Stop California REDD Now!

Apr 26, 2013 by


Citizens of the World,


Please sign this petition to Stop California REDD, which is the model for doing REDD throughout the world.

Make history by rejecting this market-based, land grabbing false solution to climate change which is bad for the planet, bad for people and does not really protect forests.


Stop California REDD! Stop REDD Worldwide!


DEADLINE May 7, 2013: 3pm U.S. EDT (GMT: 19:00/7:00 PM)

Stop California REDD Now!

This petition is now closed.

End date: May 07, 2013
Signatures collected: 691
Signature goal: 10000
691 signatures

Learn More at:

Read: Open letter to the Government of California from organizations and Activists based in Acre, Brazil

Read: Open letter to the government of California – (Spanish and Portuguese Language included)

No REDD, A Reader ~ Download/Read: English Bajar version en Espanol

Related Posts


Share This

9 comments on “Stop California REDD Now!

  1. KD Wright AKA twodogkd on said:

    We live in Riverside, CA. The pollution and particulate matters and gases from vehicles is very bad. Our City, once know as the City of Trees is losing trees at least in our neighborhood. Our urban forester is putting in urban trees, read big bushes while real trees that help our air are being removed.

    I agree with the petition to protect the trees in our parks and forests and rural areas. I strongly believe trees should be protected in urban areas as well.

    In our family, living on a busy street near the intersection of the intersection of 3 major arterials, we have had FOUR family members with CANCER, two who have died and the other two who would be dead but their cancers were accidentially caught early enough that after 4 operations total between the two they are still alive. One death from a heart attack which may have been caused or contributed to by the bad air quality, particulate matters, diesel trucks that Riverside City Council continues to allow to drive down the residential part of an arterial without regard or concern about human safety. Those trucks I believe are through trucks with no local destination, but our City Council could care less, I believe they want to cater to special interests so let the trucks ruin our street, damage our health, and impair our safety.

    I just hope that the lack of concern of our local government is not repeated by our state and federal government officials, and that at the State and Federal levels action is taken to protect our trees. Without good air we will not be here long on Earth. Think about that.

    Karen Doris Wright.

  2. anonymous on said:

    Remember, it’s THE PEOPLE, not the government, who have the power, who can and must return the power back to themselves.

    Once you accept the truth that you “government” is not your friend and sees you, the rest of the people, in this country as expendable, we can begin to reclaim our power.

    The secret of change is to focus all your energy not on fighting the old, but on buiding the new.

    Speak out, starve the system, and rebuild.

  3. Eric Manolito on said:

    In support

  4. Kit Robinson on said:

    REDD and REDD+ as it exists is essentially just colonialism and greenwash for consumerism in the west. Empower the indigenous people to manage their own resources and get better outcomes for all!

  5. johannes on said:

    Please think twice before signing this petition! When deciding on such an important issue for our planet and launching a public campaign then, as a concerned global citizen, I strongly believe it is important to provide real arguments and not mislead potential signatories through simplistic statements not backed up by real-world evidence.

    “land grabbing … bad for the planet, bad for people …does not really protect forests”?
    1) land: Most REDD projects, and certainly those certified under credible standards, work with local landholders and communities to protect the forests they already manage, very often actively strengthening their land titles or land use rights in face of competing destructive land uses (illegal logging, agriculture etc.). Please see detailed Project Design Documents like those audited under the Climate Community and Biodiversity Alliance (CCBA).
    2) people & planet: Such responsible projects protect rapidly disappearing biodiversity, soil resources, the air, and our climate (the planet). All this is rigorously measured, monitored and certified follwing very detailed and individually approved methodlogies. CCBA certification also means the creation of community benefits, e.g. by providing jobs or by maintaining the very resources their livelihoods depend on (forests and their products).
    3) forest: In order to gain carbon offset credits under credible standards – currently the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS), in the future a California approved protocol – projects or jurisdictions have to demonstrate actually achieved performance through monitoring reports (using satellite imagery and field measurements) which are independently verified. In the same way, all currently issued VCS offset credits are based on proven protection of otherwise disappearing forest.

    No one suggests replacing the responsibility for our emissions and those producing the products we consume (such as fuel, electricity) with cheap actions elsewhere. California’s regulation requires the vast majority of reductions to occur in these polluting industries. A small percentage could be achieved elsewhere, and in an independently verified way, and with the potential to create very real additional benefits for planet and people.

    If we want to fight for our planet, its forests and local communities, then we need to proactively and constructively develop solutions. There will always be bad examples and issues to point to in all and any approach, and we have to learn from these and prevent them from being repeated. This is why rigorous third-party standards have been developed (such as the CCBA and VCS) by a community of conservationists and project developers. Let’s look at what works and support and help improve those solutions.

    We are losing irreplaceable tropical forests three times the area of San Francisco every DAY. Let’s work together to reverse this trend. And let’s agree on solutions based on constructive arguments and providing the necessary information.

    Warm wishes.

    • Patrick Kamotho on said:

      Johannes,Bro.You are very wrong in regards to REDD+ You can defend the objectives of this 21st conmanship,to Americans and EU Countries but do you nknow whats happening in Africa specifically Kenya-Tana Delta curently about 200 people have lost their lives and thousands displaced by multi nationals leasing land for REDD+ related activities,Mau Forest in Kenya thousands have been evicted as of lat year in neighboring countries Uganda and DR Congo,thousands cntinues to free their country due to implementation of REDD+ projects.Mr Johannes do you know of something called Carbon Market.its market where multin nationals trade on carbon offsets,in Kenya all major forets have been patented by the same multi nationals,so we are in Kenya but we cannot participate in Carbon trade.Do you stil want more proof.?

      • johannes on said:

        Dear Patrick,
        thank you for your response. I do find it astonishing how there is a tendency of ascribing so many things that are wrong in the world in terms of conflicts over resources and ill-conceived conservation to REDD. I am not an expert on Kenya, though I have worked on many REDD projects in Africa and elsewhere. While there seem to be real human tragedies involved in the examples to cite, it struggle to see how these have to do with any ongoing REDD activities or projects, rather than with unrelated resource use conflicts and conservation initiatives.

        In fact, any REDD project looking for offset buyers today (and therefore having to be certified under the standards I quote) needs to demonstrate that there is no eviction of people and in fact ‘free prior and informed consent’ of local people, precisely to avoid these kind of things happening.

        On your question – yes, I do know carbon markets quite well which is why I pointed to the safeguards in place in my previous post. While it is clear that some early ‘carbon cowboys’ were not overly concerned about such consultations, those activities would never stand a chance of generating offset credits in the carbon market that exists today. The only actually verified REDD projects (VCS and CCB Standards) in Kenya are the Kasigau Corridor projects. You write “in Kenya all major forets have been patented by the same multi nationals” – yes, I would indeed want more proof on that…

        It is blatantly obvious that indigenous peoples and local communities have often suffered from so-called economic development, land grabs, forest destruction by companies, even eviction for conservation. Responsible REDD projects are designed to counter these same threats. Please read some of the very actual public project documentation on this – and be aware of the risk of reading biased “anti-capitalist” news coverage that ascribes all kinds of unrelated ills to an imperfect but promising new mechanism for protecting forest and respect local people.


  6. Wondimu Utto Tang on said:

    REED is not the only problem of California,but also it is defacing the right solutions for Changing Climate. We, indigenous people,are completely reject the theme of REED. Don’t naive us!!!

  7. Wondimu Utto Tang on said:

    The REED does mean none of solutions for changing Climate. Even it is assumed to be further burden on Global Warming. REED is leasing of air,land,forest, biodiversity,ecology as whole adversely;for Haves and against not haves.
    No REED!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


HTML tags are not allowed.