Future Role for Camp Pendleton

A Future Role for Camp Pendleton

If biodiversity --which does not recognize jurisdictional boundaries-- is to be maintained in the region of Camp Pendleton, innovative decision-making will be needed. At the regional scale, there must be much more coordination of planning for both development and conservation. This is easy to say and difficult to accomplish. Some of the most significant issues cross jurisdictional boundaries: upstream development in the Santa Margarita watershed causing downstream flooding in other jurisdictions, the East Side Reservoir's conservation areas in Riverside County linking to proposals generated by San Diego County, riparian channelization in one jurisdiction breaking a regional habitat pattern, and the need for joint water supply and fire management planning. From the perspective of biodiversity, even the largest public landscapes, such as the Cleveland National Forest and MCB Camp Pendleton, cannot be seen as isolated, self-contained, and self-managed entities.

The 'Camp Pendleton Special' map, produced by the U.S. Defense Map Agency (1994) and shown in figure 134, is the land management map of MCB Camp Pendleton. The legend includes symbols for operations and training areas, including the impact zones which are shown in red. Perhaps less expected are the legend symbols for rare plant communities, vernal pools, and habitats of threatened and endangered species, such as the California gnatcatcher and least Bell's vireo. As noted in the beginning of this report, the property of the base is a totally managed landscape, and to date it has been managed in an exemplary manner. It must be noted however, that this success is due, in part, to relatively sparse development in the surrounding area. In defining the future role of MCB Camp Pendleton in the management of regional biodiversity, a broader view must be taken.

This research has identified several future changes which affect the landscape of MCB Camp Pendleton across jurisdictional lines: scarcity of agricultural soils, change of soil moisture, increased flooding and stream discharge, fire management, maintenance of the natural landscape patches and connections to other major public lands, and habitat management for wide-ranging species.

In all of these, the relationship between the base and its regional context will be increasingly driven by new development in the surrounding region impacting the environmental systems on the base. One consequence will be increased pressure for environmental management on Camp Pendleton, and therefore potentially increased tension between the base's primary mission of training and habitat conservation objectives.

The lack of coordinated off-base landscape management for conservation and habitat protection, especially as these relate to developable land, may in the long-run overwhelm Camp Pendleton's ability to manage for both training and habitat concerns. It is not a matter of quid pro quo with the region; it is a matter of lessening the impacts of off-base actions and inactions upon the base.

Two examples should suffice:

Camp Pendleton now has 23% of the region's gnatcatcher habitat. This will increase to about 35% at Plans Build-Out, and will include about half the region's highest quality habitat. This increase is due to the lack of gnatcatcher habitat protection off-base.
Flooding on Camp Pendleton will double in the Santa Margarita watershed. For 1990+ it is estimated that a 25 year storm will have a peak discharge of 570m3/sec, and this will increase to 1050m3/sec peak discharge at Plans Build-Out. An increase of more than 107 million m3 of total water discharge will be lost in one 25 year storm. This is because of new regional urban development off-base.

MCB Camp Pendleton can do little about the causes of these potential impacts as long as the towns and counties, which operate for civic purposes as separate entities, perceive and administer the cross-boundary ecological functions of the landscape as discrete local actions.

The surrounding jurisdictions will face increasingly complex development and conservation conflicts as large numbers of new residents locate to the area. Coordinating regional landscape planning will also require some changes in the definition of development; regional jurisdictions should recognize that the base is not an "open space," and that military manuever and impact areas are land uses.

MCB Camp Pendleton cannot be seen as an isolated property by either the region, its several jurisdictions, or the U.S. Marine Corps. From the perspective of this study, the base is wholly interdependent with its context. The activities on the base obviously impact the region economically, demographically and in other ways. At the same time the activities (and inactivities) of the region affect Camp Pendleton. This is especially the case when considering hydrological impacts on MCB Camp Pendleton caused by upstream development, fire management, the need to plan with nearby jurisdictions, and, as regional habitat declines, the increasing pressure on Camp Pendleton to manage its land both for an increased military training mission and for the maintenance of biodiversity.