Comment / By J.A. Schwartz / Feb. 26, 2009, 2:34 p.m.

Interesting story…comprehensive but clear — the kind of environmental writing that’s rare in today’s dwindling print media. The author does a consistently fine job. You Journal folk are lucky to have her and several other outstanding writers on the payroll.

Comment / By Catch me if you can / Feb. 26, 2009, 5:30 p.m.

BLM’s management of the Headwater’s is a big dissapoint. I believe that the intent was to “conserve and study the land, fish, wildlife, and forests occurring on such land while providing public recreation opportunities and other management needs.”

The BLM is removing all of the roads as fast as they can, with no thought as to whether they may be used as future trails. The construction of the poorly planned and located Salmon Pass Trail is a joke, especially given that access is for “Guided Hikes” only. Oh boy, can you hold my hand and wipe my ass too! We have been paying for the expensive pre-commercial thinning of second growth redwood so that in 250-500 years, it will be a little bit more like old growth.

Lastly, the public is restricted to only 2 trails for a 7,500 acre area with no access to the backcountry. These bureaucrats and their biologist’s don’t want us in the Reserve…its their big petri dish. It just f-ing kills me to see signs on the south end that read…”PUBLIC LAND - NO TRESSPASSING”.

Comment / By H2O_nerd / Feb. 27, 2009, 9:06 p.m.

Does every square inch of the planet really need to be used by humans? Humans have manipulated and fouled the vast majority of the globe. What is so galling about leaving a few acres alone for nature to take its course without garbage, disturbances, and small-minded short-sighted humans, like Mr. Catch Me?

Comment / By catch me if you can’t / Feb. 28, 2009, 9:35 a.m.

If Mr. Catch me will read the article, he would understand that driving up to salmon pass is trespassing through Humboldt Redwood Company land for about 5 miles…..due to logistical reasons such as logging trucks blazing down Felt springs Road, the hikes must be coordinated. The north end of Headwaters is an amazing trail and doesn’t need to be a guided. Its a five mile hike that leads you to a pristine old-growth redwood grove.

Comment / By Caught and released / March 1, 2009, 9:05 p.m.

9:35:

BLM has a right-of-way up Felt Springs Road to the Kiosk, and also out to Alicia Pass. HRC’s truck road up Felt Springs road is used minimally. Ever heard of multiple use? Access could easily be restricted during the 2-3 month period when truck traffic is occurring. It could be worked out if they wanted it to.

In the meantime, while the BLM works on pulling their collective head out of their ass, some of us will be enjoying the Headwater’s southern end on weekends to walk, jog, and horseback ride up Felt Springs Road. A large majority of us won’t even enter the Reserve..why? Because the new trail sucks, and all of the existing roads are being removed as fast as they can.

When is the BLM going to figure out that the majority of local park users want access for dispersed recreation, not just to oogle over the “pristine old-growth”? The trees are a bonus but not the main attraction. Countless people walk and jog up Felt Springs Rd and then turn around at the Kiosk before even entering the Reserve. The northern trail is the same…the majority is located in second and third growth, which is where the most use occurs.

I would bet a paycheck that the tresspassers far outweigh the number of people participating in the guided hikes.

It sucks to have to be a “tresspasser” on Public Land.

Comment / By Jimi / March 1, 2009, 11:57 p.m.

The Headwaters is a joke by recreational standards. Much of it is unused and, contrary to an earlier comment made here, the northern trail is fairly bland. It’s consistently muddy, a fair chunk of it is paved and the old growth loop at the end is pretty small comparatively. As far as Falk goes, prepare yourself to relive the times by seeing scraps of an old saw blade or be dazzled by an old shed. The park does not get much use and doesn’t encourage much either. For anyone that truly enjoys the redwoods, a trail in either the state or national parks up north is far more rewarding than the Headwaters (and by the usage, I believe many have figured this out).

Comment / By unanonymous / March 2, 2009, 7:41 p.m.

It would have been nice for the writer to highlight some of the restoration work done by…. I know this isn’t popular, but PALCO. But that would be objective and if you ignore it enough, it never happened….

Comment / By Jeff Muskrat / March 3, 2009, 12:01 p.m.

Conflict of interests…?

This one is sick…

From the Sub-Standard 02/25/09:

“The public criticism of the Headwaters Fund’s five-year report took nearly as long as the report to the Board of Supervisors Tuesday.

Patrick Cleary, chairman of the Headwaters Fund board, presented the report covering the fund’s work between 2003 and 2008.

Originally, the fund started at a shade more than $18 million, Cleary said. Now it totals almost $21 million. During the past five years, the fund has distributed $1.6 million in grants, $951,000 in community investment grants and $2.5 million in community investment loans. One of the main focuses in the past half-decade has been on infrastructure — amounting to $5 million although the local needs are much more.

”We’ve had to pick and choose our spots,” Cleary said.

Among those were the Caltrans project to widen U.S. Highway 101 through Richardson Grove; Horizon’s addition of a flight to Los Angeles; providing upfront money to bring Delta Airlines service to the North Coast; and leveraging funds to acquire an $8.5 million Federal Aviation Administration grant and funding a study on the Humboldt Bay Harbor Recreation and Conservation District’s Redwood Dock.”

One more major reason why this project must be stopped…The fund should be used for the Trees, not against them!

Visit: http://saverichardsongrove.blogspot.com/ to get involved. Save Humboldt County!

Comment / By cdc in the Sierras / June 12, 2009, 5:52 p.m.

After reading this article, I must say I feel very lucky. In 1994, I was one of the CCC special corpsmembers doing habitat evaluation in the Elk River watershed; I saw most of the North and South Forks of the Elk and many of their tributaries (not to mention the Falk train barn in situ, not at its current location). I considered myself fortunate at the time (and still do today) to have seen a lot of territory that was not open to the general public, and now I read with some bemusement that much of it is still not open. I can understand the bitterness some might feel about the current management practices used in this now ‘public’ land.