Despite what you may see from the road, native regrowth in the area of the 2017 fire is being suffocated. That’s because rehab is being neglected
Correction: After we published this story, we found that the blackberry plant shown in the video is the native trailing blackberry (Rubus ursinus), and not the highly invasive Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor).
Video and story by Deborah Bloom. September 2, 2021. It’s been four years since the Eagle Creek Fire tore through the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area in Oregon. Ignited on September 2, 2017, when a 15-year-old boy threw a firework down a steep canyon on the Eagle Creek Trail, the fire burned 48,000 acres over several months, pouring ash into Portland 40 miles to the west and approaching the city’s water supply at Bull Run.
In 2018, the U.S. Forest Service declared: “More than a year later, the Gorge’s resilience is as beautiful as the new views, a testament to nature’s wild ways with its active geology and ecological regeneration.”
The reality is less comforting.
Loss: Tanner Creek Watershed area was among areas that burned hottest in the Eagle Creek Fire. Photo taken Oct. 31, 2017. Photo by USFS
Survey the site of the blaze today from Interstate 84 and you’d be fooled into thinking rebirth is happening. Lots of green plants dotted with vibrant flowers are filling in those depressing swaths of gray char.
That growth, however, is almost as damaging to the native landscape as the fire itself.
Non-native plants and noxious weeds—Scotch broom, blackberry, others—are in the process of reclaiming the decimated woodlands, choking out any chance for native plants and trees to rise from the ashes and reclaim the landscape.
Government agencies responsible for overseeing various sections of the burned forest haven’t kept up with the task of ensuring native growth returns.
As explained in the video above, four years of precious regrowth have already been squandered by neglect.
Appreciate this story? To support environmental journalism on Columbia Insight click here.
I am pretty sure the Eagle Creek fire did not burn for 3 months. I think it was 2.5 weeks. Please check.
September 2nd start to November 30th when it was listed as fully contained. Thats 89 days or roughly 3 months. And there was areas still smoldering for months after.
I am pretty sure the Eagle Creek fire did not burn for 3 months. I think it was 2.5 weeks. It just felt like 3 months. Please fact-check.
Heidi, per USFS the fire was 100 % contained Nov. 30. All forest fires actually burn in areas for many months even after containment. Our statement: “burned for 3 months before it was contained” is correct. Some spots burned till snows came. USFS uses terms like contained, controlled, etc.
Jurgen Hess, ecologist & fire planner.
Thank u for the comment Heidi.
I cannot help but wonder that Oregon’s longer, hotter and drier summers are having an impact on our forests’ recovery and regrowth. I find it very alarming.
For those questioning the duration of the Eagle Creek Fire, it was contained but still smoldering in late spring in 2018.
That looks to be the native blackberry not Himalayan.
Quite a disconnect between the commentary in the video and the specious claims made in the text. None of those claims are backed up in the video in which the speaker says only that some invasive are present and should be controlled. The dude is so close to the highway you can barely hear his comments. You should be embarrassed to publish such bogus crap.
With the exception of Scotch Broom, every plant featured in the video is native! The blackberries shown are Rubus ursinus, native Trailing Blackberry that comes back naturally after a fire. It helps shade the soil and protects young tree seedlings. It will naturally decrease as trees grow and shade increases. It seems like neither the man speaking in the video nor Deborah Bloom, who wrote the article know the difference between that species and invasive non-native blackberry. This article is not news, it’s an (uninformed) opinion piece and should be labeled as such. Thankfully this article seems like an exception. The other news articles I have read on your website are well-researched and we’ll-written. Please consider removing this as it doesn’t fit with an organization doing quality journalism.