BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



          SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER
                             Senator Fran Pavley, Chair
                                2015 - 2016  Regular 

          Bill No:            AB 1958         Hearing Date:    June 28,  
          2016
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Author:    |Wood                   |           |                 |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Version:   |June 21, 2016    Amended                             |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Urgency:   |No                     |Fiscal:    |Yes              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Consultant:|William Craven                                       |
          |           |                                                     |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          
            Subject:  Forestry: timberlands: restoration and conservation  
                            forest management activities


          BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
           
             1)   Prohibits timber operations unless a timber harvest plan  
               (THP) has been prepared by a registered professional  
               forester and approved by the California Department of  
               Forestry (CDF).  


             2)   Considers a THP the functional equivalent of an  
               environmental impact report (EIR) under the California  
               Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 


             3)   Requires a THP to contain a description of the location  
               of the planned harvest, the harvest method, measures to  
               avoid excessive erosion, timeframe of operations, and other  
               information required by forest practice rules (FPR) adopted  
               by the Board of Forestry (Board). 


             4)   Requires any person who owns timberlands that are to be  
               devoted to uses other than the growing of timber to file a  
               timberland conversion permit with the Board. Prohibits the  
               Board from approving a timberland conversion permit unless  
               the Board makes written findings. 







          AB 1958 (Wood)                                          Page 2  
          of ?
          
          


             5)   Exempts many timber removal activities from the  
               regulatory requirements of THPs, including Christmas tree  
               farms, right-of-ways for utility lines, conversions of less  
               than three acres, fire prevention, defensible space, and  
               dead, dying, and diseased trees. Exemptions are often  
               ministerial, requiring no multi-agency review, but are  
               subject to inspection by CDF. 


             6)   The University of California, Agriculture and Natural  
               Resources, Cooperative Extension office in Eureka provided  
               background information that indicates clear patterns of  
               conifer encroachment in white oak and black oak systems  
               across the North Coast region. Even young conifers are  
               larger than many older oak trees, and that the dominance of  
               trees like Douglas firs can occur in as little as 50 years.  
               Oaks woodlands have conservation values that are worthy of  
               preservation as biological hotspots, and as fire- and  
               drought-resistant woodlands. 






          PROPOSED LAW
          This bill creates an exemption for the restoration of oak  
          woodlands that would allow landowners to remove conifer trees  
          that are crowding out oaks provided various restrictions are  
          met. 

          ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
          According to the author, oak woodlands are the most biodiverse  
          terrestrial ecosystems in California and are disappearing at a  
          rapid rate. In some parts of the state, a significant issue is  
          the encroachment of conifers in oak woodlands. Conifers grow  
          rapidly and quickly provide excessive shade that kills oaks,  
          some of which have survived for hundreds of years. Historically,  
          low intensity, but frequent fires prevented this phenomenon, but  
          under our current fire regime the firs are successfully choking  
          out the oaks. 









          AB 1958 (Wood)                                          Page 3  
          of ?
          
          
          AB 1958, the author states, clarifies that restoring oak  
          woodlands through the removal of conifers does not require a  
          timber harvest plan from landowners who want to restore their  
          oak woodlands. 

          Pacific Birds, a habitat joint venture of public agencies and  
          nonprofits, points out that habitat losses in oak woodlands  
          exceed 90 percent in some areas and several oak-dependent bird  
          species have been extirpated from significant portions of the  
          region because of conifers becoming increasingly dominant in  
          many oak woodlands. This group states that this bill would  
          enable private landowners who are interested in oak woodland  
          restoration to face fewer hurdles in accomplishing that goal.   
          This view is shared by the Rural County Representatives of  
          California. 


          ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
          None received

          COMMENTS
             1.   While this proposed exemption is very well-intended, the  
               Committee has become concerned with the over-use of  
               exemptions for the purposes of commercial harvesting of  
               trees. These exemptions are generally ministerial, with no  
               discretionary review by CDF or any of the other sister  
               agencies that normally review THPs such as the Department  
               of Fish and Wildlife or a regional water board. Much of the  
               data regarding exemptions is contained in the analysis of  
               AB 2029 (Dahle) also heard this date by the Committee. 

          The Committee recommends that language be placed into the bill  
          that directs CDF and the other trustee agencies to make  
          recommendations to the Legislature on how the use of these  
          exemptions can be reduced, and how multi-agency review of  
          harvesting activities can be increased. Staff notes that  
          multi-agency review was the primary intent of AB 1492 (Cmte. on  
          Budget, c.289, statutes of 2012) which established the fee on  
          lumber products that is paid by consumers. This direction to CDF  
          could also involve some participation by the public, which would  
          strengthen the final work product. To the extent feasible, any  
          agency costs for developing these recommendations should come  
          from the fund balance in the AB 1492 special fund, and not the  
          general fund.  The recommendations would be due on or before  








          AB 1958 (Wood)                                          Page 4  
          of ?
          
          
          December 31, 2017. (Amendment 1) 

             2.   The bill contains a sunset date of 7 years after the  
               adoption of appropriate rules and regulations by the Board  
               of Forestry, which seems too long. The bill directs the  
               Board to finish regulations by January 1, 2018, so the  
               seven years could extend until January, 2025. 

          AB 2029 (Dahle) proposed a sunset extension until 2023, which  
          staff recommended should instead go until 2020. 

          In the interest of fairness, staff recommends that the sunset in  
          this bill also be set for December 31, 2020 so that it can be  
          evaluated for its effectiveness and considered in the context of  
          the department's review of all exemptions and emergency notice  
          provisions. (Amendment 2)



          SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS 
          
          AMENDMENT 1
               Direct CDF and other trustee agencies to make  
          recommendations to the   Legislature on how the use of  
          exemptions and emergency notices can be reduced, and how  
          multi-agency review of harvesting activities can be increased.  
          Any costs from this analysis and reporting shall be paid by the  
          special fund established by AB 1492 which is intended to pay the  
          public costs associated with       the multi-agency review of  
          timber harvest activities. This review should be done  in a  
          public process with an opportunity for public participation. The  
               recommendations would be due on or before December 31,  
          2017. 

          AMENDMENT 2
               Reduce sunset to January 2020. 

          SUPPORT
          Pacific Birds Habitat Joint Venture
          Rural County Representatives of California
          Pacific Forest Trust
          Trust for Public Land
          The Nature Conservancy









          AB 1958 (Wood)                                          Page 5  
          of ?
          
          

          OPPOSITION
          None Received

          
                                      -- END --