Slog - Comments on Lawsuit Filed in Treegate Dispute

Comment by Will in Seattle

Will in Seattle — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:36:38 -0800

Of course, they could just hold city hall hostage until then.

Comment by Self-Hating Hipster

Self-Hating Hipster — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:03:41 -0800

COMMENT DELETED: OFF TOPIC/SPAM

We remove comments that are off topic, threatening, or commercial in nature, and we do not allow sock-puppetry (impersonating someone else)�or any kind of puppetry, for that matter. We never censor comments based on ideology.

Comment by anonymous

anonymous — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:08:02 -0800

fail troll is fail.

Comment by Greg

Greg — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:41:01 -0800

Nice how the Seattle Hipster troll has to slip in some sort of gay-fear detail in every post. What an asshole.

Comment by elenchos

elenchos — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 19:48:14 -0800

Indeed, Greg. Is this that "gay panic" thing? Like the he got hit on by a dude in tight pants with a PBR, and it left a scar? I mean, spamming is a fairly harmless kind of gay panic reaction, all things considered. Least he's not the next Kyle Huff.

Or is he?

Comment by Bob

Bob — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:53:15 -0800

This is a deeply rooted problem.

Comment by nomad

nomad — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 22:03:14 -0800

The trees are us people, don't fool yourselves---as they go so go we. A mature stand of native Douglas Fir like this is worth its weight in a whole host of supported flora and fauna, from the mirco to the macro, from the mycorrhizae soil fungi symbiotically helping to sustain the understory plants through our droughty summers, to the falcons and eagles that occasionally come to rest in its branches. It took a better part of a century to make this wood and placing even a larger number of (non-native) trees along the edges of parking lots, walkways sidewalks isn't going make up for what will be lost. We have it now, let's keep it.

Comment by PJ

PJ — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 23:00:23 -0800

On the other side of Ingraham there's another wooded area with several times the trees. There's other places right near there where there are many trees than that. The real question is, do we want urban density? Do we care about public education and schools that can accommodate growing numbers of students? This is not an environmental issue. This is not even an issue except in the minds of a handful of seriously deluded people living right around that neighborhood.

Comment by the real BOB

the real BOB — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 01:03:30 -0800

#6 - you do us Bobs proud

the concept here is fait accompli - and often a very useful action

chop "em, what is the court or city going to do?

horse whip the school board? Fine them, well, OK .... make them plant trees again somewhere. OK

except Douglas Firs are shallow rooted in fact, that is why they topple in any real wind, esp. if the ground is softened by water, rain

GO GO SCHOOL BOARD (BY THE WAY, THEY DO HAVE BIG TIME E. DOMAIN AND SITE USE LEGAL POWERS, THEY OWN THE LAND, REPEAT, OWN THE LAND)

Comment by Gabe

Gabe — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 03:22:57 -0800

Where is the fucking Lorax in all of this? He speaks for the trees.

Comment by Lorax

Lorax — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 05:48:17 -0800

Please, just cut the trees and end this torture of having to listen to these people. This is not a forest. These are not exceptional trees. Let's focus on real environmental issues.

btw - do the people making all of these arguments about the Ingraham trees ride transit/walk/ride bikes? Or, are they all meat eating car drivers who live in single family houses? They probably do more environmental damage in one day than these trees would mitigate in a lifetime.

Comment by Jen

Jen — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 06:46:47 -0800

Didn't this happen at Berkley, except people actually climbed the trees and flung their feces about?

Comment by Higher education

Higher education — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 07:24:30 -0800

Here is a thought, recycle the trees into paper bags and hand them out free to the neighbors because I am sure they are also the ones bitching about the bag fee. This is stupid they school district is expanding their school advancing the education opportunity of their children. They need to shut up because it could be worse the school board could have chosen to shut it down all together.

Comment by PC

PC — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 09:12:20 -0800

Agnostic on the trees, but:

1. the school apparently has other land to build on.
2. I assume those fighting for the trees own homes on which trees were previously cut down -- and haven't planted theifront lawns with dozens of douglas firs themselves.
3. doubt anyone walks in or picnics among these trees -- probably used by kids for smoking pot...-- they have value for bugs, yes, and now they have great value, to allow people who haven't planted trees on their own property to show their devotion to trees and the earth etc., by forcing someone else to keep trees for the public good.

Comment by Greg

Greg — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 09:59:18 -0800

I AM THE LAUGHING MAN!!!

Now that we've got that cleared up...

The district doesn't come off looking very good in this. First they work within the process, but then when it goes against them they pull out and act like they didn't have to have any discussion in the first place. That's a guaranteed way to anger the neighborhood.

Comment by Lorax

Lorax — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 10:18:00 -0800

I speak for the trees.

They're pissed.

We'll see you in court.