|
County rejects U.N.
listing for Carrizo Plain
Designation of Carrizo Plain near San Luis
Obispo as a World Heritage
site may have brought tourism dollars but residents are leery.
By Steve
Chawkins, Times Staff Writer March 31, 2007
Carrizo
Plain
Membership on an elite United Nations roster of
worldwide scenic and cultural attractions might be fine for Yosemite and the Statue of
Liberty, but San Luis ObispoCounty this week turned down
that possibility for the CarrizoPlainNational
Monument, a remote 250,000-acre
swath of grasslands at its eastern end. As a result, with an April 1
deadline looming, the Wilderness Society announced it would abandon its effort
to nominate the sprawling monument as a United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization World Heritage site. The U.N. agency does not plan to
consider the next round of nominations until 2020, said Geary
Hund, the society official who was leading the
effort. "I'm disappointed," Hund said
Friday. "I've talked to World Heritage site managers across the
U.S. and none of them could
think of any drawbacks. What a site gets is recognition and prestige, and those
that aren't well-known stand to get increased agency attention and the
possibility of attracting more money through grants." The 3-2 vote by
the county's Board of Supervisors came a week after Taft, a small
KernCounty oil town, also voted to
withhold support for the idea. Opposition by local governments almost
inevitably dooms such proposals, which must jump numerous hurdles before being
approved by the U.S. Interior Department and then by UNESCO.
Supporters of the designation say it brings honor and, in many cases, tourists
to the 830 spots worldwide that are now on the list. Opponents warned of a
cascade of U.N. rules that could affect not just the monument but also areas
surrounding it. Alberta Lewis, a member of a pioneering Carrizo Plain
ranch family, told county supervisors at a Tuesday hearing: "I can see no
intelligent reason to tie up any of America with the United
Nations. Please, supervisors, don't give away any
more of our country." But Supervisor James Patterson described the
designation as "a Nobel Prize" for natural wonders. In an interview
Friday, he said the plan was derailed by "an almost-hysteria about the U.N.
coming to San Luis
Obispo
County. Some people couldn't
be persuaded that the U.N. wouldn't have a controlling interest in the
monument." Other supervisors said there wasn't enough time to fully
study the idea. Administered by the Bureau of Land
Management, the vast, virtually treeless monument 65 miles east of
San Luis
Obispo spans terrain that has
been described as California's
Serengeti and is home to more threatened and endangered animals than any other
locale in the state. President Clinton declared it a national monument three
days before he left office in 2001 even with ranching and some oil
drilling inside its borders. Environmentalists applauded the
designation, but it rankled farmers concerned about
their grazing rights and oil companies concerned about exploration in the area.
One of the nation's most productive oilfields land that generates 8% of
the state's oil production lies in Kern
County just east of the
monument, said John Martini, head of the California Independent Petroleum
Assn. That rich oilfield could be threatened by a World Heritage site
nearby, Martini told officials in Taft earlier this month. He said UNESCO's
published guidelines allow the international agency to recommend buffer zones
around sites even if, as in the case of Carrizo, none are outlined in the
initial application. "The program doesn't give the U.N. direct
control, but it gives a U.N. advisory committee a significant amount of input,"
he said. After Martini's lobbying in Taft, the local Chamber of
Commerce reversed its support for the designation and the City Council rejected
the idea. "A World Heritage site would bring added tourism to the
area," said Mayor Paul Linder, "but we have to rely on the industry that keeps
us whole the oil industry." The Wilderness Society's
Hund said UNESCO had no authority to impose
restrictions of any kind, either inside or outside World Heritage sites.
It can, however, declare a World Heritage site endangered, as it did at
Yellowstone in 1995 because of a
proposed gold mine three miles from the park. The tag was removed in
2003, seven years after the Clinton administration quashed
the mining plan. In California, there are two World Heritage sites
Redwoods
National
Park
and Yosemite
National
Park. "It has no
budgetary implications and no management implications,"
said Yosemite spokesman Scott Gediman. "But it's certainly an honor and one we take
very seriously." He said the park fills out a questionnaire about
environmental conditions for the U.N. every few years, "but we get no specific
direction on managing the park any differently than we would otherwise."
Some World Heritage sites have been victims of their own good fortune,
drawing hordes of tourists they were ill-equipped to handle. In Peru, nearly
700,000 tourists 1,000% more than 25 years ago annually flock to
the Inca ruins at Machu Picchu, and a sacred artifact there was chipped during
the filming of a beer commercial. Though World Heritage designation
alone doesn't cause any damage, it means an automatic place in guidebooks and
on tour routes. That's the main reason Ellen Cypher, a Bakersfield plant ecologist who
serves on a Carrizo advisory committee, wasn't upset that World Heritage status
seems elusive. "It didn't break my heart that it was turned down," she
said. "The biological and cultural resources are world-class, but I was a bit
afraid of it being loved to death."
http://www.latimes.com/news/science/environment/la-me-carrizo31mar31,1,321117.story?coll=la-news-environment
steve.chawkins@latimes.com
[Non-text portions of this
message have been removed]
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.
section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or
payment to those who have expressed prior interest in receiving this
information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For further
information please refer to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml |