4000 acre conservation easement bought from timber giant north of Tahoe

Sierra Pacific Industries stops some clearcutting for $8 million 

http://www.theunion.com/article/20100628/NEWS/100629756/1001&parentprofile=1053

MAP: https://picasaweb.google.com/rexfrankel/CentralValleyAndSierraNevadaMountainsNewParks#5659392895524414002

6/28/2010--Most recently, working with the Trust for Public Land, the group scooped up more than 4,000 acres (with plans for 7,000 acres) in conservation easements on Sierra Pacific Industries' land north of Truckee, the first-such conservation deal ever brokered with the lumber company.

“This is not just the conservation and protection of over 7,500 acres in the Little Truckee Watershed — we have consummated a conservation transaction with the largest private land owner in California,” said Perry Norris, executive director of the Truckee Donner Land Trust. “That's precedent setting.”

The private property runs in a checker pattern of public (U.S. Forest Service) and private land along the historic Henness Pass Road, running from west of Highway 89 north to the hills around Jackson Meadows Reservoir.

The easements prevent clear-cutting and the use of herbicides, still allows some timber harvest and opens the Sierra Pacific Industry land to the public and allow trail building, said John Svahn, stewardship director with the land trust.

And it was possible with $1.83 million from the Northern Sierra Partnership and $6.42 million from the Wildlife Conservation Board, Norris said.

http://www.nevadaappeal.com/article/SS/20100625/NEWS/100629952/0/NEWS&parentprofile=
for story and map
---------------------------

NOTE: this map is very fuzzy even when enlarged. The lake on the left is Jackson Meadows Reservoir. The lake on the right side is Webber Lake.
----------------------

more:
excerpted from

Thousands of Sierra acres conserved in new deal

http://www.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=20107120331
7/13/2010

The Truckee Donner Land Trust is in the business of conserving open space, and business is good. The down economy that has many other non-profits cutting back and bunkering down has created unique land acquisition opportunities for the group founded in 1990 in the Sierra Nevada north of Lake Tahoe. Most recently, working with the Trust for Public Land, the group scooped up more than 4,000 acres in conservation easements on Sierra Pacific Industries' land north of Truckee -- the first-such conservation deal ever brokered with the timber company.

Plans call for the addition of another 3,000 acres as part of the package that primarily straddles watersheds for the Little Truckee River and the Yuba River. It includes sections of the Pacific Crest Trail on its way from Mexico to Canada....

The private property runs in a checkerboard pattern of national forest land and private land along the historic Henness Pass Road, running from west of California 89 north to the hills around Jackson Meadows Reservoir. The easements prevent clear-cutting and the use of herbicides while still allowing some logging and opening the nearly 12 square miles of land to public access and potentially new trail construction, said John Svahn, stewardship director with the land trust.

...Norris said the first-ever conservation easement with Sierra Pacific Industries also possibly prevents serious development in the forests north of Truckee.
"This is the same 7,500 acres SPI was petitioning Sierra County to take out of timber production zone and put into general forestry, which means it could have been subdivided into 160-acre ranchettes," Norris said.

...He said Sierra Pacific Industries has transferred more than 100,000 acres to public ownership in the past, but compared to an outright sale or transfer, the conservation easements along Henness Pass mean SPI can continue to harvest wood for mills in the area, keeping jobs in the northern Sierra...

Sierra Clearcutter backs off after being sued...

-
Timber Giant Drops Logging Plans After Suit

(area planned for wipe-out was very small compared to Sierra Pacific's eventual plans to clearcut 1 million of its 1.5 million acres in California: http://www.sierraforestlegacy.org/FC_FireForestEcology/FFE_IndustrialForestlands.php)

http://www.stopclearcuttingcalifornia.org/--another useful SPI watch site

http://thptracker.blogspot.com/2009/08/greenhouse-gas-lawsuits-force-timber.html

--------------

http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/center/articles/2009/daily-journal-08-26-2009.html

8/26/2009--The state's largest timber company has withdrawn plans to log certain forests in the Sierra Nevada mountains, a week after the Center for Biological Diversity challenged the plans' climate change impacts in court.

The environmental group contested three separate plans by Sierra Pacific Industries to clear-cut more than 1,600 acres of Sierra Nevada forest. The suits allege state regulators violated the California Environmental Quality Act by failing to adequately look at the greenhouse gas emissions that result from clear-cutting, a logging practice that involves cutting down every tree in a designated area….

…The Tuscon, Ariz.-based environmental group filed three lawsuits in superior courts in Lassen, Tuolumne, and Tehama Counties in the past two weeks. Sierra Pacific officially withdrew the three challenged plans on Friday, according to Upton.

Timberworkers Suffer When Forests are Overlogged or Converted to Housing Tracts

-
Saving Forests from becoming Housing Tracts Saves Millworkers' Jobs

From the High Sierra Rural Alliance:

Regarding the Settlement between HSRA, SPI and the County of Sierra

4/18/2009--Since the announcement of the HSRA settlement with Sierra Pacific Industries and Sierra County, there have been a spate of letters-to-the-editor and an opinion piece in local newspapers implying that the closing of the SPI mill in Quincy and the loss of 150 jobs was caused by the litigation settlement between the parties. This is not true.

The agreement which SPI proposed and was agreed to by HSRA and the County of Sierra resulted in:

* 7000 acres of land zoned as Timber Production remaining in Timber Production Zone, and

* Reimbursement of HSRA costs and attorney fees by SPI, $15,640.

Making sure productive timberland within reasonable distances of timber mills is not converted into other uses protects mill jobs. The monetary settlement consists of less than four months wages for one mill worker. SPI receives generous property tax deductions by having the land in Timber Production Zone rather than General Forest. This case did not cause the loss of 150 jobs at the SPI mill in Quincy or anywhere else. For more information, please see: http://www.highsierrarural.org/announcements/aresponse

-
Sierra Pacific Industries Settles Case, Withdraws Bid to "Upzone" 34,000 Acres of Forests in 6 Northern Calif. Counties

http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/1660393.html

2-28-2009--Timber firm, Sierra Nevada environmental groups settle dispute

Two Sierra Nevada environmental groups have settled lawsuits challenging the rezoning of 12,541 acres of timberland owned by Sierra Pacific Industries, the largest private landowner in California…

Sierra and Lassen counties are among eight Northern California counties where the Anderson-based timber company had sought to remove a total of about 40,000 acres of its forests from timber production zoning. New zoning designations would start a 10-year countdown that would end the tax benefits Sierra Pacific has enjoyed under timberland production zoning, approved by the Legislature in 1976 to encourage long-term working forests.

After 10 years, the company could request new zoning designations that permit development.

With the settlements in Sierra and Lassen counties, only Tehama and Shasta counties have authorized the company's rezone requests on a combined 6,339 acres.

Sierra Pacific recently withdrew applications for rezoning 34,237 acres of timberlands in Butte, Lassen, Plumas, Sierra, Siskiyou and Trinity counties, said Mark Pawlicki, a company spokesman. The requests ranged from 7,826 acres in Plumas County to 2,537 acres in Tehama County.

Although it has no plans for development, the company is not abandoning zoning changes on some of its 1.7 million acres, Pawlicki said.

Instead of a piecemeal approach, company officials want to take a more comprehensive view that adheres to the legal processes required by state environmental laws, he said.

-----------------------

http://www.sierracounty.ws/county_docs/bos/050808%20BOS/mno05062008bosweb.pdf

County planning staff doesn’t think any development is foreseen for the thousands of acres of SPI’s forest lands that they are rezoning in Sierra County...

-

Settlement Protects Sierra County Forest Lands from Premature Development

(The Case involved Sierra Pacific Industries' Lands around 15 miles northwest of the town of Truckee which are part of the "checkerboard" of lands given to the railroads in the 1800's, with the federal government retaining every other square mile)

February 27, 2009, Sierra City--The High Sierra Rural Alliance announced the successful settlement of a lawsuit the group brought against the County of Sierra and Sierra Pacific Industries. HSRA had challenged the County's approval to rezone over 7000 acres of forested lands from a zone which limited development to a zone which would encourage development. Under the agreement the property owned by SPI in a remote and environmentally sensitive area within the checkerboard of the Tahoe National Forest will remain protected from premature development.

Under the settlement the County has agreed to rescind the disputed approval. Sierra Pacific Industries has agreed to cover all of HSRA's attorney's fees and court costs, and HSRA has agreed not to pursue the litigation in court.

The HSRA contended the rezone was not consistent with the County's General Plan; and, the exemption from environmental analysis the project received was inappropriate. "The suit challenged the legality of the rezone. The settlement was the most cost effective solution for SPI, if they believed their legal position lacked merit," said Michael Graf, attorney for HSRA. With the intent of expanding into the real estate business, the rezone was one in a series of rezones totaling more than 40,000 acres SPI has sought across Sierra Nevada counties in California. The HSRA argued such a vast project by the largest landowner in the state required environmental review. The project was approved with an exemption from analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act.

HSRA spokeswoman, Stevee Duber, stated," the settlement is great news for the integrity of the Tahoe National Forest. It doesn't make sense to convert remote forested lands for development in view of the environmental challenges we are facing due to climate change and the critical role forests play in enhancing watershed and habitat health,."

"Sierra County's General Plan is very specific about encouraging development around existing communities and discouraging development in areas remote from existing services. It's a Smart Growth principle which is widely accepted and supported by a diverse group of organizations, industries, local governments and most recently the State of California in Senate Bill 375" continued Duber, "When these sorts of policies are easily overcome, land speculation and escalating prices result, which in turn creates more pressure for random, unconstructive development."

The rezone, along Henness Pass Road between Perazzo Meadows and Jackson Reservoir would have opened the Tahoe National Forest to significant environmental impacts, as well as alter the rural qualities of Sierra County. Not only would it have removed valuable timberland from production, it would have compromised the commercial use and the forest health of the remaining productive timberlands by introducing incompatible uses. Development on private in-holdings within the National Forest alters the forest structure, can interrupt ecological processes; increase the potential for invasive species, disease and insect infestations; increase fire danger and promote rural sprawl.

Just a few weeks ago it was reported that the Northern Sierra Partnership acquired Perazzo Meadows, a 932 acre parcel, bordering the 7000 acres saved from rezoning by the HSRA. The acquisition is part of a broader plan to permanently protect the forest by purchasing as much as 200,000 acres of private in-holdings within the National Forest. The parcels, which had been slated for rezoning, are shown in red on the map below.

For the past three years the HSRA has been watch-dogging Sierra and Plumas County land-use decisions. The organization is a nonprofit based in Sierra City committed to preserving the rural qualities of the area. They believe rural values provide a balance between human, economic and environmental wellbeing. For more information, visit http://www.highsierrarural.org/.

-
Up in the "Big Trees" Area of the Sierra Nevada, a Proposal for the Arnold Rim Trail

excerpted from:
http://www.brushwoodinstitute.com/arnoldrimtrail.htm

Arnold is ringed by some truly magnificent public lands—the 8,000 acre Urban Interface (which is Forest Service land), spectacular Big Trees State Park, and the scenic Stanislaus River canyon. There is only one thing standing between an unbroken 30-mile trail encircling the community—a trail that could be accessed easily from each of Arnold’s subdivisions—and that’s Sierra Pacific Industry (SPI) land. On roughly the northeast corner of this currently imaginary loop is SPI’s 3,500-acre holding in the Upper San Antonio Creek watershed. On roughly the southwest corner is a 1,200-acre strip (also owned by SPI) that stretches from the Stanislaus River to the upper portion of the Interface between Love Creek and Moran roads. These currently separate pieces, if connected, would form an Arnold Rim Trail (ART), a breathtaking 20,000-acre community recreation resource to rival anything in the West. In addition to boosting property values and adding immeasurably to the quality of life of residents and second home owners, it would make Arnold (currently perceived as the gateway to the Big Trees, Bear Valley, and the Carson-Iceberg Wilderness) a superb recreation destination in its own right. That’s the vision. And it’s not unrealistic. ...

The 4,700 acres in question comprise three tenths of one percent of SPI’s holdings in California, and about six percent of their 75,000 acres in Calaveras County...

-
Calif. Timber Giant Threatens to "Convert" Sierra Nevada Forests

November 27, 2008

FORESTS FOREVER ALERTS
SPI SEEKS ZONING CHANGES to ALLOW TIMBERLANDS to BE DEVELOPED

Attorney General’s Office Weighs-in on a Disturbing Trend

http://forestsforever.org

When California’s largest logging company turns into a real-estate developer the consequences bode ill for the natural environment. Even California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown, Jr., sees the danger to wildlife habitat, timber supplies, and the global climate in allowing timber companies to rezone their lands for real-estate development. Thousands of acres of forested land in the state could be removed from timber production and converted to other uses, from mining to housing construction, in the process undermining the state’s climate protection strategies and degrading watersheds and wildlife habitat. Fortunately, in at least one case this November, Brown’s department helped put the brakes on what has become a disturbing trend. The attorney general deserves credit for his agency’s action, and encouragement to continue assuring California’s private forestlands remain forested.

TO TAKE ACTION: Write to Attorney General Brown and thank him for looking out for the interests of forests, climate, and wildlife habitat. Urge him to continue pressing California counties to consider global warming and forest conservation issues before they allow zoning changes that would permit forest-area development. Attorney General Edmund G. Brown, Jr. Public Inquiry Unit Office of the Attorney General P.O. Box 944255 Sacramento, CA 94244-2550

If you want to do more you can mail in comments on the official General Form for Comments/Questions to the attorney general. Download the form at: http://ag.ca.gov/contact/generalform.pdf

Also contact your county supervisors and remind them of their obligation to protect forest resources and the environment by standing firm against forestland rezoning proposals.

IN DEPTH: In June of this year, the Sacramento Bee reported, Sierra Pacific Industries (SPI), California’s largest timber company and land owner, won approval to rezone as “General Forest” about 5500 acres in Lassen County that had been managed for timber production.

http://www.sacbee.com/288/story/1004617.html

http://www.sacbee.com/288/story/1161567.html

This rezoning was a snapshot of a larger picture unfolding of a timber company harboring real-estate developer ambitions. A pattern is emerging as, in county after county, SPI seeks to have lands now classified as Timberland Production Zones (TPZs)– areas restricted to timber operations and off-limits to development– reclassified as General Forest Zones, which allow for the development of ranches, summer home tracts, mobile home parks, airports, country clubs, mines, quarries and more.

“The decision by the [Lassen County] supervisors is the latest action on the Anderson-based timber company's request to rezone more than 30,000 acres in five Northern California counties,” reported Bee correspondent Jane Braxton Little.

In September the High Sierra Rural Alliance, a nonprofit grassroots organization, petitioned Sierra County supervisors to reverse a recent decision to rezone more than 7000 acres of prime Sierra timberland owned owned by SPI.

County by county, rezoning conversions are getting the go-ahead. Even the most active citizen groups are having a tough time counteracting the trend.

According to the Bee, SPI officials indicated they have immediate no plans for putting housing on any of the rezoned lands in Northern California. The company has requested the rezonings “to increase management options” on properties in the rural counties.

Something is amiss in the rezoning process. The apparent pattern of counties rezoning land from timber production to commercial development is directly at odds with the stated intent of the California legislature.

The California Timberland Productivity Act of 1982 (CTPA) explicitly seeks to “discourage premature or unnecessary conversion of timberland to urban and other uses; discourage expansion of urban services into timberland; and encourage investment in timberlands based on reasonable expectation of harvest.” In approving the CTPA, the law that established TPZ zoning and describes the powers and duties of local government in protecting timberlands, the legislators made the following finding:

“The state's increasing population threatens to erode the timberland base and diminish forest resource productivity through pressures to divert timberland to urban and other uses and through pressures to restrict or prohibit timber operations when viewed as being in conflict with non-timberland uses. . . .” The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) is on record opposing rezoning. “CDF does not support moving land from TPZ to zoning classes that may lead to future development,” the agency announced in January 2007.

“CDF is extremely concerned with the erosion of the state's timber Base and the increased fire hazard from the future development that is likely to occur on these [rezoned] lands.” SPI maintains an active real-estate division, and the company notes that “although our primary interest is timberland acquisition, other types of lands often come with these purchases. These properties include parcels of land suitable for residential, business and recreational development.” In total, California has 5,418,979 acres of land classified as TPZs distributed in 32 counties. According to the CDF, approximately three quarters of California’s private forestlands are zoned TPZ. Landowners still pay an annual property tax, but the assessed value of TPZ land is valued for the cultivation of timber. This results in a lower tax assessment than customary "highest and best use" valuation.

On Nov. 3 of this year, Attorney General Brown’s office weighed in on the controversy with a letter to the Siskiyou County Planning Department, commenting on SPI’s request for a zoning change involving 3,846 acres on the southern slope of Mount Shasta. “The site’s current habitat supports hundreds of important Sierra species,” the letter noted. “The Zone Change will allow a range of potential new uses of the land, including farm labor housing, single family dwellings, agricultural uses and elderly housing.” Other uses of the land, dependent on SPI obtaining a conditional use permit, include “churches, schools, parks, playgrounds, private airports, dairies, commercial feedlots, golf courses. “As a factual matter,” Brown’s office observed, “it appears that many potential uses that are likely to have environmental impacts will be allowed without any further review.

“Of particular interest to the Attorney General,” the letter continued, “is that the Zone Change makes it more likely that this approximately 3800 acres of land will move out of timber production and into another use, resulting in the loss of forested land in the State. The environmental review document does not address how this rezoning may affect the net carbon balance in California. With our increasing awareness of the seriousness of the problem of climate change, climate protection strategies, including forest conservation,are acknowledged as being increasingly important in California. The loss of forest land is the second largest cause of greenhouse gas emissions globally, and forests are the most expandable long-term sink for carbon dioxide.” Brown’s office also addressed a theme apparently common to all or most of SPI’s requests for zone changes: the company’s resistance to detailing the purpose for the rezoning.

A footnote in the Attorney General’s legal opinion observed that “It does not appear that the applicant [SPI] has identified or disclosed the purpose and need of this Zone Change or its intended use of the land after rezoning. Not knowing the intended use of the land after the Zone Change is approved makes it difficult for the County to meaningfully evaluate the Zone Change’s impacts to the environment and leads to our concern that there may not be sufficient evidence to support the County’s conclusion that no impacts are anticipated.”

-----
Sierra County Rezones Timberland Owned by Sierra Pacific Industries for Probable Development North of Lake Tahoe;

Plaintiffs Say Change Violates CEQA because the rezone changes allowed use of lands from logging to logging AND development, yet the environmental impacts were not revealed or considered.

August 22, 2008

http://www.highsierrarural.org/

http://www.highsierrarural.org/Home/announcements/high-sierra-rural-alliance-sues-to-protect-timberland


Why is the challenge to Sierra Pacific Industries Rezone important?

Some have questioned the timing of the High Sierra Rural Alliance’s challenge of Sierra Pacific Industries rezone of over 7000 acres of land zoned Timber Production to General Forest. Since SPI has not stated its specific intentions for the parcels, the logic goes HSRA’s challenge is based on the speculation that development will occur. SPI has stated the rezoned parcels will continue to be managed for timber production. But, the reality of that statement is just as speculative. Once the requirement that the land be managed for timber, which is a requirement of the Timber Production Zone but not the General Forest Zone, is removed how the land will be used is unknown. The fact that SPI will lose generous tax benefits by rezoning, but does not plan on changing the use makes us wonder. The County’s Board of Supervisors is not obligated to grant the rezone, especially because there does not seem to be any compelling reason for it, or benefit to the County. The rezone and the policy of rezoning without analysis weaken the goals and policies of the County’s General Plan.

That the lawsuit is an economic burden on Sierra County has also been used to criticize the HSRA’s action. However, the County requires all applicants for land use entitlements indemnify the County against any litigation the County’s approval of the project might cause. All costs to the County of the suit will be paid by SPI. It is worth noting that the converse is not true. If the Board denies approval of a project and the applicant sues, the County would have to pay for its own litigation costs.

The fundamental question for the Board in a case where a party is requesting a rezone without committing to a specific project is whether or not the County wants to change its original objective for the area in question. By exempting rezones of TPZ to GF from environmental analysis, the Board is adopting a policy which threatens the fundamental goals of the Sierra County General Plan. All TPZ parcels are not created equal. Some are close to established communities possibly making a rezone consistent with the General Plan. Some are remote, making a rezone inconsistent with the General Plan. The attached map shows the location of TPZ parcels in the County (shaded) and the rezoned SPI parcels in red.

The lands SPI has rezoned from TPZ to GF are located on Henness Pass Road between Perazzo Meadows and Jackson Meadows Reservoir, a remote area within the Tahoe National Forest checkerboard. HSRA believes entertaining possible development plans in this area is contrary to the fundamental goals of the General Plan and threatens to undermine the rural landscape the Plan embraces, as well as, impact three watersheds, fragment sensitive habitat and increase fire danger.

Through an intensive public process, Sierra County residents crafted a comprehensive General Plan to guide the County’s growth and land use pattern from 1996 to 2012. In the General Plan the community specifically identified policies and implementation measures which would assure the accomplishment of that fundamental goal. In order to protect its forests a Forest designation was created. The goals of the Forest designation are to ensure the continued availability of private timberlands; ensure the continued viability of timber production; allow for the managed production of forest lands; retain the open space and scenic values these lands provide; and prevent conversion to residential uses and other incompatible uses. The Timber Production Zone is a special zone within the Forest designation which was created by the State of California through the Timber Production Act of 1982. The program confers tax benefits to property owners who own Class A timberlands. When the Act became law Counties which chose to take part in the program compiled lists of eligible properties and put Class A lands in TPZ. A process followed allowing property owners to contest or accept the classification. Parcels zoned TPZ are limited in use to timber management and compatible uses and are taxed at a substantially reduced rate from similar Forest designated parcels which are zoned General Forest. Among the uses potentially allowed on lands zoned General Forest include forest estates, country clubs, golf courses, guest ranches, riding stables, mines, quarries, gravel pits, sawmills, summer home tracts, mobile home parks, travel trailer parks, recreational trailer parks, airports and heliports.

The lands SPI has rezoned from TPZ to GF are located on Henness Pass Road between Perazzo Meadows and Jackson Meadows Reservoir, a remote area within the Tahoe National Forest checkerboard. HSRA believes the rezone is contrary to the fundamental goals of the General Plan and threatens the pattern of rural clustered development the Plan embraces. The rezone is a policy level decision that would allow some form of development to occur in an area where virtually no development was possible. HSRA believes now is the time for the Board to analyze whether or not the County wants development to be able to occur in this area. To wait until a specific plan is proposed removes an important level of discretion. Once the property is zoned GF, the question will be what kind of development will be allowed. The opportunity to decide whether or not the land should be developed at all will be lost. HSRA believes the public decided in the General Plan that this was not an area appropriate for development. The HSRA is committed to defending the goals and policies of the Sierra County General Plan.

Please Donate Now to Save our Forests!

http://www.highsierrarural.org/donating

-----
State's Largest Landowner Seeks to Convert Forests into Housing Tracts

http://www.highsierrarural.org/

June 6, 2008

Sierra County is embarking on a new policy of issuing zone amendments without environmental review. The most flagrant example is the recent approval of Sierra Pacific Industries application to rezone over 7000 acres of timberland in the Timber Production Zone (TPZ) to General Forest (GF). SPI is requesting similar rezones of comparable acreages in five other Sierra Nevada counties in anticipation of their new venture into the real estate business. As the largest landowner in California and Sierra County their plans to rezone vast acreages of timberland to a district which will allow private country clubs, golf courses, guest ranches, summer home tracts, mobilehome parks and travel trailer parks among other uses regardless of the impacts to timber production must be reviewed for consistency with the Sierra County General Plan and for its potential impacts on the environment.

The rezone, along Henness Pass Rd. between Perazzo Meadows and Jackson Reservoir will open the forest to significant environmental impacts, as well as alter the rural qualities of Sierra County. Not only will it remove valuable timberland from production, it will compromise the commercial use and the forest health of the remaining productive timberlands by introducing incompatible uses. Development on private in-holdings within the National Forest alters the forest structure, can interrupt ecological processes; increases the potential for invasive species and disease and insect infestations; increases fire danger; and promotes rural sprawl. Sierra County relies on volunteer fire fighters to keep our communities safe. Making land use decisions which will encourage development remote from existing communities puts a tremendous burden on those volunteers and reduces the security of the people who live in those communities.

The High Sierra Rural Alliance is a non-profit, grassroots organization committed to the preservation and enhancement of the rural Sierra experience. We believe rural values, including rural land use patterns, provide a balance between human, economic and environmental well-being. We think rural values include taking responsibility for our choices. We need your help to continue to monitor the County’s actions and provide credible, objections to irresponsible decisions.