Tree Spiking - Urban Myth?
REHaston
I was just curious about tree-spiking, claimed as:
A common tactic of fanatical anti-loggers, which has maimed and killed loggers.
A myth perpetuated by logging promoters.
I do know that sometimes trees get nailed to string fences, for tree stands,
signs, etc, and that these can be swallowed up by the tree, but this was in
the agricultural midwest.
Any references / data / opinoins?
Robert Haston
Satellite Beach, FL USA
The Ox is slow but the Earth is patient.
=======================================================
DsrtTravlr
>A myth perpetuated by logging promoters.
>
>
Like Io, a moon of Jupiter, I have no first hand information, never having been
there and seen it. I do believe it exists, tho.
Perhaps someone who has a firsthand experience will share........or their next
of kin.
Steve, the DsrtTravlr
Mike2678
In article <19971109212...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
dsrtt...@aol.com (DsrtTravlr) writes:
>Perhaps someone who has a firsthand experience will share........or their
>next
> of kin.
>
>
I have seen it done in some old growth timber of CAlif. about 15 years
ago.
Jim Sampson
I've seen tons of metal garbage imbedded in trees. It usually from attaching
a fence to the tree because they were too lazy to put a post hole in solid
rock.
--
If you think there is a solution, then you are part of the problem.
'George Carlin'
Jim Sampson
Technology Coordinator
Pierre Public Schools
samp...@pierre.k12.nospam.sd.us
Contagoras wrote in message <6467f7$27t$2...@gte1.gte.net>...
>DsrtTravlr wrote:
>>
>> >A myth perpetuated by logging promoters.
>>
>> Like Io, a moon of Jupiter, I have no first hand information, never
having been
>> there and seen it. I do believe it exists, tho.
>>
>Sounds like the perfect attitude to perpetuate an urban myth.
DsrtTravlr
>DsrtTravlr <dsrtt...@aol.com> wrote in article
><19971109212...@ladder02.news.aol.com>...
>> >A myth perpetuated by logging promoters.
NO DSRTRAVLR DIDN'T WROTE THAT. DSRTTRAVLR QUOTED THAT FROM ANOTHER ARTICLE.
Please learn how to use this thing before you make comments on what I did not
say.
To my mind, the poster of the "myth" line was saying that tree spiking did not
take place, and was a myth promoted by loggers.
I did not utter that line, but quoted it from the original article. Scroll up,
and get the thread from the beginning, instead of coming in on the middle of
the conversation, and making ludicrous statements.
I said that I believed it, since I heard substantiated stories, even though I
had no firsthand knowledge.
Lets all brush up on our Nettiquette.
Sheesh ! ! ! !
Greg Rose
DsrtTravlr (dsrtt...@aol.com) wrote:
: To my mind, the poster of the "myth" line was
: saying that tree spiking did not
: take place, and was a myth promoted by loggers.
I don't know if I'm the poster that you're referring to but just in case
let me set this matter straight. I DID NOT say that tree spiking has
ever occurred or a myth made by loggers. I said that widespread
reports of deaths and maiming resulting from tree spiking are an
urban legend. I've heard of exactly one report of a mill worker
who got injured by a tree spike. Further, I said that there is
no conclusive evidence that Earth First set that spike or any
other spikes that have injured anyone.
: I said that I believed it, since I heard substantiated stories, even though I
: had no firsthand knowledge.
We've all heard substantiated stories of tree spiking. Substantiated
stories of Earth First!ers being convicted of a tree spiking that has
led to a death and/or maiming are what is in very short supply.
Get it?
And given the rarity of the actual occurrances in ratio to the number of
times that the story is told and retold on Usenet (something like 1 to
1 billion or so) I think it's highly appropriate to point out that they
are almost always unsubstantiated accusations whose whole point is to
provide a propaganda device to descredit Earth First and other environmental
groups who want to end the harvest of the last few remnants of old
growth forest here in the Pacific NW.
Now, as I've said before... If anyone out there has evidence of widespread
terrorism carried out by Earth First via tree spiking then let's hear it.
The FBI will also be curious about why no one has been forthcoming with
it because it is definitely a violation of federal law if the tree
spiking took place on federal lands.
But might I just suggest for one moment that you all stop and consider
something?
The FBI **hasn't** found such evidence and if the FBI can't do it I doubt
anyone else can either.
: Lets all brush up on our Nettiquette.
: Sheesh ! ! ! !
Kiss Kiss.
greg rose
bill tyner
DsrtTravlr <dsrtt...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19971109212...@ladder02.news.aol.com>...
> >A myth perpetuated by logging promoters.
> >
More likely the few spikes Dave Forman of Earth First sunk into some trees
for the media cameras created your "myth". Add to that the broken band saw
and the skewered saw operator in a Roseburg Mill and the "myth" gains
credibility. Nowadays I think Earth First steers away from spiking. That
is threatened by the remaining goofball fringees that hang on Forman's
every utterance. I don't think EF ever wanted people injured or killed
during their attacks on clear cut logging practices. Still, there "most
likely" are quite a few random spikes in the trees. Myth or no, they are
potentially lethal hazards. This practice is shameful and is embarrassing
to environmentalists who work for "selective cutting" instead of clear
cutting.
Bill (another hiker)
So. Or.
Contagoras
DsrtTravlr wrote:
>
> >A myth perpetuated by logging promoters.
>
jmg
Daniel Boutin <danb...@videotron.ca> wrote:
> Yeah, but who pays????? .....the taxpayers and the buyers of products
>made from wood.
That's always the argument. But it's weak. Using that as a criteria, sure, come
around and cut anything you like anywhere you like. Hell, just clearcut the
country!
Seriously though and more importantly, the lumber companies were forced to cut
on their own properties and begin the practice of sustainable forestry there.
Everyone benefits.
J
--
Bongo Boy never litters! [www.bongoboy.com]
Kathy Hannah
aCTUALLY, ONLY ONE CASE OF INJURY HAS EVER BEEN REPORTED (sorry for
caps), and that was a staunch Republican upset that the FS had
authorized logging right up to his property line. The trial established
that the blade in question was much too old, and that the mill workers
were leary of it, irrespective that it happened to hit a spike...
Dna Dan
jmg
Kathy Hannah <kha...@pyramid.net> wrote:
>aCTUALLY, ONLY ONE CASE OF INJURY HAS EVER BEEN REPORTED (sorry for
Which is true. But we need o remember that the point of spiking trees was not to
injure, but to make the logging companies wary of cutting trees which *might*
have been spiked. Moreover, in a proper sawmill the operator would be behind a
protective panel anyway as a safety precaution that had nothing to do with
whether or not someone put a steel spike in a tree.
But most importantly, thought largely a myth, it must have cost the lumber
companies mucho bucks. Therefore it was a success.
Daniel Boutin
jmg...@ix.netcomDOTcom (jmg) wrote:
But most importantly, thought largely a myth, it must have cost the
lumber
companies mucho bucks. Therefore it was a success.
Yeah, but who pays????? .....the taxpayers and the buyers of products
made from wood.
Larry Stamm
On 9 Nov 1997 19:18:04 GMT, reha...@aol.com (REHaston) wrote:
>I was just curious about tree-spiking, claimed as:
>
>A common tactic of fanatical anti-loggers, which has maimed and killed loggers.
>
>A myth perpetuated by logging promoters.
>
>Any references / data / opinoins?
I know from first hand that trees in my area have been spiked in a malicious
sabotage attempt. I haven't heard of any trees being spiked in the last 5 years
though. It creates an extreme hazard for loggers and mill workers having to
handle spiked logs, as there is no way of predicting that they are there until
the saw hits them.
Anti-logging persons continue to sabotage logging equipment through such means
as arson or adding sugar to fuel tanks. This tatoic just creates enemies.
--
Larry Stamm
PO Box 561
McBride, BC V0J 2E0
JED
>Yeah, but who pays????? .....the taxpayers and the buyers of products made
>from wood.
Since the federal government practically gives away the wood on federal
lands, the taxpayers always pay when wood is cut on federal lands. That's
been a fixed aspect of the logging industry, this permanent subsidy to
logging companies and logging communities. It's easy to argue against
welfare to individuals, especially when they aren't working, but it's very
hard to argue against welfare to entire towns and regions, especially when
they ARE working (though not working enough to actually recover the costs of
their work to the taxpayers; a net loss when the taxpayers's inputs are
considered).
As to extra costs caused by anti-logging activities, of course, mills will
attempt to pass these on to consumers as would any business.
As the question of the morality of tree-spiking (as opposed to its costs
and effectiveness), I once thought it was immoral regardless of the need to
impede excessive and destructive logging. However, now that "law officers"
have smeared chile juice in the eyes of unarmed protestors temporarily
blinding the protestors (something I would have expected in Iran, not in the
USA), I no longer have as much sympathy for loggers who might be injured by
tree spiking as I once might have had. Although on an individual basis,
I am still capable of sympathy for almost anyone who is injured in such a
manner (individuals DO have to work).
All in all, the Humboldt Co. sheriff's department has lowered everyone's
standard a notch or two.
"To feel absolutely right is the beginning of the end."
Albert Camus
"If what I read on the internet is any indication of anything,
the end IS near. Or maybe it has even passed us without our
even knowing it." Jack
JED
>Anti-logging persons continue to sabotage logging equipment through such
>enemies.--
Not really. They're already enemies. While I have a real problem with
attacking individuals regardless of which side they're on (e.g., tree-
spiking), I have much less of a problem with attacks on property (unlike
most Americans, I hold individual rights to be on a different and higher
plane from property rights; although I know many people think property
rights are more sacred than or equal to individual rights).
Though I don't participate in either type of practice, neither do I feel bad
when environmentalists harrass logging operations. The fact that the latter
often work within the law and with the blessing of the government while
wihle the former do not doesn't mean much to me. The logging practices in
this country and in western Canada (particular in BC) are unsustainable and
ultimately highly damaging.
Stephen Sharp
>
I think that environmental fanatics should try living in a paperless &
woodless home. They can wipe their butts with moss until the moss activists get
them.
I believe there is a place for logging and good environmental policies,
however, I don't believe that
there is any place for law-breaking militants. Lastly, unless you're an expert
on BC forests practice,
keep your fiction to yourself.
Opinions welcome, not Lies....
Stephen..
jmg
gr...@black.kilchis.com (Greg Rose) wrote:
>No one is seriously suggesting that *no* logging take place, just that
>we log second-growth and plantation trees to supply pulp for paper
>to wipe our butts and that we spare the last pitiful remnants of
>the old growth forests as biological reserves.
Jeez Greg. If you keep making sense you're going to ruin it for all of us.
GStigall
Jed said:
(among other things)
>As the question of the morality of tree-spiking (as opposed to its costs
>and effectiveness), I once thought it was immoral regardless of the need to
>impede excessive and destructive logging. However, now that "law officers"
>have smeared chile juice in the eyes of unarmed protestors temporarily
>blinding the protestors (something I would have expected in Iran, not in the
>USA), I no longer have as much sympathy for loggers who might be injured by
>tree spiking as I once might have had.
Please explain how it's OK to hurt "Person A" based on the actions of "Person
B". How does the unjustifiable actions of cops in Humboldt justify losing
sympathy for injuries to loggers or anyone else???? How does this make you any
different from the anti-enviros who think the pepper spray victims deserved
what they got because someone else somewhere else is thought to have engaged
in tree spiking?
> Although on an individual basis,
>I am still capable of sympathy for almost anyone who is injured in such a
>manner (individuals DO have to work).
This contradicts your earlier statement in this posting. Do you even know what
you think about this?
>All in all, the Humboldt Co. sheriff's department has lowered everyone's
>standard a notch or two.
Speak for yourself!!! My standards and the standards of everyone I know and
have discussed this with have NOT been lowered by the atrocious behavior of
HCSD.
Georgia Stigall
Jeff Wilson
Greg Rose wrote:
> No one, and I mean absolutely no one, needs old growth to
> get fiber
> to make paper to wipe their butts. The idea that someone
> would cut
> down old growth red woods that are thousands of years old
> to make
> into pulp for paper is simply preposterous.
>
> No one is seriously suggesting that *no* logging take
> place, just that
> we log second-growth and plantation trees to supply pulp
> for paper
> to wipe our butts and that we spare the last pitiful
> remnants of
> the old growth forests as biological reserves.
>
Greg,
No one uses redwoods for paper products. Its all for
lumber. Old growth actually produces the best lumber with
the least waste. While I would like to have all the old
growth redwoods protected, I sure like to work with the
wonderful wood they produce.
On the west coast, paper is generally made from fir and
pine. Oregon and Washington have plantations that look like
huge corn fields. Most of National Forest trees are for
lumber. The best private trees are shipped to Japan at a
huge profit.
Rich
In article <346B390B...@gv.net>, jrwi...@gv.net wrote:
> Perhaps all you pro-spiking appologists need to take a
> remedial course in morals and ehtics. Anyone who advocates
> injuring or killing people to save a tree is morally
> bankrupt.
>
> Lets say I'm holding a gun to your two year old child's
> head. Lets say I'll kill the child unless you cut down a
> 500 year old redwood. Do you start the chainsaw? If your
> answer is anything but a resounding YES! then you are either
> a lying fool or scum.
There seems to have been a jump or missing link in your line of thought here.
--
your favorite soils professional
remove "spamnot" to e-mail
Mark
JED wrote:
>
> >Aw, come on, JED--I've read your posts and you do your intellect a
> >disservice with this hyperbolic claptrap. You know damned well that in
> >"Iran," they would have KILLED these people.
>
> And you know damn well that those Humboldt County deputies wished like hell
> that they had the power to KILL those demonstrators.
And someone else claimed this guy had intellect?
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha...........
> Fortunately, we have a
> somewhat strong tradition against law officers murdering people who haven't
> been convicted of any crime (although it's pretty recent; ask the "negroes"
> that were lynched by "law officers" in the south, the sons of whom now
> live in Humboldt Co.). And by the end of the Viet Nam War we had developed
> a somewhat weak tradition of NOT torturing and beating demonstrators and
> protestors. Although obviously from most comments on this subject such as
> yours, most people think atrocities are just fine...as long as it happens to
> the "bad guys" (them) and not the "good guys" (us).
>
> And you do an intellectual and moral disservice by defending these thugs in
> the Humboldt Co. sheriff's department.
Greg Rose
rick etter (ret...@bright.net) wrote:
: As to the rest of the post, Gregie has already dismissed as old stuff
: anything that occured more than 15 years ago. According to him anything
: that far back is irrelevent or didn't happen.
Anything that far back (15 years) is pretty irrelevant to what happened
in Humboldt. That's my opinion.
And only my wife calls me Gregie, and only during moments of extreme
passion.
Does this mean we have a thing going Rickie?
;^)
I hope my wife doesn't get jealous. We better keep our affair a
secret. OK?
Kiss Kiss,
greg rose
GStigall
Jeff Wilson said:>Perhaps all you pro-spiking appologists need to take a
>remedial course in morals and ehtics. Anyone who advocates
>injuring or killing people to save a tree is morally
>bankrupt.
>
I think that anyone who advocates injuring or killing for any reason except
self defense is wrong. That said...where are the pro-spiking apologists on
this board? Several of us *have* been trying to find documented cases of tree
spiking (since all of us enviros collectively get accused of being terrorists,
which is a frightening thing considering the vigilante attitudes of some folks
here). There's a difference between wanting facts about an action and
condoning the action.
Georgia Stigall
Lloyd Bowles
Greg Rose wrote:
[snip]
> When the human race finally learns that we have to allow other animals
> the mere **right** to compete with us for food, we'll have learned a
> huge lesson.
>
> As long as we all walk around with the attitude that this planet was
> made for us and all other living things were created merely to serve
> our selfish purposes I can tell you something, and I know many don't
> want to hear it, but...
>
> We don't stand a chance.
>
> And as usual I've gone on long enough. My apologies.
Don't apologize. Your message needs to be heard.
--
Lloyd Bowles
The Mad Canoeist
"Keep the open side up!"
Tae H Kim
I know that this topic would be better suited on a ‘talk’, ‘politics’, or
‘environment’ newsgroup, and I’m sure people on both sides of this topic
would rather it die out. So, my apologies in advance, and send all flames
to me via email, please.
However, since I first read of this topic in *this* newsgroup, I felt
that I had to respond to it here.
Greg Rose <gr...@black.kilchis.com>, has posted quite a few articles
asking for verifiable proof that “a tree-spiking by a member of Earth
First! has maimed or killed”. He has gone in different directions as well
- suggesting that tree-spiking is an urban myth, that if trees *have*
been spiked, there’s no proof that a member of Earth First! was the one
spiking it, and that if anyone, it may very well have been an agent of
the lumber industry - placing the blame on Earth First! instead, to
garner negative publicity towards the group.
I’m afraid that trying to uphold the claim made by others - and denied by
Mr. Rose, with it’s mutliple conditions that need to be filled, may never
be proved. However, breaking down the claim to smaller, simpler
statements could sway the opinions of those who believe that since there
is *no* proof of the larger statement, that such an occurrence never
happened.
How about we go this way:
1) Does tree-spiking exist?
2) Do members of Earth First! commit, or have committed, an act of
tree-spiking?
3) Has anyone been injured or killed by a tree-spike that had been placed
into a tree?
I know, I know, - #3 should have “into a tree - by a member of Earth
First!?”, in order to lock it up, but that simply won’t happen, for
reasons I’ll get into later.
---
1) Does tree-spiking exist?
Yes - it does. Near the end of this post, there’s an article posted to
Usenet dated March 29, 1995, that describes the spiking of ‘several
hundred’ trees in the Phillipines.
One may point out that 1995 was hardly a long time ago, and yes - that’s
true. Let’s move on to #2:
2) Do members of Earth First! commit, or have committed, an act of
tree-spiking?
Well, that’s a bit of a loaded question, since the Earth First!
organization refers to itself as a ‘non-organization’ or ‘not a
membership organization’. So, anyone caught commiting some action could
honestly say that they didn’t ‘belong’, or was not ‘a member’ of Earth
First!, since there’s no such thing as membership. Conversely, Earth
First! - as a group, could deny that such person was a ‘member’ as well,
and deflect direct responsibility for that person’s actions.
Three things, however, make me sit up and go ‘hmmm’.
One: the fact that Dave Foreman, one of the founders of Earth First!,
wrote a book called ‘Ecodefense - A Guide to Monkeywrenching’. In this
book, if what others who’ve read it, and the booksellers who review it
are telling the truth, are descriptions and instructions on how to spike
trees - even going so far as recommending a certain length and type of
spike.
To be a bit balanced, I do not recall anyone who’s read the book
remembering Foreman advocating tree-spiking for the sole purpose of
hurting people, and the ‘ethical’ tree-spiker is supposed to warn loggers
of the spiked tree afterwards.
Two: an article printed in the October 1996 issue of ‘Outside’ magazine,
which recalls Mike Rosen, a memb- no, someone *affiliated* - shall we
say, with Earth First!, spiked trees in Oregon's Pyramid Creek Grove, in
1984. I believe that this incident was what really brought attention to
Earth First! and the act of tree-spiking to wide-spread public attention.
Three: an April 1990 archived memo from Judi Bari, a leader for an Earth
First! group, renouncing the act of tree-spiking in Northern California
and Southern Oregon. I have to wonder why a group - if they’ve never
advocated such an action, would now renounce it.
That memo - actually *all* of the articles I’m referring to, have been
attached at the end on my post - with URL’s where I found them.
3) Has anyone been injured or killed by a tree-spike that had been placed
into a tree?
The ‘Outdoor’ magazine article mentions someone by the name of George
Alexander, who “was a Sonoma County mill worker who in 1987 ran his band
saw into a hidden 11-inch spike. The saw exploded, breaking Alexander's
jaw in five places and nearly severing his jugular vein.”
Now, it seems a lot of anti-Earth First! sentiment rose out of that,
simply from the association between Earth First! and tree-spiking.
However, there was never any proof to link that tree spike with Earth
First!. And there likely never will - because of the way Earth First! is
‘not organized’ - that is, with no ‘membership’ and the freedom of
different Earth First! groups not to adopt a single charter, plan or set
of requirements. That memo goes further to explain how nothing they’ve
decided is an absolute for any other Earth First! group, and that they
themselves have the right to change their minds about tree-spiking.
Whether it’s a refreshing mix of liberatianism and egalitarianism or a
devious distancing mechanism for any actions that would hurt them in the
arena of public opinion - only your level of suspicion and cynicism will
tell.
In my OPINION, that memo seems to please everyone in some way - by
renouncing tree-spiking, but at the same time, allowing individuals to
choose to ignore the renouncement and decide their own course of action.
It’s win-win - the public sees a ‘toning-down’ by the leaders, while the
rank-n-file’s still free to make their own decisions to spike or not spike.
It also makes Earth First! completely unaccountable for any one person’s
individual actions. No matter how much a person may scream that what
he/she did was because of the literature that arose from Earth First!
leaders - such as Foreman’s book, it could easily be dismissed as a
individual making personal choices. Not that I think anyone caught doing
anything *would* blame Earth First! - working alone or in trusted pairs
and in complete secrecy is recommended in several ‘ecotage’ books.
Okay, I think I’ve written *way* too much on this subject, and I’ll stop
with a quick rhetorical question and my sources of information, and if
anyone really wants to hash this out further, please do so in email.
In the article about tree-spiking in the Phillipines, it’s mentioned that
Foreman’s book is like a ‘bible’ to them - it instructs them on how to
best spike trees. Can you completely blame the person spiking the tree -
or the person who wrote the book on spiking trees?
- Tae
P.S. I’m against indiscriminate logging and wasting of our natural
resources, as well as the damaging of our environment.
-----articles-----
Subject: PHILIPPINES: Tree-Spikers Open New Front in Green War
From: ri...@pencil.cs.missouri.edu (Rich Winkel)
Date: 1995/04/18
Message-ID: <3n0tbc$s...@news.missouri.edu>
Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive
/** reg.philippine: 99.0 **/
** Topic: IPS: ENVIRONMENT-PHILIPPINES: Tree- **
** Written 7:07 AM Apr 1, 1995 by newsdesk in cdp:reg.philippine **
Copyright 1994 InterPress Service, all rights reserved.
Worldwide distribution via the APC networks.
*** 29-Mar-95 ***
Title: ENVIRONMENT-PHILIPPINES: Tree-Spikers Open New Front in Green War
By Howie Severino
QUEZON, Philippines, Mar 29 (IPS) - Stepping nimbly in the dense,
wet foliage, the visiting Aeta tribesman approaches his target
with the ease of a lifelong hunter here in a forest hundreds of
kilometres south-east of Manila.
But instead of the customary bow and arrow, Castor is equipped
with a hand drill, long steel nails, and a caulking gun with
silicon ammunition. His mission, as well as that of several
companions, is to train local residents how to place nails inside
trees in watershed areas.
The trees then become booby traps. Trying to cut them down with
a chainsaw could maim the tool's wielder once the chain hits a
nail, breaks and whips the operator at high speed. If the log
reaches a sawmill, the nail could shatter the sawmill blade and
wound workers.
Because of its high potential to inflict harm on people, tree
spiking is considered an extreme, even morally debatable, method
of forest protection. But some activists say it is a last resort
to save what remains of the Philippines' forests.
Only 25 percent of the country's land area is covered with
forests, down from 75 percent in the 1950s. According to the Asian
Development Bank, the annual deforestation rate in the Philippines
is more than 316,000 hectares a year.
''Government refuses to ban commercial logging,'' says one of
the organisers of the training session here. ''Even in national
parks where it is banned, there is little enforcement.''
Castor himself was part of a volunteer task force assigned to
arrest illegal loggers. But all those caught were eventually
released and have resumed cutting trees. The lumber that Castor
helped confiscate also disappeared from the local office of the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).
Castor says the 15 rivers that used to sustain his people's
land up north have been reduced to two due to illegal logging.
Says the Aeta: ''I am ready to offer my life. If we don't do
anything now to protect the trees, nothing will be left for our
grandchildren.''
One of Castor's colleagues defends tree-spiking by arguing that
people who illegally cut trees do so at their own risk. ''It's
either them or us,'' he says. ''If the tree-cutting is not
stopped, our water will be gone.''
Those involved in tree-spiking represent a new front in the
often violent confrontation between environmentalists and
communities on one side and loggers on the other.
This is a budding movement, with only a handful of activists
involved and several hundred trees spiked so far. No injuries have
as yet been reported from this campaign, but it may take only a
few accidents to make loggers think twice before sending their men
back into the forest.
Tree-spiking began last December in Bataan National Park, where
logging is prohibited but rampant. The idea to 'inoculate' trees
against timber cutters was introduced by visiting U.S. green
activists last year, and now ex-members of the University of the
Philippines Mountaineers are promoting it.
''During our climbs, we noticed that the trees were
disappearing,'' says an ex-Mountaineer. ''Law enforcement was
weak. We can't depend on the police and the DENR. Most NGOs are
involved in advocacy and long-term measures. We wanted to do
something directly to stop logging.''
But he adds that their group, which calls itself Volunteers for
Self-Defence, only goes to places where the local community has
requested training and are willing to spike trees themselves.
''We are selective,'' he says. ''We only spike trees along
riverbanks and trees in national parks. Tree-spiking is a direct
action that creates a defence for the tree.''
It is also the first method of environmental protection that
transfers the risk of bodily harm from the activist to the logger.
Past actions by communities included human barricades against
timber trucks, which are sometimes guarded by armed men.
According to the DENR, 60 people have died in the last several
years trying to fight illegal logging and fishing. They include
activists, priests, tribal people and eight forest rangers who
were killed by a grenade blast at a checkpoint.
DENR Undersecretary Ricardo Umali acknowledges the desperation
of many communities and environmentalists, but cautions against
doing anything illegal. He says, ''That's why the DENR has
multisectoral task forces. We encourage communities to work with
us.''
Those doing the spiking, however, say they cannot trust the
DENR and suspect many field personnel of connivance with logging
interests. The act of planting nails in trees itself is shrouded
in legal ambiguity, according to environmental lawyers, since
there is no anti-spiking law.
Says lawyer Ted Bonpin: ''Technically, one can be charged with
creating a nuisance. But in another sense, in the case of logging
in a national park, how can anybody who commits an illegal act and
harms himself claim somebody wronged him?''
But some environmentalists say tree-spiking is aimed at the
wrong people. Comments Junie Kalaw, president of Green Forum that
has been advocating a total commercial log ban: ''It physically
endangers the little guys, but allows the big guys to get away.''
The Volunteers though say communities are warned that spikes
are in the trees and could cause harm, and insist that the method
is intended to be a non-violent deterrent.
The tree-spikers bible is 'Eco-defence: A Field Guide to
Monkeywrenching' that is co-edited by Dave Foreman, a leader of
the U.S. based green group Earth First!
Although the book says many of its prescribed methods to
protect the environment are illegal in the United States, it
claims they are ''never directed against human beings or other
forms of life. It is aimed at inanimate machines and tools that
are destroying life''.
In its step-by-step guide to tree spiking, however, the book
admits the possibility of injury to chainsaw operators, and
recommends instead imbedding the spikes farther up the trunk.
This would spare the chainsaws but damage sawmill blades. And
since sawmill workers are protected by Plexiglass shields or
ensconced in control booths, argues Ecodefence, the potential of
this kind of sabotage to harm people is limited.
But this hardly applies to the Philippines, where timber
workers -- especially those in smaller sawmills, toil under
notoriously hazardous conditions, with neither shields nor booth.
The prospect of causing other people serious injury is not lost
on those receiving training here, despite their anxiousness to
find ways to protect a watershed close to home.
Mel, a local mountaineers and tree-spiker trainee makes an
earnest suggestion: ''Let's not do any spiking, but just tell
everybody that we did.'' (END/IPS/CIJ/CB/95)
Origin: Manila/ENVIRONMENT-PHILIPPINES/
----
** End of text from cdp:reg.philippine **
***************************************************************************
This material came from PeaceNet, a non-profit progressive networking
service. For more information, send a message to peacen...@igc.apc.org
***************************************************************************
----
http://outside.starwave.com/magazine/1096/9610fewe.html
Outside Magazine - October 1996
We Few, We Happy Few, We Band of Fledgling Monkeywrenchers Learning to
Speak in Sound Bites
At the nation's lone training ground for environmental activists, aimless
tree huggers are fashioned into media-savvy eco-warriors, ready for the
fray. A postcard from this year's oddest summer camp.
By Tad Friend
[...]
“Earth First!'s chief persuasive tool was "monkeywrenching," that is,
chainsawing the billboards and blowing up the bulldozers of encroaching
civilization. Foreman, the most famous Earth First!er, a rowdy, quotable,
combat-fatigue-wearing malcontent, called them "a warrior society
ris[ing] up out of the earth...to be antibodies against the human pox
that's ravaging this precious beautiful planet."
They drew a lot of attention, especially after they staged their first
theatrical direct action in 1981 by unrolling a 300-foot, black plastic
replica of a cement fracture over Arizona's Glen Canyon Dam. But Earth
First! really caught the public's eye in 1984 with a dramatic new weapon:
Mike Roselle and others spiked Oregon's Pyramid Creek Grove to prevent it
from being logged--the 11-inch nails they hid under the bark made the
trees too dangerous to cut and mill. "This is jihad, pal," Roselle wrote.
"There are no innocent bystanders, because in these desperate hours,
bystanders are not innocent.... And more spiking is needed to convey the
urgency of the situation!””
[...]
“Like all narratives of zealotry--and of the media's fickle needs--the
story of Earth First! is instructive, even if the group seemed
foredoomed. Monkeywrenching made radical environmentalism famous, but it
also made radical environmentalists into outlaws. This was a posture they
relished: As Edward Abbey, whose novel The Monkey Wrench Gang was the
bible of ecotage, always said, "Don't get caught."
But outlaws make enemies--most obviously their victims and those who fear
becoming victims. "We made every mistake you could make," Roselle
acknowleges after Cannon's session. "Wearing those Earth First!
fist-in-your-face T-shirts that just pissed everyone off, doing things
that scared people--we'll never get over George Alexander."
George Alexander was a Sonoma County mill worker who in 1987 ran his band
saw into a hidden 11-inch spike. The saw exploded, breaking Alexander's
jaw in five places and nearly severing his jugular vein. The anti-Earth
First! outcry was tremendous, though Roselle--who marked trees he spiked
with survey tape and claimed responsibility--convincingly denies the
group was involved. "But my own mother thought I'd been arrested for
spiking that tree," he says. "She saw footage of Alexander on ABC with a
huge bandage and then of me being arrested for protesting logging, and
that was the image that stuck."”
---
http://www.fish.com/~jym/ef/tree-spiking-memo.html
TREE-SPIKING RENUNCIATION &
MISSISSIPPI SUMMER IN THE
CALIFORNIA REDWOODS
April 1990
MEMORANDUM
FROM: DARRYL CHERNEY, JUDI BARI, & NORTHCOAST CALIF. EARTH FIRST!ERS
TO: ALL EARTH FIRST! GROUPS, CHAPTERS, INDIVIDUALS, ETC.
RE: TREE-SPIKING RENUNCIATION & MISSISSIPPI SUMMER IN THE CALIF. REDWOODS
I'll do my best to make this brief. At the Public Interest Law Conference
in Eugene, OR about 20 EF!ers & millworker Gene Lawhorn reached unopposed
concensus that tree-spiking must be renounced by Earth First!, at least
in Northern Calif. & Southern Oregon. The reason is that in these areas,
Earth First! has been so successful in working & strategizing with timber
workers that the alienation caused by tree-spiking, not to mention the
danger, be it real or imagined, was harming our efforts to save this planet.
Obviously, we knew this was a radical change in our previous policy to
neither condemn nor condone, and we knew that others who weren't party to
this meeting might not feel the same. So besides reading the statement,
please note the following points that were addressed that might help you
understand the process, which is not closed to further input, by the way.
Do make note that we do have an April 11 press conference scheduled in
several locations along the coast.
1.While still selling Ecodefense and singing "Spike a Tree for
Jesus," disclaimers will be inserted/and or mentioned.
2.The decision is not irrevokable, should the forest situation
worsen, although it is hard to fathom how much worse it can get.
3.The decision is not made for all Earth First!ers, and as a
non-organization, we are entitled to our individual opinions.
4.We take no responsibility for any prior spikings; our intent is to
actively advocate not spiking trees at this point. If we are charged with
not having any influence over stopping spiking, then we can counter that
we then shouldn't have any blame for encouraging it through our past open
discussions (e.g. Dear Ned Ludd.).
5.This is not a retreat, nor is it an abandonment of our neither
condemning nor condoning monkeywrenching. It is an advance toward joining
No. Calif. woodworkers in the fight to save the planet. Of course it will
also take the wind out of the timber industry's publicity sails. A
congressional aide once told me, "The only thing the timber industry
knows how to recycle is that tree spike story."
6.We have had overwhelming support for this change. Yes, there have
been exceptions, but support has been so broad we can only believe that a
renunciation of tree-spiking does reflect a broad constituency within the
Earth First! movement.
7.We will not condemn tree-spiking, unless of course it is a
completely inappropriate spiking by anyone's standards. It is completely
understandable that someone would still spike trees especially after
walking through a few clearcuts. Our position will be to ask for no
future spikings; not to condemn what might be a logical act from
someone's forlorn point of view.
8.We will encourage this cease fire by our press conference, by
putting an article in the EF! Journal, by talking about it at roadshows
and tables. In other words, we will use our influence as the new voices
of the environmental movement to make this real.
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA EARTH FIRST! RENOUNCES TREE SPIKING
In response to the concerns of loggers and millworkers, Northern
California Earth First! organizers are renouncing the tactic of tree
spiking in our area. Through the coalitions we have been building with
lumber workers we have learned that the timber corporations care no more
for the lives of their employees than they do for the life of the forest.
Their routine maiming
and killing of millworkers is coldly calculated into the cost of doing
business, just as the destruction of whole ecosystems is coldly
calculated into the cost of doing business, just as the destruction of
whole ecosystems is considered a reasonable byproduct of lumber
production. These companies would think nothing of sending a spiked tree
through a mill, and relish the anti-Earth First! publicity that an injury
would cause.
Since Earth First! is not a membership organization, it is impossible to
speak for all Earth First!ers. But this decision has been widely
discussed among Earth First!ers in our area, and the local sentiment is
overwhelmingly in favor of renouncing tree spiking. We hope that our
influence as organizers will cause any potential tree-spikers to consider
using a different method.
We must also point out that we are not speaking for all Earth First!
groups in this pronouncement. Earth First! is decentralized, and each
group can set its own policies. A similar statement to this one
renouncing tree spiking is now being made in Southern Oregon, but not all
Earth First! groups have reached the broad consensus we have on this issue.
But in our area, the loggers and millworkers are our neighbors, and they
should be our allies, not our adversaries. Their livelihood is being
destroyed along with the forest. The real conflict is not between us and
the timber workers, it is between the timber corporations and our entire
community.
We want to give credit for this change to local Earth First! policy to
the rank and file timber workers who have risked their jobs and social
relations by coming forward and talking to us. This includes Gene Lawhorn
of Roseburg Lumber in Oregon, who defied threats from his union officers
to appear publicly with Earth First! organizer Judi Bari. It also
includes the Georgia Pacific, Louisiana Pacific and Pacific Lumber
employees who are members of IWW Local #1 in Northern California.
Equipment sabotage is a time-honored tradition among industrial workers.
It was not invented by Earth First!, and it is certainly not limited to
Earth First!, even in our area. But the target of monkeywrenching was
always intended to be the machinery of destruction, not the workers who
operate that machinery for $7/hour. This renunciation of tree spiking is
not a retreat, but rather an advance that will allow us to stop fighting
the victims and concentrate on the corporations themselves.
Judi Bari, Ukiah Earth First!
Darryl Cherney, Southern Humboldt EF!
Mike Roselle, Co-Founder, Earth First!
Rick & Kathi Cloninger, Laytonville EF!
Larry Evans, Northwest CA EF!
Greg King, Redwood Action Team
Pam Davis, Sonoma County EF!
Daphne Martin, Albion EF!
---
Joyce Reynolds-Ward
On Sat, 15 Nov 1997 22:45:47 -0800, "P. M. Hayden" <pmha...@sos.net>
wrote:
>
>I know one (1) person who works in a mill, who was seriously hurt when a
>saw hit a large nail in a log. No one knows the source of the nail/spike.
>But it did exist. The injury was real.
Folks, ever heard of something called "farmer logs?"
The problem did not begin with Earth First!, nor is every incident of
a saw hitting junk in a tree caused by deliberate tree spiking. Any
place you log which has been used by people creates the possibility.
Campers hammer nails into trees to hang their stuff. Farmers nail
fences to trees. Heck, old-timey electric and telephone line
transformers used to be pounded into trees.
Absent a deliberate announcement of tree spiking, you just can't
assume such an incident was caused by sabotage. The reality, as a
friend of mine who used to be a saw filer told me, is that there's
always been junk of this sort in trees.
jrw