09/04/2026
BRANSCOMB, Calif. – September 4, 2026 – The Superior Court of Mendocino County on Wednesday September 2nd granted a preliminary injunction in litigation challenging the "Hot Tuna" and "Lincoln Logs" timber harvest plans in the Dutch Charlie watershed. This injunction keeps logging under these plans halted until the court makes a final ruling.
Friends of Dutch Charlie Creek, a small grassroots organization, is in litigation against Cal Fire and Redwood Timber Company to halt logging under the "Hot Tuna" and "Lincoln Logs" timber harvest plans (THPs) situated in the Dutch Charlie Creek watershed. The Court of Appeal had ordered a halt to timber operations on August 17. This September 2 order by Judge Charlotte Scott comes after a well-attended hearing at the Ukiah courthouse on August 27.
Friends of Dutch Charlie Creek claim that the creek is one of the last reliable spawning and rearing habitats for California's endangered coho salmon, and that surveys consistently show the creek having the highest coho redd density of all tributaries to the South Fork Eel River, which they claim is home to the most consistently abundant coho population in California. The group claims that this habitat is crucial to the continued recovery of the population, pointing to a state document describing Dutch Charlie Creek as a "stronghold" of coho salmon (source).
The Court of Appeal's August 17 order stated that Redwood Timber Company (RTC) "shall not engage in any timber operations" except "protective actions to protect water quality and other resources."
Four days after this order, on August 21, Cal Fire inspected the site and "observed an excavator constructing proposed road" and observed RTC continuing to yard and haul logs from the site. (source) On August 27, RTC informed the court that it estimated it had felled 776 acres, and yarded/skidded logs from 186 acres, with 590 acres left to yard or skid. Friends of Dutch Charlie Creek claim that continuing to construct roads and yard/skid logs violated the court's order.
RTC claimed that it needs to immediately remove logs because they "represent a HUGE FIRE HAZARD" (source). Friends of Dutch Charlie Creek consider this a specious excuse to continue commercial timber operations, claiming that the plans allow all logging slash – i.e. branches and treetops which are much more combustible than logs – to remain on site for the duration of the fire season (source) and that RTC has nowhere indicated that it intended to remove slash from the THP sites, and that Cal Fire's inspection report does not mention there being a fire hazard.
Friends of Dutch Charlie Creek contend that RTC raced to fell all of the trees in an apparent attempt to render the lawsuit moot before the court might order RTC to halt. Gualala Redwood Timber, which like RTC is owned by the Burch family, had done exactly this in a recent case. Friends claim this was a reckless action, and that yarding/skidding and hauling of logs are primary sources of the irreparable harm that the injunction is intended to prevent (source).
The Superior Court's September 2 order specifies what protective actions are allowed under the order, stating that "Logs may be removed at the locations in each THP which CalFire has opined through such notices of inspection that Forest Practice Rules require installation of waterbreaks on opened tractor roads and cable roads."
Friends of Dutch Charlie Creek claim that the Dutch Charlie watershed is steep and unstable terrain with large wetlands along the middle reach of the creek where coho spawn and rear, and that these timber harvest plans include numerous exceptions to the standard Forest Practice Rules, to allow tractor logging on steep unstable slopes (source) and in these wetlands, use of legacy haul roads immediately adjacent to the creek (source), construction of new roads near the creek (source), and felling of unmarked trees in the buffer zones along the creek (source). They claim this would lead to landslides and erosion and deliver fine sediment into Dutch Charlie Creek, which would smother coho redds, fill pools and eliminate habitat for the aquatic insects that juvenile coho rely on for food. They also claim that soil compaction and hydrologic changes from logging would increase destructive flooding during storms, and make pools shallower and warmer in the summer, eliminating coho rearing habitat. (Sources at www.savethecoho.org/comments)
Friends of Dutch Charlie Creek claim that these exceptions to the Rules directly contradict recommendations made by the California Dept of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) (source) for protection of this priority coho habitat, when a similar THP was proposed on the same harvest area and then withdrawn in 2021. The "Hot Tuna" and "Lincoln Logs" THPs were submitted in 2025. Friends of Dutch Charlie Creek say that CDFW did not respond when the group notified CDFW that the new Plans did not follow CDFW's prior recommendations. Cal Fire approved the "Hot Tuna" and "Lincoln Logs" THPs on July 2 and 3, and RTC began logging on July 3 (source). Friends of Dutch Charlie Creek filed their lawsuit on July 7.
Friends of Dutch Charlie Creek are suing on the grounds that the THPs fail to assess their impacts on coho salmon habitat. One of these potential impacts is the delivery of fine sediment into streams due to soil disturbance, in particular from construction and use of roads and yarding/skidding of logs. Friends of Dutch Charlie Creek and geomorphologist Dr. William Dietrich and fishery biologist Patrick Higgins submitted public comments in 2025 during review of the H, regarding these potential impacts. RTC's counsel claims "There is no evidence in the record that the logging operations will cause additional sediment delivery to the relevant stream system" (source). The THPs also state that "construction and use of forest and ranch roads" is a "major contributing factor" to "the sedimentation of watercourses". (source) The THPs include 3 miles of new road construction including on steep slopes and near the creek (source), in addition to the extremely dense existing road network in the harvest area (source). Friends of Dutch Charlie Creek claim that the THPs do not mention or assess the potential sediment impacts from construction or use of these roads, and that this violates the California Environmental Quality Act.
While the lawsuit focuses on sediment impacts, Friends of Dutch Charlie Creek are also concerned about other impacts, including impacts to stream flows and stream temperature, soil loss, harm to the soil and aquatic habitat from toxic herbicides, loss of wildlife habitat and forest diversity from eradication of tanoak and madrone, and long term increase to catastrophic wildfire risk. Friends claim that fire risk will increase because the largest trees which are less vulnerable to fire will be replaced by dense regrowth of smaller young trees which are highly flammable, and the landscape will become dryer and warmer due to loss of soil and greater exposure to sun and wind.
Friends of Dutch Charlie Creek is an all-volunteer grassroots organization dedicated to protecting the Dutch Charlie Creek watershed.
