New Initiative Proposed to Save Forests

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.

In a radio speech Saturday, Wilson praised the board for its fast action, saying 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,” he said.

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

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, such as 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.