Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEmail from Angela Moskow on behalf of Janet Cobb - Oak Woodland Mitigation Ordinance Menchaca, Clarissa From: Oak Staff <oakstaff@californiaoaks.org> Sent: Monday, November 5, 2018 4:27 PM To: Clerk of the Board Cc: John.Donnelly@wildlife.ca.gov;John.Walsh@wildlife.ca.gov;Janet Cobb;Calarco, Pete Subject: California Wildlife Foundation/California Oaks letter for tomorrow's hearing on Oak Woodland Mitigation Ordinance Attachments: CaWildIifeFdn_CaOaksLetterButteCoBOS11_18.pdf Dear Ashley Snyder, Please find attached a letter that I am conveying on behalf of Janet Cobb, Executive Officer of California Wildlife Foundation/California Oaks, for tomorrow's Oak Woodland Mitigation Ordinance hearing. Please share this letter with members of the Board of Supervisors. Thank you so much, Angela Angela Moskow California Oaks Information Network Manager California Wildlife Foundation/California Oaks 428 13th Street, Suite 10A Oakland, CA 94612 www.californiaoaks.org Office: (510) 763-0282 Mobile: (510) 610-4685 1 C VLif ORN 1V11 DE FOUA;7t:130E t'1`.l,'.I.LLI1 ORNins f.[}C I'+E FQJII 1IUS.:JkG 17S iith Street,SUM I1) tul 1J 51 alk land (.11 9.16tz I ia% 5 GS 99[S November 5, 2018 Honorable Butte County Supervisors 25 County Center Drive, Suite 200 Oroville, CA 95965 Via email to: Ashley Snyder, Assistant Clerk of the Board, clerkoftheboard@buttecounty.net RE: Draft Butte County Oak Woodland Mitigation Ordinance To the Honorable members of Butte County Board of Supervisors: The California Oaks program of California Wildlife Foundation works to conserve oak ecosystems because of their critical role in sequestering carbon, maintaining healthy watersheds, and providing wildlife habitat. We have communicated numerous suggestions for the oak ordinance to Development Services and the Development Commission. We have also conveyed our concerns to your attention in our letter dated August 30, 2018. Our primary concerns are summarized below. Protection of the county's oak canopy The county adopted the Oak Woodland Assessment Report to serve as the oak woodland management plan, thereby qualifying the county as eligible for Oak Woodland Conservation funding from Wildlife Conservation Board. However,the Oak Woodland Conservation Act of 2001 (AB 242) states (emphasis added): "Oak woodlands management plan"means a plan that provides protection for oak woodlands over time and compensates private landowners for conserving oak woodlands. If your Board were to adopt the current iteration of the oak ordinance Butte County would be enacting a measure that runs counter to the goal of protecting oak woodlands over time. The ordinance allows up to 70 percent removal without project-specific CEQA review, and greater than 70 percent removal with project-specific CEQA review. How does this align with the Oak Woodland Conservation Act of 2001? We recommend an uppermost figure of 10 percent removal and also recommend that the ordinance place restrictions on removals in subsequent years,using a 10 percent figure as the uppermost limit. Please also note that the Oak Woodlands Conservation Act states: 1362. It is the intent of the Legislature that this article accomplish all of the following: California Wildlife FoundationfCalifornia Oaks comments Draft Butte County Oak Woodland Mitigation Ordinance,November 5,2016 (d) Encourage local land use planning that is consistent with the preservation of oak woodlands, particularly special oak woodlands habitat elements. The legislation provides the following definition of special oak woodlands habitat elements: multi-and single-layered canopy, riparian zones, cavity trees, snags, and downed woody debris. California Oaks recommends that this language be included in the ordinance to ensure that these habitat elements are included in land planning when oaks are present. Applicability to agricultural land Another principle concern is that the scope of the draft ordinance does not include agricultural lands. We understand that the ordinance is meant to codify procedures for discretionary projects to conform to California Public Resources Code § 21083.4 and that the draft language states: The ordinance does not replace any other CEQA analysis with respect to impacts to Oak Woodlands, such as habitat loss or carbon sequestration. Nonetheless,the ordinance should apply to agricultural lands because California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)requires the analysis and mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions associated with proposed oak woodland or oak forest conversions for the reasons summarized in the paragraphs below. It is illogical for the ordinance, which is being developed to standardize the approach for determining significance, to exclude such a large proportion of the county's land. SB 32 (Pavley), enacted in 2016, extends and builds upon the provisions of the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32, Pavley),by directing the Air Resources Board(ARB)to ensure that statewide GHG emissions are reduced to at least 40 percent below the 1990 statewide emissions level by December 31, 2030. SB 1383 (Lara, 2016)requires the ARB to approve and begin implementing a comprehensive strategy to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants (SLCP)to achieve a reduction in methane by 40 percent,hydrofluorocarbon gases by 40 percent, and anthropogenic black carbon(soot)by 50 percent below 2013 levels by 2030. CEQA § 15364.5 states that"Greenhouse gas" or"greenhouse gases" includes but is not limited to: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. SB 1383, discussed above, designates percentage reductions in SLCPs as well.Neither the 2009 CEQA GHG amendments nor the enabling legislation, SB 97 (Dutton) (which authorized the development guidelines for mitigation), mention the term"carbon sequestration." CEQA's sole focus is "the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions or the effects of greenhouse gas emissions." Net present value of GHG emissions forms the foundation of the state's greenhouse reduction objectives, as well as the California Forest Protocol preservation standards. Every ton of carbon dioxide (CO2)released into the atmosphere by oak woodland or forest conversion—alongside the loss of the woodland's or forest's role in carbon sequestration—represents a measurable potential adverse environmental effect,which is covered by CEQA. Thus California requires the analysis and mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions associated with proposed oak woodland or forest conversions. 2 California Wildlife FoundationJCalifomia Oaks comments Draft➢uttc County Oak Woodland Mitigation Ordinance,November 5,2018 It is also concerning that Butte County's Climate Action Plan and Sustainable Agricultural Lands Conservation (SALC) strategy documents have no discussion of the carbon sequestered in standing trees and their associated soil. Robust GHG planning must be comprehensive and all encompassing. Mitigation Oak canopy replacement ratio: California Oaks concurs with local representatives who suggest that successful oak replanting requires much higher replacement ratios. Oak valuation: The Value of Trees methodology discussed,beginning on line 16 of page 16, of calculating costs per tree, is not sound. The impacts of oak tree conversion are cumulative across a parcel of land, and the economic value is dependent on location. Mitigation bank contributions: California Oaks recommends that the provision for payment to a mitigation bank be only to a state or a federally approved mitigation bank. California Oaks urges the Board of Supervisors to uphold the natural resource values of Butte County by strengthening the protections in the ordinance. Sincerely, CGS Janet Cobb, Executive Officer California Wildlife Foundation/California Oaks cc: John P. Donnelly, Executive Director,Wildlife Conservation Board John Walsh, Manager, Wildlife Conservation Board 3