Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
9 Arrests at Headwaters, Rally Saturday
Come to Headwaters on Saturday! Beautiful hike, legal rally, stand up for the forests and for community control of our resources!
"Hole in the Headwaters" Protests Result in Arrests; Rally Saturday
Headwaters Preserve Threatened By Logging Within Its Borders
Pacific Lumber (PL) began cutting the long-disputed "Hole in the Headwaters" logging plan on Tuesday, October 23, and nine protesters were arrested in the plan Wednesday morning. There will be a legal hike and rally held at the gates to the logging plan at Elk River Road, just south of Eureka in Humboldt county at 11 am on Saturday Oct. 27.
The controversial logging plan, (THP 1-97-520), comprising over 700 acres of redwood and Douglas fir forest runs alongside the South Fork of the Elk River. Despite the fact that the Calif. Water Board set what environmentalists touted as good precedent by requiring water course impact monitoring on PL logging plans, a convoluted and politically-charged process is allowing PL to proceed on the plan that sits entirely within the outer boundaries of the publicly-owned Headwaters Preserve. This area was identified as a high priority for acquisition after the state and Federal governments purchased 7500 acres of old growth and cut-over land in what has become known as the Headwaters Preserve, via the 1999 "Headwaters deal". The priority stems from both the location of the forest within the Preserve, now under BLM jurisdiction and in planning process for wilderness designation and restoration, and its location 150 feet above the South Fork.
Although heavily-impacted, the South Fork is considered one of the best coho salmon spawning grounds in California, and also supports runs of Chinook and Steelhead trout. It is one of only five remaining streams on the northcoast with viable salmon spawning beds. Sediment from logging-related landslides and logging roads are among the primary reasons for the drastic declines in salmon populations on the northcoast.
As part of California's portion of the funding for acquisition in the Headwaters deal, $80 million was included for purchase of Owl Creek Grove and other high value habitat areas, the area along the South Fork targeted specifically. $13 million remained after purchase of 1200 acres in Owl Creek, but due to PL's refusal to negotiate for purchase, the money's earmark expired and it reverted to the general fund in the summer of 2001. The logging plan was long under litigation, an injunction granted in July of 2000. (For background, maps, and litigation history, see EPIC's website: http://www.wildcalifornia.org)
On Oct. 18, the State Water Quality Control Board ordered PL to monitor water quality that would be affected by logging-caused erosion. Though salmon habitat experts close to the situation contend it was the agency's intention that monitoring be conducted prior to logging, PL is barreling ahead with their operations, claiming their use of helicopters preclude the need for prior monitoring. There are five other PL Timber Harvest Plans under consideration by the California Dept. of Forestry located on the South Fork Elk River, comprising 1656 acres, which could subject 20 to 30% of the South Fork to catastrophic damage over the next one to two years.
An activist known as Owl who was arrested at the logging gate commented that "Our dialogue with the loggers was quite civil, and in fact, they were expressing concern that interaction be kept on a level where no one would get hurt or injured in any way. What was interesting, though, was the fact that many of them told us they were brought in from out of state, from Oregon and Idaho."
for more info call BACH
510 848 3113
Headwaters Preserve Threatened By Logging Within Its Borders
Pacific Lumber (PL) began cutting the long-disputed "Hole in the Headwaters" logging plan on Tuesday, October 23, and nine protesters were arrested in the plan Wednesday morning. There will be a legal hike and rally held at the gates to the logging plan at Elk River Road, just south of Eureka in Humboldt county at 11 am on Saturday Oct. 27.
The controversial logging plan, (THP 1-97-520), comprising over 700 acres of redwood and Douglas fir forest runs alongside the South Fork of the Elk River. Despite the fact that the Calif. Water Board set what environmentalists touted as good precedent by requiring water course impact monitoring on PL logging plans, a convoluted and politically-charged process is allowing PL to proceed on the plan that sits entirely within the outer boundaries of the publicly-owned Headwaters Preserve. This area was identified as a high priority for acquisition after the state and Federal governments purchased 7500 acres of old growth and cut-over land in what has become known as the Headwaters Preserve, via the 1999 "Headwaters deal". The priority stems from both the location of the forest within the Preserve, now under BLM jurisdiction and in planning process for wilderness designation and restoration, and its location 150 feet above the South Fork.
Although heavily-impacted, the South Fork is considered one of the best coho salmon spawning grounds in California, and also supports runs of Chinook and Steelhead trout. It is one of only five remaining streams on the northcoast with viable salmon spawning beds. Sediment from logging-related landslides and logging roads are among the primary reasons for the drastic declines in salmon populations on the northcoast.
As part of California's portion of the funding for acquisition in the Headwaters deal, $80 million was included for purchase of Owl Creek Grove and other high value habitat areas, the area along the South Fork targeted specifically. $13 million remained after purchase of 1200 acres in Owl Creek, but due to PL's refusal to negotiate for purchase, the money's earmark expired and it reverted to the general fund in the summer of 2001. The logging plan was long under litigation, an injunction granted in July of 2000. (For background, maps, and litigation history, see EPIC's website: http://www.wildcalifornia.org)
On Oct. 18, the State Water Quality Control Board ordered PL to monitor water quality that would be affected by logging-caused erosion. Though salmon habitat experts close to the situation contend it was the agency's intention that monitoring be conducted prior to logging, PL is barreling ahead with their operations, claiming their use of helicopters preclude the need for prior monitoring. There are five other PL Timber Harvest Plans under consideration by the California Dept. of Forestry located on the South Fork Elk River, comprising 1656 acres, which could subject 20 to 30% of the South Fork to catastrophic damage over the next one to two years.
An activist known as Owl who was arrested at the logging gate commented that "Our dialogue with the loggers was quite civil, and in fact, they were expressing concern that interaction be kept on a level where no one would get hurt or injured in any way. What was interesting, though, was the fact that many of them told us they were brought in from out of state, from Oregon and Idaho."
for more info call BACH
510 848 3113
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$330.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network
BTW, I thought that this was a "public" site. I saw no protected password. I thought that democracy was fostered by a hearing of all voices. Perhaps you disagree.
Whether or not the area in question is second growth, it is a fact that clear-cuts erode the surrounding areas because the newly exposed forest is not capable of withstanding the forces of wind and weather. Is this a legitimate reason to save the "hole?"
How is it that the state or the feds don't have enough money to buy it? Could it be that they used up their resources in bailing out Charles Hurwitz when he sunk a Savings and Loan, which cost the US taxpayers 1.6 BILLION? Not to mention the $480 million he got for the Headwaters "deal." It is incorrect to say that no one cares because no one has the money. How much would it take?? To reduce the value of the forest to equate it with money is the problem, and it will never be solved while talking about it in those terms.
Let's cut out the B.S. and get right to the point: I think this forest is worth saving, you don't.
You make a big deal out of the fact that much of the forest in question is second-growth. So is most forest around here -- does that automatically make it worthless?
Given that 97% of the old-growth forests in this state have already been logged, it seems important to me to allow a good deal of the second-growth forests to go untouched and develop into a more mature forest -- and eventually into old-growth forests for our grandchildren's grandchildren.
Given that the forests in question are located in the headwaters of a river on which much effort is being expended to help restore water quality and fish habitat, it certainly makes sense to me that preserving this forest should be a high priority.
But that's only if you give a crap about forests and rivers in the first place. If you don't, you can always come up with some lame piece of eco-sophistry to justify why they should not be protected.
So you don't give a crap...that's fine, purposeful ignorance and ecological apathy are your birthrights as an American. But meanwhile, those of us who DO care aren't going to buy the idea that all second-growth forests are fair game for logging.
My advice: find something you DO care about and go work for something positive, rather than just being another lame critic on an issue that you clearly have no real understanding of.
Badger
Those who don't care about the forest fashion their "facts" to fit their pre-conceived thesis that more logging is justified in nearly all cases.
These whiny critics will always find some stupid excuse for why any given piece of forest ought to be open to logging. They can't see the forest because they're so focused on the logs.
Don't be distracted by their sad little propaganda campaign.
As for you Badger, you have hit the nail on the head regarding how I am coming at this issue vs. Wicky and the others. The basic issue is this, no one has the $$ to buy the property. You can complain all you want about how you have a higher calling than private property, but the law (whether you like it or not) requires that you would have to pay PL to get the land. Ask Julia Butterfly, maybe she can loan you some.