Protesters Are Living in a Tree to Prevent Construction of a Golf Course

[billchao]

http://www.golfdigest.com/blogs/the-loop/2015/03/golf-course-protestors-live-in-trees-new-orleans.html

Quote:

A new $24.5 million golf course is set to be built in the heart of New Orleans. Sounds great, right? Well, not to many protesters living in the area.

Two people took their unhappiness with the project to the extreme by living in a tree on the property in an effort to halt construction, according to WDSU News . Supporters told WDSU that the man, who would only be identified as "Lloyd," and the woman, who would only be identified as "Heart," have been living in a tree in City Park since Friday.

Heart finally caved on Tuesday afternoon and came down. She was cheered by gathered protestoes.

"We need to start caring for ourselves and nature is part of that," she said. "So let's be bold and take care of everything, everyone."

But Lloyd remains in the tree. We're guessing he's not a big golfer.

I think it's great that they're using their right to protest, but this seems poorly planned. Just how long did they think they could live in a tree, anyway?

This is my favorite part of the article:

Quote:

"To privatize this and make it solely for golf, I mean, I don't know how someone else can think that's not ridiculous and hilarious," said protestor Rebecca Kaplan.

However, the land was formerly part of the City Park Golf Complex before Hurricane Katrina flooded the area.

I guess she has a pretty short memory

[Rynrem]

Explain to Lloyd and Heart that NO is simply restoring the land to the beauty it once was, offer them a job as caretakers of the trees, bushes, and other natural vegetation that's will be on the course...as it sure sounds like they don't have a job at the present time.  If they refuse, arrest them for trespassing.

[dkolo]

http://www.golfdigest.com/blogs/the-loop/2015/03/golf-course-protestors-live-in-trees-new-orleans.html

I think it's great that they're using their right to protest, but this seems poorly planned. Just how long did they think they could live in a tree, anyway?

This is my favorite part of the article:

I guess she has a pretty short memory

Mark them as Ground Under Repair and build it around them.

[jsgolfer]

http://www.golfdigest.com/blogs/the-loop/2015/03/golf-course-protestors-live-in-trees-new-orleans.html

I think it's great that they're using their right to protest, but this seems poorly planned. Just how long did they think they could live in a tree, anyway?

This is my favorite part of the article:

I guess she has a pretty short memory

Quote:

"To privatize this and make it solely for golf, I mean, I don't know how someone else can think that's not ridiculous and hilarious," said protestor Rebecca Kaplan.

However, the land was formerly part of the City Park Golf Complex before Hurricane Katrina flooded the area.

This is the worst quote, someone owns this land and paid money for it.  Too many people like this lady,  just don't get that this land is someone else's and they can't comprehend that someone wants to make money off the property that they buy.  If you don't want anyone to build a golf course, buy the damn land yourself and set it up as a trust for the enjoyment of the people.

[Golfingdad]

Quote:

"To privatize this and make it solely for golf, I mean, I don't know how someone else can think that's not ridiculous and hilarious," said protestor Rebecca Kaplan.

However, the land was formerly part of the City Park Golf Complex before Hurricane Katrina flooded the area.

This is the worst quote, someone owns this land and paid money for it.  Too many people like this lady,  just don't get that this land is someone else's and they can't comprehend that someone wants to make money off the property that they buy.  If you don't want anyone to build a golf course, buy the damn land yourself and set it up as a trust for the enjoyment of the people.

While I basically agree with you in this case, remember that it's not true in a lot of cases.  The whole "it's my property, I can do what I please" idea is incorrect.  There are Zoning issues, Deed Restrictions, Easements, etc, and all of that stuff has a bearing on what can be done on your property.

I'm working on a project right now where they own about 0.7 acres, but they are forbidden from basically even touching about 85% of that due to it being within a "preservation easement."

[jsgolfer]

While I basically agree with you in this case, remember that it's not true in a lot of cases.  The whole "it's my property, I can do what I please" idea is incorrect.  There are Zoning issues, Deed Restrictions, Easements, etc, and all of that stuff has a bearing on what can be done on your property.

I'm working on a project right now where they own about 0.7 acres, but they are forbidden from basically even touching about 85% of that due to it being within a "preservation easement."

From what I'm reading that isn't the case in this issue.  Now, as an Engineer (who has to deal with County and State Regulations daily), I could write an entire rant on whether the ordinances are worthwhile but that would fill up another thread.

[billchao]

This is the worst quote, someone owns this land and paid money for it.  Too many people like this lady,  just don't get that this land is someone else's and they can't comprehend that someone wants to make money off the property that they buy.  If you don't want anyone to build a golf course, buy the damn land yourself and set it up as a trust for the enjoyment of the people.

@Golfingdad touched on a lot of good points, so I'll just add that lawful, non-violent protest is a good thing. There are lots of good reasons to protest land development. Even though I like golf, I'd probably be against building a golf course if there were envrionmental concerns, for example. Just because someone owns that property doesn't mean they can or should be allowed to do whatever they want with it. Either way, it's a poorly planned stunt, since the developers can easily build the golf course around the one tree the guy is living in.

[jsgolfer]

@Golfingdad touched on a lot of good points, so I'll just add that lawful, non-violent protest is a good thing. There are lots of good reasons to protest land development. Even though I like golf, I'd probably be against building a golf course if there were envrionmental concerns, for example. Just because someone owns that property doesn't mean they can or should be allowed to do whatever they want with it.

Either way, it's a poorly planned stunt, since the developers can easily build the golf course around the one tree the guy is living in.

At some point you have to be able to do something with your property other than looking at it.  Otherwise what's the sense of buying it.

[imsys0042]

At least Trump isn't involved.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Forbes_(farmer)

[David in FL]

At least Trump isn't involved.     [URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Forbes_(farmer)]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Forbes_(farmer)[/URL]

Trump would have just cut down the tree. Problem solved. :-D

[imsys0042]

Trump would have just cut down the tree. Problem solved.

If a tree falls down that Donald cut down in a forest, does the wind blow his wig off?

[Golfingdad]

From what I'm reading that isn't the case in this issue.  Now, as an Engineer (who has to deal with County and State Regulations daily), I could write an entire rant on whether the ordinances are worthwhile but that would fill up another thread.

Right, which is why I said "I agree with you in this case." I was just pointing out that that certainly isn't always the case.  Obviously, since you're an engineer (I didn't know that at the time) you already know all of that.

[Lihu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by billchao

http://www.golfdigest.com/blogs/the-loop/2015/03/golf-course-protestors-live-in-trees-new-orleans.html

I think it's great that they're using their right to protest, but this seems poorly planned. Just how long did they think they could live in a tree, anyway?

This is my favorite part of the article:

I guess she has a pretty short memory

Mark them as Ground Under Repair and build it around them.

Nah, they're definitely "loose impediments". . .

[dkolo]

Nah, they're definitely "loose impediments". . .

Haha, one could argue they're temporary immovable obstructions, but let's roll with it.

[Pretzel]

@Golfingdad touched on a lot of good points, so I'll just add that lawful, non-violent protest is a good thing. There are lots of good reasons to protest land development. Even though I like golf, I'd probably be against building a golf course if there were envrionmental concerns, for example. Just because someone owns that property doesn't mean they can or should be allowed to do whatever they want with it. Either way, it's a poorly planned stunt, since the developers can easily build the golf course around the one tree the guy is living in.

Protests are fine, provided that they don't break the law in the process. I'm surprised they weren't arrested and fined by police for trespassing if it was private property. As to how it should be dealt with, play it as it lies! If you land in their breakfast though, would it be a "fried egg" lie?

[newtogolf]

Clearly Lloyd and Heart have a lot of free time on their hands.

[imsys0042]

Clearly Lloyd and Heart have a lot of free time on their hands.

Whatever your politics are, it's got to be funny to think of the phrase "tree huggers".

[newtogolf]

Whatever your politics are, it's got to be funny to think of the phrase "tree huggers".

I'm all for legal and organized protesting but it seems to have gotten out of hands these days.  You also have to question their level of commitment to the cause if she couldn't even last a week.