"depriving activists of comfortable shade"?

dont you think this is a prime example of liberal whining? Did the loggers not bring you tea and cookies either? did the loggers fail to put down their chainsaws because you snapped your fingers and told them to?

I am extremely involved in the fight to save old growth and to abolish capitalism, so I just wanted to offer a comment on your reporting. i feel similarly revolted when people complain about how the police mistreated them. our real problems are the very existence of police, government, ecosystem destroyers, etc, not simply their excesses or their "wrongdoings".
A little more investigation and *work* into the real causes of forest destruction may help, rather then kneejerk reactions. please don't drop the ball when it comes to reporting and messaging. it is extremely important.

i wish Ramsey Gulch treesitters the best of luck and strength. solidarity.

I am not your public relations dept. I am not here to fight for your cause - that's your job. I am only here to report what is happening, here and now.

Yes, the loss of shade is minor. That was the whole point of reporting it - the tree sit created only a minor inconvenience for loggers, who then retalliated with what also became no more than a minor inconvenience. That is the tactical reality that has evolved in the sitters' overall campaign to stop the logging, and the loggers' retalliation to prevent that stoppage - that it has thus far been an exchange of inconveniences, nothing more.

That is the reality - the actual events transpiring. If you want a pro-forest public relations piece for YOUR fight, do it your damned self. I don't claim to be an environmentalist. I do claim to be a journalist. I journalize - to record, that others may later interpret.

As for digging, I have personally visited the CDF office for this area, purchased a copy of the Timber Harvest Plan and Official Response documents, and read them front to back twice until my brain glazed over on multiple nights from ecological and geological techno-babble. I've discussed details of the THP and the specific issued that were raised, with the current treesit leader Dragonfly. I've personally spoke to Nancy Drinkard of the CDF for a half hour about activists' specific issues on this and previous harvests, and about what documentation to read to answer these questions. I've hiked twice up to the tree sit itself, and questioned various sitters on their motives for participation. I've attended EF meetings for updates, and even left disposable cameras in the trees for sitters in case of newsworthy events. I've already retreived and developed, at my own expense, two such rolls of film and sent fresh cameras back up.

I am investigating the story heavily, discovering a great deal of surprising information from both sides, and as soon as Ive finished processing it all there will be a report.

Maybe in your simple world it all boils down to re-inforcing pre-conceived generalities like "forest destruction" and "abolishing capitalism", but dealing with reality means witholding judgement until you're done with your research. And paying attention to the details.

I'm reporting news. That means reporting the facts that I have, and letting the reader decide what they think. You want propaganda in support of your pre-conceived conclusions? Write it yourself.

-Edison

While Im "dropping the ball", knee-jerking, and failing to do "a little more investigation and *work*" on this story, when Im not hiking 2 hrs up a mountain path in total darkness to actually visit the tree sit in person without getting caught and arrested for tresspassing, when Im not attending SCEF! meetings and the SCEF! table at Farmer's Market for updates, right now Im also..

.. editing video from Monday's Reclaim-The-Streets march,

.. editing video from Tuesday's smaller Reclaim-The-Streets march,

.. editing video from an interview with Larry Templeton of Camp Paradise after the weekly City Council meeting,

.. pursuing local Rasta bands for a suitable song I can license for my Million Marijua March video, which I then have to edit in, render, and deliver to Free Speech TV,

.. going to the WAMM farm tonight to make a copy of their security camera footage of the DEA raid, to edit and publish that here.

And when Im not doing these things, Im busy attending SCIMC meetings, and running the technical side of this site (including fixing broken images for people when things dont upload correctly, diagnosing disk-full breakdowns), and manually filtering the SCIMC operations listserv to keep spam out.

And then in my copious spare time, I try to relax and have a life.

Meanwhile, you're getting something for nothing here, and asking why I don't work harder at this?

Oh, how the mind boggles.

You want to complain about someone not doing their part here? Look at the people who claim knowledge, experience, and passion for an issue, then complain about inadequate reporting, and yet do no reporting themselves. You know, people like...

Im beginning to understand why so many environmentalists think trees are better than people. Particularly Californians.

-Edison / Van

I am sorry that it appeared that I said that you weren't doing enough work.

My comment was simply this: your article (and there are several of us that are not in santa cruz and only hearing about ramsey gulch from indymedia that felt this) left a lot to be desired. most of the press releases we have seen have been heavy on cliches and skimpy on actual analysis. I suppose then, my criticism should be rephrased in the form of a question in general: why aren't the forest activists putting out good stories? Indymedia is about openpublishing and reports from the frontlines. where are these reports? I know that this may seems terrible, but I encourage people from the movement (myself included) to continue to utilize their own resources and use their own voices.

My point was to offer criticism of how the article appeared .
You claim that you are not the public relations firm for the environemental movement. But you are using your voice to speak up for the environmental movement and these particular forest activists. I would hope that you would be able to see from somebody else's perspective (somebody from within the movement) if the article seems misleading.

Honestly, I would never want to people to read about how loggers took away my "comfortable shade". I am not a treesitter because I want to be comfortable. This in my opinion only enforces the maintsream-beleif that activists only engage in direct action for their own egos. I don't want people to think that because it's not true.

The only thing worth mentioning about shade is that removing the protective forest canopy spells death for the sensitive ecosystem in the streams. Right?

Anyway, thanks for telling me to write it my damn self. I am not a treesitter from Ramsey Gulch, I am a longtime member of the movement. It was a comment from somebody in one forest to another. I have been reading these from a distance and thinking this for so long.
I DO apologize for coming off so smirky and snarky. It was a little uncalled for. But seriously, everything I have read has made me roll my eyes in some way. I just couldn't help myself. BUT I SHOULD HAVE and I do apologize.

I stand by my original point. but i guess it is really minor and i'm sorry it upset you.
It seems like you are not getting enough recognition for all the things that you do. How was I supposed to know from reading these reports from Ramsey Gulch that you have so many things to do with your life? How was I supposed to know that simply making a comment about how other people might interpret something that you write would induce mind-boggling stress on your already overloaded life? I didn't.
And *how* would I have known that you HAVE been doing so much invesitgative journalims on a report that has NOT been released yet? I didn't know that. I'm sure that SCEF has dropped the ball perhaps in some of the press. Beleive me, I hate making comments like this,but i think it's necessary. We went through a fight like this 2 years ago. I would hate to go through another fight EXACTLY like the one we went through, with no evolution in tactics, press relations, etc.
So my comments are sort of directed at you and also at your sources. YOu may not have gotten enough information from the sources you were working with.
Anyway, Edison and Van, please accept my *honest* thoughts of solidarity and my *honest* thanks for what you do.
i'm not going to post again because i dont' want to "start something" and i'm sorry if it seemed like i did.
i am a very funny person and forget what that comes across on imc channels sometime. *solidarity*

Let me spell it out for you. A detailed investigative report has not been filed yet, because I have found there are *3*.. not 2, but 3.. sides to this story. Earth First, Redwood Empires, and CDF. Each is very different. Forest defenders are not the only side with a story to tell, you know.

Nor does forest defense have a monopoly on all that is good, right, and true.

That makes for a complicated story right there. Throw in the technical side of things (something I see most forest defenders sadly ignorant of), and it's really complicated.

With all that going on, the ONLY way to report on the story is cautiously. Otherwise, I risk making major mistakes and screwing one or more sides.

Oh yeah, and if you have no way of knowing why an in-depth report hasnt been filed yet, then maybe you shouldn't criticize, eh?

-Van