

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Broadway's spotlight on redwoods helps us understand why what happens above our heads matters so much for our future below.
A woman flees devastating personal loss and finds herself at the base of towering redwood trees in Northern California. There, she persuades two botanists to let her climb hundreds of feet above the forest floor into a hidden world that transforms her perspective—and her life. This isn't the latest adventure film or bestselling memoir. It's Redwood, Broadway's unlikely hit musical that's bringing attention to one of nature's most overlooked but critical ecosystems.
Many of us working in forest conservation and restoration management were delighted when it opened on Broadway. When a musical drives sold-out audiences to stand and cheer for characters climbing into a forest canopy, it creates a cultural moment that conservation science alone never could—bringing vital attention to something that most Americans never think to look up and notice.
As a child in the 1960s, I wandered among ancient redwoods, craning my neck upward in wonder, while my parents worked to establish Redwood National Park. My father, Edgar, who would later receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his conservation work, and my mother, Peggy, who wrote about redwoods and the need to protect them and lobbying President John F. Kennedy's administration to do so, taught me that what made these giants special wasn't just their massive trunks but the entire living forest system from roots to crown. Those early lessons helped shape my life's work because what happens hundreds of feet above the forest floor matters more than most realize.
The more people recognize the vital role and wonder of forest canopies, the more momentum we build for their restoration and protection.
These aerial systems represent nature's overlooked masterpiece—a complex world scientists call the "eighth continent." Redwood canopies host biodiversity found nowhere else. Leather-leaf ferns create massive mats—up to the size of cars—that can store 5,000 gallons of water per acre, keeping forests cool and moist during summer droughts. The dense foliage also captures fog moisture that sustains the entire forest below while creating microclimates that buffer against climate extremes.
Canopies contribute to the entire forest system, linking the top to the bottom of the forest. Dust captured in the abundant foliage of ferns and huckleberry plants combined with accumulated organic matter forms rich "aerial soil" that becomes the foundation for entire sky-high communities. Rare lichens, wandering salamanders, and small mammals thrive in this elevated habitat, maintaining delicate ecological balances. From these heights, the benefits cascade downward: Canopy cover shades streams, cooling water for salmon and other temperature-sensitive aquatic species, integrating the entire forest system from treetop to riverbed into a single, interconnected climate buffer.
Yet this hidden world faces a crisis. Only 5% of old-growth redwood forests remain and have intact canopy ecosystems. Young, secondary forests that are constantly harvested lack the structure—and are not allowed time to develop—to support these rich, diverse aerial worlds. Only the largest, oldest trees—many hundreds of years old—host these critical ecosystems, and they're increasingly rare.
But hope is taking root in innovative restoration work. Working with Cal Poly Humboldt's professor Stephen Sillett and research associate Marie Antoine, we have begun transplanting fern mats, collected from the forest floor after winter storms, into the tallest trees in secondary redwood forests we conserve and manage, rebuilding canopy ecosystems from scratch. Working in our Van Eck forest near Fieldbrook, California, we've nurtured these ferns and then "planted" them hundreds of feet high in trees that will remain permanently protected. These specially selected trees are designated as "Potentially Elite Trees" (PETs)—the giants of tomorrow. Individual old trees are a lot like the oldest elephants in a herd; they contain the wisdom and resources to help an otherwise young forest function as an old forest, just as those old elephants guide their herds. And, we continue to harvest timber on these forests—on average a million board foot a year—while restoring the structure and function of old forests.
Now, we are expanding our efforts, adding huckleberry to our plantings to support new sky gardens. This patient approach creates homes for birds, salamanders, and countless insects, jump-starting processes that would naturally take centuries.
Redwood captures an essential truth: Forests are not just timber resources. They're living systems with lessons to teach us about building resilience in an uncertain future.
The Broadway experience provides audiences a glimmer of what happens when people encounter these giants in real life—and that's critically important. The more people recognize the vital role and wonder of forest canopies, the more momentum we build for their restoration and protection. But awareness must translate to action.
As debate rages on the role of federal forests and the need to protect their old and mature forests, there is also a major opportunity for action on private forests, where landowners' decisions will endure beyond a political cycle. For private forests, working forest conservation easements offer a proven path forward—providing landowners financial incentives to conserve and manage for older forests, develop complex structures, and designate future "PETs" that can support the function of old forests. This can transform forest recovery from centuries-long waits to achievable timelines within human lifespans.
Recent sweeping cuts to the National Park Service and U.S. Forest Service workforce threaten our old forests. Rangers and scientists do more than protect and research forests—they guide visitors to witness these majestic ecosystems firsthand. These cuts, applied "like an ax rather than a scalpel", endanger both the health of our forests and the transformative experiences for the public. When people stand beneath ancient trees and look upward, they understand viscerally why these forests and their canopies must be protected.
Protecting and restoring these overlooked canopy ecosystems has never been more urgent as climate change accelerates. Broadway's spotlight on redwoods helps us understand why what happens above our heads matters so much for our future below. When audiences gasp as Idina Menzel spins and embraces that massive trunk, they glimpse not just theatrical magic but a vision of what we stand to lose—and what we must fight to restore and preserve. The living world above demands our attention, protection, and active restoration—not just in California's iconic redwoods, but in every forest ecosystem on Earth.
Logging interests and the U.S. Forest Service have a history of using the wildfire threat to create “emergency” authority to bypass environmental reviews and curtail judicial oversight.
When on January 23 of this year, California Senator Jarred Huffman stood on the House floor to voice his opposition to the Fix Our Forests Act, or FOFA,, he bitterly noted how the bill had been rushed to a vote without normal consultation.
The reason for the rush was obvious. Fires were raging in the suburbs of Los Angeles and FOFA’s proponents wanted to capitalize on the tragedy to pitch their bill, which in the name of wildfire prevention exempts vast acreage of backcountry logging from ordinary scientific and judicial oversight. The irony is that the LA fires had no connection with forests whatsoever. They began as grass and brush fires near populated areas, which, fanned by ferocious Santa Ana winds, quickly spread building to building, with disastrous results.
The irony widens when you consider that in 2024, Huffman, along with California Republican Jay Obernolte, introduced a bill that actually would help communities deal with fire. Called the Community Protection and Wildfire Resilience Act, it proposed $1 billion per year to help communities harden homes and critical infrastructure while also creating defensive space around their perimeters. The bill was introduced this year yet again, six days after FOFA was rushed to a vote, but it hasn’t even been given a hearing by the House Natural Resources Committee. That committee is chaired by Oklahoma Republican Bruce Westerman, who, it turns out, is the chief sponsor of the Fix Our Forests Act.
Once again, it’s the same old formula: slash citizen oversight in the name of wildfire reduction.
Do you see the political convolutions at work here? A very real fire danger facing communities is used to promote a bill focused primarily on back country “fuels reduction,” far from such communities, while the Huffman-Obernolte bill, that focuses on the communities themselves, gets nowhere. The process not only puts millions of acres of mature and old-growth forests at risk of massive “mechanical treatments,” it leaves the immediate fire dangers faced by communities largely unaddressed.
This political formula is nothing new. Twenty two years ago, then-President George W. Bush signed into law the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003, which also sought environmental restrictions for expanded logging under the pretext of preventing wildfires like those in California. The concern for conservationists was the same then as it is now—logging interests and the U.S. Forest Service using the wildfire threat to create “emergency” authority to bypass environmental reviews and curtail judicial oversight, providing easier access to mature and old-growth forests, while doing little in the way of home hardening and community protection.
Proponents of the Fix our Forests Act would counter that there are provisions within the bill that help coordinate grant applications for communities. That’s well and good, but falls far short of what the Huffman-Obernolte bill provides, which not only includes major funding to harden homes and critical infrastructure, but helps with early detection and evacuation planning and initiates Community Protection and Wildfire Resilience plans for insurance certification.
Further, there is a plethora of research that contradicts the notion that fuels reduction and forest thinning protects communities from wildfire. In fact, intensive forest management is shown to often increase fire severity. Meanwhile, the industry position that forest protection increases fire risk doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Indeed, years of mechanical treatments have done little to solve the problem, while doing tremendous ecological damage.
Now we have President Donald Trump’s all-caps Executive Order: “IMMEDIATE EXPANSION OF AMERICAN TIMBER PRODUCTION.” Once again, it’s the same old formula: slash citizen oversight in the name of wildfire reduction. The order calls for action to “reduce unnecessarily lengthy processes and associated costs related to administrative approvals for timber production, forest management, and wildfire risk reduction treatments,” while putting community safety up as the justification. From the first paragraph: “Furthermore, as recent disasters demonstrate, forest management and wildfire risk reduction projects can save American lives and communities.” Only they don’t. The only things shown to save lives and communities are the types of actions put forth by the Community Protections and Wildfire Resilience act.
The Democratic Party has a history of protecting public lands and a constituency that expects such protection. A similar thing can be said of certain moderate Republicans, where a courageous spirit prevails when it comes to environmental protection. If there ever was a time to remember that tradition and that spirit, it would be now.
"The Forest Service should listen to the public and finalize policies that truly safeguard our oldest forests," a coalition of environmental organizations advised.
Green groups on Friday pointed to the more than 1 million public comments urging the U.S. Forest Service to protect old-growth forests from logging in urging the Biden administration to increase what critics say are inadequate protections for mature trees in a proposed federal amendment.
The Forest Service (USFS)—a branch of the U.S. Department of Agriculture—received massive input during four rounds of public comment on the National Old-Growth Amendment Draft Environmental Impact Statement.
The USFS' proposed national old-growth amendment follows a 2022 executive order by President Joe Biden that directed the agency to draft policies to protect mature trees in national forests, which are imperiled by but also play a critical role in fighting fossil fuel-driven climate change.
"The national old-growth amendment should be a transformative policy that positions the United States as an international leader in harnessing nature to confront the climate emergency and the biodiversity crisis."
Climate campaigners panned Biden's order as "grossly inadequate." Since the executive order, the Biden administration has allocated $50 million for old-growth forest conservation under the Inflation Reduction Act, which the president signed in August 2022.
In June, USFS announced a draft environmental impact statement for a proposed amendment to Biden's directive. Environmentalists called the draft a "step forward" while urging the administration to do more to protect mature forests.
"Since 2022, hundreds of thousands of people have called for an end to logging old-growth and urged that our mature forests also be protected. The Forest Service should listen to the public and finalize policies that truly safeguard our oldest forests," a coalition of green groups including the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), Earthjustice, Environment America Research and Policy Center, National Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, and WildEarth Guardians said in a joint statement.
"As the Forest Service reads the comments it has received over the last 90 days, it will find a common theme. The old-growth policy proposed in June fails to meet the central mission of the executive order—it does not protect old-growth trees from logging and allows projects that would log old-growth forests out of existence through numerous loopholes. The policy also does nothing to protect mature forests, which are needed to increase the abundance and distribution of old-growth trees and forests."
As CBD explained:
Mature and old-growth forests are carbon storage powerhouses. With thicker protective bark and higher canopies than younger trees, mature and old-growth trees are more resilient to wildfire. They also provide critical wildlife habitat, filter clean drinking water for communities, provide countless outdoor recreation opportunities, and capture the imaginations of Americans young and old.
Federal forest management prioritizes timber production and routinely sidesteps science to turn big, old trees into lumber and wood chips. Logging releases a significant amount of stored carbon, which can take centuries to be recaptured. It also eliminates older trees' ability to sequester additional carbon and damages the other ecosystem services and biodiversity values these forests provide. Many older stands and trees have no enduring protection, and hundreds of thousands of acres in national forests are at risk of being logged.
"The national old-growth amendment should be a transformative policy that positions the United States as an international leader in harnessing nature to confront the climate emergency and the biodiversity crisis," the groups' statement asserted. "We hope to see the nationwide old-growth amendment strengthened so it can become a centerpiece of our nation's climate and conservation legacies."
In a separate statement, Environment America public lands campaign director Ellen Montgomery said that "the Forest Service should listen to the more than a million people who have commented over the last two years, urging it to end logging of old-growth trees."
"The response from the public to our on-the-ground efforts to build support for a strong national old-growth amendment has shown that people want to see older trees protected," she continued. "These trees and forests are home to wildlife that we love from birds to bears. They are our allies to fight back against climate change, and all we have to do is make sure they stay upright."
"We hope the Forest Service recognizes the truth that the public knows: old-growth trees are worth more standing," Montgomery added.
Advocates also argue that the administration "must go further to protect and restore resilient old-growth forests in a way that meets the challenges of the changing climate."
Environmental groups on Thursday welcomed the U.S. government's latest progress on President Joe Biden's directive to protect old-growth forests, which are threatened by but also play a key role in combating fossil fuel-driven climate change.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Forest Service announced a draft environmental impact statement for the proposed national old-growth forest plan amendment, which is set to appear in the Federal Register Friday, launching a 90-day public comment period.
"President Biden made a commitment to protect mature and old-growth forests in the United States, and today's announcement gets us one step closer to achieving that," said Sierra Club forest campaign manager Alex Craven. "Conserving what remains of our oldest forests is undoubtedly a positive step towards climate action."
"We look forward to engaging in this process to ensure the amendment not only retains, but increases, the amount of old-growth forests across the country," Craven continued. "Shifting our approach to national forests from resources meant for extraction to natural wonders worth preserving is long overdue."
"The Forest Service must fully meet President Biden's historic directive to protect old growth, as well as our much vaster mature forests, which still remain exposed to commercial logging."
On Earth Day in 2022, Biden issued an executive order—and a few months, he later signed the Inflation Reduction Act, which directed $50 million toward old-growth conservation. Since then, the Forest Service and Department of the Interior's Bureau of Land Management (BLM) have been working on efforts to conserve ancient U.S. trees.
"With our nation's forests absorbing more than 10% of our annual greenhouse gas emissions, protecting and expanding old growth is critical to delivering on the Biden-Harris administration's and conservation priorities," White House Council on Environmental Quality Chair Brenda Mallory said in a statement Thursday.
BLM and the Forest Service have completed a historic inventory, which showed that they collectively manage approximately 32 million acres of old growth and 80 million acres of mature forests nationwide. The service also recently finalized a related threat analysis.
"The Forest Service continues to move this process forward," Earthjustice senior legislative representative Blaine Miller-McFeeley said Thursday. "However, the Forest Service must fully meet President Biden's historic directive to protect old growth, as well as our much vaster mature forests, which still remain exposed to commercial logging under the proposal."
According to The Associated Press, which obtained an early copy, the new analysis "shows that officials intend to reject a blanket prohibition on old-growth logging that's long been sought by some environmentalists" after concluding the policy "would make it harder to thin forests to better protect communities against wildfires that have grown more severe as the planet has warmed."
However, "the exceptions under which logging would be allowed are unlikely to placate the timber industry and Republicans in Congress, who have pushed back against any new restrictions," the AP reported.
As the Wilderness Society highlighted, the administration's proposal:
"We need the U.S. Forest Service to create a clear path for old-growth conservation paired with climate-informed wildfire management, if our oldest forests are to remain for generations to come," said the group's president, Jamie Williams. "The proposed national old-growth amendment is a step in the right direction, but it must go further to protect and restore resilient old-growth forests in a way that meets the challenges of the changing climate."
The new draft analysis comes as deadly wildfires rage in the U.S. West while extreme heat hits the Midwest and Northeast. Scientists stress that both fires and heatwaves are more likely because of the climate crisis.
If we are to restore old growth, combat climate change, and preserve wildlife habitats and have forests for future generations to experience, we must change the way that we manage our public forest lands.
In December, the Biden administration took a redwood-sized step toward protecting old-growth trees and forests. Following a presidential executive order in April 2022, the U.S. Forest Service announced that it intends to amend all 128 forest land management plans to conserve and expand old growth in national forests. That move clears the way for us to stop chainsaws from felling our oldest trees, which are worth more standing than as lumber. We commend Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack (who presides over the Forest Service) and his team.
As with any policy proposal, the devil is in the details. To truly prevent timber companies from chopping down our old-growth trees and forests, the final version of this proposed amendment, expected in January 2025, must be stronger in a few specific areas.
Environment America and our allies with the Climate Forests Campaign have been and will continue to advocate for the strongest possible protections for these trees and forests.
While it is a strong step in the direction of protecting critical trees and forests, even if the Forest Service’s final amendment includes the robust protections described above, it will still omit many important trees and forests.
Some of these forests are managed by another federal agency, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Interior Secretary Deb Halaand and BLM Director Tracy Stone-Manning should propose their own plan to protect older trees and forests on BLM’s lands.
We’re facing twin crises—climate change and biodiversity loss. To combat both, we need more “climate forests”—vibrant ecosystems full of older trees that absorb and store carbon.
Old-growth forests are irreplaceable and worthy of elevated protection, but there are hardly any left. To recover even a fraction of what was lost to logging over the centuries, the United States must act to protect mature trees and forests, the future old growth, from commercial logging. These forests are still developing and will turn into old-growth ecosystems, supporting biodiversity and storing more carbon if we let the trees grow. The solution to our shortage of old-growth forests is to nurture these future ones, but the Forest Service’s proposed amendment would not confer meaningful safeguards for mature forests.
Humans have built wooden homes, fences, furniture, and other products for centuries. The problems started when people began to believe that trees were most valuable when chopped down. We started industrial-scale logging to clear land for agriculture, cities, railroads, and highways. We’ve managed our forests accordingly, accepting a Forest Service mission that includes the “productivity of the nation’s forests.”
After more than a century of management for “productivity,” many of our nation’s “forests” are rows of trees of uniform species and age that we let grow only to chop down in a few decades. They resemble fields on a farm. Two-thirds of our country’s forests are “timberlands,” designated for industrial logging. If you embrace the concept of a forest as a fully functioning ecosystem, developing over decades or centuries without large-scale human interference, then it’s clear that the public forests of the United States mostly come up short.
This shortage is unfortunate because we’re facing twin crises—climate change and biodiversity loss. To combat both, we need more “climate forests”—vibrant ecosystems full of older trees that absorb and store carbon. Our national forests and grasslands are home to 3,000 species of wildlife, and according to the Forest Service, “forests in the U.S. remove the equivalent of about 12% of annual U.S. fossil fuel emissions.” No other technology can match forests for carbon removal at this scale. We don’t even have to invest in research and development to spin up new forests. We simply have to let our existing forests grow.
Approximately 38% of forestland in the United States is publicly owned, most of that is managed by the federal government. If we are to restore old growth, combat climate change, and preserve wildlife habitats and have forests for future generations to experience, we must change the way that we manage our public forest lands.
The Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management have their work cut out for them. Step one should be to finalize this proposed amendment so that it protects as many trees as possible. The administration must simultaneously be working on step two: developing durable policies for protecting the rest of our “climate forests.” We’ve heard too many trees fall in our forests. Now, it’s time to keep them standing.
One campaigner said it is "a meaningful step towards averting climate catastrophe, safeguarding vulnerable ecosystems, and fulfilling President Biden's commitment to preserve old-growth and mature trees."
Conservationists on Tuesday applauded the Biden administration's first-of-its-kind proposal to conserve and restore old-growth trees across national forests and grasslands with limits on logging, "so nature can continue to be a key climate solution."
The plan would protect the nation's most ancient forests from commercial logging on approximately 25 million acres of public lands, though it would allow some cutting of trees under stricter conditions than currently exist.
The United States is a top contributor to planet-heating pollution, largely from fossil fuels. White House Council on Environmental Quality Chair Brenda Mallory noted in a statement that "our forests absorb carbon dioxide equivalent to more than 10% of our nation's annual greenhouse gas emissions."
The proposal to amend all 128 forest land management plans in line with an executive order issued last year by President Joe Biden comes from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said that "climate change is presenting new threats like historic droughts and catastrophic wildfire. This clear direction will help our old-growth forests thrive across our shared landscape."
Many campaigners agreed—including Earthjustice's Blaine Miller-McFeeley, who praised the proposal "an important milestone," and Ellen Montgomery of Environment America, who called it "unprecedented."
"Protecting our old-growth trees from logging is an important first step to ensure these giants continue to store vast amounts of carbon, but other older forests also need protection."
Sierra Club forests campaign manager Alex Craven stressed that "our ancient forests are some of the most powerful resources we have for taking on the climate crisis and preserving ecosystems."
"We are pleased to see that the Biden administration continues to embrace forest conservation as the critical opportunity that it is," he added. "This amendment is a meaningful step towards averting climate catastrophe, safeguarding vulnerable ecosystems, and fulfilling President Biden's commitment to preserve old-growth and mature trees across federal lands."
Oregon Wild's Lauren Anderson declared that "President Biden is taking a major step forward in protecting these national treasures."
While welcoming the administration's plan, conservationists also pushed for further action from the USDA's Forest Service—which, along with the U.S. Department of the Interior's Bureau of Land Management, manages approximately 32 million acres of old-growth forests and 80 million acres of mature forests nationwide.
"Protecting our old-growth trees from logging is an important first step to ensure these giants continue to store vast amounts of carbon, but other older forests also need protection," explained Randi Spivak of the Center for Biological Diversity. "To fulfill President Biden's executive order and address the magnitude of the climate crisis, the Forest Service also needs to protect our mature forests, which if allowed to grow will become the old growth of tomorrow."
Standing Trees executive director Zack Porter pointed out that "more than 99.9% of old-growth forests in New England have already been cut down."
"For the climate and biodiversity, the Forest Service must put an end to destructive mature forest logging that prevents the recovery and expansion of old-growth forests across the U.S.," he said. "We are buoyed by today's announcement, and remain optimistic that the Forest Service will take further action to secure protections for America's future old-growth forests."
The Washington Post reported that "some environmental advocates also questioned whether the policy will last, as a future administration could easily undo it," considering that the changes "won't be finalized until the agency has completed an environmental impact statement, which it expects to finish in early 2025."
Campaigners have also long argued that protecting the carbon storage capacity of U.S. forests cannot be considered a real climate solution unless paired with other key actions. As Food & Water Watch's Thomas Meyer put it last year, "Protecting forests without addressing the root cause of the climate crisis, namely the continued extraction and burning of fossil fuels, will do very little to slow global warming."
The global phaseout of fossil fuels was a primary focus of the recent United Nations climate talks, which wrapped up in Dubai earlier this month with a deal that scientists decried as "a tragedy for the planet" because it failed to explicitly demand ending the era of oil, gas, and coal. The United States was represented at COP28 by John Kerry, Biden's climate envoy, as the president skipped the summit.
Biden, who is seeking reelection next year, has been blasted by experts, frontline communities, and younger voters for refusing to declare a national climate emergency, continuing fossil fuel lease sales for public lands and waters, enabling the Willow oil project and Mountain Valley Pipeline, and supporting the expansion of liquefied natural gas exports.
For his part, former President Donald Trump, the leading contender for the Republican Party's nomination, has vowed to "drill, drill, drill" if he wins back the White House in 2024.