"with a smattering of fish biologists"......love it............coho, ho!
Regarding the stream setbacks, they also reduced the buffer to a mere 50 feet on intermittent fish-bearing streams. Coho salmon and steelhead use these creeks for spawning and rearing. The Commission has no biological basis for their decision. They also stripped this section of the GPU of all acknowledge and consistency with NOAA Fisheries, CA Fish and Wildlife, FEMA, and Regional Water Quality last week too. Anyone who cares about restoring our fisheries and having better future opportunities to fish - sport, commercial, tribal should be mad as hell at these clowns on the Planning Commission!
So has there been, or will there be any investigations into the effects of the bogus surveys on owl habitat or timber harvest? Seems like a thorough investigation would have checked into this since impacts to protected habitat or restrictions on logging both have legal and economic ramifications related to the actions of Raymond and LeValley.
The article also failed to delve into the levels of herbicide application by GD or HRC as part of their timber management practices.
Maybe they should sell-off their fancy-A$$ 25-foot Boston Whaler with twin outboards......that could keep their office afloat for a while.
Why should folks who have the "opportunity to vote" have to wait two years to remove Johnson from the Board? I am very surprised there has been no talk of recalling this embarrassment ASAP.
Alex - in your brief tenure on the Board thanks for your support of the Woodman Creek barrier removal project.
All Comments »
In Print This Week:
Mar 13, 2014
vol XXV issue 11
The North Coast Journal Weekly
Website powered by Foundation