board of forestry and fire protection information...

Board of Forestry and Fire Protection Information Sheet

-

Type of Filing

Regular Emergency Disapproval Resubmittal Withdrawn x

Title: Rule File .

Regulatory Action# (OAL File #) or Emergency# 93-0709-04

Date(s) Notice Sent to OAL: 07/09/93

Notice File# Notice Register# Pt.tblication Date:

All Previous Related OAL Reg. Action #

15 Day Circulation Notice Date(s):

Status: Approved Date: Effective Date

Section(s) Affected

Section 100

-

Amend Adopt Appeal 1038, 1104.1

Comments:

State of Cellfomla Office of Admlnbltratlve Law

Memorandum

T~ All Regulation Coordinators Date : 5/J/7t/

Telephone: (916) 323 - 6225

From: OAL Fron~ter Subject: Return of Rulemaking Materials

OAL hereby returns the rulemaking file your agency submitted for review.

The regulation, or regulations, were repealed by operation of law because the regulatory adoption process was not completed withi n 120 days from the effective date of the emergency action.

Enclosures.

4\13\94

CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA

In re:

FORESTRY BOARD

REGULATORY ACTION: Title 14 California Code of Amend 1104.1

) ) ) ) ) )

Regulations) ) ) ) ) ) )

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>

('!, • "'""l "n i .·.' t: u

NOTICE OF REPEAL AND DELETION (Gov. Code, Sec. 11346.1)

OAL File No. 93-0709-04 E 1104.1 Exempt Conversions

Pursuant to section 11346.1 of the Government Code, you are hereby notified that the regulatory changes (adoptions, amendments and/or repeals) made by the above described emergency regulatory action were repealed by operation of law 120 days from their effective date. This repeal occurred because the regulatory adoption process was not completed, and the rulemaking file was not submitted to the Off ice of Administrative Law, within 120 days of the effective date of the emergency action.

Notice is further given that the above described regulation(s), or amendment(s) thereto, will be deleted from the California Code of Regulations pursuant to provisions of section 11346.1 of the Government Code. In the event the emergency action was an amendment or order of repeal, the text of the regulation(s) as it existed prior to the amendment or order of repeal will be reprinted in the California Code of Regulations.

A copy of this notice will be filed with the Secretary of State in 7 days. If you have any questions regarding this notice, please contact CRAIG TARPENNING Senior Staff Counsel at (916) 323-6808 or CalNet 473-6808.

Date: 04/21/94

for: JOHN D. SMITH Director

Original: Dean Cromwell, Executive Officer cc: Doug Wickizer

I served the above described notice for the Off ice of

Administrative Law by depositing a copy(ies) thereof (enclosed

in a sealed envelope(s), postage prepaid) in the United

States mail, addressed to the above named individual(s) herein,

on 0~/;t /1~ ar. Sacramento, California.

At the time of service, I was at least 18 years of age, a United

States citizen employed in the county where the mailing occurred,

and not otherwise involved in the decision. My business address

is: Office of Administrative Law 555 capitol Mall Suite 1290 Sacramento, ca 95814

I declare under penalty of perjury the foregoing is true

and correct and this declaration was executed on

ot{/i.1 fr<+ ac sa~i/lnco. ca;~=ll ~7'1_}} /L!!fM:. ------

{Signat.d're of Declarantl

(See lnst1 ms on ravers..•)

AGENCY NOTICE

REGULATORY ACTION HUMBER EMERGENCY NUMBER

9j-o7()9-ot./c For use by Office of Administrative Law (OAL) only

BOARD OF FORESTRY

1104.1 EXEMPT .. CONVERSIONS 4. AGENCY CONTACT PERSON

D Other

B. SUBMISSION OF REGULATIONS (Complete when submffting regulations)

·t ~-

D

ECIFY CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS TITLECSl AND SECTION(S) (Including title 26, If toxics-related) ·ADOPT

SECTIONS AFFECTED AMEND

1104.1 ·' TITI.E(S)

14 TITLE REPEAL

2. TYPE OF FILING

D Regular Rulemaking (Gov. • D Resubmittal Code,§ 11346) . D Changes Without Regulatory Effect

(Cal. Code Regs., title 1, § 100)

For use by Seaetuy of State only

:'I/ n

~:3 -.'L'L f 9 Pil 3: 311

2. REQUESTED PUBLICATION DATE

TELEPHONE NUMBER

rY1 Emergency (Gov. Code, ~ § 11346.1(b))

D Certificate pf Compliance:· The agency officer named below certifies that this agency complied with the provisions of Government Code§§ 11346.4. 11346.8 prior to, or within 120 days of, the effective date of the regulations listed above.

0 Print Only D Other (specify) 3. DATE(S) OF AVAILABILITY OF MODIFIED REGULATIONS ANDIOR MATERIAL ADDED TO THE RULEMAKING FILE (Cal. CcdoRogs. titlo /, §§ « and"5)

4. EFFECTIVE DATE OF REGULATORY CHANGES (Gov. Codo § 11348.2)

Effeciive 30\h day alt&< lv\l Effoc:tive on filing with Effective li'n w~h Socn>ta of St31e ~ Secrel of Stale other S

5. CHECK IF THESE REGULATIONS REQUIRE NOTICE TO, OR REVIEW, CONSULTATION, APPROVAL OR CONCURRENCE BY, ANOTHER AGENCY OR ENTITY

D Department of Finance (Form STD. 399) 0 Fair Political Practices Commission O State Fire Marshal

D Other (Specify)

6. CONTACT PERSON TELEPHONE NUMBER

7.

DOUG WICKIZER, REGULATIONS COORDINATOR (916) 653-9451

I certify that the attached copy of the regulatlon(s) Is a true and correct copy of the regulatlon(s) Identified on th is fonn, that the Information spec/fled on th is fonn Is true and correct, and that I sm the head of the agency taking this set/on, or a deslgnee of the head of the agency, and am authorized to make this cert/flcatlon.

DATE

JULY 9, 1993

DEAN CROMWELL, EXECUTIVE OFFICER

l

2

Modify 14 CCR 1104.1(a) Exemption, as follows:

Timber operation2 for the purpose and under the

3 conditions as follows are exempt from the provision of this

4 article. Such timber operations shall however comply with all

5 other applicable provisions of the Z'Berg-Nejedly Forest

6 Practice Act, and regulations of the Board adopted pursuant

7 thereto, and shall conform to applicable currently effective

a provisions of country general plans and zoning ordinances.

9 (a) A single bonafide (Southern Subdistrict only)

10 conversion to·a non-timber growing use of timberland of less ~·

11 than three acres, whether or not it is a portion of a larger

12 land parcel, under one contiguous ownership. The following

13 conditions apply to this type of timber operation:

14 (1) exempt from the timber harvesting plan preparation

15 and submission requirements (PRC 4581) and from the completion

16 report and stocking report requirements (PRC 4585 and 4587) of

17 the Act;

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

(2) exempt from the resource conservation standards

(stocking standards) (PRC 4561-4561.6) of the Act;

(3) no timber operations shall be conducted within a WLPZ

(Southern Subdistrict only) ;

(a-4) conducted pursuant to a notice submitted :to the

Director that provides the following information:

(i) names, addresses, and telephone numbers of the timber

owner, timberland owner, and timber operator;

(ii) legal description of the area where the timber

operation is to be conducted, showing section, township,

COURT PAPER STAT!t OP' CALll"ORNIA STD. 113 IREV. 8°721

84 3291S

1

2

-

range, county and assessor parcel numbers;

(iii) map showing the location of the timber operation;

3 including the location of all Class I, II., III, and IV

4 watercourses (14 CCR 916.5, 936.5, or 956.5);

5 (iv) certification by the timber owner that the

6 conversion conforms to applicable county general plans and

7 zoning ordinances;

8 (v) certification by the timberland owner that the

9 exemption in this section has not been previously used for

10 this contiguous ownership; ~·

11 (vi) the signature of the timber owner as the individual

12 who is submitting the noticeTi

13 Cviil certification by the timberland owner stating what

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

is the intended land use of the timberland to be converted


Cviii> certification by the timberland owner stating that

the intended conversion is bona fide\/CSouthern Subdistrict v only>. f4~m l4 C.c.R. sechb n ttoo(b)"

(5) Timber operations pursuant to a notice submitted

under Cal above may not commence for ten working days from the

date of the Director's receipt of the exemption unless waived

by the Director after consultation with other state and county

agencies when such consultation has occurred, in less than ten

days after the Director's receipt. Within ten working days of

receipt, the Director shall determine whether the exemption is

complete and accurate. If it is found to be complete and

accurate, the Director shall send a copy of a notice of

COURT PAPER STAT!r OP' CAt..IFORNIA STD. I 13 IAEV. 9·'721

84 32915

1 acceptance to the submitter. If the exemption is not complete

2 and accurate it shall be returned to the submitter. If the

3 Director does not act within ten days of receipt of the

4 exemption. timber operations may commence. The landowner

5 shall notify the Director of the completion of timber

6 operations within 30 days of their cessation. (Southern

7 Subdistrict only) .

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

Note: Authority Cited: Sections 4551, 4551.5, 4554, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 4627, 4628, 4512, 4513, 4584, Public Resources Code.

~·

COURT PAPER STATE OP' CALIFORNIA STD. 113 CREV. 11·721

84 32915

, . 4

CONTACT:

Dean Cromwell Executive Officer (916) 653-8007

RELEASE DATE:

July a, 1993

BOARD OF FORESTRY CLOSES THREE ACRE LOOPHOLE IN BAY AREA COUNTIES

The State Board of Forestry at its meeting on July 7 passed

emergency regulations to slow down use of an exemption in four Bay

Area counties that allows a landowner to harvest up to three acres

without filing a timber haryesting plan or meeting other

requirements.

The Board acted after hearing from representatives of the

county of Santa Cruz, the timber industry, the Sierra Club, the

Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, and the public that the

current exemption was being abused. Witnesses said that sensitive

forestlands were being cut heavily without proper analysis and

protection and that this violated the intent of the state rules.

"Public concern and anger over this kind of cutting--and its

extent--is undermining the working relationships between the timber

industry, the community, and even between neighbors," said Woody

Barnes, acting Board Chairman.

current rules allow a landowner a single one time conversion

of forestland on three acres or less without filing a timber

~· harvest plan or meeting other requirements. It is only necessary

to file an exemption and then cutting can begin.

-MORE-

-2-

Barnes explained that the existing regulation was intended to

facilitate conversion of small areas of forestland for housing or

other similar uses. However, with extremely high timber prices,

many landowners are using the exemption just to harvest trees and

have no real intention of converting the land.

"Based on the comments from Santa Cruz county, the abuse of

the exemption has created some really bad. feelings between

neighbors and is getting out-of-hand," said Barnes. He added that

he hoped the Board's action would give everyone breathing space to r·

deal with the issue.

The emergency rule modifies the exemption to prohibit

harvesting in watercourse and lake protection zones, to require a

certification of bonaf ide intent to convert, and to impose a 10-day

delay between filing the notice and harvesting.

The Board emergency action applies only to timber operations

in the Southern Subdistrict of the Coast Forest District (Santa

Cruz, Santa Clara, San Mateo, and Marin counties). Subdistrict

rules prohibit openings (clearcuts) larger than 1/2 acre.

The Board also noted it has received complaints about abuse of

the 3 acre exemption from many parts of the state. Thus the Board

has proposed a similar change in regulations applying to the

remainder of the state for consideration within 45-60 days.

# # # # #

OPTIONS ----- >

#of inspections *

# of violations

#with environmental damage

# with enforcement action

Was Conversion actually completed? * (since May 1, 1993)

OPTIONS ----- >

# of inspections * # of violations



Was Conversion actually completed?

1t (since May 1 , 1 .993

Amador-Eldorado Ranger Unit Exemption Report

Christmas Dead, Dying <3 trees Diseased Acres

29

5 (17%)

SOME-one on arch site

5

NIA NIA NIA

Conversion

83

14 (17%)

SOME

14

FEW·

Tuolumne-Calaveras Ranger Unit Exemption Report

Christmas Dead, Dying <3 Conversion trees Diseased Acres

: 5 12 10

3 (60%) 5 (42%) 8 (80%)

0 0 1 (10%)

3 (60%) 5 (42%) 8 (80%)

NIA NIA NIA ?

Totals

112

19 (17%)

SOME

19

NIA

Totals

27

16 (59%)

1 (4%)

16 (59%)

NIA

~ JAN-02-' 00 MON 02: 03 I 1 TEL NO: lt026 P01

URGENT, U R G E N T, URGENT

BOARD OF FORESTRY

THEY ARE PREPARING TO IMMEDIATELY CUT A GROVE OF REDWOODS ON THE RAEDENB BROWN PROPERTY ON FERN FLAT, APTOS, CALIFORNIA. I AM GRAVELY CONCERNED ABOUT THE TREES AND THE EFFECT THIS WILL HAVE ON MY CLOSE FRIENDS, JOHN AND JOAN ALDERSON, 2080 SPARROW VALLEY R0. 1 APTOS, CALIFORNIA, 95003, ~HO LIVE ON THE NEIGHBORING PROfERTY.

THE ALDERSONS AND THEIR NEIGHBORS LOVE THESE TREES AS PBRMANENT LIVING THINGS AND ARB HORRIFIED AT THE THOUGHT THAT THEY WILL DISAPBAR FROM VIEW.

PLBASE STOP THESE ENVIRONMENTALLY UNCONCIOUS BROWNS AND ANY OTHERS WHO WOULD CALLOUSLY CUT DOWN OUR NATURAL TREASURES. I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY HAVE A PERMIT TO DESECRATE THE FOREST. PLEASE RECIND WHATBVl!;R ORDINANCE WOULD ALLOW THIS PERMIT.

THIS MATTER REQUIRES IltnmDlATE ATTENTION. PLEASE STOP THIS.

THANK YOU,

-f~O·M PATRICIA O'GRADY, LICENSED CLINICAL SOCIAL WORKER 136 Rogers Ave. · San Carloe, CA 94070

Eve. 415-592-7486 Day 409-441-5129

JUN 30 '93 ·01:s6PM BIG CREEK DAVENPORT

(\~&eK 'Growing Redwoods for the Future"

Mr. Dean A. Cromwell Executive Director Board of Fo~estry P. o. Box 944246 Sacramento, CA 94244-2460

Re: Appeal of THP l-92-237 SCR

Dear Dean:

June JO, 1993

r Some have asked how outslopinq the existinq bypass

road would affect risk. It has been acknowledged that outslopinq the road will increase the risk of overland flows to the natural level that existed before the road was built. It also has been made clear that outsloping will eliminate the risk of concentrated runoff overflowinq the road. So, what is the net effect of these impacts?

\

The neiqhbors say that they had no problems before the road was built. There are no reports of damage from overland flows. Based on that experience qoinq back almost thirty years, one would have to conclude that overland flows pose very little risk.

The neiqbbors describe two oooasions when they experienced concentrated flows overflowinq the road. Both times they say that they suffered damaqe. (And they have described how much they fear a repeat of such incidents.) Based on that experience, one would have to conclude that concentrated flows pose a considerable risk.

Therefore, based on the experience of the neighbors, it is safe to conclude that the risk from concentrated flows is much greater than the risk from natural flows. There are no reports of damage from natural flows, but every time there has been a concentrated flow, damage has resulted. Thus, increasing the risk Of overland flows to the natural level while at the same time reducing the risk of man-made concentrated flows to zero will result in an overall reduction of risk. (References: Official Response Issues 2, 6, 8 1 11, 17, 44, & 46)

P.1/2

- '

30 '93 01:S6PM BIG CREEK DAVENPORT

~ r )

P.2/2

If the route to that conclusion isn't clear, perhaps an analogy will help. Let• s say that you decide to take up parachute jumping. We tell you that we have prepared the landing zone by removing all the obstacles, leveling the ground, and plowing the first 12 inches of soil to soften your landing-. In other words, we have reduoe the risk of landing. But, ·regrettably, we also have to tell you that a very small percentage of the parachutes are defective and will fail to open. In other words, there is a very small risk of a c;atastrophie failure. (That is analogous to the present insloped bypass road - reduced risk· of overland flows with a very small chance of catastrophic failure.)

You suggest that you don.•t· like the sound of that. We then offer to restore all the humps, bumps and obstacles in the landing· zone to return it to its natural condition. In other words, you will experience the usual risks associated with landing. And lucky for you, now '1e can guarantee that every parachute will open, no ·catastrophic failu-res. With that, I think you would aqree, the overall risk has been reduced. (That is analogous to the proposed outsloped road - some increased risk from overland flows, but no risk of concentrated flows.)

Sincerely,

J9d DALE F. HOLDERMAN, FORESTER License Number 69

Logg1~g boor,i hits c Neighbors form groups as watchdogs By MAY WONG Senrinel staff writer

SAN'l'A CRUZ - More and more ears around the county are hearing the sound of chain saws this year.

From Boulder Creek to Mount Hermon, Big Basin to UC Santa Cruz and Corralitos to the Sum· mit, residents who live near for· csts are seeing more "Caution: Logging trucks" signs posted on nearby roads.

'!'he value of timber harvesting has doubled over the past four years to $6.2 million, placing it as the eighth highest cash crop in the county in 1992.

With the pi:ice of lumber sky· rocketing, more timber harvest· ing plans for the county were submitted to the California De· partment of Forestry and Fire Protection to this date than any year in the last decade. ·

And the rate at which people are logging less than three acres - no review process required -has more than doubled.

That means that throughout the county, where homes have sprouted in and around heavily forested terrain, more residents are closer than ever to logging operations.

And they are keeping a closer watch on the loggers.

Take, for example, recent pro· tests against a proposal to log 45 acres in Lockhart Gulch near Scotts Valley. After residents ex· pressed fears of erosion and flooding, the project's fores ter, Rich Sampson, revised the plan. He expects the.county will appeal on. behalf of the residents· if the plan is approved.

"'l'he general public is catching on," said · Sampson, a fores_ter with Emeryville-based Pacific Meridian Resources. "They're going through these plans with a line-tooth comb and they'll knock you down on a technicality."

As of June 18, CDF received 23 plans covering 3,203 acres of timberland in Santa Cruz County, and more are expected. The 3,000-acre mark has been reached only live of the last 14 years, and in each case, that was by December, not June.

Please see LOGGTNG - A2 ... Y. .. ,,; .. , 01,J · ~ •• ~ ' ..

• • .. t . .. .. . '~ '

Timber ha,.Yest$, I at top, increa~ing Scotts Valley 'site

••• ~ .•· . t ",,...

. . ...... ~ .. .. ... .. . ........ "' '"'"''' u o> L••t:)' u:>cu to, he said.

Four parking control officers are riding mountain bikes that have been confiscated by city police, Farrell said.

•. '"•cu "'"u ~11ula 1.,ruz 1s one 01 the few communities in the state with a pedaling parking patrol.

The response so far from ~ocal residents, many of whom are cycling enthusiasts, has been posi-tive, said Donnelly. • : A local cyclist, Kevin Karplus,

volunteered to train the officers and advised them how to outfit the

"Basically, it's been a lot Or 'Right ons!' " he said. Parking 9ontrol officer Adrian Vandertuyn combines exercise with his search fc

There goes the neighbor.hood !°Pgging riles summit residents· ... . -. . By MAY WONG " - inel staff writer

.UMMIT - Rich Kelso, a Summit resident, says he can't relax with a book in his living room in the afternoon anymore. ~ "The sun just shines right through the house. Instead of sitting on the couch to read, you have tO wear sunglasses," he said. : Kelso's home is on 'Old Santa

Cruz Highway, on the south side of Summit Road. The home was reciently rebuilt from the 1989 earthquake. Kelso put in a 14-foot arched window in the living room for a view of the redwoods. : But a month ago, his view

changed. ; "lt was an impenetrable forest

before, and now it's just stumps :>~rf rubble," Kelso said. "That

JS us unhappy." .• ne undeveloped land next to

Kelso's home belongs to one of a I

i~ogging • 1n . ~

growing number' of property own- cut, he said . ers who are logging less than three "'I wanted to clean out the propacres without having to go through erty;" he said. "Now you've got a lengthy timber harvest review sunlight shining through it all. It process. looks pretty to me. Before it was a

thicket." Officials at the California De- But those who live in the neigh-

partment of Forestry and Fire Pro- borhood on upper Fern Flat Road tection say the rise in timber pric- have a very d.ifferent opinion. es has spurred more landowners "(The loggers) devastated the statewide to use a 1 %-year-old rule property," said Elizabeth Herbert. that gives them a one-time exemp- "It looks kind of like a parking lot tion from submitting a harvest with a few trees tucked in, whereplan if the logging project is less as before it was a nice grove of than three acres. trees."

Since January, 65 landowners in She says several small logging Santa Cruz County have signed up projects in her neighborhood of at the .CDF office in Felton for the about 20 homes have pitted neigh· exemption. In all of last year, 56 bor against neig.Qbor. were registered, i-' . . . "I kiL~ you ~ve to lQg tree.s

L.N. Kusalich, who owns a 15- somew.Bere," Kelso · saicf. ~'But acre undeveloped parcel on Fern when you ·come to' an area' like 'this Flat R<;>ad in Aptos, says ·he use9, ~p~ri; there's residences in rural the exemption this year to thin t he , , ar~~s. an d you start . logging betrees on three acres of land. About tween the· houses, it's not really ap-50 percent of the redwoods were llt<>i>P.at~:" ~ ; ...

• • • ~.· \.;~· l~ • ~ · ' , ,1

coUnty increases .. G.vittnued from Page Al ~3:ederal protections for the spotted owl have closed

·dn:; more than 600,000 acres of forest in the Pacific N.Orthwest to logging. Heavy cutting in the 1980s of large tracts owned by timber companies have reduced i)lpply and have forced a shift in the industry toward p~vately owned land such as in Sapta Cruz County. ....

upper P.art of Fern Flat Road near the Forest of ·~~sene Marks. She says six landowners in the area'have fil~d for exemptions'tlµS-.year, and three of them ~~ve alr~adx;cqt down·dozens of trees. _ , . .

''It's ' completely divided our neighborhood between those peoPle who say it's their right to log as they see fit11nd those others who say, 'what about our property values, what about our roads,' " Herbert said.

~<in the meantime, demand for lumber has gone up as I91yer inter ·ates have created a boom for the build-irfg industr ..Jd David Soho, a resource manager for CDF in Felton.

"What we really need is a . spotted owl here," said Shirley Scott, who owns an undeveloped parcel of land on Fern Flat Road.

• 1 • • It,\

Fern Flat Road, .e'.$r<ff~nt Elizabeth Herbert says loggers

help educate residents on timber harvesting and the review process. .

"It's hard to get away. with a lot of things here," said Steve Hollett, a forest practice 9fficer for CDF in Felton. "People will call if they hear a chainsaw and want to know if it's legal. It's really a self-regulating state."

Decisions aren 't polit ical

BUD MCCRARY, co-owner of Davenport-based Big Creek Lumber Co .. the larttost commercial tim-

Dave Hope, charge of tirr cerns about ti but once the l plaints.

Hope says h after a loggin[ the impacts of in the plan.

Many reside that logging ~mnno tho h oc

. !

j

Chicago Bulls take thi.rd strai

ant a rui 136th Year No.170 Mond_ay, June 21, 1993

Logging boom hits Neighbo.rs · form groups as watchdogs By MAY WONG Sentinel staff writer

SANTA CRUZ - More and more ears around the county are hearin·g the sound of chain saws th.is year.

From Boulder Creek to Mount Hermon, Big Basin to UC Santa Cruz and Corralitos to the Summit, residents who live near "forests are seeing more "Caution: Logging trucks" signs posted on nearby roads.

The value of timber harvesting has doubled over the past four years to S6.2 million, placing it as the eighth highest cash crop in the county in 1992: · ·

With the p1:ice of lumber skyrocketing, more timber harvesting plans for the county were submitted to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection to this date than any year in the last decade.

And the rate at which people are Jogging Jess than three acres - no review process required -has more than doubled.



Take, for example, recent prot""'" :io:i inc:t :i nrnnnc::il In lno 11;

$ ;

JUL- 7-93 WED 10 :33 PRt. SMITH

Poge 1 of _L Pages (lncivding T/lis PogeJ

TO:

FROM: \J\LLA-~oR FLAT ((oAl>

APTDS I CA (':S/t!JTf\- c Rvz... c OUN I

MESSAGE: -r \-tt T++~EF Ac.RE A«~ BE 1l)b ABusEt> BELA-USs

( 0 ") vtr<.S I DA.,

""Iltf CD u~FTY. L-0(:,.GtAlG.

-~. _..,_,,

. -~-

AUTOMATIC COVER SHEET

DATE: JUL- 7-93 WED 10:34

TO:

FAX #: 19166530989

FROM: PRINT SMITH

FAX #: 4086885602

02 PAGES WERE SENT

(INCLUDING THIS COVER PAGE)

P. 02

•

JUL- 7-93 WED 10:43 ~

PRINT SMITH FAX NO. 408~602 P.01

~

Dear S1rs,

Kate Schneiter

2090 SpetTow Valley Rd.

Aptos, Ce. 95003

our neighbor, who started logg1ng today, has gotten three "conversion"oermi~s in

the post week. She is logging several contiguous parcels by alternating ownership

with her hus~ond. This logging is taking ploca 1n en earthquake zone, just a few

miles from the epicenter of the '89 Loma Priete earthquake. In an area of such

critical concern this unsupervised togging and eYen ciear cutting will surely ceuse

edditional problems. VOU MUST RETHINK THIS POLICY. In the interum, please halt

the conversions.

A concerened earthquake survivor.

KrJte Schneiter

---~ ··.~-

JUL- 7-93 WED 10:43 PRINT SMITH ' ')

FAX NO. 4086885602 ~

To tue Board or Forestry;

Bdward B. Smith 3262 Fern Flat Rd. Aptos, Ca. 95003

• Tha three acre conversions must end. They are a regulatory nightmare. In our area, tbe loggers are

~ opportunists who operate 11le ~oodlums and thieves. It extortion doesn't work, they resort to threats of physical violence and deat~. They have not respected property lines, not even those ot our state parks. In our small rnral county t~ere have bean over ?0 conversions slnce January, already a 50' increase over last years total. Regulatory staff, reducea by budget cuts, are overwhelmed and have not been able to respond until after extensive damage bas occurred. Stop the rape of our commun1ty,

Enward B. Smith

P.02

-·~ ~'' .···· . '

JUL- 7-93 WED 10:43 PRINT SMITH ~-···

FAX NO. 4086885602 P.03 ~

Stewards of the Forest Trust,

Nathan Lawerence

1855 17th Ave.

Santa Cruz, ca. 95062

I am appalled at the unregulated logging o.ccu:ri:ng within the Loma •

Prieta earth qnake zone. In this environ.me1itally sensitive area sev.e-ral

exemptions have been red tagged after the damage ·was done. Without

~ a workable inspection proceodure in place, the three acre exempti<>!!s

must cease. Thes~ ravagers of the land must not be allo~Ted to conti:nue

nnchocked_

Stop the abus~.

SiDcere1y~

Nathan Lawerence

" . \

. .. JUL- .~-93 W!!D to:44

~

~

PRINT SHITH

!~ ··-·····-

FAK NO. 4086885602

Dirs Sirs;

Richord Todd lit Blake Corrolitos. Ca

• Here in Sant: a Cruz count:Y a su~den flurry of lo~ging h~s occurred in t:na oas1: 6 mon-ths. Land oastn~rs o;~ no't using the 3 acre conversion as you intendeda The conversions are greed driv~n- Th~~~·

oonverting =they are doing is 'tre~s to cash .. To avoid fu;t:tu~r fibuse. exemo'ti.ons rul!i\ 't no't be issued Ni'thout an exis1:ing building permi't and could origina'te 1aith the ccun'tY ooncerened_ In this ~!iY th2re tuil 1 be outo~a'tic oversight r;nere 'there is non~ at this time. Please EH1GC't amareenoy measures =to halt: 'the ra~e of our counl:Y by rut:hless prof i 't eers.

Riotu:1rd Todd

RicMiff Jrxf c(

P.04

~ . . . ····--·-· •.. . . . . . .. . -····-· ..

P.05



TO: ·

~ FAX #: 19166530989

FROM: PRINT SMITH

FAX #: 4086885602

05 PAGES WERE SENT

~ (INCLUDING THIS COVER PAGE)

t""' JUL-07-1993 09:53 FROM MIDWEST PLATE GLASS TO

July 7, 1993

John A. & Joan s. Alderson 2080 Sparrow Valley Road

Aptos, ca. 95003 408/688-3407

State of California-Board of Forestry FAX: #~653-0989

~&

9166530989 P.01

Re: Loq9in9 in Santa Cruz County, Rancho Valencia Area Fern Flat Road Area

Dear Sir and/or Ma~am:

Reqently there has been some logging in the Rancho Valencia area of Santa .Cruz County. A survey map of the general area indicates "Timber Preserve Zones" in large areas of the map. It appears•that these "Timber Resource Zones" may have been violated.

Apparently there is a law that allows a home owner an exemption for logging on 3 acres of that property. The intent of the law, we understand, was to allow the homeowner to log up to 3 acres to clear a homesite on the land.

We understand that several property owners in the area have applied for and received permits to harvest timber on land where a homesite already exists. In certain instances the land was "clearcut" and in at least one instance, there was a slide during the winter rains, the erosion probably caused by the clearcutting of the timber.

As residents of the area and concerned citizens, we feel that this law needs to be chan9ed to safeguard our timber and land resources in the area. There is a need to require an inspection of the site to make certain the cutting does not cause harm to the land. In addition, it may be prudent to limit the owner to only 1 parcel of 3 .acres within a 10 year period. Some may own several parcels, and 109 each parcel simultaneously. We feel that an immediate restraining order, or moratorium, should be issued on all existing loqqinq permits until an inspection plan can be implemented to prevent irresponsible profiteerinq from this loop bole in the law.

There is an approved permit pending, with cutting to begin itamediately on land adjacent to ours and other sites which may directly affect the livability of our homesite and our neighbors.

Please give this matter your urqent attention in your meeting this date.

Fr om

July 7, 1993

California Board of Forestry P.O. Box 94244 Sacramento, CA 20460

Dear Sirs:

Cilil..Cll$ for Responsible Pore.st Management

CRFM

• Citizens for Responsible Forest Management is an organization representing the Summit Community and the neighbors of the Soquel Demonstration State Forest. We are writing today requesting a moratorium on conversions until some of the abuses can bo more thoroughly studied. Several of our neighbors have had serious adverse experiences with logging projects begun under the guise of a one time three acre conversion. We strongly urge that this Iequest for a moratorium be granted and that the board adopt requirements in the future that preven.t the hTesponsible use of these conversions as an easy alternative to a THP.

cc: Ida Hills, Sierra Club; Sam Farr, U.S. Senate; Jan Beutz, Santa Cruz County Supervisor.

rltl-7Pt1~ ft>I' RPr:nt>tH:ihlP Pnr~n:t Mnnno1>numt P n R1w lOR?

P01

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

OARD OF FORESTRY 16 NINTH STREET

P.O. BOX 944246

SACRAMENTO, CA 94244-2460

(916) 653-8007

FAX (916) 6.53·0989

July 8, 1993

Ms. Stephanie Villasenor 3000 Fern Flat Road Aptos, CA 95003

Dear Ms. Villasensor,

PETE WILSON, Governor

~ re..sp onSe....

c or re.sf crt'J.PA c..-e. ·

This letter is in response to your recent correspondence . Ori' July 7, 1993, the State Board of Forestry adopted emergency regulations to slow down use of an exemption in four Bay Area counties that allows a landowner to harvest up to three acres without filing a timber harvesting plan or meeting other requirements. The Board acted after hearing from representatives of Santa Cruz County, the timber industry, the Sierra Club, the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, and the public that the current exemption was being abused.

The emergency rule modifies the exemption process by prohibiting harvesting in watercourse and lake protection zones, requiring a certification of bonafide intent to convert, and imposing a ten-day delay between filing the notice and harvesting.

The Board emergency action applies to timber operations in the Southern Subdistrict of the Coast Forest District (Santa Cruz, Santa Clara, San Mateo, and Marin counties) . The Board has also noted complaints regarding abuse of the exemption process in other parts of the state. Thus, the Board has proposed a similar change in permanent regulations applying to the remainder of the state which will be given a 45- day public review.

Sincerely,

Dean Cromwell, Executive Officer

OPTIONS.-----> Christmas trees

# of inspections * 0

# of violations 0

#with 0 environmental damage

# with enforcement 0 action

% Conversion was N/A actually completed * (since May 1, 1993)

OPTIONS ----- > Christmas trees

#of inspections *

# of violations



% conversion was N/A actually completed • (since May 1, 1993,

Mendocino Ranger Unit Exemption Report

Dead, Dying <3 Diseased Acres

21 15

1 (5%) 0

1 (5%) 0

1 (5%) 0

N/A N/A

Humboldt Ranger Unit Exemption Report


26

2 (8%)

1 (4%)

3 (12%)

N/A N/A

Conversion Totals

23 59

13 (57%) 14 (24%)

9 (39%) 10 (17%)

11 (48%) 12 (20%)

58% N/A

Conversion Totals

49 75

5 (10%) 7 (9%)

1 (2%) 2 (3%)

3 (6%) 6·(8%)

73% N/A

OPTIONS ----- >

# of inspections *

# of violations



% conversion was actually completed . * (since May 1, 1993)

OPTIONS ----- >

# of inspections *

# of violations


#with enforcement action

% conversion was actually completed

• (since May 1, 1993)

Christmas trees

NIA

Butte Ranger Unit Exemption Report


N/A N/A

Conversion

21% '

Nevada/Yuba/Placer Ranger Unit Exemption Report


N/A N/A N/A 35%

Totals

14

10 (71 %)

1 (6%)

10 (71 %)

N/A

Totals

23

4 (17%)

0

4 (17%)

NIA

.. , '

OPTIONS ----- >

# of inspections *

# of violations


# with· enforcement action


OPTIONS ----- >

# of inspections *

# of violations



% conversion was actually completed

• (since May 1, 1993;

Christmas trees

N/A

Christmas trees

N/A

Shasta-Trinity Ranger Unit Exemption Report


11

2 (18%)

0

0

N/A N/A

Siskiyou Ranger Unit Exemption Report


4

1 (25%)

0

0

N/A N/A

Conversion Totals

9 20

2 (22%) 4 (20%)

1 (11 %) 1 (5%)

2 (22%) 2 (10%)

33% N/A

Conversion Totals

6 10

2 (33%) 3 (33%)

0 0

0 0

100% N/A

.-

Follow-up Forest Practice Inspection

THP# 2-93 - 53-BUT(l}

April 20, 1993

Present at the Inspection: Richard Dixon CDF Region II HQ~, RPF; for exemptions ~ proper Representative.

The purpose of this inspection was to determine what corrective work the Department would require prior to resubmission of THP# 2-9·3 .. -BUT ( l). This THP was withdrawn for additional information, an~ue violations which had occurred during timber operations conducted on the ownership . under the following exemption numbers:

2-92Ex-tll-c1)BUT

2-92EX-tlll-(l}BUT

2-92EX1111-(l}BUT

2-92EX11111-(l}BUT

2-92EX-1111~(l)BUT

2-9~EX~(l)BUT

2-92EX-lll-(l)BUT

2-92EX-tlll-(l)BUT

2-92EX---( l)BUT

2-92EX-lll-(l)BUT '

2-92EX-lll-(l)BUT

2-93EX ... -(l)BUT

The Inspection began at landir:ig #1 on the attached map, and proceeded basically west over the ownership ending at the landing on Mr. property (west of area #10 on the attached map).

Ten reference points were identified during the inspection that would require .corrective work. At the conclusion of the inspection, the time table for accomplishing the corrective work was identified. For clarity, the finding of the inspection will be listed by the reference points identified during the inspection.

Point #1: 1. All pine tops throughout the exemption area and around the landing must be lopped to lie within 30" of the ground prior to resubmission of the THP.

2. The Class III watercourse channels must be cleared prior to the· winter period of 1993 (October 15, 1993).

3. If gates are not installed on the road into this area , slash within 75 feet of the traveled edge of the road must be lopped to lie within 30 11 of the ground prior to resubmission of the THP.

Point#2: 1. Same as #3 at Point #1.

2. Same as #1 at Point #1 .

f""' Point #2 (Continued):

3. Clear Class III Watercourse Channels prior to October 15, 1993.

Point #3: i. Although no loading was done at this landing, it was agreed that the waterbarring would be reinforced to prevent discharge of water onto the road. This would be accomplished with the THP operations.

Point #4: ' ~ ~ . 1. Seed and mulch sidecast"from road construction.

2. Rock outboard side of dip with 4-6" rock, to act as energy disipators over new fill.

3. Rock dip with crushed ro~k.

4. New road constructed must be added to THP map prior to resubmission of THP.

t l 1

A11 of ~he work prescribed in Items #1, 2, and 3 must be completed prior to the commencement of any operations to the nort of this area.

·Point #5:

This was.a landing constructed under Exemption #2-92EXWlll-(l)BUT. Significant amounts of organic debris had been incorporated into

· the fi~l. This landing was approximately seventy-five feet above a domestic water supply inlet. The construction method was in violation of 14CCR Section 943.2 (j). This is· to.be dealt with as a violation of the Exemption, and this road and the extension of the road to the north are to be deleted from the THP and not used.

1. The corrective measure for the landing will be to slope back the. fill material, remove the slash that has been incorporated into the fill, then stabilize the disturbed ground by either seed and mulchin, or the placement of slash over the distrubance and maximizing ground contact of the slash by lopping so that 90% coverage is attained and slash height is no more than 18 11 above the ground.

Point #6:

This area was operated on without an exemption received by CDF, or . an approved THP. This is in direct violation of PRC 4581 and will be dealt with as such.

1. The Class III watercourse channel must be cleaned out prior to re~ubmission of the THP.

2. Slash within 75" of the road surface must· be lopped to lie within ·3011 of the ground between point #6 and point #7. prior to resubmission of the THP.

(!""" Point #6 (Continued):

3. The road and the roadside ditch must be rocked west of point #6 as a part of the resubmitted THP.

Point #7:

1. This was another landing constructe with significant amounts of waste organic debris incorporated into the fill. This landing was constructed in violation of PRC 4581, as well as 14 CCR 943.2(j). The corrective measures which must be completed· prior to resubmission of the THP were to lop the outboard side of the landing so that the material lies within 30 11 of the ground. All material pushed over during landing constructio~ must be severed from the stump and lopped.

Point #8:

1. In the areas of 2-92EX-llllf-Cl)BUT, the waterbar spacing is kto be decreased to a maximum distance of 50 feet. This will mean additional waterbearring will be required prior to October 15, 1993 for this exemption area. The distance should be incorporated into

·the resubmitted THP.

2. The skid trail across the watercourse.is experiencing rutting as a result of apparent piping of water onto the surface. The corrective measure that is to be incorporated into the THP is that slach will be placed onto the trail surface and waiked into the ground (Punched-In) by a cat prior to October 15, 1993.

Point #9:

1. This appeared to be a mining prospect b~lldozed in the past. It .. constituted a 5-6 foot deep trench oriented directly up and down r

the slope. The THP is to call for a temporary 12" culvert at this location under the proposed road or skid trail, to be removed prior to the completion of operations.

Point #10:

1.TQis included the landing used on the property and the road which had been reconstructed on the property. Unless an agreement, signed by the landowner of recor for each property, allowing the use of these facilities is attached as an addendum to the resubmitted THP, these facilities are to be deleted from the THP.

Additional Measures Required Prior to Resubmission:

1. A signed agreement from the landowner of record is to be attached to the THP as an addenduM for any and all operations which will be proposed outside of Mr --ownership upon resubmission.

·.

. ·::~:-1-.: .. >

. ~1 .• '

2. The RPF is to flag the perimeter of all the one-time minor conversions within this THP area.

cc:D. McNamara, Forest Practice Manager s. Brown, Ranger Unit Chief

James D. Wilson ! Region II FOREST. Practice Litigation Coordinator Forester II RPF #2061

Rob McKenzie, Asst. Distr-ict Attorney, Butte County RPF.

RPF Landowner ,.

••

-~ ~:·

OPTIONS ----->

#of inspections *

# of violations



Was Conversion actually compl~ted?

. * (since May 1, 1993)

Christmas trees

0

0

0

0

NIA

TOTALS Exemption Report

Dead, Dying . <3 Diseased Acres

26 97

4 (15%) 15 (15%)

1 (4%) 3 (3%)

4 (15%) 13 (13%)

NIA NIA

* * totals include not itemized reports

CONCLUSIONS

Conversion Totals **

180 340

44 (24%) 77 (23%)

18 (10%) 22 (6%)

38 (21 %) 69 (20%)

69 (38%) NIA

+ Conversions account for most of the violations (24%). Ranges from 10% to 80% depending on ranger unit.

+ Conversions account for most of the inspections on which resource damage was discovered (10%). Ranges from 0% to 39%, depending on ranger unit.

+ Land use is actually converted on about 38% of exempt conversions.

+ Some type of enforcement action is taken on 38% of exemption inspections.

CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF FORESTRY FINDINGS PURSUANT TO

GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 11346.l(b) TITLE 14, SECTION 1104.l(a), EXEMPTIONS,

CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS

FINDING OF EMERGENCY:

As of June 28, 1993, the Board of Forestry finds that an emergency exists, and that the amendment of Title 14, California Code of Regulations (14 CCR) Section 1104.l(a) is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, safety. and general welfare.

ST~TEMENT OF FACTS CONSTITUTING THE NEED FOR EMERGENCY ACTION:

Background:

Section 1104.1 (a), 14 CCR, provides for what is commonly referred to as a minor conversion or an exempt conversion. Section 1104.l(a) allows a landowner a single conversion of an area less than three acres to a non-timber growing use of timberland. The submitter is exempt from obtaining a timber harvest plan or "THP" {PRC 4581) and from the completion report and stocking report requirements {PRC 4585 and 4587) of the Act, from the stocking standards {PRC 4561-4561.6) of the Act, and from the timberland conversion permit requirement. Use of 1104 .1 {a) is convenient because it allows a landowner with more than three acres of timberland to clearcut up to three acres without filing a THP or meeting the other requirements listed above.

The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection {CDF) has observed increased abuse of the exemption process. over the last several years, the number of exemptions being submitted to CDF has skyrocketed, brought about mainly because of record high log prices. This high number of exemptions has revealed patterns of abuse by landowners. Many people are taking advantage of market conditions and submitting 1104.l{a) exemptions without a bona fide intent to convert the land to other uses. The area is clear cut and no further conversion is taking place. CDF is receiving numerous complaints from citizens and RPFs concerning this unregulated activity. The problem is especially acute in and around Santa Cruz and in the Southern Subdistrict.

Aside from the potential cumulative environmental impacts of this onslaught of bad faith submittals, good faith timberland owners who are required to comply with all Board rules and practice sound forestry are hurt professionally and economically by public perceptions of unregulated harvesting and depletion of local resources resultant from the misuse of the exempt conversions.

Finally, the current 1104.1 exemption process does not include an administrative process for review of exemptions so as to safeguard against such mass abuse of the system.

~ Need for Emergency Action:

The Board is adoption emergency amendment to Section 1104.1 under the authority of Section 4551, 4551.5, and 4554 of the Public Resources Code (PRC).

The emergency rules are necessary to ensure than the submitter intent to actually convert to a non-timber growing use is a bona fide one. In nearly every case where the original three acres was intended for conversion to a non-timber growing use, the conversion never really occurred and simultaneously no attention was paid to stocking. Absent a true conversion, such activity requires a full THP ~long with Departmental review and other protection standards of the Board rules including stocking standards.

The emergency rules are necessary to provide the opportunity for administrative review which can safeguard against the abuses discussed above. CDF is encountering further problems with timber operations conducted under the exemption process because there is not time allotted for agency review of the Exemption Notice prior to commencement of operations. Currently, operations may commence upon mailing of the Notice of Exemption, and in many cases operations are actually completed prior to receipt of the Notice. CDF does not have the opportunity to determine if the process is being abused by people submitting bad faith conversions and effecting clearcuts beyond what is intended by Board rules.

Overall, the emergency rules are necessary to avoid the significant .adverse impact of these abuses on the public peace, health, safety, and welfare. One-time exemptions under 1104.l(a) which are not bona fide conversions allows timber operations to circumvent plan submittal and review and resource protection standards like stocking which would otherwise be required. Impacts to public trust values including forest resources, beneficial uses of water, and wildlife can occur from such misuse of the exemption system as a result of factors like increased erosion and flooding.

Further, timberland owners who submit legitimate THPs in conformance with strict Board standards are losing the trust and good will of the citizens in their locale due to flagrant abuses by others of one-time conversions. As legitimate industries suffer the public backlash for abuses by others, this has adverse effects on the overall economy and welfare of entire areas, in particular, the Southern Subdistrict. The onslaught of bad faith exemption submittals depletes area resources and creates adjacent impacts, putting legitimate non-exempt operations at a significant disadvantage. Implementation of these emergency rules will tighten up the exemption process to prevent these abuses.

SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND STATEMENT OF NECESSITY FOR PROPOSED ACTION:

Section 1104.1 is amended by implementing additional language which is only applicable to the Southern Subdistrict.

A new subsection (a) (3) is added which requires that no timber operations be conducted within a WLPZ. This is necessary to avoid adverse impact to resources within watercourse and lake protection zones including riparian wildlife and habitat, and the beneficial uses of water.

New subsections (vii) and (viii) require certification by the timberland owner of the intended land use of the converted area and certification that the intended conversion is bona fide. Both requirements are necessary to ensure that the submitter is accountable for the stated intent and use of the exempted conversion, and that resource standards like stocking are not circumvented for other than actual conyersion to non-timber growing uses. For these reasons, the word "bonafide" is added to subsection {a).

A new subsection (5) is added to 1104.l(a). This section implements a 10 day review process for CDF. Operations may not commence for at least 10 days while CDF reviews the submitted exemption for accuracy and completeness (unless the Director and other reviewing state and county agencies agree to waive this time period) . This is necessary to give CDF the opportunity to ensure that submitted notices are complete and accurate, and not being used to effect abuses of the system such as failure to convert to non-timber growing uses.

INFORMATIVE DIGEST:

PRC Sections 4551, 4551.5, and 4554 provide for the adoption of emergency regulations in the areas where rulemaking authority is granted to the Board. Respectively, these sections of the Act pertain to adoption of fore st practice rules and regulations, application and development of rules, and adoption of emergency regulations under Section 11346 of the Government Code.

These emergency regulations must be adopted immediately to prevent the abuse in the Southern Subdistrict of the exempt conversion process under Section 1104 .1 (a) of the forest practice rules. This abuse consists of a recent onslaught of bad faith exemption submittals where there is no bona fide intent to actually convert the harvested land. These misused exemptions are resulting in potential for adverse impacts to environmental resources and creating an social and economic difficulties for timberland owners who are operating in good faith under the full THP process. The regulations amend 1104 .1 to: add the word "bonafide" to subsection (a); add a new subsection (a) (3) which requires that no timber operations be conducted within a WLPZ; adds new subsections (vii) and (viii) which require certification by the timberland owner of the intended land use of the converted area and certification that the intended conversion is bona fide; and, adds a new subsection (5) which implements an administrative review process for CDF.

RELEVANT DOCUMENTS: None.

~ COSTS OF THE PROPOSAL:

There are no additional cost~ to any state agency, nor any state mandated costs to local agencies of government or school districts that require reimbursement under Part 7, Division 4 (commencing with Section 17500) of the Government Code because of any duties obligations, or responsibilities imposed on state or local agencie~ or school districts. Additionally, there will be no other non-discretionary costs or savings imposed on local agencies nor any costs or savings in federal funding to the state. This order does not create any savings or additional costs of administration for any agency of the United states Government over and above the program appropriations made by Congress. There are no mandates to local governments or school districts.

The rules will not have a significant adverse economic impact on timberland owners, timber owners, timber operators, or other

·private parties. The emergency rules would require that the submitter of an 1104 .1 (a) exemption have a bona fide intent to convert the land to a non-timber growing use. This has always been the intent of the current 1104.l(a) section. However, recently there has been an onslaught of abuse of this section and landowners have been harvesting small areas under a one-time conversion without actually having intent to covert the land to other uses.

The provisions which provide for up to a ten day review of the submittal before timber operations commence will not have significant adverse economic impacts. In cases where the bona fide intent is shown and where the notice is complete and accurate, the exemption may proceed. Also, the Director may waive, in consultation with reviewing agencies, some of the ten day waiting time. Even absent such waiver, the ten day time period results only in nominal agency costs for review, and no appreciable costs to the landowner. If the notice is not accepted, it is because the intent was not bonafide, or the notice was not complete and accurate. Bonafide intent to convert, and complete and accurate notices have always been the intended prerequisite for one time conversions of less than three acres.

The Board of Forestry must determine that no stated alternative considered would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which this regulation was adopted and would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed action.

IMPACTS ON HOUSING COSTS AND BUSINESSES:

The proposed regulatory action will not have a significant adverse economic impact on housing. No appreciable gain in the price of lumber as building material will result from adoption of these alternative regulations. Also, the rules will not have significant adverse economic impact on businesses for the same reasons set forth above.

~ AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE:

Authority Cited: Sections 4551, 4551.5, and 4554, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 4627, 4628, 4512, 4513, 4584, Public Resources Code.

~ \

--~

CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF AL ISTRATIVE LAW SACRAMENTO, CALil :mIA

In re:

FORESTRY BOARD

REGULATORY ACTION: Title 14 California Code of Amend 1104.1

) ) ) ) ) )

Regulations) ) ) ) ) ) )

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>

SUMMARY OF REGULATORY ACTION

NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EMERGENCY REGULATORY ACTION (Gov. Code, Sec. 11349.6)

OAL File No. 93-0709-04 E

These emergency regulations modify the procedure for obtaining a conversion exemption for harvesting less than three acres of timber.

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW DECISit N

OAL approves this regulatory action

REASON FOR DECISION

This regulatory action meets all apJ 1licable legal requirements.

DATE: 07/19/93

for JOHN D. SMITH . Deputy Director

Original: Dean Cromwell, Executive fficer cc: Doug Wickizer

STATE OF CALIFORNIA-OFFICE OF ADMINisTRATIVE LAW

NOTICE PUBLICATION/REGULATIONS SUBMISSION (See Instructions on

reverse) I • sm. 400 (REV. 1-001

!l""'i:iN7'0TTi<JCE~F'"1Lce'iJNu;;;MTta;"l'EH;;---rn.RE"'GU;;;LA7,T~OR;;;:Y;-;A:;:;CT;;;IO~N~N;:-::UM~BER"""'"-.-E"'""'E""°RG"'E..,.N""cY""N"""· U.,,.M""B""EA,..---.,--_....,owius __ AECUA __ Ttft't'_ACOOt< __ .........: _ _JR

~ - o'lo 9 -G:>il Ir FOf use by Office of Administrative Law (OAL) only

'l. ·=- -

AGENCY AGENCY FILE NUMBER (H any)

BOARD OF FORESTRY

A. PUBLICATION OF NOTICE (Complete for publication in Notice Register) 1. SUBJECTOFNOTICE TlllE(S) FIRST SECTION AFFECTED

1104 .1 EXEMPT CONVERSIONS <I. AGENCYCONTACTPERSON

B. SUBMISSION OF REGULATIONS (Complete when submitting regulations)

1-SPECIFY CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS TITLECS) AND SECTION($) (Including title 26, ff toxics-related) { .. '· t AOOPT

SECTIONS AFFECTED AMEND

1104.1 -TITlE(S)

14 TITLE REPEAL

2. TYPE OF FILING l

' D Regular Rulemaklng (Gov. • 0 RestJbmittal

Code,§ 11346) D Changes Without Regulatory Effect (Cal. Code Regs., title 1, § 100)

For use by Secretary of State only

2. REQUESTED PUBLICATION DATE

TELEPHONE NUMBER

rYl Emergency (Gov. Code, L..J § 11346.1(b))

D Certificate ~f Compliance: The agency officer named below certifies that this agency complied with the provisions of Government Code§§ 11346.4 - 11346.8 prior to, or within 120 days of, the effective date of the regulations listed above.

0 Print Only D Other (specify) 3. DATE(S) OF AVAILABILITY OF MODIFIED REGULATIONS AND/OR MATERIAL ADDED TO TtlE RULEMAKING FILE (Cal. Code Regs. litlo /, §§ 44 and 45)

4. EFFECTIVE DATE OF REGULA TORY CHANGES (Gov. Codo § 11346.2)

Effoctiva 3Qh day altar ~ Effodlve on filing with E.Hediva fili wlh Sec:ret of State ~ Sac:r of Stale o«he< S

5. CHECK IF THESE REGULATIONS REQUIRE NOTICE TO. OR REVIEW, CONSULTATION. APPROVAL OR CONCURRENCE BY. ANOTHER AGENCY OR ENTITY

0 Department of Finance (Form STD. 399) D Fair Political Practices Commission D State Fire Marshal

D Other (Specify)

6. CONTACT PERSON TELEPHONE NUMBER

DOUG \~ICKIZER , REGULATIONS COORDINATOR (916) 653-9451 7.

I certify that the attached copy of the regu/atlon(s) Is a true and correct copy of the regu/atlon(s) Identified on this form, that the Information specified on this form Is true and correct, and that I am the head of the agency taking this action, or a deslgnee of the head of the agency, and am authorized to make this certlflcatlon.

DATE

J ULY 9·, 1993 TYPED NAME AND TITI.E OF SIGNATORY

DEAN CROMWELL, EXECUTIVE OFFICER

1

2

Modify 14 CCR 1104.1(a) Exemption, as follows:

Timber operation§ for the purpose and under the






8 provisions of country general plans and zoning ordinances.


10 conversion to a non-timber growing use of timberland of less P•



13 conditions apply·to this type of timber operation:

14 (1) exempt from the timber harvesting plan preparation

15 and submission requirements (PRC 4581) and from the completion

16 report and stocking report requirements (PRC 4585 and 4587) of

the Act,· 17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27




{Southern Subdistrict only> ;

(-3-4) conducted pursuant to a notice submitted to the





operation is to be conducted, showing section, township,

COURT PAPER STATU OV CALIFORNIA STD. 113 iRl:V. 8°721

84 3291$


3

l

2 (iii) map showing the location of the timber operation;

including the location of all Class I, II, III, and IV

4 watercourses (14 CCR 916.5, 936.5, or 956.5);

5 (iv) certification by the timber owner that the

6 conversion conforms to applicable county general plans and

7 zoning ordinances;

8 (v) certification by the timberland owner that the

9 exemption in this section has not been previously used for

10 this contiguous ownership; ~·

11 (vi) the signature of the timber owner as the individual

12 who is submitting the notice~L

13 Cvii> certification by the timberland owner stating what

14 is the intended land use of the timberland to be converted

15 (Southern Subdistrict only);

16 (viii> certification by the timberland owner stating that

17 the intended conversion is bona fide (Southern Subdistrict

18 only).

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

CS) Timber operations pursuant to a notice submitted

under Ca) above may not commence for ten working days from the





receipt. the Director shall determine whether the exemption is



COURT PAPER 5TATC OF' CAt..1,0AHIA STO. 113 CREY. 9,721

84 32915




4 exemption, timber operations may commence. The landowner



7 Subdistrict only).

8

9

10

11

12

13


~ 14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

COURT PAPER STATIE OP' CALIFORNIA STD. I 13 IREll. Q.721

84 31915

1 Modify 14 CCR 1104.l(a) Exemption, as follows:

2 Timber operation~ for the purpose and under the






a provisions of country general plans and zoning ordinances.


10 conversion to a non-timber growing use of timberland of less ~·



13 conditions apply to this type of timber operation:

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

COURT PAPER 51"ATC 0,. CAL.,OANtA STD 113 <REV. 9·721

(1) exempt from the timber harvesting plan preparation

and submission requirements (PRC 4581) and from the completion

report and stocking report requirements (PRC 4585 and 4587) of

the Act;





( -3-.!) conducted pursuant to a notice submitted to the





operation is to be. conducted, showing section, township,

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

COURT PAPER S1'A1'C OF CALIFORNIA STD. 113 CREV. 9-721

84 3291~


{iii) map showing the location of the timber operation;

including the location of all ciass I, II, III, and IV

watercourses {14 CCR 916.5, 936.5, or 956.5);

(iv) certification by the timber owner that the

conversion conforms to applicable county general plans and

zoning ordinances;

{v) certification by the timberland owner that the

exemption in this section has not been previously used for

this contiguous ownership; ~·

{vi) the signature of the timber owner as the individual

who is submitting the noticeTi

Cvii) certification by the timberland owner stating what

is the intended land use of the timberland to be converted


Cviiil certification by the timberland owner stating that

the intended conversion is bona fide Southern Subdistrict

onlvl. ~s k~'l\eJl ,' .... "Se.c...h'v" //ooGa). - -- ti.../ cce-. -

(5) Timber operations pursuant to a notice submitted

under Cal above may not commence for ten working days from.the





receipt, the Director shall determine whether the exemption is



COURT PAPER




4 exemption, timber operations may commence. The landowner



7 Subdistrict only).

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


ST ATC Of' CALIFORNIA STD. 113 !REV. 8.72>

84 3291~

CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF FORESTRY FINDINGS PURSUANT TO

GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 11346.l(b) TITLE 14, SECTION 1104.l(a), EXEMPTIONS,

CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS

FINDING OF EMERGENCY:

As of June 28, 1993, the Board of Forestry finds that an emergency exists, and that the amendment of Title 14, California Code of Regulations (14 CCR) Section 1104.l(a) is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, safety. and general welfare.

ST~TEMENT OF FACTS CONSTITUTING THE NEED FOR EMERGENCY ACTION:

Background:

Section 1104.1 (a), 14 CCR, provides for what is commonly referred to as . a minor conversion or an exempt conversion. Section 1104.l(a) .allows a landowner a single conversion of an area less than three acres to a non-timber growing tise of timberland. The submitter is exempt from obtaining a timber harvest plan or "THP" (PRC 4581) and from the completion report and stocking report requirements (PRC 4585 and .4587) of the Act, from the stocking standards {PRC 4561-4561. 6) of the Act, and from the timberland conversion permit requirement. Use of 1104 .1 (a) is convenient because it allows a landowner with more than three acres of timberland to clearcut up to three acres without filing a THP or meeting the other requirem~nts listed above.

The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) has observed increased abuse of the exemption process. over the last several years, the number of exemptions being submitted to CDF has skyrocketed, brought about mainly because of record high log prices. This high number of exemptions has revealed patterns of abuse by landowners. Many people are taking advantage of market conditions and submitting 1104.l(a) exemptions without a bona fide intent to convert the land to other uses. The area is clear cut and no further conversion is taking place. CDF is receiving numerous complaints from citizens and RPFs concerning this unregulated activity. The problem is especially acute in and around Santa Cruz and in the Southern Subdistrict.

Aside from the potential cumulative environmental impacts of this onslaught of bad faith submittals, good faith timberland owners who are required to comply with all Board rules and practice sound forestry are hurt professionally and economically by public perceptions of unregulated harvesting and depletion of local resources resultant from the misuse of the exempt conversions.

Finally, the current 1104.1 exemption process does not include an administrative process for review of exemptions so as to safeguard against such mass abuse of the system.

~ Need for Emergency Action:

The Board is adoption emergency amendment to Section 1104 .. 1 under the authority of Section 4551, 4551.5, and 4554 of the Public Resources Code (PRC).

The emergency rules are · necessary to ensure than the submitter intent to actually convert to a non-timber growing use is a bona fide one. In nearly every case where the original three acres was intended for conversion to a non-timber growing use, the conversion never really occurred and simultaneously no attention was paid to stocking. Absent a true conversion, such activity requires a full THP ~long with Departmental review and other protection standards of the Board rules including stocking standards.

The emergency rules are necessary to provide the opportunity for administrative review which can safeguard against the abuses discussed above. CDF is encountering further problems with timber operations conducted under the exemption process because the~e is not time allotted for agency review of the Exemption Notice prior to commencement of operations. Currently, operations may commence upon mailing of the Notice of Exemption, and in many cases operations.are actually completed prior to receipt of the Notice • . CDF does not have the opportunity to determine if the process is being abused by people submitting bad faith conversi.ons and effecting clearcuts beyond what is intended by .Board rules.

Overall, the emergency rules are necessary to avoid the significant .adverse impact of these abuses on the public peace, health, safety, and welfare. one-time exemptions under 1104.l{a) which are not bona. fide conversions allows timber operations to circumvent plan submittal and review and resource protection standards like stocking which would otherwise be required. Impacts to public trust values including forest resources, beneficial uses of water, and wildlife can occur from such misuse of the exemption system as a result of factors like increased erosion and flooding.

FUrther, timberland owners who submit l·egitimate THPs in conformance with strict Board standards are losing the trust and good will of the citizens in their locale due to flagrant abuses by others of one-time conversions. As legitimate industries suffer the public backlash for abuses by others, this has adverse effects on the overall economy and welfare of entire areas, in particular, the Southern Subdistrict. The onslaught of bad faith exemption submittals depletes area resources and creates adjacent impacts, putting legitimate non-exempt operations at a significant disadvantage. Implementation of these emergency rules will tighten up the exemption process to prevent these abuses.

SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND STATEMENT OF NECESSITY FOR PROPOSED ACTION:

section 1104.1 is amended by implementing additional language which is only applicable to the Southern Subdistrict.

A new subsection (a) (3) is added which requires that no timber operations be conducted within a WLPZ. This is necessary to avoid adverse impact to resources within watercourse and lake protection zones including riparian wildlife and habitat, and the beneficial uses of water.

New subsections (vii) and (viii) require certification by the timberland owner of the intended land use of the converted area and certification that the intended conversion is bona fide. Both requirements are necessary to ensure that the submitter is accountable _for the stated intent and use of the exempted conversion, and that resource standards like stocking are not circumvented for other than actual con~ersion to non-timber growing uses. For these reasons, the word "bonaf ide" is added to subsection (a).

A new subsection (5) is added to 1104.l(a). This section implements a 10 day review process for CDF. Operations may not commence for at least 10 days while CDF reviews the submitted exemptiol!l for accuracy and completeness (unless the Director and other reviewing state and county agencies agree to waive this time period). This is necessary to give CDF the opportunity to ensure that submitted notices are complete and accurate, and not being used to effect abuses of the system such as failure to convert to non-timber growing uses.

f""' INFORMATIVE DIGEST: \

PRC Sections 4551, 4551.5, and 4554 provide for the adoption of emergency regulations in the areas where rulemaking authority is granted to the Board. Respectively, these sections of the Act pertain to adoption of fore st practice rules and regulations, application and development of rules, and adoption of emergency regulations under Section 11346 of the Government Code.

These emergency regulations must be adopted immediately to prevent the abuse in the Southern Subdistrict of the exempt conversion process under Section 1104 .1 (a) of the forest practice rules. This abuse consists of a recent onslaught of bad faith exemption submittals where there is no bona fide intent to actually convert the harvested land. These misused exemptions are resulting in potential for adverse impacts to environmental resources and creating an social and economic difficulties for timberland owners who are operating in good faith under the full THP process. The regulations amend 1104 .1 to: add the word "bonafide" to subsection (a); add a new subsection (a) (3) which requires that no timber operations be.conducted within a WLPZ; adds new subsections (vii) and (viii) which require certification by the timberland owner of the intended land use of the converted area and certification that the intended conversion is bona fide; and, adds a new subsection ( 5) which implements an administrative review

~ process for CDF.

RELEVANT DOCUMENTS: None.

COSTS OF THE PROPOSAL:

There are no additional costs to any state agency, nor any state mandated costs to local agencies of government or school districts that require reimbursement under Part 7, Division 4 (commencing with Section 17500) of the Government Code because of any duties, obligations, or responsibilities imposed on state or local agencies or school districts. Additionally, there will be no other non-discretionary costs or savings imposed on local agencies nor any costs or savings in federal funding to the.state." -This order does not create any savings or additional costs of administration for any agency of the United States Government over and.above the program appropriations made by Congress. There are no mandates to local governmen~s or school districts.

The rules will not have a significant adverse economic impact on timberland owners, timber owners, timber operators, or other

·private parties. The emergency rules would require that the submitter of an 1104 .1 (a) exemption have a bona fide inteJ;lt to convert the land to a.non-timber growing use. This has always been the intent of the current 1104. 1 (a) section. · However, recently there has been an onslaught of abuse of this section and landowners have been harvesting small areas under a one-time conversion without actually having intent to covert the land to other uses.

The provisions which provide for up to a ten day review of the submittal before timber operations commence will not have significant adverse economic impacts. In cases where the bona fide intent is shown and where the notice is complete and accurate, the exemption may proceed. Also, the Director may waive, in consultation with reviewing agencies, some of the ten day waiting time. Even absent such waiver, the ten day time period results only in nominal agency costs for review, and no appreciable costs to the landowner. If the notice is not accepted, it is because the intent was not bonafide, or the notice was not complete and accurate. Bonafide intent to convert, and complete and accurate notices have always been the intended prerequisite for one time conversions of less than three acres.

The Board of Forestry must determine that no stated alternative considered would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which this regulation was adopted and would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed action.

IMPACTS ON HOUSING COSTS AND BUSINESSES:

The proposed regulatory action will not have a significant adverse economic impact on housing. No appreciable gain in the price of lumber as building material will result from adoption of these alternative regulations. Also, the rules will not have significant adverse economic impact on businesses for the same reasons set forth above.

AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE:

Authority Cited: Sections 4551, 4551.5, and 4554, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 4627, 4628, 4512, 4513, 4584, Public Resources Code. ~

•· JUN '-23 '93 04: 15PM BIG CREEK DAVENPORT P. 2 DRAFT LETTER - NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION

DOUG/DEANi

~ WB WOULD LIKE TO ~AVE ACTION ON THIS SERIOUS LOCAL PROBLEM. WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR RECOMMENDATION AS HOW BEST TO PROCEDE.

Board of Forestry 1416 Ninth Street Sacramento, cA 95814

Greetinqs:

DALE June 23, 1993

The ability to harvest timber in the Santa Cruz Mountains depends on the good will of its residents. Right now their goQd will is beinq severely and unnecessarily tested by tha growing abuse of. three acre conversions. (Please see the accon\Panying news story.)

We continue to operate in the Santa cruz=Mountains pritnarily because of our very re~trictive rules that limit cuttinq to selective harvesting, and because of the thorough review each plan receives. In stark contrast is the new a])ility·to clearcut up to three acres by just mailing a notice to CDF ~ no explanation, no justification, no plan, no review, and most i~portantly, no appro~al. The public, and others in our industry, find that unconscionable.

~ ·on top of that, most conversions are probably illegal. certification t .. 4t a conversion complies wi t1i the county's qeneral plan, as required by the conversion rules, is almos~ invariably false. San Mateo, Santa Cruz and Santa Clara counties have fimber harvest ordinances that don't allow three acre clearcuts. If land0'11\~S were required to.submit a conversion request, instead of a conversion notice, almost every one would be denied.

If olearcutting is allowed to continue, I fear it will lead to the death of oQr indust~ here •. To those of us Who depend on the continued qood will of the public, this is an em.erqency that demands an emerqency response. In order to brinq an immediate halt to this outraqeous abuseo of the Board 1 s rules, I hope you will pass an einerqenoy requlati~n at your next meeting to repeal t.be effects of 14 C.CR 1104 .1 in the southern Subdistrict of the coast Forest Dis~ict. The addition of the underlined languaqe should do the job.

1104.i Except in 1;he scut;hern subdistriot of the coast Forest District, timber operations for the purposes and under the conditions as follows are exempt from the provisions.of this article. Etc.

It is very important that you act quickly. Any delay will only make it harder for us to continue to work in this very sensitive area.

Sincerely,

H~R T. MCCRARY Vf-4 President

Logging boom nits c Neighbors form groups as watchdogs By MAY W ONG Sen11nel Slillf w ri ter

SANTA CRUZ - More and more ears around the county are hearing the sound of chain saws this year.

From Boulder Creek to Mount Hermon, Dig Basin to UC Santa Cruz and Corralitos to the Sum· mit, residents who live near for· ests are seeing more "Caution: Logging trucks" signs posted on nearby roads.

The value of timber harvesting has doubled over the past four years to S6.2 million, placing it as the eighth highest cash crop in the county in 1992.

With the price of lumber skyrocketing, more timber harvest· ing plans for the county were submitted to the California De· partment of l"orestry and Fire Protection to this date than any year in the last decade.

And the rate at which people arc logging less than three acres - no review process required -has more than doubled.

That mea ns that throughout the county , where homes have sprouted in and around heavily forested terrain, more residents are closer than ever to logging operations. .


Take, for example. recent pro· tests against a proposal to log 45 acres in Lockhart Gulch near Scotts Valley. Afier residents ex· pressed fears of erosion and flooding, the proj ect's forester, Rich Sampson. revised the plan. He expects the county will appeal on behalf of the residents if the plan is approved.

"The general public is catching· on " said Sampson, a fores ter with Emeryville-based Pacific Meridian Resources. "They're go· ing through these plans with a fine·tooth comb and they' ll knock you down on a technicality ...

As of June 18. CDF received 23 plans covering 3.203 acres of tirn· berland in Santa Cruz County, and more arc expected. The 3,000· acre mark has been reached only fi ve of the last 14 years, and in each case. that was by December. not June.

Ple<tse see LOGGING - A2

3000 .

2000 .

1000 -

0 1979 'so ·a1

,~... .. .......... ..

. •..:. \•

Timber harvests, at top, increasin!

Ted srarro1o1 Sen1ino1 Scotts Valley ~ite ~ , • • - ~ 1 • . • .. ~,!~#i-o.;..'i\.t.l.f'.~·

. -..: : ~ -~> ;t1t:: ~ ·" -1 ; : . .. .,. bd X:t .. .ef#iQiE¥1'f""UE'flR

)

to," he sajd,

Four parking control officers are riqing mountain bikes that have heen confiscated by city police, Farrell said.

the few communities in the state with a pedaling parking patrol.

The response so far from local residents, many of whom· are cycling enthusiasts, has been posi-tive, said DonnellY.. · :.;. local cyclist, Kevin Karplus,

vplunteered to train the officers ~4 ad~sed them how to outfit the

"Basically, it's been a lot of 'Right o~s!' " he said.

.; :···.·· · .'~· ::~:.":i., .. · Parking 9onhol officer. A.9~ia.n Vandertuyn combines exercise with his search

• I "'".• ' ' ' • ' '.

l . . ·.

fhere goes ~b:e neighbo~~()pet .' . fpgging rile$. su111m.i~;.··x~S.,id~hts .: .. · i' ·M~Y WONG ~o~g ·n~ber' of"prop~~Y own~ -c~i. he said. . .. • Y . . . • '.'! wanted to clean out the prop- · ~enunel staff writer ers who are logging less than three ... . .. , ' ,. SUMMIT ru h K l s acres without having to go through erty, he ·said.. Now you ve got .Lt 'd t- c h e so,·~ }m· a lengthy timber harvest review sunlight shining. through it all. It '!~thresb1 enk '. sahiy.s l' evi can re ~ process looks pretty to me. Before it was a \Vl a oo m s i ng room m · . thicket.". tf~ ~ernoon ~nymore., . · Officials at the Callforr:ua De· Buf those who live in the neigh-... LThe sun Just shines ng~t par~ent of Fore.s~ an.d Fire P~o- borhood on upper .Fern Flat Road ~l{.ough the house. Instead of sit- tectlon say the nse m timber pnc· have a very different opinion. . ~ng on the couch to,,read, Y.ou have es bas sp~ed . more landowners "(The loggers) devastated the t~ wear sunglasses, he said. state.v.:fd~· ~o use a 1 lh-y~ar-old rule property," said. Elizabeth ,Herbert. :. Kels~·s home is on 'Old Santa t!1at gives them a. Of)e-time exemp- "It looks kind of like a parking lQt

Cruz ~ighw11y, on the south side of ho~ .fro~ subm1~ting a h~rve.st with a few trees tucked in, where- 1 ~umm1t Road. The home was re- pl~ if µle .logging project is less as before it was a nice grove 'bf oently ·rebuilt from t~e 1989 earth- tha~ ,!hr!!e .. acres: trees." -.1 " quake. ~elso put in . ~ 14-foot Sfuce January, SS landowners in She says several small log~

.. ·.• ·

~ched.\vindow m the livmg room Sanfa .. Cr:uz Co~nty have signed up projects in her. neighborhood .of , f?r a view of the redwoods. . at°'~ .GDF\ oµIce in Felton for the abq1,1t 29. hRm.e.~; h?,ve pi~~d· neigh- I :. But a month ago, his view exemption./ln''all of last yea.r, 56 bor· ag~st ne1g}\bor. : . , A '.

c)hanged, were\registe'r~d~f"1 • , ~:: ', • , .. "l·'kfi ... ~I you' :mt~e , tQJ~1rlree$'· ''~~il;ll'J 1 "It was an impenetrable forest L.N~ .. K~cb, who owns a 15· somew.J.Th~~.:.: .: l{j!Jso sa1i{ . .']l3u.t .~~i·~· ~~

tfefore, and now it's just stumps acre . undevelopea parcel · on ·'Fern when~Yo\lfcom~to"an"area'· llkeithis 1 1~ a'.nd rubble," Kelso said. "That Flat. R9ad in Aptqs, ~ys:'1le use~ .... YfP!;i:'E};tper~!s ; res.i9~nces Ph~ :~~~· ~~~· ~,~~(~~Sr! leaves us unhappy." the exen;ipti~n this ~ear to~ the; . taf~~s~~d. yo4 . sta~: log~g,d).,e· ·~ ·- · ·:The undeveloped land next to tree~ : 9l}~Wee acr~s 9flan.d.""A.bo~t . :~~~Jl .Ui,e 1h.~us~.$. ~t:s ~q~ r,~apy~~~

*lso's home belongs to one of a 50 . P.~rcen~,\:~r. ~h~:}ed\Y9od~ were· : ~~\9P.Ii~~~~~1;<:::, ~;· : "'.". 1 • ., · ~1;:·l~Y,~~

. 'jl iffent Elizabeth Herbert says 10991

' •. ,.. • ~· · • ' • J • ,,,ih· •~;~~ ;... ,., ..., ._..,. '.:.•· t· • • • • , -~--v.t·:.*~

1~ogging in Cot:lri;ty .ihcretjS·es.;: .. :::· :I~;1~ 1 .•_'4 " '-"'-· • \ ' • • ·~ •,\I

0

' •01 \ iit, •

·! Qdfttlnuedfrom·Page Al · . . . upper part of F~rh .. Flar",R9a,d . .'n~~· µi6' ·F'.or~~tj1;>~~~~-. t3:ederal' p~otections for the spotted owl ·h~ve closed se~e Mar~s., She .S~)'..S ·$~)~~~~wn~rs in ~e. ~~!'Jli..ll¥~ ·«more· than 600,000 acres of forest in the Pacif\c flle.4 fo~~e.mpt{.9¥s.Jl:jls .~eaf,.Jind ~~~.?f~~eWi8~ N'.Orth west to loggi.Dg. Heavy cutting in the 1980s of' ·· altjlad~k~t .d~\'01. Q.o.zeps 0%~~~!!5· - · :. ., .l • .... , .•• r.rJ.~~ ·

help educate residents on timber harvesting and the review process. · · . . -

"It's hard to get away. with a lo~ of things here," said Steve. Hollett, a forest practice officer for CDF in Felton. '.'People will call if they hear a chainsaw and want to know if it's legal. It's really a self-regulating state.'.'

large tracts owned by timber companies have reduced ;1It's 'completely divided our neighborhood between Sjipply and have forced a shift in the industry toward those.peoP.le who say.it's their right to log·as they' see p~vately owned land such as in Sapta Cnµ. County. fit itnd those other:s who say, 'what about.our pr,Qpei:ty ~:'{n the meantime, demand for lumber has ·gone up as v~~es, what about our r.oads,' "H'erbert .s!Q~. ·, '. :. Decisions aren't political

191£'.er interest rates have created a boom for the build· ,;What we really need is a f" ~rt spotted owl here," i.Tm industry, · David Soho, a resource manager for said Shirley Scott, who owns tdeveloped parcel of BUD MCCRARY, co·owner of Davenport-baseu Big CDF in Felto land on Fern Flat Road. Creek Lumber Co .. the largest commercial tim-

Dave He charge of cerns abou b4t once ti plaints.

Hope sa) after a log1 the impact. in the plan

Many re: that loggi1 :amnna t'h o

Chicago Bulls take thi.rd strai

antu 136th Yea~ No:1 70 Mond_ay, June 21, 1993

Logging · bg()m hits . ' .:· .... /.. . .

Neighbq.rs , fqrm .groups . . ·.as· watchdogs

By MAY WONG Sentinel 'staff writer

. SANTA .C~l!Z · - · More and mqre ears around the cpunty are hearin'g· the sound of. chain saws this year. · .

From Boulder. Creek to Mount Hermon, ·Big· Basin to UC . Santa Cruz and .. Cohalitos . to the Summit, residents who 'live near 'forests are seeing more "Caution:, .. Logging trucks" signs posted on nearby roads . . The value of timber harvesting has· doubled over the past four years to $6.2 million, placing it as the eighth highest cash crop in the county in 1992: .

With the pi:ice of lumber skyrocketing, more timber harvesting plans for the county ·were submitted to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection to this date than any year in the last decade. ·

And the rate at which people are Jogging Jess than three acres - no review process required -has more than doubled.


And they are keeping a closer watch on the loggers .

.,, _,. _ r- ·· ... .. _........,_, _ --.-- -• .....,...,.,,..

s

JUL- 7-93 WED 10:33 PR INT Sl·IJTH

••••• •• . . .

TO:

FROM:

MESSAGE: A«F BE tAJb

AB1Lf

Page 1 of _ _ /_ Pages (Including Jh1s PoJci

FLAT ((oA!> CsA-A!T7\-- c r<vz_ c ouN '

Tftf<.t"F A-Cr(E ( o /\Jv.fl(S 1u .. =n\-f (o u~FC( ABv5Ei> BELA-vSF.

\o I$EVl£w ADFQUATt

A6f1/(.Y The)£ Co1'JVE.)1o~s C L€7rR- CuTT/Vb. frtVD <(f1(1ouS

/ 0 A~ "II_ \I I('\ I r::. r<o \1 nA J

. ·

:, .-. ., : • II C't- .. • ....



TO:

FAX #: 19166530989

FROM:

.FAX #:

PRINT SMITH

4086885602

02 PAGES WERE SENT


P. 02 .

~·

•

-. ..,_ ........... _ _...__ .. ~-·- -.. ,.. -- .. -·· ·---··-". ·--·· ..... ··• -~ ..... . \ . :; ·• ! . ... . '

r".

JUL- 7~93 WED 10:43 PRINT SMITH

Dear Sirs,

FAX' NO. 4'086885602

Kote Schneiter

2090 Sperrow VelJey Rd.

Aptos, Ce. 95003

. ~

P. 01

Our neighbor, who startea logging today, has gotten three "conversion"permits in

the pest week. She is logging several contiguous parcels by alternating ownership

wtth her hus~ond. This logging 1s taking place 1n en earthquake zone, just a few

miles from the epicenter of the '89 Loma Prlete earthquake. In en area of such

critical concern this unsupervised logging end eyen clear cutting will surely ceuse

OddiUonal problems. vou MUST RETHINK THIS POLICY. In the interum,_please halt

the conversions.

A concerened earthQuake survivor.

Kate Schnetter

-- ··--·-------------·····- ···-·· ---·-········· ··---·--··------~---

.. JUL- 7-93 WED 10:43 PRINT SMITH

To tbe Board of Forestry;

FAX NO. 4086885602

Etlward B. Smith 3262 Fern Flat Rd. Aptos, Ca. 95003

•

The three acre conversions must end. They are a regulatory nightmare. In our area, the loggers are opportunists who operate lite h.ood.lum.5 and thieves. If extortion doesn•t work, they resort to threats of phys1ca1·v101ence and death. Tney ~ave not respected property lines, not even those ot our state parts.· In our small rural county tltere have bean over 70 convers1o~s since January, already a 50t increase over last years total. Regulatory staff, reduced by budget cuts,. are over'ifhelmed and bave not been able to respond until after extensive damage bas occurred. Stop the rape of our community,

Bttward B. Smith

P. 02

·- .. -·· ------------------·-·- .__,_. --- . -·--- ----- ----· ..... _ ..... _ .. -- -. --· ____ .. __ .. ---- .:..- -- .. -----·-···------~----... -·--·-·-_.. .... .., .. __.._ ... _~-.....-....... .

. ·. JllL- 7-93 WED ·10: 43 PRINT- SHITH FAX NO. 4086885602 P.03

Nathan La.'\f1erence

1855 17th Ave.

Sa:nta Cruz,, Ca. 95062

Stewards of the Forest Tru.st1

~· I am appalled at the unregulated logging oecuring within the Loma •

Priet.a earth qnake e:on~. In this en"'lironm~itally sensitive area sev~ral

exemptions have been red tagged after the damage ... 1'fas done. Without

~ a workable inspection proceoduz-e in. place, the three a.ere exempt:io!is

must cease_ Tb.es~ ravagers <'if the 1and must not be allo~~d to continue

unchoe:ked_

St.op the a.bus~.

Sincer.a-1y.

Nathan Lawerence

- --- . ·----~--- ... - -......... . ·------··--...

JUL- .~-93 ~D. l0:44 PRINT SHITH ·FAX NO. 4086885602

Richard Todd 111- Blake Corrali1:os. Ca

Dirs Sirs: ~ •

Here in San'ta Cruz oounl:Y a sudden f lurrg cf lagging hfis occurred in "the oa&t: 6 months. Land o~n·ars are not using the 3 acre conversion as you intendeda The oonversions are sr8ed driven. Thti~~ · ~onver.ting 'they are doing is treiis to cash. To avoid furt:h~r abuse. exemDtions must: not be.issued wi'thuu't an exist:ing building permit: and could e»riginat:e ilii'th the ooun'tY ooncerened_ In this W!iY 'Chara tuil l be ou1:omatic ovarsigh1: ~here t:here is none at 'this 'time. Please enac't ilmereeney measures 'to ho I. 't the YG~~ of our cut!fil:Y by rut:h less pyofi1:eers.

R.iehard Todd

RicMdff Jrx/ ri

P.04

• -----··""·---··•·•-··~-. #••- _ ••• ·•·-••••---:.:--.-.. • •• ., .. -_.. •. - ••• -.. • .,_--••••- ·•••• ·• .. rl r·---•-•.., 4 ·-~·--·----· --•

:... .... . I °:


DATE: JUL- 7-93 WED 10:44.

TO:

~ FAX #: 19166530989

FROM: PRINT SMITH

.FAX #: 4086885602

05 PAGES WERE SENT


"" •

P.05

JUL-07-1993 09:53 FROM MIDWEST PLATE GLASS TO

July 7, 1993

John A. & Joan s. Alderson 2080 Sparrow Valley Road

Aptos, ·ca. 95003 408/688-3407

state of California-Board of Forestry FAX: #~65.3-0989

9'~

9166530989 P.01

Re: Logging in Santa cruz County, Rancho Valencia Area Fern Flat Road· Area

Dear Sir a:nd/or Ma~a.m:

Reqently there has been some logging in the Rancho Valencia area of Santa .Cruz County. A survey map of the general area indi-cates "Timber Preserve Zones" in larqe areas of the 111ap. It appears•that these "Timber Resource Zones" may have been violated.

Apparently there is a law that allows a home owner an exemption for loqqinq on 3 acres of that property. The intent of the law, we understand, was to allow the homeowner to loq up to 3 aores to clear a homesite on the land.

We understand that several property owners in the area have applied for and received permits to harvest timber on land where a homesite already exists. In certain instances the land was "clearcut" and in at least one instance,. there was a slide during the winter rains, the erosion probably caused by the clearcuttinq · of the timber.

As residents of the area and concerned citizens, we feel that this law needs to be cbanqed to saf equard our timber and land resources in the area. There is a need to require an inspection of the site to make certain the cutting does not cause harm to the land. In addition, it may be prudent to limit the owner to only 1 parcel of 3 .acres within a 10 year period. Some may own several parcels, and loq each parcel simultaneously. We feel that an immediate restraining order, or moratorium, should be issued on all existing logqinq permits until an inspection plan can be implemented to prevent irresponsible profiteering from this loop hole in the law.

There is an· approved permit pending, with cutting to begin itnmediately on land adjacent to ours and other s.ites which may directly affect the livability of our homesite and our neighbors.

Please qive this matter your urgent attention in your meeting this date.

\ From :

July 7, 1993

California Board of Forestry P.O. Box 94244 Sacramento. CA 20460

Dear Sirs:

Citizens for Responslblc Pocut Ma11a1omont

CRFM

• Citizens for ~esponsible Forest Management is an organization representing the Summit Community-and the neighbors of the Soquel Demonstration State Forest. We are writing today requesting a moratorium on conversions until some of the abuses can be more thoroughly studied. Se_y~ral of our neighbors have had serious adverse experiences with logging projects begun under the guise of a one time three acre conversion. We strongly urge that this request for a moratorium be granted and that the board adopt requirements in the future that preven.t the irresponsible use of these conversions as atf easy alternative to a THI'.

cc: Ida Hills, Sierra Club; Sam Farr, U.S. Senate; Jan Beutz. Santa Cruz County Suporvisor.

P01

. . :· JAN-02-'00 MON 02:03 ID: TEL NO:

URGENT, U R G S N T1 URGENT

BOARD OF FORESTRY

THEY ARE PREPARING TO IMMEDIATELY CUT A GROVE OF REDWOODS ON THE RAEDENE BROWN PROPERTY ON FERN FLAT, APTOS, CALIFORNIA. I AM GRAVELY CONCERNED ABOUT THE TREES AND THE EFFECT THIS WILL HAVE ON MY CLOSE FRIENDS, JOHN AND JOAN ALDERSON, 2080 SPARROW VALLEY R0. 1 APTOS, CALIFORNIA, 95003, ~HO LIVE ON THE NEIGHBORING PRdfERTY.

THE ALDERSONS AND THEIR NEIGHBORS LOVE THESE TREES AS PERMANENT LIVING THINGS AND ARE HORRIFIED AT THE THOUGHT THAT THEY WILL DISAPEAR FROM VIEW,

PLSASE STOP THESE ENVIRONMENTALLY UNCONCIOUS BROWNS AND ANY OTHERS WHO WOULD CALLOUSLY CUT DOWN OUft NATURAL TREASURES. I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY HAVE A PERMIT TO DESECRATE THE FOREST. PLEASE RECIND WHATSVBR ORDINANCE WOULD ALLOW THIS PERMIT.

THIS MA'l"l'IR REQUIRES IMMEDIATE A'l'TEN'l'ION. PLEASE STOP THIS.

THANK YOU.

R~O·M PATRICIA O'GRADY, LICENSED CLINICAL SOCIAL WORKER 136 Rogers Ave. San Carlos, CA 94070

Eve. 415-592-7486 Day 408~441-5129

STATE 6F CAUFORNIA

BOARD OF FORESTRY ~ 1416 NINTH STREET . ~ P.O. BOX 944246 ·

SACRAMENTO, CA 94244-2460 (916) 653-8007 FAX (916) 653-0989

July s, 1993

Ms. Stephanie Villasenor 3000 Fern Flat Road Aptos, CA 95003

Dear Ms. Villasensor,

PETE WILSON, ~-

~·

This letter is in response to your recent correspondence. Ori' July 7, 1993, the State Board of Forestry adopted emergency regulations to slow down use of an exemption in four Bay Area counti~s that allows a· landowner to harvest up to three acres without filing a timber harvesting plan or meeting other requirements. The Board acted after hearing from representatives of Santa Cruz County, the

tf'1'1' timber industry, the Sierra Club, the Department of Forestry and ' Fire Protection, and the public that the current exemption was

being abused.

The emergency rule modifies the exemption process by prohibiting harvesting in watercourse and lake protection zones, requiring a certification of bonafide intent to convert, and imposing a ten-day delay between filing the notice and harvesting.

The Board emergency action applie,s to timber operations in the Southern Subdistrict of the Coast Forest District (Santa Cruz, Santa Clara, San Mateo, and Marin counties). The Board has also noted complaints regarding abuse of the-exemption process in other parts of the state. Thus, the Board has proposed a similar change in permanent regulations applying to the remainder of the state which will be given a 45-day public review.

Sincerely,

~~~~

Dean Cromwell, Executive Officer

r' BQARD'sr{)F FORESTRY CONr.ACT:

Dean Cromwell Executive Officer (916) 653-8007

RELEASE DATE:

July a, 1993

BOARD OF FORESTRY CLOSES THREE ACRE LOOPHOLE IN BAY AREA COUNTIES

The State Board of Forestry at its meeting on July 7 passed ~·

emergency regulations to slow down use of an exemption in four Bay

Area counties that allows a landowner to harvest up to three acres

without filing a timber haryesting plan or meeting other

~ requirements. \

The Board acted after hearing from representatives· of the

county of Santa Cruz, the timber industry, the Sierra Club, the

Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, and the public that the

current exemption was being abused. Witness.es said that sensitive

forestlands were being cut heavily without proper analysis and

protection and that this violated the intent of the state rules.

"Public concern and anger over this kind of cutting--and its

extent--is undermining the working relationships between the timber

industry, the community, and even between neighbors," said Woody

Barnes, acting Board Chairman.

Current rules allow a landowner a single one time conversion

of forestland on three acres or less without filing a timber

~ harvest plan or meeting other requirements. It is only necessary

to file an exemption and then cutting can begin.

-MORE-

-2-

Barnes explained that the existing regulation was intended to

facilitate conversion of small areas of forestland for., housing or

other similar uses. However, with extremely high timber prices,

many landowners are using the exemption just to harvest trees and

have no real intention of converting the land.

"Based on the comments from Santa Cruz county, the abuse of

the exemption has created some really bad. feelings between

neighbors and is getting out-of-hand," said Barnes. He added that

he hoped the Board's action would give everyone breathing space to f•

deal with the issue.

The emergency rule modifies the exemption to prohibit

harvesting in watercourse and lake protection zones, to require a

certification of bonafide intent to convert, and to impose a 10-day

delay b~tween filing the notice and harvesting.

The Board emergency action·applies only to timber operations

in the Southern Subdistrict of the Coast Forest District (Santa

Cruz, Santa Clara, San Mateo, and Marin counties). Subdistrict

rules prohibit openings (clearcuts) larger than 1/2 acre.

The Board also noted it has received complaints about abuse of

the 3 acre exemption from many parts of the state. Thus the Board

has proposed a . similar change in regulations applying to the

remainder of the state for consideration within 45-60 days.

# # # # #

OPTION~ -----> ·Christmas trees


·#of violations 0

#with 0 environmental damage

Ii with enforcement 0 action

Was Conversion NIA actually compl~ted? . · * (smce May 1, 1993)

TOTALS Exemption Report

Dead, Dying . <3 Diseased Acres

26 97

4 (15%) 15 (15%)

1 (4%) 3 (3%)

4 (15%) 13 (13%)

NIA NIA

* * totals include not itemized reports

CONCLUSIONS

Conversion Totals **

180 340

44 (24%) 77 (23%)

18 (10%) 22 (6%)

38 (21 %) 69 (20%)

"' 69 (38%) NIA

+ Conversions account for most of the violations (24%). Ranges from 10% to 80% depending on ranger unit.

+ Conversions account for most of the inspections on which resource damage was discovered (10%). Rang·~s from 0% to 39%, depending on ranger unit.

+ Land use is actually converted on about 38% of exempt conversions.

+ Some type of enforcement action is taken on 38% of exemption inspections.

_ _..,,.....-~~

-----------

OPTIONS.·-----> . Christmas trees


# of violations 0

·#with 0 environmental damage

# with enforcement 0 action

% Conversion was N/A actually. completed * (since May 1, 1993)

OPTIONS ---- > Christmas trees

# of inspections *

# of violations



% conversion was N/A actually completed

11' (since May 1, 1 ss;:s)

Mendocino Ranger Unit Exemption Report


21 15

1 (5%) 0

1 (5%) 0

1 (5%) 0

N/A · N/A

Humboldt Ranger Unit Exemption Report


26

2 (8%)

1 (4%)

3 (12%)

N/A N/A

Conversion Totals

23 59

13 (57%) 14 (24%1

9 (39%) 10 (17%)

11 (48%) 12 (20%) ~·

58% N/A

Conversion Totals

49 75

5 (10%) 7 (9%)

1 (2%) 2 (3%)

3 (6%) 6· (8%)

73% N/A

OPTIONS ----- >

#-of inspections *

# of violations




OPTIONS ----- >

# of inspections *

#of violations

#with environmental damage·


% conversion was actually compl~ted •(since Ma y 1, 1993

Christmas trees

N/A

Butte Ranger Unit Exemption Repo·rt


N/A N/A

Conversion

21% I

Nevada/Yu~a/Placer Ranger Unit Exemption Report


N/A N/A N/A 35%

Totals

14

10 (71 %)

1 (6%)

10 (71%)

.. N/A

Totals

23

4 (17%)

0

4 (17%)

N/A

~ \

OPTIONS ---->

# of inspections * # of violations


# with· enforcement action


OPTIONS ----- >

# of inspections *

# of violations



% conversion was actually completed * (since Ma y 1, 1993)

Christmas trees

N/A

Christmas trees

NIA

Shasta-Trinity Ranger Unit Exemption Report

Dead, Dying <3 Di~eased Acres

11

2 (18%)

0

0

N/A N/A

Siskiyou Ranger Unit Exemption Report


4 ;

1 (25%)

0

0

N/A N/A

Conversion Totals

9 20

2 (22%) 4 (20%)

1 (11 %) 1 (5%)

2 (22%) 2 (10%) ..

33% N/A

Conversion Totals

6 10

2 (33%) 3 (33%)

0 0

0 0

100% N/A

OPTIONS ----- >

# of inspections *

# of violations



Was Conversion actually completed?

. * (since May 1, 1993)

OPTIONS ----->

# of inspections *

# of violations



Was Conversion ~ctually completed 7 * since Ma ( y 1, 1.993)

~

Amador-Eldorado Ranger Unit Exemption Report

Christmas Dead, Dying <3 trees Diseased Acres

29

5 (17%)

SOME-one on arch site

5

NIA NIA NIA

Conversion

83

14 (17%)

SOME

14

FEW·

Tuolumne-Calaveras Ranger Unit Exemption ~eport


: 5 12 10 .

3 (60%) 5 (42%) 8 (80%)

0 0 1 (10%)

3 (60%) 5 (42%) 8 (80%)

NIA NIA NIA 7

Totals

112

19 (17%)

SOME

19 P•

NIA

Tot~ls

27

16 (59%)

1 (4%)

16 (59%)

NIA

......

.. . , . .

.~ .· *:

.

Follow-up Forest Practice Inspection

THP# 2-93-5j-BUT(l}

April 20, 1993

Present at the Inspection: Richard Dixon CDF Region II HQ.__,,, RPF; for exemptions-~ proper Representative.

The purpose of this inspection was to determine what corrective work the Department would require prior to resubmission of THP# 2-9·3 .. -BUT ( l}. This THP was withdrawn for additional information, anrdue violations which . had occurred during timber operations conducted on the ownership . under the following exemption numbers:

2- 92EX-lll- (l}BUT 2-92EX-1111~(l}BUT 2-92EX--- ({)BUT

2-92EX-tll-(l)BUT 2-9~EX-tlllf-(l}BUT 2-92EX-llll-(l}BUT

2- 92EX-tlll-(l}BUT 2-92EX-lll-(l}BUT 2-92EX- lll-(l}BUT

2- 92EX1111-(l}BUT 2-92EX-....-(l}BUT 2-93EX--( l)BUT

The Inspection began at landil)g #1 on the attached map, and proceeded basically west over the ownership ending at the landing on Mr. property (west of area #10 on the attached map).

Ten reference. points were identified during the . inspection that would require corrective work. At the conclusion of the inspection, the time t able for accomplishing the corrective work was identified. For clarity, the finding of the inspection will be listed by the reference points identified during the i nspect ion .

Point #1: 1. All pine tops throughout the exemption area and around the landing must be lopped to lie within 30" of the ground prior to resubmission of the THP.

2. The Class III watercourse channels must be cleared prior to the· winter period of 1993 (October 15, 1993).

3 . If gates are not installed on the road into this area , slash within 75 feet of the traveled edge of the road must be lopped to lie within 30 11 of the ground prior to resubmission of the THP.

Point#2: 1. Same as #3 at Point #1.

2. Same as #1 at Point #1.

_. ~ ........ .. .,.,. ·.

-: ~ . • i-;: .•

};.Point #2 (Conti'nued):

. .. · 3. Clear Class III Watercourse Channels prior to October 15, 1993.

Point #3: ;: · i. Although ,no loading was done at this landing, it was agreed that

the waterbarring would be reinforced to prevent discharge of water · onto the road. This would be accomplished with the THP operations.

Point #4: ' f '( · 1. Seed and mulch sidecast·from road cons~ruction.

2. Rock outboard side of dip with 4-6 11 rock, to act as energy distpators over new fill.

3. ·Rock dip with crushed rock.

4. New road constructed must be added to THP map prior to resubmission of THP.

c • • 1

_ A~l of ~he.work prescribed in Items #1, 2, and 3 must be completed ..::,=~prior to the commencement of aily operations to the nort of this

area •

.'!.~: Point #5:

/; .. ,:This was. a landing constructed under Exempt.ion #2-92EX9-Cl}BUT. :·~: Significant amounts of organic debris had been incorporated into

the fi~l. This landing was approximately seventy-five feet above a domestic water supply inlet. The construction method was in violation of 14CCR Section 943.2 (j). This is· to.be dealt with as a violation of ~he Exemption, and this road and the extension of the road to the north are to be deleted from the THP and not used.

1. The corrective measure for the landing will be ~o slope back the. fill material, remove the slash that has been incorporated into the fill, then stabilize the disturbed ground by either seed and mulchin, or the placement of slash over the distrubance and maximizing ground contact of the slash by lopping so that 90% coverage is attained and slash height is no more than 18 11 above the ground.

Point #6:

This area was operated on without an exemption received by CDF, or an approved THP. This is in direct violation of PRC 4581 and will be dealt with as such.

1. The Class III watercourse channel must be cleaned out prior to re~ubmission of the THP.

2. Slash within 75 11 of the road surface must· be lopped to lie within '30 11 of the ground between point #6 and point #7 prior to resubmission of the THP.

.,

'

. , ...

. -~··,~ _._· :~.\<~.

;. ' Point ·16 (Continued) :

3. The road and the roadside ditch must be rocked west of point #6 as a part of the resubmitted THP.

Point #7:

1. This was another landing constructe with significant amounts of waste organic debris incorporated into the fill. This landing was constructed in violation of PRC 4581, as well as 14 CCR 943.2(j). The corrective measures which must be completed· prior to resubmission of the THP were to lop the outboard side of the landing so that the material lies within 30 11 of the ground. All material pushed over during landing construction must be severed from the stump and lopped. ·

Point #8:

1. In the areas of 2-92EX-lllf-Cl)BUT, the waterbar spacing is·kto be decreased to a maximum distance of . 50 feet. This will mean

.additional waterbearring will be required prio~ to October 15, 1993 for this exemption area. The distance should be incorporated into

·the resubmitted THP.

2. The skid trail across the watercourse.is experiencing rutting as a result of apparent piping of water onto the surface. The corrective measure that is to be incorporated into the THP is that slach will be placed onto the trail surface and waiked into the ground (Punched-In) by a cat prior to October 15, 1993.

Point #9:

1. This appeared to be a mining prospect bµlldozed iri the past. It _ . constituted a 5-6 foot deep trench oriented directly up and down r

the slope. The THP is to call for a temporary 12 11 culvert at this location under the proposed road or skid trail, to be removed prior to the completion of operations.

Point #10:

1.This included the landing used on the property and the road which had been reconstructed on the .Property. Unless an agreement, signed by the landowner of recor for each property, allowing the use of these facilities is attached as an addendum to the resubmitted THP, these facilities are to be deleted from the THP.

Additional Measures Required Prior to Resubmission:

1. A signed agreement from the landowner of record is to be attached to the THP as an addendum for any and all operations which will be proposed outside of Mr-- ownership upon resubmission.

,

... ,.

2. The RPF is to flag the perimeter of all the one-time minor conversions within this THP area.

cc:D. McNamara, Forest Practice Ma nager s. Brown , Ranger Unit Chief

James D. Wilson ! Region II FOREST · Practice

Litigation Coordinator Forester II RPF #2061

Rob McKenzie, Asst . District At torney , Butte County RPF .

RPF Landowner

board of forestry and fire protection information...

Documents