Comment Log Display

Dear Members of the Board,

We are the Sierra Nevada Alliance an organization that unites
hundreds of individuals and conservation groups throughout the
Sierra Nevada.  We’ve been working to protect and restore the
natural environment of the Sierra Nevada for future generations
while promoting healthy and sustainable communities since 1993.

The Alliance remains interested and invested in the land use
target for carbon emission reductions, even though this legislation
remains largely inapplicable to rural regions, including most of
the Sierra. Despite this exclusion we know the emission reduction
target set for the State by CARB is likely to have trickle down
effects to rural areas. Depending on future decisions tied to
carbon sequestration valuation, and future follow-up legislation to
SB 375, this target could have especially significant repercussions
to the preservation of timberlands, hardwood forests and working
landscapes.

Like many individuals, organizations and agencies throughout the
State we support the redoubling of this target from 5 MMT to 11 to
14 MMT. We know 11 to 14 MMT is a realistically high target based
on the analysis of Dr. Reid Ewing and Dr. Arthur Nelson. Setting a
higher target for the land use sector will signal that land use
sector is a top priority and that regions should aim high and take
decisive action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from new
development.

A higher target must be coupled with a commitment to providing
financial resources, technical assistance and other support to help
regions, local governments, and transportation agencies achieve the
target.  A higher target will also signal to the state of
California that land use should be a high priority for financial
and technical assistance to meet the goals of AB 32. Conversely, a
low target will send the signal that business-as-usual development
should continue, and that land use is not a high priority for
resources and support.

The Sierra Nevada, like most parts of the State of California,
continues to suffer environmental damage and diminished quality of
life related to poor planning decisions. For example, per capita
vehicle miles traveled in the Sierra region are some of the highest
in the state due to sprawling development patterns. More than 75%
of oak woodland habitat in the Sierra is privately owned, and much
of that is at risk for development. A higher emission reduction
target means a better chance for the Sierra to preserve its open
space and working landscapes, and to encourage planning patterns
that are consistent with the rural quality of life that makes the
Sierra such a desirable place to live and visit.


Sincerely,
Patricia Hickson, Sierra Nevada Alliance, Program Associate