The following article was written by SC member Sam Chapman, as an LTE in the Napa Register. It was unanimously supported by the Executive Committee. (Left, Lake Hennessey)

On August 15, a majority of the Napa County Board of Supervisors, Joelle Gallagher, Anne Cottrell and Chair Belia Ramos, voted to uphold an appeal from the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) that halted a developer's effort to convert forest and natural woodlands to a vineyard.  They found that this particular proposal in this particular location was inconsistent with a number of County conservation regulations.

The CBD in their appeal pointed out that the vineyard conversion project would destroy 28 acres of forest and shrublands, block a crucial wildlife corridor, increase wildfire risk and could pollute nearby Conn Creek that feeds Lake Hennessey, the main source of Napa’s drinking water. (Right, Conn Creek. Photo credit: Save Napa Valley)

The Land Trust of Napa County pointed out that property abuts the Trust's Linda Falls nature preserve, noting that the development could disrupt wildlife corridors they have worked to create and protect.

A majority of the Napa City Council, including Mayor Sedgley, sent a letter to Board opposing the project specifically because of potential impact on the City's water supply.

In their well-documented decision, the Board majority members pointed to the project's location and potential impacts as reason for their decision.

We applaud their action.

Supervisors, noting that the project's soils are classified as highly erodible, cited inconsistencies with half a dozen different conservation policies in the County's General Plan that touched on such areas as:

• Protection of special status species and sensitive natural communities
• Sensitive domestic water supply drainage issues potentially further aggravated by climate change-caused atmospheric rivers
• Preservation of watershed open space as essential to support agriculture
• Preservation of habitat for fish and wildlife
• Limitations on development in sensitive areas next to streams
• Protection of vital wildlife corridors 

They also pointed out that the project is situated in a sensitive area next to an elementary school and child development center.

The Napa Farm Bureau in this space, in an emotion-laden statement, citing no specifics, attacked the Board's action. Their statement only undermines their own credibility, already suffering after all their candidates were defeated in the last election.

The Board of Supervisors does not serve to simply rubber stamp developments that have ticked certain boxes. If we are to safeguard our environment and the future of our valley, we need public watchdogs, on the job and protecting our interests. The three members of the Board who made this courageous decision deserve our thanks and ongoing support.

Sam Chapman, Sierra Club member; and

Napa Sierra Club Executive Committee