Sierra Pacific Industries

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sierra Pacific Industries
Company typePrivate
IndustryLumber
FounderR.H. Emmerson and Archie Aldis Emmerson
Headquarters
Anderson, California
,
United States
Number of locations
6 sawmills in California, 2 sawmills in Oregon, & 4 sawmills in Washington
ProductsWood products
Websitehttp://www.spi-ind.com/

Sierra Pacific Industries (SPI) is the second-largest lumber producer[1] in the United States. Located in Anderson, California, it is the largest private landholder in California. However, it has drawn criticism for its allegedly eco-damaging practices.

Background[edit]

On 16 August 2017 a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between parties interested in reducing wildfires on federal, state and Sierra Pacific Industries land in California. Members of the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and U.S. Forest Service joined Mark Emmerson of SPI (second right) in making the declaration.

Logging in the Sierra Nevada arose from the desire for economic growth throughout California. The California Gold Rush created a high demand for timber in housing construction, mining procedures, and building railroads. In the early days, forest harvesting was unregulated, and within the first 20 years after the gold rush, a third of the timber in the Sierra Nevada was logged.[2] The overall economic impact of the forest industry in California in the 21st century is fairly modest. California forests produce about 350 million board feet of wood products annually. These products include $100 million in market value for saw timber and $40 million in market value electricity produced from biomass. Logging creates jobs for about 2,000 private sector workers. For comparison, thirty-three million people visit the National Forests of California for recreation, generating 38,000 outdoor recreation-related jobs.[3]

The Emmersons[edit]

Main article: Red Emmerson

Emmerson has been described as "low-key, hard-working and notoriously shy of publicity".[4] Writing for The Land Report in 2022, Eric O'Keefe reported on Red Emmerson's rags to riches rise.[5] Emmerson told him he was brought up in Newberg, Oregon[6] in a broken home, failed in education, was sent to a strict[5] Seventh Day Adventist[6] boarding school in East Washington, from which he was expelled,[5] although not before getting a paying job driving a truck at 35¢ an hour (¢equivalent to $638.37 in 2023 in 2023).[6] So unsuccessful was his father at providing for his family—he built "crude, temporary" sawmills in the back yard[6]—that Curly and Emily split up.[6] She went to Alaska and his father in California.[5] During this period, and in the "timber-rich Pacific Northwest ... where nearly every occupation had something to do with timber".[6] Emmerson gained a job as a ranch hand, where he gained his nickname.[5]

Emmerson's father, Curly, writes O'Keefe, "couldn’t buy a break". He had been attempting to run sawmills since the 1920s "with checkered success", but always lacked capital. The first major success came in 1947 when competitors were embroiled in a regional strike; soon after, argues O'Leefe, Curly " made the single smartest move of his career" and recruited his son Red.[5]

History[edit]

In the 1920s and 1930s, the Northwest teemed with jerry-rigged sawmills, crude contraptions in logging camps and at railheads that sputtered to life and spewed diesel fumes and sawdust. Such was Curly’s lot. Most of his mills were woefully undercapitalized. The ones that actually made money burned to the ground. Twice.[5]

Eric O'Keefe in The Land Report

Sierra Pacific Industries—originally R.H. Emerson and son—was founded in 1950 by R. H. "Curly" Emmerson and his son A. A. "Red" Emmerson,[7][8] to build a sawmill in Northern California.[9] Previous attempts at running them had proven unsuccessful for the Emmersons.[9] The new sawmill, however, was successful under Red's management and Curly's purchasing.[9] In 1949, Emmerson leased what was to become the flagship mill in Arcata, and Red settled in to build the business—as well as gain personal experience—on-site. Further mills followed. O'Keefe notes that, at this point, the Emmersons "didn’t own a single acre. Yet they could profit from the millions of acres around them."[5] The new company benefitted from the post-war outbreak of economic prosperity, which rejuvenated both the lumber market and the housing. However, with greater demand came greater competition, which by the 1960s was severe.[10] A partnership with fellow Arcata lumber owner Mike Crook—which saw him invest $10,000  (equivalent to $253278.01 in 2023) and the Emmersons manage his mill as well as their own—as well as a successful lawsuit saw them finally "flush with cash". A series of further investments and large purchases followed until they could borrow massive sums from the Bank of America to fund growth. For example, in 1957, they borrowed $250,000 (equivalent to $2712085.31 in 2023). This was followed by another of $500,000 (equivalent to $5149606299.21 in 2023), until in 1965 the Emmersons borrowed $2.8 million (equivalent to $27071594.51 in 2023). Further, each loan had been paid off early.[5]

Crook's son John entered into a partnership with Red in 1969,[5] and the company's name was changed to that of its present incarnation as a publicly traded company.[9] Keene was bought out in 1974[5] when SPI was privatised. This also saw the official dissolution of Red's and Curly's partnership.[9] The company underwent radical expansion due to the 1980s housing boom as the majority of its lumber was destined for the house-building market. As a result of this demand, it purchased a large quantity of land. Small mills that could not compete went to the wall; SPI "took advantage of the situation and managed to record enviable growth as other companies struggled to survive". Contemporary industry leader and millionaire Harry Merlo summed up the reasons for SPI's growth at this time: "As people got out of sawmilling, what did they do? They sold their assets to Red. He was the last man standing."[11][note 1] The precise figures are unknown but appear to range from approximately 525,000 acres (820 sq mi)[9] to 1,000,000 acres (1,600 sq mi)[7] in Northern California at a cost of between $465 million (equivalent to $1174770.96 million in 2023)[9] and $660 million (equivalent to $1700326392.8 million in 2023).[7] By this point, George Emnmerson later recalled, the company had reached its limits in the state: "We had got to the point in California where there wasn't opportunity to expand ... We owned almost 1.5 million acres,[note 2] and we weren't going to build another sawmill".[9] As a result, in 2021 the company purchased Seneca, a timber company based in Eugene, Oregon, adding 175,000 acres (273 sq mi) of land in Oregon to its holdings.[9][13] The San Francisco Chronicle has argued that the reasoning behind Emmerson's land purchases is his belief that as Federal regulation increases, national forests will become unreliable for timber sourcing.[4]

Spotted owls[edit]

Northern Spotted Owl

By the late 1980s, however, public opinion had begun to turn against corporate irresponsibility in the environment, and several Ammendments had been passed tightening the 1964 Wilderness Act. Although SPI was already facing difficulties with its source material having been shrunk by the Act's Amendments, a bigger problem surfaced in the shape of the Northern Spotted Owl, concerns of which habitat had become a focus for protestors around SPI mills in Northern California.[11] The logging industry estimated up to 30,000 of 168,000 jobs would be lost because of the owl's protected status,[14] and indeed the lumber harvest declined by 80% in the North West. In turn, supply fell, and consumer prices rose.[15][note 3]

Former Pacific Forest Trust director Dr Andrea Tuttle has identified 1990 as a pivotal year in the political campaign against the logging activities of companies such as SPI. She recalled that several measures intended to limit their activities had finally achieved sufficient public support to go forward on a state ballot. Although on election day, they all eventually fell, she recalls receiving a phone call from Red Emmerson telling her, "Andrea, I never want to go through that again. What can we do?". From then on, she says, SPI became part of the debate: "All these pressures were just hammering the industry. It was piling on them from every direction. They were losing their social license to practice forestry in California."[17]

SPI bought the Sonora sawmill in 1995; this had been in operation since 1901. SPI closed the plant in 2009, although it reopened two years later following an upgrade.[18] By the 21st century, the company owned mills and timberland in the states of California, Oregon and Washington, but as well as forest had also divested into recreational parks and biomass energy.[9] In 1996, SPI was incorporated.[19]

Wealth[edit]

Forbes has estimated SPI's annual sales at over $1.5 billion. Real assets comprise 18 sawmills and other holdings across five states.[9][note 4] It is headquartered in Anderson, California, where it also runs its own fabrication plant, building many of the parts, spares and repairs for the mills.[5]

Business and criticism[edit]

Tree marker indicating property of Sierra Pacific Industries

SPI has been described as "California's largest landowner", with an estimated holding of 1,700,000 acres (2,700 sq mi), amounting to twice the area of Yosemite National Park. They are, argued SFGate, "a major player in any consideration of the state's environmental future".[7] The company's activities have attracted criticism from environmentalists, however, on account of the damage its logging techniques may have caused. For example, local activists have complained that the destruction of large numbers of clear cut trees would lead to the use of vast quantities of herbicides on their replacements, to the harm of local ecology, especially rivers.[7] The San Francisco Chronicle described the results of clear-cutting in the Sierra Nevada as leaving "a blank spot in the forest, a treeless zone, littered with charred stumps".[4] Conversely, SPI have argued, in response, that they are "in the business of growing forests, not destroying them", and that while they do clear cut in bulk, they also replant quickly. Further, not only do they replant, but they also replant brushlands with new saplings, effectively creating a new forest. This meant, said SPI, that "we're growing more timber than we're harvesting".[4] In Summer 2000, protestors from the Yuba Nation chained themselves to SPI logging equipment and vehicles and occupied the company's head office in Grass Valley, California; some protesters did jail time.[20] Soon after, SPI placed continuing logging activities in the Sierra under a moratorium.[21] The Earth Island Institute, through its John Muir Project, investigated SPI over several years and describes itself "as a clearinghouse for SPI-related information. JMP's findings indicate that Sierra Pacific embodies the worst practices in the timber industry" around the turn of the century. As part of their conclusion, they argued that while the obvious targets of environmentalists' ire, such as the Pacific Lumber Company, had been in the spotlight for a decade over their destructive logging techniques, SPI "has been quietly plundering the state's forests on a scale that makes Charles Hurwitz[note 5] look like a novice".[23]

Other criticisms have focussed on the damage to local wildlife. A suit against deforestation was filed against the company in January 2008. Activists requested the company place itself under the advice of the Forest Stewardship Council.[7] This body—an international non-profit promoting responsible management of forestry—advocates a system of logging certification.[24][25] SPI are a member of the self-regulated industry body Sustainable Forestry Initiative.[note 6] SPI has also affiliated with the NFWF in relation to the conservation of Sierra Meadows.[29]

Two different visions are evolving for the Sierra Nevada. The first is one promulgated by the U.S. Forest Service, environmentalists and ... implies an intact and essentially inviolate forest. Moderate selective cutting is allowed, but greater emphasis is placed on wildlife and recreation values. The second is basically Sierra Pacific's long-range harvest plan: clear-cutting in a methodical fashion and replanting the logged units. Meticulously managing the forest as a tree plantation, in other words. Only one vision can prevail.[4]

San Francisco Chronicle, June 26, 2000

SPI has occasionally sold some of its land to the Trust for Public Land (TPL) to consolidate habitat for wildlife, including 7,000 acres (11 sq mi) near Lake Tahoe and its forest.[30] Some of that land had originally been designated for housing development by SPI.[31] TPL has defended SPI, stating the two organisations had "an excellent working relationship ... We've done a lot of important land conservation together. They've been an extremely reliable landowner to work with."[7] In land previously cut down by SPI, some species have apparently undergone a population boom, such as the blacktail deer and black bear as a result of new food sources being revealed.[4]

In 2007 the State of California announced that SPI had paid fines equalling $13 million (equivalent to $19102551.76 in 2023) in a civil settlement brought by the California Air Resources Board. The allegations related to complaints that several of SPI's mills were operating in breach of their air pollution certification, falsifying reports and monitoring equipment, and discharging waste material to the detriment of their neighbours.[32]

In May 2008 SPI's plans for clear-cutting 1,000 acres (1.6 sq mi) in the Sierra foothills were cleared by the California Supreme Court.[33]

A.A. Emmerson (second from left) and Dan Tomascheski (second from right) of SPI at a meeting on wildfire mitigation during the 2018 Carr Fire

Climate change is intensifying the incidence of drought and the threat of wildfires in California. Sparks from heavy equipment on a Sierra Pacific site were blamed for the 2007 Moonlight Fire. In 2012, the company agreed to pay a $47 million fine and give up 22,500 acres of land to settle a federal liability lawsuit.[34] It has participated in forest thinning intended to mitigate fire risk[35] and in planning for environmental recovery after the 2018 Camp Fire, which destroyed acreage SPI had replanted after an earlier fire.[36] The company has been praised by the Deputy Fire Chief of CAL FIRE as being "on the forefront of ­progressive fire prevention practices", particularly through their investment in weather prediction technology and meteorological stations. Data from these stations is fed into the National Fire Danger Rating System to provide a more advanced indication of imminent problems.[5]

Governance and Foundation[edit]

The president was A. A. "Red" Emmerson, who was married for over 40 years to Ida. Their sons George and Mark succeeded their father as President and Chief Executive, respectively.[8] Business insider has termed the Emmersons "this family you've probably never heard of owns more land than anyone else in America", and since 2021 has been the country's biggest private landowners.[9] Vaughn Emmerson, Red's grandson, runs the Anderson fabrication plant.[5]

Ida became the president of the company's Foundation, on its creation in 1979. She was succeeded at the foundation by their daughter, George and Marlkl's sister, Carolyn Dietz. The Foundation was intended to raise money for the dependents of its workforce to go to college and achieve scholarships,[18] as well as broader investment in youth and community projects.[9]

The Foundation has made several grants and donations. In 2015, it committed $6 million to Oregon State University's wood laboratory to expand its development. In return, the laboratory was named for Red Emmerson.[8] Three years later, following the Carr Fires, it donated $1.1 million towards the Whiskeytown Environment School and another $750,000 for the rebuilding of housing that had been damaged.[37] Meanwhile Hoquiam Fire Department received $2000 to help fight wildfires.[38]

A. A. Emmerson and his children have all donated to the National Alliance of Forest Owners PAC, and have been described the PAC as being among "individual donors [who] gave 110 large ($200+) contributions" over several election cycles.[39][note 7]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ For example, in 1995 Sierra Pacific acquired the wood products division of Fibreboard.[12]
  2. ^ 1,500,000 acres (2,300 sq mi).[9]
  3. ^ However, jobs were already declining because of dwindling old-growth forest harvests and automation of the lumber industry.[14] One study at the University of Wisconsin–Madison by environmental scientists argued that logging jobs had been in a long decline and that environmental protection was not a significant factor in job loss.[16]
  4. ^ "SPI says that it now has 18 sawmills across the three states. It also has window plants in Alabama and Wisconsin."[9]
  5. ^ Owner of Pacific Lumber.[22]
  6. ^ SFI, suggested The New York Times, is considered less stringent than the Forest Stewardship Council.[26][27] For example, SFI allows more tree farming and requires fewer conservation plans or consultation with local and indigenous stakeholders.[27] However, it does enjoy the support of conservation groups such as the American Bird Conservancy, Ducks Unlimited Canada, Arbor Day Foundation, American Forests, and the Canadian Parks Council.[28]
  7. ^ Between 2014 and 2024, A. A. Emmerson donated $40,000; George and Mark Emmerson $45,000; and Carolyn Dietz $15,000.[40]

References[edit]

  1. ^ SPI 2014.
  2. ^ Beesley 1996, pp. 4–6.
  3. ^ US Forest Service 2024.
  4. ^ a b c d e f Martin 2000.
  5. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n O'Keefe 2022.
  6. ^ a b c d e f Pederson 1998, p. 489.
  7. ^ a b c d e f g Curiel 2008.
  8. ^ a b c OSU 2015.
  9. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o Dean 2024.
  10. ^ Pederson 1998, p. 498.
  11. ^ a b Pederson 1998, p. 490.
  12. ^ San Francisco Chronicle 1995.
  13. ^ Associated Press 2021.
  14. ^ a b Satchell 1990, p. 27.
  15. ^ Brokaw 1990.
  16. ^ Freudenburg, Wilson & O'Leary 1998, pp. 1–26.
  17. ^ Kelly & Tuttle 2018, p. 26.
  18. ^ a b Congressional Record 2011, p. 15401.
  19. ^ Bloomberg 2024.
  20. ^ Olsen 2001.
  21. ^ Martin 2000b.
  22. ^ Staff reporter 1985, p. 3.
  23. ^ Bevington 2001, p. 29.
  24. ^ Gulbrandsen 2010, p. 2–4.
  25. ^ Hale 2020, pp. 203–220.
  26. ^ Navarro 2009.
  27. ^ a b MacDonald 2009.
  28. ^ SFI 2021.
  29. ^ NFWF 2024.
  30. ^ Fimrite 2013.
  31. ^ Lucas 2003.
  32. ^ California Air Resources Board 2007.
  33. ^ Associated Press 2008.
  34. ^ San Francisco Chronicle 2012.
  35. ^ Kasler & Reese 2019.
  36. ^ Bialousz 2022.
  37. ^ anewscafe 2023.
  38. ^ KXRO 2021.
  39. ^ Open secrets 2024a(See note re. "several".)
  40. ^ Open secrets 2024a; Open secrets 2024b; Open secrets 2024c; Open secrets 2024d; Open secrets 2024e; Open secrets 2024f.

Works[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sierra_Pacific_Industries&oldid=1224447021"