The EPA ratings are:
- LO Lack of Objections
- EC Environmental Concerns
- EO Environmental Objections
- EU Environmentally Unsatisfactory
- Insufficient Information
2 (Insufficient Information). The draft EIS does not contain sufficient information to fully
assess environmental impacts that should be avoided in order to fully protect the
environment, or the reviewer has identified new reasonably available alternatives that are
within the spectrum of alternatives analyzed in the draft EIS, which could reduce the
environmental impacts of the proposal. The identified additional information, data,
analyses, or discussion should be included in the final EIS.
The EPA's primary concerns are;
- Some eradicated areas may need more intensive regeneration efforts than those proposed.
- Lack of information about herbicide use.
UCB and CCC have eradicated the eucalyptus and replanted more redwoods, seen below.
|The eucalypti were recently eradicated here.|
|Little redwoods where the eucalyptus once stood|
The EPA concerns about the herbicides can be addressed by simply editing the DEIS so that the FEIS addresses the EPA concerns. The FEIS will likely pass the EPA review with a LO-1
The strategy of stopping the HFRRP through the courts is counter-productive. All that will do is slow or stop the FEMA money. UC Berkeley doesn't care, it is their land, their risk, and their money. Targeting them on this issue will be as effective as living in the trees to stop the stadium renovation was.
The City of Oakland and EBRPD don't have the resources to proceed. Holding the money up in the courts will harm the community, not the University.
Our efforts are better spent identifying areas for more intensive restoration efforts and less toxic forms of weed control.
Strong community organizations, working closely with the agencies involved, have already proven that we can eradicate the eucalyptus and return the native habitat.
Let us build on that success. Not deny it's existence.