Wrong Trees Felled @ Demo- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    We need more wax
    Reputation: justbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    306

    Wrong Trees Felled @ Demo

    Did anyone catch this in the Chron on Sat? I couldn't find it on www.sfgate.com so I scanned the blurb. Out favorite ranger Ed may be in some trouble. Let's hope the whole thing gets dropped.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    gimme friction
    Reputation: Quercus agrifolia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,024
    Yeah, I saw that.

    Fricken' knuckleheads!

  3. #3
    sunnyside up
    Reputation: knobbyknees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,193

    Simple administrative mistake, way overblown

    Quote Originally Posted by justbob
    Did anyone catch this in the Chron on Sat? I couldn't find it on www.sfgate.com so I scanned the blurb. Out favorite ranger Ed may be in some trouble. Let's hope the whole thing gets dropped.
    Yeah, Ed could be in a heap of hot water for not knowing an obscure exception to a rule. CDF has been conducting tree felling classes in Soquel Forest for quite a while. Charles has even taken one of the courses-- that's why he gets to use his chainsaw to clear trees off the trails on volunteer workdays.

    CDF doesn't need a special permit to conduct the classes. They don't harvest the trees in these classes for commercial use - the wood is re-used in the forest. If you've ever ridden down Corral Trail you can see where they've felled a bunch of trees off to the side.

    They train fire fighters how to cut down and clear felled trees to make firelines. Its dangerous work and they need a safe place to learn and practice so when there is a forest fire the guys are prepared. It's one of the things that makes Soquel Forest unique.

    The problem is that the last class felled some trees in the area where they are planning on doing their next commercial harvest. They were going to use them later for a demonstration of a portable saw mill.

    Because they've submitted a "Timber Harvest Plan" the rule that they can fell trees for this class without a permit doesn't apply - but only in the area of the proposed harvest. Ed didn't know this obscure exception to the rule. If they'd conducted the class one ridge over, outside the harvest area, there wouldn't have been any problem.

    Crazy bureaucracy. I just can't believe they would fine them or take away their licences. That is really lame. It makes it sound like they were committing a crime instead of providing an important public service.

    Patty
    "...So forget all your duties, oh yeah! Fat bottomed girls, they'll be riding today..." Freddie Mercury

  4. #4
    Flyin Canine
    Reputation: shanedawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,272
    Ed and Thom are stand up guys. Anyone we can write to to attest to their character? Maybe the DA or something?

  5. #5
    RJG
    RJG is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RJG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    457
    I wish the report of this "incident" were better explained. I think, CDF, basically promissed those trees to someone, i.e. Big Creek, and now they are gone or unusable. The ranger may have known the rule, just didn't know what trees were scheduled for harvest. I agree, this is bureaucracy b.s. There are far worst crimes going on in the forrests of the Siera Nevada, Cascades and Del Norte ranges. If this happened anywhere else in California we wouldn't even hear about it. I'd support the guys at demo any day of the week.
    R

  6. #6
    sunnyside up
    Reputation: knobbyknees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,193

    better explanation?

    Quote Originally Posted by RJG
    I wish the report of this "incident" were better explained. I think, CDF, basically promissed those trees to someone, i.e. Big Creek, and now they are gone or unusable. The ranger may have known the rule, just didn't know what trees were scheduled for harvest. I agree, this is bureaucracy b.s. There are far worst crimes going on in the forrests of the Siera Nevada, Cascades and Del Norte ranges. If this happened anywhere else in California we wouldn't even hear about it. I'd support the guys at demo any day of the week.
    R
    OK, let me try again. Thom and Ed are both CDF Foresters (not rangers - CDF doesn't have rangers). Both of them have been working on a Timber Harvest Plan (THP). They've submitted the plan for review but it has not been given final approval. The trees haven't been sold yet.

    Ed teaches chainsaw safety and felling classes to CDF firemen. When he teaches these classes, the rules are that he doesn't need to submit a THP, because the trees aren't sold or removed from the property.

    The problem was that since they've submitted a THP for one small area of the forest, Ed wasn't supposed to fell trees in that area for the class - the area under the THP is excluded from the rules normally used for the class. Ed didn't know about the exception to the rule (that once you submit a THP you can't fell trees in that area for any reason).

    The people who got upset were some environmentalists who were reviewing the THP area, not the logging companies who might buy the trees.

    But they are eager to string Ed and Thom up by their boots, just because they made a simple mistake in failing to recognize that one set of rules changes another set of rules (Rule A applies except when Rule B is in use). And for some reason, the CDF head honchos in Sacramento seem to be going along with this injustice.

    Patty
    "...So forget all your duties, oh yeah! Fat bottomed girls, they'll be riding today..." Freddie Mercury

  7. #7
    dis member
    Reputation: backpedal's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    297
    Quote Originally Posted by RJG
    I wish the report of this "incident" were better explained. I think, CDF, basically promissed those trees to someone, i.e. Big Creek, and now they are gone or unusable. The ranger may have known the rule, just didn't know what trees were scheduled for harvest. R
    The trees that were felled were not within the harvest boundary, therefore, they weren't promissed to anyone. Some of the trees that were felled were within 200 yards of the harvest boundary, though. That's the technicality, and the obscure rule. The chainsaw class didn't take place within the harvest area from what you or I or Ed could see, and won't affect the harvest in a way you or I could tell, but some fat cat in Sacramento is all agitated because environmental zeolots are making phone calls and calling "foul!".

    There is probably no more difficult place in the world to legally cut down a tree than in Santa Cruz County.

  8. #8
    RJG
    RJG is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RJG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    457
    O.K. thanks backpedal/knobbyknees, that better explains the situation. I feel bad for the forresters. Don't you think that they would require some kind of mitigation i.e. replanting somewhere else, rather than fine and fire these guys?
    R

  9. #9
    just another bleepin SSer
    Reputation: singlespeed.org's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,433
    Quote Originally Posted by shanedawg
    Ed and Thom are stand up guys. Anyone we can write to to attest to their character? Maybe the DA or something?
    I second this. If anything can be done by MTBers to help them, do let us know here.
    --
    Getting old, fat, and slow...
    自転車が好きだよ

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: grrrah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,307
    Since the THP wasnt approved, I think there Thom and Ed are a long ways away from any real punishment. or at least I hope so. Especially if the intent wasnt malicious.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Hungarian_FR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    71

    To support Tom and Ed

    Until a year ago I lived near the area in question, so I made some calls to find out what was happening. Sorry, I'm suspicious of the press and the motives of the environmental group involved due to personal experience. A mistake was made, but the whole incident was blown out of proportion. It doesn't sound like Tom and Ed are in too much trouble, but the State may feel the need to respond to the squeaky wheel. A few people have written letters in support of Tom and Ed and we should do what we can to support them. I don't have email addresses, but here are the people to send letters to:

    Ruben Grijalva
    Director, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
    P.O. Box 944246
    Sacramento, CA 94244-2460

    Mike Chrisman
    Secretary for Resources
    1416 Ninth St., Suite 1311
    Sacramento, CA 95814

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.