Officials Seek Protection for Sequoias

Moving a step closer to the creation of another national monument in California, federal officials recommended Friday that President Clinton set aside 355,000 acres of a Sierra Nevada national forest to protect extensive groves of ancient sequoia trees.

Clinton, who recently established several new monuments in California and Arizona, is expected to act quickly to establish the monument.

Friday’s action angered congressional Republicans, who call it politically motivated and claim it would reduce timber industry jobs in the Sequoia National Forest.

“It’s totally political,” said Rep. Bill Thomas (R-Bakersfield), whose district includes part of the land involved in the proposal. “The damage will be enormous.”

He and two other California legislators have sponsored a bill that would require an 18-month federal study about how best to protect the trees, some of which are 3,000 years old and 100 feet around at the base.

In making the recommendation, Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman called the sequoias “jewels that are the oldest living things around.”

The trees are found only on the west slope of the Sierra. Many are in Sequoia and Kings Canyon national parks. But according to federal officials, more than half the remaining groves grow south of those parks, in Sequoia National Forest.

As Clinton’s presidency nears an end, his administration has made a number of moves to add protection to federal lands, stirring controversy, particularly in the West. Timber, recreation interests and congressional Republicans have complained loudly that Clinton is locking up vast acreage.

The same criticism arose in February, when Clinton asked Glickman to make a recommendation on whether a sequoia national monument should be created in the Sierra.

“I want to ensure that these majestic cathedral groves, which John Muir called ‘nature’s masterpiece,’ are protected for future generations to study and enjoy,” the president wrote to Glickman, whose department oversees the U.S. Forest Service.

Federal policy forbids the cutting of sequoias. But logging of surrounding conifers has been allowed in the national forest and Glickman said that can hurt the massive sequoias.

“Despite their tremendous size, giant sequoias . . . are very much affected by what happens on the surrounding forest,” Glickman said Friday in Washington. “Logging or nearby development can profoundly affect water quality in the groves and threaten the long-term survival of these rare trees.”

No commercial logging would be allowed in the monument, although timber sales under existing contracts would be permitted to proceed over the next 2 1/2 years. Noncommercial thinning and cutting of trees other than sequoias and controlled burns could be conducted within the monument to clear out growth that would fuel wildfires.

Glickman also recommended that such activities as grazing, hunting and fishing be allowed to continue on the 355,000 acres, along with operation of existing youth camps.

Environmental groups, which had proposed that about 400,000 acres be set aside, expressed concern at the continuation of any logging among the sequoia groves.

“We’re disappointed in the secretary,” said Andrew Wetzler, an attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This gives the forest service carte blanche to do the kind of thinning and ‘forest health’ logging they are so famous for.”

The provisions for noncommercial tree-cutting and recreational use were designed to appease concerns about recreational access and wildfire threats, but they failed to win over monument opponents.

“We don’t think there’s any science published that would deem that you need to set aside 355,000 acres,” complained Kent Duysen, general manager of Sierra Forest Products, a sawmill that depends on trees cut in the Sequoia National Forest for 60% of its work.

Two Central Valley public hearings on the monument proposal this year drew raucous crowds who complained about the potential drop in logging and said the designation would lead to more and more limits on their forest use.

“We’re concerned it will become a quasi-wilderness and will severely restrict recreational use,” Barbara Ferguson of the SAMS Coalition, which represents recreational groups, said Friday.

The Associated Press contributed to this story.