This article contains affiliate links to trusted partners.
Environmentalists look to block the National Park Service from planting new trees after a devastating series of fires last year.
In recent years, high-intensity fires have significantly impacted the sequoia tree population, especially in Northern California's Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks. This situation has sparked a legal dispute between the National Park Service (NPS) and a coalition of environmental groups, including the John Muir Project, Wilderness Watch, Sequoia ForestKeeper, and the Tule River Conservancy.
The core of the disagreement lies in the approach to managing the aftermath of these fires. The NPS advocates for urgent reseeding efforts in burned areas, viewing high-intensity fires as a threat to the survival of sequoias. They argue that without human intervention, these areas are unlikely to recover.
Contrastingly, research ecologist Chad Hanson, representing the plaintiff environmental groups, argues against this method. He views high-intensity fires as beneficial for regenerating sequoia populations, as they clear brush that stifles young seedlings. Hanson also raises concerns about the environmental impact of reseeding methods, which involve using dynamite and chainsaws.
The lawsuit aims to halt the NPS's reseeding plan, an addendum to a previous suit against forest thinning practices for fire prevention. Hanson, after visiting the burned areas, reported robust forest regeneration, challenging the NPS's perspective.
[vc_cta h2="Join the community!"]Love the outdoors? Join my free Facebook community where we chat and share information about national parks, hiking, outdoor activities, and more!
JOIN HERE! ⛰️ [/vc_cta]
A significant point of contention is the extent of damage caused by the fires. A 2021 report by the NPS claimed that 10% of the world's sequoias were lost in the Castle fire alone, with other estimates suggesting a loss of 13% to 19% from the 2020 and 2021 fires. Hanson, however, disputes these figures, citing his surveys and satellite imagery that indicate an 8% loss.
Hanson also criticizes the NPS's data collection methods, suggesting that non-scientists have inaccurately assessed the damage. In response, Sintia Kawasaki-Yee, a parks spokesperson, defended the credibility of the research, highlighting the involvement of USGS, UC Berkeley, and other experts.
The debate also extends to the number of seedlings per acre post-fire. The NPS's reseeding program is based on an observed average of 14,112 seedlings per acre, which Hanson and other environmentalists contest, claiming typical figures of 20,000 to 30,000, and even up to 150,000 to 200,000 seedlings per acre in some areas.
If successful, the lawsuit would prevent the NPS from using dynamite, chainsaws, and mule trains in remote areas for reseeding. While not involved in the lawsuit, Sam Hodder of the Save the Redwoods League acknowledges the urgency of the situation, citing a 19% loss of giant sequoias in just two years, but expresses regret over the delays caused by repeated lawsuits.
What do you think is the best solution for the trees? Let me know in the comments!
[vc_cta h2="National park essentials"]You'll need to enter: National parks pass 🎟️
Document your trip: National parks journal ✏️
Wear your national parks love: National parks shirts 👕
[/vc_cta]
No comments:
Post a Comment