Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
PL climber climbs trees, serves papers
This morning some time between 8:00 and 9:00 pacific lumbers two hired thugs, climber eric(eric shatz) and climber jerry, showed at the lower village treesits in freshwater.
As soon as the climbers showed up the treesitters who have cell phones got on them and started making calls. By 10:00 there were between 50 and 100 people in freshwater.
When the climbers showed up their intentions were not clear. It was assumed by many that there was only one reason they could be there, to evict treesitters. Luckily this turned out not to be the case. When climber eric got to the top of the first tree he simply served the tree's occupant some legal papers. These legal papers turned out to be a notice that the treesitters were being sued by pacific lumbers, for an unknown amount, and an order to appear in court on friday. When eric's accomplace, climber jerry started to climb his first tree, he got to the first limb, and then could not get past it. This was apparently the end of his climbing for the day. When he got back to the ground he was taunted by many of the onlookers, and was even offered climbing lessons by several people. This left climber eric to climb the remaining 19 trees in freshwater to serve there occupants with papers. Halfway through the day climber eric started to get tired, and tried to make deals with the tree sitters. If they sent down there line with a haul bag on the end he would put the papers in it, and promised not to cut the line. It was unclear how this deal would have been in any way adventageous for the treesitters. Several tree sitters are reported to have accepted the deal. In several other trees that would not send down a line eric climbed part way up the tree, and duct taped the the papers two the tree.
One peice of information that i am still unsure about is what names and addresses were on the legal papers, i heard one person say that they put peoples forest names on the papers, though this may or may not be correct.
Yesterday pacific lumber security went around to all the trees that they know to be occupied and nailed up two laminated flyers on each. THe first was a wanted poster that was seeking to find whom ever sabatoged a loader belonging to a pl contractor several weeks ago. The second flyer is on PL letterhead, and is dated march 3, 2003. These flyers are notices to "All persons trespassing upon or occupying any portion of the landowners' lands without express written permission from the landowners." the text is as follows:
We are are very concerned about the possibility of injuries to tree sitters and trespassers on our property as well as our employess, contractors and law enforcement officials. Persons in all of these categories are put at risk by your continuing illegal and dangerous activity.
Therefore, to prevent accidents, injuries, and damage to our property, we the Landowners must request that you leave our private propert and not return to the land upon which you are trespassing or to any other lands owned by us unless you have our express written permission. Concurrently, we are requesting the Humboldt County Sheriff's Office to advise you of our request that you leave our poroperty and not return. You are further advised that refusing or failing to leave after being asked to do so by us, or by a peace officer acting on our request, is criminal act in violation of California Penal Code Section 602(n). ENtering on lands of another with the intent to interfere with the owners' business may also be punishable as a misdemeanor under Penal Code Section 602(j). SUch actions also subject you to civil liability.
In addition to respecting the requirements of the laws of the State of California common sense suggests that tree-sitting, "can and mouse," hiding in the woods and other acts of trespassing on timberlands where logging operations may be in progress expose the trespasser and others to a substantial risk of harm. Tree sitting becomes even more dangerous during high winds, snow, rain, and storms of winter. We request that you leave immediately for your own safety and that of others. Neither law enforcement personnel nor company personnel should be subjected to the risk of harm you are creating for yourself and others.
The page ends with the statement "Our forests, our future - 130 years and growing"
Pacific lumber has also increased the security presence in freshwater recently. They now have 2 guards on duty, 24 hours per day, each driving around in a seperate white nissan truck, with an antenna on top. The guards also carry cameras and video cameras, which they use to take pictures of anyone, and any vehichles that they see.
If you are interested in getting involved with forest defense there is a 2 week long action camp being held from march 14 through the 30th. The camp is being held at the albee creek campground, in the matole area. Feel free to come for any part of the camp, and stay as long as you want. There will be non-violence trainings, climb trainings, and all sorts of other trainings happening every day.
directions, take highway 101 south(if your coming from eureka, 101 north if your comming from the bay area), get of at the honeydew exit, go west on mattole rd 5 miles to the albee creek campground, on the right.
for more information on forest defense in the freshwater are see http://wesavetrees.org/
When the climbers showed up their intentions were not clear. It was assumed by many that there was only one reason they could be there, to evict treesitters. Luckily this turned out not to be the case. When climber eric got to the top of the first tree he simply served the tree's occupant some legal papers. These legal papers turned out to be a notice that the treesitters were being sued by pacific lumbers, for an unknown amount, and an order to appear in court on friday. When eric's accomplace, climber jerry started to climb his first tree, he got to the first limb, and then could not get past it. This was apparently the end of his climbing for the day. When he got back to the ground he was taunted by many of the onlookers, and was even offered climbing lessons by several people. This left climber eric to climb the remaining 19 trees in freshwater to serve there occupants with papers. Halfway through the day climber eric started to get tired, and tried to make deals with the tree sitters. If they sent down there line with a haul bag on the end he would put the papers in it, and promised not to cut the line. It was unclear how this deal would have been in any way adventageous for the treesitters. Several tree sitters are reported to have accepted the deal. In several other trees that would not send down a line eric climbed part way up the tree, and duct taped the the papers two the tree.
One peice of information that i am still unsure about is what names and addresses were on the legal papers, i heard one person say that they put peoples forest names on the papers, though this may or may not be correct.
Yesterday pacific lumber security went around to all the trees that they know to be occupied and nailed up two laminated flyers on each. THe first was a wanted poster that was seeking to find whom ever sabatoged a loader belonging to a pl contractor several weeks ago. The second flyer is on PL letterhead, and is dated march 3, 2003. These flyers are notices to "All persons trespassing upon or occupying any portion of the landowners' lands without express written permission from the landowners." the text is as follows:
We are are very concerned about the possibility of injuries to tree sitters and trespassers on our property as well as our employess, contractors and law enforcement officials. Persons in all of these categories are put at risk by your continuing illegal and dangerous activity.
Therefore, to prevent accidents, injuries, and damage to our property, we the Landowners must request that you leave our private propert and not return to the land upon which you are trespassing or to any other lands owned by us unless you have our express written permission. Concurrently, we are requesting the Humboldt County Sheriff's Office to advise you of our request that you leave our poroperty and not return. You are further advised that refusing or failing to leave after being asked to do so by us, or by a peace officer acting on our request, is criminal act in violation of California Penal Code Section 602(n). ENtering on lands of another with the intent to interfere with the owners' business may also be punishable as a misdemeanor under Penal Code Section 602(j). SUch actions also subject you to civil liability.
In addition to respecting the requirements of the laws of the State of California common sense suggests that tree-sitting, "can and mouse," hiding in the woods and other acts of trespassing on timberlands where logging operations may be in progress expose the trespasser and others to a substantial risk of harm. Tree sitting becomes even more dangerous during high winds, snow, rain, and storms of winter. We request that you leave immediately for your own safety and that of others. Neither law enforcement personnel nor company personnel should be subjected to the risk of harm you are creating for yourself and others.
The page ends with the statement "Our forests, our future - 130 years and growing"
Pacific lumber has also increased the security presence in freshwater recently. They now have 2 guards on duty, 24 hours per day, each driving around in a seperate white nissan truck, with an antenna on top. The guards also carry cameras and video cameras, which they use to take pictures of anyone, and any vehichles that they see.
If you are interested in getting involved with forest defense there is a 2 week long action camp being held from march 14 through the 30th. The camp is being held at the albee creek campground, in the matole area. Feel free to come for any part of the camp, and stay as long as you want. There will be non-violence trainings, climb trainings, and all sorts of other trainings happening every day.
directions, take highway 101 south(if your coming from eureka, 101 north if your comming from the bay area), get of at the honeydew exit, go west on mattole rd 5 miles to the albee creek campground, on the right.
for more information on forest defense in the freshwater are see http://wesavetrees.org/
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
pleeze lurn to spell. it makz you look like the dumass you ar.
Oh, that's right. In my earlier comment, I forgot that the author is probably an HSU graduate (or not - school is tough when you're baked). This would explain the painstaking thoroughness exibited by our esteemed on-the-ground reporter. Or perhaps this individual is from freaking Vermont or Virginia or some other out of state location. Go home and let your mom and dad know how you are doing. Start an anti litter campaign or build more bike paths in your own state, and get the hell out of the most over regulated state in the union.
Go home now, tree sitters. You are not welcome here. Humboldt county doesn't like you anymore. None of us can figure out why anyone would stay up in a tree, crap in a bucket, and hand it off to some other wierdo to empty, aside from those that crap in buckets and those that handle buckets full of human crap. Your ways are filthy, stupid, and embarassing. And we're tired of you making a circus of our backyard. So go away now, we don't like you. You are not welcome here. Go find another place to crap in a bucket, you big bunch of jackassess.
People’s invective rants on this subject never fail to amaze me. I’ll try not to add more of my own.
A proposal: Can we stick to the issues. Lets talk about what these protesters are doing. They are trying to save some big old trees and bring attention to the fate of California’s last remaining ancient forests. If it is your view that we should keep cutting ancient trees and forests then please go ahead and provide your compelling reasons why you hold these beliefs. I’d be happy to hear them. Cyber mud-slinging brings us no closer to understanding what is good for the local community and forest environment. This is a forum for ideas and learning. I’ll stick to the issues if you will.
A proposal: Can we stick to the issues. Lets talk about what these protesters are doing. They are trying to save some big old trees and bring attention to the fate of California’s last remaining ancient forests. If it is your view that we should keep cutting ancient trees and forests then please go ahead and provide your compelling reasons why you hold these beliefs. I’d be happy to hear them. Cyber mud-slinging brings us no closer to understanding what is good for the local community and forest environment. This is a forum for ideas and learning. I’ll stick to the issues if you will.
Hey Curt. Guess what? The last of the ancient redwoods have already been saved. There is miles and miles of uninterrupted habitat for forest critters and great access for recreation. It's called Avenue of the Giants and Bull Creek Redwoods State Park, etc; it will never be cut. And guess who donated this preserve to the state? Why that would be the evil empire, Pacific Lumber. I truly am glad that these trees have been saved, and this is what the public wants; paved access with short loop trails so they don't get lost. They don't want a bunch of scattered residuals that were too scabby to make the grade the first time they cut that stand. To hear you and your treesitting brethren harangue the gullible public into saving the last of the ancient redwoods is horseshit, bro. What you hypocrites need is to agitate and have a cause to tout. This gives your lives purpose. Hey, build me more bike paths, dude. That's what we really need.
Guess what bike riding Dude, you can see ancient redwoods in Freshwater and they have been marked to cut. Why should one ancient tree be more protected than the others. And, guess what, the forest defenders do have your interests in their sights. Like protecting your ground water from poisoning and keeping Freshwater Watershed from total and permanent destruction. You need to get off your bike and educate youself about the whole picture... Dude. I bet your attitude would be different is a clearcut brought the hillside down on your house or that of a relatives. Geez
Yep, that's funny that you bring up education. You need some schooling, so absorb this. The Greenwood Heights treesitters are sitting in a state approved THP. This means that biologists have surveyed the area as well as hydrologists, geologists, botanists, soil scientists, archaeologists, foresters, and the agencies of NMFS, CDF, DFG, Fish and Wildlife, and Water Quality. After all of this scrutiny, the THP is then open for public comment, which, since EPIC and Earth First! are consistently represented by whackos who can't articulate or stay on topic, degenerates into a circus - freak show that no responsible person can take seriously. Then the THP is commonly sued by the freaks, after which a judge still approves its legality, and then this is where you decide that all of these college educated people are in error, and that it is your civic duty to stop the madness. Hmmm. Could it be that when everyone decides against you, you are wrong? No way! Now who's delusional? By the way, you speak of 'total and permanent destruction' to the watershed. You are ignorant to the fact that 90% of the watershed was logged as one giant clearcut in the early 1900's, and that they skidded old growth logs right down the creek, DUDE! Freshwater creek and the drainage recuperated from that quite nicely. And the gall that you have to tell me that the forest defecators are defending water quaility and fish. Absurd. PL is the one doing that. California has the most and the strictest regulations in the world, dipshit, and PL, due to it's HCP, is the most restricted in California - hence the world, but that's not good enough for you and your deluded cult. You're not happy with the gobs of old growth in the parks. Acknowledge it, man! It's plenty, and what's more it's all that's left. The few small and isolated areas of big (and scattered) wood on private, I say PRIVATE, land is owned and payed for not by you, but by a private entity who actually pays real taxes on it and who has made many other excessive protective concessions in order to harvest that resource. Aah, but that is where your real beef lies, isn't it? You hate MAXXAM/Hurwitz, and you can't get past that, so you slander the company workers as being whores for a paycheck. Well, they like 99% of the rest of the American populace, choose to pay taxes, provide for their familes, and not live in squalor in a tent or a tree. So guess what? They are MAXXAM and Hurwitz, and they are local, you asshole. And by the way you ignorant uneducated shitwad, those trees are not marked for cut. You just assumed that. Any forester could tell you that that is not a legal cut mark. What a dick.
You know, I took issue with many of your arguments but I’ll have to agree with you on a point here: The dubious nature of forest activism. I run the risk of insulting a group of people I happen to have a healthy respect for. I appreciate their sense of land stewardship yet I often cannot endorse their tactics and activist culture. It must always be remembered that the kids who are up in the trees and doing the most visible direct-action, are a highly visible minority. The visible tip of a much larger iceberg. The preservation of ancient trees and forests is not just about Earth First!ers and loggers. Our forests were never meant to be squandered so quickly for the profits of so few. Let’s just hope that the current debate between cutting and conserving doesn’t get confused with our mutual disdain for any “wacko- hippie freak-show-defecator dicks!” Yes, Avenue of the Giants rocks! As do the several other areas that have some standing old growth. I can think of maybe 10 places in coastal Northern California that have sizable chunks of old-growth forests. And I’m being very generous here. We’re talking about 93-97% elimination here. We are arguing over the crumbs. What’s the point of gobbling up more of that remainder? Contrary to popular belief, you can’t simply cut down 10,000+ years of evolution and expect to jump-start it back to life. I don't mean to imply that I'm right and you're wrong. It's more a matter of priorities.
I usually don't engage in these argumentations, but, ignoring the expletives, I don't see much response.
curt,
All I saw was your title when I logged on. The body of your response did not appear; hence my disjointed reply. I understand that practically all of the original forest has been replaced by second-growth, and that is why I think it is important to fully appreciate the parks. I think people get too focussed on a cause and ignore that which is already protected and take it for granted. It's not for granted. It took a huge effort to set those lands aside, and we forget the embattlements associated with those efforts. As for for private land, regardless of the owner or the means of the acquisition (for these things are also done and past), the issue truly is respect, isn't it? Proper management and stewardship by the owner in conjunction with the public's ability to show some courtesy regarding legally approved laws and regulations must be honoured not scorned. Some may not agree with the rate of cut, but can you deny that the restrictions that PL must adhere to and the resources they are sacrificing are more than any other timber company? PL and it's employees actually do try to protect their resource. The efforts of litigators and activists will be forgotten too. So I think the sitters should retire; the trees are tired of fighting gravity; they wan't to be decks in our backyards.
All I saw was your title when I logged on. The body of your response did not appear; hence my disjointed reply. I understand that practically all of the original forest has been replaced by second-growth, and that is why I think it is important to fully appreciate the parks. I think people get too focussed on a cause and ignore that which is already protected and take it for granted. It's not for granted. It took a huge effort to set those lands aside, and we forget the embattlements associated with those efforts. As for for private land, regardless of the owner or the means of the acquisition (for these things are also done and past), the issue truly is respect, isn't it? Proper management and stewardship by the owner in conjunction with the public's ability to show some courtesy regarding legally approved laws and regulations must be honoured not scorned. Some may not agree with the rate of cut, but can you deny that the restrictions that PL must adhere to and the resources they are sacrificing are more than any other timber company? PL and it's employees actually do try to protect their resource. The efforts of litigators and activists will be forgotten too. So I think the sitters should retire; the trees are tired of fighting gravity; they wan't to be decks in our backyards.
“tired of fighting gravity” ....cute. You repeatedly site California and PL as having the strictest forest practices anywhere. Didn’t the cutting yield get tripled about 10 years ago? What part of 93-97% elimination do you disagree with? Are you arguing for cutting down the last 3-7%? I don’t usually engage in on-line debates either, but I’m curiuos about the reasoning of folks who want to keep cutting down old-growth. Could you give a bit of insight into your reasoning?
1. Are old growth forests unique environments that should be preserved beyond the non-contiguous patchwork of existing parks?
2. Is the planting of a new forest as good as saving an established one?
3. At what point do we prioritize a 10,000 year old forest over PL’s next quarter’s earnings?
4. Is the logging of the Pacific NW is sustainable?
1. Are old growth forests unique environments that should be preserved beyond the non-contiguous patchwork of existing parks?
2. Is the planting of a new forest as good as saving an established one?
3. At what point do we prioritize a 10,000 year old forest over PL’s next quarter’s earnings?
4. Is the logging of the Pacific NW is sustainable?
Cut tripled? No. Stepped up. Yes. Increased planning? Definitely.
I agreed that 90 whatever % is gone. Of the remainder, 90% of that is protected in parks. The remaining 10% residing on private property (which amounts to 1% of the original) seems to be the rediculous goad for most enviros. Protecting 1% of the total will make a huge difference. Right. Until the demand for the product ceases or the product is exhausted, I believe simple economics will continue despite any and all efforts of anyone. Treesitters, you are wasting (y)our time.
answers for 1-4
1. No
2. Yes
3. Not our decision. If we want that right, then we should purchase the land in question.
4. Rotations for redwood in this region are 30 (thinning) to 50 (cc) years, so probably. I'm optomistic.
I agreed that 90 whatever % is gone. Of the remainder, 90% of that is protected in parks. The remaining 10% residing on private property (which amounts to 1% of the original) seems to be the rediculous goad for most enviros. Protecting 1% of the total will make a huge difference. Right. Until the demand for the product ceases or the product is exhausted, I believe simple economics will continue despite any and all efforts of anyone. Treesitters, you are wasting (y)our time.
answers for 1-4
1. No
2. Yes
3. Not our decision. If we want that right, then we should purchase the land in question.
4. Rotations for redwood in this region are 30 (thinning) to 50 (cc) years, so probably. I'm optomistic.
it seems i have missed the action by a month or so. forgive me for commenting so late in the game. indeed i seems that the game is over and the crowd has gone home but i would like my chance to play and especially would like for sinner to read this.
i am 21. i used to be nvolved with earth first in humboldt county when i was about 16 ans 17. iwas what i consider to be deeply involved with the tree sit on gypsy mountain. if any one remembers that.
for 6 months i lived at the base camp and hiked supplies up and acted as ground support for the tree sitters. for six months i saw alot of people come and go throught the camp and sit. at the end of the period it seems as though every one just kind of broke up and left the sit and the base camp. i was the absolute last person at the base camp. i stayed for about a month after every one left then i too simply just left. leaving behind me an unbelievable amount of trash old torn up tents wet clothing and other miscalaneoos equipment not withstanding some matresses that someone had brought in to make their sleep more comfortable. the base camp was not surprisingly held on private land. to my knowledge of the situation which is extensive earth first never gave the owner any compensation for the use of his land which was never in the agreement any way, but i distinctly remember an agreement that the owner of the land would have the phone company come in and set up a phone line for the ef ers to have access to the office and to respond to pages from the sitters. ef was supposed to foot the phone bill. they never did.
as to the sit nothing was accomplished there and in fact i dont know what if anything the objective was. the only legacy of the gypsy mountain "free state" is that a man was killed there and in his memory the site of his death was left filled with trash similar to the kind left at base camp including tents and clothing.
the thing that really gets me is that everyone just left. they werent arrested or evicted forcefully they just got bored wanted better action and just left.
i was 16-17 at the time i was there. i strongly believed in the cause of saving the redwoods and i still do.
what i realize now is that while the cause of earth first is a worth while honorable and important one earth first that i have seen has not done anything to furthewr that cause. aside from the fact that in the high ranking llevels there are intelegent and powerful people working at a judicial level to make a difference in public policy the so called grass roots movement of tree sitters and activists is getting absolutley nothing done. in my time a few thp were over turned and that is something any way but it had nothing to do with the efforts of any of the sitters or base campers. there was an old man named scotty that went to the dept of land managment office every weeka nd filed papers and did research. he was instrumental in al ot of thp overturns. but other than him i never saw any one do anyhting constructive. all ef managed to do, (atleast the group i was with at the time i was with them ) was hurt the cause of saving the trees by acting irresponsibly and letting stupid people run their mouths when they didnt know what they were talking baout, thus angering the publkic and blinding them to the importance and validity of the issue . i think that is what has happened to you sinner. you dislike Ef or any environmentalists so much for the image they portray or the actions that they take that you automatically equate them with their caus e and thus you dislike the cause as well. but if you exclude any personal experience you have had with environmentalists or any prejudice you have against them and just focus on the issue cn you really deny that saving ALL the remaining old growth is a worth while endevour. maybe you would evjoy a deck made out of red wood more than you would enjoy walking through a red wood forest and that is fine, but other red woods can grow are growing have grown and will grow. if Pl wants to grow red woods to harvest or purchase stands of young mature trees to harvest, i dont neccesarily agree with that but i would not take a stand against it. the problem i have is cutting down trees that have withstood centuries of natures fury and human development only to be chopped down in a matter fo minute s to build some ones deck. these treesare so majestic and strong and beautiful. when you see one to know that it was there when christopher colunbus came to america. it was there when the civil war was fought. it was there when your great granparents were children. so many generations have walked through these same forests and seen the same trees as us had the same thoughts as us. how can someone come in a cut it down after all these centuries after all that has been said and done at the base of that tree for hundreds of years. how can someone just ut it down for a deck and not feel an ounce of regret that noones grandchildren will ever again look at that tree in awe and wonder who else has done the same thing.
i am not sticking up for PL. i hate maxxam and charles hurwitz for the way they exploit resorces adn people for their own good. and sinner ofr you to think that PL is good just because in your opinion they arent as bad s the rest of the pack is ridiculous. maybe you dont agrre that saving the last remaining stands of old growth is a worth while cause, but you seem to be all for the tax paying working man. which by the way, i have a kid and a home and a 40 hour a week job and i pay my fare share of taxes. so if you are for the working man then you cannot be for maxxam. the way they treat their workers and the degree to which they exploit them and thier lack of any concern whatsoever for their physical safety or for their security ro for their lives in general is sickening. they care nothing for the future of thier employees jobs or their retirement. maxxam is an evil corporation. i wish i knew more specifically or could emember the things i learned about maxxam an PL. i have been out of the loop for some years. i no longer live in Ca.
but the thing that really bothers me is not neccesarily Pl or Maxxam specifically or even cutting down red woods specifically. the thing that bothers me is that a man a human being can be so callous and hateful and selfish and evil that he has no reservations about hurting other people for his own personal gain. in the example of Pl, they dont care about the job stability of teh men who are loyal to that company and break there backs for the profits of that company. they dont care about the people who live in the towns that are destroyed by flooding and land slides due to the loss of ecologicxal stability from clear cutting. htey dont give a shit about one thing but their bottom line and it makes me sick to my stomach. and dont get me wrong. i hate people like kenneth lay from enron adn the mcdonalds corporation just as much as i hate Pl. its just that i have seen directly the effects of clearcutting and whats more i have seen what wsa there beofre a clear cut and so this cause is near to my heart.
sinner you are entitled to your opinion and i can understand how you would dislike ef or any other environmental "crazies" but dont let the actions of people you dislike bling you to the issues. he cause and the activists are not one in the same. i beg you to see this . dont let hatred or dislike or disgust drive you to the other side. if you can be objective and not hate redwoods just because you hate the people who like them and if you can find other valid reasons to like Pl other than simply because you dislike and want to prove wrong or disagree with Pl's critics then i would respect your opinions. but when you make statements like "these trees are tired of fighting gravity they want to be a deck in my back yrad" i suspect that you are not objective and that you have not really thought out he issue. it makes me think that you just want to be contradictory to a group of people you dislike but that is not a reason to take a position on an issue. you should take a position because you feel strongly about your ideas. and for you sinner to honeslty say that you would rather have a 600 year old tree be a deck rather than to stand and live because Pl owns the tree and has the right to do with it what they will is ridiculous. just because you dislike Environmentalisit or thier actions and disreguard ofr the law should not in any ones mind justify the actions of Pl or Maxxam.
that is all i have to say. i hope you have taken the time to read this long and boring message.
i am 21. i used to be nvolved with earth first in humboldt county when i was about 16 ans 17. iwas what i consider to be deeply involved with the tree sit on gypsy mountain. if any one remembers that.
for 6 months i lived at the base camp and hiked supplies up and acted as ground support for the tree sitters. for six months i saw alot of people come and go throught the camp and sit. at the end of the period it seems as though every one just kind of broke up and left the sit and the base camp. i was the absolute last person at the base camp. i stayed for about a month after every one left then i too simply just left. leaving behind me an unbelievable amount of trash old torn up tents wet clothing and other miscalaneoos equipment not withstanding some matresses that someone had brought in to make their sleep more comfortable. the base camp was not surprisingly held on private land. to my knowledge of the situation which is extensive earth first never gave the owner any compensation for the use of his land which was never in the agreement any way, but i distinctly remember an agreement that the owner of the land would have the phone company come in and set up a phone line for the ef ers to have access to the office and to respond to pages from the sitters. ef was supposed to foot the phone bill. they never did.
as to the sit nothing was accomplished there and in fact i dont know what if anything the objective was. the only legacy of the gypsy mountain "free state" is that a man was killed there and in his memory the site of his death was left filled with trash similar to the kind left at base camp including tents and clothing.
the thing that really gets me is that everyone just left. they werent arrested or evicted forcefully they just got bored wanted better action and just left.
i was 16-17 at the time i was there. i strongly believed in the cause of saving the redwoods and i still do.
what i realize now is that while the cause of earth first is a worth while honorable and important one earth first that i have seen has not done anything to furthewr that cause. aside from the fact that in the high ranking llevels there are intelegent and powerful people working at a judicial level to make a difference in public policy the so called grass roots movement of tree sitters and activists is getting absolutley nothing done. in my time a few thp were over turned and that is something any way but it had nothing to do with the efforts of any of the sitters or base campers. there was an old man named scotty that went to the dept of land managment office every weeka nd filed papers and did research. he was instrumental in al ot of thp overturns. but other than him i never saw any one do anyhting constructive. all ef managed to do, (atleast the group i was with at the time i was with them ) was hurt the cause of saving the trees by acting irresponsibly and letting stupid people run their mouths when they didnt know what they were talking baout, thus angering the publkic and blinding them to the importance and validity of the issue . i think that is what has happened to you sinner. you dislike Ef or any environmentalists so much for the image they portray or the actions that they take that you automatically equate them with their caus e and thus you dislike the cause as well. but if you exclude any personal experience you have had with environmentalists or any prejudice you have against them and just focus on the issue cn you really deny that saving ALL the remaining old growth is a worth while endevour. maybe you would evjoy a deck made out of red wood more than you would enjoy walking through a red wood forest and that is fine, but other red woods can grow are growing have grown and will grow. if Pl wants to grow red woods to harvest or purchase stands of young mature trees to harvest, i dont neccesarily agree with that but i would not take a stand against it. the problem i have is cutting down trees that have withstood centuries of natures fury and human development only to be chopped down in a matter fo minute s to build some ones deck. these treesare so majestic and strong and beautiful. when you see one to know that it was there when christopher colunbus came to america. it was there when the civil war was fought. it was there when your great granparents were children. so many generations have walked through these same forests and seen the same trees as us had the same thoughts as us. how can someone come in a cut it down after all these centuries after all that has been said and done at the base of that tree for hundreds of years. how can someone just ut it down for a deck and not feel an ounce of regret that noones grandchildren will ever again look at that tree in awe and wonder who else has done the same thing.
i am not sticking up for PL. i hate maxxam and charles hurwitz for the way they exploit resorces adn people for their own good. and sinner ofr you to think that PL is good just because in your opinion they arent as bad s the rest of the pack is ridiculous. maybe you dont agrre that saving the last remaining stands of old growth is a worth while cause, but you seem to be all for the tax paying working man. which by the way, i have a kid and a home and a 40 hour a week job and i pay my fare share of taxes. so if you are for the working man then you cannot be for maxxam. the way they treat their workers and the degree to which they exploit them and thier lack of any concern whatsoever for their physical safety or for their security ro for their lives in general is sickening. they care nothing for the future of thier employees jobs or their retirement. maxxam is an evil corporation. i wish i knew more specifically or could emember the things i learned about maxxam an PL. i have been out of the loop for some years. i no longer live in Ca.
but the thing that really bothers me is not neccesarily Pl or Maxxam specifically or even cutting down red woods specifically. the thing that bothers me is that a man a human being can be so callous and hateful and selfish and evil that he has no reservations about hurting other people for his own personal gain. in the example of Pl, they dont care about the job stability of teh men who are loyal to that company and break there backs for the profits of that company. they dont care about the people who live in the towns that are destroyed by flooding and land slides due to the loss of ecologicxal stability from clear cutting. htey dont give a shit about one thing but their bottom line and it makes me sick to my stomach. and dont get me wrong. i hate people like kenneth lay from enron adn the mcdonalds corporation just as much as i hate Pl. its just that i have seen directly the effects of clearcutting and whats more i have seen what wsa there beofre a clear cut and so this cause is near to my heart.
sinner you are entitled to your opinion and i can understand how you would dislike ef or any other environmental "crazies" but dont let the actions of people you dislike bling you to the issues. he cause and the activists are not one in the same. i beg you to see this . dont let hatred or dislike or disgust drive you to the other side. if you can be objective and not hate redwoods just because you hate the people who like them and if you can find other valid reasons to like Pl other than simply because you dislike and want to prove wrong or disagree with Pl's critics then i would respect your opinions. but when you make statements like "these trees are tired of fighting gravity they want to be a deck in my back yrad" i suspect that you are not objective and that you have not really thought out he issue. it makes me think that you just want to be contradictory to a group of people you dislike but that is not a reason to take a position on an issue. you should take a position because you feel strongly about your ideas. and for you sinner to honeslty say that you would rather have a 600 year old tree be a deck rather than to stand and live because Pl owns the tree and has the right to do with it what they will is ridiculous. just because you dislike Environmentalisit or thier actions and disreguard ofr the law should not in any ones mind justify the actions of Pl or Maxxam.
that is all i have to say. i hope you have taken the time to read this long and boring message.
it makes me think that you just want to be contradictory to a group of people you dislike but that is not a reason to take a position on an issue.
and just who are you to meter out how the rest of humanity should think? and how dare you try to monopolize this discussion. it's funny but when confronted by any view but their own the leftist always presuppose that they should command any conversation and dictate rather that discuss. well that tactic works both ways.
the fact is that you have NO SAY IN THE MATTER
your opinion is of no concern, your comments however patronizing have no
place in what will come to pass. in short this is none of your business.
you do not own the trees
you do not own the land
you do not own the company
you do not even pay taxes (most likely)
Environmentalist or their actions and disregard ofr the law should not in any ones mind justify the actions they take
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$190.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network