Pacific Lumbers License Suspended, Now What
11/12/98
*******************************
RELAYED TEXT STARTS HERE:
Title: Pacific Lumbers License Suspended, Now What
Source: The Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC)
Status: Distribute freely with proper credit to source
Date: 11/12/98
E P I C U P D A T E A N D A C T I O N A L E R T ! ! !
CONTENTS:
1) RALLY FOR HEADWATERS IN ARCATA NOVEMBER 15
2) LICENSE SUSPENSION: WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
3) ACTION: LAST CHANCE TO COMMENT ON HEADWATERS DEAL!
COME TO ARCATA ON SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 15
Members of the Coalition to Save Headwaters Forest invite you to attend a
rally on the Arcata Plaza, in downtown Arcata, CA, this Sunday, November
15. We are gathering in defense not only of our forests but also of our
civil rights, as local authorities continue their unfair treatment of
environmental activists. Green Party candidate for Governor Dan Hamburg,
noted civil rights attorney Tony Serra and many others are scheduled to
speak. The rally will conclude with a march to the offices of the U.S.
Fish & Wildlife Service, which is currently taking public comment on the
Headwaters deal. Please join us in support of our fisheries, forests, and
civil rights! For more information, call one of the following numbers:
Bay Area Coalition for Headwaters: (510) 835-6303 Mendocino Environmental
Center: (707) 468-1660 Trees Foundation: (707) 923-4377
North Coast Earth First!: (707) 825-6598 EPIC: (707) 923-2931
PACIFIC LUMBER'S LICENSE SUSPENDED... NOW WHAT?
The suspension of Pacific Lumber's timber operator's license on November 9
surprised and elated many environmentalists and local community members.
Many local citizens (and apparently Pacific Lumber management as well) had
become accustomed to the California Department of Forestry's relative
inaction in these matters. The suspension was not only warranted but also
long overdue. But is this really a victory for the forests?
The license suspension at present only affects PL logging plans on which
name the company as the official "licensed timber operator," or LTO.
About half of the company's logging operations are contracted out to
independent loggers, each of which operates under an individual license.
None of these contract operations were suspended as a result of the
license suspension, and PL will very likely try to amend the plans that
were shut down so that logging can continue under a contractor's license.
According to the company, as many as 180 PL woods workers received pink
slips on Tuesday. Given that PL's pattern and practice of violating
forestry laws seems to be management policy under Maxxam, it hardly seems
fair that the working people at the bottom of the PL hierarchy should have
to pay the price for their bosses' irresponsibility. While the suspension
of PL's license was both deserved and significant, many of the people who
instructed their subordinates to break the law have essentially gone
unpunished.
According to a long-time local observer of this issue, the true problem
lies in the fact that PL's production goals are being set too high,
dictated by Maxxam's insatiable appetite for cash. PL's logging crews
cannot cut the extraordinary amount of timber demanded by their bosses
either safely or legally. Violations of forestry laws and increasing
worker endangerment are the logical results. Apparently, PL and Maxxam
management chose to continue willfully violating the law and the terms of
their provisional license, even when they knew that woods workers would be
the first to suffer the consequences of a license suspension.
Company president John Campbell has told the press that he will not appeal
the decision. The suspension is in effect through the end of the year, at
which time PL will presumably apply for a timber operator's license for
1999. Larger questions surround the impact of the suspension on the
Headwaters Forest agreement, Habitat Conservation Plan/Sustained Yield
Plan, and the associated permit allowing PL to kill endangered fish and
wildlife. Implementation of the HCP/SYP depends primarily upon the
company's willingness to comply with its provisions, and requires a degree
of trust that many state and federal officials now have even greater
reason to question.
The HCP/SYP is deeply flawed, inconsistent, lacking in scientific
credibility, and written primarily to satisfy the unrealistic, ravenous
demand for timber that created PL's problems in the first place.
Moreover, PL's record of criminal activity under Maxxam management clearly
demonstrates that the company cannot be trusted to enforce the provisions
of the plan, especially with the survival of California's coho salmon
hanging in the balance. State and federal agency officials should uphold
their responsibilities and deny the HCP/SYP. Corporations that refuse to
follow the laws of California have no business doing business in
California.
In the meantime, logging on PL land will likely continue, and Maxxam
managers will continue to draw paychecks while their woods workers sit
idle. Real changes in the company's practices, however, will probably
only come about when management itself feels the consequences of its
decisions.
Forestry officials have indicated that criminal prosecution for unfair
business practices--because PL's lawbreaking gives them an illegal
competitive advantage over law-abiding timber companies--could be
initiated by the Humboldt County District Attorney. Such crimes often
carry huge monetary penalties, but there is still no guarantee that Maxxam
and PL bosses would actually take a hit in the pocketbook. If this
contempt for the law results in the collapse of the Headwaters agreement,
however, and Charles Hurwitz loses his grip on his latest $480 million
public handout, perhaps Maxxam will finally get the point.
LAST CHANCE TO COMMENT ON THE HEADWATERS AGREEMENT! COMMENTS MUST BE
RECEIVED BY MONDAY, NOVEMBER 16!
Even following the suspension of PL's timber operating license, political
pressure to approve the Headwaters deal and the HCP/SYP remains intense.
The vigilance and vocal involvement of concerned individuals and
organizations are the only reasons Headwaters still stands, and we must
once again demonstrate our commitment to a just and ecologically sound
solution to this controversy. We have the power to effect a change in the
way our forests, water, fish and wildlife are treated in California. All
we have to do is use it.
Please send in your comments on the Headwaters Forest agreement and
associated management plans. A summary of the plans and suggestions for
comment can be found at
http://www.igc.org/epic/pages/pl_hcp.html
Comments should be mailed and/or faxed to BOTH of the following addresses.
As far as we know, emailed comments are not encouraged.
Bruce Halstead, US Fish & Wildlife Service 1125 16th Street, Room 209
Arcata, CA 95521
fax (707) 822-8411
Re: Permit numbers PRT-828950 and 1157.
John Munn, California Department of Forestry 1416 Ninth Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
fax (916) 653-8957
Re: SYP 96-002
Thanks to everyone who has already submitted written comments, testified
at public hearings, or otherwise supported the effort to save Headwaters
Forest over the past several years. While this is an important milestone
in the history of that effort, our work is far from over. We must remain
as vigilant and involved as ever in order to reach our goal of recovering
our fisheries and wildlife while sustaining our forests into the future.
The Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC) P.O. Box 397
Garberville, CA 95542
(707) 923-2931
Fax 923-4210
http://www.igc.org/epic/
Contact us at epic@igc.org to join our listserver