In recent weeks, several
high-profile environmental organizations have been celebrating a
deal they call “perhaps the greatest victory for conservation
that many of us will see in our lifetime.” If only this were true.
Sadly, it is not; the deal in question represents a major setback
for conservation.
The “deal” does result in permanent
preservation of substantial amounts of open space on
California’s Tejon Ranch, but it also involves the creation
of a major housing development of thousands of dwellings in the
heart of critical habitat for the endangered California condor.
If built, Tejon Mountain Village will pose a significant
threat to the recovery of this highly revered species. That any
environmental organization might agree to such consequences is
alarming and raises troubling questions about how the agreement was
reached.
Critical habitat is the highest level of federal
protection given to areas that are indispensable for endangered
species. It is designed to prevent significant degradation of these
areas. Critical habitat for condors was established on the Tejon
Ranch in 1976, because the lands in question were crucial for
foraging and roosting.
After a close brush with
extinction, the recovering condor population is once again using
this critical habitat on Tejon, but it’s doubtful that full
recovery of the species can be achieved in its historic range if
significant degradation of the Tejon lands is allowed. This
conclusion is not new: It has been stated in innumerable documents
and official remarks of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the
California Department of Fish and Game over the years.
Condors are sensitive to both direct and indirect threats from
human activities. Historically the huge birds have avoided urban
and suburban areas. A major housing development in the remote heart
of one of their most important use areas is exactly the sort of
degradation that critical habitat was designed to prevent. It
simply should not be permitted under any circumstances.
Incredibly, private environmental organizations with no authority
over — and little experience in — condor management issues have
now endorsed a deal that would allow the residential development of
condor critical habitat on Tejon. The Tejon deal was based on
negotiations openly described as secret, from which virtually all
experienced condor experts were excluded. Further, the deal’s
negative impacts for condors have not yet been disclosed to the
public. This is the worst sort of deal-making imaginable,
particularly for an extremely rare species that has become a public
trust.
Many of the lands sacrificed in this agreement are
of irreplaceable value to condor conservation, while many of the
lands slated for protection have not normally been used by condors
and likely will never be of importance to condors. Furthermore,
many of the protected lands would likely never be developed for
housing because of steep terrain and other practical problems.
Unfortunately, in their eagerness to protect open space,
a few well-meaning organizations have become parties to a major
threat to the future of the condor. In effect, the condor is being
asked to pay for protection of undeveloped lands of much less
critical importance than the lands being sacrificed. This
represents a huge net loss for conservation, not a benefit, and is
no cause for celebration. Nothing in the announced agreement comes
close to compensating for the losses involved.
Critical
habitat designation has the force of law and deserves the respect
and support of all, including landowners, governmental agencies and
environmental organizations. If these plans are implemented, they
would set a precedent for disregarding critical habitat protection
for other endangered species, a precedent with far-reaching and
potentially disastrous consequences.
Allowing Tejon
Mountain Village to be built in critical habitat for condors
represents a victory only for trophy-home development. As former
participants in the condor-conservation program, we know of no
evidence to support claims that these plans are generally endorsed
by “condor experts.” Aside from a few individuals paid
by Tejon, not one experienced condor biologist of our acquaintance
believes that these plans are anything other than a major mistake.
Our opposition here represents the consensus of a dozen condor
biologists with long-term experience in the condor conservation
program. We believe that preservation of critical habitat on the
Tejon Ranch is essential for conservation of the condor, and that
recovery of the species would be jeopardized by the proposed
housing development.
The writers are
contributors to Writers on the Range, a service of High
Country News (hcn.org). Both men are biologists who
studied condors for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and both
were members of the government’s Condor Recovery team. Noel
Snyder lives in Portal, Arizona, and David Clendenen lives in
Maricopa, California.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
