KQED61%

The Bay Area's Famous Redwood Trees Are Struggling 0%

By Dana Cronin0%

4/2/2026, 3:00:46 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 34 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Halo Effect, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 24% saturation with 339 hits. Analysis detected 2,503 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,414 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of 0% (0 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the article peer group.

<em>This article originally published in June of 2023. 
It has been lightly updated for republication.</em> 
There were many things Bay Curious listener Julie Menter loved about her Oakland home when she first moved there in 2017. 
Chief among them were the three towering redwood trees in her backyard, which Menter estimated had been there longer than the house itself. 
Last year, one of the trees started to look sick. 
It had lost almost all of its leaves and, despite Menter watering it, it wasn’t bouncing back. 
So Menter and her husband decided it had to come down. 
“It was so sad,” she said. 
“And I think it’s sad both for the tree because they’re such beautiful trees, they’re so old and majestic. 
But also scary to be like, ‘Whoa, this tree is not doing well, the one next to it isn’t, the ones in my neighborhood don’t seem to be doing well.’” 
She’s noticed, not just in her backyard but all around Oakland, redwood trees are looking dry and scraggly. 
“So I’m wondering, is something happening to the redwood trees in the Bay Area? 
And if so, what is it and is there anything we can do about it?” 
<h2>Magical trees</h2> 
To answer Menter’s question, we first have to understand why redwood trees are unique to the Bay Area. 
Coast redwoods  which we’re focusing on for this story  stretch up and down the Northern California coast and grow no more than 50 miles from the coastline. 
“I don’t think I fully appreciated the redwoods until I went away to school and then came back as an adult,” said Deborah Zierten, an educator with <a href="https://www.savetheredwoods.org/">Save the Redwoods League</a>. 
“This was the place that I would hike to clear my head. 
So it is a very special place for me here.” 
The quiet, cool, almost prehistoric feel of these redwood forests have provided solace to humans for millennia. 
The earliest redwood trees existed more than 200 million years ago alongside dinosaurs in the Jurassic period. 
Their natural range has shrunk a lot in that time, however. 
Now they live primarily along the coast between Big Sur and the California-Oregon border. 
Their range used to extend more broadly, until they endured a period of <a href="https://www.savetheredwoods.org/about-us/mission-history/redwoods-timeline/">severe logging in the late 19th century</a>. 
After the Gold Rush, San Francisco was booming and timber was in high demand. 
Millions of trees were logged and used to build homes and other structures around the Bay Area. 
Most of the trees here now have grown since then. 
Even by conservative estimates we’ve lost about 90 percent of what once was. 
Now, California is down to about 100,000 acres of old growth redwood forest. 
Perhaps their most identifiable feature  besides their reddish-brown bark  is their height. 
They can grow up to 300 feet tall, a feat that requires some teamwork. 
“One of the things that makes redwoods so unique is that they actually hold hands with their roots underneath the ground, and that’s how they’re able to grow to be so tall and not fall down, is that they help each other,” said Zierten. 
Their shallow but wide root systems allow them to grow to be the tallest trees on the planet. 
And the intertwining of their roots helps them exchange nutrients with one another. 
Their trunks can grow to be immense, up to nearly 30 feet in diameter. 
Redwoods can live a very long time, too. 
In fact, some of the <a href="https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/shirley/sec11.htm">oldest coastal redwoods</a> today were alive during the Roman Empire. 
Those stands of <a href="https://sempervirens.org/news/old-growth-what-it-means-and-why-it-matters/#:~:text=What%20Is%20The,redwood%E2%80%99s%20highest%20reaches.">old-growth redwoods</a>, which now account for only 5% of all redwood trees, can <a href="https://www.parks.ca.gov/? 
page_id=26107#">store more carbon</a> than any other forest on the planet. 
They have unique ways of reproducing. 
They produce seeds, like any other tree, but they can also sprout new trees from their roots. 
“So, often you will find them in circles that we call fairy rings. 
Because if a parent tree gets hurt or injured, it will send out these baby sprouts into these circles. 
And it’s kind of like a little family growing,” said Zierten. 
Redwoods prefer cool, moist climates, which is why they’re now primarily found in Northern California. 
In the summer months, when there’s a lack of rainfall, redwood trees rely on another iconic California phenomenon: coastal fog. 
“It’s almost like a sponge sucking in that water,” Zierten said. 
“Then when their needles get full, also like a sponge, any of that excess water will drip to the ground. 
And it’s almost as if they’re creating their own rain.” 
They’ve adapted to other characteristics of this region, including wildfires. 
Take the 2020 CZU Lightning Complex fires, for example, which burned through most of Big Basin Redwoods State Park near Santa Cruz. 
Three years later, that forest is green again and <a href="https://www.kqed.org/news/11835124/some-good-news-many-of-big-basins-ancient-redwoods-appear-to-have-survived">the old-growth redwood trees there are still standing strong</a>. 
Now many redwood forests  including 80% of the surviving old-growth trees  are protected either by state and local governments or nonprofits, like Zierten’s Save the Redwoods League. 
<h2>New challenges</h2> 
It’s not just Menter’s imagination: Redwood trees are indeed struggling across the Bay Area. 
“If you look up now, in most urban areas, I think everybody can pretty much see that there’s some tops that are dying back. 
There’s a lot of brown foliage in the crowns of these trees,” said <a href="https://ib.berkeley.edu/people/faculty/dawsont">Todd Dawson</a>, an environmental scientist at UC Berkeley who has been studying redwoods for decades. 
One reason for that suffering is urbanization and the subsequent proliferation of concrete and pollution. 
Roadways and sidewalks, in particular, are impinging on redwoods’ root systems, essentially suffocating them. 
“[Concrete has] a very, very negative impact on the ability of that tree to get the water it needs, get the nutrients it needs,” said Dawson. 
In addition to urbanization, climate change is wreaking havoc on redwood trees’ ideal growing conditions. 
Coastal fog, for example, upon which redwood trees rely for water, is on the decline. 
In fact, since the 1950s, Dawson said, fog has declined about 30% during the summertime, when redwoods really need it. 
That decline, coupled with periods of severe drought in California, is putting a lot of stress on the trees  especially giant sequoias, another type of redwood that lives mostly in the Sierra Nevada. 
Thousands of trees there have died due to a lack of water. 
“The water deficit itself didn’t really kill all those trees,” Dawson said. 
“It weakened them in a way where other pests and pathogens got in there and basically wiped them out.” 
In addition to a lack of water, more intense fires are also affecting redwoods. 
Though they have adapted to fire over the centuries, they can’t handle the extreme fires we’re seeing now caused by climate change and inadequate forest management. 
All in all, Dawson said redwood forests are struggling along their perimeters. 
As the wildland-urban interface stretches farther and farther into the wild, redwood trees are increasingly exposed to human impacts. 
They’re losing their buffer. 
“I think we’re going to see a patchier world,” Dawson said. 
“And that’s really disappointing and concerning for me because we sit at the heart of that. 
Humans are really the ones that are in control and are having the negative impacts that we now see.” 
<h2>What can we do? 
</h2> 
As Menter asked, is there anything we can do to save the redwoods? 
As for backyard redwood trees, Dawson said irrigation might work, but it’s more of a Band-Aid solution because “the trees require so much water. 
They also require pretty special microclimates, meaning that they like it cooler, they like these moist, foggy summers,” he said, “and I think you can’t really recreate those conditions as a person.” 
The problems redwood trees are facing now are much more systemic, said Dawson, and that’s how we should approach solutions. 
One way to help protect redwood forests is by getting them in the hands of governments and nonprofits, which Dawson said is critical to ensuring the trees’ survival here in Northern California. 
“The forests are just so special, these big cathedrals with these amazing, gigantic trees. 
There’s just nothing like that. 
And I think anybody who’s ever walked through a forest for the first time just is in awe of what a special place and what a special feel it has. 
So I’m really concerned about them and I’d love to see those forests protected in perpetuity,” he said. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 5.2%Dana Cronin: 2.4%CalMatters: 1.9%Confirmation Bias5.2%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.9%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 8.5%Dana Cronin: 6.2%CalMatters: 3.0%Availability Heuristic8.5%This article: 1.0%Dana Cronin: 0.3%CalMatters: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic1.0%This article: 0.8%Dana Cronin: 0.3%CalMatters: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.8%This article: 6.8%Dana Cronin: 2.3%CalMatters: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias6.8%This article: 1.9%Dana Cronin: 0.9%CalMatters: 6.3%Framing Effect1.9%This article: 5.7%Dana Cronin: 2.3%CalMatters: 1.0%Loss Aversion5.7%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 1.3%Dana Cronin: 0.4%CalMatters: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect1.3%This article: 1.3%Dana Cronin: 0.9%CalMatters: 3.5%Optimism Bias1.3%This article: 6.7%Dana Cronin: 4.3%CalMatters: 1.4%Pessimism Bias6.7%This article: 24.0%Dana Cronin: 10.6%CalMatters: 6.4%Negativity Bias24.0%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.4%CalMatters: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 2.1%Dana Cronin: 2.1%CalMatters: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error2.1%This article: 1.1%Dana Cronin: 0.4%CalMatters: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias1.1%This article: 2.1%Dana Cronin: 0.7%CalMatters: 1.7%In-Group Bias2.1%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 12.4%Dana Cronin: 4.9%CalMatters: 2.7%Halo Effect12.4%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.1%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.9%Recency Bias0.1%This article: 2.4%Dana Cronin: 0.8%CalMatters: 0.3%Primacy Effect2.4%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 12.7%Dana Cronin: 5.0%CalMatters: 3.1%Appeal to Authority12.7%This article: 9.8%Dana Cronin: 3.3%CalMatters: 1.1%False Dilemma9.8%This article: 2.6%Dana Cronin: 0.9%CalMatters: 0.8%Slippery Slope2.6%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.6%Dana Cronin: 5.4%CalMatters: 3.6%Hasty Generalization8.6%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 3.3%Dana Cronin: 1.1%CalMatters: 0.7%Bandwagon3.3%This article: 11.0%Dana Cronin: 6.6%CalMatters: 5.3%Appeal to Emotion11.0%This article: 2.7%Dana Cronin: 0.9%CalMatters: 0.6%Begging the Question2.7%This article: 11.3%Dana Cronin: 3.8%CalMatters: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)11.3%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 3.2%Dana Cronin: 1.1%CalMatters: 0.3%Burden of Proof3.2%This article: 3.6%Dana Cronin: 1.2%CalMatters: 0.2%Appeal to Nature3.6%This article: 1.2%Dana Cronin: 0.4%CalMatters: 0.2%Composition/Division1.2%This article: 6.5%Dana Cronin: 2.2%CalMatters: 3.1%Anecdotal6.5%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 10.4%Dana Cronin: 3.5%CalMatters: 1.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)10.4%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.0%Dana Cronin: 0.3%CalMatters: 0.8%Unattributed Quote1.0%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 1.5%Dana Cronin: 0.5%CalMatters: 3.1%Biased Writer Voice1.5%This article: 2.8%Dana Cronin: 3.0%CalMatters: 1.9%Indoctrination2.8%This article: 1.4%Dana Cronin: 1.9%CalMatters: 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias1.4%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dana Cronin: 0.0%CalMatters: 1.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

1414 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers37%attributed speech893writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageJulie Menter • 6 words • 0.0% coverageJulie Menter • 19 words • 0.0% coverageJulie Menter • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageJulie Menter • 14 words • 100.0% coverageJulie Menter • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageDeborah Zierten • 32 words • 0.0% coverageDeborah Zierten • 12 words • 0.0% coverageDeborah Zierten • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageDeborah Zierten • 44 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageDeborah Zierten • 13 words • 0.0% coverageDeborah Zierten • 19 words • 0.0% coverageDeborah Zierten • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageDeborah Zierten • 11 words • 0.0% coverageDeborah Zierten • 20 words • 0.0% coverageDeborah Zierten • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageTodd Dawson • 24 words • 0.0% coverageTodd Dawson • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageTodd Dawson • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageTodd Dawson • 12 words • 0.0% coverageTodd Dawson • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageTodd Dawson • 11 words • 0.0% coverageTodd Dawson • 16 words • 0.0% coverageTodd Dawson • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageTodd Dawson • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageTodd Dawson • 14 words • 0.0% coverageTodd Dawson • 5 words • 0.0% coverageTodd Dawson • 30 words • 0.0% coverageTodd Dawson • 18 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Julie Menter

100%flagged-word coverage
84 attributed words16% of attributed speech73% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Indoctrination+15.2 ptsWriter: 2.7%Julie Menter: 17.9%17.9%Unattributed Quote+16.7 ptsWriter: 0.0%Julie Menter: 16.7%16.7%Biased Writer Voice-2.4 ptsWriter: 2.4%Julie Menter: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-2.2 ptsWriter: 2.2%Julie Menter: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.