Background: At a California State Assembly Committee on Accountability and Administrative Review in Sacramento today chaired by Roger Dickinson, representatives from state agencies and forest owners are to provide testimony on the state’s Timber Harvest Fees and other regulatory costs.

Statements by David Bischel, President

California Forestry Association

“Timber companies are proud of their ability to maintain operations in California and produce perhaps the most environmentally-friendly wood products in the country, if not the world. We’re hopeful that today’s hearing will lead to a meaningful review of how to maintain timber harvesting in the state while increasing government efficiency in the regulatory review process.  
 

“A thorough review of the timber harvest review process is warranted given that the cost of the state’s Timber Harvest Plan regulatory review process has grown nearly 80 percent since 1997 while the number of harvest operations being regulated has decreased almost 80 percent.

“The timber harvest review process was created to accommodate more than 1,000 THPs per year, yet roughly 200 – 250 plans are now submitted annually. In 1997, 1,081 THPs were submitted and program costs totaled roughly $10 million. Yet, in 2010, 244 THPs were submitted and program costs totaled approximately $18 million.

“This budget appears to be exceptionally excessive given the shrinking number of timber harvest plans being submitted and reflects an agency approach of doing business that is no longer compatible with today’s realities or needs. 

“A more efficient alternative would be to create a single multi-agency clearinghouse for all timber-harvest related permits to reduce overall costs and maintain California’s environmental protection standards. It would also make sense to extend the life of a THP to reflect the long-term nature of sustainable forestry.

“Claims by anti-logging activists that budget reductions to the California Department of Fish and Game mean that it has no funding for timber harvest plan reviews or that the program is illegal have no basis in fact or legal merit. Forest owners pay the Department of Fish and Game fees of nearly $1,000 per timber harvest plan for environmental review and the agency’s prioritization of staffing resources does not jeopardize the review program.

“Any claims otherwise by anti-logging activists are merely a thinly guised attempt to exploit the Department of Fish and Game’s budget situation to put a stop to timber harvesting in California.

“We believe that a more meaningful environmental review process will reduce overall costs without jeopardizing the state’s environmental protections that timber companies have been operating under for decades.”

###

The California Forestry Association represents professionals committed to sustainable forestry and the protection of the state’s natural resources.
CFA is committed to keeping the public informed on issues surrounding efforts to keep California forests healthy and well-managed for water, wildlife, wildfire protection and climate change benefit.
 

BACK