If you support Measure A it is likely because you support parks. It's also likely that you saw part of MALT's misleading $300,000 advertising campaign, after all, MALT will be thing winners if this passes. What you likely don't realize is that Measure A will allocate 20 percent of public funds—some $30 million—to Marin’s largest landowners.. Private, wealthy land owners get 20% of your tax dollars that you thought were going toward parks and restoration. The financial aspect of this sneaky allocation of tax dollars is bad enough, but from an ecological aspect I can say that supporting ranching is the same as hurting nature.
Go to the page to learn more.
#MALT #Marinagriculturallandtrust #measureA #ranching #marincounty #pointreyes #cattle #nature #parks #openspace #shameofpointreyes
In order to help her fellow board members and ranching buddies procure more riches from the tax payers, Phyllis Faber is back telling lies to the media. Dear Ms. Faber, please take us on a tour of one of these flourishing ecosystems on MALT land!
#MALT #RAGG #Marincounty #ranching #unsustainable #ecosystems #nature #agriculture #animalagriculture #livestock #resources #water
Response to 'Significance of Marin Agriculture'.
It's really something to read these letters to the editor from ranch supporters which are actually testaments to the opposite of their proposed arguments. For example, this recent letter regarding “ranching significance” actually proves a point that I recently made in a presentation for one of my ecology courses; Marin agriculture uses an absurd amount of land to produce very little. And yet here we have letters proclaiming how many farms and ranches there are and and actually bragging how many acres these businesses occupy as if it's an argument in their favor. Do you not understand that the output is minuscule considering how much land was required for that output? It's as inefficient a use of land as is possible while simultaneously consuming a shocking amount of natural resources and tax dollars. I'm not saying I am an advocate for industrialization or development, I'm just pointing out the ratio of production to land use is inefficient on the level of being ludicrous. Despite the repeated abuse of the word “sustainable” by these industries, the reality is that they match the very definition of unsustainable. There are many options for land use that extend beyond commercial development and almost all of them are more eco-friendly than these "family" ranches.
#pointreyeslight #ranching #pointreyes #marin #marincounty #significance #agriculture
It's hard for the number one thing on my mind not to be, "Will the comments be as thoroughly ignored as last time?" Even after PRNS discarded nearly a thousand comments opposing ranching, the opposition to ranching was still an avalanche burying the support comments, all of which were submitted by ranchers and ranch associations.
When questioned why the comments were ignored PRNS responded, "It's not a popularity contest."
On the other hand, after a letter to the PRNS staff from the PRNS Ranching association was revealed, it showed that the management plan the park drafted was essentially a mirror copy of the ranchers' request letter.
So, I ask the public, does it feel good to know that your comments mean nothing?
I decided to share my Environmental Science presentation on YouTube in 2 parts. All data sources are listed there. Youtube.com/watchinghumans
It appears that the definition of UNSUSTAINABLE matches what we are currently calling SUSTAINABLE. Why are we so easily duped by this word?
#sustainable #marincounty #marin #ranching #water #drought #subsidies #taxes #land #dairy
In response to the MCL’s, Nona Davis’s, completely intangible argument defending the planet-killing, habitat-destroying, tax-payer-draining, wildlife-murdering, pro-ranch plan, may I remind everyone that the Marin Conservation League is responsible for hindering the initial creation of Point Reyes National Seashore in the first place dating back to 1961. Why did MCL reject the plan back then? For good reason? For tangiblee reasons? For scientific reasons? No, according to Point Reyes National Seashore’s own historical document, ‘An Administrative History of Point Reyes’, the Marin Conservation League obliged The Ranchers Assocation’s request to reject the plan without even looking at the plan. Let me repeat, the MCL was so thoroughly controlled by ranchers even back then that it took nothing more than the request of ranchers to reject a federal plan to create a National Seashore.
With a society more corrupted than ever by the financial and political power of animal agriculture and other influential, destructive industries it’s no wonder that Marin Conservation League publishes such embarrassing statements.
The Marin Conservation League has been and continues to be, in reality, a cover for its actual title, The Marin Cattle League. You can love cows and ranchers and the death of natural habitat all you want, but lies are lies and deception is deception. Just be honest about who you support when you support an organization like this.
Citizens of Marin, take control of Marin County before the county is one big cow turd.
For those willing to look at the evidence rather than live in denial, here's a link to the Administrative History hosted on the NPS website.
#marinconservationleague #marincattleleague #pointreyes #pointreyesnationalseashore #cattleindustry #ranchers #marincounty #shameofpointreyes #dairyindustry
I'll supplement this blog post by including an excellent rebuttal by Deborah Moskowitz
Point Reyes debate more than ‘philosophical’
In an article published in the IJ (“Suit targets elk, ranch plan,” Jan. 11), the Marin Conservation League’s Nona Dennis implies that our lawsuit is unwarranted, based on nothing more than “philosophical differences” about the future of ranching in Point Reyes National Seashore.
In fact, the complaint was filed because the National Park Service’s General Management Plan Amendment clearly violates multiple federal laws, including the National Environmental Policy Act and Clean Water Act. It also makes a mockery of the park service’s Organic Act and the Point Reyes Act that entrust it with preserving the area unimpaired for public enjoyment.
The plan was roundly opposed in public comments and by scientists, park advocates, environmental groups, social equity groups, animal rights activists and the Coast Miwok, whose historic stewardship is sidelined by the commercial ranching that dominates cultural interpretation. Officials are ignoring the public and the experts, relying instead on an inadequate environmental impact statement presenting almost no baseline data for making critical decisions about allocating water and other resources, determining viable elk herd size or limiting the spread of infectious cattle diseases to wildlife.
Dennis suggests that agencies “will work to resolve many of the impacts caused by ranching over time.” But the plan shows almost nothing of how the park service intends to comply with federal laws, remedy environmental damage and prevent further degradation as we face the climate crisis. Instead, it authorizes renewable 20-year leases and expands ranchers’ privileges to include row crops and livestock diversification, mobile slaughter facilities, tourist venues and — for the first time — the killing of Drakes Beach tule elk.
Clearly, these are serious, far-reaching matters of law, public policy and environmental protection. I think the District Court will hold the National Park Service to account.
— Deborah Moskowitz, San Anselmo
Humans are ready to give up...but only when it comes to helping the planet.
This project is independent and self-funded. The time and financial investment is significant. Support is greatly needed and appreciated.