Save Richardson Grove

Donna Tam/The Times-Standard
Posted:   02/25/2012 02:16:10 AM PST

A federal judge presiding over a case in which the Richardson Grove realignment project is contested has issued an order for a Humboldt County federal judge to oversee the measuring of redwood trees at the site.

According to an order filed Friday, U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup is requesting U.S. District Court Judge Nador Vadas, a federal judge who presides over cases in Eureka, conduct a site visit and supervise the measuring of specific redwood trees. The findings of the site visit are to be submitted by noon on March 19, according to the order.

The document indicated that the purpose of the visit, which is to be videotaped, is to allow the plaintiffs a chance to pick their six best examples of alleged “data errors” and see if the trees examined support those allegations.

”This view shall not be used by counsel to argue over environmental impacts or mitigation measures or anything other than the measurements and existence of the trees,” the order signed by Alsup states.

Caltrans spokesman Scott Burger said he could not say if site visits are a common occurrence for a court case of this nature, specifically because Caltrans does not often have cases stopping them from proceeding with projects. Alsup granted an injunction on the project in July.

”Today’s order is unusual,” Burger said. “While this is a unique project, it is not common for Caltrans to have a lawsuit preventing a project from moving forward. We stand behind our environmental document and we look forward to a positive outcome and for the project to move forward.”

The proposed project would realign portions of U.S. Highway 101 in Richardson Grove to allow larger cargo trucks to pass through narrow sections of the route.

The plaintiffs, which also include Californians for Alternatives to Toxics and the Center for Biological Diversity, filed a motion Dec. 5 asking Alsup to require Caltrans to prepare a full environmental impact report or revise its environmental analysis before moving forward on the project.

Alsup heard from both sides at a hearing Thursday, but did not rule from the bench.
According to Friday’s order, Vadas will determine the diameter of a redwood tree alleged by Caltrans to be 84 inches and alleged by UC Berkeley forestry professor Joe McBride to be 103 inches and look at whether old growth redwood trees were omitted from Caltrans maps and its analysis, which McBride alleges in his court declaration filed by the plaintiffs.

Additionally, if the trees were omitted, Vadas is being asked to determine the diameter of the omitted trees.

The order said one or two attorneys for both sides are to be present, in addition to at least one expert, engineer or other representative from each side who can identify and measure the trees, and specify the exact location of the trees on maps.

The order requests that Vadas prepare a report and recommendation explaining the findings along with a map marking the location of the trees.

According to the order, the plaintiffs have until noon on Monday (February 27) to select five trees for measurement.

EPIC Executive Director Gary Graham Hughes said he couldn’t comment what action the plaintiffs would take next.

”It’s really important that the court have an opportunity to investigate the merits of the case,” he said.

Donna Tam can be reached at 441-0532 or dtam@times-standard.com.

Document Links

 McBride Declaration

 Alsups Order

Thursday, February 23, 2012, San Francisco–United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Attorneys for Caltrans and the Plaintiffs (EPIC, CBD, CATS, et al.) gave oral arguments on the sufficiency of the Caltrans’ finding of FONSI (Finding Of No Significant Impact) relating to the Highway 101 Re-Alignment project through Richardson Grove.

Sharon Duggan, Esq. representing EPIC gave the oral argument for the Plaintiffs.  Sharon was ably supported by an awesome team of talented attorneys including Kevin Bundy, Stuart Gross, Phil Gregory and former Congressman Pete McClosky.  You will not find a higher caliber group of environmental law experts.

The hearing was very well attended by supporters of the Grove, not just from Humboldt County but also from the Bay Area.

Judge Alsup had issued an Order the previous day requesting that the attorneys be prepared to focus on the issue of the diameter of the trees.  This is important because the diameter of the trees influences the area of the structural root zone and the health root zone.  For example, if a tree measures a diameter of 36 inches (3 feet) its structural root zone is considered to be 9 feet around the tree and its health root zone is considered to be 15 feet around the tree.

Our argument is that Caltrans did not accurately measure the diameter of certain trees, actually omitted trees and most importantly merely listed trees on their diagrams and tables without doing any actual tree-by-tree analysis of the effects of the project on each tree.

The importance of making these points is to show that Caltrans acted “arbitrarily and capriciously” when it reached its conclusion of Finding Of No Significant Impact.

On Friday, February 24, Judge Alsup issued the attached order for the parties to meet at the Grove with their experts to measure a selected number of trees.  While I have been unable to discuss the importance of this development with our attorneys, I am assuming it shows that the Judge wants to verify whether or not Caltrans was accurate in their data gathering.  This may or may not dictate the Judge’s final ruling in the case.

Therefore, stayed tuned for further updates.  Remember, we are also pursuing a State Court action on violations of CEQA.  The hearing is to be held on March 14 in Superior Court in Eureka.

Thanks to all for their support of the Grove

Court Hearing Dates:
The Federal Court Hearing for the Richardson Grove Case is in San Francisco, Thursday February 23, 2012 at 2pm, court room #8, 19th floor, with the Honorable William Alsup.

The State Court Hearing for Richardson Grove is in Eureka, Wednesday March 14, 2012 at 9am, court room #8, with the Honorable Dale A. Reinholsten.

The public and supporters are welcome to attend; Please be respectful of the Court.

Greetings …On February 2, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee marked up its major surface transportation bill, HR 7, (called the American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act.)  The bill contained numerous anti-safety provisions.  One of them would have allowed a “state option” to permit 97,000 lb. trucks and triple-trailer trucks to operate on most roads in many states across the nation.  However, Congressman Lou Barletta (R-PA) and Congressman Jerry Costello (D-IL) introduced and championed an amendment that REMOVED these provisions and replaced them with a responsible study on the impacts of truck sizes and weights.

This was a great victory but just shows that the trucking industry will continue to lobby vigorously for bigger, heavier and more dangerous trucks. As good as this news was, there are other great concerns regarding this bill:

It would make financing for mass transit much less certain and more vulnerable, by ending a 30-year agreement that guaranteed mass transit a one-fifth share of the fuel taxes and other user fees in the highway trust fund. Instead it would complete annually with other programs.

It would open nearly all of America’s coastal waters to oil and gas drilling, including environmentally fragile areas that have long been off limits. The ostensible purpose is to raise revenue to help make up what has become an annual shortfall for transportation financing. But it is really just one more attempt to promote the drill-new-drill everywhere agenda and the interests of their industry patrons. And, most alarmingly:

It would demolish significant environmental protections by imposing arbitrary deadlines on legally mandated environmental reviews of proposed road and highway projects, and by ceding to state highway agencies the authority to decide whether such reviews should occur.

Obviously, we need to keep the pressure to oppose these provisions on our current Congressman Mike Thompson as well as the candidates for the new CD2. If this bill passes the House, we will have to contact Senators Boxer and Feinstein to oppose passage in the Senate. Please remember to “Take Action” on <http://saverichardsongrove.org/> to contact our California legislators and Governor to abandon the Richardson Grove project.

We need to take action and contact our Congressperson – for most of us this would be Mike Thompson.  As you know, CALTRANS wants to widen Highway 101 in Richardson Grove to allow STAA truck access.  Now the trucking industry has succeeded in getting legislation introduced to increase the legal weight limit – the bill is the Surface Transportation Reauthorization bill (H.R. 7)

States could permit trucks weighing up to 97,000 pounds — and in some cases as much as 126,000 pounds — on interstate highways under the bill. The current limit is 80,000 pounds in most states. Increased weight limits are supported by the trucking industry, but opposed by safety advocates.

“Larger and heavier trucks mean bigger safety risks for highway drivers,’’ Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., wrote in a letter to House lawmakers last week asking them not to raise weight limits.

You can Google Mike Thompson for his web site to send your comments or use <http://mikethompson.house.gov/contact>.  Here are a few talking points:

On average 4,000 people are killed in truck crashes annually and 100,00 more are injured.  The annual cost of truck crashes exceeds $19 billion.  In the past 10 years more than 48,000 people have needlessly died and over 1 million have been injured in truck crashes.  Enough is enough.

In fatal 2-vehicle crashes involving a passenger vehicle and a large truck, 98% of the deaths are occupants of the passenger vehicles. Adding more weight to a big truck dramatically increases the risk of death and serious injury.

The American public strongly opposes allowing bigger and heavier trucks.  In an April 2011 public opinion poll, 74% of Americans opposed increases to truck weights, with more than half of Americans strongly opposing them.

Big trucks dramatically underpay their fair share of bridge and road damage and motorists are footing the bill.  States and Congress are already struggling to find sufficient funds to repair roads and bridges and we don’t need bigger trucks doing more damage that motorists have to pay for.

Bigger trucks mean more truck traffic, more fuel consumption, more emissions, particularly greenhouse gases, and will result in more deaths and injuries.

Highway 101 is NOT Interstate 5!  Keep STAA trucks out of Richardson Grove State Park! Thank you for helping to protect our Park, our old growth trees and ourselves!

Greetings … the legal wheels are turning so stand by for action!  On December 6 the Plaintiffs (the good guys – EPIC, CBD, CATS, et. al.) filed their motion for Summary Judgment in the Federal Court action.

This motion asks the Judge to decide that there are no triable issues of fact for a jury to decide in the complaint and that judgment should be awarded to the plaintiffs.  In other words, no trial is necessary and the plaintiff wins.

However, CALTRANS will have something to say to the contrary, and their reply will be filed on December 28.  Then the Plaintiffs get a chance to reply to that and the Plaintiffs’ Response will be filed by January 18.  Finally, CALTRANS gets one last shot and their Reply will be filed by February 1.  Then there will be a hearing where the attorneys have one more chance to argue their case in front of the Judge.

The hearing is scheduled for February 23, 2012 at 8:00 AM in Judge Alsup’s courtroom on the 19th Floor of the Federal Courthouse in San Francisco.  All are encouraged to attend if possible.  We’ll update you as the time draws nearer.

And that’s not all!  A companion lawsuit was filed in State Court at the same time that the Federal Court lawsuit was filed but it has been relatively dormant until now.  The Plaintiffs will file their opening brief this Friday, December 9 in the Humboldt County Superior Court in Eureka.  A hearing is scheduled there for March 14 at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 8 in Eureka and more updates will issue as we draw closer.

To keep up on the action feel free to access EPIC’s website at www.wildcalifornia.org.  The “Action and Issues” tab has a pull down menu and Richardson Grove is the first topic.  Click there and it will take you to the most current information on our struggle and you will be able to access the actual legal documents from there.

In the meantime, this is just a reminder that we have an exciting opportunity here in the newly formed Congressional District #2 which stretches from the Golden Gate Bridge up to the Oregon boarder.  This new Congressional seat is open since Mike Thompson is moving to a District to the east and will no longer represent us.  There are multiple candidates running for the new seat and now is the time to get them talking about Richardson Grove and other issues of local concern.

Try to attend as many local town hall meetings as you possibly can when these candidates come to your area.  For example, there will be a debate of the candidates at the Mateel Community Center in Redway on January 15 – a great opportunity!

Now is also a great time to submit letters to the editor and opinion pieces and/or write to your Legislators – the State Legislature is in recess so your Assembly and State Senate representatives are in their home districts so it’s a good time to share your concerns.

That’s it for now, but stay tuned.  Meanwhile, all the best for a peaceful holiday season and a Happy New Year!  Should you wish to be removed from this listserv simply email me.  Regards, Barbara Kennedy

SAN FRANCISCO— A federal judge on Wednesday ordered California state transportation officials to stop work on a controversial plan to cut wider highway lanes through ancient redwoods in Northern California’s Richardson Grove State Park. The judge granted the injunction that was being sought by a group of plaintiffs that includes three environmental organizations and several citizens, finding the project is likely to harm trees and may violate federal law.

The judge halted plans by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to realign a section of Highway 101 that winds through old-growth redwoods in the park to accommodate large-truck travel. The work would require crews to extensively cut into the roots of towering redwoods that stand along the highway within park boundaries. The injunction prohibits all on-the-ground construction and even contract advertising, bidding, or awards until the merits of the case are heard. The case is to be heard on Dec. 1, 2011.

The court’s decision centers on the controversial project’s potentially fatal damage to the prized ancient trees, as well as harm to sensitive wildlife. The plaintiffs charged that Caltrans failed to evaluate impacts of the project in violation of environmental laws such as the National Environmental Policy Act. Those arguments were recognized as valid in Wednesday’s court decision granting the injunction. The federal lawsuit accompanies a California state action also filed by the coalition.

“This project would cause irreparable damage to one of our most prized state parks, and this decision confirms the legitimacy of our concerns,” said Gary Hughes of the Environmental Protection Information Center, a plaintiff group based in Humboldt County. “We believe that this ruling highlights the ecological importance of the state parks in redwood country, and we hope that decision-makers are beginning to understand the legal and ethical responsibility they have to steward these globally important protected areas for future generations.”

“With less than 3 percent of our ancient redwood trees remaining, we cannot allow Caltrans to injure and kill the precious giants of Richardson Grove State Park,” said Jeff Miller with the Center for Biological Diversity. “We hope that with this court decision, Caltrans will scrap this misguided project that would sacrifice redwoods and the endangered species that depend on them for the sake of a few more oversized trucks speeding through the grove.”

Plaintiffs in the case (No. C 10-04360 WHA) are Trisha Lee Lotus, Bess Bair, Bruce Edwards, Jeffrey Hedin, Loreen Eliason, Environmental Protection Information Center, Californians for Alternatives to Toxics and the Center for Biological Diversity. They are represented by a team that includes Philip Gregory and former congressman “Pete” McCloskey of Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, a law firm in San Francisco.

Judge Orders California to Halt Work on Richardson Grove Highway Expansion That Would Harm Ancient Redwoods – EPIC’s Press Release

Richardson Grove Injunction Cites Inconsistencies in Environmental Review; Caltrans Stands By Project – Times Standard

Preliminary Injunction Granted in Richardson Grove Case – Times Standard

Order Granting Preliminary Injunction – United States District Court

Save Richardson Grove allies are invited to rally in Sacramento on June 22, 2011 to protect the Grove. Participants from Humboldt and Mendocino counties will be joined by organizers from the San Francisco Bay Area, and from other locales around the state, when they converge at noon right in front of Caltrans’ headquarters in Sacramento, at 12th and N Streets. At the rally, the group plans to deliver postcards of opposition from across the state and country to send the message that the project should be immediately rescinded, at least until a better alternative can be identified.

After four years of holding off the road widening project, the broad coalition of activists, including the Bay Area Coalition for Headwaters, recognized as a long time redwood region defender, is inviting concerned citizens to rally for Richardson Grove to ensure that democracy is respected and the legal cases heard on their merits before the project moves forward. With no procedure available to the public to express substantive concerns for the negative effects the project could have on the local economy and ecological health of the ancient redwood grove, the group will take their message to Sacramento.

For more information please email: contact_us@saverichardsongrove.org.

May 25, 2011— A coalition of conservation groups, the Environmental Protection Information Center, the Center for Biological Diversity, and Californians Alternatives to Toxics, along with local residents asked a federal judge to stop California transportation officials from moving ahead with a controversial highway project that would jeopardize ancient stands of redwood trees in northern California’s Richardson Grove State Park.

The coalition seeks to halt plans by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to realign a section of Highway 101 that winds through old-growth redwoods in the park. The work would require crews to dig into the roots of towering redwoods that stand along the highway within park boundaries. Today’s filing asks a judge to stop the project until legal proceedings are complete.

The threat of possibly fatal damage to the prized ancient trees, as well as harm to sensitive wildlife posed by the controversial project, is driving today’s legal challenge, which is the second filed by the coalition. Caltrans has failed to evaluate impacts of the project in violation of the National Environmental Policy Act and the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.

“The importance of this old-growth redwood stand, in view of the important heritage of the redwood forest, requires special consideration before projects that would impact the stand are allowed to go forward,” (see below) Joe McBride, a professor of forestry and landscape architecture at the University of California at Berkeley, said in today’s filing. “Substantial, irreparable damage would occur to the trees in the project area. This would, in turn, cause negative impacts to the overall health of the forest.”

McBride’s finding is based on his scientific review of the potential of impacts to each tree along the project route — a review plaintiffs show Caltrans failed to undertake.

“This project will cause major damage to one of our most prized state parks,” said Gary Hughes of the Environmental Protection Information Center, one of the plaintiff groups and spokesman for the coalition. “For Caltrans to railroad this multimillion-dollar project by grossly understating its impacts is a violation of the public’s trust and a wasteful use of taxpayer money.”

“With less than 3 percent of our ancient redwood trees remaining, we cannot allow Caltrans to injure and kill the precious giant trees of Richardson Grove State Park,” said Peter Galvin, conservation director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “We will fight this project to the end, no matter how long it takes.”

Plaintiffs are Trisha Lee Lotus, Bess Bair, Bruce Edwards, Jeffrey Hedin, Loreen Eliason, Environmental Protection Information Center, Californians for Alternatives to Toxics and the Center for Biological Diversity. They are represented by a team that includes Philip Gregory and former congressman “Pete” McCloskey of Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, a law firm in San Francisco.