I am not very influenced by brand names. I don’t care whether or not I am dressed in the latest fashions. In fact, I have a kind of a negative sense about fashion that comes from my past. When I was younger and skiing more often, we saw mismatched clothing and the presence of a bit of duct tape to repair a tear as a badge of honor. It was our belief that people who put their energy into having matched clothing and looking good on the slopes, didn’t put enough energy into learning ski techniques. We believed that the duct tape set, which we called ourselves, was composed of better skiers. We believed that skill couldn’t be bought, but only earned by hard work. We struggled to scrape together enough money for a season ski pass, b bought used equipment and clothing at swap meets, and skied as often as we were able.

That has pretty much summed up my attitude towards outdoor equipment. When Susan and I married, we went backpacking in the high country with a plastic tarp and a roll of cord. We never had fancy backpacking sleeping bags, but carried the bulky rolls we used for camp. We believed, and I still believe, that our outdoor experiences are not limited by a lack of equipment and conversely buying more equipment won’t make us more likely to have outdoor experiences.

My canoes and kayaks are not the most beautiful boats on the water. I made them myself because I was unwilling to pay the price of manufactured boats.

There used to be a brand to which I paid attention. It was REI. The recreational cooperative was for us in the early days a source for items that could not be found locally. They sold lots of technical climbing gear and quality tents and other equipment. I still have my original membership card. In order to use it at a retail store, I have to instruct the clerk to enter three zeros in front of the number printed on the card. I cannot be scanned by the store’s equipment. It must be manually entered. I remember writing the number on paper order forms back when the original store in Seattle was more than a thousand miles from my home and we did all of our business from a catalogue. Sadly, REI has become a clothing store these days. There is a REI store in Bellingham, not far from our church, and I’ve been in it a couple of times. We did find a Christmas present there once, but most of the time, what I find is overpriced clothing. And I don’t need clothes to enjoy the outdoors.

Except that last statement isn’t quite true.

We have found that having good rain gear is pretty much essential to living in this place. This isn’t the rainy season, and we walk everyday without giving a thought to rain jackets, but for nearly half of the year, rain jackets are essential to our lifestyle. We walk outdoors every day. And we are not going to allow rain to keep us from doing what we love.

So, after moving to Washington, I bought a new rain jacket for Susan as a birthday gift. We did our homework and decided to get one made by Patagonia. In order to get the size and color she wanted, I ended up ordering it directly from the company. That means that I shared my email address with the company. That means that I get regular emails from the company advertising their clothing. So far I haven’t bought anything else from the company. When it was time to replace my rain jacket, I got mine from REI. After all they sell clothing these days.

However, I will be paying attention to Patagonia going forward. Yvon Chouinard, the billionaire founder of Patagonia has given away his company to a charitable trust. The trust, Holdfast Collective, is “dedicated to fighting the environmental crisis,” and now owns all non-voting stock - 98% of the company. The voting stock belongs to the Patagonia Purpose Trust, led by the family. That means that all profits, except those reinvested in the company, will go towards fighting the climate crisis - an estimated $100 million per year. Chouinard said of his decision, “Despite its immensity, the Earth’s resources are not infinite, and it’s clear we’ve exceeded its limits.”

Often it seems as if businesses are opposed to changes that are required to reduce carbon consumption. For examples trucking companies have steadfastly opposed California emissions standards despite the fact that increased efficiency and decreased fuel costs contribute directly to the companies’ bottom line. Policy makers continue to support subsidies to fossil fuel producers despite a demonstrable lower cost for sustainable energy production. Environmental activism has often meant standing up to corporate interests.

It is refreshing to see a wealthy person who is willing to forego increased income in order to confront the challenge of the climate crisis. Chouinard and his family will continue to be wealthy. His personal wealth is estimated at $1.2 billion. And it isn’t easy for wealthy people to shed their wealth. Despite Bill Gates’ promise to “drop off” of the list of the world’s richest people and despite a $20 billion donation to his philanthropic fund, Gates’ personal net worth has more than doubled since 2010.

It is clear that the plan made by Mr. Chouinard for Patagonia allows his family to retain control of the company. “Even public companies with good intentions are under too much pressure to create short-term gain at the expense of long-term vitality and responsibility,” he said. He believes that the way he has structured the business will produce the most support for the fight against the climate crisis. If it succeeds, the entire world will benefit from his generosity and his vision.

I probably won’t become fashionable. I probably won’t care about whether or not my outdoor clothing matches. I’m not going to set any trends. But I will pay attention to Patagonia and I may be interested in making a purchase when I need outdoor clothing.