PD Editorial: Protect California land that is wilderness in all but name

Two years ago, Rep Jared Huffman tried and failed to convince Congress to better protect some Northern California lands. Now he’s back, but the job is no easier, especially when Republicans control the House of Representatives. The cause isn’t hopeless, though.

Huffman, D-San Rafael, represents California’s 2nd Congressional District, which stretches from the Golden Gate Bridge to the Oregon border along the coast. His constituents don’t lack federal lands on which to recreate and experience nature. The district holds Redwood National Park, Six Rivers National Forest, Trinity National Forest, Point Reyes National Seashore and more. That’s not to mention the many state parks, preserves and forests up and down the North Coast.

Those lands are protected from development based on their designations, but the highest level of federal protection is rare. The best protection federal land can receive is designation as a “wilderness.” Only about 2% of the land in the lower forty-eight states have it.

Huffman’s bill, the Northwest California Wilderness, Recreation and Working Forests Act, would extend wilderness protection to about 260,000 acres in Mendocino, Humboldt and Trinity counties. It also would protect 480 miles of river with the comparable Wild and Scenic designation for waterways.

The bill is one of three targeting different parts of California. They are tied together as part of a larger Protecting Unique and Beautiful Landscapes by Investing in California Act that Sen. Alex Padilla is shepherding in the Senate.

When environmentalists and lawmakers talk about protecting public lands, some users of those lands get defensive. Hunters, fishers and off-road vehicle riders worry that new rules will limit their access to lands that belong as much to them as to every other American. They can relax in this case. The bill does not limit hunting and fishing nor does it shut down vehicle access to any legal roads or trails (illegal ones are another matter).

The bill also will not expand federal holdings. The goal is to protect what belongs to the public already, not to acquire private lands.

Other elements of the bill would encourage recreation and visitors. It would support trail improvements, build visitor centers and restore forests. Experts would study the feasibility of creating a Bigfoot National Recreation Trail through the Klamath Mountains for hiking and an Elk Camp Ridge National Trail that would be open to motorized recreation.

There’s a safety component, too. Wildfires don’t recognize the boundaries of national forests when winds push them toward communities. The bill therefore directs coordinated fire management and response as well as restoration strategies that include increased logging and rehabilitating sites of illegal marijuana grows.

These changes could reinvigorate local economies near protected lands through increased tourism, logging and restoration work that will take years.

Huffman has balanced his bill with elements for both Democrats (environmental stewardship and clean waterways) and Republicans (logging and economic support to rural areas). That should be an easy pass in both chambers of Congress, but it wasn’t the last time, so there’s no guarantee this time.

The next step is building a coalition of backers. Members of Northern California’s congressional delegation should join Huffman, and then the entire California team.

You can send letters to the editor to letters@pressdemocrat.com.