- This event has passed.
Public Outcry Needed–Jackson Forest Management Plan!
September 22, 2025 @ 1:00 pm – 5:00 pm
| JAG (Jackson Advisory Group) Meeting Monday, Sept. 22, 1-5 pm Saturday Afternoon Clubhouse, 107 S. Oak St., Ukiah, CA |
| Talking Points are below.Please submit public comments to this email address: JDSF@fire.ca.gov (subject line must contain “JAG Meeting Comment”). Comments specifically for the JAG members about the process must be submitted by 1 pm, September 18 to be distributed to the JAG members prior to the meeting. Comments specific to the Management Plan can be submitted later, and we will send out another notice with talking points. Please send your same comment to the Board of Forestry: <PublicComments@bof.ca.gov> and please cc: savejacksonforest@gmail.com so we can compile public comments of our allies. |
| It’s time for all hands on deck in the state-owned redwood coastal forest known as Jackson Demonstration State Forest! |
| The managing agency of the forest, CalFire, just released a new draft Management Plan (FMP) that is now up for public review. However, CalFire is ignoring the legal process (a full EIR, in compliance with CEQA) and also has ill-advised logging plans on the table. (in CalFire link, scroll down for Plan pdfs)The consultants hired to revise the outdated Forest Management Plan will be presenting their first draft to the Jackson Advisory Group (JAG) on September 22. We are calling for a show of protest of their illegal and fast-tracked process and voicing our principle demands for management of this precious forest.We have opposed this process from the beginning and call for public comments to the JAG and Board of Forestry (which oversees CalFire) at this time. |
| The next step in this process, and an opportunity to share our opposition is:JAG (Jackson Advisory Group) Meeting Monday, Sept. 22, 1-5 pm Saturday Afternoon Clubhouse, 107 S. Oak St., Ukiah, CA |
| Talking Points are below.Please submit public comments to this email address: JDSF@fire.ca.gov (subject line must contain “JAG Meeting Comment”). Comments specifically for the JAG members about the process must be submitted by 1 pm, September 18 to be distributed to the JAG members prior to the meeting. Comments specific to the Management Plan can be submitted later, and we will send out another notice with talking points. Please send your same comment to the Board of Forestry: <PublicComments@bof.ca.gov> and please cc: savejacksonforest@gmail.com so we can compile public comments of our allies.We will share locations and dates when CalFire sets the dates for additional public comment sessions on the Plan. We are now primarily commenting on the process, which the JAG should not sign off on. |
| Also, some great news: Northcoast state representatives–Rep. Chris Rogers and State Sen. Mike McGuire–wrote this letter to CalFire leadership on Sept. 5 that is in line with our demands to CalFire: pause THPs and conduct a full CEQA Environmental Impact Report! This letter comes after many months of forest advocates meeting with and talking to the representatives in whose district the forest lies. We have been thanking them, and look forward to working with them further. Their support couldn’t have come at a better time, as CalFire prepares this next round of greenwashing their new, fast-tracked Forest Management Plan. |
| Talking Points you can send to the JAG and CalFire immediately:The “community outreach” and subsequent drafting of the new Forest Management Plan (FMP) is in violation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A full EIR is required for this new FMP.State Senator Mike McGuire and State Assemblymember Chris Rogers agree. See their Sept. 5, 2025 letter.The new plan will likely have a significant impact on the environment. CalFire has made statements in its “New Vision” and scope of work for this FMP that demonstrates that significant change in management is expected for JDSF. This is the threshold that legally triggers the need for a CEQA process. An EIR is also essential because it requires CalFire to respond to comments and questions, and it requires CalFire to analyze alternatives and mitigation options. An EIR ensures that government-to-government tribal consultation is embedded in the process as well. Instead of doing an EIR with a public comment period, CalFire is opting for a series of community outreach events in order to greenwash their process.This must be called what it is: bogus and dishonest.The last full EIR, completed in 2007, was relied upon by CalFire for the 2016 FMP update. CalFire is relying on this nearly two decades old environmental analysis for the management plan update.The Board of Forestry (BoF) erroneously attempted to exempt itself from CEQA in a 2020 rule change to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. This rule change wrongly categorizes FMPs as merely “information collection.” (Cal Code Regs. Title 14 § 1153(b)). We don’t want the FMP to merely collect information, we want it to improve the health of the forest, which means a significant change, which means following CEQA!CalFire has stated they are not planning to do an EIR and will instead have the BoF find that the plan is exempt from CEQA review. Even if CalFire wanted to rely on the old EIR, changes to the MP have significant impacts not previously considered in connection with the project as originally approved.This process as put forth by CalFire is entirely backwards. It should not move forward until a structure for tribal co-governance agreements is in place.There are two key pieces of information that CalFire must plan to incorporate before the Management Plan moves forward.AB 1284 encourages all Calif. Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) agencies to develop co-governance agreements with tribes and allows tribes to initiate government-to-government consultation regarding co-governance and ancestral land returns.The CNRA Tribal Stewardship Toolkit is expected to be out for public comment early 2025, as a guiding document for all co-governance and land returns in California.CalFire must complete tribal consultation with all interested tribes for co-management for JDSF before the management plan is drafted. It is imperative that local tribes are at the table and are given the opportunity to craft the management plan with CalFire.The current Tribal Advisory Council established by CalFire is just that–advisory. We demand that Tribes be shown the true respect they deserve as sovereign nations–as equal governance partners with California on their traditional lands!AB 52 government-to-government consultation and cultural landscape protections must be incorporated into the new Forest Management Plan. AB 52 was enacted in 2015, after the old FMP was approved and thus has not been fully incorporated into the management of JDSF.We call on California to fund Native training programs and build institutional infrastructure in order to be able to realize the full scope of co-management.No timber harvest plans (THP)s should be approved until the new Management Plan is in place.CalFire is attempting to move forward with the AMEX THP, and Camp 8 THP. Camp 8 proposes building roads in areas of JDSF that have never seen roads and destroy one of the last second growth/old growth mixed stands of redwoods in JDSF. These maturing trees are essential to counter catastrophic climate change, and JDSF should be fully preserved and designated as “Gap 1” lands (see the recent article by EPIC).We say: First: Establish Tribal Co-Governance of JDSF, with equal authority to Tribes and the state. Second: Tribes co-write, with state agencies, a new Forest Management Plan to restore the forest and counter climate crisis. Third: The community works together to restore this Gem of a Forest! |