As one who is not involved in the current situation (if current is the
proper term for a matter that has gone on for over a decade) I would
like to present for your consideration some of the things that have been
brought to mind while reading and reflecting on the publicly available
information. As I do not sell Nature's bounty and have not been enemied
by Oakstone, I trust that you will find no hidden purpose or underlying
antipathy towards any of the parties concerned. (In the interest of full
disclosure, let me say that I have sold one Lobelia seed - to an
afflicted Novice who appeared at the Ivy-covered archway to Minia asking
for help. And I have overharvested twice in the past 40+ years, once as
a result of a faulty reflex (the first time I ever harvested) and the
second due to my nervous reaction - while harvesting in the Dun Valley I
was startled by notification of a fire and inadvertently harvested once
more without noticing it before heading off to combat the blaze.)

With that prologue behind us, let me address a few aspects of Oakstone
policies (and the implementation thereof) without either the heat and
rancor (justified or not) of some of their detractors or the personal
attacks and vituperation exercised by some of their supporters.

In general terms, laws and the attendant penalties exist to prevent
harmful acts. Any penalty beyond restitution and such restriction as may
be necessary to prevent a repeated offense is strictly punitive,
designed to hurt the offender and bring about a change in their
behavior. Both of these are appropriate components of a system of laws,
but it becomes inappropriate when the punitive component is applied
inequitably. When the impact of a common punishment on one class of
individuals is significantly greater than on the rest of society, we
consider that group to have been wronged and the punishment to be
unjust. In the context of overharvesting, there are two classes capable
of the offense. One class loses little or none of their offensive or
defensive capability by reason of being enemied to the forest, while the
other is most severely disadvantaged. This inequity (which has been
acknowledged for many years) needs to be addressed.

Another matter is the question of whether we will have a rule by law or
by fiat. It is disingenuous, at the least, to say that the letter of the
law must be adhered to and then to decide to not take action on a
pending case for reasons of personality. Organizations do not have
feelings that can be hurt. No matter what individual members may feel
about some other individual, the organization MUST conduct its affairs
in a proper, professional manner or it violates its responsibility and
damages its credibility. Those who would exercise great power must also
exercise great self-control, putting the commonweal ahead of their own.

And lastly (I realize this is lengthier than many would like, but
weighty matters do not permit of light treatment) much has been made of
the origins of Oakstone and what Lady Gaia intended. I do not presume to
know Her mind, as I did not have the honor of knowing Her (truthfully, I
would not presume to know the mind of any Divine, or any mortal, for
that matter) and know only what She stated publicly, but it seems to me
from reading those public statements that She acknowledged that change
is omnipresent in Nature. The mountain changes in form over the years,
though its substance remains constant. When conditions change, the way
we deal with them must change as well. Traditions are good, but only so
far as they support the purpose and basis that brought them into being.

So I invite everyone on both sides of the matter (or as many sides as
there are) to look at themselves, their policies, and their actions, and
ask, "Is this right? Is this just? Is this the best thing for Nature?"
If not, now is the time to act.

Sardaug

Penned by my hand on the 13th of Daedalan, in the year 359 AF.