Tree-Sitters at U.C. Berkeley

While scanning through the news on CNN.com, I ran across a rather peculiar story detailing protests on the U.C. Berkeley campus. According to University of California officials, a number of individuals have been sitting among the tree tops of dozens of Evergreen Coast Live Oaks which overlook a proposed construction site on-campus. Almost a year ago the university announced the building of a $125 million athletic training facility. While the school argues construction is necessary in order to accommodate it's growth, these protesters think otherwise. They feel destroying this grove of trees would also destroy the picturesque quality of the campus. According to the article, "they argue the athletic center would be environmentally and seismically unsound, which campus officials deny".

These "tree-sitters" have even gone to extreme measures to fight for their cause, wearing masks and referring to themselves by false names in order to protect their identities. Because of this, Police have been unable to keep track of the exact number of sitters climbing in and out of the trees week after week. While some only stay only a few hours or days, others have hung around the tree tops for weeks at a time. All the while, supporters have delivered food, water, waste containers, and books to these protesters by way of hoisting buckets into the branches. Are these protesters outsiders or students? No one seems to know.

The article explains that after a year of these tree-top protests, the university has recently won the legal right to "evict" sitters that have taken up "residence" in the trees. But the question now is how will they get them down...and safely?

Although entitled to freedom of speech and expression by the American government, governmental policy can also bring these rights into question. This seems to be the case among college campuses nationwide. While I agree that after a year of protests these individuals should be removed from the trees, I can only wonder...are these (potential) students being forced down simply because this event is occurring on a somewhat conservative college campus (in one of the most politically correct cities in America)? Would the situation be different if the event occurred off-campus or even at another campus?

This article really made me wonder how JMU would handle a protest/situation such as this. While this protest has lasted almost a year, I could not imagine the university or even surrounding community members allowing a demonstration to continue for that long on our campus. Maybe I'm just naive to think that JMU students would settle things in a different manner.

For example, last semester when the university eliminated ten varsity sports in compliance with Title IX, students attempted to fight back. With 144 students and 11 coaches personally affected by this decision, the JMU community felt they had to do something. But, instead of chaining ourselves to the athletic performance center or refusing to leave sports arenas we wrote letters, signed petitions, and sported "Save Our Sports" t-shirts. In the end, all ten sports were elimated. While the issue at hand may be a little larger than tree-sitting, I can't help but wonder if students may have responded a little differently, would the outcome be the same?

I'm curious to see how the case of the U.C. Berkeley tree-sitters plays out. Although they have delayed construction of the athletic training center thus far, will their efforts be enough to stop it all together? I guess we'll just have to wait and see!


Take a look at the article "Berkeley's protesting tree-sitters face eviction"