Coming up: Jackson Advisory Group (JAG) Meeting:
March 18, 2025 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Fort Bragg Lions Club, 430 E. Redwood Ave. Fort Bragg
Dear Jackson Forest Supporters,
What’s happening in Jackson? We haven’t sent an update in a while and want to bring you, the active members of the Coalition to Save Jackson Forest, up to current.
Many of you know that Priscilla Hunter, Pomo tribal leader, friend, visionary leader for the Jackson Forest campaign and so many other campaigns and organizations, initiator and leader of the Intertribal Sinkyone Wilderness Council, joined the ancestors in November of 2024. Her intuitive sense of politics, deep wisdom and commitment, and sense of humor are sorely missed in our forest campaign, and in the lives of those who respected and loved her. Her visions and words will continue to guide our campaign.
The Campaign to Save Jackson Forest does continue to move forward in positive directions. Thanks to the continued pressure of protests, public input and growing State-wide support, there has been no new commercial tree cutting in Jackson Demonstration State Forest (JDSF) since 2022, when a “pause” was put in place by the California Natural Resources Department. This informal de facto moratorium is still in effect, but CalFire intends to resume filing timber harvest plans in 2025. State Rep. Jim Wood and Sen. Mike McGuire have stated in writing their support for no new timber harvest plans before a new co-management plan is in place.
With the trees still standing for now, we’ve used this breather to work towards our legal and legislative goals and have made significant progress. We’ve improved our legal strategy to oppose THPs and moved closer to changing the JDSF mandate for JDSF that currently prioritizes commercial timber production.
An exciting policy update important to our work is the passing of Assembly Bill (AB) 1284. With the advocacy of California State Asm. James Ramos, Gov. Newsom’s policy declarations on Tribal co-management plans of state lands and land returned to Indigenous descendants have now been codified into law as AB 1284. AB 1284 encourages the state to consult with Tribes on co-management and co-governance agreements and land returns.
The Coalition also continues to advocate for implementation of AB 52 Tribal Government-to-Government consultation on all forest management activities within JDSF. Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), AB 52 affords protections for cultural resources including sacred and cultural heritage landscapes, and offers far more extensive mitigation measures than previously afforded, including conservation easements and land back, where there is a significant impact to these tribal cultural resources.
Last year, CalFire began early preparatory work on draft of a new Forest Management Plan (FMP) for JDSF. As the Coalition has advocated for updated management strategies for JDSF, we welcome an early review of the FMP. However, CalFire has not applied CEQA, including AB 52, to the development of a draft FMP for Jackson Forest. Instead, CalFire is receiving public input and drafting the FMP through an informal, unregulated process which does not require public comments with responses from Cal Fire and does not require climate change or GHG analysis that was missing from the old FMP. Cal Fire has also not put in place infrastructure for Tribal co-management for Jackson Forest before finalizing a new FMP.
With contractors hired by CalFire to write a draft FMP, the agency held a series of tightly controlled public meetings late last year. The meetings were dominated by CalFire personnel, misrepresenting and distorting the public’s statements, not allowing time for public testimony, intimidating speakers and even threatening to remove anyone speaking up! Coalition members who attended objected to these tactics, calling the meetings invalid as public comment.
The JAG, at its March 18 meeting, will provide an update regarding the FMP. Your written comments on the process for a new FMP, and why the forthcoming draft FMP should comply with CEQA and wait for an equal co-governance plan with Tribes to be completed are needed to show that public interest in the fate of the People’s Forest is still as strong as ever.
Suggested Comments for the March 18, 2025 JAG meeting
The public may submit comments in advance via email pertaining to the JAG meeting agenda. Please submit public comments to the following email address: JDSF@fire.ca.gov (subject line must contain “JAG Meeting Comment”). These comments must be submitted by 1:00 pm, March 14th to be distributed to the JAG prior to the meeting.
• CalFire must complete an Environmental Impact Report for the new draft Forest Management Plan (FMP) and comply with the Tribal consultation requirements under AB 52. The last time an EIR was completed for Jackson Forest was in 2008, when CEQA did not require tribal consultation or climate change analysis. An updated environmental review is needed for the public to fully understand the impacts of CalFire’s management on Jackson Forest.
• Informal public input meetings are not the same as public comments required by CEQA that can be read by the public and which require a response from CalFire. A project as complex as an Forest Management Plan needs to have a formal comment making process under CEQA and on the record.
• The Board of Forestry (BoF) illegally attempted to deregulate themselves by claiming that a FMP is not a project subject to CEQA. This doesn’t make sense because the BoF claims that the FMP is mere information collection when in fact, the FMP will dictate the types of activities that are allowed on the forest, the types of protection measures that will be taken on a landscape approach, and how much timber is harvested from the forest. This claim by the BoF also doesn’t make sense as the BoF has always relied on an EIR for approval, so what changed?
• CalFire should complete AB 52 Tribal government consultation for a Tribal co-governance agreement prior to a draft FMP in order to fundamentally restructure the management of Jackson Forest. Jackson Forest must be managed with Tribes and this co-governance should be formalized.
• No timber harvest plans (THPs) should be considered prior to completion of a new FMP.
• CalFire’s outdated FMP is out of compliance with current State laws requiring far greater protections for Tribes.
• AB 52 applies to the THPs at JDSF and is a statutory obligation that must be incorporated into the new management plan. AB 52 expands the mitigation measures provided to California Tribes to include the reparative measures of conservation easements and land back.
• JDSF should be considered a Northern Pomo Coast Yuki “cultural landscape.”
