Jeanne, thanks for sending this along. I used
to have a connection with Ridecamp but no longer. Pamela, the 100-ft.
setback from creeks is purely arbitrary and not a firm requirement. Since
the Stewarts pick up all manure at the camp weekly, and scrub it all down
when it closes for the winter on Nov. 1, we are saying that the
present fenced setbacks from Olema creek and tributaries, which have served
well for 15 years, can easily be grandfathered in to the
prospectus.
I had a long talk with the park supt.
and he admitted the document was full of errors. I told him it has so many
flaws and wrong assumptions it should be withdrawn and rewritten. He asked
me to send him a memo listing our concerns, and I sent him four
pages.
The person who wrote it
knows nothing about horses or horse camping and sought no advice before she
wrote it. The "new" camping area next to Hwy. One has no water and the
gravity-fed stock water taps in the main campground won't serve that far.
Hwy. One is noisy, busy, and dangerous in case of loose horses. A gate
there would be counterproductive as there is no room to get rigs off the road
while the gate is being worked. And on and on.
The Stewarts have been operating on
lease-back from the Park. The contract has been in the making for ten
years! This is actually the first concessionaire contract that the NPS has
ever issued for the Horse Camp. Fortunately for us, they are the Preferred
Bidders, but unless they smarten up about the prospectus, Amanda won't
bid. The Horse Council is on top of this, and we are pleased that
the word is out and that others will be writing too. Connie B.
