By Emily Gurnon
EUREKA, Calif. — While most
activists have abandoned their treetop protests, Pacific Lumber Co. has
continued its fight against the anti-logging campaign by seeking heavy
civil penalties against protesters.
In the last two years, the
company has sued more than 110 people for trespassing and interference
with its "lawful business operations," including an estimated 40
individuals from protests this spring in Freshwater, a community about six
miles from here.
Four recent lawsuits
ask for damages against individuals, in some cases in the hundreds of
thousands of dollars.
"Obviously, our end goal is to take all legal
actions available to us to discourage people who are breaking the law on
our property," said Jim Branham, a Pacific Lumber
spokesman.
Protesters, many facing criminal charges, say the civil
lawsuits are an attempt to quash activism.
"They're trying to
intimidate people to stop any type of public participation," said Jeny
Card, a 28-year-old protester who spent nearly a year living in an ancient
redwood before being arrested, and sued for $250,000, in March.
The
practice of filing lawsuits to combat civil disobedience is not new. In
the late 1980s, Pacific Lumber sued at least 17 people involved in
protests over the Headwaters Forest. The cases were settled before
trial.
Pacific Lumber's recent spate of lawsuits stems from four
protests on the company's Humboldt County land. One case was thrown out
for lack of evidence. Another case, filed in April 2001, is in settlement
negotiations. The third, involving four people who allegedly used a
vehicle to block doors to the company's Scotia headquarters, is scheduled
to go to trial next month. The fourth lawsuit was filed against activists
in this spring's Freshwater protest.
"The concept of a lawsuit is
very scary to somebody who's never been sued," said Darryl Cherney, a
longtime environmental activist who said he has been sued twice by Pacific
Lumber.
Jeanette Jungers, 50, a special education teacher from
Eureka, was sued by Pacific Lumber for $335,000. She said that for many of
those targeted — young people with little to lose — the suits are simply a
hassle. For her, she said, it's a hardship.
"From my perspective,
it means a great deal," she said. "I have a home. I have children. I don't
want them to attach my wages. I don't want to lose my
home."
Jungers never climbed the trees, but she did trespass on
Pacific Lumber property to provide weekly meals to tree-sitters. And on
one of the days the company hired climbers to remove protesters, Jungers
chained herself to a nearby tree and was arrested.
The longtime
Humboldt County resident said the suit has already cost her. She paid $250
to file an initial court document, and more court fees are
likely.
Since the mid-1960s, logging companies have filed lawsuits
against protesters who challenge industry practices, said University of
Colorado law professor George W. Pring, who with Penelope Canan wrote the
1996 book "SLAPPs: Getting Sued for Speaking Out."
"They are not
filed to win a judgment. This lumber company does not need a dime from
these people in order to balance [its] budget sheet," he said.
Protesters have labeled such lawsuits SLAPPs — or strategic
lawsuits against public participation.
Pring said the lawsuits are
"huge winners outside of the courtroom in terms of silencing people,
muzzling protests — which is why the lumber companies use them."
For Pacific Lumber, the outcome of the criminal cases will
influence the civil suits, company spokesman Branham said, referring in
particular to the case of protester Card.
Card recently accepted a
plea bargain for a $10 fine — a punishment Branham called "very
discouraging." In other cases, protesters have been sentenced to 10 days
in jail, and one activist was fined $500.
"It seems to me the
implications of [Card's] plea bargain are pretty significant," Branham
said, adding that the company is likely to pursue its civil suits more
aggressively if criminal penalties amount to a slap on the
wrist.
Russ Gans, Pacific Lumber's Eureka attorney in the civil
cases, said the lawsuits should be secondary to the criminal cases, which
could potentially result in jail time, fines, probation, stay-away orders
and restitution to the company.
"If all those avenues were being
pursued on the public, criminal end," Gans said, "these civil cases
probably wouldn't be necessary."