Skip to content (press enter)
Donate

Oceano Vehicle Free Beach History

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 (CCC) retains the authority to make changes to Park operations through periodic review of its Coastal Development Permit (CDP) that, in 1982, temporarily authorized vehicle use of the beach and dunes and authorized the Oceano Dunes State Vehicle Recreation Area (SVRA). In 2019, the CCC determined that vehicles and off-road vehicles (OHV) have 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. In response,  State Parks has developed a public works plan (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 motor vehicle use at the Park.  CCC has recommended changes such as eliminating 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, these recommendations 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 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.

These recommendations will require a significant shift in Park operations and 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. 

For further detailed information and all relevant documents, including information translated into Spanish, see the Commission’s Oceano Dunes webpage at www.coastal.ca.gov/oceano-dunes/.

Key Documents & Resources

Some important documents and resources related to this issue include:

Safe Beach and Dunes

  • The Safe Beach and Dunes website contains a wealth of videos done over the last few decades. They document most of the environmental, economic, and public health issues associated with vehicles on the beaches and dunes of Oceano. They are arranged by subject matter and each is about 30 minutes long.

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.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

How does environmental justice play a role in Oceano Vehicle Free Beach?

In 1982, when the California Coastal Commission(CCC) approved a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) for the Oceano Dunes State Vehicle Recreation Area (ODSVRA), the concept of Environmental Justice (EJ) was not well known and was not a consideration in the decision-making process. Today, it is a high-priority criterion for almost every government agency in the State of California, including the CCC, the State Parks (SP), and San Luis Obispo County (SLOC).

The campaign for an Oceano vehicle free beach is, at heart, one of environmental and economic injustice. The CCC has taken seriously the State legislative mandate of 2012 to prioritize EJ considerations in decision-making. This spirit was clearly expressed in the July 2019 statement by Naoki Schwartz, Coastal Commission Director of Environmental Justice, "Oceano is the poster child of environmental injustice on the California Coast."

With the issuing of the 1982 CDP, the community of Oceano and its beach became a “sacrifice zone” for vehicles and off-roading. There was essentially no consideration given to the environmental, economic, or social impacts of this decision on the community. The CCC did condition the SVRA permit with a stipulation that its use of Grand and Pier Avenues was temporary. They also required that State Parks, within three years of the Land Use Plan being completed, initiate studies for an alternative entrance to the SVRA, neither of which considered the issues of environmental justice for Oceano.

Consequently, Oceano has never been able to develop as a tourist beach destination like its more wealthy neighbors, Grover Beach, Pismo Beach, and Avila Beach. As a result, Oceano is one of the more economically disadvantaged communities within San Luis Obispo County. The combination of lower incomes, higher poverty, reduced educational attainment, and elevated indicators of health and housing stress points to structural socioeconomic challenges.

Based on multiple independent indicators aligned with CCC criteria, Oceano qualifies as an Environmental Justice community. The concentration of socioeconomic disadvantage, combined with demographic and health vulnerability factors, supports prioritization of Oceano for:

  • Equitable coastal access considerations
  • Protection from disproportionate environmental burdens
  • Targeted public investment and mitigation measures

Oceano Vehicle Free Beach (OVFB) vs State Vehicle Recreation Area (SVRA) — Can they coexist?

The simple answer is “yes, they could.” 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 CCC also stipulated that State Parks (SP) complete alternative entrance studies within three years so that vehicles would not be crossing Arroyo Grande Creek mouth nor using Oceano’s beach.

Thus, the implicit 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), it stated that “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 44 years later (Th3 page 7).

What do locals want?

The community of Oceano is divided about vehicles on the beach.  For decades, it has been recognized as a problem by many citizens, especially as it relates to public safety and economic repression. It is well known that most beach tourists do not want vehicles on the beach, and thus, they avoid Oceano.

Numerous community surveys and studies have documented concerns about vehicles on the beach.  For example, the last Oceano Community Specific Plan, completed in 2002, had these comments: "Oceano has one of two entrances to the Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area (SVRA) popular to off-road vehicle use of the dunes; the other entrance is north of Oceano in Grover Beach. Safety concerns have been raised over the presence of vehicles on the beach (and interaction with pedestrians). The future of vehicular use of the beach and potential for establishing a pedestrian-only portion of the beach should be addressed in the Specific Plan.”

In 2020, Pismo State Parks Division (State Parks) sent a beach use preference survey to every household and business in Oceano.  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.

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.

What are the comparative economic impacts of OVFB & ODSVRA on Oceano?

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 motor sports 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. 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 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 of bias were made in critical reviews by scientific experts in professional economic impact analysis (see below).

The largest flaw is the fact that every study assumes that if off-roading tourists no longer come to Oceano beach, 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

The historical context of motor sports economic impact studies was that the SVRA was being threatened by the California Environmental Quality Act and new environmental regulations regarding endangered species and habitat. Local citizens, environmental organizations, and the California Coastal Commission (CCC) were calling for a major reduction or 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 as they did to Pismo and Shell Beach (no vehicles on the beach) or Avila Beach (no vehicles on the 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 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 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 motor sports vehicle industry, and a great many people believe them to be true. Detailed critical analyses of these studies by professional experts have rendered them largely irrelevant from a factual basis.

The following are the most significant errors:

1. Exaggerated number of motor sports tourists

First of all, each of these studies relies on the number of tourists to local State Parks calculated by State Parks as well as study questionnaires. In addition to data from paying tourists (paid for camp site; paid for day use), there are estimated thousands of “free entry” tourists (beach walkers, surfers, families, bike riders, etc). These various numbers are then doubled by State Parks to account for multiple persons in cars or estimated “uncounted” free tourists. Additionally, and inexplicably, all of these tourists are then attributed to the SVRA, and it is then claimed that literally millions of tourists visit the SVRA. Simply not true.

2. Biased questionnaires and research methods

Respondents to questionnaires are typically biased with an over-representation of motor sports tourists. For example, the 2007 research questionnaires were distributed within the SVRA, and respondents were told that the results of the research would be used to determine future operations. They are also asked to estimate the amount of money that they spent during their stay.  Motor sports 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 and importance of their recreation. In both the 2007 and 2017 studies, respondents were asked this question: “If Oceano Dunes were 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 an off-roader would, of course, be “no.”

3. Exaggerated income from SVRA tourists

 It is reasonable to conclude that the amount of money spent by actual SVRA tourists is greatly exaggerated. In fact, 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 a hugely exaggerated estimate of EVERY visitor to every State Park or beach in South County.  

Finally, and somewhat shocking, the researchers also provided a stunning fact. They actually separated the actual motor sports tourists who ONLY visited the SVRA, and calculated that they contributed $50 million of the total $511 million.  So, while the opening line of the report states the SVRA generated $511 million, a 10% fraction of that ($50 million) is provided by visitors who only visit the Oceano SVRA. Of course, motor sports businesses, supporters, and politicians always use the $500 million number.  In fact, a recent candidate for County Supervisor bumped it up to $500 billion–about $23,000 spent by every tourist!

4. Opportunity costs

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.

Additional Reading

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