BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. Chairman, ``Ruff.'' That is what my dog Buddy says when he wants to go out for a walk, and that is what dogs throughout the bay area have been accustomed to doing in the Golden Gate National Recreation Area for decades.
I, like them, believe that the GGNRA should be able to afford the opportunity for people to recreate, whether one wants to watch a bird, ride a horse, walk a path, or climb a hill. Some of these uses are incompatible, but that doesn't mean we should ban them. That means that we should create opportunity for all.
In San Mateo County, in my district, the GGNRA is proposing zero off-leash dog areas, closing down one site that has been in operation for over many decades.
For 40 years, people and their dogs have been welcome at the beaches and trails of the GGNRA, which compromises 80,000 acres across San Francisco, Marin, and San Mateo Counties. This public land provides much-needed recreational space in the densely populated bay area.
Today, that access is at risk. The National Park Service is trying to dramatically change how it manages recreational areas in the bay area by turning the majority of open space in the GGNRA into what are called controlled zones, where visitor access and activities could be highly restricted. Public use could be denied for longstanding activities in the GGNRA, like hiking, surfing, bike riding, horseback riding, and dog walking.
The bay area is densely populated, and open space is precious. For many, the GGNRA is the only option for time outdoors.
My amendment would slow the National Park Service's regulatory overreach and ensure that people in the bay area continue to have recreational access to these urban parks.
People and nature aren't incompatible. We can be good stewards and also allow those in the GGNRA to have access to this very beautiful area.
I ask for an ``aye'' vote, Mr. Chairman, and I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT