Talk:Pacific Lumber Company

Content quality

This is essentially a PR page for Pacific Lumber. None of its numerous violations are ever mentioned, and the Palco community center page is totally irrelevant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.108.235.191 (talk) 16:26, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

More Information Needed

This is a lot more work than I can devote to right now, so this is more a placeholder as well as a note to anyone else who would like to help. The most relevant component of this page should really be a focus on the actions and directions Pacific Lumber took once it was under the ownership of Maxxam (by the way, paint me really surprised that Charles Hurwitz didn't have his own Wiki page here!). I've laid just the starting foundation of it, by breaking out the 1985 hostile takeover into its own heading in the History section. I'd like to see that section fleshed out some more; how exactly did Hurwitz take over? There's got to be old news clips... I don't think hostile takeovers happen nearly as often as they used to in the 1980s so an explanation here would be very helpful. The issue is that Palco had become a public company but I'm going to assume the problem was that the Murphys weren't a 51% stake owner (which is probably how Maxxam was able to buy up enough to own the company outright). Details would help a great deal here.

There's a lot of environmental web pages that discuss the topic of Maxxam and clearcutting but harder to find regular press articles. There are a few... an article from the Santa Rosa Press-Democrat that covered Maxxam's bankruptcy has a really nice history-at-a-glance list (http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20070120/NEWS/701200303?p=1&tc=pg).

This article didn't have a link to clearcutting, for example. I added that. But there is no link to the tree sitting that happened with Luna, and I believe that was on Palco land also. There's a lot that could be fleshed out in that whole section.

Previous to my edit, the organiztion with the info on Earth First seemed to come out of nowhere and didn't make a lot of sense in the way it was presented. I didn't delete any of it, but I did try to reoganize the sections a bit so it makes more sense, by putting it under its own banner for protests. There needs to be a more in this section, and since Judi Bari and Earth First have their own Wiki pages, it might be better to shrink the text there and just provide pointers... but only after we add other examples.

Traveliter (talk) 18:44, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

The SPIN is over. This article will reflect the real depth of this vital company's history and issues from the past, and present. Shame on previous editors for allowing this article to represent a smear of Public Relations in favor of Maxxam.

Norcalal 07:10, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I was actually impressed by the work you've done on this article until I read the above comments. You don't have to denigrate other editors to create a good article. Pairadox (talk) 09:42, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

There were shameful, despicable lies in this article. The suffering that has occurred in this heartbreaking saga of Pacific Lumber since 1985 gets to me. So when I saw the condition of the article I could barely contain myself. Please try and forgive me for being both passionate and human. Sadly the cost to Humboldt County on multiple levels far exceeds my own emotional pain. Thanks for helping me put it into perspective. I hope that a new chapter in this sad story can begin this spring. Norcalal 19:00, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

History Section Added

I have begun with a basic history section. I primarily relied on the PALCO website for the matters that are factual. I did not hold with the idea that they completely removed the Murphy family from the Company's past, which no historian can allow. Also, the information from the company going forward from 1985 leaves out the controversy and paints itself as a great steward. To say that is disputable is an understatement. The section is a beginning. Also I have rewritten the Intro and added a standard company infobox. For the most part the two original sections remain, but those need reconstructing. Some facts will do well to be added into the history and the Environmental issues will need to be re-developed from the ground up. What existed previous to this contained misinformation on the highest level. Mature editing cannot tolerate such activity. This article will mature. I hope persons who approach this will work to consider all sides despite bias. Norcalal 20:15, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Infobox title

I've noticed on both this article's infobox and Mendocino Lumber Co, article's box the title is the acronym with the full name underneath. I propose reversing that as I think it is more professional to state the full name of subject in the infobox. And to be honest I dislike shorthand as it's easy to forget what the letters stand for if it is not commonly used (unlike FEMA or NASA for example).
I'm currently reading the HCP/SYP which describe the MMCA, NSOCA, etc etc. :) Any questions? 66.52.142.4 (talk) 17:10, 17 September 2008 (UTC)User:Marcia Wright

OF course, feel free to ahead and change it. You may not know this but the Maxxam people did officially change it to PALCO. In the old days the firm was affectionately known as good ole "PL"...but those days are gone...I am waiting the appeals mess in October to make some major changes in the article. Thanks for suggesting it before just doing it. Norcalal 05:49, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Appellate Court decision

The fifth circuit decision Monday partially reversed and remanded he bankruptcy judge's confirmation of the reorganization plan. I haven't yet had a chance to read through the decision and make the appropriate changes here, except for the note at the top. I deleted a bit speculating on how the appeals courts wouldn't reverse -- we can now say what the appellate court did do. --Christofurio (talk) 13:31, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Very biased

The section on protests is overwhelmingly biased in favor of the earth first! movement. Every person in my family lost their jobs, I lost my home and a beautiful town was destroyed. These protesters stood at local stores and stations begging for money and food, they blocked roads so my children could not go to school, they hung themselves from flagpoles and climbed on the roofs of our historical buildings. Our husbands and brothers were spit on,cursed and had objects thrown at them on their way to work. Many good men were hurt or worse because of the spiking of trees and other little tricks the protesters would do. I am not qualified to make the changes to this article, as my prejudices run the opposite direction. But if someone with the scholarly qualifications could please even out the field. It is not mentioned that one of the two victims of the car bomb was implicated in the bombing of a sawmill. It is also not mentioned that the unfortunate fellow who was killed by a falling tree had climbed a locked fence and hiked two miles into privately owned property. Perhaps it would be nice to see a sidebar about the almost 5,000 acres of old growth redwoods that PL donated as park land for the state to enjoy. You know, the same old growth trees every protester had to drive through to get to the "last old growth tree". Any change is good, thank you for my opportunity to rant.LdyPharoah (talk) 03:11, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

POV

I concur some portions of this article might benefit from POV editing; but it isn't helpful to simply place a POV tag on a large article with no talk page explanation. Secrecy associated with 20th century business practices seems to have obscured many facts of interest, while the importance of this firm to both local living conditions and international lumber markets has produced a number of somewhat polarized depictions to choose from. I hope someone will identify a specific section (specific statements would be even better) with suggestion for deletion (if the statement has no in-line reference citation) or suggested alternative references presenting a better balanced viewpoint (or at least the alternative perspective).Thewellman (talk) 15:37, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Here are some of the statements in the article that led me to flag it as needing POV editing:

"Pacific Lumber has been at the center of multiple controversies since a hostile takeover by Maxxam, Inc. (of Texas), that was completed in 1986, changing its status from stable employer to one of controversy and finally instability."

"The company maintains that it is still a sustainable operation, but its policies and practices bear little resemblance to those before 1986."

"In 1975, PALCO was listed on the New York Stock Exchange.[8] In a decade, this move would cause the undoing of the venerable company and its practices and traditions."

"That explosion, and the subsequent misinformation attacks on Judi and Darryl by the FBI and Oakland police"

"The bomber was never found, because the FBI never conducted a serious investigation, choosing instead to accuse Judi Bari of planting the bomb under the driver's seat of her own car."

"to protest the deforestation of the redwood region in Northern California, which was being decimated by Maxxam"

"The bomb which nearly killed her was preceded and followed by a smear campaign against Earth First!, carried out by the FBI, which tried to charge Darryl and Judi for the bombing, and tried to brand the deep ecology group Earth First! as a terrorist organization. This misinformation campaign was largely successful."

75.111.17.22 (talk) 01:16, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Eric Jackson

Very biased? Not so much. Of note is that the specifics above are from an "editor" who has no account herein. Secondly, the first three lines in the list above turned out to be factual and are born out by history. I stated it before and I will state it again, when I first began editing the article, it looked like Mary Bullwinkle, the public spokeswoman, for PALCO (during the height of the Maxxim era, if you will) or a staff person of hers had been writing the article here unchallenged. I am not well-versed in the exact details of the matters of the war between environmental persons/organizations and the company after early 1986 but one thing is for certain, Stanwood Murphy's company, the one that invented selective cutting in the 1930s, had been radically changed and that fact did not sit well with those who cared for the environment and they did something about it. Their actions, radical ones, in more than some instances, are no more defensible than the behavior of Mr. Hurwitz or John Campbell for that matter. What happened was that a very stable company was raped following 1985-86 and the eventual result was bankruptcy. And yes, I know that even Mrs. Murphy (Woody and Warren's mother went along with the sale, so it may be argued that the "takeover" was an agreed sell-out...its so sad that the elder Murphy died of a heart attack prematurely when Woody was quite young. One wonders had he lived if things might have gone differently. But whatever, that is all musing now. The records from the bankruptcy and many other sources show all this detail. The fact that much of approximately 25,000 acres of virgin growth old-growth Redwood that the company had in 1985-86 (the largest amount in private hands that late in history) was logged and are gone (before Headwaters Forest was agreed to and paid for with about a half billion dollars of tax payer money) is a fact as those forests largely are no more. They simply do not exist. Otherwise the world's largest redwood mill in Scotia would still be running. This is entirely because the amount of logging was tripled and quadrupled in the years after Hurwitz took over the company combined with the Headwaters purchase, and, of course, the minuscule remainder of old-growth Humboldt Redwood has today. By the way they have agreed NOT to log any old-growth redwood trees over a certain size, PERIOD. And, so far, they have kept their word, impeccably, which is why you have not heard any squawking from the environmental groups. Bravo for the Fischer family and their managers. I am from a logging/trucking family with roots in Humboldt County reaching back to the 1850s, whose operations in the industry continue to this day. I have some perspective on the matter not to mention first hand accounts and information. However, none of that matters much in the actual article since original research is not allowed for good reasons. I will follow with citations in the article. I will also watch VERY carefully for whitewash and be certain that the matter is handled in a fair and balanced manner as is my (and everyone else's) privilege as an editor herein. One more thing: I see reference above to PL gifting Old-growth in the amount of 5,000 acres. I would like to see a citation on that, thank you very much. In the early days of the conservation and preservation movement -- the 1920s and 1930s -- the Save The Redwoods League, based in San Francisco, bought, yes, BOUGHT thousands of acres from PALCO and helped establish, YES ESTABLISH the very magnificent (now cash starved) California State Parks system. When you drive through Humboldt Redwoods State Park (and other groves and parks) in Southern Humboldt please note that much of that was PURCHASED at market rate, YES MARKET RATE by the SAVE THE REDWOODS LEAGUE from PALCO in the early 20th Century through careful negotiations between the league and the Murphy family. There was no gift involved. It was a business deal...cold, hard cash for redwoods. It was amazing because the interests in SF were horrified to see so much cut-over land in the environs in all directions near the SF Bay Area that they had to come all the way to Humboldt to find sizable intact, complete Redwood biospheres to work to preserve. Thankfully they did. Thank Goodness that the old PL under the Murphy family was willing to do business with the League, otherwise we would have less than the precious little we have now of the majestic old-growth redwoods to enjoy and leave to future generations. There was NEVER more than 2.1 million acres of Coast Redwoods to begin with and we have only a scant 5% left as virgin old-growth, that is barely more than 100,000 acres. 81,500 of those acres are in parks, and in 2005 just over 23,000 acres were in private hands. That means that Hurwitz logged, in about 20 years (if we remove about 7,000 acres from the total and allow for remaining acreage that the Fischers have), OVER 10% (conservatively) and maybe up to 15% of the remaining old-growth redwood REMAINING on earth. No wonder the environmentalists were upset. The Redwood was/is an amazing and beautiful building material. But after 165 years of logging, the party has long been over. Its over. Its just over. PL is gone. The final chapter of that most famous of Redwood companies was controversial and heartbreaking. How ANYONE can deny that would be beyond me. But the facts litter the internet and books from Humboldt to Houston and from Scotia to New York and beyond. Take a look and you will see... Norcalal (talk) 05:42, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Suggest removal of the POV tag from this article in the absence of suggested reference sources for a more balanced or alternative POV.Thewellman (talk) 10:02, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I've added a section boundary (in this talk page) to make it clearer that the person who added the POV tag (myself) is not the same as the person who added the previous comment ("Very Biased"). Also, I'm not sure why I should be required to do the extensive research required to find alternative reference sources in order to tag an article as lacking neutral POV. For example, I don't see how anyone could dispute that a term like "smear campaign" is laden with a certain point-of-view. Is it really necessary to find an alternative reference source in order to establish that?