Guest opinion by Mike Hupp, Mike Deane, Curtis Knight, and Rick Poore
The debate on the Roseburg Forest Products biomass plant in Weed really needs to end.
The signatories to this opinion have diverse professional backgrounds in natural resource management including aquatic habitat restoration, sustainable forestry, water use issues, fisheries biology and environmental law enforcement. We have followed the discussion on the Roseburg facility and reviewed the project Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
This facility is a sustainable, environmentally sound development that Siskiyou County needs. We believe the latest round of challenges represent an abuse of the citizen appeal procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and are needless and unnecessarily expensive for everyone.
This thoroughly considered proposal will increase Roseburg’s capacity to efficiently burn wood chips to produce electricity. This fuel would otherwise likely burn in slash piles or wildfires, and literally go up in smoke. After our wildland fires of last summer, more smoke is not what we want or need.
The power generated by the facility can be used to support the power demands of northern California, reducing our dependence on other sources of electricity. The plant also provides a desperately needed market for chips made from small trees and slash helping to make forest thinning more affordable. Forest thinning substantially reduces the threat of destructive wildfire, creates badly needed jobs and helps restore the overall health of our forests and watersheds.
The EIR considers and discloses the possible environmental consequences of the project. This exhaustive review shows that the Roseburg Biomass project would meet California’s strict air quality standards. A thorough analysis showed no discernable adverse public health impacts. The EIR also disclosed that the project would operate within Roseburg Forest Product’s existing allocated water rights.
The current round of litigation will not help protect the environment or our health. Instead it is painting Siskiyou County as a no-growth zone where environmentally friendly and sustainable businesses are not supported, but instead subjected to endless legal challenge. This kind of adversarial resistance to sustainable growth only contributes to the current economic recession and keeps us from utilizing an abundant and renewable source of energy produced right here in Siskiyou County.
The EIR for the Roseburg biomass facility thoroughly examined possible environmental impacts as the law requires. The Planning Commission had public hearings, considered the various points of view and reviewed the appeal of the project. Concerned citizens raised fair and legitimate questions in the public process that were considered and subsequently addressed.
When fair and transparent, and used appropriately, this process works. It is time however to stop wasting everyone’s money in frivolous litigation. Subjecting Siskiyou County to the withering fire of endless and expensive legal challenges serves no useful purpose.
• Mike Hupp, Registered Professional Forester
• Curtis Knight, Fisheries Biologist
• Mike Deane, Registered Environmental Health Specialist and Fisheries Biologist
• Rick Poore, Streamwise, River and Stream Restoration Specialist
|
|
|
Guest opinion by Mike Hupp, Mike Deane, Curtis Knight, and Rick Poore
The debate on the Roseburg Forest Products biomass plant in Weed really needs to end.
The signatories to this opinion have diverse professional backgrounds in natural resource management including aquatic habitat restoration, sustainable forestry, water use issues, fisheries biology and environmental law enforcement. We have followed the discussion on the Roseburg facility and reviewed the project Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
This facility is a sustainable, environmentally sound development that Siskiyou County needs. We believe the latest round of challenges represent an abuse of the citizen appeal procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and are needless and unnecessarily expensive for everyone.
This thoroughly considered proposal will increase Roseburg’s capacity to efficiently burn wood chips to produce electricity. This fuel would otherwise likely burn in slash piles or wildfires, and literally go up in smoke. After our wildland fires of last summer, more smoke is not what we want or need.
The power generated by the facility can be used to support the power demands of northern California, reducing our dependence on other sources of electricity. The plant also provides a desperately needed market for chips made from small trees and slash helping to make forest thinning more affordable. Forest thinning substantially reduces the threat of destructive wildfire, creates badly needed jobs and helps restore the overall health of our forests and watersheds.
The EIR considers and discloses the possible environmental consequences of the project. This exhaustive review shows that the Roseburg Biomass project would meet California’s strict air quality standards. A thorough analysis showed no discernable adverse public health impacts. The EIR also disclosed that the project would operate within Roseburg Forest Product’s existing allocated water rights.
The current round of litigation will not help protect the environment or our health. Instead it is painting Siskiyou County as a no-growth zone where environmentally friendly and sustainable businesses are not supported, but instead subjected to endless legal challenge. This kind of adversarial resistance to sustainable growth only contributes to the current economic recession and keeps us from utilizing an abundant and renewable source of energy produced right here in Siskiyou County.
The EIR for the Roseburg biomass facility thoroughly examined possible environmental impacts as the law requires. The Planning Commission had public hearings, considered the various points of view and reviewed the appeal of the project. Concerned citizens raised fair and legitimate questions in the public process that were considered and subsequently addressed.
When fair and transparent, and used appropriately, this process works. It is time however to stop wasting everyone’s money in frivolous litigation. Subjecting Siskiyou County to the withering fire of endless and expensive legal challenges serves no useful purpose.
• Mike Hupp, Registered Professional Forester
• Curtis Knight, Fisheries Biologist
• Mike Deane, Registered Environmental Health Specialist and Fisheries Biologist
• Rick Poore, Streamwise, River and Stream Restoration Specialist
