When Facts Fail, Use the Nuclear Option

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bR4YRyWh05c]

When you don’t have the facts, go nuclear or lie.  At least that’s what some people think is appropriate.

A reader sent me a link to this short video posted on Facebook. It obviously wasn’t put out very high budget so I wouldn’t attribute it to any legitimate environmental group (note the year 20011 and the misspellings.) But rather than present any facts to explain why they are upset by the Richardson Grove project, they state

The plan calls for cutting ancient Redwood Trees in and around the park

Then the video goes for the nuclear option to a background of a mushroom cloud followed by a large truck presumably hauling nuclear waste.

Mean while the DOE (Department of Energy) needs to get waste out of the county

PG & E needs to haul spent nuclear material away from Humboldt Bay for disposal via Highway 101

Now I understand the nuclear symbol on the tank in the anti project poster. Apparently the concern is that widening the Grove is going to allow PG&E to take out nuclear waste from our decommissioned nuclear power plant on Humboldt Bay.

First, to the best I have been able to determine, there is no plan to remove the fuel. But, if there were a plan that 1) required moving south and 2) required it being moved on STAA trucks, the government could just close the road down temporarily to allow the long vehicles through.  This is done now to move large equipment through.  But it is expensive and not practical for regular use.  However, a one time shut down or even a dozen shutdowns to move fuel would not cost as much as the project does.  According to the video,

If Caltrans is not stopped, not only will redwoods be cut but thousands of tons of nuclear waste will be traveling on Hwy 101.

Look, if you have great facts on why this project shouldn’t go forward, put them out there.  But this kind of outright lying and conflating the project with violent imagery has to stop–for the sake of the future environmental movement especially.  Reputable environmentalists need to step forward and repudiate this kind of nonsense.  Your credibility is being destroyed.  And your credibility is crucial to lead us forward in ongoing and future efforts to save our planet.

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_pluspinterestmail

76 comments

  • Well, this is a pretty common tactic, Kym. When there was passionate discussion about the Natural Gas terminal at Indian Island, the ad against DISCUSSING it depicted a nuclear explosion to create fear.
    When that fails, the next step is to shout down any dissenting opinion with numbers. It’s sad, really. But we’ve seen it used effectively after 9/11 too. Using man’s fear to influence politics is a way to muddy facts and get emotional voting rather than rational voting.
    In this case, I think the cooler heads will prevail.

    • I think it’s more accurate to say business as usual will prevail, don’t you? Our global environmental crisis isn’t the result of cooler heads prevailing…just project after project after projec….one go ahead at a time…

  • What that video says to me is that the protesters are not in touch with reality. Don’t worry Kym. The nuttier they get, the more media attention they’ll get. Then they’ll hit the national news and their nuttiness will be laid out for all to see and CalTrans will be allowed to complete the project. As per usual, the more fervent a person is, the more he is his own worst enemy.

    Part of me thinks stopping the project isn’t their goal. There’s a self-absorbed aspect to it… as if garnering media attention is its own reward and when their cause inevitably fails, they can feel righteous in their defeat. Notice how they never actually take a sane approach to an issue. It’s always extreme to a point where failure is guaranteed.

  • What that video says to me is that the protesters are not in touch with reality. Don’t worry Kym. The nuttier they get, the more media attention they’ll get. Then they’ll hit the national news and their nuttiness will be laid out for all to see and CalTrans will be allowed to complete the project. As per usual, the more fervent a person is, the more he is his own worst enemy.

    Part of me thinks stopping the project isn’t their goal. There’s a self-absorbed aspect to it… as if garnering media attention is its own reward and when their cause inevitably fails, they can feel righteous in their defeat. Notice how they never actually take a sane approach to an issue. It’s always extreme to a point where failure is guaranteed.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63h_v6uf0Ao&feature=fvst

    They should use this classic commercial and just change the words.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63h_v6uf0Ao&feature=fvst

    They should use this classic commercial and just change the words.

  • One “improvement” project at a time…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3vz1i5DyN4

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_ufO9EPmUY&feature=related

    “ever been around the outskirts of ______? That’s right, there are no outskirts!”

    • That top video is a beautiful reminder for all of us to make our decisions carefully. I love Richardson Grove and I don’t believe it will be harmed by the project. I see so much that we here are not doing to protect our environment. Entire hillsides are being clear cut to provide sunlight for grows, diesel is being spilled, and Caltrans proposes making minor changes to the roadway and even replacing plants and duff that are disturbed—and somehow stopping this project is more important than dealing with the actual devastation that is happening.

      I just don’t understand.

      • It’s always a minor change, isn’t it? And every new block of construction is always an insignificant blip on a bigger map. Do you put roads before redwoods? IN HUMBOLDT COUNTY? If your answer is anything similar to “no, but in this case yes, and only because….” then you’ve been brainwashed. Do you see the degree of wilful insanity in the videos above? That’s all California, all over California. First come the bigger roads…then the insanity really starts to snowball, and ten years later everybody shakes their head at what a shame place has become. Those videos represent the daily work of happy, honest Caltrans people shaking hands with fastmoving professional business people and bright city leaders to make eachother a whole lot of money forever to come….

  • One “improvement” project at a time…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3vz1i5DyN4

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_ufO9EPmUY&feature=related

    “ever been around the outskirts of ______? That’s right, there are no outskirts!”

    • That top video is a beautiful reminder for all of us to make our decisions carefully. I love Richardson Grove and I don’t believe it will be harmed by the project. I see so much that we here are not doing to protect our environment. Entire hillsides are being clear cut to provide sunlight for grows, diesel is being spilled, and Caltrans proposes making minor changes to the roadway and even replacing plants and duff that are disturbed—and somehow stopping this project is more important than dealing with the actual devastation that is happening.

      I just don’t understand.

      • It’s always a minor change, isn’t it? And every new block of construction is always an insignificant blip on a bigger map. Do you put roads before redwoods? IN HUMBOLDT COUNTY? If your answer is anything similar to “no, but in this case yes, and only because….” then you’ve been brainwashed. Do you see the degree of wilful insanity in the videos above? That’s all California, all over California. First come the bigger roads…then the insanity really starts to snowball, and ten years later everybody shakes their head at what a shame place has become. Those videos represent the daily work of happy, honest Caltrans people shaking hands with fastmoving professional business people and bright city leaders to make eachother a whole lot of money forever to come….

  • But Random Guy, in the case of the Natural Gas terminal, business as usual did NOT prevail. Business as usual involves discourse, discussion and revelation of facts. Instead, there was none.
    In this case, I believe Cal Trans has provided facts and has had them called “lies”. What I don’t understand is the belief that it’s okay for business to fail, Mexico (rather than our backyard) to risk pollution and someone else to clean up the mess.
    The “I’ve got mine. Screw you” attitude is what prevails. And it’s not the best attitude IMHO.

    • Score one for the people! It’s insanity, isn’t it? What else could describe the common site of fields of $300+ thousand dollar homes with no solar panels on any of them? What else could describe the central bay area’s growth over the past 5 years alone? Drive 200 miles south right now…big boxes and dense development are all the rage. Dense population construction is up over 500%. OVER FIVE HUNDRED PERCENT. PURE INSANITY, and greedy motherfuckers at the top of the heap, keeping the meek hammered down with formal protocol, and providing the well intentioned with all the words they need to hear to not get in their way.

      And they want to tell us a bigger freeway through our old growth grove is so our cheese factories and stuff can stay afloat. That’s textbook bullshit.

      • Random Guy,
        I do think we need to watch for unchecked and ugly development but this is not a freeway going in at the grove. It is still going to be a two lane road with a speed limit of 35 miles per hour.

        • roads before redwoods…it’s Interstate Highway 101…aka the freeway…and because of this project, it’s the new main artery between here and hell. More vehicles will be driving through there faster than they do now. More open space will be cleared for development to accomodate an unwanted and unwarranted population increase, based on the minimum wage workforce mold that’s been doing wonders for every city in america the past 30 years.

  • But Random Guy, in the case of the Natural Gas terminal, business as usual did NOT prevail. Business as usual involves discourse, discussion and revelation of facts. Instead, there was none.
    In this case, I believe Cal Trans has provided facts and has had them called “lies”. What I don’t understand is the belief that it’s okay for business to fail, Mexico (rather than our backyard) to risk pollution and someone else to clean up the mess.
    The “I’ve got mine. Screw you” attitude is what prevails. And it’s not the best attitude IMHO.

    • Score one for the people! It’s insanity, isn’t it? What else could describe the common site of fields of $300+ thousand dollar homes with no solar panels on any of them? What else could describe the central bay area’s growth over the past 5 years alone? Drive 200 miles south right now…big boxes and dense development are all the rage. Dense population construction is up over 500%. OVER FIVE HUNDRED PERCENT. PURE INSANITY, and greedy motherfuckers at the top of the heap, keeping the meek hammered down with formal protocol, and providing the well intentioned with all the words they need to hear to not get in their way.

      And they want to tell us a bigger freeway through our old growth grove is so our cheese factories and stuff can stay afloat. That’s textbook bullshit.

      • Random Guy,
        I do think we need to watch for unchecked and ugly development but this is not a freeway going in at the grove. It is still going to be a two lane road with a speed limit of 35 miles per hour.

        • roads before redwoods…it’s Interstate Highway 101…aka the freeway…and because of this project, it’s the new main artery between here and hell. More vehicles will be driving through there faster than they do now. More open space will be cleared for development to accomodate an unwanted and unwarranted population increase, based on the minimum wage workforce mold that’s been doing wonders for every city in america the past 30 years.

  • I have yet to watch the video here, and I have no desire to get into a virtual blog conversation. I do however want to say that (according to the print news, take it or leave it) the Humboldt County Planning Commission spoke explicitly about the highway widening through Richardson Grove facilitating 1500 trucks of nuclear material traveling from the Humboldt Bay power plant. In addition, it was a few years ago that, I believe it was the Planning Commission which spoke about the Yucca Mountain plan- which would involve nuclear material coming from all over the world into the [developed port] Humboldt Bay and then being transported via highway to Yucca Mountain. That nuclear material (waste) plan was discussed as if it could be forced upon us through the Yucca Mountain plan.

    So that was a few years ago. Just the other day, I think it was the Times-Standard that reported about the talk of 1500 trucks and the Richardson Grove road widening as a necessity for them to move nuclear crap from the Humboldt area. I believe it is unwise to transport nuclear materials/waste – period.

    As far as some of the above commentary about “facts” and “conflating”… There ARE facts, history, and documents that tell of the military and nuclear motivations behind the highway expansion.

    I notice that, with many of us, when information is difficult to accept, painful, discouraging, disturbing- or challenges long held beliefs or understandings… that information is rejected and the messenger ridiculed. When we learn something that disrupts (perhaps drastically disrupts) what we think we know, it usually means we have to change something, or do something- so in many cases we, instead, ignore or deny…

  • I have yet to watch the video here, and I have no desire to get into a virtual blog conversation. I do however want to say that (according to the print news, take it or leave it) the Humboldt County Planning Commission spoke explicitly about the highway widening through Richardson Grove facilitating 1500 trucks of nuclear material traveling from the Humboldt Bay power plant. In addition, it was a few years ago that, I believe it was the Planning Commission which spoke about the Yucca Mountain plan- which would involve nuclear material coming from all over the world into the [developed port] Humboldt Bay and then being transported via highway to Yucca Mountain. That nuclear material (waste) plan was discussed as if it could be forced upon us through the Yucca Mountain plan.

    So that was a few years ago. Just the other day, I think it was the Times-Standard that reported about the talk of 1500 trucks and the Richardson Grove road widening as a necessity for them to move nuclear crap from the Humboldt area. I believe it is unwise to transport nuclear materials/waste – period.

    As far as some of the above commentary about “facts” and “conflating”… There ARE facts, history, and documents that tell of the military and nuclear motivations behind the highway expansion.

    I notice that, with many of us, when information is difficult to accept, painful, discouraging, disturbing- or challenges long held beliefs or understandings… that information is rejected and the messenger ridiculed. When we learn something that disrupts (perhaps drastically disrupts) what we think we know, it usually means we have to change something, or do something- so in many cases we, instead, ignore or deny…

  • Verbena,
    After I wrote the piece this morning, I read the Independent which clearly states that the Planning Commission believes that the Grove project would allow for 1500 trucks of nuclear waste to go through. To say the least, I was flabbergasted (and a bit embarrassed.) I have an email in to someone who might be able to explain this better to me. I will get back to you as promptly as possible. I may owe an apology for some of what I said.

    • If they can nuclear caskets in on 101 through the grove now, they can haul them out through the grove when filled. Local Micheal Welch of Redwood Alliance plan is to keep the waste on site. Yucca mountain has so many obstacles, it may never happen.

      The lack of the project being completed, will not in any way prevent nuclear waste being moved, Wal-mart, Home Depot, other big-box stores, or any other development. It will hamper local small businesses with increased shipping costs vs doing the minor change at RG.

    • http://ia700400.us.archive.org/24/items/SaveTheGrove/SaveTheGrove.mov

      the video you posted was sent us also…..then it was taken down…then this new movie got sent to us….seems like the kids that edited it….made a few boo boo’s …I also read the local paper, and was shocked and thats why we posted this old video…but the new one is a little better… I am going try and scan the newspaper story …tonight I heard that some of the waste was already moved via 101!!??? also that the main rods will be head out on HWY 101 as soon as the project is done I will pray they drive slow…as many tucks spill 3 miles north of leggett…over 10 years ago their was a move to take the waste down hwy 299 but that was a no go, then the deep water harbor was a bright idea for a second…then it was all quite. What I hear from folks who passed this new video on to me is that the waste is going to Clive , UT ..so not sure these kids who made the video are so crazy yeah…bad typos. Anyhow check out the link….

  • Verbena,
    After I wrote the piece this morning, I read the Independent which clearly states that the Planning Commission believes that the Grove project would allow for 1500 trucks of nuclear waste to go through. To say the least, I was flabbergasted (and a bit embarrassed.) I have an email in to someone who might be able to explain this better to me. I will get back to you as promptly as possible. I may owe an apology for some of what I said.

    • If they can nuclear caskets in on 101 through the grove now, they can haul them out through the grove when filled. Local Micheal Welch of Redwood Alliance plan is to keep the waste on site. Yucca mountain has so many obstacles, it may never happen.

      The lack of the project being completed, will not in any way prevent nuclear waste being moved, Wal-mart, Home Depot, other big-box stores, or any other development. It will hamper local small businesses with increased shipping costs vs doing the minor change at RG.

    • http://ia700400.us.archive.org/24/items/SaveTheGrove/SaveTheGrove.mov

      the video you posted was sent us also…..then it was taken down…then this new movie got sent to us….seems like the kids that edited it….made a few boo boo’s …I also read the local paper, and was shocked and thats why we posted this old video…but the new one is a little better… I am going try and scan the newspaper story …tonight I heard that some of the waste was already moved via 101!!??? also that the main rods will be head out on HWY 101 as soon as the project is done I will pray they drive slow…as many tucks spill 3 miles north of leggett…over 10 years ago their was a move to take the waste down hwy 299 but that was a no go, then the deep water harbor was a bright idea for a second…then it was all quite. What I hear from folks who passed this new video on to me is that the waste is going to Clive , UT ..so not sure these kids who made the video are so crazy yeah…bad typos. Anyhow check out the link….

  • Kym, Why didn’t you post an update right at the front of this article if what you say to Verbena is true? Respectful dialogue, HUH?

    As far as I am concerned, you are contributing to the problem rather than trying to solve it.

    • Because everyone I’ve talked to said the planning commissioner is wrong. I’m still trying to reach someone who is extremely knowledgeable about this subject before I attempt to write an answer. I want to be sure to be as accurate as possible. Please feel free to research the subject too. The more research, the more likely we are to find out accurate information.

      • Perhaps you could change the title “When Facts Fail, Use the Nuclear Option.” It seems like ‘erring’ on the side of caution is best here. There is no reason to take the less cautious approach regarding the road widening plan- there would be no going back if it were implemented. Also, it seems appropriate to ‘err’ on the side of caution once you realized that you were uninformed when saying that people are lying or making things up re nuclear plans. It seems the responsible thing to do would be to at least change your title to the youtube video that you posted on this blog.

        And, I noticed a twitter that you posted (the first time i’ve ever looked at twitter). It is absolutely UNTRUE about yesterday’s protest that “Twelve [protesters] were in the roadway blocking trucks from going by.” NO people were in the road. Researching that allegation would necessitate speaking with people who participated in the protest and qualify as “extremely knowledgeable” about our intentions and what we did.

        Maybe next time you’ll join us.

  • Kym, Why didn’t you post an update right at the front of this article if what you say to Verbena is true? Respectful dialogue, HUH?

    As far as I am concerned, you are contributing to the problem rather than trying to solve it.

    • Because everyone I’ve talked to said the planning commissioner is wrong. I’m still trying to reach someone who is extremely knowledgeable about this subject before I attempt to write an answer. I want to be sure to be as accurate as possible. Please feel free to research the subject too. The more research, the more likely we are to find out accurate information.

      • Perhaps you could change the title “When Facts Fail, Use the Nuclear Option.” It seems like ‘erring’ on the side of caution is best here. There is no reason to take the less cautious approach regarding the road widening plan- there would be no going back if it were implemented. Also, it seems appropriate to ‘err’ on the side of caution once you realized that you were uninformed when saying that people are lying or making things up re nuclear plans. It seems the responsible thing to do would be to at least change your title to the youtube video that you posted on this blog.

        And, I noticed a twitter that you posted (the first time i’ve ever looked at twitter). It is absolutely UNTRUE about yesterday’s protest that “Twelve [protesters] were in the roadway blocking trucks from going by.” NO people were in the road. Researching that allegation would necessitate speaking with people who participated in the protest and qualify as “extremely knowledgeable” about our intentions and what we did.

        Maybe next time you’ll join us.

  • Verbena,
    I had considered doing the Update as per Joe’s suggestion( I don’t like to change titles because It confuses readers and then they end up frustrated) but the first (and very reputable source) I spoke to said that the planning commissioner was badly uninformed which fits with the information that I’ve researched online. I’ve been trying to reach someone who I’ve been told actually dislikes the Grove project but is very informed on the nuclear issue. That person would seem to have a lot of credibility. Hopefully, I will have some clarification soon.

    The blog post that you are referring to that I tweeted about states that “According to the CHP Traffic Incident Information Page, a group of protesters gathered in Richardson Grove. At a little after one, there were around 50 people. Twelve were in the roadway blocking trucks from going by. At some point a banner was unfurled.”

    Then I pointed to ForestDefender’s blog to allow protesters to tell their side of what happened. If a reporter isn’t at an event, it is customary to point to different sources to give a rounded picture. The reader then can choose how much credence to place on the sources used. As I’m not acting as a reporter but a blogger and an advocate for the project, I think I acted reasonably to portray the protesters fairly.

  • Verbena,
    I had considered doing the Update as per Joe’s suggestion( I don’t like to change titles because It confuses readers and then they end up frustrated) but the first (and very reputable source) I spoke to said that the planning commissioner was badly uninformed which fits with the information that I’ve researched online. I’ve been trying to reach someone who I’ve been told actually dislikes the Grove project but is very informed on the nuclear issue. That person would seem to have a lot of credibility. Hopefully, I will have some clarification soon.

    The blog post that you are referring to that I tweeted about states that “According to the CHP Traffic Incident Information Page, a group of protesters gathered in Richardson Grove. At a little after one, there were around 50 people. Twelve were in the roadway blocking trucks from going by. At some point a banner was unfurled.”

    Then I pointed to ForestDefender’s blog to allow protesters to tell their side of what happened. If a reporter isn’t at an event, it is customary to point to different sources to give a rounded picture. The reader then can choose how much credence to place on the sources used. As I’m not acting as a reporter but a blogger and an advocate for the project, I think I acted reasonably to portray the protesters fairly.

  • Kym, This is what you said above: Look, if you have great facts on why this project shouldn’t go forward, put them out there.  But this kind of outright lying and conflating the project with violent imagery has to stop–for the sake of the future environmental movement especially.  Reputable environmentalists need to step forward and repudiate this kind of nonsense.  Your credibility is being destroyed.  And your credibility is crucial to lead us forward in ongoing and future efforts to save our planet.

    Now this is what you tell me: Because everyone I’ve talked to said the planning commissioner is wrong. I’m still trying to reach someone who is extremely knowledgeable about this subject before I attempt to write an answer. I want to be sure to be as accurate as possible. Please feel free to research the subject too. The more research, the more likely we are to find out accurate information.

    Do you not see the hypocrisy? You repudiate your own words while vilifying these people. You admit you DID NOT have the “accurate” information. Yet, you go at these people for doing the very same thing. Your credibility becomes mute when you force yourself to defend it. Not much respect shown here.

    • Actually wanting to be accurate as possible does not mean what she said was inaccurate. At least she is willing to look at all sources. The grove does not have to be done to haul nuclear waste, tanks, Wal-mart goods, etc. None of their militant images require the grove project to be done. Those are out right lies.

      • “Actually wanting to be accurate as possible’ is BS. Her statement has nothing to do with being “accurate” as she freely admits. Her statement was about vilifying people and calling them “liars” WITHOUT the facts. Something wrong with pointing that out? Frankly, I don’t see any difference between the lot of you.

        • Actually, Joe, there is a difference between knowing something is wrong and putting it out there as a fact and not having complete information. Everyone knows there are no ancient redwoods being cut. I was unaware that the planning commissioner had erroneously suggested that the nuclear waste could be more easily removed through Richardson Grove. Once I was aware, I set up tracking down information from the most credible source possible ( this takes time and energy) and now have posted it above.

          • Kym, Actually, Joe, there is a difference between knowing something is wrong and putting it out there as a fact and not having complete information.

            If you believe that is true, considering everything you said above in this post and others, then you’ve got NO credibility whatsoever. The fact that you can’t see that would explain a lot.

  • Kym, This is what you said above: Look, if you have great facts on why this project shouldn’t go forward, put them out there.  But this kind of outright lying and conflating the project with violent imagery has to stop–for the sake of the future environmental movement especially.  Reputable environmentalists need to step forward and repudiate this kind of nonsense.  Your credibility is being destroyed.  And your credibility is crucial to lead us forward in ongoing and future efforts to save our planet.

    Now this is what you tell me: Because everyone I’ve talked to said the planning commissioner is wrong. I’m still trying to reach someone who is extremely knowledgeable about this subject before I attempt to write an answer. I want to be sure to be as accurate as possible. Please feel free to research the subject too. The more research, the more likely we are to find out accurate information.

    Do you not see the hypocrisy? You repudiate your own words while vilifying these people. You admit you DID NOT have the “accurate” information. Yet, you go at these people for doing the very same thing. Your credibility becomes mute when you force yourself to defend it. Not much respect shown here.

    • Actually wanting to be accurate as possible does not mean what she said was inaccurate. At least she is willing to look at all sources. The grove does not have to be done to haul nuclear waste, tanks, Wal-mart goods, etc. None of their militant images require the grove project to be done. Those are out right lies.

      • “Actually wanting to be accurate as possible’ is BS. Her statement has nothing to do with being “accurate” as she freely admits. Her statement was about vilifying people and calling them “liars” WITHOUT the facts. Something wrong with pointing that out? Frankly, I don’t see any difference between the lot of you.

        • Actually, Joe, there is a difference between knowing something is wrong and putting it out there as a fact and not having complete information. Everyone knows there are no ancient redwoods being cut. I was unaware that the planning commissioner had erroneously suggested that the nuclear waste could be more easily removed through Richardson Grove. Once I was aware, I set up tracking down information from the most credible source possible ( this takes time and energy) and now have posted it above.

          • Kym, Actually, Joe, there is a difference between knowing something is wrong and putting it out there as a fact and not having complete information.

            If you believe that is true, considering everything you said above in this post and others, then you’ve got NO credibility whatsoever. The fact that you can’t see that would explain a lot.

  • Must disagree with KIM there is are lots of reasons to not do this project. The nuclear waste sounds like bull .If they are planning to move waste it is through Humboldt not our waste out. They are cutting large trees(not in the park)and they lie about their plans and effects on the existing large trees. They do not need the project , the trucks(STAA) can not get through Eureka . The signal option would work fine as people bring large trucks through just fine. Bigger ,faster heavier trucks are not safer. Call up my show from sun. last (1:30) on KMUD. And by the way now they have more plans to rebuild 3 bridges along the ave. of giants( in fish habitat ) . No time ,no public input and they want bicycle lanes? This is all to spend money. People are upset about the damage to these trees and the government is planning to use all there resources on the push to make this happen this is way past an overreaction on a poster and it is all so unnecessary.

  • Must disagree with KIM there is are lots of reasons to not do this project. The nuclear waste sounds like bull .If they are planning to move waste it is through Humboldt not our waste out. They are cutting large trees(not in the park)and they lie about their plans and effects on the existing large trees. They do not need the project , the trucks(STAA) can not get through Eureka . The signal option would work fine as people bring large trucks through just fine. Bigger ,faster heavier trucks are not safer. Call up my show from sun. last (1:30) on KMUD. And by the way now they have more plans to rebuild 3 bridges along the ave. of giants( in fish habitat ) . No time ,no public input and they want bicycle lanes? This is all to spend money. People are upset about the damage to these trees and the government is planning to use all there resources on the push to make this happen this is way past an overreaction on a poster and it is all so unnecessary.

  • Kym, This, your statement to Verbena, manifest the true wannabe Elitist’s attitude, condescending and totally disingenuous, that is driving this whole problem. The way you talk to this person is downright offensive. It’s no wonder the demonstrators say that Caltrans “lies.”

    You post what the CHP puts out as if it is the God’s gospel truth, then try to claim NO responsibility. You say, “The reader can then choose how much credence to place on the SOURCE used”! You “think [you] acted REASONABLY to portray the protesters fairly”? You put them (some “Forest Defenders blog – people portrayed as some “scary,” extremist borderline environmental terrorist) up against the California Highway Patrol and call that “fair”? All you are doing is propagating self-serving gossip. All the while trying to paint yourself as fair and responsible.

    My issue with this “tempest in a teapot” problem is that Caltran’s has done exactly what you are doing. That, and the fact that NO ONE has done anything to get these issues clarified. Which goes to the very heart of the issue, competing agendas and refusing to talk TO the people objecting to the project, considering their stated issues and reasonably and factually addressing in a timely manner. In the meantime innocent people are put in jeopardy because no one is doing their job, to serve the public’s interests and personal safety.

    • CHP was there. Were you there?

      • So what? Doesn’t mean they tell the truth. If what the CHP reported was accurate why didn’t they arrest those people for endangering the motoring public?

        • So what?! Doesn’t mean the protesters tell the truth either. Look at their account for the number of CHP involved. Right, that is believable. I love how you complain about Kym’s linking to the site the protesters use.

          This has been debated over, and over again. Why does one have to seek out their view point to be fair? There has been articles, and blog posts about it. She even asked for their view point. Can you say nuke, military, and big box reasons are even credible reasons to stop the project?

          I take Ernie’s view. Minor project, not great impacts, bulldozing happened to those roots long ago with no visible impact, and no one will notice that much of things have changed.

          • Perfect example of the attitude that drives this problem. Why people like you can’t see the trees for the forest.

            • Actually the trees and forest will be fine. Redwood trees are hard to kill. But go ahead and ignore the original road building methods which were not as nice or careful as they are now. Not once in the topic were you able add to the actual topic. Can you add to the knowledge of the topic with experience or evidence of what the opposition says is true?

              Low level nuclear waste is already being transported through the grove and no high level nuclear waste has any real plan of being transported anywhere.

              Big boxes are already here. The grove didn’t stop them. The grove will not stop more from coming.

              The grove will not stop the military from coming. We already have a national guard unit here. This is not a great place for tanks anyhow.

            • Too bad so many conspiracy based environmentalist movements can’t see either the trees or the forest; because they are too self absorbed to see anything but themselves. Laughing out loud at the protesters myself on the issue of the Richardson Grove widening project. Capdiamont nailed it, they are really jumping the shark on this little CalTrans project (check out Wikepedia on that phrase, pretty amusing). One might also say the protesters are making a mountain out of a molehill as well. Just watch out for those moles protesters! They are within your company. You protester guys and gals are so funny. Thanks Kim for your informative forum where we can exchange our personal opinions. I support the project based on the facts as I see them. The protesters just need to come up with viable facts against and not just rely on lies.

              • Actually the best lie I have heard regards Cypress Grove Cheese importing goat milk from Mexico to make their cheese? I’ve heard that nutty idea put forth by some of those opposed to the minor road widening project proposed on Highway 101 at Richardson Grove. But to many protesters, facts just don’t matter. But I am biased in favor of the project, and I will admit that. And if you go to KIEM TV’s website their recent poll shows 70% of respondents favor the project, 27% of respondents oppose and 3% of respondents have no opinion. So according to that poll more people support than oppose. Go figure?

              • To be fair, Harry, some have pointed out concerns very reasonably. I may not agree with their interpretations of the facts but I can understand why other people might feel that way. Here is one place that offers a clear explanation of many of the protesters’ concerns.

                And thank you so much for the poll info. I’ve tried to find a link to it. Can you point me the way?

  • Kym, This, your statement to Verbena, manifest the true wannabe Elitist’s attitude, condescending and totally disingenuous, that is driving this whole problem. The way you talk to this person is downright offensive. It’s no wonder the demonstrators say that Caltrans “lies.”

    You post what the CHP puts out as if it is the God’s gospel truth, then try to claim NO responsibility. You say, “The reader can then choose how much credence to place on the SOURCE used”! You “think [you] acted REASONABLY to portray the protesters fairly”? You put them (some “Forest Defenders blog – people portrayed as some “scary,” extremist borderline environmental terrorist) up against the California Highway Patrol and call that “fair”? All you are doing is propagating self-serving gossip. All the while trying to paint yourself as fair and responsible.

    My issue with this “tempest in a teapot” problem is that Caltran’s has done exactly what you are doing. That, and the fact that NO ONE has done anything to get these issues clarified. Which goes to the very heart of the issue, competing agendas and refusing to talk TO the people objecting to the project, considering their stated issues and reasonably and factually addressing in a timely manner. In the meantime innocent people are put in jeopardy because no one is doing their job, to serve the public’s interests and personal safety.

    • CHP was there. Were you there?

      • So what? Doesn’t mean they tell the truth. If what the CHP reported was accurate why didn’t they arrest those people for endangering the motoring public?

        • So what?! Doesn’t mean the protesters tell the truth either. Look at their account for the number of CHP involved. Right, that is believable. I love how you complain about Kym’s linking to the site the protesters use.

          This has been debated over, and over again. Why does one have to seek out their view point to be fair? There has been articles, and blog posts about it. She even asked for their view point. Can you say nuke, military, and big box reasons are even credible reasons to stop the project?

          I take Ernie’s view. Minor project, not great impacts, bulldozing happened to those roots long ago with no visible impact, and no one will notice that much of things have changed.

          • Perfect example of the attitude that drives this problem. Why people like you can’t see the trees for the forest.

            • Actually the trees and forest will be fine. Redwood trees are hard to kill. But go ahead and ignore the original road building methods which were not as nice or careful as they are now. Not once in the topic were you able add to the actual topic. Can you add to the knowledge of the topic with experience or evidence of what the opposition says is true?

              Low level nuclear waste is already being transported through the grove and no high level nuclear waste has any real plan of being transported anywhere.

              Big boxes are already here. The grove didn’t stop them. The grove will not stop more from coming.

              The grove will not stop the military from coming. We already have a national guard unit here. This is not a great place for tanks anyhow.

            • Too bad so many conspiracy based environmentalist movements can’t see either the trees or the forest; because they are too self absorbed to see anything but themselves. Laughing out loud at the protesters myself on the issue of the Richardson Grove widening project. Capdiamont nailed it, they are really jumping the shark on this little CalTrans project (check out Wikepedia on that phrase, pretty amusing). One might also say the protesters are making a mountain out of a molehill as well. Just watch out for those moles protesters! They are within your company. You protester guys and gals are so funny. Thanks Kim for your informative forum where we can exchange our personal opinions. I support the project based on the facts as I see them. The protesters just need to come up with viable facts against and not just rely on lies.

              • Actually the best lie I have heard regards Cypress Grove Cheese importing goat milk from Mexico to make their cheese? I’ve heard that nutty idea put forth by some of those opposed to the minor road widening project proposed on Highway 101 at Richardson Grove. But to many protesters, facts just don’t matter. But I am biased in favor of the project, and I will admit that. And if you go to KIEM TV’s website their recent poll shows 70% of respondents favor the project, 27% of respondents oppose and 3% of respondents have no opinion. So according to that poll more people support than oppose. Go figure?

              • To be fair, Harry, some have pointed out concerns very reasonably. I may not agree with their interpretations of the facts but I can understand why other people might feel that way. Here is one place that offers a clear explanation of many of the protesters’ concerns.

                And thank you so much for the poll info. I’ve tried to find a link to it. Can you point me the way?

                • Search on KIEM TV (google or ?) and go to the KIEM station website, answer the latest poll question and that takes you to a link to previous polls.

                  I miss the KIEM TV station that we lost when the signals were changed and only available on High Def TV’s. I think the repeater is still up on Svenson’s Ridge by Bear Buttes, but I am not willing to but a new high definition tv so I watch local news on my computer. That’s how I found it. Satellite dish feeds out of LA are not local news, and if we lose funding for Public Broadcasting it will be harder for us to maintain local news on KMUD. But that’s another issue on shortsighted budget cuts being proposed that will impact our local community.

                  I’ll try and keep an open mind on the realignment issue, but when Levi and Zentner, (Nielsons Feed Store location on Broadway in Eureka) was in business we shipped quite a bit of produce out of Humboldt County that our family grew in Salmon Creek. We have Humboldt Creamery, tree nurseries, bulb/flower farms, Cypress Grove Cheese and more. Our community park farm, and other small farmers would benefit from a distribution center with refrigeration in our area that could open up new markets for all the surplus produce we grow. Food prices are going up. Maybe a new “Levi and Zentner like” facility will materialize? Farmers Markets are expanding. Humboldt is a great place to live and I think our future is bright. We have a lot of bright people here with the imagination to make a bright future for us and our kids. A community with imagination won’t always agree on everything, but that what makes this such a special place. When I worked with produce at Firhaven we sent local produce back on the Farmer’s Fruit Express truck, which was going South empty otherwise. Our community helped make sure it didn’t always go back totally empty, and local farmers made some pocket change in the process, and some lucky people in the South ate some fine local produce. We did it before. We can do it again. A state certified incubator community kitchen (like Arcata has), maybe a hydro-cooler, packing plant, refrigerated storage, distribution facility located on US101 and our abundant gardens could make it happen again? Oops, I just climbed up on my fruit crate (aka soapbox again). Our future is as bright as our community members, and that’s pretty bright in my opinion. We may not always agree on everything, but we do share our individual visions for the future of Humboldt County and that’s a good thing.

                • Harry, this is inspiring!

                • Informative link. Thanks.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *