Home › News › County News
Tree cutting by railroad leaves residents fuming
Communities on Rincon say birds harmed
STORY TOOLS 
More from County NewsMalinda Chouinard was bothered when she saw trees being trimmed near northern Ventura County beaches, fearing it might hurt nesting birds in the area.
Over time, the trees were trimmed more and more until a number of the Monterey cypress near railroad tracks parallel to Highway 1 were completely removed.
Now she's just mad.
"The neighbors are unified in their outrage" said Chouinard, one of many Solimar and Faria Beach area residents who rallied around the issue. They created a flurry of e-mails and calls to residents, politicians and agencies demanding something be done about the loss of the massive trees.
Chouinard, co-founder of Patagonia, said she was told the trees were being trimmed so they didn't smack the trains.
Union Pacific railroad spokeswoman Zoe Richmond said the company often trims or removes trees along rail lines for safety reasons mandated by the Federal Railroad Administration. Because of the safety issue, and because the trees were on railroad property, no permits were needed to do the work, she said.
But Patrick Veesart, an enforcement supervisor with the California Coastal Commission, said a permit was needed. He is investigating whether the tree removal violated laws designed to protect vegetation and the wildlife that depends on it.
Veesart said the trees are within the coastal zone, which requires permits to do any work that could harm plant or animal life.
"We don't want them cutting during nesting season," he said.
Chouinard said she's found feathers from a juvenile red tailed hawk in one pile of wood chips, and other residents snapped photos of a heron walking near one of the tree stumps. She wants lawyers to get involved in the issue to determine if any laws protecting birds were violated.
At Tuesday's Board of Supervisors meeting, Supervisors John Flynn, Steve Bennett and Kathy Long said they got calls on the issue asking them to do something.
Nancy Francis, who oversees coastal issues for the Ventura County Planning Department, said she's investigating the matter. A low-level permit to do the work was needed, but none was pulled, she said.
Dave Richard, chairman of the Faria Beach Homeowners Association, said he wants to have a meeting with all the agencies, homeowners and politicians who got involved and find a way to make sure this doesn't happen again.
And, he hopes, some new trees will be planted near where the old ones were cut down.
Download this story as a podcast!
Posted by sgsebay on May 8, 2008 at 7:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Those poor millionaires. The trees were planted by the railroad as a wind break years ago. If they want to trim or remove them, it is their business, as it is on THEIR right of way.
Posted by sstflyer on May 8, 2008 at 8:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Guess who would be first to sue if those trees caught fire and burned their homes or caused a major derailment into their homes. Chouinard "wants lawyers to get involved." Yep, this is always the best solution...Call "Chuck" Somansky, the "reputable" counselor at (1)888 ....!
If they are so truly interested in the welfare of the birds, why don't they plant more trees on their property?
Posted by numonics on May 8, 2008 at 9:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
These people complaining have too much time on their hands. There are much better issues going on that you can complain about.
Posted by Ventura22 on May 8, 2008 at 10:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Yet another example of interference and manipulating from our incompetent board of supervisors. The county has no jurusdiction or authority on railroad property. What a waste of board resources to even attempt to control the railroad company that has a legal responsibility to maintain their right-of-way on their property. We know how this will end in fed. court. Federal safety regs take precedence over county. The tracks have been there a lot longer than the homes. The only half-valid issue might be the birds, but the trees will still go away, just after nesting time ends. The responsible choice would be not to even try planting trees where they will end-up growing into the tracks or blocking the engineer's view of pedestrians. Rising sea levels may take care of these morons with homes on the beach anyway.
Posted by shaver_one on May 8, 2008 at 12:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The County may not have jurisdiction, but the Coastal Commission surely does...even if on private proerty. Laws may well have been violated.
Were these trees planted as a windbreak? Or were they planted as a noise break?
Living within earshot of the Oxnard Transportation Center, we hear these trains all the time during the day and in the middle of the night. Have fun, residents of Solimar and Faria beaches, being woke up at 2:30am, 3:30am, and 5:30am.
Posted by sslocal on May 8, 2008 at 12:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Federal safety regs take precedence over county"
You are incorrect sir.
If it goes through out county the supervisors have some say in it.
Posted by res0crek on May 8, 2008 at 12:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Some of you make this issue sound as if "nothing happened". Well, I think it is pretty sad that, again, the animals are the ones that suffer at the hands of us "superior" humans. I think it's a disgrace and very cruel to cut the trees during nesting season. Had they been cut after nesting season, the resident birds would have had a whole year to find themselves new nesting grounds.
Yes, I am a bird/animal/tree hugger, so... come on and trash me, I'm ready for you guys without hearts for animals!
Posted by Ventura22 on May 8, 2008 at 1:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Negative sslocal. Railroads have many exemptions and are almost soverign territory. This goes back many years and would be an enightening history lesson for some of you. It was for me. Their property is not subject to local control and for good reasons. They answer to the feds and some state agencies. The only say the supervisors have in it is strictly for official inquiries.
Yes, the federal safety regulations they are held accountable to do take precedence "sir" and nobody at the county government level has any authority to try and interfere. This is what gets egg in the faces of inept local governments. The only thing the RR company appears to have overlooked was the wildlife issue. I'm sure this will be verified by federal and state wildlife officials to see if any birds were in fact displaced. They should have done the tree removal last month or waited another month.
Posted by ojailala on May 8, 2008 at 2:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
All of you that first posted in favor of the RR and their chain saws.... this is not about the home owners and their view, or train noise... I wish you were the ones there watching helpless birds fall from their nests.. who knows how many birds were displaced and killed. For your information, Birds of Prey are protected by law and for someone to cut down a nest full of young hawks should pay dearly... not to mention the herons... you first posters have hearts of stone and don't see the true horror of this... its about baby birds, not $$$$$ Waiting a couple months would have been kind...Shame on you!!!
Posted by SummerSun on May 8, 2008 at 4:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I loved those trees, and the nature that lived in them. They call this progress? I think not, I call it destruction of beauty!
Posted by GuideDog on May 8, 2008 at 6:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The Philistines obviously have never read Joyce Kilmer's lines:
"I think that I shall never see
A poem as lovely as a tree"
Posted by HueyChapala on May 9, 2008 at 3:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I am really mystified by the early comments which seem to show a callous disregard for our coastal habitat and a shocking amount of blind 'you rich people got it coming' jealousy. How much one's home is worth is irrelevant, except that it means they have a great personal vested interest in protecting their home. Our laws are supposed to be applied, adhered to, and enjoyed equally.
Destruction of habitat, particularly habitat that serves threatened or endangered species, is a serious issue that is governed by many federal and state laws, regardless of who does it or where it takes place.
While railroads are exampt from some laws, they are not exempt -- nor should they be exempt -- from ALL laws, particularly those addressing coastal protection and endangered species. It is time to revisit and roll back some of those exemptions that were originally granted to robber barons of great wealth and power.
It is completely within the purview of the Board of Supervisors to launch an inquiry and I would expect a responsible and responsive Board to do so aggressively. State agencies, including the Coastal Commission and State Fish and Game, have a duty to investigate, to penalize anyone found to have flouted environmental laws, and to ensure it does not happen again. Further, they can require the restoration and/or replacement of lost or degraded habitat.
Our coastal environment, which we humans depend upon, is a complex but fragile ecosystem that is a sacred trust. Let's protect it and show it the respect it deserves if only for our own sake. Or even better: for the sake of future generations and the viability of our planet.
(Requires free registration.)
Comments on this site are to be used for the discussion and/or debate of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Comments should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We don't allow the following:
We reserve the right to delete comments and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.