The Willits News

Locals divided on forest bill
Friday, July 16, 2004 -

Ditto Brooktrails board and Willits City Council
Claudia Reed/Staff Writer

Members of the Brooktrails board knew in advance they wouldn't be able to reach consensus on a controversial state forest bill. Consequently, they declined to discuss it. No letter of support or opposition would be forwarded to the state.

Other than county Supervisor Hal Wagenet, who brought the matter to the board, Tuesday evening, no one in the thinly populated audience had any comment.

The opposite scenario with the same result took place at Wednesday's city council meeting. After three and one-half hours of passionate testimony from both council members and citizens who packed the chambers, the council decided consensus was unreachable and individual letters would have to do.

Citing a legal conflict of interest, Councilman Bruce Burton declined to participate in the discussion.

When voting time came, no one made a motion to support or oppose SB (Senate Bill) 1648, which would elevate the goals of "study, maintenance, restoration, education, recreation, and public enjoyment" to the same status as the existing "maximum sustainable timber production" at Jackson Demonstration State Forest. Councilman Ron Orenstein's compromise motion: support for the process of bill creation, died for lack of a second.

Vice Mayor Tami Jorgensen called the bill a move in the right direction but said she couldn't support its most recent version. She stressed, however, that SB1648 would create local employment by permitting some logging to take place during the wait for development of a new management plan and related EIR (environmental impact report).

Tree harvesting at Jackson State has been on hold following a successful legal challenge to the EIR submitted with the existing management plan.

Councilman Denny McEntire predicted SB1648 would leave permanent and economically destructive harvesting limitations in place.

"The (forest) board is working on the EIR, as directed," he said. "Then everybody goes back to work. Now comes (state Senator Wesley) Chesbro and mixes right in the middle of it for God-only-knows what reason."

McEntire opposed language he said would prohibit logging within 12,000 acres of 80- to 100-year-old, second-growth redwoods. He said the characteristics making redwood desirable as lumber, including the red color and naturally rot and insect resistance, are in short supply in younger trees.

Representing the timber industry, Chris Baldo said such a prohibition would encourage forest owners to cut down their trees before they reach no-harvest age. Consumers, lacking naturally resistant redwood, would turn to the pressure-treated variety, despite the possible toxicity of the treatment chemicals.

"I don't see anything in this bill that prevents harvest in the 12,000 acres," Jorgensen countered.

At issue is a paragraph (Article 5, Section 4665, Part b) describing those acres and then the "459 acres of old-growthin 11 protected groves." Following is the sentence:

"These old forest components are uncommon assets in the region. Management of these stands shall be consistent with their biological importance and regional scarcity."

Since the bill explicitly prohibits harvesting of old-growth, does the prohibition extend to the over-80 second-growth?

"When you say "regional scarcity" it's a special management class," offered city Planning Director Alan Falleri. "You protect scarce resources."

Falleri also pointed out what he saw as a "cart-before-the-horse" procedure requiring the EIR for the new management plan to "be consistent with" the provisos in the bill (Article 5, Section 4669, Part b). An environmental impact report is just that, Falleri said. After the likely impact of various actions is understood, regulations are developed, he said.

Kathy Bailey of the Sierra Club said portions of the bill had been deliberately left ambiguous in order to permit flexibility in developing the management plan. She said there was room for harvesting within the "last 100-year-old stand in the county" on a site specific basis with conservation goals in mind.

"You can log to develop old-forest values or the reverse: cut the biggest and best trees for commercial value."

Wagenet, on record as opposing the bill, may be moving in the same direction with his promotion of a "CAL-100 Standard." The standard would establish a "trademark or stamp" certifying lumber from trees at least 80 years old has been produced "in accordance with good forest stewardship."

If the bill is not rushed through the legislature, the process of refining it can be "a useful dialogue in which both sides bring something to the table," Wagenet said. SB1648 has passed the State Senate and will be considered by the Assembly's Appropriations Committee early next month.