COMMUNITY OPINION: California’s CEQA reform proposition threatens wildlife

This opinion was contributed by Aromas wildlife ecologist, farmer and author Sean McCain. The opinions expressed do not necessarily represent BenitoLink or other affiliated contributors. Lea este artículo en español aqui.

California is one of the most exceptional biodiversity hotspots in the world. The beautiful state contains thousands of unique plant, animal, and insect species spread out across its varied geography. This incredible biodiversity is the foundation for clean air, clean water, and resilient landscapes. Unfortunately, Proposition 45, a November ballot measure to dramatically reform the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), will lead to an acceleration of biodiversity loss in California.

CEQA reform is badly needed and there are some decent ideas in Proposition 45, but the broad language in the ballot measure will unleash so-called “greenfield development”. Greenfield development is a catchall term for “undeveloped open space”, often in rural and agricultural areas with high biodiversity.

Proponents of greenfield development say it is a good solution to the regulatory burden of urban construction, and that construction on undeveloped land is simply easier to achieve at scale. Indeed, despite the recent passing of laws aimed at reducing the regulatory burden of urban infill development, it remains easier to build large scale housing, data centers, and warehouses in rural undeveloped areas.

The massive scale of construction that occurs on undeveloped land is the biggest threat to biodiversity. Take the construction of an American suburb in rural California. Before concrete sidewalks and asphalt roadways are even poured, native vegetation is removed, wildlife habitat is buried, and the soil is compacted to such an extent that even the Moon’s surface appears more hospitable. What is left of the once verdant natural landscape is an ecological desert.

A similar process occurs with the construction of large scale data centers and warehouses, although this tends to occur on undeveloped land closer to urban areas.

Beyond the immediate impacts of removing nearly all signs of life to build, transforming the landscape has measurable secondary effects outside of the development area. In ecology, the term “edge effect” describes the zone between two habitats which is often filled with a high level of biotic interactions and biodiversity. Applied to the construction of a suburb, data center, or warehouse, this buffer area between the development and open space can often be an ecological dead zone.

Zooming further out, the scale of modern subdivision and infrastructure development can alter the watershed by diverting surface water flows, which can negatively impact groundwater recharge and drinking water supply. Terraforming the landscape at scale can also alter the chemical and physical properties of the soil leading to dry, depleted soils that cannot support the native biodiversity that was present prior to the disturbance. This land transformation routinely results in the colonization of the surrounding plant community by invasive shrubs and grasses, increasing the risk of devastating wildfire.

Wildlife is particularly sensitive to this scale of development. Habitat loss as a result of development is the leading cause of decline for mule deer, burrowing owls, most song birds, reptiles, and amphibians in California. A 2023 study measuring biodiversity before and after the construction of CEQA-approved projects found that nearly all native vertebrate species declined, with amphibians experiencing a near-total loss at every project site. Many of California’s most iconic species, such as Mountain lions, are known to aggressively avoid human development when selecting breeding habitat.

It is important to note that CEQA hasn’t prevented the population declines described above, but it has slowed many of them. Reforming CEQA to accelerate large scale construction on undeveloped rural land will be incredibly environmentally destructive, and it isn’t clear that the proposed infrastructure will adequately address the issues it is intended to. For example, building more single-family homes continues to be the worst way to address the housing shortage. Similarly, accelerating data center construction, a utility that appears to serve a shrinking minority of the public, is dumbfounding.

Amid the wave of Abundance-inspired legislation across the west, there are some strong solutions to address the growing housing, energy, and infrastructure shortages. Washington passed SB 5818 in 2022, which amended their state environmental policy act (SEPA) to promote urban infill housing. California passed AB 130 and SB 131 last year, which aim to reduce CEQA-related barriers to urban infill housing construction. The most significant housing law recently passed by the Federal Government is H.R. 6644, the “21st Century ROAD to Housing Act”, a behemoth law with many positive and negative implications for the environment that is outside the scope of this piece.

CEQA reform is important and it is needed, but unleashing greenfield development across the state, as proposition 45 will do, is unacceptable. Many western states are watching what California does to address housing and infrastructure issues over the next few years and my hope is that Californians will set an example by voting the misguided proposition 45 down. We can and should promote future legislation that addresses housing, energy, and infrastructure needs without further diminishing the ecological wonder that drives so many people to live in these special places.

BenitoLink invites all community members to share their ideas and opinions. By contacting Managing Editor Jim Johnson jimjohnson@benitolink.com or registering as a BenitoLink user in the top right corner of our home page and agreeing to follow our Terms of Use, you can write counter opinions or share your insights on current issues.