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.

US Forest Service failing to protect old growth trees from logging, critics say

News Feed
Thursday, August 1, 2024

They are the ancient giants of America – towering trunks of sequoias or beech or ash that started to sprout in some cases before the age of the Roman empire, with the few survivors of a frenzy of settler logging now appreciated as crucial allies in an era of climate and biodiversity crises.Joe Biden has vowed to protect these “cherished” remnants of old growth forest, as well as the next generation of mature forests, directing his government to draw up new plans to conserve the ecological powerhouses that enable US forests to soak up about 10% of the country’s carbon emissions, as well as provide a vital crucible for clean water and wildlife.Little Rock Pond Shelter in Green Mountain national forest, Vermont. Photograph: Leon Werdinger/AlamyYet, the US Forest Service has not included mature trees in this new plan, which also includes loopholes conservationists say allow ongoing felling of trees that are hundreds of years old. The Forest Service, responsible for 154 national forests and nearly 25m acres (10m hectares) of old growth trees in the US, has also largely declined to conduct required reviews of multiple logging projects amid a stampede of tree cutting that threatens the oldest, richest trees before any new curtailments are imposed.“The largest logging projects I’ve ever seen are targeting the last, best remaining old growth trees left in the country,” said Chad Hanson, a forest ecologist and co-founder of the John Muir Project.Hanson said the Forest Service had failed to properly follow the president’s directive, instead allowing logging that imperils the remaining trove of the US’s long-lived, untouched trees.“We have a rogue agency in the Forest Service that is trying to benefit the logging industry before reforms take place,” he said. “The situation is rampant as far as I can tell and it risks squandering a once-in-a-generation opportunity to protect these incredible forests.”The Forest Service – which has defended its approach – approved 31 logging projects covering 116,460 acres of old growth forests just between December and April, a recent agency report states. A further 18 planned cutting projects within old growth forests are being considered.In all, dozens of major logging projects are being advanced across the US, including the felling of 130,000 acres of old growth forest, an area roughly equivalent to the size of Chicago, in Plumas national forest in California; a plan to cut 95,000 acres in the Yaak River Valley in Montana that contains 600-year-old larch trees; and a program called the Telephone Gap project that aims to hack away a portion of ancient forest in Vermont that is 90% old growth and mature trees.Many of these plans have been granted approval since Biden’s executive order in April 2022 that demanded his agencies take action to protect the most storied, grandest trees in the US. The overall amount of logging in national forests has surged 24% during Biden’s term, despite him committing, along with 144 other world leaders, to reverse deforestation by 2030.The Forest Service has rejected the suggestion that it is allowing the timber industry to plunder older trees, pointing to reduced cutting rates compared with previous decades and a service policy to “protect, maintain and improve old growth forest conditions”. It also defended its policy on reviewing, saying all projects that fell under the scope of the mature and old growth requirement were looked at.Critics, though, see an agency pushing through a rush of logging before outdated practices are overturned. “It’s insane, there’s just no justification for this,” said Hanson, who is part of a legal effort to prevent logging amid giant sequoias, a project ostensibly to protect a species that only grows in a 60-mile band along California’s Sierra Nevada. “Why would we log giant sequoias of any size? It’s just crazy.”A red sequoia tree reaches for the sky alongside other trees. Photograph: Edu Borja/Getty ImagesIn response, environmentalists have launched legal action to stymie logging from New Hampshire to California, while tree-sitting protesters have occupied targeted woodland in Oregon. Scores of scientists have written to Biden warning that the outgoing president’s climate legacy is at risk and lamenting that “we have lost too many of those living witnesses of the past.” The “timber wars”, a fierce 1970s struggle over the future of forests that helped preserve the last fragments of old growth, appear to be rekindling, 50 years on.“If the Biden administration wants this process to be something more than a greenwashing exercise, then it must put stronger pressure on the Forest Service,” said Zack Porter, executive director of Standing Trees, a Vermont conservation group. “Biden needs to intervene to live up to his climate goals, because at the moment this process is going off the rails.”There are trees standing in America far older than the country itself. Perhaps the most famous of these, the gargantuan giant sequoias of California, can surpass the grizzled age of 3,000 years as they grow to a towering 300ft tall and slowly layer a bulk of several hundred tons, making them one of the oldest, as well as largest, organisms on Earth.A bristlecone pine, also in California, is thought to be even more ancient, clocking in at around 4,800 years old. Other species in the US range in the hundreds of years old, having survived in plunging ravines or remote mountaintops from the ravages of axe and chainsaw.Such timeworn trees were long seen as worthless. “They were viewed as old and decrepit and valuable for logging, not much else,” said Jim Furnish, a former deputy chief of the Forest Service, which was established in 1905 and has long had strong ties to the timber industry.“If you cut down the older trees, you then get younger forests that can provide timber quickly,” Furnish said. “That was the rationale, which has left us with very little old growth.”In recent decades, however, scientists have amassed evidence that older trees are treasure troves of life. They draw up and then expel moisture into the surrounding air like a sort of biotic pump, essentially creating their own weather systems, filtering water (national forests provide a fifth of the US’s clean water supply) and offering homes in craggy hollows to a panoply of wildlife.As they grow, the trees’ bark thickens, making them and the surrounding forest more resistant to fire. A network of fungi helps spread a bounty of water and nutrients to the forest community. When these trees, having mopped up huge doses of carbon dioxide, eventually die, the toppled trunks regenerate soil, nourishing trees and animals around them.“Their value is just off the charts,” said Dominick DellaSala, a veteran forest researcher. “You cut down a tree like that and you destroy habitat and lose 80% of that stored carbon into the atmosphere, more carbon than is lost from a fire. There’s just no reason to do it.”A rethink on old growth followed a bitter battle over the imperiled northern spotted owl in the Pacific north-west, with millions of acres of the bird’s favored aged forest habitat ultimately set aside from cutting in 1994. The Forest Service points to a nationwide decline in logging since this time, with the agency considering wildfires, insect infestations and the climate crisis to now be the greatest threats to US forests.Still, there has been an uptick in logging since Biden became president in 2021, with the Forest Service removing 2.94bn board ft (7.27m cubic metres)of timber from national forests last year, enough to fill more than 1.25m logging trucks, according to advocacy group calculations on agency data. The Forest Service still works towards “timber targets” that, it recently told Congress, it could increase with more resources and speedier environmental reviews.The agency has a deep-rooted mindset of muscular “management” of forests rather than just letting them grow, according to DellaSala. “They will always argue for chainsaws and bulldozers, no matter what the issue is,” he said. There is plenty that could still be cut, too – just a quarter of the 112m acres of old growth and mature forests on Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management land is protected, DellaSala’s research has calculated.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 promotionForests had long been selectively cut or burned by Native Americans but the arrival of European settlers kickstarted the widespread razing of trees for timber and farmland, to the extent that a mere 5% of original forest, scattered in small patches of trees, is left across the country. In the eastern US, barely 1% remains.The Biden effort to stem losses of old growth trees, therefore, ignited optimism that a major turning point had arrived. “We have lost so much, there is such a deficit that we are recovering from,” said Sarah Adloo, executive director of the Old Growth Forest Network. “So just hearing the words ‘old growth’ from the president’s mouth was really wonderful.”Biden ordered the Forest Service and the BLM, which collectively manage forests spanning about 250m acres, an estate about double the size of Spain, to conduct the first inventories of remaining old growth and mature forest and set about updating individual forest plans to curb their loss. “These forests are an essential partner in tackling climate change,” insisted Ali Zaidi, a senior White House climate adviser.The timber industry, long used to procuring valuable wood from some of the largest, and therefore usually oldest, trees on public land, reacted with dismay. “We are extremely concerned about the disruption this unprecedented approach will have on urgently needed management efforts,” said Bill Imbergamo, head of the Federal Forest Resource Coalition, an industry group, citing the imperative, disputed by many scientists outside industry or government, to actively cut or “thin” forests to prevent insect outbreaks, or to reduce wildfire risk.But environmentalists also saw flaws. There is no universal definition of old growth – some scientists class it as trees that have reached about 120 years in age – but there is agreement that mature trees, of about 80 years in age, must be protected to ensure more old growth in the future. The Forest Service plan, presented in December and recently updated with a draft environmental assessment, does not include mature trees, however, despite them covering more than double the area, about 68m acres, of old growth, according to the agency’s inventory of its managed land.“If you allow mature trees to be cut, you get no additional old growth,” Porter said. The Forest Service plan, which is on track to be finalized in January, also allows the felling of old growth trees for purported environmental reasons, which could be used to justify further logging that many scientists say actually worsens fire and pests.“It’s clear to me that the Forest Service is intent on promoting a new era of destructive commercial logging in old growth forests on public lands, while trying to deceptively spin it as wildfire management, forest health and community protection,” said Hanson. “Why isn’t President Biden telling the Forest Service no, and insisting that mature and old growth forests be fully protected from logging, as hundreds of scientists have urged?”In December, Chris French, the deputy head of the Forest Service, did send an agency-wide memo requiring all logging projects that include old growth forests to be reviewed and approved by service leadership before proceeding.However, when the Guardian asked the Forest Service about the status of 29 contentious logging projects across the US, the agency confirmed only five had been reviewed, with many rejected for assessment because of a supposed lack of old growth, or because the projects had started before the memo, even though such a constraint was not stipulated in the original edict.A Forest Service spokesperson said mature forests were not included in the plan because climate change “introduces a lot of uncertainty” as to where older forests can survive. “The goal is not to manage all mature forest as future old-growth forest,” he said. “In some cases, places that are currently forests will no longer be forests. In others, the plants and animals will change dramatically. So, a strict preservation approach might not work.”The spokesperson added that the service was “clearly harvesting much less timber” than it was in the period up to around 1990, when policies started to shift towards ecological needs and logging focused more on younger, plantation-based, trees.He also denied that reviews of old growth logging projects were being overlooked by service leadership, or sidestepped by local forest managers. “All projects that fall within the scope of the mature and old growth requirement are reviewed,” the spokesperson said. “Forest projects are reviewed by both the regional and national offices, so it is unlikely that forests could ignore the direction.”On a recent, steamy late-spring day, Porter led a small group through a section of the Green Mountain national forest, a 400,000-acre slice of rich northern hardwood forest in Vermont, a rare splash of older trees in a region denuded of original forest. Black bears, moose and beavers are found in this place, which has a touch of the prehistoric about it, with its gurgling streams, ferns and moss-covered boulders.“These are big, big trees for the eastern US, there’s nothing much like this left,” said John Roe, a retired forest ecologist, as he surveyed the soaring stands of maple, ash and birch. “This sort of forest is of global importance.” The trees have rebounded since the US civil war era, when farmers abandoned the area. Give these trees another 160 years, Roe said, and you will see the sort of complex, intact forest there was before European arrival.Many of these trees won’t get the chance to do so – the Forest Service is considering a logging program, called Telephone Gap, that will hew about 12,000 acres, an area slightly smaller than Manhattan, containing mostly mature trees with some old growth. “My worry is we foolishly sacrifice more than a century of recovery here,” said Porter.If you trudge deeper into the heart of this national forest you get to a lake called the North Pond, an idyllic spot favored by beavers and fringed by slopes of trees, many that have never been cleaved. Clamber over some rocks and slippery moss into these stands and you can find sentinels that have stood amid this scene for timescales that leave the modern world behind.Roe holds a tape measure to the bark of a grand yellow birch – 39in in diameter, probably 300 or so years old. A tree that was overlooking this lake, passing the seasons, before George Washington was born. “This is a monster,” Roe said, gawping up at the tree.In March, Porter got an email from the district ranger overseeing the planned logging project, stating that there was “no need” for the plan to be sent to Forest Service leadership for a review as it would not disturb what the forest managers define to be true old growth, which is this tiny amount of pre-colonial woodland left behind.

Biden’s efforts to save mature trees are not getting enough Forest Service support, according to some conservationistsThey are the ancient giants of America – towering trunks of sequoias or beech or ash that started to sprout in some cases before the age of the Roman empire, with the few survivors of a frenzy of settler logging now appreciated as crucial allies in an era of climate and biodiversity crises.Joe Biden has vowed to protect these “cherished” remnants of old growth forest, as well as the next generation of mature forests, directing his government to draw up new plans to conserve the ecological powerhouses that enable US forests to soak up about 10% of the country’s carbon emissions, as well as provide a vital crucible for clean water and wildlife. Continue reading...

They are the ancient giants of America – towering trunks of sequoias or beech or ash that started to sprout in some cases before the age of the Roman empire, with the few survivors of a frenzy of settler logging now appreciated as crucial allies in an era of climate and biodiversity crises.

Joe Biden has vowed to protect these “cherished” remnants of old growth forest, as well as the next generation of mature forests, directing his government to draw up new plans to conserve the ecological powerhouses that enable US forests to soak up about 10% of the country’s carbon emissions, as well as provide a vital crucible for clean water and wildlife.

Little Rock Pond Shelter in Green Mountain national forest, Vermont. Photograph: Leon Werdinger/Alamy

Yet, the US Forest Service has not included mature trees in this new plan, which also includes loopholes conservationists say allow ongoing felling of trees that are hundreds of years old. The Forest Service, responsible for 154 national forests and nearly 25m acres (10m hectares) of old growth trees in the US, has also largely declined to conduct required reviews of multiple logging projects amid a stampede of tree cutting that threatens the oldest, richest trees before any new curtailments are imposed.

“The largest logging projects I’ve ever seen are targeting the last, best remaining old growth trees left in the country,” said Chad Hanson, a forest ecologist and co-founder of the John Muir Project.

Hanson said the Forest Service had failed to properly follow the president’s directive, instead allowing logging that imperils the remaining trove of the US’s long-lived, untouched trees.

“We have a rogue agency in the Forest Service that is trying to benefit the logging industry before reforms take place,” he said. “The situation is rampant as far as I can tell and it risks squandering a once-in-a-generation opportunity to protect these incredible forests.”

The Forest Service – which has defended its approach – approved 31 logging projects covering 116,460 acres of old growth forests just between December and April, a recent agency report states. A further 18 planned cutting projects within old growth forests are being considered.

In all, dozens of major logging projects are being advanced across the US, including the felling of 130,000 acres of old growth forest, an area roughly equivalent to the size of Chicago, in Plumas national forest in California; a plan to cut 95,000 acres in the Yaak River Valley in Montana that contains 600-year-old larch trees; and a program called the Telephone Gap project that aims to hack away a portion of ancient forest in Vermont that is 90% old growth and mature trees.

Many of these plans have been granted approval since Biden’s executive order in April 2022 that demanded his agencies take action to protect the most storied, grandest trees in the US. The overall amount of logging in national forests has surged 24% during Biden’s term, despite him committing, along with 144 other world leaders, to reverse deforestation by 2030.

The Forest Service has rejected the suggestion that it is allowing the timber industry to plunder older trees, pointing to reduced cutting rates compared with previous decades and a service policy to “protect, maintain and improve old growth forest conditions”. It also defended its policy on reviewing, saying all projects that fell under the scope of the mature and old growth requirement were looked at.

Critics, though, see an agency pushing through a rush of logging before outdated practices are overturned. “It’s insane, there’s just no justification for this,” said Hanson, who is part of a legal effort to prevent logging amid giant sequoias, a project ostensibly to protect a species that only grows in a 60-mile band along California’s Sierra Nevada. “Why would we log giant sequoias of any size? It’s just crazy.”

A red sequoia tree reaches for the sky alongside other trees. Photograph: Edu Borja/Getty Images

In response, environmentalists have launched legal action to stymie logging from New Hampshire to California, while tree-sitting protesters have occupied targeted woodland in Oregon. Scores of scientists have written to Biden warning that the outgoing president’s climate legacy is at risk and lamenting that “we have lost too many of those living witnesses of the past.” The “timber wars”, a fierce 1970s struggle over the future of forests that helped preserve the last fragments of old growth, appear to be rekindling, 50 years on.

“If the Biden administration wants this process to be something more than a greenwashing exercise, then it must put stronger pressure on the Forest Service,” said Zack Porter, executive director of Standing Trees, a Vermont conservation group. “Biden needs to intervene to live up to his climate goals, because at the moment this process is going off the rails.”

There are trees standing in America far older than the country itself. Perhaps the most famous of these, the gargantuan giant sequoias of California, can surpass the grizzled age of 3,000 years as they grow to a towering 300ft tall and slowly layer a bulk of several hundred tons, making them one of the oldest, as well as largest, organisms on Earth.

A bristlecone pine, also in California, is thought to be even more ancient, clocking in at around 4,800 years old. Other species in the US range in the hundreds of years old, having survived in plunging ravines or remote mountaintops from the ravages of axe and chainsaw.

Such timeworn trees were long seen as worthless. “They were viewed as old and decrepit and valuable for logging, not much else,” said Jim Furnish, a former deputy chief of the Forest Service, which was established in 1905 and has long had strong ties to the timber industry.

“If you cut down the older trees, you then get younger forests that can provide timber quickly,” Furnish said. “That was the rationale, which has left us with very little old growth.”

In recent decades, however, scientists have amassed evidence that older trees are treasure troves of life. They draw up and then expel moisture into the surrounding air like a sort of biotic pump, essentially creating their own weather systems, filtering water (national forests provide a fifth of the US’s clean water supply) and offering homes in craggy hollows to a panoply of wildlife.

As they grow, the trees’ bark thickens, making them and the surrounding forest more resistant to fire. A network of fungi helps spread a bounty of water and nutrients to the forest community. When these trees, having mopped up huge doses of carbon dioxide, eventually die, the toppled trunks regenerate soil, nourishing trees and animals around them.

“Their value is just off the charts,” said Dominick DellaSala, a veteran forest researcher. “You cut down a tree like that and you destroy habitat and lose 80% of that stored carbon into the atmosphere, more carbon than is lost from a fire. There’s just no reason to do it.”

A rethink on old growth followed a bitter battle over the imperiled northern spotted owl in the Pacific north-west, with millions of acres of the bird’s favored aged forest habitat ultimately set aside from cutting in 1994. The Forest Service points to a nationwide decline in logging since this time, with the agency considering wildfires, insect infestations and the climate crisis to now be the greatest threats to US forests.

Still, there has been an uptick in logging since Biden became president in 2021, with the Forest Service removing 2.94bn board ft (7.27m cubic metres)of timber from national forests last year, enough to fill more than 1.25m logging trucks, according to advocacy group calculations on agency data. The Forest Service still works towards “timber targets” that, it recently told Congress, it could increase with more resources and speedier environmental reviews.

The agency has a deep-rooted mindset of muscular “management” of forests rather than just letting them grow, according to DellaSala. “They will always argue for chainsaws and bulldozers, no matter what the issue is,” he said. There is plenty that could still be cut, too – just a quarter of the 112m acres of old growth and mature forests on Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management land is protected, DellaSala’s research has calculated.

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

Forests had long been selectively cut or burned by Native Americans but the arrival of European settlers kickstarted the widespread razing of trees for timber and farmland, to the extent that a mere 5% of original forest, scattered in small patches of trees, is left across the country. In the eastern US, barely 1% remains.

The Biden effort to stem losses of old growth trees, therefore, ignited optimism that a major turning point had arrived. “We have lost so much, there is such a deficit that we are recovering from,” said Sarah Adloo, executive director of the Old Growth Forest Network. “So just hearing the words ‘old growth’ from the president’s mouth was really wonderful.”

Biden ordered the Forest Service and the BLM, which collectively manage forests spanning about 250m acres, an estate about double the size of Spain, to conduct the first inventories of remaining old growth and mature forest and set about updating individual forest plans to curb their loss. “These forests are an essential partner in tackling climate change,” insisted Ali Zaidi, a senior White House climate adviser.

The timber industry, long used to procuring valuable wood from some of the largest, and therefore usually oldest, trees on public land, reacted with dismay. “We are extremely concerned about the disruption this unprecedented approach will have on urgently needed management efforts,” said Bill Imbergamo, head of the Federal Forest Resource Coalition, an industry group, citing the imperative, disputed by many scientists outside industry or government, to actively cut or “thin” forests to prevent insect outbreaks, or to reduce wildfire risk.

But environmentalists also saw flaws. There is no universal definition of old growth – some scientists class it as trees that have reached about 120 years in age – but there is agreement that mature trees, of about 80 years in age, must be protected to ensure more old growth in the future. The Forest Service plan, presented in December and recently updated with a draft environmental assessment, does not include mature trees, however, despite them covering more than double the area, about 68m acres, of old growth, according to the agency’s inventory of its managed land.

“If you allow mature trees to be cut, you get no additional old growth,” Porter said. The Forest Service plan, which is on track to be finalized in January, also allows the felling of old growth trees for purported environmental reasons, which could be used to justify further logging that many scientists say actually worsens fire and pests.

“It’s clear to me that the Forest Service is intent on promoting a new era of destructive commercial logging in old growth forests on public lands, while trying to deceptively spin it as wildfire management, forest health and community protection,” said Hanson. “Why isn’t President Biden telling the Forest Service no, and insisting that mature and old growth forests be fully protected from logging, as hundreds of scientists have urged?”

In December, Chris French, the deputy head of the Forest Service, did send an agency-wide memo requiring all logging projects that include old growth forests to be reviewed and approved by service leadership before proceeding.

However, when the Guardian asked the Forest Service about the status of 29 contentious logging projects across the US, the agency confirmed only five had been reviewed, with many rejected for assessment because of a supposed lack of old growth, or because the projects had started before the memo, even though such a constraint was not stipulated in the original edict.

A Forest Service spokesperson said mature forests were not included in the plan because climate change “introduces a lot of uncertainty” as to where older forests can survive. “The goal is not to manage all mature forest as future old-growth forest,” he said. “In some cases, places that are currently forests will no longer be forests. In others, the plants and animals will change dramatically. So, a strict preservation approach might not work.”

The spokesperson added that the service was “clearly harvesting much less timber” than it was in the period up to around 1990, when policies started to shift towards ecological needs and logging focused more on younger, plantation-based, trees.

He also denied that reviews of old growth logging projects were being overlooked by service leadership, or sidestepped by local forest managers. “All projects that fall within the scope of the mature and old growth requirement are reviewed,” the spokesperson said. “Forest projects are reviewed by both the regional and national offices, so it is unlikely that forests could ignore the direction.”

On a recent, steamy late-spring day, Porter led a small group through a section of the Green Mountain national forest, a 400,000-acre slice of rich northern hardwood forest in Vermont, a rare splash of older trees in a region denuded of original forest. Black bears, moose and beavers are found in this place, which has a touch of the prehistoric about it, with its gurgling streams, ferns and moss-covered boulders.

“These are big, big trees for the eastern US, there’s nothing much like this left,” said John Roe, a retired forest ecologist, as he surveyed the soaring stands of maple, ash and birch. “This sort of forest is of global importance.” The trees have rebounded since the US civil war era, when farmers abandoned the area. Give these trees another 160 years, Roe said, and you will see the sort of complex, intact forest there was before European arrival.

Many of these trees won’t get the chance to do so – the Forest Service is considering a logging program, called Telephone Gap, that will hew about 12,000 acres, an area slightly smaller than Manhattan, containing mostly mature trees with some old growth. “My worry is we foolishly sacrifice more than a century of recovery here,” said Porter.

If you trudge deeper into the heart of this national forest you get to a lake called the North Pond, an idyllic spot favored by beavers and fringed by slopes of trees, many that have never been cleaved. Clamber over some rocks and slippery moss into these stands and you can find sentinels that have stood amid this scene for timescales that leave the modern world behind.

Roe holds a tape measure to the bark of a grand yellow birch – 39in in diameter, probably 300 or so years old. A tree that was overlooking this lake, passing the seasons, before George Washington was born. “This is a monster,” Roe said, gawping up at the tree.

In March, Porter got an email from the district ranger overseeing the planned logging project, stating that there was “no need” for the plan to be sent to Forest Service leadership for a review as it would not disturb what the forest managers define to be true old growth, which is this tiny amount of pre-colonial woodland left behind.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

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.

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.

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.

Two College Students Are Building a Robot to Replant Burned Forests

Marta Bernardino and Sebastião Mendonça invented Trovador, a six-legged, A.I.-powered robot that can plant trees in hard-to-reach, wildfire-damaged terrain

Two College Students Are Building a Robot to Replant Burned Forests Marta Bernardino and Sebastião Mendonça invented Trovador, a six-legged, A.I.-powered robot that can plant trees in hard-to-reach, wildfire-damaged terrain Nineteen-year-olds Marta Bernardino and Sebastião Mendonça are developing a robot capable of reaching and reforesting areas where humans have been unable to. Trovador For 19-year-olds Marta Bernardino and Sebastião Mendonça, the forest was the intimate, untamed backdrop of their childhood. “It was a living playground where we built worlds, a sanctuary where the concepts of ‘importance’ were felt instinctively rather than taught,” says Bernardino. As children growing up near Lisbon, the two always believed that the forest would remain a constant in their lives. But with each year, they watched as fires ravaged the forests not far from their homes, leaving behind scorched gray hillsides. Desperate to revive these forests, the two then-high school students set out to create Trovador—a robot capable of reaching and reforesting areas where humans have been unable to. The state of Portugal’s forests A 2024 study by Carlos C. DaCamara, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Lisbon, revealed that between 1980 to 2023, over 1.2 million acres burned in wildfires across mainland Portugal, equivalent to 54 percent of its territory. In 2017, the country recorded 32,000 acres of tree cover loss, with wildfire accounting for 75 percent of that destruction, the highest in a year to date. Moreover, Portugal is the southern European nation most affected by wildfires, based on the scale of burned areas and the sharp rise in recent wildfires. To begin their project, Bernardino and Mendonça set out to understand the current methods used for reforestation and the reasons behind the forests’ slow recovery. “The initial, passive hope that nature would heal itself was shattered when we learned the soil was too damaged and the fires too frequent for recovery,” Bernardino adds. Though volunteers and community members strived to revive the burned forests, it was physically impossible to reach the most vulnerable parts, which happened to be on steep, treacherous slopes. “The defining moment came,” Bernardino says, “when a project leader articulated the brutal truth: the terrain itself was the enemy, making manual replanting a dangerous and often impossible task.” She continues, “The inspiration was no longer a feeling of loss, but a cleareyed recognition of a flawed system. We saw that existing solutions—from volunteer planting to drone seed-dropping—were failing to meet the scale and complexity of the problem.” Quick facts: The impact of climate change on wildfires Between 2003 and 2023, extreme wildfire activity worldwide increased by 2.2-fold. Wildfire seasons are lengthening too, starting earlier in the spring and lasting longer into the fall. Over 60 percent of forests in Portugal lie on steep, rugged terrain, where planting is unsafe and labor is scarce, Bernardino explains. Tractors can’t handle slopes, and they compact the soil. Using heavy vehicles for reforesting can disturb the oxygen and water supply to plants and soil microorganisms. Such disturbances can cause substantial damage to the soil systems, which in certain cases can be long-lasting and even irreversible, harming the productivity of the forest and the overall functionality of the ecosystem. Drone-based aerial seeding is one viable alternative highly considered today for reforestation. However, the technique has its own challenges. While it’s competent in precision identification of suitable locations for reforestation, the method typically uses thousands of seeds per acre (at least 4,000) for blanket seedings, making it less economical. “Drones, while flexible, scatter seeds with low precision—wasting one of the most scarce natural resources,” Bernardino adds. One pilot project focusing on certain conifer species found their survival rate when dropped from drones fell between 0 and 20 percent. “Since the early 2000s, Portugal has lost over half of its forest cover, triggering erosion, water loss and biodiversity collapse,” Bernardino explains. “This crisis hits rural communities hardest: places like Fundão and Alentejo, where forests provide food, water, income and cultural identity. As ecosystems vanish, so do livelihoods.” And the rapid loss of forest cover isn’t limited to Portugal—it extends around the globe. Recent data from the University of Maryland’s Global Land Analysis & Discovery (GLAD) lab, reported in the World Resources Institute’s “Global Forest Review,” found that an unprecedented 16.6 million acres of primary rainforest was lost in the tropics in 2024. Researchers at the GLAD lab estimate that tropical primary forests vanished at an accelerated pace of 18 soccer fields every minute last year. The loss—largely caused by massive forest fires—is almost double that of 2023. “The problem itself became our blueprint,” recounts Bernardino, “and we dedicated ourselves to creating a solution that embraced all the constraints: steep terrain, high survival rates and autonomy.” A firefighter tackles the flames next to a road as vegetation burns during a wildfire in Vila Real, Portugal, this past August. David Oliveira/Anadolu via Getty Images Designing a solution In 2023, Bernardino and Mendonça set out to create Trovador—a six-legged robot able to walk on rugged slopes and plant trees. Their first €15 ($17) prototype, built from recycled parts, planted 28 percent faster than humans with a 90 percent survival rate. The saplings also thrived without any post-planting care. The two are currently working to improve the efficiency of the robot and hope that their current prototype is able to handle longer operations on steeper terrains. “We build all-terrain robots that carry baby trees on their backs and plant them autonomously across difficult terrain,” says Bernardino. The innovators didn’t expect the wave of interest that followed their initial prototype. As a top finalist for National Geographic’s 2024 Slingshot Challenge, they won a grant of $10,000, and the invention was also featured in the magazine as one of the world’s most promising youth-led climate solutions. “On the tech side, the robotics world took notice, too—we became the youngest ever to receive Europe’s top award for Robotics for Sustainability,” says Bernardino. The hexapod robot is capable of climbing slopes of up to 45 degrees while detecting and simultaneously avoiding any boulders in its way. Trovador is also equipped to carry and plant up to 200 saplings per hour. Unlike a tractor, it barely makes an indent on the ground thanks to its light movement, preserving pore space for air and water in the soil. A depth camera attached to it maps any obstacles and allows it to slightly adapt its trajectory in real time. It also uses artificial intelligence and sensors to analyze the pH and humidity of the soil, after which Trovador will follow a three-step dig-place-tamp sequence to plant rooted saplings instead of seeds. “The sequence is validated to hit up to 85 to 90 percent survival in field trials and literature,” says Bernardino. With built-in sensors, Trovador uploads real-time data like GPS coordinates of each plant, soil humidity and battery life to a cloud, allowing the team to monitor the robot remotely. Moreover, during future soil analysis, the robot will be trained to skip the dry ground and steer planting to micro-niches with better odds. Bringing a viable product to market Miguel Jerónimo, a landscape architect and coordinator of Renature projects at the Group for Studies on Spatial Planning and the Environment, an independent environmental organization in Portugal, is optimistic about the tool. “Trovador appears to be an innovative project with potential, particularly as it was developed by two young students who turned a low-cost prototype into a possible approach to one of Portugal’s environmental challenges,” says Jerónimo. “The concept of a six-legged robot designed to move across steep slopes and dense vegetation offers a practical framework for reforestation in areas that are unsafe or difficult for people to access.” While Jerónimo is hopeful about the success of Trovador, he’s equally apprehensive about the robot’s durability in the actual field. “Moving from an experimental prototype to a reliable field-ready tool will require robust testing to ensure it can handle the rough, humid and heavily vegetated conditions typical of Portuguese forests,” he says. “Operational endurance, mobility in dense vegetation and ease of maintenance are areas that need further exploration before the system can be considered ready for broad use.” Additionally, the price tag on the tool also needs to be taken into account. “Keeping production costs low will be essential,” the landscape architect points out. “The robot must be affordable if it is to become a useful and accessible instrument in large-scale reforestation efforts rather than a one-off innovation.” However, Bernardino and Mendonça already have some ideas on how to make it affordable. Instead of selling the Trovador robot itself, the team plans to first market it as a platform that they operate as a service, selling “trees-in-the-ground.” By 2026, they hope to make the robot robust and user-friendly enough to deploy it in large-scale plantations. “Clients [like] municipalities, insurers, forestry firms or NGOs can open our app, outline a polygon, choose native species and receive a quote,” Bernardino elaborates. “Pricing is expected to be a big step up from the current methods, up to six times cheaper than manual crews and four times more cost‑effective than drones once seed wastage is factored in.” The innovators are narrowing in on a minimum viable product. For the next few months, the Trovador team intends to improve the tool based on feedback they received after field testing it in Lisbon this past summer. Both Bernardino and Mendonça’s hopes and ambitions remain high. With the robot, they aspire to make “reforestation that is fast, precise, audit-ready and scalable to the millions of hectares climate models say we must restore this decade,” says Bernardino. Get the latest stories in your inbox every weekday.

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.