Bruce Bratton

Humans, Dogs, and Social Nature

A friend recently pointed out how one aspect of human behavior can provide hints about other parts of our personalities. For instance, with people who enjoy spicy foods: might it be interesting to see how they integrate endorphin rushes into other parts of their lives. Might they act in ways that invites pain, in other ways?

Similarly seeking analogs, I wonder if how people treat their pet dogs says something about their world view, in general?

What kind of person could treat this dog poorly? He was a good pet.

Fido, Get Over HERE!

Get their attention first by yelling their name, then give them stern ‘BAD DOG’ words. Yell it again if necessary, and again. If they finally show up, then smack them.

This habit of barking orders at dogs over and over, every time that the person feels the need to control their dog makes me wonder how that person sees the world. Physical brutality on top of that, just when a dog has (finally) acted as directed, makes me very sad for those relationships. Does command and control and physical brutality make sense in the larger world to such people?

A Whistle Does It

On the other hand, I’ve seen people who have the most cooperative and loving relationships with their dogs. For instance, a certain whistle brings the dog running, tail wagging. Invariably when asked about how these people got to that point with their pet dogs, they say it took a lot of time and effort. Honing communication combined with positive reinforcement are key. Are people who arrive at such non-violent relationship building with pet dogs also apt to have a similarly well-evolved means of relating to their fellow humans?

Different dog breeds have different temperaments, to be sure, but communication is key.

What To Do?

I routinely run into this issue and it really bothers me. The Capitola DMV has it. The Davenport US Post Office has it. I bet you’ve seen it, too: signs that say something to the effect of ‘No Animals Allowed Inside.’ What are humans if not animals? Minerals?

This problem of mine also crops up regularly in social commentary and literature when some ‘smart’ person decides to add their (sometimes ‘witty’) comments about what separates humans from non-human animals. Such arguments are generally flawed and baseless.

Social Animals

How might the world be better if we learned from the science of how social animals have worked out social problems? What if our conversations turned that direction regularly? And, what if humans thought a lot about that when adopting social animals into our lives?

Learning from Nature

There is a wealth of wisdom that Nature can share. Humans have benefited greatly from many of those lessons, and additional learning can take us much further.

When we see ourselves in the dogs we are trying to acculturate into our lives, we learn both how to better mesh with the dog and better hold ourselves in human society.

We might also apply this kind of learning with other social animals in our lives: parrots/parakeets/etc, deer, crows, cows, goats, quail, etc.

The finest people have the finest pets. Do dogs really look like their owners?

Cautions and Next Steps

We taught to be cautious about ‘anthropomorphizing’ non-human animal traits. The caution goes that doing so might make you blind to important differences. How about some balance here, and the adoption of a new word? How about cautioning about ‘anthroscism’ – advancing the idea that humans are somehow wildly different than all the rest of the animals? Same kind of reasoning holds: doing so might make you blind to important similarities.

Your homework: start a conversation this week about some human reaction you see that reminds you of how non-human animals act and why that might be.

-this post originally appeared as part of the online weekly blog BrattonOnline.com – a compendium of important information from around the Monterey Bay and beyond. There are movie and TV review, historic photographs from Santa Cruz, links to great media, and columns from amazingly well informed authors. Check it out! Subscribe!! donate!!!! The Blog Needs Your Support.

The Meadows of Scotts Valley

When you think of Scotts Valley, what comes to mind? What comes to my mind are hours of tedious battles to save what was left of the remarkable meadows, which are home to some fascinating species. Embedded in those memories are lessons about how other people viewed those meadows and the diversity of human perspectives.

Glenwood and Santa’s Village

Highway 17 bisected some fascinating grasslands in Scotts Valley. On the west side of the highway, one can visit what remains of the Glenwood meadows. It is called the Glenwood Open Space Preserve and is owned by the City of Scotts Valley and managed by the Land Trust of Santa Cruz County. I’m not sure how many native species are left now, but in the 1990’s when I joined the battle to save those meadows, we used R. Morgan’s statistic of an extraordinary 250 native plants on just over 200 acres. The meadows would erupt in spectacular displays of lupines and poppies, each hillslope a slightly different color with many other wildflower species.

Home to Rarities

To the east side of Highway 17 the last remaining meadow is at what was formerly known as Santa’s Village or the Polo Ranch. This smaller meadow was recently carved apart to make room for a luxury housing development by the seemingly ubiquitous Lennar Homes. Though smaller, this meadow has wonderful botanical surprises both in shallow-soiled dry rocky places and in some seepy wetlands.

These meadows are the home to the federally endangered Scotts Valley spineflower and the state-listed endangered Scotts Valley polygonum, species found nowhere else in the world. The state-listed endangered San Francisco popcornflower is awaiting better management in the seedbank in both meadows. A distinct form of Gray’s clover, if it survives, will probably one day be called the Scotts Valley clover as will a distinct form of Douglas’ sandwort – both should be listed as critically endangered and are only in the Polo Ranch meadow. A population of the State-listed rare Pacific grove clover has been found in the Glenwood meadow. The federally listed endangered Ohlone tiger beetles are also found in these meadows and in only 5 other places…all within Santa Cruz County. Opler’s long-horned moth, which should also be listed as endangered, is found feeding on cream cups in the Glenwood meadows. Western pond turtles have been found in the Glenwood pond, which would also make great habitat for the rare California red-legged frog were it not for nonnative fish which were put there a while back.

Prior Losses

Scotts Valley has a long history of destroying the things that made it a very special place and replacing those special things with poorly planned housing developments. One gets the distinct feeling that poor planning is a hallmark of that town, which has no town center and is entirely sprawl. Smells like a legacy of greed combined with lack of civic engagement and the resulting pro-developer elected official. My mentor R. Morgan lamented the loss of the marsh that was once at Camp Evers, an ancient peat bog like no other for hundreds of miles. Then there was the development at Skypark, which was an airport and now has a small fragment of the once wildflower-rich extensive meadows.

Scotts Valley High

Since the early 1990’s, as I’ve been following the more recent destruction of Scotts Valley’s ecosystems, the first to get to bulldozed was the Scotts Valley High School site. There were other sites but someone in power got their way, sacrificing rare species and permanently destroying a treasure of immense value. So powerful were the proponents that they managed to protect only tiny set aside areas for the rare species, spaces that were doomed to fail. Promises of integrating these small conservation areas with high school biology classes never materialized. Management for the endangered San Francisco popcornflower has never succeeded.

Glenwood Open Space Preserve

With great effort, the Friends of Glenwood, the California Native Plant Society and the Sierra Club managed to fend off 200+ homes and a golf course that had been proposed at the site.

Meanwhile, the Land Trust of Santa Cruz County is both succeeding and failing to manage this preserve. On one hand, they have been quite successful in managing for the most endangered species on the property- the Ohlone tiger beetle. This beautiful beetle has flourished because of their work. On the other hand, the habitat for the Pacific Grove clover seems to have been lost due to poor decisions. And, large areas of the property are being overcome by invasive species such as stinkwort and French broom.

Santa’s Village

Legal wrangling and the California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) negotiations resulted in the protection of a small private park above 40+ homes. CNPS fought to have fewer homes, arguing that more homes would require more grading, which would threaten the hydrology of the steep terrain and its rare plants. Undeterred and supported by the ‘any development is good development’ Scotts Valley City Council, the home builders dug into the hillsides which subsequently collapsed, severely damaging the rare plant habitat. After years of delaying any management, the preserve area degraded due to brush and weed encroachment. But, after many years, the Wildlife Heritage Foundation is managing the property and trying to restore some of the rare species. Let’s wish them luck!

Lessons Learned

Scotts Valley has been, like Capitola, pro-sprawl whereas Santa Cruz is hemmed in. Just wait…one day Santa Cruz may re-think its greenbelt. Maybe I’ll get to hear another City Council person tell me that if such-and-such endangered species was in their yard they’d destroy it. Maybe I’ll once again hear a developer say something like ‘that Ohlone tiger beetle is probably the most common bug in the world!’ As pressure grows to develop around the Monterey Bay, I hope that we figure out sooner than later how to ensure that natural areas remain natural. How about third-party conservation easements on our parks? Can you not see how municipalities like the City of Santa Cruz will one day try to build housing on its greenbelt? Even State Parks will see that pressure. It seems to me that land trusts should be eyeing those opportunities with interest. They could be helping to guarantee longer-term conservation now that we’ve seen how quickly the tides can turn against conservation as the populace gets poorer and the developers get richer and more powerful.

Appreciations

I feel gratitude for many of the actions people are doing to help nature around the Monterey Bay. In this column, I will extend praise for those actions to specific people but inevitably will overlook others to whom I apologize in advance…chalk it up to not knowing everything everyone is up to or just plain forgetfulness. I also realize that no one is perfect, so I focus on the specific actions that I appreciate, not the whole of what anybody or group of people does, which might include things that are, on the other hand, very bad for nature.

First Peoples

I lead with my appreciation for the First Peoples for their care for the Monterey Bay region. It is not hyperbole to say we owe everything we experience, the whole of nature, to the First People. The people who are and were indigenous to this place for thousands and thousands of generations took care of this land – every part of it. From squirrel to deer, from river to ridge, from the tallest oak to the tiniest wildflower – these things are here because of those people. The descendants of some of these people are still here, and we have much to learn from them and alongside them if we care to do so. They are still weaving together the fabric of this wonderful part of Earth.

Organic Farmers

I also appreciate organic farmers for caring for nature. By shunning the use of synthetic chemicals for pesticides and fertilizers, organic farmers are avoiding poisoning nature. These farmers forgo these things, pay fees for certification and inspection, and work harder to produce food that often times, to me, tastes better. Farming is not an easy career. I am so glad that I can afford organically grown food and that there is such an abundance produced in our region. There are lots of organic farmers that have inspired me, but I especially think of Phil Foster (Pinnacle Farm), Ronald Donkevoort(Windmill Farms), and Jane Friedmon and Ali Edwards (the original Dirty Girl Farm), and Jerry Thomas (Thomas Family Farm) as inspirations.

Weed Warriors

I want to give thanks to the folks who have long battled invasive plants in our area. Some of the hardest work protecting nature is done by the Monterey Bay’s weed warriors. These folks often volunteer their time to battle the worst invasive species affecting natural areas. They’ve battled French broom, jubata grass, ice plant, sticky Eupatorium, and on and on. Ken Moore was the godfather of weed warriors through his founding of the Wildland Restoration Team (interview pt. 1and pt. 2), but there have been many others. Linda Broadman worked with Ken and carries the torch through her leadership with the Habitat Restoration Team of the Santa Cruz Chapter of the California Native Plant Society. The Monterey District of State Parks deserves mention for steadfastly and regularly organizing volunteers to control invasive plants. Then, of course, there are the many volunteers who actually do much of the work…

Conservation Activists

This is where my appreciation will surely fall short as there are so many people who deserve recognition. Conservation activists often take civic engagement quite seriously. I am in awe of the many nature conservation activists who have fought and won so many important battles around the Monterey Bay. I have enjoyed learning from and sometimes working alongside Celia and Peter Scott, Bruce Bratton, Jodi Frediani, Michael Lewis and Jean Brocklebank, Corky Matthews, Gillian Greensite, Debbie and Richard Bulger, and Don Stevens. Behind and working with these good people were expert and dedicated legal support from Debbie Sivas, Jonathan Wittwer, Gary Patton, and Bill Parkin. Folks who have been affiliated with the Rural Bonny Doon Association and Friends of the North Coast also deserve recognition. Without people who are willing to donate their time, expertise, good judgement, intelligence, and skills we would not have much of the open space that species need to survive.

Tending the Fire

I have been so pleasantly surprised to see so much work with prescribed fire in our community. For me, this started years ago with Cal Fire including more recently as Angela Bernheisel led the first good fire at Soquel Demonstration State Forest. I have been thankful also to the work of the Central Coast Prescribed Burn Association, including their leaders Jared Childress and Spencer Klinefelter. State Parks’ Portia Halbert is a dynamo for putting good flames on the ground and an inspiration to so many others in moving that powerful tool forward. This prescribed fire work is tricky and takes brave people who know so much about so many sciences to get that kind of work done. Plus, they have to work well with others because it takes so many others to do that kind of work. They are restoring nature while making our communities safer. Thank you.

Politicians

For the last 35 years, there have been few politicians in our area that have openly declared nature to be central to their platforms, and I deeply appreciate those who have. Currently, there are very few indeed. State Senator John Laird seems to me to be an outstanding example of how a politician might succeed when keeping environmental conservation a publicly stated priority. Mayor of Marina, Bruce Delgado, is another example. I wish there were more than just those two, but that says something about both the need for more folks to run for office and the public’s will to prioritize such things when they vote.

-this post originally appeared at my weekly column for BrattonOnline.com where one can subscribe and get the best local, regional, and global news from very smart and observant people.

An Extra-Special Gift this Holiday Season

Just released from Rad Sports©, a mountain biking gift that’s bound to delight even the most avid and technical adventurer. Imagine ever-expanding heart-pounding single-track experiences that are guaranteed to make sculpted physiques and unfold stories that will be shared for a lifetime. Check out our urban and mountain locations – there’s one within a 20-minute drive for most Bay Area residents. Memberships of any skill level are affordable, and you’re guaranteed to be delighted by the countless family benefits.

This is bound to be the most talked about gift this holiday season!

Equipment

Some people choose to bring their own bikes, but why not save thousands of dollars gearing up? A membership includes professional staff assistance fitting customers with the latest in stellar machines. Our extensive stock of parts and expert technicians means that we can even customize a bike quickly and easily – just choose gear online, and the custom unit will be ready on arrival. We have partnerships with all the big names, and even many of the smaller gear shops, so anticipate profound astonishment of mounting a bike normally far, far out of financial reach. With a membership subscription, we’ll store, update, and maintain custom machines and have them at-the-ready any time a participating member wants to go for a ride.

RAD Experiences!!

Whether for first class access to all-time favorite trails or to try something new, we make mountain biking dreams come true. Our team can make it so cyclists can bomb down trails never encountering another soul, or we can deck out friends’ groups to make the next ride a highly interactive shared experience.

Are you or someone you know one of those mountain bikers that are yearning for the next new trail experience? What if we told you that we can offer thousands of new and different trails at each of our locations…and that we are creating hundreds of new trails each year? Sound too good to be true?

Our trails engineers have been keeping our work super-secret for the last decade as we tested and refined our vision. We retained the nation’s top riding experts as we drilled in on final designs. You will be amazed!

Family Friendly

Have you ever worried that you or a family member might get critically injured mountain biking? Have you wondered how the sport is affecting finances even without emergency health care costs? We’ve all heard horror stories about mountain biking injuries. And many of us know the financial secrets avid mountain bikers keep from even their closest loved ones about all the money they sink into their gear.

Our program has guaranteed, fail-safe solutions for all those worries. That’s because we are offering cutting edge virtual mountain biking experiences that even the most experienced experts say are far better than the real thing.

Gear Up!

Some have doubted the virtual reality mountain biking experience, but after just one hour they can’t get enough. Imagine a futuristic bike gym combined with an immersive virtual reality system involving all the senses. Riders feel the wind in their face, experience shockingly real changes in trail surfaces, have staff-guided customized physical activity designed to reach exercise goals, jump and turn through terrain as technical as they choose, and any wipe outs are both outstandingly realistic and virtually injury-free[1].

The Logical Next Step

Let’s face it: with the equipment mountain bikers use, the cost uncertainties of this type of recreation, and the HIGHLY limited experiences mountain bikers are all facing, our project offers the most exciting new development to hit the sport since its inception.

Already, many mountain bikers are decked out with full helmets and other safety gear. Changing that gear up for a virtual reality outfit not only lightens the load, but adds to agility, and makes for far more immersive environmental experiences.

As trails get more and more crowded, everyone wants to bomb downhill on narrow tracks without worrying about others!

Trails Galore

We’ve got all the favorite trails ready for you or your loved ones. Or why not delve into new adventure dream trails – ones that stretch the imagination. We offer a wide range of choices of environmental settings. We have local rides through exquisitely modeled places that are known and loved. And, our program can put riders into sites rocketing through topography and environments from the farthest reaches of the planet. Each month, we randomly select a suggestion to inform our trail engineers’ next design, so stay tuned for even more…Rad New Trails©!!

Act Now!

This holiday season, give the gift that is guaranteed to keep your loved ones safer, save family money for years to come, and satisfy the most avid mountain bikers’ unending itch for new radical experiences. Purchase a gift package within the next week and save 25%!! Why not get one for the whole family?

-this post originally appeared in my regular column for Bruce Bratton’s BrattonOnline.com – why not subscribe and never miss another!

[1] Or opt for our minor injury packages with requisite waivers and insurance, still a bargain! This is a popular option for those who regularly injure themselves at the sport and so might otherwise feel something missing. Injuries created by padded devices in controlled settings still carry risk.

Beavers

Beavers are again being recognized by humans as creatures crucial to holding together the natural world across much of North America and Europe. Where they are able, beavers create wetlands. Those beaver wetlands do so much for so many other beings, including us. Let’s explore California’s beaver resurgence for a few minutes.

History

There once were two beaver species, then only one living alongside indigenous people, then even those were nearly wiped out. In modern time, beavers have been variously killed, ignored, restored, or coexisted with. The Big Beaver of the Pleistocene, like so many other species, winked out when humans arrived on the continent. Probably they were too tasty. Its smaller cousin, though, survived. There are names for beaver in many native people’s languages across California. But the Old World Peoples persecuted both the native peoples and the beaver. Beavers were trapped to extirpation so early in those terrible times that as records started being written, there was already doubt that beavers had ever been in most places across the State. The state’s wildlife department finally protected the few remaining of the species and then began restoring them. Beavers, farmers, water managers, and road departments had problems working it out, so the State started allowing, and still allows, beavers to be killed where they cause too big of problem.

Over the past 20 years, brilliant folks from Back East figured out a way to solve some of those problems, so beaver coexistence technology is now a thing in California. At the same time, in just the last 5 years, our wildlife officials have started translocating problem beavers to restore the species in more places. These recent pro-beaver developments come just in time for so many reasons.

Beaver Biota

Where beaver go, many follow. Three weeks ago, I saw a river otter stick its head out of the water in a pond behind a beaver dam. River otters follow beavers as do ducks, egrets, herons, kingfishers and so much more. Rare amphibians and reptiles likely were once more abundant due to beavers, including California red-legged frogs, San Francisco garter snakes, California tiger salamanders, Western pond turtles, and Santa Cruz long-toed salamanders. Mostly, those rare species rely on manmade cattle or farm ponds nowadays, but what about before those?

I have studied the landscape for 50 miles in every direction around Santa Cruz and have found very few natural ponds. Coastal ponds are either in earthquake faults, vernal pools in ancient dune declivities (e.g., Ft. Ord), or impoundments at the back of more modern dunes. These situations are all quite rare. Looking further abroad, there are more vernal pools in the Central Valley and one can imagine oxbow lakes along many of California’s rivers before modern humans messed so much by channelizing rivers. If we could restore beaver to the landscape, I’m betting we could recover frogs, snakes, turtles and salamanders…and even fish! Most agree that California’s many species of super endangered salmon once thrived in the food-rich backwaters of beaver ponds.

I could go on and on about the many other wetland species that follow beaver pond architecture, but I’m thinking you get the idea.

Fire Stop

Recently, “Smokey the Beaver” has become a meaningful meme. In the past decade Californians have witnessed catastrophic infernos raging across the landscape like no one had previously imagined was possible. Across the West and north through Canada the same pattern has been emerging: big, big fires fueled by climate-change-induced drought, heat, and winds. The solution to fire: water. When beavers dam rivers and streams, they create fire breaks. In the huge footprints of “The Big Black,” post-fire, thank the beaver for the green strips that offer refuge to whatever wildlife may have survived the blaze. I have stood my ground on the edge of two approaching wildfires and have witnessed masses of fleeing deer, rabbits, wood rats and more running from the flames. I imagine those creatures finding beaver wetlands and hunkering down, eyes wide, hearts racing as the world around them crackles, roars, and burns. Beaver firebreaks can help save human lives and infrastructure, as well.

The Wetting

Beavers make it possible to rehydrate the West. Their dams are speed bumps for floods, slowing the surge, spreading floodwaters across floodplains, and hydrating large swaths of valley bottoms. By storing rainwater behind their dams, beavers keep streams and rivers flowing farther into the season of California’s long, dry summer. As water slows down behind beaver ponds, it can more readily recharge groundwater, too. Some have suggested that restoring beavers across the mountain meadows of the Sierra Nevada could store as much water as 2 large new reservoirs. That would be cheaper…and more sustainable!

Monterey Bay’s Beavers

Beavers are in the Salinas River all the way down to the Highway One bridge. Those riverine beavers are bank burrowers…they don’t make dams in such big rivers, but they sure like to eat the willows. You’d have to go south to San Luis Obispo before you found another beaver family. And, travelling north you would have to get onto private land along Butano Creek in San Mateo County to encounter our beaver buddies. Sometimes that population makes a more public showing downstream in the Pescadero marsh, where one mysteriously died this past year. What about prime beaver habitat in the Carmel, Pajaro, and San Lorenzo rivers? When will beavers arrive in those locations? Corralitos, Soquel, and Scott creeks also offer promising beaver habitat. Perhaps one day we can find a way to offer beavers a place alongside humans in some of those rivers or streams. Help spread the word!

-this post originally published as part of the decades-long news source for the Monterey Bay and beyond at BrattonOnline.org Check it out! Subscribe!! DONATE. Support journalism, even grassroots journalism, maybe especially grassroots journalism.

California Ground Squirrels

California ground squirrels are the burrowing type that are spreading across our landscape causing both harm and Great Good, sometimes in the same places.

A freshly dug California ground squirrel burrow – fresh potential for so many other creatures!

Description and Life History

This native rodent can be as long as 2 feet including its tail. They are chunky squirrels with less bushy tails than their tree-dwelling cousins. Their color is brown-gray and spotty and they have small ear flaps.

California ground squirrels have only one litter per year and can give birth to up to 8 young. The little ones are cute and out-and-about in just 6 weeks after being born.

Up until recently, most humans believed that ground squirrels were vegetarians. They thought that these chonky rodents grazed on grass in the early spring and ate seeds later in the season. I recall a professor at UCSC gleefully dispelling this notion in the 1990s, showing slides of California ground squirrels eating roadkill carcasses of their brethren in the middle of one of the campus entrance roads. Gross. Then, in 2024, researchers discovered California ground squirrels hunting and devouring meadow voles.

Down Under

California ground squirrels live in the ground making burrows sometimes six feet deep where they make separate rooms for raising their young, storing food, and sleeping. Those underground houses are connected to the surface by up to 35 feet of burrows and multiple entrances.

Some have hypothesized that these burrow complexes play an important hydrological role, replenishing groundwater and moderating flooding. The burrows certainly are crucial in supporting other biota.

Co-Creatures

Lots of other organisms rely on ground squirrel digging. For instance, burrowing owls don’t burrow – they rely on ground squirrels to create their underground shelter where they raise their chicks, sleep, and escape predators. Rare kangaroo rats use ground squirrel burrows. Snakes and salamanders use them, too. One of the snakes that are found in the burrows is the Pacific rattlesnake.

Predators of this Squirrel

Lots of things like to eat California ground squirrels. They are golden eagles’ favorite food. Pop goes the weasel, head sticking out from a ground squirrel burrow, blood and gore hanging from its chin: just ate one of those rodents, yum!

Rattlesnakes and California ground squirrels are co-evolving. Populations of ground squirrel that are in dense rattlesnake territory are more resistant to snake venom than those that aren’t as likely to be bitten.

To me, the most fascinating ground squirrel predator is the coyote-badger duo. Badger is good at digging into ground squirrel homes to feast on a whole family. BUT, if badger tried this alone she might not get fed: it takes some coyotes at each of the exits for everyone to eat. Here is an amazing video that shows how well these two animals get along. And, here is another video showing how some of this works.

Gardening

The grazing and dirt throwing of ground squirrels makes for habitat for some species that wouldn’t otherwise live in tall grass in productive soils. California poppies sometimes ring ground squirrel burrow complexes.

Damage

California ground squirrels can cause a bunch of problems. They undermine buildings and roads, eat orchard and row crops, and make holes that break horses and livestock’s legs. So, people spend a bunch of time and effort killing these creatures. A few squirrels often become a bunch of squirrels. In preparation for this column, I spoke with a particularly intrepid Costa Rican friend of mine who entirely trapped out a pestiferous population of the creatures…and ate them, preparing them in his pressure cooker. “They’re good! Lots of thin bones like sardines,” he said.

Spreading

After the 2020 CZU Lightning Complex Fire, California ground squirrels spread into new areas of Bonny Doon and the North Coast. Why did this happen? Some suggest that the species was native to those areas but had been exterminated back in the 1950’s with widespread use of rodenticide poisons. The species held out at UC Santa Cruz main campus and near Younger Lagoon through the 1990’s and along the bluffs up to Davenport, perhaps more recently. Young, dispersing ground squirrels were seen in 2021 along Swanton Road and then had successful colonies in Bonny Doon and at Molino Creek Farm in 2023. Their numbers are increasing in those areas. Did the fire create conditions that made it easier for the animal to disperse? Or, did people live trap and release squirrels from Davenport or Santa Cruz? We’ll never know.

How Much is Just Right?

With the important ecological role pairing with frightful damage, how many is the right number…and where should they be? This is an important question. It makes us challenge our notions of ‘neat-and-tidy’ versus ‘ecologically rich.’ Are we past the point of trying to eradicate this species in any one place, or will we try to do that again? Such interesting questions…

-this post originally published in BrattonOnline – check it out….lots to learn there.

Another Trail ‘Study’

The Peninsula Open Space Trust (POST) recently published an article about a 2023 regional trail user survey. The author of the article, Zionne Fox, wrote about some of the results of the study, and her writing helps gain new insights into POST’s philosophy regarding recreational use in natural areas.

Summary of the Article

Ms. Fox’s “blog,” published on August 28, 2025, announced the findings of a ‘unique’ regional study by the Santa Cruz Mountains Stewardship Network that had purported to assess parks trail user expectations. Fox reports the percentages of different user groups (equestrians, dog walkers, hikers, mountain bikers) that want more trails. She also notes that non-white respondents were statistically under represented. The article suggests (without supporting data) that demand for trails is growing and that ‘open space operators need practices that can meet rising visitor expectations while preserving natural habitat.’ There was also mention about many equestrians hailing from Santa Cruz County and (again, unsubstantiated) a need for additional accommodation for multi-day trail trips.

Reporting Issues

The POST article fails in many ways to meet the standards of responsible reporting, but that is predictable given the organization’s overall tendencies. First, note that the study referenced isn’t, as the author claims, ‘unique,’ at all: another, more professional study covering much the same material was published not that long ago. Also, notice that there is no link in the article to a report about the results of the survey. With further research I find that the survey authors, the Santa Cruz Mountains Stewardship Network, lacks a link to any reporting on the survey results on its website. Without more details about survey methodology, statistical analysis, and results it is difficult to draw one’s own conclusions.

Moreover, the article emphasizes only the survey results which correlate most with POST’s own goal of increased recreational use of ‘open space’ lands. For instance, statistics are provided for apparent unmet needs from various recreational groups, but similar statistics are not presented about the degree of concern for natural resource conservation, which is at odds with increased recreational use. In fact, in the ‘What’s Next’ portion of the article, there is no mention of POST’s or any other ‘open space operator’s’ intention to address survey respondents’ concerns about conserving and nurturing natural resources which suffer from over visitation. Similarly, POST suggests that those operators should focus on ‘preserving natural habitat,’ which curiously avoids the more concrete and pressing issue of conserving the specific species that are sensitive to natural areas recreational use. Habitat preservation is nearly meaningless to measure, whereas species conservation is much more useful and quantifiable, with a richer history of scientific rigor in informing open space management.

Note that the author of this article fails to mention any results from the portion of the survey asking about trail user’s negative experiences in open space areas. The survey asked poignant questions about negative interactions with dogs, people biking, shared trail use with other users, etc. Such conflicts are expected and are a challenge that trained park managers are used to addressing; unfortunately POST lacks staff with such expertise, so it is understandable that the author would avoid mention of this portion of the survey, which would otherwise reflect poorly on her organization.

The reporting insufficiencies and biases should not be surprising to those who follow POST. This is an organization focused on increased recreational use at the expense of species conservation. For instance, while on one hand cheerleading for the National Monument designation of Cotoni Coast Dairies, POST refused to sign onto a letter advocating that the designation include specific protections for natural resources. Peruse the organization’s website and you’ll find that species conservation is de-emphasized as opposed to an over-emphasis of recreational use of natural areas, which negatively affects nature. While being the best funded private organization working on open space issues in the Bay Area, POST has apparently never hired staff or engaged contractors that are professionals at managing visitor use in such a way that demonstrably protects the very species that require POST’s natural areas to survive. POST has published no reports or plans to address these concerns, at least none that are available to the public.

Methodological Issues

On its face value, the survey issued by the Santa Cruz Mountains Stewardship Network lacked the rigor to make the kinds of conclusions that POST suggests would be valuable. As opposed to previous, more rigorous studies the survey failed to sample the breadth of the population with interests in open space areas. POST notes that proportions of respondent self-reported ‘race’ did not reflect the population as a whole, but failed to note how the survey may have also biased certain user groups over others (mountain bikers vs. hikers, etc).

One would expect to encounter survey bias given the mode of delivery. The survey was a web-based survey distributed by social media networks. Open space organizations have recently become increasingly aligned with a vocal minority: well-funded mountain biking advocacy groups who undoubtedly circulated the survey in order to impact the results. Other trail user groups may have been under-represented because they have little exposure to those particular social media networks or because they lacked the computer technology to respond.

Cautionary Conclusions

We can learn valuable lessons from POST’s reporting on this trail user survey. Given the power of POST, we should continue to be vigilant about the group’s propensity to favor increased recreational use of open space lands at the cost of species conservation. This bias should make us question the organization’s ability to manage funding tied to protection of public trust resources. POST is a donor-funded organization, and so some degree of pressure from donors could help to steer the organization more towards conservation. We should also recognize that POST is not alone in making these types of mistakes. It appears that the Santa Cruz Mountains Stewardship Network is also allied with such thinking, and we have seen other conservation lands managers approaching open space management with similarly unbalanced methodologies. These trends must be reversed if we are to conserve the many species of wildlife which are sensitive to poorly managed recreational use in our parks.

As time passes and we stay alert to the possibilities, we will see if the poorly executed SCMSN trails user survey results are used to justify or rationalize actions by POST or other members in their network: wouldn’t it be a shame if they were?

-this post originally published in my column for BrattonOnline.com – a weekly blog with movie reviews and posts by very interesting people on matters near and far. I recommend subscribing to it and donating so we can continue this long tradition.

Fire Era

It seems like the world has changed. As I write this on Tuesday 9/16/25, Tropical Storm Mario is headed towards California. Back in 2020, the CZU Lightning Complex Fire was the result of another such situation, via Tropical Storm Fausto. And, as with 2020, there is a lineup of such storms…another is predicted soon after this upcoming one. We look forward to the regular Fall rains to start, typically on October 15. Meanwhile, we wait to see where the lightning will strike and if someone can extinguish the flames before the resulting inferno.

I moved to Santa Cruz in 1986…did I somehow miss old timer stories or some other form of history that tropical storms, lightning, thunder, etc., are ‘normal’ for this part of the world??!!

Does this seem normal to you?

An ODD wall of clouds eats a North Coast ridgeline, quickly (from the South) – how unusual! Aug 2, 2017

Changing How We Live

All us country folk are changing the way we live, out here on the outskirts of towns.

Many modern Californians lived for decades in the “woods.” They had sprawling outbuildings full of canning supplies and landscaping tools, tractors, chicken coops, pet pens, toys scattered about. Their homes were ”original” architecture, funky and artful. Their gardens neat or a tangle, blended into the surrounding with the forest engulfing less tended portions. Funky. That was much of country California.

In this changing world, we can no longer afford to be that way: our ‘stuff’ is burning up and making a mess. Now, we must consolidate our things into fire resistant structures and manage the surrounding vegetation.

The Vegetation Around Us

This land is productive, which means that plants make a lot of biomass each year. In most natural areas near Santa Cruz, plants produce 4,000 – 8,000 dry pounds of biomass per acre per year: that’s 6,800 – 13,600 pounds of living biomass: literally ‘tons.’ For a house that’s 1200 square feet, clearing within the 100’ required space is managing about an acre and a half of vegetation. That means chipping, burning, mulching, composting, or hauling biomass “away” – otherwise, living or shed plant parts accumulate, add up, and pose a worse fire hazard in subsequent years.

Same goes for the thousands and thousands of acres of open space/parkland around the Monterey Bay. That open space is producing lots of fuel for future wildfire.

Some of the outfall of the 2020 CZU Lightning Complex Fire

Attitudes

Many people can’t handle this new reality of living with fire, especially in the country. Sure, if you are wealthy and live rurally, you can pay for someone to manage your property for wildfire…but still it is expensive! If you are poor, you can work to do it yourself…but it takes time, strength, and know-how! I’ve asked the folks I know who take care of their rural spaces how much time it takes to manage their (small!) home’s vegetation wildfire danger. The uncannily similar answer for my informal poll is….6 hours a week.

But most people are just plain in denial about the danger, even though everyone knows someone who’s been through one of the giant fires of the past few years. Some of those in denial actually went through the last fires and somehow think that it can’t happen again.

Perhaps we’ve become inured to the fire news and so can’t grip reality. Did you know that Chinese Camp, a small town in the Sierra was nearly completely destroyed by wildfire in early September? That was the result of another ‘monsoon’ full of lightning from the South! Too much!

City Folks

It might be easier to ignore the wildfire danger if you live in the City. But people must change the way they live in the cities, apparently: in case you don’t recall there was this thing in Santa Rosa called the Tubbs Fire that burned thousands of homes, many of which were ‘in town.’

It looks to me like a wind-driven wildfire could burn a long way into Santa Cruz with houses stacked against one another adjacent to the forested and shrubby steep canyons of Moore Creek or adjacent to the thickly vegetated and at times crispy dry San Lorenzo Valley. The towns sprinkled around Fort Ord share the same danger/fate as does Monterey and Carmel.

Wind Driven?

Do we forget about the 70 mph gusts that fanned the CZU 2020 fires? Were we watching the Santa Rosa Tubbs Fire blast on high winds? The winds are increasing…

The Cause and Effect

The changing world I have outlined here is in large part due to the burning of fossil fuels, trapping sunlight…aka ‘the greenhouse effect.’ More ‘greenhouse gasses’ cause more atmospheric energy: part of the reason we are seeing the new tropical storms headed our way. The winds, with or without the storms, are demonstrably getting more intense. Predicted outcomes of climate change include extreme heat and drought events…extremes of all sorts – big swings.

The sad changes we are struggling to manage with just plain living are probably quite minor compared to what is to come based on climate change predictions. One day, folks will look back at the one-day-a-week that it takes us now to manage our yards and say “humf! That’s nothing.” What will their struggles be like? Will they be trying to survive weeks-long dust storms…building storm proof greenhouses for food?

When will we reverse this terrible trajectory?

– this article originally appeared as part of BrattonOnline.com – check it out!

Cotoni Coast Dairies BLM Land Opens to Public

The opening ceremony for public access onto the Federal Bureau of Land Management’s Cotoni Coast Dairies property was on August 15, 2025, a grim day for those who have followed this travesty, which will only worsen with the planned public access.

Building on a Tragic History

Nothing good led up to this moment. There is no one left who speaks the language of, or can show direct descendance from, the native people of this property. There are rich archeological sites illustrating that this land was settled for thousands of years. So, as with every spot in California we must see this property and how it has been and will be used as a colonialist endeavor. There is no attempt to give the land back to any coalition of First Peoples who represent those ancestors or to respect them in any way that approaches restorative justice. Oh, but there’s the name…(!)

After the genocide, the land has seen one extractive use after the next with little regard for conserving nature. The ‘Coast Dairies’ portion of the name points to cows, and cows there still are. The grazing regime has never focused on restoring the very endangered coastal prairies on the property and, even now, there is no plan to do so. This recreational use is a new, highly impactful extractive use. The property is rare for the Santa Cruz Mountains in having had very few human visitors for the last 100 years, so wildlife has been accustomed to roaming without disturbance. Cougars and badgers are especially wary of humans when setting up dens. A million visitors a year will soon be visiting and wildlife will flee.

The consortium of people responsible for so many other, better outcomes for conservation tried hard, won some concessions, but have seen great loss with how this property came to be open to the public. We tried to get anyone but the Federal Government to manage the property, but the Open Space Illuminati had other things in mind…’The Great Park’…a handful of boomers wanted their legacy in a wide swath of the area becoming a National Park. They stopped at nothing to achieve that legacy. The activists, biologists, conservationists, and regular citizens, were even sued to strike fear into them, to make them capitulate.

Money Made it Happen

The Wyss Foundation bankrolled cash-strapped ‘conservation’ organizations to create a fake grassroots campaign that culminated in Obama signing a Monument Proclamation adding 5 properties across a wide swath of coastal California to the California Coastal National Monument.

Then, the BLM routed hundreds of thousands of dollars, sole-sourcing a contract to a mountain biking advocacy organization to build the kind of trails their users wanted to see. That business quickly changed their name to a ‘trails’ organization. Instead of supporting good paying local jobs, the BLM paid this organization to rally volunteers to do the work of installing trails that were placed across a landscape without regard for the wildlife written into the President’s Proclamation for protection. When asked about how they could do such things when the property’s designation required favoring conservation over visitor use, BLM cynically snickered that the majority of the property, 51%, is set aside without public access. The rest, apparently, is a sacrifice zone.

What We Wanted and Will Pursue

Those of us who care about the native peoples, the nature of the property, and the experience of future visitors have a vision, which we will pursue despite setbacks. The land should not be Federal land – if you wonder why, you need to look at the current situation with federal lands nationwide. We always knew this, but now others are starting to understand our concerns. The current administration is selling federal land for real estate development and other extractive uses. If, after cutting the federal workforce, there are any staff remaining to manage the land at all, that will be a surprise. The Administration has said Federal lands will remain open to visitors even if there is no staffing or budgets. Oh no- could my dystopian vision for the property be closer to reality?!

If there is a chance, California should buy Cotoni Coast Dairies. Then, let’s envision taking Canada’s Indigenous Guardian’s project to this place, giving tribal people primacy in stewardship, use, and oversight. Perhaps the State could give the land back, as it has just accomplished with the Yurok.

If the property is to remain a public park with visitor access, there needs to be a radical shift in how that is approached. The regulatory designation for first managing the property for conservation needs to apply even to the areas with public access. This will require altering use patterns, even closing the trails occasionally, for the benefit of the soil, streams, wildlife and plants that Obama clearly intended to protect. There will need to be lots of monitoring and enforcement to adequately protect natural resources. The BLM will need to do a ‘carrying capacity analysis’ to determine ‘limits of acceptable change’ – thresholds that, if surpassed, trigger altered management of visitor use to bring the use into alignment with conservation.

Next Steps

It will soon be possible for visitors to monitor the situation first hand. Those of us who asked to do baseline monitoring of wildlife and plants were refused the opportunity many times. When we asked how small children and the elderly could possibly co-recreate on trails overrun by fast-moving mountain bikes, our concerns were dismissed. We will be able to help document how well BLM’s rules are working and if there is enough enforcement. We will be able to see the spread of diseases introduced by bike tires and hiking shoes ravage the amphibians, the trees, and the soil, and we will recall how BLM staff predicted those impacts in writing, with administrators choosing to ignore even the simplest measures that hundreds of other parks managers have employed to address those concerns.

-this post updated to past tense from the one posted via Bruce Bratton’s legacy site BrattonOnline.com

Right Livelihood

Picking a livelihood that helps to reduce suffering while creating a community that has access to such livelihoods are big and necessary challenges for everyone. The centrality of these goals is often overlooked. Here, I illustrate some hiccups with this process for those pursuing careers related to biology.

Biology Jobs

Bright-eyed young people gravitate towards out-of-doors careers, working with critters or plants, hoping that somehow they can help save the world by becoming experts at biology. They work hard to get biology degrees up against others who are pursuing more lucrative careers as doctors or genetic engineers. They compete for volunteer positions and internships to get hands-on experience. They go into debt to attend a Master’s degree program so that they are competitive in the marketplace of biology jobs.

A very few of these well-educated students will obtain PhDs to become research biologists or even professors. There are fewer and fewer of these jobs however, and most realize that this is hopeless unless they compete to be affiliated with the very best University faculty and labs as doctoral candidates.

Most budding biologists discover that the most available and well-paying jobs are as biological consultants. Most have loans to pay and families to raise, and that is the easiest way forward. But some can’t stomach being biological consultants (more on that later) or just never seem to be competitive in the application pool. These folks settle for jobs with government agencies such as public parks (BLM, State, City, or County Parks), regulatory and planning agencies (state or federal wildlife agencies, water districts), or advisory agencies (US Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service, Resource Conservation Districts).

Teaching and Research

How well does teaching and research mesh with ‘right livelihood?’ I will paraphrase Thich Nhat Hahn with this example. I teach biology and conservation to many students, but some of those students will get jobs in biology just to make money which will enable them to raise children who likewise have no ethical appreciation for conservation of life on earth. I already benefit from those students’ contribution to the economy, and their unethical children will likely pay for my social security.

Does that mean I shouldn’t teach and research about conservation? No. What it means is that I need to consider these outcomes of my work and seek to improve my approaches to conservation. I also realize the need to improve my community, so that the biological careers that are available to the students I teach are more ethical, so even those who enter those fields ‘for the money’ can do less harm.

Agency Biologists

It is nearly impossible for biologists working for public agencies to practice excellent biology for conservation. At best, they might incrementally reduce harm to nature, but more likely they are enabling harm to nature by helping to ‘cover’ for the other, more politically supported mandates of the agencies. For instance, the tidal wave of outside influence on parks by well-funded groups such as the Outdoor Industry Association has created a situation where parks agency biologists’ opinions are marginalized, and they are not allowed to insert any meaningful biological protective language into parks planning which is mostly about expanding extractive recreational uses for public lands (for instance, for BLM see this and for State Parks this). Instead, as you will see when following those previous links, they are asked to rationalize imbalanced planning approaches that will cause environmental degradation. When such approaches from agencies are challenged in court, there is a long legal history of courts siding on behalf of the agencies. I need to do another column on the bad news that happens when courts are asked to decide on biological matters: the quote that comes to mind is ‘if a scientist testifies to affirm it in the courtroom, a pig can fly.’

Consulting Biologists

Another career choice that biologists might make – and the most profitable by far – is biological consulting. Biological consulting is an area of the economy that has mostly been made feasible through regulations designed to protect the environment. Some consultants make a living helping public agencies that don’t have in-house biologists, often falling into the same pitfalls as outlined in the prior section. These and other for-hire biological consultants have a variety of approaches to helping their clients navigate environmental protection regulations. There is a spectrum of such approaches, and at the far end of the spectrum there are what a mentor of mine called ‘biostitutes’ – biologists who are in the business of ruining the earth for personal gain.

Biostitutes

During my 35 years of watching environmental discourses play out across the Central Coast, I have seen quite a few biostitutes profiting from environmental destruction, but their numbers are diminishing for a variety of reasons. One tactic I’ve witnessed is when otherwise well educated biostitutes claim over and over again not to understand clearly written, required monitoring guidelines: instead they create very poorly executed reports using poorly collected monitoring data in order to reduce costs for their clients. And, I’ve witnessed biostitutes misrepresent the extent of endangered, legally protected habitats by inventing their own, biased methodology of vegetation classification. In many of my experiences it has been a commonplace practice for biostitutes to, without any evidence whatsoever, claim that it is feasible to restore new areas of habitat or rare species to demonstrate to environmental regulators that there is ‘no impact’ of their clients’ proposals to destroy habitat or rare species populations. It is amazing to me that these people keep getting employed, but they do…why?

The Politics of Biology

It is my contention that biostitutes and other less blatantly unethical career biologists keep earning their livings because of their expertise in navigating interpersonal political bond formation. Subtly or not so subtly, a biologist can signal their willingness to be helpful to clients with what they would call ‘biology problems.’ Be it a subdivision developer, a parks manager, or a public works director, there will inevitably be environmental protections to integrate as part of getting projects done. The biologist is faced with the dilemma of either telling their clients (or their bosses) that there is ‘serious work’ that needs to be done to avoid biological impacts or, on the other hand, that such impacts are normal, inevitable and relatively easy to justify or repair. In the case of the biostitutes I’ve seen, there’s also often the formation of chummy comradery via framing a polar world of ‘us’ (the world-improvers) vs ‘them’ (the regulators). This situation is particularly weird as the regulators easily recognize this framing, and so clients of such biostitutes end up paying a lot more money than if they had been advised by biologists with collegial working relationships with regulators.

The easiest way to identify a potential biostitute is to ask them to provide evidence of where they have succeeded with environmental protection measures. Go to those places with an expert, and you’ll either not be able to find anything or be led to something less than success.

Learning and Growing

Those with the more collegial approaches to ‘biology problems’ are seeking the path of right livelihood. They serve as educators to both the regulators as well as those who are navigating the regulations. This approach helps the regulators learn and improve environmental protection while also helping push practitioners to be more environmentally sound. These ‘learning and growing’ biologists keep up on the science, are great communicators of science, and have a track record of succeeding with well-informed environmental protection outcomes. They will be proud to show you where they have succeeded, where they are learning, and where they look for evidence of moving in the right direction for environmental protection.

Aren’t these examples with right livelihood in biology interesting to apply across the spectrum of other jobs? I hope that you will now more easily identify the right livelihoods around you and work to make it possible to have more of these options in our community.

-this article is slightly modified from the one originally posted by Bruce Bratton at his BrattonOnline.com blog