Don Gage
District Supervisor of the County of Santa Clara
70 West Hedding
San Jose,
CA 95110
Dear Supervisor Gage,
A
month or so after we moved to the Los Gatos
mountains from the Los Angeles
area, knowledge of San Jose Water Company’s plan to put forward a
Non-Industrial Timber Management Plan seemed to enter public
consciousness. It certainly entered ours
as, if this plan is accepted, it negates many of the reasons we chose to leave Los Angeles to move to
this spot of great natural beauty.
I am sure, as the publicly elected official
responsible for the welfare of our county and its citizens, you, or a delegate
in your department, have been following all the arguments and developments
associated with the proposed logging within the Los Gatos watershed. I don’t wish to reiterate what I’m sure you
have heard from other people who are undoubtedly more knowledgeable in this
matter than I am, except to say that I concur with all points expressed in the
October 31st letter sent to you by Maryanne Zanios Murphy, posted on
the mountainresource.org website. In
addition, the Neighbors Against Irresponsible Logging seem to have supported
their valid concerns regarding increased fire danger, risk to water quality,
decreased quality of life and decreased property value with many well
documented facts. Especially pertinent
appear to be Santa Clara County’s own Noise Ordinance Section B11-192 with regard
to San Jose Water Company’s proposed use of chainsaws, logging trucks and
helicopters. This section states “No person shall operate or cause to be operated any source of
sound at any location within the unincorporated territory of the county or
allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occupied or
otherwise controlled by such person, which causes
the noise level when measured on any other property either incorporated or
unincorporated to exceed: 55 decibels for residential land use between 7:00AM
and 10:PM.”
However, a few unanswered questions have been
churning about in my mind as I have been attempting to follow the logging
proposal. The first question regards the “Non-industrial” part of the
Non-Industrial Timber Management Plan.
San Jose Water Company is a private company, albeit providing a public
service. If a private company contracts
for logging to be done on its property and intends to take profit from that
operation in any way, shouldn’t that company be applying for an “Industrial”
plan of timber management, which I believe operates under different parameters?
Also, I understand SJWC will be erecting towers to
facilitate the removal of felled trees from inaccessible areas. Although not familiar with what these
proposed towers might look like or what materials they will be constructed
from, I would imagine they are likely to be built at least partially out of
steel. Since, if approved, the NTMP
apparently stands “in perpetuity” (though one wonders how any proposal can be
accepted in perpetuity, since our entire system of government is based on the
ability to amend in order to accommodate changing needs over time), I find
myself wondering what will happen to these towers. Will they turn into rusting visual and
environmental blights, too expensive and inconvenient to maintain/tear
down? And how will they be erected in
the first place? A tower implies
something tall. Will helicopters be used
to erect them?
The
use of helicopters in general makes me nervous.
In Los Angeles
the circling of police and media helicopters is fairly commonplace, so I am
familiar with the effects their noise has on people, none of which are
positive. In fact, I worked in a school
where we had a lockdown as a result of a suspected burglar, and was able to
observe at close quarters the effect prolonged helicopter noise had on young
children. Here, I understand, the
helicopters involved will be larger and produce far more noise than their
police and media counterparts, yet they will also be flying in close auditory,
if not physical, proximity to our local elementary schools. I also find myself wondering about the
statistical likelihood over time (in perpetuity) of a helicopter crash, and the
likelihood of ensuing fire. Is this risk
worth taking, especially since the purported reason for logging in the first
place is to reduce risk from fire, either (conflicting versions given by SJWC
at different times, I believe) directly and immediately and/or by raising
revenue for the reduction of fire risk at a later date?
The
condition of the roads if the NTMP is approved is something else which concerns
me. Logging trucks are not very
maneuverable. The logs they carry are
very heavy and can roll if dislodged, and although I am sure every effort would
be made to secure them, accidents do happen.
How well are the logging trucks going to take the bends of Highway 17,
not to mention the smaller county roads such as Aldercroft Heights Road (our
only point of egress, incidentally) and Old Santa Cruz Highway? Old Santa
Cruz Highway is already reduced to one lane at the
southwestern end of Lexington Reservoir.
The other lane has actually fallen into the Reservoir and I understand
it has been in this state for a year, possibly two. How will these roads withstand the
considerable and constant (one might say perpetual!) weight of a fleet of
logging trucks traveling daily in both directions? Is the county equipped to foot the bill to
keep its several thousand mountain residents from being cut off from their
jobs, schools, medical treatment, groceries?
Then
what happens when the logging trucks travel on Highway 17, which has only two
lanes in each direction? The hours of
operation applied for in the NTMP (7a.m. to 7p.m., with an unofficial proviso
of 7a.m. to 4p.m.) overlap with peak travel times at both ends of the day. Travel time on the 17 is already generally
doubled during morning and evening rush hours.
What happens when a logging fleet is added to the mix?
The
San Jose Water Company is already working on construction projects at Alma Bridge. There is a signposted project on Alma Bridge Road,
and a project with no community notification posted occurring behind the locked
gates of SJWC’s private road adjacent to Alma Bridge,
continuing out of sight along Los Gatos Creek in a southerly direction. This latter unspecified (to my knowledge)
project has already been the subject of a visit by a Santa Clara Valley Water
District inspector (text on mountainresource.org/node/132) who reported on San
Jose Water Company’s potential permit violations due to poor soil erosion
control, poor control of water run-off, and absence of a winterization plan,
There were also woodchips found in Los Gatos Creek, the presence of which were
due to SJWC’s “miscommunication with the contractor … Chips should have been disposed
of off site.” This highlights the fact
that environmental violations may occur, miscommunications can and do happen,
that these miscommunications can lead to consequences which may or may not have
negative impacts, and that these consequences may or may not be corrected.
I
know others have mentioned the reduction in property values that residents
expect to be one outcome of the NTMP once it passes. Has the Supervisor’s office considered the
negative impact on revenue that could bring to the county? If houses sell for less, the assigned
property tax rate will be correspondingly less.
Possibly existing residents might also be entitled to request a
reassessment of their property tax rate based on one or more of the adverse
ramifications of the NTMP (reduced water quality or road access, for
instance? I don’t know the facts on this
one) resulting in a further loss of revenue for the county.
Mountain
residents aside, there are many other voters within the county who come out to
use the area abounding the proposed site of the NTMP for recreational
purposes: cyclists, joggers, rowers,
hikers, anglers and people driving through the mountains and redwoods simply
for pleasure, all choosing to pursue their pastimes in this area of great
natural beauty. I see hundreds of them
on any given weekend. I’m sure many of
these people aren’t aware that the destination for their recreational outings
is about to undergo major topographical and environmental alteration, but they
will if the NTMP is approved. Are you
prepared for a backlash?
Finally,
there must be good reason for the neighboring counties of Marin, San Francisco and Santa
Cruz to have banned logging of their watersheds. As our County Supervisor,
I trust your office has contacted, or plans to contact, the relevant
departments in these neighboring counties.
I like to think Santa
Clara County
will be afforded the benefit of learning from the experiences of other counties
in similar locales.
Mistakes
in this matter should be avoided at all costs, since the effects will be felt
“in perpetuity”.
Sincerely,
Celia
Francis