Editor,
While much work remains to protect Californians from wildfires, state Sen. Josh Becker’s sponsorship of SB 1370 is troubling. I once viewed him as an advocate for sensible climate and wildfire policy, but this troubling bill fast-tracks logging projects and the use of toxic herbicides, all under the guise of reducing wildfire risk.Â
Passage of the bill would mean that logging projects framed as urgently needed for wildfire mitigation could move forward despite limited scientific review, minimal public input and reduced oversight by agencies with deep expertise in water quality, air pollution, habitat protection and ecosystem service impacts.
Short-circuit environmental protection and community engagement? Sounds not only environmentally unsound but also undemocratic.
Rushing environmental decisions rarely end well and can result in unintended and undesirable consequences. Fuel‑break projects can fragment habitat without improving community safety, and thinning can worsen postfire erosion and water impacts, while increasing, rather than reducing, wildfire risk. In the long run, a strong review, though time-consuming, can help minimize mistakes that are not only costly but also contribute to forest degradation and climate change, the real driver of the wildfire crisis.
We should all urge state Sen. Becker to reconsider his support for Senate Bill 1370 and the wildfire fear-mongering that likely spurred it. He should instead advocate for wildfire policies that are more community-focused and don’t degrade the places that make California special.
Jennifer Normoyle
Hillsborough
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.
Already a subscriber? Login Here
Sorry, an error occurred.
Already Subscribed!
Cancel anytime
Thank you .
Your account has been registered, and you are now logged in.
Check your email for details.
Submitting this form below will send a message to your email with a link to change your password.
An email message containing instructions on how to reset your password has been sent to the email address listed on your account.
No promotional rates found.
Secure & Encrypted
Thank you.
Your gift purchase was successful! Your purchase was successful, and you are now logged in.
| Rate: | |
| Begins: | |
| Transaction ID: |
A receipt was sent to your email.
(1) comment
Thanks for your letter, Ms. Normoyle. As long as folks are okay with wildfires, potentially expansive, continuing as folks sit on their hands discussing the process of mitigation, they can go for it. But for those who truly care about wildfires and their impact, they should take action now and as needed, fine-tune their efforts. Maybe talk to those who’ve experienced Paradise and the Palisades. I’m sure they wish some wildfire mitigation action was taken.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.