1. Klamath Settlement
About a decade ago, it would be impossible to imagine the agreement that was announced in October. In 2001, you had farmers in the Klamath Basin going rogue, tearing away at the locks that held water from their crops. You had Dick Cheney taking a personal interest in their plight, reaching into his bureaucratic bag of tricks to curry the farmers’ favor. And as a consequence, you had blacklisted fisheries scientists, their reports reversed, and up to 70,000 adult salmon dead on the banks the following year. The fishermen, the farmers, the tribes, the environmentalists — all up and down the Klamath River, the largest and sickest in the region, there was plenty of hate and recrimination to spare.
Then something miraculous happened. Everyone sat down together, and, for years and years, attempted to work things out on their own. Even the energy giant PacifiCorps, owners of four dirty hydropower dams downstream of the farmers, was eventually brought into the fold. And this year, the groups that held out announced the final bit of a compromise solution that would result in the removal of the hydropower dams, a more equitable and sane system for the distribution of water resources, conservation assistance for the farmers, and a million other matters pertaining to the health and wellbeing of this extremely complicated ecosystem. The parties developed a framework over that time — the settlement agreement — and now they’ll be working to make it happen.
But not everyone made it to the finish line. Did downstream interests compromise too much? The Hoopa Valley Tribe and some enviro groups think so. A rejectionist coalition called “Klamath Conservation Partners,”which is centered locally around the Northcoast Environmental Center, charges, among other things, that the agreement’s extended timeline for dam removal is too long. The conservation partners have drafted alternative legislation that, if passed, would mandate that the dams would start to come down in 2012. How politically viable is this? Without support from upstream farmers and PacifiCorps … not very.
The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors will hold a hearing on the subject next month, right before it takes the all-but-inevitable step of signing on in support the settlement. From there, the battle transfers to the states of California and Oregon and the federal government, all of which will have to pass legislation to get the ball rolling. California’s voters will be obliged to weigh in next year, too — California’s share of dam removal costs are written into Gov. Schwarzenegger’s omnibus water bond measure, which the legislature has placed on the ballot. Tying up Klamath restoration with politically charged issues like the Peripheral Canal is obviously less than ideal — but as with all matters Klamath, there’s the perfect solution and the possible solution.
— Hank Sims
2. Creamgate
The bizarre saga of The Fall of Humboldt Creamery was easily the least expected, most confusing collapse of a local business in years. It began in February with word from Len Mayer, who had just stepped in as the company’s interim CEO. He said longtime CEO Rich Ghilarducci had up and vanished while away on a business trip. “We can’t get hold of him, we can’t contact him, and he says [by lawyer-delivered letter] there’s something wrong with the finances,” Mayer said.
Indeed there was. Forensic accountants swooped in, capes flapping, to dissect the books of the 80-year-old Fernbridge institution. Their findings suggested that Ghilarducci had been deceiving current and potential investors, not to mention employees, board members and the 40-odd dairy farmers who owned 75 percent of the business, by fudging financial statements — overstating assets and understating debts by millions and millions of dollars. Ghilarducci’s lawyer denied it. But in April the company was forced to file Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and in an August court hearing, Modesto-based Foster Farms Dairy acquired Humboldt Creamery with a winning — and solitary — bid of $19.25 million.
The FBI launched a fraud investigation, and last month a criminal grand jury convened in San Francisco to consider indicting Ghilarducci. But the fallout hasn’t been confined to the former CEO. Earlier this month, state officials sued local dairy farmers and their erstwhile cooperative for more than $400,000. The farmers contend that the state miscalculated, using Ghilarducci’s goofy numbers. Regardless, local dairy suppliers and the surrounding community won’t soon recover from the revelation that one of Humboldt County’s greatest success stories was fictional.
— Ryan Burns
3. Pot City, U.S.A.
The joint blew up this year! Much to the chagrin of county officials, anti-drugsters and, ironically, rapacious, chest-puffing ganja growers themselves, Humboldt County (and Arcata in particular) became a nationwide media cautionary tale — a case study in the unintended consequences of legalized medical dope. Moldy, flammable grow houses, inflated property values, home invasions, fake Jamaican accents … Our idyllic hippy Hobbiton has gone to pot, the storyline goes, thanks to lax regulations, gaping legal loopholes and cultural permissiveness.
Granted, we’ve long had a rep for the green, but this year we went viral. Marijuana became a burning political topic as the Obama administration announced that feds would ignore state-law-abiding dispensaries and Governor Schwarzenegger toyed with the notion of taxing marijuana to help rescue California from its economic wallow. Arcata, as the weediest town in the country, was recast as “Pot City, U.S.A.,” thanks to a news magazine story on A&E, of all places. NPR, Time, CNN and others peeked curiously at the stoners hot-boxing it behind the Redwood Curtain.
Local reviews of the media frenzy were mixed, as you might expect. Marijuana has replaced timber as our primary industry, and with that change has come a multifaceted new culture war, of sorts. While county economic development folks tried unsuccessfully to evade our pot prestige, longtime residents grew fed up with the thuggish new strain of growers. And those dopes, in turn, went after Arcata Eye Editor Kevin Hoover, threatening, harassing and, last month, even subpoenaing him for “narcing” on their botanical activities. For them, the equation is simple: Legal weed means less profits. Meanwhile, prohibition keeps fostering violent crime.
With a ballot initiative set for next year, legalization may come sooner than later. Who knows? Maybe it will ruin our local economy. Or maybe not: Humboldt now has huge name recognition, mon.
— Ryan Burns
4. Marina Center
A tip for harmonious holidays: When you and the family gather ’round the Christmas dinner table Friday, you might want to keep Marina Center on the list of taboo conversation topics. Otherwise you could end up with a heated tussle like the ones that played out this year in state and local halls of government. The highly controversial development proposal — a 43-acre shopping, office and residential complex with an 11-acre wetland and a 100,000 square-foot Home Depot — comes from CUE VI, a company owned by highly controversial local millionaires Rob and Cherie Arkley, and would sit on Eureka’s Balloon Track property, a toxic-laden former railyard. Put it all together and watch the sparks fly.
The outlines of the proposed project have been around for years, but 2009 is when the legal fight got underway. In October, after much gnashing of teeth and bureaucratic chess play, the Eureka City Council approved Marina Center’s Environmental Impact Report with a 3-2 vote. Weeks later they approved a coastal development permit, clearing the way for phase one cleanup of the site. This despite warnings that the City hadn’t adequately responded to objections from environmental groups and state agencies — like the California Coastal Commission, for one. Things got so testy, with each side accusing the other of dirty tactics and semi-hidden agendas, that Eureka City Councilman Jeff Leonard came forth at the end of October and formally requested that environmental groups please not sue the City, at least not right now. They did so anyway.
Two weeks ago, the Coastal Commission found adequate cause to hear appeals of the city’s permit approval, essentially seizing control, for now, of the project’s future. Marina Center advocates cried foul, saying the CCC has too much authority, and screwy priorities to boot. Environmental groups felt vindicated but wary. After all, it’s early yet. This was just round one.
— Ryan Burns
5. The MLPA Fight
Back in July, the Marine Life Protection Act — passed in 1999, but slow to implement — crashed upon our shores. The MLPA calls for a complete rejiggering of California’s hodgepodge of ill-defined marine protected areas (MPAs), and creation of a geographically and biologically linked network of preserved whole ecosystems representing the diversity of life and habitats in our state waters. Fishing and other extraction would be banned from some of these areas. Limited extraction would be allowed in others. Scientists would be allowed to do research in the MPAs.
A public-private partnership, the MLPA Initiative, is conducting the MPA creation process and has been wending its way region by region along the coast. Now it’s the North Coast’s turn — the region between Alder Creek near Point Arena (Fort Bragg area) and the border with Oregon.
Some distrust the process. They note impacts from new MPAs in other regions — such as the Pomo Indians being barred from some traditional gathering areas. Fishermen protest that the fisheries up here are already highly regulated and, besides, the fish stocks aren’t in danger of depletion because our brutish weather keeps the number of fishermen to a minimum.
Some local officials and scientists have tried to stall the process. The state doesn’t exactly have money to monitor these MPAs, they say. And the process relies upon the “best readily available” science to determine the MPAs — trouble is, there’s scant scientific data for our wild North Coast waters. Another contingent of locals say trust the process, help shape it.
But most seem keen on presenting a united local front. Currently, dozens of locals — fishermen, tribal representatives, government officials, scientists, surfers, abalone divers and more — are vying to be on the regional stakeholder group, which will develop the final MPA-array proposal to send on up to the final decision makers.
— Heidi Walters
6. CR Power Struggle
A certain amount of conflict is to be expected in the running of any school. Lots of smart people, each with their own opinions — it’s inevitable. But by any measure, relations at College of the Redwoods got downright toxic in 2009, with President Jeff Marsee at the center of the maelstrom. Since taking the helm at C.R. in the summer of 2008, Marsee has set about reorganizing the administrative structure, shaking up academic procedures and setting his sights on district-wide expansion.
His justification? The longstanding faculty-centric administration was ineffectual, he said. But certain faculty leaders, staff members and even students resisted Marsee’s bold moves, saying he was simply hoarding power and running the school like a business. In April, C.R.’s Academic Senate sent a letter to the college’s accreditation agency accusing Marsee of manufacturing an Educational Master Plan without their involvement. Not surprisingly, the school was promptly put back on accreditation warning status, which they’d just been removed from in January. Marsee called it sabotage.
Meanwhile, folks at C.R.’s Fort Bragg educational site were talking secession. They felt overlooked and underfunded, especially considering Marsee’s plan to purchase the old Garberville schoolhouse with bond money they said was rightly theirs. (The purchase was approved just last week by the Southern Humboldt Unified School District, though secessionist talks have been quelled.)
With contract negotiations and more funding cuts on the horizon, things at C.R. aren’t likely to calm down anytime soon. The faculty union is rumored to be preparing a lawsuit against the district for unfair labor practices. (Union President Ed Macan said he could neither confirm nor deny such rumors.) Last week, Marsee cut roughly 100 classes from the spring semester schedule, stirring the hornets’ nest yet again. Conflict seems to have spread to every aspect of school operations. Accreditation hangs in the balance.
— Ryan Burns
7. Harbor Elections
There was only one big-ticket item in this off-cycle election year — the race for two seats on the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District. For a couple of years, the countywide special district has been the locus of a fierce debate over economic development. There are two basic sides to the argument. On the one side, you have people who believe that Humboldt Bay can reclaim some of its blue-collar glory by transforming itself into a waypoint for the transshipment of goods from other places to other places. On the other, you have those who believe that this belief is unlikely ever to amount to much, and charge that the district is ignoring other opportunities in its quixotic pursuit of Big Cargo. The battle between the two sides has long been folded into the larger Humboldt County culture wars.
This year saw an opportunity for the freight skeptics to tip the balance of the board in their favor for the first time. Chief freight skeptic Mike Wilson, representing the Arcata-centric Third Division, was up for reelection; freight booster Dennis Hunter, from the Eureka-centric Fourth Division, was stepping down after a long tenure. In the Third, former state senator Dan Hauser leaped up to carry the banner for freight against Wilson; the Fourth saw two skeptics — John Ash and Susan Penn — up against union man Richard Marks, whose position on freight restoration was kept crowd-pleasingly vague.
When the smoke cleared, Marks took his race with a thin plurality — 46.2 percent — while Wilson whomped Hauser 72-28. The board now has two boosters, two skeptics and the inscrutable Marks. Did anything change? Yes — the pulp mill went away for good, leaving a sum total of zero ships entering Humboldt Bay on a regular basis.
— Hank Sims
8. Drowning
In May, the Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District shut off the valve to its industrial pipeline that for years had transported untreated Mad River water to the Samoa Peninsula and its two pulp mills. One mill had long been dead. The other had breathed its last puff of white steam for all time the previous autumn, although promises by a new buyer that the mill would be reincarnated as a tissue paper factory kept hope — especially among the 200-some laid-off millworkers — limping along for nearly a year after.
When the district shut off that water, it opened a gushing tap of trouble for the district’s remaining customers — seven municipalities serving 80,000 customers, and some retail customers served directly by the district. Now the district had too much water and no industrial customer in sight (although Freshwater Tissue’s still trying).
This means severely reduced funds to pay for the aging water system’s upkeep and operations, 45 percent of which had been subsidized by the mill. Rates for the municipalities, and their customers, will skyrocket — again; they’d tripled in some cases in the years after the first mill closed and the second one reduced its usage. The City of Eureka, for example, says that over the next five years its customers’ water rates will increase 66 percent and their sewer rates 87 percent — although some of that increase is to cover city system upgrade costs, not just to meet the HBMWD’s higher rates.
This also means the HBMWD stands to lose its state-issued rights to the 60 million gallons a day of water designated for industrial use. It has to find a new industrial customer, or else some yay-hoo from the Outside could come in and haul it all away to SoCal or wherever. So the district has been gathering in the flock — its customers — to fashion a plan to hang onto that water.
— Heidi Walters
9. Headwaters Gaffes
With hard economic times nationwide and a well-above-average unemployment rate, some of the county’s attention naturally returned to the Headwaters Fund, a $20 million pot of economic development cash that the county received when the state and federal government bought Pacific Lumber’s Headwaters Forest and took it out of timber production. The money was meant to offset the local job losses that preservation of the Headwaters would likely entail. For years, people have questioned just how much bang we’re getting for these bucks.
In the first half of the year, when the recession seemed deepest, the Headwaters Fund board and staff took a few controversial actions, one right after the other, that served, for a while, to focus the rage of Headwaters dissenters ever more sharply. First, in February, it came out that managers of the Humboldt Creamery had met with the board to discuss the possibility of the Fund taking a position in the bonds that the cooperative was then floating — this just a week before it blew up completely (see item #2). The fund’s board of directors got no further than hearing an informational presentation on the bond sale, but some wondered how the company got in the door in the first place.
Then, in quick succession, a couple of questionable PR expenditures. It turned out that the county economic development staff had, with questionable authority, diverted some Fund grant monies into a PR campaign around the politically controversial Richardson Grove realignment project, leading project opponents to howl. And then the Fund gave $44,000 to a $100,000 effort to film some Humboldt County promotional videos for dissemination on YouTube.
— Hank Sims
10. Buju and Bounty Banished
In a pair of hard-fought battles, Humboldt gay activists convinced concert promoters to cancel shows by dancehall performers known for lyrics inciting violence against homosexuals.
The fight against “murder music” began in the early ’90s when British gay activist group Outrage! protested concerts by rising Jamaican star Buju Banton, aka Mark Anthony Myrie, whose hit, “Boom Bye Bye,” speaks of shooting gay men. Outrage! accused eight dancehall acts of promoting anti-gay violence and bigotry, among them Buju Banton and Bounty Killer. A blacklist proved successful — concerts here and abroad were cancelled, as were lucrative endorsement deals — and in 2007 four artists who felt the pressure, Capleton, Sizzla, Beenie Man and Buju Banton, signed The Reggae Compassionate Act, a pledge “to not make statements or perform songs that incite hatred or violence against anyone from any community.” Buju Banton and others later denied signing and repudiated the anti-homophobic stance.
The anti-murder music campaign hit Humboldt in 2004, when HSU students successfully squashed a campus appearance by Capleton. This year, when word went out that Buju Banton was scheduled to perform this October at a Eureka nightclub, the local activist group Queer Humboldt kicked into action, waging a campaign on blogs and via e-mail. The show was canceled. A quick response to a late November show at the Arcata Theatre Lounge by another “murder music” artist, Bounty Killer (who has refused to sign the RCA), forced promoters to move that show to Eureka, then cancel it altogether.
Foes of Buju Banton may not have to worry about future local appearances. In early December Mark Myrie was videotaped trying to buy five kilos of cocaine from an undercover police officer and arrested. He is currently in a Florida jail facing drug conspiracy charges that could put him in prison for life.
— Bob Doran
This article appears in Top Ten Stories of 2009.

"Then, in quick succession, a couple of questionable PR expenditures. It turned out that the county economic development staff had, with questionable authority, diverted some Fund grant monies into a PR campaign around the politically controversial Richardson Grove realignment project, leading project opponents to howl. And then the Fund gave $44,000 to a $100,000 effort to film some Humboldt County promotional videos for dissemination on YouTube. "
Not just politically controversial, Hank. Economically controversial as well.
The Richardson Grove Improvement Project(RIP) is a project designed to RIP a hole in the Redwood Curtain for Big Box stores and development sprawl.
The NCJ is dependent upon local business advertisement revenue. I cannot imagine Wal-Mart utilizing the NCJ for advertisements….
You, Hank, made it clear that you were in support of the RIP, even before the Hole in the Headwaters Fund fiasco.
http://saverichardsongrove.blogspot.com/2009/04/town-dandy-eats-humboldt-pie.html
Don’t shoot yourself in the foot…
"…there’s the perfect solution and the possible solution."
Well said. And holding up the "perfect solution" as an excuse to destroy the possible solution is what Humboldt County environmentalists are all about.
Jeff is a liar. Small businesses are more impacted by the lack of a fix to this area of highway than any big boxes ever will be.
Jeff is a liar, because he has been told this over and over, yet continues to try and use the Walmart Bogeyman as a way to try and build opposition to the project.
The FACTS are that big box stores like Target, Costco and others can afford to offload from the STAA trucks to smaller ones in Ukiah, while it is a huge financial detriment to the smaller, locally owned business that Muskrat pretends to defend.
Jeff has been shown that a certified arborist from Berkley, of all places, has signed off on the project.
Fix the road. Save lives.
Who would have thought that CR would be having issues and STAA trucks would still have problems in Humboldt County. Has any new big boxes opened since Humboldt County was opened to STAA trucks two years ago?
Goddamn. Those are Anon.r.mous’s issues, all right.
HE IS RISEN?
Never died Hank.
And shouldn’t that be Anon.r.mous’ issues?
You’re a regular Joe Hill.
"3. muskrat lies:
Dec. 26, 7:32 p.m.
Jeff is a liar. Small businesses are more impacted by the lack of a fix to this area of highway than any big boxes ever will be.
Jeff is a liar, because he has been told this over and over, yet continues to try and use the Walmart Bogeyman as a way to try and build opposition to the project.
The FACTS are that big box stores like Target, Costco and others can afford to offload from the STAA trucks to smaller ones in Ukiah, while it is a huge financial detriment to the smaller, locally owned business that Muskrat pretends to defend.
Jeff has been shown that a certified arborist from Berkley, of all places, has signed off on the project.
Fix the road. Save lives."
Your straw man argument does nothing to support your convictions.
Those who have lived out of the area and watched their hometown overrun by Big Boxes, corporate slavery, empty storefronts of former mom and pop’s as well as rampant drugs, gangs and abandoned homes due to property value declination know better. It is a fact that the citizens of Eureka stood up and fought Wal-Mart, and won. Same with Home Depot…
Local businesses don’t support the project due to the fact that no one up here wants cheap plastic crap from China. They understand their customers needs and desires. We are not yet forced to shop at a Big Box for lack of a quality alternative.
Arborists prune, limb ,and cut down trees. The only rare time that they work with roots is with a stump grinder. A dendrologist is much better qualified to understand the root systems of trees. It is common knowledge that cutting roots affects the tree. Where is your disconnect from this reality?
Probably between your brain and your wallet…
Jeff still dodges the absolute FACT that there already big box stores up here such as Target, Costco and others.
Stopping the road realignment will not be a deterrent to a Walmart or a Home Depot. That’s why his argument is a Straw Man.
Jeff does not speak for loclly owned small business owners who are in favor of this project; to say that local business owners are against the project is a falsehood.
Fix the road. Save lives.
"Stopping the road realignment will not be a deterrent to a Walmart or a Home Depot. That’s why his argument is a Straw Man."
The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern:
Thus, Y is a resulting distorted version of X and can be set up in several ways, including:
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious, because attacking a distorted version of a position fails to constitute an attack on the actual position.
Fix the education system. Save minds…
Jeff,
Your straw man is that fixing the road will somehow prevent big box stores from relocating.
You have stated that time and time again as a reason for not fixing the road. Walmart and Home Depot are continuously mentioned by YOU.
Problem is, as mentioned time and time again, the Road in its present condition does NOT prevent big box stores from delivering their goods.
Once again – COSTCO, KMART, TARGET, as well as Safeway, Winco and other large chains make their way up to us just fine.
You are in a clear minority here, Jeff. The road needs to be fixed. It’s too f*cking dangerous.
Fix the Road. Save lives. (Your mind is beyond saving).
First sentence above should read:
Your straw man is that NOT fixing the road will somehow prevent big box stores from relocating.
From Jeff Muskrat on 12/24:
"The Richardson Grove Improvement Project(RIP) is a project designed to RIP a hole in the Redwood Curtain for Big Box stores and development sprawl."
Jeff, that’s your very first statement in this thread. There, my furry friend, is your straw man, in your own words. Thanks for going to wikipedi or wherever to print the definition of strawman, but you have just been pwned.
As I have stated, big boxes are already here; try and find another argument.
"Once again – COSTCO, KMART, TARGET, as well as Safeway, Winco and other large chains make their way up to us just fine. "
Then why the necessity for the project? Let’s save that $10 million for something worthy…
As for safety:
"Large trucks – including tractor-trailers, single-unit trucks, and certain heavy cargo vans with gross weight of more than 10,000 pounds – account for a disproportionate share of traffic deaths based on miles traveled. The fatal crash rate for large trucks is 2.4 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled – more than 50 percent greater than the rate for all vehicles on the roads. People in passenger vehicles are especially vulnerable in collisions with large trucks because of the great difference in weight between cars and large tucks. In two-vehicle crashes involving passenger vehicles and large trucks, 98 percent of the fatalities were occupants of the passenger vehicle. Overweight trucks are even more dangerous than trucks that stay within the current federal weight limits. Overweight trucks not only take longer to brake and are more prone to roll over in crashes, but they also damage roads and bridges at rapidly increasing rates even when slightly overloaded."
http://www.saferoads.org/dangers-large-trucks
But wait, there’s more…
"In addition to wrecking roads and bridges, allowing heavier and longer trucks would mean more fuel consumption and a move away from energy efficiency at a time when reducing fuel use and global warming emissions is a national imperative.
"We need to make transportation choices that cut back on fuel waste and reduce emissions, or we will all pay a steep price," said Carl Pope, Executive Director of the Sierra Club. "Bigger trucks would mean more fuel wasted and more global warming emissions at a time when all Americans are realizing we need to go in the exact opposite direction. "
"This is about highway safety and protecting our environment," said James P. Hoffa, General President of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. "Teamsters are the safest drivers on the road and know the risks of bigger trucks. Heavier or longer trucks are harder to handle, putting lives at risk, damaging the highway infrastructure and consuming more fuel."
http://www.bluegreenalliance.org/home
No straw man in here. Never attacked your character or over-simplified your position, nor have I distorted your position. Your alias "Muskrat lies" on this post is a Straw Man in itself.
Fix the attention deficit. Save time…
Once again – COSTCO, KMART, TARGET, as well as Safeway, Winco and other large chains make their way up to us just fine.
Jeff Replies:
"Then why the necessity for the project? Let’s save that $10 million for something worthy… "
Because, doofus YOU are the only one (other than other loons like Sylvia Derooy) making the argument that fixing the road will open the door to big box stores.
Once again (with feeling):
From Jeff Muskrat on 12/24: "The Richardson Grove Improvement Project(RIP) is a project designed to RIP a hole in the Redwood Curtain for Big Box stores and development sprawl."
Do you like having circular arguments with YOURSELF, Jeff?
I, and many others want the road fixed for a variety of reasons, the biggest for me being road safety.
It will also be a boon for local small business owners.
Maybe you missed it:
"Large trucks – including tractor-trailers, single-unit trucks, and certain heavy cargo vans with gross weight of more than 10,000 pounds – account for a disproportionate share of traffic deaths based on miles traveled. The fatal crash rate for large trucks is 2.4 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled – more than 50 percent greater than the rate for all vehicles on the roads. People in passenger vehicles are especially vulnerable in collisions with large trucks because of the great difference in weight between cars and large tucks. In two-vehicle crashes involving passenger vehicles and large trucks, 98 percent of the fatalities were occupants of the passenger vehicle. Overweight trucks are even more dangerous than trucks that stay within the current federal weight limits. Overweight trucks not only take longer to brake and are more prone to roll over in crashes, but they also damage roads and bridges at rapidly increasing rates even when slightly overloaded."
http://www.saferoads.org/dangers-large-trucks
Let’s all not forget, there are multiple sides to the issue.
Cal-trans wants to spend 10 million dollars of our tax money to widen a two mile section of scenic Hwy 101 through Richardson Grove State Park.($10,000,000)
That’s 5 million dollars a mile.
Through a State Park.
Without wildlife surveys.
The Richardson Grove Improvement Project(RIP) proposes to terminate 87 trees.
The RIP also proposes to cut, fill and pave the roots of 30 Ancient Redwoods that line Redwood Highway 101.
The Cal-trans environmental impact report even acknowledges that the RIP may have a significant impact to the trees and natural surroundings.
The location for the project IS the famous "Redwood Curtain", where these millennial Redwood Giants can be seen and enjoyed by drivers as they enter the Coastal Redwood section of Scenic Highway 101.
Just recently, the California Department of Transportation(DOT) reported to the State Police Cyber Crime Division that they were "under attack by hostile forces". They were referring to the 5,100 petition emails sent by the Center for Biological Diversity for their Save Richardson Grove campaign.
Can you guess what the cyber crime division’s response was? That the DOT "was suffering from an acute case of citizen involvement, to which there is no cure".(Read more at: http://saverichardsongrove.blogspot.com/
Proof positive that WE CAN ALL STOP THIS UNNECESSARY PROJECT TOGETHER!
Sign the petition now: http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2167/t/5243/p/dia/action/public/index.sjs?action_KEY=1629
Muskrat is posting crap. About 4000 people each year are killed in large truck (class 8) accidents, over 80% of those accidents where caused by the smaller car or pickup. 54000 people die each year on the roads in which no large truck can be blamed.
Also the newer trucks get better mileage than your beloved Pruis in tons freight moved per gallon. You do understand that some states already allow heavier trucks, and even longer trucks? 120,000 pounds and 57 foot long trailers. Some states even allow two full sized trailers to be towed behind the same power unit.
One of these states is Nevada, who’s roads are in better shape than California, while even allowing for harder weather and heavier trucks. So your lies from Saferoads® are busted.
I’m not dissing Nevada, but they allow a lot of controversial things, such as prostitution and gambling.
Instead of gambling with our lives, Cal-trans should back off on the RIP:
from:http://www.bluegreenalliance.org/
"The facts are clear: heavier trucks would be dirtier and would unnecessarily contribute to air pollution and global warming," said David Foster, Executive Director of the Blue Green Alliance. "The Safe Highways and Infrastructure Preservation Act will help prevent truck weights and lengths from increasing while taking action to improve the environment and make America more energy secure."
These national labor and environmental organizations are working to debunk the arguments of major corporate interests claiming bigger trucks would mean fewer trucks on the road and reduced fuel use. The Teamsters and the Sierra Club said bigger trucks will mean greater challenges for truck drivers and motorists, more fuel squandered and more pollution and global warming emissions.
Today, laws limiting triple trailers and other so-called "longer combination vehicles" apply only to the 46,000 mile Interstate Highway system. The Safe Highways and Infrastructure Preservation Act would apply this standard to the full 160,000 mile NHS, which would save millions of gallons of fuel and billions of taxpayer dollars because limiting truck weight would reduce wear and tear on infrastructure, mainly bridges.
In addition to wrecking roads and bridges, allowing heavier and longer trucks would mean more fuel consumption and a move away from energy efficiency at a time when reducing fuel use and global warming emissions is a national imperative.
"We need to make transportation choices that cut back on fuel waste and reduce emissions, or we will all pay a steep price," said Carl Pope, Executive Director of the Sierra Club. "Bigger trucks would mean more fuel wasted and more global warming emissions at a time when all Americans are realizing we need to go in the exact opposite direction. "
"This is about highway safety and protecting our environment," said James P. Hoffa, General President of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. "Teamsters are the safest drivers on the road and know the risks of bigger trucks. Heavier or longer trucks are harder to handle, putting lives at risk, damaging the highway infrastructure and consuming more fuel."
http://www.bluegreenalliance.org/
Nice lies.
Anyone care to show me how more trips = cleaner trucks? Here is a hint, it doesn’t.
But as always, we aren’t talking about getting heavier trucks into Humboldt. 80,000 pounds is 80,000 pounds.