Skip to content (press enter)
Donate

Oceano Vehicle Free Beach History Page

California State Parks operates a nearly 5,000-acre State Park in and around the City of Grover Beach and Oceano in south San Luis Obispo County, typically referred to as Oceano Dunes. It is the only State Park in California where vehicles (including off-highway vehicles, or OHVs) are allowed on the beach and dunes. The California Coastal Commission retains the ability to make changes to Park operations through periodic review of its Coastal Development Permit (CDP) that temporarily authorized uses and intensities of use at the Park in the 1980s, and found most recently in 2019 that driving at the Park has degraded dune habitats, harmed native species, caused air quality and public health issues, and made it difficult for the public to walk, swim and enjoy other non-vehicular activities at the beach and dunes.

At that time, the Commission required State Parks to address all of these issues and more, including evaluating phasing out OHV use altogether, and State Parks has now developed a draft plan in response, known as its public works plan, or PWP. Commission staff has evaluated State Parks’ draft PWP and believes it is not consistent with the Coastal Act and the City of Grover Beach and San Luis Obispo County Local Coastal Programs (LCPs), which are the standard of review for the PWP. In particular, the PWP does not address the range of coastal resource impacts associated with the uses and intensities of use at the Park.

Coastal Commission staff is recommending that the Commission amend the underlying CDP to address the coastal resource impacts caused by the operation of Oceano Dunes and bring such operations into compliance with the Coastal Act and applicable LCPs. This includes recommendations to eliminate OHV use over a 5-year transition period, provide low-cost vehicular access/camping on the beach between West Grand Avenue and Pier Avenue (with no vehicles south of that point), close the Pier Avenue entrance in Oceano, and make a series of changes to protect natural resources in the Park (including the dunes, Arroyo Grande Creek, Oso Flaco Lake, sensitive species protections, etc.).

Importantly, this recommendation would not close the Park, and it would continue to remain open and available both for general public use (including activities associated with beach day use, ocean activities, equestrian use, biking, hiking, fishing, bird watching, etc.), and for vehicular/camping use in its northern reach. Commission staff believes that, given the information that is available to the Commission today, these conditions are required for the uses allowed at the Park to be consistent with the Coastal Act and LCPs, as well as to bring finality to at least 40 years of debate and discussion on these issues.

Although staff recognizes that this recommendation will require a significant shift in Park operations, it will also allow for a different Park experience that is itself attractive for coastal visitors and that can serve as a regional economic engine, particularly for families looking for unique lower cost recreational and outdoor opportunities. Staff’s recommended conditions are found on pages 22 through 26 of this report, and the motion to implement staff’s recommendation is found on page 22. For further information, including information translated into Spanish, see the Commission’s Oceano Dunes webpage at www.coastal.ca.gov/oceano-dunes/ 

Some important documents related to this issue include:

July 2019 - Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area Coastal Development Permit 4-82-300 Review (CCC Staff recommendation)

  • This is a very significant document in which the California Coastal Commission staff detail the long history of State Parks being in violation of its Conditional Development Permit. This document clearly states that an off highway recreational area is incompatible with the dunes’ environmentally sensitive habitat and needs to be phased out within 5 years.

December 2020 - State Park’s Public Works Plan

  • This is the State Park’s 431 page response to the CCC's July 2019 letter which detailed historic and current State Parks’ violations of its Coastal Development Permit. It is a comprehensive blueprint for the future expansion of off hi-way vehicle recreation in the dunes and beach, plus other improvements to local coastal State Parks (e.g., Oceano Campground, Pismo Beach Campground, Butterfly Grove).

December 2020 Environmental Impact Review of State Parks Public Work Plan

March 2021 CCC staff response to the State Parks' Public Works Plan.

  • This document details the CCC’s dissatisfaction with the Public Works Plan and orders State Parks to begin a 5 year shutdown of all vehicles South of Pier Avenue; shutdown of the SVRA; and the closing of Pier Avenue as an access ramp to the beach; plus other interim conditions focused on protecting flora and fauna during the 5 year period.

March 2021 Addendum to the staff response to the State Parks' Public Works Plan.

  • This addendum is valuable as it presents additional CCC information and perspectives on feedback from State Parks and off roaders to the original Th3 document.

November 2024 Surfrider Amicus Brief.

  • This is a very good overview of the off-roaders lawsuit against the CCC in the form of a response from a team of major environmental organizations.  It was written in support of the CCC.

Oceano Vehicle Free Beach vs State Vehicle Recreation Area - What's the difference?

In 2020 the Pismo State Parks Division (State Parks) sent a beach use preference survey to every household and business in Oceano. It was included in the water utility bill from the Oceano Community Services District. 537 surveys were returned and verified by zip code as local. 55% of respondents expressed a desire for a vehicle-free beach for Oceano (OVFB). 28% expressed a desire to expand vehicle use on the beach and dunes.

For decades, the argument has been made that the Oceano beach vehicle highway was necessary for there to be access to the State Vehicle Recreation Area (SVRA). The simple fact is that both of these realities can co-exist, if there is the public and political will to do so.

In 1982, the California Coastal Commission (CCC) created the Oceano Dunes State Vehicle Recreational Area (SVRA). As part of the Coastal Development Permit (CDP) it authorized a temporary permit for beach access to the SVRA via Grand Avenue in Grover Beach and Pier Avenue in Oceano, thus creating a vehicle access “highway” on 6 miles of public beach.

The promise was that once a Southern entrance to the SVRA was developed, vehicles would no longer use Oceano beach for that purpose. In its March 18, 2021 CCC Staff Report (Th3), stated that “The base CDP only temporarily authorized such uses so that State Parks would have time to explore modifications to Park operations…It was anticipated that conclusions…would be finalized within a couple of years (Th3 page 3).” The report adds, “…The CCC has never analyzed or authorized permanent use of these entrances, as is required in the original CDP.   Thus, under the Coastal Act, they remain only temporarily authorized some 40 years later (Th3 page 7).

As a consequence, for more than four decades, the community of Oceano has suffered significant economic repression and environmental injustice in the loss of public recreation opportunities along its beachfront and threats to endangered species. It has also lost its most important economic asset as a coastal community, access to a safe beach.

There are two clear options for solving this problem and potential for creative thinking regarding each: First, as promised, a new entrance to the SVRA is developed, and Oceano beach is free of motor vehicles. This is the “co-existence” option. Second, the SVRA is phased out of existence, with its beach and dunes returned to their natural existence.

Surfrider is asking the relevant government agencies to come together and develop a solution that fulfills its promise of 43 years ago for an Oceano vehicle-free beach

Comparative Economic Impacts of OVFB & ODSVRA

In comparing the economic benefits to Oceano of a vehicle free beach (OVFB) with those of a vehicle dominated beach, it is often heard that off highway motor vehicle tourists spend millions of dollars and if they are not allowed on the beach and dunes then our South County economy will be drastically harmed. In fact, the local Oceano economy would be revitalized by a vehicle free beach and so would adjoining communities. Let’s look at the objective facts.

THE SVRA AND OVFB CAN CO-EXIST

First, and most important, is the historical assumption that vehicles have to be on the beach in Oceano because it is the only way to get to the State Vehicle Recreational Area (SVRA). In fact, 44 years ago, when the SVRA was first approved by the Coastal Commission, the Pier and Grand Avenues entrances were designated as “temporary” as they continue to be today. Also, Oceano was implicitly promised that, within three years, there would be a new, Southern entrance to the SVRA and vehicles would no longer need to use Oceano beach for access. The assumption was that the SVRA and a Oceano Vehicle Free Beach could co-exist. All of this remains true today. The problem is a Southern entrance was never constructed.

THE MYTH THAT OFF-ROADING CAMPERS AND DAY USERS ARE NECESSARY FOR A HEALTHY BEACH TOURIST ECONOMY.

This myth is created by those who have a vested interest in vehicles on the beach and supported by three economic impact studies which are biased and distorted with greatly exaggerated numbers. These economic impact reports have been primarily paid for by State Parks and are designed to produce the desired results by manipulation of questionnaires and who answers them; by manipulation of the number of SVRA users; and by manipulation of how much SVRA visitors spend. These conclusions have been made in critical reviews by scientific experts in professional economic impact analysis.

The 2007 Economic Impact Of Oceano Dunes SVRA and the 2017 Economic Impact Analysis Report for the Oceano Dunes District were paid for by State Parks. The historical context of these studies was/is one of the size and operations of the SVRA being threatened by the California Environmental Quality Act and new environmental regulations regarding endangered species and habitat. Local citizens, major environmental organizations, and the California Coastal Commission (CCC) were calling for a complete elimination of the SVRA. Additionally, the community of Oceano was waking up to the fact that vehicles on their beach were the major cause of a historically depressed economy. Traditional beach tourists did not come to their community like they did to Pismo and Shell Beach (no vehicles on beach) or Avila Beach (no vehicles on beach).

The fact that participants and promoters of off-roading on the beach and dunes felt threatened is understandable. One method of fighting back was to argue that the SVRA was essential to the South County economy and, if it was closed, it would wreak economic havoc on the area. Since Oceano was the ONLY community in the County with vehicles on its beach it suffered the greatest consequences. Over the past ten years the concepts of environmental and economic injustice have been applied to Oceano’s situation. In fact, the CCC staff referred to Oceano as “the poster child for environmental justice on the California Coast.”

The 2007 study concluded the SVRA generated a total of $70 million from spending by users. The 2017 study raised that to $158 million. The 2019 study by Visit SLOCAL estimated $500 million.

In fact, all of these totals are hugely exaggerated, essentially invalid, and simply serve a propaganda function for the public and private SVRA lobby. Unfortunately these fake numbers have been widely promoted by Chambers of Commerce, elected officials, the off-road vehicle industry, and a great many people believe them to be true. Detailed critical analyses of these studies by professional experts have rendered them to be largely irrelevant from a factual basis. Excerpts and links to these studies are provided below.

The largest flaw in this scenario is the fact that every study assumes that if off-roading tourists no longer come to South County that the hotel rooms, campgrounds, and restaurants they sometimes use would remain empty. The fact is that they would be filled by a “new” type of beach tourist who wants a vehicle free beach and dunes. Obviously, this change would be most relevant to Oceano.

To look at this a different way, what would happen to Pismo Beach today if they reopened their beach to motor vehicles like it used to be until they were banned in 1974? With vehicles off the beach, Pismo shifted toward a “classic beach town” model that encouraged foot traffic, clamming, swimming, surfing, and family recreation, all of which played a major role in its economic boom. Pismo stopped being what Oceano continues to be.

MAJOR FLAWS IN ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDIES

  1. Respondents to questionnaires are typically biased towards off-roading tourists. For example, the 2007 research questionnaires were distributed within the SVRA and respondents were told that results of the research would be used to determine future operations. 933 questionnaires were distributed and 409 returned. Each questionnaire was assumed to represent 9 persons for a total of 3,640 persons. Then each of these persons, including children and infants, was determined to have spent $75 during their stay. In the 2017 study 3,850 persons received a questionnaire and 909 returned it. Off-roading tourists are well aware of the threats to shrink or close the SVRA and thus are likely to exaggerate the amount of money they spend in order to boost the economic impact importance of their recreation. In both the 2007 and 2017 studies respondents were asked this question: “If Oceano Dunes was not in existence (no OHV riding, no camping, no trails, etc.) when you were considering a visit to the area, would you still have visited San Luis Obispo County?” The “correct” answer for a off-roader would, of course, be “no.”

  2. A question that has never been asked in any surveys is “If there were no longer vehicles on the beach or dunes in Oceano, would that increase or decrease your likelihood of visiting?” Since the great majority of individuals and families prefer going to beaches without vehicles, motorcycles, quads, and dune buggies zipping around we would expect a very large proportion to respond that it would increase their likelihood of visiting—as happened to Pismo Beach when they banned vehicles. This is a clear example of what economists call opportunity costs. How much money are we losing by doing this instead of that. How much money is a farmer losing, if any, by growing broccoli instead of cabbage? How much tourism money is a community losing by having motor vehicles on its beach compared to having none? Ask Pismo Beach.

  3. Another major error is that the money generated by ALL tourists to the State Parks—including day users, butterfly grove visitors, someone who drives onto the beach to watch a sunset —is treated as if it came from visitors to the SVRA . For example, a family of four who stayed in a Shell Beach hotel for three nights, ate three meals a day, and drove their car onto the beach at Grand Avenue—all of their expenditures would be counted as coming from the SVRA.

  4. The 2021 Visit SOCAL Oceano Dunes Stewardship Study opens the report’s Executive Summary with the line “ The Oceano Dunes SVRA is the second most visited destination in San Luis Obispo County with 3.4 million annual visitors in 2019.” That would be an average of 9,315 persons per day—all in the SVRA. This is simply not true and challenges the integrity of the entire economic aspect of the report. It is another example of manipulating data to create an exaggerated impression of the SVRA’s “positive impact.” The fact that this 3.4 million number is an estimate of EVERY visitor to every State Park in the South County, including campers, butterfly preserve visitors, beach walkers, surfers, hoteliers, etc and also includes other tourists who simply came into the “geographic area” of the study, an area which is never defined. Finally, while the economic impact analysis concluded that tourists account for $511 million dollars, a 10% fraction of that ($50 million) is provided by visitors who only visit the Oceano Dunes (not defined but presumably the SVRA). It does get confusing when the opening statement in the report says the SVRA was visited by 3.4 million people who generated $511 million in purchases, rentals, housing, food, etc. when, according to their own fact, it was actually only $50 million.

For those of you who want to read more deeply on the economic impacts, see below for the original research, critiques, and summaries: