It takes a Forest. Part 2

In The Hidden Life of Trees, Peter Wohlleben presents a multi-generational perspective on the “old” forests he manages in Germany. Much of the scientific inquiry that he conducted was done under the aegis of Aachen University (RWTH Aachen). In this book he links his own knowledge and scientific inquiry with recent forestry research coming out of British Columbia, Brazil, Australia, the US and Russia. And the conclusions he reaches are very thought provoking.

In this handy little tome, Wohlleben describes the links that synchronize the diverse actions of many trees into a single sentient organism. He methodically examines the resulting behavior of this socially cohesive forest through a variety of perspectives to see if the collective entity shows the essential qualities of sentience.

So what are those essential qualities of sentience? The following questions summarize some of the qualities that he examines.

Can the forest communicate? Can it count?

In the early chapters of the book Wohlleben gives many examples of how trees communicate: through their intertwined root systems, by releasing bursts of scent or by transmitting their conversations along vast subterranean fungal networks.

He also describes a well-known phenomenon that causes groups of trees to coordinate their production of fruit or seeds so that they produces a bumper crop of fruit bodies. The large crop of seeds or pine cones overwhelms the herbivores ability to consume the crop  – leaving many fruit-bodies uneaten and able to germinate in the spring.

Douglas Fir cone

In Germany this is called a “mast” year and it is usually followed by a spike in the population of herbivores – since there’s plenty for them to eat. However,  in the following year, a dramatic drop in the production of pine cones  or seeds causes the populations of deer to collapse. This unique reproductive strategy not only suggests communications between the trees, but also hints at active collaboration, and the ability to count, since these “mast” years do not occur at predictable intervals.

Can a forest smell or taste?

The notion that trees can signal danger to its neighbors by releasing a special scent is astonishing enough, but it gives rise to an even more remarkable question: can trees smell these danger signals – differentiating them from the usual olfactory background scents.

Can a forest learn from memories of prior experiences?

Wohlleben illustrates how the spruce drinks up all the available water but later adopts water frugality. He recounts the differing behaviors of two separate groups of trees:  One absorbed and transpired vast quantities of water to grow quickly, while the other retained more water and grew more slowly. It had learned the hard way that coming up dry in mid-summer was unpleasant.  This change of behavior in response to prior occurrences suggests that trees have the capability to remember and learn from previous experience. Where is this memory held? What part of the tree community makes the decisions. We’re but babes in the woods when it comes to these questions.

The forest does not practice the Law of the Jungle.

The evidence of Wohlleben’s field observations and the research from his far-flung contributors supports the notion that forests are capable of sharing resources for the benefit of the entire forest community.

The Institute for Environmental Research at RWTH Aachen has even found evidence that the trees synchronize their growth despite differences in the soil conditions and access to sun. It seems that they are all photosynthesizing at the same rate regardless of the different growing conditions. Evidently the forest does not live by the law of the jungle. Among trees the strongest make sure that the weakest are equally successful, since a uniformly strong canopy strengthens the entire forest.

How does “thinning” affect the forest?

What about “thinning” one might ask? Here in the Pacific Northwest trees are seeded quite close together necessitating an initial thinning within a dozen years or so, and then again after 25-30 years. Wohlleben claims this rips at the fabric of the growing forest. He asserts that when trees are thinned that it breaks their communications since their closest neighbors have been removed. This inhibits their ability to develop collaborative strategies to share resources and ensure a dense regrowth of the canopy. He even cites a case where “girdled” trees overcame this attempt at strangulation. The neighboring trees made sure to supply the injured trees with enough nutrients and carbohydrates to overcome their injuries.

I have found that such “girdled” forests also have a much stronger mycelium layer, suggesting that some of the aid is delivered through the mycorrhizal fungal network. From my experience this active mycelium layer also contributes to the proliferation of mushrooms – a fact that is interesting for the mushroom hunter.

The Slow Growth Movement for trees.

Wohlleben’s book delves into forest procreation and the symbiotic role that insects play in this complicated sequence of events. He also explores the age-old dilemma of how to avoid inbreeding – a mortal danger for almost all creatures. And then there’s the “upbringing” (Erzeihung) of the younger trees. It turns out that for many trees it is unhealthy to grow too quickly, and the older generation that towers over the young seedlings can enforce their “upbringing” through the simple expedient of depriving them of light. Scientists have determined that those trees that experience a slow initial growth are much more likely to live longer.

And then there are those trees that have abnormal shapes, like “pistol grip” trees that grow out of the ground at an angle, but then straighten to grow vertically upwards. In the Alps or on steep snowy slopes this bend in the trunk can be due to the pressure of snow combined with rockfall piled against the pliant trunks of seedlings. In the Pacific Northwest it is more likely due to the very slow movement of the ground. In these cases the tree grows straight, but the slowly shifting soil tilts the seedling, which later bends its growth to regain a vertical alignment. Look along the edges of our ravines to see the struggling “pistol- grip” tree trunks. Down in the basin of the ravine, you can observe the agile alders steady themselves as the ground slips by beneath them. The occasional big-leaf maple will anchor itself along the edges of the ravine. But the fir and cedar prefer to stay on the ridge lines where the earth is nearly stationary – in part, because these trees are prone to tipping over after excessive rain turns the soil into pudding and winds pummel their highest branches.

The hydrology of forests.

In one particularly good chapter he examines the forest’s hydrology. He points out that the wide expanse of forested land hugging our coasts is responsible for weather patterns as far as 400 miles inland. By clear cutting these coastal slopes we remove the sponge-like quality of these dense coastal forests to soak up the ocean storms that come thundering out of the Pacific.

For every square yard of forest, the tree canopy can grow up to 27 square yards of leaves and needles. In a good storm that canopy can absorb a couple of hundred gallons of water. Spruce can absorb up to 2.5 gallons of water per square yard of forest during a hefty rainstorm, but two thirds of the water flows off the tree to seep away in little foaming rivulets. Spruce do well in the colder northern hemisphere where the ground water seldom disappears, or on the mountain slopes where heavy rainfall and snow retain more ground water. They’re apt to be spendthrift with water, until they experience a drought. Thereafter, they are careful to retain enough water to tide them through a drought. How do they remember, and where does that memory reside? Peter has some ideas about this, but he urges more research to find the location of a forest’s “judgement.”

The question of relative timescales.

Here in the Pacific Northwest trees can grow to be 800 years old, or older. That’s nearly 10 time the longevity of humans. Does this huge disparity in timescale between trees and humans blind us to the actions of trees? What trees considered an abrupt change, might not even register on our shorter time-frame.

An example of this can be found in the current studies of climate-induced tree migration. Studies in Sweden have found that the Norway Spruce has adjusted its growing range 240 meters in elevation since 2002. Changes in altitude are a good proxy for geographic migration because the higher elevation causes temperatures to drop and the growing seasons to shrink emulating the climatic shifts associated with northward migration. However, recent studies have also revealed that instead of “heading north” trees are adjusting to the warmer and wetter climates by increasing the relative abundance of juveniles. These adaptations appear to be speeding up the trees’ life-cycles instead of shifting the distribution of tree populations northwards.

Given the enormous differences in our timescales, it may not be feasible to determine whether trees will opt for migration or simply increase their life-cycles. In that lengthy time-scale that encompasses a tree’s lifetime, we may need several lifetimes to appreciate the tree’s perspective.

My friend Martin Flatz has a tree like this. The stories about this chestnut tree’s great achievements and disasters are deeply rooted in his family’s oral traditions. It has presided over the annual puppet show for nearly 50 years, and it has seen the comings and goings of owners and refugees for several centuries. Martin’s letters bring news of how it fared in the winter storms. It is a tree of which we might say, it has its own character and has a presence in our lives.

Monetization of carbon accumulation in our forests.

For centuries we have used the forest as a resource and the only way that we estimated its value was to price it out in terms of the dimensional lumber that the tree could produce.  After about 60 years the vertical growth of our forest’s trees begins to slows. Traditionally, when the upwards expansion of the forest began to slow, we would summon the loggers.

Older trees grow faster and sequester more carbon than young trees, but this growth occurs at the base of the tree with large bulges oozing down the trunk.

But recent studies have shown that growth actually increases as the tree ages. The tree’s growth was not significant in terms of its height. Instead the studies showed that it came from an ever-expanding trunk. “Rather than slowing down or ceasing growth and carbon uptake, as we previously assumed, most of the oldest trees in forests around the world actually grow faster, taking up more carbon,” said Richard Condit. According to this staff scientist at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, “A large tree may put on the weight equivalent of an entire medium-sized tree in a year.” Just like humans this additional girth shows up as bulging growths that cascade down the trunk.

Increasingly there is heavy competition for the “free” resources that are generated in our “common areas.” Commercial interests are buying up our water, and fossil fuels are polluting our air. Fishermen, farmers, energy companies, recreational users and Indians are competing for these increasingly scarce resources. Clearly we cannot abide the degradation of our atmosphere and must find a way to regulate demand and incentivize increased carbon retention. These pressures may push us to put a price on these free resources, either in the form of a carbon tax or through a cap-and-trade market. If that occurs, users that degrade our atmosphere or use our water will be obligated to restore these resources to their prior capacity. The most direct way to do this would be to create a market that lets carbon emitters purchase carbon retention credits equal to the resource they used. A carbon tax is another alternative approach to pricing these resources and funding initiatives that increase carbon retention.

Mandating some form of compensation for the use of our common resources would immediately change how we perceive and value our forests. The forester would no longer be concerned with maximizing the output of dimensional lumber, but would instead be managing the forest to maximize its carbon retention. Trees would become more valuable as they grew older and increase their carbon absorption. Standing trees would be eligible for an annual carbon credit, that would increase with the size and age of the tree.  The creation of carbon retention credits based on carbon retention by trees would turn our coastal forests into a gold mine – as long as producers needed to buy credits to offset their depletion of our “common” resources. If such a market were to be established it would effectively recognize the huge value that our forests create in the form of breathable air, potable water, inland precipitation, and climatic stabilization.

Do trees have their own emotional needs? If so, do we accommodate these needs?

In the introduction to his book, Peter Wohlleben writes about his discovery that trees can experience pain, and have memories. He describes how their live in groups with parents and children in close proximity. In the forests that he manages heavy machinery has been banned since it is destructive to the flora and fauna and also compacts the soil making it harder for the roots and the mycorrhizal networks to propagate. Throughout Germany trees are harvested selectively, and in the forests that Peter oversees only horses are used. He reasons that this also makes commercial sense since a healthier and “happier” forest is more productive and profitable.

Even though we know that trees are living creatures we still categorize them as objects. Should we accord them with rights as we do with other living creatures like pets, and domestic animals? Yet even domesticated animals are slaughtered so that we can use them for our own survival. Why not trees? Is the harvesting of trees a reprehensible activity? Not necessarily, since we too are part of the natural food chain and we cannot survive without using the organic substances provided by our fellow creatures.

The real question is whether we use only what we need and otherwise leave the forest alone to grow in peace, without the disturbances of caterpillars, skidders and heavy trucks that thunder through the trees’ pastoral home like the four riders of the apocalypse. Instead we should begin to consider softening our impact on our forests, by reducing our massive clear cuts, by selecting logging, by using horses rather than machinery and above all by letting trees live “in a way that is appropriate to their species.” That means we should recognize their social needs, and allow them to mingle and to pass on their wisdom to their successors. Some should be allowed to grow old, unharvested, until they buckle under the natural furies of the Pacific storms.

We’ve come along way in the past century with respect to our treatment of mammals and fowl that occupy niches near us in the food chain. Lewis and Clark ate more than 200 dogs during their two year expedition; today we consider such practices to be barbaric. We raise cage-free chickens, and free range lamp, to say nothing about our monumental efforts to restore the Pacific Northwest fish runs. On Oregon’s Mt. Hood logging is severely restricted in the Bull Run watershed. They log selectively and only when it is necessary, and then they use horses equipped with  diapers to avoid introducing external organic materials.  Is it really such a giant step from where we are today to a gentler, and kinder forestry – especially if the reward systems are reversed and trees are more valuable as carbon repositories, than as dimensional lumber. When standing timber is more valuable than lumber these changes in forest management will inevitably follow. And the Pacific Northwest will experience a renewable resource boom that will reward us for our forests – since they may be the most effective guarantor of North America’s breathable air supply.

Meet your new partners in our effort to sustain the livability of our planet.

This book will leave you with more questions than you started with, but it will also make you feel like you’ve been introduced to a new form of intelligent life that’s been with us all along and may hold the key to our survival. I recommend Peter Wohlleben’s book to those fascinated with the forests, or just those looking for new perspectives on our existing paradigms. Happy reading.

Posted in Animal lore, Logging history, Mushroom Hunting, Mushroom lore, Plant lore, Uncategorized | 1 Comment

It takes a forest. Part 1

Occasionally, books come along that change the way we think about the world. Published in 1999, Jared Diamond’s Guns, Germs and Steel was one of those  books. In 2016 it happened again with publication  of The Hidden Life of Trees by Peter Wohlleben. Even before it was translated into English the New York Times had posted a notice that this obscure forestry book was taking the German book market by storm and being anticipated all around the world.

Peter Wohlleben beneath his beeches.

According to the New York Times, “Mr. Wohlleben, 51, is a very tall career forest ranger who, with his ramrod posture and muted green uniform, looks a little like one of the sturdy beeches in the woods he cares for. Yet he is lately something of a sensation as a writer in Germany, a place where the forest has long played an outsize role in the cultural consciousness, in places like fairy tales, 20th-century philosophy, Nazi ideology and the birth of the modern environmental movement.”

Since the publication of his book, it not only topped the German best-seller list, but is now climbing up the US best-seller lists enchanting readers who would normally never consider reading a book about trees. Ever since its release, Mr. Wohlleben has been asking his readers to reconsider the true nature of trees.  They’re more than just a source of building materials. They’re a community of beings that look after each other with all the tenderness and foresight we attribute to mammals.

Are we failing to see the forest for all its trees?

Trees grow without blocking sunlight to their neighbors.

Much of modern forestry has focused on optimizing the production of trees as if they were asparagus that grew in complete isolation from each other. Recently foresters have been shifting their assumptions about forestry from a focus on the individual trees to focusing on the forest as a whole. Scientists are realizing that “most individual trees of the same species growing in the same area are connected to each other.” It also seems increasingly clear that this community of trees  actively collaborates as it goes about safeguarding the resilience of the forest. Wohlleben, speaks from his experience as Germany’s expert forester, assigned to the country’s oldest forests. He reports that these old trees (mostly beeches) develop sturdy branches only on the far edges of their canopies.” They appear to be avoiding direct competition with their neighbors.  Notably, he also reports that younger plantation forests seem incapable of networking with each other to optimize the use of existing sunlight.

It Takes a Forest

“A tree is not a forest,” Wohlleben asserts. They do not live in isolation from each other. Trees, in their collective guise as a forest, have the ability to change their ecosystems by moderating extremes of temperature or turbulence. In this environment trees have been known to live extremely long. But to sustain such a balance the forest must remain intact, no matter what! If the forest can achieve this, Peter Wohlleben predicts that the trees will be happier, more productive and live considerably longer.

One of Wohlleben’s central points is that trees can communicate across the forest in at least three important ways:

  1. by casting scents,
  2. through the intermingling of their root tendrils, and also
  3. by passing resources through the mycelium layer that lies under the forest floor.

Failure to protect the integrity of the forest canopy typically produces holes that permit turbulence to rush in and cause damage. So if we accept the idea that trees collaborate, it’s not surprising that they will concentrate their resources to repair these holes and  restore their protected ecosystem. This community-centric organizing principle contrasts sharply with the Darwinian paradigm. It’s not about the survival of the fittest, but the survival of the community. In stark contrast to “Jungle Law,” trees will seek out the frailest of their kind and nurture them until the weakness has been repaired and the forest ecosystem is restored. Survival results from collaboration, not direct competition.

planation trees

Plantation trees “seem almost incapable of networking with one another” – Peter Wohlleben

Commercial clear cutting, the way we experience it here, is entirely different than the selective logging approaches used in Germany. Here we strip whole mountainsides, and denude complete watersheds. Afterwards we reseed the clear cuts. But in Peter’s experience these “plantation trees” have no ability to communicate or engage in collaboration. The mycelium under the clear cuts has not regenerated, and the underground network of living roots has been severed. Even the trees’ ability to cast off distinctive scents is useless since the nearest living neighbors may be more than a mile away. To make matters worse, we plant only a single species making the resulting forest vulnerable to environmental catastrophes.

After a clear cut the forest goes silent on all channels. When after 50 years, their replacements begin communicating with each other on the slope, they’re once again chopped down. Measured against the millennial life span of our Pacific Northwest old growth trees, these plantation trees are harvested when they’re still infants.

750 year old Klotchie Spruce

The Klootchy Spruce down on the Necanicum was said to be 750 years old when it finally succumbed to the elements. Given that longevity 50 years is just 6% of the tree’s natural lifespan. So it’s no wonder that the plantation trees haven’t learned to communicate with the surrounding forest. Measured in terms of human lifespans they would be about 5 years old when they were harvested. It could take generations of trees to rebuild the communications skills Wohlleben observed in the ancient beeches he studied.

If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

It depends upon who you’re asking?

Wohlleben contents that the trees in the forest are constantly in touch with each other, and they would certainly know if any of them fell down.

To document his assertion that trees are in constant communication with their neighbors he cites the Acacia trees in Africa, which change the chemical composition of the fluids they pump through their canopy when they detect the presence of predators like the giraffes. The acacia trees also release a flush of scent molecules that effectively warn their down wind neighbors. The up-wind neighbors get their slightly slower tip-off to the lurking danger via the root tendrils and the mycelium network. Research at the University of British Columbia has established that these signals are travel at a rate of 3 minutes per inch. At this rate the surviving neighbors 100 feet upwind of the clear cut would learn of their neighbors’ demise about 60 hours after the Husqvarna’s were fired up. Even if they didn’t feel the thundering crash of the big giants, the surrounding forest certainly learned about it very quickly. In fact they may have even “heard” it. Recent studies at the University of Western Australia, have revealed a noisy conversation among the trees at a frequency of 220 Hertz. Perhaps, this is the wavelength which trees use to communicate, like the truckers that communicate across a predesignated CB radio channel. The forest heard the falling tree, and now they’re all abuzz about it.

Perhaps it’s to dramatize the purposefulness of the trees’ actions, or maybe it’s just to engage the readers, but The Hidden Life of Trees does tend to anthropomorphize the forest. Admittedly, this dramatization can be a bit off-putting. But maybe it’s these “humanized” sensibilities that make the book so dramatic and keep us invested in the fate of Peter’s forests. Despite these slightly kitschy embellishments, the book is a “real page turner” delving deep into new research and pulling all the threads together to describe a collective sentience that operates on a time scale that makes their actions almost invisible to us.

 

Posted in Books & maps, Logging history, Plant lore, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

What’s in a name?

The Rendezvous:

Every year Peter and Pam celebrate the cold damp miserableness of Oregon’s winter. It’s the kind of sloppy coldness for which Oregonians hold an especially sodden place in their hearts. When I arrive at the rendezvous and park under the conifers lining the dirt road, I remind myself to pull my hat down over my head before stepping out of the car. The one time I neglected to give due deference to the snowy sculptures suspended overhead, a big melting parapet toppled neatly over my pate and ran down my neck with a cold rush of icy water.

It’s a rite of winter to join Peter and Pam as they celebrate the dumping of coho salmon carcasses into the little creek that runs along the back of their property. Invariably there are a gaggle of kids from Catlin Gable or elsewhere who’ve come to share the raw midwinter experience and eat some of Pam’s delicious chili.

Outside, ringed around the blazing fire, are people from all over. I know some of them, others I recognize but can’t associate with a name. Maybe they had kids at Catlin when my kids were there, or maybe I know them from my trail advocacy work, but in any event I am surprised to see them here at this special seasonal rite. I feel like going over and asking how they knew about this event, this secret forested cabal, where we sacrifice coho cadavers along the banks of Lousignont Creek.

One year, Neal Maine, one of the founders of the North Coast Conservancy, took us on an excursion into history. Starting near the barky edge of a big circular cross cut section of a big old spruce tree, he proceeded to recount the history of this area pointing out among the concentric circles the lean years and the fat ones. “Here’s where we first arrived in the Nehalem Valley”, he said picking out a ring that might have grown around the middle part of the 19th century. “Lewis and Clark must have passed by on the Columbia around here”, he said pointing to an indistinguishable ring”, a bit further in. “Here’s when Christopher Columbus arrived – albeit a long ways from here”. Tracing his progress back in time he pushed his finger deep into the countless concentric rings encircling the core of the ancient spruce. It was a seedling somewhere around the 13th century he surmised.

Locally, the 13th century was and remains an epoch clouded in mystery given how little we know about those early Tillamook Indians who explored the headwaters of the Nehalem River. Those were early days even here, and the Nehalem River was hard to find and harder to follow given its steep banks and thick vegetation. Maybe it was still a pristine forest; still untrodden ground in the 13th century. We may not know much about what went on locally in those ancient times, but it’s likely that these solitary hunters left no more than an occasional footprint among the fern-covered slopes.

But far away on the other side of the globe events were taking shape that would eventually end up affecting these remote forests in a way that would be wholly unforeseen. Far away from the damp environs of the Upper Nehalem River, wheels had already begun to turn that would ultimately connect this stream with an ancient tale of conquest, defeat and byzantine intrigue.

Lousignant

History has a curious way  of knitting people and places together. Lousignont Creek is one of those unusual linkages, a wormhole that pierces through time like a beetle chewing his way to the core.

On the surface, Lousignont seems like an odd name in these parts. More typical names of streams are Darby Creek,  Carlson Creek, or even nearby Wolf Creek. One might wonder whether Lousignont was part of the metis generation descended from the French voyageurs and their native wives. But no, the origins of this name go back as far as the 12th century, long before the Europeans even knew about the Americas.

The King of Jerusalem

During the latter half of the 12th century, the de Lusignan dynasty ruled Poitou, a small marshy fiefdom along the western coast of France. Poitou was fervently religious and supported the christian crusader kingdom based in Jerusalem. Upon the death of King Baldwin the 4th in Jerusalem, there was much competition among the crusaders for the hand of his widowed queen, Sibylla. After several byzantine maneuvers Sibylla chose Guy de Lusignan a handsome knight, ten years her junior, who had just arrived in Jerusalem.

Guido di Lusignano.jpgThus by good looks and timing Guy de Lusignan became the King of Jerusalem in 1186, reigning until 1192. Following his accession to the throne, there was increased fighting with the Ayyubids, who were loyal to Saladin. In 1187 Guy was captured by Saladin and imprisoned in Damascus. A year later he was released, but he was unable to regain his crown, despite strong support from King Richard the Lionheart. In compensation Guy was made the Lord of Cyprus, where he ruled until his death in 1194.

After that rapid rise and fall from power, we see occasional mentions of the de Lusignan family in the Middle East. In France the family had become Huguenots, or French Protestants. These french followers of John Calvin’s teachings soon ran afoul of both the church and state. Persecuted, three de Lusignan brothers fled, setting sail for the French possessions in the South Sea Islands. Despite the idyllic conditions, at least Guy tired of the Polynesian torpor and made his way to Canada.

Westward Migration

From there we can track Guy de Lousignont to Ohio, where his son, John was born in 1818. During John’s youth he apparently moved to Joseph a rough frontier town in the newly minted state of Missouri. In those days “St. Joe”, as it was called, was the “jumping-off point” for those headed west. He stayed there long enough to marry Delilah Enyart, who gave birth to two girls that apparently did not survive. Perhaps it was this tragic loss that pushed John and Delilah westwards, because in 1843 they decamped into the great western wilderness.

Arriving on the eastern reaches of the Walla Walla Valley in 1843, they stopped at the Whitman Mission and tarried awhile with Marcus Whitman – before eventually moving on to Oregon. Records reveal that by that fall John and Delilah Lousignont had finally arrived on the Lower Columbia – as part of the first wagon train to penetrate Columbia County. Once there he acquired some property, but the promise of fertile land just beyond the Tualatin mountains soon drew him into the Nehalem valley, where he built his cabin in Washington County – about as far up the Nehalem River as a canoe can reach. According to federal records, John Lousignont spent most of his years in and near Washington County. His name appears on the voters register for Clackamas County, July 26th, 1845.

“de Lusignan” was the family’s original name but over time the prefix was dropped and the spelling was adapted to conform with contemporary French spelling. But the quirky spelling continued to plague the Lousignonts since we find a wide variety of spellings in the year following their arrival:

1849 census – John Lousignont
1850 census – John Loosenalt
1854 assessment records: J. Lousignot
1855 tax roll – John Losignont

But eventually the “Lousignont” variant stuck. Due, no doubt, to the proliferation of children that followed their arrival on the Nehalem River:

Frank, November 2, 1845, at Gervais
William, April 29, 1847, near Jacksonville
Peter, June 2, 1849, in Oregon City,
Joe, January 9, 1851, near Forest Grove
Jack, February 29th, 1852, near Forest Grove,
Miriam, July 4th , 1853, near Forest Grove,
Margot, February 20th, 1855, near Forest Grove,
Rebecca, October 10, 1857, near Forest Grove
Isaac, March 29th, 1859, near Forest Grove
Kathryn, March 29th, 1861, near Forest Grove

Frank Lousignant:

The creek is actually not named after John. It’s named after his son: Frank Lousignont. Along with his father, Frank Lousignont appears to have been one of the earliest settlers in the valley, hosting new neighbors as they hurried to complete their accommodations before the weather set in and snow made travel difficult. Frank established a claim near the mouth of the creek in 1869 and lived there until 1902. Using his mule to collect supplies in Westport led him to discover an old Indian trail that ran through the valley, along the Klaskanine River, up Fishhook Creek and over the top of the hills and down to the Columbia River. This eventually became the most used trail to access the Nehalem Valley before the days of cars.

Although their homestead on the confluence of Lousignont Creek and the Nehalem River no longer exists, the family has flourished with branches located in Vernonia, Klatskanie, Birkenfeld and Vesper.

 

 

 

 

Posted in Coastal Trails, Indian lore, Uncategorized | 3 Comments

The chaos at the end of Belding Road.

std-grd-belding-sign-2014-06-08

The false beginning of the Belding Road.

The Belding road is an old logging road that descends way down to the Salmonberry River. No one I know (and that includes forestry types) have been down this abandoned road that crosses back and forth for 11 miles as it sinks nearly 2,500 feet in elevation down into the Salmonberry River Canyon.

std-grad-road-traversing-2014-06-08

Belding Road descending into the Salmonberry canyon.

Some people get a kick out of climbing up things. In my world the rivers run along the bottom of deep canyons and I’m always descending from above. Because the only roads out there are logging roads, they all lead too nowhere in particular. But they’re also everywhere – all along the ridge tops.

Sometimes, to get out into the really remote rivers, you have to drive a labyrinthian route that unspools itself linking one ridgeline to another. Ridgeline roads built to carry heavy loads of timber snake out along the heights pushing ever outwards until the very last ridge has been traversed.

The Belding Road is one of these sinuous and convoluted trails cut into the steepest slopes along the Salmonberry Canyon. It is both primally beautiful and terrifyingly brutal at the same time.

lidgerwood-roost

Lidgerwood Roost – near the infamous Windy Gap.

This close to the Coast the landscapes become fiercer: precipitous ravines with towering timbers growing off the cliffs. One of my favorite eyries is a place called Windy Gap. From there, on a good day, you can see the ships sailing up the coast. But when the gales came in 1955 this was no place for mortals. That winter it blew Lee Carrigan’s cabin right off the mountain.

http://www.foresthiker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Salmonberry-Lwr-2010-142-op2.jpg

Tunnel 32 – note the bare rock above.

When the big expected gale comes roaring ashore tomorrow, these slopes will be the first landmass they encounter. The barometer is dropping, there is an edginess in the air,

the elk are hunkering down, and the Doug firs are clenching their roots. There is a promise of violence in the air that Coleridge would appreciate.

In 2006, a gargantuan log jam blocked the Salmonberry River at Tunnel Creek. Caught in the tightly twisting canyon the river breached its banks and poured through  the train tunnel. A roaring brown whirlpool swept back up the valley pulling the steep slopes down upon itself.

http://www.foresthiker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Salmonberry-Lwr-2010-044.jpg

Widespread damage on lower Salmonberry River

I bet that by tomorrow when the first storms are due to hit, the river will churn once again. This once placid stream will be transformed, as the heavens open up, the storm roars up the canyon, and the syrupy brown water is whipped and churned with great chunks of wood and rock. As the storm intensifies the Salmonberry will froth and thrust forth great gouts of muddy water. Tossing rocks and limbs as much as 50 feet above the river, it will scour the cliffs of vegetation.

Now can you understand why I want to descend the Belding Road to see the chaos at the end of the road?

Posted in Coastal Trails, Logging history | 5 Comments

North Fork of the Salmonberry – alternative access to the Salmonberry River

Southern Route - Lower SalmonberryNorth Fork of the Salmonberry Trail

Brief summary: This trail really goes to the heart of what led me to write this guide: the desire to find the truly beautiful places that exist way out beyond where most people will venture. This hike begins with a bone-jarring, but awe-inspiring drive that creeps along the edges of steep cliffs and reveals panoramic views into the fortress of mountains surrounding the Salmonberry River. It is a landscape that conjures up the presence of natural forces that are far from pastoral and quiescent. For me this “back way” down to the Salmonberry River is a very special experience. If you really want to get “out there”, this trail will take you there (and get you home, as well).

North Fork Salmnbry

Distance/Duration: From the Sylvan exit to the bottom of the North Fork Salmonberry Road is 54.8 miles. Just the portion on US 26 (from the Sylvan interchange to the “Section 10 Road”) is 41.3 miles or 45 minutes. The dirt road from US 26 to the end of the North Fork Salmonberry Road is 13.5 miles long. Expect that it will take you at least 1 hour and 30 minutes to complete. The footpath that descends along the North Fork of the Salmonberry River is only about 1.4 miles long and will take you 1 hour and 5 minutes to traverse. The total trip (one way) will take 3 hours and 20 minutes of travel time.

The "North Fork"

The “North Fork”

Remember to add in rest stops and time to enjoy the river to your travel time. Depending on the condition of the road, I often park about a 20 minutes walk from the end of the North Fork Salmonberry Road. This portion of the road has several significant run-off gutters that cross the road diagonally, and can be challenging to cross without scraping the bottom of your car. Drive as far as your comfort level will permit, and consider unloading passengers to lighten the car. These precautions can add another 20 to 30 minutes to your travel time. That said, I have successfully navigated this rough road with a Honda Odyssey at least a dozen times, but “slick and muddy” conditions make me more cautions about how far I want to go…At a minimum plan for six and a half hours to get in and out, and back to Portland.

 Trail Log:

 From Portland to “Section 10 Road”: Head west on the Sunset Highway, and be sure to reset your odometer to zero as you pass by Exit 71B, also known as the “Sylvan exit” at the summit of the West Hills. From there travel 42 minutes or 41.3 miles to reach the “Section 10” road that diverges from US 26 on your left side. Should you miss this exit you can also take the Salmonberry exit, .2 miles onwards. The Section 10 Road is easier to spot since it emerges alongside Highway 26 and debouches into a wide gravel area on your left. The Salmonberry Road junction is harder to spot since it’s in a corner and the side road is not visible until you’re nearly through the curve – so go slowly if you miss the Section 10 Road.

NoFrkSlmnbry-32-optmzd

The “North Fork” is among the best Steel head streams in the country!

From US 26 to end of the North Fork Salmonberry Road: Reset your odometer as you leave the highway since subsequent distance measurements are given in terms of distance travelled after departing Highway 26. We leave Highway 26 at the entrance to the Section 10 Road, at an elevation of 1585 ft. To get all the way down to the Salmonberry River will require navigating past two mountain ranges each approaching 2500 ft. in elevation and then descending down to the confluence at 760 ft. elevation.

The route starts following Section 10 road, but this quickly merges with another access road (the Salmonberry Road), coming in from the right. From here on the road is designated as the “the Wheeler Road”. Keep following the Wheeler Road as it ascends the first heights. There are many smaller roads that connect to the Wheeler road, but you will want to stay on the central road (that shows the most use). After 2.68 miles (odometer reading) you will pass another road coming in from the right: Shields Road. Immediately thereafter the main road begins to descend and at 2.87 odometer miles you will enter an intersection referred to as Coyote Corner. On your left is a well-travelled road, which is the continuation of Wheeler Road. It heads east to Reeher’s Campground located behind Timber. But we will bypass this road and continue straight – now travelling along the “Wheeler Cut-off road”. At 3.66 odometer miles we encounter another connecting road (Shields Road – yes, this is the other end of the “Shields Road” that we passed a mile back) coming in from the right. Bypass it and immediately thereafter the Wheeler Cut-off Road starts to drop dramatically. Near the bottom of this steep hill the road begins to sweep around to the left. On the right side is a small forest road veering gently to your right. This is the continuation of the North Fork Salmonberry Road and can serve as an alternate route. But today we will continue to sweep around the corner where we are confronted by a three-way split.

Chose the middle road that turns slightly to the right. On the extreme right a short “skidder road” peters out almost immediately as it ascends the clear-cut slope to your right. The left hand option, the Wheeler Pond Road, is also well used since it comes in from Cochran Pond. But for our purposes we will take the middle option, which is the continuation of the Wheeler Pond Road. Slightly more than four and a half miles later, you will reach the summit of the final ridge – the site of a long abandoned logging camp (“Camp Nine”) at an elevation of 2400 ft. If you need further confirmation on how to navigate these labyrinthine roads both Chapters 23 and 24 include descriptions on how to reach Camp Nine,

Using the aforementioned route, you will enter into the ridge top clearing known as Camp Nine from the a northeasterly direction. I recommend stopping here to take in the impressive views and to scope out the various roads leading out of this clearing.

On your right is another road (Salmonberry Road) coming in from a northerly direction. Straight across the clearing (looking South) you will see three roads leading onwards. The middle one is just a short trail into the woods – long enough to accommodate a pick-up and trailer. Just to the right of the camping driveway is another road heading off in a southwesterly direction. This is the North Fork Salmonberry Road – and this is the route we will want to follow. The final choice, on the left, is the top of the Beaver Slide Road described previously.

NoFrkSlmnbry-30-optmzd

The afternoon sun filters through the forest casting a reddish glow.

Follow the North Fork Salmonberry Road from this clearing. For two miles it traverses the southerly face of this ridge and then it makes a sharp U-turn and heads along the top of a south-facing ridge with stupendous views. Soon the road turns north and begins the long descent into the basin carved by the North Fork of the Salmonberry River. The road continues in this northerly direction for about 1.7 miles (from the U-turn). During this stretch you will encounter the first “run-off gutters” that will take patience to navigate (take them at an angle). At the 1.7 mile point (from the U-turn) the road swings around and begins to traverse the slope heading in a southerly direction. This last portion of the road can be challenging, so parking the car at this turn is not unreasonable. The final part of this descent is steep, rocky and drops precipitously as it winds its way .7 miles down to the base of the slope, just above the North Fork of the Salmonberry. In all, the trip from the highway to the bottom of the North Fork Salmonberry Road will take you about 1 hour and 25 minutes.

This descent has been successfully traversed by my Honda Odyssey during the dry months of the year, but nonetheless it’s very difficult to navigate with frequent rocks and branches that need removing, and diagonal gutters carved into the road that require careful maneuvering to avoid damaging your car’s underside – not to mention retaining enough traction to climb the hill on the way out. The road gets rockier and the grade increases to more than 15% as you descend. It is quite sensible to park your car anywhere next to this road and complete the descent on foot – if you are not comfortable with the steepness and rough conditions. Such precautions are especially appropriate if conditions are wet or if you have passengers.

Trailhead: The trailhead itself is a bit anti-climactic especially after crawling your way down the steep and rocky approach road. Yes, now that you’ve reached the trailhead you can unclench your hands from their death grip on the steering wheel! During hunting season it’s customary to find one or more hunters encamped in this remote location, but at other times of the year it’s quite deserted. The easily visible footpath leaves the open area on the left side (southwesterly direction) and heads southwards along the North Fork of the Salmonberry River.

 Trail condition: The trail is fairly rugged with lots of fallen trees to cross, and several areas where the path has been buried in fallen rocks – you have to pick your way through the rocky slope. At other places the river has eaten away the supports for the rail bed and you’re left clutching at branches as you try to cross the slippery slopes overlooking the river. The trail also crosses a number of streams that can be quite active in the winter and spring.

NoFrkSlmnbry-24-optmzd

The hike down along the “North Fork” is crossed by numerous little tributaries.

 Elevation change: The elevation loss experienced on the footpath leading directly to the main stem of the Salmonberry River is a negligible 240 ft. The toughest descent was accomplished in your car.

 Trail Log: The footpath down to the main stem of the Salmonberry River actually follows a rail spur that climbed the North Fork of the Salmonberry River. The original spur line terminated at the trailhead. The road that leads down to that point was added much later. Years ago, the southern end of the rail spur we’re following crossed the Salmonberry on a high wooden bridge that connected this spur to the main line of the Pacific Railroad & Navigation line, which ran along the entire length of the Salmonberry River.

As we follow the old rail bed down and around a corner we are soon confronted with the damage wrought by a vengeful nature. At some places the rail bed has been buried by rockslides. At others it has been eroded to a whisper of a footpath. But in between you will find wide, level stretches of trail. And all along the way you’ll love the charming waterfalls that gurgle and leap their way down the valley.

The hike down this valley always seems longer than the return. It’s probably due to the fact that I tend to forget the many different types of terrain we encounter along the North Fork of the Salmonberry River. Eventually, we turn the final corner and begin a gentle descent into a cozy sunlight clearing. This is a favorite stopping place for the hunters and anglers that seasonally frequent this area. Indeed, it was through reading an angler’s guide to Oregon rivers that I first learned of this provisional trail and the “easy” access it provided to the river.

NoFrkSlmnbry-11b-optmzd

Confluence of the North Fork of the Salmonberry River and the main stem of the Salmonberry River.

Entering into the clearing, I recommend that you walk to the southern edge where the lush grass ends abruptly above a cliff overlooking the river. It was from this elevated clearing that the original bridgehead crossed the river. To get down to the river, turn around and walk to the northern edge of the clearing. From there you will see that a small path leads west and wraps around a small knoll before descending down to the riverside.

BvrSlidRd14

Loki’s Pool – where the North Fork meets the Salmonberry River.

To cross the main stem of the river (during the warmer seasons of the year) I recommend turning left immediately after descending the final drop to the riverbank. To the left you will find a pool big enough to soak in, but also shallow enough at its lower end to cross on foot. On the other side climb the shelf of river rocks and head “upstream” , while at the same time getting closer to the heavily vegetated slope the separates the river bank from the forest growing above. There among the ferns and tree roots you will notice a track that leads up the steep slope. Look closer and you should find a rope dangling down the slick slope; use it to haul yourself up and into the forest above.

Once up the slope, head to your right – to an area that seems relatively open – this is where the rail spurs that went around the end of the ridge are located. Once you’ve found them, follow them upstream through the dense underbrush until you emerge on the main rails near the mouth of the tunnel. Now you’ve found the PR&N, or as the old-timers called it, the “Punk Rotten and Nasty.”

Next on our agenda is to walk through the tunnel. This tunnel is relatively short so you can stumble your way through without a flashlight, but you would do well to come equipped with a flashlight. As we emerge from the other side of the tunnel you should note the sign that says “808”. Its significance is that the Southern Pacific, which owned this difficult stretch of railroad numbered all the tunnels to reflect their distance from the heart of the Union Pacific rail system – on Market Street in downtown San Francisco. So you are now standing 808 miles from downtown San Francisco!

Right here is also where the Edwards incline incident occurred. Had you been standing here on that fateful day in 1928, you’d have been mangled beyond recognition. But luckily for all, no one was hurt even though the valley echoed with the impact of the fully loaded rail cars as they flew across the river and were obliterated as they struck the main line of the PN&R and the cliff face beyond the tracks. Read the anecdote on gyppo logging in Chapter 21 for the full story of this dramatic incident.

Loki basking in the afternoon sunlight after swimming in his favorite pool at the confluence of the North Fork and the Salmonberry River.

Loki basking in the afternoon sunlight after swimming in his favorite pool.

If you have time before the light fades, hike along the rail line. There are many more spectacular examples of what an angry river can do to massive rails and iron bridges along the way.

To walk all the way down to the Foss Bridge from the 808 tunnel will take you another five or six hours. To walk the 2.5 miles upstream to the junction with the Beaver Slide road will take several hours because of the unusually heavy damage in this stretch of the river. As you plan your excursions along the main stem of the Salmonberry River remember to leave enough time to climb out of the canyon before nightfall! Remember there is NO WAY to call home from the bottom of this gorge to let them know you’ll be late – unless you carry a satellite beacon.

 

Posted in Misc Trails & Trips, Salmonberry Trails | 7 Comments

Excerpt from coming book on NW Oregon: What was Illahee?

Some of you may be aware that I am writing a book about trails between Portland and the Coast for the Oregon University Press that will probably be released in early 2016. As part of that exercise, I have been writing small stand-alone sections describing the lesser known aspects of NW Oregon’s history – mostly on the blog side of this site.

I often post the 1st draft of my writings as “blog” pieces, and it appears from the steady flow of registrants to the website that you seem to enjoy these explorations in to the lesser known corners of Oregon’s history.

In that spirit I herewith offer up a short digression from my forthcoming book on the fascinating concept of “territoriality” as practiced amongst the Indians of this area up until the arrival of the settlers in the 1840’s. So without further ado…

“Illahee”

To the Indians residing in and around the Portland area natural divisions such as rivers, mountains, watersheds and waterfalls were significant, but unlike Europeans they tended to not rely on these physical features to delineate the extent of their “home territory”. This, of course, became a huge problem when they began to have conflicts with settlers over land right during the middle of the nineteenth century. The Europeans wanted to have exclusive rights to the lands and sought to sequester the Indians into ever smaller parcels of land. But the Indians fundamentally did not understand the idea that a person could own any part of the physical world around them. It is true that Indians inhabited and used specific portions of the landscape, establishing what we might refer to in diplomatic history as “spheres of influence” suggesting a special association with a location based on its proximity to their villages. Had we visited northern Washington County two centuries ago we would have met Atfalati hunters and wizened Atfalati females gathering huckleberries from their “ancestral” berry bushes. Near Scappoose we would have encountered the longhouses of the wealthy Chinook Indians that fished the river. North of Tualatin Range, the Clatskanie Indians also hunted the mountains, fished for salmon and occasionally preyed upon those traveling up and down the river.  When the early traders arrived in the area and began trying to pin down the tribal claims to territory, they were aware of these geographic distinctions. As a consequence, they quickly equated these partitions to the European concept of territory. But this geographic interpretation utterly missed the essence of the Indian concept of “Illahee” – the closest concept the Indians had to our notion of territorial sovereignty.  Asking an Indian how far his “home territory” extended was akin to asking someone how big his or her family was. Quite literally this question would elicit puzzlement, and the Indian would ask whether the inquirer wanted to include cousins, second cousins, in-laws, or even in-laws’ relatives. Like “spheres of influence” their concept of ownership, “Illahee” rested on the strength of the personal ties – not on geographic characteristics. Their concept of Illahee was based on a linear concept of linkages that describe the extent of their influence, not a specific physical distance or any relationship to physical features in the landscape, like mountains and rivers.

Using the Indian framework of “Illahee” , the concept of territory was quite inclusive, but at the same time variable over time. Illahee derived its definition from a complex network of personal relationships, including multiple kinship ties that shifted with births, deaths and inter-tribal marriages. The Atfalati (a band of the Kalapuyan Indians) from Washington County were known to travel through the Coastal Mountains to trade with the Tillamooks for fish, whale meat and abalone shells. It is reported[1] that the local Chinookans strictly limited the Atfalati’s fishing rights around the Willamette Falls. But further down the Columbia River, they were granted the right to hunt seals in the “Chinookan” waters of the Lower Columbia River. In return the Chinookans were allowed to hunt for elk and deer on the northern slopes of Washington County.

The Illahee framework was primarily based on the right of primary usage, or “usufruct rights”. It applied to prime camas growing plots, high yield fishing sites, wapato ponds and even particularly bountiful huckleberry patches. These rights were typically allocated to family groups, but in fact they were often extended by marriage and mutual agreement.

It is no wonder then that the European attempts to carve out physically restricted areas both for themselves and for the remaining Indians foundered, because these two approaches to “ownership” were so utterly alien to each other, that there was no way to bridge the cultural divide. Unfortunately, the malaria epidemics of the mid-1800’s removed most of the remaining natives and the issue became moot.

But for those of us that explore different ways that people organize themselves and define their interactions with nature, “Illahee” represents a different way to relate with our natural surroundings. Food for thought?


[1] Oregon and the Collapse of Illahee, Gray H. Whaley, University of North Carolina press, 2010, page 8.

Posted in Indian lore, Lower Columbia Trails, Pioneer Lore | 4 Comments

The river that connects us; the river that divides us.

My fascination with history derives from the fact that in immersing myself in the accounts of long gone days, I am occasionally confronted with perspectives and insights that literally twist our world around.

Today the landscape near the confluence of the Willamette and Columbia Rivers is dominated by the I-5 and I-84 corridors that link the Portland area with the rest of the Pacific Northwest. In subtle ways, the grid lines of these arterials establish where we are by redefining our accessibility. All our travel flows through these hard-wired circuits. The organic connections that for over a century linked our communities along the Lower Columbia River have entirely disappeared.

Today no one is surprised to find Scappoose’s sports teams competing with Oregon teams from Tualatin, Oregon City and Salem. But this is just a recent development. Until 1908 Scappoose’s rivals were located right in Ridgefield and Kalama – both on the other side of the river in Washington.  Grange hall dances in Oregon’s hilltop communities often featured frantic drives down off the heights, lights flashing, horns blaring, trying to catch  the last cross-river ferry.

Kalama, Kelso and Cowlitz on the Washington shore enjoyed close ties with Oregon’s Scappoose, St. Helens and Goble  as ferries, paddle boats and steamers crisscrossed the river in a continuous tangle of commerce and human affairs. Traffic flowed on the river seamlessly stitching towns and communities together.

All this changed in 1908 when the railroad bridge between Portland and Vancouver was completed and the line was expanded to Kalama. Up until this time, train traffic had passed northward along the Oregon side of the river. At Goble the entire train was loaded on to The Tacoma, a 1,362 ton train carrier that could accommodate 21 cars and the locomotive.  For over 24 years The Tacoma was the critical link that connected the only rail line carrying freight north into the Puget Sound area.  But in October, 1908 the new rail bridge in Vancouver suddenly disconnected the Oregon side of the Lower Columbia from the main stream of commerce heading north. By Christmas day, The Tacoma had made its last crossing.

For a few years smaller ferries still continued to ply the river shuttling residents from the Lower Columbia River to their cross-river neighbors or to intercept the trains heading back and forth between Portland and Seattle. But with the construction of the Longview to Rainier bridge even that remnant of cross-river traffic eventually dried up.

The river that had once been a seam holding the Lower Columbia communities together, now became a partition that estranged these communities from each other, like relatives that have moved across country, or in-laws from a prior marriage. With the coming of the railroad and later the Interstate highway, an ancient geographic paradigm that had carved the tracks of human intercourse in this region was replaced, virtually overnight, by a new configuration that completely obliterated even the memory of what had existed before.

Posted in Lower Columbia Trails, Railroads, Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Tales from the Salmonberry River

Tales from the Salmonberry River

There is a 21-mile long canyon that cuts through the heart of the Oregon Coast Range from Washington County to Nehalem Bay. It is a wild and violent place where brutal storms, fresh off the North Pacific hurl themselves at the coastal mountains with a momentum and brute determination born of the Pacific vastness from which they were spawned.

In 1911 the Pacific Railroad and Navigation Company completed a rail connection from Washington County to Tillamook using the narrow passage afforded by the gorge carved out by the Salmonberry River Valley. Tillamook lay in one of the most inaccessible locations on the North Oregon Coast. It was equally inaccessible from the mouth of the Columbia River, as it was from the Willamette Valley. This link was essential to sustain the vital arteries of Tillamook’s industry, enabling resources to reach markets, and people to travel reliably.

Yet the rail link came at a high cost. Storm damage and constant geological movement constantly so plagued the P.R & N. that the locals took to calling it the “Punk, Rotten and Nasty”.  A little more than a year after rail service was first launched, nature took it’s first swipe at the railroad that snaked down the Salmonberry River. Early January 1913, rough winter weather and snow triggered a host of slides that cut rail service to Tillamook for more than 35 days.

The break in rail service was dramatic leaving people stranded away from home and resources. Towards the end of that first week in 1913, a group of eight stranded Tillamook residents assembled in Portland and decided to get back to Tillamook, regardless of what it took.

Leaving Portland early on Friday, the party of seven men and one woman reached Timber around mid-day. Their plan was to follow the railroad right-of-way all the way to the coast. But rail service had been discontinued several days earlier and no one knew how much of the railway line had been swept away by the raging storm. And yet, after eating a meal in Timber, they set out on foot determined to reach Tillamook. Nightfall found them still deep in the canyon and they were forced to bivouac in a deserted cabin. With only two sandwiches between them, dinner did little to dent their appetites. Seeking refuge in the partially collapsed cabin the party tried to sleep, but the cold fog that enveloped them kept them shivering most of the night.

The next morning they set off early and soon arrived at a railroad camp where they managed to secure some breakfast before resuming their long and arduous trek to the coast. In all they reported crossing eight to ten slides. Of these, three were particularly difficult to traverse. In three different places, the track, rails and all had been swept into the river. In some place the fill that had been laid down to support the rail bed had been washed away leaving the rail line dangling in the air. About three miles above the tiny settlement of Enright, they encountered a slide that had obliterated the track for more than 300 feet covering the entire stretch with tons of dirt and rock. Below Enright the track was covered with loose dirt and mud sometimes reaching over eight feet in depth.

Eventually, the exhausted party reached the forward work party that was clearing the line from the coast. From there the bedraggled party were carried out to Wheeler on Nehalem Bay and eventually the P.R & N acceded to the travelers’ exhausted pleas to be carried on to Tillamook. No doubt this was a journey whose story was retold over the years to underscore the determination and grit of the local inhabitants.

While the ordeal was finally over for Mrs. Johnson and her 7 male companions, the community was to suffer an extended ordeal as repeated storms kept creating new slides, destroying the repairs already made, and burying the steam shovels under tons of rock and mud. In the end, it took them 36 days to restore the rail link. At one point the line was finally opened, but within three hours the next landslide took out another 60 ft. chunk of rails. When the Portland train finally made it through the ravaged gorge to reach Tillamook it was received by a jubilant crowd.  By that time, the outgoing mail was piling up and Tillamook was running low on staples, fresh food, medicines, whiskey and even the fuel for the steam engines.

In those early days it was an epic struggle between the burgeoning township of Tillamook and the powerful forces that that visited such violent weather upon them. The efforts by the rail crews to keep the line open were truly herculean, but nature often responded with violent repercussions. The Salmonberry struck back just as soon as they finally restored service.

It happened in the steep confines of the Wolf Creek Canyon. There on the level ground near the creek side, the railroad builders had built their temporary quarters. On either side the ravine’s steep walls climbed a thousand feet to the rim of the forest above. Up on the edge of the ravine two ancient Douglas fir stalwarts bent valiantly to resist the push of the rain-soaked wind, and the pull of the earth softening under them as they slowly twisted on the very brink and toppled majestically into the abyss. They fell in an arc so that they pitched completely over smashing directly through the two houses cowering on the valley floor.

In the first lived the section foreman, William Conley, as well as the cook, his wife and their seven-year-old girl. The crash occurred around 5:30 AM in the wet grey dawn. Both men had already risen and were sipping their coffee in the early morning. They must have heard the agonized creaking as two massive trees slowly pitched end-over-end off the plateau rim 500 feet above them. The foreman’s house was hit in the middle. Louis Dudley, the cook was killed immediately, but Conley lay mortally wounded and pinned down by the giant tree.

Unhurt by the crushed central portion of the house, Mrs. Dudley quickly went to the aid of the little girl who had been sleeping at the far end of the house, beyond the fallen tree. Calling for Louis Dudley brought no responses beyond the agonized moans of Mr. Conley, the stricken foreman. Dressed only in their night gowns the woman and little girl climbed out of the wrecked house. A little way beyond lay the demolished shack occupied by some Japanese laborers, one of whom had also perished. With the wet coastal snow as deep as their waists Mrs. Dudley let loose a bellow for help – hoping to attract the assistance of the Greeks and Italians that were camped just a short way down the line.

Eventually, they did arrive, but not to render aid it seems. They quickly looted the foreman’s house and rifled Mrs. Dudley’s valise stealing her entire savings, a tidy sum of $110.00. But then they left, leaving the two women shivering in the snow. But by now the bridge crew was arriving and they did come to her succor. She and the surviving girl were taken to a local hostelry where they were helped to recuperate. Dr Hawk was summoned. The dead Japanese laborer was bundled off and the injured Conley was carefully transported out of the canyon to down into Washington County.

This was just the first of many violent eruptions that the railroad’s builders had to contend with. After the storms of 1996, scientists brought out pictures that showed the ravine stripped to it roots. In 2007, the northern slope gave way and created a giant slide whose repair would have cost more than $4 million. One has to wonder how many more times it will take to convince us that you shouldn’t “fool with mother nature”!

Posted in Coastal Trails, Railroads, Salmonberry Trails | 2 Comments

Moonshining along the Lower Columbia River.

Usually the banks of the Nehalem river are the very picture of pastoral peace and quiet, especially down on the old Warren Smith Farm near Pittsburg. In particular, the chickens sauntering around their pen in the small clearing along the Nehalem were very satisfied. Not only did they get plenty of scraps brought down from the farmhouse, but they often were treated to an absolutely awesome mash that soon had the whole roost clucking and bumping into each other as they waddled dizzily around their pen. Some had even been known to fall off the ramp leading inside.

But on this particular Monday afternoon in mid-April of 1929, the rooster and his chickens were suddenly interrupted in their leisurely pursuits when cars began to come flying down the dirt road with sirens blaring. Several Columbia County police officers, aided by state and federal prohibition officers exploded out of their cars and began rushing the apparently undefended chicken shack. The chickens temporarily stopped their purposeful examination of sundry pebbles and bugs masquerading as pebbles. The rooster did not have a warm and fuzzy feeling about this unexpected activity, especially sensing the determination of these intruders. Rising on his toes he began to wind up to his best and most impressive cock-a-doodle-do. But Sheriff Weed and his Deputy Calhoun, along with their state and federal phalanx stampeded the poultry defenders, who panicked and fled squawking up their ramp to safety.

The prohibition officers, Sheriff Weed and Deputy Calhoun bounded up the stairs to confront H.W. Dalplian and his son-in-law, Lester McConkey – both of whom were apparently busy distilling the current batch of moonshine in their 300 gallon “Kentucky” style still.

In addition to the considerable distillation equipment found on the premises, the flying squad also secured another 15 vats that held more than 2300 gallons of mash in various stages of conversion into alcohol.  They confiscated 50 gallons of yeast, fifty gallons of malt, several sacks of sugar. The arresting officers also reported that they secured a “considerable quantity” of finished and bottled moonshine in a separate building. There was no estimate of how much market-ready booze they confiscated. Thankfully, no one took note of the chickens’ participation in all these shenanigans and consequently they were allowed to remain in the chicken pen – under indefinite detention.

It appears that during the prohibition days of 1916-1933 “moonshining” was prevalent in the mountainous regions of northwestern Oregon. Unlike their Southern brethren that used corn, Oregon moonshiners used rye and added cane sugar. It was said by some of the more successful moonshiners that this approach produced a better product, and it was quicker – always a consideration when you’re trying to stay ahead of the law.

One anecdote tells of an enterprising moonshiner that built his operation into the charred remains of a massive old growth stump. When it gave off steam during the distillation process, it simply appeared as if the tree was still smoldering. Another early entrepreneur  built his “store” underneath a bridge on Bonny Slope.  From time to time, a car would casually stop on the bridge. The driver would open his door and tap on the wooden planks. A panel would slide open revealing the proprietor. Money would exchange hands as bottles of booze were hoisted aloft.

There were plenty of isolated barns, remote compounds and an abundance of forests in which to hid “moonshining” all across Columbia County, much of northwestern Multnomah County and northern Washington County. Most of the activity was organized by Portland moonshine gangs, like the Bill Smith Gang that operated a still on the Multnomah and Columbia County line. In Dutch Canyon, gang members George Davies and “Peanuts” Austin were apprehended operating an eighty gallon still  on South Scappoose Creek. According to the arresting officer, the operation was about four miles from Scappoose located deep in Dutch Canyon. The Deputy noted the convenience of  “an excellent road [that] leads right to the steps of the shack.”

Dixie Mountain had its share of illicit distillers that maintained operations buried deep in  in the tangled headwaters of  Crabapple Creek or Raymond Creek. And there were also several reports of a “six-gun tottin’ Tessie” who set up camp behind the Sophie Mozee homestead and was guarding her still with all the caliber she had. Closer to Portland, the village of Burlington prospered with several speak-easy facilities and an imposing bordello across the way. Linnton’s switch-back road system was said to be intentionally laid out in such a way as to provide the hill top residents the most time to hide their elicit enterprises.

Though we’re tempted these days to romanticize this desperate way of life, we should keep in mind how much this criminalization of liquor affected the health of the community. Help of any kind was hard to find for the wives and children that were left behind when the boot-legging father went to jail. Even the charitable organizations and the county health services were reluctant to help support these indigents, lest their aid be construed as encouragement for those that rely on outlaw income. The typical sentence for a moonshiner (usually the owner of the land) was $500 and a 30 day sentence. His assistant would just get a $500 fine, but typically being unable to pay he would end up languishing alongside his boss in the county’s “hostelry”.

 

Posted in Lower Columbia Trails, Misc Trails & Trips, Moonshine Trails and Tales, Pioneer Lore, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Kerfuffle in the St. Helens Schoolyard.

When Judge McBride became the St. Helens schoolmaster in 1866, the school was a  low-slung log cabin located alongside a swamp which, according to the pupils, “was prolific of green slime, mosquitoes and ague”.

At the time, St.Helens had only about seven families which meant that many of the children walked in from the surrounding wilderness. The Knox family sent over their contingent of pupils from Sauvie island by skiff. Both the Perry kids and the Watts’ children hiked from their homesteads – always accompanied by a large dog designed to discourage cougar encounters. Given the small amount of land that had been “tamed” by that time, it was not uncommon to encounter Oregon’s big cats and the early settlers relied on big dogs to protect their homesteads and their wandering offspring.

But once arrived at school, the dogs were kept in the schoolyard where they spend their time engaged in ferocious contests of growling, brawling and otherwise making such a ruckus that it was all but impossible to keep the children engaged with learning their “three R’s: reading, riting and reckoning.” Judge McBride had never allowed such uncouth behavior in his court, nor was he about to tolerate it in his school. So he finally responded to the mayhem with a decree that he conveyed homewards with the children. From that day forth all the dogs were to stay at home and not accompany the children to their school!

But that did not sit well with the families whose residences lay beyond the fringe of the forests, and whose youngest now had to brave the journey without their trusted canine minders. The outcry was immediate and unconditional; they would not abide by the prohibition since it put the lives of their children at considerable risk. While the immediate environs of St. Helens might occasionally see stray bears and other varmits, cougars were no longer a danger to the townsfolk. But for the homesteaders, cougars were a constant threat to their livestock, pets and their children. This uneasy coexistence of mountain lions and people was not ameliorated by the cats’ uncanny tendency to stealthily track humans – a phenomenon that endures into the present day.

For a week, the battle raged. McBride thundered outrage and demanded a suitably contemplative and uninterrupted atmosphere in which to conduct his instruction, and the dogs continued to attend school with undiminished pugilistic fervor. But just when McBride thought things couldn’t get worse, the yowls and growls escalated into a crescendo “troppo fortissimo!” All hell had broken loose outside! Everyone rushed out the door only to find the dogs ranged all around a giant cedar that grew from the center of the school yard towering over the rustic cabin. McBride and his students came to a sudden stop as they followed the dogs’ rapt attention to the drama unfolding overhead. There directly over the roof of the little school hung a huge black bear.

There was no getting around the situation, so Judge McBride marched down the hill to the nearest farmhouse, borrowed a rifle and promptly dispatched the bear in front of his adoring pupils. The issue of dogs attending school was never mentioned again.

Postscript: In 2013 an animal handler was killed by a captive cougar while cleaning their cage in Oregon’s WildCat Haven Sanctuary. Despite the numerous encounters since the days of the pioneers there never has been, a case of human mortality caused by a wild cougar in Oregon.

 

 

 

Posted in Animal lore, Lower Columbia Trails, Pioneer Lore, Uncategorized | Leave a comment