New Headwaters logging plan ordered

<p>SAN FRANCISCO -- The California Supreme Court on Thursday chided two state agencies for approving the controversial $480 million Headwaters Forest deal under which the state and federal governments bought 10,000 acres of old-growth redwood groves and set standards for how Pacific Lumber Co. would log the remaining 220,000 acres in Northern California.</p><p>The court ordered the Scotia-based company, which is owned by Maxxam, based in Houston, to submit new plans addressing how it intended to log near watersheds.</p><p>The justices said the Department of Fish and Game and the Department of Forestry and Fire wrongly agreed to protect Pacific Lumber from having to alter its endangered species protection plan if new animals become threatened.</p><p>The Supreme Court's unanimous ruling culminates nearly 10 years of legal wrangling over two lawsuits filed by environmental groups and the United Steelworkers of America objecting to the 1999 deal.</p><p>But the ruling has little immediate effect on Pacific Lumber's logging activities in Humboldt County because the company has been operating under a different harvesting plan since a trial court judge first ruled against it in 2003.</p><p>What's more, a federal bankruptcy judge last month awarded control of the bankrupt company to Ukiah-based Mendocino Redwood Co., which has promised to significantly slow tree-cutting and is supported by environmentalists.</p><p>Officials with Mendocino Redwood didn't return a call for comment.</p><p>Scott Greacen, head of the Environmental Protection Information Center, which along with the Sierra Club sued the state and Pacific Lumber, said the Supreme Court ruling written by Justice Carlos Moreno will force the state to better consider endangered species protection when approving timber harvest plans.</p><p>"This is a stunning victory for the environment and for holding government agencies accountable," Greacen said.</p><p>A spokesman for the Department of Fish and Game said agency lawyers were reviewing the complicated 87-page decision, which did side with the state and the company on other issues, including finding that considering economic and employment issues for the next 10 years, rather than the four years argued in the lawsuits, was reasonable.</p><p>The Supreme Court sent the case to a trial judge in Humboldt County to figure out what to do next.</p>