August 15, 2002
| |||
The Board of Forestry has been continuing to hack away at various rules packages. They have already passed, and the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) has approved an "incentive package for large landowners" called the Interim Watershed Mitigation Addendum (IWMA). This year's IWMA is almost identical to the one that the Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC) sued over last year (and which was turned down by OAL). The Board corrected some detail deficiencies, but failed to respond to the substantive issues raised by EPIC, which was a main reason that OAL had turned the package down. Somehow, the Board came up with a rationale that OAL accepted this year. EPIC has re-filed its lawsuit to halt a process that excludes the public. EPIC and others allege that the package fails to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act. Furthermore, the rules package might enable large, rich corporations to invest in spin-doctored ?science? created to justify lowered protections and higher levels of impact.
Several rules packages are to be heard at the Board in September and October. These include Hardwood Retention, Stocking Standards (stocking credits that would give a marginal incentive for the retention of larger trees important for wildlife), and Roads (a package that would reorder and make permanent various road requirements currently in the rules). A more comprehensive Road Management Plan Addendum package is just beginning to be, perhaps, adequately addressed. It's been in the offing since last May and is slated to be in shape by the end of 2003 for implementation in 2004.
One of the main problems with most of these packages is that there is inadequate inclusion of input from public trust agencies other than the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF), and from the public. Everything tends to be tailored to industry-copasetic standards or desires. An example of this is the tailoring of the implementation of the Science Review Panel Report of 1999. It found that the Forest Practice Rules did not assure protection and recovery of salmon and steelhead, and among its highest priority recommendations was to have a panel of experts immediately selected to deal with the key issue of rate of logging in a watershed. Action on this has so far been stonewalled, especially by CDF and the Board of Forestry. Current action by the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (NCRWQCB) may actually have a qualified panel take on that issue.
We're hoping that the Board of Forestry gets reformed. Senate Bill (SB) 234 by Senator Sheila Kuehl would actually require appropriate scientific expertise to be represented on the Board -- e.g. fisheries biology, geology, hydrology. Labor, environmental, and fishing interests would also be represented. Her bill would also deal with some important conflict of interest and ex parte communication issues.
Other important legislation includes SB 1816 by Senator Wesley Chesbro and co-authored by Assembly member Virginia Strom-Martin would increase penalties for those "who unlawfully and maliciously excavates upon, removes, destroys, injures, or defaces a Native American historic, cultural, or sacred site . . . ." This bill has passed the State Senate, passed the Assembly Committee on Public Safety, and is awaiting hearing at the Assembly Appropriations Committee. SB 1828 by Senator John Burton would enable federally recognized tribes and/or the Native American Heritage Commission to determine whether sacred sites are adequately protected from encroachment by development or other adverse impacts. This bill has been the subject of numerous articles in California newspapers recently, with developers and their allies crying that 'the sky is falling'. SB 1828 has passed the State Senate and is now in the Assembly. Both SB 1816 and SB 1828 deserve strong support.
The saga of Water Quality continues. Attempts to take action to prevent further aggravated sedimentation and recover the beneficial uses of water in the five 'especially impaired' watersheds of Freshwater, Bear, Stitz, and Jordan Creeks, and Elk River have bounced through Machiavellian hoops for over five years (since the devastating impacts of the 1997 New Year's storms). The North Coast Board is finally going ahead to form a science panel to help determine appropriate actions in those watersheds. This has happened after a failed mediation process that was instituted by the Board, after its failure to institute Waste Discharge requirements for those watersheds at it's April meeting in Eureka. Further action taken was taken in early August: Clean Up and Abate Orders for Elk River were issued, as well as Reports of Waste Discharge requirements for winter operations for Elk River. This was just before confirmation hearings for five North Coast Board members. Four were confirmed, and one resigned.
A campaign known as Clean Water Healthy Forests has been key to unify groups across California around water issues. Getting the Water Quality Boards to keep their authority from being usurped by CDF is a major goal and day-to-day task. There currently are efforts that you need to support to end watershed domination by CDF and prevent the mindless extension of Waste Discharge Requirement waivers at that end of December 2002.
The Fish and Game Commission will apparently finally rule on the petition to list Coho under the California Endangered Species Act at the end of August. Much wheeling and dealing over doing and implementing a recovery plan for Coho salmon tied in with listing now or listing later. The Fish and Game Department is recommending Endangered listing south of the Mattole and Threatened from the Mattole north to Oregon.
Watershed restoration efforts continue to grow in California as funding becomes available. Issues regarding long-term positive effects versus short-term adverse impacts to spawning areas for listed species are being addressed in the Mattole River and elsewhere. Standards of performance and rates of disturbance are matters of real importance in restoration efforts. Certain institutional constraints and perspectives need to be changed.Stay tuned and get involved whenever and wherever you can
More Articles...
TOC for Forest & River News, Summer 2002