California tree sitters holding firm despite court order

[Rob-TheStormChaser]

Eighteen tree sitters trying to save California redwoods from loggers stood firm Thursday against a court-ordered deadline to come down from their perches.

The environmentalists spent a wet and windy morning shrouded in plastic tarps on their platforms, some at least 100 feet above ground.

Pacific Lumber Co. served the tree sitters with a temporary restraining order Wednesday giving them 24 hours to come down, company spokeswoman Mary Bullwinkel said.

Bullwinkel said there are no immediate plans to remove the protesters if they refuse, but added that contracted climbers have been hired in the past to remove similarly defiant activists.

A 28-year-old tree sitter who goes by the name Remedy said she was staying put.

"The consequences to the whole community are so much greater than any consequences I might suffer," said Remedy, who is approaching her one-year anniversary in the large redwood she now calls home.

The tree sitters say the company is harvesting the area too aggressively, causing flooding and erosion. The company said the protesters are trespassing, blocking roads and interfering with business.

The trees are part of a more than 200,000-acre redwood forest owned by Pacific Lumber.

Notice of the restraining order has been served on each sitter. Plastic pouches containing thick yellow envelopes with the judge's order are nailed to the massive trunks of the redwoods.

[azsnowman]

These FREAKS need to get down, tell ya what....you know ME and these radical terrorist environmentalist, I HAVE NO problem fetching my Stihl chainsaw with the 48" bar and CUT them out of the tree Can you say *flying squrriels?"

Dennis 8)

[streetsoldier]

Ms. Bullwinkel (LOL) would be pleased, I'm sure...

[azsnowman]

Hey Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit from that tree!

Dennis

[firefighter16]

TAlk about squriells,You guys are funny.LMAO

I was wondering, why not cut off there food supply or something easy like that. They have to be getting it somewhere. I can't see them pansies eating bugs and bark.

[Rob-TheStormChaser]

lmao I'd much rather shoot them out one by one and if they ran once they hit the ground, bonus points and a can full of buckshot! lmao

[mf_dolphin]

TIMBER!!!!!!!!!!!!

Maybe make a bet on how far from the stump they'll land!

[azsnowman]

LOL!

All joking aside, I have been *called on the carpet* one time for calling these environmentalist *terrorists* (you know who you are!) I ask you, isn't this a form of terrorism? You honestly cannot say that they aren't, right?

Dennis

[wannabehippie]

these people are NOT terrorists in any way shape or form.
extremist? radical? those terms may be more accurate.

the word terrorist should be limited to persons like osama bin laden, yasser arafat, hamas, etc.

terrorists are ones who commit vile acts that kill innocent civilians.

i think that a restraining order on both ends should be implemented. to get the tree sitters down and on on the lumber companies to see if they are guilty of the over harvesting of trees that they are accused of.

if they are indeed over harvesting then that lumber company should immediately have their contract to cut down trees eliminated.
if they are not guilty the environementalists should issue an public apology and a statement saying that limited cutting down of trees is actually beneficial to the environment (ie via thinning of over growth etc)

my fear is if that the lumber companies are over harvesting (lets face it the more they cut the more they can sell and thus make money on) they will do so in other areas if they are not stopped from doing so in this case.

but like i said an investigation should be made to insure overharvesting is not taking place.

also if they are indeed overharvesting here and get away with it they will surely over harvest in other areas


peace
david

[azsnowman]

FYI Dave....lifes ARE at stake here, someone WILL be killed by wildfires this summer, MARK my words, this fire season promises to be even WORSE than last years, I'm sorry, they ARE terrorist not only in MY EYES but most of us who are threatened by these screwballs. As far as the forest being overcut, I DON'T THINK SO, once again, have you EVER been out west here just to see how DIRE our situation IS, if NOT, I challenge you to do so, come out and take a look for yourself, you CANNOT see the forest for the trees Sir! I think you need to do a little more research into this matter before you speak!

Dennis

[Rob-TheStormChaser]

Oh my! Hey man....ya gotta toothpick? heehee Sorry bad pun there pertaining to wood! I wonder if they're still in the trees? I better check on this story again!

[azsnowman]

That's the problem with these enviro terrorist, they sit behind a desk, smoking their dope without actually SEEING what's really going on, they get their info from the internet posted by the radical terrorists. Overcutting indeed "LOL!" If they only knew!

Dennis

"save a logger, eat more owl!"

[azsnowman]

David, don't take that as a personnal attack, it was NOT meant at you, it's directed at those in the Sierra Club, Forest Guardians, The Forest Conservation Council, Southwest Center for Biological Diversity.

Dennis

[wannabehippie]

i have never been out west nor can i afford it at this time. but i do have a friend who lived out in flagstaff for 4 years and just returned to NY.

he said while the forests do need thinning in certain areas what the logging industry proposed/is doing, is overboard and could hurt more than help in the long run. (btw his brother still lives there and his backyard is a national forest so he would be affected by a wildfire.

he also says that even if the forests were thinned, the fire danger is still high due to the dry conditions that have been prevelant. what is needed he says (in addition to lots of moisture) is to clean out all the undergrowth where the fires start. the dried out undergrowth acts as the kindling to the fires and helps them spread rapidly.

peace

david

[azsnowman]

Granted, it's drier than a popcorn fa** out here and while not all fires are preventable, the overgrown conditions we have is what gives these fires what they need to become monsters, the dreaded *crown fire*, that's what caused the Rodeo Chediski Fire to consume over 2000 acres per HOUR last year. Thinning would prevent the fires from crowning, the fire would run along the ground which is a very GOOD thing, we NEED fire to control the duff (that's the underbrush) BUT there's another problem, control burns, yes they are done but no sooner than the USDA starts then, they have to shut them down because some clown calls the EPA and complains, ONE of these days and it JUST might be this summer, there will be nuthin left to burn so all these clowns won't have a home to call the EPA from!

Dennis

[wannabehippie]

dennis, as AZsnowman stated in the opening post, the people that are treesitting in the redwoods arent protesting for a wholesale prohibition of cutting of trees. rather they claim that the logging industry is harvesting the trees too agressively causing erosion and floods.

limited cutting and thinning is ok, but if the treesitters claims are true (which need to be verified one way or another), then the logging company responsible should be halted immediately and be held accountable.

we must live in harmony with nature. if no one settled in the problem area mother nature would cure the overgrowth with fires. Since that obviously is not the answer here because people DO live in the danger areas, limited cutting down of trees is necessary along with controlled burns to restrict the undergrowth.
at the same time the logging industry must be watched like a hawk to make sure they dont take advantage (which i feel they would do in a minute to make a buck. just look at the oil industry taking advantage of the problems in iraq and venezuala to price gouge. )

i have seen what wildfires can do (we had one a few years back here on long island in the pine barrens). i have also seen what unchecked logging can do.

peace
david

[wannabehippie]

once again i must state that these people are NOT terrorists.

are they blowing people up? are they shooting civilians?

terrorists take aim on innocent civilians in hopes of making them afraid to do normal day to day actions. they also deliberatly injury or kill innocents.

these radical environmentalists are not doing what they are doing with intent to injury or kill anyone. or to make them afraid to do normal activities. that is the OPPOSITE of a terrorist


peace
david

[azsnowman]

Living in the White Mountains all of my life, I have grown up around the logging industry and have known many a logger in my day, loggers have more respect for the land than anyone can imagine David, do you yourself know any loggers? Can you honestly say that you have watched a logging operation in person? Why would someone who makes a living, supports a family, supports a community, pays taxes jepordize their very own existance? I don't understand where you've come this conclusion that the logging industry is out to cut every single tree just to make a buck, did you get this info out of a book, do you listen to the propaganda of these radical environmentalists? I'm sorry, you've not seen a wildfire (firestorm) until you come out west, you will never comprehend the damage that these terrorist have caused David, never. Like I said, I am at a total loss as to your way of thinking about the logging industry, I JUST DON'T GET IT!

Dennis

[azsnowman]

As far as shooting people, my wife and I have had pot shots taken at us while doing our environmental impact studies. We did a tree study back in 1998 in the White Moutain Summer Homes (which is home to many a radical environmentalist), we were tagging trees that needed to come down due to health issues, we had this one fruit loop that followed us around, yelling, screaming, you name it, she did it, it got SOOOO bad that we had to get a officer from the Pinetop Lakeside Police Dept escort us so we could finish the job. We were out doing another tree study just 3 miles out of town, we were meet by these fruit loops, they asked us in a proper manner not to enter this one particular area due to it supposedly being a Spotted Owl habitat, we proceeded with caution into the area, upon setting up our work area, a shot rang out taking out a piece of equip, NOW....that to me is a sniper, wouldn't that constitute terrorism???

Dennis

[wannabehippie]

i am sure the lumberjacks themselves care about the forests, they depend on them for a living.

it is the industry aka the companies, that dont give a crap. they care about one thing, making a buck anyway they can no matter what long term damage it does.

i have seen the damage from over logging. i dont blame the lumberjacks, they were doing their job. I blame the owners!

and to contiunally call radical environmentalists terrorists is an insult to anyone who died at the hands of the true terrorists (osama, arafat and company)


peace
david