By Christopher Quock

October 2025

It’s something both those taking and those teaching natural history courses or going on outings with specialized naturalist clubs often take for granted: the ability to plan field trips and student activities around known sites with features relevant to the class. They include sites that offer consistent access to specialized types of habitats, where good examples of particular geological features can be found, places where scientifically significant historical events took place, and sometimes where hands-on training in various field techniques can be conducted. Some of those sites have been around and publicly accessible for so long that more junior instructors can take advantage of the collective data, pictures, slides, past lesson plans, and other materials associated with them that have been amassed by previous generations of teachers or field researchers.

Imagine visiting one of those places one day to operate within the boundaries of what you understand to be allowed, based on written documents, advice from other instructors, or your own previous experiences only to be blocked by someone who questions your right to be there. Maybe it’s a wealthy and influential developer who wants to buy land for a large-scale project requiring the movement of existing public property or public right-of-ways and engages in a local PR campaign reframing visits by groups like yours as unwelcome. Maybe it’s people who still believe where others can go should be defined by strict hierarchies based on perceived ethnic identities and other sociodemographic attributes. Maybe it’s someone in a managerial or other position of power who is trying to alter your ability to be in a particular place or curtail certain activities that used to be tolerated for political reasons. Regardless, you suddenly find you and whoever you’re with seemingly at the mercy of shifting and sometimes subjective policies.

This is something I experienced first hand in Del Puerto Canyon, a place I’ve previously mentioned travelling to as a student, TA, and independently as a nature enthusiast for years. While looking up the weather forecast for the area in 2020, I learned several roadside stops along 5 miles of the canyon were set to be destroyed for a proposed agribusiness reservoir to store Delta Mendota Canal water for sale to export crop producers. Despite common knowledge of this canyon’s extensive use for educational and recreational activities, water district project backers chose this location out of more than 10 possible areas (PDF, Page 379) they’d scoped. Out of those options, it’s the one both associated with a roadway with this type of known public traffic and pre-existing plans for a future park by the adjacent city of Patterson. In response to opponents highlighting the disruption to the pre-existing park plans and destruction of Yokuts artifact sites, like a native pathway carved into the Gateway Rocks that would be destroyed for dam supports, and safety concerns for nearby residents, the editor of a valley newspaper wrote an opinion piece this year trying to downplay them.

What also got my attention was the early pushback by project backers against the general public’s ability to stop along open roadsides and pullouts within the 80’ public right-of-way and their downplaying some claims about the multiregional educational importance of Del Puerto Canyon. As a specific example, rather than fully acknowledging negative impacts to the site where a teenage Allen Bennison found the first dinosaur fossils to be identified from CA in 1936, a section of the initial draft Environmental Impact Report appears to contest assertions by some geoscience teachers (9–35) about its historical significance and exact location to try to downplay potential losses. I realized fairly early on and confirmed with both Garry Hayes and Richard Hilton (who authored Dinosaurs and other Mesozoic Reptiles of California), that the initial EIR incorrectly identifies other large reptiles as dinosaurs and questions the existence of a relatively well-established collecting location. While this dEIR was eventually invalidated in a 2022 superior court ruling (PDF) for other reasons, it’s still being used as the centerpiece for the project’s PR page, and water district backers intend to use it as a backbone for their revised draft in the near future.

While their updated messages put more emphasis on the possibility of a “compromise,” the proposed planning would still be very relatively one-sided. The replacement roadway would veer away from the riparian habitats and other areas that make that area attractive as an outdoor classroom. There are also hints that people would only be allowed to stop for passive landscape viewing in cetain paved areas determined primarily by how out of the way they are from the district’s and its customers’ future business operations rather than on what third party educators, naturalist clubs, and Indigenous groups find important. While this might satisfy some people passing through the area, it would not be as conducive to the more in-depth and exploratory activities that the historical quirks and management regimes associated with the current roadsides have long provided for.

The wildlife refuges down south that they might deliver water to as an environmental offset are also primarily designed to protect endangered species, not to support the levels of traffic and some types of activities that currently take place in Del Puerto Canyon. They’re also significantly further away from Patterson versus the short commute offered by the competing city park plans.

As I’ve gotten more involved with efforts to conserve the area, I’ve run across a number of independent supporters of the proposed dams making assertions about how certain types of people associated with urban areas need to “stay in their place.” Some have openly stated that keeping certain urban people away from the general region is a major reason why they want that section of the canyon to be destroyed by the proposed reservoir. Many practices like redlining and other laws designed to promote segregated communities have been blocked from formal enforcement or repealed. More oversight is needed to prevent those seeking to preserve community status-quos formed by such guidelines from finding other ways to functionally maintain those more hard-line policies. This is not meant to imply generalizations about all rural landowners or interest groups. There are those who also oppose this specific project. More widely, there are those who also have more pro-conservation views as well as flexible stances to recreation and the freedom of people to move between different communities. I also have extended family members with connections to farming and other rural lifestyles. But knowing how such views have impacted those of Chinese ancestry I’m descended from, who, along with other minority groups, were pushed out of rural areas by discriminatory practices and set up to be associated with stereoptypes around urban blight (1, 2), encountering modern versions of those arguments first-hand still stings.

The controversy over Wyoming’s “anti citizen science” laws, where fossil fuel and agribusiness interests lobbied for enhanced trespassing statutes against people who stop on “open land” along rural roadsides and collect data to upload to public databases, was only just a few years old then. But the negative impacts to education were already making the news. If backers of private industries can so easily go toe-to-toe with some educators around a decades-known multiregional hub for CA natural history groups and teaching institutions like Del Puerto Canyon, use resources through entities like some special districts to thwart conservationists’ efforts to acquire and protect it, and continue in spite of that general region being officially identified as a priority for state-level conservation efforts, what does that bode for other locations? If where people can go outdoors were restricted to only areas that certain industry stakeholders approve of, as opposed to the looser policies many currently take for granted, how might that also impact the ability of students, field researchers, and hobby naturalist groups to continue to independently seek out and study subjects of interest? How would that also affect the general public’s ability to identify areas they want to see protected as publicly-accessible parks or land trusts?

While I’ve explored similar topics regarding open space access equity and accommodations for educational fieldwork specifically connected to Del Puerto Canyon, I’ve seen these issues grow to a wider scale over the past few years. Multiple members of the senate and state assembly have introduced legislation that would allow projects like Del Puerto Canyon Reservoir to apply for exemptions from some provisions of the Endangered Species Act. There have now been multiple attempts to sell off public lands across California and several other states to private developers. Possible solutions that are more multiregional in scope may be needed to deal with these expanded areas of contention within California.

Despite their importance to various science disciplines, little seems to have been done legislatively to explicitly protect students and instructors undertaking data collection and field methods training activities outside of classrooms and university settings from risks from hostile third parties, as well as keeping the specific places those educational programs rely on from being destroyed. Much of the discussion around implementing safety measures has been placed on actions that schools and universities, instructors, and students’ peers can take. However, shouldn’t there also be measures put in place to dissuade external parties from initiating such hostile encounters? While steps like striking deals with local gatekeepers to might sometimes help certain individuals on a case-by-case basis, is this by itself an assured way to reach a point where other members of underrepresented groups won’t encounter those same glass ceilings or subjective standards?

Recent Supreme Court developments have opened the door for federal agents to racially profile people, which risks making others less afraid of using similar practices. In light of this, establishing state-level limitations on the ability of others to regulate people’s movements based on identity-based fears are even more important. As more figureheads across the political specturm aim to politicize education, science, natural history, and the environment, more efforts are needed to ensure that students and researchers maintain their ability to explore topics and sites of interest regardless of where they’re located in the state. While increased access and equity gained through compromise is a good overall goal, students, educators, researchers, and the natural spaces they rely on need some protections they can count on in more contentious and sometimes complex situations.

The state of California does have a state park system. However, which places get added to this network depends heavily on the discretion of political figures who are also under pressure from various industry groups. As with other park systems, there are generally more state parks in areas with local political climates that are favorable to environmental concerns. There are relatively fewer in areas where community discussions and political discourse are dominated by some business and large-scale private landowning interests. Also, general class collecting assignments, activities that train future researchers and taxonomists for the types of activities they might need to do and which sometimes serve as sources for the growth and maintenance of teaching collections, appear to be not allowed and ineligible for permits within state parks.

The situation regarding some forms collecting and other activities is somewhat different in Bureau of Land Management and some national forest areas. Instead of prohibiting activities like general class collecting outright, there’s more flexibility for what they deem to be lower impact and non-commercial activities that adhere to guidelines outlined in 43 CFR § 6300.6302.12, 43 CFR § 6300.6302.15 and 43 CFR § 6300.6302.16. Additionally, ceremonial activities by Indigenous Peoples are explicitly allowed under 43 CFR § 6300.6302.18. Archaeological and cultural resources are already protected by several acts and statutes. However, these federal lands are vulnerable to national policies aimed at ramping up more destructive extractions for energy development and the selling of public lands to private interests. As of 10/21/2025, the Bureau of Land management is deciding whether to act on federal orders to rescind the 2024 Public Lands Rule, with a public comment period closing on November 10, 2025.

Many who discuss the importance of collections focus on the educational and research activities they support. The heightened importance of teaching collections for passing on practical skills, and sometimes leading to important scientific discoveries, coupled with significant declines in both taxonomists and university-based field training courses continues to be a relevant topic of concern (1, 2, 3). Networks of smaller, regional collections have been found to sometimes better represent local biodiversity and provide entry points for more diverse groups of people to access specimen-based knowledge.

One aspect of collections that isn’t mentioned as often but I think is still valuable is their potential to provide redundancy and buffer against situations that might otherwise more negatively hinder the flow of information or academic inquiry. In a scenario where the sharing of physical or digital specimen data between different institutions is disrupted, educators who have access to local collections might have the ability to still do some specimen-related scientific and teaching work. If a developer pulls local political strings to limit data collection from an area that was once more open but which they want to fully privatize ahead of construction to reduce the risk of third parties finding anything of conservation value, physical specimens and backlogs stored in off-site collections can still allow researchers and students to learn more about that place. If an area that might otherwise serve as an ideal location to take diverse student groups is complicated by local factors increasing risks for identity-based discrimination, off site repositories of specimens and data from there can still allow those students to have some level of access. In the event those source locations are destroyed, specimens and data gathered from there can allow them to still contribute to our understanding of the natural world and inform future conservation efforts.

One event where the discussion of how to save educationally important sites arose in 2016. Hayward road workers acting on orders to repair the street erased a classic example of fault creep that had been used by geology field trips and highlighted in teaching materials for decades. Shortly after that, there were calls by some in the geosciences for compiling lists of sites and sharing information with municipal officials as needed to ensure their protection. An official from the city also mentioned that they might have been open to not altering it had they known about its importance. However, I could not find evidence of those talks leading to formal plans fully implementing such recommendations.

Questions of sovereignty and problematic historical associations between some science fields and colonial practices have become increasingly discussed among academia and the conservation community. Issues dealing with the treatment of Indigenous Peoples and practices of extracting material from the “Global South” without equivalent sharing of information or reciprocity merit increased attention. However, acknowledging these imperfections doesn’t mean science is completely without merit. Advocating for the rights of STEM researchers and students and what they need to safely do their work should still be actively discussed alongside priority topics for other conservation and community groups. Also, the increased discussions around sovereignty shouldn’t make people automatically hesitant to speak up about the impacts of local activities in different cities, counties, or congressional districts to certain multiregional concerns within the states and countries they all work and reside in. Many mandated public comment periods for cities, counties, and other public agencies are open to people from both within and outside of the communities in which they’re held. Developers and large-scale project backers use broad logistical and funding networks to forward their goals and often send representatives to meetings in multiple communities. Conservationists and educational interest groups should also be willing to form and maintain cross-jurisdictional networks to protect and advocate for the places that they value.

So what could possibly be done to ensure everyone in the state has equivalent access to greenspace both for general recreation, introductory science activities, and outlets for more advanced field data collecting practice and training?

In terms of increasing general greenspace equity for the wider outdoor recreational, cultural, and historical community:

• Could lawmakers create state laws banning private developers and special districts from acquiring lands for commercial purposes that encroach on or would create safety hazards near plans for publicly accessible recreation areas that have already been introduced by other agencies?
• Could CEQA regulations be amended to specifically require developers to account for significant impacts to outdoor recreation and educational activities? Could such regulations also require developers to use third party companies/entities to conduct public surveys about recreation to reduce the risk of bias or also being used to spread anti-recreational messaging, and that the raw data and findings be made directly available to the public through the Environmental Impact Report?
• For regions lacking adequate public green space, like many communities within the Central Valley, could more NGOs also be encouraged to provide grassroots environmental movements operating in less environmentally friendly communities with trained volunteers, capital, structural support to get past the initial hurdles and founder effects that often handicap startups, and media production capabilities to allow them to lobby as actively and effectively for open space protections as groups in more environmentally friendly areas? Many larger park systems containing diverse wildlands, like the Golden Gate National Recreation Area would not exist without concerted resistance by such groups against competing development plans.
• Could state legislation allow the Native American Heritage Commission to better protect non-burial archaeological sites on privately-owned lands, prioritize maintaining or enhancing access by Indigenous groups to “unique archaeological resources” in CEQA-related mitigation efforts, and require projects with partially-viable alternate options to pursue those secondary choices when their primary plans would destroy such sites?
• Could bills be introduced to prevent special districts from trying to limit the general public from accessing public infrastructure, right-of-ways, and related lands that are within their geographic spheres of influence but which they do not directly own, with temporary exceptions only by county or municipal approval for safety-related road repairs, fire mitigation, vector control, and other activities that fall within the specific scope of their missions?

In terms of more specifically increasing outlets for class assignments and hands-on student research methods training activities:

• Could an additional system of state-level parks/zones protected from development be created throughout California to set aside areas identified as important by representatives of various scientific associations, teachers’ organizations, and student groups, where a wider array of class assignments and other educational activities are allowed similar to how Bureau of Land Management, National Forest, and some private land trusts that are open to the public have historically been operated? Could these places be evenly dispersed throughout urban and rural regions so that hands-on learning programs anywhere in the state can count on having access to at least one or more of these locations? Could language also be included to affirm protections for archaeological sites and specific allowances for ceremonial practices by Indigenous groups analogous to BLM regulations?
• Could a science-focused NGO or government organization arise to financially compensate land trusts and other open space holders to allow access to some less sensitive areas for training activities in data collection and research methods offered by field courses, independent student projects, and naturalist associations?
• Could some laws and regulations protecting students, teachers, and researchers from having their academic work interfered with while on campuses be extended to when they’re in the field? Could labor groups formed to support and lobby for teachers and student workers work with education-friendly state lawmakers to create streamlined monitoring and reporting systems to better track instances of identity-based discrimination?

I still remember the time I and some other students I was with found ourselves on the wrong end of three irritated men with rifles who confronted us as we were legitimately visiting a public county day use area for a school field trip. As I’ve gotten more involved in environmental advocacy, I’ve heard more cases of others experiencing similar threatening or violent encounters, sometimes for as little as parking along a roadside to take a phone call. Even if some might consider those more intense encounters to be relatively uncommon, they are still unacceptable. I still hope compromise solutions that don’t involve reducing the general public’s mobility might be eventually achieved in the future. But in terms of the current climate, I think regulatory efforts to curb exclusionary activities that cross certain lines are needed. At the very least, those engaging in academic-related fieldwork and groups dedicated to promoting outdoor science education should have options to advocate for the protection of the places they depend on and policies that allow them to safely access those areas, within the confines of what their home institutions allow for, akin to how figureheads of other industries like energy development, agriculture, and real estate can for their respective interests. Will those legislators, education sector labor groups, and others who’ve championed educational equity and environmental causes in the past notice and take on some of these issues? I hope they do so soon.

*The views expressed in this piece are my own and are not to be interpreted as those of any group, organization, or employer I’m affiliated with.

The land was already heating up in the morning sunlight as Dr. Robert Zuparko took a right turn at the I-5 Patterson exit. From my vantage point riding shotgun, I could see the sight birders know as Mile Rock, that short stretch of road that helped opened the door for me to enter graduate school at San Francisco State University so many years ago. After a short wait at the pullout by Graffiti Rock, we decided to venture further down the road to find the bug camp hosted by Insect Sciences Museum of California (1, 2).

ISMC is an Oakland-based citizen science group dedicated to increasing public awareness of insect biodiversity and appreciation of nature. From my previous piece highlighting the long history of Del Puerto Canyon as an important site for many California entomologists, the group’s founder and leader, Eddie Dunbar, decided to choose it for one of their bug camps. ISMC recently partnered with WhollyH2O and the Point Molate Alliance in ongoing efforts to protect Point Molate, a stretch of critical wetland habitat in the SF Bay Area, from proposed luxury housing development. As well as submitting species observations to other public sites, they created their own free mini field guide to raise awareness about the insect fauna that can be found there. Their goals at Del Puerto Canyon were similar: to record the species they found over the course of 4 days and to make this data publicly available through iNaturalist and other field guides.

Shortly after stopping by the parking area at Frank Raines Park and getting a tip on where the group might be, we arrived at Adobe Springs. Today, it was buzzing with activity. Flowering shrubs interspersed amongst the stream willows were covered by bumble bees. They were also joined by some butterflies. Dragonflies and damselflies darted across the shallow creek. Giant water bugs and aquatic beetles scurried between the rocks beneath the shimmering surface. Several members of ISMC, carrying a variety of cameras, pans, and nets, were busy exploring this teeming biodiversity.

After a short lunch break, we headed to the Minnear Day Use Area. By then, it was over 100 degrees outside. We split up into two groups. Some of us stopped by the main parking area, marked by a tree and a garbage can lined with upright logs — two signs that have remained constant since my first visit to the canyon all those years ago. Others used a shallower, zig-zagging path further to the west. Even before I’d reached the canyon floor, I thought the creek looked relatively dry. I wondered if the milkweeds, the ones I’ve seen year after year in the north fork, would be growing or flowering this time around. I wasn’t disappointed. Though I didn’t see any monarch butterfly adults or caterpillars like I did some previous years (another group member did at a different spot), I found several blooming plants poking out of the dry ground. The main part of Del Puerto Creek was still trickling and attracting a variety of dragonflies, damselflies, and other thirsty insects. European honey bees were busily working on the small, white flowers near the water’s edge. I even saw the blue-green, metallic flash of what might’ve been a Steel-blue Cricket Hunter, but it flew off before I could get a closer look.

By mid afternoon, we were all ready to take a break and refill on water. After a short time resting and engaging in some small talk with the other group members, Dr. Zuparko and I secured some field equipment and parted ways with the other bug camp members.

On our way back to the SF Bay Area, we decided to briefly stop by Graffiti Rock again, and I was in for a surprise. The grass and scrub by the roadside was filled with tarantula hawk wasps. I’d seen a few flying overhead when we stopped there before, but the brilliant, dark blue and orange-winged insects seemed to be everywhere. Earlier in the day, another group member showed us pictures of them clustering among leaves at a different place she referred to as the “wasp spot.” But it was an entirely different experience for me to see that many in one spot with my own eyes as they chased each other and searched for nectar from every flower they could find.

Before leaving the canyon, we decided to make a last stop at the I-5 Patterson exit. It didn’t take long for me to realize that the vegetation was too hot and dry for preying mantids. Typically, Dr. John Hafernik’s entomology field trips where students were more likely to find them would take place in late Spring or early Fall. Still, I was able to find and photograph a few insects hiding in the brush. Suddenly, we were approached by a stranger who had heard about and was looking for the bug camp. I’d seen some people express an interest in social media posts about the event, and it was heartening to run into someone who was motivated to go out and learn more in person.

With many state politicians and private businesses pushing to use large parts of this place for surface water storage and suburban sprawl, the future of Del Puerto Canyon is still uncertain. Hopefully, efforts like these will help to show more people what many researchers, schoolteachers, and nature lovers have known for decades. It’s not a blank slate that can only serve the community by being developed. It’s a biodiverse area that already provides benefits for plants, animals, and many Californians.

All images in this article were taken from parks, day use areas, and roadside locations not immediately blocked off by signage or fencing and believed to be open to the public.

Added 10/6/2025: Unless stated otherwise, the views here are my own and not to be interpreted as those of any employer or organization I’m affiliated with.

On the side of a dusty road just a few hundred feet west of the I-5 Patterson exit, there was a bustle of activity. While waiting for the last cars in the caravan to catch up, as cell reception quickly drops off further down the road, students and instructors hopped out for some impromptu picture taking and insect collecting. Some held nets up in the air waiting for the passing butterfly or dragonfly. Others actively searched through the brush. A yelp of excitement suddenly filled the air, followed by the murmurs of people flocking to its source. At the center of this small crowd, a student held up a jar containing a praying mantis. Others quickly began to look in the bushes to see if they could find mantises of their own, and a handful did so in short order. While most of these turned out to be fairly common species that can be found for sale as pets or for pest control, the opening of a store-bought container can’t compare to the way the faces of both young and old light up after discovering them blending in with the tumbleweeds. According to Dr. John Hafernik, Professor of Biology at San Francisco State University and the lead instructor at the time, this bi-annual tradition had been going on since the late 1970s. However, in the late summer of 2008, this entomology class field trip to Del Puerto Canyon, near the town of Patterson, CA, set a chain of events in motion that would define the next 10+ years of my academic endeavors. John allowed some students to bring a few of the mantises back to the classroom alive to keep in terrariums. There, students could see them use their raptorial forelegs to catch prey and how well they could camouflage themselves first hand to supplement the static images from the Powerpoint™ slides. John would sometimes collect sluggish honey bees he found stranded on the 3rd floor landing of Hensill Hall on his way to work to feed them. One day, he forgot a vial of bees on his desk and found that maggots had emerged from them some time later. With the assistance of Brian Brown, Curator of Entomology at the Natural History Museum of LA County, the first instance of the phorid fly, Apocephalus borealis, parasitizing European honey bees was documented. This led to a highly publicized initial study, the launch of the Zombeewatch citizen science project, and the work for my master’s degree. So in a small way, the place with “the door” in its name was a doorway to this discovery.

This wasn’t the first time this area served as the setting for such a story. The books Dinosaurs and Other Mesozoic Reptiles of California by Richard Hilton and Treasures of the Earth: An Autobiography provide accounts of how Allan Bennison found several fossilized bones of a large animal in Del Puerto Creek while out biking and looking for rocks as a teenager in 1936. He decided to collect some and showed them to his science teacher, and this eventually led him to connect with paleontologists at UC Berkeley. Working with those scientists, his teacher from Gustine Union High School, and local rancher John Hammond, they found more fossils. Some of these were further identified as the remains of a hadrosaur, the first dinosaur discovered in California. He eventually went on to have a prolific career in the geosciences. To this day, this account has endured as an inspiring story for other budding geologists who have continued to visit this place from CSU Stanislaus, Modesto Junior College, and elsewhere.

In the decades following that discovery, Del Puerto has continued to serve as a doorway into the natural world for aspiring scientists from other disciplines. Dr. John Hafernik, now retired, wrote this about the richness of the canyon and its power to inspire:

“I arrived in California in the fall of 1970 to enter grad school at UC Berkeley. My first experience with the natural areas of California came 50 years ago in Spring 1971 when I took Ev Schlinger’s field entomology class. The class was organized around a series of insect biodiversity surveys of different nearby natural areas. We camped overnight at each site. We visited Del Puerto Canyon twice during that spring. I’ve never forgotten that experience. Del Puerto Canyon was a wonderland for me with species and insect groups I had read about but never seen alive. That springtime and Del Puerto Canyon were a special time and place where I bonded with my fellow grad students [Rosser Garrison and others]. Rosser went on to conduct his PhD research on damselflies in the Canyon. When I began teaching entomology at SF State in 1977, I wanted to give my students similar experiences to the ones that fostered my growth as an entomologist. With that in mind, over my 40 years at SF State, I always took students on field trips to Del Puerto Canyon. The Del Puerto Canyon trip was always the high point of the semester for students.

Del Puerto Canyon is rich in human history and in biodiversity. In the span of 20 or so miles one can traverse numerous Native American sites, active cattle ranches, deserted mines and even a baseball field. In terms of ecology, one goes from the agricultural fields of the Central Valley to grasslands on the lower slopes to oak and pine woodland and chaparral on the upper slopes. The free flowing Del Puerto Canyon Creek is an oasis for plants and animals with ancient groves of cottonwoods and other riparian plants and animals. Its location along the Coast Range provides habitat for a mixture of species with both southern and northern distributions. Del Puerto Canyon is a place where you can observe California’s smallest butterfly, the Western Pigmy Blue, and its largest dragonfly, Walsingham’s Giant Darner, or watch a life-or-death struggle between California’s largest wasp, the Tarantula Hawk Wasp, and the State’s largest spider, the California Tarantula. To me, there’s nowhere like it in the world.”

Rosser Garrison had this to say about his decision to also choose Del Puerto Canyon as a study site for his PhD work:

“My interest was spurred by the fact that earlier Berkeley alumni had considered Del Puerto a great place to study and observe insects. It was relatively close to Berkeley (about 95 miles), was free of onlookers or people who might have interfered with ongoing field work, and, as I later found out, was a great area to study damselflies. The area was (and hopefully still is) a great habitat for odonates. I conducted mark-recapture studies on three different species of damselflies from 25 April-4 May 1977 and a longer one from 6–23 September 1977 with one day excluded due to rain. I camped at Frank Raines Regional Park nearby every other night during those dates. During my work, I also tabulated about 33 species for the area — almost a third of the known number of species for the state…That study was part of my PhD thesis (completed November 1979) and resulted in three papers on the population dynamics and morphometrics [the study and measurement of physical features] of these damselflies”

Garrison would also stick with entomology long after finishing school, becoming a dragonfly and damselfly specialist for the California Department of Food and Agriculture. He also went on to publish several works, including Dragonfly Genera of the New World. An Illustrated and Annotated Key to the Anisoptera (2006) and Damselfly Genera of the New World. An Illustrated and Annotated Key to the Zygoptera (2010).

Dr. Phil Ward, from the Department of Entomology and Nematology at UC Davis, shared similar sentiments:

“…I have been coming to Del Puerto Canyon to collect insects since 1997. Even before I first came to DPC I knew about its reputation as an outstanding collecting site for entomologists. Since 2003 I have been bringing students in my insect taxonomy class (ENT 107 — California Insect Diversity) to DPC on all-day class excursions. Del Puerto Canyon has a rich diversity of habitats and insects, and is a great ‘outdoor classroom’ for entomology students.

Entomologists have been coming to Del Puerto Canyon for decades. Many interesting insects have been found here. Among the more unusual ants occurring in Del Puerto Canyon are two species of army ants (Neivamyrmex californicus, Neivamyrmex nigrescens), a species of honeypot ant (Myrmecocystus testaceus), and a rare myrmicine ant, Myrmica rugiventris, known from only a handful of localities in California.”

“A fair number of my students went on to get degrees in geology, and many were inspired by their explorations in DPC,” said Garry Hayes, a geology professor from the Department of Science, Mathematics & Engineering at Modesto Junior College, “Several of them collaborated on a geology field guide to the canyon for a meeting of the National Association of Geoscience Teachers in 1998.”

And Del Puerto Canyon has also had a magnetic pull for others as well. Elias Funez, a former commissioner for the Patterson Recreation and Parks Department and member of Save Del Puerto Canyon, had this to say over the phone about his early experiences in the canyon and the value of nature exposure:

“…I was introduced to Del Puerto Canyon when I was quite young. It must’ve been in the 1980s because I was born in 1983. Probably since before I can remember, my parents started taking me up there. So some of my early childhood experiences would be playing in the creek or being up at Frank Raines Park just exploring and enjoying nature out there…So I’d grown up with that and never really thought much about it until I started taking field studies classes from Modesto Junior College and finding out, wow, some of these kids from Modesto have never, ever explored outside of the city before! And so, we’d take photo excursions up to the canyon and stuff like that…It’s become, like you said, a hub for not only biology, but [also] for just photography and beauty on its own…”

From articles covering such varied topics as Mars analog sites, population dynamics of checkerspot butterflies, the habits of side-blotched lizard hatchlings (article preview), to studies comparing the effects of erosion versus ancient fault movements on landscapes in the Coast Range, Del Puerto Canyon is frequently mentioned as a location of interest in both peer-reviewed journals and literature for general audiences. Some have compared its rich natural and cultural history to that of a national park. Yet, there are stretches where one can stop and take an open-ended saunter by the public roadway from where the asphalt ends to just before where the fences begin, an ideal arrangement for a field researcher looking for a specific feature, or a class populated by budding naturalists just learning how to interact with the world beyond manicured landscapes and concrete jungles. And having decades of first-hand accounts from current and past generations of naturalists with details about good spots for finding specific things makes this place all the more powerful for engaging students with the natural world. It’s one thing to be able to recall the circumstances behind a picture of a plant, animal, geologic feature, or snapshot of a past class projected onto a screen. But it’s quite another to be able to lead students to and let them freely explore the place behind that story.

There are many accounts of the power of hands-on exploration in nature setting the stage for serendipitous scientific discoveries, engaging future naturalists, and enabling more seasoned explorers to continue their life-long love affairs with the natural world. And nature space access almost always played an integral role. In Memoirs of Black Entomologists (link to free PDF download), Dr. Jessica Ware recalls having early formative experiences from summer trips exploring the lake and forest by her grandparents’ cottage. Dr. Vernard Lewis fondly reflects on playing with ants and lizards he found in the backyard of his grammar school. He also mentions how going on collecting trips to Death Valley and the Mojave Desert with a Laney College biology instructor motivated him to pursue entomology. The late Roy Snelling, a long-time curator at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County and a well-known figure among ant taxonomists, first became fascinated with insects while looking for critters in fields by his school during lunch break. When Snelling eventually reached the point in his career when he was describing new species, he sometimes included Native American references to honor his half-Cherokee heritage. The discovery of the Light Brown Apple Moth in California (PDF download) occurred because Dr. Jerry Powell had a backyard where he could regularly set up a light trap to collect moths even after he retired from UC Berkeley.

However, many communities of professional naturalists and research collections are in trouble. Collections, which serve as hubs for networks of scientists, students, volunteers, agricultural workers, and other third parties, are being downsized and neglected. For instance, a 2014 report published in BioScience found that the number of plant collections has been decreasing in the United States since the 1990s and that the number of bird specimen donations from research institutions to museums has fallen dramatically since the 1970s. A survey by the Association of Systematics Collections (PDF download) from 1976–1986 found the annual rate at which smaller entomology collections were “orphaned” or absorbed by larger institutions nearly doubled from 36 to 65. With each collection that’s lost or downsized, so too are opportunities for training and employing future experts. Ironically, the demand for specimens, basic natural history information, and consultation services by others working in fields ranging from biomedicine to restoration ecology has been increasing. Given current trends, the ability of taxonomists and field biologists to meet these growing needs will continue to become more difficult.

Dr. Robert Zuparko, of the Essig Museum of Entomology at UC Berkeley, had this to say about these general declines and the importance of nature space access for collectors:

“Without a doubt, we are suffering from real declines in taxonomists and natural history collections. For example, identifying specimens from any of several families of parasitic Hymenoptera (a vitally economically important group of insects) can be almost impossible to do, since identification keys for certain locations are either obsolete or non-existent, usable voucher specimens are rare, damaged, and/or difficult to obtain, and experts in those groups are overworked or have retired and not been replaced. The most relevant factor at work here is lack of funding: there are fewer and fewer positions available for basic research taxonomists, and for basic natural history museum curation.

I believe (though I have no hard evidence to prove this) that the frequency and size of private insect collections has dropped precipitously over the past few decades, and thus a valuable ‘pipeline’ to natural history collections is drying up. I have no hard data, but I suspect the closing off of lands to private collectors certainly MUST be an important factor in this drop in activity.”

Donations of specimens, like those Drs. Charles and Lois O’Brien collected over their lifetimes and recently gifted to Arizona State University, are still a vital source of new material for reference and teaching collections. As funding sources for official staff and formal expeditions have decreased, some have looked to these types of naturalists; retired professionals, dedicated amateurs, and those who walk the blurry line between formal academics and hobbyists, to help pick up some of the slack for supplying physical specimens and other types of data. According to various sources, like a 2019 Yale 360 article by Jessica Leber, such networks of explorers and tinkerers are now responsible for a large percent of the new species that are found and basic natural history discoveries that occur each year. For citizen scientists who might partake in hands-on explorations of nature but not have the official endorsement from an institution if someone decides to question them, green spaces that can offer such people more maneuvering room are invaluable.

The lack of diversity within the scientific community is another longstanding issue contributing to dwindling numbers of specialists. Funding for institutional programs focused on reaching out to people from more diverse backgrounds is definitely a major part of the equation. To that end, organizations like the USDA have created scholarships and training programs geared towards engaging Indigenous people and other minority groups. Many universities have also begun to take a hard look at policies that create stumbling blocks for students and faculty from underrepresented backgrounds within the walls of their campuses. Ongoing efforts to find equity in STEM fields won’t be easy. Some unfortunate relationships between colonial history and exploration cannot be overlooked. Compromises between cultural taboos and certain forms of recreation, experimentation, and collecting in nature will also have to be addressed in order to make these disciplines more open to those with Indigenous backgrounds. However, given how much of a factor self-guided and hands-on exploration in open spaces are for the development of life-long researchers, how much do patterns of access to such sites also play in the diversity problem? What’s the point of telling someone that they can choose to study a natural history field that interests them if they are passionate enough, regardless of their income, ethnic identity, other political stances, and personal connections, if nearby nature spaces outside of the classroom either aren’t available or are watched by those who might use some of those factors to decide how much scrutiny a visitor should receive? What about individuals who have talents and skills which might be beneficial for natural history research but lack nearby outlets where they are able to cultivate them? If being lucky enough to own or live immediately next to green space remains the main pathway through which people can more freely engage in self-directed activities beyond taking photos, such as building a natural history collection or finding and raising small critters like ants and butterflies, then these other opportunities for engaging future naturalists may continue to be skewed towards those who are wealthier or more established. Furthermore, how can instructors from urban educational institutions have a fair shot at recruiting more people into fields like ecology or agricultural management without nearby, biodiverse places where students can actively experience what parts of those disciplines are like?

“Our work suggests that benefits of exposure to field science can be immense, even with low cost opportunities,” said Dr. Roxanne Beltran, Assistant Professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at UC Santa Cruz, on the general topic of making field courses more accessible, “For example, simple local field trips with limited logistical complications may provide a scalable solution.”

In a recent study, the team Dr. Beltran worked with found that attending a college field course was a significant factor in encouraging students from underrepresented minority groups to stay in STEM fields. The “leaky pipeline” of students dropping out or transferring out of science-related fields is a major issue. Study participants who took upper division field courses that offer more rigorous and hands-on experiences also reported gaining more self-efficacy, self-confidence, and the skills needed to work independently.

On the value of spaces within reach of city-dwellers of all ages and mobility levels, Richard Louv, co-founder and chairman emeritus of the Children and Nature Network and author of several books on the topic of nature education, had this to say:

“Adults receive all the same benefits to health and happiness that a child receives. I think spending time outdoors is vital for people of all ages who hope to live a balanced and full life. If we are going to have meaningful experiences with nature, we are going to have to rethink nature within cities. To connect to that nature, we can walk in our neighborhoods, get to know these pockets of nature, find out how to protect them and then learn new ways to bring more nature to the urban areas. At least one study has shown that urban parks with the highest levels of biodiversity happen to be the parks with the greatest psychological benefits for human beings. Cities can, in fact, become engines of biodiversity. Groups that help people really see where they live, that foster a sense of place.”

However, many nature spaces with the flexibility to host such varied activities are in trouble. A recent report by the Center for American Progress found that green spaces in and near urban areas have been declining at the rate of roughly one football field every thirty seconds in the United States. They also found that more rapid losses are occurring around lower-income and minority communities. Informal open space areas in and around rangelands are also particularly susceptible to urban sprawl, expansion of utilities, and agricultural intensification. Another study that looked at rural land use data for California from 1984 to 2008 found that almost two hundred thousand hectares of ranchlands were covered by buildings or converted to more intensive types of agriculture. And as far as conservation is concerned, they found that roughly 75% of these places either just had temporary reprieves from development under the Williamson Act or no formal protections at all.

The lands in and around Del Puerto Canyon are no stranger to the pressures and use conflicts stemming from open space loss. One of the most recent sources of controversy is a proposed network of dams and 800 acre reservoir by the Del Puerto Canyon Water District and the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority. According to the DPWD and Exchange Contractors, the reservoir would provide additional water storage capacity to support agribusiness interests and some wildlife refuges in the Central Valley during dry spells. According to a 2020 article in California Water Research and scoping comments for the EIR, opponents of the proposed project have pointed to alternatives already under development, like the North Valley Regional Recycled Water Program and the Eastside Water District’s groundwater recharge project near Turlock, which might be used to address water supply issues paired with convervation. Following in the footsteps of other California surface storage projects, Del Puerto Reservior would be filled by pumping water out of the state’s already stressed river systems. And in the final EIR, the canyon’s decades of use as a place not just for recreation, but intense research and educational activities, is barely mentioned.

Yet, both conservationists and competing water interests have taken action. Multiple environmental groups have filed a joint lawsuit, and some media outlets have been covering the potential negative impacts of this and other dam projects on the long-term viability of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers. However, in my efforts to reach out to members of the academic community who have made use of this area for more than half-a-century, I still run into researchers, teachers, and students who had no idea a large part of this go-to place might be flooded.

“I did not know that a reservoir (via a dam?) was planned for Del Puerto,” said Garrison on a personal note, “If so, I would not be in favor as I believe it would have a harmful impact on the odonate populations there. Several of the species rely on swift running water in order to breed. During my studies there, Del Puerto Creek was composed of pools interspersed with flowing water areas (lotic areas) and these provided various habitats for odonates residing there.”

According to Dr. Zuparko, the proposed reservoir and the gradual closing off of other nearby sites are sobering developments for some of the naturalist clubs and school groups that frequent them:

“…In my opinion, the three sites [about 2.5, 14, and 17 road miles west of I-5] noted above remain the only reliable areas in the Canyon available for insect collecting. My understanding is that the proposed reservoir would definitely flood Site #1, and MIGHT affect Site #2, while Site #3 would be unaffected…

…I had heard stories of others collecting along Corral Hollow Road, which is a short distance north of DPC. I think that collecting was done by entomology students mostly out of San Jose State, in the 1960s or early 70’s. I have since driven along Corral Hollow Road looking for collecting sites, but nowadays there is fencing along both sides of the road and almost no turnouts in which to park one’s car, so for all intents and purposes, that road is no longer available for insect collecting. I believe this means that DPC is the only east-west transect across the eastern Diablo Range, between highways 580 and 152, presently available for insect collecting…”

When potential sites for class field trips or independent projects are reduced, there’s also the problem of increased competition with other interests over the spaces that remain.

“In recent years, parts of Del Puerto Canyon, specifically Frank Raines County Park, have become dominated by OHV users, to the exclusion of nature-lovers,” said Dr. Ward regarding Zuparko’s Site #3, “For example, the place where I found that rare ant, Myrmica rugiventris, is now off-limits to me because it is reserved for OHV use. There needs to be a discussion about what is an appropriate balanced use of recreational, educational, and scientific uses of the canyon.”

Dr. Robert Raguso, a professor in the Department of Neurobiology and Behavior at Cornell University, had some personal thoughts about the social climate in parts of DPC:

“I appreciate that Frank Raines Park serves so many different kinds of people from Stanislaus County and beyond — family picnics on weekends, motor sports enthusiasts, softball teams, Biologists like me. It is important that residents not feel excluded from such a park. Outside of the park is a different story. There seems to be a long term tug of war in terms of who owns the road, the roadside, access to the canyon, how to regard visitors (e.g. as guests vs. hostile trespassers). DPC has always had great educational value for visiting students, but it is not a welcoming place outside of Frank Raines Park.”

Running into accounts like Raguso’s so early in my outreach activities struck me with dismay. From my experiences helping to lead classes as a TA, engaging in field research, and as a hobbyist, I’ve certainly run into moments that have given me pause in other places closer to the urban centers around the SF Bay Area. When random people have confronted me or groups I’ve been with, things have occasionally gotten heated. In rare instances when I’ve been alone, some people have stopped just short of getting physical. Random people have also quietly followed or lingered around me, both while I’ve been working on official projects or out on my free time doing stuff like macrophotography. Del Puerto Canyon is by no means perfect. In one of the tenser encounters I’ve had in the outdoors, some men in a truck pulled up behind a group I was with and forced us to leave a public day use area near Frank Raines Park so they could go target shooting. In terms of frequency, however, this is the only such encounter I can recall in almost 10 years of regular visits to Del Puerto. The ability to walk along the thin strips of open land and public rest stops along Del Puerto Canyon Road without having to constantly watch my back, whether carrying an insect net or just my camera, is one thing that has stuck out for me. Perhaps this overall pattern has been due to lucky timing or the relatively brief nature of my day trips. But as brief as my times there have been, they were long enough for me to feel like I could really connect with that small piece of the world in my own way. And I’ve seen similar reactions in others I’ve been with on my many trips there. If even one of those moments sets someone on a path towards a lifetime of studying nature; working to help industries like agriculture or pest management both work better and with nature, or opens the door to another scientific discovery, isn’t the opportunity to have such an experience worth saving? And can the friction that has tempered some peoples’ access to this natural classroom be resolved?

According to Funez, the current reservoir project competes with earlier ideas floated by some in the Patterson Parks Department for public recreation in the same area. Further, he strongly expressed his desire for a plan at the entrance of the canyon that would meld the area’s Indigenous history with opportunities for more casual recreation. Along with this, he still supports the idea of areas further up Del Puerto Canyon Road that could be more open to exploration by classes and other groups:

“The Native American aspect, I think, really needs to be highlighted or shown because there are grinding rocks up and down the creek bed there, and so that area needs to be just completely untouched and left alone…Along the banks, that’s where I see something like an amphitheater being built that can be multi-use for big types of productions, but could also just be left out alone for general use for people who are out there and smaller types of things. So, I would see the city of Patterson ideally regulating areas like that that would be slightly closer to the city’s influence because that would be just right within the canyon’s walls there [by] the Gateway. But further back up there, where the San Francisco State Students were at…that’s where I’ve seen a lot of people just kind of exploring and stuff on their own there, and I would see them as being able to do that still, kind of like the Minnear Day Use Area…”

“More space should be developed for a state park with expansion of interpretive activities at the existing country park areas,” said Hayes, “The canyon is already exceedingly popular for recreation but needs more in the way of learning opportunities.”

Supporting the nature access needs of the local community is certainly important. Given the current development pressures facing Del Puerto Canyon, tangible benefits of this nature space have to be made apparent to both avid outdoorspeople and the wider public. According to Funez, the shortage of formal recreation areas around Patterson has led to nature deprivation among minority groups there — including members and descendants of the farm laborers and distribution center workers who are a significant part of that town’s economy. The Yokut archaeological sites could also use more signage and barriers, in consultation with tribal groups in the area, to let people know what they are and why they should be respected. Vandalism by partygoers has been mentioned as one of the hot button issues fueling tensions between some landowners and recreational groups.

Certainly, precedents have been set for protection from development in Del Puerto Canyon in the form of Frank Raines Park and the Minnear Day Use Area. However, the process of creating a park while still allowing the lands in and around it to be multi-use spaces may still require some thought and negotiations to avoid issues other protected areas have faced. Efforts to reconcile the existence of non-passive activities at places like Point Reyes National Seashore in California and Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument in Maine have been met with controversy. Foothills Park, which was only open to residents of Palo Alto from 1969 to 2020, was governed by ordinances calling for fines and misdemeanor charges against unescorted visitors from outside the area. In arguments surrounding that policy’s formation and the lawsuit that ended it, some proponents felt that nature space was a reward for local taxpayers that could be easily damaged by outsiders. As the city of Patterson continues to grow and urbanize, can a potential park’s design and messaging find a way to cool potential disagreements between some nature lovers and those who currently live off of or “disturb” the land? Can other movements that may start up in response to increases in traffic avoid the some of the policies and rhetoric associated with places like Foothills? Hopefully, if plans for the reservoir fall through and if the creation of a park becomes the most likely option, a stable compromise between access and protection can be found.

“I’m not sure what is the best model,” said Dr. Ward, “Some sort of conservation status is needed to protect the area, but I hope that it can continue to be a place for nature hobbyists, teachers, students, and scientists. If the area were to become a state park, that would put some limits on recreation (no dogs, no OHV vehicles) that would not be popular with some people. This is a matter of ongoing discussion.”

As far as protecting some of the freedoms of property owners, Funez spoke favorably about the possibility of using strategies like those he’s seen in different parts of California:

“…So that first area closest to Patterson, of the canyon, that could be park land under Patterson’s jurisdiction. But beyond that, on the other side, I’ve envisioned like some sort of land trust, like Del Puerto Land Trust, where then the rest of it is kept as rangeland for perpetuity. Yeah, that would be amazing! And, that’s what it comes down to sometimes is, you know, money…Ranchers, they want the money that they would get from selling to the Del Puerto Water District for the reservoir. But if we came at them with the same amount of money, or maybe a little more, saying, ‘Hey, here, we’ll give you this for this ‘x’ amount of time if you just keep it as it is because it’s important as it is?’ I don’t know if a lot of the local ranchers recognize or appreciate how important some of that land is…But I know for sure that there are some ranchers; some landowners there in the canyon that have been or were interested in preserving the land.

Now that I’ve been working up here in Grass Valley and Nevada County, it’s been eye opening in terms of what communities can actually do to preserve and protect natural areas. Up here, we’ve got SYRCL…It stands for South Yuba River Citizen’s League. And they formed…decades ago when Nevada Irrigation District was proposing to dam part of the Yuba River. And so everyone in the community just got together, and they were like, ‘Hell no! That’s not going to happen!’ And they’ve continued that with the Wild and Scenic Film Festival, and they’ve just built on that every year now, so the community is so involved in protecting areas like that. I just wish just even a percentage of that could happen in Patterson…”

Raguso also expressed a desire to see a collaborative system where landowners in and around Del Puerto might be able to maintain some self-agency:

“…I’m not a resource manager, but I think that many of the tensions I have experienced since the 80s around public lands have had to do with the impression of local residents that outsiders have control over their land and livelihood. Ironically, I have seen the most success in Ecuador, where my friends from Quito purchased a small ranch, let it revert to rainforest and then began collaborating with neighbors to create a multiple use biosphere preserve that involved ecotourism, hiking trails, birdwatching and employment / enfranchisement for the local people, rather than elites from Quito.

I like the idea of DPC as a linkage between Mt. Diablo and Mt. Hamilton drainages and biota, and I still think there SHOULD be off-road-vehicle opportunities there (as at Bruneau Dunes and St. Anthony Dunes in Idaho), but also, access to the shale and serpentine, to vernal pools, to connect between the up-slope valley oak forests and the lower digger pine / blue oak woodlands. Some of the ranchers there are very knowledgeable about the local biota and it would be ideal for them to feel a part of that biosphere rather than at war with it.”

In the search for potential options to accommodate both landowners and roamers, could management structures like the Knapp Creek Wildlife Area in Wisconsin be an option? There, much of the open space is parceled into separate plots which landowners may buy, sell, and practice certain agricultural activities. However, these easements are also spaces where hunters and trappers are free to roam. Along with the right to roam, clearly-stated ground rules have been posted to minimize potential sources of conflict between hunters, ranchers, and homeowners. Might there be hope for a similar system of publicly accessible, privately owned spaces at Del Puerto Canyon geared towards accommodating the recreational activities that have been taking place there?

What about Del Puerto Canyon’s history of use by both amateur and professional naturalists? What sorts of specific strategies or needs might be good for any land management system to consider?

“…SHOULD a conservation group be found willing to adopt DPC, perhaps they could follow the parameters set up by the University of California’s Natural Reserve system, that controls a number of areas throughout the state, allowing for teaching and collection activites (including capturing specimens, not just taking images),” said Dr. Zuparko.

Dr. Paula Cushing, Senior Curator of Invertebrate Zoology at the Denver Museum of Nature and Science in Colorado who did some work on camel spiders in Del Puerto Canyon in 2010, had this to say:

“What comes to mind is advice to the resource managers that, however the land is preserved — either as an historic monument, an expansion of the Mount Diablo system, or via some other designation — preservation of habitats found in the area is key. Do whatever can be done to prevent development. And be sure that resource managers remember that in order to manage a resource, you have to know what that resource includes — in order to do this, they should definitely be open to partnerships with researchers, scientists, naturalists who can document the species found in the area. And this means being open to collecting (under permit systems). And trust professional scientists who are carrying out such research projects not to negatively impact the populations of interest.”

I know permits are important tools for protecting certain sensitive wildlife and habitats. However, those hoping to use them in future plans for Del Puerto Canyon may want to think carefully about where and how to apply them. To access various parks and reserves, including a few open to sports, recreation and motorized traffic, I’ve encountered paperwork requiring items like proof of $1 million in liability insurance, permanent storage addresses and inventory lists for all specimens that might be collected, and the creation of theses or summary reports. These might be easy for established researchers from larger institutions and staff from other parks to meet. However, what about field course instructors from other types of outfits looking for affordable venues for hands-on training? What about those, like the late Dr. E. O. Wilson, for whom building physical collections as hobbyists act as gateways into research or academia? Or what about those who struggle with formal school settings but use their activities as amateur naturalists to eventually find work in labs, museums, and pest or ag management companies? Even some university-run reserve systems have permit-based regulations that might deter budding naturalists from engaging in activities which have jump-started the careers of more well-known scientists. From recent examples like the controversy over the CDFW’s proposed changes to scientific collecting permits and other events that left commercial ladybug harvesters in legal limbo, even small alterations to such documents can have significant consequences for commercial, educational, and recreational interest groups. Land managers certainly have their own legitimate reasons for the permit systems they put in place and enforce. Smaller habitats almost completely surrounded by development may be more sensitive to some types of disturbance and need such measures to survive. However, this begs the question, “If not here, then where?” As mentioned before, Del Puerto is not only special because of its rich natural systems and cultural history, but also because of its niche role as a land of many uses. Permits may be useful, but those looking to implement them might want to consider how their scope and regulatory language could broaden or diminish who can be there and what sorts of connections they can make with this place.

What about the other sites in the Diablo Range, collectively described as “one of the most significant biological features in California” in a 2020 Bay Nature article? Some have made off-hand comments about damming every potential canyon in these hills to allow Central Valley agricultural interests in the east to stabilize and expand their profit margins. Due to financial support earmarked by former U.S. Secretary of the Interior David Bernhardt and some current state officials, a host of efforts to build new water storage facilities in California is under way. During a recent meeting, the California Water Commission approved all feasibility hearings for the creation and expansion of projects like Sites and Los Vaqueros Reservoirs. A number of these projects are designed to be filled by water pumped from the state’s already stressed rivers. Some farmers, ranchers, and small communities are struggling and need measured efforts to help them with drought-related hardships. With all of these projects going forward, however, will their collective supplies help to maintain rural California in the long-term? Or will they make these areas more attractive for rapid development that could push out some smaller farms and residents and worsen the state’s water issues? According to articles by Richard Brandi and Woody Labounty, much of the western half of San Francisco in the late 1800s to early 1900s was agricultural land. Boosted from government aid to rebuild after the 1906 earthquake and promises of reliable water in the future from the construction of Hetch Hetchy Reservoir, much of this farmland was quickly replaced by urban sprawl. According to a 2018 article in the San Francisco Chronicle, commercial farms fell from 74 in 1920 to 1 by the 1960s. Along with pushing out agriculture, this rapid change to densely-populated neighborhoods has been mentioned as one factor in the extinction of the Xerces Blue butterfly in the 1940s. Today, even after the damming of Yosemite’s twin and receiving water from several other reservoirs, SF residents are still being impacted by shortages. The vast and interconnected lands in the Diablo Range currently play host to activities like ranching, farming, and hunting while still supporting high levels of biodiversity. As these spaces are carved up into small fragments, what will happen to the long-standing histories of recreation and natural history education in this region?

Ultimately, Del Puerto Canyon’s legacy of use by various recreationalists, researchers, nature lovers, and landowners will have to be dealt with by all stakeholders in any discussions about its future. Will it still be a place where people can live off the land? If there is still open space, will naturalists both within and outside of academia be able to freely explore side-by-side as they can right now along some stretches of the canyon? Will a kid on a bike be able to roam and explore the edges of Del Puerto Creek in 2036 like Allan Bennison did in 1936? Will the roadside stop where students found and gathered those praying mantises in 2008 still be there to give others a chance to open doors to future discoveries? Only time will tell.

Unless stated otherwise, the views expressed by the author (edit added 10/6/2025) and those quoted above are their own and do not necessarily reflect the positions of any employers or institutions they are affiliated with. Statements made by individuals do not necessarily imply their endorsement for positions that are expressed in other sections of this piece. Collections of paleontological resources on public versus private lands are regulated in California. Position statements regarding any activities are provided for documentary purposes and are not intended for use as legal guidance for those activities. On 5/16/2022, a correction was made to a professional title upon the request of the interviewee. 9/28/2022: This statement is added to further clarify that the PIs and programs mentioned here take measures to reduce risks to endangered and threatened species while in the field.