For the last 15 months environmentalists have been sitting in trees, in Berkeley. The activists are protesting the removal of oak trees on campus. The trees are slated to be removed in order to make way for a renovated Memorial Stadium. Drive past the fraternities and the I-House and the stadium on any given night and you’ll be blinded by spotlights used to illuminate the tree sitters. The amount of time and energy (and likely money) that the Berkeley police has spent on the safety of these fools is obscene. People, we get it, you want the trees saved. Please take your cause to the courts and to the proper authorities and stop squatting; it is obnoxious and does not help your cause.
Related Stories
Yesterday, a tree sitter gave up his perch after 17 days of protest in another part of campus.
Last month, the police brought in an arborist to snip ropes in hopes of making life a bit more uncomfortable for tree sitters. In the process, a bucket of fecal matter was splattered. Yuck!
The arborist climbed into the grove about 6 a.m. and cut most of the ropes connecting the half-dozen platforms the tree-sitters
have built in the foliage. The arborist also took down one of the
platforms, which was uninhabited. In the process, a bucket of human
waste fell about 60 feet to the ground.
“They cut a s- bucket and it fell to the ground and exploded,” said Erik Eisenberg, 39, a leader of the tree-sitters’ ground crew who goes by the name Ayr.
UC Berkeley owns so much land. Why hasn’t UCB provided alternative sights to the stadium sight?
I would just like to say go home tree sitters. Below is a letter that someone posted a while ago on craigslist. it says exactly what i want to say. SO whom ever did wrote it, i give you mad props!!!!
“Open letter to Berkeley tree-sitters”–posted on craigslist.
Dear Berkeley tree-sitters,
Let me begin by stating that I like trees. Some of my best friends are trees and I generally support the peaceful coexistence of humans and trees. Similarly, I worry about carbon dioxide emissions and their impact on global climate. I also work on the UC Berkeley campus, and I often walk or ride along Piedmont Ave. on my way to or from work. Thus, I encounter your encampment on a near-daily basis. I see your slogans chalked on the sidewalks. I see your Tibetan prayer flags. I pass through clouds of your collective body odor and exhaled marijuana smoke. Having observed your actions for quite some time now, sometimes I wonder if you’ve ever considered just how much damage you’re doing to legitimate pro-environment, pro-leftist movements everywhere.
Let us examine a few key points that may help you understand why your effort to save the oak grove manages to be futile, ridiculous, ignorant, destructive, and offensive all at the same time:
(1) Consider what you are fighting for.
How many trees does UC intend to destroy for its construction project? (Answer: 38). Is the coast live oak an endangered or threatened species? (Answer: No). Will the removal of these individual trees have any significant impact on the health of the overall population of the species? (Answer: No). Consider how many collective man-hours your campaign has devoted to saving these trees. Has it occurred to you that your time may be better spent focusing on (for example) the huge swaths of the Amazon that are cut down by loggers and developers every day? Are you choosing to protect 38 trees because you really think it is a significant, meaningful cause? I hope not–because that would be ignorant. It seems much more likely that you choose this battle because it is relatively convenient and riskless. Honestly–why don’t you sac up and take on a *real* environmental offender?
(2) Consider your conduct.
Do you intend to win the hearts and minds of the people with catch-phrases like “Guantanamo Berkeley” chalked on the sidewalks? Do you really think you have anything in common with the prisoners currently incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay? Perhaps in a momentary flash of sobriety, one of you will realize just how offensive it is to draw a comparison between your fenced-in encampment and an actual prison.
(3) Consider the backlash of your actions.
You are the source and embodiment of all negative stereotypes that conservatives hold against liberals. If you’re going to stage a protest, are you capable of doing it in a dignified, respectable manner? Hint: smoking drugs in the trees does not exude dignity. Also, consider periodic showers. Rather than winning popular support from pedestrians who encounter your encampment, you are actually contributing to their mistrust and ire toward environmentalists. Perhaps you are Republicans dressed up as hippies deliberately trying to damage public opinion of the left?
(4) Consider your hypocrisy.
Is that your 60′s-era VW minibus parked next to the “Stop driving” message chalked on the sidewalk? Do you know what the gas-mileage on that thing is? (Answer: ~14-18 mpg) Have you considered investing in a catalytic converter? Perhaps you are also the same people who spray-paint “driving” on all the stop signs in Berkeley. Do you think your graffiti will trigger a massive, group epiphany in passing motorists and cause them to suddenly abandon the automobile as a mode of transportation? In reality, your graffiti (and your very presence) only detracts from the natural beauty of this campus and the surrounding town.
In summary, do not think for a moment that you exist under a shield of popular support. You are wasting your time on a futile, meaningless cause. If you’re going continue living outdoors and imparting your naïve views on pedestrians, I suggest that you move your operation to People’s Park (or perhaps the sidewalk of Shattuck Ave) where you can peacefully co-exist with the rest of Berkeley’s hobos.
Go home. We’re sick of you guys.
okay! one thing id like to say. lets think here why build something on a fault after an earthquake hit on oct 30 2007? huh huh?! 2) if something has been there for a long time then it should stay besides saying if we do this we’ll do that it wont make anyone happy, why? trees take long time to grow right? so what am i saying? i support what these guys are doing because me? ill sit in those trees and if they come near me ill fight for my own life. Heres another thing i dont care what the rest of ya think but you know what… i think theres another thing being said here… they might be trying to protect the safety of staff and students because if the next big one hits on that fault then they are in trouble.
hi,
I am against any activities that disturb a peaceful place and on the other hand I am against any environment damage. Both are wrong and both should be avoided if possible