Ackerson Meadow provides habitat for hundreds of plant and animal species/NPS, Robb Hirsch
This week, Yosemite National Park grew by 400 acres, its largest expansion in nearly seven decades, with the donation of wetlands and meadow habitat along the park’s western boundary. The land, known as Ackerson Meadow, was donated through the cooperative efforts of the Trust for Public Land, Yosemite Conservancy, and the National Park Service.
“The generous donation of Ackerson Meadow will preserve critical meadow habitat that is home to a number of state and federally listed protected species,” Yosemite Superintendent Don Neubacher said in a release. “It’s a stunning open meadow surrounded by forest habitat, which supports a wide variety of flora and fauna species and offers new meadow experiences for park visitors. This meadow is a remarkable gift to the American people, coming at a historic time as we celebrate the centennial of the National Park Service.”
The Trust for Public Land purchased Ackerson Meadow from private owners for $2.3 million earlier this year and donated it Wednesday to the National Park Service to be part of Yosemite National Park. Funds to buy the property came from several major contributors to the Trust for Public Land, including a bequest of $1.53 million and $520,000 by the nonprofit Yosemite Conservancy, with additional support from National Park Trust and American Rivers.
“Donating the largest addition since 1949 to one of the world’s most famous parks is a great way to celebrate the 100th birthday of our National Park Service – and honor John Muir’s original vision for the park. We are delighted, and proud to make this gift to Yosemite, and the people of America,” Will Rogers, president of the Trust for Public Land, said in a release.
Historically, Ackerson Meadow has been used for cattle grazing, but the land provides critical habitat for hundreds of plant and animal species. At just 3 percent of Yosemite National Park’s area, meadows may be home to one-third of all of the plant species found in the park. Most of San Francisco’s water is filtered by Yosemite’s meadows, including Ackerson Meadow.
“The original Yosemite boundary plans of 1890 included Ackerson Meadow, so it is exciting to finally have this important place protected,” Yosemite Conservancy President Frank Dean said in a release. “The purchase supports the long-term health of the meadow and its wild inhabitants, and creates opportunities for visitors to experience a beautiful Sierra meadow.”
In recent decades, Yosemite Conservancy has funded restoration and protection of 10 meadows, such as Stoneman, Cook’s and Sentinel meadows in Yosemite Valley and Tuolumne Meadows in the high country.
Yosemite spokesman Scott Gediman told the Associated Press that this is the largest expansion of the park since 1949.
Comments
Great news! Thanks for the article.
I'm in Redwoods right now, but a friend just told me Rob Bishop is on the radio blasting this and threatening to stop it.
No other details.
As usual Lee, a total misrepresentation of the facts. Bishop is not blasting the acquisition or threatenting to stop it. He has specifically said he doesn't want to return the property. What he is blasting is the process. It is his belief that any acquisitions such as this needs Congressional approval and he is asking why that wasn't done.
"The lawmaker said he does not want to give back the donated land but wants to know why Yosemite took action without congressional oversight. He cited federal law that requires approval of additions to a national park that are more than 200 acres and worth over $750,000."
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/6070297-181/lawmaker-says-yosemite-nat...
Nope, but I did see an independent third party's reporting of Bishop's comments which I cited. Nothing baseless about my comment. What is baseless is your hearsay report from a unidentified source which was obviously wrong.
But then, you can't let the truth get in the way of your baseless attacks.
As I said above, I heard that Bishop was on the radio blasting this. That information from a friend whose information is normally trustworthy. I double-checked with her and she says he specifically stated several times in the broadcast that we was going to require cancellation of this plan because it was done without Congressional approval. Did you hear the broadcast? If not, your comment is baseless.
Bloviating Bishop was apparently pandering to his base again.
I too have not heard Bishop bloviate personally, however the Chicago Times report on his bloviating stated:
Bishop said he does not want Yosemite to give back the land but wants answers. He said federal law requires approval of additions to a national park that are more than 200 acres and worth over $750,000.
The Park Service pointed to Land and Water Conservation Fund documents, saying the requirement only applies to acquisitions using that funding.
I'm not certain, but my reading of this article is that Bishop is not only his usual bloviating self, but is also pouting like a petulant child AND baseless.
Again, hearsay from an anonymous source. I provide quotes from a recognized media source that contradicts her supposed statements. Provide us a recording of the "broadcast". Or even when, where and on what outlet this supposed broadcast occurred. Then we can listen to his words and decide.
Thanks Rick for confirming via the Chiicago Times that Bishop has no intention of forcing the transaction to be reversed.