Board votes to reduce Giant Sequoia Monument
Also want more management and funding
Tulare County Supervisors were met with a strong, negative reaction Tuesday from an infuriated crowd of county residents and environmentalists after they passed a motion in favor of reducing the size of the Giant Sequoia National Monument from 328,000 acres to 90,000 acres.
Things got so heated that Supervisor Chairman Pete Vander Poel called for the assistant sheriff to help the angry people find the exit because they were yelling so loudly that the Board could barely hear Vander Poel read the next item on the agenda.
This was after Vander Poel extended the usual 15-minute public comment section by an extra five to 10 minutes to try and give the nearly 20 people who submitted a comment request a chance to speak on the issue.
Perhaps the outcry was due to the fact that the draft letter before the board did not mention reducing the size of the monument. County staff only requested the Board approve sending a letter to Secretary Ryan Zinke with the U.S. Department Interior regarding the review of the Giant Sequoia National Monument. The letter, which the Board also passed, primarily focuses on allowing more management in the Monument to help reduce the significant overstock of dead and dying trees. Zink is reviewing 27 national monuments on an order from President Trump. The local monument is one of the 27.
Supervisor Vice Chairman Steven Worthley said he made the motion to reduce the monument size because, “I have seen what happens when we do nothing.”
Worthley said the overgrowth in the forest is not only massive, but mind blowing, and noted that he believes management in the monument can’t be done efficiently and effectively if left in its current condition.
“We are living out the results of a passive management system today,” Worthley said.
He added that active management is the key to not only a more viable environment, but to encourage regrowth.
“You have to create openings to have regeneration, but if you don’t do anything there is not regeneration,” Worthley said.
District Five Supervisor Mike Ennis, who is personally affected by the lack of upkeep in the monument, also voted in favor of the reduction. “I have a place in the mountains and they cancel my fire insurance every year because of this mess,” Ennis said, adding that Redwoods, among other trees, are in “big-time danger.”
In addition to reducing the size of the monument, the Board also agreed to add more language to the letter, including increased forest management and to ensure there is adequate
funding for the U.S. Forest Service to achieve its mission.
“That is an important aspect because it is a nationwide issue,” said Vander Poel who, along with District 3 Supervisor Amy Shuklian, voted against reducing the monument.
Mary Merriman, with the California Native Plant Society, was among those who spoke against the Board allowing increased management in the monument.
Although Worthley didn’t mention anything about reducing the size of the monument until after the public comment period, Merriman still voiced her disapproval of the idea.
“The monument designation did not do damage to the local economy and it is not clear if the monument size is reduced who it will affect,” said Merriman, who also advocated for funding for a visitor’s center.
Springville resident
Soapy Mulholland, who has served as the president of the Sequoia Riverlands Trust for the past 15 years, said she believes the county needs emergency funding to be able to get rid of the dead and dying trees and fix other problems within the Monument, but noted that shrinking the Monument won’t solve anything.
“These trees are iconic, this is the only place on the planet where they exist,” Mulholland said.
Steven Evans, with the California Wilderness Coalition, said it is important that the Monument is well managed as it provides a place for recreation for millions of people, and provides water to downstream communities such as the Kern and Kings rivers. He also encouraged the board to draft a letter to the Trump Administration urging that the U.S. Forest be funded to address any problems.
The move by the Board comes as earlier this year, the Interior Department released a list of 27 national monuments it is reviewing under a presidential order, including Giant Sequoia National Monument in the Sequoia National Forest above Porterville. As a result the Interior announced it was seeking the public to weigh in on the monument designations.
President Donald Trump’s April 26 order could upend protections put in place under a 1906 law that authorizes the president to declare federal lands and waters as monuments and restrict their use. Sequoia National Monument was designated by President Bill Clinton in 2000 and covers 327,000 acres.