9 - "If a Tree Falls" and "L'Érreur Boréale"

by Shanaya, Nathan and Adam

There are many ways people view the world itself. Some act as if we have unlimited resources at our disposal and use those resources to make money. Others see our planet as a treasure that needs to be preserved, but unfortunately, few people listen to their pleas. In our world there are many forests that are nearly stripped of their trees. Trees that are hundreds of years old, gone, replaced with less remarkable trees that were meant to be farmed. Sure there is nothing wrong with making a living off the land itself, but there has to be a limit to what we do to the environment as there is a limit to the resources it gives us. The two films that we will be discussing will be "If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front" and "L'Érreur Boréale" which both deal with grave environmental issues that most people are unaware of.

The documentary "If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front", directed by Marshall Curry and Sam Cullman, revolves around the infamous extremist environmentalists called the Earth Liberation Front or E.L.F. for short. In December 2005, Daniel McGowan (one of the primary members of the E.L.F.) was arrested at his workplace by federal agents for being involved with what people claimed to be a "terrorist" group. After seeing all the wrong people have been causing for the environment, Daniel and the other group members decided to do something about it. They did not intend on starting small. One of their first acts of "eco-terrorism" was the destruction of a $12 million ski lodge in Vail, Colorado. They also continued to set fire to places like Lumber company buildings and SUV dealerships. Eventually one of the members, Jacob Ferguson decided that he had had enough and helped the police track down the other members of the E.L.F. by wearing a microphone and having him talk to the other members. At the end, after having caught the primary E.L.F. members, Jake Ferguson ended up walking free while many of the others received jail time including Daniel McGowan who spent 7 years in jail after his house arrest ended in 2007.

In this documentary the content was mostly biased towards the E.L.F. and environmentalists in general, but what the directors well is that they showed us the point of view of the environmentalists, the police/government, the media and the business owners. There were many scenes showing the means that the police took to rid the streets of the protesters. These means included spraying the protesters with pepper spray and throwing tear gas at them. Although they were peaceful the police still resorted to violence after warning them. In a way both parties here are right about their ideals. The environmentalists just want to preserve the limited resources of the planet, but the police are just doing their job and trying to protect other innocent citizens from the demonstrators that are disturbing the peace because there were in fact people there who were also destroying the property of others.

In our class discussion, we talked about John Locke's government (which was his idea of a good government). John Locke says that the right to fight applies to civil societies when: "The administration of the law is corrupt, or employed to commit violence or injury." This applies perfectly well to this documentary because the police were sent upon the non-violent protesters harming them with the weapons at their disposal. We also discussed ideologies and how they are critical tools for the interpretation of institutions, practices, and ways of thinking. In the documentary all parties have different views on the situation at hand. The environmentalists point of view is that they're trying to help the planet by raising awareness of foresting and other environmentally harming acts. The police and the media see them (specifically the E.L.F.) as criminals/terrorists who should be brought to justice and the business owners who are just trying to make a living off of cutting wood.

This is what Democracy Looks Like (128 minutes)

This is a documentary called "This Is What Democracy Looks Like" and it presents some similar issues brought upon us in "If a Tree Falls." This time we have protesters who are protesting against a new policy that the World Trade Organization (WTO) had recently come up with. This policy stated that they were able to use sanctions to deprive people all over the world from many of their safe working conditions and environmental standards. The issue that is similar to that of "If a Tree Falls" is the way the police treats the self-proclaimed peaceful protesters. In both films the police resorted to physical violence to control the crowd.

The documentary  “L’erreur Boréale” is another example of people who really wish to see change in how the environment (and more specifically, the trees) are treated and dealt with. In “L’erreur Boréale” , Richard Desjardins questions the Québec’s population’s responsibility for the clear cutting of the forest. He brings light to the fact that industrialization and deforestation are hand in hand and that because of this there may not be forest for decades to come.

               This movie is made in Québec and is talking specifically about this area. That is why this movie may come as more of an eye opener for people around here than “If a Tree Falls”. Due to the simple fact that it is here, we see that clear cutting and deforestation isn’t just a problem in other places—it’s right in our back yard, too.

               Governments and businesses swear that the forest will be preserved for future generations to come, but this movie is really looking into that statement and seeing if it is in fact the truth. As a consequence of this movie questioning government and big businesses, this movie raised a lot of debate that involved people with many different opinions.

               The beginning of the film shows us a forest in the morning with the natural sounds that come with it (like the birds and the water, etc). The end of the movie, we move into the city life and in corporate offices and finally close with scenes of trees being ripped down on a cloudy, ugly day. Every movie was edited and placed in a certain way, and that contrast was something that subconsciously raised the questions and debates that Richard Desjardins was trying to bring up.

               One person that this movie introduces to us is Gilles Lemieux, a researcher at L’Université Laval. He basically talks about how when trees are cut down, there isn’t 100% of a chance that they can be replanted, because the natural beings of that land that remain (such as insects) still feed off the soil and it’s nutrients. Therefore, there are many different factors to deforestation and we can’t always assume that when a tree is cut down, it’s as simple as planting another one.

               Another person that we’re presented to is Gaston Dery. He is a representative for the wood companies of Québec. He talks about how it’s always been mandatory to consult the public before doing something to the trees/nature and it’s practically the law. He, however, questions why they would need to that if they know what they are doing and are professionals.

               There are many different opinions when it comes to deforestation and the protection of natural habitat. Ultimately, this movie was created just to present the opinions and information. It was released to let people decide for themselves where to go from what has been done and what continues to be done to nature and to forest. 

                        Richard Preston: The Mysterious Lives of Giant Trees. (20 minutes)

The clip above is a Ted talk about a rain forest in the United States that has been almost wiped out. The speaker in this clip, Richard Preston, talks about how incredibly old they are, how magnificently huge they are and also how important it is to protect these trees.

Both these movies related very nicely to one another. They are different extremes of activism against the destruction of nature. We have two groups of activists in the states, radical activists and those who protest peacefully on the streets. In Quebec, there are no public demonstrations being done to stop the madness. "L’Erreur Boréale" showed us that no one is doing anything to stop companies from throwing away our natural forests.

                                           

From watching "l’Erreur Boréale", we have come to the realization that the destruction of forests isn’t only happening elsewhere such as rainforests or places in the United States, they are also happening right here in Québec and our economy is dependent on it. The clear cutting of our forests is bringing in 10 billion dollars in exports and many jobs, but is it really worth it?

As a group, we really admire nature. We found that a group of organisms that coexist tens of thousands of years very impressive.  We also found it that we are letting people destroy these age old forests. The destruction of these forests affects more than just the trees themselves. The first and most important is the local wildlife. When they cut down these huge patches of forest, they just say the animals will go elsewhere.  However, the truth is we are running out of places for the animals to flee their homes to.  We found this exceptionally disrespectful to our land because it is extremely cruel to be constantly evicting animals without notice and expecting them to make due somewhere else. Another group it affects is the aboriginals, who would otherwise be using these territories as hunting grounds. One more group that the deforestation affects is the people who have cottages or campgrounds. Many people have a culture of going to their cabin or campground in the middle of nowhere to relax and enjoy nature. By ripping out the trees from all around their campsites, they lose the magic of camping or having a cottage in a forest. Instead of being on a lake with trees surrounding the region, you have the perimeter of a lake covered in trees and a clear cut as far as the eye see. Being a group of people that enjoys nature, we would be disgusted if we returned to our cabin or campground to find that the land surrounding it had been replaced with a logging companies’ land fill, full of broken branches roots and maybe some weak looking saplings here and there. 

These two films show us that depending on how you were brought up and where you are from, you will have completely different ideologies. For example, a lumber worker would think that cutting down trees is a good thing because he was taught that they were a good source of wealth. Whereas someone who is having their backyard destroyed by deforestation will think of lumberjacks as heartless demons who are exploiting nature and it's resources. There is also the neutral point of view. Typically these people will think that what lumberjacks are doing is wrong, but drastic measures to stand against them should never be taken.

The films have also shown us the true face of the lumber industry. They have shown us the wildlife that it affects, the people it affects and even the people fighting back. The film also shows us that different people, depending on where they stand, will have completely different ideologies. We have come to the realization that perhaps burning down someone’s work place is not the best way to shut them down, although it is effective. However, burning down someone’s workplace is a terrible thing to do.  Peaceful protest is the safest option for all parties. In essence, if you don’t agree with someone, discuss it by writing to the government, starting a webpage addressing the situation or publicly demonstrate to make people hear what you have to say. Don’t jump to Molotov cocktails.