CLEARCUTTING ENDORSED TO SEQUESTER CARBON

Michael Endicott, Advocate

A new forestry battlefront has opened up at the Air Resources Board (ARB) as part of implementation of AB 32 (climate change). The newly “Revised and Approved Forest Action Protocol” (version 3.0, Sept. 2009) contains a provision that, if allowed to stand, will justify decimating California’s forest resources in the name of climate action.

Our forests (local and global) have good potential for sequestering carbon. Recognizing this, the ARB recently approved Forest Action Protocol provisions which would allow credits for voluntary forest based offset actions by carbon emitters. These credits could be used to speed reforestation efforts after a fire, to buy easements to prevent conversion of forested areas to development, and, to improve forest management practices so they are harvested at a more sustainable level, improve habitat values and reduce negative water quality impacts. All these appear to be reasonably productive options. But, the ARB went further and wrote in subsidies for clear cutting operations as well.

After Sierra Club California volunteer testimony, as well as that of our allies, some ARB members indicated they were very uncomfortable with the Kudos to Bill Magavern (shown left) for being named to the Capitol Weekly Top 100 List of “…influence peddlers, power brokers and political players in California.” The newspaper listed Bill as #38 and offered the following rationale for its choice: “As the Sacramento-based director of Sierra Club California, Bill Magavern is a critical environmental voice as it relates to government policy and legislation. He and his colleagues weigh in on all things environmental: water, air, timber, land use and, increasingly, global warming. He bird-dogs the Air Resources Board, testifies at hearings and invokes the cachet of the Sierra Club to support — or oppose — legislation.” (April 16, 2009) clearcutting provision, and, that their vote for the Protocol was not a commitment to include clearcutting as any part of a regulatory compliance program under a cap and trade program planned for adoption next year.

Inclusion of clearcutting as an ARB endorsed sequestration technique completely undermines the value and credibility of the Protocol program. Clearcutting is an un-natural forest management technique, with no potential for timely carbon sequestration. And, as such, it will be a meaningless offset option that will suck away dollars that would go to real time reductions of emissions through energy efficiency programs and renewable energy development.

The “gold rush” for our trees was launched moments after ARB Protocol approval when the Governor and SPI (the largest clear cutting operation in California), with great fanfare, announced clearcutting as the poster child for the offset program. Not reforestation. Not conversion prevention. But, subsidizied clear cuts!

Watch for our updates and alerts on ways you can help to fix this loophole in the ARB’s climate program.