Let the Voters Decide on Old-Growth Trees

When Gray Davis was campaigning for governor, he promised that he would protect all remaining old-growth trees in California--a promise that he has thus far failed to keep.

Davis’ inaction sparked a citizens’ initiative known as the California Heritage Tree Preservation Act, which would protect trees over 150 years old on nonfederal commercial forest lands. It would not apply to urban or suburban settings. (A recent announcement by Boise Cascade regarding its old-growth practices does not affect California.)

The initiative is backed by a broad coalition of environmental groups and religious organizations that have been collecting signatures to qualify the initiative for California’s November ballot.

However, in a shameless effort to deprive Californians of their right to vote on this important measure, the California Forestry Assn.--the timber industry’s lobbying arm--filed an eleventh-hour writ to invalidate signatures gathered and force the process to start over. Although a Superior Court judge rejected the industry’s claims last month, logging interests have indicated that they will appeal.

The timber industry claims that the title and summary of the initiative, which were prepared by Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer, create “prejudice in favor of the initiative” by using “politically charged” words such as “old growth,” “heritage trees” and “protects.” The industry also claims that preventing the felling of ancient trees shouldn’t be described as “protecting” them.

The industry’s legal wranglings have led most observers to conclude that its true goal is to stall the signature-gathering and block the initiative from qualifying for a vote this year. The next eligible statewide ballot is 2004. By that time, timber corporations will have cut many of the trees that the initiative seeks to protect.

Californians should be outraged. The ancient-tree protection initiative would give voters an opportunity to choose between the short-term profits of timber executives and the long-term welfare of future generations.

The U.S. Forest Service estimates that, in the last 150 years, more than 80% of the old-growth forests in the Sierra Nevada have been lost because of logging. Even more dire estimates apply to the coastal redwood forests and the coast ranges in Northern California. Yet the chainsaws keep cutting.

On nonfederal lands in California there are virtually no meaningful protections for old-growth forests. Timber giants such as Pacific Lumber and Sierra Pacific Industries routinely clear-cut vast swaths of ancient stands on the lands they own. According to estimates from the state, Sierra Pacific has increased clear-cutting on its lands by more than 2,000% in the last several years. Neither Davis nor the state Legislature has acted to stop this devastation, despite the fact that such practices have been shown to irreparably damage vital wildlife habitat, as well as increase the risk of severe fires.

The proposed California Heritage Tree Preservation Act is a first step toward protecting the remnants of California’s original forests. While it would not protect whole ecosystems, it would at least stop the largest, oldest trees from being cut down and hauled to the mill.

Voters should be allowed to decide.