Editor’s note: The following is a letter to the editor. The opinions expressed in this letter are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect those of The Mendocino Voice. If you would like to submit a letter to the editor feel free to write to info@mendovoice.com.
Dear Editor:
Our hats off to Mendocino County Supervisors Haschak, Williams and Mulheren: a visionary path forward with their leadership. Their recent vote in support of AB2494 redefines the management goals for Jackson Demonstration State Forest and all of our California State Demonstration Forests.
This bill is a breakthrough in a process that has been frustrating for the public and the tribes, and unproductive for many years. Introduced by State Assemblyman Chris Rogers and co-authored by State Senator Mike McGuire, this bill gets to the heart of the impasse.
It mandates co-management between Cal Fire and the tribes in recognition of the latter’s stewardship that has stood the test of time—tens of thousands of years. And while it will still allow for logging, it would prioritize preserving ancestral and cultural sites, environmental stewardship, ecological restoration, water, wildlife and research that is more than an excuse for more logging. It would shift the “demonstration” from logging to tourism, recreation and carbon sequestration.
We know that our coastal redwood forests are so awe-inspiring that people come here from around the world to experience them. We believe that the recreational and spiritual value of JDSF is far more important than the value of its commercial timber. We also believe that the economic value of recreation in JDSF already surpasses the economic value of timber sales under the current mandate, which represent only a tiny fraction of the timber revenue for the county.
While the current mandate supports commercial logging as the highest use of state forest land, which includes clearcuts and taking trees up to four feet in diameter, AB2494 would shift the primary source of funding for California Demonstration State Forests from timber to tourism and recreation.
The public is overwhelmingly in support of changing the mandate for managing California’s Demonstration State Forests. We invite our other supervisors, Cline and Norvell, to support AB2494 in recognition of the vastly greater benefits from recreation, tourism, carbon sequestration and water retention. We also invite the Fort Bragg City Council and other Mendocino County cities to enthusiastically support this bill.
Sheila Jenkins, Willits
Peggy Backup, Ukiah
Charlotte Healy, Fort Bragg
What these mis-guided letter writers don’t want to admit is that California’s Demonstration State Forests are already providing all the benefits that this poorly written bill advocates. All of the state forests already provide carbon sequestration and contribute to climate resiliency. They already provide for long term research, recreation, ecological processes, habitat, clean water, etc. They already provide for tribal involvement in the management. What is more is that with the timber sales they are able to provide employment County yield tax revenue, and pay for the Demonstration State Forest program without our tax dollars. This bill advocates reducing timber harvesting so low they have to shift the cost of maintaining these forests onto the tax payers. Now who would vote for a bill that reduces employment, reduces local revenue, and increases the tax burdens. This is not modernization; it’s just dumb.
If you believe that CalFire is currently doing these things in JDSF, then why object to updating the legal language to reflect this current practice. The bill changes the legal mandate which is the current law and does not prioritize these things you say they already do “carbon sequestration, research, recreation, ecological processes, habitat, clean water, etc”. This mandate has not been updated in 50 years and requires an outdated policy of maximum sustainable yield with no updates for climate change. This bill does not prevent logging it just allows for more stable funding for the demonstration forests. JDSF has had no income for years which is an unsustainable situation. This does not put the cost of maintaining the forest on the tax payers or increase tax burdens. This bill funds the Demonstration forests through an already exciting fund (Timber Regulation and Forest Restoration Fund) that has an excess that far exceeds the costs of running the forest. Income from logging the forests will enter this same fund. This bill ends what many leaders in our government call a “perverse system” that incentivizes cutting the biggest and oldest trees in the forest. You can read Evan Mill’s published study showing the ways in which this bill will increase employment. It is considered a jobs bill and if it does not pass those much needed jobs will be missed.
On top of what Jessica Curl says: The new Bill 2494 takes the pressure off the JDSF to fund the other 13 Demo forests throughout the state. This would ensure that most of the funds received from any logging would stay here on the coast and not in Sacramento.
Bert,
I agree with you that Jackson and other forests already provide some carbon sequestration and climate resiliency. But, sadly, it is not enough.
Yes, carbon could be recaptured if new trees could grow fast enough to take the place of the mature trees that are cut. However, because redwood trees take centuries to grow to maturity, they are highly susceptible to the stresses of long- and short-term environmental changes. The changes we are now experiencing, such as the record heat cycles and severe drought, are now becoming more extreme and more frequent every year due to the undeniable effects of climate change.
Continued commercial logging is already adding to this environmental stress and damage, while climate change is now challenging all of our assumptions about the best ways to “manage” our forests, and how much time we have to demonstrate any successes or failures.
Regarding timber sales providing employment and county tax revenue, I have learned through reading Cal Fire’s own documents and attending their meetings that most of the revenues from logging in JSDF go towards the salaries of administrative personnel who do work related to the THP permit approval process for private logging companies. This is mostly paper work, including feasibility analysis, mapping, mitigation reports, compliance reviews, and coordination with other agencies, all for the purpose of timber extraction. Another large portion of this money goes towards logging road decommissioning and repair of environmental damage after the approved logging project is completed.
Taking out the logging mandate will make most of those expenses unnecessary. Instead, easily-transferable jobs at all skill levels will emerge, from professional scientists and technicians to on-the-ground contractors and workers involved in forest preservation and environmental restoration, not to mention growth in the county’s already much more lucrative tourist industry. Change is happening. We have to decide what we will do to live with it.
This forest has been in “ restoration “ since the state acquired it. It was logged over and lit on fire. Now, because of management it is a healthy, working forest. All this bill does is take local jobs and revenue and turn it into taxpayer funded projects. We’ve lost all common sense around here. Has anybody seen what has happened to our local forest service? Wake up please!
“While represented as a model of sustainable practices, throughout its history the forest’s health and productivity has been overstated and many environmental harms, downplayed, or ignored outright. This, together with incomplete or otherwise faulty accounting, has led to inflated claims of forest health, and carbon storage. Activities occurring in JDSF also often elevate the risk of destructive wildfire and compromise water quality, with environmental impacts including degrading the habitat of endangered salmon, which are still barely returning following their decimation in earlier eras of logging…Social and cultural harms are often a corollary of greenwashing, as is the case of logging-related damage to archaeological sites and impeding current-day tribal use of the landscape. These issues underpin a far more widespread concern, as Cal Fire is the entity that approves all timber harvest plans throughout the state. Given decades of inertia and conflict with the public and independent experts, the attainment of improved practices would likely require institutional and legislative reforms.” Greenwashing in the Redwoods: A Critical Look at Cal Fire’s Management of Jackson Demonstration State Forest by Evan Mills, PhD and John O’Brien, PhD
One of the core improvements in this bill is the inclusion of language as follows: “(d) It is the policy of the state to respect California Native American tribal sovereignty and to seek opportunities for co-management and integration of local indigenous traditional ecological knowledge in forest management.”
This bill allows the management to officially prioritize research instead of commercial logging. This means more resources and focus on research in the forest.
In contrast to relying on a volatile timber market, this bill allows for a stable funding source supporting the long-term success of the Demonstration State Forest system.
Lynne
Not sure what you mean by “restoration since the state acquired it,” The State liquidated virtually all remaining old-growth forest (approximately 28,000
acres, or 60% of the JDSF area) after acquiring the land. Much of this was in the form of massive clear-cuts in the eastern portion of the forest. Cutting of old growth trees continued into the 1980s the whole eastern 40% of the forest was clear-cut since that time. The purpose of this bill is to change the mandate away from:”maximum sustained production” to a focus on restoration. This bill supports moving JDSF to a “healthy working forest”. This bill does not decrease local jobs, in fact, it gives us an opportunity to increase jobs in our area. You can see the details of both the effect of jobs and the history of the forest at the Trail Stewards Website under position papers. The change in funding does not increase taxes and is not based on “taxpayer funded projects”. It is worth mentioning that part of the reason come areas is JDSF look so good is that the forest did have a notable period of restoration when in 2000 The Campaign to Restore Jackson State Forest sued CalFire and logging stopped for almost 10 years. It is remarkable to look at the graphs of forest growth and see the recovery that took place during this period.