The Petition:

To: UC Berkeley and the City of Berkeley:

The undersigned support the proposed stadium upgrade project at UC Berkeley and whole-heartedly support the construction of the high performance athletic center at the proposed site. We believe Cal's football program has added significantly to the student experience at UC Berkeley and these additions and upgrades will further the program's success.

The new facility has been vetted by engineers and is environmentally sound. Trees that will be lost will be replaced in other parts of the campus, by three-fold.

It's time the voices of Cal fans are heard, that the 64,000 plus fans that attend Cal home games are heard. Cal football is an important and integral part of UC Berkeley and we believe these improvements are vital to its future.

Sincerely, the undersigned.

If you wish to sign the petition, it is available here:

http://www.petitiononline.com/callfb07/petition-sign.html

A sample of supporter opinions follows here:

Quoc-Anh To: I am all for the environment, trust me, but saving the oaks and not building an athletic facility that would improve multiple Cal Sports teams is absurd. Oak trees have been cut down to build numerous things, and besides, those oak trees will eventually die. These can be replanted elsewhere. "Tradition" and "history" means nothing when you are able to replant new oak trees. An oak tree is an oak tree, you can't relocate the athletic facility elsewhere that would be more strategic. Bottom line, the environment is important, but in this case, construction will not equal absolute death of all the oak trees. Let the construction go on!

Alex Rollin: The upgrades will not only benefit the football team, but the school as a whole. Much of the school's publicity is derived from the success and positive exposure of the football team, which will without question will do better with the new facilities. The field itself will be safer for the fans. Also, the students, in general, will have new buildings to learn in. The athletes will finally have facilities to compete with other major universities. The oak trees in place now are not native there anyway, so planting three times as many elsewhere should make people happy. I don't think these protestors understand how much that this delay will hurt the progress of the university and that these environmental concerns have already been addressed in the new plans.

Bob Tuck '72: In response to the two main criticisms of the project, intensity of use (traffic), and removal of trees, here are some thoughts; The activities that will take place in the new sports center are currently taking place at locations all over the campus. Multiple trips are required by staff and students participating in the various programs. Centralizing the activities will reduce trips, and therefore traffic. The urban forest will not be lost. It will be shifted to a new riparian wonder, the section of Strawberry Creek that will reappear after decades underground at the North end of the Stadium. The new trees will not be mature specimens, but I pledge, and I'm certain that others will pledge the monies necessary to purchase as mature of specimens as are available. I'll start the "Big Trees" drive myself. As a CNR Major at Cal, I learned the importance of the streamside ecology. This project gets some back, and it will be great.

Donald Mitchell: I am an environmentalist with a Cal degree in biology and an M.S. in Conservation Biology. I would be on the other side of this issue if the trees proposed for removal at the project site comprised a irreplaceable or even significant woodland ecosystem. By any sober ecological analysis, they simply do not. The facility upgrade is long overdue, will benefit the university, students, and alumni - this is the time and place to proceed with this project.

Gregory D. Pike: This proposal is well designed and will help to ensure the continuation of great football and sports programs at Cal. Oh, and by the way, to those members of the Berkeley City Council, the City of Berkeley will receive even greater increased tax revenues from all the fans that have attended the games and shop, eat and patronize local merchants. If you want to continue to receive tax revenues from the Cal fans, vote in favor of the stadium upgrade proposal. It's no brainer.

David Umberg: I consider myself somewhat of an environmentalist, but this is ridiculous. I see no problem in cutting down a few trees that UC Berkeley planted especially when they will plant three trees for every one cut down. People are opposing these upgrades because of safety issues, but a large part of the upgrades will be in making the stadium SAFER. It seems like protesters are thinking with their hearts but not with their heads.

Alexander Mack: The sooner the new structure is built the sooner we can retrofit the existing stadium making it safe to be in. The longer we wait, the more lives are being put into needless risk.

Carl Janson: I am a 40-year Sierra Club member, I love trees, but enough is enough. This plan is sound and should be allowed to move forward.

Andrew A. Adelman: Please complete the stadium renovation as soon as possible. Please keep in mind that the stadium and football team success bring $$$ to the university, City of Berkeley and businesses in Berkeley. Stop the craziness and start the project.

Jeff Williams: This is a well thought out and much needed project for the university as a whole, and benefits many groups of students, not just football players. Opposition to this proposal sounds like more of the narrow-minded negativism that has crept into city government in recent years. Please take the time to consider this proposal fairly and find a way to work with the University to make it happen on terms that are fair to all concerned.

Rebecca Benassini: This stadium plan is a good balance of preserving and enhancing the landscape while ensuring the safety of students and student-athletes.

Richard Davis: The upgrades the University seeks at Memorial stadium are critical to the future success of athletics at the University. The upgrades ensure the safety of students, fans, and residents alike. This project needs to move forward at the planned site.

Tien Nguyen: I fully support Cal's decision to build the necessary infrastructure for a great academic institution that also excels in sports.

Eddie Gulbenkian: An upgraded stadium will benefit everyone. In fact, it can bring a whole state or region together. Recruits in all sports look at it, and recognize a commitment to developing a winning program by the university. I believe the renovation will make Berkeley better economically as well. Look at what the football program has done the past five years.

Rob Gilmore: As a long time real estate developer in California, I am confident that an environmentally friendly construction project can be achieved. We are continuously working with the various agencies to mitigate for the removal or relocation of heritage oaks. There is no reason for an all or nothing approach. Go Bears.

Kris Johansen: Please build it, I will die within the next ten years, and I really want to die knowing Cal athletics are not going to be dissolved.

James Shine: I am a forth generation native Californian, Berkeley and Hastings grad, currently living in South Carolina. I love and miss most things California. I miss the bay area and a home that was Woodside, with a California live oak (I loved that tree), growing through the house. Keep Jeff Tedford. Build the stadium. Go Bears!

C. N. Coby Cohen: The Student Athlete High Performance Center and the future upgrades to Memorial and the surrounding properties are essential to the success of our student-athletes, the safety of the entire Cal community, and the maintenance of Cal's position as the top public university in the U.S.

Peter Lagarias: I support the new facility and planting of new trees. The planting of new trees can ameliorate the loss of a few trees by this project. I have participated in planting redwoods here in Marin County, and believe this can be done at Berkeley.

Colin LeClair: Students-athletes are the ambassadors of our school's great traditions, character, and reputation for excellence. Can this contrarian subculture show me how their plight to save a few trees will draw funding for the University's scholarships, academic programs and world-renowned research, attracting the brightest students from all over the world? Opposition to this project is selfish and myopic.

Eric Werts: I am all for environmentalism. The glade in question is not a naturally occurring oak glade - it too was planted. It is right in the middle of high-traffic campus activity, just as it was when it was originally planted. I am all in favor of replacement native oak trees at a 3:1 ratio to add to the overall tree canopy in the campus area. This is not destruction of natural areas adjacent to pristine wilderness zones, this is basically the lawn next to a college stadium!! The opponents have to be realistic. The birds and squirrels and periodic small animals are habituated to this unnatural environment created by man and will easily enjoy the new plantings of trees as they grow to maturity.

Jane Lepisto: I am proud to be considered a hippy, radical, freak from Berkeley. I believe in considering the environment and in considering the benefits versus the cost to habitat. This has been done in this instance and the UC Berkeley campus should be allowed to move forward on this project that will ultimately benefit not only the campus, but also the greater Berkeley area.

Gary Obligacion: I attended Cal from 1984-1988 and my children still view Berkeley as their "home" even though we live in Monterey. Please do everything you can to make sure that The University of California at Berkeley is always a campus and facility that warrants the praise of all other campuses across the United States.

John O'Dea: While I did attend UC Berkeley in the early 80's I did not graduate and finished elsewhere. The area in question is indeed a beautiful place but the needs of providing enhanced recreation and conditioning are paramount. I have spent 11 years as an exercise physiologist in Indiana and see daily the number one preventable health risk is lack of exercise. This facility will provide a quality outlet for conditioning of both athletes and non-athletes. I applaud those whose environmental beliefs are strident because here in the Midwest all construction starts with leveling fields and forest. I firmly believe the this necessary project will be done with the least amount of natural disturbance and probably the University will bend over backwards to enhance other green areas.

Kevin Kilty: I am concerned about the environment and the old oak trees, but when weighed against the safety factors (seismic), revenue from football program, and the continued athletic experience for students, fans, and alumni families, I wholly support the improvements.

And finally, a signature from Oski himself:

Oski Ursas Strawberryensis: OK, you've gotten my attention. I have watched the planning process of the project from my lair up here in strawberry canyon and I see that it is a very sensible and necessary improvement to the urban landscape of the lower campus. I love what my teams are doing ... representing me so well. My athletes need this ... the campus community will benefit greatly ... and the seismic safety of the stadium will eventually be improved. Besides, there are many trees and shrubs up here in the canyon. Come up and see me sometime, or catch me on campus at a game ... Go Me! (Bears that is).

©Copyright 2006, BearInsider.com and Scout.com. All rights reserved.

If you haven't done so already, subscribe to The Bear Insider so you can participate in this active online Cal community and get access to the members-only content from the nation-wide Scout.com network.

Bear Insider staff writers visit the Insider discussion board regularly, and are available to discuss questions you may have about this article and Cal Athletics.