Pt. Reyes lacks funding for appropriate next steps

I am writing to recent news that 12 ranch operations on leased West Marin parkland have agreed to a settlement that will lead to their closure (“Point Reyes ranchers, National Park Service, environmentalists reach agreement on disputed land,” Jan. 10). The revised management plans appear to leave unclear exactly what will be done after they leave, who will do it and who will pay.

For the past decade, advocacy groups opposed to ranching in the Point Reyes National Seashore have peppered the park service with litigation to stop long-term leases to ranches and to allow tule elk, which were reintroduced to the park in the 1970s, access to the entire park.

Last year, the park service agreed to remove fencing to allow the elk to become a free-ranging herd. That decision was a big complication for the ranchers. The beleaguered families agreed to a buyout of their leases, which also will eliminate ranch worker jobs and housing.

In January, the National Park Service released a 144-page management plan for the 28,000-acre planning area, including the former ranchland. It provides for affected parkland to be governed by an array of new regulations, including 57 management strategies, provision for free-ranging elk and with eventual enhanced trail connections.

According to the plan, the strategies are to be “accomplished over time … subject to available funding and staffing.” The revised plan states three times the need for “funding and partnerships” to accomplish its goals, with financial assistance from other “private and public sources” to assist displaced workers. I am concerned that funding won’t come through. Additionally, the historically understaffed National Park Service is under threat from the presidential administration. It could lead to a slashing of the workforce, giving all proposals an uncertain immediate future.

A better business plan is needed before evicting ranchers and workers. The public should know if taxpayers will be on the hook to backfill the costs.

— Ann Thomas, Corte Madera

Reading Ashley legacy columns is real pleasure

I would like to thank the Marin IJ for reprinting some of Beth Ashley’s columns. Even though Ashley died years ago, they still have a contemporary significance in 2025.

Our community has lost many things over the decades. We will probably not see someone like Ashley again. I hope the IJ will continue to offer a platform for writers like her.

I look forward to reading her “legacy” columns. Her words are a reminder to how I got interested in reading the daily paper by looking for Herb Caen’s columns in the San Francisco Chronicle when I was 18 years old.

— Jade Leong, Mill Valley

MMWD proposal is not going to be good enough

After three years of studies, the Marin Municipal Water District Board of Directors recently approved a plan for surviving a four-year drought (“MMWD votes to advance Sonoma-to-Marin water pipeline,” March 2). I believe the approved plan falls way short of what is needed. I predict another drought will lead to draconian rationing that could result in the death of all Marin’s landscaping and mature trees.

Two years ago, MMWD adopted progressive requirements for emergency conservation and rationing in dry years. I worry we could be seeing those “emergency” years more frequently in the future. With this plan, I suspect we will be living in perpetual fear of running out of water.

I urge everyone to let your representative on MMWD’s board know that you want a better plan. Email addresses are available at marinwater.org/board-contact.

— Ed Jameson, Larkspur

Bridgeway plan does more for cyclist safety

I enjoyed reading Warren J. Wells’ recent Marin Voice commentary (“Better Bridgeway plan in Sausalito makes sense for more than just cyclists,” Feb. 28). As a long-time resident of Sausalito, I am often astounded by the way I am treated as a cyclist. I see improvements everywhere in the Bay Area, but very little in Sausalito.

I use my bicycle for work, school, recreation and grocery shopping. My son also bicycles to Tamalpais High School in nearby Mill Valley. I often see families with children exuding pure joy as they ride through the fog on the bridge while I cross them on my way to work in San Francisco. I smile and echo their excitement, but can’t help but internally pray for their safe passage through Sausalito.

As an assistant coach on the Tam High mountain-bike team, we take our squad into Tennessee Valley to practice in the Marin Headlands, but we avoid returning through Sausalito due to safety concerns. It’s as if the collective safety of cyclists seems to be of little concern to the city. Those in favor of keeping the middle lane on Bridgeway appear to be prioritizing the ability of delivery vehicles to occasionally and illegally stop in the middle of the road over the safe passage of cyclists. Sausalito serves as the only gateway for all cyclists traveling north of San Francisco. We have a moral responsibility to provide safe passage.

I am writing to express my support for the Bridgeway bike lanes as outlined by Wells. While it may not be a complete solution, it is a positive step forward. I implore the City Council to demonstrate political courage and approve this plan.

— Mustafa Alami, Sausalito

USAID funding did much to help the larger world

The recent gutting of the U.S. Agency for International Development is a reckless betrayal of American leadership and values. For over six decades, USAID has been a lifeline, delivering humanitarian aid, stabilizing fragile nations and strengthening our national security. Now, by cutting it to the brink of elimination, millions are left vulnerable. The credibility of the United States has been diminished worldwide.

The freezing of foreign aid has already led to the closure of health-care clinics in refugee camps, leaving countless people without lifesaving medical assistance. In Thailand, a refugee from Myanmar was being denied a needed oxygen tank after the cuts and died. In sub-Saharan Africa, the abrupt end to HIV/AIDS treatment programs threatens to reverse decades of progress.

This isn’t just a humanitarian crisis, it’s a national security crisis. When the U.S. withdraws support from struggling regions, I am concerned that adversaries like China and Russia will step in, filling the vacuum and expanding influence. Meanwhile, American farmers who relied on USAID contracts to ship food to famine-stricken areas are seeing those opportunities vanish, further hurting rural economies.

USAID represents less than 1% of the federal budget, yet its impact has been immeasurable. To allow Elon Musk, an unelected tech billionaire, to dictate American foreign policy is disgraceful. Congress must act now to restore USAID, protect American jobs and defend our place as a global leader.

— Jennifer Burt, Novato

What does US gain from outburst in Oval Office?

It looks as though President Donald Trump, who prides himself on his deal-making prowess, has done it again. His reprehensible display of contempt for Ukraine and its leader in the Oval Office on Feb. 28 — “great TV” as Trump called it — has alienated members of the European Union. I suspect it has forced them to reconsider any reliance on the United States to uphold the principles of democratic government.

His unhinged and ill-considered tariffs against the EU (one of the strongest global economies, and one of our big trading partners) are giving Russian President Vladimir Putin a great opportunity (Russia is one of the weaker) — to be seen as allied with the U.S. in thought, if not yet in treaty.

Other than burnishing the hypothesis behind this self-destructive move to isolationism in an increasingly global community, the U.S. has nothing to gain from all this. That’s a bad deal.

— David Hirzel, San Rafael