Category Archives: Sequestration 2022

SB5962

SB5962 – Planning for and implementing the conservation or restoration of 30% of Washington’s lands and waters by 2030.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Das (D; 47th District; Kent) (Co-Sponsors Rolfes, Lovelett- Ds)
Current status – Referred to the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Water, Natural Resources, and Parks.
Next step would be – Scheduling a hearing.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
The bill would require the Director of the Recreation and Conservation Office to adopt a plan to conserve or restore 30% of Washington’s lands and waters by 2030, in consultation with the Commissioner of Public Lands, and the directors of the Departments of Fish and Wildlife, Commerce, Ecology, and Agriculture. The plan would have a collaborative and inclusive approach to conservation; benefit everyone in the state; support locally led and designed efforts; honor tribal sovereignty and support the priorities of tribal nations; pursue conservation and restoration, use science as a guide; and build on existing tools and strategies, emphasizing flexibility and adaptive approaches. It would be adopted by December 31, 2023, and the Director would publish periodic progress reports on its implementation and progress toward achieving the 30 by 30 goal.

The bill says that “conservation” should be considered to include “not only preservation, but also the restoration as well as the use of lands and waters that are consistent with providing the critical resources that sustain all life on earth”. It also says that lands and waters designated for special protections like parks, marine sanctuaries and “other public lands” should be considered as “conserved” by the plan, as well as additional lands and waters in public or private management that protect important ecosystem functions.

The bill would create a 30 by 30 Commission, chaired by the Director of the Office, to assist in the development of the plan. It would include representatives of the other departments listed above, and the Director would appoint other members, including land conservation and preservation advocates; additional rural landowners; advocates for outdoor recreation and parks, including urban park accessibility; and representatives from disproportionately impacted communities identified by the environmental health disparities map; from forestry, farming, and ranching; and from cities, counties, and special purpose districts. The Director would also invite representatives of Federal agencies managing lands in the state and representatives of tribes to serve on the Commission. The Director and the Commission would have to include a robust public engagement program in the development of the plan, providing equitable community engagement among all segments of the state.

As a foundation for the plan, the director would be required to adopt guidance for including lands and waters considered to currently be in conservation status, and to prepare an assessment of current progress toward meeting the policy, informed by data and maps provided by relevant governments.

The bill would require state agencies to act consistently with this policy goal, and be
guided by the plan in achieving it. (The bill would encourage cities, counties, and special purpose districts to act consistent with it.)

SB5961

SB5961 – Requires state agencies and local governments to use biochar products in projects when it’s feasible, with various exceptions.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Sefzik (R; 42nd District; Whatcom County) (Co-Sponsor Warnick – R)
Current status – Senate concurred in the House amendments.
Next step would be – To the Governor.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the House – Passed
Had a hearing in the House Committee on State Government & Tribal Relations February 21st; passed out of committee the 23rd. Referred to Rules. Amended on the floor to limit the requirements to public works projects; specify that the biomass must come from various waste materials; and to not require using it if any of the criteria for exceptions apply rather than all of them. Passed by the House.

In the Senate – Passed
Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Water, Natural Resources & Parks February 1st. Replaced by a substitute and passed out of committee February 2nd. Referred to Ways and Means; had a hearing there February 5th; passed out of committee February 7th. Referred to Rules, and passed by the Senate unanimously February 10th.

Summary –
Substitute –
The substitute would require the Department of Natural Resources to implement a pilot project to evaluate the costs and benefits of marketing and selling forest products to a biochar facility. It would determine if revenues cover the costs of preparing and conducting the sales, and identify and evaluate factors impacting those, including regulatory constraints and staffing levels. The project would have to include sales in the Olympic region, and be completed by June 30, 2024. DNR would work with stakeholders and report the results and any recommendations to the appropriate committees of the Legislature By November 1, 2024.

Original bill –
The bill would require state agencies and local governments to use biochar products in projects when they can be utilized. It wouldn’t be required if they weren’t available within a reasonable period; if the available products didn’t comply with purchasing standards; if they didn’t meet Federal or State health, quality, and safety standards; or if the prices weren’t reasonable or competitive. It wouldn’t be required of a state agency if the total cost of using it were prohibitive; if applying it would have detrimental impacts on the physical characteristics and nutrient condition of the soil as it is used for a specific crop; or if the project was growing trees in a greenhouse.

SB5633

SB5633 – Creating a voluntary, incentive-based plan to conserve at least one million acres of working forestland; and reforest at least one million acres by 2040.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Rolfes (D; 34th District; Bainbridge Island) (Co-Sponsors Short, Gildon, Hawkins, Wagoner, and Warnick – Rs; Das, Hasegawa, Lovelett, Nguyen, Nobles, Randall, and Stanford – Ds) (By request of the Department of Natural Resources)
Current status – Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Water, Natural Resources & Parks January 20th. Still in committee at cutoff.
Next step would be – Dead bill.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
HB1895 is a companion bill in the House.
There’s a staff summary.

Summary –
The bill would require the Department of Natural Resources to create a voluntary, incentive-based working and nonworking forest conservation and reforestation plan intended to conserve at least a million acres of working forestland and reforest at least a million acres by 2040. The plan would have to respect the full diversity of landowner management and investment objectives, and utilize or develop incentive-based strategies that address preventing the loss of working and nonworking forestland across the state; opportunities to implement incentive-based carbon compensation programs for avoiding conversion and reforestation; reforestation on forestland impacted by wildfire, pests, disease, landslides, land-use change, and other stressors; and tree planting and increased canopy coverage in urban areas. prioritizing highly impacted or overburdened communities. It would have to use the plan to assess and prioritize conservation and reforestation actions each biennium.

The Department would be required to develop a framework to address the goal, mapping and prioritizing areas across the state based on criteria including risk of permanent forest loss, or the loss of critical environmental, economic, cultural, equity, or health benefits including value to local economies, carbon sequestration, landscape-level habitat connectivity, or salmon recovery and important wildlife habitat. It would evaluate and promote existing carbon compensation programs and other incentives for emissions reductions to assist forestland owners in voluntarily engaging in carbon markets. It would map and prioritize historically forested areas, including postwildfire areas and areas where reforestation or afforestation efforts might support environmental restoration, local economic development, or tribal restoration objectives, and it would conduct an analysis of the regional reforestation pipeline, including seed collection, nursery capacity, and workforce needs, to ensure an adequate basis to meet goals and growing needs. (Reforestation analyses would be required to include an ecological assessment of advantages and disadvantages of intervention, and of best strategies for maintaining and restoring ecological integrity and resilience to climate change.) It would map and prioritize urban and community areas where tree planting might provide environmental, economic, or health benefits, particularly to highly impacted or overburdened
communities. It would conduct the analysis needed to develop a strategic plan, including specific criteria to prioritize the conservation of forests at risk of conversion, and analysis of the reforestation pipeline, the state’s private sector logging and milling capacity, and equity and environmental justice impacts.

In developing the framework, the department would have to consult with impacted communities using the State’s community engagement plan and identify opportunities to increase equity in forestland ownership; utilize the Washington health disparities map to help identify highly impacted or overburdened communities lacking equitable access to forest benefits; consult with the Washington State Office of Equity on how to make values-driven, data informed decisions to identify and address disparities impacting communities of color; invite input from tribes on forested areas with important cultural, ecological, and economic values threatened by conversion or other disturbance; and engage a range of stakeholders (including a long specified list) in the development and implementation of the conservation and reforestation plan.

The Department would be required to identify, prioritize, utilize, and develop voluntary tools, financing opportunities, and incentive-based activities consistent with the plan, using appropriations provided for that specific purpose. It would have to utilize and build on various previous reports to the Legislature. It would assess and inventory existing voluntary tools, financing opportunities, and incentive-based activities relevant to the goals of the plan, and consider new ones. These might include tools such as payment for ecological services, technical or financial support to small forestland owners, tax or market incentives, conservation and working forest easements, fee simple land acquisition, or transfer of development rights. The Department would identify their limitations and make recommendations to improve, accelerate, or expand them to maximize their effectiveness. It would identify new or existing voluntary tools, financing opportunities, and incentives addressing economic stressors that contribute to forest conversion (including the retention of milling infrastructure, market access,
and workforce development); that give financial value to the underlying environmental, health, equity, and cultural values of working forestlands; and that provide support to small working forestland owners achieving their objectives and goals.

The Department would develop a pilot rapid response fund to test opportunities and barriers to acquiring private working forestlands at imminent risk of conversion from willing sellers, and maintaining them as working forests.

By December 1st 2022, the Department would report to the Office of Financial Management and the appropriate committees of the Legislature including a map and justification of identified priority areas, an approach to monitoring to assure that the forested acres were meeting the criteria of success established in the plan, and a description of activities to be undertaken consistent with it. The plan would have to be finalized and submitted to them by December 1st 2023. Each biennium after that, the Department would have to submit a report reviewing previous and future activities. This would include a list and brief summary of tools, financing opportunities, and incentives used in the preceding biennium, including total funding, costs for those, and their outcomes and effectiveness. It would highlight any of them that contributed to more equitable outcomes, including equity in forestland ownership, access to green spaces, and urban tree cover canopy. It would include any barriers to implementation, legislative or administrative recommendations to address those, and a comparison of the requested and actual funding for the plan the previous biennium, with an analysis of the additional progress that would have been expected with full funding, if that’s possible. The report would include a list and brief summary of tools and incentives to be used in the next biennium with requested appropriations, including information from the prioritization process. It would identify potential partnerships between the State and the forest products industry to promote the use of those as a way toward maintaining the state’s forestland base and reaching its emissions goals, and would identify a range of other potential partnership opportunities. The report would include criteria by which working and non-working forested areas would be considered protected from conversion, including a minimum time frame for that conclusion. It would provide an update on the acres of working and nonworking forestland by region, and on private sector logging and milling capacity, including gains or losses, and potential reasons for significant changes. It would provide an update on the quantity and quality of jobs created or sustained through conservation and reforestation activities; on the locations and acres reforested; and on consultation with highly impacted communities.

SB5619

SB5619 – Develops a plan to conserve and restore at least 10,000 acres of kelp forests and eelgrass meadows by 2040.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Lovelett (D; 40th District; Anacortes)
Current status – Senate concurred in the House amendments.
Next step would be – To the Governor.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
HB1661 is a companion bill in the House.

Comments –
The findings say:
These marine forests and meadows play an important role in climate mitigation and adaptation by sequestering carbon and relieving ocean acidification. Marine vegetation can sequester up to times more carbon than terrestrial forests, and therefore represent a critical tool in the fight against climate change.
There’s research on using kelp growing on open ocean platforms, where the biomass falls into regions where there’s so little biological activity that it doesn’t break down and the carbon captured in its growth stays sequestered. I don’t know how much carbon from our local kelp forests stays sequestered for long. How well local eel grass meadows sequester carbon is unclear.

In the Senate – Passed
Had a hearing in Agriculture, Water, Natural Resources & Parks January 20th; replaced by a substitute and passed out of committee January 27th. The substitute, which matches the one for HB1661, would focus the Conservation Plan on native species; have it address current conservation efforts; and identify research needed on native seaweed aquaculture. It specifies consultation and adds reporting requirements. Referred to Ways and Means. Had a hearing there February 5th. Amended and passed out of committee February 7th. (The amendment has DNR map both native and non-native eelgrass and kelp throughout the Sound and along the coast and allows it to use that mapping in establishing the health and conservation plan.) Referred to Rules; passed the Senate unanimously February 10th.

In the House – Passed
Had a hearing in the House Committee on Rural Development, Agriculture & Natural Resources February 18th; passed out of committee February 23rd. Referred to Appropriations. Amended to make it null and void if funding isn’t appropriated for it, and passed out of committee February 28th. Referred to Rules, and passed by the House March 2nd.

Summary –
Original bill –
The bill would require the Department of Natural Resources to work with partners to establish a kelp forest and eelgrass meadow health and conservation plan that tries (subject to available funding) to conserve and restore at least 10,000 acres of kelp forests and eelgrass meadows by 2040.

They would develop a framework to identify and prioritize kelp forest areas in greatest need of conservation or restoration, mapping areas throughout Puget Sound and along the coast where they were historically present, identifying priority locations for restoration that are at highest risk of permanent loss, or that contribute significant environmental, economic, and cultural benefits to tribal nations and local communities; locations where opportunities for partnership and collaboration exist, and locations where restoration would most benefit nearshore ecosystem function including salmon recovery, water quality, and other ecosystem benefits. They would identify potential stressors impacting the health and vitality of forests and meadows in prioritized areas in order to specifically address them in conservation and restoration efforts.

The department would collaborate with impacted tribal nations, and other local and regional partners, to address conservation and restoration needs in the priority areas and the appropriate tools and partnerships to address them. In developing coordinated actions and success measures, it would assess and inventory existing tools for conserving and restoring these ecosystems and reducing stressors related to their decline; identify new or amended tools that would support the goals of the plan; and identify success measures to track progress toward them.

The department would submit a report to the Office of Financial Management and the appropriate committees of the Legislature by December 1, 2022, including a map and justification of identified priority areas, an approach to monitoring the areas that are meeting the criteria for conservation or restoration established in the plan, and activities to be undertaken consistent with the plan. A final version of the plan would have to be submitted to OFM and these committees by December 1, 2023.

The department would continue to monitor kelp forests and eelgrass meadows to inform adaptive management of the plan and coordinated partner actions, and submit a report every two years including an updated map of distributions and trends; a summary of success measures and findings, including relevant information from the prioritization process; an updated list summarizing potential stressors, prioritized areas, and corresponding coordinated actions and success measures; an update on the number of acres of kelp forests and eelgrass meadows conserved by region, including restoration or loss in priority areas; an update on consultation with impacted tribal nations and local communities; any barriers to plan implementation; and legislative or administrative recommendations to address those barriers.

HB1672

HB1672 – Exempts local property tax increases for conservation futures from RCW 84.55.010’s limits on local levies.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Wylie (D; 49th District; Vancouver)
Current status – Had a hearing in Finance January 18th. Still in committee at cutoff.
Next step would be – Dead bill.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
The bill would exempt local property tax increases for conservation futures from RCW 84.55.010’s limits on local levies. (That limits a local levy to the amount of the largest property tax in a district during the most recent three years, adjusted for various factors like increased assessed values, times one of several limit factors which depend on the district but are often 1%.)

HB1661

HB1661 – Develop a plan to conserve and restore at least 10,000 acres of kelp forests and eelgrass meadows by 2040.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Shewmake (D; 42nd District; Whatcom County)
Current status – Had a hearing in the Committee on Rural Development, Agriculture & Natural Resources January 18th; replaced by a substitute January 25th. Referred to Appropriations, and had a hearing there February 3rd. Still in committee by cutoff.
Next step would be – Dead bill.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
SB5619 is a companion bill in the Senate.

Summary –
Substitute –
The substitute would focus the Conservation Plan on native species; have it address current conservation efforts; and identify research needed on native seaweed aquaculture. It specifies consultation and adds reporting requirements.

Original bill –
The bill would require the Department of Natural Resources to work with partners to establish a kelp forest and eelgrass meadow health and conservation plan that tries (subject to available funding) to conserve and restore at least 10,000 acres of kelp forests and eelgrass meadows by 2040.

HB1631

HB1631 – Creates a sustainable farms and fields advisors network to assist interested food producers and processors.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Shewmake (D; 42nd District; Whatcom County)
Current status – Referred to Appropriations. Still in committee at cutoff.
Next step would be – Dead bill.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Comments –
The bill contains a list of things the advisors are supposed to do, but it also says interlocal agreements between each group of conservation districts are supposed to set the workload and priorities for the advisor that group hires.

In the House –
Had a hearing in the House Committee on Rural Development January 11th; passed out of committee January 26th.

Summary –
The bill would create a sustainable farms and fields advisors network to help agricultural producers and food processors increase energy efficiency, use green energy, sequester carbon, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The State Conservation Commission would develop the network and groups of adjacent conservation districts would each hire, host, and share the services of an advisor. The advisors would consult with interested farmers and food processors to help them develop sustainable farms and fields plans to reduce their carbon footprint by increasing energy efficiency, increasing their utilization and production of green energy, sequestering carbon, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. They would also inform conservation districts, farmers, and food processors about local, state, and federal funding opportunities, including the State’s sustainable farms and fields grants (assuming that program was funded this session), to help achieve these goals. Each group of districts would establish a committee to develop a prioritized list of farmers and food processors interested in working with the advisor, and each advisor’s workload and priorities would be set according to an interlocal agreement established between those districts.

The Commission would hire a coordinator for the advisors, who would also be responsible for disseminating current information about energy efficiency and climate-smart practices and funding opportunities, applying for grants, writing progress reports, and other needed activities. In consultation with Washington State and the University of Washington, the Commission would evaluate and update the most appropriate carbon equivalency metric to apply to the sustainable farms and fields grant program by July 1, 2024. (Unless it identified a better metric, it would consider the storage of 3.67 tons of biogenic carbon for one hundred years as the equivalent of avoiding one ton of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions, and calculate annual storage as a linear proportion of that.)

The Commission would report to the Legislature and the Governor every two years on the sustainable farms and fields grant program and the advisors, including grants awarded, projects funded, greenhouse gas emissions reduced, and carbon sequestered. It would also update, at least annually, a public list of projects and pertinent information including a summary of state and federal funds, private funds spent, landowner and other private cost-share matching expenditures, the total number of projects, and an estimate of carbon sequestered or emissions reduced.