They are the oldest living things on the face of the earth and the tallest. Some have looked down on the world around them for two thousand years. Earlier cultures had the good sense to revere them; but ours, since the mid-Nineteenth Century, has systematically destroyed them. The greatest remaining concentration of these great trees- and historically the scene of the greatest devastation by loggers- is along California's north coast. As a species, the coast redwoods are not endangered. New growth takes root easily. What is in danger is the old growth, described as trees that are more than 250 years old, with a trunk diameter of more than four feet at breast height. At one time, the majestic old growth forests covered millions of acres along a 50-mile wide coastal band stretching from San Francisco to southern Oregon.
Today, less than 90,000 acres of old-growth forests remain. Through the concerted and often courageous action of conservationists, starting in the early Twentieth Century, about 80,000 acres are now incorporated into state or national parks. Some of the most notable are:
Armstrong Redwoods State Reserve, located north of San Francisco on the Russian River, where two of the largest and most famous trees, named Parson Jones and Colonel Armstrong, stand under the watchful eye of a legendary park ranger.
Humboldt Redwoods State Park, located in the Eel River Basin of northern California, containing what is claimed to be the largest remaining contiguous old-growth redwood forest in the world. (The Humboldt Redwoods Interpretive Association maintains a website to provide useful information.)
The oldest trees are, of course, irreplaceable, and most of them are gone. The remainder is now, for the most part, under federal or state protection. Only a few thousand acres of old growth- perhaps as few as 6,000- are under the control of the big forest products companies. Is this really enough to cause the intense conflict that still rages between two or three corporations on one side and local conservationists on the other? In our opinion, the answer is yes, and for more than one reason.
The statistics are complicated and are therefore capable of being used in different ways by the differing parties. Published information suggests the following:
The total distribution of coast redwoods, including old and new growth, currently occupies about 1,740,000 acres;
Of these, only about 350,000 are in the public domain, of which about 80,000 acres are old growth;
Most of the coast redwood forests, amounting to well over a million acres, are owned by no more that seven industrial forest products companies, only a few of which are considered by the conservation community to be engaged in sustainable practices.
Some corporate executives argue that most of the old growth is already protected and that the destructive harvesting of the past was, in any event, not their responsibility. Conservationists argue, we believe correctly, that any remaining old growth forests- even as little as 6,000 acres- represent a national treasure which should be placed under a public trust. But the argument, and its intensity, run much deeper. A generally accepted paradigm is that the family-owned timber companies, many of which harvested sustainably, protecting the long-term health and productivity of their forests, have been taken over by a fewer number of corporate giants which were driven to dispose of the assets as quickly and efficiently as possible.
Pacific Lumber Company, owned by Maxxam, a Texas holding company, is regarded by its California neighbors as the worst offender in this regard. Another large operator, Louisiana Pacific, was similarly distrusted by its neighbors. When it sold to new owners, a respected family firm which also owns The Gap, Inc. retail chain, expectations were raised very high. But the new company, Mendocino Redwood Co., has quickly inherited much of the distrust which was lavished on its predecessor.
These problems run much deeper than preservation of the old growth. When short-term profits rather than long-term, sustained prosperity govern harvesting policy, the effect on the surrounding habitat is often devastating. Without natural protection, hillsides wash out into rivers, poorly constructed roads pour dirt and gravel into streams, and mudslides pour down on private homes. One of the world's richest and most beautiful natural habitats has suffered enormously. The coho salmon and steelhead trout are disappearing, many forms of wildlife are threatened, water is badly polluted by herbicides, and the quality of life for the human population is declining. The State of California has offered astonishingly little protection to neighboring communities. And this has led to local activism which has been characterized, sometimes fairly but more often falsely, as dangerous, irresponsible, and immature.
Unavoidably, the media cover the more flamboyant protesters. But closer examination always reveals a much more serious, thoughtful, and highly localized line of resistance, depending more on moral authority than finances to achieve results. There are many examples along the northern coast of California, such as respectable, grey-haired Mary Pjerrou, a long-time resident of the village of Elk, who leads the Redwood Coast Watersheds Alliance, to fight, in and out of court, to protect her community from destructive harvesting practices. These local resisters have used every tool at their disposal, including the Endangered Species Act. The case of the Northern Spotted Owl received national attention and occasional ridicule. It's helpful to keep in mind that, to a local activist, the federal laws protecting the habitat of an endangered species have also become a useful means of protecting the human habitat.
When the public at large finally reaches a consensus on an issue of this kind, solutions can emerge very quickly. A decade or so ago, the public became aware that tuna fishermen were setting their purse nets on the dolphins which swim just above the tuna schools, killing thousands of these appealing creatures every year. The most effective public response came in the form of consumerism, stirring a response from the major food companies to bring dolphin-free tuna to the supermarkets. Similarly, the coast redwood may now become a consumer protectorate. Home Depot, the largest retailer of wood products in the world, recently announced that, by the year 2003, it will carry only "certified" wood products. What this means, in practice, is that an independent organization has certified that the product being sold meets a standard of sustainability, according to the following criteria:
Timber sustainability- whether the company's methods will provide for growth rather than depletion of timber stocks over time;
Ecosystem maintenance- how well the company's operation protects endangered species, stream health and unique ecosystems such as old growth forests;
Financial viability strong enough to support good citizenship in the local community.
As one timber harvester said to a local newspaper: "The government hasn't been able to change forest practices. The environmental movement hasn't been able to change forest practices. But the consumer, through the purchase of sustainably grown and certified materials, will be able to finally change forest practices."
The many grass-roots organizations throughout California which have been out on the front lines for years- such as the Save the Redwoods League- deserve our respect and the time needed for us to understand the issues. And, as consumers, we have the ability right now to start looking for the "certified" label when we visit Home Depot or the local lumber yard.
They are the oldest living things on the face of the earth and the tallest. Some have looked down on the world around them for two thousand years. Earlier cultures had the good sense to revere them; but ours, since the mid-Nineteenth Century, has systematically destroyed them. The greatest remaining concentration of these great trees- and historically the scene of the greatest devastation by loggers- is along California's north coast. As a species, the coast redwoods are not endangered. New growth takes root easily. What is in danger is the old growth, described as trees that are more than 250 years old, with a trunk diameter of more than four feet at breast height. At one time, the majestic old growth forests covered millions of acres along a 50-mile wide coastal band stretching from San Francisco to southern Oregon.
