Have you flown over the Sierra lately, or just looked out your car window as you drive east on Highway 88 or Highway 4? You can’t miss the big, ugly patches of bare land left by Sierra Pacific Industries as it continues its scorched-earth policy of “forest management” — clearcutting its massive Sierra landholdings.

This fall, SPI received a big boost from the state when industry advocates persuaded the California Air Re-sources Board to allow clearcutting to qualify for carbon credits as part of the state’s efforts to fight climate change. The board ignored the testimony of numerous conservation groups, which asked for more time to review the decision’s environmental impacts.

The groups submitted a letter to the board, which said, “Forest clearcutting is not the solution for achieving greenhouse gas reductions in California. Scientific studies show that forest clearcutting is the worst option for reducing forest carbon emissions, and that it has devastating impacts on California’s forests, water, biodiversity, and fish and wildlife. Moreover, the forest protocols were purportedly designed not only to help achieve greenhouse gas reductions, but also to provide a range of significant public and environmental benefits including clean water, biodiversity, fish and wildlife habitat, recreation, and aesthetics.”

The letter goes on to state that the industry-supported protocol would allow forestry practices that worsen climate change while causing the loss of important fish and wildlife habitat and biodiversity.

On September 30, immediately after the protocols were adopted, SPI and Equator, a forest carbon trading firm, announced a deal to provide funds to SPI under the new carbon credit program. The arrangement covers “some 60,000 acres of SPI’s private timberland in California,” and claims the company will sequester “an additional 1,500,000 tons of carbon dioxide over the next five years in excess of what would have otherwise occurred.” While the announcement contained few details, there were no assurances that clearcutting and the flammable young conifer plantations that follow it would not be included.

“This looks a whole lot like a giant timber company getting paid millions of dollars to do business-as-usual, and destroying our forests, water quality, and wildlife in the process,” said Brian Nowicki of the Center for Biological Diversity. “Giving carbon credits for logging operations is a shell game where timber companies win, and the forest, the climate, and everyone else loses.”