____________________________________________________________________________ who we are | volunteer | jobs | newsletter | contact us | links | donate | FoFo stuff | home

California licensed foresters argue against AB 2926

On March 26, 2008, Chantz Joyce, President of the California Licensed Foresters Association (CLFA), based in Pioneer, California, wrote to the Hon. Sally Lieber at the State Capitol to apprise her of CLFA's opposition to AB 2926.

In part, Joyce wrote:

“For dubious, if non-existent ecological benefits, we feel that AB 2926 threatens to further destabilize an already struggling forest products sector, risking serious negative cumulative economic, social and environmental impacts; including the accelerated conversion of private forestland in California to other uses, such as subdivision and development.

"Ironically, by reducing timberland productivity and therefore the amount of greenhouse gases sequestered by trees and forest products, AB 2926 would also impair California’s ability to fight global warming and to comply with the requirements of AB 32.

"New clearcuts are unattractive to many people and this contributes to the perception that clearcutting is harmful to the environment. This view is reinforced by vocal individuals and interest groups that criticize the practice publicly using graphic images and sweeping generalizations about its impacts. In this context, the term clearcutting often is used incorrectly as a derisive synonym for careless logging or permanent forest clearing. Although not widely recognized, professional foresters carefully define and prescribe clearcutting as a science-based tool for effective harvest and regeneration of unique forest types, while also following laws that directly address specific concerns about environmental impacts.

"Although California’s standards are the strictest, wood fiber is a commodity and California producers must compete in a global marketplace. In the neighboring timber producing states of Oregon and Washington, clearcut sizes are limited to 120 acres – up to 240 acres in Washington with additional environmental review. Therefore our existing clearcut size limitations are already several times more restrictive than our sister states in the Pacific Northwest."