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