"We have an evil government," says Patagonia founder Yvon Chouinard…
One of the most enduring stories in surf, and certainly its most heart warming, is climber Yvon Chouinard and the company he founded in 1973 called Patagonia.
If you want to fall under Yvon’s spell, read this profile piece from The New Yorker a few years back.
A few things about Patagonia.
They donate 10 percent of profits to various charities, they do this thing on Black Friday where they donate total profits to grassroots environmental organisations (in 2016 it was ten million dollars), used Patagonia gear can be traded-in via their Worn Wear website and, true to its central coast roots, has its office and flagship store in Ventura.
Lately, the company has become, rightly I think, enraged by the American president’s approach towards his country’s radically diverse and therefore important to protect environment.
Last December, Patagonia declared war on the US government and Trump with a lawsuit in response to “his proclamations of reducing the Bears Ears National Monument by 85% and the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument by almost 50%. Patagonia is suing over the interpretation of the Property Clause of the U.S. Constitution in which the country vests Congress with the power to manage federal lands. The company’s CEO, Rose Marcario, contends that when Congress passed the Antiquities Act of 1906, it did not give any president the power to reverse a prior president’s monument designations.”
In a recent profile in GQ magazine, the Patagonia v Trump war is given lavish coverage.
“I asked Chouinard about the lawsuit and his personal feelings about Trump. He thought for a moment, perhaps to contain himself. “What pisses me off about this administration is that they’re all these ‘climate deniers’—well, that’s bullshit. They know what’s happening. What they’re doing is purposely not doing anything about climate for the sake of making more money.” He paused, bowed his head, and scraped his fingernails on the table. He sat up again. “That is truly evil. That’s why I call this administration evil. They know what they’re doing, and they’re doing it to make more money.”
“Gradually, the conversation went even darker. About Trump, Chouinard added, “It’s like a kid who’s so frustrated he wants to break everything. That’s what we’ve got.” I asked sarcastically if any part of him was an optimist. Marcario, sitting next to him, laughed loudly. “Did you just ask Yvon if he’s an optimist?” Chouinard smiled and cocked his head. “I’m totally a pessimist. But you know, I’m a happy person. Because the cure for depression is action.”
“In December, Chouinard was invited to Washington to testify before the House Committee on Natural Resources. He refused. In a response Patagonia made public, Chouinard wrote to the committee chairman: The American people made it clear in public comments that they want to keep the monuments intact, but they were ignored by Secretary Zinke, your committee, and the administration. We have little hope that you are working in good faith with this invitation. To me, he scoffed and shook his head; Washington’s the kind of desert a man like him could get lost in. “You sit down in a little chair, and they’re up on high chairs looking down at you, and they give you two and a half minutes to give your testimony,” he said. “I’m not going to play that game.”
“It reminded me of how Chouinard had described his childhood, growing up in Burbank, facing off against teachers and bullies. When I asked him how it felt to be attacked by the administration, he laughed. “I’m stoked. If you’re not getting attacked, you’re not trying hard enough.”
It’s a helluva story about a helluva man. Read it all here.
fuck this boomer jew and all you pussies making surfing super corny and gay. bring back surf nazis!
Yvon Chouinard is a crazy old millionaire, who seems to think founding an adventure sports wear brand that manufactures its clothing in the most evil and monstrously polluting country in the world (China), gives him authority on the environment, or at least distracts from the fact that he’s a total hypocrite. He’s just acting as partisan hack, doing his two bits.
Bears Ears belonged to Utah and was being managed just fine. Obama unconstitutionally grabbed the land from the people and gifted it to the Feds, so unelected bureaucratic functionaries can make decisions about the lands of Utah from DC- the same brilliant types who “accidentally” spilled 1 million gallons of toxic orange wastewater into the Colorado river and seem to make a lot of decisions that bend money back to the beltway. The Feds own MOST of the west, they talk about the “Peoples Land,” but this is the new-speak- they took it from the people.
Trump has been systematically dismantling the power of the executive branch, pretty remarkable considering everyone seems to think he’s an authoritarian, and also the thing that angers the true totalitarians the most, because when they find themselves in office again, the federal executive will be significantly weaker and they won’t be able to torture us with their self-assured cupidity.
oh christ… please don’t bring your bullshit over here.
Yvon for Prez.
i don’t think so. much like permitting bigamy, that would be a municipal/local ordinance.
Not totally on topic. Visited Sayulita recently mostly out interest and intrigue as to why so people holiday there. Disgusting (do i really need to expand on this?). Left within a hour. Is this surfing now?
si
Maybe the cheap drugs? I dunno….want to see disgusting, check out Bali
I’m all for protecting the environment but I’ve heard their overpriced wetsuits suck.
I pitched to test them but could not get assigned. This made me sad, because I really wanted to know for sure the answer to this.
But why did he sue in the name of his company, not himself? Sounds like marketing to me. Why didn’t he use the opportunity to appear in front of the House Committee? It would have been an excellent forum to air his views.
a black Trump?
I live in the middle of one of these areas to lose protection. This is what is going to happen: https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
you need to focus on the job creation, that’s what its really all about
I got a job for you: Planting twolips.
i was joking. clearcutting is bullshit no matter how many lumberjacks object.
Too many people.
I like Patagonia’s social policies but I have never spent that kind of money on leisure wear. I honestly cannot fathom how people can be so wasteful with their money to pay $100 for a shirt.
I’ve typically had Patagonia stuff last long enough to even out the price. Like I wear it for enough years that it ends up not being ridiculous. Definitely some stuff they sell is like, ha ha, nope, though, for sure.
I agree, you might pay more but they seem to last forever.
i rock my down vest I got in 07
ha ha yeah — i have some fleece things that i’m not sure when i bought? but they’re still goin’
Better than global cooling thought right?
I’m always down for a fight. I’ve never been to Australia so I’ll just take your word on that. Back to the challenge to fight though. Let’s do it. I got some anger to get out. Where should we meet?
Right under the alleged hole in the ozone layer. Remember that one? I remember that one from grammar school, the hysterics, the propaganda. Global warming is the new hole in the ozone layer. The popular hysterical thing to get all bent over. I’m not a scientist, nor scholar, just a humble pirate.
I wonder how many barrels of oil it takes to make….um….let’s say 50 surfboards?
That doesn’t align right now with our agenda. Thusly, it doesn’t exist as a real fact, making it a non issue. Liberal thought process in its simplest form.
thank goodness we aren’t in control of a single branch of government right now, things are going swimmingly in our absence, eh?
Honestly bro, things are great for me and my business. I don’t watch, read, or keep up with the news. The grit is the only news source I read with any regularity so to formulate an opinion would taste a lie. The reason being, I can’t change it, make it stop, or divert the flow of the tide one way or another.
deregulation is generally good for business, in the short term. guess we’ll have to see how it all pans out. i’m not really a fan of policies that encourage offshoring of jobs, which have been been approved as readily by dems as republicans. hopefully wages will grow fast enough for people to afford domestically made products, but that would require a lot of people to get a substantial raise. i assume you are a business owner, have you been paying your guys more, now that things are going well?
Like I said I’m not versed enough to make a serious opinion. In my world it’s simple. Either you’re good or you’re not, that’s hasn’t changed in some time. Liberal or not. What is funny to me is how liberals dodge their own hypocrisy to point out another’s. I guess the same could be said for righties, the trend is, I see most righties tend to have their heads on straight and get work pays. Work for a liberal is not truly work, like it or not, your workers are voting for a living.
yeah, no beef here either. do you mean that people generally vote for their economic self-interest? because i do agree with you there. and that’s how this clown got into office. it’s not a zero-sum world though, your workers making more doesn’t have to mean there’s always less left for you.
Ow no, I’m all for my mates making more, that means I did well, and they did well. I always tell my guys do better than me, and encourage, even nurture that. I’m the first guy to stick my neck out and sign some paperwork or endorse a guy that wants it. Ya gotta earn that though, and it’s not easily handed out, nor free. As for the Don, yes, people voted for this clown out of anger. I persoanlly voted for him as he was the lesser of two evils. I’m not shocked by him or his actions though. He was the host of a T.V. show for crying out loud.
And it’s nothing personal bitter guy, I find you funny and like your input.
Exactly my approach.
Sustainable Surf can tell you that , but whats your point
1) that surfers are actually the grubbiest humans on the planet in that they still use toxic chemical cocktails to surf on?
2) because we use oil based products we cannot be critical of the negative affect this is having on the future liveability of the planet?
1.) No
2.) No
You can’t just go from fossil fuels to alternative energy overnight. The first step in doing so is removing ourselves from dependence on Saudi Arabia’s oil. That also accomplishes having less US national interests in the middle east, which is a good thing cause less military intervention. I believe that alternative energy will displace fossil fuels, eventually. For now, we need to mine minerals and fossil fuels here in order to survive the transition away from fossil fuels. A necessary evil as I see it. Look at it in terms of making a board. The work Sustainable Surf is doing can’t effectuate change overnight because there’s still too much demand for business as usual. And that’s okay.
we are now a net exporter of oil. we are not dependent on Saudi Arabia or any other boogeyman Muslims.
yes we remember the Ozone layer , we suffered here in Southern Australia for a decade , from November to March 20 mins in the sun would fry you , and we are he skin cancer capital of the world. Since the banning of CFC’s , guess what ….we are now able to go to the beach again as its slowly but surely returning to normal, so nothing Hysterical here !
Fried in 20 min? that’s because you ozzies got too much British blood in ya..
Actually I have never worn sunscreen so that 20 mins was me , nasty peeling and now all better….
I am impressed by the defiance to respond in Washington. It is understandable. Because the argument always gets muddied. We say the world is important and it needs looking after and someone says so what about jobs? Fuck working in a dying world.
read the book – had to revisit the cover. somebody dust-off the 25th amendment before Trump destroys humanity and the planet… somebody?
https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
The world is screwed i say…
Aquabumps gallery in Bondi is chargin $450 for a framed print of Derek going for a body bash this morning. Is that really worth 4 x Outerknown beanies D ?
Between you and me, did you pump out a quick 50 push-ups before de-robbing 😉
https://www.aquabumps.com/2…
https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
OK hoodies have increased in price now because of Kelly’s jetstar baggage fee and the fee to process his traffic infringement.
Congress has been bought and paid for. there’s no money in leaving things intact, just like there’s no money in not developing real estate or extracting fossil fuels, coal, or iron ore. this is why these lands have been set aside, because people understand the short term thinking that puts money in everyone’s pockets.
i’d think the millions they donate would offset that a bit but go ahead, reject the good until it becomes perfect
Patagonia guy needs to get over it. He’s not being bullied here. If that land in Utah was so f’n important to protect, why did no President do so until Obama. President Trump most certainly has the right to re-designate the boundaries of a national monument. Obama declared that land a national monument without congressional approval pursuant to the Antiquities Act. He did so in Hawaii too. And Alaska. Alaska passed a law telling Obama to go screw himself. States’ rights are very important. I’d be interested to hear how the Hawaiians feel about Obama reaching all the way across the Continental United States, across the Pacific Ocean and into the lands of Hawaiians telling them that land use is now restricted. For archeological purposes. So ‘research groups’ can siphon more tax dollars for archeological research that isn’t finding anything except coins in the pockets of researches. Fuck that. Enough is enough. It’s an antiquated law that no longer meets its intended purpose. That land has to be managed. The Dept of the Interior does not have the resources to deal with the management of this land. It’s better left to the States and private parties, not the Feds.
states/private parties (code for $/natural resource extraction). that’s like saying, “if national parks were so important, how come it took Teddy Roosevelt to figure it out”. an antiquated law? that should be replaced with what, free market principles? i can’t believe you think things will work out well if left to Congressmen and the special interests funding their campaigns. and don’t tell me the archaeology departments are lining anyone’s pockets. not in HI, not anywhere.
There’s a difference between a national monument designation and a national park. Under the law, a monument is only to be as big as is necessary to retain the archeological potential. There were two studies done at Utah universities (Utah State and Southern Utah) that showed these land designations hurt local economies and further strained the DOI with budgetary requirements. And guess what? There is so much shit we use in our daily lives that is petroleum based and petroleum derivative that we would seriously have to go back to wearing frickin animal skins to truly get away from our dependence. It’s not just about gas in your car.
man, this response was more predictable than even i had expected. long live oil. bury that head in the sand. everything is gonna work out great, global warming is a hoax foisted upon us by the academics. now i remember your shit about how consensus isn’t science.
“I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.
“Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.
“There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.
“In addition, let me remind you that the track record of the consensus is nothing to be proud of” – Michael Crichton MD –
find a doc that passed a board exam
I have a doctorate and passed my board exam. There. Is that enough?
then don’t quote guys that write fiction
Why not? He was Harvard educated, Harvard Medical School educated and existed in the ultra liberal Trump bashing world we know as Hollywood. He spoke at CalTech on the very subject matter we are debating. Global warming. He wrote his first book while a medical student and followed his passion. Smart motherfucker. Smarter than you. Smarter than I. I’m not here to convince you I’m right, and you’re wrong. I’m here to voice my opinion. I would appreciate the same respect.
“if its science, it isn’t consensus”? i’m commenting on your comment. you haven’t been disrespected. and you’re right, this is all Hollywood’s doing. wonder what Dr Oz thinks. i’ll take his word over Stephen Hawking’s.
I agree , “With great power, comes great responsibility , of keeping it real!” ….Spider-Man and Ali G!!
what about quoting a friction writer like Chas?
on climate change? not recommended.
Is what he says true? What does he mean by consensus? A general agreement?
Science is seldom hard facts anymore. Theories that are prooven are called proofs. This is the goal of most scientists, reaching a proof. Therefore Science is more intersted in delving deep into the world of theories.
Theories based on numerical models that are compared to verifiable data are most often the best we have until we have a proof. “Consensus science” is at most a clumsy way of expressing the notion that most scientitsts agree that this is the best theory we have at the moment.
Scientists strive to be the one to disprove a theory and have their theory replace one that already exists. If the new theory explains something 1 % better than the old theory then the old theory is “debunked” and consensus shifts to the new theory.
The “consensus science” thing really is a null argument and I’m not sure what MC MD’s point is.
bitter guy commented to me: “now i remember your shit about how consensus isn’t science.”
I was just responding to him giving me shit. Thought I’d sling shit right back at him.
I can appreciate this comment. To be honest, I had no recollection what bitter guy was referencing with my opinion about consensus science. So I googled consensus science and the Crichton quote came up among the first few. I read it and agreed without regard to the fictional nature of the author’s ways. His opinions are fiction too because of what books he writes, I guess. Anyways, I appreciate your comment.
In the west, public lands have always been mixed use — in the sense that conservation, recreation, and resource extraction (mining and grazing rights, specifically) have had to coexist. Sometimes that coexistence has worked out better than others. This includes national forest lands. Managing public lands of all designations has been about balancing those competing interests.
In the case of the Bears Ears and Escalante, the monument proclamation specifically privileged conservation and recreation in creating the monument. And as part of that conservation, yes, the fossil records and archealogical artifacts are significant in that argument. But to say that archeology is the only thing going on here isn’t quite correct.
I haven’t seen the research you reference here, but there is quite a lot of data on Utah in particular that points to the dollar value of Utah’s public lands as tourist and recreation destinations. As things stand, however, advocates haven’t had much luck convincing the state government which is tied by tradition to grazing and mining interests to think in different terms about land use.
Basically, conservationists need new laws on the whole, if they want to ensure that conservation and recreation are given priority over resource extraction on the west’s public lands. Pretty sure Mr. Chouinard doesn’t need me to tell him that, though. Bro knows.
Of course he is not being bullied here. He is speaking out in defence of things he believes require defending.
” So ‘research groups’ can siphon more tax dollars for archeological research that isn’t finding anything except coins in the pockets of researches.”
Have you ever met an archaeologist? I’m guessing the answer is no.
Actually, I met Zahi Hawass when I was in Giza. The guy was an egotistical jerk and treated others with contempt and disregard. Thank goodness he didn’t follow us into Khufu’s burial chamber. Probably colored my opinion of archaeologists.
Is he doing research at Bears Ears? No archaeologists are getting rich from research in Utah. Energy interests who advocated for more resource extraction in places like Bears Ears and Chaco Canyon are, however.
yeah, exactly.
once met a white American , he belonged to some kind of cult that had pointy hats and they loved the letter K, probably colored my opinion of Merrycans!
Ha! What’s the matter Brutus? Can’t handle that someone has an opinion that is different than your own? So you feel its necessary to imply that i’m a member of the KKK? That’s pathetic.