| 
						  
						   For Immediate Release, November 28, 2018 
                          Contact: Peter Galvin, (707) 986-2600, [email protected] 
                          Court  Hears Arguments to Stop Destructive Highway-widening Project Through Ancient  California Redwoods 
                          
                          SAN FRANCISCO— Conservation groups and  Humboldt residents appeared in federal court today for a hearing on a legal  challenge to Caltrans’ controversial “Richardson Grove Operational Improvement  Project.” The project would needlessly damage and harm ancient redwood trees in  California’s iconic Richardson Grove State Park along Highway 101 in Humboldt  County. 
                          The highway-widening project would damage  the roots of more than 100 of Richardson Grove’s ancient redwoods, including  trees up to 3,000 years old, 18 feet in diameter and 300 feet tall. Caltrans  has pursued this project solely to incrementally improve passage for oversized  commercial trucks, and continues to rely on inadequate environmental review. 
                          “These are some of California’s oldest  and most iconic trees. It’s ridiculous that Caltrans continues to push a plan  to hack into them just to accommodate a few more huge trucks,” said Peter  Galvin with the Center for Biological Diversity. “The redwoods of Richardson  Grove have survived for thousands of years, and we’ll continue fighting to keep  these ancient trees intact.” 
                          At today’s hearing before Judge William  Alsup in the U.S. District Court in San Francisco, the plaintiffs and Caltrans presented  motions for summary judgment, with each side arguing that its case should  prevail as a matter of fact and law without going to trial. The motions are  under submission and a court ruling is forthcoming. 
                          Litigation against the Caltrans  project in Richardson Grove has been pursued in both state and federal court.  In 2012 the federal court issued a temporary injunction stopping the project,  citing numerous errors in Caltrans’ mapping and measurement of affected  old-growth redwoods and use of faulty data. The state court ruled in May 2018 against  a Caltrans motion to dismiss the state lawsuit. 
                          Background  
                            The federal  lawsuit challenges Caltrans’ violations of the National Environmental Policy  Act due to inadequate evaluation of the environmental impacts of cutting into  tree roots. The suit also alleges violations of the Transportation Act, which  requires highway projects with federal funding to minimize harm to natural  resources in state parks.  
                          The lawsuit  was filed by the Center for Biological Diversity, Environmental Protection  Information Center, Friends of Del Norte, Californians for Alternatives to  Toxics, and longtime local residents Bess Bair, Trisha Lee Lotus, Jeffrey Hedin  and David Spreen.  
                          Previous legal challenges had blocked  construction and forced Caltrans to rescind all project approvals in 2014. The  agency reapproved the project in 2017, claiming it had made significant changes.  However, Caltrans still intends to cut into tree roots, threatening the stability  and viability of old-growth redwoods. The conservation groups also filed suit in  state court challenging the new project approval. 
                          Richardson  Grove State Park, where tourists often first encounter large redwoods when  heading north on Highway 101, is home to one of the last protected stands of  accessible old-growth redwood trees in the world. The park has essential  habitat for threatened and endangered species such as the northern spotted owl,  and its creeks support runs of imperiled salmon and steelhead trout. 
                          Caltrans  first proposed the project in 2007, claiming the widening is needed to  accommodate large-truck travel. But Highway 101 through Richardson Grove is  already designated for larger trucks and does not have significant safety problems.  The agency cannot demonstrate that the project is necessary for safety or would  benefit the local economy. 
                          The attorneys for the plaintiffs in this suit are Philip  Gregory; Stuart Gross of Gross & Klein LLP; and Sharon Duggan, a staff  attorney with EPIC and a long-time expert on environmental law. 
                                      
                     |