Tag: point reyes national seashore

Deer, Elk, Fencing

Blacktail Deer Clears Fence at Point Reyes National Seashore

This photo shows a deer jumping over a barbed-wire fence.

Blacktail deer clears a fence at Point Reyes.

The most common way barbed-wire fences kill deer and elk is when they get their hind legs caught between the top two wires.   If you were to picture how they might jump, you might think of how a human performs a swan dive with back legs pointed to the rear.  But no, deer need to have their hind legs pointed forward immediately after beginning the jump so their hind legs hit the ground right after the front legs.  The photo above illustrates this.

If the top wire isn’t cleared and there isn’t at least 12 inches between the top wires, then their hooves go under the second wire and the result is that the top wire and the second wire reverse positions as the deer gets caught and falls.  That reversal is called “scissoring.”  A good way to demonstrate this is to take a rubber band and stretch it between your thumb and index finger.  Now take a pen or pencil and insert it between the top and lower band and rotate it 270 degrees.

The deer’s weight causes it to hang from the top two wires and it is impossible for the deer to free itself.  If the wires are far enough apart scissoring won’t happen, although the deer may still get injured in falling, especially if a barb is in contact with one or both legs.

If you want to see an example of scissoring, click here.

This Point Reyes elk somehow got barbed wire tangled in his antlers.  NPS informed me many weeks later that the wire somehow fell off.  I hope so.

This is a photo of a bull tule elk in the rutting season with barbed wire caught in his antlers.

A bull tule elk has caught some barbed wire in his antlers. This can lead to injury or death.

This Point Reyes bull elk wasn’t so lucky.

This is a photo of the skull of a bull elk with barbed wire tangled in the antlers and tightly wound around its lower jaw.

Bull Elk Killed by Barbed Wire

The wire wrapped across the bridge of its nose and its lower jaw.  Its mouth was wired shut and it died slowly from lack of food or water or both.    Note how the wire worked its way half way through its lower jaw.

Fencing is dangerous for wildlife and doesn’t belong in a national park.  Cattle and the business of ranching on national park lands don’t belong in a national park either.

Deer, Elk, Fencing, Point Reyes National Seashore

Point Reyes National Seashore Sets World Record for Livestock Fence Height

This is a photo of a barbed wire fence that is 55 inches in height which is much higher than a deer or elk can jump.

Barbed Wire Fence Is 56 Inches High, Not the Preferred 40 Inches

On January 15 I wrote about a new fence along the reconstructed Sir Francis Drake Boulevard that runs from Estero Road to near Schooner Creek Road.  It violates almost every rule for wildlife-friendly fencing even though NPS said in its FEIS that any new fences would be wildlife-friendly.   The top wire is 48 inches high with 12 inches between each of the wires below it, leaving the bottom wire 12 inches above ground for deer fawns and elk calves to have to try to crawl under.  They can’t do that, especially with barbed wire tearing their flesh.

On January 24 I drove out the reconstructed Sir Francis Drake Boulevard to Chimney Rock and the lighthouse and found further new fencing along it even worse than the fencing I wrote about on January 15 because it is absurdly high.

I listed the specs for a wildlife-friendly fence in my January 15 blog.  Here they are again:

  1. The top wire should be low enough for adult animals to jump over, preferably no more than 40 inches, and “absolutely no more than 42 inches.”
  2. The distance between the top two wires should be “[a]t least 12 inches,” so elk and deer won’t tangle their back legs with the top wires; (For a photo showing what happens if the top two wires are not far enough apart, click here.)
  3. The bottom wire should be “at least 18 inches,” above the ground.
  4. The top and bottom strands should be “smooth wire” (like regular two strand twisted barbed wire, but without the added barbs) so animals don’t get snagged and injured.
  5. No vertical stays.

Also, the top wire should be made highly visible so mammals and birds see it when running and/or flying by using high visibility wire or sections of white pvc pipe, flagging or a top rail.

The top wire of the newest found fence here is 56 inches high with 12 inches between each of the wires below it, leaving the bottom wire 20 inches above ground.  Put another way, the wires are 56, 44, 32 and 20 inches above ground.  The top and bottom wires are not smooth; there is no flagging or anything else used to make the top wire visible to mammals and birds running and/or flying and there are not supposed to be any vertical stays.

So, what will it take for NPS to make this fence wildlife-friendly?  The top wire needs to be removed because it is barbed and way too high.  The wire below it, which is now 44 inches above ground, needs to be removed because it will be the top wire, but it is barbed so it can’t be used as the top wire, and because it is also too high so it needs to be lowered by 2 inches or, preferably, four inches. to 42 or 40 inches.  That wire, as the new top wire, also needs to be made more visible.  When that new top wire is installed, the wire below it, now at 32 inches above ground, will need to be lowered because, as the new second wire, it must be at least 12 inches below the new top wire.   The bottom wire needs to be replaced because it is barbed, not smooth, and the vertical stays need to be removed.

As I think about the fences in the three articles I’ve written recently, what I’m most struck by is how NPS says new fencing will be wildlife-friendly and it doesn’t keep its word.  Far from it.  How can the public expect that appropriate construction specs and all the mitigation measures will be followed for new projects described in the FEIS?  And, by the way, what about all the damage done in the past from ranching that still remains?  No commitments were made in the FEIS to remediate past (and continuing) damage to water quality; native plants; soils (damaged and/or lost due to compaction, and erosion and resultant gullies); native fish and wildlife species, such as salmon, steelhead, pronghorns, ground squirrels; etc.

What is Superintendent Craig Kenkel’s response to all this?  Ask him:  Craig_Kenkel@nps.gov.

Elk

Point Reyes; Fencing in Home Range of Drakes Beach Elk Herd Is NOT Wildlife-Friendly

A friend read my blog about the new fence along Sir Francis Drake Boulevard and sent me two photos.  They showed a 7-strand barbed wire fence that looked very tall and there was very little space between the top two wires and between the bottom wire and the ground.  He added that the fence was along Drakes Beach Road where the Drakes Beach elk herd exists.  That was surprising and concerning to me.  I had checked the fences throughout PRNS, including along Drakes Beach Road, for a fencing blog I wrote in 2014 (available here) and I never saw a 7-wire fence in Point Reyes then, let alone in a place so important to the wild free-roaming Drakes Beach elk herd.

So, the next day I went to investigate.  Here’s what I found:

This is a photo of a fence which is difficult for a deer or elk to jump over or for deer fawns or elk calves to crawl under.

Good Example of a Fence on East Side of D Ranch that is Not Wildlife-Friendly

Before discussing the fence in the photo above, I want to point out that in its EIS for a new general management plan for the ranching area, NPS stated that it would follow wildlife-friendly fencing standards in managing the area.  It adopted the specs of USDA’s Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS).  The NRCS specs adopt “A Landowner’s Guide to Wildlife Friendly Fences: How to Build Fences with Wildlife in Mind.”  First edition (2008).  To view the NRCS specs/Landowner’s Guide, click here.  It describes a wildlife-friendly fence as generally one that allows animals to jump over or crawl under it without injury.  Page 8.   More specifically:

  1. The top wire should be low enough for adult animals to jump over, preferably 40 inches, and “absolutely no more than 42 inches.”  Id.
  2. The distance between the top two wires should be “[a]t least 12 inches,” so elk and deer won’t tangle their back legs with the top wires; Id.  (For a photo showing what happens if the top two wires are not far enough apart, click here.  It’s called “scissoring.”)
  3. The bottom wire should be “at least 18 inches,” above the ground.  Id.
  4. The top and bottom strands should be “smooth wire” (like regular two strand twisted barbed wire, but without the added barbs) so animals don’t get snagged and injured.   Id.
  5. No vertical stays.  Id.

Finally, the top wire should be made highly visible so mammals and birds see it when running or flying by using high visibility wire or sections of white pvc pipe, flagging or a top rail.  Id.

How does the above fence stack up against the wildlife-friendly fence specs?  Not very well.  The fence is 47 inches high and there is only a clearance of 6 inches between the two top wires.  The top wire should no more than 42 inches high and, preferably, only 40 inches high.  The clearance between the two top wires should be at least 12 inches to prevent scissoring.  The bottom wire is a little over 12 inches above ground and it should be 18 inches.  The top and bottom wires should be smooth and the top wire needs to be made more visible.  Starting from the top, it looks like the second, fourth and sixth wires are new and taut and the first, third, fifth and bottom wires are old, rusted and not taut.  It seems like it was partially replaced recently.

As was evident in my previous article about new fencing along Sir Francis Drake Boulevard, NPS doesn’t seem too enamored with wildlife-friendly fencing.  It didn’t follow it there.  Furthermore, in the EIS NPS said wildlife-friendly fencing would only be used when new or replacement fences are built.  Finally, it said only 20% of existing fencing would be replaced in the next 20 years.  That’s 1% (3.4 miles) of 340 miles of existing fencing per year.  Obviously, making fencing wildlife-friendly is not a high priority for the Park Service at Point Reyes.

However, the FEIS Appendix also states as follows:  “While all new Fencing would be required to be wildlife friendly, the EIS does not require that existing fencing be changed until it needs to be replaced because replacing all fencing would be cost prohibitive. NPS would work with ranchers as needed to make adjustments to fences that pose a threat to wildlife.  In areas where elk occur, fences would be repaired and/or replaced with wildlife-friendly fence designs that reduce the extent of damage by elk, and as existing fencing is replaced, it would be replaced with wildlife-friendly Fencing.”  FEIS, Appendix at P-42.  (Emphasis added.)

This fence certainly poses “a threat to wildlife.”  It’s also in an area “where elk occur” so it should be, without doubt, a very high priority for NPS to make wildlife-friendly.  The same should apply to the entire stretch of fencing along both sides of the road to Drakes Beach because the elk cross the road for its entire length and not one part of it is wildlife-friendly.  Furthermore, NPS has a statutory duty to protect and preserve wildlife and the existing fencing along Drakes Beach Road is a threat to that wildlife.  This actually applies to all fencing at Point Reyes (and Golden Gate NRA)  because deer and elk exist all over and none of the fencing is wildlife-friendly.

About 10 years ago, NPS modified two or three sections of the fencing on each side of Drakes Beach Road to provide the elk some spots where they could clear the fence easily.  This was for the benefit of the A and C Ranches who have grazing privileges there and who often complained of the cost of repair for broken fence wires (that were broken because they were kept too high).  It was also of benefit to the elk by reducing injuries to them when they jump the wildlife-unfriendly fences on both sides of the road.

This is a photo of a fence that was made wildlife-friendly and then a rancher undid that.

Wildlife-Friendly Fence Undone by C Ranch

I mentioned these lowered fences in my 2014 blog about the fencing at Point Reyes being so unfriendly to wildlife with these few exceptions for the elk along Drakes Beach Road. Well, as the photo above shows, the ranchers didn’t like making it easier for the elk to jump the fences even if it reduced their need to repair fence wires because they don’t want any elk eating any grass on the lands they have subsidized permits for.   So, they ignored NPS’s attempt to do a good thing and strung wire at a height that would cause elk problems.  In the photo above, the top of the board is 37.5 inches.  That was how NPS had modified the fence so elk could clear it easily and safely.  The C Ranch added a barbed (not smooth) wire.  That wire is 45.5 inches high.  Due to the distance and lighting, the rest of the wires are difficult to see, but there are two additional wires (not counting the angled tension wires) plus the board.  The lowest wire is at 18 inches.  In summary, this spot is no longer easy for elk to jump and the rancher can continue to complain about the elk damaging the fences on his side of the road because the entire fence run is wildlife-unfriendly.  I noticed the other spots along Drakes Beach Road where NPS had removed the top wire and replaced it by a board lower down were also all changed by the two ranchers.

NPS never did anything about what the ranchers did to undo NPS’s attempt to reduce elk problems with the fences.  NPS should immediately convert the new Sir Francis Drake Boulevard section of fencing that I wrote about recently, and this fencing along both sides of Drakes Beach Road, to be wildlife-friendly.  Then, it should do the same with all other fencing in the two parks and complete the work in no more than twelve months.

Deer, Elk, Fencing, Point Reyes National Seashore, Ranching, Uncategorized

New Fencing at Point Reyes National Seashore and It’s Not Wildlife-Friendly

Barbed-Wire Fence

New 48″ High Fence

New Fencing Along the Newly Reconstructed Section of Sir Francis Drake Boulevard Is Not Wildlife-Friendly.

The reconstructed section of Sir Francis Drake Boulevard has been opened to the public.  I drove it a week ago.  Along the south side of the road is a new barbed wire fence.  It looked really tall to me so I stopped and measured it.  It is 48 inches high.  That’s way too tall for deer or elk to safely clear!  The space below the bottom wire measured 12 inches.  That’s way too low for fawns or elk calves to crawl under!  There is 12 inches of space between the rest of the wires.

The Final EIS states that all new fencing, as well as replacement fencing, will be wildlife-friendly.  The FEIS adopts the USDA’s Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS)  spec for wildlife-friendly fencing.  The NRCS spec adopts “A Landowner’s Guide to Wildlife Friendly Fences: How to Build Fences with Wildlife in Mind.”  First edition (2008).

To view the NRCS spec/Landowner’s Guide, click here.  It describes a wildlife-friendly fence as one that allows animals to jump over or crawl under it without injury.  Page 8.   More specifically:

  1. The top wire should be low enough for adult animals to jump over, preferably 40 inches, and “absolutely no more than 42 inches.”  Id.
  2. The distance between the top two wires should be “[a]t least 12 inches,” so elk and deer won’t tangle their back legs with the top wires; Id.  (For a photo showing what happens if the top two wires are not far enough apart, click here.)
  3. The bottom wire should be “at least 18 inches,” above the ground.  Id.
  4. The top and bottom strands should be “smooth wire” (like regular two strand twisted barbed wire, but without the added barbs) so animals don’t get snagged and injured.   Id.
  5. No vertical stays.  Id.

Finally, the top wire should be made highly visible so mammals and birds see it when running or flying by using high visibility wire or sections of white pvc pipe, flagging or a top rail.  Id.

To the best of my knowledge, the fence along Sir Francis Drake Blvd. is the first new fence since the FEIS for a new General Management Plan was released.  Does it pass the fencing standards NPS promised it would follow in the FEIS for new fences?   No.  Far from it.  I know the ROD hasn’t been signed yet, but come on.   It will be signed soon.

It is not highly visible at all.  No attempt has been made to meet that standard.  It is 48 inches high, not the 42 inch (or the preferable 40 inch standard) considered the maximum height to allow adult deer and elk to jump over it.  It does pass the 12 inch spacing between the top two wires.  The bottom wire is only 12 inches from the ground, thereby failing miserably to meet the 18 inch clearance standard!  Fawns and elk calves will not be able to crawl under it.  The top and bottom strands should be smooth wire, but they aren’t.  Finally, there should be no vertical stays, but there is one midway between every two posts.  Another problem is that it doesn’t account for the fact that the fence is built on sloping land for much of its length.  The photo above is an example.  A deer standing on the road side of the fence is standing on land that is roughly one or two feet lower than the land the fence is on.  That means the deer must jump much, much higher than the 48 inches.  That is virtually impossible to do.  If a deer could jump that high, it lands in thick brush.

This new fence violates every wildlife-friendly fencing requirement except the space between the top two wires.  Furthermore, there are never any cattle along this stretch of road because the land behind the fence in covered in dense brush for as far as one can see.  There is no reason for this fence.  If there is some plausible reason why it should remain, then this fence should be modified to be wildlife-friendly and that should be done now.

After I drafted this article I called NPS to ask about the fence.  I was told others had already contacted NPS about it.  I asked why it was 48 inches high with only 12 inches clearance at the bottom in disregard of wildlife-friendly fencing standards promised in the FEIS.  I received a call-back the next day and was told the fence height was a mistake and it would be lowered to 42 inches in height.   As to the 12 inches at the bottom, I was told it was actually 14 inches and would remain at that height (and barbed, not smooth wire) because the fence along this section of road required a diversion from a wildlife-friendly fence design to keep cattle off the road.  So much for the statement in the FEIS that “all new Fencing [sic] would be required to be wildlife-friendly.”  Wildlife-friendly fencing was designed to be adequate for holding cattle whether it was along a road or not.

The fence section I measured a week ago had 12 inches of clearance at the bottom so when I was told it was 14 inches above ground I decided to drive out to the park and measure several random sections of the fence.  First, a word about the measuring device I created.  I took two yardsticks and, with the aid of rubber bands, I extended them so they became 48 inches in length.  I also had a 12-inch ruler which I added to where the yellow yard stick had been slid up 12 inches.  It provided an easy to see contrast at the 12 inch mark.  The bottom wire in the photo is about 11.5 inches above the ground.

The measurements I got varied, but the most common measurement I got was 12 inches, give or take half an inch.  You can tell it’s 12 inches at the bottom just by eye-balling it because each wire is equally spaced compared to the wire above and/or below it.  Starting at the top wire, which is about 48 inches above ground, every wire below it is equidistant from the wire above and/or below it.  Hence, if the top wire is 48 inches above the ground, the bottom wire is going to be 12 inches above ground.

But even if I had gotten mostly the 14 inch measurements NPS claimed, that would still be four inches less than the standard for a wildlife-friendly fence (and barbed)!   I don’t see any reason for this fence to be there at all given the heavy brush that extends as far back as you can see.   Cattle don’t go into areas of heavy brush.  But even if there is a need for a fence there, it should be wildlife-friendly like NPS has committed to in the FEIS.

NPS’s Promise to Convert All New and Replacement Fencing To Wildlife-Friendly Fencing Throughout the Two Parks.

In looking at the FEIS to see what it says about wildlife-friendly fencing, I just realized something that I don’t think I realized about NPS’s statement to convert to wildlife-friendly fencing when I read the DEIS.  The FEIS states as follows:  “Fencing—Approximately 20% of the 340 miles of existing fencing would be replaced, 24 miles of fence would be installed for the Resource Protection subzone, and an additional 35 miles of new fence would be constructed to improve livestock management over the 20-year lease/permit term. NPS anticipates up to 5 Fencing projects annually.”  FEIS at 110.  (Emphasis added.)

So, only 20% of 340 miles of fencing will be replaced during the 20-year lease/permit terms per the preferred alternative in the FEIS.  Twenty percent in 20 years is one percent per year or 3.4 miles per year.  To do 340 miles would take 100 years.  What a joke!  Point Reyes National Seashore and Golden Gate National Recreation Area are units of the national park system.  There should be no fencing at all.  If any fencing is to remain, it must be converted to wildlife-friendly fencing now – regardless of which ranching alternative is chosen.   What is NPS’s reason for this lack of any real action?

NPS gives it in the FEIS’s Appendix:  “While all new Fencing would be required to be wildlife friendly, the EIS does not require that existing fencing be changed until it needs to be replaced because replacing all fencing would be cost prohibitive. NPS would work with ranchers as needed to make adjustments to fences that pose a threat to wildlife. In areas where elk occur, fences would be repaired and/or replaced with wildlife-friendly fence designs that reduce the extent of damage by elk, and as existing fencing is replaced, it would be replaced with wildlife-friendly Fencing.”  FEIS, Appendix at P-42.  (Emphasis added.)

Cost?  That is not good enough.  As stated above, fencing doesn’t belong in the national park system and neither do beef and dairy cattle.  If cattle are going to be kept in a unit of the national park system, then the fencing must be made wildlife-friendly now, not 20, 40, 60, 80 or 100 years from now.  Each ranch should be able to complete that work in a year.  Another option would be for NPS to take on this responsibility.  The 1906 NPS Organic Act and the two park statutes require fencing that is friendly to wildlife now, not up to 100 years from now.

If you agree that NPS should fix the new one or two mile stretch of fencing along Sir Francis Drake Blvd. with a proper wildlife-friendly fence immediately and complete the conversion of all the rest of the fencing in the two parks to wildlife-friendly fencing in the next twelve months, send an email to Craig Kenkel, the new Superintendent at Point Reyes National Seashore, at Craig_Kenkel@nps.gov, or send a letter to him at 1 Bear Valley Road, Point Reyes Station, CA 94956.

Point Reyes National Seashore

Point Reyes National Seashore; Former Cattle Area Where Elk Now Prevent Brush Intrusion

Panoramic photo showing amount of grassy area in elk reserve at Point Reyes National Seashore.
Photo showing amount of grassy area in elk reserve at Point Reyes National Seashore.

Point Reyes National Seashore is in the middle of a controversial planning process to determine whether 28,000 acres of commercial ranching operations conducted on federally-owned national park lands should continue or not.  The National Park Service (NPS) bought the land about 50 years ago and it has never had the nerve to make the ranchers to leave.

If ranching is stopped, the ranchers and their cattle, plus many miles of fencing which restrict human and wildlife movement, would be removed and the public would finally be able to recreate on these lands and the lands would be managed for the benefit of wildlife, such as elk, and other natural resources. Right now, the only difference between what NPS wants and what the ranchers want in the planning process regarding elk is whether to shoot 10% of the 120 elk each year (NPS) or all of them at once (ranchers). Why? Elk eat grass and grass is dedicated 100% to cows in this national park. That’s right. No grass or other forage is allocated by NPS for elk or other wildlife.

One argument the ranchers make for why they should be allowed to stay on (at subsidized rents no less) is that if you remove them and their nearly 6,000 dairy and beef cows, the lands will go from beautiful green grasslands (in winter yes, but dead brown grass in summer) to a thick cover of brush that one couldn’t even walk through. Are they right? No.

Here is a panoramic photo of a large portion of the fenced Tomales Point Elk Reserve where 10 elk were reintroduced and hundreds of cows were removed 40 years ago. (Press Command/+ (PC Control/+) one or more times to increase size of photo.)  If the ranchers were correct, this area would be devoid of grass and completely covered in brush. But it’s not.  What you see is mostly grass with brush more prevalent on sloping land like you see in the two draws to the left of the parking lot.

Even though there were only 10 elk to begin with, compared to the hundreds of cattle that had been there before them, the elk herd as it has grown has kept the area basically as it was 40 years ago in terms of a mix of grass and shrubs, like coyote brush and bush lupine. Elk eat grass too (as the ranchers often complain) and they eat more brush than cows because they are not only grazers, like cows, but browsers, like deer, as well.

Still need convincing? Here’s what the range scientists at UC, Berkeley, (by nature, a group favoring cattle grazing), said, begrudgingly, in their 2018 Point Reyes Range Study for Seashore managers to inform them as to whether Point Reyes should be managed for commercial ranching or the preservation and restoration of wildlife, especially elk, and other natural resources:  “Grazing has been shown to negatively impact shrub establishment. Cattle browse minimally on mature coyote brush plants with browse increasing in heavily grazed areas, but they regularly defoliate and uproot coyote brush seedlings, preventing the spread of these shrubs into neighboring grasslands (Elliot & Wehausen 1974; McBride 1974). Johnson and Cushman (2007) found tule elk reduced total shrub cover in a paired grazed and ungrazed enclosure study at PORE.”  “Grazing Plan: Recommendations for [PRNS] managed grazing lands.” Range Ecology Lab, UC, Berkeley, August 15, 2018, at 13.  (Emphasis added.)

A national park should be managed to preserve and protect nature and, if man has damaged it, then NPS should make every effort to restore it to its natural condition. That is in accord with the 1916 NPS Organic Act and NPS management policy.

Before European man and his cows arrived these lands were part of a native coastal prairie stretching from Oregon to southern California. That has all changed with the arrival of cattle.

AS NPS says:  “Less than one percent of California’s native grassland is still intact today. The northern coastal prairie, which extends into Oregon, is the most diverse type of grassland in North America. Pristine patches of this vegetation still grow at Point Reyes on either side of the San Andreas Fault. Deschampsia coastal prairie is found on the Point Reyes peninsula and Danthonia coastal prairie is found on Bolinas Ridge. Coastal prairie is dominated by long lived perennial bunchgrasses, such as Purple needlegrass (Stipa pulchra), California fescue (Festuca californica) and California oatgrass (Danthonia californica), all of which can stay green year round with the moisture provided in the fog belt [and thanks to their very deep root systems].

By 1850, dairy ranchers had arrived at Point Reyes, lured by the near-ideal conditions for raising cattle. Since then, ranchers planted many non-native grasses, many of which were invasive and began to out-compete the native grasses.”   https://www.nps.gov/pore/learn/nature/prairies.htm

Finally, the non-native, annual grass at Point Reyes, which looks like a golf course in winter and a desert in summer, has little wildlife value. While it is eaten by a few mammals, such as elk, it is not a food of many wildlife species and provides no cover or nesting value for wildlife like coyote brush and other shrubs do.