Forestry: working forest management plan.
Summary
(1) The Z'berg-Nejedely Forest Practice Act of 1973 prohibits a person from conducting timber operations on timberland unless a timber harvesting plan has been prepared by a registered professional forester and has been submitted to the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and approved by the Director of Forestry and Fire Protection or the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection. A violation of the act is a crime. This bill would authorize a working forest tree farmer, as defined, to file a working forest management plan prepared by a registered professional forester with the department and would require the director to review the submitted plan to determine if it is in compliance with the act, and rules and regulations of the board, and to return the plan if the director determines that it is not in compliance. The bill would require an amendment that is a substantial deviation from the approved plan to be approved by the director or the board. The bill would require a working forest tree farmer to file a working forest harvest notice in any year in which there are plans to harvest timber on timberland covered by the working forest management plan. If it is determined that certain objectives are not being met or that there are persistent violations of an approved plan's requirements, the bill would require that the previously approved working forest management plan be canceled by the department and that any further timber operations under the plan be terminated. The bill would require the board, no later than December 31, 2015, to adopt regulations to implement these provisions. Because a violation of these provisions is a crime, this bill would imposed a state-mandated local program. (2) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Bill status
passed
3 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2012
Committee Review
Jun 2012
Assembly Passage
May 2012
Senate Passage
Governor
Introduced Feb 23, 2012
Last action Jun 26, 2012
Floor votes · Assembly May 29, 2012
How they voted
69–0
Passed · 3 other
Total votes 72
May 29, 2012
D
Democratic45
95% Yea
I
Independent1
0% Nay
R
Republican26
100% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
18
Key actions
5
Committee
7
Amendments
1
Jun 26, 2012
Upper · Passed
In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
upper
Jun 7, 2012
Committee
Referred to Com. on N.R. & W.
upper
May 29, 2012
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (69-0-3)
assembly
May 16, 2012
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. To consent calendar. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (May 16).
lower
May 3, 2012
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
May 1, 2012
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (April 23).
lower
Apr 9, 2012
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on NAT. RES.
lower
Mar 29, 2012
Committee
Referred to Com. on NAT. RES.
lower
Feb 24, 2012
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 25.
lower
1 primary · 1 co-sponsor
Sponsors
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 2170
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 2170. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline