Of trees and trains

Which comes first, sensitive habitats or
train safety?
To hear Union Pacific tell it, that's a decision
the railroad operator was forced to make
recently, when it chopped down eight cypress
trees near rail lines next to Faria Beach.
The rail line, which owns 33,000 miles of
track in the Western United states, was criticized
for removing the trees after a conservation
group reported the project to county and
state officials.
Union Pacific did act quickly to stop further
tree removals, but there is disagreement about
whether the company took that step because it
was asked to by regulators, or because it had
completed the work it set out to do. Whichever
is the case, the situation underscored the
complexity of the overlapping jurisdictions
responsible for ensuring the environmental
integrity of Ventura County's coastline and
the safety of the transportation systems passing
through the region.
Union Pacific Spokeswoman Zoe Richmond
said the trees were removed to ensure compliance
with Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA) safety standards. The trees were on the
company's private property, she said, and were
hitting trains as they passed by.
"That's something that can be a potential
safety hazard," she said. "Throughout the system
we're always making sure that the rightof-
way is cleared of trees and other debris."
Richmond said her company is aware of
the concerns that were expressed over the tree
removal and that Union Pacific was talking to
various agencies about issues that may come
up in connection with this or similar projects,
but she said the federal regulations trump
local concerns.
In a letter sent May 5 to Pat Veesert of the
California Coastal Commission, Alan Sanders,
the conservation chair of the Los Padres
Chapter of the Sierra Club, said some of
the trees removed supported nesting herons
and other species. Later, during a telephone
interview with the Reporter, Anders said lab
tests on feathers found in some downed nests
confirmed that red tail hawks were among the
other species involved.
"We're all for maintenance and conducting
activities to ensure safety, but this is obviously
a situation where they really needed to talk
to some people," Sanders said. "Even if they
were given permission to cut these trees down
they probably would have been told not this
time of year.
"This looks like two different agencies
saying two very different things," she said,
referring to the FRA and the California
Coastal Commission.
Veesert said he talked to several representatives
of Union Pacific as well as the
company's contractor to figure out what happened,
and the parties agreed to suspend
the tree cutting activity. He said he did an
initial investigation because members of the
public contacted him, but the matter was the
responsibility of the Ventura County planning
department. Still, he said, he understood
the railroad has a vegetation management
plan and must abide by federal rules.
"We're not trying to second guess the RR
and second guess the federal government," he
said. "No one's telling them they shouldn't do
their safety or maintenance work on their rail
corridors. What we are saying is there might
be a more appropriate time to do that work."
Sanders said it took days to get through
to Veesert after receiving numerous calls
on May 1 and 2 from residents near Faria
concerned the tree cutting threatened the
habitats of local species (some of them found
nests in the falling trees). He sent letters to
the commission and the county to look into
the matter, but he was worried the move
would be too late, as some of the trees may
have already been chipped up.
"People feel there may have been evidence
contained within the downed trees," he said.
"Unfortunately it may be that they've done
this many times in the past and no one paid
any notice. If it's something that's happened
before, the reality is responsible agencies don't
have people out on the ground much of the
time. Most of the times its civilians who take
notice and they don't know who to contact."
Sanders said there simply is not enough
enforcement of environmental laws, and activists
are stepping in to make sure regulations
are followed.
"Most of my colleagues are all, in effect,
doing work that you would expect someone
else to be getting paid to do," he said. "For whatever
reason the work is not getting done."
County planners would not comment on
their role and any measures they could take
to prevent future tree cutting, whether Union
Pacific violated any local rules, or if there are
any mitigation measures the company will
have to take to compensate for any damage the
removal may have done.
Steve Bennett, the county supervisor
whose district includes Faria Beach, said planners
would not comment until they had fully
reviewed its coastal plan and examined what
control the county can exert over actions such
as Union Pacific's.
Constituents contacted Bennett and fellow
supervisor John Flynn to complain about the
tree removals.
Despite Veesert's claim Union Pacific
stopped cutting trees after he contacted them,
Bennett said the coastal commission was not
responsible for halting the operation. Instead,
the supervisor said, the company stopped cutting
the trees because it had already finished
the job it set out to do.
"Anybody could say it was their phone call
that got it to stop," Bennett said.
He also said he asked planners to see what
they can do to make sure a similar situation
doesn't arise in the future.
"What I'm trying to find out, and we have
already talked to our planning department, is
the next time we change our coastal plan we
want to increase our ability to have control over
these types of things," said Bennett, who admitted
that there is a constant tension between
local sovereignty and federal law. "So far we
haven't found anything that says we have the
ability to stop them from doing that but we are
committed to updating our ordinance."