The mainstream corporate media had been no friend to Earth First!, the IWW, or any of the other participants in the Redwood Summer coalition, but at least the two radical organizations and/or movements had their own press that they could count upon, for what it’s worth, or so one might have thought. However, from the beginnings of Redwood Summer, there was simmering tension between the organizers of the campaign and the staff of the Earth First! Journal that, by the time of Dave Foreman’s “resignation” from Earth First! had erupted in to a full blown conflict. Much of this had to do with the influence of the IWW and Judi Bari and the subsequent integration of class struggle environmentalism into the deep ecology movement and the contradictions within Earth First! this exposed.
Most observers identified the tree spiking renunciation, which took place in March of 1990, as the first major example of political differences between the Journal staff and the organizers in northwestern California, but in reality the problems began much earlier.[1] As early as 1988, the anarcho-syndicalist oriented Libertarian Labor Review, in its critical expose on Earth First!, which was written in part as a response to the May 1988 Industrial Worker’s de fact tribute to Earth First! and which ultimately served as the catalyst for the Earth First! – IWW “alliance”, pointing out that Dave Foreman and his allies in Earth First! had heavy handedly denounced “Alien Nation” a budding left-libertarian tendency within the young movement.[2] The Earth First! Journal staff had looked upon the potential alliance between Earth First! and the IWW favorably, as long as the concept remained in the abstract. However, when Earth First! – IWW Local 1 had issued statements in solidarity with the soon-to-be outsourced Potter Valley L-P mill workers[3], and Darryl Cherney and Judi Bari wrote the song Potter Valley Mill which drew the connections between clear cutting and outsourcing[4], the Journal described the mill closure as a “win” for environmentalists.[5] This represented a substantial difference of opinion.
Frustration with the coverage of Redwood Summer in the Earth First! Journal had been articulated by Earth First! cofounder Mike Roselle to The Nation and Anderson Valley Advertiser columnist Alexander Cockburn at the first major Redwood Summer demonstration at Samoa.[6] The criticisms of the Journal discussed by Roselle led to a roundtable discussion a few weeks later at the annual Earth First! RRR in Montana.
If a majority opinion can be articulated by an organization that repeatedly insists that “it’s a movement, not an organization,” it more or less shared the frustrations expressed by Earth First!ers from northwestern California. The discussion and debate also included Earth First!ers from elsewhere, including Orin Langelle, co-organizer of Earth First! – IWW Local #2 and Hardwood Summer, Karen Wood-Campbell from southern Oregon, and others. The participants of the roundtable represented a diverse collection of political tendencies within Earth First!, and not all of them had agreed with the renunciation of tree spiking or agreed that class struggle environmentalism was a viable strategy, but they did reach consensus that the Earth First! Journal as it currently operated did not adequately represent the movement, and they agreed that a new direction, and for that matter, a new staff, was necessary. The minutes of this meeting were published in the Mabon (September 22) 1990 issue of the Earth First! Journal.[7]
According to Karen Pickett, this discussion had been a long time coming and had little to do with Dave Foreman’s and Nancy Morton’s “resignation” from Earth First! in late August. Pickett recalled:
“The now famous Journal meeting at the RRR happened because there had long been rumblings about where the Journal was at, how it had changed, how it perhaps needed to change. Things were brought to a head by the piece by the Journal staff in the May 1990 issue and by Roselle’s unpublished but much discussed response to that piece. But let’s clarify: Roselle’s response was articulate, if critical. Most people who read it thought it had merit, but he didn’t get down and dirty until his letter to John (Davis) about the decision not to run his piece.”[8]
Dave Foreman had promised that he was not going to criticize the apparent new direction that Earth First! was taking, though he did so half heartedly, feeling compelled to lace his statement with sectarian comments that suggested that his vision of the movement as a deep ecology, conservation oriented movement was incompatible with the mass based, class struggle, social justice oriented environmentalism evident in Redwood Summer[9], an incompatability that Judi Bari disputed.[10] The Earth First! Journal staff made no such promises however, and in the Mabon (September 21) 1990 issue the much maligned staff vented their collective spleens at the Earth First!ers involved in Redwood Summer, framing the resignation of Foreman and the criticism of the Journal as “takeover” by “leftists.” That autumnal equinox Journal was essentially a collective tantrum thrown by its staff as well as several “old guard” Earth First!ers fiercely loyal to Dave Foreman, and they spun the apparent rift within the movement as northern California Earth First! versus everyone else, which was highly inaccurate. Karen Pickett elaborated:
“The staff says there’s a faction trying to ‘dictate’ the direction of the Journal—there’s a group, not a faction and it was a process agreed upon at the RRR. We were given the task of gathering and distilling input for the Journal. That’s not dictating. The group comes from Missouri, Texas, Arizona, New York, New Mexico, Montana, and Washington as well as California, and the reason there was a delay between the Journal meeting and communication put out to the staff and the movement at large is because as an alternative to the staff receiving criticism and ideas thrown at them randomly and from all directions we all wrote up our ideas and criticisms, exchanged them and attempted to see what points we had general agreement on and tried to distill our input.”[11]
The idea that the Earth First!ers involved in northern California were some sort of “faction” was ludicrous. Often they disagreed with each other on finer points. For example, Greg King had no involvement in Redwood Summer at all.[12] This was due, in part, to his being discouraged by the revelations of the bombing of Bari and Cherney, but also due to his not being especially comfortable with the idea of mass based civil disobedience himself. Likewise, Judi Bari had not been especially enthused with the Golden Gate Bridge banner hanging that took place on April 23, 1990. Still neither had felt it necessary to quit Earth First! or issue screeds against the other in the pages of the Earth First! Journal about it.[13] At the time, Greg King, having done a lion’s share of the work to fight for the preservation of Headwaters Forest, was considered as important a spokesperson as Bari and Cherney.[14] For his part, Greg King has since humorously reflected, that if he could write a book about the events of 1990, it would be titled: Redwood Summer: I Wasn’t There.[15]
The roundtable had not suggested that any of the current staff wouldn’t at least be considered for a newly constituted Journal collective, yet the entire staff either ignorantly assumed this was the case, or deliberately made it sound like it was, in order to score debating points. Karen Pickett explained the situation in detail:
“[I]f you read G.T.’s distillation, you’ll notice an effort to give due respect to hard working staff, a recognition that we can’t change everything all at once (contrary to some people’s vision of a power grab, which has not been in my field of vision) that we are not at war with the staff and to put some positive ideas out while asking for further input. As trashed as the Journal staff seems to feel, this piece does not trash them, offensiveness of accompanying poem not withstanding (and as G said in opening paragraph, it was intended as an attention grabber)…
“My view of what we were doing at the Journal meeting at the RRR, and in subsequent communication between Journal committee members was coming up with criticisms, ideas, and guidelines, for a national newspaper that would best serve the EF! movement, the principles of biodiversity preservation, and be an effective intra-movement communication vehicle. The Journal staff came to the RRR, if defensive and bruised from their communication with Roselle, recognizing that not everyone agreed with the ideas they put out in the May Journal re: what and why the Journal is recognizing that changes were needed, and that they should be responsive to direction from the larger movement. At least that’s what they said. But now they are saying they’d rather quit than change and that’s okay too, but why trash the people who are trying to work on keeping a paper running and the movement itself on your way out the door? I also fail to see why the Journal staff feels compelled to quit en masse before even responding to the committee’s input or why it was deemed appropriate to publish five swan songs and four additional pieces critical of Northern California all in one issue.”[16]
Pickett wasn’t exaggerating either. The “swan songs” all deflected criticism of the current staff as being essentially a power grab by the “anthropocentric” Redwood Summer “cabal”. Editor John Davis announced that he would be stepping down as editor at the end of 1990, and hinted he might also resign from Earth First!. His only explanation for doing so was, “I cast my vote with Paul Watson, Kris Sommerville, Nancy Morton, Dave Foreman, Howie Wolke, and others in this issue who warn that EF! Is being sidetracked by anthropocentric concerns.”[17] Business Manager Kris Sommerville echoed Foreman’s and Morman’s opinion that biocentrism and social justice represented an unbridgeable chasm, and dismissed the “voluntary oversight committee” as the rants of a “small but remarkably loud cabal (that) has hurled volumes of abusive criticism at the Journal and individual staff members,” which was, as it turns out, a serious case of the pot calling the kettle black.[18] Assistant Editor Dale Turner cited as his reason for resigning as being due to, “the recent upsurge in people who would change the focus of the movement and the Journal, and who would have the current staff came as one burden too many. They would steal the biocentric heart of Earth First! and I have neither the energy nor the heart to fight them.”[19] This was ironic given the fact that after Operation Thermcon, Dale Turner said in a radio interview with Orin Langelle, that the movement had been targeted by the FBI because, “Earth First! is a social change movement.”[20] Roger Featherstone disdainfully rejected the idea that the Journal should be published by volunteers, as opposed to a paid staff, declaring, “anyone who seriously thinks that a Journal as comprehensive as this one can be put out under ‘crash pad’ type conditions is being very unrealistic,” which was a fair criticism, to the extent it wasn’t a broad sweeping generalization of volunteer editors.[21]
The most accusatory, and certainly the longest, resignation came from merchandise manager Nancy Zierenberg. She selectively quoted Mike Roselle’s interview with Alexander Cockburn mostly out of context to make it sound as though the Earth First! cofounder was suggesting that Earth First!ers in California were emphasizing social and economic issues at the expense of biodiversity rather than integrating all three into a unified analysis and struggle.[22] Karen Pickett rebutted this notion by stating:
“Social and economic justice first is not what I’m hearing in my corner of California. I do hear people putting the ecological battles in their appropriate political context in order to target the most appropriate purveyors of ecological calamity and to most effectively interfere with their business of destroying the earth.”[23]
Zierenberg implied that the Journal Roundtable at the RRR was essentially composed of cat’s paws for Mike Roselle in order to surreptitiously isolate Dave Foreman. Her statements, taken with those of the others, suggested that the actual motivation behind the roundtable was a covert movement by northern California EarthFirst!ers who were evidently jealous of Dave Foreman’s popularity within the movement to drive him out covertly, as if the latter were so popular that openly disagreeing with his views, and, evidently by extension, the direction of the Earth First! Journal would be widely unpopular within the movement, which is a highly dubious claim. This was an incredibly ironic stance for Zierenberg to take, given the fact that most Earth First!ers, particularly those most loyal to Dave Foreman had argued, following the FBI’s “Operation Thermcon” sting operation in Arizona, that targeting Dave Foreman would be a waste of time, because he was not the “supreme leader” of Earth First![24] Zierenberg’s statements also suggested that the “rank and file” organizers of Redwood Summer (and other concurrent campaigns), many of whom were women, were incapable of making their own decisions, a notion that did not sit well with Karen Pickett who responded:
“I deeply resent the suggestion that any of us at the Journal meeting were there to do Mike’s bidding, to be ‘Roselle’s representatives’ or ‘followers of Roselle’ as implied by (Nancy Zierenberg). Mike is capable of representing himself; we all know he’s not shy. In fact, he’s got a big mouth and a somewhat different agenda than me, so it is an absurd and offensive notion that we have these camps aligning with a couple of bearded boys. I think people engaged in serious discussions of the direction of the movement and what kind of newspaper we want deserve more credit.”[25]
Zierenberg had taken exception to a statement made by Karen Pickett that the Journal, whose offices had once been in Tucson, Arizona and now were located in Canton, New York, should be located in “an activist community”, going so far as to equate the latter with “flakiness”, and to question whether or not Pickett was aware that there had been no shortage of environmental activism within either Tucson or Canton. Zierenberg insinuated that this was a (further) attempt by California Earth First!ers to further consolidate their power within Earth First![26] Pickett countered by arguing that she never suggested that the San Francisco Bay Area (or any other location in California) was what she had in mind, and that what she had meant was that the closer the production of the Journal was to the center of most actions, the more likely it was that it could be produced by volunteers as opposed to the paid staff that currently produced it and created potential conflicts of interest.[27]
The “swan songs” alone had been bitter enough, but they paled in comparison to the quartet of editorials criticizing Redwood Summer. Earth First! cofounder Howie Wolke’s lengthy diatribe began by taking sides in the feud between his cofounders, Foreman and Roselle, and quite plainly placed the blame squarely on the shoulders of the latter. While Roselle’s comments about Foreman made at Samoa may have indeed included personal jabs, Wolke’s demonstrated that he was not above such things himself by declaring;
“The unraveling of Earth First! cohesiveness comes down to this: self proclaimed anarchist and cause-loving types versus those of us who view most causes, lifestyle debates, and other extraneous issues as annoying baggage that detracts from our focus on wildland conservation. I honestly don’t know if the rift is one of style or substance. I do know that those of us with a long history in the conservation movement are often at odds with some who have a background in various social change movements. In 16 years of wildland activism, I’ve learned that to be effective, you FOCUS. That’s not to say that I oppose EF! activists being involved with other causes, outside the realm of EF! But let’s learn some tolerance, folks. Leaving other causes at home (baggage) allows us to tolerate varying beliefs on non-wildland/environmental issues. Including other causes within the EF! realm creates various ‘litmus tests’ for EF! activists and detracts from our numbers and from our ability to save natural diversity. Darryl Cherney, for instance, is publically suggesting that EF! deemphasize wilderness and broaden to include a wide array of social issues. That kind of thinking is a dangerous impediment to wildland activism. I hope that those within Earth First! have the wisdom to squelch such unfocused, self-defeating garbage.” [28]
How one could reconcile “learning tolerance” and “squelching” those view with which one disagreed was not explained by Wolke, but his claim that Cherney (or any other Earth First!er who helped organize Redwood Summer) was calling for an “abandonment” of wilderness preservation rather than an enhancement of the strategies to achieve that goal by addressing social issues, including class as part of the campaign simply wasn’t hearing the message, that Judi Bari was persistently trying to hammer home, which was you simply couldn’t have one without the other.[29]
Roger Featherstone, who had once been instrumental in bringing Earth First! and the IWW together, denounced the “new guard” within the movement, which was, ironically, due mainly to the influence of the very same IWW. Said Featherstone:
“They call themselves the new voice of the environmental movement and if we are to believe what they say, we are a social issues outfit.
“Now, largely because of this trend toward compromise with social groups, we are crippled as wilderness advocates. The press manipulates us as easily as we once manipulated them. Discussion within the movement focuses on lifestyle and politics. The public sees only the “new” side of the movement…
“We are at a trail junction. Do we head to town, or back to the wilderness? I’ll side with wilderness, with the bears. I always have, always will. Now the movement only gets in my way. It’s time for us a sindividuals and as groups to make a decision. Wilderness, or the city? Once we focused on how to save the wilderness. Now, new voices are asking, “how do we make other groups like us?…
“If the new Earth First! can’t handle monkeywrenching, count me out. I’d rather boot out the whole flock of liberal wimps then ask anyone to give up their wrench…
“Even in northern California some people are fed up with the social issues agenda put out by Judi, Darryl, and Mike…
“The old guard believes the planet can only be healed by mother earth herself and is only possible if enough genetic diversity is preserved in large wilderness areas. This requires saving what remains, restoring more, and cutting the human population. The new guard believes that humans will be responsible for straightening out the mess, and that we must start by acting as socially responsible citizens and then worry about the other creatures—the ‘only by healing ourselves can we heal others’ school of thought. The new guard works in coalitions with labor, social, and progressive groups.”[30]
In response to Roger Featherstone, Karen Pickett simply responded, “what makes you think you are at odds with us in siding with the bears when we are out in the woods defending the marbled murrelet?”[31] This was a fair question. The notion that the Earth First!ers involved in Redwood Summer, those working most closely with the IWW, were embracing social issues at the expense of conservation biology rather than integrating both into a grander strategy all stemmed from Dave Foreman’s and Nancy Morton’s imagination.
Bill Devall’s began his critique—by far the most benevolent of the four, perhaps due to his being a resident of Humboldt County—by pondering whether one could “resign or retire from a non organization”, and by declaring that the Earth First! movement had achieved most of the goals set by its founders, Foreman, Ron Kezar, Bart Koehler, Roselle, and Wolke:
“EF! made mainstream environmental groups appear moderate. It brought new tactics to the environmental movement, including the use of demonstrations and formation of action oriented networks concerning specific issues. People working under the EF! banner opened new issues for the whole environmental movement.
“For example, the ancient forest issue would not have had the popularity it has today if EF!ers had not begun tree sitting and demonstrating in the forests of Oregon and California. The campaign to ‘Free Our Public Lands’ from cattle grazing originated within the EF! movement. This was a lonely battle for many years but in the summer of 1990 it became an issue for mainstream environmentalists. Environmentalists, hunters, fishers, and farmers have now formalized a national Public Lands Action Network.
“Earth First!ers made the now famous ‘hamburger connection’ between deforestation of tropical rainforests to create pasture for cattle grazing and hamburgers sold in fast-food restaurants in the US. Out of that campaign came a heightened awareness of the social and economic reasons for rapid defore-station of the tropics. The international rainforest action networks have now made tropical deforestation a mainstream issue.
“Earth First!ers have helped to establish a new agenda and to state issues in new terms. These achievements have helped move the whole environmental movement from the stagnation it experienced during 1980s. The basic discussion has shifted from concerns over human safety and health to the broader issue of ecocentric vs. anthropocentric perspectives.
“It should be stated clearly, however, that EF! never was and is not now the activist wing of the deep, long-range ecology movement. Some EF!ers are supporters of deep ecology; many are not.”[32]
Here, Devall was also repeating the sectarian jab that Dave Foreman had leveled at Earth First!ers in northwestern California and southern Oregon specifically, that the latter were attempting to “transform Earth First! from an ecological group into a Leftist group.”[33] Devall elaborated further by stating, even more dismissively of his northern California comrades:
“EF! in California, in 1990, seems increasingly isolated from mainstream environmental groups. EF! gatherings more and more seem like the last refuge for hippies, rainbows, urban “punk” anarchists and full time demonstrators…
“I have the impression that some nihilists and anarchists have invaded ‘the movement,’ whatever that is. Indeed it seems the rainbow coalition, anarchists, hippies, ecofeminists, anyone who wants to be ‘where the action is,’ and leftists of all varieties, including so called social ecologists, have infested radical environmentalism because radical ecology seems to be the only game in town in the 1990s.”[34]
The “only game in town” comment was a rather odd pronouncement considering that just the previous year striking coal miners in Pittson, Virginia had been engaging in a mass uprising, that included direct action at the point of production and the use of Ecodefense like tactics, drawing in rank and file workers from around the country[35] and even an Earth First!er or too[36]. It was true, of course, that there were indeed a few “activist junkies” who glommed onto Redwood Summer, a fact acknowledged by, but also clarified by Karen Pickett:
“(Most of the anarchists, hippies, ecofeminists, and activist junkies) get weeded out pretty quickly by the misanthropy, irreverence, or simple hard line so that the only hippies, the only anarchists, the only ecofeminists left are the ones that put the earth first. Sure, the face of our movement is changing. A truly subversive approach compels people to reexamine assumptions… This ‘new EF!’ is partly a product of evolution and partly myth—a myth that needs to be shattered.” [37]
To be certain, Devall was not arguing against inclusiveness in Earth First!. He claimed to be as supportive of it as anyone else in northern California, but his contention was that social justice and economic struggles had to be placed in their proper context:
“New energy is always welcomed in a movement. But the problem facing EF! seems to be a problem of green movements everywhere at this time. Unless ecological wisdom is placed at the top of any political agenda, then all the other human issues tend to be addressed before environmental issues.
“We know that preservation of wilderness and native biodiversity have little chance of success in political arenas unless activists address the issues of imperialism, militarism, and poverty and debt in the Third World. However, these issues, in my opinion, must be addressed in the context of ecological wisdom…
“The structural weakness of EF!, perhaps, has left it open to the most disruptive tactics and to the antics of some of the most disruptive individuals in “the movement.” Indeed the openness of EF! has paradoxically made it more closed.
“In my observations at Rendezvous and during Redwood Summer, I’ve seen a kind of paranoia manifest. Is this person an agent? can I trust this person with information? Is this person politically ‘correct’? Part of this has resulted from political oppression by state agencies. We know that FBI agents infiltrated the movement. We know about harassment of some EF!ers by police agencies. We know that many ‘dirty tricks’ were done to some Earth First!ers. But part of the problem is a result of the way some EF!ers relate to each other and to newcomers at EF! gatherings.
“Is EF! a tribe, or a group, or a movement? Is it a network, or a collective, or a consensus group? It is, we are told, nonhierarchical…
“Without a clear and consistent message and instead a diversity of messages from people speaking as EF!ers, the media and those who want to discredit Earth First! can interpret events to their own advantage. And, it seems to me, the dominant image of Earth First! for several years has been ‘tree spiking ecoterrorists,’ As Dave Foreman pointed out, EF! lost control of its own media image several years ago.
“It lost control of its image because, in part, the messages have been mixed. ‘Some Earth First!ers may tree spike, but I never tree spike.’ ‘Some people are misanthropic but not EF!ers as a group.’ Statements such as these seem clear to people in the movement but are easily manipulated by enemies of the movement.
“I’m not sure that ‘ecodefense,’ nonviolent direct action, development of intellectual theories of ‘big wilderness,’ urban anarchism, tribal groups, labor issues and the revival of the IWW, and assorted other issues can all exist within the same non-group under the same label. I would like for them to coexist, but inner logic of such a congregation seems lacking.”
The problem for Devall was that most of the Earth First!ers who participated in the organizing of Redwood Summer disagreed with the notion that these varying tendencies couldn’t coexist, and to be certain, the professor’s involvement in Redwood Summer had been minimal.
If Earth First! was trying to avoid being labeled “tree-spiking terrorists” it didn’t help that in the same issue, the maligned Journal staff chose to publish—as its defense of the tactic of tree spiking—a truly asinine piece by Sea Shepherd Society founder and Earth First! organizer Captain Paul Watson, which was more of a sectarian rant against the class struggle environmentalism of Judi Bari than an effective defense of the tactic.[38]
To begin with, Watson insisted on using the verb “denounce” to describe the Earth First! – IWW Local #1’s actions when they had gone to great pains to make it clear that their aim was to renounce the tactic, as opposed to denouncing it, which was to say that they would not use it or condone it, but they would allow other Earth First!ers to go their own way.[39] Watson’s “defense” also included some very dubious claims about the history and effectiveness of the tactic, arguing that he invented it and subsequently introduced it to Earth First! via Mike Roselle:
“As a child I witnessed my father break a chainsaw on a horseshoe that had been nailed to a tree a century before and became over time internal armor protecting the heart of the elderly and noble being. I was delighted.
“In the mid-sixties I spiked some trees to protect them from developers in my neighborhood. It was not successful. The trees were cut down, but with the small satisfaction of two broken saw chains.
“Then in 1982, the Grouse Mountain Ski Resort in North Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada an-nounced that they were selling the timber rights to the south slope of Grouse Mountain. The decision meant that loggers would bald-face the mountain overlooking the city of Vancouver.
“The public was outraged. Despite efforts by the North Vancouver City Council, petitions from school children, and appeals from prominent citizens, the resort would not relent.
“I organized a small cadre of concerned eco-activists and we formed the North Vancouver Garden and Arbor Club. We started out early on a Sunday morning, each armed with a hammer and backpack filled with metal spikes. The six of us spiked some 2,000 trees, and pulled out every survey stake we could find. We posted warning signs starting that the entire condemned lot had been randomly spiked. We then drove into Vancouver and dropped off press releases to the media.
“The next day, the shit hit the fan. The Vancouver Sun and the Vancouver Province both ran front page stories. We followed up with interviews on TV sta-tions wearing masks—all of us identified as spokesperson Wally Cedarleaf.
“Within a day, the sawmills stated flatly that they would not buy logs from the spiked lot. The deal was off. Grouse Mountain Resort people were furious. We were denounced as terrorists and criminals by those we thought were our allies—The North Vancouver City Council, Greenpeace and assorted other eco-bureaucrats. We didn’t give a damn—the trees were saved. Grouse Mountain would remain intact. The tactic worked.”[40]
Except that it didn’t. As Judi Bari’s and Darryl Cherney’s meticulous research revealed later, all of the spiking incidents mentioned by Paul Watson ultimately failed to prevent the eventual cutting of the spiked timber sales.[41] Watson’s one piece of evidence that spiking works was that it “(kept) the issues of old-growth and clearcutting in the news. It is controversial and as such, generates discussion in the media and amongst the public.”[42] Watson’s account was contradicted, however, by Gene Lawhorn’s experiences which the editors of the Journal—to their credit—saw fit to publish as a counterpoint to Watson’s:
“The timber industry loves the fact that some Earth First! activists advocate tree-spiking. It gives them a great propaganda tool. Take for example the false press releases sent to the news media by the industry after California Earth First! activists renounced tree spiking. These releases stated that Earth First! would continue tree spiking. Someone even forged Judi Bari’s and Darryl Cherney’s signatures on them. Also note that the death threats against Judi and Darryl started shortly after the spiking renunciation. It scared the hell out of the timber industry and its ass-kissing supporters to see Earth First! activists building alliances with loggers and mill workers. That’s why they tried to assassinate Judi and Darryl. The last thing corporations want is their employees demanding an accountability as to how the environment is being treated by the employers.”[43]
Additionally, Watson’s claim to have invented the tactic would have had to have made him about 100 years old—which he most certainly was not—because tree spiking dates back to labor disputes that took place around the turn of the 20th Century. Although Judi Bari believed that the tactic was invented and used by the IWW[44], it turns out that this is merely a myth based on anti-IWW propaganda spread by the employing class to discredit the Wobblies, and, in fact, the tactic is much older.[45]
Watson also tried to claim that the tactic was not potentially harmful to timber workers, but did so, not by citing any researched studies, but simply by repeating the following anecdote:
“I…made inquiries of the logging industry while pretending to be an insurance investigator. I asked if chainsaws had safety mechanisms that would prevent the chain from breaking and striking the operator. I was assured that such an accident could not happen, for all the chainsaws used had chain guards to prevent a broken chain from whip-ping back into the face of the logger. I was also told that the sawmills required safety shields between the mill saws and the operators.
“I also asked, ‘Is it possible for a logger or a sawmill worker to be injured if the saw should strike a metallic object imbedded in a log?’ The answer from three different industry spokespeople was a definite ‘no.’ The companies I questioned were MacMillan Bloedel, Crown Zellerbach, and Weldwood Lumber…
“(T)ree-spiking works. It does not hurt trees. It does not injure people. It is simple and cheap.
“The logging barons have little defense against it. They moan and groan and gnash their teeth but they can do little—except of course to employ the old tactic of divide and conquer.”[46]
Gene Lawhorn could, again, call upon his own experiences to disprove Watson’s dubious claim:
“Shortly after I returned to work from the (Roseburg Forest Products Strike), I was operating a log splitter on the deck of the debarker. Not far behind me was a circular saw which was out of view from where I was standing. The saw operator sits behind a half inch of Plexiglas in an air conditioned booth. The saw at that time hit a spike and all around the mental fragments from the saw and the spike flew like shrapnel from a bomb. Not one piece hit the Plexiglas, and luckily none hit me…
“In the first veneer mill I worked in, the two saw operators had no protection other than their hard hats and safety glasses. We tried to get management to place Plexiglas panels in front of the saws but they refused. There are hundreds of these small non-union mills throughout the Pacific Northwest where safety is nonexistent.”[47]
Judi Bari would recount several similar incidents several years later, and, of course, one could scarcely forget the experience of Cloverdale L-P mill worker George Alexander three years previously, who had nearly been decapitated due to a spiked log, though it should be emphasized that the spiking had not been done by anyone associated with or close to Earth First![48] Sadly, however, a number of Earth First!ers were not swayed by such arguments, and they continued to insist that spiking was not harmful to workers, because all industrial jobs had risks, or that spiking served as an effective litmus test dividing those with “biocentric” values from those that didn’t, as if there were no biocentrists who opposed the tactic.[49]
In any case, most observers agreed that the debate about tree spiking was essentially a red herring, and that it was an attempt to place the blame for Foreman’s resignation from Earth First! on the shoulders of those who renounced the tactic rather than face the music that serious political contradictions existed within the movement that could no longer be ignored or glossed over.[50] Watson made it painfully obvious that his real motivation was to denounce anything and everything “impure” introduced to Earth First! by the activists in northern California:
“[I]n our society, money talks and industry money was successful in swaying anthropocentric opinions against tree-spiking. There was a weak link in our movement. Those anthropocentric, socialistic (sic) types—whose hearts bleed for the antiquated (sic) rights of the workers—were won over. Concerned that the logger was a ‘victim’ these so-called defenders of the forest proceeded to weaken our one totally effective tactic by denouncing (sic) it…
“It was tragic that Judi and Darryl were hurt in the bombing of their car. We will probably never know what really happened. But it is more tragic if the bombing continues to give martyr status to two people who have seriously compromised the established principles of Earth First!
“Redwood Summer is not an Earth First! type of action. Civil disobedience is costly to its participants both financially and physically. It is a tactic that springs from deep Judeo-Christian ethics of self-sacrifice and self-inflicted persecution. It was not practiced by North American native peoples. The establishment loves CD. The authorities are trained to deal with it. There are no surprises.[51]
This last statement was absurd, not to mention baseless. The establishment had spent well over $400,000 in Humboldt County alone trying to stifle civil disobedience.[52] The notion that the attempts to build bridges with affected timber workers was based on sentimentality rather than a holistic, strategic analysis, or that class struggle could simply be dismissed as “antiquated” was to ignore reality.[53] Finally, as a number of women Earth First!ers would demonstrate two years later in defense of Enchanted Meadow near Albion California against L-P’s continued assault on the last remaining old growth redwoods in Mendocino County, all of the successes that Watson promised tree spiking could deliver, in theory, could actually be achieved through the use of stringing yarn around the targeted trees. Said yarning also did not pose any threat or danger to loggers or millworkers as tree spiking did, and the use of yarn presented a much more “feminine” alternative to the hyper machismo mystique of tree spiking.[54] Watson’s worst statements, however, were these:
“Redwood Summer would have us believe that the loggers are not our enemy…The reality of (Judi Bari's) views are plain. She is acting from an anthropocentric ethical foundation and I am coming from a biocentric base…
“As for myself, I do not believe in loggers, I believe in trees. I do not believe in fishermen, I believe in fish. I do not believe in miners, I believe in the rocks beneath my feet. I do not believe in pie in the sky spirituality, I believe in rainbows, rivers, mountains, and moss. I do not believe in environmentalists, I believe in the environment…
“Either way, the logger is a rot, a disease and an aberration against nature, and I among others will not weep a single tear at his demise.”[55]
If this sounds extreme, it pales in comparison to the screeds Watson issued forth in a letter to the editor on the subject which read:
“Redwood Summer is a betrayal of Earth First!. Redwood Summer should have been organized by the Sierra Club or some other organization that has no qualms about bellying up to the bar with scum like loggers and log truck drivers.
“I stand with the Redwoods against the axe hefting bastards who would destroy them. The idea of working with loggers to save trees is akin to working with Dachau guards to insure that Jews get proper showers.”[56]
This is the same Paul Watson who had once sailed out upon the high seas to pull up Japanese drift nets and, in 1986, had scuttled the entire Icelandic whaling fleet in 1986 near Reykjavik, right about the same time that Ronald Reagan and Mikael Gorbachev were having their historic summit in Malta.[57] Statements such as these were not, by any means representative of most Earth First!ers, and yet they were exactly the sort of comments that gave the likes of William Pendley, Candace Boak, Marilyn Butcher, Anna Sparks, and Glenn Simmons any credibility among timber workers. All the reactionaries had to do is republish statements like this and the timber workers would naturally agree that Earth First!ers weren’t their friends. The notion that workers chose to be exploited is a little like suggesting that an abused child chooses to be born into an abusive family, and it speaks volumes about Watson’s limited political consciousness. Darryl Cherney issued a passionate response to Watson that spoke to this reality, not in the rhetoric of traditional Marxist political economy, but rather Earth First! oriented biocentrism:
“[F]or all of Captain Paul Watson’s ‘blame the loggers’ rhetoric, I have yet to hear him say ‘blame the logging company owners and management executives.’ Watson’s clear lack of political and economic analysis would have him ramming tugboats instead of whaling ships if he followed his own advice. We must distinguish between the humans who are making the decisions and the ones, who albeit are ‘Good Germans,’ are still just intimidated into just following orders. Dave Foreman is a staunch advocate of strategic selective monkeywrenching. Old Dave himself has said to primarily go after the big companies and leave the Mom and Pop operations alone. I would STRONGLY suggest that we be staunch advocates of strategic, selective misanthropy. We are all deserving of criticism. But priorities, for the goddesssake! If you have one bag of sand, pour it into Maxxam’s bulldozer, not Rainbow Mountainflower’s Holistic Forestry Collective’s Forklift.
“Of all the timber workers that Judi Bari has built alliances with, many have quit or been fired. She laughingly calls it ‘the future ex-timber workers’ alliance.’ But regardless of their employment status, these loggers, millworkers and truckers, men and women (very strong women) have proven themselves to be invaluable sources of information, a significant thorn in the side of the timber industry, excellent media spokespeople and a rude awakening and consciousness raiser for their fellow employees. How many EF!ers realize that timber workers have risked their jobs and lives getting arrested and participating in EF! actions in Northern California and Oregon? How many of your realize that EF!’s misanthropic banjo player, George Shook, was a forester for a corporate logging firm and the U.S. Forest Service for 7 years? Should we have given up on him because he once killed a helluva lot of trees?
“Not everyone can quit their polluting job at once to become an EF!er. You can’t blame prisoners for the conditions of the prison. But there is a role for people to keep their job and wrench from within. They can put viruses in computers, lose the mail, call in sick, sab the machinery, and subvert the dominant paradigm! And on their days off, the house painter can paint our banners, the computer programmer type our newsletters, the movie actors can perform our guerilla theatre, and the loggers burn up feller bunchers (3 in Mendocino alone!). Loggers are just another group of working people, no more or less guilty that the rest of us—with one exception. That exception is the one who profits the most by a quantum leap from the exploitation of the Earth: the industrial, thieving, Earth-raping, white collared, white skinned, scum-sucking corporate greedhead. Biocentrically, we can no more blame a logger for destroying the forest than we can blame cows for destroying the prairies and deserts. They both should be engaged in doing something different, but from a biocentric viewpoint, they are following their natural instincts and following the path of least resistance.”[58]
As it turns out, Paul Watson was an unreliable source in any case. According to Darryl Cherney, the Sea Sheppard Society founder was delusional as evidenced by his offering himself as a witness for the FBI in the lawsuit against the agency by Bari and Cherney a decade later, claiming that Cherney had asked Watson’s advice on how to construct a bomb matching the description of the one that nearly killed Bari. The FBI didn’t even consider Watson’s delusional notion worthy of serious thought.[59]
J.P. Bernhard’s write up on the Sequoia Action Week, discussed in more detail a few chapters previously, was no less of a hit piece against Redwood Summer than was Captain Paul Watson’s “defense” of tree spiking. No more than a quotation of the last paragraph of the article is needed to demonstrate this:
“It’s crisis time at Earth First! and neither the FBI nor the bombing of Judi and Darryl is the cause. There’s a plan afloat to turn EF! into an organization, to create a board of directors to control the Journal, to form equal alliances with environmental corporations—in other words to spray the roots out of which EF! grew with Roundup. If it succeeds, kiss the Earth goodbye.”[60]
None of the accusations made by Bernhard were even remotely accurate, and it is evident that he was clutching at straws to find fault with the organizers of Redwood Summer. Said Darryl Cherney of all ten of these screeds some twenty-one years later:
“My takes is that these people fit into several very clear categories: COINTELPRO operatives, couch potato wannabe activists, people who did not attend Redwood Summer and therefore have no idea what actually happened, and last and most importantly, those whose vision was so clouded by our renunciation of tree-spiking that nothing we did from that point on could be right, bigots against Californians (common in the USA), pathological liars, those jealous of our ability to organize large sustained campaigns, and people with zero ability to engage in strategic analysis. For the latter I’ll say that only a true idiot (who wasn’t a cop) would viciously go after a huge Earth First! movement after it was bombed and blamed by the FBI. That’s quite a few categories but there was no shortage of those who spewed this tea-party-like intransigent vitriol.
“The notion that one could go after Judi Bari as she lay in her hospital bed and the Redwood Summer movement in general after it picked up the pieces and kept going with gusto and with great humor (contrary to those humorless critics who claimed we had no humor) is a testimony to how activists can be just as clueless as those we claim are destroying the environment, for they are, in fact, attempting to destroy their brothers and sisters in the battle. And that assumes that they are actual activists.
“Let’s follow the careers of those who critiqued Redwood Summer and see where they are since. Wild Rockies held Cove Mallard Summer and in fact, the summer long campaign became a theme throughout Earth First! and other movements, such as with Toxic Summer, Detroit Summer and Clayquot Summer. History will show that Wild Rockies decided to embrace sabotage as part of their Cove Mallard Summer and then quickly retract it when threats of violence emerged in their faces.
“Part of the issue back then revolved around the resignation of Dave Foreman, who quit without warning to the movement (we learned of it from the press to whom he sent a press release without sharing with the rest of the movement) as Judi lay in her bed writhing in agony. What was worse is that Dave blamed his resignation square on Judi’s shoulders, even as she remained in solidarity with Dave who had been arrested by the FBI for actual acts of committed sabotage by EF! and other movement people. We conducted Redwood Summer for many reasons, one of which was to show the FBI and the world that the intimidation of Dave Foreman would not shut us down. Some gratitude we got in return. But as the only area that suffered an actual worker injury from tree spiking and as the most active Earth First! group in the country by leaps and bounds (literally, sometimes) we knew what the consequences were better than any of them. But we did not denounce the groups who embraced tree spiking as they denounced us with nothing short of loathsome words.”[61]
Mike Roselle was no more charitable in his critique of what he considered a collection of obvious hit pieces against those who had organized Redwood Summer and had expanded the scope of Earth First!.[62] Karen Pickett also excoriated those critical of Redwood Summer for their misdirected anger, declaring:
“I don’t agree with John Davis when he ‘warns’ that ‘EF! is being sidetracked by anthropocentric concerns’—I do believe that EF! is being sidetracked by accusations and unnecessary factionalizing that has its basis in rumors perhaps fostered by the FBI and their ilk, who are no doubt gleefully rubbing their hands over this last issue of the Journal…
“The FBI infiltration, the Arizona busts, the bombing, and other violence against activists have been hard on the movement and have used up a lot of energy better spent. But these events have also galvanized support for EF!, pushed our issues in to the headlines and made many of us stronger and more committed to the defense of the earth. It’s been a drag to deal with the level of bitterness and hostility I’m encountering in people whom I think have the same basic goals as me. It’s also a waste—hurl your hostility toward Charlie Hurwitz or Lujan or Stephen Bechtel or Mike Fain where it’s better spent and let’s get on with the business at hand.”[63]
To most outsiders, even those close to the movement, it was painfully obvious that Earth First! faced a crisis. Redwood Summer supporter Russell Norvell accurately assessed the debate thusly:
“Over the years, the simple issue of Wilderness has remained the same, but the message has changed with the times. The message today must reach mill towns, larger urban centers and the workers who contribute to pollution—both in terms of industrial, pollution spawning productivity, but pollution as well in terms of excess population. Therein, I think, lies an explanation for the split in Earth First!. Dave Foreman kept his eye on the issue of Wilderness, but did not hear the changing message, the more appropriate message. Judi Bari saw both, heard it all, and from a philosophical point of view, responded appropriately. Too, one must concede Judi Bari’s background as being a factor. In her “other life” before coming to Mendocino County she had been a labor organizer. It was natural that she should draw on this background, and ally herself with the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), which has historically been known as the most militant union for workers in the woods and mills.
“Unfortunately, it was equally natural that such an EF!-IWW alliance would lead to the present divisiveness, prompting Dave Foreman and Nancy Morton’s farewell apologia in the current EF! Journal.”[64]
However, Norvell’s understanding of the controversy was, in some sense, no less muddy than that of some those embroiled within it, because he described Judi Bari as Foreman’s “successor”, stating, “In the meantime, within the EF! organization (ha, ha) one can hear the sad-happy cry: ‘The King is dead; long live the Queen.’ Despite any perceptions she may have to the contrary, Judi Bari is now head.”[65] To those who were no less important, and no less “leaders” of the movement than Bari, this was deeply insulting. Said an anonymous Earth First!er writing under the pseudonym “Annie” in response,
“Such writings do not give one a whole view of EF! (and in his case, not even half a view!).
“Earth First! is not and has never been an ‘organization’; it’s a movement. We don’t concern ourselves with any hierarchy. Many of us don’t even give a hoot about a split and feel that the lecturers and philosophers can write and argue about it all they want.
“Those of us who have been living in the woods and have a close affinity with the cycles of nature are not threatened by splits or dissensions and actually rather welcome them as nature has taught us things are not often what they seem.
“We also do not wait for anyone to ‘lead’ us. Our strength lies in having no leader. The ‘King’ and ‘Queen’ who we listen for is Mother Nature, and her higher Nature which guides us just fine.
“Contrary to mainstream impressions, Dave Foreman was not our ‘King’ or leader. He was someone who we listened to—someone who was saying what so many of us were feeling for so long. Dave gave us the vocabulary to express our feelings.”[66]
Again, while the argument about Earth First! being a movement rather than an organization is highly debatable, even dubious, the rest of “Annie’s” critique is spot on. Elsewhere in his commentary, Norvell had pooh-poohed the growing cautiousness of Earth First!ers around security, dismissing this is as paranoia[67], to which “Annie” responded:
“It may be easy for Rusty in his comfort to scoff at our fears, but you bet we’re cautious! Entrapment, Mike Tait, shaved heads, dead cats, threats dripping with insanity, and yes, a bomb, tend to make some folks a tad suspicious. We are not just writing cute articles; we are threatening the status quo and there are those who don’t like it! If we are cautious, paranoid as some call it, so be it!”[68]
“Annie’s” perspective was entirely sensible, given the circumstances. She was also correct in pointing out that most rank and file Earth First!ers were not at all invested in any “split”, a sentiment echoed by long time Mendocino County Earth First!er, Don Morris, who correctly assessed that, “this falsely perceived rift will eventually result in a larger, stronger, more diverse movement.”[69] Earth First!er Kelpie Wilson, who was a key organizer of Redwood Summer agreed, declaring:
“The whole idea that EF! has split into two camps, lining up behind Roselle or Foreman, or depending on how you see it, Bari or Watson, is absolute garbage. This duality paradigm is completely shallow, as is the perception that EF! has leaders who can depose each other or rise to fill power vacuums. The reality is that a movement that was never a unified whole recently ceased working together to the point where it became dysfunctional.”[70]
Though much of this dysfunctionality was woven in the woof, so-to-speak, given Earth First!’s disdainfulness over structure, it also had the ability to recover quickly. The first real test of Earth First!’s collective cohesiveness following the circular firing squad exhibited in the Mabon 1990 issue of the Earth First! Journal took place the weekend of November 17-18 at an Earth First! activist conference held in Boulder, Colorado, which was attended by eighty Earth First!ers, including Kelpie Wilson, Karen Pickett, Sequoia Greenfield, and Roger Featherstone, among others. Large contingents from California and Montana were joined by smaller groups and individual activists from Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, Vermont, and Washington. This was seen by many participants as, “an opportunity to ‘take the gloves off’ i.e.the gloves of niceness that keep us from honestly challenging each other’s words and actions.” As if to emphasize this point, Sequoia, half jokingly calling herself the “Revolutionary Ecoterrorist Pie Brigade”, filled two pie shells with whip cream implicitly threatening to use them against anyone she perceived as talking too much or exhibiting smugness or arrogance.[71] Kelpie Wilson recalled her experiences at the conference in detail, stating:
“As I took my place in the crowded classroom on the Boulder campus, I saw everyone looking around tensely at each other, old friends and action comrades, wondering how much and whose blood would spill that day. Then our worst fears were realized. Sequoia pulled two cream pies out of a paper sack and placed them on the floor in the middle of the room. We knew someone was going to get it.
“Finally, our brave facilitators, MB and Duff, quieted the nervous chit chat and the meeting began. Roger Featherstone opened with a statement: ‘If this movement doesn’t stand for wilderness and biodiversity above all else, then I’m walking out right now.’ Well, settling that question will eat up the whole weekend, I thought.
“Then a miracle happened. Person after person said something like: ‘Yes, preserving wilderness is my first priority, but what good does it do to protect wilderness in preserves if it has no ozone layer protection, no protection from acid rain and toxic waste? We also need to deal with people and how they live on this planet. It’s all connected.’ Few could see any reason to limit EF! to strictly wilderness preservation issues because there are many effective ways to put the earth first. Finally, after only about an hour of discussion (hallelujah!) the following principles were consensed upon:
“Earth First! is a collection of autonomous groups and individuals who operate under the same basic principles:
- We put the earth first, meaning we are biocentric, working to preserve biodiversity and wilderness.
- We have a no compromise stance
- We take action.
“Roger Featherstone stayed in the room.
“The group then decided to have a go-around to find out where all the perceived conflicts had come from. Poor communications, big egos and bad mouthing got the most votes. Many cited the EF! Journal’s refusal to provide space for internal debates as a major factor inhibiting communication.”[72]
The so-called “split” and the “resignation” of various Earth First!ers encompassed many issues—particularly the tension between conservation biology and social issues, growth in Earth First!, and the direction of the Earth First! Journal—but was dealt with civilly and quite productively. All felt that there had been far too much name calling and personal attacks aired publically, both in the Journal and in the corporate press. Use of the latter added the risk of having one’s statements quoted incorrectly, quoted out of context, or deliberately altered by the editor in order to discredit Earth First!. Some argued that the corporate press should be avoided at all costs, while others felt that it was more effective to train activists to use it to their advantage. Everyone agreed that it needed to be made clear that anyone speaking as an Earth First!er was only speaking for themselves and not for the movement as a whole. All agreed that there wasn’t so much of a “split” as there were a lot of “rumors, badmouthing, hurt feelings, and poor communications.” These were exacerbated by the fact that the Journal, which is where many of these thoughts and debates were aired, only came out every six weeks, which allowed disagreements and misunderstandings to fester rather than be addressed in a timely fashion.[73] Kelpie Wilson reported on Redwood Summer’s use of their BBS on EcoNet—an early manifestation of the internet that existed before widespread use of email and the world wide web—which allowed the campaign’s various satellite offices to remain in communication with each other in almost real time, relative to letters and even phone calls, and suggested that such efforts could be expanded to encompass all of Earth First!.[74] This idea was well received, though more conventional methods, such as more effective use of phone trees and more frequent letters through the mail were also agreed upon.[75]
One issue in particular that was hotly debated and specifically related to the need for more effective communication, was the tree spiking renunciation.[76] Earth First!ers from bioregions that had not renounced tree spiking stressed the importance of communicating with other chapters before issuing statements on behalf of Earth First! as a whole.[77] This was a bit unfair, considering that those who had issued the renunciation had actually been very careful about their handling of the statement. That it was misconstrued was due to bad luck and the ignorance of others. Although the renunciation had been issued only by those Earth First!ers and IWW members from northern California and southern Oregon, the corporate media had spun the declaration as coming from all of Earth First!. To make matters worse, the Earth First! Journal had published the renunciation itself, but had omitted the clarifying statement issued by the signers explaining the distinctions they were trying to make, and which also made it clear that they were not speaking for Earth First! as a whole.[78] Further, the signers of the renunciation had sent letters asking other Earth First! groups for input on their intentions, but only two had responded.[79]
Another similarly debated and discussed issue was that of the growth (in numbers) of Earth First! as a movement and its evolution. Related to this was the issue of inclusiveness. As described in detail in a report about the conference published in the Yule 1990 Earth First! Journal:
“A hot topic of discussion was ‘Racism in Earth First!’ Some people feel that Earth First! has always been open to anyone wanting to participate. Many expressed that merely being ‘open’ is no solution, as we have all seen in regard to wimmin (sic) in the movement. One person gave an example of the lie of ‘openness’ by citing that he is one of only three openly gay people within this movement, and that others at a RRR planning session expressed fear that he would bring his gay friends. Homophobia, racism, sexism, classism, and other ‘isms’ are things we may not embrace as our issues, but let’s not pretend they don’t exist in our biocentric little heads.”[80]
The issue of racism in particular was driven home by a meeting during the conference with two sympathetic members of the International Indican Treaty Council. One of the speakers discussed Eurocentric attitudes prevalent among non-native organizations, even Earth First!, and pointed out that while Earth First!’s growing commitment to nonviolence was noble, white activists see violence as an inconvenience to be avoided, indigenous peoples’ are subjected to systemic violence daily. Naturally, the issues of security, infiltration, and harassment had been on everyone’s mind, given the revelations of the FBI’s COINTEPRO activity against Earth First! in Arizona, Montana, and northern California. The other speaker from the IITC reminded the assembled environmentalists that the views of the tribal council leadership that routinely collaborates with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) does not represent the view of most rank and file Indians, resembling in most ways the lack of commonality between timber workers and their employers.[81]
Inevitably, the issue was related to the discussion on Redwood Summer as a campaign, since the campaign had been the largest such effort ever organized, in whole or in part, by Earth First!ers yet. There was much criticism around the perceived lack of direction experienced by new arrivals at Redwood Summer base camps (much of which could be chalked up to the rapid growth of the movement, the inexperience dealing with such a large influx of new activists, and sheer burnout).[82] As recalled by Kelpie Wilson:
“Many EF!ers had ‘problems’ with Redwood Summer. They cited the flakiness of disorganization of base camp and a dilution of principles by bringing in so many new ‘non-Earth First!ers.’ My response as an organizer was to say, ‘If you have a problem, jump in and fix it up!’ To their credit, many EF! organizers who came to the North coast did just that.”[83]
Some of the new arrivals had been offended by the nonviolence code, particularly the prohibition against property destruction, which many didn’t agree should be equated with violence.[84] This spoke to the lack of understanding by many of how the economic realities of the gyppo logging system made monkeywrenching an ineffective tactic, and if this facet of the issue was discussed at the conference, it went unreported.[85] Others felt that the campaign relied too heavily on the corporate media as a strategy. Redwood Summer organizers present at the conference reminded the rest that the campaign was a coalition effort (involving the IWW and Seeds of Peaces as well as many others), not strictly speaking an Earth First! campaign, and that it represented new ground. Never before had direct action in defense of the wilderness taken place on such a large scale in the woods, on the streets, in the offices of government agencies, or in corporate boardrooms. The organizers conceded that some mistakes were made, but these were part of the learning process. They expressed frustration that they had been disproportionally criticized, that they had not received sufficient recognition for their successes, and that overall the campaign had been successful in education and radicalizing a larger group of new activists than any other Earth First! campaign thus far. Hardwood Summer activists reported similar successes, and noted that they had not prohibited monkeywrenching, though the economic situation was different there, and the affected forestlands were on public lands.[86]
Other issues discussed included whether or not deep ecology and conservation biology could be integrated into the same movement as direct action (most agreed they could), discussions on the Earth First! “Direct Action Fund” (DAF), the Earth First! Foundation, and the future of the Earth First! Journal. On this last subject all agreed that it was time to elect (or rather “consense”) on a new staff. For the sake of accountability, the assembled Earth First!ers decided to elect a rotating staff, and agreed that the Wild Rockies (Missoula, Montana) Earth First! chapter was the best candidate out of three (the others being Colorado Earth First! and Big River Action Group) based on their relative qualifications (though some joked that it was their representative’s collection of cardigan sweaters that had swayed the vote).[87] As for the cream pies, both got thrown. A rather smug acceptance speech from the two Missoula Earth First!ers resulted in one of the two cream pies being hurled in their direction.[88] The other pie had been tossed at one of two women who had revealed that they had been interviewed by a certain “men’s magazine”, before she had a chance to reveal that the interviewer (a man, naturally) had misrepresented his position and the genre of the publication.[89]
For the most part, the outcome of the activist conference demonstrated that Don Morris had been correct in his prediction that Earth First! would emerge stronger despite what were obviously growing pains and that it could survive the departure of one (or more) of its outspoken “leaders”. Kelpie Wilson’s impressions matched that feeling:
“I went to the EF! activist conference very reluctantly. I really thought I would end up losing friendships. The only way to approach this one, I thought, is to check my ego at the door. As it turned out, almost every other person attending had the same thought! It’s really not so surprising though, because the earth is dying, it’s going fast, and we don’t have time for egos anymore.
“It was amusing and weird to come back and read Russ Norvell’s column proclaiming Judi Bari as Queen of Earth First! and chastising her for not spurring us on. Many of us dream of a nonhierarchical human society that lives in peace with the earth. We want our movement to reflect this vision. Just because Judi wanted to see the ‘bearded-men-who-talk-throughtheir-teeth’ lose power in EF!, doesn’t mean she must become EF!’s Margaret Thatcher!”[90]
Certainly, talk of a “split” within Earth First! had been greatly exaggerated, but several issues remain far from settled, including the matter of tree spiking, which would be debated for years, but ultimately never resolved. This was due, in no small way, to the fact that while the consensus achieved at the Boulder activist conference was positive, the question of whether Earth First! could and would integrate class struggle into its deep ecology was not addressed, and this represents a serious oversight. Granted, to many, “class struggle” conjured forth notions of either dogmatic, sectarian, and largely irrelevant Marxist “parties”, whose membership numbered in the low hundreds at best, or worse still, raised the specter of bureaucratic totalitarian “communist” regimes, whose record on the environment was not appreciably better (and was in some cases worse) than those of western capitalist states, particularly in world where such concepts were considered outmoded, even on the left after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Yet, the struggle against the destruction of the Earth begged the question of who was destroying it and why. Absent a class analysis, the best many could come up with was a misanthropic theory that the problem was simple due to “human nature”. The resulting response was a vague idea of a greatly reduced human population (with little or no explanation on how this was to be achieved, or even whether or not humans would actively determine the means for such a reduction in its own numbers), living in a far less technological world.[91]
Where Earth First! incorporated class struggle into its strategy most deeply was where the IWW was most strongly influential, and that was in the regions that organized Redwood Summer. Unfortunately, the IWW was, at the time, far from free of internal strife itself. IWW member Gary Cox, who had been instrumental in bringing Earth First! and the IWW together and had strongly encouraged Judi Bari and Darryl Cherney to join the IWW originally in 1988 had resigned from the union’s general executive board (GEB), to which he had been elected overwhelmingly by the membership to serve a one year term for 1990, and ultimately from the organization itself. Cox had been deeply offended by the publication, in the May 1990 issue of the Industrial Worker of an extremely inflammatory poster-centerfold submitted by a collective of members involved in radical feminist causes, entitled “Go Fuck a Fetus!,” which was aimed at anti-choice extremists who would often use images of bloody fetuses in order to influence public opinion. Cox was, himself, pro-choice, but he had been in contact with many mineworkers, both union and nonunion, whom he felt might be receptive to the IWW economically, but tended to be conservative socially. Such an inflammatory statement was self marginalizing, in Cox’s opinion, and had the effect of the IWW cutting its collective nose off in spite of its face.[92]
While the chair carries no extra voting power on the executive board, it does retain the duty of cosigning all checks issued in the name of the IWW with the elected General Secretary-Treasurer, who, in 1990, was a member named Jeff Ditz, who also carried a union card in the United Auto Workers union.[93] Ditz’s administration was considered by many to be something of an embarrassment administratively, though the much maligned officer was also considered personable and a good spokesperson for the organization. Due to the administration’s perceived inability to pay bills in a timely fashion, produce financial records in accordance with Constitutionally mandated deadlines (or upon request), and a general lack of best practices, Jahn began refusing to cosign checks until the rest of the board and the membership at large called for Ditz’s ouster. The late 1980s and 1990s were an era in left politics when bureaucratic and administrative precision were generally deemphasized in favor of taking action, whether rightly or wrongly, and Jahn’s scorched earth policy was universally condemned within the IWW, even by many who were equally disgusted with Ditz’s less than stellar administrative work, ultimately leading to the former’s expulsion—which, in the IWW a very rarely invoked process—from the organization by a popular vote.[94]
Considering the connections between the IWW and Earth First!, and the proven FBI COINTELPRO-like disruption of the latter, it is fascinating that now investigation was done to determine if the IWW itself had not been disrupted. Certainly they would have been a target, and the FBI was certainly aware of Bari’s and Cherney’s membership in the One Big Union. The sort of internal internecine conflicts within Earth First! and administrative wrangling that befell the IWW precisely matched classic COINTELPRO like disruptions that undermined the Black Panthers, Students for a Democratic Society, the Socialist Workers’ Party, and other left organizations.[95] What is known is that the IWW’s ability to report on the goings on at the end of Redwood Summer and many other administrative functions, if poorly administered by Ditz were utterly brought to a near standstill by Ed Jahn. The September 1990 issue of the Industrial Worker was only four pages in length.[96] In the long run, the IWW survived and flourished in spite of these problems, and Gary Cox eventually rejoined, still the damage done and the lost potential due to it has never been fully quantified. Suffice it to say, as did Gary Cox, class struggle is anything but polite.
Notes:
[1] “The Earth First Divorce”, by Judi Bari, Anderson Valley Advertiser, August 29, 1990; and “Expand Earth First!”, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[2] “Earth First! The Underbelly Exposed”, by Chris Shillock, Libertarian Labor Review, issue #6, Winter 1989.
[3] “Forgive Us Our Trespass: Earth First! Blames Cut and Run Logging for the Potter Valley Mill Closure” by Darryl Cherney, Anderson Valley Advertiser, December 14, 1988, Mendocino Commentary, December 15, 1988, and the Country Activist, December, 1988.
[4] “Here and There in Mendocino County”, by Bruce Anderson, Anderson Valley Advertiser, May 24, 1989.
[5] “L-P Blames Environmentalists for Mill Closure”, staff report, Earth First! Journal, Brigid / February 2, 1989.
[6] “Talkin’ Earth First!: an interview with Mike Roselle”, by Alexander Cockburn, Anderson Valley Advertiser, July 4, 1990.
[7] “A Report from the Journal Advisory Committee, by G. T., Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[8] “Breaking Up or Breaking Apart”, by Karen Pickett, Earth First! Journal, Samhain / November 1, 1990.
[9] “Parting is Such Sweet Sorrow”, by Dave Foreman and Nancy Morton, Anderson Valley Advertiser, August 29, 1990, and “Good Luck, Darlin’ It’s Been Great”, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[10] “The Earth First Divorce”, by Judi Bari, Anderson Valley Advertiser, August 29, 1990; and “Expand Earth First!”, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[11] “Breaking Up or Breaking Apart”, by Karen Pickett, Earth First! Journal, Samhain / November 1, 1990. Emphasis in the original.
[12] “Lost in the Woods”, by Greg Goldin, Los Angeles Weekly, September 7, 1990.
[13] Author’s interview with Darryl Cherney, May 9, 2012.
[14] “Lost in the Woods”, by Greg Goldin, Los Angeles Weekly, September 7, 1990.
[15] Author’s interview with Darryl Cherney, May 9, 2012.
[16] “Breaking Up or Breaking Apart”, by Karen Pickett, Earth First! Journal, Samhain / November 1, 1990.
[17] “Editor’s Note”, by John Davis, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[18] “Renunciation”, by Kris Sommerville, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[19] “Regrets and Relief” by Dale Turner, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[20] “Wherefore Art Thou, Earth First!?”, by Darryl Cherney, Anderson Valley Advertiser, January 16, 1991.
[21] “Shitty Committee Minority Response”, by Roger Featherstone, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[22] “Time to Move On”, by Nancy Zierenberg, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[23] “Breaking Up or Breaking Apart”, by Karen Pickett, Earth First! Journal, Samhain / November 1, 1990. Emphasis in the original.
[24] “The Empire Strikes Back: FBI Attacks Earth First! – Foreman, Milett, 2 Others Arrested”, by Dale Turner, Earth First! Journal, special edition, June 16, 1989.
[25] “Breaking Up or Breaking Apart”, by Karen Pickett, Earth First! Journal, Samhain / November 1, 1990. Emphasis in the original.
[26] “Time to Move On”, by Nancy Zierenberg, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[27] “Breaking Up or Breaking Apart”, by Karen Pickett, Earth First! Journal, Samhain / November 1, 1990. Emphasis in the original.
[28] “Focus on Wilderness”, by Howie Wolkie, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990. Emphasis added.
[29] “The Earth First Divorce”, by Judi Bari, Anderson Valley Advertiser, August 29, 1990; and “Expand Earth First!”, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[30] “Whither Earth First! – Take Three”, by Roger Featherstone, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[31] “Breaking Up or Breaking Apart”, by Karen Pickett, Earth First! Journal, Samhain / November 1, 1990.
[32] “Maybe the Movement is Leaving Me”, by Bill Devall, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[33] “Parting is Such Sweet Sorrow”, by Dave Foreman and Nancy Morton, Anderson Valley Advertiser, August 29, 1990, and “Good Luck, Darlin’ It’s Been Great”, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[34] “Maybe the Movement is Leaving Me”, by Bill Devall, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[35] “Revolt in the Coal Fields: Report from the Front”, by Gary Cox, Industrial Worker, 1989.
[36] “Workers Take it Over!”, by Darryl Cherney, Country Activist, October 1989.
[37] “Breaking Up or Breaking Apart”, by Karen Pickett, Earth First! Journal, Samhain / November 1, 1990.
[38] “In Defense of Tree Spiking”, by Captain Paul Watson, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[39] “Notes on the Renunciation of Tree Spiking, unpublished letter, by Karen Wood, March 19, 1989; letter courtesy of Gene Lawhorn’s personal archives.
[40] “In Defense of Tree Spiking”, by Captain Paul Watson, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[41] “The Secret History of Tree Spiking, Part II”, by Judi Bari, Anderson Valley Advertiser, March 8, 1993 and Earth First! Journal, Brigid / February 2, 1995.
[42] “In Defense of Tree Spiking”, by Captain Paul Watson, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[43] “Why Earth First! Should Renounce Tree Spiking”, by Gene Lawhorn, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[44] “A Lesson for Environmentalists: The Earth First! Split, Part 2”, by Russell Norvell, Anderson Valley Advertiser, November 14, 1990.
[45] Foner, Philip S., History of the American Labor Movement, Volume VII: Labor and World War I 1914-1918, ©1987, International Publishers, New York, NY., Chapter 12, The IWW in Lumber, pp.246-63.
[46] “In Defense of Tree Spiking”, by Captain Paul Watson, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[47] “Why Earth First! Should Renounce Tree Spiking”, by Gene Lawhorn, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[48] “The Secret History of Tree Spiking, Part I”, by Judi Bari, Anderson Valley Advertiser, February 17, 1993 and Earth First! Journal, Yule / December 21, 1994.
[49] “Response to Gene Lawhorn”, by California Formanista, Earth First! Journal, Yule / December 21, 1990.
[50] “A Lesson for Environmentalists: The Earth First! Split, Part 2”, by Russell Norvell, Anderson Valley Advertiser, November 14, 1990.
[51] “In Defense of Tree Spiking”, by Captain Paul Watson, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[52] “Protesters Put Big Dent in Budget: ‘Summer’ Costs Near $400,000”, by Mark Rathjen, Eureka Times-Standard, Septmeber 5, 1990
[53] Foster, John Bellamy, “The Limits of Environmentalism Without Class: Lessons from the Ancient Forest Struggle of the Pacific Northwest” New York, NY., Monthly Review Press (Capitalism, Nature, Socialism series), 1993. [Need Pages]
[54] “Yarning”, [Need Context], featured on the album Who Bombed Judi Bari?, edited by Darryl Cherney, 1997.
[55] “In Defense of Tree Spiking”, by Captain Paul Watson, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[56] “Dear People”, letter to the editor by Captain Paul Watson, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[57] “Lost in the Woods”, by Greg Goldin, Los Angeles Weekly, September 7, 1990.
[58] “Wherefore Art Thou, Earth First!?”, by Darryl Cherney, Anderson Valley Advertiser, January 16, 1991.
[59] Author’s interview with Darryl Cherney, May 9, 2012.
[60] “Sequoia Sayonara”, by J.P. Bernhard, Earth First! Journal, Mabon / September 22, 1990.
[61] Author’s Interview with Darryl Cherney, May 5, 2011.
[62] Author’s Interview with Mike Roselle, May 6, 2011.
[63] “Breaking Up or Breaking Apart”, by Karen Pickett, Earth First! Journal, Samhain / November 1, 1990.
[64] “A Lesson for Environmentalists: The Earth First! Split, Part 1”, by Russell Norvell, Anderson Valley Advertiser, November 7, 1990.
[65] “A Lesson for Environmentalists: The Earth First! Split, Part 2”, by Russell Norvell, Anderson Valley Advertiser, November 14, 1990.
[66] “No EF! Split Here, Rusty.”, by “Annie”, Anderson Valley Advertiser, November 21, 1990. Emphasis in the original. It’s not clear who “Annie” is though the likelihood is, from the context of the response, that she is “Annie Oakleaf”, one of the signers of the tree spiking renunciation.
[67] “A Lesson for Environmentalists: The Earth First! Split, Part 2”, by Russell Norvell, Anderson Valley Advertiser, November 14, 1990.
[68] “No EF! Split Here, Rusty.”, by “Annie”, Anderson Valley Advertiser, November 21, 1990.
[69] “All Hands!”, letter to the editor by Don Morris, Anderson Valley Advertiser, October 17, 1990.
[70] “Earth First! Split? Bananas!”, by Kelpie Wilson, Anderson Valley Advertiser, November 21, 1990.
[71] “Boulder Activist Conference”, by Sage, Howler, Da’Non, and Karina, Earth First! Journal, Yule / December 21, 1990.
[72] “Earth First! Split? Bananas!”, by Kelpie Wilson, Anderson Valley Advertiser, November 21, 1990.
[73] “Boulder Activist Conference”, by Sage, Howler, Da’Non, and Karina, Earth First! Journal, Yule / December 21, 1990.
[74] Cite the interview with SS Here.
[75] “Boulder Activist Conference”, by Sage, Howler, Da’Non, and Karina, Earth First! Journal, Yule / December 21, 1990.
[76] “Earth First! Split? Bananas!”, by Kelpie Wilson, Anderson Valley Advertiser, November 21, 1990.
[77] “Boulder Activist Conference”, by Sage, Howler, Da’Non, and Karina, Earth First! Journal, Yule / December 21, 1990.
[78] “Earth First! Split? Bananas!”, by Kelpie Wilson, Anderson Valley Advertiser, November 21, 1990.
[79] “Boulder Activist Conference”, by Sage, Howler, Da’Non, and Karina, Earth First! Journal, Yule / December 21, 1990.
[80] “Boulder Activist Conference”, by Sage, Howler, Da’Non, and Karina, Earth First! Journal, Yule / December 21, 1990.
[81] “Boulder Activist Conference”, by Sage, Howler, Da’Non, and Karina, Earth First! Journal, Yule / December 21, 1990.
[82] “Boulder Activist Conference”, by Sage, Howler, Da’Non, and Karina, Earth First! Journal, Yule / December 21, 1990.
[83] “Earth First! Split? Bananas!”, by Kelpie Wilson, Anderson Valley Advertiser, November 21, 1990.
[84] “Boulder Activist Conference”, by Sage, Howler, Da’Non, and Karina, Earth First! Journal, Yule / December 21, 1990.
[85] Neither Wilson’s nor Sage. Et. al. report any discussion of the issue on this level in either account.
[86] “Boulder Activist Conference”, by Sage, Howler, Da’Non, and Karina, Earth First! Journal, Yule / December 21, 1990.
[87] “Boulder Activist Conference”, by Sage, Howler, Da’Non, and Karina, Earth First! Journal, Yule / December 21, 1990.
[88] “Earth First! Split? Bananas!”, by Kelpie Wilson, Anderson Valley Advertiser, November 21, 1990.
[89] “Boulder Activist Conference”, by Sage, Howler, Da’Non, and Karina, Earth First! Journal, Yule / December 21, 1990.
[90] “Earth First! Split? Bananas!”, by Kelpie Wilson, Anderson Valley Advertiser, November 21, 1990.
[91] Foster, John Bellamy, “The Limits of Environmentalism Without Class: Lessons from the Ancient Forest Struggle of the Pacific Northwest” New York, NY., Monthly Review Press (Capitalism, Nature, Socialism series), 1993. [Need Pages]
[92] FACT CHECK THIS with Cox and 1990 GOBs.
[93] FACT CHECK THIS with 2012 Constitution to see if this is still the case.
[94] FACT CHECK THIS with 1990 GOBs.
[95] “Stop FBI Repression!: The Historical Context to Recent Bomb Charges Against California Earth First! Activists, by Michael Robinson and Jim Vander Wall” Industrial Worker, July 1990.
[96] “Help!”, by the Linda Butler, et. al. Industrial Worker, September 1990.