Headwaters Forest Video Available

Don Baccus dhogaza at pacifier.com
Fri Oct 3 23:53:06 EST 1997

In article <3435AA58.3350 at livingston.net>,
Don Staples  <dstaples at livingston.net> wrote:

>The full question went on to ask if they announced the spiking, why did
>they not announce their guilt at the accident?

In this case, they did not announce their spiking, which actually is
circumstantial evidence that they didn't do the spiking (since preventing
logging, not harming loggers, is the goal, and this can only be successful
if the spiking is announced.  And, here on the west coast, we've seen
plenty of spiking announcements, so I personally have no reason to
believe that EF! spikers didn't follow this common-sense agenda).

>Spiking is terroristic tactics, regardless of the motive, it is a land mine,
>in place for generations in the big trees.

Hmmm...so are hunting camps, then, since the horizontal tiny limbs often
nailed to big trees often rot long before generations have passed and
long before the trees in camp are harvested, leaving large nails behind.

Must mean hunters are terrorists, then.

(and, yes, plenty of hunter camps, and old, once-official USFS campgrounds,
are harvested out here).

>But it did terrorize, and did cause injury (assumption on my part, not
>all metal was put there for the purpose of the spiking, I have seen
>everything from nails, insulators, scythes, chain, even an axel once,
>and many farm tools.  Most can be seen if new, imposible if old.)

First, I've never heard of loggers being "terrorized", which I assume
means in part that they were frightened to do their job due to heightened
danger.  Spiking as a potential danger did get some press out here (I,
unlike you, live out here) but those who were "terrorized" harp on, and
harp on, this single northern CA incident which hasn't even been pinned
on spiking by EF! or any other conservation group.

In my previous post, I suggested that your definition of terrorism was
such that used car dealers who raise razor wire fences were committing
acts of terrorism against car thieves, which you then suggested meant
that spikers were the equivalent of car thieves.  My newsreader crashed
in the midst of answering that, but, no, given your definition that
trying to prevent folks from taking action by raising a passive barrier
that might cause injury was a form of terrorism, many forms
of barriers are terrorist in nature.  I.E. razor wire fences.  If this
is your definition of terrorism, then many legal forms of property
protection are terrorist in nature, which makes the word rather useless.

>Your story doesn't ring true (not your fault Catherine, good reporting)
>as it does not fit the worker or the worker ethic that I have seen.

Ever hear of the Wobblies?  The history of the labor/industry relationship
in the timber industry is one of battle, violence, and hatred.  It really
took the conservation movement to bring them together.  

But, not always.  Currently we conservationists and major timber worker
unions are united in our opposition to Sen. Slade Gorton's present effort
to allow federal timber (cheap) to be substituted for private logs shipped
overseas, reversing legislation passed in 1990 to provide more jobs here
when the federal cut was lowered.  Seems that the workers have belatedly
remembered the industry and politicians aren't trying to improve their
lot in the least.

>Logging is hazardous enough
>without ass holes intentionally making it worse.  That applies to human

How does a human blockade increase hazards to workers?   They simply stop
and wait for the USFS to clear the blockade.  No one is harmed.

You're really reaching, now...

- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza at pacifier.com>
  Nature photos, on-line guides, at http://donb.photo.net

More information about the Ag-forst mailing list