As an HSU alumni, and one seriously troubled by the current, runaway "profiteering" climate the Bush Administration has fostered, promoted, created, I was alarmed at seeing the recent civil complaint filed by the District Attorney of Humboldt County against the Pacific Lumber Co.

Of crucial importance is how revised regulations proposed by the Bush Administration seeks to achieve, and unless blocked by court order will achieve, virtually unbridled discretion solely to lumber companies to decide what trees to cut, and how. Conspicuously absent from these proposals is any ability for public comment or management of such priceless public resources by government that is accountable to the people even through the electorate process.

As the 45 page verified civil complaint for various fraud counts vividly details, such private companies will actively misrepresent data so as to gain permission to harvest natural resources. Is it any wonder, then, that such "interests" would seek a "change" in laws that would allow them to do as they please without having to even submit for consent to harvest such resources? Owing to the predisposition of such companies, as is evidenced by the recent complaint mentioned, is is either sane or prudent to invest such profiteering interests with the sole discretion over public resources? In California alone nearly 10 Million of 20 Million acres of public forests and lands will be literally "handed over" to such interests.

A specific and aggressive strategy for court action and public relations must be developed at all levels to oppose such rank disregard for such priceless natural resources as Sequoia National Monument and others forested lands.

Paul Gallegos is not out to eliminate logging jobs. If anything, jobs in logging may increase over the future as a result of Mr. Gallegos diligent policing of the growth stock of these jobs: THE FOREST THAT THE TREES GROW IN.

A forest is not just trees. It is the soil they grow in too. Soils in forests such as our are very delicate. Have you ever tried to grow corn in sand? I have seen it tried. It is yellowed, stunted and no one's getting fat off that. Have you been out 299 and seen the overcut hillsides by Korbel with yellowing struggling little dwarf conifers on them? I have. And that's the future of logging if we allow the unstable soils of our forest especially on steep slopes be chowdered and rain-washed away by cut-and-run tactics that PL is famous for.

More jobs are created by the work-intensive selective cutting. Drive up to Kneeland and see what I mean. There are areas where young trees are left standing. The soils are way less disturbed there than in clearcuts nearby. In order to preserve those little trees and their necessary soil structure underneath to grow into harvestable giants, many more man hours were needed to gingerly fall the larger trees.

True, this cuts into profits. And PL will say that a loss in profits is a loss in jobs. Not necessarily so. Redwoods will be logged by PL. Perhaps if the fat corporate cats at the top can't buy as many yachts as they used to, Maxxam will abandon PL.

I'd love to see the workers buy that company as a cooperative and return the profits to their families. Sustainable selective cuts will siphon alot of the corporate funds out of the big bosses at PL and put it back into the pockets of the people who actually work to earn the money. What a delightful concept.

And Mr. Gallegos will hopefully bring that about in his lawsuit against PL. Mr. Gallegos knows about and cares about the logging industry. Perhaps he's tried to grow corn in sand and noticed it doesn't feed anybody.

When huge chunks of timber-growing real estate fall into a river, everybody loses. Everybody that is, except the corporate hogs of PL who are sailing in their third yacht down in the Caribbean. Like the Once-lers in The Lorax, their cash is in hand. They could care less if there is soil enough left to sustain PL families into another generation. They've squirreled away their nut into other investments that will net their grandkids yachts.

Meanwhile, our hard working people go on unemployment and welfare as they watch their hacked and shredded jobs slide into the rivers. Heck, we can't even fish to chase away the blues anymore. The rivers are all filled with silt. From: *drum roll* irresponsible logging.

As someone who has worked in the woods cutting trees, I can tell you that "Pal"co is a name only. They've successfully divided a community that really all stand for the same thing: health of the forests. One, for the sake of trees, fish and birds. The other for the sake of sustainable industry through the preservation of the underpinning that runs it: the soils.

What a sweet racket PL has going on. The corporate leeches suck the fat from the workers, pit them against "the environmentalists" so they won't notice their pensions being plundered and their job base being slashed. This, while PL breaks numerous laws that are so impacting on our community as to last for generations.

And when our top elected lawman points out how they are in violation of law and community, PL gathers "support" [read: "sign this petition or you know we'll fire you."] from it's employees and other political paid-offs to oust Gallegos for representing the entire community interest.

Finally, here's a thought to consider: Commercial redwood only grows in one area in the world. Here. Therefore it is a product in high demand. Why are we cutting it so fast? To sell lots of it cheap until it's gone? Or to savor the selling at a higher price over an indefinite period of time?

PL wants the first option. Gallegos wants the second. The first benefits corporate PL only. The second benefits everyone.

Gallegos stated on KHSU's Thursday Night Talk that an amended Complaint that addressed the California Department of Fish and Game and California Division of Forestry objections to the lawsuit would be submitted by now. We are over a week past the supposed due date for the amended complaint. Given the very serious objections to the lawsuit by CDFG and CDF, it would behoove the DA to address them as soon as possible. The CDF/CDFG objections to the lawsuit, as stated in the letter to Humboldt County Supervisor Jimmy Smith, can be viewed through the KEET website. I would suggest that website as a primary source of information on this issue. We need facts, not rhetoric. And anybody who seriously reviews the record thus far regarding this lawsuit should see that its "factual" basis is shaky at best.

I believe the DA Gallegos intends to test the shakey legal foundation that the Headwaters Agreement sits on; given that it basically could compel State officials to support fraud and lawbreaking.

No civil agreement can supercede criminal law. PL is in violation of actual criminal law by underreporting or purposefully omitting facts, and by endangering people, the environment and wildlife through its logging practices via the Headwaters Agreement.

No judge may find in favor of civil law if it violates criminal law. So the merit of the Gallegos case is very compelling. Basically and open and shut case. Just because officials in high positions decided to enter into an illegal agreement with PL, doesn't make that agreement any more viable when tested against pre-existing criminal laws.

If I were one of the State officials that entered into this agreement, I'd be sweatin' in my skivvies right now. People in the State of California are amassing as I write this to force State officials to reconsider their position with respect to the Headwaters Agreement.

I encourage people to look to MANY sources, not just one slant on the Gallegos case. The more angles examined, the better able you will be to make a balanced opinion about the matter. Don't forget the law library, cause that's the ultimate place this matter will be decided.......

Ms. Dessel:
Your argument is based on rhetoric and NO facts. Have you checked the CDFG/CDF letter to Supervisor Jimmy Smith, as I (strongly) suggested people do? Until you do so and show where you think that letter is in error, you have no basis for calling the Gallegos lawsuit "open and shut." Of course, it's easier to cop out and adopt the position that State agencies disagree with the lawsuit because they are part of the Big Conspiracy. That is the type of cult thinking that's popular among "forest defenders."
Your eagerness to assume PL's guilt in this case reminds me of your eagerness to suggest that Kevin Laporta was guilty of molesting his daughter, and that Diana Mae Preston's shooting him was "understandable," a position you defended in many newspaper letters.

I am not a "forest defender" as in dreadlocked hippie, pot-smoking liberal radical.

I'm a ranch owner, I've made a living falling trees in the past. I also enjoy[ed] fishing; something I used to do more of in the pre-silted river days. I eat meat and love rodeo. I stand in defense of the forest because I attended a university and took courses in forest ecology and soils. I happen to know about temperate rainforest soils and their inability to withstand physical destruction. Plus I have eyes that see what damage has been done. That's a no-brainer. Soil is what trees grow in. Trees are what provides jobs. Pretty elementary deduction there pal.

I personally detest dreadlocks. Enough of my bio. Now to the pertinent facts:

No matter what you say, one thing is open and shut: I don't even have to look at a single detail of the Gallegos case to speculate, quite accurately actually, that if the case winds up demonstrating that PL and others acted or enacted an agreement that violates standing criminal code in the State of California, that those actions supercede any civil code in existence when weighing a final decision as in say, a courtroom.

Documents are fine and they have their place. I'm throwing an opinion out based on my knowledge of the facts over the years. I've kept up on the Maxxam/PL situation. What logger hasn't? There are ALOT more logger types that oppose PL's practices than you think. The ones who work for PL and other affiliates are required to fight with other people who are out to save their jobs [most moderate environmentalists]; but they vote in private at the polls.

I live in a community with environmental radicals, moderates, right wing logger types, moderate logger types; the whole spectrum. One thing we all agree on after hours at the pub is that we need the forests. Bottom line. And healthy forests grow on healthy soils. Logging practices that disturb soil structure hurt everyone right across the board. This is one of many woodsworkers and ex-woodsworkers who voted for Gallegos and I'll do it again.

Paul Gallegos has rounded up the respective parties and invited them to the courtroom to examine what he feels are criminal acts of negligence. The Court will weigh whatever evidence Mr. Gallegos has against whatever evidence PL has. Standard procedure. In the end the verdict will reflect dominant law. If PL has committed criminal acts, then the case has merit. The only way to determine this is to walk it through the system.

I can tell you that if I logged that hillside that fell down and caused so much destruction, I'd EXPECT to be getting a letter from our DA, AND to be served a civil suit for damages against the people and property I had harmed. No one would back my whining an moaning about how unreasonable it was that the DA was after me. They'd string me up and put on the irons as soon as look at me.

Providing jobs is not a carte blanche for activity that hurts everyone. Not in the USA. Not now, not ever. If that's "rhetoric" to you buddy them I'm invitin' you to find another country to live in 'cause ya don't belong in mine.

"Free Thinker", who are you anyway? And why do you leave out your real name?

It is interesting upon looking back that you refer to me as "Ms. Dessel".

On what basis to you assume I'm a woman?!

Your motivations for posting here are dubious. Who's writing your paychecks?

Pseudonyms are commonly and legitemately used by many people in most of the postings on this site. Your use of your first initial and your last name was your individual choice. Your choice not to use a pseudonym and your writing style strongly suggest that you are in fact Jennifer Dessel of Trinidad. Jennifer Dessel is a prolific contributer to letters to the editor columns in area newspapers. Please correct me if you are in fact not Jennifer Dessel.
About myself: I am not employed by any timber company, regulatory agency, consultant, or party to the Headwaters Agreement. I heard the shots that killed Kevin Laporta. I was not amused by your response to that sickening, cold-blooded murder in the letters columns.
So, Ms. Dessel, now that you've shown us your hootin' hollerin' flag salutin' apple pie eatin' side (you're not talking down to us rednecks, are you?) would you mind telling us where you worked falling timber, what you raise on your ranch, and where this wonderful pub is where loggers and deadheads get all luvvy duvvy with each other?
Agreed fact: Trees grow on soil. The rest of that posting is rhetoric.

I guess someone's got their undies in a bunch.

I've written a few letters, 7 in all I think over the last 4 years to various newspapers concerning various events. And now I think I recognize you. Are you affiliated with my neighbors who tried to arson one of my barns with livestock in it? The case where I have a signed letter from Terry Farmer saying the DA won't even view a video tape of that crime? Where I was raised this is called accesory after-the-fact.

Most likely yes, that's who you are. And given the company you keep, I'll take what you say from now on with a huge chunk of salt. About the size I put out for the livestock.

I raise sheep and goats. I fell the hardest timber there is to fall right in Trinidad: Hardwood for firewood in a selective cut style. Hardwood is hardest to fall because of the offset nature of the trees. I worked the ground cables and used an old pickup to pull the trees down while my boss cut.

You got something against apple pie buddy? You obviously have something against people coming together for a common cause. Read your last entry again. You insinuate that there can't possibly be a place where people come together from all walks and hang out. In fact, it almost feels like your hoping that's the case.

You and your pals have something to lose by members of our divided community coming together to fight for sane logging??? I'll bet you want to know which pub it is where people of different minds come together against PL. Feels a little overwhelming doesn't it?

Imagine that: environmentalist and logger interests sharing a beer and some laughs over a game of pool.

Didn't catch your name. If your going to hurl insults, don't hide behind Pseudonyms or people will see you as a chicken.

Hey, chicken goes good with apple pie! Mmmmmmm

Don't blow a gasket now! Yes, Ms Dessel, you have authenticated your claims to cutting firewood and raising livestock. Those issues are settled. And I truly hope that you get all the assistance and protection you need against whoever those arsonists are. Nobody deserves to be violated that way. But the hysterical tone of your last post amused me and, I must admit, boosted my dastardly ego. Just don't start shooting people, OK? And get a good night's sleep. Rest assured, I only know you through your public writings and his exchange. I would never recognize you in a crowd, nor you me. Apple pie and chicken? Sounds good to me! So, what's the name of the pub? I'm curious.

Well "Free Thinker" I don't know how much off topic we can banter on this site.

How about you tell me your name and I'll tell you the name of the pub. I can't help but wonder why the exact pub's name is so important to you. I will tell you it exists. I will tell you I've been there. I will tell you I've seen loggers and environmentalists known to each other and sharing good times. You'll just have to accept that as my word.

If it bothers you that people can come together from all sides and see PL as negligent then your painting yourself out to be a divisive person. PL may have a position for you in upper management; like in the employee relations department.

Trees do grow in soil. Clearcutting trounces soil structure. Good soil for temperate forest conifers is made poorer by structural disturbance where there's been clearcutting, or any cutting on steep slopes where the effects of rainfall are increased with strong runoff downslope.

The poorer the soil, the poorer the growth of trees. The underlying structure becomes poorer as gullys and slumps form on the slope. The likelihood of slides increases with logging on steep or unstable slopes.

But don't take my word for it, go to the hearings and listen to the engineers talk about this same "rhetoric". Only the Court will call it "expert opinion". Or in the meantime visit the library and check out some books on forest soils, stability and structure.

No, I didn't write the books on the real and devastating consequences of poor logging practices, but other people have. They come with big flashy graphic pictures too. I like that. The publishing companies who put these books out must feel Mr. Gallegos' case has some merit. I certainly do.

I am truly flattered that you spend such a disproportionate amount of effort responding to my postings and that learning my name is so important to you. But I detect something obsessive going on and I don't want to have to get a restraining order. That's the beauty of pseudonyms. Here's the deal: You withhold the name of the pub and I will assume that it doesn't exist. I withhold my name and you can assume that I am whoever you think I might be. You can make a picture of the ugliest face you can imagine, call it "Free Thinker", and use it for target practice.
I am not impressed with your knowledge of how forest practices affect soils. For example, you forgot to mention that yarding is the biggest influence on ground disturbance. And until you delve deeper into the documentation surrounding these issues, including that which does not suport your preconceptions, rhetoric will be all you contribute. And don't just go repeating the politically correct folklore about what documents such as the UC Team review and WQB scientific review panel report say about these issues. Their view is much more even-handed and critical of all sides than some would have us believe.
This is my last response to you, Ms Dessel. You're free to rant and rave all you want.

Amusing. They make decaf you know. But again, you'll have to take my word for it; I can't prove decaf exists on the internet!

But to the matter of the subject; I did say that maybe you shouldn't just take my knowledge of soils and forests. Expert witnesses will be called in these areas. Attend the hearings and post about what comes up in the minutes. If I'm wrong I'm sure the record will reflect that. But if the same science is in place that was working when I was in university, then soils will fail on steep slopes in rainforests where logging has trashed the surface structure.

We'll keep an eye on this merited case and see if we can't put some more people out in the forests working the more man-hour extensive job of selective cutting. I'd like to see PL employee-owned and scores of workers taking their time to keep logging a respectable job that will last for generations. Again, commercial redwood grows only here. Like gold, maybe we can name our price and employ twice the people we have now in the woods.

Worth thinking about anyway!

Why the comment about the "Big Conspiracy" and cult thinking? If I didn't know better, I would swear that this is Assistant DA Stoen speaking.

.(a) federal investigation has developed information that (assistant district attorney) Stoen misused his position to obstruct pending investigations that might have adversely impacted on the Peoples Temple of which he was then a member." - California State Attorney General Evelle Younger in a letter to San Francisco District Attorney Joseph Freitas informing him that his office was under investigation.

Face it, PL, you're going to lose.
Everyone knows of your deceptive ways, and now it's all coming out in the wash, and it's about time!
You can't just cook the books, over and over, scatter the paperwork, break every law on the books, and expect to get away with it.
Everyone knows that your logging practices are illegal, and that the HCP/SYP is just a big scam.
It just takes the system awhile to catch up with what everyone else already knows.
You owe, big time, PL.
Isn't it embarassing when all your dirty laundry gets aired, for everyone to smell?
The evidence is all there, and you're going to lose, in a really big way, and everyone will be waiting for justice, and relishing in the repurcussions of your crimes.
You lose, PL.