The fight for the redwoods

1A ONfnOVERSy continues sur-

! rounding the latest in a series of proposals to enlarge the Redwood National Park.

Acquisition of land surrounding the park is seen by environmentalists as essential "to protect the park" from logging near its borders. The lumber industry. buttressed by a massive compendium of facts, firmly believes the park is well protected and that loss of additional redwood lands to the federal government would only result in additional unemployment in an area already suffering l5% unemployment. It would cost hundreds of millions of dollars at a time when the federal government is asking its citizens to make sacrifices in a number of areas in their lives.

The latest government proposal for park expansidn is a plan by Interior Secretary Cecil D. Andrus that would add 48,000 acres at a cost of $359 million. It followed by several weeks an even more grandiose scheme by San Francisco Rep. Phillip Burton to acquire 74,000 acres surrounding the park.

It was the Burton proposal that kicked off the latest phase of the controversy, which involves (at least) two main areas of contention: loss of jobs and the precedent setting government taking of privately-owned timber lands.

Burton held hearings initially in Eureka, in the heart of the redwoods, sparking demonstrations of opposition to his proposals that culminated in loggers forming a ll2 tiuck convoy that descended upon San Francisco after an all night drive (see photo). It was backed up by 2O busloads of supporters who also wanted to show their opposition to the park expansion.

For one enraged citizen's opposition to redwood park expansion, please see p.27.

Any plans to add to the park have encountered increasingly bitter oppo- sition. Industry is quick to note that since the park was created in 1964, a number of promises made by the federal government have not been kept. Specifically, redwood industry workers were not retrained. not a single family has received special federal assistance, and no special loans have been made available to businesses hurt by loss of the redwood lands.

The record of the park is even more dismal. The authorized cost of $92 million has already reached $172 million with $110 million more pending in court. It is not only the most expensive park in the U.S., it is also more than twice as expensive as all the other National Parks in America combined. as of last September. Presently there is no master plan for the park, which both California and federal officials concede is needed, nor has Congress allocated adequate funds to improve the park. The State of California has not donated its three adjacent parks as promised.

It is among the least visited parks in the country, proving that tourism is not the answer to replacing jobs lost, say industry sources.

Despite Sierra Club claims, obser-

Story at a Glance

The lumber industry isfighting hard to prevent expansion of the Redwood National Park . lumbermen say the redwoods are already saved and protected, that park enlargement makes neither economic nor environmental sense.

vers note, the park is already protected. There are 500 miles of redwood along the coast, comprised of 181,000 acres (283 square miles) preserved in over 100 parks and reserves. Within the present park boundaries lies virtually the entire natural spectrum of redwood ecological features.

Arcata Redwood, Louisiana-Pacific and Simpson Timber Co., the three timber firms affected by the proposed park expansion, have increased their efforts to establish responsible long term forest management programs. Despite the conjecture that their logging efforts in areas surrounding the park might endanger the Tall Trees Gove there has been no evidence presented by the Sierra Club of actual damage to a single tree. Redwood Creek runs through the area of the redwood giants, yet aerial photos of the creek and the grove dating back

(Please turn to page 32)