HAF BREAKS GROUND
HAF as `land trustees' of the public's LYNN VIETOR NATURE PRESERVE `broke
ground' within the limits of the nature sanctuary on the first week of
July 2001. This breached HAF's fiduciary responsibility to guard what
their Founder Vera Perrott Vietor created in 1972 for the public to enjoy,
to be guarded `native and unspoiled', not even a
On the following page are three views of the site in June 2001 before being violated, for comparison with the second set of three photos after being violated by HAF in July 2001.
JUNE 2001 PHOTOS
1) Looking northwest over the 1.4 acres (10 % of the Preserve) to be
Vera's heirs were able to stall HAF's planned August 1999 `break ground' for some 22 months. But they found no help from the Courts, the California Attorney General, Humboldt Planning, Humboldt County Supervisors, California Coastal Commission, all of whom sided with HAF the destroyers, rather than coming to the aid of Vera's will and trust as the creator of a public treasure in the form of her architecturally significant residence and the 14.3 acre hillock, some 90% as predominately a redwood grove.
JULY 2001 PHOTOS
A) Looking northwest over the violated site
HAF broke ground the first week of July 2001. The displaced deer that usually lay in the meadow in the days and forage at night were wandering around in a daze for several days. HAF were stopped about two weeks into despoliation by native Americans of the Wiyot and Yurok tribes as not having cleared that there were not sacred native American's sites in the area. This reflects on the bogus building permit, wherein HAF duped Planning, not divulging that the site was a public Nature Preserve. This resulted in a building permit without an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or archeological review, coming back to haunt Planning, Supervisors, Coastal for duplicity in aiding and abetting HAF's chicanery. The place is called Indianola for a reason. It is called a public Nature Preserve for a reason too.
A picture is worth 1000 words. Look at the second set and contemplate
Pennekamp's April 1999 Court document statement: (Exhibit 6--#20) `site
be used without intruding on the woodlands and meadows that Mrs. Vietor
wished to preserve.'