SF Bay Area Indymedia indymedia
Indybay About Contact Newsletter Calendar Publish Community

Santa Cruz Indymedia | Environment & Forest Defense | Government & Elections | Health, Housing, and Public Services

Proposed Cell Sites Threaten Santa Cruz Wildlife Area; Demonstration at Verizon Wireless
by Bradley Stuart Allen ( bradley [at] riseup.net )
Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
Residents of Santa Cruz County concerned about health, privacy, and the environment, as well as those who enjoy the beaches of the north coast free of cell towers and other industrial equipment, demonstrated in front of Verizon Wireless's retail store on Pacific Avenue in downtown Santa Cruz on Saturday July 21. The protest raised awarenesses about the company's plans, along with NextG corporation, to install six new cell sites along Highway 1 and Swanton Road in the county's remote north coast region.

Demonstrators say the North Coast Cell project is a threat to views, endangered species and resident safety. The California Coastal Commission is expected to decide whether to issue a coastal permit for the project at its meeting on Aug. 10 at the Santa Cruz County building. A large community presence is anticipated.
can-you-hear-me-now_7-21-12.jpg
can-you-hear-me-now_7-21-...

Stop Smart Meters!, an advocacy, media outreach, and direct action organization, reports the following:

Cell phone, wi-fi, and smart meter emissions were labelled by the World Health Organization in May 2011 as a Class 2B carcinogen, and many are reporting symptoms from exposure to these devices. Despite this, California utility customers are being charged a large fee to avoid this carcinogen. Verizon is a partner with PG&E and receives wireless data pulses from PG&E SmartMeters containing residents' private data.

Mockups of the cell sites that are currently in place have been obstructing views and cluttering the landscape for months. Residents were given little notification and many wondered about the strange cylindrical and rectangular objects suddenly mounted on the poles. The equipment will directly interfere with views from Swanton Rd. to the coast and the pristine redwood valley in between, a designated and protected special scenic area. “What do ‘protected areas’ mean if we are not going to defend these areas from industrial development? We expect the Coastal Commissioners to take a hard look at this project, how it violates the Coastal Act, and undermines public access to the coast” says Joshua Hart, spokesperson for the local group opposing the project.

Local environmentalists have raised the alarm over impacts from cell towers that studies indicate may have deadly consequences for endangered species in the area. Organizations like the Sierra Club’s Santa Cruz Group have come out against the plan. The northernmost tower is proposed to be constructed only feet from Big Basin State Park, adjacent to wetlands that are home to federally endangered species such as the Red Legged Frog and Western Pond Turtle. Studies have shown a 90% mortality rate for tadpoles exposed to cell tower radiation at the distance that tadpoles in Waddell Creek wetlands would be exposed.

Fire risk is also at issue. NextG Corp. is a defendant in a lawsuit filed by residents of Malibu who suffered nearly 15 million in damages from a 2007 wildfire caused by power poles overloaded with telecommunications equipment that blew over and sparked in high winds. Opponents of the project are saying that the last thing the Bonny Doon area needs is another wildfire. NextG Corp. has already strung miles of cable between the proposed sites which community members say they have done without a permit and in violation of the Coastal Act.

Many local residents are opposed to the project, and see the cell sites as an existential threat to their quality of life and the pristine nature of the local environment. High speed wired DSL service is available widely throughout the area at residences, so the need for a series of power gulping cell sites emitting pulsed microwave radiation 24/7 has been questioned – particularly in the proposed locations, sending a carcinogenic substance into Big Basin, California’s first state park and still home to a thriving ecosystem.

More info and project documents can be found at:
http://stopsmartmeters.org/2012/06/22/northcoast/



Text from a flyer distributed at the July 21 demonstration:

VERIZON THREATENS SANTA CRUZ COUNTY NORTH COAST

NextG, a provider for Verizon Wireless, wants to construct 6 new 4G cell sites between Santa Cruz and Big Basin State Park along Highway One and Swanton Rd. Several of these cell sites are very close to critical habitat for endangered species, including one just yards from Waddel Beach and wetlands in Big Basin State Park. Studies show serious and fatal consequences for wildlife and for people from wireless infrastructure.

Keep our North Coast pristine! Together we can stop Verizon!

The other proposed cell sites are at:
  • 3 mile beach
  • 4 mile beach
  • Scaroni Rd.
  • Laguna Rd.
  • 1.1 miles north of Swanton Berry Farm on Swanton Rd. (ruining the first view of Swanton Valley)
What You Can Do:
  1. Write to the CA Coastal Commission by the first week of August- c/o Susan Craig 725 Front Street, Suite 300, Santa Cruz, CA 95060. Include all the reasons to oppose the project: safety, aesthetics, and health / environmental protection. Brief is okay.
  2. Speak out at the CA Coastal Commission meeting in Santa Cruz on Aug. 10 at 9:00 a.m. at the County building.
  3. Spread the word to those who live in the area, or anyone who loves the North Coast- as it is!
  4. If you are a Verizon customer, switch to another provider (and tell them why!) or even better, lose the cell entirely- protect your health! Call Verizon customer service at: 1.800.837.4966
  5. Learn more about the project by visiting: StopSmartMeters.org/2012/06/22/NorthCoast/
    Questions? info@stopsmartmeters.org or PO Box 30 Davenport, CA 95017
§Can You Hear Me Now? Wireless Radiation Kills
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
boycott-verizon_7-21-12.jpg
boycott-verizon_7-21-12.jpg

§Wireless Kills
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
wireless-kills_7-21-12.jpg
wireless-kills_7-21-12.jpg

§There Is No App to Repair Wireless Health + Eco Damage
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
no-app-repair-damage_7-21-12.jpg
no-app-repair-damage_7-21...

§Cell Phones Cause Cancer
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
cell-phones-cause-cancer_7-21-12.jpg
cell-phones-cause-cancer_...

§Handing Out Flyers
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
handing-out-flyers_7-21-12.jpg
handing-out-flyers_7-21-1...

§Wireless Is Microwave Radiation
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
wireless-microwave-radiation_7-21-12.jpg
wireless-microwave-radiat...

§Bill Azua Santa Cruz Verizon Police Department
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
bill-azua-santa-cruz-verizon-police-department_7-21-12.jpg
bill-azua-santa-cruz-veri...

§Stop Verizon's Attack on Big Basin State Park
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
verizon-attacks-big-basin-state-park_7-21-12.jpg
verizon-attacks-big-basin...

§Telecommunication Corporations Microwave Bees
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
telecommunication-corporations-microwave-bees_7-21-12.jpg
telecommunication-corpora...

§No Wireless Radiation
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
no-wireless-radiation_7-21-12.jpg
no-wireless-radiation_7-2...

§Strings Yes Wireless No
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
strings-yes-wireless-no_7-21-12.jpg
strings-yes-wireless-no_7...

§Gail Williamson and Bill Azua
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
gail-williamson_bill-azua_7-21-12.jpg
gail-williamson_bill-azua...

§Cell Phone CPR
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
cell-phone-cpr_7-21-12.jpg
cell-phone-cpr_7-21-12.jpg

§Death By Cell Phone
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
death-by-cell-phone_7-21-12.jpg
death-by-cell-phone_7-21-...

§Telecommunication Corporations Microwave Bees
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
telecommunication-corporations-microwave-bees_2_7-21-12.jpg
telecommunication-corpora...

§Verizon Wireless Protest on Pacific Avenue
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
verizon-protest-pacific-avenue_7-21-12.jpg
verizon-protest-pacific-a...

§StopSmartMeters.org
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
stop-smart-meters_7-21-12.jpg
stop-smart-meters_7-21-12...

§Verizon Employees Strike A Pose
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
verizon-employees-strike-pose_7-21-12.jpg
verizon-employees-strike-...

§Joshua Hart, Stop Smart Meters!
by Bradley Stuart Allen Sunday Jul 22nd, 2012 9:45 PM
joshua-hart_7-21-12.jpg
joshua-hart_7-21-12.jpg


Comments  (Hide Comments)

by Looking Good
Monday Jul 23rd, 2012 12:00 AM
I love your costumes and street theater! I really hope people wake up to this threat to ecological and human health. Thanks for all that you are doing.
by Mark S.C. Twain
Monday Jul 23rd, 2012 12:05 AM
Recovering from weird summer flu. Will be there next time!

Thanks for protecting our freedom as well!
by Mark S.C. Twain
Monday Jul 23rd, 2012 12:08 AM
Please check out Bookshop Santa Cruz tomorrow night......Medea Benjamin of Code Pink is talking about Drone Warfare!

Thanks!
by Robert Potts
Monday Jul 23rd, 2012 9:22 AM
Could you please furnish some hard stats on how many people have been killed by wireless. Your signs say that wireless kills, please furnish some proof. Thanks
by Concerned Scientist
Monday Jul 23rd, 2012 7:52 PM
I feel that the statement "Cell phone, wi-fi, and smart meter emissions were labelled by the World Health Organization in May 2011 as a Class 2B carcinogen..." is an intentionally misleading one. The author understands that the majority of persons reading this are going to be unfamiliar with this rating system and are going to think, "Gosh, class 2B, that sounds scary." Class 2B substances are those for which there is not adequate evidence to support either classifying them as carcinogenic or noncarcinogenic. The majority of tested substances or exposure circumstances are placed into either this category or category 3, another category indicating lack of certainty. Other category 2B substances include bracken ferns, carageenan (thickener in a variety of vegan packaged foods), and coffee. There actually has been a fair amount of study into the effects of low frequency electromagnetic radiation on the human body. The vast majority of it has found no evidence that electromagnetic radiation causes cancer. Therefore, the majority of people who have taken the time to look into this have concluded that the abundance of the evidence indicates that if low frequency EMF has any carcinogenic effects, they are for most people's purposes negligible given the variety of toxins that we are exposed to.

The study on tadpoles which you referenced is hilariously flawed, can be picked apart by most biology undergrads as garbage, and had no chance of being published in a real journal, it isn't real science.

If you want to attempt to back your arguments with science, please know something about the science you are attempting to use. If you don't want to take the time to do this, please just state that your beliefs on this issues are matters of faith, personal experience or whatnot.

Thanks
by RF witts
Tuesday Jul 24th, 2012 11:25 AM
Some people still amaze me, its called RF people, RADIO FREQUENCY Radiation but its not enough, as the scientist said, to harm you unless your standing right in front of a cellphone antenna or microwave dish (that transmits, not receives). EME studies are done all the time if you are so worried about a certain area you can always pay out a pretty penny to have it assessed.
by Angela Flynn
( angelaflynn80 [at] msn.com ) Tuesday Jul 24th, 2012 11:33 AM
Other Class 2B carcinogens are asbestos and DDT. Toxic agents are placed on this list as the evidence accumulates. You can be sure that microwaves do kill people. Just talk to anyone whose loved ones have died from a brain tumor, such as one of my good friends. You will find some good references here http://mcs-america.org/index_files/EHS.htm and everyone should read Andrew Goldsworthy, Ph.D's explanation of the biological processes caused by microwave exposure. There is a short version available at the above link, however the July Newsletter has a 17 page feature story by Goldsworthy. You can access it here - http://mcs-america.org/index_files/newsletterarchives.htm
by Concerned Parent
Tuesday Jul 24th, 2012 12:25 PM
Concerned Scientist, the 2B classification is not as wishy-washy as you make it out to be. There are many things that can't be classified as carcinogenic one way or another, mostly because no testing for chronic effects has been done, and those are not classified at all.

The 2B classification isn't some dumping ground for things that can't be categorized, but an acknowledgement that something is a POSSIBLE carcinogen based on studies that links it to the development of cancer.

You want evidence that RF radiation causes harm? Start here:

http://www.bioinitiative.org/

And for a very long list of scientific studies that show harm, go here:

http://www.justproveit.net/

Most of all, stop buying into industry propaganda masquerading as science, and pay attention to what's happening in the real world. People are getting injured by wireless technologies, and many countries around the world recognize it, have much lower exposure standards, and recommend that children not use cell phones at all, because they are especially vulnerable to such harm.

If you look at the fine print in your cell phone manual, you'll see that even the industry warns consumers not to put the phones directly up to their heads!
by For the Record
Tuesday Jul 24th, 2012 1:00 PM
This video of an interview with the former head of the WHO IARC panel who made the decision, saying that there was enough evidence to designate wireless as a PROBABLE- not just a possible carcinogen. The writing is on the wall people.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JyAlO_UdSk

It's cigarette denial 2.0 Don't get burned.
by Concerned Scientist
Tuesday Jul 24th, 2012 10:38 PM
In the interest of fully examining evidence and keeping a dialogue up, I want to respond to all of those who responded to me and others who do not feel that there is any evidence that cell phones have adverse effects on human health.

Angela Flynn: Asbestos is a class 1 carcinogen (a substance which the UN considers to be proven to cause cancer in humans). DDT is a class 2B carcinogen, the primary manner in which DDT adversely effects humans and other animals is as an endocrine disruptor, that is, a substance that alters hormone levels in the body, not as a carcinogen. There is significantly more evidence that DDT may also be a minor carcinogen than there is evidence that cell phones have any carcinogenic effect, but not enough to move it into category 2A (probable carcinogens)

Concerned Parent: The list of studies compiled by the Prove-It website which you provided a link for may make the casual web browser think there is a large amount of evidence for their beliefs. However, upon further examination, you will notice that the majority of these studies conclude that there is no link between cancer and cell phones. I am not sure whether they intentionally did this or were just too lazy to read the studies they cited, but it really just helps to disprove their stance: it shows that there has been an enormous amount of research done on this topic and that most of that has shown no link between cell phones and cancer.

For The Record: Unfortunately, the link you sent is to a video which is blocked as private.

Please try to use your critical thinking skills.

by Art Kab
Sunday Jul 29th, 2012 6:08 AM
Class 2B means possibly carcinogen to humans according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a branch of the WHO. Dioxin is Class 2B Carcinogen. Lead is a Class 2b Carcinogen. So are gasoline and diesel fuel. But then again, so is coffee. Having said that, the WHO and the IARC have not been completely above board about this. For example, Michael Repacholi, the head of the EMF Project at the WHO met regularly with US Military and Wireless Executives while in his position and now works for the Wireless Industry. The following Norwegian movie, A Radiant Day, fills you in on pertinent information regarding this: http://www.nrk.no/nett-tv/klipp/428197/. Furthermore, a member of the IARC at the Karloinska Institute was forced to leave the IARC during these deliberations due to ties with the cell phone industry. On top of this, numerous studies, like the RELEX Studies, were dismissed. Had they been taken into account, cell phone radiation would have been classified as either a probably carcinogen or a carcinogen. http://www.law.harvard.edu/news/2011/11/18_safra-center-cellphone-radiation-corruption.html . After all, numerous studies have shown that it breaks DNA -- both single and double-strand. This is an established fact. It should really be a no-brainer that it causes cancer for those who look at all the facts and don`t just trust to the so-called experts to tell them up from down.
by Art Kab
Sunday Jul 29th, 2012 6:23 AM
Sometimes the people who claim to be scientists are actually the worst scientists around. Why? Because they are the ones lacking in any critical thinking skills. For one, critical thinking implies discernment. For example, one has to be able to discern which studies are bogus -- i.e. are paid for by the wireless industry and are performed by their lackey scientists where the results are decided before the experiment even begins (I call this manufactured research) -- and the honest research done by ethical researchers/scientists searching for the Truth (rather than selling their credentials to the highest bidder).

"The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something that you know nothing about." Wayne Dyer

"Condemnation without investigation is the highest form of ignorance." Albert Einstein


“Children are born true scientists. They spontaneously experiment and experience and re-experience again. They select, combine, and test, seeking to find order in their experiences - `which is the mostest? which is the leastest?` They smell, taste, bite, and touch-test for hardness, softness, springiness, roughness, smoothness, coldness, warmness: they heft, shake, punch, squeeze, push, crush, rub, and try to pull things apart.”

Buckminster Fuller
Obviously the Head of the IARC Would Not Like What Is On This Video to Be Publicly Known
by (A)
Wednesday Aug 1st, 2012 7:34 AM
I support the Smart Meter protests mostly because of privacy issues, waste of funds and other matters. I am more concerned with where cell towers are placed as far as eye sores or damage to the eco system where they are being built.

New designs are a step in the right direction. They look like trees as far as eye sores. Yes, I know its a small step but a step all the same. But if wireless is that bad then were all going to die. Because it is everywhere. Its already at most beaches. Its running through most of us right now.

Wireless helps people during large protests mobilize. Are we to stop all wireless? What are you deeming safe if anything wireless? What about our microwave ovens? The radiation from our TV's? Have you all given up wireless?

With that said. I could be wrong. What do I know? I am not a scientist. I want to see more studies. Real proof from unbiased sources. I am a realist. I have not seen any real proof yet. With cell phones, wireless internet, etc. There is no escaping it unless it's all shut down. And unless it is proven absolutely that that is is a health threat. This will never stop. People are too hooked like zombies to their gadgets.

And the proof is simply not there yet. I could be wrong. You could be wrong. We need more studies by unbiased scientists.

But I salute you for standing up for what you believe. And I mean that. Peace
by (a)
Wednesday Aug 1st, 2012 8:02 AM
I did look at the studies shown so far. And while I am sure there are people who are sensitive to certain electromagnetic freq. Studies like this one blow I find biased as the person knew the phone was there. It should have been conducted with healthy people who were not sure if a cell phone was there or not. Despite it being turned on or off.

Again. I am no scientist. But studies like these I find a tad biased. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EI9fZX4iww&feature=player_embedded

I do love the costumes. Please show me the light and bring me to your side. I am still on the fence waiting.