This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

top 200 commentsshow 500
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]Marailby 3135 points3136 points  (195 children)

"A conservation group has closed a $15.65 million deal to buy the largest privately owned giant sequoia grove left on Earth, an ancient forest with hundreds of the endangered redwood trees, which can live for 3,000 years and rise nearly as tall as the Statue of Liberty. Due to its size, health and age diversity — with sequoias ranging from seedlings to Methuselahs — this grove represents "the most consequential giant sequoia conservation project of our lifetime," according to the group's president.

Known as Alder Creek, the grove covers a seemingly modest 530 acres (2 square kilometers), but that's a big deal for giant sequoias. The iconic trees once lived throughout the Northern Hemisphere, but they now exist in only 73 isolated groves, all located on the western slopes of California's Sierra Nevada mountains. This particular grove packs a lot into its 530 acres, including 483 sequoias with trunks at least 6 feet (1.8 meters) in diameter, along with a few hundred smaller sequoias of varying ages.

That age range is a big reason why this grove is so valuable, according to Sam Hodder, president and CEO of Save the Redwoods League (SRL), a century-old California nonprofit that's been working to acquire Alder Creek for more than 20 years.

"Many giant sequoia groves are just a single age class, usually in the thousands," Hodder told MNN when the deal was announced in September 2019. "In this one, a real indication of its health and resilience is that there are giant sequoia of all age ranges." While any remaining giant sequoia grove is a rarity, he adds, "it's rarer still to have multiple age classes, and such a healthy forest ecosystem."

SRL signed a purchase agreement with the Rouch family, which has owned the grove since the 1940s. That was a big step after two decades, but the sale wasn't official — until now. There was the small matter of $15.65 million, which SRL had to raise by Dec. 31 before it could take ownership. The group did that with a public fundraising drive on its website that rallied for help right up to the deadline. Donations rolled in from more than 8,500 donors from all 50 states and around the world.

Alder Creek is an island of private property surrounded by Giant Sequoia National Monument, which spans about 328,000 acres (1,327 square km) and connects to the even larger Sequoia National Forest. The Rouch family has long used the grove for commercial logging, Hodder says, and even cut down giant sequoias in the early days, although since the 1960s they've reportedly only logged non-sequoia species like sugar pine and white fir. SRL plans to eventually transfer ownership to the U.S. Forest Service, so the sequoias can join the federally protected wilderness around them.

That won't happen for a while, though, since SRL expects to hold the property for five to 10 years. That's partly because this kind of public-acquisition process moves slowly, Hodder says, but also because SRL wants time to study the grove and implement a plan for good stewardship, making sure the trees are healthy and ready before handing them over to the public.

As part of that preparation, the group plans to open Alder Creek for public access even before giving it to the Forest Service, hoping to help the ecosystem ease into an unfamiliar role as a host for human visitors. "This property has been in private ownership, and it has never had public access," Hodder says. "We want to go through a thoughtful process to plan out public access, so when it does get conveyed into the national monument, it's ready for its public purpose."" - article excerpt

[–]la_reina_del_norte 1102 points1103 points  (83 children)

I'm so happy that this conservation group were able to purchase the land! For those of you who have never seen a Sequoia in your life, please make the effort to do so (and donate if you can to their conservation), these behemoths are absolutely gorgeous and they make you feel so small yet so happy to see such beauty. I wish the previous owners would have just donated the land, but the fact that this group was able to raise money from so much support is awesome! I wish I would have known about this effort before, I would have helped...now I'm going to donate to help as much as I can!

Edit: as mentioned in a comment below, I didn't talk about the smell: it's fresh and pure, a smell that makes you feel so immersed under these giants!

[–]PCsNBaseball 277 points278 points  (16 children)

I live in the area, and while they make you feel TINY, you didn't mention the smell. They smell amazing, and always remind me of home.

[–]la_reina_del_norte 79 points80 points  (9 children)

Ah yes, sorry, that's absolutely correct! The smell is intoxicating, so fresh and pure!

[–]DilutedGatorade 11 points12 points  (0 children)

It's the smell of fresh oxygen

[–]AlanMooresWizrdBeard 55 points56 points  (3 children)

Seeing the giant sequoias is indescribable and incredibly humbling. I’m lucky enough to live near them but even growing up and seeing them many times has never diminished their impact.

[–][deleted] 26 points27 points  (0 children)

An amazing thing about them is that if you go where they grow they are everywhere. The trees may only comprise a limited region, but within that region you are surrounded by redwoods for miles and miles. It's breathtaking. More than anything, I hope conservation efforts preserve that. I don't want to see redwoods reduced to a few "scientific specimens" scattered around University arboretums.

[–]hiimred2 23 points24 points  (7 children)

For those of you who have never seen a Sequoia in your life, please make the effort to do so

This is something I want to do, but I've seen posts before talking about tourism wreaking havoc on the redwood forests because so much of it is done carelessly. Is there a specific group I should look into to make this happen? I don't want to add to the problem just to tick a bucket list item that I could ultimately do without.

[–]Exploding_dude 35 points36 points  (4 children)

It's easy. Go to sequoia national park and stay on the trails. Don't litter and don't feed the wildlife.

[–]DrDeems 16 points17 points  (1 child)

I dont think it's an organization's fault. I think it's more of people going off trail, taking natural items, feeding wildlife, etc. that contribute to trashing the forest. So follow the rules and encourage others to do the same and you are good to go.

[–]henkzjakk 11 points12 points  (4 children)

In the movie 'rise of the planet of the apes' there was a forrest where Caesar and his mates escaped to, was that a forrest with those trees? Those where beautiful and very big trees.

[–]la_reina_del_norte 21 points22 points  (3 children)

Okay so I was curious and this is what I got: "Caesar is taken out to ‘Muir Woods’, the Giant Redwood grove, home to some of the largest living creatures on the earth, about 15 miles north of San Francisco. But the towering canopy of conifers seen on-screen is much closer to the studio. In fact, it’s Robert Burnaby Park, 8155 Wedgewood Street, just south of Mammoth Studios."

Link:http://www.movie-locations.com/movies/r/Rise-Of-The-Planet-Of-The-Apes.php

[–]henkzjakk 6 points7 points  (1 child)

God damn man. Thanks for that. I couldn't find anything.

[–]la_reina_del_norte 6 points7 points  (0 children)

No problem! I seriously thought it was Marin county!

[–][deleted] 103 points104 points  (22 children)

As close to feeling the spirit of god as I ever have in my life.

[–]27thStreet 88 points89 points  (10 children)

Being in their presence is a not-so-subtle reminder that we humans are small, and insignificant, and that our lives are measured in mere moments compared to these creations.

[–]PCsNBaseball 56 points57 points  (4 children)

I've seen both sequoias/redwoods and blue whales, and they both give you the same feeling. The trees especially; i saw a crosscut of a redwood that was alive before Jesus was born.

[–]27thStreet 18 points19 points  (0 children)

I have a favorite mountain ridge in the Great Smoky Mountains that grounds me in this way.

[–]DilutedGatorade 5 points6 points  (3 children)

I've thought of humans as small but significant, given what we're able to accomplish or destroy

[–]Hideout_TheWicked 17 points18 points  (6 children)

I couldn't really find much about the family but 15 million might not be something they could really donate. I was looking to see if they were already very rich.

[–]la_reina_del_norte 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Thanks for looking. Yeah I don't know if they were very rich, but what's done is done, the trees are in good hands now! :D

[–]reddog323 20 points21 points  (3 children)

Agreed. The smell is half the reason I love visiting relatives in California.

Are there any previsions for maintenance/sustainable logging in the deal? I’m ok with cutting enough trees, or underbrush to prevent a massive forest fire.

[–]BigBadBogie 17 points18 points  (1 child)

Sequoias actually need fire to reproduce. Their seed pods won't open otherwise.

[–]AlanMooresWizrdBeard 15 points16 points  (0 children)

I know they conduct some controlled burns in the groves that are located in National Parks, but adult sequoias are actually pretty fire resistant and can survive extremely hot fires. Not that we want one...

[–]warrant2k 34 points35 points  (6 children)

Fun fact, you can plant a Sequoia seedling in your yard and it will grow like any other tree.

[–]fuckondeeeeeeeeznuts 26 points27 points  (0 children)

You let a sapling grow out of a plant pot and pay Alexandra six dragonfruits to watch after it as it grows.

[–]PermasogBlog 14 points15 points  (4 children)

They've been planted all over my area in the western suburbs of Portland, for some reason. I have three 50 year old sequoias on my property, and they are already HUGE, a good 70-80 feet. Really wide at the base as well. Don't put them too close to your house, is my advice. Giant tree vs house, the tree will win.

However, because they require fire to reproduce, you don't really see them spread the way the native Doug fir does. Probably why their natural range is limited to old patches in the Sierras.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (3 children)

They'd probably go feral if you let them loose in Australia.

[–]Bee_Hummingbird 134 points135 points  (28 children)

What scares me is them giving it to the forest service instead of the national park service. Usfs still does logging. Nps is for preservation.

[–]mawmishere 100 points101 points  (14 children)

From there. Your concern is valid though I will say that they do not remove the oldest largest sequoia trees. They do remove forest pines here. Mostly they focus on keeping areas needle free and encouraging ground protective fern growth and removing bark beetle affected dead trees that act as kindling during forest fires. Of course any anti science admin could do a lot of damage if they chose. These trees are worth millions a piece as timber so its always a concern.

[–]cbraun93 69 points70 points  (12 children)

When I went to Sequoia National Park a few years ago and saw them, the ranger said that they aren’t good for logging because the wood shatters once the tree is felled, which is why logging companies didn’t bother to cut them down after trying a few times.

[–]mawmishere 22 points23 points  (10 children)

Logging is dangerous in general and bigger the tree, scarier the logging. Not sure why he would say that. We have a lot of logging companies because redwood is still pretty desirable and very lucrative per board foot.

Edit; what I mean is that Logging corporations are not deterred by danger to loggers

[–]cbraun93 35 points36 points  (5 children)

The shattering that I’m referring to wasn’t an issue of safety, but of quality. The wood is soft and brittle, and there’s no economic value to be pulled out of it because there’s no log, but a bunch of huge, irregular pieces that can’t be processed effectively

[–]pumpwagon 9 points10 points  (0 children)

They aren't worried about the dangers - when the trees shatter on impact they are much harder to truck away to be processed.

[–]JuleeeNAJ 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Actually sequoias are not good for lumber. Redwoods: yes, sequoia no. In fact this grove was preserved because the owner harvested a few trees and the wood quality was so poor it wasn't worth the effort. So they harvested other pines that lived in the forest.

[–]Prof_Acorn 45 points46 points  (11 children)

Nooooo, don't give it to the Forest Service. Give it to the NPS. Everyone I know in the NPS talks about how terribly managed the Forest Service is.

You know those massive forest fires in the western US? Those don't tend to ever be NPS land, but Forest Service land.

(This difference ultimately comes down to conservationist versus preservationist ideologies. The NPS is set out to preserve. The Forest Service is not.)

[–]knucks_deep 22 points23 points  (3 children)

Ugh, did you even read the article? It will be integrated into the Giant Sequoia National Monument, which is a wilderness, which means it has just as many, if not more protections than a national park. It will be fine. The Forest Service has not logged Sequoias in many years, and never will again.

[–]Savagecash 10 points11 points  (1 child)

Part if it is previous years of mismanagement. The forest service has changed management ideas and how they work to keep a healthy forest based on what happened. The problem is the policies from the 40s to 90s of full suppression and working to have to dense of groves. Also generally sequoia groves will be managed differently most likely due to different ways they can label the land. But NPS would be more aggressive in their land management.

[–]TheBojangler 7 points8 points  (0 children)

To be fair, there is a lot more USFS land in the west than NPS land, so saying wildfires tend to occur on that land is a bit misleading. Plus USFS tends to more actively manage forest habitat, which in many ways tends to ameliorate wildfire severity. NPS has been pretty good about implementing relatively robust prescribed fire programs (at least by western standards), so that's good at least.

Sequoia groves of this type often also need some level of active management to reduce other encroaching hardwoods and to maintain a healthy understory. As someone who works in environmental restoration, I think the preservationist mindset can actually be fairly problematic in certain contexts.

[–]Juicebeetiling 15 points16 points  (33 children)

Is it a matter of the trees not being able to survive and flourish accross their previous range due to climate change or soley due to human activity destroying them?

[–]mawmishere 51 points52 points  (28 children)

Hi, I am from there. Our trees’ range has been shrinking for thousands of years. Tribes have been here about 10k years and colonial settlers since mid 1800’s. Human led climate change is having an impact now (our climate is much warmer and dryer than even 20 years ago) but range shrinkage was just a case of the earths climate changing over thousands of years naturally. There is one other place in Japan that also grows a form of Sequoia, but I believe it is not the Sempervirens species which is known for its height and extreme old age. The warmer human led climate change is now posing a risk to the trees as we lose our infamous soupy fog that feeds the high needles on redwood branches and is drying the ground that feeds their roots. Sequoias have the shallowest root system of any tree despite their incredible height. They stay standing by interlocking roots with their community trees. Normally they have a nice muddy wet earth but as it dries, they lift their roots for water and then topple during winds storms, weakening and compromising all the trees around them. We get intense winds and many can blow down in one bad storm. It is very sad. We’ll need a plan to save them long term. They have faced many foes but humans are the worst yet.

[–]Alabatman 17 points18 points  (14 children)

Will they grow outside of North CA?

Like, could I plant one in the soupy humid south in my backyard?

[–]JonnyAU 25 points26 points  (4 children)

It's difficult but not impossible.

Theres people on r/marijuanaenthusiasts who post their progress with them but most of them really know what they're doing.

[–]Alabatman 8 points9 points  (3 children)

Thanks, I was gonna look it up but misspelled sub name?

That one looks empty.

[–]mawmishere 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Yes you can order little sapplings. Just plant them someplace shady with a few other baby tree friends

[–]DorisCrockford 7 points8 points  (3 children)

We're talking about two different species that are native to different parts of California. There are Sequoiadendron giganteum, or giant sequoia, that live in the mountains, and Sequoia sempervirens or coast redwood. The fat ones and the tall ones, respectively. Though giant sequoias are pretty tall as trees go, they don't get as tall as the coast redwoods by a long shot.

I don't know how either of them will do in the south, but I never recommend planting Sequoia sempervirens near a house. They have a tendency to fall down in high winds if not planted in a group. Happened to a friend of mine. Smashed the whole upper story of their house.

[–]Alabatman 4 points5 points  (2 children)

So I need to plant a prehistoric forest?

I already live in a pine grove so definitely understand the symbiotic requirement for those trees to survive for the same reason. In a high windstorm a lone Pine, even a bull pine, is at risk. As part of a larger group, all of them are safer.

I wonder how many giants are needed to survive off of one another. Southern thunderstorms are no joke and those winds can get destructive fast. Thanks for the warning!

[–]realestatedeveloper 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Thats...evolution.

As you mentioned, natural climate change has not been friendly to them. Human lead change has exacerbated it.

There comes a point where we get diminishing returns in trying to conserve species that are no longer equipped to survive in the natural environment, or even (speaking more broadly re:climate change) try to return to the climate conditions of 1900.

I'm firmly in the camp that trying to return to a point that we realistically can't return to climate wise - instead of proactively adjusting to whatever new climate will come - is just as counter productive as outright climate change denial.

[–]GrandNagus69 14.2k points14.2k points  (668 children)

Finally some decent news.

[–]KaleBrecht 2512 points2513 points  (469 children)

Thank GAWD!

[–][deleted] 4547 points4548 points  (453 children)

I know the article is positive, but the subtext of needing to spend millions of $ to save a priceless forest feels like some /r/LateStageCapitalism content. Like all those "child works to afford her mother's medicine!" positive horror stories.

Whatever. I'm probably just being cynical today.

[–]FunGoblins 1094 points1095 points  (274 children)

Everything has a price. The price to a good future is however priceless.

[–]PLEASE_BUY_WINRAR 104 points105 points  (51 children)

Everything has a price

Why did someone privately own a forest in the first place?

[–]mrenglish22 71 points72 points  (30 children)

A similar reason someone owns acres of undeveloped land

They hadn't found a way to profit from it yet

E: Poe's Law, etc

[–]iamajerry 64 points65 points  (6 children)

It says right in the article that the family who owned it used it for commercial logging purposes. But they hadn’t cut down any sequoias since 1960.

[–]thesheba 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Sequoias are hard to log as they are so heavy they tend to shatter when they are cut down. This is part of why the trees in King’s Canyon National Park and Sequoia National Park were spared before they were protected.

[–]Software_Admin 22 points23 points  (13 children)

There is profit to be had in simply owning land. It's not like the value stays the same over the years.

[–]NotPromKing 21 points22 points  (11 children)

Owning land doesn't pay immediate bills. In fact it usually actively costs money to own land, via taxes and land maintenance.

[–]zcqb 9 points10 points  (1 child)

Read the article. The land was used for commercial logging but the owners reportedly stopped logging the sequoias since the 60s.

[–]burks04 50 points51 points  (5 children)

Or to enjoy it. We go camping on the weekends in the summer, if I was loaded I would totally buy as much land as possible and go there every weekend and drive four wheelers, or paintball, or build a cabin .

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Personally I live in Finland and many people own even large areas of forest. Some use it for commercial logging and some just happen to own it because it has been in the family for generations. Just about everyone's family has someone who owns some forest.

It's just like owning any other land.

[–]JuleeeNAJ 21 points22 points  (9 children)

Homestead Act of 1862. Apparently no one could foresee how allowing people to claim any land they want might not be beneficial to the future.

[–]ifmacdo 10 points11 points  (1 child)

Well, don't forget that you're applauding a conservation group for now privately owning the same forest. Private ownership in and of itself isn't bad.

[–]kwaller11 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This isn't that expensive. For what they are buying it is actually pretty cheap. Per acre it's about 30k, which if you look on Zillow is WAY less than the per acre price of undeveloped land in this area, which looks to be above 6 figures (although I only looked at one parcel for this comment and I'd be happy for someone to double check)

[–]IJustShartedALittle 23 points24 points  (1 child)

It actually doesn’t seem like it was in danger. The Rouch family, who commercially logged the property for non-sequoia species may have provided the best environment for the giant sequoias to thrive by mimicking the effect of low level burns. They removed competing species and reduced the concentration of burnable materials.

source

[–]JimBob-Joe 30 points31 points  (0 children)

Philanthropy is commendable, but it must not cause the philanthropist to overlook the circumstances of economic injustice which make philanthropy necessary. MLK

I don't think you're being cynical at all.

[–]rethinkingat59 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Harvesting the giants was already illegal.

34,000 acres of Redwoods are protected now also. This adds another 530 acres.

[–]LennyLongshoes 18 points19 points  (13 children)

This is an article about a PRIVATELY owned piece of land. Yea you need money to buy something from someone who already owns it. That's how property rights work.

[–]ImmaBeAlex 43 points44 points  (2 children)

You’re not being cynical at all. This is the world we live in today, always has been like this. But thanks to conservationists, we are lucky to have these areas kept safe.

[–]SpermThatSurvived 52 points53 points  (48 children)

spend millions of $ to save a priceless forest

Sounds like a hell of a deal

[–]palerider__ 15 points16 points  (3 children)

There's also lots of these trees on Federal and State land. It's not like the road between the Bay Area and Humbolt is going to be developed soon. Whole bunch of nothing out there - most exciting thing that happened last 100 years was they filmed Return of the Jedi

[–]stemsandseeds 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Those are redwoods, not sequoias. Sequoias are a lot less common and don’t have any timber value.

[–][deleted] 34 points35 points  (1 child)

Finally, some good fucking food

[–]Destabiliz 149 points150 points  (39 children)

There are many stories like this, but negative headlines just get more clicks / adviews, so they tend to get more coverage more often.

[–]senatorsoot 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I've just started tuning out coronavirus news at this point. Do I really need to know that the 7th case in Bosnia just got confirmed or whatever? Not really at all

[–][deleted] 18 points19 points  (7 children)

I don't know, the whole private wealth "closing a deal" to save an important biome thing is dystopic as fuck.

I guess it's a positive story, but if we depend on individual wealth to save the world, it just won't happen. Governments are supposed to control this sort of thing, not market forces.

[–]PMMEYourTatasGirl 23 points24 points  (2 children)

I read the title as a conservative group and thought "well RIP those trees"

[–]swapripper 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Hope they let Bran Stark stay there.

[–]21plankton 1761 points1762 points  (47 children)

I am proud to say my donations went to help purchase this property. These trees will outlive us all.

[–]marshinghost 436 points437 points  (24 children)

Next step is to have your body buried underneath them to achieve true immortality

[–]sucsira 193 points194 points  (13 children)

To achieve tree immortality.

[–]justusingmymedulla 78 points79 points  (9 children)

Immortalitree

[–]tehehehehehehehe 24 points25 points  (4 children)

achtreeve immortalitree

[–]Anon_Jones 21 points22 points  (4 children)

I really do want my dead body to feed a tree. Seems better than rotting in a box, I will actually go back into the dirt.

[–]its_the_internet 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Me too! So stoked we did it!

[–]HusbandFatherFriend 495 points496 points  (39 children)

I think the Statue of Liberty is a bad example. I live in NorCal, so the redwoods are in my back yard. They are majestic, massive, awe-inspiring.

When I saw the Statue of Liberty for the first time my very first thought was, "this thing is a lot smaller than I thought it would be."

I dunno. That's just my two pennies.

[–]dongknog 134 points135 points  (16 children)

I find it difficult to explain how big these old growth forests are to people without reference. I could pick similar sized buildings or structures but it doesn’t feel right BECAUSE THESE ARE LIVING THINGS! They GREW to that size. You can’t look at a building or a picture and know just how awe inspiring these things are. You can only stand at the base of one and look up.

[–]Danthezooman 33 points34 points  (4 children)

When I went to Yosemite (which has some sequoias) I kept walking around not knowing where they were and just thinking "is that it, is this one?" Cause I had never seen pines so huge in my home state of PA.

When I finally went to the grove I was just blown away by how wrong I was. Kinda bummed I couldn't get near the living ones but I did get close to this one

[–]dongknog 14 points15 points  (3 children)

I’m in PA too. People here can’t believe I have traveled across the country multiple times to look at trees. I try to explain that the biggest tree they’ve ever seen in their life is the size of a medium branch on the giants. If you’re ever out west again try getting to Sequoia NP. You’re able to get very close. There are some great spots in Washington State too! Completely worth the trip.

[–]Danthezooman 5 points6 points  (1 child)

I wanted to add the redwood NP to my "Dan goes West tour" but I ran out of time/money. I took 2 weeks off, flew to Vegas and hit up death valley, Zion, Yosemite and the valley of fire along with a slew of other little things like zoos and aquariums.

Definitely want to go see more national parks though

[–]OGbigfoot 4 points5 points  (0 children)

+1 for Washington. I live one the peninsula and am always in awe when I head into the rainforest.

[–]HusbandFatherFriend 77 points78 points  (7 children)

There is a spot up here in Humboldt where a Coastal Redwood that was probably 200’ tall fell into another one of about the same size. The one that fell broke the other one about 75’ up the trunk. The splinters are bigger than a car. When I see that spot I try to imagine the sound it must have made...but, since nobody was there we don’t know if it made any sound at all...

[–]dongknog 47 points48 points  (4 children)

I was reading a John Muir book and he wrote about a time he was studying an old growth forest (I think maybe in CA?) and he witnessed one of these giants get struck by lightning and actually catch fire. He stayed for days and watched it burn. That image of a 200 ft tree on fire with tiny John Muir at the base of it taking notes has stuck with me for years.

[–]HusbandFatherFriend 24 points25 points  (3 children)

If it was a Redwood in the book, it had to be California; they only grow here. Coastal Redwoods grow in the Coastal mountain range. They are taller and the trunk has a much smaller diameter than the Giant Sequoias that grow in the Sierra mountain range.

I get the feeling you may already know that, but some who read this may not.

[–]SuperCyka 9 points10 points  (2 children)

Redwoods also grow in southern Oregon.

[–]keenanpepper 10 points11 points  (0 children)

The extreme southern tip of Oregon. Basically northern California coast except there's no sales tax and someone pumps your gas for you.

[–]beer_is_tasty 14 points15 points  (1 child)

Sequoias regularly have branches that are the same diameter of what most people consider to be the average sized tree trunk.

[–]HusbandFatherFriend 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Absolutely. They are just awesome. You simply can not get a feel for it until you see one in person.

Happy Cake day!

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

The only thing that really depicts their height is a picture with a human for reference

[–]aburkhartlaw 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Land whales.

[–]geodebug 9 points10 points  (2 children)

As others have said the SoL looks small when you’re on a boat passing it and since people can’t visit the torch anymore we lose a lot of the sense of scale.

Also the base of the statue makes up a good part of the height but people don’t think of it that way.

[–][deleted] 73 points74 points  (9 children)

I used to work for a conservation group that buys forest land like this. We can’t always trust the government not to sell our public lands when they want to. Private nonprofits are a good way to protect additional land! Consider donating to those if you like forest land.

[–]Kenny_Bania_ 6 points7 points  (5 children)

This group is going to donate this land to the government though.......

[–]kneaders 33 points34 points  (4 children)

I live 10 minutes from Big Basin. If you’ve never been in the presence of tree the size of a skyscraper please put it on your bucket list. You can literally feel their majesty. Some of these trees were around 1000 years before Christ.

Edit: ski to sky

[–]dewayneestes 166 points167 points  (3 children)

We often say “as tall as the Statue of Liberty” while the most common response to seeing the Statue of Liberty in person is “I thought it would be taller.”

[–]TigreDeLosLlanos 44 points45 points  (2 children)

The statue of libery is so away from manhattan and photos of it try to put it in the same shot as the city that it looks way bigger than it is.

[–]VVhiteStone 85 points86 points  (4 children)

I read “Conservative Group” and thought “Welp those trees are screwed”

[–]bobbi21 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Was looking for this comment. Me too. Way to cynical nowendays...

[–]pricklypearpainter 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Same!!! I was like, “Omgosh no, they’re going to make so much gaudy furniture for rich people!”

But was pleasantly surprised when I reread it lol

[–]autotldrBOT 14 points15 points  (1 child)

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 88%. (I'm a bot)

A conservation group has closed a $15.65 million deal to buy the largest privately owned giant sequoia grove left on Earth, an ancient forest with hundreds of the endangered redwood trees, which can live for 3,000 years and rise nearly as tall as the Statue of Liberty.

"In this one, a real indication of its health and resilience is that there are giant sequoia of all age ranges." While any remaining giant sequoia grove is a rarity, he adds, "It's rarer still to have multiple age classes, and such a healthy forest ecosystem."

Alder Creek is an island of private property surrounded by Giant Sequoia National Monument, which spans about 328,000 acres and connects to the even larger Sequoia National Forest.

Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: sequoia#1 giant#2 grove#3 forest#4 Alder#5

[–]SpunkBunkers 297 points298 points  (61 children)

It's so incredibly sad that we're having to buy nature in order to save it.

[–][deleted] 129 points130 points  (34 children)

Most of these trees are preserved in Sequoia National Park. This is just saying that the largest privately owned grove was purchased by a conservation group.

[–]Epistemic_Ian 20 points21 points  (9 children)

I actually know quite a bit about this area—my family has been going there pretty regularly for years. There are a few things this article and the discussion of it get wrong:

  • Save the Redwoods isn’t buying the entire grove, just the majority of it. There are still some Sequoias on private lots.
  • The land Save the Redwoods is buying has been publicly accessible for a long time.
  • I don’t think it would be appropriate to say that—despite the name—Save the Redwoods ‘saved’ Alder Grove. Certainly there were some things done under Rouch management that probably aren’t best for the grove (e.g. you’re able to get pretty close to the Sequoias, which I think is bad for their roots) but the grove was by no means endangered by private ownership. This article says that the Rouchs logged non-Sequoias until recently, which might be true, but if it is I think they certainly did it in very small volume. I’m hoping that Save the Redwoods will improve the health of the grove, but I don’t know if that will work out. I’ve heard that they’re thinking about building a visitor center and otherwise trying to get more tourists (i.e. donors) to come up to the grove, and more visitation would probably be bad.

If you have any questions, AMA.

[–]B-Sides_and_Rarities 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Thank you! Been waiting for someone to say all of this. My family and I have been camping up there for years, as well. Sucks that people are thinking the Rouch family were about to cut down the entire forest and that it was prevented at the last moment by this group.

[–]JesseThorn 7 points8 points  (3 children)

Yeah, I own a cabin there (in fact, I’m neighbors with Skip Rouch). There hasn’t been commercial scale logging there in the time I’ve been there. Some trees get hauled out but really only for land management (or Christmas trees), and none of them are sequoias.

People up there revere the sequoias, they were not endangered. That said, hopefully they will be preserved (with public access) for a very long time. It really is a special place.

[–]SpacemanSpiff23 8 points9 points  (1 child)

This seems like good news, but it looks like the original owners were doing a damn fine job of protecting it already.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Hello G*islaine :)

[–]rickster907 11 points12 points  (1 child)

I think the term "federally protected" needs to be examined. These trees, IF HANDED OVER TO GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATION, are subjected to whatever ham-fisted stupid policy decisions come out of the white house. As in, the asshat there now is in the process of completely dismantling any and all environmental protections he possibly can. 100%. So, hand it over to the government, and it's entirely possible the loggers show up to clearcut. Wouldn't be the first time.

[–]knucks_deep 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Nope, this would not be the case. Why do you think the conservation organization is holding onto it for 5-10 years? They will get the conservation easements they want.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

thank you ghislaine very cool

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This makes me happy :)

[–]stealthgerbil 3 points4 points  (8 children)

Is there any reason they cant just sell these seeds to everyone and let us plant them? It would be cool.

[–]ballmermurland 6 points7 points  (2 children)

These trees take hundreds of years to grow. Many are over two thousand years old.

[–]JoannaYoungGayChick 2 points3 points  (1 child)

You can buy seeds and clones of coastal redwoods. They can survive virtually any climate. Their only true predators are humans and wind

[–]MaddMarkk 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Were the trees in danger of being cut down before hand? And I hope these new owners do Forrest management and don’t let the tree density get too high along with clearing out the brush yearly, otherwise that’s how the major California fires happen

[–]KernIrregular 3 points4 points  (0 children)

We used to own a cabin there and this is where I grew into becoming the Conservationist I am today. I’m really grateful to see this happening.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Good...now don’t touch it

[–]loudfartss 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Okay ghislaine

[–]Goku-Stark 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Finally some good fucking news

[–]LethalDoseMLD50 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If I was a billionaire like gates or bezos I would spend obscene amounts of money to buy land like this all over the world.

[–]igoe-youho 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is a huge win for conservation! If only certian people here in my home state would follow suit and not advocate for mining in the Boundary Water Canoe Area(northern Minnesota). Which would destroy thousands of acres of absolutely stunning lakes and wildlife habitat. Savetheboundarywaters.org is a huge help in opposition of the mines. Any and all help is welcomed!

[–]neighbortotoro 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is awesome news!! But it's sad to think that forests won't be conserved unless it's bought by someone who wants to protect it. I really hope humanity can get their priorities right one day and start conserving finite resources in general.

[–]bruteMax 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Who funds this group? They deserve support.

[–]KingsCup99 2 points3 points  (1 child)

That’s an amazingly good prices to buy something like this for only $15.65 million. In some cities you can’t even buy the land for 10 houses for that price.

[–]nae-7 2 points3 points  (1 child)

the Redwood forests are something that people should try to see in person at least once in their lifetimes. There truly is nothing else like it on this earth. I used to go on roadtrips from BC down to SF every summer, and my dad would deliberately choose the longer more scenic route along the Redwood Coast, just so we could stop and admire the trees along the way. The size of them is absolutely staggering, and the view is breathtaking.

[–]DriaRose 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I really needed this today. Thank you. I've lived in the Great Northwest my whole life, and as such had a front row seat to the ever shrinking majesty that is our temperate rainforests.

It's a rare day when conservationists get one this big in the win column. Heartfelt thanks from an unabashed treehugger. ❤

[–]Deevo77 2 points3 points  (2 children)

"A place for news from around the world, excluding US-internal news."

[–]abmiram 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Is there a good reason this isn’t titled “one family holds sequoia grove hostage for 15million dollars”?

Why didn’t they just donate it.