| "What about the bears? - ATASCADERO Just kidding. Everybody knows that nothing is more important than the automobile. To expand on the subject (“Death to roadkill,” Nov. 3), there is never, ever any talk anywhere about possibly curtailing (even in the very distant future) the amount of cars. Things slowing down? Build more roads. So every day a zillion cars go north while another zillion go south, and anything that gets in the way is splattered. Lastly, what are Mr. Kuyper’s bona fides as a biologist? He is always calling for action and oversight, but on what basis? If he feels the crossing area should be observed, maybe he should give it a go instead of trying to foist the job off on the Department of Fish and Game. Random thoughts." |
This is a letter to the San Luis
Obispo newspaper, New Times, in response to Forest Watch's criticism of Cal
Trans attempts to protect animals from death by vehicle. |
| "The agreement calls for the
Forest Service, state agencies and groups that use the Forest Service
lands to work together to prevent road building on a total of 900,000
acres in four national forests in Central and Southern California,
including Los Padres. “Today’s agreement brings us one step closer toward securing the permanent protection of our region’s wild places,” said Jeff Kuyper, director of Los Padres Forest Watch, a Santa Barbara-based conservation group......Much of the Los Padres land affected by the ruling is in Santa Barbara and Ventura counties. However, 52,865 acres within the Santa Lucia Ranger District in San Luis Obispo County are included, Kuyper said. Of that land, 36,923 acres will be considered for wilderness designation. It is in three areas: 16,830 acres in the Black Mountain area, 20 miles northeast of San Luis Obispo; 12,245 acres in the Machesna Mountain area, 20 miles east of San Luis Obispo; and 7,848 acres in the Garcia Mountain area, 13 miles east of Arroyo Grande. An additional 15,942 acres in the La Panza and Los Machos Hills areas will receive interim roadless-area restrictions, Kuyper said. The agreement is awaiting approval by federal district court Judge Marilyn Hall Patel. "The Settlement Agreement can be downloaded here: http://ncfp.files.wordpress.com/2010...ment-filed.pdf And of course besides all of the feel good "protecting the land" and "protecting the endangered species" you will see on page 6 that the Plaintiff will receive $250,000 from the Forest Service - that means you and me. Who is the Plaintiff you ask? Anti Access organizations including the CBD (the Center for Biologic Diversity) This is the busine$$ that drives Anti Access." |
It is not unreasonable to assume that Forest Watch shared in that $250,000. This quote is from http://mobile.pirate4x4.com/forum/ |
| More from pirate 4x4; "ttlbddy 11:24 AM 12-23-2010 This thread is not about this particular Settlement Agreement but more about Anti Access orgs getting payouts for virtually nothing other than bringing forth a lawsuit." "Bebe 03:46 PM 12-23-2010 The EAJA has an interesting history, IMHO it's being abused by the Environmental Orgs. It's not being used they way it was intended to be used or in the way it was created. Originally it was created by the SBA." "I only found out a short while ago that organizations were getting paid for suing the government." |
From pirate4x4 |
| LUCKY 777 2011-05-02 11:51 AM The kiosk workers at the end of Paradise Road two weeks ago did not know that the Aliso trail just above Upper Oso campground had collapsed and was no longer passable. When we reported it to the Forest Service they said THEY knew, and that is was possible it will never be repaired because of a lawsuit. They said Los Padres Forest Watch has a potential lawsuit out with the Forest Service. So they have their hands tied right now. As a result of this lawsuit slides from this winter's rains are not being cleared off trails and roads, and popular camps are closed indefinitely. Pathetic. If a mule can't get across the trail you gotta know it is in bad shape! COMMENT 169614 2011-05-02 01:20 PM Los Padres Forest Watch is the reason the first water crossing is still closed on Paradise Road as well. Those are the type of do gooders we could do without. |
These quotes are from a site called edhat.com |
| Deal struck on brush clearing An environmentalist group has reached a settlement with the U.S. Forest Service over roadside brush clearing in a California national forest. The agency had planned to spend about $1 million in federal stimulus money to clear vegetation from 750 miles of roads in the Los Padres National Forest. The project was awarded to a logging contractor last year after the Forest Service found it didn't warrant a comprehensive environmental review, but that decision was challenged by an environmental group, Los Padres Forestwatch. The group claimed that the agency violated environmental law by not submitting the project to notice and public comment procedures. A federal judge agreed and entered a limited injunction against the brush-clearing activities last month. Under the terms of the deal with Los Padres Forestwatch, the Forest Service has agreed to avoid clearing vegetation from wilderness and riparian areas and consult with an agency biologist to prevent harm to sensitive species. Clearing will be subject to seasonal constraints in some areas and the logging company will be prohibited from removing trees larger than six inches in diameter, among other provisions. The agency has also agreed to pay the environmental group $60,000 in compensation for attorney fees. |
This comes from Capitolpress.com |
| Judge Gives Los Padres NF to LPFW Do the members and four paid staffers of Los Padres Forest Watch ever even visit the Los Padres? Would you ever cross paths with one of them on a trail? It seems rather unlikely to me. Their brand of wilderness appreciation seems to be limited to sweet dreams on soft pillows in Santa Barbara encased in high thread count sheets, forgetting about boots on the ground facing real conditions in real places on real trails and roads in the forest. The clearing project proposed by the Forest, funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, proposed clearing flammable vegetation within ten feet of either side of existing USFS roads within the LPNF, many decades-old, to facilitate safe access for recreation, fire prevention and emergency response. That’s it. Ten feet, on already-disturbed lands, along existing roads. Routine road maintenance for public safety and resource management. Yet the LPFW managed to bend the ear of a judge who doesn’t know the difference between a scoping study and an EIS – between routine road maintenance and a trans-Ventana freeway. One gets the impression the LPFW would be happy to see the national forest closed to all human use and visitation except the occasional biologist clambering through the chaparral counting frogs or condors. It's always a good idea, when in the Santa Lucias, to be watchful of the Dark Watchers. |
From ventanawild.org |
| The Plot Thickens... Now, miracle of miracles, it looks as though the Los Padres ForestWatch has gotten Rep. Elton Gallegly on board with their proposal: http://www.independent.com/news/2011/ju ... more-wild/ Something's fishy here. Here's how the League of Conservation Voters rates Elton Gallegly: 111th Congress (2009-2010) 4% 111th, 2nd Session (2010) 0% 110th Congress (2007-2008) 9% 109th Congress (2005-2006) 7% 108th Congress (2003-2004) 6% 107th Congress (2001-2002) 18% 106th Congress (1999-2000) 23% In short, he's AWOL on environmental issues -- a ZERO in the current Congress. So what's his motivation for being Mr. Environment all of a sudden, sweeping 200,000 acres of the Los Padres into "Wilderness"? Could there be some horsetrading in the works? Or maybe some greenwashing to cover-up another attempt at his failed 2006 Lake Piru / United Water land grab? Stay tuned. |
From ventanawild |
| A roadside fuels project on the
Los Padres National Forest (LPNF) was enjoined on March 4, 2011, by
United States District Judge Lucy H. Koh (Northern District of
California). The project, funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), proposed the clearing of flammable vegetation within ten feet of either side of approximately 750 miles of USFS roads within the LPNF. An eco-litigious group, Las Padres ForestWatch [here] appealed the project. The Preliminary Injunction decision is [here].....The eco-litigious Plaintiff, Los Padres ForestWatch, claims to care about fire and fuels management, but their actions belie their words. They also claim to care about “spiritual” sites of Native American tribes, but they are clueless about traditional land management with anthropogenic fire. The Los Padres ForestWatch officers and staff are exclusively white liberals with an emphasis on lawyers [here]. Their partners are the usual pro-holocaust anti-human eco-litigious mainstays [here]. It is difficult to see anyone in this courtroom drama who actually gives a sh*t whether the LPNF explodes into more severe and extremely destructive megafires or not. The Defendants, Plaintiffs, lawyers, and judge are all blithely uncaring about the prospects of further catastrophic incineration of the LPNF. They are all holocausters. Burn baby burn. Responsible stewardship, based on historical and traditional methods for historical and traditional purposes, is not on their radar screens. The taxpayers fund them all, though. The taxpayers pay for the government functionaries, the judges, the lawyers, and the fires. The taxpayers get robbed and then the taxpayer’s land is destroyed. It’s a catastrophic annihilation for profit scheme. All the players are in on it. |
From http://westinstenv.org |