Quantcast

Protecting One of Earth's Greatest Treasures

Insights + Opinion

Michael Brune

This week one of the greatest natural treasures on Earth was protected. The giant sequoias are direct descendants of the enormous trees that once covered North America and loomed over dinosaurs in vast forests of fern and evergreen. Now they survive in just one small redoubt, the western slopes of the Sierra Nevada.

By the time modern man first encountered the giant trees, only sixty-odd scattered groves remained. Our first response was awestruck incredulity. Our second was to start cutting them down. The wood wasn't good for much. Since it was too fibrous and brittle for construction, most of it became shingles, stakes and matchsticks. The plundering lasted for decades, with one lumber company felling an estimated 8,000 trees in the Converse Basin alone. Soon, nearly a third of the giant sequoias were gone.

In fairness, it's difficult to imagine the mindset of a 19th century lumberman. We can more easily understand why over 1 million people would sign a petition to President Theodore Roosevelt in 1909 demanding that something be done to protect the trees (that's about one in 80 Americans, at a time when signing a petition required more than a mouse click). Little wonder that a fledgling conservation group called the Sierra Club adopted the giant sequoia for its first official seal and for every logo to this day. The word iconic has been overused to the point of meaninglessness, but no adjective better suits these majestic trees.

Thankfully, something was done. Eventually, about half of the remaining giant sequoias wound up under the protection of the National Park Service, in Yosemite, Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks. Finally, these trees would be safe from logging.

Most of the remaining trees, however, were in Sequoia National Forest, which was (and still is) managed by the U.S. Forest Service. The Forest Service was accustomed to managing trees and other natural resources as commodities, and the giant sequoias were no exception. Some logging of giant sequoias continued well into the 20th century. Almost as alarming, though, was the aggressive logging of other tree species in giant sequoia forests, which severely harmed the unique ecosystem on which the giant sequoias depend.

President Clinton's creation of Giant Sequoia National Monument on April 15, 2000, was designed to change that. The new national monument held most of the giant sequoia groves not already under federal protection. Although most national monuments are managed by the National Park Service, this one, which had been carved out of Sequoia National Forest, was placed under the authority of the Forest Service, but with a key provision:

No portion of the monument shall be considered to be suited for timber production, and no part of the monument shall be used in a calculation or provision of a sustained yield of timber from the Sequoia National Forest. Removal of trees, except for personal use fuel wood, from within the monument area may take place only if clearly needed for ecological restoration and maintenance or public safety.

The Forest Service was given three years to develop a plan for managing the new national monument. But when the plan was finally unveiled, under the Bush Administration, it didn't take the intent of the proclamation to heart. The Forest Service wanted to allow 7.5 million board feet of timber, enough to fill 1,500 logging trucks, to be removed from the monument each year.

Because the Forest Service's plan was so obviously at odds with the intent of the monument proclamation, the Sierra Club and five other groups, as well as the California attorney general, challenged it in court. More than two years later, we won. Judge Charles R. Breyer of the United States District Court for Northern California found that "the Forest Service's interest in harvesting timber has trampled the applicable environmental laws." Judge Breyer added that the monument plan was "decidedly incomprehensible."

The Forest Service was told to start over and try again.

Now, after six years, hundreds of thousands of public comments, and countless hours of hard work, the U.S. Forest Service has finally released a management plan for Giant Sequoia National Monument that doesn't default to cutting trees down. That's a significant departure from the Bush administration's practice of logging without limits.

Like the National Park Service, which has done a stellar job of managing its own giant sequoia forests, the new plan clearly states that the Forest Service will give priority to using fire (instead of chain saws) as a means of keeping the forests healthy (giant sequoias are resistant to fast-burning fires, which are essential to the giant sequoia ecosystem). It also spells out more clearly when trees may be removed for ecological and safety reasons. No giant sequoias greater than 12 inches in diameter can be cut, and then only as a last resort. The new plan even recommends the creation of a new 15,110 acre Moses Wilderness Area, which will be important as plants and wildlife adapt to climate change.

Is it perfect? No. There's still the possibility that some exemptions and loopholes could allow too much logging in the wrong places in the name of fire prevention. We look forward to working with our members, volunteers, scientists and the Forest Service to address those concerns.

But under this plan for the Giant Sequoia National Monument, it's at least possible that the U.S. Forest Service will finally treat the surviving giant sequoias like the irreplaceable treasures they are, using the same tools for ecological restoration that have worked so well in the neighboring national parks. We will remain vigilant to assure that this possibility becomes a reality and that these mighty forests are finally restored to health.

We've spent more than a century working to protect all of these forest giants. But for trees that have watched the seasons change for thousands of years, and for a species that's adapted and endured for millennia, these perilous decades have been only the merest wink of time. Let's hope their patience pays off.

You can thank the U.S. Forest Service for improving their plan and encourage them to make it even stronger here.

Visit EcoWatch’s BIODIVERSITY page for more related news on this topic.

 

EcoWatch Daily Newsletter

Juvenile hatchery salmon flushed from a tanker truck in San Francisco Bay, California. Ben Moon

That salmon sitting in your neighborhood grocery store's fish counter won't look the same to you after watching Artifishal, a new film from Patagonia.

Read More Show Less
Natdanai Pankong / EyeEm / Getty Images

By Lauren Panoff, MPH, RD

Coconut meat is the white flesh inside a coconut.

Read More Show Less
Sponsored
Arx0nt / Moment / Getty Images

By Taylor Jones, RD

Oats are a highly nutritious grain with many health benefits.

Read More Show Less
Pexels

Get ready to toast bees, butterflies and hummingbirds. National Pollinator Week is June 17-23 and it's a perfect time to celebrate the birds, bugs and lizards that are so essential to the crops we grow, the flowers we smell, and the plants that produce the air we breathe.

Read More Show Less
Alexander Spatari / Moment / Getty Images

It seems like every day a new diet is declared the healthiest — paleo, ketogenic, Atkins, to name a few — while government agencies regularly release their own recommended dietary guidelines. But there may not be an ideal one-size-fits-all diet, according to a new study.

Read More Show Less
Sponsored
Logging shown as part of a thinning and restoration effort in the Deschutes National Forest in Oregon on Oct. 22, 2014. Oregon Department of Forestry / CC BY 2.0

The U.S Forest Service unveiled a new plan to skirt a major environmental law that requires extensive review for new logging, road building, and mining projects on its nearly 200 million acres of public land. The proposal set off alarm bells for environmental groups, according to Reuters.

Read More Show Less
Maskot / Getty Images

By Kris Gunnars, BSc

It's easy to wonder which foods are healthiest.

Read More Show Less
Homes in Washington, DC's Brookland neighborhood were condemned to clear room for a highway in the 1960s. The community fought back. Brig Cabe / DC Public Library

By Teju Adisa-Farrar & Raul Garcia

In the summer of 1969 a banner hung over a set of condemned homes in what was then the predominantly black and brown Brookland neighborhood in Washington, DC. It read, "White man's roads through black men's homes."

Earlier in the year, the District attempted to condemn the houses to make space for a proposed freeway. The plans proposed a 10-lane freeway, a behemoth of a project that would divide the nation's capital end-to-end and sever iconic Black neighborhoods like Shaw and the U Street Corridor from the rest of the city.

Read More Show Less