Letters + Opinion » Mailbox

'Lipstick on a Pig'

comment

Editor:

John Andersen's attempt to put lipstick on a pig is certainly from the " PALCO playbook" ("Come See for Yourself," Aug. 1) The log decks are sky high and the word is Humbodt Redwood Co. is still refusing logs from smaller operators in an attempt to impact market prices. We haven't seen forest liquidation like this since the days of Maxxam/PALCO's hostile take over of the Murphy family-run business.

HRC adjusted the current timber harvest plans (before their FSC audit) because they were so egregiously out of alignment with the FSC standards. As I recall, only the steepest slopes of the helicopter units were excluded.

When John Andersen refers to "saving old growth," it's important to point out that a single tree popping up on a cut over landscape does not a forest make. When he refers to set-asides, it's important to know this is not the same as permanent protection or preservation. There is no long-term, in perpetuity agreements in writing for any area of the company's holdings in the Mattole. The language they have developed is very misleading to the public.

They claim that turning our landscape into monoculture plantations is "fir dominant restoration." This involves the use of herbicides and creates dangerous wildfire situations from increased fuels, leaving surrounding communities at risk. 

For all of our conversations and so-called "tours," it hasn't made much of a difference. I am left with the impression this has all been for show and an opportunity for HRC to check a box off on their requirements. That would be the pesky forest community box allowing them to say, "We gave them a tour before we cut it down. We're good to go." 

Gabrielle Ward, Redcrest

Add a comment