"The Sixties are over," some yelled. "Cut down the trees."

[Webster Green]

Football fans encounter Cal tree-sitters

<snip>
(09-01) 18:35 PDT Berkeley -- For fans from Tennessee, tree-sitters protesting a planned demolition of an oak grove outside UC Berkeley's Memorial Stadium posed a fascinating sideshow to Saturday's Cal-Tennessee football game.

With their orange T-shirts popping out from a sea of blue and gold, fans of the Tennessee Volunteers gazed curiously past a newly built chain-link fence - put up by the university earlier in the week to prevent potential altercations between game-goers and oak lovers - and snapped photographs of each other in front of the banner-draped tree houses.
<snip>

<snip>
In the dark after the game, won by Cal 45-31, many of the 70,000 spectators pouring out of the stadium stopped to watch a circle of drumming, dancing and yelping tree lovers in a grove outside the fenced area. The Cal fans were derisive. "The Sixties are over," some yelled. "Cut down the trees."
<snip>

More: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/09/02/BA92RTVDI.DTL&feed=rss.bayarea

[acmavm]

1. Yeah, the sixties are over, global warming has taken over,

erosion is running rampant in areas where the trees have been cut down, and all these rocket scientists can say is cut down the trees.

What a bunch of schmucks.

[Mz Pip]

5. It's not that simple

THe university will plant 3 trees for every one cut down, just in another place. Berkeley is one of the most tree filled campuses I've ever been too. It's like a forest on some parts of the campus. No one is advocating clearcutting the area.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[acmavm]

9. Those are old growth trees. There is no need to destroy every damn thing

in nature just because someone thinks they have a 'better' use for the land.

You're right. It is NOT that simple.

[sandnsea]

19. Planted trees aren't old growth

Old growth is generally trees that are 200 years old, and/or natural forests that have never been cut.

These are just beautiful old trees, whose value can, and should, be measured historically to the neighborhood. But there really isn't any "old growth" reason for these trees to be saved while most people don't give a crap that real old growth forests are being mowed down all over the world.

They're pretty, and more people see them, that's all.

[China_cat]

14. The 3 trees they will plant will be pines, not replacements

for the old growth oak. There's no comparison.

[JeffR]

2. "The Sixties are over, let's destroy the planet we live on!"

Yay for America!!!!!!

:eyes:

[Richard D]

4. That is a great image you have there.

[JeffR]

6. Yours too!

Thanks.

[nam78_two]

7. Seriously

Insane isn't it?

[JeffR]

8. There has to be a quantifiable explanation for this

"Corporate controlled media + lousy education standards + total ignorance of science = a nation of myopic idiots hellbent on destroying themselves and everyone else and unable to see that's what they're doing"

Or something like that. I just don't know anymore. It makes my brain ache.

[Fla_Democrat]

3. I wonder how

that would have played out if the states had been reversed. If the "drumming, dancing and yelping tree lovers" had been trying to protect a oak grove in Tennessee. :evilgrin:


The Tennesseans were still agog. "This is awesome. Let's take a look," someone chuckled as police spotlights cast eerie shadows on dancers and shirtless tree climbers.


Whatcha wanna bet there would be pick-ups loaded with Roundup lined up down the block.

[antigone382]

36. The only Tennessean quoted in the article supported the protesters.

Eva Stewart...about halfway down the article (who incidentally has the same first name as me :)).

I'm not gonna try to claim that Tennessee is a hotbed of liberalism, but don't forget this is the home of Al Gore, Bonnaroo, and the second most ecologically diverse region in the world (the Cumberland Plateau). I grew up in a part of rural Georgia that was completely choked by rampant, thoughtless development, and now live in a region of Tennessee that could very easily suffer the same thing, but for the commitment of locals to preserving our community and its ecological assets. Now granted, I live just down the road from a liberal arts university, so a lot of that is students, professors, and "smarties" of different stripes...but engage in a conversation with any Hillbilly at the local fruit stand and you'll see the same resistance to big corps and housing developments that the intellectuals espouse.

[Mrs. Overall]

10. I used to live just a block from the stadium, and walked under those trees

every day. It's a beautiful grove and I'm glad some people care enough to try to protect it.

[Link93]

11. The story as I heard it is that those trees were planted when the stadium was built, 1923.

The university has stated that it will plant 1 mature tree and 2 saplings for each tree that is cut down.

[alarimer]

12. So what if they plant other trees?

It's like replanting trees after clear-cutting an old growth forest. It is NOT the same and will never BE the same. Old growth tree have a place as habitat, for example, that new trees do not.

And cutting them down for a new stadium or some such is just asinine. Put it somewhere else. Or better, yet, make do with what it ALREADY THERE.

[Link93]

13. What is the definition of old growth trees? Are these considered old growth?

The version that I heard was the the trees were planted at the time the stadium was built. This could be incorrect of course.

[sandnsea]

20. Not that I ever heard

Maybe in 2-300 years, if a forest were truly replanted and tended to its natural state, then someone might call it old growth in comparison to everything else.

But I've never heard of trees planted curbside as old growth. I think it's a terrible disservice to those who are trying to save the thousand year old redwoods, and other forests that I consider true old growth and in real danger.

[OzarkDem]

48. Agree, why a new stadium

College tuition is outrageous enough these days, usually the result of the high cost of college sports. Very few college sports programs turn a profit.

[LWolf]

17. The other side of that story:

<snip>

The Memorial Grove is a native Coast Live Oak ecosystem, native oaks are the most important terrestrial ecosystems in California.

Saving the Memorial Grove is supported by The Sierra Club, The California Native Plant Society, The California Oak Foundation and Julia Butterfly Hill.

and <snip>

...First and foremost the Oak Grove is ecologically and historically important no matter who “planted” the trees.

The main problem with UCs argument is that many of the oak trees in the grove planted themselves after the stadium was built! Because the grove is a thriving ecosystem that is replanting itself. The California Native Plant Society says,

“The Oaks are well established and signs of recruitment (naturally re-seeded oak trees) are present an this site.”

bAt least 5 Coast Live Oaks and a native Bay Laurel predate the stadium. The image below is a historic oak from the 1800s that predates the University itself.



When the University built the stadium in the 1920s they planted many additional oaks in the Memorial Grove. But even more important many of the oaks in the grove planted themselves as the grove continues to reseed itself to this day! Thats what makes it an ecosystem NOT a “landscaping project”.

And on the replanting:

<snip>

How many oaks does UC want to cut down?

UC’s wants to cut down 38 mature Coast Live Oaks - the university keeps on saying they will cut 26 oaks but a simple count in the grove adds up to 38. Additionally a number of other specimen trees including California Bay Laurel, Redwood and Sequoia would be cut down.

UC says they will replace the trees 3 to 1, won’t we end up with more trees at the grove?

No. There simply would not be enough room to plant the oak trees UC claims they would plant in what little space would be left at the grove. The University wants to dig out 2/3 of the grove for a massive cement building. It would be physically impossible for them to cram 3 to 1 oak trees into one third the space. Oak trees need space to grow for their canopy and the small space that would be left could never support all those extra trees long term. UC might plant trees in other parts of campus, but they would destroy the existing grove.

More: http://www.saveoaks.com/SaveOaks/Main.html

[sandnsea]

21. Is it partly natural grove?

That has always been on the location? That would be different.

[LWolf]

23. A few of the trees predate the University.

The rest (of the oaks, anyway), have naturalized there. This is currently a critical issue for oak groves all over the state:

<snip>

Losses due to clearing for urbanization and agriculture have been compounded by regeneration failure within many existing stands. Sapling populations in many oak woodlands are insufficient to offset mortality of older trees, leading to a gradual conversion of oak woodland to oak savanna and finally to annual grassland. Suppression of regeneration in areas that would otherwise be suitable for oak growth seems to be a recent phenomenon (within the past 60 to 80 years), and is in many cases due to long-term livestock grazing. In many woodlands that have been impacted by long-term grazing, the degradation of the ecosystem is so profound that oak woodland vegetation may not recover for many decades after grazing is eliminated, if it recovers at all.

http://www.phytosphere.com/oakplanting/oakplanting.htm

<snip>

What would be the effect of the loss of oaks on California’s wildlife? Using the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships system, a collection of models of ecological relationships between wildlife species and their habitats developed by the California Department of Fish and Game and other biologists, we can begin to predict which species might be affected. More than 200 of California’s 675 species of birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians are associated with oaks in California’s coastal counties. The models indicate that more than 95 percent of these would be negatively affected by an oak die-off; only a few would benefit.

http://www.calacademy.org/calwild/2001spring/stories/letters.html

<snip>

The eight species of tree oaks in California cover an estimated 4.5 x 106 ha, or about 10% of the state, and provide shelter and food for a vast array of wildlife species including over 300 vertebrates and an estimated 5,000 species of insects. Despite this, and the fact that California's oak woodlands include some of the largest remaining old-growth forest in the United States, relatively little of these woodlands are protected, with over 80% in private ownership .

http://www.hastingsreserve.org/OakStory/Problem2.html

[sandnsea]

24. "little of these woodlands are protected"

I might give a little more credibility to the concern for these 38 oak trees, if there were equal concern for the acres of old growth groves in the state that aren't getting the needed attention at all.

They did the same thing in Eugene about ten years ago, and I wasn't impressed then either. Educate people about how we're losing all our natural old growth forests, and have lost 96% already, then I'll think people really care about the issue.

Many people genuinely care about both, but too often these tree protests are just bandwagon melodrama that don't do anything to bring attention to the real changes that are needed.

[Webster Green]

27. The protests can and do keep the trees from being cut..

"Bandwagon melodrama"? WTF?!....That is an insult to these protesters. The trees are still there. Why criticize the few people who are actually doing something while worrying that not enough is being done?

I'm sure if you would like to get involved in a support capacity (perhaps public relations and media co-ordination), you would be welcomed.

I've done support work for major blockades and tree sittings with Earth First in Humboldt and Mendocino County. It was a very rewarding experience. Trees were saved.

Try it....you'll like it! :hippie:

[sandnsea]

30. Yeah, maybe the 38 trees

The rest are being clear cut at a rate I haven't witnessed in years.

I've offered to help change the debate. It seems if you're not willing to go crazy over voles or trees being cut down for parking lots, you're efforts aren't wanted.

[LWolf]

33. There is equal concern on the part of many.

This is just one action in one place in the state. As you can see in the links I posted, the concern is widespread. This grove is just one place where the conflict is converging.

Did the "Save the Oaks at the Stadium" organization really show up in Eugene, or was that a different organization?

[sandnsea]

35. Downtown oak trees

I don't know who was sitting in the trees and crying and throwing themselves against the fences and holding candlelight vigils.

There are tree-sitters in other CA oak groves? I missed the pictures.

[LWolf]

40. There are numerous other groups and other actions.

Not all are tree-sitters, of course. There's some effort to legislate protection:

http://www.wcb.ca.gov/Pages/oak_woodlands_Act.html

http://www.californiaoaks.org/html/newsletter.html

A sitter, and helpers, actually prevented the removal of a 400 yo oak tree, "Old Glory," in my old district in CA a few years back:

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/West/12/04/old.oak.ap/

The tree removal was delayed, and then a compromise was reached which uprooted the tree and moved it, if you can believe that:



The tree was moved about 1/4 mile away, and seemed to recover from the stress ok. I haven't had any updates since I moved 2 years ago.

I seem to remember another particular heritage oak in Wilton was going to be cut, and petitions circulating. I don't remember the results, though.

Generally, larger organizations work on the overall picture, and local people take on specific local sites.

[sandnsea]

43. and it's the groups that get things done

The tree-sitters tend to be folks caught up in the self-importance of the moment. As do these momentary protests over a local tree or two (or 38). I bet most of the people involved in that tree 2 years ago have forgotten all about it. I would certainly bet they don't know anything about the problems with California Oaks in general. It's good to worry about a stream or grove in your neighborhood, really good. It would be better if we'd use those opportunities to expand awareness, and we just don't.

[LWolf]

44. I agree that awareness should be expanded.

I'd like to think of the local people as thinking globally, but acting locally, with the larger organizations tracking the bigger picture.

The Berkeley grove is important because it HAS been regenerating, and many of the oaks outside the towns have not.

The real issues for California Oak groves are that most of them are on private property, subject to clearing and development at the whim of the owner. That, the overgrazing, a new oak fungus devastating wild populations, and the shadow of climate change...those factors are making the future of oak groves in CA in danger in the big picture. It may be that isolated groves protected from development in the midst of the city may be the future of the oak in California.

[niyad]

18. welcome to DU

[Lint Head]

15. Yep, the sixties are over. There is no world peace. Everyone

does not live in harmony and love because the fascists have taken over the country destroying the Constitution and human lives
with greedy war money and pollution. :dem:

[niyad]

16. heirs to james "if you've seen one tree, you've seen them all" watt (and his protege, james-in-a-

skirt gale norton, both, unfortunately, from colorado.

[Webster Green]

57. That is actually a Ronnie Reagan quote..

Sort of....

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/reagan/redwoods.asp

[depakid]

22. Some of the comments by the sports "commentators" were disgusting

Quite frankly, they deserve everything that's coming to them during the next decade- and just watch, they'll be the ones who whine and cry the loudest.

[INDIA]

26. It's University Property.

Berkley has offered a perfectly acceptable deal that other Universities would never even consider. They may do what they wish with their property, in this case, building more space for an expanding sports program, with much focus being given to Women's sports, a la Title IX.

The people living in the trees look like idiots. And now they look like idiots on a national stage. Good job guys.

[Webster Green]

28. They don't look like idiots to me..

You, on the other hand.....

[depakid]

29. "They may do what they wish with their property"

This is precisely the sort of attitude that I'm talking about....

And it will come back to haunt you (sooner than you think).

[INDIA]

32. Yes, cutting down a couple dozen trees..

and replanting three times as many will bring about the end of the world. And they are doing it for a stupid reason, expanding athletic facilites, particularly athletic facilites that the women's teams can use.

Am I in Freeperville? Why are people hating on Berkley? Arguably one of the more forward thinking and progressive Universities in the world.

Those people protesting were NOT students. Some of them looked flat out homeless. Not a good face to put on your movement.

[sandnsea]

38. I grew up in California

In all fairness, as a kid, we always looked sort of "homeless". Oregon students too, that's where the whole "grunge" thing came from, as you might recall.

[Mz Pip]

41. I've lived in

the Berkeley area for over 35 years. The city treats the university like some unwanted step child. It's nuts. I work for the university and it is as progressive an institution as I can imagine. It is probably the best public univerity in the world.

Last year there were 45,000 applications from prosepective freshmen. In order to meet the needs of the growing population in CA the university has to expand and improve its facilities. This includes facilities for student athletics. And just because some save the trees group decides that what the university is doing isn't necessary, that doesn't mean they are right.

This is not an old growth forest. These are trees that UC planted when it build the original facilty in the 20s. These trees are on university property and will be replaced. I am more concerned about meeting the needs of the student population at Berkeley and providing good facilities for all of its students than I am about the narrow wants of a group of people, most of whom aren't even from here.


It was interesting to read the comments on the article from the OP at the sfgate page. Perhaps the best one sugested that the way to save old growth forests was to go to school and study science and find a cure for the diseases that are wiping out so many of these trees around the state rather than sit in trees. But that would be harder.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[sandnsea]

46. What about the alternative

Is there some reason this can't be implemented.

http://www.saveoaks.com/SaveOaks/Alternatives.html

[Mz Pip]

47. I doubt the university

is being divisive on purpose. These are not anti-environment people. I can't speak for the architects or the planners of this project but I doubt they chose the place they chose just to piss people off.

UC Berkeley is not some enemy force to be defeated. It's a top ranked university that is trying to do right by its students. Students live in cramped rooms because the city won't let the university do anything with People's Park. Build needed dorms? No way.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[sandnsea]

51. Maybe they just didn't consider alternatives

Doesn't mean there aren't environmental concerns just because someone might have overlooked a solution. Just like the fact that we're going to have to go higher if we want to continue saving open spaces, and places like People's Park. Tough choices in the coming years, that's for sure.

[sandnsea]

31. The tree-sitters have an alternative plan too

It's a perfectly good plan. They need to give more attention to it so people will see there's no real reason to cut down this particular group of trees.

[INDIA]

34. 13 plus athletic teams are sharing the same stadium.

Berkley has expanded it's women's sports since Title IX. I'd say that's a "real" reason. In higher education, your improving/expanding or your becoming obsolete.

[sandnsea]

37. It's for a training facility

There are other solutions.

http://www.saveoaks.com/SaveOaks/Alternatives.html

[OzarkDem]

50. The myth of growing and expanding

is the reason tuition has skyrocketed. Fewer and fewer people can afford to attend college these days. The trend is towards declining enrollment.

There's too much of a corporate CEO mentality at universities these days and its putting the cost of college out of reach of many students.

[Mz Pip]

52. Declining enrollment?

Not at Berkeley. Cal's application pool grew from around 40,000 to 45,000 in one year. Acceptance rate is around 24%. Kids want to come to Berkeley and there is no sign of that changing anytime soon.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[OzarkDem]

54. Its declining overall

and its sad to see schools spending so much money building palaces to college sports while tuition and student loan debt keep rising.

[Mz Pip]

55. College sports

at least at the Division I level bring money to the college. And college athletic scholarships give money to students who might not otherwise be able to attend college. Decent facilites aren't really palaces. The Iraq Embassy is a palace. The new training facility planned for Cal is not.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[OzarkDem]

56. The big public university in our state

is finally taking a stand and cutting back on college sports expenses because, even though they bring in a lot of money, they cost even more. In the study they did, it was found most college sports programs lose money.

Its great if yours is making a profit, but that's rare and its time for a reality check at most campuses as state legislatures and parents push schools to be more financially accountable.

[LeftyMom]

25. Northern California has lost so many old oaks to Sudden Oak Death and other diseases

Cutting healthy old oaks down is a fucking travesty.

[SalmonChantedEvening]

39. Yeah, and the Nineties are over, so stop blaming Clinton!

:hippie:

[Popol Vuh]

42. LMAO

Looks like the pinko commies kicked ass on the hitler youth... How priceless...

[Raine]

45. Yeah that's why it's important not to cut down trees

now, duh. :silly:

[bbgrunt]

49. what's so funny about peace love and understanding? People

who will pay a fortune to attend sports and even get coffins decorated with their favorite teams' colors but believe they are immune from the consequences of their lack of respect for the earth.

[Webster Green]

53. The 60's are NOT over.......goddammit!

So stop saying that!

Seriously, I hadn't really noticed.

The 60's are alive and well in Northern California!:hippie: