Talk:Earth First!

message: The charge that Earth First! caused three deaths must be presented as one POV.  Actually, even presenting it at all, without any supporting reference, is dubious, but I'm assuming good faith until someone can add a citation. JamesMLane 14:30, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm very skeptical about this claim, as I've read many books discussing Earth (including critical ones) and have never seen this specific claim. Also it's generally understood tree-spiking targets the milling side of things, not the loggers. I'm not sure what James meant by a citation -- if he meant a counter-citation...well it's hard to dispute something when you have nothing cited to dispute. Unless someone expresses something to the contrary (e.g. a citation or good reason not to), and given the clear POV in it's initial wording ("As part of thier ecodefense program they have been directly responsible for the death of people. Three loggers were murdered in Northern California as a result of "spiking" the trees they were cutting down. These tactics are deplorable. Murder is NOT justifiable for any cause."), I'm strongly inclined to remove it. Mahonia 10:28, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, by a citation I meant support for the assertion that opponents had made this charge.  An example would be a link to newspaper article in which Hoggish Greedly, the chairman of the Environmental Exploiters Association, is quoted as saying that three loggers died.  I raised this point almost two months ago, and no citation has been forthcoming.  Accordingly, I'll now delete the passage.  If Hoggish or one of his ilk actually did make the charge, it can certainly be restored to the article, but only if presented as a charge (not stated as a fact) and supported by a citation. JamesMLane 16:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't think it matters if you are "very skeptical about this claim" Mahonia, what matters are the facts. I have worked in a logging mill, and run a portable mill on site myself and I can tell you that spikes could very easily cause serious injury to the operator. Carbide teeth are braised on and when they hit a spike it can cause them to fly off at a very high rate of speed, effectively turning them into shrapnel. If one where to hit someone's eye or the temple, or the neck, serious injury or death is possible. A man at the mill I worked at was working the saw when it hit a very large (antique) nail and two teeth lodged into his cheek and arm. He was rushed to the hospital, and was ok after some stitches, but he could have lost an eye or worse. Also, hitting a spike with a very large chain saw could easily send the blade into the legs, neck or face... again causing injury or death. So... spiking trees is a VERY serious act, a crime, regardless of whether you are operating a chain saw or a mill.76.185.123.23 18:20, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That is not doubted (after all thats the point, isnt it - a spiked tree is worthless/dangerous for milling thus remains uncut?), but is not the point here. The point is whether spiking done by EF caused injury or death, who says so, and whether reliable sources can be found for these claims. Also "These tactics are deplorable. Murder is NOT justifiable for any cause" is just an opinion and has no place in an encyclopedia --84.159.140.98 21:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alleged deaths 

message: Please source. The roadcamps were not an earth First movement and it looks like you have claimed that things having nothing to do with this group were in fact done by this Earth First. Please therefore source the claims you make in the section or it will be removed, SqueakBox 23:15, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good to have someone to help. I agree that the position of earth first is confusing. As a way of trying to get the relative contributions of the different groups correct, I've created another page Environmental direct action in the United Kingdom, which is currently an orphan page, with much the same content as here. Ideally the page could describe the history of the movement from the 1990's onwards, without making it specifically Earth First! related. The time seems right to document history of this important movement. --Salix alba (talk) 14:56, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Earth First! in the UK

message: Anyone know about the above protest/tree-village? There is some content at :Category:Tree Village which is about to be speedy deleted. I've copied some content to Tree sitting and a complete copy to my user space at User:Salix alba/Tree Village. If anyone knows more about these protests, with sources, they may be worth an individual article. --Salix alba (talk) 22:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fall Creek/Red Cloud Thunder Tree-Village 

message: I've removed the anon addition (most notably the southern California tractor bomber, known as Riccardo), I could not find anything relavant in google, the closest was  but that turn out to be a fictional character in and RPG. --82.138.219.137 16:05, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've never heard about it, so it's probably not "most [notable]". I'd guess it's a joke. Ungovernable ForceThe Wiki Kitchen! 17:22, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:   the southern California tractor bomber, known as Riccardo 

message: Time magazine has a photo essay TIME: Forest Defenders with 9 slides of various forest protests. Probably not worth including in main article but worth a look. One interesting caption: The Bush Administration has opened areas of Oregon's Siskiyou National Forest for logging, despite being sued by the governers of Oregon, Washington, New Mexico and California under the National Environmental Protection Act.. 
Maybe there is a need for a more general article on anit-logging protest, as its not just EF which does this. --Salix alba (talk) 12:11, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time magazine Forest Defenders 

message: I removed the list that originally started at the bottom of the article. If anyone objects go ahead and rv the change and lets discussed the reasons for keeping the list. --I already forgot 01:30, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I cleaned it up and moved it from the bottom the article, I agree with the removal. Arbitrary bits of trivia don't seem helpful for understanding the topic. Burlywood 20:37, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: List of references in media outlets/trivia

message: Just curious why EF isn't linked to Green anarchism?  Seems like a fruitful connection.  I'd call EF! one of Eco-anarchism's leading exponents. --Dylanfly 14:32, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Why no link up with Green anarchism?

message: Re: the arguments a while back about labelling EF as "terrorists", versus simply noting that other organizations have labelled them as "terrorists" - I think there's a third option. 
If, say, the FBI labels them "terrorists", the article can report that fact - i.e., the fact that the FBI labels them such - but only if it also provides in sufficient detail the FBI's proof or reasons for labelling them such, if they happen to have any; and then examines the proof provided by the FBI, making points countering the FBI's proof if there are any.
Flat-out labelling is always misleading, and I hope that tactic never infiltrates Wikipedia to turn us into yet another propaganda tool. However, if someone has e.g. really truly blown something up, and was actually convicted of it, and an organization has publicly declared their support of this person's action, and the FBI has made the argument that because of that declaration of public support they consider the organization to be "terrorist", that's useful info to have in the article, as long as the full disclosure of why is in there.
If, however, someone has e.g. only been accused of blowing something up, or if the organization has not publicly declared their support of something despite the FBI's assertion that they have, or the FBI is simply labelling without offering any proof whatsoever; or, if the FBI is only labelling them as "terrorist" because some members have been proven to also be members of a completely different organization that goes around performing legal demonstrations at animal testing labs; or if the organization hasn't publicly said anything, but they're being labelled because some self-identified "members" or "fellow-travellers" have personally advocated violence; then while it is still useful information to report that the "FBI labels them terrorists", all of the counter-arguments should be put forward in the article to provide full disclosure to the reader.
And all while obeying WP:V, WP:NPOV and WP:NOR. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad (talk) 15:28, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You're workin' pretty hard there to rationalize away the "terrorist" label, but unfortunatly they fit the description (child molester don't think they are doing anything wrong either). See the argument over at the ELF article for discusstion. Proxy User (talk) 23:18, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Most governments fit "the" definition as well. Murderbike (talk) 21:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This 'famous' FBI ref is talking about the ELF, a radical group that came out of EF. The EF movement is not mentioned as being eco-terrorists anywhere.   Channel ®    17:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, please note that the government of China presently labels the Dalai Lama a terrorist. I'm sure Aung Sun Soo Kyi is labelled a terrorist in Burma. I'm sure the French justified blowing up the Rainbow Warrior because it was involved in terrorism. Meanwhile, supposed IRA "terorists" had complete freedom of movement in the US while their organization was involved in bombings in London. If you would like to write "Earth First was declared a terrorist organization by the FBI in a memorandum dated X.X.XX", and give the proper reference, providing balance with statements from other people disputing that to illustrate that the "terorist" definition is in dispute, then you've given us a great factual statement that's worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. But "EF are terrorists" is not even remotely WP:NPOV. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad (talk) 13:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Their actions have gotten people killed; That’s terrorism. There is not “wriggling out of this.” Earth First IS a Terrorist organization. Change the subject all you want, but that doesn’t change the facts.174.25.42.71 (talk) 07:31, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terrorists? No - again. 

message: See Operation Backfire (FBI) for more, for US law enforcement operations. Don't know what the UK equivalent is for any similar UK law enforcement operation. Also go to www.fbi.gov, SEARCH icon, type here Domestic Terrorists and/or Single Issue Terrorists, "Eco-Terrorists" as well. Also do the same at www.doj.gov (also @ www.usdoj.gov) as well. 65.173.104.109 (talk) 08:43, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No. You can state that some American organisation says "They ARE terrorists" (according to the loosest labeling of "terrorists") but wikipedia articles are not (in) the position to declare "They ARE terrorists". That would be Original Research. All we can do is state references for reliable sources who (at the time) hold that perspective. Otherwise what's to stop people defacing the America article with claims that Americans are terrorists for all the wars they start, atomic bombs they have used to kill people, torturing performed in off-shore gaols, defamation and persecution of whistle-blowers, etc. etc. Instead, all WP will uphold is "this source said this" and "that source said that" but not "Americans are terrorists" and not "ELF are terrorists". 120.17.12.124 (talk) 04:44, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: They ARE terrorists

message: The graphic renders pretty horribly, I couldn't tell what it was until I clicked on the image to get a bigger version.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.106.249.87 (talk) 23:21, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Need better graphic

message: I checked the cited source for the claim under "Earth First! in popular culture" regarding the claim that the Young Republican's Earth Day 2000 motto was "EARTH FIRST! We'll log Earth first, other planets later!".  The source was a blog, and not an obviously reputable source, I googled the phrase.  Google gave me 12 results, most being blogs, which cite the source cited by Wikipedia.  Further googling for the Young Republicans *ever* having an Earth Day motto turned up nothing.  As this statement appears to blatantly false, I will be deleting it from the article.  Also worth noting is that the source asserts the motto immediately before suggesting that all Young Republicans be deported to the Amazon Rainforest.
Also, the citations in general seem to be lacking for this article.  One is a dead link and five citations contain insufficient information for locating the sources, as they do not have a link.  Please update the citations if you are familiar with the topics.
Topherwhelan (talk) 10:38, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poor Citation 

message: There are a lot of "Source requested" notices in this article. I am trying to find a suitable source for the "Edward Abbey as inspiration" statement. The right source is obviously EarthFirstJournal.org, but then the problem becomes how to treat that as a source, because it seems to operate more or less as a blog and the writers use pseudonyms. How does Wikipedia treat a source like that? Albert Sumlin (talk) 13:07, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Assuming the journal is the group and not a third party, WP:SELFPUB applies. Can you be more specific on what line you are looking at in the article and what page in the source discusses it?Cptnono (talk) 19:27, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: "Edward Abbey often spoke at early gatherings, and his writings were an inspiration that led him to be revered by the early movement.[citation needed]" There are many individual posts at the EarthFirstJournal that would seem to justify this, but none of them seem to speak officially for the movement, which I think is more or less the way the movement is supposed to function (non-hierarchical/plausible deniability.) Albert Sumlin (talk) 00:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Without a specific page it is too vague to verify.Cptnono (talk) 00:47, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about source rules 

message: It's too short imo. Thanks.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.95.129.245 (talk) 12:23, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  More should be added about this eco-terrorist group 

message: I've removed the following recent addition
:Is the Earth First! movement a terrorist organization?  Labels are used to make the hard to understand easy to communicate, it is often said, one man's Terrorist is another man's Freedom Fighter. Think about how the human species in 300 years from now, will view these people (Earth First!) who stood opposed to the harvesting of this Planet which our species and all life as we know it exists upon, just for short term material gain of a few individuals. Thou human history has shown that political movements which engage in random violence often fail to accomplish their goals of political change as negative backlash of emotions wanes public support for the movement and isolates them from the greater political actors. Such as the case with "The Weathermen" of the anti-war movement of early 70's http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/weatherunderground/movement.html or even as applied to the Earth First! movement how the Una-Bomber Ted quietly observed environmentalists debate tactics at a large environmental conference before hitchhiking back to his remote mountain cabin. http://fair.org/extra-online-articles/exploding-abcs-unabomber-hoax/ Terrorist use violence to influence political outcomes and governments, usual thru murder, kidnapping, and bombings of government buildings or sites of cultural importance. Ted bombed & killed people and he was shunned by the environmental movement. Judi Bari & her bard were bombed by the FBI who arrested them and called these Earth First!ers "Terrorists" after California Earth First had come to agreements with local logger worker unions.http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Earth-First-activists-win-case-FBI-cops-must-2829885.php The Earth First! movement engages targets of environmental destruction with civil disobedience actions designed to draw attention and to slow down destruction of threaten wild areas, using lock-down actions whereas people become living blockades. http://historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/lockbox.html http://www.britannica.com/topic/civil-disobedience Avalon of the Earth Liberation Front died in FBI custody on terrorism charges for multiple arsons and his ELF cell arrested & are in federal prison presently on life sentences, all these ELF "terrorists" were disgruntled Earth First activists and left mere civil disobedience tactics behind to engage in random violence against property costing millions of dollars but did not kill anyone.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_C._Rodgers http://www.targetofopportunity.com/elf.htm 
It fails guidlines on a number of fronts. It looks like synthesis and WP:OR making an argument rather than trying to be WP:NPOV. --Salix alba (talk): 22:34, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  June 2015 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Earth First!. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160330121445/https://www2.fbi.gov/congress/congress02/jarboe021202.htm to https://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress02/jarboe021202.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.lowbagger.org/foundersstory.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051016222643/http://www.penbay.org:80/ef/treesit_first1985.html to http://www.penbay.org/ef/treesit_first1985.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:41, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This page is in need of serious restructuring. It's current organization and sections are inefficient and jumbled. It jumps around to different topics with no transition or explanation. Sorting through the current information and breaking it up into sub-headings, in addition to adding new sections such as "History", "Organizational Structure", "Controversies", "Past Campaigns" etc. would result in a much cleaner and understandable article. 
Currently the page reads like an informal oral history, and is incredibly hard to follow. Additionally it lacks credible, non-biased sources.
Lboconnell (talk) 18:53, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Organization & Content 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Earth First!. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.penbay.org/ef/treesit_first1985.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060402225934/http://earthfirstgathering.org.uk/ to http://www.earthfirstgathering.org.uk/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:09, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Earth First!. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051016224709/http://www.penbay.org/ef/mikejakubal_1sttreesit85.html to http://www.penbay.org/ef/mikejakubal_1sttreesit85.html
*Added archive http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20011115021119/http://www.monitor.net/monitor/9808a/pepperspray1a.html to http://www.monitor.net/monitor/9808a/pepperspray1a.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:13, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: One very puzzling aspect to this article: group founded in 1980, and an uncited claim that it 'emerged' in 1979? This is complete nonsense. Please try to ensure that all statements are properly cited. I do realise that some young Wiki contributors have a bit of a fixation with including the mythical 1970s (not the reality) in spurious claims on this site, but it really does not make good, accurate or logical reading. How this completely uncited statement has survived so long is a puzzle. Perhaps a section on what led up to the founding of the group might be more appropriate?
(86.178.252.247 (talk) 08:40, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uncited statement removed 

message: The section of the article "Early years, from 1980–1989" has a lot of citations from penbay.org which is a dead website but use to host the EarthFirst! Journal - and many of the articles are written by Ron Huber. These are all bias and primary sources and eventually need to be replaced. Adding a note here, in case anyone wants to focus on this in the future. Jooojay (talk) 18:03, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: EarthFirst! Journal or penbay.org, poor sources used and they need to be replaced

message: :File:Earth First demonstration1 (25116290829).jpg on Commons is described as showing an Earth First demonstration. Can anyone determine the date, and confirm whether the protestors are Earth First? The placards appear to reference Mary's Peak. Belbury (talk) 17:40, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unidentified photo 

message: EF! isn't really heard about in Poland, I am pretty sure that it doesn't exist here Marmoladaa (talk) 21:28, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source on EF! being in Poland? 

message: The article only examples of england and the us. In the article for exame, netherlands is only used 1 time, in the intro. Espesially since the haydays of earth first (or at least the time they got headline after headline) are over I think its safe to assure that every earth first member in europe is either 80+ or has moved over to much popular sortlike movements like extinsion rebelion.
tldr: if noone has sources for the country EF is active in its safe to delete them imo 2001:1C01:3B0E:EB00:24BE:6328:6FCC:3692 (talk) 14:12, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Earth first being in mainland Europe.