Recent Press

Marin Ranchers Fear Countywide Plan Would Invite Trespassers
Marin Independent Journal
Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Marin farmers are angry about proposed new regulations that would limit the size of the homes they could build and allow the county to list their property as the site of future hiking trails.

Those concerns brought about 125 people to the Planning Commission's Monday meeting, one of a series of public hearings on the latest update to the Marin Countywide Plan, the county's central planning document.

"It was one of the largest turnouts I've ever seen, with a cross section of cattlemen, organic farmers, traditional farmers, grass-fed beef ranchers and dairymen, and they weren't there to talk about just a single issue," said county Agricultural Commissioner Stacy Carlsen.

The commission agreed to include a map of existing and proposed county trails within the plan. Farmers have objected to the map because some of the proposed trails cross private, agriculturally zoned land. Many see the map as an invitation by the county to trespass on their property.

"There's no question in my mind that when people see a county map that says 'proposed trail,' people aren't going to understand or realize what that means," said Mike Gale, president of the Marin Farm Bureau. "Maybe 98 to 99 percent of the people who try to use that trail will be respectful of the property, will close the gates behind them and keep their dogs on a leash. But it's that 1 percent that disrupts production and upsets cattle that has united the farming community in opposition to this issue."

County officials point out that the plan discourages hikers from trespassing.

"Only those trails shown on the maps as existing trails are available for public use," says the caption accompanying the map of Marin's trails. "In regard to proposed trails, the public has no right to enter private property without the owner's permission. If and when the public acquires or is granted an easement for trail purposes in any area where a trail is proposed, the exact location of such proposed trail will be determined at that time."

They add that hikers, bikers and equestrians are unlikely to use the telephone book-sized countywide plan as a trail map when other sources are available, and that the county government has no plans to force property owners to create a trail.

"This county has no history of using eminent domain to obtain an easement," said Wade Holland, chairman of the Planning Commission. "When we get them, it's virtually always because the owner wants to sell us an easement."

But farmers say they don't understand why a county that already has more than twice the number of trails as neighboring Sonoma would insist on proposing future trails across private property.

"We want to encourage the public to take advantage of the trail system," Gale said. "But we have 641 existing trails. If there's a reason why trails have to cross private property, I can't think of what it is."

County officials say many of the proposed trails in question have been identified for decades.

"We've had trails in agricultural areas since 1986," said Bill Long, a member of the county Parks and Open Space Commission and chairman of the Bay Area Ridge Trail Council. "Most of them are existing fire roads that you would find on many different maps. There are public benefits to having a trail network that includes trails in that part of the county."

But historic maps can include mistakes, as rancher Dominic Grossi knows.

"We had a trail put on our property and listed as 'existing,' when there was never an easement," Grossi said. "It wasn't part of the 1983 draft of the countywide plan. Someone found a Novato trails map and decided to put the trail on it."

Grossi finally convinced the Planning Commission to remove the trail across his property from the plan. Other property owners aren't as fortunate, he said.

"The map doesn't show parcel lines, so it's difficult to tell whether a trail crosses your property or not," Grossi said.

Farm and pasture lands aren't just private property, ranchers insist. They're also food-production facilities - and ones in which trespassers could cause serious problems.

"We have a large number of visitors to West Marin, including some from foreign places," said Agricultural Commissioner Carlsen. "In enjoying the landscape and the environment, they may in fact transmit diseases to livestock. We've had that experience with the British foot-and-mouth disease, with tuberculosis, and with Newcastle. So it's not an unfounded concern. I think a more immediate impact might be vandalism, with ranchers having to make repairs and pick up litter left along the trails."

The Planning Commission, however, voted unanimously to recommend inclusion of the trails map in the final countywide plan, with Commissioner Jo Julin absent. Commissioners argued that the map was needed to allow the plan to function as a guide to future planning.

"People have the right to know that the Parks and Open Space Department has tagged this area as a good place for a connecting trail," Commissioner Holland said. "If the trails weren't on the map, we'd be accused of conducting government in secret."

While farmers and ranchers were nearly united in their opposition to public trails across agricultural land, they were divided in their response to new regulations that would limit the size of buildings on land zoned for agriculture.

The new countywide plan update would limit the size of a single home to 3,000 square feet, and restrict the total amount of dwelling units on agricultural land to 6,000 square feet.

Supporters of the plan say it would protect agriculture by discouraging property owners from building "starter castles," rather than using the land for farming.

"Those are people whose primary interest isn't agriculture," said Inverness rancher Kevin Lunny. "They want to buy a big piece of property and build a giant home."

But opponents say it isn't fair for owners of agricultural land - already restricted by county zoning from building more than one home in 60 acres - to be subject to further building regulations.

"If someone can build an 18,000-square-foot home in Novato, why can't they do it in West Marin, which has a lot more acreage?" Gale said.

Doing so could force farming families to choose between continuing to live on the farm and passing the farm down to the next generation, since the entire family might be unable to live within the space provided by the plan.

"My grandfather, father and I all have homes on our property," said Grossi, a rancher in unincorporated Novato. "They're comfortable homes, about 2,500 square feet. And we can never build again. If my son wants to join us, he won't be able to build a home.

"That's the lifestyle here - farming for the next generation," Grossi said. "This is going to put an end to agriculture in Marin County."

The Planning Commission, however, voted 4-2 to recommend the restrictions on agricultural building sizes. Of the dissenters, Commissioner Don Dickenson voted to establish a committee to develop new standards, while Commissioner Mark Ginalski voted to exempt a farmer's primary residence from the size cap.

Despite their concerns, many Marin farmers believe the countywide plan has helped to preserve agriculture in the county.

"Our overall attitude is that the county's land use policy since 1973, administered through the general plan and its ordinances, is extremely important to the sustainability of agriculture both as a land use and viable industry," said Robert Berner, executive director of the Marin Agricultural Land Trust. "The countywide plan, for the most part, and its updated revision continues that tradition of support for agriculture."

But some believe the county's farms and ranches need increased support from its leaders.

"I believe that agriculture in Marin is at a crossroads," Gale said. "Does Marin want to have some boutique farms and a handful of ranches, or productive agriculture? Its future is in the hands of those who are establishing the countywide plan as a blueprint to follow."

Gale is hoping for a a better day when the plan comes before the Board of Supervisors this fall.

"There are only five people we'll have to persuade now, and we'll do our best to put the pressure on," Gale said.

Home | Site Map | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy