Redwoods - Damage - Compromised Research

[mdvaden]

Those who read previous posts probably saw a page called The Forest Weeps, about the destruction of native plants around notable coast redwoods. You can see the photos at the following link. Upadates will be posted there if there are any changes.

LINK >http://www.mdvaden.com/redwood_the_forest_weeps.shtml

Regarding people who leaked locations, one is known through information he posted a few years ago, but removed references to his name. He is located near Medford. Anyhow, the link explains the wear and tear in enough detail. I also added an update to my redwood discovery page about related aspects like some new discoveries and photos not being shared fully.

See > http://www.mdvaden.com/redwood_year_discovery.shtml

[Joe]

Mario, I'm rather surprised that when you talked to the rangers and, ".....Both men expressed how lean the park's budget is."

Yikes, what with salaries and other costs like their trucks, etc.... the idea that they can't afford signs to protect trees is disgusting. Whoever is ultimately responsible for that forest isn't doing his/her job.
Joe

[Rand]

Noticed a typo toward the bottom of the page:

A few asked if we found a coast redwood the size of General Sherman. The question is best unanswered. The Sierra Nevada is betprepared for extra foot traffic and crowds.

I appreciated the beautiful photos as always.

[mdvaden]

Mario, I'm rather surprised that when you talked to the rangers and, ".....Both men expressed how lean the park's budget is."

Yikes, what with salaries and other costs like their trucks, etc.... the idea that they can't afford signs to protect trees is disgusting. Whoever is ultimately responsible for that forest isn't doing his/her job.
Joe

I go the parks a lot, and there are very few employees for that amount of territory. Probably half the rangers I feel are adequate for that much acreage. Sillett definitely doesn't mince words. So when he's speaking of lean budgets, that tells me much of what I need to know. And heading back to the topic, hopefully some damage can be curbed.

Noticed a typo toward the bottom of the page:

With 200 pages being changed on and off weekly there are definitely typos.

...

[Don]

Joe-
As a one-time NPS employee, I can verify that we (the NPS) were seriously underfunded during the period that I was employed there (1995 to 2007), and to this day. I, and many others, were not on permanent employment, but worked on term appointments on "soft money" (funding resulting from grants, sought annually from a variety of non-governmental sources), just to get the job done, of "providing and protecting" for the public, those most precious of American lands. Witness current backlogs on maintenance in the millions of dollars.
Signs without anyone to educate, interpret, and enforce are usually ignored, and worse, vandalized. We need to better fund our National Parks. (Sung to the tune of "Signs..."

"Sign, sign, everywhere a sign
Blockin' out the scenery, breakin' my mind
Do this, don't do that, can't you read the sign?
And the sign said anybody caught trespassin' would be shot on sight
So I jumped on the fence and-a yelled at the house, "Hey! What gives you
the
right?"
"To put up a fence to keep me out or to keep mother nature in"
"If God was here he'd tell you to your face, Man, you're some kinda sinner"
[Signs
The 5 Man Electrical Band
lyrics as recorded by The Five Man Electrical Band in 1971 and included on
the 1990 compilation album "Made In Canada - Volume Three 1965-1974"
(BMG KCD1-7158)]

There's a lesson there, about how we sometimes view "just signs".
-Don

Mario, I'm rather surprised that when you talked to the rangers and, ".....Both men expressed how lean the park's budget is."

Yikes, what with salaries and other costs like their trucks, etc.... the idea that they can't afford signs to protect trees is disgusting. Whoever is ultimately responsible for that forest isn't doing his/her job.
Joe

[John Harvey]

I don't know what the answer is. We have seen the worst case scenario already although its effects are ongoing.
Here are my biggest concerns...I agree that the parks are understaffed but what would more rangers do? Educating the public is good. Guided tours are good. "Stay on trail" signs are great on small loops like Muir Woods, Big Basins redwood loop, maybe a forest like Montgomery Woods, but how would they work on Boy Scout Trail or James Irvine Trail? Maybe a large sign at the beginning of some trails that is very bold and to the point?
I would like to find ways to protect without criminalizing activity. Obviously climbing, deliberately destroying vegetation, lighting fires and so on should be punishable by the law but I fear a time where stepping off trail would bring the same fine or punishment. Part of that is because I like to explore and the other part is because I enjoy others photos and finds. I know that personally the way I move through the forest has changed since my first times in the forest as has the content I share and how I share it. (I've covered a lot of that in previous posts)
I do like your effort, Mario, in bringing awareness through your page. If a majority of forest lovers can adapt the universal responsibility many of us feel then that will make a huge difference. We know that there will be some who post locations publicly and still climb 10ft up the Screaming Titans for a photo, but awareness is very important.

[jamesrobertsmith]

Do what Richard Leakey did when he was in charge of Kenya's National Parks: execute poachers. No, we can't kill people destroying our National Parks flora, but we can hire enough enforcement rangers to look over our National Parks and wilderness areas. We can charge and heavily prosecute people who break the rules and the laws protecting our Parks. We spend trillions of dollars on insane military projects and jack-shit on our National Parks. Shut down those crazed military budgets and shift the money to worthwhile projects.

[John Harvey]

So the consensus is that these are not in the budget? Too bad.

[mdvaden]

Good one John.

To some it won't matter, but for people who enjoy updates and photos, the small discovery blackout has slowly spread. I mentioned that Dr. Sillett removed his redwood pages and canopy photos from the HSU website.

Even conifers.org coast redwood page is handicapped presently. Redwood National Park is listed having the tallest 3 redwoods as of 2016, but that wasn't the case as of around 2013. So at my page, I'm not planning to clarify or correct what rank or heights may be misaligned or assigned to the wrong redwood.

Its not that Dr. Earl is being kept out of the loop. But I think the last speck of data that Sillett or Taylor shared, probably omitted tree names altogether. That means even a couple of experts have probably guessed which height goes to what tree. And I haven't shared everything found with him yet either, because its much more streamlined to keep track of the few "in the loop" by sharing to very few to begin with.

So there is erosion of information virtually everywhere now.

[SteveH]

Has there been any solid reliable information as to who is behind certain web sites? From what I have heard, a great deal of information has been gathered up and it may have revealed something.