3rd 30x30 Progress Report Released

The California Natural Resources Agency, the state agency tasked with carrying out our state goal of protecting 30% of land and coastal waters by 2030 released their annual progress report on July 7th.

In it, they reported that we have safeguarded 26.1% of lands and 21.9% of coastal waters thus far.

Let’s break down what’s in the report!

Terrestrial Side

The Sáttítla Highlands with Mt Shasta in the background. Photograph: EcoFlight

On the land side, we have jumped forward by 0.9%, with an additional 853,000 acres, thanks to the two recent national monument designations, Sáttítla and Chuckwalla. The Sáttítla Highlands National Monument, located in Northern California, represents the results of longtime advocacy from the Pit River Nation to have their ancestral land and waters protected. The national monument designation of the Sáttítla Highlands will help protect 224,676 acres of land and water that are home to endangered and rare flora and fauna. The underground volcanic aquifers of Sáttítla supply water to millions of people. The landscape is a geological wonder with old-growth pine forests, snowy mountainsides, and lakes dotting the land.

Coastal Progress

Nearly 100% of the incredible progress made on the coastal side this year can be attributed to the state modifying its standards for what counts as conserved on the coastal side. The Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary, off the Central Coast, was designated by the Biden administration last November and now counts under 30x30 progress. The Sanctuary marked the first such preserve in California to be managed in cooperation with Indigenous peoples. Marine Sanctuaries didn’t previously count under the 30x30 goal because, unfortunately, they do not limit damaging stressors on marine biodiversity. The Sanctuary allows halibut bottom trawling in portions of it, a practice that involves dragging a large, weighted net along the seafloor to capture fish and other marine life living on or close to the seabed. The impacts of dragging heavy gear on the sea floor can damage sensitive seabed habitats like coral reefs and seagrass meadows. It can also resuspend sediment, affecting water quality and light levels. Bottom trawling is also associated with high levels of unwanted bycatch, including juveniles of target species or non-target animals like dolphins, sea turtles, and sharks, which are often injured or killed in the process of accidentally being caught. Additionally, bottom trawling, through seabed disturbance, can release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, contributing to climate change.

The Sanctuary also allows for the operation of an oil and gas pipeline through it from the Santa Ynez Unit.

Overall, environmental advocates would like to see more durable biodiversity protections in the Marine Sanctuary. The Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency, Wade Crowfoot, said that a management plan that would set more protections for biodiversity is in the works. If the management plan doesn’t materialize in a way that boosts environmental and biodiversity protections, then the sanctuary could be removed from what the state considers protected under the 30x30 goal.

Rate of Progress & Prop 4

Based on the first progress report from the state, we projected that we would need to conserve at least one million acres of land and about 83,333 acres of coastal water every year until 2030 to reach our goal. Last year, we conserved 861,000 acres of land and no coastal waters. This year, we conserved 853,000 acres of land and 191,000 acres of coastal waters, exceeding the needed rate for coastal conservation by over two times. Although we are a little beneath the needed rate of progress on the land side this year (47,000 acres shy), we have yet to see Prop 4 funds be dispersed for projects protecting biodiversity and coastal resilience. The Governor has proposed $286 million in Prop 4 funds for biodiversity and coastal resilience. Once the legislature, hopefully, appropriates the same amount of Proposition 4 bond funds this August for 30x30 projects, we hope to see increased progress in subsequent years. Prop 4 funds were supposed to be additive funds to help the state increase its ability to prepare for climate change, fight against climate change, and conserve our land and waters for future generations, and for the sake of biodiversity.

Quality of Progress

Although the state may have some gaps in how they consider conservation a priority, we still commend the state for continuing to make progress on this goal, using the strongest definition for conservation in the entire nation. We know that ourselves, and other environmental advocates have issues with the coastal issues this year, but on the land side, we and the state are on the same page. We are proud of California for having the highest standards in the nation when it comes to 30x30.

Recent CEQA Rollbacks & 30x30

Although we are happy to see the state continuing to advance this goal, with the recent CEQA rollbacks, and mitigation being slashed as a pathway (essentially), if the legislature doesn’t do cleanup on what was passed in SB 131, the state will be undercutting their own 30x30 goal.

State Bill 131 makes significant changes to our State’s Environmental Quality Act. Specifically, provisions in SB 131 threatens the 30x30 goal by:

• SB 131 currently does not include important habitat lands or habitat lands necessary to complete Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan reserve or preserve areas in the list of “natural and protected lands.” The inclusion of habitat and NCCP/HCP lands is important to ensure that those CEQA exemptions in SB 131 that are subject to avoiding impacts on natural and protected lands also include making sure CEQA will apply to the projects impacting habitat lands.  

• The loss of the application of CEQA to projects affecting species raises significant concerns regarding the protection of species and habitat in California. Without CEQA applicability to projects in these areas, there would be no obligation for project developers to conduct biological surveys of the land to be developed. 

• Most private property has not been surveyed for the presence of a species. Instead, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) either waits for developers to request a permit under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) or relies on the biological surveys generated through the CEQA process to provide the necessary information to lead agencies.

• The consequences of CEQA exemptions affecting lands where species are found would eliminate the trigger or requirement for developers to comply with CESA. Developers would cease obtaining CESA permits, leaving CDFW with limited ability to enforce CESA.

• Creating a CEQA exemption for projects that impact habitat for rare, declining, endangered, and threatened species would result in the absence of a CEQA process and, consequently, no mitigation for the loss of habitat.

• No mitigation for loss of habitat would lead to an overall loss of habitat from these projects, potentially pushing declining species closer to extinction. This outcome directly contradicts the state’s statutory goal of achieving its 30x30 goal, which aims to halt the extinction crisis.