BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER |
| Senator Fran Pavley, Chair |
| 2013-2014 Regular Session |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BILL NO: AB 2142 HEARING DATE: June 24, 2014
AUTHOR: Chesbro URGENCY: No
VERSION: June 17, 2014 CONSULTANT: Bill Craven
DUAL REFERRAL: No FISCAL: No
SUBJECT: State forests: sale of timber.
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
1. Existing law assigns forestry regulation and timber harvest
regulation to the California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection (CDF). Generally, landowners and commercial timber
companies are prohibited from conducting timber operations
unless a timber harvest plan (THP) or another similar permit has
been prepared by a registered professional forester and approved
by the CDF. The Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency has
certified that a THP is the functional equivalent of an
environmental impact report (EIR) under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
2. However, there are also exemptions from the permitting
process and one of those exemptions is the Forest Fire
Prevention Exemption often referred to as the "La Malfa
Exemption" for timber removal that assists in reducing fire risk
and that meets various conditions:
a) The harvesting must occur on parcels of 300 acres or less;
b) The harvesting must decrease fuel continuity (both vertically
and horizontally);
c) The harvesting must result in making the average diameter of
the trees that remain in the stand larger than the average
diameter of the trees in the stand prior to the fuel reduction
activities;
d) A registered professional forester must prepare the notice of
exemption;
e) The level of residual stocking must be consistent with
maximum sustained production of high-quality timber products;
f) The activities must comply with the regulations that protect
archaeological sites; and
g) Only trees less than 18 inches in stump diameter, measured at
1
8 inches above ground level, may be removed. However, within 500
feet of a legally permitted structure, or in an area prioritized
as a shaded fuel break in a community wildfire protection plan
approved by a public fire agency, if the goal of fuel reduction
cannot be achieved by removing trees less than 18 inches in
stump diameter, trees less than 24 inches in stump diameter may
be removed if that removal is necessary to achieve the goal of
fuel reduction.
3. Last year, AB 744 (Dahle) established a three-year pilot
project in several counties in the Sierra Nevada on lands that
are co-terminous with the boundaries of the Sierra Nevada
Conservancy (with the additions of Modoc, Trinity, and Siskyou
Counties) to evaluate if an increase in the diameter of trees
that could be removed under the La Malfa exemption as well as
new, additional conditions, would improve the economic utility
of this exemption in reducing the risk of catastrophic wildfire.
All activities pursuant to this exemption shall occur within the
most recent version of the CDF fire hazard severity zone map in
the moderate, high, and very high fire threat zones.
That bill expanded the diameter of trees that could be removed
from 18 to 24 inches, prohibits the use of clear-cutting,
requires that acreage reflect a net increase in the diameter of
the remaining trees, and other specified conditions.
COMMENTS
According to data from CDF that was submitted last year the
total acreage treated pursuant to the existing La Malfa
exemption since 2005 is 8400 acres. That is not much acreage,
although as an exemption, it is also not intended to be used
expansively. That said another consideration is whether one of
the reasons the exemption has not been used is that previous
restriction on tree size may have made the use of that
exemption un-economic. Some environmental organizations will be
leery of harvesting activities that increase the tree diameter
size pursuant to this exemption without the normal environmental
review since activities pursuant to this exemption are approved
with a ministerial permit.
PROPOSED LAW
This bill would add Del Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino, Sonoma, and
Trinity Counties to the AB 744 pilot program. All of the AB 744
conditions would apply to this bill.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
2
According to the author, the fire risk in these northern
counties is also increasing, and he would like the department to
be able to observe if the pilot project would be useful in those
counties and to landowners to reduce fire risk.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
None received
SUPPORT
California Farm Bureau Federation
OPPOSITION
None Received
3