Geographic Area to Include or Exclude in the Study Alternatives

Geographic Areas to Include or Exclude in the Study Alternatives

Support Alternative C. Management and expertise of the NPS. It should be much bigger- entire mountain range and communities.
Like Alternative C - but it is not big enough. Needs to include all of the San Gabriel Mountains and watershed.
Extend the informational sites (in Alternative C) west and north - beyond the San Gabriel Watershed. Draw in other communities. The sub-watersheds should be included.
Like the geographic area of Alternative A - also include Santa Clarita, San Antonio Creek, Antelope Valley, Cucamonga Creek, and Lytle Creek.
Not wanting NRA to trump local park urban needs.
Difficulty saving watershed, finding willing sellers, etc. Concentration for Tujunga area and Mountains Forever.
Would prefer Tujunga watershed has its own NRA designation. Afraid all of the resources will be concentrated on the San Gabriel Valley areas leaving out the Tujunga area.
Tujunga area is often/always neglected. Want the focus to include Tujunga watershed and Rim of the Valley to encompass appropriate fair share of resources to match area boundary.
Separate the watersheds as two separate areas within larger maximum watershed with separate resources and separate funding.
Watershed division is important.
Would like to save lands that are zoned for building but not yet developed.
Concern if maximum geographic area is considered, can it be divided into two or more separate units to better distribute funds and resources.
Tujunga wants its own identity. Don't want to be identified as a San Gabriel National Recreation Area - would be offensive to area residents.

Supports existing proposals for additional wilderness.
Large area is important because people live on fringes - more opportunities for people to recreate on the edges, and middle for wildlife habitat.
Include as much area - Alternative A.
Connection for trails in Sand Canyon area to Pacific Crest Trail - by Robinson Ranch property.
Wants more area = Alternative A.
More land included would be better for improving recreation.
Would like Big Rock Creek included o Interesting wildlife corridor o Not enough picnic/camping areas in this area
Interconnection, links from communities.

Largest area protected with NPS involvement is important as an Alt.
Expand vision of area.
Emphasize connecting youth to area; also preservation range from wilderness to urban parks. Connection idea via corridors of southern communities to forest.
Likes maximum land area preservation, education opportunities for youth.
Protection of Baldy Village as private inholding. Leave out of designation.
Area should have sufficient size for management.
Opportunity to improve recreational quality of area. [NRA] Should include West Placentia, all of the forest to I-5 and Cajon Pass. Allow industrial cities to opt out. Management structure of C/USFS/NPS and other agencies.
Go all the way to Wrightwood, Devil's Punchbowl, Farmer's Market, Little Rock, Pear Blossom, and St. Andrew's Abby.
Support NRA - go beyond boundaries of USFS

Claremont wilderness and other areas of wilderness. Involve NPS. Consider NP for recreation and water supply.

Would like to include lands to east in study area i.e. San Bernardino Mountains and east part of the San Gabriels.
Alternative C- why weren't the tributaries included? Also why weren't the Puente Chino Hills included?
Alternative C with NPS involvement and include larger boundaries of A and B.

Ecological boundaries and adaptability for climate change, fire impacts and recreation. Be considered/planned for within NRA. Areas suggested to be added to NRA:

Castaic Mountains and Tejon Ranch - add to ecological processes, boundaries.
Simi Hills and around San Fernando Valley. How to get wildlife corridors across Highways 5 and 14.
Expand area of interest/corridors to include Verdugo Mountains and San Rafael Hills
NRA.
Improve species linkages - better than drainage/concrete channels.
San Gabriel and Rio Hondo
Puente Chino Hills - including Diamond Bar and Puddingstone
Cajon Pass and eastern San Gabriels
Include San Antonio and Lytle Creeks.

Alt B has more corridors (tributaries) - good thing - should expand to the north.
Likes Alternative A because it includes more area, and this would aid protection of natural resources.
Pleasant View Ridge is not even included in the boundary under Alternative C.
Situation with the Elsmere Canyon is the result of the lack of coordination between agencies; would not like this situation to spread to the North Slope area if the area is not included in a [NRA] boundary.
Expand to include Castaic Mountains - importance of the wildlife corridor between the two portions of the ANF. That connection is also important to maintaining water quality and ecological values along the Santa Clara River.
Expand study to include areas to the east - particularly San Antonio Creek, Lytle Creek. Document their important Wild & Scenic values.
Prefer the management structure of Alt C with the largest possible land area, and connections to the urban communities along the San Gabriel River.

Don't have the patchwork landownership of SAMO - this is a good thing.

Would hate to see the Puente-Chino Hills left out; Significant Ecological Area and connection to Chino Hills State Park.

Connection to Whittier Hills and new potential Discovery Center at the hub of the Emerald Necklace; the Discovery Center could be an information center (Alternative C)
Include Cucamonga Wilderness in the study.

Need an Option/Alternative D - combining the good parts of each alternative:

Management component (NPS) of Alternative C
Inclusion of the San Gabriel Mountain Range (Maximum area of Alternative A)
Include the two Rivers - San Gabriel River and the Rio Hondo Riverways
Include the Puente-Chino Hills
Have the most NPS involvement as possible
Need more funds: USFS doesn't have enough funds alone. Need NPS funds.

Clearly define the differences between Wilderness Areas and other USFS areas and Wild and Scenic Rivers. These involve different approaches to resource management.
NPS should include the Cucamonga Wilderness, east of the study area.
Expand the study area to the east. NPS does a great job and other areas merit protection. Include the Cucamonga Wilderness and Mount Baldy Area.
Alternatives: Include in an NRA the entire San Gabriel River watershed.
The Puente-Chino Hills are connected to the (Santa Ana) Mountains via Gypsum and Coal Canyons. A similar connection is needed at State Route 57.
There is no need for the whole area of the study because we don't need more recreation in the forest- additional access/recreation to trails and parks should be in urban setting.
We need all the protected open space we can get. Need for urban parks great- connect urban to rural.
Cucamonga Wilderness should be included.
Include as much land in NRA as possible to enable connections of urban areas to the forest - create unity of watershed.
Alt A and B added to C - Adding Coyote Hills to Ocean.
Add Eastern edge foothills, San Jose Hills/Puente Hills, Coyote Hills/create connections.
Add Alhambra Wash and Rio Hondo River, Sanchez Adobe and Montebello Hills, Mission site, Pio Pico House, Pico Rivera spreading grounds to create path/trail.
Utilize old Pacific Electric lines easements/research /red car all rail lines/abandoned easements.
Save as much land as possible, stop development of hilltops.
Proposed hybrid alternative:

Alternative C - level of NPS involvement; NPS brings notoriety, cohesiveness, and funding
Alternative B - inclusion of the Puente-Chino Hills, Rio Hondo and San Gabriel River all the way to Whittier Narrows; include historic sites (original site of San Gabriel Mission, Pio Pico, etc) and cultural values
Alternative A - include maximum area of the forest - biggest area of the San Gabriel forest and the North Slope; habitat linkages would be improved; why wasn't eastern area to Cajon Pass and Cucamonga Wilderness and San Bernardino Forest included? Similar geology.

Add north of the divide to the forest area in the other alternatives.
Was there ever a time when both the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains would be studied or connected now or in the future? This is an important connection to consider.
I recommend that a San Gabriel Mountains National Recreation Area ensure that the various communities south of the San Gabriels in the watershed study are to be included in an NRA. This will help address the park inequities that plague our communities and the possible creation of a local urban park network interconnected by trails and bikeways with the San Gabriel Mountains.
Likes comprehensiveness of Alternatives A and C. Make Alternative C bigger to include a broader geographic area. Take Alternative A as an example and extend to include the Cucamonga Wilderness.
No new wilderness areas.
Would like new wilderness areas- areas to connect Sheep Mountains to Cucamonga Wilderness; benefit to endangered animals.
Want connection of San Gabriel River - Mountains to the sea.
Promote a regional perspective of habitat areas; do not exclude habitat areas and work to connect fragmented areas.
One participant supported the alternative that includes Angeles National Forest and the river areas that extend south from the mountains (Alternatives A and C). Technical assistance and financial resources are needed. USFS needs more funding for recreation.
Connect the river communities to the mountains.

Demonstrate (or provide) a national model on how to connect urban areas to federal lands.
A maximum amount of land area should be included in an NRA.
Bring education and interpretation to the communities beyond the forest boundary.
Expand A to the east to include the Lytle Creek drainage and Cucamonga; as well as Placerita on the west (mountain/drainage not relative to County lines, etc.)
Include Cucamonga area within the NRA.

Please protect the San Gabriel Mountains by creating a National Recreation Area that encompasses them.
A National Recreation Area (NRA) should include all of the area historically considered to be part of the San Gabriel Mountains and all of the watershed study area outside of the national forests and with the management structure in Alternative C which would create a partnership between the National Park Service and the Forest Service (which would continue to manage the San Gabriel Mountains).
The NRA should include all of the area historically considered to be part of the San Gabriel Mountains, including all of the National Forest lands between the I-5 and Highway14 on the west and the I-15 on the east. Ideally, the NRA designation should include additional Wilderness and Wild & Scenic Rivers on National Forest lands, including segments of the San Gabriel River, San Antonio Creek, Little Rock Creek, and Lytle Creek. Joint NRA/Wilderness/Wild River designation will protect water quality, outdoor recreation opportunities, and sensitive wildlife and their habitat.
I am writing in support of an NRA designation for the area that is the Angeles National Forest as well as adjacent areas that make up the greater watersheds.

We encourage the development of a new alternative that combines the following elements of the three current alternatives, with some modifications, to the extent practicable: An expansive National Recreation Area that includes as much of the National Forest land within the San Gabriel Mountains as possible (building upon Alternative A). We envision a network of green spaces linking urban neighborhoods, mountains, and rivers within a broader ecosystem. An ecosystem-scale approach will not only help ensure the comprehensive management of the natural resources in this area, but also provide the residents of the San Gabriel Valley with increased recreational opportunities and a stronger connection to their mountains and watershed.
The PHLF has been owned and operated by the Districts since 1970. The 1,365-acre site is located immediately southeast of the intersection of the San Gabriel Valley (1-605) Freeway and the Pomona (SR-60) Freeway in unincorporated Los Angeles County. A portion of this site is located within the conceptual boundaries of proposed Alternative B. The PHLF is scheduled to close on October 31, 2013. However, maintenance and operation of the closed site will continue for years to come. Imposition of additional regulatory requirements will only impede the Districts' ability to properly maintain the site. The land-filled portion of the PHLF site will be ultimately dedicated for park and recreational use. The specifics of the site plan will be the subject of future planning between the surrounding community, the Districts, and the Los Angeles County Department of Parks and Recreation. While it may be appropriate to designate part or all of this area as an NRA or other formal federal open space network, the Districts have concerns regarding the associated impacts on the land-filled portions of the property.
I recommend that a San Gabriel Mountains National Recreation Area ensure that all of the national forest lands historically considered to be part of the San Gabriel Mountains be included in the NRA. This would include the public land between the I-14 on the west and the I-15 on the east.
We would like to see a SGM NRA include all of the territory considered to be part of the San Gabriel Mountains, all the National Forest land between I-14 on the west and I-15 on the east. This vision represents an expansion of the landscape in Alternative A to include the section of the San Bernardino National Forest east of the Study Area that contains the heavily used Ice House Canyon, Cucamonga Wilderness and Lytle Creek.
The San Gabriel Mountains National Recreation Area should cover all of the land of the San Gabriel Mountains. This includes national forest land between SR 14 to the west, and I-15 on the east - an expansion of the territory shown in Alternative A. Outside of the national forests, the NRA would include the San Gabriel Valley communities south of the Angeles National Forest that are in the watershed study area, including Azusa, El Monte and many others. This partnership could be the structure for planning and funding of programs to connect communities with the recreational resources of the mountains. This effort could include a system of trails, parks and public transportation, perhaps involving buses to transport visitors along the Angeles Crest Highway and Highway 39 on weekends. The NRA should address the preservation and restoration of wildlife corridors, although they lie outside the NRA area. Proposed alternatives should describe in detail how an NRA could protect such corridors between the two sections of Angeles National Forest, and between the forest and the Santa Monica Mountains or Puente-Chino Hills. It should also examine how expanding the NRA eastward to the Cajon Pass area would enhance and protect the important wildlife corridor between the San Bernardino Mountains and the San Gabriels.
The new maximum public benefit alternative we advocate would include all of the territory historically considered to be part of the San Gabriel Mountains. This would include the national forest land between the I-14 on the west to the I-15 on the east. This vision represents an expansion of the landscape in Alternative A to include the section of the San Bernardino National Forest east of the watershed study area that contains heavily used Ice House Canyon, the Cucamonga Wilderness and Lytle Creek. The new alternative would also include the San Gabriel Valley communities south of the Angeles National Forest that are in the watershed study area, including Azusa, El Monte and many others. This would facilitate planning for and funding of innovative programs to connect often park poor communities with the recreational resources of the San Gabriel Mountains, which we believe could get more kids outdoors and begin to address our growing southern California obesity and diabetes crisis. The draft report should explore the possibility of a San Gabriel Mountains National Recreation Area including additional communities adjacent to San Gabriels outside of the watershed study area, such as Los Angeles (Tujunga Canyon), Santa Clarita (the Placerita Canyon Nature Center), and Antelope Valley cities such as Palmdale. The NRA proposal should address how cities and other entities outside the formal NRA boundaries could participate in NRA planning and have their communities benefit from the national recreation area.
TPL supports the creation of a National Recreation Area (NRA), but would like to see a larger area encompassed within an NRA than is proposed in any of the alternatives. The establishment of an NRA over the entire study area would afford greater protection for the natural, cultural, and recreational resources that are recognized as nationally significant. Additionally, by encompassing the many communities within the study area, the NRA will generate improved access to outdoor recreation for the area's underserved populations, an important consideration given Secretary Salazar's renewed emphasis on outdoor recreation for young people.
The boundaries should include the entire San Gabriel Mountain Range extending from Cajon Pass on the east, west to include the Angeles National Forest in the vicinity of the Santa Clara River and should include both the north and south slopes of the range. Connecting the San Gabriel River and the Rio Hondo and their tributaries with the San Gabriel Mountains will provide an integrated system of parks and natural areas that would protect both natural and cultural/historical resources. It would also allow for integration of the Emerald Necklace projects into a larger environmental system of connected habitats that would provide expanded wildlife corridors. Incorporation of the above areas would link urban neighborhoods to natural spaces and the historical richness of the area. Major early trails, including the Santa Fe Trail, the path of the Portola expedition, and the federally designated Juan Bautista de Anza trail, pass through the valley areas and cross these rivers. The NRA would present an opportunity to educate the public about the importance of water and its management in Southern California. An extension of the area into the Montebello Hills would include the historically valuable sites of the Sanchez Adobe and the original location of the San Gabriel Mission. Extending up San Jose Creek, an eastern tributary of the San Gabriel River, will connect the historic Workman Temple Homestead with other of sites important in the early history and pre-Columbian settlement of Southern California. By extending the scope of the NRA to Cajon Pass, an opportunity is created for an interpretive geological road up Lone Pine Canyon extending from the historical Route 66 to Palmdale along the San Andreas Fault. Prime opportunity for educating the public about this major feature in Southern California and its role in the creation of the San Gabriel Mountains. It would also provide an opportunity to educate visitors about the varied ecosystems from desert to mountain environments.
I feel that a combination of the alternatives you presented would be more useful. The area encompassed by alternative A plus the lower sections of the river in alternative B would make a broader National Recreation Area. It would allow the protection/management of the entire forest/watershed as a whole.
The concept that is finally approved should include a large enough area and improve upon the current USFS management we have now, which is poor due to lack of resources and funding.
I think the final proposal should definitely include the Cucamonga Wilderness to the East and Placerita Canyon Nature Center to the West.
I realize that the entire area would be too unwieldy for management by the National Park Service but I don't see why the Angeles National Forest part of the area could not be managed as a National Park. This area is constantly under threat for development and overuse and would greatly benefit from National Park protection.
I'm in favor of Alternative C because it would give the area support from the NPS, USFS, and other agencies. However, I would like to see the NRA include all of the San Gabriel Mountains as in Alternative A.
The idea of focusing on the water shed is profoundly important in this semi-arid area of So. CA.
A National Recreation Area (NRA) study should include all of the area historically considered to be part of the San Gabriel Mountains and all of the watershed study area outside of the national forests.

A NRA should include all of the area historically considered to be part of the San Gabriel Mountains including all of the national forest land between the I-14 on the west and the I-15 on the east and all of the watershed study area in the San Gabriel Valley outside of the national forests including cities such as Azusa and El Monte.
One consequence of including all of the SGM/ANF in a NRA designation would be to bring in the upper watershed of the Los Angeles River. This would be a good thing, as both rivers discharge to the San Pedro Bay and are often considered to be a "dual" watershed. The Forest Service manages both upper watersheds, thus splitting them in the designation would not make sense. And, even more importantly, the public sees no distinction based on the watershed boundaries. So while I am a proponent of watershed planning, for this project I think the whole of the SGM/ANF should be managed together as a NRA.

My suggestions for all 3 plans (A, B, C) for improving recreational opportunities and protecting significant resources in the San Gabriel Watershed land area shown on your maps would be to extend the southern border further south to include the 510 acres of Chevron property in northwest Fullerton of the Coyote Hills, plus the 72.5 acres of the Robert Ward Nature Preserve, tangent to the Chevron property and owned by the City of Fullerton, California. It is all part of the Coyote Creek watershed that drains into the San Gabriel River.
I like Alternative A the best but would like to also cover the entire San Gabriel Watershed too. Alternative B is too small. Alternative C is too small.
Too much private property on the north of all of the alternatives. Limit your scope on the north to the National Forest boundary.
I would like to request you consider having the largest area, as shown in Map A be combined with the management scope offered in Alternative C. Especially after the devastating Station fire, this level of management would insure that the recovering forest vegetation, wildlife, and water resources are protected and enhanced to the maximum level possible while mapping out trails and use areas for the future.
I would like the LA River and its headwaters added: both rivers connect Angelinos to our mountains. I would like the NRA expanded to the ocean, due to the logic of the watershed.
Drainage and watershed based NRA starting at all headwaters and going downstream as far as feasible. Include entire San Gabriel River drainage including San Jose and Coyote Creeks, Riotondo (Montebello Hills), Walnut Creek, and stream washes and canonized streams upper Arroyo, etc.
I like components of all three parts. I favor a hybrid that combines the extensive area of Alt. A: as much of the SG mountains as possible; the community and habitat connectors of Alt. B; and the comprehensive management and service components of Alt. C, especially the NPS involvement.
The West Coyote Hills in Northwest Orange County absolutely needs to be incorporated into the National Recreation Area that the National Park Service intends to create in Southern California. Making the West Coyote Hills a National Recreation Area is a top priority of the Rivers and Mountains Conservancy (RMC). It is a top priority of RMC because the West Coyote Hills is clearly the most valuable and unique inland undeveloped ecosystem remaining in Southern California, and is located right in the heart of heavily urbanized Los Angeles and Orange Counties (where people essentially have only outdoor developed parks containing baseball fields, tennis courts, and so on that they can go to; hardly any outdoor natural open space areas exist anymore in urbanized Southern California).
Some radical environmental groups are all ready trying to expand this project into the San Antonio Watershed. First of we do not have a river flowing in the San Antonio Canyon it is a stream which portions of it dries up in the summer. Second in the village it is all private property no leased land. We have a school, firer department, post office, church and several businesses. We have our own private water system and we supply the forest service with water free of charge.
I am requesting a San Gabriel National Recreation Area which would include all of the area historically considered to be part of the San Gabriel Mountains and all of the watershed study area outside of the national forests. A special effort should be made to connect surrounding communities to the forest. This effort would include a robust system of trails, parks and public transportation. This system would expand recreational opportunities in park-poor communities outside the forest and improve recreational access to the forest and the San Gabriel River. I would place a huge emphasis on preserving wilderness, especially the wild rivers.
None of the alternatives are appropriate as an initial offering. Therefore, the best alternative would be for the NPS to assist in developing recreational areas Outside the National Forest e.g. in the southern portion of alternative B.
West Coyote Hills urban wilderness contains examples of rare coastal sage scrub and related habitats, and has one of the largest remaining populations of endangered coastal cactus wrens and California gnatcatchers. It is an area much needed for wilderness experience by people in the surrounding cities. It should be included in the study area.
I think that alternative C provides the most promising management and support mechanism for such a park and it does recognize its biodiversity and its support of sensitive wildlife while providing a popular recreational destination, it misses what could be the greatest and most unique asset of any San Gabriel Mountains NRA. That is, its location as the core of a far greater resource, a habitat connection between our urban (suburban) wildness areas.
The NRA should be as large as possible.
We recommend that the NPS adopt an alternative that creates a NRA for the entire Study Area. This would encompass the San Gabriel Mountains and the Puente-Chino Hills as well as the City of Santa Fe Springs and the connecting area in between. The entire expanse of the San Gabriel Mountains and the Puente-Chino Hills must be part of the final plan so that these important land forms are protected and preserved to the maximum extent possible.
The portion of the study area within the City of Chino Hills is located well beyond the boundaries described within the San Gabriel River Watershed Study Act, "San Gabriel River and tributaries north of Santa Fe Springs and a portion of the San Gabriel Mountains." It is our position that this area has been in appropriately included within the study area. The two maps illustrating the affected areas within the city are very vague and do not identify which parcels are being included. The City of Chino Hills respectfully requests that the portions of the city be removed from the San Gabriel River Watershed Study.
The entire eastern portion of the Angeles National Forest (east of Hwy 14) and the San Gabriel River along with its tributaries in the Study Area should be incorporated into the San Gabriel Mountains National Recreation Area (NRA). This would allow for a cohesive, unified management plan for the entire region.
Our organization wonders why the Castaic Mountains and San Bernardino Mountains portions of the Angeles National Forest have been excluded from both the study area and from Alternative Concept A. We believe consideration should be given to including these portions of the national forest, thereby creating a more unified national recreation area. We note that the National Park Service states it "has determined that the San Gabriel Mountains and Puente-Chino Hills portions of the study area are suitable for inclusion in the National Park System." We assume that, because no similar statement has been made regarding the San Gabriel River and other waterways and areas in the basin, the National Park Service determined they are not suitable for inclusion in the system. We agree with these determinations. As with the exclusion of the Castaic Mountains and San Bernardino Mountains portions of the Angeles National Forest, we wonder the reason for ending the southern portion of the study area well before the San Gabriel River and Los Angeles River reach the ocean. Without adequate explanation for excluding what would seem natural parts of the study area, we believe a significant gap in information exists, leaving the public to make decisions in the dark.
The vision for a NRA is incomplete without including the entire San Gabriel River Watershed. Protecting the upper part of the watershed is without question extremely important. But ignoring the lower river gives the impression that the San Gabriel River system just becomes a drainage ditch after it leaves La Habra. This arbitrary cut off line leaves out the Coyote Creek Watershed, the San Gabriel River's largest tributary, as well as the protected Cerritos Wetlands and the 600 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub at West Coyote Hills. Coyote Hills is the last remaining lowland Coastal Sage Scrub in the region and is connected to Chino Hills by Brea Creek. Coyote Hills is a thriving ecosystem with four threatened plant communities, 60 pairs of California Gnatcatchers and a large population of nesting Coastal Cactus Wren. It is resting area on the pacific flyway, wintering ground for raptors, and a refugee for rare and endangered species endemic to Coastal Sage Scrub. While significant in itself, conserving Coyote Hills also provides a nucleus from which wildlife habitat restoration can radiate outward along the drainages that flank or course through them, enabling a synergy that will enhance the entire system; whereas further loss and degradation of habitats in the Coyote Hills will limit the ability of restoration efforts along the drainages to support the greatest diversity of native species." Since Coyote Hills is so ecologically important and it abuts the border of your study area, it should be included in the watershed study. We urge you to establish a San Gabriel Watershed National Recreation Area that includes the lower watershed.
We suggest that the area to be included in the NRA encompass all areas in the study area. Specifically, we believe all of the San Gabriel Mountains (including the North Slope), the San Gabriel Watershed, and the Puente-Chino Hills as pictured in Alternative B. As your study has noted, these hills maintain a high degree of biological diversity. The gift of time without glaciations has allowed a great diversification of species. They are also designated critical habitat by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for the endangered California gnatcatcher that lives in the rare and disappearing coastal sage scrub community. This great diversity has been has been aided by the rare Mediterranean climate and the calliope of movement and frequent change in topography due to earthquakes.

The Puente-Chino Hills Task Force strongly supports the development of a National Recreation Area (NRA) that would provide a much needed recreational/educational resource for the large urbanized population of the Los Angeles region. While each of the alternatives detailed in Newsletter #4 of the Special Resource Study provides separate specific benefits, we would encourage that the strengths of each alternative be combined into one alternative. Specifically we would recommend that the land included in the NRA be made up of all the land in each alternative. This would include all of the San Gabriel Mountains (including the North Slope), the San Gabriel Watershed, and the Puente-Chino Hills.
We don't believe that NPS can support the finding that the Puente-Chino Hills area is "nationally significant" based on the stated NPS criteria. Newsletter #4 acknowledges that "this area is somewhat of an island of open space surrounded by urbanized areas". The Puente-Chino Hills area is indeed surrounded by urban uses, a fact that contradicts the NPS requirement that an area must "retain a high degree of integrity as a true, accurate, and relatively unspoiled example of a resource." In the case of Aera's property, nearly a century of continuous oil and cattle operations have altered the property, and extensive work will be required to remediate those impacts and restore the property to its natural biological function. This fact is not acknowledged or addressed anywhere in the NPS discussion. The size of the Puente-Chino Hills acreage within the study area is not provided in the newsletter, but the Santa Ana Mountains acreage appears to represent the lion's share of the total acreage recited. Since the Santa Ana Mountains are 10 miles distant from the Study area and are not proposed for inclusion in the NPS action, this acreage should not be included for purposes of meeting the "sufficient size" test of feasibility. Finally, the "efficient administration" test of feasibility is addressed with the following statement on Page 4 of Newsletter #4: "The only areas outside of the Angeles NF that would be feasible for national park designation are those that have the potential for collaborative management with local state and federal managers to protect natural and cultural resources, provide recreation, public access, interpretation and educational opportunities and other compatible uses. In addition, technical and administrative assistance for conservation and recreation planning is a feasible role for the NPS." This explanation essentially concedes that the Puente-Chino Hills area fails the "efficient administration" test, in which case it does not meet the feasibility requirements. That NPS might have a "feasible role" in "collaborative management" is not sufficient to support a feasibility finding.
Alternative Concept B, the San Gabriel Parks and Open Space Network, proposes a partnership of public and private landowners and organizations to coordinate management strategies to protect and enhance natural resources, cultural resources, recreation, and access. The map and the description of this plan indicates that this concept extends as far north as the Angeles National Forest, includes the San Gabriel Mountains, the San Gabriel River and its tributaries, and stretches as far east as the Puente-Chino Hills corridor, and possibly extending as far southeast as the Cleveland National Forest. As described in greater detail below, I strongly oppose Alternative B. It is important to note that Congress did not specifically authorize the National Park Service to study the Puente-Chino Hills area. Again, the Puente-Chino Hills area is not North of Santé Fe Springs, is not part the San Gabriel Mountains or the San Gabriel River, and is not part of the San Gabriel Mountains that lie within the jurisdiction of the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy. It is also important to note that in testimony before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Subcommittee on National Parks hearing on H.R. 519 on May 13, 2003, Sue Masica, Associate Director of Park Planning, Facilities, and Lands at the National Park Service, described the Department of Interior's interpretation of the bill's study area. "HR. 519 directs a special resource study of portions of the San Gabriel River and the San Gabriel Mountains to determine whether they meet the criteria for addition to the National Park System, and offer alternative recommendations for their protection. The San Gabriel River Watershed runs south from the San Gabriel Mountains through a heavily urbanized part of Los Angeles County. The study area includes the San Gabriel River and its tributaries north of Santa Fe Springs, and a portion of the San Gabriel Mountains that lies within the jurisdiction of the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy. “While the Puente Hills area generally is part of the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy, as defined by Section 32603 (c) (1) (C) of the State of California Public Resource Code, this area does not fit the other geographical criteria for study as set by Congress and understood by the Department of Interior in testimony before Congress. Again, I believe the Puente-Chino Hills area is outside of the study area's jurisdiction.
Preliminary Alternative Concept "B" includes maps identifying properties located within the Coyote Creek tributary as Nationally Significant Areas, including some within Diamond Bar's city limits and sphere of influence. As the only tributary located south of the City of Santa Fe Springs, and therefore outside the Congressionally-authorized Study Area, properties in the Coyote Creek tributary watershed should not be eligible for NPS consideration. The City of Diamond Bar again requests that the NPS remove all properties in the Coyote Creek tributary watershed from the Study Area to meet the terms established by Congress. Preliminary Alternative Concept "B" identifies properties not included in the map of Nationally Significant Areas. If these properties are not identified as Nationally Significant, they seemingly fail NPS suitability requirements for inclusion in the national park system.
While alternative A brings additional attention and perhaps additional funding for the Angeles Forest it does not address the issues of connecting the Angeles Forest to the ocean via the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles rivers. This alternative does not bring attention or funding to access, interpretation and education or additional open space in the region. This alternative does not go beyond current federal boundaries and does not affect funding or planning outside this boundary nor does it bring in the National Park Service with its deep resources that are focused on recreation and habitat restoration and protection projects.
The National Park Service should best spend its energies developing recreational opportunities in the watershed below (South of) the San Gabriel Mountains. In these times of the need for energy conservation it just seems logical to develop opportunities for the general public to recreate on or near the water of the San Gabriel Mountain tributaries near their homes.
We believe that a broader scope is needed in order to address the unique character of our region. For this reason, we support the recommendation that has been developed by the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy (RMC), which would create a National Recreation Area that encompasses the entire study area. This would provide the greatest benefit to our region by expanding the opportunity for open space funding, technical assistance and coordination between agencies.
At the last round of public meetings in September regarding the Special Resource Study it became evident that at least some of the alternatives and concepts being considered would include San Antonio Canyon into the San Gabriel Watershed National Recreation Area, and as such, could significantly impact the lives of the citizens of the Mt. Baldy area. However, the direction and goals of the proposed alternatives were vague, making it impossible to anticipate the tangible changes we might expect. This has made the citizenry a little uneasy.
I and most of the community of Mt Baldy support most of Alternative "C". However, it should not include the Mt Baldy community. We are already saturated, especially in winter, with the snow players. Frequently, the road must be closed because emergency equipment cannot move through the community and recreation area.
I support a large NRA in the ANF as proposed in Concept A. To this NRA, I would add the San Gabriel River from Azusa to Pico Rivera. The idea of this is that the NPS could provide additional resources to better manage recreation in the National Forest. For example, all overnight camping within 3 miles of a road should be restricted to established campgrounds in order to prevent over-crowding and unsanitary conditions.
Alternative C does not include a big enough section of the National Forest.

San Gabriel Mountains and Watershed Special Resource Study			National Park Service
Comments by Code