On behalf of the students, faculty, staff, alumni, and community members of the Redbud Woods Working Group, I would like to respond to several of the issues raised in the editorial "Redbud Woods: Right fight, Wrong spot" printed in the Wednesday June 8, 2005 edition of the Ithaca Journal.

While we are happy to have our efforts described as heroic and our goal laudable, several other points require clarification or correction.

Redbud's Historic Nature

First, it should be noted that the slow conversion of Robert H. Treman's lawn "to a patch of young woods" was part of the original vision of landscape architecture pioneer Warren Manning, who designed the space for his friend, the prominent Ithaca citizen, conservation, Cornell alumnus and trustee. According to the Ithaca Daily News of November 2, 1901, Manning determined the west lawn should be "left to nature as the best gardener." On the University's own Proposed Parking Lot FAQs, recently posted to www.cornell.edu , they acknowledge that Redbud Woods is "the lawn of the historic Treman estate," while dismissing it as "overgrown with invasive species." This statement is an attempt to obscure Manning's historic and innovative design plan, fulfilled by the continued growth of the Woods as a vibrant urban green space.  

Ecology of the Woods

Second, the Redbud Woods Working Group has never argued the ecological value of the Woods as undisturbed native habitat. In fact, we remind the Editor that Treman and Manning left the lawn to "nature as the best gardener," as stated in the November 2, 1901 edition of Ithaca Daily News. Nature produced a vibrant urban green space, a self-forested garden featuring a variety of introduced as well as native tree species. The Woods get their name from a particularly magnificent selection, the Redbud (Cercis canadensis) . A prized horticultural specimen, the Redbud "has naturalized abundantly [in the Woods] and creates a reddish-purple haze of flowers in the spring," according to the Plantations entry on Redbud Woods.

However, in addition to aesthetic value, the Woods *do* have ecological value, providing habitat to birds and wildlife, including winter hibernation habitat for three species of butterfly that feed exclusively on hackberries. The Editor also fails to mention that, besides invasives, the Woods boast a wide range of native plant species.   In fact, the Cornell Plantations entry on Redbud Woods describes it as   " inherently a very fertile, dry, limy site with a warm microclimate" and goes on to contradict the Editor's assertion that "There are no rare species there [at Redbud Woods]." Rather, two resident species, hackberry ( Celtis occidentalis ) and ( Quercus muhlenbergii ), are locally scarce and locally rare, respectively.   Furthermore, the Editor's implication that Redbud Woods is just a common lot-grown-wild fails to recognize that urban wildland is rare and disappearing, and the University's unresolved transportation issues will continue to imperil Ithaca's open spaces indefinitely.

And while it is true that Redbud Woods would not take "hundreds of years to replace," the Editor makes a transparent effort to disguise and downplay its actual age, approximately 70 years. In a letter to President Lehman and the Administration, Cornell Professor of Government   Elizabeth Sanders observes:

"In the past century, much of the Northeast has become re-forested, as agriculture has died out. There are very few old growth forests in the Northeast. This reforestation makes up a tiny bit for the DEforestation in the rest of the country, where forests are being lost to development."

Protester Tactics

Third, in regards to the tactics employed in defense of the Woods, the Redbud Woods Working Group is a diverse, non-authoritarian group of students, as well as faculty, staff, alumni, and community members, who, as individuals, engage in a variety of actions. Some bravely risk injury to themselves based on their beliefs and convictions, while others show support in other ways, such as writing letters, gathering signatures, and engaging in negotiation with the Administration.

Conclusion

While we recognize and, as individuals, work for many other "honorable and laudable causes," we feel this is the right fight, because we love Cornell and it is up to us to ensure its continued aesthetic, historic, and ecological integrity. Perhaps the University administration should reconsider "the precious money, time and sweat" they pour into a misguided effort to build a parking lot nobody wants. And perhaps the Editor should scrutinize the Administration's conduct and intentions, rather than blindly assuming their will as the natural, unfettered determinant of the outcome in this multi-stakeholder controversy over Redbud Woods.