| 词条 | Draft:Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC) |
| 释义 |
The Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC) is a non-profit organization based in Humboldt County, California. EPIC advocates and litigates on behalf of California’s northwestern forests, fish and wildlife, with a focus on non-federal forestry reform, federal land conservation and biodiversity protection[1]. EPIC was founded in 1977, when residents of Humboldt County came together to successfully end aerial applications of herbicides by industrial logging companies in the county. The organization has filed over 100 lawsuits on behalf of imperiled species and forested habitat. EPIC’s actions in California resource policy have been recognized by the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy, which named EPIC one of the most effective organizations in California[2]. EPIC's office headquarters are located in Arcata, CA. They host local radio shows on KMUD, KHSU, and Thursday Night Talk and are featured in the quarterly North Coast Environmental Center's Eco News Report. Successful LitigationEPIC v. Johnson (1983)EPIC v. Johnson was focused on preventing Georgia-Pacific from clear-cutting 75 acres of old growth forest, (known as the “Sally Bell Grove”), located on California’s coast at Little Jackass Creek in traditional Sinkyone Tribal territory. [3] The Sally Bell Grove is named after the last full-blooded Sinkyone Indian whose survival and resilience personified the activist and native efforts to protect the grove[4]. EPIC allied with the International Indian Treaty Council against California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and Resources Manager Ross Johnson, Acting Director Jerry Partain, the State Board of Forestry, the Secretary of the California Resources Agency, Rex Timber, Inc., and the Georgia-Pacific Corporation. EPIC prevailed in the case, prompting the California Department of Forestry and the private timber industry to consider the cumulative impacts that would result from the logging activities on natural resources of the State. EPIC’s victory in this case verified that full compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act in preparation and review of Timber Harvesting Plans, and verified that consultation with Native American Heritage Commission is required if there is evidence the timber operations could adversely affect a Native American cultural site. In 1985, the same 75-acre clear-cut Timber Harvest Plan was re-submitted, and again approved by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, with Geogria-Pacific changing only the date of submission. EPIC filed suit again-however, the impending litigation and public education attracted the interest of the Trust for Public Land. In December of 1986, the land generously purchased 7,100 acres of land from Georgia-Pacific Corporation, and donated 3,300 acres to the State. EPIC’s victory preserved the Sally Bell Grove and doubled the size of the Sinkyone Wilderness State Park.. The Sinkyone Wilderness State Park is the first Inter-Tribal Park in California where visitors are able to learn about indigenous California land stewardship and practice land restoration.[1]Marbled Murrelet and EPIC v Pacific Lumber Co. (1993)Marbled Murrelet and EPIC v Pacific Lumber Co. marked EPIC’S first federal lawsuit utilizing the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). The court determined that the Pacific Lumber Company's plans to log 237 acres of continuous old-growth forest in Owl Creek would violate section 9 of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), because the proposed logging would harass and harm the marbled murrelet, interfering with the sea-bird’s essential breeding and nesting behaviors. The court permanently enjoined the Pacific Lumber from operating on its state-approved logging plan. The Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC) was the first entity to successfully use the Endangered Species Act to enjoin logging on non-federal forest lands. EPIC’s success saved marbled murrelets critical nesting habitat. The marbled murrelet was listed as “threatened” by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service on October 1, 1992. Despite the clear prohibition against injuring or harming listed species under the ESA, Pacific Lumber illegally resumed logging in Owl Creek during Thanksgiving weekend in 1992. EPIC received an Emergency Stay from the California Court of Appeal which was able to put a stop to activity. In March 1993, Pacific Lumber extracted the illegally cut timber from November of 1992. As a result, EPIC filed suit in federal court in April of 1993. On February 2, 1994 EPIC received a Preliminary Injunction, and a permanent injunction one year later on February 27, 1995. On May 7, 1996, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed the district court judgment. As of February 18, 1997, Pacific Lumber’s final appeal was refused to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.[1]Sierra Club and EPIC v. Pacific Lumber Company (Headwaters Forest Case) (1988)EPIC jointly filed suit with the Sierra Club in this case against the California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection, the Maxxam Corporation, the Pacific Lumber Company, and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection to challenge a Pacific Lumber Timber Harvest Plan to log 325 acres of old-growth redwood and Douglas fir in Lawrence Creek and Shaw Creek, tributaries to the Van Duzen River within the Headwaters Forest Complex. A unanimous California Supreme Court decision held that the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection cannot approve logging plans which fail to include information requested by agencies with jurisdiction over natural resources to determine the impacts of proposed logging on old-growth dependent wildlife species. Significantly, the Court held that in approving a logging plan the Board must comply with the provisions of the Forest Practices Act and California Environmental Quality Act, thus affirming the standard previously established in EPIC v. Johnson. This case involved Pacific Lumber plans to cut previously unharvested old-growth forest in the Headwaters Forest Complex. Humboldt State University has compiled EPIC archives relating to the Headwaters case and has made them available to the public.[1] EPIC v CDF and PL (1999)On March 1st, 1999, the Headwaters Forest Agreement was consummated between Maxxam Corporation, the Pacific Lumber Company, the Federal Government and the State of California, transferring the 7,500-acre Headwaters Forest Reserve to the public. As part of the Headwaters Forest Agreement, a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) was agreed upon between the Pacific Lumber Company, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Marine Fisheries Service. The Maxxam Coporation and its subsidiaries, including the Pacific Lumber Company, received $480 million of federal and State funds and several thousand acres of additional forestland were transferred to the company as part of the Agreement. The California Department of Forestry (CDF) also approved a Sustained Yield Plan (SYP), for the Pacific Lumber Company timberlands, and a 50-year incidental take permit for the threatened Marbled Murrelet, and various other State-level permits for the Pacific Lumber Company (PL) were approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). EPIC filed suit on March 31, 1999 to challenge the State-approved portions of the Headwaters Forest Agreement, including the issuance of California Endangered Species Act (CESA) Incidental Take Permits in the Sacramento County Superior Court. EPIC v. CDF and PL asserted that State agency officials unlawfully approved the SYP and CESA ITP’s due to incomplete analysis of the cumulative effects the liquidation of tens of thousands of acres of old-growth and mature timberlands that would be logged. The suit also claims that the marbled murrelet Incidental Take Permit issued by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife , would allow the logging and destruction of several thousand acres of known-occupied and potentially-occupied marbled murrelet habitat. EPIC v CDF also disputed the approval of a five-year streambed alteration agreement by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife that would have authorized for the construction and placement of watercourse crossings, and related road facilities,as well as other activities including water diversions on Pacific Lumber Company property. EPIC v Caltrans (2010-Present)The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) approved the Richardson Grove project despite widespread public opposition. The project proposed to widen the highway through Richardson Grove State Park, a popular camping destination among old-growth redwoods. In response, EPIC filed two lawsuits against Caltrans, one in state court and the other in federal court. In 2011, the Northern District Court of California issued a preliminary injunction, temporarily enjoining the project. In 2012, The Northern District Court of California ordered Caltrans to revisit and re-evaluate critical aspects of it's environmental analysis, citing "faulty data".[2] In 2013, Caltrans issued a "supplement" to its previous the Environmental Impact Report (EIR). In 2014, the California Court of Appeals ruled in favor of EPIC, finding Caltrans failed to adequately consider potential impacts to old-growth redwoods. That same year, EPIC filed its third lawsuit, this time in federal court over the 2013 supplement to the EIR. EPIC settles with Caltrans, who withdrew their approval of the project. In 2017, Caltrans released new "addendum" to the EIR. EPIC filed its fourth lawsuit in state court in 2017 to protect the ancient redwood grove.[3] Humboldt Marten, California Endangered Species Act Listing (2018)The Humboldt Marten is a small, cat-like carnivore found only in old-growth forests and coastal shrubs of Oregon and Northern California. They were thought to be extinct until recently, however an estimated population of less than 200 individuals remains in California. The Marten’s low population is due to trapping and extensive logging, which has shrunk its habitat by 95 percent as well as fragmenting the population into two isolated groups. The species faces additional threats from wildfires, exposure to toxicants, cannabis cultivation, increased predation, and climate change.[4] With the extreme pressure on the Humboldt Marten population, environmental groups have sought to protect it by filing for listing under the Endangered Species Act. In 2015 the Center for Biological Diversity and the Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC) placed a scientific petition to list the species as endangered. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife, responding to the petition, recommended that the species be listed. On August 23, 2018 the California Fish and Game Commission held a public hearing, resulting in the decision to list the species as endangered. With this decision, it is illegal to take (kill) the Marten except under special circumstances.[5] References1. ^1 2 {{Cite book|title=Defending Giants: The Redwood Wars and the Transformation of American Environmental Politics|last=Speece|first=Darren|publisher=University of Washington Press|year=2017|isbn=978-0-295-99951-7|location=Seattle and London|pages=154–156, 167}} 2. ^{{Cite news|url=https://www.courthousenews.com/groups-fight-plan-widen-highway-california-redwood-grove/|title=Groups Fight Plan to Widen Highway in California Redwood Grove|date=2017-11-06|access-date=2018-09-16|language=en-US}} 3. ^{{Cite news|url=https://lostcoastoutpost.com/2017/jun/26/expected-epic-and-others-launch-new-lawsuit-agains/|title=As Expected, EPIC and Others Launch New Lawsuit Against Caltrans' Richardson Grove Improvement Project|work=Lost Coast Outpost|access-date=2018-09-15|language=en}} 4. ^{{Cite news|url=https://lostcoastoutpost.com/2018/aug/21/state-fish-game-commission-will-consider-listing-h/|title=State Fish & Game Commission Will Consider Listing the Humboldt Marten as Endangered at Thursday Meeting in Fortuna|work=Lost Coast Outpost|access-date=2018-09-27|language=en}} 5. ^{{Cite news|url=https://www.times-standard.com/2018/08/24/humboldt-marten-listed-as-an-endangered-species-in-california/|title=Humboldt marten listed as an endangered species in California|date=2018-08-24|work=Times-Standard|access-date=2018-09-27|language=en-US}} |
| 随便看 |
|
开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识，基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识，是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。