The initial clauses of
the Jackson State resolution being considered here today say, "The forests
of Mendocino County are important for its economy, environment and
wildlife, and for the recreation, nourishment and education of its
citizenry, and… Jackson Demonstration State Forest is a unique and valuable
forest asset whose future is of great importance to Mendocino County…" I
ask that you take these statements to heart and act accordingly.
Given the forest’s importance on many dimensions and the great changes
that have taken place in the last fifty years, the Board should not simply
rubber stamp the mission created for Jackson State Forest when it was
acquired in 1947. The mission of large-scale timber production was set when
timber was king in Mendocino, when there were uncounted millions of
old-growth trees and vast stands of primeval redwood forest. Today the
former timber king is on its deathbed. No primeval forest remains. The
industrial forestlands are decimated. Jackson State Forest contains the
only sizeable stands of mature second growth in Mendocino County. It
constitutes the only large publicly owned redwood forest south of Humboldt
County.
It is long past time to seriously reevaluate the purpose and goals for
this public forest.
Because of the forest’s importance to so many interests in Mendocino
County, the Board of Supervisors should take a leading role in this
reevaluation. This resolution and this hearing are no way to decide on an
issue of such broad importance and complexity. The Board should not take
any position at this time on the future use of Jackson State Forest.
Any position taken today would be without factual foundation and would deny
the citizens of this county their right to be fully heard and counted.
If you wish to govern wisely, you will do two things today:
One, with respect to the resolution sent to you by the Forest Council,
you will reject it or amend it to remove any language that prejudges the
future use of Jackson State Forest. I have provided you with an alternative
resolution that does the latter.
Two, you will set up a special committee to make a major inquiry into
the best and highest use of Jackson State Forest. The committee should be
charged with holding hearings, on the coast as well as inland, to gather
information and testimony, and to develop recommendations for the Board.
This committee should not be the Forest Council, which concerns itself only
with timber issues. The committee should have broad business, recreation,
education, and environmental representation. Business representation should
include not only timber businesses but retail stores, inns, wineries, and
construction firms – all of which benefit from Mendocino becoming a more
attractive visitor destination and place to live.
I urge you to look and listen to the people who have come to oppose
large-scale logging and to support restoration of Jackson State. Most of
these people had to travel from the coast, devoting much of their day to
the trip. For every one that is here, at least ten feel as strongly but
could not spare the time. These are not radicals, tree huggers, or
malcontents. They are representative of the broad population of the county.
They have come here because they believe strongly that the well-being of
Mendocino County will suffer greatly if our only public forest is
sacrificed to please the local timber industry. And there those who have
come from outside of the county, to remind you that this is a state
forest, a forest owned by all of the people of California, a forest that
should not be used for narrow private benefit.
In listening to testimony today, you need to recognize a difference of
great significance between those who support restoring the forest and most
of those who are here to support logging – the significance to their
pocketbooks. You will hear loud calls for more logging from those who
directly profit from cutting the public forest, either as owners of mills
and logging companies or those who work for them. If this were a judicial
proceeding, all of these would rightfully be denied a place on the jury. By
contrast, those who support restoration will profit not at all from
restoration. Indeed, they have come here at their own expense and on their
own time to stand up for what they believe is right.
In the end, you will vote either for the broad common good or for the
narrow benefit of the timber industry. The choice is clear, and a great
number of people will know how you choose. I trust that you will choose
wisely.