The Fire Priest

(This essay was written in 2017, and is included in my book “Sanctuary.” I’m reposting it here on July 20, 2024, on the anniversary of “the fire mass.”)

The miraculous part of the story, in a highly condensed version, goes like this: On July 20, in the year 1783, an Icelandic volcano known as Laki sent a greedy tongue of lava toward the village of Kirkjubæjarklaustur. When lava threatened to engulf the church—with all of the villagers inside—the Lutheran pastor Jón Steingrímsson prayed and preached with great passion and vigor until the river of molten rock hardened into a wall, sparing the huddled parishioners.

These days, travelers passing through this small village in the south of Iceland can visit a wooden cross memorializing “the fire mass,” as Jón Steingrímsson’s famous sermon is known. There are no plaques offering an explanation, no displays. Simply a metal plate that says: “Hér Var Eldmassan 20 Juli 1783.” At dawn, when no one is around, the cross seems to bear witness in much the same way as a tree or a stone.

Stopped the lava. Sure, he did. I don’t expect you to believe it. Or you may believe, as I do, that the approaching lava hardened, sparing the church, but not at the prompting of prayer. (The ice-cold waters of the Skafta River might have had something to do with it.) Nevertheless, it is a compelling story. And, as is usually the case, the miracle is both the most dubious and the least interesting part of the story.

In 2017, Iceland is a largely secular and scientifically literate nation, with a definite streak of practicality when it comes to volcanoes. It is not likely that many Icelanders actually believe that the good pastor’s prayers stopped the lava. It’s not even clear that the people of Jón’s time believed it. Maybe some did and some didn’t. I’d venture to guess that Icelanders, throughout their history, have often prayed to stop lava, and usually to no avail. They had prayed to their Norse Gods before the year 900, and they had prayed to their Christian God after that, with no discernable change in result.

One famous story gives insight into the attitudes of Icelanders toward their troublesome mountains. In the year 900, at the annual gathering called the Althing that brought together families and factions from all parts of the island together to settle feuds and establish treaties, a very important order of business rose to the top of the agenda: whether or not to keep the old Norse Gods, or adopt the new religion of Christianity.

The Althing was really Europe’s first parliamentary democracy, and the chieftains were debating policy. Passionate speeches were given both for and against the new religion. Stakes were high. In the middle of the deliberations, Hekla, the island’s most notorious volcano, ominously began to rumble and smoke. The defenders of the Norse Gods said “See! It is a sign of Odin’s anger! We must not do this thing!” When a man named Snorri Godi, a respected cheiftain, ascended to the law rock to speak, he said, “What angered the Gods when the lava burnt which we are standing on now?”

In other words: Don’t our mountains erupt all the time? After their long experience with volcanoes, it’s fair to say Icelanders probably understand the behavior of lava as well as anyone on earth. They understood it pretty well even in the year 900. So, it is hard to know what the farmers in 1783 really thought.

Nonetheless, the “Fire Priest” is a celebrated and beloved figure, a national hero. He is acknowledged as much for what he did after the eruption, as for what he did during it. To put it in a nutshell: with persistence and knowledge, and over the long haul, he tended to his neighbors. And that is an understatement.

As I write this 226 years later, Seattle, where I live, is choking on smoke—not from a volcano, but from hundreds of massive fires that are burning across the Canadian border, as British Columbia suffers its worst fire year in history (so far). In complicated ways, humans have power over nature, and at the same time nature has power over us. It’s easy, in our era, to forget the second part of that truth.

Calamity comes in many forms. Meanwhile: daily life continues for those outside of calamity’s immediate reach. We may wonder, if we have time for it, how we will behave when we are in calamity’s reach. While I’m doubtful of the miracle, the story of the Fire Priest speaks to me. It asks the question: How do we take care of each other in times of deteriorating circumstances?

***

It is a peculiar truth of human nature that people are more often moved by the suffering of one person than by the suffering of many. Our reactions are out of proportion because there is only so much room in our hearts for grief. Our eyes and our minds become glazed over by statistics.

For instance, a lone small Syrian girl washed up upon a beach in Cypress may be a cause for tears, while ship after capsized ship of refugees may be, merely, a cause to turn off the television. A person who may shrug with indifference at the horror of Aleppo may rise in indignation when a refugee is assaulted on a city bus. Is it because we don’t really care about Aleppo, or is it because we are touched, mainly, by what is right in front of us?

Maybe reports of a massacre in Aleppo, or a tsunami in Indonesia, or a famine in Somalia strike most of us as happening in some other world, while what happens on a bus in our city is in our world. We seem to understand best the pain that we see, and to sympathize most with the pain that we share. When the scale of suffering is too large, the location too distant in time or geography, the victims too unlike us in culture or belief, it all becomes a blur.

But every world is someone’s world. There is only one world, and we are part of it. We are more connected than we may think.

***

On June 8, 1783, Laki erupted. It continued to erupt for the next eight months. This volcano did not consult the monarchs of Britain or France, or the Founding Fathers of America. These men of consequence on both sides of the Atlantic knew nothing about it. They knew only that it had become hard to breathe in Paris and London. By September, they would hear rumors of cataclysm, but at first, only a smattering of farmers and fishermen knew about the eruption, as they hunkered down in their sod houses and prayed for deliverance.

In the highlands of Iceland, far from the capitols and parliaments and the armies of men, the skin of the earth split open along a 16-mile seam. The resulting outpouring of lava from this open gash in the earth was one of the most significant geological events in several thousand years.

To be clear, no pyroclastic cloud swallowed cities whole. There was no tsunami wiping out harbors full of ships. In terms of magnitude, Laki was not as explosive as the more famous eruptions of Krakatoa and Tambora, which happened in the same century. But here’s the thing: Laki kept going. After eight months, Laki had created the largest lava flow in historic times.

So the eruption of Laki is every bit as significant as the eruptions of Krakatoa and Tambora. Arguably, it is more so, because it was the beginning of an ordeal that would affect more lives than any other volcano. While Laki was not spectacularly explosive, it to this day counts as the deadliest instance of atmospheric pollution in the past few thousand years.

Air knows no boundaries. What happens in one place, no matter how removed from the centers of people and power, affects all the others. Few people knew about the presence of Laki, because few people lived on the Southern coast of Iceland in 1783. But as the toxic cloud from the eruption spread—first over Europe, and then Africa, Asia, and America—Laki made its presence known to them.

Suffering is both universal and personal. It both isolates and unites us. The farmers in Egypt and Japan who starved by the hundreds of thousands in the year following Laki’s eruption had no idea why the air was bad and the rains failed. They did not even know about a place called Iceland. And on that small island nation, in the aftermath of catastrophe, an obscure Lutheran pastor demonstrated, as well as anyone I can think of, care in the face of deteriorating circumstances.

He is rather unique, as national heroes go. He declared nothing, he conquered no territory, he made no one rich, and he commanded no army. He was never a head-of-state. He was not particularly forceful or intimidating. Yet every schoolchild in Iceland learns his name. He is as integral to their story of themselves as George Washington and Abraham Lincoln are to us. What he was, above all, was a healer, a binder of wounds. A shepherd.

***

First, back to the beginning, and with some context: It is interesting to know when things happen, as well as why and how. The Reverend was a man of his time and place, with one foot in the Enlightenment, and one in the Reformation. Can we imagine what it would be like to be him? How would he see the world?

Jón Steingrímsson was born in 1728 on a hardscrabble Icelandic farm. This puts him, more or less, into the same time period as the Founding Fathers of our nation: Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Paine, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, and the rest. It also places him alongside of the great thinkers of the Enlightenment—David Hume, Francis Bacon, John Locke. Although he was a contemporary of these men, in circumstance he could hardly be further apart.

In the salons of Paris and London, men more “cultured” (and wealthier and certainly more powerful) than Jón were debating ideas that would transform Western civilization. In what would soon become the United States, Benjamin Franklin had already distinguished himself as a leading example of an enlightened thinker. And a young Thomas Paine, still in Britain, was developing the political theories that would soon give birth to his tract ‘Common Sense,’ which would in turn spark the American Revolution.

Rural Iceland, at this time, was reeling from a century of non-stop misfortune: eruptions, smallpox, livestock diseases, famine. The country was poor and isolated, the settlements were small. In the mid-eighteenth century, it was a far cry from the salons of Paris or London.

Still, compared to his neighbors, Jón was literate and well-educated. He was a keen observer of nature, and would employ this gift in a way that would make geologists happy in future centuries, providing them with a first-rate and first-hand account of the deadliest volcanic eruption in recorded history.

Jon’s account of the Laki eruption is one of the best primary sources in volcanology. His record-keeping was meticulous and detailed, and his precise observation of natural phenomena leading up to, during, and after the eruption have given scientists and historians the best information they have about this mysterious event.

And yet, Jón was not a scientist. He was a believer in signs and visions, a man who felt that God spoke to him through dreams, and who believed that he was perceptive of the presence of ghosts. He was not, by any means, a man of reason in the mold of Hume, Franklin, or Paine.

His path to this vocation began in dire poverty and hard work, after his father died young. By the age of nine, Jón had already become adept at working pasturage and running livestock. It was probably not unusual for Icelandic boys to be astute about sheep and horses. But he had more in mind for himself: He was curious about both the natural and the supernatural world, so he left the farm for the diocese school in Hólar, and began to study.

His start at the school was inauspicious. As skilled as the boy may have been with livestock, his interactions with humans were hampered by an awkward stammer. Initially, the teachers were not impressed with the stuttering boy.

But he proved to be determined. He had an interest in both natural science (such as it was in 1745) and theology. He learned Latin and read classical literature. He developed a keen interest in herbal medicine. And he must have possessed something else, something hard to define. A certain aptitude for dealing with difficult people, for caring about and calming others. Because upon his graduation, he was tapped by the Bishop of Hólar for a peculiar task.

Near Hólar, a certain wealthy farmer and former soldier by the name of Jón Vigfússon was known for his explosive temper, excessive drinking, and brutality. Vigfússon also had a wife named Þórunn, and he was known to abuse her. There was a church on this man’s property.

The peculiar task the bishop had chosen was this: The Bishop asked Jón to become the deacon of this church, hoping that Jón’s calm and steady presence might encourage some piety in Vigfússon, and stem the man’s violence toward both his neighbors and his wife.

Although it doesn’t seem to me like the most promising job for a bright young scholar who could have easily left Iceland for the University of Copenhagen, Jón said yes to the Bishop.

The rest is fairly predictable, but no less true. Þórunn Hannesdóttir, the unfortunate wife of Jon Vigfússon, was considered something less than a beauty. She was described as “sway-backed, with a protruding stomach, a receding hairline, and a face scarred by smallpox.” And Jón Steingrímsson fell deeply in love with her.

Adultery would probably have been inevitable, had the hard-drinking Vigfússon not died in his sleep, probably of liver failure. Earnest young Jon wasted no time with the widow Vigfússon, and one year after the irascible farmer’s death, Jon and Þórunn were married. Unfortunately, a daughter was born only a few months after the wedding. The Bishop considered the timing clear evidence of sin, and Jon was removed from his position as deacon. He had to move. The year was 1755.

Also in 1755, a volcanic eruption of Katla, a volcano along Iceland’s southern coast, unleashed what is possibly the earth’s largest flood in historic times. Hardly anyone in America or Europe knew about it or comprehended its scope. Few people lived in the flood’s path. In the same year, an earthquake unleashed a tsunami off the coast of Portugal that devastated Lisbon, killing upwards of 50,000 people. (You’d think this event might make it into the history books, but I don’t remember learning about it in school.)

In North America, Great Britain and France jockeyed for control of the Great Lakes and Ohio River Valley, in what would become known as the French and Indian War. Colonists were expanding into the same region, and within a decade, as a result of the Stamp Act, would begin to chafe under British Rule. The first steam engine in America was installed in a mine. Trains would not be far behind. In the West Indies, Alexander Hamilton was born. And in far-away Iceland, Jón, with his new wife and daughter, made an arduous trek to the south of Iceland (not far from the volcano Katla), nearly freezing to death along the way.

He was not interested in starting a revolution, changing the culture, controlling trade, or questioning his religion. His goal, simply stated, was to have a successful farm with a woman he had seen abused by another man, and now loved as his wife.

***

There is more to say about both the Fire Priest and the eruption of Laki, but first, let me say a thing or two about Icelandic churches. I don’t mean the giant church in the center of Reykjavik, the one on all the postcards, the one with its towering gothic ramparts. No, I mean the small chapels that are scattered across the rural landscape and that are not much different now than they were two hundred years ago.

I will confess that I once was, but no longer am, a religious man. American evangelical Christianity, especially, does not impress me. But I will also confess that on a recent trip to Iceland, something in my soul was stirred by the small chapels that are scattered across the landscape of Iceland. Both the chapels and cemeteries that accompany them. It was almost enough to make me want to find some kind of faith again. Almost.

These chapels are small. They are one-room affairs, built according to a common template. They look, more or less, like a child’s Christmas tree ornament. Many of them would hold no more than 30 people. They are, to me, the perfect antidote to the “mega-churches” of our current culture. They seem to be built, intentionally, in places where they are dwarfed by the landscape.

While it might have been the intention of the architects of Europe’s great cathedrals to give glory to God by raising structures of unparalleled magnificence, it seems to have been the intention of Icelanders to give glory to God by building structures of simplicity and modesty. These lovely buildings speak, to me, more of humility than of dominion. They speak to me of community and care.

These churches were not built by slaves, nor were they commissioned by kings. They were built by free men and women, farmers and shepherds and fishermen, people who lived and died in these rocky valleys. None of them were built out of marble; through the centuries, they decomposed, and then were rebuilt in the same spot over and over and over again. A church that dates back to the year 1200 may be still, in 2017, cleaned and maintained and ready for use.

Most of the churches are built next to farms, as the priests who served here for countless generations have been farmers. After completing the same work in pasture and field and fishing boat as their neighbors, these clergymen would tend to the needs of their neighbors: a baptism, a marriage, a confession, last rites, a burial.

Pews, altars, chalices, and other instruments of worship are well and lovingly crafted. These churches seem hallowed by centuries of prayer paired with communal care and struggle. Inside, the air is still and waiting.

It was into such a church that pastor Jón gathered his flock on July 20, 1783, as the sky darkened and the gray ash fell, and an enormous river of lava threatened to obliterate his church, his farm, his animals, his village, and all the people he called friend and neighbor.

***

Let me now bridge the gap between Jón and Þórunn’s arrival in the south, in 1755, and the famous day of July 20, 1783, when Jón, filled with the Spirit of The Lord, is said to have stopped the lava in its relentless march to the Atlantic Ocean. In a way, it’s a shame to skip over the years lightly. In our telling of history, we focus on dramatic days, fateful moments, while giving short-shrift to day-to-day living. But isn’t daily life the crucible in which lives and loves are shaped?

Nevertheless, here’s the short version: In 1755, Jón and his new wife headed for the remote south, where, over time, they established a prosperous farm. His neighbors saw in him a steady and dependable man. He was a skilled and observant farmer and fisherman. He understood the care of and the habits of livestock. In addition, he put to use what he had learned at school, and broadened his knowledge and experience with medicine. He understood a great deal about plants, and the use of healing herbs. His parishioners came to him not only for good advice, but for physical healing as well; he became the region’s doctor, and over the course of his life, assisted over 2000 patients. Considering that Iceland at the time had fewer than 50,000 residents, it’s clear that people came from near and far.

In time, his natural inclination to be a peacemaker, healer, and leader attracted the attention of his neighbors. It also attracted the attention of the church that initially educated him and placed him in a role of service—and then later removed him from service for the sin of loving his wife too ardently, too soon. Once again, he was persuaded—although he at first was reluctant—to step into a difficult situation for the good of others. 

This time, he was conscripted to assist a cantankerous and drunken priest who was in failing health. He was made an “assistant” priest and given one half of the parish. In time, the people in the parishes of the south petitioned the church to make Jón their primary priest. And so, despite his earlier disbarment, he was ordained in 1760.

As well as understanding animals, Jón knew the habits of people—how they bickered, how they sometimes hated and sometimes loved one another. His neighbors looked to him for leadership, and by all accounts he provided it; he performed their weddings, christened and baptized their babies, treated their illnesses, advised them in their trials, and buried them when they died.

Although he liked his neighbors, he was disturbed by what he considered “moral laxity and ingratitude” during times of plenty, and he felt that he had been warned in dreams about an approaching time of hardship. He began to feel uneasy. In 1783, he began to have strange and troubling dreams. And on June 8, the earth split open.

***

Of course, other things of consequence were also happening in 1783. One of the most important things, from an American point of view, happened in Paris, on September 8. Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, and John Jay signed a piece of paper, and the United States of America officially became a nation.

Wait a minute, you might protest. Didn’t that happen on July 4, 1776? Well, no. While July 4 marked the beginning of America’s labor pains (or maybe we could say the start of labor was as early as 1765, with the Stamp Act), it wasn’t until 1783 that the difficult birth of our nation was over. It was not until 1787 that we had a constitution.

It took some time and effort for Americans to get free. (Just as it may take some time and effort to stay free.) The United States declared its independence in 1776, but just saying something doesn’t make it so; a war still needed to be fought. Finally, on September 8, 1783, at the signing of the Treaty of Paris, Great Britain relinquished its hold on its former colony, and recognized the United States as an independent nation. And then another struggle began, for the ideals and the identity of the new nation. Would it live up to its own expectations?

At the signing of the Treaty of Paris, the American delegation made note of the malignant air that hung thickly over Paris. If they had known about the reason for the acrid air, they might have reflected on the truth that nature is unconcerned with the ideological conflicts of men. No doubt, there was some discussion about the weather. It had been a disastrous summer, with crop failures, unexplained malignancies, and strangely-colored “fogs” that burned the lungs.

The dignitaries assembled in Paris might have heard rumors about a cataclysmic volcanic eruption in Iceland. It is doubtful they had much understanding of how this eruption was affecting the whole world. In fact, the bad air had been killing Europeans all summer long. Before long, it would kill people all over the world.

As a person obsessed with Iceland, I have for a long time been familiar with the eruption of Laki in 1783. What had not occurred to me before writing this essay was the curious juxtaposition of this eruption with the birth of our nation. Is it coincidental? It is the complex way of the world that what may be a year of hope and birth in one nation may be a year of despair and death in another. It is also the complex way of the world that people are never quite as independent as they think they are.

In 1783, The United States of America—manifestly destined, perhaps, to become a superpower in world affairs—celebrated its birth. At the same moment in history, Iceland—neither a new nor a great country in the sense of economic or military might—faced its gravest challenge and most devastating catastrophe.

In both nations, remarkable people rose to the occasion in their country’s time of need. In the smaller nation ravaged by the whims of nature, a man of extraordinary character would be forced to confront a kind of despair most of us will never experience. In his own country, the Fire Priest is revered. But outside of his homeland, he would never achieve the fame of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, or Alexander Hamilton.

How do we measure greatness? How do we measure patriotism?

***

To explain the global consequences of Laki in a brief phrase: A large volcanic eruption affects weather. And because of how long it lasted, the volume of gases it put into the air, and the peculiar chemical composition of those gases, the eruption of Laki affected weather to a great and deadly degree. It’s hard to calculate with certainty how many people died, directly and indirectly, from the Laki eruption. If famine is taken into account, certainly, millions—first in Europe, and later in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia.

The year following Laki was known, in many parts of the Northern Hemisphere, as the year without a summer. But in Europe, the summer of 1783 began, in fact, with stifling heat. A strangely yellowish miasma slithered with a kind of quiet malice across the continent, starting first in the British Isles and Norway, and spreading inexorably south and east. Sunsets were unnaturally red. The “dry fogs,” as they were known, stung the eyes and burned the nose, throat, and lungs. Crops in the field took on a withered and bleached appearance. These caustic fogs shrouded London, Paris, Berlin, Stockholm, St. Petersburg, Rome: everywhere. People began to die in unusual numbers. The malady struck the healthy and hale as well as the weak, particularly affecting those who worked in the fields.

John Adams, John Jay, and Benjamin Franklin breathed this sinister air as they signed, on Sept 8, the treaty that gave them and their fellow patriots a country. The people on the south coast of Iceland had no knowledge of such events, and by September they were just trying really really hard not to die.

Eventually, the foul air even reached Turkey, Cairo, and beyond. Some places that suffered greatly were far from the source of the pollution, and could never have guessed its cause. In Egypt, crops failed and one sixth of the population died of famine. In Japan, tens of thousands starved. In France, social distress caused in part by famine made the country ripe for revolution.

Winter arrived with a vengeance. After catastrophic harvests, Europe was in poor shape to withstand a harsh winter. When it came, the cold was so beyond the range of normal variance that those inclined to see “signs and portents” in the weather had a field day. The predictable panic led to both political strife and religious zealotry. Surely, God must be speaking. But was it a judgment, or was it a test of resolve? No doubt many believed that the end of the world was nigh.

Those with scientific curiosity and some knowledge of world affairs, like Benjamin Franklin, probably understood that a disastrous eruption had occurred in Iceland, and suspected this as a cause both of the noxious vapors and the crazy weather. But they had no understanding, yet, of the precise mechanisms by which such things could happen.

America felt the effects too. It turns out that in some senses, no place is independent. And that all places are vulnerable.

The western hemisphere had been spared the toxic clouds, but still had to endure a harder winter in the New World than any of the colonists had ever experienced. To say that the winter of 83-84 was bitterly cold in the United States would be an understatement. Ice floes choked the Mississippi and actually floated into the Gulf of Mexico. The harbor in Charleston, South Carolina, froze solidly enough to skate on. Can anyone in 2017 imagine this? The next year, a horde of New Englanders—a hardy lot, not easily intimidated by cold—were chastened enough to pick up stakes and migrate to the Ohio Valley.

But no place on earth suffered—and in isolation, with neither comfort nor aid from any outside source—as acutely as Iceland. And in Iceland, the epicenter of the pain was the parish of Jón Steingrímsson.

***

In speaking of the winter, I have jumped ahead of the day on which Jón Steingrímsson earned the name Eldprestur: The Fire Priest. So let me now go back to July 20, 1783.

This is how I imagine it: Jón closed the door. The air was acrid with fumes and fear. And then, filled with the Spirit of The Lord, Jon preached and prayed. Sweat beaded his brow. He prayed for a long time. (After all, where else was there to go, and what else was there to do? It’s not like people could go home for lunch.) This has been immortalized as Eldmessa: The Fire Mass. When the people finally opened the door of the church, they saw that what had been a river of molten rock had hardened into a wall of protection.

It’s the miraculous version of events: How, when the sky darkened and the world seemed about to end, when the air burned the lungs and smelled of sulfur, when streams of lava surrounded the farmers and left them no means of escape, Jón gathered his people into his small church and began to pray for mercy. And mercy was granted!

Only… it wasn’t.

And here is where the story gets interesting. If the story of the Fire Priest was simply the hagiography of an Icelandic Moses, it would not be so compelling. No, the story matters precisely because it is not miraculous.

Jón Steingrímsson could not stop the lava, any more than he could stop the pain that would follow. Deliverance happens all in a rush, but suffering unfolds slowly.

The famous scene at the church was only one small slice of the story, taken from the middle. The eruptions didn’t stop; Laki belched lava and toxic fumes from June to February. Earthquakes rumbled incessantly, plumes of choking smoke darkened the sky, grey ash fell like sleet, and caustic rains burned holes in the leaves of plants. More and more farms succumbed to relentlessly advancing tongues of lava.

After the farmers at the church were spared, they had to continue living, and there was nowhere to escape to. Their pastor had no more influence over the elements than they did. From this point on, it is less a story of a powerful Moses, and more a story of a tired and human and increasingly heartbroken man who, nevertheless, did not let his decency rest. His job was to shepherd his flock.

In carrying out this task, he did not seem to get much help from the Almighty. God, as He or She is sometimes inclined to do, spared the farmers a quick death in order to give them a lingering and gruesome one instead. Having survived the eruption, the unfortunate Icelanders had to endure its aftermath.

Poisonous ash, slick as viscera from the acid rain, coated every plant that an animal or human might consider eating. Flourine in the water killed the fish. There was no escaping the necessity of breath, which burned a person’s lungs on every inhalation. At times, the eruption plume obscured the sun, making mid-day as dark as night.

Weeks turned to months, and the lava that spared the church continued to consume farms, pastures, lives. From June to February, Laki belched sulphuric acid, fluorine, and other noxious gases, leaving the air, water, and plant life poisoned. While the land eventually recovered, people suffered from starvation and flourinosis for several years. These years have been christened Móðuharðindin: The Mist Hardships.

The poison began to take its toll on both animal and human bodies. Sharp pains in the stomach, excruciating muscle contractions, swelling of joints, bleeding gums. Farmers watched their animals gradually die from the fluorine, their bodies sloughing skin and flesh, their bones and cartilage becoming freakishly bendable and malformed, their teeth and tongues falling out of their mouths.

The farmers had to know that their children would be next.

There was no refuge. No place to go. To some degree, the whole island was affected. The only food for a farmer’s livestock and family was what he had put away in the cellar and barn—and since the eruption began on June 8, not much was in the cellar or the barn. All fresh water was probably contaminated.

And then: winter. A long tunnel with no light at its end.

It might be a bit easier to imagine this for people who have traveled the southern coast of Iceland. There are no trees. There is nothing to stop the never-ending wind. And when winter comes, a merciless blankness of white. (Beautiful, yes, but merciless.) And that winter, just as in Europe, New Orleans, and Japan, would be the worst Iceland had experienced in centuries.

To those who have read accounts of the Donner Party, some of the details of that winter might be familiar: After animals died, people ate the hay—moldy and contaminated as it was—intended for their horses. They scoured beaches for fish bones, and boiled them down into thin gruel. Some chose to take their chances on the putrid flesh of their dead horses, salting it as best they could; others preferred starvation to this unbearable fare. Those who ate it doubled over in bizarre contractions that folded them up before they died. People boiled and ate leather from shoes, bridles, and farm implements. Accounts from the time don’t mention cannibalism… but who knows?

Between one fourth and one fifth of the population of Iceland starved. What is surprising is that more did not. It helped that food from the ocean—cod, seals, whales—was still edible. But it was hard to fish in the brutal winter. Along the south coast, in Jón’s parish, which was closest to Laki, certainly more than a fourth of the people died.

The volcano finally decided to rest in February, 1874. But it was a long road back to health, for both the land and its people. All through 1874 and 1875, people continued to starve; homeless and hungry refugees wandered the countryside, looking for mercy.

Those who found Jón, found mercy.

As desperation grew, social order began to disintegrate. Farms were looted and burned; people without farms wandered aimlessly. Jón traveled up and down the district, using his knowledge of herbal cures to do what he could, wherever he could.

Through the winter of 83-84, people kept dying. Jón buried them. He built their caskets.

A strange twist in the story, and one that I find more mysterious and more compelling than the story of the halted lava flow, is this: Out of all the horses in the district, the only horse that remained healthy enough to carry dead bodies was Jón’s own horse, which, though not exactly energetic, somehow didn’t succumb to fluorine poisoning, even though it ate the same contaminated grass. 

If God is in this story, He may be in that horse.

Finally, Jón decided to leave his struggling family and people in order to make a difficult trek westward to seek help from the Danish officials in Reykjavik. (Iceland at this time was under the authority of the Danish king.) His appeal was heard, and he was granted a sealed money box with significant funds, to take to the Danish district overseer in the town of Vik, to distribute as the overseer saw fit.

On his way to Vik, while Jón was attending to a sick man, someone broke into the money box and stole just enough money to buy a cow. But the seal to the box was broken, and Jón was now likely to be in big trouble with the Danish overseer.

Traveling alone toward Vik, Jón then came upon a large company of his own parishioners, traveling west in search of livestock. Hungry, weak, and dead broke, his people were hoping to be able to buy animals on credit—an unlikely transaction, given the economic state of the whole island.

The seal to the box was already broken. Knowing that he would be adding bigger trouble to already-present trouble with the Danish overseer, Jón distributed the money anyway. When he arrived in Vik, he was, indeed, in big trouble. Fortunately, his bishop vouched for him before the Danish governor, and Jón was spared serious consequences.

Somewhere in the deep pit of the winter, his beloved wife Þórunn died. Jón wrote, “When I lost my wonderful wife, everything… collapsed around me.” In time, he began to sicken too. After ministering to his neighbors’ needs, he returned home only to lay in the dark and cold, without lighting his lamps. He fell into a deep depression. He badly injured his arm, and could barely dress himself.

Still, he continued to care for others. He gathered the herbs for healing tinctures, he nursed them, bathed putrid sores, splinted limbs, and when his ministrations failed, he built the caskets for them and he buried them. And he kept a record. In typically Icelandic fashion, he recorded and he remembered everything. How many buried. Their names.

I have no idea if, at some point during the long winter of 83-84, the good reverend Jón cursed his God. I have no idea how he understood his faith, or if he was tempted to discard it. I know only this: He kept going.

More than two years after the Eldmessa, and once again in a role reminiscent of Moses, Jón was leading a group of hungry refugees eastward along the coast in search of food. And a second “miracle” occurred: advance scouts of the party came upon 70 adult seals and 150 pups. While it might, to our modern sensibilities, seem awful to club baby seals, it was salvation to the long-suffering men, women, and children who had huddled, two years earlier, in Jón’s church to be delivered from the lava. It was the turning point. Jón held an impromptu service of thanksgiving on the beach, and it was, finally, the beginning of the end of the Móðuharðindin: The Mist Hardships.

And when things finally got better, not the next spring, but the one after that, when the grass grew once again green and fresh and unpolluted, and the sheep no longer had teeth falling out of their mouths, and the human survivors once again found joy and vitality enough to fall in love and get married and have children, he recorded their births and baptisms. Their names.

***

We get to choose our heroes—not only for what they do, but for why.

For two desperate years after the eruption, while the land was poisoned and people died in cold houses, and the most selfish of men raided their neighbors for the slightest scrap of food or a still-living horse or sheep to butcher, Jón was the strong and humane presence that held together the community.

It would have been tempting to just take care of himself and his family. In an unraveling world, in a situation of little hope and apparently limitless suffering, he exhibited a kind of leadership that is all too rare in politicians and corporate tycoons—a kind that grows out of love and is manifested in acts of generosity and sacrifice.

We have our Jón Steingrímssons too; every country does. We can find them and honor them. We may get the dubious privilege to be them. I don’t want this privilege; who does? Americans may not have to endure anything as difficult as the Laki winter of 1783. We haven’t had to yet, although we have had some hard times; in my lifetime, Hurricane Katrina comes to mind—but it was short. The Dust Bowl was longer. I didn’t have to go through either of these. I’m humbled by how little I’ve had to endure; when I let this realization sink fully in, it tempers both pride and self-pity.

We are vulnerable. All of us, whether we are from the most powerful nation in the world, or a small island in the North Atlantic.

Power and toughness are not the same thing.

It is possible to be both gentle and tough. We may be called upon to be both. No amount of hubris or wealth should lead us to believe that we are great enough to resist nature, which surely has something planned for us.

Nature gives us beauty beyond measure, as well as the water, soil, and patterns of weather that sustain us. It gives us life, but it does not necessarily give us mercy. That is something we must provide for each other. Sometime soon, we may have to be self-sufficient enough to take care of ourselves, and generous enough to take care of our neighbors.

And, always, let us hold on to the belief that everyone matters. Every birth, every marriage, every death, breath, kiss, bite of food, drink of clean water, animal companion, friend at the door, lover in the night, flower in the meadow—recorded and remembered, held in the heart with tenderness.

The Tropical Update, Project 2025, and Drowning Government in a Bathtub

I’m not going to start with politics. Instead, I’m going to start with something that we often consider small talk, although there is nothing small about it: the weather. 

I am what you might call a weather geek. This means I obsessively track the movement of ridges and troughs, highs and lows. I follow the melting of the snowpack (in multiple states), and water temperatures in the Gulf of Mexico. I get excited about a derecho in Indiana, a cluster of super-cells in Oklahoma, a Nor’easter in Maine, or an atmospheric river pummeling the mountains of Northern California. For some reason, I sort of expect others to get excited about these developments too. Most folks don’t get too excited—unless they are directly affected. 

In the winter, I know where the polar vortex will park its frigid ass, predictably prompting soft-minded politicians to scoff at scientists warning us about the warming atmosphere and oceans. Unlike those politicians, I’m also paying attention to blobs of unseasonably warm temperate air that settle over Greenland, making it hard for both bears and Inuit hunters to depend on sea ice. And starting about this time of year, I spend quite a bit of time tracking what is going on in the Atlantic Ocean, the Caribbean Sea, and the Gulf of Mexico. I always follow the tropical update.

So I’ve known for a while that this summer’s Atlantic hurricane season doesn’t look good. That’s kind of an understatement. There are a number of contributing factors, but the most important one is this: water temperatures in early May that are as high as they typically are in late July. Of course, there are some variables that could inhibit storm development no matter how warm the water is. It’s also possible that a majority of storms veer off to the northeast and remain what forecasters call “fish storms,” never reaching our coast. But still… we could be in for a rough ride.

***

Another guy who pays close attention to the weather is a fellow on Youtube who goes by the name of Beau of the Fifth Column. You may know him—if you know him—as a keen observer of the political weather in our country. He tackles every subject from LGBTQ rights to foreign policy to race to gender to guns. But he wears another hat as well: he offers clear and practical guidance when it comes to helping people prepare for the literal weather. Based as he is in Florida, he is especially attuned to the threats posed by hurricanes.

Beau occupies a peculiar cultural niche; he is white, rural, southern, and undeniably left-leaning in his views. Considering his politics, a surprising number of conservatives are in his audience, and they predictably write angry and insulting letters to him, but apparently keep on watching. Maybe one reason they keep watching is because of his excellent videos on survival skills and emergency preparedness. To date, he has posted about 100 such videos—most of them fairly short, but at least ten that go into a lot of depth and specificity. 

He is, in other words, a “prepper,” a person who values and teaches self-sufficiency and thinks it’s a good idea to be ready for when the shit hits the fan. His approach, however, is a far cry from the kind of swagger (tinged with meanness) that can go hand-in-hand with the “I’ll take care of me and my own” mentality. What he also teaches—passionately and unequivocally—is the importance of community. For every video that teaches survival skills, he’s got one that emphasizes community-networking. Neighbors helping neighbors. Again, about 100 in all. 

One of Beau’s videos helped me when I wanted to create a top-notch emergency kit (or “bug-out bag” as the preppers call it) in the event of an earthquake in Seattle. But I also consult Beau’s videos when I want to think in a deeper way about what resilience looks like—not just for myself, but for a neighborhood, a city, or a country. Part of Beau’s message is this: We don’t get through disasters on our own, no matter how dialed-in we are with our skills, no matter how well-stocked our cellars. And the more sizable the disaster, the more true this is.

***

Between now and November, I’ll be sharing some writing that expresses what I think is at stake in the coming elections. When I say this, I have in mind all elections, not just the big one—because what and who we choose at the city, county, and state level influences the direction of the nation.  

The ability and the willingness of government (at all levels, from city to nation) to effectively cope with natural disasters strikes me as one of the rock-solid obligations that any government has towards its citizens. And when I say cope with I mean more than respond to. I also mean doing our best to predict these events, prepare for them, and minimize their effects. It is a multi-faceted task that requires money, commitment, and expertise both before and after the disaster.

This is where I’m going to bend my thoughts to the 2024 elections, because how well (or how poorly) our society deals with these events is absolutely connected to who we put in office and what policies those people enact. And we need to think broadly about those policies, because what we choose to do before a disaster strikes is as important as what we do after one strikes. 

The government’s approach to natural disasters is not an issue that is likely to raise anyone’s blood pressure. It’s not a ferocious skirmish in the culture wars. It seldom gets mentioned in a campaign speech or an angry tweet. And yet, it matters—a lot. In fact, when the time comes for it to matter personally to you (or me), it may matter as much as anything in the world. 

***

The term natural disaster includes hurricanes, floods, wildfires, earthquakes, eruptions, tornados, tsunamis, ice storms, and any number of dramatic and oddball things that nature can throw at us. It can also include phenomena that cause damage cumulatively rather than in one dramatic event—such as drought, or an extended heat wave. A pandemic, though not weather-related, is certainly also a natural disaster. And I’d include human-caused changes to the environment that magnify the harm caused by natural events. 

We don’t usually think of these as disasters, but they contribute to them. Case in point: The Louisiana wetlands provide a buffer for New Orleans and other cities and towns when a powerful hurricane brings storm surge, wind, and waves; the loss of those wetlands amplifies a hurricane’s impact. Consider how a ravaged watershed in mountainous terrain can lead to disastrous erosion, flooding, and mudslides. Consider how the over-drafting of an aquifer is an act that can’t be undone.

And then there is the slow-motion but also irreversible and inescapable reality of sea-level rise—a looming disaster for coastal cities. About 40% of Americans live on the coast, mostly in cities. As a threat, sea-level rise is completely intertwined with weather-induced flooding. And it’s not a one-time event; it’s a disaster that continues—not just for weeks or months, but indefinitely. In cities such as Miami, New Orleans, Boston, and New York, this disaster is not as far off in the future as we may think. And the scope of it is mind-boggling.

***

It is a certainty that extreme weather events will increase in both frequency and severity. In fact, they already have—and the increase will only accelerate. Given this certainty, I want a government that will work to make our communities more resilient as we move into this difficult future. I want people in office who understand the connections between careful planning, responsible development, good design, and the intelligent management of land and water. At every level of government, from the city to the nation, I will support candidates and policies that enable us to predict, prevent (when possible), and prepare for natural disasters. 

At the helm of our ship of state, I want people who respond with expertise, commitment, and compassion to any natural disaster in any city, state, or region—regardless of the political slant of the region. In other words, I want them to be apolitical in the pursuit of their primary goal, which is to help all communities deal with the trouble nature throws at us. This means they must display a willingness to cooperate and coordinate with their political adversaries. A hurricane in Texas, wildfires in California, tornadoes in Oklahoma, ice storms or floods in New England, or a massive earthquake in my home town of Seattle: all of these merit the same level of commitment from agencies tasked with disaster response. 

These disasters hurt everybody. They are not partisan. They are not selective. (Well, maybe they are selective in one way: They disproportionately hurt the poor—those with flimsy housing, for instance. Or those with no insurance, or no money in the bank to start anew.) A storm is not a ‘respecter of persons,’ to use the old-timey church phrase. When the cat 5 storm slams into your town, it doesn’t matter if you are urban, rural, liberal, conservative, Christian, pagan, atheist, white, black, brown, straight, gay, young, or old. No one gets a pass.

***

Nature doesn’t threaten, it doesn’t bluster, it doesn’t air its grievances on social media. Nature doesn’t take sides in a heated debate about socialism, capitalism, or any other kind of -ism. It doesn’t say “I’m going to kick your ass soon.” In fact, in between disasters, it bestows on us the same quiet grace it always has: a gentle rain in April, buds on the fruit trees. In the time between disasters, nature doesn’t get as much news coverage as a salacious trial involving a porn star, protests on college campuses, or the latest outrageous statement by someone-or-other. 

Nature doesn’t draw attention to itself, and so we take it for granted. We go back to the default assumption that nature is the stable and reliable and mostly benevolent backdrop to our lives. It is a mistaken assumption. This is the reality we inhabit: From California to Tennessee, from Houston to New York City, extreme rainfall events have turned what used to be considered 100-year floods into 7-year floods. The Gulf of Mexico approaches the temperature of bath water in summer, making the rapid intensification of hurricanes a common occurrence.

Permafrost is melting in Alaska. Sea level is rising, as is the acidity of the ocean. Fire seasons in the western US and Canada in recent years  have been far worse than I ever thought possible when I was a firefighter in the 1980s. The Gulf Stream is slowing down, and the increasingly erratic Polar Jet Stream is becoming loopy, allowing warm temperate air to spill into the Arctic, while displaced Arctic air (the infamous Polar Vortex) spills farther south than we are used to.

What is the upshot of all this? In various ways, nature is kicking our asses. The consequences are not theoretical. People suffer. We need to pay attention, we need to build resilience into our communities, and we need to have a national commitment to take care of one another—as well as a national commitment to address the causes of our ever-more-frequent disasters. It is a huge task with a huge price tag—but the cost of neglecting the task is greater.   

***

A reader might wonder at this point why I bother to write these things. Haven’t we all made up our minds already about how we are going to vote? Maybe for the presidency that is the case, and I’m certain that my essays are not going to sway (or even reach) any true believers in the Orange One. But there are down-ballot races and local elections, and all of them matter. And in many of those other races, there are people who follow a certain strain of thinking that I think will take us in a very bad direction—you might say a disastrous direction—when it comes to dealing with natural disasters. 

If you’ve been paying attention to the Supreme Court’s decisions that don’t have to do with abortion or the former president, and if you’ve been learning about the game plan of Project 2025, you’ll know what I mean when I say that a primary goal of many current GOP politicians is what they call ‘the dismantling of the regulatory state.’ While this might sound attractive if you have a Libertarian bent, the implications of it are god-awful if you actually care about climate, disaster preparation, and the well-being of people—or the well-being of all creatures, for that matter.

Grover Norquist, that shriveled prophet of the gospel of unfettered selfishness, famously said that his goal was to shrink government to the size where it could be drowned in a bathtub. Catchy little phrase, that. It especially appeals to wealthy sociopaths who want to behave without restraint. But what about the rest of us? Right after a category 5 hurricane or a 9.0 earthquake, no one (except perhaps a billionaire who can retreat to a very comfortable bunker) wants government so small that it could be drowned in a bathtub. 

***

Budgets are moral documents. They reflect our collective priorities. I support the generous funding of agencies that help us take of each other, as well as taking care of the land and water on which we all depend. 

Given that extreme weather events are increasing, adequate funding for FEMA, NOAA, the Weather Service, the CDC, (and other research, land management, and public health agencies) means more than maintaining the budgets of these agencies at current levels. It means a significant boost in funding. It also means help for cities in dealing with sea level rise. It also means adequate funding for the Coast Guard and the Army Corps of Engineers. In the coming years, they will have a lot of work to do. 

These agencies need to be well-funded and staffed by men and women with expertise in their respective fields. It is madness to starve the budgets of these agencies at a time when they are needed more than ever. It is also absolute madness to purge the civil service of competent professionals, as Trump has threatened to do. An agency that is tasked with something as complex as understanding what is going on in the atmosphere and the ocean, or carrying out logistically daunting disaster response, must not be run by political hacks, grifters, and ass-kissers.

I intend to vote—at every level of government—for people who demonstrate a commitment to land and water management principles that support nature’s amazing ability to heal itself and reverse the damage we have inflicted upon it. I intend to vote—again, at every level—for people who care about what sort of world my grandchildren will inherit. People who put long-term responsible action above short-term economic gain for those who profit from deregulation and the abuse of nature. 

I want people in charge who are long-range planners and whole systems thinkers. I want them to believe in the importance of building codes, zoning, and environmental regulations. I also want them to be compassionate. I want them to care. It’s a plus if they have kids or grandkids, and are determined to pass on a world that is not hopelessly damaged.

I want leaders who understand that the work of disaster preparation and response is completely intertwined with the work of environmental stewardship. Here’s an example: Good urban planning that incorporates a lot of green space, street trees, and features like swales and green roofs significantly alleviates problems with flooding when a city is hit with extreme rain. These same features also cool a city during heat waves. It is hard to calculate the worth of such features, but they save both lives and money. They also are not a given; they are choice made by municipal governments. They are sometimes vociferously opposed by some folks who don’t want any demands placed on them when it comes to how they develop property.

In the aftermath of a catastrophe, we all praise the courage of first responders, and acknowledge their necessity. Do we also praise the foresight, wisdom, and necessity of those who help us avert a catastrophe or lessen its impact? 

***

Some folks with a lot of wealth and power see government regulation primarily as a thing that exists only to restrain them from making as much money as they possibly can. They choose not to see (or not to care about) how regulations can be the avenue through which Americans take care of each other. In fact, they treat the care-taking roles of government with derision, calling it “the nanny state.” 

They cloak their goals in the rhetoric of freedom. They frequently put the word burdensome in front of the word regulation, hoping that we will get used to the words always being yoked together. They hope we’ll forget the many ways in which appropriate regulation of powerful people has lifted many of the burdens that have, throughout history, afflicted less powerful people.

Here is a quick example of beneficial regulation that has nothing at all to do with weather: In 1990, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was passed, requiring a wide range of institutions to improve accessibility for people with disabilities. If you share your life with someone who has, say, cerebral palsy, you know how profoundly the ADA affected their life. For more than a decade, I worked as a group home manager, job coach, recreation therapist, and physical therapist’s aide for people who had both developmental and physical disabilities. I saw first-hand how the ADA transformed their lives, and I feel deep appreciation for this act of government.

We should not forget that the ADA was opposed by many who considered it burdensome regulation that limited the freedom of developers and business owners to construct buildings as they saw fit. But from the point of view of those with disabilities, the ADA opened the doors of freedom, equality, dignity, and inclusion. 

The feudal lords of the middle ages were not saddled with “burdensome regulation.” It worked out quite well for them; for the peasants, not so much. 

In contrast to the toxic selfishness of Grover Norquist and his ilk, effective disaster response (and preparation, for that matter) is a cooperative exercise in community building. It’s an opportunity for mutual care-giving at a time in our cultural history when the bonds of neighborliness are increasingly frayed. It’s an opportunity for both physical and spiritual connection between people. The work brings together people of all types: hydrologists, engineers, urban planners, first responders, public health officials, cooks, carpenters, mechanics, local merchants, Search and Rescue teams, and all manner of volunteers. 

***

I’m now going to briefly address the man at the top of the GOP ticket—and what he represents to me when it comes to the issues of disaster response and communal caregiving. And I’m going to veer into personal territory here, because every disaster—for the people experiencing it—is personal. 

If you know anything about me, you may know that I love my city. And if you know anything about my city, you might know that we have a geological sword of Damocles hanging over our skyline. That sword is the threat of an earthquake. And not just any old earthquake—we are overdue for the big one, a quake that might reach a 9.0 on the Richter Scale. 

This is not something that we think about every day up here, but for some of us (particularly geology nerds like me) it is never too far from our consciousness. That’s why I’ve put some attention into assembling a bug-out bag. A 9.0 striking a major city would wreak devastation beyond what Americans are used to—even after Hurricanes Katrina and Maria. The big one might not happen for a century or more. Or… it could happen next year.

A second fact about my city is that we are, in both a geographical and political sense, on the “left coast.” Our political character should not matter in regard to the government’s response to a disaster such as an earthquake. The problematic word in the previous sentence is the word should. I will be forthright about a very real worry that I have: If a 9.0 earthquake strikes my city next year, I have no confidence that a Trump administration would respond in compassionate, admirable fashion. 

For Trump, personal grudges become policy, and he holds grudges not only against individuals that have crossed him, but against whole demographics. One of his favorite words lately is retribution. He has an essentially vengeful nature, and I doubt he would be much motivated to care for suffering people in Seattle—although he might relish the chance to send in troops for some reason not related to relief work.

I’m not saying he’d do nothing for my beloved city in the event of a catastrophic earthquake. Let me just say I don’t think he’d give it his best shot. 

The GOP, which used to describe itself as the party of personal responsibility, has become the party of no restraint. That is what ‘dismantling the regulatory state’ is all about. No one demonstrates this better than the party’s leader, the man who flushes his toilet ten times in a petulant tantrum against water-saving appliances. It is beyond ridiculous. It is also dangerous.

His attitude is that of a spoiled child who resents any sort limit or restraint on his behavior. His message to water: “I’ll show you who is boss!” But beyond this cartoonish need to assert his dominance even over the water in a toilet bowl, there is something more sinister. It is an active malice toward those who don’t worship him, and a contempt for vulnerable people. 

I remember when he threw roles of paper towels at the suffering people of Puerto Rico. 

***

This seems like a good place to take a tangent that may seem, at first, to have little to do with natural disasters—although, in fact, it has a lot to do with them. I want to speak about the phrase ‘dismantling the regulatory state,’ and what I think it means to the people who frequently use it.

And I’ll begin with this exhortation: Every American, before voting this year, should become thoroughly familiar with the goals of Project 2025, the document put out by the Heritage Foundation that is functioning as a blueprint for what we can expect, should the GOP prevail in the upcoming election.  

Lurking beneath the debate about the proper size of government is a perhaps more important question: What is government for? Whose interests should it serve? 

We should not be fooled by the rhetoric of people who characterize regulation that ensures that our food is safe, our water is clean, our workplaces are non-discriminatory, and our labor practices are non-exploitive as some sort of oppression. It is not. 

Nor should we be fooled when they tell us that they are motivated by a burning love of liberty. Not when the same people who want to abolish the Environmental Protection Agency (because, you know, freedom) are pretty determined to intrusively regulate many aspects of both our private and communal lives. 

These folks disguised as proponents of self-sufficiency and responsibility would have us believe that their intent to drown government in a bathtub is grounded in noble sentiments about individual liberty. But it’s not about liberty at all. It’s about power: who holds it, who doesn’t, and who benefits from it. A closer look reveals that they don’t really want to dismantle the regulatory state—they just want to redirect it. 

The politicians who sign on to Project 2025 want a government that will keep its nose out of issues like water pollution, tax evasion, food and drug safety, resource depletion, workplace conditions, minimum wages, and discriminatory practices in both lending and hiring. In other words, they want a government that no longer inhibits their worst behavior, and frees them from any obligation to care about others. 

They want a government that will keep its nose out of corporate boardrooms, but they are perfectly willing to have that same government stick its nose into our bedrooms… and classrooms, and libraries, and doctor’s offices. 

I hope we all remember that the people behind Project 2025 who talk about over-reach (and define it primarily as an issue that impacts business) are the same folks who applaud recent court decisions that are incredibly intrusive and controlling of the private lives of Americans. They have every intention of extending that intrusion even further. They have embraced the goals of Dominionism, a particularly strange (and, to me, frightening) strain of evangelical faith that is hostile to the ideas of separation between church and state, diversity, and many cherished notions about privacy and personal liberty.

Make no mistake—the people who want to dismantle the regulatory state when it comes to the EPA or the CDC or OSHA are the same ones who empower religious zealots to call the shots from the courtroom to the classroom to the library to the doctor’s office. The choice they present us with is not between an intrusive regulatory state on the left, and a government that cherishes individual liberty and personal responsibility on the right. No, the choice is between two drastically different visions regarding what sort of regulations the government should impose. 

Take a close look at Project 2025. Please. Here’s my take on it: The politicians who embrace this manifesto will go after any policy designed to protect vulnerable Americans from predatory ones, defining such policies as “over-reach,” or—to use the most effective scare word in politics—socialism. At the same time, they have every intention of dictating the most private aspects of our personal lives, taking away civil rights that are grounded in the 14th Amendment—an amendment, by the way, they would undo if they could.

***

How am I going to sum this up?

Until the last section, the focus of this essay has been somewhat narrow: natural disasters and the government’s role in preparing for them and responding to them. Sure, it’s an issue about money, and science, and logistics. In some ways, it is also an issue about efficiency, scale, and coordination between levels of government. But at heart, it is an issue about care.

In terms of how we decide who and what to vote for, it is only one issue among many, and all the issues are connected. 

When I broaden my view to consider all the issues, I see a profound difference between the two paths ahead of us in November. I see a difference between those who essentially understand themselves as public servants, and those who essentially understand themselves as rulers who can shape a society so that they have unchecked power and are responsible to no one. 

I know which version of government I will choose—in every election, not just the big one. 

The River Knows

The Skykomish River, Washington

In the past few days, my friends from the desert have been messaging me. “You okay up there? You treading water?”

Seattle is in the news, thanks to an “atmospheric river” that has been aimed like a firehose at western Washington for a few days now. Atmospheric rivers are nothing new in early December, although this one is pretty damn wet, even by Pacific Northwest standards. I don’t mind. I like the rain. Rain is the soul of this place.

The river in the sky feeds the terrestrial rivers — both in the moment, and through the snowpack that will feed them come July. Rain down here in the lowlands means snow in the high country, which means that on the other side of the year, the sunny side, rivers will maintain a healthy flow for salmon, for orchards, for people, for all creatures.

Out walking my dog through a forest of towering Douglas fir and Western hemlock, I found myself singing a truly great song, The River Knows Your Name, by John Hiatt. For anyone who has ever loved a river and felt peace along its banks, this song will ring true. “In the silence, darling, let us pray… Let the river take it all away.”

Hiatt mentions particular rivers in the song: the Brazos, the Wabash, the Seine. No doubt these are significant in his life. If the song were mine, I’d sing of the rivers of my home in the Pacific Northwest: The Skagit, the Methow, the Nooksak, the Skykomish, the Stillaguamish, the Baker, Icicle Creek. Old and true friends.

The Methow River, Washington

The first Washington river that knew and spoke my name isn’t even called a river, although in Arizona, where I was raised, it would be considered a river of magnitude and consequence. I first met Icicle Creek in 1994, when I had just moved to Seattle. I remember driving up the canyon feeling the kind of growing excitement that one feels upon first meeting a person who might become a beloved partner.

Located on the eastern dry side of the Cascade Range, Icicle Creek Canyon seemed a perfect blend of the alpine Cascades and the semi-arid country where I had grown up. It was a deep and steep canyon — over a mile deep, in fact — with rugged snowy peaks above. On the south-facing slope, open Ponderosa glades and granite benches made me think of the canyons of Central Idaho, where I had fought fires years ago.

A recent forest fire had denuded the north-facing slope, revealing countless outcrops and scattered boulders of perfect granite: a rock-climber’s paradise. The canyon made me think of the Pearl Jam lyric: “I will walk into your garden of stone.” I parked the car, scrambled down a steep bank, and sat for a long while by the raging creek. Yep, I thought, I could call this place home.

In the next few years, Icicle Canyon became a refuge. It was both church and playground. Being on the dry side of the mountains, “the Icicle” melted out earlier than other areas, making it an ideal location for late spring and early summer adventures.

At low flow, Icicle Creek threads its way through car-sized boulders. Gates and chutes and eddies challenge the skills of expert kayakers. At high flow, it is something else altogether. Swollen with all of the melted snow from the Stuart Range, the “creek” completely inundates the boulders, creating massive billows of frothy green water and fearsome boat-swallowing holes.

Icicle Creek, Washington

Despite the canyon’s name, on summer days it could be hot to go rock-climbing in the Icicle. Dust and rattlers. Yellow Jackets and Poison Ivy. South-facing crags like convection ovens. But always, Icicle Creek down below, a noisy silver ribbon threading the rocks. Glistening like the promise of paradise when you’ve been roasting in purgatory for a few hours.

While I went cragging with friends, I sought out the high peaks alone. My eyes and feet were drawn to the summits of the Stuart Range, especially the rugged and complex massif of Dragontail, with its knife-edged aretes and steep snow chutes. I craved long days with no speech and no people — only the sound of wind and water. And at the end of a very long day, or couple of days, Icicle Creek welcomed me down.

The Stuart Range, Icicle Creek watershed, Washington

I associated the sound of that water with the joy and relief of a successful ascent. The river seemed a paradoxical embodiment of both ferocity and peace. It always seemed to me that the creek was offering a greeting. So you’ve come back. Often I would spend an hour or two at the creek, cleaning myself, dunking my head, soaking my feet in water that was not long ago part of the Colchuck glacier, and that would soon nourish an orchard of sweet apples downstream. Sometimes I would take a nap.

One such nap stands out in memory. It came at the end of a long day. I had left the trailhead at 3 AM, trudging through the forest with my headlamp. My goal was to climb and link together a series of summits: Enchantment, Dragontail, The Witches Tower, and Little Annapurna. It was a day of scrambling on loose talus, kicking steps up steep ice, and post-holing in deep snow. When I made it back down to the creek fourteen hours later, I was utterly thrashed.

There is nothing quite like the incomparable beauty of mountain water. I found an isolated little alcove with a sandbar where beams of warm late afternoon sunlight slanted through the trees, stripped down to my skivvies, and promptly fell asleep. When I woke up, I was blissfully disoriented. Wasn’t sure where I was, when it was, or maybe even who I was. I felt like a leaf floating down a river.


We each have our own rivers, the ones that speak our names. Icicle Creek is one for me. For some of my river-running friends back in my original hometown of Flagstaff, Arizona, the Colorado is a sacred river, particularly where it flows through the depths of the Grand Canyon. They are more at home on its sandy beaches than anywhere else on earth.

Tanner Rapids, Colorado River, Grand Canyon, Arizona

The Colorado is a sacred river to me, too. As a teenager, I spent some blessed days along its banks. Under a full moon, I sat on rocks in the river at Hance Rapids, Sockdolager Rapids, and Tanner Rapids.

Before I was old enough to backpack into the Grand Canyon, other more modest but also lovely desert rivers spoke my name. These were rivers that began in mystery somewhere in the Ponderosa pine forest, then carved their way through rusty sandstone on their way to the desert. Oak Creek, Sycamore Creek, West Clear Creek, Beaver Creek, and Fossil Creek. These delightful creeks along the Mogollon Rim held many surprises: perfect swimming holes, pockets of lushness, elegantly sculpted slots, deep potholes.

West Clear Creek, Arizona

It is remarkable to me how vivid and visceral my memories of childhood remain. We are, each of us, part of a chain.

Is it possible to look forward and backward at the same time? And to still be solidly and peacefully in the present moment? My life is tethered to those who came before me and those who will come after.

As I get older, it seems that the years go by so quickly.

Time is sort of like a river. I apologize for the cliche, and this is not a new observation. But still. It is, with each instant, a different river, but you can revisit rivers from your youth. How easily I can close my eyes and be on the riverbanks of my Arizona childhood, camping at Tanner Rapids in the Grand Canyon, or jumping off a log into the welcoming water of Fossil Creek.

Fossil Creek, Arizona. Photo by Timo Wilsey.

In the same way, my daughter Jordan’s memories will be of cold Cascade rivers. Jordan was my frequent rock-climbing partner, and many of her memories of being with me by flowing water will be linked to our time on the rope. For instance, she might remember a nice swimming hole on the Snoqualmie, right by the bridge, with a rope swing, where we would stop for a dip after a day of climbing at Exit 38. Or she might, like me, smile at the recollection of Icicle Creek after a day of hot and dusty bouldering.

Her son — my grandson — is just over one year old. He will be shaped by his own rivers. Which ones will speak his name?

Here is a vision of something I would like to do a decade from now, when my grandson is eleven: I would like to take him to a mellow spot by a river. It doesn’t matter which one. A place where the light is dappled by the flitting leaves of birch or sycamore, where the sunlight perceived through closed eyelids is the warmest and gentlest color imaginable.

Skykomish River, Washington

I’d like to catch crawdads in a cup. Splash in the river, skip flat stones. Notice the herring-bone pattern on a spider’s abdomen. Teach him to identify trees by the bark. Help him work up the courage to jump off a rock ledge into the water. Find ripe berries and the prettiest autumn leaves.

Then, when we get hungry, grill some burgers. Maybe they will be kelp burgers, which will perhaps not be weird for either him or me in 2033. Baked beans and watermelon. On a nice tablecloth, in honor of my mother who taught me that any picnic, even if you are eating on a log, benefits from such presentation. Dos Equis for me, sweet tea for him.

After dinner, I’d teach my grandson the guitar riffs from Back In Black and the solo from Stairway to Heaven (well, air guitar). Some music never dies. I’d teach him the backing vocals on Midnight Train to Georgia (You and me, boy, we’re The Pips.)

He might be amused at the kind of music that grandpa liked. He’d fall asleep in the car on the way home. Maybe dreams would swirl around in his head, like trout in the shadowy place beneath a cutbank.

An electric car, to go with the kelp burger.

This is what I would like to do, in 2033.

Fossil Creek, Arizona

My mother is 93 years old, and her memories are less distinct with each passing day. Even so, she remembers much of her childhood. From time to time, amusing stories pop out. For instance, she remembers stealing watermelons from a neighbor’s garden, and how she and her sisters in the magical thinking of childhood assumed that if they took their shoes off, they would leave no footprints.

And how the crusty old neighbor discovered their shoes at the garden’s edge, and left a sloppy plug of chewing tobacco in every shoe. That’ll learn ya. She remembers working as a teenager in cherry orchards and in a perfume factory. She remembers eating squirrels during the Great Depression. With her twin sister Rhoda, she sang duets in churches. Once, she sang for Brenda Lee, who was in the front pew.

My mother also has memories of water. They are not like mine. She never saw a river that tumbled ass-over-teakettle out of the mountains or carved its way deep into sandstone until she journeyed out west as a young bride in 1950, moving with my father first to California, and then to the Zuni Indian Reservation, in New Mexico.

The river of her Michigan childhood, called the Grand, was part of her everyday life. It was slow-moving and placid, meandering through flat country, in no hurry to get anywhere. After heavy rains, the Grand would sometimes flood the marshy field in front of her house, and if the water in the flooded field froze over, she and her sisters would ice-skate on it, as you might expect from the children of Dutch immigrants. I can easily imagine this ice-skating girl.

There was also a nameless creek in the woods, where, on Saturday nights, the whole family (seven girls and a boy) would go to take their weekly baths. It was a time and place with no running water. A few years ago, we went ambling down an endless network of country roads in Plainfield Township, looking for that particular bathing spot in the woods. We didn’t find it. The memory was so clear in my mother’s mind, but hard to reconcile to the actual landscape.

I wonder if, in her mind, time is compressed. If it all seems not so long ago, or even if it will on her deathbed seem that everything in her life will be present all at once. As if she is a leaf on a river. Carried by water.

West Michigan wetlands

Diverse currents flow into us, merge, make us who we are. The currents move through us, and contribute to someone else’s story. Downstream.

My father also grew up in Michigan, but I have a hard time imagining him there. He was most at home in the high desert of Arizona and New Mexico, where he lived for most of his life. When I think of my father, I think of three rivers. His ashes were scattered into the waters of two of them. The third river often holds no water at all.

He was a modest man in every respect. He had an open ear and an open mind. He was gentle. He loved the earth and all of its creatures. He loved the Grand Canyon and the river at the bottom of it with all of his very large heart. In his later years, he lived along Oak Creek, spending many quiet mornings on its banks. Both of these streams carried his ashes away.

West Fork of Oak Creek, Arizona

He was in some ways a paradoxical man, blending his religious upbringing with his career as a mathematician. He believed that Jesus was raised from the dead, but was doubtful that Jonah was swallowed by a whale. He believed in an orderly and logical universe and he wanted to understand things. When the Apollo astronauts came out to Flagstaff to train on the lava flows, he worked on a team attempting to predict what the surface of the moon might be like, and how vehicles could navigate it.

As my father lost himself to Alzheimer’s, he didn’t remember much. He could no longer clearly tell me about the work he did for USGS with the space program. He forgot who my mother was.

Near the end, when things had become very confusing, my father leaned heavily on music. At bedtime, he listened to hymns sung by the country singer Jim Reeves. Take My Hand, Precious Lord was a favorite. “Through the storm, through the night, Lead me on to the light, Take my hand, precious Lord, Lead me home.”

On the final road trip of his life, we rode together in a moving van across New Mexico. He insisted on it, even though I was sick with the Swine Flu, and I gave it to him, and it hit his old body very hard. As we drove, he remembered all he could about living in Zuni in the 1950s. Names of kids. The choir, the track team, the basketball team.

Not long after that trip, the riverbed of his memory went dry, but I can’t help but think that in his body was residual memory. In the body itself, not just in the brain’s neural connections.

The Zuni River is a most-often dry wash that runs right through the old pueblo of Zuni, where my father spent some of the happiest years of his life. It leads eventually to the also usually dry river bed of the Little Colorado, winding its dusty orange way through the desert until it meets the big Colorado in the heart of the Grand Canyon.

Maybe a dry arroyo holds the memory of the water that once filled it.

Maybe the Zuni River remembered my father’s name.


In the year 2040, my daughters Jordan and Monty will be 50 and 41, respectively. My grandson will be 18.

I’d like to spend time with him by the river. Any river. It might be a river that means the world to me, or it might be a river that will come to mean the world to him, and that he, in due time, will want to share with his children.

In the year 2060, Monty will be 61 — the same age that I am right now. My grandson who was 18 in 2040 will be only 38 in 2060. I say only. This is not very old; this grandchild of mine might have children of his own by then.

It is strange to think of it, but in the year 2083, my grandson will be the age I am as I write this. Maybe he’ll be noticing, also, how time goes by so quickly. By the year 2100, if he’s still living, he will be 78. Not really all that old. I think of my grandparents. It is amazing to be interwoven with someone who lived in 1900, and someone else who may be alive in 2100.

The lives of those we love stretch into the future. How fleeting the time, and how present we will still be in the memories of those who follow — even if we have passed away by then.

I don’t know if I’ll ever go to Michigan again, but if I do, I’d like to find that creek in the woods.

I can go to the sycamore tree by the creek where my father’s ashes are scattered, and still feel him there.

Sycamore tree, Oak Creek, Arizona

The town of Lytton, British Columbia, sits at the confluence of two of North America’s great rivers, the Fraser and the Thompson. Among rivers, they are jewels, on par with the Colorado, the Columbia, the Stikine, and the Yukon. They are the arteries of Western Canada. Although it doesn’t carry the number of fish it used to, the Fraser historically is one of the great salmon rivers of the world.

Both are large and forceful, especially in spring when swollen with snowmelt. Both cut through deep, dramatic canyons and offer powerful, exciting rapids. Both are borne of glaciers in the Canadian Rockies.

The confluence of the Fraser and Thompson Rivers near Lytton, British Columbia

When Jordan was a teenager, she and I took a guided raft trip down the Thompson. I remember the rugged bluffs, the noble ponderosas, the roller-coaster ride through huge standing waves. Massive pillows of water. But mostly I remember this:

On a calm stretch, as we drifted past some streaked, rusty hills, we looked up at some mine shafts, black holes bored into the slope. Cinnabar, I presumed. “What are those?” asked a woman on the raft. “Paprika mines,” answered the guide. The woman looked up at the hill in wonder and appreciation. “Ooohh,” she said slowly. “So that’s where it comes from!” The guide didn’t even crack a smile.

About 100 miles due south of Lytton, as the crow flies, is the Baker River. It is just shy of the Canada/US border, smack-dab in the pocket of the world that feels most like home to me. Like Icicle Creek, it is one of my favorite rivers.

Baker River, Washington

The Baker is small, unlike the Fraser and the Thompson. It has a small watershed. But what it lacks in size, it makes up for in sheer loveliness and richness of life. In its lower half, the Baker is impounded by dams. But in its upper half, the Baker runs wild and free through some of the most rugged alpine terrain in North America. Its upper watershed is roadless and trail-less. Pristine. Wet, steep, and green.

The river moves through enormous old-growth trees, Western Red Cedar, Western Hemlock, and many other species, both deciduous and conifers. There are woodland flowers such as red columbine, bunchberry, and false Solomon’s seal. Red huckleberries and purple ones, thimbleberries, salmonberries. In the cool forest, lichens and mushrooms and mosses do their all-important work. Everything is layered, intricate, interwoven. Somewhere under the mat of life there is ground, but it’s hard to find it.

The Baker is birthed under the aptly-named Picket Range, a row of serrated peaks in the hard-to-reach heart of the North Cascades. The peaks that surround the upper Baker watershed have names like Mount Despair and Mount Fury. Snowpack tends to be deeper and last longer here than anywhere else in the lower 48 states. More than a dozen glaciers feed the stream.

The Picket Range

By late summer, in a dry year, glaciers might account for as much as half of the river’s flow. The beautiful blue-green tinge of the water is due to suspended silt from the glaciers that feed it. Such silt, called glacial flour, is so fine that the water appears crystal-clear up close, but imparts a slight milkiness when seen from greater distance.

The Baker supports runs of all five kinds of Pacific salmon: Chinook, Sockeye, Coho, Chum, and Pink. Also Steelhead. This is a point of distinction for such a small river. A river fed by glaciers is advantageous for salmon. It has a more even flow and a reliably colder temperature than a river fed primarily by snow and rain.

That color. Glacial water flowing over stones. Clear with a hint of teal, deepening where there are pools.

Baker River, Washington

A couple of years ago, I hiked up the Baker River with Monty. They seemed like part of the forest to me, belonging there as much as the berries and mushrooms and towering Western Hemlock. Belonging there as much as the nurse logs.

A nurse log is a fallen tree that decomposes into the ground, in the process providing a nutrient-rich place for saplings to grow. A nurse log holds, pound for pound, more life than any place in the forest. A nurse log is how one generation of trees passes along its life force to the next, how it nurtures the young, even in death.

I would like to do this hike with Monty every year, or as often as we possibly can, for as long as my legs work. In 2040, if I’m still around, I’ll be 78. Monty will be 41.


It is expected that in in 2040, unless our path changes in a significant way, all summer sea ice in the Arctic Ocean will be a thing of the past. Oceans will be increasingly acidic and increasingly bereft of life. All across the globe, mountain glaciers will vanish.

The most important word in the previous paragraph is the word unless.

It may seem that I’ve made, with no transition, an abrupt shift from personal stories to the “political” issue of climate change. My view is that I didn’t change the subject.

Because this is precisely how I understand the subject: My daughters will be 50 and 41 in 2040. My grandson will be 18. He will be the age I am now in 2083.

The year 2023 has been, world-wide, the hottest on record. This is true of both land and sea temperatures.

But the summer I want to talk about was in 2021. That was one that Northwesterners will not forget. It reached 118 in parts of Washington, and it might have been close to that at the bottom of the canyon where Icicle Creek tumbles through the pines beneath snow-capped peaks.

It was even worse to the north. On June 29, the temperature reached 121.3 Fahrenheit in Lytton, where the Thompson meets the Fraser. The day after this modest town at the confluence of two majestic rivers set this unenviable Canadian record, it burned to the ground.

Lytton is (was) on the east side of the mountains, so it can get hot. Hotter than Seattle or Vancouver, anyway. It was often the hot spot in British Columbia. But historically, hot has meant 95 and, more rarely, 100 or 105. More akin to Missoula, Montana, than to Phoenix or Bagdad. Lytton’s average high in July is a mere 82. That means that on June 29, 2021, Lytton was 40 degrees hotter than their average high for July.

In forested places, especially in arid regions, temperature should never be considered by itself. It should always be coupled with soil moisture. Think about soil moisture as a critical measure of the land’s health. Its ability to sustain plant life, fungal life, insect life, and microbial soil life. Human life.

The scenery and topography surrounding what once was Lytton is stellar. Snowcapped mountains rise nine thousand feet above the Fraser. It’s a bit like Icicle Creek, or a bit like western Montana on steroids. It is hard to over-praise this country. The slopes are draped in ponderosa pine at the bottom of the canyon, transitioning with elevation to spruce and fir and eventually alpine tundra and glaciers.

Fraser River, British Columbia. Photo by Roger Puta. In the public domain.

A temperature 40 degrees above the average July high. Imagine that, wherever you live. In Phoenix, that would be a temperature of 146. In Denver, 132. In Dallas, 136. In Las Vegas, 147. In Washington DC, 129. And in the mountain town of Flagstaff, Arizona, where I grew up, 122.

A “freak” heatwave. Words like “unprecedented” and “historic” were used to describe it. Before it happened, I think many would have considered it inconceivable. But will it be unusual in 2040? Temperatures 40 or even 50 degrees above normal have been occurring with some frequency in the Arctic for several years now.

Climate change is not in the far distance. It is bearing down on us now. It will get persistently worse in the next few decades. What we could lose is incalculable, and cannot be reduced to dollars. I think, for most of us, it is inconceivable. But we had better conceive of it.

The years go by quickly.


There is no clear line separating the personal from the political. My love of a river is personal. Icicle Creek. The Baker. The Thompson. The Colorado. And of course nothing in my life is more personal and more important than my children and their future.

2040 is not that far away. The path we are on is not in doubt — at least not to anyone who has their eyes open. It’s not my intent, in this note, to go into too much detail about the global consequences of this change. I’ve done that elsewhere, and I’ll do it again.

I will say this. The Baker River will be different in 20 years. Unless we change the path we are on, it won’t support five species of salmon. Will it support even one? I don’t know. The Thompson will be different too, although the paprika mines will still probably be there.

The year 2040 does not seem imminent, but it will come upon us before we know it. The current is moving quickly. Twenty years ago seems like yesterday to me. Heck, I played some Fleetwood Mac on Spotify, and 40 years ago seemed like yesterday.

Maybe 2100 seems like really a long ways off, but people you love will inhabit that year. Unless our path changes, they will inherit a world damaged beyond what we are willing to think about.

Unless. Unless is the key word.

Baker River, Washington

What that future will be like is determined not just by me or you, but by the whole society. It is not at all clear that Americans — or humans generally, for that matter — truly grasp the nature and the scope of this challenge. If we did fully grasp it, what would we do differently?

I don’t know. Eschew cheeseburgers? Travel by horse? Change lightbulbs? There is no single action. No single answer. Many things can be done; taken alone, none of them are adequate, or even very measurable.

If creativity and money and political influence are necessary to lead us toward solutions, then I wonder how the people who have the creativity and money and influence can be moved—by love—to apply it. Where is the fulcrum?

It may be that the most impactful thing we can do is to refuse to extend power to leaders who are neither generous nor careful. It is an unfortunate truth that some people really don’t give a shit about the future — even though their own children may inhabit it.

We need to not allow such people to advance beyond high school student council in their political aspirations.

Beyond that, it is not my intention (at least in this note) to tell people exactly what I think they should do about climate change. We will all decide for ourselves. Feeling guilty and distraught and filled with dread doesn’t help. (Trust me on that one.)

The future is not set in stone. Consequence is always downstream from choice. Think of a river. We are not only riding the current; we are the current.

Maybe my main point is this: Action is rooted in love.

We are connected to those who came before us — and to those who come after. I would like to walk with Monty up the Baker River in 2040, and see salmon in the pools. I’d like to take my grandson to a river.

I don’t know if my father’s spirit is somewhere in the universe, sentient still. If so, it would make him smile if he could see me catching crawdads with my grandson.

That is what I would like to be doing in 2040.

North Fork of the Skykomish River, Washington

Orcas, Moloch, Power, and AI

Illustration by Charles Foster, 1897, from Bible Pictures and What They Teach Us. In the public domain.

This is an essay about artificial intelligence, but I am going to begin with orcas.

An orca is an apex predator. It takes from the sea what it needs to live — salmon, tuna, seals, and so on. It is a beautiful animal, as well as intelligent and fearsomely efficient. But as intelligent as it may be, it does not invent a trawler that rakes the ocean floor, destroying the habitat of countless creatures that it doesn’t even eat.

The kind of power that humans exercise, through our use of tools, is different in both scale and quality than the hunting behavior of an orca, or tiger, or any other apex predator.

The orca has neither the means nor the inclination to destroy the complex network of life upon which it depends. Homo sapiens stands alone in this regard. No animal besides us has ever had the ability to decimate the biosphere itself.

Maybe this is what the biblical phrase dominion over the earth means. It is not, in my view, such a good thing.

For most of human history, we also did not have this ability. But we have it now. Our ability to do harm — to other humans and all creatures — has been accelerating since the beginning of the industrial revolution. The speed of that acceleration increased exponentially with the invention of the atomic bomb around 70 years ago.

With the development of artificial intelligence, the acceleration of technology — and particularly of technology that has the capacity to make our civilization self-terminating — has reached the stage where, on a graph, the curve goes nearly vertical. In our cleverness, we have created tools of such power that they can fundamentally alter the planet itself.

These tools have the bizarre capability to improve themselves, without our input. While the power of these tools is increasing at a rate we can barely comprehend, what has not kept pace is our capacity to exercise wisdom, restraint, and discernment in the use of such tools, as we make decisions regarding how we will live in relation to each other and to the rest of the living world.


A couple of nights ago, I was listening to an interview with the social philosopher and systems thinker Daniel Schmachtenberger. It was a long and wide-ranging interview, and at one point he was talking about ways in which past powerful civilizations crashed and burned.

Throughout history, civilizations that have attained great power have also been self-terminating. Even when they were conquered by an outside force, their downfall was partially or mostly because they were ripe for collapse.

The reasons are various, but also similar from case to case: They ruined their land, depleted their resources, overextended their reach, exploited their workers, corrupted their own institutions, or exhausted the morale and good will of their own citizens.

He asked a question that slipped under my skin like a splinter: “Why have we humans not been good stewards of power?”

I can hardly think of a more important question.

It’s interesting that Schmachtenberger used the word stewards in framing his question. Implicit in that word steward is the assumption that we are responsible to someone other than ourselves. We are, in other words, caretakers. We bear responsibility for the well-being of others.

To whom might we be responsible? Our children and grandchildren? Our communities? Does it go beyond that, to all humans? Or to other living creatures? Might we bear a responsibility to a deity? Or to a river that provides us with water, or to the soil from which our food grows?

Of course, if we are responsible to no one, then the future beyond our own short lives need not concern us. But most people I know are not content with that. Even if we draw our circle pretty tightly, unless we are soul-dead, most of us care about someone besides ourselves.

We all may have different notions regarding how far our responsibility extends, but I suspect most of us feel a responsibility toward our most direct descendants, at least. Our children, our grandchildren.

In this context, the word responsibility may seem a bit stiff; what we more often call it is love.

How do we become better stewards of power? Or, to frame the question a bit differently: How do we find and channel the power to become better caretakers of that which we love?

I believe that we will not be able to navigate the coming years without a substantial shift in how we exercise power — both in regard to how we treat other humans, and in how we treat the other living beings that share this planet with us.

This has everything to do with artificial intelligence.


Let me offer a brief introduction to Daniel Schmachtenberger, although it will be inadequate. I’ll start by stating that for anyone interested in how we might navigate our way through a perilous future, he is worth listening to.

In speaking to friends, I’ve described him as a social philosopher and a systems thinker. I’m not at all sure that this is how he would describe himself. In addition to those descriptors, I’d also add risk analyst. Maybe the best thing to call him is “thoughtful dude with a good heart.”

By risk analyst, I don’t mean what an insurance adjustor or stock broker does. Think bigger than that. Think about species survival. Think about ecological and civilizational collapse. Think existential risk.

Simply put, an existential risk is something that could spell disaster for everyone, everywhere.

(For example: Climate change and all of its subsidiary effects, runaway artificial intelligence, the unravelling of both ecosystems and social systems, loss of biodiversity, nuclear war, and last but not least, an economy based on limitless growth taking us past planetary limits.)

In examining these issues, Schmachtenberger often employs concepts of game theory, which is a branch of philosophy that can apply to poker, fantasy football, or even flirting with someone in a bar — but in a wider sense is about how people make choices, and how they weigh the benefits and costs of those choices.

He thinks a lot about three interlocking questions: What kind of predicament are we in? How did we get here? Where are we headed? One of my favorite quotes of his is “If we do not immediately and completely change our direction, we are likely to end up where we are going.”

Let that one sink in.

A concept from game theory that Schmachtenberger often works with is the idea of multi-polar traps. A multi-polar trap is any kind of situation in which people acting in their own self-interest make choices that harm the wider community — including, in the long run, themselves.

Multi-polar traps are characterized by a lack of trust, transparency, and coordination. A classic example from ecology is the tragedy of the commons, in which people deplete a resource for short-term gain, rather than cooperating to find a level of sustainable use that insures the resource will be available to them (and their children) in the future.

As in “Damn! No more fish in the lake! How come we didn’t see that coming?”

A classic example from social science is the prisoner’s dilemma, in which two people driven by self-interest and distrust of each other fail to behave in a way that gives the best outcome to them both.

Also, arms races in general are variations of a multi-polar trap. This includes the theory of deterrence through escalating retaliation. It may work for a while, but when it fails, it can fail catastrophically.

In a multi-polar trap, what benefits the individual (or small group) in the short-term actually harms everyone in the long-term. Thus it is that we are seduced into going down a path that leads us all to a destination no one really wants to arrive at.

(Who among us actually wants ocean acidification? Mass extinctions? Depleted topsoil? Stronger hurricanes? Who wants the ocean to hold more plastic than fish? And yet we relentlessly persist in our march toward these outcomes.)

One way to think about it: We are trapped in patterns of behavior that are self-destructive. Why? Part of the answer is that we operate within systems and institutions that are, at best, poorly designed, and at worst, downright sociopathic.

If we look for technological solutions to our problems without changing the underlying behavioral patterns that brought us to where we are, we are likely to find those very technological solutions contributing to the problems. This is because the self-destructiveness lies less in the technology itself than in the incentives that determine its use.


In addition to multi-polar trap, Daniel Schmactenberger uses another ten-dollar term: The meta-crisis. Consider this a fancy phrase for the crisis behind the crisis.

Think not of a single problem — like climate change, or nuclear war, or topsoil depletion — but rather of the recurrent patterns that give rise to our self-destructive behaviors that lead to such problems.

There are several existential threats that face humans (not just Americans) in 2024. These threats are intertwined, and they amplify each other. They can’t be solved separately; there needs to be a coordinated, whole-systems approach.

We won’t make much (if any) progress in addressing these threats as long as we operate within systems — economic systems, political systems, religious systems — that offer perverse incentives and reward destructive and exploitive behavior.

Daniel Schmachtenberger (and others) apply the principles of game theory to the open question of whether or not humans can survive our own cleverness at using tools, and our own insatiable desire to dominate one another and gobble up the rest of the living world.

When I was a teenager, the existential threat we (sometimes) worried about was nuclear war. These days, nuclear war is just one of several existential threats, and not even the one that seems most likely. Climate change and all of its subsidiary effects comes immediately to mind, of course.

And then there are ecological dominoes falling that are spoken of less often — things like topsoil depletion, dead zones in the ocean, persistent toxins in the water we drink and the air we breathe. Perhaps most disastrous: Loss of biodiversity, from insects on up. (It turns out that insects are a lot more necessary for the continuation of life as we know it than we are.)

At the intersection of environment and technology, disturbing new possibilities lurk: Engineered (or resurrected) viruses can be used as bio-weapons. The same techniques of genetic modification that can be used to enhance the nutritional value of a grain of rice can be used to make seeds sterile, so that they must be purchased, yearly, from corporations.

Are we not the masters of the world? Can we survive the bitter fruit of our own brilliance? How shall we live with ourselves?

A paradigm shift has to occur if we are to make it beyond the next couple of decades.

That paradigm shift has to involve how we understand and apply power — not only among our fellow humans, but in relationship to all other creatures. What sort of power destroys the possibility of a livable future, and what sort of power can bring us into a livable future?

In the realm of technology, who wants immensely powerful and insidious artificial intelligence, developed by people who do not have our best interests at heart, to shape our reality? Who wants a media landscape in which no one can distinguish accurate reporting from deep fakes?

Who wants a society in which people are hopelessly confused, outraged, manipulated, and fearful?

Nevertheless, we are headed, lemming-like, into that very future. “If we do not change our direction, we are likely to end up where we are going.”

We need better route-finders. Where will we find them?

I think it is best that we not give the task to machines — or to sociopathic billionaires, or authoritarian strongmen, or ambitious politicians, or the wizards in silicon valley who blessed us all with algorithms that “maximize engagement” on social media, regardless of the effect these algorithms have on the health of our society.

It is a route-finding task for all of us, guided by our meager organic intelligence.

And motivated by our sense of love, tenderness, and responsibility to those who live downstream from us and will inherit the mess we’ve made of the world.


In the popular imagination, the AI threat seems to be the specter of a super-computer run amok, a kind of overlord who either enslaves or eliminates us. I don’t know how likely this is. Some thinkers in the field of AI are concerned about it. It’s not really my primary worry.

The moment at which we are eclipsed by our machines is often referred to by the somewhat mystical term The Singularity. The word seems to be uttered with either a sense of doom or a sense of deliverance, depending on one’s view of AI. (As a recovering evangelical, I can’t help but feel a familiar vibe, as if The Singularity might be a technological equivalent of The Rapture.)

A slightly different concern is that AI will be so freakishly efficient at the tasks we give it that we will be sorry to get what we ask for. Imagine Mickey Mouse in The Sorcerer’s Apprentice, unable to control the out-of-control brooms.

(For an amusing thought experiment, google “AI and the paper clip problem”.)

As dramatic as these scenarios are, they do not express my main concern about AI. I think that long before it turns us into slaves, or simply wipes us out, or turns the world into paper clips, it is likely to be harnessed by a small group of humans driven not by the desire to shape a better and more sustainable future, but rather to gather wealth, power, and control for themselves — at the expense of the rest of us.

The same old goal, but on steroids.

It’s far more banal than Total Domination. It is likely to be, simply, the accumulation of money and influence. But banal or not, with AI at their disposal, they will be ruthlessly efficient. One of the first effects of AI may be the devaluation and impoverishment of workers whose skills will no longer be considered relevant. It is hard to predict just who these people will be.

An awful lot of rapacious human behavior and undoable damage — assisted by AI — can occur long before we reach The Singularity. AI can (and will) be directed toward more effectively exploiting and manipulating both humans and non-human nature, turning everything under the sun into… well, not paper clips necessarily, but some sort of a commodity.

If AI is developed and funded by people who seek market (or military, or electoral) advantage over their rivals, it will amplify all of the other already-present existential threats. It is an accelerant, like gasoline on a fire.

And there is my concern, in a nutshell: AI is an accelerant to every other existential risk.

The last thing we need, in 2024, is an accelerant. In addition to turbo-charging exploitation and manipulation, AI can accelerate every variety of arms race, including the development of biological weapons, surveilance tools, drone weapons, and cyber-attacks. The right to privacy is already on thin ice; with AI it will be drowned.

And let’s not forget propaganda: AI will shape what we see on our screens, and people will be deceived by disinformation more effortlessly and more easily than we already are. Convincing ‘deep fakes’ may render the idea of visual and auditory recorded evidence meaningless.

It will not surprise me if this AI capacity is used extensively within a year’s time, affecting both electoral and judicial processes.

If our primary way of apprehending truth is through our screens, we are in deep trouble.


Yes, I’m painting a grim picture. Too grim, perhaps, in the view of AI apologists.

After all, couldn’t AI be used to do marvelous things, like cure cancer, design resilient and adaptive cities, more quickly deliver us from fossil fuels, improve the efficiency and reliability of supply chains, or find an alternative to plastic?

Well, sure it could. I hope it will. All technology is available for multiple uses.

A claim I often hear is that AI, like any tool, is morally neutral. I’m not sure that I accept that claim, but I won’t argue the point here. Instead, I will make two observations: First, AI is likely to be used in any way that it can be used. And second, it is generally quicker and easier to unravel a rug than to weave one.

If AI can be used to design more efficient supply chains, for instance, it can also be used to disrupt them. If it can be used to cure a virus, it can be used to create and spread one as well. To what use shall AI be put? This question begs others: Who has the power to determine its use? Who has the wisdom? Are the power and the wisdom in the same hands?

Consider this: AI promises to deliver nearly unlimited power to the relatively small number of people who are at the spearhead of its development and deployment. Who are these people?

Well, I guess we don’t know, for sure. But they are embedded in one of three places: they work for corporations like Google and Microsoft, or are in the employ of obscenely wealthy individuals, or they are in the security/intelligence apparatus of any nation state that has the budget and the expertise to pursue the research. In all three settings, no doubt, there is a race to develop and deploy AI before adversaries/competitors do so.

Whether the goal is to increase market share or to have the most advanced weaponry, the imperative is to win against the competition. So… don’t expect cautious restraint to govern the development of AI. There is no incentive to show restraint. Those who show restraint lose the race. Your competitors (or enemies, if you want to use the word) will move ahead of you.

It doesn’t matter how many respected scientists and philosophers sign a letter warning of the dangers and urging caution.

Along with restraint, both trust and transparency will also be sacrificed. Between governments, between corporations, there will be secrecy rather than coordination. It should go without saying that the general public will not know what is happening. Most of us won’t ever know the extent to which AI manipulates us.

What sort of hunger drives people to win when the cost of winning is perhaps greater than anyone (everyone) can afford to pay? Liv Boeree, a professional poker player, has valuable insights about game theory, zero-sum games, perverse economic incentives, and how these intersect with the pursuit of power through artificial intelligence.

Boeree has memorably personified this hunger as Moloch, which she characterizes as the god of unhealthy competition. Historically, Moloch was the insatiable bull-headed god of the ancient Canaanites, who supposedly granted success and power to his worshippers — in exchange for the sacrifice of their own children.

It’s a pretty damn good metaphor.


All technologies can be (and will be) used for conflict-oriented purposes. AI will, as well. It will be used for purposes of manipulation and disinformation. It will be used to gain political, military, or market advantage.

In other words, it will be used to confer power to some people and to erode the power of other people. And in this regard, it will be more effective — by many orders of magnitude — than any technology in history.

I’m not really sure why I used future tense in the preceding paragraphs.

As we move into exponentially more powerful tech, we can’t continue to use it with the types of conflict-orientation we have used up till now. We can’t continue to use it in a way that is governed by an understanding of our life together as a zero-sum game in which some people win at the expense of others.

Understand: when I say we can’t do this, I mean we can’t do this and expect a livable future for the majority of humanity.

It is perfectly evident that some people think we can do this, and they are already doing it. They intend to be the winners at the game. My contention is that these people are willing to sacrifice a livable future for their own children (and yours) in order to win.

All of the tech we use in some way or another externalizes harm–on other (usually poorer and more vulnerable) people, on other creatures, on the atmosphere, on the oceans. It takes only a little bit of self-reflection to understand that this harm rebounds, eventually, to ourselves.

Think, for a minute, of the rapid pace of AI development. Now think of the next decade, and the capabilities of this AI deployed for the purposes of the authoritarian leaders that seem to be consolidating their grip all over the globe, like mold overcoming a loaf of bread.

But sure, AI might be used to find a cure for cancer, or find an alternative to plastic.


Whether Google is calling the shots, or Microsoft, or the Pentagon, or bunker-boy billionaires, or the security forces in any number of countries, AI will be put to the service of its developers. (At least initially. At some point, it may slip away from their control and become accessible to any genius in a basement who has the skills to use it.)

But in the meantime, what are the goals of its developers? While the goals of a corporation and the goals of a national government are not quite the same, the word domination applies to both. And that right there is the heart of the problem. It is a behavioral problem, rather than a technological one.

My understanding of how large-language AI models work is that they essentially teach themselves how to converse (and behave?) by examining a huge data set of information, primarily (but not necessarily limited to) what is available on the internet. Given how people behave on the internet, this should not give us comfort.

It may be that we can develop AI in a way that is more likely to bring about positive outcomes, but that seems unlikely unless we first change ourselves. After all, we are the data set.

No doubt, I’ve just oversimplified what they do, but the concept I’m getting at is this: AI is mimetic. It seems to me that the process is computational, not creative. Put another way: It does not seem self-directed. It lacks consciousness, will, self-awareness. It is not reflective. Right?

Right?

The more an AI ‘teaches’ or ‘improves’ itself, the greater its reach. How large can the data set become? Possibly everything ever written or preserved on a computer. An AI could, for example, quickly digest everything written by or about Tolstoy, and then generate new writing that captures the style (and presumably the values) of Tolstoy.

It may not feel what Tolstoy felt, but perhaps it can make decisions as if it felt what Tolstoy felt.

Here are some of my curiosities:

Could AI be ‘trained’ to not only understand humility, but to demonstrate it?

Could it be taught not only the concept of restraint, but the practice of it?

Could it be taught wisdom, (which is, of course, not the same as knowledge)?

To many people, these questions will seem to be odd, maybe even absurd. But I think we had better seriously consider them.

Could AI fully grasp — and not only grasp, but apply to its own behavior — the teaching of Socrates that the acceptance of one’s own limitations is the beginning of wisdom?

As any reader can tell, my disposition toward AI is not favorable. My worries weigh more than my enthusiasm. But the preceding questions are not rhetorical ones. I honestly don’t know the answers.

Could AI be used to nurture and empower people, rather than dominate, manipulate, deceive, surveil, or replace them?

On the surface, this may seem to be a question about AI, but really it is a question about us.

It’s a question about incentives.

Unless we thoughtfully shape the underlying incentives that govern its development and use, AI will be an accelerant to every variety of existential risk.

In the end, the underlying question is more about us than it is about AI: How do we become better caretakers of that which we love?

It’s a human task. It’s not a task we can outsource.

Poster in my favorite local coffee shop

Monkeyflower

Mimulus lewisii and Mimulus tilingii, Lower Curtis Glacier, Washington

Let me introduce you to some friends of mine, delightful fellows, full of the joy of life. They live at the terminus of the Lower Curtis Glacier, on the jagged western flank of Mount Shuksan, in the North Cascades of Washington state. My bright yellow friend is Mimulus tilingii; my vibrant purple friend is Mimulus lewisii. More casually, they are known as Monkeyflowers. Specifically, they are the Great Purple Monkeyflower and the Mountain Monkeyflower.

I visit them once a year, and both tilingii and lewisii appear to be perfectly happy in the harsh environment of the glacial moraine, which is, essentially, an unconsolidated heap of rubble left behind by a retreating glacier. Some of them, seeking out a gentler neighborhood, choose lush meadows nearby. But whether they choose the moraine or the meadow, my friends are routinely buried under monumental amounts of snow, and they see daylight for just a few months of the year. It’s not any easy place to live.

Mimulus lewisii, near Lower Curtis Glacier, Washington

Although Monkeyflowers are well-suited to the hardscrabble life, they won’t hesitate to choose a cushier location, should one be available. Throughout the Cascades, in the lowlands as well as they highlands, I’ve seen them perched on tiny ledges beside or behind a waterfall; the best real estate a flower could ask for. In this regard, they remind me of a happy-go-lucky traveler who can spread a bivy sack on the barest and most exposed piece of ground and be content, yet can also enjoy a luxurious bed at a five-star resort.

Mimulus lewisii, near Lower Curtis Glacier, Washington

Of all the places I’ve seen Mimulus, none was more memorable than a verdant meadow near the Lower Curtis Glacier, where both yellow and purple Monkeyflowers laid claim to the best spots along a splendid creek that threaded a rock garden. I fell in love with this place, and I make an annual pilgrimage to it. The meadow hosts a party of alpine flowers, and in late August the Monkeyflowers are the life of the party.

Mimulus lewisii and unidentified Mimulus (I don’t think it’s tilingii), near Lower Curtis Glacier, Washington

The Mimulus sisters have a cousin from California known as Mimulus nanus. This sun-loving Californian cousin lives along the eastern flank of the Sierra Nevada mountains, in a marvelous volcanic landscape called the Mono Craters. I’ve seen a profusion of gorgeous violet Mimulus nanus growing out a field of loose pumice. It didn’t seem like a growing medium that could support anything at all, and yet the monkeyflowers were happy, along with Gray’s lupine. It was hard to fathom how the tiny plants could take root there, much less thrive.

Mimulus nanus, Mono Craters, California

And yet another place Monkeyflowers live: a crack in a south-facing cliff of basalt on the eastern end of the Columbia River Gorge, a place that gets only about 15 inches of annual precipitation and bakes in a level of heat that can be every bit as extreme as the alpine cold of a glacial moraine that is buried in snow for eight or nine months of the year. The Monkeyflowers in the gorge don’t grow out in the open. The common name of these beauties is the Seep Monkeyflower, and as their common name indicates, they prefer to be near a seep or a creek. Any little crack will do, as long as there is some water.

Mimulus guttatus, Columbia River Gorge, Washington

It is a scrappy plant. A resilient plant. A remarkable plant. Here are some cool things to know about the Monkeyflower: It can thrive in inhospitable conditions, such as on the threshold of hot springs, or in serpentine soils that would kill most plants. It is highly adaptable to wide range of harsh climactic conditions and in soils that are heavy-laden with minerals or are just plain impoverished. In fact, Monkeyflowers make themselves at home in the snowiest place in North America, and in some of the hottest corners in the Mojave Desert. It is a pioneer plant in places that are bereft of life for either natural or man-caused reasons, such as glacial moraines or contaminated and toxic mine tailings.

Mimulus lewisii and Mimulus tilingii, near Lower Curtis Glacier, Washington

It’s a humble plant, but it harbors a kind of greatness, as humble little plants often do. Its greatness has not been lost on botanists and those who conduct genetic research. In recent years, it has become a bit of a darling to scientists who study plant evolution and adaptation. In fact, if you want to find a hopping good party of cheerful botanists, you might want to find an annual conference of Mimulus researchers. There are many hundreds of scientific papers written about Mimulus guttatus, the Seep Monkeyflower.

Mimulus lewisii, Lower Curtis Glacier, Washington

So, why is the Monkeyflower such a star? Multiple reasons. First of all, Monkeyflowers grow fast, produce lots of seeds, and have a simple and completely sequenced genome — all traits that make them ideal for genetic study. And, to quote from an article by Elizabeth Pennisi in Science magazine, “their explosion of flower colors and forms, diverse lifestyles, and extraordinary hardiness… have seduced researchers studying plant evolution and adaptations.”

What kind of research have these scientists been seduced into conducting? And what, exactly, does it mean for a species of flower to have diverse lifestyles? Well, in addition to living successfully in drastically different environments, Monkeyflowers exhibit a range of local variation in terms of color and pattern, bloom time, and other characteristics. It turns out that it’s an excellent species to study in terms of genetic mutation and natural selection.

Mimulus tilingii, Lower Curtis Glacier, Washington

For example, researchers have recently discovered that within a single patch of Mimulus guttatus there will be individual plants with different flowering times, flower sizes, and amount of seed production. The later-blooming plants prefer wet years, while the early bloomers do their best in years when drought makes an early bloom crucial. Both variants coexist in the same population, and seem to have evolved simultaneously, in a process called fluctuating selection.

Mimulus lewisii, near Lower Curtis Glacier, Washington

In a time when changing climate is disrupting formerly predictable patterns of precipitation, when even atmospheric jet streams and ocean currents are increasingly unsure of themselves and what they will do, it seems that one path to resilience is to be prepared for anything. When it isn’t quite clear (to either us or the flowers) how things will go from year to year, and when the only sure bet is an increase in weather anomalies, Monkeyflowers demonstrate the peculiar capability of evolving in multiple directions at the same time. Quite a trick! So don’t be fooled by the simple appearance and meager genome of such a humble little gravel-dwelling flower. It’s got a plan. Better, perhaps, than our plan.

A Beautiful Truth

I have been writing quite a bit lately about climate change, and what can be done about it. One of the terms that I use often is “regenerative agriculture.” It may be that this is an unfamiliar term to some people, so I think I’ll give a brief explanation.

First, this: I’d venture to guess that most people consider the burning of fossil fuels for transportation and home heating to be the main contributor of atmospheric carbon. However, the combined effects of a couple of centuries of soil degradation and fossil fuel use associated with agriculture may exceed it. It is hard to overemphasize the role of soil as both a cause of climate change, and a partial remedy for it.

Regenerative agriculture is guided by a straightforward question: What is good for the soil? (This leads to more questions: What is good for water? Pollinators? Invertebrates? Microbes? Birds?) The central principle is that soil is a neighborhood of inter-related creatures, and its continued health can be the primary concern of the farmer, land manager, or even the home gardener.

One way to think of it is that the word “regenerative” is sort of the opposite of “exploitive.” Exploitive and extractive are kindred words, just as regenerative, nurturing, and restorative are kindred words. How can a farmer or gardener relate to his or her soil in a way that is nurturing rather than exploitive? An analogy might help:

Consider a company where the workers are exploited. This might mean underpaid, overworked, harassed, deprived of benefits, and so on. It is quite possible that the company’s short-term profits are impressive, and shareholders are happy. The bank is happy.

However, the company’s long-term viability is less certain. It might be viable as long as it can get new workers to replace the ones who are burned out, chewed up, and spit out. But can it keep on doing this, indefinitely?

In a similar way, farming that exhausts soil can be quite productive in the short term. In places and times where people find it easy to leave exhausted soil behind, and simply move on to fertile virgin soil, techniques of building soil are not often considered important.

As it turns out, feeding soil a steady diet of ammonium nitrate fertilizer is like giving your employees endless cans of Red Bull rather than food. And using vast amounts of pesticide and herbicide is like flooding antibiotics into a person who is perpetually sick, with no concern about gut flora. There is a better way.

Regenerative Agriculture is not new wisdom. In fact, it is old wisdom. The farmer and author Wendell Berry (among many others) has been describing it to American audiences for the past half-century. Its principles include (but are not limited to): use of cover crops, crop rotation, responsible and appropriate management of livestock, no-till or minimum-till methods, a minimum of chemical inputs that harm soil life and water, and growing a diversity of crops rather than a single crop.

The practices of regenerative agriculture help to address some of the causes of climate change, and provide relief from some of the consequences. In a nutshell: degraded soil releases carbon into the atmosphere, while healthy soil absorbs and holds it.

Just as importantly, healthy soil holds more water than degraded soil, recharging groundwater, and decreasing ground surface temperature. A soil that holds carbon also holds water and resists compaction. It acts like a sponge, and it harbors life. Organic matter and air pockets separate mineral grains.

It is in this space that threads of fungi forge the way, and plant roots follow. Soil with higher moisture, especially if it has something growing on it, heats up more slowly than dry, bare soil. Transpiration cools the air above it. On a wide scale, this is a climate-affecting difference.

The persistent “heat domes” that increasingly plague the arid Western US are absolutely related to a deficit of soil moisture. As are, of course, wildfires. Paradoxically, compacted soil that has poor water retention can lead to problems caused by too much water pooling in fields or running off of denuded slopes: salinization, erosion, flooding.

Regenerative practices can alleviate some of the consequences of climate change. They lower soil temperature and raise soil moisture. They reduce erosion. They improve soil fertility and tilth. This has cascading effects: more microbes, more invertebrates, more pollinators, more birds, and more of everything that depends on soil life, right on up the food chain.

In the past few centuries, the ruination of soil has contributed more C02 to the atmosphere than the burning of fossil fuels. It has contributed to drought, heat waves, and famine. Rehabilitation of soil could do as much as any single action to slow down climate change. This is a huge deal.

Many people are sliding into hopelessness, as they feel that we have passed tipping points. Even if we could halt greenhouse gas emissions now, they fear, there is simply too much C02 and methane in the atmosphere already. But it is too soon to lose hope.

Regenerative agriculture — on both land and at sea — can remove C02 and break down methane. To get a handle on climate change, humans need to understand and work with — rather than against — the natural processes of the carbon cycle and the hydrological cycle. Regenerative agriculture does both.

I have written before and will write again about regenerative agriculture in the oceans, in the form of a very particular style of kelp and shellfish farming. The benefits are similar to regenerative practices on land: more biodiversity, carbon sequestration, cleaner water, and healthy food for people.

We fret over carbon dioxide and methane. Regenerative agriculture reduces both. But in regard to climate change mitigation, the chemical compound we don’t talk about nearly enough is actually good old H20. Water. And regenerative agriculture does something about that, too.

I’ll make a point that seems more ‘spiritual’ than scientific: the practices that improve soil’s ability to absorb both water and carbon are the very same practices that reflect a benevolent attitude toward life of all kinds: animals, plants, fungi, and invertebrates.

In other words, generosity matters. The project of improving soil has everything to do with our treatment of other living creatures. We have a damaged relationship to our fellow creatures. We have a damaged relationship to soil. To water. We can repair it.

Many of us hold deep anxiety about our future; we know we have put ourselves on a path of self-destruction. Curiously enough, the path that leads to our deliverance is the path of caring for other creatures as much as we care for ourselves. This is a beautiful truth.

Anyone can play a role in caring for soil. No role is too small. If you have a yard, you can decide to forego chemicals that harm soil life. You can put away the leaf-blower. You can raise flowers that feed pollinators. You can participate in and advocate for community gardens, school gardens, food forests, rooftop gardens, church gardens.

When you vote, you can pay attention to a candidate’s views on land and water management. You can support businesses that do the right thing when it comes to soil. You can find ways to support local, small farmers, especially those that treat land, water, plants, and animals with respect.

There is hope for our children and grandchildren if we can shift our thinking. We need to work with the earth. Stewardship can replace exploitation; reciprocal relationship with other living beings can replace domination. Love can be our guiding star.

Atolls

Tsuga mertensia, Del Campo Peak, Washington

The title of this essay might lead a reader to expect a literary journey to someplace tropical, someplace in the South Pacific, someplace with coconut palms and a hammock. That might be a welcome diversion to readers who are weary of winter. Alas, this is not a journey that escapes the cold. On the contrary, it is a journey that heads straight into it. And there will be trees, but they are not palms.

This essay is indeed about atolls — but not ones formed by a coral reef. The atolls of which I speak are formed by a cluster of remarkable, resilient trees called Tsuga mertensia: the mountain hemlock. They occur not in the South Pacific, but in the Pacific Northwest, high up in the rugged, cold, and snowy North Cascade mountains of Washington state.

Like their tropical counterparts, these alpine atolls are small islands surrounded by water — only the water, in this case, is snow. And also like their tropical counterparts, they form through a process of gradual accretion, as life builds upon life.

Of course, they are not really atolls at all. It’s a metaphor, first employed by an alpine botanist in the 1930s. But it is an apt metaphor. They look like islands in the summer, when the meadows around them are a sea of wildflowers. And they look even more like islands from October to June, when they are surrounded by billowing waves of snow.

Yellow Aster Basin, Washington

How do these atolls form? And why, among all possible distribution patterns that a tree species might adopt, does the mountain hemlock adopt this one?

The answer comes into clarity at the nexus of several key facts about climate, topography, and biology. First of all, snow is very, very deep here. The growing season is short. There are hazards to be avoided. It can be tough for any living thing to go it alone in such a place. In the subalpine zone, a seedling is more likely to survive if it is in the lee of a larger tree. Hence, the presence of one tree makes life easier for the next one, and the next one.

Yellow Aster Basin, Washington

But I am getting ahead of myself. First let me introduce you to the tree itself. To my mind, the mountain hemlock captures the spirit of the North Cascades as well as any tree. If you’ve ever taken a day trip to Mount Rainier, or went skiing at the Mount Baker Ski Area, you’ve seen it. It is the snow-plastered tree that graces the January picture on a calendar.

In fall and winter, atmospheric rivers from the Pacific take aim at the Northwest coast, giving the lowland forests a long, deep drink. These forests host behemoth trees like the coast redwood, Sitka spruce, western hemlock, western red cedar, and Douglas fir. Along the rivers, big leaf maples drop their dinner-plate-sized leaves. All of these are magnificent trees. In fact, in terms of both diversity and sheer majesty, I can’t think of any place with better trees.

But where the Pacific storms bump up against the steep slopes of the North Cascades, where the wind picks up speed as it sweeps upslope, where mist wraps around ridge lines, and where the dense clouds drop heavy wet snow — tons of it — a different tree comes into its own. A tree that was built for just this climate and just this topography. It is not as big as the lowland trees, but what it lacks in size it more than makes up for in character.

Kulshan, also known as Mt. Baker. Mountain hemlocks on a ridge, Washington

It is the quintessential tree of the wet, western slope of the mountains. It is the brooding tree that so often is shrouded in mist, the one with the dark and hoary silhouette up on a ridge line. It is a dignified tree, maybe even somber. At lower elevations, mountain hemlock drapes the slopes in a dense and continuous forest. In the hours before dawn, it can be a bit spooky to hike through a forest of mountain hemlock. The word primeval comes to mind.

Mountain hemlocks in mist, Gothic Basin, Washington

At higher elevations, it diminishes in size and grows more sparse. It often forms attractive clumps—atolls—in a meadow. One of the most distinctive features of the tree is a droopy leader at the top. It also has graceful branches that subdivide at the end into many small, supple twigs, creating a web-like bough that can hold big loads of snow (until a skier or climber happens to be directly underneath them). This leader and branches give it a distinctly different profile than the stiff and prickly spruces that occur in the subalpine zone on the dry eastern side of the Cascades.

The tree produces tons of small, narrow cones that are brown with papery scales when mature, and a beautiful luminescent shade of purple when immature. The bark is grey and shallowly furrowed. The needles are bluish-green, short, and flat, reminiscent of rosemary. They are arranged spirally around the twig, creating a ‘bottlebrush’ appearance which is accentuated in midsummer, when the growing tip erupts in bright new growth, like little stars at the end of each twig.

Mountain hemlocks in mixed conifer forest near Maple Pass, Washington

It’s clear from its name that it is not a flatlander. It inhabits coastal ranges from Southeast Alaska to California, where it is found in only the wettest parts of the Sierra Nevada. Aside from a few pockets in Northern Idaho and the northwest corner of Montana, it is not a Rocky Mountain tree. It likes things damp, shall we say. And, even though it is superbly adapted to snow, it is not a tree that wants its roots in frozen soil.

In the North Cascades it starts as low as 3000 feet, where it mixes with Pacific silver fir, and extends all the way to timberline, which is generally between 6000 and 7000 feet. Mountain hemlock inhabits the middle kingdom, between the giant trees of the valley bottoms and the wilderness of rock and ice above. On these startlingly steep slopes, it forms extensive, dense stands.

Mountain hemlock forest, Lost Creek Ridge, Washington

If you are hiking up into the high country from one of the valley bottoms, it will take a long time. For several miles and for an elevation gain of four thousand feet, you will see a lot of tree trunks. At first, you’ll be in the lowland forest of the western hemlock, the western red cedar, and the Douglas fir. It’s a lush forest, filled with mossy nurse logs, and the dense understory of salmonberry, red huckleberry, thimbleberry, devil’s club, salal, and various other shrubs.

After you’ve gained about 1000 feet (depending on your trailhead elevation), you will notice a change in the trees; you’ve entered the silver fir zone. You’ll be in this domain for a long time, and for a lot of switchbacks. Gradually as you ascend, mountain hemlocks will appear, and after gaining about 1500 feet, they will predominate. It will remain so until timberline.

At the lower end of its range mountain hemlock is a large tree, though not as large as its sibling, the western hemlock. The largest known mountain hemlocks in Washington approach 200 feet and are about 6 feet in diameter. (This is big, but not nearly as big as the lowland and coastal behemoths of the aforementioned species, some of which can reach 300 feet and be nearly 20 feet in diameter.) A typical large mountain hemlock might be 100 feet tall with a trunk a couple feet wide. Like the western hemlock, it is a tall, straight tree with a cylindrical form.

In the mountain hemlock zone, the forest is somber and dark. There isn’t as much of much of an understory as in the lower forest (although there are delicious huckleberries!). Brief and occasional glimpses of the snowy peaks above will tantalize you, through the thick trunks and heavy boughs of the hemlocks. Ever so gradually as you ascend, the hemlocks get smaller, but it’s only noticeable over miles and hours.

Kulshan through Mountain hemlock boughs, Washington

Now and then you may emerge from the forest into an avalanche path, a brief and chaotic strip of sudden sunlight, Sitka alder, downed trees and debris. Kind of a battle zone. Tongues of snow will last well into late summer. As much as any tree, mountain hemlock bears the brunt of natural violence. Avalanches routinely rip through timber, leaving behind a tapestry of bright and dark green stripes. It’s common to see large trunks snapped in two, like toothpicks. But this destruction notwithstanding, Tsuga mertensia has made its peace with snow.

Glacier lily, Mountain hemlocks, and avalanche paths, Sibley Creek, Washington

At the upper extent of its range, as it approaches timberline, the mountain hemlock can appear to be a whole different character. The higher you go, the smaller the trees become, both in terms of height and girth. Whereas they are tall and cylindrical at lower elevation, trees in the high country, burdened as they are with deeper loads of snow, can be beautifully misshapen. It is a creature defined by its relationship with snow.

Their crowns may be truncated or their boughs widely splayed. Their trunks may be J-rooted or bent. Without the benefit of a human pruner, these trees in the subalpine zone can become a piece of bonsai art. And like other trees that live at timberline, mountain hemlock can take on a gnarled, stunted form (known as krummholz) where it hunkers down in deference to fierce weather.

Mountain hemlock at timberline, Sibley Creek Ridge, Washington

In the upper drainages of the Nooksack, the Baker, and the North Fork of the Skykomish, mountains of startling vertical relief form pockets that catch the prevailing southwesterly winds. These topographical catcher’s mitts bear the full force of the atmospheric rivers that hit the Cascade range. As a result, these watersheds are among the wettest places in North America.

Annual precipitation in these places can easily exceed 140 inches. Most of it comes in the winter. At the Mt. Baker ski area, annual snowfall averages around 600 inches and in many winters exceeds 800 inches. In the winter of 1998–99, the ski area recorded 1140 inches of snow — a world record. These are conditions in which the mountain hemlock thrives.

Yellow Aster Basin, Washington

In one quite distinctive way, Tsuga mertensia demonstrates how it has evolved to succeed in such a snowy place. A very high sugary sap content imparts unusual flexibility in the trunk of the tree. This renders them extremely ‘bendy,’ so that they can be held down all the way to the ground by heavy snow loads, and then spring back up when the snow melts. BOING!!! Backcountry travelers are familiar with these ‘catapults,’ and are careful to walk around them rather than straddle them.

The Cascades are so effective at wringing moisture out of the atmosphere that the country on the leeward side, the eastern slope, is a spacious dryland forest of ponderosa pine. Not far beyond that, it is essentially a treeless grassland, thick with ticks and rattlesnakes (but not without its charms). But on the western slope where the mountain hemlock lives, the situation is steep, wet, and green. Cross-country travel is diabolically difficult. The North Cascades are a stand-offish range, not offering their treasures easily. But the treasures are sublime.

Mountain hemlock and Mt. Shuksan, Washington

I’ve been speaking in a somewhat inexact way about ‘zones’ of vegetation. The concept is familiar to anyone who has driven a highway that goes from a low place to a high place. In each zone, there are not only characteristic trees, but shrubs, berries, flowers, fungi, birds, mammals, and all manner of living things. As elevation is gained, the species change, and so do the patterns of growth, of size, of density and spacial arrangement.

For many human travelers, the zone that is most sublime is what is known as the subalpine. The word ‘subalpine’ simply means below the alpine, which is accurate enough but not very poetic. What it is: slopes of butter-yellow avalanche lilies, timbered knolls, waterfalls, boulder gardens threaded by chattering streams, and glorious cirques jeweled with lakes that mirror snowcapped peaks.

Foggy Lake, Washington

It’s where you camp the night before you attempt one of those high peaks, and wake up to a frosted world. Frozen or flowing, water infuses the landscape; it is in tiny pools, rivulets that gather into streams that tumble and plunge toward the rivers down below. It’s in dewdrops that bead the leaves of every flower and bush.

Mt. Shuksan, Washington

From high summer to the first snows of October, it’s a place of extravagant life. A lot of living is packed into a few short months. A whole lot of procreating. A lot of interspecies drama. A lot of color. The wildflowers waste no time, and neither do the bumblebees, butterflies, and birds. Tiny pollinated urns turn into plump berries on scarlet bushes. Ptarmigan chicks scuttle about in the heather, and marmots hoot at intruders.

Many modest summits top out in the subalpine, offering views that rival those from any hard-gained alpine peak. Glorious undulating ridges offer miles of delightful scrambling, alternating between rocky outcrops, meadows, and dense thickets of scrappy, dwarfish trees. Sibley Ridge and Trapper Peak are two of my favorite destinations in the subalpine.

A well-situated atoll and the Pickett Range, Washington

At a lower elevation Tsuga mertensia thickly carpets the slopes, but in the subalpine it is sparser, more widely scattered. It lives in clusters that are most often situated on small rises or ridges. In other words — atolls. The trees do not populate bowls or depressions; they are staking out the high ground. Why?

Mountain hemlock atoll, Yellow Aster Basin, Washington

Because that is where the snowpack is thinnest, which means that is where the growing season is the longest. It’s where young trees are safe from avalanches that sweep away or bury everything in their path, and it’s where tiny saplings feel the warmth of the June sun, long before the surrounding meadow is free from its heavy blanket of snow.

Despite how these outcrops and promontories are exposed to the full force of winter gales, it is precisely here that young mountain hemlocks find a hospitable place to get started in life. Especially if they can grow close in the orbit of an old survivor. The typical pattern is that there are, within a small atoll, one or two trees that are significantly older and larger than the rest.

In any atoll, one intrepid tree had to start things off. If the winged seed from a Tsuga mertensia cone was lucky enough to land on a good spot, it might make it. The first years would have been the hardest. Then there comes a time when this persistent pioneer tree becomes shelter for another. And so the atoll begins.

Solitary Mountain hemlock, Yellow Aster Basin, Washington

Once a single tree is tall enough to poke out above the winter snowpack, it creates conditions favorable for the growth of new trees. The dark foliage of the tree speeds melting around its base, allowing for patches of warm, bare ground while an adjacent meadow is still blanketed in snow.

There is a correlation between snowpack and the establishment and expansion of atolls. In an extended period of drier and warmer winters, atolls are likely to expand and new ones will become established. When there is a longer growing season, trees stake out new ground. These trailblazers will survive and grow tall enough to establish a safe harbor for subsequent seedlings. On the other hand, a string of heavy snow winters will inhibit the expansion of atolls and prevent new ones from getting started.

The way these mountain hemlock atolls are dispersed across the landscape is very satisfying to the eye. It is as aesthetic as any designed garden. One way to think of it is that this particular instance of beauty is shaped by hardship. Or, to be more precise, it is shaped by Tsuga mertensia’s response to hardship.

In our thinking about evolution and adaptation, we often recognize the importance of competition — especially in situations where life is particularly precarious. Do we appreciate, also, the importance of cooperation? Do we understand the ways in which one tree grows in the grace of another?

Mountain hemlock atoll with Mt. Shuksan

Worry Stones

Hidden away in a dresser drawer, I have a beautiful hand-made bowl that was given to me as a gift about two decades ago, from an old friend of mine, a fine woodworker. It really should not be in a dresser drawer. It should be where people can see it, and I have determined that it now will be.

I had invited my friend to Washington to climb Mount Shuksan, a glorious peak that rivals, to my mind, the Grand Teton in both its rugged profile and extraordinary dignity. It was such a pleasure to climb it with my friend. Although it was not explicitly stated, I felt that the bowl he gave me was kind of an exchange; I shared with him a sacred place, a place that I dearly love, and he shared with me an exquisite expression of his love of wood.  

Inside the bowl, also hidden from view, are a couple hundred stones. To be more specific, they are semi-precious stones that I had gathered, shaped, and polished over a few years. I intended to fashion them into jewelry, particularly earrings to adorn the lovely ears of my wife and daughters. Intended is the key word in that last sentence.

Leopardskin jasper, intricately-branched moss agates, citron with rutile inclusions, tiger’s eye and hawk’s eye, rare and lovely Biggs jasper, jade, serpentine, hematite banded with iron, rhodonite and delicate pink rhodochrosite, pearly-blue chalcedony, deep blue sodalite laced with veins of milky quartz, softly-glowing green amazonite.

I dabbled for a while in lapidary work, but never acquired the skills and expensive equipment necessary to become serious about it. To my recollection, all I ever made was earrings. When we moved to a house that didn’t have a good space for a grinding wheel, I put the unfinished stones in the wooden bowl, and that was the end of that. I’ve not worked with them since.

I rarely think about these stones. Whenever I happened to open the drawer and see them—always incidentally, while looking for something like toenail clippers—they have felt symbolic of the unfinished bits of my life. The intention I once had of turning them into jewelry has slipped, like an unreturned phone call, into oblivion.

This tendency to begin something and not to finish it is part of my nature. It manifests in so many ways: Doing the dishes, reading Tolstoy, finishing up a degree in Restoration Horticulture. Learning to build a cob house and a green roof. Grafting fruit trees, cultivating mushrooms, making stone jewelry, playing the trombone. Half-done. Half-learned.

Enough learned to know and appreciate what is possible. When I look at the bowl of stones, a little zing goes through me, a little moment of enthusiasm. What if I set up my grinder again, turned these stones into something finished? But I suspect I won’t do it. Yes, yes, I could, if only I set my mind to it. But there are so many books to (not) read first. 

Despite the fact that they never became jewelry, I don’t regret any of the time spent on those stones. Both effort and joy went into the process. I loved finding rough-cut slabs at some funky little rock shop. Rummaging through crates at estate sales. Spending the day at some obscure creek or beach looking for water-polished treasures, or chipping away at outcrops for agates.

And then the pleasure of finding just the perfect little square inch of beauty in the stone that I could chisel out, then grind into the shape I wanted, then polish until it shimmered. It was an activity I could get lost in, an activity that kept me in the moment and quieted the mind. In this way, it was like making music, or shaping a poem, or climbing a cliff.

Maybe at some point I will actually make a few more pairs of earrings. The rest of the stones I may just give away, unfinished. They serve no practical purpose. I guess you could put one in your pocket and rub it. See what it does for you. Throughout history, people in many cultures invested stones with symbolic meaning.

According to Wikipedia, worry stones are “smooth, polished gemstones, usually in the shape of an oval with a thumb-sized indentation, used for relaxation or anxiety relief. The smoothness of the stone is most often created naturally by running water. The size of a worry stone is often about half the size of a silver dollar coin…”

This use of the stone is reminiscent of many ancient beliefs about stones conferring certain powers or protections upon those who are adorned with them. I don’t know about that. But I do know that working with these stones did my spirit some good, in much the same way that growing a garden and keeping bees does my spirit good.

Making money from the sale of jewelry was never the goal. In fact, making the jewelry was never even the goal. What was the goal? I suppose I don’t really know, but it’s sort of like this: I remember the way my dog Rosie, who has moved on now, would gnaw at a bone for hours, lost to everything but the visceral pleasure of crunching on a pig’s knuckle.

A dog who worries at a bone has not a care in the world. When I was hunched over a work bench, chipping away at a hunk of stone, there was no room in my mind for anxiety about the future, or disappointment with myself, or gripes aimed at the Creator.

A dog “worries at a bone,” we say. Funny that this word worry applies to both a mental state of anxiety and the verb that can also describe what we do (or at least what I do) to banish it. Maybe the stones in this gorgeous little bowl are worry stones. A way to calm the spirit. 

A kind of pig’s knuckle. The mineral manifestation of prayer. A way to feel connected to the earth. A way to pay attention. A way to show gratitude.

A Beautiful Mess

On the summit of Ruth Mountain, Mount Shuksan in the distance.

My education about the geology of the North Cascades began with the climbing guidebooks of the late and great Fred Beckey, the legendary dirt-bag climber and curmudgeon. Collectively known as “Beckey’s Bible,” the three-volume Alpine Guides were the first books I bought in Seattle, when I moved here in 1994. I considered them a doorway to adventure. They are without a doubt three of the most influential books in my life. 

Beckey’s Bible, books I, II, and III

Beckey’s guides introduced a whole generation of pilgrims to these mountains. Although the primary purpose of the books is to describe climbing routes, I found myself drawn to his introductions as much as his route descriptions. He goes into considerable detail regarding the geography, geology, botany, and history of the different sub-regions of the Cascades. 

Beckey is famous as a cantankerous climber, but definitely underrated as a wordsmith. Consider, for instance, this sentence describing Mount Shuksan “…rising in a spearhead of dark rock (greenschist), carved by elements into deep cirques and ragged aretes, adorned with chaotic hanging glaciers, frosted and tiered with snow plaques and ice patches.” 

Mount Shuksan from the Northeast, on the way to Ruth Mountain. I am inside the caldera.

After reading that, I knew right away that I had to climb Shuksan. And I did climb it, and it was memorable for many reasons—not the least of which was the most splendid outdoor latrine I’ve ever had the privilege to use. (I bring up this usually private moment only because while visiting this latrine I witnessed the most spectacular icefall I have ever seen.) 

I knew from that first description that I needed to get up Shuksan, but what I didn’t know right away is how deeply in love I would fall with the area all around the mountain, an area of geological mysteries, record-breaking snowfall, botanical oddities, perfect alpine lakes, and scenery that is as grand as any place in North America.  

While I’ve only reached the summit of Shuksan once, I’ve made repeated trips to three neighboring peaks that are less lofty but no less magical: North Twin, Tomyhoi Peak, and Ruth Mountain. And I make an annual pilgrimage to swim in the lovely Lake Ann and climb around on the ice of the Lower Curtis Glacier, nestled in a cirque on Shuksan’s western flank.  

Lovely Lake Ann doesn’t melt out until August. Shuksan, with the Upper and Lower Curtis Glaciers.

So while Shuksan richly deserves to be praised in poetry, prose, and song, while it deserves to have dissertations and books written about how it came to be, this blog post is mostly about the land around it. More specifically, it is about two incredible and peculiar geological features that sandwich the great mountain.

One of these features is immediately to the west of Mount Shuksan, and a hiker making his way to the Lower Curtis Glacier will cross it. The other is just to the east of Shuksan, and a climber standing on the summit of Ruth Mountain will be standing right in the center of it—likely without even knowing it.  

Both of these features are the result of geological events of almost unimaginable drama and violence, events that fundamentally altered the landscape. And yet, for all their impressive magnitude, both features have been so thoroughly eroded over time that they will be pretty much invisible to the eye that is not trained to see them. 

I am speaking of ancient calderas. 

***

The gentle and elegant slopes of Ruth Mountain, remnant of an ancient volcano.

Just to the east of Mount Shuksan, Ruth Mountain is a bit of an anomaly—a relatively gentle, smooth-sloped triangular peak that stands out conspicuously in a sea of jagged rock draped with precarious and fractured glaciers. When I stand on the summit of Ruth, gazing at the razor-sharp skyline of the Picket Range and the dark and forbidding Nooksack Tower, I’m amazed that I could enter the inner sanctum of such a place with relative ease.

Ruth’s easygoing aspect and straightforward approach is unusual in a region where climbing and suffering are synonymous. The welcoming character of the mountain is fortunate for an aging solo climber; it means I don’t have to rope up, and I can easily do it in a day, even with a wonky knee and a growing old-man belly.

Inside a crevasse on Ruth Glacier.

(Because the route up Ruth crosses an active glacier that has a few easily avoidable crevasses, many people do rope up on it. It is considered more than a casual hike, and some guide services charge clients in the neighborhood of $800 to reach its summit. But it is not a hard ascent, is usually done in a day, and poses minimal risk to anyone with common sense, good boots, and some skill with an ice ax.)

The summit offers a stupendous vantage of some of the North Cascades’ most impressive features, such as the aptly-named Picket Range and the austere Nooksack Cirque with its hanging glaciers and seracs poised to come crashing down into the cirque at any moment.

Nooksack Cirque, from the summit of Ruth. Along with Ruth Glacier, headwaters of the Nooksack River.

Indeed, it almost seems unfair that such a summit can be reached by an uncomplicated day-hike, when so many other nearby summits (with lesser views) require bushwhacking through nearly impenetrable forests, side-hilling on diabolical scree, and threading your way through gullies of shattered rock. A trip up Ruth seems like I’m getting away with something. 

The Pickett Range. Remote, incredibly difficult to travel through. The wild heart of the North Cascades.

Often, it is a precipitous peak surrounded by gentler neighbors that draws the eye and holds a viewer’s appreciation. But I find Ruth’s shape to be a lovely and satisfying contrast to the dramatic topography around it. Its shape is related, of course, to its history. Ruth looks different from the neighboring peaks because it is different.

Like the ugly duckling who was really a swan and not a duck, Ruth is not kindred to the peaks around it. While the peaks around it are the non-volcanic and crumpled result of tectonic plates colliding, Ruth—along with its modest neighbor to the north, Hannegan Peak—is what remains of an ancient volcano. And Ruth sits in the middle of a caldera known as the Hannegan Caldera. Its creation was about 3.7 million years behind us.

If you’ve been to Ruth, you may be surprised to learn this. Standing on the summit and looking over the landscape of rugged peaks and deep glacial valleys, it does not look like you are in the middle of caldera. But there are signs, for those who know how to read them. 

The event or sequence of events that created the caldera was bizarre, kind of delightful to contemplate, and unique in the world as far as geologists can tell. At least they haven’t yet found evidence of a similar occurrence elsewhere. While calderas are not all that uncommon on the face of the earth, the Hannegan Caldera holds a special distinction: It is the only known “two-phase, reciprocal, double-trap-door collapse caldera” in the world. 

Wow. That’s a mouthful. What the heck does it mean?

***

On the face of it, there is nothing exceptional about a caldera (although they are exceedingly cool). Calderas occur where potent volcanoes obliterate themselves in an explosive eruption, thus emptying a subterranean chamber of magma. The roof of this chamber then collapses, either in whole or in part, creating a depression that is akin to a crater, but much bigger.

The sunken area is most often roughly circular, although the shapes vary. A caldera might look more like a football, or a kidney, or an amoeba, or a jellybean. Sometimes resurgent volcanic activity will raise bumps or cinder cones within the caldera. Geysers, boiling mud pots, and fumaroles indicate that plenty of heat is not far beneath the surface, and future eruptions are possible. Often, the caldera will fill with water.

As a chain of impressive subduction-zone volcanos, the Cascade Range holds its share of calderas. The most recent, most famous, and most visible one is in Oregon, where a stratovolcano in the style of Rainier, Baker, and Adams erupted about 5700 years ago, leaving behind the deepest and one of the most beautiful lakes in North America. 

Crater Lake is the most recently formed caldera in the Cascade Range. Incredibly photogenic and instantly recognizable, it is a poster child for calderas. The lake was formed when Mount Mazama obliterated itself in an eruption that geologists estimate as a solid 7 on the Volcanic Explosivity Index. 

Crater Lake, Oregon. Caldera formed by the eruption of Mount Mazama. NPS photo, by Kim Chamales

A 7 on the VE scale is a damn big blast, by the way. Enough to cover most of the USA with ash. In our lifetimes, there has not been a 7 anywhere in the world. The largest eruption in the past century was Mount Pinatubo, in the Philippines, in 1991. It was a 6. There have been a handful of sixes in human history, including the infamous Krakatoa, in 1883. 

The largest eruption in several millennia was Tambora, in Indonesia, in 1815. It was a 7. The eruption that created the caldera of Santorini and probably also birthed the legend of Atlantis, circa 1600 BC, is estimated to have been a 7. And that’s it—just those two. They don’t get any bigger than that for the duration of recorded human history.  

I should mention that a 7 is not just a little bit bigger than a 6. The scale is exponential, so a 7 is ten times greater than a 6. The VE scale goes to 8, and an 8 is commonly referred to as a ‘supervolcano,’ although the term ‘supereruption’ would be better, since eruptions of such magnitude are not always associated with a single discernible mountain peak. The last time an 8 rocked the planet was 27,000 years ago in New Zealand, and the most recent Yellowstone eruption of this size occured 640,000 years ago.

Mount St. Helens, in 1980, was only a 5. I say only as if a 5 were merely a hiccup. The two calderas that are on both sides of Mount Shuksan, the Hannegan and the Kulshan Calderas, were both created by explosions estimated to be 7 on the VE scale. As the crow flies, they are less than eight miles apart, and Shuksan is placed squarely right between them. Mount Shuksan has definitely witnessed some dramatic action in its time here on earth! If a mountain could talk, what stories it would tell. 

***

This seems as good a time as any to talk about time. And size, too. And power.

I’ve hiked through both the Hannegan and Kulshan Calderas on many occasions. On every trip, I stop to admire and photograph the alpine wildflowers. On the way to the Lower Curtis Glacier, on a ridge just above Lake Ann, there is a slope that hosts a smattering of Saxifraga tolmiei, also known as Tolmie’s Saxifrage. It is a delicate and tiny flower, hunkering close to the ground. It thrives in the snowiest of locations, and is endemic to the Pacific Northwest.

From this ridge of flowers, you can see most of the million-year-old Kulshan caldera, with Mount Baker beyond it, to indicate the possible site of the next big hole in the ground. The flowers on the hillside are lucky to last a month before they shrivel. 

An alpine flower such as Saxifraga tolmiei lives for a handful of years. A flower on the plant lives for maybe a month before it shrivels. Blink of an eye—but long enough to get pollinated by a bee, develop its seeds, and broadcast them across the waiting ground. The bumblebee that fulfills the purpose of the flower also lives for a short summer season. Long enough to do its work. 

Are we much impressed by age? Or by size? In what way do we understand power? There is power in a VE7 eruption. There is power in an earthquake, or a tsunami, or a river of ice. There is a different kind of power in the saxifrage blossom and in the bee that pollinates it. 

Saxifraga tolmiei, aka Tolmie’s Saxifrage. Very small and gorgeous alpine, it hunkers low to the ground.

It’s been my experience of life that significance is not measured solely in terms of duration. Neither is it reckoned in terms of size. Significance is a subjective assessment, based on what is in the heart and soul (if I may be permitted to use such a mushy term) of the one making the assessment.

Consider a dog that has the lifespan of a decade, but lives on in the heart of a human who gave it a name. Consider a beloved child whose life is cut short by illness or accident; she is on earth for only a few years, but is of greater significance to her mother than any thousand-year-old tree or million-year-old mountain. Consider a single afternoon that, for one reason or another, you carry with you like a treasure. Consider yourself. 

Sam, the noble dog, on the shores of Puget Sound. He was too young this year to take into the wilderness.

Each creature and even each caldera is one part of a larger story of interaction and inter-being that encompasses all of time. 

In the wet forests of the Cascades, I am always entranced by the ephemeral blooms of mushrooms that are, quite literally, ‘here today and gone tomorrow.’ But the fleeting fungi is just the fruiting part of an underground web of mycelium that persists under snow, through seasons of drought, through times that seem barren. 

In similar fashion, a single aspen tree—a short-lived species—scuttles its golden spade-like leaves in the sunlight for a mere fifty years or so before it falls to the ground and transitions to soil. But a single tree may be part of a grove, and a grove has characteristics of a living organism. The life force of an individual tree is carried on through the grove the way water from a thousand small creeks merges in a river. Hard to say where anything ends.

Aspens, San Francisco Peaks, Arizona. A long ways from Mount Shuksan, but another sublime mountain.

In trying to imagine and write about geological history, it is easy to compress a million years into a moment, as if on a Tuesday there was a certain landscape, and then—Boom!—on Wednesday there was the Hannegan Caldera where yesterday’s meadow had been. 

It’s easy to imagine the distant past as one rapidly occurring cataclysm after another. It’s easy to picture a pell-mell succession of eruptions, floods, meteors, climate shifts, extinctions. But do we imagine life being placid and serene for a pterodactyl in the Mesozoic? Or for a Woolly Mammoth in the Pleistocene? 

When describing landscape-shaping events, I’m tempted to resort to comic-book exclamations: KABOOM!!! KAPOW!!! CRAAACK!!!. I’m tempted, also, to visualize them as discreet, single events. For instance, in regard to the plate tectonics that creates mountain ranges: India plows north through the Indian Ocean, slams into Asia, and just like that—OOOOF!!!—the Himalayas are thrust skyward. Or, closer to home: a big slab of ocean floor basalt slams into North America and then is transformed, by geologic wizardry, into the greenschist crags and towers and summit pyramid of Mount Shuksan. PRESTO!!!

The complex wall of greenschist that makes up the western flank of Shuksan, above Lower Curtis Glacier.

But when that chunk of ocean floor basalt that is the genesis of Mount Shuksan“slammed” into North America during the Mesozoic era, it’s not as if a human observer (a time-traveller, of course), could have walked out of her palm-frond hut on the Pacific coast, and watched a chunk of land crash into the beach like an out-of-control ferry coming too fast into a dock. She wouldn’t see that basalt transformed by pressure and heat, then crumpled and folded and thrust 9000 feet into the air. She probably would have seen just another pleasant Mesozoic sunset. Heard the plaintive cry of a pterodactyl. If we could squeeze time and let its essence drip out, what would that essence be? The earth is inconceivably violent and sublimely peaceful. Simultaneously.

What endures for millenia, what endures for a month, what is melting too quickly, and what is timeless. Shuksan, Lower Curtis Glacier, and monkeyflowers on the glacial moraine.

And what about the slice of time that we inhabit, right now, in 2023? It is probably more cataclysmic, more pivotal, more dramatic, than any comparable slice of time from the past. For instance, what we may perceive as a slowly-unfolding change in climate is, in terms of the earth’s rhythms, happening unbelievably fast. Faster than such changes have happened before. 

***

So, back to that intriguing phrase “two-phase, reciprocal, double-trap-door collapse caldera.” 

It helps to take it one word at a time. The relevance of the word ‘collapse’ has already been established; a caldera is formed when an area of land that sits atop a hollowed-out subterranean chamber collapses. What does ‘two-phase’ mean? It simply means that the collapse of the caldera occurred in two distinct phases, separated in time, rather than as one event. 

Now, let’s move on to the idea of a trap door. Maybe the best way to proceed is to conjure up the mental image of the entrance to the lair of a trap-door spider. A trap door is, essentially, a flap. Just like a flap of skin after an injury, only it’s on the skin of the earth. For most of the perimeter of the flap, there is a discontinuity in the skin, a crack in the earth. But on one end, the ground is unbroken and continuous. This forms a hinge. 

Imagine a giant, somewhat circular chunk of land that sits above an empty chamber. Prompted by gravity, the land begins to sink. As it does so, cracks form around the perimeter of the circle. They are called faults. But on one end of the circle, faults do not form, and the structural integrity of the land holds it up and inhibits the collapse. In other words, there is a sort of hinge on one end of the caldera. As a result, the collapse is lopsided, far more pronounced on one end than on the other. More of a slump than a uniform drop. 

This is where the significance of the descriptor two-phase kicks in. Keep in mind that in geologic time, phase one doesn’t happen on Tuesday, followed by phase two on Wednesday. Phase one and two may be separated by tens or hundreds of thousands of years. Enough time can elapse between phases for more volcanic activity to occur within the caldera. 

Magma chambers can refill, raising a large bump within the caldera. More eruptions can occur, emptying the chamber again. Another collapse occurs. It happens, once again, to be a trap-door collapse, where the sinking happens on only one side. Only this time, the side that collapses and the side that is hinged are reversed. Voila: A double-trap-door collapse. It is reciprocal because the two sides take turns. 

***

Although local geologists know them, neither the Hannegan nor the Kulshan caldera are well-known among the general population. They are certainly a far cry from famous. But there are some famous calderas all around the world.

For instance, the city of Naples, Italy, is cradled inside a mammoth caldera known as Campi Flegrei. It’s a risky place for three million people to live. The still-active volcano of Vesuvius sits on the edge of this huge caldera, giving a daily reminder to the citizens of Naples that there are no guarantees in life.

Elsewhere in the Mediterranean, the circular arrangement of the Greek islands of Santorini hints at a caldera that is now filled by the sea. The eruption that created this caldera may have been the event that gave birth to the legend of Atlantis. 

In Yellowstone National Park, three enormous and overlapping calderas bear testimony to the explosive past of a “supervolcano” that sits above a hot spot in the earth’s mantle. Yellowstone Lake partially fills one of these calderas. 

In California, the ski town of Mammoth is nestled inside the huge Long Valley Caldera. The center of the Long Valley Caldera holds some delightful hot springs that would be even more enjoyable if they were not pretty much constantly occupied by aggressively naked and often inebriated climbers, hipsters, shamans, and shred-betties.

Despite the stellar scenic qualities of these two obscure calderas of the North Cascades, the reason they are not as well-known as the other examples mentioned here is simple enough: they simply aren’t easily recognizable as calderas.

I’ve mentioned that a person standing on the summit of Ruth Mountain would have trouble realizing that he is inside a caldera. It’s equally true that a hiker laboring up the slope to Lake Ann, looking back at the gleaming snow cone of Mount Baker, would have trouble realizing that the valley she is looking across is, in fact, the center of the Kulshan Caldera. 

Many of Earth’s calderas are much older than the Hannegan and the Kulshan, yet remain clearly recognizable. In contrast, the two calderas that flank Mount Shuksan are difficult to discern just by looking at the landscape; geological sleuthing is required. Why is this? The answer has to do with another reality of the North Cascades: the presence of ice. 

A rare event: a hot spring all to myself, on a glorious morning in the Long Valley Caldera, California.

It can be hard to recognize an ancient caldera in a place where aggressive glaciation has scoured the land. During recurrent ice ages, glaciers thousands of feet thick advanced and retreated several times, removing softer rock and leaving more resistant rock behind. When the caldera rim has been breached, tongues of ice widen and deepen the breach. After the ice is gone, rivers assume ownership of the valleys. Lakes drain away. 

Other processes that sculpt a landscape continue. Further volcanic activity can alter the caldera’s appearance, raising new mountains within the caldera. It may no longer look anything like a bowl. A hiker can be standing smack dab in the middle of an ancient  caldera and never know it. But there are geological signs for those who can read them. There are ways that rocks tell the story.  

One way that rocks tell the story is with thick deposits of a volcanic rock called ignimbrite, which is a blend of volcanic ash and pumice, welded together. (If you’ve heard of volcanic tuff, it is the same thing as ignimbrite.) The name is derived from a combination of the Latin words for fire and rain. The name bears no relation to James Taylor; it has to do with the origin of ignimbrite in a pyroclastic flow from an explosive eruption. 

Sunrise on the ignimbrite of Hannegan Peak.

The rock that composes Mount Shuksan is very dark. It is greenschist, which is a metamorphic rock formed from basalt that has been altered by pressure and heat. On a gloomy, misty day, this dark rock adds to the brooding mystique of the mountain. In contrast, the ignimbrite deposited by caldera-forming eruptions is a light-colored formation, ranging from beige tan to grey. It looks frothy, like hardened meringue on a petrified pie. 

More ingnimbrite, this time in the Kulshan Caldera. From the trail to Lake Ann.

Ignimbrite is evident on the south slopes of Hannegan Peak; from the slopes of nearby Ruth Mountain, you can see it glowing in the light of sunrise. It is also evident in the watershed of Swift Creek, eroded into steep gullies. In both cases, the light rock is visible from a distance, and it tells the tale of two calderas. 

***

That tale is a single chapter in a long and complicated story. The story is as long as the earth is old. I intended, in this blog entry, to only dip into the chapter about two calderas in one of my favorite corners of creation. But I must also say a bit about Mount Shuksan, that incomparable mountain first introduced to me in the words of Fred Beckey, who had spent more than a few days on its slopes. So the last part of this blog entry is not about calderas at all. It recounts some geology that is older and stranger than calderas. It is about the formation of the mountain range that is most significant to me, which is to say: closest to my heart.

In addition to Mount Ruth and the Lower Curtis Glacier, another one of my favorite places in the shadow of Shuksan—I’m not embarrassed to call them my sacred places—is Tomyhoi Peak, which is a short distance to the north. I try to go there once a year, and a year that I miss this hike feels just a bit incomplete. 

I’ve written at length about Tomyhoi Peak before, so I won’t do it here, except to quickly mention that among its charms are a fern grotto that boasts greater fern diversity than any place in North America, incomparable blueberry meadows, and a basin of jewel-like tarns that melt out in late July, and are perfect for an icy baptism. 

Shuksan again, this time from the north. On the way up Tomyhoi Peak. Mt Baker is just to the right of this photo. I don’t know why I don’t have a photo of the two of them in the same frame.

I bring up Tomyhoi, briefly, because the view of Shuksan from Tomyhoi is splendid, and in one notable way quite different from the views of Shuksan that you get from either Ruth or the Lower Curtis Glacier. There is no place better than the upper ridge of Tomyhoi if you want to view craggy Mount Shuksan side by side with the other great mountain of this region: Mount Baker, the volcano, the reigning queen.

And here’s Baker. I prefer the native name of Kulshan. Baker is some British dude who never even came here. Baker is the queen. She could be the cause, someday, of the next caldera. Who knows?

I love this view. Baker (or Kulshan, to use its indigenous name) and Shuksan, equal in beauty, are utterly unalike. One is clearly a volcano; the other clearly is not. I love the North Cascades, in part, because of this contrast. It suggests a long and complex history. The volcano is a recent creation, a youngster, merely the most recent expression of the forces that created the two calderas, and Rainier, and Glacier Peak, and a long line of ghost volcanoes that have come and gone, leaving their signatures in layers of ash.

But that other mountain, the craggy one… How did it come to be? And why are they right next to each other?

Shuksan again. This is the view most people see, from near the Mt. Baker ski area.

For a long time, the North Cascades was one of the least understood mountain ranges in America, at least in terms of a coherent narrative of its origin. Sure, the volcanoes were easy enough to understand, but the jagged mountains in northern Washington are, for the most part, not volcanic. The range seemed like a jigsaw puzzle where even after it’s assembled, the pieces don’t seem to fit. At least, the assembled picture seems more like a Picasso than a Rockwell.

Before the theory of plate tectonics was widely understood and accepted (which is to say before the 1960s) the geology of the North Cascades was pretty inexplicable. This mountain range was in many respects a perplexing jumble of rocks that didn’t belong together. One sub-range was composed of a granite batholith, like the Sierras in California. Another sub-range right next to it was composed of metamorphosed sediments, or sea-bed basalts, or even an oddball rock like Dunite, which is rare on the surface of the earth, but common in the Mantle. These patches of different rock types seemed pasted on to each other with no rhyme or reason.

But there is a reason, and it begins with a key fact to keep in mind when contemplating the jigsaw puzzle: A subduction zone right off the coast. A place where one of the earth’s crustal plates collides with another, and then keeps going, diving deep under the North American continent, experiencing heat and pressure, buckling, folding, changing before it is thrust high into the sky.

And in addition, just to make things even more interesting, the presence of south-to-north strike-slip faults (like the San Andreas Fault in California) that over time shift whole chunks of land northward. In some places where plates meet, they don’t collide; rather, they slip sideways. The Straight Creek Fault, which passes near Mount Shuksan, is one such south-to-north strike-slip fault.

Plate tectonics was indeed the key to the puzzle. In the words of an unnamed contributor to Wikipedia, “…the new science of plate tectonics illuminated the ability of crustal fragments to ‘drift’ thousands of miles from their origin and fetch up, crumpled, against an exotic shore.” 

Some uncredited authors, like some dirt-bag climbers, have a way with words. 

The North Cascades are as geologically complicated as any mountains in North America, and the area specifically around Mount Shuksan is especially so. A geologic map of the area presents a tapestry of slivers and wedges, shards and blobs. It’s a collage of chaos, a mosaic with no discernible pattern. A mess.

The colors represent different rock types. The lines are faults. Mount Shuksan is center right. Ruth Mountain is further to the right. The Kulshan Caldera is center left, right in between Shuksan and Baker. Can you guess what QTcc means?

Mind you, the word ‘mess’ is not a geological term. A geologist might refer, instead, to plutons and terranes, deposits and intrusions. She might go on to explain that intrusions come from below, while deposits are laid down from above. A pluton is a mass of magma that didn’t erupt on the surface, but rather solidified underground; a terrane, on the other hand, is a chunk of land that moves laterally, thanks to the phenomenon of continental drift.

But then she might concede, as well, that… yeah, it’s a bit of a mess. A beautiful, fascinating mess. Why is it so messy? It’s messy in large part due to a phenomenon known as exotic terrane accretion. What the heck does that mean? Well, turn the word accretion into a verb: accrete. To accrete is to add one thing to another. Slap it on, glob it on, paste it on. So an accretion is a bit of something that is pasted on to another bit of something. But what is a terrane, and why is it exotic?

I’ll let a geologist explain it. In the words of Dr. Ralph Dawes of Wenatchee College, “A terrane is a group of related rocks that formed together in one area, do not show any relationship to the other rocks around them, and are separated from the rocks around them by faults. Terranes range in size from a few square miles to thousands of square miles. Plate tectonics explains how terranes can be moved across an ocean and added to a continent. Because terranes come from a distant location they are often referred to as exotic terranes.”

And there you have it: The North Cascades are made up of bits and pieces of land from all over the Pacific Rim, plastered together. Terrane is another word, a snazzier word, for a ‘crustal fragment.’

Starting in about the 1970s, a few geologists began employing the new technique of paleo-magnetic analysis in order to determine the origin of rocks. This led them to construct what seemed, at first, a theory a little too implausible to believe. But, over the past few decades, more and more evidence is lining up to support it. What’s the theory? 

I like the way the geologist J.N. Carney puts it: “It was soon determined that these exotic crustal slices had in fact originated as ‘suspect terranes’ in regions at some considerable remove, frequently thousands of kilometers, from the orogenic belt where they had eventually ended up.” The movement of these terranes was not just in one direction; in addition to ‘slamming’ into North America, they also ‘slipped’ northward in much the same way that Californian real estate on the west side of the San Andreas Fault is currently slipping northward toward Seattle. 

I love the phrase ‘suspect terranes.’ Hmmmm…. Where are your papers, you wandering chunk of granite?

Simply put, these fellows were suggesting that a sizable chunk of the Cascades—the mighty Stuart range batholith, to be precise—originated in Baja California. The alignment of magnetic crystals in the granite of Mount Stuart—crystals which are sensitive to the position of the magnetic North Pole—functioned as nature’s own GPS. They indicated the latitude at which the rock was formed.

Mount Stuart, not in the vicinity of Shuksan, but one of the premier peaks of the North Cascades. And an immigrant from Baja California.

What at first seemed a crackpot theory has now wandered into mainstream acceptance as more and more evidence accumulated. Such is the way of geology. Drifting pieces of land that, one after another, have plastered themselves onto the western edge of what is now Washington, are referred to as ‘exotic terranes.’ They are exotic because they come from far away. The granite of iconic Mount Stuart, a dramatic peak that exemplifies the grandeur of the North Cascades, hitched a ride from Mexico, and probably without documents. It slipped north, five or ten feet at a time. This ‘suspect terrane’ was quite determined. It was playing the long game.

Dragontail Peak and Colchuck Peak, Stuart Range. More hitchhikers from Mexico. Reflected in the water of Colchuck Lake.

So it seems that chunks of this snowy Alpine range are tropical in origin. Some chunks came from Mexico, and some came from far out in the Pacific. The greenschist of Mount Shuksan started out as a terrane of ocean-floor basalt that got intimate with North America about 100 million years ago, more or less. As it turns out, the North Cascades, like the West coast cities of Seattle, Vancouver, and San Francisco, has a long history of immigration.

The hike from Artist Point to the Lower Curtis Glacier—a linear distance of only six miles—moves through at least four different rock types. In the process, it traverses an ancient caldera, crosses a pluton of igneous rock, and ends up on a vast pancake of ice where huge boulders of greenschist tumble from the cliffs above, and then bounce off the glacier, shattering as they hit slabs of granite below. The ice is dimpled by thousands of small projectiles.

Detritus from the constant rockfall on the Lower Curtis Glacier. Shards of greenschist, embedded in the ice.

Throughout the geological crazy quilt that is the Mount Shuksan region, narrow tongues of one rock type intrude into another. Seemingly random pockets of one type are nestled within another. The land is dissected by faults running in multiple directions. Because of the extreme topography, rockfall and erosion carry rocks of one sort far from their original placement.

One rock type may smear into another. On the way to Tomyhoi Peak, in a place where landslides are funneled through a cleft in the cliffs, one such smear has created a unique soil blend that has brought together many different species of fern that are not usually found together. This small pocket holds greater fern diversity than any place in North America.

Ferns growing in the seam between two distinctly different rock types. Tomyhoi Peak.

I always linger in the fern grotto, as I call it. The place has come to be emblematic, to me, of the whole Mount Shuksan region. And let me say that the word grotto is a bit tongue-in-cheek. It has, to me, a vaguely Victorian ring to it. A grotto sounds like a manicured place, a quiet little hide-away where well-mannered people enjoy crumpets and tea. It sounds gentle.

This is not such a place. It’s a rocky outcrop below a large and unstable talus slope. It’s ragged. In the summer, rocks tumble down; for much of the year, avalanches are funneled through the gap in the cliff above. The avalanches carry trees down, snapping them like toothpicks. This grotto is under construction, so to speak. And yet, the delicate ferns grow in the cracks.  

I love the juxtaposition of rocks and life. This whole essay has been about rocks, but my experience in these places always involves life: the pasqueflower that grows along a creek, the rotund ptarmigan chicks scuttling around witlessly through the heather. In the pre-dawn hour, plump toads hop along the trail like gray stones moving by magic in the dark. The life is not always well-disposed towards me; once, between Lake Ann and the glacier, while climbing over some rocks, I was walloped by some unseen creature, most likely an insect of some sort. My hand swelled and throbbed, then turned numb and tingly. I just kept on hiking. It got better. 

Sometimes the life is vaguely menacing. Also in the pre-dawn hour, I’ve briefly glimpsed the sleek body of a cougar crossing the trail ahead of me. More than once, I’ve encountered black bears. I take great delight in watching mountain goats navigate the steep and polished slabs of granite by the terminus of the Lower Curtis Glacier, where Shuksan Creek tumbles exuberantly into the valley that was once the epicenter of a VE7 eruption. The goats keep their distance, but stay close enough to watch, hoping, perhaps, to chew on a salty pack strap or lick a place on the rock where I might pee.

The greenschist of Mount Shuksan lasts for millennia, while the living creatures (including me) live and die in the blink of an eye. Regardless of duration, both are significant. And they are intertwined, of course. The greenschist, the ignimbrite, the hitch-hiking granite pluton, the tiny saxifrage, the sleek cougar, the indolent toad, the vulnerable ptarmigan, the sure-footed goat, the human who is glad to escape suburbia for a day… all are made of the same stuff.

And all of it is, indeed, a beautiful mess.

Basalt!

I could start with this: CaMgO6Si2. What does it tell you about basalt? Not much, if you don’t know how to read it. Some important things, if you do. But I am not a chemist, and this is not a textbook, so I will not delve into the proportions of pyroxenes, olivine, and silica. I won’t talk about the differences between basalt, gabbro, andesite, and rhyolite. I’ll keep it simple: Basalt is lava. It is a certain kind of lava. It is common on the face of the earth, and even more common on the floor of the sea. It possesses some interesting characteristics. And it can be beautiful. 

Basalt is the most common bedrock on the face of the earth, although most of it is on the ocean floor. On land, it accounts for about 10% of the earth’s surface. Most of it occurs in large provinces known as “flood basalts,” places where huge amounts of basaltic lava erupted, over an extended period, above a “hot spot.” A hot spot is a place where a plume of magma rises through the earth’s mantle, and finds its way to the surface.  The word plume sounds sort of sort of playful and non-threatening. Delicate, even. Plume is the French word for feather. It is easy to imagine a feather of magma tickling the underbelly of the earth’s crust. The word conveys neither the volume of magma involved, nor the consequences of its entry into the surface world.  

Hawaii is one such hot spot. The magma plume remains stationary, but the earth’s crust slides over it, creating the impression that the hot spot is moving. The Big Island is currently located right over the hot spot; in the past, it was Maui, and before that, Molokai, then Oahu, and so on. The string of islands stretching to the northwest leaves a record of how the tectonic plate has moved. Yellowstone also sits over a hot spot. A series of ancient calderas lined up between Yellowstone and northern Nevada shows us how the hot spot has moved—or, rather, how it has has not moved, but the earth’s skin has moved over it. The reason Yellowstone is sometimes referred to as a potential “supervolcano” is because the amount of magma that can be brought to the surface by a mantle plume is incredibly large—far larger than the amount of magma that lies beneath a subduction-zone volcano. 

I suspect that in the imaginations of most people, the archetypical volcano is a glimmering cone, like Mount Fuji or Rainier, or Cotopaxi. Most of the planet’s famous volcanoes belong to mountain chains that parallel plate boundaries. Along a plate boundary, one tectonic plate dives beneath another, partially melting in the process. This fuels the volcanoes. But despite their beauty and fearsome eruptions, these subduction zone volcanoes are not the sources of most of the earth’s basalt. Other volcanoes rise right in the middle of a tectonic plate, far from a subduction zone. The explanation is a hot spot. The lava might break through via explosive eruptions, but it also might come through a series of cracks or rifts that bleed lava in huge amounts over thousands of years. These may not be as impressive as a towering mountain, but over time they are responsible for most of the lava on the earth. 

Iceland sits directly above another hot spot. In fact, the island is only one small part of an enormous area of flood basalts, most of it under water. This area—known as the North Atlantic Large Igneous Province—spans the Atlantic, from the coast of Greenland to the coast of Norway. This hot spot, however, is unique in one respect; instead of being in the middle of a tectonic plate, it occurs right along the boundary of two plates that are spreading apart. This means the volcanoes of Iceland are fueled by two sources: a hot spot and a separating seam. As a result, Iceland is particularly active. In the past 800 years, one third of the lava that has flowed over the earth’s surface has been on the island of Iceland.

There are Large Igneous Provinces (LIPs) all over the world. Most of them are on the sea floor, but a few well-known LIPs are on land. The largest of these regions is an area in Russia called The Siberian Traps. This region is roughly the size of Alaska. Another well-known LIP covers about one-fourth of India and is known as The Deccan Traps. Why are these geological landforms called Traps? The word is derived from the Swedish word for step. Over thousands of years, the basalt was deposited in multiple layers. On the flank of a mountain or canyon, each of these layers has the appearance of a terrace, or a step. 

In the United States, we have our own homegrown LIP, the Columbia Basin flood basalts, which cover much of Washington, Oregon, and Idaho, and a small slice of Nevada as well. It is the largest expanse of basalt in North America. As massive as it is, however, it is small compared to the Siberian Traps. It is difficult to be precise about the volume of lava that came from the eruptions that created the Siberian Traps, but geologists have estimated that it could have covered all of Western Europe to a depth of one kilometer. 

It could take an entire book to really talk about basalt. It merits such attention. Like water, it is both ubiquitous and fascinating. People take it for granted. (They may also take it for granite.) But I am not a geologist, and I’m only writing a blog entry. This is not a Large Igneous Lecture (LIL). It is a Small Igneous Blog Entry (SIBE). It is also an excuse to share some photography. So it is high time that I focused on the beauty of basalt in one of its common forms: the column. 

Based on the circumstances of its creation, basalt is diverse in texture, color, and form. Sometimes it solidifies into columns; other times it is amorphous, ropy, or frothy. Sometimes it is dense; other times it is full of holes from trapped air bubbles. In places where recurring lava flows occurred over thousands or millions of years, it is often stratified, like sedimentary rock, with each layer displaying distinct characteristics due to a different rate of cooling or different proportions of mineral ingredients. 

Columnar basalt is formed when a thick lava flow cools slowly. Lava that is in immediate contact with air or water will not form columns, but interior lava that is insulated has more time to cool. As it cools, the lava contracts. Cracks develop, just as they do in the mud of a drying lakebed when the perimeter of the lake does not shrink, but the mud within the perimeter does. The cracks do not occur in random fashion; as it turns out, nature prefers an angle of 120 degrees. And this creates hexagons. The thicker the flow, the longer it takes for lava to cool. The longer it takes to cool, the larger in diameter the columns will be. If the cooling of the lava was uniform throughout the flow, the hexagons would be perfect, but seldom is cooling uniform. With uneven cooling, the hexagons are distorted and irregular. Of course, some columns just feel a need to be different, and so pentagons occur from time to time. Nature is a dance of pattern and variation.

One delightful example of columnar basalt is at Svartifoss, the Black Waterfall, in southern Iceland. This is a magical little enclave. A distinctive feature is that the columns fracture and drop from the bottom up, forming an overhang with hundreds of small roofs. As the blocks break off and drop to the slope below, they assemble in a talus slope of hexagonal boulders. Hexagons are common in nature. Snowflakes, the cells of a honeycomb, pomegranate seeds, the many facets of an insect’s eye, and even carbon molecules are all hexagonal. Next time you are in a bathtub, take a good look at bubbles; while a single bubble is circular, the interior bubbles in a raft will morph to hexagons. This is a manifestation of the dense packing principle, which involves the most efficient way to fill a space with the least amount of material. 

It would take many lifetimes to investigate the smorgasbord of basalt in Iceland. One good place to sample the variety of structure and texture is along the rugged coastline, where basalt cliffs meet the relentless pounding of the North Atlantic. It is possible to see how different layers of basalt take on different characteristics. The water exploits weaknesses in the rock, sculpting towers, caves, and arches. One of the best examples of columnar basalt in Iceland is the long cliff at Gerduberg, on the Snæfellsnes Peninsula. There is something deeply satisfying about standing at the base of basalt columns, staring up at the parallel cracks. There is something even more satisfying about climbing them!

Basalt columns occur in volcanic landscapes all over the world. Three of the most famous formations are the Devil’s Postpile, in California; Devil’s Tower, in Wyoming; and the Devil’s Causeway, in Northern Ireland. I don’t know why the devil has such a fondness for columnar basalt. I find nothing sinister in these magnificent columns. Much of my home state of Washington is covered in basalt, due to the huge prehistoric effusion of lava known as the Columbia Basin flood basalts. A connoisseur of columnar basalt has much to choose from. Frenchmen Coulee is well-known for its tall basalt columns, many of them curiously rippled like crinkle-cut French Fries. The Tieton River valley offers miles of beautiful columns, tinged orange by lichen, rising above the beautiful swift-flowing Tieton River. But my favorite columnar basalt in Washington may be a crag at a place called the Drumheller Channels, just south of Moses Lake, in the desert interior.  

At Drumheller Channels, a long row of columns rises out of the grasslands. The top of the crag is a mosaic of basalt pillows separated by deep cracks. (Don’t drop your car keys!) It is a hike across a few miles of tick-infested grasslands to reach these cliffs, so it is very quiet and peaceful. From the top, the view over the channeled scablands feels oceanic. Approximately 15,000 years ago, unimaginably huge floods from glacial Lake Missoula scoured this country, carving deep coulees and countless potholes.

At the beginning of this SIBE, I mentioned that basalt has some interesting characteristics. I’m about to go into detail about one of those characteristics. It has to do with a chemical reaction that takes place between basalt and carbon dioxide. But first,  let me say this: At my local plant nursery I can find basalt, ground to a fine powder and put in a bag, ready to add to my garden soil as an amendment. What is the benefit of that? Well, in theory, it adds some minerals that are important for root development and the uptake of nutrients and water. Many people know that volcanic soil, as it breaks down, is often quite fertile. In particular, basalt is high in both calcium and magnesium, which are important for plants. In practice, I consider the value of basalt dust as a garden amendment to be slight, although the people who put it in bags would beg to differ.

Which isn’t to say I’m not a fan of basalt dust. On a world-wide scale, and over the course of millennia, there is no denying the virtues of basalt-derived soil. It is often the substances that seem most humble and unremarkable that in fact hold properties that enable life and keep the earth in balance. One of the intriguing properties of basalt is this: As it weathers, it actually absorbs CO2 from the atmosphere, and transforms it to calcium carbonate in the form of calcite crystals. In effect, it changes CO2 from a gas to a solid. This property of basalt is gaining more attention in our time of runaway climate change. 

Enhanced Rock Weathering is gaining more attention as one proposed method of removing CO2 from the atmosphere and putting it back in soil. We all know what weathering refers to: the natural processes, both chemical and physical, that turn rocks into dirt. “Enhanced weathering” is a fancy term for speeding up the process. When proponents of ERW speak of weathering, the weathering they intend to “enhance” is primarily the breakdown of basalt. The way to enhance basalt it is to pulverize it. To make, essentially, a whole lot of basalt dust, and then get a whole lot of farmers to willingly spread it over a whole lot of fields. Maybe it could even be bagged and sold at your local nursery. 

It almost sounds too simple to be true: You can grind basalt into powder, spread it on crops, and it not only benefits crops (well, maybe)—it also takes CO2 out of the air, as well. If the practice was wide-spread enough to bring this basalt dust downstream and into the ocean, it might also help estuaries by making the PH of the water slightly more alkaline. It sounds sort of like a crazy idea, to try to save the planet by smashing basalt. (I have vastly oversimplified the issue by putting it into these terms.) The reasoning is this: The process of CO2 sequestration through the weathering of basalt is already happening in nature, but it happens slowly and the effects are too small to address the degree of CO2 that is currently plaguing us. Why can’t we speed it up? Could it work? I don’t know, but it is being studied by serious people. 

As it turns out, this stone that chronicles a time when almost all life on earth was wiped out due to a climate drastically altered by greenhouse gases, offers us some possible avenues to try to stop those same disastrous climatic changes from happening again. There is a wonderful geological irony to it. In the 4.5-billion year history of the earth, there have been a few catastrophes that have set back life in a major way. Most of these extinction events, as they are called, have been associated with the same large-scale vulcanism that gives us LIPs and most of our basalt. In fact, the worst extinction event happened at the end of the Permian era, about 250 million years ago, and was due to the extravagant vulcanism that created the Siberian Traps. How interesting that the type of rock that is most associated with extinction-causing climate disasters is also the type of rock that, over time, sets things right again. 

In the natural cycle of vulcanism, the weathering of the basalt produced in atmosphere-altering eruptions is a long-term mechanism through which the greenhouse gases from those very eruptions are reduced. On a geologic time scale, basalt-derived soil does indeed absorb atmospheric CO2 and transform it to calcium carbonate. In due course, the alkaline calcium carbonate finds its way to the sea and gradually brings acidic oceans back into balance. But it takes a long damn time. How long? Well, far, far longer than Homo sapiens has (so far) walked the earth. Geologists estimate that it took nine or ten million years for life to bounce back after the Permian extinction, when no one was around to smash up the basalt. 

At the time of the Permian extinction event, the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere was probably at least twice what it is now. This was sufficient to kill 85 to 90% of terrestrial species, and 95% of marine species. How high is the concentration of CO2 in today’s atmosphere? In 2021, it reached 421 parts per million (PPM). Although not as high as it was during the Permian Extinction, this is definitively higher than it has been at any point in the past 800,000 years, probably higher than it has been in the past 3 million years, and possibly higher than it has been in the past 23 million years.

On the climb up to that high concentration at the end of the Permian era, it was a relatively slow climb until certain tipping points were reached; then it accelerated. If we are educated about what is happening in our world currently, we are familiar with some of these tipping points: The release of methane from the sea floor. The thawing of permafrost. The loss of Arctic ice. Unless we change direction decisively, we are likely headed into an extinction event as severe as any the earth has yet experienced. Will it be “game over” for the earth itself? Of course not. Basalt, for instance, will endure. Water will endure—although most of the life in it may not. But it will be game over for the vast majority of plants and animals. How will humans fare? Who knows? But considering that we depend on other living creatures for our survival, the outlook is poor. 

Of course an extinction “event” doesn’t happen all at once. In fact, it’s not a single event. It doesn’t happen on a Tuesday at 3:40 PM. In fact, it can’t even be pinned to a specific year or even decade. The event we are in now is not unfolding quickly enough to compete with news headlines about Covid-19 or Afghanistan—but it is of greater consequence than anything else that makes the news. Nothing else even comes close. It’s hard to predict how long it will take, although on a geologic time scale it is happening drastically fast—far more quickly than any previous extinction event caused by volcanic activity. 

How much “enhanced weathering” of basalt would it take to make a difference? A helluva lot. How much would it benefit crops or estuaries? Not clear. Is this a silver bullet? No. There are no simple answers to the problem of climate change. The problem is so large that our efforts to combat it must be correspondingly large. It is increasingly clear that modern human societies are not changing quickly enough to slow down greenhouse gas emissions in the next couple of decades. We must find ways not only to decrease what we put into the air, but also to remove what we have already put into it. I don’t know what the best solutions will be, but it seems to me that we need to look to natural processes for insight. In that regard, basalt has something to say to us—whether we pulverize it or not. If we listen carefully, the soil itself may tell us what to do. The water, too, may tell us.

I do not know if basalt can be a key to unlock at least a partial solution to climate change. I do know that basalt is, to me, a synecdoche of the earth herself. It is both the question and the answer. It is Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva, the beginning, the middle, and the end. And it looks so good in columns.

***

I don’t have a public comments option, but I welcome your responses. Feel free to leave a comment at markrozema62@gmail.com