As I’ve said, I’m not opposed to widening the road to allow for easier access for goods into and out of the county. But I think some good points are raised and the issue warrants some substantive discussion.
I’ll put the blog in my list soon.
Recent Comments
 | That Other Anonymous on Online Petition to the Board o… |
 | Just Watchin on Online Petition to the Board o… |
 | Anonymous on Online Petition to the Board o… |
| Anonymous on Online Petition to the Board o… |
| That Other Anonymous on Online Petition to the Board o… |
| Anonymous on Online Petition to the Board o… |
| That Other Anonymous on Online Petition to the Board o… |
| Anonymous on Online Petition to the Board o… |
 | Janelle Egger on On the Watering Down of the Pu… |
| That Other Anonymous on Online Petition to the Board o… |
| Cookie on Online Petition to the Board o… |
 | Democratic Jon on Online Petition to the Board o… |
 | "Henchman Of Justice… on Online Petition to the Board o… |
| "Henchman Of Justice… on Online Petition to the Board o… |
| Anonymous on Online Petition to the Board o… |
21 comments
Comments feed for this article
March 1, 2009 at 12:35 am
Anonymous
Does the road go through the grove or merely near it?
March 1, 2009 at 6:31 am
Fred Mangels
It (Highway 101) goes through it.
March 1, 2009 at 8:12 am
humboldturtle
Save the money, close the road. Boats work fine.
March 1, 2009 at 10:37 am
Ernie's Place (Branscomb)
That’s easy for a turtle to say…
March 1, 2009 at 11:03 am
Ron Glick
Ran into the head of State Parks the other day at a fundraiser. I was standing by the wall when they were introducing the big wigs. They introduced her, she waved, she was standing right in front of me talking to a county supervisor. I asked her about Richardson Grove. She said the biggest tree being cut was only 10 inches in diameter. Is this true?
March 1, 2009 at 11:16 am
bull moose
It is true that no old growth is slated for removal under the Caltrans plan. But roots on old growth trees will be cut, if I understand the plan correctly. I agree with Eric’s assessment. It’s probably a good idea to move forward with the realignment (it’s more of a straightening than a widening), but let’s make sure every viewpoint is heard and considered.
March 1, 2009 at 11:48 am
Anonymous
The Richardson Grove project is just a getting a foot in the door sort of thing.There are areas south of there which pose as greater obstacles ans once the work is being done on the grove,you’ll see more proposals for other projects.Widened the grove won’t do all that much without other spots on the road being widened as well.Be careful,and watch what you are getting into if you support this project and think that this is it.
March 1, 2009 at 12:25 pm
ED Denson
I’m generally speaking against cutting any redwoods in the grove. How about “realigning” the road to skip the grove entirely (I think that would take a couple of bridges).Cost vs present cost? Stimulus job?
Questions about the current plan: how many trees would be cut? How many trees are there in the grove, and of what diameter? Are we talking about losing 1% of the trees or 10% of the trees. What effects will cutting the trees have on the remaining trees, and wildlife. If 101 becomes, say, wider will this make traffic faster, and create more roadkill? Any of the roadkill endangered? What effect will opening the canopy have on the plants, or will the canopy reasonably quickly recover? Increased risk of vunerability to wind? Just a few off the cuff questions. Perhaps they’ve been answered in the studies? Anyone know?
March 1, 2009 at 2:08 pm
humboldturtle
Request a copy of all documents relative to any by-pass of Richard Grove that may have been considered. The topic was alive as late as the 1980′s.
March 1, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Moviedad
It’s really hard to accept these “Abstract Justifications” for doing this particular project. There are so many parts of the infrastructure that need immediate repair and maintenance, and do not require us to believe all these: “this is gonna happen,” and “Things will be like this in the future so we need to…..” I just don’t understand the need. who is it really going to benefit? Don’t we already have the answer to that question?
Is supporting retail infrastructure more important than supporting public infrastructure?
March 1, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Rose
There’s the rub, Ed – all that “Stimulus,” all those projects – and every single one of them will meet with resistance and challenges – you can’t even CUT a TREE to widen a tiny section of road.
Grok?
March 1, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Eric Kirk
Well, there wasn’t too much resistance to the Confusion Hill bypass. But where would this bypass go? Through Dimmick Ranch and French’s Camp?
March 1, 2009 at 7:08 pm
Ron Glick
Not one word on here about human safety. Seems it should have relevance.
March 1, 2009 at 7:38 pm
bull moose
The STAA-length trucks can’t pass through Richardson Grove without either crossing over the yellow line or straying over onto the shoulder. Being that this is in the middle of a state park, with pedestrians and cyclists sharing the road, safety is a huge concern here.
Another factor to consider is that even though they are prohibited by law from passing through Richardson Grove, drivers of STAA trucks do it anyway. Some drivers are willing to risk getting caught. And some STAA trucks have a legal exemption to the restriction — the cattle industry and maybe auto carriers as well. So these trucks are traveling through the Grove right now, even though it’s unsafe.
The pretext that realignment will just open the door for big box stores like WalMart doesn’t really hold water. WalMart already sends trucks up this route, using shorter rigs that are legal through the Grove. So, some of you need to find a different argument.
I used to be against this project. But after I had all the facts presented to me, I’ve changed my mind. It makes sense, for safety’s sake.
March 1, 2009 at 7:44 pm
Anonymous
Go to the Richardson Grove blog and read what is really going to happen. I am so disappointed and surprised some people think all this tree falling is OK. Go drive through Richardson Grove again and see just how beautiful and inspiring it is.
Big trucks being allowed to come in is ABSOLUTELY IRRELEVANT compared to preserving the beauty and inspiration of the grove and wildlife, and I’m amazed people aren’t up in arms about this project now that most everywhere else is logged and gone.
Shame on you all to put commerce first and do nothing.
March 2, 2009 at 11:21 am
Tired of Hysteria
How about go to the DEIR and read what is really going to happen, instead of counting on activists to do all your thinking for you – whether they’re environmental activists OR business activists? All this hysteria is making me scream. The biggest part of the project is the retaining wall, which is OUTSIDE of the park, right where the road narrows down. The stretch of road inside the park that’s going to be affected is about 150 feet long, and a whole lot of people are acting like the park is going to be razed and an eight-lane superhighway is going to be built.
LOOK AT THE FACTS. Bull Moose did.
Oh, and by the way, I consider myself an environmentalist. I also support local businesses. It doesn’t have to be an either/or.
Signed,
A Public Figure Who’s Sick of Black & White Arguments
March 2, 2009 at 4:38 pm
Ann Johnson-Stromberg
Ed you had a few questions and about the DEIR and I thought I would forward you to an article that is located at http://www.northcoastprosperity.com/business-news.
The info there offers background and some basic info on what is happening and what Caltrans has laid out. I wrote it as an update for those interested what the local small businesses are saying. I work in a public relations capacity on this project on behalf of the business community, but I wholeheartedly believe this project is in the best interest of our entire community.
This project does not cut down old-growth trees, this project was creatively pieced together to minimize cost and environmental impacts and still meet this areas need for a safe and legal passage for standard-sized STAA trucks.
Anyhow I am not interested in stirring controversy, just wanted to provide more info for those who said they wanted more details. Also a photo of where the retaining wall is planned is also on that link.
March 3, 2009 at 8:33 pm
Anonymous
I wasn’t referring to the felling of redwoods but over 100 other trees. And I just read in the Independent (page 2, end of Arkley article) that Headwaters-supported infrastructure projects include Richardson Grove. Great, save Headwaters but cut the trees here. Well with this and the Navy playing war games off the coast, it’s clear nobody here really gives a damn about the environment.
March 4, 2009 at 9:27 am
Ann Johnson-Stromberg
Again the facts are faulty here anonymous. The maximum number of trees project slated for removal is 89 trees , however the DEIR states that Caltrans expects that number to actually be smaller. None of those trees meet the California State Parks definition for “large tree” which is 36″ in diameter at breast height.
The majority (67 percent) of the tree removal will be done outside the park. Over half of the trees to be removed are tan oak (49 trees) with the majority ranging from 4”-10” in diameter. About thirty percent of the trees (28 trees) are Douglas Fir ranging from 4” to 24”. Seven redwoods ranging from 4” to 16” (the two being removed from the park are 6” and 7” in diameter.) There are also four trees of various species being removed.
For those of you who have more questions about the DEIR I suggest you get a copy from Caltrans so that at least we can all be on the same page. You can also call or email Kim Floyd directly in the Eureka office.
December 5, 2009 at 7:57 pm
MistyForestDreamer
Wow, more Richardson Grove propaganda wherever I go. The Caltrans plan for Richardson Grove is to cut into the roots of 23 OLD GROWTH TREES. Cutting the roots cuts off the life supply to these “protected old growth trees” that are thousands of years old. Disturbing that canopy, is also messing with the inter-twined root systems necessary for these old growth trees and the natural habitat to survive.
Local businesses will all close if you open the road for faster speeds. What are they thinking? Big Box, is what they are all thinking, Arkley, Marina Center, Home Depot, and even Wal-mart, poisen Lily’s bad business practices, and once again it is “once the zoning is changed. This can not be allowed to proceed. Protect is protect, and protect is what I will do with every fiber of my being.
The two year study of the endangered Marbled Murrelet’s is something Caltrans is planning to DO AFTER THE PROJECT IS COMPLETE.
189 Pages of discrepancies is what is in the Caltrans Draft Environmental Impact Report, and prepare for a major pain in the head. All charts and grafts are old and no “real” studies have been done on the protected species. Noise level charts are also totally off. Geeze, the computer has more accurate charts of noise levels of this ear defining equipment.
I don’t even believe the above poster, Ann Johnson Stromberg, has even read the entire Draft Environmental Impact Report, but is continuing the down play and false information it is. Oh, that is right, you have vested interest in trying to pretend this will make Humboldt County Prosperous so you can keep your job? If you actually read the entire DEIR ($10) at Caltrans, you will see all the lies it contains.
JUST SAY NO TO CALTRANS CUTTING INTO THE ROOTS OF 23 OLD GROWTH TREES. A Remotely activated Signal light will work, and slow the f_ _ _ down. Those trucks speed through there all the time. Charge $198 for speeding, and ticket ALL speeders. Money goes to help local services. Save the taxpayers 7 Million dollars they don’t have. For accurate information, go to SaveRichardsonGrove dot org where people with no vested interested have uncovered the real facts of this situation.
December 5, 2009 at 8:00 pm
MistyForestDreamer
Wow, more Richardson Grove propaganda wherever I go. The Caltrans plan for Richardson Grove is to cut into the roots of 23 OLD GROWTH TREES. Cutting the roots cuts off the life supply to these “protected old growth trees” that are thousands of years old. Disturbing that canopy, is also messing with the inter-twined root systems necessary for these old growth trees and the natural habitat to survive. Local businesses will all close if you open the road for faster speeds. What are they thinking? Big Box, is what they are all thinking, Arkley, Marina Center, Home Depot, and even Wal-mart, once the zoning is changed. This can not be allowed to proceed. Protect is protect, and protect is what I will do with every fiber of my being.
The two year study of the endangered Marbled Murrelet’s is something Caltrans is planning to DO AFTER THE PROJECT IS COMPLETE.
189 Pages of discrepancies is what is in the Caltrans Draft Environmental Impact Report, and prepare for a major pain in the head. All charts and grafts are old and no “real” studies have been done on the protected species. Noise level charts are also totally off. Geeze, the computer has more accurate charts of noise levels of this ear defining equipment.
I don’t even believe the above poster, Ann Johnson Stromberg, has even read the entire Draft Environmental Impact Report. Oh, that is right, you have vested interest in trying to pretend this will make Humboldt County Prosperous so you can keep your job. Once again, “The Gain Seekers” try to destroy the environment for their precious bottom line, that will not, let me repeat, THE BOTTOM LINE WILL NOT TRICKLE DOWN TO ANY SAVINGS at the cash register.
JUST SAY NO TO CALTRANS CUTTING INTO THE ROOTS OF 23 OLD GROWTH TREES. A Remotely activated Signal light will work, and slow the f_ _ _ down. Those trucks speed through there all the time. Charge $198 for speeding, and ticket ALL speeders. Money goes to help local services. Save the taxpayers 7 Million dollars they don’t have.
For accurate information, go to SaveRichardsonGrove dot org where people with no vested interested have uncovered the real facts of this situation.