Comment Log Display
Below is the comment you selected to display.
Comment 16 for Forests Comments for the GHG Scoping Plan (sp-forests-ws) - 1st Workshop.
First Name: S
Last Name: Robinson
Email Address: srmw@comcast.net
Affiliation:
Subject: Comments on Forest Scoping
Comment:
Re: Draft Scoping Plan Preliminary Recommendation on Sustainable Forests Submitted online at http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/spcomment.htm Dramatic reduction in CO2 emissions and additional carbon sequestration are urgently needed. The California legislature and the Governor have boldly stepped forward and we understand that all businesses, governmental agencies and citizens must make sacrifices and changes in order to address this world-wide crisis. All industry sectors will undoubtedly lobby against change and promote their own “science” view. In the end CARB must ensure that good unbiased science is used and that no one industry sector is allowed to escape “transparency.” If one sector gets away without reducing emissions then another sector will have to take up the slack. CARB must continue to hold high standards and be vigilant and ensure that any delegation of work on AB 32 issues to agencies or Boards is not biased by political or industry pressure. The current forest sector scoping document is a first step but it needs to be significantly strengthened to embrace the bold challenge of AB 32. As currently written it requires little over the status quo for the forest industry. Forests are critical to climate change and forests can either be managed in a way that emits more CO2 than they sequester for decades. The issue of CO2 emissions from forest and forest soils disturbance is one that is not adequately addressed. --Clearcutting practices produce more CO2 and immediately eliminate more carbon sequestration than other logging methods for a variety of reasons that are clearly documented. Companies like Collins Pines and The Mendocino Redwood Company have embraced sustainable harvest methods that reduce CO2 emissions and sequester more carbon in the short term and long term. This approach needs to be addressed and alternative timber harvest methods that produce less CO2 than clearcutting need to be rquired by Cal Fire Resources. --Climate change conditions such as higher temperature and less rainfall will severely stress forests. Scientific analyses and reviews show that forestry practices that build diverse unevenaged will increase the chances for healthy forests and wildlife habitat. Plantation forests are more susceptible to climate change impacts and should not be replacing biodiverse properly thinned and maintained forests. --In one Sierra Nevada County nearly ½ of the entire forest is privately owned by a company that is converting that forest area to tree plantations following clearcutting type timber harvest. As climate change worsens the impact of that plantation conversion is likely to be disastrous. --Timber harvest methods need to be those methods that do not degrade watersheds or snowmelt runoff rates for California’s critical water supplies. Clearcutting is has the most negative impacts on water. --CAL FIRE Resources and Board of Forestry need to ensure that all science views on climate change related forestry issues are proactively brought forward and fully evaluated – not just those that support industry views. All calculations and assumptions used in climate change and forestry work need to be readily available for peer and public review. This transparency needs to be strengthened in the foresty arena. Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Attachment:
Original File Name:
Date and Time Comment Was Submitted: 2008-08-01 17:19:11
If you have any questions or comments please contact Office of the Ombudsman at (916) 327-1266.