BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER |
| Senator Fran Pavley, Chair |
| 2013-2014 Regular Session |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BILL NO: AB 2239 HEARING DATE: June 24, 2014
AUTHOR: Chesbro URGENCY: No
VERSION: April 22, 2014 CONSULTANT: Toni Lee
DUAL REFERRAL: No FISCAL: Yes
SUBJECT: Forest practices: management plans: change of
ownership.
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
Existing law, the Z'berg-Nejedly Forest Practice Act (Act) of
1973 (Public Resources Code (PRC) §4511 et seq.), prohibits a
person from conducting timber operations on timberland unless a
harvest plan outlining the proposed logging operations has been
prepared by a registered professional forester, submitted to the
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), and
approved by the Director of Forestry and Fire Protection or the
State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection. These harvest
plans, are functionally equivalent to an environmental impact
report (EIR) under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). Violating the Act is a crime punishable with a maximum
fine of $1,000 and a maximum of 6 months jail time.
Before 2013, CAL FIRE accepted two types of harvest plans:
timber harvest plans (THPs) and nonindustrial timber management
plans (NTMPs). THPs are meant to evaluate all of the potential
impacts that might occur as a result of the logging plan and
implement measures to reduce these impacts. NTMPs (PRC §4593)
allow nonindustrial private forest (NIPF) timberland owners,
those who own less than 2,500 acres of timberlands, to prepare a
long term management plan with the objective of creating an
uneven aged timber stand (i.e. no clearcutting) and sustained
yield. The cost of preparing a NTMP is about 25 to 50% more than
a typical THP, primarily due to the required sustained yield
analysis. However, unlike a THP, which is valid for up to seven
years, an NTMP lasts in perpetuity. The additional costs
associated with an NTMP are recaptured over time since
subsequent harvest entries can be conducted under a much simpler
notice to CAL FIRE. NTMPs are transferable between landowners,
1
but expire 180 days from the date of change of ownership unless
the new owner notifies CAL FIRE in writing of his or her
assumption of the plan (PRC §4593.10).
Last year, Chesbro's AB 904 created working forest management
plans (WFMPs) (Ch. 648, Stats 2013). These plans are similar to
NTMPs, but apply to nonindustrial landowners with less than
15,000 acres of timberland and contain stricter environmental
standards (PRC §4597). If land described in the WFMP changes
ownership, the working forest landowner must notify the new
landowner of the existence of the WFMP (PRC §4597.5). In turn,
the new landowner must notify CAL FIRE in writing of the
assumption of the working forest management plan. If CAL FIRE
does not receive this notification within one year from the date
the previous owner advises the new owner to assume the plan, the
plan expires.
PROPOSED LAW
This bill:
Requires the transferring landowner of land described in
a WFMP or NTMP to:
Notify the acquiring landowner of the existence
of a WFMPs or NTMP.
Inform the acquiring landowner that he or she
must inform CAL FIRE concerning whether he or she
intends to adopt the plan.
Send CAL FIRE a copy of the notice provided to
the acquiring landowner.
Requires CAL FIRE to provide the notice to the acquiring
landowner if the transferring landowner fails to do so.
Authorizes CAL FIRE to cancel a WFMP or NTMP if the new
owner does not assume the plan within one year of receiving
the notice.
Specifies that violating these provisions does not
constitute a crime.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
The author states that this bill "provides clean up language to
make the WFMP's transfer provisions clearer and give CAL FIRE
the discretion to cancel a plan if the new landowner does not
assume it within the specified time frame. Additionally, this
bill amends the NTMP transfer of ownership language so it is
governed by the same transfer provisions contained in the WFMP
statutes."
2
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
None received
COMMENTS
1. This bill would nearly double the amount of time a new
landowner would have to assume an NTMP and give CAL FIRE
the authority to cancel the plan if the new landowner fails
to adopt the NTMP within a year. The requirement that the
previous landowner take action to ensure that the new
landowner has the necessary knowledge to adopt the NTMP
increases the likelihood of continuing the plan.
2. The Assembly Natural Resources analysis notes that in
drafting this bill, Legislative Counsel determined that
through violating the notification requirements outlined in
the bill, the transferring landowner would commit a crime.
This is not the intent of the bill. If the transferring
landowner does not provide the new landowner with notice to
assume the plan, eventually CAL FIRE will. A recent
amendment clarifies that the bill does not create a new
crime.
SUPPORT
None Received
OPPOSITION
None Received
3