WatershedEvents

DOUGLAS FIR #1

This is the first post in a series aimed at documenting and celebrating the many mature Douglas fir trees that are growing on the back half of our property. It is my hope that conducting this verbal and pictorial process will bring me even closer to these majestic creatures. I respect and admire them so much, and they've come to mean the world to me.

I called them “creatures” just now, which should give you a fair idea how I tend to view the vegetated portion of the world in general. I find it increasingly difficult to draw hard-and-fast distinctions among the various modes of life on the planet, and in some ways consider such labels as “animal,” “plant,” and “insect” artificial and unnecessary. The notion that we humans are fundamentally separate and distinct from any other living thing on this planet doesn't work for me these days. It's just too obvious to me how connected and interconnected it all is. I guess I am coming closer and closer to fully embracing the Gaia Hypothesis, and I definitely tend, at least partially, towards Animism on occasion.

But enough about me – it’s on to the trees! And I am starting with #1, although I will digress and get out of order frequently after this first excursion into the woods

The first thing to get your head around is the fact the Douglas fir isn’t a member of the Fir family at all; it’s a member of the Pine family. Pseudotsuga menziesii is its scientific name, and I’m still wrestling with that. “Pseudo” is from the ancient Greek and means “false.” “Tsuga” is from the Japanese language and means hemlock tree, referencing the fact that the Douglas fir is often confused with that variety of tree. It’s enough to make a guy shake his head and move on.

The Menzeiesii part makes a little more sense. Archibald Menzies was born toward the end of the Age of Enlightenment and became a naval officer, surgeon, botanist, and artist. He was a fascinating character, a contemporary of another famous Scotsman and botanist, David Douglas. During his visits to the Pacific Northwest, Douglas sent the first seeds of the species back to Britain. Douglas gave the tree its scientific name and honored Menzies in the process. That’s how the fir/false hemlock/pine tree was “discovered” by Menzies, yet ended up with Douglas for its common name.

#1’s trunk is roughly 6’ in diameter and it is about 150’ tall. It is one of the largest Douglas firs on the property. An educated guess puts it at about 100 -120 years old, typical statistics for the many large firs on the property and in our tree-blessed neighborhood. This entire area was heavily logged during the first part of the last Century, when the Timber Industry was at its peak.

I shudder to think of how the area must have looked when this tree was just beginning to grow. Turn of the century timber operations were conducted without much scruple for environmental concerns. Remember, this was the same period in which the hills of Seattle were cut down to size and the Panama Canal was built; those same mechanical and environmental sensitivities were employed in the clear-cutting of western Washington.

It's hard to believe #1 is really a young specimen, it's so tall and straight, and truly is a hefty piece of wood; but by Douglas Fir tree standards this tree is definitely just hitting its stride. They can get up to 300+ feet tall and be as big 8 feet in diameter. With any luck at all it can expect to live another 300 years or so, and a 500 year life-span is not out of the question. There are of course lots of variables involved with such speculations, but it could happen. This youngster has already weathered some tough times.

Forty years ago, or thereabouts, when this lot was first being cleared, a bulldozer or some other large piece of heavy equipment was working the land and gave #1 a nasty wound in the lowest section of the trunk. It could have been fatal at the time, but the tree was healthy enough to take defensive action. In a complex and fascinating process called compartmentalization, trees do not “heal” so much as they “wall off” or isolate injury. In a sense they grow a new tree around the site of wounds and disease. Compartmentalization in progress can be seen in the photo below.

The understory here has changed significantly since this tree started growing. Where once there were only sword fern, mahonia, salal and other natives in abundance there is now an increasing number of transplants also crowding the base of #1: non-native Rhododendrons mostly, plus some ubiquitous Herb Robert and the occasional, unwelcome non-native blackberry.

When we can, we yank out the blackberry and tolerate a few of the Stinky-Bob - somehow there's always a little clump or two we somehow missed. We also keep an eye open for insects and quickly dispatch any we recognize as harmful; the rest we simply admire and let them go on their way. Overall we do our best to be good stewards for these great trees and the rest. It gives back way more than we can ever repay.

 

OPEN LETTER TO THURSTON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

Note: There are five County Commissioners: Carolina Mejia, District 1; Gary Edwards, District 2; Tye Mesner, District 3; Wayne Fournier, District 4; Emily Clouse, District 5. There is also a county Manager, Leonard Hernandez. Commissioners Mesner and Fournier each represent key sections of the Mclane Basin. For more information look here.

The Mclane Creek watershed is one of the most valuable natural resources in Thurston County. At its heart is the creek itself, the main body of water in one of the most ecologically intact watersheds in Thurston County. Today, however, that distinction is being threatened by the Department of Natural Resources(DNR) decision to put some of its most complex and mature stands of timber on the chopping block.

The two forested acreages involved are designated Bears U1 and U2 and are located in the Capital Forest. The timber stands on uniformly steep and unstable slopes directly above the Mclean Creek Nature Preserve. The land itself has gone without major disturbance for many decades. Except for hikers and hunters the forest rarely sees human visitors, and is home to a wide variety of animal life and native vegetation.

The environmental and aesthetic issues involved are of serious concern; but the direct physical threats to the creek are even more worrisome. A timber harvest on densely vegetated and steep hillsides such as those involved in the Bears project can’t possibly be conducted without harming a salmon bearing stream that lies in such close proximity. Bad luck during the harvest - a major weather event for example, or a landslide - could cripple it permanently.

I am urging you, as County Commissioners, to use every bit of your considerable power and influence to convince the Department of Natural Resources to abandon Bears U1&U2. The threats to Mclean Creek and all that its basin contains are too real and the potential loses too great. A better use for the Bears acreage would be to make it part of DNR's Carbon Project inventory. That would tie it in nicely to the planned trends in your own "McLane Creek Basin Water Resource Protection Study."

Thank you for your time and attention!
_________________________________________
Dr. Eric L. Lindstrom / WatershedEvents.com
Wetlands Advocate and Mclean Basin Resident

DNR - A WATERSHED MOMENT?

I recently wrote about a timber parcel on which DNR is planning to take bids. It occurred to me at the time that the organization might be at at a major inflection point when next it grapples with its mission. A recent court decision legally affirmed (once again) the Department’s discretionary rights where alternatives to timber harvesting contracts are concerned. This in turn furthers its Carbon Project Plan and, in the process enhances its environmental stance.

The suit was brought by a organizations and counties with strong ties to timber; it was opposed, naturally enough, by environmental groups that intervened in the DNR’s defense. It’s easy to get snarled up in the competing viewpoints between Timbermen and Environmentalists; but setting aside the Cutting vs Keeping arguments for a moment, it becomes clear that a larger and more pivotal question looms: given the clear option to move forward with a non-traditional forest management strategy, will the Department actually do it?

The initial plan only involves 10,000 acres or so, a minuscule portion of the State’s 2 million+ acres of forestland. For DNR to make this the kind of program a viable and meaningful one it will have to increase the size of those kinds of holdings significantly. That will require a considerable sales job, internally as well as in the marketplace. The internal side may actually be the harder sell.

If you appreciate the role that “culture” plays in management, then you’ll recognize that moving the Department further toward the Environmental side won't be easy. I would never call the Department “Old Fashioned,” but I will wager that many of the old hands in some of the offices were shaking their heads and saying, “WAIT, WHAT?” when this last court case was over.

It will be interesting to watch the DNR for the next several years. The Environmental Crisis is already upon them, just as it is the rest of us. Like the general population, there will be those stuck in the “Old School” mentality who won’t or can’t embrace change; many others will be too busy, worn down, or defeated to even care; but for the rest, the worries and challenges of dealing with urgent environmental issues of all kinds will continue to mount. How these get dealt with over the next few years will be telling.

I learned about Conservation as a kid, over 70 years ago, and adopted that perspective until the ’60s, when Environmentalism forced me to re-examine my conservationist assumptions. I’ve been trying to balance the two often conflicting ideas with daily life as an ordinary human being ever since. In some ways it’s a Have-It-All kind of mentality I am trying to adopt, and I’ve not yet figured out how to get that done. Neither, I’ll wager, has the DNR.

How (or even if!) DNR folks are going to make the sort of cultural change the Carbon Project represents will be interesting to see. There will soon be new management and that may significantly impact the change process. But, one way or the other, maybe they should adopt the practice of never making a hard decision about the forests they manage until they’ve stood alone under the trees for a while, listening to the wind.

BEARS U1 & U2 AND MCLANE CREEK

The DNR has announced plans to take bids on a couple stands of timber located in the State’s Capital Forest. The two sections are called Bears U1 and U2, and you can find them by enlarging this map to 50% and studying the east side. Look in Quadrant #35 in the extreme NE corner, just a stone’s throw from the Mclane Creek Nature Preserve. You'll see that U1 actually comes down very close to the creek itself.

A little familiarity with the lay of the land in that area should give you a good idea why wetlands advocates might be alarmed by the news. At the very least, logging in that specific area is sure to increase environmental strain on Mclane Creek and the basin through which it runs. And with a little attendant bad luck during the process it could even end the creek’s usefulness as a spawning ground for multiple species of Salmon.

The terrain in that general area is very steep and rugged. The base rock is Basalt, but the upper surface is several layers of till and glacial outwash deposited by both the advance and retreat of the Puget Lobe of the glacier that moved over and through this area around 19k BP. This soil is mostly packed layers of sand and gravel somewhat amended over the centuries by intermittent deposits of wind-blown silt and organic matter.

As a “skin” it leaves a lot to be desired because it is neither thick nor well-connected to the bedrock. Saturated with water it tends to move easily over sloped ground. When that slope approaches the Angle of Repose (roughly 30-40 degrees) layers within the saturated soil may begin to move on their own – “creep” takes place. At steeper angles that movement may occur wholesale – a landslide, in other words.

The slopes upon which Bears U1 & U2 are to take place are uniformly steep, sometimes so steep as to be unnavigable except by the most determined and skilled hiker. Even when the landscape is healthy and in its natural state this steepness, combined with the area’s geological properties and its location just a short distance above the creek makes any major disturbance in the area a potential threat to the stream and it’s seasonal lodes of Salmonid species,

At any point in time serious threats to the creek’s existence as a Salmon bearing stream will almost surely occur. A disastrous forest fire, landslide, or weather event – any one of these kinds of extreme events could occur. But an incursion by a timber operation would almost certainly cause permanent damage to Mclane Creek’s continued ability to be a spawning ground for the thousands of Salmon that return each year.

“The Mclane Creek basin is in relatively good shape,” according to a study by Thurston County’s Regional Planning Council. But the key word here is "relatively," and its vital not to loose sight of it when studying any environmental report by a state or federal authority. The fact is Mclane Creek isn’t at all “well.” Its dealing as best it can with a suite of serious water quality and environmental challenges. Almost all are attributable to human action, and all of them combined have been severe enough to land the creek on state and federal D303 lists of water quality impaired streams for decades.

The major issues from a Salmon standpoint are turbidity, temperature, and nutrient load. A forest operation like this in such proximity to the creek is bound to negatively impact all three of these. How much impact is a very difficult question to answer, until the damage is done. But there will be significant damage to the regular order of things, of that there can be no doubt. You can’t cut down a bunch of big fir and cedar trees without tearing up a good sized chunk of underbrush and the ground upon which all of it grows. While most of it will regenerate* over time, the initial blow will be felt by the land for years.

The timber harvesting industry has made great strides in terms of protecting human and forest health, and the DNR and other state agencies have much to say about how the process of harvesting should take place; but for locations such as those where Bears U1 and U2 are proposed, those rules and regulations won’t prevent real damage from occurring to the soil, vegetation, and wildlife of the area. Neither will they adequately protect the Salmon of Mclane Creek. 

As far as the potential revenue that Bears U1 and U2 timber sales might generate for the state, an intact forest is worth potentially much more, particularly in the long haul. There's always the Carbon Capture angle to consider. It would be great if DNR decided it should look toward that option where Bears U1 and U2 are concerned, now that it can.

_________

*Growing a monoculture where a diverse one once existed is in no way "regeneration," but it's what frequently gets passed off for being one by proponents of plantation forests.