BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2424
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 7, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
Wesley Chesbro, Chair
AB 2424 (Portantino) - As Introduced: February 24, 2012
SUBJECT : Forest resources: timberlands
SUMMARY : Declares that it is the policy of the state to
encourage prudent and responsible forest resource management
calculated to serve the public's need for timber and other
forest products, while giving equal consideration to the
public's need for watershed protection, fisheries and wildlife,
sequestration of carbon dioxide, and recreational opportunities
alike in this and future generations.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Establishes the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
(Department), which is responsible for the fire protection,
fire prevention, maintenance, and enhancement of the state's
forest, range, and brushland resources, contract fire
protection, associated emergency services, and assistance in
civil disasters and other nonfire emergencies.
2)Creates within the Department the State Board of Forestry and
Fire Protection (Board), which consists of nine members
appointed by the Governor. The Board is required to protect
the state's interest in forest resources on private lands,
which includes establishing adequate forest policy and
determining general policies for the Department.
3)Declares that it is the policy of the state to encourage
prudent and responsible forest resource management calculated
to serve the public's need for timber and other forest
products, while giving consideration to the public's need for
watershed protection, fisheries and wildlife, sequestration of
carbon dioxide, and recreational opportunities alike in this
and future generations.
THIS BILL declares that it is the policy of the state to
encourage prudent and responsible forest resource management
calculated to serve the public's need for timber and other
forest products, while giving equal consideration to the
public's need for watershed protection, fisheries and wildlife,
AB 2424
Page 2
sequestration of carbon dioxide, and recreational opportunities
alike in this and future generations.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose of the Bill. According to the author,
A question has arisen �at] the Board of Forestry
about?the Legislature's intent language about the
Forest Practice Act that states in part: '�It is the
policy of the state to encourage prudent and
responsible forest resource management calculated to
serve the public's need for timber and other forest
products] while giving consideration to the public's
need for watershed protection, fisheries and wildlife,
and recreational opportunities alike in this and
future generations.' The question was does 'giving
consideration' �mean] equal consideration? The
�Attorney General] ruled that it did and this bill
�codifies] that opinion.
2)Background. In a January 5, 2009 letter (not a formal
opinion) to the Board of Forestry, a deputy attorney general
advised (not ruled) the following:
�T]he explicit language of the �Forest Practice Act]
requires that the Board balance timber production and
protection and restoration of forest resources.
However, the �Forest Practice Act] does not require
that this balance be affirmatively struck in favor of
timber production or otherwise constrain the weight
the Board may give to protection and restoration of
other natural resource values provided by timberlands
in the rules and regulations promulgated by the Board.
Nor do CEQA, CESA or any other statute otherwise
constrain the Board's discretion in this regard.
Indeed, if anything, both CEQA and CESA assure that
forest resources, including imperiled species and
their habitat, be protected during timber operations
and thus balance the Board's authority to weigh too
heavily in favor of timber production.
Asserting, as the author does, that this letter supports
AB 2424
Page 3
giving equal consideration to timber production and protection
and restoration is technically incorrect and could have the
consequence of harming the environment. The deputy attorney
general's letter supports a balancing test, not an equal
consideration test. According to The Essential Dictionary of
Law 27 (2004), "balance" is defined as "compar�ing] the value
of one thing with another. "Equal" is defined as "hav�ing]
the same value, size, degree, or quantity."
If the Board "balances" timber production against protection
and restoration, it could determine, for example, that
timberlands with sensitive habitat must be protected more than
a property owner's right to harvest timber. In this
situation, under a balancing test, protecting the sensitive
habitat can be treated as more valuable than producing the
timber. However, if the Board has to give "equal
consideration," it is forced to review the timber harvest
operation and the sensitive habitat at the same level. This
could lead to unintended environmental issues.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Forests Forever (sponsor)
California Native Plant Society
Sierra Club California
Opposition
Associated California Loggers
California Cattlemen's Association
California Farm Bureau
California Forestry Association
California Chamber of Commerce
California Licensed Foresters Association
Fullerton Chamber of Commerce
Sierra Pacific Industries
Southwest California Legislative Council
Analysis Prepared by : Mario DeBernardo / NAT. RES. / (916)
319-2092
AB 2424
Page 4