ForestEthics : Protect Forests and Our Climate

CFAX Radio -- "Straight Talk" about Enbridge pipeline proposals

Wed, 26 May 2010 00:00:00 PDT

ForestEthics' Sr. Energy Campaigner, Nikki Skuce, talks about the overwhelming opposition to the proposed Enbridge pipelines in BC. Specifically, she discusses a recent Mustel poll. The poll�s key findings:

80 percent of British Columbians support a crude oil tanker ban for BC�s coastal waters, while 15 percent think tanker traffic should be allowed.
Significantly more British Columbians oppose the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline (51 percent), than support it (34 percent).
British Columbians who strongly oppose Enbridge�s pipeline (31.7 percent) outnumber strong supporters (8.1 percent) nearly four to one.

Listen to the interview:

10.05.26_Nikki_CFAX_Poll.mp3

The Tyee -- A five-part series on the future of "green" wood

Mon, 15 Mar 2010 00:00:00 PDT

The battle is fierce between more stringent outfits like the Forest Stewardship Council and the U.S. timber industry-backed Sustainable Forestry Initiative. What are the competing standards? Which approach is gaining traction? And at a moment when the timber industry is hard hit in B.C., what are the prospects for making this province home to truly sustainable forestry harvest practices? The Tyee explores the war over eco-certified wood in this multi-part series.
Take Action: Tell the "Sustainable" Forestry Initiative to stop greenwashing its certification of forest destruction >>

Part 1: Future of 'Green' Wood Hangs on US Decision

New LEED rules poised to remake market for environmental forest products, Canadian timber. First of five parts this week.
By Monte Paulsen, March 15, 2010

Excerpt:

In September of 2009, lawyers representing the environmental group ForestEthics filed complaints with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and the U.S. Internal Revenue Service in which they accused the SFI of deceptive practices that amount to greenwashing. They also challenged the legitimacy of SFI's tax status as a public charity.

"The Forest Stewardship Council was put in a position -- with the LEED decision and SFI's ramping up -- of having to make a decision," said Seattle attorney Peter Goldman, who represents ForestEthics. "Were they just going to sit back and let SFI claim the green mantle? Were they going to watch SFI position themselves as an equal player in the paper and lumber market? Or was FSC going to do something about it?"

Read the full article here >>

Part 2: Eco Group's Trade Complaint Targets US Wood Certifier

ForestEthics charges that SFI's 'vague' standards mislead consumers. Second of five parts this week.
By Monte Paulsen, March 16, 2010

Excerpt:

"SFI broadly claims that its standards include 'measures to protect water quality, biodiversity, wildlife habitat, species at risk and forests with exceptional conservation value.' But most, if not all, of SFI's environmental and social measures in the SFI standard are vaguely worded, suggesting a central purpose to defend and legitimize status quo industrial forestry as environmentally and socially responsible, without requiring SFI participants to do more that they did before," ForestEthics' 27-page FTC complaint alleges.

Read the full article >>

Part 3: Wood War Sprawls to IRS, Fortune 500

Can an industry-created nonprofit meet the test for a public-interest charity?
By Monte Paulsen, March 17, 2010

Excerpt:

"SFI Inc. is a fully independent, charitable organization dedicated to promoting sustainable forest management." So says the Sustainable Forestry Initiative's web site. And so says the U.S. Internal Revenue Service.

But ForestEthics, an environmental group allied with the rival Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), doesn't believe the SFI is truly independent of the timber companies that created it. And ForestEthics has lodged a complaint challenging SFI's right to be a charitable organization.

Read the full article >>

FORTUNE 500 COMPANIES WARNED OF GREENWASH RISK

Tue, 09 Mar 2010 00:00:00 PST

Greenwashing by the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) is again under harsh scrutiny, this time in a trend-setting eco-conscious magazine and in the mailboxes of its target markets.

Last Friday ForestEthics mailed letters to Fortune 500 companies that rely heavily on direct mail to market their products and services, including companies from the insurance, financial services and telecommunications sectors.

Citing the growing public controversy about SFI's deceptive 'green' marketing practices, the letters offer ForestEthics' expertise to help companies find legitimate ways to safeguard their brands and promote the environmental attributes of their products. (Letter available by request.)

"SFI's greenwashing could be toxic for any brand associated with it," said Aaron Sanger of ForestEthics. "SFI is spending millions of dollars to market business as usual environmental destruction as 'green', and these misleading claims undermine the hard work and smart choices of any business making a sincere effort to be environmentally responsible."

To raise awareness globally about SFI's greenwashing, ForestEthics published an ad (view the full size ad) in this month's Boho Magazine, whose eco-conscious readers in over 37 countries were greeted with a full page ad depicting a window's view of a clearcut forest with the headline "You can see right through SFI's greenwash." SFI's soothingly 'green' logo is modified to incorporate imagery suggesting forest destruction.

Boho Magazine is the winner of the AVEDA Environmental award for Best New Launch and winner of the 2009 SustainPrint "Newcomer Magazine of the Year" award. It is the first fashion magazine to use 100% recycled post-consumer waste paper and be completely UV-coating free, with no glossy finishes and only use of soy-based inks. Boho is available at bookstores and newsstands nationwide, including Barnes & Noble, Borders, Whole Foods, and Target and in more than 37 countries.

Last November, ForestEthics released a large floating banner exposing SFI as a greenwasher at Greenbuild, the world's largest green building conference in Phoenix, Arizona. The group also ran an ad in USA Today's Phoenix edition spotlighting SFI's greenwashing practice of certifying forest destruction as 'sustainable'.

These actions add powerful visual elements to a campaign that began in September when ForestEthics filed legal complaints with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that became the focus of an article in the New York Times on September 12.

In its FTC complaint, ForestEthics described how SFI, funded and managed primarily by large logging companies, gives its seal of approval to the logging practices of these same companies that harm people and wildlife, damage water resources and destroy forests.

The report submitted to the IRS focused on SFI's nonprofit status, as SFI's funding and activities serve the private interests of wood and paper companies that want a 'green' image. This is not a proper purpose for an organization with the same nonprofit status that the IRS gives to public charities.

Tell the "Sustainable" Forestry Initiative to stop greenwashing its certification of forest destruction

Wed, 24 Feb 2010 00:00:00 PST

Hey SFI, it's time to stop your greenwashing!

The Sustainable Forestry Initiative certification label has allowed companies like Sierra Pacific Industries to appear green for too long. By dismantling the credibility of their phony green label, we're striking a major blow to to the primary method irresponsible companies uses to trick the public. Together, we will reclaim green labels!

Sign the petition to reform forest certification practices.

ForestEthics exposes SFI Greenwash at Greenbuild 2009

Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:00:00 PST

Click on image to enlarge.

Shaking things up at the conference

In his keynote address on the opening day of Greenbuild, the world�s largest green building conference, Al Gore exhorted the audience to be vigilant against the deceptive practice of �Greenwash.�

We agree. At this year�s Greenbuild, ForestEthics called Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) on its greenwash. The morning after the speech, ForestEthics released a large floating banner announcing to the crowd of 25,000 �SFI= Green~~build~~wash." The banner hovered directly over the Sustainable Forestry Initiative�s booth, providing a necessary rejoinder to the �sustainable� talk being peddled below.

Watch a slideshow of our various activities at Greenbuild below and read the press release here >>

Our ad in USA Today

Simultaneously, we launched an ad in the USA Today, also spotlighting the greenwashing practices of SFI. The ad copy reads:

"With views like this, some window companies have no business at Greenbuild.

You're only as green as the companies you keep. And while Andersen Windows, Kolbe Windows & Doors, and Jeld-Wen are in Phoenix this for Greenbuild, the world's largest green building conference, they're doing business with some decidedly ungreen characters. Names like Sierra Pacific Industries, whose name belies its greenwashing practice of certifying "destruction as usual" logging.

If these window companies really want to be considered green, they ought to reconsider the crowd they're running with. Until then, they have no business running with the crowd at Greenbuild."

Click on the ad to view a larger version, and tell these windows companies to green up their act and save the Sierra >>

Phony Forest Protection Program Exposed at World�s Largest Green Building Conference

Thu, 12 Nov 2009 00:00:00 PST

Click here to view a larger version this ad.

Greenwashing by the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) was an unexpected addition to the agenda at this year�s Greenbuild�the world�s largest green building conference�in Phoenix, Arizona. Today�the day after keynote speaker Al Gore exhorted Greenbuild to call out greenwashing�ForestEthics released a large floating banner exposing SFI as a greenwasher.

On the conference�s opening day, ForestEthics ran an ad in USA Today�s Phoenix edition spotlighting SFI�s �greenwashing practice� of certifying forest destruction as �sustainable�. Copies of this ad and a brochure detailing SFI�s shortcomings circulated throughout the massive conference�with an estimated attendance of 25,000 people.

The ad targeted three prominent window companies for their ties to SFI, as well as to �notorious� California clearcutter Sierra Pacific Industries.

Learn more about the ad and the banner here >>
(PDFs of the Ad & Photos of the Floating Banner available on request

In October, the Sierra Club also filed a complaint with SFI, presenting scientific evidence that SFI certified logging by Weyerhaeuser on extremely steep and unstable mountainsides in SW Washington despite publicly available evidence that these mountainsides were prone to landslides. In a major regional rainstorm in December 2007,massive landslides did occur on logging sites certified by SFI as sustainable, producing downstream logjams and record flooding. The report submitted to the IRS focused on SFI's nonprofit status, as SFI�s funding and activities serve the private interests of wood and paper companies that want a 'green' image. This is not a proper purpose for an organization with the same nonprofit status that the IRS gives to public charities.

New York Times -- Environmental Groups Spar Over Certifications of Wood and Paper Products

Fri, 11 Sep 2009 00:00:00 PDT

For more than a decade, the nonprofit Forest Stewardship Council generally has been viewed as the premier judge of whether a wood or paper product should be labeled as environmentally friendly.

But to the dismay of major environmental groups, that label, known as F.S.C., is facing a stiff challenge from a rival certification system supported by the paper and timber industry. At stake is the trust of consumers in the ever-expanding market for �green� products.

This week lawyers for ForestEthics, a nonprofit group dedicated to protecting forests, filed administrative complaints with the Federal Trade Commission and the Internal Revenue Service challenging the credibility of the rival label, known as the Sustainable Forestry Initiative, or S.F.I.

Read the full article >>

PHONY �GREEN� CERTIFICATION LABEL MISLEADS CONSUMERS, CHEATS TAXPAYERS

Fri, 11 Sep 2009 00:00:00 PDT

SAN FRANCISCO - Today ForestEthics joined the growing fight against 'greenwashing' by reporting the "Sustainable Forestry Initiative" (SFI) to the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Internal Revenue Service (IRS). These actions are part of a broader ForestEthics campaign to show that SFI misleads consumers with deceptive 'green' marketing and cheats taxpayers by operating as a nonprofit entity that pays no taxes.

You can download the IRS complaint .pdf here and download the FTC complaint .pdf here.

"SFI is spending millions to market wood and paper products sourced from destructive logging operations as 'green'," said Aaron Sanger of ForestEthics. "But the type of logging that they call 'green' destroys houses, roads, and watersheds while irrevocably injuring vibrant forested ecosystems."

"Meanwhile, environmentally controversial companies like Sierra Pacific Industries and Weyerhaeuser are taking tax deductions for their monetary contributions to SFI."

In its FTC complaint, ForestEthics describes how SFI, funded and managed primarily by large logging companies, gives its seal of approval to the logging practices of these same companies that harm people and wildlife, damage water resources and destroy forests.

The report submitted to the IRS focuses on SFI's funding and activities that serve the private interests of wood and paper companies that want a 'green' image. This is not a proper purpose for an organization with the same nonprofit status that the IRS gives to public charities.

"People are more concerned than ever about the damage inflicted on our atmosphere, forests, oceans, rivers and communities by reckless corporate behavior," said Daniel Hall of ForestEthics. "Greenwashers such as SFI enable the offending companies to profit from these concerns, while continuing to wreak the very environmental harm that consumers wish to avoid."

SFI today gives its seal of approval or 'certification' to more than 160 million acres of logging in forests across North America. To receive this certification, a logging company must pay for an SFI assessment of its operations and an outside auditor to check the company's compliance with SFI standards. But the standards are full of loopholes, and the assessment and audit processes are largely confidential. This means a logging company rarely needs to make changes in its business-as-usual operations to acquire SFI certification.

The ForestEthics campaign against SFI will include a wide variety of tools, including pressure on companies to sever their links to SFI, protests against wood and paper products that bear the SFI label and public communications to educate consumers and companies about SFI's greenwashing.

You can download the IRS complaint .pdf here and download the FTC complaint .pdf here.

SF Bay Guardian � Sierra timber practices aren't front-page news anymore � but the brutal devastation of clear-cutting continues apace

Wed, 09 Sep 2009 00:00:00 PDT

[The following are excerpts from the full article]

"A decade ago, logging and forestry practices in the Sierra were big news. Media reports, protests, and legislative action focused on SPI's practice of slicing through entire large tracts of land, hacking down every tree, bush, and seedling and leaving nothing but devastation behind.
But most of the news media have long since moved on to other issues � and the clear-cutting continues. If anything, the pace at which SPI is felling the forest has hastened since the intensive logging controversies grabbed headlines in the 1990s...

CLEAR-CUT FRENZY

You don't need to travel to the Sierra to get the picture � connecting to Google Earth will suffice. Zoom into Arnold and levitate above Highway 4. Beyond the lush forest "beauty strips," the landscape looks like a moth-eaten blanket of evergreens."

(We made the Google Earth view of SPI's clear-cuts easy for you. Click play above to get a glimpse of SPI's destruction of California's Sierra.)

Read the full article >>

Take action to save the Sierra

Against the Grain radio -- Interview with Josh Buswell-Charkow

Mon, 26 Jan 2009 00:00:00 PST

Sierra Campaigner Josh Buswell-Charkow speaks to C.S. Soong about the state of the Sierra. Against the Grain is a radio show on KPFA-FM in Berkeley, California. From the Against the Grain website:

Forests serve vital ecological functions and sequester huge amounts of carbon. But can they survive the activities of wood products companies like Sierra Pacific Industries? Joshua Buswell links logging to climate change and a host of other environmental concerns.

Redding Record Searchlight -- SPI criticized for herbicide use

Sat, 10 Jan 2009 00:00:00 PST

Critics of the state's largest private landowner say it's spraying too much herbicide on its cleared timberland.

"It's a tool like a chain saw for them and we think it should be something used as a last resort," said Joshua Buswell, Sierra campaigner for ForestEthics, a nonprofit environmental group with offices in San Francisco, Washington, D.C., and Canada.

The group recently released an analysis of state data that showed Anderson-based Sierra Pacific Industries sprayed more than 335,000 pounds of herbicide - chemicals that kill plants - on its land in the north state between 1995 and 2006.

But Sierra Pacific Industries, and other companies in the forestry industry, use less than 1 percent of the herbicide sprayed in the state, said Mark Pawlicki, spokesman for the Anderson-based company.

He said the agriculture industry sprayed more than 350 million pounds of herbicide during the same period in farm-heavy Fresno County.

"And, of course, in Fresno County that was put on the food we eat," Pawlicki said.

Ingredients in the herbicides used on Sierra Pacific's land include atrazine, which has been shown to cause male frogs to gain female sex organs and has been outlawed in Europe, said Tyrone Hayes, a biology professor at the University of California at Berkeley.

"I think it should be banned, personally," Hayes said.

He said he thinks the chemical puts workers applying it and people who drink from watersheds where it's sprayed at a health risk.

Sierra Pacific usually applies the herbicides to its land shortly after harvest to knock down fast-growing vegetation that can out-compete tree seedlings for sunlight, Pawlicki said. He said the company is sure to be within allowable limits for herbicides set by state and federal agencies.

And he said the company tests water that flows off its land.

"When the water leaves our property it meets drinking water standards," Pawlicki said.

But Don Erman, a retired ecology professor who taught at University of California at Davis, said he thinks there is reason to be concerned even if tests show water to have low levels of chemicals.

"We constantly keep learning that the amounts that we thought had no effect have some effect," Erman said.

In the two years since the data analyzed by ForestEthics ended, Pawlicki said Sierra Pacific has made some changes to what herbicides it uses. He said the company is using "better chemicals," with their most commonly used herbicide being Roundup.

"Most of what we use you can buy in the hardware store," Pawlicki said.

Because of the way the Department of Pesticide Regulation tracks herbicide usage, Buswell said it's unclear how many acres Sierra Pacific treated with herbicides.

Sierra Pacific is the state's largest private landowner, with more than 1.7 million acres of forests. That includes 240,000 acres in Shasta County, 93,000 in Siskiyou County, 118,000 in Tehama and 194,000 in Trinity.

Pawlicki said the land is usually sprayed only once, to give replanted trees a chance to start.

"We do it once in 80 years," he said.

But Buswell said the data shows some land has been treated as many as five to 10 times in a decade.

"They've gone in and sprayed a number of areas repeatedly," Buswell said.

Stockton Record -- Timber company's herbicide use blasted

Fri, 19 Dec 2008 00:00:00 PST

ANDREAS - The environmental group Forest Ethics released a report Thursday analyzing the 770,000 pounds of herbicides that timber giant Sierra Pacific Industries used on its lands during an 11-year period and calling on the company to reduce its use of the chemicals.

Sierra Pacific Industries is California's largest private land owner, with about 1.7 million acres statewide. The company also is the largest private land-owner in Calaveras County, with about 75,000 acres here.

The amount of pesticides used in forestry is miniscule when compared with what happens in farming zones such as San Joaquin County, where around 11 million pounds of pesticides are used every year, or about 12 pounds for every acre of land in the county.

But even though the figures for SPI reflect only a fraction of a pound of pesticide use per acre in any given year, several scientists said that herbicides such as atrazine that are used in forestry pose a risk at even very low levels both to wildlife and to the humans whose drinking water originates in the mountain forests.

Tyrone Hayes, a professor in University of California, Berkeley's Department of Integrative Biology, said studies have shown that atrazine at even extremely low concentrations can mimic hormones and alter the sexual biology of creatures from frogs to humans.

"Hormones work in the parts per billion, parts per trillion range," Hayes said.

Don Erman, professor emeritus of aquatic ecology at the University of California, Davis, said he believes there's enough evidence that trace amounts of herbicides are a danger to wildlife and humans that foresters should reconsider their use. Herbicides are typically used after an area is logged to suppress shrubs and other low-growing plants so that newly planted trees have time to grow.

"Those are choices we make as a society. Do we really care about what is in the water we drink, or do we want to have the cheapest food on Earth, or the cheapest timber on Earth," Erman said.

Sierra Pacific Industries spokesman Mark Pawlicki said the company's pesticide use is small compared with food crop farming, and even that use is carefully regulated by state laws.

"Overall, forestry use of herbicides in California is less than 1 percent of total herbicide use," Pawlicki said. "In our case we do extensive monitoring in stream courses where we use herbicides."

"We have yet to find a detectable amount in any watercourse," Pawlicki said.

Hayes said he was skeptical. He and other scientists say concentrations of pesticides such as atrazine may be missed simply because standard lab tests are not sensitive enough.

"We know that it persists, sometimes for years," Hayes said.

Pawlicki said if the state or federal regulations on pesticide use are inadequate, then scientists should take that up with those governments, rather than Sierra Pacific Industries.

"We only do it once, or sometimes twice in an 80-year period," he said of herbicide applications done when particular areas are replanted.

See for yourself

Records of pesticide use in California are available online at http://calpip.cdpr.ca.gov/cfdocs/calpip/prod/main.cfm.

The database has records of atrazine and imazapyr use for forestry purposes in Calaveras County for 2006 and earlier.

New Figures Detail Logging Giant�s Vast Herbicide Use

Thu, 18 Dec 2008 00:00:00 PST

Statistics released today by international environmental group ForestEthics show for the first time the total quantity and variety of toxic herbicides used by Sierra Pacific Industries (SPI) as part of their controversial logging practices.

Compiled between 1995 and 2006, the data reveals that California�s largest private landowner has used over 770,000 pounds of toxic chemicals to manage their tree plantations across Northern California. The questionable safety of these chemicals, and the sheer quantity used in the watersheds of California�s rivers and streams, raises questions about whether SPI is using herbicides as a crutch, when they should be used as a last resort.

Contact ForestEthics at 415.407.3426 to learn more about SPI�s herbicide use in your specific county.

�The evidence for pesticides acting as endocrine disruptors affecting everything from sexual development, to immune function, to cancer is increasing and is no longer simply a hypothesis,� said Professor Tyron Hayes of the Department of Integrative Biology at Berkeley and an expert on atrazine. �The task now is to figure out exactly what and how much humans and wildlife are exposed to and assess the relative risks to environmental health and public health.�

One of the toxins detailed in the report, atrazine, was the second most frequently detected pesticide in EPA's National Survey of pesticides in drinking water wells. Studies have shown that at levels 1/30th of what the EPA allows in drinking water, atrazine can cause male frogs to grow ovaries. It is also suspected to have caused male fish in the Potomic River to grow eggs. ForestEthics� records find that SPI has used over 91,450 pounds of atrazine. Its use is banned by the European Union.

Imazapyr is also used by SPI in their forestry practices. It has been shown to increase the number of brain and thyroid cancers in male rats and can be persistent in soil for up to a year. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has gone on record stating that imazapyr is a threat to endangered species in 24 states east of the Mississippi River. SPI has used almost 31,000 pounds of this chemical in the state.

"Scientific work has shown that even trace amounts of common herbicides such as atrazine have deleterious ecological effects when present in streams and lakes,� said Don Erman, Professor Emeritus, University of California, Davis and the Science Team Leader of the Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project. �Pesticides show up in some of our most pristine watersheds, and forestry practices increasingly rely on herbicides in management after logging and fire. Individual citizens, watershed groups and others need information on what, where and when herbicides are being applied to forestlands."

SPI is already facing scrutiny from concerned citizens due to its persistent use of destructive logging practices such as clearcutting and the conversion of natural forests to tree plantations. Their heavy reliance on toxics in everyday management is yet another example of a business model that is viewed as controversial and outdated.

"For years I have witnessed the devastation caused by timber companies as they clearcut forests in Shasta County, replacing forests with sterile tree plantations and eviscerating habitat for wildlife,� said Sue Lynn of Montgomery Creek, a small town 36 miles outside Redding. �The astounding quantities of herbicide being sprayed in our forests outrages me. They do not have the right to poison the land and the watersheds that provide drinking water for Californians."

The process of compiling this information required over half a year of sorting through data from the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR). By California law all commercial herbicide use must be reported, including the time, location and quantity of each application.

ForestEthics� �Save the Sierra� campaign is working to transform the destructive logging practices of California�s largest landowner, Sierra Pacific Industries. Since 1995, SPI has clearcut or converted to plantation over a quarter of a million acres of natural forests, with plans for up to a million acres within the next fifty years. Though the Sierra is home to half of California�s plants and animals and the source of 60% of our drinking water, SPI continues to ruin this natural treasure with its destructive practices.

San Jose Mercury News -- Opinion: The Sierra forests can prevent Global Warming

Wed, 17 Sep 2008 00:00:00 PDT

California's Global Warming Solutions Act is a landmark attempt to cap greenhouse gas emissions across all sectors of the state's economy. Signed into law in September 2006, the California Air Resources Board is figuring out the precise formula by which the state will reduce emissions 25 percent by 2020.

Imagine a grand formula that somehow left out � cars. Or industrial manufacturing. Leaving out one of these huge emissions sources would render any climate legislation toothless.

Fortunately, both will likely be accounted for. But will forests? Judging by recent statements, it isn't clear whether the state recognizes the outsize role California's forests play in naturally absorbing carbon emissions, or the quantity of carbon dioxide released when these forests are irresponsibly clear-cut.

Deforestation's role

Deforestation and logging account for one-fifth of all global carbon emissions � more than all trains, planes and, yes, automobiles combined. Any serious attempt to address California's contributions to climate change must include an understanding of what's happening in the forests of the Sierra Nevada.

In April, ForestEthics released "Climate of Destruction," a report outlining the logging practices of Sierra Pacific Industries, the state's largest landowner, and its effects on climate change. The results were not surprising: SPI's brand of forestry � large-scale clear-cutting operations across the Sierra and conversion of wild lands to sterile tree plantations � contributes mightily to climate change, more so than even wild fires. Its management plan calls for the clear-cutting and conversion of up to a million acres to "tree farm" plantations over the next 50 years.

Studies have shown that California's forests are particularly carbon-rich and that the best way to preserve a forest's stored carbon is to preserve the forest itself. We often talk about weaning ourselves off fossil fuels as a first step toward greater sustainability, but addressing deforestation is arguably as important.

As we put out our report, SPI released its own, titled "How California's Forests Store Carbon and Improve Air Quality.'' It's a nice title, but so were President Bush's "Clear Skies Act" or "Healthy Forests Restoration Act". A message of "don't worry, what we are doing now, which is what we have always done, is actually green'' permeates the report to justify clear-cutting and tree plantations. And when clear cuts are called a climate solution, it's time to worry.

Age counts

The more a forest ages, the more carbon it stores. Old trees, roots, woody debris and undisturbed soil combine to form a rich carbon-absorbing system that a human-made tree plantation cannot replicate. Remember nature? It works pretty well. When mature forests are clear-cut, most of the vast carbon stored goes into the atmosphere. When you see a clear-cut, imagine a tailpipe.

The industry says young and growing trees consume carbon at a faster rate than older trees, and are therefore more valuable weapons against climate change. Young trees do absorb carbon at a higher rate. But this is a little like saying that because a baby's mind acquires language and complex thought rapidly early in life, intelligence acquired between ages 5 and 55 is of little use to society.

There's a huge fortune of carbon "intelligence" in a natural forest, and clear-cutting for little baby tree plantations runs counter to the ways the Earth is designed to protect itself.

California officials who are working on turning the Global Warming Solutions Act into on-the-ground policy treat forests as a carbon-neutral bystander. Is it the influence of the logging industry?

It would be a shame if a self-interested industry and its friends in Sacramento kept one of Gov. Schwarzenegger's proudest accomplishments from reaching its full potential.

Todd J. Paglia is executive director of ForestEthics, a forest and climate advocacy group.