What do you think about Jerry Brown's ruling regarding oak woodland and climate change?
California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown, Jr. has reached a landmark lawsuit settlement with San Bernardino County involving the extent to which the County’s environmental impact report for its General Plan update should address impacts on climate change. This is the first time any California jurisdiction has entered into a legally binding agreement to look at the overall impact of its planning on global warming.
The agreement solidifies climate change as an impact to be addressed in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) environmental review documents. Significant impacts to oak woodlands must be addressed in CEQA green house gas reviews because oak impacts uniquely combine carbon capture and carbon emission issues.
Very disappointing that I didn’t see this in the general media. But I’m a huge fan of oak woodland, and was impressed with the ruling. What do you think, and how can we build on this?
I did see it, but it was credited to the Governor. FEMA has an action plan related to the return of the inland sea (which occurs when the icecaps melt). It would seem reasonable for the States to have their own plans, Glad to see Jerry is still around.
jerry brown is a fruitcake deluxe.
the best way to build on this is raise taxes to protect the forest.
then reduce peoples freedom by making it a "sanctuary" and forbid public use so it stays as pristine as possible.
I thought Jello Biafra from the Dead Kennedys said that Jerry Brown was a Nazi…
Oak woodlands are definitely worth preserving. I used to live in a place called Oakwood although unfortunately most of the oaks had long since gone. One of my favourite places is a steep hillside covered in natural oaks that runs down to the shores of the Atlantic, it’s almost untouched by humans because it’s so inaccessible.
Oaks, like all trees, have an important role to play in regulating the climate of the planet. They act like a giant pair of lungs, inhaling CO2 and exhaling oxygen, without them our atmosphere would be very different and by now it would probably be unbreathable.
I think the ruling is a step in the right direction and greater consideration should be given to the wider environmental implications of felling woodland and forestry.
If we want to build on this I think it’s up to the people to let it be known how they feel. Nobody would question that the general feeling is that we need to protect the tropical rainforests but less attention is paid to the smaller scale problems closer to home.
Wait until you get the oak wilt disease that is decimating the oak groves in my state. And our natural resource agency is ignoring it completely.