 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
Coalition Sign-on Letter General
Plan Update 2020 Sonoma
County Planning Commission Sonoma
County Board of Supervisors June 19, 2003 Re: Timber Conversions FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD Background The issue of timberland conversions to agricultural uses is a vital issue affecting the ecological health of Sonoma County. The large-scale conversion of redwood or other conifer forests, oak woodlands, and native grasslands to intensive or industrial agriculture causes extensive and irreversible environmental impacts. With a lack of preventative regulations at the County level, and questionable oversight being given by the California Department of Forestry, the need to protect our forestlands must be regarded as a priority in the formulation of the County General Plan. In order to extend these protections to the maximum number of timber and wildlands throughout the county, protection of forestland must be included throughout the Timber Production Zones (TPZ) and Resource and Rural Development Zones (RRD). While we recognize the importance and support the maintenance of viable lands suitable for agricultural uses, there are already many protections for agriculture within the existing General Plan under agricultural zoning designations. We believe that agriculture and forest protection can coexist while protecting remaining forestland against further harmful development. Impacts The
conversion of forestland includes many immediate as well as
unforeseen ecological impacts. The most common include habitat
fragmentation, water diversion, soil erosion, and water pollution.
Construction and maintenance impacts such as fences are known
to impede wildlife movements, and access roads carve the way
toward other subsequent developments that can further reduce
the number of net wildlands. Cumulative impacts such as increased
runoff and sedimentation can cause severe harm to recovering
watersheds and anadromous fish populations. Furthermore, the
introduction of chemicals present in herbicides, fungicides,
and pesticides widely used in industrial agriculture have been
found to create major disruptions in soil microclimates which
can produce many long term negative health effects at the microbial
level and throughout the food chain. In order to insure the long term health and the greatest level of protection for our forest ecosystems, we support the adoption of Option Three as outlined in the June 20, 2002 Staff Report. This option would affect an estimated 194,000 acres of the 230,000 acres of timberland in Sonoma County. It includes specific language that would protect natural resource lands, watersheds, critical biotic areas, as well as fish and wildlife habitat. Protection against intensive development of lands constrained by geologic hazards, steep slopes, poor slopes, poor soils or poor water, fire and flood prone areas, biotic and scenic areas, and other constraints is also included in this option. Option Three, while expanding the county's jurisdiction to protect forestland, would prohibit agricultural production and other uses which would result in the permanent conversion of timberlands. Conclusion As organizations and individuals representing diverse interests throughout Sonoma County, we collectively realize that the protection of our remaining forest ecosystems is a crucial and integral part of maintaining the overall ecological health of our future. The protection of Sonoma County's forestlands is as critical to humans as it is to the wildlife that depends on them for sustenance. We recognize that the continued conversion of timberlands to intensive agriculture continues to cause serious threats to impaired watersheds and wildlands that have already been subject to years of mismanagement. We also contend that further cumulative impacts associated with future conversions and alteration of the landscape will cause irreversible ecological damage. We support Option Three as formulated by County staff because it encourages the maximum protection for forestlands in the most critical of land use zones. We urge staff to consider the recommendations and endorsements of Option Three as provided by the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, Fifth District Supervisor Mike Reilly, and all the signatories of this letter included below. Sincerely,
The
following are Signatories to this Letter: Friends
of the Gualala River Don
McEnhil Friends
of the Russian River Coastal
Forest Alliance Community
Clean Water Institute Sierra
Club Redwood Chapter, Sonoma Group Madrone
Audobon Society George
Davis Pocket
Canyon Protection Group Northern
California River Watch World
Stewardship Institute Forest
Unlimited Russian
River Residents Daniel
Schoenfeld Marty
Griffin Shepherd
Bliss Kevin
McEnnis Kelly
Brown Ron
Sundergil
|