Forestry Conversions by Ernie Carpenter

[Ernieman]

Forest Conversions
Ernie Carpenter
The last two years I served on the Board of Supervisors (1995-1997) the Board established under my leadership a Local Task Force to propose local timber harvest rules. There were many issues from clear cuts to stream side conservation, to watershed protection. We developed a proposal that was adopted by the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors. That proposal would have strengthened the environmental component of the Forest Practice Rules. Unfortunately, the Board of Forestry was in no mood for local rules in those days and they were not adopted by the State.

Example of new hillside vineyard in Sonoma County

Today, several forest owners have entertained conversion of forest to vineyards. I understand the issue as I was a consultant on a project for Coastal Forestlands. My role with Coastal Forestland was to advise on how to strengthen the environmental component. I was able to work on a conservation program for 80,000 acres of coastal redwood forest in Sonoma and Mendocino counties. This had never been done before in California. It was an exciting opportunity for conservation.

The Coastal Forestlands project that I consulted on at the turn of this century was not the proposed Preservation Ranch project that is before the County today. This 19,000-acre part of the Coastal Forestlands property located in Sonoma County was sold to Premier Pacific and was then named Preservation Ranch. I have no interest in that project and my consultant work ended in early 2000.

The old Coastal Forestlands conservation plan for the 19,000-acre Sonoma County property proposed an expansion of the County Park, Soda Springs Reserve (Kelly Park), along with an equestrian trail from a staging area next to Skaggs Springs Road to Soda Springs Reserve. Provision was made for camping and outdoor recreation. The entire 19,000-acre property would have a conservation easement with wildlife and stream habitat protection, and extensive oak woodland reserves. The plan being considered was to have ridge top vineyards with about eight vineyard parcels and one forest parcel that would remain out of the 160 legal parcels on these 19,000 acres. No application for timberland conversion, winery or vineyard was ever filed.

Two parcels of the 80,000 acres were later sold to The Conservation Fund with an easement held by The Nature Conservancy. The results so far have been to raise the bar for environmental protection by wiping out hundreds of development parcels, with conservation easements on about 38,000 acres, stream habitat and oak forest reserves, and these two contiguous properties are owned by a national conservation organization. A third parcel, the Willets Woods, 20,000 acres does not yet have a conservation easement but it is registered as a forest improvement project with the California Climate Action Reserve. I believe the owner is open to a similar conservation easement approach.

I was involved in advising on all aspects of the environmental outcomes on the property. I do not believe Premier Pacific Vineyards implemented the proposed conservation plan development by the former consultant team that included me. I am very willing to work with CalPERS (owner) to see if a similar forest conservation outcome would be feasible on the 19,000-acre property. They could recoup their investment and the goodwill of the citizens of Sonoma County and California. It would certainly be in the best interest of the West County.

There are other issues with forest conversion to vineyards including watershed, habitat, busing in workers, worker housing, loss of timber stock, use of chemicals, and this list goes on. Finally, Green House Gas reduction is now an imperative issue and must be considered. Given that the forest is our lifeblood and lungs of the planet, I have come to the conclusion that there should be no forest conversions for vineyards. The Board of Forestry has adopted policies on GHG, a related issue, and these policies must be strengthened to protect wildlife, stream and old growth habitat, while preserving and sustaining the productive forest industry for rural jobs and local economy.

No more forest conversions to Vineyards.

[maryr45]

Well said Ernie, good to see you being able to change your mind when it suits you. Are you still a garbage man?

There may be hope for you yet :0P

Mary

Forest Conversions
Ernie Carpenter
The last two years I served on the Board of Supervisors (1995-1997) the Board established under my leadership a Local Task Force to propose local timber harvest rules. There were many issues from clear cuts to stream side conservation, to watershed protection. We developed a proposal that was adopted by the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors. That proposal would have strengthened the environmental component of the Forest Practice Rules. Unfortunately, the Board of Forestry was in no mood for local rules in those days and they were not adopted by the State.

Example of new hillside vineyard in Sonoma County

Today, several forest owners have entertained conversion of forest to vineyards. I understand the issue as I was a consultant on a project for Coastal Forestlands. My role with Coastal Forestland was to advise on how to strengthen the environmental component. I was able to work on a conservation program for 80,000 acres of coastal redwood forest in Sonoma and Mendocino counties. This had never been done before in California. It was an exciting opportunity for conservation.

The Coastal Forestlands project that I consulted on at the turn of this century was not the proposed Preservation Ranch project that is before the County today. This 19,000-acre part of the Coastal Forestlands property located in Sonoma County was sold to Premier Pacific and was then named Preservation Ranch. I have no interest in that project and my consultant work ended in early 2000.

The old Coastal Forestlands conservation plan for the 19,000-acre Sonoma County property proposed an expansion of the County Park, Soda Springs Reserve (Kelly Park), along with an equestrian trail from a staging area next to Skaggs Springs Road to Soda Springs Reserve. Provision was made for camping and outdoor recreation. The entire 19,000-acre property would have a conservation easement with wildlife and stream habitat protection, and extensive oak woodland reserves. The plan being considered was to have ridge top vineyards with about eight vineyard parcels and one forest parcel that would remain out of the 160 legal parcels on these 19,000 acres. No application for timberland conversion, winery or vineyard was ever filed.

Two parcels of the 80,000 acres were later sold to The Conservation Fund with an easement held by The Nature Conservancy. The results so far have been to raise the bar for environmental protection by wiping out hundreds of development parcels, with conservation easements on about 38,000 acres, stream habitat and oak forest reserves, and these two contiguous properties are owned by a national conservation organization. A third parcel, the Willets Woods, 20,000 acres does not yet have a conservation easement but it is registered as a forest improvement project with the California Climate Action Reserve. I believe the owner is open to a similar conservation easement approach.

I was involved in advising on all aspects of the environmental outcomes on the property. I do not believe Premier Pacific Vineyards implemented the proposed conservation plan development by the former consultant team that included me. I am very willing to work with CalPERS (owner) to see if a similar forest conservation outcome would be feasible on the 19,000-acre property. They could recoup their investment and the goodwill of the citizens of Sonoma County and California. It would certainly be in the best interest of the West County.

There are other issues with forest conversion to vineyards including watershed, habitat, busing in workers, worker housing, loss of timber stock, use of chemicals, and this list goes on. Finally, Green House Gas reduction is now an imperative issue and must be considered. Given that the forest is our lifeblood and lungs of the planet, I have come to the conclusion that there should be no forest conversions for vineyards. The Board of Forestry has adopted policies on GHG, a related issue, and these policies must be strengthened to protect wildlife, stream and old growth habitat, while preserving and sustaining the productive forest industry for rural jobs and local economy.

No more forest conversions to Vineyards.

[maryr45]

p.s. Where is this incredible forest to vineyard conversion and when was it done? Does the State and County still allow this?

Well said Ernie, good to see you being able to change your mind when it suits you. Are you still a garbage man?

There may be hope for you yet :0P

Mary

[Ernieman]

I have been an environmental and government consultant to several local companies the past several years. The last three years I have worked for North Bay that has the collection contracts. Familiarly I am a garbage man. More formally, I am a waste and recycle consultant. Thanks. Never been big on Forest Conversions, the article speaks for itself. It is time for the County to come to grips with this issue and end forest conversions.

[Imagery]

p.s. Where is this incredible forest to vineyard conversion and when was it done? Does the State and County still allow this?

If Efren "F**k the environment" Carrillo has his way, since big business supports him, he'll vote to allow it. Nothing short of clear-cutting the entire 20,000 acres to make way for grapes would be objectionable to him, since his puppet masters have contributed enough to keeping him in power.