Tejon Mountain Village has been controversial to say the least.  The "Conservation and Land Use Agreement" (LUA) and actual development have raised environmental concerns locally as well as at state and even national levels.  The controversy is in three primary areas: land conservation, wildlife and water.  There are distinctions between the Tejon Ranch Company (TRC) and Tejon Mountain Village in these very complex issues.  Because one is the subsidiary of the other, this series of articles will primarily reference the parent company. 

Tejon Ranch is to be setting aside up to approximately 240,000 acres of their land for conservation.  That's close to 90% of their holding.  This has been confirmed by the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), The Sierra Club and is explicitly stated in the agreement.  During the first interview with The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), this reporter was left with the impression that conservation of any land was contingent on purchase.  Upon further investigation this was found to not be entirely accurate.

A large chunk of 62,000 acres is contingent on purchase before being set aside.  The vast majority of land, 178,000 acres, has already permanently been set aside at no cost.  Jessica Lass of the NRDC was happy that so much land had been set aside without a court case. 

Jim Dodson of The Sierra Club seemed confident funds could be raised in time to purchase the 62,000 acres.  The deadline is December 31, 2010 but it isn't a hard deadline according to Dodson.  Environmental groups should be able to get an extension if necessary.  A state bond has already been approved. 

Ileene Anderson of the CBD did not understand the land agreement this way when presented with acre figures during a follow-up phone conversation.  She did however acknowledge that not all conservation lands had to be purchased...remarking "Our position is that what TRC is 'voluntarily' putting under conservation easements (the ones that won’t be bought) are nothing more than what they would be required to do for mitigation for their proposed projects + unbuildable lands (too steep/seismically active). "

In response Barry Zoeller of TRC writes "Contrary to CBD's contention, the 178,000 acres of open space we're dedicating at no cost is very developable, either as master planned communities or subdivided into multi-acre 'Ranchettes.'  There is also no indication whatsoever that those lands would have been required as mitigation."

"Tejon Ranch has been dealing honestly and productively." says Dodson.  When asked about the alleged split in the Sierra Club over Tejon Mountain Village, he said "There is always a split.  Working with an environmental group is like herding cats and there will always be disagreement on important issues."  The group with irreconcilable differences is said to be small and includes some in the Frazier Mountain community.

The ranch has a three-fold mission according to Barry Zoeller and the Tejon Ranch website (click here).  Conservancy, historic land use (ranching, farming and hunting) and planned development.  Jim Dodson of The Sierra Club is on the conservancy board and says environmental groups that did not leave the table during negotiations now have a say in ranching operations that they didn't have before. 

The Center for Biological Diversity left the table.  Ileene Anderson says there are 36 endangered species that live on Tejon land in addition to the California Condor that roosts there.  The condor does not nest on TRC land but it is the CBD's chief concern.  More on that in the next article, Tejon Ranch: Wildlife.