BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2029|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2029
Author: Dahle (R), Gordon (D) and Wood (D)
Amended: 8/16/16 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE NATURAL RES. & WATER COMMITTEE: 7-0, 6/28/16
AYES: Pavley, Stone, Hertzberg, Hueso, Jackson, Monning, Vidak
NO VOTE RECORDED: Allen, Wolk
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 6-0, 8/11/16
AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza, Nielsen
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bates
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0, 6/1/16 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Timber harvesting plans: exemptions
SOURCE: Author
DIGEST: This bill extends the Forest Fire Prevention Pilot
Project (Pilot Project) from January 1, 2018 to January 1, 2021,
expands the diameter of larger trees that could be harvested on
forest land without a timber harvest plan and requires a report
to the Legislature, as specified.
ANALYSIS: Existing law, pursuant to the Z'Berg-Nejedly
Forest Practice Act and other statutes:
1)Prohibits timber operations unless a timber harvest plan (THP)
has been prepared by a registered professional forester and
AB 2029
Page 2
approved by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
(CDF).
2)Considers a THP to be the functional equivalent of an
environmental impact report (EIR) under the California
Environmental Quality Act.
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 adopted by the
Board of Forestry and Fire Protection (Board).
4)Establishes numerous statutory exemptions from the above
provisions that include Christmas tree farms, rights-of-way
for utility lines, conversions of less than three acres, fire
prevention, defensible space, and dead, dying and diseased
trees.
5)Provides that these exemptions do not require the interagency
review that is required of THPs, and they are often approved
ministerially based only on a submission from the landowner or
a registered professional forester hired by the landowner.
Such submissions are called a notice of exemption.
6)Provides a separate exemption for the emergency removal of
fuel hazards that allows for trees to be removed that are up
to 30 inches in diameter without a THP.
7)Names one of these exemptions as the Forest Fire Prevention
Pilot Project. This Pilot Project exemption is subject to
the following restrictions on harvesting as well as other
conditions:
a) Only trees less than 24 inches in stump diameter are
eligible;
AB 2029
Page 3
b) Tree harvesting must decrease fuel continuity and
increase quadratic mean diameter of the stand;
c) No new road construction or reconstruction;
d) No known sites of rare, threatened, or endangered plants
or animals will be disturbed, threatened, or damaged;
e) The activities are limited to the Sierra Nevada Region
or the Counties of Del Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino, Modoc,
Sonoma, Siskiyou, or Trinity;
f) CDF is required to conduct an onsite inspection after
harvest operations to determine compliance with the
provisions of this exemption;
g) The exemption may be used on parcels of 300 acres or
less; and
h) The Pilot Project sunsets three years after the
effective date of regulations adopted by the Board which in
this case is January 1, 2018.
This bill extends the Pilot Project from January 1, 2018 to
January 1, 2021, expands the diameter of larger trees that could
be harvested on forest land without a THP and requires a report
to the Legislature, as specified.
Comments
Accountability and the legislative report. CDF and the Board
are required to review and submit a report to the Legislature
regarding the Pilot Project and exemptions, among other things,
by December 31, 2017. Should the report not be submitted, the
AB 2029
Page 4
appropriate Senate Budget Sub-Committee or the Senate Natural
Resources and Water Committee are required to hold a hearing.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:YesLocal: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, this bill has
unknown costs (Timber Regulation and Forest Restoration Fund),
to the CDF.
SUPPORT: (Verified8/15/16)
American Insurance Association
Associated California Loggers
CAL FIRE Local 2881
Calforests
California Cattlemen's Association
California Chamber of Commerce
California Farm Bureau Federation
California Licensed Foresters Association
California Professional Firefighters
California Ski Industry Association
California State Association of Counties
Forest Landowners of California
Forest Products Industry National Labor Management Committee
Green Diamond Resource Company
Lyme Redwood Forest Company
Michigan-California Timber Company
Pacific Forest Trust
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Personal Insurance Federation of California
Placer Land Trust
Property Casualty Insurers Association of America
Roseburg
Rural County Representatives of California
Sierra Business Council
Sierra Foothill Conservancy
Sierra Pacific Industries
AB 2029
Page 5
SMUD
Soper-Wheeler Company
Truckee Donner Land Trust
W.M. Beaty & Associates
One individual
OPPOSITION: (Verified8/15/16)
California Native Plant Society
Center for Biological Diversity
Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch
Environmental Protection Information Center
Sierra Club California
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author, the Pilot
Project has thus far treated about 2,000 acres and those who
have used the exemption have reported barriers which include:
(1) lack of access to land which is why the author seeks
language to include a road construction amendment; (2) lands in
counties that have some lands within the boundaries of the
Sierra Nevada Conservancy but some lands not within the
conservancy are unable to use the exemption on those lands not
within the conservancy's boundaries; (3) the diameter limitation
of 24 inches is too restrictive; and (4) the 2018 sunset is fast
approaching and California continues to face a high risk of
catastrophic wildfire.
Numerous other supporters include timber companies and others in
the timber business, regional organizations and land trusts from
the Sierra, firefighter organizations, landowner associations,
and others all of whom make basically the same points:
1)Too much of California's forests are unnaturally dense because
of decades of fire suppression. The treatment authorized by
the exemption could help improve the resilience of
California's forests to fire, pests, and disease.
2)Forest jobs are important in rural counties and offer a
counterpoint to the trend of the underground drug economy.
3)The ongoing drought is damaging forests with a huge die-off of
trees. If consumed by wildfires, not only will the result be
AB 2029
Page 6
greenhouse gas emissions, but the ability of the forests to
sequester carbon and provide other environmental benefits such
as wildlife habitat and contributions to the state's water
supply will be adversely affected.
4)Two companies that used the exemption, Beaty and Associates
and Green Diamond, complained that the exemption is
economically infeasible, in part because the prohibition on
harvesting larger diameter trees could not then offset the
costs of removing smaller diameter trees. In two other
situations, the companies said that the 24 inch limitation
prevented the removal of unhealthy or overstocked trees that
were greater than 24 inches in diameter.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: There is significant opposition to
this bill from three environmental organizations with extensive
forestry experience: the Sierra Club, the Environmental
Protection Information Center, and the Center for Biological
Diversity. Their points include:
1)The alleged benefits of thinning forests are scientifically
disputed although there is general agreement that removing
small diameter trees that are densely packed together have
positive benefits on reducing fire risk.
2)Larger trees are more resilient to fire, and provide numerous
environmental benefits, including carbon sequestration, so
expanding the diameter of trees is counter-intuitive, except
for their commercial value as logs. Large trees serve as a
seed source following a fire.
3)The proposed increase in tree diameter smacks of commercial
logging without any environmental review.
4)Removal of larger trees increases the likelihood that more
flammable ground vegetation and smaller trees will
proliferate.
5)Larger trees are already in short supply because of
over-logging, and removing more of them will impair forest
health in many stands.
6)This bill is premature and, although the exemption has been
expanded by previous legislation, there has been no evaluation
AB 2029
Page 7
of the exemption by CDF.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0, 6/1/16
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Arambula, Atkins, Baker,
Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke,
Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley,
Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth
Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto,
Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper,
Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim,
Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis,
Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte,
O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez,
Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting,
Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon
Prepared by:William Craven / N.R. & W. / (916) 651-4116
8/16/16 18:04:06
**** END ****