LITIGATION

In two separate lawsuits, EPFW and Central Sierra Environmental Resource Center challenged the approval by the California Department of Forestry of two Timber Harvest Plans submitted by Sierra Pacific Industries. The lawsuits alleged that SPI and CDF failed to adequately analyze cumulative impacts of the proposed timber harvests and failed to analyze the impacts of proposed pesticide and herbicide treatments. EPFW was denied relief by the trial court and appeal the trial court decision. The appellate courts (3rd and 5th District) issued contradictory rulings, one in favor of EPFW, one against. In 2006, EPFW requested review by the California Supreme Court. The request was granted, and the case was decided in May 2008. For additional information, to review documents filed, read the courts' opinions, please visit the court's web sites provided below.

California Supreme Court Case Numbers S143689, S130092

Supreme Court Opinion, May 22, 2008

Case Number Court of Appeal: C043687 Trial Court Case Number: CV28494, EBBETTS PASS FOREST WATCH v. DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
Case Number Court of Appeal: C043687 Trial Court Case Number: PC20020253, EBBETTS PASS FOREST WATCH v. DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
Case Number Court of Appeal: C043825 Trial Court Case Number: CV28494, EBBETTS PASS FOREST WATCH v. DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
Case Number Court of Appeal: C043825 Trial Court Case Number: PC20020253, EBBETTS PASS FOREST WATCH v. DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY

Appellate Court, 5th District, Case Summary:

Trial Court Case: 48910
Court of Appeal Case: F042896
Case Caption: Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch et al. v. California Department of Forestry & Fire et al.
Filing Date: 04/25/2003
Oral Argument Date/Time: 01/26/2006 10:00 AM

Supreme Court Case: S143689

Appellate Court, 3rd District, Case Summary:

Appellate Court Case No.: C043825 Trial Court Case No.: CV28494 Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch v. Department of Forestry etc., et al. et al.
Appellate Court Case No.: C043687 Trial Court Case No.:PC20020253 Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch v. Department of Forestry etc., et al. et al.
Appellate Court Case No.: C042700 Trial Court Case No.:65917 Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch v. California Dept. of Forestry et al., et al.
Appellate Court Case No.: C040127 Trial Court Case No.:PC20010106 Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch v. Forestry & Fire Protection et al. et al.

DOCUMENTS

Opinion of THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, (El Dorado and Calaveras), Filed 11/9/04, CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

Opinion of THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, Filed 5/15/06, CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION

PRESS

Court decision rejects SPI clearcutting plans for areas east of Big Trees State Park
Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch and CSERC prevail in legal challenge

Arnold, CA- After years of working its way through the courts, a lawsuit by conservation groups has halted lumber company plans that would have allowed clearcut-type logging of more than 1,100 acres of private forest land east of Big Trees State Park. The 5th District Court of Appeals published its legal judgment this week, finding that the California Department of Forestry (CDF) failed to follow the law by approving three disputed clearcutting plans by timber giant Sierra Pacific Industries (SPI).

The court agreed with the plaintiffs, Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch (EPFW) from Arnold and the Central Sierra Environmental Resource Center (CSERC) from Twain Harte. In its ruling, the court upheld the two environmental groups' complaints that CDF failed to consider the environmental effects of SPI's herbicide use and that the state agency also failed to adequately assess the overall, cumulative effects caused by SPI's widespread clearcutting.

"SPI filed timber harvest plans for 51 units, 49 of them clear cuts," Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch president Bruce Castle said. "We’ve been working on this, educating people, ever since. To date, we have not slowed down clear cutting in the Sierra. SPI doesn't pay a lot of attention to us at this time, and will continue not to until we pose some kind of threat."

"Again and again we have pressed CDF to look at the big picture," stated Bruce Castle, president of Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch. "We've repeatedly urged the State to require SPI to follow the law by carefully analyzing what the cumulative effects will be for the rare wildlife and plant species that are most at risk from clearcutting. This is one step in getting SPI to admit the environmental impacts of turning areas of living forest into sterile tree plantations."

In its legal opinion published this week, the Appeals Court found that CDF must require SPI to provide a fuller analysis of the effects of widespread herbicide treatments and to use appropriate assessment areas to judge the cumulative effects of logging on different kinds of rare, declining species.

Since the mid-1990's, SPI has aggressively pursued clearcutting or similar types of logging treatments on its vast timberland holdings in Northern California. In many years, just within Calaveras and Tuolumne counties, the company has stripped more than 150 blocks of forest of up to 20 acres each in size. That kind of logging treatment has often resulted in a total of more than 3,000 acres per year of clearcut-type logging just within those two counties, with thousands of additional clearcut acres being denuded elsewhere in the mountains.

That widespread clearcutting by SPI has created a checkerboard of highly visible bare patches across the middle elevations of the mountains -- sparking severe criticism of their plans from a number of Sierra Nevada communities. In response to the public outcry, SPI has steadfastly maintained that the company's timber harvest plans were legal and that their chemically treated, heavily-managed tree plantations produce lumber faster than natural, diverse forests stands.

Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch and the Central Sierra Environmental Resource Center challenged the legality of the three disputed plans, contending that impacts to water quality and other concerns were not legally or adequately addressed. The court's ruling determined that CDF abused its discretion and was prejudiced toward approval of the plans in violation of state law.

"We could have filed lawsuits against all of SPI's logging plans," pointed out John Buckley, CSERC's executive director, "but we wanted to be sensitive to the needs of mill workers and loggers. By targeting these three THPs with this lawsuit, we're hopefully steering SPI and CDF towards better legal compliance and a reduction in environmental harm, without stopping all SPI logging or shutting down mills."

One of the plans that the court has now ruled as being illegal was the Cedar Flat timber harvest plan that proposed over 400 acres of clearcut-type logging in 26 separate logging units to the east of Calaveras Big Trees State Park. Some units were laid out to within 200 feet of the Park boundary. The Curry Timber Harvest Plan, further northwest from the State Park, would have straddled Beaver Creek, so any sediment washing downslope from the denuded hillsides would potentially run into the Park. The third THP, called Base Camp, was located north of Beardsley Reservoir. It would have allowed more than 300 acres of clearcut-type logging.

Addie Jacobson of EPFW shared concerns over ongoing approval of clearcutting by the California Department of Forestry (CDF). "CDF is responsible to protect the citizens and public trust resources of the State. Consistently approving clearcutting timber harvest plans to accommodate timber companies has put our resources at risk. This legal decision helps set CDF back on course to protect us all. A timber company such as SPI does not need to stop logging; they just need to do a gentler job that will cause less harm to water, wildlife and scenic values."

Calaveras County Supervisor Merita Callaway noted that water is the single most valuable economic resource that comes from the forested lands of the Sierra Nevada. "When CDF follows the court's direction, cumulative impacts will be more appropriately addressed and that will benefit our local forests' watersheds. That means everyone wins, since we all depend upon clean water."

For further information, contact: Bruce Castle - EPFW at (209) 728-2771 or John Buckley - CSERC at (209) 918-2485.