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.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

New Multnomah Falls parking fees spark debate, federal review

News Feed
Wednesday, April 24, 2024

Multnomah Falls visitors have already had to contend with traffic jams, new timed entry permits and occasional closures. Now some are staring at new parking fees.A small private parking lot across the street from the waterfall on the Historic Columbia River Highway has become a flashpoint for debate after new parking meters went up last weekend charging visitors up to $20 for what had previously been free spots.Sasquatch Shuttle — the company that operates the lot, runs a seasonal shuttle service to the falls and offers guided tours of the historic highway – implemented the new parking fees Thursday to alleviate congestion in the Columbia Gorge, the Salem Statesman Journal first reported Friday.The fees do not affect the main Multnomah Falls parking lot off Interstate 84, which remains free. Sasquatch Shuttle said it has leased the small lot on the historic highway from Union Pacific Railroad and will charge between $5 and $20 based on the day and season.The fees are reportedly rankling some visitors and have raised concerns within the U.S. Forest Service, which manages Multnomah Falls and is reviewing the situation.“While the Forest Service is interested in new approaches to reduce congestion and increase traffic safety around Multnomah Falls, we need to ensure it’s done in way that balances public access needs through an equity lens with our responsibilities to protect and preserve this landscape,” the federal agency said in an emailed statement.“We typically do that by requiring projects or changes like this to undergo a detailed approval process, including coordination with our partners, to ensure compliance with the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area Act,” the statement said.Nic Granum, deputy forest supervisor for the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area, said although new parking fees have been under discussion for years, it isn’t clear whether Sasquatch Shuttle is permitted to implement them. The ownership of that parking lot is also currently in question, despite the arrangement struck between the railroad company and shuttle service, Granum said.The national scenic area is a confusing patchwork of federal, state, county, city and private lands, where small parcels can lead to major headaches whenever land ownership is called into question.Granum said there’s currently no timeline for sorting out the issue at Multnomah Falls, but emphasized the agency’s sense of urgency.“It’s a high priority for us to get this resolved,” Granum said. “I think the more clarity we have the better.”People visit Multnomah Falls in the Columbia River Gorge on Tuesday, April 23, 2024.Jamie Hale/The OregonianFee signs are set up in the Sasquatch Shuttle pay lot at Multnomah Falls.Jamie Hale/The OregonianMeanwhile, Sasquatch Shuttle owners said they are simply implementing a crowd control measure that has been a long time coming, using their status as a private company to enact change much more quickly than the various government agencies that operate in the Columbia Gorge.“We’re doing what the government was unable to do,” co-owner Kent Krumpschmidt said.Sasquatch Shuttle also owns a 250-space parking lot in nearby Bridal Veil, where people can pay $5 for parking and a shuttle ride to Multnomah Falls. The company said those who don’t want to pay up to $20 to park in the roughly 48-space lot in front of the falls are encouraged to use their shuttle instead.On Tuesday afternoon, the company’s small pay lot near Multnomah Falls was nearly full, even though plenty of parking spaces were open in the free lot off Interstate 84. A parking attendant, who was busy collecting $10 payments, said the company would be charging $20 once its shuttle was up and running in May.The Sasquatch Shuttle parking, located steps away from the Multnomah Falls Lodge, offers premium access for those who want it, the company said. They also happen to be the only parking spots for those visiting the waterfall via the Historic Columbia River Highway, which runs parallel to the interstate.There is no convenient way to get from the historic highway to the main Multnomah Falls parking lot, forcing visitors to either bypass the main attraction of the famed “waterfall corridor” or jockey for spots in the small pay lot. That design has led to the infamous traffic congestion issues, which all parties in the Columbia River Gorge have been working to correct.“It’s a massive safety issue, and it’s also an environmental concern,” said Krumpschmidt, who is a former deputy with the Multnomah County Sheriff’s Office. “There were many instances where emergency response was delayed sometimes drastically.”Krumpschmidt and fellow co-owner Alan Dayley said they are not motivated by profit, but by a desire to alleviate that congestion. Money from the parking spots goes toward supporting their shuttle service, they said, as well as employees who monitor the parking lots.“Nobody likes change,” Dayley said. “No one’s going to like having to pay for something that’s historically been free.”As for the U.S. Forest Service review, the Sasquatch Shuttle owners said their understanding is that the government agency is not challenging the fees themselves but the installation of a fee machine in the parking lot. They also said the question of who owns the lot has been bouncing around for nearly two years, with no resolution and no evidence presented to them either way.Until it all gets resolved, the new parking fees will remain with peak tourism season set to begin in May.Visitors who park in the main lot off Interstate 84 will continue to be able to park there for free, though $2 timed entry permits will once again be required between May 24 and Sept. 2, from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. daily. Those permits will not be required for cars parking in the new Sasquatch Shuttle pay lot.Granum urged the public not to frame the parking issue as a conflict between Sasquatch Shuttle and the U.S. Forest Service. Both entities share the same vision for Multnomah Falls and the Historic Columbia River Highway, he said.“We have different authorities and different objectives just by our nature, but we’re all users of the gorge and stewards of all the responsibilities we have,” including recreational access, environmental considerations and economic development, Granum said. “All of those things are important and sometimes finding the balance in those doesn’t happen overnight.”The owners of Sasquatch Shuttle agreed, citing their continued good relationship with the agency.“We like the forest service, we’re all going the same direction and we all have the same end goal in mind,” Dayley said. “We have no beef with them whatsoever.”--Jamie Hale covers travel and the outdoors and co-hosts the Peak Northwest podcast. Reach him at 503-294-4077, jhale@oregonian.com or @HaleJamesB.Our journalism needs your support. Subscribe today to OregonLive.com.

A private shuttle company is charging up to $20 to park in spots that used to be free.

Multnomah Falls visitors have already had to contend with traffic jams, new timed entry permits and occasional closures. Now some are staring at new parking fees.

A small private parking lot across the street from the waterfall on the Historic Columbia River Highway has become a flashpoint for debate after new parking meters went up last weekend charging visitors up to $20 for what had previously been free spots.

Sasquatch Shuttle — the company that operates the lot, runs a seasonal shuttle service to the falls and offers guided tours of the historic highway – implemented the new parking fees Thursday to alleviate congestion in the Columbia Gorge, the Salem Statesman Journal first reported Friday.

The fees do not affect the main Multnomah Falls parking lot off Interstate 84, which remains free. Sasquatch Shuttle said it has leased the small lot on the historic highway from Union Pacific Railroad and will charge between $5 and $20 based on the day and season.

The fees are reportedly rankling some visitors and have raised concerns within the U.S. Forest Service, which manages Multnomah Falls and is reviewing the situation.

“While the Forest Service is interested in new approaches to reduce congestion and increase traffic safety around Multnomah Falls, we need to ensure it’s done in way that balances public access needs through an equity lens with our responsibilities to protect and preserve this landscape,” the federal agency said in an emailed statement.

“We typically do that by requiring projects or changes like this to undergo a detailed approval process, including coordination with our partners, to ensure compliance with the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area Act,” the statement said.

Nic Granum, deputy forest supervisor for the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area, said although new parking fees have been under discussion for years, it isn’t clear whether Sasquatch Shuttle is permitted to implement them. The ownership of that parking lot is also currently in question, despite the arrangement struck between the railroad company and shuttle service, Granum said.

The national scenic area is a confusing patchwork of federal, state, county, city and private lands, where small parcels can lead to major headaches whenever land ownership is called into question.

Granum said there’s currently no timeline for sorting out the issue at Multnomah Falls, but emphasized the agency’s sense of urgency.

“It’s a high priority for us to get this resolved,” Granum said. “I think the more clarity we have the better.”

Multnomah Falls Parking Fees

People visit Multnomah Falls in the Columbia River Gorge on Tuesday, April 23, 2024.Jamie Hale/The Oregonian

Multnomah Falls Parking Fees

Fee signs are set up in the Sasquatch Shuttle pay lot at Multnomah Falls.Jamie Hale/The Oregonian

Meanwhile, Sasquatch Shuttle owners said they are simply implementing a crowd control measure that has been a long time coming, using their status as a private company to enact change much more quickly than the various government agencies that operate in the Columbia Gorge.

“We’re doing what the government was unable to do,” co-owner Kent Krumpschmidt said.

Sasquatch Shuttle also owns a 250-space parking lot in nearby Bridal Veil, where people can pay $5 for parking and a shuttle ride to Multnomah Falls. The company said those who don’t want to pay up to $20 to park in the roughly 48-space lot in front of the falls are encouraged to use their shuttle instead.

On Tuesday afternoon, the company’s small pay lot near Multnomah Falls was nearly full, even though plenty of parking spaces were open in the free lot off Interstate 84. A parking attendant, who was busy collecting $10 payments, said the company would be charging $20 once its shuttle was up and running in May.

The Sasquatch Shuttle parking, located steps away from the Multnomah Falls Lodge, offers premium access for those who want it, the company said. They also happen to be the only parking spots for those visiting the waterfall via the Historic Columbia River Highway, which runs parallel to the interstate.

There is no convenient way to get from the historic highway to the main Multnomah Falls parking lot, forcing visitors to either bypass the main attraction of the famed “waterfall corridor” or jockey for spots in the small pay lot. That design has led to the infamous traffic congestion issues, which all parties in the Columbia River Gorge have been working to correct.

“It’s a massive safety issue, and it’s also an environmental concern,” said Krumpschmidt, who is a former deputy with the Multnomah County Sheriff’s Office. “There were many instances where emergency response was delayed sometimes drastically.”

Krumpschmidt and fellow co-owner Alan Dayley said they are not motivated by profit, but by a desire to alleviate that congestion. Money from the parking spots goes toward supporting their shuttle service, they said, as well as employees who monitor the parking lots.

“Nobody likes change,” Dayley said. “No one’s going to like having to pay for something that’s historically been free.”

As for the U.S. Forest Service review, the Sasquatch Shuttle owners said their understanding is that the government agency is not challenging the fees themselves but the installation of a fee machine in the parking lot. They also said the question of who owns the lot has been bouncing around for nearly two years, with no resolution and no evidence presented to them either way.

Until it all gets resolved, the new parking fees will remain with peak tourism season set to begin in May.

Visitors who park in the main lot off Interstate 84 will continue to be able to park there for free, though $2 timed entry permits will once again be required between May 24 and Sept. 2, from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. daily. Those permits will not be required for cars parking in the new Sasquatch Shuttle pay lot.

Granum urged the public not to frame the parking issue as a conflict between Sasquatch Shuttle and the U.S. Forest Service. Both entities share the same vision for Multnomah Falls and the Historic Columbia River Highway, he said.

“We have different authorities and different objectives just by our nature, but we’re all users of the gorge and stewards of all the responsibilities we have,” including recreational access, environmental considerations and economic development, Granum said. “All of those things are important and sometimes finding the balance in those doesn’t happen overnight.”

The owners of Sasquatch Shuttle agreed, citing their continued good relationship with the agency.

“We like the forest service, we’re all going the same direction and we all have the same end goal in mind,” Dayley said. “We have no beef with them whatsoever.”

--Jamie Hale covers travel and the outdoors and co-hosts the Peak Northwest podcast. Reach him at 503-294-4077, jhale@oregonian.com or @HaleJamesB.

Our journalism needs your support. Subscribe today to OregonLive.com.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

They survived wildfires. But something else is killing Greece’s iconic fir forests

In the Peloponnese mountains, the usually hardy trees are turning brown even where fires haven’t reached. Experts are raising the alarm on a complex crisisIn the southern Peloponnese, the Greek fir is a towering presence. The deep green, slow-growing conifers have long defined the region’s high-altitude forests, thriving in the mountains and rocky soils. For generations they have been one of the country’s hardier species, unusually capable of withstanding drought, insects and the wildfires that periodically sweep through Mediterranean ecosystems. These Greek forests have lived with fire for as long as anyone can remember.So when Dimitrios Avtzis, a senior researcher at the Forest Research Institute (FRI) of Elgo-Dimitra, was dispatched to document the aftermath of a spring blaze in the region, nothing about the assignment seemed exceptional. He had walked into countless burnt landscapes, tracking the expected pockets of mortality, as well as the trees that survived their scorching. Continue reading...

In the southern Peloponnese, the Greek fir is a towering presence. The deep green, slow-growing conifers have long defined the region’s high-altitude forests, thriving in the mountains and rocky soils. For generations they have been one of the country’s hardier species, unusually capable of withstanding drought, insects and the wildfires that periodically sweep through Mediterranean ecosystems. These Greek forests have lived with fire for as long as anyone can remember.So when Dimitrios Avtzis, a senior researcher at the Forest Research Institute (FRI) of Elgo-Dimitra, was dispatched to document the aftermath of a spring blaze in the region, nothing about the assignment seemed exceptional. He had walked into countless burnt landscapes, tracking the expected pockets of mortality, as well as the trees that survived their scorching.Hardy slow-growing conifers usually thrive in the Peloponnese mountains.This time, however, something felt wrong almost immediately. The scale was off. As Avtzis and his colleagues moved deeper into the trees, the familiar sights of a post-fire forest gave way to something far more unsettling.The scale of the damage was profound“There were hundreds upon hundreds of hectares worth of lost trees,” he says – not just those lost in the fire itself, but large patches dead and dying among the green, where the flames had not reached them.In the Peloponnese mountains, whole stretches of green forest are turning orange, as the long-lived fir trees dry up and die. The level of destruction was so far beyond what Avtzis had seen in previous years, it forced him to immediately contact the environment ministry and raise the alarm.“The scale of the damage was profound,” he says.Researchers found ‘hundreds upon hundreds of hectares worth of lost trees’.Researchers across Greece and central Europe have warned for years that climate breakdown will push local ecosystems into unfamiliar territory. Wildfires are not new: according to data from the Global Forest Watch, between 2001 and 2024, Greece lost 200,000 hectares (500,000 acres) of trees to fires.But fires are not the only thing killing trees, and the forces shaping wildfire aftermath have shifted dramatically in the past five years. What Avtzis saw was the result of multiple pressures stacking on top of one another, each amplified by the climate crisis.The first is severe, prolonged drought, now a defining feature of Greece’s climate. The dryness is compounded by a steady decline in winter snow. A study by the Institute for Environmental Research and Sustainable Development and the National Observatory of Athens found that between 1991 and 2020, Greece lost an average of 1.5 days of snow cover a year, eroding one of the country’s most important sources of slow-release moisture.Prolonged droughts and reduced snow fall are among the causes of the forest die-off. Then comes the biological fallout. Drought-degraded soils and shrinking groundwater leave fir trees weakened, creating an opening for insects. “We know that severe drought weakens the trees,” Avtzis says. “But when we looked more closely at what was happening, we found bark beetles had taken advantage. They were attacking the trees.”Bark beetles – particularly those in the Scolytinae subfamily – have emerged as a growing threat to Greece’s already stressed forests over the past two years.Their name is owed to the fact that the insects bore beneath the outer bark, cutting into the systems trees rely on to transport water and nutrients. Once they establish themselves inside drought-stressed firs, their numbers can rise rapidly. “When a population reaches outbreak levels,” Avtzis says, “it becomes extremely difficult to bring it back under control.”The phenomenon is not confined to Greece. Bark beetle outbreaks have become a wider European concern, Avtzis says, mirroring patterns seen elsewhere on the continent. “Southern Europe may be more vulnerable,” he says, “but we’re observing similar dynamics in countries like Spain.”The implication is concerning – indicating that the drivers behind the Peloponnese die-offs are not local anomalies, but symptoms of a broader ecological shift.Yet amid the accelerating pressures of the climate crisis, there are cautious notes of optimism. Nikos Markos, a forest climatologist at FRI, points to the regenerative capacity of Mediterranean ecosystems. “Post-fire regeneration can be quite satisfactory,” he says, “even in some areas of the Peloponnese.”Forest recovery after fires is slow and uneven. Recovery, however, is slow and uneven. “It is not something we can see in the first year,” Markos adds. “It may take four or five years.”Avtzis is pragmatic when he speaks about what it will take to protect Greece’s highland forests. “I’m going to be realistic,” he says. “The government and the ministries have to take the initiative and mobilise the necessary funding to confront this problem.”Some steps, he notes, were already beginning by the time he had submitted his report on the Peloponnese. “They contacted the major regional forest services and asked how much funding was needed,” he says. “What really matters now is whether those plans are actually put into action.”Asked whether Greece’s shifting meteorological patterns are likely to keep accelerating, and whether that poses an existential risk for southern Europe’s forests, Avtzis pauses. “There is no time to be pessimistic,” he says. “But we have a lot of work to do.”The tools, he says, already exist. “We have the knowledge. We have the scientists. Now, we need to start going out and talking about this,” he says. “Because what we’re seeing now is only going to become more frequent and more intense.”Find more age of extinction coverage here, and follow the biodiversity reporters Phoebe Weston and Patrick Greenfield in the Guardian app for more nature coverageThe climate crisis will make extreme weather events more frequent for Europe’s forests.

Forests
Crisis
Mountains

How the Trump administration is fast-tracking logging in Illinois’ only national forest

Facing pressure to increase timber harvests, the Forest Service is sidestepping rigorous environmental reviews and limiting public participation.

When the Forest Service approved the sale of nearly 70 acres for commercial logging in southern Illinois’ Shawnee National Forest in late 2024, Sam Stearns was furious. The Shawnee is the only national forest in the state, and one of the smallest in the nation. The agency initially billed the so-called McCormick Oak-Hickory Restoration Project timber sale as a “thinning” operation to remove older trees and make room for younger saplings. Logging operations contribute to habitat loss, and Stearns found the Forest Service’s justification lacking. “Never in the history of this planet has a forest been logged back to health,” said the 71-year-old Stearns. Stearns, who is the founder of the preservation group Friends of Bell Smith Spring, planned to oppose the sale. He began keeping an eye out for the agency’s public comment period, which provided residents like him an opportunity to voice their concerns. For months, he and other local environmentalists scoured the web and local newspapers for mentions of the sale to prepare for the comment period, but the McCormick Project never turned up.   It would turn out that the Forest Service advertised the project under a completely different name. The sale was titled “V-Plow,” and by the time advocates realized it, they were already a week into the project’s three-week comment period. In the past, advocates said comment periods for logging operations lasted as long as 45 days. Court documents would later reveal that the agency initially didn’t receive any bids. It eventually awarded the contract to an interested buyer in Kentucky in June 2025.  The following month, Stearns and other environmentalists sued the agency to block the plan. They cited the presence of endangered bats and potential impacts to a nearby national natural landmark and alleged that the Forest Service had violated the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA. Earlier this fall, a federal judge temporarily blocked the project before allowing the logging to proceed. The case is still pending, and a spokesperson for the Forest Service declined to comment due to the ongoing litigation. The legal battle is part of a broader clash between fast-tracking projects and ensuring environmental reviews as required by federal law. NEPA mandates that federal agencies consider the environmental impacts of projects, but it includes a provision for “categorical exclusions” that let agencies bypass full reviews and limit public participation for minor proposals. “This can be a legitimate process, for instance, when used for routine things where the impacts are minimal and well established, like campsite or trail maintenance,” said Garrett Rose, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council. “Unfortunately, this administration has been working to aggressively expand the exemptions available to [the Forest Service], and minimize disclosure of projects impacted by categorical exclusions.” In 2023, the Biden administration attempted to use these shortcuts to speed up permitting for projects like renewable energy and broadband internet. Earlier this year, President Donald Trump began pressing the Forest Service to fast-track timber harvests on public lands. In one executive order, he directed the Forest Service to adopt categorical exclusions developed by other agencies to “reduce unnecessarily lengthy processes.” That means, for example, the Forest Service could use categorical exclusions developed by the Department of Agriculture’s rural development agency for wastewater treatment plants or transmission lines, according to Rose. The order also instructed the Forest Service to develop new exclusions for “thinning” projects related to wildfire mitigation. Advocates fear the agency is applying categorical exclusions more widely than before for logging projects to comply with Trump’s directive. Local watchdog groups across the country are scrambling to make sure the public has a chance to provide input when logging and oil and gas extraction are approved on public lands. Ryan Talbott, a conservation advocate with Wildearth Guardians in the Pacific Northwest, said the Forest Service recently cited categorical exclusions developed by the Tennessee Valley Authority to approve a logging project in Mount Hood National Forest, which excused it from the standard robust public comment process. The agency also utilized the same categorical exclusion to move a project forward in Alaska’s Tongass National Forest. “This all comes back to Trump’s timber executive order,” Talbott said. “They’re looking for every possible avenue to expedite timber production.”  In Indiana, environmentalists recently scored a rare victory against the Forest Service. In September, a federal judge stopped a logging project in the Hoosier National Forest, siding with local advocates who argued the agency’s plan violated NEPA. The ruling found that the Forest Service did not properly weigh the environmental impacts of a proposal to log 4,000 acres and clearcut 4,000 more, among other actions, within Indiana’s only national forest.   In Illinois, however, Stearns’ lawsuit is still ongoing. A Kentucky logging crew harvested about half of the nearly 70-acre timber sale in late August before temporarily halting in early September due to Stearns’ lawsuit. The loggers have yet to finish the job.  Standing at a distance from the cut hillsides in late November, Stearns said the Forest Service is bad at a lot of things, but they’re good at one thing: cutting down trees.  “Even if they were getting a premium price for this wood, which I know they’re not, those trees would be much more valuable standing, contributing to the health of an ecosystem, than they’ll ever be cut like that,” he said.  Editor’s note: The Natural Resources Defense Council is an advertiser with Grist. Advertisers have no role in Grist’s editorial decisions. This story was originally published by Grist with the headline How the Trump administration is fast-tracking logging in Illinois’ only national forest on Dec 16, 2025.

Forests
Agriculture
Energy

Australia has new laws to protect nature. Do they signal an end to native forest logging?

What do Australia’s new nature laws mean for native forests? The reforms closed a loophole that stopped legal scrutiny of logging. But we need the full detail.

Reforms to Australia’s nature laws have passed federal parliament. A longstanding exemption that meant federal environment laws did not apply to native logging has finally been removed from the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. Native forest logging will now be subject to national environmental standards – legally binding rules supposed to set clear goals for environmental protection. This should be a win for the environment, and some have celebrated it as an end to native forest logging in Australia. But the reality is such celebrations are premature. We don’t have all the details of the new standards, or know how they will be enforced and monitored. Business as usual? Federal Environment Minister Murray Watt has told the forestry industry, including in Tasmania, that native forest operations will continue as usual. In an interview with ABC Radio Hobart, he said the changes keep day-to-day forestry approvals with the state government, but introduce stronger federal oversight. If that is the case, the logging of habitat for endangered species, such as the swift parrot, will continue, pushing these species closer to extinction. The Tasmanian government has shown no signs of willingness to change its current approach. And if “business as usual” logging persists, the environment reforms will fall far short of what Australia’s forests – and their plants and animals – need. Uncertain standards We don’t yet know what the national forestry standards will contain. But the draft standards for some threatened and endangered forest species aren’t enough to arrest ongoing declines, based on drafts I’ve seen that are yet to be publicly released. Crucially, we can’t meet the habitat requirements for many forest-dependent species by simply replanting previously cleared land. This is because the trees in replanted forests won’t be mature for several hundred years. Many forest-dwelling species live in holes and hollows that occur only in mature trees. In other words, allowing loggers to “offset” the forests they damage by replanting other areas is broadly impossible. This reinforces longstanding concerns about the limitations of biodiversity offsets as a way to conserve endangered forests and animals. Swift parrots are fast-flying migratory parrots. They are critically endangered, partly because the forests they nest in are being logged. Thirdsilencenature/Flickr, CC BY-ND Industry pushback Parts of the forest industry are already seeking to rebrand damaging practices such as mechanical thinning (the removal of large numbers of trees), as forms of so-called “active management” to create healthy forests. The Australian government’s Timber Fibre Strategy makes extensive reference to the use of “active management”. However, the scientific evidence shows the opposite: such activities can degrade forest structure (by removing key understorey vegetation), facilitate the invasion of weed species, and undermine the ecological integrity of forests. Different forests Australia has a vast range of different forest types, and many support a variety of animals and plants threatened by forestry operations. Effective national standards therefore need to be detailed and sophisticated to deal with such complexity. This will take considerable time to design. And it’s possible each species and forest type will need a different set of standards. These will need to account not only for the direct impacts of logging – such as the death of animals when their habitat trees are felled – but also indirect impacts. For example, logging can increase fire risk, promote the spread of weeds and feral animals into disturbed areas, and trigger long-term changes in vegetation structure. Developing national standards is only part of the challenge. Implementing them will demand significant new resources, as well as robust monitoring to ensure governments and logging contractors actually stick to the rules. Better recovery Many of Australia’s threatened species don’t have up-to-date recovery plans that will guide the best way to prevent their extinction. And when plans do exist, there is often a lack of resourcing to put them into action. Without substantial investment, many plants and animals will fall between the cracks, and these new environmental standards will not deliver the change so desperately needed. They must be matched with careful monitoring of species in forests and properly-funded plans for their recovery. A simple solution There is a straightforward way to avoid the ecological, administrative, and financial problems created by native forest logging – stop it altogether. The evidence shows ending native forest logging would deliver significant benefits for biodiversity, forest ecosystems, and reduce fire risks. It also would benefit government finances because taxpayers would no longer need to subsidise an economically unviable industry that currently loses large amounts of money. The environment law reforms are to be welcomed. But the devil will be in the detail as to whether hopes for better environmental outcomes and improved forest conservation are realised. David Lindenmayer receives funding from the Australian Government, NSW Government and the Victorian Government. He is a Councillor with the Biodiversity Council and a Member of Birdlife Australia, the Ecological Society of Australia, and the Australian Mammal Society. He is a Fellow of the Australian Academy of Science, Fellow of the American Academy of Science, Fellow of the Ecological Society of America, and Fellow of Royal Zoological Society of NSW.

Forests
Nature
Business

Mischievous Hands': Indonesians Blame Deforestation for Devastating Floods

By Ananda TeresiaSOUTH TAPANULI, Indonesia, Dec 2 (Reuters) - Indonesian Reliwati Siregar gestured angrily at deforestation around her home on the...

SOUTH TAPANULI, Indonesia, Dec 2 (Reuters) - Indonesian Reliwati Siregar gestured angrily at deforestation around her home on the island of Sumatra, where landslides and floods brought by a tropical storm killed more than 700 people in its deadliest disaster since a cataclysmic tsunami in 2004."Mischievous hands cut down trees ... they don't care about the forests, and now we're paying the price," Siregar said at a temporary shelter near her home in Tapanuli, the worst-hit area, with about a quarter of the death toll, government data shows.The landslides buried homes and crippled rescue and relief efforts, while floodwaters washed ashore dozens of logs, Siregar said."The rain did cause the flood, but it's impossible for it to sweep away this much wood," the 62-year-old added, her voice rising in disgust. "Those raindrops do not cause wood to fall."Environmental experts and regional leaders said the tropical storm in the Malacca Strait that hit Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand last week, killing more than 800 people, was just one of many worsened by climate change.But deforestation in Sumatra led to a disproportionately deadly toll, they said.  "Yes, there were cyclonic factors, but if our forests were well-preserved ... it would not have been this terrible," Gus Irawan Pasaribu, a local government leader in Tapanuli, told Reuters by telephone.Pasaribu said he had already protested to the forestry ministry over licences issued for the use of forest area for projects, but it ignored his pleas.Indonesia's forestry and environment ministries did not reply to Reuters requests for comment.Media said the attorney general's office is leading a task force to check if illegal activities contributed to the disaster, and that the environment ministry would query eight companies in industries such as logging, mining and palm plantations, after logs washed ashore in some areas of Sumatra.They did not identify the companies or projects.Masinton Pasaribu, another local government official in Tapanuli, blamed the clearing of natural forests to make way for palm plantations, which yield palm oil, one of Indonesia's main exports.Authorities in the archipelago, home to many dense tropical forests, have looked to reverse some of the destruction but lean heavily on its vast natural resources to fuel economic growth.Monitoring group Global Forest Watch says North Sumatra lost 1.6 million hectares of tree cover over the period from 2001 to 2024, or the equivalent of 28% of the tree-covered area.From 2001 to 2024, Sumatra as a whole has lost 4.4 million hectares (11 million acres) of forest, an area bigger than Switzerland, said David Gaveau, founder of deforestation monitor Nusantara Atlas."This is the island of Indonesia that has had the most deforestation," he said, adding that global warming was the biggest factor in the deadly floods, though deforestation had a secondary role.Environment-focused group JATAM said its analysis of satellite imagery showed construction for the China-funded 510MW Batang Toru hydropower plant, planned to begin operating in 2026, contributed to the destruction."This situation can no longer be explained merely by the narrative of 'extreme weather,' but must be understood as a direct consequence of upstream ecosystem and watershed destruction by extractive industries," it said in a statement.Reuters could not reach North Sumatra Hydro Energy, which runs the plant, to seek comment. Its parent, China's SDIC Power Holdings, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Another environment-focused non-government group, Walhi, sought revocation of a government permits for the hydropower plant in a 2018 lawsuit in a state administrative court, but the court rejected the suit in 2019, media say."This disaster was caused not only by natural factors but also ecological factors, namely mismanagement of natural resources by the government," Walhi said.JATAM said legal permits to convert forests into extraction zones covered about 54,000 hectares (133,000 acres), a majority of them for mining.Among the permit holders is PT Agincourt Resources, which operates the Martabe gold mine in the Batang Toru ecosystem.In a statement to Reuters it said making a direct link between the floods and the mine's operations was "a premature and inaccurate conclusion". Instead, it pointed to extreme weather, the overflowing river, and a blockage of logs at one point in its course."Usually just a few ... but now, there's more than ever," said Yusneli, 43, a resident of the West Sumatran city of Padang, who goes by one name, as she described the alarm caused by the number of logs washing ashore. (Reporting by Yudhistira in Tapanuli, Ananda Teresia, Fransiska Nangoy, Stanley Widianto, Zahra Matarani and Heru Asprihanto in Jakarta and Johan Purnomo, Willy Kurniawan and Aidil Ichlas in Padang; Writing by Gibran Peshimam; Editing by Josh Smith and Clarence Fernandez)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

Forests
Climate
Government

European Parliament Supports Year-Long Deforestation Law Delay

BRUSSELS (Reuters) -The European Parliament on Wednesday voted in favour of delaying the implementation of the European Union's deforestation law...

BRUSSELS (Reuters) -The European Parliament on Wednesday voted in favour of delaying the implementation of the European Union's deforestation law by one year.Companies will have an additional year to comply with new EU rules to prevent deforestation, the European Parliament said in a statement.Large operators and traders must respect the obligations of this regulation as of December 30, 2026, and micro and small enterprises from June 30, 2027.The ban on imports of cocoa, palm oil and other commodities linked to forest destruction is a key pillar in the EU's green agenda.The world-first policy aims to end the 10% of global deforestation fuelled by EU consumption of imported soy, beef, palm oil and other products, but has become a politically contested part of Europe's green agenda.But it faces pushback from some industries and countries that say the measures are costly and logistically challenging.Critics have previously warned of environmental setbacks.Food majors such as Nestle, Ferrero and Olam Agri back the law. They warned last month that delaying it endangers forests worldwide and is contrary to the EU's aim of simplifying business rules.Advocacy group Business For Nature called the delay "a profound failure of political courage".(Reporting by Charlotte Van Campenhout, editing by Bart Meijer and Ed Osmond)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

Forests
Business
Nature

Suggested Viewing

Talking Trees

Yes, trees can talk. They communicate through their roots. Please listen to what they have to say in this short film.

Forests
Extinction
Climate

We Trees

Ever wonder what trees think of us now that we have created a climate disaster? This 2-minute film answers that question. As Bill McKibben recently tweeted about the film, “Who speaks for trees? In this short and elegant video, the trees themselves.” It has been screened at Green Fest (Serbia), The Colorado Environmental Film Festival, The Wildlife Conservation Film Festival and Winner of Merit at the Nature Without Borders Film Festival.

Forests
Chemicals
Climate

Where Do They All Go?

Join us on an quiet trip into the woods and see all the sites, big and small, that you may not have noticed before. There are critters, birds, deer, trees, and great bodies of water that will capture your eye for you to gaze upon. But be forewarned, some day these great sites may disappear in place for something more modern. So enjoy what time you have to gaze on such sites, it may be your last.

Land Use
Experimental
Forests

The Windshield Effect

As a child, Julian and his mother, Sylvie, could spend hours out in nature admiring the soundtrack of the plentiful insects. One day, a grown Julian is out on a run in those same woods and when he takes off his ear buds, realizes he cannot hear anything at all. A trip to the audiologist assures him there is nothing wrong with his ears, but he is still left shaken. Back in the forest, he comes to the realization that the insects themselves have gone silent in a mass die off. Also known as the "Windshield Phenomenon" that documents how bugs no longer splatter on windshields as we drive as insect populations are down more than 45% over the last 4 decades.

Forests
Extinction
Nature

The Story of a Forest

In 2004, a generation of activists arose in South Florida, carrying the passion of direct action groups like Earth First. and the deep analysis of the global justice movement that had swept the country in the preceding years. These activists sought local issues that exemplified the threats of corporate globalization. They stumbled upon a plan from biotech industry giants acting in collusion with the administration of then-Governor Jeb Bush to clear a vast swath of land in the Northeast Everglades of Florida to accommodate The Scripps Biotech Research Institute - And it was on. Over the next ten years, endless county zoning meetings were counter-balanced by dozens of civil disobedience arrests and a near-constant flow of news headlines about the battle: lawsuits, scandal, corruption, tree sits, endangered species, pranks, blockades, and a roller coaster of incremental victories followed by devastating losses for years on end. THE STORY OF A FOREST captures it all in a 1/2 hour documentary about the Palm Beach County Environmental Coalition (PBCEC) and Everglades Earth First!'s (EEF!) ten-plus year campaign to stop the Scripps Biotech development, with a focus on protecting biodiversity in the Briger forest and the Florida wetlands.

Activism
Forests
Business

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.