GREENFIELD — There are many reasons the Wendell State Forest Alliance wanted to “have our day in court,” they told Judge Mark Mason in Franklin County Superior Court Tuesday.
Citing concerns about climate change, endangered species and the recreational value of the woods, the 29 co-plaintiffs are suing the state’s Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), alleging the logging of 100-year-old oak trees on an 80-acre stand in Wendell State Forest over the summer broke numerous state laws and regulations.
Tuesday, they argued against a motion to dismiss the case, presented by Assistant Attorney General Kendra Kinscherf. Ultimately, Mason listened to both sides and said he would rule on the motion in 60 to 90 days, calling the issue “complex.”
Following the hearing, lead-plaintiff and retired regional health agent Glen Ayers was optimistic and said he was pleased that the judge listened thoroughly to the group’s arguments.
“He heard us. He was paying attention. He wasn’t sleeping up there,” Ayers said. “Yes, this is about Wendell, but it’s also about so much more.”
The Wendell State Forest Alliance is not represented by a lawyer, and the group is not asking for any money in the suit. Rather, they explained to Mason, they would like a declaration or recognition that the DCR’s actions were wrong, so that a similar project won’t happen in other forests.
“We’re just a group of concerned citizens. We don’t have money for a lawyer. The only thing we have is the integrity with which we stand, and our minds and our bodies,” said alliance member James Thornley.
The group’s protests began in fall 2018, when the group now called the Wendell State Forest Alliance held signs along Route 2 protesting the proposed logging project. Over the following year, protesters held rallies at the forest, circulated petitions and sent letters to the governor. Once logging began in the summer, protesters tried to physically stop the project by standing in the way of loggers or equipment, and even chaining themselves by trees, actions which led to more than 30 arrests.
They filed the lawsuit against the state in August, asking for a “preliminary injunction” to halt the project — a motion that was denied.
Kinscherf said Tuesday the “entirety of the complaint” against DCR should be dismissed, and noted that logging already finished up in September.
“The action, the selective cutting of trees in Wendell State Forest, has completed, so now their claims are moot,” she said.
Kinscherf said the state accepts several of the protesters’ assertions — there are rare Jefferson salamanders in the forest, and climate change is a concern.
However, she argued that DCR broke no laws in carrying out the project as established stewards of public forests. She said only a small parcel of the more than 8,000-acre forest had been logged during the project.
Previously, Kinscherf had also argued the logging project was done to improve the health of the forest by removing diseased trees. DCR Commissioner Leo Roy, in a meeting with the Wendell Selectboard, also said the project is best for combating climate change in the long run by keeping a diverse forest of healthy trees that will continually sequester carbon from the atmosphere.
The Wendell State Forest Alliance disagrees, and said in court that the forest should be untouched in order to sequester the most carbon now, in the midst of a “climate crisis.”
“We face a grave and growing danger,” said alliance member Bill Stubblefield. “If given a chance, we will prove these assertions through the discovery process and introduction of expert witnesses.”
Priscilla Lynch, another member, said the case should be allowed to go forward in order to show the damage done to the forest’s recreational value in court.
“That forest mattered to people, it had significance to people and the damage done to that forest is an unending harm,” she said. “The DCR are the stewards of the forest. They are not the owners of the forest. We are the owners of the forest.”
Gia Neswald, an alliance member, called into question the procedures leading up to the logging. She said that DCR projects may be appealed, but the DCR itself is the authority that rules on the appeal, a procedural “absurdity,” she said. She also said that, while the DCR claims public input was allowed, there is “absolutely no evidence” that the “substantial” comments the group submitted to the DCR were considered at all.
Mary Thomas, a member of the Wendell Conservation Commission, said the lawsuit should continue because it violates state laws protecting endangered species. She said the DCR reduced its established buffer zone of 1,000 feet away from Jefferson salamander vernal pools to 50 feet for the project.
Ayers brought up case law that has established such logging projects can’t happen unless essential to the “quiet enjoyment of the facilities” by the people.
He said he is encouraged that the judge is taking at least 60 days to decide how to rule.
Reach David McLellan at dmclellan@recorder.com or 413-772-0261, ext. 268.