Reward Fund for Coast Redwood Native Plant Habitat Damage / MD Vaden

[easy-lift guy]

The fund can also be used for burl poaching.

 

Unless we quoted you wrong, it sounded like you questioned whether there is any merit in that, or if anything like that can be accomplished.

 

Burl poaching, right got it. Shut down all of the parks ASAP. Triple razor wire around every single tree. Post unarmed persons around all of these areas in order to explain to the people responsible what they are doing is wrong and convince them that they should stop or they will be told again, and again.

easy-lift guy

[Richard 1234]

I've read both links and the ones about the burls.

The burl thing is obviously wrong but are you trying to keep everyone out of the woods completely?

I still don't understand how the Internet is at fault.

The $1000 guy is meaningless for all we know it's you or even no one?

 

In a few words can you explain what you are trying to achieve please?

[mdvaden]

I've read both links and the ones about the burls.

The burl thing is obviously wrong but are you trying to keep everyone out of the woods completely?

I still don't understand how the Internet is at fault.

The $1000 guy is meaningless for all we know it's you or even no one?

 

In a few words can you explain what you are trying to achieve please?

 

One of the links already answered part of your question about "completely"?

 

Also, the trails and groves, like you wrote, already prove that redwood forests are not reserved for a priviledged few. Each redwood park is threaded with trails providing easy access.

 

The goal is to identify the source of leaks.

 

The $1000 donation was from an "outsider" to the tree community, who lives a couple thousand miles east of here. A man who visited the redwoods several times, witnessed some of the destruction to the habitats. They also uncovered enough information on their own to realize that there's a problem that needs to be resolved.

[Richard 1234]

My grasp of English must be failing me!

So can I ask again what you are trying to achieve in a couple of sentences?

[treequip]

One of the links already answered part of your question about "completely"?

.

 

I, like I am sure many others here would love to give a sheyite about this but you don't make it easy and comments like that aren't likely to help your cause.

 

I tried reading the information and lost the will to live trying to decide what it was you were trying to achieve, I came away with the distinct impression that you wanted to police who went near the trees

 

Ya lost me a while back

[Ghettoblaster]

All very cryptic!

[elspedo]

My grasp of English must be failing me!

So can I ask again what you are trying to achieve in a couple of sentences?

 

I'm still in this boat, even having read both the links it still makes no sense.

 

Why not just ask the people who are going there who has told them about the area?

 

Would a better use of the money not be to afford some protection to the trees rather than going on an internet man hunt for someone which will make little to no difference?

 

This is obviously something very close to your heart but I don't think it's coming across in the best way.

[mdvaden]

My grasp of English must be failing me!

So can I ask again what you are trying to achieve in a couple of sentences?

 

Prevent damage. Either reverse, or prevent.

 

Let me explain this another way for others too.

 

Lets take one tree for example in the parks that has not been leaked. Its the tallest of the species known. The ground was so unstable around it, that I don't go back at all to remeasure or get photos. At that tree, I could make the area unstable with just one visit per year (solo).

 

Its not whether I think others have a right to see a tree like that or not. Its purely that the location can't even handle 2 visitors a year without compromising the habitat. That's why I don't go back. That one has nothing to do with being sacred or something like that.

 

If the anonymous person leaking some stuff now, were to access the file or location for that tree, they could immediately drive dozens, maybe hundreds, of people there. And the tree can barely handle one person.

[benedmonds]

I think I understand the issue, you want to stop people getting up close to the redwoods like this.... Possibly sounds a little hypocritical.?

 

While I agree protection might be needed I think your cash would be better spent in education rather then tracking down individuals posting the locations.

Possibly a few fences round the trees with some information boards. Anyone who is willing to trek into the forest to see these trees is going to be predisposed to protecting them and are not causing intentional damage. They just don't know the consequences of there actions..

Edited January 23, 2016 by benedmonds

[Aunt Maud]

In my experience of USAnia, the Parks Folk tend to be pretty militant about Parks Stuff, shouldn't it just be left down to them to sort it ?