| ||||
Immediately after the California Department of Forestry prepared and certified its Environmental Impact Report last fall, the Campaign and Forests Forever filed a lawsuit to invalidate the EIR. Despite the pending legal action, CDF proceeded with its plans to log some of the most environmentally sensitive and beautiful areas of the forest: in April, CDF invited timber companies to bid on the THPs for Brandon Gulch and Camp 3.
To prevent the logging, the Campaign requested a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction from Mendocino Superior Court. Judge Richard Henderson issued a denial, and the next day, June 11, logging began. Six days later, the Campaign petitioned the California First District Court of Appeals for an emergency writ to stay logging and reverse the denial of the preliminary injunction. The petition was granted two hours after its filing. But in less than a week, some 1,500 trees containing approximately one million board feet of lumber were cut.
Environmental Impact Report Ruled Invalid
On July 30, Judge Richard Henderson of the Mendocino Superior Court revoked CDF 's new management plan and halted logging in Jackson State Redwood Forest.
Ruling on suit brought by the Campaign and Forests Forever, Judge Henderson invalidated the EIR and directed the Board of Forestry to rescind its approval of the management plan. He found significant deficiencies in the treatment of both the regional setting of Jackson State and the analysis of cumulative impacts.
Correcting these deficiencies is a major task and will not be accomplished quickly. At a minimum, the deficiencies in the EIR must be corrected, the revised EIR submitted for public comment, the comments responded to, and the revised Final EIR approved by the Board of Forestry (rather than by CDF, as was the EIR invalidated by the court).
The implications of the decision are far broader and more profound than the requirements to correct the deficiencies in the EIR. Judge Henderson acknowledged the financial harm that his decision would bring to owners and workers in coastal timber operations -- and he placed blame squarely on CDF.
| ||||
Taken as a whole, Judge Henderson's decision amounts to a strong indictment of CDF's disregard for the public, the environment, and the law. The state administration and legislation cannot ignore this criticism, which comes not from an environmental organization, but from a judge who has demonstrated a strong concern for the well being of the timber industry.
CDF is charged with enforcing the environmental laws designed to protect the state's forest resources. Its failure to perform an even minimally adequate environmental review of its own timber operations is scandalous. It raises fundamental questions about CDF's ability and desire to enforce forestry environmental laws, as well as its fitness to manage the state forests.
Appeals Court Lectures CDF
In an August 20 hearing, the California Court of Appeals inserted itself forcefully into contentious and complex litigation on logging of Jackson State Redwood Forest.
The Court dispensed with lawyers ' arguments. Instead, for nearly half an hour, the three judges interrogated and lectured Charles Getz, chief counsel for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Prevention (CDF). They were openly hostile to CDF's contention that a lower court's invalidation of a new management plan did not prevent them from carrying out the disputed logging plans for Brandon Gulch and Camp 3. They told CDF to stop litigating and to get moving on developing a legally valid environmental study.
Mr. Getz attempted to defend CDF 's ability to carry out the two plans. The judges, openly and unanimously skeptical, asked pointed questions and offered counter arguments to every point raised by Mr. Getz.
At one point, in apparent frustration, a judge asked Mr. Getz, "Why does CDF continue to try to evade and reinterpret previous rulings and agreements? Why doesn't it just move forward to get a valid EIR and management plan?"
When Mr. Getz responded by complaining about the delays created by the litigation and the economic hardship the loss of logging revenue imposed on the state, Chief Justice Haerle interrupted and said, very pointedly and strongly, "In that case, the burden falls on the bureaucracy to do the job right."
The judges then turned to Paul Carroll, lawyer for the Campaign. The Chief Justice first noted that the Mendocino Superior Court had not issued a final judgment on whether logging in Brandon Gulch and Camp 3 could continue. He then counseled Mr.Carroll that for the Appeals Court to overturn the lower court 's failure to enjoin the two logging plans, he would need to bring an appeal to this court.
When Mr. Carroll replied that he would take this step, Justice Haerle announced, "The Court defers a decision in this case until after a final judgment is issued by the Mendocino Superior Court. The stay on logging remains in place."
Then, contrary to the expectations of forest supporters, in September Judge Henderson ruled that logging--not only the two THPs begun earlier, but all logging--can proceed under the old management plan, which was superceded by approval of the new plan in November 2002. Nowhere in the law or policy, however, is there provision for the old plan to come back to life. Campaign attorney Paul Carroll will contest this ruling.
Jackson Forest remains under constant threat: CDF has repeatedly demonstrated its unwillingness to obey its own environmental protection laws, and the values saved by three years' of legal action will be destroyed if the legislative mandate for Jackson State Forest is not changed. The Campaign is preparing to move to the legislature and will work together with a coalition of environmental organizations and with expert consultants and counsel to change the legislative mandate for Jackson State.
For more information, visit www.jacksonforest.com.