New Tree Protection Initiative Planned : Forests: Environmentalists criticize an emergency measure passed last week as being inadequate to guard timberlands.

As Gov. Pete Wilson was praising the state Board of Forestry for its new emergency regulations to protect timberlands, angry environmentalists--skeptical that the rules will adequately preserve trees--were preparing to campaign Saturday for a new initiative with tougher provisions.

Unimpressed with the regulations and critical of the board’s attempts to pass them quickly, Forests Forever Inc. unveiled an initiative proposal for the November, 1992, ballot to fund forest restoration programs, protect dwindling species of oak, restrict exports of California logs and protect watershed areas.

Cecelia Lanman, the organization’s director, said her group had already decided in September to draft a new initiative after concluding that a forest measure approved by the Legislature did not provide adequate protection for the state’s fragile timberlands.

The legislative measure was vetoed by Wilson as being unworkable, and he urged the Board of Forestry to address the issue by adopting emergency regulations, which it did Wednesday.

Lanman, who said the bill is inadequate, criticizes Wilson and the board for making it look like they have done something to protect trees when, in her judgment, they have not.

In a radio speech broadcast Saturday, Wilson praised the board for its fast action, saying that the new regulations would give broad protection to the state’s 7.1-million acres of privately owned timberlands.

“These new regulations will limit clear-cutting of forests. They will require practices that significantly reduce soil erosion and harm to fish and wildlife,” Wilson said. “And they will protect California’s old-growth forests, trees that were already old when Christopher Columbus first set sail for the New World.”

But Lanman disagreed, saying that, for example, provisions to protect ancient forests are so narrowly worded that they could only apply to a few of California’s centuries-old forest lands.

She also questions whether the regulations will stop clear-cutting or soil erosion.

“It’s kind of a continuation of what the Legislature did,” she said. “We saw this coming back in September and felt we had to go ahead and organize an initiative.”

The emergency regulations, like the legislation Wilson vetoed, have drawn mixed reactions from the environmental community and the timber industry. While some organizations, like Forests Forever, have been critical, others, including the Planning and Conservation League, have been supportive.

Many groups still have not taken a stand, although they criticized the board for its lightning-fast action taken after a single, hurriedly convened public hearing.

Sharon Duggan, an attorney representing several North Coast environmental groups, said the quick decision gave the public very little time to understand the regulations or comment on them.

“We were outraged at the way this process was done . . . to adopt these regulations without proper review makes no sense at all,” said Joan Reiss, regional director of the Wilderness Society.

The emergency regulations expire after 120 days but Wilson said he will urge the board to make them permanent.

In the meantime, he repeated his pledge to “bring all parties together” to design a forestry protection proposal for legislative consideration next year.