Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Children are stuck inside, glued to screens. Are 'forest schools' the antidote?

News Feed
Monday, September 9, 2024

On a glorious summer day, a preschooler named Roger teetered on rocks dotting a creek in eastern Orange County, unsure if he could make it back to where his classmates and caregivers were waiting. A volunteer youth mentor with Earthroots Field School stuck out her hand, reassuring the 3-year-old, who grasped it and took one confident step toward her. Then another. “There we go!” someone called out as he cleared the burbling waterway.Pushing edges — like learning to balance on rocks without a parent swooping in — is a central tenet of nature-based education, according to Angela Capps, a teacher at the school, one of a rapidly growing number of early education providers that are centered around the natural world. Youngsters use artificial eggs and natural materials to create nests during forest kindergarten summer camp at Earthroots Field School in Silverado Canyon. (Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times) Nature-based education — sometimes called forest schools, nature preschools or outdoor kindergartens — is based on a straightforward premise: “that it’s really good to have kids outdoors a goodly chunk of their day,” said David Sobel, professor emeritus at Antioch University New England and author of “Beyond Ecophobia: Reclaiming the Heart in Nature Education.”Indeed, researchers have found nature-based learning supports creativity, resiliency, executive function, school readiness and a host of other benefits for the body and mind. Scandinavia-originated forest schools arrived in the U.S. in the 1960s and are part of the broader nature-based education movement. In recent years, the concept has exploded amid worries about children getting lost in the virtual world and the country’s youth mental health crisis. The pandemic turbocharged the trend, as schools closed and parents sought safe learning environments for their preschoolers.As of the last school year, there were about 800 nature preschools in the U.S., a 200% increase since 2017, according to a survey by the nonprofit Natural Start Alliance, which supports access to nature-based early childhood education. California is among the top three states with the highest number of schools, which primarily serve children ages 3 to 5. Children and parents explore a creek on a temperate summer day during forest kindergarten camp at Big Oak Canyon, a 39-acre property that serves as home base for Earthroots Field School. (Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times) Proponents say children immersed in nature are happier and healthier — and may be poised to become the next generation of climate warriors. An early connection to nature can plant the seeds for its stewardship.“We only protect that which we love,” said Lia Grippo, president of the California Assn. of Forest Schools. “If we want children to grow into adults who can carry the burdens, honestly, we and previous generations have created for them, then they have to be in love with the land they live on.” While the movement is suffused with optimism — as growth shows no sign of slowing down — there are challenges.A large number of programs are unlicensed and therefore unable to tap public funding, prompting criticism that they’re only accessible to wealthy families who can pay tuition, and the movement is contending with a stark lack of diversity that hasn’t meaningfully improved even as programs multiplied. According to Alliance’s recent survey, white children made up 78% of the student bodies of nature preschools, compared with roughly 47% of the U.S population. Latino and Black children are underrepresented relative to the broader population. (Addressing racial disparities is top of mind for many nature educators, and this past year saw the creation of the Black Educator Network, an Alliance-affiliated professional community for Black educators in nature-based early education.) Many of the programs are geared toward preschoolers, in part because of a desire to front-load a child’s life with meaningful experiences in nature. Another reason is early education tends to be more flexible than grade school in terms of structure and regulation, or as Sobel puts it: It’s “less riddled with academic expectations so it’s a place where the innovation could happen easier.”Many programs strive to develop environmental literacy, which can broadly be defined as understanding and caring about environmental issues and having the skills needed to work toward solving them. But how do teachers start molding preschoolers into model environmental citizens? Jodi Levine, executive director of Earthroots Field School, helps a summer camp attendee make a nest. (Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times) Jodi Levine, executive director of Earthroots, said the teachers don’t directly discuss climate change with their very young learners. Creating lessons that help kids “fall in love with nature” is “all that they need to understand the beauty of it and the value so that it’s not destroyed,” she said. Becca Hackett-Levy, founder and director of Northeast L.A. Forest School, said learning about climate change “can start the day they come out of the womb.” It’s not about discussing the science or overarching concepts, but “about being present in nature and seeing what we as humans are doing.”Children also experience it firsthand. Last year, a brush fire forced a group to evacuate from Elysian Park. Ash rained down as the children were asked to share what they felt, saw, heard, tasted and smelled. Hackett-Levy said it was a concrete lesson about a warming climate colliding with dry invasive grasses. Fabienne Hadorn, co-founder of the Arroyo Nature School, which operates outdoors in a public park in Pasadena, said the topic sometimes comes up as children ask questions and make observations. The discussions don’t involve the term “climate change,” but center on the impacts — such as cars causing damage to the air. The emphasis is often on the need to take care of the planet. Scout, 2, plays in the mud kitchen at Arroyo Nature School. She made several delicious “cakes.” (Christina House / Los Angeles Times) Talking about climate change can be stressful, but not all stress is equal, according to Rahil Briggs, national director of Zero to Three’s HealthySteps, a pediatric primary care program. If a child is in a stable, safe and nurturing environment, they can experience “positive stress.” A small amount of motivating anxiety, she said, is helpful for learning new skills. It can be felt while learning to cross a stream or discussing the environment in a developmentally appropriate way. While California education officials have championed environmental literacy for students, foundational elements of nature school can put it at odds with public education and regulatory norms.Nature schools, for example, typically embrace managed risk. Many in the movement see exposing kids to experiences such as climbing a tree as key to developing the resiliency needed to withstand future stressors.Hadorn said her staff may offer guidance as the children climb trees, advising where to put their foot, or catch them if they falter, but the youngsters lead the charge. “We make sure a teacher at every moment is there if they want to climb,” she added. Children play beneath the trees on a warm summer day at Arroyo Nature School. (Christina House / Los Angeles Times) Operating outside can also create tension with public land managers. Levine said she was kicked out of two parks as she learned to navigate the rules — including the requirement that visitors stay on paths. “We know better now,” she said, and students are taught to respect the rules of places they go. (Eventually the school acquired a property in Silverado Canyon.) Hadorn said she moved locations in Lower Arroyo Park after officials tried to charge her a fee associated with renting out a specific area of the park — a category she doesn’t think applies to her roving band of children. She said she has a good relationship with the rangers and always makes sure the area is left in pristine condition. Hackett-Levy approached L.A. city park officials and worked out an agreement to hold classes in Elysian and Griffith parks. Previously, she’d sometimes try to nab a first-come, first-served area, but would find herself scrambling if someone else had gotten there first.According to the survey by Natural Start Alliance, 42% of nature schools are not licensed. The percentage is much smaller for programs that are based entirely outdoors, and, according to state regulators, there are none in California.Kit Harrington, Alliance’s senior policy advisor, said these schools often operate for fewer hours or with fewer children than required for licensing, or are otherwise exempt. Being unlicensed “could imply that something should be licensed but isn’t (as in an unlicensed doctor, for example),” she said in an email. “In the case of these programs, they are primarily operating in ways that don’t require them to be licensed.”In many states, fully outdoor schools aren’t eligible for licensing. California regulators indicated it’s a gray area and there does not appear to be an effort to clarify the rules or develop new ones. Earthroots Field School’s Jodi Levine helps children up a bank after checking out a creek. (Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times) Some nature educators want a path to licensing, but others fear regulations will undercut the spirit of the programs.Hadorn wonders what might become of tree climbing. Would they set a height limit? She acknowledges that there are upsides, however, such as providing security for parents. Zoli, 4, plays with yarn and sticks at Arroyo Nature School. (Christina House / Los Angeles Times) There’s also concern that the landscape — the primary classroom for nature schools — is becoming less safe for youngsters. Extreme phenomena are challenging nature schools’ emphasis on withstanding the elements by simply wearing the right gear. California — touted as a great backdrop for outdoor education because of its frequent bluebird days — is experiencing increasingly fierce wildfires and punishing heat.The elements disproportionately affect young children, whose smaller bodies absorb “more of the bad stuff,” said Briggs, who is also a clinical professor of pediatrics, psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York. As the climate and regulatory landscape evolves, nature continues to teach. On a recent scorching day, the cascading branches of a California peppertree enveloped a dozen children attending Arroyo Nature School. Hours passed without a phone in sight. Leo, Zoli and Francis wrapped yarn around sticks to create a makeshift jail. Desmond worked water into clay. Asa and Mylo read books about bugs and cars.Scout brought over a fresh-baked cake to sample. The secret ingredient? Mud.The gloopy stuff clung to the 2-year-old’s arms like organic opera gloves. It threatened to sully her white dress flecked with rainbows.She didn’t mind.

Proponents of 'forest schools' say children immersed in nature are happier and healthier — and may be poised to become the next generation of climate warriors.

On a glorious summer day, a preschooler named Roger teetered on rocks dotting a creek in eastern Orange County, unsure if he could make it back to where his classmates and caregivers were waiting.

A volunteer youth mentor with Earthroots Field School stuck out her hand, reassuring the 3-year-old, who grasped it and took one confident step toward her. Then another. “There we go!” someone called out as he cleared the burbling waterway.

Pushing edges — like learning to balance on rocks without a parent swooping in — is a central tenet of nature-based education, according to Angela Capps, a teacher at the school, one of a rapidly growing number of early education providers that are centered around the natural world.

A child builds a pretend bird's nest.

Youngsters use artificial eggs and natural materials to create nests during forest kindergarten summer camp at Earthroots Field School in Silverado Canyon.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Nature-based education — sometimes called forest schools, nature preschools or outdoor kindergartens — is based on a straightforward premise: “that it’s really good to have kids outdoors a goodly chunk of their day,” said David Sobel, professor emeritus at Antioch University New England and author of “Beyond Ecophobia: Reclaiming the Heart in Nature Education.”

Indeed, researchers have found nature-based learning supports creativity, resiliency, executive function, school readiness and a host of other benefits for the body and mind.

Scandinavia-originated forest schools arrived in the U.S. in the 1960s and are part of the broader nature-based education movement. In recent years, the concept has exploded amid worries about children getting lost in the virtual world and the country’s youth mental health crisis. The pandemic turbocharged the trend, as schools closed and parents sought safe learning environments for their preschoolers.

As of the last school year, there were about 800 nature preschools in the U.S., a 200% increase since 2017, according to a survey by the nonprofit Natural Start Alliance, which supports access to nature-based early childhood education. California is among the top three states with the highest number of schools, which primarily serve children ages 3 to 5.

Children explore a creek.

Children and parents explore a creek on a temperate summer day during forest kindergarten camp at Big Oak Canyon, a 39-acre property that serves as home base for Earthroots Field School.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Proponents say children immersed in nature are happier and healthier — and may be poised to become the next generation of climate warriors. An early connection to nature can plant the seeds for its stewardship.

“We only protect that which we love,” said Lia Grippo, president of the California Assn. of Forest Schools. “If we want children to grow into adults who can carry the burdens, honestly, we and previous generations have created for them, then they have to be in love with the land they live on.”

While the movement is suffused with optimism — as growth shows no sign of slowing down — there are challenges.

A large number of programs are unlicensed and therefore unable to tap public funding, prompting criticism that they’re only accessible to wealthy families who can pay tuition, and the movement is contending with a stark lack of diversity that hasn’t meaningfully improved even as programs multiplied.

According to Alliance’s recent survey, white children made up 78% of the student bodies of nature preschools, compared with roughly 47% of the U.S population. Latino and Black children are underrepresented relative to the broader population. (Addressing racial disparities is top of mind for many nature educators, and this past year saw the creation of the Black Educator Network, an Alliance-affiliated professional community for Black educators in nature-based early education.)

Many of the programs are geared toward preschoolers, in part because of a desire to front-load a child’s life with meaningful experiences in nature. Another reason is early education tends to be more flexible than grade school in terms of structure and regulation, or as Sobel puts it: It’s “less riddled with academic expectations so it’s a place where the innovation could happen easier.”

Many programs strive to develop environmental literacy, which can broadly be defined as understanding and caring about environmental issues and having the skills needed to work toward solving them. But how do teachers start molding preschoolers into model environmental citizens?

A woman shows a child a handful of twigs and grass.

Jodi Levine, executive director of Earthroots Field School, helps a summer camp attendee make a nest.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Jodi Levine, executive director of Earthroots, said the teachers don’t directly discuss climate change with their very young learners. Creating lessons that help kids “fall in love with nature” is “all that they need to understand the beauty of it and the value so that it’s not destroyed,” she said.

Becca Hackett-Levy, founder and director of Northeast L.A. Forest School, said learning about climate change “can start the day they come out of the womb.” It’s not about discussing the science or overarching concepts, but “about being present in nature and seeing what we as humans are doing.”

Children also experience it firsthand. Last year, a brush fire forced a group to evacuate from Elysian Park. Ash rained down as the children were asked to share what they felt, saw, heard, tasted and smelled. Hackett-Levy said it was a concrete lesson about a warming climate colliding with dry invasive grasses.

Fabienne Hadorn, co-founder of the Arroyo Nature School, which operates outdoors in a public park in Pasadena, said the topic sometimes comes up as children ask questions and make observations. The discussions don’t involve the term “climate change,” but center on the impacts — such as cars causing damage to the air. The emphasis is often on the need to take care of the planet.

A little girl plays in the mud.

Scout, 2, plays in the mud kitchen at Arroyo Nature School. She made several delicious “cakes.”

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

Talking about climate change can be stressful, but not all stress is equal, according to Rahil Briggs, national director of Zero to Three’s HealthySteps, a pediatric primary care program. If a child is in a stable, safe and nurturing environment, they can experience “positive stress.” A small amount of motivating anxiety, she said, is helpful for learning new skills. It can be felt while learning to cross a stream or discussing the environment in a developmentally appropriate way.

While California education officials have championed environmental literacy for students, foundational elements of nature school can put it at odds with public education and regulatory norms.

Nature schools, for example, typically embrace managed risk. Many in the movement see exposing kids to experiences such as climbing a tree as key to developing the resiliency needed to withstand future stressors.

Hadorn said her staff may offer guidance as the children climb trees, advising where to put their foot, or catch them if they falter, but the youngsters lead the charge. “We make sure a teacher at every moment is there if they want to climb,” she added.

Children play under a shade cloth strung between trees.

Children play beneath the trees on a warm summer day at Arroyo Nature School.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

Operating outside can also create tension with public land managers. Levine said she was kicked out of two parks as she learned to navigate the rules — including the requirement that visitors stay on paths. “We know better now,” she said, and students are taught to respect the rules of places they go. (Eventually the school acquired a property in Silverado Canyon.)

Hadorn said she moved locations in Lower Arroyo Park after officials tried to charge her a fee associated with renting out a specific area of the park — a category she doesn’t think applies to her roving band of children. She said she has a good relationship with the rangers and always makes sure the area is left in pristine condition.

Hackett-Levy approached L.A. city park officials and worked out an agreement to hold classes in Elysian and Griffith parks. Previously, she’d sometimes try to nab a first-come, first-served area, but would find herself scrambling if someone else had gotten there first.

According to the survey by Natural Start Alliance, 42% of nature schools are not licensed. The percentage is much smaller for programs that are based entirely outdoors, and, according to state regulators, there are none in California.

Kit Harrington, Alliance’s senior policy advisor, said these schools often operate for fewer hours or with fewer children than required for licensing, or are otherwise exempt. Being unlicensed “could imply that something should be licensed but isn’t (as in an unlicensed doctor, for example),” she said in an email. “In the case of these programs, they are primarily operating in ways that don’t require them to be licensed.”

In many states, fully outdoor schools aren’t eligible for licensing. California regulators indicated it’s a gray area and there does not appear to be an effort to clarify the rules or develop new ones.

Children climb a riverbank.

Earthroots Field School’s Jodi Levine helps children up a bank after checking out a creek.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Some nature educators want a path to licensing, but others fear regulations will undercut the spirit of the programs.

Hadorn wonders what might become of tree climbing. Would they set a height limit? She acknowledges that there are upsides, however, such as providing security for parents.

A child plays with a web of yarn and sticks.

Zoli, 4, plays with yarn and sticks at Arroyo Nature School.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

There’s also concern that the landscape — the primary classroom for nature schools — is becoming less safe for youngsters. Extreme phenomena are challenging nature schools’ emphasis on withstanding the elements by simply wearing the right gear. California — touted as a great backdrop for outdoor education because of its frequent bluebird days — is experiencing increasingly fierce wildfires and punishing heat.

The elements disproportionately affect young children, whose smaller bodies absorb “more of the bad stuff,” said Briggs, who is also a clinical professor of pediatrics, psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York.

As the climate and regulatory landscape evolves, nature continues to teach.

On a recent scorching day, the cascading branches of a California peppertree enveloped a dozen children attending Arroyo Nature School. Hours passed without a phone in sight. Leo, Zoli and Francis wrapped yarn around sticks to create a makeshift jail. Desmond worked water into clay. Asa and Mylo read books about bugs and cars.

Scout brought over a fresh-baked cake to sample. The secret ingredient? Mud.

The gloopy stuff clung to the 2-year-old’s arms like organic opera gloves. It threatened to sully her white dress flecked with rainbows.

She didn’t mind.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

The Major NJ Wildfire Shows Unexpected Urban Areas Are at Risk

A forest fire that erupted in New Jersey and spread overnight highlights the major wildfire risk faced by the state and other urban areas

Why New Jersey Is Actually a Place with Major Wildfire RiskA forest fire that erupted in New Jersey and spread overnight highlights the major wildfire risk faced by the state and other urban areasBy Stephanie Pappas edited by Jeanna BrynerFirefighters try to extinguish a fast-moving brush fire along on November 19, 2024 in New York City. Spencer Platt/Getty ImagesA forest fire that erupted in New Jersey yesterday morning was spurred by winds and dry weather, fulfilling a prediction by state officials that the state would see an active fire season this spring.The Jones Road Fire has burned 12,000 acres, more than the average area burned by wildfires in the state in an entire year. A drought warning has been in effect in New Jersey since November 2024, which means that many drought status indicators, such as current drinking water supplies, are below normal. And after a busy fall fire season, spring kicked off with an above-average number of fires as well. The Jones Road Fire, which forced evacuations in Ocean County, New Jersey, threatened hundreds of homes and businesses in a populated area.How Did the New Jersey Fire Spread?On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.State fire officials have not yet determined the cause of the fire, but it grew in dry, windy conditions. The blaze started at the edge of the Pinelands, a region of pine forests known for its wildfire risk. In fact, the Pinelands’ landscape has been shaped by fire—if it didn’t regularly burn, the ecosystem would transition into an oak forest, says David Robinson, New Jersey’s state climatologist and a professor at Rutgers University.“Traditionally, spring is fire season down in the Pinelands, so as far as seasonal timing to this fire, there’s nothing unusual,” Robinson says. “The fact that [the fire] spread so quickly may be a testament to the fact that it hasn’t rained in over 10 days.”Because of New Jersey’s population density, the state experiences a lot of what research ecologist Michael Gallagher of the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Northern Research Station calls “interface fires,” which are fires that start where human habitation bumps up against wildland. “Fires as small as an acre frequently threaten homes,” Gallagher says.But the Jones Road fire moved quickly into an exurb-type environment with numerous buildings in its path. Wind-borne embers sped the fire along, starting spot fires that ignited new blazes, Gallagher says. His research has shown that in the spring, the sun tends to heat the south side of pine trees in the forests of the Pinelands, causing the bark to dry and curl. These curls ignite easily in a fire. Winds blowing from the north are then well poised to catch these tiny flaming brands, blowing them ahead of the main fire.How Did New Jersey’s Drought Worsen Fire Conditions?October 2024 was the driest month in the state in 130 years, Robinson says. Though fires generally peak in spring in New Jersey, it saw a busy fire season in the fall, as did much of the Northeast.Winter brought some relief. This year, however, New Jersey’s fire season, which typically starts in March, began in earnest in January, state officials said in a March 3 news conference. Between January 1 and March 3, the state saw 214 fires burn through 514 acres, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection reported. In comparison, 69 fires burned 21 acres during the same period in 2024.“We’re continuing just where we left off last year,” said state fire chief Bill Donnelly in the briefing.Precipitation improved somewhat in March and April, Robinson says, but it hasn’t recovered to the point that the state is out of the drought. “The news is all kind of good, but we still have to remember we are in a drought warning,” he says. And while the overall trend has been toward more moisture, the Pinelands area had been going through a mini dry spell before the fire began, with almost two weeks without rain, he says. The sandy soil and pine needles in the regions don’t hold on to water for long.“This area dries out very quickly,” Robinson says.That means the weather was ripe for fire, and wind gusts of up to 25 miles per hour quickly whipped the fire toward inhabited areas.“Last night [the fire] was on the eastern end of the Pinelands, near the [Garden State] Parkway, and it hopped the Parkway and headed toward the coast in a populated area. So [this was] a real worrisome situation,” Robinson says.How Will Climate Change Affect New Jersey’s Fire Risk?Wildfires are aggressively managed in New Jersey, with prescribed burns to reduce fuel and quick suppression when fires do ignite, Robinson says. These evolving actions should tamp down any climate-change-related increase in risk and make it difficult to compare the state’s fire outlook with a preindustrial “normal.” New Jersey has a history of large fires, including a multiple-fire outbreak in 1963 known as Black Saturday, which burned 183,000 acres and killed seven people.Long-term projections suggest the state will get a little wetter in a warming world, though rain is not expected to become more frequent, but rather will likely be heavier when it does fall. Warming temperatures could nudge the state’s fire risk a little bit higher as fuels dry out faster, however.“Things become volatile pretty quickly,” Robinson says.

A Sequoia Forest in Detroit? Plantings to Improve Air Quality and Mark Earth Day

Arborists are hoping to transform vacant land on Detroit’s eastside by planting giant sequoias, the world’s largest trees

DETROIT (AP) — Arborists are turning vacant land on Detroit's eastside into a small urban forest, not of elms, oaks and red maples indigenous to the city but giant sequoias, the world's largest trees that can live for thousands of years.The project on four lots will not only replace long-standing blight with majestic trees, but could also improve air quality and help preserve the trees that are native to California’s Sierra Nevada, where they are threatened by ever-hotter wildfires.Detroit is the pilot city for the Giant Sequoia Filter Forest. The nonprofit Archangel Ancient Tree Archive is donating dozens of sequoia saplings that will be planted by staff and volunteers from Arboretum Detroit, another nonprofit, to mark Earth Day on April 22.Co-founder David Milarch says Archangel also plans to plant sequoias in Los Angeles, Oakland, California, and London. The massive conifers can grow to more than 300 feet (90 meters) tall with a more than 30-foot (9-meter) circumference at the base. They can live for more than 3,000 years.“Here’s a tree that is bigger than your house when it’s mature, taller than your buildings, and lives longer than you can comprehend,” said Andrew “Birch” Kemp, Arboretum Detroit's executive director.The sequoias will eventually provide a full canopy that protects everything beneath, he said.“It may be sad to call these .5- and 1-acre treescapes forests,” Kemp said. “We are expanding on this and shading our neighborhood in the only way possible, planting lots of trees.”Giant sequoias are resilient against disease and insects, and are usually well-adapted to fire. Thick bark protects their trunks and their canopies tend to be too high for flames to reach. But climate change is making the big trees more vulnerable to wildfires out West, Kemp said.“The fires are getting so hot that its even threatening them,” he said. Descendants of Stagg and Waterfall Archangel, based in Copemish, Michigan, preserves the genetics of old-growth trees for research and reforestation. The sequoia saplings destined for Detroit are clones of two giants known as Stagg — the world's fifth-largest tree — and Waterfall, of the Alder Creek grove, about 150 miles (240 kilometers) north of Los Angeles.In 2010, Archangel began gathering cones and climbers scaled high into the trees to gather new-growth clippings from which they were able to develop and grow saplings.Sequoias need space, and metropolitan Detroit has plenty of it.In the 1950s, 1.8 million people called Detroit home, but the city's population has since shrunk to about one-third of that number. Tens of thousands of homes were left empty and neglected.“There’s not another urban area I know of that has the kind of potential that we do to reforest," he said. “We could all live in shady, fresh air beauty. It's like no reason we can’t be the greenest city in the world.”Within the last decade, 11 sequoias were planted on vacant lots owned by Arboretum Detroit and nine others were planted on private properties around the neighborhood. Each now reaches 12 to 15 feet (3.6 to 4.5 meters) tall. Arboretum Detroit has another 200 in its nursery. Kemp believes the trees will thrive in Detroit.“They’re safer here ... we don’t have wildfires like (California). The soil stays pretty moist, even in the summer,” he said. “They like to have that winter irrigation, so when the snow melts they can get a good drink.” How will the sequoias impact Detroit? Caring for the sequoias will fall to future generations, so Milarch has instigated what he calls “tree school” to teach Detroit’s youth how and why to look after the new trees.“We empower our kids to teach them how to do this and give them the materials and the way to do this themselves,” Milarch said. “They take ownership. They grow them in the classrooms and plant them around the schools. They know we’re in environmental trouble.”Some of them may never have even walked in a forest, Kemp said.“How can we expect children who have never seen a forest to care about deforestation on the other side of the world?" Kemp said. "It is our responsibility to offer them their birthright.”City residents are exposed to extreme air pollution and have high rates of asthma. The Detroit sequoias will grow near a heavily industrial area, a former incinerator and two interstates, he said.Kemp’s nonprofit has already planted about 650 trees — comprising around 80 species — in some 40 lots in the area. But he believes the sequoias will have the greatest impact.“Because these trees grow so fast, so large and they’re evergreen they’ll do amazing work filtering the air here,” Kemp said. “We live in pretty much a pollution hot spot. We’re trying to combat that. We’re trying to breathe clean air. We’re trying to create shade. We’re trying to soak up the stormwater, and I think sequoias — among all the trees we plant — may be the strongest, best candidates for that.”Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Feb. 2025

Banned DDT discovered in Canadian trout 70 years after use, research finds

Potential danger to humans and wildlife from harmful pesticide discovered in fish at 10 times safety limitResidues of the insecticide DDT have been found to persist at “alarming rates” in trout even after 70 years, potentially posing a significant danger to humans and wildlife that eat the fish, research has found.Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, known as DDT, was used on forested land in New Brunswick, Canada, from 1952 to 1968. The researchers found traces of it remained in brook trout in some lakes, often at levels 10 times higher than the recommended safety threshold for wildlife. Continue reading...

Residues of the insecticide DDT have been found to persist at “alarming rates” in trout even after 70 years, potentially posing a significant danger to humans and wildlife that eat the fish, research has found.Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, known as DDT, was used on forested land in New Brunswick, Canada, from 1952 to 1968. The researchers found traces of it remained in brook trout in some lakes, often at levels 10 times higher than the recommended safety threshold for wildlife.“DDT is a probable carcinogen that we haven’t used in 70 years here [Canada], yet it’s abundant in fish and lake mud throughout much of the province at shockingly high levels,” said Josh Kurek, an associate professor in environmental change and aquatic biomonitoring at Mount Allison University in Canada and lead author of the research.The research, published in the journal Plos One, discovered that DDT pollution covers about 50% of New Brunswick province. Brook trout is the most common wild fish caught in the region, and the research found DDT was present in its muscle tissue, in some cases 10 times above the recommended Canadian wildlife guidelines.Researchers said DDT, which is classified by health authorities as a“probable carcinogen”, can persist in lake mud for decades after treatment and that many lakes in New Brunswick retain such high levels of legacy DDT that the sediments are a key source of pollution in the food web.“The public, especially vulnerable populations to contaminants such as women of reproductive age and children, need to be aware of exposure risk to legacy DDT through consumption of wild fish,” said Kurek.Throughout the 1950s and 60s, half the province’s conifer forests were sprayed with DDT, a synthetic insecticide used to control insects carrying diseases such as malaria and typhus. Canada banned the use of the substance in the 1980s.The 2001 Stockholm convention on persistent organic pollutants banned DDT worldwide for mass agricultural use, although it is still permitted in small quantities for malaria control.“This mess can’t be cleaned up,” said Kurek. “DDTs can persist in lake mud for decades to centuries and then cycle in the food web. The best approach is to manage the public’s exposure of legacy DDTs by encouraging everyone to follow fish consumption guidelines and consider reducing exposure.skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotion“Our findings are a clear wake-up call to abandon our overreliance on synthetic chemicals. Lessons need to be learned so we don’t repeat past mistakes. Our study hopefully informs on other contaminants that we apply broadly today, such as road salt and herbicides like glyphosate. We absolutely need to do things differently or our ecosystems will continue to face a lifetime of pollution.”

Portland City Council moves to reject controversial PGE Forest Park transmission project

The Portland City Council moved Thursday to reject a PGE transmission upgrade project in Forest Park that would require the utility to clearcut more than 370 trees on about 5 acres in the park.

The Portland City Council moved Thursday to reject a Portland General Electric transmission upgrade project in Forest Park that would require the utility to clearcut more than 370 trees on about 5 acres in the park. The decision Thursday night – described as “tentative” until a final vote on May 7 – came after councilors considered appeals by the Forest Park Conservancy and Forest Park Neighborhood Association to overturn a city of Portland hearings officer approval in March of PGE’s proposal. The vote followed five hours of presentations and public testimony and directs city attorneys to write an ordinance to grant the appeals and overturn the hearings officer’s decision. PGE can appeal to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals. PGE wants to rewire a 1970s transmission line and add a second line in the utility’s existing right-of-way and said the upgrade will address an increase in the region’s energy demand and prevent rolling blackouts in North and Northwest Portland. A report from Portland’s Permitting and Development Office in January recommended that the hearings officer turn down PGE’s project due to non-compliance with environmental standards and the city’s Forest Park management plan. But hearings officer Marisha Childs last month went against those recommendations, agreeing with PGE about the need for the project and finding that routing through Forest Park “is the least environmentally detrimental option” of all the alternatives PGE analyzed. The two groups that filed the appeals said PGE failed to meet city approval criteria and that project would set a precedent for further development in the park. PGE’s proposal had touched off a months-long clash between the utility and opponents who seek to protect the trees in the 5,200-acre park because they provide valuable habitat for countless wildlife species and climate benefits to all city residents. More than 3,000 people filed testimony about the project, including over 1,000 who sent in comments ahead of the appeals hearing, with the vast majority against the upgrade. Several hundred protesters gathered at City Hall before the hearing. They held cardboard cutouts of trees, animals and insects and signs that read “Save Forest Park,” “No more ecocide” and “You have to be nuts to destroy Forest Park.” A protester at Portland City Hall holds a sign opposing PGE's transmission upgrade project in Forest Park ahead of a City Council appeals hearing. Beth Nakamura“It’s important to have more energy transmission infrastructure, power lines and responsive grids, yet this is one of the situations where it is very clear there is no ambiguity. PGE can build this project elsewhere in order to keep the lights on,” Damon Motz-Storey, the Sierra Club Oregon chapter’s director, told the crowd. “These trees have been standing since before we even had electricity in homes.”Motz-Storey then led the rally in a chant: “Listen to the people and the trees, not PGE.” Protesters and park advocates filled the council chambers and two overflow rooms, testifying one after another that the PGE project runs counter to the city’s plan to sustain an old-growth forest in Forest Park and asking for the council to save the trees and protect the park. Protesters at Portland City Hall listen as the City Council considers the appeals on PGE's controversial Forest Park transmission project. Beth Nakamura“This project is unacceptable to us and the community and the critters and plants that depend on us to say no to cutting trees, building roads, bulldozing, filling in wetlands and streams and saying this is good for climate resilience,” said Scott Fogarty, executive director with Forest Park Conservancy, the group that filed one of the appeals. The conservancy formed to maintain trails and restore native habitat in the park. Fogarty said PGE’s proposed plan to offset losses from the upgrade does not address cutting down 100-year-old trees and the benefits they bring. The mitigation proposal includes planting Oregon white oak seedlings near the project area, seeding the transmission corridor and access road edges with a pollinator-friendly native seed mix and paying a fee to the city to remove invasive species in the park. He also said the upgrade would pave the way for city approval of future phases of the project in Forest Park and lead to more tree removal. PGE has said those future phases could affect another 15 acres of the park. “Is 5 acres acceptable? Is 20 acres acceptable? Where do we draw the line?” Fogarty asked the council members. “One could argue losing just one 100-year-old tree is unacceptable, let alone 5 acres. In the age of climate resilience, this project flies in the face of retaining carbon suckers in a region that is seeing increased impacts from climate change, including potential fire danger.” PGE argued before the council that the project area is neither old nor ancient forest and that the maintenance of existing transmission lines is key to preserving blackout-free electricity. A proposal by Portland General Electric to cut more than 370 trees in Forest Park to upgrade transmission lines has spurred opposition. The utility and renewable energy proponents say the upgrades are needed to address transmission bottlenecks and fulfill state clean energy mandates.courtesy of Portland General Electric“Alleviating this choke point is important because our experts predict that as early as 2028 there is the risk of outages during times of peak demand,” said Randy Franks, a senior project manager for PGE. “Think about the hottest part of the day, during an ongoing heat wave, with no fans and no air conditioning.”Franks said the more than 20 alternatives PGE examined were not practical, would require the utility to take property through eminent domain, would take too much time or cost too much – and could lead to similar or even greater negative impacts to trees and wildlife outside the park. He said the city’s Forest Park management plan acknowledges the existence of utility corridors and the need to maintain and upgrade them over time and that doing so will help reduce global warming.“If we are serious about combating climate change, we simply have to improve the grid, keep it reliable and increase transmission capacity,” Franks said. Only a handful of people testified in favor of PGE’s plans. “Utilities around the country, including ours, are facing the most rapid load increases in a generation and concomitant reliability challenges. At the same time, our state is laboring to remove from the grid the coal and gas plants that are fueling climate change locally,” said Angus Duncan, the former chair of the Northwest Conservation and Power Planning Council, a group tasked with developing and maintaining a regional power plan. “We need to rebuild the power system to exclude fossil generation.” Council members Angelita Morillo and Steve Novick questioned the assertion that PGE’s proposal would help combat climate change. Novick also asked why PGE did not provide more evidence as to why the transmission upgrades are needed by 2028, not at a later date. Other councilors said they did not feel PGE had proved an alternative outside the park was unfeasible and did not present a compelling mitigation plan. And most of the 12 council members said they disagreed with PGE and the hearings officer that the proposal meets the parameters of the park’s management plan. “Ultimately, I think what has been proposed is probably the best option in the park,” said Councilor Eric Zimmerman. But, he said, nothing in PGE’s proposal showed that the council should overrule the Forest Park management plan. “I don’t think the standard has been met to not follow that plan,” Zimmerman said.Council President Elana Pirtle-Guiney agreed. “If an alternative (to the project) exists, we should not be granting an exception,” she said. Councilor Dan Ryan said the decision will likely be one of many to pit the needs for clean electricity against those of protecting the environment. “Portland will be having more and more tough decisions that include extremely difficult trade-offs. This is just where we are in managing the climate crisis,” Ryan said. “I think PGE worked really hard to find the best option and yet we all want a different option.” That’s because, he added, he – like other Portlanders – loves the park and its trees. “Forest Park is a cathedral,” Ryan said. “And maybe it’s Holy Week and I’m just treating this in a very spiritual way, but it’s just really difficult for me to think I could take a vote that would on the appearance be about deforesting Forest Park during this sacred week.” — Gosia Wozniacka covers environmental justice, climate change, the clean energy transition and other environmental issues. Reach her at gwozniacka@oregonian.com or 971-421-3154.Our journalism needs your support. Subscribe today to OregonLive.com.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.