California’s Western Joshua tree is an iconic part of our desert landscape and is cherished by locals and visitors of the High Desert alike. But recent, overly broad conservation efforts have created significant challenges for the very communities that have been faithful stewards of the species for decades.
Imagine not being able to turn on the lights in your home because of a permit delay. Or having a failing septic system you can’t fix. Or living in a community still waiting for reliable water and sewer service. These aren’t hypothetical situations. They’re happening right now, and they involve basic, life-sustaining needs.
As the new State Senator representing many of the communities where these trees grow, I’ve heard directly from residents, homeowners, and local agencies about a serious problem: the Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act, as it is currently being implemented, is not working for the people it affects every day.
The Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act did not move through the normal policy committee process where local governments, water agencies, and homeowners could fully weigh in. Instead, it was folded into a budget trailer bill and fast-tracked with minimal public vetting in 2023.
That approach may have been advantageous for the select few that negotiated the bill’s provisions behind closed doors, but it left many practical, on-the-ground problems unresolved for the communities now living under the law.
That is why I introduced a three-bill package, Senate Bills 1061, 1062, and 1063, to fix how the Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act works in the real world.
One of the biggest issues starts with what actions constitute the taking of a Western Joshua tree.
Under the current framework, the definition of the word “take” as it pertains to the Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act is very broad, and based on a definition that was built for wildlife that can be hunted or pursued, not for a plant that stays rooted in the ground.
The result is that even when a homeowner or small project is trying to save a tree by moving it a short distance, they can still be pulled into a full take-permit process.
However, even inside the full take-permitting process, the true killing of a tree is not usually the result, because the California Department of Fish and Wildlife often conditions the permit on relocating the tree instead of cutting it down. In other words, the practical outcome on the ground is already relocation, not destruction.
SB 1061 simply recognizes that reality upfront by making clear that moving a tree within a limited, commonly owned footprint should not trigger the same permitting burden as cutting it down.
Instead of requiring a “take” permit and then effectively issuing a relocation permit, this bill creates a streamlined process for homeowners to relocate trees with out the burden of high fees or complex mitigation measures and allows CDFW to focus on cases where real loss is at stake.
It is also important to recognize what the science says. Both the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s formal status review and the federal analyses by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service of the Western Joshua tree have evaluated the best available scientific information and found that listing the species as endangered or threatened is not warranted. In fact, the status review found that the Western Joshua tree is currently abundant and widespread, which lessens the overall impact of potential threats and substantially lowers the risk of extinction in the foreseeable future.
But even still, rigid mitigation fee structures can pose a significant financial challenge for projects of all types and sizes.
Existing law already requires periodic review of the species’ status and adjustment of fees to ensure adequate conservation funding, but it does not clearly describe how CDFW should structure those fees when different projects have very different impacts.
As a result, a single fee schedule may not reflect the reality of a project as it is being carried out on the ground, potentially overcharging some projects that are far less disruptive than others.
Senate Bill 1062 allows for a more intentional approach to fee design, to better align costs with actual impacts, rather than mandating a one-size-fits-all fee structure. Specifically, this bill promotes a fairer and more practical fee structure under the WJTCA by directing CDFW to consider whether mitigation fees should be proportionate to a project’s actual impact and tiered by project size, type, or other criteria.
Tailoring fee schedules to be proportional to the project means lowering costs, protecting smaller or lower-impact projects from carrying the same financial burden as larger projects, and reducing the risk of disproportionate costs being passed on to local agencies, ratepayers, and rural communities.
But by far the most problematic consequence of the WJTCA has fallen on regular homeowners, who are facing significant difficulty in maintaining safe and habitable homes.
If you need to install or repair a utility line – whether it is electricity, water, sewer, or wildfire hardening – you may be required to go through a lengthy permitting process, pay fees, and complete mitigation measures.
In some cases, this can delay access to essential services or make projects financially out of reach. I have heard from seniors on fixed incomes who are told they must pay mitigation fees for multiple Western Joshua trees to replace a failing septic tank, and from working families who discover that the mitigation bill for trees in their yard makes building and ADU and connecting it to life-sustaining services – as required by law – financially out of reach. These are not luxury projects. These are basic health, safety, and housing needs.
Senate Bill 1063 addresses this directly. It creates an expedited permitting pathway for projects tied to life-sustaining services and removes fees and complex mitigation requirements in these situations. That means a homeowner can fix a failing septic system, connect to sewer, or harden their home against wildfire without facing prohibitive, per-tree mitigation fees that put the project out of reach.
No family should be left waiting for electricity or clean water because of a permitting delay.
The Legislature recently took up this bill package in the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee. After consideration, SB 1061 and SB 1062 passed out of the committee and will continue moving forward, while SB 1063 stalled and did not advance. This outcome is disappointing, particularly given the real and ongoing challenges homeowners face when trying to access basic, life-sustaining services. SB 1063 was designed to address those urgent needs, and its failure to move forward leaves many of those concerns unresolved.
To be clear, this bill package does not pave the way for invasive, large-scale development that would disrupt the character of communities or destroy the beautiful wildlands that exist in the Desert. It simply improves how the law works in practice.
The Legislature now has a chance to restore balance and reason to how we work around this iconic species, and SB 1061, 1062, and 1063 are a targeted attempt to do exactly that by grounding conservation in sound science, reducing unnecessary burdens on residents and public utility providers.
More information on the Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act bill package, including detailed fact sheets and updates, is available online visiting senate.ca.gov/ochoabogh.
We can preserve the expansive natural habitat of our beloved desert species while also recognizing the needs of the people who live in these communities. Conservation and common sense are not mutually exclusive.
California can do both.
Published by Hi-Desert Star on May 20, 2026. Print version only.