REGION: Groups sue to throw out forest plans

Nature, wildlife said vulnerable to power lines, roads

By DAVE DOWNEY - Staff Writer | Thursday, August 14, 2008 7:44 PM PDT

Environmental groups sued the U.S. Forest Service in San Francisco federal court Thursday in a bid to throw out new management plans for the four Southern California national forests, saying they don't adequately protect the open-space islands from the pressures of an ever-expanding urban region.

Those forests include the Cleveland, which covers 460,000 acres in San Diego, Riverside and Orange counties, and the 665,000-acre San Bernardino forest in Riverside and San Bernardino counties.

The Cleveland takes in Palomar Mountain, the pine-covered mountains around Julian and the oak- and chaparral-carpeted hills west of Lake Elsinore. The San Bernardino is home to the alpine forests around Idyllwild and Southern California's highest peak, the 11,502-foot San Gorgonio Mountain.

The groups alleged that the plans, several years in the making and adopted in 2005, leave some of the region's best preserved natural lands vulnerable to damage from new roads, motorcycles, power lines and grazing, and asked that the Forest Service be ordered to come up with new blueprints for long-term forest management.

It is time to start over, said David Hogan, conservation manager for the Center for Biological Diversity in San Diego, one of seven groups to join the lawsuit.

"The plans were written by a presidential administration that has been extraordinarily hostile to environmental protection," Hogan said in a telephone interview.

"What we really have right now is a choice between managing Southern California national forest lands for the benefit of recreation and nature, or, as the Forest Service has chosen, for development and exploitation," he said. "These national forests are surrounded by populations of millions of people. They have become last refuges for wildlife and nature, and for people who want to escape the urban grind."

John Heil, a spokesman for the Forest Service's California office in Vallejo, declined comment, saying the federal agency has a policy of not talking about lawsuits.

The Center for Biological Diversity was joined in the suit by the Sierra Club, Defenders of Wildlife, the California Wilderness Coalition, Wilderness Society, California Native Plant Society and Los Padres ForestWatch.

The lawsuit follows two other suits about the forest plans filed in the same federal district court earlier in the year. Those challenged pieces of the plans.

In March, the state filed suit, alleging that the plans wrongly opened some roadless areas to building roads. During the same month, the Center for Biological Diversity alleged that the plans fail to properly protect imperiled species that live in the forests.

This latest action is the first to challenge the plans in their entirety, Hogan said.

Administrators for Cleveland plan to add a dozen miles of new roads to accommodate the growing demands of riders of motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles in the backcountry. Utilities have proposed building power lines across portions of the forest in North San Diego County near Ramona and in Southwest Riverside County near Lake Elsinore.

Contact staff writer Dave Downey at (760) 745-6611, Ext. 2623, or ddowney@nctimes.com.

Next Previous

Advertisement

2 comment(s)[-]Go to Top

No Way wrote on Aug 14, 2008 10:52 PM:Doesn't anyone else see the environmental stance a just plan odd????

"What we really have right now is a choice between managing Southern California national forest lands for the benefit of RECREATIONAL and nature, or, as the Forest Service has chosen, for development and exploitation,"

But the enviornmentalist group is upset because..."alleged that the plans leave some of the region's best preserved natural lands vulnerable to damage from new roads, motorcycles, power lines and grazing."

I guess " motercycles, and driving on roads...not off roading but on the new roads..are not RECREATIONAL...be it that they are recreational vehicules and all, and some people are too handicapped to walk.

When they say...development and exploitation...they must mean (you gotta know I'm kidding) the rolling hills of Cow-condos and how exploitated the trees feel for being dwarft by the powerlines.

Too all of them...I'd like to send out a huge "I'm sorry" for any one that ever picked on them in high school...But really...retaliation against society at this age is, well...it's like we given them a passivity gun with this law and they want to force us to live indoors unless we are meditating on a well defined path while being observed by "Ranger Rick" for any false moves.

Bill One wrote on Aug 15, 2008 4:47 PM:It's easy to understand these enviro groups. They want this land set up for their own use. As long as you will hike in and/or back pack then your good. Any other access is not okay with them. Not only do they oppose new roads, they want the exsisiting roads closed. It's all about them. Oh sure, they will say it's to protect the enviroment or it's for our kids, the reality is they want it all closed except for hiking. That denies access to allot of people.

First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.

Submit Comment[-]

(optional)
   

Advertisement

Videos