10,000 acres in Sierra Nevada protected
Lyons Ridge was purchased by the Northern Sierra Partnership, American River Conservancy and Nature Conservancy. Photo/American River Conservancy
By Paul Rogers, San Jose Mercury News
More than 10,000 acres of scenic meadows, forests and trout streams in the Sierra Nevada 10 miles west of Lake Tahoe have been preserved in a deal in which environmentalists hope to prove that thinning out overgrown forests can increase California’s water supply.
The Northern Sierra Partnership, an environmental group based in Palo Alto and founded by longtime Silicon Valley leaders Jim and Becky Morgan, joined with the Nature Conservancy and the American River Conservancy to buy the land for $10.1 million from Simorg West Forests, a timber company based in Atlanta.
The deal, which closed Aug. 5, preserves a landscape south of Interstate 80 in Placer County adjacent to Granite Chief Wilderness in the Tahoe National Forest. The land contains more than 20 miles of blue ribbon trout streams.
10,000 acres saved? Sounds to me like it’s going to be logged. To show that downed trees will help with the drought? What a joke! Timber!!! OLS
Great article explaining evergreen ecosystems in regard to unhealthy forests that are a huge issue when crown fires slam into developed areas. Be interesting to see if any analysis is given to fishery health. Wonder if the old logging roads might make for great mtn bike recreation.
Who appointed these (self proclaimed experts) Bay Area outsiders in charge of our forests?!
“Who appointed these (self proclaimed experts) Bay Area outsiders in charge of our forests?!”
Gee, Kit. They are the owners of the land. Is there a problem with owners legally using their own land?
They are Activists owning 10,000 acres. I see nothing good coming from this. Stay tuned.
People who grew up in the mountains and are very focused most definitely have an edge. BUT, some bay area families were the 1st domestic, sustained legal settlers west of the continental divide in 1848. Hence, some of these families have lived all over the west, and have traveled all over the west.
“They are the owners of the land. Is there a problem with owners legally using their own land?”
If only most of you folks here believed that ALL the time, instead of only when the property owners are using their land the way YOU like it to be used. . .
This group put up their own money to buy the land and for that I give them credit. Most environmentalist want the someone else to buy the land and then tell them what they can or cannot do. If it works to thin the forest out they will have preserved some beautiful land, streams and forest for all of us to look at and enjoy for generations to come. If the forrest is thinner it will no burn to a crisp like all the unmanaged forest in the West are doing now. It is funny how you do not see those type of destructive fires on private timber ground but mostly US Forest ground that has kot been properly managed.
As usual. someone missed the message – these people PURCHASED the land from a TIMBER company – not to log it, but to preserve it. . .
The question then is, if any here have an extra $ 10,000,000 lying around, would they buy 10,000 acres (@ 1,000/acre) out of the goodness of their heart (?). . .& love for the land (?)
Using their land “legally” is not the issue. . .
By “thinning” up to “50 percent of the trees in many of these areas, Bales said, the amount of water flowing into streams could increase from 9 to 16 percent. Sierra-wide, that could increase the water running off by 500,000 to 1 million acre feet a year, enough for up to 5 million people for a year. Much of that would flow into rivers, where it could be stored behind existing dams.”
Sounds like a boon for logging companies, farmers, and anyone who benefits off of full reservoirs such as developers.
Sounds like they are more concerned about getting as much water off the mountain as possible while making as much money off lumber as possible, and selling it as an environmental concern.
Never mind that what holds the snow for the longest time is the forest canopy, which in turn keeps the trout streams and rivers flowing longer and cleaner throughout the year. Never mind that the same canopy helps protect the snow pack when we get unseasonably warm rain storms in the winter. Remove 50% of the canopy and virtually all of the understory in the process and they may get more than they bargained for, how long can you tread water?
Interesting that I was repeatedly asked to donate to help “save” this area and they never once mentioned logging up to 50% of it as part of their plan.
My gut tells me this is an environmental group in name only.
This link was in the comment section where the “whole story” was posted;
http://stopthinningforests.org/
The before and after picture at the top reminds me of what was, and what remains of areas in Tahoe like the bike path between the high school and sawmill, and 89 across from Pope beach, among others after “thinning”.
I also like this from the link;
“Most importantly, take a walk into the forests and find a thinned area. Sit in that area a while and then find an area that has not been thinned and do the same. Think about the land, the ground, the living beings who depend on those areas and decide for yourself which place is truly healthier.”
Forest | Definition of forest by Merriam-Webster
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/forest
Merriam‑Webster
Full Definition of FOREST. 1. : a (dense) growth of (trees) and (underbrush) covering a large tract.
So by “thinning” or by logging, which is really what’s happening, you’re saving the trees by cutting them down and selling them?
It’s amazing people buy into this word game. That the people who profit from cutting down forests present themselves as trying to protect the environment and combat the drought.
A healthy tree is not one cut down and hauled away on a logging truck to be sold.
Lets save the trees and not keep cutting them down.OLS
Look around your home. Everything you see was grown or mined. Which would you rather have next door??
It’s great they purchased this 10,000 acres to protect it, I’m hoping from development. Hopefully they will return it to a “wild” state with no roads and few trails. Using the current drought as a headline gets everyone’s attention. How much water will be saved by this action ? Not enough to matter. And they will be logging it just the same. Only hope is they restore any roads and past logging trash piles.
So wrongula, if it was a developer or logging co. That bought the land and said they were gonna clear cut it because it was “theirs to do with it as they would” and someone said no, or go ahead you would be saying the same thing only defending the action. You are such a f÷=/ing hypocrite. Always finding a way to point out the fact that someone else is wrong. Whaaaaaaa, bla, bla, bla…
Kats Cr@ps fears “Bay Area outsiders.”
From the article, “For years, loggers turned the property’s evergreen forests into wooden crates for Central Valley fruits and vegetables. Now the environmental groups plan to remove old logging roads and restore the landscape.”
Your Xenophobia is showing Kats.
Dumb as a rock: We all know Xenophobia is the only and biggest word you know. Move on………
Wooden crates will be the past as your Governor steals farmers land for his ridiculous tunnel, carved under his train to nowhere. A bigger idiot and carelessness has yet to be seem……oh, but for the fool in DC
Kitty litter. Finger pointing extraordinaire. Who will he blame in two years? Sounds like a game show…