ACTION ALERT: Clearcuts Threaten the Lower Klamath—Here’s What You Should Know (and Do)

In the past few months, Green Diamond Resource Company has proposed nearly 800 cumulative acres of clearcuts and over seven miles of new or reconstructed roads across four timber harvest plans (THPs) in the Lower Klamath Watershed. This is one of the most ecologically sensitive areas on the North Coast—home to northern spotted owl and Humboldt marten, and a lifeline for salmon and other aquatic species. After decades of intensive logging, it’s time to tell Green Diamond: stop.

Why the Lower Klamath Matters

The Lower Klamath is a biodiversity engine. Old and mature forest stands provide nesting and denning habitat; riparian forests cool streams and build the complexity salmon need; intact soils hold carbon and prevent sediment from choking waterways. When Green Diamond chips away at these systems—especially at the pace and scale proposed—we risk losing species, water quality, and climate resilience we can’t easily get back.

A Company with a Controversial Record and a Heavy Footprint

Green Diamond’s lineage stretches back to the 1890s, with ties to early industrial logging across the Pacific Coast. Many lands that later became state and federal redwood parks were once under company (formerly Simpson Investment Company) ownership. Today, Green Diamond controls nearly 400,000 acres in California, shaping forest conditions across entire watersheds. The company points to certifications and programmatic plans, but certifications aren’t a substitute for strong, site-specific safeguards—especially in a watershed as sensitive as the Lower Klamath. The Forest Stewardship Council certification that Green Diamond touts in all of its THPs is not as sustainable as some may think, as its standards on clearcuts are less stringent than the current California Forest Practice Rules. 

Clearcutting: An Outdated Tool for a Climate-Stressed Era

Clearcutting removes most or all trees in a stand at once. That simplification has cascading effects: it reduces canopy cover and shade, elevates stream temperatures, worsens water quality, destabilizes slopes, fragments wildlife habitat, and releases large amounts of stored carbon. While industry argues it can regenerate commercially valuable species, that narrow goal ignores the broader ecological functions—old forests’ structural diversity, down wood, complex soils, and cool, clean water—that take generations to rebuild.

What’s Missing from These THPs

The current THPs fall short in several critical ways:

• Wildlife impacts: Insufficient detail on how operations will affect northern spotted owls, marbled murrelets, and Humboldt martens—including how much suitable habitat will be removed or degraded and where critical movement corridors may be severed.

• Rare plants: Deferred surveys and lack of clarity on avoidance measures for rare and sensitive plant species that can be wiped out by ground disturbance.

• Water quality and fish: Inadequate analysis of how clearcutting and new roads will increase sediment, elevate stream temperatures, and reduce habitat complexity essential for salmonids.

• Cumulative effects: Minimal accounting for the layered impacts of decades of intensive harvest in this watershed, or even effects of these plans together.

• Alternatives: Lack of serious consideration of less destructive harvest methods (e.g., variable-retention, selective thinning) that could meet economic objectives while maintaining ecological function.

• Wildfire risk: Downplaying how extensive canopy removal can increase wildfire risk and spread rates, and failing to propose meaningful, enforceable mitigations tailored to site conditions.

Too often, the company leans on broad, program-level agreements—like Habitat Conservation Plans—to claim additional, site-specific protections aren’t needed. But these THPs are precisely where site-specific mitigations matter most.

The Bottom Line

In a climate and biodiversity crisis, continuing to manage the Lower Klamath with large-scale clearcuts and new roads is reckless. If Green Diamond will not withdraw these THPs, the company must substantially revise them to: avoid sensitive habitats and rare plants; meaningfully protect and restore riparian buffers and slope stability; adopt ecologically focused alternatives to clearcutting; analyze cumulative watershed impacts with transparent, accessible data; and implement enforceable measures to reduce wildfire risk and carbon sequestration loss.

The Lower Klamath’s forests, wildlife, and communities deserve more than minimum compliance—they deserve stewardship that matches the stakes.

Take Action

Public comments can influence the outcome of these plans. Tell regulators and Green Diamond to protect the Lower Klamath and reject or heavily revise these THPs.

Submit your comment!