CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS PROPOSITION 130 : Commercial Tries to Show Support Is Mainstream

Proponents of Proposition 130, designed to save California’s forests from logging, began their advertising campaign Wednesday with a commercial intended to show mainstream support for the forestry measure.

The 30-second television commercial, which will be aired through Sept. 30 in most major media markets, shows a fresh-faced state park ranger in a Smokey Bear hat strolling through a grove of trees and bemoaning the loss of giant redwoods. The ranger notes that the California State Park Rangers Assn., the Audubon Society and the Sierra Club support the measure.

The commercial comes at a time when opponents are linking the measure to the radical Earth First! environmental group in radio commercials. The group is not a sponsor of Proposition 130, although members of Earth First! may support it and were hired along with others to circulate petitions to qualify it for the Nov. 6 ballot.

“We have no involvement with Earth First! whatsoever,” said Proposition 130 spokesman Steven Glacier, accusing opponents of a “smear tactic. . . . We are backed by mainstream groups. . . .”

Proposition 130 would ban clear-cutting on all timberlands statewide. It defines clear-cutting as the removal at one time of 60% or more of trees from 2.5 acres or more, or, in the Sierra Nevada, from five acres or more.

“Almost all of the cutting that is done in California now could be called a clear-cut under that definition,” said Ross Johnson, chief of forest practice regulation for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.

The measure also would put environmentalists on a state forestry board that decides appeals to logging plans. Environmental groups charge that the governor-appointed board now is dominated by supporters of the logging industry.

Proposition 138, a countermeasure put forth by the forest products industry, would ban clear-cutting only of old-growth or ancient forests and reduce by 50% clear-cutting in other forests.

But the countermeasure defines clear-cutting differently from Proposition 130. Johnson said Proposition 138 follows the state’s definition, meaning that all but about six sizable trees could be removed from an acre.

In the commercial for Proposition 130, the park ranger notes that only 5% of the state’s ancient redwoods remain. According to the state forestry department, California still has about 1.6 million acres of redwood forests, but about 95% of them have been cut down at least once or twice. Some species of wildlife depend on virgin forests for survival.

Although the television commercial may reassure voters that the initiative does not represent merely the views of an extremist group, the ad also provides the opposition with another opportunity to criticize the involvement of a San Mateo financial adviser in the anti-logging effort.

As required by law, backers of Proposition 130 note that funding for the ad came from H.L. Arbit, as well as from environmental groups. Opponents claim that Harold Arbit, the financial adviser, has major holdings in timber and paper companies that primarily do business outside California and hence would profit by Proposition 130’s passage. Forestry workers and their families staged a demonstration in front of the Pacific Stock Exchange on Tuesday to protest what they said would be huge profits for Arbit if the measure passed.

Arbit, however, says he contributed $940,000 to the measure because of long-held concerns about logging practices and not for personal financial gain. He says he personally owns no stocks and maintains that timber stocks he bought for his clients represent a tiny fraction, about one-fifteenth, of their portfolios.

In addition to changing logging practices, Proposition 130 would authorize $742 million in state general obligation bonds to purchase remaining ancient forests and save them from logging.

Opponents contend that the measure would reduce logging by 70% and eliminate 75,000 jobs in California. Supporters argue that it will increase timber harvests over the long term because it requires loggers to save more of the forest land now.