March 3, 2004
Mr. George Gentry
Board of Forestry
P.O. Box 944246
Sacramento , CA 94244-2466
RE: Napa County Proposed Local Forest Practice Rules
Dear Mr. Gentry & Board of Forestry,
As president of the Napa Valley Land Stewards Alliance (NVLSA), I represent approximately 950 Napa County rural property owners dedicated to eliminating regulatory obstacles to good land stewardship. NVLSA recently sponsored a successful voter referendum against Napa County 's Stream Setback Ordinance because that ordinance hampered and discouraged good stewardship.
NVLSA members are concerned that the special timber rules being proposed by Napa County would impose similar obstacles if adopted by the State. As we read them, these rules are a barely disguised effort to make the permit application process so onerous and Napa County timber harvests so complex and expensive that they will for all practical purposes be prohibited. We therefore ask that you not approve these special rules.
We believe that the State Board of Forestry already does an excellent job of regulating timber harvests under its existing state-wide rules, and that there is nothing unique about Napa County 's forests that require special rules. We feel that special rules for Napa County are unnecessary and would be counterproductive.
Timber harvests in Napa County already seem rare. Contrary to the tone of the Napa County request, logging operations have not become a public nuisance in Napa County , and to my knowledge no school bus has ever been run down by a logging truck. In fact, few of us can even remember seeing a logging truck on Napa County Roads.
Napa County Supervisors have apparently conveyed to you their belief that Napa County citizens favor more stringent regulation of timber harvests, and that these special timber rules enjoy broad support. However, I believe they are mistaken. Only a small but vocal minority in Napa County is taking the position that the best way to save the forest is to save every tree, whereas the vast majority understands that harvesting and thinning are necessary and beneficial, and should not be discouraged by excessive regulation.
Prior to yesterday's election, Napa County Supervisors mistook the shrill cries of that same small but vocal minority for the wishes of the majority on the issue of stream setbacks. Yesterday's stunning defeat of Napa County 's Measure P demonstrated just how far out of touch the Napa County Supervisors have been with the wishes of the majority on that particular issue. I believe they are equally out of touch on the issue of forestry rules.
The sensible majority of Napa County citizens understand that discouraging harvests helps condemn the forest to eventual destruction by catastrophic wildfire. Although the beneficial impacts of frequent fires on the health of the forest are now widely recognized, decades of successful wildfire suppression in Napa County have left us with an extremely hazardous situation in which a fire can burn hot enough to destroy mature, healthy trees. This puts the entire forest at risk, and establishing new rules that discourage clearing and thinning can only increase that risk.
It would be sadly ironic if the efforts of a misguided few to save every tree were to actually contribute to the destruction of our forest. Not only would it be irresponsible for the Board of Forestry to allow this to happen, but the BOF would surely be blamed. After all, if the adoption of these new rules were to be followed by a catastrophic fire, I doubt that Napa County would stand up and take responsibility for allowing the fuel to build up to dangerous levels. It is far more likely that the County would point to the BOF and say It wasn't our fault, because the BOF was in charge .
The State of California is charged with managing our forest resources precisely because local politics are too vulnerable and responsive to the emotional input of the uninformed, and California 's forest resources are far too important to be left to the vagaries of that kind of local political wrangling.
Please keep in mind that the majority of informed Napa County Citizens are relying on the Board of Forestry to continue regulating the management of our forests objectively and efficiently, in order to ensure the long term health and economic viability of our forest resources. We believe that approving these special rules would jeopardize your ability to continue meeting that responsibility. We urge you not to approve these special rules.
Sincerely,
George Bachich, president
Napa Valley Land Stewards Alliance
back