Home
News Items
Action Ideas
Current THPs
Maps
Archives
Photo Album
Education
Great Links
Donations
Contact Us
Letters

From the Stockton Record
Thursday, January 11, 2001

EPFW asks county to set timber-harvest regulations

By Francis P. Garland - Lode Bureau Chief

ARNOLD -- Six California counties have their own set of logging regulations that supercede those established by the state Board of Forestry, and a local citizens group is pushing to make Calaveras County No. 7.  The group is putting together a timber task force to research the long-term effects of various timber-harvesting methods, and to draft logging rules tailor-made for the county. Those rules would need approval by the county Board of Supervisors and state Board of Forestry before supplanting state laws governing timber harvesting on private property.

Task-force supporters originally hoped the supervisors would appoint the panel. In September, the supervisors supported it, but in October they rejected it and told supporters they could form their own task force.  The rejection didn't deter the group, however, and co-chairwoman Addie Jacobson said she and others are laying the groundwork for an effort that could take several months to complete.  Jacobson said she hopes to attract a dozen or so people to synthesize the mountains of information on timber-harvesting methods, their impacts on the environment and state and county logging regulations. But more people are needed to track down that research, she said.

One of the group's tasks will be to research counties that have had
specific logging regulations approved by the forestry board. Lake, Marin, Monterey, San Mateo and Santa Clara have done so, with Lake's new rules taking effect this month. At least two others -- Sonoma and Mendocino -- have submitted proposed regulations to the state board. But those packages were not adopted, said Bill Schultz, who heads up the state Department of Forestry and Fire Protection's forest practices program within the Tuolumne/Calaveras ranger unit.

Developing local logging rules and getting them approved by the state board won't be easy. Counties must prove to the state there is a special need for local regulations. There is no guarantee the task force will recommend banning clear-cutting despite the fact that the practice came under heavy fire in the Arnold and West Point areas last year, Jacobson said.

A major Sierra Pacific Industries clear-cut logging operation in the White Pines area east of Arnold last spring sparked a locally based uprising that resulted in numerous protests -- one of which landed in criminal court.

The task force can't go into this exercise with a predetermined outcome, Jacobson said. "We want to do justice to this," she said. Although Calaveras County has a small population base, there are plenty of qualified and knowledgeable people to develop local rules, said Terri Walsh, a botanist serving as a task force co-chairwoman. The group's leaders haven't yet decided if it will ask Sierra Pacific Industries for input, but Jacobson said she'd favor that route. "For the validity and credibility of the document we produce, we need to give them a chance to say their piece."

Ed Struffenegger, a Sierra Pacific spokesman, said Wednesday the timber giant, if approached by the task force, would want to be involved. "The amount of involvement depends on where we see this group going in terms of developing recommendations to the Board of Supervisors and how much weight they would carry," he said. Jacobson said the task force has no set timetable to complete its work, but added she's shooting for sometime this spring. If the group develops logging rules, there is no guarantee the county board will support them.  Supervisor Paul Stein, for one, said he would not support them because the state forestry board's regulations are sufficient.  "The Sierra Nevada is an expansive range of property," he said. "To micromanage a subhabitat of that resource is wrong. If you are going to change the law, it should be done at the (state) level."

Board Chairwoman Lucy Thein said the board needs to be open-minded. "If they come up with a plan and some direction," she said, "we need to listen to them. That's what we asked them to do -- go forth and find some answers."

* To reach Lode Bureau Chief Francis P. Garland, phone 736-9554 or e-mail

A Forest Is More Than Trees

By Verna Johnston, Camp Connell

Naturalist and author of two University of California Press books:

California Forests and Woodlands (1994) 

Sierra Nevada, The Naturalist’s Companion, Revised Edition (1998).

 

In his recent article, “Clear-cutting can be a healthy forest practice if controlled properly,” County Supervisor Paul Stein argues for a continuation of this practice and cites a University of California site, The Blodgett Forest Research Station near Georgetown, to support his view.

 I commend Supervisor Stein for his willingness to look at the practice of clear-cutting through the lens of scientific research. But his article presents generalizations and conclusions with no specific date to back them up.  He does not pinpoint a single study nor provide any hard evidence that shows clear-cutting to be healthy for a forest.

 His claim that “The UC study...provides irrefutable evidence that clear-cutting can be a healthy forest practice when completed under properly controlled conditions” does not hold up.

The web site for Blodgett <www.cnr.berkeley.edu/ forestry/blodgett.html> lists more than a hundred studies.  Which study is he referring to?  As for “irrefutable evidence,” we know that any scientific investigation of a complex topic such as forest practices is ongoing, much as research in medicine is ongoing.  Today’s “truth” may turn out to be tomorrow’s misconception.

 One of the reasons for a proposed two-year- state-wide moratorium on clear-cutting, which Supervisor Stein opposed, was to give the community an opportunity to collect and examine all current research on this issue.  A single study, even one conducted under the aegis of the University of California, is unlikely to provide us with “truth” or ”irrefutable evidence” in this matter.

 Supervisor Stein is talking timber, not forest, when he praises clear-cutting as a means of “enhancing the production capacity of the ground."  "Production capacity,” a phrase borrowed from industry, suggests that the success of forest management can  be measured solely by the two-by-fours a forest produces. He further asserts that the ”yield from future regeneration of the forest is more than double” after clear-cutting. A dubious premise. If “yield” means only board feet of lumber harvested from an acre of forest, and that’s the only thing we value in a forest, then the clear-cutting bias can be seen for what it really is -the bottom line-profit from wood.

 But a forest is much more than trees.  The ecosystem we call a forest encompasses all the diversity of life with it-in addition to the trees, the shrubs and fallen logs that shelter and feed wildlife, the birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, insects, the wildflowers, the fungi, the incredible array of microorganisms in the earth, the very soil itself.  And all of these inter-relate in ways we have only begun to discover to keep a forest healthy.

 Supervisor Stein’s claim of “direct evidence that water quality can be maintained a a high level and wildlife diversity is actually enhanced” when clear-cutting is practiced needs challenging. What is this direct evidence?  Clear-cut slopes usually lead to surface water runoff, erosion and mud slides once the tree and shrub roots and fallen leaves that blanketed the ground are gone. Diversity of wildlife usually is greatest amid a mosaic of habitats, not in the plantation that follows most clear cuts.

 Supervisor Stein praises clear-cutting as a way to improve on nature, to go beyond what natural selection has achieved over thousands of years. This will take some doing! Instead of wiping out the forest and its wildlife in one dire clear cut, why not selectively harvest some trees at intervals, keeping the forest a continuously going concern both ecologically, anesthetically, and economically? 

Why such a hurry to devastate our green world?

 

Verna Johnston, Camp Connell

Naturalist and author of two University of California Press books:

California Forests and Woodlands (1994) and Sierra Nevada, The

Naturalist’s Companion, Revised Edition (1998).

 

Sacramento Bee

October 3rd, 2000

Changing face of Sierra brings new breed of clear-cut foes

By Stuart Leavenworth
Bee Staff Writer


California's logging battles often produce some repetitious moments: activists chaining themselves to trees. Timber executives railing about "extremists." But in the state's latest fight over forests, the tree huggers aren't so easy to recognize.
Across the Sierra Nevada, old timber towns are being transformed by small businesses, retirees and urban refugees. Now, many of them are organizing against the state's largest private landowner -- Sierra Pacific Industries which plans to clear-cut 1 million acres of its forests over the next century, or 1 out of every 40 acres of forest in California.  

From Shasta to Calaveras counties, unlikely activists are gathering
petitions, protesting, networking -- worried that SPI clear-cuts will hurt not only bird nests, but also their nest eggs.
"We are not just a bunch of environmental junkies," said Len Heinz, a 67-year-old real estate agent in El Dorado County, where SPI plans to cut near scenic Jenkinson Lake. "We are out here working for the community, and we want to have a voice." Never before active on logging issues, residents like Heinz reflect a demographic shift in the Sierra that could have profound implications for SPI, which owns 1.5 million acres of land from Yosemite to Mount Shasta.

In the past, timber interests have tried to dismiss protesters as radicals who are out of touch with average Californians. Often they were right. But as they get older and more restless, average Californians are increasingly moving to the mountains, establishing businesses and settling into subdivisions. Many of them now worry that "their" mountains will be scalped.

In Nevada County, where SPI plans clear-cuts near two forks of the Yuba River, businesses and county supervisors have urged state lawmakers to establish logging rules "that more accurately reflect the changing values of communities."

In the Calaveras County town of Arnold, residents have held rallies, gathered petitions and stitched a quilt to depict the 49 tracts SPI plans to log in the area, including one planned near a popular state park. Some of the oppositions include Realtors, shop owners and owners of a local country club. SPI officials say their opposition consists of "a relatively small number of people making a lot of noise," but others disagree. "This issue has galvanized people like nothing I've ever seen," said Calaveras County Supervisor Merita Callaway, a retired PG&E manager.

The changing SierraSierra Pacific Industries, the state's largest private landowner, is increasingly using clear-cuts -- leveling all trees on a plot -- to harvest timber on its property. Those logging plans are clashing with the changing communities of the central Sierra Nevada, which are becoming increasingly dependant on tourism and affluent retirees, and less reliant on logging and wood products.

Acres of Sierra Pacific Industries timber approved for clear-cutting statewide:
1995: 994
1996: 3,817
1997: 2,390
1998: 4,785
1999: 8,585

Timber harvests In billions of board feet:
1993:
Nevada County:
Private land: 33.82
Public land: 3.97
Placer County:
Private land: 52.29
Public land: 5.71
El Dorado County:
Private land: 121.85
Public land: 120.24
Amador County:
Private land: 25.38
Public land: .76
Claveras County:
Private land: 61.35
Public land: 19.45
Tuolumne County:
Private land: 50.79
Public land: 61.53
1995:
Nevada County:
Private land: 48.86
Public land: 2.82
Placer County:
Private land: 48.02
Public land: 6.66
El Dorado County:
Private land: 113.19
Public land: 11.39
Amador County:
Private land: 22.13
Public land: .27
Claveras County:
Private land: 51.24
Public land: 3.02
Tuolumne County:
Private land: 48.32
Public land: 39.27
1997:
Nevada County:
Private land: 66.50
Public land: 9.32
Placer County:
Private land: 35.75
Public land: 15.46
El Dorado County:
Private land: 71.51
Public land: 20.38
Amador County:
Private land: 15.99
Public land: 4.10
Claveras County:
Private land: 59.21
Public land: 1.88
Tuolumne County:
Private land: 66.59
Public land: 23.46

With elevation and population of about 4,000, Arnold is an old sawmill town that typifies the transitions of the Sierras. Weathered bait shops stand side by side with tony galleries and New Age shops, which try to lure customers with promises of "whole life therapies." Many residents say they can live with selective logging practiced by the previous owner of Arnold's surrounding timber lands, Georgia Pacific. But about five years ago, SPI started buying Georgia Pacific's lands and introduced a new style of forestry.
This year, SPI filed plans to log tracts near Calaveras Big Trees State Park, the town's main tourist attraction, and White Rock Lake, the town's drinking water reservoir.  Under SPI's preferred logging method, crews generally clear tracts of 10 to 20 acres, haul out the logs, burn the stumps, spray herbicides, then replant seedlings.  "It looks like a bomb hit it," said Bunny Firebaugh, a 69-year-old resident of Arnold, referring to some of SPI's ongoing clear-cuts in the area. "You can't just cut down everything, put in a pine plantation and call it a forest."

Sierra Pacific officials acknowledge their clear-cuts aren't pretty. But they say the cuts are necessary to clear out scraggly, previously logged forests, so SPI can replant and grow millions of faster-growing pines.  Tim Feller, SPI's district manager in Grass Valley, says Californians continue to have a big appetite for wood. He also says the company has been careful to comply with California's relatively strict logging rules, which limit clear-cuts to 20 acres - 40 acres with exceptions.  "A lot of this is coming from the professional forest activist groups," said Feller. "They shut down logging on the national forests, and now they are
coming after us."

Based in Anderson, just south of Redding, SPI was once a little-known timber company. But over the past decade, the family-run firm has gone on a buying spree, led by 71-year-old Archie Aldis "Red" Emmerson. Now it is one of the nation's largest private landowners, owning 1 of 3 acres of timber industry land in California.

In a 100-year plan unveiled this year, Emmerson announced that SPI plans to clear-cut 70 percent of its 1.5 million acres.
Emmerson routinely declines interviews, but friends and state officials describe him as an unassuming billionaire with considerable political clout.

In July, Emmerson held a party for Gov. Gray Davis that raised $129,000 for the governor's re-election campaign. The company also has a hand in setting timber policy through a seat on the state Board of Forestry.  Employees credit Emmerson for securing a sustainable timber base at a time when logging is decreasing on public lands.  "Red is an amazing guy," said Ed Bond, SPI's manager of human resources. "He recognized early on that the Forest Service was not interested in expanding its timber sales ... So he begged and borrowed to buy the land we now own."

For SPI and many state officials, "own" is the operative word. Unlike previous battles over public timber sales, SPI is now clear-cutting on its own land, not national forests. It's a point that resonates with SPI supporters, such as Lee Pendleton, a 63-year-old retired accountant from Grass Valley. Having moved from Los Angeles to Nevada County six years ago, Pendleton says he is sick of "damn liberals" decrying clear-cuts, even as they build wood decks on their houses "and drive around in their big polluting cars."  Pendleton says SPI should do what it wants with its land, as long as it stays within the law.  "I'm against what the timber companies did in Washington, where you could drive 20 miles from Yakima or Seattle, and see completely denuded
mountains," said Pendleton, who has organized a petition drive in support of SPI. "Here if they cut 20 acres, people have a fit."

Others see it differently.  A few weeks ago, Mike Toney walked out of his house near Cedar Ridge, in rural Nevada County, and drove down a bumpy dirt road. Within minutes, he came to a steep hillside of charred stumps and barren ground, where thistles competed with pine seedlings.  He got back in his truck, drove a quarter mile down the road and came across another SPI clear-cut.  "This is what they call sustainable forestry," said Toney, looking at acres of stumps and seedlings. "I guarantee you, the slope of this hill is more than 50 percent."

Under California's 256-page book of forest practice rules, such clear-cuts are legal. The rules prevent property owners from logging trees within a certain distance of fish-bearing streams, but don't limit the steepness of hillsides where clear-cuts can occur.
Louis Blumberg, a deputy director for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, says state officials are now weighing whether its rules are adequate to deal with an unprecedented increase of clear-cuts in the Sierra.
"We recognize the public has concerns about clear-cuts," said Blumberg. "But the professional foresters have told us that clear-cutting is an acceptable technique at the proper place, at the proper rate. Our job is to make sure that whatever method is used does not degrade state resources."
Some say such degradation is inevitable as SPI clear-cuts 10,000 acres a year. "The question isn't whether there will be an impact, but how much the impact will be," said Jerry Franklin, a University of Washington forest ecology professor who has long studied the Sierra Nevada.
Franklin says the steep slopes and loose soils of the Sierra make the region especially sensitive to clear-cuts.  SPI officials say their logging practices mimic the natural "blow-downs" and small fires that historically opened patches of the Sierra.
"That's nonsense," said Franklin, who contributed to the 1996 Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project, a research project sponsored partly by the University of California, Davis. "In the Sierra, nature operated at a much smaller spacial scale than 20 acres. So it's not very honest to suggest that this is modeled on some kind of natural regime."

To get a handle on the consequences, the Sierra Club and other groups urged state lawmakers this summer to suspend clear-cutting statewide for two years, while a commission studies alternative logging practices.
To drum up support, Firebaugh and two other Calaveras residents stitched together a quilt that depicts SPI's clear-cuts. For a while, the quilt hung in the office of Assemblyman Fred Keeley, a Santa Cruz Democrat who authored the clear-cut bill.  Their needlework didn't win the day.  Faced with opposition from the timber industry, the Keeley bill died in the final days of the Legislature. Proponents are now considering a ballot proposition that would ban clear-cutting on private land and have planned a new round of protests.
Last week, activists from the group Yuba Nation suspended themselves above two trees on Sierra Pacific property near Graniteville, where SPI has state approval to clear-cut 350 acres on various separate tracts.  Today activists will be demonstrating at a meeting of the state Forestry Board in Sacramento, which is under pressure to further limit logging near salmon streams on the north coast.
SPI officials say the demonstrations show how extremists are setting the agenda on clear-cuts. But don't tell that to Len Heinz.
A retired schoolteacher from San Francisco, Heinz and his wife moved seven years ago to Pollock Pines, where their home has a panoramic view of Jenkinson Lake and the surrounding hills.
A few months ago, Heinz learned that SPI has filed plans to clear-cut three tracts on those hills, including one that will be 1,000 feet from Jenkinson
Lake.
Working with his neighbors, Heinz had to scramble to meet the state's 15-day limit on responding to timber harvest plans. They made the deadline, but state foresters rejected their challenge.
"This is a farce," said Heinz, a neighborhood watch leader in Pollock Pines.  "The public doesn't have the foggiest idea of what is going on until it is too late."
As for the loggers, they have mixed feelings. Many support SPI, but worry about the rising emotions of protesters. Some say the company has been too aggressive in logging near areas sure to produce a backlash, such as Arnold's drinking water reservoir.
"I think they brought it on themselves by cutting so close to White Pines Lake," said Jason Prest, an Arnold logger who spent a recent Wednesday clearing an SPI tract in Tuolumne County.

Asked what kind of logging method he preferred, Prest cracked a smile.  "I like selective logging," he said, wiping his brow. "There's more shade."

To Defend the Earth, Defend Human Rights

 By MARK HERTSGAARD

On Wednesday, prosecutors in Russia will try to reopen an espionage case against Russia's most prominent environmental dissident, Alexander Nikitin. The bizarre grounds? That the government violated Nikitin's civil rights the first time it tried to convict him.

Halfway around the world, in Mexico, no less absurd a dilemma faces Rodolfo Montiel, who organized fellow villagers in the southern state of Guerrero to nonviolently resist the clear-cutting of forests. The peasants formed human chains to block logging roads, angering local timber barons and attracting death threats. In May 1999, Montiel and a friend, Teodoro Cabrera, were captured at gunpoint by Mexican army soldiers and tortured for days into making phony confessions to drug and weapons violations. Last month, a federal court found the two men guilty and sentenced Montiel to six years and Cabrera to 10 years in jail.

Environmentalism can be dangerous. While activists in wealthy democratic nations like the U.S. pursue their causes from the comfort of their middle-class lives, their counterparts in less-fortunate countries pay a fearsome price for speaking out. But people like Nikitin and Montiel are defending the Earth we all share. We need them to succeed if we want to reverse deforestation, toxic contamination, global warming and other threats to our future. It is time, therefore, to expand our definition of environmentalism: Defending the Earth also means defending human rights.

Nikitin's troubles with the authorities began in 1996, when he made world headlines by exposing what he called "a Chernobyl in slow motion"--the Russian navy's reckless dumping of mothballed nuclear submarines in the Barents Sea and Kola Peninsula. A former submarine captain, Nikitin included only previously published information in his expose. Nevertheless, the Federal Security Service, Russia's recast KGB, charged him with espionage--on the basis of a law written months after he was imprisoned.

Nikitin spent 10 months in jail and three years fighting his way through the court system. After 11 separate trials, Nikitin was acquitted of all charges last December by the City Court of St. Petersburg. The court criticized the Federal Security Service's violations of Nikitin's rights--the very finding prosecutors now shamelessly cite to justify a retrial, even though the Russian Supreme   Nikitin was lucky in one respect: Besides courage and determination, he had friends outside Russia with the money, skill and dedication to help him. 

The Bellona Foundation, a group based in Norway that published his expose, organized an effective legal defense team and international publicity campaign. Vice President Al Gore and French President Jacques Chirac were just two of the world leaders who talked to former Russian President Boris N. Yeltsin about Nikitin. "We made sure that whenever Russian officials and diplomats traveled abroad, they had Nikitin, so to speak, in their cocktail glasses," Bellona's Siri Engesaeth said. Engesaeth made this remark in July at a meeting of former winners of the Goldman Environmental Prize, at which Nikitin, who won the prize in 1997 but had been prohibited from leaving Russia to accept it, was the guest of honor. Montiel won the Goldman prize this spring but was only allowed to receive it in prison. To free him, Engesaeth said, outsiders will have to mount a campaign similar to that for Nikitin. That campaign is now underway, buoyed by a new alliance between the Sierra Club and Amnesty International--evidence that environmental and human rights leaders at last recognize a need to collaborate.

Montiel's case has received media attention, and dozens of members of Congress have written to Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo urging his immediate release. Zedillo made no reply, but his successor, President-elect Vicente Fox, requested a meeting with Sierra Club, Amnesty International and Goldman officials when he visited Washington  in August. Meanwhile, however, Montiel was convicted.   Clearly it will take added pressure to win justice for Montiel, just as Nikitin still needs support as he faces the Russian Supreme Court on Wednesday. In a Sept. 5 interview in New York, former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev told me, "Some of the Russian institutions are going overboard on this issue, and we must help put an end to this prosecution."

 Russia and Mexico have each spent 70 years under the thumb of   But even authoritarian states are susceptible to outside pressure--- outsiders care enough to exert it.

Mark Hertsgaard Is the Author, Most Recently, of "Earth Odyssey: