Since arriving in the Mattole Valley of Humboldt County in 1971, Richard Gienger has immersed himself in homesteading, forest activism, and watershed restoration. Richard's column covers a range of issues including fisheries and watershed restoration and forestry, plus describes opportunities for the public to make positive contributions in the administrative and legislative arenas as well as in their own backyards.
FIRE continues to be a compelling issue in California. One of
the major motivating factors continues to be the high profile June 2007 Angora Fire southwest of Lake Tahoe, which burned more than 250 structures and more than 3,000 acres in a very short time. This disaster coupled with all the attendant controversy, resulted in, among other things, the formation of the California-Nevada Tahoe Basin Fire Commission which recently released their "Review Draft of the Commission's Report to the Governors." The draft Report has 48 findings and 90 recommendations set out in six categories: Environmental Protection, Issues of Governance, Community and Homeowner Safety, Forest and Fuels Management, Fire Supression, and Funding. Many of these findings and recommendations have broad application--to everyone's neighborhood. Check out the Cal Fire (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection--CDF) website for links to the Fire Commission and the Draft Report.
| |||
Fish Need Healthy Water
Right along with the elemental struggles with fire are the elemental struggles over water--water quantity and water quality; lot's of take and little give. The Klamath woes continue. A long negotiation process ends in a `settlement', but a settlement that seems to guarantee irrigation flows in Oregon, but not for fish. On top of it, the settlement, ostensibly based on dam removal, does not provide for dam removal. In the Sacramento/San Joaquin Rivers system, not only has the key commercial fall runs of Chinook Salmon failed, but a whole new Central Valley Delta & `Peripheral Canal' crisis confronts California. The 26th Annual Salmonid Restoration Conference in Lodi this March was awesome--and awesomely depressing, with presenter after presenter showing the horrific cumulative impacts wrought by humans especially in the San Joaquin River system and Delta.
A lack of water and an abundance of toxins, decaying levees, and fish killing pumping stations make up part of a litany of despair. In the midst of that, also this March, an independent `blue ribbon' panel submitted a report and recommendations on water policy and the Delta to the State Water Resources Control Board. Former California legislator and panel chair relayed a conclusion: ". . . public trust and a related constitutional doctrine should become the very foundation of decision-making about California water." He said that, ". . . the status quo must change . . . [and obviously] proposed changes will face stiff opposition."
These quotes come from an article entitled, "Water as public trust: An historic debate," by Contra Costa Times reporter, Mike Taugher. He gives a pretty good history of the concept of "public trust," from the Roman Empire, to the California Supreme Court decision in the 1880s that stopped hydraulic mining, to the 1983 Mono Lake decision, to the 1986 State Appeals Court decision that underlined the authority of the State Water Resources Control Board "to modify permits to operate the state water department's State Water Project and the federal Central Valley Project to protect fish and wildlife." The Delta is in much worse shape today. Taugher goes on to say: "The state board is considering whether to wield its authority over public trust as part of a larger package of measures meant to address the Delta's problems. A decision could be made in late spring." That's with my emphasis. We better pay attention and act for the public trust.
Coho Salmon
| |||
The Coho Recovery Team is showing a bit of life, with the Department of Fish & Game appointing Dr. Stephen Swales to head up the effort. They even had a meeting in December 2007. The `yet another' California budget crisis is slamming protection and recovery efforts once again. There is a bill, SB 562 with $5 million for salmon restoration, authored by Senator Pat Wiggins with cosponsorship by Assembly Member Patty Berg, wending its way through the California Legislature. It's supposed to enable around $20 million in matching federal funds. Hopefully it will be passed and signed into law by the Governor. Weigh in.
Unfortunately the Board of Forestry (BoF) and the Department of Fish & Game (DFG) have passed rules that the Environmental Protection and Information Center (EPIC), the Sierra Club, and California Trout, Inc. (CalTrout) feel are inadequate for the protection and recovery of Coho Salmon on California's private and state forestlands. Those three groups have submitted petitions to invalidate rules passed in late 2007 by the BoF and DFG. Quite a few of the rules look like they might be helpful, but there's about a 100% agency, industry, and public consensus that those rules would never be applied because they require a finding by DFG that a `take' will, or is likely to occur, on a logging plan--something that DFG has never done and is unlikely to ever do. There are also issues regarding allegedly improper delegation of authority to Cal Fire by DFG as regards the listed Coho.
A positive note on all this is found in all the very positive fishery and watershed work being done throughout the North Coast. I've included a few photos of these positive endeavors. However, even these sometimes have their controversies.
Archaeological and Cultural Heritage
Hoped for reforms in the Archaeological and Cultural Heritage Protection Program of Cal Fire, and a workshop to help make corrections, remain delayed. The situation is so bad that Cal Fire is unable to fund meetings of the Native American Advisory Council (NAAC) to Cal Fire, and 47 forestry personnel are unable to take the required courses for the rudimentary skills they need for archaeological protection. The big problems of not having enough qualified professionals to oversee the program, and often inadequate consultation with California Indians, remain `controversial' and in need of corrective measures.
Program Timberland Environmental Impact Report
The pilot project for a Program Timberland Environmental Impact Report (PTEIR) for the Mattole River Watershed continues. A scoping session was held by Cal Fire in February. The project for `light touch' forestry in the Mattole Valley follows the EIR process under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Scoping comments were sought by the sponsoring Mattole Restoration Council through March 21st. Some controversy is involved. Clearcutting and variable retention silviculture (often having very large cut areas) are not allowed under initial project drafts. The emphasis is on all-aged management and selection harvest. Some issues that have arisen include the use of herbicides, adequacy of old growth protection and recruitment, too large forest openings (draft would allow group selection up to 2 1/2 acres), adequate review, and adequate protection and restoration measures. It's a pretty exciting process. Again, pay attention--stay tuned to the MRC website.
Usal Redwood Forest
The Redwood Forest Foundation, Inc. (RFFI), new owners of the 50,000 plus acres of the Usal Redwood Forest thanks to a $65 million loan from the Bank of America, continues to work on pressing tasks such as management needs, a conservation easement, and incorporation of the community in community-based forestry. There is a public information meeting planned for April 22nd at the Mateel Community Center and another in Fort Bragg around the same time or in early May.
Odds & Ends
Elsewhere in this edition of Tree's Forest & River News, there is a quite detailed article by the Institute of Sustainable Forestry's (ISF's) John Rogers about one very significant aspect in the incredible vicissitudes of the Pacific Lumber/Maxxam bankruptcy and reorganization process. This aspect is the availability of easement funding , which is crucial for the long-term conservation and stability of working forests. There are certain political forces trying to keep this type of funding from going to non-profits and others--funding that would protect vital resource producing forestlands that are liable to be destroyed by development. The worst case scenario was instigated by PL/Maxxam in their reorganization proposal to convert some of the most productive timberland in the world, 22,000 acres east of Fortuna, into 160 acre `kingdoms' that they claimed would yield hundreds of millions of dollars to get them out of bankruptcy and keep Maxxam/Hurwitz in control.
Last column I sketched out some of the fall-out from that `worst case' scenario, the amazing resistance by the Humboldt County Supervisors in issuing an emergency halt to building permits on Timber Production Zone (TPZ) lands, and the subsequent panic by smaller Humboldt County forestland owners. By next column, I might be able to sift through the panic issue as it moves through the General Plan process, the building code issues, and threats to the so-called rural way of life.
For now, I'd just like to summarize where this PL/Maxxam fate seems to be heading. There are four formal, or officially court recognized, reorganization proposals: two by PL/Maxxam (varieties of their origninal proposal--one from a PL view, one from a Scopac view--both depending on taking land out of timber and into development), one by creditor Marathon in partnership with the Mendocino Redwood Company (this seems a strong offer with local support, including the unsecured creditors: reduced production to allow forest recovery and maintaining the mill, pension fund, and local workers), and the noteholders plan for an auction to the highest bidder (out-Hurwitz Hurwitz). In a development in late March, ex-Governor Pete Wilson was hired to out the noteholders `plan' and disparage the Marathon/Mendocino plan--and to claim that the noteholder's highest-bidder approach was the only legally supportable plan.
The so-called conservation alternative was hoped to be sponsored by a group of creditors, but was not, and so is dependent on being the winning bid if it goes to auction, or else working partnerships out with Marathon/MendoRC if they prevail. Word has it that PL/Maxxam's plans won't be selected. The conservation alternative has the Nature Conservancy, Save-the-Redwoods League, RFFI, Bank of America, the Community Forest Team, and others trying to strike a balance with working forests, conservation easements preventing development, maintenance of the mill, areas of community forests, and protection of essential old growth and wildlife habitat. Voting on the plans by creditors had to be done by March 25th. So called `confirmation' hearings by the bankruptcy judge in Corpus Christi started on April 8th. What plan and/or what plan process will prevail will start to perhaps then become clear.
Get in touch with EPIC and Humboldt Watershed Council for the latest information on many of the above topics and other issues. Please get involved in ways that are effective and meaningful for you, and that contribute to real solutions. --rg
More Information About
Restoration Leadership Project
More Articles...
TOC for Forest & River News, Spring 2008