. Publication of the Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Re-
source Study and Environmental Assessment will be followed by
The U.S.Forest Service(USFS)manages approximately one- a minimum 6o-day public comment period. If no significant
quarter of the study area(approximately i8o,000 acres in the environmental impacts are identified and no major changes are
San Gabriel Mountains)as part of the Angeles National Forest made to the alternatives then a Finding of No Significant Impact
and the San Gabriel Mountains National Monument.Together, (FONSI)would conclude the study process.The FONSI will
the mountains within SMMNRA and the U.S.Forest Service include a final decision by the NPS(selected alternative). The
lands serve as large natural areas that provide the majority of Secretary of the Interior will then transmit the final study re-
the study area's core habitat for native plant and wildlife spe- port consisting of the FONSI,and any technical corrections to
des.The network of mountains,rivers and streams that con- the draft study report,to Congress,along with the Secretary's
nect these two large areas,including the Simi Hills,the Santa recommendations for the study area.At this time,the final rec-
Susana Mountains,Verdugo Mountains-San Rafael Hills,the ommendations will be made available to the public.
Los Angeles and Santa Clara Rivers and their tributaries,pro-
vide additional habitat and corridors that connect the.region's Study Findings
core habitat areas.
The study process includes two analyses,one that focuses on
the potential creation of a new unit of the national park sys-
Public Involvement tem;and a second that focuses on potential adjustment of the
existing boundary of SMMNRA.It should be noted that there
Public Scoping is a certain amount of overlap between the criteria for a new
The NPS launched public scoping for this study in summer park unit and the criteria for a boundary adjustment to an ex-
2010.A notice of scoping was published in the Federal Reg- isting national park area.Both sets of criteria require proposals
ister(Vol.75,No. Number 167(Monday,August 30,2010), to be feasible and demonstrate a need for NPS management
pp.52969-52971).The study team produced and distributed over management by other entities.
an informational newsletter and press releases to the media,
individuals,organizations,and government officials.Public New National Park Unit
information was made available on the National Park Service's
Planning,Environment and Public Comment(PEPC)website National Significance
and project website at www.nps.gov/pwro/rimofthevalley. The National Park Service(NPS)uses four basic criteria to
evaluate the significance of proposed areas.These criteria,
181
6 Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter#4 • Spring 2015
•
tp
Examples of nationally significant natural resources include geologic history of the Transverse Ranges Province;diverse fossils;and high biodi-
versity,including native grassland vegetation and rare plant species.Photos:NPS.
listed in the NPS Management Policies 2006,state that a re- lated to migration and commerce. Additionally,the study area
source is nationally significant if it meets all of the following features cultural resources identified as significant through
conditions: national historic landmark theme studies in areas such as as-
tronomy and astrophysics.
• It is an outstanding example of a particular type of re-
source. The nationally significant resources of the study area offer
• It possesses exceptional value or quality in illustrating superlative opportunities for public enjoyment and scientific
or interpreting the natural or cultural themes of our na- study.The varied topographic features provide highly scenic
don's heritage. landscapes including seashore,mountain views,and verdant
• It offers superlative opportunities for public enjoyment, canyons within a two hour drive of more than 18 million
or for scientific study. people.Existing public open spaces,recreation areas,and trails
• It retains a high degree of integrity as a true,accurate, provide superlative opportunities for hiking,biking,outdoor
and relatively unspoiled example of a resource. education,and birding.Cultural resources depict a wide range
of historical themes and provide opportunities to interpret the
The NPS evaluates national significance for cultural resources region's rich cultural heritage.
by applying the national historic landmarks(NHL)criteria
contained in 36 CFR Part 65. The dynamics between areas of exceptionally high biodiver-
sity and long history of human settlement and development
The study finds that the Rim of the Valley Corridor contains provide unique opportunities for scientific research and study.
resources of national significance,many of which have been The Santa Monica Mountains and the San Gabriel Mountains
identified as nationally significant through previous studies or have a long history of research in geology,Mediterranean
designations.This includes national park or trail system desig- ecosystems,and astronomy.Comparatively fewer studies have
nations(Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area, been published on the natural and cultural resources of the
Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail and Old Spanish Simi Hills,Santa Susana Mountains,and Verdugo Mountains,
National Historic Trail),and national historic landmarks. which have high potential for scientific study.
Nationally significant natural resources include:t)outstand- The study area retains a high degree of integrity and contains
ing examples of geologic history including the evolution of the relatively unspoiled examples of significant resources,despite
Transverse Ranges Province;2)a diversity of well-preserved impacts in some areas from agriculture,urban development,
marine and terrestrial paleontological resources;and 3)high and associated infrastructure.Approximately 84%of the study
biodiversity,including outstanding examples of native grass- area lands arc protected recreation areas,conserved open
lands,coastal sage scrub,chaparral,dry coniferous forests,and spaces,or vacant undeveloped lands.Isolated pockets of both
alluvial fan sage scrub. nationally significant natural and cultural resources are present
in the more urbanized portions of the study area.
Nationally significant cultural resources represent a wide range
of themes related to human use and settlement in the region. Suitability
High concentrations of archeological resources provide insight To be considered suitable for addition to the national park
into more than to,000 years of Native American history.Out- system,an area must represent a natural or cultural resource
standing examples of cultural resources also include national type that is not already adequately represented in the national
historic landmarks representing topics such as architecture, park system,or is not comparably represented and protected
recreation,space exploration,and oil extraction,as well as for public enjoyment by other federal agencies;tribal,state,or
national historic trails that mark important national events re- local governments;or the private sector.
Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter#4 • Spring 2015 J 8 2
7
..-6.14.44111411(1\ .
! Ne _
-- ji:it,..- -//'-/ : .• . -
li
9'�i'. :_ ` / , V --1[- ►7+. _tiers il •
Nationally significant cultural resources relate to a variety of themes including archeological resources, as shown by rock art;oil extraction,
represented by Well No.4 Pico Canyon;architecture, including the Gamble House;and space exploration resources,such as the Space Flight
Operations Center at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Photos(left to right): NPS, Herald-Examiner Collection/Los Angeles Public Library, NPS,
NASA.
The NPS has determined,based on the character,quantity Feasibility
and quality of resource values in the study area,that there are To be feasible as a new unit of the national park system,an area
nationally significant resources in the Rim of the Valley Cor- must be:(t)of sufficient size and appropriate configuration
ridor study area suitable for inclusion in the national park to ensure sustainable resource protection and visitor enjoy-
system.These resources are primarily located in the San Ga- ment(taking into account current and potential impacts from
briel Mountains and foothills,Upper Santa Clara River,Santa sources beyond proposed park boundaries),and(2)capable of
Susana Mountains,and Arroyo Seco area.Each of these areas efficient administration by the National Park Service at a rea-
contain natural and/or cultural resources that represent themes sonable cost.
not currently represented in the National Park Service or com-
parably managed sites,including: In evaluating feasibility,the NPS considers a variety of factors
for a study area,such as the following:
• The San Gabriel Mountains and Upper Santa Clara
River depict unique geological features and dramatic geo- • Land use,current and potential site uses,ownership
logic processes,a wide diversity of rare habitats located in patterns,planning and zoning
close proximity given the dramatic changes in topography, • Access and public enjoyment potential
and technological advances in the areas of astronomy, • Boundary size and configuration
chaparral ecosystems,and watersheds. • Existing resource degradation and threats to resources
• The Santa Susana Mountains contain a convergence of • Public interest and support
montane and desert influences that create rare and un- • Social and economic impact
usual plant communities not found in other comparably • Costs associated with operation,acquisition,develop-
managed areas.Well No.4,Pico Canyon Oil Field National ment,and restoration
Historic Landmark,represents the birth of California's
oil industry which was once the second most prolific oil- The feasibility evaluation also considers the ability of the NPS
producing state. to undertake new management responsibilities in light of cur-
• Suitable national historic landmarks in the culturally rich rent and projected availability of funding and personnel.An
Arroyo Seco include the Rose Bowl National Historic overall evaluation of feasibility is made after taking into ac-
Landmark,representing a unique aspect of recreation count all of the above factors.
in America,and the Space Flight Operations Center and
Twenty-five Foot Space Simulator national historic land- The feasibility evaluation generally found that most feasibility
marks which embody significant advances in deep space factors could be met.Although the study area has a diverse ar-
exploration. ray of land uses,ownership,and management,the area could
be feasibility managed as national park unit using the collab-
The Santa Monica Mountains and Simi Hills(outside SMMN- orative management model exhibited by SMMNRA.There is
RA),Conejo Mountain-Las Posas Hills,Los Angeles River and considerable potential for public access and enjoyment indud-
Verdugo Mountain-San Rafael Hills areas contain resources of ing many existing trails,parks,and open space and opportu-
national significance but are similar to those already protected nities to expand trails systems and provide additional recre-
in SMMNRA.These resources do not meet suitability require- ational areas.Lands within the study area are of sufficient size
ments for a new unit of the national park system,but would and configuration to protect nationally significant resources.
expand and enhance resource protection and visitor use op- Social and economic impacts would largely be beneficial,as a
portunities currently represented in SMMNRA. new park unit would bring new jobs and revenue to the region.
18 3
8 Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter 114 • Spring 2015
However,costs of a new national park unit are not feasible Protect Significant Resources and Values, or to Enhance
when compared to the lesser costs of expanding the existing Opportunities for Public Enjoyment Related to Park
SMMNRA boundary,which is also under consideration in this Purposes
study. Thestudy finds that the addition of lands in the study area to
SMMNRA would enhance protection of significant resources
The study finds that creation of a new national park unit is and expand opportunities for public enjoyment related to the
not feasible,in comparison to the resource management and purpose of SMMNRA.Areas eligible for addition to SMMNRA
operational efficiencies afforded by a boundary adjustment to (approximately 313,00o acres of land)include:habitat types that
SMMNRA. Many of the significant resources within the study contribute to the high biodiversity of the Santa Monica Moun-
area augment the national significance of SMMNRA and pro- tains;functioning wildlife corridors;highly scenic landscapes;
vide habitat connectivity essential for long-term preservation of and archeological sites.Eligible areas also include thousands
the significant resources within the Santa Monica Mountains, of acres of open space and recreation areas,miles of trails,
thus warranting physical connection to the SMMNRA bound- hundreds of sites of historical value,and national historic trails
ary and a seamless interagency management approach. which provide exceptional public enjoyment opportunities.
Expanding SMMNRA to the east into the City of Los Angeles
Need for NPS Management would provide new opportunities for the NPS to reach out to
The need for direct NPS management is the final criterion for a communities in some of the most ethnically diverse and densely
favorable recommendation for a proposed new unit of the na- populated areas in the United States.
tional park system.Only areas that are determined significant,
suitable,and feasible as a new national park unit are evaluated Otherwise Protect Park Resources that are Critical to
for this final criterion.Because a boundary adjustment was Fulfilling Park Purposes
found to be a more feasible option for NPS management within Including study area resources in SMMNRA allows for greater
the study area,this criterion need not be evaluated. protection of national recreation area resources and fulfillment
of park purpose.Maintaining SMMNRA's habitat value and
Conclusions—New National Park Unit high biodiversity will depend in part on functional habitat con-
The NPS finds that the study area contains nationally signifi- nectivity and protection of the broader ecosystem.A boundary
cant resources suitable for inclusion in the national park sys- adjustment that would include the Rim of the Valley Corridor
tem. While the study found that that multiple feasibility factors areas would provide the widest range of tools to maintain
relevant to establishing a new unit of the national park system habitat connectivity and protect significant resources including
could be met,the assessment of boundary adjustment criteria authority to expend funds to inventory,monitor,and study re-
identified resource management and operational efficiencies sources,as well as protection through land acquisition.
that could not be achieved through the establishment of a new
unit.It was recognized that a new unit would not compare Feasibility to Administer Lands Added through the
favorably with a SMMNRA boundary adjustment in terms of Boundary Adjustment
costs,the duplication of management structures,and the com- Added lands must be feasible to administer considering their
plexity involved in operating two similar but independent units. size,configuration,and ownership;costs;the views of and im-
The study team concludes that it would not be feasible to es- pacts on local communities and surrounding jurisdictions;and
tablish a new partnership unit that would have similar purposes other factors.Lands eligible for inclusion in SMMNRA include
to the existing park,and adjacent to or within close proximity approximately 313,009 acres of land in the study area and along
to it.A boundary adjustment to SMMNRA would be more the Los Angeles River that are not already within the bound-
feasible.Therefore,the study area does not meet the feasibility aries of SMMNRA.Eligible areas include the Santa Monica
criterion and is not eligible for designation as a new unit of the Mountains outside of the current boundary,the Arroyo Seco
national park system. and Los Angeles River corridors,the Verdugo Mountains-San
Rafael Hills,the San Gabriel Foothills,the Upper Santa Clara
Addition to Santa Monica Mountains National Rec- River corridor,portions of the Santa Susana Mountains and
reation Area (Boundary Adjustment) Simi Hills,and the Conejo Mountain-Las Posas Hills.Areas
In accordance with section 3.5 of NPS Management Policies determined ineligible for inclusion in a boundary adjustment
2006,the NPS evaluated whether boundary adjustments(addi- include lands within the San Gabriel Mountains that are cur-
dons to)SMMNRA would protect significant resources related rently managed by the U.S.Forest Service.
to the purpose of the national recreation area,address opera-
tional issues,or otherwise protect resources critical to fulfilling Within these 313,000 acres,two boundary adjustment configu-
the authorized purpose of SMMNRA.The evaluation also de- rations are considered feasible additions to SMMNRA.The
termines the feasibility of administering the newly added lands draft study report alternatives explore these two different ap-
in terms of size,configuration and ownership,costs,impacts proaches to a SMMNRA boundary adjustment.The first con-
on local communities and surrounding jurisdictions,and other figuration(defined as alternative C)would expand the national
factors such as the presence of hazardous substances or exotic recreation area to include 173,00o acres to the north and the
species.Finally,the evaluation determines whether other alter- east,focusing resources in more urban areas,where there is a
natives for management are adequate or not. greater need for recreational opportunities and access to ope 18 4
Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter N4 • Spring 2015 9
space.The second configuration(defined as alternative D) opportunities.These tools and authorities include direct land
would include all 313,000 acres determined eligible for inclu- conservation by the NPS to protect the broader ecosystem and
sion in SMMNRA and therefore would provide greater inclu- funding to provide facilities that support recreation and public
sion of nationally significant resources and important regional enjoyment.
wildlife corridors that support the area's high biodiversity.
Broadening the NPS'ability to partner beyond the current
The cost of an addition to the boundary of SMMNRA is fea- SMMNRA authorized boundary would expand the efficient
sible using the existing collaborative partnership-based man- cooperative management approaches that have been applied
agement model exemplified by SMMNRA,which respects and in the Santa Monica Mountains for over 3o years.The NPS
builds upon the complex mix of existing land use,ownership, would be able to expand its current cooperative manage-
and regulatory authorities.A boundary adjustment would went agreement with California State Parks,the Santa Monica
enhance opportunities for collaborative management with lo- Mountains Conservancy,and the Mountains and Recreation
cal,state,and federal managers to protect natural and cultural Conservation Authority,thus allowing for new visitor opportu-
resources and provide recreation,public access,and other nities,scientific research and study,and coordinated manage-
compatible uses.Given the high cost of land in Los Angeles ment of essential wildlife corridors.Given the complexity of
and Ventura counties,limited,strategic land acquisition would ownership and management,high cost of land acquisition,and
likely be most feasible.Land acquisition would only be consid- demands of a growing metropolitan region,having multiple
ered where there are willing sellers. agencies working in partnership has been necessary to leverage
adequate resources for land protection.
The social and economic impacts of a boundary adjustment
appear to be largely beneficial.The addition of new areas to Conclusions -Boundary Adjustment Evaluation
SMMNRA would not necessarily establish new regulatory An adjustment to the boundary of SMMNRA is feasible using
or land use authority over local governments or private lands the collaborative partnership-based management model exem-
within the boundary. plified by SMMNRA,which respects the complex mix of exist-
ing land use,ownership,and regulatory authorities.Inclusion
Adequacy of Protection Alternatives Considered of lands of the Rim of the Valley Corridor in SMMNRA would
This report determines that a boundary adjustment would contribute to protection of significant resources related to the
provide the greatest opportunity for protection of resources purpose of the national recreation area and expand opportuni-
related to SMMNRA's purpose when compared to other ties for public enjoyment at SMMNRA.
protection alternatives evaluated in the draft study report.Al-
though other agencies and organizations would provide some Alternatives
level of protection under current conditions(alternative A)and
additional NPS tools and resources for regional cooperation The following section describes a range of management alter-
(alternative B)would contribute to the long-term protection natives that are being considered by the National Park Service
of SMMNRA,a boundary adjustment would provide NPS in the draft study report.
with the fullest range of conservation tools and authorities to
protect significant resources and provide public enjoyment Overview of the Alternatives
The study team developed four alternatives based on informa-
tion gathered from public and stakeholder input,internal NPS
discussions,evaluation of special resource study and boundary
adjustment criteria,historical research,and NPS management
models.The four alternatives considered are a"no action"al-
ternative,which serves as a baseline for comparison,and three
"action"alternatives.
• Alternative A:Continuation of Current Management
(No Action)serves as a baseline for evaluating the ac-
tion alternatives;
• Alternative B:Cooperative Conservation Partnership
would foster cooperative planning and funding tools for
the NPS,partner agencies and landowners in the study
area and conserve key habitat linkages to the Los Padres
and Angeles national forests;
• Alternative C:Rim of the Valley Boundary Adjust-
ment(Preferred Alternative)includes a SMMNRA
boundary adjustment(approximately 173,000-acre addi-
California red-legged frog has been the focus of a re- tion)that would provide more recreational opportuni-
introduction effort in SMMNRA. Photo:NPS.
185
10 Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter 114 • Spring 2015
ties and protect habitat linkages,with an emphasis on area.In alternatives C and D where new areas are proposed for
creating more opportunities near urban areas;and addition to SMMNRA,this cooperative management approach
• Alternative D: Regional Rim of the Valley Boundary would continue to apply. It would also continue to be used in
Adjustment and Cooperative Conservation Areas in- ongoing management of SMMNRA(all alternatives).
eludes a SMMNRA boundary adjustment(approximate-
ly 313,000-acre addition)with an emphasis on protecting U.S. Forest Service Management
regional wildlife corridors that would include most areas The alternatives do not include any U.S.Forest Service(USFS)
within the Rim of the Valley Corridor(excluding U.S. managed lands in a boundary adjustment for SMMNRA.Man-
Forest Service managed areas).Cooperative conserva- agement and ownership of the Angeles National Forest and
tion approaches are recommended for key habitat link- San Gabriel Mountains National Monument lands would be
ages between the Rim of the Valley Corridor study area maintained in all alternatives.USFS policies would continue to
and the Los Padres and Angeles national forests. be applied to management of these lands.The NPS and USFS
could work cooperatively through cooperative management
The alternatives explore ways to meet study objectives and op- agreements on initiatives to protect resources,provide visitor
portunities to address primary issues identified by public and services,and conduct public outreach.
stakeholder scoping comments,provide long-term protection
of nationally significant resources,and meet important objet- Retention of Local Land Use and Existing Regulatory
rives for the next century of NPS management.These issues Authorities/NPS Regulatory Authorities
include: In all alternatives,lands would continue to be managed
through a variety of public and private mechanisms by pri-
• Protection of Nationally Significant Resources.The vate landowners,federal,state and local agencies,universi-
study identifies nationally significant natural and cultural ties,and organizations.In Santa Monica Mountains National
resources in need of protection in the study area. Recreation Area(SMMNRA)where the NPS has proprietary
• Habitat Fragmentation and Loss of Open Space.Per- jurisdiction,lands not owned by NPS are typically regulated by
haps the greatest threat to the protection of the nation- local and state agencies or other federal authorities that have
ally significant natural resources in SMMNRA is the loss jurisdiction in the area.In proprietary jurisdiction parks,the
of habitat connections to other large protected areas. state government has not ceded the state's jurisdiction over
• Preservation of Recreational Opportunities and Ac- the park area to the NPS.However,under the National Park
cess to Open Space.Regional population growth con- Service Organic Act 1916,which established the National Park
tinues,increasing demand for recreational opportuni- Service,the Secretary of the Interior has broad authority to
ties. Existing park,open space,and recreation areas are establish regulations on certain activities,regardless of owner-
unevenly distributed,with the fewest park areas most ship,within authorized national park unit boundaries.Such
frequently occurring in low income communities of regulations are found in 36 Code of Federal Regulations(CFR)
color and in areas with high numbers of children. Chapter i.
• Regional Coordination.The study area includes a
diverse array of land managers and resource manage- Additional NPS regulations that could pertain to activities on
ment agencies.The alternatives explore opportunities lands considered for addition to SMMNRA in alternatives C
for greater efficiency,collaboration,priority setting,and and D include regulation of mineral extraction and the ex-
funding to enhance resource protection and public en- ercise of nonfederal oil and gas rights.These regulations are
joyment opportunities. designed to insure that activities undertaken pursuant to these
rights are conducted in a manner consistent with the purposes
Elements Common to All Action Alternatives for which the national park system and each unit thereof were
created.
A Partnership Approach to Management
The National Park Service recognizes that many other public New or existing solid waste disposal sites would be regulated
agencies,private conservation organizations,and individuals under 36 CFR Chapter 2,Part 6. These regulations prohibit the
successfully manage important natural and cultural resources operation of any solid waste disposal site,except as specifically
and recreational opportunities within the study area.The NPS provided for,and govern the continued use of any existing
applauds these accomplishments and actively encourages ex- solid waste disposal site within the boundary of any unit of the
pansion of conservation activities by state,local,and private national park system.For example,within SMMNRA,the San-
entities,and by other federal agencies. itation Districts of Los Angeles County obtains a permit from
NPS to operate the Calabasas landfill in Agoura Hills.
For over 3o years,the NPS has managed SMMNRA through
a unique partnership in which the federal government works The extent to which such regulations would affect land uses
collaboratively with state,and local park agencies and private would be dependent on what is specified in the legislation au-
landowners to protect the natural and cultural resources of the thorizing the boundary expansion,and the nature of the activi-
186
Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter#4 • Spring 2015 11
ties.Legislation would be required to implement a boundary established,the Rim of the Valley Trail could be eligible for
addition to SMMNRA.It should be noted that through any designation as a National Recreation Trail,through the existing
resulting legislation,Congress can make determinations about application process,which is voluntary and could be initiated
uses and regulations within a specific park unit.For example, by trail managers.
some national recreation areas are open to mineral leasing if
specified resource protection and administrative objectives can Fire Protection
be met. Congress would also specify which areas would be Fire protection would remain the responsibility of existing
included or excluded. federal,state,and local agencies(Los Angeles and Ventura
counties,U.S.Forest Service,NPS,California Department of
All of the study alternatives would adhere to existing general Forestry and Fire Protection).NPS fire management practices
plans and local zoning,as well as state and local laws and would only apply to land purchased by the NPS.
policies on lands that are not federally owned.The NPS is
authorized to provide comments on proposed projects within Water Supply, Flood Protection, and Sanitation
SMMNRA and the broader Santa Monica Mountains Zone Infrastructure Facilities and Functions
(SMMZ).SMMNRA's 1978 authorizing legislation established The greater Los Angeles metropolitan region has highly corn-
the SMMZ which includes watersheds and canyon slopes as- plex systems of public infrastructure to transport and store
sociated with,but not formally included in SMMNRA,as well local and regional water supplies,and to manage flood protec-
as the easternmost portion of the Santa Monica Mountains tion.In addition,numerous facilities are necessary to treat
encompassing Griffith Park.Local and state agencies are re- wastewater and manage solid waste.The alternatives would
sponsible for land use regulations within this zone,but the not affect existing public right-of-ways,change existing water
NPS retains,by law,reviewing authority on projects involving rights,water supply operations,water treatment operations,or
federal funds,permits,or licenses that may affect the national flood protection efforts.
recreation area.This authority was provided by Congress when
the national recreation was established to reduce downstream As described in the section on local land use and regulatory
impacts on national recreation area resources when possible. authorities,NPS would be required to regulate solid waste
facilities per 36 CFR,Chapter 1,Part 6,in areas proposed for
Privately Owned Lands addition to SMMNRA.However,through any resulting legis-
Within the national recreation area boundary,the NPS only lation,Congress could make an exception for this regulation
has authority to directly regulate lands under NPS ownership should this prove an undue burden on the NPS and sanitation
(with the exception of solid waste facilities and oil and gas ex- agencies given the number of solid waste facilities needed to
traction as described above).Neither inclusion in the national support adjacent urban areas.Such facilities could also be ex-
recreation area nor consideration of cooperative conservation eluded from a boundary adjustment.
approaches would impact local land use authority over lands
not owned by the NPS. The proposed alternatives would not affect existing and
future water rights. Management of water supply and treat-
NPS policy is to acquire lands and interests in lands only from ment plants would continue under current authorities.In
willing sellers,with condemnation as a means of last resort. alternatives C and D,the areas proposed for inclusion in the
Land acquisition by the NPS would be strategic and limited by SMMNRA boundary would not entail any new or future ben-
funding availability.A land protection plan would set priorities eficial uses or requirements for water supply,water quality,or
for NPS land acquisition.In some cases Congress has expressly air quality regulations.
limited NPS land acquisition authorities.Legislation would be
required for a boundary expansion to SMMNRA.Such legis- Geographic Database
lation could expressly limit NPS land acquisition to lands for SMMNRA would work with partners to develop a collabora-
which there are willing sellers. tive geographic database to support decision-making in the
study area. Universities and other partners would be engaged
Rim of the Valley Trail to assist in building scientific knowledge to support decision-
The NPS would support completion of the Rim of the Val- making.
Icy Trail through partnerships and technical assistance.Once
View of the Simi Hills and the Santa Monica Mountains. Photo: NPS.
12 Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter 1t4 • Spring 2015 1 8 7
Alternative A;r',Continuation of Current Management(No Action Alternative)
Concept
The no action alternative is required by the National Environmental Policy Act to provide a baseline from which to compare ac-
tion alternatives. Current programs and policies of existing federal,state,local and non-profit organizations would continue at
existing levels and current conditions and trends would continue.The geographic focus of alterative A includes the 65o,000-acre
study area known as the Rim of the Valley Corridor.
The National Park Service would have no role in the study area beyond efforts related to existing national park or historic trail
units(Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area,the Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail,the Old Spanish
National Historic Trail)and existing financial and technical assistance programs such as the Land and Water Conservation Fund
grant program,Federal Lands to Parks Program, the Rivers,Trails and Conservation Assistance Program,and the National His-
toric Landmark program.
Proposed Area In the no action alternative,existing cooperative management
The area examined in the no action alterative is the 65o,000- efforts between agencies would continue,and current efforts
acre study area known as the Rim of the Valley Corridor.This to protect significant resources and provide new recreational
is also the authorized area or jurisdiction for the Santa Monica opportunities would continue to occur based on current pro-
Mountains Conservancy,a state land conservancy(see map, grams and plans as funding allows.Although fluctuations are
Alternative A:No Action Alternative). inevitable,it is assumed that these efforts will continue at cur-
rent levels.
Existing Management
Federal,state,and local government agencies and conservation Private Land Stewardship
organizations own and manage a little over half of the land in Under the no action alternative,private land conservation ef-
the study area. forts and private recreational opportunities would continue at
current levels.Local ordinances and initiatives would continue
NPS Management to determine appropriate uses for private lands.Private land
In the no action alternative,the NPS would continue to protection efforts such as conservation easements,however,
manage Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area would continue to be uncoordinated with broader regional
(SMMNRA)in partnership with existing agencies and organi- goals for conservation and recreational opportunities.
zations in accordance with the 2002 General Management Plan.
Land identified for conservation in the national recreation Rim of the Valley Trail
area's land protection plan would be acquired as funds are Legislation in 1983 extended the geographic limits of the Santa
available.Any SMMNRA management activities in areas be- Monica Mountains Conservancy's authority to encompass an
yond the current national recreation area boundary would be area known as the Rim of the Valley Trail Corridor.Under the
limited to projects that further SMMNRA's defined purpose. no action alternative,various agencies and organizations would
Current efforts include urban outreach efforts in Los Angeles likely continue to develop proposed segments of the Rim of
and resource management cooperation and assistance.In addi- the Valley Trail system. The NPS would continue to plan and
tion to management of SMMNRA,the NPS would continue to implement portions of the trail that traverse park boundaries
manage the two national historic trails(NHT)which traverse as funds become available.NPS technical assistance in comple-
the study area,the Juan Bautista de Anza NHT and the Old don of the full trail would be limited to existing technical as-
Spanish NHT.The NPS would continue to provide technical sistance and grant programs. Other agencies and organizations
assistance to local communities and organizations through the along the trail corridor would continue to work on existing
Rivers,Trails and Conservation Assistance Program and van- conservation goals and efforts.
ous grant programs that support land conservation and various
aspects of historic preservation. Recreational Opportunities and Access
Under the no action alternative,new recreational opportuni-
Management by Other Agencies and Organizations ties and access would occur through existing agencies,organi-
Other federal land management agencies such as the U.S.For- zations,and local governments as funding permits. The U.S.
est Service,U.S.Army Corps of Engineers,and the Bureau of Forest Service,and other state and local agencies and organi-
Land Management would continue to manage study area lands zations would continue to manage recreational opportunities
according to existing plans and policies;as would state and lo- according to current plans.Recreational opportunities would
cal land management agencies. continue to be limited in some portions of the study area,in-
188
Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter#4 • Spring 2015 13
19A •• x 3'g
rt
\ - Y U
. \\ ' �•` yC c C C �Q
' _- G O a m is S�t! o 10 " C m
��i til p i°273- 2 i g Z
41 - - .0 m m*9 `m S
u = r' ± �. ,. it a3 641§ 64-2,§
4.
Z 75a
co y aFgi'�
._ I
z = 1 -''•• '- , . . ' . '� ; ; ho
12
...t. ' ' : •'\\i? IL A
•
' 1.1• -%• I P.
W
4
.., A ,/,
•
.-,
i_
ii ,
ie....
c .
1 r. s.' , .__d . V
!
` r a d
•M - 1 ``
stir + �q z 'r1 )" / liii
• 1 1 ace c.g c.s
4 411 al M
•
C" u 1 ,� • 1 -
- .
+
4
o ►
1 C.... �.,sem
c.— : I ' " ,. •, _. C) ii
i!
r . p
Q = . 40 30 '(
1
3
W +• F
_V `
4—. pp 8
......4 :!1; gpi
L = 9 E 2jt Y
CD 0 la; 5i
t14ll
i
Q 1
U
ril
1 8 9
14 Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter#11 • Spring 2015
eluding Los Angeles in the east and in certain neighborhoods
of the Camarillo community in the west.However,existing r' •
collaborative efforts among the City of Los Angeles,Mountains `+ 7 ,i fir+,
Recreation and Conservation Authority,the U.S.Army Corps -
of Engineers,and many other agencies and organizations —
would continue to expand recreational activities along the Los
Angeles River,including expansion of the Los Angeles River _
Trail.
- 1 '''
+. I
Resource Protection - ? 'l.: N' '
, NoN.
Protection of natural and cultural resources under the manage- ;M 'it. s ,\ —.
meat of existing agencies would continue.Government grant - I
programs,California state land conservancies,local govern- r '14 -1air,.; f) ,
ments,and non-profit land conservancies/trusts throughout -
the study area would continue to conserve and restore native 4
ecosystems and habitat.Coordination among agencies to pro- 1
tect wildlife habitat and corridors and cultural resources would
continue to occur on a case-by-case basis in various locations , .
throughout the study area.
Operations and Maintenance I _. „,. _
Operations and maintenance of existing parks and open space '
would be assumed to remain at existing levels,with fluctua- i . :., .-
tions •
over time due to local and state budget priorities.For i j -d'=` • - 1 ',
some agencies,more resources are available for the acquisition ;IV' -. : ! -4° _
of lands than are available for operations and management. . `x�` '•`- , r'`
• 1
Fundingand Costs -' 'r
Alternative A assumes that current authorized funding levels y ';'
for the NPS within SMMNRA would continue. Some fluctua- �.. _►-- L r' i
dons would occur to account for inflation,new management
•
needs,and to reflect national budget priorities. The NPS base ”` ��
budget for SMMNRA in fiscal year 2012 was$8.6 million, . • - '... r-A
which includes employee salaries and day-to-day operating t ,,.
expenses. SMMNRA also receives funding from other NPS ..
programs such as those that fund construction projects and r. '; u.
biological monitoring. ••'' •y, , �
u44v1
. h
i. llikkji,
e-� , 4
A Al
It. ..!,,," Iii
IN, ti ,
. ..,
...„. .
. ,..,.. ,
. .... ,.
Many partnership efforts between public agencies and non-govern-
mental organizations occur in the region. Examples include land
protection,such as the purchase of Elsmere Canyon in the study area
through partnership between local and state agencies(top);recre-
ation planning,such as establishment of the Los Angeles River Rec-
reation Zone(center);and study of wildlife movement in the region
which has included SMMNRA(bottom).Photos:NPS.
Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter#4 • Spring 2015 115 9
•
Alternative B:'Coope'rativeConservation Partnership
Concept
Congress would authorize and direct SMMNRA to facilitate a partnership of public and private landowners,organizations,and
institutions to establish an interconnected system of parks,habitat,and open space within the study area.Rim of the Valley Corridor
area partners would also collaborate to provide coordinated education and interpretation focused on connecting people to the spe-
cial resources and stories in the study area. The geographic focus of alterative B includes the 65o,000-acre study area known as the
Rim of the Valley Corridor and habitat linkage areas that connect the Rim of the Valley Corridor to the Los Padres National Forest
and the Sierra Pelona unit of the Angeles National Forest.Existing agencies,organizations,and landowners would continue to own
and manage lands within these areas.The existing SMMNRA boundary would remain unchanged.
These objectives would be achieved through the development of a cooperative conservation plan.The plan would identify shared
goals and identify specific strategies for connecting open space,providing new recreational opportunities,and coordinated educa-
tion and interpretation.Implementation of the plan would be accomplished by the public and private organizations and individuals
that own and manage land in the area.
The NPS would continue to manage SMMNRA in partnership with other agencies and organizations.Beyond SMMNRA,the NPS
would work through existing authorities to provide technical assistance to partners to achieve the goals of the plan.
Proposed Area local communities.NPS technical assistance could be provided
There would be no boundary adjustment to SMMNRA. The for natural resource protection,trail and park planning,and
geographic focus of the partnership efforts and NPS technical partnership development between agencies,organizations,and
assistance would generally include the Rim of the Valley Cor- landowners to facilitate achievement of common goals.
ridor study area and habitat linkage areas important for protec-
tion of significant resources,including areas connecting the Non-Governmental Organizations and Private Land
Santa Susana Mountains to the Topatopa Mountains and areas Stewardship
connecting the San Gabriel Mountains to the Sierra Pelona(see Additional resources,strategies,and opportunities for private
map,Alternative B:Cooperative Conservation Partnership). conservation efforts and land stewardship would be a key com-
ponent of the cooperative conservation plan.Local landown-
Management Approach ers and organizations could participate in the development of
the plan.Private land stewardship actions would be voluntary
Achieving Goals through Cooperative Conservation on the part of the landowner.The cooperative conservation
Existing management by agencies,local government,organ- plan could identify additional opportunities to provide techni-
zations,landowners,and institutions as described under the cal assistance and leverage funding and for private landowners
no action alternative would continue under this alternative. to conserve or restore lands.
However,through the development of a cooperative conserva-
tion plan,agencies,organizations,and landowners would work Non-governmental organizations would be part of the coop-
together to establish regional goals and priorities for protection erative conservation planning effort and could work collab-
of significant resources,including key wildlife corridors,and oratively with agencies and private landowners to help protect
new opportunities for recreation,and educational program- significant resources and critical wildlife corridors.
ming throughout the area. Federal,state,local,and private
organizations could participate to develop and initiate imple- Rim of the Valley Trail
mentation of the cooperative conservation plan.The coopera- The cooperative conservation plan would identify opportuni-
tive conservation planning effort would not establish addition- ties,priorities,and specific strategies for completion of the Rim
al regulatory or land use authority over existing governmental of the Valley Trail.Planning and implementation of the trail
agencies or other regulatory authorities.Local government would be supported by the NPS through technical assistance
participation and implementation actions would be voluntary and partnerships.The trail would continue to be owned and
managed by partner agencies and organizations.Those agen-
Congress would direct the NPS to facilitate the development of cies and organizations would continue to be responsible for
the conservation plan for the Rim of the Valley Corridor area trail development.
and adjacent habitat linkages.Following completion of the
plan,SMMNRA would provide technical assistance to agen- Recreational Opportunities and Access
cies and organizations in the Rim of the Valley Corridor area to The cooperative conservation plan would identify priorities for
achieve the goals of the plan and to increase outreach efforts to recreational opportunities with particular emphasis on con-
191
16 Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter#4 • Spring 2015
10
'` I a
IN
o 2 _ Q <`
ii
U 4.- 3 i A.
, a J
giC YM S C re i-. ce p 3
_ / ..r Via` , 2g 76 tZ as $ u S v
yO • -4 r+r y \�F. � n L c ♦A c °J 0 6
0 a .,, ate - °' n az r9,z S ; 2 S1 a` a
ri,
o. :ii \+%ap4":-
Q r_
tIt
^'
" y ` ` 1 a
r .•S• w` Yg
l AS ,...i"
U
r,i NZ, .4:\N
a
11 91 N: � , 4 !
,_,,
__,,,,,
4 „,,, 4 L *
11
•\ -• 1-7Ipz,.140%•.\\.:V.
. \
l''''iii '
N.
r...., 4 . ..:-.
16
N' E5`
`\ 4 ilftiLt
z
,..-.3•,- \ a t%.. Vr x 6
z tai
1 1 \ ., .iNiN.1'\\\10.1_t '
'iL. \::: \ NN,s.\-z\.,,\ •
\\:44:',:**.l. ::" \\'‘ :' .71 '
\\.:,...\,,, -, 1
1 LI
li
0 ti , \\4\ N.. 11
U .r• 9ii1.s. 0 ..,- I.'
.i�mi 4a 11
O
Q U iif
r I
192
Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter 14 • Spring 2015
17
In more developed areas,the cooperative conservation plan
would identify priority areas where restoration could enhance
biodiversity and create more resilient biological systems.
Restoration objectives explored in the plan could create new
habitat linkages between the Santa Monica and San Gabriel
Mountains.In more rural and undeveloped areas,existing
federal and state programs that provide financial incentives
. for private landowners to restore habitat could be leveraged to
- � `'' achieve plan objectives.
. Partner agencies and organizations would make recommen-
::• , • '• dations related to cultural resources protection and inter-
- pretation and would engage key educational and research
�
� institutions to implement there
commendations. Additional
• •.. :a.r - inventories,documentation and mapping of cultural sites
could be undertaken both on public lands and on the land of
In alternative B,the NPS would provide technical assistance and part- willing private landowners.Information about sensitive sites
nership support for planning and implementation of the Rim of the
Valley Trail. Photo: NPs. need not be released to the public;details and locations may
need to be withheld to protect the resources.Native American
netting existing trail systems and park units and targeting new tribes and organizations with ties to the area could continue
recreation and open space for communities that currently lack to work with landowners and managers to protect sacred sites
adequate access. and archeological resources,and to obtain access or owner-
ship of important sites for ceremonial,interpretive,and/or
The NPS would provide technical assistance to communities educational purposes.
and organizations within the Rim of the Valley Corridor area
to plan for parks and trails,and to provide interpretation and Operations and Maintenance
education about significant resources and conservation ef- Existing public and private landowners and managers would
forts.The NPS would coordinate and collaborate with the U.S. continue to operate and manage their land and facilities.The
Forest Service's Southern California Consortium to conduct cooperative conservation plan could identify additional needs
outreach with schools and youth. for operations and maintenance as well as opportunities where
cooperative management approaches could streamline the op-
Education and Interpretation eration and maintenance of parks and open space.
The cooperative conservation plan would evaluate needs
and opportunities for interpretation and education.The NPS Funding and Costs
could provide technical assistance in interpretive and cdu- The cooperative conservation plan would identify ways to le-
cational messaging in partnership with existing agencies and verage additional resources from existing incentive programs
organizations throughout the cooperative conservation area. and outside funding sources.To facilitate development of the
Public engagement in resource protection through both inter- cooperative conservation plan,the NPS would require funding
pretation and citizen science would be explored in the coop- for coordination of the plan.Given the complexity of jurisdic-
erative conservation plan. tions and land ownership in the region,and the amount of
public engagement that would be anticipated,the total one-
Resource Protection time cost of the effort could range from S5oo,000-$700,000.
The cooperative conservation plan would identify common These costs would include staffing,public outreach,and devel-
priorities for land conservation that would emphasize pro- opment of publications and outreach materials.
tecting and enhancing habitat connectivity between existing
parks and open spaces,and protection of nationally significant Although the NPS would not have direct management respon-
resources.Existing park and open space authorities would sibilities for areas beyond SMMNRA,additional resources
use the plan to target future land conservation efforts around would be required for the NPS to engage in cooperative ef-
priorities established in the cooperative conservation plan. forts and to provide long-term technical assistance in the
Emphasis would also be placed on private land stewardship implementation of the cooperative conservation plan.The
and providing technical assistance to public and private land- annual NPS operating budget increase for these cooperative
owners,as requested,to conserve resources. The NPS would conservation efforts(based on FY2012 costs)is estimated to be
continue to purchase lands to protect core habitat areas and approximately$400-1,000,000,primarily for staffing.The level
wildlife corridors within the existing SMMNRA boundary and of staffing would indicate the degree to which the NPS could
collaborate regionally to share research and information to provide technical assistance and additional outreach and edu-
protect important wildlife corridors. cation programs.
193
18 Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter N4 • Spring 2015
Alternative G Rim of the Valley:Boundary Adjustment (Preferred Alternative).
Concept
Alternative C would include a boundary adjustment to Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area(SMMNRA)to provide
more recreational opportunities to a broad range of urban audiences,including many who are under-represented in national parks
and underserved by state and local parks. This alternative would also provide for protection of significant resources and habitat
connections within the proposed addition to SMMNRA.
The proposed boundary adjustment would add 173,000 acres to SMMNRA's authorized boundary. Areas included in the boundary
adjustment generally include the portions of the study area bordering the most populous areas of the Los Angeles region,including
the mountains surrounding the San Fernando and La Crescenta Valleys,and the Los Angeles River and Arroyo Seco corridors.The
boundary adjustment would not include any area of the Angeles National Forest or San Gabriel Mountains National Monument.
SMMNRA would be authorized to partner and provide technical assistance to land managers and private landowners to protect
habitat connections to the national forests and to assist local communities in planning for recreational opportunities.
Proposed Area As in alternative B,the NPS would also expand its capacity to
In alternative C,the proposed boundary adjustment would provide technical assistance to agencies and organizations in
add the Los Angeles River and Arroyo Seco corridors,the Ver- the Rim of the Valley Corridor area for natural resource pro-
dugo Mountains-San Rafael Hills,the San Gabriel Mountains tection and restoration,trail and park planning,and to bring
foothills,and the eastern portions of the Simi Hills and the agencies,organizations,and landowners together towards
Santa Susana Mountains to SMMNRA.Existing parks such achieving common goals.
as Griffith Park,Hansen Dam,Sepulveda basin,Los Encinos
State Park,Debs Park,El Pueblo de Los Angeles Historical Local Land Use Authorities
Monument,and Los Angeles State Historic Park would serve The SMMNRA boundary addition would not establish addi-
as major portals into the Rim of the Valley area.U.S.Forest tional regulatory or land use authority over local governments.
Service managed lands would not be included in the boundary Local ordinances would continue to determine appropriate
adjustment(see map,Alternative C:Rim of the Valley Boundary uses for private lands.Private land stewardship actions and
Adjustment). conservation efforts would continue to be voluntary on the
part of the landowner.
The proposed boundary adjustment would add 173,000 acres
to SMMNRA and would require Congressional legislation for Rim of the Valley Trail
implementation.Approximately go%of the 173,000-acre addi- Various agencies and organizations would continue to develop
tion is currently protected by other land management agencies proposed segments of the Rim of the Valley Trail. Overall
and organizations for purposes that include conservation,open planning and implementation of the Rim of the Valley Trail
space,and/or recreation. would be supported by the NPS through technical assistance
and partnership development. Planning would include careful
Management Approach coordination with existing agencies,organizations,and private
Management by existing agencies,local governments,organ- landowners to ensure that trail alignments do not conflict with
zations,private landowners,and institutions described under existing land uses and ownership.The NPS could develop and
the no action alternative would continue under alternative C. manage new segments of the Rim of the Valley Trail within the
However,the NPS would become another partner in the man- expanded boundary of SMMNRA.
agement of an additional 173,000 acres within the study area.
Cooperative conservation approaches described under alterna- Recreational Opportunities and Access
tive B would be a component of the management approach for Inclusion in the NPS boundary would give NPS the author-
the proposed addition to SMMNRA. ity to expend funds on creating new trails and other facilities
where appropriate.As requested,and contingent on funding,
The NPS could expend funds on resource protection,visitor the NPS would provide technical assistance to surrounding
services,land acquisition,and the planning and development communities(the San Fernando Valley and other urban areas)
of visitor facilities such as trails,waysides,etc.within the NPS to enhance access to SMMNRA and other open space areas
boundary. NPS land acquisition would be targeted,with an through trail connections and public transportation options
emphasis on significant resources,maintaining and enhancing and to increase the overall diversity of public parklands.The
habitat connectivity,and providing recreational opportunities. NPS would emphasize and promote the public health benefits
The NPS would only consider purchase of land from willing of outdoor recreation.Expanding SMMNRA into urban areas
sellers.
194
Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter#4 • Spring 2015 19
I
......
1=
ea. . . -
E
A ..i.
V Er J G
m •
:2g 9 z gJ;Di
e 1 .. s� m
i at 9 x_ it:i mg E
O '. _4 d d
d L _r_ - - W3 '0
cot. ci
g - r- ,� zz u'iz c 2 = s a.
f. I - V
RE 1 Al —
Ra `
o d
m
Iri 1►.
2= i \. �1\ it
. .1ry� p
i^ L� 4 '^` 1 III/f • �' it ,� Z
, 'r + . 'r 1 i-:
L
, . 1
I ;'�'
1 .• i✓. , . -..
'S J I') 46 ►
•
1 i k`> F.
1/4 a
�
`` hf /� /
I I Z a N`o£
<xo
`Nim t s Pit
r — ~ I �� `r
/ - �
{! s. .___ ,D F.
rvCt•"'! . 1 .
i� 1 V S E I
1 � Z ,�
I' 1 r
FP
L. 1 r• It
�f
L rcd. U \ ' i
i 1
J7 •\ 1-. - 1, r ''• \; '
.- r
3.
•
//�� C , . III, r Lh
ifli : ,-- / il
Ez-
z < _ 1 . . ‘, .g. al ji /
1. gild -. .^
...., -; ,, e
J
-. .c
+�-J ° o C
E —
sr 15 1
19 5
20 Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter U4 • Spring 2015
to the north and east would provide new close-to-home op- Hills and Santa Susana Mountains contain numerous archeo-
portunities for those communities that do not have adequate logical sites,including rock art examples not found in the San-
parks and recreation areas.The NPS could also coordinate and to Monica Mountains.Many sites of architectural significance
collaborate with the U.S.Forest Service's Southern California would also be within the boundary adjustment,including the
Consortium to conduct outreach on recreational and learning Gamble House National Historic Landmark in Pasadena.
opportunities with local schools and youth.
With a focus on engaging urban populations,the NPS could
Education and Interpretation create a network of partners to develop natural and cultural
The lands within the proposed boundary adjustment in alter- resource management programs that would engage the public
native C would provide new opportunities for educational and through expanded citizen science,volunteer programs,educa-
interpretive programs and more engagement of urban com- tion,and interpretation.The NPS could partner with stake-
munities.The NPS would seek opportunities to coordinate holders to develop a collaborative land protection program
interpretive and educational messaging and programs in part- that includes both cooperative conservation planning tools and
nership with existing agencies and organizations. Interpretive strategic land acquisition.
themes related to nationally significant resources throughout
the Rim of the Valley Corridor area would be emphasized(e.g. Including such resources in SMMNRA would allow the NPS
biodiversity,geology,paleontology,technology,economic de- to use its full range of tools and authorities for resource protec-
velopment,and the interaction between human culture and the tion including land acquisition,inventorying and monitoring,
environment).With the Los Angeles River and its tributaries and a variety of resource protection projects. The current
providing close-to-home physical and recreational connec- inventory and monitoring program of SMMNRA would be ex-
tions,watershed interpretive themes could also be emphasized. panded to include the new areas and would inform decision-
Cultural resources in downtown Los Angeles and other urban making for resource management.
communities would also provide opportunities to interpret the
rich cultural heritage of the region. Operations and Maintenance
Existing land managers would continue to operate and man-
Resource Protection age their land and facilities.NPS would be responsible for
The alternative C boundary adjustment would also add to operations and maintenance of lands that it acquires.Through
SMMNRA numerous natural and cultural resources that would cooperative management agreements,the NPS would have the
expand and enhance protection of significant resources within opportunity to share staff,facilities and funding with partner
SMMNRA including portions of the Santa Monica-Sierra agencies,streamlining operational efficiencies.Existing staff at
Madre wildlife corridor within the Simi Hills and Santa Susana SMMNRA would contribute toward operation of the expand-
Mountains.Numerous studies have documented the impor- ed park area.However,additional staffing and expertise would
tante of this corridor for wildlife movement.Also included are be required for management of the new areas.
native grasslands,more oak woodland types,and habitat for a •
range of additional rare and sensitive species in the Simi Hills Funding and Costs
and Santa Susana Mountains.The San Gabriel Mountains foot- Initially,existing SMMNRA staff and operations would sup-
hills included in alternative C contain alluvial fan sage scrub, port the newly added areas.Initial staffing needs would pri-
a distinct and sensitive natural community that has adapted marily be for park planning,outreach,and coordination with
to the unique fluvial processes of the Los Angeles basin.The other agencies and organizations.Increased staffing for the
boundary adjustment would also include the Verdugo Moun- expanded SMMNRA would happen incrementally over time
tains,and more connections to Griffith Park,as well as remnant as implementation planning specifies objectives and as the
riparian areas along the Los Angeles River which are important NPS acquires land.Following completion of a management
ecological stepping stones between the Santa Monica and San plan that would identify more specific goals for land protec-
Gabriel mountains. tion,resource management,facilities,education,and outreach,
more detailed operational costs and staffing needs would be
The boundary adjustment in alternative C would include sig- identified.The annual NPS operating budget for the expanded
nificant cultural resources related to space exploration and the SMMNRA in alternative C could range from 59.5-$to.5 million,
Cold War that are located in the Arroyo Seco corridor and Simi an increase of$9oo,000-$1.9 million above SMMNRA's wiz
Hills.Other significant historical sites that reflect the settlement operating budget. The level of staffing needs would reflect the
and economic development of the region include the Pico emphasis of future management(e.g.the amount and type of
Well.No.4 National Historic Landmark,portions of the But- land acquired by NPS,ability to accomplish objectives through
terfield Overland Trail,the Arroyo Seco Parkway,Route 66,and partnerships).
the El Pueblo de Los Angeles Historical Monument.The Simi
196
Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter#4 • Spring 2015 21
Alternative D `Regional;Rim of the.Valley_Boundary,Adjustment with Cooperative Conservation Areas
Concept
Alternative D includes a boundary adjustment to Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area(SMMNRA)and authority
for NPS to provide technical assistance to surrounding local communities,agencies,and private landowners to maintain habitat
connectivity,protect significant resources,and plan for new parks and trails.
The alternative D boundary adjustment would add 313,000 acres to SMMNRA's authorized boundary to connect large natural ar-
eas and promote long-term resiliency of the significant natural resources within SMMNRA and the broader study area. The bound-
ary expansion would also provide more recreational opportunities. The SMMNRA boundary addition would include most areas
within the Rim of the Valley Corridor with the exception of lands owned and managed by the U.S.Forest Service as part of the An-
geles National Forest and San Gabriel Mountains National Monument.
For critical habitat linkages outside of the proposed boundary addition,SMMNRA would be authorized to partner and provide
technical assistance to land managers and private landowners to maintain and enhance habitat connections to the national forests
(as in alternative B).
Proposed Area tive D.Agencies and local governments would maintain au-
SMMNRA Boundary Adjustment thorities and land management responsibilities.However,the
The boundary adjustment would add 313,000 acres to SMMN- NPS would become another partner in the management of the
RA.Approximately 23%of the new area is currently protected additional areas with authority to expend funds on land pro-
by existing land management agencies and organizations(see tection,visitor facilities,interpretive and educational programs,
map,Alternative D:Regional Rim of the Valley Boundary Adjust- and inventorying and monitoring of resources within the area.
ment with Cooperative Conservation).
NPS Roles
The proposed boundary adjustment would add most of the The NPS would work collaboratively with public and private
areas within the Rim of the Valley Corridor study area to partners to protect significant resources,expand public enjoy-
SMMNRA.Areas that would be included are the Los Angeles ment opportunities,and provide interpretation and education
River and Arroyo Seco corridors,the Verdugo Mountains-San about the area's resources.
Rafael Hills,the San Gabriel Mountain foothills,the Upper
Santa Clara River,the Santa Susana Mountains,the Simi Hills, The NPS could expend funds on land acquisition,and the
and the Conejo Mountain-Las Posas Hills.Areas within the planning and development of visitor facilities such as trails,
Santa Monica Mountains Zone such as Griffith Park and the waysides,etc. Land acquisition would be completed in part-
western escarpment of the Santa Monica Mountains near nership with other agencies and organizations.Any NPS land
California State University Channel Islands would also be in- acquisition would be targeted,with an emphasis on protecting
eluded. This boundary adjustment includes the Santa Monica- significant resources,maintaining and enhancing habitat con-
Sierra Madre wildlife corridor within the study area. nectivity,and providing recreational opportunities.The NPS
would only consider purchase of land from willing sellers.The
NPS would have no land use regulatory authority for lands that
U.S.Forest Service managed lands would not be included in
the boundary adjustment.The National Park Service(NPS) it does not own.
and U.S. Forest Service would explore partnership opportuni-
ties similar to the no action and the cooperative conservation To facilitate habitat connectivity between the study area and
partnerships alternatives. the Los Padres and Angeles national forests,the NPS would be
authorized to engage in cooperative conservation partnerships
Cooperative Conservation Areas and provide technical assistance to public and private land-
Habitat linkages between the study area and the Los Padres owners,organizations,and institutions north of the study area
and Angeles national forests would not be part of the ex- (similar to alternative B). There would be no NPS land acqui-
panded SMMNRA.However,the NPS would be authorized to sition or management of these areas.
partner with and provide technical assistance to land managers
and private landowners to maintain and enhance habitat in alternatives B and C,NPS would also expand its capacity
con-
nectivity(as in alternative B). to provide technical assistance to agencies and organizations in
the Rim of the Valley Corridor area to increase outreach efforts
Management Approach to local communities.NPS technical assistance could also be
provided for natural resource protection and restoration,trail
Management by existing agencies,local governments,orga-
nizations,private landowners,and institutions as described and park planning,and to bring agencies,organizations,and
under the no action alternative would continue under alterna- landowners together to achieve common goals.
197
22 Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter#4 • Spring 2015
C y Q
Q N
7.
0 C._ Q ; V i. L b i
p 3
m rt.
gSm 71, o & ;,s:ate
I
V r a
2[RC �, Q. �j LL 11 • V
O �§§c D 1L� $n Y
r � A" Azrhz' c S''.d5m a 0.
Y r •
- /7
fa
a ip do
a s • V
, �M
m
y l l ♦ on a
r A.a��
//:>:: \� 11111.
v
` ' 1 15a
Irt -, .
� { f i Li
i '.\\\\ ."'s \\I) 4 ..,i • i
1 { 1 I
1 �' 1 { r_ r —. �t
\\ . II
.-,..\. r . ,
I., 41 T =4 ••....
r \ c.a
co
RN __ ; toxz mow.
y
O 1 _r I g:=
U 1 .� .rte Z 1 3
n Q.• .W ~ ` -1 w 7 7i N o
O !Y 'JG 1 , %+1 frill111111 ,
C i1
. ,. r ,.
1 0 . L r_ 3—t------, , 'N, ° II .
2.
r - 1
1 \
C t \ t
'- •%i 1 ..1 ii
z, 1
; 44
` ,`\ y r/
\.
_ w
— 'I F ei
_ \ t
_ �• 1 i
-4/—��I1 J 0
)1
C V f \ 1
L
CD
_.
O li
_
!Y
Q y . Ic
�
Pr ;i o p
Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter 114 • Spring 201S 3 7 8
23
,,A.,..4t-- ii "or s
..; .-- r
. ,
. . 7.,.,..,4,i1,7.1 ,
iglik
T ` 1''111. + �- • 1*
,t,..:- . .7 ,,,,,w-,,_ , • „11'... . •,4',:i--i.a'' -' '...-.''' ' 7: .— .:
tr.
_ ,,,,, •:.
74%---..hi.:.
.jam r. - '.
Resource protection efforts in alternative D would include long-term conservation of regional wildlife corridors. Similar to alternative C,al-
ternative D would provide opportunities to engage urban audiences in recreation,education and interpretation. Photos:NPS.
Other Federal, State and Local Land Management Agencies Rim of the Valley Trail
and Organizations Because the expanded SMMNRA would encompass the en-
New planning efforts would explore opportunities for agen- tire Rim of the Valley Trail,this would provide the NPS with
cies to collaborate and set shared goals for resource protection, opportunities to own or manage new segments of the trail
connecting parklands and trails,restoration objectives,and throughout its planned route.Other agencies and organiza-
providing coordinated interpretive and educational opportuni- tions would continue to develop proposed segments of the
ties that highlight nationally significant resources in the newly Rim of the Valley Trail.Overall planning and implementation
added areas. of the Rim of the Valley Trail could be supported by the NPS
through technical assistance and partnership development.
Implementation of conservation efforts for cooperative con- Planning would include careful coordination with existing
servation areas outside of the SMMNRA boundary adjustment agencies,organizations,and private landowners to ensure that
would be executed by state and local governments,private trail alignments do not conflict with existing land uses and
entities,and other federal agencies.The NPS would provide ownership.
technical assistance to these agencies and organizations where
needed. Recreational Opportunities and Access
Inclusion in the SMMNRA boundary would give NPS the au-
Local Land Use Authorities thority to expend funds on facilities to support recreation and
The SMMNRA boundary addition would not establish addi- public enjoyment.Because alternative D would also include
tional regulatory or land use authority over local governments. larger areas of undeveloped open space,the NPS would evalu-
Local ordinances would continue to determine appropriate ate and explore opportunities for acquiring lands to provide
uses for private lands. Private land stewardship actions and new recreational opportunities.As requested and contingent
conservation efforts would continue to be voluntary on the on funding,the NPS could provide technical assistance to sur-
part of the landowner. rounding communities(the San Fernando Valley and other
urban areas)to enhance access to SMMNRA and other open
Non-Governmental Organizations and Private Land space areas through trail connections and public transporta-
Stewardship tion options and to increase the overall diversity of public
The NPS would work cooperatively with conservation orga- parklands.
nizations and private landowners upon request to undertake
cooperative conservation efforts(easements,grants,technical As in alternative C,expanding SMMNRA into urban areas
assistance for best management practices,etc.)that do not re- northward and eastward would provide new close-to-home
quire federal land acquisition. opportunities for those communities that currently do not
have adequate parks and recreation areas.The NPS would
For the cooperative conservation areas outside of the SMMN- conduct outreach to local communities,organizations,and
RA boundary addition,private land stewardship would be a schools to promote healthy recreation.The NPS could also co-
key component of conservation efforts.An implementation ordinate and collaborate with the U.S.Forest Service's South-
plan would identify a range of private land stewardship strate- em California Consortium to conduct outreach on recreational
gies that could maintain habitat linkages and protect habitat if and learning opportunities with local schools and youth.
implemented.Private land stewardship actions would be vol-
untary on the part of the landowner.
19 9
24 Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter 114 • Spring 2015
Education and Interpretation ners would be engaged to assist in building scientific knowl-
Educational and interpretive opportunities within the ex- edge to support decision-making.
panded SMMNRA would be similar to alternative C.The
NPS would seek opportunities to coordinate interpretive and The larger scope of alternative D provides the most opportuni-
educational messaging and programs in partnership with exist- ties for the NPS to play a direct role in long-term conservation
ing agencies and organizations. Interpretive themes related of regional wildlife corridors through land acquisition and
to nationally significant resources throughout the Rim of the other means of land protection such as private land stew-
Valley Corridor area would be emphasized(e.g.biodiversity, ardship.Agencies and organizations within the added areas
geology,paleontology,technology,economic development,and would continue to acquire lands for conservation and open
the interaction between human culture and the environment). space as permitted under existing authorities.The NPS would
Cultural resources in downtown Los Angeles and other areas focus land acquisition on protection of core habitat areas in
in the Rim of the Valley Corridor area provide new opportuni- SMMNRA and in protecting critical wildlife corridors within
ties to interpret the rich cultural heritage of the region. the newly added areas.
Topics currently interpreted at SMMNRA such as film produc- Operations and Maintenance
don,Native American history and pre-history,and the signifi- NPS would be responsible for operations and maintenance of
cance of Mediterranean ecosystems would be expanded by lands that it acquires.Existing land managers would continue
the inclusion of new sites and resources.New cultural themes to operate and manage their land and facilities.Through co-
would include architecture,resource extraction and produc- operative management agreements,the NPS would have the
tion,space exploration,astronomy,and the Cold War. opportunity to share staff,facilities and funding with partner
agencies,streamlining operational efficiencies.Existing staff at
Resource Protection SMMNRA would contribute toward operation of the expand-
Significant cultural and natural resources described in the ed park area. However,additional staffing and expertise would
alternative C boundary adjustment would be included in alter- be required for management of the new areas.
native D.In addition to these resources,alternative D would
include rare endemic plant and fossil resources associated with Funding and Costs
Conejo volcanic geologic features in the Conejo Mountain-Las Initially,existing SMMNRA staff and operations would sup-
Posas Hills area.This area also includes a western wildlife cor- port the newly added areas.Initial staffing needs would pri-
ridor connection to the Santa Susana Mountains. Alternative marily be for park planning,outreach,and coordination with
D would also include the Upper Santa Clara River area which other agencies and organizations.Increased staffing for the
is home to more sensitive plant community types than any expanded SMMNRA would happen incrementally over time
other portion of the study area. as implementation planning specifies objectives and as the
NPS acquires land.Following completion of a management
Within the boundary adjustment area,the NPS would partner plan that would identify more specific goals for land protec-
with stakeholders to develop a collaborative land protection tion,resource management,facilities,education,and outreach,
program that includes both cooperative conservation planning more detailed operational costs and staffing needs would be
tools and strategic land acquisition. The current inventory identified.The annual NPS operating budget for the expanded
and monitoring program of SMMNRA would be expanded to SMMNRA could range from$lo-$12 million,an increase of
the new areas and would inform decision-making for resource $1.4-3.4 million above SMMNRA's 2012 operating budget. The
management.The NPS could provide technical assistance in level of staffing needs would reflect the emphasis of future
scientific study,restoration opportunities,and documentation management(e.g.the amount and type of land acquired by
of cultural and natural resources.Universities and other part- NPS,ability to accomplish objectives through partnerships).
4 �... •
- 4 :}. '' -
41
At- if
.. _ .
• _.4,..i,
__ _ ,.
_ . • ., _
A .
-,,-„,,,_,„,,,:_:. _ •,-..1.7.;.-,4,:..... •,-: .,-- _ _ .;
itc,
Alternatives C and D would provide new close-to-home recreation opportunities. Photo: NPS.
Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter#4 • Spring 201': 25 0
0
Environmental Assessment
Background _ _
Before taking an action,the National Environmental Policy -- �
e.
Act(NEPA)requires federal agencies to identify a range of al-
ternatives for that action and to analyze the potential environ-
mental impacts of that action,including any potential adverse
environmental effects that cannot be avoided if the proposed
k-'
action is implemented.The NPS prepared an environmental
assessment(EA)for the Rim of the Valley Corridor Special -, 4 y
Resource Study to identify and analyze the potential environ- + - .?}
mental and socioeconomic consequences of each of the alter- 4"-- • ,�7.7,;;.-. • ,
natives considered in the study. <.rr , 1
Impacts . ,�`
• x
Consequences are determined by comparing likely future con- a`' ; ,.
ditions under each alternative with the existing baseline condi- • +"; • , 111
tions as described in the"no action"alternative.The analysis 4: `'T '". - '
includes consideration of the context,intensity,and duration �..
of direct and indirect effects of all the alternatives. • T , .
•- TfA 4
The NPS based analysis and conclusions on a review of ex-
isting literature,information provided by experts within the
NPS as well as outside organizations,analysis of case studies
of existing programs in other locations,and the professional Typical vegetation in the Conejo Canyons area. Photo: NPS.
judgment of the team members.The findings of this study will
inform a recommendation by the Secretary of the Interior to environmentally preferable alternative,the NPS and the public
Congress.If Congress takes action,then new environmental are faced with determining the relative merits of the choices
analysis would be undertaken prior to implementation actions, before them as represented among the alternatives and must
This new analysis would propose specific actions whose spe- clearly state through the decision-making process what values
cific impacts would he assessed prior to implementation. and policies were used in reaching a decision.Based on analy-
sis of the alternatives,the alternative that would best protect,
The NPS evaluated the environmental consequences of each preserve and enhance historic,cultural and natural resources
alternative on the following topics:land use(including prime based on analysis of NEPA Section ioi-B criteria is alternative
and unique farmlands and urban quality),paleontological D.Therefore,alternative D is the environmentally preferable
resources,water resources,vegetation,wildlife,special status alternative.
species, prehistoric and historic archeological resources,tra-
ditional cultural(ethnographic)resources,historic structures Consistency with NEPA Section 101-8
/cultural landscapes;visitor experience,park operations and NEPA Section ioi-B requires analysis of the following criteria:
partnerships,socioeconomics,and environmental justice.
i. Fulfilling the responsibilities of each generation as trust-
The NPS finds that there would be no significant impacts as- ee of the environment for succeeding generations;
sociated with the proposed alternatives. 2. Ensuring for all generations safe,healthful,productive,
and esthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings;
Environmentally Preferable Alternative 3. Attaining the widest range of beneficial uses of the envi-
Implementing regulations for NEPA promulgated by the ronment without degradation,risk of health or safety,or
Council on Environmental Quality require that agencies iden- other undesirable and unintended consequences;
tify"the alternative or alternatives which were considered to 4. Preserving important historic,cultural and natural
be environmentally preferable."According to the Council on aspects of our national heritage and maintaining,wher-
Environmental Quality,the environmentally preferable alterna- ever possible,an environment that supports diversity
tive is the alternative that will promote the national environ- and variety of individual choice;
mental policy as expressed in NEPA's Section ioi.Ordinarily, 5. Achieving a balance between population and resource
this means the alternative that causes the least damage to the use that will permit high standards of living and a wide
biological and physical environment;it also means the alter- sharing of life's amenities;and
native which best protects,preserves,and enhances historic, 6. Enhancing the quality of renewable resources and ap-
cultural,and natural resources(46 FR 18026-18038).Accord- proaching the maximum attainable recycling of deplet-
ing to NPS Director's Order 12,through identification of the able resources.(NEPA Section ioi(b))
2 0 1
26 Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter M4 - Spring 2015
Each of the alternatives would meet criteria 1-5 to some degree. Next Steps
In each alternative,the NPS would work to achieve its mandate After the distribution of the Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft
to protect significant resources for the enjoyment of future Special Resource Study and Environmental Assessment,there
generations,thus meeting criterion 1. However,alternatives C will be a minimum 6o day public review period.If no sig-
and D would meet criterion 1 to the greatest degree by expand- nificant environmental impacts are identified and no major
ing the NPS mandate to additional areas in the Rim of the Valchanges are made to the alternatives then a Finding of No
ley Corridor.Alternatives C and D would also best meet the Significant Impact(FONSI)would conclude the study process.
intent of criteria 2 and 3 through offering greater opportunities 1,he l UNSI will include a final decision by the NPS(selected
to protect esthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings and alternative). The Secretary of the Interior will then transmit
through the expansion of beneficial uses of the environment the final study report consisting of the FONSI,including the
such conservation,recreation,and other public enjoyment op- selected alternative,and any technical corrections to the draft
portunities.Alternative D would best achieve criterion 4 as it study report,to Congress,along with the Secretary's recom-
would provide the opportunity to protect a greater amount of mendations for the study area.At that time,the final recom
historic,cultural and natural resources that depict important mendations will be made available to the public.
aspects of our national heritage.All alternatives would likely
meet the principles identified in criterion 5 as local,state,and A special resource study serves as one of many reference
federal conservation efforts would continue to provide recre- sources for members of Congress,the NPS,and other persons
ational opportunities and protect open space that contribute interested in the potential designation of an area as a new unit
to a high quality of life in the greater Los Angeles metropolitan of the national park system.In this study,the NPS will also
area.Alternatives C and D would best meet this criterion as provide information to Congress and other interested persons
the NPS could improve coordination of collaborative efforts regarding the potential of a boundary adjustment for Santa
to protect open space and directly contribute NPS resources Monica Mountains National Recreation Area.Readers should
for land protection efforts. Criterion 6 does not apply to the
alternatives because there are no specific plans for projects that be aware that the findings and analysis contained in this special
would use depletable resources. resource study do not guarantee the future funding,support,
or any subsequent action by Congress,the Department of the
Interior,or the NPS.Identification of an environmentally pre-
Alternative C best meets criteria t,2,3,and 5,while alternative ferrel alternative should not be viewed as a positive or negative
D best meets all five of the applicable criteria and therefore recommendation by the NPS for any future management strat-
would best meet the Section tot-B criteria.Alternative D would
best protect,preserve,and enhance historic,cultural,and egy or action.
natural resources in the Rim of the Valley Corridor.Because
alternative D best meets all five of the five applicable criteria,
alternative D would best meet the Section tot-B criteria.
.. . ... .. g.1:: c e!4.1.. -
I
•r 'N';a.tr ° ,- ^V;•',;}`14.t'- + c *gyp ,,� b,.4 ' }y, + ' Ar'Nt
.. 8 x' 1.= , y G', t�^• . s..,A1.yy� 7 `•' -.. f ''-r :�.
. CIS
..3% 't
Ranger led hike with youth in Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area. Photo: NPS.
Rim of the Valley Corridor Drart special Resource Study&Environmental Assessment • Newsletter#4 •' Spring 2015 22 0 2
i
•
' Jai- ^
J - 7 wr
z ^• - i 47.
t 7 z _
..• r. t a
T
13=
M
d
V
7
9,
W
ec
To
Q a)
- a
c C
lb
C u
W ':3 I' ++ C
_ ► N Ill a) W
d
:I./
p U p 2 0 Le — y 71 -- Ln 01 C zi Q. o ' ,r oN o C ,-cn
41 _N Q O N kri N V1 Z
o 13 46 > Q Q1 v N C N cz CO 1 VI eti IO J+ J N C
N Vl E O^ O
H
C - N Y >, T Q t C N W
a.
z � 21n � OQ I � n = n = � Q oda z to- x
V rt, T O. �; f0 ›:,01 tC -Orn > ro tT �I.n
O `° i rp ill
10 7 c -pC roo
rn s _a, Q. t ca O vaL I- r--- VI- n CI12m
203
m n _ - . .„...- I W
a —. O a T
N LL [ll ii, CO m
mCh c. - E W
, .•.r '01 Q C m .0 m-O 0)
705 E 1-
c.) ...or
I b 4 f .:-I \- 0 U c m W cnv� m n- i2 N
1b� I I / .-I �� m 2 mmalm� m
• w m 5 C 1 -� 2 m W W O c ,`Foy,Z'LL'0 U
LI
> C iv /, 0E CUE &.• o rnm o ,-
1) �' • ~-••+ o_ — J M
m azo 0. m co D y v 0 <7
cd t - •
� • CO Z c Z D o 2 0 OS as a
-0 c
d " 1 �� J _ tom, W „
Q \ w .
O CI N j •s -
(n ♦ v
/ mil la
_ A
m 7
�
IA-- 'Ai 1 O
/ a -• _ O a
J
1 d
l 1, \ , W I E 8 m
%♦ .4.2 /J I /� W 2 `W
% i . o -510-s z
. i iIII r I ,� I
;__
i 1
• ` \
Ii iii i t,5 B . I10
VIM M,
I. I E ♦ j +
•oII wff t;:. ;/, r"""1.1
1 4-h
,
vlE 'c o jf f r.
`� ZEAe4 C 4 % u
io
8- it
._.1. • !,-- , 7� 0. CG�W W w •
1 m2
•
CO
.
Z m - i ij x o o r .. '',.
W U Qv ib
5 �,� ace`° Hi
11 °vI may „+ _r
1 4 40 -
, ,
gra
> b' . 00 d
QJr ����� I'4, i'� .tom_ _ Z 1 Z °m
L Y�
, °
W rY �� 1. v r an
g
6 A
E o
WO
r'- ,00 , I \ i-_ O' oZm
1E 44-C.'
` 1
cu, I I •
l I N I _ I i (n r y
\
1 t
/ .„.._ " ...11 I 1
_ ..,,,,..„4, ,L \ _ f
•
1610 ,
alE
.��. 1 1 f 1
L I I \' . I
1..L — baa c I `t / c a f YN
CCA C I / � , ......1 m
C/) }, �Ean 1 i 1 , • 1 2`o
Q.
h=gg \ If
' =E
Z CEag I IIO. �a
1 V-
I13 -ooze q 2 ♦,.� f co 1
Ci -E f.1 1 0 I N wa
^, Aien
m U • / 030 �°n°a
•
CZ — 1
r ��` 0 .4. gN
za
L .) z
W ,�
O m a
Q ® v U
6.c
m- •v
204
• -
Z X i
._
X i 1
1 •,., 2
04.1; I i
1- -I I I I i Is 2
I
IPT.,
1 ii. ,I 4. w :
1 !Rill
•„, , t s4 •
2 ; 2 , ' 4 i :-,RAi ft
•
I z nia • 11. CL
•:: > ..7. '-',' I , 't,
, E. I
I I
----. .t. ....., . )'' m 1 ,:
1 ,
„:
-•.'---•------:i -
,
4
''. :- ..,,..;* tt ' '. • -,.
._,
>, = , ,. %,_, ,, • ,,,- ,-., ,: „, t B'
:-..) 7..
_ ,,_,
— 0 4.1 - I'' i
V cj .
> ,..
''; CI%.. c- ... l'
r..1 •.
1 ii II I
.
_
- _
'''- --------- -,.. -•-• i ill g ii ii
• .. --
„, __ , , iz ,..• ....„
' f-iEl i 1;1 I
=
_
'-' --,,, - " • , •„
L.:
likke.e 46.. '-i• .i'i . '• : , • \ ''
/..-
... 1 '1 - '' * .•
E.11
g
-.1,.:
:
VI
.,.--... _
:L27„,,•s
•
_
, '‘, •
- ,
`-.
a.) i N - .., • .
. , I
< _ . It
•0
\ .i :
c
cc
1 ...,...: ---_-_-4', "..."--di - •-•1;14,1 p-- •
L.. ..
--, -..z.-.:: r • -,_ ••• .. -
1 ......x
• ,...
\
u
e
•-,....,- __;- , 1 .:7:5
0.)
IZT—r •>—(:z._
... g
•. ,_ .• t.—. i,
— /.5 - •
-,..=.
,..•:•.:.-.
,I
1
LILI
C2Ic.t.)
cL0
.- -
,
1 r)(J
i,....4..,,
•t
.. , •
1 i
•Nem 40 e 4 i -s '‘k...;L>-P.'''''\--'\ ' t
Jr---"TN.N.. ti-- ( ,. • I 30f1
..,
4----; • x 1 ....-.., ,
1 g
C --- -- -il'.1 • 1
i 2
C) \
I
_li. .
'•''' - •
ill2, t TO
0 4 e
,..... ,
. .
. •-
r. -......... ..
........., ri • pii (e>
=
. 1 a . .1
-1
G .;
>t 2
rift i
13
1 t
n %
411141611L1111 41:/”. L:
r 1
l : r"-
. -.
> 4-,
,1 IP .,
i , : .
'-..;
.. •.
s.--. (
\ ■ 11
ii i•mi 4.- ,
r-- t Y31
) Ail
,•., :
:
2 rs
„..
... _...,
., i ...;.?
'---.1. . -----
_........
ra
tL„tr 1 i
. ..-
ilmil 0
......
1 . ci
.7.,
< LL.)
-,-
:LI'