Who loses?
Logging by San Jose Water
Neil Wiley

As neighbors and customers of San Jose Water, we lose a lot if they log the lands in our neighborhoods. During the logging, we’ll lose the peace and quiet that are a special attribute of mountain living. Chain saws, tractors, helicopters, and logging trucks are loud and polluting. Truck traffic will impact Highway 17, Summit Road, Old Santa Cruz Highway, and Bear Creek Road. It will be loud and annoying.

But it’s the long-term effects that concern me more. Cutting the biggest redwoods and Douglas firs will not improve fire safety. In fact, loss of their protective canopies will encourage understory broom and brush, creating ladders of fire that even the relatively fire-resistant redwoods can’t stop. Commercial logging doesn’t improve fire safety; it increases fire danger.

Logging is a dirty business. It creates erosion, pollution, and silted streams. Downstream water companies and private wells could face polluted water.

Firemen said that access was a problem during the ’85 fire. It was, but it was the locked gates and secrecy of San Jose Water that hampered access. Will creating unimproved tractor trails through the forest improve access to fire engines? And will San Jose Water improve public access, or will they continue to keep us out?

San Jose Water stands to lose even more than we do. They are in a difficult position. After no action for twenty years, they are offering a logging operation that will take up to 18 years. If ineffective in stopping a major fire, they could be charged with negligence by homeowners and their own stockholders. They need to develop a plan that really improves fire safety, not simply removes the biggest, most fire-resistant trees.

San Jose Water is a prime candidate for a takeover. American Water Works Company almost bought their parent (SJW Corporation) in 1999, only to be thwarted by procedural delays created by the California Public Utilities Commission. The water business is becoming increasingly concentrated in the hands of fewer large national and international companies. This is not a good thing for San Jose or our local communities.

San Jose Water is not in a strong position. In 2003, their revenue was $146.10 million, but their revenue growth was only 2.10 percent. A failed logging operation could be the catalyst for a takeover.

San Jose Water managers have told me that the Lake Elsman watershed produces the cleanest water in their system. They explained that this is why they protect it from trespassers. If that is true, why should they endanger their most important asset—clean water from a pristine watershed—for what may well be a marginal logging operation? If their water becomes dirtier, and they must overhaul their mountain treatment plant, how much profit will be lost?

Even Big Creek Lumber has something to lose. Although Big Creek has sued both Santa Cruz and San Mateo Counties to soften logging rules, and their record is not spotless, they want to be known as a “good” logging company. Big Creek is a local family-owned business with a proud heritage and the last remaining saw mill in Santa Cruz County. I don’t think that they want their reputation sullied by an ineffective plan.

How can we all win?
San Jose Water has the right objective—reduce fire danger. And I understand their need to log to pay for it. But any plan must include limbing trees to 17 feet, removing brush and dead trees, providing defensible fire lines, and improving access for firemen and their equipment. Removing a high percentage of big trees is counterproductive, but very selective harvesting could still pay for the forest cleanup.

Public access is a more difficult objective. San Jose Water managers have taken me on tours where I saw the damages inflicted by trespassers, but perhaps a permit plan could enable access to Sierra Azul open space preserve. Such access by responsible citizens could improve safety by keeping a public eye out for illegal and dangerous activities.