Rainforest Ship Blockaded And Picketed
  
The Blockade
At 6:15am on 12 November 1990, the Melbourne Rainforest Action Group (RAG)
blockaded the Alam Teladan as it travelled up the Yarra River into Melbourne. 
It was the sixteenth rainforest timber ship blockade undertaken by the group. 
The ship had previously been blockaded by Brisbane RAG activists on 30 October
and painted by Sydney RAG activists on 6 November.
 
There were about seventy people at the action in Melbourne, forty-four of whom
went into the water - either swimming or on surfboards.  Activists entered the
water from the public wharf adjacent to Harbour Control carrying a white fence
picket and formed a picket line directly in front of the ship.  This was
intended to draw attention to the seventy-two hour picket due to commence once
the ship had been unloaded.  Several surfers attempted to ride the (small) bow
wave and two swimmers managed to bowride the vessel.  It was the fifth time
that we have been able to get activists onto the bow.
 
The ship was carrying rainforest timbers from South East Asia and was
chartered by the Kansai Steamship Company of Japan.

The Picket
After six months of careful planning, the first 'Save the Rainforests' picket
began at 7:30am on Friday 16 November 1990 at Victoria Dock.  Three days
later, when the picket concluded, not one truck had crossed the picket line. 
As a result of union bans imposed by the Seamen's Union of Australia (SUA) and
the Waterside Workers' Federation (WWF), and the interruption caused by the
picket, delays on the Alam Teladan shipment into Melbourne exceeded seven
days.
 
Coordination of the picket had been undertaken by a Melbourne RAG working
group which supported collectives active in seven areas: unions, liaison,
networking, registration, support, media and the action.

Unions
The union group liaised with fourteen unions involved in the rainforest timber
trade or around the dock area, including the WWF, the SUA, the Australian
Workers' Union (AWU) and the Transport Workers' Union (TWU). Meetings with
union executives and subsequent letters asked for official recognition of the
picket, the opportunity for RAG members to discuss the issue with
rank-and-file members and for the union to request Victorian Trades Hall
Council endorsement of the picket. Unions were also offered an article for the
union newsletter.

In the end, only the TWU decided to recognize the picket; and this was largely
because it is State Branch policy to recognize any picket!  The strength of
TWU support for the picket had waned considerably - partly because of the
disastrous state of the transport industry in Australia - since the original
discussions with the union in May.

Liaison
The liaison group had organised meetings with Kooris, the police, the Port of
Melbourne Authority (PMA), port security officials, the shipping agent
(Hetherington-Kingsbury) and legal advisers.  These meetings were used to
explain the details of our action and, with the exception of the meeting with
Kooris, to gain information regarding the logistics and legal implications of
the picket.  A legal briefing paper was prepared as a result of these
meetings.
 
In addition, letters were written to the Kansai Steamship Company, their
agent, the five companies in the ANRO shipping consortium, Conaust (the
stevedoring company), the Port Philip Sea Pilots, and about forty timber
merchants and fifteen trucking companies.  These letters outlined our concerns
and invited each group to withdraw from their role in the rainforest timber
trade.
 
So far, one company, Armour Timber & Trading Pty. Ltd., has written to advise
us that they will "substitute plantation pine against our current use and
sales of South East Asian rainforest timbers".

Networking
The networking group (which really functioned with only one active member)
wrote letters to other activist groups, distributed copies of our picket
leaflet, organised display of the picket poster and arranged speakers for
interested groups.
 
Although there was a pleasing turnout of new people at the picket, there was
virtually no support from established environment groups.  The International
Socialist Organisation was well represented and helped organize the 'picket
party' on the second night.

Registration
The registration group organised equipment for the picket site (including a
caravan, tents, tables and chairs), the roster of picketers, the information
stall (including 'picketers' kits'), donation bucket, first aid and access to
bathroom facilities.
 
While lack of commitment to the roster timetable and insufficient people to
formally brief new picketers were weaknesses, the core group of people at the
picket ensured that the picket was staffed at all times and new people were
made welcome.

Support
The support team organised food, drink, childcare and the sleeping
arrangements and while this was another area where the burden fell on too few
people, the support was superb throughout the duration of the picket.  Because
there were no arrests, jail and legal support were not needed for this picket.

Media
Ten days prior to the picket, the media group rang the major news
organisations in Melbourne and dispatched a twelve-page media kit.  They
arranged for a mobile telephone to be located at the picket site (to guarantee
easy access for reporters) and issued a news release the day before the picket
started. Regular reports of the picket were also posted on Pegasus - the
Australian link in the global computer network for activists.
 
The media group also organised letter writing stalls. Some letters were sent
to the TWU thanking them for recognizing the picket.  Others were sent to the
two largest timber merchants - Timbersales and Gunnersens - encouraging them
to withdraw from the trade.  This activity had significant impact.

Action
The action group undertook reconnaissance tasks at the dock and handed
leaflets to truck drivers and other unionists during the unloading of the
previous two Kansai shipments in July and September.  This also provided more
detailed information regarding which timber merchants and trucking companies
were involved in the trade.
 
The action group planned the picket format and arranged banners and placards. 
The group also organized roleplays, entertainment (including the 'picket
party') and the peacekeeping team.  As it turned out, the picket went smoothly
and the peacekeepers had no problems.

Down at the dock
The first picket was designed to rely on moral suasion and education and had
four main goals.  Firstly, it was intended to educate people about Australia's
role in rainforest destruction through its imports of rainforest timbers. 
Secondly, the picket was designed to mobilize more people to get actively
involved in the campaign.  Thirdly, it was designed to compel trade unionists,
timber merchants, trucking companies and others to seriously ponder their role
in rainforest destruction.  And fourthly, it was hoped that we could delay the
removal of the timber.
 
On the first morning, our focussing circle included a news conference, a
description of picket logistics, an explanation of our nonviolent philosophy
and another role play.  We also organised pairs of activists to speak with the
drivers.  Once the gates opened at 7:30am and the timber quarantine officer
indicated that the timber had been cleared, the fifty activists - including
several school students - waited expectantly.
 
After two hours, during which time many trucks collecting steel and other
vehicles were let through, it became clear that the timber trucks were not
coming, although we were not sure why.  As a result, a mood of celebration
started to swell.  The two television crews gave up waiting and informed us
that without a truck crossing the picket line, the story was not newsworthy! 
Sympathetic newspaper reporters and photographers told us the same thing
during the next couple of days.
 
As it turned out, for the three day duration of the picket, not one timber
truck crossed the picket line.  Throughout the picket the atmosphere was happy
and friendly.  Many new people came down because they had seen a picket poster
or heard reports of the picket on the radio.  The maximum number of people on
the picket line at any one time was about fifty (at the beginning and during
the 'picket party') and there was usually between fifteen and thirty during
the day and as few as about ten overnight.
 
One highlight of the picket was the presence on several occasions of the
Indian satyagrahi Dr. K. Arunachalam, who worked with Mahatma Gandhi for
twenty years.  In Australia as part of a tour to investigate the progress of
nonviolent revolution in this part of the world, Arunachalam - who is a
supporter of the Chipko andolan (tree hugging movement) in India - was keen to
'offer resistance' to rainforest destruction by his personal presence at the
picket.
 
At 7:30am on the third morning, the first picket ended as planned.  We
arranged a complete clean-up of the site and various other follow-up tasks. 
Importantly, several people remained to thank the truck drivers, inform them
that we would be back next time and to find out who had made the decision to
not send trucks down to the dock during the picket.

An evaluation
The picket was never reported on television or in 'The Age' - Melbourne's
respected daily broadsheet.  The only daily newspaper reports were contained
in the Murdoch tabloid which ignored all the information we gave them and
quoted spokespeople for our opponents.  A spokesperson for the Australian
Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) said we were "grandstanding and depriv[ing]
people of their jobs"; a spokesperson for the Victorian Association of Forest
Industries (VAFI) said "these bans are expensive for Australia"; and a
spokesperson for the Australian Timber Workers' Union said they would break
the picket to allow the shipment's distribution!  Radio reports about the
picket were generally very favourable.
 
Given the highly favourable news reports Melbourne RAG has received in its
campaign so far (and the support expressed by individual journalists at the
picket site), it seems logical to assume that this media treatment reflects
increasing concern on the part of vested interests that our campaign is
proving effective.  Given the Building Workers' Industrial Union ban on the
use of rainforest timber on construction sites, the decisions by three major
plywood manufacturers (Hancock Bros, Ralph Symonds and Big River Timbers) to
not use rainforest timber in the manufacture of plywood, the decision not to
use rainforest timber by two local councils (Diamond Valley and St. Kilda),
the increasingly widespread consumer boycott and now the withdrawal by the
Armour Timber company from the trade, this concern is well founded.
 
It is evident from information gleaned in discussions with the truck drivers
and from subsequent telephone conversations with the largest merchant, the
largest trucking company, the shipping agent, the TWU and the PMA, that the
timber merchants decided not to remove the rainforest timber during the
picket.  Apart from a couple of owner-drivers who rang the TWU for advice
about what to do, it is clear that other drivers were not ordered to collect
the shipment or were given other work.
 
Whether the decision was made to avoid a 'confrontation', to avoid publicity
or for some other reason, we have not been able to clearly establish. 
Whatever the reason, the picket achieved each of its goals and had a
significant impact on the industry.  This is evident by virtue of the fact
that there was clearly a coordinated industry decision to not send trucks to
the dock during the picket; a decision which presumably could only have
resulted from considerable industry dialogue.
 
One measure of the impact of the picket came in the closing words of a
telephone conversation with the state manager of a large timber merchant
following the picket.  His words went something like the following: "I've now
got a collection of letters about rainforests from school kids".  The tone of
his voice was reflective.

Robert J. Burrowes